Current H-1B Cap Count for Fiscal Year 2007 as of 05/19/2006
As of 05/19/2006
Cap | Beneficiaries Approved | Beneficiaries Pending | Beneficiary Target 1 | Total | Date of Last Count | |
H-1B | 58,200 2 | 6,934 | 35,942 | 61,000 | 42,876 | 5/19/2006 |
H-1B Advance Degree Exemption | 20,000 | 1,537 | 3,821 | 21,000 | 5,358 | 5/19/2006 |
H-1B (FY 06) | 58,200 | —— | —— | —— | Cap Reached | 8/10/2005 |
H-1B Advance Degree Exemption (FY 06) | 20,000 | —— | —— | —— | Cap Reached | 1/17/2006 |
1 Refers to the estimated numbers of beneficiary applications needed to reach the cap
US sets ball rolling on H-1B visa cap
Via The Economic Times of India
NEW DELHI: The move to increase the
number of visas for temporary highly skilled (H-1B) workers has gathered
momentum in the US Senate, with the introduction of yet another bill, S 2611 or
‘a bill to provide for comprehensive immigration reform and for other
purposes’.
The bill proposes to increase the annual cap from
65,000 to 115,000 and automatically increase the new cap by 20% each year. The
bill also proposes to create a new exemption to the proposed cap for anyone who
has an “advanced degree in science, technology, engineering, or
math” from any foreign university.
As per the proposals in
this bill, H-1B workers are eligible for green cards and will be allowed to stay
and work in the US for as long as it takes to process the green card
application.
US Senate in wrangle over English
The US Senate has voted in favour of making English the national language.
The measure, backed by Republicans, came as an amendment
to a controversial immigration bill currently going through the Senate.
Lawmakers voted by 63-34 in favour of the move, which
calls on the government to “preserve and enhance the role of English as
the national language”.
But the Senate also approved a milder Democrat amendment describing English as the “common and unifying language”.
Neither of the bills would bar the use of Spanish or other languages in government services.
‘Preserving our culture’
The BBC’s Emilio San Pedro, in Miami, says the issue of
the preservation of the English language and American culture is for
many at the heart of the immigration debate in the US.
Many Americans are concerned that the influx of
immigrants from the Mexican border are altering the very fabric of
American life, our correspondent says.
 |
US ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS
About 11.5m illegal immigrants in the US
Four out of 10 have been in US five years or less
75% were born in Latin America
Most enter via southern US border
California, Texas and Florida host most illegal immigrants
Many work in agriculture, transport and construction
|
“This is not just about preserving our culture and
heritage, but also about bettering the odds for our nation’s newest
potential citizens,” said Oklahoma Republican James Inhofe, who
sponsored the national language amendment.
Sen Inhofe said polls show around 80% of Americans would support a move to formalise English as the national language.
But critics fear the move could lead to discrimination against people who are not proficient in English.
“Although the intent may not be there, I really believe
this amendment is racist,” said Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid. “I
believe it is directed at people who speak Spanish.”
Both amendments will be included in the bill that the
Senate sends to the House of Representatives, where the differences
will need to be reconciled.
President Bush, during a visit to Arizona to promote his
immigration reform package, did not specifically endorse the move but
stressed the need for unity.
“Americans are bound together by shared ideals and
appreciation of our history, of respect for our flag and ability to
speak the English language,” he said.
Mr Bush has proposed tightening border security while
giving many existing illegal immigrants the right to stay. Many
Republicans say the plan is too soft, arguing that illegal immigration
should be criminalised, while Central American states have attacked the
US proposal to build hundreds of kilometres of fencing along its border.
Senate vote endorses English as the ‘national language’
The Senate voted yesterday to make English the ”national language” of the United States, declaring that no one has a right to federal communications or services in a language other than English except for those already guaranteed by law.
The measure, approved by a vote of 63 to 34, directs the government
to ”preserve and enhance” the role of English, without altering
current laws that require some government documents and services to be
provided in other languages. Opponents, however, said it could negate
executive orders, regulations, civil service guidances, and other
multilingual ordinances not officially sanctioned by acts of Congress.
Only nine Senate Democrats voted for the amendment; one Republican, Senator Pete V. Domenici of New Mexico, voted against it.
The
English-language debate has roiled American politics for decades, and
in some quarters, has been as controversial and important as the
long-debated amendment to ban flag burning.
The impact of the new
Senate language amendment was unclear even after its passage. The
language negating claims to multilingual services appears
straightforward. It also sets requirements that immigrants seeking US
citizenship know the English language and US history. The amendment
would require more thorough testing to demonstrate English-language
proficiency and knowledge of US history and customs like the Pledge of
Allegiance and the national anthem.
But its author, Senator James
Inhofe, Republican of Oklahoma, made two last-minute changes that some
opponents said would water down its effect significantly. By
stipulating that the English-only mandates could not negate existing
laws, Inhofe spared current ordinances that allow bilingual education
or multilingual ballots. And by changing the amendment to label English
the ”national language” rather than the ”official language” of the
country, Inhofe may have lessened its symbolic power.
”In my
view, we had it watered down enough to make it acceptable,” said
Senator John McCain, Republican of Arizona, one of the chief architects
of the Senate immigration bill.
But proimmigration groups and
some Democrats said the amendment would obliterate executive orders
issued by President Clinton that mandated the provision of multilingual
services and communications by a variety of federal agencies, and could
undermine court orders, agency regulations, civil service guidances,
and state and local ordinances that provide multilingual services.
Further
complicating the picture, moments after approving the Inhofe amendment,
the Senate voted 58 to 39 to approve a competing amendment by Senator
Ken Salazar, Democrat of Colorado, declaring English the ”common
unifying language of the United States” but mandating that nothing in
that declaration ”shall diminish or expand any existing rights”
regarding multilingual services.
