-
Quote:
Originally Posted by
rupen86
Alright, here is the good way, I hope.
Senate CIR bill is not being taken up by house and house does not have its CIR. So, which CIR bill do we talk about when we call to congressman?
I think its best to keep simple things simple.. Just ask your congressman to support S.744. Period. I think that will cover all of our concerns without getting into details or politics.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by
rupen86
Alright, here is the good way, I hope.
Senate CIR bill is not being taken up by house and house does not have its CIR. So, which CIR bill do we talk about when we call to congressman?
We should start with talking about provisions in the senate bill that is beneficial to us, as we are primarily advocating for us. If he as anti-CIR congressman, we need to remind him that democrats probably won't support a piecemeal approach and hence he need to support CIR in its entirety.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by
qesehmk
Rupen, I agree with Viz. We can always talk in terms of senate bill as a concept. The focus of making calls to congressman should be 3 fold:
1) It helps establish their position on senate CIR and clarify basis of opposition.
2) It helps strengthen support for CIR and improves their understanding of the need urgency as well as mass support behind it.
3) It creates ground for a discharge petition (if Boehner continues to refuse to table senate CIR or continues to stall senate CIR on one pretext or another).
Dynamics are changing. Recently Schumer and Mccain indicated they are ready to work piecemeal bills. Even Obama will start shifting in future.So the terms of House will dictate the course of immigration bills in future as the house is dealing with more people in grassroot level. It is difficult to find the people like Hatch who wants to be completely corporate friendly in house.
Discharge petition never going to work in immigration as single republican will not sign the petition. I doubt even democrats will sign. Discharge petition was last option given to use in rarest of rare situation arises.If they use this for just to give green cards to foreigners then credibility of US will be in question. So discharge petition is out of question for immigration and it is being discussed only in forums as we Indians take it easy any thing. So any immigration bill be mostly in terms of house(a tleast 70% mainly in illegal immigration and number of green cards) or never.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Ramsen
Dynamics are changing. Recently Schumer and Mccain indicated they are ready to work piecemeal bills. Even Obama will start shifting in future.So the terms of House will dictate the course of immigration bills in future as the house is dealing with more people in grassroot level. It is difficult to find the people like Hatch who wants to be completely corporate friendly in house.
This was always going to be the case. A Senate Bill is at the mercy of the house and vice versa. I won't go as far as saying it'll be on the House's terms as no final bill will be passed without both parties signing off in conference.
Quote:
Discharge petition never going to work in immigration as single republican will not sign the petition. I doubt even democrats will sign. Discharge petition was last option given to use in rarest of rare situation arises.
This is the intention of a Discharge Petition. Why else would you use it?
Quote:
If they use this for just to give green cards to foreigners then credibility of US will be in question.
Based on what?
Quote:
So discharge petition is out of question for immigration and it is being discussed only in forums as we Indians take it easy any thing.
Huh?
Quote:
So any immigration bill be mostly in terms of house(a tleast 70% mainly in illegal immigration and number of green cards) or never.
As I said before, this was always going to be the case. It's a matter of opinion what % will be based House's terms.
-
You can make out from the history. Between 1931 and 2003, House members filed 563 discharge petitions. Only 47 of those managed to obtain the signatures of the majority of the House. The House voted to discharge just 26 of those bills, and passed only 19 of the bills they covered. In the end, only two of those 563 bills became law. Even for fiscal cliff Nancy Pelosi considered discharge petition but did not work on 2012 middle.
Top 5 reasons in the current climate that discharge petitions will not work
1. Apart from Partian politics there is also differences between house and Senate in immigration policy. Even democrats in house are ok to pass a different bill in house. So discharge petition is amost out of question
2. In Senate no one from top most leadership voted for immigration bill including Mcconnell. Each republican will think this in mind before signing
3. Now Reid is considering nuclear option in nominations on next week. It will harden the position of GOP further in both houses if Reid's effort succeed.
4. Immigration issue does not have any deadline and no compelling reason to pass within 1 month or 1 year or 5 years. So they will wait until compromise is reached.
5. Most cases compromise will be reached if there is threat of discharge petition as that is huge embarrasment to the leadership. Also if discharge petition fails that will be end of it for many years. So they will attempt for compromise instead of trying and closing the door for many years
-
Another important development today is Gov.Schweitzer's decision in Montana to not seek the Democratic nomination
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com...enate-in-2014/
This puts another red state Democratic Senate seat in play as Sen.Baucus is not seeking re-election. The GOP is feeling the tide turning in its quest for Senate control and they might feel that stalling now will put them in a better position after the next election
-
You make really excellent points.
