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

[gcq]

I should point out that ** is a pro-EB2 organization. Though some of their core members are EB3 guys, their agenda is pretty much EB2-I specific. I am one of the EB3-I guys who quit participating in their activities for that reason. They try to use hapless EB3-I as their campaign tool taking advantage of their misery. But when it comes to their internal work, EB2-I drives their agenda except for HR 3012.

Here is more proof for it from their facebook.
https://www.facebook.com/****************

China EB2 (Master's degree required) is slower than EB3 (Bachelor's degree required) ...Need any more proof that Legal High-Skilled Immigration is broken??

[gcq]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/...ration-reform/

“We are announcing the Gospel that welcomes the stranger and we will denounce those that block immigration reform.”

[gcq]

http://www.politico.com/story/2013/0...ion-95293.html

Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) made his clearest indication yet that he would be fine with a piecemeal approach to immigration reform preferred by the Republican-led House.Schumer, the leader of the Gang of Eight whose comprehensive immigration reform legislation passed the Senate in June, said even if the House passes separate bills, those measures could eventually be bundled in a House-Senate conference committee.

[rupen86]

http://www.politico.com/story/2013/0...ion-95293.html

"Schumer also noted on CNN that a few of the House bills — such as one on agriculture workers and another on high-skilled immigrants — are “very similar” to components in the Gang of Eight bill."

It is disappointing that he is not seeing or does not want to see difference between house and senate bill on high skill immigration.

[PD2008AUG25]

At the center of the internal debate is Nancy Pelosi and the question of whether Democrats will file a so-called “discharge petition” for the Senate immigration bill. If a discharge petition were signed by a majority in the House, the measure would get a full floor vote.

This seems to be something new. Senate bill can still be on the house floor without Boehner's approval, not that it is very likely.


http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/...tion-strategy/

[PD2008AUG25]

All the more proof that only focus of bill for Democrats is legalization and citizenship for undocumented. They are willing throw in anything together to get it done.

[qesehmk]

All the more proof that only focus of bill for Democrats is legalization and citizenship for undocumented. They are willing throw in anything together to get it done.

The only reason there is ANY talk of ANY EB reform is because of what dems are trying to accomplish for illegals. So EB reform is riding on back of illegals. Without illegals nobody is even talking about EB. GOP's piecemeal approach is lipservice. They don't want to be seen sitting idle. But their core approach on immigration is "Do nothing".

[PD2008AUG25]

The only reason there is ANY talk of ANY EB reform is because of what dems are trying to accomplish for illegals. So EB reform is riding on back of illegals. Without illegals nobody is even talking about EB. GOP's piecemeal approach is lipservice. They don't want to be sitting idle. But their core approach on immigration is "Do nothing".

Dems have been holding legal reform hostage for decades using arbitrary notion of "comprehensive", legal reform otherwise has broader support and is quite achievable. Dems are not doing legal immigration any favors by supporting it, they want more from legal immigration backers to push their ugly goat through fence.

[qesehmk]

For decades? I am sorry but I don't know what you are talking about!

But as per arbitrary notion of "comprehensive" - what is arbitrary to you is a consistent position that Obama administration took. It is their policy prerogative to choose their constituency and to their credit they worked towards it and also included EB in it.

My point is that GOP doesn;t want any reform EB or FB or illegal. Just go back to Bush Era .... Bush and McCain wanted reform. Who shot it down? Do you think democrats? Well you are wrong. It was their own party GOP who pushed back. Today McCain and Bush are supportive of reform. But GOP hasn't budged.

Politics and personal liking of political parties aside - EB folks need to understand that without CIR there is NO reform out there. Nothing. Nada. Zilch. People like Mark Zuckerberg are trying very hard ... but EB immigration is much tougher than you think. So the best way is to ride along with CIR.

Dems have been holding legal reform hostage for decades using arbitrary notion of "comprehensive", legal reform otherwise has broader support and is quite achievable. Dems are not doing legal immigration any favors by supporting it, they want more from legal immigration backers to push their ugly goat through fence.

