H******i
发帖数: 4704 | 1 Petition Letter:
Subject: Reform Administrative Procedures for Employment-based Immigration
Process
Dear Mr. President,
We are people who have experience and skills that are complementary to those
of Americans. We are people who spend our best years helping American
companies become more globally competitive. We are people who come from
thousands of miles away to legally pursue our American dreams.
We abide by all U.S. laws and regulations, only to find ourselves one of the most
regulated group of human beings. By immigration laws, we are employment-
based immigration petitioners on second and third preferences, hereafter
abbreviated as EB2/EB3, from very populous countries, versus ROW, which
means “The Rest of the World”.
By law there are a limited number of visas available for EB2 and EB3
petitioners from each country. By law there is also a possibility for EB2
and EB3 petitioners from populous countries to use the under-utilized visa
numbers from less populous countries. We are here not arguing whether it
was fair to give the same 2803 visa quota to countries with over 1 billion
population, such as China and India, and to countries with under 50 thousand
population, such as Monaco and Liechtenstein. We are here to abide by the
laws that were erected by U.S. legislature.
But there is NO law forbidding EB2 and EB3 from populous countries to submit
I-485 petitions. It is the administrative process that artificially
discriminates EB2 and EB3 from populous countries. While ROW EB2 and EB3
can expect to receive their green cards in a matter of several months, we
have to wait year after year after year, and still not allowed to submit our
I-485 petitions.
Submitting I-485 is the third step of the EB2 and EB3 immigration process.
If approved, it will lead to the fourth step, which is receiving a green
card. If not approved, no green card will be issued to the petitioner. It
is the step of issuing a green card that was governed by the visa quota for
each country, not the step of submitting I-485.
Obviously there is a clear line between submitting I-485 and issuing a green
card. But the current EB2 and EB3 immigration process artificially blends
the two separate steps together. USCIS does NOT accept I-485 until
Department of State believes there is a visa quota available for that
petitioner.
Such a practice incurred tremendous pain on us. Metaphorically speaking we
deserve to submit I-485 and wait indoors for our turn to receive a green
card, and it’s inhumane to leave us waiting outdoors in the sun and rain
for years.
We urge you to immediately reform administrative procedures for employment-
based immigration process:
1. Grant EB2 and EB3 petitioners a grace period from the day they become
unemployed. The grace period can be a fixed window of, for example, 6
months, or a floating window, for example, that is proportionally to the
time they have been working in U.S.
a) From the economic perspective, such a grace period will provide
opportunities for other U.S. employers to find out that these newly-
unemployed foreign workers may have exactly the experience and skills that
these companies urgently need. Without such a grace period, if one loses
her or his job, they have to find another job IMMEDIATELY or leave this
country IMMEDIATELY.
b) From the empirical perspective, the longer a foreign worker has been
legally working in U.S., the more she or he is committed to some long-term
investments, such as owning a house or having children born here. It’s
both humane and reasonable to grant them enough time to sell their homes and
re-arrange schooling for their children. Without such a grace period, a
default or fire sale could be the natural consequences, which will worsen
the fragile housing market today.
2. Allow EB2 and EB3 petitioners to submit I-485 forms if we have been
legally working in U.S. for 5 years and/or are 180 days since our I-140
petitions have been approved.
a) In the first place, the current process unnecessarily punishes us
simply because we were born in a populous country. A similar EB2 from ROW
would have received her green card within several months. We understand the
reason to wait for the green card. But there is no reason for us to wait
to file our I-485 petitions.
b) In the second place, we are not challenging any law. We are simply
asking for an administrative convenience. The law sets a visa quota for
petitioners from each country. We respect the law and, as always, we abide
by the law. But the law does NOT forbid submitting I-485 applications.
c) In the third place, we are not even challenging the Visa Bulletin.
For EB2 and EB3 petitioners from populous countries, every month, Mr.
Charles Oppenheim in the Department of State decides the cut-off dates so
that nobody can file I-485 form if their “Priority Date” is not prior to
the cut-ff date in Visa Bulletin. We respect the Visa Bulletin, but we
believe the Visa Bulletin was established to control the issuance of green
cards, rather than to control the filing of I-485.
To summarize, we urge you to reform the current inhuman immigration
procedures by allowing a grace period and separating I-485 filing from Visa
Bulletin. Such two simple and small steps will significantly relieve us of
tremendous pressures that we face every day!
