Comprehensive Immigration Bill at Senate

akela,

you are right. If they remove AC21 provision it is a big big blow to oversubscribing countries. Atleast current law is better than this one.
 
Where in the Specter proposal have you seen language about removal of "AC21" provisions ? Please list this, I can't find it.


can_card said:
akela,

you are right. If they remove AC21 provision it is a big big blow to oversubscribing countries. Atleast current law is better than this one.
Click to expand...
 
marlon2006 said:
Where in the Specter proposal have you seen language about removal of "AC21" provisions ? Please list this, I can't find it.
Click to expand...


The very last line in the Page 246 of the pdf file. It says by striking paragraph 5. Paragraph 5 is the elimination of country limit in EB visas, in section 202 of INA. This paragraph was included to INA by AC21 law.
 
I am wondering who was the lobbyst behind such drastic request that would not benefit the oversubscribed country applicants. Sad.

can_card said:
The very last line in the Page 246 of the pdf file. It says by striking paragraph 5. Paragraph 5 is the elimination of country limit in EB visas, in section 202 of INA. This paragraph was included to INA by AC21 law.
Click to expand...
 
We will see how effective IV is. Can they request that this provision of striking off paragraph 5 be removed from Senetor Spectar proposal. Will it be braught in todays conference call of IV. Can they request their lobbist that this issue be taken before March 2, when the bell be places in Senate.

Thanks,
akela
 
whats the use of challenging IV? -- to akela

Akela,
I guess its unfair to gauge or challenge IV for what they are capable of. I guess they have just started ( 2 months old) now and are trying there bit inspite of having a full time job at hands.

im sure that you know what im talking about and will take it in the right spirit.
 
akela, post this in the IV forum

akela said:
We will see how effective IV is. Can they request that this provision of striking off paragraph 5 be removed from Senetor Spectar proposal. Will it be braught in todays conference call of IV. Can they request their lobbist that this issue be taken before March 2, when the bell be places in Senate.

Thanks,
akela
Click to expand...

Akela, IV is formed of people just like yourself. IV does not monitor every post on this forum on a regular basis. Post this on the IV forum. Participating in the IV forum and contributing financially to IV would help in addition to challenges and requests to IV.
 
If you wait to see...

akela said:
We will see how effective IV is. Can they request that this provision of striking off paragraph 5 be removed from Senetor Spectar proposal. Will it be braught in todays conference call of IV. Can they request their lobbist that this issue be taken before March 2, when the bell be places in Senate.

Thanks,
akela
Click to expand...
If all retrogressed individuals wait to see how effective IV is, we will all miss the bus!
PA Forum members here and at IV should directly try to reach Sen Spector's office to request relief on this provision as well as allowing filing of I-485 when retrogressed! I am sure that IV will also take up these issues as everybody seems to be discussing these at IV as well!
Yes, the Comprehensive Immigration Bill markup was mentioned at the Conference Call, but no decisions about this were taken. This Conference Call was in general to make people aware of IV, it seemed to me, and I came away impressed with the organization that has taken up cudgels on your & my behalf! There are teams that work on different aspects - like Liaison, Content, Membership, and website issues - and all of these people have day jobs! They are making progress, but all of us have to join in!
I am not a very political or activist-kind of person, but I do believe in contributing my bit time-and-money wise to an organization that is fighting for me!
 
sORRY,
I am not challenging them. I was just making a comment, can they make an effective strategy to make the above mentioned change. This is a clear and present danger, and it is one if the assesment is that the senator bill will pass. It's not a challenge in the sense that if IV fails, it sucks and lets not contribute to them. Far from it, it is just one battle in many and we do need a organization like IV. But yes, if they succeed in this their credibility will sky rocket.

Thanks,
aK
 
akela said:
sORRY,
I am not challenging them. I was just making a comment, can they make an effective strategy to make the above mentioned change. This is a clear and present danger, and it is one if the assesment is that the senator bill will pass. It's not a challenge in the sense that if IV fails, it sucks and lets not contribute to them. Far from it, it is just one battle in many and we do need a organization like IV. But yes, if they succeed in this their credibility will sky rocket.

Thanks,
aK
Click to expand...

Agree totally that we need to keep on the ball on this one, Akela. I was not able to make a clear connection between EB5 and the "special immigrant" category that is also mentioned in Specter's markup, but it seemed to me that if the EB visa spillover is removed, then EB1-3 would fall right through to EB5. Special immigrants are not subject to a country quota. If EB5==special immigrants, then party time for unskilled workers.
 
