Bills, Rules & Politics

[Turbulent_Dragonfly]

I hear that Grace Meng's amendement for stopping the spillover for FY 2021 and FY 2022 had passed the committee. I cross checked the amendment and verified that it makes spillover as zero. For people not familiar with INA (d)(2)(C) specifies the spilloever from FB to EB.



She also another amendment which will provide visa's for people affected by DT's presedential proclamations. I could not confirm for sure whether it had passed the committee, but the text of the amendement is there. If someone cross checks if it had passed, please share.

Here's the text to the Appropriations Bill for FY 2021.

With democrats controling the house, the Committee version should fly through congress. Don't know what will happen in the Senate.

If you ask me, no immigration related amendments will make it through. They will all be cleaned out. I have observed these type of backdoor fixes being tried many times before.

[Zenzone]

I hear that Grace Meng's amendement for stopping the spillover for FY 2021 and FY 2022 had passed the committee. I cross checked the amendment and verified that it makes spillover as zero. For people not familiar with INA (d)(2)(C) specifies the spilloever from FB to EB.



She also another amendment which will provide visa's for people affected by DT's presedential proclamations. I could not confirm for sure whether it had passed the committee, but the text of the amendement is there. If someone cross checks if it had passed, please share.

Here's the text to the Appropriations Bill for FY 2021.

With democrats controling the house, the Committee version should fly through congress. Don't know what will happen in the Senate.

Why do I get a Deja'Vu moment here? Wait didn't the dems try the same thing last year too through appropriations (Can someone confirm). This Meng amendment feels pretty substantial for an appropriations bill. As such appropriations is not expected to pass until Dec 2021 atleast with piece meal bills happening to keep the funding going until then. Interesting it says that re-capture unused FB to EB SO numbers in 2021 fiscal also and give it back to the FB. Its essentially a re-capture bill also for FB.

[inspired_p]

Why do I get a Deja'Vu moment here? Wait didn't the dems try the same thing last year too through appropriations (Can someone confirm). This Meng amendment feels pretty substantial for an appropriations bill. As such appropriations is not expected to pass until Dec 2021 atleast with piece meal bills happening to keep the funding going until then. Interesting it says that re-capture unused FB to EB SO numbers in 2021 fiscal also and give it back to the FB. Its essentially a re-capture bill also for FB.

What happens to. FADs if no spillover is considered? I would assume it will retrogress tremendously.

[gthbvf]

Doesn't Appropriations bill need simple majority to pass? ..With thin majority of Ds in Senate , passing appropriations before end of FY21still possible?

[Zenzone]

Doesn't Appropriations bill need simple majority to pass? ..With thin majority of Ds in Senate , passing appropriations before end of FY21still possible?

That's my point. If the govt. doesn't shut down (highly unlikely in my opinion) with a split senate, the bill is expected to pass in Dec 2021. But the language says FY 2021 wasted visas should be re-captured back. If that's the case ~ 150K wasted FB SO from this fiscal should also flow back to EB next year. Not sure of the real impact.

Without getting technical on the language pre-maturely, these type of amendments have very slim chance as such to begin with. If these are minor annoyance USCIS wastage due to poor processing efficiency is the real concern in my opinion. Feels like posturing.

[Zenzone]

Doesn't Appropriations bill need simple majority to pass? ..With thin majority of Ds in Senate , passing appropriations before end of FY21still possible?

That's why immigration provisions almost always get stripped out as they are subjected to filibuster. Its a tacit agreement that worked even during DT's years and prior.

[gthbvf]

You missing point ..Ideally Appropriations/Omnibus bill has to pass in FY21 (before Sept2021) .. With simple majority vote needed it's doable in Senate . And since D control Senate so hard to strip amendment sourced from house D.

[abcx13]

You missing point ..Ideally Appropriations/Omnibus bill has to pass in FY21 (before Sept2021) .. With simple majority vote needed it's doable in Senate . And since D control Senate so hard to strip amendment sourced from house D.

