PDA

View Full Version : Why can't we be all hopeful about the next congress ?


purethoughts
11-08-2006, 09:33 AM
Hi All,

As you all know the Dems have won the house and may be the senate and i am very happy with the first part of the news. I do not care about the senate since last time house republicans sank our boats by opposing any attempts to reform the immigration system.

So now since those people are gone all the dots are lining up nicely.

1. President wants to pass few things before his terms ends. He does not want to be remembered as the Iraq War president, but someone who passed some immigration reforms etc.

2. Senate has already passed and agreed to some kind of immigration reform.

3. And now since Dems control the house they can actually work with the rest of the two players and pass some kind of immigration bill.

I would say that it is time to join IV and support them in a way it makes sense. Not like we did before (Hiring a lobbyist and try to sneak in some legislation.) I think that lobbying practice will be hard to do since Dems wants to pass some kind of anti-corruption measure(It is their way of cleaning up Republican Lobbyists from the Washington.)

So i think that we should think about our strategies and push IV for some kind of strategy change since the environment is now favourable.

Cheers !

anilsal
11-08-2006, 10:32 AM
Nobody can stop anyone from being hopeful of the future.

Dems have always been pro-immigration. If the overall immigration reform takes time, can we atleast push smaller ticket items forward starting January, when dems take over the committees?

Items include:
a)Ability to file 485 when visa numbers are not current.
b)Clear BEC backlog.
c)Handle the namecheck delays in 485.
d)??

anilsal
11-08-2006, 11:18 AM
Or why not get GC stamped at port of entry after finger printing and checking ur credentials? Kidding.

I think a speedup of the process for skilled/educated workers is a possibility, to ask for.

purgan
11-08-2006, 11:33 AM
You'll read tomorrow about the Democrats big win in the House (and possible the Senate). You probably won't read about how badly anti-immigrants in the House have done this evening. Between retirements and losses, at least 12 and as many as 20 hardcore anti-immigrant Congressman will be gone in January. They include

Bass (R-NH)
Beauprez (R-CO)
Bradley (R-NH)
Cubin (R-WY)
Gutknecht (R-MN)
Hayworth (R-AZ)
Heffley (R-CO)
Hyde (R-IL)
Ryun (R-KS)
Taylor (R-NC)
Sweeney (R-NY)

And another several races are too close to call including

Bilbray (R-CA)
Doolittle (R-CA)
Drake (R-VA)
Kuhl (R-NY)
Musgrave (R-CO)
Otter (R-ID)
Renzi (R-AZ)
Schmidt (R-OH)

No matter what is said after this election, the American public spoke and made it clear that they do not buy the anti-immigrant rhetoric of some in Congress. Not a single pro-immigrant Congressman lost as far as I can tell.

(from visalaw)

purgan
11-08-2006, 11:35 AM
One of the first election results of the evening is the loss by John Hostettler of his House seat in Indiana. Hostettler is the anti-immigration Republican chair of the House Immigration Subcommittee and he ran his race largely on an anti-immigration platform. All of the networks have called the election for Brad Ellsworth. The Democrats appear to be moving toward claiming the majority in the House and that would result in a new chairman anyway. But come January I can now tell readers that there will be a new person in charge of this critical committee.

(from visalaw)

ANTI-L VISA REPUBLICAN LOSES IN CONNECTICUT
Nancy Johnson, a leading opponent of L-1 intracompany visas, has lost her House seat. Johnson had been a vocal critic of the L-1 visa category and had proposed a low cap on the category.

gcpain
11-08-2006, 01:19 PM
I am sure nobody in house or senate oppose these small items. Please core members go for these following items in lameduck session. Do not wait just move forward.

Items include:
a)Ability to file 485 when visa numbers are not current.
b)Clear BEC backlog.
c)Handle the namecheck delays in 485.

Add d) remove spouse and immediate dependents from counting annual cap

TheOmbudsman
11-08-2006, 01:33 PM
Hi Puerthoughts,

You made me laugh so hard. "I think that lobbying practice will be hard to do since Dems wants to pass some kind of anti-corruption measure(It is their way of cleaning up Republican Lobbyists from the Washington.)"

Have you heard that Pelosi got 55 million dollars ? How about Sen. Reid ? Sen. Reid used to be anti illegal aliens in the past. He has been through a conversion lately. Things that money can buy, right ?

