To rupen86
Interestingly the increase from 7 to 15 percent was also the amendment offered by Sen Grassley at the time of his original hold last December and so that might emerge as the consensus figure
To rupen86
Interestingly the increase from 7 to 15 percent was also the amendment offered by Sen Grassley at the time of his original hold last December and so that might emerge as the consensus figure
Rupen / GS
In addition to ideological differences, don't forget that neither wants to grant another an immigration victory. So any bill that has exclusive mark of either party will fail. A bill that is seen as bipartisan is more likely to go through.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rupen86
Quote:
Originally Posted by gs1968
From Oh Law firm. While this lawyer's opinion on immigration does not matter, it is worth noting that he is not mentioning including country quota removal in his proposals which reiterates the point that these lawyers associated with ALIA have changed their tone which earlier supported HR 3012.
11/17/2012: Some Thoughts of Realistic and Workable Immigration Reforms for the Leaders of Congress and the President
This reporter discussed earlier that any realistic and workable immigration reforms must be derived from balance of power between the two parties within the framework of national interest and fundamental principles that have formed a foundation for immigration system in this nation. Otherwise, the nation will repeat failure of comprehensive immigration reform and suffer from political games and rhetoric for interest of political parties rather than the the interest of the nation and people. The immigration reform should start from the basic concept of "overhaul" of the current immigration system within the foregoing guiding principles and goals. The leaders do not have to go too far to collect such thoughts because over the years, innumerable ideas and proposals have been presented and debated without the foregoing guiding principles and purposes. Current leaders may salvage some of those thoughts and proposals to work out the nation's new immigration system.
This reporter wants to review some of the thoughts which the political leaders may want to think about to achieve the balance of power between the two parties and keeping fundamental principles and foundation which our forefathers have laid out for overall framework of the nation's immigration system.
Legalization of undocumented immigrants: It appears that the leaders, particularly after the November 2012 election, appear to be moving towards a consensus that the legalization should be seriously considered one way or another. The question remains "in what form and what direction." There have been floating around the statistics of undocumented immigrants in this country. Conservative figure is 11 million and liberal statistics is 20 million. These numbers will drastically redraw political landscape within next decade - pro-Democrat, so-to-speak. No reasonable person will assume that the Republican leaders and constituents will agree, under any circumstances, to immediate grant of permanent resident statuses to these undocumented immigrants. To be realistic, there have been discussions among both Republicans and Democrats an option of legalization of these immigrants with an opportunity to seek permanent resident status under the nation's immigration system, to wit, they will have to find their way under the family or employment-based or other immigration routes just like any other new immigrants. Their applications for the permanent resident statuses should also be determined by the rule of first-in and first-out in the immigration lines, the rule which is called "priority date" in the current immigration law. This option will also assure fairness to the "legal" immigrants who have been waiting in the long lines years and years. This option will affect the Republican's power to a minimum from the point of number of eligible voters for the next decade, and other than extremely ultra conservative right wing section which is minority in the current political landscape, most of the mildly right and middle of the road Republicans are likely to agree to.
The foregoing legalization principle will not work unless the leaders work out workable border protection because it will repeat the same history down the road.
Family-based immigration system may have to be restructured under the basic guidelines and goals for realistic and workable option. Family unification has been founding principle for this nation of immigrants, but the current family-based immigration system is somewhat archaic considering the changes in the concept of "family" over the decades. There are plenty of proposals from both sides of the aisle for this reform in the Congress, and the current leaders and major players of the immigration reform should work out reform in this part of the immigration system towards maintaining balance of powers between the two parties.
