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

[rupen86]

From oh law firm,
Reforming primary process would produce more productive congress. I agree with that.

http://www.nationaljournal.com/colum...gress-20130206

[vizcard]

I also watched the entire hearing. It does look like, house bill is not going to include citizenship. I do not how this difference between house and senate is going to be resolved.

The Republcans want to do high skilled immigration reform separately since both parties agree on what needs to be done. Obama says no piece-meal immigration reform. I just hope it all gets worked out before the summer.

[rupen86]

The Republcans want to do high skilled immigration reform separately since both parties agree on what needs to be done. Obama says no piece-meal immigration reform. I just hope it all gets worked out before the summer.

My optimism has reduced over pass couple of days. I see below main problems and I can't think of way out of it.

1) Democrats want comprehensive immigration reform which includes (clear) pathway to citizenship. Senate republicans will agree to citizenship but not without "trigger".

2) House republicans will introduce a bill without pathway to citizenship and limited to giving legal status which democrats and Obama won't support.

3) Inclusion of same-sex couples won't be acceptable to republicans.

4) Democrats would want more not less family green cards which republicans would not accept.

5) Elimination of diversity visa program may not be acceptable to democrats.

6) Piecemeal approach won't be acceptable to democrats.

Point no 1,2 look most important and contentious to me. Other issues can be worked out with some difficulty.

[rupen86]

How Obama can help in immigration effort.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...LEFTTopOpinion

[rupen86]

Labrador says house republicans won't accept pathway to citizenship clause which means any bill coming out in the house is not going to have that.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/0...n_2638484.html

Goodlatte seems less critical of it.
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/p...aring/1890171/

So, to me it seems that the passage of the bill would depend on whether senate's bill is going to come up for the vote in house or not. Although it will be rejected by most house republicans, it would need support of only handful on republicans to pass.

[rupen86]

House announcement expected anytime now.
http://www.naplesnews.com/news/2013/...n-reform-plan/

[seahawks2012]

Seib & Wessel: Immigration Overhaul Showdown:
http://live.wsj.com/video/seib--wess...7-ED4DA7C54CC4

[seahawks2012]

Seib & Wessel: Immigration Overhaul Showdown:
http://live.wsj.com/video/seib--wess...7-ED4DA7C54CC4

She mentions 4-6 weeks as the time-frame...

[rupen86]

She mentions 4-6 weeks as the time-frame...

yes, in that time, senate draft bill is expected to come.

[abcx13]

You know how I've been ranting that legals deserve better than being lumped with illegals? And y'all don't agree? Vivek Wadhwa puts it more eloquently that I ever did:

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

[qesehmk]

abcx - i think Vadhawa made the case forcefully that day - in fact I posted so on this forum immediately. But as I watched - I thought he was way over the top when he said America is losing edge. All he put forth was emotional commentary. There was NO data to back it up. So to be honest - IMHO - his commentary came across more as political than analytical or expert commentary.

While EB immigration is useful since it gives edge in terms of technology - I do think that illegal immigration - is economically important since it creates instant demand and contributes significantly to the GDP. 13 million people rushing to buy houses and cars and everything they couldn't buy before because of lack of proper identity. Just think about that.

I just don't think America is losing edge. When panic hits the world markets ... the US dollar appreciates rather than depreciate. What does that tell you? Edge is a function of innovation. But innovation is a function of not just intelligence but law and order, equal opportunity AND economic size/might/coverage. A particular country may pull ahead in one industry like mining or telephones or robotics. But US not only has complete coverage of all industries - but they have tremendous law and order and equal opportunities advantage. I cant think of any other country including in Europe that can match US. Euro is one of those attempts to replace US but look where they are. They can't even determine whether they want to stay together. China is the only other alternative - but where is freedom. Equal opportunity is too far away without that. And then our own India scores poorly both on equal opportunity and law and order. So we come back to US.

That's why I say that this whole talk about US losing edge is non-sense. Majority of nobel prize winners were born outside US. What does that tell you? It tells you that the brightest minds on earth think that US is still the destination to do something worthwhile in their lives. The number of students coming from India reduced 4% YoY this year (which by itself is in the margin of error) because of visa rejections as opposed to reductions in applications. The number from China rose 26%. So again - wadhwa really needs to put numbers on the table to make the point.

