Lobbying/Identifying the Last Successful Coalition

[berkeleybee]

It seems important to identify the coalition that was successful in getting the H-1B caps raised. Clearly they had the clout and the right strategy figured out.

Do we know who (lobbyists and legislators) were involved and how that happened?


Some groups that I found were:

1. AILA
http://www.aila.org/

2. CompeteAmerica
http://www.competeamerica.org/index.html

Compete America, formerly called American Businesses for Legal Immigration, is the group that managed to get the H-1B waiver for foreign students with Masters and PhD degrees from US universities.


much smaller and now defunct

3. Immigrant Support Network
http://www.isn.org/

The Immigration subcommittee of the judiciary committee is sure to be involved, even if they are preoccupied with supreme court nominations right now. A list of the senators is available at

http://www.vote-smart.org/committee.php?comm_id=40

Immigration, Border Security and Citizenship Subcommittee
416 Russell Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510
Phone: 202-224-3521
Fax: 202-224-0103

Republicans:
John Cornyn, TX, Chair
Charles E. Grassley, IA
Jon Kyl, AZ
Mike DeWine, OH
Jeff Sessions, AL
Sam Brownback, KS
Tom Coburn, OK

Democrats:
Edward M. Kennedy, MA, Ranking Member
Joseph R. Biden Jr., DE
Dianne Feinstein, CA
Russell D. Feingold, WI
Charles E. Schumer, NY
Richard J. Durbin, IL

[berkeleybee]

I sent an email to Eric Thomas (ethomas@competeamerica.org) at Compete America to ask if they were aware of the effects of the October 2005 Visa Bulletin and the implications of per-country limits.



He wrote back saying:

Thank you for writing. This is a top priority for Compete America, and we are actively working for a legislative solution to the green card crisis. If you would like to help, we are in the process of collecting personal stories about people caught unfairly in the system. We believe that “putting a face” on the issue will help Members of Congress better understand the situation and help us gain support for a solution. To that end, we are looking for highly accomplished professionals that have been forced to wait for years — and who are either still waiting, or have given up and returned home. Both situations point to the high cost being paid by individuals and by U.S. companies.
Thanks again,
Eric Thomas

We need the articulate members amongst us to get up there and tell our stories. If you feel up to this, write back to him.


I am also attaching the letter I sent [which borrows liberally from the two Dinesh Shenoy articles (2001, 2005)]. I would encourage you to modify the letter with some details about yourself and send it to legislators and members of the media. So far I have sent it to the Democrat members of the immigration subcommittee and Thomas Friedman at the New York Times.

[berkeleybee]

I apologize for flooding this thread, but the thought that Compete America is looking for stories and faces to show members of congress made me think of something

To illustrate the per-country limit problem what we need is to find people who applied on the same approximate date, with the same qualifications, but were of different countries.

One person, in all likelihood, European who got his greencard right away, once labor certification happened, because he/she is from the "right" country

Five or ten others, in all likelihood, brown-skinned, who are still waiting, all because they are from the "wrong" country.

If that doesn't make people sit up and start paying attention to the details/take note of the implication of the current policy I don't know what will.

Do you or your friends have any such examples?

[berkeleybee]

I was delighted when I found this comprehensive list of pro-immigration organizations, put together by someone who is anti-immigration, even anti-temporary workers. Little did they know how useful it would be to us (not to worry, even if they take the page down, I've saved it as an archive file, but we can't attach .mht files to these posts).

We should get in touch with as many of these organizations as possible. Make them focus on getting rid of per-country limits.

http://www.zazona.com/ShameH1B/Skunks.htm#ABLI

[santosh_30]

I had a little suggestion...if it makes any sense.

Someone had made a mention of putting up a "large" ad in the New York Times, Economist, WallStreet Journal. How about we set up a separate fund on this forum just for that. Make it so that people can pay via Paypal. Of course, tehy cna pay by check or credit card if they want. But Paypal would be quicker, safer, and easier to manage.

