Page 95 of 98 FirstFirst ... 45859394959697 ... LastLast
Results 2,351 to 2,375 of 2436

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

  1. #2351
    Quote Originally Posted by sportsfan33 View Post
    Disagree. You will be surprised how many of the high earning immigrants are Republicans. If I was a voter, I would vote Republican too. Anyway, it is not relevant to discuss the future of the parties. From our perspective, my point was that waiting for the CIR and hoping EB will ride on it is fool's gold. It's not going to happen. We should stay on course and try to get what's best for us.
    You can disagree but facts do not change. Look up any website and that's what they are discussing. Obama's Coalition includes latinos, african americans, women, young people and immigrants. It is hard to fight against this Coalition. There are statistics also available to look at. I would be very happy to see EB immigration bill getting passed but I would say chances for that has reduced as Oh Law firm pointed out and I agree with that.

  2. #2352
    Quote Originally Posted by qesehmk View Post
    I wouldn't express myself so strongly as you. However I think Oh's analysis is quite poor. I do think that since Obama has nothing to lose hereafter, he will push things aggressively. However that doesn't mean he will block piecemeal legislation. Especially one like HR3012 that is so ripe to sign.

    Governance is about making choices and bargains. Especially now that Obama has nothing to lose - he doesn't have to take an approach of either/or. Now he can afford to shoot for both. In other words he can take piecemeal AND comprehensive - BOTH approaches.

    The real question is - how will his immigration policy fit with his stance on outsourcing, jobs creation and economic revival. That will better shape his support for EB reforms in particular rather than whether EB reform is piecemeal or NOT.
    Surely he would not block it, but democrat leadership in the senate may not bring it up sensing a chance for CIR.

  3. #2353
    People might find this talk (there's a transcript too) from TED interesting:

    http://www.ted.com/talks/pankaj_ghem...sn_t_flat.html

  4. #2354
    Quote Originally Posted by sportsfan33 View Post
    From the perspective of legal immigrants, nothing should change. We should continue similar strategies like HR 3012 to get what we want - FAIRNESS.
    Quote Originally Posted by qesehmk View Post
    Especially now that Obama has nothing to lose - he doesn't have to take an approach of either/or. Now he can afford to shoot for both. In other words he can take piecemeal AND comprehensive - BOTH approaches.
    Totally agree with both the statements above. Also as others have expressed unless the country caps are removed the effect of any other bill will be very limited for EB-I. If we are restricted to 7% cap then we will always be at the mercy of spillover (leftover) from what others don't consume. At the same time applicants from other countries will be free to move from their special queue in one category to their special queue in another category bypassing older EB-I applicants in all the categories. Lobbying for a piecemeal approach does not hurt, its elements can be included in a comprehensive bill if one ever comes up.
    Last edited by GhostWriter; 11-07-2012 at 01:24 PM.

  5. #2355
    One really favorable outcome of this election is that immigration reform has become a very important issue and both parties would do their best to cater to this constituency. This needs to be leveraged. Since HR 3012 is what will help EB2-I most, and since it is also a ripe bill, I think we should do our best to start approaching senators. Harry Reid has already sounded about need for cooperation on immigration reform and I think he has in mind pending bills. I also think Immigration Voice has got the opening it was looking for.

  6. #2356
    Quote Originally Posted by sportsfan33 View Post
    Disagree. You will be surprised how many of the high earning immigrants are Republicans. If I was a voter, I would vote Republican too. Anyway, it is not relevant to discuss the future of the parties. From our perspective, my point was that waiting for the CIR and hoping EB will ride on it is fool's gold. It's not going to happen. We should stay on course and try to get what's best for us.
    Obviously there is a portion of high earning immigrants that are republicans but no way are they a majority. BBC had an article about how 85% of Indians (one of the higest earning minorities in the US) are democrats. Not everyone votes purely based on their self interest. Almost all immigrants have seen bigger governments than in the US and they are not necessarily opposed to that idea. The exception tends to be eastern Europeans who have seen so much government brutality that they think the other extreme is better.

  7. #2357
    Quote Originally Posted by kkruna View Post
    Except that there is decidedly more urgency to embrace (hispanic) immigrants on both sides of the divide. CIR (whatever it means) may have good chance in 2013. If it happens, EB immigration reform should also be riding the same wave.