Senators said the conflict will have to be worked out in negotiations with the House.
Bush opposes English as national language: Gonzales
HOUSTON (Reuters) – President George W. Bush
has long opposed making English the country’s national language,
Attorney General Alberto Gonzales said on Friday, the day after the
Senate voted to do so.
The vote came in an amendment to proposed
legislation overhauling U.S. immigration law and directed the
government to “preserve and enhance” the role of English. Opponents
said it could affect the status of some multilingual services offered
by government organizations.
Adding to the confusion, the Senate
also adopted a softer amendment calling English the “unifying language”
of the United States. Senators take both versions into negotiations
over a final bill with the U.S. House of Representatives.
Gonzales did not directly address Bush’s position on the
controversial amendment because the Senate has not yet voted on the
whole bill. But he said that Bush has in the past rejected such efforts.
“The
president has never supported making English the national language,”
Gonzales said after meeting with state and local officials in Texas to
discuss cooperation on enforcement of immigration laws.
He said
Bush has instead long supported a concept called “English-Plus,”
believing that it was good to be proficient in more than one language.
“English
represents freedom in our country and anybody who wants to be
successful in our country has a much better chance of doing so if they
speak English,” Gonzales said. “It is of course a common language.”
But, Gonzales said, “I don’t see the need to have laws or legislation that says English is the national language.”
The text of President Bush’s address on US immigration policy
THE PRESIDENT: Good evening. I’ve asked for a few minutes of your time to discuss a matter of national importance
— the reform of America’s immigration system.
The issue of immigration stirs intense emotions, and in recent
weeks, Americans have seen those emotions on display. On the streets of
major cities, crowds have rallied in support of those in our country
illegally. At our southern border, others have organized to stop
illegal immigrants from coming in. Across the country, Americans are
trying to reconcile these contrasting images. And in Washington, the
debate over immigration reform has reached a time of decision. Tonight,
I will make it clear where I stand, and where I want to lead our
country on this vital issue.
We must begin by recognizing the problems with our immigration
system. For decades, the United States has not been in complete control
of its borders. As a result, many who want to work in our economy have
been able to sneak across our border, and millions have stayed.
Once here, illegal immigrants live in the shadows of our society.
Many use forged documents to get jobs, and that makes it difficult for
employers to verify that the workers they hire are legal. Illegal
immigration puts pressure on public schools and hospitals, it strains
state and local budgets, and brings crime to our communities. These are
real problems. Yet we must remember that the vast majority of illegal
immigrants are decent people who work hard, support their families,
practice their faith, and lead responsible lives. They are a part of
American life, but they are beyond the reach and protection of American
law.
We’re a nation of laws, and we must enforce our laws. We’re also a
nation of immigrants, and we must uphold that tradition, which has
strengthened our country in so many ways. These are not contradictory
goals. America can be a lawful society and a welcoming society at the
same time. We will fix the problems created by illegal immigration, and
we will deliver a system that is secure, orderly, and fair. So I
support comprehensive immigration reform that will accomplish five
clear objectives.
First, the United States must secure its borders. This is a basic
responsibility of a sovereign nation. It is also an urgent requirement
of our national security. Our objective is straightforward: The border
should be open to trade and lawful immigration, and shut to illegal
immigrants, as well as criminals, drug dealers, and terrorists.
I was a governor of a state that has a 1,200-mile border with
Mexico. So I know how difficult it is to enforce the border, and how
important it is. Since I became President, we’ve increased funding for
border security by 66 percent, and expanded the Border Patrol from
about 9,000 to 12,000 agents. The men and women of our Border Patrol
are doing a fine job in difficult circumstances, and over the past five
years, they have apprehended and sent home about six million people
entering America illegally.
Despite this progress, we do not yet have full control of the
border, and I am determined to change that. Tonight I’m calling on
Congress to provide funding for dramatic improvements in manpower and
technology at the border. By the end of 2008, we’ll increase the number
of Border Patrol officers by an additional 6,000. When these new agents
are deployed, we’ll have more than doubled the size of the Border
Patrol during my presidency.
At the same time, we’re launching the most technologically advanced
border security initiative in American history. We will construct
high-tech fences in urban corridors, and build new patrol roads and
barriers in rural areas. We’ll employ motion sensors, infrared cameras,
and unmanned aerial vehicles to prevent illegal crossings. America has
the best technology in the world, and we will ensure that the Border
Patrol has the technology they need to do their job and secure our
border.
Training thousands of new Border Patrol agents and bringing the most
advanced technology to the border will take time. Yet the need to
secure our border is urgent. So I’m announcing several immediate steps
to strengthen border enforcement during this period of transition:
One way to help during this transition is to use the National Guard.
So, in coordination with governors, up to 6,000 Guard members will be
deployed to our southern border. The Border Patrol will remain in the
lead. The Guard will assist the Border Patrol by operating surveillance
systems, analyzing intelligence, installing fences and vehicle
barriers, building patrol roads, and providing training. Guard units
will not be involved in direct law enforcement activities — that duty
will be done by the Border Patrol. This initial commitment of Guard
members would last for a period of one year. After that, the number of
Guard forces will be reduced as new Border Patrol agents and new
technologies come online. It is important for Americans to know that we
have enough Guard forces to win the war on terror, to respond to
natural disasters, and to help secure our border.
The United States is not going to militarize the southern border.
Mexico is our neighbor, and our friend. We will continue to work
cooperatively to improve security on both sides of the border, to
confront common problems like drug trafficking and crime, and to reduce
illegal immigration.
Another way to help during this period of transition is through
state and local law enforcement in our border communities. So we’ll
increase federal funding for state and local authorities assisting the
Border Patrol on targeted enforcement missions. We will give state and
local authorities the specialized training they need to help federal
officers apprehend and detain illegal immigrants. State and local law
enforcement officials are an important part of our border security and
they need to be a part of our strategy to secure our borders.
