|
[VIEWED 41955
TIMES]
|
SAVE! for ease of future access.
|
|
|
|
|
|
guy_tensed
Please log in to subscribe to guy_tensed's postings.
Posted on 11-30-11 11:33
AM
Reply
[Subscribe]
|
Login in to Rate this Post:
0 
? 
|
| |
BAD NEWS FOLKS !!!!!
EB2 will take 4 Years
EB3 will take 12 Years (damn !)
WASHINGTON: In a move that would benefit highly-skilled workers from countries like India seeking to stay in the US, the House of Representatives has voted to end per-country caps on worker-based immigration visas.
The bill (HR 3012) passed by the US House of Representative in a voice vote, from both the parties, completely eliminates the per-country caps for employment-based visas and raises the per-country cap from seven per cent to 15 per cent for family-based visas, all without adding even a single additional visa.
The current Immigration and Nationality Act generally provides that the total number of employment-based immigrant visas made available to natives of any single foreign country in a year cannot exceed seven per cent of the total number of such visas made available in that year, a result of which a large number of qualifies Indians in particular are rejected because of this anomaly in the existing law.
Supporters of this bill termed it as pro-growth and pro-job. Speaking on the floor of the House in support of the bill, Congressman Steve Cohen said the bill removes the so-called "per-country" limits from applying to employment-based green cards.
"Current immigration law provides 140,000 green cards annually to employment-based immigrants. The law, however, prevents any one country from receiving more than 7 per cent or 9,800 of the total 140,000 visas," he said.
"Because of this per-country limit, a country like India, with a population of 1.2 billion, is limited to the same number of visas as a country like Iceland, with a population of 300,000 and a lot of ice," he argued.
"This makes no sense and has resulted in decades-long backlogs for nationals from India, as well as China, and it makes it impossible for certain US employers to attract and retain certain essential workers they need to help keep America competitive. Indeed, from India and China there are many people trained in STEM areas that we need in our country to keep competitive," Cohen said.
He said that eliminating the per-country limit for employment-based immigrants would level the playing field and treat everyone on a first-come, first-served basis.
"Because the bill does not provide additional green cards, it does not address the current overall backlogs. And that's unfortunate. But the bill does treat people and those backlogs more equitably. To make sure that there are no unintended consequences, the elimination of the per-country limit is phased in slowly over 3 years," he said.
Congressman Jim Moran said that this bill is very important for the tech sector to grow and expand.
"We know how important technology firms are going to be in the global economy of the 21st century; but I don't think we fully take into account how important it is to continue to attract the best and brightest from around the world who, in fact, do want to go to graduate school here and do want to continue residing in the United States and to work here applying their talents and skills," Moran said.
Congresswoman Zoe Lofgren said, "This bill will help certain Indian nationals, who now face a wait of 70 years to get green cards.
"... But because the bill does not address the scope of the backlogs, it will increase the wait time for many others. Under this bill, everyone seeking an employment-based third preference green card will have to wait 12 years. That may be more equitable, but it doesn't fix the underlying problem," he said.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
SarkiMailoParewadada
Please log in to subscribe to SarkiMailoParewadada's postings.
Posted on 12-01-11 10:02
AM [Snapshot: 3627]
Reply
[Subscribe]
|
| Login in to Rate this Post:
0
?
|
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
sammu2011
Please log in to subscribe to sammu2011's postings.
Posted on 12-01-11 10:30
AM [Snapshot: 3658]
Reply
[Subscribe]
|
| Login in to Rate this Post:
0
?
|
| |
Email your senator, that's the best you could do at this time. Time is really short. Grassley has put a hold, but that does not mean that HR 3012 is dead now. Immigration Voice, the monster behind this game is hell bent on getting this passed. They have been lobbying on this for years and they actually predicted 90 percent support on HR voting, and were right on the money. Indians actually clogged the washington DC switchboard when they were calling for support for this bill. HR 3012/ S 1857 ( the twin bill in the senate) if passed will not only make our life miserable but all our future generations. Visa Lottery can be stopped anytime. EB green card is the only option for us to get residency in the US and you don't want to wait for 10 years. Even EB2 will be backlogged by several years if HR3012 was to pass thru the senate.
