Immigration Voice - Forums
Register Get Involved Contact Lawmakers Advocacy Discussion 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

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #331 (permalink)  
Old 01-15-2016, 01:24 PM
Junior Member
Priority Date
:
Category
:
N/A
I140 Mailed Date
:
Chargeability
:
Processing Stage
:
I485 Mailed Date
:
Compare
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 18
kaca is on a distinguished road
Default Legal Immigration

I think Republicans are more supportive of Legal Immigration than Democrats.
Even HR 213's sponsor Jason Chaffetz is a Republican.
The whole immigration reform got derailed because Democrats wanted to fix the Illegal Immigration along with Legal Immigration. Else by this time most of the reforms might have been passed.
We need to see how to get to Paul Ryan for his support to bring HR 213 to the floor.
I hope something can be done before the 114th Congress comes to an end in a year.
Bookmark and Share Compare Reply With Quote


1 out of 1 members found this post helpful.
  #332 (permalink)  
Old 01-15-2016, 02:46 PM
Junior Member
Priority Date
:
Category
:
N/A
I140 Mailed Date
:
Chargeability
:
Processing Stage
:
I485 Mailed Date
:
Compare
Join Date: Oct 2015
Posts: 14
bob4gc is on a distinguished road
Default

Just curious, as rule making process, can DHS/USCIS update the current regulation based on the comments (like removal of compelling circumstances etc.) and then resubmit (to OMB?) and call for public comments again? or should it happen only in next NEW regulation (possibly after withdrawing the current one), assuming USCIS considers our concerns/comments?
Bookmark and Share Compare Reply With Quote


  #333 (permalink)  
Old 01-15-2016, 03:04 PM
Moderator
Priority Date
:
Category
:
EB3
I140 Mailed Date
:
Chargeability
:
India
Processing Stage
:
I-140
I485 Mailed Date
:
Compare
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 104
vikidisi is a jewel in the rough vikidisi is a jewel in the rough vikidisi is a jewel in the rough
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bob4gc View Post
Just curious, as rule making process, can DHS/USCIS update the current regulation based on the comments (like removal of compelling circumstances etc.) and then resubmit (to OMB?) and call for public comments again? or should it happen only in next NEW regulation (possibly after withdrawing the current one), assuming USCIS considers our concerns/comments?
This one comment period is all we have.
Bookmark and Share Compare Reply With Quote


  #334 (permalink)  
Old 01-15-2016, 03:23 PM
Junior Member
Priority Date
:
Category
:
N/A
I140 Mailed Date
:
Chargeability
:
Processing Stage
:
I485 Mailed Date
:
Compare
Join Date: Oct 2015
Posts: 14
bob4gc is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by vikidisi View Post
This one comment period is all we have.
Thanks viki. But do they add/modify/remove the text of regulation after replying to all our comments post- comment period? Like all of us, I'd like to see compelling circumstances and other adverse clauses deleted.
Bookmark and Share Compare Reply With Quote


  #335 (permalink)  
Old 01-15-2016, 03:30 PM
Moderator
Priority Date
:
Category
:
EB3
I140 Mailed Date
:
Chargeability
:
India
Processing Stage
:
I-140
I485 Mailed Date
:
Compare
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 104
vikidisi is a jewel in the rough vikidisi is a jewel in the rough vikidisi is a jewel in the rough
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bob4gc View Post
Thanks viki. But do they add/modify/remove the text of regulation after replying to all our comments post- comment period? Like all of us, I'd like to see compelling circumstances and other adverse clauses deleted.

Yup - which is the goal of the commenting period. Very important to continue posting comments and encourage others to post as well. Also stay tuned for the next set of comments that IV will provide that will go into the technical details.
Bookmark and Share Compare Reply With Quote


