Immigration Voice - Forums
Register Get Involved Contact Lawmakers Contact Media Latest Posts Image Image Image Image

Go Back   Immigration Voice > Immigration Voice Issues and Congressional updates > IV Agenda and Legislative Updates
Click to log in with Facebook
IV Agenda and Legislative Updates Immigration Voice's Agenda and Legislative Updates

advertisement
 

Donation Goal
Goal amount for this month: 10000 USD, Received: 0 USD (0%)
Donate Now
Please contribute to Immigration Voice.

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #256 (permalink)  
Old 04-22-2013, 03:52 AM
Junior Member
Priority Date
:
Aug-09
Category
:
EB2
I140 Mailed Date
:
Chargeability
:
Processing Stage
:
I-485
I485 Mailed Date
:
Compare
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 12
sup_eb2_2009 is a splendid one to behold sup_eb2_2009 is a splendid one to behold sup_eb2_2009 is a splendid one to behold sup_eb2_2009 is a splendid one to behold sup_eb2_2009 is a splendid one to behold sup_eb2_2009 is a splendid one to behold sup_eb2_2009 is a splendid one to behold
Default WHY/Logic added

I have added the logic section for 8,9,10

Amendment Proposal 8:
Subject: Immediately enacting visa recapture
Section of Bill: 2304
Page/Line of Bill: 276
New addition: N
Change or Removal of a provision: Y. Change fiscal year 2015 to 2014.
WHY/LOGIC(No more than 100 words): The purpose is to remove the existing EB backlog as quickly as possible. If this enable for existing EB category immediately, back log will be cleared with the help of extra visas. There will be no need to Merit Based track 2 which will make EB people unfairly potentially wait for 7 more years.


Amendment Proposal 9:
Subject: Immediately enacting country cap removal
Section of Bill: 2306
Page/Line of Bill: 296
New addition: N
Change or Removal of a provision: Y. Para named Effective Date - change to immediate.
WHY/LOGIC(No more than 100 words): The purpose is to remove the existing EB backlog as quickly as possible. If this enable for existing EB category immediately, back log will be cleared with the help of the fairness in the first come first serve process. There will be no need to Merit Based track 2 which will make EB people unfairly potentially wait for 7 more years.


Amendment Proposal 10:
Subject: Immediately enacting exemption of derivative beneficiaries from the count
Section of Bill: ?
Page/Line of Bill: 299
New addition: N
Change or Removal of a provision: Y. Change to immediate
WHY/LOGIC(No more than 100): The purpose is to remove the existing EB backlog as quickly as possible. If this enable for existing EB category immediately, back log will be cleared with the help of extra visas. There will be no need to Merit Based track 2 which will make EB people unfairly potentially wait for 7 more years.
Bookmark and Share Compare Reply With Quote


  #257 (permalink)  
Old 04-22-2013, 03:29 PM
Senior Member
Priority Date
:
Feb-05
Category
:
EB3
I140 Mailed Date
:
05/05/2007
Chargeability
:
India
Processing Stage
:
I-485
I485 Mailed Date
:
07/27/2007
Compare
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 236
RNGC has much to be proud of RNGC has much to be proud of RNGC has much to be proud of RNGC has much to be proud of RNGC has much to be proud of RNGC has much to be proud of RNGC has much to be proud of RNGC has much to be proud of RNGC has much to be proud of
Default

^
__________________
NC State Chapter
Attended the DC Rally
Contribution: $500+
Attended the Advocacy days in DC - 2011
Status : I-485 pending, PD Feb 2005, EB3 - India
Bookmark and Share Compare Reply With Quote


  #258 (permalink)  
Old 04-22-2013, 03:33 PM
Senior Member
Priority Date
:
Feb-05
Category
:
EB3
I140 Mailed Date
:
05/05/2007
Chargeability
:
India
Processing Stage
:
I-485
I485 Mailed Date
:
07/27/2007
Compare
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 236
RNGC has much to be proud of RNGC has much to be proud of RNGC has much to be proud of RNGC has much to be proud of RNGC has much to be proud of RNGC has much to be proud of RNGC has much to be proud of RNGC has much to be proud of RNGC has much to be proud of
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by aswami View Post
Amendment Proposal ??:
Subject: MERIT-BASED TRACK TWO: immigrant visas limited to 1/7 per year for 7 years

Section of Bill: SEC. 2302. MERIT-BASED TRACK TWO.
Page/Line of Bill: 271
New addition: N.A.
Change or Removal of a provision: Allocate visas to a minimum of 1/7 the number of aliens to whom visas have not been issued. If more visas are available due to amends to the INA (or any other reason), allocate them to the aliens even if the total goes above 1/7 for that particular year.
WHY/LOGIC(No more than 100 words): If more visa numbers are available, there is no reason to limit allocating them to just 1/7 of the people who have applied 5 years ago. Giving out the available visas will avoid the repetition of the problem of available visas not being allocated to people who are waiting in the queue. This will get the previous backlogs cleared faster.


Amendment Proposal ??:
Subject: Ensure recaptured immigrant visas from 1992 to 2013 are all used up.

