Discussion On The Politics of Immigration Reform (Comprehensive Or Otherwise)

[gs1968]

Quick question. I thought the House had to just pass the amendments in the senate version and it becomes good to go to POTUS. Am I wrong?

Basically if the House agrees with the Senate Bill it can pass the Bill as is and send it to the President. It appears like Lofgren has issues with the Senate Bill which is significantly different from the House Bill that passed last summer. She wants to get approval from her House colleagues and also the Senate Members to come up with a reconciled version that can pass both chambers. At this point it is unclear when and how that will happen given the time constraints.

[AceMan]

Thappu panniten, mannichidungo please?

Q, Malā māpha karā bhā'ū

[Zenzone]

Thappu panniten, mannichidungo please?

Q, Malā māpha karā bhā'ū

haha! Good one mate!

[suninphx]

Q, Malā māpha karā bhā'ū

LOL - q तुला नक्की माफ करेल (or so do I hope being fellow Puneri)

[qesehmk]

Thappu panniten, mannichidungo please?

Q, Malā māpha karā bhā'ū

LoL .... for what?

BTW - I found your story about charity chicken quite funny because I thought that was a bit over the top principled!! You ought to be made an honorary citizen of Pune. The place has many such crazy ass principled people. Mean no disrespect -- telling you beforehand

[rabp77]

Basically if the House agrees with the Senate Bill it can pass the Bill as is and send it to the President. It appears like Lofgren has issues with the Senate Bill which is significantly different from the House Bill that passed last summer. She wants to get approval from her House colleagues and also the Senate Members to come up with a reconciled version that can pass both chambers. At this point it is unclear when and how that will happen given the time constraints.

i think we have see quite a few times that senate pass a bill, and it gets no where in house. Or house passes it, and its goes nowhere in senate. Hopes have been dashed so many times, that its good to have low expectations.

[qesehmk]

i think we have see quite a few times that senate pass a bill, and it gets no where in house. Or house passes it, and its goes nowhere in senate. Hopes have been dashed so many times, that its good to have low expectations.

The difference this time is - it is the house bill that is sent back to house. So this is an amendment. The problem is Zoe lofgren says the amendment makes the problem worse. So she is going to change something have house approve it and then hope senate also approves it.

I think that's a tall order.

[alpha0]

The difference this time is - it is the house bill that is sent back to house. So this is an amendment. The problem is Zoe lofgren says the amendment makes the problem worse. So she is going to change something have house approve it and then hope senate also approves it.

I think that's a tall order.

I have doubts about democrats' intentions at this time. Biden is going to be in WH soon and dems control house. It is very likely that republicans will control senate. If Biden wants to do something for DACA and undocumented, dems need some bargaining chips with republicans and this seems like a good chip as tech lobby support this bill.

[qesehmk]

I have doubts about democrats' intentions at this time. Biden is going to be in WH soon and dems control house. It is very likely that republicans will control senate. If Biden wants to do something for DACA and undocumented, dems need some bargaining chips with republicans and this seems like a good chip as tech lobby support this bill.

This is no chip for republicans. Wake up. Republicans sat on this Dem bill for 15 months and are sending back to house with 2 weeks remaining. Senator after senator from GOP held this up for no reason only to pass it with significant alterations with 2 weeks to go for the house session to end.

[AceMan]

LoL .... for what?

BTW - I found your story about charity chicken quite funny because I thought that was a bit over the top principled!! You ought to be made an honorary citizen of Pune. The place has many such crazy ass principled people. Mean no disrespect -- telling you beforehand

None taken!!! It was like see something, say something.

[gs1968]

This is no chip for republicans. Wake up. Republicans sat on this Dem bill for 15 months and are sending back to house with 2 weeks remaining. Senator after senator from GOP held this up for no reason only to pass it with significant alterations with 2 weeks to go for the house session to end.

The deal with Sen.Durbin was more detailed and nuanced and I can agree that a 6 month delay was probably reasonable. Sen.Scott probably told Lee what he wanted in the Bill even before the block and I am sure they did not need 4 months to come up with 2 small subsections at the end of the Bill. The impact obviously is huge if only 70% of green cards are available for H-1B conversion which is the largest source of backlog. Sen.Lee was probably debating the right course and decided to ask for UC again and pass some veriosn of the Bill in the Senate to start off negotiations/conference. I do agree that the time appears to be limited for reconciliation and may explain the lack of objection in the senate.