You know how I've been ranting that legals deserve better than being lumped with illegals? And y'all don't agree? Vivek Wadhwa puts it more eloquently that I ever did:

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

[rupen86]

You know how I've been ranting that legals deserve better than being lumped with illegals? And y'all don't agree? Vivek Wadhwa puts it more eloquently that I ever did:

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

What Vivek Wadhwa is advocating is piecemeal approach rather than comprehensive because one part is being held hostage to the other part. I agree with him. All parts should stand on their own and would pass if they had merit in themselves. But political reality is something different. In current political environment, it is not going to be accomplished. While we can argue what is right/wrong etc, as I have said before, politics is about votes and not about right/wrong most of the time.

[abcx13]

abcx - i think Vadhawa made the case forcefully that day - in fact I posted so on this forum immediately. But as I watched - I thought he was way over the top when he said America is losing edge. All he put forth was emotional commentary. There was NO data to back it up. So to be honest - IMHO - his commentary came across more as political than analytical or expert commentary.

While EB immigration is useful since it gives edge in terms of technology - I do think that illegal immigration - is economically important since it creates instant demand and contributes significantly to the GDP. 13 million people rushing to buy houses and cars and everything they couldn't buy before because of lack of proper identity. Just think about that.

I just don't think America is losing edge. When panic hits the world markets ... the US dollar appreciates rather than depreciate. What does that tell you? Edge is a function of innovation. But innovation is a function of not just intelligence but law and order, equal opportunity AND economic size/might/coverage. A particular country may pull ahead in one industry like mining or telephones or robotics. But US not only has complete coverage of all industries - but they have tremendous law and order and equal opportunities advantage. I cant think of any other country including in Europe that can match US. Euro is one of those attempts to replace US but look where they are. They can't even determine whether they want to stay together. China is the only other alternative - but where is freedom. Equal opportunity is too far away without that. And then our own India scores poorly both on equal opportunity and law and order. So we come back to US.

That's why I say that this whole talk about US losing edge is non-sense. Majority of nobel prize winners were born outside US. What does that tell you? It tells you that the brightest minds on earth think that US is still the destination to do something worthwhile in their lives. The number of students coming from India reduced 4% YoY this year (which by itself is in the margin of error) because of visa rejections as opposed to reductions in applications. The number from China rose 26%. So again - wadhwa really needs to put numbers on the table to make the point.

But Wadhwa has studied this! I think he did a report with the Kaufman foundation which showed that the number of immigrants staying, starting companies, etc. has been lower relative to the past numbers. Looking at Nobel prize winners is not indicative because they will show a lag. Immigration has only gotten harder in the last 5-10 years (and then too for IC only). Most people don't win Nobel prizes at the age of 30 (ten years after college). So the number of immigrant nobel laureates will take longer to go down. And the absolute number is so low anyway, that I suspect it would take a lot to see statistical significance.

In any case, I can anecdotally tell you that most Indian grads from top schools are going back these days. At least that's been my experience. Better opportunities at home, visa/GC too much of a hassle, etc. I have friends at top Silicon Valley companies where the companies want to apply for EB2 GCs but the guys want to go back because it's such a hassle and the wait is long and they can't switch jobs. So I think Wadhwa is spot on that lots of immigrants are going back. TriValley types might be staying but I don't think anyone cares about those...the flood of Indian IT H1Bs also continues unabated, but (on average) they don't seem like the world beating innovators anybody would want to attract.

Your other points about how the US is still the best would take too long to rebut. But given the employment situation, the shoddy infrastructure, the paucity of students going into R&D, etc. other countries will overtake the US soon if they haven't already (and even if the Euro falls apart, which is very unlikely, the average German or Swede will enjoy a higher quality of life than an American). In my view, the US is a country now in decline. And unlike more egalitarian societies such as Japan, this decline will be quite precipitous for all but the 1%. Most Americans and Indians who want to come here (i.e. all of India) are too blind to see this.

[bvsamrat]

I echo this. USA is loosing edge to itslef what It was 20-30 years ago. in olden days most of the Indian college toppers aim for a US college. But now I know that they are not applying or returning back. An IIT grad can not stay for 6 years in limbo and then compete with others on same platform on IT jobs.

Either due to internet or due to emerging Down under countries(AUS-NZ), US is no longer carries same status in research/innovation as it used to be 20-30 years back.

Still it is the leader, but may go down if the same situation continues. I guess this is the main focus of Obama to strengthen excellence in education.

But Wadhwa has studied this! I think he did a report with the Kaufman foundation which showed that the number of immigrants staying, starting companies, etc. has been lower relative to the past numbers. Looking at Nobel prize winners is not indicative because they will show a lag. Immigration has only gotten harder in the last 5-10 years (and then too for IC only). Most people don't win Nobel prizes at the age of 30 (ten years after college). So the number of immigrant nobel laureates will take longer to go down. And the absolute number is so low anyway, that I suspect it would take a lot to see statistical significance.

