http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/...93A00W20130411
Hopefully Durbin's H1B issues will be resolved soon as well.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/...93A00W20130411
Hopefully Durbin's H1B issues will be resolved soon as well.
To abcx13
Thanks for the link and I do hope the other issues are resolved as well.
The problem is that these closed-door deals do not seem to have broader support and although there is initial enthusiasm,there also seems to be regret/remorse later.
http://www.politico.com/story/2013/0...lan-89917.html
They are obviously revisiting this as the current W-visa plan will not pass the House
http://thehill.com/blogs/on-the-mone...migration-bill
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/11/us...pagewanted=all
And they apparently have a deal! I guess H1B was resolved?
We are assuming that all the EB provisions are uncontroversial and let's hope that proves to be the case. For the record, here's my want list:
1. Remove country quotas
2. Stop counting dependents
3. Recapture
4. Special STEM GC
5. Increase in overall EB numbers from 140k.
Let's see how many we get.
BTW, now that the AP doesn't use the term illegal immigrant, did anyone see the Jay Leno about how they are all undocumented Democrats instead? Hilarious, I tell you.
ETA: Greg Siskind's blog is also good. http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/
He says McCain says bill won't be out for a few days. So hopefully early next week? Let's hope the House gets their shit together too.
Next Tuesday hopefully
http://www.politico.com/story/2013/0...ent-89965.html
Why is McCain changing his mind?
http://dailycaller.com/2013/04/11/mc...igration-bill/
To abcx13
This from an article in The Hill
"Interests advocating for an increase in STEM visas — for immigrants with advanced science, technology, engineering and math backgrounds — are likely to be pleased with the legislation.
A person familiar with the talks said that while there are strict caps — lower than Republicans wanted — on many types of worker visas, STEM visas will not count against the quota."
http://latino.foxnews.com/latino/pol...oftens-stance/
Sounds positive for the house.
I'm curious whether anyone here was around for the 2007 CIR effort and whether this time seems different in some way?
Let's see - there are 8 in the Gang and 18 members on the committee. Assume all 8 vote against ALL amendments as one of the articles suggested they are planning to do. Then they just need another 1 or 2 votes to preserve the Bill. I think they can probably get those from Feinstein or Leahy if not the other Democrats. If they stick together, I have a hard time seeing why this won't pass the Committee. So Grassley can get as many hearings as he wants and whine and moan, but how is he going to get support for an amendment?Quote:
Originally Posted by gs1968
Let's hope the STEM GC is retroactive and won't require new PERMs. Would defeat the whole purpose...
All 8 are not part of the committee. But still, I think there will be enough votes to pass the committee.Quote:
Originally Posted by abcx13
Whoops! Elementary mistake. Sorry!Quote:
Originally Posted by rupen86
http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/i...-election.html
https://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/12/u...plan.html?_r=0 - Some details on what we can expect for EB immigration. Hopefully the actual bill is better. This doesn't sound like a good deal.
http://tv.msnbc.com/2013/04/11/immig...n-citizenship/
These illegals really are a bunch of ingrates. They are getting provisional legal status and a green card and they're still whining about citizenship.
"Among proposals to reduce backlogs is a plan to accelerate green card applications of foreigners living legally in the United States who have been waiting to receive their documents for 10 years or more. "Quote:
Originally Posted by abcx13
Who comes under this? EB3-India ? They seem to be indicating that 10 year wait is reasonable wait.
After 10 years, it plans to implement new merit based system with 138,000 green cards. This looks like what is available with EB now. But new system will include everyone in that. High-skill, low-skill and illegals. If that is the case, it would be a mess bigger than current one.
I agree. Things may be slightly better as they would be removing dependents from quota but then if they are going to include all the categories, as you said it'll be a bigger mess.
One of the articles mentioned not counting against cap spouses and minor children and expediting the process for those waiting for more than 10 years. Many people in EV3 I have children who aged out. What about those people? Aren't they entitled to same benefits as DREAMers? Just because they became an adult staying legally in this country doesn't mean that they be treated inferior to those who came as children illegally.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rupen86
"So far, the kind of outrage that doomed immigration reform in 2007 seems scarce. Since the November presidential elections, where President Barack Obama drew 71 percent of the Hispanic vote against Republican Mitt Romney, key GOP leaders have insisted the party must embrace reform in order to become more competitive among Hispanics."
http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/immigration-restrictionist-groups-hope-launch-grassroots-revolt-against-190447654--election.html
The article was talking about removing dependents from the quota for green card holders. I hope, it applies to EB categories also.Quote:
Originally Posted by CleanSock
I don't know about you guys, but as the release of detailed proposals gets closer, I for one am not particularly looking forward to wading through 100s of pages to understand exactly what they mean to EB.