Section of Bill: SEC. 2304. WORLD-WIDE LEVELS AND RECAPTURE OF UNUSED IMMIGRANT VISAS.
Page/Line of Bill: 276
New addition: Ensure that the unused immigrant visas from years 1992 to 2013 will ALL be issued to people waiting in the queue for more than 5 years, regardless of how long it will take to issue them, even if it is beyond FY 2015.
Change or Removal of a provision: N.A.
WHY/LOGIC(No more than 100 words): The way the bill is currently worded, it sounds as if the unused visas recaptured from 1992 to 2013, should all be issued only in FY 2015. If any of those old visas are not issued in FY 2015, they may be lost forever! We know the number of those unused visas is going to be large and USCIS will most probably not be able to issue all of them within just one year 2015. Therefore, it is important to ensure that each and every one of those recaptured visas are issued even if it takes more time, beyond FY 2015, to do so.

Amendment Proposal ??:
Subject: Ensure recaptured immigrant visas from a previous year are not wasted.

Section of Bill: SEC. 2304. WORLD-WIDE LEVELS AND RECAPTURE OF UNUSED IMMIGRANT VISAS.
Page/Line of Bill: 276
New addition: Ensure that the unused immigrant visas from a previous year can be issued in multiple future years, and not just the immediate next year. For example, if X number of visas are unused in year 2016, USCIS should issue these unused visas not only in 2017, but also in 2018 and beyond until they are all used up.
Change or Removal of a provision: N.A.
WHY/LOGIC(No more than 100 words): The way the bill is currently worded, it sounds as if the unused visas recaptured from a previous year, can be issued in the immediate subsequent year only. For example, X number of unused visas from 2016 can be issued only in 2017, but not beyond. This limitation will once again result in a large number of unused visas accumulating year after year as it has currently happened from 1992 to 2013.
All good ideas! Hope IV admins consider this
__________________
NC State Chapter
Attended the DC Rally
Contribution: $500+
Attended the Advocacy days in DC - 2011
Status : I-485 pending, PD Feb 2005, EB3 - India
Bookmark and Share Compare Reply With Quote


  #259 (permalink)  
Old 04-22-2013, 04:04 PM
Senior Member
Priority Date
:
Feb-05
Category
:
EB3
I140 Mailed Date
:
05/05/2007
Chargeability
:
India
Processing Stage
:
I-485
I485 Mailed Date
:
07/27/2007
Compare
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 236
RNGC has much to be proud of RNGC has much to be proud of RNGC has much to be proud of RNGC has much to be proud of RNGC has much to be proud of RNGC has much to be proud of RNGC has much to be proud of RNGC has much to be proud of RNGC has much to be proud of
Default what documents are needed!

As we are busy adding new amendments, we should also think how they are planning to enforce the Law!

We need clear instructions as what documents/paperwork is needed for each conditions. For example, what is needed to prove its been 5 years since we applied for GC ? There are so many conditions, I think it the job of USCIS to clearly mention what documentation is needed to qualify for each of the criteria. We should never have the confusion like "same or similar". There should be no confusion as what USCIS is expecting, rather, they just make it very clear what they need as PROOF! Now many of us get 1 year EAD!, USCIS should attach a letter saying why I got just 1 year EAD instead of 2 ? So, if they had mentioned the documents needed for 2 year EAD, it will be very helpful and people can be sure that they will get a 2 year EAD because they have submitted all the documents they asked for! We don't need to have a wiki for documents needed!

So, the point is implementation of the LAW ( i know I am counting the eggs before they are hatched), but the idea is IV work closely with USCIS and help make the system very transparent so we don't rely on LUCK!!
__________________
NC State Chapter
Attended the DC Rally
Contribution: $500+
Attended the Advocacy days in DC - 2011
Status : I-485 pending, PD Feb 2005, EB3 - India
Bookmark and Share Compare Reply With Quote


  #260 (permalink)  
Old 04-22-2013, 04:30 PM
Senior Member
Priority Date
:
Nov-10
Category
:
EB2
I140 Mailed Date
:
Chargeability
:
India
Processing Stage
:
I-140
I485 Mailed Date
:
Compare
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 109
pd052011 has a reputation beyond repute pd052011 has a reputation beyond repute pd052011 has a reputation beyond repute pd052011 has a reputation beyond repute pd052011 has a reputation beyond repute pd052011 has a reputation beyond repute pd052011 has a reputation beyond repute pd052011 has a reputation beyond repute pd052011 has a reputation beyond repute pd052011 has a reputation beyond repute pd052011 has a reputation beyond repute
Default

I am wondering why STEM Masters Graduates are not exempt from numerical limitations. Should it not reflect the H1B quota assignment? Maybe a separate EB category. Any ideas from STEM Masters Grads in IV?
Bookmark and Share Compare Reply With Quote


advertisement
 
 
  #261 (permalink)  
Old 04-22-2013, 07:30 PM
Member
Priority Date
:
Sep-07
Category
:
EB3
I140 Mailed Date
:
02/22/2008
Chargeability
:
India
Processing Stage
:
I-140
I485 Mailed Date
:
Compare
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 34
lostcause2007 has a reputation beyond repute lostcause2007 has a reputation beyond repute lostcause2007 has a reputation beyond repute lostcause2007 has a reputation beyond repute lostcause2007 has a reputation beyond repute lostcause2007 has a reputation beyond repute lostcause2007 has a reputation beyond repute lostcause2007 has a reputation beyond repute lostcause2007 has a reputation beyond repute lostcause2007 has a reputation beyond repute lostcause2007 has a reputation beyond repute
Default

Not sure what you mean.
Page 304 and 305 specifically exempts masters grads (who earned degree 5 years prior to initial petition submission) from numerical limitations.

