I have heard that last time there was a time lag of 6 months. During this time lag, USCIS will interpret the law and make changes. So even if the bill passes, it will take us until Jan 2008 to see the results.
Pelosi Message in Regards to STRIVE
- Thread starter thera33
- Start date
I have heard that last time there was a time lag of 6 months. During this time lag, USCIS will interpret the law and make changes. So even if the bill passes, it will take us until Jan 2008 to see the results.
Senate will start discussions on this in May as per the dem senate head.; so we are looking at Oct'07 at the earliest as the best case scenario for any enactment.
I thought this has to be discussed in the house, why will Senate start discussion on this?
gc_retrogress
Registered Users (C)
First did house ok the bill
Did house pass this bill?
Did house pass this bill?
Bill Text of STRIVE Act available now on Immigration Voice
Finally Immigration Voice got their hands on the actual 700 page bill last night from Washington DC.
THIS IS NOT YET ON THOMAS.LOC.GOV . It will be available on Thomas on Monday or Tuesday. The bill number will be H. R. 1645 if you want to look for it on thomas.loc.gov
This is available only to very very few people and Immigration Voice is lucky to have this bill text this early before its even on Thomas.(thomas.loc.gov)
A few things that pop out in the title 5 are :
1. Sec 511 : 485 filing when visa numbers are not available.
: 3 year extension of EAD/AP.
2. Sec 515 : Visa revalidation within USA (so you dont have to go outside to get stamped).
3. Sec 514 : Backlog reduction of labor files.
We will add more on Immigration Voice website as we learn more.
THE BILL TEXT IS HERE : http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=3714
Please also read the thread about Meet-the-lawmakers drive on Immigration Voice and actively take steps to meet your congressmen and Senators during the Easter recess of Congress between 2nd and 9th April when most legislators are back home from DC in their districts.
Finally Immigration Voice got their hands on the actual 700 page bill last night from Washington DC.
THIS IS NOT YET ON THOMAS.LOC.GOV . It will be available on Thomas on Monday or Tuesday. The bill number will be H. R. 1645 if you want to look for it on thomas.loc.gov
This is available only to very very few people and Immigration Voice is lucky to have this bill text this early before its even on Thomas.(thomas.loc.gov)
A few things that pop out in the title 5 are :
1. Sec 511 : 485 filing when visa numbers are not available.
: 3 year extension of EAD/AP.
2. Sec 515 : Visa revalidation within USA (so you dont have to go outside to get stamped).
3. Sec 514 : Backlog reduction of labor files.
We will add more on Immigration Voice website as we learn more.
THE BILL TEXT IS HERE : http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=3714
Please also read the thread about Meet-the-lawmakers drive on Immigration Voice and actively take steps to meet your congressmen and Senators during the Easter recess of Congress between 2nd and 9th April when most legislators are back home from DC in their districts.
gcwhenever
Registered Users (C)
looks like this is going to be a washout. dont hold your breath, not going to happen anytime soon, if at all, per this article:
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/23/washington/23immig-q.html?_r=1&oref=slogin
Doubts Arise on Immigration Bill’s Chances
By RACHEL L. SWARNS
Published: March 23, 2007
WASHINGTON, March 22 — House lawmakers stood before the television cameras on Thursday and hailed the introduction of a new measure to secure the border and move millions of illegal immigrants toward citizenship.
Senators Edward M. Kennedy and John McCain last year, when allied on an immigration bill. Mr. McCain is now keeping his distance.
But behind the scenes, there was much more uncertainty than celebration among proponents of what would be the most substantial overhaul of immigration laws in two decades.
Three months into the new Congress, immigration legislation is hitting some unexpected roadblocks. A mix of presidential politics and unforeseen fissures between Democrats and their Republican allies has stalled movement in the Senate.
Key lawmakers in both chambers seem to be moving to the right to assuage conservatives who helped derail immigration legislation last year. Now there are doubts as to whether Congress will actually send an immigration bill to President Bush this year.
Only a few months ago, Democrats and Republicans alike were predicting that immigration legislation would move relatively smoothly — with bipartisan support — through the new Democratic-controlled Congress. Lawmakers and advocates for immigrants remain hopeful that that can still happen, but they said the political environment had changed.