[rupen86]

This seems to be something new. Senate bill can still be on the house floor without Boehner's approval, not that it is very likely.


http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/...tion-strategy/

I personally favor discharge petition if they want to accomplish something seriously. Rather than relying on Boehner to do something and then relying again to go to conference committee and then again relying that conference report gets a vote and that too majority of republican vote, this seems to be easier option if they can get 20-30 republicans to sign for it.

[bieber]

If not for Rubio, the senate bill wouldn't even stand a chance for voting. It's weird how dems get the credit even when reps did something about it.

Current administration did nothing when they have complete power on both houses. If Rubio didn't take initiative they wouldn't even do anything about it except saying they are for comprehensive reform. This administration stand is to do it 'comprehensive' yet president signed dream act before elections. that shows the priorities and true color of politics

[qesehmk]

Rubio was dem's proxy for CIR. The environment is so toxic - no democrat could've championed the reform by himself. So they had to put a republican as their proxy and that's what they did.

If not for Rubio, the senate bill wouldn't even stand a chance for voting. It's weird how dems get the credit even when reps did something about it.

Current administration did nothing when they have complete power on both houses. If Rubio didn't take initiative they wouldn't even do anything about it except saying they are for comprehensive reform. This administration stand is to do it 'comprehensive' yet president signed dream act before elections. that shows the priorities and true color of politics

[PD2008AUG25]

For decades? I am sorry but I don't know what you are talking about!

At the hearing, you said “For ten years, I insisted that nothing happen on STEM [Science Technology Engineering and Mathematics] or any other particular part of comprehensive immigration reform unless we did it all.”

http://techcrunch.com/2013/02/10/dea...ilicon-valley/

But as per arbitrary notion of "comprehensive" - what is arbitrary to you is a consistent position that Obama administration took. It is their policy prerogative to choose their constituency and to their credit they worked towards it and also included EB in it.

Consistent? DREAM act was hardly "comprehensive". Obama was ready to sign it, had it passed Senate.

President Barack Obama and top Democrats pledged to introduce the Dream Act into the House by November 29.[36] The House of Representatives passed the DREAM Act on December 8, 2010,[37][38] but the bill failed to reach the 60-vote threshold necessary to end debate on the Senate floor

My point is that GOP doesn;t want any reform EB or FB or illegal. Just go back to Bush Era .... Bush and McCain wanted reform. Who shot it down? Do you think democrats? Well you are wrong. It was their own party GOP who pushed back. Today McCain and Bush are supportive of reform. But GOP hasn't budged.

My point is Democrats don't want any reform. They consistently set unrealistic arbitrary goals (comprehensive, must-have-citizenship, diversity) to torpedo any real opportunity at any reform and blame the other party.

Politics and personal liking of political parties aside - EB folks need to understand that without CIR there is NO reform out there. Nothing. Nada. Zilch. People like Mark Zuckerberg are trying very hard ... but EB immigration is much tougher than you think. So the best way is to ride along with CIR.

This is what exactly Democrats have been selling for years. I don't think that's true. EB related bills can easily pass if Democrats change their stance. Republican opposition to CIR looks far more principled than Democrats' opposition to non-CIR bills. Border security, Amnesty are real concerns, but not the hypothetical grouping of immigrants based on nothing.

[qesehmk]

PD - I wish you and anybody good luck working with republicans to get any EB reform done. I will be very happy if that happens either way. Dems or republicans. Comprehensive or Piecemeal.

At the hearing, you said “For ten years, I insisted that nothing happen on STEM [Science Technology Engineering and Mathematics] or any other particular part of comprehensive immigration reform unless we did it all.”

http://techcrunch.com/2013/02/10/dea...ilicon-valley/




Consistent? DREAM act was hardly "comprehensive". Obama was ready to sign it, had it passed Senate.

President Barack Obama and top Democrats pledged to introduce the Dream Act into the House by November 29.[36] The House of Representatives passed the DREAM Act on December 8, 2010,[37][38] but the bill failed to reach the 60-vote threshold necessary to end debate on the Senate floor



My point is Democrats don't want any reform. They consistently set unrealistic arbitrary goals (comprehensive, must-have-citizenship, diversity) to torpedo any real opportunity at any reform and blame the other party.



This is what exactly Democrats have been selling for years. I don't think that's true. EB related bills can easily pass if Democrats change their stance. Republican opposition to CIR looks far more principled than Democrats' opposition to non-CIR bills. Border security, Amnesty are real concerns, but not the hypothetical grouping of immigrants based on nothing.

