Bills, Rules & Politics

[gs1968]

That was posted by a paki. Republicans want to remove the DV Visa category and implement merit based immigration. Why would they want to stick to diversity in Employment based immigration?

The Republican rhetoric about merit based immigration is a ploy to distract from their goal to limit overall LEGAL immigration. The DV visa has become dominated by African and Asian countries and there is very little representation from the countries that the GOP would like immigration to come from. I should also point out that for all the talk of changing to a merit based system there has been very little meaningful legislation proposed by them. Certain FB categories/DV visa would be eliminated and parents of US citizens would also be excluded so that the overall legal inflow would drop thereby givin EB visas a higher percentage. I have not seen any proposal that would increase EB numbers or reallocate the eliminated categories to EB immigration. If anything the administration has been very punitive to EB immigration under the Buy American Hire American agenda. This includes removal of EAD for H-4,interviews for EB visas,H-1B tightening for initial employment and transfers etc.

Frank Cissna is an ex-Grassley staffer with intimate knowledge of EB immigration. The interview mentioned above at the National Press Club is an interesting read and his insights matter and have the power to influence legislative action. I have linked a few articles below

https://www.propublica.org/article/t...written-senate

https://qz.com/india/1357772/indian-...n-cards-in-us/

If in spite of fervent efforts this bill does not go through it will come down to the usual parties that have stifled efforts in the past. Organizations like CIS,numbersUSA and FAIR have time on their hands to mount a full court press since there is unlikely to be neaningful action on this if any till mid-November after the elections

On a different note, it is a momentous week in the Senate for appropriations. The senate is trying to combine both the Defense and Labor/health & Human Services appropriations into one package before the end of the week and likely go home for the Labor day break. If they pull it off they would have funded 9 out of 12 bills most likely leaving Homeland security/State and Commerce/Justice for after the elections. The house has passed 7/12 but has been in recess this month. I only bring this up because as more of these packages are passed the chances for a giant omnibus bill recede. Of course the house and senate still have to conference and pass it beofre the end of September but it is likely that the staffers are working hard behind the scenes. The omnibus would have been an excellent opportunity to slip in the 392 amendment. It was tried in the previous package in March but did not happen

[gs1968]

I'd love to see this succeed, but I think it is a long shot, particularly given the current climate.

I had a look at this many years ago and history suggests that Congress intended the current situation where dependents are counted against the numerical limits.

This is from memory, but the essential facts are correct.

Back in 1990, the House and Senate came up with separate Bills with differing content, which then had to go through the Reconciliation process.

One Bill (the House one, I think), proposed an EB allocation of c.70k which explicitly did not count dependents.
The other Bill, proposed an EB allocation of 140k which explicitly counted dependents.

After reconciliation, the final Bill had an allocation of 140k for EB, without any explicit language either way.

It's not really credible that Congress decided to double the number of visas available to EB during the reconciliation talks, when each of their individual proposals resulted in broadly the same number.

The final figure strongly suggests that the intent was to include dependents, but the explicit language was missed in the redrafting of the hybrid reconciliation Bill.

I wish it were otherwise. It would solve virtually all the current problems of visa numbers.

Addendum

A pro piece Why We Can’t Wait: How President Obama Can Erase Immigrant Visa Backlogs with the Stroke of A Pen by Gary Endelman and Cyrus Mehta also mentions this situation (see section with footnote [8]).

The antis are certainly aware of it. I really don't like linking to an organization like this, but it explains the argument and has the actual figures in greater detail.
Could Obama Increase Immigration By Not Counting Family Against Visa Caps?

The articles are a bit of a read, but they do give the background to the issue.


It's certainly the counter argument that this lawsuit will come up against.

