.

THE OH LAW FIRM

Dedicated Professionals in Immigration Law for Over 24 Years

Current Page[06/01/2008 - Present]/Archive XVII[03/31/2008 - 05/31/2008]Archive XVI[08/01/2007 - 03/31/2008/Archive XV [04/30/2007 - 07/31/2007]/Archive XIV[06/15/2006 - 03/31/2007]Archive XIII [12/01/05 - 06/14/06]/ Archive XII [08/01/05 - 11/30/05]/Archive XI [04/30/05 - 07/31/05

11/30/2005: Nonimmigrant Visas Issued in FY 2005 by Country and by Visa Type

• The State Department statistics for nonimmigrant visa issuance in FY 2005 (10/01/2004 - 09/30/2005) reflect very interesting trend of top countries as follows:
  • H-1B:
    • Total: 124,100
    • India: 53, 579
    • China: 7,113
    • UK + N. Ireland: 5,617
  • F-1:
    • Total: 237,890
    • Korea: 35,310
    • Japan: 24,554
    • China: 21,642
    • India: 20,173
    • Taiwan: 15,488
  • E-3: Total - 4
• For H-1B visa applications, applications by the Indians take overwhelming numbers close to 45% of the total H-1B visa applications worldwide, while Chinese apply for the H-1B visas in a small number probably because the Chinese do not make overseas trips to apply for the H-1B visas unlike the Indians. When it comes to F-1 student visas, the trend is reverse. India is only rank 4 in the number of F-1 visa applications, less than 10% of total foreign students' F-1 visa applications. This statistics may partially reflect the fact that the H-1B Visa Reform Act of 2005 giving special 20,000 additional numbers to those U.S. Master degree earned probably had more stakes to Chinese than Indians. Flip side of this coin is that the Indians have more stake with the S. 1932 H-1B recapture legislation than Chinese or other main H-1B candidates.
• Look at the E-3 visas. Only four visas had been issued by September 30, 2005 worldwide!

11/30/2005: E-3 Visa Eligibility for J-1 Who Are Subject to 2-Year Foreign Residency Requirement

• The State Department has confirmed that the two-year foreign residency requirement does not preclude the J-1 aliens including International Medical Graduates from applying for E-3 visas. However, any stay in the U.S. in E-3 status will not be considered for the requirement of two-year foreign residency compliance.

11/30/2005: Processing Times of Security Advisory Opinions and Namechecks for "Visa" Applications

• The U.S. Department of State has reported to the AILA the following status of various security and criminal namecheck clearance statistics:

• 	Total Processed	FY 05 Average	As of 08/2005
  Condors	63,332	6.2 days	2.65 days
  Mantis	24,197	15.45 days	14.45 days
  NCIC	195,758	15.45 days	3.42 days

• The processing times report appears very different from the various reports by the visa applicants who had to go through agonizing waiting and waiting process to obtain the visas allgedly due to the delays in the security clearance.

11/29/2005: Comprehensive Immigration Reform Legislation Rocky Road Ahead

• Bush's lip is still wet on the guest worker program, but report indicates that there are so many hawks in the House who are ready to fight against their own "head hancho" that unless something unsual happens, the chance appears to be very slim that comprehensive immigration reform will make through the House. The House is reportedly opposing any immigration bills that involves legalization of illegal aliens in any shapes or forms, including the guest worker program and not to mension earned adjustment of status of illegal aliens.
• Since the Senate is poised to deal with the comprehensive immigration reform legislation coming February, we want to see this issue handled in the next session of Congress that opens on January 18, 2006. We rather want to see this session of Congress to focues on the two less controversial legislative bills before they adjourn for the rest of the 1st Session of the 109th Congress. The first and the foremost important bill is S. 1932 which deals with the "legal" immigration which should receive the top priority in the legislation. Since the budget reconciliation legislation is expected to be wrapped up when the Congress returns next week and the House-Senate Conference Committee is expected to resolve the differences in one way or another, we just hope that the members of the House are sober enough to recognize the urgency of the legal immigration packet under S. 1932. We hope that the members of the House clearly recognize the distinction between the S. 1932 immigration issue and the comprehensive immigration reform issue which is likely to exhaust the nation's political heat and energy during the first part of the 2nd Session of 109th Congress next year. We also hope that the Congress resolves the bi-partisan DREAM Act before they adjourn. We want to remind the Congress that the identical bill almost passed the Congress but for the sunset of the 108th Congress. Again the issue underlying this legislation is somewhat different from the comprehensive immigration reform and should be dealt with separately from the comprehensive immigration reform process. Some people wonder whether Bush is drumming up the comprehensive immigration reform issue to redirect the nation's political heat and attention from the Iraq war controversy to illegal immigration and border security issues. We certainly hope that ain't true.

11/29/2005: Minnesota Political/Opinion Leaders in Full Swing in Support of National Strategy for Attracting Foreign Powers

• Minnesota Governor Tim Pawlenty reportedly urged that foreign students who earn graduate degrees in selected, economically desirable fields from American universities should become automatically eligible for green card. The editorial of Star Tribune in Minneapolis urges the country to develop a national strategy for attracting foreign brainpowers stating that green card could be a carrot for world's best and brightest and quoting the International Herald Tribune November 25 editorial that "Nobody questions the importance of barring entry to another Mohammed Atta; but nobody should be oblivious to the danger of excluding another Einstein." Senator Norm Coleman, a rising star in the GOP politics, and Representative James Oberstar (MN) are actively advocating and urging a strategic national plan for expanding foreign student access to American institutions of higher learning.
• The Congress will return to the Hill next week to resolve the differences between the Senate and the House in the "employment-based" and "legal immigration" legislative bill which is part of S. 1932. Again, the leaders in the House and the Senate should realize that this bill deals with an important national strategy for foreign brain power immigration issues which are "separate" from the issues the President addressed yesterday. For the S. 1932, the leaders in the House and the Senate should show a bi-partisan support as it transcends the ideological differences between the right and the left when it comes to a long term national strategy for foreign brain powers in this country.

11/28/2005: Full Text of Bush Speech on Border Security and Immigration Reform

• Score cards: Positive Notes: (1) Legalization of certain illegal aliens in the form of temporary guest worker program; (2) Support for immigrant visa quota increase. Negative Notes: (1) Legalization for the purpose of "temporary" work only; (2) No reward in the form of earned adjustment.
• Refer to the Bush's original Temporary Guest Worker program of January 7, 2004.
• Senators Kyl and Cornyn, after all, it was your day!

11/28/2005: Bush to focus on illegal immigration Today at 4:45 p.m. (PST)

• Report indicates that Bush is scheduled to elaborate his plan for border security and illegal immigrant issues in Arizona. Bush has to walk a very thin rope between the ultra-right wing conservative group within its GOP that strongly opposes any kind of legalization including Guest Worker Program and Earned Adjustment of Status on one end of the rope and the Hispanic voters on the opposite end of the rope whom Bush has to appease to get their politial support in the coming national election. In order to play in this circus tactfully, he is reportedly to talk tough on the border security and enforcement agenda on one hand and push his agenda for guest worker program on the other.
• It is almost certain that when it comes to the Guest Worker Program, he may reiterate his original proposal which does not include the earned adjustment of status. Since he has to walk between the McCain-Kennedy and Cornyn-Kyl Comprehensive Immigration Reform bills in the Senate, he may want to keep his own agenda which stands in the middle of the specturum of the two conflicting Comprehensive Immigration Reform legislative bills: Probably opposing the earned adjustment but proposing legalization of illegal aliens in the form of a Temporary Guest Worker Program which may require the departure of the temporary guest workers after completing the temporary guest work in order to seek immigration into the U.S. afterwards. From the perspectives of President Fox of Mexico, probably this would be the next best morning sick pill which they will have to swallow in order to deal with his own political problem in Mexico.
• U.S. Senate is scheduled to deal with the Comprehensive Immigration Reform in coming February, and this is probably a good start and overture for the process. Well, let's see how the circus will unfold this evening.

11/27/2005: Council of Graduate Schools Report: Graduate Enrollement for Engineering/Physical Sciences in the U.S. in 2004

• This report indicates that only a little over 10% of the total graduate enrollment included Engineering and Physical Sciences in the U.S. Out of the total enrollment in Engineering, 50% were taken by non-resident aliens. For the Physical Sciences, 41% were taken by non-resident aliens. This survey reflects that this country's science and engineering are predominantly dependent on the foreign students, non-resident foreign engineers and physical scientists.
• It is unclear how the present shut-down of H-1B visas and the employment-based immigrant visa retrogression have affected higher learning instutitions and research institutions in terms of recruitment and retaining these brains, but there have been sporatic reports of exodus of the foreign scientists and engineers in 2005 and reduced enrollment of foreign students in graduate schools in the field of engineering and physical sciences in 2005. This statistics should be an alarm to the nation's political leaders and policy makers.
• Unquestionably, the nation should push forward two policies parallelly: One is the educational reform and the other is immigration policy. The nation has expressed for quite a while our concerns with the American youngsters not choosing sciences and engineerings. Thus far, there is no statistics that the nation's policy makers have been successful to turn the trend around. It is too obvious that this change will not take place in a short period of time as the goal cannot be achieved by the educational reform alone. There appears to be a much deeper cause for the problem which is more or less related to the changing culture in this country placing less value and weight on research and education that require hard work. We are convinced that it will eventually change in the future, even though it may take decades and decades. Pending the changes, though, the nation cannot afford being left behind of other competitors in the world. The nation should separate the emotional issue from the reality. Attracting and retaining these foreign scientists and engineers will remain one of the top national interests for this country to sustain its leadership in the world, at least until the time when the country's youngsters find the highest value and weight on research and education in science and engineering. This country cannot just educate and let loose the critically needed foreign scientists and engineers when the country does not have an alternative to fill the vaccuum. The damage may not be witnessed today or tomorrow, but in the years to come. History will judge very harshly over the nation's leaders for having failed to lead the country in the right direction such that the nation would not suffer from the "irrepaprable" damage and scar for "years to come."

