Discussion of Bills that remove the Per Country Limits - H.R.3012, H,R. 213

[Pedro Gonzales]

My reason for disagreement is that if denying political victory was the reason, they did not have to do anything. Instead of putting this on calendar, Reid would have referred this to subcommittee where Grassley is a ranking member and it would have died there or Schumer would have not negotiated with Grassley at all for removing Irish E-3 from Hr 3012.

Zero Sum game argument does not apply to 3012 since it does not favor any one group in the long run. In the shorter term, it tends to benefit I/C but in the longer run, it creates level playing field for all. I do not think democrats would be opposed to this idea.

Give this, democrats do not have the will to pass standalone bill like this. Their agenda remains CIR (read illegal immigration) which could include some parts of legal immigration.

I agree with Rupen on this. I don't buy the argument that the Dems are to blame for this just because they control the senate. They do not have a filibuster proof majority and so they do not have 'complete' control.
Also, Schummer's emails and the messages sent out by his staffers has steadfastly been that there is at least one (and potentially more) GOP senator holding the bill. That said, the whole argument is pointless. Ron's actions over the last year have significantly dented his credibility, as does his second statement. I don't see how there wouldn't be a lame duck session.

[immitime]

I agree with Rupen on this. I don't buy the argument that the Dems are to blame for this just because they control the senate. They do not have a filibuster proof majority and so they do not have 'complete' control.
Also, Schummer's emails and the messages sent out by his staffers has steadfastly been that there is at least one (and potentially more) GOP senator holding the bill. That said, the whole argument is pointless. Ron's actions over the last year have significantly dented his credibility, as does his second statement. I don't see how there wouldn't be a lame duck session.

Discussing and debating ron's words are the greatest waste of time, most of the attorneys are against H.R.3012, after elections, H.R.3012 can be the only immigration bill to pass the Senate during lame duck session and become law. (ron is like, i have headache so cut my head... that is the meaning of "no lame duck session") Polticians will forget the politics after the elections, or not this much impact as of now, The reason that H.R.3012 was not taken on floor until September is, not to have a point for republicans during debate with BO.

Whoever wins this election, there is still a strong chance for H.R.3012, Q and others please don't believe the bluffer attorney(s)/ROW words and waste time on that.

[qesehmk]

Pedro - republicans wouldn't have filibustered their own bill. If dems wanted this to go through this would've. I am a firm dem supporter and still am saying this.

Schumer Reid or Grassley are only individuals. And I would trust their actions or statements -whether reps or dems. The bottomline for this bill is - it was a republican bill that passed the congress but couldn't get through democratic senate. My last 2 cents.

ps. - I do not track Ron. So can't comment on him. Just saying what i think happened.


I agree with Rupen on this. I don't buy the argument that the Dems are to blame for this just because they control the senate. They do not have a filibuster proof majority and so they do not have 'complete' control.
Also, Schummer's emails and the messages sent out by his staffers has steadfastly been that there is at least one (and potentially more) GOP senator holding the bill. That said, the whole argument is pointless. Ron's actions over the last year have significantly dented his credibility, as does his second statement. I don't see how there wouldn't be a lame duck session.

[justvisiting]

I agree with Rupen on this. I don't buy the argument that the Dems are to blame for this just because they control the senate. They do not have a filibuster proof majority and so they do not have 'complete' control.
Also, Schummer's emails and the messages sent out by his staffers has steadfastly been that there is at least one (and potentially more) GOP senator holding the bill. That said, the whole argument is pointless. Ron's actions over the last year have significantly dented his credibility, as does his second statement. I don't see how there wouldn't be a lame duck session.

I believe Schumer's staffers when they say they are addiitonal holds.
I think the current situation is: Schumer wants to be able to bring up the E-3 bill. He won't bring up 3012 unless the E-3 bill is brought up. There are holds on both bills. In order for 3012 to pass, there must be political will to file cloture on both.

About Ron Gotcher: He is good at giving advice on immigration matters, but not at prognosticating what will happen in Congress.

[rupen86]

Pedro - republicans wouldn't have filibustered their own bill. If dems wanted this to go through this would've. I am a firm dem supporter and still am saying this.

Schumer Reid or Grassley are only individuals. And I would trust their actions or statements -whether reps or dems. The bottomline for this bill is - it was a republican bill that passed the congress but couldn't get through democratic senate. My last 2 cents.

ps. - I do not track Ron. So can't comment on him. Just saying what i think happened.

If democrats wanted to pass the bill, they could have. I do not see how this bill would not get 60 votes needed to pass filibuster. If this bill was to voted, I do not see point of negotiating with Grassley. But the stand that is taken is that, this bill would be passed with unanimous consent and as long as all senators are not satisfied, this bill won't pass. That's why I am not optimistic about lame duck also. So, I am not saying that democrats are not to blame. They have to be blamed, but not because of election year reason. The way events have folded, they logically point to the conclusion that other senators have objections and as long as they are not addressed, it won't be passed. That being said, I would be happy to be proven wrong during lame duck.

[vizcard]

Or this is just not on their priority list.

[nilebib]

Or this is just not on their priority list. true, lots of thing pending there..

[redsox2009]

Last STEM Bill, i.e 20000 additional H1B visas bill went during the lame duck session in 2004. Hoping this year also another STEM bill will pass during lame duck session in Nov.

[vizcard]

If a STEM bill were to be passed, how would it work logistically? Would one have to re-file a 140 under EBx category and give up the EB2/3 app? If EBx dates are not current (hence no 485), would you lose your current EAD?

All hypothetical questions at this point but will be key if it does pass.

[kd2008]

http://www.npr.org/2012/10/05/162297444/preventing-silicon-valleys-immigrant-exodus

NPR did a good interview.

[rupen86]

Looks like Irish E-3 is not dead.

http://www.irishcentral.com/news/Chance-of-Irish-E3-visas-put-on-hold-by-US-presidential-election--172519691.html

[pakkpk]

http://www.kauffman.org//uploadedFiles/Then_and_now_americas_new_immigrant_entrepreneurs. pdf

A very good analysis on foreign born immigrants in USA. Thanks to kaufman foundation.

[rupen86]

for the first time in debates, immigration was discussed.

http://abcnews.go.com/ABC_Univision/presidential-debate-obama-romney-spar-immigration/story?id=17493358#.UH63Q67IbSc

[bvsamrat]

The way Romney talked, he will hand over GC to Immigrants who got US degrees Or accredited degrees from foreign univeristies. Only it were to so simple and easy


for the first time in debates, immigration was discussed.

http://abcnews.go.com/ABC_Univision/presidential-debate-obama-romney-spar-immigration/story?id=17493358#.UH63Q67IbSc

[GhostWriter]

I watched the debate and below is what President Obama said when talking about immigration. I do like him but i think what he said is not true. Can anyone tell me what did he do to reduce the backlog during his term.

"First thing we did was to streamline the legal immigration system to reduce the backlog, make it easier, simpler and cheaper for people who are waiting in line, obeying the law, to make sure that they can come here and contribute to our country. And that's good for our economic growth. They'll start new businesses. They'll make things happen to create jobs here in the United States."

http://www.npr.org/2012/10/16/163050988/transcript-obama-romney-2nd-presidential-debate


for the first time in debates, immigration was discussed.

http://abcnews.go.com/ABC_Univision/presidential-debate-obama-romney-spar-immigration/story?id=17493358#.UH63Q67IbSc

[kd2008]

I watched the debate and below is what President Obama said when talking about immigration. I do like him but i think what he said is not true. Can anyone tell me what did he do to reduce the backlog during his term.

"First thing we did was to streamline the legal immigration system to reduce the backlog, make it easier, simpler and cheaper for people who are waiting in line, obeying the law, to make sure that they can come here and contribute to our country. And that's good for our economic growth. They'll start new businesses. They'll make things happen to create jobs here in the United States."

http://www.npr.org/2012/10/16/163050988/transcript-obama-romney-2nd-presidential-debate

FBI name check issues were resolved, USCIS reduced the time needed to process many forms, quite a lot of data is now posted by USCIS, nobody thought USCIS could process as many I-485s as they processed so quickly with a turn around time of 60 day in last year's surge. So from administration point of view yes, he has done a lot.

The legislative relief is something Congress has to work on and they haven't done their part at all. Zilch.

What we call backlog is not what what USCIS calls backlog. According to USCIS, if they get an application and they do not process within the time duration expected for that form then they have a backlog. Which is what USCIS faced during July 2007 fiasco. Hence they were backlogged then and are not backlogged now.

[GhostWriter]

Fair points Kd, thanks. They did manage to preadjudicate bulk of applications filed in 2011-2012 within 6-7 months as well.


FBI name check issues were resolved, USCIS reduced the time needed to process many forms, quite a lot of data is now posted by USCIS, nobody thought USCIS could process as many I-485s as they processed so quickly with a turn around time of 60 day in last year's surge. So from administration point of view yes, he has done a lot.

The legislative relief is something Congress has to work on and they haven't done their part at all. Zilch.

What we call backlog is not what what USCIS calls backlog. According to USCIS, if they get an application and they do not process within the time duration expected for that form then they have a backlog. Which is what USCIS faced during July 2007 fiasco. Hence they were backlogged then and are not backlogged now.

[rupen86]

FBI name check issues were resolved, USCIS reduced the time needed to process many forms, quite a lot of data is now posted by USCIS, nobody thought USCIS could process as many I-485s as they processed so quickly with a turn around time of 60 day in last year's surge. So from administration point of view yes, he has done a lot.

The legislative relief is something Congress has to work on and they haven't done their part at all. Zilch.

What we call backlog is not what what USCIS calls backlog. According to USCIS, if they get an application and they do not process within the time duration expected for that form then they have a backlog. Which is what USCIS faced during July 2007 fiasco. Hence they were backlogged then and are not backlogged now.

This is called "Cherry-picking" of the facts. I do not think processing 485 speedily is that much of a advantage to people. People are more interested in reducing time it takes to process new H1b petition or that when they go to their home countries for stamping visa, they get that done. So many cases are happening now that visa stamping is denied even though those people were staying here for many years. There was article that published which argued whether State department had more jurisdiction than USCIS. There is no relief for green card backlog. There is no relief on giving EAD to H4 which he had announced earlier in the year which does not require new legislation. He said he could not put in DREAM act because republicans would not support it. I do not know from when he needs that support. Healthcare bill was passed without a single republican vote. Why can't he pass this bill that way then? He said he does not have legal authority to pass something which can give relief to illegal people and that congress has to do something and then he comes at the 11th hour and pass executive order.

[abcx13]

At a time when the economy as a whole is not adding any new jobs, it is very hard for the Congress to justify adding new employment based green cards in the system. To the average Joe, it looks like the government is importing new labor at the expense of American citizens. They just wouldn't understand all these folks are already working on temporary status. Look at the presidential debates and the amount of misinformation. It is very easy to attack the president if something like this were to pass. People like to hear catch phrases...no one can really think and analyze the situation rationally.He could easily have passed immigration reform in the first couple of years of his presidency. Bush supported it and some of that support would likely have carried over. Instead he choose to pass a flawed healthcare 'reform' bill that does nothing except kicking the can down the road and ensuring that costs will spiral further out of control.

[rupen86]

At a time when the economy as a whole is not adding any new jobs, it is very hard for the Congress to justify adding new employment based green cards in the system. To the average Joe, it looks like the government is importing new labor at the expense of American citizens. They just wouldn't understand all these folks are already working on temporary status. Look at the presidential debates and the amount of misinformation. It is very easy to attack the president if something like this were to pass. People like to hear catch phrases...no one can really think and analyze the situation rationally.

The only real legislation relief is HR 3012. One other intelligent solution is to eliminate the dependents from the EB system and make them get their GCs through the FB system. Meanwhile, the dependents who previously used AOS would remain in the US on the temporary *W* visa along with the EAD/AP. I think this second solution would greatly reduce the stress on the EB system and distribute some of the overload from EB to FB.

If the argument is that economy is bad and new people should not be added to workforce, same argument can be applied to 1.6 M illegal also who are given EAD. Also, when we are talking about green card backlog, we are not talking about adding new people to the workforce. Those people are already working here on work visas.

[immitime]

I watched the debate and below is what President Obama said when talking about immigration. I do like him but i think what he said is not true. Can anyone tell me what did he do to reduce the backlog during his term.

"First thing we did was to streamline the legal immigration system to reduce the backlog, make it easier, simpler and cheaper for people who are waiting in line, obeying the law, to make sure that they can come here and contribute to our country. And that's good for our economic growth. They'll start new businesses. They'll make things happen to create jobs here in the United States."

http://www.npr.org/2012/10/16/163050988/transcript-obama-romney-2nd-presidential-debate

Exactly.. He is keeping his job by lying... no wonder someone called him in capitol Hill that "YOU LIE", the economy bad argument is not well taken, if he can issue Employment authorization to 1 million people. Why can't he take care of Legal immigrants First???

[abcx13]

One fundamental difference is that the illegal workforce would compete with the blue collar jobs, whereas the H1B workforce would compete with the white collar jobs. Secondly, adding the illegals to the actual workforce may be beneficial in the long term if you don't plan on deporting them. a) You can now tax them, b) it reduces the downward pressure on the wages, and c) once legalized, the newly legal American residents would be against bringing in more illegals in the future that would compete against the *legal American residents*. Thirdly, Hispanic vote is very significant.

There are no such pressures when H1Bs are taken into equation. We are already taxed. We even pay the social security taxes. Giving us more GCs would be unpopular with the average Joe, and we don't make enough numbers to swing the election either way. Hence, any solutions that includes the word *recapture* are just fantasies in my opinion.

Point b is also true of H1B slaves tied to jobs with below market wages. While H1Bs pose competition to white collar workers in the short term, in the long run they likely create thousands of more jobs. A few Sergey Brins and Vinod Khoslas every year will create way more growth and employment than they take away. Blue collar workers do none of this - not to say that they aren't vital to the construction and agricultural industry. So I disagree with you that the average American would rather legalize them over skilled STEM immigrants.

At the end of the day, this was simply vote bank politics. And yes, Obama does LIE about a great many things (so do Republicans for that matter) and not just immigration. This is coming from someone who considers themselves a dyed-in-the-wool liberal but hates what Obama has done to this country and around the world...

[bvsamrat]

Yes. Giving GC to H1B does not improve anything to the economy. All h1Bs do pay same taxes irrespective of their GC status or not.

The only way immigration can bring benfit to the economy is either by bringing in invesetments or talent/skills by bringing new ideas/research etc in so called STEM fields.


One fundamental difference is that the illegal workforce would compete with the blue collar jobs, whereas the H1B workforce would compete with the white collar jobs. Secondly, adding the illegals to the actual workforce may be beneficial in the long term if you don't plan on deporting them. a) You can now tax them, b) it reduces the downward pressure on the wages, and c) once legalized, the newly legal American residents would be against bringing in more illegals in the future that would compete against the *legal American residents*. Thirdly, Hispanic vote is very significant.

There are no such pressures when H1Bs are taken into equation. We are already taxed. We even pay the social security taxes. Giving us more GCs would be unpopular with the average Joe, and we don't make enough numbers to swing the election either way. Hence, any solutions that includes the word *recapture* are just fantasies in my opinion.

[abcx13]

I am normally a Republican leaning person on many things, but there are some things about Obama that intrigue me. It looks like he panders to the Hispanics, but at the same time, his administration deported a record number of illegals (close to 400K per year, which is at least 40% higher than GWB). It looks like Obama is too soft on foreign policy, but during his time, the drone attacks actually increased to a record level in various parts of the world. It looks like Obama is very ineffective, but thinking back to 2008 and all the talk of gloom and doom, I cannot help thinking that in many little ways, he has gotten some things done. It also looked like he was beaten to death in debate #1 only to come out strong in debate #2 and in hindsight, he might have deliberately sucked in debate #1! It also looks like his healthcare bill is a disaster, but if you think deeper, he is just making all the uninsured people pay (either the insurance or a fine) that should eventually help *everyone*.

Yes, Obama will lie - they all do. And he will indulge in vote bank politics. But there are elements of national interest in his policies and giving EADs to undocumented is a good example. If legal immigration backlog is not being fixed, then I am inclined to believe it is also in the national interest, and we need to find alternative ways to make our situation better. If HR 3012 was too steep a hill to climb, I wonder why no proposal came to shift the dependents to FB and eliminate them from EB altogether.

Apart from drone attacks, Obama has also been worse on civil liberties (warrantless wiretapping and giving telcos retroactive immunity) despite being a Constitutional lawyer. He has invoked the State Secrets defense in such cases more than Bush ever did. Oh, and he went to war in Libya by doing an end-run around Congress.

I think the healthcare thing is a bandaid. People are forced to get insurance, HMOs make a boatload of money, costs keep spiraling out of control. We already spend 2x what some European countries do and have less to show for it. Driving more people into the arms of private insurers by government fiat will only make this problem worse.

He also lied about being easy on medical marijuana dispensaries in California. His DoJ is now actively going after them.

Yet liberals seem blind to their Messiah's MANY flaws. There are more similarities between the two parties than differences...

[rupen86]

I am normally a Republican leaning person on many things, but there are some things about Obama that intrigue me. It looks like he panders to the Hispanics, but at the same time, his administration deported a record number of illegals (close to 400K per year, which is at least 40% higher than GWB). It looks like Obama is too soft on foreign policy, but during his time, the drone attacks actually increased to a record level in various parts of the world. It looks like Obama is very ineffective, but thinking back to 2008 and all the talk of gloom and doom, I cannot help thinking that in many little ways, he has gotten some things done. It also looked like he was beaten to death in debate #1 only to come out strong in debate #2 and in hindsight, he might have deliberately sucked in debate #1! It also looks like his healthcare bill is a disaster, but if you think deeper, he is just making all the uninsured people pay (either the insurance or a fine) that should eventually help *everyone*.

Yes, Obama will lie - they all do. And he will indulge in vote bank politics. But there are elements of national interest in his policies and giving EADs to undocumented is a good example. If legal immigration backlog is not being fixed, then I am inclined to believe it is also in the national interest, and we need to find alternative ways to make our situation better. If HR 3012 was too steep a hill to climb, I wonder why no proposal came to shift the dependents to FB and eliminate them from EB altogether.

