You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
A new visa, H-5A and H-5B -- New Bill
- Thread starter GOD_BLESS_YOU
- Start date
Bill is reffered to following committees on 5/31/2005:
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d109:HR02330:@@@X
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d109:h.r.02330:
Subcommittee on 21st Century Competitiveness:
http://www.visi.com/juan/congress/cgi-bin/newcommittee.cgi?commcode=heducation_21&site=ctc
Subcommittee on Workforce Protections
http://www.visi.com/juan/congress/c...?site=ctc&lang=&commcode=heducation_workforce
Subcommittee on Employer-Employee Relations
http://www.visi.com/juan/congress/cgi-bin/newcommittee.cgi?commcode=heducation_employer&site=ctc
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d109:HR02330:@@@X
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d109:h.r.02330:
Subcommittee on 21st Century Competitiveness:
http://www.visi.com/juan/congress/cgi-bin/newcommittee.cgi?commcode=heducation_21&site=ctc
Subcommittee on Workforce Protections
http://www.visi.com/juan/congress/c...?site=ctc&lang=&commcode=heducation_workforce
Subcommittee on Employer-Employee Relations
http://www.visi.com/juan/congress/cgi-bin/newcommittee.cgi?commcode=heducation_employer&site=ctc
If I understand it right Bush gave no go to the bill.
www6.lexisnexis.comAnd so we're going to continue working closely with congressional leaders on those efforts. But I think the President has kind of outlined his principles and there's no change in terms of his principles.
Last edited by a moderator:
If congress accepts the bill and the president is against it then the following can happen:baby_mde said:So that means this new bill is doomed?
1. If the president signs and dates the bill, it becomes law.
2. If Congress is in session, and the president does not sign the bill within 10 days, the bill becomes law without his signature.
3. The president may "veto" the entire bill. The bill goes back to Congress for a second vote, in which it must get a two-thirds majority of votes in each chamber in order to become law.
4. The president may veto single budget items ("line items"). The item then goes back to Congress for a second vote, in which it must get a two-thirds majority of votes in each chamber in order to become law. This is the "line item veto."
5. If Congress adjourns within 10 days of giving the bill to the president, and he does not sign it, the bill dies.
Anyway the fact that the president is not excited by the bill is not a good sign for those who put his hopes on it.
In the case of H-5 visas the most probable action of the president will be to veto the adjustment to permanet status part of the bill. I do not think that he would veto the whole proposal.
This prediction is entirely my private point of view not taken from any other source. As I am not a politician or a lawyer it can be far from the truth. Let's see what will happen.
Last edited by a moderator:
After a bill is introduced it goes to a proper comitee. The comitee decides what to do with it. It can discard the bill if decided that it is not worthy of the debate. In fact comitee is the final destination of many bills.pani_6 said:What does this mean...bill being refered to the committies???
Otherwise the bill is returned to the house and after debate may go to the president for approval.
End of Retro.. if both we and EMPLOYERS try
Friends,
We all know that we are (Tech Guys) in big trouble. So let us STOP predicting what could happen by just sitting. We have to give our best shot and we will win.
Oneside we have to try ourself and otherside we have to get support from our EMPLOYERS. In present situation without EMPLYERS support it is very difficult ot win.
Please talk to your EMPLOYERS and ask them to send letters/email to Congress.
Guys what you think..
Friends,
We all know that we are (Tech Guys) in big trouble. So let us STOP predicting what could happen by just sitting. We have to give our best shot and we will win.
Oneside we have to try ourself and otherside we have to get support from our EMPLOYERS. In present situation without EMPLYERS support it is very difficult ot win.
Please talk to your EMPLOYERS and ask them to send letters/email to Congress.
Guys what you think..
Shusterman's website has a write-up from the AILA regarding the H-5A/H-5B bill. At least there would be one item that would benefit us:
***********************************
The 290,000 ceiling for employment-based immigrant visas is redistributed among the employment-based immigrant visa categories and certain modifications are made to current categories. 20% is allocated to the first preference—aliens with extraordinary ability, outstanding professors and researchers, and multinational executives and managers. 20% is
allocated to the second preference—aliens holding advanced degrees or having exceptional ability. 35% is allocated to the third preference—skilled workers and professionals. 5% is allocated to a re-designated fourth preference—investors. 30% is allocated to a re-designated fifth preference—other workers performing unskilled labor that is not of a temporary or seasonal
nature (previously included in third preference). Each year, all unused immigrant visas from the first four preference categories will be made available for fifth preference workers.
