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

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by idiotic

Guys/Girls,

A small exercise here will be very useful. I know many of us have written to senators and got the response by now. So, can we reply with senator name and his stand (yes/no/ambiguous response) on this. As many of us are spread through out USA, it would be a good exercise to see the collective results well before the actual voting.

---

idiotic,
We have usually refrained from doing so in the past. The reasoning behind not putting a senator's name in an open forum is that we end up opening the senator up for attack or calls/meetings from the other side. Most of the times, people don't put up the senator's name, and instead pm the forum member who "really" wants to know.

I am not opposing your idea. I just feel - based on previous decisions taken on this and other boards - that we shouldn't identify the name. In practice, this will mean that we will not be able to create a comprehensive "tally" of senator names and votes, as you have suggested. Not having that tally before the vote may not be such a big detriment. At the end of the day, what matters to us is that the senators who are supporting the cause are not bombarded from the other side.

Of course, this is just my humble opinion. Other than that, I'd suggest that folks do what you have done - Call, or meet, the senator and do the best to convince them to say yes.

I'd also request that you edit your post and remove the senator's name and state.

Thanks for the effort!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by manubhai

We have usually refrained from doing so in the past. The reasoning behind not putting a senator's name in an open forum is that we end up opening the senator up for attack or calls/meetings from the other side. Most of the times, people don't put up the senator's name, and instead pm the forum member who "really" wants to know.

I am not opposing your idea. I just feel - based on previous decisions taken on this and other boards - that we shouldn't identify the name. In practice, this will mean that we will not be able to create a comprehensive "tally" of senator names and votes, as you have suggested. Not having that tally before the vote may not be such a big detriment. At the end of the day, what matters to us is that the senators who are supporting the cause are not bombarded from the other side.

Of course, this is just my humble opinion. Other than that, I'd suggest that folks do what you have done - Call, or meet, the senator and do the best to convince them to say yes.

I'd also request that you edit your post and remove the senator's name and state.

Thanks for the effort!

---

Agree with your intention but there is a workaround.. Let us private message to one representative and let him collect the info and post combined tally.. will that work?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by idiotic

Guys/Girls,

A small exercise here will be very useful. I know many of us have written to senators and got the response by now. So, can we reply with senator name and his stand (yes/no/ambiguous response) on this. As many of us are spread through out USA, it would be a good exercise to see the collective results well before the actual voting.

My 2 cents..

---

Idiotic (no pun intended, LOL), please delete your post. The communication from the Senator was intended for you. If the Senator wanted to tell the whole world, he/she would have held a press conference and let everyone know. Please be considerate and do not undo the hard work done by everyone else.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kd2008

Idiotic (no pun intended, LOL), please delete your post. The communication from the Senator was intended for you. If the Senator wanted to tell the whole world, he/she would have held a press conference and let everyone know. Please be considerate and do not undo the hard work done by everyone else.

---

I already edited my post to remove the senator name.. the only place it shows the senator name now is in your post (Quoted text).. Please edit it too.. thanks

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kd2008

Idiotic (no pun intended, LOL), please delete your post. The communication from the Senator was intended for you. If the Senator wanted to tell the whole world, he/she would have held a press conference and let everyone know. Please be considerate and do not undo the hard work done by everyone else.

---

kd2008,
Dont think idiotic's intention was to "undo the hard work done by everyone else". He was just trying to come up with a creative idea and I'd rather thank him for the initiative.

Also, if a senator sends out a note or a mail to someone, unless distinctly specified in the communication, the senator assumes that that communication WILL be made public - with or without a press conference.

That said, the one thing we all seem to agree on is that "WE" don't want to leak out names because it hurts our cause. It will be great if all those who oppose HR3012 continue calling Mr. Grassley, and ONLY Mr. Grassley, while we focus on calling everyone else.

That said, I agree with your intention and we all are trying to follow the same path - call and meet the Senators, convince them, and get this bill passed.

Thanks!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lalaji

Oh Law Firm update:

01/11/2012: Potential Implication of Appointment of Comprehensive Immigration Reform Advocate Cecilia Muñoz to the White House Top Position of Director of the Domestic Policy Council.