11/25/2005: Katrina Affected F-1 Short-Term EAD/Reduced Course Load Rule Effective 11/25/2005

• Federal Register
• USCIS Announcement
• FAQ

11/25/2005: DREAM Act: Relief for Law Breakers or Innocent Victims?

• This bill is intended to extend compassion to the yougsters who entered the U.S. before he/she had reached 16 years of age. Obviously, most of these youngsters have become "illegal" aliens not on their volition but on the parent's volition. For sure, they are "undocumented" aliens, but they were not the ones who had made such decisions. Most of these children had to live with the label of "illegal aliens" and had to drop tears in bed with a broken heart, not to mention the humiliation and ridicule which they have been suffering from their parents' acts. The memory is still fresh about a Cuban child who was brought to this country illegally by his mother who had failed to survive in the boat. This child stirred a huge political storm in this country for the two reasons: One, political, and the other, legal. Political issue involved the Cuban exile community in this country and very complex dynamics for American strategic interest in the liberation of Cuba. The legal issue involved the right of the natural parent over a minor child seeking a political asylum against the legal custodian's will, the father. On both sides of the controversy, however, there was not a single voice raised against the child's illegal alien status, not to mention labelling of the minor child as a "law breaker." Was he? Where was the child's act either intentionally or negligently breaking a law? In fact, the child was a victim of his mother who had forced him to be on board to attempt to enter the U.S. illegally to seek a refuge.
• Law does not exist in vacuum. Sometimes, morality or equity acts as a remedy to alleviate the harshness of the law. However, where the harshness of the law cannot be alleviated or corrected or cured by the morality or equity, a legislation has to step in to achieve the desirable remedy against such harshness. The DREAM Act of 2005 is intended to bring into the law "compassion" and "remedy from the unnecessary harshness over the innocent young souls." The bill is not a simple amnesty of law breakers.

11/24/2005: Summary and Full Text of "DREAM" Act of 2005

• Full Text
• Summary: This bill includes residency tuition eligibility, cancellation or waiver of removal (deportation), and grant of a permanent resident status. However, we will skip the tuition residency provision and focus on the eligibility of the defined youngster illegal aliens for the permanent resident status.
  • Threshold Requirements:
    • At the time of initial entry into the U.S., the alien must not have reached 16 years of age. Accordingly, those who entered the country after 16th birthday will not be qualified for green card benefit under this bill.
    • At the time of the enactment of this legislation (date of the President's signature), the alien shoud have been "physically" present for a continuous period of not less than 5 years. Accordingly, those who stayed for a period of less than 5 years at the time this bill is signed into the law will not be eligible for the green card under this legislation. The following overseas trips would not break the continous physical presence requirement:
      • Departed from the U.S. for one trip for less than 90 days; or
      • Departed from the U.S. for more than one trip but for less than 180 dates in aggregate; or
      • Even if departed more than 90 days or 180 days in aggregate, if the alien could not return to the U.S. due to exception circumstances for one of the following reasons, such trip would not break the continuous physical presence:
        • Due to his/her own serious illness; or
        • Due to death or serious illnes of a parent, grandparent, sibling, or a child
      • Overseas uniformed services would not break the continuous physical presence.
      • Notice to Appear served on the alien for removal proceeding would not break the continuous physical presence.
    • At the time of application, the alien:
      • Admitted to Institution of Higher Education; or
      • Earned a high school diploma; or
      • obtained a general education development certificate.
    • At the time of submission of the application, the alien must meet "good moral character" requirement. Good moral character is broader than any involvement with the criminal activities or other deportability in the immigration statutes.
    • If the alien is either inadmissible or deportable for one of the following provisions, the alien is not eligible:
      • Failure to attend removal (deportation) proceeding;
      • Smuggler of illegal aliens;
      • Attended public schools after certain date and subject to 5 year bar from admission to the U.S. because of such violation once the alien departs from the U.S.;
      • Subject to a final order for violation of Section 274C of the immigration statute (document fraud) after reaching 16 years of age;
      • Committed fraud or willful misrepresentation to seek a visa or admission, or other documents, including false claim of U.S. citizenship after reaching 16 years of age.
    • Not under a "final" administrative or judicial order of exclusion, deportation or removal order after reaching 16 years of age. Accordingly, those who remain in exclusion/deportation/exclusion proceedings or an appeal of the exclusion or deportation order is pending will still be eligible even if such order was handed down after reaching 16 years of age.
  • Immigration Benefits for the Aliens Who Meet the Foregoing Requirements:
    • Cancellation of removal (deportation) or waiver of removability for humanitarian concerns and family unity.
    • Conditional Permanent Resident for 6 Years. The conditional status removable through the removal petitions just like marriage cases and investor immigration proceedings on a different proceeding.
    • Eligible for a U.S. citizenship after 5 years in conditional resident status, but unless the condition has been been removed, the alien will not be eligible for the citizenship.
  • Effective Date: The satisfaction of the foregoing eligibility will be determined on the date of enactment of this legislation unless otherwise provided.
  • USCIS Implementation Timefrme:
    • Once this legislation is enacted by the signature of the President, the USCIS is required to publish a proposed regulation to implement this law within 180 days. However, unlike other proposed regulation, this proposed regulation will be considered an "interim" regulation which will take effect immediately upon publication of the proposed regulation in the federal register. Accordingly, the eligible aliens will be able to apply for the permanent resident status at least 180 days after the enactment of this legislation.
    • Within reasonable after publishing the proposed regulation, the USCIS is required to publish either an Interim or Final regulation.
  • Immigrant Visa Quota: The qualified aliens are not subject to any immigrant visa quota or per country limits.
• Once the alien attains the conditional permanent resident status under the foregoing rules, he/she will have to file a petition to remove the conditions within certain period before reading 6 years in a conditional resident status. We will summarize this part of the legislative bill later as they are not revelant at this time. Please stay tuned.

11/24/2005: Approaching Immigration Lottery Deadline, 12/04/2005

• The two-month immigration lottery will end at 12:00 pm EST (GMT-5) on December 4, 2005. People may not want to wait until the last minute as electronic filing can experience some unexpected difficulties. Please send it now. DV-2007 Immigration Lottery
  

11/24/2005: Immigration Monthly Statistical Report of 10/31/2005

• DHS released the statistics on November 18, 2005 for the following immigration activities:
  • Inspections
    Southwest Border Apprehensions
    Immigration Benefits
    Naturalization Benefits
    Removals
    Asylum
    
• In the Immigration Benefits, it has reported that applications and petitions for immigration benefits in September 2005 decreased 5 percent compared to the number received in September 2004. September approvals decreased 16 percent, while denials increased by 6 percent and pending percent when compared to September 2004. In fiscal year 2005, receipts increased by 7 percent, approvals increased and denials increased by 2 percent compared to fiscal year 2004. Major volumes in September 2005 receipts include: 102,506 I-765 employment authorizations; 62,561 I-90 Green Card renewals/replacements; 59,609 I-130 relative/ I-129F fiancé(e) petitions; and 50,414 I-485 permanent resident adjustments. Major volumes of pending applications at the end of September 2005 include: 1,291,868 I-130 relative/I-129F fiancé(e) petitions; 889,447 I-485 permanent resident adjustments; 274,395 I-765 employment authorizations; 253,553 I-90 Green Card Renewals/replacements; and 61,374 I-821 temporary protected status.
• There are indications that the USCIS has been working on processing time reduction efforts and will accelerate the efforts at all levels including the Service Centers and the local field offices. Under the Bush 5-year immigration 6-month processing time program of $500 millions, the agency needs to achieve the goal by September 30, 2006. Accordingly in the next one year, immigrants will witness a substantial reduction in processing times, and at the same time added pressures on the limited immigrant visa numbers. Without doubt, this will negatively affect the clogged immigration visa numbers unless the Congress passes legislations to give a relief to the clogged visa retrogression.

11/23/2005: USCIS H-1B & H-2B Cap Count Update as of November 2005

• H-1B: The U.S. Master degree holders still have numbers available.
• H-2B: The number exceeded the cap for the first half of FY 2006, but according to the AILA, H-2B petition can be filed beginning from December 1, 2006 using the second half of the FY 2006 cap numbers (33,000). December 1, 2005 is the earliest date one can file for the second half cap numbers. Since the second half of FY 2006 does not start until April 1, 2006, the earliest validity date for these H-2B approval will be April 1, 2006 or thereafter. Remember that the returning H-2B worker cases do not need cap numbers and will be eligible to apply for H-2B anytime until September 30, 2006. On a related note, the American consulate in Monterrey, Mexico is adopting a special policy allowing substitutions on H-2B visa applications including the returning H-2B worker. The substitutions do not have to be from the same category, for instance, a new H-2B worker can be substituted for someone who was initially classified as an H-2R. This is a good news for all the H-2B applicants.

11/23/2005: Katrina Affected F-1 Short-Term EAD/Reduced Course Load Rule to be Published on 11/25/2005

11/23/2005: Employer in Michigan Ordered Payment of $2.25 Million Backwages for Violation of H-1B LCA by DOL

• The U.S. Department of Labor, ESA, reportedly ordered an employer in Michigan, named Computech, Inc. to pay $2.25 million to 232 H-1B workers for violation of H-1B LCA law. Read on.