  #336 (permalink)  
Old 01-15-2016, 03:30 PM
Member
Priority Date
:
Category
:
EB2
I140 Mailed Date
:
Chargeability
:
Processing Stage
:
I485 Mailed Date
:
Compare
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 30
devndev has a reputation beyond repute devndev has a reputation beyond repute devndev has a reputation beyond repute devndev has a reputation beyond repute devndev has a reputation beyond repute devndev has a reputation beyond repute devndev has a reputation beyond repute devndev has a reputation beyond repute devndev has a reputation beyond repute devndev has a reputation beyond repute devndev has a reputation beyond repute
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kaca View Post
I think Republicans are more supportive of Legal Immigration than Democrats.
Even HR 213's sponsor Jason Chaffetz is a Republican.
The whole immigration reform got derailed because Democrats wanted to fix the Illegal Immigration along with Legal Immigration. Else by this time most of the reforms might have been passed.
We need to see how to get to Paul Ryan for his support to bring HR 213 to the floor.
I hope something can be done before the 114th Congress comes to an end in a year.
Yes, there are a handful of good republicans, but the vast majority will only do what benefits their corporate sponsors.. Please note that Chamber of Commerce who just pissed all over the EAD regulation is a republican/conservative organization.. Also take a note of what stand the current leading Republican presidential candidates are having to take regarding immigration in general - which reflects the nativist nature of their base..
Bookmark and Share Compare Reply With Quote


  #337 (permalink)  
Old 01-15-2016, 03:35 PM
Administrator
Priority Date
:
Jun-02
Category
:
EB3
I140 Mailed Date
:
08/04/2003
Chargeability
:
India
Processing Stage
:
I-140+I-485
I485 Mailed Date
:
10/06/2003
Compare
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 996
Administrator2 has a reputation beyond repute Administrator2 has a reputation beyond repute Administrator2 has a reputation beyond repute Administrator2 has a reputation beyond repute Administrator2 has a reputation beyond repute Administrator2 has a reputation beyond repute Administrator2 has a reputation beyond repute Administrator2 has a reputation beyond repute Administrator2 has a reputation beyond repute Administrator2 has a reputation beyond repute Administrator2 has a reputation beyond repute
Default

Comments are important. But if anyone put in comments like "I support regulation but can you change blah blah..." such comments are useless.

No one is seeking your support. But they will read your comments more carefully if you say "I oppose in the current format because of blah bhah, and here is how to fix it blah blah"....

Last edited by The Alchemist; 01-15-2016 at 03:48 PM.
Bookmark and Share Compare Reply With Quote


  #338 (permalink)  
Old 01-15-2016, 04:08 PM
Junior Member
Priority Date
:
Dec-13
Category
:
EB2
I140 Mailed Date
:
Chargeability
:
India
Processing Stage
:
I-140
I485 Mailed Date
:
Compare
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 18
LogicalImmigrant is on a distinguished road
Default 1k0-8nel-zxbp

I oppose this rule.
If PERM and i-140 is approved for a non-immigrant but cannot file i-485 because the immigrant visa number is not available - Whose fault is this?

If DHS/USCIS cannot issue immigrant visas even if the personnel fully qualify and go through the required procedure, why would DHS/USCIS accept multiple (PERM, i-140 etc.) application fee and let them wait in the backlogs for more than a decade? Is this not called INTELLECTUAL SLAVERY?

If DHS/USCIS cannot issue immigrant visas, please stop accepting the applications and raise hopes in the applicant life.

What good is this rule doing? Retaining the priority date? That is the starting point of the vicious cycle on which the unethical employers and immigration attorney are feeding on.

FIRST STOP THIS VICIOUS CYCLE BY PROVIDING EAD AND ADVANCE PAROLE if you cannot issue immigrant visas for the qualified applicants because they deserve it more than you think and provide them certainty in life.

Isn't America a nation founded by immigrants? If this is a fact, please heal this nation by removing all the strings("compelling reasons") attached to this regulation and setting the lobbyists, unethical employers, unethical lawyers straight. In turn we can teach our kids the same.

God Bless America!

Logical Immigrant
Bookmark and Share Compare Reply With Quote


  #339 (permalink)  
Old 01-15-2016, 04:14 PM
Junior Member
Priority Date
:
Dec-13
Category
:
EB2
I140 Mailed Date
:
Chargeability
:
India
Processing Stage
:
I-140
I485 Mailed Date
:
Compare
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 18
LogicalImmigrant is on a distinguished road
Cool

Quote:
Originally Posted by LogicalImmigrant View Post
I oppose this rule.
If PERM and i-140 is approved for a non-immigrant but cannot file i-485 because the immigrant visa number is not available - Whose fault is this?

