Deprecated: Assigning the return value of new by reference is deprecated in /home/covoare2/public_html/wp-includes/cache.php on line 36

Deprecated: Assigning the return value of new by reference is deprecated in /home/covoare2/public_html/wp-includes/query.php on line 21

Deprecated: Assigning the return value of new by reference is deprecated in /home/covoare2/public_html/wp-includes/theme.php on line 506

Warning: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home/covoare2/public_html/wp-includes/cache.php:36) in /home/covoare2/public_html/wp-includes/wpmu-functions.php on line 67

Warning: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home/covoare2/public_html/wp-includes/cache.php:36) in /home/covoare2/public_html/wp-includes/wpmu-functions.php on line 68

Warning: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home/covoare2/public_html/wp-includes/cache.php:36) in /home/covoare2/public_html/wp-includes/wpmu-functions.php on line 69
Anatolie » Blog Archive » Am venit pe J1. Cum rămân?

Anatolie

integrare fără asimilare

Am venit pe J1. Cum rămân?

Posted by Anatolie Gavriliuc on July 28th, 2008

13.jpgAud întrebarea asta foarte des ultimul timp. Cu părere de rău nu există un răspuns uşor şi simplu.

Sfatul care l-aş da e să vorbeşti cu un jurist/avocat care se specializează în emigrare. Sunt multe metode de a rămâne în SUA şi fiecare din ele are specificul şi condiţiile sale. Numai un avocat cu experienţă poate să dertermine ce soluţie ar lucra pentru cazul tău specific.

O variantă e să apelezi la azil (politic, sau refugiu). Pentru asta trebuie să poţi demonstra că există primejdie (potenţială) pentru viaţa ta (a grupului social/politic/etc din care faci parte). Fără conflicte mari cu Transnistria e greu de făcut vre-un caz puternic, poate numai legat de reducerea libertăţii de exprimare de către comunişti sau demonstraţiile recente anti-gay. Un jurist bun are experienţa necesară să lucreze cu detaliile tale particulare.

E posibil de trecut şi pe alte vize. F1 - viza de student e o variantă “tradiţională” pe care trec moldovenii de pe J1. Cunosc şi cazuri când n-a mers. Depinde de mulţi factori. Iarăşi - un jurist specializat în emigrare ar fi de mare ajutor să nu dai în refuzuri.

Varianta cea mai optimală (din punct de vedere a vizelor) ar fi dacă ai vre-o ofertă de munca calificată şi ai putea căpăta viza de lucru - H1b. Asta fără un jurist nici nu te gândi s-o faci. Însa cheia aici e “oferta de muncă”, fara ea nici juristul nu te ajută.

Desigur că face să participi la loteria anuală de Green Card. E gratis, şi se poate întâmpla ca norocul să-ţi surâdă, ca şi altor cca 300-400 familii din Moldova anual.

Dacă nu ai pereche, căsătoria cu un cetăţean american îţi oferă Green Card instantaneu. E un fel de Green Card “temporar” pe primii doi ani, după care devine permanent. Tentaţia unei căsătorii “de convenienţă” e mare, însă pe lîngă faptul ca e ilegal e şi o ideie destul de scumpă, înjositoare şi riscantă din toate punctele de vedere. Părerea mea e că nu face - preţul moral, financiar şi al potenţialului omis e prea mare.

Mai sunt o mulţime de alte vize de tot felul cu cerinţe foate specifice şi înguste. Repetând a câta oară - numai un jurist bun te va ajuta să găseşti calea optimală. De obicei ei oferă prima consultaţie gratis. Apoi taxa e de la $100 la $250 pe oră. Face să plăteşti cel puţin prima consultaţie, însâ află dacă a rezolvat cazuri similare cu al tău.

Din toate acestea un lucru e cel mai important - Să nu ramâi nici o zi ilegal in SUA!!! O singura zi ilegal o să-ţi taie orice posibilitate să emigrezi pe viitor. Chiar daca vei câştiga loteria Green Card - nu vei putea veni. E MULT mai bine să pleci acuma înapoi acasă dacă nu poţi să-ţi extinzi şederea in SUA şi mai târziu să revii pe altă cale. Sau vei câştiga loteria, sau vei găsi oferte de lucru prin internet (tu deja ştii unde si ce să cauţi, deja ai legături aici). Poate cu vre-un alt program cu vre-o firma americană din MD, sau alte posibilităţi care apar odată ce ai fost pe aici.

Ce vreau să spun e că viaţa nu se termină acuma, nu face să sacrifici totul pentru a rămâne in SUA. Ţi-ai lărgit orizontul şi întorcându-te înapoi acasă vei vedea lucrurile cu alţi ochi şi vei vedea mai bine şi căile de a mai veni încoace. Şi cât încă mai eşti în SUA - fă cât mai multe legături cu oamenii de aici. Niciodată nu strică.

288 Responses to “Am venit pe J1. Cum rămân?”

  1. Liudca Says:

    Anotolie iti mltumesc mult pentru raspuns , dar mai am o intrebare :), cum pot perticipa la loteriea Green Card, care ar fi site-ul…
    Astept

  2. Anatolie Says:

    De obicei loteria e din Octombrie pana in Decembrie. Vezi mai multe detalii in urmatoarele materiale - /category?list=green-card

  3. Vadim Says:

    Ce a spus Anatol este adevarat 100%. Ce as mai putea adauga este asta:
    poti trece pe viza B2 - turist. Asta se da in mod normal pe 6 luni si de obtinut prima data e f usor. Dupa 6 luni poti sa mai ceri inca o data b2 pe inca 6 luni, dar sansele a doua oara sunt mai mici, tb sa convingi ca are sens sa mai stai 6 luni sa “calatoresti” pe aici. Intre timp poti fie sa convingi o companie sa te “sponsorizeze” pentru h1b sau pentru h2b sau sa intri la un colegiu mai ieftin la cursuri de engleza (asta daca nu ai banii pentru un college mai serios). Vb de cursuri de engleza pentru ca pentru asa un program costul unui semestru e in jur de 2-3.5 mii $ pe cand la o universitate obisnuita costul poate incepe de la 6-8 mii pe semestru (si asta la o public university).
    Intorcandu-ma la visa b2 (de turist) ea se poate face si cu ajutorul avocatului sau si cu un para legal mai shmeker. In ambele cazuri experienta anterioara a “expertului” e esentiala.

  4. Eugenia Says:

    Ma alatur cuvintelor postate de Anatolie Gavriliuc si Vadim, si cu toate astea, imi cer scuze pentru-ca in unele momente urmeaza sa-i repet.
    Din viza J-1 iti poti schimba statutul in viza B-2, deasemenea se poate schimba si in F-1, H-2B sau H-1B. Schimbarea statutului in H-2B nu e dificil si nici scump insa din pacate, pe 29 iulie, cota pentru viza H-2B s-a inchis pentru anul acesta. Ca sa treci in H-1B trebuie sa intrunesti o serie de conditii precum 4 ani de studii superioare sau 3 ani experienta pentru fiecare an de studii, o companie care sa aplice pentru tine si care trebuie sa se oblice sa-ti plateasca un salariu destul de mare si alte conditii.In plus, este foarte costisitoare (taxe) si apoi trebuie sa platesti si un avocat fara de care nici nu poti incepe procedura. La toate astea se adauga si faptul ca petitiile pentru H-1B se depun intr-o singura zi din an - 1 Aprilie. Pentru viza de student F-1, trebuie sa incepi a studia aici si nu ai dreptul la munca decit in institutia in care studiezi.
    Prin urmare, cei care nu au depus petitiile pina la 29 iulie 2008 pentru obtinerea vizei H-2B si nici nu pot aplica pentru viza H-1B, cea mai buna solutie ar putea fi viza de turist B-2. Ea se obtine pe termenul maxim de 6 luni, e adevarat ca nu-ti confera dreptul la munca insa costa doar un pic mai mult de jumatate de mie de dolari si din ea poti trece in viza H-2B odata ce se deschide cota pentru Aprilie 2009. Odata ajuns in statutul de non-imigrant, detinator a vizei de munca H-2B, iti poti extinde acest statut pina la 3 ani si apoi…
    Sanse sunt multe de a ramine in SUA legal, trebuie doar sa te informezi corect si sa nu faci acte care ar impedica USCIS sa-ti aprobe petitia.
    Oarecum, pentru alte tipuri de vize nu, insa pentru obtinerea sau extinderea vizei de turist B-2 si a celei de munca H-2B, va pot ajuta. Pentru aceasta scrieti pe adresa de e-mail pupaza111@yahoo.com
    Va pot oferi informatiile de care aveti nevoie in acest sens (nu iau taxe pentru consultati), iar vizele nu sunt scumpe.

  5. baker Says:

    As vrea si eu sa adaug ceva si eu referitor la “casatoria cu un cetatean american”. Din anul acesta Green Cardul nu se elibereaza instantaneu, cum a spus Anatolie. Dureaza aproximativ 5 luni, eu inca nu l-am primit, dar am aplicat o luna in urma (in iulie). Si costa $1010. Plus trebuie sa avem interviul.Una e imbucurator: nu sunt ilegal aici, in rest hotariti Dvoastra!:)):))

  6. Kila Says:

    Zi-mi si mie mai multe denspre casatorie te rog. Care e procedura? Dupa cit timp de la inscrierea oficiala poti aplica pentru Green Card? Ai avut nevoie si de un avocat sau te-ai descurcat si fara? Am vazut o companie care promite Obtinerea Green Cardului prin mariaj timp de 90 de zile si cereau taxa pu USCIS in valoare de 1.365$. Cred ca tu, bazindu-te pe experienta ta poti sa-mi spui cel mai corect. Si inca citeva intrebari te rog! In cit timp obtii dreptul la munca pe calea aceasta si in cit timp poti obtine dreptul la calatorie (sa pleci inafara tarii si sa te reintorci). Acum ca procedura de obtinere a GC (pu tine) e in proces, poti pleca impreuna cu el in MD si sa te reintorci pin obtii GC? Raspunde-mi te rog din cele invatate trecind prin aceasta experienta.
    Merci, anticipat, foarte mult!

  7. tita Says:

    va rog !
    daca as pleca cu viza studenteasca de lucru si m-as casatori cu un roman in SUA ,care are green card ,plecat cu loteria vizelor ,care ar urma sa fie statutul meu ?
    sa presupun ca risc si raman cu el acolo pana primeste cetatenia .Eu voi putea avea statutul celei care s-a casatorit direct cu un cetatean SUA?Adica voi primi green card?

  8. Anatolie Says:

    Pana el nu devine cetatean nu-s cai practice sa-ti schimbi statutul tau, adica tot pe viza care esti vei ramanea, sau daca ea expira vei fi nevoita sa pleci din tara.

    Teoretic exista viza… paremise V1, daca nu gresesc, insa rindul curent de procesare e cca 5-6 ani (cauta pe www.uscis.gov acolo este mai multa informatie), deci mai repede sotul tau va capata cetatenia decat procesarea cazului tau apelat acuma.

  9. tita Says:

    mii de multumiri!!!
    dupa acordarea cetateniei “sotului “eu nu voi primi green card?
    daca as fi fost deja casatorita cu el ?

    Ar avea el inconveniente la primirea cetateniei?
    mai revin !
    multumesc ca sunteti alaturi de minevsi ma indrumati in planul meu

  10. admin Says:

    De ce pui “sotul” in ghilimele? :)

    Nu, el n-o sa aiba incoveniente la primirea cetateniei. Nu, tu n-o sa capeti automat green card.

    Dupa ce el capata cetatenia, el trebuie sa trimita forma I-130 (petition for alien relative), si tot in acelasi pachet tu incluzi forma I-485 (application for permanent residence or adjustment of status), a si inca de la sot o sa trebuiasca Affidavit of Support. Mai multe detalii vezi aici - http://www.uscis.gov/files/article/A1_english_v%202.pdf

    Odata ce expediezi toate acestea, posibil cain vre-o 3 luni vei capata Green Card temporar. Daca viz ta curenta nu-ti permite sa lucrezi (sau va fi pe cale sa expire in perioada ceea) - e o ideie buna sa incluzi in petia voastra si Work Permit applicaiton (nu mai tin minte ce forma e, insa daca o cauti la uscis.gov o vei gasi). Apoi, daca mai vrei sa calatoresti inafara SUA pina vine insasi documentul de Green Card (dureaza vre-o jumate de an posibil) - poti include in pachetul initial si cererea pentru Travel Document (o gasesti si pe asta la uscis.gov)

  11. tita Says:

    MUltumesc !
    am scris “sotul”fiindca nu imi este inca dar cam la acest plan ne gandim .Scolile sunt foarte scumpe in state si intentionez sa stau ilegal pana primeste el cetatenia dar sa ne casatorim inaite de acordarea cetateniei .In aceste conditii vreau sa stiu care sunt riscurile sau pasii de urmat.NU CONCEPE SA PLEC DE LANGA EL ,si prin casatorie obtin automat asigrare de sanatate,ceea ce e f. important ,mai ales daca va urma si o saarcina.

  12. ANAtolie Says:

    Eu sunt pe J1 si sotia pe J1 neam casatoria in USA, la mine J1 expira curind. Ce trebuie sa fac ca sa trec pe J2, Mersi

  13. Sergiu Boscaneanu Says:

    Baieti si Fete

    Cum voi dati seama ca Ofiterii de la Serviciul American de Immigrare chear sunt atit de prosti ca sa nu inteleaga ca voi incercati si in fel si chip ca sa ramineti in SUA ilegal? desigur ca inteleg si la asta ma alaturezi si eu cu ofuterii de la Immigrare.Eu sunt deja in SUA de 10 ani, am facut totul legal venind pe viza de B2 apoi de 2 ori meam extinso apoi pe F-1, si apoi am ajuns in situatia ca F-1 meau retraso automat si meau dat statut temoprar de Resident permanent. Va rog frumos, ce nu ati face, sa faceti legal. casatoriile in SUA intre Moldoveni cu scopul de a ramine NU TREC aici asa cum se trece in Moldova(cunostinte si cumatrizmul). Aici LEGEA este LEGE, si se pedepseste aspru. Imi aduc aminte de ziua de 5 Decembrie cind am avut Inreviul pentru Green Card, in sala de asteptare erau doua moldovence , la care din continutul conversatiei lor am inteles ca au facut o casatorie falsa ca sa ramina in SUA, interviul meu nu a durat mai mult de 10 minute, unde am fost foarte surprins de onestitatea ofiterului de Immigrare care mea spus ca voi trebui sa astept ceva timp ca sa imi ajunga numarul de Green Card ca sa imi fie emis. In asa asteptare sunt oameni care au pus actele din 1986, si dinsii tot mai asteapta. Oricum, cind eram gata sa plec, ale cele doua moldovence au fost arestate drept din sala de asteptare fiindca dinsele au supra stat peste terminul de viza emisa lor. mea fost jale, doar pentru iun minut si nu mai mult. Fiind in SUA, eu nu am platit nici un ban la nici un Avocat de Immigrare, totul am facut de unul singur si totul a fost facut legal, si acum culeg roada muncii mele facindumi viitorul meu. In curind parintii mei, sora si nepoatele imi revin in ospetie, si am descoperit ca este posibil ca sa le fac actele si pentru ei. Asta este in mod lega de fapt.Asa ca daca doriti sa ramineti in SUA, faceto in mod LEGAL, ca daca o faci in mod lega, autoritatile nu te ating. Pe 10 Ianuarie 2009, mam reintors in SUA din Moldova, si la aeroportul din Chisinau, am fost nevoit sa le spun la citi-va moldoveni urmatoarele: De ce nu raminmeti la voi in tara? Noi in SUA nu avem nevoie de Voi. Noi si asa avem 12 millioane de illegali si nu stim ce sa facem cu ei. Dinsii au ramas cu gura cascata la acele auzite. Suna ca sunt rasist? Da sunt, fiindca locurile de munca sunt luate de oameni ca dinsii care se gasesc illegal in tara si este un cataclizm pentru altii. Apoi8 si mintalitatea moldovenelor veniti in SUA este ca acea din Moldova. Voi daca veniti in SUA, debarasitiva de caile de ghindire ca in Moldova, aici in SUA nimenea nu iti este dator sa faca ceva pe gratis, totul este masurat in timp si bani.Daca nu iti schimbi caracterul de conduita si ghindire, tu nu supravetuesti in SUA. Eu, personal mam dezbairisit de totul ce a fost legat de moldova si mintaletatea post Sovietica -Moldoveneasca, si am reusit. Asa-ca baieti si fete, multa sanatate si putere sa treciti prin birocratiea cu multe filtre a Seerviciului de Immigrare al tarii mele care se cheama Statele Unite ale Americii.
    cu respect, Sergiu

  14. Sergiu Boscaneanu Says:

    Asculta si tine minte.
    In forularul I-485 care este pre-pachetul pentru Adjustment of the Status este in instructie clar scri cine nu sunt acceptati pentru a putea lua rezidenta. Adica studentii cu J1 si J2 nu sunt eligibili. Casatoria ta in SUA este valabila, dar nu este o cale ca sa poti obtine Green Cardul. Daca tu ai sa citesti Intructia formularului I-485 mai cu atentie, tu trebuie sa fii casatorit dupa un Cet al SUA nascut in SUA ori Naturalizat. Altfel sansele tale de a lua Green Cardul sune ZERO. Cum Ofiterul de la Immigrare de la Centrul Oficiului din Vermont sa se uite in baza ta de date , o sa refuze automat si o sa emita un ordin de deportare din SUA si o sa trebuieasca ca sa faci ceva drastic ca sa ramii. cunosc o familie de tineri moldovdeni care sau casatorit in SUA, au copil, dar cind au data sa obtina beneficii pentru copil, au fost refuzati din motivul ca nu sunt cet ai SUA, copilul este cet al SUA prin nascare, dar el poate sa obtina beneficii dupa 18 ani, asa ca pina atunci, faceti ce stiti.Dinsii au fost norocosi ca Serviciile Sociale nu au anuntat Immigrarea pe dinsii. Asta este realitatea. Asa ca Anatolie, Citeste forma I-485 cu atentie si calculeaza cu ochi reali care sunt + si- cind vei apela la Immigrare. Bafta tie. Sergiu

  15. Marian Says:

    Am fost ei eu candva pe J1 sponsorizat de stat, asa ca m-am intors acasa am terminat universitatea si tocmai dupa aia am revenit normal. In primul rand sunt doua tipuri (sau chiar si mai multe, dar eu personal stiu de 2) de viza J1: viza care e sponsorizata de o institutie guvernamentala (de exemplu cei ce vin pe ACCELS sau IREX) sau cei care-s sponsorizati de organizatii private (de ex. cei ce vin prin SOROS). Astia care-s sponsorizati privat NU au 2-year home residency requirement, asa ca nu incurcati asta. Deci se poate de trecut direct pe H1-B. Mai este inca o cale prin care astia dupa vize J1 de stat pot continua lucrul in state - sa se angajeze la companii internationale, tip World Bank, IFC, Inter American Developmnet Bank, UN etc. etc.

    In al doilea rand, asa usor se vorbeste pe aici de viza H1-B de parca asta e cum se spune in rusa “raz pliunut’”. Eu am terminat MBA la una din cele mai bune scoli de business international din SUA si am cautat aproape 8 luni de zile de lucru pana am gasit, asa ca nu va faceti idei gresite, acum e foarte greu sa te angajezi in America pe asa viza. Mai ales acum cu toti indienii si chinezii care vin sa se angajeze in firme IT, cota de 65,000 pentru undergrad si 20,000 pentru masterat nu mai e suficienta, iar numarul de aplicanti uneori e de doua-trei ori mai mare… s-a ajuns sa faca loterie si din vizele H1-B… asa ca companiile acum nu prea se rup in rand sa sponsorizeze caci riscul e mult mai mare.

    De asmenea nu stiu de ce se tot zice ca viza turistica se da pe 6 luni?! Prietena mea a venit la mine anul trecut in Octombrie (viza a primito in Septembrie inca) si i-au deschis-o pe 10 ani. 6 luni insa e termenul timp de care ea are dreptul sa se afle pe aceasta viza in SUA. Dupa 6 luni trebuie de parasit tara… si din cate stiu eu, deja dupa 6 luni in afara SUA se poate iarasi de revenit inca pe 6 luni - adica jumate de an in SUA, jumate in afara.

    D-le Boscaneanu, esti rau omule de tot… Sarmanii oameni din Moldova nu stiu cum sa scape de saracia de acolo, iar tu le zici lor asa ceva?!?! Bine ca tu ai fost destept si ai venit aici la timp cand cui nu-i e lene putea veni usor, cand americanii nu erau asa de speriati de atacuri si nu stiu ce…. dar moldovenii ce, nu au dreptul si ei sa vina la o viata mai buna daca vor, chiar si nelegal?! Si daca asa te indignezi ca ei iti fura lucrul se face impresia ca tu dupa 10 ani de trai in America tot te ocupi cu lucru de tip spalator sau constructor/gradinar?!? Adica mexicoshii ca vin cu milioanele pe tine nu te deranjeaza, da ca vreo 10 moldoveni in cruce vin deja e problema mare… Hai nu bate capu si mai taci un pic. In rest, sunt de acord cu ce spui tu despre a face totul legal, desigur ca asta e calea cea mai buna, dar cand omul e desperat el nu prea are prea multe alegeri ;).

  16. ANAtolie Says:

    Eu sunt pe J1 (18 luni)si NU am 2-year home residency requirement, asa ca de ce nu as pute sa aplic pentru statutul de J2 spouse, fiind casatorit aici in USA cu cetaten a Republicii Moldova care la rindul ei e pe J1(18). Casatoria nu e fictiva. As putea sa aplic singur sau prin un jurist.

  17. Irina Says:

    Salut,
    As vrea sa va contrazic!
    Ma numesc Irina si lucrez la o companie Work and Travel si stiu foarte bine care vor fi consecintele celor care au plecat in SUA cu viza J1 si incearca sa ramana, cum zic ei “legal”.Chiar daca iti deschizi un alt tip de viza (aflandu-te in SUA), indiferent care ar fi tipul, tu incalci termenul de sedere.Pentru SUA vei fi legal, dar nu si pentru ambasada SUA in Moldova.Odata intors in Moldova, iti va fi foarte dificil , atat tie cat si rudelor tale,sa te mai introci vreodata in SUA.Anul acesta ambasada are acces la o baza de date, de invidiat (depisteaza daca ai rude de gr 1, 2, 3 aflate ilegal in SUA), chiar si amenzile neplatite, asa ca inainte de a te decide sa ramai, gandeste-te bine!

  18. MDA Says:

    Salut, Irina,

    Eu am venit cu J-1 in SUA, si nu am ramas aici cum zici tu “legal”, ci legal. Si nu am incalcat nici un termen de sedere. Nu mai scrie si tu multe.

    Dar sunt de acord cu tine in privinta sederii ilegale aici. Nu face, sunt riscuri mari nu numai pt cel care sta ilegal, ci si pt toti membrii familiei.

  19. Doina Says:

    Irina scuza de expresie ce spui tu sounds like bullshit. Inteleg ca ati primit unele instuctiuni la firma si nu vezi nimic out of box.

  20. Daniel Says:

    Care sunt sansele mele daca plec cu Work and Travel sa raman legal in America si ce trebuie sa fac? Va multumesc mult si va rog sa-mi raspundeti!

  21. Irina Says:

    Ok, Doina, daca consideri ca e bullshit, incearca-ti norocul!!
    Nu o spun fiindca “am primit unele instructiuni”……avem cazuri reale in sezonul Work and Travel 2009, cand studentul a intarziat cu 2-3 zile si a luat refuz la ambasada.Si credeti-ma ca au intarziat tocmai din lipsa de informare.Acesta e si motivul pentru care am comentat mai sus si nicidecum ca sa va conving sa va intoarceti.
    Si, in fine…e alegerea voastra!

  22. doina Says:

    Irina,

    n-am avut in vedere sa ramina ilegal, sau sa intarzie cu intoarecerea, am sustinu doar ca exista posibilitati sa vii pe J1 si sa ramii in state legal. Exemplu te casatoresti, lucrezi pentru o organizatie interntational de exemplu UN in New York, iti expira perioada obligatiune J1 (1 sau 2 ani), serviciu la UN se consideradar infara tarii dar te afli in state, asa a procedat o cunostinta de a mea. N-am indemnat pe nimeni la sedere ilegala, am sustinut doar ca e posibil sa vii pe J1 si sa ramii legal in state, doar atit.

  23. Ioana Says:

    Buna tuturor!

    Multa informatie folositoare, n-ai ce zice. Ma bucura faptul ca lumea se ajuta unul pe altul asa cum poate. Am venit in SUA acum 6 luni, programul intership, si ca multa alta lume as vrea a ramin pe o perioada mai lunga. Viza imi expira in 6 luni si am J1. Se zice ca posibilitati sunt multe, dar nici o posibilitate nu este clara. Sa presupunem ca imi schimb statutul de viza in cel de B1, care e institutia care e capabila sa faca asta? Caci dupa cite eu stiu doar ambasada US in Moldova e capabila a faca asta. Mi-ar fi foarte de folos daca cineva care a avut o situatie similara, sa fie mult mai explicit. Multumesc anticipat tuturor celor care se sustin, dar nu vorbesc mizerii celorlati, Sergiu nu uita de unde ai venit, si n-o fa pe desteptul. Esti mindru de realizarile tale? Foarte bine, insa nu descuraja restul lumii, ureazale mai bine succes.

  24. Ala Says:

    Anunt : Daca aveti dorinstsa sa va legalizati in USA pe statut Politic, Religios, Coruptie, Statut de refugiat, Permanent resident card si multe alte cai de a ramine in state. Procesul duriaza de la 3 luni la 7 luni. Prima suma de bani se achita cind semnam contractul si incepem procesul impreuna cu actele care vor fi necesare, veti achita ( INS)-(IMIGRATION)-si alte fee. Restul banilor se achita cind primiti actele la mina. Daca aveti nevoe adresativa :.
    www.emigration-visa.com Tell:1-916-838-8781
    E-mail:ilya_zdragat@yahoo.com

  25. MDA Says:

    Ala,

    “firma” Dumneavoastra utilizeaza email de yahoo?

    :-D

  26. Ala Says:

    Nu e firma mea…
    M-au rugat sa afisez anuntul si uite l-am afisat :)
    Iti pare ceva nu in regula? Eu nu prea sunt informata in acest domeniu…

  27. ilie_zdragat Says:

    salut Anatolie sunt eu ILIE eu ma ocup cu legalizarile de 5 ani deja daca ai dori sa stii mai multe amanunte pai dami telefon si vb .

  28. ilie_zdragat Says:

    salut! Am inteles ca doresti sa ramii aici?

  29. Victoria Says:

    pot sa intreb si eu ceva

  30. Victoria Says:

    eu la fel vreau sa schimb visa din J1 in F1, dar din Moldova cind am venit parintii mei au semnat un contract ca daca nu ma intorc la timp ei trebuie sa plateasca o suma de bani….e corect asa?

  31. MDA Says:

    In contract mi se pare scrie ca daca ramai ilegal in SUA atunci parintii vor plati o anumita suma de bani. Daca ramai legal (schimbi viza) ei nu vor plati nimic.

  32. Victoria Says:

    In contract nu este specificat daca stai legal sau ilegal, acolo scrie ca daca nu te intorci la timp, atunci trebuie sa plateasca ….

  33. Victoria Says:

    am venit prin work and travel aici in Sua, si mi-a mai ramas o luna sa stau aici, eu vreau sa-mi prelungesc viza dar nustiu care metoda e mai buna sa trec in visa F1? sau H1-B? Eu am aici o familie care au bussinesul lor si eu am lucru la ei, dar cum as putea sa fac sa ramin aici legal sa lucrez? Nu vreau sa stau ilegal….mai am o luna si as vrea sa fac ceva ca sa stau legal…va rog frumos ajutati-ma….daca stiti vre-un avocat dati-mi emailul lui….multumesc mult

  34. MDA Says:

    Nu stiu, poate s-a schimbat ceva. Eu cand am venit in 2006 prin J-1, era speificat in contract ca parintii vor trebui sa plateasca $10,000 in cazul in care eu raman ilegal. Dar eu am ramas legal si ei nu au trebuit sa plateasca nimic.

    In privinta avocatului, mai spune si tu in ce stat esti?

    Daca vrei sa ramii prin F1, atunci trebuie sa te interesezi pe la institutiile de invatamant si sa-ti alegi un program ceva unde sa aplici sa inveti.

  35. Victoria Says:

    Eu deja mi-am gasit un colegiu in Washington, dar e prea scump….si ma gindesc poate sa vorbesc cu vre-un avocat sa ma indrume ce sa fac…eu acuma sint in statul Connecticut…

  36. Victoria Says:

    Contractul care s-au iscalit parintii mei scrie ca trebuie sa plateasca 6000$, dar asta e problema ca acolo nu scrie ca daca stai legal sau ilegal…..

  37. Victoria Says:

    Dar tu cum ai facut sa stai legal?

  38. MDA Says:

    Citeste atent contractul, poate scrie undeva ca daca ramai legal parintii nu trebuie sa achite nimic.

    Eu am aplicat pt F1, la o scoala la un program de limba engleza (pt acest program deadline-ul pt studentii straini e mai tarziu si sunt mai putine documente de pregatit). In timp ce eram in programul de engleza mi-am pregatit toate celelalt doc si am aplicat la universitate (m-am transferat de la univ din Moldova).

    Tu daca ai gasit scoala/univ unde sa inveti, poti sa intrebi acolo la oficiul “International Students Services” sau ceva de genul asta (fiecare universitate are oficiu pt studentii straini). Ei o sa-ti dea sfaturi si pot sa te ajute. Cei care lucreaza in oficiul mentionat stiu foarte bine toate procedurile. Contacteaza-i.

  39. Victoria Says:

    Eu am gasit un colegiu in Washington… Lake Washington,Technical college…dar e prea scump pe an sa inveti…..si acuma incerc sa aflu ceva detalii, cum pot sa intru si multe altele…..vreau sa te mai intreb ceva, eu acuma lucrez pe contractul care am venit dar eu vreau sa plec de aici in Washington, eu il anunt pe angajatorul meu….cum crezi nu o sa fie probleme…eu vreau sa plec mai repede sa fac documentele pentru scoala…eu i-am spus angajatorului dar el mi-a zis ca trebuie sa lucrez pina se termina contractull.

  40. Victoria Says:

    As putea sa plec fara sa-i zic….

  41. MDA Says:

    Ca atare contractul e contract, daca seful nu vrea sa te lase sa pleci, nu stiu daca ai putea… Dar tu nu poti sa-ti iei liber cateva zile, sau vre-o saptamana? Timpul liber poti sa-l consacrezi gasirii si pregatirii pt univ. Tu poti sa contactezi universitatea si prin email, sau telefon, ai incercat?

  42. Victoria Says:

    da am incercat si sper sa fac asa….sau o sa gasesc alte metode…multumesc mult….

  43. linlla Says:

    salut,am si eu citeva intrebari la MDA daca desigur poti sa-mi raspunzi.Am venit si eu cu j1 si vreau sa ramin aici legal,am inteles ca o posibilitate ar fi de a ma inscrie la vre-un colegiu,si cel mai simplu ar fi la un program de limba engleza,intrebarea este cu kit timp inainte ar trebui sa apelez la ei ca sa nu intirzii ku pregatirea documentelor si kare sint costurile,eu am incercat sa-i telefonez dar se pare ca nu-s prea darnici la dat informatii,sau se fac a nu intelege.Multumesc anticipat.

    cred ca acum o multime de studenti au aceiasi intrebare…cind anume sa apeleze ca sa nu fie prea tirziu…mersi inca o data

  44. MDA Says:

    Multi studenti au intrebarea asta (care e “deadline”-ul pt a aplica pt programul ESL) dar acesta intrebarea nu are un raspuns unic. Majoritatea universitatilor in SUA sunt private si conditiile lor, inceputul/sfarsitul simestrelor, etc sunt diferite. Ca sa stiti cand anume e ultima zi pt a aplica trebuie sa contactati universitatea respectiva ca sa aflati.

    Dar acum, la sfarsit de iulie, e cazul sa va pregatiti documentele deja si sa aplicati pt ESL.

    In privinta costurilor - acelasi lucru, depinde de institutia de invatamant. Dar numai taxa pt un simestru de obicei e in jurul a $4000 (pt ESL program). Plus vreo $550 anual pt asigurare medicala (este obligatorie). In afara de asta, unul din documentele pt admitere va fi o scrisoare de la banca sau orice alt document care arata ca aveti destule resurse/fonduri pt a studia. In acest document univ. va include diferite costuri (de ex. “living costs”, “insurance” etc). De la universitate va va spune suma minima pe care ar trebui sa o aveti in acest documnent.

    Referitor la “am incercat sa-i telefonez dar se pare ca nu-s prea darnici la dat informatii” nu prea am auzit la institutiile de invatamant de aici. Aici sunt chiar foarte darnici cu asa informatii pt ca asa fac ei bani. Sunt bucurosi sa-ti explice totul numai sa devii studentul lor ca sa platesti acolo. Nu stiu, poate nu ai sunat la departamentul corect.

    Plus, nu trebuie sa te interesezi numai de o universitate. Vezi ce ofera si alte institutii. Dupa asta poti sa alegi sa studiezi acolo unde iti este mai convenabil .

  45. Aliona Says:

    Salut,daca dispuneti de mai multa informatie…va rog sami spuneti in cazul cind vreau sa ramin in SUA,de ce acte am nevoie ca sa pot aplica la azil politic?la moment am viza J1,stiu ca in legatura cu protestele care au avut loc la noi in tara multi studenti au benificiat pe loc de azil,stiu ca trebuie de facut rost de acte care ar confirma ca ai fost traumat fizic si moral si ca nu avem un viitor superb in tara noastra….daca dispuneti de informatii va rog sa-mi raspundeti,merci.

  46. Aleona Says:

    Aici intradevar sunt oameni care se ajuta mult unii pe altii, altora insa (Sergiu), rusine!Eu am venit anul trecut cu J-1 si datorita forumului acesta am putut ramine legal in tara. Daca o sa va uitati mai sus o sa gasiti postarea Eugeniei, d-ei mi-a facut documentele pentru B-2 anul trecut, apoi mi-a extins visa ca sa pot trece in H-2B vara aceasta. Si am primit aprobare la toate petitiile facute de d-ei. Acum muncesc si sunt multumit ca sunt legal in tara. Succese si voua!

  47. Alex Says:

    Mah fratilor de peste Prut…. eu am venit cu J1 in America…. si planuiesc sa raman ilegal…ma mira faptul ca odata ajunsi aici parca ati uitat de unde veniti….. (auzi la Sergiu…”tara lui america”)…. mi-am gasit partener de afaceri si ne-am facut firma…. nu vreau sa stau toata viata in tara lui sergiu pentru ca nu se merita….2-3 ani imi ajung sa imi construiesc viitorul in tara mea….. e a 3-a oara cand sunt in america…..si ca sa ma mai plimb nu se merita…nu fac nici un rahat fiind nehotarat.

    Imi cer scuze daca jignesc pe cineva dar acolo unde iti este bine ramai!

    O vara minunata

  48. rady Says:

    buna eu trebuie sa plec in america cu viza h1b dar am aproape 3 luni si actele nu o mai iesit de la emigrari patronul a dat si 1000 de dolari sal faca la ungenta in 3 luni cam cat ar mai dura

  49. Horia Says:

    Rady, taxa de 1000 dolari pentru urgentare (premium processing) ii obliga pe cei de la USCIS (servicul de imigrare) sa proceseze aplicatia ta in termen de 15 zile din data cind se aplica pentru urgentare ( nu e numaidecit ca sa fie in aceeasi zi cind aplici pentru H1-B, poate fi si mai tirziu). Daca USCIS nu proeceseaza cazul tau in 15 zile ei trebuie sa-l proceseze in continuare in stare de urgenta si ii intorc patronului tau taxa de 1000 dolari inapoi. Bafta!

  50. rady Says:

    si ar mai putea dura mult cat pot maxim sa mai astept?????????

  51. rady Says:

    cat poate dura pana cand sunt gata actele si sa te duci la viza cam cate luni

  52. rady Says:

    ma poate ajuta cineva cat dureaza maxim pana cand iese actele pt munca america

  53. Alexandru Says:

    POt sa aflu si eu cum sa aplic la azil politic daca viza j1 a expirat?

  54. rady Says:

    astept de 5 luni sa vina actele petru munca america cu viza h1b am auzit ca poate dura 6 luni poate dura mai mult de 6 luni ? ma poate ajuta cineva?

  55. Oly Says:

    Buna. Sa-mi raspunda cineva daca poate la urmatoarea intrebare: ce se are in vedere prin naturalizare? De ex, eu urmez sa ma casatoresc cu viitorul meu sot care a venit aici in urma cu 10 ani pt ca a cistigat loteria Green Card si intre timp a devenit si cetatean american. Casatorindu-ma cu el, voi putea sa obtin si eu green card chiar daca el nu s-a nascut aici dar are acte de cetatean american? eu sunt aici cu viza J-1. Multumesc.

  56. mk Says:

    a mai auzit cineva de ilie zdragat , cum merg treburile la el face ceva treaba a mai cistigat cineva cazul cu azil politic prin emigration-visa service

  57. Vasea Says:

    eu am aplicat prin Ilie Zdragat cu vreo 5 luni in urma si inca nu am nici un act obtinut, cum primesc ceva concret va anunt, deocamdata astept

  58. alina Says:

    Buna.
    Ma numesc Alina si am venit in State cu o Viza J1 care o sa imi expire luna aceasta pe 15. Stiu ca este destul de tarziu insa as dori sa aplic pentru o viza de turist.

    As fi foarte recunoscatoare celor care am puteam sa-mi spuna daca documetele care dovedesc legatura cu tara trebuie sa fie in engleza si de asemenea as dori mai multe informatii referitoare la documentele necesare.

    Va multumesc!

  59. stefania Says:

    Buna,
    As avea o intrebare…anul trecut am fost in SUA cu programul Work AND Travel…in acest timp am aplicat pentru schimbarea vizei(h2b)la oficiul din California(prin posta,eu fiind in IL)…mi-a venit raspunsul…si in acel document scria ca….”cererea mi-a fost returnata deoarece…formularul complectat nu este cel corect…asa ca trebuie sa complectez un alt formular sa il trimit”intre timp am lasat-o balta..si m-am intors in tara,la termen.
    As dori sa stiu…acest lucru apare undeva in datele ambasadei…ca un refuz de viza?(nicaieri in documentele primite nu scria ”respins”)anul acesta vreau sa aplic din nou pt viza de student…trebuie sa ii informez de acest lucru sau nu apare in datele lor…
    multumesc mult….

  60. mk Says:

    baieti si fete cine a aolicat si doreste sa aplice prin zdragat nu faceti fiindca nu face nimic a luat banii si a disparut fara urma intr-un “TRIP” prin europa ,puteti sa va convingeti apelind numarul de pa emigration-visaservice.com

  61. bogdan Says:

    Salut Analolie!
    Voi fi foarte recunoscator daca imi va raspunde la intrebarea mea cineva: Am viza J1 pe vara aceasta si doresc sa mai ramin in SUA, schimbindu-mi statul vizei in B1 pe 6 luni. Ce consecinte sau probleme pot aparea dupa ce ma voi intoarce in tara natala si pe urma voi dori sa mai aplic la o alta viza (B1 de exemplu).

  62. Eugen Says:

    ATTN: BEWARE OF ILIE ZDRAGAT AND IMMIGRATION VISA SERVICES located in SACRAMENTO, CA
    To Mk:
    Hey Mk! I read your message today and I thought you might be interested in joining me: I am about to file a lawsuite against Ilie Zdragat and Immigration Visa Services. This so named attorney is unauthorized to practice law in CA and will be seriously punished by authorities. He takes people’s money and disappeares. If you know any other people who suffered from his actions, please reply to my message.We can obtain justice!

  63. Vasea Says:

    referitor la Ilie Zdragat, e un tip care vorbeste mult si promitator pana vede banii, iar cand ajunge la lucruri serioase e foarte ocupat si nu poti da de el, mai pe scurt nu vreau sa stric vorba cu el, dar nu l-as recomanda la nimeni!

  64. Olesea Says:

    Salut,
    Vasea, Mk si Eugen va rog frumos sa ma informati in privintza problemelor pe care le-atzi avut cu Ilie Zdragat.
    Eu deasemeni am de afacere cu dinsul si tzin minte cazul din primavara cind il sunam shi imi dadea info la mesageria vokala kum ka este plecat in Europa si va veni tokmai in Noiembrie. Insa ulterior dinsul m-a contactat si mi-a spus ka atunci cind mesageria vocala e plina pai automat se transfera la alta mesagerie shi bla bla bla si ka respectiv mesageria a doua avea mesajul inregistrat inka de un an in urma… sigur ka mi s-a parut dubios shi nu l-am crezut :-D
    Insa mi s-a fakut rushine cind am intrebat pe reprezentant de la verizon daca asha ceva in genere e posibil :-) si karoci OBLOM :-D akazyvaetza e posibil…

    Oricum ash dori sa diskut ku voi si sa mai aflu cyte ceva din experientza voastra in ceea ce priveshte colaborarea cu I.Zdragat.
    Va voi fi foarte recunoskatoare daka imi vetzi scrie vre-un raspuns.
    Pupici
    Paka paka

  65. Olesea Says:

    in cazul in care nu doritzi sa scrietzi mult aici pe site pai putem sa facem schimb de numere de telefoane ori email ori odnoklassniki daka avetzi :)

  66. Eugen Says:

    Salut Olesea, Vasea, Mk!

    Din care oras si stat sunteti?

  67. Olesea Says:

    Salut Eugen,
    sunt in Los Angeles.
    Potzi sa-mi spui pe skurt ce s-a intimplat la tine cu Ilye?

  68. Olesea Says:

    Vasea, Mk si Eugen va rog sa ma contactatzi pe:
    olesea.lesea@gmail.com

    :) ma maninka CURiozitatea :D ca sa stiu sa n-o patzesk shi eu…

  69. Vasea Says:

    cand nam trecut din interviu si trebuia sa ma prezinte la sud a inceput sa dispara si apoi ca n-are licenta si ca nu poate si… caroce nui serios, si cunosc mai multi cu aceeasi problema, mai bine dati singuri sau va luati un avocat normal, o sa para mai scump dar in final o sa economisiti bani, timp si nervi, foarte multi nervi.

  70. Olesea Says:

    nu shtiu, nu shtiu… pyna ce dynsul m-a ajutat mult. Ma enervam de la inceput cind nu raspundea la sunetele mele telefonice indata insa am deja cyteva luni de cind ma consult cu dynsul, pare a fi fain. Mi l-a recomandat un prieten de-al meu care a fost multzumit de serviciile lui.
    Si l-am recomandat la cytziva prieteni de-ai mei care au inceput colaborarea ku dynsul.
    Eu am gasit cum sa dau de dynsul cind mie imi trebuie :D Pur si simplu yl sun des :D :D :D

  71. Olesea Says:

    Baietzi, adica, Eugen, Victor si Mk, de ce nu-mi scrietzi pe email? Hai ca vreau sa shtiu si eu ce atzi patzit cu Ilye Zdragat. In caz contrar voi face concluzia ca vorbele voastre erau aruncate in vint fara motiv ori explicatzie.
    Scrietzi-mi va rog pe olesea.lesea@gmail.com

  72. vasile Says:

    salut lume lume ma numesc Vasile si am ocazia sa fiu si eu pe acest chat unde colaboram o comunitate de basarabeni, ceea ce pot sa spun eu in privintsa lui Ilie Zdragat e ca: Eu si inca 12 prieteni deai mei care am veit in state am fost ajutati de D-nul Ilie si suntem multumiti de serviciile care ni lea oferit ci ca suntem fericiti si ne traim viatsa aici in USA deja muncim invatsam si avem baza vietii aici multumita lui. Vrea sa spun una oamenilor mai putin cu carte la cap. Daca aveti ceva probleme personale sau nu ati ajuns la un numitor comun cu D-nul ILIE mai bine sa nu puneti asa comentarii copilaresti. Deoarece eu sunt la curent si cunoscut cu o sumedenie de persoane care au fost ajutati de el si sunt foarte multumiti si as ami lau recomandat si mie.

  73. Vasea Says:

    salut vasile, daca esti atat de educat, de ce modul tau de exprimare se aseamana atat de mult cu al celui despre care scrii?

  74. MDA Says:

    Vasile, poti sa ne spui si noua unde invatati voi?

  75. irina kravchenko Says:

    oi bliiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiin si copchii la minte se ved moldovenii cum mai invidiaza…………….nu am ce spune,,,,,,,,,,,Am fost clienta lui Ilya 2 ani in urma, eu impreuna cu sora mea ! Ilya multumim de serviciile tale, nu te uita la prostii care scriu aici si birfesssssssssssssccc!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! invidiaza…….eu si multe prietene care neai ajutat suntem foooooaaaaaaaarteeeeeeeeee multumite—————-

  76. Stas Says:

    Salut,am si eu o intrebare vreau in citeva saptamini sa aplic pentru viza b2 din j1 pot sa o fac direct prin USCIS..sau trebuie neaparat sa apelez la un jurist..sunt informat 100% in ceea ce sa fac? cineva a mai apelat singur la viza b2? va rog sa ma ajutati

  77. MDA Says:

    Se pare ca foarte lume educata apeleaza la serviciile lui Ilya :)

  78. MDA Says:

    Stas, daca esti sigur ca stii tot ce trebuie sa faci pt a-ti schimba viza, un jurist nu e necesar. Eu mi-am schimbat J-1 in F-1 fara jurist si am obtinut-o. Dar se recomanda ajutorul unui jurist pt ca de multe ori noi credem ca stim 100% dar daca ceva nu a fost corect, cateodata e prea tarziu sa mai indrepti greseala. Deci poti sa faci totul si singur, dar e mai sigur cu jurist.
    Succes!

  79. Andrey Says:

    привет всем…
    Иля мы за тебья и пасиб за помашь.
    Витали и Паша

  80. Tatiana Says:

    Ilusa apreciez munca si efortul depus de catre tine si agentia immigration visa services !!! 100+++++++++++++++++++++++++10000000+++++++++++++++

  81. Oleg Says:

    I just want to say that, mr. Zdragat was honest and he help me out with my immigration problems i want to just say thank you and god bless Mr. Zdragat.

  82. MDA Says:

    Oleg, de ce trebuie sa-i multumesti in engleza, ca sa te inteleaga americanii? Americanilor nu le trebuie serviciile D-lui. Zdragat. :D

  83. Fat Frumos Says:

    O astfel de comunitate ar putea discuta lucruri mult mai importante si sar opri sa tot invidieze,Mike, Eugen, Vasea in caz ca ati avut ceva cu ilie zdragat ar fi mult mai bine daca il veti cintacta personal pentru o solutie a rezolva conflictul dintre parti. Ilie felicitarile noastre, grupului din nordul Moldovei poate ne recunosti ne ai in memorie, 7 luni in urma am colaborat in urma carui am primit acte in State multumita serviciilor ”Immigration Visa Services” multumiri anticipate.

  84. Eugen Says:

    Stimati prieteni! Informatia despre Ilie Zdragat este bazata nu numai pe practica proprie, dar si pe practica cunoscutului meu. Noi am platit dolarii cistigati cinstit, dar ajutorul promis asa si nu l-am primit. Termenul vizelor noastre a expirat si noi pur si simplu nu stim cui sa ne adresam dupa ajutor. Posibil ca Ilie Zdragan si a ajutat cuiva, dar nu la toti cui a promis.

  85. Eugen Says:

    Pardon, am gresit cu familie: Zdragat

  86. Olesea Says:

    Salut, uite Eugen ori kum te mai cheama realmente nici ka ma intereseaza.
    Nu vreau sa-l apar prea mult pe I.Zdragat caci nu ne-am jucat in aceeashi “pisocinitza” :) insa dak sincer pai deja mi-am fakut concluzia in ceea ce priveshte ce treaba ai mai avut tu ku Zdragat.
    Chestia este ka yn cazul yn care la tine ceva n-o mers asha kum trebuie nu ynseamna ka tre sa iei shi sa bagi lumea yn boale ku absurditatzile tale.
    Ka ai pus o gramada de oameni pe striom degeaba. Am ajuns ka am shi kontrolat valabilitatea licentzei shi s-o adeverit ka tu ai mintzit, ori cine akolo o spus ka el nu are licentza.
    Idee nu am kum la tine shi la “prietenul” tau au dekurs lucrurile ku Ilye ynsa am impresia ka prosta vreai sa-i strici reputatzia din cauza ka anume la tine ceva probleme.
    Stai kuminte shi kauta ieshire din situatzie shi lasa jelea.
    La mine totul ok, la prietenii mei e ok shi am inka 2 prietene kare sunt in proces shi vad ka nimeni din noi nu a avut probleme ku expirarea vizei shi bla bla bla ka sa dam vina pe Zdragat.
    Daca vedeai ka ytzi expira viza pai de ce nu ai fakut nimik? de ce nu l-ai fugarit dar pe Ilye sa se grabeaska daka tot sustzii ka el e vinovatul? ori tu ashteptai ka Ilye sa ytzi spuna ka bre la tine viza expira pe kutare data, de parka tu singur nu ai ochi shi creier in kap ka sa te uitzi la tine in pashaport.
    Poneatno ku tine shi ku jelea ta.
    Deam s-o pornit el sa-l dea pe Ilye yn judecata. Sorry, o simpla intrebare atunci… cum ai de gynd tu sa-l dai pe Zdragat yn judecata daka viza ta e expirata shi dupa cyte yntzeleg eshti nelegal yn tzara? Numai sa vorbeshti aiurea shtii. De ce dar mie Zdragat nu mi-a furat banii shi mi-a fakut totul la timp? Ori eu sunt o exceptie?
    Presupun ka tu nu aveai aktele necesare shi de aia cred eu ka ai lungito pyna ti-a expirat shi viza…
    Termina ku absurditatzile shi kauta-tzi mai bine deja o cetatzeanka shi nu te mai plynge atyta de lacunele proprii. Dai vina pe cineva fara ka sa le explici oamenilor exact cum s-au petrecut lucrurile ka sa shtim shi noi eshti vinovat tu ori el? Vad ka pyna yn ziua de azi nu mi-ai trimis nici tu nici Vasea shi nici Mk absolut nici un email ku nishte argumente koncrete impotriva lui Zdragat.
    Respectiv nici nu cred in vorbele tale.
    Shi daka la tine o fost rau pai uite ka la noi e bine.
    Cine e deshtept va intzelege despre ce eu vorbesk.
    pake pake

  87. Gagauz1983 Says:

    Zdarova rebeat, konehno ne maeo delo no smotry i pohitati ohen smesno. Jal whto na moldavskom ia ohen ploho gavary no na skolko po skolko ponemay. Eugen-Vasea-Mike vam sovet: lytsa pozvanie tomy heloveky pogavarite snim i resite snim vse voprosi, kak inteligetnie lydi a ne bydite kak babi na bazar. Ja lihno znay mnogo rebeat katorim Ilya pomog v tom hesle i mne a esli vi myjki s naryje a v nytri babi to ato vashi problemi hto daja ne mojite resat voprosi kak nastoiasi myjiki a trepati i nagadit tolko pitaites ! Ne perejivaite ne tolko internet instantia dlia reklami a est eseo reklama na dela naprimer kak ia i moi dryzei mi vsegda recomendyem vsem atovo heloveka Ilie Zdragat, Olesea no a ti molodets daja esli ti baba no ti v pravelnom napravlenie smotres ”Ilya mi za tebja tvoi bivsie klienti GAGAYZI”

  88. Olesea Says:

    Pizdetz, 1983 gagauzov navalilo na Ilyu i zavalili Ameriku :))) LOL
    joking :-D
    Gagauz1983, sam ty baba :) a ea devushka. No vsioravno spasiba za molodetz, hotea ne dlea tebea storalasi :-P a citoby moi druziea ne perejyvali izza tuparasticeskih sluhov bez osnovanii.

  89. Jora_MD Says:

    olesea pot sa spun ca esti atit de incintata si indrazneata ca mine:))))))))))))))))))) eu sunt pentru Ilie, sunt foarte multumit de serviciile immigration visa services , intradevar ma ajutat mult, acum 3 zile inurma am luat Cartea Verge,Uraaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa:) VA ROG SA MA FELICITATI sunt foarte fericit…!!! Immigration Visa Services (best of the best) www.emigration-visa.com RECOMAND LA TOTI

  90. Yanna-Ygor Says:

    Birfe Birfe si ear Birfe apoi doar ura intre basarabenii nostrii. Ar fi mult mai frumos de a rezolva cazul in particular.Ilie Zdragat apreciem munca si serviciile tale.

  91. kirdik Says:

    SALUT
    In viata asta nimic nu poate fi perfect, chear daca au fost momente triste, doar suntem oameni si oameni trebuie sa raminem.
    “Immigration Visa Services” doar in sus si inainte, succes si dezvoltare la maxim.
    Incintat de serviciile oferite, am fost ajutat pe 10+.

  92. Madalina Says:

    Is this page dedicated to Immigration Visa Services?
    Could you people stop all this Bull Shit and talk on the topic of this article? In case you forgot, the actual topic was on J1 visa and how to change it into another status in order to remain in US legally.
    This page wasn’t made for advertising an agencies services.

  93. Jullian Says:

    Saluatare tuturora! Am si eu problema de rezolvat optez pe sfatul vostru. J1 visa curenta vreau sa schimb statul in F1, mai am aproximativ 30 zile pina ce expira J1-nul, ce pot sa fac si cum sa procedez? Prefer sa nu am de afacere cu avocatii. Daca cineva poseda informatie referitor la acest caz, as fi foarte recunoscator daca ma ajutati, orice informatie este utila. Multumesc anticipat! imi puteti scri pe iulikm@yahoo.com inca odata multumesc. Bafta la toti!!!

  94. Jullian Says:

    Cer scuze de greseala: “J1 vreau sa schimb statutul in F1″

  95. lenka Says:

    Salut ,Vasea si Eugen eu tot am avut de afacere cu Ilie daca aveti e-mail si am putea discuta mai succint problema data …astept raspuns

  96. tanyk Says:

    Salut…as vrea sa intreb daca cineva este la curent cu asa probl ,sau cel putin a trecut prin ea…vreau sa ma casatoresc aici in SUA…am social security number..viza mea expira in septembrie..nu stiti ce documenete necesit pentru a aplica dupa inscrierea casatoriei?…caci am gasit pe forumuri ca prima se aplica pu SSN..pe cind eu il am…sau poate trebuie sa trimit o parte din formulare pentru a fi la curent autoritatile ca eu sunt casatorita?ms mult..orice sfat e binevenit

  97. Madalina Says:

    in privintza la casatorie shi ce forme sunt necesare pentru obtinerea GC viziteaza www.uscis.gov
    Plus tre sa iai in consideratie faptul ca sotul tre sa aiba un venit de min 18500$ pe an. Sunt mai multe kestii de kare tre sa ai grija kiar inainte de a te casatori.
    Daca sotul nu face atitia bani pe an respectiv tre sa gasiti un sponsor, mai bine sponsorul sa fie o fata in cazul tau, insa in kazul asta sponsorul tre sa aiba un venit de 20 shi ceva mii de $ pe an. Nu-mi aduc aminte cu cit precis se mareste suma necesara. Acest statement este necesar pentru a demonstra autoritatilor ca pe parcursul unui an ori 2 (nu stiu) sotul ori sponsorul are destule resurse financiare pentru a avea grija de tine in cazul in care nu gasesti job.

  98. Jana Says:

    Buna tuturor! Eu ma numesc Jana, sunt in Houston, Texas. Biroul nostru de drept ofera servicii in toate sferele dreptului de imigrari: B-2, F-1, J-1, H-2B, H-1B, L, Q, O… Azil Politic, Green Card, toate tipurile de viza, avem 10 ani experienta!
    Avem oficiu in Houston si in New York.
    De asemenea, una dintre directiile noastre se ocupa cu Imigrarea in Canada.
    Suntem licentiati, semnam contracte si acceptam plati in rate daca este necesar.
    infoehsanlaw@gmail.com este adresa mea de e-mail. De asemenea ma puteti contacta la numarul de telefon 832-370-3336.
    Daca aveti nevoie de ajutor si va este frica sa dati peste “avocati” care va-r putea insela, da informatii gresite sau ruina cazul, suntem aici pentru a va ajuta. Noua ne pasa de imaginea promovata de clientii nostri!

  99. fiodor Says:

    Jana, atunci de ce nu dai macar cate un simplu sfat la oamenii nostrii care sunt in fel si fel de situatii daca tot zici ca esti avocata sau…. exmplu ar trebuie sa fie Cristina Milaciu ca avocata, care din cand in cand mai raspundea la cate o intrebare de a oamenilor de pe aici.

  100. Vlad Says:

    Salut tuturor.
    Sunt sigur raspunsul multor intrebari in baza Immigration si visa va pot oferi agentia de care am fost ajutati ”immigration visa services,, www.emigration-visa.com

  101. Big Daddy Says:

    Vlad am verificat www.emigration-visa.com si nu are licenta??

  102. Vlad Says:

    Salut, eu nu stiu ce are ce nu are dar, rezultatele au fost pozitive, si in privinta licensei in oficiu cind am fost la ei am vazut licensa atirnata.

  103. Catalina Says:

    Salut tuturor,am o intrebare,va rog sa ma ajutati,am venit recent in SUA si am ramas ilegal acum vreau sa plec acasa,stie careva care este amenda sau ce probleme pot avea la aeroport?multumesc mult anticipat.