[qesehmk]

The deal with Sen.Durbin was more detailed and nuanced and I can agree that a 6 month delay was probably reasonable. Sen.Scott probably told Lee what he wanted in the Bill even before the block and I am sure they did not need 4 months to come up with 2 small subsections at the end of the Bill. The impact obviously is huge if only 70% of green cards are available for H-1B conversion which is the largest source of backlog. Sen.Lee was probably debating the right course and decided to ask for UC again and pass some veriosn of the Bill in the Senate to start off negotiations/conference. I do agree that the time appears to be limited for reconciliation and may explain the lack of objection in the senate.

I love your nuanced way of thinking and writing. Thank you for that.

This makes for a rich conversation as compared with when we fight along fault lines such as dems this and reps that! Appreciate it.

[AceMan]

I love your nuanced way of thinking and writing. Thank you for that.

This makes for a rich conversation as compared with when we fight along fault lines such as dems this and reps that! Appreciate it.

I see a long term situation with the bill. I am not discounting the fact the features of applying for AOS after 2 years of approved EAD and kids age lock out is a million times better than the current situation.

Hypothetically if the bill passes the house as is and the President signs it, law will be from FY 2023 according to the new terms. Please note the people will be greened only when final date is valid for applicants PD. We had just seen the April 2020 numbers where Eb2 India has 300,000 primaries waiting. Adding a single dependent will show the number to be 600,000. Every year on an average India is adding 50,000 primary applicants in Eb2 and 3 combined.

It will be unlikely Fd to go beyond Jan 2015 in 2032 even after the rule is in place. I would count about 5-10 million people in Trishanku status.

[Turbulent_Dragonfly]

I see a long term situation with the bill. I am not discounting the fact the features of applying for AOS after 2 years of approved EAD and kids age lock out is a million times better than the current situation.

Hypothetically if the bill passes the house as is and the President signs it, law will be from FY 2023 according to the new terms. Please note the people will be greened only when final date is valid for applicants PD. We had just seen the April 2020 numbers where Eb2 India has 300,000 primaries waiting. Adding a single dependent will show the number to be 600,000. Every year on an average India is adding 50,000 primary applicants in Eb2 and 3 combined.

It will be unlikely Fd to go beyond Jan 2015 in 2032 even after the rule is in place. I would count about 5-10 million people in Trishanku status.

This is exactly my view and I couldn't articulate it better. All this bill does, and has been trying to do since 2011 is try to rearrange the visa allocation, i.e. take pain from one or two parties and distribute it to everyone else in the name of fairness so that everyone feels some pain. It's just completely bogus and I totally don't buy the 'at least it's a start'. All it will do is pit different immigrant groups against each other and against US tech workers. The China exclusion stuff is also completely baloney. Let's say when you were a child in India and went to some RSS camps because you were made to and there is a record of it. Now if you are denied a GC based on that even though you have spent the last 20 years in the US and don't espouse any radical views, will that be fair?

[AceMan]

When a compromise is being looked for, a less than perfect solution is acceptable for no solution at all.

[qesehmk]

All this bill does, and has been trying to do since 2011 is try to rearrange the visa allocation, .....

The China exclusion stuff is also completely baloney.

On these two counts i have a bit different view. Even if the current bill rearranges, that by itself alleviates pain for EB-IC backlog and more importantly it paves the way for lifting up of overall EB limit from 140K to perhaps 250K. Today because the backlog is monolithic, nobody cares about it.

As per China - i think it is reasonable to scrutinize or ban people that belong to armed forces of other countries especially hostile countries (china I don't believe is a hostile country but unfortunately quite a few americans think that way). That's America's sovereign right. Generally speaking if you haven't done anything against USA or humanity there is nothing to be afraid of. I myself was part of NCC and wrote in my citizenship application. Many Indian armed forces folks have become American citizens. I personally know at least one.

