PDA

View Full Version : Obama Admin to bypass Congress and change immigration system




Brian4Liberty
05-14-2014, 03:41 PM
The Obama Administration seems to be using some bureaucratic maneuvers (a "regulatory amendment") to bypass Congress and increase the number of immigrant work visas issued. In essence, this will allow those in the US on H-4 visas (spouses and families of those who come here with an H-1B) to be eligible to work. Currently the H-4 is not a work permitted visa.

Most H-1B visas are technical in nature, and the need for more and more of these visas is pushed by "best and brightest" and "can't find Americans to do the work" corporatist propaganda, which is then repeated by politicians and others who are complicit or ignorant of the truth.

What will be the justification for authorizing H-4 visa holders to get work permits? "Can't find any Americans for any jobs at all"?

No doubt the US Chamber of Commerce and their political puppets will go right along with Obama on this power grab. After all, it's obvious that unemployed American spouses, teenagers and other family members are not looking for work, so this is a necessary immigration "reform" measure. :rolleyes:


Summary

The Department of Homeland Security proposes to extend the availability of employment authorization to certain H-4 dependent spouses of principal H-1B nonimmigrants. The extension would be limited to H-4 dependent spouses of principal H-1B nonimmigrants who are in the process of seeking lawful permanent resident status through employment.

http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=USCIS-2010-0017-0001

Ronin Truth
05-14-2014, 03:44 PM
Will his order allow him to be POTUS?

RandallFan
05-14-2014, 04:14 PM
This is a good issue to hit Democrats on.

You are not going to win the hispanic vote because you say you want cheap labor for the tech lobby.

Brian4Liberty
05-14-2014, 06:40 PM
This is a good issue to hit Democrats on.

You are not going to win the hispanic vote because you say you want cheap labor for the tech lobby.

Every American from the middle-class down to minimum wage workers should be concerned about the level of immigration during a high unemployment recession, but the cultural Marxists have stifled all debate by screeching "that's racist" at all discussion of immigration.

Carson
05-14-2014, 06:52 PM
The Obama Administration seems to be using some bureaucratic maneuvers (a "regulatory amendment") to bypass Congress and increase the number of immigrant work visas issued. In essence, this will allow those in the US on H-4 visas (spouses and families of those who come here with an H-1B) to be eligible to work. Currently the H-4 is not a work permitted visa.

Most H-1B visas are technical in nature, and the need for more and more of these visas is pushed by "best and brightest" and "can't find Americans to do the work" corporatist propaganda, which is then repeated by politicians and others who are complicit or ignorant of the truth.

What will be the justification for authorizing H-4 visa holders to get work permits? "Can't find any Americans for any jobs at all"?

No doubt the US Chamber of Commerce and their political puppets will go right along with Obama on this power grab. After all, it's obvious that unemployed American spouses, teenagers and other family members are not looking for work, so this is a necessary immigration "reform" measure. :rolleyes:

I would imagine the central banks will make money on the money it creates to loan the government for all of the social services they will require. I think that is part of the reason this sort of thinking is so prevalent. That and unlimited funds to buy people that act this way.

I would imagine the whole conspiracy of corruption's economy will benefit.

Ours not so much. More of the wealth out of the capital that capitalism needs to operate will be sucked out by the stealth backdoor socialism.


When I started looking into where the money was coming from to buy off the politicians and subvert the immigration laws of the world, I came across what may be the root of many of our problems. Fiat Money.

No matter how much real money people can put together to build their countries the way they want there are those that can print up what ever it takes to get their way.

Maybe this will help make the danger of fiat money clear.

Imagine you and me are setting across from each other. We create enough money to represent all of the world's wealth. Each one of us has one SUPER Dollar in front of him.

You own half of everything and so do I.

I'm the government though. I get bribed into creating a Central Bank.

You're not doing what I want you to be doing so I print up myself eight more SUPER Dollars to manipulate you with.

All of a sudden your SUPER Dollar only represents one tenth of the wealth of the world!

That isn't the only thing though. You need to get busy and get to work because YOU'VE BEEN STIFFED with the bill for the money I PRINTED UP to get YOU TO DO what I WANTED.