  104. Alex Says:

    De ce vrei sa te intorci inapoi in Moldova Catalina?

  105. Utsu Says:

    Numai am inchis cazul, sunt din Romania Bucuresti. Si am ramas foarte fericit de serviciile oferite de www.emigration-visa.com ma numesc Utsul.

  106. Ciudo Nezemnoe Says:

    Ilie Zdragat, satisfa-mi cerintzele mentionate in sms-uri shi mesaje pai fac un blog special dedicat in special tie.
    O zi buna in continuare ;-)

  107. Tolya Says:

    Ilusha multumesc foarte mult pentru ajutorul si efortul care lai depus pentru ami obtine actele in statele unite, din partea noastra baetiol care neai ajutat daca ne tii minte 9 persoane din florida iti suntem foarte recunoscatori si nu vei ramine nemultumit, in special eu voi indruma toti prietneii mei si cunostintele mele doar la oficiul vostru Immigration Visa Services contactele www.emigration-visa.com datorita voua avem o viata mai frumoasa mai buna si avem un viitor intradevar plin de bucurii si clipe frumoase, iti uram sanatate si succes in lucrul pe carel ai si multi multi clienti.

  108. Ciudo Nezemnoe Says:

    Ilie, adika presupusul “Tolya” termina sa-ti scrii auto-laude ok. Tin minte de parca era ieri cum ma rugai sa-ti scriu niste comentarii bune aici pe labordei deoarece erau unele persoane care incercau sa-ti arate adevarata ta fatza. Am facuto nu deoarece esti un specialist bun ori un om de incredere ci deoarece imi erai si inca imi esti dator cu banii pe care tzi i-am imprumutat cu mult timp in urma si pe care nu vreai sa-i intorci. Imi pare rau ca am facuto daca sincer, deoarece i-am dus in eroare pe altzi oameni…
    Plus la asta, blogul asta nu este dedicat numelui tau ori firmei tale. Este dedicat unei teme anumite. Daca asa de tare vrei sa-i faci autoreclama porneste macar un blog pentru chestia respectiva si nu murdari pagina cu myzgylituri aiurea.

  109. Ciudo Nezemnoe Says:

    P.S. Ori mai bine spus pot sa tzi-l pornesc eu (blogul) daca tot nu ai unde scrie.

  110. Jana Says:

    “fiodor Says:
    September 21st, 2010 at 10:30 pm

    Jana, atunci de ce nu dai macar cate un simplu sfat la oamenii nostrii care sunt in fel si fel de situatii daca tot zici ca esti avocata sau…. exmplu ar trebuie sa fie Cristina Milaciu ca avocata, care din cand in cand mai raspundea la cate o intrebare de a oamenilor de pe aici.”

    Buna, Fiodor, si tuturor celorlati!
    Mi-as dori sa pot dedica mai mult timp forumului acesta pentru a putea citi si da sfaturi la “oamenii nostrii care sunt in fel si fel de situatii”, insa din pacate, timpul nu-mi piermite sa intru pe aici decit odata la citeva luni. Am dat si eu sfaturi si am raspuns si la intrebari pe aici, sub diferit user name insa. Nici acum nustiu daca nimersc parola si userul de data trecuta, sar putea sa fiu nevoita sa-mi creez altul pentru a putea posta).
    Probabil ca daca as intentiona sa-mi fac mai multi clienti de pe acest forum, mi-as memora si userul si as fi si un membru mai activ. M-am inregistrat aici inca pe cind cautam si eu sfaturi si raspunsuri la intrebari, asa ca cei de aici mi-ar putea fi mai mult prieteni decit potentiali clienti.
    Houstonul are foarte multi imigranti. Ajuti un client si el iti mai aduce 3. Nu pentru a-mi face publicitate am dat contactele mele pe forum si nici pentru-ca am lipsa de clienti ci pentru-ca intodeauna ma bucur sa ajut oamenii din tara.

    Succese tuturor si Craciun Fericit!

  111. ilie zdragat Says:

    Salut tuturor, am aruncat si eu o privire pe aici sa vad cit e de popular numele meu si agentiei Immigration Visa Services. www.emigration-visa.com
    Am citi unelea comentarii care sau atasat pe aici si intradevar poporul nostru este un picut diferit si fiecare cu moral diferit. Una ce pot sa spun cine are ceva intrebari personale catre mine ma puteti gasi la numarul 1-916-838-8781 ILIE, sine are intrebari pe baza cazurilor de immigration sau vize, si situatiilor create aflinduse aici in USA puteti intra la websitul atashat http://emigration-visa.com/ru/consultation/ pentru moldoveni, rushi si ukraineni si daca sunt cineva din basarabia de peste prut intrati la websitul http://emigration-visa.com/en/consultation/ si indepliniti ancheta data apoi veti primi raspuns la orice intrebare data de D-tra. In asa mod sper fiecare din cei care au dubii sau ginduri urite ca isi for schimba parerea si atitudinea fata de ceea cei au scris mai sus. Succes la toti.

  112. Sanika Says:

    Salut Ilie am o intrebare: Ma aflu in state de 5 luni, original venit din R. Moldova si as dori sa ramin aici dar legal. Sper sami dati un raspuns cum as putea face asta in mod legal. Eu am fost maltratat si inchis la 7 aprilie 2009 cind au fost alegerile, am toate evidentele documental. Ce ma sfatuiti sa fac si cagbi sa incep procesul.

  113. Ghena Says:

    Bre P.. sau cum te mai numesti acolo da banii!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  114. vladutzzzz Says:

    sal la tatzi moldovenii ma numesc vlad eu nu il cunosc pe ilya asta dar va pot spune una ii un mincinos de nu te vezi stie sa vorbeasca frumos sa te conviga fiara dar el ii un bleg si jumate intrebatio pe ciuda nezimnoe ca o fost bine invirtita de fiara asta daca cineva vrea sa apeleze la ilie mai bine va adresati la mine am sa ma starui sa va fac lucrurile un pic mai bine si pe bani mai putini sa nu il faceti numai pe ilya gospodar sasi plateasca facturile:la bmw.casa si asa mai departe un lucru vreau sa va spun daca vreti sa aveti banii in buzunar ginditiva ca cred ca la voi banii nu va dau afara din casa si vreau sa ma intelegeti corect nu sunt avocat dar vreau sa va deschid ochii in privinta lui ilya VA DORESC SUCCESE SI FERITIVA DE FIARA NUMITA :ILYA_ZDRAGAT

  115. ilie zdragat Says:

    Sanika in cazul tau mai bine intra online la websitul agentiei si completeaza ancheta oficiala http://www.emigration-visa.com/en/consultation/ apoi de la agentiei avocatii iti vor raspunde prin email sau telefon. Am doar ceva intrebare catre tine nu te ingrijoreaza comentariile de mai sus ceea ce au scris gena si vladyzzzz ?

  116. ilie zdragat Says:

    Vladuzzzz inainte de a vorbi ceva mai bien sa te gindesti bine ce scrii sau spui, o sa pari mult mai deshtept ca in cazul tau sau daca ai ceva personal cu mine ar fi normal sa ma contactezi ci sa nu vorbesti in vint adica lumea ma cunoaste din alte parti si in moduri diferite de ale tale si credema fiecare om individual isi decida ce sa faca. Sucess in continuare Vladuzzzz

  117. ilie zdragat Says:

    Ghena sau cum ma numesc eu acolo? da cui sai dau banii ?

  118. Eugenia Says:

    Pentru Adrian (cazul cu Azil Politic).
    Sunt la Oficiul din New York saptamina aceasta, poti sa ne vizitezi.
    Eugenia
    (832)370-3336

  119. vladuzzzz Says:

    sal va scriu iarasi eu, fiindca vad ca copilul asta pe numie iliya zdagat vad ca nu se poate calma cine ii scrie si cine ce face .crede ca cineva incearca sa ii puna bete in roate la bisnesul lui cred ca nu mai are bani sasi plateasca bmw si cauta jartve noi eu vam mai spus si va mai spun odata la toti fiti foarte atenti el stie sa vorbeasca bine are sait oficial dar intrebatil cum poti sa fii avocat cind in moldova a terminat 7 clase si in state a venit cu azil politic (religie)si aflinduse in state de 5 ani cum poti acorda servicii de avocat???va doresc la toti succese si feritiva mai bine de copilul asta nastrusnic si mai bine verificati orce lucru pina a va apuca daca cineva are intrebari scrieti ca eu va raspund nu va fie rusine

  120. dan Says:

    @Vladuzzzz calmeaza putin aplele, am facut si eu o raita la situl lui Zdragat, in primul rind el nu pretinde ca e avocat ci consultant, pentru a fi consultant nu se cer anumite studii, poate doar ceva licente. Omul ofera la inceput consultatie pe gratis si pe urma e la decizia fiecaruia, daca sa accepti servicii cu plata sau nu. A venit cu azil politic (religie) si care-i problema??? Statut legal are si fiecare vine pe calea sa. Nu inteleg ce faci atitea valuri in tazik??? Invidie si porkarie moldoveneaska:)))))))

  121. Paraskovia Says:

    Salut la toti, \si mult mai mult Dan mia placut mult mesajul tau. Eu din cite stiu Ilie Zdragat si familia lui au acte americane din 1995 in baza religioasa au emigrat in State. Eu personal familia lui o cunosc de 13 ani de zile si rudele sale la fel. Ce tine de Bmw cum spune Vladuzzz sa ti fie rusine ce spui daca esti un lenew si un birfitor asa si o sa fii in continuare si еще зу acest site cu aceste birfe ale tale. Omul a invatat, invata si cu munca si sudoare a obtinut ceea ce are plus daca din 200 din clientii lui ilie 10 sunt ne multumiti atunci facetiva singuri conluzia oamenii care cititi aceste birfe despre Ilie. El este dintro familie educata, religioasa si ordonata care au ajutat o sumedenie de oameni in diosebi Ilie o multime de persoane aici in State si peste hotare.Una situ ca la nimeni nu a bagat mina in buzunar sai ia un $ din contra va consulta gratis dupa care luati decizia singuri ci nu va cere $200 pentru consultatie, plus din cite siu eu lucra la un pret minim fata de avocati care pentru servicii eau $10000 si in sus, va rog sa va deschideti ochii oameni buni si sa faceti concluzia la situatie singuri.Omul poate sa aiba si masina si casa si еще су doreste nimeni nui poate sai puna bete in roate la asa ceva dar voi birfitorilor (ma refer la persoanele care posteaza prostii si birfe compuse de grupuri de birfitori si oameni ne educati) sa va apucati de munca sa lucrati sa va dea domnul putere si capabilitate la 3 masini diferite Bmw, case, avere si sa fiti fericiti in viata muncind ca omul care se trezeste dis de dimineatsa la 4 sau 5 AM si ajunge acasa o data in saptamina si isi vede familia odata in 2 saptamini. God Bless you all my friends.

  122. body$ Says:

    Privetik lume ! Paraskowia And Dan si eu sunt un fost klient a lui Ilya Zdragat…doar vreau sa adaug la ceea ce ati scris… Ilya Zdragat e un om foarte educat si cu inima in el… cind am apelat la el nu aveam nici de munca si nici unde locui. Ilya ma ajutat si mea gasit si de munca plus mea gasit si loc unde sa locuesc temporar…imi amintesc ma luat la magazin cu el si mea procurat si hrana pntru 2 saptamini ca nu aveam nici ce sa minc. Dar voi cei care scriti asa comentarii pe acest forum dativa seama ce scriti despre Ilya Zdragat…el este pazit si ocrotit de Dumnezeu si in asa caz cum nu vati starui voi sa comiteti prostii in potriva lui si sa scriti faradelegi in contra lui Ilya Zdragat o sa fiti pedepsiti de Dumnezeu care vede totul de sus. Ginditiva bine la price pas carel faceti si ceea ce scriti despre fiecare. Eu am apelat la serviciile lui… el a fost cult… si sa purtat omeneste cu mine… la moment am green card si o sai fiu recunoscator toata viata mea acestui om. Succes in continuare la toti !!!

  123. ilie_zdragat Says:

    Salut tuturor persoanelor care eau parte din acest website dedicat persoanelor din fosta USSR si Romania Paraskovia, Dany si Body$ nu vaam retinut cine sunteti dar va multumim pentru mesajele postate, si tuturo persoanelor care au mai postat mesaje de ne multumire si intartare la rau. Rog mult cine are ceva personal cu mine si cu agentia in care eu sunt director IVS Immigration Visa Services www.emigration-visa.com sa ma contactati personal pe mine la telfonul 1-916-838-8781 in caz de nu raspund la sunetul vostru lasatim un mesaj vocal cu numarul de telefon si numele vostru unde pot sa va gasesc. Va multumesc pentru atentie si God Blass all of You and have a good day !

  124. ilie_zdragat Says:

    Si mai rog un lucru viats apersonala nu meo implicati in postul de munca pe carel am, nu e necesar. Cite masini am si ce masini am la fel Vladuzzzz daca esti atit de smecher si indraznet dami teelfon si discuta cu mine ci nu intarta lumea la minie sau cum a spus persoana mai sus porcarii moldovenesti din cauza invidiei, si pentru ca sa iti luminez putinsi sati clarific vederea eu in state sunt din 1995, fii bun si interesazate bien de persoana inainte de a vorbi ceva, cum se mai spune la Moldova Nu te baga in tarita ca sa nu te mince porcii cam asa ceva este o vorba) si dupa cum am mai spus cine are ceva intrebari va rog sa ma contactati personal si sa terminati cu discutiile de genul (VIATSA PERSONALA A LUI ILIE ZDRAGAT).

  125. alex_m Says:

    salutare tuturor am si eu o intrebare….in vara urmeaza sa merg cu work and travel cu viza j1 e pe 3 luni…..aaa e a 2 oara cand merg si as avea intentia sa raman sunt student acu termin facultatea aici in tara pierd timpul numai,in fine ideea e in felul urmator pot sa imi schimb viza sau sa o prelungesc? de catre angajator sau la ambasada…..sau sa ies din tara merg pana in canada?ce alternative am sa raman?…..asa pe scurt….ca de ramas la negru aud din toate partile ca daca raman ma da afara ca nu stiu ce si tam tam tam….please help….multumesc:)

  126. VladutZzzz Says:

    Sal scriu iarasi eu vreau sa va spun un singur lucru daca il stiti asa de bine pe ilie ma bucur dar ilie nu e crestin dar un cretin si jumatate care minte lumea si atita timp cit is intro tara democrata fac ce vreau si scriu ce vreau dar tu ilie vad ca te lauzi singur pe tine de nu ai masuri dute mai bine si cauta de lucru la un mak dar nu minti copiii estea care lucreaza sati plateasca bilurile ok

  127. Elena Says:

    Ce porcarii scrise de VladutZzzz paremise ca acest copil nu are 7 ani dea-casa, si credca Ilie tea lasat contactele sal contactez sau sal vizitel in officiu daca ai ceva probleme si rinza te minca sau te ustura in piept cinei achita billurile sau ce lucra. 3 luni in urma prin organizatia http://emigration-visa.com/en/consultation/ am obtinut actele si sunt multumita de munca si efortul acestor oameni. Au serviciile la nivel profesional concret si punctual si tu VladutZzzz scrii asa birfe impreuna cu ceva porci ca si tine democratule, daca ai intelege cuvintul si sensul DEMOCRATIE INTRO TARA asta nu inseamna sa rapsindesti informatie gresita si insalaciuni despre un un care ofere ceva servicii sau e fondatorul unei organizatii. Dar mai bien spus din cele citite am inteles ca esi un ne educat cara ai tras sapa de coada in tara de unde esti si ai stat la fundul unei vaci care ai pascuto si ai vazut si tu ceva dolari verzi in ochii tai si iti pare ca deja teai facut destept. Daca esti atit de invidios pai mergi si tu la scoala si fa studii obtien o licensa sau certificat ca sa poti oferi aceleas sericii si flagul in mina apoi inainte lucra si fa bani nimeni nu-ti interzice, dar de magari si invidiosi ca tine e plina lumea. In viatsa personala pe Ilie nul cunosc ce masina are si ce casa are la fel nu cunosc dar cind am mers in officiu la el am fost primita calduros si respectos la un nivel profesional de catre colectivul organizatiei immigration Visa Services plus la toate persoanele care mi lau recomandat prin el au obtinut si ei actele 2 ani in urma si cunosc cel putin 13 persoane care la fel prin organizatia data au primit actele cu succes. Eu ca o eleva care am venit din Moldova nu prea multe perspective in viatsa am avut dar mama ma educat dea-casa si ma invatsat cum sa ma comort cu lumea ca sa primesc un raspuns reciproc al corpontamentului meu fatsa de persoana opusa si la scoala la fel am invatsat matematica ca sa stiu cum sa le adun si sa fac ceva in viatsa asta. Dar dobitochi si birfitori sunt destui ( Ilie din partea mea scriu sa nu dai atentia acestor oameni care nu au frina la limba si gura spurcata) VladutZzzz dar tu daca ai ceva esit din comun credca mai sus e informatie destula unde poti sa mergi sa vorbesti cu persoana in cauza dar nu birfe de ale tale pe internet ci mai bien spus credca tu singur nu stii ce doresti de la viatsa si stai ca un copil si moroncaesti sub mustatsa apoi explodezi de invidie si dispui de intelepciune prin care ai putea la un mod inteligent si democrat sa rezolvi aceasta problema pe care o ai tu singur cu tine.

  128. Inna Says:

    Hi, forte interesna sa citesc sii scris aisi
    De mutisor nu am visitat websitu isa
    Iliusa a stat atit de popular de atita vreme
    Licna nie neo placut cum o lucart cu mine si prietenu meu nea ajutat mult si am scoso in capat cu bine
    Dem avem si green card in moldova la parint am fost si pe sora tot am kemato incoce
    My point e fiecare in parte si licno sa resolfe problemili ci iliusa kear dac nu ati rezolvat seva +
    Iliusa spasiba balsoe za tvoi pomosi ti nas virucil v nujnoe vremia i kagda nam bilo ocen tiazelo v zizni
    Tote cele bune tie
    Ni place cum ai modificat websitul e mult mai ydobno sa ti folosesti acuma.

  129. viKtoria Says:

    Nu va dati coplesiti de acest lash…alde ILIE ZDRAGAT….doar scoate banii din studenti si nu mai FAce nimik treaba…DE CE? din simplul fapt ca anume acesta ii este serviciul sa minteasca tinerii care si asa ramin pe drumuri straine si nu au ideie inkotro sa apuce….cindva l-am crrezut si eu…ka pe un moldovean de-al nostru….dar si aici moldovean pe moldovean se maninca…NERUSINATULE…BRAVO VLADUTZZZZZ!!!!! DAU PALARIA JOS!!!! IAR LASULUI II SPUN DOAR CITEVA CUVINTE….DUMNEZEU NU BATE CU BATSUL!!!!!!crestinule…..fu fu fuuuuuuuuuuu

  130. viKtoria Says:

    si INNA invata-te a scrie gramatical odata ce scrii in 2 limbi..nici una nu suna corect…..!!!!!!!!!

  131. viKtoria Says:

    si oamenilor nu le este “CIUDA” ca ai masini si mai nu stiu ce akolo…..tot binele odata si odata se va termina…la noi va fi totul bine pentru ka la timp am deskis okii…dar tu fara soviste te plimbi ku masinile cumparate pe banii studentilor…rusine ca nu te duce capul sa-ti faci o kapika si sa nu fii dikutat aiurea pe forumuri…cindva vei avea si tu nevoie de un avokat bun si nu uita ca en aflam intr-o tara democrata si am multi martori si cu multe dovezi care sunt “frumosule” precis ca nu in favoarea ta….. GOOD LUCK!

  132. Eugenia Says:

    Pentru cei ce cauta ajutor in prelungirea statutului legal in SUA, precum trecerea din viza J-1, Work and Travel in viza de turist, puteti apela la numarul de telefon: 832-370-3336 sau e-mail: pupaza111@yahoo.com.
    Va pot ajuta cu informatii despre aceste vize si cu obtinerea vizei B-2.

    Eugenia Lozovanu.

  133. viKtoria Says:

    eu am dat singura de la J1 am trecut la cea de turist…..nu am keltuit nici un ban….doar kit pe viza 300 dolari si atit…si nu este nimik komplikat akucati-va oameni buni si faceti singuri akolo este doar o forma care se indeplineste online si ceea ce trebuie de la voi s-o akitati si in plus sa rimite pe adresa lor o scrisoare unde scrieti DE CE aveti nevoie de viza si atit…..numai ka putini primesc aceasta viza ca acum cu crizele estea mai au si ei limite….

  134. Ion Says:

    Si ai primit viza Victoria?
    Stiu ca un prieten de-al meu a aplicat la viza de turist online si n-a primit nici pina acum vre-un raspuns. A trecut deja 2 ani si a ramas ilegal. Un altul a trimis prin posta si i-au dat refuz ca n-a avut toate actele necesare, sau ceva de genul asta.
    Mie mi-a explicat un avocat ca este o forma care trebuie de indeplinit dar daca numai cu forma aia sunt sanse mici sa primesti viza, si apoi daca faci greseli atunci ai toate sansele sa i-ai refuz. Dupa ce aplici inca s-ar putea sa ti se mai ceara documete adaugatoare si daca ei nu le primesc in timpul cerut si daca nu toate documentele atunci nu mai i-ai viza. Avocatii mai adauga ceva in pachetul ala, nustiu exact ce scriu ei sau ce documete dar e mult mai usor sa obtii viza prin cineva care are experienta deja.
    Pe mine m-au sfatuit mai multi oameni care sunt aici de multi ani si cred ca nu-i momentul sa economisesc astea 300$ - 500$ pe avocat si sa-i pierd pe cei 300 Application Fee si inca sa ramin ilegal chiar din start. Mai bine legal si in siguranta pina mai deschid si eu ochii sa inteleg mai bine sistema din tara aceasta, decit ilegal si cu plus 400$ in buzunar.
    Eu aplic prin avocat.

  135. viKtoria Says:

    Ion…uite este o forma care se indeplineste online si nu e nimik greu…si nu ai ce gresi ca e informatie ce tine de tine…. si in plus scrii scrisoare unde motivezi de ce anume vrei sa ramii aici inka pe un timp, si mai trebuie sa arati un kont bankar de vreo 5000$..asta se face foarte usor….daca aceia mai au nevoie de dokumente (desi inafara de aceste .nu mai cer nimik)..apoi faci rost, ma rog poate ai uitat vreo kopie sa pui in plik…si e normal ca ei aleg akolo cui sa-i deie viza si kui nu..nu stiu care sunt criteriile..dar viza turistika e ca si viza J1 adika se obtine 50%-50%…eu am facut singura si am primit..in plus eu cind am aplikat noi eram 4 fete si al toate odata ne-a acceptat…si fara avokat si fara keltuiala de bani si fara mari probleme… repet viza o obtii dupa kum ti-e norocul..ca nu dau la toti si nu stiu care sunt criteriile..da avokatii nui askultati ka ei vor bani si nu mai adauga ei nimik……la urma urmei viza aceasta nu e atit de importanta ca sa aplici ku ajutorul avokatului..iata cind mierge vorba de azil politik akolo da…e serioasa treaba….dar viza turistika nu merita atitea jertve..

  136. Anichka Says:

    Salut tuturor. Am trecut cu privirea prin aceasta discutzie shi am vazut ca sint multi care au ramas dezamagiti de serviciile asha zisului “avocat” shi “ofitzer de immigrare” Ilie Zdragat. Intentzionez sa dau in judecata acest individ, daca mai e cineva care doreshte sa se alature sau daca deja sa intentat procesul verbal va rog mult sa ma contactatzi pe adresa crushenigma@aol.com El trebuie sa plateasca pentru minciunile shi toti bani estorcatzi de la oameni.

  137. Andrey Says:

    Ilya do not worry noi suntem mult mai multi care neai ajutat si suntem foarte multumiti de rezultate. Dumnezeu sa te binecuvinteze si sati ajute in continuare dar celor rai si careti doresc raul prin aceste comentarii si falsificari vor primi rasplata dupa faptele lor. Noi suntem cu tine grupa din florida 25 persoane sper sa nu ne uitat.

  138. Anichka Says:

    Toate mesajele de sustinere pentru Ilya sint false … scrise de “oamenii lui”, “prietenii lui sau persoane pe care le are la mina” Nu credetzi tot acest Bull S**t.

  139. Nicolai Says:

    eiii lume haide sa uitam de Ilya si oricum nu mai atrageti atentia la cei ce il protejeaza, fiindca aceste persoane defapt e doar una sau doua, fiindca compania multstimatului Dragat incearca sa se protejeze la reclama proasta dar adevarata din cite cred eu, eu am vorbit doar o singura data cu el la telefon, si sincer eu miam facut o impresie rea despre el,vocabularul lui in limba romina(un cuvint in romina, unul in rusa), si nu prea cred ca el ar face fatsa nici intr-o instanta de judecata, DECI NU ATRAGETI VA ROG ATENTIA LA CEI CARE IL PROTEJEAZA, ASTA NU MERITA. Oricum nu cred ca cel care a vizitat acest saite mai apeleaza la serviciile lui.

  140. Nicolai Says:

    deci intrebarea mea ar fi: eu am viza J1 pina la sfirsitul anului, si vreau cumva so prelungesc am 8 luni state in SUA legal si mai am 3 luni, acum cum pot sami prelungesc Viza care ar fi metoda mai usoara, sint sanse de cistig prin azil politic? si daca da datimi va rog datele de contact al unui avocat bun :D inafara de Dragat varog.

  141. Sergiu Says:

    Salut .. ajutatima va rog..cum pot sa aplic la azil politic fiind ilegal in state(dupa cit timp pot sa aplic dupa ce expira viza si cit timp duriaza ) si cam ce caz sar potrivi cu Transnistria?

  142. Victor Says:

    ^ Sergiu, in legatura cu azilul, poti aplica in decurs de un an de la intrarea in state. Daca vrei, lasa email-ul tau, iti scriu detalii

  143. Sergiu Says:

    del.sergiu.ds@mail.ru i-mi scrii aici Victor

  144. Anna Says:

    Victor poti sa-mi scrii si mie detalii pls….vintu_anna@yahoo.com…viza mi-a expirat acum pe 10 septembrie 2011 am vrut sa aplic pt viza turistica insa am fost sfatuita mai bine sa dau direct la azil politic…daca cunosti care motivatii in obtinerea azilului politic au cea mai mare rata de castig…Daca sunt pt a 3 vara in USA cu J1 poate asta influienta cumva ???

  145. viKtoria Says:

    dragii mei faptul azilului cu tema Transnistriei nu va svatui ca e tare mare problema acolo care nici lumea nu o stie…e o mare mafie akolo…..scriu pentru ca singura sunt de akolo….. si am cistigat acum vara azilul cu un alt caz care este la fel de puternic

  146. viKtoria Says:

    si in general sunt 3 teme care sunt aici puternice si luati cu ele azilul…..EXCEPTIE FACE POLITICA!!!! nu transnistria si nu 7 aprilie……

  147. Alexandru Says:

    Dati-mi va rog si mie detalii la azilul politic
    sancis_i@yahoo.com Va multumesc mult…

  148. Alexandru Says:

    Victoria poti sa ma ajuti sau sami dai detalii referitor la azil..?

  149. Dumitru Says:

    Privet, vad multe comentarii aici, si fiind in situatia voastra 5 luni in urma. Luind parte la protestele din 7 aprilie 2009 am si dovezile respective: poze, video am obtinut azilul prin organizatia www.ivsoi.org
    pretul mea convenit,dupa care am inceput procesul cu ei si ma costat $3000 tipm de 3 luni am obtinut totul, nusitu informatia poate va va fi de folos.

  150. Nadina_Verde Says:

    Buna la toti! Alex uite iti dau un numar de telefon 1-866-229-0407 dinsii lucreaza de luni pina vineri incepind la 9 pina la 5 pacific time eu cu dinsii am luat azilul….

  151. Nadina_Verde Says:

    nistiu sinii viktorya da vadcai mare clantsanoasa si invidioasa vidati la dinsa jizni ne udalasi semeni o desovca

  152. Bratani Says:

    Mrs, ilie e star dupa cum se vede-mai aveti cel pupa in fund? nul cunosc dar am aruncat o privire peste saitul emigration-visa.com si e multa informatie acolo cum se fac procesele care va intereseaza!

  153. vikin$ Says:

    ce dibilizm moldovnesc

  154. parazitii Says:

    Pretik,,, multe-am mai vazut la viata mea dar asa nechipzuiti rar mi so intilnit sa vad…..cind zeci de persoane scriu pozitiv de persoana si 2 persoane negativ atunci meas inchipui ca persoanele cu clonul negativ au ceva probleme mentale sau poate nu le merge bine in viata personala. Sunt intimplator aici pe acest profil deoarece am venit si eu in state de putin timp si un prieten mea recomandat acest site sa apot comunica cu persoane din Moldova dar, ce am vazut e ca 5 incinati se staruie sa convinga celelate persoane ca ilie zdragat este in tot felul.
    Ciao la toti.

  155. Ecaterina Says:

    Salutare. Am si eu o intrebare …Am venit cu viza j1 anul acesta in State…. si m-am decis sa ramin printre ultimile zile :( dar totusi nu vreau sa mai stau ilegal aici ..de aceea ma gindesc ce ar fi mai bine sa fac pentru a ma documenta… azilul politic,casatoria?? ceea ce ii legat de casatorie,sunt state unde pot fi mai multe sanse de a obtine green card-ul daca te casatoresti cu un cetatean american ? eu sunt acum in Chicago,si multi spun ca aici ii un pic mai greu de a obtine GC (( deoarece aici deja sunt prea multi emigranti care fac asa metode pentru a se legaliza. Sau daca mai stie cineva daca sunt colegii care primesc fara documente??

  156. Valentina Says:

    Salutare !!! Ecaterina am venit si eu in state prin mai anula cesta pe aceeasi viza j1 dar in luna iunie am apelat la o organizatie pot sati las numarul de telefon si saitu lor 18662990407-www.ivsoi.org prin care la moment am obtinut statutul de refugiat incearca la ei.

  157. Valentina Says:

    ilie eu si cu sotul iti miltumim pentru efortul pe care lai depus pentru noi si amu suntem in sua legal ne bucuram de viata da de idioti care scriu vorbe urite si ginduri inselatoare e plina lumea tu nu lua in cap ce scriu ei. Go ilie go ilie go ilie suntem de partea ta AAA crditul nostru

  158. tolea Says:

    Ilusha noroc de la Toela si Valera din Cicago ne mai tsii minte? Suntem multsumitsi de lucru vostru.

  159. Andrei Says:

    Ilya succes in continuare si nu lua in seama ce scriu dusmanii…

  160. Florinel Says:

    Florin ma numesc si o salutare la toti, parerea mea este urmatoarea: Fiecare individ in parte poate sa ea decizia s-a cu cine sa lucre si condiitii-le de a lucra, in particular eu impreuna cu Ilie am lucrat si i-mi pare un om foarte modest, educat si de la bun inceput me-a spus ce ma asteapta in caz pozitiv si in caz negativ, de aceea va pot da un sfat din partea mea puteti fi sigur daca veti avea nevoe de serviciile sale il puteti contacta la 19168388781 si D-nea lui va va ajuta. Va urez la toti numai pace.

  161. olanash2011 Says:

    ilie suntem de partea ta pentru ca mintamita tie azi am casa am pe masa am cu si sa intretin familia aici in america

  162. development Says:

    Sal… recomand organizatia care neo ajiutat www.ivsoi.org

  163. Dumitru Says:

    Am verificat acest web: www.ivsoi.org am gasit multa informatie pozitiva si de folos !

  164. Anna Says:

    il cunosc destul de bine pe zdragat, shtiu limbajul care il foloseshte in vorbirea de zi cu zi de asemenea shi greshelile cind vine vorba de a scrie un text, Citind mesajele de sustinere a in favoarea lui am observat aceleashi gresheli aceashi tactica … foarte ushor am detectat-o Nimeni nu tie Dusman draga Ilie pur shi simplu tinete de cuvint shi fa lucru care zici cal faci pentru care eshti platit. Eu nu shtiu cum voi dar eu iam dat ff multi bani mai bine de un an in urma shi n-a facut nimik, tot sun pe numaru care voi toti il lasatzi aici shi nimeni nu raspunde … sau pune pe altcineva sa vb in locul lui. Asta nu e nici o dovada de seriozitate, punctualitate shi profesionalism. Cam de ce sia scimbat firma, web-ul samd. Am multe intrebari la care tot ashtept raspuns, shi nici nu pot da de nimeni ca sa mi se raspunda, permanent e ocupat shi nu are timp sau nu raspunde la telefon

  165. Nicolas$$$ Says:

    Florin poti sini spui cam in citi bani si timp vo rezovlat ilie voua procedurile si ai prinit documentile ca vreu si eu si dau la legalizare si dau peste niste advocati scunchi anaibii ser 10000 pe caz mumtumesc anticipat

  166. De Anonim Says:

    o satzi ceara intre 1500 shi 3000 cit timp deja????? cind i-a veni lui sa faca vreo ceva, daca inca e in stare de asa ceva.( sau poate pur shi simplu sa-ti i-a banii shi sa dispara si sa nu mai dai de el) El nu e Avocat sa tzii cont de acest lucru. Te-as sfatui sa nu te adresezi la el ca daca FBI se porneshte pe urmele lui atunci va fi rau de el shi pentru toti care au obtinut actele prin manipulare de lege, Daca shi cineva a obtinut ceva prin aceasta “persoana” SHI TOATE ACESTEA NUMAI DACA SUB NUMELE DE Nicolas$$$ NU SE ASCUDE INSASHI zdragat. TARE MAI PUTE A ZDRAGAT DACA SINCER

  167. David Andrei Says:

    De Anonim ce agresiv(a) mai esti de parca-ti fura bucata te piine. Totusi am verificat la Secretary of State Department of California daca Zdragati si Organizatia s-a e legal inegistrata si funcionaza activ si am dat de o informatie pozitiva, intradevar e totul curat si dupa lege, apoi mai adaug personal cunosc persoane care au fost aujutati de el si nu au fost amagiti sau el sa dispara dupa cum spui tu De Anonim(a) tot asa Organizatia este acreditata si recunoscut de Homeland Security si Department of Justice, Board of Immigration Appeals Executive Office, Ambasada Republicii Moldova din Washington, Ambasada Statelor Unite din Chisinau, la fel am vazut licenza atirnata pe perete in oficiu la el dar tu scrii tot felul de informatii inselatoare si duci lumea in eruoare de parca tu le esti sponsorul acestor oameni s-au poate chear esti initiatorul acestor bunturi impotriva lui Zdragat. Intradevar poate a avut omul slabaciuni si a cazut in momente grele si rele si nu a avut sprijinul pozitiv si corect dar la moment? eu inainte de-al recomanda prietenilor mei am vorbit cu el in persoana la ei in oficiu, si-l cunosc personal pe ZDRAGAT ILIE. Cred ca FBI se va lua dupa tine mai degraba pentru ca sunt suta la suta ZDRAGAT din prima zi cind a inceput acest efort ei il au in consideratie dupa cum in USA toti si toate lucrurile sunt sub controlul FBI.

  168. Vladik@565 Says:

    Pravet vrau eu si vi spun am apilat la advakat tipa profesional in san frantisko am plati 12000$ si tolky to ni kakoi mne dali otkaz na sobesedovani si advakatu o zis sorry vlad am fakut tot ci am putu amu trebui si mirgem in sud da pentru asta trebu si ni platesti 3000$ pintru fiicari sud takchto mi bini platam si eu 1500$ sau 3000$ di cit am pirdut 12000$

  169. Anonim Says:

    Ilie Zdragat care te ascunzi sub “David Andrei” sint client/a tau/ta caruia/careia iai spus ca inca ashtepti aprobarea de la Homeland Security Ce tot indrugi prostii pe aici???? Cit despre FBI mai vedem noi ce va fi atunci cind vor vb cu toti cei care leai luat banii shi nu au mai auzit de tine sau ai chemat immigrarea ca sai trimita in MD. Mesajele de pe odnoklassniki leai shters dar de aici nu le poti shterge. Mii ciuda ca ai promis shi miam facut iluzii ca in sfirshit voi duce o viatza normala…. shi inca tziam dat shi bani pe care totushi am sperantza sai vad inapoi. Eu shtiu ca tu stai ca pe ace cind vine vb de FBI..tu asta mie miai spus….. ei vor scotoci in adincul trecutului afacerilor tale asha ziselor binefaceri “creshtinule”. Dumnezeu nu bate cu batzu sa shtii asta

  170. Alexa Says:

    Ce sensatii dure !!!! Anonim asa slujbe repede pun capastru omului desfrinat apoi mai trag cu ochiul pe aici si tot vad texte intregi despre ilie, ilie credca daca facea el ceva contra legii avea sa fie inhamat de ei de ceva timp inapoi. Apropo nu pot intelege cum un om care se ascunde de lege poate sa atraga clientii si apoi sai dea pe mina emigrarii tot legii scrii ceva fara sens nu-l apar dar am avut ocazia sa muncesc cu avocatii cot la cot si sunt cunoscuta cu sistemul legii; mai sus am citit cine are intrebari sau sunt nemultumiti sa va adresati direct sau sa telefonati uite eu am telefonat si mea raspuns angazatii lui in acel timp am si scris la posta electronica mea raspuns timp de 4 zile nu vad ceva insuficient sa comis acest om.

  171. Anonim Says:

    Draga Alexa nu te obosi tare cu mesaje de aparare. Pur si simplu o sa vad ce se intimpla cind acest individ va fi denuntzat Si am so fac inainte sa plec acasa nimeni nu a facut nimic pin acum pentru ca el ii are pe toti la mina Tare nu mash surprinde sa aflu ca au fost deschise credite in bank shi bani luati - el doar are informatzia despre tare multi oameni. O sai fie bine inca vreo 6 luni. Dar tu Alexa tare mai miroshi a Ilie

  172. ilie zdragat Says:

    Va salut pe toti, de ceva vreme nu am intrat pe aici. Anonim,Alexa,Vlad si ceilalti va rog sa argumentati la propria persoana. Anonim daca ai probleme personale sau profesionale cu mine teash ruga sa ma contactezi la 1916 838 8781 Ilie si vom discuta problema in cauza daca esti atit de inteligent si educat dupa cum te descrii aici, ce tine de FBI lucrurile care le scrii poftim putem discuta la un officiu central governamental FBI Building problema pe care o ai, mult mai mult persoanele care au plingeri sau neplaceri la fel va rog sa ma contactati la 1916-838-8781 sau ilya_zdragat@yahoo.com cu orice problema sau ne multumire pe care o aveti sunteti bine veniti in oficiul organizatie adresa o puteti gasi la www.ivsoi.org in rest daca are cineva intrebari sau are nevoe de ceva consultatii va rog sa vizitati www.ivsoi.org pentru a obtine un raspuns la intrebarile pe care le aveti. Anonim special pentru tine public anunts sa ma contactezi sa discutam si sa vedem ce probleme ai si cu ce teash putea ajuta sau lasi si tu numarul tau de telefon or poshta electronica ca noi toti de pe acest sait sa te putem contacta public si deschis.
    Cu stima si respect va urez la toti sarbatori fericite de iarna.

  173. Anonim Says:

    Era si te asteptat sa apari pe aici sub numele tau adevarat si sa te aperi, sa te dai drept om bun Sint cam ocupat acum… dar la sigur te contactez eu, am mai mare interes ca tine

  174. Ilie zdragat Says:

    Anonim eu tot timpul mam aflat cu numele meu adevarat aici dar tu ce tot indrunci pe aici? din cite inteleg iti trebuiesc urgent dar nu dai nici un telefon nimic. Cum sunt eu ma cunoashte lumea mai bine shi cei care scriu de rau shi cei care scriu de bine toti au dreptul la opinia sa, tu vad cati ascunzi shi numele shi prenumele mai ales daca eshti atit de itneresat shi teai dat opinia facuta public atunci prezintate public sa te cunoasca lumea cine eshti cu ce team ofensat? shi ce faradelegi au fost comise in directia ta personal din partea mea? asta ash dori sa mentionez sa dau evidentsa departamentului FBI local. Astai tot ce am vrut sati spun.

  175. Anonim Says:

    Vad ca eshti tare activ aici si sub numele tau adevarat, vad ca nu mai sint sustinatori ci doar tu, da numi fac eu griji … ca acushi vor aparea. o sa te contactez stai fara grija, cit despre public “Le dau doar un sfat sa nu se lege de tine pentru ca nu te tzii de cuvind” Bietzii studenti pe care iai amagit shi leai luat banii shi au fost nevoiti sa plece in MD … pe cine intereseaza pot da shi nume … shii puteti gasi pe odnoklassniki ca sa vb cu ei toti va vor spune aceeashi poveste. N-am interes sa ponegresc pe nimeni pe nedrept. Iar numele meu il vei afla la timpu potrivit … Nu de alta da cine shtie ce mai e in capu tau

  176. Anonim Says:

    am omis raspunsul la intrebarea ta referitor la ce rau miai facut? Ai promis sa ma ajuti cu actele inca din vara trecuta si ai disparut de pe odnaklassniki am incercat sa iau legatura cu tine sami spui ce se intimpla shi abia acum tziai facut aparitzia iaca carei problema mea cu tine Da a so rezolv eu Sa se mai limpeseasca apele La tine tot e asha de usor cind vorbeshti shi ca pare ca deam ai acte pin numai primeshti tu banii si actele dupa care de parca nici nai mai existat. Da deam mam convins singur ca ceea ce pare ushor si bine nu miroase a bine deloc

  177. rodika Says:

    eu am venit in SUA cu viza J1,este a treia oara deja si am hotarit sa ramin.acuma sunt in asteptarea vizei B2 pe jumatate de an dar as vrea sa am o viza cu o durata mai mare de timp.as vrea viza care se ofera pe 10 ani si nu stiu cu cine sa ma consult.sunt intr-un orasel mic si nu am cu cine sa vb in privinta la viza.as vrea sa stiu cum o pot face,de ce am nevoi si cit ar costa toata aceasta procedura.cine ma poate ajuta…va rog!!!!!!!

  178. Anonim Says:

    pentru Ilie:
    Mio trebuit putin timp ca sa caut stirea asta pe unimedia, uite cam la ce mam referit cind am mentionat biroul federal de investigatie. http://unimedia.md/?mod=news&id=37094
    shi mai ales la asta
    “Noi nu avem drept scop să-i pedepsim dur pe acei care sunt în căutarea unei vieți mai bune. Este vorba despre oameni care fac profit pe seama acestora. Ei folosesc sistemul nostru de imigrare generos al cărui obiectiv este să ajute persoane cu gânduri bune să vină aici”, a declarat la o conferinţă de presă agentul Departamentului de investigații de securitate internă, Dan Lane.
    Cred ca eshti la curent cu asha caz si cred ca cam de asta o incepi de la 0
    Diferentza intre tine shi ei nui mare, tu shtii ce am eu in vedere
    mai Mult nam ce scri referitor la discutia asta
    Asa ca pregateshte sa intorci banii sau sa apari in fata judecatii

  179. Andrei Says:

    Nu alta da suna a piar

  180. ilie zdragat Says:

    Anonim daca ai in cap asha ginduri shi te ocupi cu asha ceva atunci e problema ta, tot iti mai spun sati faci griji de tine ci nu de altii cu gindurile tale compuse si argumente false. Inca odata iti mai spun scrieti numele cine eshti shi prenumele sa te shtie toata lumea de eshti atit de istet sau uite numarul de telefon 9168388781 ma gaseshti oricind, daca nu raspund lasami voicemail shi te voi telefona daca aintradevar ai probleme si neplaceri.

  181. ilie zdragat Says:

    Rodia referitor la tine intra pe www.ivsoi.org shi sunt formele necesare shi instructiile pentru ati procesa actele in continuare sua mai uitate pe www.uscis.gov

  182. MARKUS Says:

    Salut tare la toti ! AM SI EU O INTREBARE CARE MA FRAMINTA DE MULT TIMP!
    AM UN FRATE CARE A PLECAT IN SUA CU 2-3 ANI IN URMA PRIN WORK AND TRAVEL! ACUMA 5 LUNI A APLICAT LA UN AZIL POLITIC SAU NU MAI STIU EU LA CE … SI S-A TREZIT CA A OBTINUT GREEN-CARD!
    ACUMA SE PRIMESTE CA EL A RAMAS ACOLO ILEGAL, SI APOI A CAPATAT GREEN CARDUL … CHIAR NU DEMULT A FOST ACASA IN MOLDOVA PENTRU O LUNA SI A PLECAT INAPOI DUPA ASTA! ACUMA VREU SA STIU EL FIIND DEJA LEGAL ACOLO … SE MAI PUNE IN VIGOARE PEDEAPSA PENTRU MINE CA EU FIIND RUDA DE GRADUL 1 CA SA NU POT OBTINE VISA ? FIINDCA EU ANUL ACESTA M-AM INSCRIS LA WORK AND TRAVEL CA SA PLEC SI EU IN SUA! SI DACA DA aTUNCI DE CE ? SI DACA NU LA FEL … P.S: DACA SE PRIMESTE CA AJUNG SI EU ACOLO … CUM MA POT LEGALIZA ? MULTUMESC MULT !
    SCRIETI AICI RASPUNS SAU PE EMAIL :
    marcelcontulescu@yahoo.com
    Multumesc anticipat!

  183. viKtoria Says:

    RODIKA UN SFAT SI DIN PARTEA MEA: mergi pe alaturi de informatie si tot ce tine de numele ILIE ZDRAGAT…. oameni buni nu credeti in omul acesta si sa nu va lasati speriati de ce zice el….de bulding FBI…care ma? iti dai seama ce zici…lasule mai tare te-ai teme tu sa te apropii de acel building….desigur ca un student sarac si amagit de unu ca tine se teme sa se bage in afaceri ca sa te traga la raspundere aflindu-se nelegal…dar sa stii ca banii se fac- sanatate sa fie, DAR TU TICALOSULE TINE MINTE CA DUMNEZEU NU BATE CU BATSUL……ai s-o patesti odata si odata…..

  184. Antonescu Says:

    Viktoria ce infiorata esti-mai stergete pe la bot ca aduce a saliva

  185. viKtoria Says:

    bot ai tu needucatule…..da de saliva nu-ti face griji pe tine nu te va lua piraul!!!!!!

  186. Antonescu Says:

    Seai mai patit de esti asa disperata? si tu si anonim sau in viatsa nu va merji ghini cu haracter de idiot?

  187. Anonim Says:

    Auzi tu Antonescu-le aka Zdragat IDIOT eshti tu … M-am adresat cu ceva anume la pesoana ta???? stai frumos in banka ta shi vorbeshte doar cind eshti intrebat… needucatule… pic de cultura n-ai in tine

  188. viKtoria Says:

    kiar sunt fericita si anume dupa prostia ca m-am legat cu al-de Zdragat care m-a dus in ripa….un alt om bun m-a slavat si akum sunt cu Green Card de altfel eram sa fiu prin MD….. si nu suntem aici toti ca sa il facem de rusine..ca de ar fi fost om de treaba lumea nu ar vorbi de rau despre Zdragat…..fiecare isi spune opinia si mai ales daca am avut de suferit cu “ajutorul si serviciile lui profesionale”…asa ca taci si inghite….nimeni nu nascoceste nimik si mai mult ka atit nimeni nu-l invideaza pe acest tikalos…daca si-ar face treaba dupa kum se reclama aici nu ar fi scrise atitea prostii in partea lui..

    CORECT E UN IDIOT… ca pe semama la niste oameni care sunt adusi de soarta aici si vai si cum fac niste bani..iar el s-a gasit profesional…esti un tikalos ca te plimbi cu masini cumparate pe spinarea si lacrmilie sarmanilor care ii lasi in drum..
    mai repet odata DUMNEZEU NU BATE CU BATUL……. banii se fac dar raul te va ajunge odata si odata…
    TIKALOS TIKALOS TIKALOS TIKALOS TIKALOS TIKALOS TIKALOS TIKALOS TIKALOS TIKALOS TIKALOS TIKALOS TIKALOS TIKALOS TIKALOS TIKALOS TIKALOS TIKALOS TIKALOS TIKALOS TIKALOS TIKALOS TIKALOS TIKALOS TIKALOS TIKALOS TIKALOS TIKALOS TIKALOS TIKALOS TIKALOS TIKALOS TIKALOS TIKALOS TIKALOS TIKALOS TIKALOS TIKALOS TIKALOS TIKALOS TIKALOS TIKALOS TIKALOS TIKALOS

  189. Anonim Says:

    Viktoria iti dau un sfat Da-l in judecata o satzi sufle intrun loc daca ai Green Card Eu cunosc multi oameni care au suferit de pe urmele lui shi care tare ar vrea sa faca acest lucru. Te incurajez sa te vb cu cineva care cunoashte legea shi daca e nevioe iti dau numele persoanelor care ar depune marturii impotriva lui

  190. viKtoria Says:

    eu ,anonim , oi face lukru ista dar mai inkolo cid oi lua pasaportul caci akum nu vreau sa-mi puna piedici ca cit de cit are informatia mea caci m-am pornit si eu cu el sa dau la azil…de aiai nu fac acum asa kestii ka poate sa ma puna pe mine in glod…si aici stau cu un alt nume :)…. dar stii am vb cu avokatul meu care m-a skos din glodul in care m-a bagat Zdragat..si noi am hotarit sa mai asteptam si la el au mai ajuns inforatii si alti studenti kare au nimerit in minciunile lui asa ca orikind gasesc dovezi….urmeaza s ama gindesc daca acum dupa toate cistigate :merita sa o fac or nu….am doua contracte de la el care l-am semnat eu si care mi l-a trimis un baiat din CAlifornia cind l-au semnat ei si daca le aduk ka dovezi acela o nimereste bine cu totul…dar iarasi mai rabd eu..am akum alte kestii…thank de sustinere!!!

  191. Antonescu Says:

    si prajesti mai sus la tati comentarili ci pintru dinsu sintem mai multi cu adevarat nheo ajiutat >>ilii sintem di partia ta

  192. Anonim Says:

    Antonescu-le mai ai nevoie de citiva ani in shcoala sa te inveti a scrie si a vorbi cu oamenii NECARTURARULE Eu lichina cunosc mai mult de 20 persoane care au ramas fara cel putin 2000$ fiecare, shi alte persoane care au dat shi 7 mii, cazuri unde sotu shi sotia au dat cite 2000 fiecare shi au fost nevoiti sa plece vara asta la MD ca ilie nu a facut nimic shi nau mai putut da de el

  193. viKtoria Says:

    deloc nu ma supara cuvintele tale,poti spune tot ce iti vine prin minte….pur si simplu da-ti seama la ceea ce se spune mai in sus…TOTI CARE AU FOST AMAGITI ISI SPUN PARERILE IN ADRESA LUI ZDRAGAT, DAR TU “OM CU CARTE” TE ARUNCI IN ADRESA NOASTRA DESI TIE NIMIK NU TI S-A SPUS JIGNITOR…ei da e treaba ta cu tine nu ma leg eu…nu am treaba si timp pentru tine….tu stii oameni care au ajuns la un bun final..dar eu am fost amagita si inka multi alti oameni ii kunosc asa ca taci akolo si sustine-l pe imbecilul cela si nu iti ridika autoritatea injosindu-ne pe noi care suntem impottriva…
    ITI REPET SA FI FOST OM DE TREABA SA SI MERS KU NOI KU KAZURILE SI SA FI PIERDUT ERA UNA…DAR CIND A LUAT CAPIKA SI O DISPRAUT APU TREBUIE SA-L BLAGOSLOVIM? STAI INTR-O PARTE SI SUSTINEL TININD APA IN GURA…. ADIOS

  194. Igor Says:

    Privet vsem. Ja moldavskuy ne ochen ponemau, no odno skasat mogy. Ilie Zdragat ochen silno menja podstavil i obmanyl. Otdal emu poslednie dengi za dokymentu, on raboty ne zdelal , isches na zvonki ne otvechaet. Y etogo cheloveka daje license nety chto delat kakie libo dokymentalnue procesu.
    Kogda yje bydet pravosydie? Pochemy na eto mnogie zakruvaut glaza? On ved obmanyl ne tolko menja yveren. Chelovek etim na juzn zarabatuvaet obbiraya drygih.

  195. MK Says:

    Salutare tutoror care au avut de a face cu Ilie sau se gindesc sa o faca… E UN AFERIST. el, fratele sau Pavel Zdragat, Prietena sa-ucraineanca etc. Pe odnoklassniki a existat o grupa cu persoane amagite de ei…si era un numar impunator. Personal cunosc 4 oameni care i-au dat 1500$ si…. adio! Am gasit alte persoane din diferite parti al Americii care au patit la fel. NU IL CREDETI!!! Vorbeste mult si anagramat, nu cunoaste ca lumea nici o limba- nici romana,nici rusa, nici engleza. Multumita lui am fost nevoiti toti acesti oameni sa venim inapoi acasa….
    Dar Dumnezeul e mare si am gasit avocat ADEVARAT si cale de a ne intoarce.LEGAL. De-abia asteptam sa venim in state si sa-l dam de gol pe acest “talentat” jurits. Dovezile le-am pastrat, avocat avem. Asa ca multe nu scriu, sa nu-i stric “surpriza”. Oameni buni, ca sa nu stati mult la dubii, cereti-i nr. de licenta….(cind eu am cerut-o a zis “e pe perete, nu pot sa o scot’) si veti afla ca nu exista, omul acesta ILIE ZDRAGAT se joaca cu focul si legea si crede ca va ramine nepedepsit, nu va lasati amagiti!!!!
    Succes tuturor!

  196. MK Says:

    Igor, zdrastvui! Ea napisal na rumynskom, poetomu pi6u tebe… da, ne ty odin takoi, da, nas mnogo i my za pravosudie. Uje byla ideea na sovmestnyii sudebnyii isk, 4em boli6e liudei soberem, tem lu46e i tem doli6e on budet v tiurme sideti. Ne ot4aivaisea, pi6i!

  197. Igor Says:

    MK spasibo, za otvet. A tebe on 4to zdelal?

  198. Anonim Says:

    O Da ego padruga- ona high maintenance devushka(ktota doljen cupiti ei vse shmotchi i vseo tam … shto ona hochet) K stati ona toje paralegal hochet stati, hodit v shcolu po atoi povode

  199. Igor Says:

    A tak eto izza nie takoi shum? Menya kinul Ilie Zdragat, a gde na neo mogno posmotret?

  200. MK Says:

    Anonim, Igor- podruga ego menea ne interesuet, tak kak Ilie skryvaetsea, vy6el na nee i na4al pro nego spra6ivati, na odnoklassnikah, da oni i v Facebook esti i vezde v nete, prosto poi6ite.
    A 4to sdelal? 4to i vsem ostalinym- denigi vzeal i ni4ego krome boltovni ne sdelal, KIDALOVO. Li4no znaiu liudei kotorie iz-za nego postradali

  201. MK Says:

    Pavlik Zdragat 23 года, California, США este fratele lui pe odnoklassniki, pe prietena o cheama Anna

  202. MK Says:

    fetelor, formati haremul lui “Ilusha’ si traiti fericite, nu va bagati acolo unde nu nu intelegeti. Puteti sa scrieti cit vreti, ride acela care ride la urma.
    p.s: aici nu sunt echipe de fotbal ‘p/u si impotriva” exista o persoana/grup de persoane care incalca legea si amageste oamenii

  203. MK Says:

    apropo, sa nu uit- familia ZDRAGAT e/e in lista neagra a Ambasadei USA din Moldova, asa ca daca vei dori sa vii in vizita in Moldova, sa stii ca autoritatile de-abia te asteapta, succes!!!

  204. Anonim Says:

    menea toje ne interesuiet ego i ego padruga … mne interesuiet to sto on vzeal denghi y propal, vseo shto ea imela vedu ato to shto oni vse vmeste
    Dorogaya moya Lenachka ea nekogo ne zaviduiu a na schiot kto glupyi ili lenivyi esceo posmotrim. Tebea ne Kto ne spashival nichego
    POchemu dlea tebea tak vajna shto Amnistrator saita pochistil vse ata??? ili ato tebea Ilie prosil shto b staviti tut coment???

  205. anatoli Says:

    faraonilor va roade la stomak si nebunit? eu lichno cu 3 ani inapoi mam adresat la ilii dupacare am fost ajutat calduros prietenos
    tat timpu cind al sunam raspunde la tilifon-dadaca nu rapsunde ma suna inapoi pi urma si tu iuda di anonim, viktorya, mksi blejii shelalti f…teti capu amu c el vo luat bani so sisparut?
    patsanii mei mei 2 luni in urma so adresat la el si mai daunazi o avut interviu la emigration sii tot normal
    eu blea az ma apuc di capu vostru ini suni tati cunoscutii si prieteni care o fost ajutati di ilii minimum 30studienti stiu sa scrii comentarii aici si am si pun la cale pi tati carei situ sis ajiutati di dinsu sa scrie aici da voi sa luati o palca in gura daca va maninci limba si nu ai undi o scartina
    si timpitule si prostule si scrii tu di ambasada ilii o fost in moldova mai daunazi si ti maninci dingura ci abasad alo pus in lista neagra magarule si esti si tontolanule mergi la biserica si seriti ertari si nu ti pedepsasci dumnezau

  206. Viorel Says:

    Vreau sa ma adresez tururor celor care citesc acest forum si care au dubii in privinta domnului Ilie Zdragat.
    Din totdeauna am incercat sa fiu realist si va recomand si voua.
    Sa privim impreuna real lucrurile.

