Thread: Point System For US

__________________________________________________ _______________This is from IMMIGRATION DAILY FROM ILW.COM
1. COMMENT

A Point System For US

We commend the Senate for doing the right thing for the country.
Debating S. 1348 on the Senate floor is a formal recognition by
Congress that our country's policy on immigration is distinctly
different from and unrelated to our country's policy on
terrorism. A commitment to a point system is a recognition by
Congress that our country needs an immigration policy, not an
immigrant policy. Congress is sub silentio accepting that our
policy over the last 42 years was wrong, and needs to be amended.

The Kennedy-Kyl coalition behind S. 1348 has agreed to five
pillars which form the core of their internal agreement, and have
agreed to defend each one of these five together. Either we will
have CIR with all these five points, or we will not have CIR at
all in this Congress. The five pillars are: two on enforcement -
border enhancements and employment verification; two on benefits
- legalization and a guest worker program; one on citizenship -
English/civics training/requirements. The point system is tied
with an umbilical cord to legalization. Advocates have to realize
that under the Kennedy-Kyl compromise, the point system is the
framework for anything that they seek to accomplish. To fight the
point system at this stage in the Senate is akin to holding back
the tides.

In a surprising development, opposition to the bill stems most
loudly not from the anti-immigrationists, but family-immigration
advocates, and centers on the elimination of the family-based
categories in favor of a point system. What is apparently lost on
some is that the point system also eliminates all the employment
based categories. A point system, properly structured, will
ensure prompt immigration of many who would face delays of a
decade or more under the current family system. The surprising
thing, in our view, is that Congress is not proposing to apply
the point system retroactively to the entire family and
employment backlogs. We remain convinced that the one non-
negotiable position that advocates ought to hold is that the
biological family (spouses and minor children) should be
sacrosanct (for all, LPRs, USCs, guest workers, etc), and under
no circumstances should any extended family member (parent,
siblings, adult children) of any category (LPRs, USCs, etc)
receive more favorable treatment than members of the biological
family. Opposition to the biological family unit would be
immoral.

Advocates who are concerned about family categories should focus
on accomplishing their ends within a point system. Surely, that's
what the process of floor amendment is for. This point applies
even more forcefully to advocates of employment based
immigration. Most employment immigration attorneys have been
waiting with baited breath for CIR since they had been repeatedly
assured that SKIL would be part of CIR. We believe that SKIL has
been left out only because SKIL, as originally written, applied
only within the context of employment based categories, not a
point system. If SKIL were redrafted now, and presented as a
floor amendment within the context of a point system, we believe
there are sufficient votes for SKIL to once again become part of
CIR.

Post-CIR, we see a glorious future ahead for immigration, and
thus for the bar. Fasten your seat belts for the ride.

Reminder: The Deadline Is Tuesday, May 22nd For PERM with Joel
Stewart.
http://www.ilw.com/seminars/may2007.shtm

We welcome readers to share their opinion and ideas with us by
writing to mailto:editor@ilw.com.
_______________________________________ ... or@ilw.com.

"Anti-Immigrationists" ?!

NO NEED FOR FURTHER COMMENT.