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

[rupen86]

Today saw an ad on CNN by anti-immigrant group FAIR targeting H1B in CIR.

Dick Durbin and Chuck Grassley are surely going to put amendment on H1B but I hope provisions related to EB are not touched.

[bvsamrat]

Whether it is good or bad these 11m are a factor in economy, low paying jobs in shops/hotels/restaurants. I was surprised to see mexican cooks and waiters in many Indian restaurants. USA wage rates for these jobs for these are the lowest in developing countries. In Aus/NZ/UK these rates are almost double.

Yes, don't go after the other 11 million uneducated and underskilled illegals who will suck at the taxpayers' teat.

It's disgraceful that we're the bargaining chip for 11 million illegals. We who obeyed the law, we who are usually highly qualified (yes, even the IT bodyshoppers - at least relative to the strawberry pickers), we who are net contributors to the economy, we... - we are the same as the illegals.

Good job, Mr. President and Democrats. If I ever do become a citizen of this fine country, I will surely reconsider my allegiance to the Democratic party.

[qesehmk]

I echo that samrat.

Another point is - who is to call them illegal? Arizona Texas California were all part of mexico and US took them all by force i.e. illegally from Mexico! How about the rest of the US (except Louisiana) which was taken from various different Indian Americans - again through wars - i.e. illegally. Same with Hawaii .... just one fine day US felt like having Hawaii and made it part of their territory.

The funny thing is - even white people show the decency and honesty to admit this and stand by all immigrants. Heck - if that was not true - Obama would never be the president. But it's a pity that some Indians coming from India remain coward and narrow minded when it comes to self-interest.

Whether it is good or bad these 11m are a factor in economy, low paying jobs in shops/hotels/restaurants. I was surprised to see mexican cooks and waiters in many Indian restaurants. USA wage rates for these jobs for these are the lowest in developing countries. In Aus/NZ/UK these rates are almost double.

[rupen86]

I agree with the broad picture.

abcx --> I don't deny parts of your argument; especially the one about "relative merit". However, the illegal immigration problem is a problem of the *Americans*. Until we get the citizenship, we are not stakeholders. Hence, we cannot pass judgment or criticism to our host country regarding the specific policy choices they make. If the relief to our plight is depending upon letting 11M+ people in the queue, so be it. We should do anything and everything in our power to push the CIR.

The CIR also stands to have a good outcome if it is a one time amnesty coupled with tighter border security and prevention of future illegal immigration. I do agree with the *moral hazard* argument, but I also think it is stretched to a point of being racist. The *moral hazard* argument is employed very typically by tea-partiers, who conveniently ignore the trillions of dollars bailouts to *mostly white* Wall Street. At least these 11M+ people took risks, live in constant danger of deportation and have lived in life long humiliation of *having no papers*. If we really think from their perspective, we would empathize better. Legalizing these people will make them stakeholders to preventing future illegal immigration and bring them in the mainstream US economy, reduce the remuneration they send to their parent countries and keep the money in the US, and improve their living conditions and push the wages at the lowest rung higher causing a *trickle up* effect. This is the exact same argument I had used for HR 3012. We Indians are in a way similar in our situation (not the actual intensity of plight, but in concept) to our illegal brothers and sisters. We don't have *options* and we are exploited in various H1B scams. If we had the same options as everyone else, our H1B transgressions would disappear and the vicious circle would be broken. That would be the way to fix it unless one happened to believe that Indians are inherently dishonest (similar to believing all illegal immigrants are inherently law breakers and are bad for the US). We all know in today's enlightened times, these arguments hold no water. Everything is a function of opportunities, and we have to open opportunities for 11M+ illegals and *ourselves* in the process.

Let's stop cribbing now. The CIR is a golden opportunity and it will happen only with Obama. No other president will ever care or push hard, so let's hope for the best.

If we do not deserve to discuss what is going on in politics, we have no business in opening this forum. On the same ground, Piers Morgan can not discuss gun-control whether it is good or bad. The reason that we discuss about this is that we are living here and what is going on affects us as well as this country. Freedom of speech gives this right. It does not give this right to only citizens.

You are right that our fate is linked with CIR, so crying about "illegal" or "undocumented" people does not help our cause. But it is just logical to think that way. That's what even politicians including President is suggesting when he says they will have to go at the back of the line so that people who played by the rules are not punished. When you see that politicians do not have problem with 11m "illegal" people but problem with few thousand h1bs, it raises logical questions.

[skpanda]

Could not agree more!!

My biggest problem is why is Legal Immigration held hostage for 11 million+ undocumented immigrants?

People talk about America being a land of immigrants - yes that is correct. before 1950 it was easier to move around to different countries (legal/illegal) and the host countries did not care much since that was not huge number. But after 1950s most countries put controls. if that did not happen then whole of India/China/Mexico/Easter europe would have flooded US/Propsoerous countries.