Quote:
Originally Posted by pd052011 View Post
I am wondering why STEM Masters Graduates are not exempt from numerical limitations. Should it not reflect the H1B quota assignment? Maybe a separate EB category. Any ideas from STEM Masters Grads in IV?
Bookmark and Share Compare Reply With Quote


  #262 (permalink)  
Old 04-22-2013, 08:48 PM
Junior Member
Priority Date
:
Category
:
N/A
I140 Mailed Date
:
Chargeability
:
Processing Stage
:
I485 Mailed Date
:
Compare
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 9
ketavanda is on a distinguished road
Default

I can be VOLUNTEER 2...I will do this every night.

Also, it is IV leadership choice to pick the proposals they like. We are just volunteers compiling proposals in logical format.

PART 1

Updated to 16 Amendment proposals

Propose the below format:

Amendment Proposal 1:
Subject:Removal of 5 year cutoff for advanced STEM degree holders
Section of Bill: (Somebody please suggest)
Page/Line of Bill: Page 305 Line 10
New addition: N
Change or Removal of a provision: Y
WHY/LOGIC(No more than 100 words): Majority of the currently backlogged and future EB2 category applicants have earned their US advanced STEM degree more than 5 years ago. Many of the applicants have not yet filled for the green card but have earned US advanced STEM degree more than 5 years ago. In order to truly reduce backlog for advanced STEM graduates, removal of the 5 year cutoff is very important. Alternatively it can be extended to 10 years. This will serve the true purpose of the reform bill.


Amendment Proposal 2:
Subject: Change to provision of EAD for H4 spouses
Section of Bill: 4102
Page/Line of Bill: Page 663/ Line 23
New addition: N
Change or Removal of a provision: Y
WHY/LOGIC(No more than 100 words):

- It will be an incentive for the H1 visa holders to stay longer and choose US over other competitive countries to make their home.
- If both people work in the same family, it indirectly boosts day care and other supporting industries.
- Giving more people employment authorization will simply share the current US debt. This is subject to H4 on EAD getting jobs.
- Giving away more EADs will simply generate more revenue for USCIS, that way we can help people keep their jobs without losing money.
- Since most of the H4 visa holders are women, here is an opportunity to empower the women in this country.


Amendment Proposal 3:
Subject: Just like L1 visa managers and executives, exempt the H1B managers and executives from the annual numerical limits on employment-based immigrants
Section of Bill: (Somebody please guide)
Page/Line of Bill: Page 301 Line 13
New addition: Y
Change or Removal of a provision: N
WHY/LOGIC(No more than 100 words): It does not make sense to give first preference category immigration to L1 foreign executives, while ignoring and giving second preference to H1B employees who worked hard to get promoted through ranks and became managers and executives.


Amendment Proposal 4:
Subject: Give EAD to all the approved I-140 irrespective of PD
Section of Bill: This is not there on the bill
Page/Line of Bill:
New addition: Y
Change or Removal of a provision: N
WHY/LOGIC(No more than 100 words): When they can give work authorization and travel doc for un documented , why not give EAD for all the I-140 the moment the bill is passed. After all the h1 guys are paying SS and taxes for years.


Amendment Proposal 5:
Subject: Track 2: 10 years requirement should not be continuous but can be with breaks also
Section of Bill: LONG-TERM ALIEN WORKERS AND OTHER 6 MERIT-BASED IMMIGRANTS
Page/Line of Bill: 271
New addition: should be considered for all the people who have spent more than 10 years not necessarily continuous.
Change or Removal of a provision: There should be an explanation on 10 years
WHY/LOGIC(No more than 100 words): Most of the people who are on h1 cannot stay more than 6 yrs and have to go back to home land. You can get 7th year if you have a pending EB. In case you have an EB you are covered in other sections of the bill anyways. So this is for people who have no EB in place and spent more than 10 years in US legally. So this needs to be modified stating that who have spent time in US for 10 yrs combined not necessarily continuous in any legal status l1,h1,h4,l2,b1,f1 etc


Amendment Proposal 6:
Subject: Seamless i-140/485 portability
Section of Bill: SEC. 4103.ELIMINATING IMPEDIMENTS TO WORKER MOBILITY
Page/Line of Bill: Page 664 Lines 5 -13
New addition: N
Change or Removal of a provision: It should add the provision- Make I-140 completely and automatically portable. An Approved i-140 should stand even if employer is changed and new employer should be able to proceed with AOS when date is current. If a 485 is in progress it gets similarly carried over to new employer and also the application can be bumped up from say EB3 to EB2 by providing new job description and/or qualifications.
WHY/LOGIC(No more than 100 words): As the Greencard is already approved and just waiting for a Visa Number. No point repeating every process again, and also this will remove an obstacle to job mobility lessen the indented servitude.