Employment-based immigration system must be completely overhauled. The world has changed during past century through the industrialization revolution and the global age. Current system has turned literally archaic to the level of "smelly." Let's talk about the EB-1 immigrants. We are living in a global world and hi-tech and cyber space. It is indeed ridiculous that the nation imposes a restriction to this level of immigrants by quota numbers. Why? We do not want Einstein any more? We do not want Olympic gold medalists any more? This nation desperately needs this level of immigrants. In fact, this nation must work out a device to indiuce and invite this level of immigrants to this country to enrich every sector of this nation across the board for the sake not only for a decade but decades and centuries. This is the most ridiculous part in the current employment-based immigration system. It does not end with the extraordinary worker EB-1A provision. The same goes with Outstanding Researcher & Teachers EB-1B as well. What about EB-1C multi-national corporate executive or manager immigration? We are living in a global economy. Restriction of these immigrants is another smelly part of the current immigration system. Just take out the whole EB-1 immigration from the quota system. The country of immigrants should always need in-flow of such top notch immigrants to enrich this nation!
EB-5 immigrant investors. This is another ridiculous provision in the law when the nation is eager and desperate to attract foreign investment and talented entrepreneurs to keep the nation's edge in economic competition with other nations. Why impose quota? Quota must be removed for these immigrants. Currently, the U.S. government, including USCIS, has been using incredible amount of resources and funds for promotion of these immigrants. How contradictory and archaic the current law is. EB-5 immigration has to be changed to a permanent program and without quota.
STEM EB-2 immigration: This is one of the areas which is strongly supported by both parties. The businesses of the nation and higher learning institutions are desperate for change in this part of immigration law. Again, immigration quota should be removed either to attract or retain these critical foreign talents.
Non-STEM EB-2: This reporter recalls a prediction by certain political leaders and immigration lawyers about 15 years ago that the country's employment-based immigration system will move toward direction focusing on the EB-2 considering changing world and economy. The allocation of immigration quota for these immigrants should be focused in the new overhauled immigration system.
Changes in the criteria of quota system: One of the flaws in the current employment-based immigration system is count of quota numbers including spouses and children of the primary foreign workers. It is unrealistic any talented foreign workers will consider immigrating to this country without their spouses and children. When the law considers the number of foreign workers the country wants to accept or even invite, the law should just count the foreign workers in determination of quota, and the spouses and children should be immigrated literally as follow-to-join or accompanying family members.
The foregoing changes will keep the balance of power between the Republicans and the Democrats, assuming that the businesses and foreign workers are pro-Republican and legalized immigrants are pro-union and pro-Democrat. However, the labor union should also be realistic for their power base. The legalization proposal will add power to the unions, and the unions should accept pro-Republican employment-based immigration reform as well for them to be realistic. The union power will not be lost except that some unions in certain specific sectors may be affected. However, in the bargain, compromise, and negotiation processes, one should expect that there are always losers and winners. The point is that such sector interest should not override the interest of the nation and the people. We all should remember that without give-and-take, the nation will never see a reform in such a critical issue as immigration reform. The President should lead and draft the Comprehensive Immigration Reform bill, hopefully with due consideration given to the foregoing goal of balance of power, as soon as possible.
Hi Guru's,
Is it true? Or this site showing wrong info ???
http://immigrationlegalblog.com/2012...have-a-chance/
The article is confusing between HR3012 and STEM. The latter is scheduled to be taken up in House on Friday. HR3012 is in Senate.Quote:
Originally Posted by anish5
ACHIEVE act is introduced.
http://www.politico.com/news/stories...274.html?hp=l5
It does not address anything on legal immigration. Under this process 'DREAM' kids will get W3 (green card) faster than some of the EB categories. It also negates the GOP statement that those people will be put at the end of the line.
Not sure what all Republicans hope to achieve in lame duck session. They could just be setting stage for dialogue in Senate in the new Congress next year.
The W-3 is not a green card, not even close. It must be renewed every 4 years and you DO NOT have access to public welfare benefits. That is a very important difference.Quote:
Originally Posted by rupen86
This may be the closest idea to a DREAM act that could get by the house.
Let's say it is EAD. But even in that case, that would be better than current EB2, EB3 I/CQuote:
Originally Posted by justvisiting
If there was any hope left for stand alone bill, this one removes that hope.
http://thehill.com/blogs/hillicon-va...inst-stem-bill
The Administration has said that they will also address legal immigration. Trouble is, CIR is likely to be a free-for-all-long-drawn-out-political-oneupmanship. Though the deadline is 2014 before elections.