In any case, I can anecdotally tell you that most Indian grads from top schools are going back these days. At least that's been my experience. Better opportunities at home, visa/GC too much of a hassle, etc. I have friends at top Silicon Valley companies where the companies want to apply for EB2 GCs but the guys want to go back because it's such a hassle and the wait is long and they can't switch jobs. So I think Wadhwa is spot on that lots of immigrants are going back. TriValley types might be staying but I don't think anyone cares about those...the flood of Indian IT H1Bs also continues unabated, but (on average) they don't seem like the world beating innovators anybody would want to attract.

Your other points about how the US is still the best would take too long to rebut. But given the employment situation, the shoddy infrastructure, the paucity of students going into R&D, etc. other countries will overtake the US soon if they haven't already (and even if the Euro falls apart, which is very unlikely, the average German or Swede will enjoy a higher quality of life than an American). In my view, the US is a country now in decline. And unlike more egalitarian societies such as Japan, this decline will be quite precipitous for all but the 1%. Most Americans and Indians who want to come here (i.e. all of India) are too blind to see this.

[qesehmk]

Would be interested in this report - if you can share the link. But even without seeing this report - I would say it is quite possible that indeed people are going back to their countries simply because immigration quota hasn't kept up with the H1B quota. So all those H1Bs that came to US don't necessarily have a way to stay here. Which makes it hardly surprising that a lot of people are going back.

But that is not what I am disputing with Wadhwa. I am disputing the argument that US is in decline. My contention is that this must be proved with numbers. Secondly that must be correlated to exodus of immigrants or lack of immigrants (they are not necessarily teh same thing). Finally - any such decline must be relative since competition between countries is always relative. As an example - if indeed US is in decline and lets say the absolute measure on GDP measured in US dollars is -5% relative to 5 years back then we must see other countries that are on the rise using same measures and same currency.

Granted both China and India would pass this test. So the next question is - how serious a competition they are today and how long before they will become serious competition. And then one needs to finally ask question - is immigration a key determinant that makes India China's rise or contentment thereof a certainty?

So given all these questions - their complexity - I just don't think that there is enough information on the table for lawmakers to actually believe that US is in decline and that the decline is because of US immigration policies. On the contrary - think about it - there is significant data on the table that shows how manufacturing jobs went abroad and how that increase income inequality in the American middleclass and how it suppressed wages for decades and how that is a strategic threat to American dominance.

So - while getting a GC and an opportunity to stay in US is everybody's dream and every body has every right to dream whatever they want - it would be prudent for pro-immigration folks to actually use data to make case.

Now - what sportsfan said above is absolutely true - I agree with him 100% on every word. It would be wise for Indians and Chinese to hitch on CIR and abolish country quota altogether!!!! That would be so much powerful.

p.s. - If i were wadhwa - making a case before congress - I would have used the fact that this country was founded on equal opportunity and immigrants from India China don't get equal opportunity. Period. That in itself would be such a powerful case to be made.

But Wadhwa has studied this! I think he did a report with the Kaufman foundation which showed that the number of immigrants staying, starting companies, etc. has been lower relative to the past numbers.

[abcx13]

Would be interested in this report - if you can share the link. But even without seeing this report - I would say it is quite possible that indeed people are going back to their countries simply because immigration quota hasn't kept up with the H1B quota. So all those H1Bs that came to US don't necessarily have a way to stay here. Which makes it hardly surprising that a lot of people are going back.

But that is not what I am disputing with Wadhwa. I am disputing the argument that US is in decline. My contention is that this must be proved with numbers. Secondly that must be correlated to exodus of immigrants or lack of immigrants (they are not necessarily teh same thing). Finally - any such decline must be relative since competition between countries is always relative. As an example - if indeed US is in decline and lets say the absolute measure on GDP measured in US dollars is -5% relative to 5 years back then we must see other countries that are on the rise using same measures and same currency.

Granted both China and India would pass this test. So the next question is - how serious a competition they are today and how long before they will become serious competition. And then one needs to finally ask question - is immigration a key determinant that makes India China's rise or contentment thereof a certainty?

So given all these questions - their complexity - I just don't think that there is enough information on the table for lawmakers to actually believe that US is in decline and that the decline is because of US immigration policies. On the contrary - think about it - there is significant data on the table that shows how manufacturing jobs went abroad and how that increase income inequality in the American middleclass and how it suppressed wages for decades and how that is a strategic threat to American dominance.