On #2 I think you meant - establishment rather than top leadership. Because Graham and McCain are certainly top leaders that supported CIR. While Grahm is kind of establishment. McCain certainly isn't.
I however would disagree that Obama and dems will accept anything that is piecemeal. My definition of piecemeal would be anything that doesn't have path to citizenship and/or doesn't address 11m "undocumented/illegal" workers.
As per discharge petition I think even though odds are against - that threat needs to held out there in order for GOP to work in immigration reform. And as such various pro immigration groups must work to convince GOP senators to support senate CIR or majority of it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Ramsen
You can make out from the history. Between 1931 and 2003, House members filed 563 discharge petitions. Only 47 of those managed to obtain the signatures of the majority of the House. The House voted to discharge just 26 of those bills, and passed only 19 of the bills they covered. In the end, only two of those 563 bills became law. Even for fiscal cliff Nancy Pelosi considered discharge petition but did not work on 2012 middle.
Top 5 reasons in the current climate that discharge petitions will not work
1. Apart from Partian politics there is also differences between house and Senate in immigration policy. Even democrats in house are ok to pass a different bill in house. So discharge petition is amost out of question
2. In Senate no one from top most leadership voted for immigration bill including Mcconnell. Each republican will think this in mind before signing
3. Now Reid is considering nuclear option in nominations on next week. It will harden the position of GOP further in both houses if Reid's effort succeed.
4. Immigration issue does not have any deadline and no compelling reason to pass within 1 month or 1 year or 5 years. So they will wait until compromise is reached.
5. Most cases compromise will be reached if there is threat of discharge petition as that is huge embarrasment to the leadership. Also if discharge petition fails that will be end of it for many years. So they will attempt for compromise instead of trying and closing the door for many years
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by
gs1968
Another important development today is Gov.Schweitzer's decision in Montana to not seek the Democratic nomination
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com...enate-in-2014/
This puts another red state Democratic Senate seat in play as Sen.Baucus is not seeking re-election. The GOP is feeling the tide turning in its quest for Senate control and they might feel that stalling now will put them in a better position after the next election
Unfortunately, its not going to be matter to the outcome for immigration. Senate bill has passed. Even if the Republicans gain control of the Senate and pass piece meal House legislation, Obama will veto anything without a P2C.
Besides democrats strongly believe that McConnell is vulnerable in KY. They think they can get that seat. Plus most likely interim Senator Chiesa (R-NJ) will not win a permanent seat in a blue state.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by
gcq
We should start with talking about provisions in the senate bill that is beneficial to us, as we are primarily advocating for us. If he as anti-CIR congressman, we need to remind him that democrats probably won't support a piecemeal approach and hence he need to support CIR in its entirety.
I agree. It is not the bill but the provisions in the senate bill that we are supporting. As long as those provisions are in any bill, we support that bill. We are talking about our problems and suggesting solutions (senate provisions) for solving them.
-
The main tricky issues in immigration are
1.To convince people for giving citizenship to illegal immigrants
2. How to achieve 90 to 100% reduction of future illegal immigration by border security and internal enforcement in a few years time
3. Number of future legal immigration numbers without impacting US workers.
4. Economy benefit
Senate bill failed 3 of 4 major points. If 3 of 4 will be satisfied there is no need for this much advocacy or lobbying.
-
They are all good points - generally frequently heard from anti-immigrant groups.
While talking with our Sr VP HR (the kind of big shots that have company planes to fly them around) of one of my former employers, I learnt from him that this concern about US workers is nothing new. This resistance to immigration is nothing new.
Before Indians and Chinese there were Irish. "Oh irish are stealing our jobs!!" And before Irish there were italians and germans and dutch.
So every successive immigration group goes through same crucifix and the arguments are always the same.
So IMHO we need to stand together and continuously make our voice heard in a positive manner and make sure that whatever case we make is in the broader interest of people rather than just me or a bunch of my friends getting GCs.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Ramsen
The main tricky issues in immigration are
1.To convince people for giving citizenship to illegal immigrants
2. How to achieve 90 to 100% reduction of future illegal immigration by border security and internal enforcement in a few years time
3. Number of future legal immigration numbers without impacting US workers.
4. Economy benefit
Senate bill failed 3 of 4 major points. If 3 of 4 will be satisfied there is no need for this much advocacy or lobbying.
-
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by
qesehmk
You make really excellent points.
On #2 I think you meant - establishment rather than top leadership. Because Graham and McCain are certainly top leaders that supported CIR. While Grahm is kind of establishment. McCain certainly isn't.
I however would disagree that Obama and dems will accept anything that is piecemeal. My definition of piecemeal would be anything that doesn't have path to citizenship and/or doesn't address 11m "undocumented/illegal" workers.