Posted on Tue, Feb. 28, 2006
Senators seeking to reach immigration endgame

BY DENA BUNISThe Orange County Register
WASHINGTON - If immigration reform were a game of chess, the first gambit would have taken place in December when the House passed its border security bill. But the pieces will really start to move on Thursday when the Senate Judiciary Committee holds its first meeting on the subject.
And like any game between grandmasters, this one could take a while. Those who have been watching the preliminaries believe it could be years.
"I really do think that this is probably a longer debate than simply this Congress," said Doris Meissner, who was the commissioner of the former Immigration and Naturalization Service under President Clinton. "The critical step right now is to have a credible alternative on the table so that it can be a productive debate."
What Meissner is talking about is an alternative to the only immigration legislation that has emerged from the 109th Congress - a House bill that cracks down on illegal immigration through a series of enforcement measures.
But according to the White House and a bipartisan group of senators, that measure won't do the job. President Bush and senators on both sides of the aisle say the nation's immigration system is broken and needs an overhaul. That opinion is also held by the powerful Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Pa., who Friday unveiled a 305-page immigration bill that combines enhanced enforcement, a new guest-worker program and a way for the estimated 11 million illegal immigrants here now to work legally.
Specter's measure combines features of the House bill, a measure authored by Sens. John McCain, R-Ariz., and Edward Kennedy, D-Mass., and another one introduced by Republican Sens. John Cornyn of Texas and Jon Kyl of Arizona. If the Senate does pass something this year, it would set up a confrontation with the House.
Those who vehemently oppose any guest-worker program, like Rep. Ed Royce, see their ace in the hole as an equally powerful House Judiciary Committee Chairman, Rep. James Sensenbrenner, R-Wis. The enforcement bill that passed the House was a combination of a homeland security measure and Sensenbrenner's ideas. And Royce believes Sensenbrenner could win the day in conference, particularly with a committed House GOP leadership. "I feel confident that the vast majority of the Republican House conference do not want to see an amnesty, they want to see enforcement first," said Royce, R-Calif.
Royce won't rule out supporting a limited temporary guest-worker program later if he can be convinced that tougher border and interior enforcement measures are starting to work.
Rep. Dana Rohrabacher, R-Calif., said he wants to see the issues handled separately so he can vote for enforcement and against a guest-worker measure. And while he acknowledges that there may be significant support among the GOP for a temporary worker program, he believes that would hurt the party in the long run.
"They may win a legislative victory today and then lose the war by turning off so many American voters that Republicans lose the next election because 10 percent of the Republican voters will just sit home and not go out and vote," said Rohrabacher.
McCain, in a conference call with reporters last week on the eve of his nationwide tour to sell his immigration bill, believes if given the information, voters will agree with him, especially about the issue of illegal workers already here.
"We believe that sending them back is something that is not only not humane, but not possible," he said.
Public opinion polls on this issue are paradoxical.
A Time magazine poll in late January indicated that 63 percent of respondents believe illegal immigration is a serious or extremely serious problem. And 83 percent said providing social services for illegal immigrants cost taxpayers too much.
At the same time, 76 percent of those polled said illegal immigrants should be able to earn citizenship and 73 percent favored guest-worker registration for illegal immigrants already here.
Those seeking more restrictive immigration policies have gotten increasingly politically involved. So far no congressional or gubernatorial race has turned on immigration. But Minuteman Project founder Jim Gilchrist's 25 percent showing against John Campbell in the 48th Congressional District special election and GOP primary campaigns in several other border states in 2004 were contentious enough and drew enough media attention to have made political analysts take note. The Minuteman Project has organized patrols at the border to highlight illegal immigration.
Experts who have followed this issue for decades say they have never seen such emotionalism and rancor.
"It's going to be an extraordinary debate filled with fear and guilt and racism and xenophobia," said Alan Simpson, a former Republican senator from Wyoming. As chairman of the immigration subcommittee, Simpson was one of the authors of the 1996 immigration bill designed to tighten the immigration system.
"Everybody is talking about it," Simpson said. "That's the difference. Now you've got meatpacking plants, chicken plants. All of them using the undocumented."
Meissner said when she was commissioner, a handful of states were the major stakeholders in the issue: California, New York, Florida, Illinois, Texas and Arizona.
"Now it's Nebraska, it's North Carolina, it's Iowa, it's Nevada," she said. "It is many parts of the country that have just not been accustomed to immigration. And what they are encountering most is illegal immigration because that's where the jobs are."
On the face of it, those lobbying for a comprehensive answer seem to hold most of the power: the U.S. Chamber of Commerce has made this their No.1 issue. They are including how House members voted on the immigration bill in their rating system, with those who voted for it getting an unfavorable score on that bill.
And while Bush has been silent so far on exactly which bill he'd support, he has made it clear he wants Congress to go beyond the House measure.
"Do I want him to do more from my viewpoint?" McCain said of Bush. "Probably. What I think he is going to do is weigh in as this debate evolves, as we move closer to the floor of the Senate."
---
WHAT'S NEXT
Thursday: Senate Judiciary Committee scheduled to debate immigration bills. Will probably meet weekly until the panel can reach agreement and send a measure to the full Senate.
March 27: Date Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn., wants to bring immigration bill to the floor.
 