There will be headlines, but I have found from previous experience that the devil is in the detail, or that good items were not considered headline worthy.
The way Bills are written they talk about deleting this and inserting this to the existing law and sometimes it only becomes clear what the true effect is when you reconstruct the the whole.
It's interesting that recent leaks have talked about a "merit based system" for employment. That almost suggests an overhaul of the current Categories.
To Spectator
The time to review the legislation would be in December after the conference report is approved by both houses (if it gets that far).
gs1968,Quote:
Originally Posted by gs1968
Personally, I would want to know what both the House and the Senate were proposing at the time they release their proposals and understand the differences and the agreements.
I would not want to wait to analyze what came out of conference, otherwise how can you lobby for what is important to EB in the conference discussions, or understand what might have been lost in those proceedings?
Spec, from what I understood the merit based system would go into effect much later in the decade. Please correct me if I understood it incorrectly. Undocumented folks who maintain status will join with others to compete for the green card in the merit based system.Quote:
Originally Posted by Spectator
Who knows what they are thinking. Most of the decision makers are unsympathetic and clueless for EB situation in general. This is in spite of heavy lobbying by the tech industry. But then again we are talking about 500K or so people while the undocumented represent 11 million. So it is obvious where their priorities lie.
I'm with Spec on this. I intend to read and analyze the bills as soon as they come out just as I did with HR3012. That helps to a) understand the gains or losses to folks like us (I'm assuming there are no gains or losses to me directly as I should get my GC before this comes to fruition), b) dispel rumors / falsehoods that will be propagated about the bills as we saw happen with HR3012, and c) if necessary, lobby for changes.Quote:
Originally Posted by Spectator
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/12/te...ted=2&src=recg
Several lobbyists and advocates who have spoken to Senate staff members say they are optimistic about at least two items high on their wish list: a fast-track green card line for math and science graduates like Mr. Sankhla, no matter which country they come from, and a near doubling of the visas for temporary workers.
The Senate is considering eliminating the per-country quotas for those who graduate from United States universities with math, science and engineering degrees.
If STEM graduates do not count towards cap, I do not know what is the point in removing per country quota only for them. It is so disappointing to see that there is even a discussion to remove per country quota only for STEM graduates. This gives me feeling that if EB immigration just gets STEM and double the H1s, it will worsen the situation of people who do not have US degree.Quote:
Originally Posted by geterdone
Spec, could you please interpret in plain English, how this might affect EB backlogged cases including those who have not yet filed their I-485s?
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/12/us...plan.html?_r=0
My interpretations are as follows:Quote:
Among proposals to reduce backlogs is a plan to accelerate green card applications of foreigners living legally in the United States who have been waiting to receive their documents for 10 years or more.
Any immigrants who have been working legally in this country for 10 years would also move rapidly to receive green cards, either through the current system or later through the new merit system.
The plan would also free up additional green cards by eliminating a category of foreigners who are now eligible for those visas: siblings of United States citizens.
The bill would also remove annual limits on the number of green cards for a different category, spouses and minor children of legal permanent residents. The senators estimate that 800,000 immediate family members will move through the backlog and gain green cards over the next decade as a result of that change.
At the end of 10 years, the bill would create a program offering 138,000 merit-based visas each year to foreigners based on their work skills, but also on other considerations including family ties. Green cards will be offered to workers in three categories: high-skilled foreigners in technology and science, employees with a middle range of white collar skills, and low-wage workers. Farmworkers are not included, as they will come under a separate program.
Immigrants who will be eligible for merit green cards would include those formerly here illegally, if they have remained in good standing, learned English and passed other requirements, and remained employed for 10 years.
But other migrants would be eligible for those green cards as well, including agricultural guest workers who had been legally employed in this country for 10 years, and other temporary visa holders. There would be no special, dedicated path to citizenship for immigrants who had once lived in the country illegally.
If you can document this. You are golden! You get a green card. Would some one like me who was on F-1 visa for 6 years and worked on an assistantship count that time towards the 10 yr limit? I hope so.Quote:
Any immigrants who have been working legally in this country for 10 years would also move rapidly to receive green cards, either through the current system or later through the new merit system.
Next more EB green cards will be available by this change,The most difficulty I has was with this,Quote:
"The plan would also free up additional green cards by eliminating a category of foreigners who are now eligible for those visas: siblings of United States citizens."