Spec
I somehow missed this post of yours till today and felt I should add to it. I remember the discussion during President Obama's highly anticipated EO a few years ago and your REDACT/REDACT post. i remember being amazed at the sheer arbitrary,totally random and absurd nature of the discussions to come up with the numbers that have stuck with us for almost 30 years. What was the number 140000 based on and what is the rationale behind the 7%. Even if those numbers were pulled out of thin air a annual adjustment of numbers based on either total population or workforce participation would have made more sense. In 1990 the US population was 248 million and today it is 330 million (an increase of 82 million or equivalent of today's population of unified Germany). Even since the first iteration of HR 392 ( HR 3012) in September 2011 the population has increased by 21 million (almost an Australia) The numbers we are fighting over (140000) represents 0.0004 % of the current US population. In a capitalist country with a nimble mindset it is astonishing to see the complete lack of flexibility or foresight in this regard

[EB3Iwaiting]

Spec
The numbers we are fighting over (140000) represents 0.0004 % of the current US population. In a capitalist country with a nimble mindset it is astonishing to see the complete lack of flexibility or foresight in this regard

Truly amazing, isn't it? A country that loves free trade is so restrictive when it comes to labor. I think most agree that country of birth has no place in EB quota. It was created decades ago and has no place in today's world. Most would probably even agree that EB quota is too low (only 14% counting dependents) out of all the GCs given out. If dependents are removed, only around 6.75% of skilled people are given GCs.

The problem of course, lies with the few (the Grassleys and of course CIS, FAIR and NumbersUSA). They just do not like brown people taking their high paying jobs and a first generation of immigrants being so successful. Then there is the fear that whites will become a minority. All these led to the arbitrary per country cap and the resistance to remove it.

There is also a bigger reason - like I mentioned before...considering a capitalist country, their EB GCs are actually too low. But no one complains as only one or 2 countries suffer in the backlog and most get it in 2 years. There is no work disruption thanks to AC21 and they get to keep the H1Bs on unending renewals as indentures servants pumping into their Social Security and Medicare.

The real fear to removing country caps and the real reason to oppose it is that if people from all countries have to end up waiting 5 to 6 years (simply because the EB quota is low), there will be a combined push by the entire EB community to INCREASE the quota and these anti immigrant groups fear that Congress will eventually cave. Here is a piece from the CIS article as to why they oppose HR392:

"While this would not directly increase the number of legal immigrants overall, it would speed up the visa issuances for those from China, India, and to a much smaller degree, aliens from Vietnam and three Central American nations (in the EB-5 and EB- 4) categories, and slow them for everyone else.

The slowing of visa issuances to all nations then might lead to a successful effort to remove (or inflate) the current numerical ceilings, thus increasing overall immigration."

Grassley and the anti immigrant groups know this...and hence, they are trying to gut it at its roots. They know that removing the per country cap will eventually lead to an increase in EB GCs.

[HarepathekaIntezar]

Senate has already ignored the Companion Bill. It had only 10 sponsors. This Bill may pass the House, but looks like an up hill climb in the reconciliation. At the least it will expose some more anti-indians like Cissna and the CIS.

[HarepathekaIntezar]

Got rfe today for I-693 and G-325 A

PD March 2010

Maybe the USCIS is thinking H.R 392 will pass..

[gten20]

https://twitter.com/USCIS/status/1053399682658041856
Dp5tTnyWkAcIqXC.jpg

[rocketfast]

https://twitter.com/USCIS/status/1053399682658041856
Dp5tTnyWkAcIqXC.jpg

I do hope that they can get rid of lottery for H1B and do some kind of meaningful distribution. I am tired of hearing that Indians are "cheap" workers. But I doubt that their regulation will be ready by April 1.

[smile245]

I wonder how Trump’s policy will affect political asylum in the United States due to tensions at the border between the United States and Mexico. Because not only drugs are imported from Mexico to the United States, but illegal arms trafficking from the United States to Mexico occurs, which may affect the increase in refugees in the country.

[iatiam]

Looks like Kevin Yoder lost his seat effectively putting an end to the slim chances that HR392 had in this congress. Even if it is re-introduced the chances of passing a grid-locked congress is very small.

Iatiam

[Immigo]

Not sure if this was mentioned on any other thread - hence, adding it here. There was a case filed by EB-5 investors for not counting dependents in the 10k visas allocated for EB-5 investors. USCIS won the case and therefore, there is no change in the way dependents get counted. https://cis.org/North/USCIS-Wins-Big-EB5-Court-Case

[HarepathekaIntezar]

Check this out:

https://www.politico.com/story/2019/...n-deal-1116049

[altek001]

Check this out:

https://www.politico.com/story/2019/...n-deal-1116049

As always, DACA and TPS are key to deals in shutdown and legal immigrants are not a priority.

