LIA EB3 2010-2011游说项目正式启动

再接再励，团结共进（http://www.lianational.org/latest-news/page-9）


---LIA EB3游说项目紧急号召捐款！ 鉴于2010年中国EB3的游说项目取得了巨大成功，
为中国EB3争取到了3480个名额，比份额2687 多了近800个名额! 比08、09两年的总和
多了近1000个! LIA EB3 项目组经过再次投票，决定立刻和游说顾问---Bruce
Morrison续约，在2011年财政年度继续保证中国EB3分到应得的名额，并利用Family
fall across 和其他渠道争取多余的名额。

前期六个月的合同需要$9000 ($1500 x 6)。请大家尽快到LIA EB3网页捐款（http://www.lianational.org/Home/projects/eb3）。

支票请寄：
PO Box 2082, Santa Clara, CA 95055
Payable to "Legal Immigrant Association"

我们需要在10月底前筹集至少$6000 以开始合同。

鉴于EB3捐款人只有100多人，建议捐款额为每人$100,最低捐款额为$50。

希望大家积极响应！
问题或建议请发信到：[e-mail]或电话：800-556-7065， ext. 3


2009年9月底，中国EB3游说组借助LIA在游说平台，聘用 Bruce Morrison（http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bruce_Morrison）作为游说顾问，保证在2010年度中国EB3的名额不再短缺，并争取超出份额的多余名额。

Bruce Morrison 毕业于Yale 法学院，和克林顿夫妇是同届同学，关系密切。毕业后成
为移民律师。之后当选美国众议院议员，并在1989~1991年间任众议院移民委员会主席
，主导了1900年移民法改革，创造了H1B program, 并使每年合法移民的数量从十几万
提高到100万。他的立法经历成就了他对移民法的独一无二的理解。他的政府关系也帮
助他日后成功地游说了多个移民项目。值得一提的是在90年后，唯一的一次大规模增加
绿卡名额的游说项目就是Morrison 促成的---2005，他为护士移民争取到了65,000个额
外名额。

所以，我们非常幸运能用低廉的价格（每个月$1500）请到Bruce Morrison 为中国EB3
代言。

一年过去，Bruce Morrison 凭借其在政府部门的人脉和对移民法名额分配的精通，在
EB3项目上游说效果显著!

Bruce Morrison 关于游说和诉讼的总结见附录。

首先，Bruce Morrison 确保了我们分到2687应得的名额。他在去年夏天要求DOS和
USCIS解释过去两年中国EB3名额短缺的原因，迫使DOS承认广州大量的名额浪费是根源
，并承认短缺对中国EB3造成了很大伤害。更重要的是，DOS和USCIS都意识到中国的EB3
有专业人士代言维护利益，我们不再是任人摆弄的弱势群体了。另外，Bruce Morrison
促使移民局公布了库存数据，大大提高了排期的可预见性。这些，都为中国EB3达到份
额奠定了坚实的基础。

更重要的是，Bruce Morrison 今年初成功地游说了DOS,把几百个中国family 的剩余名
额分给了中国EB3。这是我们今年能够超出份额的主要原因。虽然这不是全部的family
剩余名额，但是这种操作时过去几年没有过的。仅这一点，就充分体现了Bruce
Morrison的游说价值。

还有一些多余的名额属于灰色区域，可以用排期制定的误差来解释。在游说代言以前，
我们遭遇的都是负误差，现在我们有了正误差。
现在很多EB3申请人在关注EB3诉讼。我们也真心希望这个官司能打赢，最好的结果是帮
我们追回08、09少分的2500名额。为此，我们中的一些志愿者为诉讼贡献不少力量，包
括寻找诉讼律师等等。现在的律师Bob Pauw 是一个有丰富经验的移民诉讼律师。我们
希望他能有所作为。值得一提的是，Bruce Morrison 虽然不参与诉讼，但是多次向Bob
Pauw 提供免费咨询，帮他研究名额分配的条文。

但是，我们完全不同意有了诉讼就停止游说的看法。因为诉讼还没有成功的经验，失败
的风险很高。现在看来，即便是有Bob Pauw 代言，能胜诉的可能性也超不过50%。一旦
被法官驳回，即使能向上一级法院上诉，但是费钱费时费力，可行性就更低了。而且诉
讼的周期很长。对我们有利的裁决不是短时间内可以做出的。

游说项目的效果是已经被事实证明的了，而且游说是短期见效的。还有，如Bruce
Morrison 在他的报告所述，诉讼时为了过去的名额，而游说是为了将来能多分名额。
二者缺一不可。

所以，我们希望那些支持诉讼的申请人也能够支持游说。
关于游说，有些曾经是项目组的志愿者有先入为主的认识误区，觉得游说就是拿到名额
分配数据，哪个组织或个人拿到的数据及时或详细，那么就他的“游说”作用就大。这
是看法是因为他们不了解华盛顿游说的运作模式。有些政府官员，如DOS的Charles
Oppenheim, 对Public inquiry 的回复非常及时，但是并是说他的回复就证明你对他决
策的“有影响”。

