Rep. Jason Chaffetz bill would lift country-by-country caps on employment-based visas

[Pokymon]

Countries such as India and China should have increased numbers of visas issued for high-tech workers seeking vacant jobs within companies starved for those types of workers, according to a new bill introduced Thursday by Rep. Jason Chaffetz, R-Utah.

The bill, HR3012, does not change the overall cap on such visas, however.

That cap on employment-based visas is set at 140,000 by the State Department and the number of those visas can’t exceed 7 percent of that total for each nation.

Under the bill’s provisions, the employment-based visas would be issued on a first-come, first-serve basis.

Chaffetz said it doesn’t make sense to have countries like China and India bumping up against that ceiling while other countries like Zambia and Finland don’t approach their annual total.

[This message was edited by Admin on September 23, 2011 at 06:53 AM.]

[Belle]

"Countries such as India and China should have increased numbers of visas issued for high-tech workers seeking vacant jobs within companies starved for those types of workers, according to a new bill introduced Thursday by Rep. Jason Chaffetz, R-Utah."

Yet, the bill does not increase the number of workers available to so called "starved" companies, it just substitutes one country for another. And makes it look like India and China are the only countries where high tech workers come from. Hmm... makes you wonder, does not it?

I am not a fan of per-country limits, but they are not the reason for retrogression. The 140K limit is the culpit. This bill is not helping to solve the problem, and it is a typical Republican "divide and conquer" approach. Legal vs illegal, EB vs FB, India and China vs ROW, and so on. Make them fight againt each other, so they don't fight for common interests, like actually increasing or removing the total quota. If you want to waste your time on this one, go ahead.

[dm_neo]

Originally posted by Belle:

"Countries such as India and China should have increased numbers of visas issued for high-tech workers seeking vacant jobs within companies starved for those types of workers, according to a new bill introduced Thursday by Rep. Jason Chaffetz, R-Utah."

Yet, the bill does not increase the number of workers available to so called "starved" companies, it just substitutes one country for another. And makes it look like India and China are the only countries where high tech workers come from. Hmm... makes you wonder, does not it?

I am not a fan of per-country limits, but they are not the reason for retrogression. The 140K limit is the culpit. This bill is not helping to solve the problem, and it is a typical Republican "divide and conquer" approach. Legal vs illegal, EB vs FB, India and China vs ROW, and so on. Make them fight againt each other, so they don't fight for common interests, like actually increasing or removing the total quota. If you want to waste your time on this one, go ahead.

Agreed.

[GlenLIVEit]

I do not understand the logic of your statement that 104K is the culprit; maybe I am missing something here.

Isn't this the limit of H1B (and other work visas) visas issued in a year (since it is a NON-IMMIGRANT/EMPLOYMENT visa)? If yes, then this should have no relevance to the number of IMMIGRANT visas available per country. In that case, it does not drive the fact that how many GCs are given out in a year.

Please educate me if I am thinking wrong.

[dm_neo]

If passed, this bill will surely help EB2. But I believe that is already happening though at the end of fiscal year.

I'm not at all in favor of increasing the annual 140k limit, as people already abuse the EB green card process in the same way they do with H1B.

[Joe.F]

Bills are a dime a dozen. They don't mean much. And this bill probably hasn't much chance of becoming law.

[rs_1973]

@GlenLIVEit:

Per-country quota/limits exist only for immigrant visas (GCs) not H-1B - and that is what the bill supposedly aims to eliminate (??).

The 140K story: Suppose you have 100 candies and need to distribute this one candy a child in a large elementary school. NO matter how you decide to pick the kids (black/white/brown, pre-school/kinder/grade, girls/boys) you can only satisfy 100 kids. On the other hand, if you had more candies, say 200, then you have obviously increased the number of happy kids.

That is the bottleneck, the per-year 140K limit, not how you decide to distribute these amongst the various nations.

[Belle]

GlenLIVEit, no. For a simple reason that one does not have to have an H1 visa to get into EB category. There is of course a relationship between being H1 and later going into EB category, however, there are other categories with similar "natural paths", like L, F, or O. They are smaller, but their share is growing.