They would need Manchin and Sinema's support.

[Zenzone]

You missing point ..Ideally Appropriations/Omnibus bill has to pass in FY21 (before Sept2021) .. With simple majority vote needed it's doable in Senate . And since D control Senate so hard to strip amendment sourced from house D.

No chance as such. Last year Durbin tried it. Also, this year's appropriations bill will be delayed. Have seen this song and dance many times.

Some early analysis for your reference (please take it with a grain of salt) - https://www.am22tech.com/usa/news/bl...-eb-spillover/

[GCkaLADDU]

That's my point. If the govt. doesn't shut down (highly unlikely in my opinion) with a split senate, the bill is expected to pass in Dec 2021. But the language says FY 2021 wasted visas should be re-captured back. If that's the case ~ 150K wasted FB SO from this fiscal should also flow back to EB next year. Not sure of the real impact.

Without getting technical on the language pre-maturely, these type of amendments have very slim chance as such to begin with. If these are minor annoyance USCIS wastage due to poor processing efficiency is the real concern in my opinion. Feels like posturing.

I believe devil is in the details. It all boils down to what is considered as the established worldwide level for EB for year 2020 (156K vs 140K) and 2021 (262K vs 140K) in the section B of the amendment. Per my understanding it should be 156K/262K as these limits were already established at the start of the fiscal year. If thats the case, then definitely the calculation for 2022 stands at 140K + (262K - Used Visas in 2021)

Section E makes spillover for 2021 and 2022 as zero but its not clear how this effects the numbers for 2021. Does this text make section B as 140K? If no what is the point of adding year 2021 in the this section

[Zenzone]

I believe devil is in the details. It all boils down to what is considered as the established worldwide level for EB for year 2020 (156K vs 140K) and 2021 (262K vs 140K) in the section B of the amendment. Per my understanding it should be 156K/262K as these limits were already established at the start of the fiscal year. If thats the case, then definitely the calculation for 2022 stands at 140K + (262K - Used Visas in 2021)

Section E makes spillover for 2021 and 2022 as zero but its not clear how this effects the numbers for 2021. Does this text make section B as 140K? If no what is the point of adding year 2021 in the this section

Here is the logical conflict. This year USCIS must have given more than 140K visas in EB (even if they waste a lot of visas), so how can allotted numbers be retroactively redacted. Makes no sense because more than the 140K statutory limit was exceeded only because of the spillover at the beginning on 2021 fiscal flowing into the EB from FB per INA (d)(2)(C). If the SO was retroactively reset to zero then USCIS would have breached the INA numerical limit for FY 2021.

[android09]

Here is the logical conflict. This year USCIS must have given more than 140K visas in EB (even if they waste a lot of visas), so how can allotted numbers be retroactively redacted. Makes no sense because more than the 140K statutory limit was exceeded only because of the spillover at the beginning on 2021 fiscal flowing into the EB from FB per INA (d)(2)(C). If the SO was retroactively reset to zero then USCIS would have breached the INA numerical limit for FY 2021.

The same thing was tried last year as well. The DHS was a continuing resolution funding. Fully expect the same this year as well. Doubt if this will be enacted through a omnibus bill with 50-50 and VP breaking the tie.

[Zenzone]

The same thing was tried last year as well. The DHS was a continuing resolution funding. Fully expect the same this year as well. Doubt if this will be enacted through a omnibus bill with 50-50 and VP breaking the tie.

Agree that. Regular continuing appropriations will need filibuster proof majority if I'm not mistaken here. Also, as noted above Sinema and Manchin will be key players as well regardless.

[rsnake]

Does anyone know if any of the Republicans on the committee voted for this amendment too?

[qesehmk]

I quickly scanned the meng amendment and this is how it comes across to me. It has 2 key provisions.
1) Recapture all unused visas from 2020 and 2021 and give them back to EB and FB both.
2) Make USCIS reserve visas for some of the applicants and process them in 2022 with 2020+2021 quota!!