Amendment Proposal 7:
Subject:Include the condition that aliens in EB waiting for more than 3 years on EB-2 (or) waiting for more than 5 years on EB-3
Section of Bill :SEC. 2302. MERIT-BASED TRACK TWO. (C) ELIGIBILITY (1)EMPLOYMENT-BASED IMMIGRANTS
Page/Line of Bill: Page 270 Lines 7-13
New addition: N
Change or Removal of a provision: An alien who is the beneficiary of a petition filed before the date of the enactment of this Act to accord status under section 203(b) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, if the visa has not been issued with in ("5 years after the date on which such petition was filed") should be changed to something like ("3 years after the date on which such petition was filed, if the alien holds an advanced degree (Eb-2) (or)5 years after the date on which such petition was filed").
WHY/LOGIC(No more than 100 words): IV Admin can judge how fair is this request and how important it is .Anyone, Please feel free to add your points here.


Amendment Proposal 8:
Subject: Immediately enacting visa recapture
Section of Bill: 2304
Page/Line of Bill: 276
New addition: N
Change or Removal of a provision: Y. Change fiscal year 2015 to 2014.
WHY/LOGIC(No more than 100 words): The purpose is to remove the existing EB backlog as quickly as possible. If this enable for existing EB category immediately, back log will be cleared with the help of extra visas. There will be no need to Merit Based track 2 which will make EB people unfairly potentially wait for 7 more years.


Amendment Proposal 9:
Subject: Immediately enacting country cap removal
Section of Bill: 2306
Page/Line of Bill: 296
New addition: N
Change or Removal of a provision: Y. Para named Effective Date - change to immediate.
WHY/LOGIC(No more than 100 words): The purpose is to remove the existing EB backlog as quickly as possible. If this enable for existing EB category immediately, back log will be cleared with the help of the fairness in the first come first serve process. There will be no need to Merit Based track 2 which will make EB people unfairly potentially wait for 7 more years.


Amendment Proposal 10:
Subject: Immediately enacting exemption of derivative beneficiaries from the count
Section of Bill: ?
Page/Line of Bill: 299
New addition: N
Change or Removal of a provision: Y. Change to immediate
WHY/LOGIC(No more than 100): The purpose is to remove the existing EB backlog as quickly as possible. If this enable for existing EB category immediately, back log will be cleared with the help of extra visas. There will be no need to Merit Based track 2 which will make EB people unfairly potentially wait for 7 more years.

Anybody who think their proposal is important, please fill in above format and I shall update the list.

Thanks,
Ketavanda
Bookmark and Share Compare Reply With Quote


  #263 (permalink)  
Old 04-22-2013, 08:52 PM
Junior Member
Priority Date
:
Category
:
N/A
I140 Mailed Date
:
Chargeability
:
Processing Stage
:
I485 Mailed Date
:
Compare
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 9
ketavanda is on a distinguished road
Default

I can be VOLUNTEER 2...I will do this every night.

Also, it is IV leadership choice to pick the proposals they like. We are just volunteers compiling proposals in logical format.

Updated to 16 Amendment proposals


PART 2


Propose the below format:


Amendment Proposal 11:
Subject: Ensure Transparency with Immigration
Section of Bill: ?
Page/Line of Bill: ?
New addition: Y
Change or Removal of a provision: Add
WHY/LOGIC(No more than 100): USCIS have to create a page which would give an approximate date as when I will get a green card. If someone has filed I-485, with the information in the application and some basic questions, they should be able to give us a Priority number! If I get the number 4757, it means i am in line and 4757 people are in front of me, so this number should keep getting lesser and lesser each day/week/month/year! With all the numbers in hand, number of people applied, the categories they are in, the number of visas available, its a basic addition/subtraction that needs to be done. This will make the system very transparent.


Amendment Proposal: 12
Subject: Extend RPI status to individuals withapproved I-140 petitions and their immediate dependants for whom DHS does not have an immigrant visa available.
Section of Bill: 2101
Page/Line of Bill:Page 59
New addition: N
Change or Removal of a provision: y
Amending the criteria for RPI to include people with approved immigrant visa petitions and their immediate dependants (lawfully present in the country) allows these law abiding people to have the same benefits of job mobility and travel accorded to undocumented aliens who have been physically present in the country since before January 1, 2012. It bypasses the EAD issue for H4 spouses of Indian origin.


Amendment Proposal: 13
Subject: MERIT-BASED TRACK TWO: immigrant visas limited to 1/7 per year for 7 years
Section of Bill: SEC. 2302. MERIT-BASED TRACK TWO.
Page/Line of Bill: 271
New addition: N.A.
Change or Removal of a provision: Allocate visas to a minimum of 1/7 the number of aliens to whom visas have not been issued. If more visas are available due to amends to the INA (or any other reason), allocate them to the aliens even if the total goes above 1/7 for that particular year.
WHY/LOGIC(No more than 100 words): If more visa numbers are available, there is no reason to limit allocating them to just 1/7 of the people who have applied 5 years ago. Giving out the available visas will avoid the repetition of the problem of available visas not being allocated to people who are waiting in the queue. This will get the previous backlogs cleared faster.