A summary of the arguments for removing retrogression should be depicted in a eye-catching but informative manner. And we should put some faces to the plight.

I dont know how much a half-page ad costs for NYT. I am hazarding a guess here. Say $20000. If each person contributes, on an average, $50, thats 400 people. This forum may easily have that many people who are affected by the retrogression. And I think $50 is a paltry sum to pay considering the time and trouble that would be saved by reaching a wider audience and getting some positive results. Papers like NYT and Wall Street Journal reach an elite audience and these papers usually make the government take stock of their opinions and editorials. Maybe this would attract interest of some journalists who would be willing to do some stories/articles ont his issue and we would get a domino effect that would build momentum for this cause.

I think a start would be to start a new thread with a lot of visibility, somethign like the announcements made by Rajivji about how DOL backed off their position on PERM and get a count of how many people would contribute. Then, we can get someone with good creative skills or the right contacts to draft the ad.

Any comments?

Thanks,

Santosh

[retro_unjust]

Berkleybee I found your strategy impressive and constructive. Nice !

[berkeleybee]

Santosh,

That is a good idea, but I think we have not got to the point where we have lined up our arguments and organizations. If there is an ad, there will be coverage, and we need to have talking points and spokespersons lined up to continue the debate.

My sense is that we are not there yet; Check out the techworkers yahoo groups.

We don't seem to have realized that there are large lobby groups that are already invested in this process, and that we need to work with them not reinvent the wheel.

I find it interesting that this thread does not get as much traffic as threads where we simply vent about the basic problem, without analysis.

Originally Posted by santosh_30

I had a little suggestion...if it makes any sense.

Someone had made a mention of putting up a "large" ad in the New York Times, Economist, WallStreet Journal. How about we set up a separate fund on this forum just for that. Make it so that people can pay via Paypal. Of course, tehy cna pay by check or credit card if they want. But Paypal would be quicker, safer, and easier to manage.

A summary of the arguments for removing retrogression should be depicted in a eye-catching but informative manner. And we should put some faces to the plight.

I dont know how much a half-page ad costs for NYT. I am hazarding a guess here. Say $20000. If each person contributes, on an average, $50, thats 400 people. This forum may easily have that many people who are affected by the retrogression. And I think $50 is a paltry sum to pay considering the time and trouble that would be saved by reaching a wider audience and getting some positive results. Papers like NYT and Wall Street Journal reach an elite audience and these papers usually make the government take stock of their opinions and editorials. Maybe this would attract interest of some journalists who would be willing to do some stories/articles ont his issue and we would get a domino effect that would build momentum for this cause.

I think a start would be to start a new thread with a lot of visibility, somethign like the announcements made by Rajivji about how DOL backed off their position on PERM and get a count of how many people would contribute. Then, we can get someone with good creative skills or the right contacts to draft the ad.

Any comments?

Thanks,

Santosh

[berkeleybee]

Lynn Shotwell at the American Council for International Personnel (http://www.acip.com/acipweb.nsf/Policy_Center?OpenPage) wrote back to me saying that they are working with Congress on this issue, and asking if she could use my story.

I'd encourage you to write with your experiences to

Lynn Shotwell,
Executive Director
Lynn_Shotwell@acip.com

Originally Posted by berkeleybee

I was delighted when I found this comprehensive list of pro-immigration organizations, put together by someone who is anti-immigration, even anti-temporary workers. Little did they know how useful it would be to us (not to worry, even if they take the page down, I've saved it as an archive file, but we can't attach .mht files to these posts).

We should get in touch with as many of these organizations as possible. Make them focus on getting rid of per-country limits.

http://www.zazona.com/ShameH1B/Skunks.htm#ABLI

[berkeleybee]

This story posted on the techworkers group about how the 1996 immigration battle was won:

http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/4.08/netizen_pr.html

[meg_z]

I too think we should focus on lobbying groups. Thanks for your effort.

