Tag Archives: United States

Immigration Blog, Indian-Americans and U.S. Politics Blog

Hard to Believe We Made It

Leave a comment

This is the immigration story of Mr. Prabhakar Joshi, sent to USINPAC in response to the White House’s appeal for immigration stories to help frame robust immigration policies. The same has been sent to the White House as well.  

The year was 1963. We were citizens of India. My wife, Savita, got an admission and assistantship to work on her doctorate program in the Texas Woman’s University (TWU), Denton, TX. She did not want to go alone and I did not want to leave her. United States would not grant me a visa unless I had a work offer in hand. So my wife and I sent a letter to her major professor, Dr. P.B.Mack, to offer a job. She immediately agreed to give part-time work and sent us a letter to that effect. We were jubilant.

But that would not clear our road. My supervisor would not let me leave the Home Department, Govt. of Maharashtra state, because he claimed that he gave me promotions and I was working in Special Branch dealing with secret and confidential matters. I was frustrated. I petitioned to another officer holding a parallel position. He agreed and sent the papers to the ultimate authority, the Secretary of the Dept. He approved. We were jubilant again.

Then there was another hitch. The Reserve Bank of India would not let us take more than $7.40 each. Why? China had attacked India and the government wanted to save all the dollars. We wrote to a pen-friend in Louisiana, who was a Secretary to Governor. She promised $200 instantly when we arrive in the USA.

Passport was a hassle. Without using the good offices of my father who was the president of Thane Congress and my father in law who was a State senator (member of Legislative council), Bombay, & the chief of a national political party we received our passports and visas faster than the normal speed.

After a lot of thinking, we took leave from our work places, the Home Dept. for me and the SNDT, University for Savita, and decided to embark. Took loans to meet our huge expenses and got to a travel agent. Asked him to send us by a ship to England to save money and then by air to USA.

Our journey on a ship was very enjoyable except one night’s sea sickness. Finally, when arrived in New York, we got those $200 at a telegraph office. Took a taxi to the bus station. The driver asked for a tip. We asked for the change. Took the change and told him that since you are forcing us for a tip we are not giving any.

We bought 2 bus tickets to Denton, TX. A few dollars were left. Therefore did not eat on the way; only one cup of coffee for both of us. In Denton, a pen-friend had booked a one bed room apartment for us. Paid rent and all the money was gone.

Next day went to register at the Univ. of Texas. They won’t complete the process unless the fee was paid. We asked to see the treasurer, who in turn sent us to the Univ. President. He allowed us 10 days after which our names would be removed from the univ. if not paid.

We went to a bank; showed our credentials and offered my wife’s golden jewelry in exchange for the loan. The loan was approved. We took only the amount necessary for our fees and refused to take more.

Thus we got enrolled. I used to walk to the Univ.  two miles, one way, with a bag full of books in hand, in cold and in summer. After a month, a car stopped and asked me “are you at the Univ. of TX? I answered yes. He asked why did I walk? I told “ walking is a good exercise”. He smiled and offered a ride—every day. Next year, we bought a bicycle for $8 at a Police auction. My wife would sit on the bar while I drove for shopping. Some waived from their windows. In two years we completed our degrees and got employed. Then we brought our 8-year old son, Chandrashekhar, who was left with my parents/his grandparents. This much story is enough this time.

(Do you have an immigration story you would like to share? Write to USINPAC at info@usinpac.com)

Defence And Strategic Affairs Blog, India-US Relations Blog

A Rocky Road Ahead

Leave a comment

Since the United States has announced its intentions to withdraw its troops from Afghanistan by 2014, leaders in the White House have been looking toward India as an ally in facing the coming strategic and military challenges in the region. For the U.S., the choice of India is an obvious one. Its growing geopolitical presence and commitment to democracy is a strong force among unstable countries, and deep economic ties with Afghanistan (last year, India gave Afghanistan almost $2 billion a year alone in economic and development aid!) all make India a prime candidate to manage postwar reconstruction. Yet what has been heralded as “a full-blown strategic partnership” in shepherding the region’s development is drastically falling short.