If DHS/USCIS cannot issue immigrant visas even if the personnel fully qualify and go through the required procedure, why would DHS/USCIS accept multiple (PERM, i-140 etc.) application fee and let them wait in the backlogs for more than a decade? Is this not called INTELLECTUAL SLAVERY?

If DHS/USCIS cannot issue immigrant visas, please stop accepting the applications and raise hopes in the applicant life.

What good is this rule doing? Retaining the priority date? That is the starting point of the vicious cycle on which the unethical employers and immigration attorney are feeding on.

FIRST STOP THIS VICIOUS CYCLE BY PROVIDING EAD AND ADVANCE PAROLE if you cannot issue immigrant visas for the qualified applicants because they deserve it more than you think and provide them certainty in life.

Isn't America a nation founded by immigrants? If this is a fact, please heal this nation by removing all the strings("compelling reasons") attached to this regulation and setting the lobbyists, unethical employers, unethical lawyers straight. In turn we can teach our kids the same.

God Bless America!

Logical Immigrant
One of the 7 comments that I have posted till now. I don't know if this will do any good for us, but I feel its a good way to remove some of the frustration.
Bookmark and Share Compare Reply With Quote


  #340 (permalink)  
Old 01-16-2016, 12:07 AM
Member
Priority Date
:
Category
:
N/A
I140 Mailed Date
:
Chargeability
:
Processing Stage
:
I485 Mailed Date
:
Compare
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 57
Ramalingam is infamous around these parts Ramalingam is infamous around these parts Ramalingam is infamous around these parts Ramalingam is infamous around these parts Ramalingam is infamous around these parts Ramalingam is infamous around these parts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bob4gc View Post
Just curious, as rule making process, can DHS/USCIS update the current regulation based on the comments (like removal of compelling circumstances etc.) and then resubmit (to OMB?) and call for public comments again? or should it happen only in next NEW regulation (possibly after withdrawing the current one), assuming USCIS considers our concerns/comments?
Based on all the efforts the regulation should be changed. The following are happening
1. The opposing comments in this is overwhelming in this regulation which is unprecedented. If they consider all the comments then the regulation could be changed unless they want to cancel the regulation itself.

2. IV was invited by WH immigration team. So there is chance to tell the concerns of immigration community

3. IV is planning to hire lobbyists. So it is possible lobby with WH immigration team and eventually with DHS.

So based on the above there is a best chance that regulation can be fixed
Bookmark and Share Compare Reply With Quote


0 out of 1 members found this post helpful.
  #341 (permalink)  
Old 01-16-2016, 07:35 AM
Junior Member
Priority Date
:
Category
:
N/A
I140 Mailed Date
:
Chargeability
:
Processing Stage
:
I485 Mailed Date
:
Compare
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 14
saviontly is a splendid one to behold saviontly is a splendid one to behold saviontly is a splendid one to behold saviontly is a splendid one to behold saviontly is a splendid one to behold saviontly is a splendid one to behold saviontly is a splendid one to behold
Default My comment (attached IV document)

I reject this rule as it doesn't solve any of the current problems of workers like me who are on I 140 and in USA for past 9 years.

Every time I need to look for a better opportunity I need to find an employer who would sponsor H1 visas and need to start my green card all over again.

Employers who sponsor H1 visas can always hire people for a lot less pay than US citizen workers. This unfairly benefits the employers and puts US workers and long time employees in US with I 140 like me at a hopeless position.

Change this joke of a rule which benefits no one except the employers, immigration lawyers and the lobbyists who collectively formed as a syndicate to water down to this rule so that people like me remain on H1 visas for the remaining of our lives and they earn profits by paying lesser wages (employers), H1 visa filing fees (lawyers).

Compelling circumstances clause is so restrictive that hardly anyone benefits for this rule. It should be removed or more liberal by including anyone who has elapsed 6 years of H1 as a compelling circumstance to get EAD.

Why should this EAD be any different from the Employment Based EAD?
Bookmark and Share Compare Reply With Quote


  #342 (permalink)  
Old 01-16-2016, 11:17 AM
Member
Priority Date
:
Category
:
N/A
I140 Mailed Date
:
Chargeability
:
Processing Stage
:
I485 Mailed Date
:
Compare
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 42
palciparum is on a distinguished road
Default

8,369 comments received so far. Lot of comments from Desis and US workers oppose the rule.

