• Home
  • Today
  • Advocacy
  • Forum
Donate
  • login
  • register
Home

They need you!

Forum links

  • Recent changes
  • Member list
  • Search
  • Register
Search Forums
 
Advanced Search
Go to Page...

Resources

  • Do I qualify?
  • In-state tuition
  • FAQ
  • Ways to legalize
  • Feedback
  • Contact us

Join our list

National calendar of events

ยซ  

March

  ยป
S M T W T F S
1
 
2
 
3
 
4
 
5
 
6
 
7
 
8
 
9
 
10
 
11
 
12
 
13
 
14
 
15
 
16
 
17
 
18
 
19
 
20
 
21
 
22
 
23
 
24
 
25
 
26
 
27
 
28
 
29
 
30
 
31
 
 
 
 
 
Sync with this calendar
DAP Forums > DREAM Act > The News Room

AP source: Immigration bill could exclude many

  • View
  • Post new reply
  • Thread tools
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • next ›
  • last »
#1
04-12-2013, 09:15 AM
Senior Member
Joined in May 2009
329 posts
swordfish
0 AP
WASHINGTON (AP) — A bipartisan immigration bill soon to be introduced in the Senate could exclude hundreds of thousands of immigrants here illegally from ever becoming U.S. citizens, according to a Senate aide with knowledge of the proposals.

The bill would bar anyone who arrived in the U.S. after Dec. 31, 2011, from applying for legal status and ultimately citizenship, according to the aide, who was not authorized to discuss the proposals before they were made public and spoke on condition of anonymity.

It also would require applicants to document that they were in the country before Dec. 31, 2011, have a clean criminal record and show enough employment or financial stability that they're likely to stay off welfare.

Those requirements could exclude hundreds of thousands of the 11 million immigrants in the U.S. illegally from the path to citizenship envisioned by the bill, the aide said.

Although illegal immigration to the U.S. has been dropping, many tens of thousands still arrive each year, so the cutoff date alone could exclude a large number of people. That may come as a disappointment to immigrant rights groups that had been hoping that anyone here as of the date of enactment of the bill could be able to become eligible for citizenship.

But Republicans in the immigration negotiating group had sought strict criteria on legal enforcement and border security as the price for their support for a path to citizenship, which is still opposed by some as amnesty. Details on the criminal record requirement were still being finalize,d but anyone with a felony conviction was likely to be excluded, the aide said.
The new details emerged as negotiators reached agreement on all the major elements of the sweeping legislation.

After months of closed-door negotiations, the "Gang of Eight" senators, equally divided between the two parties, had no issues left to resolve in person, and no more negotiating sessions were planned. Remaining details were left to aides, who were at work completing drafts of the bill.
"All issues that rise to the member level have been dealt with," Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., said in a statement Thursday. "All that is left is the drafting."

Democratic Sen. Dick-Durbin of Illinois said the bill probably would be introduced on Tuesday.

The landmark legislation would overhaul legal immigration programs, require all employers to verify the legal status of their workers, greatly boost border security and put millions of immigrants living in the U.S. illegally on a 13-year path to citizenship. A top second-term priority for President Barack Obama, it would enact the biggest changes to U.S. immigration law in more than a quarter-century.

Deals gelled over the past two days on a new farm-worker program and visas for high-tech workers, eliminating the final substantive disputes on the legislation.

Next will come the uncertain public phase as voters and other lawmakers get a look at the measure. Already, some conservatives have made it clear their opposition will be fierce.

Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Ala., complained that the bill would ensure that millions get amnesty but border enforcement never happens.

"This is also why it is so troubling that (Senate Judiciary Chairman Patrick Leahy, D-Vt.) has rejected the GOP request for multiple hearings and that members of the Gang of Eight have publicly announced their intention to oppose any amendments," Sessions said in a statement Thursday. "To proceed along these lines is tantamount to an admission that the bill is not workable and will not withstand public scrutiny."

Pro-immigrant activists also were gearing up for a fight even as they expressed optimism that this time, Congress will succeed in passing an immigration overhaul bill. Many of those pushing for the legislation were involved in the last major immigration fight, in 2007, when a bill came close on the Senate floor but ultimately failed.

"I think it's a pretty remarkable breakthrough that eight ideologically diverse senators are working so well together on such a challenging issue," said Frank Sharry, executive director of America's Voice, a group advocating for an overhaul of U.S. immigration policy. "And I think the fact that they've come up with a bill they can all support and defend suggests that it's the heart of a bill that will finally pass into law."

Once the legislation is introduced, it will be considered by the Senate Judiciary Committee, which has scheduled a hearing for Wednesday and likely will begin to amend and vote on the bill the week of May 6. From there, the bill would move to the Senate floor.

Both in committee and on the floor, the bill could change in unpredictable ways as senators try to amend it from the left and the right. The Gang of Eight — Schumer, Durbin, and Sens. John McCain and Jeff Flake, R-Ariz., Marco Rubio, R-Fla., Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., Robert Menendez, D-N.J., and Michael Bennet, D-Colo. — have discussed banding together to defeat amendments that could significantly alter the legislation.