I agree with your first para especially to the point that he deliberately underperformed in the first debate. I was wondering how no one was talking about it.

However, I do not agree with the seconds para. How giving EAD to illegal is in national interest and keeping legal people to wait longer is in national interest is beyond my imagination. If legal people get green cards, they are going to start investing more here like buying homes etc. If HR 3012 is steep hill, everything else is steeper than that. When you talk about shifting dependents to FB, democrats will never support that. For them, FB is more important than EB.

[rupen86]

Yes. Giving GC to H1B does not improve anything to the economy. All h1Bs do pay same taxes irrespective of their GC status or not.

The only way immigration can bring benfit to the economy is either by bringing in invesetments or talent/skills by bringing new ideas/research etc in so called STEM fields.

Not true. If H1bs are made green cards, they are going to make bigger investments here like buying homes etc.

[bvsamrat]

One can buy home with H1B very easily and infact most of them doing all the time.


Not true. If H1bs are made green cards, they are going to make bigger investments here like buying homes etc.

[rupen86]

One fundamental difference is that the illegal workforce would compete with the blue collar jobs, whereas the H1B workforce would compete with the white collar jobs. Secondly, adding the illegals to the actual workforce may be beneficial in the long term if you don't plan on deporting them. a) You can now tax them, b) it reduces the downward pressure on the wages, and c) once legalized, the newly legal American residents would be against bringing in more illegals in the future that would compete against the *legal American residents*. Thirdly, Hispanic vote is very significant.

There are no such pressures when H1Bs are taken into equation. We are already taxed. We even pay the social security taxes. Giving us more GCs would be unpopular with the average Joe, and we don't make enough numbers to swing the election either way. Hence, any solutions that includes the word *recapture* are just fantasies in my opinion.

If vote bank politics is the reason, I agree with that. But argument about blue color vs white color does not hold. Blue color votes are more important than white color. But by irking blue color votes, he is not risking much in terms of votes from his base and stands to gain by more Hispanic support. This year, there is no talk about giving more green cards. There were issues like HR 3012, EAD for H4 which does not increase overall green cards. Even there, we have not see any leadership. If Hr 3012 was simply put up for vote invoking cloture, it would have been passed. But someone has to use his political clout at the upper level of leadership which is lagging here. EAD for H4 was simply executive order which did not need any bill.

[rupen86]

One can buy home with H1B very easily and infact most of them doing all the time.

The point here is that green card gives sense of stability. When people feel stable, that's when they buy homes and make other sizable investments. I am not suggesting that H1 people can not buy homes

[rupen86]

There are no data that prove that people on GCs buy houses any more than people on H1Bs. People with *more secure* jobs do buy houses, and it is independent of H1B/GC.

Also national interest != fairness. It is in national interest to legalize the illegals and it is not in the national interest to give 2X amount of Gcs to the legals. This is a very simple concept, as much as we all dislike it. I myself have gone through great troubles and pains to understand how in the world this is possible, but well, it is. It makes sense for America.

As I have stressed, we do serve an important purpose. However the thing is that H1B is already a pretty flexible and powerful visa and we already have all tie rights of citizens and residents. No one asks for our immigration documents before we can make any investments here. We have the carrot...just not the carrot cake, and America suddenly does not turn around by giving us the carrot cake. That's the truth.

EDIT: Actually, it's more about the EAD to the dependent than a GC. My wife is using her EAD well, and our household income has gone up, and we suddenly can think of affording our dream house. So, an EAD to my wife will turn us into homeowners next year. So I retract my first statement and agree that an EAD/GC can turn people on the sidelines into homeowners. So America can indeed benefit by minimizing temporary residents and increasing permanent residents.

I agree with your last Edit para that when people have EAD/GC, they feel more secure. Even though one has H1 and a stable job, one would not feel necessarily stable/secure as he is dependent on H1 employer to stay in this country. He would not have flexibility to change jobs as GC person would have. So, my point as you have agreed to in your edit para is that America does tend to benefit by converting temporary workers to permanent workers.

[Pedro Gonzales]

Perhaps, best to move most of this last page into the 'left vs. right' thread.

To those on the left attacking Obama for being too far to the right, i agree with your concerns. I don't understand how people in the center can simultaneously attack him for being too far to the left. I am not a 'dyed-in-the-wool-liberal'. I have always been a moderate, and I like where Obama has stood all through these last 4 years. I think Obama has ranged between slightly left of center to slightly right of center on pretty much everything. Slightly right of center on things like drone strikes, medical marijuana, record deportations, and infact, Health care reform. Slightly left of center with the stimulus, Lilly-Ledbetter, energy policy and financial sector regulations. With the exception of the financial sector regulations, which I think Congress fluffed (not just him, by going too far on some regulations and not far enough on others) I think he's got it right every time.

However, I support Obama because Obamacare benefits me personally, and it will benefit most of you too. When you become citizens, if you want your parents to get their GCs and spend considerable periods of time in the US, the travelers insurance they use now will be insufficient. Your parents will not qualify for free Medicare or Medicaid and there is a 5 year period (until they become citizens) when they will not be able to buy into Medicare. Currently, insurance options for them are a) expensive and b) don't cover pre-existing conditions (if your parents have either diabetese or high blood pressure, basically all it covers are broken bones and little else) and c) have limited coverage ($50K for folks like my dad who are over 73). Right now, my parents do not want to spend much time in the US because of this. They don't want a significant health event to end up bankrupting my brother and me. If Obama wins, that worry ends. With Obamacare, starting in 2014, they will have have insurance that will take care of b) and c). Republicans argue that the coverage will still be expensive, but Democrats and many independent studies argue that prices will trend down. Eitherway, even if i have to spend$2000 a month on insurance, I will save most of that through nanny-cost / day-care savings.

For me the choice is both simple and personal. If Obama wins, my parents move to the US in 2014 and live with us (they already have their GCs, btw since my brother is a citizen). If Romney wins, I will get to spend less time with them. I suspect, this will be true for most of you, at some point in the future. You're just not aware of it yet.

[rupen86]

Perhaps, best to move most of this last page into the 'left vs. right' thread.

To those on the left attacking Obama for being too far to the right, i agree with your concerns. I don't understand how people in the center can simultaneously attack him for being too far to the left. I am not a 'dyed-in-the-wool-liberal'. I have always been a moderate, and I like where Obama has stood all through these last 4 years. I think Obama has ranged between slightly left of center to slightly right of center on pretty much everything. Slightly right of center on things like drone strikes, medical marijuana, record deportations, and infact, Health care reform. Slightly left of center with the stimulus, Lilly-Ledbetter, energy policy and financial sector regulations. With the exception of the financial sector regulations, which I think Congress fluffed (not just him, by going too far on some regulations and not far enough on others) I think he's got it right every time.

However, I support Obama because Obamacare benefits me personally, and it will benefit most of you too. When you become citizens, if you want your parents to get their GCs and spend considerable periods of time in the US, the travelers insurance they use now will be insufficient. Your parents will not qualify for free Medicare or Medicaid and there is a 5 year period (until they become citizens) when they will not be able to buy into Medicare. Currently, insurance options for them are a) expensive and b) don't cover pre-existing conditions (if your parents have either diabetese or high blood pressure, basically all it covers are broken bones and little else) and c) have limited coverage ($50K for folks like my dad who are over 73). Right now, my parents do not want to spend much time in the US because of this. They don't want a significant health event to end up bankrupting my brother and me. If Obama wins, that worry ends. With Obamacare, starting in 2014, they will have have insurance that will take care of b) and c). Republicans argue that the coverage will still be expensive, but Democrats and many independent studies argue that prices will trend down. Eitherway, even if i have to spend$2000 a month on insurance, I will save most of that through nanny-cost / day-care savings.

For me the choice is both simple and personal. If Obama wins, my parents move to the US in 2014 and live with us (they already have their GCs, btw since my brother is a citizen). If Romney wins, I will get to spend less time with them. I suspect, this will be true for most of you, at some point in the future. You're just not aware of it yet.

Time will tell how beneficial it is going to be but that was not the discussion topic of this thread in last page. The point was his immigration policies.

[abcx13]

I am absolutely fine with Obama granting EADs to DREAM kids while the legal immigration is in limbo. I can understand it.

I am not. It is rank cowardice. For that matter, he could lean on the DOS (a branch of the Executive, mind you) to make all dates temporarily current for a month or two to get all legal immigrants EADs. It would be fair then...

[imdeng]

Thanks Pedro for the thoughtful post.

Despite all the criticism of Obama, if he wins and then when the dust settles on his 8 years as the President, I think he would be considered one of the great ones - surely on par with LBJ and FDR. Remember that Lincoln was not quite liked much either when he was running for his second term.

Perhaps, best to move most of this last page into the 'left vs. right' thread.

To those on the left attacking Obama for being too far to the right, i agree with your concerns. I don't understand how people in the center can simultaneously attack him for being too far to the left. I am not a 'dyed-in-the-wool-liberal'. I have always been a moderate, and I like where Obama has stood all through these last 4 years. I think Obama has ranged between slightly left of center to slightly right of center on pretty much everything. Slightly right of center on things like drone strikes, medical marijuana, record deportations, and infact, Health care reform. Slightly left of center with the stimulus, Lilly-Ledbetter, energy policy and financial sector regulations. With the exception of the financial sector regulations, which I think Congress fluffed (not just him, by going too far on some regulations and not far enough on others) I think he's got it right every time.

However, I support Obama because Obamacare benefits me personally, and it will benefit most of you too. When you become citizens, if you want your parents to get their GCs and spend considerable periods of time in the US, the travelers insurance they use now will be insufficient. Your parents will not qualify for free Medicare or Medicaid and there is a 5 year period (until they become citizens) when they will not be able to buy into Medicare. Currently, insurance options for them are a) expensive and b) don't cover pre-existing conditions (if your parents have either diabetese or high blood pressure, basically all it covers are broken bones and little else) and c) have limited coverage ($50K for folks like my dad who are over 73). Right now, my parents do not want to spend much time in the US because of this. They don't want a significant health event to end up bankrupting my brother and me. If Obama wins, that worry ends. With Obamacare, starting in 2014, they will have have insurance that will take care of b) and c). Republicans argue that the coverage will still be expensive, but Democrats and many independent studies argue that prices will trend down. Eitherway, even if i have to spend$2000 a month on insurance, I will save most of that through nanny-cost / day-care savings.

For me the choice is both simple and personal. If Obama wins, my parents move to the US in 2014 and live with us (they already have their GCs, btw since my brother is a citizen). If Romney wins, I will get to spend less time with them. I suspect, this will be true for most of you, at some point in the future. You're just not aware of it yet.

[rupen86]

I think we could keep talking about this from our point of view, but we need to consider the administration point of view and the national interest.

I have already explained that by granting the EADs to the DREAMers, the government can collect taxes. Also, in a free and open society, we should not have a large segment of disenfranchised population in the long term as well. EADs to the DREAMers is a first step in that direction.

By contrast, H1Bs are already taxed and they already have all the rights and get all the benefits (sans the voting rights) that American citizens get. Making the dates current for us simply creates more overhead for the USCIS and they get nothing in the long run (not even the EAD renewal revenue). If I were working in the USCIS and if I had the visibility into the DOS policies, I would be extremely pissed if the dates were made current because it means more work and headaches for me.

I agree that dependent EADs can make a huge difference, and I do sympathize with those who don't have it. However, having gone through great troubles (by temporarily breaking our family apart while my wife moved and worked in India with our daughter while I stayed back) to make other options available to ourselves, I feel those options are available to everyone. In the end, those who *want and can* *will and do*.

To say that H1bs have all the rights of American citizens except voting can not be further from the truth. H1b is dependent on his employer to stay in this country. The day he goes out of job, he can no longer stay here or for some reason USCIS or Dos decides that they are not going to approve h1b extension or transfer, that person can not stay. So his existence is dependent on various factors. That is not true for American citizen. When you are talking about revenue in the form of tax, you are only looking at the revenue from the salary tax. When temporary worker becomes permanent citizen, he is surely going to make more investments and revenue is going to increase in different for of taxes. I absolutely do not believe that giving EAD to illegal was because of national interest. If that was the case, there was no need to wait till election. It could have been done much in advance.

[abcx13]

With due respect, I am talking of civil rights and liberties.You and I normally agree on things, but with all due respect you have no idea what you are talking about. Non-US citizens no longer have customary due process rights or habeaus corpus which is a pretty big deal and goes right to the heart of civil rights and liberties, if not fundamental rights. In theory you are also required to carry your papers at all times - I don't think it can get more draconian than that.

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/political-animal-a/2012_06/is_habeas_corpus_dead037877.php

That completely eviscerates your argument, which was weak as it is since, as already mentioned, H1Bs have employer mobility as most USCs do.

[abcx13]

Let me understand this clearly. Has any one of us have carried all our papers in the US ever? Let us say in a hypothetical situation, you are arrested for failure to carry your papers. Do you really think they can lock you away?

I have read the famous *1984* and have been greatly influenced by it at one time. I am however wised up and I believe such a draconian government will not arise. Human beings are not machines, and the *lines of reason* are not breached in a functioning society. Hence, I leave the Habues Corpus issue at the door. You are technically right (as the president was technically right on the *Libya terror* issue), but it's not the whole truth.

My point was only this: An illegal lives in fear of deportation every day. An illegal is breaking law every day by accruing illegal presence and getting paid illegally. The government can practically seize all his/her assets and send him/her out. That cannot happen with us. Hence, I find it far fetched to compare our predicaments to the illegals. Yes, we have problems, but a little context please?

Civil rights exist precisely for such 'hypotheticals'. If civil rights didn't exist, such hypotheticals would be routine occurrences. In fact some already are despite laws to the contrary.

If you had actually wised up after reading 1984 you would realize that civil liberties are rapidly eroding around right before your eyes - the right to privacy, the right to a free and fair trial, the right to just and reasonable punishment, existence of probable cause for searches, etc. Go read about the NDAA and Hedges vs. Obama and other violations of civil liberties and then come back and tell me that the government won't persecute (or prosecute) you for what is essentially thoughtcrime.

How would you feel about attending an Occupy Wall St. protest as a H1B? What if they arrest you and charge you with something just for being in a park and supporting those kids? Does it reduce your motivation to participate? That's direct suppression of your 1st Amendment (which thankfully is still guaranteed to everyone on US soil regardless of their citizenship) right there. Good luck trying to fight the system on that. Civil rights are eroded in small pernicious ways that in aggregate result in a large scale impact to what the populace can and cannot do.

Anyway, it's hard to argue with someone who simply wants to ignore the facts.

And re illegals, it is a choice they make. I am not asking them to make that choice. They made it and they can live with the consequences of their actions. It's really not my problem. That is the brutal reality. (I'm not talking about DREAMers here, I mean the original illegal that migrated.)

[rupen86]

With due respect, I am talking of civil rights and liberties. OF COURSE an H1B is stuck to the employer because the EMPLOYER PETITIONS FOR HIM/HER. If I was your employer and you ran after the first green field after I petitioned for you, I would be pissed (and somehow I have a feeling I am not alone in this rational judgment). Think about your H1B job as an apprenticeship if it helps.

Have you ever heard that there are self petitions that are independent of the employers? They are called EB2-NIW and EB1A.

If you don't buy a house today, you will pay rent or buy a house tomorrow. You will buy your groceries. You will send your kids to day cares/pre schools. You will take vacations. You pay taxes. So my friend, you are *already investing* and just because a few thousand legal immigrants in the US are not going to buy houses today is not going to budge the administration into granting us additional green cards.

I have already explained many times giving EADs to illegals is beneficial to the nation. Can you refute the specific points? Will the administration not gain additional tax revenue? As for its timing, sure, it is politically motivated. So what?

I guess summary here is: fixing legal immigration is not in national interest and fixing illegal immigration is in national interest.

[qesehmk]

Ironically - that is actually true for a variety of reasons: some rational some irrational:

1. The power of numbers. Legal backlogs runs into a few hundred thousands max. Illegal one is in millions.
2. The political expediency - Legal ones don't influence politics. Illegal ones do.
3. The job situation - illegal ones already have illegal jobs and are not pereceived to be taking jobs away. While legal immigration is attacked for jobs going to India or China or whatever.
4. Value / or Loss due to legal immigration backlog hasn't been demonstrated anywhere by anybody. Its anecdotal at best e.g. Bill gates talking about it. But how do you value 60K EB2 and EB3 bright people rotting in immigration pipeline? So unless somebody demonstrates that and makes a case for it is not going to make anybody believe that it is more important than the big numbered illegal alien backlog.


I guess summary here is: fixing legal immigration is not in national interest and fixing illegal immigration is in national interest.

[rupen86]

You have got it absolutely right. That is the gist of my argument, and however all of us do not like it, it is the truth.

I guess you will at least have Grassley as one taker of this argument :)

[rupen86]

I guess you will at least have Grassley as one taker of this argument :). Correction here, he won't agree about illegal part. But at least you got 50% vote for legal immigration from him.

[rupen86]

What does Grassley have to do with anything? You seem to be a big fan of captain Irrelevant Random.

Grassley opposes legal immigration just like you who says it is not in national interest. Btw, do you support or oppose HR 3012? HR 3012 makes it easier for people to get green card. So, according to your logic, you should oppose it since it is not in national interest. And going further by that logic, there should not be any green card number available. That way, people will stay on H1, EAD which will be good for national interest.

[rupen86]

Let me clarify for your benefit:

I have taken a Devil's advocate position and I have put out a thought by *PRETENDING* to be an AMERICAN LAWMAKER. Now, I have 2 problems: Legal immigration and illegal immigration. By being a Devil's advocate, I contend that the lawmaker will first attempt to fix the illegal immigration problem. Read Q's post above to understand the points he has made.

Now, I am no longer a Devil's advocate. I am a legal immigrant and I support legal immigration 100%. I have posted so many times IN FAVOR of HR 3012 on all possible forums, did my rounds of phone calls, went to the senators offices last year and early this year, and my stance here is nothing short of well known.

If you haven't followed my posts, I ask you try to do this and get a little bit of context. Once you have the context, you will realize your first statement is utterly false and you had no idea what you were talking about.

Legal immigration is not in national interest is devil's advocate opinion or your opinion ?

