We may gain from Frists political motives ..

S

saras76

Banned
Guys and Gals,

A lot of interesting things seem to have happened since yesterday. I must say that a lot of forum members are doing a commendable job of keeping us all updated on the latest development. From what I have read thus far it seems that out of sheer luck us "legal immigrants" seem to be in positive territory. Bill Frist has pushed his own bill purely as a political ploy to improve his chances in 2008 Presidential elections. We lucked out because he has kept all the legal immigration relief provisions in his bill. On the other hand if the Senate is able to mark up the Mcain bill or some other version by 27th we will still be okay because the legal provisions are bound to be in that bill as well.

Looking ahead to the battle in the House. I believe it would be best if the Frist bill gets there. The House will probably reject any bill which gives amnesty to illegals. The only hope for such a bill to pass would be if the Senate changed it from total amnesty to something more acceptable.

Whatever be the case, we have a long road ahead. In december we got to the house and then they quitely threw out all the immigration stuff. Lets hope the house doesn't ruin the party once again.

regards,

saras76
 
Immigration

The house is more anti immmigrant (whether legal or illegal). Whilst I agree with you that it is good that both sen Frist's bill as well as the McCain/Kennedy bill have provisions for us, lets not forget that whatever the senate approves has to go through conference with the House and that is where the true battle lies.
I think that it might be better to have the controversial illegals provisions in committee so that Tancredo and company will be focussed on that rather than on our provisions, Since believe me even Frists bill is not sufficiently anti-immigrant for them! They want their house version passed last year.
On the other hand, you are also right that the illegal immigrant provisions might serve to lead to gridlock and failure to pass anything.
Ideally for us Frist's bill would be adequate and also not unduly congest the USCIS. Just doubt the house will let our provisions stay if it were to get to conference, if they were inclined to do so then sec 1932 provisions would have made it to law.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Good points ..

posmd said:
The house is more anti immmigrant (whether legal or illegal). Whilst I agree with you that it is good that both sen Frist's bill as well as the McCain/Kennedy bill have provisions for us, lets not forget that whatever the senate approves has to go through conference with the House and that is where the true battle lies.
I think that it might be better to have the controversial illegals provisions in committee so that Tancredo and company will be focussed on that rather than on our provisions, Since believe me even Frists bill is not sufficiently anti-immigrant for them! They want their house version passed last year.
On the other hand, you are also right that the illegal immigrant provisions might serve to lead to gridlock and failure to pass anything.
Ideally for us Frist's bill would be adequate and also not unduly congest the USCIS. Just doubt the house will let our provisions stay if it were to get to conference, if they were inclined to do so then sec 1932 provisions would have made it to law.
Click to expand...

posmd,

You make some very good points. I totally agree with you on everything apart from the true reasons for throwing out 1932. I believe the main reason was that 1932 was attached to a budget bill and most congressman did not like that idea. At that time they stated that "ALL" immigration matters would be tackled this year in a separate "Immigration Only Bill". No one really knows how true those statements were but if that is the case then Congressman would be willing to atleast consider some sort of immigration bill and may even pass it. As for our chances, here is my assesment ..

I have my doubts that either of these bills will make it to law. The only hope is that an "Enforcement" heavy bill gets to Congress and is presented as such instead of a bill that blatantly provides amnesty to illegals or eases immigration. If the bill is tilted towards two key political positions, "Securing Americas Borders" and "Enforcing Immigration Policy", more congressman will jump on board in order to win votes by siding with a bill that tries to tackle the supposed problems at the border. The whole thing hinges on the perception of the US public. If we get lucky the bill will take on the shape of "immigration reform by way of enforcement" and not "amnesty to illegals". If this happens then provisions for legal immigrants may get through by tagging along with the enforcement provisions. A bill without enforcement as the key measure will surely fail. There is no doubt about that ...

This being election year, it is to hard to precdict what might happen. Decisions are not going to be made out of logic or fairness, they are all going to be politically motivated. We have to hope that somehow we end up in someones political favor and get through. Its going to be tough.

regards,

saras76
 
Election Year?

Saras,

The next presidential elections are in November 2008.
So you are refering to 2008 elections?
 
I totally agree. Frist bill have more chanches to get through Senate and concgress as there is no resistance for EB category. Anti-immigrant would be happy to see tough enforcement provision for illegal.

While Senator Spector bill contains guest worker provision and amnesty for 11 million illegal. Most likely, this will not pass in congress. Remember, President Bush also against to give amnesty to illegal (although he wants guest worker provision).

It is in our favor that Frist bill remain on floor and not replace by Senator Specter bill otherwise immigration reform bill as a whole have very steep climbing !!



saras76 said:
Guys and Gals,

A lot of interesting things seem to have happened since yesterday. I must say that a lot of forum members are doing a commendable job of keeping us all updated on the latest development. From what I have read thus far it seems that out of sheer luck us "legal immigrants" seem to be in positive territory. Bill Frist has pushed his own bill purely as a political ploy to improve his chances in 2008 Presidential elections. We lucked out because he has kept all the legal immigration relief provisions in his bill. On the other hand if the Senate is able to mark up the Mcain bill or some other version by 27th we will still be okay because the legal provisions are bound to be in that bill as well.

