Posted on 09/21/2015 9:00:26 PM PDT by Freedom56v2
Administration lawyers ‘reinterpret’ the law to greatly increase visas for technology firms.
Last week Senate Judiciary Committee chairman Chuck Grassley hit back against Obama’s Department of Homeland Security (DHS) after the agency pushed through, during a previously aimed at bringing over highly sought-after “intracompany transferees” from American firms’non-immigrant worker visas) the Obama administration, at the behest of Big Tech lobbyists, has told its agency lawyers to think up a clever alternative. In a strongly worded letter to Obama’s immigration authorities, Grassley, a 35-year Senate veteran, closely outlines the legal and practical faults of the new policy and demands answers from the agency regarding its purported authority for the move. The L-1B visa, a cousin of the H-1B, applies to so-called “specialized knowledge” employees, usually in the IT industry, who may be transferred to the U.S. from their foreign affiliated employer to work here for up to five years. Often, as with H-1B holders, these “temporary” workers obtain sponsors and apply for permanent status. When President Obama announced his general plans to “reform” the program last spring, he stated that his goal was to allow more workers to move from foreign offices into the U.S. “in a faster, simpler way.” Americans should get behind the proposal, he stated, as it “could benefit hundreds of thousands of nonimmigrant workers and their employers,” which “in turn, will benefit [the] entire economy.” Setting aside concerns about whose “economy” will actually be benefited — the public’s or the special interests’ — the problem with this new “reform” is that the L-1B intracompany-transferee program was never meant to be a mass temporary-worker program. On the contrary, as Grassley’s letter states, Congress’s intent was to ensure that the class of persons eligible for such visas would be “narrowly drawn.” This would seem to comport a...
(Excerpt) Read more at nationalreview.com ...
Winners; billionaires who run IT corporation and their international stock holders. Democrats who convert thes H-1B visa into permanent status voters.
Losers; The rest of the USA.
Losers; The rest of the USA.
Brilliant summary - there's nothing more to say.
At this point Ted Cruz and his rich backers need to understand that mass legal immigration is a millstone around Cruz' neck, and that he has no hope of beating Trump unless he cuts himself free of it. I'd love to see that happen - but I wouldn't bet the farm on it.
I forgot to add to the ‘winners’ group the politician OF BOTH PARTIES who become rich taking bribes for the “Cheap Labor Express”...
Cruz is an honest politician, once he’s bought he stays bought.
I listened to him on Hannity one afternoon. Said all the right things on immigration. Next day, I read an article where he gave a speech to some type of West Coast/Pacific business group. The gist of the speech was how he would increase immigration and expand the H1B visa program. Typical politician.
He’s a complete and total fraud. I’d still like to know when he read the TPA/TPP/TIA. Neither he nor anyone from his staff can say when he had time to read if before voting on it.
His "buyers" need to understand that if he stays "bought" he loses.
While I have no problem trashing Obama, this has been going on for a long time.
The Use — And Abuse — Of L-1 Visas
Date: Sunday, July 02, 2006 2:43 PM
http://web.archive.org/web/20130423041617/http://www.zazona.com/NewsArchive/2006-07-02%20The%20Use%20—%20And%20Abuse%20—%20Of%20L-1%20Visas.htm
H-1 visas edge out H-1Bs
Date: Wednesday, February 22, 2006 3:24 PM
Data from SEC filings database:
Wipro:
As of June 30, 2004
H-1B visas 1,121
L-1 visas 1,569
As of March 31, 2003
H-1B visas 683
L-1 visas 1,150
As of December 31, 2002
H-1B visas 726
L-1 visas 1,004
As of September 30, 2002
H-1B visas 725
L-1 visas 912
Satayam
As of December 31, 2005
H-1B visas 5,600 persons
L-1 visas 740 persons
December 31, 2004
H-1B visas 4,000
L-1 visas 700
As of September 30, 2002
H-1B visas 1,860
L-1 visas 779
see my post # 48
[H-1B] Winners; billionaires who run IT corporation and their international stock holders. Democrats who convert thes H-1B visa into permanent status voters.
Losers; The rest of the USA.
Brilliant summary - there’s nothing more to say.
_____________________
Agreed! Excellent summary.
Not sure what you are saying here....that it’s OK, because this practice was noted in a forum in 2006....data from 2002 and 2004???
Your Data is from over 10 years ago, and I have to say that although the practice was going on, it seems that it is now far worse and the economy is far softer than it was in the first part of 21st century.
IN addition, the political landscape has dramatically changed—we did not have one trying to fundamentally change the USA!!
BTW, you say you have no problem trashing Obama...the GOPe is every bit as complicit.
I stand with those who put AMERICAN workers first.
Re: “Not sure what you are saying here....that it’s OK, because this practice was noted in a forum in 2006....data from 2002 and 2004???”
I’m saying this practice was going on long before Obama. By the dates you can see that it was going on under GW.
My point is that it is not only Obama and those with a -D after their name who have been trashing the economy and giving away American jobs.
The eGOP just did it under the table while Obama does it in your face. The eGOP called it ‘Free Trade’ and Obama calls it wealth distribution.
I understood that....It can be difficult to detect “tone” in a post, I am glad you clarified, because it almost seemed like you were justifying the practice and dismissing the views of those concerned about the displacement of tech workers.
I am not limiting my condemnation to the Dems, tho I believe the numbers have expanded as have the numbers of people overstaying these visas under this administration.
Like me, most of the posters that condem this practice are just as frustrated with the GOPe as the Dems. (See H-1B Visa ping.)
Do you believe that the practice has increased or decreased since 2002?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.