Discussion of Bills that remove the Per Country Limits - H.R.3012, H,R. 213

[immitime]

Not to dash everybodys hope....This website is claiming that moving dates to March 1st 2008 is a rumor

From immigration-law website:

10/28/2011: Annual Immigrant Visa Number Limit for FY 2012 by Family-Based and Employment-Based Immigration Categories

Thus far, the EB-2 immigrant visa number movement was not too bad in the first two months of FY 2012 (October and November 2011). This overall data is posted for readers who are not too familiar with the the annual immigrant visa number limits. Lately proposed elimination of per country numerical limitation in employment-based immigration has raised a lot of issues and controversies out there as triggered by H.R. 3012 which was just passed in the House Judiciary Committee yesterday and which will be on the full House floor for the final House action sooner or later. This bill was introduced by a conservative Republican Congressman Chaffetz from Utah and co-sponsored by the Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, Congressman Lamar Smith who has been known to be ultra conservative. In passing this bill in the House Judiciary, however, one of the most powerful Democratic House member in the immigration legislation, Congresswoman Zoe Lofgren of California joined the group as another co-sponsor, turning the bill into a bi-partisan bill. As readers are well aware of, Congresswoman Zoe Lofgren introduced in the House a similar bill in a different context quite earlier, which has been pending in the House. Accordingly, her joining of other co-sponsors of this bill will impact her own pending bill one way or another, even though her own bill will still remain alive in the House. (For the summary of her own bill, please click here.) Reportedly, she joined Represeantives Chaffetz and Smith on a condition to accept her amendment to the bill putting a cap of three years for the legislation, and the House Judiciary Committee thus passed this bill, as amended.
This legislation is controversial in the Rest of World (All Other Countries category) community in the immigrant visa bulletin and EB-3 immigrant community as the immigrant visas available for these groups will be affected in monthly visa allocations and their I-485 waiting times by the elimination of per country numberical limitation for which Chinese and Indian EB-2 have the highest stake. This reporter has reminded the readers frequently "life is an irony" in immigration legislation.
Soon, the State Department will release the Visa Bulletin for the month of December 2011. There is an unconfirmed information that the EB-2 cut-off dates for China and India may further move forward to March 1, 2008. At this juncture, this informaton remains a "rumor" in that it cannot be confirmed and verified. However, we will find out the truth soon. Please stay tuned to this web site for the release of December Visa Bulletin. At this time, there is a confirmed prediction of a significant cut-off date movement between now and February. Such movement will not be the norm throughout the fiscal year, and there is a possibility for retrogression of the cut-off during the summer months.Weather is getting a little bit chilly out there as we are approaching the Winter season. In this country, Holloween is one of the most exciting seasonal event a year for the kids with pumkins all around. Happy Holloweens, readers!

The date movement depends on How many new I-485s are filed after Nov 1st 2011.. and of course there might be CP cases too, we will never know. Blogs, Attorneys, Individual blogs, forums, websites to increase traffic can claim anything. but just give always 25 % probability on that.

[TeddyKoochu]

Hi Teddy/Nishant/Qesehmk

Thank you for your great service and I may posting wrong place but trying to get answer from Guru's, please advise..

Judiciary commitee approved HR 704 bill 3 month ago and not yet been submitted to house floor as of now, Will that same thing happen HR 3012?, I wish to approve this HR 3012, but trying to understand the procedure after commiitee approve ?

The U.S. House Judiciary Committee Wednesday approved the Security and Fairness Enhancement for America Act (HR 704)
Committee approves bill to eliminate per-country limits on high-skilled immigrants (HR 3012)

My knowledge about the legislative process is limited. AFAIK after the committee vote the bill has to come to both the house and senate floors be discussed, debated and get passed in the same session otherwise the bill gets lapsed. Unfortunately in this long journey many bills simply get dropped out and very few make it to the president’s desk. HR3012 has passed the committee vote and is a very promising legislation for retrogressed countries but it’s still a long way to go. It’s great that the bill made it this far.

[username]

Is that HR3012 pass through the house?

The bill, which passed by a voice vote in the House Judiciary Committee on Thursday, creates what he says is a fairer system that is “first come, first serve.”

http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/politic...ffetz.html.csp

Washington • Federal law currently restricts how many highly skilled foreign workers can be hired from select countries, but that could change under legislation by Rep. Jason Chaffetz, R-Utah.

