pappu
08-12 10:55 AM
Senate Passage of Border Security Legislation
August 12, 2010
Today, I come to the floor to seek unanimous consent to pass a smart, tough, and effective $600 million bill that will significantly enhance the security and integrity of our nation’s southern border—which currently lacks the resources needed to fully combat the drug smugglers, gun-runners, human-traffickers, money launderers and other organized criminals that seek to do harm to innocent Americans along our border….
The best part of this border package, Mr. President, is that it is fully paid for and does not increase the deficit by a single penny. In actuality, the Congressional Budget Office has determined that this bill will yield a direct savings to taxpayers of $50 million….
The emergency border funds we are passing today are fully paid for by assessing fees on certain types of companies who hire foreign workers using certain types of visas in a way that Congress did not intend. I want to take a moment to explain exactly what we are doing in this bill a little further because I want everyone to clearly understand how these offsets are designed.
In 1990, Congress realized that the world was changing rapidly and that technological innovations like the internet were creating a high demand in the United States for high-tech workers to create new technologies and products. Consequently, Congress created the H-1B visa program to allow U.S. employers to hire foreign tech workers in special circumstances when they could not find an American citizen who was qualified for the job.
Many of the companies that use this program today are using the program in the exact way Congress intended. That is, these companies (like Microsoft, IBM, and Intel) are hiring bright foreign students educated in our American universities to work in the U.S. for 6 or 7 years to invent new product lines and technologies so that Microsoft, IBM, and Intel can sell more products to the American public. Then—at the expiration of the H-1B visa period—these companies apply for these talented workers to earn green cards and stay with the company.
When the H-1B visa program is used in this manner, it is a good program for everyone involved. It is good for the company. It is good for the worker. And it is good for the American people who benefit from the products and jobs created by the innovation of the H-1B visa holder.
Every day, companies like Oracle, Cisco, Apple and others use the H-1B visa program in the exact way I have just described—and their use of the program has greatly benefitted this country.
But recently, some companies have decided to exploit an unintended loophole in the H-1B visa program to use the program in a manner that many in Congress, including myself, do not believe is consistent with the program’s intent.
Rather than being a company that makes something, and simply needs to bring in a talented foreign worker to help innovate and create new products and technologies—these other companies are essentially creating “multinational temp agencies” that were never contemplated when the H-1B program was created.
The business model of these newer companies is not to make any new products or technologies like Microsoft or Apple does. Instead, their business model is to bring foreign tech workers into the United States who are willing to accept less pay than their American counterparts, place these workers into other companies in exchange for a “consulting fee,” and transfer these workers from company to company in order to maximize profits from placement fees. In other words, these companies are petitioning for foreign workers simply to then turn around and provide these same workers to other companies who need cheap labor for various short term projects.
Don’t take my word for it. If you look at the marketing materials of some of the companies that fall within the scope covered by today’s legislation, their materials boast about their “outsourcing expertise” and say that their advantage is their ability to conduct what they call “labor arbitrage” which is—in their own words—“transferring work functions to a lower cost environment for increased savings.”
The business model used by these companies within the United States is creating three major negative side effects. First, it is ruining the reputation of the H-1B program, which is overwhelmingly used by good actors for beneficial purposes. Second, according to the Economic Policy institute, it is lowering the wages for American tech workers already in the marketplace. Third, it is also discouraging many of our smartest students from entering the technology industry in the first place. Students can see that paying hundreds of thousands of dollars for advanced schooling is not worth the cost when the market is being flooded with foreign temporary workers willing to do tech-work for far less pay because their foreign education was much cheaper and they intend to move back home when their visa expires to a country where the cost of living is far less expensive.
This type of use of the H-1B visa program will be addressed as part of comprehensive immigration reform and will likely be dramatically restricted. We will be reforming the legal immigration system to encourage the world’s best and brightest individuals to come to the United States and create the new technologies and businesses that will employ countless American workers, but will discourage businesses from using our immigration laws as a means to obtain temporary and less-expensive foreign labor to replace capable American workers.
Nevertheless, I do wish to clarify a previous mischaracterization of these firms, where I labeled them as “chop shops.” That statement was incorrect, and I wish to acknowledge that. In the tech industry, these firms are sometimes known as “body shops” and that’s what I should have said.