Looking ahead to the battle in the House. I believe it would be best if the Frist bill gets there. The House will probably reject any bill which gives amnesty to illegals. The only hope for such a bill to pass would be if the Senate changed it from total amnesty to something more acceptable.

Whatever be the case, we have a long road ahead. In december we got to the house and then they quitely threw out all the immigration stuff. Lets hope the house doesn't ruin the party once again.

regards,

saras76
Click to expand...
 
Tancredo has already said he is against Legal Immigration provisions in Bill Frist's bill.
Thre will be big fight in conf regardless of which clause goes there.
Realistically we should be happy even if they allow capture of unused numbers from previous yrs. Even if that goes through it will be great.
 
There are two elections ...

Lx95 said:
Saras,

The next presidential elections are in November 2008.
So you are refering to 2008 elections?
Click to expand...

Lx95,

There are two major elections in this country and occur two years apart from eachother. The first is the Congressional Elections where all the Congressman and Senators are elected. This will happen this year. The other one is the Presidential elections that will occur two years from now.

Hope this clears your confusion.

regards,

saras76
 
Ok Saras76,

When we can expect this bill come to voting in congress?
This year or the next presidential election year i.e 2008???
 
Lx95 said:
Ok Saras76,

When we can expect this bill come to voting in congress?
This year or the next presidential election year i.e 2008???
Click to expand...

Bill Frist is aspiring to be a Pres Candidate for 2008.

Entire House and about 1/3 of senate go for elections every 2 years.
 
Memos'

I had a question,

When a new Bill is singed into the law and if the NEW Bill overrides an OLD one...

Does all the memos' associated with the OLD bill die with the OLD bill or they get carried over to the NEW bill?


Thanks
:eek: :eek: :eek:
 
Section 406 exempts from the numerical cap on employment-based visas aliens with advanced degrees in science, technology, engineering, or math, and has worked in a related field in the U.S. during the 3 year period preceding their application for adjustment of status
Click to expand...


Does this mean a guy from India who has his Masters in Engg or Bach in Engg with 3 years of experience ... will NOT be counted against numerical cap on employment-based visas.

Wow.. if this is true then ... retrogression will simply disappear...
or it's TOO GOOD to be TRUE.....????
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Advanced degree is Master's or higher not Bachelors degree.

Nadi said:
Does this mean a guy from India who has his Masters in Engg or Bach in Engg with 3 years of experience ... will NOT be counted against numerical cap on employment-based visas.

Wow.. if this is true then ... retrogression will simply disappear...
or it's TOO GOOD to be TRUE.....????
Click to expand...
 
GC_DJ said:
Advanced degree is Master's or higher not Bachelors degree.
Click to expand...


:( Only masters ... more guys with only Bachelors are retrogressed... I guess.

But again what if a guy with Bachelors complete Masters in one of the open universities in India .. It might take a year and half ... but will be able to beat the retrogression...
 
GC_DJ said:
Advanced degree is Master's or higher not Bachelors degree.
Click to expand...

Also another constraint, you should have worked for 3 years prior to filling for your green card in a related field. So if you have a masters in Chemical Engg and you are working in Software Development, that doesn't cut it.
 
<quote>Also another constraint, you should have worked for 3 years prior to filling for your green card in a related field. So if you have a masters in Chemical Engg and you are working in Software Development, that doesn't cut it.</quote>


Not completely though.. one could be working in software development on a product related to chemical engineering.. such cases would need a bit of hard sell but doable. As always, the burder of proof lies on the applicant. I would think that if the Labor Certification mentions knowledge in that field, it would make the task easier. Examples... CAD related companies usually prefer Mechanical\Civil Engineering background and they tend to ask for such engineering expertise in their LCs.
 
Why would Frist's bill be the final Senate bill?

Frist said his bill is only a "backup plan" if SJC doesn't reach an agreement. Thus it's unlikely that SJC will leave the situation as it is --- they will try desperately to reach "something". Once that something, whatever it is, is in agreement, Frist's bill is going to be off table.

So how likely Frist's bill will be the final Senate bill?
 
Nadi said:
Does this mean a guy from India who has his Masters in Engg or Bach in Engg with 3 years of experience ... will NOT be counted against numerical cap on employment-based visas.

Wow.. if this is true then ... retrogression will simply disappear...
or it's TOO GOOD to be TRUE.....????
Click to expand...


Well it might be only for guys with Masters and PhD's ...
Almost all in EB1 and many in EB2 ....have done masters and Phd's and good for them they will not be counted in any Quota system...

Good for EB-3 guys .. as all the PhD's and Masters guys will not consume the country Quota and EB Quota.... so it will result in more EB-3 adjucations ... even if they stick to 10% country limit.
Does it sound music to EB-3 guys.
Let me know if I am wrong.....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top