Chaffetz’s Fairness for High-Skilled Immigrants Act, which advanced to the House floor Thursday, would drop the caps for country of origin that now limit how many workers can come from, say, India or England.

Chaffetz, who first ran for office on a platform of clamping down on illegal immigration, says his legislation fixes a problem with visas that hurts American businesses.

The bill, which passed by a voice vote in the House Judiciary Committee on Thursday, creates what he says is a fairer system that is “first come, first serve.”

“By removing per-country limits, American companies will be able to access the best talent,” Chaffetz said. “This legislation is pro-growth, pro-jobs, and pro-family.”

Chaffetz’s bill does not increase the number of visas available for highly skilled workers. The legislation is co-sponsored by Judiciary Chairman Lamar Smith, R-Texas.

I am not against of this bill but if this bill pass than mainly India and China will benefit from it. It will harm most of the world/countries (excluding India, China, Mexico & Philippines). Just a thought.

[sreddy]

Come on be fair man.. If this bill doesn't pass, some these EB3 folks in the line joined recently will have to wait for 20-30 years to get their GC. Do you expect an employer don't throw them away for 20-30 years? That's not fair. Also take in terms of population ratio, these two courntries have same numbers as small countries around? Not fair.

I am not against of this bill but if this bill pass than mainly India and China will benefit from it. It will harm most of the world/countries (excluding India, China, Mexico & Philippines). Just a thought.

[qesehmk]

username this bill (3012) will make it first come first serve or FIFO (if you are into computers!)
FIFO doesn't sound harmful. The current country limits has been harming EBs from IC for so long. This bill removes that.

I am not against of this bill but if this bill pass than mainly India and China will benefit from it. It will harm most of the world/countries (excluding India, China, Mexico & Philippines). Just a thought.

[username]

Come on be fair man.. If this bill doesn't pass, some these EB3 folks in the line joined recently will have to wait for 20-30 years to get their GC. Do you expect an employer don't throw them away for 20-30 years? That's not fair. Also take in terms of population ratio, these two courntries have same numbers as small countries around? Not fair.

As I said before I am not against this bill, it was just a thought.

If this bill comes or not what you have said will remain the same(EB3 folks in the line joined recently will have to wait for 20-30 years to get their GC). It will only help old folks who are already in line. For new people join the line will be even more worst.

username this bill (3012) will make it first come first serve or FIFO (if you are into computers!)
FIFO doesn't sound harmful. The current country limits has been harming EBs from IC for so long. This bill removes that.

Q, you are correct. Only solution to EBs is to increase the limit.
This bill will surely help people who are in the line but it will make it worst for new one joining the line no matter which country. Just imagine...

[yesman]

I agree! This bill only provides every individual (within a EB category) an equal shot at immigration irrespective of which country he/she was born in. That only sounds fair to me but again, I'm from India

username this bill (3012) will make it first come first serve or FIFO (if you are into computers!)
FIFO doesn't sound harmful. The current country limits has been harming EBs from IC for so long. This bill removes that.

[yesman]

It only makes it as bad (for people joining the line from ROW) as it would be for an Indian/Chinese national joining the line.

As I said before I am not against this bill, it was just a thought.

Q, you are correct. Only solution to EBs is to increase the limit.
This bill will surely help people who are in the line but it will make it worst for new one joining the line. Just imagine...

[bieber]

when H1 doesn't have restriction on country, EB green card should follow same path, in my opinion

disclosure -I'm from India, I will benefit

[username]

It only makes it as bad (for people joining the line from ROW) as it would be for an Indian/Chinese national joining the line.

so in other words we are asking all other countries to suffer in EB3 category as we Indian and Chines are suffering currently. Sound great.

[iamdeb]

username this bill (3012) will make it first come first serve or FIFO (if you are into computers!)
FIFO doesn't sound harmful. The current country limits has been harming EBs from IC for so long. This bill removes that.

Very well put Q. Everyone should have equal and fair chance at getting the green card. For so many years the people from other countries have been grinning their way to GC,whilst we suffer from anxiety,stress and depression because of the long wait.

[skpanda]

I think it important to spread awareness amont the anti immigrants who post in those websites without even understanding what the bill does. Please take out some time to rebuke the inaccurate comments from anti immigrants.

