Discussion On The Politics of Immigration Reform (Comprehensive Or Otherwise)

[axecapone]

2013 and 2014 has been very different from any other year for immigration. This attempt at immigration reform got the most attention from everyone in the US than any other attempt I can think of. Just when we all thought that the steam was all gone and it would be one more failed attempt, the debate kept going on. People were still protesting and media was still covering it. There is pressure on GOP to do something because they don't have a chance at White House sooner or later. They will only damage their image further. They definitely have some incentive to pass it. I don't buy Obama's argument about immigration helping the economy. The only argument I will buy for any immigration reform is vote bank.

Do Republicans have an incentive to pass it? Yes.

Do they have an incentive to pass it this year? Probably not but I think this time, people wont keep quiet till something is done about it. CA now allows illegal immigrants to get a law license. That's like a state putting pressure on immigration reform.

I think there is still hope.

[idiotic]

Becky Tallent tweets confirms the principles doc will be released today :

http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/...48531764733444

Speaker John Boehner plans to unveil a general set of immigration reform principles when the House GOP holds its annual retreat Thursday.

[idiotic]

Principles leaked 15 minutes before

BREAKING: Here are the Republican Principles for #Immigration Reform–to be formally announced by @SpeakerBoehner at 4:30 pm ET

http://davidleopold.net/category/uncategorized/

[Jagan01]

Principles leaked 15 minutes before

BREAKING: Here are the Republican Principles for #Immigration Reform–to be formally announced by @SpeakerBoehner at 4:30 pm ET

http://davidleopold.net/category/uncategorized/

Thanks for the headsup...

[idiotic]

Principles leaked 15 minutes before

BREAKING: Here are the Republican Principles for #Immigration Reform–to be formally announced by @SpeakerBoehner at 4:30 pm ET

http://davidleopold.net/category/uncategorized/

Legislative language is already done last year for almost all of these sections and is forwarded to house floor either from House Judiciary Committee or House Homeland Security Committee.

The only bill pending is the DREAM act bill / KIDS act bill or whatever which I think will be released just in time before the House takes it up as a bunch in single day and passes all of them at once..

Be optimistic and keep working with orgs like fwd.us

[idiotic]

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner...eat-rich-lowry

Here’s a quick, early read-out of the immigration discussion at the House retreat, which was still ongoing as of 20 minutes ago, from one source in the room. Boehner made a brief presentation that hewed to the principles that have been released. He gave the impression, at least to the observer, that he’s not committed. He said there’s been no decision to take anything to the floor, but he is absolutely opposed to a conference with the Senate on the Gang of Eight bill. The House members seemed to break down into roughly thirds: those who like the principles and want to move; those who like the principles but think this is the wrong time to do anything; those who opposed the principles and also think the timing is wrong. This source says it was a friendly, “in the family” discussion without a lot of anger or high emotion, at least while this source was in the room.

Other, more detailed accounts should be leaking out soon.

[mechanical13]

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner...eat-rich-lowry

Here’s a quick, early read-out of the immigration discussion at the House retreat, which was still ongoing as of 20 minutes ago, from one source in the room. Boehner made a brief presentation that hewed to the principles that have been released. He gave the impression, at least to the observer, that he’s not committed. He said there’s been no decision to take anything to the floor, but he is absolutely opposed to a conference with the Senate on the Gang of Eight bill. The House members seemed to break down into roughly thirds: those who like the principles and want to move; those who like the principles but think this is the wrong time to do anything; those who opposed the principles and also think the timing is wrong. This source says it was a friendly, “in the family” discussion without a lot of anger or high emotion, at least while this source was in the room.

Other, more detailed accounts should be leaking out soon.

Whats a little encouraging about this, is thats its relatively moderate commentary coming from conservative website. Its likely that the "real" reaction from the GOP was a little more positive than described here. I'm of the opinion that the National Review is likely to portray Boehner's commitment to be weak to appease its base, than claim that the GOP leadership is committed to reform.

But this is Congress we're talking about, so anything is possible. I wouldn't be surprised if immigration reform doesn't pass for another 50 yrs.

[idiotic]

http://www.speaker.gov/general/qa-dr....yWBzIDEM.dpuf

Speaker sets up FAQ page for immigration reform.. Nice..

[drop2ocean]

EB2I - PD June 15 2010. Predictions on when the PD can be current please.

Considering we aren't hearing any progress on Immigration reform 2014, is there any positive news / developments at all for legal immigration ?