[vedu]

This is exactly my view and I couldn't articulate it better. All this bill does, and has been trying to do since 2011 is try to rearrange the visa allocation, i.e. take pain from one or two parties and distribute it to everyone else in the name of fairness so that everyone feels some pain. It's just completely bogus and I totally don't buy the 'at least it's a start'. All it will do is pit different immigrant groups against each other and against US tech workers. The China exclusion stuff is also completely baloney. Let's say when you were a child in India and went to some RSS camps because you were made to and there is a record of it. Now if you are denied a GC based on that even though you have spent the last 20 years in the US and don't espouse any radical views, will that be fair?

Criticizing something is easier than coming up with your own solution. Say you are given a chance to prepare a fresh bill from the scratch with no current baggage (existing backlogs, etc. none). Then how will you do it? Where will you set the cap for max number of annual visas? 140,000 or 250,000 or no max cap (infinity). No max cap will help everybody and millions and millions of people from all different countries will come to the US every year. Next question is whatever annual cap you decide, how will you allocate it? Will you allocate it based on the specific quota for each country or on a first come, first serve basis? OR will you allot separate quota for each industry type? There are so many other questions you will have to answer in your bill. How will you deal with people with affiliation with foreign armed forces, etc.? Will there be some kind of stops for bad agents OR will your bill welcome everybody to this country irrespective of their background. Then, once you decide on that, how will you do the background check, particularly if foreign armed forces will like to keep that data confidential for their own sovereignty and security related concerns? And then, when you come up with your final bill, your next task is to get 100 people to agree on that.

[gs1968]

When a compromise is being looked for, a less than perfect solution is acceptable for no solution at all.

I did some basic calculations on my understanding of the current Bill for EB-3 and I am hoping that I am seriously wrong with this as I am not great at reading Bill language.This calculation is for EB3 category for FY23
If we assume 70% of 40K it gives us 28000 visas for EB3 for H-1B conversion.5.75 % reserved for abroad applications (non-India/China) is 2300 (40000 x 0.0575) decreasing number availability to 25700. 30% for non India/China as part of transition is 12000 bringing availability down to 13700. 4400 for primary nurse applicants and conservatively 4400 for dependents = 8800 bringing it down to 4900 per year for India/China for FY23. Is my reasoning correct ? This clearly cannot be right so i must be reading the language wrong or double counting or overlapping categories. I am also not clear on how the 70% cap is calculated but based on Sen.Scott's press release he wants that amount for workers not on H-1B. The law states that no more than 10000 visas should be issued in EB-3 category for unskilled workers and hat is the number he is trying to preserve.Please feel free to correct and I will be happy to be wrong

[Zenzone]

This is exactly my view and I couldn't articulate it better. All this bill does, and has been trying to do since 2011 is try to rearrange the visa allocation, i.e. take pain from one or two parties and distribute it to everyone else in the name of fairness so that everyone feels some pain. It's just completely bogus and I totally don't buy the 'at least it's a start'. All it will do is pit different immigrant groups against each other and against US tech workers. The China exclusion stuff is also completely baloney. Let's say when you were a child in India and went to some RSS camps because you were made to and there is a record of it. Now if you are denied a GC based on that even though you have spent the last 20 years in the US and don't espouse any radical views, will that be fair?

As Q eloquently puts above, breaking the country cap will shed a light of urgency on GC backlogs and how pathetic the age old arbitrary 140K cap actually is. Then it unifies every immigrant as opposed to pitting us against each other based on the country we belong to presently. That paves the way for an organized push which will be second stage for an increase in the # of EB GCs. Ultimately, I don't see anything else solving the problem. Alternatively, measures like not counting the derivatives into the visa cap and re-capturing unused visas from the past may alleviate the problem but not solve it in the longer run. Removing the country cap makes this problem to be seen and felt by every single immigrant and consequently unifies our activism efforts.