This is the first time I am seeing immigrants defending any bill and answering to the anti immigrant rhetoric. I hope this bill passes and brings some relief to all of us.

[sreddy]

Everybody suffering won't be 20-30 years ... may be about 5-6 years. Yes, it does sound great to me.

so in other words we are asking all other countries to suffer in EB3 category as we Indian and Chines are suffering currently. Sound great.

[srimurthy]

I guess the EB is Employment Based Immigration and USCIS state the following:

"Every fiscal year (October 1st – September 30th), approximately 140,000 employment-based immigrant visas are made available to qualified applicants under the provisions of U.S. immigration law. Employment based immigrant visas are divided into five preference categories. Certain spouses and children may accompany or follow-to-join employment-based immigrants. "

And when we talk about equal opportunity on Employment and selection is based on qualification, these contradict against the country based limits.

To maintain the ratio of ethnicity, there is a diversity visa and also family based which have country limits. I guess going forward if they see that the back log / wait time is so high for any category (EB2 / EB3) for all countries, then there can be bills brought in to support that the current numbers of 140K are not sufficient and US wants more skilled professionals and increase that number.

Just my thoughts.

so in other words we are asking all other countries to suffer in EB3 category as we Indian and Chines are suffering currently. Sound great.

[cbpds1]

This bill (3012) has a long way to go......Usually the Dems and Repubs are at loggerheads not to give either one the upper hand during election time.

Moreover Mr O has to think if it will alienate his hispanic base as he ends up doing something for the legal folks while leaving the illegals in quandry

I do support this bill and I do not think CO is pushing dates based on the bill. He is getting a 35-40k inventory perhaps so he can use the same precedence prior to 2011.

Very well put Q. Everyone should have equal and fair chance at getting the green card. For so many years the people from other countries have been grinning their way to GC,whilst we suffer from anxiety,stress and depression because of the long wait.

[tanu_75]

so in other words we are asking all other countries to suffer in EB3 category as we Indian and Chines are suffering currently. Sound great.

It's not a question of asking someone else to suffer. It's about fixing something which is stupid. If you want to have diversity, then have an alternate plan to do it. But if you mix that with trying to remain competitive for talent and skills in today's world, then you better not have lame rules like these where you stop countries who provide 90% of the skills that you want. But as they say, there's no cure for stupid.

[qesehmk]

Q, you are correct. Only solution to EBs is to increase the limit.
This bill will surely help people who are in the line but it will make it worst for new one joining the line no matter which country. Just imagine...

username, yes the best solution is to either increase the overall CAP. Some people (like Bill Gates) have suggested that there should be no cap. If a business makes a decision to hire - why prevent them. I think that would be too extreme. But I would say it is ridiculous to not have a cap in FB or a very high cap in FB but in EB which actually helps economy there is a very small cap.

As per 3012 - the bad part is - it is a zero sum game. So yes EB2ROW and EB3ROW wait times will increase further. But the current system itself is unfair. 3012 only seeks to make it fair.

But I wholeheartedly agree that the best solution is to increase overall cap to at least twice the current.


ps. - On another note, to EVERYBODY, its understandable why people from ROWMP will find 3012 hurtful. So lets not villify people who oppose 3012. We should root for everybody and that includes ROW.

[leo07]

Guys, If we want to use this forum for discussing political outcomes. let's at least show respect to each others ideas. What might be stupid to us might not be stupid to others. So, they will be inclined to use much harsher words next time. Next thing we know, we would be bringing our mothers and sisters into game

It's not a question of asking someone else to suffer. It's about fixing something which is stupid. If you want to have diversity, then have an alternate plan to do it. But if you mix that with trying to remain competitive for talent and skills in today's world, then you better not have lame rules like these where you stop countries who provide 90% of the skills that you want. But as they say, there's no cure for stupid.

[Pedro Gonzales]

As I said before I am not against this bill, it was just a thought.

If this bill comes or not what you have said will remain the same(EB3 folks in the line joined recently will have to wait for 20-30 years to get their GC). It will only help old folks who are already in line. For new people join the line will be even more worst.


Q, you are correct. Only solution to EBs is to increase the limit.
This bill will surely help people who are in the line but it will make it worst for new one joining the line no matter which country. Just imagine...

