S. 1932 Status

S 1932 v/s House Bill

Technically this also depends from which bill they wanted to start the reconciliation. They the Conf. members want to start the recon. from the house bill, they could very well avoid the immi. provisions by taking up some other provisions of the S 1932 that provides a revenue stream to meet the needs of the house bill. There are no need for discussions at this point.

But if they starts from the Senate bill, them there is a need to discuss 8001/8002 provisions (as these provides revenue) , if they want to drop these. Also discussions are required to compensate the loss of revenue (by dropping 8001/8002) by adding a similar revenue provision from house bill.

These are my thoughts.........


ravs4us said:
well if something is missing/contradicting in two versions than it would be debated in conference committe and then if approved by the committee would be voted in both the houses.
Click to expand...
 
Recd email from AILA

Your Help Needed to Defeat Devastating Anti-Immigrant Legislation in the House!

National Call-In Days, Tuesday and Wednesday, December 13-14 Take Action!

Urge your Representative to Defeat Sensenbrenner's Devastating Anti-Immigrant Proposal!

This Wednesday or Thursday (December 14 or 15), the House will consider the Border Protection, Antiterrorism, and Illegal Immigration Control Act of 2005 (H.R. 4437), an extreme and dangerous enforcement-only bill introduced by Rep. James Sensenbrenner (R-WI). H.R. 4437 would have a truly devastating impact on undocumented immigrants, lawful permanent residents, and U.S. citizens. We must act now to prevent its final passage.
Among other damaging provisions, the bill would:

Criminalize unlawful presence
Strip the courts of much of their remaining jurisdiction over immigration matters

Gut the due process rights of aliens and permanent residents
Expand expedited removal
Broaden the definition of alien smuggling to include family members, employers, and immigrant advocates

Expand the definition of aggravated felony
Create new grounds of deportability and inadmissibility

Increase mandatory detention
Militarize the border
Place limitations on eligibility for naturalization
Please call your Representative on Tuesday or Wednesday and urge him or her to oppose H.R. 4437! Rather than solving our immigration challenges, H.R. 4437 would criminalize millions of hardworking, law-abiding immigrants and divide American families. Enforcement-only legislation will not fix our broken immigration system. Instead, we need realistic, comprehensive reform.
 
I think the negotiation is going on in the conference meeting

The negotiation for 8001 and 8002 is either going or finished. It won't be happening in Senate or House, it would be in the conference. Now is the wait mainly for the result. I do not feel optimistic, only because one of the anti immigration site said they acheived in defeating that provision (of section 8001). That I would guess was the right time when negotiation were carried out. I though have faint hope and belief in almighty for a miracle. Lets see!!
 
yep only miracle can work now

akela said:
The negotiation for 8001 and 8002 is either going or finished. It won't be happening in Senate or House, it would be in the conference. Now is the wait mainly for the result. I do not feel optimistic, only because one of the anti immigration site said they acheived in defeating that provision (of section 8001). That I would guess was the right time when negotiation were carried out. I though have faint hope and belief in almighty for a miracle. Lets see!!
Click to expand...
 
Guys i am confused here. On Cspan i see Only senators talking and it says Senate Session. If that is the case then what are they discussing exactly? Why wud they RE-Discuss S-1932? Is each house (ie senate/house) trying to incorporate the other's version seperately and then they will meet together or what? Are they even discussing S-1932??
 
From what I'm seeing and understand, the decision from the conference report is voted on in both the houses IF an issue is raised on that report. This is what we saw all morning. Some senators were DISPLEASED about certain provisions in the conf report, and asked for votes. If the vote wins, it goes back to conference to re-consider/re-work.
Smae thing happenned in the congress. Some one raised a concern on the conf report for a certain provision of patriot act, they are voting on it now.

There were 2 such votes on S1932. None related to 8001/2.

I don't beleive there will be a comprehensive vote for the entire bill. I may be worng though.
 
House is discussing HR3010, whatever bill that is. Sunjoshi can you pls expand a little on what u just said? Still a lil confused :confused:
 
You might be right
and then let me be the devils advocate. Someone reported that they saw some senator talking about legal immigration and how they need to be helped (and was apperantly not happy, i.e. something had happenned - scrap 8001?). He did not bring that to vote (i.e. it was not considered big enough an issue to be faught for). Now I did not see the senate hearing. Can anyone who saw it shed more light on it.

rgds,
a
 
We are in nervious ninty and about to make century (of pages) for this thread .I hope some think will come up once we make 100 pages for this thread .
 
Canadian_dream, then what u mean is, that the Senate is actually discussing the house bill? In that case dont they have to dicuss the Sec 8001/2 as they directly conflict with the house's version which proposes ONLY an increase in L1 fees. Or is that not seen as a conflict but just an additional means of revenue?

Quick question. Cant the joint committee pass BOTH senate and house versions when it comes to immigration? Thinking abt it, Sec 8001 deals with GCs and fee increases, so that makes money. Sec 8002 deals with increasing H1s and increasing fees for L1. House part also increases L1 fees. Cant the joint committee then just incorporate the 3 things? They are each pretty distinct and every single one of them adds to revenue AND is desperately needed for companies and employees.
 
Guys pardon my dumbness but what is supposed to be in the Conference report? Does the senate and house each have a separate one? If they are voting on measures seperately then how is it that there is only one report?
 
