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

[Pedro Gonzales]

I can take some initiative in drafting this letter. Do we have any numbers before we undertake this endeavor? For example, out of the X physician visas given out, how many of them were from India/China?

Also, I am interested in finding out how the distribution of profession is specifically in EB2. I have always been EB2-centric in my argument, because EB3-I already has a very strong argument (the 70 year wait) in their favor. If you take the entire PERM data, it is not surprising to find out that 76% of India represent IT, but how many of the ones are IT only in EB2 (we can do some creative data mining, such as setting a cut-off above 70-75K in the PERM data and using that subset for EB2 - it won't be perfect, but it would be something).

Also, the simplistic SOC-code argument lacks merit, as IT is not just one profession but comprises of system engineering, application engineering, network engineering, software development and so on. So it is extremely unfair to say that all of us are crowding out just 1 profession, when in reality, there are at least 10s (if not 100s) of different professions under the umbrella of the "SOC-15 IT". can we compile a list of professions under SOC-15 and drive the point of *variety within IT*?

Also, how much share IT itself is taking in the US economy in terms of the GDP and exports? If IT is the dominant industry field, it is not surprising at all that 76% of immigrants are professing IT. Let's make the point that IT is the driving force of American competitiveness, and actually results in a net trade surplus. America is in trade deficit because it imports most of the manufactured stuff and oil, whereas it is in surplus as it exports services, software, entertainment etc. So all of us are helping the US trade balance.

Let's get together with it friends. Please provide valuable information, data, any other arguments that we can come up with, and I can start drafting a letter that we can all work on.

I am planning on meeting the Senators personally in the first week of December, and I will give them a hand written letter. They are more likely to read it than the junk they receive in emails/faxes.

It goes back to that PERM data from the link I'd attached to my last email. If we can prove Jonty's point about Indian/Chinese doctors being a disproportional share of the EB2-NIW physicians, the argument falls apart. It doesn't have to be > 76%. If it is > 50% we're set. Even if it is only as high as 30%, I think we can make a credible argument. I don't have MS Access, so I can't open the file. Surely someone on this forum does (this thread has had almost 15,000 views for crying out loud). Now's the time for you guys to get involved. We're not asking you to do it for us, do it for yourselves.

I get your point, however. We disprove the physician theory. He's going to say the IT influx hits marine biologist supply. Then architects. Then colonoscopy technicians. We'll have to explain the 'IT surplus' eventually. However, for now, I think we attack the 'physician dilemma' head on. Should be a quicker fix.

[gcq]

IMO there is no need to respond to Jeff's antics. He has no logic in his argument. If he presents his points about physicians to anyone, it will work against his position.

What we should do is engage our Indian organizations and ask them to support this bill as it benefits family based applicants. If have this kind of support from GC holders and citizens, our bills will sail smoothly.

No need to analyze distribution of professions in each category. It does not make sense from a lawmakers perspective. Arguments for/against doesn't make any difference from lawmakers perspective.

About grassley:
he is not going to make a difference in the bill. Grassley is the senate version of Steve King. Look how steve king's amendment were thrown out on Judiciary committee. Most probably this bill will come up in judiciary committee only if it gets strong support from both democrats and republicans. In that case grassley cannot do anything. As far as I see, charles schumer has already bought into this. Senator Cornyn ( republican ) is also a strong supporter of this. There will be more senators from either side of the aisle supporting this.

About Jeff's argument "it is not helping illegals":
It is a very narrow bill. Everybody knows that. CHC lawmaker Luis Gutierrez is already a co-sponsor. Latino organizations are already supporting Rubio's bill as it has the provisions of HR 3012 in it. We could make our positions stronger by asking Latino groups to support this bill because of the family component side of it. Latinos will be benefited in a big way by 7 to 15% increase in FB quota.

[gcq]

Jeffs yahoo group post:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/EB_ROW/message/812

His strategy requesting lawmaker to attach DREAM act to this bill in order to kill the bill.