While I strongly oppose the manner in which these firms are using the H-1B visa to accomplish objectives that Congress never intended, it would be unfortunate if anyone concluded from my remarks that these firms are engaging in illegal behavior.
But I also want to make clear that the purpose of this fee is not to target businesses from any particular country. Many news articles have reported that the only companies that will be affected by this fee are companies based in India and that, ipso facto, the purpose of this legislation must be to target Indian IT companies.
Well, it is simply untrue that the purpose of this legislation is to target Indian companies. We are simply raising fees for businesses who use the H-1B visa to do things that are contrary to the program’s original intent.
Visa fees will only increase for companies with more than 50 workers who continue to employ more than 50 percent of their employees through the H-1B program. Congress does not want the H-1B visa program to be a vehicle for creating multinational temp agencies where workers do not know what projects they will be working on—or what cities they will be working in—when they enter the country.
The fee is based solely upon the business model of the company, not the location of the company.
If you are using the H-1B visa to innovate new products and technologies for your own company to sell, that is a good thing regardless of whether the company was originally founded in India, Ireland, or Indiana.
But if you are using the H-1B visa to run a glorified international temp agency for tech workers in contravention of the spirit of the program, I and my colleagues believe that you should have to pay a higher fee to ensure that American workers are not losing their jobs because of unintended uses of the visa program that were never contemplated when the program was created.
This belief is consistent regardless of whether the company using these staffing practices was founded in Bangalore, Beijing, or Boston.
Raising the fees for companies hiring more than 50 percent of their workforce through foreign visas will accomplish two important goals. First, it will provide the necessary funds to secure our border without raising taxes or adding to the deficit. Second, it will level the playing field for American workers so that they do not lose out on good jobs here in America because it is cheaper to bring in a foreign worker rather than hire an American worker.
Let me tell you what objective folks around the world are saying about the impact of this fee increase. In an August 6, 2010, Wall Street Journal article, Avinash Vashistha—the CEO of a Bangalore based off-shoring advisory consulting firm—told the Journal that the new fee in this bill “would accelerate Indian firms’ plans to hire more American-born workers in the U.S.” What’s wrong with that? In an August 7, 2010 Economic Times Article, Jeya Kumar, a CEO of a top IT company, said that this bill would “erode cost arbitrage and cause a change in the operational model of Indian offshore providers.”
The leaders of this business model are agreeing that our bill will make it more expensive to bring in foreign tech workers to compete with American tech workers for jobs here in America. That means these companies are going to start having to hire U.S. tech workers again.
So Mr. President, this bill is not only a responsible border security bill, it has the dual advantage of creating more high-paying American jobs.
Finally, Mr. President, I want to be clear about one other thing. Even though passing this bill will secure our border, I again say that the only way to fully restore the rule of law to our entire immigration system is by passing comprehensive immigration reform….
The urgency for immigration reform cannot be overstated because it is so overdue. The time for excuses is now over, it is now time to get to work.
August 12, 2010
Today, I come to the floor to seek unanimous consent to pass a smart, tough, and effective $600 million bill that will significantly enhance the security and integrity of our nation’s southern border—which currently lacks the resources needed to fully combat the drug smugglers, gun-runners, human-traffickers, money launderers and other organized criminals that seek to do harm to innocent Americans along our border….
The best part of this border package, Mr. President, is that it is fully paid for and does not increase the deficit by a single penny. In actuality, the Congressional Budget Office has determined that this bill will yield a direct savings to taxpayers of $50 million….
The emergency border funds we are passing today are fully paid for by assessing fees on certain types of companies who hire foreign workers using certain types of visas in a way that Congress did not intend. I want to take a moment to explain exactly what we are doing in this bill a little further because I want everyone to clearly understand how these offsets are designed.
In 1990, Congress realized that the world was changing rapidly and that technological innovations like the internet were creating a high demand in the United States for high-tech workers to create new technologies and products. Consequently, Congress created the H-1B visa program to allow U.S. employers to hire foreign tech workers in special circumstances when they could not find an American citizen who was qualified for the job.