That to me represents what has been happening to the economy, and us, and why so many of our occupations just can't keep up with the fake money presses.

We are going to have to regain control of our government before we can regain control of our currency and regain control of our country.

Brian4Liberty
05-14-2014, 09:18 PM
A Computer Science professor's take:


Wed May 14 10:02:49 PDT 2014

...a bit of a drama in progress at

http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=USCIS-2010-0017-0001
...
Here is what the situation is:

The USCIS proposes a new regulation, under which the spouses of some
H-1B visa holders, here in the U.S. under an H-4 visa, would be granted
work authorization. DHS, by law, must open the proposal to public
comment, which anyone can submit at the above site.
...
No one here will be surprised to hear that I think this proposal is a
not a good idea. But what really concerns me is PROCESS. I regard this
as one of the most blatant acts of deception and abuse by a presidential
administration I've ever seen, by either party.

First, there is the usurpation of the powers of the Legislative Branch.
Though there may well be a loophole or two that USCIS found for their
action, the fact is that it at least violates the spirit of the
Constitution, if not the letter.

I'm not even sure that it is proper for USCIS to solicit comments from
noncitizens. But it's definitely wrong to take an action that USCIS
knows will adversely impact citizens.

In that light, it's truly outrageous that USCIS says the proposal is
designed to prevent "economic hardship" to the H-1B families. In fact,
some of the H-1B comments make the same point, along the lines of, "It's
hard to live on a single income, especially for families with
children..." The obvious question--obvious even to the USCIS, I'm
sure--is, What about the economic hardships brought upon Americans by
the H-1B (and now, H-4) program?

Yes, I do sympathize with the frustrations of highly-educated H-4s who
must stay home idle. But let's put things in perspective, OK?

The industry lobbyists (whom USCIS seems to have close relations with,
judging from their use of all the industry's talking points) always
argue that American tech workers aren't impacted by H-1B, citing low
unemployment rates. As I've said before, this is highly misleading.

People who can't find work are forced to leave the field; the former
engineer now working as a schoolbus driver or box packer (to cite two
instances I've seen personally) counts as employed, even though he is
underemployed. Many software developers are independent contractors,
who count as employed even though H-1B causes them to have fewer
contracts and lower rates. Of course, EVERYONE in H-1B-heavy fields is
impacted in the form of lower wages, due to simple supply and demand;
even the NRC commission, with reps from Intel and Microsoft, conceded
this. H-1B software developers form a substantial fraction of the
new jobs created each year in that occupation.

Yes, this does cause economic hardship among Americans. In some cases,
it has even been a factor in heart attacks and suicides. (When I
mentioned this once to Neflix CEO and strident advocate of H-1B
expansion Reed Hastings, he replied sarcastically, "Yeah, and it causes
them to beat their wives.")
...
As I've pointed out many times, I personally have no stake in the H-1B
issue. But whenever I see an issue on which I know the conventional
wisdom (typically shaped clandestinely by PR experts working for the
vested interests) to be wrong, I tend to speak out. And when a
government agency is involved in deliberate deception (yes, deliberate),
I am doubly motivated to call them out on it.

The agency has been involved in flagrant bias from the beginning, when
it used the term "our broken immigration system" on its home page, a
code phrase for desiring an expansionist immigration policy. But USCIS
has really outdone itself this time.
...
More:
http://heather.cs.ucdavis.edu/Archive/H4.txt

Michelangelo
05-15-2014, 08:59 AM
Immigration helps an economy grow and is itself is indicator that things are improving. Migrants are highly mobile and their movements give us an idea of the economic well being of a region. Contrary to what some here believe, the primary pull factor for migrants is finding jobs, not welfare, and so they are quick to leave a region when it is clear it has low potential for economic growth.

Furthermore, the number of jobs available is not static. More migrants actually increase the number of jobs needed since they increase aggregate demand and help improve labor specialization. At the micro level you see migrants out-competing some natives for jobs, but you need to take into account the number of jobs that are also created by the improved labor specialization. Everything has decreasing returns and so migration alone is not sufficient to make a poor economic situation great, but even at its worst migration is only neutral. The United States in particular already receives so many migrants and has such a large population that the marginal migrant has a pitifully small, but positive, effect on the economy. It must be emphasized that the effect is still positive though.