11/23/2005: Congressional Contact Assistance

• Everyone is getting ready to reunite with the family members and close relatives during the long Thanksgiving holiday weekend. So are the Congressional delegates (Senators and Representatives of the House). Businesses, no matter how small or large, and other profit and nonprofit corporate entities should spare their time to contact the Congressional delegates either via fax or via e-mail. AILA will provide links ( fax or e-mail) to these contacts to assist the corporate America. CompeteAmerica.Org provides abundance of materials to prepare your support letters. If you are small entities, http://isnamerica.org/ will provide such access to the Congressional delegates via fax.

11/22/2005: Visa Number Recapture Legislation Under S. 1932

• The immigration system in this country desperately needs reform to face the changes in the past few decades, particularly in the issues related to relief of legalization in the context of the nation's demographic changes and the needs for the low-end labor forces.
• However, the nation and the members of the Congress should bear in mind that the pending visa number recapture legislation has nothing to do with the "reform" of the immigration system. This legislation proposes no "reform" of the exising immigration system. This legislation just proposes to rectify the past failure of the government to properly implement the laws and issue the immigrant as well as nonimmigrant visas timely and in disregard of the spirit and legislative intent of the immigration statutue. Neither this legislation is related to any issues of legalization of certain segment of undocumented immigrants. The issues of Comprehensive Immigration Reform and Visa Number Recapture are completely two separate and unrelated issues and the Congress and the upcoming Conference Committee should not be distracted by another critical immigration legislation that lie ahead of them. The Congress and the Conference Committee should continue to focus the nation's mandate on the needs for rectifying its past failures and resolving the pressing issues of retaining the international brains in this country and recruiting international brains to assist the high tech and research industries to retain the brains and maintain cutting edge under the environment of growing international competition. The nation cannot afford keeping its growing trend of outsourcing the high-end resources to her competitors, potentially weakening her strength and power over the long haul.
• Distinguished Senators and Congress members, with all due respect, this reporter urges you to go over the foregoing analysis and promptly pass the visa number recapture proposals in the original Senate bill, S. 1932.

11/22/2005: "DREAM" Act for Innocent Youngster Illegal Immigrants Reintroduced in the Senate

• On November 18, 2005, Senator Richard Durban from Illinois and 12 other cosponsoring Senators in the Senate reintroduced this "long awaited" immigration bill. The millions of illegal alien youngsters who came to the U.S. accompanying their parents and fell into the illegal alien designations not due to the faults of themselves but due to the faults of their illegal alien parents. This bill was almost enacted last year unless there was some turn of the events that changed the political landscape in this country at the end of the year and automatically died when the Congress failed to act on the bill before the close of 108th Congress. This bill is to amend the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 to permit States to determine State residency for higher education purposes and to authorize the cancellation of removal and adjustment of status of certain alien students who are long-term United States residents and who entered the United States as children, and for other purposes.
• This bill has been referred to the Senate Judiciary Committee for its action. The bill number is S. 2075. For those who want to review its prior bill under the same name of DREAM Act (S.1545), please click and roll down to review the text of the old version. This bill was also introduced at the end of the year, but unlike the prior bill, this bill is not going to die automatically because it is the 1st Session of 109th Congress that is sunsetting and all the pending bills will be continuously acted upon by the Congress until 2nd Session of 109th Congress sunsets, which is more than a year away.
• As soon as the full text of the reintroduced bill is made available, we will post the summary. Please stay tuned.
  

11/21/2005: Short-Term Employment Authorization and Reduced Course Load for Certain F-1 Nonimmigrant Students Adversely Affected by Hurricane Katrina

• USCIS is planning to provide certain short-term employment authorization and reduced course load for certain F-1 nonimmigrant students who have been adversely affected by Hurricane Katrina. The USCIS requested the OMB for its clearance on November 18, 2005. This notice will be published in the federal register on November 25, 2005.

11/20/2005: We Thank Sen. Arlen Specter (Penn) for His Support for Sponsored Immigration Packet in S.1932

• The immigration packet in the S. 1932 was introduced and strongly supported by the Chairman of Judiciary Committee, Sen. Arlen Spector (Pennsylvania), a highly respected senator in the Hill. Now since the S. 1932 is returned to the Senate, the nation looks forward to his continuing support for his proposal in collaboration with his colleagues in appointing members to Conference Committee in the Senate as well as in the House.
• The following Senate record of S. 1932 proceedings reflects how he envisioned the importance of the immigration for the future of this nation and why Sen. Byrd was wrong:
  • The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from West Virginia is recognized.
  • Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, the reconciliation bill would increase immigrant work visas by 350,000 per year, about one-third of the current level. It is a massive and destabilizing increase that does not belong on the reconciliation bill.
  • My amendment would strike the increase in immigrant work visas and impose a $1,500 immigrant application fee on multinational corporations. With my amendment, the Judiciary Committee would exceed its reconciliation savings targets and do so without increasing immigrant work visas. We authorized over half a million H-1B visas in 2000. Last year, we authorized another $100,000 over 5 years. Do we really need another 150,000 visas on top of that? When is enough enough?
  • My amendment has the support of the unions. It has the support of immigrant enforcement groups. It has the support of Republican and Democrat Senators. I urge agreement of the amendment.
  • The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Pennsylvania.
  • Mr. SPECTER. Mr. President, I am opposed to this amendment because the fees for L visas would raise funds but would do nothing to fill very important jobs in the United States. The existing plan submitted by the Judiciary Committee imposes a fee, but it extends the H-1B visa and recaptures the visas which were not used in the last 5 years. There are very careful safeguards so that U.S. jobs are not lost. (Matthew Oh note: According to the news report, right after the passage of H.R. 4241, the White House released its opinion more or less agreeing with this assessment, expressing its view that the White House disagreed with the provision imposing fees for L visas for purposes other than immigration. Right on, Mr. President!)
  • I understand the position of the distinguished Senator from West Virginia, the position of the unions, but I believe their concerns are misplaced and that there is a real need for these positions of highly skilled professionals, Ph.D.s, advanced degrees. Therefore, with due respect to my colleague from West Virginia, I ask for a ``no'' vote.
  • The PRESIDING OFFICER. All time has expired. The question is on agreeing to the amendment.
  • Mr. BYRD. I ask for the yeas and nays.
  • The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
  • There is a sufficient second.
  • The yeas and nays were ordered.
  • The clerk will call the roll.
  • The assistant legislative clerk called the roll.
  • Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from New Jersey (Mr. CORZINE) is necessarily absent.
  • The PRESIDING OFFICER. Are there any other Senators in the Chamber desiring to vote?
  • The result was announced--yeas 14, nays 85.
• With due respect, we disagree with the Sen. Byrd assessment of the financial burden of this bill on the deficit. From our calculation, it would rather contribute additional revenue of about $150 million. Fortunately, 85 Senators read implication and significance of this immigration packet correctly and we look forward to the continuing strong support from these 85 Senators in the conference process under the leadership of Sen. Arlen Specter.
• This reporter proposes to the business leaders, higher learning institutions, high tech industries, and immigrants to send "thank you" e-mails to the respected Senator from Pennsylvania.

11/20/2005: Answer to Confusion on Passage of S. 1932 by House on 11/18/2005

• It appears that the immigrant community is terribly confused because the House passed not only H.R.4241 but also S.1932 right after passing H.R. 4241 after the midnight of 11/17/2005. It appears that the GOP intended to resolve the deficit reduction legislation as soon as possible and acted swiftly on S.1932 which was on the desk of the House Speaker.
• Here is exactly what happened:
  • 11/14/2005 6:02pm:
    Received in the House.
    11/14/2005:
    Message on Senate action sent to the House.
    11/14/2005 7:16pm:
    Held at the desk.
    11/18/2005 1:50am:
    Mr. Nussle asked unanimous consent to strike all after the enacting clause and insert in lieu thereof the provisions of H.R. 4241 as passed by the House.
    11/18/2005 1:50am:
    Considered by unanimous consent.
    11/18/2005 1:50am:
    H.AMDT.633 Amendment reported by the House Committee on Rules.
    11/18/2005 1:50am:
    H.AMDT.633 On agreeing to the Rules amendment (A002) Agreed to without objection.
    11/18/2005 1:50am:
    On passage Passed without objection.
    11/18/2005 1:50am:
    Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
    11/18/2005:
    Message on House action received in Senate and at desk: House amendment to Senate bill.
• The House passed S.1932 striking all the provisions in the S.1932 and inserting in lieu thereof H.R. 4241 as passed by the House that night! This House action was then sent to the Senate and at the desk of Senate President pro temp at this time. Because of the differences between the two bills, S. 1932 is expected to the Conference Committee after the Congress returns to the session on December 6, 2005. This means that the businesses, academic community, and immigrant community should focus on the House-Senate conference committee to resolve differences between the S. 1932 as passed by the Senate and the S.1932 as amended by the House. H.R. 4241 which was passed that night is merged into S. 1932 and out of the picture hereon. The Senators and the House members have returned to your community for the next two weeks and it is a golden opportunity for the supports of the original S. 1932 to contact their Congressional delegations in their community during this holiday season. The House Speaker and the GOP majority whips in the Senate and House will play an important role in the conference process.
• It is hoped that this posting clears the confusion in the immigrant community.
  

11/18/2005: How House/Senate Conference Committee Members are Determined?

• For general information, please click here.
• Read also Conference Committee Process.(see Attachment #4)

11/18/2005: Service Center November 18, 2005 Processing Times

• Please see the home page.