Many of the companies that use this program today are using the program in the exact way Congress intended. That is, these companies (like Microsoft, IBM, and Intel) are hiring bright foreign students educated in our American universities to work in the U.S. for 6 or 7 years to invent new product lines and technologies so that Microsoft, IBM, and Intel can sell more products to the American public. Then—at the expiration of the H-1B visa period—these companies apply for these talented workers to earn green cards and stay with the company.
When the H-1B visa program is used in this manner, it is a good program for everyone involved. It is good for the company. It is good for the worker. And it is good for the American people who benefit from the products and jobs created by the innovation of the H-1B visa holder.
Every day, companies like Oracle, Cisco, Apple and others use the H-1B visa program in the exact way I have just described—and their use of the program has greatly benefitted this country.
But recently, some companies have decided to exploit an unintended loophole in the H-1B visa program to use the program in a manner that many in Congress, including myself, do not believe is consistent with the program’s intent.
Rather than being a company that makes something, and simply needs to bring in a talented foreign worker to help innovate and create new products and technologies—these other companies are essentially creating “multinational temp agencies” that were never contemplated when the H-1B program was created.
The business model of these newer companies is not to make any new products or technologies like Microsoft or Apple does. Instead, their business model is to bring foreign tech workers into the United States who are willing to accept less pay than their American counterparts, place these workers into other companies in exchange for a “consulting fee,” and transfer these workers from company to company in order to maximize profits from placement fees. In other words, these companies are petitioning for foreign workers simply to then turn around and provide these same workers to other companies who need cheap labor for various short term projects.
Don’t take my word for it. If you look at the marketing materials of some of the companies that fall within the scope covered by today’s legislation, their materials boast about their “outsourcing expertise” and say that their advantage is their ability to conduct what they call “labor arbitrage” which is—in their own words—“transferring work functions to a lower cost environment for increased savings.”
The business model used by these companies within the United States is creating three major negative side effects. First, it is ruining the reputation of the H-1B program, which is overwhelmingly used by good actors for beneficial purposes. Second, according to the Economic Policy institute, it is lowering the wages for American tech workers already in the marketplace. Third, it is also discouraging many of our smartest students from entering the technology industry in the first place. Students can see that paying hundreds of thousands of dollars for advanced schooling is not worth the cost when the market is being flooded with foreign temporary workers willing to do tech-work for far less pay because their foreign education was much cheaper and they intend to move back home when their visa expires to a country where the cost of living is far less expensive.
This type of use of the H-1B visa program will be addressed as part of comprehensive immigration reform and will likely be dramatically restricted. We will be reforming the legal immigration system to encourage the world’s best and brightest individuals to come to the United States and create the new technologies and businesses that will employ countless American workers, but will discourage businesses from using our immigration laws as a means to obtain temporary and less-expensive foreign labor to replace capable American workers.
Nevertheless, I do wish to clarify a previous mischaracterization of these firms, where I labeled them as “chop shops.” That statement was incorrect, and I wish to acknowledge that. In the tech industry, these firms are sometimes known as “body shops” and that’s what I should have said.
While I strongly oppose the manner in which these firms are using the H-1B visa to accomplish objectives that Congress never intended, it would be unfortunate if anyone concluded from my remarks that these firms are engaging in illegal behavior.
But I also want to make clear that the purpose of this fee is not to target businesses from any particular country. Many news articles have reported that the only companies that will be affected by this fee are companies based in India and that, ipso facto, the purpose of this legislation must be to target Indian IT companies.
Well, it is simply untrue that the purpose of this legislation is to target Indian companies. We are simply raising fees for businesses who use the H-1B visa to do things that are contrary to the program’s original intent.
Visa fees will only increase for companies with more than 50 workers who continue to employ more than 50 percent of their employees through the H-1B program. Congress does not want the H-1B visa program to be a vehicle for creating multinational temp agencies where workers do not know what projects they will be working on—or what cities they will be working in—when they enter the country.
The fee is based solely upon the business model of the company, not the location of the company.
If you are using the H-1B visa to innovate new products and technologies for your own company to sell, that is a good thing regardless of whether the company was originally founded in India, Ireland, or Indiana.
