Page 15 of 49 FirstFirst ... 5131415161725 ... LastLast
Results 351 to 375 of 1209

Thread: Bills, Rules & Politics

  1. #351
    Sophomore
    Join Date
    May 2018
    Location
    Jhumri Talaiya
    Posts
    19
    Quote Originally Posted by qesehmk View Post
    Reduce H1B is something that is consistent with his political base and his stance over the years. "Reduce Legal Immigration" is something new. I am hearing it for the first time.
    He probably lost the nomination today!

  2. #352
    Guru
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Bay Area
    Posts
    825
    Yes- IV trying their best. Wondering if they should change strategy and focus on getting something piecemeal. Like getting EADs at least. Big bang approach has failed enough times.

  3. #353
    Quote Originally Posted by suninphx View Post
    Yes- IV trying their best. Wondering if they should change strategy and focus on getting something piecemeal. Like getting EADs at least. Big bang approach has failed enough times.
    I think enough capital is spent on this to start something new. This is the root cause which they are trying to address.

  4. #354
    Quote Originally Posted by qesehmk View Post
    I is an uphill task as there is virtually nobody in backlogged people's camp. Left / Right / Corporations you name it.

    However IV and whoever else contributed need congratulations for at least trying.
    Your prediction was correct again ...(for now)

  5. #355
    Quote Originally Posted by jackbrown_890 View Post
    Your prediction was correct again ...(for now)
    "Remember, Red, hope is a good thing, maybe the best of things, and no good thing ever dies." Shawshank Redemption.

    If the bill had passed, I would have said in your face "Q". But he is realistic without emotion. My brain kept telling me to be realistic, however the heart was racing. I guess you need a lot of training to take emotion out.

    Anyway, good game friends. My wife sent me her regrets. A couple of friends with late 2009 PDs sent their messages on this topic. Life goes on.

    "When life gets you down, you know what you gotta do? Just keep swimming." Finding Nemo

  6. #356
    Sensei
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Bay area
    Posts
    60
    The problem with immigration is that immigrants forget once they are naturalized. There are few like Q who keep pushing the agenda. If 140K+ immigrants get naturalized each year and vote as a bloc then Bernie or Trump can not afford to ignore immigration. If we consider only the last 20 years as a period of struggle that means 2.8 MM went through this struggle. Just to put it in context total number of Jewish voters that both the parties pander to is 5.3 MM.
    SC: NSC | PD: 2nd-Oct-2009 |RD: 1-Mar-2012 |ND: 7-Mar-2012 | FP Notice: ?? | EAD/AP : ??

  7. #357
    Quote Originally Posted by bookworm View Post
    The problem with immigration is that immigrants forget once they are naturalized. There are few like Q who keep pushing the agenda. If 140K+ immigrants get naturalized each year and vote as a bloc then Bernie or Trump can not afford to ignore immigration. If we consider only the last 20 years as a period of struggle that means 2.8 MM went through this struggle. Just to put it in context total number of Jewish voters that both the parties pander to is 5.3 MM.
    What does Perdue want - More visa for nurses or less visa for nurses. I'm hearing both versions.

  8. #358
    Sophomore
    Join Date
    Oct 2018
    Location
    Cambridge, MA
    Posts
    19
    Quote Originally Posted by smuggymba View Post
    What does Perdue want - More visa for nurses or less visa for nurses. I'm hearing both versions.
    Do we know what he wants? He provided no indication of what he specifically wants changed in the resolution other than that he is concerned about the impact on certain "industries". The carve-out for nurses was for Rand Paul.

  9. #359
    Sensei
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    San Francisco
    Posts
    84
    I have not looked at the C-Span videos but one of the news articles mentions that Perdue in his statement was actually quite positive about the bill, and was willing to discuss in detail with Mike Lee. Even though I am not optimistic about the bill given the blows in the past years, I would still be looking forward to when/if the bill is tabled for a second time next week.