11/18/2005: Passage of H.R. 4241 - What Does It Mean to Me?

• Apparently there are some people in the immigrant community who misunderstand that the immigrant visa and H-1B recaptures or spouse/children special provisions may take effect soon. Passage of H.R. 4241 does not mean that the immigration bills have also passed the House. The H.R. 4241, unlike the Senate S.1932, did not include the immigration bills. Then why did the immigrant community monitor the passage of this bill? Both S. 1932 of the Senate and H.R. 4241 are two different versions of the same legislation named Omnibus Deficit Reduction Act ( also called Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act) and unless the House bill, H.R. 4241, passes, the process of conference to compromise between the House bill and the Senate bill will not be commenced. Since the House bill did not include the immigration packet, while the Senate bill included immigration packet, the immigrant community wanted to see that the conference process would start as early as possible so that they will know whether the Congress will eventually accept the S. 1932 immigration packet and legislate it into a law.
• In this regard, the passage of H.R. 4241 is not the end but the beginning of the process to get the Senate S.1932 immigration recapture bill be passed as part of the final version of the Ominibus Deficit Reduction Act. The Congress will go into the Thanksgiving holiday recess from next week and no voting sessions will start until next month. Due to another big holidays ahead, Christritmas and New Year, the Congress will have a very limited time to wrap up the legislative activities of the First Session of the 109th Congress. Report indicates that the conference process is likely to start next month when the Congress returns to the Hill. Since this is the beginning of the process to get the immigration bills accepted by the both Houses, the business, academic, and immigrant communities should expand their efforts for the next one week or so in order to assure that the current immigration clog be relieved as soon as possible.

11/18/2005: House Passed H.R. 4241 by Vote 217-215 at 01:41 a.m. Today

• The House debated all night last night and finally passed this bill by hair-thin close vote of 217 yeas and 215 nays at close to 2 O'clock this morning without amendment for the immigration bills.
• Read and help the immigration community's last minute effort

11/17/2005: E-Mail Link to Each Member of the House

• Employers and immigrants, it is your finger tips away. Click here to send your message to your Congressional delegate in your district. Just type in your Zip Code and write your message and click!
• To view the current proceedings on the House floor, please click here.
• The following text may be copied and customized to fit your situation and e-mail to your representative using the link above.
• Dear Member of Congress:
  • As we begin Fiscal Year 2006, America’s long-term economic health must be at the forefront of our nation’s legislative agenda. I am writing to alert you to several issues that we believe pose a significant threat to U.S. competitiveness and economic security. Leading business and scientific organizations recently warned that the United States is in danger of losing its innovative edge. Lagging student interest in math, science and engineering, coupled with a pattern of reduced government investment in basic research in the physical sciences are troubling indicators for the future. These disturbing trends must be reversed.
  • As we continue efforts to grow our pipeline of American scientists and engineers, we need to enable U.S. companies recruiting at U.S. universities to have access to all the graduates – including foreign students. For example, in electrical engineering, 56 percent of master’s and 66 percent of the PhD graduates of U.S. programs in 2004 were foreign students. We should open the doors wide to these talented individuals. Unfortunately, current U.S. Government policies are going in the exact opposite direction. If U.S. businesses are not able to hire or retain these employees, our overseas competitors will. As an example of the growing problem, on August 12, 2005, the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) announced that the entire FY 2006 allotment of H-1B visas had been exhausted. The announcement was unprecedented, as it came nearly two months prior to the beginning of the new fiscal year – signaling both the significant demand for highly educated workers in many specialized professions and a growing competitiveness problem for America. This is the seventh time since 1997 that the cap on H-1B visas has been reached before the end of the fiscal year. This is the second year in a row that it has been reached on or before the start of the fiscal year. U.S. employers need predictability – something the current system does not allow.
  • The green card process also needs reform to enable employers to hire and retain the best qualified individuals in sufficient numbers. We believe that those individuals with the education, experience, knowledge and skills critical to U.S. competitiveness in the 21 st Century should be granted priority permanent resident status. Such reforms would significantly assist U.S. employers in retaining that talent, as well as alleviate the overwhelming demand for H-1B visas. USCIS’ efforts to reduce application backlogs have created another problem – unavailability of permanent visas, frequently called “green cards.” As of October 1, 2005, the State Department has set the clock backward – adding years to the wait for a green card for thousands of foreign professionals from countries such as India, China and the Philippines. The impact of the new restrictions will make it nearly impossible for these highly educated and skilled workers to gain permanent residence in the United States in the foreseeable future. Moreover, the recent unavailability of visas will force thousands of professionals to put their lives on hold, with the inability to change jobs, locations or employers.
  • To make matters worse, many of these professionals – including researchers, scientists, teachers and engineers – will see their wait for permanent residency drag on for many more years. Our system of backlogs, delays and unpredictability is discouraging and unwelcoming, forcing many valued employees to seek employment in other nations. This is not only disruptive to U.S. employers and our economy, but exceedingly unfair to hard-working, valued members of the American workforce. Access to this talent keeps innovation and jobs in the United States. Tapping America’s Potential and the National Association of Manufacturers’ 2005 Labor Day Report are available at www.competeamerica.org and www.nam.org.
    
  • The U.S. Senate passed S. 1932 which includes Section 8001 and Section 8002 to resolve the foregoing problems which this nation faces. The House bill, H.R. 4241, failed to include these important parts of the budget reconciliation legislation. Please support Sections 8001 and 8002 of S. 1932 in the conference process. Thank you. Sincerely, xxxxxxxxx, President, yyy Corporation, address, telephone number.

11/17/2005 (9:00 p.m.): House Returned to Session and Currently Debates H.R. 4241

• The House returned to the session at about 8:16 p.m. (EST) and started debating H.R. 4241. Please stay tuned to this web site for the House action tonight.

11/17/2005: H.R. 4241 Update

• The House has yet to debate this bill even though it was laid on table this afternoon. The House may or may not return to the session this evening. If they don't, they will pick it up early tomorrow. If they do, they are expected to have two hours of debate before they get into roll calls for this bill. It appears that the House resolution on this bill indicates that amendments may not be allowed on the floor for this bill, and it is almost certain that the House will pass H.R. 4241 without the S. 1932 immigration package.
• Since the budget reconciliation bills are expected to move to the Senate-House conference committee which is yet to be formed by the Speaker of the House and the President of the Senate, people are encouraged to keep sending support letters to the Speaker of the House and the President of the Senate plus members of the Senate Judiciary Committee and the House Budget Committee, especially the bill sponsors, to adopt the S.1932 Section 8001 and Section 8002. Traditionally, the Speaker and the President have been nominating the conference members mostly from the members of the Committees in each House that passed the conflicting bills. Please do not give up yet. The fight is not over. Remember Yogi Berra? It ain't over till it is over. Please do not loosen your "bite!" Business and academic communities are extremely important for the last minute push, and we urge each of you to contact your employers to keep contacting these Senators and Congress people starting early tomorrow morning.

11/17/2005: H.R. 4241 Laid On Table in the House, 12:45 P.M. EST

• This bill is on the table now for the debate on the House floor. We will monitor the progress of this bill today. Please stay tuned.

11/16/2005: Support of Merger of ICE-CBP Reportedly Growing in the Congress

• Report indicates that there is a growing support for merger of the two immigration enfocement agencies and it may come sooner than expected. Stay tuned.

11/16/2005: House Floor Action Update

• The House was in full session all day today passing various legislative bills and resolutions. The House failed to reach H.R. 4241. But H.R. 4241 is still scheduled to be debated and acted upon before Saturday. It is just that there is slim chance that this bill will be acted upon within today even though the House is still in full session as of this reporting (5:00 p.m. EST). Once this bill is passed, there is a good chance that the Speaker of the House may name the members for the conference with the Senate bill. Please stay tuned.

11/16/2005: Economic Growth and Importance of Immigration

• The Immigration Policy Center has just released its study dated November 2005 on "Economic Growth and Immigration" which establishes that the American population will face labor force problem without continuing feed-in of the immigrants due to the trend of population growth that would not meet the needed labor forces to sustain the economic growth of the country. Please read on.

11/16/2005: November 2005 DHS Inspector General Report Recommending Merger of ICE and CBP Immigration Enforcement Agencies

• This controversial report puts the DHS leadership at the edge. Read on.

11/15/2005: House Concluded the Debate and Vote for the Bills of the Today's Agenda

• The House wrapped up the debates and voting for various legislative bills at 7:44 p.m. House did not reach the H.R. 4241 today. We hope to see that the House reach this bill tomorrow. Please stay tuned.

11/15/2005: House Started Debating Various Bills Starting at 2:00 p.m. Est., and Voting Will Start at 6:30 p.m. Est.

• House is currently (3.20 p.m.) debating one bill after another bill and has not reached the H.R. 4241. And then for the bills which they completed debate will be voted from 6:30 p.m. tonight. At this time, we are watching very closely whether it will reach H.R. 4241 today and whether any amendments will be presented on the floor. Please stay tuned.

11/14/2005: ICE - CBP Duel Over Merger Issue Elevated to DHS - DHS IG Duel

• The ICE has lost Michael Garcia for a while and currently is headless, and the CBP Commissioner is retiring and no replacement has been announced. The duel between the ICE and CBP over the immigration enfocement power and merger issue has been a talk of the town in the Beltway for quite a while. The struggle of the confirmation of the nominee of the ICE assistant secretary in the Senate has added a fuel over the burning house.
• Now, report indicates that the DHS Inspector General is expected to release a report tomorrow recommending merger of these two immigration enforcement agencies and behind the scence, there have been confrontations between the DHS leadership and the Inspector General. It is obvious that this will be eventually resolved by the oversight authority and the President, but this is one of the fall-outs of scrapping the legacy INS and creating a new immigration structure hastily under the pressure of 9/11 incident without putting sufficient amount of review and study on the potential fallouts from merger of 22 giant federal departments. Just interesting to watch how these duels will unfold in the future.
• Well, the Senate reaction was quick. Please read the Senate rection.