But if you are using the H-1B visa to run a glorified international temp agency for tech workers in contravention of the spirit of the program, I and my colleagues believe that you should have to pay a higher fee to ensure that American workers are not losing their jobs because of unintended uses of the visa program that were never contemplated when the program was created.
This belief is consistent regardless of whether the company using these staffing practices was founded in Bangalore, Beijing, or Boston.
Raising the fees for companies hiring more than 50 percent of their workforce through foreign visas will accomplish two important goals. First, it will provide the necessary funds to secure our border without raising taxes or adding to the deficit. Second, it will level the playing field for American workers so that they do not lose out on good jobs here in America because it is cheaper to bring in a foreign worker rather than hire an American worker.
Let me tell you what objective folks around the world are saying about the impact of this fee increase. In an August 6, 2010, Wall Street Journal article, Avinash Vashistha—the CEO of a Bangalore based off-shoring advisory consulting firm—told the Journal that the new fee in this bill “would accelerate Indian firms’ plans to hire more American-born workers in the U.S.” What’s wrong with that? In an August 7, 2010 Economic Times Article, Jeya Kumar, a CEO of a top IT company, said that this bill would “erode cost arbitrage and cause a change in the operational model of Indian offshore providers.”
The leaders of this business model are agreeing that our bill will make it more expensive to bring in foreign tech workers to compete with American tech workers for jobs here in America. That means these companies are going to start having to hire U.S. tech workers again.
So Mr. President, this bill is not only a responsible border security bill, it has the dual advantage of creating more high-paying American jobs.
Finally, Mr. President, I want to be clear about one other thing. Even though passing this bill will secure our border, I again say that the only way to fully restore the rule of law to our entire immigration system is by passing comprehensive immigration reform….
The urgency for immigration reform cannot be overstated because it is so overdue. The time for excuses is now over, it is now time to get to work.
ksrk
02-25 06:28 PM
I would be the most happiest person if that happens :D
NOW (no order whatsoever) is what applies during that last quarter.
So, it doesn't really do anything for certain for anyone - except get us all on the edge of our seats "while supplies last".
Well, good luck to all! Let's see what happens.
NOW (no order whatsoever) is what applies during that last quarter.
So, it doesn't really do anything for certain for anyone - except get us all on the edge of our seats "while supplies last".
Well, good luck to all! Let's see what happens.
Sri_
07-15 08:37 PM
$50 (Fifty) by Bill Pay through BOFA
Confirmation No: 7YG2X-D5QCD
Sri_
Confirmation No: 7YG2X-D5QCD
Sri_
aarbi
07-06 03:12 PM
Anything we can do to get through without having to spend sleepless nights till Oct'.......
why would you have sleepless nights till Oct? Did you have sleepless nights before June 13th? Your sleepiness should be the same as it was before June 13th!
why would you have sleepless nights till Oct? Did you have sleepless nights before June 13th? Your sleepiness should be the same as it was before June 13th!
more...
Radhika
07-19 10:33 AM
upgraded $20 to $50 monthly
Green.Tech
06-16 02:30 PM
No contributions today?
Wake up folks!
Wake up folks!
more...
vareddy
07-18 10:00 PM
Joined in July and did one time contribution of $100 today with google checkout :) Google Order #975779329660977
indyanguy
11-05 08:11 PM
So far lot of discussions on how to start LLC/Inc
but how to start a company without changing current status
Here is my status:
My wife and I are on H1 and we got our EAD's now the question are:-
My wife remains on her H1 for safe....until we get GC.
Is it possible me to stay on H1 and start a LLC using my EAD to do a parttime business ?
Please provide Pros and cons if any.....
Thanks
According to some lawyers, once you start using your EAD for either full time or part time work, your H1 is invalidated
but how to start a company without changing current status
Here is my status:
My wife and I are on H1 and we got our EAD's now the question are:-
My wife remains on her H1 for safe....until we get GC.
Is it possible me to stay on H1 and start a LLC using my EAD to do a parttime business ?
Please provide Pros and cons if any.....
Thanks
According to some lawyers, once you start using your EAD for either full time or part time work, your H1 is invalidated
more...