[HarepathekaIntezar]

As always, DACA and TPS are key to deals in shutdown and legal immigrants are not a priority.

Agreed. But the liar-in-chief made a statement regarding EB Immigration. Maybe it was just another lie or maybe not. I am trying to get a copy of the actual proposal. It would be interesting to read.

[sanjeevtrivedi]

The comment made earlier this week on H1B was nothing to do with per country quota. It was mostly for the US educated people whom they will make process similar and possibly easier for them to get GC . Having said that implementing that itself will take years.

Sorry to sound pessimistic, any immigration deal for shutdown will only focus on the illegal immigrant,they don't care about legal immigration

Unfortunately for people who are stuck in the queue will have to go through this pain for next several years. I don't think any thing significant will happen in next 2 years. Just go back and see, since how many years this per country quota has been raised, once even passed in the house, nothing happened and possibly nothing will happen.

Surprisingly, there is all talk of AI, Machine learning etc etc and DHS/USCIS/CO none of this folks can predict the actual demand and some reasonable dates for people in Queue. I am 100% convinced they all know and want to create uncertainty and anxiety.

[gcwait]

Agreed. But the liar-in-chief made a statement regarding EB Immigration. Maybe it was just another lie or maybe not. I am trying to get a copy of the actual proposal. It would be interesting to read.

From where, white house?

[HarepathekaIntezar]

The comment made earlier this week on H1B was nothing to do with per country quota. It was mostly for the US educated people whom they will make process similar and possibly easier for them to get GC.

Can you float your idea of how that will happen? Let me go with your thought and float my idea of how that may happen..abolish DV and divert that quota to US STEM Grads category (this will be a new category within the EB Quota) with no Per country quota?

[HarepathekaIntezar]

From where, white house?

That is funny

[HarepathekaIntezar]

The comment made earlier this week on H1B was nothing to do with per country quota. It was mostly for the US educated people whom they will make process similar and possibly easier for them to get GC . Having said that implementing that itself will take years.

Sorry to sound pessimistic, any immigration deal for shutdown will only focus on the illegal immigrant,they don't care about legal immigration

Unfortunately for people who are stuck in the queue will have to go through this pain for next several years. I don't think any thing significant will happen in next 2 years. Just go back and see, since how many years this per country quota has been raised, once even passed in the house, nothing happened and possibly nothing will happen.

Surprisingly, there is all talk of AI, Machine learning etc etc and DHS/USCIS/CO none of this folks can predict the actual demand and some reasonable dates for people in Queue. I am 100% convinced they all know and want to create uncertainty and anxiety.

That is only the opening gambit. Manchin may propose an amendment with the 2013 CIR. Clueless IV folks had no idea that this was coming. Now they will suddenly wake up and claim that they knew everything and have been "lobbying behind the scenes" for EB Immigration reform!!

https://www.politico.com/story/2019/...nkford-1116062

[excalibur123]

That is only the opening gambit. Manchin may propose an amendment with the 2013 CIR. Clueless IV folks had no idea that this was coming. Now they will suddenly wake up and claim that they knew everything and have been "lobbying behind the scenes" for EB Immigration reform!!

https://www.politico.com/story/2019/...nkford-1116062

However may be IV folks are bashed around everywhere, I think they are sincere in their efforts. Yes they were arrogant or naive at times. Also it is possible some of them had their own ambitions or sense of entitlement, and they considered that as perhaps the cost of providing their time and help.

But if you look closely they have tried to crack this nut in their own way and to the best of their understanding of how DC works. And they are sincere in that. And I for one believe them when they raised hue and cry around plans of admin to alter provisions of AC21 early last year.

Though I think now their support is waning a bit as most of their initial supporters were EB3s, and most of them have got their GCs as EB3 dates have leaped.

[qesehmk]

It is true IV is to my knowledge the only organized group advocating for EB and EB-India in particular. So please do support them for your own sake.

I do think they have some serious drawbacks but i will reserve my criticism for private discussions if they reach out to me.