11/14/2005: Breath-Taking House Voting Schedules and Need for Contact with the Members of the House within Today and Tomorrow

• The House is scheduled to adjourn after the some voting activities between tomorrow evening and Friday evening, November 18, 2005 for the Thanksgiving break. Currently, no voting activities are scheduled on the House floor until and after the first week of December 2005, once the House misses to vote for H.R. 4241 before the Thanksgiving! Besides, there is no roll call scheduled for any bills or resolutions today and the earliest voting is not expected until tomorrow evening. Accordingly, today and tomorrow are the critical dates for the businesses, schools, and immigration supporters to contact en masse the members of the House so that this bill is passed within this week. The House is under political pressure to act on the deficit reduction bill (H.R. 4241). Please act now!!

11/13/2005: Impact of Grace Korean United Methodist Church Case on Potential Opportunity for Motion to Reopen of Previous Denials on This Issue

• Those whose I-140 was denied on this issue of a single bachelor's degree requirement are likely to file a motion to reopen the denial of their prior cases based on this Oregon federal district court decision. The question is how much the USCIS will be bound by this court decision. There are two potential issues to win in such a motion to reopen proceeding. One potential issue is the potential USCIS argument that the decision of the case is narrow and applies only to a similar situation in the State of Oregon. More troublesome is the fact that this case will not be reported in the Court Reporter, indicating that it will not have a "precedent" force. Accordingly, those who intend to file a motion to reopen or who will face denial of I-140 petitions on this issue in the future because of the Service Center's decision to defy the court decision in Oregon are likely to face further struggle unless the USCIS voluntarily decides to follow the Oregon federal court decision. Otherwise, it is anticipated that this issue will have to be litigated again in the future cases. We urge the AILA to work with the USCIS HQ in Washington to encourage the USCIS leadership, particularly Mr. Robert Divine, Acting Deputy Director, to adopt the Oregon decision as the USCIS' new policy.

11/12/2005: H.R. 4241 Prospect for the House Passage Next Week Uncertain

• The report indicates that the House Deficit Reduction Act of 2005 is swirled in a very complicated political climate within the House GOP making the fate of this legislative bill uncertain at this moment. Accordingly, the prospect for passage of this bill on the House floor next week is uncertain as well. As we reported earlier, the fate of the Senate immigration package in the S.1932 is currently clinging on the passage of the House bill, and immigrant community is experiencing emotional roller-coaster and frustration. Please stay tuned to this web site for the development of the House action next week.

11/11/2005: Grace Korean United Methodist Church v. Michael Chertoff, CV.04-1849-PK

• The issue and the ruling are somewhat narrower than those we discussed earlier. First, this ruling does not apply when the labor certification did not require a Bachelor's degree or "equivalent." The issue in this case is focused on a narrow issue of interpretation of "equivalent." Accordingly, should the Service Center deny I-140 petition based on the labor certification application which required a Bachelor's degree and the alien does not have a bachelor's degree, this decision will have no affect on the standards which the Service Centers have been denying I-140 for lack of a single bachelor's degree. However, if the labor certification required a bachelor's degree or "equivalent," those who try to use this decision have a good chance to win as the employer can argue that "equivalent" included not only combination of education and experience but combination of two different educational degrees or diplomas, even though it will constitute a dicta.
• Accordingly, this case gives an important lesson to the labor certification filers that if the alien beneficiary does not have a four-year college degree but has an equivalent multiple foreign degrees, the labor certification application should always require "bachelor's degree or equivalent."
• On behalf of the readers of this message, this reporter wishes to express a profound appreciation to a gentleman who allowed this reporter to share this case link with our readers. Thank you!

11/11/2005: Immigration Recapture Bill in Impasse Over Budget Reduction Battle in the House

• Senator Arlen Specter, the Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, proposed this immigration bill as part of the Budget Omnibus Reconciliation Act of 2005 and it appears that the strategy worked in the Senate. However, the House leaders are battling with the Deficit Reduction Act of 2005 even without the immigration recapture provisions as revealed by its cancellation of vote yesterday. The House GOP leaders are considering to try a vote again when it comes back from the Veterans Day (today) holiday weekend. The Senate S. 1932 is at this time trapped in the House internal struggle. At this time, no member of the House has come forward to introduce an amendment to add the Senate immigration packet to the House bill on the floor. In fact, it is not clear whether such amendment strategy will work better than the strategy to handle the S. 1932 immigration bill rather at the conference level. At this point, quick vote of the House budget bill with or without immigration packet is the top priority from the perspectives of the immigration community. Please read the New York Times report on yesterday's struggle in the House.

11/11/2005: Q&A E-Mails and Suggestions

• This reporter has been writing Q&A to discuss some visa retrogression related issues. We have covered almost 100 questions and answers. We believe that most of the visa retrogression related questions have been thoroughly covered and we will cease updating the visa retrogression related Q&A. The Visa Retrogression Q&A will be accessible through the link at the home page.
• Beginning today, we will start a new Q&A under the titile of "Advanced Q&A" to discuss some novel employment-based immigration issues. The rule for addressing such questions via e-mail is as follows: (1) Individual specific questions will not be answered. (2) Too basic questions will also be not answered. (3) Too long e-mail question will be ignored. This reporter has a limited time to read e-mails. To address a "short" question, people should address a single-issue question and not multiple-issue question. We will definitely ignore any e-mails that seek a second opinion. Let's start a new dialogue.

11/11/2005: Service Center Denials of Combination of Two Foreign Degrees as Equivalent U.S. Bachelor's Degree and Court Challenge

• Lately the Service Centers have growingly shown a hawky attitude denying I-140 petitions when the labor certification required a bachelor's degree and the alien beneficiary could meet only by either two academic degrees or equivalent education. Most typically, it involves an Indian professional who attained a Bachelor of Science degree (3-year degree) and a post-graduate diploma or degree (1 or 2-years). The foreign credential evaluators have been issuing an authoritative evaluation that these academic prepreation is equivalent to a bachelor's degree (4-year degree) in the United States. In the past, people did not have any problem in obtaining I-140 approval on such foreign credential evaluation. In fact, such standard was supported by the USCIS Business Division Chief, Efferen Hernandez, who had opined that such combination of two progress educational degrees met the legal standard for the bachelor's degree requirement. However, the Nebraska Service Center started challenging such interpretation of the regulation, and defying the opinion of the USCIS high-ranking official, started denying such I-140 petitions. Worse yet, lately this disease started spreading to other Service Centers and the number of denials started growing all over the country.
• Now, we have a positive news. The federal district court in the State of Oregon in Grace Korean United Methodist Church vs. Michael Chertoff, Case Number 04-1849, (Oregon District, November 3, 2005) disagreed with the USCIS position on the interpretation of "equivalent" in educational requirement in the labor certification application and has just struck down the USCIS view. The details have yet to be released, but we are lucky that the court has blocked the opening of flood gate in this important issue. This site will report the details as soon as this reporter obtains a copy of this decision. Please stay tuned to this website.

11/11/2005: BIA Rules Termination of Refugee Status Not a Requirement for Removal Proceeding

• Yesterday, the BIA handed down a rule that removal proceedings may be commenced against an alien who was admitted to the U.S. as a refugee without prior termination of the alien's refugee status, and a refugee who has been granted a lawful permanent status can be removed without the refugree status first terminated. see In re Smriko, 23 I&N. 836 (BIA 2005), Interim Decision #2520, November 10, 2005.

11/10/2005: House GOP Leaders Scraped the Scheduled Vote of H.R. 4241 Today

• Report indicates that the House Republican leaders canceled a planned vote Thursday on a $51 billion budget-cut package in the face of a revolt over cuts to Medicaid, food stamps and student loans. The decision by GOP leaders came despite a big concession to moderates Wednesday, when the leaders dropped provisions to open the Arctic National Refuge to oil and gas exploration, as well as a plan allowing states to lift a moratorium on oil drilling off the Atlantic and Pacific Coasts.

11/10/2005: December 2005 Visa Bulletin

• See home page. In December, the numbers moved forward quite substantially. Now, what's next? Let's see what the Visa Bureau says about the movement:
  • EB Visa Number Prediction:
    • The backlog reduction efforts of both USCIS and the DOL continue to result in very heavy demand for EB numbers. The amount of cases currently being processed is sufficient to use all available numbers in many categories. The level of demand in the Employment categories is expected to be far in excess of the annual limits, and once established, cut-off date movements are likely to be slow.
  • Will There be Cut-Off Dates for Any Additional Countries in EB-1 and EB-2?
    • It may be necessary to establish a cut-off date for the “All Chargeability Areas” EB-2 category at some point during the 2nd half of the FY. It is too early to estimate whether future demand will warrant such action. As of October 1st, cut-off dates for the EB-1 and EB-2 for China and India were established due to heavy demand; cut-off date movement is expected to be limited until a demand pattern has been determined.
  • What About Schedule A?
    • The 50,000 Schedule A numbers will provide relief to many Employment preference applicants, since any Schedule A applicant whose priority date is beyond the relevant Employment preference cut-off date can be processed and charged against the 50,000 limit. It is expected that Schedule A numbers will be available on a “Current” basis throughout all of FY-2006.
  • Why Such Huge Backlog?
    • The reasons the Employment categories had become current were in previous years are that the AC 21 recaptured a “pool” of 131,000 Employment numbers unused in FY 1999 and 2000, and allowed those recaptured numbers to be used by the oversubscribed countries, and the substantial decline in demand for numbers for adjustment of status cases prevented the annual limits from being reached for several years. In FY-2006, we are faced with continuing heavy demand due to the DHS and DOL backlog reduction efforts, along with an Employment limit which is approximately 40% lower than that of FY-2005. The lower annual Employment limit is a result of the virtual elimination of the “pool” of recaptured AC21 numbers, returning us to the pre-July 2001 situation.
    • In recent years, the application of the rules outlined in AC21 has allowed countries such as China – mainland born, India, and the Philippines to utilize large amounts of employment numbers which would have otherwise gone unused. During FY-2006, due to anticipated heavy demand, the AC21 provisions are not expected to apply, and the amount of Employment numbers available to any single country will be subject to the 7% cap. It is anticipated that the addition of unused FY-2005 Family numbers and the remaining AC21 numbers to the 140,000 annual minimum will result in an FY-2006 annual Employment limit of 152,000. This will mean an Employment per-country limit for FY-2006 of approximately 10,650.
• Overall the prediction is not too promising. We need the Recapture legislation and the Comprehensive Immigration Reform legislation!