Even more uncertain, though, is the Republican-led House, where a bipartisan group is also crafting an immigration bill, though timing of its release is uncertain. Many conservatives in the House remain opposed to citizenship for immigrants who have been living in the U.S. illegally.
  • Reply With Quote
Post your reply or quote more messages.
swordfish
View Public Profile
Send a private message to swordfish
Find all posts by swordfish
#2
04-12-2013, 09:48 AM
Senior Member
Joined in Nov 2012
15,081 posts
Pianoswithoutfaith's Avatar
Pianoswithoutfaith
30 AP
Man 2 years requirement was too low should have been at least 5. Actually makes the bill really look like an amnesty
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2Face View Post
I personally knew that if he wins he's not going to be touching DACA.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2Face View Post
I hope Trump wins second term.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BestBefore1984 View Post
Tranny is not derogatory term dummy
  • Reply With Quote
Post your reply or quote more messages.
Pianoswithoutfaith
View Public Profile
Send a private message to Pianoswithoutfaith
Find all posts by Pianoswithoutfaith
#3
04-12-2013, 10:04 AM
Moderator
From Atlanta, GA
Joined in Aug 2008
2,822 posts
freshh.'s Avatar
freshh.
250 AP
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pianoswithoutfaith View Post
Man 2 years requirement was too low should have been at least 5. Actually makes the bill really look like an amnesty
I expected it to be five. And who knows what it will be once the final version is released.
__________________
Self-Prepared, Jamaican, Visa Overstay ; Expiration: 10.18.18
Renewal #3 Sent: 01.21.18 (Chicago, IL)| Arrived: 01.23.2018
G-1145:01.26.18|Biometrics Received: 01.30.18 (02.16.18 ) | Biometrics Completed : 02.16.18
  • Reply With Quote
Post your reply or quote more messages.
freshh.
View Public Profile
Send a private message to freshh.
Find all posts by freshh.
#4
04-12-2013, 10:07 AM
Senior Member
Joined in Nov 2012
15,081 posts
Pianoswithoutfaith's Avatar
Pianoswithoutfaith
30 AP
Yeah hopefully a few years more than 2
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2Face View Post
I personally knew that if he wins he's not going to be touching DACA.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2Face View Post
I hope Trump wins second term.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BestBefore1984 View Post
Tranny is not derogatory term dummy
  • Reply With Quote
Post your reply or quote more messages.
Pianoswithoutfaith
View Public Profile
Send a private message to Pianoswithoutfaith
Find all posts by Pianoswithoutfaith
#5
04-12-2013, 10:31 AM
BANNED
Joined in Mar 2009
1,530 posts
Sonawabich
0 AP
Make it 5
  • Reply With Quote
Post your reply or quote more messages.
Sonawabich
View Public Profile
Find all posts by Sonawabich
#6
04-12-2013, 10:41 AM
Senior Member
Joined in Jun 2007
2,690 posts
CIR_DREAM2009
210 AP
This is ridiculous. Make it yesterday, if the Republicans know what's good for them ... (I have no idea why you guys want it stricter)
__________________
EAD/DACA Renewal: 10/8/2014
  • Reply With Quote
Post your reply or quote more messages.
CIR_DREAM2009
View Public Profile
Send a private message to CIR_DREAM2009
Find all posts by CIR_DREAM2009
#7
04-12-2013, 10:44 AM
Senior Member
Joined in Sep 2012
5,606 posts
JJ Glo's Avatar
JJ Glo
60 AP
Quote:
Originally Posted by CIR_DREAM2009 View Post
This is ridiculous. Make it yesterday, if the Republicans know what's good for them ... (I have no idea why you guys want it stricter)
LOL.


Yeah, 2 years seems like way too little.
__________________
Self filed AOS │Apps Received By USCIS - 3/18/19 │Biometrics Done - 4/11/19
Interview Scheduled - 4/24/19│Interview Date - 5/31/19│AOS Approval - 5/31/19
Permanent Resident Card Received - 6/8/19
  • Reply With Quote
Post your reply or quote more messages.
JJ Glo
View Public Profile
Send a private message to JJ Glo
Find all posts by JJ Glo
#8
04-12-2013, 10:47 AM
Senior Member
Joined in Aug 2012
856 posts
Severity
0 AP
Hate to agree but 5 years seem right. I would say 4 but 5 sounds much better.
__________________
Mailing Method Certified
Date Received - 08/30/2012
i797c letter- 09/07/2012
Biometrics- 10/02/2012
Approved- 11/26/2012
  • Reply With Quote
Post your reply or quote more messages.
Severity
View Public Profile
Send a private message to Severity
Find all posts by Severity
#9
04-12-2013, 11:34 AM
BANNED
Joined in Oct 2012
2,487 posts
Happyman0607
0 AP
2 years????? What the fuckk??????? That's ridiculous.. Why should someone who's been here illegally for 2 years get the same benefit as someone who had to live here and struggle for 20 years??! That's complete bull shit..
  • Reply With Quote
Post your reply or quote more messages.
Happyman0607
View Public Profile
Find all posts by Happyman0607
#10
04-12-2013, 11:39 AM
Senior Member
From california
Joined in Oct 2012
372 posts
superanxious
0 AP
Yes 5 years
__________________
App. Rec.: Oct. 29 Bio letter: Nov. 7
Bio walk in: Nov. 19 Bio Appt.: Nov. 26
APPROVE: DEC. 31 DACA & EAD
App. July 29 16. Bio Oct. 16. Exp. 11/17/16
Approve 11/16/2017
  • Reply With Quote
Post your reply or quote more messages.
superanxious
View Public Profile
Send a private message to superanxious
Find all posts by superanxious
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • next ›
  • last »


« Previous Thread | Next Thread »

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page

Contact Us - DREAM Act Portal - Archive - Top
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2026, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.