  10. #360
    Of everything you wrote Idli this sentence puzzled me. You guys in different places - physically and GC journey wise?
    Quote Originally Posted by idliman View Post
    My wife sent me her regrets.
    On another note - I am currently watching Roussevelts on NetFlix. I always admired FDR. But because of this docuseries now I have come to greatly admire Teddy Roussevelt too. One of his advisors once asked him how come some his views were not strictly constitutionalist. On that Teddy said, "Constitution is there to serve people. Not the other way around."

    I feel the same way about all existing laws around immigration or even the constitution itself. The principle of non-discrimination and equality is bigger than any law on the books or the constitution itself. And hence you should trust America's ability to be fair. Accordingly in addition to the current efforts, backlogged immigrants should also try to fight the immigration battle in the courts and in the court of public opinion based on principle of non-discrimination and equal opportunity.
    Last edited by qesehmk; 09-19-2019 at 09:45 PM.
    I no longer provide calculations/predictions ever since whereismyGC.com was created.
    I do run this site only as an administrator. Our goal is to improve clarity of GC process to help people plan their lives better.
    Use the info at your risk. None of this is legal advice.

    Forum Glossary | Forum Rules and Guidelines | If your published post disappeared, check - Lies and Misinformation thread


  11. #361
    Quote Originally Posted by qesehmk View Post
    Of everything you wrote Idli this sentence puzzled me. You guys in different places - physically and GC journey wise?

    On another note - I am currently watching Roussevelts on NetFlix. I always admired FDR. But because of this docuseries now I have come to greatly admire Teddy Roussevelt too. One of his advisors once asked him how come some his views were not strictly constitutionalist. On that Teddy said, "Constitution is there to serve people. Not the other way around."

    I feel the same way about all existing laws around immigration or even the constitution itself. The principle of non-discrimination and equality is bigger than any law on the books or the constitution itself. And hence you should trust America's ability to be fair. Accordingly in addition to the current efforts, backlogged immigrants should also try to fight the immigration battle in the courts and in the court of public opinion based on principle of non-discrimination and equal opportunity.
    Q, you have mentioned many times about fighting this battle in the courts but one thing that I fail to understand is that how can you win this in court? There is a law that Congress made. The system is working as per the law. Right now there is a backlog for certain countries because there is more demand than supply from those countries. However that doesn't mean that the law is not doing its job.

    I am not arguing in favor of the law of country caps. But whether I like the law or not, it is still the law and the system is following that law and working according to it.

    The job of the court is to interpret laws and not change them or make new laws. That is the job of Congress. So how can a backlogged candidate appeal to court saying this is discrimination because he has to wait for decades to get green card due to country cap? Because if the candidate makes that argument, the court is just going to defer that to Congress and ask the candidate to approach members of Congress and do advocacy for changing the law. How can a court override the law made by Congress?

    You have made the case for fighting this issue in court multiple times but my personal feeling is that the case will not stand in court even for a day. If it was a indeed genuine way of solving this issue, then someone would have approached the court by now. I believe advocacy remains the only way.

  12. #362

  13. #363
    Quote Originally Posted by TheLureoftheGreen View Post
    How about Bernie? Did he decide to not object knowing full well that Purdue was going to? Do we know anything about that? Else, we'll just see another "surprise" objection next time...
    Let's not forget Bernie is heavily influenced by his Pakistani campaign manager Faiz Shakir, who is behind Bernie's comments on Kashmir. Pakistanis are against this bill for obvious reasons.
    PD: 08/25/2008 EB2I

  14. #364
    Quote Originally Posted by PD2008AUG25 View Post
    Let's not forget Bernie is heavily influenced by his Pakistani campaign manager Faiz Shakir, who is behind Bernie's comments on Kashmir. Pakistanis are against this bill for obvious reasons.
    Actually Bernie has opposed high skilled immigration since his first campaign in 2016 and he has been consistent on his views since years if not decades. So give the man his due. But ot course the chances of him getting nomination or becoming the president are very very low. One potential issue is the damage he can do to the current bill. Also note that Ilhan Omar and Rashida Talib opposed the bill in House and voted against it. So this seems to be a trend among far left politicians.

    Iatiam

  15. #365

    Lightbulb

    Jonty - it is mighty progress to advocate against country caps as opposed to EAD relief and similar issues IV used to advocate for. As I said they should give this blog its due.