11/10/2005: Voice Your Support for S.1932 NOW!

• It is your finger tips away. Click here to send your message to your Congressional delegate in your district. Just type in your Zip Code and write your message and click!
• To view the current proceedings on the House floor, please click here.

11/10/2005: How S. 1932 Will Help Deficit Reduction, the Goal of H.R. 4241?

• Members of the House of Representatives, the Senate bill, S. 1932, not only helps the America to recruit the brightests, to retain the brightest and protect our technologies against international competitors, and to keep the jobs in the U.S. and not to outsource our jobs, but also will help to reduce the nation's deficit upto $150,000,000.00.
• Senate bill proposes to impose $500.00 additional I-140 filing fee for EB-1, EB-2, and EB-3. Considering the fact that the numbers for EB-4 and EB-5 are negligible, the total numbers may run upto close to 140,000 a year.
• Senate bill proposes to impose $500.00 additional I-140 filing fees for 90,000 recaptured EB immigrant visa numbers.
• Senate bill proposed to impose $500.00 addtional H-1B filing fees for 90,000 recaptured H-1B visa numbers.
• The Senate immigration recapture part of the S.1932 is a winner for America and for the Congress from the four corners of the common sense! Please amend the H.R. 4241 to add this part (Section 8001 and 8002) of the Senate bill to Section 5100 to the House bill, H.R. 4241.

11/10/2005: H.R. 4241 Likely Tabled on the Floor Today

• Republican House Majority Leader, Blunt says GOP takes this to the floor on Thursday. The chance for this bill is improving as the sticky issue relating to the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to oil and gas drilling and to ease restrictions on offshore drilling may be removed from the bill. Currently, this issue is considered to be a roadblock to passage of the bill, but potential removal of this provision is likely to pave a way to passage of this bill, not necessarily today but when the House returns next Monday. There are not too many days left before the Congressional session will be over for this session. If the House passes this bill, H.R. 4241, there is a good chance that H.R. 4241 and S. 1932 may go to the conference before the Congress will go into recess. People are urged to continue their efforts to contact the members of the Congress.

11/09/2005: Foreign Labor Certification Applications and FIFO (First-In First-Out) Principle

• The reengineering of foreign labor certification was founded on two concepts in terms of the processing procedures: One is electronization and the other was nationalization or centralization. The reengineering system has gone through many trial and errors and caused pains and aches to the customers.
• After a disastrous start as related to the decision matrix, it appears that the PERM program has shown signs of stability, except the two problems: One is practical abandonment of 45-60 day processing rule in the regulation and irregularity of processing of applications in that there is currently no uniform processing time between the Chicago and Atlanta National Processing Centers and within each National Processing Center, the pattern of processing applications shows irregularity. Second problem is unsettled national policy on multiple applications. So-called Bill Carlson's Round 5 policy on this issue has been on hold even before it was commenced on September 1, 2005. Pending the revisitation of the policy, it appears that processing of earlier PERM applications remains more or less stale at "in process." We urge the leaders of the DFLC in Washington to resolve these hang-ups as soon as possible so that the PERM can move on as planned. Because of the second problem, the processing of PERM applications has turned out to be irregular raising the issue of "fairness" in management of the system.
• For the Backlog Elimination Centers in Dallas, Philadelphia, New York, Boston, and Denver, ???, currently these offices reportedly do not follow the FIFO processing principles as related to a number of factors that affect the final decision process relative to other cases in the permanent labor certification process. DOL has recently explained that these included the type of application (RIR, regular application, special handling, limited review, etc), the stage of processing at which the application was received by the the Backlog Elimination Center, for instance, the applications received from the regions have already completed recruitment, and these cases could move along earlier than those received from the states. Another factors that affected the FIFO processing was the dates of applications pending at each center, which determined each application's place within the FIFO queue, the differeent quality of the applications, some raising questions that took longer, and the response time of the employer to center's 45-day letters.
• The practical abandonment of FIFO again raises the impression of processing and management of applications irregularly and without a uniform national standard. It raises concerns with the "fairness" of treating the customers equally on a fixed uniform standard.
• Another problem the current labor certification management presents is lack of accessibility of the customers and channel for communication with the customers. The function of the intermediary (AILA Labor Certification Liason) has noticeably been set back and the agency is operating the system secluded from the customer community. It is strongly urged that DFLC/BECs operates the labor certification processing openly and keep the customers informed of the status of the business. Whenever something is run behind the curtain, it creates a misunderstanding of irregularity and lawlessness. The agency should start reporting the processing times for each BEC as soon as possible. The customer community is not informed of what communications are being released to which intermediaries and no intermediaries report the state of the processing. We urge the DFLC to "open the door" wide directly to the customers by updating the customers on its website and reporting regularly the processing times.

11/09/2005: Foreign Graduate Students Enrollment Up in 2005

• The state department reports that first-time enrollments of foreign students at U.S. graduate institutions increased 1 percent from 2004 to 2005, following three years of declines, an independent academic organization reports. Enrollments were up 11 percent for Middle Eastern students, up 5 percent for Korean students and up 3 percent for Chinese and Indian students from 2004 levels, according to the study. Read on.

11/09/2005: Legislative Process: What Process Will the S. 1932 and H.R. 4241 Go Through From Here On?

• As the House is about to mark up full house debate of H.R. 4241, the House version of Budget Omnibus Reconciliation bill, people are anxious to learn what process the bills from the Senate and the House will go through as people want to participate in the final legislative process. Unless the a member of the House introduces the Senate immigration bill as an amendment on the floor, it is obvious that the Senate S. 1932 bill and the House H.R. 4241 will go to conference of the two Houses. Next question then is who will be the members of the Conference Committee from each House. This will not be known until the differences in the two bills between the House and the Senate are fixed by the passage of the bills by each House and in each House a motion is taken to send them to the conference. The members of conference committee are not appointed by the Speaker of House and the President of Senate until it gets to this stage. Stay tuned for the development of the budget reconciliation legislative process.
• In the meantime, as a civic lesson, people may want to read the following two materials:
  • Legislative Process
  • Conference Committee Process.(see Attachment #4)

11/08/2005: "Blue" Labor Certification? What's That?

• AILA has been advised by the DOL that DOL will print the certified labor certification on a blue sheet. At the same time, the coloful stamp of the Certifying Officer will disappear as well. Hmmmmm..........................................................."Blue" Certification vs "Green" Card: One wonders who selected these colors? Doesn't "Blue" represents "cool" as well as "down" or "depressed?" Interesting...........................................!

11/08/2005: Michael Aytes Memo Gives Guidance on Eligibility to Self-Petition as Battered Spouse of USC or LPR Within 2 Years of the Abusers's Loss of Status

• This memorandum dated October 31, 2005 and issued by Mr. Michael Aytes, Acting Associate Director of Domestic Operations, USCIS, issued to give guidance to the field offices concerning the change in the self-petitioning eligibility requirements regarding the effect of an abuser's loss of immigration status prior to the filing of and following the approval of a self-petition. Family-Based Immigration practioners should read this memorandum. Read on.

11/08/2005: Michael Aytes Memo to Set Forth Revised Standards for Determining I-602 Filing Requirement for Waivers for Refugees

• This memorandum dated October 31, 2005 and issued by Mr. Michael Aytes, Actng Associate Director of Domestic Operations, USCIS, revises the standards on when I-602 filiing is required for granted waiver of excludability for refugees under 209(C). Local district practitioners should read this memorandum. Read on.

11/08/2005: House H.R. 4241 has been reported to the full House by the Budget Committee and Awaiting for Debate (Union Calendar 151)

• Businesses are urged to contact their Congressional delegations immediately to introduce amendment in line with the S. 1932, Sections 8001 and 8002.