[Turbulent_Dragonfly]

Criticizing something is easier than coming up with your own solution. Say you are given a chance to prepare a fresh bill from the scratch with no current baggage (existing backlogs, etc. none). Then how will you do it? Where will you set the cap for max number of annual visas? 140,000 or 250,000 or no max cap (infinity). No max cap will help everybody and millions and millions of people from all different countries will come to the US every year. Next question is whatever annual cap you decide, how will you allocate it? Will you allocate it based on the specific quota for each country or on a first come, first serve basis? OR will you allot separate quota for each industry type? There are so many other questions you will have to answer in your bill. How will you deal with people with affiliation with foreign armed forces, etc.? Will there be some kind of stops for bad agents OR will your bill welcome everybody to this country irrespective of their background. Then, once you decide on that, how will you do the background check, particularly if foreign armed forces will like to keep that data confidential for their own sovereignty and security related concerns? And then, when you come up with your final bill, your next task is to get 100 people to agree on that.

There are other countries which have modernized or in the process of modernizing the immigration system. It is not some massively groundbreaking idea, just that there is no will to do it here. So though my lament may be viewed as criticism of other's efforts to at least do something about it. it's really pointed toward the fact there can be no consensus to pass meaningful immigration reform now or in the future which will factually benefit the US and the people immigrating here.

[AceMan]

As Q eloquently puts above, breaking the country cap will shed a light of urgency on GC backlogs and how pathetic the age old arbitrary 140K cap actually is. Then it unifies every immigrant as opposed to pitting us against each other based on the country we belong to presently. That paves the way for an organized push which will be second stage for an increase in the # of EB GCs. Ultimately, I don't see anything else solving the problem. Alternatively, measures like not counting the derivatives into the visa cap and re-capturing unused visas from the past may alleviate the problem but not solve it in the longer run. Removing the country cap makes this problem to be seen and felt by every single immigrant and consequently unifies our activism efforts.

As I mentioned earlier 5-10 million Thrishanku legal people will look for fairness at that time and it would be a joint effort nearly 30 years after the problem first surfaced.

[Turbulent_Dragonfly]

Trump and his cronies are going to loom large over the next four years. They will continue to drumbeat all the nativist and nationalistic views and keep dishing out disinformation and misinformation to undermine every single agenda in the Biden administration by interjecting themselves at every point. Sorry, I don't know why I am feeling so pessimistic in my outlook. The way the post election madness has gone on with the support of 70+ million Americans cheering on for a demagogue has really soured my optimism for America in general in the short term.

[alpha0]

This is no chip for republicans. Wake up. Republicans sat on this Dem bill for 15 months and are sending back to house with 2 weeks remaining. Senator after senator from GOP held this up for no reason only to pass it with significant alterations with 2 weeks to go for the house session to end.

It was Sen Durbin who killed the most time and changed the basic structure of the bill by adding EAD providions and other stuff. For Sen Scott, i dont even know why he put a hold and what he really wanted as it was very clear that he was asked to do that by someone else.

I strongly feel that if the bill removed country caps from say 40-50% of EB GCs and kept the caps on rest, most of these carveouts would not have been necessary and implementation of the bill could be much simpler.

[qesehmk]

It was Sen Durbin who killed the most time and changed the basic structure of the bill by adding EAD providions and other stuff. For Sen Scott, i dont even know why he put a hold and what he really wanted as it was very clear that he was asked to do that by someone else.

I strongly feel that if the bill removed country caps from say 40-50% of EB GCs and kept the caps on rest, most of these carveouts would not have been necessary and implementation of the bill could be much simpler.

I agree with second part above.

But as per Durbin - I have debuked this many times. There is a thread on this topic, please read if it is of value to you.

https://www.qesehmk.org/forums/showt...ghlight=Durbin

[Sebiswaiting]

My thought on per-country quota.
1.For Employment based GC, country quota doesn't belong. It doesn't make any sence. Skill/Job is irrelevant to country of birth. Country quota is against EB purpose.
2. Diversity visa has country counts. It is needed there as the purpose of the visa is diversity. Diversity visa doesn't allow countries like India/China. And I agree they should not be allowed as their large numbers do not help purpose of the DV.

It is irrelevant whether pain moves from one set of people to another. But it is relevant that birth country is wrong in EB.

Increasing GC - That is lawmakers job to define based on countries need. It may be reduced or increased based on employment need, not based on backlog size.