Join the EB ROW group in yahoo. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/EB_ROW/
There are several resources, letters, tons of informaiton.
Follow the blog and the tweeter.
http://skilledimmigrant.blogspot.com/
http://twitter.com/#!/search/realtime/skilledimmigrant
|
| |
|
|
sammu2011
Please log in to subscribe to sammu2011's postings.
Posted on 12-01-11 10:41
AM [Snapshot: 3759]
Reply
[Subscribe]
|
| Login in to Rate this Post:
0
?
|
| |
This is a very good letter that a ROW member has put together....
--------------------------------------
Dear Senator Corker,
Hope you are well. By now you might have received a lot of correspondence in favor of Bill
HR.3012 & S.1857. If that is the case then it is easy for you to imagine how the passing of this
bill will skew the future immigration landscape as duly noted by Senator Grassley. I humbly
request you to look into Senator Grassley’s position on this bill.
Nonetheless here is some additional information that you might consider useful when looking
considering your stand on these two bills. We are a small potential legal immigrant group trying
to work our way through a system. Please feel free to visit our blog to understand our issue at
this time <www.skilledimmigrant.blogspot.com>
HR. 3012 & S.1857 Need More Debate
On November 29th the House of Representatives passed the bill HR 3012 titled "The Fairness
for High Skilled Immigrants Act". While the intentions of the legislators behind this bill are
commendable, when one looks at the bill in detail it raises troubling questions. It also highlights
a few gaps that have not been addressed by this bill. Similar bill S. 1857 is pending in the
Senate.
At a high level this bill eliminated the per country cap of 7% in the employment based category.
The argument being "Is it fair to award 7% of the visas to larger population countries such
as India & China compared to country such as Ireland?" If this bill is passed then it slightly
reduces the immigration backlog for applicants from India & China but significantly worsens it for
applicants from all other countries.
Let's look into some areas that the bill does not address:
1. In 2010 49,087 of visas of the 148,343 immigrant visas granted in the employment
based categories were awarded to applicants born in either India or China. This
accounts for ~33% of the total EB visas granted. Applicants from India alone were
granted ~20% of the visas and not the 7% as stated (
http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/
statistics/yearbook/2010/ois_yb_2010.pdf
)
2. An argument in favor of this bill is that this bill helps America's competitiveness by
attracting skilled labor. But is it really about skilled labor or cheap labor? Is there a
conclusive study which proves that this change will make America more competitive in
the global economic space?
3. A recent survey (
http://topics.dallasnews.com/article/04GS8O506kfDn?q=Europe)
shows that Indian IT companies ranked amongst the world's lowest paying employers.
On an average Indian IT companies paid $36,120 & a Swiss IT company paid a similar
employee $167,8902. In view of this data one cannot help but wonder if this is about
attracting high skilled workers and not just low cost labor. Shouldn't we address the root
cause of the problem and help prevent American businesses from outsourcing the jobs
to low paying countries?
4. The employment based category also includes immigrants with as little as 2 years
of experience who may not have a college degree. This bill will surely facilitate the
clogging of the immigrant applicants in this category?
5. The Department of State
website indicates that these 7% caps are implemented to
prevent the monopolization of visas by applicants from a single country. This is similar
to antitrust regulations that protect the interests of small businesses and consumers.
This bill is a repudiation of this principle. What provisions will be added to prevent
monopolization of immigration in the future?
6. It was mentioned in the House that companies need to wait long to hire graduates from
countries with a high population, however the temporary worker program, commonly
known as the H1B program, was implemented to overcome that limitation and has been
highly successful in recruiting graduates/skilled professionals from any country, a major
portion of these visas are granted to applicants from India and China.