Originally Posted by berkeleybee

Lynn Shotwell at the American Council for International Personnel (http://www.acip.com/acipweb.nsf/Policy_Center?OpenPage) wrote back to me saying that they are working with Congress on this issue, and asking if she could use my story.

I'd encourage you to write with your experiences to

Lynn Shotwell,
Executive Director
Lynn_Shotwell@acip.com

[applying4gc]

berkeleybee,

Thank you for sharing your constructive information.

We must keep the immigration reform issue front and center. By continuously communicating our issues/concerns about the retrogression to the local and national media, advocacy groups, and Congress, the retrogression will be resolved sooner than later. But we have do it together.

I will e-mail Lynn_Shotwell@acip.com and ethomas@competeamerica.org (Eric Thomas). I will also instruct friends and family to e-mail Eric and Lynn regarding the retrogression.

I agree that we don't need to reinvent the wheel.

There is already a plethora of organizations (see list below) advocating/applauding for Secure America and Orderly Immigration Act of 2005 (also known as Kennedy-McCain act). Kennedy-McCain bill will increase employment-based visas to 290,000 from 140,000.

"Business, Labor, Faith, and Immigrant Communities Applaud Introduction of The Secure America and Orderly Immigration Act of 2005

American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA)
American Jewish Committee (AJC)
Arab Community Center for Economic and Social Services (ACCESS)
Arizona Interfaith Network (AIN)
Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN)
Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights of Los Angeles (CHIRLA)
Conservatives and Business Representatives
Cook County (IL) Resolution
Episcopal Migration Ministries (EMM)
Essential Worker Immigration Coalition (EWIC)
Fair Immigration Reform Movement (FIRM)
The Farm Labor Organizing Committee (FLOC), AFL-CIO
Heartland Alliance’s Midwest Immigrant & Human Rights Center (MIHRC)
Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society (HIAS)
Idaho Community Action Network (ICAN)
Illinois Coalition for Immigrant and Refugee Rights (ICIRR)
Immigrant Rights Network of Iowa & Nebraska
International Franchise Association
Jesuit Conference and Jesuit Refugee Service USA
Laborers' International Union of North American (LIUNA), AFL-CIO
Lutheran Immigration and Refugee Services (LIRS)
Massachusetts Immigrant & Refugee Advocacy Coalition (MIRA)
Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund (MALDEF)
National Asian Pacific American Legal Consortium (NAPALC)
National Association of Latino Elected and Appointed Officials (NALEO) Educational Fund
National Council of La Raza (NCLR)
National Immigration Forum
National Immigration Law Center (NILC)
National Korean American Service & Education Consortium (NAKASEC)
National Restaurant Association
New York Immigration Coalition (NYIC)
OCA
PCUN, Oregon's farmworker union, and CAUSA, Oregon's immigrant rights coalition
People for the American Way (PFAW)
Service Employees International Union (SEIU), AFL-CIO
UNITE HERE!
US Committee for Refugees and Immigrants (USCRI)
United Farm Workers (UFW)
United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB)
U.S. Chamber of Commerce"

Source: http://www.cirnow.org/content/en/support_cir_bill.htm

Media is also getting the message because in the last few months major circulations have written about immigration reform. Los Angeles Time, New York Times, among others.

Let's continue to e-mail/fax/write to the advocacy groups as well as to the media and Congress about the retrogression.

[gte123]

Per BerkeleyBee's suggestion I sent an email to Eric Thomas (Compete America), this is the reply i got back from him. I also emailed Lynn, awaiting a reply...
**************************************

Thank you very much for sharing your story with me. Â I can only imagine how frustrating the system has been for you. Â As you know, we are collecting these stories to help put a face on the issue so the Washington bureaucrats cant just look at numbers. We will be in touch as the project progresses. Many thanks and best wishes to you and your family.
Eric Thomas
Compete America
***********************************
I suggest other's do the same...

Keep up the good work BerkeleyBee,appreciate it.