11/08/2005: Dear Dintinguished Leaders of AFL-CIO and Other Unions

• We are grateful for your efforts to keep our jobs in the United States. We also realize that you are one of the stakeholders when it comes to the shrinkage of the job market in the U.S. as affected by the outsourcing and exporting of jobs to foreign countries in that you need to protect the size of your membership to powerfully represent the interests of the workers.
• We want to call your attention to a legislative bill, S. 1932, which the Senate overwhelmly passed on November 3, 2005 exactly to protect the jobs against the outsourcing of jobs. The House is currently working on the Deficit Reduction Act of 2005 (H.R. 4241) which does not reflect the provisions that protect jobs in the U.S. under the Section 8001 of S. 1932. We invite you to join us to educate the House members to accept the Senate bill and either amend the House bill which was passed by the Budget Committee of the House on November 3, 2005 or when it gets to the conference committee, they consent to the Senate bill.
• Here is why you will have to do it:
• If S. 1932 is enacted into law, the following jobs will remain in the U.S., albeit by the foreign workers, contributing to the nation's employment and economy in that these foreign workers will generate businesses, revenues, and competitive edge over the foreign businesses by participating in the consumer market and investment market. They will also contribute to the growth of employment and your membership.
  • If the unused H-1B numbers of 300,000 are not recaptured and used, the U.S. businesses will have to outsource 300,000 jobs to foreign countries.
  • If 90,000 unused Employment Based immigrant visa quota numbers are not recaptured and used, these jobs will also be outsourced to foreign countries.
• Distinguished union leaders, the jobs taken by foreign workers either in the U.S. or foreign countries depend on the market forces in the global economy and free trade. For the international competitions, U.S. businesses will have to rely on some foreign workers, particularly high tech professionals, no matter where they perform the jobs.
• However, if the job had to be done overseas by the outsourced foreign workers in a territory of a foreign country, they will not contribute to the American economy other than supply of labor forces, and these outsourced jobs will not create businesses and jobs in the related industries as they will not spend money to buy the goods and services in this country. The foreign workers who are hired and work in the country will generate and boost the country's domestic businesses and jobs as they spend their income in this country. Granted that the U.S. businesses will need their services and allegedly they will take away American jobs, the result will remain same: No matter what, whether in the form of oursourcing or hiring foreign workers within the country, probably the same number of jobs may be allegedly taken away by the global market forces. The huge difference between the two is that outsourcing of jobs will not help to create jobs and business within the country by the forced of consumption but the foreign workers in the U.S. will. Come to think of the affect of McDonald hamburger drive-in orders taken by foreign workers in a foreign country and orders taken by a foreign worker in town. Come to think of the ongoing Northwest Airlines Mechanics strikes.
• A large number of high tech workers have already moved or are currently moving to our competitors in the Europe, Canada, Australia. Our business clients are more and more bringing the jobs to foreign companies in Asia and South America. No one can stop the rule of global economy and the business reality.
• Dear union leaders, the bill is not asking to increase annual quota or cap. These are the numbers which the law has already provided in the existing statures, but wasted because of the government failure to process petitions and applications timely for a number of reasons in the past. We are talking about the "recapture"of the numbers which the laws and regulations mandated the U.S. government to use but the government failed. Because of the fault of the government, the Congressionally mandated quota and cap have not been issued and the U.S. businesses are going outside of the country to look for labor foces in the foreign countries. You will agree that it is not the best interest for our nation and our economy. S. 1932 will not take away American jobs in that the law already provided these numbers and the law was in the lawbook. Please contact your Congressional representatives to tell them that S. 1932 is not to take away jobs from the American labor market but to protect the American labor market by precluding outsourcing of our jobs to foreign countries, particularly our competitors! Thank you.

11/06/2005: S. 1932 and Spouse and Children of EB Beneficiary

• S. 1932 provides that the immigrant visa for the accompaning or following-to-join deriavative beneficiary spouse and children of EB direct beneficiary should not be counted in EB annual cap. Some people question that since the system must draw the visa numbers from somewhere for the spouses and children, where the visa number will be drawn. This question is derived from misunderstanding of the immigration quota system. Under the current immigration system, all the employment-based immigrant petitions fall under the preference categories and in that regard are subject to the quota system. However, when it comes to the family-based immigration systems, the immediate relatives (spouses and children, and parents) of a U.S. citizen are not subject to the quota system and the U.S. government can issue green cards for these beneficiaries without any limitation in numbers. A similar concept will apply to the spouses and children of EB applicant under S. 1932, but the difference is that in the case of the spouse or children of EB direct beneficiary, unless the direct beneficiary's I-140 petition is eligible, their spouses and children will not be able to submit I-485 applications. Besides, unless the direct EB beneficiary's I-485 is first or simultaneously approved, the U.S. government will not be able to approve their I-485 applications. Accordingly, they remain "derivative" beneficiaries whose fate will depend on the direct beneficiary's eligibility and approval of the green card. The spouses and children thus cannot obtain the green card approval as separately from the direct beneficiary's immigration proceeding. In the following-to-join context, their applications may be processed after the direct beneficiary's I-485 is approved, but again the direct beneficiary's I-485 approval is basis for the family members' application and approval. In this regard, they will be indirectly subjected to the preference visa quota system in that unless the direct beneficiary's I-485 is approved after he/she gets his/her visa number current in the Visa Bulletin, their (spouses and children) I-485 applications will not be approved either. It is just that their applications would not take out visa numbers from the specific preference category quota and nothing more. This issue is discussed in Q&A 98, but we are reposting it in view of the widespread confusion in the immigrant community.

11/06/2005: S. 1932 and Consular Immigrant Visa Proceeding vs. I-485 Application Proceeding

• People must understand that the provision in the S. 1932 that will permit certain people to apply for adjustment of status (I-485) even during the period of visa retrogression will not apply to those who go through the consular immigrant proceeding. This means that those who have been waiting for the visa number outside of the U.S. to start the consular immigrant visa proceedings will not be able to get any help from this legislation. They will remain "subject" to the visa retrogression and until the visa number becomes available, they will not be able to apply for the immigrant visa for years from now. Those, who had already started the consular immigrant visa proceedings to take advantage of speedy processing in some consulates like Montreal, Canada or whatever and then remain stuck with the visa number retrogression, may be able to file I-485 application regardless of the visa retrogression, if they will be physically present in the U.S. at the time when this bill is enacted into law and the USCIS starts implementing the law.
• Once this bill is enacted into law, there will be a huge difference between the consular immigrant visa processsing and the USCIS I-485 adjustment processing. Under the visa retrogression environment, it will make no sense that one considers a consular immigrant visa proceeding once this bill is enacted into law. This may sound unfair to those who will have to go through the consular proceeding as they are present outside of the U.S., but the intent of this legislation is to give a relief to those who will have to face a tremendous hardship after spending years of endurance and hard work and have been stricken by the lightening ball of visa retrogression. This bill amends Section 245 of the immigration statute which applies only to the I-485 application proceedings for those who are physically present in the United States.

11/05/2005: Mr. President, Distinguished Members of Congress, and Mr. Secretary Chertoff

• Did you know that almost half of the graduate students currently enrolled in the physical sciences and engineering at the United States universities come from other nations? I mean "half!!" With all due respect, please allow me to tell you what this statistics mean to this country. If we fail to retain these scientists and engineers, they will take these technologies to foreign countries, particularly our competitors. Our competitors are sending all type of messages and winks to attract these scientists and engineers, not because they look cute or handsome or beautiful, but because they want to steal our technologies and knowledges through these scientists and engineers. The damage to this country in the long haul will be devastating. Without any doubt, you all love the United States of America as I do.
• Mr. Secretary Chertoff, Homeland Security, please think about why your predecessor, Mr. Tom Ridge said in April 14, 2003 that "as we secure America from terrorists, we do not want to risk losing the next Enrico Fermi or Albert Einstein…We would be a far poorer nation in many, many ways." He served this country at a time when the terrorism was more pressing issue for this nation.
• I urge you, Mr. President and Mr. Secretary, to remind the members of the Congress of the importance of S. 1932 which the Senate passed on November 3, 2005 to keep these critical human resources to this country and protect our technologies. I urge you to contact members of the Congress to support and consent to this bill.
• I also want to take this opportunity to reiterate my previous statement that if this bill is not passed, the businesses will be forced to take these jobs to foreign countries in the name of outsourcing with the econimically damaging consequences. As you are aware, the House is scheduled to pick up this bill in the very near future and your urgent action will be critically important for the future of our country.

11/05/2005: Advisory for PERM I-140 Filers

• AILA has reported that at least one Service Center, Nebraska Service Center, advised that when people file I-140 petition with the "certain" approved PERM applications, unless the DOL PERM approval letters are also filed with the certified ETA 9089, proper priority date may not be recognized. Here "certain" means the certified ETA 9089 with color printed statement in Item O. It is thus prudent and advisable that it may be a good practice to file all the I-140 petitions with the certified ETA 9089 enclosing the DOL cover letter that comes with the certified ETA 9089 to assure a proper assignment of the priority date. Important, Important!

11/04/2005: I-485 Filing During Visa Retrogression Under S.1932 - Who Is Covered?

