Subject: HQ NR #7062: Summary of the Senate Immigration Subcommittee Mark-up of Simpson Bill S 1394

From: [email-masked]
Date: Fri, 1 Dec 1995 12:46:18 -0500

*  *  *    N E W S   R E L E A S E   7062   *  *  *
             _________   December 1, 1995   __________

   [[[[[[  [[[[[[[[[[    [[[[[[       [[[[[[[      [[[[[[[
    [[[     [[[        [[[    [[[   [[[    [[[   [[[    [[[    ______
    [[[     [[[       [[[          [[[          [[[
   [[[     [[[[[[[[  [[[            [[[[[        [[[[[
   [[[     [[[       [[[               [[[[[        [[[[[    ______
  [[[     [[[        [[[                  [[[          [[[  ____
  [[[     [[[         [[[    [[[  [[[[   [[[   [[[[   [[[
[[[[[[  [[[[[[         [[[[[[[     [[[[[[[[     [[[[[[[[

&^&^&^&^&^&^&^&^&^&^&^&^&^&^&^&^&^&^&^&^&^&^&^&^&^&^&^&^&^&^&^&^&^&^&^
IFCSS Foundation, Inc. 733 15th Street, NW  Suite 440 Washington,
     D.C. 20005   Tel: (202) 347-0017      Fax: (202) 347-0018
&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=

   Summary of the Senate Immigration Subcommittee Mark-up 
                  of Simpson Bill S 1394

Simpson Bill S 1394 was adopted on November 29 with a vote of 5 to 2.
Only did two Democrats Kennedy (D-MA) and Simon (D-IL) vote Nay agai-
nst the bill.     Senator Feinstein crossed the line and joined other  
Republicans to favor it. The IFCSS presents hereby the summary of the 
mark-up in the following. From the given remarks in Mark-up,  you may 
be aware of what and how these Senators were thinking about,    which  
will be good for the on-going campaign.    Although   some provisions 
were removed, it still contains very strict items, and doesn't change 
its instinct of being an anti-immigration, anti-business,  and extre-
mely discriminative legislation. 

                      *   *   *   *   *

In his opening statement, Simpson explained his stands and acknowled-
ged the concerns that business and education  groups had expressed to 
him, and noted that he was making a number of changes to address the-
se concerns.    Kennedy objected to the cuts proposed in family spon-
sored and business related immigration, and Simon, expressing a simi-
lar theme, said that illegal, but not legal immigration is the probl-
em, and that,   in general, the public is "thoroughly confused" about 
the distinction. However, Grassley (R-IA) supported the overall redu-
ction   in numbers but wanted to make sure that labor shortages could 
be dealt with in a timely manner.   He noted that his constituents in 
Iowa are concerned not only about illegal immigration,  but also with 
the level of legal immigration. Feinstein said she was "undecided" on 
the issue of cuts ,   but preceeded to talk about the perceived nega-
tive impacts of immigration on California.    An   immigrant comes to 
Calif., and "ends up bringing 35 or 40 people, and this has an impact".
                     ___     ___     ___

* Simpson' Concessions to the Business Community -
  Four revisions to the bill were offered by him, which were accepted
without objection as a modification to the   underlying bill prior to
the offering of actual amendments:  
  1). Reduce the fee that employers  would  be  required  to pay when 
they sponsor a foreign worker; 
  2). Direct that the fees paid by employers be put  into  a  private 
fund dedicated to providing  scholarship and  training in the   given 
industry;
  3). Restore, with a few conditions, the visa category the bill  had 
previously eliminated for outstanding professors and researcher; 
  4). Remove the  requirement that the two year of post  degree  work
experience outside the US for foreign students to qualify for an  em-
ployment-based visa.

* Immunizations required for new immigrants -
  Offered by Kyl (R-AZ) and passed by voice vote.

* Formula for Refuge Targeted Assistance -
  Offered by Feinstein, which would direct more "targeted assistance"
money to California and passed by voice vote.

* Discussion on family immigration -
  Presented by Kennedy to ameliorate some of S 1394's more restritist
measures aimed at family-sponsored immigration.   Due   to  Simpson's 
opposition, the amendment was not offered, and Kennedy vowed to do it
again in full Judiciary Committee;

* English requirement for employment-bsed immigration -
  Offered by Simon to soften Simpson's more restrict  provision,  but 
it was defeated by a vote of 5 to 1.

* Protection for conditional status immigrants -
  Offered by Kennedy to provide protection   to immigrant workers  who 
would be subjected to a new two year conditional status. Under S 1394, 
employment-based immigrants would only receive permanent  resident  if 
they demonstrate at the end of a two year conditional period that they 
are still with the same  employer  who  sponsored them for their visa. 
The amendment would allow a  worker  to  escape   an   exploitative or 
abusive employer if that employer "materially altered" the  terms  and 
conditions of employment. It passed.

* Parachute kids -
  Offered by Feinstein for requiring the elementary  childred  to stay 
at the private school as they apply the visa for, but not move to pub-
lic one.
             --------------------------------------

The IFCSS presents again in the following the provisions regarding the 
employment based immigration after the mark-up, for your reference:

* Worldwide employment-based preference  is  reduced to  90,000  from 
  current 140,000;
 
* Labor Certificate (L.C.) becomes very difficult to  obtain  because
  employers must pay 10% fee (value of the annual compensation inclu-
  ding wages, benefits, and all other compensation) for each applica-
  tion;

* Maximal stay  for  Non-immigrant H-1B and L visas is reduced  to  3
  years (current 6 yrs for H-1B and 5/7 for L);

* New fee is  imposed  on employers who want to employ H-1B applicant
  makeing employers  very difficult to hire aliens.     The fee would
  be 5% first year, 7.5% second year, and 10% last year of stay ( fee 
  = annual compensation including wages, benefits and all other comp-
  ensation);
 
* Additional attestations are required before approval of H-1B:
  a. Employers must pay H-1B workers  at least  100%  of  the  actual 
  compensation or 105% of the prevailing wage level;
  b. no displacement of U.S. workers ( or  must pay H-1B  replacement
  workers 105% of the mean of the compensation paid the laid-off   US
  worker);
 
* The bill will take effect on October 1, 1996, if it passes.

*********************************************************************
* PBS-L is IFCSS's news distribution list for individuals. To sign  *
* on or off from the list, please send email to [email-masked]  *
* leave the subject line open and put in the mail body:             *
*    (For signing on)      sub PBS-L last name first name           *
*    (For signing off)     unsub PBS-L last name first name         *
* For more information about IFCSS, write to [email-masked]   *
*********************************************************************