Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

New bill text

Collapse
X
  •  
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • New bill text

    Has anyone found the new bill's text? If you have it please post....

  • #2
    Has anyone found the new bill's text? If you have it please post....

    Comment


    • #3
      Anyone?

      Comment


      • #4
        http://shusterman.com/toc-leg.html#6E

        Comment


        • #5
          Floor Schedule
          Monday, May 21, 2007

          1:00 p.m.: Convene and resume consideration of the motion to proceed to S. 1348, the Comprehensive Immigration Legislation

          Watch CSPAN2

          Comment


          • #6
            Explora, that's the old bill.

            Comment


            • #7
              <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Houston:
              Explora, that's the old bill. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
              Thanks, let me edit that. I've got too many windows open.

              Comment


              • #8
                The bill has some horrible points but actually includes some sensible reform. I'm surprised!

                Comment


                • #9
                  I like it. The only thing I don't understand is how are they going to decide who qualifies for a Green card according to the point system. Is there like a pass mark (say 75 points and you qualify) or is it the more points you can get the better.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Houston:
                    Explora, that's the old bill. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

                    Yes and no.

                    It is the right bill number. However, to keep things clandestine and underhanded in the Senate (yes, really), the new "bill" has been introduced as an amendment (S.Amdt. 1150) in the nature of a substitute to the original bill, with the reading of the text of the amendment also dispensed with so it doesn't get printed and we can't see it.

                    The Shusterman link above is a draft of the amendment now being considered. An even better version is available from The Heritage Foundation here too:

                    http://www.heritage.org/Research/Imm...egislation.cfm

                    (Thank to Sen. Sessions for saying that during his speech on the floor, afraid it was quite buried however)

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Chris Parker:
                      <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Houston:
                      Explora, that's the old bill. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

                      Yes and no.

                      It is the right bill number. However, to keep things clandestine and underhanded in the Senate (yes, really), the new "bill" has been introduced as an amendment (S.Amdt. 1150) in the nature of a substitute to the original bill, with the reading of the text of the amendment also dispensed with so it doesn't get printed and we can't see it.

                      The Shusterman link above is a draft of the amendment now being considered. An even better version is available from The Heritage Foundation here too:

                      http://www.heritage.org/Research/Imm...egislation.cfm

                      (Thank to Sen. Sessions for saying that during his speech on the floor, afraid it was quite buried however) </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

                      Chris Parker,
                      Thanks for informing us of this. I'd initially viewed several sites and I had been on thomas.loc.gov/ and found S.1348 but Houston said it was the old one. I clicked on Senate, Floor Schedule for 5/23, and it said "all info except text." I'm getting confused on this because s.1150 is State Inspected Meat and Poultry. Then I typed in S.Amdt.1150 and it said it hasn't yet been received by GPO (govt printing office) because of delays in printing of numerous bills or large bill is to be printed.

                      On C-SPAN2 screen said S.1348. Where did you find the info title s.admt1150 as a substitute?

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by explora:
                        Chris Parker,
                        Thanks for informing us of this. I'd initially viewed several sites and I had been on thomas.loc.gov/ and found S.1348 but Houston said it was the old one. I clicked on Senate, Floor Schedule for 5/23, and it said "all info except text." I'm getting confused on this because s.1150 is State Inspected Meat and Poultry. Then I typed in S.Amdt.1150 and it said it hasn't yet been received by GPO (govt printing office) because of delays in printing of numerous bills or large bill is to be printed.

                        On C-SPAN2 screen said S.1348. Where did you find the info title s.admt1150 as a substitute? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
                        First, you can thank Sen. Sessions for telling everyone where the public can read the actual text of the proposal. He spoke about it during his 3-hour speech on the Senate floor on Monday afternoon, but who really reads that stuff except someone like me?

                        About the process being used by the Senate, let me try explaining this again...

                        The bill number is S.1348; S.Amdt.1150 (or SA 1150) is an amendment to it in the nature of a substitute (i.e. strike all and replace with the following...). Amendments to the amendment are presently in order. On C-SPAN & the news, however, the official bill number being considered is still S.1348.

                        Because the actual "bill" is in S.Amdt.1150, the proposal is not searchable as a bill is. The amendment to the bill is what is actually being debated and what will become the bill (after any further amendments are applied) if the amendment and the bill passes the Senate. Theoretically, if S.Amdt.1150 doesn't eventually pass, yes the original bill text that we can only see now could be voted on instead.

                        Normally an amendment's text is printed in the Congressional record when it is proposed. In this case, however, the Senators agreed to not print it at all. So, the result is we can't see the actual bill that they are debating. However, I gave a link above to a copy of the draft that was distributed to Senators on Saturday has been posted (actual amendment might have some last minute changes) and somehow The Heritage Foundation got a copy of.

                        You can't search for an amendment on the main THOMAS search page. You can search for it here, however:

                        http://thomas.loc.gov/bss/110search.html

                        The amendment is also linked to from S.1348 on the status information page. GPO has not printed it because the Senate hasn't ordered it printed. The Senators seem to not want the public to see the actual original text, only the final version after all amendments to the amendment if it passes, and if it fails, we just keep seeing what we see now.

                        There is more information in the actual bill than the publicly announced "highlights" actually say. For example, Parent Visitors would only be allowed to stay 30 days/year, after the U.S. citizen or temporary worker posts a $1000 bond and gives a guarantee of that there will no overstay.

                        In my opinion, this is a very deceitful way to go about proposing legislation, shameful in its own right, and just like the illegal immigrants have done, it unfairly avoids the formal process and procedure that is supposed to be done before a bill is to be considered on the floor.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by boyan:
                          I like it. The only thing I don't understand is how are they going to decide who qualifies for a Green card according to the point system. Is there like a pass mark (say 75 points and you qualify) or is it the more points you can get the better. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
                          They are trying to model the U.S. immigration system after Canada'a employment-based visa system. What somebody forgot to tell them, however, is Canada also has a family-based immigrant visa system like the U.S. which doesn't use the point system and is much more generous too.

                          Guess they got a lost by the fact that a few points are given for having a relative in Canada if you want an employment-based immigrant visa. That is how half-baked this bill really is, and why it never should have made it onto the Senate floor.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Chris Parker,
                            Much appreciated!!

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              you are right about the family based visas in Canada , it has nothing to do with point system.

                              Comment

                              Sorry, you are not authorized to view this page

                              Home Page

                              Immigration Daily

                              Archives

                              Processing times

                              Immigration forms

                              Discussion board

                              Resources

                              Blogs

                              Twitter feed

                              Immigrant Nation

                              Attorney2Attorney

                              CLE Workshops

                              Immigration books

                              Advertise on ILW

                              EB-5

                              移民日报

                              About ILW.COM

                              Connect to us

                              Questions/Comments

                              SUBSCRIBE

                              Immigration Daily



                              Working...
                              X