In the spring of 2009 when S887 was introduced I didn't mention it with a newsletter because I thought it was of so little consequence it wasn't worth the bandwidth or the trouble. Let me explain why with a brief history lesson.
Durbin and Grassley originally introduced the bill in 2007 as S. 4169. My assessment at that time was that the bill had more to do with placating angry constituencies than solving problems. At the time I was about the only H-1B activist that voiced any skepticism about the bill at all, except for Norm Matloff, who was far more positive about the bill's merits than I was.
In response to S. 4169 the following two newsletters were written.
S. 4169 showed up again during the TARP bailout. Senators Bernie Sanders (I-VT) and Charles Grassley (R-IO) introduced amendment S306, which was a smaller version of S. 4169. It put mild restrictions on H-1B hiring by banks that receive bailout money. The amendment actually survived but AILA lobbyists succeeded in watering it down to the point it was mostly meaningless. AILA vowed to crush the amendment so the fact that it survived at all is somewhat of a mystery. Cheap labor advocates still gripe about S306 because they don't want us the pleasure of enjoying a small symbolic victory.
To read more about S. 4169 read these newsletters:
There is another conclusion that is equally possible: S. 4169 and 887 are merely placebo bills that are intended to placate their constituencies and to garner pro-labor media attention. If that was the goal then the bills are a success—even Lou Dobbs gushed all over Durbin and Grassley at the time 4169 was introduced. This theory gains credence because it would seem that if Durbin or Grassley took these bills seriously they should have had enough political power to pressure at least several senators to sign on. They are, after all, senior members of the Senate! Perhaps senators have a gentlemen's agreement that the D/G bills are nothing but placebos so there is no reason to co-sign if doing so could get them in trouble with big business.
In conclusion, Overby's article is right on the money but it doesn't go far enough. Overby did an excellent job and unfortunately she is probably correct about the future of H-1B. In fact her article is so good that she must be reading the "Job Destruction Newsletter" archive to get her information. LOL!