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

[chengisk]

Ever since Sen.Grassley lifted his hold, Ron is gone bonkers.

[rupen86]

E-3 is a major obstacle to HR 3012. Schumer came up with adding the E-3 visas to 3012 to calm his Irish consitutents, worried about the bill having nothing for the Irish. There will be no 3012 without E-3. The deal reported by ** is for an up-or-down vote on the E-3. That will not happen. Harry Reid is not about to shut down the Senate for such a small bill. (Specially during the lame duck with so many pending legislation - postal bill, transportation bill, VAWA reauthorization, farm bill, taxmaggeddon, just to name a few).

Separating Irish provision and 3012 are very well publicized. Grassley while releasing the hold had mentioned this in the press release. The deal might be to put E-3 for up-down vote without filibuster but whether it will pass house is not clear.

[justvisiting]

Attorney Ron the fear mongerer this is from his website. How he wrote about H.R.3012 on Sept 20th 2012 and how he wrote on Sept 21st 2012. Just compare the exactly opposite views. so never believe this speculative guys.

Current Updates on H.R.3012 thread Source :-http://www.immigration-information.com/forums/showthread.php?t=17688&page=47&p=78858&highlight=# post78858
Sept 20th 2012
I may be mistaken, but I'm pretty sure that I heard correctly this morning that Congress is about to recess and that they are giving up on the farm bill and the transportation bill until after the election. If so, then that's all folks. If they shut down now, they will have at least five major legislative items to deal with in the lame duck session and there won't be time for anything else.

Sept 21st 2012.
The House is gone until after the election. If HR3012 is unacceptable to Grassley without his amendment, then IF it were to pass the Senate somehow, the House won't be there to vote on the amended bill. We can say with absolute certainty that HR3012 cannot be acted upon until mid-November if it is acted upon by the Congress at all.

I'm sorry but I fail to see the contradiction between those two posts. The first one is talking about how busy the lame duck will be. The second simply pointed out that the House had left and if the Senate were to pass an amended bill, there is no House to receive it until November.

[gs1968]

To rupen86

The last paragraph of his press release states thus-

"I appreciate the willingness of other members to work with me to include measures that will help us combat visa fraud, and ultimately protect more American workers. I look forward to working with others as H.R. 3012 progresses in the Senate.

Is this supposed to mean that it is no quick unanimous consent but open the Bill to more amendments from other Senators?

[rupen86]

To rupen86

The last paragraph of his press release states thus-

"I appreciate the willingness of other members to work with me to include measures that will help us combat visa fraud, and ultimately protect more American workers. I look forward to working with others as H.R. 3012 progresses in the Senate.

Is this supposed to mean that it is no quick unanimous consent but open the Bill to more amendments from other Senators?

From that sentence, we can assume that. That being the case then this bill would be a punching bag where everyone can punch and put their amendments (which they otherwise could not have passed on their own merit).

[immitime]

I'm sorry but I fail to see the contradiction between those two posts. The first one is talking about how busy the lame duck will be. The second simply pointed out that the House had left and if the Senate were to pass an amended bill, there is no House to receive it until November.

Read the below sentence that means there is no time for H.R.3012 or any other bills in lame duck session. but see the 21st postings.. Hope you got it.

If they shut down now, they will have at least five major legislative items to deal with in the lame duck session and there won't be time for anything else.

[justvisiting]

Read the below sentence that means there is no time for H.R.3012 or any other bills in lame duck session. but see the 21st postings.. Hope you got it.

If they shut down now, they will have at least five major legislative items to deal with in the lame duck session and there won't be time for anything else.

Parsing words one by one sometime makes you lose the overall meaning. I would summarize Mr. Gotcher as saying he feels it is highly unlikely (but not impossible) for HR 3012 to be taken up in the lame duck.

[rupen86]

From that sentence, we can assume that. That being the case then this bill would be a punching bag where everyone can punch and put their amendments (which they otherwise could not have passed on their own merit).

Thinking more about this, it might be in Grassley's interest to pass this bill during lame duck as he may not get another chance to pass his amendment another time. He might be negotiating with other senators to put their amendments and bring that during lame duck for a vote.

[justvisiting]

Schumer's STEM bill's text is now up: S. 3553. It is very similar to the Lofgren bill. It also extends per country caps to the new EB 6 category. There is a provision there to renew the H1-B stamp inside the US. I know this bill will not go anywhere. I do wonder why Schumer, who is the sponsor of S. 1983, adding the per-country caps?

[Ramsen]

I always suspect these senators copy the texts from previous failed bills. That should explain the inclusion country cap. If they purposfully included in the bill then that means they are interested to keep the country quota and that means HR 3012 or S 1983 is doomed.

Schumer's STEM bill's text is now up: S. 3553. It is very similar to the Lofgren bill. It also extends per country caps to the new EB 6 category. There is a provision there to renew the H1-B stamp inside the US. I know this bill will not go anywhere. I do wonder why Schumer, who is the sponsor of S. 1983, adding the per-country caps?

[rupen86]

I always suspect these senators copy the texts from previous failed bills. That should explain the inclusion country cap. If they purposfully included in the bill then that means they are interested to keep the country quota and that means HR 3012 or S 1983 is doomed.

