If you do not try, you never know. - Hilary Clinton
促使俺对此问题关注的, 主要是陈丹红律师的文章“09年6月份职业移民印度排期倒退将会影响中国申请人”. 因此俺写了前两贴: “改变游说策略: 剩余名额的使用也应有上限. 事不宜迟”
http://web.wenxuecity.com/BBSView.php?SubID=immigration&MsgID=477446
以及“争抢剩余名额的战斗已经打响, 请来听俺煽煽情”
http://web.wenxuecity.com/BBSView.php?SubID=immigration&MsgID=477985
目的是想让大家知道当前中国出生的申请人在名额分配上的尴尬境地, 呼吁大家一起以信件和EMAIL的方式进行游说, 来为中国争名额. 值得不值得一做, 是个见仁见智的问题. 老实讲, 俺并没有必赢的信念. 政策这东西在美国从来不是靠认识哪个大人物说句话就能解决问题的, 政治力量都是从最初的政治鼓动开始积累起来的, 不能只想到水到渠成的那一刻. 大家看一下总统选举就知道了. 俺认为, 这事做了对自己(比如, 万一差一点儿今年就拿到了)和对以后的人都是负责任的, “俺们曾经争取过”, 没什么可遗憾的, 不用多想老美看咱象阿三还是阿四.
有人也许要问, iCall如此“丧心病狂”的卯足了劲要跟老印干, 是不是跟老印有什么深仇大恨. 深仇大恨倒谈不上, 但是在公司里老印一旦得势, 非常跋扈, 对老中尤其不友好. 可以告诉大家, 老中肯定比老印能干, 但老印肯定比老中爬得快, 原因就不讨论了, 将来一定是老印欺负老中. 嗨! 扯远了, 还是谈谈斗争策略吧.
不妥之处
俺的上一贴也有不慎之处, 最好还是不要和反移民团体同流合污. 他们除了反对, 是不会花心思弄清合法移民和非法移民, 中国职业移民和印度职业移民的区别的. 另外, 不可在中国人以外宣传这件事以寻求其他国家的支持, 以免挑起种族冲突, 反而不利于集中精力干我们的事. 大家默默的干就是了. 总原则是“悄悄的进村, 打枪的不要”.
写作要点
第一, 大家发EMAIL要避免种族问题, 要多谈多元化.
第二, 少谈中国, 多谈其他国家, 必要时也可把中国印归在一类, 当一回ROW. 达到目的更要紧. 可用你们的英文名署名.
第三, 给老美的数字的数字要直接引用, 不要任何运算, 不要太多.
第四, 写得一定要简洁, 不要长篇大论. 别人都明白的道理就不要写了.
两个样本(不介意别人照搬俺的样本, 不过希望大家写得更好)
(Example 1)
Dear President/Senator/Congressman,
I am an immigrant from the rest of the world. Like many other employment based immigrants, I am subject to per-country quota, and therefore I am still in waiting for green card right now. However, I would not complain about diversity policy because this policy makes people, ever from small their countries, still have opportunities. Under this policy, each country in each category can only take at most 7% of the total number of that category.
But, did you notice that India born EB2 immigrants took the 21% of total EB2 numbers while almost all countries EB3 even did not reach 7% ceiling when all visa numbers are consumed? This fact totally defeated diversity policy and is unacceptable by people from other countries. The reason is that each category is allowed to use unused numbers that are carried from the up-level category WITHOUT LIMITATION. Totally 22,076 were carried over from EB1 to EB2 in FY 2008. India born EB2 immigrants used 11,561 ones out of 22,076.
What about EB3? There are more people from more countries waiting in this category. They got NOTHING from 22,076 carry-over visa numbers from EB1. This is a diversity hole in that each EB category country theoretically has only 2,805 (7%) per-country cap before carry-over while one country acquired 11,561 carry-over visas.
I strongly solicit law makers to pay attention to this issue. It makes more sense to set a PROPER LIMITATION of using carry-over visa numbers from up-level category for each country of each category, such that carry-over visa numbers may be distributed over more countries. Diversity may be abided by.
Thanks for your consideration.
(Example 2)
Dear President/Senator/Congressman,
My name is XXXXXX, and my story is simple. I am one of the numerous people who immigrated to the United States in search of a better life for myself and my family. As many others who are here on work visas, I am subject to a per-country quota when filing for permanent residency. Still, I believe in the diversity policy because it provides an opportunity for people from every nationality to live in and subsequently contribute to this country.
Under this policy, prospective permanent residents filing under the EB category, which is further subdivided into three categories, from one country can have at most 7% of the entire allowance of that category. However, in the EB2 category, Indian immigrants took 21% of the total EB2s granted in fiscal year 2008 and China took 9.9%. None of any other countries reached 7% cap.
How did this inequity occur? EB1’s unused quotas trickled down to EB2 without regard to the nationality of the applicants. In fiscal year 2008, a total of 22,076 quotas were carried over from EB1 to EB2. Without the discretion established by the diversity policy, 11,561 of 22,076 green cards (52.4%) were awarded to Indian immigrants. Furthermore, despite that most of the EB applicants were in the EB3 category, they did not share the rollover quotas from EB1. EB2 alone consumed the 22,076 remainder in fiscal year 2008. What resulted was that applicants in EB3 that did not reach the 7% ceiling, sharing the plight of waiting.