[rinku1112]

I think Sportsfans' plan to hand deliver letters to Senators/Congressmen in DC is not a bad idea. The main ROWer plan which is crytal clear to everyone is to scuttle HR3012/S1857 by expanding its scope. Some poison-pills that ROWers are cooking to expand the scope to kill these bills:

1) IT from India will swamp everyone else: This is a fallacious argument. There was/is shortage of IT skills in US and since India graduates a lot of Engineering/IT professionals who can communicate in English, there was a perfect match over a period of time to bridge this demand from India. If you look at the number of Nurses that come into US, you will see a lot of them are from Phillipines. There is an acute shortage of Nurses in US at the moment and there are a large number of professionally trained Nurses from Phillipines that are bridging this gap currently. I am quite positive if someone can look at the number of Nurses that are coming out of Phillipines to US the % will be quite high as well.

Our counter argument should be - Making long term laws by focusing on short term trends is inherently flawed.

2) DREAM act provisions attached to HR3012/S1857: I agree with poster 'gcq' that this argument will not fly too much, especially since DREAM bill already had its chance in Congress on its own. The scope of these bills is intentionally narrow so that they can pass. There is not only limited relief for severely backlogged EB professionals but also for backlogged FB families which will benefit Hispanic families.

Our counter argument - Piling on DREAM provisions that were very divisive when it had a chance in Congress will kill the limited relief that these bills will provide to EB and FB backlog victims; affecting Hispanic families that would have some much needed relief with raise in country cap in FB if these bills are not allowed to pass with their current narrow scope.

[leo07]

YUP, that's a sure way of killing a bill!

Jeffs yahoo group post:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/EB_ROW/message/812

His strategy requesting lawmaker to attach DREAM act to this bill in order to kill the bill.

[leo07]

Very good argument. The bill as it stands, with whatever minimal inclusions has the best chance of passing. If anyone is trying to expand the scope, they surely are trying to scuttle the efforts. I think proponents are firm on not expanding the scope at this point.

I think Sportsfans' plan to hand deliver letters to Senators/Congressmen in DC is not a bad idea. The main ROWer plan which is crytal clear to everyone is to scuttle HR3012/S1857 by expanding its scope. Some poison-pills that ROWers are cooking to expand the scope to kill these bills:

1) IT from India will swamp everyone else: This is a fallacious argument. There was/is shortage of IT skills in US and since India graduates a lot of Engineering/IT professionals who can communicate in English, there was a perfect match over a period of time to bridge this demand from India. If you look at the number of Nurses that come into US, you will see a lot of them are from Phillipines. There is an acute shortage of Nurses in US at the moment and there are a large number of professionally trained Nurses from Phillipines that are bridging this gap currently. I am quite positive if someone can look at the number of Nurses that are coming out of Phillipines to US the % will be quite high as well.

Our counter argument should be - Making long term laws by focusing on short term trends is inherently flawed.

2) DREAM act provisions attached to HR3012/S1857: I agree with poster 'gcq' that this argument will not fly too much, especially since DREAM bill already had its chance in Congress on its own. The scope of these bills is intentionally narrow so that they can pass. There is not only limited relief for severely backlogged EB professionals but also for backlogged FB families which will benefit Hispanic families.

Our counter argument - Piling on DREAM provisions that were very divisive when it had a chance in Congress will kill the limited relief that these bills will provide to EB and FB backlog victims; affecting Hispanic families that would have some much needed relief with raise in country cap in FB if these bills are not allowed to pass with their current narrow scope.

[leo07]

I think trying to answer or frame a response to everyone's argument will not be very helpful. It could make us look bad. IMHO, we must point out what's "unjust" and "unfair" without referring to others talking-points.

Someone should draft a letter to the politicians with these numbers. Because the opposing side has started bombarding them with Jeff's argument.

[rinku1112]

Very good argument. The bill as it stands, with whatever minimal inclusions has the best chance of passing. If anyone is trying to expand the scope, they surely are trying to scuttle the efforts. I think proponents are firm on not expanding the scope at this point.

Thanks Leo. Yes, the primary focus for us should be to defeat any attempts by anyone to rewrite or modify the existing bill(s). That said, I dont know much about advocacy or the dynamics inside US Congress to pretend I have a solution from that happening

My only motivation in supporting this initiative is to strip all undeserved benefits that these trash ROWers enjoy now with the current country cap status-quo!

[Pedro Gonzales]

I think trying to answer or frame a response to everyone's argument will not be very helpful. It could make us look bad. IMHO, we must point out what's "unjust" and "unfair" without referring to others talking-points.