    Care este una din cele mai mari probleme ale business-ului? CONCURENTA! Anume ea stirneste “lupte” intre antreprenorii de rind si chiar intre corporatiile intregii lumi. Fuga pentru bani stirneste anmite jocuri murdare, in care faptele reale se ascund, iar minciuna se da drept adevar. Aceste jocuri manipuleaza multimea, care accepta informatia(ideea), fara a o filtra sau cerceta cit de corecta este. Anume aceasta multime este folosita de anumiti lideri politici pentru a stirni proteste. Cum spunea Lapusneanu - “Prosti, da’ multi”

    Acelasi joc murdar este dus de concurentii domnului Ilie, care aduc la cunostinta noastra niste lucruri care sunt la prima vedere reale, dar care nu pot fi nicidecum dovedite.
    Internetul ne da posibilitate sa fim anonimi, sa ne expunem parerea (in cazurile de mai sus mincinile)fara frica de a fi gasiti sau pedepsiti.

    Ce vad eu aici mai sus, sunt doar niste persoane (sau poate chiar una) care au ca scop, eliminarea concurentului, prin anumite vorbe, in care nu au legatura directa cu realitatea.
    Unul chiar m-a amuzat:

    “a luat banii si a disparut” - Unde? Cine isi permite sa-si schimbe asa des locul de trai? Cine o sa riste pentru o suma mizera sa traiasca toata viata in frica?

    Asa ca va recomand sa ignorati vorbele stupide si lipsite de sens si sa revenim la realitate.
    Ma numesc Viorel, sunt persoana reala, nu fac parte din falimia Zdragat, l-am cunscut pe d. Ilie, aici in USA.
    Ma aflam si eu in situtie grea cu documentele, dar m-am adresat dupa ajutor la dumnealui.
    In primul rind, mi s-au explicat riscurile, apoi termenurile si suma. Anume eu am fost cel care am luat decizia, nu am fost “hipnoitizat” cu promisiuni si vorbe goale. Am inteles care sunt obligatiile d-lui Ilie, cu ce anume ma poate ajuta si unde sunt deja de sine statator.
    Multi gresesc cind cred ca se adreseaza ca la magazin “Am platit banii - primesc garantat document”. Dar lucrurile nu-s chiar asa simple cum par.
    In cazul meu, am apelat la d. Ilie, pentru perfectionarea documentelor. Documentele au fost perfectionate si trimise la instantele cuvenite mai putin de 2 saptamini. Azi ma aflu la 2 pasi de Green Card, am deja confirmare de la centru de imigratii.
    Dumnealui si-a indeplinit promisiunea care a dat-o si mai mult ca atit, am fost insotit peste tot, nu am fost nevoit sa folosesc taxiul sau masina proprie intr-un oras necunoscut. Mult a contat si sustinerea morala. Pentru aceasta ii sunt foarte recunoscator si ii urez mult succes. Ma intristeaza faptul ca numele dumnealui este ponegrit pe nedrept de niste oameni fara simt.

    Spre final, vreau sa ma adresez studentilor care au ajuns aici, nu asteptati minuni de la ambasada Moldovei sau de la presedinte, dumeanvoastra sunteti aici pentru a va face un viitor, sunteti abia la inceput, daca doriti sa obtineti ceva, trebuie sa stiti sa jertfiti si citeodata sa mergeti chiar la risc. Eu va recomand sa va perfectionati documentele, sa va bucurati de aceleasi drepturi si sa traiti o viata fara frica.
    In cazul meu, totul a mers bine, pentru ca am am stiut sa fiu realist si nu am crezut in vorbe prostesti, ceea ce va recomand si voua.

    Succese!

  207. inna Says:

    Salut tuturor !
    Ma numesc Inna si adaug si eu citeva chestii clare, scurte prin ce am trecut si ce am semnat, apropo nu mi sa bagat mina in buzunar dar am achitat de buna voe dupa ce am citit acest contract apoi lam semnat si actul respectiv apoi am inceput procesul “DACA E NEVOE O SA BAT CLOPOTUL” la toti prietenii, cunostintele care am apelat la el tinind piept pentru Ilie Zdragat
    aici in special am tapat pentru voi nesimtitilor care vorbiti urit si minciuni…………….

    AICI INFO:

    Immigration Visa Services (IVS)
    8880 Cal Center Drive 4Th Floor Suite 400 Sacramento CA 95826
    Office:1-866-229-0407 Direct:1-916-838-8781
    Web: www.ivsoi.org E-mail: info.ivsoi.org

    Re:
    Madame:
    This correspondence shall serve to confirm that you have retained (IVS) to prepare an application for Asylum using your former status as a: J1 Visa, (IVS) will represent you on a flat-fee plus costs basis. Enclosed herewith please find a copy of the (IVS)-Client fee agreement. Please sign the agreement so we can complete and file your application. I want to confirm again your understanding that given the nature of this filing and your current immigration status in the United States this matter may be referred to immigration court for removal to Moldova. (IVS) fee does not include work before said court. Moreover you may need to present additional applications if your removal case is initiated.
    If you have any questions or concerns feel free to contact the undersigned. In addition please note that if you have an urgent matter after regular business hours or weekends you may reach us via e-mail at www.ivsoi.org look for the “Contact Us” tab. Please contact us for further information.
    Sincerely,
    Immigration Visa Services (IVS)
    Ilie zdragat

    ASTA NUI TOT

    IMMIGRATION VISA SERVICES
    8880 Cal Center Drive, 4Th Floor Suite 400, Sacramento CA 95826
    Office:1-866-229-0407 Direct:1-916-838-8781
    Info@emigration-visa.com
    Www.emigration-visa.com

    IMMIGRATION VISA SERVICES
    and
    CLIENT AGREEMENT

    PARTIES

    This contract is made on: between:………………. Immigration Visa Services, hereinafter referred to as and: ………….. hereafter referred to as ” Client”

    SCOPE OF RETENTION

    Client retains and employ Immigration Visa Services to act as Immigration Visa Services for Client for services presenting a claim for Asylum, Withholding of Removal and relief under the U.N. Convention Against Torture.

    FEE FOR IMMIGRATION VISA SERVICES

    In consideration regarding for the services provided by Immigration Visa Services with regard to the matter referred in second paragraph above, Client agrees to pay Immigration Visa Services the fees in the amount of: $………. receipt of which is hereby acknowledged.

    IMMIGRATION INTERVIEW

    This retainer agreement contemplate the services will be paid:$……….. when the contract is signed.

    APLEAL(S) AND OTHER LEGAL WORK

    This retainer agreement does not contemplate or include legal services relative to an appeal(s) to the board of Immigration Appeals (BIA), Federal Courts, Motion to Reconsider, Motion to reopen or matters related to employment work authorization.
    COSTS AND OTHER CHARGES

    Client agree to advantage or to reimburse Immigration Visa Services for any costs incurred, immediately upon presentation, arising out of the matter described in paragraph two herein-above. Costs include: Except INS and USCIS filing, tax, interpreter/translator, airline tickets. Immigration Visa Services may, at his hole discretion, advance said cost or enter a separate agreement with Client to compensate for the costs at a flat rate(s).
    All returned checks will be assessed a $30 charge. If Client present check that is not honored by the financial institution, Immigration Visa Services, reserve the rights to request that all future payments from Client be made either by cash, cashier check or money order. Immigration Visa Services also reserve the rights to withdraw from his representation, and reimbursement of fee will be subject to the terms outlines in paragraph, Three, Five, Seven, Eight and Nine.

    RETAINER AMOUNT

    Client agree to pay Immigration Visa Services, a retainer in the amount of:$……….. prior to a commencement of any services provided by Immigration Visa Services. Said retainer constitutes a true retainer, and is non-refundable as the Immigration Visa Services, is making him self and his stuff available for the Client
    The remainder of the contract fee, as specified in paragraph Three, above will be applied towards preserving the Immigration Visa Services time to work on this matter and services rendered. Initial( ).

    REIMBURSMENT FEE(S)/RETAINER

    Client understand that Immigration Visa Services is providing services on a flat fee plus coasts basis. In the event that Client or Immigration Visa Services terminate this agreement, Client agrees to the Immigration Visa Services will be entitled to to compensation of services render and the retainer advanced to Immigration Visa Services described on paragraph, Seven herein-above, is non-refundable.
    EXPERTS/ASSISTANTS

    Immigration Visa Services in his sole description, may employ experts, Investigators, translator/ interpreters, associate counsel, paralegal(s) and legal assistant(s) to assists the Immigration Visa Services with regard to the services matter. All such personal shall report exclusively to the IVS.
    PRESENTATIONS
    It is agreed that Immigration Visa Services, has made no guaranties regarding the outcome of this matter, and that all expression relative to it are matter s of only. Client further understands that the Immigration Visa Services fees described herein-ab Immigration Visa Services is not set by Law, but is negotiable between Immigration Visa Services and Client.

    AMENDMENTS

    This Immigration Visa Services-Client fee retainer agreement May only be modified by written instrument executed by the party to be charged.

    SOLE AGRREMENT

    This Immigration Visa Services-Client fee retainer agreement, with a total pf four pages, contains the sole agreement of the parties related to the subject matter set forth in paragraph Two, herein-above, and correctly set forth the rights, duties and obligations of each to the other as of the date of execution, Any prior agreements, promises, negotiations, or representations not expressly set forth in this instrument are not force and effect.

    CLIENT DUTIES

    Client agree to be truthful with Immigration Visa Services, cooperate, to keep Immigration Visa Services, informed of any information developments which may come to Client attention, to abide by this agreement, to pay Immigration Visa Services bills on time, and to keep Immigration Visa Services advised of Client address, phone number, whereabouts, and any changes in Client information and documents, and will personally appear at all meetings and services proceedings.

    SEVERABILITY IN EVENT OF PARTIAL INVALIDITY

    If any provision of this agreement is held in whole or in part to be unenforceable for any reason, the remainder of that provision and of the entire agreement will be sever-able and remain in effect.

    JURISDICTION AND VENUE

    Client signature bellow shall serve to acknowledge that the same has read and understood all of the foregoing terms and agrees to them as of the date immigration Visa Services, first provided services. If more then one Client signs bellow, each agrees to be liable, jointly and severally, for all obligations under this agreement. Client shall receive a full executed copy of this agreement.

    CLIENT:_____________________

    SIGNATUE:___________

    DATE:________

    Immigration Visa Services:____________________

    SIGNATURE:__________

    DATE:________

    STATEMENT OF SERVICES FEES AND COSTS DUE

    TO:

    FROM: Immigration Visa Services

    DATE:

    The fees and costs are as fallows:

    Fee: $…………
    Paid: $…………..
    Future costs ( To be billed at the future case ): $0,000.00
    Other: $0,000.00
    Payments to date: $0,000.00
    Total: $…………………

  208. Andy Says:

    eu blea az ma apuc di capu vostru ini suni tati cunoscutii si prieteni care o fost AMAJITI di ilii si blea faraonilor va roade la stomak si nebunit da voi sa luati o palca in gura daca va maninci limba
    ilii o fost la mulidova si a fost prinit cu apladismente de ambasadorul de la america! iar voi tati care i-ati dat mii de dolari si vi-i jele, ca vre si ilii sa-si cumpere smutci de ferma si masina cum nu-i la nimeni inchideti-va gurili!!!duseti-va la biserica si rugati-va la Dumnezeu sa puteti si voi sa amajiti asa ca dinsu si sereti ertare ca nu v-a facut mama bilbiit si n-aveti galstuk si custium si web-camera ca dinsu sa semanati cu “advokat”
    semnat Ilii sau Pavlik ZDRAMAGAR

  209. лысый дядя Says:

    привет всем! я не очень понимаю язык, но просто расскажу свою историю про свой опыт с Ильёй Здрагатом- много слов, никакого результата, кроме как липовых документов и потеряных денег и нервов. НЕнадёжный и рискованный вариант для тех у кого истекает срок визы и важно всё сделать грамотно.

  210. L.A. Says:

    Contractu cela nis de stes fundu nui bun Tu macar ai citit ce aiureli te pune el sa semnez??? Client understand that Immigration Visa Services is providing services on a flat fee plus coasts basis. In the event that Client or Immigration Visa Services terminate this agreement, Client agrees to the Immigration Visa Services will be entitled to to compensation of services render and the retainer advanced to Immigration Visa Services described on paragraph, Seven herein-above, is non-refundable.

    Tu intelegi clar ce se spune in acest articol???? Banii sint NON-REFUNDABLE no matter what. Cam asta e politica lui ii trimiti banii shi pe urma nu mai raspunde la telefon sau il are inchis, nici la emailuri nu raspunde, nici pe retelele de socializare nul mai poti gasi, si pe urma daca ceva asteas banii pentru timpu care l-am pierdut cu tine “Immigration Visa Services will be entitled to to compensation of services”

    Poate sa fi ajutat el si citi nu ar fi ajutat eu nu cred nici un mesaj de sustinere in favoarea lui. Despre mine insa pot spune ca De un an jumate ma tot poarta pe drumuri ca ba imi intoarce banii ba continua procesu, de sunat il sun shi nu raspunde sau are telefonul inchis. Eu tot sint persoana reala pe care nimeni nu a rugat sa las comentariu aici asa cum se spune sus :”ARE CONCURENTA” Cea mai josnica scuza pe care o poti auzi de la un “Avocat” Aici in SUA nici nu auzi asha ceva, am vazut oficii din cite persoane am cunoscut in asha domeniu, dar nici unul….. nici unul nu a mentionanat “CONCURENTA”

    Viorel: Dami te rog datele tale de contact email sau chiar telefonul m-ar interesa sa vb cu tine, daca tu atit il aperi. Nu mi-am lasat numele pentru ca nu se termina tot aici pe pagina asta. Daca eu as fi in locul tau si cineva mar ruga sa las asa info aici a lasa sa ma contactezi. Sa vad daca ai acelasi curaj shi in REALITATE ca si din fata monitorului. Eu ashtept sa vad detaliile tale aici. Merci anticipat

    Apropo el singur s-o oferit sa ma ajute s-i am mers la risc, dar faza e ceea ca nu sia indeplinit nici una din obligatiunile promise fata de mine, absolut nimic doar vorbe goale.

  211. viKtoria Says:

    ma adresez catre domnul “Avokat” daca intradevar tine la cariera lui si vrea sa-si pastreze autoritatea de avokat profesional care ajuta indeosebi moldovenii am o propunere sa intoarca toti banii tinerilor care au ramas nemultumiti.asa ar face un profesional care din anumte consecinte nu si-a dus lukru pina la kapat…

  212. viKtoria Says:

    apu ce sa las aici un account number pentru transfer d-le “Avocat”…?

  213. Ghitza Says:

    Pai e bun zdragat sau nu? l-am sunat si am intrebat ce e el si mi-a zis ca nui avocat e acreditat de imigration sa ajute oameni am intrebat de licenta si frumusel ma refuzat. Cineva ajutor?

  214. viKtoria Says:

    pai tokmai ca nu are licenta..dar mie mi-a aratat si diplome si ce nu vreti..in plus daca e avokat sa ajute oamenii in emmigration lasa sa nu se bage in lukruri care nu il duce capu sa faca…or ramine cu sfatul dat si mai mult nimik or duce lukru pina la urma daca il incepe…da in fine ia kapika si dispare…fuuu…din el avokat ca din mine sotie de presidinte….

  215. rodika Says:

    salut la toti,
    am o intrebare pentru voi si va rog mult sa ma ajutati.eu am venit in state cu viza J1 de 3 ori,acuma e a treia oara.viza a expirat pe 10 septembrie cind eu deja depunesem pentru viza B2 pe care acuma si o am,ea expira pe 19 martie.nu am stat nici o zi in state ilegal.acuma, eu peste 2 saptamini ma casatoresc cu un cetatean american.de care acte am eu nevoie pentru a depune pentru green card,cit ma costa aproximativ,cam peste cit timp il primesc si cit timp eu trebuie sa traiesc cu dinsul si dupa asta sa divortez??????si inca o intrebare…….pina a primi green cardul pot merge cu sotul(fiind cetatean american) in Moldova si dupa asta sa ma pot reintoarce??????va rog mult sa ma ajutati.va multumesc

  216. Anna Says:

    Rodika cred ca pe asha teme e de dorit de vb nu chiar atit de deschis, ash putea rsp la asa intrebari insa nu aici

  217. rodika Says:

    ok.atunci spunemi cum sa te gasesc si sa vb despre asta???????

  218. Anna Says:

    lasa-mi un email adress si eu te contactez :)

  219. rodika Says:

    email-ul meu e rpopa@mail.ru.astept sa imi scrii.merci

  220. Anna Says:

    Luni am scris email pe adresa care ai lasat aici rpopa@mail.ru nu am primit nici un raspuns, iar azi e miercuri deja …. si ma intreb daca ai primit email sau ….

  221. Violeta Says: Says:

    … Ilie, baiete, am citit aceste mesaje si… am “murit”. Ocazivaetsea, tu nu numai pe cei din Moldova, care abea vor sa plece in SUA i-i jefuesti, dar si pe cei, care se afla deacum acolo, in SUA - le golesti buzunarele? Ce mai dai coordonate de legatura cu tine, daca tu chear nu raspunzi nici la mesaje, nici la telefon? Eu, inca la 21.08.2009 te-am trimis 2000$ sa ma ajuti sa ajung in SUA, si tu pina acum n-ai intreprins nimic… Ceiea ce inseamna, ca tu din start ne-ai unselat??? Am citit aceste comentarii si m-am ingrozit, cu ce AFERIST m-am legat. Da eu am luat credit, si pina acuma inca nu l-am achitat… COROCE, ILIE, IMEDIAT ME-AI INTORS BANII, ca o sa a-i MARI NEPLACERI! Iar, voi, moldoveni, toti ce-i inselati de cel mai AFURISIT moldovan - ILIE ZDRAGAT- haide-ti sa intreprindem ceva, sa-l pedepsim! O sa va fiu foarte recunoscatoare, daca o sa ma ajutati cu un sfat. Multumesc anticipat!

  222. viKtoria Says:

    Violeta suntem aici sute poate kiar si mii care sunt in situatia ta si nu se stie inka citi vor nimeri in miinile tikalosului. de intreprins se poate cite ceva dar trebuie sa se apuce de asta cineva care deja are cetatenie..eu spre exemplu am green card si nu as vrea sa risc din cauza lui..dar daca ma intomesc cu un statut mai serios (cetatenia) apoi il prind cu kita pe spate…am poze cu dinsu-contractul lui (si alte contracte inkeiate cu altii),am cazul care mi l-a facut (un ris dar nu caz)….asa ca am un coz puternik impotrtiva lui…daca acum se tusuie cu mmasinele noi va veni timpul si nu va avea bani de “kilotei”.
    PRINCIPALUL CEI CARE AU RAMAS GOLITI DE BANI SA SE TINA DE ACEST SITE SI SA NU NE PIERDEM,CACI DACA NU AZI APOI MIINE DAR NE VOM RASKULA IMPOTRIVA LUI.!!!!

  223. Violeta : Says:

    ViKtoria, esti foarte draguta, ca me-ai raspuns, si i-ti multumesc FOARTE MULT de sfat si de sustinere. Eu acum ma grabesc, dar mai tinem legatura. Mai am un sir de intrebari si rugaminte la tine, legate de blestematul asta de ZDRAGAT… Mai revin. MULTUMESC! I-ti doresc succese-n toate!

  224. Anna Says:

    Ilie Tu si oameni din Moldova ai golit de bani??? Cum a fost spus mai sus nu mas mira sa aud ca au fost deschise Credite pe numele clientilor, tu doar ai toata informatia necesara pentru un credit mic de vreo 5-10 mii. capital one si altii dau usor asa credite
    Violeta eu te-as sfatui sa depui plingere la Ambasada SUA, ori pur si simplu mergi si vorbeste cu cineva acolo, el e doar cetatean SUA, le explici situatzia si chiar poti face referire la acest site, sint sigura ca la ambasada sint oameni care vor intelege ce se intimpla aici pe acest forum si vor pune politia SUA sau chiar Biroul Federal pe urmele lui. Ceea cu ce el se ocupa e incalcare federala si cineva mai sus foarte frumos o spus ce se intimpla in cazuri de manipulare a legii, spalare si estorcare de bani sub pretext de diferite promisiuni, sau pretinzind acest cineva in cazu dat Ilie ca e avocat sau chiar ofiter de immigrare cum sa prezentat altora. Daca vrei putem trece la o conversatzie privata si vorbim mai mult la tema
    Succese

  225. viKtoria Says:

    foarte bine spus Ana si cred ca e o ideie foarte buna anume Violeta sa inceapa ceva (ca aici noi suntem in situatii mai komplikate ku dokumentele si unii kira inka poate nelegali au ramas si nu vrem sa riskam) dar odata ce va incepe unul si se vor skoate in publik toate plingerile de aici eu cred ca se poate de salvat omenirea inka de un dobitok necredincios….

  226. Violeta : Says:

    Fetelor! Haide-ti sa ne unim eforturile sa luptam so zleishim vragom nashim, da scrieti-mi, Va rog la “vilea_k@yahoo.com”. Eu chear muncesc in apropierea ambasadei SUA in Moldova la Chisinau. Dar cineva me-a sugerat, ca mai bine ar fi sa ma adresezi direct la Politia, Serviciu fiscal sau FBI din sectorul din SACRAMENTO, unde se afla asha numita intreprindere a lui ZDRAGAT… Dar haide-ti mai bine sa disutam privat pe e-mail meu sus mentionat! Multumesc, ca sinteti receptive. Astept.

  227. viKtoria Says:

    salut Violeta… uite eu pot sa iti transmit poze cu el, numerele lui de telefon toate care el le-a folosit si le-a tot skimbat ignorindu-ma, pot sa-ti transmit contractele (diferite) inkeeate ku el si cartea de vizita falsa,si cazul meu care el mi l-a facut si e stupid de tot..dar daca sincer sunt cu green card acum si nu vreau ca numele meu sa figureze undeva pina nu vad ca de el s-au apukat serios…

  228. viKtoria Says:

    daca se mai gaseste aici cineva care are ceva dovezi haide-ti sa le stringem la gramada si atunci sa se inceapa ceva..sau cine are statut deja intocmit poate sa se prezinte ca martor…

  229. MARKUS Says:

    Victoria salut! adauga-ma te rog pe skype : bboy_markus
    sau scrie-mi un e-mail: marcelcontulescu@yahoo.com

    sa putem vb…

  230. Nicolae Says:

    Bai oameni buni!

    Faceti un topic aparte cu “avocatul” vostru si discutati acolo.

    Intrebarea mea este: vreau sa plec in SUA cu viza turistica am SSN in 2006 am fost in SUA cu J1 work and travel. Stiu ca nu ai dreptul la munca cu B1/B2,ma voi putea angaja la serviciu fara probleme cu SSN si viza turistica ?

    Multumesc anticipat

  231. Anastasia Says:

    Ilie Zdragat will go to jail very soon and for good.
    I’m already taking care of it.
    The only thing I need you to do guys is to go to the link below and write to the right department.
    If you’re afraid then write it anonymously to the following 3 representatives that will sure be extremely happy for your cooperation in helping them stop immigration fraud and scam.
    1)
    http://www.immigrationfraudvictims.org/letters.html

    2)Contact: I.C.E. (Immigration & Customs Enforcement) Tip Line: (866) 347-2423
    PO box 648005 Lee’s Summit, MO 64064

    You can provide information anonymously, but (better yet) give your information and agree to share any documentation or proof you have to see some action taken.

    3) Plus better read this and take action:
    http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.e8b24a3cec33ca34c48bfc10526e0aa0/?vgnextoid=e309d4aaee6ab210VgnVCM100000b92ca60aRCRD&vgnextchannel=6358d4aaee6ab210VgnVCM100000b92ca60aRCRD

  232. Anastasia Says:

    oh and I’m sure Ilie, his brother, girlfriend, aunt, cousins are reading this once in a while and giving false positive feedbacks.
    Please tell him my words:
    “Ilie Zdragat, give me my 4000$ back and I’ll withdraw my report on your illegal activity. I’ve been quietly gathering information about you and now I have all the necesarry proof to make you pay and I feel powerful as never before. I bet you forgot about me, but I didn’t forget about what an asshole you are. Prepare to lose everything you’ve earned on your illegal immigration scams and frauds, cause you’re going down baby, you’re going down.”

  233. Anastasia Says:

    you know what Ilie, I’ve changed my mind. I want you to give me back my 4000$ plus another 4000$ so totally 8000$ ok :)
    You know my number, oh wait I’ve changed it.
    you know my email, oh no, I’ve changed that also :))
    I don’t need the fucking money you asshole cause I’m gonna receive the satisfaction of a lifetime seeing you losing everything, your US documents, your car, the support and respect of your girlfriend and family, your fantastic life is going to be fucked in the ass while in jail. Pardon my French but every time you’re gonna be fucked in the ass you’re gonna regret that you didn’t give me the money back when I was asking you properly.
    Now I have the money, I have the status, I have the support and power I need to make you pay 1000 times more.
    Adios amigo
    and Welcome to HELL

  234. Anna Says:

    Pentru nicolae
    Nu vei putea lucra decit doar under the table…. E-Verify e foarte des intilnit, dar sar putea sa ai noroc si sa o slujba decenta … prin cunoscuti prieteni…. doar la cei care nu vor folosi E-Verify. Foarte curind asta va fi obligatoriu pentru toate companiile….

  235. anonim Says:

    Anastasia come down here is the law:

    BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONS CODE
    SECTION 22440-22448

    22440. It is unlawful for any person, for compensation, other than
    persons authorized to practice law or authorized by federal law to
    represent persons before the Board of Immigration Appeals or the
    United States Citizenship and Immigration Services, to engage in the
    business or act in the capacity of an immigration consultant within
    this state except as provided by this chapter.

    22441. (a) A person engages in the business or acts in the capacity
    of an immigration consultant when that person gives nonlegal
    assistance or advice on an immigration matter. That assistance or
    advice includes, but is not limited to, the following:
    (1) Completing a form provided by a federal or state agency but
    not advising a person as to their answers on those forms.
    (2) Translating a person’s answers to questions posed in those
    forms.
    (3) Securing for a person supporting documents, such as birth
    certificates, which may be necessary to complete those forms.
    (4) Submitting completed forms on a person’s behalf and at their
    request to the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services.
    (5) Making referrals to persons who could undertake legal
    representation activities for a person in an immigration matter.
    (b) “Immigration matter” means any proceeding, filing, or action
    affecting the immigration or citizenship status of any person which
    arises under immigration and naturalization law, executive order or
    presidential proclamation, or action of the United States Citizenship
    and Immigration Services, the United States Department of State, or
    the United States Department of Labor.
    (c) “Compensation” means money, property, or anything else of
    value.
    (d) Every person engaged in the business or acting in the capacity
    of an immigration consultant shall only offer nonlegal assistance or
    advice in an immigration matter as defined in subdivision (a). Any
    act in violation of subdivision (a) is a violation of this chapter.

    22441.1. (a) A person engaged in the business or acting in the
    capacity of an immigration consultant shall satisfactorily pass a
    background check conducted by the Secretary of State.
    (b) The Secretary of State shall disqualify an individual from
    acting as an immigration consultant for any of the following reasons:
    (1) Conviction of a felony.
    (2) Conviction of a disqualifying misdemeanor where not more than
    10 years have passed since the completion of probation. A conviction
    after a plea of nolo contendere is deemed to be a conviction within
    the meaning of this paragraph. The list of disqualifying misdemeanors
    shall be the same as the disqualifying misdemeanors applicable to
    notaries public appointed and commissioned pursuant to Chapter 3
    (commencing with Section 8200) of Division 1 of Title 2 of the
    Government Code.
    (3) Failure to disclose any arrest or conviction in the disclosure
    form required pursuant to subdivision (c) of Section 22443.1.
    (c) The Secretary of State shall complete a background check on
    every person engaged in the business or acting in the capacity of an
    immigration consultant who was bonded and qualified pursuant to this
    chapter on or before December 31, 2006.
    (d) The Secretary of State shall not file a bond, disclosure form,
    or photograph from a person who has failed to pass the background
    check required by this section.

    22442. (a) Every person engaged in the business or acting in the
    capacity of an immigration consultant who enters into a contract or
    agreement with a client to provide services shall, prior to providing
    any services, provide the client with a written contract, the
    contents of which shall be prescribed by the Department of Consumer
    Affairs in regulations.
    (b) The written contract shall include all provisions relating to
    the following:
    (1) The services to be performed.
    (2) The costs of the services to be performed.
    (3) There shall be printed on the face of the contract in 10-point
    boldface type a statement that the immigration consultant is not an
    attorney and may not perform the legal services that an attorney
    performs.
    (4) The written contract shall list the documents to be prepared
    by the immigration consultant, and shall explain the purpose and
    process of each document.
    (5) The written contract shall state the purpose for which the
    immigration consultant has been hired and the actions to be taken by
    the immigration consultant regarding each document, including the
    agency and office where each document will be filed and the
    approximate processing times according to current published agency
    guidelines.
    (6) The written contract shall include a provision that informs
    the client that he or she may report complaints relating to
    immigration consultants to the Office of Immigrant Assistance of the
    Department of Justice. The written contract shall also include a
    provision stating that complaints concerning the unauthorized
    practice of law may be reported to the State Bar of California. These
    required provisions shall include the toll-free telephone numbers
    and Internet Web sites of those entities.
    (c) An immigration consultant may not include provisions in the
    written contract relating to the following:
    (1) Any guarantee or promise, unless the immigration consultant
    has some basis in fact for making the guarantee or promise.
    (2) Any statement that the immigration consultant can or will
    obtain special favors from or has special influence with the United
    States Citizenship and Immigration Services, or any other
    governmental agency, employee, or official, that may have a bearing
    on a client’s immigration matter.
    (d) The provisions of the written contract shall be stated both in
    English and in the client’s native language.
    (e) A written contract is void if it is not written pursuant to
    subdivision (d).
    (f) The client shall have the right to rescind the contract within
    72 hours of signing the contract. The contents of this subdivision
    shall be conspicuously set forth in the written contract in both
    English and the client’s native language.
    (g) An immigration consultant may not make the statements
    described in subdivision (c) orally to a client.
    (h) This section does not apply to employees of nonprofit,
    tax-exempt corporations who help clients complete application forms
    in an immigration matter free of charge or for a fee, including
    reasonable costs, consistent with that authorized by the Board of
    Immigration Appeals under Section 292.2 of Title 8 of the Code of
    Federal Regulations.

    22442.1. (a) A person engaged in the business or acting in the
    capacity of an immigration consultant shall provide a signed receipt
    to a client for each payment made by that client. The receipt shall
    be typed or computer generated on the consultant’s letterhead.
    (b) A statement of accounting for the services rendered and
    payments made shall be provided to the client every two months, shall
    be typed or computer generated on the immigration consultant’s
    letterhead, and shall display the individual charges and total
    charges for services and the client’s payments offsetting those
    charges. The consultant shall provide the client a written
    translation of the statement in the client’s native language.

    22442.2. (a) An immigration consultant shall conspicuously display
    in his or her office a notice that shall be at least 12 by 20 inches
    with boldface type or print with each character at least one inch in
    height and width in English and in the native language of the
    immigration consultant’s clientele, that contains the following
    information:
    (1) The full name, address, and evidence of compliance with any
    applicable bonding requirement including the bond number, if any.
    (2) A statement that the immigration consultant is not an
    attorney.
    (3) The services that the immigration consultant provides and the
    current and total fee for each service.
    (4) The name of each immigration consultant employed at each
    location.
    (b) Prior to providing any services, an immigration consultant
    shall provide the client with a written disclosure in the native
    language of the client that shall include the following information:
    (1) The immigration consultant’s name, address, and telephone
    number.
    (2) The immigration consultant’s agent for service of process.
    (3) The legal name of the employee who consulted with the client,
    if different from the immigration consultant.
    (4) Evidence of compliance with any applicable bonding
    requirement, including the bond number, if any.
    (c) (1) Except as provided in paragraph (2) or (3), an immigration
    consultant who prints, displays, publishes, distributes, or
    broadcasts, or who causes to be printed, displayed, published,
    distributed, or broadcasted, any advertisement for services as an
    immigration consultant, within the meaning of Section 22441, shall
    include in that advertisement a clear and conspicuous statement that
    the immigration consultant is not an attorney.
    (2) Notwithstanding paragraph (1), a person engaging in the
    business or acting in the capacity of an immigration consultant who
    is not licensed as an attorney in any state or territory of the
    United States, but is authorized by federal law to represent persons
    before the Board of Immigration Appeals or the United States
    Citizenship and Immigration Services, shall include in any
    advertisement for services as an immigration consultant a clear and
    conspicuous statement that the immigration consultant is not an
    attorney but is authorized by federal law to represent persons before
    the Board of Immigration Appeals or the United States Citizenship
    and Immigration Services.
    (3) Notwithstanding paragraph (1), a person who is not an active
    member of the State Bar of California, but is an attorney licensed in
    another state or territory of the United States and is admitted to
    practice before the Board of Immigration Appeals or the United States
    Citizenship and Immigration Services, shall include in any
    advertisement for immigration services a clear and conspicuous
    statement that he or she is not an attorney licensed to practice law
    in California but is an attorney licensed in another state or
    territory of the United States and is authorized by federal law to
    represent persons before the Board of Immigration Appeals or the
    United States Citizenship and Immigration Services.
    (4) If an advertisement subject to this subdivision is in a
    language other than English, the statement required by this
    subdivision shall be in the same language as the advertisement.

    22442.3. An immigration consultant shall not, with the intent to
    mislead, literally translate, from English into another language, the
    words or titles, including, but not limited to, “notary public,”
    “notary,” “licensed,” “attorney,” “lawyer,” or any other terms that
    imply that the person is an attorney, in any document, including an
    advertisement, stationery, letterhead, business card, or other
    comparable written material describing the immigration consultant.
    (b) For purposes of this section, “literal translation” of a word
    or phrase from one language means the translation of a word or phrase
    without regard to the true meaning of the word or phrase in the
    language that is being translated.
    (c) An immigration consultant may not make or authorize the making
    of any verbal or written references to his or her compliance with
    the bonding requirements of Section 22443.1 except as provided in
    this chapter.

    22442.4. (a) A person engaged in the business or acting in the
    capacity of an immigration consultant shall submit to the Department
    of Justice, fingerprint images and related information required by
    the Department of Justice for the purpose of obtaining information as
    to the existence and content of a record of state and federal
    convictions and arrests and information as to the existence and
    content of a record of state and federal arrests for which the
    Department of Justice establishes that the person is free on bail, or
    on his or her recognizance, pending trial or appeal. An immigration
    consultant who has been issued a bond as described in Section 22443.1
    on or before December 31, 2006, shall submit the fingerprint images
    and related information to the Department of Justice on or before
    July 1, 2007.
    (b) The Department of Justice shall forward the fingerprint images
    and related information received pursuant to subdivision (a) to the
    Federal Bureau of Investigation and request a federal summary of
    criminal information.
    (c) The Department of Justice shall review the information
    returned from the Federal Bureau of Investigation and compile and
    disseminate a response to the Secretary of State pursuant to
    paragraph (1) of subdivision (p) of Section 11105 of the Penal Code.
    (d) The Secretary of State shall request from the Department of
    Justice subsequent arrest notification service, pursuant to Section
    11105.2 of the Penal Code, for each person who submitted information
    pursuant to subdivision (a).
    (e) The Department of Justice shall charge a fee sufficient to
    cover the cost of processing the requests described in this section.
    (f) The Secretary of State shall not post on its Internet Web site
    information received from the Department of Justice.

    22443. (a) A person engaged in the business or acting in the
    capacity of an immigration consultant shall deliver to a client a
    copy of each document or form completed on behalf of the client. Each
    document and form delivered must include the name and address of the
    immigration consultant.
    (b) (1) A person engaged in the business or acting in the capacity
    of an immigration consultant shall retain copies of all documents
    and forms of a client for not less than three years from the date of
    the last service to the client.
    (2) Upon presentation of a written consent signed by a client, an
    immigration consultant shall provide a copy of the client file to law
    enforcement without a warrant or a subpoena.
    (c) (1) A person engaged in the business or acting in the capacity
    of an immigration consultant shall return to a client all original
    documents, including, but not limited to, original birth
    certificates, rental agreements, utility bills, employment stubs,
    Department of Motor Vehicle licenses with dates of entry, and
    passports, that the client has provided to the consultant in support
    of the client’s application.
    (2) Any original document that does not need to be submitted to
    immigration authorities as an original document shall be returned by
    the immigration consultant immediately after making a copy or
    reproduction thereof.

    22443.1. (a) (1) Prior to engaging in the business or acting in the
    capacity of an immigration consultant, each person shall file with
    the Secretary of State a bond of fifty thousand dollars ($50,000)
    executed by a corporate surety admitted to do business in this state
    and conditioned upon compliance with this chapter. The total
    aggregate liability on the bond shall be limited to fifty thousand
    dollars ($50,000).
    (2) The bond may be terminated pursuant to Section 995.440 of, and
    Article 13 (commencing with Section 996.310) of Chapter 2 of Title
    14 of Part 2 of, the Code of Civil Procedure.
    (b) The bond required by this section shall be in favor of, and
    payable to, the people of the State of California and shall be for
    the benefit of any person damaged by any fraud, misstatement,
    misrepresentation, unlawful act or omission, or failure to provide
    the services of the immigration consultant or the agents,
    representatives, or employees of the immigration consultant while
    acting within the scope of that employment or agency.
    (c) An immigration consultant who is required to file a surety
    bond with the Secretary of State shall also file a disclosure form
    with the Secretary of State that contains all of the following
    information:
    (1) The immigration consultant’s name, date of birth, residence
    address, business address, residence telephone number, and business
    telephone number.
    (2) The name and address of the immigration consultant’s agent for
    service of process if one is required to be or has been appointed.
    (3) Whether the immigration consultant has ever been convicted of
    a violation of this chapter or of Section 6126.
    (4) Whether the immigration consultant has ever been arrested or
    convicted of a crime.
    (5) If applicable, the name, business address, business telephone
    number, and agent for service of process of the corporation or
    partnership employing the immigration consultant.
    (d) An immigration consultant shall notify the Secretary of State’
    s office in writing within 30 days when the surety bond required by
    this section is renewed, and of any change of name, address,
    telephone number, or agent for service of process.
    (e) The Secretary of State shall post information on its Internet
    Web site demonstrating that an immigration consultant is in
    compliance with the bond required by this section and has
    satisfactorily passed the background check required under Section
    22441.1, and shall also post a copy of the immigration consultant’s
    photograph. The Secretary of State shall ensure that the information
    is current and shall update the information at least every 30 days.
    The Secretary of State shall only post this information and
    photograph on its Internet Web site if the person has filed and
    maintained the bond, filed the disclosure form and photograph
    required to be filed with the Secretary of State, and passed the
    background check required by Section 22441.1.
    (f) The Secretary of State shall develop the disclosure form
    required to file a bond under this section and make it available to
    any immigration consultant filing a bond pursuant to this section.
    (g) An immigration consultant shall submit all of the following
    with the disclosure form:
    (1) A copy of valid and current photo identification to determine
    the immigration consultant’s identity, such as a California driver’s
    license or identification card, passport, or other identification
    acceptable to the Secretary of State.
    (2) A photograph of himself or herself with the dimensions and in
    the style that would be acceptable to the U.S. Department of State
    for obtaining a United States passport, as instructed by the
    Secretary of State. An immigration consultant bonded on or before
    December 31, 2006, shall submit the photograph on or before July 1,
    2007.
    (h) The Secretary of State shall charge and collect a filing fee
    to cover the cost of filing the bond.
    (i) The Secretary of State shall enforce the provisions of this
    chapter that govern the filing and maintenance of bonds.
    (j) This section does not apply to employees of nonprofit,
    tax-exempt corporations who help clients complete application forms
    in an immigration matter free of charge or for a fee, including
    reasonable costs, consistent with that authorized by the Board of
    Immigration Appeals under Section 292.2 of Title 8 of the Code of
    Federal Regulations.

    22443.2. (a) The Secretary of State shall issue a cease and desist
    order to a person subject to this chapter’s provisions who has failed
    to comply with the provisions governing the filing and maintenance
    of bonds or who does not satisfactorily pass a background check
    required by Section 22441.1, and shall give notice of the person’s
    noncompliance or failure to satisfactorily pass the background check
    to the Attorney General. Prior to issuing a cease and desist order to
    a person pursuant to this subdivision, the Secretary of State shall
    provide the person with notice and an opportunity to demonstrate that
    grounds do not exist for disqualification.
    (b) For orders issued for failure to comply with the provisions
    governing the filing and maintenance of bonds, the order shall
    include a statement that notice of the person’s noncompliance shall
    be sent to the Attorney General.

    22443.3. It is unlawful for any person to disseminate by any means
    any statement indicating directly or by implication that the person
    engages in the business or acts in the capacity of an immigration
    consultant, or proposes to engage in the business or act in the
    capacity of an immigration consultant, unless the person has on file
    with the Secretary of State a disclosure statement and a bond, in the
    amount of, and subject to the terms described in, Section 22443.1,
    that is maintained throughout the period covered by the statement,
    such as, but not limited to, the period of a Yellow Pages listing.

    22444. It is unlawful for any person engaged in the business or
    acting in the capacity of an immigration consultant to do any of the
    following acts:
    (a) Make false or misleading statements to a client while
    providing services to that client.
    (b) Make any guarantee or promise to a client, unless the
    guarantee or promise is in writing and the immigration consultant has
    some basis in fact for making the guarantee or promise.
    (c) Make any statement that the immigration consultant can or will
    obtain special favors from or has special influence with the United
    States Citizenship and Immigration Services, or any other
    governmental agency, employee, or official, that may have a bearing
    on a client’s immigration matter.
    (d) Charge a client a fee for referral of the client to another
    for services which the immigration consultant cannot or will not
    provide to the client. A sign setting forth this prohibition shall be
    conspicuously displayed in the immigration consultant’s office.

    22445. (a) (1) A person who violates this chapter shall be subject
    to a civil penalty not to exceed one hundred thousand dollars
    ($100,000) for each violation, to be assessed and collected in a
    civil action brought by any person injured by the violation or in a
    civil action brought in the name of the people of the State of
    California by the Attorney General, a district attorney, or a city
    attorney. An action brought in the name of the people of the State of
    California shall not preclude an action being brought by an injured
    person.
    (2) The court shall impose a civil penalty for each violation of
    this chapter. In assessing the amount of the civil penalty, the court
    may consider relevant circumstances presented by the parties to the
    case, including, but not limited to, the following: the nature and
    seriousness of the misconduct, the number of violations, the
    persistence of the misconduct, the length of time over which the
    misconduct occurred, the willfulness of the defendant’s misconduct,
    and the defendant’s assets, liabilities, and net worth.
    (3) Any action brought pursuant to this section by the Attorney
    General, a district attorney, or a city attorney shall also seek
    relief under subdivision (c) of Section 22446.5.
    (4) If the Attorney General brings the action, one-half of the
    civil penalty collected shall be paid to the treasurer of the county
    in which the judgment was entered, and one-half to the General Fund.
    If a district attorney brings the action, the civil penalty collected
    shall be paid to the treasurer of the county in which the judgment
    was entered. If a city attorney brings the action, one-half of the
    civil penalty collected shall be paid to the treasurer of the city in
    which the judgment was entered, and one-half to the treasurer of the
    county in which the judgment was entered.
    (b) In addition to the provisions of subdivision (a), a violation
    of this chapter is a misdemeanor punishable by a fine of not less
    than two thousand dollars ($2,000) or more than ten thousand dollars
    ($10,000), as to each client with respect to whom a violation occurs,
    or imprisonment in the county jail for not more than one year, or by
    both fine and imprisonment. However, payment of restitution to a
    client shall take precedence over payment of a fine.
    (c) A second or subsequent violation of Sections 22442.2, 22442.3,
    and 22442.4 is a misdemeanor subject to the penalties specified in
    subdivisions (a) and (b). A second or subsequent violation of any
    other provision of this chapter is a felony punishable by
    imprisonment in state prison.
    (d) An action brought pursuant to this section shall be commenced
    within four years after discovery of the commission of the offense.

    22446.5. (a) A person claiming to be aggrieved by a violation of
    this chapter by an immigration consultant may bring a civil action
    for injunctive relief or damages, or both. If the court finds that
    the defendant has violated a provision of this chapter, it shall
    award actual damages, plus an amount equal to treble the amount of
    actual damages or one thousand dollars ($1,000) per violation,
    whichever is greater. The court shall also grant a prevailing
    plaintiff reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs.
    (b) Any other party who, upon information and belief, claims a
    violation of this chapter has been committed by an immigration
    consultant may bring a civil action for injunctive relief on behalf
    of the general public and, upon prevailing, shall recover reasonable
    attorneys’ fees and costs.
    (c) The Attorney General, a district attorney, or a city attorney
    who claims a violation of this chapter has been committed by an
    immigration consultant, may bring a civil action for injunctive
    relief, restitution, and other equitable relief against the
    immigration consultant in the name of the people of the State of
    California.
    (d) An action brought under this chapter shall be set for trial at
    the earliest possible date, and shall take precedence over all other
    cases, except older matters of the same character and matters to
    which special preference may be given by law.

    22447. (a) A person who is awarded damages in an action or
    proceeding for injuries caused by the acts of a person engaged in the
    business of, or acting in the capacity of, an immigration
    consultant, in the performance of his or her duties as an immigration
    consultant, may recover damages from the bond required by Section
    22443.1. In an action brought by the Attorney General, a district
    attorney, or a city attorney, the court may order relief for benefit
    of the injured parties to be paid from the bond.
    (b) When any claim or claims against a bond have been paid so as
    to reduce the principal amount of the bond remaining available to pay
    claims below the principal amount required by Section 22443.1, the
    immigration consultant shall cease to conduct any business unless and
    until the bond has been reinstated up to the minimum amount required
    by Section 22443.1.

    22448. Any civil action to enforce any cause of action pursuant to
    this chapter shall be commenced within four years after the cause of
    action has accrued. The cause of action is not to be deemed to have
    accrued until the discovery, by the aggrieved party, of the facts
    constituting the violation.

  236. anonim Says:

    Also Ilie on his organization website www.ivsoi.org have the REPORT SCAM tab for the people who wants to report Immigration Scam: here is the link
    https://www.ftccomplaintassistant.gov/FTC_Wizard.aspx?Lang=en

  237. Madina Says:

    ya priehala po gostevoi vize i hochy ostatsya, podskajute kuda mojno obratitsya i skolko eto bydet stoit?

  238. calin Says:

    salut.. vreu sa zic ca ilie este un om care isi tine promisiunea pina la urma.. poate la inceput sa para ca a uitat de client si parca a vorbit vorbe in vint, insa pina la urma parerele ramin doar a fi pareri, si lucrul inceput se duce pina la sfirsit cu bine. fiti siguri de asta.
    sunt o perosoana care a cistigat procesul cu ajutorul lui ilie. multumesc mult.

  239. Rodica Says:

    Draga Calin Daca tu zici ca Ilie se tine de cuvint de ce nu mai pot da de el de mai bine de 6 luni ? Am incercat sa iau legatura cu el de nenumarate ori prin email, telefoane sms voicemailuri, retele de socializare …. nu a raspuns la nici unul din mesaje sms email. Care om aflat in asa bisnes are o astfel de atirnare fata de clientii lui? Nu sint aici de ieri sau azi sa nu am idee de ce se intimpla si cum lucreaza oamenii. De ce el nu face nici un efort CA ASTFEL DE PARERI SA NU EXISTE SI IN GENERE SA NU APARA DE LOC?????
    O SA ZICI DE CONCURENTA …. E VREAJEALA DE A LUI ILIE. CICA ARE CONCURENTA … PE DRACU ARE NU CONCURENTA

  240. Anastasia Says:

    Dear “Anonim” I mean Ilye,
    stick those laws in your butt, you know what you’re doing and what you’re doing isn’t consultation, you’re making fake cases, fake asylum cases, taking people’s money and you make them wait till their visa expires so you can report them to the immigration. Believe me you won’t get out of this one.
    Bye Loser.

  241. Nicolae Says:

    Pentru Anna,

    Mersi pentru raspuns, sa inteleg ca e diferit de la caz la caz, cei acela in E-Verify ? in

    ca o intrebare e posibil de schimbat status vizei de turist in viza de lucru sau student ?

    Sau cit esti in SUA cauti o companie care vrea sa te sponsorizeze si apoi te intorci in Moldova si aplici din nou pentru viza de lucru ?

  242. ali Says:

    salut, am si eu o intrebare,daca sotul are doar green card,eu ca sotie pot apela la green card prin forma I-130?

  243. Anna Says:

    pentru Nicolae
    uite aici info ce e E-Verify
    http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.eb1d4c2a3e5b9ac89243c6a7543f6d1a/?vgnextoid=75bce2e261405110VgnVCM1000004718190aRCRD&vgnextchannel=75bce2e261405110
    Chestia e destul de serioasa cunosc ff multi care pur si simplu nu mai pot lucra pentru ca nu trec E-Verify( nu au permis de munca … asta si este E-Verify… angajatoru verifica, sau e obligat sa verifice daca ai sau nu permis de munca)asta se refera si la cetatzeni. Referitor la cum treci dintr-o viza in alta nu detin asa info
    Succese

  244. Anna Says:

    Pentru Ali
    sotu tau poate face petitzie pentru tine, dar adresseaza-te la un avocat el shtie mai bine ce si cum… numai nu la zdragat sau cineva ca el

  245. Anna Says:

    Ali si Nicolae (954) 309-6377
    Uite un numar de telefon al unei firme de avocati, personal nui cunosc si nici nu am lucrat cu ei, nici nu iam sunat macar odata ca sai intreb vreo ceva, am gasit pur si simplu numaru pe net si mam gindit ca va poate fi util(asta ca sa nu se creada ca fac reclama cuiva sau tipa sint concurenta lui Zdragat, sau ii pun bete in roate lui zdragat) Si mai simplu baieti cautati in google free immigration advice/consultation, sau intrati pe www.uscis.gov acolo este informatie de pentru fiecare caz, si obtiunile in dependenta de caz
    Succese

  246. daniel Says:

    buna ziua,am cistigat grencardul si ma intereseaza daca am fost judecat am sansa de a pleca in sua?prima judecata a fost 2 ani in urma incercam sa trec prutul,si mau prins pe hotarul md linga prut si mau amendat cu 400 de lei,a doua oara jumatate de an in urma am facut accident in stare de ebrietate,permisu nu mi lau luat,miau dat doar ceasuri in folosul statului,mersi dinainte

  247. Andrei Says:

    Este adevarat ca daca esti din Transnistria e mai usor sa capeti azil politic? Am citit si la inceputul paginii dar nu sint chiar sigur ce avea in vedere Dl.Anatol.

  248. лысый дядя Says:

    Pentru Andrei azilul politic nu e ceva usor sa castigi , e ca o loterie daca nu ai ceva de la care ai avut de suferit , doar ca folosesti numele Transnistria nu il vei castiga poti sa te inglozi mai tare , sfatul meu e sa incerci alte metode mai sunt multe , numai ca nici intr-un caz nu apela la azilul politic al faimosului Ilie zdragat e aferist mare , am avut de suferit din cauza lui acum nu raspunde .

  249. Adelina Says:

    Eu am luat actele saptamina trecuta prin Zdragat si nu regret, dar sunt multumita de serviciile organizatiei lor.

  250. Anna Says:

    Adelina cu cit timp in urma iai dat banii si actele?? sau te-as ruga sa lasi un email ca sa vb cu tine mai detaliat la tema, ori tu eshti ca si cei de mai sus care se lauda ca au luat actele prin Zdragat dar cind vine vorba de o adresa de email sau ceva mai concret… nimeni nu raspunde sau toti dispar. Ori scriemi mie pe qweas_10@consultant.com. Astept :)

  251. Andrei Says:

    Va multumesc. Stie cineva daca e posibil de legalizat,daca da in ce mod trebuie de facut atunci cind are loc casatoria cu un posesor de GREEN CARD in sua? daca ati trecut prina sa ceva sau cunoasteti pe cineva scrieti va rog andrei-semeniuc@rambler.ru
    Va multumesc anticipat si urez succes tuturor la extragerea din octombrie !

  252. viKtoria Says:

    andrei.faptul ca esti din Transnistria nu-ti da nici un privelegiu…sunt si eu de akolo..dar am cistigat azil ku alte motive,principalu e sa dai de persoana competenta si nu al-de Iliusa ZDRAGAT!!!!!!!!!!!1

  253. Андрей Says:

    Здравствуйте,уважаемые студенты. Сейчас, например, действует федеральная программа, помогающая в особенности тем, кто приехал в Америку по студенческой визе и еще не заполнили на продление визы или получение постоянного статуса. К этой категории еще относятся те которые приехали по рабочей или религиозной визе. Новость в том, что это все можно сделать бесплатно, то есть не нужно нанимать никакого адвоката и платить за его услуги. Все заполняется бесплатно и человек должен будет заплатить только технические услуги (fingerprinting, photo, green card fee) в случае присвоения ему статуса, то есть человек реально экономит $5-7К на адвокатские услуги. Заполнять могут и те, которые находятся в стране 2-3 года, главное условие, чтобы человек заехал в страну легально и находился в одну из вышеперечисленных категориях. Если вы считаете эту информацию полезной, можете звонить, для подробностей, или выслать мне email.
    (916) 470-2264, Андрей.
    otsurkanu@yahoo.com
    P.S. De asemenea,vorbim romaneste.

  254. Vick Says:

    hey, buna..eu sunt in USA pentru a 2-a oara cu viza J1 si vreau sa spun ca ceea ce a zis Anatolie e foarte adevarat. Adica doar acelea sunt caile de a ramine aici legal. Eu am umblat vreo luna si ceva ca sa pot sa imi fac documente sau toate chestiile alea ca sa pot sta legal aici si nu sa primit nimic. Am fost si la USICS sa incerc sa obtin forma I140 care desigur trebuie sa gasesti sponsor pentru asta care sa iti achite taxa de $580 si asta doar ca sa obtii resedinta permanenta si crede-ti ca asemenea lucru nu gasesti la hotele, magazine, resturante ma refer mai mult la studentii care vor sa ramina aici prin viza J1….trebuie sa fi-i specializat intr-un domeniu mai concret cum ar fi: sa fii-i profesor la un colegiu puternic etc. Am luat si avocat care mi-a zis ca sunt doar 2 cai de a ramine legal mai mult: sa te casatoresti cu un cetatean american sau naturalizat sau sa aplici la un colegiu sau universitate internationala care contractul desigur e cam scump pentru acesti studenti. Am incercat si la serviciile militare, gindindu-ma sa intru in US Army aici crezind ca poate prin asta este o cale sa capat ceva si nu sa primit nici cu asta deoarece ai nevoie de greencard sau de cetatenie americana ca sa ajungi acolo. Acum am ajuns la punctul final care este casatoria. Am gasit o fata care arata destul de bine si este deacord sa se casatoreasca cu mine eu platind-ui o suma oarecare si dupa obtinerea greencardu-lui sa divortam, dar informind-ma mai bine despre aceasta nu este chiar atit de usor cum crede-ti sau cum credeam eu….daca esti descoperit ai probleme destul de grava chiar si inchisoarea. Asa ca totusi cred ca o sa ma intorc si o sa aplic la greencard in MLD si sper sa fiu ft norocos si sa-l obtin repede, nu vreau sa imbatrinesc, am nevoie de putere ca sa intru in armata americana.

  255. rodika Says:

    salut.eu sunt in statele unite de un an si 2 luni.am venit cu viza J1.de 2 ori am fost in Alaska si a 3 oara am hotarit sa ramin,acum ma aflu in new hampshire.am aplicat la azil politic si acuma astept interviul.dar oricum ma ghindesc la mai multe variante cum ar fi……eu cunosc o persoana care e din aceeasi tara ca si mine,Moldova,el a cistigat green cardul si acum e foarte bine in SUA.intrebarea mea e “”"daca ma casatoresc cu el,care sunt beneficiile,si primesc eu green cardul ca si el??????”"”"”va rog sa ma ajutati.va multumesc

  256. jorik Says:

    salut,as cauta pe cineva de inkredere care mar putea sfatui,ajuta cu doc spre usa….puteti sami recomandati pe cineva,va rog e ft important…ms mult

  257. Violeta Says: Says:

    ZDRAGAT, MINCATE-AR CIUMA, INTOARCE-MI BANII !!! Cum te tine pamintul cu asha pacate???? Te-ai sters urmele de peste tot, te ascunzi ca un LASH! Nu crede, ca a-i sa ajungi zile bune, procedind asha !

  258. Anatol Says:

    Salut! Am o intrebare referitor la obtinerea actelor de sedere in State! Sunt in America din 2009 si am venit cu visa J1 dar am ramas aici fara sa obtin nici un act . Care ar fi modalitatile de legalizare dupa un asa termen. Ce as putea sa fac in cazul meu? Multumesc.

  259. anonimus Says:

    Ai putea sa te casatoresti :)E singura solutie sa iesi din ilegalitate, sau cu ceva noroc sa se dea legea pt emigranti ca se tot vorbeste despre ea , acum inapoi nu mai poti da, daca te intorci in tara …o sa ai interdictie forever (teoretic nu e forever e doar pt vreo 10 ani desi nu cred ca ti-ar mai da cineva viza nici dupa 10 ani) Succes in toate .