Will this rule be Cancelled with such opposition? or will it be modified as we still need to specifically say what we want from rule to fix the problem?

I agree with Administrator's post ...."I oppose in the current format because of blah bhah, and here is how to fix it blah blah"....

Every one says I oppose the rule but we need text to say I oppose rule in its current format and We need this to FIX the rule .... we need those comments from IV to say exactly what we need.

I am deeply disappointed by seeing monetary support so far...$10,200. We don't mind raising $25,000 for GS in less that 2 days but we can have 800-1000 people on phone call and not raise money. We all spend money on various things and expect someone else to pick up our Tab for this fix.

I wish and hope something will come out of this rule if all of us working together.

Thanks IV for all your efforts.
Bookmark and Share Compare Reply With Quote


  #343 (permalink)  
Old 01-17-2016, 05:21 PM
Junior Member
Priority Date
:
Category
:
N/A
I140 Mailed Date
:
Chargeability
:
Processing Stage
:
I485 Mailed Date
:
Compare
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 9
puneet2k5 is on a distinguished road
Default

When would IV send out the suggestions for the second round of comments??
Bookmark and Share Compare Reply With Quote


0 out of 1 members found this post helpful.
  #344 (permalink)  
Old 01-19-2016, 06:39 AM
Junior Member
Priority Date
:
Category
:
N/A
I140 Mailed Date
:
Chargeability
:
Processing Stage
:
I485 Mailed Date
:
Compare
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 1
iwantgreencar is on a distinguished road
Default

Hi all ,

Thanks IV for leading us in the battle.
I am considering making a payment too .
I have a question to the community .
I know a lot us are waiting on HR213 to take out the numerical limitation for India and China and that would be a Great Leap Forward for to reduce our back log.

The recent proposals clearly talks about that in the below section ?
Is that not a great step and going to do us a great help ?

https://www.federalregister.gov/arti...h-skilled#h-24

Section
E. The Increasing Damage Caused by Immigrant Visa Backlogs
"Since AC21 was enacted in October of 2000, workers seeking LPR status in the United States—particularly within the EB-2 and EB-3 preference categories—have faced increasing challenges as a consequence of the escalating wait times for immigrant visas. It often takes many years before an immigrant visa number becomes available. For some, the delays can last more than a decade. The combination of numerical limitations in the various employment-based preference categories with the per-country limitations that further limit visa availability to certain workers, has produced significant oversubscription in the EB-2 and EB-3 categories, particularly for Indian and Chinese nationals. For instance, the current approximate backlog for an EB-3 immigrant visa for workers from most countries is only a few months. For nationals of certain countries applying in the EB-3 category, delays have extended more than a decade. [30]"
Bookmark and Share Compare Reply With Quote


  #345 (permalink)  
Old 01-19-2016, 07:41 AM
Junior Member
Priority Date
:
Category
:
EB2
I140 Mailed Date
:
Chargeability
:
India
Processing Stage
:
I-140
I485 Mailed Date
:
Compare
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 15
prasadjoglekar is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by iwantgreencar View Post
Hi all ,
I know a lot us are waiting on HR213 to take out the numerical limitation for India and China and that would be a Great Leap Forward for to reduce our back log.

The recent proposals clearly talks about that in the below section ?
Is that not a great step and going to do us a great help ?
HR213 would be a Great Leap, but the current proposal is not a great step. The proposed rule doesn't change much of the current status quo. It certainly talks about the problems, but the "proposals" to fix those problems are non-existent.

The rest of this thread, particularly admin's template response explain why, with examples and considerable context.
Bookmark and Share Compare Reply With Quote


Reply

Bookmarks


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 On
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are On

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Proposed modification to regulation for allowing EAD for certain H4s Administrator2 IV Agenda and Legislative Updates 64 08-12-2014 01:06 PM
New AC-21 regulation discussion bazuka6 AC21 Portability after 180 days of 485 filing 4 05-12-2008 01:15 PM
LC Substitution Regulation Lasantha Retrogression, priority dates and Visa bulletins 2 05-02-2007 02:12 PM



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:37 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
(c)ImmigrationVoice.org