kartikiran
08-23 08:34 AM
So does this mean:
a) Less of EB1
b) Less of EB2- ROW
c) Less porting from EB3->EB2
If implemented may help the EB2-I/C backlog move faster. Probably USCIS's way of reducing the backlog!!
deepimpact, shame on you to think like this. This is just one more of example of how ignorant the immigrant community is about the ground realities of these law changes in the employment-based immigration rules which includes H1B, L1s, EB apps etc.
1. The neufield memo of Employer-employee relationship & giving not 3 years of H1B visas but in some cases depending on the contract 3 months of H1B visas.
2. The fee hikes of H1B & L1 visas.
3. Make EB1, EB2 etc more strict to make it almost impossible to get anymore EB2 apps approved. BTW there is nothing which stops them from issuing another memo to review all EB2/EB3 I-140 approval and revise the approvals & deny them if deemed necessary. What would you say then?
You completely missed the point. Put the events in chronological order and you will realize why IV Core insists on meeting lawmakers. Pretty soon, there will be no avenues even with a lot of legitimate experience for an immigrant unless they end up winning nobel prizes....sorry there are not many nobel prize winners in this world and I have not met one so far.
Anyway, hope others continue to meet the lawmakers leaving your EB2-EB3 divide to ask them for recapture and removal of country limits.
Peace.
a) Less of EB1
b) Less of EB2- ROW
c) Less porting from EB3->EB2
If implemented may help the EB2-I/C backlog move faster. Probably USCIS's way of reducing the backlog!!
deepimpact, shame on you to think like this. This is just one more of example of how ignorant the immigrant community is about the ground realities of these law changes in the employment-based immigration rules which includes H1B, L1s, EB apps etc.
1. The neufield memo of Employer-employee relationship & giving not 3 years of H1B visas but in some cases depending on the contract 3 months of H1B visas.
2. The fee hikes of H1B & L1 visas.
3. Make EB1, EB2 etc more strict to make it almost impossible to get anymore EB2 apps approved. BTW there is nothing which stops them from issuing another memo to review all EB2/EB3 I-140 approval and revise the approvals & deny them if deemed necessary. What would you say then?
You completely missed the point. Put the events in chronological order and you will realize why IV Core insists on meeting lawmakers. Pretty soon, there will be no avenues even with a lot of legitimate experience for an immigrant unless they end up winning nobel prizes....sorry there are not many nobel prize winners in this world and I have not met one so far.
Anyway, hope others continue to meet the lawmakers leaving your EB2-EB3 divide to ask them for recapture and removal of country limits.
Peace.
wallpaper Phillies Pumpkin. blog.al.com
Macaca
01-06 12:28 PM
You have some more in other science related disciplines like TIFR (not sure if they give M.S. degree).
I did not see MS in any discipline.
They had PhD CS also; my friend got PhD from there.
They also had something like a CS diploma (don't remember details). They had 10 (??) theoretically sound courses. Students in most US schools will not be able to handle these courses.
However, course content is not the only strength of US Education (all levels). Something else (which is hard to enumerate and quantify) happens outside the classes. But it does not happen to everyone: some are not receptive and others don't run into it!
I did not see MS in any discipline.
They had PhD CS also; my friend got PhD from there.
They also had something like a CS diploma (don't remember details). They had 10 (??) theoretically sound courses. Students in most US schools will not be able to handle these courses.
However, course content is not the only strength of US Education (all levels). Something else (which is hard to enumerate and quantify) happens outside the classes. But it does not happen to everyone: some are not receptive and others don't run into it!
natrajs
09-11 04:37 PM
I understand your frustration. Since there is no spillover in the first quarter of new fiscal year, it was expected that PD would move back. How can you you expect 2006 PD for Oct when there is no spillover visa numbers.
Next year Jul-Sep 2009, PD should move to mid 2006 again.
My 2 cents.
Again on Next yr Jul 09-Sep 09 the DOS move the dates to Mid 2006 or Early 2007 and then the ineffiicient USCIS approve the cases with later PD's and leave the Older PD case
Until USCIS fix their system, it will be very hard , The Whole thing is unpredictable and much harder than winning a Power ball or mega million lotterry
Next year Jul-Sep 2009, PD should move to mid 2006 again.
My 2 cents.
Again on Next yr Jul 09-Sep 09 the DOS move the dates to Mid 2006 or Early 2007 and then the ineffiicient USCIS approve the cases with later PD's and leave the Older PD case
Until USCIS fix their system, it will be very hard , The Whole thing is unpredictable and much harder than winning a Power ball or mega million lotterry
2011 Philadelphia Phillies
gcisadawg
02-08 07:15 PM
Absolutely wrong. If husband and wife are filing a joint tax return, it is wrong on her part to send money to her parents without informing her husband. Leave the taxes, it was simply wrong on a wife's/husband's part to do ANY major money transaction without letting your other partner know. Its equivalent of cheating (just financial cheating). Do you think it is ok for a man to send money to his parents?