I believe that could be because they do not want to include 3012 provisions in this. If 3012 passed, it would apply to all categories anyway.

[redsox2009]

Schumer's STEM bill's text is now up: S. 3553. It is very similar to the Lofgren bill. It also extends per country caps to the new EB 6 category. There is a provision there to renew the H1-B stamp inside the US. I know this bill will not go anywhere. I do wonder why Schumer, who is the sponsor of S. 1983, adding the per-country caps?

During Nov lameduck session S.3553 bill has more chance of passing than H.R.3012, this bill was introduced in House and Senate separately, both bills were introduced by Jud. Committee members. Bills went to jud.committee and once the committee meets, these will get cleared.

Bill S.3553 is more helpful than H.R.3012, S.3553 gives additional 55000 green cards for two years and this will reduce substantial backlogs both in EB2 and EB3, I know few people who did their masters were forced to apply under EB3 cat.

[Pedro Gonzales]

During Nov lameduck session S.3553 bill has more chance of passing than H.R.3012, this bill was introduced in House and Senate separately, both bills were introduced by Jud. Committee members. Bills went to jud.committee and once the committee meets, these will get cleared.

Bill S.3553 is more helpful than H.R.3012, S.3553 gives additional 55000 green cards for two years and this will reduce substantial backlogs both in EB2 and EB3, I know few people who did their masters were forced to apply under EB3 cat.

Negative, if you're Indian, S3553 will be far less helpful. I'm for anything that adds visas numbers for EB, but the fact is, as it is currently written, the 55,000 visa numbers will be largely used up by EB3ROW, and any benefit to EB2I and EB3I will only through spillover if any. This thread covers these issues over the last couple of pages.

[justvisiting]

Negative, if you're Indian, S3553 will be far less helpful. I'm for anything that adds visas numbers for EB, but the fact is, as it is currently written, the 55,000 visa numbers will be largely used up by EB3ROW, and any benefit to EB2I and EB3I will only through spillover if any. This thread covers these issues over the last couple of pages.

Well, the thread has not actually analized S. 3553, only the republican DV-STEM bill.

It's academic, because neither bill is likely to pass this year. However, S.3553 includes the follwoing provision, not found in the Republican bill:

(1) UNUSED VISAS- Section 203(b)(1) of such Act (8 U.S.C. 1153(b)(1)) is amended by striking `(4) and (5)' and inserting `(4), (5) and (6)'.

This means that spillover would go EB6--->EB1---->EB2

And if they add 55K visas, I assure you, there will be spillover.

So it would benefit EB2 I/C, not EB-3-ROW (Unlike the bill previously discussed).

[rupen86]

Well, the thread has not actually analized S. 3553, only the republican DV-STEM bill.

It's academic, because neither bill is likely to pass this year. However, S.3553 includes the follwoing provision, not found in the Republican bill:



This means that spillover would go EB6--->EB1---->EB2

And if they add 55K visas, I assure you, there will be spillover.

So it would benefit EB2 I/C, not EB-3-ROW (Unlike the bill previously discussed).

It is not going to be much helpful to EB3-I as HR 3012.

[Pedro Gonzales]

So it would benefit EB2 I/C, not EB-3-ROW (Unlike the bill previously discussed).

Correct me if i'm wrong, but this still applies the country caps for EB6, does it not? IF so, of the 55K visas, all but 14% (7% each for India and China) will be available first to ROW candidates with established PDs and US MS degrees (which would be folks in EB3ROW) and next to ROW candidates without established PDs but recent MSs (future EB3ROW or EB2ROW candidates). It's anybody's guess how many EB3ROW candidates have US STEM Masters degrees, but the trackitt users (that great source of credible data) claim 25% to 50%. I think that's high, but who knows? Even though the spillover will fall through to EB2 India, we'd be at the mercy of yet another spillover category. I'd label this 'potentially significant' to EB2I, nothing better.

India's 7% of the 55K will all go to EB3I folk with earlier PDs, which will provide some relief to the beleaguered masses, but nothing game-changing (instead of moving 1 week every visa bulletin, their numbers would move 2 weeks every visa bulletin).

HR3012, on the other hand, would be game changing to both EB2I and EB3I. That's my point. To the extent it still has legs, HR3012 is by far the better option for EB2I and EB3I, so that's where I'm investing my capital. Still, as I said, I will happily support any bill that adds EB visa numbers.

[abcx13]

Pedro, I still haven't seen that the bill makes applicants eligible just by virtue of the US STEM MS. Doesn't the job require a MS too as it does with EB2?

[redsox2009]

Any extra green card should be welcome..............I don't care how it comes and who benifits by that green card. End of the day we should stop complaining about who is benifiting rather than thanking for queue moving or wait period decreasing...........

[Pedro Gonzales]

Pedro, I still haven't seen that the bill makes applicants eligible just by virtue of the US STEM MS. Doesn't the job require a MS too as it does with EB2?