We can hire all the lobbysts now. There are bad apples in both parties. That is a fact. If you really want to understand why the GOP lost, read some serious analysis below.

Regards,

The Ombudsman



WorldDailyNet
Why the GOP is losing

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: November 3, 2006
1:00 a.m. Eastern




Entering the weekend before his midterms, George Bush and his party appear fated to lose the House they have held for a dozen years. The Senate is on a knife's edge.
The latest polls continue to show that by 52 percent to 37 percent Americans wish to see a Democratic takeover. Approval of Congress has never been lower. Americans think the nation is on the wrong track. Support for the war in Iraq has collapsed to a third of the nation.

What went wrong? Certainly, on three traditional Republican issues strong military, conservative judges and lower taxes the GOP remains America's Party.

(Column continues below)


How do we know? Because no Democrat in a close race is calling, Mondale-like, for higher taxes or attacking Bush for elevating judges John Roberts and Sam Alito to the Supreme Court. In the tight Senate races in Tennessee and Virginia, Democratic nominees Harold Ford and Jim Webb are outspokenly pro-defense.

On immigration, where Bush aligns with Kennedy-McCain, his party has abandoned him. The Republican House stands for border security, no amnesty and no new guest-worker program. Nor is this a losing issue. Even Hillary Clinton voted for 700 miles of security fence on the Mexican border.

What, then, are the causes of Republican malaise?

First is the perception the GOP is no longer a virtuous party that seeks to live up to principles and a high standard of public ethics. The adventures of the Abramoff Gang, Mark Foley, Duke Cunningham and his poker-party pals, of pork barrel and bridges to nowhere have demoralized the Republican base and disgusted Middle America. There is a feeling, even on the right, that if this crowd is run out of Dodge, its expulsion will not be unwarranted.

Second, while the macro economy seems to be firing on all eight cylinders the Dow has risen above 12,000, and the Misery Index of inflation plus unemployment has fallen to the lowest levels in modern times not all Americans are participating in the prosperity.

Employment in health care has grown by almost 2 million, but some 3 million manufacturing jobs have vanished. There has been a population explosion among billionaires, but the real median wage of a male worker has not risen in decades. The daily closure of factories here, as more and more Chinese goods show up at Wal-Mart, points to inescapable consequences: The price of the GOP's free-trade-uber-alles ideology is the loss of the Reagan Democrats.

In Ohio, which was indispensable to Bush is 2000 and 2004, free trade is a millstone around the GOP neck. If Bush loses the House or Senate, free-trade globalism goes on the shelf. Not only will Bush fail to win congressional support of a Doha Round trade treaty, he will be denied any renewal of fast-track authority. The new Congress will not rubber stamp trade treaties, but demand a voice and votes on any new deal the Bushites negotiate on behalf of Corporate America.

But if Republicans are swept from power, the reason will be Iraq. By two to one, Americans have reached the conclusion that the war was a mistake, that taking down Saddam was not worth the price in blood, that the management of the war has been as botched as John Kerry's joke, that it is time to bring the troops home and let Iraqis do the fighting for their own freedom, democracy and independence.

And the more seats Republicans lose Tuesday, the greater will be the pressure on the party and president to find an early exit.

Yet about the war, America remains divided and conflicted. For the roaring Republican reception to Bush's calls for "victory" testifies to another truth. While most American wish we had never gone in and want out, America does not want to lose the war as we lost Vietnam.

Neither party knows a way to accomplish what America wants: to leave Iraq without losing the war. And the reason neither party knows how to do it is because it cannot be done. Like a patient suffering from cancer, we want an end to the "chemo" the awful news daily coming out of Iraq but we do not want the consequences.

What, then, has cost the Republican Party its patrimony?

The answer is, first, hubris. Dominating Congress for a dozen years, the GOP began to behave with the same haughtiness as those they displaced. They forgot who sent them here, and why.

Second, ideology. Bush Republicans refuse even to reconsider, despite contradictory evidence, what their ideology teaches: that free trade is best, that U.S. power is invincible, that all the world wants to be like us, that our motives are always pure and theirs malevolent.

Tuesday will bring the party back to earth. But it will not solve the crises that beset the country. For while the Democrats may be the political alternative, the Democrats' ideology of big government liberalism is even more bankrupt.



Hi All,

As you all know the Dems have won the house and may be the senate and i am very happy with the first part of the news. I do not care about the senate since last time house republicans sank our boats by opposing any attempts to reform the immigration system.