I think it is important to have counterpoints to every argument against the bill, although we may not need to include everything in every letter we send out.

There is no reason for HR3012 to not pass. This should be easy. We have both fairness and numbers on our side. I think we should use both effectively. Below is what I've been thinking about for a while but haven't had the time as I've got busy both at work and at home.

My suggestion is that we have a website that
a) details the arguments for HR3012/S1857
b) debunks every argument against HR3012 with facts and rational arguments.
c) a summary of the bill along with links to it and
d) action items to help get HR3012 passed.

I think that the right people to actually put 'a' and 'b' in words are sportsfan33, damnrandom and nathang (all from trackitt, I think sportsfan33 is the only one here) if they would volunteer to help. They write very cogently (although nathang does get pretty verbose at times I think the other two can temper the length of his responses). I think that the rest of us can all contribute to the arguments above and provide data to help them write out the responses.

The website would need an easy to remember url, and shouldn't have anything else other than 'a' through 'd' above for simplicity.

Ultimately, such a website could serve as a go-to place for a grassroots recruitment effort too. There will come a time (and probably soon) when we need to man phones to call senators/congressmen and I think we should reach out to the folks that would benefit the most from HR3012 passing: grad students and H4 spouses. They have time on their hands and the motivation to make multiple rounds of calls. I think the way to reach out to them is to post one page posters on desi grocery stores and movie theatres across the country. The poster would have only two things on them 1) a cartoon depicting the absurdity of the country caps (we need a cartoonist, btw) and 2) the url of the website above (which is why it needs to be simple and easy to remember). That would result in inbound traffic to the website that will outline the rest. I'm not trying to sideline ** here. The action items would be theirs. We leave the advocacy to them. We just focus on the marketing aspect.

To get this off the ground, we'd need
a) someone who can relatively quickly get a website together that can take lots of traffic
b) cartoonist to help come up with an attention grabbing description of the absurdity of country caps (I have an idea).
c) sportsfan33, damnrandom and nathang to type out the arguments for and debunking of arguments against HR3012 (much of the material is already available either on trackitt or here)
d) the rest of us to supply data to them to help out with c,
e) us all to print out the posters and post them in the desi grocery stores and movie theatres
f) collect a list of indian grad student association emails.

I wanted to do this with a smaller group in a more secretive manner, but given time constraints, I think its best to crowdsource the effort.

What do you all think?

[gcq]

One issue with responding to Jeff's argument is.

As of now Jeff don't have many people working on his crazy action items. If we try to respond to his arguments as action items, we will be actually marketing his idea though in a negative way. Remember we have the numbers.

Smartest thing to do is to depict how this country cap is a non-sense with our own points rather than countering Jeff's points. Spreading the message to our GC and citizenship friends and family is the best way to increase support.

[jackbrown_890]

I totally agree with gcq. If we start writing to other senators/H.R.s, even though we will be defending our point against what that guy has been saying, we will actually be marketing his idea as gcq said because some sanators/hrs who are opposing the idea of 3012 may use jeff's points in their arguments.
As others mentioned, i see a their point in writing to congress and tell them the facts but at the same time we do not want to spread his words.
I see on majority of bills related websites: 3012 has over 80% public support and less thn 20% opposing this bill. It is good to have someone opposing this too but it is not threat yet unless the opposition to this bill grows beyond 25%. So that guy may be encouraging lot of people to write but it seems like he is still far from damaging the idea of majority support to these bills. (i do believe in - if it ain't broke bro, don't fix it - he hasn't done considerable amount of damage YET, so right now we don't need to fix anything (yet) lets just sit tight and hope the bill goes for a vote soon in the House.
If more and more people here feels like the opposition to these bills is rising, thn i am in- we will respond to his argument.
Another reason, I also get excited about doing things right away but i would like to see people keep their excitement to themselves untill we really need it i.e. for the right time i.e. when bill is on the floor for vote. At that time lets attack congress with phone calls/emails/letters...
Lets see for day or two if lot of people here thinks we need to do something and respond to that guy's argument,,we will form a letter/petition to support our argument.
does that sound reasonable?

One issue with responding to Jeff's argument is.