[qesehmk]

Pl keep the discussion objective rather than personal.

[bvsamrat]

You can count me as supporter of Grassley on strict control of H1B.

We are forgetting that by H1B, we are getting very many special privilages than any other country in the world.

Only the issue is that with H1B, you have to have a job all the times. But that is the aspect of H1B-temperory worker in a special skills category and and nothing more.

Or else, you can come with extraordinary special catogory skills without any job ! No objection!

Frankly, once the H1B skills are avaiable locally, they are no longer needed and hence the 6 years limit rightly put.

Due to the dual intent nature, H1Bs can also apply for GC and that should be considered as an advantage as against other counries for eg. Middle East where people would stay only temperorily even for 10-15 years with the intent of going back to the home country.

As per the waiting times/Visa number increase etc. for EB2 and EB3, it is to be decided and guided by US economy,growth factors and local people.

If one thinks 10 years tax paying H1B with without GC is very hard.
But if so- why so many applicants for H1B in 2007/2008 even resulting in lottery.

it shows that despite all this, people still prefer this route of H1B to GC.
With recent 2007 and 2010 alloting EAD's you can not complain as it gave us a very good opportunity to stay on AOS even without job.

What more one would expect? dole and food stamps? like they do it in NZ and AUS but no jobs even for doctors who have to resort to driving cabs?




I guess you will at least have Grassley as one taker of this argument :). Correction here, he won't agree about illegal part. But at least you got 50% vote for legal immigration from him.

[rupen86]

You can count me as supporter of Grassley on strict control of H1B.

We are forgetting that by H1B, we are getting very many special privilages than any other country in the world.

Only the issue is that with H1B, you have to have a job all the times. But that is the aspect of H1B-temperory worker in a special skills category and and nothing more.

Or else, you can come with extraordinary special catogory skills without any job ! No objection!

Frankly, once the H1B skills are avaiable locally, they are no longer needed and hence the 6 years limit rightly put.

Due to the dual intent nature, H1Bs can also apply for GC and that should be considered as an advantage as against other counries for eg. Middle East where people would stay only temperorily even for 10-15 years with the intent of going back to the home country.

As per the waiting times/Visa number increase etc. for EB2 and EB3, it is to be decided and guided by US economy,growth factors and local people.

If one thinks 10 years tax paying H1B with without GC is very hard.
But if so- why so many applicants for H1B in 2007/2008 even resulting in lottery.

it shows that despite all this, people still prefer this route of H1B to GC.
With recent 2007 and 2010 alloting EAD's you can not complain as it gave us a very good opportunity to stay on AOS even without job.

What more one would expect? dole and food stamps? like they do it in NZ and AUS but no jobs even for doctors who have to resort to driving cabs?

Summary from your post is: H1b is very good visa and if one is asking for faster GC, he is asking too much.

[rupen86]

My wish: Legal immigration should be the prime focus over all immigration related issues in the US.

The reality: Legal immigration is the last thing (and hence it is the least priority issue) on the lawmakers agenda.

My opinion: Fixing the legal immigration is NOT in the national interest. Fixing the illegal immigration IS in the national interest.

My devil's advocate position: I am a US lawmaker. If I belong to the tea party, I want to send all illegals home. If I am a moderate, I want to get the illegals in the mainstream. If I am a bleeding heart liberal, I want to pass the DREAM. Legal immigration? What the hell is that? Don't these people have enough privileges already? OK, let's think about this illegal problem more.

My position on immigration issues:
a. Support HR 3012 unquestioningly. Hates the fact of the large spread between waiting times of the ROWers and Indians.
b. Support EADs for H4 spouses (whose primaries have i140 clear) and think this should be one of the top priority items should HR 3012 fail.
c. Do not have enough information on Grassley's H1B proposal to form judgment. On surface, I support tightening the screws to stop the H1B abuse.
d. Support the STEM bill very strongly.
e. Eager to learn and educate others seeking information.

Ok, so your opinion is solving legal immigration problem is not in national interest but your wish is it should be solved. Did I get it right ?

[GhostWriter]

So what will Ron Gotcher do now :). Did you use EAD or H1-B. I didn't realize there was a shortage in this category.



I have taken a Devil's advocate position

[vizcard]

Stopping illegal immigration is like trying to hold a paper cup under a faucet. The focus needs to be on slowing down influx through border protection and legalizing the DREAMers. Without illegal immigration, a lot of the menial jobs will not be done in a cheap manner. So the cosy of your lawn care goes up, your nanny or housekeeper gets too expensive, etc etc.

I'm not in favor of solving illegal before legal but the reality is that it is a bigger problem in terms of sheet numbers. Plus it's a political play.

[Pedro Gonzales]

Not directly related to the topic at hand, but the Wadhwa report released by the Kaufmann foundation (summarized in this Murthy memo here: http://www.murthy.com/2012/10/23/kauffman-immigrant-entrepreneurship-slows-overall-zooms-among-indians/) has some interesting points.


Indian entrepreneurs rank first among immigrants that have founded companies since 2006, in high-tech industries like bioscience, computers and communications, innovation and manufacturing, semiconductors, software, defense / aerospace, and environmental products and services.

Several other findings underscore the pivotal role played by Indian entrepreneurs in the engineering and technology sectors, during the 2006-2012 period studied by the Kauffman team:

Indians continue to be at the forefront of immigrant-led entrepreneurship.
Of the total of immigrant-founded [engineering and technology] companies, 33.2% had Indian founders, up about 7% from 2005. Indians have founded more such companies than immigrants born in the next top seven immigrant-founder-sending countries combined.
The top ten sending countries of immigrant entrepreneurs in descending order were India (33.2%), China (8.1%), the United Kingdom (6.3%), Canada (4.2%), Germany (3.9%), Israel (3.5%), Russia (2.4%), Korea (2.2%), Australia (2.0%) and the Netherlands (2.0%).

I don't endorse anyone engaging in the time consuming India vs. ROW debates, but to those of you who do, this may help combat the "Indians are all frauds" argument. To be clear, the numbers above probably mirror the % of EB visas given to each of these countries, so it would not support an "Indians are the best" argument either. It would however support an argument that, as a group, Indians pull their weight in terms of job creation, so a switch to a FIFO distribution of visa numbers and the resulting increase in Indians getting GCs at the expense of ROWers will not result in a change in numbers of jobs created in the US economy.

[kkruna]

Yes this was brought up in one of the Ron's forum too. But you can't appeal to logical faculties of people who are happy for the benefit they have now and want to preserve it. The typical response in such cases is that they would denounce the whole class of people who are pressing for equity. A good example of Consistency Theory in Psychology.

[vrs7734]

Yes this was brought up in one of the Ron's forum too. But you can't appeal to logical faculties of people who are happy for the benefit they have now and want to preserve it. The typical response in such cases is that they would denounce the whole class of people who are pressing for equity. A good example of Consistency Theory in Psychology.

Exactly for the same reason, I have stopped writing anything on Ron's forum. That forum is now filled with narcissists, whiners and Indian haters. People, who tried to fight back HR3012 and could not even gather 50 people on their forum (sorry organization) are acting like messiah of ROW. Funny thing is they still are using Ron's forum as nobody cares about their own. Typical armchair quarterbacks :cool:

[Ramsen]

In Ron's Forum only 5 people are more active and another 5 may be active little bit. Yes Row does not have numbers now. Ron himself is supporting country quota removal but he prefers to do with recapture so that impact will be minimal for Row. So Row opposition does not make or break Hr 3012 as they have a few in number. Even in future years they cannot organise 50 people. But I suspect Senators themselves are hesitant on Hr 3012 or country quota removal. If that is the case then country quota removal will always distance dream. We will get indication by the end of the year. Or some invisible forces are behind the stalling of the bill. There are many other organizations may be lobbying against the bill(of course nothing was shown in the paper). Infact healthcare lobby(manily nurses) is strong always. Hr 3012 is against their interests. Of course AILA and some companies were not that much active after Grassley amendment.


Exactly for the same reason, I have stopped writing anything on Ron's forum. That forum is now filled with narcissists, whiners and Indian haters. People, who tried to fight back HR3012 and could not even gather 50 people on their forum (sorry organization) are acting like messiah of ROW. Funny thing is they still are using Ron's forum as nobody cares about their own. Typical armchair quarterbacks :cool:

[rupen86]

In Ron's Forum only 5 people are more active and another 5 may be active little bit. Yes Row does not have numbers now. Ron himself is supporting country quota removal but he prefers to do with recapture so that impact will be minimal for Row. So Row opposition does not make or break Hr 3012 as they have a few in number. Even in future years they cannot organise 50 people. But I suspect Senators themselves are hesitant on Hr 3012 or country quota removal. If that is the case then country quota removal will always distance dream. We will get indication by the end of the year. Or some invisible forces are behind the stalling of the bill. There are many other organizations may be lobbying against the bill(of course nothing was shown in the paper). Infact healthcare lobby(manily nurses) is strong always. Hr 3012 is against their interests. Of course AILA and some companies were not that much active after Grassley amendment.

I used to be active on Ron's forum but later gave up because that got crowded with ROWers whose only goal in life was opposing HR 3012. And I do not blame them because it is like snatching benefit from them which they already have however unfair it might be. We would do same if we were in that situation. Now, coming to HR 3012, I do not think senators in principle would be opposed to country quota removal. If that was the case, we would not have seen any progress on the bill after it reached senate. Till Grassley removed hold from the bill, we were periodically seeing some news on this. I think something happened after he removed the hold. There might be senators or other lobbyists who are against Grassley's amendments and because the positions is take that it would be passed with unanimous consent, it may not be moving forward. This is my guess from the events that have happened.

[nilebib]

Recently, I got same feeling at Ron site.. I will never return to that site..
You guys are very balanced here and do very good mathematical prediction on movements.

[abcx13]

Not directly related to the topic at hand, but the Wadhwa report released by the Kaufmann foundation (summarized in this Murthy memo here: http://www.murthy.com/2012/10/23/kauffman-immigrant-entrepreneurship-slows-overall-zooms-among-indians/) has some interesting points.



I don't endorse anyone engaging in the time consuming India vs. ROW debates, but to those of you who do, this may help combat the "Indians are all frauds" argument. To be clear, the numbers above probably mirror the % of EB visas given to each of these countries, so it would not support an "Indians are the best" argument either. It would however support an argument that, as a group, Indians pull their weight in terms of job creation, so a switch to a FIFO distribution of visa numbers and the resulting increase in Indians getting GCs at the expense of ROWers will not result in a change in numbers of jobs created in the US economy.

You'd somehow have to segment founders a % of total immigrants by year. My contention is that that percentage has declined over time for Indians. Most Indians smart enough to set up companies these days GO BACK because they can't be bothered to wait here for 5 years before getting a GC. Basically if you are an Indian immigrant today, you can't set up a company! You have to wait 5+ years for a GC. So I'm pretty sure that Wadhwa's immigrant founders migrated when times were better and waits were shorter...

[rupen86]

good article on how Obama and Romney both are either ignorant or lying about the EB immigration.

http://discuss.ilw.com/content.php?745-Bloggings-Clueless-on-Business-Immigration-by-Mike-Hammond

[abcx13]

good article on how Obama and Romney both are either ignorant or lying about the EB immigration.

http://discuss.ilw.com/content.php?745-Bloggings-Clueless-on-Business-Immigration-by-Mike-Hammond

Raises some good and obvious points. I'm sure that the fine folk here could design a better policy than any of the two idiots running for President. (There I said it, I do think both of them are idiots.)

[pdfeb09]

My contention is that that percentage has declined over time for Indians. Most Indians smart enough to set up companies these days GO BACK because they can't be bothered to wait here for 5 years before getting a GC.
Not necessarily .. Even if someone is smart enough to set up a company, he/she may need the experience to pull it off, not to mention the funding. If 5 years is the timeline for a GC, it is a good enough time to get the know-how and find the avenues for funding your own enterprise.

Moreover, most people realize that they can set up their own shop AFTER working for some organization. Few are those that go on their own right out of the college.

[abcx13]

Not necessarily .. Even if someone is smart enough to set up a company, he/she may need the experience to pull it off, not to mention the funding. If 5 years is the timeline for a GC, it is a good enough time to get the know-how and find the avenues for funding your own enterprise.

Moreover, most people realize that they can set up their own shop AFTER working for some organization. Few are those that go on their own right out of the college.

My point is that if you have a great idea today, you are not going to wait five years to execute on it. A lot of people talk about getting experience, skills, blah, blah, blah by working at some established company for X number of years. I think real entrepreneurs just go out and start their company instead. In other words, talkers talk and doers do. The really successful entreprenuers just go and start companies and take their lumps as they come, while the talkers keep talking about how they'll have the experience, skills, network, funding, etc. someday to maybe start a company. That day usually never comes...I know too many people like that (I'm probably like that too though I like to think things might have been different if I had a GC when I was in college - though that's a lame excuse).

Oh, and the really smart guys don't let funding get in the way. They beg, borrow and steal to make it happen. There's a great story about how the airbnb founders sold cereal to raise money...but you can't really do that on a H1 or a F1. So good luck. You can't even quit your job...

[bvsamrat]

Yes. If one can wait for 5-10 years for a GC, we know what they in for! Career or other things?. 10 years is a long time to loose a career of one's dreams.


Not necessarily .. Even if someone is smart enough to set up a company, he/she may need the experience to pull it off, not to mention the funding. If 5 years is the timeline for a GC, it is a good enough time to get the know-how and find the avenues for funding your own enterprise.

Moreover, most people realize that they can set up their own shop AFTER working for some organization. Few are those that go on their own right out of the college.

[pdfeb09]

My point is that if you have a great idea today, you are not going to wait five years to execute on it.
And my point was, many people get the idea that they can turn into a successful business after working for a while and not out of college directly. There are not many Zuckerbergs or Bill Gates .. there are some and they probably don't even come here ...

[abcx13]

And my point was, many people get the idea that they can turn into a successful business after working for a while and not out of college directly. There are not many Zuckerbergs or Bill Gates .. there are some and they probably don't even come here ...

I just think what you are proposing is preposterous. If you wait 5-7 years for a GC to start a business (usually technology), your idea is probably outdated and irrelevant by then if someone else hasn't already done it. Why is it so hard to recognize that the lack of a GC is a huge impediment to starting a business?

[pdfeb09]

You'd somehow have to segment founders a % of total immigrants by year. My contention is that that percentage has declined over time for Indians. Most Indians smart enough to set up companies these days GO BACK because they can't be bothered to wait here for 5 years before getting a GC. Basically if you are an Indian immigrant today, you can't set up a company! You have to wait 5+ years for a GC. So I'm pretty sure that Wadhwa's immigrant founders migrated when times were better and waits were shorter...


Not necessarily .. Even if someone is smart enough to set up a company, he/she may need the experience to pull it off, not to mention the funding. If 5 years is the timeline for a GC, it is a good enough time to get the know-how and find the avenues for funding your own enterprise.

Moreover, most people realize that they can set up their own shop AFTER working for some organization. Few are those that go on their own right out of the college.


I just think what you are proposing is preposterous. If you wait 5-7 years for a GC to start a business (usually technology), your idea is probably outdated and irrelevant by then if someone else hasn't already done it. Why is it so hard to recognize that the lack of a GC is a huge impediment to starting a business?

Let's back up a little bit. You said that you think the proportion of people that can be successful business people has gone down because of the time it takes to get the GC.

All I was saying was, there are many people who can start and sustain a successful business, but many times it takes a few years for them to form and run with the idea. I was saying the proportion of people who can successfully establish and run a business has NOT gone down.

If you have an idea today and do not want to wait .. fine .. NOT having an idea for business right out of the school does NOT mean you are dumb .. !! as you tried to imply ...

BTW .. NO one denies that not having a GC is a huge impediment in starting a business if you have the idea !

my last on this.

[abcx13]

But Zuck and Gates (not a fan of them, and using them just for the debate) are the *outliers* and the human civilization has been shouldered 100% by the outliers.

I do agree to abcx - if you *have it*, you won't wait to get irrelevant experience and become a corporate slave. I am not sure if giving fast GCs is the answer, but the fact is that the current wait times are not making it easy. Many people find the infrastructure and endless possibilities when they come to the US. If they don't have immigration on their side, how are they going to turn those possibilities into reality?

P.S. About the abcx's original claim, I can't speak for the entrepreneurs, but I can speak for the really smart kids from India who used to come in hordes to the US schools in the 90s and early 00s. They are gone. They are not coming here any longer. The US is just not getting the cream at the top like it used to.

I'm not a fan of Zuck either but I think more highly of Gates (for better or worse, with his Gates Foundation work, he has cleansed his name, at least with me)! Nevertheless there are other more respectable/less controversial examples like Sergey Brin.

I think really smart kids from India still come here and the US still gets the cream compared to other countries but sadly a lot of these kids end up going back because of all the immigration hassles. I personally know of many who have already done so or refuse to get on the GC treadmill because they will go back after a couple of years anyway given the long wait. But I agree with you that most of the students who come these days seem to go the Tri-valley type diploma mills (just go hang out on trackitt for a while). In the long run this will probably reduce the high respect that Indians currently enjoy due to the hard work of all the IIT/IIM/AIIMS immigrants in the past.

[rupen86]

There are other aspects of EB immigration other than the EB2-IC and EB3-I green card categories. H1B, L1, PERM filing, labor certification to name a few.

An argument could be made that massive backlogs exist BECAUSE the system is efficient. If PERM/labor was taking 3 to 5 years for everyone, EB1 and EB2-WW would never have a high usage, and EB2-I and even EB3-I would receive substantially more portion of the visas.

Obama could use his executive power to alleviate the backlog though. I am not sure what's the opinion of the people here - can he do it to stop counting dependents?

from the above list of H1B, L1, PERM filing, labor certification, which process is faster now under Obama compared to earlier ?

[bvsamrat]

Very true

In olden times, toppers from most of the colleges and IITs end up in top US universities and hence the name and fame.

I also know quite a few IITians who recently got into the best universities, but went back immediately after seing the ground reality. Do not blame them. That's why I say STEM is the neeed and that to0 to the top US colleges only with good GPAs, if US needs to attract good brain power and would be enterprenuers.