[berkeleybee]

Thanks for the nice words both on the thread and in private messages. Those of you who are reading this thread -- rate it (those stars next to some threads) and keep it going.

The political wheels are just beginning to be oiled, we each need to do our bit to get them moving.

Those who are writing in with their stories to Compete America and ACIP -- make them as specific as possible, describe the various ways in which you are affected.

BTW, do we have forum members whose firms are already members of Compete America? Most of the big tech firms are, as are many universities.

[marlon2006]

Pardon me if I misunderstood this, but you seem to think that a way to solve this backlog problems for Indians is by getting rid of per country quotas ? If so, then the worldwide people like me would be affected in a huge pile of millions of Indians and Chinese GC applicants. I think that is not fair. If this is correct, I suggest that you guys simply suggest increase of Visa numbers, but don't suggest fixes at expenses of making the worldwide people suffer with this. I don't think that will ever be implemented anyway, but let's make sure we implement a fair fix to everyone.

Originally Posted by berkeleybee
I was delighted when I found this comprehensive list of pro-immigration organizations, put together by someone who is anti-immigration, even anti-temporary workers. Little did they know how useful it would be to us (not to worry, even if they take the page down, I've saved it as an archive file, but we can't attach .mht files to these posts).

We should get in touch with as many of these organizations as possible. Make them focus on getting rid of per-country limits.

[nashdel]

Do you really think what you want is fair. It is not going to be decided by me and you, therefore there is no point in arguing but I believe, those million people belong to same world as yours and we all are foreginers. Whoever comes first gets served first. I hope you are not talking about minority rights for smaller countries. By this logic you can also say since indians and chinese can consume so much oil there is nothing left for other countries so Smaller countries should get free oil. It is a free market economy. This is not a cultural event. we are talking about employment based immigration. whoever has got the skills should get the first choice. But don`t worry US policy makers think you are right, for whatever reason.

Originally Posted by marlon2006

Pardon me if I misunderstood this, but you seem to think that a way to solve this backlog problems for Indians is by getting rid of per country quotas ? If so, then the worldwide people like me would be affected in a huge pile of millions of Indians and Chinese GC applicants. I think that is not fair. If this is correct, I suggest that you guys simply suggest increase of Visa numbers, but don't suggest fixes at expenses of making the worldwide people suffer with this. I don't think that will ever be implemented anyway, but let's make sure we implement a fair fix to everyone.

Originally Posted by berkeleybee
I was delighted when I found this comprehensive list of pro-immigration organizations, put together by someone who is anti-immigration, even anti-temporary workers. Little did they know how useful it would be to us (not to worry, even if they take the page down, I've saved it as an archive file, but we can't attach .mht files to these posts).

We should get in touch with as many of these organizations as possible. Make them focus on getting rid of per-country limits.

[marlon2006]

Unlikely this per country quota will change, and yes, I think it is very fair as is but that's off topic and I won't discuss it in this thread; without a per country quota, immigration diversity would be almost non existent.
That could be very good for Indians but not good at all for the host country and the rest of the world.

Originally Posted by nashdel

Do you really think what you want is fair. It is not going to be decided by me and you, therefore there is no point in arguing but I believe, those million people belong to same world as yours and we all are foreginers. Whoever comes first gets served first. I hope you are not talking about minority rights for smaller countries. By this logic you can also say since indians and chinese can consume so much oil there is nothing left for other countries so Smaller countries should get free oil. It is a free market economy. This is not a cultural event. we are talking about employment based immigration. whoever has got the skills should get the first choice. But don`t worry US policy makers think you are right, for whatever reason.

[LCSilence]

[acmil]

Immigration should depend on the skills that bring value to the country and not on the country where you were born. "Employment based visa" literally means based on the skills needed for employment. Moreover I dont think it is fair to give same number of visas to country with a population of 10million and 1billion. Certainly not if person from country A is more talented than person from country B.

[AbGCDeDo]

The original intention was to get better Diversity, offcourse talent is necessary but immigrants of all level are equally valuable.
I have been convincing myself "Everyone has same importance in this world. No one is more important that other."