So - while getting a GC and an opportunity to stay in US is everybody's dream and every body has every right to dream whatever they want - it would be prudent for pro-immigration folks to actually use data to make case.

Now - what sportsfan said above is absolutely true - I agree with him 100% on every word. It would be wise for Indians and Chinese to hitch on CIR and abolish country quota altogether!!!! That would be so much powerful.

p.s. - If i were wadhwa - making a case before congress - I would have used the fact that this country was founded on equal opportunity and immigrants from India China don't get equal opportunity. Period. That in itself would be such a powerful case to be made.

Agree wholeheartedly with your P.S. The per country limits are by definition discriminatory and racist. Heck, I don't even understand how they are constitutional.

The problem with using numbers for a lot of these things is that you can make numbers say what you want. Besides, a lot of indicators such as GDP are have huge inherent flaws (too long to get into now) so sometimes the 'qualitative truth' is more powerful and meaningful.

Here are the studies:

http://www.kauffman.org/newsroom/imm...udy-shows.aspx
http://www.kauffman.org/research-and...al-talent.aspx

[rupen86]

American constitution applies to American citizens. It tells us nothing about how the immigration policies should be enacted. As recently as 1965, all "non white" countries were barred from participating in immigrating to the US. Yes, it was racist, but it is still the right of the host country to determine how they should conduct their immigration policies. In the same light, they can continue with their trend of 7% country caps.

What I and everyone else have always argued is the practical reality that such caps harm the US more. They create a large disadvantaged labor pool that is easily exploited by the employers and create a similar effect at the "higher end of the food chain" that undocumented workers create at the lower end. Actually, the ROWers that get fast track green cards are screwing over other ROWers who are discriminated against in the job marker because employers find Indian candidates with a potential 5 to 15 year wait too irresistible. We are already seeing Indians consuming more than 50% H1Bs. Why? Because there is a "positive feedback" queue that insists on increasing more and more and taking more and more people "in limbo" who can be paid below market and made to work dog hours.

When this discrimination is removed, everyone is subject to same wait, which is better for everyone in the long run. Also, when this happens, only then the true extent of the backlogs will be seen in 3 simple queues (EB1/EB2/EB3), which will also make it easier for policymakers to increase the numbers. Surely someone eloquent enough out there can offer this argument against the country caps.

Some of the recent proposals that promised to *reform* employment based immigration featured more H1Bs!!! Let's be beware of this trap. I have always maintained we need more GCs, so we can leverage our positions better with the Microsofts of the world, but that's precisely they don't want. I am sensing the tech lobby prefers more H1Bs and even more people in limbo. Their employees getting GCs en-masse is bad for their bottom lines.

With the passage of 1964 civil rights act, discrimination based on nationality is illegal.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/realspin...lly-senseless/

[abcx13]

American constitution applies to American citizens. It tells us nothing about how the immigration policies should be enacted. As recently as 1965, all "non white" countries were barred from participating in immigrating to the US. Yes, it was racist, but it is still the right of the host country to determine how they should conduct their immigration policies. In the same light, they can continue with their trend of 7% country caps.

What I and everyone else have always argued is the practical reality that such caps harm the US more. They create a large disadvantaged labor pool that is easily exploited by the employers and create a similar effect at the "higher end of the food chain" that undocumented workers create at the lower end. Actually, the ROWers that get fast track green cards are screwing over other ROWers who are discriminated against in the job marker because employers find Indian candidates with a potential 5 to 15 year wait too irresistible. We are already seeing Indians consuming more than 50% H1Bs. Why? Because there is a "positive feedback" queue that insists on increasing more and more and taking more and more people "in limbo" who can be paid below market and made to work dog hours.

When this discrimination is removed, everyone is subject to same wait, which is better for everyone in the long run. Also, when this happens, only then the true extent of the backlogs will be seen in 3 simple queues (EB1/EB2/EB3), which will also make it easier for policymakers to increase the numbers. Surely someone eloquent enough out there can offer this argument against the country caps.

Some of the recent proposals that promised to *reform* employment based immigration featured more H1Bs!!! Let's be beware of this trap. I have always maintained we need more GCs, so we can leverage our positions better with the Microsofts of the world, but that's precisely they don't want. I am sensing the tech lobby prefers more H1Bs and even more people in limbo. Their employees getting GCs en-masse is bad for their bottom lines.

For anyone but Indians, who seems so desperate to come here, the long queues would act as negative feedback instead of positive feedback! Re the constitutionality of racism, see the post above. Segregation (let alone racism when it comes to immigration) was legal in the period you cite. Even if you think immigration can technically be racist since the subjects are not USCs, do you really think Congress can pass a law saying no black people? Or only 1 black person? Or 100/yr? Yet, that's effectively what the country caps have done for India and China...