Tuesday, February 28, 2006
Immigration reform highly unlikely in 2006, Kolbe says
BLAKE MORLOCK

Tucson Citizen



Immigration reform won't happen this year, Iraq may indeed be on the edge of a civil war and Americans are getting worked up for nothing as outrage flares over a United Arab Emirates firm managing American ports.

So says Republican U.S. Rep. Jim Kolbe, a committee chairman overseeing the U.S. foreign policy budget and a key player in international relations.

Yesterday, Kolbe spoke to the Tucson Citizen Editorial Board for the first time since announcing his retirement in January.

Related video:

Rep. Jim Kolbe on immigration issues

His prognosis wasn't good on a couple of key issues including immigration.

The U.S. House of Representatives passed a bill that looked solely at tougher enforcement, while the Senate is debating a policy that would allow for guest workers to do jobs that employers have a tough time filling.

Kolbe predicted that House Republicans won't compromise with a Senate bill that seems lenient on illegal immigrants.

"As far as they're concerned, they've washed their hands. They've cast their vote," Kolbe said. "They can go back to their district and say, 'I voted to be tough.' "

The only way an immigration reform plan might happen is if the Senate passes an "enforcement-only" bill that can be reconciled with the House version, he said.
That would be "a horrible turn of events," Kolbe said.

Moreover, he shrugged off attempts by his fellow Republicans in the Arizona Legislature to craft state laws to go after illegal immigrants, saying it made "very little sense."

Kolbe said "there's a grave danger" that Sunni-Shiite violence could escalate into an Iraqi civil war.

If that happens, Kolbe said he's not sure what the next move should be for the United States..

"If it goes to an all-out civil war ... even if we wanted to, could we separate the sides and enforce some law and order?" he asked. "I suppose we could try."

The cost of security in Iraq is eating up money that could be spent on the Iraqi water system and oil production, which is down from where it was two years ago.

The portion devoted to security in the cost of a public works project has risen from 12 percent to 33 percent in the last three years, Kolbe said.

"You are losing so much ground just doing security and then the project gets done (and) it gets blown up," Kolbe said.

He said there's no danger in having the UAE firm managing port operations.

"That's a totally bogus issue," Kolbe said. "It deflects us from talking about the real issue and that's port security."

Fewer than 1 percent of containers coming into the country are inspected and that's the real issue rather than "who owns the company that runs the cranes," Kolbe said.

The UAE has been an ally in the war on terror, and many U.S. troops once stationed in Saudi Arabia now are based there.

"They aren't perfect, but there's no one in the Middle East that's perfect," Kolbe said.

http://www.tucsoncitizen.com/news/local/022806kolbe
 
Please send mails to Pawlenty on retrogression issue !!

Posted on Tue, Feb. 28, 2006
Pawlenty seeks more H1-B visas
Governor cites nation's need for more high-tech, specialty workersBY FREDERIC J. FROMMERAssociated PressWASHINGTON — Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty asked a key senator on immigration issues Monday to back an increase in the number of visas for foreign workers in high-tech and specialty fields, arguing it would help U.S. businesses become more competitive.
Pawlenty, a Republican who has pushed for a crackdown on illegal immigration, said it also was important to encourage legal immigration, such as raising the number of H1-B visas from the current national limit of 65,000. He made that pitch in a meeting with Sen. John Cornyn, a Texas Republican who chairs the Judiciary Committee's immigration, border security and citizenship subcommittee. "To have an artificial cap of 65,000 is not near enough," Pawlenty said. "So we would like to see that dramatically increased."
Pawlenty said he didn't think there needed to be a cap at all.
"But 65,000 is ridiculously low, given how thirsty we are for engineers, researchers, computer programmers — we've got a big shortage in a lot of these areas," he added.
Cornyn, who appeared with Pawlenty at a news conference, said he shared the governor's concern about businesses outsourcing in response to a lack of skilled workers and said one solution is more H1-B visas. A spokesman said later the senator supported an increase in the visas as part of a comprehensive immigration reform bill.
"We need to do more than just border security," Pawlenty said. "We also need to find ways to promote legal immigration."
"As we look at H1-B visas, I would hope that we would be focused on those categories and occupations where we have a shortage, where's there's an unmet need or projected unmet need," he added.

