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
  #1 (permalink)  
Old 03-15-2006, 12:53 PM
Junior Member
Priority Date
:
Nov-05
Category
:
EB2
I140 Mailed Date
:
Chargeability
:
Processing Stage
:
I-140
I485 Mailed Date
:
Compare
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 1
ramanujan is on a distinguished road
Default About I-485 in Specter's Bill

Folks,

Sen. Specter's immigration bill has no provisions for filing of EAD/I-485 even with priority dates retrogressed. It appears that none of the amendments are proposing that this provision be added to the final bill.

Is there something we can do to get this provision added to the bill? Can QGA help in anyway to get it added? I think that the ability to file EAD/I-485 under retrogression will benefit one and all.

-Ramanujan
Bookmark and Share Compare Reply With Quote


  #2 (permalink)  
Old 03-15-2006, 01:05 PM
Member
Priority Date
:
May-05
Category
:
EB2
I140 Mailed Date
:
Chargeability
:
India
Processing Stage
:
I-140
I485 Mailed Date
:
Compare
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 76
bheemi has a spectacular aura about bheemi has a spectacular aura about bheemi has a spectacular aura about
Default is immigration voice workikng towards this issue

Hi,
I dont think anybody pushing forward about this issue..Filing of 485 during retrogression..
Immigration Voice :
Is there any scope any where to add this to current bill...are our immigration voice working towards this issue at all...if so can you pls let us know what you are doing for this issue..because I did not see anywhere updates from immigration voice ..or any ammendments on this issue..
Bookmark and Share Compare Reply With Quote


  #3 (permalink)  
Old 03-15-2006, 01:05 PM
Super Moderator
Priority Date
:
Nov-06
Category
:
Others
I140 Mailed Date
:
Chargeability
:
Processing Stage
:
Labor Certification
I485 Mailed Date
:
Compare
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 610
ragz4u is on a distinguished road
Default Thats one of IV's goal

Ramanujam,

Over the last couple of weeks IV core committee members and QGA have had several meetings with important members of Senate and House. We have tried to educate the relevant folks about our situation.

It is premature to assume/speculate one way or other whether any pro-immigrant provisions will be removed/added. The next few days will provide a good idea of how things might unfold

There are a ton of amendments that are being introduced by various Judiciary Committee members. The committee has only reached Title 3 while Title 4 and 5 are the ones that most affect us

In the same vein, the Judiciary Committee is NOT the only place an amendment can be brought into the bill.

After the Judiciary committee, the bill will be brought to the floor. At that time too amendments can be brought in by Senators. Once the bill passes the senate, the bill will be discussed by the Joint Conference Committee that will negotiate and come to a common bill from both the House Version HR4437 and the senate version of it. Here too, pro-immigrant provisions can be added/removed

So in short, we will try our best to ensure that all our goals mentioned on the home page are achieved (hopefully ) and we will keep on working on it until the final bill gets passed by both the house and senate after the joint conference committee!
Bookmark and Share Compare Reply With Quote


  #4 (permalink)  
Old 03-15-2006, 01:18 PM
Senior Member
Priority Date
:
Jan-02
Category
:
EB3
I140 Mailed Date
:
01/01/2000
Chargeability
:
Brazil
Processing Stage
:
I-485
I485 Mailed Date
:
01/01/2000
Compare
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 580
Ramba has a brilliant future Ramba has a brilliant future Ramba has a brilliant future Ramba has a brilliant future Ramba has a brilliant future Ramba has a brilliant future Ramba has a brilliant future Ramba has a brilliant future Ramba has a brilliant future Ramba has a brilliant future Ramba has a brilliant future
Default Has IV core teem has any idea about bringing back AC21?

Filing 485 during visa unavailability, should not be the concern in this bill. Why our people are worrying about filing AOS when visa number unavailable? Man, this should not be our concern at all. Our main concern should be reinstating the AC21 provision that allow the oversubscribed countries to use excess visas in each EB category. Specter removed very important provision that eliminate per country limit in EB visas for oversubscribed countries. This is a big blow to India, China. It will stop all the benefits from this bill.

If the current form of specter bill passes, there is no benefit to any of us. If EB visa increased to 290K, excluding dependents from counting from FY 2001, recapturing unused visa from 2001 to 2005, and excluding EB1 (OR+EA) and EB2 (MS+3) from count, that drastically increase the visa numbers. The increase is unimaginable, and I feel that it will be about 4 to 5 times than current 140K numbers. If all the listed provisions appears in the final bill, the visa number will always be “current” for all countries for many years, provided AC21 (elimination of per country limit if demand is less than supply) reinstated. If this happens, no one needs to worry about filing AOS when visa number unavailable. That situation never arises.