[gcq]

http://news.yahoo.com/house-conserva...-politics.html

WASHINGTON (AP) — Conservative Republicans on Wednesday ruled out any immigration legislation in the House this year, insisting that the GOP should wait until next year when the party might also control the Senate.
House GOP leaders unveiled their broad immigration principles last week that gave hope to advocates and the Obama administration that the first changes in the nation's laws in three decades might happen in the coming months. Immigration legislation is one of the top priorities for Obama's second term. But several of the conservatives were adamant that the House should do nothing on the issue this year, a midterm election year when the GOP is angling to gain six seats in the Senate and seize majority control. Democrats currently have a 55-45 advantage but are defending more seats, including ones in Republican-leaning states.

"I think it's a mistake for us to have an internal battle in the Republican Party this year about immigration reform," Rep. Raul Labrador, R-Idaho, told reporters at a gathering of conservatives. "I think when we take back the Senate in 2014 one of the first things we should do next year after we do certain economic issues, I think we should address the immigration issue."

Labrador's comments were noteworthy as he was one of eight House members working on bipartisan immigration legislation last year. He later abandoned the negotiations.
"This is not an issue that's ready for prime time to move legislatively," said Rep. Joe Barton, R-Texas, who said Republicans should use the principles to begin a dialogue with Hispanics.

Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, said the House should focus on the four bills dealing with security that the Judiciary Committee approved last summer. Absent any action on those bills, Jordan said it would be tough to do any immigration legislation this year.
The definitive statements from the conservatives came as Douglas Elmendorf, the head of the Congressional Budget Office, told a House panel that the comprehensive, Senate-passed immigration bill would have a positive impact on the nation's finances.
The Senate last June passed a bipartisan bill that would tighten border security, provide enforcement measures and offer a path to citizenship for the estimated 11 million immigrants living in the United States illegally.

The measure has stalled in the House where Speaker John Boehner and other leaders have rejected a comprehensive approach in favor of a bill-by-bill process.
Elmendorf told the House Budget Committee that a CBO analysis "found that that legislation would reduce budget deficits and lead to a larger economy and over time lead to higher output per person in this country."
Specifically, he said additional workers, especially high-skilled, highly educated employees, would increase the nation's tax revenues.
The House leaders' broad principles would tighten border and interior security, establish a verification system for employers and legalize some of the 11 million immigrants. It would not provide a special path to citizenship to those living here illegally, though it would give children brought to the country by their parents a shot a citizenship.
Conservatives have said they distrust Obama to enforce any new law, citing his waivers and suspensions of provisions on the health care law.
Boehner said Tuesday that Republicans were discussing "whether we should proceed, if we proceed and how we would proceed. It's also clear from our members that we believe that securing our borders has to be the first step in this process."

But he added that conversations are continuing and "no decision's been made." Further tamping down any optimism for legislation this year was Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., who told reporters that differences between the Senate's comprehensive approach and the House's piecemeal strategy were an "irresolvable conflict."
"I don't see how you get to an outcome this year with the two bodies in such a different place," McConnell told reporters.

[IsItWorthTheTrouble]

Considering we aren't hearing any progress on Immigration reform 2014, is there any positive news / developments at all for legal immigration ?

Legal immigration remains - and shall remain for the foreseeable future - hostage or a step child to the illegals. CIR is all about the illegals. With republican primaries for the senate/house having started, I see only a small gap of 5-6mos (May/June - Nov '14) by which time the legal immigration bills 've to pass. Remember its no longer comprehensive but one-step-at-a-time republican approach.

If democrats lose majority in the senate then we can kiss any hopes of a bill for legal immigration passing as the dems - esp obama - would try to use even his veto power to stop the bill from becoming law as they wouldn't want the republicans to gain support among legal immigrants nor lose their support among the hispanics in the national elections.

I for one don't expect anything to happen in this current political climate. Everybody would do their dance..do a sparing 'act'..but ultimately return to their respective tents to cool their heels. Cruelly, the joke certainly is going to be on the legal immigrants, who having followed the law of the land - however insane it's - will continue to be law abiding citizens contributing to the growth of this country.

[qesehmk]

Immigration reform is going nowhere. In a matter of 2-3 days GOP has changed its tune from principles of immigration reform to trust issues with Obama.

http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/cong...ve-year-n23671

In nutshell the dynamic is this:
1. Labor markets and social mood are not conducinve for any reform - legal or illegal doesn't matter.
2. An economic revival 2-3 years from now will warrant immigration reform and it may happen then.
3. Right now any reform is a win-lose game between Dems and Reps and so it is not going to happen
4. This would mean Obama - if wants to do anything in the short term - will have to resort to executive action and do something on immigration middle of this year before the congressional elections. This will only mean things like allowing spouse to work on H4 etc if that.

p.s. - It would be a mistake to blame lack of progress on illegals. Legal immigration has no takers including the industry. The industry also has vested interest in keeping slaves out of H1. So legals have better chances of any reforms that are tied to illegals. I know that sounds twisted but unfortuately that's the reality.