http://www.wctrib.com/ap/index.cfm?page=view&id=D8G1PGV02
 
This is what I have been saying

Folks, I strongly believe we need to focus in a short and long-term goal.
The short-term should be a request to remedy the veterans in this greencard process. Likely a compromise in this comprenhensive immigration reform won't be reached this year. Then we would be in a bad shape.



GOD_BLESS_YOU said:
Posted on Tue, Feb. 28, 2006
Pawlenty seeks more H1-B visas
Governor cites nation's need for more high-tech, specialty workersBY FREDERIC J. FROMMERAssociated PressWASHINGTON — Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty asked a key senator on immigration issues Monday to back an increase in the number of visas for foreign workers in high-tech and specialty fields, arguing it would help U.S. businesses become more competitive.
Pawlenty, a Republican who has pushed for a crackdown on illegal immigration, said it also was important to encourage legal immigration, such as raising the number of H1-B visas from the current national limit of 65,000. He made that pitch in a meeting with Sen. John Cornyn, a Texas Republican who chairs the Judiciary Committee's immigration, border security and citizenship subcommittee. "To have an artificial cap of 65,000 is not near enough," Pawlenty said. "So we would like to see that dramatically increased."
Pawlenty said he didn't think there needed to be a cap at all.
"But 65,000 is ridiculously low, given how thirsty we are for engineers, researchers, computer programmers — we've got a big shortage in a lot of these areas," he added.
Cornyn, who appeared with Pawlenty at a news conference, said he shared the governor's concern about businesses outsourcing in response to a lack of skilled workers and said one solution is more H1-B visas. A spokesman said later the senator supported an increase in the visas as part of a comprehensive immigration reform bill.
"We need to do more than just border security," Pawlenty said. "We also need to find ways to promote legal immigration."
"As we look at H1-B visas, I would hope that we would be focused on those categories and occupations where we have a shortage, where's there's an unmet need or projected unmet need," he added.

http://www.wctrib.com/ap/index.cfm?page=view&id=D8G1PGV02
Click to expand...
 
PACE act is the best bet

All these immigration bills are a pipe dream. Even the supporters of these bills agree that it may take few years just to get it through. Some of the proposals can not even be backed up with any reasoning. Reducing the %wise distribution for EB1 and EB2 while EB2 is still retrogressed does not make any sense. If this bill passes we have another phase where everyone starts moving over to EB3. Right now EB2 is the preferred choice. Just a big cyclic disorder.

I think the PACE act has the best chance of going through. It does not have the controversial amnesty or guest worker program.
 
It seems that PACE is bundled up into this comprehensive bill

I see PACE having less chance of passing through both houses this way than being one single bill. Thanks.


bear23 said:
All these immigration bills are a pipe dream. Even the supporters of these bills agree that it may take few years just to get it through. Some of the proposals can not even be backed up with any reasoning. Reducing the %wise distribution for EB1 and EB2 while EB2 is still retrogressed does not make any sense. If this bill passes we have another phase where everyone starts moving over to EB3. Right now EB2 is the preferred choice. Just a big cyclic disorder.

I think the PACE act has the best chance of going through. It does not have the controversial amnesty or guest worker program.
Click to expand...
 
Article Last Updated: 02/28/2006 2:13 AM MST

Huntsman pushing immigration reform
Governors meeting: He and Arizona's chief want colleagues to send a resolution to Congress
By Thomas Burr
The Salt Lake Tribune