• One of the huge benefits which the just passed Senate Reconciliation bill, S. 2932, will offer to the immigrants is to allow filing of I-485 application for certain EB petition beneficiaries and their family members, even during the period of visa retrogression, upon payment of $500 fees. It is thus important that people understand who are covered by this provision.
• The following I-140 petition beneficiaries will be able to file I-485 applications regardless of the visa number availability:
  • Those whose employer filed I-140 petition for him or her, but who could not file I-485 applications because of the visa number retrogression. This group includes two sub-groups: Group A: Those whose I-140 petition has already been approved at any time. Group B: Those whose I-140 petition has been filed and pending at the tme of enactment of this legislation. It appears that those whose I-140 petition is not pending at the time of enactment of this legislation, one may still be able to file concurrent I-140 and I-485 application during the period of visa retrogression inasmuch as the USCIS revises the current concurrent filing regulation. Otherwise, these group of people have to wait until their I-140 petition is approved before they can file I-485 applications.
  • Those who are eligible for I-485 applications under this new legislation will be able to obtain EAD and Advance Parole pending their I-485 applications. Of course, their I-485 application will not be approved until the visa number becomes available.
  • EB classifications which are covered by this legislation are as follows:
    • EB-1A (Extraordinary Worker)
    • EB-1B (Outstanding Researcher)
    • EB-1C (Multinational Corporate Executives and Managers
    • EB-2 (Advanced Degree or Exceptional Ability Workers including NIW)
    • EB-3 (Professional or Skilled Worker)
    • EB-3EW (Unskilled Worker)
    • EB-3EX (Schedule A Worker)
  • EB-4 (I-360 Religious Workers) and EB-5 (Investor Immigrant) workers are not covered.
  • The accompanying or following to join spouses and children are also covered.
• Once they file I-485 applications, they will also receive the AC-21 portability benefits and will be able to change employment after 180 days of I-485 filing.
• Because of the foregoing benefits, even if the Immigration Reform legislation fails to increase the EB quota numbers substantially large enough to cover the current visa number waiters and forth-coming I-485 filers, they will be able to at least lead a normal life using EAD and Advance parole.
• For the foregoing reasons, the immigrant community should work hard in collaboration with their employers to get the Reconciliation bill enacted into law!!!!
• The full text of this part of the legislative bill is as follows:
  • `(2) If a supplemental petition fee is paid for any petition under subparagraph (E) or (F) of section 204(a)(1), an application under paragraph (1) of this subsection on behalf of an alien beneficiary of such petition (including a spouse or child who is accompanying or following to join the principal beneficiary) may be filed without regard to the limitation set forth in paragraph (1)(C). An application for adjustment of status filed under this paragraph may not be approved until such time as an immigrant visa becomes available.'.
  • (2) PENDING APPLICATIONS- An alien on whose behalf a petition was pending under subparagraph (E) or (F) of section 204(a)(1) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1154(a)(1)), on the date of enactment of this Act may, upon the payment of the supplemental petition fee set forth in such section, apply for adjustment of status under this subsection without regard to the limitation set forth in section 245(a)(1)(C) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1255(a)(1)(C)), as amended by paragraph (1).
    

11/04/2005: Budget Reconciliation Bill: What Is It and How Does It Work?

• As everyone knows by now, the immigration packet of the Senate S.1932 was a part of the Budget Reconciliation Bill. The Senate passed the Reconciliation Bill yesterday but the Reconciliation Bill on the part of the House just passed the Budget Committee in the House yesterday and is scheduled to be presented to the House floor next week. At this time, the two reconciliation bills have many differences and they will have to go through the conference committee process for resolution of the differences. One of the areas of difference is the immigration bill which the House bill did not cover. The House bill covers in Section 5101 charge of fees on L-1 visa application and no provisions on H-1B or immigration visa recapture or other povisions which the Senate passed yesterday. For the House bill, please click here. Accordingly, there is some risk that the immigration bill may face a crisis in the conference process. That is why the business, academic community, high tech community, and immigrant community should continue their efforts to educate and pursuade the members of the House of Representatives in their jurisdictions so that the House consents to the Senate immigration bill.
• People may want to know how the reconciliation bill works in order to participate in the process. Please click here to learn about the reconciliation bill.

11/04/2005: Passage of S. 1932 Means a Lot to Higher Learning & Research Institutions and High Tech Industry

• Report indicates that the current broken employment based immigration system, unless it is mended quickly, will create a serious irreparable damage to the future of this nation because of the failure to recruit the brightest and to retain the recruited brightest in the country. The higher learning industry, research industry, and high tech industry, have decried and deplored inaction by the country's political leaders to prevent such long-lasting irreparable damage.
• The passage of S.1932 is indeed a timely action by the political leaders to mend such disastrous long-term and long-lasting irreparable damage before too late. The meaning of this bill should be looked at, among others, the following three perspectives as related to the higher learning, research industry and high tech industry:
  • Issue of "recruitment" of the brightest in the growing international competition: The political leaders do not have to waste their time to do research on this issue. There is an abundance of reports and stastistics that have been released by the nation's leading institutions as well as the testimonies before the subcommittees, committees of the Congress. These industries have been experiencing a serious challenge to attract more "Einsteins" and "Bernsteins," because of the broken American immigrantion system.
  • Issue of "retaining" the brightest foreign workers under the environment of serious international competition: This country has a pool of the brightest foreign workers who have been contributing to the nation by enriching the social, cultural, scientific, and economic foundation on which this nation stands and by keeping the competitive edge and leadership in the international competition in the global economy and world. Recent exodus of these brightest foreign workers has raised a concern not only from the perspectives of the stakeholder industries but also from the perspectives of historians. The nation's leaders can not dwell on short-sighted policies and visions in leading the strongest country in the world. In the current environment of terrorism and homeland security, the leaders can lose sight of their mission which is given by the Constitution of the nation and the rich history of this country, unless they keep looking back the implication of their actions.
  • Issue of "impact" of the current broken immigration system on outsourcing of American jobs: During the past one month, this web site has repeatedly brought up this issue and we do not have to reinterate the importance of mending the employment-based immigration system.
• We realize that this important immigration packet is presented to the Congress as part of the Omnibus Reconciliation bill which contains numerous volitile political issues other than immigration issues. We hope that the political leaders in the House and the Senate, and for that matter, the President quickly work out concensus for other politically vulnerable issues quickly and enact this bill into a law as quickly as possible. The impact of other politically vulnerable issues was evident from the record of votes of the Senators who passed the immigration bill in the Judiciary Committee in absolute majority but who passed the entire packet of S. 1932 in the dangerously slim margin. A number of the members of the Senate Judiciary Committee voted in favor of the immigration packet in the Judiciary Committee but voted "nays" to S.1932 which contained the immigration bill in the full Senate because of the other politically vulnerable items in the bill. We urge the Congress and the President to work out the differences without too much pains and swiftly pass this bill into law within the next two weeks.

11/03/2005: Approaching Travel Season and USCIS Advisory for I-485 Waiters

• During the holiday season, it is expected that a lot of immigrants may travel outside of the U.S. The USCIS has issued advisory to the I-485 waiters not to leave home for international travel without Advance Parole. Please keep the following rules in mind when travel:
  • If you have a valid H-1B, H-4, L-1, or L-2, you may travel on the nonimmigrant visa and you do not have to travel on Advance Parole. When you travel on nonimmigrant status, please make it sure when you return that: (1) Your passport is valid; (2) You have a valid H or L visa in the passport. If you do not have one of these two, you will not be able to reenter the country.
  • Never reenter the country using any nonimmigrant visas other than a valid H or L. Entry on other nonimmigrant visa status will make your pending I-485 application abandoned and the I-485 application will be denied.
  • When you travel on Advance Parole, don't leave home without the hard copies of the "approved" Advance Parole. Application is not enough. Sometimes, Advance Parole is not a guaranty to return to the U.S. if it turns out, without your knowledge, that you were subject to 3-year or 10-year bar. In that case, even if you have in your possession advance parole documents, you should not leave the country.
  • Canada, Mexico, and adjacent islands are foreign coutries. If you overstep the boundary without a valid H/L visa status or without Advance Parole, your pending I-485 application will be considered abandoned and denied later. Again never reenter on a travel document waiver or other nonimmigrant status. Your I-485 will be denied later.

11/03/2005: Senate Passed S. 1932 Reconciliation Bill including Immigration Packet which Senate Judiciary Had Passed

• At. 05:51 p.m. (est), the full Senate passed S. 1932 after defeating Byrd Amendment. On the House side, the House Budget Committee just passed the House version of the appropriation bill which is scheduled to the full House action next week. The difference between the House bill and the Senate bill will be resolved thereafter at the conference committee. Please stay tuned!

11/03/2005: Byrd Amendment Just Rejected 03:02 EST

• We thank the Senators who have agreed to importance of Section 8001 of S. 1932, and rejected the Byrd Amendment.
• However, this is just the second hurdle we have overcome. Another monstrous hurdle is still ahead of us - Conference committee with the House. Now is the time to call the leaders and other members of the House of Representatives to let them understand how important this Senate bill is! Don't roll down your sleeves yet.
• Look at the list of Senators who voted for Byrd and who voted against Byrd. Vote results.
• In Minnesota, Senator Norm Coleman rejected the amendment and retiring Mark Dayton agreed with Byrd. Unreal! Good Bye, Mr. Dayton!

11/03/2005: Senate in Midst of Roll Calls for Various Amendments 3:00 EST

• After the past few days dabates on the floor, the Senate is finally taking roll calls for various amendments presented on the floor. Sen. Byrd Amendment has yet to take roll calls. So far they have acted on twelve amendments this afternoon. Please stay tuned to this Breaking News site for the breath-taking news.

11/03/2005: Senator Byrd and Distinguished Members of the U.S. Senate

• We are forced to repost our October 19 message to help the Senators, particularly Senator Byrd the real issue involved in the immigration proposals which are part of the Reconciliation bill, S. 1932. We are asking you once again whether you want U.S. businesses take these number of jobs to foreign countries. If you do not pass Title VIII, Section 8001 of this bill, you are sending out the message that the Senate wants these jobs taken out to foreign countries.
• If you pass this bill, the following jobs will remain in the U.S., albeit by the foreign workers, but these jobs which are kept in the country will generate businesses, revenues, and competite edge ove the foreign businesses.
  • If the unused H-1B numbers of 300,000 are not recaptured and used, the U.S. businesses will have to outsource 300,000 jobs to foreign countries.
  • If 90,000 unused Employment Based immigrant visa quota numbers are not recaptured and used, these jobs will also be outsourced to foreign countries.
• Distinguished Senators, the