I think #2 makes the whole thing unnecessarily complicated. If #1 is accomplished then #2 becomes moot.

Now as per #1 - the devil in the details is that meng is proposing equitable distribution between EB and FB by in proportion of their base size.
Step 1 - Recapture visas = Visas available for EB+FB for 2020+2021 - Visas used for EB+FB for 2020+2021.
Step 2 - Distribute fairly across EB and FB in proportion.

So do the math. My back of the hand calculation tells me there could be approx 400K visas in total and basically EB will get 150K and FB will get 250K for 2022 (in proportion of their size which is approximately in that range).

So if this bill passes then we are talking about 290K visas for EB for USCIS fiscal 2022.

So the first order of business is for the people with best understanding of legal jargon to pour over Meng's pdf and confirm what I am saying.
And then the second order of business is to write to your congressman asking him to support meng.

We can also try to influence Meng to remove the unnecessary part of her amendment or modify it to make it less complicated (imagine the complications for USCIS / DOS trying to implement that 2nd part).

Overall I give thumbs up to this.

[Zenzone]

Does anyone know if any of the Republicans on the committee voted for this amendment too?

Zip. It was 37-24 along party lines.

[Zenzone]

I quickly scanned the meng amendment and this is how it comes across to me. It has 2 key provisions.
1) Recapture all unused visas from 2020 and 2021 and give them back to EB and FB both.
2) Make USCIS reserve visas for some of the applicants and process them in 2022 with 2020+2021 quota!!

I think #2 makes the whole thing unnecessarily complicated. If #1 is accomplished then #2 becomes moot.

Now as per #1 - the devil in the details is that meng is proposing equitable distribution between EB and FB by in proportion of their base size.
Step 1 - Recapture visas = Visas available for EB+FB for 2020+2021 - Visas used for EB+FB for 2020+2021.
Step 2 - Distribute fairly across EB and FB in proportion.

So do the math. My back of the hand calculation tells me there could be approx 400K visas in total and basically EB will get 150K and FB will get 250K for 2022 (in proportion of their size which is approximately in that range).

So if this bill passes then we are talking about 290K visas for EB for USCIS fiscal 2022.

So the first order of business is for the people with best understanding of legal jargon to pour over Meng's pdf and confirm what I am saying.
And then the second order of business is to write to your congressman asking him to support meng.

We can also try to influence Meng to remove the unnecessary part of her amendment or modify it to make it less complicated (imagine the complications for USCIS / DOS trying to implement that 2nd part).

Overall I give thumbs up to this.

Interesting take. Another point is that these appropriation bills are subjected to filibuster in Senate as they cover discretionary spending. I already see folks like T.Cotton being vocal with their opposition. It feels like posturing to me.

[abcx13]

I quickly scanned the meng amendment and this is how it comes across to me. It has 2 key provisions.
1) Recapture all unused visas from 2020 and 2021 and give them back to EB and FB both.
2) Make USCIS reserve visas for some of the applicants and process them in 2022 with 2020+2021 quota!!

I think #2 makes the whole thing unnecessarily complicated. If #1 is accomplished then #2 becomes moot.

Now as per #1 - the devil in the details is that meng is proposing equitable distribution between EB and FB by in proportion of their base size.
Step 1 - Recapture visas = Visas available for EB+FB for 2020+2021 - Visas used for EB+FB for 2020+2021.
Step 2 - Distribute fairly across EB and FB in proportion.

So do the math. My back of the hand calculation tells me there could be approx 400K visas in total and basically EB will get 150K and FB will get 250K for 2022 (in proportion of their size which is approximately in that range).

So if this bill passes then we are talking about 290K visas for EB for USCIS fiscal 2022.

So the first order of business is for the people with best understanding of legal jargon to pour over Meng's pdf and confirm what I am saying.
And then the second order of business is to write to your congressman asking him to support meng.