So now since those people are gone all the dots are lining up nicely.

1. President wants to pass few things before his terms ends. He does not want to be remembered as the Iraq War president, but someone who passed some immigration reforms etc.

2. Senate has already passed and agreed to some kind of immigration reform.

3. And now since Dems control the house they can actually work with the rest of the two players and pass some kind of immigration bill.

I would say that it is time to join IV and support them in a way it makes sense. Not like we did before (Hiring a lobbyist and try to sneak in some legislation.) I think that lobbying practice will be hard to do since Dems wants to pass some kind of anti-corruption measure(It is their way of cleaning up Republican Lobbyists from the Washington.)

So i think that we should think about our strategies and push IV for some kind of strategy change since the environment is now favourable.

Cheers !

TheOmbudsman
11-08-2006, 01:37 PM
Purgan,

As an Ombudsman, it is my task to admonish you.
Hayworth sponsored a measure that would increase the Employment Base greencard visa numbers and would refute illegal immigration. It seems that makes him an anti illegal-immigration representative, not "anti immigration" as you described.

Folks, our hopes are up and that is a good exercise to our soul. However, please refrain from mistating facts.

Thanks,

The Ombudsman


You'll read tomorrow about the Democrats big win in the House (and possible the Senate). You probably won't read about how badly anti-immigrants in the House have done this evening. Between retirements and losses, at least 12 and as many as 20 hardcore anti-immigrant Congressman will be gone in January. They include

Bass (R-NH)
Beauprez (R-CO)
Bradley (R-NH)
Cubin (R-WY)
Gutknecht (R-MN)
Hayworth (R-AZ)
Heffley (R-CO)
Hyde (R-IL)
Ryun (R-KS)
Taylor (R-NC)
Sweeney (R-NY)

And another several races are too close to call including

Bilbray (R-CA)
Doolittle (R-CA)
Drake (R-VA)
Kuhl (R-NY)
Musgrave (R-CO)
Otter (R-ID)
Renzi (R-AZ)
Schmidt (R-OH)

No matter what is said after this election, the American public spoke and made it clear that they do not buy the anti-immigrant rhetoric of some in Congress. Not a single pro-immigrant Congressman lost as far as I can tell.

(from visalaw)

gsc999
11-08-2006, 03:09 PM
Hi All,

As you all know the Dems have won the house and may be the senate and i am very happy with the first part of the news. I do not care about the senate since last time house republicans sank our boats by opposing any attempts to reform the immigration system.

Cheers !

Nancy Pelosi, soon to be the trendsetting 1st female speaker of the house, also the nightmare of many ultra-conservative, anti-immigration Republicans has already discussed her 1st 100 hour agenda for the new congress:

- Day One: Put new rules in place to "break the link between lobbyists and legislation."
- Day Two: Enact all the recommendations made by the commission that investigated the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001.
- Time remaining until 100 hours: Raise the minimum wage to $7.25 an hour, maybe in one step.
- Cut the interest rate on student loans in half.
- Allow the government to negotiate directly with the pharmaceutical companies for lower drug prices for Medicare patients.
- Broaden the types of stem cell research allowed with federal funds
- All the days after that: "Pay as you go," meaning no increasing the deficit, whether the issue is middle class tax relief, health care or some other priority.

All the above are her quotes from Associate press from last week.

I guess, day one agenda is what you were alluding to about lobbying and legislation. We will see. Also, it is unlikely that CIR will come up in the Nov. lameduck session because the whole attention has been focussed on Iraq war and other technical issues. We will have to wait for next year for any meaningful progress on comprehensive immigration but it is a certainty that it will happen.

jazzy2
11-08-2006, 03:11 PM
From what is evident, the GOP lost big time. Should we now hire a lobby closer to the democratic party?

485Mbe4001
11-08-2006, 03:12 PM
Please include....e) Recapture unused visas from the last 5-10 years...the line will shorten a little bit atleast, if that goes through, with a, b & c you are just moving from one line to another unending line.

I am sure nobody in house or senate oppose these small items. Please core members go for these following items in lameduck session. Do not wait just move forward.

Items include:
a)Ability to file 485 when visa numbers are not current.
b)Clear BEC backlog.
c)Handle the namecheck delays in 485.

Add d) remove spouse and immediate dependents from counting annual cap