If current form of Specter bill passes, all the new numbers created thro above listed provisions, will not give any benefit to India/China. DOS simply say per country limit is 10% only no matter what. Remember that, 10% is total of FB+EB numbers. (480000+290000). India and China FB numbers are also heavily backlogged. Therefore our main concern is to reinstate AC21 provision not filing AOS, and keep pressure to keep the listed provisions (EB visa increased to 290K, excluding dependents from counting from FY 2001, recapturing unused visa from 2001 to 2005, and excluding EB1 (OR+EA) and EB2 (MS+3)) in the final bill
Bookmark and Share Compare Reply With Quote


  #5 (permalink)  
Old 03-15-2006, 01:32 PM
Member
Priority Date
:
May-05
Category
:
EB2
I140 Mailed Date
:
Chargeability
:
India
Processing Stage
:
I-140
I485 Mailed Date
:
Compare
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 76
bheemi has a spectacular aura about bheemi has a spectacular aura about bheemi has a spectacular aura about
Default

hi Super_Moderator,

Why cant we try to add now..instead of waiting for later time..to add this ammendment thru some senator or somebody for filing 485 during retrogression...

just to know whey we need to wait for later to add this...
Bookmark and Share Compare Reply With Quote


  #6 (permalink)  
Old 03-15-2006, 01:39 PM
Super Moderator
Priority Date
:
Nov-06
Category
:
Others
I140 Mailed Date
:
Chargeability
:
Processing Stage
:
Labor Certification
I485 Mailed Date
:
Compare
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 610
ragz4u is on a distinguished road
Default Bheemi, thats what we'd love too :)

Quote:
Originally Posted by bheemi
hi Super_Moderator,

Why cant we try to add now..instead of waiting for later time..to add this ammendment thru some senator or somebody for filing 485 during retrogression...

just to know whey we need to wait for later to add this...
Unfotunately thats not the way the US political system works! Just as we are trying to get pro-immigrant stuff in, there are others who are trying to negate our force and in fact get any pro immigrant stuff out! Example, numbersusa.

As I have said in my previous post, we are trying to push for the pro-immigrant package at every step. It could happen now, it could happen later, in the worst case it might not happen at all! There are a lot of forces involved in this.

What is in our control is to keep trying and not give up till the very end. And make no mistake, we are doing that every second coz we are in the same boat as you are.

Last edited by ragz4u; 03-15-2006 at 02:43 PM.
Bookmark and Share Compare Reply With Quote


  #7 (permalink)  
Old 03-15-2006, 01:54 PM
Member
Priority Date
:
Oct-02
Category
:
EB3
I140 Mailed Date
:
Chargeability
:
India
Processing Stage
:
N/A
I485 Mailed Date
:
Compare
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 86
Sandeep is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bheemi
hi Super_Moderator,

Why cant we try to add now..instead of waiting for later time..to add this ammendment thru some senator or somebody for filing 485 during retrogression...

just to know whey we need to wait for later to add this...
There is no question of waiting and watching here - please be assured that IV is doing everything possible to address this issue. This bill is not very straight forward due to the fact that it is entangled in too many complexities which we are not even a part of. So we have to tread very carefully here. IV is getting professional advice in this regard and it would make sense to follow that advice and not jump the gun.
Bookmark and Share Compare Reply With Quote


  #8 (permalink)  
Old 03-15-2006, 02:30 PM
Senior Member
Priority Date
:
Nov-03
Category
:
EB2
I140 Mailed Date
:
Chargeability
:
Processing Stage
:
N/A
I485 Mailed Date
:
Compare
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 105
mchundi is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bheemi
hi Super_Moderator,

Why cant we try to add now..instead of waiting for later time..to add this ammendment thru some senator or somebody for filing 485 during retrogression...

just to know whey we need to wait for later to add this...
Guys,
This is a complex issue. That one point may have been the reason S-1932 did not go thru. It gives an impression as if 1/2 million employment based G.C's will be dumped into the market, but in reality the USCIS is able to process around 200k G.C's per year.
The current provisions in the CIRB target several areas and likely to keep the dates current for EB-1,2,3 current for a couple of years.
Our consultants have advised us well in this regard, if they have done so.
--MC
Bookmark and Share Compare Reply With Quote


