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

[pessimist]

i met with sen.hatch's office during the advocacy event and his office has been very supportive about eb provisions. they do have a soft corner for religious worker visas for UT but that has not impacted their general support for eb backlog removal.

[gs1968]

If they have shared that multiple times already-how come it was not posted in any of these forums thus far. These are provisions in the I-squared Act and may be a return gift to Senator Hatch.I had also read earlier that the I-squared Bill was a marker Bill and some provisions would be rolled into CIR.

[kd2008]

I think I V has deliberately chosen to be quite to media but very visible to political circles. Media still jumbles up high skilled & low skilled and people label it more GCs for all. People have animus towards H-1B and media will harp onhow these h-1bs are now clamoring for more GCs.

I-squared act was all that was needed to be the bargaining chip for us. A full blooded bill that captured all our demands. It made gang of 8's task a lot easier.

On I V's facebook page they posted snippets of white house meeting. There was also a thread on their forums about it.

[gs1968]

I still visit Mr.Gotcher's forum ( I know other forum members here have mixed views about that) and I quote below his post from yesterday AM

"Everything that I've heard and read points to a realignment of quota priorities, with visas being taken from family based and given to employment based applicants. Again, this is only rumor, but what I'm hearing is that F2A beneficiaries will become "immediate relatives" (quota exempt), and all other family based categories, except possibly F1, will be eliminated. I have no idea how they will handle cases already in the pipeline.

We should see the text of the Senate bill next week, at the latest. The Judiciary Committee is holding their first hearing on it on Wednesday and I imagine they will need actual text to work with. At that point, we can see what they propose to do with the EB quota. I've heard that they are going to decouple dependents from the quota. This would more than double the numbers available. Also, I've heard that visa recapture will be included. This would add more than 300,000 visas to the quota immediately. If dependents are not counted, that would be the equivalent of adding more than 600,000 visas back into the quota. Finally, there are strong rumors that some groups (EB1a, STEM advanced degree holders) will be quota exempt and also that the main EB quota itself will be expanded considerably. I should add that it is a foregone conclusion that the single state limit will be eliminated. "

This aligns with what gcq has posted above. I have mentioned before the expanding support for the I-squared Act and the current sponsor & co-sponsor count now stands at 26. Obviously Grassley/Sessions/Vitter etc are not part of the list. Also the benefit of such a Bill is that the wait times of all countries will be reduced dramatically and will eliminate the heartache/ill-feelings that HR 3012 provoked last year

[qesehmk]

KD - I would respectfully state that I doubt that. My first hand experience with that organization has been terrible to say the least. They grabbed all credit they could from my blog and never supported 1 % the idea that number crunching actually helps anyone.

On the other hand many ideas came out of this blog including but not limited to -
A) country backlog is the real problem in EB immigration.
B) Family numbers from EB should be counted towards FB quota.

I have no respect for them whatsoever because they don't know how to respect others nor they know how to respect a dialog. If they cared so much for immigrants why did they spread lies about me and this blog when I stopped writing there and started writing on my own blog?

All this crap about them having inside access to any office is BS. It's a BS organization with BS leadership that doesn't know politics nor they know organization nor they know advocacy.

I think I V has deliberately chosen to be quite to media but very visible to political circles. Media still jumbles up high skilled & low skilled and people label it more GCs for all. People have animus towards H-1B and media will harp onhow these h-1bs are now clamoring for more GCs.

I-squared act was all that was needed to be the bargaining chip for us. A full blooded bill that captured all our demands. It made gang of 8's task a lot easier.

On I V's facebook page they posted snippets of white house meeting. There was also a thread on their forums about it.

[qesehmk]

pessimist - thank you for writing on this blog. Did you actually meet with hatch or did you visit the office and couldn't see him?

i met with sen.hatch's office during the advocacy event and his office has been very supportive about eb provisions. they do have a soft corner for religious worker visas for UT but that has not impacted their general support for eb backlog removal.

[kd2008]

KD - I would respectfully state that I doubt that. My first hand experience with that organization has been terrible to say the least. They grabbed all credit they could from my blog and never supported 1 % the idea that number crunching actually helps anyone.

On the other hand many ideas came out of this blog including but not limited to -
A) country backlog is the real problem in EB immigration.
B) Family numbers from EB should be counted towards FB quota.

I have no respect for them whatsoever because they don't know how to respect others nor they know how to respect a dialog. If they cared so much for immigrants why did they spread lies about me and this blog when I stopped writing there and started writing on my own blog?

All this crap about them having inside access to any office is BS. It's a BS organization with BS leadership that doesn't know politics nor they know organization nor they know advocacy.

Q, I certainly sympathize with your experience. There is no doubt you were wronged. But the truth is there for all to see. I have made many trips to Senators and house reps. They know I V. They know also I V is backed by Tech companies. There are facebook posts showing I V invitation to White house. When bills are announced, legislators mention I V.