Why the white house should help us? 各位兄弟姐妹，请大家使劲想，使劲帮忙！ |
s***r
发帖数: 1121 | 2 we are employment-based immigration petitioners in USA. We have the
following request...
1.
2.
3.
Talk our contributions.
This is not a poem, novel, or whatever. Use plain and easy English. |
w*******r
发帖数: 2792 | 3 the most
regulated group of human beings?
我建议你不要以太情绪化的方式写这个信，还是客观事实点比较好，美国的正式文件还是很讲求严谨
的，你的文章中夸张和主观性的东西比较明显。
我给律师写过材料，干过下手，亲自写的发表的文章和报告很多，当然这对于一个美国人来说也都是很
普通的工作经历。但是我想好心地说一句，这么写真的不行。你的风格更像中国人写议论文，排比加夸
张的句子。美国人写这些东西就好比写科技文章，更追求证据充足和逻辑严谨，而并不强调文采。楼上
的那位朋友说的没错。
你只要有一句话明显非事实，人家会一笑了之，对你所说的东西不予严肃考虑。 |
M*******t
发帖数: 513 | 4 very good writing.
but Please re-think,
as you asked, why should the white house help us, esp., at the current
economic situation.
we are not asking for the mercy from the us gov.,they would not consider at
this time. they might consider if it were the IT booming days, or if the 3rd
tech renovation era is here ...,but not now.
those
【在 H******i 的大作中提到】
: Petition Letter:
: Subject: Reform Administrative Procedures for Employment-based Immigration
: Process
: Dear Mr. President,
: We are people who have experience and skills that are complementary to those
: of Americans. We are people who spend our best years helping American
: companies become more globally competitive. We are people who come from
: thousands of miles away to legally pursue our American dreams.
: We abide by all U.S. laws and regulations, only to find ourselves one of the most
: regulated group of human beings. By immigration laws, we are employment-
|
H******i
发帖数: 4704 | 5 should be "one of", already added
你的文章中夸张和主观性的东西比较明显。please point it out so that I can work
on them one by one.
还是很讲求严谨
国人来说也都是很
议论文，排比加夸
不强调文采。楼上
【在 w*******r 的大作中提到】
: the most
: regulated group of human beings?
: 我建议你不要以太情绪化的方式写这个信，还是客观事实点比较好，美国的正式文件还是很讲求严谨
: 的，你的文章中夸张和主观性的东西比较明显。
: 我给律师写过材料，干过下手，亲自写的发表的文章和报告很多，当然这对于一个美国人来说也都是很
: 普通的工作经历。但是我想好心地说一句，这么写真的不行。你的风格更像中国人写议论文，排比加夸
: 张的句子。美国人写这些东西就好比写科技文章，更追求证据充足和逻辑严谨，而并不强调文采。楼上
: 的那位朋友说的没错。
: 你只要有一句话明显非事实，人家会一笑了之，对你所说的东西不予严肃考虑。
|
q****x
发帖数: 7404 | 6 because we are helping the economy.
【在 M*******t 的大作中提到】
: very good writing.
: but Please re-think,
: as you asked, why should the white house help us, esp., at the current
: economic situation.
: we are not asking for the mercy from the us gov.,they would not consider at
: this time. they might consider if it were the IT booming days, or if the 3rd
: tech renovation era is here ...,but not now.
:
: those
|
H******i
发帖数: 4704 | 7 details please! thank you.
please contribute why the White House should make the change as we requested!
【在 q****x 的大作中提到】
: because we are helping the economy.
|
I****8
发帖数: 988 | 8 LZ's idea is very good, submit 485 first then issue green card.
Maybe we need brainstorm a little bit on how to compose it.
we need figure out what we have? what make us different and unique?
( we are a group of people who have advanced degree, we have skill and
knowledge, we are experienced or skilled works)
what we can offer? Can our skills help stimulating US economy? help
increasing US jobs? Help getting more advanced degree personnel or skilled
workers join into this country's future?
what is our goal?
what will make white house think it is something important?
(President Obama advocate "changes", we saw a lot of exciting changes, such
as health care reform etc. He is now working on immigration reform and we
think that is something white house may help changing it.
I am strongly believe big changes consist of a lot of small changes, It is
small change to you but it is huge changes for us and fellow immigrants.
Multiple small changes makes big change possible.)