As per discharge petition I think even though odds are against - that threat needs to held out there in order for GOP to work in immigration reform. And as such various pro immigration groups must work to convince GOP senators to support senate CIR or majority of it.
I think all this pathway to citizenship should be looked differently. Let me give it a try
1. EB category people especially from India and Chine are here for 10+ years and are yet to get their GC(LPR). All these long years they maintained perfect legal status and stuck it out literally. After LPR or GC, wait another 5 years to get Citizenship. Total years to citizenship 15. Illegal immigrants with CIR will get citizenship in 13 years. Kind of unfair I think. Republicans offer -> we will document them but give them no guarantee of citizenship. Fair in my opinion. Work here on that temp status(Just like H1B and L1 do) and get your employer to sponsor your GC. Nobody can stop that right?
2. In the tax debate that happened last year, Dems demanded "let us pass on what we agree". Why not apply that to CIR(something like HR3012 from last congress).
3. Piecemeal legislation will ultimately benefit all in my opinion. Getting all illegals a documented status will motivate them to seek better opportunity and if employment GC is made merit based who is going to benefit ultimately these illegals right?
4 . Finally I agree in life nothing is fair but we all have to agree that vote bank politics is being played here on both sides and hence if we for once try to be (I don't know the right word here) subjective/fair we should realize that this actually motivates individual to do the wrong thing.
-
http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/McC...7/15/id/515049
"I don't think anybody's satisfied with the status quo on immigration," McConnell said. "And I hope the House will be able to move forward on something and we can get this into conference and get an outcome that will be satisfactory for the American people."
-
druvraj - I have debated this many times and so I will respond only by reiterating my position that - politics will play its own role - we can't influece it too much - forget changing it. We should understand that EB community's well being is riding on back of "CIR" and hence 11m "undocumented/illegals" rather than vice versa. As such EB's should stand together with CIR rather than trying to take any other view for practical and selfish reasons.
I think your points are all valid points that can be argued eitherway. I am only emphasizing the practical/selfish reasons why EB's should join CIR or such efforts. This is my last on this topic.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
druvraj
I think all this pathway to citizenship should be looked differently. Let me give it a try
1. EB category people especially from India and Chine are here for 10+ years and are yet to get their GC(LPR). All these long years they maintained perfect legal status and stuck it out literally. After LPR or GC, wait another 5 years to get Citizenship. Total years to citizenship 15. Illegal immigrants with CIR will get citizenship in 13 years. Kind of unfair I think. Republicans offer -> we will document them but give them no guarantee of citizenship. Fair in my opinion. Work here on that temp status(Just like H1B and L1 do) and get your employer to sponsor your GC. Nobody can stop that right?
2. In the tax debate that happened last year, Dems demanded "let us pass on what we agree". Why not apply that to CIR(something like HR3012 from last congress).
3. Piecemeal legislation will ultimately benefit all in my opinion. Getting all illegals a documented status will motivate them to seek better opportunity and if employment GC is made merit based who is going to benefit ultimately these illegals right?
4 . Finally I agree in life nothing is fair but we all have to agree that vote bank politics is being played here on both sides and hence if we for once try to be (I don't know the right word here) subjective/fair we should realize that this actually motivates individual to do the wrong thing.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by
druvraj
I think all this pathway to citizenship should be looked differently. Let me give it a try
1. EB category people especially from India and Chine are here for 10+ years and are yet to get their GC(LPR). All these long years they maintained perfect legal status and stuck it out literally. After LPR or GC, wait another 5 years to get Citizenship. Total years to citizenship 15. Illegal immigrants with CIR will get citizenship in 13 years. Kind of unfair I think. Republicans offer -> we will document them but give them no guarantee of citizenship. Fair in my opinion. Work here on that temp status(Just like H1B and L1 do) and get your employer to sponsor your GC. Nobody can stop that right?
2. In the tax debate that happened last year, Dems demanded "let us pass on what we agree". Why not apply that to CIR(something like HR3012 from last congress).
3. Piecemeal legislation will ultimately benefit all in my opinion. Getting all illegals a documented status will motivate them to seek better opportunity and if employment GC is made merit based who is going to benefit ultimately these illegals right?
4 . Finally I agree in life nothing is fair but we all have to agree that vote bank politics is being played here on both sides and hence if we for once try to be (I don't know the right word here) subjective/fair we should realize that this actually motivates individual to do the wrong thing.
Unfortunately politicians ( atleast majority of them ) think about their own self-interest.
Like Q said politics will takes its own course, i think at this point the only thing EB community can do is lobby for legal provisions in CIR.