I V by no means is a perfect organisation. But they are certainly not BS as you say. You were wronged and you have animus for them and that is understandable. But for them, nobody would be banging legislators doors for attention. They certainly know politics way better than most organisations that lobby in DC.

Once you are over your slight, you may be able to see that there are good people in that organisation who had nothing to do with how you were treated and are helping EB backlog cause.

I hope that this is the end of this discussion and we can focus on matters at hand.

[gs1968]

To pessimist
Thanks for the information based on personal experience.We are well aware that Sen.Hatch is very supportive of legal immigration especially employment based.In addition to the I-squared Act we should also be thankful for his leadership role in formulating and passing AC21 Act in 2000. However we should not assume that his support extends to other aspects of the proposed legislation as noted below

http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politic...o-Senate-floor

"Senator Hatch emphasized that, for his part, getting one piece in place doesn’t guarantee his “yes” vote on an eventual bill being crafted by the so-called “gang of eight” in the Senate.
"While I understand this [farm-worker provision] will be included in the Gang of 8 proposal, no one should assume that I'm backing their overall plan," Hatch said in his statement.

[qesehmk]

kd .. thanks for a civil reply. All I can say is I hope you are right and I am wrong.

Q, I certainly sympathize with your experience. There is no doubt you were wronged. But the truth is there for all to see. I have made many trips to Senators and house reps. They know I V. They know also I V is backed by Tech companies. There are facebook posts showing I V invitation to White house. When bills are announced, legislators mention I V.

I V by no means is a perfect organisation. But they are certainly not BS as you say. You were wronged and you have animus for them and that is understandable. But for them, nobody would be banging legislators doors for attention. They certainly know politics way better than most organisations that lobby in DC.

Once you are over your slight, you may be able to see that there are good people in that organisation who had nothing to do with how you were treated and are helping EB backlog cause.

I hope that this is the end of this discussion and we can focus on matters at hand.

[gs1968]

Such an important week and everybody is so quiet on this forum!
Hopefully the Republicans don't read the liberal LA Times

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationwo...,5787920.story

Also the House Bill may be unveiled on Thursday and steal some of the Senate's thunder

http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/...icle-1.1314521

[rupen86]

Such an important week and everybody is so quiet on this forum!
Hopefully the Republicans don't read the liberal LA Times

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationwo...,5787920.story

Also the House Bill may be unveiled on Thursday and steal some of the Senate's thunder

http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/...icle-1.1314521

I guess we need to see more positive news and the actual bill having positive things for EB. So far, we have not seen that except ** claiming that those things will be there in the bill.

[abcx13]

They seem to be slipping again. Judiciary hearing is now on Fri instead of Wed.

http://firstread.nbcnews.com/_news/2...-language?lite

[pessimist]

Completely Agree. and therein lies one one of the biggest challenges. But apart from the posturing in the statement above which is understandable ...I think there are plenty other offices that we really need to be worried about rather than Hatch.
And btw, completely agree with KD2008's points as well. I was honored to get to go to the WH with the team and I think it took quite a bit of traction and credibility and to pull that off. I will leave it at that and not comment further since I understand the sentiments here.

However back to the actual discussion, more than the senate what i was pleased to hear about was the 3-track path to citizenship that the House gang came up with...because my impression about the situation in the House was more disconcerting since not every there office seemed to be on board with CIR.
Overall, there is a lot of posturing/rhetoric going on and it is eventually the "give and take" that will follow the revealing of the bill that will really determine who stands where wrt CIR.

[gs1968]

I found this information interesting.I hope abcx13 does not feel incensed by this knowing his viewpoint on higher education related immigration

http://dailycaller.com/2013/04/15/so...s-over-skills/

[abcx13]

This is a somewhat bizarre article and if everything that is implied comes true it would result in a truly moronic system. The merit based system that mixes family and employment based immigration is less than ideal (as it is the US has the lowest ratio for EB immigration as a % of total immigration) and clearly insufficient if it is intended as a replacement for the EB system which seems to be the case - if instead it replaces the DV and is in addition to the current EB system, then I guess it's okay... I guess we'll also have to wait till tomorrow to see how the backlog is eliminated.

Some more here: http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/201...n-tuesday.html

And on the House bill:
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics...-own-overhaul/

[rupen86]

I found this information interesting.I hope abcx13 does not feel incensed by this knowing his viewpoint on higher education related immigration

http://dailycaller.com/2013/04/15/so...s-over-skills/

Even though, it may be correct, merit based system is supposed to be implemented after 10 years. ILW article that
abcx13 posted is suggesting that merit based system is replacement of diversity visa program. If that is the case, then it is not a big deal. So, for us, we have to see how they change the current EB system.

[rupen86]

This is a somewhat bizarre article and if everything that is implied comes true it would result in a truly moronic system. The merit based system that mixes family and employment based immigration is less than ideal (as it is the US has the lowest ratio for EB immigration as a % of total immigration) and clearly insufficient if it is intended as a replacement for the EB system which seems to be the case - if instead it replaces the DV and is in addition to the current EB system, then I guess it's okay... I guess we'll also have to wait till tomorrow to see how the backlog is eliminated.