Now, if you think that 140K is not the problem but the H1 quota is, is your suggestion to cut H1 quota? I am sure this suggestion will find a lot of supporters among Republicans and even some Democrats.

My logic, however, is very simple - if you stop limiting by country, you are just reshuffling people in the same line, some move forward, but exactly the same number fall back. EB2 India/China will probably become current or near current - EB2 ROW may retrogress by a few months. EB3 India will move forward by a few months, and EB3 ROW will move back by a few months (they will have the same dates now). The total number of people in line, however, will be exactly the same.

To shorten the line, you need to add total numbers.

[Belle]

"I'm not at all in favor of increasing the annual 140k limit, as people already abuse the EB green card process in the same way they do with H1B."

They abuse it because it is so freaking difficult to get through honestly - because the numbers are so retrogressed, and those are so retrogressed becuase of the 140K limit. This is probably the worst self-defeating position out there, akin to a slave asking to be beaten more because being beaten causes him bad thoughts.

[Joe.F]

Originally posted by Belle:

"I'm not at all in favor of increasing the annual 140k limit, as people already abuse the EB green card process in the same way they do with H1B."

They abuse it because it is so freaking difficult to get through honestly

That is NOT an excuse.

And it has become "freaking difficult" because of the abuse.

The abusers are the real culprits.

[nipukumar]

I would like to see family members are not counted for the EB immigrant visas. That would also greatly enhanced/simplify the EB immigrant visa situation. As of now, all family members along with the primary candidates are counted for the 140K total EB immigrant visas. Assuming on average, One primary candidate adds one dependent, at present we are only seeing half of the 140K coming to primary candidates.

[Belle]

No Joe, if it was easier to get green cards, the abuse would have been down, and in particular, it would have been down if people did not have to wait for their green cards for 10 years. I am not excusing the abusers, I am simply pointing out a cause and effect relationship - the more restrictive the system, the higher the abuse, thus the solution is to relax the rules, and not to tighten them. For example, where do you see H1 abuse go if H1 was fully portable and renewable by the employee (much like EAD) after one year in the US? Making things overregulated and more difficult is how restrictionist kill immigration - let's introduce entry bars, and there will be more illegal immgrants, and if there is more illegal immgrants, they can start demanding more and more repressive immgration measures for everyone.

Basically, by suggesting not to increase the quota because of the abuse you are voting for more abuse, not less.

[Joe.F]

Originally posted by nipukumar:

I would like to see family members are not counted for the EB immigrant visas.

Hmm, care to provide a link for that?

As far as I know, family members are not counted for the EB quota.

From one law firm's website (sorry, can't post the link here):

"Spouses and children under the age of 21 are generally entitled to receive their Green Card (U.S. Permanent Resident Visa) along with the primary applicant. The family members are not counted against the visa preference cap within each category; only the primary applicant is count for the quota limit."

Also, see http://murthyforum.atinfopop.com/4/OpenTopic?a=tpc&s=1024039761&f=4954030822&m=6031069371

"Family members (spouse, children) are not considered under the quota. Only the primary (employee) comes under the count and the whole family is counted as only 1."

There doesn't seem to be anything in the law (that I could find) that says that family members are counted towards the EB quotas.

[simpleguy81]

F2A also should be improved.. It doesn't make sense for someone's spouse etc to wait many years to come to the US.. With this, at some point, people are forced to choose between career (related to EB) and marriage prospects..

[karanmokati]

Originally posted by JoeF:

Originally posted by nipukumar:

I would like to see family members are not counted for the EB immigrant visas.

Hmm, care to provide a link for that?

As far as I know, family members are not counted for the EB quota.

From one law firm's website (sorry, can't post the link here):

"Spouses and children under the age of 21 are generally entitled to receive their Green Card (U.S. Permanent Resident Visa) along with the primary applicant. The family members are not counted against the visa preference cap within each category; only the primary applicant is count for the quota limit."