“I don’t know why we were so naïve to think that things were going to go so swimmingly,” said Michele Waslin of the National Council of La Raza, an immigration advocacy group, who addressed concerns about the stalemate in the Senate. “I sincerely hope the process gets back on track very soon.”
Democratic leaders say Republican backing is critical, both to ensure passage of a bill in the Senate and to protect newly elected moderate and conservative Democrats in the House, some of whom campaigned against legalizing illegal immigrants.
Democrats and Republicans stood side by side at the House news conference Thursday. But the possibility of a partisan rift remains palpable, particularly in the Senate.
Senator John McCain, the Arizona Republican who is running for president, has distanced himself from Senator Edward M. Kennedy, the Massachusetts Democrat, as Mr. McCain has faced a barrage of criticism from conservatives who oppose his support of the legalization of illegal immigrants. The two men joined forces last year to help pass the Senate bill, which would have put most of the nation’s illegal aliens on a path to citizenship.
Mr. Kennedy has suggested a plan on his own, but his Republican allies have yet to embrace it. Angered by Mr. Kennedy’s decision to exclude him and other moderates from early negotiations, Senator Arlen Specter, Republican of Pennsylvania and an architect of last year’s bill, is now leading a group of Republicans in drafting a competing set of immigration principles in consultation with the White House. A Senate vote on immigration, which was expected next month, may not take place now until May or June.
Senator John Cornyn, Republican of Texas, said the discussions between Republican lawmakers and White House officials might result in an agreement markedly different from last year’s Senate bill.
The statement of Republican principles under consideration may eliminate a path to citizenship for guest workers and require illegal immigrants to leave the country before becoming eligible for permanent residence, measures that Mr. Cornyn acknowledged might prove toxic to some Democrats.
“It could well move in a direction that will not result in a bill,” said Mr. Cornyn, who criticized last year’s Senate bill as an amnesty for lawbreakers. “It’s a delicate negotiation, still very much a work in progress.”
Mr. Specter said he still supported last year’s Senate bill, allowing guest workers and illegal immigrants to move toward citizenship. But he, too, said the Republican consensus position might be quite different.
As to whether it would be acceptable to Senate Democrats, Mr. Specter said, “It’s too soon to say.”
The new House bill would also require the majority of illegal immigrants to leave the country before they could move toward citizenship, a requirement opposed by many employers and union leaders.
“If the process doesn’t work and it strands people outside the country, the word will get around and people will stay in a subterranean economy,” said Randel K. Johnson, a vice president of the United States Chamber of Commerce.
The House bill, which is sponsored by Representatives Luis V. Gutierrez, Democrat of Illinois, and Jeff Flake, Republican of Arizona, would give illegal immigrants six years to leave the United States and re-enter legally.
The bill would also allow 400,000 to 600,000 foreigners to participate each year in a new temporary worker program. Both programs would include a path to citizenship and would begin after border security measures and other conditions were in place.
Despite his concerns, Mr. Johnson praised the bill as a step in the right direction. Mr. Kennedy said he hoped it would prod the Senate to “forge the right kind of compromise.” Mr. Flake agreed, saying he still hoped lawmakers would send a bill to Mr. Bush by the fall.
“The fact that we’re moving in the House will jump-start the Senate a little,” Mr. Flake said. “There’s still time.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/23/washington/23immig-q.html?_r=1&oref=slogin
Doubts Arise on Immigration Bill’s Chances
By RACHEL L. SWARNS
Published: March 23, 2007
WASHINGTON, March 22 — House lawmakers stood before the television cameras on Thursday and hailed the introduction of a new measure to secure the border and move millions of illegal immigrants toward citizenship.
Senators Edward M. Kennedy and John McCain last year, when allied on an immigration bill. Mr. McCain is now keeping his distance.
But behind the scenes, there was much more uncertainty than celebration among proponents of what would be the most substantial overhaul of immigration laws in two decades.
Three months into the new Congress, immigration legislation is hitting some unexpected roadblocks. A mix of presidential politics and unforeseen fissures between Democrats and their Republican allies has stalled movement in the Senate.
