Immigration Politics

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/n...-bill/1925017/

Ooh, look what BO's draft left out? Legal immigration! Panderer-in-chief.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by abcx13

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/n...-bill/1925017/

Ooh, look what BO's draft left out? Legal immigration! Panderer-in-chief.

---

Yes, in addition it creates special pathway to citizenship for illegals and makes them citizen in 8 years. Great plan.!!!

Other than politics, there can not be any other goal of making and leaking this plan out. White house says that if congress fails to act, it will come out with the plan and push it. I do not know at that time, how this plan would succeed when bipartisan plan would have failed. It would surely succeed in creating argument that Obama came with his own plan and republicans defeated it. Rubio correctly says that the plan would be dead on arrival.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/0...n_2703722.html

It also raises questions about Obama's true intentions whether he is genuinely interested in the solution as many republicans have openly questioned recently.

I do not think we should read much into that article. Obviously it is an incomplete draft that is somehow gotten leaked out with just the info on amnesty and such. All comments based on merely what is published in the USAtoday would be prejudicial.

To chengisk
Good to hear from you after a long time-I agree with you that we should not jump to conclusions based on a leak which clearly is a political ploy to pressure Congress to get things moving.Congressman Becerra and his group were going to unveil legislation this month but Congress has recessed and there is no date for the release. We should also be careful with our expectations for CIR and its relationship to EB reform.Below is a link to a blue print for the Gang of Eight proposals

http://www.cnn.com/2013/01/28/politi...ork/index.html

The mention about legal immigration reform itself is very vague let alone employment based reform. Most of the proposals relate to undocumented immigrants and employment verification. The current optimism is based on somehow rolling over proposals of the I-squared Act into CIR and so far there has been no indication of this happening. The 2 common members between the I-2 Act co-sponsors and the gang of eight are 2 GOP senators (Flake & Rubio). Senator Rubio has been inconsistent with his ideas on this subject and Sen.Flake albeit a very vocal proponent of high skill immigration while in the House is a freshman Senator now.

The legislation still has to go through the Senate Judiciary Immigration sub-committee and then the full Committee comprising Sens.Sessions and Grassley and we are not sure what form it will take. Some of the proposals in the I-squared Act are outlandish especially related to the H1 visas and there is no hope of getting those past the House even if it clears Senate. We should spare the President verbal abuse till more concrete proposals emerge

On a different note-during the earlier debate in 2007 for the CIR senate Bill, President (then Senator) Obama proposed an amendment which was defeated to scrap the merit-based points system in favor of family reunification so there is no question where his sympathies lie

http://projects.washingtonpost.com/c...e/1/votes/200/

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gs1968

we should spare the President verbal abuse till more concrete proposals emerge

On a different note-during the earlier debate in 2007 for the CIR senate Bill, President (then Senator) Obama proposed an amendment which was defeated to scrap the merit-based points system in favor of family reunification so there is no question where his sympathies lie

http://projects.washingtonpost.com/c...e/1/votes/200/

---

wise words gs. I agree.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gs1968

To chengisk
Good to hear from you after a long time-I agree with you that we should not jump to conclusions based on a leak which clearly is a political ploy to pressure Congress to get things moving.Congressman Becerra and his group were going to unveil legislation this month but Congress has recessed and there is no date for the release. We should also be careful with our expectations for CIR and its relationship to EB reform.Below is a link to a blue print for the Gang of Eight proposals

http://www.cnn.com/2013/01/28/politi...ork/index.html

The mention about legal immigration reform itself is very vague let alone employment based reform. Most of the proposals relate to undocumented immigrants and employment verification. The current optimism is based on somehow rolling over proposals of the I-squared Act into CIR and so far there has been no indication of this happening. The 2 common members between the I-2 Act co-sponsors and the gang of eight are 2 GOP senators (Flake & Rubio). Senator Rubio has been inconsistent with his ideas on this subject and Sen.Flake albeit a very vocal proponent of high skill immigration while in the House is a freshman Senator now.