  260. Adrian Says:

    Update:
    Pentru totzi…
    Beware of Ilie Zdragat. Il cunosc personal inca din Moldova, cuvinte nu’s sa’l descriu. Fitzi atentzi, asta e tot!
    No, nu’s invidios de banii care ii cishtiga necinstit.
    Da, cunosc doar un procent mic de case’uri care el le’a cishtigat (din intimplare)!
    Nu ash dori sa devenitzi victime.

    Apropo:
    Google Ilye Zdragat
    USA vs ILYE ZDRAGAT
    Federal Court???
    That sucks!

  261. Roma Says:

    KENNY N. GIFFARD, State Bar No. 101727
    Attorney at Law
    2214 21st Street
    Sacramento, California 95818
    Telephone: (916) 456-3030
    Attorney for Defendant
    ILIE ZDRAGAT
    IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
    FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Case No. 2:12-cr-00387-MCE
    Plaintiffs, STIPULATION AND ORDER
    vs.
    ILIE ZDRAGAT,
    Defendant.
    /
    It is hereby stipulated and agreed to by the United States of America
    through TODD D. LERAS, Assistant United States Attorney, and defendant ILIE
    ZDRAGAT, by and through his attorney, KENNY N. GIFFARD, that the status
    conference set for Thursday, March 28, 2013, be continued to a status conference on
    Thursday, June 27, 2013, at 9:00 a.m.
    This continuance is being requested because defense counsel needs time to
    prepare for trial, to review discovery, and to interview witnesses. The discovery already
    presented to the defendant in this case is voluminous and comprises numerous cds which
    need to be translated, and several thousand pages of investigative reports.
    Furthermore, the parties stipulate and agree that the interests of justice
    1
    ________________________________________________________________________
    Case 2:12-cr-00387-MCE Document 27 Filed 03/28/13 Page 1 of 3
    1
    2
    3
    4
    5
    6
    7
    8
    9
    10
    11
    12
    13
    14
    15
    16
    17
    18
    19
    20
    21
    22
    23
    24
    25
    26
    27
    28
    served by granting this continuance outweigh the best interests of the public and the
    defendant in a speedy trial. (18 U.S.C. 3161(h)(A)).
    Speedy trial time is to be excluded from the date of this order through the
    date of the status conference set for June 27, 2013, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
    3161(h)(7)(B)(iv) (reasonable time to prepare) (Local Code T4).
    Dated: March 25, 2013
    Respectfully submitted,
    /s/ Kenny N. Giffard
    KENNY N. GIFFARD
    Attorney for Defendant
    ILIE ZDRAGAT
    /s/ Todd D. Leras
    ______________________________________
    TODD D. LERAS
    Assistant U.S. Attorney
    ORDER
    Based upon the stipulation of the parties and good cause there appearing
    therefrom, the Court hereby finds that the failure to grant a continuance in this case would
    deny defense counsel reasonable time necessary for effective preparation, taking into
    account the exercise of due diligence. The Court specifically finds that the ends of justice
    served by the granting of such continuance outweigh the interests of the public and the
    defendant in a speedy trial. Based upon these findings and pursuant to the stipulation of
    the parties, the Court hereby adopts the stipulation of the parties in its entirety as its order.
    Time is excluded from computation of time within which the trial of this matter must be
    commenced beginning from the date of the stipulation through and including June 27,
    //////
    2
    ________________________________________________________________________
    Case 2:12-cr-00387-MCE Document 27 Filed 03/28/13 Page 2 of 3
    1
    2
    3
    4
    5
    6
    7
    8
    9
    10
    11
    12
    13
    14
    15
    16
    17
    18
    19
    20
    21
    22
    23
    24
    25
    26
    27
    28
    2013, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 3161(h)(7)(A) and (B)(iv) (reasonable time for defense
    counsel to prepare and Local Code T4. A new status conference date is hereby set for
    June 27, 2013, at 9:00 a.m.
    IT IS SO ORDERED.

  262. someone Says:

    Senators introduced a long-awaited and sweeping immigration overhaul early Wednesday morning, touching off what is likely to be a charged debate over whether the legislation amounts to “amnesty” for those who broke the rules and does enough to help those who follow them.

    Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., appeared on the Senate floor around 2 a.m. Wednesday to file the 844-page bill. It is the product of weeks of negotiations among the Senate’s “Gang of Eight,” a bipartisan group that includes Schumer and seven others.

    “This bill marks the beginning of an important debate,” Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., said. “And I believe it will fix our broken system by securing our borders, improving interior enforcement, modernizing our legal immigration to help create jobs and protect American workers, and dealing with our undocumented population in a tough but humane way that is fair to those trying to come here the right way and linked to achieving several security triggers.”

    Rubio is arguably the most vital of the eight co-authors, as his support has the potential to attract fellow conservatives. He and others in the “gang” are making a hard-charging effort to ease conservative concerns, pointing out that the bill includes language to both boost border security while putting limits on the so-called path to citizenship.

    The bill, as expected, includes a carefully calibrated trade-off where millions of illegal immigrants would be put on a pathway to legal status in exchange for paying fines, provided certain border security steps are taken.

    Arguably the biggest hurdle to passage will be convincing conservatives that the flow of illegal immigration will be stemmed — and not increased — by the legislation.

    The bill, as introduced, would require the Homeland Security Department to create and launch plans for border security and fencing before illegal immigrants can enter a provisional status. This could happen as early as six months after enactment of the bill.

    They would remain in that provisional status for 10 years, able to work legally but barred from federal benefits like welfare or health care. After 10 years they could seek green cards conferring permanent legal status, provided certain goals for border apprehensions and other security measures are met.

    After another three years, those immigrants could petition for citizenship.

    In total, the bill creates a minimum 13-year path to citizenship for up to 11 million illegal immigrants, costing them each $2,000 in fines plus additional taxes. Applicants would have to meet other criteria as well in order to qualify.

    It’s unclear whether the border security “triggers” will be enough to satisfy skeptical lawmakers. Conservatives say border security improvements should be verified before illegal immigrants can seek citizenship. Illegal immigrant advocates say their pathway should not be held up by that process.

    Regardless, the plan dedicates billions to security efforts, including $3 billion to providing more border agents, customs agents and surveillance systems along the border; and $1.5 billion to building up border fencing.

    It also includes language meant to assuage concerns that the mass legalization would send millions onto the federal welfare rolls. The bill claims to strengthen a federal law requiring applicants for legal status to prove they won’t become government dependents — some Republicans have claimed this law is rarely enforced.

    Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., one of the authors in the bipartisan “Gang of Eight,” said after meeting with President Obama Tuesday afternoon that the security provisions in the bill would assure “we won’t have a third wave” of illegal immigration.

    “It’s not amnesty,” he added, preemptively responding to criticism of the pathway to legal status.

    Obama, after being briefed by McCain and Schumer, said the bill is “largely consistent with the principles that I have repeatedly laid out for comprehensive reform.”

    The authors, though, were confronting concerns about the bill’s contents, even before its release. Rep. Lamar Smith, R-Texas, put out a statement claiming “it legalizes almost everyone in the country illegally before the border is secured.”

    “I don’t think the American people are going to give the Senate another turn at bat,” he said.

    The statement drew a rebuke from Rubio’s office.

    “To have an honest debate, we need to be clear about the facts — and unfortunately there’s already some misinformation being spread about what’s in the bill. Our legislation will implement the toughest border security and immigration law enforcement in U.S. history before a single illegal immigrant is able to apply for permanent residence in the U.S.,” Rubio spokesman Alex Conant said.

    The security and legalization efforts, though, are only part of the sweeping plan.

    The legislation also would remake the nation’s inefficient legal immigration system, creating new immigration opportunities for tens of thousands of high- and low-skilled workers, as well as a new “merit visa” aimed at bringing people with talents to the U.S. Senators had planned to formally introduce the bill Tuesday, but after Monday’s bombing at the Boston Marathon a planned press event was delayed until later in the week.

    Employers would face tough new requirements to check the legal status of all workers.

    Overall, the changes represent the most dramatic overhaul to U.S. immigration law in more than a quarter-century.

    The bill is the result of months of secretive negotiations among eight lawmakers. In addition to Schumer and McCain, they are Democrats Dick Durbin of Illinois, Robert Menendez of New Jersey and Michael Bennet of Colorado, working with Republicans Rubio of Florida, Lindsey Graham of South Carolina and Jeff Flake of Arizona.

    Even harder work lies ahead now that legislative language will become public for other lawmakers and groups on all sides to examine and react to. The Senate Judiciary Committee will hold hearings on the bill beginning Friday and likely move to amend and vote on it in May, with action on the Senate floor expected later in the summer. The Republican-controlled House also must act, and opposition from some conservatives there is likely to be fierce.

    People brought here illegally as youths would have a faster path: They could get green cards in five years and would become eligible for citizenship immediately thereafter.

    U.S. citizens no longer would be able to sponsor their siblings for eventual U.S. citizenship, a change activist groups have opposed. That’s among several changes aimed at rebalancing an immigration system that now awards around 15 percent of green cards to people with employment ties, and the majority to people with family ties, to a system that awards 45 percent to 50 percent of green cards based on employment ties.

    There would be no limit in the number of green cards awarded to people of extraordinary ability in science, arts, education, business or athletics, or to outstanding professors, doctors and others. A new startup visa would be created for foreign entrepreneurs trying to come here to start their own companies.

    Visas for highly skilled workers greatly in demand by technology companies would nearly double. Low-skilled workers would be able to come in for jobs in construction, long-term care and other industries, ultimately up to 200,000 a year. A new agriculture visa program would bring farm workers to the U.S.; farm workers already here illegally would get a faster path to citizenship than others here illegally, able to seek a green card in five years, an effort to create a stable agricultural workforce.

    The bill is titled the “Border Security, Economic Opportunity and Immigration Modernization Act of 2013.”

    Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/04/17/immigration-bill-authors-defend-package-ahead-release-amid-security-concerns/#ixzz2TA5RPxuN

  263. someone Says:

    Emboldened by the recent sweep of Latino voters, the Obama administration has promised to make immigration reform a top issue moving forward. Despite this energy, politicians are still all too eager to jump up and say that any “path-to-citizenship” reform would not be the dreaded term “amnesty.” But why has the word amnesty become so taboo?

    Many decision makers on both sides of the political aisle contend that amnesty for the estimated 11 million illegal immigrants in the United States would be destructive to our economy (a.k.a. the “they took our jobs” argument), drain our entitlement programs, and encourage even more illegal immigration. So let’s tackle these issues.

    One, immigration is a net positive on the economy, no matter how you shake it. Economic study dating back to Adam Smith has showed that increasing the number of economic actors in a market increases the specialization of labor and is a net boon to any economy. The fallacy of “they took our jobs” also doesn’t hold up in a modern economy. There isn’t a fixed pie of jobs on the market. If that were the case, then with the influx of immigrants, women workers, and baby-boomers in the U.S. within the past 60 years, you would see massive unemployment over that period (which we don’t).

    Interestingly, many of the foreign workers that immigrate to the United States are just complements to the current workforce — meaning they are either very high skilled or low skilled. Economist Ben Powell expertly explodes the economic myths of immigration in this short video here.

    Two, the argument that increased immigration would just exacerbate our spending problem and place an increased burden on taxpayers is tricky. Immigrants do consume public goods such as education for their children, health care, etc. that cost state and local governments an estimated $11 billion to $22 billion per year. However, empirical study of illegal’s’ economic impact demonstrates that they actually contribute more to the public coffers in taxes than they cost in social services. Moreover, the Congressional Budget Office has estimated that a path to citizenship for all unauthorized immigrants would increase federal revenues by $48 billion while only costing taxpayers $23 billion.

    Even if they were a drain on the government, that wouldn’t be an indictment of the immigration system but of government policy. If policy makers are worried about the drag on taxpayers, then why not reform our entitlement system? Still if they can’t do that, then decision makers can still charge an additional income tax on immigrants to pay for the programs … and foreign labor would still come to the U.S. in droves!

    Lastly, do you want to punish people according to the law … even if the law is unjust and immoral? Immigration to the U.S. is far more effective at helping foreigners than foreign aid. By just moving here, people from the worst parts of the world can increase their standard of living dramatically. So why, as thoughtful people, should we support immigration restrictions that just act to perpetually trap millions in Third World-misery?

    Amnesty for illegal currently living here would bring millions of people living on the fringe of society into the fold, making most everyone better off. Even if economists and I are wrong about the benefits of immigration, there are still cheaper and more humane alternatives to deporting millions of people while building a wall to keep people out. So don’t we have a responsibility to find it?

  264. someone Says:

    Earlier this week, when the Heritage Foundation released its much-anticipated paper claiming the immigration bill would cost a bazillion dollars, something unusual happened: Large numbers of Republicans widely, though not uniformly, denounced it as shoddy, agenda-driven bunkum. This had never happened before — not when Heritage predicted the Bush tax cuts would deliver far more revenue than anybody expected, or when it projected Paul Ryan’s budget would push unemployment below 3 percent, or that poor people have it great because manufactured appliances are cheap.

    The Heritage paper was expected to be a moment when the forces of rebellion within the GOP rallied, when a prestigious conservative institution connected the measure to the bugaboo of big government. Instead, something like the opposite seems to have happened. The party Establishment, which has calculated that it needs to suture off the immigration wound, struck back hard and fast. Douglas Holtz-Eakin, a leading Republican economist, said the report “misleads.” Arch-conservative Republican Senator Jeff Flake assailed it. “I don’t believe their report is really legitimate,” added Marco Rubio. By the normally prevailing standards of party unity, these are fighting words.

    The release of the Heritage report signaled that, even if this effort at immigration reform ends the same way as the failed 2007 overhaul, it will transpire differently. Republican advocates will not be cowering before the baying mobs of the right but asserting themselves confidently, inflicting damage of their own. For an outfit like Heritage to find its intellectual bona fides questioned by fellow Republicans is the sort of reputational harm that might give it, and other conservatives skeptics, pause about throwing themselves wholeheartedly into the rebellion.

    The Heritage study debacle has marginalized the anti-immigration wing of the party, with all the Democrats and many of the Republicans piling on. The trouble is going to be significantly worsened by Dylan Matthews’s explosive revelation that a co-author of the Heritage study argued that Latino immigrants have inherently lower IQs than white Americans, having once written, “No one knows whether Hispanics will ever reach IQ parity with whites, but the prediction that new Hispanic immigrants will have low-IQ children and grandchildren is difficult to argue against.” That is not going to play well on Univision, and is going to only hasten the GOP’s panic to pass a bill and put the issue behind them.

    But the political optics of this have thrown off a slightly misleading impression about the underlying policy debate. The Heritage immigration study is, indeed, a horrendously shoddy piece of work. (Here’s one thorough debunking.) By the low, low standards of Heritage Foundation work, on the other hand, it’s actually rather sturdy. As commentators like Andrew Biggs and David Frum have pointed out, the cooking of the books exaggerates, but does not wholly concoct, a certain underlying truth. The legalized immigrants disproportionately have low levels of educational attainment. Hard-working though they may be, they are more likely to reside in the bottom half of the income distribution, the half that pays lower tax rates and receives a higher share of benefits.

    What’s more (conservatives haven’t pointed this out), the hardening class divisions in American society render it less certain that these immigrants will follow the path of upward mobility that previous generations had. It is far more difficult for working-class families to propel their children upward today than it was during most of the twentieth century.

    Higher levels of immigration do create more dynamism, more wealth, for the economy as a whole, but those gains are not equally shared. As the Congressional Budget Office concluded, higher levels of unskilled immigration would “slow the growth of the wages of workers already present in the United States with whom they most closely compete.” (Keep in mind that those working-class Americans suffering from increased wage pressure includes a healthy dose of recent immigrants themselves.)

    Affluent Americans would continue to benefit from the availability of cheap labor, of course. By contrast, letting in more high-skill immigrants would both increase economic growth and reduce inequality, by subjecting educated American workers to wage competition. (And guess what: college-educated workers don’t like the prospect of cheaper foreign competition any more than the working class does.)

    This argues for tilting the balance of the bill toward a higher ratio of skilled to unskilled labor. Remember, the immigration bill isn’t only about finding a way to handle undocumented immigrants. It also reforms future avenues of legal immigration. Frequent Republican adviser Yuval Levin sensibly proposes that the bill be amended to let in fewer low-skilled legal immigrants and more higher-skilled legal immigrants:

    Amending the bill to significantly reduce the scale of low-skill immigration (by eliminating the guest-worker program and changing the merit-point system to place far greater value on education and skills) would be a major change, of course, but not one that undercuts the fundamental compromise of the bill, which is about a balance between border enforcement and legalization rather than high- and low-skill immigration.

    Of course, it’s hard to figure out how this would help the bill pass. The only constituency for a change like that would be labor unions and liberals. Business wants as much cheap labor as it can get, and social conservatives want as little immigration as they can get. The politics of the immigration bill are ugly, and the compromise currently on offer has taken its current form because it is the best remedy the willing supporters could find, and the only way to get a law past the yahoos of the right. Still, the stupidity of the political opposition shouldn’t obscure the fact that the best intellectual critiques of the Gang of Eight bill are more substantive than you might think.

  265. someone Says:

    Congress has once again taken up the difficult issue of comprehensive immigration reform, marking the first time since 2009 that there has been significant momentum for major changes to the U.S. immigration system. That debate has raised immensely challenging questions across the immigration landscape – how to handle the estimated 11 million undocumented immigrants in the United States; whether to change the rules about which family relationships can be the basis for immigration to this country; what levels of immigration of lesser-skilled workers is right for the economy. In addition, changes to the high-skilled business immigration system are very much part of the conversation, and these present key challenges of their own.

    With an issue that has been as controversial as immigration has, provoking strong sentiments on every side, it is entirely possible that nothing will happen at all. If Congress fails to reach consensus for change, our immigration laws will go forward as they are today, and many of the problems associated with the current legal structure will remain unsolved. Businesses will continue to struggle with government quotas that haven’t changed in decades, and even high-skilled legal immigrants will continue to endure years of backlogs to obtain permanent resident status, commonly known as a “green card.” Should change not happen now, the comprehensive immigration reform debate is unlikely to be taken up again until at least after the 2014 election cycle.

    If agreement can be reached, the changes to U.S. immigration laws are likely to include changes to the rules for high-skilled immigration. There are a wide variety of proposals for change in this area, and while nobody can predict what changes might take place, there are some common themes that are often discussed.

    One common theme is changes in government quotas, particularly for employment-based green cards and for H-1Bs (temporary work visas used for high-skilled workers). To obtain an H-1B, the worker must hold at least a bachelor’s degree in a field related to his or her proposed employment, and the proposed job itself must require at least a bachelor’s degree. H-1Bs are currently capped at 65,000 per year, with an additional 20,000 H-1Bs available for people who hold an advanced degree from a U.S. college or university. Employment-based green cards are capped at 140,000 per year, and that figure includes green cards that go to spouses and children of workers receiving green cards. It is estimated that more than 50 percent of the 140,000 annual green card quota is used for immediate family members, meaning that no more than 70,000 workers receive green cards each year. Government data shows that the U.S. workforce currently is made up of more than 154 million workers, so the high-skilled quotas account for less than one percent of the overall workforce. Even if these quotas were doubled, high-skilled foreign workers would continue to be a tiny percentage of the overall workforce in the United States.

    There is a growing recognition among policymakers, however, that high-skilled workers are an essential part of the American workforce and that there is a particular shortage of workers with advanced degrees in science, technology, engineering and mathematics (“STEM”) fields. The President, congressional leaders in both parties, and a host of economic analysts have all recognized that these workers create jobs and contribute to economic growth, and that it is self-destructive policy to limit America’s access to them. Many proposals associated with high-skilled immigration reform would exempt from the current quotas those individuals with an advanced STEM degree from a U.S. college or university. This would have two effects. First, for those individuals, it would eliminate the quota problems and delays associated with our current immigration structure. Second, by exempting those individuals from the quota, it would free up a quota number that would otherwise be used by the STEM worker so that it can be used by someone else. This would provide some level of quota relief without actually raising the quota.

    Another common theme is that of incorporating into our immigration laws something of a preference for green cards over temporary visas. This would be accomplished with both a carrot and a stick. By making the green card process more streamlined for certain high-skilled workers, employers would be given an incentive to shift from relying on workers on temporary visas to sponsoring their foreign national employees for green cards. At the same time, there are proposals for additional restrictions on temporary visas, such as H-1Bs, that would make it more complicated and substantially more expensive to obtain a temporary visa for a worker, even putting aside the quota issues. These kinds of restrictions may include the following:

    Increasing fees paid to the government for H-1B and other temporary visas, sometimes by several thousand dollars;
    Requiring employers to prove both that they have actively and unsuccessfully recruited for a U.S. worker and that they have not had any layoffs of U.S. workers before those employers can sponsor an H-1B for a new hire;
    Increasing wage requirements for H-1B workers so that they would have to be paid a wage rate that is greater than the market wage, thus making it substantially more expensive to hire a foreign worker on an H-1B than a U.S. worker; and
    Increasing enforcement provisions, such as requiring annual compliance audits of companies that file a sizeable number of H-1B petitions.

    These kinds of additional restrictions may well be the price that is exacted from employers to gain access to high-skilled foreign workers. Advocates for these restrictions believe that there are qualified U.S. workers available for these jobs and that by making the H-1B process more difficult and expensive, companies will make greater efforts to find those qualified U.S. workers. If, however, there in fact is not a sufficient supply of U.S. workers available with the kind of education and experience needed for these kinds of positions, then the question becomes whether such restrictions will make the process so challenging that companies will move projects abroad rather than bringing high-skilled workers here. The answer to this question could have a dramatic effect on the U.S. economy as it continues its recovery efforts.

    Proposals for changes to our immigration laws have also included some changes that would be welcomed by companies that employ high-skilled foreign workers. Many of these changes are included in the Immigration Innovation Act of 2013, which was introduced in the Senate on January 29, 2013. That bill contains such provisions as the following:

    An increase in the H-1B quota to 115,000 per year, with a separate provision that would allow the H-1B quota to change year-to-year depending on usage of the quota in the previous year.
    A recapture of employment-based green cards that were authorized under prior law but that were never used due to administrative and processing delays. These would help to reduce somewhat the current backlog in employment-based green cards, where some high-skilled foreign workers currently have to wait 10 years or more for a green card.
    A change to the law regarding the existing 140,000 annual employment-based green card quota so that family members would no longer count against that quota. Similarly, green cards for workers with an advanced degree in a STEM field from a U.S. college or university would also no longer count against that quota, nor would individuals of extraordinary ability, or outstanding professors and researchers. While the employment-based green card quota itself would remain unchanged, these exemptions from the quota would help to ease the backlog and would ensure that workers particularly in demand, such as advanced degree STEM workers, would not be placed into long quota backlogs.
    A provision that would give H-1B workers a 60-day grace period to find another position or to leave the U.S. if they are terminated from their employment. Under current law, there is no grace period, and an H-1B worker is immediately considered “out of status” if he or she is no longer employed.
    Elimination of the “per country” limitations on employment-based green cards so that all high-skilled workers are treated the same without reference to country of nationality. Under existing law, no more than seven percent of the annual quota of employment-based green cards can go to workers from any single country. This has resulted in very long backlogs for people from India and China, who make up a disproportionate number of high-skilled immigrants. By removing the per-country restrictions, country of nationality would no longer affect the wait time to obtain a green card.
    Provision of work authorization to spouses of H-1B workers. This would allow spouses of H-1B workers to obtain an employment authorization card, and they could then be employed in the United States. Under current law, spouses of H-1B workers cannot obtain employment authorization.

    The Immigration Innovation Act of 2013 would also raise processing fees. The processing fee for an H-1B would increase by $2,500 for most companies, and the processing fee for a green card would increase by $1,000. Most of the revenue raised by these fee increases would be directed toward improving STEM education in the United States.

    Discussions about changes to U.S. immigration laws, both for high-skilled workers specifically and comprehensive reform overall, continue to evolve. We may see dramatic changes that reduce backlogs and make it easier for U.S. companies to attract the world’s top talent. We may also see changes that add further restrictions to the process and add expense, which may cause companies to make large-scale changes in their business planning process if they believe those changes will effectively prevent them from finding necessary new hires. Finally, we may see no changes at all, as a very real possibility exists that Congress will be unable to reach agreement on this very complicated issue. It is unlikely that Congress will pass an immigration reform bill that only addresses high-skilled immigration without also addressing the broader issues of undocumented immigrants and lesser-skilled labor. If that occurs, our existing system will continue, and employers of high-skilled workers will need to continue to engage in a complex system of planning around delays, quotas and challenging administrative requirements.

  266. someone Says:

    Allow undocumented immigrants who have lived in the United States continually since before December 31, 2011 to apply for “Registered Provisional Immigrant Status” if they pay back taxes and $500 in fines, and if they have not been convicted of a felony or 3 or more misdemeanors or voted illegally. Individuals with this status can work for any employer and travel outside the country but are not eligible to receive means-tested federal public benefits.

    After 10 years in Registered Provisional Immigrant Status, individuals will be eligible – pending border security measures and a clearing of existing backlogs for legal immigrants – to earn a merit-based green card if they have worked in the United States, demonstrated knowledge of the English language and paid an additional fine of $1000.

    Allow eligible DREAM act applicants and certain agricultural workers to apply for green cards within five years

    Regarding border security, the bill would set a goal of “90% effectiveness” – meaning the rate of apprehensions and turnbacks of potential entrants – per fiscal year in the most high-risk areas of the southern border. If that goal is not met within five years, a bipartisan “Border Commission” made up of border state governors and experts will be formed to issue new recommendations on how to achieve it.

    Allocate $3 billion for increased surveillance and manpower along the country’s southern border and an additional $1.5 billion for fencing.

    Include a border security “trigger” requiring that no undocumented immigrant can achieve legal “Registered Provisional Immigrant” status until strategies for border security have been submitted by the Department of Homeland Security to Congress.

    Require an additional “trigger” that prevents those with “Registered Provisional Immigrant” status from becoming eligible to apply for Lawful Permanent Resident status until the Department of Homeland Security and the Comptroller General certify that border security strategies are operational and a mandatory employment verification system has been implemented.

    Create a new “W” visa program to allow non-agricultural temporary workers to come to the United States to work for registered employers.
    Eliminate family-based visas for siblings of United States citizens as well as the Diversity Visa program while eliminating caps on visas for certain employment-based categories.

    Use a point system for a new “merit based” visa, of which 120,000 would initially be awarded per year, with a maximum cap of 250,000 annually. Points will be awarded based on criteria including education, employment and length of residence in the U.S.

    Require an “enhanced E-Verify” system to prevent ineligible workers from taking jobs in the United States. Employers with more than 5,000 employees will be phased in within two years; employers with more than 500 employees will be phased in within three years.

    Raise the annual cap on H1-B visas for high-skilled workers from 65,000 to 110,000, with provisions to prevent such workers from undercutting American wages. Set a maximum cap at 180,000 such visas.

    Posted by Peter Rousmaniere at 7:05 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)
    March 19, 2013
    Latino voters and immigration

    Latino Decisions released new polling data today highlighting why immigration reform has become the number one political issue for Latino voters, and the answer is close personal connections between Latino voters and Latino undocumented immigrants.

    The poll was funded by immigration reform advocates.

    The poll finds that 58% of Latino registered voters now cite immigration reform as the top priority for the Congress and President, up from 35% in November 2012. One reason is that 63% of Latino voters say they personally know someone who is an undocumented immigrant, either a member of their family or a close personal friend. Further, 39% of Latino voters say they personally know someone, or a family who has faced deportation or detention for immigration reasons, and increase of 14 points over 2011, when 25% of Latino voters said they personally knew someone who had faced deportation or detention.

    The poll asked Latino voters if they knew any young immigrants who had applied for the 2012 “deferred action” program that would allow DREAM Act-eligible immigrants to live in the U.S. and attend college with temporary visas. More than one in five Latino voters (22%) knows someone who has already applied for deferred action, with 18% saying they know someone who is eligible, but not yet applied.

    Background:

    Latino Decisions interviewed 800 Latino registered voters via landline and mobile phone, across all 50 states, from February 15-26, 2013. Interviews were conducted in English or Spanish, at the preference of the respondent, and all interviewing staff was fully bilingual. The survey averaged 20 minutes in length and has an overall margin of error or +/- 3.5%. On split sample questions the margin of error is +/- 4.9%. For questions about the results, please contact Gary Segura gary.segura@latinodecisions.com

    The poll was sponsored by America’s Voice, National Council of La Raza, and SEIU.

    Posted by Peter Rousmaniere at 6:38 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)
    February 16, 2013
    Congressional seats: ready to go Red with slight change in Hispanic voting

    The Georgetown [University]Public Policy Review carefully analyzed each Congressional district for the potential of gains by Republicans if the percentage of Hispanic voting Republicans went up. It concluded that there are many more competitive races in heavily Hispanic areas for Democrats to lose than to gain. A shift of Hispanics from Dem to Rep would produce a lot more Rep wins than a shift of the same percentage from Rep to Dem would create more Dem wins.

    “There are two different lenses through which to consider the Republican perspective. First, most incumbent Republicans will not have a strong incentive to vote for an immigration bill containing a path to citizenship if a significant Hispanic population appears to be lacking in their districts. In fact, many conservatives may be far more concerned about primary challengers than Hispanic backlash.

    On the other hand, the Republican Party as a whole has a tremendous opportunity to turn districts in their favor. If they can redefine themselves to the Hispanic population, starting with comprehensive immigration reform, they will be doing more than pouring water on the DCCC’s gunpowder—they will be stealing it for themselves.”

    Posted by Peter Rousmaniere at 10:00 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)
    February 1, 2013
    Is the STEM problem a fiction?

    The blog of the Economic Policy Institute questions if the United States needs more foreign science, technology, engineering and math degreed people from abroad, given as two thirds of native born STEM graduates apparently work outside the fields for which they were educated.

    The posting:

    Fixing a problem that doesn’t exist: Special interest STEM immigration bills are not needed

    Business groups and their allies, including New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg and various non-profit advocacy organizations, have been arguing for years—without real evidence—that the United States is losing a race to attract the world’s best and brightest young scientists, engineers, computer techies and mathematicians. In a report entitled, Immigration of Foreign Nationals with Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) Degrees, Ruth Wasem of the Congressional Research Service (CRS) recently reviewed the statistics regarding these highly skilled migrants and concluded: “The United States remains the leading host country for international students in science, technology, engineering, or mathematics (STEM) fields.” The United States has been and continues to be extraordinarily welcoming to foreign students, and especially to those in the STEM fields. CRS reports that the number of foreign graduate students in the STEM fields increased by 50 percent since 1990:

    “The number of full-time graduate students in science, engineering, and health fields who were foreign students (largely on F-1 nonimmigrant visas) grew from 91,150 in 1990 to 148,923 in 2009, with most of the increase occurring after 1999. Despite the rise in foreign student enrollment, the percentage of STEM graduate students with temporary visas in 2009 (32.7%) was comparable to 1990 (31.1%). Graduate enrollments in engineering fields have exhibited the most growth of the STEM fields in recent years. About 40,000 graduate degrees were awarded to foreign STEM students in 2009, with 10,000 of those going to Ph.D. recipients.”

    But Microsoft and the Chamber of Commerce claim that we’re losing those graduates, that our immigration system doesn’t let us keep the talent our universities have trained. That claim is untrue. CRS reports that in the decade from FY 2000 to FY 2009, the U.S. granted legal permanent residence to almost 300,000 STEM workers, in addition to granting temporary work permits (for up to six years) to hundreds of thousands of others.

    Continue reading “Is the STEM problem a fiction?” »

    Posted by Peter Rousmaniere at 3:10 PM | Permalink | Comments (1)
    January 29, 2013
    President Obama’s immigration reform plans Jan 29 2013

    The Administration is proposing a “provisional” category or undocumented immigrants, as does the Senate’s statement. The White House Press Office issued this statement today:

    FACT SHEET: Fixing our Broken Immigration System so Everyone Plays by the Rules

    America’s immigration system is broken. Too many employers game the system by hiring undocumented workers and there are 11 million people living in the shadows. Neither is good for the economy or the country. It is time to act to fix the broken immigration system in a way that requires responsibility from everyone —both from the workers here illegally and those who hire them—and guarantees that everyone is playing by the same rules.

    President Obama’s commonsense immigration reform proposal has four parts. First, continue to strengthen our borders. Second, crack down on companies that hire undocumented workers. Third, hold undocumented immigrants accountable before they can earn their citizenship; this means requiring undocumented workers to pay their taxes and a penalty, move to the back of the line, learn English, and pass background checks. Fourth, streamline the legal immigration system for families, workers, and employers.

    Together we can build a fair, effective and commonsense immigration system that lives up to our heritage as a nation of laws and a nation of immigrants.

    The key principles the President believes should be included in commonsense immigration reform are:

    Continuing to Strengthen Border Security: President Obama has doubled the number of Border Patrol agents since 2004 and today border security is stronger than it has ever been. But there is more work to do. The President’s proposal gives law enforcement the tools they need to make our communities safer from crime. And by enhancing our infrastructure and technology, the President’s proposal continues to strengthen our ability to remove criminals and apprehend and prosecute national security threats.

    Cracking Down on Employers Hiring Undocumented Workers: Our businesses should only employ people legally authorized to work in the United States. Businesses that knowingly employ undocumented workers are exploiting the system to gain an advantage over businesses that play by the rules. The President’s proposal is designed to stop these unfair hiring practices and hold these companies accountable. At the same time, this proposal gives employers who want to play by the rules a reliable way to verify that their employees are here legally.

    Earned Citizenship: It is just not practical to deport 11 million undocumented immigrants living within our borders. The President’s proposal provides undocumented immigrants a legal way to earn citizenship that will encourage them to come out of the shadows so they can pay their taxes and play by the same rules as everyone else. Immigrants living here illegally must be held responsible for their actions by passing national security and criminal background checks, paying taxes and a penalty, going to the back of the line, and learning English before they can earn their citizenship. There will be no uncertainty about their ability to become U.S. citizens if they meet these eligibility criteria. The proposal will also stop punishing innocent young people brought to the country through no fault of their own by their parents and give them a chance to earn their citizenship more quickly if they serve in the military or pursue higher education.

    Streamlining Legal Immigration: Our immigration system should reward anyone who is willing to work hard and play by the rules. For the sake of our economy and our security, legal immigration should be simple and efficient. The President’s proposal attracts the best minds to America by providing visas to foreign entrepreneurs looking to start businesses here and helping the most promising foreign graduate students in science and math stay in this country after graduation, rather than take their skills to other countries. The President’s proposal will also reunify families in a timely and humane manner.

    Continue reading “President Obama’s immigration reform plans Jan 29 2013″ »

    Posted by Peter Rousmaniere at 3:21 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)
    January 28, 2013
    Senators’ statement of principles on immigration reform

    As published by the Washington Post this morning….this is the most important single document to start off the immigration reform effort in 2013.

    Bipartisan Framework for Comprehensive Immigration Reform Senators Schumer, McCain, Durbin, Graham, Menendez, Rubio, Bennet, and Flake

    Introduction

    We recognize that our immigration system is broken. And while border security has improved significantly over the last two Administrations, we still don’t have a functioning immigration system. This has created a situation where up to 11 million undocumented immigrants are living in the shadows. Our legislation acknowledges these realities by finally committing the resources needed to secure the border, modernize and streamline our current legal immigration system, while creating a tough but fair legalization program for individuals who are currently here. We
    will ensure that this is a successful permanent reform to our immigration system that will not need to be revisited.

    Four Basic Legislative Pillars:

    o Create a tough but fair path to citizenship for unauthorized immigrants currently living in the United States that is contingent upon securing our borders and tracking whether legal immigrants have left the country when required;

    o Reform our legal immigration system to better recognize the importance of characteristics that will help build the American economy and strengthen American families;

    o Create an effective employment verification system that will prevent identity theft and end the hiring of future unauthorized workers; and,

    o Establish an improved process for admitting future workers to serve our nation’s workforce needs, while simultaneously protecting all workers.

    1. Creating a Path to Citizenship for Unauthorized Immigrants Already Here that is Contingent Upon Securing the Border and Combating Visa Overstays

    Our legislation will provide a tough, fair, and practical roadmap to address the status of unauthorized immigrants in the United States that is contingent upon our success in securing our borders and addressing visa overstays.

    To fulfill the basic governmental function of securing our borders, we will continue the increased efforts of the Border Patrol by providing them with the latest technology, infrastructure, and personnel needed to prevent, detect, and apprehend every unauthorized entrant.

    Additionally, our legislation will increase the number of unmanned aerial vehicles and surveillance equipment, improve radio interoperability and increase the number of agents at and between ports of entry. The purpose is to substantially lower the number of successful illegal border crossings while continuing to facilitate commerce.

    We will strengthen prohibitions against racial profiling and inappropriate use of force, enhance the training of border patrol agents, increase oversight, and create a mechanism to ensure a meaningful opportunity for border communities to share input, including critiques.

    Continue reading ” Senators’ statement of principles on immigration reform” »

    Posted by Peter Rousmaniere at 8:59 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)
    January 18, 2013
    Introduction to H-2A temporary agricultural worker program

    The following is an introduction to the H-2A program for temporary agricultural workers. The introduction is drawn mainly from Congressional Research Service. Immigration of Temporary Lower-Skilled Workers: Current Policy and Related Issues.

    Introduction

    Foreign agricultural workers have been a recent focus of attention in Congress, with the immigration subcommittees of both the House and the Senate Judiciary Committees holding related hearings in 2011 and 2012. A number of legislative proposals on agricultural guest workers have likewise been put forward in the 112th Congress. Some bills would amend INA provisions on the H-2A visa, while others would establish new temporary agricultural worker programs as alternatives to the H-2A program. Still other proposals would couple a legalization program for agricultural workers either with H-2A reform, as in the traditional AgJOBS formulation, or with other changes to current law on agricultural labor.

    Of the 79,000 certified H-2A positions in 2010, 40% were in the top five states (in order of size): North Carolina, Louisiana, Georgia, Kentucky, Florida. [Table A-1, pg. 28]

    How it works

    The H-2A program allows for the temporary admission of foreign workers to the United States to perform agricultural labor or services of a seasonal or temporary nature, provided that U.S. workers are not available. In general, for purposes of the H-2A program, work is of a temporary nature where the employer’s need for the worker will last no longer than one year. Thus, an approved H-2A visa petition is generally valid for an initial period of up to one year. An employer can apply to extend an H-2A worker’s stay in increments of up to one year, but an alien’s total
    period of stay as an H-2A worker may not exceed three consecutive years. An alien who has spent three years in the United States in H-2A status may not seek an extension of stay or be readmitted to the United States as an H-2A worker until he or she has been outside the country for three months.

    Prospective H-2A employers are required to submit a job order to the state workforce agency (SWA) serving the area of intended employment before filing a
    labor certification application. Once reviewed and cleared by the SWA, the job order becomes the basis for recruiting U.S. workers to fill the employer’s job openings. The employer can then file the labor certification application with DOL. In the DOL application the employer must first apply to DOL for a certification that (1) there are not sufficient U.S. workers who are qualified and available to perform the work; and (2) the employment of foreign workers will not adversely affect the wages and working conditions of U.S. workers who are similarly employed.

    Prospective H-2A employers must attempt to recruit U.S. workers and must cooperate with DOL-funded state employment service agencies (also known as state workforce agencies) in local, intrastate, and interstate recruitment efforts. Under the H-2A program’s fifty percent rule, employers are required to hire any qualified U.S. worker who applies for a position during the first half of the work contract under which the H-2A workers who are in the job are employed.

    Continue reading “Introduction to H-2A temporary agricultural worker program” »

    Posted by Peter Rousmaniere at 8:07 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)
    January 12, 2013
    Chamber of Commerce for comprehensive immigration reform

    U.S. Chamber of Commerce president Thomas J. Donohue gave his annual state of business address on January 10, and said the following about immigration reform (excerpted). I’d say he is calling for comprehensive reform, including normalizing the status of undocumented immigrants.

    …..But we still need immigrants. We are locked in a global competition for the world’s best talent. This is the competition that will separate the economic leaders from the laggards in the 21st century.

    The Chamber is already teaming up with the labor unions, faith organizations and ethnic groups, and law enforcement to build a coalition for comprehensive reform.

    We believe immigration reform should include the following inter-related components:

    We need to secure our borders. It is imperative that people and commerce flow efficiently and lawfully through our nation’s ports and across our borders.

    In addition, our laws must be revised to welcome needed labor and talent into our economy through thoughtfully-designed guest worker programs. This includes provisional visas for lesser-skilled workers. It also includes expanding the caps for high-skilled visas, and, expanding green cards for foreign nationals who graduate from our colleges and universities with advanced degrees.

    We also need a workable, reliable national employee verification system. And, we need to provide a path out of the shadows for the 11 million undocumented immigrants who live in the United States today—provided that they meet strict conditions.

    Posted by Peter Rousmaniere at 10:02 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)
    Introduction to H-2A temporary agricultural worker program

    The following is an introduction to the H-2A program for temporary agricultural workers.The introduction is an excerpt from Congressional Research Service. Immigration of Temporary Lower-Skilled Workers: Current Policy and Related Issues 12/13/12 report.

    Introduction

    Foreign agricultural workers have been a recent focus of attention in Congress, with the immigration subcommittees of both the House and the Senate Judiciary Committees holding related hearings in 2011 and 2012. A number of legislative proposals on agricultural guest workers have likewise been put forward in the 112th Congress. Some bills would amend INA provisions on the H-2A visa, while others would establish new temporary agricultural worker programs as alternatives to the H-2A program. Still other proposals would couple a legalization program for agricultural workers either with H-2A reform, as in the traditional AgJOBS formulation, or with other changes to current law on agricultural labor.

    Of the 79,000 certified H-2A positions in 2010, 40% were in the top five states (in order of size): North Carolina, Louisiana, Georgia, Kentucky, Florida. [Table A-1, pg. 28]

    How it works

    The H-2A program allows for the temporary admission of foreign workers to the United States to perform agricultural labor or services of a seasonal or temporary nature, provided that U.S. workers are not available. In general, for purposes of the H-2A program, work is of a temporary nature where the employer’s need for the worker will last no longer than one year. Thus, an approved H-2A visa petition is generally valid for an initial period of up to one year. An employer can apply to extend an H-2A worker’s stay in increments of up to one year, but an alien’s total
    period of stay as an H-2A worker may not exceed three consecutive years. An alien who has spent three years in the United States in H-2A status may not seek an extension of stay or be readmitted to the United States as an H-2A worker until he or she has been outside the country for three months.

    Prospective H-2A employers are required to submit a job order to the state workforce agency (SWA) serving the area of intended employment before filing a
    labor certification application. Once reviewed and cleared by the SWA, the job order becomes the basis for recruiting U.S. workers to fill the employer’s job openings. The employer can then file the labor certification application with DOL. In the DOL application the employer must first apply to DOL for a certification that (1) there are not sufficient U.S. workers who are qualified and available to perform the work; and (2) the employment of foreign workers will not adversely affect the wages and working conditions of U.S. workers who are similarly employed.

    Prospective H-2A employers must attempt to recruit U.S. workers and must cooperate with DOL-funded state employment service agencies (also known as state workforce agencies) in local, intrastate, and interstate recruitment efforts. Under the H-2A program’s fifty percent rule, employers are required to hire any qualified U.S. worker who applies for a position during the first half of the work contract under which the H-2A workers who are in the job are employed.

    Continue reading “Introduction to H-2A temporary agricultural worker program” »

    Posted by Peter Rousmaniere at 2:13 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)
    Temporary worker programs: Introduction

    In December the Congressional Research Service issued a report on two key temporary worker programs, H-2A and H-2B. This posting excerpts from the report’s introductory overview of both programs. Later postings will address the programs in greater detail. These postings will bring you up to speed on the basics of temporary foreign worker programs in the U.S.

    There are many temporary work visa programs. A comprehensive list of them in contain in a 2009 report by the Migration Policy Institute, “Aligning Temporary Immigration Visas with U.S. market needs.” In 2008, some 262,000 temporary visas were issues for high skilled labor, and 158,000 such visas for low skilled labor, almost entirely H-2A and H-2B. In addition there were 168,000 “mixed skilled” temporary visas issued.

    The report excerpted below and in later postings is: Congressional Research Service. Immigration of Temporary Lower-Skilled Workers: Current Policy and Related Issues. 12/13/12.

    The [Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952], as originally enacted, authorized an H-2 nonimmigrant visa category for foreign agricultural and nonagricultural workers who were coming temporarily to the United States to perform temporary services (other than services of an exceptional nature requiring distinguished merit and ability) or labor. The 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA) amended the INA to subdivide the H-2 program into the current H-2A agricultural worker program and H-2B nonagricultural worker program and to detail the admissions process for H-2A workers. The H2A and H-2B programs are administered by the Employment and Training Administration (ETA) of the Department of Labor (DOL) and U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS).

    The H-2A and H-2B programs are administered by DOL and DHS, with DOL making a determination on the labor certification application and DHS adjudicating the non-immigrant visa petition.

    While there are many differences between the H-2A agricultural worker program and the H-2B nonagricultural worker program, the process of importing workers under either program entails the same steps. Employers who want to hire workers through either program must first apply to DOL for labor certification, as discussed in the next section. After receiving labor certification, a prospective H-2A or H-2B employer can submit an application, known as a petition, to DHS to bring in foreign workers. If the application is approved, foreign workers who are abroad can then
    go to a U.S. embassy or consulate to apply for an H-2A or H-2B nonimmigrant visa from the Department of State (DOS). If the visa application is approved, the worker is issued a visa that he or she can use to apply for admission to the United States at a port of entry.

    In both the H-2A and H-2B programs, there is a tension between providing protections to U.S. and foreign workers on the one hand and making the programs responsive to legitimate employer needs on the other. While these competing interests are longstanding, the current environment— with relatively high levels of U.S. unemployment; discussions about expanding the E-Verify electronic employment eligibility verification system (as discussed below); and concerns about
    shortages of legal workers, especially in agriculture—has heightened the tensions.

    Temporary Labor Certification

    DOL’s ETA is responsible for administering the labor certification process under the H-2A and H2B programs. Under both programs, employers submit applications in which they request the certification of a particular number of positions.

    INA provisions on the admission of H-2A workers state that an H-2A petition cannot be approved unless the petitioner has applied to DOL for certification that

    (1) there are not sufficient workers who are able, willing, qualified … and available at the time of application for a visa and admission to the United States and at the place where the alien is to perform such skilled or unskilled labor, and (2) the employment of such alien will not adversely affect the wages and working conditions of workers in the United States similarly employed. [INA §218(a)(1)(A), (B)]

    There is no equivalent statutory labor certification requirement for the H-2B program. The INA, however, does contain some related language. For example, it defines an H-2B alien, in relevant part, as an alien “who is coming temporarily to the United States to perform other temporary service or labor if unemployed persons capable of performing such service or labor cannot be found in this country.” [INA §101(a)(15)(H)(ii)(b)] The H-2B labor certification requirement instead appears in DHS regulations. These regulations state:

    “The petitioner may not file an H-2B petition unless the United States petitioner has applied for a labor certification with the Secretary of Labor … and has obtained a favorable labor certification determination …[8 C.F.R. §214.2(h)(6)(iii)(C)].

    The H-2A and H-2B labor certification requirements are intended to provide job, wage, and working conditions protections to U.S. workers. They are implemented in both programs through a multifaceted labor certification process that requires prospective H-2A and H-2B employers to conduct recruitment for U.S. workers and offer a minimum level of wages and benefits that varies by program.

    Posted by Peter Rousmaniere at 8:32 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)
    December 20, 2012
    The “Texas Immigration Solution”: Guest worker programs

    The Texas Immigration Solution is a self-described conservative organization focused on immigration reform. It describes its mission to “enact conservative, market-based immigration reform into law,” and to “provide a voice for conservative job creators by educating the broader community on the urgent need for comprehensive, conservative, market-oriented reforms of the immigration process.”

    Its solution is guest worker program-based for both skilled and unskilled workers, with conservative approaches to immigration in general:

    Secure Our Borders – We demand the application of effective, practical and reasonable measures to secure our borders and to bring safety and security for all Americans along the border and throughout the nation.

    Modernize the United States Social Security Card – We support the improvement of our 1936 Social Security card to use contemporary anti-counterfeit technology. The social security card will not be considered a National ID card for U.S. citizens.

    Birthright Citizenship – We call on the Legislative, Executive, and Judicial branches of the United States to clarify Section 1 of the 14th amendment to limit citizenship by birth to those born to a citizen of the United States with no exceptions.

    Create an Effective and Efficient Temporary Worker Program – A national Temporary Worker Program should be implemented to bring skilled and unskilled workers into the United States for temporary periods of time when no U.S. workers are currently available. The program should also require:

    Self-funding through participation fees and fines;

    Applicants must pass a full criminal background check;

    Applicants with prior immigration violations would only qualify for the program if they paid the appropriate fines;

    Applicants and/or Employers must prove that they can afford and/or secure private health insurance;

    Applicants must waive any and all rights to apply for financial assistance from any public entitlement programs;

    Applicant must show a proficiency in the English language and complete an American civic class;

    Temporary Workers would only be able to work for employers that deduct and match payroll taxes;

    All participants would be issued an individual Temporary-Worker Biometric Identification Card that tracks all address changes and both civil and criminal court appearances as a defendant.

    Posted by Peter Rousmaniere at 10:48 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)
    December 19, 2012
    The Colorado Compact

    Colorado — with an estimated 180,000 undocumented immigrants — has created a compact on immigration, following Utah’s lead of a few years ago, which itself was in response to Arizona’s draconian legislation. According to the Greeley Tribune, the Colorado Compact arose out of 200 meetings throughout the state. The need for immigrant labor is most acute among the state’s farms, which “like many others nationally, have lost workers to the better-paying jobs of the oil and gas field, while also struggling to find local residents willing to do agriculture’s physical labor….Signers of the Colorado Compact span faith organizations, law enforcement agencies, the business community, immigrant-rights advocates and institutions of higher education, as well as agricultural interests.”

    The Colorado Compact:

    The Colorado Compact is an effort to convene and promote a reasonable conversation on immigration in Colorado that could lead to real and lasting federal reform. The Compact brings together leaders and community members of diverse backgrounds and politics who are committed to fostering a more rational and collaborative approach to immigration policy than exists today. We believe that the growing consequences of a broken immigration system must be addressed in a bipartisan effort that considers the principles outlined in this compact.

    FEDERAL RESPONSIBILITY

    Immigration policy is a federal issue between the U.S. government and other countries. We urge the Colorado congressional delegation to work to enact immigration policy at the federal level that improves our immigration system, keeps our communities safe, and protects our borders.

    STRENGTHENING OUR ECONOMY

    Colorado is best served by a free-market philosophy that maximizes individual freedom and opportunity. Our immigration system must be flexible enough to address the needs of businesses while protecting the interests of workers. This includes a visa system that is both responsive and effective at meeting the demands of our economy. It should also acknowledge the beneficial economic contributions immigrants make as workers, taxpayers, and consumers.

    ENSURING OUR NATIONAL SECURITY

    We believe that maintaining the safety and security of the United States is an utmost priority. Our immigration system must ensure the protection of our communities and national borders.

    FAMILY

    Strong families are critical to developing successful individuals and cohesive communities. Our immigration policies, where possible, should prioritize keeping close families together in order to ensure the most supportive home environments for all children across our state.

    EFFECTIVE ENFORCEMENT

    We support a law enforcement strategy that focuses on public safety, targets serious crime, and safeguards witnesses and victims. We further urge a reasonable and predictable regulatory environment that considers the interests of, and unintended consequences to businesses, workers, and consumers. Furthermore, the broader reform effort should eventually include a way to accurately, reliably, and affordably determine who is permitted to work, ensuring an adequate labor force for a growing economy.

    A COMMONSENSE APPROACH

    Immigrants are part of our communities across Colorado. We must adopt a commonsense approach to this reality that reflects our values and recognizes the critical role immigration has played in our nation’s history and economy. Our immigration policies must provide a sensible path forward for immigrants who are here without legal status, are of good character, pay taxes, and are committed to becoming fully participating members of our society and culture.

    Posted by Peter Rousmaniere at 9:16 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)
    November 24, 2012
    Immigration reform prospects for 2013

    Why immigration reform in 2013? Muzaffar Chishti and Claire Bergeron cite the following:

    • The Republican Party was jolted by the surprisingly low Latino support for presidential nominee Mitt Romney
    • nearly two-thirds of American voters (65 percent) now support giving most unauthorized immigrant workers a chance to apply for legal status.
    • recognition in both political parties that reforming the current legal immigration system is critical to advancing the United States’ global economic competitiveness.
    • For a bill to stand a chance of passage, it must get through Congress before House members gear up for the 2014 mid-term elections. Most interpret that political reality to mean that a bill’s best chance would be in 2013.

    The article in full: “US Election Realigns Stars for Immigration Reform, But Significant Hurdles Remain”

    Published on 11-23-2012

    In one sweep, the re-election of President Barack Obama has transformed immigration reform, an issue that for years has largely been seen as a third rail of American politics, into a first-tier legislative agenda item for the 113th Congress. In perhaps the clearest sign that the calculus on immigration has dramatically shifted, a chorus of Republican Party leaders and conservatives who have traditionally opposed immigration reform efforts voiced support for enacting legislation that would include legalization for some of the country’s 11 million unauthorized immigrants.

    Backers of such a measure are moving quickly to turn ambitious goals into legislative reality. On November 11th, Senators Charles Schumer (D-NY) and Lindsey Graham (R-SC) announced that they were re-initiating efforts to draft a broad, bipartisan immigration reform bill. Three days later, President Obama, in his first post-election press conference, told reporters that he expected movement on immigration reform “very soon after [the] inauguration”.

    Continue reading “Immigration reform prospects for 2013″ »

    Posted by Peter Rousmaniere at 7:15 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)
    November 11, 2012
    Ten politicans to watch on immigration reform

    Daniel Strauss of the Hill lists “10 players to watch on immigration:” President Obama, Rep. Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.), Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), Rep. Luis Gutierrez (D-Ill.), Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), Sen.John McCain (R-Ariz.), Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.), Rep. Steve King (R-Iowa), and Sen. Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.).

    The list in depth:

    President Obama. Even before he was elected to a second term, Obama had already been laying the groundwork for immigration reform. Over the summer, he issued a new directive protecting immigrants who came to the country illegally from being deported provided they meet certain criteria. After failing to pass a bill in his first four years, Obama said that immigration reform would be one of the highest priorities of his second term. But will he push a comprehensive approach, or a scaled-down version of the measure, such as the Development, Relief and Education for Alien Minors (DREAM) Act?

    Rep. Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.). Goodlatte is considered the favorite to be the new chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, which has jurisdiction on immigration. In 2011, he introduced legislation to get rid of the immigrant visa lottery program. He has been a vocal critic of the DREAM Act. Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) this week has opened the door to passing immigration reform, attracting criticism from conservatives.

    Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.). The Senate Judiciary Committee chairman has been proponent on comprehensive immigration reform and his voting record includes support for establishing a guest-worker program, opposing limiting welfare for illegal immigrants and allowing illegal immigrants to participate in Social Security.

    Continue reading “Ten politicans to watch on immigration reform” »

    Posted by Peter Rousmaniere at 7:27 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)
    October 21, 2012
    Dream Act: employment and economic impact

    The Partnership for the New American Economy issued an important report in October on the economic results of the Dream Act, if enacted.

    “The Economic Benefits of Passing the DREAM Act,” by Juan Carlos Guzmán and Raúl C. Jara, draws upon the current versions of the DREAM Act submitted by Sen. Richard Durbin (S.952) and Rep. Howard Berman (H.R. 1842).

    To be eligible, an undocumented person has to have come to the United States at age 15 or younger, be currently age 35 or younger, have been present in the country for at least five years, completed high school, and completed at least two years of higher education or honorably served in the armed forces for at least two years.

    Eligible immigrants per the Act first receive conditional legal status for a period of six years, under which they can complete their studies and work legally in the United States. After that period, if they have met all of the requirements, they can apply for permanent legal status (a green card) and eventually citizenship

    The authors forecast that by 2030 the Act will create 1.4 million new jobs, and increase by 19% the total compensation of all eligible youth. How will this happen?

    First, enacting the law would provide an incentive for their further education because for most of those who would be eligible the legalization provisions can only be attained through completion of high school and some college. Receiving more education opens access to higher-paying jobs, enabling these undocumented youth to become much more productive members of our society.

    Second, gaining legal status itself translates into higher earnings for these youth since legal status allows DREAMers to apply to a broader range of high-paying jobs rather than having to resort to low-wage jobs from employers who are willing to pay them under the table.

    According to the authors, this will not take away jobs from native born Americans:

    First, many economists find that immigrants tend to complement the skills of native workers rather than compete with them, especially as immigrants move up the education and skills chain. Increasing the education of immigrant workers would therefore decrease the competition between DREAMers and the native-born.

    Second, research shows that an increase in college-educated immigrants directly increases U.S. gross domestic product—the largest measure of economic growth—which correlates to more jobs for American workers. In the 1990s, for example, the increase in college-educated immigrants was found to be responsible for a 1.4% to 2.4% in U.S. GDP.

    http://www.renewoureconomy.org/economic-benefits-dream

    Posted by Peter Rousmaniere at 4:19 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)
    June 16, 2012
    Labor force impact of new Obama policy will be large

    The Pew Hispanic Center estimates that most of the persons to be protected by the administration are 18 to 30, thus in the labor force.