7. This bill is one that makes fundamental changes to current immigration queues, yet it
takes effect immediately upon passage. USCIS is not given any time to study the impact
of the bill, nor time to draft and implement new guidance and regulations for immigration
adjudicators. Such immediate implementation without time to put into place the detailed
regulations necessary to ensure a smooth transition will likely lead to chaos for some
time to come.
8. Lastly, how will this bill deal with people who already started their immigration petition
before this law will be implemented?
In full disclosure, we all do have a dog in this fight but, all we are asking is to do the "right thing"
for all US Citizens, potential Immigrants & America's businesses, as only united we can make
America even more competitive & continue to be the world leader.
References:
On a closing note, we would like to again state that we are not against this bill in principle, but
are requesting a detailed study and debate before it is implemented. As the butterfly effect
theory states that small changes can result in a big impact. Let's make sure that this small
change doesn't make a big negative impact by duly debating and studying the change.
“Give me six hours to chop down a tree and I will spend the first four sharpening the axe.” - Abe
Lincoln.
|
| |
|
|
eutamanche
Please log in to subscribe to eutamanche's postings.
Posted on 12-02-11 12:15
AM [Snapshot: 4874]
Reply
[Subscribe]
|
| Login in to Rate this Post:
0
?
|
| |
Hello all,
Please use the link below to send letters to your Senators. On the right hand side of the page you will see a link to Send a letter to your Rep(choose Oppose). After you click "Oppose" you will be in the page where you can enter your zip code and the senators for your constituent will be shown on the left. Please select all the senators so that the letter will be sent to all of them. Also, the website will give you a format of the letter that will be sent to the senators, and you can edit it with the message you have for them. All you need to enter is your email address. Please act.
http://www.opencongress.org/bill/112-h3012/show
Thanks
|
| |
|
|
eutamanche
Please log in to subscribe to eutamanche's postings.
Posted on 12-02-11 1:02
PM [Snapshot: 5291]
Reply
[Subscribe]
|
| Login in to Rate this Post:
0
?
|
| |
One of the senators from my district replied to my letter. This shows that if you act, it will be noticed.
|
| |
|
|
Poon-Hill
Please log in to subscribe to Poon-Hill's postings.
Posted on 12-02-11 1:08
PM [Snapshot: 5308]
Reply
[Subscribe]
|
| Login in to Rate this Post:
0
?
|
| |
I am waiting reply from my senators...
|
| |
|
|
meraj
Please log in to subscribe to meraj's postings.
Posted on 12-02-11 1:19
PM [Snapshot: 5336]
Reply
[Subscribe]
|
| Login in to Rate this Post:
0
?
|
| |
If you guys are sending mails to senators , consider raising point about chain migration as well. Clearing huge backlog in such a short time for the people from India and china , will also add large number citizens 5 yrs down the line. People from this part of world have tendency of sponsoring their relative as soon as possible. It has potential large chain migration down the line. Senator has already raise this point but you can tell your senators that large number of immigrant in short period of time is your concern.
|
| |
|
|
IT_Guy
Please log in to subscribe to IT_Guy's postings.
Posted on 12-02-11 2:38
PM [Snapshot: 5480]
Reply
[Subscribe]
|
| Login in to Rate this Post:
0
?
|
| |
Sep 22, 2011 - Introduced in House. This is the original text of the bill as it was written by its sponsor and submitted to the House for consideration. This is the latest version of the bill currently available on GovTrack.
To amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to eliminate the per-country numerical limitation for employment-based immigrants, to increase the per-country numerical limitation for family-sponsored immigrants, and for other purposes.
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Mr. CHAFFETZ (for himself and Mr. SMITH of Texas) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary
To amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to eliminate the per-country numerical limitation for employment-based immigrants, to increase the per-country numerical limitation for family-sponsored immigrants, and for other purposes.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ‘Fairness for High-Skilled Immigrants Act’.
