UPDATE on new version of Dream Act

[glus]

I can't reveal the source. But in a day or two it will be apparent:
This is from 12/1/2010

Dear XXXXX,

Late last night, Majority Leader Reid (D-NV) filed a new version of the DREAM Act (S. 3992) with the aim of attracting broader support for DREAM to get the requisite 60 votes to pass the Senate. With the filing of this new bill, the anticipated date for bringing DREAM to a vote will be delayed. The earliest Reid could file a cloture motion on the new bill would be this coming Thursday. After waiting out the requisite 30 hours post-cloture, it could "ripen" over the weekend, and effectively come up for a vote on Monday at the earliest.

The new version addresses many of the concerns raised by Republicans and tightens the restrictions on eligibility in several respects. Among other changes, the new version does the following:

* Excludes from eligibility those with certain criminal convictions, such as for offenses punishable by a maximum term of more than 1 year (felony) or 3 misdemeanors
* Requires all applicants to provide their biometric data to DHS, to submit to background checks and medical examination, and to register for military selective service
* Requires applicants to pay all taxes
* Sets the cut-off age to those who are less than 30 years-old on the date of enactment
* Provides a "safe harbor" from removal only to those applicants who present a prima facie case of eligibility
* Extends the good moral character requirement back to the date the alien entered the United States rather than the date of enactment of DREAM
* Expands the applicable grounds of inadmissibility to include the health-related, public charge, smuggling, draft dodging, and unlawful voting grounds
* Expands the applicable grounds of deportability to include public charge, unlawful voting, and marriage fraud grounds
* Excludes those who participated in persecution
* Clarifies that no one can apply before 1 year after enactment
* Requires applicants to demonstrate eligibility by a preponderance of the evidence
* Eliminates repeal of the in-state tuition ban
* Defines institution of higher education to include only U.S.-based programs
* Requires those who subsequently apply for adjustment to meet the English language and civics requirements typically required for naturalization
* Expands the circumstances where disclosure of confidential information about DREAM applicants is required for homeland security or national security purposes
* Creates conditional nonimmigrant status for 10 years, followed by 3 years of LPR status prior to application for naturalization

[LONGGCQUE]

NO IV Provisions here.. whats our take, if at all this is true ?

[go_guy123]

NO IV Provisions here.. whats our take, if at all this is true ?

There is nothing...ding for skilled immigrants.

[ambals03]

So... now whatis our plan of action ?

[glus]

Unfortunately from what I am hearing, there is very much "no no" to adding anything out of direct context to this bill. Supposedly a few Republican senators will support this as long as it remains DREAM for illegal children only :(

[s416504]

See Full Text of New Stand-Alone DREAM Act of 2010 Introduced 11/30/2010 at :

The Oh Law Firm (http://www.immigration-law.com/)

[lifestrikes]

Politics in Washington is just a joke.

* Reply from NC Senator - I don't support DREAM Act as standalone bill.
* GOP Senators to Reid - We will block all the bills in Lame Duck session, unless Tax bill is taken care.

[go_guy123]

Unfortunately from what I am hearing, there is very much "no no" to adding anything out of direct context to this bill. Supposedly a few Republican senators will support this as long as it remains DREAM for illegal children only :(

Labor unions are alo behind Dream act ....as this is a controlled amnesty. Children get citizenship and in turn pronsor for their parents.
Labor Unions want amnesty as illegal workers end up competing/busting unions as they work "outside their system". Only solution to legalize then and then get then in the Union.

Skilled workers work though work permit...so attacking the permit permit system i.e H1B/L1 etc is the
best strategy which doesnt work for illegals.

[lifestrikes]

So... now whatis our plan of action ?

Pack our bags and go home.

[abhishek101]

People have to realize Democratrs = Illegals and Anti Legals

If you are thinking anything else then you are in la la land.

here in California Feinstein is openly against Legal immigration and strongly supports amnesty for illegals. And I am basing that after visiting her office.