There is a legal immigration process. Everybody needs to follow that. period.

Even if US prefers to give Amnest to there 11m undocumented people on humanitarion grounds, that is ok. But why do I (who followed the rules) need to held hostage for those who did not follow the rules?

Even Bill Gates says the same thing.
http://earlystart.blogs.cnn.com/2013...-held-hostage/

If we do not deserve to discuss what is going on in politics, we have no business in opening this forum. On the same ground, Piers Morgan can not discuss gun-control whether it is good or bad. The reason that we discuss about this is that we are living here and what is going on affects us as well as this country. Freedom of speech gives this right. It does not give this right to only citizens.

You are right that our fate is linked with CIR, so crying about "illegal" or "undocumented" people does not help our cause. But it is just logical to think that way. That's what even politicians including President is suggesting when he says they will have to go at the back of the line so that people who played by the rules are not punished. When you see that politicians do not have problem with 11m "illegal" people but problem with few thousand h1bs, it raises logical questions.

[rupen86]

Could not agree more!!

My biggest problem is why is Legal Immigration held hostage for 11 million+ undocumented immigrants?

People talk about America being a land of immigrants - yes that is correct. before 1950 it was easier to move around to different countries (legal/illegal) and the host countries did not care much since that was not huge number. But after 1950s most countries put controls. if that did not happen then whole of India/China/Mexico/Easter europe would have flooded US/Propsoerous countries.

There is a legal immigration process. Everybody needs to follow that. period.

Even if US prefers to give Amnest to there 11m undocumented people on humanitarion grounds, that is ok. But why do I (who followed the rules) need to held hostage for those who did not follow the rules?

Even Bill Gates says the same thing.
http://earlystart.blogs.cnn.com/2013...-held-hostage/

That is because we have to accept the fact that we do not have political power and in politics, it is rarely about "right" or "wrong". It is always about politics.

[rupen86]

I have no problem discussing it. I am only pointing out that although we feel we deserve to be here more than the illegals, the host country may not feel that way for whatever reasons. I was also talking from the perspective of taking sides. If you went to your senator tomorrow and told him/her how you hated this 11m+ legalization, it will hurt us too! If we hope to accomplish anything, we need to be united in a common cause and convey a consistent message. Other than that, discuss all you want.

Also, a *few thousand* H1Bs is a myth just to be clear. It's a *few thousand new H1Bs per year*, which can quickly escalate into a substantial white collar workforce competing against other white collar Americans.

If you put this in perspective, we are talking about difference between millions and thousands.

By your argument, those millions of illegal workers would mostly take blue collar jobs and blue collar american workers would be competing against blue collar non american workers. So, americans having white collar job deserve better protection ? I do not think so.

[rupen86]

Really? Aren't you aware that until 1965, people of non European origin were barred from immigrating into the US? If anything, controls have been loosened substantially over the period, and no matter how much suffering we tolerate, conditions are too good to be true for immigrants in the US - even the EB-immigrants (case in point: EB2-ROW). EBx-I is disgruntled mainly at the differentiated treatment. Remove this artificial QoS, and we are all happy.

Legal immigration is not a hostage to anything, and I have come to this conclusion after much thought. There is only a problem of EBx-I in the legal immigration (x=2,3). The main problem in this country is illegal immigration and let's be thankful that EBx-I will benefit while the illegals problem gets solved.

We are not talking about sufferings on conditions of legal immigrant people. Legal immigration bill won't pass without combining that with the piece which includes illegal immigration problem which means legal immigration is held hostage to the other problem.

[skpanda]

I respect your opinion. But I do not share it.

The main reason why meaningful bills such as HR3012 have not passed is the illegal problem is not resolved. That to me is hostage. You may or may not agree with it. That is fine.

Good luck!

btw.. 1950 was just a number i threw in. Most countries paid attention to their immigration system only in the 2nd part of 20th century. Before that it was relatively easier to move around for a person who had means (money/skill/information).

Really? Aren't you aware that until 1965, people of non European origin were barred from immigrating into the US? If anything, controls have been loosened substantially over the period, and no matter how much suffering we tolerate, conditions are too good to be true for immigrants in the US - even the EB-immigrants (case in point: EB2-ROW). EBx-I is disgruntled mainly at the differentiated treatment. Remove this artificial QoS, and we are all happy.

Legal immigration is not a hostage to anything, and I have come to this conclusion after much thought. There is only a problem of EBx-I in the legal immigration (x=2,3). The main problem in this country is illegal immigration and let's be thankful that EBx-I will benefit while the illegals problem gets solved.

