Like this information? Subscribe to the PolitiHacks digest!
The top-level summary doesn’t include us. Fine, we’ve got no lobbyists to prioritize us, so that’s no worries. Ignore the TechCrunch article that says otherwise.
But we’re an explicit bullet point in the official mid-level summary, published on Scribd.
And I’ve got further confirmation from sources at the Small Business Administration, from the US Chamber of Commerce, and from folks checking in with Senators.
- Elimination of diversity lottery
- Creation of startup visa
- De facto/impilcit creation of STEM Green Card through exemption from numerical limits for PhDs; Masters get an increased slice of first-come, first-serve visas that should prevent caps
- Creation of a new points-based merit visa
- Mandatory E-Verify (we’ll want to set up a White House Innovation Fellow to hack this for startups, cause I hear it’s a bulky process for tiny firms)
- Bill is getting introduced over the next day or so, first hearing scheduled tomorrow
- Expecting a Senate vote mid-summer (Senators put odds of it passing around 60-80%)
- Expecting the House to move in the fall, with a final vote between Sept and November (House Representatives put odds of it passing around 40-60%)
- Realistically, we want the President to sign a final bill by New Year’s; slow, but feasible
I’m waiting on specific language to see if the startup visa actually works, though.
For example, the qualifications in Startup Visa Act of 2011 or 2013 would create a worthless startup visa, eligible only to Masters or PhDs in technical fields or current workers, and with a STEM Green Card, the Masters and PhDs have an easier path to follow. Startup Act is much better.
We still don’t know the capital levels or milestones, either of which could also choke off a successful startup visa, which after all is just an idea that needs to be effectively executed on.
I compared legislative comparisons since PG’s essay in 2009: