Category Archives: Front Page

House Healthcare Package Seeks to Lower Drug Prices and Stabilize the Marketplace

House Healthcare Package Seeks to Lower Drug Prices and Stabilize the Marketplace

Siena Ruggeri
May 13, 2019

The House has released a newly-combined package of healthcare bills that will have a positive effect on both prescription drug prices and the affordability and accessibility of health insurance coverage. NETWORK supports all seven bills included in the Strengthening Health Care and Lowering Prescription Drug Costs Act (H.R. 987). The package contains three bills concerning drug pricing and four bills addressing the stabilization of the healthcare marketplace created by the Affordable Care Act. The prescription drug pricing legislation would mainly increase generic competition, which can help make affordable drugs available more quickly to consumers. The four bills in the package designed to strengthen the Affordable Care Act would increase support for consumers and state marketplaces and ensure health care plans offer full coverage.

Prescription Drug Bills

The prescription drug pricing bills included in the package are:

  • The Protecting Consumer Access to Generic Drugs Act of 2019 (H.R. 1499)
  • The BLOCKING Act of 2019 (H.R. 938)
  • The CREATES Act of 2019 (H.R.965)

The Protecting Consumer Access to Generic Drugs Act of 2019 would make it illegal for brand-name and generic drug manufacturers to enter into agreements in which the brand-name drug manufacturer pays the generic manufacturer to keep a generic equivalent off the market. These agreements are known as “pay-for-delay” deals.

Two other two drug pricing bills are bipartisan proposals. The BLOCKING (Bringing Low-cost Options and Competition while Keeping Incentives for New Generics) Act of 2019 discourages an exclusivity period for generic applicants wanting to produce a drug that is no longer patented.

The CREATES (Creating and Restoring Equal Access to Equivalent Samples) Act of 2019 would help generic drug manufacturers quickly acquire the samples they need to start making an affordable generic version of a drug. Currently, brand-name drug companies can game safety protocols to delay generic entry into the market. If enacted, this legislation would help generic competition get on the market faster and ensure consumers have affordable options for the prescriptions they need.

ACA Stabilization Bills

The bills concerning the Affordable Care Act in the package are:

  • The MORE Health Education Act (R.987),
  • R. 1010, Limiting the availability of “junk plans”
  • The State Allowance for a Variety of Exchanges (SAVE) Act (R.1386)
  • The ENROLL Act of 2019 (R.1386)

The Marketing and Outreach Restoration to Empower (MORE) Health Education Act would provide funding for outreach to underserved communities to help community members enroll in healthcare plans on the ACA marketplace. This funding has been slashed by the Trump administration in the past couple of years, making it harder for consumers to stay informed about the health insurance options.

H.R.1010 reverses the Trump Administration expansion of short-term, limited-duration insurance plans. These “junk plans” do not cover maternal or mental health, can discriminate based on age, gender, and preexisting conditions, and leave users without care in a medical crisis.

The SAVE Act provides federal funding to help states set up state-based health insurance marketplaces and expand healthcare to more people in their states.

The ENROLL Act would provide $100 million in funding to the Federally-Facilitated Marketplace (FFM) navigator program. Navigator programs are an essential part of the ACA’s success and have faced devastating cuts for the past couple of years.

Restoring the Affordable Care Act

These fixes would restore important provisions in the original Affordable Care Act that ensured low-income and medically underserved communities had access to information and support to decide between their health insurance options. All healthcare coverage must be comprehensive and reliable in an emergency—short-term insurance is no substitute. In order to provide accessible, affordable, and high-quality healthcare, we must ensure these ACA provisions stay in place to protect consumers and support them in their healthcare choices.

NETWORK Calls for Affordable Drugs in NAFTA 2.0 Negotiations

Congress Must Demand the Administration Remove New Pharmaceutical Monopoly Protections from the Text of NAFTA 2.0

Laura Peralta-Schulte
May 10, 2019

Laura Peralta-Schulte, NETWORK Senior Government Relations Advocate, participated in a briefing on Capitol Hill to raise concern for policies included in the Trump administration’s ongoing trade negotiations. Read Laura’s speech below:

Good afternoon. My name is Laura Peralta-Schulte and I am a Senior Government Affairs Advocate for NETWORK Lobby for Catholic Social Justice. NETWORK is a Catholic leader for justice founded over forty years ago by Catholic Sisters and open to all who share our passion. Some of you may know us by our campaign, “Nuns on the Bus.”