It would be preferable for immigration reform to be done legislatively, as we must always be watchful of the Presidency growing in power, but Obama's changes here are for the better.

eduardo89
05-15-2014, 09:09 AM
Will this apply to all holders of H-4 visas or just spouses and dependents of those holding H-1B visas?

In any case, I totally support this move and hopefully they also extend it to TN visas.

Michelangelo
05-15-2014, 10:24 AM
Unfortunately only spouses would be covered, but they're still accepting comments so one can hope.

eduardo89
05-15-2014, 11:27 AM
Just noticed another catch in the proposal:


The extension would be limited to H-4 dependent spouses of principal H-1B nonimmigrants who are in the process of seeking lawful permanent resident status through employment.

This only applies to the spouses of H-1B visa holders who are also in the process of applying for a green card (permanent residence).

I completely agree with allowing the spouses of H-1B visa holders to work, especially if they're in the process of permanently settling in the US. This is a good step towards ensuring that immigrants are working and that they won't go on welfare. Once you become a permanent resident you have access to government assistance, so this policy should help prevent them going on welfare.

Brian4Liberty
05-15-2014, 12:50 PM
467003956434972673

Brian4Liberty
05-15-2014, 01:01 PM
Immigration helps an economy grow and is itself is indicator that things are improving. Migrants are highly mobile and their movements give us an idea of the economic well being of a region. Contrary to what some here believe, the primary pull factor for migrants is finding jobs, not welfare, and so they are quick to leave a region when it is clear it has low potential for economic growth.

Furthermore, the number of jobs available is not static. More migrants actually increase the number of jobs needed since they increase aggregate demand and help improve labor specialization. At the micro level you see migrants out-competing some natives for jobs, but you need to take into account the number of jobs that are also created by the improved labor specialization. Everything has decreasing returns and so migration alone is not sufficient to make a poor economic situation great, but even at its worst migration is only neutral. The United States in particular already receives so many migrants and has such a large population that the marginal migrant has a pitifully small, but positive, effect on the economy. It must be emphasized that the effect is still positive though.

It would be preferable for immigration reform to be done legislatively, as we must always be watchful of the Presidency growing in power, but Obama's changes here are for the better.

That is the argument put forth by think-tanks, which is then readily taken up by the US Chamber of Commerce and others who are only interested in cheaper labor.


Furthermore, the number of jobs available is not static.

Very true. The number of jobs can also decrease. In the middle of the greatest recession in the history of the US, unemployment is high, labor participation rate is low and the number of jobs is not increasing. Increasing the size of the labor pool does not automatically make the number of jobs grow anymore than increasing the money supply increases the number of jobs. There are many factors at play.

Increasing the labor pool in an effort to goose (increase) economic growth is just another Keynesian pyramid scheme. Goes right along with printing money. And the real impact of both of those schemes is to lower wages.

The US working class is suffering from a terrible headache, and the corporatists have a cure: hit them in the head with a hammer.

Needless to say, people with vested interests are pushing this, and they have no concerns for the unemployment rate, the disappearing middle class, or the wages of existing Americans.

Brian4Liberty
05-15-2014, 01:05 PM
Unfortunately only spouses would be covered, but they're still accepting comments so one can hope.

It includes family members through age 21. So it will include all the children who want to work.

Of course the US Chamber of Commerce would say that we have a severe shortage of Americans aged 14-21 to fill jobs.

Brian4Liberty
05-15-2014, 01:07 PM
In any case, I totally support this move and hopefully they also extend it to TN visas.

Which part? The power grab by the Obama Administration or anything that might help you to immigrate to the US?

Deborah K
05-15-2014, 01:10 PM
This guy is such a liar. I just can't stand him.



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mlssL1P0hao

eduardo89
05-15-2014, 01:16 PM
Which part? The power grab by the Obama Administration

The executive branch has a lot of power to change the immigration status of non-citizens within the US.


or anything that might help you to immigrate to the US?
I already have a TN visa and my company has already offered to sponsor me for employment based residence, so I don't have that trouble.