In the light of current EB-3 unavailability:
20% of 290,000 for EB-2 = 58,000 (~32% more than present 44,000)
35% of 290,000 for EB-3 = 101,500 (~130% more than present 44,000).
However another item that seems weird:
Section 306: Adjustment to Lawful Permanent Resident Status
Section 306 amends INA § 245 to provide for adjustment to lawful permanent resident status for eligible aliens admitted under the H-5A program, either through employer-based petitions or, if the alien has maintained H-5A status in the U.S. for a cumulative total of four years, through self-petition. Applicants for adjustment under this section must be physically present in the U.S. and establish that they meet the requirements of INA § 312 (setting forth the English language and civics requirements for naturalization applicants) or be satisfactorily pursuing a course of study to achieve such knowledge. Aliens will not be deemed ineligible for H-5A nonimmigrant status solely by virtue of the fact that they have filed for adjustment of status or have otherwise sought permanent residence in the U.S.
Section 306 also authorizes the Secretary of Homeland Security to extend the stay of an H-5A nonimmigrant beyond the period of authorized stay if a labor certification or immigrant visa petition filed on behalf of the alien is pending. In such cases, the alien’s stay shall be extended in one-year increments until a final decision is made on his or her lawful permanent residence.
Note, it doesn't say anything about LC pending for 365 days or more. If there was no 365 day rule, a lot of people would have less stress about filing LCs and H-1Bs expiring.
***********************************
The 290,000 ceiling for employment-based immigrant visas is redistributed among the employment-based immigrant visa categories and certain modifications are made to current categories. 20% is allocated to the first preference—aliens with extraordinary ability, outstanding professors and researchers, and multinational executives and managers. 20% is
allocated to the second preference—aliens holding advanced degrees or having exceptional ability. 35% is allocated to the third preference—skilled workers and professionals. 5% is allocated to a re-designated fourth preference—investors. 30% is allocated to a re-designated fifth preference—other workers performing unskilled labor that is not of a temporary or seasonal
nature (previously included in third preference). Each year, all unused immigrant visas from the first four preference categories will be made available for fifth preference workers.
In the light of current EB-3 unavailability:
20% of 290,000 for EB-2 = 58,000 (~32% more than present 44,000)
35% of 290,000 for EB-3 = 101,500 (~130% more than present 44,000).
However another item that seems weird:
Section 306: Adjustment to Lawful Permanent Resident Status
Section 306 amends INA § 245 to provide for adjustment to lawful permanent resident status for eligible aliens admitted under the H-5A program, either through employer-based petitions or, if the alien has maintained H-5A status in the U.S. for a cumulative total of four years, through self-petition. Applicants for adjustment under this section must be physically present in the U.S. and establish that they meet the requirements of INA § 312 (setting forth the English language and civics requirements for naturalization applicants) or be satisfactorily pursuing a course of study to achieve such knowledge. Aliens will not be deemed ineligible for H-5A nonimmigrant status solely by virtue of the fact that they have filed for adjustment of status or have otherwise sought permanent residence in the U.S.
Section 306 also authorizes the Secretary of Homeland Security to extend the stay of an H-5A nonimmigrant beyond the period of authorized stay if a labor certification or immigrant visa petition filed on behalf of the alien is pending. In such cases, the alien’s stay shall be extended in one-year increments until a final decision is made on his or her lawful permanent residence.
Note, it doesn't say anything about LC pending for 365 days or more. If there was no 365 day rule, a lot of people would have less stress about filing LCs and H-1Bs expiring.
Good analysis, gc_2006. The bill also states following:
"Unused employment-based immigrant visas from previous fiscal years are recaptured and made available for employment-based immigrant visas for future fiscal years."
So is this 35% EB-3 plus recaptured (?) immigrant visas sufficient enough to make EB-3 current?
Anyway thumps-up for this bill, atleast employment-based immigrant visas point of view. Also it has good measure for family unity and backlog reduction for family based gc.