The steps I’ve outlined will improve our ability to catch people
entering our country illegally. At the same time, we must ensure that
every illegal immigrant we catch crossing our southern border is
returned home. More than 85 percent of the illegal immigrants we catch
crossing the southern border are Mexicans, and most are sent back home
within 24 hours. But when we catch illegal immigrants from other
country [sic] it is not as easy to send them home. For many years, the
government did not have enough space in our detention facilities to
hold them while the legal process unfolded. So most were released back
into our society and asked to return for a court date. When the date
arrived, the vast majority did not show up. This practice, called
“catch and release,” is unacceptable, and we will end it.
We’re taking several important steps to meet this goal. We’ve
expanded the number of beds in our detention facilities, and we will
continue to add more. We’ve expedited the legal process to cut the
average deportation time. And we’re making it clear to foreign
governments that they must accept back their citizens who violate our
immigration laws. As a result of these actions, we’ve ended “catch and
release” for illegal immigrants from some countries. And I will ask
Congress for additional funding and legal authority, so we can end
“catch and release” at the southern border once and for all. When
people know that they’ll be caught and sent home if they enter our
country illegally, they will be less likely to try to sneak in.
Second, to secure our border, we must create a temporary worker
program. The reality is that there are many people on the other side of
our border who will do anything to come to America to work and build a
better life. They walk across miles of desert in the summer heat, or
hide in the back of 18-wheelers to reach our country. This creates
enormous pressure on our border that walls and patrols alone will not
stop. To secure the border effectively, we must reduce the numbers of
people trying to sneak across.
Therefore, I support a temporary worker program that would create a
legal path for foreign workers to enter our country in an orderly way,
for a limited period of time. This program would match willing foreign
workers with willing American employers for jobs Americans are not
doing. Every worker who applies for the program would be required to
pass criminal background checks. And temporary workers must return to
their home country at the conclusion of their stay.
A temporary worker program would meet the needs of our economy, and
it would give honest immigrants a way to provide for their families
while respecting the law. A temporary worker program would reduce the
appeal of human smugglers, and make it less likely that people would
risk their lives to cross the border. It would ease the financial
burden on state and local governments, by replacing illegal workers
with lawful taxpayers. And above all, a temporary worker program would
add to our security by making certain we know who is in our country and
why they are here.
Third, we need to hold employers to account for the workers they
hire. It is against the law to hire someone who is in this country
illegally. Yet businesses often cannot verify the legal status of their
employees because of the widespread problem of document fraud.
Therefore, comprehensive immigration reform must include a better
system for verifying documents and work eligibility. A key part of that
system should be a new identification card for every legal foreign
worker. This card should use biometric technology, such as digital
fingerprints, to make it tamper-proof. A tamper-proof card would help
us enforce the law, and leave employers with no excuse for violating
it. And by making it harder for illegal immigrants to find work in our
country, we would discourage people from crossing the border illegally
in the first place.
Fourth, we must face the reality that millions of illegal immigrants
are here already. They should not be given an automatic path to
citizenship. This is amnesty, and I oppose it. Amnesty would be unfair
to those who are here lawfully, and it would invite further waves of
illegal immigration.
Some in this country argue that the solution is to deport every
illegal immigrant, and that any proposal short of this amounts to
amnesty. I disagree. It is neither wise, nor realistic to round up
millions of people, many with deep roots in the United States, and send
them across the border. There is a rational middle ground between
granting an automatic path to citizenship for every illegal immigrant,
and a program of mass deportation. That middle ground recognizes there
are differences between an illegal immigrant who crossed the border
recently, and someone who has worked here for many years, and has a
home, a family, and an otherwise clean record.
I believe that illegal immigrants who have roots in our country and
want to stay should have to pay a meaningful penalty for breaking the
law, to pay their taxes, to learn English, and to work in a job for a
number of years. People who meet these conditions should be able to
apply for citizenship, but approval would not be automatic, and they
will have to wait in line behind those who played by the rules and
followed the law. What I’ve just described is not amnesty, it is a way
for those who have broken the law to pay their debt to society, and
demonstrate the character that makes a good citizen.
Fifth, we must honor the great American tradition of the melting
pot, which has made us one nation out of many peoples. The success of
our country depends upon helping newcomers assimilate into our society,
and embrace our common identity as Americans. Americans are bound
together by our shared ideals, an appreciation of our history, respect
for the flag we fly, and an ability to speak and write the English
language. English is also the key to unlocking the opportunity of
America. English allows newcomers to go from picking crops to opening a
grocery, from cleaning offices to running offices, from a life of
low-paying jobs to a diploma, a career, and a home of their own. When
immigrants assimilate and advance in our society, they realize their
dreams, they renew our spirit, and they add to the unity of America.
Tonight, I want to speak directly to members of the House and the
Senate: An immigration reform bill needs to be comprehensive, because
all elements of this problem must be addressed together, or none of
them will be solved at all. The House has passed an immigration bill.
The Senate should act by the end of this month so we can work out the
differences between the two bills, and Congress can pass a
comprehensive bill for me to sign into law.
America needs to conduct this debate on immigration in a reasoned
and respectful tone. Feelings run deep on this issue, and as we work it
out, all of us need to keep some things in mind. We cannot build a
unified country by inciting people to anger, or playing on anyone’s
fears, or exploiting the issue of immigration for political gain. We
must always remember that real lives will be affected by our debates
and decisions, and that every human being has dignity and value no
matter what their citizenship papers say.