What I support is allowing more employment-based immigration to the US and increase the opportunities for those who are already in the US to enter the workforce. There is no legitimate reason why the spouse of someone on a work visa, who is already going through the process of being granted permanent residence status, shouldn't be allowed to work as well.

eduardo89
05-15-2014, 01:17 PM
The Obama Administration seems to be using some bureaucratic maneuvers (a "regulatory amendment") to bypass Congress and increase the number of immigrant work visas issued.

H-1B visas are nonimmigrant visas!!!

HOLLYWOOD
05-15-2014, 01:27 PM
The executive branch has a lot of power to change the immigration status of non-citizens within the US.


I already have a TN visa and my company has already offered to sponsor me for employment based residence, so I don't have that trouble.

IIRC wasn't it the majority GOP Capital Hill that voted to give the presidency more powers during the Dubya W. Bush years? Perfect example
of how absolute power can be abused, not by the current administration that voted for it, but an administration that inherits such powers down the road.

Now think NDAA...

Michelangelo
05-15-2014, 02:01 PM
That is the argument put forth by think-tanks, which is then readily taken up by the US Chamber of Commerce and others who are only interested in cheaper labor.

It is also the correct argument and the one agreed upon by most of the economic profession.



Very true. The number of jobs can also decrease. In the middle of the greatest recession in the history of the US, unemployment is high, labor participation rate is low and the number of jobs is not increasing. Increasing the size of the labor pool does not automatically make the number of jobs grow anymore than increasing the money supply increases the number of jobs. There are many factors at play.

Increasing the labor pool in an effort to goose (increase) economic growth is just another Keynesian pyramid scheme. Goes right along with printing money. And the real impact of both of those schemes is to lower wages.

The US working class is suffering from a terrible headache, and the corporatists have a cure: hit them in the head with a hammer.

Needless to say, people with vested interests are pushing this, and they have no concerns for the unemployment rate, the disappearing middle class, or the wages of existing Americans.

I love the ABCT, but let's not go around comparing the expansion of the money supply with migration. An increase in migration causes both an increase in the supply and demand for labor. Allowing the market to decide how many migrants is optimal is the best outcome. Are we not all in favor of the market here? If so, we should do away with all migration barriers and invite everyone to come so long as they are not criminals. If they can find employment and housing for themselves then the market has deemed their entrance to be optimal.

I am happy you brought up how in a recession we see a decrease in jobs. Yes, we do. We also see a decrease in migration. As I said, migrants are very responsive to economic conditions. During the great stagnation we've seen many migrants returning back home. We could see many more leaving the United States if they were not terrified that doing so would jeopardize their ability to return in the future. Our current migration system is doubly absurd; it does not allow migrants to freely enter or to freely exit.

It continually saddens me to see otherwise reliable defenders of free markets become supporters of government intervention when it comes to the labor market. A true supporter of free markets is in favor of free trade in both apples and in the labor that picks those apples. To support free market policies in one sector but abandoning that support in another shows that one is not a true supporter of liberty.

Brian4Liberty
05-15-2014, 03:56 PM
H-1B visas are nonimmigrant visas!!!

I've never met anyone on a H-1B that wasn't in the process of getting their green card, and then citizenship after that.

Hold on, let me modify that. Some Canadians here on work visas spit on the ground of you ask them if they want to become US citizens. I've also seen these people go out of there way to make sure that US citizens are not hired when more headcount is needed.

eduardo89
05-15-2014, 04:02 PM
I've never met anyone on a H-1B that wasn't in the process of getting their green card, and then citizenship after that.

H-1B is not an immigrant visa. It does not entitle you to permanent residence (green card) and a path to citizenship. It is, however, a 'dual intent' visa which allows you to simuteneouly apply for permanent residence.

Philhelm
05-15-2014, 04:03 PM
I completely agree with allowing the spouses of H-1B visa holders to work, especially if they're in the process of permanently settling in the US. This is a good step towards ensuring that immigrants are working and that they won't go on welfare. Once you become a permanent resident you have access to government assistance, so this policy should help prevent them going on welfare.