Key lawmakers in both chambers seem to be moving to the right to assuage conservatives who helped derail immigration legislation last year. Now there are doubts as to whether Congress will actually send an immigration bill to President Bush this year.
Only a few months ago, Democrats and Republicans alike were predicting that immigration legislation would move relatively smoothly — with bipartisan support — through the new Democratic-controlled Congress. Lawmakers and advocates for immigrants remain hopeful that that can still happen, but they said the political environment had changed.
“I don’t know why we were so naïve to think that things were going to go so swimmingly,” said Michele Waslin of the National Council of La Raza, an immigration advocacy group, who addressed concerns about the stalemate in the Senate. “I sincerely hope the process gets back on track very soon.”
Democratic leaders say Republican backing is critical, both to ensure passage of a bill in the Senate and to protect newly elected moderate and conservative Democrats in the House, some of whom campaigned against legalizing illegal immigrants.
Democrats and Republicans stood side by side at the House news conference Thursday. But the possibility of a partisan rift remains palpable, particularly in the Senate.
Senator John McCain, the Arizona Republican who is running for president, has distanced himself from Senator Edward M. Kennedy, the Massachusetts Democrat, as Mr. McCain has faced a barrage of criticism from conservatives who oppose his support of the legalization of illegal immigrants. The two men joined forces last year to help pass the Senate bill, which would have put most of the nation’s illegal aliens on a path to citizenship.
Mr. Kennedy has suggested a plan on his own, but his Republican allies have yet to embrace it. Angered by Mr. Kennedy’s decision to exclude him and other moderates from early negotiations, Senator Arlen Specter, Republican of Pennsylvania and an architect of last year’s bill, is now leading a group of Republicans in drafting a competing set of immigration principles in consultation with the White House. A Senate vote on immigration, which was expected next month, may not take place now until May or June.
Senator John Cornyn, Republican of Texas, said the discussions between Republican lawmakers and White House officials might result in an agreement markedly different from last year’s Senate bill.
The statement of Republican principles under consideration may eliminate a path to citizenship for guest workers and require illegal immigrants to leave the country before becoming eligible for permanent residence, measures that Mr. Cornyn acknowledged might prove toxic to some Democrats.
“It could well move in a direction that will not result in a bill,” said Mr. Cornyn, who criticized last year’s Senate bill as an amnesty for lawbreakers. “It’s a delicate negotiation, still very much a work in progress.”
Mr. Specter said he still supported last year’s Senate bill, allowing guest workers and illegal immigrants to move toward citizenship. But he, too, said the Republican consensus position might be quite different.
As to whether it would be acceptable to Senate Democrats, Mr. Specter said, “It’s too soon to say.”
The new House bill would also require the majority of illegal immigrants to leave the country before they could move toward citizenship, a requirement opposed by many employers and union leaders.
“If the process doesn’t work and it strands people outside the country, the word will get around and people will stay in a subterranean economy,” said Randel K. Johnson, a vice president of the United States Chamber of Commerce.
The House bill, which is sponsored by Representatives Luis V. Gutierrez, Democrat of Illinois, and Jeff Flake, Republican of Arizona, would give illegal immigrants six years to leave the United States and re-enter legally.
The bill would also allow 400,000 to 600,000 foreigners to participate each year in a new temporary worker program. Both programs would include a path to citizenship and would begin after border security measures and other conditions were in place.
Despite his concerns, Mr. Johnson praised the bill as a step in the right direction. Mr. Kennedy said he hoped it would prod the Senate to “forge the right kind of compromise.” Mr. Flake agreed, saying he still hoped lawmakers would send a bill to Mr. Bush by the fall.
“The fact that we’re moving in the House will jump-start the Senate a little,” Mr. Flake said. “There’s still time.”
Last edited by a moderator:
thanks
Thanks for posting this. Easily the most important piece of info I have seen in some time. The delay in introducing the bill in the senate did not look promising. Also, from the way Lou Dobbs was questioning Guitterez yesterday, it did not seem like a very serious thing even to Lou Dobbs.
Of course, this is really not what we hoped for
.
gcwhenever:
Thanks for posting this. Easily the most important piece of info I have seen in some time. The delay in introducing the bill in the senate did not look promising. Also, from the way Lou Dobbs was questioning Guitterez yesterday, it did not seem like a very serious thing even to Lou Dobbs.