I do agree with your point that information about transactions should be known to both parties. To answer your question, yes, in my opinion, it is perfectly OK for a man to send money to his parents since the man is earning. If the girl earns, she earns that right.
Say, when the couple goes to India for a vacation, I totally support the girl buying gifts similar to what the man has bought for his family/relatives. I also support assistance based on humanitarian needs for girl's parents. ONLY when it is comes to demands of sending monthly allowance or occasional lump sum, a line needs to be drawn.
I do agree with your point that information about transactions should be known to both parties. To answer your question, yes, in my opinion, it is perfectly OK for a man to send money to his parents since the man is earning. If the girl earns, she earns that right.
Say, when the couple goes to India for a vacation, I totally support the girl buying gifts similar to what the man has bought for his family/relatives. I also support assistance based on humanitarian needs for girl's parents. ONLY when it is comes to demands of sending monthly allowance or occasional lump sum, a line needs to be drawn.
more...
gonecrazyonh4
04-25 12:54 PM
Maybe highly intelligent people make irrational decisions.:)
Many of the H1B's are so involved in their work , they really donot follow their green card procedure and pressure their employers for better deal on filing their papers even when they have the chance.
New H1B's coming into the country should be given some guidance on the permanent residency process so that they donot end up like many of us in the forum waiting for years to get their residency.
Many of the H1B's are so involved in their work , they really donot follow their green card procedure and pressure their employers for better deal on filing their papers even when they have the chance.
New H1B's coming into the country should be given some guidance on the permanent residency process so that they donot end up like many of us in the forum waiting for years to get their residency.
digital2k
05-06 11:33 AM
Don�t miss this opportunity, Everything else can wait
This is the Chance, Don't delay any longer
Thank You, those who called, pls advise, help others
Those who are waiting, pls call and you'll feel proud to have done so
This is The Historic moment
Be proud part in making history Now
Friends, Everyone help keep this post at Number 1 by motivating others
As the CIR bill outline is getting introduced today, we all need to do our share in making our voice heard. Our issues are real and affect about a million people patiently waiting in line for past several years. We are high-skilled immigrants who have followed all the rules and contribute significantly to the innovation and economy of this county. Our strength is our grassroots efforts, so let us all call our lawmakers and ask them to take immediate action on the immigration bill.
Call your Legislators:
Immigration Voice is organizing a nationwide call-the-lawmakers drive. We request members to call each and every senator and congress member. This drive will precede the �Advocacy Day(s)� in Washington, DC and �Meet the lawmaker� drive in local districts. Members can use this phone call conversation with their local lawmaker offices to follow-up with lawmakers when they meet during the break just after the Memorial day.
Don�t miss this opportunity:
This is the perfect time to call the lawmakers. The bill needs a push via support from people like us and all lawmakers needs to be encouraged and urged to help us. There are indications that there will be lot of activity on immigration issues in both House and Senate after the Memorial day. We need to make those activities go in our favor and not die like the CIR bill in 2006 & 2007. Thus it is important to starting calling lawmakers, starting from the Senate members. In order to capitalize on this opportunity, it is very important that everyone calls every lawmaker of this country. The similar next opportunity will be in 2013. We can participate now or we will all have ourselves to blame.
When:
This campaign starts today at 4:00 PM EST on 29th April, 2010) (Today) and will run until the end of next week. All IV members are encouraged to make multiple phone calls whenever they find some time during the day.
Who:
This is the order in which we would prefer that members call. Call all the senators listed here, even if they are not from your state.
This is the list of offices where there is maximum potential to swing votes either because they are new in the US senate or because they may be reconsidering their position on CIR if the bill has stricter provisions in it.
TIER I: LIST OF KEY SENATORS FOR CIR
Senator Scott Brown (R-Massachusetts)
(202) 224-4543
Senator Judd Gregg (R-New Hampshire)
(202) 224-3324
Senator Richard Lugar (R-Indiana)
(202) 224-4814
Senator Michael Enzi (R-Wyoming)
(202) 224-3424
Senator Lindsey Graham (R-South Carolina)
(202) 224-5972
Senator John Ensign (R-Nevada)
(202) 224-6244
Senator Orin Hatch (R-Utah)
(202) 224-5251
Senator John Cornyn (R-Texas)
(202) 224-2934
Senator John Kyl (R-Texas)
(202) 224-4521
Senator Mitch Mcconnell (R-Kentuky)
(202) 224-2541
Senator Amy Klobuchar (D-Minnesota)
(202) 224-3244
Senator Claire McCaskill (D-Missouri)
(202) 224-6154
Senator Jon Tester (D-Montana)
(202) 224-2644
Senator Jim Webb (D-Virginia)
(202) 224-4024
Senator Sheldon Whitehouse (D-Rhode Island)
(202) 224-2921
What you could say to the Senator offices listed above:
When you call:
Be courteous. Tell the lawmaker office that:
--------------------------------------------
I am a high skilled immigrant and a member of Immigration Voice. I fully support the proposed comprehensive immigration reform proposal released a few days back.