    However I disagree that advocacy (i.e. legislative way) is the only way. I think nobody has even tried courts. Second public opinion is another way to make advocacy even more effective. The moment people realize how much injustice Indians and Chinese are facing ... believe me .. they will root for you.

    As I said earlier in my post - principles and values and peoples' wishes are bigger than laws regulations and even constitution. Hence it is critical to appeal to Americans' sense of justice.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jonty Rhodes View Post
    Q, you have mentioned many times about fighting this battle in the courts but one thing that I fail to understand is that how can you win this in court? There is a law that Congress made. The system is working as per the law. Right now there is a backlog for certain countries because there is more demand than supply from those countries. However that doesn't mean that the law is not doing its job.

    I am not arguing in favor of the law of country caps. But whether I like the law or not, it is still the law and the system is following that law and working according to it.

    The job of the court is to interpret laws and not change them or make new laws. That is the job of Congress. So how can a backlogged candidate appeal to court saying this is discrimination because he has to wait for decades to get green card due to country cap? Because if the candidate makes that argument, the court is just going to defer that to Congress and ask the candidate to approach members of Congress and do advocacy for changing the law. How can a court override the law made by Congress?

    You have made the case for fighting this issue in court multiple times but my personal feeling is that the case will not stand in court even for a day. If it was a indeed genuine way of solving this issue, then someone would have approached the court by now. I believe advocacy remains the only way.
    I no longer provide calculations/predictions ever since whereismyGC.com was created.
    I do run this site only as an administrator. Our goal is to improve clarity of GC process to help people plan their lives better.
    Use the info at your risk. None of this is legal advice.

    Forum Glossary | Forum Rules and Guidelines | If your published post disappeared, check - Lies and Misinformation thread


  16. #366
    Sophomore
    Join Date
    Sep 2019
    Location
    Princeton, New Jersey
    Posts
    25
    Quote Originally Posted by iatiam View Post
    Actually Bernie has opposed high skilled immigration since his first campaign in 2016 and he has been consistent on his views since years if not decades. So give the man his due. But of course the chances of him getting nomination or becoming the president are very very low. One potential issue is the damage he can do to the current bill. Also note that Ilhan Omar and Rashida Talib opposed the bill in House and voted against it. So this seems to be a trend among far left politicians.

    Iatiam
    Bernie is far far left and he will never jump on the legal immigration band wagon. I think not only Ilhan Omar and Rashida Talib, Democrats were generally never good for India.

    As Q quoted - - for such a change in the political mindset, people of America should get involved , Q is absolutely right. IV or other organizations should talk about this as much as possible through main stream media. Besides, we ourselves should talk about it with Americans we meet and greet everyday to spread the knowledge. Many Americans I talk to, have no knowledge of Legal immigration but, are well aware of DACA.

  17. #367
    Quote Originally Posted by qesehmk View Post
    Jonty - it is mighty progress to advocate against country caps as opposed to EAD relief and similar issues IV used to advocate for. As I said they should give this blog its due.

    However I disagree that advocacy (i.e. legislative way) is the only way. I think nobody has even tried courts. Second public opinion is another way to make advocacy even more effective. The moment people realize how much injustice Indians and Chinese are facing ... believe me .. they will root for you.

    As I said earlier in my post - principles and values and peoples' wishes are bigger than laws regulations and even constitution. Hence it is critical to appeal to Americans' sense of justice.
    Q - Who knows! God forbid if this does not work then maybe IV would decide to take this approach. This is the most conducive time for having this bill passed. If not now, then I do not see this passing ever...

  18. #368
    Quote Originally Posted by qesehmk View Post
    Jonty - it is mighty progress to advocate against country caps as opposed to EAD relief and similar issues IV used to advocate for. As I said they should give this blog its due.

    However I disagree that advocacy (i.e. legislative way) is the only way. I think nobody has even tried courts. Second public opinion is another way to make advocacy even more effective. The moment people realize how much injustice Indians and Chinese are facing ... believe me .. they will root for you.

