Printable View
Spec - do you think that is by mistake or by design. The guy has been doing this as his full-time job year after year and he can't calculate numbers and understand the impact of release of numbers in a certain manner then either he is extremely incompetent or he is following certain policy objectives - whatever they are.
My money is on the latter with a 100% confidence level.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spectator
Q,Quote:
Originally Posted by qesehmk
I don't know what possessed him last year (I like to think he was trying to help as many people file I-485 as possible), but I am sure it is by design this year as well.
Q and Spec,Quote:
Originally Posted by Spectator
Just to be crystal clear what specific policy objective are your guys talking. If you cannot mention those in an open forum I am fine with it and I will get what you had in mind.
drujav,Quote:
Originally Posted by druvraj
To be clear, I don't think there are any policy objectives beyond using the visas efficiently. I was only talking about a deliberate decision to release "spare" visas much later this year (which is the more normal practice).
I thought it is worthwhile to have a thread on this topic by itself and not use the calculations thread for this.
So Druvraj, I have no insider information. What I put forth is rational thought and analysis. Please take whats useful and I would be happy to learn your thoughts.
In US, the government runs by policy rather than individuals' whims. So senators, congressmen and even presidents can't move a leaf unless there is pressure behind it from somebody. That somebody usually is A) Thinks Tanks B) Lobbyists C) Public+Media. A is clearly driven at a much higher intellectual level and the role of propoganda is subtle. B is opportunistic and hidden. C is pretty much what we call propaganda - except in case of catastrophic events when the public perceptions changes far beyond short term manipulation.
But together these form policy of a government. Generally the policy is fairly immune to political bickering because the policy is ultimately driven by Big money. The difference between dems and reps look relatively superficial when you think about policy.
Immigration is no different. Immigration has economical, geo-political, social and otherwise-political objectives.
Economical ones include - contribution to GDP. Replacement of workforce. Competitiveness of certain industries. Availability of Cheap Labor. Overall competitiveness of the economy. EB category contributes from tech and innovation and productivity perspective. FB category contributes from sheer quantitative perspective. Don't underestimate 1M new immigrants every year. That's clothes cars houses and all kinds of stuff for 1M new people every year!
Geo-political objectives include noble ones and not so noble ones. eg. increasing or creating special haitian quota after the haitian earthquake is quite humanitarian and creates good will. But then bringing in dissidents from all countries eg. Cuba Vietnam Iraq Afghanistan --- why even Iran... Romania and all over the place - under refugee category and I suspect through diversity "Lottery" is nothing but a very potent political tool. That's a good way to get insight into friendly and not-so friendly places around the world.
Social objectives - Clearly US is a country of immigrants. So if anybody knows the value of immigrants and diversity, it is USA first and foremost. Having people from various backgrounds come to US creates a balanced progressive society that is strengthened by differing views on various aspects of life. It is a sign of confident culture to allow immigration and US culture clearly is one.
Otherwise political objectives are the shameless games being played by both parties and the vote bank politics of it. I don't think we need to talk about it. But that is a factor as well.
So all these things together shape immigration policy. Bottomline is - every single visa category is driven by policy and the visa allocation is not haphazard at all. I am not saying somebody is sitting somewhere with a cookbook recipe of policy and its implementation because that's not how strategy is conceived, planned or executed. Those of you who have participated at strategy formulation in the business world can possibly understand this. However when things happen on the ground, they happen for a reason.
As I said - I do not have any insider knowledge of immigration policy or objectives. But I would be extremely surprised if somebody just sat on a computer and released visas according to the math. I just don't believe that's how it happens. Case in point - between 2007-2010 DoS USCIS and DoL worked tirelessly to flush out ROW applications from PERM, 140 and then 485 queues thus suppressing EBIC approvals. If you are interested - actually go and find data from those years and you will realize what I am talking about. If they kept processing ROW applications in EB just like they did prior to 2007, EBIC (EB2IC in particular) would've greatly benefited. I am not saying that EB2IC should or shouldn't have benefited .... but the point is- somewhere somebody in government recognized this fact and took steps to achieve what they thought would be a balanced way of allocating visas.
I guess that's what I am referring to when I talk about immigration policy. Would be interested in others' thought.
p.s. - Also I think that instead of complaining about current immigration problem - this forum should work towards formulating and create such analyses that can proactively influence immigration policy. So please feel free to add to this thread from that perspective as well.
Quote:
Originally Posted by druvraj
Q and Spec,
Thank for responding.
I have a theory that while internal policies are often different and guided by various philosophies the reasons given for the current scenario should fit the guidelines. I agree with you Q on all the points and it was precisely for this reason I wanted to confirm. It was hard for me to believe that ROW were given preferential treatment and to a large degree I feel that CO gave EB2IC some of that starting 2011 by moving the dates all the way to 2010. Anyways I like your idea Q about using this forum to proactively influence immigration policy. Keep up the good work guys.
PS - Teddy where are u?