All of us on this blog have brought much needed calculations to immigration discussions and highlighted how per country quota is the real problem. But then if anybody has to address the question organization is critical. IV is the ONLY organized group today working in your interest. They are not perfect but then nothing is.

However may be IV folks are bashed around everywhere, I think they are sincere in their efforts. Yes they were arrogant or naive at times. Also it is possible some of them had their own ambitions or sense of entitlement, and they considered that as perhaps the cost of providing their time and help.

But if you look closely they have tried to crack this nut in their own way and to the best of their understanding of how DC works. And they are sincere in that. And I for one believe them when they raised hue and cry around plans of admin to alter provisions of AC21 early last year.

Though I think now their support is waning a bit as most of their initial supporters were EB3s, and most of them have got their GCs as EB3 dates have leaped.

[HarepathekaIntezar]

I do think they have some serious drawbacks but i will reserve my criticism for private discussions if they reach out to me.

I don't think they will reach out to you or want to hear any criticism bro. @excalibur123 has nailed it when he said this:

they were arrogant or naive at times. Also it is possible some of them had their own ambitions or sense of entitlement

[Immigo]

I don't think they will reach out to you or want to hear any criticism bro. @excalibur123 has nailed it when he said this:

The problem is that focusing on removal of country limit sucks up all oxygen in the room - perhaps, those efforts are better spent elsewhere. Last 8 years have shown that there is sufficient resistance to HR392 like bill and it is unlikely to pass (at least stand alone!). My reading of the congressional research service report also is that the country cap removal is a long shot ( https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/R/R45447 ).

When 20k masters H1Bs were added in 2007, no additional GCs were provided. An additional 40K masters GCs (for the 20k masters H1B) per year, would have gone a long way in reducing the GC backlog. If we had these additional GCs even for the years where H1B cap was reached since 2007, we would have had an additional 300-400K GCs!

[qesehmk]

I know HPKI

But after so many years seeing the drama and plight of EB India - I have come to the conclusion that there literally is no one rooting for EB India except this blog and IV. And we are just a blog ... not really an organization. So better stand behind IV.

I don't think they will reach out to you or want to hear any criticism bro. @excalibur123 has nailed it when he said this:

[excalibur123]

The problem is that focusing on removal of country limit sucks up all oxygen in the room - perhaps, those efforts are better spent elsewhere. Last 8 years have shown that there is sufficient resistance to HR392 like bill and it is unlikely to pass (at least stand alone!). My reading of the congressional research service report also is that the country cap removal is a long shot ( https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/R/R45447 ).

When 20k masters H1Bs were added in 2007, no additional GCs were provided. An additional 40K masters GCs (for the 20k masters H1B) per year, would have gone a long way in reducing the GC backlog. If we had these additional GCs even for the years where H1B cap was reached since 2007, we would have had an additional 300-400K GCs!

I agree removal of country caps is very very hard. It goes against the basic principle of diversity which is embedded in so many laws. You can argue many ways but still the other side would have some valid arguments too.

And even if somehow whole house and senate agreed upon it - the optics of one country receiving nearly all cards are so bad that negative press would kill it in a day. You have to just see how fast the media reacts these days.

Maybe they could have shot for a higher cap - say 25 or 30 percent. Or a time based max on how much one has to wait after filing i140.

[qesehmk]

The problem is that focusing on removal of country limit sucks up all oxygen in the room .

I completely disagree. You are underestimating fairness of American people. Indian community hasn't made a strong case for FIFO.

When 20k masters H1Bs were added in 2007, no additional GCs were provided. An additional 40K masters GCs (for the 20k masters H1B) per year, would have gone a long way in reducing the GC backlog. If we had these additional GCs even for the years where H1B cap was reached since 2007, we would have had an additional 300-400K GCs!

True. But when Trump and co is reducing existing GC numbers (e.g. diversity and now EB5) the chance of lifting overall limit are at least as dim as removal of per country quota.

It goes against the basic principle of diversity which is embedded in so many laws.

Again - I couldn't disagree more. Diversity is desirable but not mandatory. Equality on the other hand is a matter of justice and is more than desirable. It is a foundational need of American constitution.