Originally Posted by acmil

Immigration should depend on the skills that bring value to the country and not on the country where you were born. "Employment based visa" literally means based on the skills needed for employment. Moreover I dont think it is fair to give same number of visas to country with a population of 10million and 1billion. Certainly not if person from country A is more talented than person from country B.

[nashdel]

Hey marlon, I feel cheap to answer this therefore I would say, My best wishes for you. May you go on Get you GC and then open a company with 100 employees each one from different country even if they do not have right skills.

[marlon2006]

Right, but then the alien from the small country also has several years of experience, reputable degrees, taking masters from a top US university, etc as qualified as the ones from the large countries. If you don't even a give a chance for the guy from the small country to come here because most of the numbers are taken by the very large country, in the long run how would you know who is really more qualified in the first place. Don't forget there are personality traits and culture that are very important and important for a given organization and environment. Moreover, again is about diversity. Studies show that more diverse a group is, more efficient the group is. I don't see how the US would benefit by allowing the very large countries to take over the vast majority of Visa slots.

Originally Posted by acmil

Immigration should depend on the skills that bring value to the country and not on the country where you were born. "Employment based visa" literally means based on the skills needed for employment. Moreover I dont think it is fair to give same number of visas to country with a population of 10million and 1billion. Certainly not if person from country A is more talented than person from country B.

[marlon2006]

Sure, Nashdel. I would hire qualified people, and diverse as possible. Indians are not the only ones qualified in the world.

Originally Posted by nashdel

Hey marlon, I feel cheap to answer this therefore I would say, My best wishes for you. May you go on Get you GC and then open a company with 100 employees each one from different country even if they do not have right skills.

[LCSilence]

The McCain Kennedy bill has been out for over two month, however anybody know when it is going to be discussed on the floor?

[newkidhere]

I beg to differ from Marlon. Any quota undermines competitiveness.

It is unfair for someone to stand long in queue when somebody else just walks past and gets the Permenant Residency.

Though I agree on Diversity, I too want to point that there is no level playing field. Differential treatment for people from different country is not a fair play.

These are the days of open market and competition and talking of quota and reservation only pulls the country and its competitiveness down in the long run. Be it permanent residency or business or sports or anything for that matter.

No one can say, since Chinese have larger population, only limited Gold Medals for Chinese in Olympics or No chinese allowed to compete for Gold in any Olympics for next forseeable future.

Competition is the name of the game. Let us be sportive and accept the challenges and face the struggle together.

Thanks

[marlon2006]

Hey NewKidHere, I think Olympics competition is not a good analogy. When you are doing sports, you care for short-term results. I think diversity is more important in a long-term, collaborative environmnet.

For example, the other day I read that American companies are trying to hire South American executives, because that type of professionals are known to have a culture that can easily adapt to any environment. Yes, they are qualified as any in the world, but the personality trait here is as important as any of the attributes such as years of experience, education, communication skills, etc. Now if you just bring bodies from country Zillion-A or Billion-B, and you monopolize the market that way, you overhelm the folks from the small country and the host country and employers cannot take advantage of this critical qualification. Note that years of experience, number of degrees, number of language you speak at certain point is quantitative. There is more than that to be evaluated in a professional or immigrant in the long-term.

I think folks should focus to get the visa numbers increased to a point of getting them current. Asking to change this per country quota will just make the Worlwide folks like me to react and request the opposite to our good representatives. That's all.

Originally Posted by newkidhere

I beg to differ from Marlon. Any quota undermines competitiveness.

It is unfair for someone to stand long in queue when somebody else just walks past and gets the Permenant Residency.

Though I agree on Diversity, I too want to point that there is no level playing field. Differential treatment for people from different country is not a fair play.

These are the days of open market and competition and talking of quota and reservation only pulls the country and its competitiveness down in the long run. Be it permanent residency or business or sports or anything for that matter.

