You can disagree but facts do not change. Look up any website and that's what they are discussing. Obama's Coalition includes latinos, african americans, women, young people and immigrants. It is hard to fight against this Coalition. There are statistics also available to look at. I would be very happy to see EB immigration bill getting passed but I would say chances for that has reduced as Oh Law firm pointed out and I agree with that.Quote:
Originally Posted by sportsfan33
Surely he would not block it, but democrat leadership in the senate may not bring it up sensing a chance for CIR.Quote:
Originally Posted by qesehmk
People might find this talk (there's a transcript too) from TED interesting:
http://www.ted.com/talks/pankaj_ghem...sn_t_flat.html
Quote:
Originally Posted by sportsfan33
Totally agree with both the statements above. Also as others have expressed unless the country caps are removed the effect of any other bill will be very limited for EB-I. If we are restricted to 7% cap then we will always be at the mercy of spillover (leftover) from what others don't consume. At the same time applicants from other countries will be free to move from their special queue in one category to their special queue in another category bypassing older EB-I applicants in all the categories. Lobbying for a piecemeal approach does not hurt, its elements can be included in a comprehensive bill if one ever comes up.Quote:
Originally Posted by qesehmk
One really favorable outcome of this election is that immigration reform has become a very important issue and both parties would do their best to cater to this constituency. This needs to be leveraged. Since HR 3012 is what will help EB2-I most, and since it is also a ripe bill, I think we should do our best to start approaching senators. Harry Reid has already sounded about need for cooperation on immigration reform and I think he has in mind pending bills. I also think Immigration Voice has got the opening it was looking for.
Obviously there is a portion of high earning immigrants that are republicans but no way are they a majority. BBC had an article about how 85% of Indians (one of the higest earning minorities in the US) are democrats. Not everyone votes purely based on their self interest. Almost all immigrants have seen bigger governments than in the US and they are not necessarily opposed to that idea. The exception tends to be eastern Europeans who have seen so much government brutality that they think the other extreme is better.Quote:
Originally Posted by sportsfan33
Republicans are smart enough to realize that defeat has nothing to do with lack of immigration reform. Latinos have always been pro-democratic. Reagan's amnesty didn't change that. After a new CIR, new Latino citizens will mostly embrace democrats anyway. Why would Republicans want that?Quote:
Originally Posted by kkruna
I expect full-on CIR drama to go on for 4 more years without going anywhere.
President Bush had got more than 40% of latino votes. Had Romney got that much, he would have won. Even though latinos are going to favor democrats, that margin is going to reduce if immigration does not remain top issue since socially they are more republican leaning.Quote:
Originally Posted by PD2008AUG25
Your argument is that demographics is not going to change in future. But data, statistics and trend does not favor that conclusion. The general conclusion right now is that white electoral vote will continue to decline and other groups will continue to increase their percentage.Quote:
Originally Posted by sportsfan33
That being said, there is nothing wrong in pushing 3012.
It's crazy that a delusional out-of-touch PE baron could get nearly half of the popular vote when the financial industry has squeezed the middle class in this country so thoroughly.Quote:
Originally Posted by sportsfan33
On your second point, inflows from Mexico have already reversed. The Pew center had some research on this that you can look up (sorry, too lazy). Net migration from Mexico to the US is now either zero or negative IIRC.
Demographics are changing despite reduced immigration because lower-educated immigrants (Hispanics, Blacks, whatever) have more kids than more-educated Americans (whites, Indians, Asians, etc.). I'm not trying to be racist or anything but I think it's pretty well established that education is inversely correlated with the no. of kids someone has, and it's also a fact that some of the immigrant groups are less educated than locals.Quote:
Originally Posted by rupen86
Rupen86 and sportsfan33, your contribution to the forum is highly valued and your insights are a great asset to this forum. That said, I would urge you to please create your own thread and move the discussion on politics to that thread. This thread is for discussing specific bills.
Thank you!
I do not think those discussions were irrelevant to the bill we are discussing. We are talking about possible CIR and how it might impact 3012. If the moderator thinks they are irrelevant, please feel free to delete them.Quote:
Originally Posted by kd2008
Here is a good analysis on demographics, changes to future senate procedures and possible CIR.
http://discuss.ilw.com/content.php?8...y-Greg-Siskind
75 % of Asians voted for Obama. I hope it get attention. though we are not as decisive block as others like African-American or Latinos.Quote:
Originally Posted by rupen86
To sportsfan33
This from morning tech on POLITICO
REID PLEDGES ACTION ON IMMIGRATION — We told you yesterday that a mix of electoral politics and existing congressional interest could push immigration reform — particularly, measures focused on high-skilled workers — back to the foreground. And Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid confirmed that in a press conference yesterday, telling reporters it's "very, very high on the list" of things to do next year. The "only thing we need to get immigration reform done is a few Republican votes," Reid said.