Anyone applying for Permanent Resident Status can concurrently apply for employment authorization. It usually takes about four months to get the Employment Authorization Card.

eduardo89
05-15-2014, 04:05 PM
Anyone applying for Permanent Resident Status can concurrently apply for employment authorization. It usually takes about four months to get the Employment Authorization Card.

H-1B visa =/= application for permanent resident status. The spouses of H-1B visa holders cannot get an EAC.

Philhelm
05-15-2014, 04:08 PM
H-1B is not an immigrant visa. It does not entitle you to permanent residence (green card) and a path to citizenship. It is, however, a 'dual intent' visa which allows you to simuteneouly apply for permanent residence.

http://www.uscis.gov/i-140

Brian4Liberty
05-15-2014, 04:12 PM
It is also the correct argument and the one agreed upon by most of the economic profession.

Well, if the economic profession agrees, it must be fact.

So after a decade and a half of massive immigration, why have wages fallen and the recession continued?


I love the ABCT, but let's not go around comparing the expansion of the money supply with migration.

I like the comparison. A pyramid scheme is a pyramid scheme. Do the experts disagree?


I am happy you brought up how in a recession we see a decrease in jobs. Yes, we do. We also see a decrease in migration. As I said, migrants are very responsive to economic conditions.

So why is an increase urgent right now? Why is the US CoC and Zuckerberg spending hundreds of millions if not billions to bribe politicians and push propaganda to increase immigration in the middle of a recession? Is there some other market force at work here other than your simplified model? Are there forces that are not accounted for by the economic "experts"?

If this is an experiment in how increasing the labor pool ends a recession, then it has failed miserably.

Philhelm
05-15-2014, 04:15 PM
H-1B visa =/= application for permanent resident status. The spouses of H-1B visa holders cannot get an EAC.

I'm well aware of the difference. When a nonimmigrant files for Permanent Resident Status based upon an I-140, the derivative spouse may concurrently file for Permanent Resident Status as well as employment authorization. Or did you define "in the process of permanently settling in the U.S." to be something other than filing an application for permanent residence?

Michelangelo
05-15-2014, 11:54 PM
Well, if the economic profession agrees, it must be fact.

So after a decade and a half of massive immigration, why have wages fallen and the recession continued?

I already made this point, immigration alone is not a panacea. Poor fiscal policy can't be fixed with open borders alone.




I like the comparison. A pyramid scheme is a pyramid scheme. Do the experts disagree?


You are comparing it with the ABCT in an attempt to discredit migration by association. It is ironic that Hayek and Mises were both life long migrants who lived not only in their native Austria, but Switzerland, the United Kingdom, and the United States respectively.



So why is an increase urgent right now? Why is the US CoC and Zuckerberg spending hundreds of millions if not billions to bribe politicians and push propaganda to increase immigration in the middle of a recession? Is there some other market force at work here other than your simplified model? Are there forces that are not accounted for by the economic "experts"?

If this is an experiment in how increasing the labor pool ends a recession, then it has failed miserably.

One of the lobbies for immigration reform is the high tech lobby, which obviously wants to be able to recruit high tech workers from abroad. Employers should be able to hire whoever they want, which in this case is foreigners. What is your point here?

You do know that we libertarians are a lobbying group as well right? We continually try to influence politicians to vote for free market policies, but that doesn't make us devils since our ultimate goal is more liberty for everyone. Likewise there is nothing wrong with employers seeking to use the electoral process in order to increase their liberty to hire whoever they wish.

Brian4Liberty
05-22-2014, 01:46 PM
You do know that we libertarians are a lobbying group as well right?

What's with the "we"? You don't speak for all libertarians, or libertarian leaning people.

You're a single issue open borders concern poster on this forum, so there is no further use in going in circles here. You want open borders, for whatever reasons, I want immigration control, specifically for economic and resource reasons.



"Totally free immigration? I've never taken that position. I believe in national sovereignty." - Ron Paul

Michelangelo
05-22-2014, 04:42 PM
What's with the "we"? You don't speak for all libertarians, or libertarian leaning people.