I'm not a fan of Zuck either but I think more highly of Gates (for better or worse, with his Gates Foundation work, he has cleansed his name, at least with me)! Nevertheless there are other more respectable/less controversial examples like Sergey Brin.

I think really smart kids from India still come here and the US still gets the cream compared to other countries but sadly a lot of these kids end up going back because of all the immigration hassles. I personally know of many who have already done so or refuse to get on the GC treadmill because they will go back after a couple of years anyway given the long wait. But I agree with you that most of the students who come these days seem to go the Tri-valley type diploma mills (just go hang out on trackitt for a while). In the long run this will probably reduce the high respect that Indians currently enjoy due to the hard work of all the IIT/IIM/AIIMS immigrants in the past.

[rupen86]

H1B is more streamlined with a clear employee-employer relationship memo, and the USCIS/DOS seem to be weeding out the bad apples from the barrel. Also, the labor certifications are more scrutinized in the past. Finally, we all know the record speed at which the USCIS processed applications earlier this year that caused a retrogression so early.

I don't know if Obama is responsible for everything and not necessarily everything may be faster, but the USCIS did demonstrate early in the year that if it wanted, it could process thousands of applications in a relatively short time. Heck, most of the 485 filers this year received EAD/AP in LESS than 2 months. Less than 2m months I say, and in many cases, less than 45 days (it took me slightly over a month personally). So obviously, things have improved greatly than in the past, and this year's supposed *debacle* was far better managed than the 2007 chaos.

If processing 485 faster amounts to reducing backlog, I agree.

[abcx13]

Is the backlog the problem of the White House? The president cannot just take an administrative order out of his hat and grant us more numbers. The Congress has to pass a law that he can only sign. The president can only *execute*...he cannot *enact*. Civics 101.

Also, supply-chain logistics clearly tell us that if the inventory is being processed very efficiently (fast processing of labor applications), and if the number of takers is limited (fixed number of visas), then the backlog will increase. In fact, to achieve backlog reduction, the USCIS had to be very inefficient. If they were taking 5 years to process an average labor certification versus 3 months, then you might see the EB2-I dates even current today.

Obama's claim is absolutely true and everyone on this board has witnessed the record speed at which their applications were processed. The backlog has NOTHING TO DO WITH THE EFFICIENCY. It is purely a function of the supply of visas. It is a problem of the legislation, not of execution.

Don't disagree with anything you say except that I think Obama might be taking credit for something he personally had no hand in!

I believe not counting dependents can be done with an admin order according to Cyrus Mehta.

[rupen86]

Is the backlog the problem of the White House? The president cannot just take an administrative order out of his hat and grant us more numbers. The Congress has to pass a law that he can only sign. The president can only *execute*...he cannot *enact*. Civics 101.

Also, supply-chain logistics clearly tell us that if the inventory is being processed very efficiently (fast processing of labor applications), and if the number of takers is limited (fixed number of visas), then the backlog will increase. In fact, to achieve backlog reduction, the USCIS had to be very inefficient. If they were taking 5 years to process an average labor certification versus 3 months, then you might see the EB2-I dates even current today.

Obama's claim is absolutely true and everyone on this board has witnessed the record speed at which their applications were processed. The backlog has NOTHING TO DO WITH THE EFFICIENCY. It is purely a function of the supply of visas. It is a problem of the legislation, not of execution.


To the point 1: if that was the case, Obama would not have claimed that he did something to reduce backlog. Can he make executive order? I am not sure on what he can and what he can. But he very well demonstrated that by doing executive order on illegals. And he can certainly do for H4s. He promised comprehensive immigration bill in the first year when both senate and house had democrat majority. He could have very well pushed other legal immigration bills which would have got bipartisan support.[/I]

Point 2: This is unique and weird solution to the problem. But is has not been implemented that way. So, no point in talking about something which is not done and will not be done. We are talking about backlog here, not efficiency.[/I]

Point 3: May be everyone on this board have witnessed their 485 getting processed faster. But I am sure there will be hardly be people here who will agree that backlog is reduced. Because people are interested in how fast green card backlog is reduced. Not how fast their 485 is processed.

[rupen86]

Your original point was: "THE PRESIDENT IS LYING". I proved to you he can certainly take credit for faster processing if it happened under his rule. You can claim "but, but but...he didn't do anything", which could be true, or it could be not. There is no way to know.

You just do not seem to understand that the backlog has NOTHING to do with the president. And, EB1, and EB2-WW are clear winners of the increased efficiency as they do walk away with EADs in 1 month and GC in 6 months after their PERM is approved. So NOT EVERYONE will reach your conclusion. The backlog is only a problem of IC. Everyone else has a different tale to tell.

OF COURSE the backlog is more BECAUSE the system is efficient. You can't have your cake and eat it too.

My last post here. I am drawn into irrelevant side discussion again and again.

I said he is either ignorant or lying that his administration has reduced the backlog. You are trying to prove that he did so by faster processing of 485. Now, you can believe that faster processing of 485 reduces backlog, I do not. Now, your another point is that enhanced efficiency of PERM and I140 is increasing backlog for I/C. Has this efficiency increased under Obama? If yes, he can take credit that he reduced backlog for ROW. Not everyone will agree that backlog problem is there because only people who are affected will tell that. I believe on this forum most of the people are I/C. That's why I believe they will agree that backlog problem is not reduced. Just because you believe that others opinion is not relevant to the point you are talking does not make that irrelevant. The other side can also think same for you.

[rupen86]

It may be doable, but in my opinion, it's too risky and it doesn't help their election prospects in any way. I think a better solution is to invent the temporary W visa (that Lofgren had in one of the competing proposals during the early days of HR 3012) and push all dependents under FB altogether. It will still require an action from the Congress.

On the other hand, giving EADs to H4 dependents *should be* more doable. I am no law expert, but if DREAM kids can have EADs, certainly H4 depends too, and that could be a focus of immigration groups should HR 3012 fail. Contact the president directly and try to influence him - of course if it's doable via an executive order.

Moving dependents to FB is more difficult than 3012. Democrats care more about FB than EB. When moving dependent from EB to FB, that would mean eating FB quota which democrats are never going to agree to.

I agree with election politics reason about EAD for H4.

[qesehmk]

I see some people have visceral hatred of Obama. While anything and everything can be discussed on this forum - may i suggest that we take "I hate [Obama, Bush, Cheney, Romney, *]" kind of discussion to a thread by such name PLEASE.

Don't mean to offend anybody. Just saying that please open a thread for that kind of discussion if there interest in politics since most people on this thread are interested in understanding what's happening latest on various bills.

[Pedro Gonzales]

Rupen,

The basic issue is that your definition of backlog (which matches the definition of all of us on this forum) is different from the President's, the DoS or the USCIS definition. Their definition of backlog is, applications waiting to be processed BY THEM. Yours is applications awaiting green cards. The latter doesn't concern them. They're not in the business of providing green cards, they're in the business of processing applications for green cards. Your application and mine, was processed, we were provided our combo card and our names removed from the backlog. In this respect, the President was neither lying, nor ignorant. His concern is just different from ours. If you want to attack his focus on healthcare reform instead of comprehensive immigration reform in 2009, that's a different point that probably deserves to be in another thread, as I stated a week ago and Q has repeated today.

[bvsamrat]

Earlier I read that few important immigration bills were passsed during lame duck session. will there be any such luck for HR-3012?. Is it still under consideration?


Rupen,

The basic issue is that your definition of backlog (which matches the definition of all of us on this forum) is different from the President's, the DoS or the USCIS definition. Their definition of backlog is, applications waiting to be processed BY THEM. Yours is applications awaiting green cards. The latter doesn't concern them. They're not in the business of providing green cards, they're in the business of processing applications for green cards. Your application and mine, was processed, we were provided our combo card and our names removed from the backlog. In this respect, the President was neither lying, nor ignorant. His concern is just different from ours. If you want to attack his focus on healthcare reform instead of comprehensive immigration reform in 2009, that's a different point that probably deserves to be in another thread, as I stated a week ago and Q has repeated today.

[Pedro Gonzales]

Earlier I read that few important immigration bills were passsed during lame duck session. will there be any such luck for HR-3012?. Is it still under consideration?
I'd say there's a 20% chance, but i'm basing it on absolutely no information.

[gs1968]

To bvsamrat
This article might interest you.As Pedro has mentioned there is a lot of speculation but no concrete information in this article

http://www.metrocorpcounsel.com/articles/21083/immigration-legislation-lame-duck-session-yes

[gs1968]

Another article on STEM visas-is there still hope?

http://www.rollcall.com/news/Last-Ditch-Talks-Resume-on-High-Tech-Visa-Legislation-218674-1.html?pos=hln

Also this link from the Boston globe

http://bostonglobe.com/business/2012/11/03/election-issue-critical-innovation-opening-doors-for-educated-entrepreneurial-immigrants/KYg74JcG36VfZ1COedaB1O/story.html

Sorry for multiple edits but it appears that the issue is still alive even amidst the cacophony of the elections

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/comment/9618891/Keeping-foreign-talent-in-the-US-is-an-issue-on-which-both-sides-must-agree.html

[redsox2009]

I think STEM has more chance of passing than HR3012. I also belive STEM brings more relief than to HR 3012.

STEM adds 55000 more GC's
HR 3012 doesn't add new GC's but will remove Country quota after x number of years.

[redsox2009]

HR 3012 is still ahead in the legislation process than the STEM. During the heyday of HR 3012, there were more positive reports and yet, the bill has sputtered to the finish line. STEM has a long way to go.


In 2004, 20000 additional H1B bill was introduced in both house and senate at the same time during lame duck sessions. This year STEM was introduced by the Judicary comitte members in both House and senate, this is a good sign since they can influence the schedule of the bills to committe and outcome from the comitte.



For EB2-IC, STEM provides minimal relief and the majority of the benefits are expected to go to EB3-ROW, who could be current with the next few years while EB2-IC continue to languish behind by several years. Unless country caps are removed, the EB2-IC backlog simply will not go away. If you are in EB2-IC, you should first support HR 3012 and then STEM.


Perhaps you should read the bill before making the statement, Bill says the job requirement should have requirement for higher education and person should do the masters in the US. I don't know what makes you think it is helping EB-3. If unused visas avaliable after giving visas to people who did their master's/Ph.d in then US, then they will give visas to people who did masters in foregin countries, if visas are avaliable then visas will be spilled over to Eb-1 to down.

Recently the USCI has changed the I140 application format, not sure if the cahnge in I140 is to streamline new STEM Process or just to streamline their own process.


I advise you to read the bill before making statements and passing wrong impressions.

My personal belief, I don't care who benifts or who don't, as long as the additional visas are granted and lines are moving fast than anticiapted/expected, the bill is good for the immigration community. Stop complaining and start working with your senators/house members.

[rupen86]

Rupen,

The basic issue is that your definition of backlog (which matches the definition of all of us on this forum) is different from the President's, the DoS or the USCIS definition. Their definition of backlog is, applications waiting to be processed BY THEM. Yours is applications awaiting green cards. The latter doesn't concern them. They're not in the business of providing green cards, they're in the business of processing applications for green cards. Your application and mine, was processed, we were provided our combo card and our names removed from the backlog. In this respect, the President was neither lying, nor ignorant. His concern is just different from ours. If you want to attack his focus on healthcare reform instead of comprehensive immigration reform in 2009, that's a different point that probably deserves to be in another thread, as I stated a week ago and Q has repeated today.

People can twist the meaning of a word, the way it would suit them. If he had reduced green card backlog by bringing in CIR, he would have talked about that. But because he has not, he chose to change the meaning of the word. The immigration backlog would affect people who are in that pool. So, if some kind of poll was to be conducted, those would be the people who would be polled. Among those people, you will hardly find people who would say backlog is reduced. Even by USCIS definition of backlog, the backlog is not reduced. H1b application is taking record time now than ever before. Unless, we are talking about I140 processing backlog, I do not know any other things where backlog is reduced. I never wanted to address healthcare issue in this forum and did not raise the point until some started talking about that.

[rupen86]

To bvsamrat
This article might interest you.As Pedro has mentioned there is a lot of speculation but no concrete information in this article

http://www.metrocorpcounsel.com/articles/21083/immigration-legislation-lame-duck-session-yes

This article seems to suggest that some employers are opposing 3012 because it would create backlog for other countries and to counter balance that STEM bill is introduced. However, I do not know why they did not oppose initially and chose to oppose later.

[gs1968]

To sportsfan33

I agree on your assessment about the odds of HR 3012 vs STEM Act. The only point of concern is that the same players in the 3012 game (Smith/Lofgren/Schumer etc) who agreed to eliminate country caps about 1 year ago( it has been that long since 3012 cleared the House) seem to have no qualms in including country caps in their STEM legislation. Has there been a re-consideration of the wisdom of country cap elimination or is this just a start and when some version of 3012 passes they feel it would apply to STEM also?

On the topic of STEM the article linked below is an interesting read and shows how hard it is to change anything immigration-related in America

http://betabeat.com/2012/09/schumer-senator-brains-act-h1n1-visas-green-cards-general-assembly/

[redsox2009]

And it still does not change the fact that HR 3012 is ahead in the legislative process.


Boy oh boy. I really love it when people make such statements that make them look stupid later on.



EXACTLY. And it is well known that plenty of people in EB3-ROW have masters degrees or higher, because it is an open secret that EB3-ROW still hasn't mastered the art of inflating the job requirements and pass it as EB2.



The point is that EB3-ROW will have sufficient demand to nearly consume the additional STEM visas because we know that plenty of people in EB3-ROW have Masters and higher. There will be hardly any spillover because EB3-ROW by all accounts has tremendous demand that will be visible once the dates cross August 2007.



Huh?



And my advice is to think and do your research before passing judgments.



By all means, work with your senators, rally, get the STEM bill passed and watch EB3-ROW becoming current and EB2-I lagging behind 7 years. Please come back and tell us how you feel about an EB3-ROW co-worker getting cool jobs and opportunities while you remain stuck in a rut. There is no way I am wasting my time with the STEM bill until the country caps are lifted because it does nothing to improve EB2-I backlog.

Can you tell me what is difference between EB2 vs EB3? if the job requirement has Masters or higher it is default EB2. So if you think EB3 Row will use STEM Bill, help me understand.

[rupen86]

You keep asking for the moon consistently, and you will never get the moon. The US is not in the business of giving a green card to everyone who wants to apply. Nearly the entire world (and especially even Europe now) is in a worse place, so everyone would like to immigrate. But everyone can't - it has to be done under a quota.

The link that was pointed to by a lawyer was not correct, because the lawyer also wanted to ask for the moon, and there is no moon to be had here.

The only way to eliminate backlog (the way you define the backlog) is HR 3012. It makes the field even and eliminates GREAT VARIANCES from the system. If the system had no variance and was predictable, everyone will accept it and will move on.

The US president cannot pass HR 3012. He can only sign a law that could be passed by the Congress.

Finally, a good number of H1B applications are flatly denied or delayed because of the blatant misuse of the EVC model. I say, good riddance. H1B is a "good intent and faith" based visa, and those words do not rhyme with "desi body shop". If these bad apples are thrown out of the barrel, it will make things for legit people. I for instance, have never had H1B stamping issues (4 times and counting) at consulates in Canada and India.

Why do you want moon then by passing HR 3012 ?

You seem to be suggesting that president is helpless unless congress acts. This can not be more further from the truth. He certainly has the ability to influence congress. In case of Hr 3012, all that was needed was the commitment at upper leadership to push it. If it was put up for the vote, it would have been passed by now. If he had put CIR in first 2 years when democrats where in absolute majority, we would not be talking about this now assuming CIR included legal immigration.

On H1b, you are suggesting that denials and delays are for EVC model. While I agree for denials, I do not agree for delays. Even for direct employer-employee relationship, it is taking longer time then any time ever before. And why does EVC model still exist if USCIS wants to eliminate it ?

[qesehmk]

sportsfan - this is a great post because it clearly lays out how HR3012 is different from STEM (at least from EBIC perspective). How confident you are about this? Anybody else who can corroborate this?

We should probably create a separate thread to lay this difference out very clearly in front of all EB folks.


A person does not need EB2 categorization to apply in EB6 (the new proposed STEM category). By definition, a person who has a Masters or higher will be eligible for EB6. Also, this category is subject to 7%, so EB6-I will be 7% of 55K, which is around 3850.

Once this category comes into effect, everyone who is eligible in EB2 and EB3 will apply. Let's assume no one in EB2-ROW will apply because EB2-ROW is current. In that case, the bulk of the applicants will come from EB3-ROW. Since EB3-ROW demand is estimated to be far in excess of 55K, and since a good portion of those applicants are estimated to be STEM beneficiaries, we can very well project that when the category goes into effect, EB2-I will receive almost no spillover.

What's worse, even out of the extra 3850 numbers, some numbers might be taken by EB3-I. Some folks in EB3-I very well have Masters and above. So the net benefit to EB2-I is close to 3000 additional visas and *maybe* some more spillover (i.e. STEM eligible EB3-ROW folks who might have otherwise ported to EB2-ROW). I don't deny there is some benefit to EB2-I, but it is small in the grand scheme of things and I am not losing my sleep over it.

I hope the picture is clear to you now.

[abcx13]

I think Pedro was the one who originally pointed out that the benefits of the STEM bill will mostly go to EB3-ROW. His and sportsfan's argument is that the new STEM visa does not require the job to ask for a MS degree, unlike the existing EB2 system where you don't automatically qualify for second preference just by virtue of having a MS, the job has to require it too. I've never seen the part of the bill that this is waived for the proposed STEM visa.

I don't think the intent of the bill is to have STEM MS holders working at a car wash or a Dunkin' Donuts, which is precisely what will happen if sportsfan's interpretation is correct (hello Tri Valley).

[nyy_27]

Apart from the points the Pedro and Sportsfan bring up, if you also look at the composition of students in STEM graduate classes in most accredited universities in the US, I think no one would dispute that Indian and Chinese students comprise a large chunk, definitely more than 7%, perhaps as much as 50% or more in some masters and doctoral programs. So, even ethically, I have a problem with supporting any law that has a backlog built in. It just makes a mockery of the effort the students have to put in, and makes the benefits dependent on a cosmic accident called place of birth.