The legislation still has to go through the Senate Judiciary Immigration sub-committee and then the full Committee comprising Sens.Sessions and Grassley and we are not sure what form it will take. Some of the proposals in the I-squared Act are outlandish especially related to the H1 visas and there is no hope of getting those past the House even if it clears Senate. We should spare the President verbal abuse till more concrete proposals emerge

On a different note-during the earlier debate in 2007 for the CIR senate Bill, President (then Senator) Obama proposed an amendment which was defeated to scrap the merit-based points system in favor of family reunification so there is no question where his sympathies lie

http://projects.washingtonpost.com/c...e/1/votes/200/

---

Even though there is still room to believe that White house's final bill might include something for legal immigration, one thing is clear that the plan includes separate pathway for citizenship which will put illegal people on a faster path to citizenship than many waiting in the line legally. So, I agree with Rubio that the plan would reward those who broke the law than those who chose to follow the rule. Also, I do not know what the white house bill would achieve except political rhetoric when the plan is supposed to be put forward when bipartisan bill would have failed. It was interesting to know about Obama's amendment about favoring FB over EB.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by chengisk

I do not think we should read much into that article. Obviously it is an incomplete draft that is somehow gotten leaked out with just the info on amnesty and such. All comments based on merely what is published in the USAtoday would be prejudicial.

---

These things don't just get 'leaked' by accident. This was a deliberate and controlled leak and clearly the intent was to emphasize the illegal amnesty provisions. Based on this leak and gs' post about BO's prior maneuverings, it is quite clear which way the President inclinations leans.

Even if I wasn't prejudiced against BO, I think this was a pretty dumb leak in that all it does is antagonize the Republicans - as Marco Rubio's response clearly demonstrated. There seemed to be enough momentum, I don't see why there was a need to release this.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by abcx13

These things don't just get 'leaked' by accident. This was a deliberate and controlled leak and clearly the intent was to emphasize the illegal amnesty provisions. Based on this leak and gs' post about BO's prior maneuverings, it is quite clear which way the President inclinations leans.

Even if I wasn't prejudiced against BO, I think this was a pretty dumb leak in that all it does is antagonize the Republicans - as Marco Rubio's response clearly demonstrated. There seemed to be enough momentum, I don't see why there was a need to release this.

---

Even the democrats agree white house plan would not pass.
http://abclocal.go.com/kfsn/story?se...rld&id=8994315

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rupen86

Even the democrats agree white house plan would not pass.
http://abclocal.go.com/kfsn/story?se...rld&id=8994315

---

Leaks do not happen by itself.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...ing-immigrati/

If someone was serious about the issues, he would not do something to demoralize people working on the solution.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rupen86

Yes, in addition it creates special pathway to citizenship for illegals and makes them citizen in 8 years. Great plan.!!!

Other than politics, there can not be any other goal of making and leaking this plan out. White house says that if congress fails to act, it will come out with the plan and push it. I do not know at that time, how this plan would succeed when bipartisan plan would have failed. It would surely succeed in creating argument that Obama came with his own plan and republicans defeated it. Rubio correctly says that the plan would be dead on arrival.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/0...n_2703722.html

It also raises questions about Obama's true intentions whether he is genuinely interested in the solution as many republicans have openly questioned recently.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rupen86

Even though there is still room to believe that White house's final bill might include something for legal immigration, one thing is clear that the plan includes separate pathway for citizenship which will put illegal people on a faster path to citizenship than many waiting in the line legally. So, I agree with Rubio that the plan would reward those who broke the law than those who chose to follow the rule. Also, I do not know what the white house bill would achieve except political rhetoric when the plan is supposed to be put forward when bipartisan bill would have failed. It was interesting to know about Obama's amendment about favoring FB over EB.

---

Rupen - the proposed bill gives the path to residency ie GC not citizenship.