As of now Jeff don't have many people working on his crazy action items. If we try to respond to his arguments as action items, we will be actually marketing his idea though in a negative way. Remember we have the numbers.

Smartest thing to do is to depict how this country cap is a non-sense with our own points rather than countering Jeff's points. Spreading the message to our GC and citizenship friends and family is the best way to increase support.

[immitime]

I totally agree with gcq. If we start writing to other senators/H.R.s, even though we will be defending our point against what that guy has been saying, we will actually be marketing his idea as gcq said because some sanators/hrs who are opposing the idea of 3012 may use jeff's points in their arguments.
As others mentioned, i see a their point in writing to congress and tell them the facts but at the same time we do not want to spread his words.
I see on majority of bills related websites: 3012 has over 80% public support and less thn 20% opposing this bill. It is good to have someone opposing this too but it is not threat yet unless the opposition to this bill grows beyond 25%. So that guy may be encouraging lot of people to write but it seems like he is still far from damaging the idea of majority support to these bills. (i do believe in - if it ain't broke bro, don't fix it - he hasn't done considerable amount of damage YET, so right now we don't need to fix anything (yet) lets just sit tight and hope the bill goes for a vote soon in the House.
If more and more people here feels like the opposition to these bills is rising, thn i am in- we will respond to his argument.
Another reason, I also get excited about doing things right away but i would like to see people keep their excitement to themselves untill we really need it i.e. for the right time i.e. when bill is on the floor for vote. At that time lets attack congress with phone calls/emails/letters...
Lets see for day or two if lot of people here thinks we need to do something and respond to that guy's argument,,we will form a letter/petition to support our argument.
does that sound reasonable?

There is strong business lobbying happening in the background as per financial times article, so this bill definitly is going to make it in an election year, but only thing we need to make sure is avoid a "Fillibuster" in the senate! any of the Senator can do that.to block the bill, We had previous histories And in the forum any one can write against or in favour of. ultimately Congress and Senators are taking decisions. To my knowledge we need to focus on Senators and Congressman, rather than replying to ignorable comments. And catch hold of US Citizens (of India and China Origin) I am working with some of the groups and they all agreed to see the senators during Thanksgiving recess when they are in their constituencies. In each state we need to focus this. and they all agreed because of the Family Based provision in this bills, and also what the EB immigrants from India and China is going through. most of them were not aware of this issue!

Hoping and Praying for the best.

[leo07]

I agree that there is a risk of us "selling" Jeff's points while responding. Response should be carefully, if at all, to convince the remaining by-standers without losing the ones in pocket

[Jonty Rhodes]

I agree with most of you above so I don't have to add anything new to the above discussion. The bottomline is that we need to show the hardships and the problems we face with current system showing that we only want the system to be fair, unbiased and non-discriminatory.

Having said this, there are strong and influential organization of Indian and Chinese Physicians which may be supportive of HR 3012. If someone who has good drafting skills can prepare a letter and send it these organizations requesting them to support this bill and asking them to throw their weight behind HR 3012, it would definitely take care of ideas of people like Jeff.

American Association of Physicians of Indian Origin(AAPI) is a very strong and influential organization with more than 40,000 members. They include physicians of Indian Origin born in US as well as physicians of Indian origin who have emigrated from India and other countries to US. If this organization supports the bill, it would be a huge positive step for us. For physicians like me, AAPI supporting HR 3012 is comparable to an Indian IT Professional getting the support for HR 3012 from Microsoft, Apple or Google.

Though beware that there are two different organizations with similar names. Here is the link for both. It would not hurt to ask for support from both the organizations.

http://aapiusa.org/

http://www.aapio.org/index.html

Here is a wikipedia link about this organization.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/America..._Indian_Origin

Similarly, there are two associations for Chinese physicians. The Association of Chinese American Physicians (ACAP) and Chinese American Medical Society.

http://acaponline.org/

http://www.camsociety.org/presidentmessage_2010.html

And there are various ethnic medical societies.

http://www.ama-assn.org/ama/pub/abou...ociations.page

[kuku82]

I agree that we should be very judicious about including any of Jeff's non-sense in our communication with the congressmen. However, at the very least, I feel we should include 1-2 max of the common points that ROWers used against the bill (indo - chn dominance, body shops stealing away GCs, etc.) along with their respective counterpoints. A ratio of 80/20 (90/10??) about points supporting the bill and reasons ROWers give for being against the bill respectiv. should be a healthy balance.