[cbpds1]

Agree, wasnt Mark Zuckerberg campaigning for legal immigration incl H1?
Point 3 is right on target.
I think Obama can "not" implement laws but not change them like "allowing" H4 spouse to work.

Immigration reform is going nowhere. In a matter of 2-3 days GOP has changed its tune from principles of immigration reform to trust issues with Obama.

http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/cong...ve-year-n23671

In nutshell the dynamic is this:
1. Labor markets and social mood are not conducinve for any reform - legal or illegal doesn't matter.
2. An economic revival 2-3 years from now will warrant immigration reform and it may happen then.
3. Right now any reform is a win-lose game between Dems and Reps and so it is not going to happen
4. This would mean Obama - if wants to do anything in the short term - will have to resort to executive action and do something on immigration middle of this year before the congressional elections. This will only mean things like allowing spouse to work on H4 etc if that.

p.s. - It would be a mistake to blame lack of progress on illegals. Legal immigration has no takers including the industry. The industry also has vested interest in keeping slaves out of H1. So legals have better chances of any reforms that are tied to illegals. I know that sounds twisted but unfortuately that's the reality.

[qesehmk]

Yes Indeed Zuckerberg certainly is putting the money where his mouth is.

As per executive action I don't know where and how much they can stretch the existing laws. But basically executive action includes implementing, not implementing, stretching, and bending of existing laws. I have a hunch that there will be more of it just before the elections. Oink oink.

Unfortunately for legal immigrants - they are going to have to wait till the economy makes a strong come back or the dates creep up.

Agree, wasnt Mark Zuckerberg campaigning for legal immigration incl H1?
Point 3 is right on target.
I think Obama can "not" implement laws but not change them like "allowing" H4 spouse to work.

[idiotic]

From GOP politics point of view, they have excellent chance of taking back the senate and retaining house this year elections.
All (except 2) of the competitive seats up for election are for Democrats to lose..
Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Co...nate_seats.png

Since this is the most likely outcome for next congress where both houses are controlled by GOP, they are much better off preparing the piecemeal bills this year with the principles recently outlined but actually pass them piecemeal next year putting inordinate pressure on Obama not to Veto the piecemeal bills.

It is nearly impossible for Obama to veto say EVerify bill alone.. No reason whatsoever..

[Jagan01]

From GOP politics point of view, they have excellent chance of taking back the senate and retaining house this year elections.
All (except 2) of the competitive seats up for election are for Democrats to lose..
Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Co...nate_seats.png

Since this is the most likely outcome for next congress where both houses are controlled by GOP, they are much better off preparing the piecemeal bills this year with the principles recently outlined but actually pass them piecemeal next year putting inordinate pressure on Obama not to Veto the piecemeal bills.

It is nearly impossible for Obama to veto say EVerify bill alone.. No reason whatsoever..

Why would they not wait for 2016 ?

If they get a republican president and repubs in both houses then they can take full credit.

[idiotic]

Why would they not wait for 2016 ?

If they get a republican president and repubs in both houses then they can take full credit.

They can never win white house till they get Hispanic votes.

[Jagan01]

They can never win white house till they get Hispanic votes.

In politics, never say never.

The republicans do not need hispanic votes to win white house. They only need them not to vote for democrats. Not everyone votes. If there is less motivation to vote for democrats that might do the trick for the republicans. With popularity of democrats going down, they might not get as many Hispanic votes (they would feel they did not do much for immigration), lower american votes in general (obamacare failure, economy not completely recovered).

I had posted on this forum the picture of republicans winning the senate long time back. It is very important to understand that immigration decision will be more due to political reasons (it is not economical or social).

I feel below is the strategy by republicans:
1. Get back Senate and hang on to House
2. Completely kill immigration by going slow. Giving offers which Democrats wont accept. They will keep moving the goalpost to something that Obama wont reach for.
3. Have a pro immigration face at the next presidential election. There will be many more pro-immigration candidates for primaries. May be one of the senate gang of eight. OR Paul Ryan OR Jeb bush Or....

Try and convince the Hispanics that Republicans will at least get them legal status if not path to citizenship. their goal will be to convince them that one bird in hand is better than two in the bush.