Of course, this is really not what we hoped for
.gcwhenever
Registered Users (C)
hey qp, wish I had found something positive.gcwhenever:
Thanks for posting this. Easily the most important piece of info I have seen in some time. The delay in introducing the bill in the senate did not look promising. Also, from the way Lou Dobbs was questioning Guitterez yesterday, it did not seem like a very serious thing even to Lou Dobbs.
Of course, this is really not what we hoped for
Good luck to you and to me and all of us!!!
marlon2006
Registered Users (C)
On crack?
People writing these bills must be on crack. This is the very same amnesty thing all over again. They simply don't get tired and come back all over again. Just because the head of the household should go outside of the country (for one day) and come back, that doesn't change the nature and criticism against the amnesty. "Securing the border first", then applying the bill. Attempting physical security without policies and procedures to back it up are simply a null attempt. I want to see how one can minimize the influx of people on a porous border at the same time the entire world is broadcasting that the US will grant an amnesty for whoever is able to fake a document showing they are here before June 2006. You will see people crossing those borders like squirrels.
I am sorry to say, but this one does not look much better than the other bills.
Flake-Gutierrez Amnesty Bill Introduced
On March 22, Rep. Jeff Flake (R-AZ) and Rep. Luis Gutierrez (D-IL) introduced H.R. 1645, the Security Through Regularized Immigration and a Vibrant Economy (STRIVE) Act, which would give amnesty to aliens who were illegally present in the United States before June 1, 2006, and would create a program to import 400,000 more foreign “guestworkers” each year. The legislation also includes a "touchback" provision that would require illegal aliens to return home before applying for citizenship. CongressDailyPM quotes Rep. Gutierrez as saying, when asked how long illegal aliens would have to stay away, that "Maybe they could do it in a day."
The already overburdened and error-prone U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services would be responsible for ensuring that amnesty applicants pay a $2,000 fine and meet certain criteria, and for handing out temporary visas and work permits to 12-plus million illegal aliens and the additional “guestworkers.”
People writing these bills must be on crack. This is the very same amnesty thing all over again. They simply don't get tired and come back all over again. Just because the head of the household should go outside of the country (for one day) and come back, that doesn't change the nature and criticism against the amnesty. "Securing the border first", then applying the bill. Attempting physical security without policies and procedures to back it up are simply a null attempt. I want to see how one can minimize the influx of people on a porous border at the same time the entire world is broadcasting that the US will grant an amnesty for whoever is able to fake a document showing they are here before June 2006. You will see people crossing those borders like squirrels.
I am sorry to say, but this one does not look much better than the other bills.
Flake-Gutierrez Amnesty Bill Introduced
On March 22, Rep. Jeff Flake (R-AZ) and Rep. Luis Gutierrez (D-IL) introduced H.R. 1645, the Security Through Regularized Immigration and a Vibrant Economy (STRIVE) Act, which would give amnesty to aliens who were illegally present in the United States before June 1, 2006, and would create a program to import 400,000 more foreign “guestworkers” each year. The legislation also includes a "touchback" provision that would require illegal aliens to return home before applying for citizenship. CongressDailyPM quotes Rep. Gutierrez as saying, when asked how long illegal aliens would have to stay away, that "Maybe they could do it in a day."
The already overburdened and error-prone U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services would be responsible for ensuring that amnesty applicants pay a $2,000 fine and meet certain criteria, and for handing out temporary visas and work permits to 12-plus million illegal aliens and the additional “guestworkers.”
gcwhenever:
Thanks for posting this. Easily the most important piece of info I have seen in some time. The delay in introducing the bill in the senate did not look promising. Also, from the way Lou Dobbs was questioning Guitterez yesterday, it did not seem like a very serious thing even to Lou Dobbs.
Of course, this is really not what we hoped for
Can there be a perfect immigration bill ever? Nothing is going to be perfect. It is a question of Dems pushing the clause that says border security first and then everything else and hopefully the senate and house pass it. The problem this time round may be the senate. Dems need atleast 10-15 reps to support the bill. The bill is going to be discussed in May. I guess something will pass but not until May and not enacted until late 2007/early 2008 at the earliest.