On one side is the growing diplomatic tension between the U.S. and India, which has forestalled bilateral commercial trades and sharply highlighted differences in priorities. To be clear, the U.S. and India have dramatically improved their relationship following the Cold War, when the U.S. sided with India’s rival, Pakistan, and India maintained economic and military relations with the Soviet Union. Since then, economic interests were better aligned, as bilateral trade has reached almost $100 billion just last year alone. Still, India is defiantly opposed to complying with U.S. demands if they were to compromise its own economic interests. In Iran, for example, the U.S. has called for sanctions against Iran’s growing nuclear capabilities, and has asked India to cease its commercial transactions with the country. But India views things differently, stating that oil and natural gas purchase from Tehran are vital to its economy. Moreover, Indian diplomats assert that it is “in India’s interest to maintain good ties with Iran, with whom it shares deep historical, cultural and religious connections.” They also believe that purchasing Iranian oil will “strengthen ties with Iran as a hedge against an uncertain future in Afghanistan after the U.S. withdrawal,”, and are thus reluctant to rebuke Iran’s nuclear purchases.

Differences in priorities in China are also a source of contention between Indian and U.S. lawmakers. The U.S. has made strides in containing what it perceives to be a geopolitical threat by China, due to its growing military strength and influence in Asia. Indeed, leaders in Beijing have even suspected that the U.S. is attempting to partner with India in containing China, claims that the U.S. staunchly denies. But India is not interested in upsetting China and has worked very hard in cooperating in areas of mutual interest and opportunity and believes than an alliance with the U.S. will fracture that relationship.

Finally, currency problems in India are hampering its ability to provide stable finances for Afghanistan’s reconstruction. High interest rates have destabilized India’s investment climate, forcing it to focus inward and shrink expenditures.

The future of the U.S.-India relationship will depend heavily on who wins this November. The Democratic Party will likely continue on its current trajectory, gently pushing India to open its markets for investment and to align with the U.S. The Republican Party’s foreign policy is traditionally more aggressive, and will probably reiterate demands for Indian liberalization and compliance with Iran sanctions.

Immigration Blog

Reforms That Would Help Employer-Sponsored Immigrants

Leave a comment

Indians wait longer than other potential employment-based immigrants. That means reforms to America’s employer-sponsored immigration system are likely to help many Indians, as well other skilled professionals. There are several actions Congress or the executive branch can take that will reduce wait times and provide substantial relief to employers and skilled immigrants.

STEM Exemption for Skilled Immigrants

First, Congress can exempt from the green card quotas immigrants with a master’s degree or higher from a U.S. university in a science, technology, engineering or math (STEM) field. This provision has been included in past legislation by Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-CA) and some others. Congress could expand this measure to go beyond only degrees in those fields or to include individuals who received a Ph.D. in a technical field from abroad. Research has shown those who receive their degree abroad arrive in the United States with substantial human capital, garnered without any U.S. expense, but also may be among the finest in their fields.

Count Only Principals, Not Dependents, Toward Annual Quota

Second, a new law could count only the principal employment-based immigrants, not their dependents, against the 140,000 annual employment-based quota. One reason for the large green card backlogs is that annual H-1B temporary visa quotas count only the principal recipient of an H-1B visa, whereas about half of the 140,000 quota for employment-based immigrant visas is utilized by the dependents (spouse and/or children) of the sponsored immigrant. In addition, Congress could raise the 140,000 annual quota to a higher level.

Utilize Unused Employment-Based Green Cards

Third, lawmakers could provide additional green card relief by including numbers previously allocated by Congress that were not utilized in prior years, such as due to agency processing delays. The State Department estimates there are more than 300,000 unused employment-based green cards allocated in previous years that have never gone to recipients due to administrative issues.

Eliminate the Per Country Limit

Fourth, Congress could eliminate the per country limit on employment-based immigrants. H.R. 3012 would accomplish this feat over a four-year period. The legislation passed the House and, at least for now, is being delayed by a “hold” on the legislation by Senator Charles Grassley (R-IA). Liberalizing rules for employment-based green cards is less controversial than other proposed immigration reforms, as evidenced by the overwhelming vote in the House of Representatives on H.R. 3012.

