A Proposal for True Immigration Reform

1) Set clear annual (and 3-year) immigration targets by category

Create a statutory “U.S. Immigration Levels Plan” published every year with a 3-year horizon (economic, family, humanitarian), similar to Canada’s approach. Canada publicly sets projected totals and category shares in its levels planning.

Why it matters: Congress and the public can see the plan, agencies can staff to it, and employers/families get predictability.

2) Build a single, points-based “Economic PR” system (the U.S. Express Entry equivalent)

Create one federal economic stream that works like Canada’s Express Entry:

• Online candidate pool (people submit a profile)

• A transparent points grid that ranks candidates (age, education, English ability, work experience, U.S. job offer, U.S. experience, etc.)

• Regular invitation rounds where the government invites the highest-scoring candidates to apply for permanent residence

U.S. design choices (key calls Congress would make):

• Points for U.S. labor needs: give extra points for higher wages, verified shortage occupations, critical skills, and U.S. work experience (similar to how points systems reward “human capital” and job-market fit).

• Category-based draws: allow targeted invitation rounds (e.g., healthcare, STEM, trades)

• Cap alignment: set an annual economic Permanent Resident number and run draws until it’s filled.

For context, the U.S. already has statutory worldwide minimums like ~140,000 employment-based and 226,000 family-sponsored preference in visa bulletin calculations; a modern system would reorganize how economic slots are awarded rather than relying on long queues and fragmented pathways.

3) Create a “State Nominee Program” (Canada’s PNP, but American)

Give states (and potentially major metro regions) an allocation of nominations tied to labor shortages and population needs. If a state nominates a candidate, that candidate receives a large points boost in the federal pool.

Why it matters: It lets Iowa, Michigan, and upstate New York compete for talent with different needs than NYC/SF—without creating a totally separate federal bureaucracy for each region.

4) Modernize family immigration with clearer lanes and faster timelines

Keep a dedicated family sponsorship track

A Canada-like reform usually does two things:

• Defines who qualifies (spouses/partners, dependent kids, parents/grandparents with rules)

• Pairs eligibility with processing standards (digital case management, predictable timelines)

Congress could decide whether to preserve the U.S. concept of “immediate relatives” being uncapped, or move closer to Canada’s more explicitly planned family intake—but either way, the “modernization” is: simpler rules + faster adjudication + transparent targets.

5) Make processing truly digital, measurable, and fast

A Canada-like system also means end-to-end online intake and measurable service standards (Canada publishes processing-time tools and describes Express Entry timelines/steps such as invitations and application windows). (Canada)

U.S. implementation moves:

• One federal portal for economic candidates (profile → invite → upload → decision)

• API-like data sharing across DHS/State/Labor (identity, security checks, credentials)

• Public dashboards: inventory, median processing times, and targets vs. actuals

6) Manage the transition (so you don’t strand people mid-line)

A workable transition plan usually includes:

• Grandfathering existing applicants in current queues

• Standing up the new pool for new applicants starting on a fixed date

• A backlog reduction surge (staffing + overtime + process simplification) so the old system winds down rather than lingering for decades