    In immediate term, what happens to pending legislations like HR3012 and STEM visa remains to be seen. We should expect some 'family' twist to EB visas as well.
    Republicans are smart enough to realize that defeat has nothing to do with lack of immigration reform. Latinos have always been pro-democratic. Reagan's amnesty didn't change that. After a new CIR, new Latino citizens will mostly embrace democrats anyway. Why would Republicans want that?

    I expect full-on CIR drama to go on for 4 more years without going anywhere.
    PD: 08/25/2008 EB2I

  8. #2358
    Quote Originally Posted by PD2008AUG25 View Post
    Republicans are smart enough to realize that defeat has nothing to do with lack of immigration reform. Latinos have always been pro-democratic. Reagan's amnesty didn't change that. After a new CIR, new Latino citizens will mostly embrace democrats anyway. Why would Republicans want that?

    I expect full-on CIR drama to go on for 4 more years without going anywhere.
    President Bush had got more than 40% of latino votes. Had Romney got that much, he would have won. Even though latinos are going to favor democrats, that margin is going to reduce if immigration does not remain top issue since socially they are more republican leaning.

  9. #2359
    Quote Originally Posted by sportsfan33 View Post
    If Jeb Bush ran for the presidency in 2016 (heck even if he was nominated today in 2012), it would be a victory for the Republicans. And despite record Latinos voting against him, what really scuttled Romney were "47%", "let Detroit go bankrupt", and "I think 14% is a fair tax for a person with a net worth of $300 million and making all his money from capital gains".

    EVEN then, the election was very close.

    The immigrants are not going to continue to increase in the US. The American dream is becoming more and more difficult and if the government scales back even a little from the social programs such as food stamps and medicare (this is going to happen in the next few years regardless of who is in power - China is not going to finance the American welfare endlessly), life will be extremely brutal for the immigrants at the lower rung of the ladder. We already know many stories of Indians going back. Prepare to hear such stories about Latinos.

    I reach the same conclusion: CIR is not going to happen. This election did not change that. The Republicans should be able to find a moderate candidate who finds appeal in the American middle class, and that candidate will win in 2016. The reports of Republican demise are very exaggerated. Let us really push for the bill during the lame duck session.
    Your argument is that demographics is not going to change in future. But data, statistics and trend does not favor that conclusion. The general conclusion right now is that white electoral vote will continue to decline and other groups will continue to increase their percentage.

    That being said, there is nothing wrong in pushing 3012.

  10. #2360
    Quote Originally Posted by sportsfan33 View Post
    EVEN then, the election was very close.

    The immigrants are not going to continue to increase in the US. The American dream is becoming more and more difficult and if the government scales back even a little from the social programs such as food stamps and medicare (this is going to happen in the next few years regardless of who is in power - China is not going to finance the American welfare endlessly), life will be extremely brutal for the immigrants at the lower rung of the ladder. We already know many stories of Indians going back. Prepare to hear such stories about Latinos.
    It's crazy that a delusional out-of-touch PE baron could get nearly half of the popular vote when the financial industry has squeezed the middle class in this country so thoroughly.

    On your second point, inflows from Mexico have already reversed. The Pew center had some research on this that you can look up (sorry, too lazy). Net migration from Mexico to the US is now either zero or negative IIRC.

    Quote Originally Posted by rupen86 View Post
    Your argument is that demographics is not going to change in future. But data, statistics and trend does not favor that conclusion. The general conclusion right now is that white electoral vote will continue to decline and other groups will continue to increase their percentage.

    That being said, there is nothing wrong in pushing 3012.
    Demographics are changing despite reduced immigration because lower-educated immigrants (Hispanics, Blacks, whatever) have more kids than more-educated Americans (whites, Indians, Asians, etc.). I'm not trying to be racist or anything but I think it's pretty well established that education is inversely correlated with the no. of kids someone has, and it's also a fact that some of the immigrant groups are less educated than locals.

  11. #2361
    Rupen86 and sportsfan33, your contribution to the forum is highly valued and your insights are a great asset to this forum. That said, I would urge you to please create your own thread and move the discussion on politics to that thread. This thread is for discussing specific bills.

    Thank you!

  12. #2362
    Quote Originally Posted by kd2008 View Post
    Rupen86 and sportsfan33, your contribution to the forum is highly valued and your insights are a great asset to this forum. That said, I would urge you to please create your own thread and move the discussion on politics to that thread. This thread is for discussing specific bills.