The above can be true if and only if dependents are excluded from numerical limits. I hope so this is true.Quote:
"The bill would also remove annual limits on the number of green cards for a different category, spouses and minor children of legal permanent residents. The senators estimate that 800,000 immediate family members will move through the backlog and gain green cards over the next decade as a result of that change."
'Full Marco' on Sunday.
http://www.mediabistro.com/tvnewser/...-shows_b174826
I agree. Bills are a PITA to understand but I was hoping the usual suspects - Gotcher, Matthew Oh - would do the hard work for us.Quote:
Originally Posted by Spectator
Based on what I've read so far, there are a LOT of negatives as you guys have covered. I've summarized them here (am I missing anything?):
1. Only removing per-country quotas for STEM MS. In fact, it's not like they are 'removing' per country caps as much as there is NO cap. Not removing per country quotas is unjust and discriminatory.
2. Dependents are only being excluded from family visas so far it seems.
3. The 140k merit based system that will supposedly come into force 10 years from now will be woefully inadequate. It seems worse than what we have now since it will have categories for lower skilled workers. Though I guess we already have EB3 Unskilled - maybe the reporter was confused and it's not a major change from the existing system?
4. If H1Bs go up without a concomitant increase in GCs we will have even larger backlogs (maybe that's what our corporate overlords want anyway). However, that said, I think the US STEM MS GC could potentially go a long way in alleviating those. At that point, it would be HUGELY beneficial to get a MS degree if you don't have one already. I guess people whose companies refuse to file in EB2 will still be stuck. Or if you don't have a US MS...
5. The acceleration for people who've been waiting for 10 years is way too slow. Which other country takes 10 freakin' years to grant permanent residency?! And apart from a few EB3I guys, who would qualify for this? And it puts EB3 on the same timeline as illegals, which is fundamentally unjust.
6. No one has mentioned this but I think it's silly not to index immigrant visas to population growth. I haven't seen any of the genius Senators talk about this.
http://rockcenter.nbcnews.com/_news/...te-legacy?lite
Yesterday zuckerberg and today laurene powell jobs.... this is powerful. Good signs for immigration reform.
http://www.politico.com/story/2013/0...020.html?hp=r3
It is interesting to note Sen.Hatch's role in this negotiation as he would not have taken part in it if he did not have positive vibes to CIR in general. Hopefully some of the I-squared Act of his will get added to the Bill in Committee in return
"The proposal would set a cap of 112,000 visas per year for three-year visas, essentially allowing for 337,000 over a three-year period"Quote:
Originally Posted by gs1968
"The plan would allow foreign farm workers to apply for green cards in a five-year timeframe"
Looks like everyone is eligible to apply for green card. We have yet to see an article which would say green card numbers would increase significantly.
This is from **:
Quote:
Have we not shared already, multiple times, that the bill will contain -
1.) Recapture (from unused GC since 2001)
2.) Elimination of per-country limits
3.) Exemption for dependents
4.) Exemption for US STEM graduates
5.) Ability for H-4 to work (if your country of origin reciprocates the same)
6.) 60 days Grace period on H1
When reading these news reports, take it with a lot of salt as many of these reporters cannot differentiate between legals and illegals, H1B and green cards. Will know the actual details when the bill comes out.
For the 2007 CIR, all applicants in the current system were to be flushed out immediately by approving them. Only after approving the current legal applicants, could they approve illegals. Otherwise they would end up giving preference to law-breakers over law abiding legal applicants.
I am surprised to hear the news that current backlog will be eliminated only over a period of 10 years. There is something fishy about these reports/leaks.
http://blog.pe.com/multicultural-bea...efeating-bill/
.................................................. .................................................. ................
The coalition in favor of immigration reform with a path to citizenship includes organizations that typically don’t agree on most issues. Beck predicted that once legislation is introduced, the details will divide those groups.
“Think of all the things in there someone can oppose,” he said.
Different groups and politicians have widely varying ideas on how long illegal immigrants would have to wait for legal residency and then for citizenship, and how the process should work, Beck said.
.................................................. .................................................. ................
.................................................. .................................................. ................
i met with sen.hatch's office during the advocacy event and his office has been very supportive about eb provisions. they do have a soft corner for religious worker visas for UT but that has not impacted their general support for eb backlog removal.
If they have shared that multiple times already-how come it was not posted in any of these forums thus far. These are provisions in the I-squared Act and may be a return gift to Senator Hatch.I had also read earlier that the I-squared Bill was a marker Bill and some provisions would be rolled into CIR.