People of faith across traditions believe every life has dignity and is sacred. NETWORK Lobby grounds our work in the principles of Catholic Social Justice, which hold that access to healthcare is human right because it is necessary for well-being. The Catholic Sisters and activists of NETWORK reject the notion that only the wealthy should have access to care. Our most sacred texts urge us to “Learn to do good. Seek justice. Help the oppressed.” (Isaiah 1:17)

We acknowledge the genius of scientists who create cures for disease and the role industry plays in our health system. Business is a noble calling if performed in the service of the common good.

Provisions in the current NAFTA 2.0 text, however, are not pro-patient and do not promote the common good. Instead, they prioritize profits over patients.

Powerful companies are attempting to use complicated trade negotiations to lock in current U.S. drug policies and prevent Congress from taking reasonable steps to curb drug price gouging. The new agreement creates new roadblocks for generic companies to compete with brand name products after a patent has expired. It also attempt to export our bad policies to our neighbors.

This is the wrong way forward.

The provisions of the World Trade Organization’s Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS), currently in effect in all NAFTA countries, should continue to be the standard in the new NAFTA agreement. TRIPS calls for respect of intellectual property rights, including those for medicines. It also recognizes each nation’s right to take necessary steps to ensure that medicines are available to all of their residents.

We urge your offices to insist that the Administration change the text of the current Agreement to get rid of the following anti-competitive, anti-patient provisions:

First: The current text of NAFTA 2.0 locks in a minimum 10-year marketing exclusivity period for new biologic medicines. (Article 20.49.1).  These medicines include many new treatments for cancer, heart disease and even vaccines.

This provision would lock in current rules and stop from Congress from being able to make change.

The faith community has particular concern about how this rule would affect Mexico, where access to medicines for many patients is already simply out of reach. According to the OECD data, seven of every 10 Mexicans live in or near poverty.1 If unchanged, even fewer people will be able to afford needed medicines causing preventable suffering and death.

Second: NAFTA 2.0 expands what drugs get special biologic protections and doubles exclusivity for some medicines. This is in Article 20.49.2. Congress expressly excluded certain drugs from additional monopoly protections. This provision, and others, must be changed to conform to U.S. law.

Third: NAFTA 2.0 extends monopoly protection through “evergreening” provisions. It requires nations to extend patents through minor changes without any increased therapeutic benefits for patients well beyond the original 20-year patent. This is in Article 20.36.2.

Lastly, the agreement requires nations to provide patent term extensions or grant longer protections for perceived administrative delays. This is Article 20.44. This provision would block competition from the marketplace and limit Congress from making changes.

No matter what your position is on trade policy, we believe Congress should establish U.S. healthcare policy, not trade negotiators and industry lobbyists.

We believe each nation has a right to ensure residents have access to life-saving treatments.

At the beginning of his pontificate, Pope Francis wrote a letter were he sharply condemned what he called an “an economy of exclusion.” He wrote, “Just as the commandment “Thou shalt not kill” sets a clear limit in order to safeguard the value of human life, today we also have to say, “thou shalt not” to an economy of exclusion and inequality. Such an economy kills. “

Today, high prescription drug prices force people to choose whether to take the medicines they need, or, instead, to ration or simply go without needed treatments in order to be able pay for other necessities like food and shelter. This is wrong.

Congress must say no to an economy of exclusion and insist the Administration remove these provisions from the current text.

 

View NETWORK’s Principles of Drug Pricing.

 

  1. https://www.oecd.org/fr/mexique/global-and-mexico-economic-outlook-2018.htm 

Legislative Update: Drug Pricing Reforms

Legislative Update: Drug Pricing Reforms

Siena Ruggeri
May 7, 2019

Congress is making drug pricing reform a bipartisan priority. While there has been an overwhelming amount of legislative activity around the issue of drug pricing, much of the legislation responds to a few core ideas. The strongest pieces of legislation align with NETWORK’s own principles of drug pricing reform: companies must justify their price increases, companies cannot block their competition from entering the market, and drugmakers must disclose how they set prices. While they seem small, if implemented, all of these details will have a dramatic impact on overall prescription drug affordability. Put together, these reforms would save the federal government billions of dollars a year and ensure countless people can access to the drugs they need.

