• 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

«  

August

  »
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

In Immigration Bill Talks, House Group Raises Voice

  • View
  • Post new reply
  • Thread tools
#1
05-10-2013, 08:30 PM
Senior Member
Joined in May 2006
6,569 posts
Ianus's Avatar
Ianus
0 AP
https://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/11/u...bill.html?_r=0
Quote:
WASHINGTON — A bipartisan group in the House of Representatives has been meeting on and off for four years behind closed doors, working on its own version of legislation to overhaul the nation’s immigration laws. But with a comprehensive bill already making its way through the Senate Judiciary Committee, the House group is fast losing its chance to shape the debate percolating on Capitol Hill, let alone put forth a proposal of its own.

“I think a lot of us believed in this bipartisan group that we would have finished quite some time ago,” said Representative Xavier Becerra, Democrat of California and a member of the group. “I think you really make it tough for yourself, and I hope House Republicans would agree with me on that, that you make it difficult to believe that you’re for fixing the broken immigration system and getting our economy on track unless you really seriously try to start in May.”

Already, the House Judiciary Committee has begun introducing a series of bills pegged to certain parts of an immigration overhaul, in a move designed, in part, to press the bipartisan group to action.

One major block, aides say, is reluctance on the part of Republicans in the group to accept a deal between the nation’s leading business and labor organizations, which would establish a guest worker program, known as a W-Visa program, for low-skilled, year-round temporary workers, those who perform seasonal work but are allowed to stay in the country throughout the year.

Though the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the A.F.L.-C.I.O. reached an agreement in late March on a guest worker program, which was incorporated into legislation drafted by a similar bipartisan group in the Senate, House Republicans believe the deal is too favorable to labor and are trying to rework it. The current agreement starts the number of available W-Visas at 20,000, capping it at 200,000 visas annually, and limits the number of visas available to construction occupations at 15,000 annually.

Democrats in the House group say there was an implicit agreement to accept whatever deal the business and labor groups agreed upon. But Republicans want to raise the overall cap, particularly on construction visas.

“From a 30,000-foot level, the concern is that construction is being treated differently than any other industry in the Senate bill,” said Geoff Burr, the vice president of federal affairs for the Associated Builders & Contractors. “The 15,000 cap in the Senate bill is preposterous.”

Republicans and outside groups are pushing several options to increase the number of construction visas available: making those visas a percentage of the overall W-Visas, rather than imposing a hard cap; making it easier for employers who still face labor shortages after the quota is met to use a “safety valve” exemption to bring in more foreign workers; and creating a returning worker exemption, in which those workers are not counted under the cap.

But Democrats in the group think that trying to modify the already delicate business-labor agreement could harm the overall bill.

“The moment you pull the thread from one side on this fabric, this compromise, the moment it gets undone on the other side,” Mr. Becerra said.


Labor organizations have publicly and privately indicated that they will not support any changes to the existing W-Visa program. “We can’t accept any changes in the W-Visa program,” said Tom Snyder, the A.F.L.-C.I.O.’s immigration campaign manager. “We spent many months working and reworking and carefully crafting this agreement with the Chamber of Commerce, and succeeded in getting it into the Senate bill, and we just won’t accept changes.”

Whatever legislation does emerge from the Republican-controlled House, however, is expected to be to more conservative than the Senate’s approach. The House bill would offer a 15-year path to citizenship, rather than the 13-year path in the Senate plan, aides say. Both bills, however, would allow people in the country illegally to earn a green card in 10 years.

Under the House plan, people would also be required, as part of their application progress for legal status, to sign an admission stating they had violated American immigration laws, aides said. That admission would lead to a probationary status, and if an immigrant was then found to violate the terms of probation, he or she would be subject to deportation.

Conservative groups have been critical of the Senate bill’s estimated costs. The Heritage Foundation issued a study estimating that the legislation would cost taxpayers roughly $6.3 trillion over the next 50 years, but members of both parties objected to it. The report also became a target when it was disclosed that the co-author, Jason Richwine, had written a doctoral dissertation in which he said immigrants’ I.Q.’s should be considered when crafting policy. On Friday, Mr. Richwine, a senior policy analyst at the foundation, resigned.

The Senate bipartisan group is eager for the House to produce legislation of its own — especially if it reflects principles in line with those already in the Senate plan.

“If the House eight of them came in with a bill very similar to ours, that would be helpful, and I would hope they could,” said Senator Charles E. Schumer
, Democrat of New York and a member of the Senate group.
__________________
We shall win our Dream!
  • Reply With Quote
Post your reply or quote more messages.
Ianus
View Public Profile
Send a private message to Ianus
Find all posts by Ianus
#2
05-10-2013, 11:23 PM
Senior Member
Joined in Sep 2012
298 posts
dude33
0 AP
Really such a waste of time .. amend what is already presented , that make more common sense
__________________
Date Application Sent - 8/21/2012/Delivered-8/23
Date of I-797 C Notice of Action- 08/28/2012
Date Biometrics scheduled - 9/24/12 Walk in: 9-13-12
Date of EAD approved - 10/29/12 Date received -11/03/12 Applied for S.S 11/06/12 Date S.S received 11/10/12
  • Reply With Quote
Post your reply or quote more messages.
dude33
View Public Profile
Send a private message to dude33
Find all posts by dude33
#3
05-10-2013, 11:29 PM
Senior Member
Joined in Feb 2013
253 posts
not_today
0 AP
Quote:
Originally Posted by dude33 View Post
Really such a waste of time .. amend what is already presented , that make more common sense
I highly suspect this bill won't even be voted on. It's probably just a decoy to call the attention of House members towards a similar bill that's actually available and they can get familiar with.
  • Reply With Quote
Post your reply or quote more messages.
not_today
View Public Profile
Send a private message to not_today
Find all posts by not_today
#4
05-11-2013, 12:03 PM
Senior Member
Joined in Aug 2012
2,113 posts
VeryNicePerson1's Avatar
VeryNicePerson1
0 AP
I'm starting to suspect there may never be a House bill...which means the Senate needs to get the bill through soon!!! Lets do this!!
  • Reply With Quote
Post your reply or quote more messages.
VeryNicePerson1
View Public Profile
Send a private message to VeryNicePerson1
Find all posts by VeryNicePerson1


« 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 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.