One more thing btw. I haven't seen any Chinese folks around in these forums promoting this bill. Are there any other forums that are primarily used by the Chinese? Maybe we can talk to our Chinese coworkers (if not already done so) to garner their support as well......

[leo07]

I appreciate what you are doing. my only suggestion would be to not give undue importance to naysayers points. But highlight more on our plight and why it's right.

Thanks, there is a lot of useful discussion and direction on this forum.

I will phrase a letter later today and send it to a few key members here. I had the same direction - I don't want to brood over Jeff's points too much and make my rebuttal sound like a rebuttal, but at the same time, it should show the side of our argument comprehensively. If any Senator had any doubt about this, those doubts should get resolved. That should be our proactive goal.

I don't want us to be anti-illegal immigration (and neither pro-illegal immigration for that matter). However we should take the stand that EB immigrants can use a piecemeal approach that helps us right now without considering any fancy grand reform scheme, and we will always be in support of any *fair* legislation that is created for immigration as a whole. Let's also not use the words legal/illegal here...employment based immigrants is a proper usage because we are not fighting for other legal immigrants either.

[essenel]

Wow...I'm really glad to see that this thread is so active. I have been actively supporting H.R. 3012. I've sent several emails, made several calls to representatives and also visited a senator's office. Will continue to do what I can. Per country limits are out-dated and completely unfair. I've noticed that several people on this thread have been doing a lot to keep advocacy efforts alive and trying to get other people involved. Kudos to you guys. I am following it like a hawk and chipping in however I can....

[manubhai]

I agree with most of what you are saying in concern to "dont respond to Jeff because that just elevates his points". Very true. That said I think there were some incredible points laid out by Pedro that we've just ignored in the messages after.

My humble disagreement is with the statement: "The bottomline is that we need to show the hardships and the problems we face with current system". I dont think that THAT is what the underlying, singular, driving message should be from "us".

Our troubles and sacrifices cannot be sold as the the primary reason for why United States needs to act on a policy issue. The only reason why United States will and should change a policy is because it serves the interest of United States.

And THAT is what we should be selling as the primary reason why HR 3012 should be supported.

How does 3012 help United States? Its economy? We are all very clear about that. We KNOW how it makes a difference in the long run. That's what we need to sell.

And... who's our audience? If you are writing on a newspaper's message board in response to an article or a comment, your audience is different than if you go to meet with your representative or senator. Your audience is different if you are writing to the Indian/Chinese Student Association of a university. And yet again, your audience is different if you are responding to a message from an ignorant jackass on Trackitt.

For a news site/message boards where the audience is "general public" who has no understanding of and desire to understand the mess of immigration... dont bore them with how you have to wait and you cant buy a house and that your wife cant work (that's my life btw!!!). SERIOUSLY - DONT DO THAT. You have 10 words and 5 seconds in your comments to get their attention or lose it. Dont waste it by telling them that this bill is good because it makes YOUR messed up life much easier. Instead tell them how this is a "small step forward' for this great country in a bipartisan environment where nothing is moving forward.

Some of the points you could use:

1. This bill is about potential LEGAL immigrants who are educated, experienced, English speaking, tax paying, professionals who have legally entered United States after having proven their worth.
2. This bill is a practical bill because it does not aim to solve all the immigration problems in one swoop. It is a small step in the right direction.
3. This bill does NOT increase the number of legal immigrants allowed in the United States.
4. More than ever before, United States' economy needs the best it can attract. This bill aims to make USA a more productive and competitive nation by allowing these potential immigrants a better, fairer path to become immigrants.
5. This bill eliminates an archaic provision of the currently broken immigration law that discriminates the amount of time a legal immigrant needs to wait based on his country of birth.
6. This bill has garnered solid support from both republicans and democrats in both the house and the senate. It is a product of sane minds on both sides of the aisle working together to produce small, beneficial results for the US economy.
7. This bill will have no impact on the diversity of the immigrant pool because it only impacts a small percentage of the total immigrant pool.