Amendment Proposal: 14
Subject: Ensure recaptured immigrant visas from 1992 to 2013 are all used up.
Section of Bill: SEC. 2304. WORLD-WIDE LEVELS AND RECAPTURE OF UNUSED IMMIGRANT VISAS.
Page/Line of Bill: 276
New addition: Ensure that the unused immigrant visas from years 1992 to 2013 will ALL be issued to people waiting in the queue for more than 5 years, regardless of how long it will take to issue them, even if it is beyond FY 2015.
Change or Removal of a provision: N.A.
WHY/LOGIC(No more than 100 words): The way the bill is currently worded, it sounds as if the unused visas recaptured from 1992 to 2013, should all be issued only in FY 2015. If any of those old visas are not issued in FY 2015, they may be lost forever! We know the number of those unused visas is going to be large and USCIS will most probably not be able to issue all of them within just one year 2015. Therefore, it is important to ensure that each and every one of those recaptured visas are issued even if it takes more time, beyond FY 2015, to do so.


Amendment Proposal: 15
Subject: Ensure recaptured immigrant visas from a previous year are not wasted.
Section of Bill: SEC. 2304. WORLD-WIDE LEVELS AND RECAPTURE OF UNUSED IMMIGRANT VISAS.
Page/Line of Bill: 276
New addition: Ensure that the unused immigrant visas from a previous year can be issued in multiple future years, and not just the immediate next year. For example, if X number of visas are unused in year 2016, USCIS should issue these unused visas not only in 2017, but also in 2018 and beyond until they are all used up.
Change or Removal of a provision: N.A.
WHY/LOGIC(No more than 100 words): The way the bill is currently worded, it sounds as if the unused visas recaptured from a previous year, can be issued in the immediate subsequent year only. For example, X number of unused visas from 2016 can be issued only in 2017, but not beyond. This limitation will once again result in a large number of unused visas accumulating year after year as it has currently happened from 1992 to 2013.


Amendment Proposal: 16
Subject: National Interest Waiver (EB2-NIW) be exempt from numerical limitations.
Section of Bill: 203(b)
Page/Line of Bill: Page 306, Line 21/22.
New addition: No.
Change or Removal of a provision: Yes.
WHY/LOGIC(No more than 100 words): NIW cases are subjective and very difficult to get approved. Due to 1998 NYDOT case, the NIW cases are adjudicated with high standards, almost comparable to EB1B. If EB1B and PhD cases can be exempt from numerical limitations, then why not EB2-NIW? Also, the new rule of petitioning within 5 years of graduation may be a disadvantage for people with US Masters degree, who want to apply under NIW category.

Anybody who think their proposal is important, please fill in above format and I shall update the list.

Thanks,
Ketavanda
Bookmark and Share Compare Reply With Quote


  #264 (permalink)  
Old 04-22-2013, 10:06 PM
Junior Member
Priority Date
:
Category
:
N/A
I140 Mailed Date
:
Chargeability
:
Processing Stage
:
I485 Mailed Date
:
Compare
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 3
desimallu is infamous around these parts desimallu is infamous around these parts desimallu is infamous around these parts desimallu is infamous around these parts desimallu is infamous around these parts desimallu is infamous around these parts desimallu is infamous around these parts desimallu is infamous around these parts desimallu is infamous around these parts desimallu is infamous around these parts desimallu is infamous around these parts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by balbirbagdu View Post
We are busy in preparing amendments whereas those guys are not even going to pass anything , situation looks hopeless . Port to EB2 and wait . Nothing will happen .. Somehow this name Grassley is a bad omen for immigrant community . Not sure what does he want?
Man dont loose hope.There are 4-5 senators who wants to kill the bill rightaway,thats why they want to delay it(delay means killing the bill).However if they markup and come to vote soon(i mean late may or early june),I am sure senate will pass it.But house is not going to accept this bill in its entirity anyway.That is confirmed by leader Boblatte
Again we dont even know what's even in the house bill.Does it even say anything abt eb2,eb3 etc.

So basically its all abt timing.If this bill rushes through and House brings another bill soon to negotiate and tweak,this will pass.If it gets pushed,bill will fail.
Bookmark and Share Compare Reply With Quote


1 out of 3 members found this post helpful.
  #265 (permalink)  
Old 04-23-2013, 12:38 AM
Donor/Moderator
Priority Date
:
Category
:
EB2
I140 Mailed Date
:
12/22/2009
Chargeability
:
India
Processing Stage
:
I-140
I485 Mailed Date
:
Compare
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 376
sage2006 has a reputation beyond repute sage2006 has a reputation beyond repute sage2006 has a reputation beyond repute sage2006 has a reputation beyond repute sage2006 has a reputation beyond repute sage2006 has a reputation beyond repute sage2006 has a reputation beyond repute sage2006 has a reputation beyond repute sage2006 has a reputation beyond repute sage2006 has a reputation beyond repute sage2006 has a reputation beyond repute
Default

We will be updating summary being put together by IV members soon (currently on 2nd post of the the thread) which will clarify a lot of aspects of the high-skilled provisions.