    Thank you!
    I do not think those discussions were irrelevant to the bill we are discussing. We are talking about possible CIR and how it might impact 3012. If the moderator thinks they are irrelevant, please feel free to delete them.

  13. #2363
    Here is a good analysis on demographics, changes to future senate procedures and possible CIR.

    http://discuss.ilw.com/content.php?8...y-Greg-Siskind

  14. #2364
    Quote Originally Posted by rupen86 View Post
    Here is a good analysis on demographics, changes to future senate procedures and possible CIR.

    http://discuss.ilw.com/content.php?8...y-Greg-Siskind
    75 % of Asians voted for Obama. I hope it get attention. though we are not as decisive block as others like African-American or Latinos.

  15. #2365
    Guru
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Reading PA
    Posts
    542
    To sportsfan33
    This from morning tech on POLITICO

    REID PLEDGES ACTION ON IMMIGRATION — We told you yesterday that a mix of electoral politics and existing congressional interest could push immigration reform — particularly, measures focused on high-skilled workers — back to the foreground. And Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid confirmed that in a press conference yesterday, telling reporters it's "very, very high on the list" of things to do next year. The "only thing we need to get immigration reform done is a few Republican votes," Reid said.

    I know there is still a possibility of HR3012 in the lame duck session but the statement above seems to imply that it might be part of a larger immigration package in the next congress

  16. #2366
    Well, he said next year instead of next Congress, so maybe they will take it up next year? But I don't have any hopes when it comes to the feckless fools in Congress...

  17. #2367
    Quote Originally Posted by gs1968 View Post
    To sportsfan33
    This from morning tech on POLITICO

    REID PLEDGES ACTION ON IMMIGRATION — We told you yesterday that a mix of electoral politics and existing congressional interest could push immigration reform — particularly, measures focused on high-skilled workers — back to the foreground. And Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid confirmed that in a press conference yesterday, telling reporters it's "very, very high on the list" of things to do next year. The "only thing we need to get immigration reform done is a few Republican votes," Reid said.

    I know there is still a possibility of HR3012 in the lame duck session but the statement above seems to imply that it might be part of a larger immigration package in the next congress
    I agree. There is a sea change in the attitude of republicans on immigration. While we did not see practically a word on immigration bill in terms of CIR in last few years, we are starting to see lot of talk just after the election. See the link below.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/09/us...tion.html?_r=0

    I believe, we should just not be satisfied with 3012. Rather, we should focus on including other aspects in possible CIR package like recapture, excluding dependents etc. This will also get support from ROW EB community unlike 3012. I feel this is a golden opportunity and we should make every effort to get things done what we care about.

  18. #2368
    Quote Originally Posted by rupen86 View Post
    I agree. There is a sea change in the attitude of republicans on immigration. While we did not see practically a word on immigration bill in terms of CIR in last few years, we are starting to see lot of talk just after the election. See the link below.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/09/us...tion.html?_r=0

    I believe, we should just not be satisfied with 3012. Rather, we should focus on including other aspects in possible CIR package like recapture, excluding dependents etc. This will also get support from ROW EB community unlike 3012. I feel this is a golden opportunity and we should make every effort to get things done what we care about.
    Yes, but Republicans are more interested in winning back the Latino base they've eliminated. Nobody gives a rat's ass about legal immigrants. I was reading some comments in the WSJ from Obama about how he was going to focus on CIR, which meant legalizing illegals and giving them a path to perm residency and citizenship.
    He didn't say anything about legal immigration...

    Legalizing illegals is not going make a dime's worth of difference to America's economic woes whereas bringing in highly-educated scientists and researchers would...yet guess what Congress would rather do.

  19. #2369
    Quote Originally Posted by abcx13 View Post
    Yes, but Republicans are more interested in winning back the Latino base they've eliminated. Nobody gives a rat's ass about legal immigrants. I was reading some comments in the WSJ from Obama about how he was going to focus on CIR, which meant legalizing illegals and giving them a path to perm residency and citizenship.
    He didn't say anything about legal immigration...

    Legalizing illegals is not going make a dime's worth of difference to America's economic woes whereas bringing in highly-educated scientists and researchers would...yet guess what Congress would rather do.
    I agree. That's where the focus would be..But even for the purpose of showing that they have done something about legal immigration, they will have to include something on legal immigration.