Muñoz's appointment to the White House's top domestic policy position is considered a signal to Hispanic voters that Obama has not given up on immigration reform, despite the lack of progress in his first term, according to a report. Even though the immigrant community may not see immediate impact of this appointment on immigration legislation, without doubt, this will affect, in one way or another, the White House's position on pending and future immigration reform policy and direction for immigration legislation in the Congress. Recent report of the White House internal struggle on CIR between the First Lady, who is an advocate of CIR, and the former White House Chief of Staff and current Mayor of Chicago, who had been known to have a different position, may also have some level of connection to the Obama's position on immigration in coming months, regardless of its implication on the November election strategy. It may be interesting to watch whether it will impact one way or another the Democrat's position in the Senate on the pending H.R. 3012. Traditionally the comprehensive immigration reform advocates have been opposing piecemeal immigration reform, particularly employment-based immigration reform, from their position that such piece-meal immigration reform legislation will weaken the chances for comprehensive immigration reform legislation. In order to accomodate Democrat's such dynamic position, Rep. Chaffetz accomodated increase in family-based immigrant visa per country limit and three-year phase-in arrangement for elimination of the employment-based per country limitation in the bill and was able to obtain support from the two strongest Democrat CIR advocate members of the House, Rep. Luis Gutierez and Rep. Zoe Lofgren as co-sponsors of the bill. Please stay tuned to this website for the development. Remember that this is a national election year. Most of the coming legislative bills will have some implication for the Presidential election strategies of each party.

---

Mathew OH of oh law firm nowadays connects everything to H.R.3012, that is an attorneys, inherent fear to losing business on EAD renewal and H1B extensions! of course site traffic too. I do not understand how an appointment will make an impact on Senators! He is comparing apples with oranges! :) ( I won't be surprised if he says there is not much snowing this winter because of H.R.3012 is in the Senate calendar!)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by manubhai

kd2008,
Dont think idiotic's intention was to "undo the hard work done by everyone else". He was just trying to come up with a creative idea and I'd rather thank him for the initiative.

Also, if a senator sends out a note or a mail to someone, unless distinctly specified in the communication, the senator assumes that that communication WILL be made public - with or without a press conference.

That said, the one thing we all seem to agree on is that "WE" don't want to leak out names because it hurts our cause. It will be great if all those who oppose HR3012 continue calling Mr. Grassley, and ONLY Mr. Grassley, while we focus on calling everyone else.

That said, I agree with your intention and we all are trying to follow the same path - call and meet the Senators, convince them, and get this bill passed.

Thanks!

---

Adding to this no Senator replies clearly for the concern of a bill, they just have the standard reply like "When the bill comes for consideration, I Will keep your opinion/views in mind" By this statement of the Senators reply, it is very difficult to assume what is in their minds, and lot of things changes between cup and the lip.and of course that is Politics!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by manubhai

kd2008,
Dont think idiotic's intention was to "undo the hard work done by everyone else". He was just trying to come up with a creative idea and I'd rather thank him for the initiative.

Also, if a senator sends out a note or a mail to someone, unless distinctly specified in the communication, the senator assumes that that communication WILL be made public - with or without a press conference.

That said, the one thing we all seem to agree on is that "WE" don't want to leak out names because it hurts our cause. It will be great if all those who oppose HR3012 continue calling Mr. Grassley, and ONLY Mr. Grassley, while we focus on calling everyone else.

That said, I agree with your intention and we all are trying to follow the same path - call and meet the Senators, convince them, and get this bill passed.

Thanks!

---

If someone replied yes / no to our letters, I do not think we can change their positions very easily by calling or doing whatever (Eg. Our "holding" senator). It will be very useful if we can meet up with the people who are inbetween. For example in my state, there is one senator who already replied yes but the other one is giving ambiguous response. I already called their office and also planning to meetup with him if possible.

Can we see any impact on HR3012 based on below article information?
01/11/2012: Potential Implication of Appointment of Comprehensive Immigration Reform Advocate Cecilia Muñoz to the White House Top Position of Director of the Domestic Policy Council.