It is surprising to see a few members here continue to post unnecessarily negative posts. I understand there is frustration with backlogs and that we want relief soon but being negative and pessimistic based on half-baked understanding of the bill is of NO use.

The bottom-line from our review so far is that this is a great bill and a NET POSITIVE for high-skilled immigrants. Sen.Schumer rightly said that it does a little bit for every group....only difference is that it does MORE than little for EB applicants. If you look at various groups out there, apart from undocumented and DREAM proponents (lets not kid ourselves...those are the main groups for whom this bill was created)....we are the ONLY group that stands to gain quite a lot wrt backlog removal (exemptions, addnl GCs since what is allotted to merit based will come to EB for 4 years. per country cap removal, visa recapture).

Thanks to the members who suggested amendments...it was of great help and we will pick the final list tommorow to finalize our proposals. Spread the msg among your network about how S.744 will help us and there we should join on the IV platform to make all future Action Items successful.
__________________
CNN iReport | Facebook | Google+ | Twitter | YouTube

Last edited by sage2006; 04-23-2013 at 12:55 AM.
Bookmark and Share Compare Reply With Quote


advertisement
 
 
  #266 (permalink)  
Old 04-23-2013, 01:10 AM
Member
Priority Date
:
Aug-03
Category
:
EB3
I140 Mailed Date
:
Chargeability
:
India
Processing Stage
:
I485 Mailed Date
:
Compare
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 88
sunny2007 has a reputation beyond repute sunny2007 has a reputation beyond repute sunny2007 has a reputation beyond repute sunny2007 has a reputation beyond repute sunny2007 has a reputation beyond repute sunny2007 has a reputation beyond repute sunny2007 has a reputation beyond repute sunny2007 has a reputation beyond repute sunny2007 has a reputation beyond repute sunny2007 has a reputation beyond repute sunny2007 has a reputation beyond repute
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sage2006 View Post
We will be updating summary being put together by IV members soon (currently on 2nd post of the the thread) which will clarify a lot of aspects of the high-skilled provisions.

It is surprising to see a few members here continue to post unnecessarily negative posts. I understand there is frustration with backlogs and that we want relief soon but being negative and pessimistic based on half-baked understanding of the bill is of NO use.

The bottom-line from our review so far is that this is a great bill and a NET POSITIVE for high-skilled immigrants. Sen.Schumer rightly said that it does a little bit for every group....only difference is that it does MORE than little for EB applicants. If you look at various groups out there, apart from undocumented and DREAM proponents (lets not kid ourselves...those are the main groups for whom this bill was created)....we are the ONLY group that stands to gain quite a lot wrt backlog removal (exemptions, addnl GCs since what is allotted to merit based will come to EB for 4 years. per country cap removal, visa recapture).

Thanks to the members who suggested amendments...it was of great help and we will pick the final list tommorow to finalize our proposals. Spread the msg among your network about how S.744 will help us and there we should join on the IV platform to make all future Action Items successful.
If the early donors want to dance to their own tunes , they can dance here on this forum. They want politicians to see only positive responses here , just close this forum for others.
__________________
Support HR.633 ( HR-3012 ) and Support Fairness!

Facebook | Google+ | Twitter | Contribute | HR3012 Wiki

Info on Rally | Posters | Volunteers
Bookmark and Share Compare Reply With Quote


  #267 (permalink)  
Old 04-23-2013, 01:41 AM
Donor/Moderator
Priority Date
:
Category
:
EB2
I140 Mailed Date
:
12/22/2009
Chargeability
:
India
Processing Stage
:
I-140
I485 Mailed Date
:
Compare
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 376
sage2006 has a reputation beyond repute sage2006 has a reputation beyond repute sage2006 has a reputation beyond repute sage2006 has a reputation beyond repute sage2006 has a reputation beyond repute sage2006 has a reputation beyond repute sage2006 has a reputation beyond repute sage2006 has a reputation beyond repute sage2006 has a reputation beyond repute sage2006 has a reputation beyond repute sage2006 has a reputation beyond repute
Default

Anyone can say what they want as long as there are facts to back it up and it is not speculation. As far as I know none of your posts or any others (except for posts with personal attacks) have been moderated.

wrt effective date clause, of course we want the bill to be enacted asap and that is the first thing everyone noticed (for e.g we immediately proposed effective date of FY after enactment of bill so if it is passed before oct 1 2013 then FY2014 it is) but if the bill is not passed before beginning of FY2014, which is very likely, then there is no option but to wait for next FY. But making it or other points seem as this catastrophic issue is overdoing it...which is the point being made. lets look at the larger picture and we have to be reasonable and logical in the changes/amendments we can ask for. Or else the people we advocate to and the staffers we work with will stop taking us seriously.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sunny2007 View Post
If the early donors want to dance to their own tunes , they can dance here on this forum. They want politicians to see only positive responses here , just close this forum for others.
__________________
CNN iReport | Facebook | Google+ | Twitter | YouTube