If dems can win House then it is a completely different ball game. I am just hoping that either of the two gets control of both houses. The one who controls both houses will also get white house.

[Ramsen]

In politics, never say never.

The republicans do not need hispanic votes to win white house. They only need them not to vote for democrats. Not everyone votes. If there is less motivation to vote for democrats that might do the trick for the republicans. With popularity of democrats going down, they might not get as many Hispanic votes (they would feel they did not do much for immigration), lower american votes in general (obamacare failure, economy not completely recovered).

I had posted on this forum the picture of republicans winning the senate long time back. It is very important to understand that immigration decision will be more due to political reasons (it is not economical or social).

I feel below is the strategy by republicans:
1. Get back Senate and hang on to House
2. Completely kill immigration by going slow. Giving offers which Democrats wont accept. They will keep moving the goalpost to something that Obama wont reach for.
3. Have a pro immigration face at the next presidential election. There will be many more pro-immigration candidates for primaries. May be one of the senate gang of eight. OR Paul Ryan OR Jeb bush Or....

Try and convince the Hispanics that Republicans will at least get them legal status if not path to citizenship. their goal will be to convince them that one bird in hand is better than two in the bush.

If dems can win House then it is a completely different ball game. I am just hoping that either of the two gets control of both houses. The one who controls both houses will also get white house.

GOP has a good chance of taking over Senate in 2014 and if there is a good candidate and Hillary is not standing then they can win Presidency. I think many neutral persons do not like Obama care. GOP uses this properly they can win easily.

[idiotic]

http://homeland.house.gov/hearing/he...and-priorities

This is going to be a good one.. Jeh Johnson will be grilled on various topics including immigration..

[Jagan01]

Q, Kanmani, and other Gurus:

I had a question regarding the process to be followed once the dates are current. I have never filed EAD in the past and this might be the first time.

1. Do they check the history of dependent ?
2. Do we need to keep track record of the history of the dependent, her employment OPT/CPT, etc.
3. How many years tax returns etc needs to be on file ?
4. When is the interview conducted. Is it even before we get the EAD ?

Thanks,
Jagan

[Kanmani]

Jagan,

1.Yes. They do check the history of the dependent. Each applicant is verified for maintaining lawful status.
2. Yes.
4. Nowadays, not every applicant is interviewed. If they find any misconduct within the records, that would trigger an interview. Finger printing appointment is not related to EAD processing.

[qesehmk]

Jagan
#1 & #2 - yes indeed.
#3 - do your best. American government is not inflexible. If they want they can ask alll years you have been present in US. Personally I don't think I gave any tax records at all. But my memory could be wrong.
#4 - I think all AOS folks get interviewed. But not all 485 folks do. Fingerprinting is quick in and out. At least we never had any interview for sure.

Q, Kanmani, and other Gurus:

I had a question regarding the process to be followed once the dates are current. I have never filed EAD in the past and this might be the first time.

1. Do they check the history of dependent ?
2. Do we need to keep track record of the history of the dependent, her employment OPT/CPT, etc.
3. How many years tax returns etc needs to be on file ?
4. When is the interview conducted. Is it even before we get the EAD ?

Thanks,
Jagan

[Jagan01]

Jagan,

1.Yes. They do check the history of the dependent. Each applicant is verified for maintaining lawful status.
2. Yes.
4. Nowadays, not every applicant is interviewed. If they find any misconduct within the records, that would trigger an interview. Finger printing appointment is not related to EAD processing.

Jagan
#1 & #2 - yes indeed.
#3 - do your best. American government is not inflexible. If they want they can ask alll years you have been present in US. Personally I don't think I gave any tax records at all. But my memory could be wrong.
#4 - I think all AOS folks get interviewed. But not all 485 folks do. Fingerprinting is quick in and out. At least we never had any interview for sure.

Q, Kanmani,

Thanks for your response. When you say they check for dependents immigration history, does it mean visa status or they also check employment history.

If spouse has worked on on campus employment, CPT and OPT at different employers then what kind of letters do I need to get from them. CPT and OPT anyways gets recorded in SEVIS. On campus employment does not get recorded and typically that is an hourly job. IS there anything that I need to have in place and be aware of? What king of documentation is necessary ?

Will tax forms suffice ? I mean w2 or 1099 that is provided by the employer ?

[Kanmani]

Jagan, Its been 2 years since we filed our I-485.

Unlike I-140, I-485 is individual application which collects information on the individuals independently.

Even though she is a derivative of yours , the application calls for her employment history too. If you fill your employment information in your application, your wife has to fill hers in her application I recommend you to download I-485 form and try filling out manually .