Muñoz's appointment to the White House's top domestic policy position is considered a signal to Hispanic voters that Obama has not given up on immigration reform, despite the lack of progress in his first term, according to a report. Even though the immigrant community may not see immediate impact of this appointment on immigration legislation, without doubt, this will affect, in one way or another, the White House's position on pending and future immigration reform policy and direction for immigration legislation in the Congress. Recent report of the White House internal struggle on CIR between the First Lady, who is an advocate of CIR, and the former White House Chief of Staff and current Mayor of Chicago, who had been known to have a different position, may also have some level of connection to the Obama's position on immigration in coming months, regardless of its implication on the November election strategy. It may be interesting to watch whether it will impact one way or another the Democrat's position in the Senate on the pending H.R. 3012. Traditionally the comprehensive immigration reform advocates have been opposing piecemeal immigration reform, particularly employment-based immigration reform, from their position that such piece-meal immigration reform legislation will weaken the chances for comprehensive immigration reform legislation. In order to accomodate Democrat's such dynamic position, Rep. Chaffetz accomodated increase in family-based immigrant visa per country limit and three-year phase-in arrangement for elimination of the employment-based per country limitation in the bill and was able to obtain support from the two strongest Democrat CIR advocate members of the House, Rep. Luis Gutierez and Rep. Zoe Lofgren as co-sponsors of the bill. Please stay tuned to this website for the development. Remember that this is a national election year. Most of the coming legislative bills will have some implication for the Presidential election strategies of each party.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lalaji

Can we see any impact on HR3012 based on below article information?
01/11/2012: Potential Implication of Appointment of Comprehensive Immigration Reform Advocate Cecilia Muñoz to the White House Top Position of Director of the Domestic Policy Council.

Muñoz's appointment to the White House's top domestic policy position is considered a signal to Hispanic voters that Obama has not given up on immigration reform, despite the lack of progress in his first term, according to a report. Even though the immigrant community may not see immediate impact of this appointment on immigration legislation, without doubt, this will affect, in one way or another, the White House's position on pending and future immigration reform policy and direction for immigration legislation in the Congress. Recent report of the White House internal struggle on CIR between the First Lady, who is an advocate of CIR, and the former White House Chief of Staff and current Mayor of Chicago, who had been known to have a different position, may also have some level of connection to the Obama's position on immigration in coming months, regardless of its implication on the November election strategy. It may be interesting to watch whether it will impact one way or another the Democrat's position in the Senate on the pending H.R. 3012. Traditionally the comprehensive immigration reform advocates have been opposing piecemeal immigration reform, particularly employment-based immigration reform, from their position that such piece-meal immigration reform legislation will weaken the chances for comprehensive immigration reform legislation. In order to accomodate Democrat's such dynamic position, Rep. Chaffetz accomodated increase in family-based immigrant visa per country limit and three-year phase-in arrangement for elimination of the employment-based per country limitation in the bill and was able to obtain support from the two strongest Democrat CIR advocate members of the House, Rep. Luis Gutierez and Rep. Zoe Lofgren as co-sponsors of the bill. Please stay tuned to this website for the development. Remember that this is a national election year. Most of the coming legislative bills will have some implication for the Presidential election strategies of each party.

---

lalaji,

Please check my above post regarding this. NO impact whatsoever, Fear mongering and site traffic by attorneys.. that is the only thing happening, until Senate recess is over come Jan 23rd:)

Thanks. One interesting think i noticed is her husband is an indian 'Amit Pandya' :ohuman rights lawyer.

Lot of negative information is being spread on websites with references to H.R. 3012. Can we all take some time out and post in support of this bill? Esp the WaPo bill...Anti H.R. 3012 people are posting comments as citizens...

http://www.livemint.com/2012/01/1023...een-cards.html

http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/...y.html?hpid=z5

I tried to post pro HR 3012 opinion on both articles but moderator never posted. Everybody should post positive comments on the articles.