I REALLY recommend that we move this discussion to another thread. I've been actively debating this on trackitt for the last month and trust me, the debate gets ugly soon.

Anyway, as to "For new people join the line will be even more worst. " that is plain nonsense. It should be obvious to anyone who knows how the system works that eliminating country caps can do nothing but good for someone from a retrogressed country. I am cutting and pasting something I wrote on trackitt in response to someone who made the same claim with respect to EB3I. Hope it clarifies the situation for you.

"Yes, an EB3I with a PD of 2010 will continue to have a long wait for his green card, but a) his/her wait will not be 15 to 18 years (btw, I don't buy into the 70 year nonsensical number either), and b) his/her wait will be considerably shorter than (orders of magnitude, certainly less than half as long as) it would have been with country caps.

Simple assumptions:
1) # of EB3 I in the queue per the I485 inventory is 57K.
2) # of EB3 total in the queue per the I485 inventory is 122K.
3) On average 1000 EB3I applicants per month after July 2007, that's 52 months x 1K = 52K EB3Is waiting to file I-485
4) On average 3000 EB3total apps per month after July 2007, 52 months x 3K = 156K EB3total waiting to file I-485
5) Total of 109K EB3I and 278K EB3total in the queue before someone from EB3I applies for his PERM today.

Ignoring porting from EB3 to EB2 and assuming no spillover ever comes down to EB3 because EB2 continues to use all the visa numbers,
a) Status quo: 3K visa numbers for EB3I per year, it'll take the guy that applies now 109K/3K = 36 years to get his GC (I think in reality the number of EB3I applicants per year post2007 will be below 1000, as more people apply in EB2 than EB3, plus porting plus some spillover will eventually fall to EB3, together will make the wait significantly better but this is a conservative estimate).
b) If country caps are removed: 40K visa numbers for all EB3s per year, it'll take the guy 278K/40K = 7 years to get his GC."

So, in that case the 36 year wait for the EB3I becomes a 7 year wait with HR 3012

Hope that addresses your concerns.

[username]

I REALLY recommend that we move this discussion to another thread. I've been actively debating this on trackitt for the last month and trust me, the debate gets ugly soon.

Anyway, as to "For new people join the line will be even more worst. " that is plain nonsense. It should be obvious to anyone who knows how the system works that eliminating country caps can do nothing but good for someone from a retrogressed country. I am cutting and pasting something I wrote on trackitt in response to someone who made the same claim with respect to EB3I. Hope it clarifies the situation for you.

"Yes, an EB3I with a PD of 2010 will continue to have a long wait for his green card, but a) his/her wait will not be 15 to 18 years (btw, I don't buy into the 70 year nonsensical number either), and b) his/her wait will be considerably shorter than (orders of magnitude, certainly less than half as long as) it would have been with country caps.

Simple assumptions:
1) # of EB3 I in the queue per the I485 inventory is 57K.
2) # of EB3 total in the queue per the I485 inventory is 122K.
3) On average 1000 EB3I applicants per month after July 2007, that's 52 months x 1K = 52K EB3Is waiting to file I-485
4) On average 3000 EB3total apps per month after July 2007, 52 months x 3K = 156K EB3total waiting to file I-485
5) Total of 109K EB3I and 278K EB3total in the queue before someone from EB3I applies for his PERM today.

Ignoring porting from EB3 to EB2 and assuming no spillover ever comes down to EB3 because EB2 continues to use all the visa numbers,
a) Status quo: 3K visa numbers for EB3I per year, it'll take the guy that applies now 109K/3K = 36 years to get his GC (I think in reality the number of EB3I applicants per year post2007 will be below 1000, as more people apply in EB2 than EB3, plus porting plus some spillover will eventually fall to EB3, together will make the wait significantly better but this is a conservative estimate).
b) If country caps are removed: 40K visa numbers for all EB3s per year, it'll take the guy 278K/40K = 7 years to get his GC."

So, in that case the 36 year wait for the EB3I becomes a 7 year wait with HR 3012

Hope that addresses your concerns.

In my discussion am talking ONLY about new people joining EB3 line....