Based on your understanding, when do you think the conference report is going to be published? Do we have a chance this year? Thanks!

Canadian_Dream said:
Motion to Instruct the Confrees in NOT a direct discussion of House bill. It is a motions that:

Instruct HOUSE Confrees to agree to the Senate Amendment. It is voted upon like any other motion.
The can have such motion for any clause that they deemed questionable and then voted upon it.

They may or may not instruct confrees about 8001/8002 counterpart of house bill based on how questionable it is to the Senate. We have to wait for the conference report to publish before we know what happened.
Click to expand...
 
Everyone,

Please note that the debate that was going on in the senate was related to the motion to instruct the conferees. This is not conference committee. Genearlly the conference committee is apointed when there is a difference in the bill passed by the House and Senate. The committee then discuss the difference that are existing between the two bills.

The Deficit reduction bill is very complex bill. Also it is very important for this administration to pass this bill before the end of this year. For that reason the Republican leaders in House and Senate are trying to reach a compromise before the bill is given to the conference committee. Under the law Senate and House memebers can instruct the conferrees but the conferrees are not required to follow that instructions. Hope this would clarify the doubts that people on this board has.
 
Anyone helped me understand this?

if check S.1932,(http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d109:s.01932:)

you will find Latest Major Action:
11/18/2005 Passed/agreed in House. Status: On passage Passed without objection.
if you click the related bill H.R. 4241(http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d109:HR04241:),

the NOte is

Note: H.R. 4241, as passed House, was inserted in lieu of the text in S. 1932 and the amended S. 1932 was passed by the House. For further action, see S. 1932.

Do it mean that S.1932 should be final? does that mean 8001 and 8002 would be added automatically if no trouble such as food stamp, emergency assistance?

thanks....
 
The opinion of Canadian_dream looks to be logical.

My 2 cents:
This discussion is Motion of instruction and it is guideline to conference committee members (Senete side) for better negotiation.
Contravercial issues they are discussing now to get openion of Senete.
Good thing I am looking forward is; they are not discussing on 8001/8002 means they do not have resistence from counter part conference members.



Canadian_Dream said:
In my opinion:

1. There is no conference report as yet.
2. There are no confrees either
3. What is going on is simply "Motion to Instruct the Confrees".
4. A similar step happen yesterday in the house too. (for 1 hr in the morning)

I don't think this has anything to do with 8001/8002. Motion to instruct the confrees simply target clauses that are directly confilicting the Senate version. This motion is simply voicing the concern.
Unless there is a conference report on the bill we cannot be certain if 8001/8002 made it ot not. The conference report will come only after confrees are decided. Conference Report will be published (on the official BILL Page on the Library of Congress on Thomas) before being voted on.
Click to expand...
 
Can we retain lawyers/lobbyists/experts for our case...

Friends,

Can we band together to hire lobbyists who know the run of the process and who could be instrumental in getting the word out to the people that matter at the right time and less importantly, keep us in the loop about the actions we need to take, etc

Right now, we are running around like chickens who have had their heads cut...Our intentions are good but it seems like we lack clear purpose, directions and agenda...

It could be isnamerica ( that is the group I know that is closest to the common need of this audience )

I understand that AILA has lobbyists but they have a much wider agenda and may not be expected to take a fight on the issues that are dear to us.

Even corporations like Microsoft whose lobbyists were instrumental in getting this piece of legislation tucked into the budget actually have different agendas that ours. They care more for expansion of H1s ( not that it is a bad thing ) and would not mind sacrificing retrogression if there is a need to.

Ultimately, Retrogression affects employees and in fact, several scrupulous employers benefit from it.

I would like to hear what this forum thinks

Thanks!!
 
Corporate help

The name of the memers of the conf committee yet to be announced. All the discussions between GOP leaders are going on background i.e offline. We do not know clearly about the fate of 8001 in the conference level. Once the final conference report appears in the thomas web site, without 8001, all our efforts are waste. Nothing can be done after that.

Sofar, we have sent more faxes to law makers. Still we do not know who will support 8001 in the conference level. Also, we do not know how hard the chairman of SJC (original sponser of 8001) will resisit, if 8001 gets dropped in conference.

What I feel if some one in these corporations (major H1b and GC sponsers) send a offcial fax to the Conf. committee members, it will add more leverage.

It will be really great, If employer reps of these corporates in DC or PA meet the chairman of Senate Judiciary commitee and expalin in detail to include 8001. Folks, working in these corporates may take initiatives.

Microsoft
IBM
Lucent
Hewlett Packard
Cisco
Compuware
Oracle
12 Technologies
Motorola
AT&T
Intel
Sun Microsystems
TATA
Analysts International
Nortel
American Express
Bank of America
GTE
Boeing
Intel
3Com
Wal-Mart
Alcatel
Siemens
General Electric
EDS
Mastech
America Online
Qualcomm
Honeywell
Compaq
Enron
Ajilon
Qwest
Ercsson
Texas Instruments
Raytheon
Syntel
Citibank
Goldman Sachs
PeopleSoft
State Streetbank
Bell Atlantic
Deloitte & Touche
United Airlines
Verizon
Applied Materials
Aerotek
Abbot Laboratories
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top