[abcx13]

abcx, the bill will not still grant GCs to STEM grads working at a car wash. it clearly says that the person must be working in a STEM field to be eligible. Ok, I forgot about that stipulation. But anyway, my other point still stands that I haven't seen anything which says that the job doesn't need to require a STEM MS (like EB2).

[Pedro Gonzales]

I had read one of the STEM bills (the GOP one, I think) but not the other (the Dem one), since, at the time, it's language hadn't yet been released. The one I did not read may have had a different interpretation.

I was pretty certain about my interpretation of the language at the time. there was some debate in this forum and I believe I convinced the other person (wasn't you abcx13?). I was unable to find those posts now, not sure why. I remember that the 25% figure was from someone reputed on trackitt (sangiano, perhaps?). In any case, I don't really think its worth any of our time looking into it now, until there is some more chatter about the STEM bill. If there is, I promise to read both bills again and summarize once more keeping all the above points in mind.

[abcx13]

In any case, I don't really think its worth any of our time looking into it now, until there is some more chatter about the STEM bill. If there is, I promise to read both bills again and summarize once more keeping all the above points in mind.Agreed!

(pass 10 char limit)

[qesehmk]

Q, pedro had brought the point up first as others have said. I didn't read the bill yet, just its summary, and based upon that, I am basing my argument. The summary of the bill said that a) Masters and above education, and b) a job in the STEM occupation were the criteria. It did not say that the job itself had to be for Masters and above.

Thanks Sport. Kudos to Pedro then. Regardless whether there is degree requirement for job or not - the key question is - are these visas be held to country quota? Because if so - then we are back to square one. The only thing that will somewhat alleviate pain would be if the stem visas will be incremental to current EB limit OR even better are unlimited in nature i.e. every STEM graduate is guaranteed one as long as there is a job. Any thoughts on these questions?

[rupen86]

Seems status quo will remain. House for Republicans, Senate for democrat and Obama as president.

[Pedro Gonzales]

Thanks Sport. Kudos to Pedro then. Regardless whether there is degree requirement for job or not - the key question is - are these visas be held to country quota? Because if so - then we are back to square one. The only thing that will somewhat alleviate pain would be if the stem visas will be incremental to current EB limit OR even better are unlimited in nature i.e. every STEM graduate is guaranteed one as long as there is a job. Any thoughts on these questions?

There certainly was a limit under both bills. The Dem bill added new visa numbers, and the GOP bill took it out of the DV quota. And the country caps remained under both bills.

[kkruna]

Seems status quo will remain. House for Republicans, Senate for democrat and Obama as president.

Except that there is decidedly more urgency to embrace (hispanic) immigrants on both sides of the divide. CIR (whatever it means) may have good chance in 2013. If it happens, EB immigration reform should also be riding the same wave.

In immediate term, what happens to pending legislations like HR3012 and STEM visa remains to be seen. We should expect some 'family' twist to EB visas as well.

[rupen86]

Except that there is decidedly more urgency to embrace (hispanic) immigrants on both sides of the divide. CIR (whatever it means) may have good chance in 2013. If it happens, EB immigration reform should also be riding the same wave.

In immediate term, what happens to pending legislations like HR3012 and STEM visa remains to be seen. We should expect some 'family' twist to EB visas as well.

From Oh law firm:

Next Congress and the White House will practically see no changes: The second term President Obama in the White House, the Democratic majority Senate in the upper chamber of the federal legislature, and the Republican majority House in the lower chamber of the legislature. Unlike the first term, however, the President is likely to push very aggressively comprehensive immigration reform for two reasons: Firstly, this is a sort of mandate imposed on him in this election. Secondly, he will have nothing to lose from being aggressive because this is the last term he can run for the White House. What does this mean to the direction of immigration reform? Piecemeal immigration reforms, particularly employment-based immigration reform, are likely to face a steep uphill battle. Why? For the comprehensive immigration reform forces, piecemeal immigration reform legislation will weaken the chances for comprehensive immigration reform legislation. The results of this election have reinforced such dynamics. Advocates of employment-based piecemeal immigration reform should come to grips with the political reality and learn to work within the dynamics by realizing importance of negotiation and compromise rather than antagonizing other forces.

[abcx13]

From Oh law firm:

Next Congress and the White House will practically see no changes: The second term President Obama in the White House, the Democratic majority Senate in the upper chamber of the federal legislature, and the Republican majority House in the lower chamber of the legislature. Unlike the first term, however, the President is likely to push very aggressively comprehensive immigration reform for two reasons: Firstly, this is a sort of mandate imposed on him in this election. Secondly, he will have nothing to lose from being aggressive because this is the last term he can run for the White House. What does this mean to the direction of immigration reform? Piecemeal immigration reforms, particularly employment-based immigration reform, are likely to face a steep uphill battle. Why? For the comprehensive immigration reform forces, piecemeal immigration reform legislation will weaken the chances for comprehensive immigration reform legislation. The results of this election have reinforced such dynamics. Advocates of employment-based piecemeal immigration reform should come to grips with the political reality and learn to work within the dynamics by realizing importance of negotiation and compromise rather than antagonizing other forces.

Matthew Oh is an idiot. Lots of talk and unsubstantiated speculation, doesn't actually know shit.

[rupen86]

Matthew Oh is an idiot. Lots of talk and unsubstantiated speculation, doesn't actually know shit.

I agree with his analysis here. Democrats may smell a chance to pass CIR as they might think that republicans will have to move to the center. That being the case, they may not be interested in passing piece-meal legislation.

[rupen86]

There is absolutely zero mandate on Obama to do anything. The most notable accomplishment of his second term may be starting a war with Iran unfortunately.

Did you guys see the record number of votes? Almost 120 million cast!!! It's obvious that Obama supporters again came out in droves, but the election was still very very close and Obama was up against the Mittens!!! If the GOP had a real candidate, it was all over for the poster boy.

The point is - why did Obama let things get so bad for him when practically all the blacks and latinos voted for him in record numbers? BECAUSE he is absolutely not different from anyone who preceded him or anyone who succeeds him. The CIR is a dream, and in my opinion, it will continue to be a distant dream.

From the perspective of legal immigrants, nothing should change. We should continue similar strategies like HR 3012 to get what we want - FAIRNESS.

I believe this election was more about demographics than economy. It is not Romney's problem that he lost. It is republican party's problem. Their base is old, white and dying. They need to expand their base otherwise they would become irrelevant in the coming time.

[qesehmk]

I wouldn't express myself so strongly as you. However I think Oh's analysis is quite poor. I do think that since Obama has nothing to lose hereafter, he will push things aggressively. However that doesn't mean he will block piecemeal legislation. Especially one like HR3012 that is so ripe to sign.

Governance is about making choices and bargains. Especially now that Obama has nothing to lose - he doesn't have to take an approach of either/or. Now he can afford to shoot for both. In other words he can take piecemeal AND comprehensive - BOTH approaches.

The real question is - how will his immigration policy fit with his stance on outsourcing, jobs creation and economic revival. That will better shape his support for EB reforms in particular rather than whether EB reform is piecemeal or NOT.

Matthew Oh is an idiot. Lots of talk and unsubstantiated speculation, doesn't actually know shit.

[rupen86]

Disagree. You will be surprised how many of the high earning immigrants are Republicans. If I was a voter, I would vote Republican too. Anyway, it is not relevant to discuss the future of the parties. From our perspective, my point was that waiting for the CIR and hoping EB will ride on it is fool's gold. It's not going to happen. We should stay on course and try to get what's best for us.

You can disagree but facts do not change. Look up any website and that's what they are discussing. Obama's Coalition includes latinos, african americans, women, young people and immigrants. It is hard to fight against this Coalition. There are statistics also available to look at. I would be very happy to see EB immigration bill getting passed but I would say chances for that has reduced as Oh Law firm pointed out and I agree with that.

[rupen86]

I wouldn't express myself so strongly as you. However I think Oh's analysis is quite poor. I do think that since Obama has nothing to lose hereafter, he will push things aggressively. However that doesn't mean he will block piecemeal legislation. Especially one like HR3012 that is so ripe to sign.

Governance is about making choices and bargains. Especially now that Obama has nothing to lose - he doesn't have to take an approach of either/or. Now he can afford to shoot for both. In other words he can take piecemeal AND comprehensive - BOTH approaches.

The real question is - how will his immigration policy fit with his stance on outsourcing, jobs creation and economic revival. That will better shape his support for EB reforms in particular rather than whether EB reform is piecemeal or NOT.

Surely he would not block it, but democrat leadership in the senate may not bring it up sensing a chance for CIR.

[abcx13]

People might find this talk (there's a transcript too) from TED interesting:

http://www.ted.com/talks/pankaj_ghemawat_actually_the_world_isn_t_flat.html

[GhostWriter]

From the perspective of legal immigrants, nothing should change. We should continue similar strategies like HR 3012 to get what we want - FAIRNESS.


Especially now that Obama has nothing to lose - he doesn't have to take an approach of either/or. Now he can afford to shoot for both. In other words he can take piecemeal AND comprehensive - BOTH approaches.



Totally agree with both the statements above. Also as others have expressed unless the country caps are removed the effect of any other bill will be very limited for EB-I. If we are restricted to 7% cap then we will always be at the mercy of spillover (leftover) from what others don't consume. At the same time applicants from other countries will be free to move from their special queue in one category to their special queue in another category bypassing older EB-I applicants in all the categories. Lobbying for a piecemeal approach does not hurt, its elements can be included in a comprehensive bill if one ever comes up.

[kkruna]

One really favorable outcome of this election is that immigration reform has become a very important issue and both parties would do their best to cater to this constituency. This needs to be leveraged. Since HR 3012 is what will help EB2-I most, and since it is also a ripe bill, I think we should do our best to start approaching senators. Harry Reid has already sounded about need for cooperation on immigration reform and I think he has in mind pending bills. I also think Immigration Voice has got the opening it was looking for.

[randomax]

Disagree. You will be surprised how many of the high earning immigrants are Republicans. If I was a voter, I would vote Republican too. Anyway, it is not relevant to discuss the future of the parties. From our perspective, my point was that waiting for the CIR and hoping EB will ride on it is fool's gold. It's not going to happen. We should stay on course and try to get what's best for us.

Obviously there is a portion of high earning immigrants that are republicans but no way are they a majority. BBC had an article about how 85% of Indians (one of the higest earning minorities in the US) are democrats. Not everyone votes purely based on their self interest. Almost all immigrants have seen bigger governments than in the US and they are not necessarily opposed to that idea. The exception tends to be eastern Europeans who have seen so much government brutality that they think the other extreme is better.

[PD2008AUG25]

Except that there is decidedly more urgency to embrace (hispanic) immigrants on both sides of the divide. CIR (whatever it means) may have good chance in 2013. If it happens, EB immigration reform should also be riding the same wave.

In immediate term, what happens to pending legislations like HR3012 and STEM visa remains to be seen. We should expect some 'family' twist to EB visas as well.

Republicans are smart enough to realize that defeat has nothing to do with lack of immigration reform. Latinos have always been pro-democratic. Reagan's amnesty didn't change that. After a new CIR, new Latino citizens will mostly embrace democrats anyway. Why would Republicans want that?

I expect full-on CIR drama to go on for 4 more years without going anywhere.

[rupen86]

Republicans are smart enough to realize that defeat has nothing to do with lack of immigration reform. Latinos have always been pro-democratic. Reagan's amnesty didn't change that. After a new CIR, new Latino citizens will mostly embrace democrats anyway. Why would Republicans want that?

I expect full-on CIR drama to go on for 4 more years without going anywhere.

President Bush had got more than 40% of latino votes. Had Romney got that much, he would have won. Even though latinos are going to favor democrats, that margin is going to reduce if immigration does not remain top issue since socially they are more republican leaning.

[rupen86]

If Jeb Bush ran for the presidency in 2016 (heck even if he was nominated today in 2012), it would be a victory for the Republicans. And despite record Latinos voting against him, what really scuttled Romney were "47%", "let Detroit go bankrupt", and "I think 14% is a fair tax for a person with a net worth of $300 million and making all his money from capital gains".

EVEN then, the election was very close.

The immigrants are not going to continue to increase in the US. The American dream is becoming more and more difficult and if the government scales back even a little from the social programs such as food stamps and medicare (this is going to happen in the next few years regardless of who is in power - China is not going to finance the American welfare endlessly), life will be extremely brutal for the immigrants at the lower rung of the ladder. We already know many stories of Indians going back. Prepare to hear such stories about Latinos.

I reach the same conclusion: CIR is not going to happen. This election did not change that. The Republicans should be able to find a moderate candidate who finds appeal in the American middle class, and that candidate will win in 2016. The reports of Republican demise are very exaggerated. Let us really push for the bill during the lame duck session.

Your argument is that demographics is not going to change in future. But data, statistics and trend does not favor that conclusion. The general conclusion right now is that white electoral vote will continue to decline and other groups will continue to increase their percentage.

That being said, there is nothing wrong in pushing 3012.

[abcx13]

EVEN then, the election was very close.

The immigrants are not going to continue to increase in the US. The American dream is becoming more and more difficult and if the government scales back even a little from the social programs such as food stamps and medicare (this is going to happen in the next few years regardless of who is in power - China is not going to finance the American welfare endlessly), life will be extremely brutal for the immigrants at the lower rung of the ladder. We already know many stories of Indians going back. Prepare to hear such stories about Latinos.It's crazy that a delusional out-of-touch PE baron could get nearly half of the popular vote when the financial industry has squeezed the middle class in this country so thoroughly.

On your second point, inflows from Mexico have already reversed. The Pew center had some research on this that you can look up (sorry, too lazy). Net migration from Mexico to the US is now either zero or negative IIRC.


Your argument is that demographics is not going to change in future. But data, statistics and trend does not favor that conclusion. The general conclusion right now is that white electoral vote will continue to decline and other groups will continue to increase their percentage.

That being said, there is nothing wrong in pushing 3012.

Demographics are changing despite reduced immigration because lower-educated immigrants (Hispanics, Blacks, whatever) have more kids than more-educated Americans (whites, Indians, Asians, etc.). I'm not trying to be racist or anything but I think it's pretty well established that education is inversely correlated with the no. of kids someone has, and it's also a fact that some of the immigrant groups are less educated than locals.

[kd2008]

Rupen86 and sportsfan33, your contribution to the forum is highly valued and your insights are a great asset to this forum. That said, I would urge you to please create your own thread and move the discussion on politics to that thread. This thread is for discussing specific bills.

Thank you!

[rupen86]

Rupen86 and sportsfan33, your contribution to the forum is highly valued and your insights are a great asset to this forum. That said, I would urge you to please create your own thread and move the discussion on politics to that thread. This thread is for discussing specific bills.

Thank you!

I do not think those discussions were irrelevant to the bill we are discussing. We are talking about possible CIR and how it might impact 3012. If the moderator thinks they are irrelevant, please feel free to delete them.

[rupen86]

Here is a good analysis on demographics, changes to future senate procedures and possible CIR.

http://discuss.ilw.com/content.php?819-Bloggings-African-Americans-Strongly-Support-Immigration-Reform-by-Greg-Siskind

[sp2008]

Here is a good analysis on demographics, changes to future senate procedures and possible CIR.

http://discuss.ilw.com/content.php?819-Bloggings-African-Americans-Strongly-Support-Immigration-Reform-by-Greg-Siskind

75 % of Asians voted for Obama. I hope it get attention. though we are not as decisive block as others like African-American or Latinos.

[gs1968]

To sportsfan33
This from morning tech on POLITICO

REID PLEDGES ACTION ON IMMIGRATION — We told you yesterday that a mix of electoral politics and existing congressional interest could push immigration reform — particularly, measures focused on high-skilled workers — back to the foreground. And Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid confirmed that in a press conference yesterday, telling reporters it's "very, very high on the list" of things to do next year. The "only thing we need to get immigration reform done is a few Republican votes," Reid said.

I know there is still a possibility of HR3012 in the lame duck session but the statement above seems to imply that it might be part of a larger immigration package in the next congress

[abcx13]

Well, he said next year instead of next Congress, so maybe they will take it up next year? But I don't have any hopes when it comes to the feckless fools in Congress...

[rupen86]

To sportsfan33
This from morning tech on POLITICO

REID PLEDGES ACTION ON IMMIGRATION — We told you yesterday that a mix of electoral politics and existing congressional interest could push immigration reform — particularly, measures focused on high-skilled workers — back to the foreground. And Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid confirmed that in a press conference yesterday, telling reporters it's "very, very high on the list" of things to do next year. The "only thing we need to get immigration reform done is a few Republican votes," Reid said.

I know there is still a possibility of HR3012 in the lame duck session but the statement above seems to imply that it might be part of a larger immigration package in the next congress

I agree. There is a sea change in the attitude of republicans on immigration. While we did not see practically a word on immigration bill in terms of CIR in last few years, we are starting to see lot of talk just after the election. See the link below.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/09/us/politics/boehner-confident-of-deal-with-white-house-on-immigration.html?_r=0

I believe, we should just not be satisfied with 3012. Rather, we should focus on including other aspects in possible CIR package like recapture, excluding dependents etc. This will also get support from ROW EB community unlike 3012. I feel this is a golden opportunity and we should make every effort to get things done what we care about.

[abcx13]

I agree. There is a sea change in the attitude of republicans on immigration. While we did not see practically a word on immigration bill in terms of CIR in last few years, we are starting to see lot of talk just after the election. See the link below.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/09/us/politics/boehner-confident-of-deal-with-white-house-on-immigration.html?_r=0

I believe, we should just not be satisfied with 3012. Rather, we should focus on including other aspects in possible CIR package like recapture, excluding dependents etc. This will also get support from ROW EB community unlike 3012. I feel this is a golden opportunity and we should make every effort to get things done what we care about.

Yes, but Republicans are more interested in winning back the Latino base they've eliminated. Nobody gives a rat's ass about legal immigrants. I was reading some comments in the WSJ from Obama about how he was going to focus on CIR, which meant legalizing illegals and giving them a path to perm residency and citizenship.
He didn't say anything about legal immigration...

Legalizing illegals is not going make a dime's worth of difference to America's economic woes whereas bringing in highly-educated scientists and researchers would...yet guess what Congress would rather do.