    In a report issued on June 15, the Center said that up to 1.4 million children and young adults who are in the United States illegally could potentially benefit from today’s announcement by the Obama Administration about changes in deportation policies, according to an estimate from the Pew Hispanic Center, a project of the Pew Research Center.

    The 1.4 million estimate includes 700,000 unauthorized immigrants who are ages 18 to 30 but arrived in the U.S as children and are currently enrolled in school or have graduated from high school; and an additional 700,000 who are under the age of 18 and are enrolled in school. This includes 150,000 who are currently enrolled in high school.

    Overall, the 1.4 million estimate represents about 12% of the 11.2 million unauthorized immigrants in the U.S. as of 2010, according to an estimate by the Pew Hispanic Center. Among the 1.4 million potential beneficiaries of the new policy, some 70% are from Mexico. For details on the numbers and characteristics of unauthorized immigrants in the U.S, see the Pew Hispanic Center report “Unauthorized Immigrant Population: National and State Trends, 2010.”

    A Pew Hispanic Center survey taken late last year found that by a margin of 59% to 27%, Latinos oppose the deportation policies of the Obama Administration. Among Latinos, some 41% are aware that the number of deportations of unauthorized immigrants annually has been higher during the Obama Administration than during the George W. Bush Administration, while 36% say the two Administrations have deported the same number of unauthorized immigrants, and 10% say fewer have been deported under the Obama administration.

    Nearly 400,000 unauthorized immigrants were deported annually during the first two years of the Obama Administration—-about 30% more than the annual average during the second term of the Bush Administration. Among those deported in 2010, nearly all (97%) were Hispanic. By comparison, among all unauthorized immigrants, 81% are Hispanic.

    According to the same 2011 Pew Hispanic Center survey, 91% of Latinos support the DREAM Act, a proposal that would grant legal status to unauthorized immigrant children if they attend college or serve in the U.S. military for two years. And 84% of Latinos favor granting in-state tuition at public colleges to unauthorized immigrants who graduated from high school in their states.

    Posted by Peter Rousmaniere at 6:14 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)
    December 8, 2011
    Alabama now reaping the harvest of its immigration law

    I am back, after two months of extensive travel

    The chickens are coming home roost in Alabama. Two legally working foreign workers in auto plants have been arrested.

    According to Fox News, “Before the auto workers’ problems, in early November, [Alabama Governor Robert] Bentley told a Birmingham business audience that the law had not hurt Alabama’s image with industrial prospects. But Bentley now says the two arrests involving foreign auto workers “theoretically” could hurt Alabama’s ability to recruit foreign industries.”

    The article in full:

    Alabama Governor to Foreign Biz: Don’t Worry About Immigration Law

    After local police recently detained employees of Mercedes-Benz and Honda under the state’s immigration law, Alabama’s governor is reaching out to foreign executives to let them know that the state welcomes them.

    “We are not anti-foreign companies. We are very pro-foreign companies,” Bentley told reporters at the Capitol.

    The Republican governor and other supporters of Alabama’s new immigration law — aimed at driving undocumented immigrants out of the state — have described it as the nation’s toughest. Some parts of it were put on hold by the federal courts, but major provisions took effect in late September, including allowing police to detain motorists who can’t produce a valid driver’s license.

    Before the auto workers’ problems, in early November, Bentley told a Birmingham business audience that the law had not hurt Alabama’s image with industrial prospects. But Bentley now says the two arrests involving foreign auto workers “theoretically” could hurt Alabama’s ability to recruit foreign industries.

    Since then, two foreign workers with the Mercedes-Benz and Honda auto assembly plants in Alabama have run into problems.

    Continue reading “Alabama now reaping the harvest of its immigration law” »

    Posted by Peter Rousmaniere at 4:21 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)
    August 31, 2011
    NY Times editorial about Alabama Law

    The Nation’s Cruelest Immigration Law

    The Alabama Legislature opened its session on March 1 on a note of humility and compassion. In the Senate, a Christian pastor asked God to grant members “wisdom and discernment” to do what is right. “Not what’s right in their own eyes,” he said, “but what’s right according to your word.” Soon after, both houses passed, and the governor signed, the country’s cruelest, most unforgiving immigration law.

    The law, which takes effect Sept. 1, is so inhumane that four Alabama church leaders — an Episcopal bishop, a Methodist bishop and a Roman Catholic archbishop and bishop — have sued to block it, saying it criminalizes acts of Christian compassion. It is a sweeping attempt to terrorize undocumented immigrants in every aspect of their lives, and to make potential criminals of anyone who may work or live with them or show them kindness.

    It effectively makes it a crime to be an undocumented immigrant in Alabama, by criminalizing working, renting a home and failing to comply with federal registration laws that are largely obsolete. It nullifies any contracts when one party is an undocumented immigrant. It requires the police to check the papers of people they suspect to be here illegally.

    The new regime does not spare American citizens. Businesses that knowingly employ illegal immigrants will lose their licenses. Public school officials will be required to determine students’ immigration status and report back to the state. Anyone knowingly “concealing, harboring or shielding” an illegal immigrant could be charged with a crime, say for renting someone an apartment or driving her to church or the doctor.

    The American Civil Liberties Union and the Justice Department have also sued, calling the law an unconstitutional intrusion on the federal government’s authority to write and enforce immigration laws. The A.C.L.U. warns that the law would trample people’s fundamental rights to speak and travel freely, effectively deny children the chance to go to school and expose people to harassment and racial profiling.

    These arguments have been made before, in opposition to similar, if less sweeping, laws passed in Arizona, Utah, Indiana and Georgia. What is remarkable in Alabama is the separate lawsuit by the four church leaders, who say the law violates their religious freedoms to perform acts of charity without regard to the immigration status of those they minister to or help.

    “The law,” Archbishop Thomas Rodi of Mobile said in The Times, “attacks our core understanding of what it means to be a church.”

    You’d think that any state would think twice before embracing a law that so vividly brings to mind the Fugitive Slave Act, the brutal legal and law-enforcement apparatus of the Jim Crow era, and the civil-rights struggle led by the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. But waves of anti-immigrant hostility have made many in this country forget who and what we are.

    Congress was once on the brink of an ambitious bipartisan reform that would have enabled millions of immigrants stranded by the failed immigration system to get right with the law. This sensible policy has been abandoned. We hope the church leaders can waken their fellow Alabamans to the moral damage done when forgiveness and justice are so ruthlessly denied. We hope Washington and the rest of the country will also listen.

    Posted by Peter Rousmaniere at 6:33 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)
    August 30, 2011
    Alabama’s Immigration law dissected

    On June 9, 2011, Alabama enacted H 56, the most aggressive state law to date to control immigration. Federal judge has stayed the implementation of the law until at least late September. Most of the media discussion has been about non-work-related provisions of the law, for instance, police questioning, access to church-related services, and public education. Here, we look at the business –related provisions, which are excerpted below. The key provisions are:

    Section 9 - Government contractors prohibited from hiring unlawful aliens

    Section 11 - curb-side hiring prohibited

    Section 13 – Harboring an unlawful alien

    Section 15 prohibiting private sector hiring of unlawful aliens, at penalty of permanent revocation of licenses and permits

    And

    Section 26 - State of Alabama to provide E-Verify service to small employers

    I have included below key passages in each of these sections.

    “….the court shall direct the applicable governing bodies to forever suspend the business licenses and permits, if such exist, of the business entity or employer throughout the state….” (Section 15 (f)

    Section 9 - Government contractors prohibited from hiring unlawful aliens

    (a) As a condition for the award of any contract, grant, or incentive by the state, any political subdivision thereof, or any state-funded entity to a business entity or employer that employs one or more employees, the business entity or employer shall not knowingly employ, hire for employment, or continue to employ an unauthorized alien and shall attest to such, by sworn affidavit signed before a notary.

    ……Violations of Section 9 (a)

    Continue reading ” Alabama’s Immigration law dissected ” »

    Posted by Peter Rousmaniere at 11:57 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)
    May 31, 2011
    IT CEOs pitch for a better immigration policy

    Four IT industry leaders called on May 19 for a new immigration policy. They touch on a number of issues, including dysfunction in our relations with foreigners who earn graduate degrees here. “Today foreign nationals account for 50% of master’s degrees and 70% of Ph.D. degrees in electrical and electronic engineering in the U.S. Yet, our antiquated immigration laws numerically limit the numbers of these individuals, by the thousands, from entering our country annually. What kind of strategy is it to train the world’s best and brightest in our great universities – and then require them to leave?”

    The authors are members of the President’s Council on Jobs and Competitiveness

    Their statement in full:

    America needs a 21st century immigration policy

    President Obama’s recent focus on immigration highlights America’s “broken” system and its impact on our economy. Fixing it requires Republicans and Democrats to show political courage and implement reforms to expand and strengthen the American economy. As members of the President’s Council on Jobs and Competitiveness, we share his deep concern that our nation’s ability to compete economically is being damaged by the two parties battling over immigration laws and policies.

    To some, the link between immigration reform and economic growth may be surprising. To America’s most innovative industries, it is a link we know is fundamental.

    Continue reading “IT CEOs pitch for a better immigration policy” »

    Posted by Peter Rousmaniere at 5:57 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)
    April 21, 2011
    More on Utah’s new immigration related laws

    On the heels of Utah’s passage of an immigration – related law, Farmer Justice’s president Bruce Goldstein wrote an op-ed in the Salt Lake Tribune saying that the state should be paying more attention to reforming an existing guest worker program, the H-2A program. Goldstein is concerned that guest worker programs tend to be inadequate in protecting the interests of both guest and American workers. He plugs for AgJOBS, which was part of the failed immigration reform effort in Washington in 2007.

    The article in full:

    Paying for a guest worker law already in place
    By BRUCE GOLDSTEIN

    Published: April 14, 2011 12:10AM

    Bruce Goldstein is president of Farmworker Justice, a nonprofit organization based in Washington, D.C., that works to improve living and working conditions for migrant and seasonal farm workers.

    Amidst the debate and controversy surrounding Utah’s new immigration laws, state legislators in Salt Lake City seem to think they’ve created a model for America. They portray their pilot guest worker program as a compromise that others might use as a model.

    They must think Utah’s taxpayers aren’t paying careful attention, because they’ll be saddled with spending money to duplicate a program that largely already exists.

    Last month, Utah Gov. Gary Herbert signed into law four bills heralded by some commentators as a holistic and comprehensive state approach to immigration reform. One of the bills would create a pilot program to bring guest workers from the state of Nuevo Leon, Mexico, to perform temporary work. (Another would create a guest worker status for undocumented workers already working in Utah.)

    If the pilot bill for managing guest workers in Utah sounds familiar, that’s because, in spite of the media attention and self-congratulation that accompanied the state law, we have had a federal system in place since the 1940s that does virtually the same thing. In fact, the United States already has two such programs for temporary or seasonal jobs, the H-2A visa for agricultural work and the H-2B for nonagricultural work. Each visa already requires state involvement.

    Continue reading “More on Utah’s new immigration related laws” »

    Posted by Peter Rousmaniere at 11:08 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)
    March 28, 2011
    The Utah Compact on immigration

    Business, religious and community leaders in Utah signed on November 11, 2010, the following Utah Compact. This Compact set the stage for a package of immigration bills enacted this month.

    Utah Compact:

    A declaration of five principles to guide Utah’s immigration discussion

    FEDERAL SOLUTIONS: Immigration is a federal policy issue between the U.S. government and other countries — not Utah and other countries. We urge Utah’s congressional delegation, and others, to lead efforts to strengthen federal laws and protect our national borders. We urge state leaders to adopt reasonable policies addressing immigrants in Utah.

    LAW ENFORCEMENT: We respect the rule of law and support law enforcement’s professional judgment and discretion. Local law enforcement resources should focus on criminal activities, not civil violations of federal code.

    FAMILIES: Strong families are the foundation of successful communities. We oppose policies that unnecessarily separate families. We champion policies that support families and improve the health, education and well-being of all Utah children.

    ECONOMY: Utah is best served by a free-market philosophy that maximizes individual freedom and opportunity. We acknowledge the economic role immigrants play as workers and taxpayers. Utah’s immigration policies must reaffirm our global reputation as a welcoming and business-friendly state.

    A FREE SOCIETY: Immigrants are integrated into communities across Utah. We must adopt a humane approach to this reality, reflecting our unique culture, history and spirit of inclusion. The way we treat immigrants will say more about us as a free society and less about our immigrant neighbors. Utah should always be a place that welcomes people of goodwill.

    Supported by the Mormon Church

    Statement from The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints:

    As a worldwide church dealing with many complex issues across the globe, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints promotes broad, foundational principles that have worldwide application. The Church regards the declaration of the Utah Compact as a responsible approach to the urgent challenge of immigration reform. It is consistent with important principles for which we stand:

    * We follow Jesus Christ by loving our neighbors. The Savior taught that the meaning of “neighbor” includes all of God’s children, in all places, at all times.

    * We recognize an ever-present need to strengthen families. Families are meant to be together. Forced separation of working parents from their children weakens families and damages society.

    * We acknowledge that every nation has the right to enforce its laws and secure its borders. All persons subject to a nation’s laws are accountable for their acts in relation to them.

    Public officials should create and administer laws that reflect the best of our aspirations as a just and caring society. Such laws will properly balance love for neighbors, family cohesion, and the observance of just and enforceable laws.

    Posted by Peter Rousmaniere at 9:41 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)
    New guest worker and other legislation from Utah

    Utah has enacted in March a law that attempts to set up, on a single state basis, a guest worker program allowing illegal workers to participate. Though of doubtful constitutionality – it will take a waiver from Washington for Utah to effective write a guest worker program – it is an example of creative thinking about immigration.

    According to the Pew Hispanic Center, Utah has about 110,000 illegal immigrants, of which 75,000 are in the workforce.

    The legislation follow up on the Utah Compact, which business, religious and community leaders in Utah agreed to in late November. I am posting on that compact in another post.

    The Deseret News editorialized it support of the legislation, saying that “This year, Utah’s lawmakers have managed to accomplish legislatively what has eluded Congress: increased enforcement that weeds out dangerous criminals while providing a guest worker program coupled with tough but common-sense safeguards.”

    One report describes the guest worker law, HB 116, as follows:

    On Tuesday March 15, Utah Governor Gary R. Herbert signed immigration bills including HB 116 into law, which addressed immigration enforcement, guest-worker visas and employment verification by employers in Utah. Utah became the first state to enact laws to let illegal workers remain in the state along with their families.

    Governor Herbert called it “the Utah solution.” He said, “Utah has taken a thoughtful, rational approach and found common ground.”

    While most acknowledge immigration is primarily a federal issue, Governor Herbert said these bills provide him some leverage at the federal level to engage the federal government in addressing Utah’s challenges, according to the press release.
    The federal government would have to grant a waiver, since the U.S. Congress can only enact immigration laws and enforce them. If the federal government fails to grant a waiver, Utah might engage in a legal challenge by the U.S. Department of Justice.

    The guest-worker program under HB 116 will take effect in two years. It would allow the Utah Department of Safety to issue state visas to more than 110,000 undocumented immigrants in the state. Immigrants would have to pay $2,500 for permits or pay $1,000 for overstaying a visa in the U.S. Their families would be included in the permits. Undocumented workers would have to go through a background investigation once they sign up for the guest-worker program. They would be expected to learn English, but would not be required.

    Another new law, HB 466, allows the governor to enter into a pilot program with the Mexican state of Nuevo Leon to supply legal workers through existing federal guest-worker programs.

    A third bill, HB 497, requires police to check the immigration status of suspects who are arrested for felony or serious misdemeanor charges, placing an immigration enforcement activity in the hands of local police officers. This law is expected to face immediate legal challenges.

    Posted by Peter Rousmaniere at 9:25 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)
    January 1, 2011
    State house battles in 2011 over illegal immigration

    Count on 2011 to see a lot of “Arizona-plus” legislative initiatives at the state level. These will be opposed by business lobbies, Democrats, and the Hispanic community. Below is an article in today’s NY Times:

    Political Battle on Illegal Immigration Shifts to States
    By JULIA PRESTON

    Legislative leaders in at least half a dozen states say they will propose bills similar to a controversial law to fight illegal immigration that was adopted by Arizona last spring, even though a federal court has suspended central provisions of that statute.

    The efforts, led by Republicans, are part of a wave of state measures coming this year aimed at cracking down on illegal immigration.

    Legislators have also announced measures to limit access to public colleges and other benefits for illegal immigrants and to punish empl

  267. someone Says:

    Allow undocumented immigrants who have lived in the United States continually since before December 31, 2011 to apply for “Registered Provisional Immigrant Status” if they pay back taxes and $500 in fines, and if they have not been convicted of a felony or 3 or more misdemeanors or voted illegally. Individuals with this status can work for any employer and travel outside the country but are not eligible to receive means-tested federal public benefits.

    After 10 years in Registered Provisional Immigrant Status, individuals will be eligible – pending border security measures and a clearing of existing backlogs for legal immigrants – to earn a merit-based green card if they have worked in the United States, demonstrated knowledge of the English language and paid an additional fine of $1000.

    Allow eligible DREAM act applicants and certain agricultural workers to apply for green cards within five years

    Regarding border security, the bill would set a goal of “90% effectiveness” – meaning the rate of apprehensions and turnbacks of potential entrants – per fiscal year in the most high-risk areas of the southern border. If that goal is not met within five years, a bipartisan “Border Commission” made up of border state governors and experts will be formed to issue new recommendations on how to achieve it.

    Allocate $3 billion for increased surveillance and manpower along the country’s southern border and an additional $1.5 billion for fencing.

    Include a border security “trigger” requiring that no undocumented immigrant can achieve legal “Registered Provisional Immigrant” status until strategies for border security have been submitted by the Department of Homeland Security to Congress.

    Require an additional “trigger” that prevents those with “Registered Provisional Immigrant” status from becoming eligible to apply for Lawful Permanent Resident status until the Department of Homeland Security and the Comptroller General certify that border security strategies are operational and a mandatory employment verification system has been implemented.

    Create a new “W” visa program to allow non-agricultural temporary workers to come to the United States to work for registered employers.
    Eliminate family-based visas for siblings of United States citizens as well as the Diversity Visa program while eliminating caps on visas for certain employment-based categories.

    Use a point system for a new “merit based” visa, of which 120,000 would initially be awarded per year, with a maximum cap of 250,000 annually. Points will be awarded based on criteria including education, employment and length of residence in the U.S.

    Require an “enhanced E-Verify” system to prevent ineligible workers from taking jobs in the United States. Employers with more than 5,000 employees will be phased in within two years; employers with more than 500 employees will be phased in within three years.

    Raise the annual cap on H1-B visas for high-skilled workers from 65,000 to 110,000, with provisions to prevent such workers from undercutting American wages. Set a maximum cap at 180,000 such visas.

    Posted by Peter Rousmaniere at 7:05 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)
    March 19, 2013
    Latino voters and immigration

    Latino Decisions released new polling data today highlighting why immigration reform has become the number one political issue for Latino voters, and the answer is close personal connections between Latino voters and Latino undocumented immigrants.

    The poll was funded by immigration reform advocates.

    The poll finds that 58% of Latino registered voters now cite immigration reform as the top priority for the Congress and President, up from 35% in November 2012. One reason is that 63% of Latino voters say they personally know someone who is an undocumented immigrant, either a member of their family or a close personal friend. Further, 39% of Latino voters say they personally know someone, or a family who has faced deportation or detention for immigration reasons, and increase of 14 points over 2011, when 25% of Latino voters said they personally knew someone who had faced deportation or detention.

    The poll asked Latino voters if they knew any young immigrants who had applied for the 2012 “deferred action” program that would allow DREAM Act-eligible immigrants to live in the U.S. and attend college with temporary visas. More than one in five Latino voters (22%) knows someone who has already applied for deferred action, with 18% saying they know someone who is eligible, but not yet applied.

    Background:

    Latino Decisions interviewed 800 Latino registered voters via landline and mobile phone, across all 50 states, from February 15-26, 2013. Interviews were conducted in English or Spanish, at the preference of the respondent, and all interviewing staff was fully bilingual. The survey averaged 20 minutes in length and has an overall margin of error or +/- 3.5%. On split sample questions the margin of error is +/- 4.9%. For questions about the results, please contact Gary Segura gary.segura@latinodecisions.com

    The poll was sponsored by America’s Voice, National Council of La Raza, and SEIU.

    Posted by Peter Rousmaniere at 6:38 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)
    February 16, 2013
    Congressional seats: ready to go Red with slight change in Hispanic voting

    The Georgetown [University]Public Policy Review carefully analyzed each Congressional district for the potential of gains by Republicans if the percentage of Hispanic voting Republicans went up. It concluded that there are many more competitive races in heavily Hispanic areas for Democrats to lose than to gain. A shift of Hispanics from Dem to Rep would produce a lot more Rep wins than a shift of the same percentage from Rep to Dem would create more Dem wins.

    “There are two different lenses through which to consider the Republican perspective. First, most incumbent Republicans will not have a strong incentive to vote for an immigration bill containing a path to citizenship if a significant Hispanic population appears to be lacking in their districts. In fact, many conservatives may be far more concerned about primary challengers than Hispanic backlash.

    On the other hand, the Republican Party as a whole has a tremendous opportunity to turn districts in their favor. If they can redefine themselves to the Hispanic population, starting with comprehensive immigration reform, they will be doing more than pouring water on the DCCC’s gunpowder—they will be stealing it for themselves.”

    Posted by Peter Rousmaniere at 10:00 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)
    February 1, 2013
    Is the STEM problem a fiction?

    The blog of the Economic Policy Institute questions if the United States needs more foreign science, technology, engineering and math degreed people from abroad, given as two thirds of native born STEM graduates apparently work outside the fields for which they were educated.

    The posting:

    Fixing a problem that doesn’t exist: Special interest STEM immigration bills are not needed

    Business groups and their allies, including New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg and various non-profit advocacy organizations, have been arguing for years—without real evidence—that the United States is losing a race to attract the world’s best and brightest young scientists, engineers, computer techies and mathematicians. In a report entitled, Immigration of Foreign Nationals with Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) Degrees, Ruth Wasem of the Congressional Research Service (CRS) recently reviewed the statistics regarding these highly skilled migrants and concluded: “The United States remains the leading host country for international students in science, technology, engineering, or mathematics (STEM) fields.” The United States has been and continues to be extraordinarily welcoming to foreign students, and especially to those in the STEM fields. CRS reports that the number of foreign graduate students in the STEM fields increased by 50 percent since 1990:

    “The number of full-time graduate students in science, engineering, and health fields who were foreign students (largely on F-1 nonimmigrant visas) grew from 91,150 in 1990 to 148,923 in 2009, with most of the increase occurring after 1999. Despite the rise in foreign student enrollment, the percentage of STEM graduate students with temporary visas in 2009 (32.7%) was comparable to 1990 (31.1%). Graduate enrollments in engineering fields have exhibited the most growth of the STEM fields in recent years. About 40,000 graduate degrees were awarded to foreign STEM students in 2009, with 10,000 of those going to Ph.D. recipients.”

    But Microsoft and the Chamber of Commerce claim that we’re losing those graduates, that our immigration system doesn’t let us keep the talent our universities have trained. That claim is untrue. CRS reports that in the decade from FY 2000 to FY 2009, the U.S. granted legal permanent residence to almost 300,000 STEM workers, in addition to granting temporary work permits (for up to six years) to hundreds of thousands of others.

    Continue reading “Is the STEM problem a fiction?” »

    Posted by Peter Rousmaniere at 3:10 PM | Permalink | Comments (1)
    January 29, 2013
    President Obama’s immigration reform plans Jan 29 2013

    The Administration is proposing a “provisional” category or undocumented immigrants, as does the Senate’s statement. The White House Press Office issued this statement today:

    FACT SHEET: Fixing our Broken Immigration System so Everyone Plays by the Rules

    America’s immigration system is broken. Too many employers game the system by hiring undocumented workers and there are 11 million people living in the shadows. Neither is good for the economy or the country. It is time to act to fix the broken immigration system in a way that requires responsibility from everyone —both from the workers here illegally and those who hire them—and guarantees that everyone is playing by the same rules.

    President Obama’s commonsense immigration reform proposal has four parts. First, continue to strengthen our borders. Second, crack down on companies that hire undocumented workers. Third, hold undocumented immigrants accountable before they can earn their citizenship; this means requiring undocumented workers to pay their taxes and a penalty, move to the back of the line, learn English, and pass background checks. Fourth, streamline the legal immigration system for families, workers, and employers.

    Together we can build a fair, effective and commonsense immigration system that lives up to our heritage as a nation of laws and a nation of immigrants.

    The key principles the President believes should be included in commonsense immigration reform are:

    Continuing to Strengthen Border Security: President Obama has doubled the number of Border Patrol agents since 2004 and today border security is stronger than it has ever been. But there is more work to do. The President’s proposal gives law enforcement the tools they need to make our communities safer from crime. And by enhancing our infrastructure and technology, the President’s proposal continues to strengthen our ability to remove criminals and apprehend and prosecute national security threats.

    Cracking Down on Employers Hiring Undocumented Workers: Our businesses should only employ people legally authorized to work in the United States. Businesses that knowingly employ undocumented workers are exploiting the system to gain an advantage over businesses that play by the rules. The President’s proposal is designed to stop these unfair hiring practices and hold these companies accountable. At the same time, this proposal gives employers who want to play by the rules a reliable way to verify that their employees are here legally.

    Earned Citizenship: It is just not practical to deport 11 million undocumented immigrants living within our borders. The President’s proposal provides undocumented immigrants a legal way to earn citizenship that will encourage them to come out of the shadows so they can pay their taxes and play by the same rules as everyone else. Immigrants living here illegally must be held responsible for their actions by passing national security and criminal background checks, paying taxes and a penalty, going to the back of the line, and learning English before they can earn their citizenship. There will be no uncertainty about their ability to become U.S. citizens if they meet these eligibility criteria. The proposal will also stop punishing innocent young people brought to the country through no fault of their own by their parents and give them a chance to earn their citizenship more quickly if they serve in the military or pursue higher education.

    Streamlining Legal Immigration: Our immigration system should reward anyone who is willing to work hard and play by the rules. For the sake of our economy and our security, legal immigration should be simple and efficient. The President’s proposal attracts the best minds to America by providing visas to foreign entrepreneurs looking to start businesses here and helping the most promising foreign graduate students in science and math stay in this country after graduation, rather than take their skills to other countries. The President’s proposal will also reunify families in a timely and humane manner.

    Continue reading “President Obama’s immigration reform plans Jan 29 2013″ »

    Posted by Peter Rousmaniere at 3:21 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)
    January 28, 2013
    Senators’ statement of principles on immigration reform

    As published by the Washington Post this morning….this is the most important single document to start off the immigration reform effort in 2013.

    Bipartisan Framework for Comprehensive Immigration Reform Senators Schumer, McCain, Durbin, Graham, Menendez, Rubio, Bennet, and Flake

    Introduction

    We recognize that our immigration system is broken. And while border security has improved significantly over the last two Administrations, we still don’t have a functioning immigration system. This has created a situation where up to 11 million undocumented immigrants are living in the shadows. Our legislation acknowledges these realities by finally committing the resources needed to secure the border, modernize and streamline our current legal immigration system, while creating a tough but fair legalization program for individuals who are currently here. We
    will ensure that this is a successful permanent reform to our immigration system that will not need to be revisited.

    Four Basic Legislative Pillars:

    o Create a tough but fair path to citizenship for unauthorized immigrants currently living in the United States that is contingent upon securing our borders and tracking whether legal immigrants have left the country when required;

    o Reform our legal immigration system to better recognize the importance of characteristics that will help build the American economy and strengthen American families;

    o Create an effective employment verification system that will prevent identity theft and end the hiring of future unauthorized workers; and,

    o Establish an improved process for admitting future workers to serve our nation’s workforce needs, while simultaneously protecting all workers.

    1. Creating a Path to Citizenship for Unauthorized Immigrants Already Here that is Contingent Upon Securing the Border and Combating Visa Overstays

    Our legislation will provide a tough, fair, and practical roadmap to address the status of unauthorized immigrants in the United States that is contingent upon our success in securing our borders and addressing visa overstays.

    To fulfill the basic governmental function of securing our borders, we will continue the increased efforts of the Border Patrol by providing them with the latest technology, infrastructure, and personnel needed to prevent, detect, and apprehend every unauthorized entrant.

    Additionally, our legislation will increase the number of unmanned aerial vehicles and surveillance equipment, improve radio interoperability and increase the number of agents at and between ports of entry. The purpose is to substantially lower the number of successful illegal border crossings while continuing to facilitate commerce.

    We will strengthen prohibitions against racial profiling and inappropriate use of force, enhance the training of border patrol agents, increase oversight, and create a mechanism to ensure a meaningful opportunity for border communities to share input, including critiques.

    Continue reading ” Senators’ statement of principles on immigration reform” »

    Posted by Peter Rousmaniere at 8:59 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)
    January 18, 2013
    Introduction to H-2A temporary agricultural worker program

    The following is an introduction to the H-2A program for temporary agricultural workers. The introduction is drawn mainly from Congressional Research Service. Immigration of Temporary Lower-Skilled Workers: Current Policy and Related Issues.

    Introduction

    Foreign agricultural workers have been a recent focus of attention in Congress, with the immigration subcommittees of both the House and the Senate Judiciary Committees holding related hearings in 2011 and 2012. A number of legislative proposals on agricultural guest workers have likewise been put forward in the 112th Congress. Some bills would amend INA provisions on the H-2A visa, while others would establish new temporary agricultural worker programs as alternatives to the H-2A program. Still other proposals would couple a legalization program for agricultural workers either with H-2A reform, as in the traditional AgJOBS formulation, or with other changes to current law on agricultural labor.

    Of the 79,000 certified H-2A positions in 2010, 40% were in the top five states (in order of size): North Carolina, Louisiana, Georgia, Kentucky, Florida. [Table A-1, pg. 28]

    How it works

    The H-2A program allows for the temporary admission of foreign workers to the United States to perform agricultural labor or services of a seasonal or temporary nature, provided that U.S. workers are not available. In general, for purposes of the H-2A program, work is of a temporary nature where the employer’s need for the worker will last no longer than one year. Thus, an approved H-2A visa petition is generally valid for an initial period of up to one year. An employer can apply to extend an H-2A worker’s stay in increments of up to one year, but an alien’s total
    period of stay as an H-2A worker may not exceed three consecutive years. An alien who has spent three years in the United States in H-2A status may not seek an extension of stay or be readmitted to the United States as an H-2A worker until he or she has been outside the country for three months.

    Prospective H-2A employers are required to submit a job order to the state workforce agency (SWA) serving the area of intended employment before filing a
    labor certification application. Once reviewed and cleared by the SWA, the job order becomes the basis for recruiting U.S. workers to fill the employer’s job openings. The employer can then file the labor certification application with DOL. In the DOL application the employer must first apply to DOL for a certification that (1) there are not sufficient U.S. workers who are qualified and available to perform the work; and (2) the employment of foreign workers will not adversely affect the wages and working conditions of U.S. workers who are similarly employed.

    Prospective H-2A employers must attempt to recruit U.S. workers and must cooperate with DOL-funded state employment service agencies (also known as state workforce agencies) in local, intrastate, and interstate recruitment efforts. Under the H-2A program’s fifty percent rule, employers are required to hire any qualified U.S. worker who applies for a position during the first half of the work contract under which the H-2A workers who are in the job are employed.

    Continue reading “Introduction to H-2A temporary agricultural worker program” »

    Posted by Peter Rousmaniere at 8:07 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)
    January 12, 2013
    Chamber of Commerce for comprehensive immigration reform

    U.S. Chamber of Commerce president Thomas J. Donohue gave his annual state of business address on January 10, and said the following about immigration reform (excerpted). I’d say he is calling for comprehensive reform, including normalizing the status of undocumented immigrants.

    …..But we still need immigrants. We are locked in a global competition for the world’s best talent. This is the competition that will separate the economic leaders from the laggards in the 21st century.

    The Chamber is already teaming up with the labor unions, faith organizations and ethnic groups, and law enforcement to build a coalition for comprehensive reform.

    We believe immigration reform should include the following inter-related components:

    We need to secure our borders. It is imperative that people and commerce flow efficiently and lawfully through our nation’s ports and across our borders.

    In addition, our laws must be revised to welcome needed labor and talent into our economy through thoughtfully-designed guest worker programs. This includes provisional visas for lesser-skilled workers. It also includes expanding the caps for high-skilled visas, and, expanding green cards for foreign nationals who graduate from our colleges and universities with advanced degrees.

    We also need a workable, reliable national employee verification system. And, we need to provide a path out of the shadows for the 11 million undocumented immigrants who live in the United States today—provided that they meet strict conditions.

    Posted by Peter Rousmaniere at 10:02 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)
    Introduction to H-2A temporary agricultural worker program

    The following is an introduction to the H-2A program for temporary agricultural workers.The introduction is an excerpt from Congressional Research Service. Immigration of Temporary Lower-Skilled Workers: Current Policy and Related Issues 12/13/12 report.

    Introduction

    Foreign agricultural workers have been a recent focus of attention in Congress, with the immigration subcommittees of both the House and the Senate Judiciary Committees holding related hearings in 2011 and 2012. A number of legislative proposals on agricultural guest workers have likewise been put forward in the 112th Congress. Some bills would amend INA provisions on the H-2A visa, while others would establish new temporary agricultural worker programs as alternatives to the H-2A program. Still other proposals would couple a legalization program for agricultural workers either with H-2A reform, as in the traditional AgJOBS formulation, or with other changes to current law on agricultural labor.

    Of the 79,000 certified H-2A positions in 2010, 40% were in the top five states (in order of size): North Carolina, Louisiana, Georgia, Kentucky, Florida. [Table A-1, pg. 28]

    How it works

    The H-2A program allows for the temporary admission of foreign workers to the United States to perform agricultural labor or services of a seasonal or temporary nature, provided that U.S. workers are not available. In general, for purposes of the H-2A program, work is of a temporary nature where the employer’s need for the worker will last no longer than one year. Thus, an approved H-2A visa petition is generally valid for an initial period of up to one year. An employer can apply to extend an H-2A worker’s stay in increments of up to one year, but an alien’s total
    period of stay as an H-2A worker may not exceed three consecutive years. An alien who has spent three years in the United States in H-2A status may not seek an extension of stay or be readmitted to the United States as an H-2A worker until he or she has been outside the country for three months.

    Prospective H-2A employers are required to submit a job order to the state workforce agency (SWA) serving the area of intended employment before filing a
    labor certification application. Once reviewed and cleared by the SWA, the job order becomes the basis for recruiting U.S. workers to fill the employer’s job openings. The employer can then file the labor certification application with DOL. In the DOL application the employer must first apply to DOL for a certification that (1) there are not sufficient U.S. workers who are qualified and available to perform the work; and (2) the employment of foreign workers will not adversely affect the wages and working conditions of U.S. workers who are similarly employed.

    Prospective H-2A employers must attempt to recruit U.S. workers and must cooperate with DOL-funded state employment service agencies (also known as state workforce agencies) in local, intrastate, and interstate recruitment efforts. Under the H-2A program’s fifty percent rule, employers are required to hire any qualified U.S. worker who applies for a position during the first half of the work contract under which the H-2A workers who are in the job are employed.

    Continue reading “Introduction to H-2A temporary agricultural worker program” »

    Posted by Peter Rousmaniere at 2:13 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)
    Temporary worker programs: Introduction

    In December the Congressional Research Service issued a report on two key temporary worker programs, H-2A and H-2B. This posting excerpts from the report’s introductory overview of both programs. Later postings will address the programs in greater detail. These postings will bring you up to speed on the basics of temporary foreign worker programs in the U.S.

    There are many temporary work visa programs. A comprehensive list of them in contain in a 2009 report by the Migration Policy Institute, “Aligning Temporary Immigration Visas with U.S. market needs.” In 2008, some 262,000 temporary visas were issues for high skilled labor, and 158,000 such visas for low skilled labor, almost entirely H-2A and H-2B. In addition there were 168,000 “mixed skilled” temporary visas issued.

    The report excerpted below and in later postings is: Congressional Research Service. Immigration of Temporary Lower-Skilled Workers: Current Policy and Related Issues. 12/13/12.

    The [Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952], as originally enacted, authorized an H-2 nonimmigrant visa category for foreign agricultural and nonagricultural workers who were coming temporarily to the United States to perform temporary services (other than services of an exceptional nature requiring distinguished merit and ability) or labor. The 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA) amended the INA to subdivide the H-2 program into the current H-2A agricultural worker program and H-2B nonagricultural worker program and to detail the admissions process for H-2A workers. The H2A and H-2B programs are administered by the Employment and Training Administration (ETA) of the Department of Labor (DOL) and U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS).

    The H-2A and H-2B programs are administered by DOL and DHS, with DOL making a determination on the labor certification application and DHS adjudicating the non-immigrant visa petition.

    While there are many differences between the H-2A agricultural worker program and the H-2B nonagricultural worker program, the process of importing workers under either program entails the same steps. Employers who want to hire workers through either program must first apply to DOL for labor certification, as discussed in the next section. After receiving labor certification, a prospective H-2A or H-2B employer can submit an application, known as a petition, to DHS to bring in foreign workers. If the application is approved, foreign workers who are abroad can then
    go to a U.S. embassy or consulate to apply for an H-2A or H-2B nonimmigrant visa from the Department of State (DOS). If the visa application is approved, the worker is issued a visa that he or she can use to apply for admission to the United States at a port of entry.

    In both the H-2A and H-2B programs, there is a tension between providing protections to U.S. and foreign workers on the one hand and making the programs responsive to legitimate employer needs on the other. While these competing interests are longstanding, the current environment— with relatively high levels of U.S. unemployment; discussions about expanding the E-Verify electronic employment eligibility verification system (as discussed below); and concerns about
    shortages of legal workers, especially in agriculture—has heightened the tensions.

    Temporary Labor Certification

    DOL’s ETA is responsible for administering the labor certification process under the H-2A and H2B programs. Under both programs, employers submit applications in which they request the certification of a particular number of positions.

    INA provisions on the admission of H-2A workers state that an H-2A petition cannot be approved unless the petitioner has applied to DOL for certification that

    (1) there are not sufficient workers who are able, willing, qualified … and available at the time of application for a visa and admission to the United States and at the place where the alien is to perform such skilled or unskilled labor, and (2) the employment of such alien will not adversely affect the wages and working conditions of workers in the United States similarly employed. [INA §218(a)(1)(A), (B)]

    There is no equivalent statutory labor certification requirement for the H-2B program. The INA, however, does contain some related language. For example, it defines an H-2B alien, in relevant part, as an alien “who is coming temporarily to the United States to perform other temporary service or labor if unemployed persons capable of performing such service or labor cannot be found in this country.” [INA §101(a)(15)(H)(ii)(b)] The H-2B labor certification requirement instead appears in DHS regulations. These regulations state:

    “The petitioner may not file an H-2B petition unless the United States petitioner has applied for a labor certification with the Secretary of Labor … and has obtained a favorable labor certification determination …[8 C.F.R. §214.2(h)(6)(iii)(C)].

    The H-2A and H-2B labor certification requirements are intended to provide job, wage, and working conditions protections to U.S. workers. They are implemented in both programs through a multifaceted labor certification process that requires prospective H-2A and H-2B employers to conduct recruitment for U.S. workers and offer a minimum level of wages and benefits that varies by program.

    Posted by Peter Rousmaniere at 8:32 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)
    December 20, 2012
    The “Texas Immigration Solution”: Guest worker programs

    The Texas Immigration Solution is a self-described conservative organization focused on immigration reform. It describes its mission to “enact conservative, market-based immigration reform into law,” and to “provide a voice for conservative job creators by educating the broader community on the urgent need for comprehensive, conservative, market-oriented reforms of the immigration process.”

    Its solution is guest worker program-based for both skilled and unskilled workers, with conservative approaches to immigration in general:

    Secure Our Borders – We demand the application of effective, practical and reasonable measures to secure our borders and to bring safety and security for all Americans along the border and throughout the nation.

    Modernize the United States Social Security Card – We support the improvement of our 1936 Social Security card to use contemporary anti-counterfeit technology. The social security card will not be considered a National ID card for U.S. citizens.

    Birthright Citizenship – We call on the Legislative, Executive, and Judicial branches of the United States to clarify Section 1 of the 14th amendment to limit citizenship by birth to those born to a citizen of the United States with no exceptions.

    Create an Effective and Efficient Temporary Worker Program – A national Temporary Worker Program should be implemented to bring skilled and unskilled workers into the United States for temporary periods of time when no U.S. workers are currently available. The program should also require:

    Self-funding through participation fees and fines;

    Applicants must pass a full criminal background check;

    Applicants with prior immigration violations would only qualify for the program if they paid the appropriate fines;

    Applicants and/or Employers must prove that they can afford and/or secure private health insurance;

    Applicants must waive any and all rights to apply for financial assistance from any public entitlement programs;

    Applicant must show a proficiency in the English language and complete an American civic class;

    Temporary Workers would only be able to work for employers that deduct and match payroll taxes;

    All participants would be issued an individual Temporary-Worker Biometric Identification Card that tracks all address changes and both civil and criminal court appearances as a defendant.

    Posted by Peter Rousmaniere at 10:48 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)
    December 19, 2012
    The Colorado Compact

    Colorado — with an estimated 180,000 undocumented immigrants — has created a compact on immigration, following Utah’s lead of a few years ago, which itself was in response to Arizona’s draconian legislation. According to the Greeley Tribune, the Colorado Compact arose out of 200 meetings throughout the state. The need for immigrant labor is most acute among the state’s farms, which “like many others nationally, have lost workers to the better-paying jobs of the oil and gas field, while also struggling to find local residents willing to do agriculture’s physical labor….Signers of the Colorado Compact span faith organizations, law enforcement agencies, the business community, immigrant-rights advocates and institutions of higher education, as well as agricultural interests.”

    The Colorado Compact:

    The Colorado Compact is an effort to convene and promote a reasonable conversation on immigration in Colorado that could lead to real and lasting federal reform. The Compact brings together leaders and community members of diverse backgrounds and politics who are committed to fostering a more rational and collaborative approach to immigration policy than exists today. We believe that the growing consequences of a broken immigration system must be addressed in a bipartisan effort that considers the principles outlined in this compact.

    FEDERAL RESPONSIBILITY

    Immigration policy is a federal issue between the U.S. government and other countries. We urge the Colorado congressional delegation to work to enact immigration policy at the federal level that improves our immigration system, keeps our communities safe, and protects our borders.

    STRENGTHENING OUR ECONOMY

    Colorado is best served by a free-market philosophy that maximizes individual freedom and opportunity. Our immigration system must be flexible enough to address the needs of businesses while protecting the interests of workers. This includes a visa system that is both responsive and effective at meeting the demands of our economy. It should also acknowledge the beneficial economic contributions immigrants make as workers, taxpayers, and consumers.

    ENSURING OUR NATIONAL SECURITY

    We believe that maintaining the safety and security of the United States is an utmost priority. Our immigration system must ensure the protection of our communities and national borders.

    FAMILY

    Strong families are critical to developing successful individuals and cohesive communities. Our immigration policies, where possible, should prioritize keeping close families together in order to ensure the most supportive home environments for all children across our state.

    EFFECTIVE ENFORCEMENT

    We support a law enforcement strategy that focuses on public safety, targets serious crime, and safeguards witnesses and victims. We further urge a reasonable and predictable regulatory environment that considers the interests of, and unintended consequences to businesses, workers, and consumers. Furthermore, the broader reform effort should eventually include a way to accurately, reliably, and affordably determine who is permitted to work, ensuring an adequate labor force for a growing economy.

    A COMMONSENSE APPROACH

    Immigrants are part of our communities across Colorado. We must adopt a commonsense approach to this reality that reflects our values and recognizes the critical role immigration has played in our nation’s history and economy. Our immigration policies must provide a sensible path forward for immigrants who are here without legal status, are of good character, pay taxes, and are committed to becoming fully participating members of our society and culture.

    Posted by Peter Rousmaniere at 9:16 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)
    November 24, 2012
    Immigration reform prospects for 2013

    Why immigration reform in 2013? Muzaffar Chishti and Claire Bergeron cite the following:

    • The Republican Party was jolted by the surprisingly low Latino support for presidential nominee Mitt Romney
    • nearly two-thirds of American voters (65 percent) now support giving most unauthorized immigrant workers a chance to apply for legal status.
    • recognition in both political parties that reforming the current legal immigration system is critical to advancing the United States’ global economic competitiveness.
    • For a bill to stand a chance of passage, it must get through Congress before House members gear up for the 2014 mid-term elections. Most interpret that political reality to mean that a bill’s best chance would be in 2013.

    The article in full: “US Election Realigns Stars for Immigration Reform, But Significant Hurdles Remain”

    Published on 11-23-2012

    In one sweep, the re-election of President Barack Obama has transformed immigration reform, an issue that for years has largely been seen as a third rail of American politics, into a first-tier legislative agenda item for the 113th Congress. In perhaps the clearest sign that the calculus on immigration has dramatically shifted, a chorus of Republican Party leaders and conservatives who have traditionally opposed immigration reform efforts voiced support for enacting legislation that would include legalization for some of the country’s 11 million unauthorized immigrants.

    Backers of such a measure are moving quickly to turn ambitious goals into legislative reality. On November 11th, Senators Charles Schumer (D-NY) and Lindsey Graham (R-SC) announced that they were re-initiating efforts to draft a broad, bipartisan immigration reform bill. Three days later, President Obama, in his first post-election press conference, told reporters that he expected movement on immigration reform “very soon after [the] inauguration”.

    Continue reading “Immigration reform prospects for 2013″ »

    Posted by Peter Rousmaniere at 7:15 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)
    November 11, 2012
    Ten politicans to watch on immigration reform

    Daniel Strauss of the Hill lists “10 players to watch on immigration:” President Obama, Rep. Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.), Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), Rep. Luis Gutierrez (D-Ill.), Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), Sen.John McCain (R-Ariz.), Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.), Rep. Steve King (R-Iowa), and Sen. Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.).

    The list in depth:

    President Obama. Even before he was elected to a second term, Obama had already been laying the groundwork for immigration reform. Over the summer, he issued a new directive protecting immigrants who came to the country illegally from being deported provided they meet certain criteria. After failing to pass a bill in his first four years, Obama said that immigration reform would be one of the highest priorities of his second term. But will he push a comprehensive approach, or a scaled-down version of the measure, such as the Development, Relief and Education for Alien Minors (DREAM) Act?

    Rep. Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.). Goodlatte is considered the favorite to be the new chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, which has jurisdiction on immigration. In 2011, he introduced legislation to get rid of the immigrant visa lottery program. He has been a vocal critic of the DREAM Act. Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) this week has opened the door to passing immigration reform, attracting criticism from conservatives.

    Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.). The Senate Judiciary Committee chairman has been proponent on comprehensive immigration reform and his voting record includes support for establishing a guest-worker program, opposing limiting welfare for illegal immigrants and allowing illegal immigrants to participate in Social Security.

    Continue reading “Ten politicans to watch on immigration reform” »

    Posted by Peter Rousmaniere at 7:27 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)
    October 21, 2012
    Dream Act: employment and economic impact

    The Partnership for the New American Economy issued an important report in October on the economic results of the Dream Act, if enacted.

    “The Economic Benefits of Passing the DREAM Act,” by Juan Carlos Guzmán and Raúl C. Jara, draws upon the current versions of the DREAM Act submitted by Sen. Richard Durbin (S.952) and Rep. Howard Berman (H.R. 1842).

    To be eligible, an undocumented person has to have come to the United States at age 15 or younger, be currently age 35 or younger, have been present in the country for at least five years, completed high school, and completed at least two years of higher education or honorably served in the armed forces for at least two years.

    Eligible immigrants per the Act first receive conditional legal status for a period of six years, under which they can complete their studies and work legally in the United States. After that period, if they have met all of the requirements, they can apply for permanent legal status (a green card) and eventually citizenship

    The authors forecast that by 2030 the Act will create 1.4 million new jobs, and increase by 19% the total compensation of all eligible youth. How will this happen?

    First, enacting the law would provide an incentive for their further education because for most of those who would be eligible the legalization provisions can only be attained through completion of high school and some college. Receiving more education opens access to higher-paying jobs, enabling these undocumented youth to become much more productive members of our society.

    Second, gaining legal status itself translates into higher earnings for these youth since legal status allows DREAMers to apply to a broader range of high-paying jobs rather than having to resort to low-wage jobs from employers who are willing to pay them under the table.

    According to the authors, this will not take away jobs from native born Americans:

    First, many economists find that immigrants tend to complement the skills of native workers rather than compete with them, especially as immigrants move up the education and skills chain. Increasing the education of immigrant workers would therefore decrease the competition between DREAMers and the native-born.

    Second, research shows that an increase in college-educated immigrants directly increases U.S. gross domestic product—the largest measure of economic growth—which correlates to more jobs for American workers. In the 1990s, for example, the increase in college-educated immigrants was found to be responsible for a 1.4% to 2.4% in U.S. GDP.

    http://www.renewoureconomy.org/economic-benefits-dream

    Posted by Peter Rousmaniere at 4:19 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)
    June 16, 2012
    Labor force impact of new Obama policy will be large

    The Pew Hispanic Center estimates that most of the persons to be protected by the administration are 18 to 30, thus in the labor force.

    In a report issued on June 15, the Center said that up to 1.4 million children and young adults who are in the United States illegally could potentially benefit from today’s announcement by the Obama Administration about changes in deportation policies, according to an estimate from the Pew Hispanic Center, a project of the Pew Research Center.

    The 1.4 million estimate includes 700,000 unauthorized immigrants who are ages 18 to 30 but arrived in the U.S as children and are currently enrolled in school or have graduated from high school; and an additional 700,000 who are under the age of 18 and are enrolled in school. This includes 150,000 who are currently enrolled in high school.

    Overall, the 1.4 million estimate represents about 12% of the 11.2 million unauthorized immigrants in the U.S. as of 2010, according to an estimate by the Pew Hispanic Center. Among the 1.4 million potential beneficiaries of the new policy, some 70% are from Mexico. For details on the numbers and characteristics of unauthorized immigrants in the U.S, see the Pew Hispanic Center report “Unauthorized Immigrant Population: National and State Trends, 2010.”

    A Pew Hispanic Center survey taken late last year found that by a margin of 59% to 27%, Latinos oppose the deportation policies of the Obama Administration. Among Latinos, some 41% are aware that the number of deportations of unauthorized immigrants annually has been higher during the Obama Administration than during the George W. Bush Administration, while 36% say the two Administrations have deported the same number of unauthorized immigrants, and 10% say fewer have been deported under the Obama administration.

    Nearly 400,000 unauthorized immigrants were deported annually during the first two years of the Obama Administration—-about 30% more than the annual average during the second term of the Bush Administration. Among those deported in 2010, nearly all (97%) were Hispanic. By comparison, among all unauthorized immigrants, 81% are Hispanic.

    According to the same 2011 Pew Hispanic Center survey, 91% of Latinos support the DREAM Act, a proposal that would grant legal status to unauthorized immigrant children if they attend college or serve in the U.S. military for two years. And 84% of Latinos favor granting in-state tuition at public colleges to unauthorized immigrants who graduated from high school in their states.

    Posted by Peter Rousmaniere at 6:14 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)
    December 8, 2011
    Alabama now reaping the harvest of its immigration law

    I am back, after two months of extensive travel

    The chickens are coming home roost in Alabama. Two legally working foreign workers in auto plants have been arrested.

    According to Fox News, “Before the auto workers’ problems, in early November, [Alabama Governor Robert] Bentley told a Birmingham business audience that the law had not hurt Alabama’s image with industrial prospects. But Bentley now says the two arrests involving foreign auto workers “theoretically” could hurt Alabama’s ability to recruit foreign industries.”

    The article in full:

    Alabama Governor to Foreign Biz: Don’t Worry About Immigration Law

    After local police recently detained employees of Mercedes-Benz and Honda under the state’s immigration law, Alabama’s governor is reaching out to foreign executives to let them know that the state welcomes them.

    “We are not anti-foreign companies. We are very pro-foreign companies,” Bentley told reporters at the Capitol.

    The Republican governor and other supporters of Alabama’s new immigration law — aimed at driving undocumented immigrants out of the state — have described it as the nation’s toughest. Some parts of it were put on hold by the federal courts, but major provisions took effect in late September, including allowing police to detain motorists who can’t produce a valid driver’s license.

    Before the auto workers’ problems, in early November, Bentley told a Birmingham business audience that the law had not hurt Alabama’s image with industrial prospects. But Bentley now says the two arrests involving foreign auto workers “theoretically” could hurt Alabama’s ability to recruit foreign industries.

    Since then, two foreign workers with the Mercedes-Benz and Honda auto assembly plants in Alabama have run into problems.

    Continue reading “Alabama now reaping the harvest of its immigration law” »

    Posted by Peter Rousmaniere at 4:21 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)
    August 31, 2011
    NY Times editorial about Alabama Law

    The Nation’s Cruelest Immigration Law

    The Alabama Legislature opened its session on March 1 on a note of humility and compassion. In the Senate, a Christian pastor asked God to grant members “wisdom and discernment” to do what is right. “Not what’s right in their own eyes,” he said, “but what’s right according to your word.” Soon after, both houses passed, and the governor signed, the country’s cruelest, most unforgiving immigration law.

    The law, which takes effect Sept. 1, is so inhumane that four Alabama church leaders — an Episcopal bishop, a Methodist bishop and a Roman Catholic archbishop and bishop — have sued to block it, saying it criminalizes acts of Christian compassion. It is a sweeping attempt to terrorize undocumented immigrants in every aspect of their lives, and to make potential criminals of anyone who may work or live with them or show them kindness.

    It effectively makes it a crime to be an undocumented immigrant in Alabama, by criminalizing working, renting a home and failing to comply with federal registration laws that are largely obsolete. It nullifies any contracts when one party is an undocumented immigrant. It requires the police to check the papers of people they suspect to be here illegally.

    The new regime does not spare American citizens. Businesses that knowingly employ illegal immigrants will lose their licenses. Public school officials will be required to determine students’ immigration status and report back to the state. Anyone knowingly “concealing, harboring or shielding” an illegal immigrant could be charged with a crime, say for renting someone an apartment or driving her to church or the doctor.

    The American Civil Liberties Union and the Justice Department have also sued, calling the law an unconstitutional intrusion on the federal government’s authority to write and enforce immigration laws. The A.C.L.U. warns that the law would trample people’s fundamental rights to speak and travel freely, effectively deny children the chance to go to school and expose people to harassment and racial profiling.

    These arguments have been made before, in opposition to similar, if less sweeping, laws passed in Arizona, Utah, Indiana and Georgia. What is remarkable in Alabama is the separate lawsuit by the four church leaders, who say the law violates their religious freedoms to perform acts of charity without regard to the immigration status of those they minister to or help.

    “The law,” Archbishop Thomas Rodi of Mobile said in The Times, “attacks our core understanding of what it means to be a church.”

    You’d think that any state would think twice before embracing a law that so vividly brings to mind the Fugitive Slave Act, the brutal legal and law-enforcement apparatus of the Jim Crow era, and the civil-rights struggle led by the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. But waves of anti-immigrant hostility have made many in this country forget who and what we are.

    Congress was once on the brink of an ambitious bipartisan reform that would have enabled millions of immigrants stranded by the failed immigration system to get right with the law. This sensible policy has been abandoned. We hope the church leaders can waken their fellow Alabamans to the moral damage done when forgiveness and justice are so ruthlessly denied. We hope Washington and the rest of the country will also listen.

    Posted by Peter Rousmaniere at 6:33 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)
    August 30, 2011
    Alabama’s Immigration law dissected

    On June 9, 2011, Alabama enacted H 56, the most aggressive state law to date to control immigration. Federal judge has stayed the implementation of the law until at least late September. Most of the media discussion has been about non-work-related provisions of the law, for instance, police questioning, access to church-related services, and public education. Here, we look at the business –related provisions, which are excerpted below. The key provisions are:

    Section 9 - Government contractors prohibited from hiring unlawful aliens

    Section 11 - curb-side hiring prohibited

    Section 13 – Harboring an unlawful alien

    Section 15 prohibiting private sector hiring of unlawful aliens, at penalty of permanent revocation of licenses and permits

    And

    Section 26 - State of Alabama to provide E-Verify service to small employers

    I have included below key passages in each of these sections.

    “….the court shall direct the applicable governing bodies to forever suspend the business licenses and permits, if such exist, of the business entity or employer throughout the state….” (Section 15 (f)

    Section 9 - Government contractors prohibited from hiring unlawful aliens

    (a) As a condition for the award of any contract, grant, or incentive by the state, any political subdivision thereof, or any state-funded entity to a business entity or employer that employs one or more employees, the business entity or employer shall not knowingly employ, hire for employment, or continue to employ an unauthorized alien and shall attest to such, by sworn affidavit signed before a notary.

    ……Violations of Section 9 (a)

    Continue reading ” Alabama’s Immigration law dissected ” »

    Posted by Peter Rousmaniere at 11:57 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)
    May 31, 2011
    IT CEOs pitch for a better immigration policy

    Four IT industry leaders called on May 19 for a new immigration policy. They touch on a number of issues, including dysfunction in our relations with foreigners who earn graduate degrees here. “Today foreign nationals account for 50% of master’s degrees and 70% of Ph.D. degrees in electrical and electronic engineering in the U.S. Yet, our antiquated immigration laws numerically limit the numbers of these individuals, by the thousands, from entering our country annually. What kind of strategy is it to train the world’s best and brightest in our great universities – and then require them to leave?”