"Unused employment-based immigrant visas from previous fiscal years are recaptured and made available for employment-based immigrant visas for future fiscal years."
So is this 35% EB-3 plus recaptured (?) immigrant visas sufficient enough to make EB-3 current?
Anyway thumps-up for this bill, atleast employment-based immigrant visas point of view. Also it has good measure for family unity and backlog reduction for family based gc.
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d109:HR02330:@@@X
pani_6 said:What is the status of the Bill???
Senate Judiciary hearing for "comprehensive immigration reform"
Guys,
Senate Judiciary hearing for comprehensive immigration reform (which includes to recapture of unused immigrant visas and increase number of yearly immigrant visas to 290,000) is scheduled on Tuesday, Jul. 26, 2005 9:30 a.m.
So come on guys...please..please send emails / letters / fax / make phone calls to your senators as well as senate judiciary members. Our goal is to hit our message to them by Monday. Everyone's effort counts!
Here is the link which will provide senators and other committe's contact info:
http://immigrationportal.com/showpost.php?p=1202739&postcount=183
Please modify the letter according to your situation.
Guys,
Senate Judiciary hearing for comprehensive immigration reform (which includes to recapture of unused immigrant visas and increase number of yearly immigrant visas to 290,000) is scheduled on Tuesday, Jul. 26, 2005 9:30 a.m.
So come on guys...please..please send emails / letters / fax / make phone calls to your senators as well as senate judiciary members. Our goal is to hit our message to them by Monday. Everyone's effort counts!
Here is the link which will provide senators and other committe's contact info:
http://immigrationportal.com/showpost.php?p=1202739&postcount=183
Please modify the letter according to your situation.
Bush wants immigration bill in fall
President Bush yesterday told House Republicans that he wants them to pass an immigration bill this fall, but members said he may not get a bill he likes.
Mr. Bush, speaking to a closed-door meeting on Capitol Hill, said immigration reform is part of his agenda, and his deadline gives a boost to those looking for a guest-worker program.
"It's great," said Rep. Jeff Flake, Arizona Republican, who is sponsoring an immigration overhaul that would give those already here illegally a multistep, 11-year path to citizenship. His bill also would allow in 400,000 guest workers per year and also put them on a multistep path to citizenship.
Mr. Flake said his bill gives the House a way to meet the president's deadline.
"Ours is a bipartisan bill, and we're ready, and I think the [House Republican] Conference is, as well," Mr. Flake said.
The bill, which is the preferred solution of many immigrant advocacy groups, also is advancing in the Senate, sponsored by Sen. John McCain, Arizona Republican, and Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, Massachusetts Democrat.
But other Republicans said rushing to meet Mr. Bush's schedule would jeopardize other priorities.
"If you load up the agenda with a big immigration bill, that's going to be a problem for Social Security," one Republican congressman said.
Kevin Madden, a spokesman for House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, said it's "too early to put a timetable" on when a bill could come before the House, but said Mr. DeLay hopes Republicans can agree on something that can pass "sooner rather than later."
Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, Tennessee Republican, told reporters recently that a bill could not be done this year, but he wants to bring one up by next summer.
The president did not go into specifics at yesterday's meeting, several Republicans said. But Mr. Bush previously has called for a guest-worker program that matches workers with employers who say they cannot fill those jobs with Americans. He also called for an increase in the level of legal immigration.
But he has not submitted a bill or clarified what happens to current illegal aliens, who would be eligible for his worker program, when their time in the program is over.
The president's call for a worker program puts him on a collision course with Mr. DeLay, who has said the House will first pass an immigration security and enforcement bill and then later pass a worker program.
A host of House Republicans agreed.
"I believe we need to work very quickly and effectively on behalf of the American people for added border security -- an immigration bill that does enforcement first," said Rep. J.D. Hayworth, Arizona Republican. "The people demand it."
He said Americans are fed up with worker plans that include promises of enforcement measures that are never met.
But Mr. Flake said such a two-step plan never will work, because any enforcement program would deprive businesses of workers and would leave them needing a way to fill those job slots. Thus, any bill that passes will have to have both enforcement and a worker program, he said.
"The notion that you can do piecemeal reform is quickly being dismissed," he said.
source:washingtontimes
President Bush yesterday told House Republicans that he wants them to pass an immigration bill this fall, but members said he may not get a bill he likes.