[bvsamrat]

Let us not flogg the dead horse. It is foregone conclusion that 11m need solution and fast as they are here now.But to deter future problem border security needs tighteting and add new visa catagory(or add more numbers at low wage category).

It also does not not mean that legal immigration should be lax or give more rights than what they have.The name it self suggest that there should be controls and guards for the legals-depending on everchaging economy,diversity and finally the need for it - following supply and demand. Frankly If there is no demand or economically counter productive, it could even stop why not?

It like a comparing a normal skin lesion and cancer. No doubt cancer gets treated on priority and no one argues how it got there. But deal with it on top priority.

I respect your opinion. But I do not share it.

The main reason why meaningful bills such as HR3012 have not passed is the illegal problem is not resolved. That to me is hostage. You may or may not agree with it. That is fine.

Good luck!

btw.. 1950 was just a number i threw in. Most countries paid attention to their immigration system only in the 2nd part of 20th century. Before that it was relatively easier to move around for a person who had means (money/skill/information).

[rupen86]

It's 11M one time versus 50 thousand * 3 (count kids/spouses too) per year indefinitely. Within 10 years, it's 1.5 million. Within 20 years, it's 3 million. Within 40 years, it's 6 million. Yes, it will take a few decades, but the numbers will be up there and they are certainly not a fraction of the numbers represented by the illegal immigrants. And H1Bs taking white collar jobs and driving the wages down is a big deal to Americans, and don't blame them for it. Americans would like to have blue collar services subsidized, but they don't want to see erosion of their paycheck at the same time.

It took 40 years for your math to come to half the number of 11m people we were discussing. Of course, it had inherent assumptions that all 115k people would apply for green card and also 11m people will remain at 11m over 40 years. Nice try.

H1b has wage protection clause which blue collar jobs do not have but still they will drive wages down but 11m people won't. Again, nice try.

[qesehmk]

I didn't mean to turn this into a fight. So I wouldn't comment any further other than just say - this forum of course is and should remain free for ALL ideas and thoughts. So long as we are respectful of each other - the discussion will remain fruitful - so lets keep it that way.

[kiddo9256]

AEI Immigration Reform Discussion - http://www.c-span.org/Events/Conserv...s/10737437723/ (~1hr)

it was interesting to watch conservative viewpoint .. i kinda liked reihan salam's POV .. 11m people will complement the workforce and fill in different job category..

high skilled legal immigrants may impact native born 25 or more with not-so-high-skills but will carry weight for native born seniors ( pay taxes for next 20-30 yrs fiscal impact etc)

[SilverLight]

http://www.cnn.com/2013/02/01/us/leg...tml?hpt=hp_bn1

[rupen86]

H1Bs are high wage earners and have far more staying power than the illegal immigrants. I did concede that it takes decades to come to numbers close to the illegal's present numbers, but I just want to clarify it's not a *few thousand H1Bs* as you were trying to make believe. It's few thousand H1Bs + dependents every year out of which a substantial percentage would opt for a permanent residency. That's the correct picture. Do you really want to explain it as it is to the Americans with a straight face? Do you believe the Americans will be more sympathetic to your cause than the illegal immigrants? If so, I think you need to observe the reality a little more carefully.

Then you should also take into consideration that 11m people do not remain 11m after 40 years. They are going to be married, have kids and sponsor others.

[rupen86]

Your information is factually incorrect. It was NOT easy to move around even if you had money, and US for example specifically forbade it (I assume the same was the case in various other first world countries). Immigration was never an issue before because there was no globalization.

HR 3012 also failed because ROW opposed it and Republicans in the Senate killed it. Its failure had nothing to do with illegal immigration and Democrats. That's another serious factual error. What you meant is various attempts at visa recapture have failed because illegal immigration issue was not solved, and to that, I agree with.

Finally, even suppose legal immigration is held *hostage* to illegal immigration to quote your terminology, I have argued that's absolutely fine and even *fair* if you change your perspective and looked at it from the point of the US. Yes, I also understand it's good to have followed the law, but that alone automatically does not grant us a special privilege in getting our own bill passed.

HR 3012 did not fail because of ROW opposition. If that was the case, it would not have been again included in I-Squared bill. It did not get killed because of republicans in senate. Grassley (Republican) put hold on it and there was no willingness in democratic leadership to put it up for the vote to pass filibuster.

Legal immigration being hostage to the illegal may be fine for you but not for most people who are waiting legally in EB and FB categories. It is other story that it is the political reality.

[gs1968]

To rupen86

"They are going to be married, have kids and sponsor others."