One of the most straightforward reforms is allowing government agencies to negotiate drug prices. Other government agencies like the Bureau of Veterans’ Affairs  already negotiate prices with suppliers, yet Medicare Part D is not able to negotiate their drug prices. Medicare Part D covers prescriptions Medicare users fill at pharmacies. As the largest purchaser of prescription drugs in the world, Medicare has significant bargaining power that is not being leveraged. There are multiple pieces of legislation addressing Medicare negotiation, including H.R. 1046, the Medicare Negotiation and Competitive Licensing Act. This bill would use the mechanism of competitive licensing to incentivize companies to negotiate with government buyers. House leadership is currently working on a drug pricing bill that will include drug pricing negotiations, but bill text has yet to be released.

An ongoing issue that keeps drug costs high is the delay tactics the pharmaceutical industry employs to block competition and charge monopoly prices. The CREATES Act (H.R. 965) addresses tactics that large pharmaceutical industries use to prevent generic competition from entering the market, which provides consumers with more affordable options. The Preserve Access to Affordable Generics and Biosimilars Act (S.64) and the Protecting Consumer Access to Generic Drugs Act (H.R. 1499) are other reforms that prohibit these delay tactics.

Finally, there is an overall lack of justification for how prices are being set and no accountability for unjustified price spikes. There are a few pieces of legislation that address the issue of price gouging. The aptly-named Stop Price Gouging Act (H.R.1093/S.378) would require companies to report on their price increases and would fine companies for excessive, unjustified price increases. These revenues would be reinvested in future drug pricing research in the public interest. The Stopping the Pharmaceutical Industry from Keeping drugs Expensive (SPIKE) Act of 2019 (S.474) and the CURE High Drug Prices Act (S.637) take similar approaches.

These reforms work together to address the root causes of why our prescription drug prices are abnormally high. While the industry would like you to believe it’s simply a case of bad actors or pharmacy benefit managers, in reality, the system itself is designed to exploit vulnerable patients and maximize profits. In order to make a substantial impact on the affordability of prescription drugs, we have to enable transparency measures like government agencies negotiating prices, ending delay tactics that prevent healthy competition, and holding companies accountable for price gouging life-saving drugs. The innovations of prescription drugs are only useful if people can actually access lifesaving treatments. We must mobilize around these issues to ensure no one else has to die because they can’t afford treatments as simple as insulin or a rescue inhaler. There is bipartisan energy to do something about drug pricing, but these reforms will only materialize if we continue to put pressure on our lawmakers to act.

Paid Leave Proposals Shouldn’t Slash Social Security

Paid Leave Proposals Shouldn’t Slash Social Security

Siena Ruggeri
May 2, 2019

We are at a rare moment of bipartisan agreement on the importance of paid leave. The Trump administration has expressed support for the idea of paid family leave, and suggests six weeks of paid parental leave in its 2020 budget proposal.  Senators Marco Rubio and Mitt Romney’s New Parents Act (S.920) offers a leave option for new parents. Senators Joni Ernst and Mike Lee have introduced the Child Rearing and Development Leave (CRADLE) Act, a discussion draft that is very similar to the Rubio bill. Finally, Senators Bill Cassidy and Kyrsten Sinema are collaborating on a bipartisan paid leave proposal.

While there is hope in the bipartisan enthusiasm for paid leave, the details of these proposals are highly concerning. We must be diligent in informing our members of Congress what a truly robust paid leave program looks like.

These proposals have a narrow view of what constitutes paid leave. The proposals would only offer leave for parents caring for a new child through birth or adoption. While this type of leave is important, family leave is used for many other reasons. Three out of four workers have a caregiving responsibility, and a lack of paid leave makes it incredibly difficult for them to remain financially secure while providing the care their family members need. If a worker has a child with a disability, an aging parent, or a spouse with a serious illness, they would not be covered under these proposals. Paid leave legislation is not family-friendly unless it addresses all the types of caregiving situations workers live with.

When looking closely at the funding of these proposals, it becomes apparent that the paid leave is not responsibly paid for. Both the New Parents Act and the CRADLE Act are funded by cuts to Social Security. In order to access their “paid leave,” new parents have to borrow from their Social Security benefits. As a result, parents would have to either delay their retirement by half a year or take a 3% overall cut to their lifetime benefits. Working parents already lose an estimated $10,513 in wages for taking 12 weeks of unpaid leave. Instead of addressing this problem, the proposed legislation punishes working parents in a different way by cutting their benefits. Cuts to Social Security are irresponsible and unacceptable.