You're a single issue open borders concern poster on this forum, so there is no further use in going in circles here. You want open borders, for whatever reasons, I want immigration control, specifically for economic and resource reasons.

I don't feel the need to comment on most other issues since the community seems to do largely well on them. In general the libertarian community has a great deal of consensus regardless of whether you are a Paulite, a Misean, a Rothbardian, Friedmanite, whateverlabelpeopleprefernowadays etc etc.

And then there are those areas that no consensus has formed. Immigration, intellectual property, abortion, foreign policy etc.

I focus on immigration because I find it to be an area where there is an absurd amount of misinformation that has misguided people away from open borders. There is no case to be made against open borders on either economic or natural resource concerns.

There is a case to be made against borders if you're concerned about visible inequality. Open borders decreases inequality by allowing the world's poorest people to seek employment elsewhere, but this creates situations where we come into more constant contact with the poor and realize just how big the economic divide is.

There is a case to be made against open borders if you're concerned about the political effects of open borders. I'm sympathetic to this argument myself, but I find that simply separating citizenship from the right of adobe fixes this. Recent work in the field is showing that migrants actually decrease welfare states by making voters less interested in redistribution schemes.

But an economic case against open borders? That is simply as absurd as an economic case against free trade. Migration causes individuals or certain sectors to find themselves replaced, but only in the same manner in which new technology or free trade does. In the long run these individuals move onto new employment and resources become better spent. The economy as a whole gets larger and per capita wealth increases.

Brian4Liberty
05-22-2014, 05:14 PM
There is no case to be made against open borders on either economic or natural resource concerns.
...
But an economic case against open borders? That is simply as absurd as an economic case against free trade. Migration causes individuals or certain sectors to find themselves replaced, but only in the same manner in which new technology or free trade does. In the long run these individuals move onto new employment and resources become better spent. The economy as a whole gets larger and per capita wealth increases.

I am well aware of the hypothesis. I used to be foolish enough to believe it myself. Reality has shown otherwise. Real world evidence has shown mass immigration to be a disaster for the people who are already living here. It effects them economically. It's a pyramid scheme, whether you want to admit it or not. It's just like creating money in an attempt to grow the economy. You can disagree all day, that doesn't make you correct.

Edit: And as I have said a thousand times on this forum, additional and expanded immigration makes sense when there is a true need, when true unemployment is extremely low and when the number of people on the public dole is extremely low.

RonPaulMall
05-22-2014, 05:50 PM
But an economic case against open borders? That is simply as absurd as an economic case against free trade. Migration causes individuals or certain sectors to find themselves replaced, but only in the same manner in which new technology or free trade does. In the long run these individuals move onto new employment and resources become better spent. The economy as a whole gets larger and per capita wealth increases.

Your fallacy is in assuming that per capita wealth is the be all and end all. Somebody with a familiarity with Austrian economics should know better. The economic case for immigration restriction is simple- many if not most people value a decent quality of life (less pollution, less congestion, less crowded schools, less crime, less social dysfunction) over a nominal increase in GDP. I live in Miami, which is a perfect example of what we are talking about. There is no doubt Miami has higher economic output now than it did in the 1950's. But Miami of the 1950's was a pretty decent place to live while Miami of today is a place no responsible parent would attempt to raise a child.

Brian4Liberty
05-22-2014, 06:29 PM
Your fallacy is in assuming that per capita wealth is the be all and end all.

Not to mention that per capita completely ignores the massive wealth gap that has resulted from our print money, import cheap labor, export production economy.

DamianTV
05-22-2014, 07:22 PM
Dick. Tator.

He has a pen, phone, and no respect for our system of Govt. Not that it is functional in its current state, but its the behavior of a Dictator to ignore, overrule, or discard the checks and balances of a system that once used to work. Funny thing is the reason it doesnt work is no one sticks to it, unless it suits them.

P3ter_Griffin
05-22-2014, 08:16 PM
What's with the "we"? You don't speak for all libertarians, or libertarian leaning people.

You're a single issue open borders concern poster on this forum, so there is no further use in going in circles here. You want open borders, for whatever reasons, I want immigration control, specifically for economic and resource reasons.

Brian4What?