As gs pointed out do not read anything into incomplete draft bills.

The other important thing to note that both Dems and Reps are aligned on what needs to be done for EB immigration. So all the rhetoric and politics will be around illegal immigration. Rest assured the final bills will have provisions for legal immigration in there.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by vizcard

As gs pointed out do not read anything into incomplete draft bills.

The other important thing to note that both Dems and Reps are aligned on what needs to be done for EB immigration. So all the rhetoric and politics will be around illegal immigration. Rest assured the final bills will have provisions for legal immigration in there.

---

While we may not read much into incomplete draft, republicans and other parties are reading and talking about it.
http://www.christianpost.com/news/do...-reform-90270/

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Christian Post article

The leaked White House immigration proposal had several issues of concern for Republicans: it would not include adequate border security, it would not require unauthorized immigrants to wait until all immigrants who have applied to enter the country through legal means are processed first, and there would be no guest worker program. A bill that did not include, at least, these three would not be able to pass in the Republican-controlled House.

Obama has already called for giving gay partners family status in the legislation, and there have been discussions in the House and Senate about adding that to the bill. Such a proposal, though, would diminish support among many, mostly Republican, members of Congress.

---

Bolding mine.

This is the same president who until a few years ago didn't believe gay marriage was okay. Why not try to repeal DOMA instead of torpedoing an immigration bill with immigration rights for gay couples? I support the idea but it just seems like a non-starter. Applying a purely utilitarian lens to the situation, I suspect the constituency of potential gay immigrants is much smaller than that of all (non-gay) legal and illegal immigrants. If you could pass a bill to cover just the latter, or do nothing, what would a sensible person rather do?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by abcx13

Bolding mine.

This is the same president who until a few years ago didn't believe gay marriage was okay. Why not try to repeal DOMA instead of torpedoing an immigration bill with immigration rights for gay couples? I support the idea but it just seems like a non-starter. Applying a purely utilitarian lens to the situation, I suspect the constituency of potential gay immigrants is much smaller than that of all (non-gay) legal and illegal immigrants. If you could pass a bill to cover just the latter, or do nothing, what would a sensible person rather do?

---

My theory on that is this is a case where he asks for everything and then negotiates down to something in the middle... atleast I hope so.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinio...0da_story.html

an interesting article. By creating an artifical divide between his plan and GO8 plan, he has pushed republicans firmly into GO8 camp. Republicans may find it difficult not to support GO8 plan when details come out.

If you look at it this way, Obama can't be seen to be winning by passing any immigration bill. Best way is let Republicans feel they prevented Obama getting his way, which is unrealistic White house bill.

I think Obama is more aggressive on undocumented agenda in CIR. If Obama does not get CIR passed in Congress, he may allow with his executive powers that all undocumented who are in the country more than 5 years are granted EAD as he did for DREAMERS by deferred action. Democrats will win the congressional election in 2014 and reach to 2/3 majority in both houses. This will pave a road for CIR in 2016 right before presidential election and wiping out GOP candidate. GOP may try to impeach him.

What about us, the legal immigrants who are waiting for 5-30 years for GC???

"The Alliance for Citizenship delivered 300,000 petitions to the Senate Judiciary Committee last week and is spending a quarter-of-a-million dollars on a Spanish language ad this week, calling for citizenship as part of immigration reform. A nationwide bus tour has been organized, ending in Washington for an April 10th march in Washington. The activists say they are making the push now because time is not on their side."

http://www.scpr.org/blogs/politics/2...le-congress-o/

Lobbying on CIR will be at the peak until July 2013. What are we doing for EB provisions to be in CIR?

Represents what I was thinking.

http://latino.foxnews.com/latino/opi...terproductive/

Interesting article on NPR.

http://www.npr.org/2013/02/19/172373...ing-h-1b-visas

Also the anti-immigration groups are not going away quietly

http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/...gration-battle