Last edited by sage2006; 04-23-2013 at 01:50 AM.
Bookmark and Share Compare Reply With Quote


  #268 (permalink)  
Old 04-23-2013, 04:20 AM
Junior Member
Priority Date
:
Aug-09
Category
:
EB2
I140 Mailed Date
:
Chargeability
:
Processing Stage
:
I-485
I485 Mailed Date
:
Compare
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 12
sup_eb2_2009 is a splendid one to behold sup_eb2_2009 is a splendid one to behold sup_eb2_2009 is a splendid one to behold sup_eb2_2009 is a splendid one to behold sup_eb2_2009 is a splendid one to behold sup_eb2_2009 is a splendid one to behold sup_eb2_2009 is a splendid one to behold
Default

It's absolutely correct that we should end the negativity here. As we have seen yesterday, 2 Indians testifying against fellow Indians, it proves that the only thing we need is to learn how to stay together. The bill has lots of good things for EB but at the same time it has a soft underbelly by the name H1-B. In the past H1-B has been the biggest excuse for the senators to block HR-3012. If the same politics gets played here IV might need to be pro-active by ensuring that H1-B is not blocking the primary purpose. Increasing the H1B cap was advocated by tech companies. It was never primary goal of the reform. The reform needs to streamline the EB and FB process, that's all people wanted.
Bookmark and Share Compare Reply With Quote


  #269 (permalink)  
Old 04-23-2013, 06:38 AM
Donor
Priority Date
:
Jun-08
Category
:
EB2
I140 Mailed Date
:
02/21/2013
Chargeability
:
India
Processing Stage
:
I-485
I485 Mailed Date
:
Compare
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 303
hello has a reputation beyond repute hello has a reputation beyond repute hello has a reputation beyond repute hello has a reputation beyond repute hello has a reputation beyond repute hello has a reputation beyond repute hello has a reputation beyond repute hello has a reputation beyond repute hello has a reputation beyond repute hello has a reputation beyond repute hello has a reputation beyond repute
Smile Best Bill for EB

Hi All
I don't think most of folks crying here about enactment and other EB provision know the earlier CIR bills(20006 and 2007).There was nothing for EB category.We have got alot in this bill.I have a few questions for EB folks who are complaining here.Did we do anything close to dreamers in terms of mobilizing the community?How many of us put our videos on you tube?How many of us give our story to media?Answer to all these is very few.So why are we complaining about effective dates and time.US is making this bill for the country not for a particular community.Immigration is privilege not right.FB is loosing a lot,DV will be abolished,undocumented immigrants will apply GC after 10 years.Almost all our provisions are in the bill,enactment dates could be different and may change during discussions.Now on H4 EAD,everybody wants that EAD should be given to all H4's but I don't see any problem with reciprocal rule.Why should US give EAD to the spouses of H1 when the country of origin of that H1 holder doesn't do the same to a US citizen.Instead of convincing US senators why don't folks convince own country leaders and call their MP's and consulate here in US.
I am not trying to be critical here but think about positives that in few years whole EB category will be current.We should applaud IV,Gang of 8 and all other folks involved in shaping up this bill.Please encourage more folks to join IV.So IV can have more resources.Stay positive and we"ll win.
Thanks!
__________________
Facebook | Google+ | Twitter | YouTube
Bookmark and Share Compare Reply With Quote


  #270 (permalink)  
Old 04-23-2013, 09:43 AM
Senior Member
Priority Date
:
Apr-03
Category
:
EB3
I140 Mailed Date
:
04/17/2007
Chargeability
:
India
Processing Stage
:
I-485
I485 Mailed Date
:
06/29/2007
Compare
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 217
vsrinir has a reputation beyond repute vsrinir has a reputation beyond repute vsrinir has a reputation beyond repute vsrinir has a reputation beyond repute vsrinir has a reputation beyond repute vsrinir has a reputation beyond repute vsrinir has a reputation beyond repute vsrinir has a reputation beyond repute vsrinir has a reputation beyond repute vsrinir has a reputation beyond repute vsrinir has a reputation beyond repute
Default Citizenship to who paid taxes legally for 10 years

Amendment proposals:


Citizenship to those who paid taxes legally for 10 years.



Quote:
Originally Posted by ketavanda View Post
I can be VOLUNTEER 2...I will do this every night.

Also, it is IV leadership choice to pick the proposals they like. We are just volunteers compiling proposals in logical format.

Updated to 16 Amendment proposals


PART 2


Propose the below format:


Amendment Proposal 11:
Subject: Ensure Transparency with Immigration
Section of Bill: ?
Page/Line of Bill: ?
New addition: Y
Change or Removal of a provision: Add
WHY/LOGIC(No more than 100): USCIS have to create a page which would give an approximate date as when I will get a green card. If someone has filed I-485, with the information in the application and some basic questions, they should be able to give us a Priority number! If I get the number 4757, it means i am in line and 4757 people are in front of me, so this number should keep getting lesser and lesser each day/week/month/year! With all the numbers in hand, number of people applied, the categories they are in, the number of visas available, its a basic addition/subtraction that needs to be done. This will make the system very transparent.