可以列举几个移民过来的成功人士的故事，以说明当初如果没有好的移民政策哪来今天
这些美国的优秀企业？
虽然，移民局法律有移民人口比例要维持，但出生国的人口众多，并不能说明我们不是
有用之才。相反这个比例要相应增加，现在美国在危机时刻，今天的“纳贤”才能为明
天的繁荣打下基础（就这么个意思，英语写作好的同学能否翻成优美些的句子，能写得
不卑不亢那是最好的）
requested!
【在 H******i 的大作中提到】
: details please! thank you.
: please contribute why the White House should make the change as we requested!
|
w**s
发帖数: 141 | 9 谢谢你给我们指导。我们是摸着石头过河，谁也没干过这个。LZ放弃长周末给大家处了
两个稿件。您有这方面的专业培训。可否多给些意见？给些具体些的意见吧。这样LZ才好下手呀？
还是很讲求严谨
国人来说也都是很
议论文，排比加夸
不强调文采。楼上
【在 w*******r 的大作中提到】
: the most
: regulated group of human beings?
: 我建议你不要以太情绪化的方式写这个信，还是客观事实点比较好，美国的正式文件还是很讲求严谨
: 的，你的文章中夸张和主观性的东西比较明显。
: 我给律师写过材料，干过下手，亲自写的发表的文章和报告很多，当然这对于一个美国人来说也都是很
: 普通的工作经历。但是我想好心地说一句，这么写真的不行。你的风格更像中国人写议论文，排比加夸
: 张的句子。美国人写这些东西就好比写科技文章，更追求证据充足和逻辑严谨，而并不强调文采。楼上
: 的那位朋友说的没错。
: 你只要有一句话明显非事实，人家会一笑了之，对你所说的东西不予严肃考虑。
|
a**v
发帖数: 357 | 10 First of all, great work guys! Very good writing.Thanks!
I am glad you took out the "dog" part. We have our dignity and no one can
take it away from us.
We might also want to show some "teeth" in the letter, not just "asking for
mercy". Meaning, by doing the suggestions we made, they are doing themselves
a favor too, just just for us. It is a win-win situation.
The consequence of current immigration practice will results in some of
brightest (most have US advanced degrees) leaving or considering leaving.
Granted, there will be always be a huge pool of Eb2/Eb3 waiting to get their
immigration approved. BUT, the quality will not remain the same. |
|
|
H******i
发帖数: 4704 | 11 我非常想show some teeth, 真得很想。
但是我不想让白宫幕僚向USCIS和外交部问责的时候，回答是：这些人是EB23,我们对于
创业者已经有了八月二号的新政，我们对于顶尖人才用EB1和EB2 NIW渠道处理。他们企
图把自己打扮成EB1和EB2 NIW来威胁我们，不要上他们的当。
for
themselves
their
【在 a**v 的大作中提到】
: First of all, great work guys! Very good writing.Thanks!
: I am glad you took out the "dog" part. We have our dignity and no one can
: take it away from us.
: We might also want to show some "teeth" in the letter, not just "asking for
: mercy". Meaning, by doing the suggestions we made, they are doing themselves
: a favor too, just just for us. It is a win-win situation.
: The consequence of current immigration practice will results in some of
: brightest (most have US advanced degrees) leaving or considering leaving.
: Granted, there will be always be a huge pool of Eb2/Eb3 waiting to get their
: immigration approved. BUT, the quality will not remain the same.
|
l****y
发帖数: 561 | 12 刚看了开头1，2段。就觉得上来应该先明确报一下此信代表谁，而不是一段排比。这段
排比可以放在后面。我的0.01 cent.
我继续看。 |
l****y
发帖数: 561 | 13 再有个问题，140批了之后就可以交EAD/AP的话对我们petitioner和uscis对整个绿卡申
请过程的管理是不是更合理？ |
l****y
发帖数: 561 | 14 总觉得一下放开485提交时间是很大一步，很难遭到同意。 |
l****y
发帖数: 561 | |
l****y
发帖数: 561 | 16 丢了工作grace period短那个request，感觉如果是很少一部分人无奈因此离开美国，
此要求不会给予考虑的。谁给指条路哪里弄到数据支持一下。 |
l****y
发帖数: 561 | 17 request 2更靠谱。因为大量petitioner被这个485 filing束缚手脚。but again，no
real data。
最起码能让人有更多自由工作是底线。其实我觉得相关的应该有规定 －－ 比如在同一
领域升迁并且工资相应长到规定的数字是应该被允许的；再比如工作类别之间可以小范
围呼唤；还有petitioner只要从priority date为同一雇主工作超过一定年数（比如3－
4年）而且140批了，就可以换雇主；140批了至少就可以申请EAD和AP而不是必须等交了
485才行。 |
l****y
发帖数: 561 | 18 其实，最根本的原因是美国本身就是移民国家。没有移民就没有美国。象我们老中申请
eb2／3的大多是有这一份不错的工作，兢兢业业为公司（间接为美国）努力工作的。美
国是自由民主的国家，我们理解gc是美国政府赋予的privilege。可是我们一直是在努
力争取着自己的自由民主的生活。能让如此多的技术准移民在自己的技术领域更自由的
发展贡献比现在受巨大限制更附和美帝利益。咔咔。 |
l****y
发帖数: 561 | 19 我胡说完毕。lz辛苦写信。大家长周末继续愉快。 |
a**v
发帖数: 357 | 20 They will always find excuses. The point is what they gain by doing that.