I know many of you listening tonight have a parent or a grandparent
who came here from another country with dreams of a better life. You
know what freedom meant to them, and you know that America is a more
hopeful country because of their hard work and sacrifice. As President,
I’ve had the opportunity to meet people of many backgrounds, and hear
what America means to them. On a visit to Bethesda Naval Hospital,
Laura and I met a wounded Marine named Guadalupe Denogean. Master
Gunnery Sergeant Denogean came to the United States from Mexico when he
was a boy. He spent his summers picking crops with his family, and then
he volunteered for the United States Marine Corps as soon as he was
able. During the liberation of Iraq, Master Gunnery Sergeant Denogean
was seriously injured. And when asked if he had any requests, he made
two: a promotion for the corporal who helped rescue him, and the chance
to become an American citizen. And when this brave Marine raised his
right hand, and swore an oath to become a citizen of the country he had
defended for more than 26 years, I was honored to stand at his side.
We will always be proud to welcome people like Guadalupe Denogean as
fellow Americans. Our new immigrants are just what they’ve always been
— people willing to risk everything for the dream of freedom. And
America remains what she has always been: the great hope on the
horizon, an open door to the future, a blessed and promised land. We
honor the heritage of all who come here, no matter where they come
from, because we trust in our country’s genius for making us all
Americans — one nation under God.
Thank you, and good night.
END 8:18 P.M. EDT
Senate guest worker plan survives attack, Boxer, Alabama Republican fails to kill provision, but number of visas is reduced
Via The San Fransisco Chronical
By Carolyn Lochhead, Chronicle Washington Bureau
Washington —
Seldom do California’s liberal Democratic Sen. Barbara Boxer and Alabama’s
conservative Republican Sen. Jeff Sessions agree on anything. But they joined
Tuesday in a failed attempt to kill the guest worker provision of the Senate’s
broad overhaul of U.S. immigration law, calling it a threat to U.S. workers.
Their 69-28 defeat — one of a sequence of amendment battles that
backers of the Senate bill won handily — demonstrated a powerful momentum
behind the underlying legislation. Senators on both sides said President Bush’s
push for the bill in a prime-time speech Monday night, in which he called for
National Guard troops at the Mexican border, had aided its prospects.
But even if the Senate bill passes, it faces a difficult future. The House
passed a border enforcement bill, and conservative Republicans show little sign
of bending to Bush’s will on an issue that has riled GOP voters across the
country. The bills would have to be merged and House leaders persuaded in an
election year to embrace Senate provisions creating a program to allow legal
residence and citizenship for illegal immigrants now in the country — an
idea they have rejected repeatedly as tantamount to amnesty.
The emotional Senate debate Tuesday threw a spotlight on the deep
fractures the immigration issue opens in both parties, the strange and fragile
alliances it forges and the conundrums posed by any attempt to control the flow
of human beings over national boundaries.
Those alliances included the call by Boxer and Sessions to kill a proposed
guest worker program that would provide temporary visas for future immigrants
with jobs in the United States.
“There are 3.6 million workers in construction with an average wage of
$18.21,” Boxer said. “I meet with my working people in California. They’re
fighting hard for these jobs, they want more of these jobs, not less of these
jobs, and the last thing they want is a guest worker program that is going to
provide a big pool of workers who will get far less than this amount and take
jobs away from my people.”
“There is nothing temporary about this guest worker program,” agreed
Sessions, saying the bill offers new migrants — as well as most of the
estimated 12 million illegal immigrants already in the country — a path to
citizenship, leading to extraordinary new numbers of blue-collar migrants.
Several senators on both sides of the aisle — including Dianne
Feinstein, a California Democrat who voted for the immigration bill in the
Judiciary Committee — cited a new analysis released Monday by the
conservative Heritage Foundation that predicted far more people immigrating
into the country than anticipated as a result of the Senate’s legislation.
Feinstein and Jeff Bingaman, D-N.M., prevailed 79-18 on an amendment to
reduce the number of low-skill guest worker visas from 325,000 a year to
200,000 and to remove an automatic escalator that would have increased the
low-skill visas by 20 percent each year that the ceiling was reached.
The Heritage analysis added up all the provisions of the 616-page Senate
bill and extended them over 20 years, producing a mid-range estimate of more
than 100 million new legal immigrants — a third of the current U.S.
population — if the guest worker programs grow at 10 percent a year and
workers bring their families as currently allowed.
“It all adds up to millions and millions of people,” Feinstein said.
In addition to a new guest worker program for unskilled immigrants, the
overall bill would provide a path to earned citizenship for those immigrants
who entered the illegally country before January 2004, toughen border
enforcement, impose new sanctions on employers who hire illegal immigrants,
provide a separate program for 1.5 million farm workers and expand visas for
high-skilled migrants.
Guest worker provisions include not only the visa program for low-skill
workers but also an expansion of H1B visas for high-skill workers, many of whom
are employed in Silicon Valley. The H1B visa is the primary U.S. work permit, a
nonimmigrant classification used by a foreign worker who will be employed
temporarily in a specialty occupation.
“We did not realize the extent to which large numbers of people are
brought in on some of these visas,” Feinstein said, noting that the Judiciary
Committee took its earlier action under a strict deadline to produce a bill.
Feinstein said she would like to eliminate the 20 percent escalator in the
H1B skilled visa category as well.
“It’s simply too many,” Feinstein said, adding the H1B category — which
has stirred controversy among U.S.-born engineers — could generate 3.67
million foreign workers over the next 10 years.
The proposed H1B expansion from 65,000 visas to 115,000, with the 20
percent escalator each year the ceiling is breached, is eagerly sought by
computer makers who contend that educated foreigners are an asset to the
industry and vital to maintaining the U.S. technological lead. It has stirred
opposition among native-born engineers who contend that foreign tech workers
have undermined salaries and discouraged U.S. children from entering tech
fields.