I think white house is under fire from media after the comments....................
http://www.businessinsider.com/obama...valley-2012-11
Lets wait and see for few more days, before giving up.
Democrats will never agree for removing the diversity program because those people who come on that program are mostly democrats. So, in other words, they are importing 50,000 democrats every year and they will file for their relatives.Quote:
Originally Posted by redsox2009
Democrats laid out plan for CIR which did not include anything on EB immigration.
http://latino.foxnews.com/latino/new...ration-reform/
We can just hope that there would be something on EB immigration in CIR like recapturing and not counting dependents.
I know this is far-fetched, but can't Republicans use STEM visa bill as bargaining chip for any fiscal cliff agreement? When everyone says STEM bill will go nowhere, why Lamar is even bothering?
I think the political angle always exist and it really is hard on EB especially IC folks.
However, immigration reforms overall is a bigger strategic priority and a necessity for US. Immigration is not just politics - it is economics. I studied under somebody who worked closely with greenspan (or so he said :) ). This guy taught us that targeted GDP growth is usually 3% under normal growth curves. Of that 1% comes from productivity and 2% from population growth. The native population growth usually is 0.5%. So essentially the remaining 1.5% needs to come from immigration. If you look at US, that goal is NOT being fulfilled. Luckily the technology fuelled more than 1% of economy productivity between 1990 and today. However given where we are - post real estate bubble popping - immigration once again becomes critical.
So these facts tell you why CIR i.e. comprehensive immigration is not all politics.
My 2 cents ... as always!
Quote:
Originally Posted by rupen86
Not in a lifetime. They are not that desperate. If they were this serious, they would not have put this bill knowing that it can not pass.Quote:
Originally Posted by PD2008AUG25
Another article on the futility of the STEM Bill-
http://www.voxxi.com/hispanic-caucus...ration-reform/
Rep.Robert Goodlatte of VA who takes over as House Judiciary Committee chairman next year is a strong opponent of Diversity Visas and we have probably not heard the last of this.
Principles laid out in CHC also does not include anything on EB immigration except STEM. This is worrisome.Quote:
Originally Posted by gs1968
Of course not. That's highly skilled immigration and the CHC's electorate/constituents broadly speaking are not.Quote:
Originally Posted by rupen86
STEM BILL is in the house and it is being debated........Dem's are opposing in the current form and asking for amendments and Rep's are supporting...............
STEM Bill passed in house.
redsox Thank you. What does this mean. What are the next steps?Quote:
Originally Posted by redsox2009
STEM passed in House , final vote 262 to 150.
http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/curri...es_stem_e.html
Next Steps SenateWH.............Only one Senator has offically voiced againist to the bill. Chances of passing is slim.
Few weeks ago, Dem Senator Schumer gave his blessings to this bill. Not sure if that is offical or unoffical. Sen. Schumer is one of the brains behind the CIR or any immigration bill. If Sen. Schumer gives nod to this bill, chances will improve drastically.
Tech companies are rallying behind the bill, I have confidence this bill can pass.
Thanks redsox.
Those interested in understanding the process please see. http://www.familiesusa.org/resources...ow-a-bill.html
Basically - a bill can be introduced in any house but has to pass both houses and then onto president. Even if president vetoes - the bill can be passed if both houses veto president's veto by 2/3rd majority.
As per this bill - it pass republican majority senate. So no surprise. Basically republicans are pumping up the ante with Obama administration that yesterday only opposed this bill saying piecemeal legislation is not acceptable.
p.s. - A little more about this bill. Basically this bill seeks to remove diversity program and use those visas towards foreign STEM graduates of US degrees. This bill will benefit EB2 as well as EB3 across all countries. There are really no losers except of course diversity program.
Quote:
Originally Posted by redsox2009