WASHINGTON - Utah Gov. Jon Huntsman Jr. plans to ask his Western colleagues today to vote on a resolution asking Congress to pass comprehensive immigration reform that would oppose blanket amnesty but support a guest worker program.
Huntsman, a Republican who is proposing the resolution with Arizona's Democratic Gov. Janet Napolitano at a meeting of the Western Governor's Association, is calling for legislation to "protect and preserve the safety and interests" of the United States while also recognizing the need for "Western industries to have a stable and legal supply of workers," according to a release provided in advance of the meeting.
"Our states are on the front lines of a tidal wave of illegal immigration," Huntsman says in the release. "The debate in Washington has been polarizing and unhealthy, and we are asking the administration and Congress to adopt this bipartisan framework and recommendations agreed to by the Western Governors' Association."
Immigration has been one of the top issues of the National Governors Association as state leaders huddle in Washington.
While Congress has passed one immigration bill, there have been calls for more stringent and more comprehensive legislation from several sides of the immigration debate.
And increasingly, states are leading the charge, with Arizona and New Mexico both declaring states of emergency because of the influx of illegal immigrants.
"Governors feel they have to get into this debate because of the lack of action on the federal level in the first place," says Kirk Jowers, director of the University of Utah's Hinckley Institute of Politics, "and this issue so impacts the governors at the state level that they've decided they need to be a catalyst for this reform."
The proposal by Huntsman and Napolitano also calls for the U.S. leaders to work with Mexican and Latin American governments to "generate economic growth, improve the standard of living and promote ownership"


in those countries as a way to stem the tide of immigration to the United States. Immigration was among the topics President Bush touched on during a Monday morning meeting with governors - possibly in anticipation of today's policy proposal, Huntsman said.

What Huntsman, Napolitano want

Utah Gov. Jon Huntsman Jr. and Arizona Gov. Janet Napolitano are asking Western governors to:
* Oppose blanket amnesty to all undocumented workers and support "appropriate sanctions" for those breaking the law.
* Urge Congress to avoid creating incentives for more illegal immigration by "creating unnecessary hurdles and lengthy delays" for those wishing to immigrate legally.
* Call for full funding for law enforcement and security along the southern U.S. border, enforcement using "cutting-edge" technology, better coordination with law enforcement agents and construction of a federal correctional facility to house illegal immigrants convicted in state courts as well as reimbursement to states for incarcerating illegal immigrants.
* Request full funding for processing employment-based visas; eliminating visa-request backlogs and increasing the number of visas to meet U.S. industry needs, especially in high-tech, bio-tech and seasonal-based industries.
* Establish a guest worker program that will include background checks to help supply workers where there are shortages.
* Enforce sanctions against employers for hiring illegal immigrants along with a system for employers to verify citizenship and worker status.

http://sltrib.com/utah/ci_3554083
 
SENATOR KENNEDY OUTLINES CONCERNS WITH CHAIRMAN SPECTER’S
By Congressional Desk
February 28, 2006
WE NEED TO ENACT RESPONSIBLE REFORM CONSISTENT WITH OUR IDEALS.

Washington, DC: Today Senator Kennedy issued the following statement on Senator Specter’s immigration reform proposal expressing his concerns in advance of the Judiciary Committee hearing on Thursday. The Kennedy-McCain plan to fix our broken immigration system has received strong diverse backing by business and labor groups, Republicans and Democrats, religious groups and immigration advocates because of its commonsense approach to both strengthen border protection and our economy by offering a pathway to citizenship. Also below is a side-by-side comparison of the McCain-Kennedy bill and Specter’s proposal.

“I look forward working with Chairman Specter on comprehensive immigration reform so that temporary workers can come here safely, and the 11 million illegal workers already here will have a way to earn permanent residence and citizenship. I have concerns about his proposal that would establish for the first time in our nation’s history a class of millions of people who are forever in a temporary worker status, thereby creating a second-class status for immigrant workers. And I am concerned that his enforcement provisions contain punitive measures that would horribly affect many immigrants and their families and do nothing to fix the broken immigration system. Laws would apply retroactively and due process would be limited. It would unfairly punish and criminalize countless hardworking immigrants and divide American families. This proposal will only drive immigrants further into the shadows. We need to enact responsible reforms consistent with our country’s ideals and our heritage as a nation of immigrants and a nation of laws.”

http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/viewArticle.asp?articleID=6378
 
Senate Judiciary Committee
Full Committee meeting
DATE: March 2, 2006
TIME: 09:30 AM
ROOM: Dirksen 226

http://judiciary.senate.gov/meeting_notice.cfm?id=1789

II. Bills

S. 1768, A bill to permit the televising of Supreme Court proceedings

[Specter, Leahy, Cornyn, Grassley, Schumer, Feingold, Durbin]


S. 829, Sunshine in the Courtroom Act of 2005

[Grassley, Schumer, Cornyn, Leahy, Feingold, Durbin, Graham, DeWine, Specter]

S. _____, Comprehensive Immigration Reform [Chairman’s Mark]
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top