Supporters of the bill, including its chief sponsors Sen. Edward Kennedy,
D-Mass., and Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., countered that the bill contains
protections for U.S. workers and immigrants alike, including requirements that
employers search for U.S. workers first and pay prevailing wages.
The first critical test vote after Bush’s speech came Tuesday when the
Senate defeated an amendment by Sen. Johnny Isakson, D-Ga., that would have
required the administration to certify that the borders were secure before
legal immigration could be expanded. The amendment, which would have brought
down the entire bill, lost 40-55 when 17 Republicans joined 38 Democrats to
defeat it.
The vote “was a good sign that we’ve got a majority coalition to hold
together on it,” said Sen. Sam Brownback, R-Kan., a key conservative backer of
the legislation. He said Bush’s call Monday to send 6,000 National Guard troops
to the border helped undermine a key conservative objection.
“A number of people have been calling for National Guard troops on the
border for some time,” Brownback said. “So he said, fine, he’ll do it. I think
it helped on that.”
Sen. Mel Martinez, R-Fla., another chief sponsor, said he was nervous
before the vote on Isakson’s amendment because it was “the toughest for most
people. I think (support) will grow from here.”
The Senate, continuing to work through several dozen amendments, is set to
vote on passage by Memorial Day.
Some members speculate privately that the difficulty of melding any Senate
call for broader legal immigration with the House enforcement crackdown,
combined with Bush’s political weakness, could delay a conference committee
until after the election — and possibly kill the bill entirely.
Yet the progress of the legislation has been eerily similar to the
struggle over the last major immigration overhaul 20 years ago, where a fragile
coalition of business and ethnic lobbies cobbled together legislation that
skirted defeat several times.
H-1B Cap Count as of 5/12/2006
|
Cap |
Beneficiaries Approved |
Beneficiaries Pending |
Beneficiary Target 1 |
Total |
Date of Last Count |
|
|
H-1B |
58,200 2 |
6,033 |
28,775 |
61,000 |
34,808 |
5/12/2006 |
|
H-1B Advance Degree Exemption |
20,000 |
1,392 |
3,246 |
21,000 |
4,638 |
5/12/2006 |
|
H-1B (FY 06) |
58,200 |
—— |
—— |
—— |
Cap Reached |
8/10/2005 |
|
H-1B Advance Degree Exemption (FY 06) |
20,000 |
—— |
—— |
—— |
Cap Reached |
1/17/2006 |
Excerpts From Bush’s Speech on Immigration
Excerpts of President Bush’s address Monday night on immigration, as released by the White House.
——
On Bush’s ideas for immigration overhaul:
“We are a nation of laws, and we must enforce our laws. We are also a
nation of immigrants, and we must uphold that tradition, which has
strengthened our country in so many ways. These are not contradictory
goals. America can be a lawful society and a welcoming society at the
same time. We will fix the problems created by illegal immigration, and
we will deliver a system that is secure, orderly, and fair.”
——
On border security:
“Since I became
president, we have increased funding for border security by 66 percent
and expanded the Border Patrol from about 9,000 to 12,000 agents. …
We have apprehended and sent home about 6 million people entering
America illegally.
“Despite this progress, we do not yet have full control of the border,
and I am determined to change that. Tonight I am calling on Congress to
provide funding for dramatic improvements in manpower and technology at
the border.”
——
On a temporary worker program:
“The reality is that
there are many people on the other side of our border who will do
anything to come to America to work and build a better life. They walk
across miles of desert in the summer heat, or hide in the back of
18-wheelers to reach our country. This creates enormous pressure on our
border that walls and patrols alone will not stop. To secure the border
effectively we must reduce the numbers of people trying to sneak
across.”
——
On enforcement:
“We need to hold
employers to account for the workers they hire. It is against the law
to hire someone who is in this country illegally. Yet businesses often
cannot verify the legal status of their employees because of the
widespread problem of document fraud. Therefore, comprehensive
immigration reform must include a better system for verifying documents
and work eligibility. …
“A tamper-proof card would help us enforce the law and leave employers
with no excuse for violating it. And by making it harder for illegal
immigrants to find work in our country, we would discourage people from
crossing the border illegally in the first place.”
——
On amnesty:
“We must face the reality that millions of illegal immigrants
are already here. They should not be given an automatic path to
citizenship. This is amnesty, and I oppose it. Amnesty would be unfair
to those who are here lawfully and it would invite further waves of
illegal immigration.”
——
On assimilation:
“We must honor the
great American tradition of the melting pot, which has made us one
nation out of many peoples. The success of our country depends upon
helping newcomers assimilate into our society, and embrace our common
identity as Americans. Americans are bound together by our shared
ideals, an appreciation of our history, respect for the flag we fly,
and an ability to speak and write the English language.”
——
On the tone of the debate:
“We must always remember that real lives will be affected by our
debates and decisions, and that every human being has dignity and value
no matter what their citizenship papers say.”
Many unaware of enforcement level
Via The Star-Telegram
By BRYON OKADA and DIANE SMITH
STAR-TELEGRAM STAFF WRITERS
05/15/2006
FORT WORTH – Under President Bush, the U.S. has already deported more people than under any other president in U.S. history.
Since Bush took office, the U.S. has not deported fewer than 150,000
illegal immigrants a year and had deported an estimated 881,478 through
2005. According to U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, the U.S.
deported 160,700 people in fiscal 2005. Of these, 52.5 percent were
criminal illegal immigrants.
Now Bush is poised to push a harder stance by bringing in National
Guard troops to patrol the U.S.-Mexico border. He is expected to
provide details during a prime-time address tonight.
News of the president’s plan comes as hard-line immigration
advocates push for better policing of the estimated 11 million illegal
immigrants in the United States. But longtime immigration experts and
former government officials say the public hasn’t been paying attention.
Lynn Ligon, a retired work-site investigator for the former U.S.
Immigration and Naturalization Service, said the agency “has been
enforcing the laws all along.”
But a recent Zogby poll commissioned by the Center for Immigration
Studies found that 70 percent of respondents agree with the statement,
“Efforts in the past have been grossly inadequate and the government
has never really tried to enforce immigration laws.”
At its shrillest, the national hoopla — immigrants and critics shouting at each other in the streets “Si se puede!” and
“Secure the border, that’s an order!” — illustrates the no-win
situation that immigration enforcement officials have to deal with
every day.
“The public may want to see high-profile raids,” Ligon said, “so
they can say, ‘Boy, I’m not going to shop there,’ and then next week
they’re back again.”
High-profile is what the public got with the April 20 bust of IFCO
Systems North America, a Houston-based pallet-services company. Seven
managers and 1,187 illegal immigrants were arrested in 26 states.
Same with Operation Tarmac, which was launched in December 2001 and
netted more than 900 unauthorized workers at U.S. airports, including
62 at Dallas/Fort Worth Airport in November 2002.
In both cases, the rhetoric was tough. The night of the IFCO bust,
Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff said the government would
target the biggest offenders. Julie Myers, chief of Immigration and
Customs Enforcement, echoed the sentiment. Talk of an amnesty program,
long part of Bush’s proposed policy for handling illegal immigration,
subsided.
Immigrants, legal and illegal, interpreted the IFCO bust differently.
Rumors of random raids and widespread stings circulated, including
in Fort Worth. Students, mostly in rural areas, stayed home from
school. A rumor circulated that authorities were looking for single men
and people with criminal records.
Immigration officials expressed dismay at the reaction. “I’m
starting to sound like a broken record,” agency spokesman Carl Rusnok
said wearily after another day of trying to tell people that no random
raids were being carried out.
This is the fickle, schizophrenic history that immigration
enforcement officers deal with: wild swings between talk of amnesty
programs and mass deportations.
“Immigration [officials] won’t pick up kids coming out of school —
that is a no-no,” Ligon said. “They are not going to be following kids
home to see where they live.”
It’s not that the illegal immigrants aren’t there in plain sight.
Everybody knows. But these days — post-9-11 — the focus is on
stopping terrorists, not day laborers.
Hey Buddy, Can You Spare an Engineer
05/14/2006
Richard Powers knows the engineering work is out there and that his
company, BCI Engineering & Scientists, has the talent to compete
for its share of the growing market.
The
big problem will be finding enough skilled employees to do the work,
said Powers, the president and chief executive officer of the Lakeland
company.
“For more than two years now, the demand for people has
been extreme,” he said. “We are not making phone calls (looking for
business). If we got any more work, we don’t know how we would do it.”
BCI
employs 120 people and has 18 openings requiring degrees in engineering
or science, such as biology or geotechnical engineering, a branch of
geology dealing with soils and minerals, said Powers, a licensed
geologist. The latter shortage is particularly acute.
“If we can find four of them, they’d have work right away,” he said.
If finding 18 people seems challenging, it actually represents progress, Powers said. A year ago, BCI had 30 such job openings.
“This is the firs time in years I can remember having less than 20,” he said.
In 1997, when Powers bought a controlling interest in the company, BCI had about 40 employees with $3 million in annual revenue.
Powers
and senior managers developed an aggressive growth plan that added
services, including water resource and environmental consulting, and
new Florida offices in Orlando, Jupiter and Minneola.
Last year
the company had $13 million in revenue and expects to top $15 million
this year, Powers said. It hopes to reach $30 million by 2010.
Only the shortage of skilled labor will hold his company back, Powers added.
BCI hardly faces that problem alone.
“We
see that not only in our profession but in speaking to my (business)
colleagues,” said Anu Saxena, an engineer and president of
Ascgeosciences Inc., another Lakeland engineering firm. “Business
owners today not only have to manage financial capital, they have to
manage their human capital.”
The shortages exist particularly
large in growth states like Florida, said Pramod Khargonekar, the dean
of the College of Engineering at the University of Florida in
Gainesville.
“The number of graduates hasn’t increased that much, but the demand has boomed,” Khargonekar said.
In
Florida, the shortages have cropped up in fields such as civil and
geotechnical engineering related to the state’s construction boom,
Saxena and Khargonekar agreed. Geotechnical engineering includes soil
and construction materials testing and construction inspection.
All
three engineers traced the skilled labor shortage to two factors
largely beyond the profession’s ability to control: The decline of
graduates in scientific fields from U.S. colleges and the increasing
difficulty in recruiting foreign-born professionals because of the post
9/11 controversy over federal immigration policies.
U.S.
colleges will produce 45,000 graduates with technical degrees, Powers
said. China alone will produce 1.5 million such graduates, and India
nearly as many.
“The problem is in the elementary, middle and
high schools,” he said. “Their whole experience in earth science might
be one chapter in one book.”
Lack of trained science teachers
means not only that students get a poor foundation in academics, but
indifferent teachers fail to motivate students to consider a career in
science fields, Powers said.
“Deficiencies in science and
engineering start in the elementary, middle and high schools,” Saxena
agreed. “The schools need to do more to prop up interest in the
sciences.”
The UF engineering college turns out about 950
graduates a year, Khargonekar said, but it could immediately increase
that to 1,200 if enough students showed interest.
“The other
thing we don’t do in this country is get enough women involved in
engineering and science,” he said. “In the middle schools, there’s this
kind of subliminal message sent to girls that science and engineering
are not for them.”
Powers and Saxena said professionals and
scientific societies are pushing for better science education in the
public schools. But Khargonekar did not absolve the professions
entirely.