These legislative proposals ignore how women and people of color, are most impacted by paid leave policies. Of the estimated 43.5 million unpaid caregivers, 60% are women. Among Millennial caregivers, over half are people of color. These populations are taking on the most caregiving responsibilities yet face pay and benefits cuts for doing so. Due to structural barriers in the workplace, 73% of Latinx and 62% of Black workers qualify for FMLA yet cannot afford to take it. These proposals do nothing to remedy these disparities. Instead of addressing the wealth gap, workplace discrimination, and unpaid labor caregivers face, these proposals force them to make more impossible choices between work and family.

We must reach out to the writers of these proposals and emphasize that family-friendly workplace legislation must be comprehensive and responsibly funded. The FAMILY Act provides a self-sustaining family and medical leave fund that includes all types of caregiving. Instead of taking away Social Security benefits, it is funded by a modest payroll tax that costs employees $1.50 a month. If Congress wants to improve workplaces for families, any reform must be universal, inclusive, and responsibly funded.

 

Feature image courtesy of Demos. 

Faces of Our Spirit-Filled Network: John Noble

Faces of Our Spirit-Filled Network: John Noble

John Noble
May 3, 2019

Tell us a little about yourself and the work you do.

I’m a Roman Catholic activist and student pursuing a Master of Divinity degree at Brite Divinity School, a Disciples of Christ seminary in Fort Worth, Texas. When I’m not in class, I work part-time as a tutor. I’m also an intern with Pastors for Texas Children, a ministry to Texas schools that advocates for fair and equitable public school funding. I’m passionate about ecumenical cooperation, solidarity, and building a mass movement for transformative social change.

How did you first learn about NETWORK and what inspired you to get involved?

I first encountered NETWORK at a Call to Action conference, where I met Ashley Wilson (NETWORK’s communications manager). I was struck by NETWORK’s commitment to transformative change, and I’ve been hooked ever since. In college, I worked for Iowa Citizens for Community Improvement, who co-sponsored the Des Moines stop of the 2014 Nuns on the Bus tour. I’m also close friends with Sister Jeanie and Sister Elaine Hagedorn, who have been “Nuns on the Bus.” As someone who’s been “NETWORK-adjacent” for a long time, it’s exciting to get involved at a deeper level!

What issue area are you most passionate about?

I’m very passionate about Church renewal and reform efforts. I’m currently a part of the Re/Generation young leaders project with Call to Action, and I work closely with several church reform initiatives like CTA, Equally Blessed, and the Women’s Ordination Conference.

How are you engaging your community on important social justice issues?

As an intern with Pastors for Texas Children, I work to mobilize local faith leaders in support of Texas’ public school system. This involves both direct service ministries and policy change at the statehouse level. I’m also blessed to be at a divinity school that prioritizes justice in their mission. Through Brite, I’ve been involved with several initiatives for gender/sexual justice and immigration rights.

How has your advocacy for social justice shaped your view of the world?

One of my favorite quotes is from Episcopalian activist William Stringfellow, who says that “vocation is simply being a human being.” Social justice advocacy has allowed me to affirm my own human dignity, and to affirm the human dignity of my neighbors.

How does your faith inspire you to work for justice?

Catholic social teaching and liberation theology, particularly thinkers like James Cone and M. Shawn Copeland, have been long-standing inspirations in my faith journey. Through involvement with movements like the Catholic Worker, I’ve learned that the recognition of humanity, through building a sacred and justice-oriented relationship with myself, my God, and my neighbor is what underpins the deepest expressions of my faith.

Who is your role model?

I’ll cheat and name 2: Jennifer Harvey, my undergraduate advisor, and Fr. Terry Moran, a peace and justice activist who encouraged me to apply for the NETWORK board.

Is there a quote that motivates or nourishes you that you would like to share?

“There’s really no such thing as the ‘voiceless’. There are only the deliberately silenced, or the preferably unheard.” ― Arundhati Roy

What social movement has inspired you?

I’m so inspired by the Sunrise Movement, a movement of young people working to end the climate crisis, and the King’s Bay Plowshares 7, a group of anti-nuclear protestors facing jail time for their bold stand against militarism and white supremacy. On a personal note, I had the opportunity recently to join a rally at the Texas Statehouse organized by Texas teachers’ unions, and that was extremely inspiring.

What was your biggest accomplishment as an activist in the past year?