    The authors are members of the President’s Council on Jobs and Competitiveness

    Their statement in full:

    America needs a 21st century immigration policy

    President Obama’s recent focus on immigration highlights America’s “broken” system and its impact on our economy. Fixing it requires Republicans and Democrats to show political courage and implement reforms to expand and strengthen the American economy. As members of the President’s Council on Jobs and Competitiveness, we share his deep concern that our nation’s ability to compete economically is being damaged by the two parties battling over immigration laws and policies.

    To some, the link between immigration reform and economic growth may be surprising. To America’s most innovative industries, it is a link we know is fundamental.

    Continue reading “IT CEOs pitch for a better immigration policy” »

    Posted by Peter Rousmaniere at 5:57 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)
    April 21, 2011
    More on Utah’s new immigration related laws

    On the heels of Utah’s passage of an immigration – related law, Farmer Justice’s president Bruce Goldstein wrote an op-ed in the Salt Lake Tribune saying that the state should be paying more attention to reforming an existing guest worker program, the H-2A program. Goldstein is concerned that guest worker programs tend to be inadequate in protecting the interests of both guest and American workers. He plugs for AgJOBS, which was part of the failed immigration reform effort in Washington in 2007.

    The article in full:

    Paying for a guest worker law already in place
    By BRUCE GOLDSTEIN

    Published: April 14, 2011 12:10AM

    Bruce Goldstein is president of Farmworker Justice, a nonprofit organization based in Washington, D.C., that works to improve living and working conditions for migrant and seasonal farm workers.

    Amidst the debate and controversy surrounding Utah’s new immigration laws, state legislators in Salt Lake City seem to think they’ve created a model for America. They portray their pilot guest worker program as a compromise that others might use as a model.

    They must think Utah’s taxpayers aren’t paying careful attention, because they’ll be saddled with spending money to duplicate a program that largely already exists.

    Last month, Utah Gov. Gary Herbert signed into law four bills heralded by some commentators as a holistic and comprehensive state approach to immigration reform. One of the bills would create a pilot program to bring guest workers from the state of Nuevo Leon, Mexico, to perform temporary work. (Another would create a guest worker status for undocumented workers already working in Utah.)

    If the pilot bill for managing guest workers in Utah sounds familiar, that’s because, in spite of the media attention and self-congratulation that accompanied the state law, we have had a federal system in place since the 1940s that does virtually the same thing. In fact, the United States already has two such programs for temporary or seasonal jobs, the H-2A visa for agricultural work and the H-2B for nonagricultural work. Each visa already requires state involvement.

    Continue reading “More on Utah’s new immigration related laws” »

    Posted by Peter Rousmaniere at 11:08 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)
    March 28, 2011
    The Utah Compact on immigration

    Business, religious and community leaders in Utah signed on November 11, 2010, the following Utah Compact. This Compact set the stage for a package of immigration bills enacted this month.

    Utah Compact:

    A declaration of five principles to guide Utah’s immigration discussion

    FEDERAL SOLUTIONS: Immigration is a federal policy issue between the U.S. government and other countries — not Utah and other countries. We urge Utah’s congressional delegation, and others, to lead efforts to strengthen federal laws and protect our national borders. We urge state leaders to adopt reasonable policies addressing immigrants in Utah.

    LAW ENFORCEMENT: We respect the rule of law and support law enforcement’s professional judgment and discretion. Local law enforcement resources should focus on criminal activities, not civil violations of federal code.

    FAMILIES: Strong families are the foundation of successful communities. We oppose policies that unnecessarily separate families. We champion policies that support families and improve the health, education and well-being of all Utah children.

    ECONOMY: Utah is best served by a free-market philosophy that maximizes individual freedom and opportunity. We acknowledge the economic role immigrants play as workers and taxpayers. Utah’s immigration policies must reaffirm our global reputation as a welcoming and business-friendly state.

    A FREE SOCIETY: Immigrants are integrated into communities across Utah. We must adopt a humane approach to this reality, reflecting our unique culture, history and spirit of inclusion. The way we treat immigrants will say more about us as a free society and less about our immigrant neighbors. Utah should always be a place that welcomes people of goodwill.

    Supported by the Mormon Church

    Statement from The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints:

    As a worldwide church dealing with many complex issues across the globe, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints promotes broad, foundational principles that have worldwide application. The Church regards the declaration of the Utah Compact as a responsible approach to the urgent challenge of immigration reform. It is consistent with important principles for which we stand:

    * We follow Jesus Christ by loving our neighbors. The Savior taught that the meaning of “neighbor” includes all of God’s children, in all places, at all times.

    * We recognize an ever-present need to strengthen families. Families are meant to be together. Forced separation of working parents from their children weakens families and damages society.

    * We acknowledge that every nation has the right to enforce its laws and secure its borders. All persons subject to a nation’s laws are accountable for their acts in relation to them.

    Public officials should create and administer laws that reflect the best of our aspirations as a just and caring society. Such laws will properly balance love for neighbors, family cohesion, and the observance of just and enforceable laws.

    Posted by Peter Rousmaniere at 9:41 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)
    New guest worker and other legislation from Utah

    Utah has enacted in March a law that attempts to set up, on a single state basis, a guest worker program allowing illegal workers to participate. Though of doubtful constitutionality – it will take a waiver from Washington for Utah to effective write a guest worker program – it is an example of creative thinking about immigration.

    According to the Pew Hispanic Center, Utah has about 110,000 illegal immigrants, of which 75,000 are in the workforce.

    The legislation follow up on the Utah Compact, which business, religious and community leaders in Utah agreed to in late November. I am posting on that compact in another post.

    The Deseret News editorialized it support of the legislation, saying that “This year, Utah’s lawmakers have managed to accomplish legislatively what has eluded Congress: increased enforcement that weeds out dangerous criminals while providing a guest worker program coupled with tough but common-sense safeguards.”

    One report describes the guest worker law, HB 116, as follows:

    On Tuesday March 15, Utah Governor Gary R. Herbert signed immigration bills including HB 116 into law, which addressed immigration enforcement, guest-worker visas and employment verification by employers in Utah. Utah became the first state to enact laws to let illegal workers remain in the state along with their families.

    Governor Herbert called it “the Utah solution.” He said, “Utah has taken a thoughtful, rational approach and found common ground.”

    While most acknowledge immigration is primarily a federal issue, Governor Herbert said these bills provide him some leverage at the federal level to engage the federal government in addressing Utah’s challenges, according to the press release.
    The federal government would have to grant a waiver, since the U.S. Congress can only enact immigration laws and enforce them. If the federal government fails to grant a waiver, Utah might engage in a legal challenge by the U.S. Department of Justice.

    The guest-worker program under HB 116 will take effect in two years. It would allow the Utah Department of Safety to issue state visas to more than 110,000 undocumented immigrants in the state. Immigrants would have to pay $2,500 for permits or pay $1,000 for overstaying a visa in the U.S. Their families would be included in the permits. Undocumented workers would have to go through a background investigation once they sign up for the guest-worker program. They would be expected to learn English, but would not be required.

    Another new law, HB 466, allows the governor to enter into a pilot program with the Mexican state of Nuevo Leon to supply legal workers through existing federal guest-worker programs.

    A third bill, HB 497, requires police to check the immigration status of suspects who are arrested for felony or serious misdemeanor charges, placing an immigration enforcement activity in the hands of local police officers. This law is expected to face immediate legal challenges.

    Posted by Peter Rousmaniere at 9:25 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)
    January 1, 2011
    State house battles in 2011 over illegal immigration

    Count on 2011 to see a lot of “Arizona-plus” legislative initiatives at the state level. These will be opposed by business lobbies, Democrats, and the Hispanic community. Below is an article in today’s NY Times:

    Political Battle on Illegal Immigration Shifts to States
    By JULIA PRESTON

    Legislative leaders in at least half a dozen states say they will propose bills similar to a controversial law to fight illegal immigration that was adopted by Arizona last spring, even though a federal court has suspended central provisions of that statute.

    The efforts, led by Republicans, are part of a wave of state measures coming this year aimed at cracking down on illegal immigration.

    Legislators have also announced measures to limit access to public colleges and other benefits for illegal immigrants and to punish empl

  268. someone Says:

    Allow undocumented immigrants who have lived in the United States continually since before December 31, 2011 to apply for “Registered Provisional Immigrant Status” if they pay back taxes and $500 in fines, and if they have not been convicted of a felony or 3 or more misdemeanors or voted illegally. Individuals with this status can work for any employer and travel outside the country but are not eligible to receive means-tested federal public benefits.

    After 10 years in Registered Provisional Immigrant Status, individuals will be eligible – pending border security measures and a clearing of existing backlogs for legal immigrants – to earn a merit-based green card if they have worked in the United States, demonstrated knowledge of the English language and paid an additional fine of $1000.

    Allow eligible DREAM act applicants and certain agricultural workers to apply for green cards within five years

    Regarding border security, the bill would set a goal of “90% effectiveness” – meaning the rate of apprehensions and turnbacks of potential entrants – per fiscal year in the most high-risk areas of the southern border. If that goal is not met within five years, a bipartisan “Border Commission” made up of border state governors and experts will be formed to issue new recommendations on how to achieve it.

    Allocate $3 billion for increased surveillance and manpower along the country’s southern border and an additional $1.5 billion for fencing.

    Include a border security “trigger” requiring that no undocumented immigrant can achieve legal “Registered Provisional Immigrant” status until strategies for border security have been submitted by the Department of Homeland Security to Congress.

    Require an additional “trigger” that prevents those with “Registered Provisional Immigrant” status from becoming eligible to apply for Lawful Permanent Resident status until the Department of Homeland Security and the Comptroller General certify that border security strategies are operational and a mandatory employment verification system has been implemented.

    Create a new “W” visa program to allow non-agricultural temporary workers to come to the United States to work for registered employers.
    Eliminate family-based visas for siblings of United States citizens as well as the Diversity Visa program while eliminating caps on visas for certain employment-based categories.

    Use a point system for a new “merit based” visa, of which 120,000 would initially be awarded per year, with a maximum cap of 250,000 annually. Points will be awarded based on criteria including education, employment and length of residence in the U.S.

    Require an “enhanced E-Verify” system to prevent ineligible workers from taking jobs in the United States. Employers with more than 5,000 employees will be phased in within two years; employers with more than 500 employees will be phased in within three years.

    Raise the annual cap on H1-B visas for high-skilled workers from 65,000 to 110,000, with provisions to prevent such workers from undercutting American wages. Set a maximum cap at 180,000 such visas.

    Posted by Peter Rousmaniere at 7:05 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)
    March 19, 2013
    Latino voters and immigration

    Latino Decisions released new polling data today highlighting why immigration reform has become the number one political issue for Latino voters, and the answer is close personal connections between Latino voters and Latino undocumented immigrants.

    The poll was funded by immigration reform advocates.

    The poll finds that 58% of Latino registered voters now cite immigration reform as the top priority for the Congress and President, up from 35% in November 2012. One reason is that 63% of Latino voters say they personally know someone who is an undocumented immigrant, either a member of their family or a close personal friend. Further, 39% of Latino voters say they personally know someone, or a family who has faced deportation or detention for immigration reasons, and increase of 14 points over 2011, when 25% of Latino voters said they personally knew someone who had faced deportation or detention.

    The poll asked Latino voters if they knew any young immigrants who had applied for the 2012 “deferred action” program that would allow DREAM Act-eligible immigrants to live in the U.S. and attend college with temporary visas. More than one in five Latino voters (22%) knows someone who has already applied for deferred action, with 18% saying they know someone who is eligible, but not yet applied.

    Background:

    Latino Decisions interviewed 800 Latino registered voters via landline and mobile phone, across all 50 states, from February 15-26, 2013. Interviews were conducted in English or Spanish, at the preference of the respondent, and all interviewing staff was fully bilingual. The survey averaged 20 minutes in length and has an overall margin of error or +/- 3.5%. On split sample questions the margin of error is +/- 4.9%. For questions about the results, please contact Gary Segura gary.segura@latinodecisions.com

    The poll was sponsored by America’s Voice, National Council of La Raza, and SEIU.

    Posted by Peter Rousmaniere at 6:38 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)
    February 16, 2013
    Congressional seats: ready to go Red with slight change in Hispanic voting

    The Georgetown [University]Public Policy Review carefully analyzed each Congressional district for the potential of gains by Republicans if the percentage of Hispanic voting Republicans went up. It concluded that there are many more competitive races in heavily Hispanic areas for Democrats to lose than to gain. A shift of Hispanics from Dem to Rep would produce a lot more Rep wins than a shift of the same percentage from Rep to Dem would create more Dem wins.

    “There are two different lenses through which to consider the Republican perspective. First, most incumbent Republicans will not have a strong incentive to vote for an immigration bill containing a path to citizenship if a significant Hispanic population appears to be lacking in their districts. In fact, many conservatives may be far more concerned about primary challengers than Hispanic backlash.

    On the other hand, the Republican Party as a whole has a tremendous opportunity to turn districts in their favor. If they can redefine themselves to the Hispanic population, starting with comprehensive immigration reform, they will be doing more than pouring water on the DCCC’s gunpowder—they will be stealing it for themselves.”

    Posted by Peter Rousmaniere at 10:00 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)
    February 1, 2013
    Is the STEM problem a fiction?

    The blog of the Economic Policy Institute questions if the United States needs more foreign science, technology, engineering and math degreed people from abroad, given as two thirds of native born STEM graduates apparently work outside the fields for which they were educated.

    The posting:

    Fixing a problem that doesn’t exist: Special interest STEM immigration bills are not needed

    Business groups and their allies, including New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg and various non-profit advocacy organizations, have been arguing for years—without real evidence—that the United States is losing a race to attract the world’s best and brightest young scientists, engineers, computer techies and mathematicians. In a report entitled, Immigration of Foreign Nationals with Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) Degrees, Ruth Wasem of the Congressional Research Service (CRS) recently reviewed the statistics regarding these highly skilled migrants and concluded: “The United States remains the leading host country for international students in science, technology, engineering, or mathematics (STEM) fields.” The United States has been and continues to be extraordinarily welcoming to foreign students, and especially to those in the STEM fields. CRS reports that the number of foreign graduate students in the STEM fields increased by 50 percent since 1990:

    “The number of full-time graduate students in science, engineering, and health fields who were foreign students (largely on F-1 nonimmigrant visas) grew from 91,150 in 1990 to 148,923 in 2009, with most of the increase occurring after 1999. Despite the rise in foreign student enrollment, the percentage of STEM graduate students with temporary visas in 2009 (32.7%) was comparable to 1990 (31.1%). Graduate enrollments in engineering fields have exhibited the most growth of the STEM fields in recent years. About 40,000 graduate degrees were awarded to foreign STEM students in 2009, with 10,000 of those going to Ph.D. recipients.”

    But Microsoft and the Chamber of Commerce claim that we’re losing those graduates, that our immigration system doesn’t let us keep the talent our universities have trained. That claim is untrue. CRS reports that in the decade from FY 2000 to FY 2009, the U.S. granted legal permanent residence to almost 300,000 STEM workers, in addition to granting temporary work permits (for up to six years) to hundreds of thousands of others.

    Continue reading “Is the STEM problem a fiction?” »

    Posted by Peter Rousmaniere at 3:10 PM | Permalink | Comments (1)
    January 29, 2013
    President Obama’s immigration reform plans Jan 29 2013

    The Administration is proposing a “provisional” category or undocumented immigrants, as does the Senate’s statement. The White House Press Office issued this statement today:

    FACT SHEET: Fixing our Broken Immigration System so Everyone Plays by the Rules

    America’s immigration system is broken. Too many employers game the system by hiring undocumented workers and there are 11 million people living in the shadows. Neither is good for the economy or the country. It is time to act to fix the broken immigration system in a way that requires responsibility from everyone —both from the workers here illegally and those who hire them—and guarantees that everyone is playing by the same rules.

    President Obama’s commonsense immigration reform proposal has four parts. First, continue to strengthen our borders. Second, crack down on companies that hire undocumented workers. Third, hold undocumented immigrants accountable before they can earn their citizenship; this means requiring undocumented workers to pay their taxes and a penalty, move to the back of the line, learn English, and pass background checks. Fourth, streamline the legal immigration system for families, workers, and employers.

    Together we can build a fair, effective and commonsense immigration system that lives up to our heritage as a nation of laws and a nation of immigrants.

    The key principles the President believes should be included in commonsense immigration reform are:

    Continuing to Strengthen Border Security: President Obama has doubled the number of Border Patrol agents since 2004 and today border security is stronger than it has ever been. But there is more work to do. The President’s proposal gives law enforcement the tools they need to make our communities safer from crime. And by enhancing our infrastructure and technology, the President’s proposal continues to strengthen our ability to remove criminals and apprehend and prosecute national security threats.

    Cracking Down on Employers Hiring Undocumented Workers: Our businesses should only employ people legally authorized to work in the United States. Businesses that knowingly employ undocumented workers are exploiting the system to gain an advantage over businesses that play by the rules. The President’s proposal is designed to stop these unfair hiring practices and hold these companies accountable. At the same time, this proposal gives employers who want to play by the rules a reliable way to verify that their employees are here legally.

    Earned Citizenship: It is just not practical to deport 11 million undocumented immigrants living within our borders. The President’s proposal provides undocumented immigrants a legal way to earn citizenship that will encourage them to come out of the shadows so they can pay their taxes and play by the same rules as everyone else. Immigrants living here illegally must be held responsible for their actions by passing national security and criminal background checks, paying taxes and a penalty, going to the back of the line, and learning English before they can earn their citizenship. There will be no uncertainty about their ability to become U.S. citizens if they meet these eligibility criteria. The proposal will also stop punishing innocent young people brought to the country through no fault of their own by their parents and give them a chance to earn their citizenship more quickly if they serve in the military or pursue higher education.

    Streamlining Legal Immigration: Our immigration system should reward anyone who is willing to work hard and play by the rules. For the sake of our economy and our security, legal immigration should be simple and efficient. The President’s proposal attracts the best minds to America by providing visas to foreign entrepreneurs looking to start businesses here and helping the most promising foreign graduate students in science and math stay in this country after graduation, rather than take their skills to other countries. The President’s proposal will also reunify families in a timely and humane manner.

    Continue reading “President Obama’s immigration reform plans Jan 29 2013″ »

    Posted by Peter Rousmaniere at 3:21 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)
    January 28, 2013
    Senators’ statement of principles on immigration reform

    As published by the Washington Post this morning….this is the most important single document to start off the immigration reform effort in 2013.

    Bipartisan Framework for Comprehensive Immigration Reform Senators Schumer, McCain, Durbin, Graham, Menendez, Rubio, Bennet, and Flake

    Introduction

    We recognize that our immigration system is broken. And while border security has improved significantly over the last two Administrations, we still don’t have a functioning immigration system. This has created a situation where up to 11 million undocumented immigrants are living in the shadows. Our legislation acknowledges these realities by finally committing the resources needed to secure the border, modernize and streamline our current legal immigration system, while creating a tough but fair legalization program for individuals who are currently here. We
    will ensure that this is a successful permanent reform to our immigration system that will not need to be revisited.

    Four Basic Legislative Pillars:

    o Create a tough but fair path to citizenship for unauthorized immigrants currently living in the United States that is contingent upon securing our borders and tracking whether legal immigrants have left the country when required;

    o Reform our legal immigration system to better recognize the importance of characteristics that will help build the American economy and strengthen American families;

    o Create an effective employment verification system that will prevent identity theft and end the hiring of future unauthorized workers; and,

    o Establish an improved process for admitting future workers to serve our nation’s workforce needs, while simultaneously protecting all workers.

    1. Creating a Path to Citizenship for Unauthorized Immigrants Already Here that is Contingent Upon Securing the Border and Combating Visa Overstays

    Our legislation will provide a tough, fair, and practical roadmap to address the status of unauthorized immigrants in the United States that is contingent upon our success in securing our borders and addressing visa overstays.

    To fulfill the basic governmental function of securing our borders, we will continue the increased efforts of the Border Patrol by providing them with the latest technology, infrastructure, and personnel needed to prevent, detect, and apprehend every unauthorized entrant.

    Additionally, our legislation will increase the number of unmanned aerial vehicles and surveillance equipment, improve radio interoperability and increase the number of agents at and between ports of entry. The purpose is to substantially lower the number of successful illegal border crossings while continuing to facilitate commerce.

    We will strengthen prohibitions against racial profiling and inappropriate use of force, enhance the training of border patrol agents, increase oversight, and create a mechanism to ensure a meaningful opportunity for border communities to share input, including critiques.

    Continue reading ” Senators’ statement of principles on immigration reform” »

    Posted by Peter Rousmaniere at 8:59 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)
    January 18, 2013
    Introduction to H-2A temporary agricultural worker program

    The following is an introduction to the H-2A program for temporary agricultural workers. The introduction is drawn mainly from Congressional Research Service. Immigration of Temporary Lower-Skilled Workers: Current Policy and Related Issues.

    Introduction

    Foreign agricultural workers have been a recent focus of attention in Congress, with the immigration subcommittees of both the House and the Senate Judiciary Committees holding related hearings in 2011 and 2012. A number of legislative proposals on agricultural guest workers have likewise been put forward in the 112th Congress. Some bills would amend INA provisions on the H-2A visa, while others would establish new temporary agricultural worker programs as alternatives to the H-2A program. Still other proposals would couple a legalization program for agricultural workers either with H-2A reform, as in the traditional AgJOBS formulation, or with other changes to current law on agricultural labor.

    Of the 79,000 certified H-2A positions in 2010, 40% were in the top five states (in order of size): North Carolina, Louisiana, Georgia, Kentucky, Florida. [Table A-1, pg. 28]

    How it works

    The H-2A program allows for the temporary admission of foreign workers to the United States to perform agricultural labor or services of a seasonal or temporary nature, provided that U.S. workers are not available. In general, for purposes of the H-2A program, work is of a temporary nature where the employer’s need for the worker will last no longer than one year. Thus, an approved H-2A visa petition is generally valid for an initial period of up to one year. An employer can apply to extend an H-2A worker’s stay in increments of up to one year, but an alien’s total
    period of stay as an H-2A worker may not exceed three consecutive years. An alien who has spent three years in the United States in H-2A status may not seek an extension of stay or be readmitted to the United States as an H-2A worker until he or she has been outside the country for three months.

    Prospective H-2A employers are required to submit a job order to the state workforce agency (SWA) serving the area of intended employment before filing a
    labor certification application. Once reviewed and cleared by the SWA, the job order becomes the basis for recruiting U.S. workers to fill the employer’s job openings. The employer can then file the labor certification application with DOL. In the DOL application the employer must first apply to DOL for a certification that (1) there are not sufficient U.S. workers who are qualified and available to perform the work; and (2) the employment of foreign workers will not adversely affect the wages and working conditions of U.S. workers who are similarly employed.

    Prospective H-2A employers must attempt to recruit U.S. workers and must cooperate with DOL-funded state employment service agencies (also known as state workforce agencies) in local, intrastate, and interstate recruitment efforts. Under the H-2A program’s fifty percent rule, employers are required to hire any qualified U.S. worker who applies for a position during the first half of the work contract under which the H-2A workers who are in the job are employed.

    Continue reading “Introduction to H-2A temporary agricultural worker program” »

    Posted by Peter Rousmaniere at 8:07 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)
    January 12, 2013
    Chamber of Commerce for comprehensive immigration reform

    U.S. Chamber of Commerce president Thomas J. Donohue gave his annual state of business address on January 10, and said the following about immigration reform (excerpted). I’d say he is calling for comprehensive reform, including normalizing the status of undocumented immigrants.

    …..But we still need immigrants. We are locked in a global competition for the world’s best talent. This is the competition that will separate the economic leaders from the laggards in the 21st century.

    The Chamber is already teaming up with the labor unions, faith organizations and ethnic groups, and law enforcement to build a coalition for comprehensive reform.

    We believe immigration reform should include the following inter-related components:

    We need to secure our borders. It is imperative that people and commerce flow efficiently and lawfully through our nation’s ports and across our borders.

    In addition, our laws must be revised to welcome needed labor and talent into our economy through thoughtfully-designed guest worker programs. This includes provisional visas for lesser-skilled workers. It also includes expanding the caps for high-skilled visas, and, expanding green cards for foreign nationals who graduate from our colleges and universities with advanced degrees.

    We also need a workable, reliable national employee verification system. And, we need to provide a path out of the shadows for the 11 million undocumented immigrants who live in the United States today—provided that they meet strict conditions.

    Posted by Peter Rousmaniere at 10:02 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)
    Introduction to H-2A temporary agricultural worker program

    The following is an introduction to the H-2A program for temporary agricultural workers.The introduction is an excerpt from Congressional Research Service. Immigration of Temporary Lower-Skilled Workers: Current Policy and Related Issues 12/13/12 report.

    Introduction

    Foreign agricultural workers have been a recent focus of attention in Congress, with the immigration subcommittees of both the House and the Senate Judiciary Committees holding related hearings in 2011 and 2012. A number of legislative proposals on agricultural guest workers have likewise been put forward in the 112th Congress. Some bills would amend INA provisions on the H-2A visa, while others would establish new temporary agricultural worker programs as alternatives to the H-2A program. Still other proposals would couple a legalization program for agricultural workers either with H-2A reform, as in the traditional AgJOBS formulation, or with other changes to current law on agricultural labor.

    Of the 79,000 certified H-2A positions in 2010, 40% were in the top five states (in order of size): North Carolina, Louisiana, Georgia, Kentucky, Florida. [Table A-1, pg. 28]

    How it works

    The H-2A program allows for the temporary admission of foreign workers to the United States to perform agricultural labor or services of a seasonal or temporary nature, provided that U.S. workers are not available. In general, for purposes of the H-2A program, work is of a temporary nature where the employer’s need for the worker will last no longer than one year. Thus, an approved H-2A visa petition is generally valid for an initial period of up to one year. An employer can apply to extend an H-2A worker’s stay in increments of up to one year, but an alien’s total
    period of stay as an H-2A worker may not exceed three consecutive years. An alien who has spent three years in the United States in H-2A status may not seek an extension of stay or be readmitted to the United States as an H-2A worker until he or she has been outside the country for three months.

    Prospective H-2A employers are required to submit a job order to the state workforce agency (SWA) serving the area of intended employment before filing a
    labor certification application. Once reviewed and cleared by the SWA, the job order becomes the basis for recruiting U.S. workers to fill the employer’s job openings. The employer can then file the labor certification application with DOL. In the DOL application the employer must first apply to DOL for a certification that (1) there are not sufficient U.S. workers who are qualified and available to perform the work; and (2) the employment of foreign workers will not adversely affect the wages and working conditions of U.S. workers who are similarly employed.

    Prospective H-2A employers must attempt to recruit U.S. workers and must cooperate with DOL-funded state employment service agencies (also known as state workforce agencies) in local, intrastate, and interstate recruitment efforts. Under the H-2A program’s fifty percent rule, employers are required to hire any qualified U.S. worker who applies for a position during the first half of the work contract under which the H-2A workers who are in the job are employed.

    Continue reading “Introduction to H-2A temporary agricultural worker program” »

    Posted by Peter Rousmaniere at 2:13 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)
    Temporary worker programs: Introduction

    In December the Congressional Research Service issued a report on two key temporary worker programs, H-2A and H-2B. This posting excerpts from the report’s introductory overview of both programs. Later postings will address the programs in greater detail. These postings will bring you up to speed on the basics of temporary foreign worker programs in the U.S.

    There are many temporary work visa programs. A comprehensive list of them in contain in a 2009 report by the Migration Policy Institute, “Aligning Temporary Immigration Visas with U.S. market needs.” In 2008, some 262,000 temporary visas were issues for high skilled labor, and 158,000 such visas for low skilled labor, almost entirely H-2A and H-2B. In addition there were 168,000 “mixed skilled” temporary visas issued.

    The report excerpted below and in later postings is: Congressional Research Service. Immigration of Temporary Lower-Skilled Workers: Current Policy and Related Issues. 12/13/12.

    The [Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952], as originally enacted, authorized an H-2 nonimmigrant visa category for foreign agricultural and nonagricultural workers who were coming temporarily to the United States to perform temporary services (other than services of an exceptional nature requiring distinguished merit and ability) or labor. The 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA) amended the INA to subdivide the H-2 program into the current H-2A agricultural worker program and H-2B nonagricultural worker program and to detail the admissions process for H-2A workers. The H2A and H-2B programs are administered by the Employment and Training Administration (ETA) of the Department of Labor (DOL) and U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS).

    The H-2A and H-2B programs are administered by DOL and DHS, with DOL making a determination on the labor certification application and DHS adjudicating the non-immigrant visa petition.

    While there are many differences between the H-2A agricultural worker program and the H-2B nonagricultural worker program, the process of importing workers under either program entails the same steps. Employers who want to hire workers through either program must first apply to DOL for labor certification, as discussed in the next section. After receiving labor certification, a prospective H-2A or H-2B employer can submit an application, known as a petition, to DHS to bring in foreign workers. If the application is approved, foreign workers who are abroad can then
    go to a U.S. embassy or consulate to apply for an H-2A or H-2B nonimmigrant visa from the Department of State (DOS). If the visa application is approved, the worker is issued a visa that he or she can use to apply for admission to the United States at a port of entry.

    In both the H-2A and H-2B programs, there is a tension between providing protections to U.S. and foreign workers on the one hand and making the programs responsive to legitimate employer needs on the other. While these competing interests are longstanding, the current environment— with relatively high levels of U.S. unemployment; discussions about expanding the E-Verify electronic employment eligibility verification system (as discussed below); and concerns about
    shortages of legal workers, especially in agriculture—has heightened the tensions.

    Temporary Labor Certification

    DOL’s ETA is responsible for administering the labor certification process under the H-2A and H2B programs. Under both programs, employers submit applications in which they request the certification of a particular number of positions.

    INA provisions on the admission of H-2A workers state that an H-2A petition cannot be approved unless the petitioner has applied to DOL for certification that

    (1) there are not sufficient workers who are able, willing, qualified … and available at the time of application for a visa and admission to the United States and at the place where the alien is to perform such skilled or unskilled labor, and (2) the employment of such alien will not adversely affect the wages and working conditions of workers in the United States similarly employed. [INA §218(a)(1)(A), (B)]

    There is no equivalent statutory labor certification requirement for the H-2B program. The INA, however, does contain some related language. For example, it defines an H-2B alien, in relevant part, as an alien “who is coming temporarily to the United States to perform other temporary service or labor if unemployed persons capable of performing such service or labor cannot be found in this country.” [INA §101(a)(15)(H)(ii)(b)] The H-2B labor certification requirement instead appears in DHS regulations. These regulations state:

    “The petitioner may not file an H-2B petition unless the United States petitioner has applied for a labor certification with the Secretary of Labor … and has obtained a favorable labor certification determination …[8 C.F.R. §214.2(h)(6)(iii)(C)].

    The H-2A and H-2B labor certification requirements are intended to provide job, wage, and working conditions protections to U.S. workers. They are implemented in both programs through a multifaceted labor certification process that requires prospective H-2A and H-2B employers to conduct recruitment for U.S. workers and offer a minimum level of wages and benefits that varies by program.

    Posted by Peter Rousmaniere at 8:32 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)
    December 20, 2012
    The “Texas Immigration Solution”: Guest worker programs

    The Texas Immigration Solution is a self-described conservative organization focused on immigration reform. It describes its mission to “enact conservative, market-based immigration reform into law,” and to “provide a voice for conservative job creators by educating the broader community on the urgent need for comprehensive, conservative, market-oriented reforms of the immigration process.”

    Its solution is guest worker program-based for both skilled and unskilled workers, with conservative approaches to immigration in general:

    Secure Our Borders – We demand the application of effective, practical and reasonable measures to secure our borders and to bring safety and security for all Americans along the border and throughout the nation.

    Modernize the United States Social Security Card – We support the improvement of our 1936 Social Security card to use contemporary anti-counterfeit technology. The social security card will not be considered a National ID card for U.S. citizens.

    Birthright Citizenship – We call on the Legislative, Executive, and Judicial branches of the United States to clarify Section 1 of the 14th amendment to limit citizenship by birth to those born to a citizen of the United States with no exceptions.

    Create an Effective and Efficient Temporary Worker Program – A national Temporary Worker Program should be implemented to bring skilled and unskilled workers into the United States for temporary periods of time when no U.S. workers are currently available. The program should also require:

    Self-funding through participation fees and fines;

    Applicants must pass a full criminal background check;

    Applicants with prior immigration violations would only qualify for the program if they paid the appropriate fines;

    Applicants and/or Employers must prove that they can afford and/or secure private health insurance;

    Applicants must waive any and all rights to apply for financial assistance from any public entitlement programs;

    Applicant must show a proficiency in the English language and complete an American civic class;

    Temporary Workers would only be able to work for employers that deduct and match payroll taxes;

    All participants would be issued an individual Temporary-Worker Biometric Identification Card that tracks all address changes and both civil and criminal court appearances as a defendant.

    Posted by Peter Rousmaniere at 10:48 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)
    December 19, 2012
    The Colorado Compact

    Colorado — with an estimated 180,000 undocumented immigrants — has created a compact on immigration, following Utah’s lead of a few years ago, which itself was in response to Arizona’s draconian legislation. According to the Greeley Tribune, the Colorado Compact arose out of 200 meetings throughout the state. The need for immigrant labor is most acute among the state’s farms, which “like many others nationally, have lost workers to the better-paying jobs of the oil and gas field, while also struggling to find local residents willing to do agriculture’s physical labor….Signers of the Colorado Compact span faith organizations, law enforcement agencies, the business community, immigrant-rights advocates and institutions of higher education, as well as agricultural interests.”

    The Colorado Compact:

    The Colorado Compact is an effort to convene and promote a reasonable conversation on immigration in Colorado that could lead to real and lasting federal reform. The Compact brings together leaders and community members of diverse backgrounds and politics who are committed to fostering a more rational and collaborative approach to immigration policy than exists today. We believe that the growing consequences of a broken immigration system must be addressed in a bipartisan effort that considers the principles outlined in this compact.

    FEDERAL RESPONSIBILITY

    Immigration policy is a federal issue between the U.S. government and other countries. We urge the Colorado congressional delegation to work to enact immigration policy at the federal level that improves our immigration system, keeps our communities safe, and protects our borders.

    STRENGTHENING OUR ECONOMY

    Colorado is best served by a free-market philosophy that maximizes individual freedom and opportunity. Our immigration system must be flexible enough to address the needs of businesses while protecting the interests of workers. This includes a visa system that is both responsive and effective at meeting the demands of our economy. It should also acknowledge the beneficial economic contributions immigrants make as workers, taxpayers, and consumers.

    ENSURING OUR NATIONAL SECURITY

    We believe that maintaining the safety and security of the United States is an utmost priority. Our immigration system must ensure the protection of our communities and national borders.

    FAMILY

    Strong families are critical to developing successful individuals and cohesive communities. Our immigration policies, where possible, should prioritize keeping close families together in order to ensure the most supportive home environments for all children across our state.

    EFFECTIVE ENFORCEMENT

    We support a law enforcement strategy that focuses on public safety, targets serious crime, and safeguards witnesses and victims. We further urge a reasonable and predictable regulatory environment that considers the interests of, and unintended consequences to businesses, workers, and consumers. Furthermore, the broader reform effort should eventually include a way to accurately, reliably, and affordably determine who is permitted to work, ensuring an adequate labor force for a growing economy.

    A COMMONSENSE APPROACH

    Immigrants are part of our communities across Colorado. We must adopt a commonsense approach to this reality that reflects our values and recognizes the critical role immigration has played in our nation’s history and economy. Our immigration policies must provide a sensible path forward for immigrants who are here without legal status, are of good character, pay taxes, and are committed to becoming fully participating members of our society and culture.

    Posted by Peter Rousmaniere at 9:16 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)
    November 24, 2012
    Immigration reform prospects for 2013

    Why immigration reform in 2013? Muzaffar Chishti and Claire Bergeron cite the following:

    • The Republican Party was jolted by the surprisingly low Latino support for presidential nominee Mitt Romney
    • nearly two-thirds of American voters (65 percent) now support giving most unauthorized immigrant workers a chance to apply for legal status.
    • recognition in both political parties that reforming the current legal immigration system is critical to advancing the United States’ global economic competitiveness.
    • For a bill to stand a chance of passage, it must get through Congress before House members gear up for the 2014 mid-term elections. Most interpret that political reality to mean that a bill’s best chance would be in 2013.

    The article in full: “US Election Realigns Stars for Immigration Reform, But Significant Hurdles Remain”

    Published on 11-23-2012

    In one sweep, the re-election of President Barack Obama has transformed immigration reform, an issue that for years has largely been seen as a third rail of American politics, into a first-tier legislative agenda item for the 113th Congress. In perhaps the clearest sign that the calculus on immigration has dramatically shifted, a chorus of Republican Party leaders and conservatives who have traditionally opposed immigration reform efforts voiced support for enacting legislation that would include legalization for some of the country’s 11 million unauthorized immigrants.

    Backers of such a measure are moving quickly to turn ambitious goals into legislative reality. On November 11th, Senators Charles Schumer (D-NY) and Lindsey Graham (R-SC) announced that they were re-initiating efforts to draft a broad, bipartisan immigration reform bill. Three days later, President Obama, in his first post-election press conference, told reporters that he expected movement on immigration reform “very soon after [the] inauguration”.

    Continue reading “Immigration reform prospects for 2013″ »

    Posted by Peter Rousmaniere at 7:15 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)
    November 11, 2012
    Ten politicans to watch on immigration reform

    Daniel Strauss of the Hill lists “10 players to watch on immigration:” President Obama, Rep. Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.), Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), Rep. Luis Gutierrez (D-Ill.), Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), Sen.John McCain (R-Ariz.), Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.), Rep. Steve King (R-Iowa), and Sen. Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.).

    The list in depth:

    President Obama. Even before he was elected to a second term, Obama had already been laying the groundwork for immigration reform. Over the summer, he issued a new directive protecting immigrants who came to the country illegally from being deported provided they meet certain criteria. After failing to pass a bill in his first four years, Obama said that immigration reform would be one of the highest priorities of his second term. But will he push a comprehensive approach, or a scaled-down version of the measure, such as the Development, Relief and Education for Alien Minors (DREAM) Act?

    Rep. Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.). Goodlatte is considered the favorite to be the new chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, which has jurisdiction on immigration. In 2011, he introduced legislation to get rid of the immigrant visa lottery program. He has been a vocal critic of the DREAM Act. Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) this week has opened the door to passing immigration reform, attracting criticism from conservatives.

    Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.). The Senate Judiciary Committee chairman has been proponent on comprehensive immigration reform and his voting record includes support for establishing a guest-worker program, opposing limiting welfare for illegal immigrants and allowing illegal immigrants to participate in Social Security.

    Continue reading “Ten politicans to watch on immigration reform” »

    Posted by Peter Rousmaniere at 7:27 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)
    October 21, 2012
    Dream Act: employment and economic impact

    The Partnership for the New American Economy issued an important report in October on the economic results of the Dream Act, if enacted.

    “The Economic Benefits of Passing the DREAM Act,” by Juan Carlos Guzmán and Raúl C. Jara, draws upon the current versions of the DREAM Act submitted by Sen. Richard Durbin (S.952) and Rep. Howard Berman (H.R. 1842).

    To be eligible, an undocumented person has to have come to the United States at age 15 or younger, be currently age 35 or younger, have been present in the country for at least five years, completed high school, and completed at least two years of higher education or honorably served in the armed forces for at least two years.

    Eligible immigrants per the Act first receive conditional legal status for a period of six years, under which they can complete their studies and work legally in the United States. After that period, if they have met all of the requirements, they can apply for permanent legal status (a green card) and eventually citizenship

    The authors forecast that by 2030 the Act will create 1.4 million new jobs, and increase by 19% the total compensation of all eligible youth. How will this happen?

    First, enacting the law would provide an incentive for their further education because for most of those who would be eligible the legalization provisions can only be attained through completion of high school and some college. Receiving more education opens access to higher-paying jobs, enabling these undocumented youth to become much more productive members of our society.

    Second, gaining legal status itself translates into higher earnings for these youth since legal status allows DREAMers to apply to a broader range of high-paying jobs rather than having to resort to low-wage jobs from employers who are willing to pay them under the table.

    According to the authors, this will not take away jobs from native born Americans:

    First, many economists find that immigrants tend to complement the skills of native workers rather than compete with them, especially as immigrants move up the education and skills chain. Increasing the education of immigrant workers would therefore decrease the competition between DREAMers and the native-born.

    Second, research shows that an increase in college-educated immigrants directly increases U.S. gross domestic product—the largest measure of economic growth—which correlates to more jobs for American workers. In the 1990s, for example, the increase in college-educated immigrants was found to be responsible for a 1.4% to 2.4% in U.S. GDP.

    http://www.renewoureconomy.org/economic-benefits-dream

    Posted by Peter Rousmaniere at 4:19 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)
    June 16, 2012
    Labor force impact of new Obama policy will be large

    The Pew Hispanic Center estimates that most of the persons to be protected by the administration are 18 to 30, thus in the labor force.

    In a report issued on June 15, the Center said that up to 1.4 million children and young adults who are in the United States illegally could potentially benefit from today’s announcement by the Obama Administration about changes in deportation policies, according to an estimate from the Pew Hispanic Center, a project of the Pew Research Center.

    The 1.4 million estimate includes 700,000 unauthorized immigrants who are ages 18 to 30 but arrived in the U.S as children and are currently enrolled in school or have graduated from high school; and an additional 700,000 who are under the age of 18 and are enrolled in school. This includes 150,000 who are currently enrolled in high school.

    Overall, the 1.4 million estimate represents about 12% of the 11.2 million unauthorized immigrants in the U.S. as of 2010, according to an estimate by the Pew Hispanic Center. Among the 1.4 million potential beneficiaries of the new policy, some 70% are from Mexico. For details on the numbers and characteristics of unauthorized immigrants in the U.S, see the Pew Hispanic Center report “Unauthorized Immigrant Population: National and State Trends, 2010.”

    A Pew Hispanic Center survey taken late last year found that by a margin of 59% to 27%, Latinos oppose the deportation policies of the Obama Administration. Among Latinos, some 41% are aware that the number of deportations of unauthorized immigrants annually has been higher during the Obama Administration than during the George W. Bush Administration, while 36% say the two Administrations have deported the same number of unauthorized immigrants, and 10% say fewer have been deported under the Obama administration.

    Nearly 400,000 unauthorized immigrants were deported annually during the first two years of the Obama Administration—-about 30% more than the annual average during the second term of the Bush Administration. Among those deported in 2010, nearly all (97%) were Hispanic. By comparison, among all unauthorized immigrants, 81% are Hispanic.

    According to the same 2011 Pew Hispanic Center survey, 91% of Latinos support the DREAM Act, a proposal that would grant legal status to unauthorized immigrant children if they attend college or serve in the U.S. military for two years. And 84% of Latinos favor granting in-state tuition at public colleges to unauthorized immigrants who graduated from high school in their states.

    Posted by Peter Rousmaniere at 6:14 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)
    December 8, 2011
    Alabama now reaping the harvest of its immigration law

    I am back, after two months of extensive travel

    The chickens are coming home roost in Alabama. Two legally working foreign workers in auto plants have been arrested.

    According to Fox News, “Before the auto workers’ problems, in early November, [Alabama Governor Robert] Bentley told a Birmingham business audience that the law had not hurt Alabama’s image with industrial prospects. But Bentley now says the two arrests involving foreign auto workers “theoretically” could hurt Alabama’s ability to recruit foreign industries.”

    The article in full:

    Alabama Governor to Foreign Biz: Don’t Worry About Immigration Law

    After local police recently detained employees of Mercedes-Benz and Honda under the state’s immigration law, Alabama’s governor is reaching out to foreign executives to let them know that the state welcomes them.

    “We are not anti-foreign companies. We are very pro-foreign companies,” Bentley told reporters at the Capitol.

    The Republican governor and other supporters of Alabama’s new immigration law — aimed at driving undocumented immigrants out of the state — have described it as the nation’s toughest. Some parts of it were put on hold by the federal courts, but major provisions took effect in late September, including allowing police to detain motorists who can’t produce a valid driver’s license.

    Before the auto workers’ problems, in early November, Bentley told a Birmingham business audience that the law had not hurt Alabama’s image with industrial prospects. But Bentley now says the two arrests involving foreign auto workers “theoretically” could hurt Alabama’s ability to recruit foreign industries.

    Since then, two foreign workers with the Mercedes-Benz and Honda auto assembly plants in Alabama have run into problems.

    Continue reading “Alabama now reaping the harvest of its immigration law” »

    Posted by Peter Rousmaniere at 4:21 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)
    August 31, 2011
    NY Times editorial about Alabama Law

    The Nation’s Cruelest Immigration Law

    The Alabama Legislature opened its session on March 1 on a note of humility and compassion. In the Senate, a Christian pastor asked God to grant members “wisdom and discernment” to do what is right. “Not what’s right in their own eyes,” he said, “but what’s right according to your word.” Soon after, both houses passed, and the governor signed, the country’s cruelest, most unforgiving immigration law.

    The law, which takes effect Sept. 1, is so inhumane that four Alabama church leaders — an Episcopal bishop, a Methodist bishop and a Roman Catholic archbishop and bishop — have sued to block it, saying it criminalizes acts of Christian compassion. It is a sweeping attempt to terrorize undocumented immigrants in every aspect of their lives, and to make potential criminals of anyone who may work or live with them or show them kindness.

    It effectively makes it a crime to be an undocumented immigrant in Alabama, by criminalizing working, renting a home and failing to comply with federal registration laws that are largely obsolete. It nullifies any contracts when one party is an undocumented immigrant. It requires the police to check the papers of people they suspect to be here illegally.

    The new regime does not spare American citizens. Businesses that knowingly employ illegal immigrants will lose their licenses. Public school officials will be required to determine students’ immigration status and report back to the state. Anyone knowingly “concealing, harboring or shielding” an illegal immigrant could be charged with a crime, say for renting someone an apartment or driving her to church or the doctor.

    The American Civil Liberties Union and the Justice Department have also sued, calling the law an unconstitutional intrusion on the federal government’s authority to write and enforce immigration laws. The A.C.L.U. warns that the law would trample people’s fundamental rights to speak and travel freely, effectively deny children the chance to go to school and expose people to harassment and racial profiling.

    These arguments have been made before, in opposition to similar, if less sweeping, laws passed in Arizona, Utah, Indiana and Georgia. What is remarkable in Alabama is the separate lawsuit by the four church leaders, who say the law violates their religious freedoms to perform acts of charity without regard to the immigration status of those they minister to or help.

    “The law,” Archbishop Thomas Rodi of Mobile said in The Times, “attacks our core understanding of what it means to be a church.”

    You’d think that any state would think twice before embracing a law that so vividly brings to mind the Fugitive Slave Act, the brutal legal and law-enforcement apparatus of the Jim Crow era, and the civil-rights struggle led by the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. But waves of anti-immigrant hostility have made many in this country forget who and what we are.

    Congress was once on the brink of an ambitious bipartisan reform that would have enabled millions of immigrants stranded by the failed immigration system to get right with the law. This sensible policy has been abandoned. We hope the church leaders can waken their fellow Alabamans to the moral damage done when forgiveness and justice are so ruthlessly denied. We hope Washington and the rest of the country will also listen.

    Posted by Peter Rousmaniere at 6:33 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)
    August 30, 2011
    Alabama’s Immigration law dissected

    On June 9, 2011, Alabama enacted H 56, the most aggressive state law to date to control immigration. Federal judge has stayed the implementation of the law until at least late September. Most of the media discussion has been about non-work-related provisions of the law, for instance, police questioning, access to church-related services, and public education. Here, we look at the business –related provisions, which are excerpted below. The key provisions are:

    Section 9 - Government contractors prohibited from hiring unlawful aliens

    Section 11 - curb-side hiring prohibited

    Section 13 – Harboring an unlawful alien

    Section 15 prohibiting private sector hiring of unlawful aliens, at penalty of permanent revocation of licenses and permits

    And

    Section 26 - State of Alabama to provide E-Verify service to small employers

    I have included below key passages in each of these sections.

    “….the court shall direct the applicable governing bodies to forever suspend the business licenses and permits, if such exist, of the business entity or employer throughout the state….” (Section 15 (f)

    Section 9 - Government contractors prohibited from hiring unlawful aliens

    (a) As a condition for the award of any contract, grant, or incentive by the state, any political subdivision thereof, or any state-funded entity to a business entity or employer that employs one or more employees, the business entity or employer shall not knowingly employ, hire for employment, or continue to employ an unauthorized alien and shall attest to such, by sworn affidavit signed before a notary.

    ……Violations of Section 9 (a)

    Continue reading ” Alabama’s Immigration law dissected ” »

    Posted by Peter Rousmaniere at 11:57 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)
    May 31, 2011
    IT CEOs pitch for a better immigration policy

    Four IT industry leaders called on May 19 for a new immigration policy. They touch on a number of issues, including dysfunction in our relations with foreigners who earn graduate degrees here. “Today foreign nationals account for 50% of master’s degrees and 70% of Ph.D. degrees in electrical and electronic engineering in the U.S. Yet, our antiquated immigration laws numerically limit the numbers of these individuals, by the thousands, from entering our country annually. What kind of strategy is it to train the world’s best and brightest in our great universities – and then require them to leave?”

    The authors are members of the President’s Council on Jobs and Competitiveness

    Their statement in full:

    America needs a 21st century immigration policy

    President Obama’s recent focus on immigration highlights America’s “broken” system and its impact on our economy. Fixing it requires Republicans and Democrats to show political courage and implement reforms to expand and strengthen the American economy. As members of the President’s Council on Jobs and Competitiveness, we share his deep concern that our nation’s ability to compete economically is being damaged by the two parties battling over immigration laws and policies.

    To some, the link between immigration reform and economic growth may be surprising. To America’s most innovative industries, it is a link we know is fundamental.

    Continue reading “IT CEOs pitch for a better immigration policy” »

    Posted by Peter Rousmaniere at 5:57 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)
    April 21, 2011
    More on Utah’s new immigration related laws

    On the heels of Utah’s passage of an immigration – related law, Farmer Justice’s president Bruce Goldstein wrote an op-ed in the Salt Lake Tribune saying that the state should be paying more attention to reforming an existing guest worker program, the H-2A program. Goldstein is concerned that guest worker programs tend to be inadequate in protecting the interests of both guest and American workers. He plugs for AgJOBS, which was part of the failed immigration reform effort in Washington in 2007.

    The article in full:

    Paying for a guest worker law already in place
    By BRUCE GOLDSTEIN

    Published: April 14, 2011 12:10AM

    Bruce Goldstein is president of Farmworker Justice, a nonprofit organization based in Washington, D.C., that works to improve living and working conditions for migrant and seasonal farm workers.

    Amidst the debate and controversy surrounding Utah’s new immigration laws, state legislators in Salt Lake City seem to think they’ve created a model for America. They portray their pilot guest worker program as a compromise that others might use as a model.

    They must think Utah’s taxpayers aren’t paying careful attention, because they’ll be saddled with spending money to duplicate a program that largely already exists.

    Last month, Utah Gov. Gary Herbert signed into law four bills heralded by some commentators as a holistic and comprehensive state approach to immigration reform. One of the bills would create a pilot program to bring guest workers from the state of Nuevo Leon, Mexico, to perform temporary work. (Another would create a guest worker status for undocumented workers already working in Utah.)

    If the pilot bill for managing guest workers in Utah sounds familiar, that’s because, in spite of the media attention and self-congratulation that accompanied the state law, we have had a federal system in place since the 1940s that does virtually the same thing. In fact, the United States already has two such programs for temporary or seasonal jobs, the H-2A visa for agricultural work and the H-2B for nonagricultural work. Each visa already requires state involvement.

    Continue reading “More on Utah’s new immigration related laws” »

    Posted by Peter Rousmaniere at 11:08 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)
    March 28, 2011
    The Utah Compact on immigration

    Business, religious and community leaders in Utah signed on November 11, 2010, the following Utah Compact. This Compact set the stage for a package of immigration bills enacted this month.

    Utah Compact:

    A declaration of five principles to guide Utah’s immigration discussion

    FEDERAL SOLUTIONS: Immigration is a federal policy issue between the U.S. government and other countries — not Utah and other countries. We urge Utah’s congressional delegation, and others, to lead efforts to strengthen federal laws and protect our national borders. We urge state leaders to adopt reasonable policies addressing immigrants in Utah.

    LAW ENFORCEMENT: We respect the rule of law and support law enforcement’s professional judgment and discretion. Local law enforcement resources should focus on criminal activities, not civil violations of federal code.

    FAMILIES: Strong families are the foundation of successful communities. We oppose policies that unnecessarily separate families. We champion policies that support families and improve the health, education and well-being of all Utah children.

    ECONOMY: Utah is best served by a free-market philosophy that maximizes individual freedom and opportunity. We acknowledge the economic role immigrants play as workers and taxpayers. Utah’s immigration policies must reaffirm our global reputation as a welcoming and business-friendly state.

    A FREE SOCIETY: Immigrants are integrated into communities across Utah. We must adopt a humane approach to this reality, reflecting our unique culture, history and spirit of inclusion. The way we treat immigrants will say more about us as a free society and less about our immigrant neighbors. Utah should always be a place that welcomes people of goodwill.

    Supported by the Mormon Church

    Statement from The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints:

    As a worldwide church dealing with many complex issues across the globe, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints promotes broad, foundational principles that have worldwide application. The Church regards the declaration of the Utah Compact as a responsible approach to the urgent challenge of immigration reform. It is consistent with important principles for which we stand:

    * We follow Jesus Christ by loving our neighbors. The Savior taught that the meaning of “neighbor” includes all of God’s children, in all places, at all times.

    * We recognize an ever-present need to strengthen families. Families are meant to be together. Forced separation of working parents from their children weakens families and damages society.

    * We acknowledge that every nation has the right to enforce its laws and secure its borders. All persons subject to a nation’s laws are accountable for their acts in relation to them.

    Public officials should create and administer laws that reflect the best of our aspirations as a just and caring society. Such laws will properly balance love for neighbors, family cohesion, and the observance of just and enforceable laws.

    Posted by Peter Rousmaniere at 9:41 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)
    New guest worker and other legislation from Utah

    Utah has enacted in March a law that attempts to set up, on a single state basis, a guest worker program allowing illegal workers to participate. Though of doubtful constitutionality – it will take a waiver from Washington for Utah to effective write a guest worker program – it is an example of creative thinking about immigration.

    According to the Pew Hispanic Center, Utah has about 110,000 illegal immigrants, of which 75,000 are in the workforce.

    The legislation follow up on the Utah Compact, which business, religious and community leaders in Utah agreed to in late November. I am posting on that compact in another post.

    The Deseret News editorialized it support of the legislation, saying that “This year, Utah’s lawmakers have managed to accomplish legislatively what has eluded Congress: increased enforcement that weeds out dangerous criminals while providing a guest worker program coupled with tough but common-sense safeguards.”

    One report describes the guest worker law, HB 116, as follows:

    On Tuesday March 15, Utah Governor Gary R. Herbert signed immigration bills including HB 116 into law, which addressed immigration enforcement, guest-worker visas and employment verification by employers in Utah. Utah became the first state to enact laws to let illegal workers remain in the state along with their families.

    Governor Herbert called it “the Utah solution.” He said, “Utah has taken a thoughtful, rational approach and found common ground.”

    While most acknowledge immigration is primarily a federal issue, Governor Herbert said these bills provide him some leverage at the federal level to engage the federal government in addressing Utah’s challenges, according to the press release.
    The federal government would have to grant a waiver, since the U.S. Congress can only enact immigration laws and enforce them. If the federal government fails to grant a waiver, Utah might engage in a legal challenge by the U.S. Department of Justice.

    The guest-worker program under HB 116 will take effect in two years. It would allow the Utah Department of Safety to issue state visas to more than 110,000 undocumented immigrants in the state. Immigrants would have to pay $2,500 for permits or pay $1,000 for overstaying a visa in the U.S. Their families would be included in the permits. Undocumented workers would have to go through a background investigation once they sign up for the guest-worker program. They would be expected to learn English, but would not be required.

    Another new law, HB 466, allows the governor to enter into a pilot program with the Mexican state of Nuevo Leon to supply legal workers through existing federal guest-worker programs.

    A third bill, HB 497, requires police to check the immigration status of suspects who are arrested for felony or serious misdemeanor charges, placing an immigration enforcement activity in the hands of local police officers. This law is expected to face immediate legal challenges.

    Posted by Peter Rousmaniere at 9:25 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)
    January 1, 2011
    State house battles in 2011 over illegal immigration

    Count on 2011 to see a lot of “Arizona-plus” legislative initiatives at the state level. These will be opposed by business lobbies, Democrats, and the Hispanic community. Below is an article in today’s NY Times:

    Political Battle on Illegal Immigration Shifts to States
    By JULIA PRESTON

    Legislative leaders in at least half a dozen states say they will propose bills similar to a controversial law to fight illegal immigration that was adopted by Arizona last spring, even though a federal court has suspended central provisions of that statute.

    The efforts, led by Republicans, are part of a wave of state measures coming this year aimed at cracking down on illegal immigration.