  #9 (permalink)  
Old 03-15-2006, 03:15 PM
Senior Member
Priority Date
:
Jan-03
Category
:
EB3
I140 Mailed Date
:
01/01/2007
Chargeability
:
India
Processing Stage
:
I-485
I485 Mailed Date
:
07/02/2007
Compare
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 837
eb3retro has a reputation beyond repute eb3retro has a reputation beyond repute eb3retro has a reputation beyond repute eb3retro has a reputation beyond repute eb3retro has a reputation beyond repute eb3retro has a reputation beyond repute eb3retro has a reputation beyond repute eb3retro has a reputation beyond repute eb3retro has a reputation beyond repute eb3retro has a reputation beyond repute eb3retro has a reputation beyond repute
Default good points

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ramba
Filing 485 during visa unavailability, should not be the concern in this bill. Why our people are worrying about filing AOS when visa number unavailable? Man, this should not be our concern at all. Our main concern should be reinstating the AC21 provision that allow the oversubscribed countries to use excess visas in each EB category. Specter removed very important provision that eliminate per country limit in EB visas for oversubscribed countries. This is a big blow to India, China. It will stop all the benefits from this bill.

If the current form of specter bill passes, there is no benefit to any of us. If EB visa increased to 290K, excluding dependents from counting from FY 2001, recapturing unused visa from 2001 to 2005, and excluding EB1 (OR+EA) and EB2 (MS+3) from count, that drastically increase the visa numbers. The increase is unimaginable, and I feel that it will be about 4 to 5 times than current 140K numbers. If all the listed provisions appears in the final bill, the visa number will always be “current” for all countries for many years, provided AC21 (elimination of per country limit if demand is less than supply) reinstated. If this happens, no one needs to worry about filing AOS when visa number unavailable. That situation never arises.

If current form of Specter bill passes, all the new numbers created thro above listed provisions, will not give any benefit to India/China. DOS simply say per country limit is 10% only no matter what. Remember that, 10% is total of FB+EB numbers. (480000+290000). India and China FB numbers are also heavily backlogged. Therefore our main concern is to reinstate AC21 provision not filing AOS, and keep pressure to keep the listed provisions (EB visa increased to 290K, excluding dependents from counting from FY 2001, recapturing unused visa from 2001 to 2005, and excluding EB1 (OR+EA) and EB2 (MS+3)) in the final bill

this person is bringing some valid points to ponder. People please go through her posting and i agree with her regarding the numbers is still 10% only for india. we need to fight for removing the per country limit, or else, we may probably be in this retrogression mess for quite sometime.
Bookmark and Share Compare Reply With Quote


  #10 (permalink)  
Old 03-15-2006, 03:22 PM
Senior Member
Priority Date
:
Jun-04
Category
:
I140 Mailed Date
:
Chargeability
:
Processing Stage
:
Labor Certification
I485 Mailed Date
:
Compare
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 449
admin is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by eb3retro
this person is bringing some valid points to ponder. People please go through her posting and i agree with her regarding the numbers is still 10% only for india. we need to fight for removing the per country limit, or else, we may probably be in this retrogression mess for quite sometime.
eb3retro,

Your concerns are well placed. Please be rest assured that we're working on reinstating the AC21 clause on per country limits.

Due to the sensitive nature of lobbying, we're sorry that we will not be able to divulge any more detailed information.
Bookmark and Share Compare Reply With Quote


  #11 (permalink)  
Old 03-15-2006, 03:38 PM
Senior Member
Priority Date
:
Jan-03
Category
:
EB3
I140 Mailed Date
:
01/01/2007
Chargeability
:
India
Processing Stage
:
I-485
I485 Mailed Date
:
07/02/2007
Compare
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 837
eb3retro has a reputation beyond repute eb3retro has a reputation beyond repute eb3retro has a reputation beyond repute eb3retro has a reputation beyond repute eb3retro has a reputation beyond repute eb3retro has a reputation beyond repute eb3retro has a reputation beyond repute eb3retro has a reputation beyond repute eb3retro has a reputation beyond repute eb3retro has a reputation beyond repute eb3retro has a reputation beyond repute
Default Thanks Admin

Quote:
Originally Posted by admin
eb3retro,

Your concerns are well placed. Please be rest assured that we're working on reinstating the AC21 clause on per country limits.

Due to the sensitive nature of lobbying, we're sorry that we will not be able to divulge any more detailed information.

Thanks for the response admin, I understand your concerns.
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
Analysis of Specter's Markup to Comprehensive Immigration Bill admin IV Agenda and Legislative Updates 15 03-07-2006 01:18 PM
Draft text of Senator Specter's bill ragz4u IV Agenda and Legislative Updates 12 02-24-2006 09:02 PM
Called Sen Specter's office eb3_nepa IV Agenda and Legislative Updates 5 02-21-2006 08:35 PM
Sen Specter's Response eb3_nepa IV Agenda and Legislative Updates 8 02-03-2006 05:01 PM



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:25 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
(c)ImmigrationVoice.org