Democracy is a bad form of govt but its the best among all other alternatives ( paraphrasing a quote form well known person), (in a way there just can't be an ideal govt.)
-
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/...land-security/
Republicans getting a trusted man as head of homeland security is a huge positive push towards CIR passing....
Once CIR passes, DHS is in for a major restructuring..
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by
idiotic
Joe lieberman looks a good choice but dems will be very unhappy with him - I am sure.
-
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by
qesehmk
They are all good points - generally frequently heard from anti-immigrant groups.
While talking with our Sr VP HR (the kind of big shots that have company planes to fly them around) of one of my former employers, I learnt from him that this concern about US workers is nothing new. This resistance to immigration is nothing new.
Before Indians and Chinese there were Irish. "Oh irish are stealing our jobs!!" And before Irish there were italians and germans and dutch.
So every successive immigration group goes through same crucifix and the arguments are always the same.
So IMHO we need to stand together and continuously make our voice heard in a positive manner and make sure that whatever case we make is in the broader interest of people rather than just me or a bunch of my friends getting GCs.
If we say those points are heard from anti immigrants then most of the US citizens and US congress is anti immigrants based on their policy. Democrats wants workers protection in legal immigration. So they can be considered as anti immigrant in that respect. Republicans does not to give pathway to citizens without complete control of border security. So they are anti immigrants. That is the major issue in immigration bill. Basically we Indians want GC fast as each one of us are thinking as Superior(Just because our Managers or CEO told ' You are doing excellent job'). So we are supporting any bill which gives faster GC and branding anyone points out problems in the bill as anti immigrant. But I am sure the bill is not going to be passed until the bill is acceptable to majority of US people
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Ramsen
1... If we say those points are heard from anti immigrants then most of the US citizens and US congress is anti immigrants based on their policy....
2.. So we are supporting any bill which gives faster GC and branding anyone points out problems in the bill as anti immigrant.
....
3. But I am sure the bill is not going to be passed until the bill is acceptable to majority of US people
#1 - not true. Majority people are quite liberal actually .... including republicans. Just because you are for American workers doesn't make you anti-immigrant. Anti-immigrant is anti-immigrant no matter what. Majority Americans like immigration.
#2 - Nothing wrong in that.
#3 - Kind of agree..except that congress doesn't always pass laws that represents people's wishes. Within the limits of indirect representation... yes one could argue ultimately people's wishes may be represented.
-
Indian IT to cheer as US immigration bill gets a jolt
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by
qesehmk
#1 - not true. Majority people are quite liberal actually .... including republicans. Just because you are for American workers doesn't make you anti-immigrant. Anti-immigrant is anti-immigrant no matter what. Majority Americans like immigration.
#2 - Nothing wrong in that.
#3 - Kind of agree..except that congress doesn't always pass laws that represents people's wishes. Within the limits of indirect representation... yes one could argue ultimately people's wishes may be represented.
If majority likes immigration. That is correct. But what level is big question. For example wide majority will tell no for any bill which gives pathway to citizenship at the same time future illegal immigration continue(The current CIR does that as CBO report shows only 33 to 50% future illegal immigration will be reduced). I think some kind of legalization for illegal immigrants immediately and trigger for pathway for citizenship could go well.
Anyhow for legal immigration Senate numbers will not be accepted by house. So compromise will lead to moderate number.
So it is not that much difficult to reach a deal. But it may take many more years to reach a deal as both sides need to become flexible.But so called anti immigrants also will have a say on legislation that will be passed. I doubt you can can pass a legislation by completely ignoring Senator Sessions or Rep Steve King.
-
We will see what happens! The picture is right now bleak for any reform ... comprehensive or piecemeal.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Ramsen
If majority likes immigration. That is correct. But what level is big question. For example wide majority will tell no for any bill which gives pathway to citizenship at the same time future illegal immigration continue(The current CIR does that as CBO report shows only 33 to 50% future illegal immigration will be reduced). I think some kind of legalization for illegal immigrants immediately and trigger for pathway for citizenship could go well.
Anyhow for legal immigration Senate numbers will not be accepted by house. So compromise will lead to moderate number.
So it is not that much difficult to reach a deal. But it may take many more years to reach a deal as both sides need to become flexible.But so called anti immigrants also will have a say on legislation that will be passed. I doubt you can can pass a legislation by completely ignoring Senator Sessions or Rep Steve King.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by
qesehmk
We will see what happens! The picture is right now bleak for any reform ... comprehensive or piecemeal.
Q or anybody,
Could anybody please help me understand what provisions are there in the currently passed CIR bill that helps EB2-3 I&C people?