Also, see http://murthyforum.atinfopop.com/4/OpenTopic?a=tpc&s=1024039761&f=4954030822&m=6031069371

"Family members (spouse, children) are not considered under the quota. Only the primary (employee) comes under the count and the whole family is counted as only 1."

There doesn't seem to be anything in the law (that I could find) that says that family members are counted towards the EB quotas.

I am sure that family members are counted against the EB quota, one of the biggest reason why there is quite a bit of retrogression. I cannot provide the link either but if you google, the answer will become quite evident.

[This message was edited by Admin on September 24, 2011 at 12:07 PM.]

[Shurap1]

Originally posted by JoeF:

Originally posted by nipukumar:

I would like to see family members are not counted for the EB immigrant visas.

Hmm, care to provide a link for that?

As far as I know, family members are not counted for the EB quota.

From one law firm's website (sorry, can't post the link here):

"Spouses and children under the age of 21 are generally entitled to receive their Green Card (U.S. Permanent Resident Visa) along with the primary applicant. The family members are not counted against the visa preference cap within each category; only the primary applicant is count for the quota limit."

Also, see http://murthyforum.atinfopop.com/4/OpenTopic?a=tpc&s=1024039761&f=4954030822&m=6031069371

"Family members (spouse, children) are not considered under the quota. Only the primary (employee) comes under the count and the whole family is counted as only 1."

There doesn't seem to be anything in the law (that I could find) that says that family members are counted towards the EB quotas.

JoeF I think you are wrong. If you see this bill is being repetitively being introduced which actually will count 1 visa per family.

[Joe.F]

Originally posted by karanmokati:

I am sure that family members are counted against the EB quota

Unless you can provide a law text or other evidence for it, you are simply wrong.

What you "think" you know is irrelevant.

Please provide evidence for your claims.

[Joe.F]

Originally posted by simpleguy81:

F2A also should be improved.. It doesn't make sense for someone's spouse etc to wait many years to come to the US.. With this, at some point, people are forced to choose between career (related to EB) and marriage prospects..

There used to be a special visa for spouses of PRs, in the early 2000s. The V visa, if I remember right. That was not extended, though.

[Joe.F]

Originally posted by Belle:

No Joe, if it was easier to get green cards, the abuse would have been down, and in particular, it would have been down if people did not have to wait for their green cards for 10 years. I am not excusing the abusers, I am simply pointing out a cause and effect relationship - the more restrictive the system, the higher the abuse, thus the solution is to relax the rules, and not to tighten them. For example, where do you see H1 abuse go if H1 was fully portable and renewable by the employee (much like EAD) after one year in the US? Making things overregulated and more difficult is how restrictionist kill immigration

Well, since you point to the H1...

There was significant H1 abuse (25%, as per a USCIS study), which resulted in the H1 quota filling immediately in the mid-2000s.

The result was stricter enforcement of the H1 rules, and look where the H1 quota is now.

I grant you that the GC stuff is a bit more complex. To a large extent, the current quota backlogs are a result of the H1 increases during the dot-com years, and not having corresponding GC quota increases.

Of course, the H1 abuse of years past, and more recently, the F1/CPT abuse through fake universities hasn't made it any easier to get relief through Congress.

People need to understand that abuse always comes back to bite them (and others, even if these others did everything by the book.)

[chakrakr]

Hmm, care to provide a link for that?

As far as I know, family members are not counted for the EB quota.

Also, see http://murthyforum.a...22&m=6031069371

From the same link which you cited --- Comment from Attorney 6 "It is not correct that only one visa number is used per family. It is one per person"

[Attorney_6]

Family members are definitely counted against the EB limits. That is why I-485s can not be filed even for spouses/children unless the PD is current for them and why their cases also wait for a visa number in order to get an approval (even if the primary's case was approved earlier.)

There have been proposals to change this...but, that has not happened. It is part of the problem----there are limits of the number of workers in the various categories, but the spouses and non-US born kids of the workers use up the limited numbers, too.