Allow Filing of Adjustment of Status Before Priority Date

Fifth, allow individuals to file for Adjustment of Status (Form I-485) prior to when his or her immigrant visa become available. Currently, skilled foreign nationals mired in the employment-based green card backlog are often not able to accept promotions or change jobs without the risk of starting their green card applications again. For those waiting a long time the fear of waiting even longer is significant. That would change if early filing of Adjustment of Status were permitted.

If U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services were to allow individuals waiting for green cards to file for Adjustment of Status even if their priority date has not been reached it would facilitate a more normal existence for those stuck in the green cad backlog. For example a spouse would likely become eligible to work legally in the United States. Also, it is likely the ability to travel in and out of America would become easier, helping people both personally and professionally.

Implementing any or all of the reforms recommended here would aid U.S. employers, immigrants and the American economy, keeping more talent and resources inside the country.

Immigration Blog

America Lacks An Immigrant Entrepreneur Visa

Leave a comment

It would surprise many people that there really is no good way for a foreign national from India or elsewhere to gain permanent residence (a green card) by starting a new company. In fact, it is difficult to even gain a temporary visa as the founder of a new business.

EB-5 Is Not a True Immigrant Entrepreneur Visa

The closest America has today to an immigrant entrepreneur visa is the EB-5 (employment-based fifth preference) immigrant investor visa. The immigrant investor visa became part of the Immigration and Nationality Act in 1990. To receive such a visa, which awards permanent residence (a green card), an individual must invest either $1 million or $500,000 (if in a Regional Center) and create at least 10 jobs. “Approximately 90 to 95 percent of individual Form I-526 petitions filed each year are filed by Alien Investors who are investing in Regional Center-affiliated commercial enterprises,” according to U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services. While it is clear attracting capital to the United States is positive, EB-5 primarily helps existing projects, rather than facilitates or rewards startup activity.

In addition, Congress and agency regulations have not made it easy for potential immigrant investor visa holders. This is one reason the EB-5 category has never come close to utilizing fully the 10,000 allocation of immigrant visas available under the statute.

American Tradition Favors Establishing an Entrepreneur Visa

While there is no reason to eliminate the immigrant investor visa category – and, in fact, there is a strong case to be made for streamlining its requirements to making it more accessible to potential investors – it goes against America’s tradition to reward cash investments but not entrepreneurial talent in U.S. immigration law. For a long time, the United States favored talent and hard work over cash. An entire genre of literature, the Horatio Alger stories, featured rags to riches heroes. The stories of many of today’s immigrants who become successful entrepreneurs illustrate that talent is a better indicator of success than a healthy bank balance.

Bills in Congress

A number of bills in Congress have been introduced that would establish an immigrant entrepreneur visa. The Startup Act (S. 1965), introduced by Senators Jerry Moran (R-KS) and Mark Warner (D-VA), would create a new green card category for entrepreneurs, focusing on highly-skilled foreign nationals with an existing tie to the United States. The bill “creates a new visa for up to 75,000 immigrant entrepreneurs who hold an H-1B visa or have completed graduate level work in a STEM [science, technology, engineering and math] field, and who during the 1-year period after the new visa is issued register at least one new business entity which employs at least two full-time, non-family member employees, and invests or raises capital investments of at least $100,000,” according to a summary of the legislation provided by the bill’s authors. “If these requirements are satisfied, the entrepreneur would have three additional years to remain in the U.S. and operate his or her business. During the three-year period, the entrepreneur must employ at least five, full-time, non-family members for the business entity. At the end of the three years, a recipient may apply to remove the conditional status.”

The Startup Visa Act of 2011 (S. 565), introduced by Senators John Kerry (D-MA) and Richard Lugar (R-IN), would make an immigrant visa available to a foreign national who raises at least $100,000 from a “qualified venture capitalist, a qualified super angel investor, or a qualified government entity” and creates five full time jobs in the United States (other than for a spouse, son or daughter), raises $500,000 in capital investment, or has an unexpired H-1B visa or a graduate degree in a STEM field from a U.S. university and attracts $20,000 in investment from a qualified investor and creates at least three jobs and generates revenue, or raises capital of, $100,000 within two years.