    Legislators have also announced measures to limit access to public colleges and other benefits for illegal immigrants and to punish empl

  269. Veronyka Says:

    Buna tuturor! Am si eu o intrebare:

    Cind eram studenti am fost de citeva ori in SUA, cu prietenul, acum sotul, cu viza J1, am respectat toate conditiile si ne-am intors in tara la timp de fiecare data. Acuma suntem din nou in SUA cu viza turistica, eu o am deskis ape 10 ani, sotul pe 1 an. Cum am putea face sa raminem legal aici pt mai mult timp, (nu 6 luni cum este indicat in viza- la imntrarea in state)? Este o modalitate de-a schimba viza B2, turistica in alt tip de viza, de lucru si pt mai mult timp? AStept sugestiile si ajutorul vostru! Multumesc.

  270. someone Says:

    A comprehensive immigration reform bill that includes a path to citizenship for immigrants living in the country illegally is “highly unlikely” to pass the Republican-majority House of Representatives, Georgia Republican Rep. Tom Price, the vice chair of the House Budget Committee, said.

    During a Christian Science Monitor breakfast meeting Wednesday, a reporter asked Price if a majority of House members could support a path to legality for immigrants similar to the provision in the bill currently moving through the Senate.

    “I think at this point, that would be highly unlikely,” Price said. “Because I don’t think there’s a trust of our conference in the administration to enforce the current laws that are on the books as they relate to much of immigration. And not just this administration—it has been previous administrations as well.”

    Price, who opposes the comprehensive approach taken in the Senate—which combines enhanced border security with a path to legality—pointed to the failure of the comprehensive immigration reform bill signed by President Ronald Reagan in 1986. Despite promises at the time that the law would end the flow of illegal immigration, millions still reside in the United States outside the bounds of the law.

    Price said that the Obama administration would need to prove that it can enforce current laws before he would consider supporting new comprehensive legislation. In the meantime, Price said he would rather Congress take a piecemeal approach.

    “There’s no trust at all. The first step in regaining that trust is living up to the promise that was made to the nation back in 1986, and that is controlling and securing the border,” Price said. “So until the administration is able to do that, I don’t think that there’s any trust that whatever could pass would be enforced or made certain that it would work in a positive way.”

    The Senate Judiciary Committee in May approved its own immigration bill, which supporters hope will receive a vote by the full chamber by July 4. A bipartisan group of House members are still negotiating a version for the lower chamber.

    Florida Republican Sen. Marco Rubio, one of the lead architects of the Senate bill, will attend a meeting of conservative House members to discuss the bill on Wednesday.

  271. Luminita Says:

    Buna ziua! A depus cineva pentru azil politic in SUA? ajutatima va rog si pe mine cu niste informatii, in cat timp sa rezolvat cazul? care a fost motivul scris in cererea pt azil? multumesc anticipat

  272. someone Says:

    Republican Senator Kelly Ayotte on Sunday threw her support behind a sweeping U.S. immigration bill, calling it a “thoughtful” reform that would ease the burden of illegal immigration and allow companies to more easily hire qualified workers.

    Support from Ayotte, who has been courted by the bill’s backers, could pave the way for other Republicans to endorse the measure in the Senate, where a vote is expected by the end of June.

    “Our immigration system is completely broken,” Ayotte, of New Hampshire, told CBS’ “Face the Nation” program. “This is a thoughtful, bipartisan solution to a tough problem, and so that is why I am going to support it.”

    Ayotte, an ally of Senator John McCain of Arizona, one of the bipartisan “Gang of Eight” senators who crafted the bill, said it would improve border security and ensure the U.S. economy, particularly its high-tech sector, was able to attract the best workers.

    She also said the bill deals with the problem of having 11 million undocumented immigrants living in the nation.

    The Senate bill is expected to get strong support among Democrats, but will need some Republican votes to meet the 60-vote minimum required for passage.

    Many supporters believe the overhaul of immigration laws faces its toughest challenge in the Republican-led House of Representatives, where conservatives have expressed skepticism about the central aspect of the Senate bill, a path to citizenship for undocumented immigrants.

    The Senate bill, which is backed by President Barack Obama, also would authorize billions in new spending for enhanced border security and would create new visa programs for high- and low-skilled workers. Obama has made immigration reform a top priority of his second term.

    Senator Rand Paul of Kentucky, another Republican whose vote is being sought by immigration supporters, said on Sunday he was open to voting for the bill, but said he would insist on changes, including provisions to toughen border security.

    Paul, who has hinted at a possible presidential run in 2016, has backed the concept of a path to citizenship for the undocumented, but criticized the bill for not having a mechanism to assure that the U.S. border with Mexico is secure. He also wants visa programs that allow companies to hire foreign workers expanded.

    “I am the conduit between conservatives in the House who don’t want a lot of these things and more moderate people in the Senate who do want these things. I want to make the bill work, but see, the thing is, what they have in the Senate has zero chance of passing in the House,” Paul told the “Fox News Sunday” program.

    “I’m really trying to make immigration work, but they are going to have to come to me and they’re going to have to work to make the bill stronger if they want me to vote for it,” Paul added.

    Both Republican and Democratic senators are likely to offer amendments to the bill to bolster border security, considered by critics to be a weak link in broad immigration reform.

    Skeptics of comprehensive reform warn of the risk of a repeat of 1986 when President Ronald Reagan signed legislation that offered amnesty to 3 million undocumented immigrants, but failed to obtain the level of border security that backers had anticipated.

    These critics complain that the 1986 amnesty ended up attracting more illegal immigrants.

    Democrats have vowed to fight any amendments - including those on border security - that would create too many obstacles to the 13-year path to citizenship included in the Senate bill.

    The “Gang of Eight” senators are trying to preserve Democratic priorities in the legislation while courting enough Republican votes to ensure its passage.

  273. someone Says:

    Backers of far-reaching immigration legislation are turning their attention to courting support and counting votes after the Senate pushed the contentious bill over early procedural hurdles.

    Two votes to place the bill formally before the Senate and open for amendments each drew more than 80 votes Tuesday, reflecting a bipartisan desire to debate the legislation to remake the nation’s immigration laws and open the door to citizenship to millions.

    Despite the lopsided votes, Republicans served notice they will seek to toughen the bill’s border security provisions and impose tougher terms on those seeking to gain legal status. “This bill has serious flaws,” said their party leader, Sen. Mitch McConnell of Kentucky.

    At the White House, President Barack Obama insisted the “moment is now” to give the estimated 11 million immigrants living in the United States illegally a chance at citizenship and prodded Congress to send him a bill by fall.

    At its core, the bill sets out a 13-year journey to citizenship for the millions of immigrants who arrived in the country illegally through the end of 2011 or who overstayed their visas. The bill also requires a tighter border to prevent future illegal immigration.

    Other key provisions would create a new program for low-skilled workers to enter the country and expand the number of visas for high-skilled workers who are particularly in demand in technology firms.

    Supporters expressed confidence they could muster the 60 votes needed for the bill to pass the Senate by July Fourth. Democrats control 54 Senate votes, and Republicans 46. But a number of opponents said success was far from assured. And supporters are hoping for closer to 70 votes on final passage to show resounding momentum for the bill and pressure the Republican-led House to act. The safe margin is considered to be 60 votes because that is the number required to fend off a filibuster.

    To that end, the bill’s four Democratic and four Republican authors were looking for ways to accept Republican amendments on border security and other issues that could win over additional supporters — without making the path to citizenship so onerous that Democratic support is threatened.

    “Just because the process has been to date so encouraging does not mean we can take anything for granted. So we welcome constructive input from our colleagues, we want to work with them,” said Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., one of the authors. “But the one thing none of us will do is condition the path to citizenship on factors that may not ever happen in order to appear tough.”

    Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., a potential 2016 Republican presidential contender and the author of the bill with the strongest ties to conservatives, said that about half the Senate’s Republicans might be prepared to back the measure — but only with stronger border provisions.

    An early skirmish took shape over a proposal by Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas. It would permit the legalization process to begin but require several changes before anyone currently in the country illegally could receive a green card that confers permanent legal residence.

    Those changes include apprehension of at least 90 percent of those seeking to cross into the United States at every segment of the southern border, implementation of a biometric exit system at all airports and seaports of entry and a nationwide E-Verify system to check the legal status of prospective employees.

    Democratic supporters of the legislation have deemed Cornyn’s plan a “poison pill,” designed to wreck the bill’s chances for passage instead of enhance them. But the Texan told reporters he had some leverage to force changes, if nothing else.

    “I think if they had 60 votes to pass a bill out of the Senate, they probably wouldn’t be talking to me. And they are,” Cornyn said of majority Democrats.

  274. someone Says:

    About 8 million immigrants living unlawfully in the United States would gain legal status under sweeping legislation moving toward a vote in the Senate, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office said Tuesday, adding the bill would push federal deficits lower in each of the next two decades.

    In an assessment that drew cheers from the White House and other backers of the bill, Congress’ scorekeeping agency said the legislation would boost the overall economy. It put deficit reduction at $197 billion across a decade, and $700 billion in the following 10 years if the bill became law.

    The White House quickly issued a statement after the report was released, saying it was “more proof that bipartisan commonsense immigration reform will be good for economic growth and deficit reduction.” Other supporters said the estimate would add to the momentum behind a measure that toughens border security at the same time it holds out the hope of citizenship to millions who came to the United States illegally or overstayed their visas.

    The assessment came as the pace of activity increased at both ends of the Capitol on an issue that President Barack Obama has placed at the top of his domestic agenda.

    Challenged by protesters chanting “shame, shame,” House Republicans advanced legislation to crack down on immigrants living illegally in the United States, at the same time the Senate lurched ahead on a dramatically different approach offering the hope of citizenship to the same millions.

    Republican Rep. Trey Gowdy of South Carolina said the bill moving through the House Judiciary Committee was part of a “step by step, increment by increment” approach to immigration, an issue that can pit Republican against Republican as much if not more than it divides the two political parties.

    California Democratic Rep. Zoe Lofgren predicted there would be “millions of American citizens taking to the street” in protest if Republicans pressed ahead with the bill. The measure permits state and local authorities to enforce federal immigration laws and requires mandatory detention for anyone in the country illegally who is convicted of drunk driving.

    Despite the protests, approval by the committee was a foregone conclusion. The panel’s chairman, Rep. Robert Goodlatte, R-Va., said future bills would require companies to make sure their employees are living in the United States legally, create a program for foreign farm workers who labor in the United States and enhance the ability of American firms to hire highly skilled workers from overseas.

    Those steps and more are already rolled into one sweeping measure in the Senate, a bipartisan bill that Obama supports and that appears on track for a final Senate vote as early as July 4.

    The CBO said in its report and accompanying economic analysis that the legislation would raise economic activity in each of the next two decades as millions of workers join the legal workforce paying taxes. Not all the forecast was as favorable, though. CBO said average wages would decline through 2025 as a result of the bill, and that unemployment would go up slightly.

    One critic quickly seized on the impact on pay. “It’s going to raise unemployment and push down wages,” Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Ala., said of the bill, a combination he said would hammer American workers.

    The report was issued near the end of a day of skirmishing on the Senate bill.

    In a series of votes during the day, the Senate rejected a move by Sen. John Thune, R-S.D., to require the installation of 350 miles of fencing along the U.S.-Mexico border before legalization can begin for anyone currently in the United States illegally.

    Similarly, the Senate rejected a proposal by Sen. David Vitter, R-La., to prevent legalization until a biometric system is in place to track people entering or leaving the country through air, sea or land points of departure.

    Those proposals were overshadowed by a larger debate over the types of border security requirements the legislation should contain. Republicans generally want to toughen the existing measure, particularly since the bill includes a 13-year path to citizenship for immigrants in the country illegally — a provision that sparks opposition from voters who could be influential in GOP primaries in next year’s mid-term elections.

    Sen. John Hoeven, R-N.D., told reporters that he and others want the government to demonstrate an ability to apprehend the vast majority of those attempting to enter the country illegally before anyone already present can take the first step toward possible citizenship.

    Democrats have previously been unwilling to consider proposals along those lines, arguing they could postpone legalization for years if not longer. As drafted, the bill gives the government six months to develop a plan to achieve border security, but does not hold up legalization while it is being tested for effectiveness.

    It was unclear what, if any, compromise is possible on that point. Agreement would greatly increase the bill’s chances for passage with a large bipartisan vote.

    The measure was drafted by a bipartisan Gang of Eight and represents a series of political trade-offs among senators as well as outside groups like business and labor, growers and farm workers. In addition to border security and a path to citizenship, it includes an expanded number of visas for highly skilled workers prized by the technology industry and a new program for low-skilled workers. It also features a top-to-bottom overhaul of a decades-old system for parceling out visas to future legal immigrants, reducing the importance of family ties while emphasizing education, job skills and youth.

    Broad in its scope, the bill calls for new judges, prosecutors and other officials to handle cases involving immigration law. At the same time, it would require the government to pay for legal representation, if necessary, for unaccompanied children caught up in such cases, as well as for adults determined to be legally incompetent because of a serious mental disability.

    Any talk of compromise in the House appeared distant as Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, sought to reassure conservatives who have expressed fears he will allow legislation to come up this summer that they oppose and Democrats support.

    One official who attended the closed-door meeting quoted the Ohio Republican as saying he has no intention of allowing a bill to come up that would violate the principles of the GOP majority and split its ranks. The speaker also made clear that legislation must satisfy Republican concerns about border security, according to the official.

    At roughly the same time, Goodlatte gaveled the Judiciary Committee to order, and more than a dozen protesters who had been seated in the hearing room stood up and began clapping and chanting, “Shame, shame, shame! More of the same!” They were ushered out but their cries could still be heard in the hallway and committee proceedings were briefly interrupted.

  275. someone Says:

    The Senate has voted down a GOP attempt to block immigration legislation offering eventual U.S. citizenship to millions of people.

    The 68-30 vote overturned a procedural objection that Republicans tried to bring against the bill.

    The vote came as senators worked Wednesday to remove the remaining hurdles ahead of final passage as early as Thursday.

    The vote was an indication the legislation commands the backing of well over the 60 senators needed to pass the measure and send it to the House, where an uncertain future awaits.

    The White House-backed measure spends tens of billions on border security while establishing a 13-year path to citizenship for 11 million people already here illegally.

    THIS IS A BREAKING NEWS UPDATE. Check back soon for further information. AP’s earlier story is below.

    The Senate is poised to push landmark immigration legislation across a few final hurdles ahead of passage as early as Thursday of the bill opening the door to U.S. citizenship for millions.

    The legislation cleared an early procedural hurdle this week with room to spare, and more test votes were due Wednesday. The White House-backed bill would pour billions into border security and offer a path to citizenship to some 11 million immigrants now in the United States illegally.

    “A permanent, commonsense solution to our dysfunctional system is really in sight,” Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., said Wednesday on the Senate floor. “It is my hope that our colleagues in the House will follow the Senate’s lead and work to pass bipartisan reform and do it now.”

    Opponents weren’t convinced.

    “It continues to promote false promises that the border would be truly secure,” said Sen. Charles Grassley, R-Iowa.

    Prospects were anything but clear in the GOP-controlled House, where many conservatives oppose citizenship or even legalization for people in this country illegally. House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, reiterated Wednesday that he has no plans to hold a vote on the Senate-passed immigration bill.

    “We are not going to take up the Senate bill,” the speaker told fellow Republicans in a meeting Wednesday morning, according to Rep. John Fleming, R-La.

    The House Judiciary Committee was to vote Wednesday on legislation requiring employers to verify their workers’ legal status. It’s the third in a series of single-issue immigration bills the committee has voted on as it takes a piecemeal approach to overhauling the nation’s immigration system, in contrast with the Senate’s comprehensive bill.

    In the Senate, after the addition of $38 billion in provisions strengthening border security, doubling the size of the border patrol, and completing hundreds of miles of fencing, the legislation looked likely to command support from around 14 Republicans on final passage. That’s more than enough to ensure the 60-vote margin needed for passage, as all 52 Democrats and the two independents who usually vote with them look likely to stick together.

    As time drew short to cut any last-minute deals before final action on the bill, there was still some hope of negotiating a few final amendments that could bring even more Republicans on board.

    Sen. Rob. Portman, R-Ohio, was pushing an amendment to strengthen an electronic employment verification program made mandatory in the bill. “I can’t vote for (the bill) without it,” Portman said.

    Sen. Saxby Chambliss, R-Ga., sought changes to a new agriculture workers program that he said makes it too easy for farm workers to get permanent U.S. residency.

    But the measures sought by Portman and Chambliss are being opposed by some immigrant advocacy groups, and some Senate Democrats believe the bill has enough Republican support as is without pursuing more changes.

  276. someone Says:

    A U.S. Senate-passed immigration bill would significantly reduce the flow of illegal immigrants, but increased U.S.-Mexico border security costs would eat into projected budget savings, the Congressional Budget Office said on Wednesday.

    The CBO concluded that the bill, which would double the number of federal agents along the border and complete the 700 miles of fencing, would reduce the number of people entering the United States from Mexico without documentation by one-third to one-half.

    The Democratic-led Senate passed the sweeping immigration bill at the end of June, but the legislation’s fate is unclear in the Republican-controlled House of Representatives. Some House Republicans have complained that the Senate bill’s border security provisions are not strong enough and the majority do not want to provide a path to citizenship for the 11 million illegal immigrants, which is at the heart of the Senate bill.

    Before senators voted to strengthen the security measures, the non-partisan CBO had estimated that the Senate bill would shrink illegal immigration by about one-quarter.

    The original bill would have dispatched 3,500 additional federal agents to the Mexican border. The current bill would add 20,000.

    “It’s pretty clear that CBO is estimating diminished returns. The improvements from CBO are pretty modest,” said Edward Alden, a senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations think tank who specializes in immigration policy and border security.

    The CBO also found that the cost of doubling the number of agents, finishing the fence and buying high-tech surveillance equipment would shrink potential deficit reduction promised under the legislation.

    The report concluded that the bill, if enacted, could reduce deficits by $158 billion from 2014 to 2023. When additional appropriations needed to implement the legislation are added in, the savings shrink further to $135 billion.

    Previously, the CBO estimated that the version of the bill passed by the Senate Judiciary Committee would reduce deficits by $197 billion over 10 years, or $175 billion with the additional appropriations.

    The biggest factor cited by the CBO was a net 10-year increase in direct costs of $36 billion to fund the increased border security measures.

    But the measure as passed by the Senate would still produce massive deficit reduction in the second decade of $685 billion, the CBO said, versus a previous estimate of $700 billion. These savings, which take into account stronger economic growth fueled by an increase in the legal U.S. workforce, are being touted by Democrats and some moderate Republicans as an incentive for passage of the legislation.

    The bill as passed by the Senate would result in a slightly smaller increase in the U.S. population over the first decade - 9.6 million residents versus a previous estimate of 10.4 million.

    In addition to providing a path to citizenship for undocumented foreigners, the legislation increases the number of work visas and requires U.S. companies to use a government program to verify that they are not employing illegal immigrants.

    House Republicans are due to meet July 10 to discuss how to proceed on immigration policy.

  277. Eugenia Says:

    Pentru a schimba statutul din J-1 Work and Travel in B-2, Viza de Turist, ma puteti contacta in continuare pe adresa de e-mail pupaza111@yahoo.com

    Eugenia

  278. Iana Says:

    As dori sa depu la Azil politic,ajutatima va rog si pe mine cu niste informatii, in cat timp sa rezolvat cazul? care a fost motivul scris in cererea pt azil? multumesc anticipat

  279. Vlad Says:

    Y menya vopros k ludyam kotorie imeli delo s ILIE ZDRAGAT . On hot komy to pomog, sderjal svoe obeshanie, a esli net, vernyl dengi ?
    Na danniy moment nebydy govorit kakyu symmy on y menya vzyal na reshenie dela, no zavtraki prodoljautsya mesyac za mesyacem… Podskajite please, kak i chto sdelat esli eto zatyanetsya eshe na odin god ?

  280. Vlad Says:

    Y menya vopros k ludyam kotorie imeli delo s ILIE ZDRAGAT . On hot komy to pomog, sderjal svoe obeshanie, a esli net, vernyl dengi ?
    Na danniy moment nebydy govorit kakyu symmy on y menya vzyal na reshenie dela, no zavtraki prodoljautsya mesyac za mesyacem… Podskajite please, kak i chto sdelat esli eto zatyanetsya eshe na odin god ? neohota vpadat v krainosti, tak kak est family

  281. Violeta Says: Says:

    Ilya Zdragat - obmanscic i afferist, ne sveazivaitesi s nim. On menea obmanul na vse 100. Obesceal pomoci, vislala 2000 $ i … s contami. Steor vse sledi i seiceas ne mojem ego naiti. Derjit zemlea takih podletov?… Ne idite po nasemu puti, naidite normalinih liudei.

  282. someone Says:

    The Senate has voted down a GOP attempt to block immigration legislation offering eventual U.S. citizenship to millions of people.

    The 68-30 vote overturned a procedural objection that Republicans tried to bring against the bill.

    The vote came as senators worked Wednesday to remove the remaining hurdles ahead of final passage as early as Thursday.

    The vote was an indication the legislation commands the backing of well over the 60 senators needed to pass the measure and send it to the House, where an uncertain future awaits.

    The White House-backed measure spends tens of billions on border security while establishing a 13-year path to citizenship for 11 million people already here illegally.

    THIS IS A BREAKING NEWS UPDATE. Check back soon for further information. AP’s earlier story is below.

    The Senate is poised to push landmark immigration legislation across a few final hurdles ahead of passage as early as Thursday of the bill opening the door to U.S. citizenship for millions.

    The legislation cleared an early procedural hurdle this week with room to spare, and more test votes were due Wednesday. The White House-backed bill would pour billions into border security and offer a path to citizenship to some 11 million immigrants now in the United States illegally.

    “A permanent, commonsense solution to our dysfunctional system is really in sight,” Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., said Wednesday on the Senate floor. “It is my hope that our colleagues in the House will follow the Senate’s lead and work to pass bipartisan reform and do it now.”

    Opponents weren’t convinced.

    “It continues to promote false promises that the border would be truly secure,” said Sen. Charles Grassley, R-Iowa.

    Prospects were anything but clear in the GOP-controlled House, where many conservatives oppose citizenship or even legalization for people in this country illegally. House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, reiterated Wednesday that he has no plans to hold a vote on the Senate-passed immigration bill.

    “We are not going to take up the Senate bill,” the speaker told fellow Republicans in a meeting Wednesday morning, according to Rep. John Fleming, R-La.

    The House Judiciary Committee was to vote Wednesday on legislation requiring employers to verify their workers’ legal status. It’s the third in a series of single-issue immigration bills the committee has voted on as it takes a piecemeal approach to overhauling the nation’s immigration system, in contrast with the Senate’s comprehensive bill.

    In the Senate, after the addition of $38 billion in provisions strengthening border security, doubling the size of the border patrol, and completing hundreds of miles of fencing, the legislation looked likely to command support from around 14 Republicans on final passage. That’s more than enough to ensure the 60-vote margin needed for passage, as all 52 Democrats and the two independents who usually vote with them look likely to stick together.

    As time drew short to cut any last-minute deals before final action on the bill, there was still some hope of negotiating a few final amendments that could bring even more Republicans on board.

    Sen. Rob. Portman, R-Ohio, was pushing an amendment to strengthen an electronic employment verification program made mandatory in the bill. “I can’t vote for (the bill) without it,” Portman said.

    Sen. Saxby Chambliss, R-Ga., sought changes to a new agriculture workers program that he said makes it too easy for farm workers to get permanent U.S. residency.

    But the measures sought by Portman and Chambliss are being opposed by some immigrant advocacy groups, and some Senate Democrats believe the bill has enough Republican support as is without pursuing more changes.
    someone Says:
    July 3rd, 2013 at 1:01 pm

    A U.S. Senate-passed immigration bill would significantly reduce the flow of illegal immigrants, but increased U.S.-Mexico border security costs would eat into projected budget savings, the Congressional Budget Office said on Wednesday.

    The CBO concluded that the bill, which would double the number of federal agents along the border and complete the 700 miles of fencing, would reduce the number of people entering the United States from Mexico without documentation by one-third to one-half.

    The Democratic-led Senate passed the sweeping immigration bill at the end of June, but the legislation’s fate is unclear in the Republican-controlled House of Representatives. Some House Republicans have complained that the Senate bill’s border security provisions are not strong enough and the majority do not want to provide a path to citizenship for the 11 million illegal immigrants, which is at the heart of the Senate bill.

    Before senators voted to strengthen the security measures, the non-partisan CBO had estimated that the Senate bill would shrink illegal immigration by about one-quarter.

    The original bill would have dispatched 3,500 additional federal agents to the Mexican border. The current bill would add 20,000.

    “It’s pretty clear that CBO is estimating diminished returns. The improvements from CBO are pretty modest,” said Edward Alden, a senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations think tank who specializes in immigration policy and border security.

    The CBO also found that the cost of doubling the number of agents, finishing the fence and buying high-tech surveillance equipment would shrink potential deficit reduction promised under the legislation.

    The report concluded that the bill, if enacted, could reduce deficits by $158 billion from 2014 to 2023. When additional appropriations needed to implement the legislation are added in, the savings shrink further to $135 billion.

    Previously, the CBO estimated that the version of the bill passed by the Senate Judiciary Committee would reduce deficits by $197 billion over 10 years, or $175 billion with the additional appropriations.

    The biggest factor cited by the CBO was a net 10-year increase in direct costs of $36 billion to fund the increased border security measures.

    But the measure as passed by the Senate would still produce massive deficit reduction in the second decade of $685 billion, the CBO said, versus a previous estimate of $700 billion. These savings, which take into account stronger economic growth fueled by an increase in the legal U.S. workforce, are being touted by Democrats and some moderate Republicans as an incentive for passage of the legislation.

    The bill as passed by the Senate would result in a slightly smaller increase in the U.S. population over the first decade - 9.6 million residents versus a previous estimate of 10.4 million.

    In addition to providing a path to citizenship for undocumented foreigners, the legislation increases the number of work visas and requires U.S. companies to use a government program to verify that they are not employing illegal immigrants.

    House Republicans are due to meet July 10 to discuss how to proceed on immigration policy.

  283. someone Says:

    Allow undocumented immigrants who have lived in the United States continually since before December 31, 2011 to apply for “Registered Provisional Immigrant Status” if they pay back taxes and $500 in fines, and if they have not been convicted of a felony or 3 or more misdemeanors or voted illegally. Individuals with this status can work for any employer and travel outside the country but are not eligible to receive means-tested federal public benefits.

    After 10 years in Registered Provisional Immigrant Status, individuals will be eligible – pending border security measures and a clearing of existing backlogs for legal immigrants – to earn a merit-based green card if they have worked in the United States, demonstrated knowledge of the English language and paid an additional fine of $1000.

    Allow eligible DREAM act applicants and certain agricultural workers to apply for green cards within five years

    Regarding border security, the bill would set a goal of “90% effectiveness” – meaning the rate of apprehensions and turnbacks of potential entrants – per fiscal year in the most high-risk areas of the southern border. If that goal is not met within five years, a bipartisan “Border Commission” made up of border state governors and experts will be formed to issue new recommendations on how to achieve it.

    Allocate $3 billion for increased surveillance and manpower along the country’s southern border and an additional $1.5 billion for fencing.

    Include a border security “trigger” requiring that no undocumented immigrant can achieve legal “Registered Provisional Immigrant” status until strategies for border security have been submitted by the Department of Homeland Security to Congress.

    Require an additional “trigger” that prevents those with “Registered Provisional Immigrant” status from becoming eligible to apply for Lawful Permanent Resident status until the Department of Homeland Security and the Comptroller General certify that border security strategies are operational and a mandatory employment verification system has been implemented.

    Create a new “W” visa program to allow non-agricultural temporary workers to come to the United States to work for registered employers.
    Eliminate family-based visas for siblings of United States citizens as well as the Diversity Visa program while eliminating caps on visas for certain employment-based categories.

    Use a point system for a new “merit based” visa, of which 120,000 would initially be awarded per year, with a maximum cap of 250,000 annually. Points will be awarded based on criteria including education, employment and length of residence in the U.S.

    Require an “enhanced E-Verify” system to prevent ineligible workers from taking jobs in the United States. Employers with more than 5,000 employees will be phased in within two years; employers with more than 500 employees will be phased in within three years.

    Raise the annual cap on H1-B visas for high-skilled workers from 65,000 to 110,000, with provisions to prevent such workers from undercutting American wages. Set a maximum cap at 180,000 such visas.

    Posted by Peter Rousmaniere at 7:05 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)
    March 19, 2013
    Latino voters and immigration

    Latino Decisions released new polling data today highlighting why immigration reform has become the number one political issue for Latino voters, and the answer is close personal connections between Latino voters and Latino undocumented immigrants.

    The poll was funded by immigration reform advocates.

    The poll finds that 58% of Latino registered voters now cite immigration reform as the top priority for the Congress and President, up from 35% in November 2012. One reason is that 63% of Latino voters say they personally know someone who is an undocumented immigrant, either a member of their family or a close personal friend. Further, 39% of Latino voters say they personally know someone, or a family who has faced deportation or detention for immigration reasons, and increase of 14 points over 2011, when 25% of Latino voters said they personally knew someone who had faced deportation or detention.

    The poll asked Latino voters if they knew any young immigrants who had applied for the 2012 “deferred action” program that would allow DREAM Act-eligible immigrants to live in the U.S. and attend college with temporary visas. More than one in five Latino voters (22%) knows someone who has already applied for deferred action, with 18% saying they know someone who is eligible, but not yet applied.

    Background:

    Latino Decisions interviewed 800 Latino registered voters via landline and mobile phone, across all 50 states, from February 15-26, 2013. Interviews were conducted in English or Spanish, at the preference of the respondent, and all interviewing staff was fully bilingual. The survey averaged 20 minutes in length and has an overall margin of error or +/- 3.5%. On split sample questions the margin of error is +/- 4.9%. For questions about the results, please contact Gary Segura gary.segura@latinodecisions.com

    The poll was sponsored by America’s Voice, National Council of La Raza, and SEIU.

    Posted by Peter Rousmaniere at 6:38 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)
    February 16, 2013
    Congressional seats: ready to go Red with slight change in Hispanic voting

    The Georgetown [University]Public Policy Review carefully analyzed each Congressional district for the potential of gains by Republicans if the percentage of Hispanic voting Republicans went up. It concluded that there are many more competitive races in heavily Hispanic areas for Democrats to lose than to gain. A shift of Hispanics from Dem to Rep would produce a lot more Rep wins than a shift of the same percentage from Rep to Dem would create more Dem wins.

    “There are two different lenses through which to consider the Republican perspective. First, most incumbent Republicans will not have a strong incentive to vote for an immigration bill containing a path to citizenship if a significant Hispanic population appears to be lacking in their districts. In fact, many conservatives may be far more concerned about primary challengers than Hispanic backlash.

    On the other hand, the Republican Party as a whole has a tremendous opportunity to turn districts in their favor. If they can redefine themselves to the Hispanic population, starting with comprehensive immigration reform, they will be doing more than pouring water on the DCCC’s gunpowder—they will be stealing it for themselves.”

    Posted by Peter Rousmaniere at 10:00 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)
    February 1, 2013
    Is the STEM problem a fiction?

    The blog of the Economic Policy Institute questions if the United States needs more foreign science, technology, engineering and math degreed people from abroad, given as two thirds of native born STEM graduates apparently work outside the fields for which they were educated.

    The posting:

    Fixing a problem that doesn’t exist: Special interest STEM immigration bills are not needed

    Business groups and their allies, including New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg and various non-profit advocacy organizations, have been arguing for years—without real evidence—that the United States is losing a race to attract the world’s best and brightest young scientists, engineers, computer techies and mathematicians. In a report entitled, Immigration of Foreign Nationals with Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) Degrees, Ruth Wasem of the Congressional Research Service (CRS) recently reviewed the statistics regarding these highly skilled migrants and concluded: “The United States remains the leading host country for international students in science, technology, engineering, or mathematics (STEM) fields.” The United States has been and continues to be extraordinarily welcoming to foreign students, and especially to those in the STEM fields. CRS reports that the number of foreign graduate students in the STEM fields increased by 50 percent since 1990:

    “The number of full-time graduate students in science, engineering, and health fields who were foreign students (largely on F-1 nonimmigrant visas) grew from 91,150 in 1990 to 148,923 in 2009, with most of the increase occurring after 1999. Despite the rise in foreign student enrollment, the percentage of STEM graduate students with temporary visas in 2009 (32.7%) was comparable to 1990 (31.1%). Graduate enrollments in engineering fields have exhibited the most growth of the STEM fields in recent years. About 40,000 graduate degrees were awarded to foreign STEM students in 2009, with 10,000 of those going to Ph.D. recipients.”

    But Microsoft and the Chamber of Commerce claim that we’re losing those graduates, that our immigration system doesn’t let us keep the talent our universities have trained. That claim is untrue. CRS reports that in the decade from FY 2000 to FY 2009, the U.S. granted legal permanent residence to almost 300,000 STEM workers, in addition to granting temporary work permits (for up to six years) to hundreds of thousands of others.

    Continue reading “Is the STEM problem a fiction?” »

    Posted by Peter Rousmaniere at 3:10 PM | Permalink | Comments (1)
    January 29, 2013
    President Obama’s immigration reform plans Jan 29 2013

    The Administration is proposing a “provisional” category or undocumented immigrants, as does the Senate’s statement. The White House Press Office issued this statement today:

    FACT SHEET: Fixing our Broken Immigration System so Everyone Plays by the Rules

    America’s immigration system is broken. Too many employers game the system by hiring undocumented workers and there are 11 million people living in the shadows. Neither is good for the economy or the country. It is time to act to fix the broken immigration system in a way that requires responsibility from everyone —both from the workers here illegally and those who hire them—and guarantees that everyone is playing by the same rules.

    President Obama’s commonsense immigration reform proposal has four parts. First, continue to strengthen our borders. Second, crack down on companies that hire undocumented workers. Third, hold undocumented immigrants accountable before they can earn their citizenship; this means requiring undocumented workers to pay their taxes and a penalty, move to the back of the line, learn English, and pass background checks. Fourth, streamline the legal immigration system for families, workers, and employers.

    Together we can build a fair, effective and commonsense immigration system that lives up to our heritage as a nation of laws and a nation of immigrants.

    The key principles the President believes should be included in commonsense immigration reform are:

    Continuing to Strengthen Border Security: President Obama has doubled the number of Border Patrol agents since 2004 and today border security is stronger than it has ever been. But there is more work to do. The President’s proposal gives law enforcement the tools they need to make our communities safer from crime. And by enhancing our infrastructure and technology, the President’s proposal continues to strengthen our ability to remove criminals and apprehend and prosecute national security threats.

    Cracking Down on Employers Hiring Undocumented Workers: Our businesses should only employ people legally authorized to work in the United States. Businesses that knowingly employ undocumented workers are exploiting the system to gain an advantage over businesses that play by the rules. The President’s proposal is designed to stop these unfair hiring practices and hold these companies accountable. At the same time, this proposal gives employers who want to play by the rules a reliable way to verify that their employees are here legally.

    Earned Citizenship: It is just not practical to deport 11 million undocumented immigrants living within our borders. The President’s proposal provides undocumented immigrants a legal way to earn citizenship that will encourage them to come out of the shadows so they can pay their taxes and play by the same rules as everyone else. Immigrants living here illegally must be held responsible for their actions by passing national security and criminal background checks, paying taxes and a penalty, going to the back of the line, and learning English before they can earn their citizenship. There will be no uncertainty about their ability to become U.S. citizens if they meet these eligibility criteria. The proposal will also stop punishing innocent young people brought to the country through no fault of their own by their parents and give them a chance to earn their citizenship more quickly if they serve in the military or pursue higher education.

    Streamlining Legal Immigration: Our immigration system should reward anyone who is willing to work hard and play by the rules. For the sake of our economy and our security, legal immigration should be simple and efficient. The President’s proposal attracts the best minds to America by providing visas to foreign entrepreneurs looking to start businesses here and helping the most promising foreign graduate students in science and math stay in this country after graduation, rather than take their skills to other countries. The President’s proposal will also reunify families in a timely and humane manner.

    Continue reading “President Obama’s immigration reform plans Jan 29 2013″ »

    Posted by Peter Rousmaniere at 3:21 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)
    January 28, 2013
    Senators’ statement of principles on immigration reform

    As published by the Washington Post this morning….this is the most important single document to start off the immigration reform effort in 2013.

    Bipartisan Framework for Comprehensive Immigration Reform Senators Schumer, McCain, Durbin, Graham, Menendez, Rubio, Bennet, and Flake

    Introduction

    We recognize that our immigration system is broken. And while border security has improved significantly over the last two Administrations, we still don’t have a functioning immigration system. This has created a situation where up to 11 million undocumented immigrants are living in the shadows. Our legislation acknowledges these realities by finally committing the resources needed to secure the border, modernize and streamline our current legal immigration system, while creating a tough but fair legalization program for individuals who are currently here. We
    will ensure that this is a successful permanent reform to our immigration system that will not need to be revisited.

    Four Basic Legislative Pillars:

    o Create a tough but fair path to citizenship for unauthorized immigrants currently living in the United States that is contingent upon securing our borders and tracking whether legal immigrants have left the country when required;

    o Reform our legal immigration system to better recognize the importance of characteristics that will help build the American economy and strengthen American families;

    o Create an effective employment verification system that will prevent identity theft and end the hiring of future unauthorized workers; and,

    o Establish an improved process for admitting future workers to serve our nation’s workforce needs, while simultaneously protecting all workers.

    1. Creating a Path to Citizenship for Unauthorized Immigrants Already Here that is Contingent Upon Securing the Border and Combating Visa Overstays

    Our legislation will provide a tough, fair, and practical roadmap to address the status of unauthorized immigrants in the United States that is contingent upon our success in securing our borders and addressing visa overstays.

    To fulfill the basic governmental function of securing our borders, we will continue the increased efforts of the Border Patrol by providing them with the latest technology, infrastructure, and personnel needed to prevent, detect, and apprehend every unauthorized entrant.

    Additionally, our legislation will increase the number of unmanned aerial vehicles and surveillance equipment, improve radio interoperability and increase the number of agents at and between ports of entry. The purpose is to substantially lower the number of successful illegal border crossings while continuing to facilitate commerce.

    We will strengthen prohibitions against racial profiling and inappropriate use of force, enhance the training of border patrol agents, increase oversight, and create a mechanism to ensure a meaningful opportunity for border communities to share input, including critiques.

    Continue reading ” Senators’ statement of principles on immigration reform” »

    Posted by Peter Rousmaniere at 8:59 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)
    January 18, 2013
    Introduction to H-2A temporary agricultural worker program

    The following is an introduction to the H-2A program for temporary agricultural workers. The introduction is drawn mainly from Congressional Research Service. Immigration of Temporary Lower-Skilled Workers: Current Policy and Related Issues.

    Introduction

    Foreign agricultural workers have been a recent focus of attention in Congress, with the immigration subcommittees of both the House and the Senate Judiciary Committees holding related hearings in 2011 and 2012. A number of legislative proposals on agricultural guest workers have likewise been put forward in the 112th Congress. Some bills would amend INA provisions on the H-2A visa, while others would establish new temporary agricultural worker programs as alternatives to the H-2A program. Still other proposals would couple a legalization program for agricultural workers either with H-2A reform, as in the traditional AgJOBS formulation, or with other changes to current law on agricultural labor.

    Of the 79,000 certified H-2A positions in 2010, 40% were in the top five states (in order of size): North Carolina, Louisiana, Georgia, Kentucky, Florida. [Table A-1, pg. 28]

    How it works

    The H-2A program allows for the temporary admission of foreign workers to the United States to perform agricultural labor or services of a seasonal or temporary nature, provided that U.S. workers are not available. In general, for purposes of the H-2A program, work is of a temporary nature where the employer’s need for the worker will last no longer than one year. Thus, an approved H-2A visa petition is generally valid for an initial period of up to one year. An employer can apply to extend an H-2A worker’s stay in increments of up to one year, but an alien’s total
    period of stay as an H-2A worker may not exceed three consecutive years. An alien who has spent three years in the United States in H-2A status may not seek an extension of stay or be readmitted to the United States as an H-2A worker until he or she has been outside the country for three months.

    Prospective H-2A employers are required to submit a job order to the state workforce agency (SWA) serving the area of intended employment before filing a
    labor certification application. Once reviewed and cleared by the SWA, the job order becomes the basis for recruiting U.S. workers to fill the employer’s job openings. The employer can then file the labor certification application with DOL. In the DOL application the employer must first apply to DOL for a certification that (1) there are not sufficient U.S. workers who are qualified and available to perform the work; and (2) the employment of foreign workers will not adversely affect the wages and working conditions of U.S. workers who are similarly employed.

    Prospective H-2A employers must attempt to recruit U.S. workers and must cooperate with DOL-funded state employment service agencies (also known as state workforce agencies) in local, intrastate, and interstate recruitment efforts. Under the H-2A program’s fifty percent rule, employers are required to hire any qualified U.S. worker who applies for a position during the first half of the work contract under which the H-2A workers who are in the job are employed.

    Continue reading “Introduction to H-2A temporary agricultural worker program” »

    Posted by Peter Rousmaniere at 8:07 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)
    January 12, 2013
    Chamber of Commerce for comprehensive immigration reform

    U.S. Chamber of Commerce president Thomas J. Donohue gave his annual state of business address on January 10, and said the following about immigration reform (excerpted). I’d say he is calling for comprehensive reform, including normalizing the status of undocumented immigrants.

    …..But we still need immigrants. We are locked in a global competition for the world’s best talent. This is the competition that will separate the economic leaders from the laggards in the 21st century.

    The Chamber is already teaming up with the labor unions, faith organizations and ethnic groups, and law enforcement to build a coalition for comprehensive reform.

    We believe immigration reform should include the following inter-related components:

    We need to secure our borders. It is imperative that people and commerce flow efficiently and lawfully through our nation’s ports and across our borders.

    In addition, our laws must be revised to welcome needed labor and talent into our economy through thoughtfully-designed guest worker programs. This includes provisional visas for lesser-skilled workers. It also includes expanding the caps for high-skilled visas, and, expanding green cards for foreign nationals who graduate from our colleges and universities with advanced degrees.

    We also need a workable, reliable national employee verification system. And, we need to provide a path out of the shadows for the 11 million undocumented immigrants who live in the United States today—provided that they meet strict conditions.

    Posted by Peter Rousmaniere at 10:02 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)
    Introduction to H-2A temporary agricultural worker program

    The following is an introduction to the H-2A program for temporary agricultural workers.The introduction is an excerpt from Congressional Research Service. Immigration of Temporary Lower-Skilled Workers: Current Policy and Related Issues 12/13/12 report.

    Introduction

    Foreign agricultural workers have been a recent focus of attention in Congress, with the immigration subcommittees of both the House and the Senate Judiciary Committees holding related hearings in 2011 and 2012. A number of legislative proposals on agricultural guest workers have likewise been put forward in the 112th Congress. Some bills would amend INA provisions on the H-2A visa, while others would establish new temporary agricultural worker programs as alternatives to the H-2A program. Still other proposals would couple a legalization program for agricultural workers either with H-2A reform, as in the traditional AgJOBS formulation, or with other changes to current law on agricultural labor.

    Of the 79,000 certified H-2A positions in 2010, 40% were in the top five states (in order of size): North Carolina, Louisiana, Georgia, Kentucky, Florida. [Table A-1, pg. 28]

    How it works

    The H-2A program allows for the temporary admission of foreign workers to the United States to perform agricultural labor or services of a seasonal or temporary nature, provided that U.S. workers are not available. In general, for purposes of the H-2A program, work is of a temporary nature where the employer’s need for the worker will last no longer than one year. Thus, an approved H-2A visa petition is generally valid for an initial period of up to one year. An employer can apply to extend an H-2A worker’s stay in increments of up to one year, but an alien’s total
    period of stay as an H-2A worker may not exceed three consecutive years. An alien who has spent three years in the United States in H-2A status may not seek an extension of stay or be readmitted to the United States as an H-2A worker until he or she has been outside the country for three months.

    Prospective H-2A employers are required to submit a job order to the state workforce agency (SWA) serving the area of intended employment before filing a
    labor certification application. Once reviewed and cleared by the SWA, the job order becomes the basis for recruiting U.S. workers to fill the employer’s job openings. The employer can then file the labor certification application with DOL. In the DOL application the employer must first apply to DOL for a certification that (1) there are not sufficient U.S. workers who are qualified and available to perform the work; and (2) the employment of foreign workers will not adversely affect the wages and working conditions of U.S. workers who are similarly employed.

    Prospective H-2A employers must attempt to recruit U.S. workers and must cooperate with DOL-funded state employment service agencies (also known as state workforce agencies) in local, intrastate, and interstate recruitment efforts. Under the H-2A program’s fifty percent rule, employers are required to hire any qualified U.S. worker who applies for a position during the first half of the work contract under which the H-2A workers who are in the job are employed.

    Continue reading “Introduction to H-2A temporary agricultural worker program” »

    Posted by Peter Rousmaniere at 2:13 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)
    Temporary worker programs: Introduction

    In December the Congressional Research Service issued a report on two key temporary worker programs, H-2A and H-2B. This posting excerpts from the report’s introductory overview of both programs. Later postings will address the programs in greater detail. These postings will bring you up to speed on the basics of temporary foreign worker programs in the U.S.

    There are many temporary work visa programs. A comprehensive list of them in contain in a 2009 report by the Migration Policy Institute, “Aligning Temporary Immigration Visas with U.S. market needs.” In 2008, some 262,000 temporary visas were issues for high skilled labor, and 158,000 such visas for low skilled labor, almost entirely H-2A and H-2B. In addition there were 168,000 “mixed skilled” temporary visas issued.

    The report excerpted below and in later postings is: Congressional Research Service. Immigration of Temporary Lower-Skilled Workers: Current Policy and Related Issues. 12/13/12.

    The [Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952], as originally enacted, authorized an H-2 nonimmigrant visa category for foreign agricultural and nonagricultural workers who were coming temporarily to the United States to perform temporary services (other than services of an exceptional nature requiring distinguished merit and ability) or labor. The 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA) amended the INA to subdivide the H-2 program into the current H-2A agricultural worker program and H-2B nonagricultural worker program and to detail the admissions process for H-2A workers. The H2A and H-2B programs are administered by the Employment and Training Administration (ETA) of the Department of Labor (DOL) and U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS).

    The H-2A and H-2B programs are administered by DOL and DHS, with DOL making a determination on the labor certification application and DHS adjudicating the non-immigrant visa petition.

    While there are many differences between the H-2A agricultural worker program and the H-2B nonagricultural worker program, the process of importing workers under either program entails the same steps. Employers who want to hire workers through either program must first apply to DOL for labor certification, as discussed in the next section. After receiving labor certification, a prospective H-2A or H-2B employer can submit an application, known as a petition, to DHS to bring in foreign workers. If the application is approved, foreign workers who are abroad can then
    go to a U.S. embassy or consulate to apply for an H-2A or H-2B nonimmigrant visa from the Department of State (DOS). If the visa application is approved, the worker is issued a visa that he or she can use to apply for admission to the United States at a port of entry.

    In both the H-2A and H-2B programs, there is a tension between providing protections to U.S. and foreign workers on the one hand and making the programs responsive to legitimate employer needs on the other. While these competing interests are longstanding, the current environment— with relatively high levels of U.S. unemployment; discussions about expanding the E-Verify electronic employment eligibility verification system (as discussed below); and concerns about
    shortages of legal workers, especially in agriculture—has heightened the tensions.

    Temporary Labor Certification

    DOL’s ETA is responsible for administering the labor certification process under the H-2A and H2B programs. Under both programs, employers submit applications in which they request the certification of a particular number of positions.

    INA provisions on the admission of H-2A workers state that an H-2A petition cannot be approved unless the petitioner has applied to DOL for certification that

    (1) there are not sufficient workers who are able, willing, qualified … and available at the time of application for a visa and admission to the United States and at the place where the alien is to perform such skilled or unskilled labor, and (2) the employment of such alien will not adversely affect the wages and working conditions of workers in the United States similarly employed. [INA §218(a)(1)(A), (B)]

    There is no equivalent statutory labor certification requirement for the H-2B program. The INA, however, does contain some related language. For example, it defines an H-2B alien, in relevant part, as an alien “who is coming temporarily to the United States to perform other temporary service or labor if unemployed persons capable of performing such service or labor cannot be found in this country.” [INA §101(a)(15)(H)(ii)(b)] The H-2B labor certification requirement instead appears in DHS regulations. These regulations state:

    “The petitioner may not file an H-2B petition unless the United States petitioner has applied for a labor certification with the Secretary of Labor … and has obtained a favorable labor certification determination …[8 C.F.R. §214.2(h)(6)(iii)(C)].

    The H-2A and H-2B labor certification requirements are intended to provide job, wage, and working conditions protections to U.S. workers. They are implemented in both programs through a multifaceted labor certification process that requires prospective H-2A and H-2B employers to conduct recruitment for U.S. workers and offer a minimum level of wages and benefits that varies by program.

    Posted by Peter Rousmaniere at 8:32 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)
    December 20, 2012
    The “Texas Immigration Solution”: Guest worker programs

    The Texas Immigration Solution is a self-described conservative organization focused on immigration reform. It describes its mission to “enact conservative, market-based immigration reform into law,” and to “provide a voice for conservative job creators by educating the broader community on the urgent need for comprehensive, conservative, market-oriented reforms of the immigration process.”

    Its solution is guest worker program-based for both skilled and unskilled workers, with conservative approaches to immigration in general:

    Secure Our Borders – We demand the application of effective, practical and reasonable measures to secure our borders and to bring safety and security for all Americans along the border and throughout the nation.

    Modernize the United States Social Security Card – We support the improvement of our 1936 Social Security card to use contemporary anti-counterfeit technology. The social security card will not be considered a National ID card for U.S. citizens.

    Birthright Citizenship – We call on the Legislative, Executive, and Judicial branches of the United States to clarify Section 1 of the 14th amendment to limit citizenship by birth to those born to a citizen of the United States with no exceptions.

    Create an Effective and Efficient Temporary Worker Program – A national Temporary Worker Program should be implemented to bring skilled and unskilled workers into the United States for temporary periods of time when no U.S. workers are currently available. The program should also require:

    Self-funding through participation fees and fines;

    Applicants must pass a full criminal background check;

    Applicants with prior immigration violations would only qualify for the program if they paid the appropriate fines;

    Applicants and/or Employers must prove that they can afford and/or secure private health insurance;

    Applicants must waive any and all rights to apply for financial assistance from any public entitlement programs;

    Applicant must show a proficiency in the English language and complete an American civic class;

    Temporary Workers would only be able to work for employers that deduct and match payroll taxes;

    All participants would be issued an individual Temporary-Worker Biometric Identification Card that tracks all address changes and both civil and criminal court appearances as a defendant.

    Posted by Peter Rousmaniere at 10:48 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)
    December 19, 2012
    The Colorado Compact

    Colorado — with an estimated 180,000 undocumented immigrants — has created a compact on immigration, following Utah’s lead of a few years ago, which itself was in response to Arizona’s draconian legislation. According to the Greeley Tribune, the Colorado Compact arose out of 200 meetings throughout the state. The need for immigrant labor is most acute among the state’s farms, which “like many others nationally, have lost workers to the better-paying jobs of the oil and gas field, while also struggling to find local residents willing to do agriculture’s physical labor….Signers of the Colorado Compact span faith organizations, law enforcement agencies, the business community, immigrant-rights advocates and institutions of higher education, as well as agricultural interests.”

    The Colorado Compact:

    The Colorado Compact is an effort to convene and promote a reasonable conversation on immigration in Colorado that could lead to real and lasting federal reform. The Compact brings together leaders and community members of diverse backgrounds and politics who are committed to fostering a more rational and collaborative approach to immigration policy than exists today. We believe that the growing consequences of a broken immigration system must be addressed in a bipartisan effort that considers the principles outlined in this compact.

    FEDERAL RESPONSIBILITY

    Immigration policy is a federal issue between the U.S. government and other countries. We urge the Colorado congressional delegation to work to enact immigration policy at the federal level that improves our immigration system, keeps our communities safe, and protects our borders.

    STRENGTHENING OUR ECONOMY

    Colorado is best served by a free-market philosophy that maximizes individual freedom and opportunity. Our immigration system must be flexible enough to address the needs of businesses while protecting the interests of workers. This includes a visa system that is both responsive and effective at meeting the demands of our economy. It should also acknowledge the beneficial economic contributions immigrants make as workers, taxpayers, and consumers.

    ENSURING OUR NATIONAL SECURITY

    We believe that maintaining the safety and security of the United States is an utmost priority. Our immigration system must ensure the protection of our communities and national borders.

    FAMILY

    Strong families are critical to developing successful individuals and cohesive communities. Our immigration policies, where possible, should prioritize keeping close families together in order to ensure the most supportive home environments for all children across our state.

    EFFECTIVE ENFORCEMENT

    We support a law enforcement strategy that focuses on public safety, targets serious crime, and safeguards witnesses and victims. We further urge a reasonable and predictable regulatory environment that considers the interests of, and unintended consequences to businesses, workers, and consumers. Furthermore, the broader reform effort should eventually include a way to accurately, reliably, and affordably determine who is permitted to work, ensuring an adequate labor force for a growing economy.

    A COMMONSENSE APPROACH

    Immigrants are part of our communities across Colorado. We must adopt a commonsense approach to this reality that reflects our values and recognizes the critical role immigration has played in our nation’s history and economy. Our immigration policies must provide a sensible path forward for immigrants who are here without legal status, are of good character, pay taxes, and are committed to becoming fully participating members of our society and culture.

    Posted by Peter Rousmaniere at 9:16 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)
    November 24, 2012
    Immigration reform prospects for 2013

    Why immigration reform in 2013? Muzaffar Chishti and Claire Bergeron cite the following:

    • The Republican Party was jolted by the surprisingly low Latino support for presidential nominee Mitt Romney
    • nearly two-thirds of American voters (65 percent) now support giving most unauthorized immigrant workers a chance to apply for legal status.
    • recognition in both political parties that reforming the current legal immigration system is critical to advancing the United States’ global economic competitiveness.
    • For a bill to stand a chance of passage, it must get through Congress before House members gear up for the 2014 mid-term elections. Most interpret that political reality to mean that a bill’s best chance would be in 2013.

    The article in full: “US Election Realigns Stars for Immigration Reform, But Significant Hurdles Remain”

    Published on 11-23-2012

    In one sweep, the re-election of President Barack Obama has transformed immigration reform, an issue that for years has largely been seen as a third rail of American politics, into a first-tier legislative agenda item for the 113th Congress. In perhaps the clearest sign that the calculus on immigration has dramatically shifted, a chorus of Republican Party leaders and conservatives who have traditionally opposed immigration reform efforts voiced support for enacting legislation that would include legalization for some of the country’s 11 million unauthorized immigrants.

    Backers of such a measure are moving quickly to turn ambitious goals into legislative reality. On November 11th, Senators Charles Schumer (D-NY) and Lindsey Graham (R-SC) announced that they were re-initiating efforts to draft a broad, bipartisan immigration reform bill. Three days later, President Obama, in his first post-election press conference, told reporters that he expected movement on immigration reform “very soon after [the] inauguration”.

    Continue reading “Immigration reform prospects for 2013″ »

    Posted by Peter Rousmaniere at 7:15 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)
    November 11, 2012
    Ten politicans to watch on immigration reform

    Daniel Strauss of the Hill lists “10 players to watch on immigration:” President Obama, Rep. Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.), Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), Rep. Luis Gutierrez (D-Ill.), Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), Sen.John McCain (R-Ariz.), Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.), Rep. Steve King (R-Iowa), and Sen. Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.).

    The list in depth:

    President Obama. Even before he was elected to a second term, Obama had already been laying the groundwork for immigration reform. Over the summer, he issued a new directive protecting immigrants who came to the country illegally from being deported provided they meet certain criteria. After failing to pass a bill in his first four years, Obama said that immigration reform would be one of the highest priorities of his second term. But will he push a comprehensive approach, or a scaled-down version of the measure, such as the Development, Relief and Education for Alien Minors (DREAM) Act?

    Rep. Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.). Goodlatte is considered the favorite to be the new chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, which has jurisdiction on immigration. In 2011, he introduced legislation to get rid of the immigrant visa lottery program. He has been a vocal critic of the DREAM Act. Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) this week has opened the door to passing immigration reform, attracting criticism from conservatives.

    Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.). The Senate Judiciary Committee chairman has been proponent on comprehensive immigration reform and his voting record includes support for establishing a guest-worker program, opposing limiting welfare for illegal immigrants and allowing illegal immigrants to participate in Social Security.

    Continue reading “Ten politicans to watch on immigration reform” »

    Posted by Peter Rousmaniere at 7:27 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)
    October 21, 2012
    Dream Act: employment and economic impact

    The Partnership for the New American Economy issued an important report in October on the economic results of the Dream Act, if enacted.

    “The Economic Benefits of Passing the DREAM Act,” by Juan Carlos Guzmán and Raúl C. Jara, draws upon the current versions of the DREAM Act submitted by Sen. Richard Durbin (S.952) and Rep. Howard Berman (H.R. 1842).

    To be eligible, an undocumented person has to have come to the United States at age 15 or younger, be currently age 35 or younger, have been present in the country for at least five years, completed high school, and completed at least two years of higher education or honorably served in the armed forces for at least two years.

    Eligible immigrants per the Act first receive conditional legal status for a period of six years, under which they can complete their studies and work legally in the United States. After that period, if they have met all of the requirements, they can apply for permanent legal status (a green card) and eventually citizenship

    The authors forecast that by 2030 the Act will create 1.4 million new jobs, and increase by 19% the total compensation of all eligible youth. How will this happen?