Some more here: http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/201...n-tuesday.html

And on the House bill:
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics...-own-overhaul/

It is interesting to see that ilw article talks about all points other than EB

[abcx13]

Even though, it may be correct, merit based system is supposed to be implemented after 10 years. ILW article that
abcx13 posted is suggesting that merit based system is replacement of diversity visa program. If that is the case, then it is not a big deal. So, for us, we have to see how they change the current EB system.

This article suggests 4 years if I understand it correctly.

[immi2910]

From Trackitt http://www.trackitt.com/usa-discussi...page/last_page

They cite: http://dailycaller.com/2013/04/15/im...oyees/?print=1

Spouse and kids to be exempted from 140K cap. Also, EB1 exempt from the cap and PHD STEM holders

Here is the excerpt from the article:

The nation’s current immigration law allocates a green card not only to each incoming employee, employee’s spouse and their young children. The new law would expand the number of employee Green Cards by exempting several categories of immigrants from the 140,000 annual cap, including the spouses and children of new green card recipients.

The new law would also exempts certain categories of employees, including “multinational executives and managers if they been employed at least one year,” according to the text read to TheDC by Jenks.

The bill also exempts “outstanding researchers and professors,” as well as people with doctorates in the very broad section of “science, technology engineering and math.”

This “STEM” field includes physicists and chemists, engineers, biologists and computer experts.

[gs1968]

This is the official stand of numbersUSA

https://www.numbersusa.com/content/n...on-levels.html

I am pinching myself as the leaked details seem too good to be true. I hope the House will take a sympathetic view of the proposals.

However the GOP whip has said that the House will not be prodded into action by the Senate Bill and work on its own Bill at their own pace

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner...m-robert-costa

And then there is a third track
http://www.nationaljournal.com/congr...s-own-20130415

[abcx13]

Interesting...it doesn't say STEM MS. Let's hope by STEM doctorate they also mean STEM MS and it was just an omission.

Also, I just realized that excluding dependents is a given. If they are removing quotas for spouses and unmarried kids of GC holders from the FB categories, then it would be inconsistent not to remove from EB. Otherwise you could get an EB GC and then immediately petition under FB (though this would mean that the EB petitioner would have to be "kind enough" not to clog up EB numbers and use uncapped FB).

So EB1 would be exempt, as would dependents, as would STEM PhD. That should free up at least 100k (40k from EB1, at least 70k dependents @ 2/GC, and then some STEM - but I'm double counting...) I think? Then you'll have to split that based on SOFAD to EB2 and EB3.

[rupen86]

Interesting...it doesn't say STEM MS. Let's hope by STEM doctorate they also mean STEM MS and it was just an omission.

Also, I just realized that excluding dependents is a given. If they are removing quotas for spouses and unmarried kids of GC holders from the FB categories, then it would be inconsistent not to remove from EB. Otherwise you could get an EB GC and then immediately petition under FB (though this would mean that the EB petitioner would have to be "kind enough" not to clog up EB numbers and use uncapped FB).

So EB1 would be exempt, as would dependents, as would STEM PhD. That should free up at least 100k (40k from EB1, at least 70k dependents @ 2/GC, and then some STEM - but I'm double counting...) I think? Then you'll have to split that based on SOFAD to EB2 and EB3.

It is possible that they might have excluded MS. One of the articles earlier mentioned removing per country quota for STEM. That would make sense then.

[gs1968]

To abcx13
The exemption of spouses and minor children has now been confirmed by various sources. For the sake of perspective-this is the last known position of the House on the F-2A category during the STEM debate last November

http://latino.foxnews.com/latino/pol...y-republicans/

The most that the Republicans would offer was to allow the spouses to wait in the USA while awaiting GC approval.There was no increase in GC numbers,elimination of country cap or work authorization. It is a huge jump from this position to what the Senate is proposing now. However if there is tremendous momentum coming out of the Senate for this Bill then the reluctance of the House can be overcome

[seahawks2012]

To abcx13
The exemption of spouses and minor children has now been confirmed by various sources. For the sake of perspective-this is the last known position of the House on the F-2A category during the STEM debate last November

http://latino.foxnews.com/latino/pol...y-republicans/

The most that the Republicans would offer was to allow the spouses to wait in the USA while awaiting GC approval.There was no increase in GC numbers,elimination of country cap or work authorization. It is a huge jump from this position to what the Senate is proposing now. However if there is tremendous momentum coming out of the Senate for this Bill then the reluctance of the House can be overcome

Thanks for the update. What I don't get is why would House not include eliminating country limits if it already had pass HR3012 (eliminating country limits)?

[gs1968]

It appears that the Boston tragedy will delay the CIR Bill rollout

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013...est=latestnews