Amendment Proposal: 12
Subject: Extend RPI status to individuals withapproved I-140 petitions and their immediate dependants for whom DHS does not have an immigrant visa available.
Section of Bill: 2101
Page/Line of Bill:Page 59
New addition: N
Change or Removal of a provision: y
Amending the criteria for RPI to include people with approved immigrant visa petitions and their immediate dependants (lawfully present in the country) allows these law abiding people to have the same benefits of job mobility and travel accorded to undocumented aliens who have been physically present in the country since before January 1, 2012. It bypasses the EAD issue for H4 spouses of Indian origin.


Amendment Proposal: 13
Subject: MERIT-BASED TRACK TWO: immigrant visas limited to 1/7 per year for 7 years
Section of Bill: SEC. 2302. MERIT-BASED TRACK TWO.
Page/Line of Bill: 271
New addition: N.A.
Change or Removal of a provision: Allocate visas to a minimum of 1/7 the number of aliens to whom visas have not been issued. If more visas are available due to amends to the INA (or any other reason), allocate them to the aliens even if the total goes above 1/7 for that particular year.
WHY/LOGIC(No more than 100 words): If more visa numbers are available, there is no reason to limit allocating them to just 1/7 of the people who have applied 5 years ago. Giving out the available visas will avoid the repetition of the problem of available visas not being allocated to people who are waiting in the queue. This will get the previous backlogs cleared faster.


Amendment Proposal: 14
Subject: Ensure recaptured immigrant visas from 1992 to 2013 are all used up.
Section of Bill: SEC. 2304. WORLD-WIDE LEVELS AND RECAPTURE OF UNUSED IMMIGRANT VISAS.
Page/Line of Bill: 276
New addition: Ensure that the unused immigrant visas from years 1992 to 2013 will ALL be issued to people waiting in the queue for more than 5 years, regardless of how long it will take to issue them, even if it is beyond FY 2015.
Change or Removal of a provision: N.A.
WHY/LOGIC(No more than 100 words): The way the bill is currently worded, it sounds as if the unused visas recaptured from 1992 to 2013, should all be issued only in FY 2015. If any of those old visas are not issued in FY 2015, they may be lost forever! We know the number of those unused visas is going to be large and USCIS will most probably not be able to issue all of them within just one year 2015. Therefore, it is important to ensure that each and every one of those recaptured visas are issued even if it takes more time, beyond FY 2015, to do so.


Amendment Proposal: 15
Subject: Ensure recaptured immigrant visas from a previous year are not wasted.
Section of Bill: SEC. 2304. WORLD-WIDE LEVELS AND RECAPTURE OF UNUSED IMMIGRANT VISAS.
Page/Line of Bill: 276
New addition: Ensure that the unused immigrant visas from a previous year can be issued in multiple future years, and not just the immediate next year. For example, if X number of visas are unused in year 2016, USCIS should issue these unused visas not only in 2017, but also in 2018 and beyond until they are all used up.
Change or Removal of a provision: N.A.
WHY/LOGIC(No more than 100 words): The way the bill is currently worded, it sounds as if the unused visas recaptured from a previous year, can be issued in the immediate subsequent year only. For example, X number of unused visas from 2016 can be issued only in 2017, but not beyond. This limitation will once again result in a large number of unused visas accumulating year after year as it has currently happened from 1992 to 2013.


Amendment Proposal: 16
Subject: National Interest Waiver (EB2-NIW) be exempt from numerical limitations.
Section of Bill: 203(b)
Page/Line of Bill: Page 306, Line 21/22.
New addition: No.
Change or Removal of a provision: Yes.
WHY/LOGIC(No more than 100 words): NIW cases are subjective and very difficult to get approved. Due to 1998 NYDOT case, the NIW cases are adjudicated with high standards, almost comparable to EB1B. If EB1B and PhD cases can be exempt from numerical limitations, then why not EB2-NIW? Also, the new rule of petitioning within 5 years of graduation may be a disadvantage for people with US Masters degree, who want to apply under NIW category.

Anybody who think their proposal is important, please fill in above format and I shall update the list.

Thanks,
Ketavanda
__________________
sri
Bookmark and Share Compare Reply With Quote


Reply

Bookmarks

advertisement
 

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are On

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Comprehensive Immigration bill introduced in Senate curiousmind News articles and reports 98 02-05-2013 01:55 PM
Immigration Reform 2013 discussions: H1B and F1, not for EB folks quasar81 IV Agenda and Legislative Updates 27 01-10-2013 05:26 PM
Immigration Reform Bill Introduced in Congress Blog Feeds Recent Blogs 9 02-11-2010 07:13 AM
Any Schedule of H1B/L1 reform bill introduced in the Senate starscream IV Agenda and Legislative Updates 2 05-11-2009 05:49 PM
The Senate Immigration Reform Bill: Key Issues karthik204 Retrogression, priority dates and Visa bulletins 5 05-31-2007 01:59 PM


advertisement

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:53 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
(c)ImmigrationVoice.org