[seahawks2012]

Article about Vivek Wadhwa's points:
http://techcrunch.com/2013/02/10/dea...8TechCrunch%29

[rupen86]

When each country has exactly the same share (7%) of the pie, it is not discriminatory. What I am arguing is that it is based upon an outdated model of an arbitrary criterion.

Having same percentage does not mean equal opportunity or fairness. Moreover, the argument that those laws only apply to US citizens is incorrect.

[rupen86]

Not necessary. There are several countries that I can think of for whom the long queues would induce a precise positive feedback effect that plagues us Indians today. Also, today, *racism* is taboo, but *countryism* is not. It is perfectly acceptable socially and politically to speak ill of a country. Not that the Americans speak ill of us, but if you try to equate racism to the long queues faced by Indians, the link is very weak and tenuous. Any argument presented should have a business justification - my 2 cents.

Some questions on this.
1) Are you saying that people from some countries like long queues?
2) About the business justification, I have not seen anyone arguing that reforming highly skilled immigration does not have business justification and instead seen tons of articles that it has many economic advantages.

[vizcard]

When each country has exactly the same share (7%) of the pie, it is not discriminatory. What I am arguing is that it is based upon an outdated model of an arbitrary criterion.

Having any quota based on nationality is not illegal per se but it goes against the principles on which america was founded. Same goes for the constitution applying to US Citizens only. It might not directly apply but believe me the press would create a sh!t storm if there was something that was truly non-constitutional in principle.

Ofcourse in Congress, principles = political rants.

[qesehmk]

sport - agree w attractiveness - which is a nice word for slavery really. I have personally experienced it and I think its an open secret and employers love H1B for that reason.

I also agree about the fact that country quota or not is for Americans to decide. I guess vizcard said the same. So indeed there is no legal basis for opposing country quota.

However I think a strong case for abolishing the country quota exists based on 1) Economic Rationale 2) Civil Rights laws and American principle of equal opportunity.

And I do think that - the best way to accomplish it is by hitchhiking with CIR rather than taking a separate path.

I think that's the best I can say on this topic for now

For 1), my argument was that long queues actually make you attractive employees in the job market. This is the dirty open secret. I have seen this happen in my company so often now, that it has stopped to amuse me any longer. Senior developers leave, and those positions are filled with H1B fodder ripe for a decade long wait from that dreaded country west of China, south or Russia and east of Pakistan. As an individual, you will never like the long queue, but collectively, long queues have benefited Indians a lot, which is one reason why > 50% H1Bs are consumed by Indians, > 70% H1Bs are consumed by IT, and > 60% of all IT personnel are Indians. Actually, long queues have disrupted the diversity in the job market worse than what HR3012 was supposed to. There are millions of H1Bs in the US right now. I don't have an exact figure, but I remember reading something like 2 million. That's a huge pool of people with no leveraging power at all.

[gs1968]

To sportsfan
The number of co-sponsors for the I-2 Act has crept up to 16 (including Sen.Hatch) although the precise motivation for this is hard to determine.The H-1B increase could be part of it.At the very least we know that these Senators have no objection to removal of country cap.However the major players in the last debate (Schumer,Durbin,Grassley,Sessions,Vitter) are not to be found on the list and without their involvement I feel it is hard to get into judiciary committee and pass it.Also no corresponding legislation at House level yet.

It is also interesting to note that there is a family provision in the I-squared act to increase per country limits to 15 % (same as in HR 3012 last year) .Also the gradual phase-in language of HR 3012 is missing and we might be able to see the complete benefit starting Oct 2013

[rupen86]

It is true that America was founded on principle of equal opportunity, but then, why not open the door to the entire world, let everyone become a permanent resident, grant everyone an EAD and let the best man/woman win? One question we need to answer is why remove the country cap from EB but preserve it in FB?

The quota applies when America its granting is privileges to people who don't have them. Once you have those, the quota no longer applies. That's the way it is. That's how I see it. In principle, there is nothing wrong with the quota, but it doesn't work well in practice, and it's in the best interests of all parties to remove it. That's how I have argued. Feel free to counteract.

The quota was to preserve the diversity. In employment world, it should not be based on diversity but should be based on merit. That's why it does not make sense in EB but it makes sense in FB. Comparing "opening gate to entire world" to equal opportunity does not make sense. There is limited quota of 140k which is fine but within that limit, some countries are getting preferential treatment because of 7% quota which is a problem.