[bieber]

Rubio was dem's proxy for CIR. The environment is so toxic - no democrat could've championed the reform by himself. So they had to put a republican as their proxy and that's what they did.

Can you be more specific? Democrats convinced Rubio to be their proxy? and Rubio agreed to it risking his party support

[bieber]

PD - I wish you and anybody good luck working with republicans to get any EB reform done. I will be very happy if that happens either way. Dems or republicans. Comprehensive or Piecemeal.

I think Marco Rubio is behind the current progress of immigration reform. and he deserves the credit more than any other senator/president.

[gcq]

If not for Rubio, the senate bill wouldn't even stand a chance for voting. It's weird how dems get the credit even when reps did something about it.

Current administration did nothing when they have complete power on both houses. If Rubio didn't take initiative they wouldn't even do anything about it except saying they are for comprehensive reform. This administration stand is to do it 'comprehensive' yet president signed dream act before elections. that shows the priorities and true color of politics

Rubio is not a champion of anything. He was against amnesty till recently. He acted as if he likes CIR once he had a shot at becoming a presidential candidate. Even then he was confused as to what he want to do with CIR as CIR moved through senate. IMO presence/absence of Rubio would have made no impact to CIR. The real champions of CIR from Senate GOP is McCain and Graham. Regarding Rubio, democrats might have thought "one more GOP", more the merrier. Rubio is not mature enough to take a stand on CIR, all he sees is an opportunity to attract latino votes if he becomes a presidential candidate.

[qesehmk]

The short answer is yes indeed.

Rubio is a relatively new young senator with sky high ambition of becoming a president. If Obama can be a half term senator turned president then why not me ..... that's the thinking here. With Obama's re-election on the back of latino votes he sensed an opportunity (it was proved beyond doubt that GOP is in trouble going forward without latino votes). His own being puerto rican is an asset and he thought he could do it. All others republicans knew immigration is a hot potato and let him lead it. Democrats would've been happy with any republican do their bidding for them ... so they let him be the proxy for their agenda.

Leadership and forming public opinions is not a trivial thing. Rubio is not that kind of material. He is just a proxy.

p.s. - As per 2016 .... GOP is going to have a tough time fighting latino power + the changing way of how elections are fought and won using technology and crowd sourcing of funds. The second factor is something that many of us don't realize. But Obama pretty much has transformed how elections are fought and won using technology.

Can you be more specific? Democrats convinced Rubio to be their proxy? and Rubio agreed to it risking his party support

[bieber]

Q and gcq

no comments

[qesehmk]

bieber - You are wiser than me. I generally am incapable of saying what you just said

Q and gcq

no comments

[idiotic]

PD - I wish you and anybody good luck working with republicans to get any EB reform done. I will be very happy if that happens either way. Dems or republicans. Comprehensive or Piecemeal.

Well said.. It's amazing that people cannot see that the opposition to CIR is really doing nothing and sticking with current system and primarily driven by anti immigrant groups whose only goal is to reduce immigration.. They always think there is a fairyland in between these anti immigrants will solve all immigrant's problems in a ideological way and pro-immigrant groups are standing in the way..

[qesehmk]

Obama right now speaking about CIR ..
http://www.nbcnews.com/video/nbcnews.com/52713163

Made a great point that CIR actually addresses all republicans concerns on immigration and actually improves situation on all counts. GOP members' objection now is that it doesn't solve problems 100%. Further he said that he doesn't know a human problem that can be solved 100% with a law.

Politics aside - but that is the right argument IMHO. GOP members just don't want to pass any immigration reform - comprehensive or otherwise and that's why they insist on a perfect bill.

[rupen86]

Steve King again showing frustration. I think this is good, helping immigration reform.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/0...n_3746834.html

[gten20]

Steve King again showing frustration. I think this is good, helping immigration reform.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/0...n_3746834.html

http://www.theatlanticwire.com/polit...gration/68262/

[rupen86]

Rubio: Pass immigration reform or Obama may legalize 11 million by fiat

http://www.nydailynews.com/blogs/dc/...illion-by-fiat