Update from Oh Law firm:

01/12/2012: Update Report of Irish Lobby for Schumer S. 1983

Irish news media reports today its lobbying activities to solicit support of S. 1983 which includes H.R. 3012 version and Irish E-3 nonimmigrant visas for legal and illegal Irish. They are and will continuously drum up their lobby campaigns during next few weeks to find seven (7) Republican Senators to support this bill. Reportedly, Schumer stated that he had 53 votes in the Democratic caucus in the Senate who had agreed to vote for the bill. This is somewhat promising news for H.R. 3012 supporters. As we reported earlier, the supporters of H.R. 3012 and S. 1983 should increase their efforts to get one of these bills passed in the Senate as soon as the Senate return late this month. Otherwise, the chances for success will turn slimmer and slimmer because of changing political landscape involving the national election strategies. Please stay tuned.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sunnyznj

Lot of negative information is being spread on websites with references to H.R. 3012. Can we all take some time out and post in support of this bill? Esp the WaPo bill...Anti H.R. 3012 people are posting comments as citizens...

http://www.livemint.com/2012/01/1023...een-cards.html

http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/...y.html?hpid=z5

---

Very true. The ROWers are hell bent on creating roadblocks for this bill. They are leaving no stones unturned in their effort to tarnish HR 3012.They are being dishonest,unscrupulous and slanderous in all their posts. We need to mitigate their effect before Senate returns to session.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by iamdeb

Very true. The ROWers are hell bent on creating roadblocks for this bill. They are leaving no stones unturned in their effort to tarnish HR 3012.They are being dishonest,unscrupulous and slanderous in all their posts. We need to mitigate their effect before Senate returns to session.

---

i would say,,don't hesitate to post your opinions/comments on those websites under d articles..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jackbrown_890

i would say,,don't hesitate to post your opinions/comments on those websites under d articles..

---

It boils my blood to see some of the comments in there.. i have started replying but we need more supporters to comment on these articles and to present facts instead of the baseless BS that ROW is spewing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sunnyznj

It boils my blood to see some of the comments in there.. i have started replying but we need more supporters to comment on these articles and to present facts instead of the baseless BS that ROW is spewing.

---

I understand your frustation brother, do not worry too much they are only some hand full of people who pays money to wapo and livemint to delete comment of pro H.R.3012 just to make our side depressed, do not fall for that. We will know what is the reality when the Senate comes back on Jan 23rd.

Of course we can reply, but they delete the pro posts. If you remember a few weeks back there was a poll, in washingtonpost site to oppose and support the same bill. but they showed it as more opposition by hook or crook so do not fall for that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by immitime

I understand your frustation brother, do not worry too much they are only some hand full of people who pays money to wapo and livemint to delete comment of pro H.R.3012 just to make our side depressed, do not fall for that. We will know what is the reality when the Senate comes back on Jan 23rd.

Of course we can reply, but they delete the pro posts. If you remember a few weeks back there was a poll, in washingtonpost site to oppose and support the same bill. but they showed it as more opposition by hook or crook so do not fall for that.

---

I agree and hence i am not even bothering to argue with folks on there..

Whenever we post on public sites, make sure our arguments are civil and to the point. Also please make sure we don't insult american citizens.

http://irishecho.com/?p=69124

I think instead of arguing with opponents of HR3012, a strong case should be made for HR 3012 at every opportunity.

No point in fighting with anybody over HR 3012.

Adding to Q's point above: After a point, responding to comments becomes a circular and usually a self-fulfilling cycle. They wont have to "respond" if you don't. They will take out what they have by writing one or two comments and they'll stop. If they feel the need to write 5 comments, you've just doubled it to 10.

I am not asking you to stop. I am requesting that you please spend your valuable time commenting only if you have already spent your valuable time in calling and meeting the senators.

Responding to comments won't get HR3012 to pass.

A senator's vote will get HR3012 to pass.

Emailed Senator again
Hoping to hear back from his office before 23rd..

Update from Oh Law Firm:

01/13/2012: Target Republican Senators Picked by Irish Lobbysts for Support of S. 1983 Schumer Bill