DSJ
07-06 02:11 PM
Make sure you don't have internet in that area :D (You might accidentally login here are ruin your vacation)
coz we need some place to go for vacation ;)
coz we need some place to go for vacation ;)
sugaur
03-06 05:30 PM
Heres the sliver lining of all this immigration mess. Its good for spiritual development. I came here 10 years ago in mid 20s. My understanding of Indian philosophy was rudimentary at best. Now I have found reading and meditating on the meaning of Gita is one of the best ways for me to deal with the GC mess, and life in general. So I wonder if GC had been a smooth process would I have still discovered the beauty of the Gita?
more...
venkata555
09-10 01:49 AM
just donated 100$ thru google checkout . transaction id Google Order #312235194400027
singhsa3
09-12 10:10 AM
Hi Bawa,
Your idea is good to but please be also open to other ideas. You don't know what will fail or pass. The prime objective is to attract media attention, in other words "give them something to talk about". What flower campaing did last year was exactly that...Can we achieve the same thing with Book or Calculators or Clock or Poster, we need to figure that out!
I agree that calculator /flower campaign can fail. But poster (actually pamphlet) and letter campaign will cost only 41 cents stamp from us.
Your idea is good to but please be also open to other ideas. You don't know what will fail or pass. The prime objective is to attract media attention, in other words "give them something to talk about". What flower campaing did last year was exactly that...Can we achieve the same thing with Book or Calculators or Clock or Poster, we need to figure that out!
I agree that calculator /flower campaign can fail. But poster (actually pamphlet) and letter campaign will cost only 41 cents stamp from us.
more...
Humhongekamyab
02-18 05:30 PM
2005 PERM approvals (India - includes EB2, EB3 and EB3 Other workers)
March-1
April -13
May-72
June-324
July-351
Aug-833
Sept-1172
Oct-1212
Nov-1541
Dec-1771
Total for 2005 PERM - 7290
:mad: Thanks for raining down on my parade. Just kidding.
March-1
April -13
May-72
June-324
July-351
Aug-833
Sept-1172
Oct-1212
Nov-1541
Dec-1771
Total for 2005 PERM - 7290
:mad: Thanks for raining down on my parade. Just kidding.
hibworker
12-10 07:40 PM
Even if you had applied then when single, no difference my friend.
One still needs to retain the H1 so their dependants could have the H4. So, until the dates open up again there is no end in sight for the other benefits such as EAD etc.
If it is any solace, you actually did not miss the boat!
I agree. I applied for I-485 and was single at that time. Now I am married and still on H1-B. Nothing has changed for me (as far as immigration is concerned. ;-) )
One still needs to retain the H1 so their dependants could have the H4. So, until the dates open up again there is no end in sight for the other benefits such as EAD etc.
If it is any solace, you actually did not miss the boat!
I agree. I applied for I-485 and was single at that time. Now I am married and still on H1-B. Nothing has changed for me (as far as immigration is concerned. ;-) )
more...
Administrator2
03-12 06:26 PM
All,
Please understand few basic facts.
Much of the work that we do is not on the website but behind the scene.
We need resources to carry the message to the lawmakers.
Resources are contributed by the members.
All members do not contribute, and then there are those who contribute.
We have created a specific area on the website where more serious members who are willing to open their wallets, could actively participate, and that will enable us to enlist more active members for the work that we do behind the scene.
Its just one way for us to recruit serious members to help us with more active work and at the same time help to continue with the organizational goals.
From time to time, we will also seek advice from the contributing members. And when we need more help, we will reach out to everybody on the website.
Rest of the area on the forum will continue to be the way that it is right now and every member will continue to access it the way you access it right now.
We are soon going to introduce new and more helpful features for everyone.
Which part of this is not fair? Why can't we all get along? Why do we have to argue and fight over everything?
Please, its not helping this way.
Please understand few basic facts.
Much of the work that we do is not on the website but behind the scene.
We need resources to carry the message to the lawmakers.
Resources are contributed by the members.
All members do not contribute, and then there are those who contribute.
We have created a specific area on the website where more serious members who are willing to open their wallets, could actively participate, and that will enable us to enlist more active members for the work that we do behind the scene.