[rupen86]

Yes, but Republicans are more interested in winning back the Latino base they've eliminated. Nobody gives a rat's ass about legal immigrants. I was reading some comments in the WSJ from Obama about how he was going to focus on CIR, which meant legalizing illegals and giving them a path to perm residency and citizenship.
He didn't say anything about legal immigration...

Legalizing illegals is not going make a dime's worth of difference to America's economic woes whereas bringing in highly-educated scientists and researchers would...yet guess what Congress would rather do.

I agree. That's where the focus would be..But even for the purpose of showing that they have done something about legal immigration, they will have to include something on legal immigration.

[abcx13]

I agree with sportsfan that STEM or no STEM or recapture or no recapture, the country limits need to go. They are blatantly discriminatory and are just a different form of racism.

[rupen86]

One more link showing immigration effort will begin post inauguration.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/08/immigration-reform-senate_n_2093178.html

It also tells that democrat bill would be in line with the one introduced by Robert Menendez which included visa recapture.

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/112/s1258/text

Interestingly, this bill (Menendez) does not include per country quota removal. Instead, it increases to 15%. But it includes visa recapture and looks like it includes excluding dependents from the count.

[abcx13]

Both those links are the same (inadvertant mistake perhaps?). Nowhere do they talk about legal immigration.

[Ramsen]

Filibuster is used by both democrats and Republicans. The removal will do harm for both parties. If they remove now and there is a possiblity for GOP to get majority in 2 years or 4 years. That time they will revert the bills passed by democrats. Also they may need 60 votes to remove filibuster rule. Or they will filibuster the filibuster removal.

Republicans might want to think about getting on the train. Though they’ve mucked up opportunities to take over the Senate in 2010 and 2012, they have another opportunity in 2014, when Democrats will have 20 seats up for re-election and Republicans will be defending only 13. If the filibuster ends now, there’s a real chance that the first party to benefit from a reformed Washington would be the Republicans. That should be a change they can believe in.


Both those links are the same (inadvertant mistake perhaps?). Nowhere do they talk about legal immigration.

[rupen86]

Both those links are the same (inadvertant mistake perhaps?). Nowhere do they talk about legal immigration.

Sorry for the mistake. Here it is. I have corrected in the earlier post also.

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/112/s1258/text

[Spectator]

One more link showing immigration effort will begin post inauguration.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/08/immigration-reform-senate_n_2093178.html

It also tells that democrat bill would be in line with the one introduced by Robert Menendez which included visa recapture.

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/112/s1258/text

Interestingly, this bill (Menendez) does not include per country quota removal. Instead, it increases to 15%. But it includes visa recapture and looks like it includes excluding dependents from the count.I had a quick look and found considerably more than that.

a) Recapture of previously wasted visas.

b) Rollover of any wasted visas to the next year.

c) Exempt from Numerical Limitations



1) Dependents

2) EB1A

3) Aliens who have earned an advanced degree in the sciences (not including the social sciences), technology, engineering, or mathematics from a United States institution of higher education (as defined in section 1001(a) of title 20) and have been working in a field related to their degree subject in the United States under a nonimmigrant visa during the 2-year period preceding their application for an immigrant visa under section 203(b).

4) Alien physicians who have completed service requirements of a waiver or exemption requested by an interested State agency or by an interested Federal agency under section 214(l), including those alien physicians who completed such service before the date of the enactment of this subparagraph.

5) Also see (e). Not EB but helpful to those that marry after GC.

d) Elimination of the EB-1A Preference Category because of (c)(2).

e) Reclassification Of Spouses And Minor Children Of Lawful Permanent Residents As Immediate Relatives. They're no longer subject to Numerical Limits and F2A would no longer exist.

f) Increase Per Country Limit to 15%.

g) Allow filing of an I-485 based on having an approved I-140, subject to the primary applicant paying a fee of $500.

h) AP and EAD in 3 year increments.

i) Visa Revalidation for (E), (H), (I), (L), (O), or (P) visas within the USA.

j) H4 status allowed to work.


Just exempting Dependents from Numerical Limits effectively raises the overall allocation to about 300k.

On top of that the number no longer has to cover EB1A, Advanced STEM degree holders earned at a US Institution and the alien physician exemption.

The real number in today's terms would be nearer 400-500k per year.

[rupen86]

I had a quick look and found considerably more than that.

a) Recapture of previously wasted visas.

b) Rollover of any wasted visas to the next year.

c) Exempt from Numerical Limitations



1) Dependents

2) EB1A

3) Aliens who have earned an advanced degree in the sciences (not including the social sciences), technology, engineering, or mathematics from a United States institution of higher education (as defined in section 1001(a) of title 20) and have been working in a field related to their degree subject in the United States under a nonimmigrant visa during the 2-year period preceding their application for an immigrant visa under section 203(b).

4) Alien physicians who have completed service requirements of a waiver or exemption requested by an interested State agency or by an interested Federal agency under section 214(l), including those alien physicians who completed such service before the date of the enactment of this subparagraph.

5) Also see (e). Not EB but helpful to those that marry after GC.

d) Elimination of the EB-1A Preference Category because of (c)(2).

e) Reclassification Of Spouses And Minor Children Of Lawful Permanent Residents As Immediate Relatives. They're no longer subject to Numerical Limits and F2A would no longer exist.

f) Increase Per Country Limit to 15%.

g) Allow filing of an I-485 based on having an approved I-140, subject to the primary applicant paying a fee of $500.

h) AP and EAD in 3 year increments.

i) Visa Revalidation for (E), (H), (I), (L), (O), or (P) visas within the USA.

j) H4 status allowed to work.


Just exempting Dependents from Numerical Limits effectively raises the overall allocation to about 300k.

On top of that the number no longer has to cover EB1A, Advanced STEM degree holders earned at a US Institution and the alien physician exemption.

The real number in today's terms would be nearer 400-500k per year.

Yes, with this kind of bill, everything would be current even with per country cap.

[gs1968]

STEM Bill
This was on POLITICO today
"LAWMAKERS HAGGLING OVER STEM GREEN CARD BILL — From Eliza Krigman: “Rep. Lamar Smith is looking to advance a new version of STEM green card legislation during the lame duck, according to several tech industry sources. ... The legislation in the works would swap 55,000 so-called diversity visas for the same number of green cards for foreign students with advanced degrees in science, technology, engineering and math fields.

“The House rejected a similar bill by Smith last September, on a vote that required a supermajority for passage. Aides for Smith and Schumer are said to be negotiating over so-called family-based provisions governing the immigration of spouses and children of legal permanent residents. The new version, according to sources following the issue, may include language allowing the spouses and children to wait in the U.S. for their green card, as opposed to waiting abroad. But negotiations on details of the family-based provisions are ongoing, and Schumer’s office hasn’t seen a bill reflecting that language.” The Pro story: http://politico.pro/UyLABd

I don't know how much of this is new information.I had posted a link 4-5 days ago that already contained this information

http://www.rollcall.com/news/Last-Ditch-Talks-Resume-on-High-Tech-Visa-Legislation-218674-1.html?pos=hln

Anyway following up on the theme from yesterday-any movement on these immigration ideas is most likely after the second-term inauguration of President Obama

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/08/immigration-reform-senate_n_2093178.html

[rupen86]

STEM Bill
This was on POLITICO today
"LAWMAKERS HAGGLING OVER STEM GREEN CARD BILL — From Eliza Krigman: “Rep. Lamar Smith is looking to advance a new version of STEM green card legislation during the lame duck, according to several tech industry sources. ... The legislation in the works would swap 55,000 so-called diversity visas for the same number of green cards for foreign students with advanced degrees in science, technology, engineering and math fields.

“The House rejected a similar bill by Smith last September, on a vote that required a supermajority for passage. Aides for Smith and Schumer are said to be negotiating over so-called family-based provisions governing the immigration of spouses and children of legal permanent residents. The new version, according to sources following the issue, may include language allowing the spouses and children to wait in the U.S. for their green card, as opposed to waiting abroad. But negotiations on details of the family-based provisions are ongoing, and Schumer’s office hasn’t seen a bill reflecting that language.” The Pro story: http://politico.pro/UyLABd

I don't know how much of this is new information.I had posted a link 4-5 days ago that already contained this information

http://www.rollcall.com/news/Last-Ditch-Talks-Resume-on-High-Tech-Visa-Legislation-218674-1.html?pos=hln

Anyway following up on the theme from yesterday-any movement on these immigration ideas is most likely after the second-term inauguration of President Obama

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/08/immigration-reform-senate_n_2093178.html

I could not open Politico Pro story. I think it requires registration. But if only STEM bill passes in the lame duck without 3012, it won't be good news for us. They would feel that something has been done about legal immigration and next year when CIR negotiations take place, legal immigration aspects may be ignored.

[SaibabaAug2010]

In my view, the chances of passing any immigration bill during this lame duck session are NIL. Though I really wish for HR 3012 clear the congress during lame duck. The reason I think that because of the recent election outcome Democrats want to push for bigger bill rather than piece meal immigration (I hardly see the right wing in Republican Party accepting Immigration reform. Elections are just over and each media and most of the political analysts / politicians are talking about immigration, once dusts settle down then we will know how many will really talk about Immigration).

I hope that DREAM Act will pass in next 1 to 4 years and not sure any kind of legal immigration will be added to that. I guess tea party in republican will add removal of country quota in the DREAM Act proposal along with something else during negotiation. All we can do is wait and watch.

[immitime]

Some encouraging news.

http://www.metrocorpcounsel.com/articles/21083/immigration-legislation-lame-duck-session-yes

[rupen86]

Some encouraging news.

http://www.metrocorpcounsel.com/articles/21083/immigration-legislation-lame-duck-session-yes

This is old and has been posted before. There does not seem to be much chance of immigration bill during lame duck now after the change in dynamics.

On the other note:
Obama on Comprehensive immigration bill. I do not see anything here on legal immigration here except for farmers.

http://www.allvoices.com/contributed-news/13384360-president-obama-moving-forward-on-comprehensive-immigration-reform

[Ramsen]

If you really analyse for past 4 years pattern if the lawmakers does have some concerns of legal immigration bill they just tell the excuse as CIR. Those who are lobbying does not understand what is the mood of the congress. Basically they do not have any justification to add more green cards or H1b when unemployment is 8%. For Hr 3012 there is no unity among the groups that were lobbying. If a bill is non controversial then it should have passed within a few days. Microsoft lobbied for 20k h1b and green card with 10k and 15k fees. That did not go anywhere though new visa numbers were very less. Also Indian Eb3 is only thing which has impractical waiting time. Just for one category for one country persons is congress needs to pass a bill? If wiating time increases from 10 to 12 years any impact for USA? But if CIR comes then some relief will be there Let us wait and see.


This is old and has been posted before. There does not seem to be much chance of immigration bill during lame duck now after the change in dynamics.

On the other note:
Obama on Comprehensive immigration bill. I do not see anything here on legal immigration here except for farmers.

http://www.allvoices.com/contributed-news/13384360-president-obama-moving-forward-on-comprehensive-immigration-reform

[vizcard]

I dont think they will deal with immigration in the lame duck. They are doing to be heads down on the fiscal cliff issues.

[rupen86]

If you really analyse for past 4 years pattern if the lawmakers does have some concerns of legal immigration bill they just tell the excuse as CIR. Those who are lobbying does not understand what is the mood of the congress. Basically they do not have any justification to add more green cards or H1b when unemployment is 8%. For Hr 3012 there is no unity among the groups that were lobbying. If a bill is non controversial then it should have passed within a few days. Microsoft lobbied for 20k h1b and green card with 10k and 15k fees. That did not go anywhere though new visa numbers were very less. Also Indian Eb3 is only thing which has impractical waiting time. Just for one category for one country persons is congress needs to pass a bill? If wiating time increases from 10 to 12 years any impact for USA? But if CIR comes then some relief will be there Let us wait and see.

If there is no justification for adding more green card, what is the justification for making 11m illegal as legal ?

[Pedro Gonzales]

If you really analyse for past 4 years pattern if the lawmakers does have some concerns of legal immigration bill they just tell the excuse as CIR. Those who are lobbying does not understand what is the mood of the congress. Basically they do not have any justification to add more green cards or H1b when unemployment is 8%. For Hr 3012 there is no unity among the groups that were lobbying. If a bill is non controversial then it should have passed within a few days. Microsoft lobbied for 20k h1b and green card with 10k and 15k fees. That did not go anywhere though new visa numbers were very less. Also Indian Eb3 is only thing which has impractical waiting time. Just for one category for one country persons is congress needs to pass a bill? If wiating time increases from 10 to 12 years any impact for USA? But if CIR comes then some relief will be there Let us wait and see.

HR3012 was more than just about EB3I. From the perspective of most of the tech firms lobbying for it, it was likely more about EB2I and EB2C. But the country would have passed it not just to benefit the applicants, but also the employers. Besides, HR3012 also had a family component that would have made hundreds of thousands of citizens originally from the Philippines and Mexico happy.

Also, I take issue with your characterization of my wait time as being practical. It's been 5.5 years since I first sent my lawyer my application and supporting material, and it'll likely be another year before I get my green card. 6.5 years is not a practical wait from my perspective. Even less so when you consider where my ROW peers are careerwise and compare that to where I stand. The flexibility of having a green card affords significant benefits. I have had to put a job offer on hold myself because the employer did not want to expose himself to the risk of me having to leave the country if my I485 was turned down.

To the basic point that you and Rupen both are making, that CIR is probably what will eventually include the country cap elimination provisions, I still have hope that HR3012 will be revisited in the lame-duck session. If that doesn't happen, I think CIR will be the catchall that will include it.

[Pedro Gonzales]

I am sure Pedro will share this feeling.


Absolutely do. Of my starting class in Investment Banking, there were only 4 of us that survived the several rounds of lay-offs in 2008 and 2009. I moved to a private equity client as soon as I got my I140 to avoid the risk of getting hit in future rounds. If i'd risked staying on, I would likely be a Director with my own clientele and fighting for a shot at making Managing Director and entering the big leagues. Of the 3 others who did stay on (1 citizen and 2 GC holders) one got laid off and the other two are still there and likely to make MD next year. I switched down a couple of gears in the interest of safety. My biggest crib now, though, is more personal than professional. I hate living 2000 miles away from my wife and daughter, when there is a job out there in Phoenix that is a perfect fit. Still, one perseveres as best one can.

[qesehmk]

Ramsen - I think EB quota is so less as it is - it doesn't dent unemployment a bit eitherway. Also - by definition - these are the jobs where qualified Americans are hard to find (technically of course!).

If unemployment was the reason - then why does that reason not discussed at all - when talking about CIR which would mean millions and millions of non EB workers? The reason is the power of voting block that stands behind CIR vs the non-existent voting block behind EB folks. EB folks do not have a voting block and other than very few tech leaders like Bill Gates - there virtually isn't a solid tech lobby support.


If you really analyse for past 4 years pattern if the lawmakers does have some concerns of legal immigration bill they just tell the excuse as CIR. Those who are lobbying does not understand what is the mood of the congress. Basically they do not have any justification to add more green cards or H1b when unemployment is 8%.


My biggest crib now, though, is more personal than professional. I hate living 2000 miles away from my wife and daughter, when there is a job out there in Phoenix that is a perfect fit. Still, one perseveres as best one can. I know what this looks like since i have been personally experiencing this since 3 months. Because of Sandy the client literally went under water and I am enjoying warm Arizona for now! I was stunned to see a photo of Bowling Green station completely under water.

[rupen86]

seems Irish E3 is still not dead.

http://www.rte.ie/news/2012/1115/bruce-morrison-us-visa.html

[Ramsen]

Unfairness is evil. That's that.

If you say about unfairness there are lot in the immigration system. Why 55k diversity is needed? Why country quota is needed only in FB but not in EB. Those are benefits given to certain country people. If you remove country quota in FB demographics will change in a few years instead of 20 to 30 years time. We have wasted 2 years for Hr 3012. Do you want to waste more years by just asking removal of country quota? Instead why not establish a common ground with Row and all the other groups who are fighting for releif? Then it may be easier to get it. If you do not have unity in a smallest of the immigration group what can you get? You perception country quota is unfair. But Row perception is it is fair. So Senate may not act on this.

[rupen86]

If you say about unfairness there are lot in the immigration system. Why 55k diversity is needed? Why country quota is needed only in FB but not in EB. Those are benefits given to certain country people. If you remove country quota in FB demographics will change in a few years instead of 20 to 30 years time. We have wasted 2 years for Hr 3012. Do you want to waste more years by just asking removal of country quota? Instead why not establish a common ground with Row and all the other groups who are fighting for releif? Then it may be easier to get it. If you do not have unity in a smallest of the immigration group what can you get? You perception country quota is unfair. But Row perception is it is fair. So Senate may not act on this.

The FB system was based on the concept of diversity and uniting the families. These concepts do not apply to EB system. That's why quota system in EB is unfair. The law prohibits discrimination based on the country of origin. But quota system does just that. I believe now is not the time for HR 3012. It is time to achieve bigger than that. Time was never better for immigration bill than now. So, we should work on other aspects which will get ROW support like not counting dependents, recapturing visas etc. But I disagree with the logic that we should abandon 3012 just to have better terms with ROW. People are not going to give away benefits that they have however unfair they are. But now is not the time to fight for that. If CIR does not happen, then we should fall back on this plan.

[immitime]

Now is THE time for H.R.3012,, if it is mixed with CIR it will never happen there is nothing so far in the CIR proposals for Legal immigration. and CIR is never going to happen. Again and Again counry based discrimination is UNFAIR and that will be eliminated by passing H.R.3012 and that will happen before Dec 31st.

CIR is a democratic party gimmick. The forthcoming immigration debate will center around the requirements for legalization and on how the undocumented population will eventually become citizens. Republicans such as Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., have suggested legalization but no citizenship, which is a nonstarter among Democrats. However, the process through which citizenship is obtained could be a place where both parties agree. It needs to be fair to those already waiting in line and yet doable for undocumented immigrants within their lifetimes.

it the vote by two senators that torpedoed the 2007 immigration bill? and wasn't one of those senators named Obama? Why did he do it? He weren't happy with the way it was going because some didn't want a blanket amnesty and forever chain migration. No CIR will pass as it is, all these are political gimmicks for the winning of the second term. No comprehensive bill is seeing light. only Piece meal fix will happen if at all something is happening.