I recently launched a podcast, the People’s Parish, that focuses on the intersections of Catholicism and progressive politics.

What are you looking forward to working on in the coming months?

I’m really excited about my first NETWORK board meeting, for more episodes of the People’s Parish to drop, and to finish my M.Div. program!

NETWORK Strongly Supports the Equality Act

NETWORK Strongly Supports the Equality Act

Siena Ruggeri
April 26, 2019

NETWORK Lobby for Catholic Social Justice urges a yes vote on H.R. 5, the Equality Act. NETWORK is open to all who share our passion. We are proud to raise our voices for our LGBTQ+ friends and colleagues to ensure they live free from discrimination. We know that all people have inherent dignity. No one should tolerate hate or discrimination towards any member of our human family. In our efforts to mend the gaps in our society, we will leave no one behind.

Guided by our Catholic Social Justice values and founded by women religious, we welcome and affirm all LGBTQ+ members of our human community. In the spirit of our founders, our work is guided by relationship and encounter. We have seen the pain, alienation, and violence that our society has inflicted upon members of the LGBTQ+ community. We call upon Congress to end these grave injustices.

We cannot mend the gaps of our society without changing how our nation has permitted discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity. Those who identify as part of the LGBTQ+ community live in fear of being denied a place to live, losing their job, barred from bathrooms, and refused medical care because of who they are and who they love. We must act for the common good and heal our nation. We must end the unique oppression LGBTQ+ people encounter in their daily lives.

Passing the Equality Act would offer legal protections in every aspect of the lives of members of the LGBTQ+ community. It builds upon existing federal civil rights laws to explicitly prohibit discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity in education, employment, housing, credit, federal jury service, public accommodations, and the use of federal funds. While many aspects of LGBTQ+ equality have been affirmed by the courts, it is important to enshrine LGBTQ+ civil rights protections into law to provide certainty for all people.

As people of faith, we are disturbed by how our beliefs have been used to deny the sacredness and dignity of members of our community. Our scripture tells us that we should walk towards everyone—no exceptions. We are called to radical acceptance and see God in all people. Guided by this prophetic vision of justice, we urge Congress to vote yes on H.R. 5 and pass the Equality Act.

Funding the First Step Act: Critical Programs for Criminal Justice Reform

Funding for the First Step Act: We Need Programs for Criminal Justice Reform

José Arnulfo Cabrera
April 26, 2019

The First Step Act was a bipartisan bill that took the first step forward to getting criminal justice reform, and in December 2018 it became law! All of these returning citizens would not have been incarcerated if the Fair Sentencing Act had been passed before 2010. The act stopped punishment disparities between both possessing and selling crack cocaine and powdered. But the First Step Act does more than that. It reduces the amount of mandatory minimum by creating a new system called a safety valve, which reviews individual nonviolent drug offense cases with no prior criminal background. The bill will also authorize funding for programs that will help returning citizens break the chains of our injustice criminal justice system. In the next four years, Congress has the authority to appropriate $75 million dollars to rehabilitative for individuals who will be released because of the First Step Act.

Every February the President sends his budget request to Congress as they begin their regular appropriations process. The passing of First Step Act was possible because of many Republicans and Trump, who supported it. But when we saw that Trump only requested $14 million in this year’s budget request, we became worried that the Trump Administration wasn’t committed to implementing the full $74 million the First Step Act authorized. At NETWORK, we believe that the budget is a moral document that shows what our government’s priorities are. If the budget does not allocate the full $74 million authorized to carry out the First Step Act, then it is clear that criminal justice reform is not one of these priorities.

Officials in the Trump administration shared that they plan to increase their funding request in the next budget year to $147 million, so it can offset the money that fell short last year. The Department of Justice (DOJ) also stated that more funding will need to be appropriated in order to be able to begin implement the policies in the First Step Act. At a White House celebration of the passing the First Step Act, Trump stated that his administration has the full intention of fully funding the First Step Act. While the funding is very important, there are programs that must begin to in order for the policies to take place. On April 8, the DOJ announced the first programs that the First Step Act seeks to create. The DOJ‘s National Institute of Justice (NIJ) share they choose Hudson Institute to host the Independent Review Committee. This program will assist the DOJ in developing and implementing risk and needs assessment tools and evidence-based recidivism reduction that will help incarcerated individuals become return citizens. This is a good start and does give us hope the First Step Act policies will be implemented.