We reported earlier that supporters of S. 1983 that includes H.R. 3012 and Irish E-3 nonimmigrant visa needed at least seven (7) Republican Senators to break the potential filibuster by Sen. Chuck Grassley. Irish media is actively soliciting Irish community to contact the following Senators:
Kentucky: Senator Mitch McConnell: 202-224-2541
Maine: Senator Susan Collins: 202-224-2523
Maine: Senator Olympia Snowe: 202-224-5344
Alaska: Senator Murkowski: 202-224-666
Indiana: Senator Lugar: 202-224-4814
Arizona: Senator John McCain: 202-224-2235
South Carolina: Senator Lindsey Graham: 202-224- 5972
Ohio: Senator Rob Portman: 202-224-3353
Florida: Senator Marco Rubio: 202-224-3041
Massachusetts: Senator Scott Brown: 202-224-4543
Pennsylvania: Senator Pat Toomey: 202-224-4254
Illinois: Senator Mark Kirk: 202-224-2854
New Hampshire: Senator Kelly Ayotte: 202-224-3324
Iowa: Senator Chuck Grassley: 202-224-3744
Texas: Senator John Cornyn: 202-224-2934
This reporter understands that the H.R. 3012 lobbysts and supporters, including Indians, have been working hard to get seven Republican Senators. We are not sure whether they are targetting at the same Republican Senators, but time is running out and both communities must work hard to get their bill sailed through the Senate floor successfully as soon as the Senate returns to the session. January 23, 2012 meeting will be pro forma session and there will be no votes and the supporters may want to have the bills taken care of at least by the first week of February 2012.

If there is an E3 visa for Australia and now perhaps an E3 visa for Ireland, why not one for India? Could this be point of emphasis for future advocacy? I believe Australia got the E3 visa in exchange of supporting the first Gulf war. Ireland is pushing for E3 because of historic linkages between US and Ireland. May be next time India is in a good bargaining positions (some treaty/military support/containing China/etc) - India should push for E3 visa as well.

E3 for Australians is really a waste right now. They hardly use a third of the 10K annual limit. If anything, E3 should be opened for other nationalities once demand from original target countries have been met.

Also - E3 is pretty awesome visa - it can be renewed as many times as you wish, spouses can work without limitations and dependents are NOT counted in the quota. The renewal process is really fast too.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by imdeng

Also - E3 is pretty awesome visa - it can be renewed as many times as you wish, spouses can work without limitations and dependents are NOT counted in the quota. The renewal process is really fast too.

---

Only drawack is there is no path to Greencard/Citizenship with an E3 visa.

Senate Floor UPDATE:
As per Senate Floor Log:
The Senate will next convene for business on Monday, January 23, 2012 at 2:00 PM. There will be in a period of Morning Business for two hours. At 4:00 PM, the Senate will proceed to an Executive Session to consider the nomination of Cal. #438 (John Gerrard to United States District Judge for the District of Nebraska). There will 90 minutes of debate on the nomination followed by a vote on confirmation at 5:30 PM. On Tuesday, January 24, 2012 at 2:15 PM, the Senate will have a cloture vote on the Motion to Proceed to S. 968 ( Preventing Real Online Threats to Economic Creativity and Theft of Intellectual Property Act of 2011).

It looks like HR3012 will not be taken soon...Please confirm.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lalaji

It looks like HR3012 will not be taken soon...Please confirm.

---

It will be read for second time and placed on calender for sure on Jan 23, 2012. When it comes up for voting is a different story and no one knows at this point. Hope it will be sometime soon.

Are they going to decide the voting date on Jan 23,2012

Any updates guys.. 5 more days to go...

HR3012 bill is not in the below link..Earlier it was there...

http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CCAL-11...2012-01-17.pdf

Dec 17th 2011 bills missing...

Bill is very much there.
H.R. 3012 (Fairness for High-Skilled Immigrants Act of 2011). The bill was read for the first time. The second reading was objected to
http://www.senate.gov/galleries/pdcl/

Began the Rule 14 process of H.R.3012, the Fairness for High-Skilled Immigrants Act of 2011.

See below

http://democrats.senate.gov/?s=3012
http://democrats.senate.gov/2011/12/...ember-17-2011/

thanks for the clarification.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lalaji

Any updates guys.. 5 more days to go...

---

No updates on the bill...but it looks like on 23rd somewhere between 2 & 4 PM, they will bring up 3012 for 2nd reading..
there are 2 bills which were read 1st time on Dec. 17....another one is H.R. 440..

Excellent article on Rule 14.

http://www.llsdc.org/attachments/wys...RS-RS22299.pdf

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mniwas

Excellent article on Rule 14.

http://www.llsdc.org/attachments/wys...RS-RS22299.pdf

---

Excellent indeed...Thanks for sharing

http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/...KpP_story.html


still people are tring to push the immigration bill....hope to see some moment...one more week wait for senate to start ...fingers crossed :)