No one can say, since Chinese have larger population, only limited Gold Medals for Chinese in Olympics or No chinese allowed to compete for Gold in any Olympics for next forseeable future.

Competition is the name of the game. Let us be sportive and accept the challenges and face the struggle together.

Thanks

[berkeleybee]

Marlon,

Don't you think that employment based visas should be based on skills and qualifications? If two people applied at the same time and both have employers who want to hire them, then they should get their green cards at the same time. What is going on right now is that there may be two people who applied at the same time, have the same skills, but one of them from the "right" country gets his greencard right away and the one from the "wrong" country might have to wait up to 7 years more.

That just seems wrong to me. The whole idea of employment based immigration is that those skills are needed in this country. Everyone who gets in line and has the skills should be treated the same way.

As for competitiveness, think of the consequences of employers knowing that a worker is not mobile -- cannot switch jobs, and needs the employer to keep refiling his H-1 -- you think that worker would be able to negotiate raises, or benefits comparable to others? How do you think that would affect the market for that type of worker?

[vvk01]

No offence just trying to be logical.

There is no basis to use any of the used analogies.
In sport, it does not matter what size of you country is, you allowed to have only one team representing your country and the size of the team is not indefinite.

There is nothing about competition in immigration rules are established to serve interests of the country, it's not business, otherwise immigration benefits would be traded on NASDAQ. You may not agree that current rules are serving the country interests, but they're created by authorities elected by the people of this country.

Originally Posted by newkidhere

I beg to differ from Marlon. Any quota undermines competitiveness.

It is unfair for someone to stand long in queue when somebody else just walks past and gets the Permenant Residency.

Though I agree on Diversity, I too want to point that there is no level playing field. Differential treatment for people from different country is not a fair play.

These are the days of open market and competition and talking of quota and reservation only pulls the country and its competitiveness down in the long run. Be it permanent residency or business or sports or anything for that matter.

No one can say, since Chinese have larger population, only limited Gold Medals for Chinese in Olympics or No chinese allowed to compete for Gold in any Olympics for next forseeable future.

Competition is the name of the game. Let us be sportive and accept the challenges and face the struggle together.

Thanks

[berkeleybee]

Hang on, do we have someone on this forum that is actually fine with the way things are? You don't want to change things -- since elected officials created the current mess?

Or do you only want the change the part of the law that affects you? ;-)

Originally Posted by vvk01

You may not agree that current rules are serving the country interests, but they're created by authorities elected by the people of this country.

[santosh_30]

Guys:

Why are we arguing? There is a diversity lottery to take care of the diversity that Marlon wants. This is employment visas we are talking about and YES there should be per country quotas....but the quotas should be in porportion to the size of the country or the contribution the talent from that country make.

Having said all this I am glad they are going to scrap the diversity lottery. I have seen a lot of people who have come here under diversity lottery...and having come here just "by chance", they do not have the adaptability, flexibility, and qualifications required to make it in the American culture and they form their own cliques and become clannish and spread their narrow-mindedness here. But I guess that is the price one should pay for "diversity" and Marlon would be OK with that. As they say, it takes all kind of people to make this world.....maybe the US government shoudl have a legal quota set aside for "illegal immigrants"...why not add them to the mix while we are at it....yes?? Variety is the spice of life...right??

And by the way, Olympics is not the right analogy for this....in Olympics we are talking about "equal representation" of all countries in a sporting event. Here we are talking about a capitalist country trying to sustain its economy with qualified imported labor while at the same time finding a strategy to manage the reaction of indigineous people to excessive strain from immigration.


Santosh

[acmil]

Participation in Olympics may not be the right analogy. However putting a quota on maximum number of gold medals that country can win can be an analogy. Imagine if there is a quota on the number of medals a country can win (in this case it would be USA) so that people from smaller countries can also win medals too and hence maintain diversity (and hence spirit of people from smaller countries).

Although I am not saying that getting a GC is equal to getting a medal. Winning a medal is much bigger achievement than getting a GC.