Key points that matter to Mr. John Doe Public:
1. No increase in visas.
2. Helps build the US economy for decades to come.
3. About LEGAL, not ILLEGAL immigration. About high skilled professionals, not people who jump the fence.
4. Both democrats and republicans are supporting this. Finally... some sign of sanity.
5. No change in immigration diversity.

Finally... I'd say again... Pedro has mentioned two things that somehow we've continued to ignore. He said this about a month back too - involve the "grad students and H4 spouses" and "spread the word". I'm not sure how many here have come to US straight on H1 and how many have been grad students. I can assure you, in the miserable, poverty stricken days of my masters, if someone would have told me that you have the choice of green card between 2 years and 6 years, I'd have gone to the moon for that guy. So yes, please find the email addresses of Indian Student Associations and their administrators (easily found on the university website or Google it). Mail them, spread the word. I ask people to vote on popvox, etc, not because voting on those sites helps the cause. But it brings a sense of ownership to the person who took the time to create a login/password and press the support button. And when they see the number of votes go from 2 to 20 to 200, it makes people feel they are part of a community and that they too can do a "little" to make a difference. So yes... please... spread the word. Ask people to mail and get the telephone number of the congressmen (list is on this thread and on **).

Finally, my opinion may differ from some of you, but I am extremely glad that we have folks here who are all trying to do the best they can to get this bill to pass. Good luck!!

[gcq]

manubhai,
Great post. One point I would add. Don''t put up the argument LEGAL vs ILLEGAL. That will work against us. Most of the democrats and surprisingly large number of republicans are in support of undocumented/illegals. So keep that comparison out of the conversation.

Don't know whether anyone noticed the after effects Albama's strict immigration law. Undocumented are needed for this economy.
Watch this one http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/201...ld-you-so.html

[manubhai]

manubhai,
Great post. One point I would add. Don''t put up the argument LEGAL vs ILLEGAL. That will work against us. Most of the democrats and surprisingly large number of republicans are in support of undocumented/illegals. So keep that comparison out of the conversation.

Don't know whether anyone noticed the after effects Albama's strict immigration law. Undocumented are needed for this economy.
Watch this one http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/201...ld-you-so.html

gcq,
I agree that "elected officials" may be in support of illegals. However, IMHO, our reader on a newspaper site, or in conversation, needs to be "informed/taught/coached" differently. I've seen people talk about "this bill will bring in more of those illegal mexicans who are committing crime in my neighborhood" in a conversation about 3012. You read that and you go "HUH?".
People need to be told that this bill doesn't bring in the bad boys... its only about the good boys.
As for "elected officials" - If they have any sort of impact on this bill, I assume they'd have read the two page bill and understood it enough to know that this bill does no harm and no good to illegals. So even if they do support illegals, there is no reason for them to not support this bill even if we do end up bringing up the subject.

[kuku82]

Side topic: CBO estimate for HR. 3012 is out

http://cbo.gov/ftpdocs/125xx/doc12561/hr3012.pdf

[whiskeylover]

Jeffs yahoo group post:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/EB_ROW/message/812

His strategy requesting lawmaker to attach DREAM act to this bill in order to kill the bill.

That's the marc guy on yahoo forums. Extremely annoying and filled with an anti-India agenda. He also claims to be a USC and seems to know some anti-immigration Americans. He's the only guy you should watch out for.

[whiskeylover]

I totally agree with gcq. If we start writing to other senators/H.R.s, even though we will be defending our point against what that guy has been saying, we will actually be marketing his idea as gcq said because some sanators/hrs who are opposing the idea of 3012 may use jeff's points in their arguments.

I agree, but we should have the facts ready just in case someone brings up this point. Then you should have those number handy to debunk Jeff's myth.

[whiskeylover]

My suggestion is that we have a website that
a) details the arguments for HR3012/S1857
b) debunks every argument against HR3012 with facts and rational arguments.
c) a summary of the bill along with links to it and
d) action items to help get HR3012 passed.

I can put together a quick website and assign a few of us here permissions to add content to it. I can eat the cost of domain registration and website hosting. I have plenty of experience with this and that's the least I can do for my desi brethren. Lemme know.

[jackbrown_890]

I am not sure if anyone mentioned it here yesterday that AGREE Act is also going to be introduced in the House by Bill keating and Richard Hanna. Another bi-partisan team.
It will be companion bill of Coon-Rubio AGREE.