NETWORK has been on the Hill talking with the staffers of Congress members, along with our partners, to ensure that $75 million will be appropriated to fully fund the First Step Act policies. For all of the correct programs to be implemented, the bill will need to allot enough money for the government to fund them.

“How to Lobby:” Training the Stone Ridge Sophomore Class

“How to Lobby:” Training the Stone Ridge Sophomore Class

Alannah Boyle
Erin Sutherland
April 18, 2019

Last week, the Grassroots Mobilization team welcomed the last of the Stone Ridge School of the Sacred Heart sophomore class to our office for a “How to Lobby” Presentation before taking them up to Capitol Hill to visit their federal legislators.  Beginning in October, we (Erin Sutherland and Alannah Boyle, Grassroots Mobilization Associates) have had the opportunity to train and accompany the entire sophomore class at Stone Ridge on dozens of lobby visits.

In each visit, we taught the sophomores about the importance of Family Friendly Workplace policies, including paid family medical and sick leave. Right now, there are two great bills going through both the House and Senate: The Healthy Families Act (H.R. 1784/S. 840) which guarantees workers the right to earn sick days to care for themselves or a family member, and the FAMILY Act (H.R. 1185/S. 463), which provides workers the opportunity to access paid sick leave.  Through Stone Ridge’s Social Action program, a group of approximately ten sophomores visited the NETWORK office every other week for the past seven months. It is only at the end of this program that we see the magnitude of our reach.

Alannah Boyle, Grassroots Mobilization Associate, presenting to Stone Ridge students.

Erin:

“I had not gone on a lobby visit until I started working at NETWORK. For me, when I had heard of lobbying in the past, the word connoted meeting of special interests, of wealthy people in suits, speaking more eloquently on issues than I could.  However, after going to my first lobby visit in coalition (and with coaching from Sr. Quincy Howard, Government Relations Advocate at NETWORK) this past fall, I realized that the only thing needed for a successful lobby visit and sincere conviction in an issue I cared about. Alannah and I tried to pass on these two important skills to our students by staging mock lobby visits with lots of contingencies (what if we need to meet in the hallway, as is common?  Or if the staffer we meet with tries to change the topic of our visit?) to help make the girls prepared and confident for whatever could come their way.  We also talked with the students about how, as women, the right to paid family and medical leave has or will affect us personally at some point in our lives, between becoming a parent, to needing to take care or a relative, or taking time off in the wake of personal trauma.

“Every few weeks, I was humbled to accompany such eloquent and diligent young women to advocate for such important policies. It made me hopeful to see the next generation already engaged in federal advocacy – years before I was!  It also reinforced my belief that lobbying can and should be accessible to all as a way to engage with our legislators on issues that matter to us.”

Alannah:

“Unlike Erin, I had been on a few lobby visits prior to beginning my work here at NETWORK. The first time I went on a lobby visit was as a college student after attending the Ignatian Family Teach-In when I myself was first trained by a NETWORK staff member on how to lobby, almost five years ago. I vividly remember how excited and equipped I felt after completing my first training and attending my first lobby visit. Realizing now that Erin and I have trained almost 100 high school students, and equipped them with these same skills, has been incredibly rewarding. We all have the ability to lobby and advocate our elected officials on issues that matter to us. As constituents, our Members of Congress work for us. NETWORK’s “How to Lobby” training helps to answer the questions that can make lobbying seem scary.”

Advocating for Congress to Pass H.R. 6: The Dream and Promise Act of 2019

Advocating for Congress to Pass H.R. 6: The Dream and Promise Act of 2019

Laura Peralta-Schulte
April 17, 2019

The Dream and Promise Act of 2019, H.R. 6, was recently introduced in the House of Representatives. This legislation establishes a roadmap to U.S. citizenship for (1) immigrant youth and (2) current or potential holders of (a) temporary protected status (TPS) or (b) deferred enforced departure (DED). The bill provides conditional permanent resident (CPR) status and a roadmap to lawful permanent resident (LPR) status and, eventually, U.S. citizenship for immigrant youth who entered the U.S. before age 18, have four or more years of residency, and graduated from high school (or the equivalent). In addition, it provides an opportunity for people who currently have or who may be eligible for TPS or DED who have three or more years of residency to apply for LPR status and, eventually, U.S. citizenship. This common sense legislation mends the gap in access to citizenship and allows our immigrant sisters and brothers to receive legal protections that will allow them to continue to thrive.