I have not read Schummer's bill. I read through the Republican bill a few weeks ago and I thought it only required a STEM job and a US STEM Masters. A MS job was not a requirement. So, the EB3 folk would have qualified. Again, it was a while ago, and a pretty quick read, so I may be wrong.

Any extra green card should be welcome..............I don't care how it comes and who benifits by that green card. End of the day we should stop complaining about who is benifiting rather than thanking for queue moving or wait period decreasing...........

I don't know that there were any complaints. I was just addressing a comment that one bill would be better than the other. I'll reiterate, I think both bills would be good for us.

[rupen86]

Ron on HR 3012,

"Given the hard line the Dems took on the STEM bill ("zero sum solutions are not acceptable") I think that it would be difficult for them to support HR3012 at this point. I'm pretty sure they took that position solely for the purpose of denying the Republicans any kind of win on immigration, but even so it would be difficult for them to reverse themselves immediately on HR3012.

Also, I am hearing more and more grumbling from the far right that this Congress should just punt on the fiscal cliff and let the next Congress deal with it. If that is the case, then there might not be a lame duck session at all. "

[qesehmk]

I agree with the first part that dems denied replublicans a small immigration victory.

The second part about lame duck session- I am not sure what Ron exactly means.

Ron on HR 3012,

"Given the hard line the Dems took on the STEM bill ("zero sum solutions are not acceptable") I think that it would be difficult for them to support HR3012 at this point. I'm pretty sure they took that position solely for the purpose of denying the Republicans any kind of win on immigration, but even so it would be difficult for them to reverse themselves immediately on HR3012.

Also, I am hearing more and more grumbling from the far right that this Congress should just punt on the fiscal cliff and let the next Congress deal with it. If that is the case, then there might not be a lame duck session at all. "

[rupen86]

I agree with the first part that dems denied replublicans a small immigration victory.

The second part about lame duck session- I am not sure what Ron exactly means.

I disagree with the first part where he says democrats wanted to deny small victory to republicans. I think what he is suggesting in the second part is that democrats have made the position that they won't support zero sum solution meaning taking from somewhere and giving it to someone else. In case of HR 3012, it is taking from ROW and giving to I/C. I do not agree with that logic also. And in the end, he is saying that there won't be lame duck session because some in the far right are saying to go over fiscal cliff. I disagree with that also. Even though, they do not want to arrive at any solution, they would at least show that they are working to get to some solution.

[imdeng]

My sense of the current political winds is that Republicans are going to lose (and perhaps lose big) in Nov and part of the blame will be put on their obstructionism in congress. Also they are likely to get trounced with Latinos (even more than in 2008, an Obama advantage of 75/25 is quite possible) - and if that happens then Republicans will have to start paying serious attention to immigration related issues so that they have something to talk about in 2014 and 2016. I can see common sense legislation like HR-3012 (or one of its cousins) getting through the Senate and House in a hurry in the lame duck session.

Last lame duck session (in 2010) was surprisingly productive - I am hoping for a repeat of the same.

PS> Designers of HR-3012 messed up in asking for a very aggressive roll out. A 5-6 years gradual roll out would perhaps have not attracted the kind of ROW hue-n-cry like it ended up getting.

[qesehmk]

There is really nothing to disagree with first part. It is a fact now that HR3012 won't be passed in senate - controlled by dems. Thus dems denied republicans a small immigration victory since HR3012 is republican bill. The bill was especially a no-no for dems given chaffetz is a mormon and former democrat.

Zero sum game etc is an argument just like chuck shumer created another distraction by tagging irish E3 visas on this same bill.

I don't mean to turn this into a dem bashing thing. Just trying to put things in right perspective.

I disagree with the first part where he says democrats wanted to deny small victory to republicans. I think what he is suggesting in the second part is that democrats have made the position that they won't support zero sum solution meaning taking from somewhere and giving it to someone else. In case of HR 3012, it is taking from ROW and giving to I/C. I do not agree with that logic also. And in the end, he is saying that there won't be lame duck session because some in the far right are saying to go over fiscal cliff. I disagree with that also. Even though, they do not want to arrive at any solution, they would at least show that they are working to get to some solution.

[rupen86]

There is really nothing to disagree with first part. It is a fact now that HR3012 won't be passed in senate - controlled by dems. Thus dems denied republicans a small immigration victory since HR3012 is republican bill. The bill was especially a no-no for dems given chaffetz is a mormon and former democrat.

Zero sum game etc is an argument just like chuck shumer created another distraction by tagging irish E3 visas on this same bill.

I don't mean to turn this into a dem bashing thing. Just trying to put things in right perspective.

My reason for disagreement is that if denying political victory was the reason, they did not have to do anything. Instead of putting this on calendar, Reid would have referred this to subcommittee where Grassley is a ranking member and it would have died there or Schumer would have not negotiated with Grassley at all for removing Irish E-3 from Hr 3012.

Zero Sum game argument does not apply to 3012 since it does not favor any one group in the long run. In the shorter term, it tends to benefit I/C but in the longer run, it creates level playing field for all. I do not think democrats would be opposed to this idea.

Give this, democrats do not have the will to pass standalone bill like this. Their agenda remains CIR (read illegal immigration) which could include some parts of legal immigration.