[waitingnwaiting]

People have to realize Democratrs = Illegals and Anti Legals

If you are thinking anything else then you are in la la land.

here in California Feinstein is openly against Legal immigration and strongly supports amnesty for illegals. And I am basing that after visiting her office.

I pity your education level/basic intelligence. Do you even have a Bach. degree? or did a diploma after 12th and substituted it for education?

You visited a Senator office that is a democrat.

And based on your talk with that office, you have made a general statement of all democrats.

With your logic, if you had visited Sen. Sessions office, you would have said that all Republicans are anti-immigrants. :D:D

You really need to do learn a lot about political position of each democrat in Senate and House on various issues.

[imh1b]

People have to realize Democratrs = Illegals and Anti Legals

If you are thinking anything else then you are in la la land.

here in California Feinstein is openly against Legal immigration and strongly supports amnesty for illegals. And I am basing that after visiting her office.

Dude stop seeing this world like a programmer. It is not zeros and ones/ black and white.

You are only right only about one Senator. So you are better off than some fools on other website. I found a popular fool on other website praising this Senator for her support for Legals. He/She may have just met with some staffer and talked nicely. Now they think the Senator is for Legals. Come on. Do some research on a Senator before you go and meet one. Ask them what bills and amendments they have proposed or will propose if they tell you they support us.

[abhishek101]

Thank you WaitingWaiting for your compliments, and imh1B I am not a programmer.

WaitingWaiting I am actually illeterate who has never gone to school, but I do read news paper and follow the logic. Also I have visited other offices, and I am very clear Democrats bad for Legals, you can sugar coat it any way you want.

For sessions I agree he is anti immigrant but then there are quite a few in Republicans who are very strongly supportive of Legal immigration, I can say the same for Democrats and Illegals.

Go and read Economist, Time or even WSJ and you will be able to read that democrats are against legals.

Recently Economist published an article that Under Obama biggest casualty is Legal Immigration.

Now I might be illeterate of 12th fail but I can still read and understand the facts. Some how all the degrees does not give some people any Common Sense.

Just to back me up I have a Btech from IIT and am doing an MBA from Wharton. Let's see what you have.

[gc_peshwa]

Guys
Humbly request to be civil while posting :-)

Abhishek
Kudos for visiting the senator's office. Highly appreciated.
Politics Rule #1: No permanent friend or foes.
Politics Rule #2: No concrete stance on a any issue. Keep changing according to demands by "Polity".
Who is the polity? WE, intending legal immigrants, are ALSO polity, just like the "undocumented".

If you met a staffer a Sen. Feinstein's office who was anti-legal lets edcuate that person. PM the admin/pappu with details of your experience.

Again thank you for taking the time to lobby!

[waitingnwaiting]

Just to back me up I have a Btech from IIT and am doing an MBA from Wharton. Let's see what you have.

Ha Ha

If you are IIT Wharton, I am MIT, Harvard,

Attitude like yours is why your Senator is against Legals. You have too much airs around you for being from IIT and Wharton. You guys think too high of themselves and look down upon the rest of the world. You think everyone else is a fool and you are the next Google founder and USA is doing a great dis-service by denying you a Green Card.

If you are so smart, why are you stuck in EB3? Why can't you start a new company? Why don't you do something innovative in your career and apply in EB1.

There is already a category called EB1 Extraordinary ability for best and the brightest people like yourself. You should be applying there and get green card in a couple of months.

Moreover India needs best and the brightest like you. It invested lacs of rupees giving you free education in IIT and you left India for dollars. The Senator is more Pro-India than you by being against legals . So that you can go to India and use your IIT Wharton skills to improve your motherland.

[Abhinaym]

Dude stop seeing this world like a programmer. It is not zeros and ones/ black and white.



Programmers see the world in black and white?? That's interesting, I didn't know we were all color-blind or incapable of understanding the greys in thought processes.