SEC. 2. NUMERICAL LIMITATION TO ANY SINGLE FOREIGN STATE.
(a) In General- Section 202(a)(2) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1152(a)(2)) is amended--
(1) in the paragraph heading, by striking ‘AND EMPLOYMENT-BASED’;
(2) by striking ‘(3), (4), and (5),’ and inserting ‘(3) and (4),’;
(3) by striking ‘subsections (a) and (b) of section 203’ and inserting ‘section 203(a)’;
(4) by striking ‘7’ and inserting ‘15’; and
(5) by striking ‘such subsections’ and inserting ‘such section’.
(b) Conforming Amendments- Section 202 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1152) is amended--
(1) in subsection (a)(3), by striking ‘both subsections (a) and (b) of section 203’ and inserting ‘section 203(a)’;
(2) by striking subsection (a)(5); and
(3) by amending subsection (e) to read as follows:
‘(e) Special Rules for Countries at Ceiling- If it is determined that the total number of immigrant visas made available under section 203(a) to natives of any single foreign state or dependent area will exceed the numerical limitation specified in subsection (a)(2) in any fiscal year, in determining the allotment of immigrant visa numbers to natives under section 203(a), visa numbers with respect to natives of that state or area shall be allocated (to the extent practicable and otherwise consistent with this section and section 203) in a manner so that, except as provided in subsection (a)(4), the proportion of the visa numbers made available under each of paragraphs (1) through (4) of section 203(a) is equal to the ratio of the total number of visas made available under the respective paragraph to the total number of visas made available under section 203(a).’.
(c) Country-Specific Offset- Section 2 of the Chinese Student Protection Act of 1992 (8 U.S.C. 1255 note) is amended--
(1) in subsection (a), by striking ‘subsection (e))’ and inserting ‘subsection (d))’; and
(2) by striking subsection (d) and redesignating subsection (e) as subsection (d).
(d) Effective Date- The amendments made by this section shall take effect as if enacted on September 30, 2011, and shall apply to fiscal years beginning with fiscal year 2012.
(e) Transition Rules for Employment-Based Immigrants-
(1) IN GENERAL- Subject to the succeeding paragraphs of this subsection and notwithstanding title II of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1151 et seq.), the following rules shall apply:
(A) For fiscal year 2012, 15 percent of the total number of immigrant visas made available under section 203(b) of such Act (8 U.S.C. 1153(b)) shall be allotted to immigrants who are natives of a foreign state or dependent area that was not one of the two states with the largest numbers of natives obtaining lawful permanent resident status during fiscal year 2010 under such section 203(b).
(B) For fiscal year 2013, 10 percent of the total number of immigrant visas made available under such section 203(b) shall be allotted to immigrants who are natives of a foreign state or dependent area that was not one of the two states with the largest numbers of natives obtaining lawful permanent resident status during fiscal year 2011 under such section 203(b).
(C) For fiscal year 2014, 10 percent of the total number of immigrant visas made available under such section 203(b) shall be allotted to immigrants who are natives of a foreign state or dependent area that was not one of the two states with the largest numbers of natives obtaining lawful permanent resident status during fiscal year 2012 under such section 203(b).
(2) PER-COUNTRY LEVELS-
(A) RESERVED VISAS- With respect to the visas reserved under each of subparagraphs (A) through (C) of paragraph (1), the number of such visas made available to natives of any single foreign state or dependent area in the appropriate fiscal year may not exceed 25 percent (in the case of a single foreign state) or 2 percent (in the case of a dependent area) of the total number of such visas.
(B) UNRESERVED VISAS-
(i) IN GENERAL- With respect to the immigrant visas made available under such section 203(b) and not reserved under paragraph (1), for each of fiscal years 2012, 2013, and 2014, not more than the number of such visas calculated under clause (ii) shall be allotted to immigrants who are natives of any single foreign state.
(ii) CALCULATION OF NUMBER- The numbers of visas calculated under this clause for a fiscal year is the number that is equal to 70 percent of the total number of immigrant visas made available under such section 203(b) for such fiscal year.