I think I V has deliberately chosen to be quite to media but very visible to political circles. Media still jumbles up high skilled & low skilled and people label it more GCs for all. People have animus towards H-1B and media will harp onhow these h-1bs are now clamoring for more GCs.
I-squared act was all that was needed to be the bargaining chip for us. A full blooded bill that captured all our demands. It made gang of 8's task a lot easier.
On I V's facebook page they posted snippets of white house meeting. There was also a thread on their forums about it.
I still visit Mr.Gotcher's forum ( I know other forum members here have mixed views about that) and I quote below his post from yesterday AM
"Everything that I've heard and read points to a realignment of quota priorities, with visas being taken from family based and given to employment based applicants. Again, this is only rumor, but what I'm hearing is that F2A beneficiaries will become "immediate relatives" (quota exempt), and all other family based categories, except possibly F1, will be eliminated. I have no idea how they will handle cases already in the pipeline.
We should see the text of the Senate bill next week, at the latest. The Judiciary Committee is holding their first hearing on it on Wednesday and I imagine they will need actual text to work with. At that point, we can see what they propose to do with the EB quota. I've heard that they are going to decouple dependents from the quota. This would more than double the numbers available. Also, I've heard that visa recapture will be included. This would add more than 300,000 visas to the quota immediately. If dependents are not counted, that would be the equivalent of adding more than 600,000 visas back into the quota. Finally, there are strong rumors that some groups (EB1a, STEM advanced degree holders) will be quota exempt and also that the main EB quota itself will be expanded considerably. I should add that it is a foregone conclusion that the single state limit will be eliminated. "
This aligns with what gcq has posted above. I have mentioned before the expanding support for the I-squared Act and the current sponsor & co-sponsor count now stands at 26. Obviously Grassley/Sessions/Vitter etc are not part of the list. Also the benefit of such a Bill is that the wait times of all countries will be reduced dramatically and will eliminate the heartache/ill-feelings that HR 3012 provoked last year
KD - I would respectfully state that I doubt that. My first hand experience with that organization has been terrible to say the least. They grabbed all credit they could from my blog and never supported 1 % the idea that number crunching actually helps anyone.
On the other hand many ideas came out of this blog including but not limited to -
A) country backlog is the real problem in EB immigration.
B) Family numbers from EB should be counted towards FB quota.
I have no respect for them whatsoever because they don't know how to respect others nor they know how to respect a dialog. If they cared so much for immigrants why did they spread lies about me and this blog when I stopped writing there and started writing on my own blog?
All this crap about them having inside access to any office is BS. It's a BS organization with BS leadership that doesn't know politics nor they know organization nor they know advocacy.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kd2008
pessimist - thank you for writing on this blog. Did you actually meet with hatch or did you visit the office and couldn't see him?
Quote:
Originally Posted by pessimist
Q, I certainly sympathize with your experience. There is no doubt you were wronged. But the truth is there for all to see. I have made many trips to Senators and house reps. They know I V. They know also I V is backed by Tech companies. There are facebook posts showing I V invitation to White house. When bills are announced, legislators mention I V.Quote:
Originally Posted by qesehmk
I V by no means is a perfect organisation. But they are certainly not BS as you say. You were wronged and you have animus for them and that is understandable. But for them, nobody would be banging legislators doors for attention. They certainly know politics way better than most organisations that lobby in DC.
Once you are over your slight, you may be able to see that there are good people in that organisation who had nothing to do with how you were treated and are helping EB backlog cause.
I hope that this is the end of this discussion and we can focus on matters at hand.
To pessimist
Thanks for the information based on personal experience.We are well aware that Sen.Hatch is very supportive of legal immigration especially employment based.In addition to the I-squared Act we should also be thankful for his leadership role in formulating and passing AC21 Act in 2000. However we should not assume that his support extends to other aspects of the proposed legislation as noted below
http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politic...o-Senate-floor
"Senator Hatch emphasized that, for his part, getting one piece in place doesn’t guarantee his “yes” vote on an eventual bill being crafted by the so-called “gang of eight” in the Senate.
"While I understand this [farm-worker provision] will be included in the Gang of 8 proposal, no one should assume that I'm backing their overall plan," Hatch said in his statement.
kd .. thanks for a civil reply. All I can say is I hope you are right and I am wrong.Quote:
Originally Posted by kd2008
Such an important week and everybody is so quiet on this forum!
Hopefully the Republicans don't read the liberal LA Times
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationwo...,5787920.story
Also the House Bill may be unveiled on Thursday and steal some of the Senate's thunder
http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/...icle-1.1314521