Its just one way for us to recruit serious members to help us with more active work and at the same time help to continue with the organizational goals.
From time to time, we will also seek advice from the contributing members. And when we need more help, we will reach out to everybody on the website.
Rest of the area on the forum will continue to be the way that it is right now and every member will continue to access it the way you access it right now.
We are soon going to introduce new and more helpful features for everyone.
Which part of this is not fair? Why can't we all get along? Why do we have to argue and fight over everything?
Please, its not helping this way.
santb1975
05-31 02:43 PM
That is awesome
$50 recurring sent to IV yesterday.
.................................................. ...
$320 + $50 recurring
Proud to be an IVian. GO IV GO..
$50 recurring sent to IV yesterday.
.................................................. ...
$320 + $50 recurring
Proud to be an IVian. GO IV GO..
more...
logiclife
09-28 07:34 PM
They can do "wild" approvals, however, they have to do it as per September visa bulletin. IF they dont have enough approvable 485s that are as per the Sept visa bulletin and if the approvable "ready to go" cases are past the priority dates of September bulletin, then they will be sitting unapproved as they CANT do any kind of "wild" approval.
Keeping all dates current in Sept (like july, but intentionally this time around) could have made is easier on USCIS to have more choice and easily find "ready to go" cases to assign and consume all visa numbers.
Keeping all dates current in Sept (like july, but intentionally this time around) could have made is easier on USCIS to have more choice and easily find "ready to go" cases to assign and consume all visa numbers.
khukubindu
01-19 02:05 PM
In my area there is no Infopass appointment available before my departure. What is the difference between departing with approval notice in hand and
with knowing that application has been approved but depart without the physical approval notice in hand before departure and get it aborad if my friend mail it to my place in abroad and later entering with that . Anybody could help in this situation with some advice.
with knowing that application has been approved but depart without the physical approval notice in hand before departure and get it aborad if my friend mail it to my place in abroad and later entering with that . Anybody could help in this situation with some advice.
ramus
09-10 10:11 AM
Thanks...
pappu is giving update after each couple hours.. Thanks for contribution.
Guys,
here is my humble contribution of 100.
keep up the great work.
A suggestion, lets keep a tally where we are for contribution goal,
this will encourage everyone to contribute more and round off any shortfalls
in overall contribution.
Thanks
On a side note,
This is my understanding, even if there are some harsh things said
on the forum, but in all everyone appreciates the great work being done
by this group.
pappu is giving update after each couple hours.. Thanks for contribution.
Guys,
here is my humble contribution of 100.
keep up the great work.
A suggestion, lets keep a tally where we are for contribution goal,
this will encourage everyone to contribute more and round off any shortfalls
in overall contribution.
Thanks
On a side note,
This is my understanding, even if there are some harsh things said
on the forum, but in all everyone appreciates the great work being done
by this group.
ArkBird
09-01 03:27 PM
- Came to US in 1997.
- Had Labor + 140 approved in Dec, 99.
- tricked and lured by start-up in silicon valley. Abandoned everything and came to California in Jan, 2000 made the deadly mistake of not taking the copy of approved I-140 (I still slap myself every morning for that mistake ;) )
- Found out they have only one customer
- Founder wasted own 20 Million dollars but never increased the tally for the customer from 1
- "Startup" went under in 2002.
- Joined new company (the only customer of start-up) and filed labor in March, 2003 and enjoying every minute of it... :)
Cheers
ArkBird
- Had Labor + 140 approved in Dec, 99.
- tricked and lured by start-up in silicon valley. Abandoned everything and came to California in Jan, 2000 made the deadly mistake of not taking the copy of approved I-140 (I still slap myself every morning for that mistake ;) )
- Found out they have only one customer
- Founder wasted own 20 Million dollars but never increased the tally for the customer from 1
- "Startup" went under in 2002.
- Joined new company (the only customer of start-up) and filed labor in March, 2003 and enjoying every minute of it... :)
Cheers
ArkBird
alanoconnor
01-23 06:16 AM
pd dec 03
rir
case "in process"
rir
case "in process"
No comments:
Post a Comment