I know there is still a possibility of HR3012 in the lame duck session but the statement above seems to imply that it might be part of a larger immigration package in the next congress
Well, he said next year instead of next Congress, so maybe they will take it up next year? But I don't have any hopes when it comes to the feckless fools in Congress...
I agree. There is a sea change in the attitude of republicans on immigration. While we did not see practically a word on immigration bill in terms of CIR in last few years, we are starting to see lot of talk just after the election. See the link below.Quote:
Originally Posted by gs1968
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/09/us...tion.html?_r=0
I believe, we should just not be satisfied with 3012. Rather, we should focus on including other aspects in possible CIR package like recapture, excluding dependents etc. This will also get support from ROW EB community unlike 3012. I feel this is a golden opportunity and we should make every effort to get things done what we care about.
Yes, but Republicans are more interested in winning back the Latino base they've eliminated. Nobody gives a rat's ass about legal immigrants. I was reading some comments in the WSJ from Obama about how he was going to focus on CIR, which meant legalizing illegals and giving them a path to perm residency and citizenship.Quote:
Originally Posted by rupen86
He didn't say anything about legal immigration...
Legalizing illegals is not going make a dime's worth of difference to America's economic woes whereas bringing in highly-educated scientists and researchers would...yet guess what Congress would rather do.
I agree. That's where the focus would be..But even for the purpose of showing that they have done something about legal immigration, they will have to include something on legal immigration.Quote:
Originally Posted by abcx13
I agree with sportsfan that STEM or no STEM or recapture or no recapture, the country limits need to go. They are blatantly discriminatory and are just a different form of racism.
One more link showing immigration effort will begin post inauguration.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/1...n_2093178.html
It also tells that democrat bill would be in line with the one introduced by Robert Menendez which included visa recapture.
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/112/s1258/text
Interestingly, this bill (Menendez) does not include per country quota removal. Instead, it increases to 15%. But it includes visa recapture and looks like it includes excluding dependents from the count.
Both those links are the same (inadvertant mistake perhaps?). Nowhere do they talk about legal immigration.
Filibuster is used by both democrats and Republicans. The removal will do harm for both parties. If they remove now and there is a possiblity for GOP to get majority in 2 years or 4 years. That time they will revert the bills passed by democrats. Also they may need 60 votes to remove filibuster rule. Or they will filibuster the filibuster removal.
Republicans might want to think about getting on the train. Though they’ve mucked up opportunities to take over the Senate in 2010 and 2012, they have another opportunity in 2014, when Democrats will have 20 seats up for re-election and Republicans will be defending only 13. If the filibuster ends now, there’s a real chance that the first party to benefit from a reformed Washington would be the Republicans. That should be a change they can believe in.
Quote:
Originally Posted by abcx13
Sorry for the mistake. Here it is. I have corrected in the earlier post also.Quote:
Originally Posted by abcx13
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/112/s1258/text
I had a quick look and found considerably more than that.Quote:
Originally Posted by rupen86
a) Recapture of previously wasted visas.
b) Rollover of any wasted visas to the next year.
c) Exempt from Numerical Limitations
1) Dependents
2) EB1A
3) Aliens who have earned an advanced degree in the sciences (not including the social sciences), technology, engineering, or mathematics from a United States institution of higher education (as defined in section 1001(a) of title 20) and have been working in a field related to their degree subject in the United States under a nonimmigrant visa during the 2-year period preceding their application for an immigrant visa under section 203(b).
4) Alien physicians who have completed service requirements of a waiver or exemption requested by an interested State agency or by an interested Federal agency under section 214(l), including those alien physicians who completed such service before the date of the enactment of this subparagraph.
5) Also see (e). Not EB but helpful to those that marry after GC.
d) Elimination of the EB-1A Preference Category because of (c)(2).
e) Reclassification Of Spouses And Minor Children Of Lawful Permanent Residents As Immediate Relatives. They're no longer subject to Numerical Limits and F2A would no longer exist.
f) Increase Per Country Limit to 15%.
g) Allow filing of an I-485 based on having an approved I-140, subject to the primary applicant paying a fee of $500.
h) AP and EAD in 3 year increments.
i) Visa Revalidation for (E), (H), (I), (L), (O), or (P) visas within the USA.
j) H4 status allowed to work.
Just exempting Dependents from Numerical Limits effectively raises the overall allocation to about 300k.
On top of that the number no longer has to cover EB1A, Advanced STEM degree holders earned at a US Institution and the alien physician exemption.
The real number in today's terms would be nearer 400-500k per year.