To resolve this crisis, I strongly urge lawmakers to reform the current practice of distributing unused EB1 visas. I feel that it is reasonable to set a proper restriction on using carry-over visa numbers so that immigrants from traditionally underrepresented countries and of neglected EB categories can have an equal claim to the American Dream.
I deeply appreciate your time and consideration.
(精力有限, 这两篇写得不够好, 请高手指正)
游说目标
House Subcommittee on Immigration, Citizenship, Refugees, Border Security, and International Law
http://www.visi.com/juan/congress/cgi-bin/newcommittee.cgi?site=ctc&lang=&commcode=hjudiciary_immigration
Congress VIP (already included in above link, but I list them here for your focus)
Zoe Lofgren (D-CA) [Chairman]
Phone: 202-225-3072
Fax: 202-225-3336
Email Form: http://forms.house.gov/lofgren/webforms/contactzipauth.html
Steve King (R-IA) [Ranking Member]
Phone: 202-225-4426
Fax: 202-225-3193
Email Form: http://steveking.house.gov/index.cfm?FuseAction=ContactUs.ContactForm
Senate Immigration, Refugees and Border Security
http://judiciary.senate.gov/about/subcommittees/immigration.cfm
Senate VIP (already included in above link, but I list them here for your focus)
Charles E. Schumer, New York (Chairman)
Contact Form
http://schumer.senate.gov/new_website/contact.cfm
John Cornyn, Texas (Ranking Member)
Contact Form
http://cornyn.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Contact.ContactForm
White House
http://www.whitehouse.gov/contact/
PHONE: 202.456.1111.
当前, 俺需要肯出力的朋友继续寻找有价值的游说目标. 再好的策略, 也要有人实施, 实施的人不是别人, 正是我和你. 如同大家一起出资买Lottery, 不是机会更大一点吗?
如何协调
俺们这是集体行动, 要做一点点协调, 俺提议分单双号, 单日发邮件的, 发给民主党议员, 双日发邮件的, 发给共和党议员. 发给白宫的没有限制. 凡是发过的议员, 请在置顶区第一贴上加一跟贴”XXXX年XX月XX日发EMAIL给XXX.XXX”, 做个跟踪, 其他人也可再发同一人. 这样, 俺们就能把主要版面留给有问题需要解答的朋友. 要是版主能帮助开辟一游说专栏更好.
不同意见
本坛也有人不同意俺呼吁的, 不要紧, 不顶就是了. 但把中印比作"本是同根生"就比较可笑. 俺就想为以后中国多得名额, 也是希望中国人将来少受印度人的气. 仅此而已.
怎样心态
如果你的案子受阻, 你是否会有找第一夫人找议员的冲动? 不如这样, 把你的Energy用到这地方来. 权当玩lottery, 中了人人有份. 再说, 国会设这些网站, 就是为了倾听来自各方面的意见的, 不提白不提. 要比把意见写在文学城有用, 俺们没有投票权, 还没有互联网的使用权吗? 就是真的有幸去玩 immigration lottery, 不是也要填个表吗? 去那些网站填个FORM吧, 可以用化名, 也可以堂堂正正的留下真实姓名, 就象EBAY注册那么简单. 干吧.
一些问题
Q: 为什么不考虑游说其他内容, 比如增加移民总量?
A: 除非总量倍增或完全放开国家限制, 否则对中国职业移民帮助不大. 这是由使用余额的次序决定的. 但总量倍增或完全放开国家限制是不可能的. 事实上, 只要余额使用合理, 中国不够的部分很容易消化掉. 这对现有的体系冲击最小.
Q: 有多大的把握议员能听到俺们的声音?
A: 俺估计信件和EMAIL都是由秘书处理的, 如同找工作简历到达用人部门前先要由Recruiter和HR过滤一样. 为了使你写的东西能从千百篇里脱颖而出, 写作要求简洁又不失重点, 有特点. 最后是运气. 增大运气需要三“多”. 发送的人多, 发送的目标多, 发送的版本多. 这就为什么需要大家参与.
Q: 是不是每个人都去议员网站上发EMAIL效率最高?
A: 这里有两种不同的工作既Write/Revise和Search/Send, 俺的感觉, 同时做这两件事, 脑筋不易转换. 最好是有人做W/R, 有人做S/S. 但参与者各自为政, 是做不到这一点的. 所以, 先看一看参与者再说. 最理想是大家以接力的形式参加, 而不是全程参与.
Q: 假如下月排期全部为C了, 还值得不值得一干?
A: 下月为C不等于以后都为C. 再说老中与老印之间的竞争远超移民范畴. 为将来职场斗争做一点防患于未然的事, 未尝不可.
Q: 其他问题和建议可在回贴里提.
A: 应注意节省版面 (不互相攻击, 少说气话).
最后, 咱们来唱一首歌
起来, 不愿多排期的人们, 把我们的游说筑成我们新的名额, 中国移民到了, 最关键的时刻, … 我们万众一心, 冒着敌人的炮火, 前进, 前进, 前进, 进!