Your calculation dose not make sense to me. Currently FY is 2012 and EB3 India stands in 2002 (10+ yr wait) , EB3 - China stand in 2004, Mexico and Philippines stand in 2005. How come just removing country cap from EBs (EB3) it will give GC to new people joining the line in 7yrs instead of 10+ yrs with the same numbers of applicants and quota?

This bill will be unfair to people other than ICMP (India, China, Mexico, Philippines). I am thinking from other end of ICMP. Just an example, if person "A" country of changeability is Australia and currently if "A" apply for GC under EB3 than "A" will get GC in less than 1 year. If this bill pass, than "A" has to wait atleast 10+ yr to get GC. For new people joining EB3 line (dose not matter which country of changeability) waiting time will 10+ yrs.

Just for you information my country of changeability is india.

[qesehmk]

[B][COLOR="darkred"]if person "A" country of changeability is Australia and currently if "A" apply for GC under EB3 than "A" will get GC in less than 1 year. If this bill pass, than "A" has to wait atleast 10+ yr to get GC. For new people joining EB3 line (dose not matter which country of changeability) waiting time will 10+ yrs.

username, if you do the math,(just as an exampe) if 50% people today have wait time of 10 years, and 50% have 0, then if you institute strict FIFO, the average waittime will be 5 years.

[Pedro Gonzales]

[B][COLOR="darkred"]
This bill will be unfair to people other than ICMP (India, China, Mexico, Philippines). I am thinking from other end of ICMP. Just an example, if person "A" country of changeability is Australia and currently if "A" apply for GC under EB3 than "A" will get GC in less than 1 year. If this bill pass, than "A" has to wait atleast 10+ yr to get GC. For new people joining EB3 line (dose not matter which country of changeability) waiting time will 10+ yrs.

Just for you information my country of changeability is india.

No doubt an Australian EB3 applicant will have a longer wait than he does now. No one is disputing that.

But he does not have a 1 year wait under the status quo, he has a 4 - 5 year wait, and he won't have a 10 year wait, per my calculations he'll have a 7 year wait. You can use different assumptions and come up with a different figure, but it will be very hard for you to justify your 10 year figure. In 10 years, 40,000 x 10 = 400,000 visa numbers will have been given out. Since the queue per the June inventory is only 122K, and since it covers folks until July 2007 PDs, that means in the ~52 months since July 2007, 378K EB3 applications have been received, which =~ 7,250 EB3 applicants per month. If you look at the inventory, you'll see that at no point has it been consistently above 3,000 applicants, and we've been in a recessionary environment for most of the intervening period so I see that as being highly highly improbable.

In any case, the point of my previous post was that for EB3I there is a significant improvement, not just for the folks in the queue, but for folks who haven't yet applied for their PERM. And for the folks not yet in the queue, it benefits not just EB3I, also EB3C, EB3P, EB3M, and potentially in the future EB3 South Korea, Pakistan and Taiwan too, all of which countries may in the next several years also retrogress.

[username]

Q & Pedro Gonzales,

If we have left out EB3 visa number than where it will go? I mean to ask is if ICMP use there 2080 visa number and EB3 Italy only use 80 out 2080, than where 2000 visa number will go? Does it fall to EB3 row?

[Pedro Gonzales]

Q & Pedro Gonzales,

If we have left out EB3 visa number than where it will go? I mean to ask is if ICMP use there 2080 visa number and EB3 Italy only use 80 out 2080, than where 2000 visa number will go? Does it fall to EB3 row?

That is exactly what ROW is. All folks from countries that don't use 2800 visa numbers. But totally, they require more than their supply of 38,800 (40,000 - 2,800 x 4 (I,C,M,P)), which is why ROW is also retrogressed. A few countries in that group use close to their 2,800 limit (SK, Taiwan and Pakistan are the 3 I read about), so if their numbers increase they'll exceed the limit too and also retrogress.

[Pedro Gonzales]

That is exactly what ROW is. All folks from countries that don't use 2800 visa numbers. But totally, they require more than their supply of 38,800 (40,000 - 2,800 x 4 (I,C,M,P)), which is why ROW is also retrogressed. A few countries in that group use close to their 2,800 limit (SK, Taiwan and Pakistan are the 3 I read about), so if their numbers increase they'll exceed the limit too and also retrogress.

Ironically, if they cleared all EB3 backlogs, and then immediately after that, all countries were retrogressed, we'd see a FIFO allocation of PDs going forward.