Calling F2A experts regarding the bill H.R 3012

[LPR 0]

Hello all,

I've been following this forum for over a week now and I finally joined today. This forum is very informative and helpful.

I have a question regarding the Bill H.R 3012 that was recently introduced in the Congress (House). If (only if), that bill passes in the congress and becomes a law, What is the impact that it has on the F2A movement in general and India in particular? The bill has the provision to increases the per country limit in the Family based system from 7 % to 15 %. Can ony one please throw some light on this?

Once again, thanks everyone.

PS: I have already voted in support of the bill H.R 3119 and requested few of my friends to vote as well.

[kumbahara 3]

To understand the implications of HR 3012, you need to understand how the current process of visa allocation works. The DOS - Visa Office headed by Mr.Oppenheim releases the visa bulletin, based on the numerical limits prescribed by the INA laws and its amendments. It states for F2A, 75% is exempt from numerical limitation and thereafter 7% per country quotas should be followed. If you look at the attachment, F2A data, you can clearly make out more than 50-60% of the total 88K+ visa - visa wastage is allocated to Mexico and closeby latin american countries. In 2010 it was close to 73%, 2009 around 60%. The 2011 data is unavailable owing DOS not releasing the yearly visa report. (http://www.visajourney.com/forums/topic/336198-transparency-and-cis-bureaucracy/)

So all in all, an increase in the country quota might only benefit if the beneficiary belongs to Mexico and the rest of the world would see a longer wait time or slower cutoff date movement if the current setup is followed by DOS. Imagine the security check line at the airports. The long winding queue that leads to the counter for ID verification. DOS Cutoff dates, tries to limit the number of the people entering the serpentine queue. But each of the counter may be thought of as individual consulates in different countries.Because of a demand from Mexico and close by latin american countries, DOS only advances cutoff dates to fill the serpentine queue irrespective of how the movement is at the counter. Hence for low demand countries (for F2A specifically), like India, there are no sufficient cases that correspond to the cutoff dates and hence either waste the visa or spillover to other categories like F3,F4 etc. The F2A data document in the link for other thread illustrates this very shortcoming.

While many members of this forum like to believe "Ignorance is bliss", the very justification or process of establishing the cutoff dates are a bane to low demand countries and is not even a fair means of distributing the visas based on consumption and hence will always result in wastage. HR 3119, if it sees the light of the day, has better provisions in terms of visa wastage recapture and rolling over the wasted visas to the subsequent year quotas as well as temporary "W" visa while beneficiaries wait out the flawed visa allocation mechanism.

[LPR 0]

Agreed. So we should oppose HR 3112.But..But..

1) I heard the total 7 % country limit is for both Employment and Family based combined. That is 7 % of 366,000(140,000 + 226,000) which is 25,620 that India/China should get in total/year. But India and China exceed that limit in EB based visas. Is that the reason they are not able to process India/Chinese Visas for F2A? So with H.R 3012, the EB limit will be gone and the 15 % per country means 15 % of 226,000 which is 33,900. Probably then there is a chance of DOS/USCIS processing more India/Chinese appplications at the consulates.

I am just guessing and I am not even sure if my assumption is valid.

Thanks Kumbhara for your awesome work. I appreciate it.

[kumbahara 3]

Well, one can modify the quote of "The world works in mysterious ways" to "CIS works in mysterious ways"! If such a hypothesis stands true that F2A petitions for India/China are dragged below because of EB petitions, think again. Such a farce is across the board on ALL low demand countries. But any hypothesis can only be true, if we know more information on a month by month basis or a quarterly basis at the least. Hence the plea for the members to contact CIS Ombudsman for demand statistics for family based petitions

I would appreciate your comment even more if the many people who have viewed this topic to write a simple email as directed in the thread, just to demand show us the demand statistics! (http://www.visajourney.com/forums/topic/336198-transparency-and-cis-bureaucracy/)

While, if and when HR3012 passes, it would be even more longer for most of the members who visit this forum because most of the the F2A visas are already exempt from numerical limitation. Also its a good indication that F4 numbers are consistently higher than F2A issuance, its clearly because of spillovers and not because of visa quotas being exhausted.

Unfortunately, it seems like with HR 3012, things arent going to improve, rather go downhill for F2A hopefuls!

Agreed. So we should oppose HR 3112.But..But..

1) I heard the total 7 % country limit is for both Employment and Family based combined. That is 7 % of 366,000(140,000 + 226,000) which is 25,620 that India/China should get in total/year. But India and China exceed that limit in EB based visas. Is that the reason they are not able to process India/Chinese Visas for F2A? So with H.R 3012, the EB limit will be gone and the 15 % per country means 15 % of 226,000 which is 33,900. Probably then there is a chance of DOS/USCIS processing more India/Chinese appplications at the consulates.

I am just guessing and I am not even sure if my assumption is valid.

Thanks Kumbhara for your awesome work. I appreciate it.

[LPR 0]

Well, one can modify the quote of "The world works in mysterious ways" to "CIS works in mysterious ways"! If such a hypothesis stands true that F2A petitions for India/China are dragged below because of EB petitions, think again. Such a farce is across the board on ALL low demand countries. But any hypothesis can only be true, if we know more information on a month by month basis or a quarterly basis at the least. Hence the plea for the members to contact CIS Ombudsman for demand statistics for family based petitions

I would appreciate your comment even more if the many people who have viewed this topic to write a simple email as directed in the thread, just to demand show us the demand statistics! (http://www.visajourney.com/forums/topic/336198-transparency-and-cis-bureaucracy/)

While, if and when HR3012 passes, it would be even more longer for most of the members who visit this forum because most of the the F2A visas are already exempt from numerical limitation. Also its a good indication that F4 numbers are consistently higher than F2A issuance, its clearly because of spillovers and not because of visa quotas being exhausted.