If H.R.3012 is not happening before Dec 31st, better burn the passport and learn Latin language, all will get direct US citizenship!..Just kidding.


The FB system was based on the concept of diversity and uniting the families. These concepts do not apply to EB system. That's why quota system in EB is unfair. The law prohibits discrimination based on the country of origin. But quota system does just that. I believe now is not the time for HR 3012. It is time to achieve bigger than that. Time was never better for immigration bill than now. So, we should work on other aspects which will get ROW support like not counting dependents, recapturing visas etc. But I disagree with the logic that we should abandon 3012 just to have better terms with ROW. People are not going to give away benefits that they have however unfair they are. But now is not the time to fight for that. If CIR does not happen, then we should fall back on this plan.

[rupen86]

Now is THE time for H.R.3012,, if it is mixed with CIR it will never happen there is nothing so far in the CIR proposals for Legal immigration. and CIR is never going to happen. Again and Again counry based discrimination is UNFAIR and that will be eliminated by passing H.R.3012 and that will happen before Dec 31st.

CIR is a democratic party gimmick. The forthcoming immigration debate will center around the requirements for legalization and on how the undocumented population will eventually become citizens. Republicans such as Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., have suggested legalization but no citizenship, which is a nonstarter among Democrats. However, the process through which citizenship is obtained could be a place where both parties agree. It needs to be fair to those already waiting in line and yet doable for undocumented immigrants within their lifetimes.

it the vote by two senators that torpedoed the 2007 immigration bill? and wasn't one of those senators named Obama? Why did he do it? He weren't happy with the way it was going because some didn't want a blanket amnesty and forever chain migration. No CIR will pass as it is, all these are political gimmicks for the winning of the second term. No comprehensive bill is seeing light. only Piece meal fix will happen if at all something is happening.

If H.R.3012 is not happening before Dec 31st, better burn the passport and learn Latin language, all will get direct US citizenship!..Just kidding.

I see several problems with HR 3012 working against it.

First, if it were to happen, it would have happened much earlier after Grassley lifted the hold. No one knows the reason, but I feel some senators were opposing it either Grassley's amendments or 3012 itself and they wanted to pass by unanimous consent. So, even if one senator is dissatisfied, it would not pass.

Second thing that I see is that top level democratic leadership does not look keen on eliminating country quota. It is reflected in the earlier CIR bill put forward. In that bill, they wanted to increase quota from 7% to 15% rather than eliminating it.

Third problem is that, because CIR is in news all over the place, no one would want to negotiate and loose capital by passing a small bill.

CIR may not happen but the fact remains that there was never a better time than this to pass it. If 3012 is put up as part of CIR, it would not have to live on the mercy and blackmailing of people like Grassley.

[GhostWriter]

If H.R.3012 is not happening before Dec 31st, better burn the passport and learn Latin language, all will get direct US citizenship!..Just kidding.

I would say learn Spanish or Portuguese if you really want to go that route. You might be disappointed to discover later on that Latin is a dead language :).
Also i would advise learing the language before burning the passport, just in case you change your mind later !!

[Ramsen]

I see several problems with HR 3012 working against it.

First, if it were to happen, it would have happened much earlier after Grassley lifted the hold. No one knows the reason, but I feel some senators were opposing it either Grassley's amendments or 3012 itself and they wanted to pass by unanimous consent. So, even if one senator is dissatisfied, it would not pass.

Second thing that I see is that top level democratic leadership does not look keen on eliminating country quota. It is reflected in the earlier CIR bill put forward. In that bill, they wanted to increase quota from 7% to 15% rather than eliminating it.

Third problem is that, because CIR is in news all over the place, no one would want to negotiate and loose capital by passing a small bill.

CIR may not happen but the fact remains that there was never a better time than this to pass it. If 3012 is put up as part of CIR, it would not have to live on the mercy and blackmailing of people like Grassley.

Your analysis is close to mine. Even after passing in House Reid does not annouce anything about this bill. He was very careful and wise that he did not show his position.
But ** and many Indians are still optimistic about the bill. It is ok to take effort till end of the year. But based on practical situation you need to change accordlingly. If you do losing fight always then no end for this. So if elimination is country quota is difficult we can try recapture with increase of country quota to get some relief.

[anish5]

Hi Guru's please comment ?

http://newdelhi.usembassy.gov/pr111912.html

May be good news for EB friends?

http://thehill.com/blogs/hillicon-valley/technology/268927-smiths-high-skilled-immigration-bill-to-be-taken-up-by-house-next-week

[rupen86]

Hi Guru's please comment ?

http://newdelhi.usembassy.gov/pr111912.html

May be good news for EB friends?

http://thehill.com/blogs/hillicon-valley/technology/268927-smiths-high-skilled-immigration-bill-to-be-taken-up-by-house-next-week


For the first link, I have this link referring to it.
http://www.ustraveldocs.com/in/in-niv-visarenew.asp
It says that if you are working for the same employer and your visa expired in last 12 months, then you qualify. So, it is little advantage but not whole lot.

For the second link, even though house passes STEM bill, there is no action expected in the senate. So, it is more of symbolic vote. Something they might like in CIR.

[gs1968]

To rupen86

As far as the STEM Bill is concerned,I feel your position is overly pessimistic though one can hardly blame you for being so
I feel that it has a 50-50 chance of passing both chambers.Most Bills introduced in Congress have trouble getting voted upon once let alone being voted on twice like this Bill.I feel they would not have resurrected the Bill if they did not feel its chances as being positive. The fate of the Bill is dependent on the margin by which it passes.If it garners the support of a large number of Democrats then it might get some attention in the Senate.Please review the following articles especially the one from Roll Call

http://dailycaller.com/2012/11/21/the-innovation-economy-needs-food-for-thought/

http://www.rollcall.com/news/vote_will_test_gops_post_election_immigration_stra tegy-219059-1.html?pos=oplyh

I am also copying the contents from the web blog RightsideNews about the essence of this Bill

"House to Resurrect STEM Bill During Lame-Duck
Republican Leadership in the U.S. House of Representatives announced last week its intention to take up STEM legislation introduced by Judiciary Chairman Lamar Smith (R-TX) during the lame-duck session. (CQ Today, Nov. 13, 2012) The bill, H.R. 6429, eliminates the visa lottery by reallocating the 55,000 green cards available under the program to two new employment-based visa categories, the EB-6 and EB-7. (See H.R. 6429; see also Judiciary Committee Summary of Bill)
The EB-6 category proposed under the legislation is intended for foreign students holding a PhD in a STEM field (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics) from a U.S. university who agrees to work for at least five-years in the aggregate for the petitioning employer or in the U.S. in a STEM field. (See H.R. 6429 at §2) Similarly, the proposed EB-7 category is intended for foreign students holding both a Master's and baccalaureate degree in a STEM field from a U.S. university who agrees to work for at least five-years in the aggregate for the petitioning employer or in the U.S. in a STEM field. (Id.) Those with Master's degrees would be granted a green card only after all qualifying PhD petitions have been granted. (Id.)
Under the bill, employers who petition to hire these graduates under the EB-6 or EB-7 categories must receive labor certification. This means that in order to approve a petition for an EB-6 or EB-7 green card, the Secretary of Homeland Security (DHS) must first receive certification from the Secretary of Labor that the petitioning employer cannot find sufficient, willing, qualified, and available American workers, and that employment of the alien will not adversely affect the wage and working conditions of similarly situated employees. (Id., see also INA § 212(a)(5)(A)) However, the bills allows the DHS Secretary to waive this requirement if he or she deems a waiver of such to be in the national interest.
The legislation also would create a new non-immigrant student visa category specifically for foreign students seeking to study in a STEM field and potentially seek an EB-6 or EB-7 green card in the future. (See H.R. 6429 at §5) While statutorily the provision is intended to get around the current requirement that foreign students declare they intend to return to their country of residence upon graduating, it has the potential to increase competition for American students studying in STEM fields, as universities benefit significantly from admitting foreign students who pay full tuition rates. (See INA § 101(a)(15)(F))
If Leadership makes good on its promise, it would be the second time in less than three months the bill is called to the floor for a vote. Republicans placed the bill on the House's suspension calendar in September, which requires a two-thirds vote to pass legislation. The bill failed, receiving a final vote of 257 to 158. (See Roll Call Vote #590)"

I feel that the time constraint is clearly there as both chambers are likely to adjourn by December 14.Whether this Bill is advantageous to I/C EB immigrants is questionable and I remember the number crunchers like Sportsfan/Spec etc analyzing this in detail a while back.

Another point to remember is the changing of the guard in the House Judiciary Committee chairmanship in the next Congress.As Rep Lamar Smith is term limited by Republican party rules,Rep.Robert Goodlatte of VA will assume chairmanship in Jan 2013. He is an outspoken opponent of the DV lottery and has introduced numerous Bills in every Congress to abolish this. Hence it is very likely he will attempt to do so again in 2013 and the Democrats may hold off passing this STEM Bill which abolishes the DV lottery to have a bargaining chip during CIR negotiations next year

[rupen86]

To rupen86

As far as the STEM Bill is concerned,I feel your position is overly pessimistic though one can hardly blame you for being so
I feel that it has a 50-50 chance of passing both chambers.Most Bills introduced in Congress have trouble getting voted upon once let alone being voted on twice like this Bill.I feel they would not have resurrected the Bill if they did not feel its chances as being positive. The fate of the Bill is dependent on the margin by which it passes.If it garners the support of a large number of Democrats then it might get some attention in the Senate.Please review the following articles especially the one from Roll Call

http://dailycaller.com/2012/11/21/the-innovation-economy-needs-food-for-thought/

http://www.rollcall.com/news/vote_will_test_gops_post_election_immigration_stra tegy-219059-1.html?pos=oplyh

I am also copying the contents from the web blog RightsideNews about the essence of this Bill

"House to Resurrect STEM Bill During Lame-Duck
Republican Leadership in the U.S. House of Representatives announced last week its intention to take up STEM legislation introduced by Judiciary Chairman Lamar Smith (R-TX) during the lame-duck session. (CQ Today, Nov. 13, 2012) The bill, H.R. 6429, eliminates the visa lottery by reallocating the 55,000 green cards available under the program to two new employment-based visa categories, the EB-6 and EB-7. (See H.R. 6429; see also Judiciary Committee Summary of Bill)
The EB-6 category proposed under the legislation is intended for foreign students holding a PhD in a STEM field (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics) from a U.S. university who agrees to work for at least five-years in the aggregate for the petitioning employer or in the U.S. in a STEM field. (See H.R. 6429 at §2) Similarly, the proposed EB-7 category is intended for foreign students holding both a Master's and baccalaureate degree in a STEM field from a U.S. university who agrees to work for at least five-years in the aggregate for the petitioning employer or in the U.S. in a STEM field. (Id.) Those with Master's degrees would be granted a green card only after all qualifying PhD petitions have been granted. (Id.)
Under the bill, employers who petition to hire these graduates under the EB-6 or EB-7 categories must receive labor certification. This means that in order to approve a petition for an EB-6 or EB-7 green card, the Secretary of Homeland Security (DHS) must first receive certification from the Secretary of Labor that the petitioning employer cannot find sufficient, willing, qualified, and available American workers, and that employment of the alien will not adversely affect the wage and working conditions of similarly situated employees. (Id., see also INA § 212(a)(5)(A)) However, the bills allows the DHS Secretary to waive this requirement if he or she deems a waiver of such to be in the national interest.
The legislation also would create a new non-immigrant student visa category specifically for foreign students seeking to study in a STEM field and potentially seek an EB-6 or EB-7 green card in the future. (See H.R. 6429 at §5) While statutorily the provision is intended to get around the current requirement that foreign students declare they intend to return to their country of residence upon graduating, it has the potential to increase competition for American students studying in STEM fields, as universities benefit significantly from admitting foreign students who pay full tuition rates. (See INA § 101(a)(15)(F))
If Leadership makes good on its promise, it would be the second time in less than three months the bill is called to the floor for a vote. Republicans placed the bill on the House's suspension calendar in September, which requires a two-thirds vote to pass legislation. The bill failed, receiving a final vote of 257 to 158. (See Roll Call Vote #590)"

I feel that the time constraint is clearly there as both chambers are likely to adjourn by December 14.Whether this Bill is advantageous to I/C EB immigrants is questionable and I remember the number crunchers like Sportsfan/Spec etc analyzing this in detail a while back.

Another point to remember is the changing of the guard in the House Judiciary Committee chairmanship in the next Congress.As Rep Lamar Smith is term limited by Republican party rules,Rep.Robert Goodlatte of VA will assume chairmanship in Jan 2013. He is an outspoken opponent of the DV lottery and has introduced numerous Bills in every Congress to abolish this. Hence it is very likely he will attempt to do so again in 2013 and the Democrats may hold off passing this STEM Bill which abolishes the DV lottery to have a bargaining chip during CIR negotiations next year

From oh law firm. I agree with below analysis.

Report indicates that this bill will indeed be put up for a vote on Friday 11/30/2012 as this reporter suspected. The report also confirms our suspicion that there was no process of compromise and negotiation between the Republican and Democratic leaders for this bill to be reintroduced as reflected by strong opposition against this bill by the key Democratic Congresswoman, Zoe Lofgren in the House. The struggle between the Republican and Democratic parties appears to be an ideological difference on recognition and retention of value of diversity as the country's fundamental principle of immigration system, to wit, Republicans want to leave the flow of new immigrants opened to the demand of market for the high skilled foreign labor forces, while the Democrats want to preserve the decades' old value of diversity in immigration. This difference between the two parties is very fundamental and steep in that there are two different political constituent communities in this country that can determine tip of scale for power between the two parties. Since the concept of diversity will bring a fundamental and long-term print, foot-hold, and destinity for each party, the struggle transcends the difference in ideology or ethnic or emotional issues and it is not easy for the party strategists to reach a reconciliation or compromise. The fate of H.R. 3012 and other employment-based piecemeal immigration reform bills, including the upcoming STEM Jobs Act bill, vivdly reflects such struggle between the two parties behind the legislative process. Unless the leaders find a wisdom to delicately balance these differences and conflicts in interest, the country will not be able to achieve any immigration reform, no matter whether it is a piecemeal or comprehensive reform in formats. The key will lie with "compromise" that will guarantee the balance of power between the two parties. Any bills that would not guarantee such balance will be destined to fall in American political process.

[gs1968]

To rupen86
Thank you for bringing this article to the forum's attention.It is both disheartening and frustrating. However I still feel that the momentum is finally beginning to gather for immigration reform.Please review the following article and go down to the part about HR 3012 provisions.There has been behind the scenes activity about country cap elimination ever since the Bill was received in the senate but it has been difficult to convince the chamber.This validates Sen Hutchinson's letter from before the fall recess about the Bill's bleak chances this year

http://dailycaller.com/2012/11/21/the-innovation-economy-needs-food-for-thought/

We will keep waiting.......

[rupen86]

To rupen86
Thank you for bringing this article to the forum's attention.It is both disheartening and frustrating. However I still feel that the momentum is finally beginning to gather for immigration reform.Please review the following article and go down to the part about HR 3012 provisions.There has been behind the scenes activity about country cap elimination ever since the Bill was received in the senate but it has been difficult to convince the chamber.This validates Sen Hutchinson's letter from before the fall recess about the Bill's bleak chances this year

http://dailycaller.com/2012/11/21/the-innovation-economy-needs-food-for-thought/

We will keep waiting.......

I had gone through this earlier. But the main problem as Oh Law firm pointed out is the ideological difference between democrats and republicans. The democrats seem to be giving more importance to diversity than talent. Both 3012 and STEM's goal are to replace diversity with talent. If democrats have to give in to that, they would have to get something in return. I feel that even in CIR, it would be difficult to include 3012. Increasing the quota limit from 7% to 15% would be more likely. That's what is reflected in earlier bills introduced by democrats. For our purpose, if recapture and not counting dependents are included, that would serve the purpose of removing backlogs.

[gs1968]

To rupen86

Interestingly the increase from 7 to 15 percent was also the amendment offered by Sen Grassley at the time of his original hold last December and so that might emerge as the consensus figure

[qesehmk]

Rupen / GS

In addition to ideological differences, don't forget that neither wants to grant another an immigration victory. So any bill that has exclusive mark of either party will fail. A bill that is seen as bipartisan is more likely to go through.


I had gone through this earlier. But the main problem as Oh Law firm pointed out is the ideological difference between democrats and republicans. The democrats seem to be giving more importance to diversity than talent. Both 3012 and STEM's goal are to replace diversity with talent. If democrats have to give in to that, they would have to get something in return. I feel that even in CIR, it would be difficult to include 3012. Increasing the quota limit from 7% to 15% would be more likely. That's what is reflected in earlier bills introduced by democrats. For our purpose, if recapture and not counting dependents are included, that would serve the purpose of removing backlogs.


To rupen86

Interestingly the increase from 7 to 15 percent was also the amendment offered by Sen Grassley at the time of his original hold last December and so that might emerge as the consensus figure

[rupen86]

From Oh Law firm. While this lawyer's opinion on immigration does not matter, it is worth noting that he is not mentioning including country quota removal in his proposals which reiterates the point that these lawyers associated with ALIA have changed their tone which earlier supported HR 3012.

