Senate Judiciary Bill to recapture Visa# at the Brink of Collapse

[marmaduk]

Courtesy of www.immigration-law.com:
"The full Senate failed to take a roll call for this bill today. Believe it or not, Senator Byrd intends to offer an amendment tomorrow (11/2/05) to remove the H-1B and immigrant visa retrogression provisions passed by the Senate Judiciary Committee from the Budget Reconciliation Package.
Please call your Senators and urge a "NO vote on the Bird Amendment Immediately!!" "

For those who're not familiar with this bill:
http://www.washingtontimes.com/natio...0738-8062r.htm

I really don't understand why they would kill such bill and offer a L1 fee increase to compensate for it. For crying out loud...if they truly fear competition from H1-B worker, what do they think L1 worker is?

Just another way to squeeze the legal immigrants I guess, my condolences to them.

[marmaduk]

Courtesy of www.immigration-law.com:
"The full Senate failed to take a roll call for this bill today. Believe it or not, Senator Byrd intends to offer an amendment tomorrow (11/2/05) to remove the H-1B and immigrant visa retrogression provisions passed by the Senate Judiciary Committee from the Budget Reconciliation Package.
Please call your Senators and urge a "NO vote on the Bird Amendment Immediately!!" "

For those who're not familiar with this bill:
http://www.washingtontimes.com/natio...0738-8062r.htm

I really don't understand why they would kill such bill and offer a L1 fee increase to compensate for it. For crying out loud...if they truly fear competition from H1-B worker, what do they think L1 worker is?

Just another way to squeeze the legal immigrants I guess, my condolences to them.

[AliBA]

Let's see, now. Why would we oppose a bill that excludes families of H1-Bs from the quotas, and effectively adds a couple of hundred thousand MORE immigrants a year to our already-high one million or so legal ones? And all for a measly $500 a head which has an insignificant effect on the budget deficit, but a major one on workers who would be displaced. Also, remember Marmaduk--H1-Bs are NONIMMIGRANTS until they're able to adjust status. There's no guarantee of a green card for them, and no RIGHT or PROMISE that they can remain here.

[marmaduk]

The families of H1-B worker is not counted toward the quota to begin with (they're coming using H2-B and can't work nor displace anyone). Their argument is against raising the quotas of H1-B.
Also whats wrong with trying to recapture visa# that otherwise would've been lost during retrogession. These people already waiting for years for no fault of their own.

[AliBA]

The green card numbers, Marmaduk. That's a big sticking point. Not only does the bill, as I last read it, raise the cap, but it excludes the family of an H1-B worker from the numbers used in allocating employment-based green cards. The effect is to substantially increase the number of legal immigrants each year, under the guise of a budget bill.

These people have been waiting years because of factors which should have been obvious to them when they accepted the H1-B. They knew or should have known that there a limited number of employment-based green cards, and that there were per-country quotas. They also knew that an H1-B is NOT a guarantee of a green card. They gambled. Remember, Marmaduk--immigration policy is for the benefit of the US, NOT the would-be immigrant. If Congress wants to change immigration policy, especially since it's so controversial these days, the way to do it is not by trying to hide it in a budget bill, or sneak it through after everyone's gone home, as Congress did the 2000 increase in the H1-B cap.

[marmaduk]

But those so-called visa# has already been issued, but then lost due to one reason or another. If its already been issued, whats wrong with reusing it for someone else that can benefit? Thats exactly what the Labor Dept did with their Labor Cert.

[AliBA]

If there's nothing wrong with it, then Congress should be willing to debate that, and the whole immigration provision, as stand-alone legislation, especially since it involves major changes in US immigration policy.

It's also a good argument against "guest worker" programs. The H1-B started out as supposedly for the "best and brightest" guest workers for use in "temporary" labor shortages. US employers got hooked on cheaper labor, and somehow those provisions fell by the wayside, dual intent was allowed, we've seen Congress dilute the program's provisions to make it easier to H1-Bs to remain here permanently, and now we see that they want to increase the numbers and make it even easier to remain--all without ever coming out publicly and announcing a policy change. Do you care to guess what would happen if Congress ever did do a "guest worker" program including low-skilled workers?

[marmaduk]

It might appear so right now Aliba, but for a long period of time, the visa# for employment based green card applicants has remained current for all countries. Only recently within the last year or so that the visa# retrogress all the way back to 1998 to some countries. Had USCIS done a better job of keeping track of the system (yeah..right!) applicants would be able to make more uniformed decision.
Now when there's a chance to help them that's stuck in the queue, the avenue was squashed.