:rolleyes:

[raghav0]

Ha Ha

If you are IIT Wharton, I am MIT, Harvard,

Attitude like yours is why your Senator is against Legals. You have too much airs around you for being from IIT and Wharton. You guys think too high of themselves and look down upon the rest of the world. You think everyone else is a fool and you are the next Google founder and USA is doing a great dis-service by denying you a Green Card.

If you are so smart, why are you stuck in EB3? Why can't you start a new company? Why don't you do something innovative in your career and apply in EB1.

There is already a category called EB1 Extraordinary ability for best and the brightest people like yourself. You should be applying there and get green card in a couple of months.

Moreover India needs best and the brightest like you. It invested lacs of rupees giving you free education in IIT and you left India for dollars. The Senator is more Pro-India than you by being against legals . So that you can go to India and use your IIT Wharton skills to improve your motherland.

Can we stop making this a pissing contest and concentrate on what we can do in order to ensure that our woes and needs are included in the DREAM Act? This just seems like the order for any new post that comes out which requires us to come together more than ever and all we do is find ways to disrupt the unity!! Its either EB2 Vs EB3 or Rep Vs. Dems or about one's qualifications and positions....The bottom line that no matter what pedigree we have and where we work, the fact that we are a part of IV determines only one thing when it comes to our Green card - WE ALL ARE IN THE SAME MISERABLE STATE!!

[go_guy123]

Thank you WaitingWaiting for your compliments, and imh1B I am not a programmer.

WaitingWaiting I am actually illeterate who has never gone to school, but I do read news paper and follow the logic. Also I have visited other offices, and I am very clear Democrats bad for Legals, you can sugar coat it any way you want.

For sessions I agree he is anti immigrant but then there are quite a few in Republicans who are very strongly supportive of Legal immigration, I can say the same for Democrats and Illegals.

Go and read Economist, Time or even WSJ and you will be able to read that democrats are against legals.

Recently Economist published an article that Under Obama biggest casualty is Legal Immigration.

Now I might be illeterate of 12th fail but I can still read and understand the facts. Some how all the degrees does not give some people any Common Sense.

Just to back me up I have a Btech from IIT and am doing an MBA from Wharton. Let's see what you have.


Hi Abhiskel101 Good that you analysed this...It time to call a spade a spade. Democratic party is only for undocumented referred as "illegals"

By the ways the latest news is that GOP is holding Dream act hostage. Tax cuts is the price they want to extract for dream act

[willigetgc?]

shame on the members who incite intolerance and cast people (members/programmers/lawmakers) in generalities. Stop this nonsense.

The point is we have to make the lawmakers actually see our perspective. The first time I go to the lawmaker office, I meet the aide, the second time - the aide and since I have been visiting them often, the aide knows me well - and talks to me about the politics in DC. By itself, its not a great task/achievement. However, I know for a fact that I am getting through to them. Still, all my effort is just a drop of water in the ocean (like i said elsewhere on the forum).

See if you can be inspired to commit to meeting with your senators regularly?

[sage2006]

It is surprising that in spite of detailed posts by more experienced members, folks are making the same mistakes again and again when it comes to meeting lawmakers and presenting our case.
Firstly, kudos to thoes who have taken the step of scheduling meetings with lawmakers but then after going to such a meeting it is important that we speak purely about legal immigration policy and not about how we are superior than the others! No lawmaker will view us favorably and accept our provisions when we present it in such a manner and then we come back and complain about how a certain lawmaker is an enemy of our provisions.
I do not believe that we can label either Democrats OR Republicans in one broad stroke as anti-anything. The views and policies vary from one lawmaker to another and from time to time..which is why it is important that our members across the country meet with THEIR respective lawmaker to find out what the individual stance is. We are all frustrated but that does not mean we dilute our own efforts and dig a grave for ourselves in that frustration.