11/17/2012: Some Thoughts of Realistic and Workable Immigration Reforms for the Leaders of Congress and the President

This reporter discussed earlier that any realistic and workable immigration reforms must be derived from balance of power between the two parties within the framework of national interest and fundamental principles that have formed a foundation for immigration system in this nation. Otherwise, the nation will repeat failure of comprehensive immigration reform and suffer from political games and rhetoric for interest of political parties rather than the the interest of the nation and people. The immigration reform should start from the basic concept of "overhaul" of the current immigration system within the foregoing guiding principles and goals. The leaders do not have to go too far to collect such thoughts because over the years, innumerable ideas and proposals have been presented and debated without the foregoing guiding principles and purposes. Current leaders may salvage some of those thoughts and proposals to work out the nation's new immigration system.
This reporter wants to review some of the thoughts which the political leaders may want to think about to achieve the balance of power between the two parties and keeping fundamental principles and foundation which our forefathers have laid out for overall framework of the nation's immigration system.
Legalization of undocumented immigrants: It appears that the leaders, particularly after the November 2012 election, appear to be moving towards a consensus that the legalization should be seriously considered one way or another. The question remains "in what form and what direction." There have been floating around the statistics of undocumented immigrants in this country. Conservative figure is 11 million and liberal statistics is 20 million. These numbers will drastically redraw political landscape within next decade - pro-Democrat, so-to-speak. No reasonable person will assume that the Republican leaders and constituents will agree, under any circumstances, to immediate grant of permanent resident statuses to these undocumented immigrants. To be realistic, there have been discussions among both Republicans and Democrats an option of legalization of these immigrants with an opportunity to seek permanent resident status under the nation's immigration system, to wit, they will have to find their way under the family or employment-based or other immigration routes just like any other new immigrants. Their applications for the permanent resident statuses should also be determined by the rule of first-in and first-out in the immigration lines, the rule which is called "priority date" in the current immigration law. This option will also assure fairness to the "legal" immigrants who have been waiting in the long lines years and years. This option will affect the Republican's power to a minimum from the point of number of eligible voters for the next decade, and other than extremely ultra conservative right wing section which is minority in the current political landscape, most of the mildly right and middle of the road Republicans are likely to agree to.
The foregoing legalization principle will not work unless the leaders work out workable border protection because it will repeat the same history down the road.
Family-based immigration system may have to be restructured under the basic guidelines and goals for realistic and workable option. Family unification has been founding principle for this nation of immigrants, but the current family-based immigration system is somewhat archaic considering the changes in the concept of "family" over the decades. There are plenty of proposals from both sides of the aisle for this reform in the Congress, and the current leaders and major players of the immigration reform should work out reform in this part of the immigration system towards maintaining balance of powers between the two parties.
Employment-based immigration system must be completely overhauled. The world has changed during past century through the industrialization revolution and the global age. Current system has turned literally archaic to the level of "smelly." Let's talk about the EB-1 immigrants. We are living in a global world and hi-tech and cyber space. It is indeed ridiculous that the nation imposes a restriction to this level of immigrants by quota numbers. Why? We do not want Einstein any more? We do not want Olympic gold medalists any more? This nation desperately needs this level of immigrants. In fact, this nation must work out a device to indiuce and invite this level of immigrants to this country to enrich every sector of this nation across the board for the sake not only for a decade but decades and centuries. This is the most ridiculous part in the current employment-based immigration system. It does not end with the extraordinary worker EB-1A provision. The same goes with Outstanding Researcher & Teachers EB-1B as well. What about EB-1C multi-national corporate executive or manager immigration? We are living in a global economy. Restriction of these immigrants is another smelly part of the current immigration system. Just take out the whole EB-1 immigration from the quota system. The country of immigrants should always need in-flow of such top notch immigrants to enrich this nation!
EB-5 immigrant investors. This is another ridiculous provision in the law when the nation is eager and desperate to attract foreign investment and talented entrepreneurs to keep the nation's edge in economic competition with other nations. Why impose quota? Quota must be removed for these immigrants. Currently, the U.S. government, including USCIS, has been using incredible amount of resources and funds for promotion of these immigrants. How contradictory and archaic the current law is. EB-5 immigration has to be changed to a permanent program and without quota.
STEM EB-2 immigration: This is one of the areas which is strongly supported by both parties. The businesses of the nation and higher learning institutions are desperate for change in this part of immigration law. Again, immigration quota should be removed either to attract or retain these critical foreign talents.
Non-STEM EB-2: This reporter recalls a prediction by certain political leaders and immigration lawyers about 15 years ago that the country's employment-based immigration system will move toward direction focusing on the EB-2 considering changing world and economy. The allocation of immigration quota for these immigrants should be focused in the new overhauled immigration system.
Changes in the criteria of quota system: One of the flaws in the current employment-based immigration system is count of quota numbers including spouses and children of the primary foreign workers. It is unrealistic any talented foreign workers will consider immigrating to this country without their spouses and children. When the law considers the number of foreign workers the country wants to accept or even invite, the law should just count the foreign workers in determination of quota, and the spouses and children should be immigrated literally as follow-to-join or accompanying family members.
The foregoing changes will keep the balance of power between the Republicans and the Democrats, assuming that the businesses and foreign workers are pro-Republican and legalized immigrants are pro-union and pro-Democrat. However, the labor union should also be realistic for their power base. The legalization proposal will add power to the unions, and the unions should accept pro-Republican employment-based immigration reform as well for them to be realistic. The union power will not be lost except that some unions in certain specific sectors may be affected. However, in the bargain, compromise, and negotiation processes, one should expect that there are always losers and winners. The point is that such sector interest should not override the interest of the nation and the people. We all should remember that without give-and-take, the nation will never see a reform in such a critical issue as immigration reform. The President should lead and draft the Comprehensive Immigration Reform bill, hopefully with due consideration given to the foregoing goal of balance of power, as soon as possible.

[anish5]

Hi Guru's,
Is it true? Or this site showing wrong info ???

http://immigrationlegalblog.com/2012/11/new-push-for-highly-skilled-workers-push-in-congress-hr-3012-might-have-a-chance/

[kkruna]

Hi Guru's,
Is it true? Or this site showing wrong info ???

http://immigrationlegalblog.com/2012/11/new-push-for-highly-skilled-workers-push-in-congress-hr-3012-might-have-a-chance/

The article is confusing between HR3012 and STEM. The latter is scheduled to be taken up in House on Friday. HR3012 is in Senate.

[rupen86]

ACHIEVE act is introduced.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories...274.html?hp=l5

It does not address anything on legal immigration. Under this process 'DREAM' kids will get W3 (green card) faster than some of the EB categories. It also negates the GOP statement that those people will be put at the end of the line.

[kkruna]

Not sure what all Republicans hope to achieve in lame duck session. They could just be setting stage for dialogue in Senate in the new Congress next year.

[justvisiting]

ACHIEVE act is introduced.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories...274.html?hp=l5

It does not address anything on legal immigration. Under this process 'DREAM' kids will get W3 (green card) faster than some of the EB categories. It also negates the GOP statement that those people will be put at the end of the line.

The W-3 is not a green card, not even close. It must be renewed every 4 years and you DO NOT have access to public welfare benefits. That is a very important difference.

This may be the closest idea to a DREAM act that could get by the house.

[rupen86]

The W-3 is not a green card, not even close. It must be renewed every 4 years and you DO NOT have access to public welfare benefits. That is a very important difference.

This may be the closest idea to a DREAM act that could get by the house.

Let's say it is EAD. But even in that case, that would be better than current EB2, EB3 I/C

[rupen86]

If there was any hope left for stand alone bill, this one removes that hope.

http://thehill.com/blogs/hillicon-valley/technology/269985-obama-administration-comes-out-against-stem-bill

[kkruna]

The Administration has said that they will also address legal immigration. Trouble is, CIR is likely to be a free-for-all-long-drawn-out-political-oneupmanship. Though the deadline is 2014 before elections.

[redsox2009]

I think white house is under fire from media after the comments....................

http://www.businessinsider.com/obama-turns-his-back-on-silicon-valley-2012-11

Lets wait and see for few more days, before giving up.

[rupen86]

I think white house is under fire from media after the comments....................

http://www.businessinsider.com/obama-turns-his-back-on-silicon-valley-2012-11

Lets wait and see for few more days, before giving up.

Democrats will never agree for removing the diversity program because those people who come on that program are mostly democrats. So, in other words, they are importing 50,000 democrats every year and they will file for their relatives.

Democrats laid out plan for CIR which did not include anything on EB immigration.

http://latino.foxnews.com/latino/news/2012/11/29/democrats-present-principles-for-immigration-reform/

We can just hope that there would be something on EB immigration in CIR like recapturing and not counting dependents.

[PD2008AUG25]

I know this is far-fetched, but can't Republicans use STEM visa bill as bargaining chip for any fiscal cliff agreement? When everyone says STEM bill will go nowhere, why Lamar is even bothering?

[qesehmk]

I think the political angle always exist and it really is hard on EB especially IC folks.

However, immigration reforms overall is a bigger strategic priority and a necessity for US. Immigration is not just politics - it is economics. I studied under somebody who worked closely with greenspan (or so he said :) ). This guy taught us that targeted GDP growth is usually 3% under normal growth curves. Of that 1% comes from productivity and 2% from population growth. The native population growth usually is 0.5%. So essentially the remaining 1.5% needs to come from immigration. If you look at US, that goal is NOT being fulfilled. Luckily the technology fuelled more than 1% of economy productivity between 1990 and today. However given where we are - post real estate bubble popping - immigration once again becomes critical.

So these facts tell you why CIR i.e. comprehensive immigration is not all politics.

My 2 cents ... as always!


Democrats will never agree for removing the diversity program because those people who come on that program are mostly democrats. So, in other words, they are importing 50,000 democrats every year and they will file for their relatives.

Democrats laid out plan for CIR which did not include anything on EB immigration.

http://latino.foxnews.com/latino/news/2012/11/29/democrats-present-principles-for-immigration-reform/

We can just hope that there would be something on EB immigration in CIR like recapturing and not counting dependents.

[rupen86]

I know this is far-fetched, but can't Republicans use STEM visa bill as bargaining chip for any fiscal cliff agreement? When everyone says STEM bill will go nowhere, why Lamar is even bothering?

Not in a lifetime. They are not that desperate. If they were this serious, they would not have put this bill knowing that it can not pass.

[gs1968]

Another article on the futility of the STEM Bill-

http://www.voxxi.com/hispanic-caucus-on-immigration-reform/

Rep.Robert Goodlatte of VA who takes over as House Judiciary Committee chairman next year is a strong opponent of Diversity Visas and we have probably not heard the last of this.

[rupen86]

Another article on the futility of the STEM Bill-

http://www.voxxi.com/hispanic-caucus-on-immigration-reform/

Rep.Robert Goodlatte of VA who takes over as House Judiciary Committee chairman next year is a strong opponent of Diversity Visas and we have probably not heard the last of this.

Principles laid out in CHC also does not include anything on EB immigration except STEM. This is worrisome.

[abcx13]

Principles laid out in CHC also does not include anything on EB immigration except STEM. This is worrisome.

Of course not. That's highly skilled immigration and the CHC's electorate/constituents broadly speaking are not.

[redsox2009]

STEM BILL is in the house and it is being debated........Dem's are opposing in the current form and asking for amendments and Rep's are supporting...............

[redsox2009]

STEM Bill passed in house.

[qesehmk]

redsox Thank you. What does this mean. What are the next steps?
STEM Bill passed in house.

[gkjppp]

STEM passed in House , final vote 262 to 150.

http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/curriculum/2010/05/us_house_finally_passes_stem_e.html

[redsox2009]

Next Steps SenateWH.............Only one Senator has offically voiced againist to the bill. Chances of passing is slim.


Few weeks ago, Dem Senator Schumer gave his blessings to this bill. Not sure if that is offical or unoffical. Sen. Schumer is one of the brains behind the CIR or any immigration bill. If Sen. Schumer gives nod to this bill, chances will improve drastically.


Tech companies are rallying behind the bill, I have confidence this bill can pass.

[qesehmk]

Thanks redsox.
Those interested in understanding the process please see. http://www.familiesusa.org/resources/tools-for-advocates/tips/how-a-bill.html

Basically - a bill can be introduced in any house but has to pass both houses and then onto president. Even if president vetoes - the bill can be passed if both houses veto president's veto by 2/3rd majority.

As per this bill - it pass republican majority senate. So no surprise. Basically republicans are pumping up the ante with Obama administration that yesterday only opposed this bill saying piecemeal legislation is not acceptable.

p.s. - A little more about this bill. Basically this bill seeks to remove diversity program and use those visas towards foreign STEM graduates of US degrees. This bill will benefit EB2 as well as EB3 across all countries. There are really no losers except of course diversity program.


Next Steps SenateWH.............Only one Senator has offically voiced againist to the bill. Chances of passing is slim.


Few weeks ago, Dem Senator Schumer gave his blessings to this bill. Not sure if that is offical or unoffical. Sen. Schumer is one of the brains behind the CIR or any immigration bill. If Sen. Schumer gives nod to this bill, chances will improve drastically.


Tech companies are rallying behind the bill, I have confidence this bill can pass.

[seahawks2012]

http://www.bizjournals.com/bizjournals/washingtonbureau/2012/11/30/stem-worker-visas-pass-house-obama.html

[PD2008AUG25]

http://www.bizjournals.com/bizjournals/washingtonbureau/2012/11/30/stem-worker-visas-pass-house-obama.html

Ridiculous. Why put headline like "Tech sector gets big win on visas from Uncle Sam", just to write "The House bill, however, isn't likely to go anywhere in the Senate." in the body?

I am very much pessimistic about passage of any immigration related bill in this congress or the next. Dems are being too cocky after Obama victory and Republicans, as usual, intransigent. It is hard to expect them to agree on even scope of bill, much less the details.

Most appalling is this quote from Gutierrez ‏"There was not an asterisk on the Statue of Liberty that said 'your IQ must be this high to enter.'" Just let everyone in.

[seahawks2012]

I agree about the title for the article.

On a slightly different tangent, none of the bills talk about the pain point of not being able to file for EAD until the priority date is current. If the wait time is going to be in few years, then having an EAD helps remove dependency on H1-B and its renewal/stamping non-sense. It would make life much easier for many people waiting for the green cards if they had EAD.


It is quite frustrating to go through H1-B renewal process as now a days it is taking 5 months unless ofcourse if you pay for "Premium Processing". Most companies for H1-B renewal do not do "Premium Processing" they do that only when hiring a new employee. In addition, having the EAD also helps Spouse to have flexible job - basically live a normal life!

[gs1968]

All talk and no action

http://thehill.com/blogs/hillicon-valley/technology/270447-silicon-valley-dems-hold-out-hope-for-high-skilled-immigration-reform

[gs1968]

This from the LA times today-

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-immigration-20121208,0,1954734.story

I realize that a lot of this has been already hashed before but it specifically mentions worker visas.However what form this may take is still uncertain.

One other note of caution to people who may be in a position to sponsor parents for green cards. The last immigration overhaul attempt in 2007 had a provision to limit parents visas annually instead of the numerical exemption like now to decrease chain migration.So the progress of any legislation needs to be watched closely

[rupen86]

This from the LA times today-

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-immigration-20121208,0,1954734.story

I realize that a lot of this has been already hashed before but it specifically mentions worker visas.However what form this may take is still uncertain.

One other note of caution to people who may be in a position to sponsor parents for green cards. The last immigration overhaul attempt in 2007 had a provision to limit parents visas annually instead of the numerical exemption like now to decrease chain migration.So the progress of any legislation needs to be watched closely

Another article focusing on legal immigration.

http://www.politico.com/story/2012/12/immigration-debate-ensnares-tech-talent-84713.html

The problem I see that when legal immigration talk comes in to play, STEM bill comes up and they seem to be suggesting that it is the bill which will solve legal immigration problems. I hope, it does not stay limited to STEM. STEM is not going to reduce backlogs in EB categories to the extent 3012 would have done. I hope, other measures like recapturing visas and not counting dependent in the quota get included.

From Oh law firm, there is 'gang of 8' working on a bill.

http://www.politico.com/story/2012/12/new-gang-of-eight-on-immigration-84772.html?hp=l1

Some of the people in this 'gang of 8' like Bob Menendez have introduced bills in the past who have included above aspects. So, I hope they come up with the bill which will seriously address EB problem.

[immitime]

Another article focusing on legal immigration.

http://www.politico.com/story/2012/12/immigration-debate-ensnares-tech-talent-84713.html

The problem I see that when legal immigration talk comes in to play, STEM bill comes up and they seem to be suggesting that it is the bill which will solve legal immigration problems. I hope, it does not stay limited to STEM. STEM is not going to reduce backlogs in EB categories to the extent 3012 would have done. I hope, other measures like recapturing visas and not counting dependent in the quota get included.

From Oh law firm, there is 'gang of 8' working on a bill.

http://www.politico.com/story/2012/12/new-gang-of-eight-on-immigration-84772.html?hp=l1

Some of the people in this 'gang of 8' like Bob Menendez have introduced bills in the past who have included above aspects. So, I hope they come up with the bill which will seriously address EB problem.

All big show offs. next 4 years nothing is going to happen on Legal immigration front. The only chance is after 2014 elections if democrats takes congress and senate then there is a slight chance. But a that time they will make 11 million illegals as US citizens, then also all will be waiting in EB queue, that is the fact.

For now all sweet talks will subside. See the fate of STEM bill both parties will have same bill with little difference and fillisbuster each other. Political crows fighting. This WH is against Legal immigration. (full stop)

[axecapone]

Question around HR 213. I see that there is some activity going on in that bill. It started with a handful of co-sponsors and now it has 39 of them. I am wondering what is the significance of this (if any)

https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/house-bill/213/cosponsors

[geterdone]

Question around HR 213. I see that there is some activity going on in that bill. It started with a handful of co-sponsors and now it has 39 of them. I am wondering what is the significance of this (if any)

https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/house-bill/213/cosponsors

I don't think it will become a law. Even if it passes house it will stall in senate. Hope I am wrong!

Few weeks back there was some talk about some legal action against per country limits on this forum. Is something still happening?

[mesan123]

Well got update from our Local congressmen, he is co-sponsoring the Hr213 bill, and the secretary told she is still waiting for DHS reply and WH....DHS acknowledge the queries from the congressmen and still o reply from them....planning to meet congressmen .....she told she will find his schedule and book an appointment......once i get it will post here......

Well Thank you Q for always mentioning we should try, it did work, yes it involved more persistence to keep following up, so please everyone try to contact your local congressmen , few might be Anti, but there might be few who will help out.

[abcx13]

I wonder if at this point we should solely focus on removing per country limits. Then it will become everyone's problem - French, German, Japanese, etc. Right now I think no one cares because it's Indian and Chinese. I just wrote to Paul Ryan, Bob Goodlatte, and Trey Gowdy about HR213. And also to the WH about the EAD and per country limits. It may not do any good but I think we need a consistent message. That other forum - Immigration awaaz - doesn't seem to be achieving s***.