If they really upset about it, at least let the recapturing part goes through. There's no harm in that part.

[marmaduk]

The elephant's head promises that immigration overhaul in early 2006, but we're talking politician here. The same one that led us to this mess to begin with. I see nothing wrong with grabbing opportunities when it present itself, especially after the Judiciary committe has passed it.

[AliBA]

Actually, a number of us pointed out back in 2000 during the debate on the increase in the H1-B cap that there would simply not be enough employment-based GCs for the number of H1-Bs admitted, let alone their families. And that was just assuming that all employment-based GCs went to H1-Bs and no one else. The current problem was entirely predictable, if not the exact timing of it. Supposedly, many H1-Bs are science or CS whizzes, at least that's industry's excuse for wanting them. Can't these guys do simple arithmetic? Industry had the chance then to push for more green cards, but didn't. Guess it didn't seem too important as long as it could keep getting the bodies it wanted.

It's unreasonable to expect USCIS to "keep better track of the numbers" when Congress has enacted piecemeal legislation, increases in H1-B caps, and ad hoc mini-amnesties such as TPS and 245i over just the past decade. In fact, a number of "immigrant rights" groups and H1-Bs lobbied for these increases because they figured THEY would benefit from them. Some of the early lobbyists may even have benefited, but the increase in numbers plays avoc with the chances of those who came after. Each of these requires time, training, and resources to implement, and provides new routes for people to get in line for green cards. Add to that, that legalized people are able to sponsor THEIR relatives, and it's hard to see how or why USCIS should be able to plan better. What would make sense is if the US set a fixed number of immigrants, family or employment-based, and then stuck to it.

The Judiciary Committee passed it out of Committee for a vote of the full Senate, but the Senate will vote as it wishes. It may even vote for this provision, but if it does, the provision MUST STILL GET APPROVAL BY THE HOUSE, and that's a tougher sell than the Senate. You may believe in "seizing opportunity", but you'd also better plan on what to do if you don't catch it.

[marmaduk]

Well looks like its moot point afterall, Byrd's amendment has been rejected.
Thank you mr & mrs senator...for once I'll applaud the politician for something...

[AliBA]

Not quite yet. The House and Senate bills still have to be reconciled. The Senate isn't known as "the rich man's club" for nothing.

The House Judiciary Committee (the counterpart of the Senate Judiciary Committee which passed the immigration provisions in the Senate) has already passed provisions identical to those sought by Senator Byrd. After the House passes its version, a conference committee will reconcile the differences.

But also think about this, Marmaduke. The real sticking point in the whole immigration process is Immigration processing green cards in a timely manner. Congress isn't budgeting anything more for this, and if you think the additional money in fees will be used for it, think again. Also, every time there is a change in law, rules and regs must be written for implementing it, which means Immigration is going to be doing that, and that can take literally years. Staff must be hired and trained to handle the additional workload (do you think there are provisions for that in this budget?). In other words, getting green cards is going to get slower for everyone, especially those already backlogged. If you're one of those affected by the retrogression, you benefit, but if you're one of those in the backlog, you don't.

You'd also better pray that Congress doesn't decide to do a guest worker program when it resumes next year, because if it does, well, there goes more money and manpower diverted to that.

[marmaduk]

One at a time Aliba, 1st the Senate, then the congress and then the law. I know congress isn't gonna increase the operating budget for USCIS for this, but at the very least this will allow more visa# to be available, and thats a good thing for those stuck in the queue. If any, this just show how out of touch the congress is with the immigration problem (both legal and illegal).

My peeve with all of this simple. Countless time argument have been made against illegal immigration and the push toward legal immigration. Yet, the govt/senate/congress/(you name it), continuously undermine effort to smoothen legal immigration. In one hand we tell everyone to do it the legal way, on the other hand we s-ucker punch the legalization process.... Take example on this Byrd's amendment. If they're worried about H1-B quota,etc, then fine, amend it to kill that part. But not only he does that, he also intend to kill the visa recapture. Its something thats already available and wasted for crying out loud, what harm would've come from letting it pass?

Again, I tipped my hat off to the legal immigrant that are stuck in the queue. I hope they can bear it a bit longer while our "estemeed" leader sort their own mess.

[betamichigan]

Marmaduk,

Do you have any idea or when do you speculate that this bill will pass and more H-1s will be available for people with Bachelor degrees?

I would appreciate your input!

[marmaduk]

If it'll pass congress/senate, then I expect it to be passed in 1st half of 2006 and implemented in 2nd half of 2006. Hopefully in time for FY 2007.