    As I said earlier in my post - principles and values and peoples' wishes are bigger than laws regulations and even constitution. Hence it is critical to appeal to Americans' sense of justice.
    So who are we supposed to sue? USCIS for implementing the laws of the country or the Federal government for using it's sovereign rights to decide who enters the country?

    Iatiam

  19. #369
    IATIAM, I hope you understand that it's not my fight and it's not my path to walk on. I can only show you the way ... these are good questions to brainstorm as part of your strategy. As I said --- if I were doing these things I will wage a war on 3 fronts:

    1) Courts
    2) Public Opinion and Corporations
    3) Legislative Bodies

    Right now only #3 is being pursued which is necessary but not sufficient.
    Quote Originally Posted by iatiam View Post
    So who are we supposed to sue? USCIS for implementing the laws of the country or the Federal government for using it's sovereign rights to decide who enters the country?

    Iatiam
    I no longer provide calculations/predictions ever since whereismyGC.com was created.
    I do run this site only as an administrator. Our goal is to improve clarity of GC process to help people plan their lives better.
    Use the info at your risk. None of this is legal advice.

    Forum Glossary | Forum Rules and Guidelines | If your published post disappeared, check - Lies and Misinformation thread


  20. #370
    Sophomore
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    36
    Quote Originally Posted by qesehmk View Post
    IATIAM, I hope you understand that it's not my fight and it's not my path to walk on. I can only show you the way ... these are good questions to brainstorm as part of your strategy. As I said --- if I were doing these things I will wage a war on 3 fronts:

    1) Courts
    2) Public Opinion and Corporations
    3) Legislative Bodies

    Right now only #3 is being pursued which is necessary but not sufficient.
    Using this thread to brainstorm on an idea for approaching courts. Will be great if you share inputs for feasibility of this as this has been on my mind for some time now. The idea aims at going to court for being able to apply for citizenship (without necessarily getting a GC as the numerical limitations only pertain to to GC and not citizenship). As per instructions for form N-400 (application for naturalization), the following are the eligibility criteria for applying for naturalization.

    1. You are at least 18 years of age at the time of filing (except active duty members of the U.S. Armed Forces);
    2. You are a permanent resident of the United States for a required period of time;
    3. You have lived within the state or USCIS district where you claim residence for at least 3 months prior to filing;
    4. You have demonstrated physical presence within the United States for a required period of time;
    5. You have demonstrated continuous residence for a required period of time;
    6. You demonstrate good moral character;
    7. You demonstrate an attachment to the principles and ideals of the U.S. Constitution;
    8. You demonstrate a basic knowledge of U.S. history and government (also known as “civics”) as well as an ability to
    read, write, speak and understand basic English; and
    9. You take an Oath of Allegiance to the United States. Some applicants may be eligible for a modified oath.

    Most of us will meet all criteria except 2. The idea is to go to court for the definition of 'permanent resident'. Since H1-B with approved I-140 is renewable in perpetuity, why is it not considered permanent ? Perhaps the case for people on EAD after filing I-485 is even stronger.

    IMO, best people to challenge this will be EB2-NIW candidates who have EAD. This will be because EB2-NIW does not need to be backed by an approved labour. Therefore EB2-NIW + EAD candidates ARE permanent residents.

    If a challenge in court is successful, this will imply at least people with EB2-NIW, who have an EAD for 5 years, will be able to apply for citizenship. In the best case scenario, even people who have an approved I-140 > 5 years, will be able to apply for citizenship.

  21. #371
    Pandit
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    Sunny SoCal
    Posts
    108
    Quote Originally Posted by NJMavarick View Post
    I think enough capital is spent on this to start something new. This is the root cause which they are trying to address.
    The root cause is not country cap. 140K is not enough visas for EB category. Remember, India always received more GCs than 7% most years in EB1/2/3 category.

    In my opinion, allocating 30% for the most backlogged country would have been much better. The backlogged country is guaranteed certain visas and others would have to wait probably 12-18 months. Such bill wouldn't have attracted ROWers to lobby against it.