  20. #2370
    I agree with sportsfan that STEM or no STEM or recapture or no recapture, the country limits need to go. They are blatantly discriminatory and are just a different form of racism.

  21. #2371
    One more link showing immigration effort will begin post inauguration.

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/1...n_2093178.html

    It also tells that democrat bill would be in line with the one introduced by Robert Menendez which included visa recapture.

    http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/112/s1258/text

    Interestingly, this bill (Menendez) does not include per country quota removal. Instead, it increases to 15%. But it includes visa recapture and looks like it includes excluding dependents from the count.
    Last edited by rupen86; 11-09-2012 at 02:27 PM.

  22. #2372
    Both those links are the same (inadvertant mistake perhaps?). Nowhere do they talk about legal immigration.
    Last edited by qesehmk; 11-09-2012 at 01:10 PM. Reason: Removed foul language. Banned abcx13 for 7 days for repeated use of foul language inspite of previous warnings.

  23. #2373
    Filibuster is used by both democrats and Republicans. The removal will do harm for both parties. If they remove now and there is a possiblity for GOP to get majority in 2 years or 4 years. That time they will revert the bills passed by democrats. Also they may need 60 votes to remove filibuster rule. Or they will filibuster the filibuster removal.

    Republicans might want to think about getting on the train. Though they’ve mucked up opportunities to take over the Senate in 2010 and 2012, they have another opportunity in 2014, when Democrats will have 20 seats up for re-election and Republicans will be defending only 13. If the filibuster ends now, there’s a real chance that the first party to benefit from a reformed Washington would be the Republicans. That should be a change they can believe in.

    Quote Originally Posted by abcx13 View Post
    Both those links are the same (inadvertant mistake perhaps?). Nowhere do they talk about legal immigration.
    Last edited by Ramsen; 11-09-2012 at 02:18 PM.

  24. #2374
    Quote Originally Posted by abcx13 View Post
    Both those links are the same (inadvertant mistake perhaps?). Nowhere do they talk about legal immigration.
    Sorry for the mistake. Here it is. I have corrected in the earlier post also.

    http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/112/s1258/text

  25. #2375
    Guru Spectator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    A Galaxy Far far Away
    Posts
    3,337
    Quote Originally Posted by rupen86 View Post
    One more link showing immigration effort will begin post inauguration.

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/1...n_2093178.html

    It also tells that democrat bill would be in line with the one introduced by Robert Menendez which included visa recapture.

    http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/112/s1258/text

    Interestingly, this bill (Menendez) does not include per country quota removal. Instead, it increases to 15%. But it includes visa recapture and looks like it includes excluding dependents from the count.
    I had a quick look and found considerably more than that.

    a) Recapture of previously wasted visas.

    b) Rollover of any wasted visas to the next year.

    c) Exempt from Numerical Limitations

    1) Dependents

    2) EB1A

    3) Aliens who have earned an advanced degree in the sciences (not including the social sciences), technology, engineering, or mathematics from a United States institution of higher education (as defined in section 1001(a) of title 20) and have been working in a field related to their degree subject in the United States under a nonimmigrant visa during the 2-year period preceding their application for an immigrant visa under section 203(b).

    4) Alien physicians who have completed service requirements of a waiver or exemption requested by an interested State agency or by an interested Federal agency under section 214(l), including those alien physicians who completed such service before the date of the enactment of this subparagraph.

    5) Also see (e). Not EB but helpful to those that marry after GC.

    d) Elimination of the EB-1A Preference Category because of (c)(2).

    e) Reclassification Of Spouses And Minor Children Of Lawful Permanent Residents As Immediate Relatives. They're no longer subject to Numerical Limits and F2A would no longer exist.

    f) Increase Per Country Limit to 15%.

    g) Allow filing of an I-485 based on having an approved I-140, subject to the primary applicant paying a fee of $500.

    h) AP and EAD in 3 year increments.

    i) Visa Revalidation for (E), (H), (I), (L), (O), or (P) visas within the USA.

    j) H4 status allowed to work.


    Just exempting Dependents from Numerical Limits effectively raises the overall allocation to about 300k.

    On top of that the number no longer has to cover EB1A, Advanced STEM degree holders earned at a US Institution and the alien physician exemption.

    The real number in today's terms would be nearer 400-500k per year.
    Without an irritant, there can be no pearl.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •