June 7, 2007 10:30 PM PDT
Immigration overhaul bill dies in Senate
- Related Stories
-
Tech seeing red over green-card proposal
June 6, 2007 -
Work bill would create new ID database
May 21, 2007 -
Congress rethinks the Real ID Act
May 8, 2007 -
Immigration reform and America's innovation lead
May 25, 2006 -
Police blotter: 911 dispatcher misuses database, kills ex-girlfriend
May 19, 2006 -
There's no getting off that no-fly list
December 15, 2005 -
Aging computers hobble Homeland Security
December 15, 2005 -
FAQ: How Real ID will affect you
May 6, 2005 -
National IDs for everybody?
October 4, 2004 -
Senate scrutinizes air travel database
March 13, 2003
The proposal, which represented the most sweeping overhaul of U.S. immigration laws in a generation and was backed by President Bush, unexpectedly stalled on a procedural vote in the Senate of 45 to 50. At least 60 votes were needed.
At 628 pages, at least in its later forms (PDF), the bill was unusually convoluted and ignited an inferno of opposition from conservatives who said the new "Z" visa for illegal aliens would amount to an unacceptable form of amnesty.
Technology firms, too, fretted that the green card overhaul would chip away at the predictability of the current process for recruiting and hiring foreigners and leave too much control over the talent-screening process in the government's hands.
An opinion article by immigration attorney Martin Lawler in Thursday's Wall Street Journal calculated that the Secure Borders, Economic Opportunity, and Immigration Reform Act would have allowed Mexican horse groomers to obtain permanent residency--but blocked green card applications from actor Michael J. Fox, journalist Peter Jennings and California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, all immigrants.
Another flashpoint for criticism was the proposed creation of the Employment Eligibility Verification System, which would have created new databases that all employers would have to use to investigate the immigration status of current and future employees or face stiff penalties.
Republican-led opposition proved fatal to the shaky alliance between the president and the Democratic Senate leadership, which had hoped that a hard-fought compromise would survive a series of procedural votes this week. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, however, predicted the measure would eventually resurface on Capitol Hill.
See more CNET content tagged:
immigration,
vote,
president





http://www.heritage.org/Research/Immigration/wm1490.cfm
I thought buying votes was illegal? Thank God this bill was stopped.
Now if we can just get around to stop calling them illegal or undocumented immigrants. When my respective grandparents showed up here they were subjected to a massive amount of documentation. That's what made them immigrants. They were cataloged, numbered, and, in at least one case, had a slight name change. If you don't have the docs, you're not an immigrant. You're a lawbreaker. It's pretty simple.
Sorry, Mr. President. Or maybe not, depending on what you really intended...
Oracle
Google
Microsoft
Google especially should be ashamed of its behavior. They should be fighting for equal opportunity and freedom, not openly denying it to others and their workers.
No loss. We need to make sure that if the bill comes back we have the following safeguards for both h-1b employees:
#1 - Give immigrants the ability to control their own destiny. Allow h-1b employees to apply for Green Cards on their own (if they choose to). So that they can be safe from company shutdowns or layoffs, and can freely move around to make sure they are getting a fair value for their labor.
Let's put an end to the GREEN WHIP.
Open up the whole U.S. labor market to allow U.S. Citizens to compete in an open and fair market for U.S. jobs:
#1 - We are not asking for any job entitlement, just an equal opportunity for U.S. citizens to apply for and be considered for jobs in the United States. No employer, be they from India or any other country can be allowed to hire only from their native country for jobs based in the United States. To do so is clear discrimination, bigotry in its worst form, and must be banned.
H-1b jobs shops used by Google, and alike, practice open discrimination against workers in the United States, because these shops discriminate against americans, in favor of people with an h-1b.
For too long companies have been using the h-1b program to facilitate the IT Offshoring process. At the same time, these same companies have openly discriminated, barred, U.S. candidates from applying for jobs within the United States.
In open testimony, before Congress, a job candidate called a U.S. recruiting agency and asked if she could apply for a job. The Congress and staff were shocked to hear (and be direct I-witnesses to) that the recruiting agency would not consider her resume because she was not in the U.S. on an h-1b visa.
Two congressman, Dick Durbin and Chuck Grassely are investigating this, and several related incidents. As part of the investigation they sent a letter to the top users of h-1b Visas. Which happen to be the major Indian IT Outsourcing firms. These companies whined to the Indian government. Now the Indian government is putting up a smoke screen over the whole issue, a smoke screen consisting of International threats of Sanctions against the United States.
The U.S. needs to shine a bright light on the open job discrimination perpetrated against U.S. citizens. But India (specifically Karmal Nath) want to force/black-mail the United States into allowing open discrimination to occur within the United States.
We need to fight for the equality of the U.S. worker on U.S. soil. Not a handout, not entitlement, just equality.
And please contact your senator & congress person and stop "Birthright Citizenship". The cost to deliver babies is enourmous and we all pay for it through additional taxes and then the child is automatically a US Citizen.
($100,000 per head should do it) and much more diligent
enforcement against those who hire illegal immigrants. Problem
solved in a few months with no silly and expensive fences, walls,
electronic surveillance. Then valid U.S. workers could get back to a
fair employment playing field, and the Mexicans could go back and
make Mexico a better, less parasitic, less corrupt country.
Employers who've enjoyed the bounty of cheap, illegal labor should
be forced to take the hit. Not workers and not consumers.
2. It would screw up the system even worse for those of us who play by the rules.
3. It would provide a whole new set of criminalized behaviors to give the the executive branch an excuse to exercise force against the citizens of this country, i.e. you and me.
4. It would raise taxes.
5. It would divert tax money into the pockets of the cronies of the government representatives supporting this bill. The rich get richer and we end up paying the bill, assuming we can get the job.
6. The more databases the government creates to "manage" people, the more screwed up the data becomes, and the less capable they are of cleaning ANY of them up.
7. For what it's worth, I've yet to hear of an I.T. worker (or any other white collar worker for that matter) losing his or her job to an illegal immigrant. You just don't see a lot of ******** wearing 3-piece suits to work; although that might not necessarily hold true of snowbacks.
I use the terms "*******" and "snowback" in their traditional meanings to describe illegal aliens who come across the Mexican or Canadian borders. You don't like the terms, too bad; they are both accurate and appropriately derogatory of people who break the law.