Unfortunately, it seems like with HR 3012, things arent going to improve, rather go downhill for F2A hopefuls!

Just read the news that they introduced a new bill in Senate S 1857 which may be a companion bill to the H.R 3012. Is there a way to request congressmen/senators to at least add an amendment to this bill i.e., granting the Temporary 'W' visa to the spouses and minor children of GC holders? I live in NY/NJ area and I am willing to meet congressmen personally in my area.

Kumbahara and/or other experts, please weigh in with your thoughts.

[kumbahara 3]

I am not sure on the technicality of more amendments in the house for HR3012. The companion bill in the senate is IMHO a way to cut down on discussions related to the bill so that either can be given a green light.If you look into the proceedings of HR3012, you can see the sponsor Jason Chaffetz assert that his bill merely changes the distribution of the allocation of visas and neither adds or removes more visas. While a temporary W visa fits the outline, when Congresswoman Zoe Lofgren introduced such amendment, it was disregarded as not being germane to the bill.

Both on the house and senate committees of judiciary, few senators call the shots on policy changes and majority of the congress votes along the party lines. Iam all for writing to senators/congressmen. On the senate committee, Charles Schumer of NY, John Cornyn of TX have a lot of say and on the house floor Zoe Lofgren, Lamar Smith and the sponsor of the bill Jason Chaffetz would have more say on what gets tagged along.

This thread contains the contact info for them http://www.visajourney.com/forums/topic/328932-wake-up-f2a-fellow-members-and-send-this-draft/page__st__135__p__4944982#entry4944982

Often I have noticed, apart from meeting in person, writing to them through snail mail evokes more response than canned email or petitions. I have communicated with Lofgren before and she understands the process being an ex immigration attorney. Hence the need to make sure her bill HR 3119 to be discussed on the immigration subcommitee and possibly inform the senators on the shortcomings of the current process.

Just read the news that they introduced a new bill in Senate S 1857 which may be a companion bill to the H.R 3012. Is there a way to request congressmen/senators to at least add an amendment to this bill i.e., granting the Temporary 'W' visa to the spouses and minor children of GC holders? I live in NY/NJ area and I am willing to meet congressmen personally in my area.

Kumbahara and/or other experts, please weigh in with your thoughts.

[limitless 0]

Hello All,

I recently read this thread as I am in the same boat. Thanks for sharing all the information, especially the "F2AData.PDF" file posted by "kumbahara".

With respect to H.R. 3012, I seem to have a different opinion. I am of the feeling that this bill should help India F2A cases. Please correct me if I am mistaken, but this is how I am calculating the numbers.

So, total quota for second preference family based is 114,200 of which 75% are exempt and 2% are subjected to per-country cap.

That means, 75% * 114, 200 = 85,650 (these numbers are given in first-come-first-served basis irrespective of country of origin).

Now, from the remaining 2% i.e. 2% * 114, 200 = 2,284 (these are subjected to 7% per-country cap, that means no country should get more than 7% * 2,284 = 160)

So, India along with each other country was getting these extra 160.

Now with H.R.3012, India along with each other country should get 15% * 2,284 = 342.

So if H.R.3012 passes, per year, India gets an extra 342 - 160 = 182 F2A visa numbers.

Based on the "F2AData.PDF" file posted by user "kumbahara", India is using on an average 1,100 F2A numbers per year.

So with H.R.3012 the extra 182 visa numbers India is getting should help move the dates forward. (Please note: 182 is 16% of 1,100).

Now, in theory, the only downside of H.R.3012 comes in case of spill-over numbers. With 7% country cap, its likely that some numbers

from F3, F4, F1 categories can spillover to F2 category, now with 15% cap, the chances are that high demand countries like Mexico can use

all allocated F3, F4, F1 numbers leaving no room for spillover. But in reality and based on "F2AData.PDF", no numbers got spilledover to F2A

even with 7% cap, so i would like to see this only as a theoretical risk.

In summary, i am of the opinion that H.R.3012 should help low demand countries for F2A (like India compared to Mexico and Dominican Republic).

Please share your thoughts about my analysis.

Thank you.

Well, one can modify the quote of "The world works in mysterious ways" to "CIS works in mysterious ways"! If such a hypothesis stands true that F2A petitions for India/China are dragged below because of EB petitions, think again. Such a farce is across the board on ALL low demand countries. But any hypothesis can only be true, if we know more information on a month by month basis or a quarterly basis at the least. Hence the plea for the members to contact CIS Ombudsman for demand statistics for family based petitions

I would appreciate your comment even more if the many people who have viewed this topic to write a simple email as directed in the thread, just to demand show us the demand statistics! (http://www.visajourney.com/forums/topic/336198-transparency-and-cis-bureaucracy/)

While, if and when HR3012 passes, it would be even more longer for most of the members who visit this forum because most of the the F2A visas are already exempt from numerical limitation. Also its a good indication that F4 numbers are consistently higher than F2A issuance, its clearly because of spillovers and not because of visa quotas being exhausted.

Unfortunately, it seems like with HR 3012, things arent going to improve, rather go downhill for F2A hopefuls!

[limitless 0]

One important contradiction with respect to my calculation I found in "F2AData.PDF" file is in FY 2010

how come Dom.Rep got 5,200 "2A Subject" numbers? Not even total cap subject number is that high (2% * 114,200 = 2,284).

Same year, India was given 920 cap-subject numbers.

Now that does not make sense.