(3) RULES FOR CHARGEABILITY- Section 202(b) of such Act (8 U.S.C. 1152(b)) shall apply in determining the foreign state to which an alien is chargeable for purposes of this subsection.
|
| |
|
|
LahureDai
Please log in to subscribe to LahureDai's postings.
Posted on 12-02-11 2:40
PM [Snapshot: 5487]
Reply
[Subscribe]
|
| Login in to Rate this Post:
0
?
|
| |
I heard from both senators I sent my concerns to. Please guys dint hesitate to express your concerns. At least, senators will realize some people have to suffer if this bill is approved in senate.
|
| |
|
|
doublehonda
Please log in to subscribe to doublehonda's postings.
Posted on 12-02-11 3:12
PM [Snapshot: 5574]
Reply
[Subscribe]
|
| Login in to Rate this Post:
0
?
|
| |
i received one from the Senator's office in my area thanking me for my views and that will be under review ....so i guess this is the right time to vote . Here is the link
Euta Manche provided above
"Please use the link below to send letters to your Senators. On the right hand side of the page you will see a link to Send a letter to your Rep(choose Oppose). After you click "Oppose" you will be in the page where you can enter your zip code and the senators for your constituent will be shown on the left. Please select all the senators so that the letter will be sent to all of them. Also, the website will give you a format of the letter that will be sent to the senators, and you can edit it with the message you have for them. All you need to enter is your email address. Please act.
http://www.opencongress.org/bill/112-h3012/show
Thanks"
|
| |
|
|
Dweej
Please log in to subscribe to Dweej's postings.
Posted on 12-02-11 3:43
PM [Snapshot: 5651]
Reply
[Subscribe]
|
| Login in to Rate this Post:
0
?
|
| |
I sent an email to the senators too. Hopefully it'll count.
Last edited: 02-Dec-11 03:43 PM
|
| |
|
|
sanju.baba
Please log in to subscribe to sanju.baba's postings.
Posted on 12-02-11 5:42
PM [Snapshot: 5783]
Reply
[Subscribe]
|
| Login in to Rate this Post:
0
?
|
| |
Yeah brother do what you gotta do to stay in this country.....sorry Nepal we too good for you!  Sad.....
|
| |
|
|
doublehonda
Please log in to subscribe to doublehonda's postings.
Posted on 12-04-11 10:20
AM [Snapshot: 6375]
Reply
[Subscribe]
|
| Login in to Rate this Post:
0
?
|
| |
Folks ..here is veryuseful link to oppose this bill .
Itseems all I and C are rapidly supporting this . we need to act now to probably secure ROWers
http://www.petition2congress.com/5680/please-oppose-3012-immigration-bill/
This opposition will straight go to Capitol Hill and the numbers are counted according to statistics .
So please oppose the bill by voting now to secure all ROWers future in US.
|
| |
|
|
Naya gahre thuldai
Please log in to subscribe to Naya gahre thuldai's postings.
Posted on 12-05-11 7:54
PM [Snapshot: 6765]
Reply
[Subscribe]
|
| Login in to Rate this Post:
0
?
|
| |
Has anybody made a facebook page for opposing HR 3012?
|
| |
|
|
guy_tensed
Please log in to subscribe to guy_tensed's postings.
Posted on 12-14-11 12:55
PM [Snapshot: 7390]
Reply
[Subscribe]
|
| Login in to Rate this Post:
0
?
|
| |
Fellow Nepalese Friends,
Please create a Facebook Page to Oppose HR 3012.
If this Bill passes, your dream of Green Card will be shattered ! It will be 12 years for some and more than 4 years for some.
So please do what you can at this point, oppose this bill by sending emails to senators !
If you are really close to getting Green Card under Eb3 or Eb2, it will be delayed by 5-6 years more for EB3 and 4 years for EB2...
|
| |