我们是Bruce Morrison 8个客户里最小的一个，他不可能在获得数据的及时性和那些每
天盯着排期的网友或网络组织相比。但是，Bruce Morrison 是前国会议员，是移民法
的制定者，和Oppenheim 熟识20多年。他对政府官员的影响力和我们自己是不能同日而
语的。这也是为什么他能争取到family 剩余名额，而我们只能停留在理论分析而已。

所以，EB3游说项目的通过事前的专业游说拿到名额，特别是多余名额，而不是事后的
分配数据。请大家不要被误导。

感谢大家的捐款支持！
LIA EB3 游说项目组

2010年10月18日

附录：Summary from Bruce Morrison regarding EB3 lobby and litigation
The visa under usages in 2008 and 2009 occurred when we were not retained by
LIA.  We warned that monitoring of monthly results was required, but the
group apparently did not have the resources to retain us.
We began this project a year ago to press for the maximum possible China EB-
3 numbers that we could achieve.  Even before the project began, I had spent
the summer of 2009 pressing Mr. Oppenheim about the severe shortfall in
China EB-3s for 2009 and the reasons for it.  Early in our project I raised
the issue of family fall across and that many China family numbers had gone
unused in 2009.  That was the crucial fact that moved Mr. Oppenheim to move
China to ROW and to keep it there for the bulk of the year.  As the end of
the year approached, he was worried about how far over its allocation China
was (with the CSPA 300 deduction).  Although I pressed him to stay at ROW,
he indicated that the FB usage appeared to be very high and he feared that
he would not cover the extra EB numbers.  In the end, I was right and the
extra numbers were fully covered.  However, Mr. Oppenheim continues to
resist my arguments for an internal EB fall down regime that would provide
even more numbers to EB-3 because they are “not needed” for EB-5, EB-1 or
EB-2.  Moving him on this analysis would be a primary focus of 2011 work.
The lawsuit had nothing to do with our numbers in 2010.  The suit began
after most of the extra numbers were already allocated.  And the suit was
not considered by the judge till the last week of the fiscal year.  And the
decision was reserved, so there has been no pressure on Mr. Oppenheim from
the lawsuit.  However, there is no doubt that the suit made lobbying harder,
because Mr. Oppenheim resented the fact that his actions were being
questioned in this way.  I warned of that effect from the beginning. 
However, if the suit is successful, it will be worth it.  For that reason, I
have actively helped Bob Pauw from the beginning.  I consulted with him
about how the visa allocation system works.  He did not have nearly the
knowledge that I have about the system.  But he is a very good lawyer and he
has presented a good case.  The challenge is to accelerate the use of
numbers for pending cases, not to take numbers from one group of Chinese
immigrants to give to another group.  I developed a theory of “equitable
reallocation” that would move the cut-off dates ahead to readjust the
allocation between China and other countries to reflect the improper hold-
back of the cut-off in 200 and 2009.  This would allow the per-country limit
to be exceeded in 2011 to allow for reallocation.  Bob also has presented a
“recapture” theory—giving more per-country numbers to China in 2011 that
it was denied in 2008 and 2009.  However, since there were no extra overall
EB numbers in those years, the numbers would come from long ago and I am
skeptical about whether the court can recapture them in this way. In
addition to monitoring the visa allocations and providing lobbying arguments
that were successful in increasing the overall numbers, I was able to make
big progress on transparency at both DHS and USCIS.  It was our lobbying
that led to the creation of the I-485 inventory.  And I used that to get Mr.
Oppenheim to provide the pending demand reports that he now publishes each
month.  We have dramatically changed the quality of information to predict
and advocate cut-off date movement.  The next steps are the integration of
field office cases into the I-485 inventory and the creation of an approved
I-140 inventory to predict future demand.  I have moved both of these
projects forward this month in anticipation of a contract extension.  In the
future, monitoring of FB usage will also become important to push for fall
across usage.  And there are still arguments for better use of fall down and
fall across numbers to enhance the annual totals available to EB-3.  China
is starting behind the ROW cut-off for 2011.  It will stay there unless
there is forceful lobbying to move it up.  The lawsuit is about 2008 and
2009 and has nothing to say about that—and could result in China numbers
from  2011 being reduced to handle 2008 and 2009, rather than adding to the
total.





LIA EB3C 项目组

http://www.lianational.org/Home/projects/eb3

800-556-7065, ext. 3
[e-mail]

所有跟帖： 

• “与时俱进”看游说，来年的游说项目不是很有必要！恕我冒昧。。。 -好汉- ♂ (8754 bytes) () 10/23/2010 postreply 12:21:19

• 回复：“与时俱进”看游说，来年的游说项目不是很有必要！恕我冒昧。。。 -justchecking- ♀ (55 bytes) () 10/24/2010 postreply 17:57:00