Legislation by Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-CA), H.R. 2161 (The IDEA Act) contains similar provisions on establishing an immigrant entrepreneur visa to those contained in S. 565 and S. 1965. However, it also contains a section that eschews capital requirements and enables a foreign-born entrepreneur to receive an immigrant visa if he or she creates 10 or more full-time U.S. jobs within two years, without regard to the amount of outside capital raised.

It is unclear whether Congress will act on any of these bills. Legislative measures that place less emphasis on the amount of capital a foreign national invests or raises fit best within the American tradition of entrepreneurship. It also conforms to today’s reality of how businesses get started. Giving foreign nationals who start new companies deserve an opportunity to follow through on their dreams and, in the process, create jobs and wealth in America.

Immigration Blog

Family Immigration Backlogs Persist

Leave a comment

In recent years, much attention has been paid to the long waits for green cards for employer-sponsored immigrants. Many believe such waits harm the competitiveness of U.S. companies, since it makes it more difficult to retain top talent in the United States.

Much less attention has focused on the waits in the family-sponsored immigration categories. The wait times for sponsoring a close family member are long and, in some cases, extremely long. In a November 2010 report, the State Department tabulated more than 4.5 million close relatives of U.S. citizens and lawful permanent residents on the immigration waiting list who have registered for processing at a U.S. post overseas. That does not include individuals waiting inside the United States, such as in a temporary visa status, who would gain a green card via adjustment of status at a U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services office. Counting such individuals as well would likely increase the waiting list to over 5 million.

An “immediate relative” of a U.S. citizen can immigrate to America without being subjected to an annual quota. This is important, since it is the relatively low quotas in the family and employer-sponsored preference categories that lead to waits of often many years for would-be immigrants. While there is no numerical limit in the immediate relative category, processing would still normally takes several months. The three primary immediate relatives included in the category are: spouses of U.S. citizens; unmarried children of a U.S. citizen (under 21years old, or under 16 if adopted); and parents of U.S. citizens, if the petitioning citizen is at least 21 years old.

The Preference Categories

Below are the descriptions of the four family-sponsored preferences as detailed in the State Department’s monthly visa bulletin, along with their annual quotas.

“First – Unmarried Sons and Daughters of Citizens: 23,400 a year.

“Second – Spouses and Children, and Unmarried Sons and Daughters of Permanent Residents: 114,200 A. Spouses and Children: 77% of the overall second preference limitation, of which 75% are exempt from the per-country limit; B. Unmarried Sons and Daughters (21 years of age or older): 23% of the overall second preference limitation.

“Third – Married Sons and Daughters of Citizens: 23,400.

“Fourth – Brothers and Sisters of Adult Citizens: 65,000.”

The wait times are longer for U.S. residents sponsoring relatives in Mexico and the Philippines. That is because of the per country limits, which generally limit a country to no more than 7 percent in the preference categories. For example, the wait time for a U.S. citizen petitioning for a brother or sister from the Philippines exceeds 20 years. For siblings from countries other than Mexico and the Philippines the wait times are closer to 10 years. These  estimates are based on examining the visa bulletins and other data from the State Department and U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services.

Wait Times for Sponsoring a Relative in India

The wait times for individuals sponsoring relatives who are in India are estimated to be as follows:

Unmarried Adult Children of U.S. Citizens – 7 year wait.

Spouses and Minor Children of Permanent Residents – 3 year wait.

Spouses and Minor Children of Permanent Residents – 8 year wait.

Married Adult Children of U.S. Citizens – 10 year wait.

Siblings of U.S. Citizens – 11 year wait.

More Visas Needed to Reduce Family Wait Times

To reduce family wait times more immigrant visas would need to be added to the family preference categories. H.R. 3012, which would eliminate the per country limit for employment-based immigrants, would help people from India and China in those categories. However, increasing the per country limit from 7 percent to 15 percent in the family categories, which the bill does, would help those waiting the longest for family members from Mexico and the Philippines. By doing so, it would lead to somewhat longer waits for family-sponsored immigrants from other countries, including India. Other than permanently increasing the number of family-sponsored green cards, something Congress has not done since the current quotas were set in 1990, the long wait times for relatives will likely continue.