Dreamers, TPS, and DED holders have lived in the United States for years. They are an integral part of our society. For example, in 1990, Salvadorans were given TPS and many have lived in the United States since then.  Individuals from other countries were also given similar protection in response to emergency conditions in countries impacted by war, famine or natural disaster.  Likewise, Dreamers have lived the majority of their lives in the U.S. and some have been protected by DACA since 2012. DACA, TPS, and DED programs have allowed these immigrants to work in the U.S. and shielded from deportation.  In return, they have contributed billions to our economy, started American families, and integrated into American culture.

How does H.R. 6 help immigrant youth?

  1. Longer CPR status. Extends the length of CPR status from eight to ten years to give applicants more time to fulfill requirements.
  2. Expands stays of removal. Stays the removal of minors who are not yet eligible for relief but may become eligible in the future and who temporarily unenroll from school.
  3. Better hardship standard. Permits people with CPR to obtain LPR status without satisfying the employment, military, or educational tracks if their deportation would cause “hardship” to themselves or immediate family members (instead of “extreme hardship”).
  4. Apprenticeship eligibility. Includes apprenticeship programs as a qualifying education to obtain CPR status.
  5. No medical examination. Eliminates the costly medical examination for applicants.
  6. Caps fee. Establishes a fee ceiling of $495 for immigrant youth applying for CPR status.
  7. Professional licenses. Clarifies that people with CPR can access professional, commercial, and business licenses.
  8. Career and technical education. Permits people with CPR who obtain a certificate or credential from an area career and technical education school to obtain LPR status.
  9. Criminal and inadmissibility bars. Updates the criminal background bars and inadmissibility requirements.1

Additionally, H.R. 6 has the following provisions that are similar to the Dream Act of 2017:

  1. LPR status. Provides LPR status to CPR holders who: (1) serve in the uniformed services for two years, (2) complete two years at or obtain a degree from an institution of higher education, or (3) work 75 percent of the time in CPR status (with flexible evidentiary burdens such as affidavits).
  2. Removes barriers to in-state tuition. Makes it easier for states to provide in-state tuition to immigrant students.
  3. Federal financial aid. Establishes that CPR-holders are eligible for federal loans, work study, services, but not grants.

How does H.R. 6 help people with TPS or DED?

  1. LPR status. Provides LPR status for people with TPS or DED (and those who were eligible but did not apply) who apply within three years from the date of enactment if they (1) had at least three years of continuous residence (as well as residence since the date required the last time that the person’s nation of origin was designated) and (2) were eligible for or had (a) TPS on Sept. 25, 2016, or (b) DED on Sept. 28, 2016. This includes nationals of 13 countries: El Salvador, Guinea, Haiti, Honduras, Liberia, Nepal, Nicaragua, Sierra Leone, Somalia, South Sudan, Sudan, Syria, and Yemen.
  2. Inspection and admission. Classifies people with TPS or DED as inspected and admitted for the purposes of Immigration & Nationality Act (INA) section 245(a), making it easier to obtain LPR status through existing channels (e.g., a family-based petition).
  3. Stay of removal. Stays the removal (deportation) of individuals while an application is pending.
  4. Caps fee. Establishes a fee ceiling of $1,140 for people with TPS or DED applying for LPR status.
  5. Transparency for TPS. Requires the secretary of the U.S. Dept. of Homeland Security (DHS) to provide an explanation for and report within three days of publishing notice to terminate TPS designation for certain nationals.

How does H.R. 6 help both immigrant youth and people with TPS or DED?

  1. Deported immigrants eligible. Enables certain immigrant youth deported under the Trump administration and people who had TPS or DED who were deported as of September 2016 to apply for relief from abroad.
  2. Protections for detained and non-detained. Allows immigrants in deportation proceedings, including those in detention, to apply for relief under the INA and protects eligible applicants from deportation.
  3. Administrative review. Provides robust administrative and judicial review of denials.
  4. Grant program. Establishes a grant program for nonprofit organizations to assist applicants.
  5. Fee exemption. Provides a narrow fee exemption for applicants who meet certain requirements.
  6. Advance parole and employment authorization. Allows individuals with a pending application to apply for advance parole and employment authorization (a work permit).
  7. Adjustment through existing channels. Clarifies that individuals may apply for LPR status through existing legal pathways, such as through family- or employment-based sponsorship.
  8. Confidentiality provisions. Protects the information submitted by applicants (and all DACA requests) from disclosure.