“We in the engineering community haven’t done enough
to tell people what engineers do,” the dean said. “Everybody knows what
a doctor does and what a lawyer does, but nobody knows what an engineer
does.”
U.S. companies traditionally turned to foreign-born
students who obtained technical degrees in their own countries or at
U.S. universities.
Since 9/11, fewer foreign students are
studying at U.S. universities, said Khargonekar, a native of India now
a U.S. citizen, and it has become harder for those that do matriculate
to find jobs in this country after graduation.
“What has
happened for the last three years is a growing perception that the
United States is not friendly to foreigners,” he said. “When I came
here (in 1978) it was very friendly.”
Many of BCI’s most recent
hires have been foreign-born professionals, said Les Bromwell, BCI’s
founder and a principal engineer. The last four hires in the water
resources group, the company’s largest, are from India, Turkey,
Thailand and China.
“We’re a little United Nations,” he said.
Still, Bromwell and Powers said, that route has become much longer and strewn with more red tape.
The
process at the federal Immigration and Naturalization Service of moving
from a student visa, which allows a person to work at a U.S. company
for a year after graduation, to a permanent resident with a “green
card” takes at least five years, Bromwell said. Citizenship can take 10
years or longer.
“I view that as a tremendous barrier,” Powers
said. “They (U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services officials) are
tremendously inefficient and not at all concerned with the needs of
business. (USCIS) is much more concerned about their process than
results and achievement.”
Moreover, the stiffening of U.S. visa
requirements comes at a time when other countries are competing more
effectively for skilled workers.
“Many engineers who came here
from India and China are no longer coming here. If they do come here
(for a degree), they go back because there’s more opportunity in their
home countries,” Saxena said. “Why come to America for opportunities
when there are opportunities in your own backyard.”
Khargonekar
sounded an optimistic note. Federal officials have come to realize they
are losing the global competition for top scientists and engineers, he
said, and they have begun relaxing entry restrictions for skilled
workers and degree-seeking students.
That suits BCI executives.
What Bromwell started as an engineering company catering to the
phosphate industry has branched out to embrace more than a dozen
engineering disciplines. Among them are aquatic restoration, geologic
hazards, investigative engineering and geographical information
services and database development.
It serves six major market areas — government, mining, industry, insurance, land development and construction.
Although
it does most of its business in Florida, Powers said, BCI has a global
reach that includes projects in India, Brazil, Jamaica and St. Croix.
Among its more nearby projects are:
• Aquatic restorations of Lakeland’s Banana Lake, the St. John’s River and the Lake Morton shoreline.
•
Civil engineering, such as the ongoing Eloise Redevelopment and
Revitalization Plan and a revitalization of downtown Inverness.
• Environmental reclamation projects such as the Tenoroc Fish Management Area.
Beginning
in the middle 1980s and accelerating in 1997, when Powers took control,
BCI officials realized the company had to diversify from it original
base in the boom-or-bust phosphate industry, the CEO said.
“There
was a new energy. There was a strong realization that, if we don’t
diversify our services and our client base, we probably will not be
around long,” Powers said.
Officials: Thousands of troops will head to border
Via CNN.com
05/15/2006
In Oval Office address, Bush urges Congress to increase funding
WASHINGTON (CNN) — President Bush will announce plans to deploy “up to 6,000” National Guard troops to the U.S.-Mexico border to support border patrol officers when he addresses the nation Monday night, an administration official said.
“We do not yet have full control of the border, and I am determined
to change that,” the president will say, according to excerpts of his
speech released by the White House.
“I am calling on
Congress to provide funding for dramatic improvements in manpower and
technology at the border,” Bush will say in his Oval Office speech to
the nation, which will be carried live at 8 p.m. ET Monday on CNN and
Pipeline.
Earlier, a senior administration official said the
president would announce the deployment of several thousand troops to
provide surveillance and security for U.S. border patrol agents as part
of his push for a broader overhaul of immigration laws.
The U.S. Immigration Law Blog by Ashwin Sharma 
Can you prove you’re a citizen?
Via The Portland Tribune
Immigration concerns could lead to tougher DMV regulations
The 2007 Oregon
Legislature must decide whether to require everyone applying for a
state driver’s license to prove they are in this country legally and
have a valid Social Security number.
Oregon law does not
currently require those applying for driver’s licenses to be U.S.
citizens or legal aliens. But a 2005 federal law called the Real ID Act
requires all states to issue driver’s licenses only to legal U.S.
residents with proof of their citizenship status. The act was passed
for a variety of purposes, including cracking down on potential illegal
immigrants, fraud, ID theft and child-support evaders.
Under the
act, citizens will be required to produce birth certificates,
naturalization papers or passports. Legal aliens will have to show
their immigration and residency documents. The act also requires all
applicants to have valid Social Security numbers.
The requirements would apply to both new applicants and people renewing their licenses.
All state governments must comply with the law by May 2008. If not,
the driver’s licenses and identification cards they issue will not be
accepted as identification for such federally regulated activities as
boarding an airplane, opening a checking account, collecting Social
Security benefits or qualifying for federally guaranteed student loans.
State Senate Majority Leader Kate Brown, D-Portland, said it is too
early to know what the Legislature will do because the federal
government has not yet finished writing the rules to implement the law.
But Brown is concerned that Congress has not appropriated any money to
help pay for the new licenses, which, she says, could cost up to $100
each to issue.
“People aren’t going to be willing to pay that,
and there will be gridlock at airports if the federal goverment doesn’t
get its act together,” Brown said.
One goal of the Real ID Act
is stemming the flow of illegal aliens, according to co-sponsor U.S.
Rep. James Sensenbrenner, R-Wis. In a Jan. 27 letter to constituents,
Sensenbrenner said the act helps to bring “the issue of illegal
immigration to the forefront of the national debate.”
