Two US Senators have filed a bill that would change the way immigrants are evaluated for green cards. This BBC article provides a nice, high-level overview of the bill, but it's basically a point system. Applicants must be at least 18 and score at least 30 points to apply for a visa - which is no guarantee one will be given to them. The conventional wisdom is that this bill has no real chance of becoming law.
Time Magazine published a questionnaire that you can use to determine whether or not you would be allowed to apply for a US visa. I have many questions about these questions, not the least of which is, "Are these all the questions?" It was never clear to me if Time's questionnaire was complete - there are only 7 questions. However, a cursory look through the ol'Internet didn't provide any more detail.
The questions themselves raise questions, too. They're a bit murky. For instance, the question regarding one's highest level of education gives clear preference to STEM degrees. But what if you have an advanced degree in the humanities? Does that mean nothing? The humanities are grossly undervalued by our current culture, so, yeah. An advanced degree in the humanities probably means nothing.
Just for kicks, I pretended I was Ai Weiwei, the Chinese artist and activist, completed Time's RAISE Questionnaire. I got to 26 points. Although fluent in English, he has no education degree, he's nearly 60, and lacks both a Nobel Prize and an Olympic medal. If he invests at least $1.35 million for a new commercial enterprise, he gets to 32 points. Is there a penalty for saying you will invest millions in a commercial enterprise, but not ever doing so?
I am 43, speak fluent English, and have a Masters Degree in Public Policy from the University of Chicago. I took a broad view of public policy as a "science", in the same vein as political science, and even then I could only get to 24 points.
Fortunately, I expect my Nobel Prize to be announced in October - that will put me over the top!