    First, enacting the law would provide an incentive for their further education because for most of those who would be eligible the legalization provisions can only be attained through completion of high school and some college. Receiving more education opens access to higher-paying jobs, enabling these undocumented youth to become much more productive members of our society.

    Second, gaining legal status itself translates into higher earnings for these youth since legal status allows DREAMers to apply to a broader range of high-paying jobs rather than having to resort to low-wage jobs from employers who are willing to pay them under the table.

    According to the authors, this will not take away jobs from native born Americans:

    First, many economists find that immigrants tend to complement the skills of native workers rather than compete with them, especially as immigrants move up the education and skills chain. Increasing the education of immigrant workers would therefore decrease the competition between DREAMers and the native-born.

    Second, research shows that an increase in college-educated immigrants directly increases U.S. gross domestic product—the largest measure of economic growth—which correlates to more jobs for American workers. In the 1990s, for example, the increase in college-educated immigrants was found to be responsible for a 1.4% to 2.4% in U.S. GDP.

    http://www.renewoureconomy.org/economic-benefits-dream

    Posted by Peter Rousmaniere at 4:19 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)
    June 16, 2012
    Labor force impact of new Obama policy will be large

    The Pew Hispanic Center estimates that most of the persons to be protected by the administration are 18 to 30, thus in the labor force.

    In a report issued on June 15, the Center said that up to 1.4 million children and young adults who are in the United States illegally could potentially benefit from today’s announcement by the Obama Administration about changes in deportation policies, according to an estimate from the Pew Hispanic Center, a project of the Pew Research Center.

    The 1.4 million estimate includes 700,000 unauthorized immigrants who are ages 18 to 30 but arrived in the U.S as children and are currently enrolled in school or have graduated from high school; and an additional 700,000 who are under the age of 18 and are enrolled in school. This includes 150,000 who are currently enrolled in high school.

    Overall, the 1.4 million estimate represents about 12% of the 11.2 million unauthorized immigrants in the U.S. as of 2010, according to an estimate by the Pew Hispanic Center. Among the 1.4 million potential beneficiaries of the new policy, some 70% are from Mexico. For details on the numbers and characteristics of unauthorized immigrants in the U.S, see the Pew Hispanic Center report “Unauthorized Immigrant Population: National and State Trends, 2010.”

    A Pew Hispanic Center survey taken late last year found that by a margin of 59% to 27%, Latinos oppose the deportation policies of the Obama Administration. Among Latinos, some 41% are aware that the number of deportations of unauthorized immigrants annually has been higher during the Obama Administration than during the George W. Bush Administration, while 36% say the two Administrations have deported the same number of unauthorized immigrants, and 10% say fewer have been deported under the Obama administration.

    Nearly 400,000 unauthorized immigrants were deported annually during the first two years of the Obama Administration—-about 30% more than the annual average during the second term of the Bush Administration. Among those deported in 2010, nearly all (97%) were Hispanic. By comparison, among all unauthorized immigrants, 81% are Hispanic.

    According to the same 2011 Pew Hispanic Center survey, 91% of Latinos support the DREAM Act, a proposal that would grant legal status to unauthorized immigrant children if they attend college or serve in the U.S. military for two years. And 84% of Latinos favor granting in-state tuition at public colleges to unauthorized immigrants who graduated from high school in their states.

    Posted by Peter Rousmaniere at 6:14 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)
    December 8, 2011
    Alabama now reaping the harvest of its immigration law

    I am back, after two months of extensive travel

    The chickens are coming home roost in Alabama. Two legally working foreign workers in auto plants have been arrested.

    According to Fox News, “Before the auto workers’ problems, in early November, [Alabama Governor Robert] Bentley told a Birmingham business audience that the law had not hurt Alabama’s image with industrial prospects. But Bentley now says the two arrests involving foreign auto workers “theoretically” could hurt Alabama’s ability to recruit foreign industries.”

    The article in full:

    Alabama Governor to Foreign Biz: Don’t Worry About Immigration Law

    After local police recently detained employees of Mercedes-Benz and Honda under the state’s immigration law, Alabama’s governor is reaching out to foreign executives to let them know that the state welcomes them.

    “We are not anti-foreign companies. We are very pro-foreign companies,” Bentley told reporters at the Capitol.

    The Republican governor and other supporters of Alabama’s new immigration law — aimed at driving undocumented immigrants out of the state — have described it as the nation’s toughest. Some parts of it were put on hold by the federal courts, but major provisions took effect in late September, including allowing police to detain motorists who can’t produce a valid driver’s license.

    Before the auto workers’ problems, in early November, Bentley told a Birmingham business audience that the law had not hurt Alabama’s image with industrial prospects. But Bentley now says the two arrests involving foreign auto workers “theoretically” could hurt Alabama’s ability to recruit foreign industries.

    Since then, two foreign workers with the Mercedes-Benz and Honda auto assembly plants in Alabama have run into problems.

    Continue reading “Alabama now reaping the harvest of its immigration law” »

    Posted by Peter Rousmaniere at 4:21 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)
    August 31, 2011
    NY Times editorial about Alabama Law

    The Nation’s Cruelest Immigration Law

    The Alabama Legislature opened its session on March 1 on a note of humility and compassion. In the Senate, a Christian pastor asked God to grant members “wisdom and discernment” to do what is right. “Not what’s right in their own eyes,” he said, “but what’s right according to your word.” Soon after, both houses passed, and the governor signed, the country’s cruelest, most unforgiving immigration law.

    The law, which takes effect Sept. 1, is so inhumane that four Alabama church leaders — an Episcopal bishop, a Methodist bishop and a Roman Catholic archbishop and bishop — have sued to block it, saying it criminalizes acts of Christian compassion. It is a sweeping attempt to terrorize undocumented immigrants in every aspect of their lives, and to make potential criminals of anyone who may work or live with them or show them kindness.

    It effectively makes it a crime to be an undocumented immigrant in Alabama, by criminalizing working, renting a home and failing to comply with federal registration laws that are largely obsolete. It nullifies any contracts when one party is an undocumented immigrant. It requires the police to check the papers of people they suspect to be here illegally.

    The new regime does not spare American citizens. Businesses that knowingly employ illegal immigrants will lose their licenses. Public school officials will be required to determine students’ immigration status and report back to the state. Anyone knowingly “concealing, harboring or shielding” an illegal immigrant could be charged with a crime, say for renting someone an apartment or driving her to church or the doctor.

    The American Civil Liberties Union and the Justice Department have also sued, calling the law an unconstitutional intrusion on the federal government’s authority to write and enforce immigration laws. The A.C.L.U. warns that the law would trample people’s fundamental rights to speak and travel freely, effectively deny children the chance to go to school and expose people to harassment and racial profiling.

    These arguments have been made before, in opposition to similar, if less sweeping, laws passed in Arizona, Utah, Indiana and Georgia. What is remarkable in Alabama is the separate lawsuit by the four church leaders, who say the law violates their religious freedoms to perform acts of charity without regard to the immigration status of those they minister to or help.

    “The law,” Archbishop Thomas Rodi of Mobile said in The Times, “attacks our core understanding of what it means to be a church.”

    You’d think that any state would think twice before embracing a law that so vividly brings to mind the Fugitive Slave Act, the brutal legal and law-enforcement apparatus of the Jim Crow era, and the civil-rights struggle led by the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. But waves of anti-immigrant hostility have made many in this country forget who and what we are.

    Congress was once on the brink of an ambitious bipartisan reform that would have enabled millions of immigrants stranded by the failed immigration system to get right with the law. This sensible policy has been abandoned. We hope the church leaders can waken their fellow Alabamans to the moral damage done when forgiveness and justice are so ruthlessly denied. We hope Washington and the rest of the country will also listen.

    Posted by Peter Rousmaniere at 6:33 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)
    August 30, 2011
    Alabama’s Immigration law dissected

    On June 9, 2011, Alabama enacted H 56, the most aggressive state law to date to control immigration. Federal judge has stayed the implementation of the law until at least late September. Most of the media discussion has been about non-work-related provisions of the law, for instance, police questioning, access to church-related services, and public education. Here, we look at the business –related provisions, which are excerpted below. The key provisions are:

    Section 9 - Government contractors prohibited from hiring unlawful aliens

    Section 11 - curb-side hiring prohibited

    Section 13 – Harboring an unlawful alien

    Section 15 prohibiting private sector hiring of unlawful aliens, at penalty of permanent revocation of licenses and permits

    And

    Section 26 - State of Alabama to provide E-Verify service to small employers

    I have included below key passages in each of these sections.

    “….the court shall direct the applicable governing bodies to forever suspend the business licenses and permits, if such exist, of the business entity or employer throughout the state….” (Section 15 (f)

    Section 9 - Government contractors prohibited from hiring unlawful aliens

    (a) As a condition for the award of any contract, grant, or incentive by the state, any political subdivision thereof, or any state-funded entity to a business entity or employer that employs one or more employees, the business entity or employer shall not knowingly employ, hire for employment, or continue to employ an unauthorized alien and shall attest to such, by sworn affidavit signed before a notary.

    ……Violations of Section 9 (a)

    Continue reading ” Alabama’s Immigration law dissected ” »

    Posted by Peter Rousmaniere at 11:57 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)
    May 31, 2011
    IT CEOs pitch for a better immigration policy

    Four IT industry leaders called on May 19 for a new immigration policy. They touch on a number of issues, including dysfunction in our relations with foreigners who earn graduate degrees here. “Today foreign nationals account for 50% of master’s degrees and 70% of Ph.D. degrees in electrical and electronic engineering in the U.S. Yet, our antiquated immigration laws numerically limit the numbers of these individuals, by the thousands, from entering our country annually. What kind of strategy is it to train the world’s best and brightest in our great universities – and then require them to leave?”

    The authors are members of the President’s Council on Jobs and Competitiveness

    Their statement in full:

    America needs a 21st century immigration policy

    President Obama’s recent focus on immigration highlights America’s “broken” system and its impact on our economy. Fixing it requires Republicans and Democrats to show political courage and implement reforms to expand and strengthen the American economy. As members of the President’s Council on Jobs and Competitiveness, we share his deep concern that our nation’s ability to compete economically is being damaged by the two parties battling over immigration laws and policies.

    To some, the link between immigration reform and economic growth may be surprising. To America’s most innovative industries, it is a link we know is fundamental.

    Continue reading “IT CEOs pitch for a better immigration policy” »

    Posted by Peter Rousmaniere at 5:57 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)
    April 21, 2011
    More on Utah’s new immigration related laws

    On the heels of Utah’s passage of an immigration – related law, Farmer Justice’s president Bruce Goldstein wrote an op-ed in the Salt Lake Tribune saying that the state should be paying more attention to reforming an existing guest worker program, the H-2A program. Goldstein is concerned that guest worker programs tend to be inadequate in protecting the interests of both guest and American workers. He plugs for AgJOBS, which was part of the failed immigration reform effort in Washington in 2007.

    The article in full:

    Paying for a guest worker law already in place
    By BRUCE GOLDSTEIN

    Published: April 14, 2011 12:10AM

    Bruce Goldstein is president of Farmworker Justice, a nonprofit organization based in Washington, D.C., that works to improve living and working conditions for migrant and seasonal farm workers.

    Amidst the debate and controversy surrounding Utah’s new immigration laws, state legislators in Salt Lake City seem to think they’ve created a model for America. They portray their pilot guest worker program as a compromise that others might use as a model.

    They must think Utah’s taxpayers aren’t paying careful attention, because they’ll be saddled with spending money to duplicate a program that largely already exists.

    Last month, Utah Gov. Gary Herbert signed into law four bills heralded by some commentators as a holistic and comprehensive state approach to immigration reform. One of the bills would create a pilot program to bring guest workers from the state of Nuevo Leon, Mexico, to perform temporary work. (Another would create a guest worker status for undocumented workers already working in Utah.)

    If the pilot bill for managing guest workers in Utah sounds familiar, that’s because, in spite of the media attention and self-congratulation that accompanied the state law, we have had a federal system in place since the 1940s that does virtually the same thing. In fact, the United States already has two such programs for temporary or seasonal jobs, the H-2A visa for agricultural work and the H-2B for nonagricultural work. Each visa already requires state involvement.

    Continue reading “More on Utah’s new immigration related laws” »

    Posted by Peter Rousmaniere at 11:08 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)
    March 28, 2011
    The Utah Compact on immigration

    Business, religious and community leaders in Utah signed on November 11, 2010, the following Utah Compact. This Compact set the stage for a package of immigration bills enacted this month.

    Utah Compact:

    A declaration of five principles to guide Utah’s immigration discussion

    FEDERAL SOLUTIONS: Immigration is a federal policy issue between the U.S. government and other countries — not Utah and other countries. We urge Utah’s congressional delegation, and others, to lead efforts to strengthen federal laws and protect our national borders. We urge state leaders to adopt reasonable policies addressing immigrants in Utah.

    LAW ENFORCEMENT: We respect the rule of law and support law enforcement’s professional judgment and discretion. Local law enforcement resources should focus on criminal activities, not civil violations of federal code.

    FAMILIES: Strong families are the foundation of successful communities. We oppose policies that unnecessarily separate families. We champion policies that support families and improve the health, education and well-being of all Utah children.

    ECONOMY: Utah is best served by a free-market philosophy that maximizes individual freedom and opportunity. We acknowledge the economic role immigrants play as workers and taxpayers. Utah’s immigration policies must reaffirm our global reputation as a welcoming and business-friendly state.

    A FREE SOCIETY: Immigrants are integrated into communities across Utah. We must adopt a humane approach to this reality, reflecting our unique culture, history and spirit of inclusion. The way we treat immigrants will say more about us as a free society and less about our immigrant neighbors. Utah should always be a place that welcomes people of goodwill.

    Supported by the Mormon Church

    Statement from The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints:

    As a worldwide church dealing with many complex issues across the globe, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints promotes broad, foundational principles that have worldwide application. The Church regards the declaration of the Utah Compact as a responsible approach to the urgent challenge of immigration reform. It is consistent with important principles for which we stand:

    * We follow Jesus Christ by loving our neighbors. The Savior taught that the meaning of “neighbor” includes all of God’s children, in all places, at all times.

    * We recognize an ever-present need to strengthen families. Families are meant to be together. Forced separation of working parents from their children weakens families and damages society.

    * We acknowledge that every nation has the right to enforce its laws and secure its borders. All persons subject to a nation’s laws are accountable for their acts in relation to them.

    Public officials should create and administer laws that reflect the best of our aspirations as a just and caring society. Such laws will properly balance love for neighbors, family cohesion, and the observance of just and enforceable laws.

    Posted by Peter Rousmaniere at 9:41 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)
    New guest worker and other legislation from Utah

    Utah has enacted in March a law that attempts to set up, on a single state basis, a guest worker program allowing illegal workers to participate. Though of doubtful constitutionality – it will take a waiver from Washington for Utah to effective write a guest worker program – it is an example of creative thinking about immigration.

    According to the Pew Hispanic Center, Utah has about 110,000 illegal immigrants, of which 75,000 are in the workforce.

    The legislation follow up on the Utah Compact, which business, religious and community leaders in Utah agreed to in late November. I am posting on that compact in another post.

    The Deseret News editorialized it support of the legislation, saying that “This year, Utah’s lawmakers have managed to accomplish legislatively what has eluded Congress: increased enforcement that weeds out dangerous criminals while providing a guest worker program coupled with tough but common-sense safeguards.”

    One report describes the guest worker law, HB 116, as follows:

    On Tuesday March 15, Utah Governor Gary R. Herbert signed immigration bills including HB 116 into law, which addressed immigration enforcement, guest-worker visas and employment verification by employers in Utah. Utah became the first state to enact laws to let illegal workers remain in the state along with their families.

    Governor Herbert called it “the Utah solution.” He said, “Utah has taken a thoughtful, rational approach and found common ground.”

    While most acknowledge immigration is primarily a federal issue, Governor Herbert said these bills provide him some leverage at the federal level to engage the federal government in addressing Utah’s challenges, according to the press release.
    The federal government would have to grant a waiver, since the U.S. Congress can only enact immigration laws and enforce them. If the federal government fails to grant a waiver, Utah might engage in a legal challenge by the U.S. Department of Justice.

    The guest-worker program under HB 116 will take effect in two years. It would allow the Utah Department of Safety to issue state visas to more than 110,000 undocumented immigrants in the state. Immigrants would have to pay $2,500 for permits or pay $1,000 for overstaying a visa in the U.S. Their families would be included in the permits. Undocumented workers would have to go through a background investigation once they sign up for the guest-worker program. They would be expected to learn English, but would not be required.

    Another new law, HB 466, allows the governor to enter into a pilot program with the Mexican state of Nuevo Leon to supply legal workers through existing federal guest-worker programs.

    A third bill, HB 497, requires police to check the immigration status of suspects who are arrested for felony or serious misdemeanor charges, placing an immigration enforcement activity in the hands of local police officers. This law is expected to face immediate legal challenges.

    Posted by Peter Rousmaniere at 9:25 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)
    January 1, 2011
    State house battles in 2011 over illegal immigration

    Count on 2011 to see a lot of “Arizona-plus” legislative initiatives at the state level. These will be opposed by business lobbies, Democrats, and the Hispanic community. Below is an article in today’s NY Times:

    Political Battle on Illegal Immigration Shifts to States
    By JULIA PRESTON

    Legislative leaders in at least half a dozen states say they will propose bills similar to a controversial law to fight illegal immigration that was adopted by Arizona last spring, even though a federal court has suspended central provisions of that statute.

    The efforts, led by Republicans, are part of a wave of state measures coming this year aimed at cracking down on illegal immigration.

    Legislators have

  284. someone Says:

    Immigration reform is stalled in Congress but that’s not stopping immigrants from contacting lawyers, filling out paperwork and making other preparations in hopes of getting a head start should laws change.

    That’s got some advocates concerned that immigrants, who have been duped before by unscrupulous attorneys and others, could be snookered again. California lawmakers last week passed a bill to ban the practice of charging fees for services related to immigration reform before Congress passes an overhaul.

    Immigrant supporters are warning people to be wary of anyone — lawyers, immigration consultants or “notarios” — who offers to help fill out paperwork for a still-non-existent legalization program. Yet many are also urging immigrants to make sure their personal documents are in order now, saying there could be long lines at consular offices for passports and other paperwork.

    “If you start planning for it the day it passes, you are probably going to be too late,” said Daniel Sharp, legal director at the Central American Resource Center in Los Angeles.

    Immigration is one of President Barack Obama’s top priorities for his second term, but a reform bill faces an uncertain future in Congress. With an estimated 11 million immigrants in the country illegally, a broad overhaul could mean millions of people would be seeking legal services and consular documents and filing paperwork with the U.S. government.

    Immigrants, especially those who are newcomers and speak little English, have been conned in the past, most infamously by so-called “notarios,” who try to earn their trust with a term that carries hefty legal weight in many Latin American countries. Such scams not only sap immigrants of their hard-earned cash but could even wind up getting them deported.

    To steer immigrants clear of fraud, the Mexican government has started a free hotline to provide information about the immigration debate. And in Los Angeles, officials said they are investigating websites that claim to help immigrants get their legal papers even though no legislation has passed.

    The California bill, if signed into law by Gov. Jerry Brown, would also crack down on those billing themselves as “notarios.”

    “Everybody wants to be first in line but there’s no line to get in,” said the bill’s author, Assemblywoman Lorena Gonzalez, D-San Diego.

    The State Bar pushed hard for the legislation, over the cries of immigration attorneys, fearing the rampant fraud that has long been a problem in immigration services could bankrupt a fund created to compensate clients duped by crooked lawyers.

    Should an immigration bill pass, advocates say, immigrants may only have a year to submit an application. Some advocates say it’s too soon to see a lawyer, and certainly too early to shell out large sums of money to get ready for immigration reform.

    Immigrants can better spend their time obtaining their children’s school records and collecting documents to prove their residence like rental agreements and car loans, said Jorge-Mario Cabrera, a spokesman for the Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights of Los Angeles.

    Lawyers say they can help now by running background checks and potentially find that immigrants are eligible for other benefits, which has occurred with young people trying to stay in the U.S. legally under an Obama administration program, said Reed Trautz, director of the American Immigration Lawyers Association’s practice and professionalism center.

  285. someone Says:

    Outline of the Border Security, Economic Opportunity, and Immigration Modernization
    Act of 2013
    Border Security
    A.
    Goal for Border Security
    We will establish the following “goal” for border security–to achieve and maintain effective
    control in high risk border sectors along the Southern border. This will be done in two ways:
    1)
    Persistent surveillance in High Risk Sectors along the Southern Border; and
    2)
    An Effectiveness Rate of 90% in a fiscal year for all High Risk Sectors along the
    Southern Border

    Effectiveness Rate
    ” definition — The number of apprehensions and turn backs in a specific
    sector divided by the total number of illegal entries.

    High Risk Border Sector
    ” — Border sectors where apprehensions are above 30,000 individuals
    per year.
    B.
    Border Security Fund and Border Fencing Fund

    180 days after the date of the enactment of the bill, the Secretary shall submit a strategy, to
    be known as the “Comprehensive Southern Border Security Strategy,” for achieving and
    maintaining effective control in all high risk border sectors along the Southern border.

    Our bill will appropriate $3 billion to implement this strategy. This money will be used for
    acquiring, among other things:
    o
    Surveillance and detection capabilities developed or used by the Department of
    Defense;
    o
    Additional Border Patrol agents and Customs and Border Protection officers at and
    between ports of entry along the Southern border;
    o
    Fixed, mobile, and agent portable surveillance systems; and
    o
    Unmanned aerial systems and fixed-wing aircraft and necessary and qualified staff
    and equipment to fully utilize such systems.

    180 days after the date of the enactment of the bill, the Secretary shall establish a strategy, to
    be known as the “Southern Border Fencing Strategy,” to identify where fencing, including
    double-layer fencing, infrastructure, and technology should be deployed along the Southern
    border.
    o
    Our bill will appropriate $1.5 billion to implement this strategy.
    1
    C.
    Border Security Triggers
    1.
    Trigger to Initial Adjustment of Status
    No immigrant in undocumented status may be adjusted to “Registered Provision Immigrant”
    (RPI) legal status until
    the Secretary has submitted to Congress the Notice of Commencement
    upon completion of each of the Comprehensive Southern Border Security Strategy and the
    Southern Border Fencing Strategy
    2.
    Trigger to Adjustment of Status from Registered Provisional Immigrant Status
    to Lawful Permanent Resident Status
    Except for immigrants who are eligible for the DREAM Act and the Agricultural legalization,
    aliens in RPI status shall not be eligible to adjust to Lawful Permanent Resident status until the
    Secretary of Homeland Security submits a written certification to the President and the Congress,
    based on analysis by and in consultation with the Comptroller General, that each of the following
    measures has been achieved:

    the Comprehensive Southern Border Security Strategy has been submitted to Congress
    and is substantially deployed and substantially operational;

    the Southern Border Fencing Strategy has been submitted to Congress, implemented, and
    is substantially completed;

    the Secretary has implemented a mandatory employment verification system to be used
    by all employers to prevent unauthorized workers from obtaining employment in the
    United States; and

    the Secretary is using an electronic exit system at air and sea ports of entry that operates
    by collecting machine-readable visa or passport information from air and vessel carriers.
    D.
    Process for Creating Border Security Accountability

    If an Effectiveness Rate of 90% or higher for all High Risk border sectors is reached
    during the first 5 years after the bill is enacted—the “Border Security Goal” has been
    achieved.

    If an Effectiveness Rate of 90% or higher for all High Risk border sectors has not been
    reached during the first 5 years of the bill,
    a “Southern Border Security Commission”
    shall be established.

    The Border Commission will be a bipartisan commission composed of the four border
    state governors (or their appointees) and border security experts appointed by the
    2
    President and by the Majority and Minority Leaders in the U.S. Senate and the U.S.
    House of Representatives.

    The Border Commission shall issue a “Report and Recommendation” that specifically
    recommends the manpower, technology, and resources it believes is necessary to achieve
    a 90% border effectiveness rate in
    all high risk border sectors.

    The bill will appropriate up to $2 billion for DHS to implement the recommendations on
    manpower, technology, and infrastructure made by the Border Commission.

    This $2 billion will not become available for expenditure until the issuance of the
    Commission’s Report and Recommendations. If this money is not necessary because the
    90 percent efficiency rating has been met, the appropriation will expire and the funds will
    be available for other immigration enforcement uses as recommended by the U.S. Senate
    and House Appropriations Committees.

    If the “Border Commission” has not issued a Report and Recommendation within the
    required 180 days, the appropriation will transfer to DHS for its use in creating and
    implementing a new “Southern Border Security Plan” designed to a
    chieve a 90% border
    effectiveness rate in
    all high risk border sectors.
    E.
    Additional Border Security Resources

    Provide funding for 3,500 additional Customs agents (OFO Officers) nationwide

    Provide Authorization for the National Guard to be deployed to the Southwest
    border
    for the following purposes:
    (1) to construct fencing, including double-layer and triple-layer fencing;
    (2) to increase ground-based mobile surveillance systems;
    (3) to deploy additional unarmed, unmanned aerial systems and manned aircraft sufficient
    to maintain continuous surveillance of the Southern Border;
    (4) to deploy and provide capability for radio communications interoperability between
    U.S. Customs and Border Protection and State, local, and tribal law enforcement agencies;
    (5) to construct checkpoints along the Southern border to bridge the gap to long-term
    permanent checkpoints; and
    (6) to provide assistance to U.S. Customs and Border Protection, particularly in rural,
    high-trafficked areas, as designated by the Commissioner of U.S. Customs and Border
    Protection.
    3

    Authorize and fund border crossing prosecutions
    and related court costs in the Tucson
    Sector at a level sufficient to increase the average number of prosecutions from 70 a day
    to 210 a day ($50 million from the $3 billion Border Security Fund).

    Provide increased funding for Operation Stonegarden
    to assist state and local law
    enforcement to help prevent illegal activity along the border.

    Provide additional funding for additional border patrol stations and forward
    operating bases
    to interdict individuals entering the United States unlawfully
    immediately after such individuals cross the Southern border and to provide full
    operational support in rural, high-trafficked areas.

    Allow Homeland Security Officials to Access all Federal Lands
    in order to capture
    drug traffickers, human smugglers, and other unlawful actors attempting to cross through
    federally protected lands.

    Provide funding for vital radio communications and interoperability
    between
    Customs and Border Patrol and state, local, and tribal law enforcement to assist in
    apprehension efforts along the border.

    Reauthorize the State Criminal Alien Assistance Program (SCAAP)
    to reimburse
    state and local law enforcement for the cost of incarcerating criminal undocumented
    immigrants.

    Authorization the deployment of Department of Defense border radar equipment
    as
    deemed necessary by the DHS Secretary.

    Strengthen prohibitions on inappropriate uses of force and racial profiling
    and
    require periodic training of all CBP personnel on these prohibitions.

    Establish a Department of Homeland Security Border Oversight Taskforce of community
    representatives appointed by the President to interact with DHS regarding border
    security.

    Allow the CIS Ombudsman to serve on ICE and CBP issues.

    Improved training for Border Patrol and DHS oversight provisions.
    Legalization and Legal Immigration
    I.
    Adjustment of Status to Registered Provisional Immigrant Status

    Individuals in unlawful status may apply to adjust their status to the legal status of Registered
    Provisional Immigrant Status.

    Eligibility Criteria:

    Residence in the United States prior to December 31, 2011 and maintenance of
    continuous physical presence since then.
    4

    Paid a $500 penalty fee (except for DREAM Act eligible students), and assessed taxes,
    per adult applicant in addition to all applicable fees required to pay for the cost of
    processing the application.

    Ineligible if:
    o
    Convicted of an aggravated felony;
    o
    Convicted of a felony;
    o
    Convicted of 3 or more misdemeanors;
    o
    Convicted of an offense under foreign law;
    o
    Unlawfully Voted; and
    o
    Inadmissible for Criminal, National Security, Public Health, or other morality
    grounds.

    Spouses and children of people in RPI status can be petitioned for as derivatives of the
    principal applicant (but must be in the United States at the time).

    Immigrants in RPI status can work for any employer and travel outside of the United States

    Individuals outside of the United States who were previously here before December 31, 2011
    and were deported for non-criminal reasons can apply to re-enter the United States in RPI
    status if they are the spouse, of or parent of a child who is, United States citizen or lawful
    permanent resident; or are a childhood arrival who is eligible for the DREAM Act.

    The Application period will be for 1 year with the possibility of extension by the Secretary
    for an additional 1 year.

    Individuals with removal orders will be permitted to apply as will aliens currently in removal
    proceedings.

    RPI status shall last for a 6-year term that is renewable if the immigrant does not commit any
    acts that would render the alien deportable. Another $500 penalty fee is applicable at this
    time.

    The Secretary may collect a processing fee from individuals who register for RPI status in an
    amount that is sufficient to recover all of the costs of implementing the registration program.

    An individual who has been granted RPI status is not eligible for any Federal means-tested
    public benefit (as such term is defined in section 403 of the Personal Responsibility and
    Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 (8 U.S.C. 1613)).

    An individual who adjusts from registered provisional immigrant status to lawful permanent
    residence shall be deemed, as of the date of such adjustment, to have completed the five-year
    period specified in 8 USC 1612 and 1613.
    5

    A noncitizen granted registered provisional immigrant status under this section shall be
    considered lawfully present in the United States for all purposes, while such noncitizen
    remains in such status, except that the noncitizen
    o
    is not entitled to the premium assistance tax credit authorized under section 36B
    of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986; and
    o
    shall be subject to the rules applicable to individuals not lawfully present that are
    set forth in section 1402(e) of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (42
    U.S.C. 18071).

    After 10 years, aliens in RPI status may adjust to Lawful Permanent Resident Status through
    the same Merit Based System everyone else must use to earn a green card (described below)
    if the following things have occurred:
    o
    The alien maintained continuous physical presence
    o
    They paid all taxes owed during the period that they are in status as an RPI
    o
    They worked in the United States regularly;
    o
    And demonstrated knowledge of Civics and English
    o
    All people currently waiting for family and employment green cards as of the date of
    enactment have had their priority date become current.
    o
    A $1,000 penalty fee is rendered

    People in DREAM Act Status and the Agricultural Program can get their green cards in 5
    years and DREAM Act kids will be eligible for citizenship immediately after they get their
    green cards.
    Legal Immigration

    The bill eliminates the backlog for family and employment-based immigrants (see below
    discussion of merit-based system).

    Currently, there are four preference categories based on family relationships and 480,000
    visas are allocated to family. Under the new system there will be two family preference
    categories and they will cover unmarried adult children; married adult children who file
    before age 31, and unmarried adult children of lawful permanent residents. We are expanding
    the current V visa to include those with family relationships.

    The bill repeals the availability of immigrant visas for siblings of U.S. citizens once 18
    months have elapsed since the date of enactment.

    The bill amends the definition of “immediate relative” to include a child or spouse of an alien
    admitted for lawful permanent residence, and the child or spouse of an alien who is
    accompanying or following to join the child, parent or spouse of a U.S. citizen or lawful
    permanent resident.

    The bill amends the existing category for married sons and daughters of citizens of the
    United States to bar anyone from entering who is over 30 years of age.

    The bill repeals the Diversity Visa Program. Aliens who were or are selected for diversity
    immigrant visas for fiscal years 2013 or 2014 will be eligible to receive them.
    6

    On the employment green card categories, the bill exempts the following categories from the
    annual numerical limits on employment-based immigrants: derivative beneficiaries of
    employment-based immigrants; aliens of extraordinary ability in the sciences, arts, education,
    business or athletics; outstanding professors and researchers; multinational executives and
    managers; doctoral degree holders in STEM field; and physicians who have completed the
    foreign residency requirements or have received a waiver.

    The bill then allocates 40 percent of the worldwide level of employment-based visas to : 1)
    members of the professions holding advanced degrees or their equivalent whose services are
    sought in the sciences, arts, professions, or business by an employer in the United States
    (including certain aliens with foreign medical degrees) and 2) aliens who have earned a
    master’s degree or higher in a field of science, technology, engineering or mathematics from
    an accredited U.S. institution of higher education and have an offer of employment in a
    related field and the qualifying degree was earned in the five years immediately before the
    petition was filed.

    The bill increases the percentage of employment visas for skilled workers, professionals, and
    other professionals to 40 percent, maintains the percentage of employment visas for certain
    special immigrants to 10 percent and maintains visas for those who foster employment
    creation to 10 percent.

    The bill creates a startup visa for foreign entrepreneurs who seek to emigrate to the United
    States to startup their own companies.

    Merit Based Visa:
    The merit based visa, created in the fifth year after enactment, awards
    points to individuals based on their education, employment, length of residence in the US and
    other considerations. Those individuals with the most points earn the visas. Those who
    access the merit based pathway to earn their visa are expected to be talented individuals,
    individuals in our worker programs and individuals with family here. 120,000 visas will be
    available per year based on merit. The number would increase by 5% per year if demand
    exceeds supply in any year where unemployment is under 8.5%. There will be a maximum
    cap of 250,000 visas.

    Under one component of this merit based system the Secretary will allocate merit-based
    immigrant visas beginning on October 1, 2014 for employment-based visas that have been
    pending for three years, family-based petitions that were filed prior to enactment and have
    been pending for five years, long-term alien workers and other merit based immigrant
    workers.

    Long –term alien workers and other merit based immigrant workers includes those who have
    been lawfully present in the United States for not less than ten years and who are not
    admitted as a W visa under section 101(a)(15)(W) of the Act.

    Between fiscal years 2015 and 2021, the Secretary shall allocate a seventh of the total
    number of those with employment based visas that have been pending on the date of
    enactment. Petitions for spouses and children of permanent residents who are accorded
    status under the INA are automatically converted to petitions to accord status as immediate
    relatives. Between fiscal years 2015 and 2021, the Secretary shall follow a specific formula
    to allocate visas to those with family based petitions pending on the date of enactment and
    subject to some restrictions visas should be authorized in the order petitions were filed. In
    fiscal year 2022, the Secretary of State shall allocate visas to half the number of those that
    filed family based petitions after the date of enactment and had not had a visa issued by
    7
    October 2021. In fiscal year 2023, the visas should be allocated to the other half of those that
    filed family based petitions after the date of enactment and who had not had a visa issued by
    October 2021. Visas allocated for these family based petitions will be issued based on the
    order in which petitions were filed.
    8
    Employment Verification
    1.
    Mandatory, Enhanced E-Verify
    : All employers will be required to use the E-Verify system
    over a 5-year phase-in period. Employers with more than 5,000 employees will be phased in
    within 2 years. More than 500 employees will be phased in within 3 years. All employers,
    including agricultural employers, will be phased in within 4 years.
    2.
    Photo matching
    : As part of the E-Verify system, every non-citizen will be required to show
    their “biometric work authorization card,” or their “biometric green card.”
    These photographs will be stored in the E-Verify system. In order for the non-citizen to be
    cleared for a job, the picture on the card presented by the employee to the employer will have
    to exactly match the identical picture the employer has on the E-Verify system. The
    employer must certify that the photograph presented in person matches the identical
    photograph in the system.
    a.
    Passports
    - For U.S. citizens with passports, the picture on the passport presented
    by the employee will have to match the identical picture the employer has on the
    E-Verify system. A driver’s license can be used, so long as the citizen’s state has
    agreed to submit a photo to E-Verify.
    b.
    Agreements with State DMVs
    – The DHS Secretary shall create and administer a
    grant program to reimburse States that provide the Secretary access to driver’s
    license information as needed to confirm that a driver’s license presented under
    subsection (c)(1)(C)(i) confirms the identity of the subject of the System
    determination, and that a driver’s license matches the State’s records; and such
    assistance as the Secretary may request in order to resolve further action notices
    or nonconfirmations relating to such information. $250 million will be
    appropriated to carry out this subparagraph.
    c.
    Additional security measure for those without photos
    : The Secretary shall develop
    specific and effective additional security measures to adequately verify the
    identity of individuals whose identities may not be verified using the photo tool
    described above. Such additional security measures shall: 1) be kept up-to-date
    with technological advances; and 2) provide a means of identity authentication in
    a manner that provides a high level of certainty as to the identities of such
    individuals, using immigration and identifying information maintained by the
    Commissioner of Social Security or the Secretary that may include review of
    identity documents or background screening verification techniques using
    publicly available information.
    3.
    To provide additional security, USCIS will also have a system in place with the capacity to
    :
    a.
    Allow employees to “lock” their Social Security number in the E-Verify system so
    that their number cannot be used by another individual. The number can be unlocked
    every time the individual seeks new employment and then locked again afterward.
    9
    b.
    Investigate whether Social Security numbers are being improperly used multiple
    times. USCIS can run scans to determine if a Social Security number is being used
    too many times within a short time period or if it is being improperly used in multiple
    geographic locations. If fraud is detected, USCIS can either launch an investigation or
    temporarily lock the Social Security number. If no fraud is found, the number will be
    unlocked. If it is found, the perpetrator can be caught.
    c.
    Allow all employees to check their own E-Verify history. Individuals will therefore
    know if their social security number has been improperly used and can alert officials.
    4.
    Due process requirements are established so that legal workers are not prevented from
    working due to errors in the system or because of employer negligence or misconduct.
    Temporary Visas
    H-1B Visa Reform

    We will raise the base cap of 65,000 to 110,000 (we amend the current 20,000 exemption for
    U.S. advanced degree holders to be a 25,000 exemption for advanced degree graduates in
    science, technology, engineering, and mathematics from U.S. Schools).

    In future years, the cap can go as high as 180,000.
    The cap will increase/decrease in the
    following way:
    a.
    It will be based on two factors plugged into one formula known as the “High
    Skilled Jobs Demand Index” (with each factor weighed at 50%):
    i.
    The percentage by which cap-subject nonimmigrant visa petitions
    approved under section 101(a)(15)(H)(i)(b) for a fiscal year exceeds/fails
    to meet the cap (50%)
    ii.
    The inverse of the percentage increase/decrease between the previous
    fiscal year and the current fiscal year in the number of unemployed
    persons in the “management, professional, and related occupations
    category” of BLS data (50%).
    b.
    The most the cap can increase/decrease by each year is 10,000 visas.

    We prevent H-1B workers from undercutting the wages paid to American workers by
    requiring employers to pay significantly higher wages for H-1B workers than under current
    law (and to first advertise the jobs to American workers at this higher wage before hiring an
    H-1B worker).
    10

    We will provide spouses of H-1B workers with work authorization if the sending country of
    the worker provides reciprocal treatment to spouses of U.S. workers.

    We will establish a 60-day transition period for H-1B workers to change jobs.

    We will provide dual intent visas for all students who come here on bachelor’s degree
    programs or above.

    We crack down on abusers of the H-1B system by requiring “H-1B dependent employers” to
    pay significantly higher wages and fees than normal users of the program.

    If the employer has 50 or more employees, and more than 30% but less than 50% are H-
    1B or L-1 employees (who do not have a green card petition pending), the employer must
    pay a $5,000 fee per additional worker in either of these two statuses.

    If the employer has 50 or more employees, and more than 50% are H-1B or L-1
    employees (who do not have a green card petition pending), the employer must pay a
    $10,000 fee per additional worker in either of these two statuses.

    We will also crack down on the use of the H-1B and L visas to outsource American jobs
    by prohibiting companies whose U.S. workforce largely consists of foreign guestworkers
    from obtaining additional H-1B and L visas.

    In Fiscal Year 2014, companies will be banned from bringing in any additional workers if
    more than 75% of their workers are H-1B or L-1 employees.

    In Fiscal Year 2015, the ban applies to companies if more than 65% of their workforce
    are H-1B and L-1 workers.
    In Fiscal Year 2016, the ban moves to 50%

    We require recruiting of American workers prior to hiring an H-1B nonimmigrant. The
    Secretary of Labor must establish a searchable website for posting H1B positions. The site
    must be operational and online within 90 days of the passage of the new law. We require
    employers to post a detailed job opening on the Department of Labor’s website for at least 30
    calendar days before hiring an H1B applicant to fill that position.

    We bar employers from recruiting or giving preference to H-1B or OPT workers over
    American workers.
    11

    We establish significant new authorities and penalties to prevent, detect, and deter fraud and
    abuse of the H-1B and L-1 visa systems by fraudulent employers.
    W-Visa Program For Lower-Skilled Workers

    We create a new nonimmigrant classification known as the W-Visa. The W visa holder is an
    alien having a foreign residence who will come to the US to perform services or labor for a
    registered employer in a registered position. The spouse and minor children of the W visa
    holder will be allowed to accompany or follow to join and will be given work authorization
    for the same period of admission the W nonimmigrant is allowed to be here.

    We establish an independent statistical agency called the Bureau of Immigration and Labor
    Market Research (Bureau) headed by a commissioner that will be placed within US
    Citizenship and Immigration Services in the Department of Homeland Security. The
    Commissioner shall be appointed by the President with the advice and consent of the Senate.

    The Bureau will devise a methodology to determine the annual change to the cap for W
    nonimmigrants; supplement the recruitment methods employers use to attract W
    nonimmigrants; devise and publish a methodology to designate shortage occupations by job
    zone; conduct a survey every 3 months of the unemployment rate of construction workers
    and the impact on such workers; study and report to Congress on employment-based and
    immigrant and nonimmigrant visa programs; make annual recommendations to improve such
    programs; and carry out any functions necessary to accomplish the abovementioned duties.

    The Commissioner shall establish a methodology to designate shortage occupations and the
    methodology will allow an employer to ask the Commissioner if a particular occupation in a
    particular area is a shortage occupation.

    The employees of the Bureau shall have the expertise to identify US labor shortages in the
    US and make recommendations to the Commissioner on the impact of immigrant and
    nonimmigrant aliens on US labor markets.

    At the request of the Commissioner, the Secretary of Commerce, the Director of the Bureau
    of the Census, the Secretary of Labor and the Commissioner of the Bureau of Labor Statistics
    shall provide data to the Commissioner, conduct appropriate surveys, and assist the
    Commissioner in preparing recommendations.

    The Director of USCIS shall submit a budget to Congress that the Bureau will need to carry
    out its duties and the US Comptroller General shall submit to Congress an audit of the
    budget.

    Twenty million dollars are appropriated from the Treasury to establish the Bureau. Fees
    collected from those employers participating in this program shall also be used to establish
    and fund the Bureau. The Secretary may also establish other fees related to the hiring of alien
    workers and use such fees to fund the Bureau.
    12

    The new Bureau will serve four main functions: play a role in determining the numbers for
    the annual cap of the new worker visa, declare shortage occupations, expand the list of real-
    world recruitment methods registered employers may use in order to ensure the choices
    provided employers do not become outdated. The new Bureau will also report on every
    aspect of the employment immigration system and make yearly recommendations and reports
    to Congress on how to reform these programs to make them work best for the American
    economy.

    A certified alien is eligible to be admitted to the US as a W nonimmigrant if hired by a
    registered employer for employment in a registered position in a location that is not an
    excluded geographic location.

    The spouse and minor children of the W visa holder may be admitted to the US for the same
    period and will be given work authorization. The W nonimmigrant will apply to the
    Secretary of State at a US embassy or consulate in a foreign country to be a certified alien.
    To be eligible, he or she cannot be inadmissible, has to pass a criminal background check,
    agree to accept only registered positions in the US and meet any other criteria as established
    by the Secretary. He or she shall report to his or her initial employment no later than 14 days
    after first admitted to the US.

    A certified alien may be granted W nonimmigrant status for an initial period of three years
    and may renew his or her status for additional three year periods. He or she may not be
    unemployed for more than 60 consecutive days and must depart the US if he or she is unable
    to obtain employment. W-visa holders can travel outside the US and be readmitted to the US
    but cannot be readmitted for longer than the remaining time left in their original visa.
    Registered employers
    .

    An employer seeking to be a registered employer shall submit an application to the
    Secretary with appropriate documentation to demonstrate it is a bona fide employer with
    the estimated number of W nonimmigrants they will seek to employ each year,
    anticipated dates of employment and a description of the type of work. The Secretary
    may refer to the Secretary of Labor an employer application if there is evidence of fraud
    for potential investigation. The Secretary of Labor may audit any of these applications.
    Ineligible Employers
    .

    No employer may be approved to be a registered employer if the Secretary determines
    after notice and an opportunity for a hearing, that the employer has knowingly
    misrepresented a material fact, knowingly made a fraudulent statement, or knowingly
    failed to comply with the terms of such attestations; or failed to cooperate in the audit
    process in accordance with the regulations promulgated by the Secretary.

    No employer may be approved to become a registered employer if within three years
    prior to the date of application, they committed any hazardous occupation orders
    violations resulting in injury or death under the child labor provisions contained in
    section 12; been assessed a civil money penalty for any repeated or willful violation of
    the minimum wage provisions of section 6; or been assessed a civil money penalty for
    13
    any repeated or willful violation of the overtime provisions of section 7 (other than a
    repeated violation that is self reported) of the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 and any
    applicable regulation.

    No employer may be approved to become a registered employer if within three years
    prior to the date of application, they received a citation for a willful violation or repeated
    serious violation involving injury or death of section 5 of the Occupational Safety and
    Health Act of 1970 (OSHA).

    An employer described above will be ineligible to be a registered employer for a period
    determined by the Secretary but no more than three years. An employer who has been
    convicted of any offense involving slave labor or any conspiracy to commit such offense,
    or any human trafficking offense shall be permanently ineligible to become a registered
    employer.
    Term of registration
    .

    The Secretary shall approve applications to become registered employers for a term of
    three years. An employer may submit an application to renew the employer’s status as a
    registered employer for additional three year periods. At the time an employer’s
    application is approved, such employer shall pay a fee in an amount determined by the
    Secretary to be sufficient to cover the costs of the registry of such employers. Each
    registered employer shall submit to the Secretary an annual report that demonstrates that
    the employer has provided the wages and working conditions that the registered employer
    agreed to provide its employees.
    Registered positions
    .

    Each registered employer shall submit to the Secretary an application to designate a
    position for which the employer is seeking a W nonimmigrant as a registered position.
    Each application will describe each such position and include an attestation of the
    following: the number of employees of the employer; the occupational category, as
    classified by the Secretary of Labor, for which the registered position is sought; and
    whether the occupation is a shortage occupation.
    Wages:

    The wages to be paid which will be either the actual wage paid by the employer to other
    employees with similar experience and qualification or the prevailing wage level for the
    occupational classification in the geographic metropolitan statistical area whichever is
    higher.

    The attestation will also attest that the working conditions will not adversely affect the
    working conditions of other workers employed in similar positions and that the employer
    has carried out the required recruiting activities and there is no qualified US worker who
    14
    has applied for the position who is ready, willing and able to fill such position pursuant to
    the requirements outlined here.

    The attestation will also attest that there is not a strike, lockout or work stoppage or labor
    dispute in the area where the W nonimmigrant will be employed. The employer also has
    to attest that he or she has not laid off and will not lay off a US worker during the period
    beginning 90 days prior to and ending 90 days after the date the employer designates the
    registered position for which the W visa holder is sought unless the employer has notified
    such US worker of the position and documented the legitimate reasons that such US
    worker is not qualified or available for the position.

    The Secretary shall provide each registered employer whose application is approved with
    a permit that includes the number and description of such employer’s approved registered
    positions. The approval of a registered position is for a term that begins on the date of
    such approval and ends the earlier of either the date the employer’s status as a registered
    employer is terminated or three years after the date of such approval or upon proper
    termination of the registered position by the employer.
    Requirements
    .

    Recruitment
    . Each registered position shall be for a position in an eligible occupation. A
    position may not be registered unless the registered employer advertises the position for
    30 days, including the wage, range, location and proposed start date; on the Internet
    website maintained by the Secretary of Labor, and with the workforce agency of the State
    where the position will be located, and carries out not less than three of the additional
    recruiting activities described in this section or any other recruitment activities
    determined to be appropriate as added by the Commissioner.

    Eligible and ineligible occupations.
    An occupation is an eligible occupation if it is a zone
    one, two or three occupation as defined in this section. An occupation may be ineligible
    to be considered as a registered position if it requires a bachelor’s degree or higher or is
    an occupation that requires the W to perform work as a computer operator, programmer
    or repairer. The Secretary of Labor shall publish the eligible occupations an on-going
    basis on a publically available website.

    If a W nonimmigrant terminates employment in a registered position or is terminated
    from such employment by the registered employer, such employer may fill the vacancy
    by hiring a certified alien, a W nonimmigrant, a US worker or an alien who has filed a
    petition for a visa.

    Except as described below, a registered position shall be approved by the Secretary for
    three years. A registered position shall continue to be a registered position at the end of
    three years if the W nonimmigrant hired for such position has a pending petition for
    immigrant status filed by the registered employer. Such registered positions will
    terminate either on the date the petition is approved or denied or on the date of the W
    employee’s termination of employment with the registered employer.
    15

    Employer fees.
    The employer will pay a registration fee to be determined by the Secretary
    when the employer’s application for the registered position is approved. The fees
    collected will be used to carry out this program. A registered employer will pay an
    additional fee for each approved registered position measured by a specific formula that
    considers the size of the business and the proportion of non US workers in the registered
    employee positions. These fees will be used to fund the operations of the new Bureau of
    Immigration and Labor Market Research described above.

    Registered employers may not be required to pay an additional fee if they are a small
    business with twenty five or fewer employees. No registered positions will be approved
    for employers who are not small businesses and where thirty percent or more of the
    employees are not US workers.

    No W nonimmigrants may be hired for an eligible occupation in a metropolitan statistical
    area that has an unemployment rate that is more than eight and a half percent unless the
    Commissioner identifies the occupation as a shortage occupation or the Secretary
    approves the position under the safety valve described below.
    The Cap
    .

    Beginning April 1, 2015, unless the Secretary of Homeland Security extends the start
    date, the cap for W visas will be split into two six month segments in a year. The annual
    cap on the maximum number of registered positions that may be approved each year are
    limited for the first four years. 20,000 for the first year; 35,000 the second year; 55,000
    the third year and 75,000 the fourth year. For each year after the fourth year, the annual
    cap will be calculated according to a statistical formula that takes the following four
    factors into consideration: the rate of change in the number of new job openings in the
    economy; the inverse rate of change in the number of unemployed US workers; the
    percentage change the Bureau recommends the annual cap should increase or decrease;
    and the percentage difference between the number of W-visas requested in the prior fiscal
    year compared to the cap in the prior fiscal year.

    In addition to the number of registered positions made available for a given year, the
    Commissioner may make available an additional number of registered positions for
    shortage occupations in a particular geographical area. The Bureau’s recommendations
    for determining annual cap recommendations will be subject to notice and comment and
    formal rule making.
    The Safety Valve
    .

    The Secretary has the authority to make additional registered positions available for a
    specific registered employer if the annual cap for registered positions has been reached
    and none remain available for allocation. He may also make additional positions
    available if that registered employer is located in an area that has an unemployment rate
    greater than 8.5% or if the registered employer has carried out no less than seven of the
    described recruiting activities and posts the position for no less than thirty day on the
    Secretary of Labor’s internet website and with the State workforce agency where the
    position will be located.
    16

    A W nonimmigrant hired to perform an eligible occupation pursuant to a special
    allocation of registered positions may not be paid less than the greater amount of either
    the level 4 wage set in the Foreign Labor Certification Data Center Online Wage Library
    or the mean of the highest two-thirds of wages surveyed for such occupation in that
    metropolitan statistical area.

    A registered position made available for a year under this paragraph shall require the
    deduction of a visa number available under the regular W-visa cap in the subsequent year
    or the earliest possible year for which a visa becomes available again under the cap.

    Fifty percent of the total number of registered positions will be made available during the
    first six months of the year. The rest will be used during the second six month period.

    For the first month of each six month period, a registered position may not be created in
    an occupation that is not a shortage occupation unless the Commissioner has not
    designated any shortage occupations that year. During the second, third and fourth
    months of each six month period, one-third of the number of registered positions
    allocated for such period shall be approved only for a registered employer that is a small
    business. Any remaining registered positions not allocated to small businesses will be
    made available for any registered employer during the last two months of each six month
    period.

    No more than thirty-three percent of the registered positions available per year may be
    granted to perform work in a construction occupation. The number of registered positions
    granted to construction occupations may not exceed 15,000 per year or 7,500 for any six
    month period. A registered employer may not hire a certified alien for a registered
    position to perform work in a construction occupation if the unemployment rate for
    construction occupations in the corresponding occupational job zone was more than eight
    and a half percent. The unemployment rate will be determined by using the most recent
    survey taken by the Bureau or if no survey is available, by a recent, legitimate privately
    conducted survey.

    Portability and Promotion.
    A W nonimmigrant who is admitted to the US by a registered
    employer may terminate such employment for any reason and seek and accept
    employment with another registered employer in any other registered position within the
    terms and conditions of the W nonimmigrant visa. A registered employer who has
    applied for a registered position in a shortage occupation may promote the W
    nonimmigrant to a registered position in an occupation that is not a shortage occupation if
    such employee has been employed with that employer for no less than twelve months.
    Such a promotion will not increase the number of registered positions for that employer.

    Prohibitions on Outplacement.
    A registered employer may not place, outsource, lease or
    otherwise contract for the services or placement of a W nonimmigrant employee with
    another employer if more than fifteen percent of the employees of the registered
    employer are W nonimmigrants.
    17

    Waiver of rights prohibited.
    A W nonimmigrant shall not be denied any right or any
    remedy under Federal, State, or local labor or employment law that would be applicable
    to a US worker employed in a similar position with the employer because of the alien’s
    status as a W. A W may not be required to waive any rights or protections under this Act.

    Prohibition on treatment as independent contractors.
    A W nonimmigrant is prohibited
    from being treated as an independent contractor under any Federal or State law and no
    person including an employer or labor contractor and any affiliated persons may treat the
    W as an independent contractor. However, registered employers who operate as
    independent contractors may hire W nonimmigrants.

    Use of Fees.
    A fee related to the hiring of a W nonimmigrant required to be paid by an
    employer under this Act shall be paid by the employer and may not be deducted from the
    wages or other compensation paid to a W nonimmigrant. The employer is not responsible
    for the W nonimmigrant’s cost of round trip transportation from a certified alien’s home
    to the location of the registered position and the cost of obtaining a foreign passport. An
    employer shall comply with all applicable Federal, State and local tax laws with respect
    to each W nonimmigrant employed by the employer. Fees collected in this section shall
    be used to carry out the W nonimmigrant program and to fund the Bureau if any funds
    remain.

    Whistleblower Protections.
    It is unlawful for an employer of a W nonimmigrant to
    intimidate, threaten, restrain, coerce, retaliate, discharge, or in any other manner
    discriminate against an employee or former employee because the employee or former
    employee discloses information to the employer or any other person that the employee or
    former employee reasonably believes demonstrates a violation of this section or
    cooperates or seeks to cooperate in an investigation or other proceeding concerning
    compliance with the requirements of this section.

    Complaint process and Enforcement.
    The Secretary shall establish a process for the
    receipt, investigation and disposition of complaints with respect to the failure of a
    registered employer to meet a condition of this section or the lay off or non-hiring of a
    US worker. The Secretary shall promulgate regulations for the receipt, investigation and
    disposition of complaints by an aggrieved W nonimmigrant respecting a violation of this
    section. No investigation or hearing shall be conducted on a complaint concerning a
    violation unless the complaint was filed within six months of the violation. The Secretary
    shall determine within 30 days of the filing of the complaint if there is reasonable cause
    to conduct an investigation and if there is a reasonable basis to believe that a violation of
    this section has occurred. If the Secretary decides there is a reasonable basis, she shall
    issue notice to the interested parties and offer an opportunity for a hearing on the
    complaint within 60 days. After the hearing, the Secretary has 60 days to make a finding
    on the matter awarding reasonable attorneys fees and costs to the prevailing party.
    The Agricultural Job Opportunity, Benefits, and Security Act
    18

    The Agricultural Job Opportunity, Benefits, and Security Act (
    AgJOBS)
    would allow
    current undocumented farm workers to obtain legal status through an Agricultural Card
    Program. Undocumented farm workers who have made a substantial prior commitment
    to agricultural work in the United States would be eligible for an Agricultural Card.

    Agricultural workers who fulfill future Agricultural Card work requirements in U.S.
    agriculture, show that they have paid all taxes, have not been convicted of any serious
    crime, and pay a $400 fine are eligible to adjust to legal permanent resident status.
    Spouses and minor children would receive derivative status.

    A new agricultural guest worker visa program would be established to ensure an adequate
    agricultural workforce. A portable, at-will employment based visa (W-3 visa) and a
    contract-based visa (W-2 visa) would replace the current H-2A program

  286. Otrocol Says:

    Sunt pe terioriul statelor unite de pe data de 11 iulie, impreuna cu parintii am varsta de 19 anii am primit Social security, mi-am facut id-ul…green cardul nu imi apare este luna octombrie si numai mie nu mi-a venit, imi poate spune cineva de ce intarzie? vreau sa merg in romania pana dupa sarbatorii mentionez ca pe viza de pe pasaport am numarul de green card ma pot intoarce aici cu viza si numarul de pe green card? Am fost la usscis dau ceva de genul si mi`a spus ca pot calatorii cu viza aceea timp de 1 an de zile…dar la ambasada din romania mi`a spus ca nu e adevarat spunetimi va rog care este adevarul daca aveti idee

  287. Alex Says:

    Pentru Veronika

    Din cite stiu se poate inca de prelungit pe 6 luni viza turistica

  288. tota Says:

    شركة عزل اسطح بالدمام

Leave a Reply

XHTML: You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>