Jim Ludwick, the director of Oregonians for Immigration Reform, believes the state should comply with the Real ID Act.
“If we don’t comply, we face financial ruin. There are so many
things we won’t be able to do with our driver licenses — including
getting a job,” said Ludwick, whose statewide advocacy group favors
tougher immigration laws.
A number of immigration-rights groups
oppose the federal act, saying it will turn the Oregon Driver and Motor
Vehicle Services into a de facto immigration agency and will not
prevent illegal immigrants from driving without licenses.
“It
will just marginalize undocumented workers even more and fuel a huge
black market in forged documents,” said Aeryca Steinbauer, a
coordinator for Causa, an immigrant-rights organization whose name
means “cause” in Spanish.
Oregon currently is one of 10 states
allowing illegal immigrants to obtain driver’s licenses, provided they
are Oregon residents. According to DMV spokesman David House, the
Legislature made the decision because it considers driving to be a
safety issue.
Safety first
Like other applicants, illegal aliens must pass written and hands-on driving tests to obtain their licenses.
“The feeling was, they’re here and driving anyway, so we need to make sure they’re safe drivers,” House said.
No committee of the Legislature currently is studying whether to
comply with the act. According to House, the state DMV has provided
individual legislators with background information on the act if they
ask.
The act also applies to identification cards issued by the state agency.
An analysis prepared by the Oregon DMV says that if the Legislature
agrees to comply with the act, “every driver in Oregon will be required
to provide proof of identity, Social Security number, legal presence
and address before being issued a driver’s license or identification
card.”
Illegal residents hard to count
The
DMV analysis predicts the new requirement could prevent 2.6 percent to
6 percent of driving-age residents from qualifying for a license.
According to House, the figures are only a guess because no one knows,
for certain, how many illegal aliens live in Oregon.
Government
agencies and nonprofits both publish estimates of the number of illegal
immigrants in Oregon. They vary widely, with the government figures on
the lower side.
The U.S. Census Bureau estimated there were
90,000 illegal immigrants in Oregon in 2000. The Oregon Employment
Department estimates the number is much higher now, somewhere between
120,000 and 132,000. The nonprofit Pew Hispanic Center put the figure
of “unauthorized migrants” even higher in an April 2006 fact sheet —
between 125,000 and 175,000. Also in April, the Oregon Center for
Public Policy, a liberal think tank, issued a report that
“conservatively” puts the “undocumented” immigrant population between
128,000 and 150,000.
A 2005 study by Bear Stearns, a national
investment consulting firm, concludes the higher estimates are more
accurate — and may even be too low. The study, titled “The Underground
Labor Force Is Rising to the Surface,” does not break the illegal
immigrant population down by state. But it concludes that the federal
government is drastically underestimating the number of illegal
immigrants in the country.
According to the report, the number
of illegal aliens in the country is at least twice the U.S. Census
Bureau’s estimate of around 9 million.
The size of this
extra-legal segment of the population is significantly understated
because the U.S. Census Bureau does not capture the total number of
illegal immigrants,” reads the report.
Although there are no
exact numbers, the majority of immigrants in Oregon — both legal and
illegal — are Hispanic. The Census Bureau estimates that 311,400
foreign-born people lived in Oregon in 2002. Of that number, the
largest group — 36.17 percent— was born in Mexico. For comparison, all
Asian countries put together accounted for 29.37 percent of the
foreign-born population.
The Census asks people if they speak a
language other than English at home. In 2000, approximately 321,350
Oregonians said yes, with more than 214,605 saying their primary
language was Spanish. The next most-common languages — German,
Vietnamese and Russian — each had less that one-tenth the number of
Spanish speakers.
Many workers undocumented
The
new requirements in the Real ID Act undoubtedly will inconvenience many
Oregonians who have lost their proof of citizenship or immigration
papers. But, if the new requirements prevent illegal immigrants from
driving, they also could cause problems for employers who rely on them,
knowingly or otherwise.
“Undocumented immigrants are critical to
the state work force. Without proper identification, these people will
find it harder to prove identity in banks and retail establishments and
to qualify for Oregon jobs,” according to the DMV analysis.
Whatever the figures, the employment department believes that the vast
majority of adult illegal immigrants are working. A routine 2001
Immigration and Naturalization Service audit found that illegal
immigrants are a significant presence in the Portland area. As part of
the audit, INS officials reviewed the paperwork for 3,306 service
industry employees and found that 834 — 25 percent — were in violation
of immigration laws.
The results of the audit were released days
before the 9/11 terrorist attacks. Since then, Congress has abolished
the INS and assigned its enforcement powers to a new agency within the
U.S. Department of Homeland Security: U.S. Immigration and Customs
Enforcement.
ICE no longer conducts routine audits on employees
within a service sector, according to Virginia Kice, ICE’s western
regional communications director and spokeswoman. Instead, Kice says
ICE is focusing its investigations on what she calls key components of
the public safety infrastructure, such as airport employees.
Federal investigators found 124 illegal immigrants working at the
Portland International Airport in December 2001 and arrested 30 of them
for using false documents as part of a national sweep called Operation
Tarmac.
According to Kice, ICE also is targeting employers who
intentionally break the law to employ illegal immigrants. Last month,
21 illegal immigrants were arrested at the North Portland office of
IFCO Systems North America, a pallet-building company. Nationally,
1,200 illegal immigrants and seven current or former company managers
were arrested during the sweep. Federal officials accuse the company of
recruiting workers in Mexico and Central America and paying to smuggle
them across the border.
Kice said ICE is conducting other investigations but declined to discuss them.
Ludwick expects more investigations and arrests if the state complies with the Real ID Act.
“Right now, Oregon driver’s licenses are an open invitation to
fraud,” he said. “But once the state toughens up its requirements,
identifying people who aren’t supposed to be here will be easier.”