There is no free lunch. If they don't risk of anything with rejecting the
request; then why would they accept this.
Most EB1s are in Academic, while most EB2/3 in industry; they are not
comparable. There is no point to argue which category contributes more to
the economy/society.
【在 H******i 的大作中提到】
: 我非常想show some teeth, 真得很想。
: 但是我不想让白宫幕僚向USCIS和外交部问责的时候，回答是：这些人是EB23,我们对于
: 创业者已经有了八月二号的新政，我们对于顶尖人才用EB1和EB2 NIW渠道处理。他们企
: 图把自己打扮成EB1和EB2 NIW来威胁我们，不要上他们的当。
:
: for
: themselves
: their
|
|
|
H******i
发帖数: 4704 | 21 即使你能够交485，但是一转眼你被裁员了，马上就必须离开美国，那么交了485有什么
用呢？
【在 l****y 的大作中提到】
: 丢了工作grace period短那个request，感觉如果是很少一部分人无奈因此离开美国，
: 此要求不会给予考虑的。谁给指条路哪里弄到数据支持一下。
|
w*****g
发帖数: 3922 | 22 我对政治不很懂，但我觉得最不该提的可能就是经济。
目前我们的诉求所影响的基本只有中印EB2和包括中国印在内的一些国家的EB3，这些人
对于整个美国的经济来说，几乎是微不足道的一股力量。他们的工资相对于平均水平并
不低，但其实也并不高，他们的购买力和购买习惯根本不足以对美国经济有任何影响。
如果一味强调移民带来的经济利益的话，政府应该以更开放的政策鼓励投资移民，而不
是工作移民。
政府完全可以不理会我们的要求，因为那也不会成为政府的失误。
所以，我反而以为，我们应该着力向政府询问为什么剩余名额要按PD分。如果说法律确
实规定了剩余名额按PD分，那为什么法律同时规定7%的平均原则。为什么中国申请者是
两种截然不同的分配原则共同施下的唯一受害者。
政府必须认真回答我们的这个问题，因为这涉及到法律的公平和公正性问题。（当然，
美国的政法是分开的，但我们不需要过多顾及这个）
创业者，否则白宫幕僚向USCIS和外交部问责的时候，回答将会是：这些人是EB23,我们
对于创业者已经有了八月二号的新政，我们对于顶尖人才用EB1和EB2 NIW渠道处理。他
们企图把自己打扮成EB1和E
those
【在 H******i 的大作中提到】
: 即使你能够交485，但是一转眼你被裁员了，马上就必须离开美国，那么交了485有什么
: 用呢？
|
l****y
发帖数: 561 | 23 我的意思是说如果只有很少人面临这个问题的话，这个请求是不会被考虑的。
【在 H******i 的大作中提到】
: 即使你能够交485，但是一转眼你被裁员了，马上就必须离开美国，那么交了485有什么
: 用呢？
|
H******i
发帖数: 4704 | 24 您不早出来舌战群儒。我岂能没有想到这些（有老贴为证）？但是众口难调，这是政治
请愿，需要大多数人的选票。我只能尽最大力量接受意见，态度非常好地改正。大多数
人喜欢大波我就隆胸，大多数人呵斥肥婆我就吸脂。
http://www.mitbbs.com/article0/EB23/31394579_0.html
【在 w*****g 的大作中提到】
: 我对政治不很懂，但我觉得最不该提的可能就是经济。
: 目前我们的诉求所影响的基本只有中印EB2和包括中国印在内的一些国家的EB3，这些人
: 对于整个美国的经济来说，几乎是微不足道的一股力量。他们的工资相对于平均水平并
: 不低，但其实也并不高，他们的购买力和购买习惯根本不足以对美国经济有任何影响。
: 如果一味强调移民带来的经济利益的话，政府应该以更开放的政策鼓励投资移民，而不
: 是工作移民。
: 政府完全可以不理会我们的要求，因为那也不会成为政府的失误。
: 所以，我反而以为，我们应该着力向政府询问为什么剩余名额要按PD分。如果说法律确
: 实规定了剩余名额按PD分，那为什么法律同时规定7%的平均原则。为什么中国申请者是