NETWORK is working to get every Democratic member in the House to co-sponsor the bill and to find Republican co-sponsors as well.

Now is the time for all of us to ask our Members of Congress to support H.R. 6.

Family-Friendly Workplaces Are Crucial for Our Nation

Family-Friendly Workplaces Are Crucial for Our Nation

Tralonne Shorter
March 17, 2019

On March 14, NETWORK Senior Government Relations Advocate Tralonne Shorter spoke at a press conference with Rep. Rosa DeLauro, Senator Patty Murray, Rep. Lauren Underwood, and Rep. Alma Adams about the introduction of the Healthy Families Act. View photos of the press conference on NETWORK’s Flickr account.

At NETWORK we are working every day for the dignity of the common good: urging elected officials, including the President, to join us on our mission to put people over profits. We not only advocate for social justice on Capitol Hill, but we also are a leading example of family-friendly workplace policies that reflect the current and future nature of families and women in the workforce.

Inspired by Catholic Social Justice, we believe that workplace and labor policies must respect the dignity of every human being, and recognize the needs of every human being to be in community with one another. In our advocacy for family-friendly workplace policies, we have focused on guaranteeing that all workers have access to paid family leave and sick leave, ending the gender and racial wage gap, and encouraging flexible scheduling to give employees and employers more tools and resources to create mutually beneficial schedules.

Current bills coming up in Congress include issues that support national paid family and medical leave insurance programs (Family and Medical Insurance Leave [FAMILY] Act), as well as setting a consistent standard for earning sick days (Healthy Families Act). It is our hope that the successful passage of these bills will enable more workers to access necessary time off that would allow them to care for themselves and their families.

The patchwork of existing workplace policies is not a sufficient safety net for workers and their loved ones. Just 17% of workers in the U.S. have access to paid family leave, and only 40% of workers can take paid personal medical leave.[1] The private sector is making strides in offering family-friendly workplaces, but those protections are not enough on their own and often leave out the lowest-paid workers. The United States is the only industrialized nation that does not provide universal paid leave benefits, making time off inaccessible to lower-wage workers. While 92% of the highest wage earners has access to paid sick leave, only 31% of the lowest earning workers can take paid sick time.[2]

The Healthy Families Act and the FAMILY Act would serve as two major solutions to promoting family-friendly workplaces, and upholding workers’ inherent dignity in allowing paid leave. As people of faith, we value an economy that puts people, not profit, at the center. We know that when the people at the economic margins of our society do better, we all do better.

The Healthy Families Act would set a consistent standard for accruing sick days: workers would earn a minimum of one hour of paid sick time for every 30 hours worked, up to 56 hours (seven days) per year. Additionally, the act would enable workers in businesses with fifteen or more employees to earn up to seven job-protected, paid sick days each year. These sick days would allow people to recover from illnesses, access preventive care, provide care to a sick family member, or attend school meetings related to a child’s health condition or disability.

The FAMILY Act would provide workers with up to partial income to take time for their own serious health conditions, pregnancy and childbirth recovery, care of a family member, birth or adoption, or military caregiving needs. The act covers all workers—part-time, lower-wage, and self-employed workers are all eligible. All companies are covered, no matter their size; the paid leave would be funded by small employer and employee contributions that amount to 2 cents for every $10 in wages.

The Healthy Families and FAMILY Acts not only contain provisions that would allow workers to earn paid sick days and family leave to care for themselves or an immediate family member, they also include important protections for victims of domestic violence, stalking, or sexual assault. No one should have to worry about losing their job while recovering from the trauma of intimate partner violence or harassment. These laws ensure every worker has access to the time they need to care for themselves and their loved ones.

We know paid sick days work because we’ve seen them implemented in 10 states and 20 cities around the country. Providing family-friendly workplace protections is necessary to build an economy that puts people, not profit at the center. Catholic Social Justice teaches that workplace and labor policies must respect the dignity of every human being, and recognize the needs of every human being to be in community with one another. The right to work must operate in concert with human needs of community – and our government should institute laws to ensure family-friendly workplaces.

Now is the time for Congress to pass the FAMILY Act and the Healthy Families Act, so that every employer can provide a pro-family friendly workplace that reflects the current and future nature of families and women in the workforce.

[1] http://www.nationalpartnership.org/our-work/workplace/paid-leave.html

[2] https://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/ebs2.pdf