    What country cap removal will achieve is, spread the pain unanimously which I think is not good. Many ROWers apply GC while on OPT itself and they don't even apply H-1Bs. Country cap removal will force everyone apply for H-1Bs which in turn reduce the total H-1Bs from India.

    Any day, I would have taken 30% for most backlogged country than going for everything. 30% and I-140 EAD would have been awesome without catching anyone's attention.

    Just my $.02

  22. #372
    Quote Originally Posted by Immigo View Post
    Using this thread to brainstorm on an idea for approaching courts. Will be great if you share inputs for feasibility of this as this has been on my mind for some time now. The idea aims at going to court for being able to apply for citizenship (without necessarily getting a GC as the numerical limitations only pertain to to GC and not citizenship). As per instructions for form N-400 (application for naturalization), the following are the eligibility criteria for applying for naturalization.

    1. You are at least 18 years of age at the time of filing (except active duty members of the U.S. Armed Forces);
    2. You are a permanent resident of the United States for a required period of time;
    3. You have lived within the state or USCIS district where you claim residence for at least 3 months prior to filing;
    4. You have demonstrated physical presence within the United States for a required period of time;
    5. You have demonstrated continuous residence for a required period of time;
    6. You demonstrate good moral character;
    7. You demonstrate an attachment to the principles and ideals of the U.S. Constitution;
    8. You demonstrate a basic knowledge of U.S. history and government (also known as “civics”) as well as an ability to
    read, write, speak and understand basic English; and
    9. You take an Oath of Allegiance to the United States. Some applicants may be eligible for a modified oath.

    Most of us will meet all criteria except 2. The idea is to go to court for the definition of 'permanent resident'. Since H1-B with approved I-140 is renewable in perpetuity, why is it not considered permanent ? Perhaps the case for people on EAD after filing I-485 is even stronger.

    IMO, best people to challenge this will be EB2-NIW candidates who have EAD. This will be because EB2-NIW does not need to be backed by an approved labour. Therefore EB2-NIW + EAD candidates ARE permanent residents.

    If a challenge in court is successful, this will imply at least people with EB2-NIW, who have an EAD for 5 years, will be able to apply for citizenship. In the best case scenario, even people who have an approved I-140 > 5 years, will be able to apply for citizenship.
    You are basically challenging definition of "Permanent resident". As per the law it is clear who is considered permanent resident: Any person not a citizen of the United States who is living in the U.S. under legally recognized and lawfully recorded permanent residence as an immigrant. Also known as “permanent resident alien,” “resident alien permit holder,” and “Green Card holder.”
    Key words= Legally recognized and lawfully recorded...
    It is going to be really difficult to challenge that in the court.

  23. #373
    Quote Originally Posted by jimmys View Post
    What country cap removal will achieve is, spread the pain unanimously which I think is not good. Many ROWers apply GC while on OPT itself and they don't even apply H-1Bs. Country cap removal will force everyone apply for H-1Bs which in turn reduce the total H-1Bs from
    Just my $.02
    Good; the pain should be EQUAL for ALL; they they all might come to the table to find a consensus. Status Quo works awesome for ROW; express lane no wait.

  24. #374
    Sensei
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Bay area
    Posts
    60
    Quote Originally Posted by smuggymba View Post
    What does Perdue want - More visa for nurses or less visa for nurses. I'm hearing both versions.
    Read somewhere else that Perdue-Lee have a deal. Nurses will get 15K instead of 8K. Likely to be up for UC tomorrow.

    Now waiting for Bernie to pop up with a carve out for agricultural workers
    SC: NSC | PD: 2nd-Oct-2009 |RD: 1-Mar-2012 |ND: 7-Mar-2012 | FP Notice: ?? | EAD/AP : ??

  25. #375
    Quote Originally Posted by bookworm View Post
    Read somewhere else that Perdue-Lee have a deal. Nurses will get 15K instead of 8K. Likely to be up for UC tomorrow.

    Now waiting for Bernie to pop up with a carve out for agricultural workers
    True! Looking at this..whats stopping another Senator to request for some other carve out! Knowing that all it takes is one Senator..I am not too optimistic. Mind says No, Heart says Yes.

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
  •