: 两种截然不同的分配原则共同施下的唯一受害者。
|
w**s
发帖数: 141 | 25 同意！这样的门槛太高。不容易被接受。
我们的要求应该明确，就一条。 提前递交485。 避免政客避重就轻，把其它的容易的
要求满足了。而避开 提前递交485。 提前递交485才是我们这次请愿的唯一目的。
另外，我有关与如何提前递交485。我们需要商榷一下：
现在我们提出的是在美国工作5年，140批准180，全地球人都可以交485。其实，这个全
地球人，只有中印。而中印申请人比例悬殊，至少1：3。 这样，是不是更加把中印捆
绑。中国分不到SO？
我们最开始讨论这个485行动的时候，我很清楚的记得JWE提出的是让PD在cut off day
半年（或是一年）的申请人递交485。这样是避免在每个财年之末，因为没有485 库存
而使得SO都让人数重多的印度人抢走。而在财年末，PD在cutoffday半年（一年）之外
的申请人，谁也不知道到底有多少，就让中，印对半分。现在的问题是，老奥说他明确
知道在cutoffday之外的中印申请人，他就死抓着中印捆绑。这是2007年大朝留给我们
中国申请人的严重问题。要是无人知道cut off day 之外具体的申请人数，我们就有充
分的理由去和国务院要求，中印平分SO.
假设我们的请愿能够得到满足，我们NIU的下一步就是要更多的为中国人争取到SO。
我们现在的请愿要求，有些大，会让中印更加捆绑。 中印捆绑是所以问题的根本。如
果现在，没有中印捆绑，还是像2007之前，中国快印度2年中国现在的cut off day就是
， 2009 、 4、 15。 如果，没有中印捆绑，我们分到去年和今年的SO，那我们中国人
的cutoffday本应是current。这样，我们中国人就不会伤成现在这样。远看未来，中印
更加捆绑，印度人更多，中国人会被拖累的没有任何喘息。 大家想想看，是不是这个
道理？
中国人现在被捆绑的主要原因之一是在07年大潮的时候，中印是哗啦啦都交了485了。
国务院奥本明确知道中印的demand是多少。他没有理由不把每年都Spill Over按照供需
要求分配，这就无法改变中印捆绑。现在07年的backlog要清空了。对07之后的确切
demand没人知道，这样我们才能要求奥本把SO平分。这样才能是中印不捆绑。这是绝好
的机会。否则，再重蹈一次07大潮，今天的人都交了485。之后呢？让现在还没有申请
绿卡，也更没有任何发言权的中国职业移民和多余自己4、5倍的印度人捆绑等待10年还
是15年？这不负责吧。
而且，我们一下要求地球人都交458，就像回答07，移民局的案例要用卡车来运。移民局
有了一次，他不会同意的。请愿门槛高，难度大，不容易被接受。让PD在cut off day
半年（或是一年）的申请人递交485。移民局能接受，我们才没有白忙活。否则，即使白宫和移民局说，
移民局也可以列举种种理由说这样不能执行。我们全白忙活了。
【在 l****y 的大作中提到】
: 总觉得一下放开485提交时间是很大一步，很难遭到同意。
|
w*******r
发帖数: 2792 | 26 最新新版本好了很多.
个人建议,应该在一开始就指出这封信的目的是什么,写信的人是谁,并用几句话总结一
下为什么你们的建议是对美国有利的.
然后用正文部分展开.
看信的人,不管是谁,必然很忙,必须在第一段就把事情基本说清楚,否则看信人很可能心
里嘀咕一句这是什么,然后考虑到是一帮没有选举权的人写的东西,不必理会,就直接扔
垃圾桶了. |
H******i
发帖数: 4704 | |
k*********y
发帖数: 17 | 28 In June 2011, the unemployment rate among the civilian labor force with
Bachelor's degree and higher was 4.4%, comparing with the national
unemployment rate of 9.2%.
Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics
EB2&3 immigrants are the engine of the American growth. We deserve better
treatment from the government. |