When I read that line of yours-I was reminded of the last serious immigration attempt in 2007. I know members in this forum are at different stages of immigration but in an attempt to stem secondary chain immigration,there was a proposal to limit the Parents of US citizens category to numerical limits of 40000 per year. This category is currently unlimited. This debate must be watched closely because if that is brought up again then undecided people should move quickly to get their applications in for their parents

[gs1968]

A couple of articles to fill everybody with some hope

http://news.sciencemag.org/sciencein...r-slices-.html

http://www.rollcall.com/news/schumer...1.html?pos=adp

[qesehmk]

Its unfortunate politics that both sides are playing. What's happening is - Obama doesn't want to give in even a small victory to republicans. EB immigration is mostly republican sponsored/led. Whereas republicans clearly are not in love with hispanics - certainly not all republicans.

However the fact 4 republican senators joined schumer is a positive sign. Cross the fingers.

A couple of articles to fill everybody with some hope

http://news.sciencemag.org/sciencein...r-slices-.html

http://www.rollcall.com/news/schumer...1.html?pos=adp

[rupen86]

A couple of articles to fill everybody with some hope

http://news.sciencemag.org/sciencein...r-slices-.html

http://www.rollcall.com/news/schumer...1.html?pos=adp

I do not think piecemeal approach would work given the political reality. Senate would pass the bill and then the pressure would be on Boehner to take it to the house floor even though majority of republicans in the house do not support it. Also, passing bills like STEM do not go far away in helping EB backlogs compared to the one introduced in the senate (I-squared).

[pakkpk]

http://budget.senate.gov/republican/...4-d64c557e2a1b

As Ranking Member Sessions has explained, “Encouraging self-sufficiency must be a bedrock for our immigration policy, with the goal of reducing poverty, strengthening the family, and promoting our economic values. But Administration officials and their policies are working actively against this goal.”

When the bill S.1 is drafted, OMB and the Committee on budget will assign a very big cost to it.

[rupen86]

Reality check on immigration reform.

http://tv.msnbc.com/2013/02/01/reali...rms-obstacles/

I agree with the viewpoint that timeline is important. It should happen before Congress's summer recess.

[gcq]

Its unfortunate politics that both sides are playing. What's happening is - Obama doesn't want to give in even a small victory to republicans. EB immigration is mostly republican sponsored/led. Whereas republicans clearly are not in love with hispanics - certainly not all republicans.

However the fact 4 republican senators joined schumer is a positive sign. Cross the fingers.

The fundamental issue with Immigration politics is ideological divide. Democrats are socialist leaning. GOP is business leaning. Naturally these interests conflict. We are the victims of this class rivalry. Then vote bank politics comes into play. This is a curse for all democracies. Any smart thinking political party would yearn for this millions of new voters. However GOP with its traditionally anti-immigrant attitude won't allow this political smartness rein over their anti-immigrant views. George Bush though a failure in all other aspects was smart enough to understand that and hence he pushed for CIR in 2007.

[rupen86]

http://budget.senate.gov/republican/...4-d64c557e2a1b

As Ranking Member Sessions has explained, “Encouraging self-sufficiency must be a bedrock for our immigration policy, with the goal of reducing poverty, strengthening the family, and promoting our economic values. But Administration officials and their policies are working actively against this goal.”

When the bill S.1 is drafted, OMB and the Committee on budget will assign a very big cost to it.

That seems right but I do not think it is going to affect the bill. I feel Obama has abandoned fiscal issues in favor of social issues which can be seen in fiscal cliff deal.

[rupen86]

From Oh law firm, from this law firm's point view, there is agreement for the undocumented people but not for EB immigration.

02/02/2013: CIR Proposals of Three Key CIR Players of President, Senate, and House Approach Overall Similar Approach for Legalization Issues

Various reports indicate that the three players are proposing a conceptual framework for the issue of legalization of undocumented immigrants which is very similar to those which we outlined: Legalization that assures party power balance by asking the legalized undocumented immigrants to seek green card sponsorship and stay at the end of the immigration waiting queue. Again, this proposal is widely accepted at this time as it assures the balance of power between the Republican Party and the Democratic Party in the long term, and at the same time assures fairness between legal immigrants and undocumented/legalized immigrants.
Under the cirucmstances, it is upto the Republican leaders and labor unions to accept a proposal to increase the badly needed highly skilled foreign workers immigrant quota without affecting the family-based immigration system. Part of this concept is already presented in the Senate Immigration Innovation bill, but this will present a point of severe fight from the ultra-right wing concervative Republicans as well as ultra left wing labor unions. Accordingly, the forementioned three key CIR players should work hard to negotiate and reach a compromise with two far-right and far-left sectors such that CIR bill be enacted this year. Should the Congress fail to pass the CIR, all the blames are likely to be directted to these far-right and far-left political forces that should pay political liability in the future because reportedly such failure will result in no-CIR until 2016! Will see how it will play out