We can also try to influence Meng to remove the unnecessary part of her amendment or modify it to make it less complicated (imagine the complications for USCIS / DOS trying to implement that 2nd part).

Overall I give thumbs up to this.

Q - I don't think it will actually allocate unused visas proportionally to EB and FB. I think it will allocate unused FY20+FY21 EB to EB in FY22 and unused FY20+FY21 FB to FB in FY22. FY20 FB-> FY21 EB SO that is unused by the time the bill passes also goes back to FB.

[Zenzone]

Q - I don't think it will actually allocate unused visas proportionally to EB and FB. I think it will allocate unused FY20+FY21 EB to EB in FY22 and unused FY20+FY21 FB to FB in FY22. FY20 FB-> FY21 EB SO that is unused by the time the bill passes also goes back to FB.

Out of curiosity, how many EB visas were wasted in FY 2020.

[AceMan]

Out of curiosity, how many EB visas were wasted in FY 2020.

EB visas issued for 2020 147,153. Visas available ~156,000

https://travel.state.gov/content/dam...bleV-Part3.pdf

[Zenzone]

EB visas issued for 2020 147,153. Visas available ~156,000

https://travel.state.gov/content/dam...bleV-Part3.pdf

Okay. So that means we had a SO of ~ 16K for FY 2020 and those 9K unused visas fall back to EB as part of this SO also?

[AceMan]

Okay. So that means we had a SO of ~ 16K for FY 2020 and those 9K unused visas fall back to EB as part of this SO also?

I recall an attempt to insert country cap removal in appropriations bill last year or the year before with no success. I suspect USCIS is not going to process more than 140K visas for 2021.

[gammaray]

I recall an attempt to insert country cap removal in appropriations bill last year or the year before with no success. I suspect USCIS is not going to process more than 140K visas for 2021.

The difference is last years congress was composed differently, with the Senate under Republican majority. If the budget bill is passed as a reconciliation bill it can pass the Senate with a simple majority and all democrats will vote along party lines. The small side items added to the bill like Meng's amendment will not register and not deter any of the members to vote against the bill, imo. In fact, I would argue, it would actually be presented and perceived in a positive light since it's giving back the lost visa of the covid years. Remember the covid spillover was an unintended consequence that benefited one type of immigrant visa's (more specifically, one country's immigrant visas) and hurt the other. So the amendment will really be viewed as a fair step to restore parity (to a system that's inherently unfair to begin with but that's a separate matter).

[qesehmk]

Q - I don't think it will actually allocate unused visas proportionally to EB and FB. I think it will allocate unused FY20+FY21 EB to EB in FY22 and unused FY20+FY21 FB to FB in FY22. FY20 FB-> FY21 EB SO that is unused by the time the bill passes also goes back to FB.

Thank you abcx. I will check again. Can somebody else put forth their simplified view of what meng amendment actually proposes? The more views we have the better.

[Zenzone]

The difference is last years congress was composed differently, with the Senate under Republican majority. If the budget bill is passed as a reconciliation bill it can pass the Senate with a simple majority and all democrats will vote along party lines. The small side items added to the bill like Meng's amendment will not register and not deter any of the members to vote against the bill, imo. In fact, I would argue, it would actually be presented and perceived in a positive light since it's giving back the lost visa of the covid years. Remember the covid spillover was an unintended consequence that benefited one type of immigrant visa's (more specifically, one country's immigrant visas) and hurt the other. So the amendment will really be viewed as a fair step to restore parity (to a system that's inherently unfair to begin with but that's a separate matter).

I think you might be mixing up reconciliation vs. new appropriations. This amendment is sitting in the new appropriations bill which will require filibuster if I'm not wrong. Also, its not the question of "small" amendment because the Senate Parliamentarian reviews and strikes down items in the reconciliation bills that don't confirm to Byrd's rule and other limitations on what can be thrown into such omnibus bills. These bills have a very narrow scope. Durbin's amendment last year was struck down by the parliamentarian for example.