Mr. Bush, speaking to a closed-door meeting on Capitol Hill, said immigration reform is part of his agenda, and his deadline gives a boost to those looking for a guest-worker program.
"It's great," said Rep. Jeff Flake, Arizona Republican, who is sponsoring an immigration overhaul that would give those already here illegally a multistep, 11-year path to citizenship. His bill also would allow in 400,000 guest workers per year and also put them on a multistep path to citizenship.
Mr. Flake said his bill gives the House a way to meet the president's deadline.
"Ours is a bipartisan bill, and we're ready, and I think the [House Republican] Conference is, as well," Mr. Flake said.
The bill, which is the preferred solution of many immigrant advocacy groups, also is advancing in the Senate, sponsored by Sen. John McCain, Arizona Republican, and Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, Massachusetts Democrat.
But other Republicans said rushing to meet Mr. Bush's schedule would jeopardize other priorities.
"If you load up the agenda with a big immigration bill, that's going to be a problem for Social Security," one Republican congressman said.
Kevin Madden, a spokesman for House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, said it's "too early to put a timetable" on when a bill could come before the House, but said Mr. DeLay hopes Republicans can agree on something that can pass "sooner rather than later."
Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, Tennessee Republican, told reporters recently that a bill could not be done this year, but he wants to bring one up by next summer.
The president did not go into specifics at yesterday's meeting, several Republicans said. But Mr. Bush previously has called for a guest-worker program that matches workers with employers who say they cannot fill those jobs with Americans. He also called for an increase in the level of legal immigration.
But he has not submitted a bill or clarified what happens to current illegal aliens, who would be eligible for his worker program, when their time in the program is over.
The president's call for a worker program puts him on a collision course with Mr. DeLay, who has said the House will first pass an immigration security and enforcement bill and then later pass a worker program.
A host of House Republicans agreed.
"I believe we need to work very quickly and effectively on behalf of the American people for added border security -- an immigration bill that does enforcement first," said Rep. J.D. Hayworth, Arizona Republican. "The people demand it."
He said Americans are fed up with worker plans that include promises of enforcement measures that are never met.
But Mr. Flake said such a two-step plan never will work, because any enforcement program would deprive businesses of workers and would leave them needing a way to fill those job slots. Thus, any bill that passes will have to have both enforcement and a worker program, he said.
"The notion that you can do piecemeal reform is quickly being dismissed," he said.
source:washingtontimes
Last edited by a moderator:
Senate Judiciary Hearing (7/26) Testimony on "Comprehensive Immigration Reform" bill
Hal Daub - President & CEO, The American Healthcare Association (AHCA)
http://judiciary.senate.gov/testimony.cfm?id=1588&wit_id=4544
TAMAR JACOBY - Senior Fellow, Manhattan Institute
http://judiciary.senate.gov/testimony.cfm?id=1588&wit_id=4545
Gary Endelman - Author and Immigration Practitioner
http://judiciary.senate.gov/testimony.cfm?id=1588&wit_id=4546
Patrick Leahy - United States Senator, Vermont
http://judiciary.senate.gov/member_statement.cfm?id=1588&wit_id=3985
Russ Feingold - United States Senator, Wisconsin
http://judiciary.senate.gov/member_statement.cfm?id=1588&wit_id=85
Source: http://judiciary.senate.gov/hearing.cfm?id=1588
Hal Daub - President & CEO, The American Healthcare Association (AHCA)
http://judiciary.senate.gov/testimony.cfm?id=1588&wit_id=4544
TAMAR JACOBY - Senior Fellow, Manhattan Institute
http://judiciary.senate.gov/testimony.cfm?id=1588&wit_id=4545
Gary Endelman - Author and Immigration Practitioner
http://judiciary.senate.gov/testimony.cfm?id=1588&wit_id=4546
Patrick Leahy - United States Senator, Vermont
http://judiciary.senate.gov/member_statement.cfm?id=1588&wit_id=3985
Russ Feingold - United States Senator, Wisconsin
http://judiciary.senate.gov/member_statement.cfm?id=1588&wit_id=85
Source: http://judiciary.senate.gov/hearing.cfm?id=1588
baby_mde said:When will they Vote?
Probably this fall.