I am calling to express my support for the high skilled provisions to resolve the current green card backlogs of the doctors, engineers, research scientist and professors etc. This group of highly skilled immigrants stimulates every part of the economy participating in creating economic prosperity, innovation and entrepreneurship for creating more jobs in America.
I strongly urge the Senator to please support this proposal. If it is possible, could you please share the position of the Senator on the recently released (last week) Comprehensive Immigration Reform proposal?
Thank you and I am counting on the Senator�s support for this very important issue of national importance. Please convey regards to the Senator.
--------------------------------------------
If you belong to the constituency (State) of the lawmaker, then tell them that you belong to their district/state and are calling to seek their help. If you are talking to a Senator office then tell them you are anxiously waiting for a Senators support for the immigration bill.
Then ask: What is the lawmaker�s position on immigration proposal? If the position is
- Supportive: Then thank the lawmaker office for it.
- If they oppose it: Then request them to support the high skilled green card provisions of the bill that will greatly help you. You sincerely hope that the lawmaker will reconsider his/her position and help you.
Be polite and persuasive in your message.
Question What if some Senators say they do not support amnesty. -
Answer "For last 10 years there has been no High-skilled immigration bill passed by the Congress. The world has changed in last 10 years. I understand that the Senator is a champion for creating more jobs in America. Employment based green cards will create jobs in America. I want to start my own company and hire people in America. But I cannot do that if I don't have a green card.
I would sincerely request you to please convey to the Senator if he would consider supporting some version of the immigration
giving more weight to green cards and creating jobs in America, or maybe the Senator could lead the effort for improving the proposal"
TIER II: LIST OF KEY SENATORS SPONSORING OR CO-SPONSORING CIR BILL
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (Nevada)
(202) 224-3542
Senator Dick Durbin (Illinois)
(202) 224-2152
Senator Chuck Schumer (New York)
(202) 224-6542
Senator Patrick Leahy (Vermont)
(202) 224-4242
Senator Dianne Feinstein (California)
(202) 224-3841
Senator Bob Menendez (New Jersey)
(202) 224-4744
Sen. Ben Cardin (Maryland)
(202) 224-4524
What:
When you call:
Be courteous. Tell the lawmaker office that:
--------------------------------------------
I am a high skilled immigrant and a member of Immigration Voice. I fully support the proposed comprehensive immigration reform proposal due to be introduced later in the day today.
Thank you for the Senator�s leadership on this very important issue of immigration. Please convey my gratitude, full support and regards to the Senator.
--------------------------------------------
Be polite and persuasive in your message.
Stick to the message and you will really make a big difference.
Please post the outcome of your call on this thread. For more information please contact IV.
Thank You,
Immigration Voice
This is the Chance, Don't delay any longer
Thank You, those who called, pls advise, help others
Those who are waiting, pls call and you'll feel proud to have done so
This is The Historic moment
Be proud part in making history Now
Friends, Everyone help keep this post at Number 1 by motivating others
As the CIR bill outline is getting introduced today, we all need to do our share in making our voice heard. Our issues are real and affect about a million people patiently waiting in line for past several years. We are high-skilled immigrants who have followed all the rules and contribute significantly to the innovation and economy of this county. Our strength is our grassroots efforts, so let us all call our lawmakers and ask them to take immediate action on the immigration bill.
Call your Legislators:
Immigration Voice is organizing a nationwide call-the-lawmakers drive. We request members to call each and every senator and congress member. This drive will precede the �Advocacy Day(s)� in Washington, DC and �Meet the lawmaker� drive in local districts. Members can use this phone call conversation with their local lawmaker offices to follow-up with lawmakers when they meet during the break just after the Memorial day.
Don�t miss this opportunity:
This is the perfect time to call the lawmakers. The bill needs a push via support from people like us and all lawmakers needs to be encouraged and urged to help us. There are indications that there will be lot of activity on immigration issues in both House and Senate after the Memorial day. We need to make those activities go in our favor and not die like the CIR bill in 2006 & 2007. Thus it is important to starting calling lawmakers, starting from the Senate members. In order to capitalize on this opportunity, it is very important that everyone calls every lawmaker of this country. The similar next opportunity will be in 2013. We can participate now or we will all have ourselves to blame.
When:
This campaign starts today at 4:00 PM EST on 29th April, 2010) (Today) and will run until the end of next week. All IV members are encouraged to make multiple phone calls whenever they find some time during the day.
Who:
This is the order in which we would prefer that members call. Call all the senators listed here, even if they are not from your state.
This is the list of offices where there is maximum potential to swing votes either because they are new in the US senate or because they may be reconsidering their position on CIR if the bill has stricter provisions in it.
TIER I: LIST OF KEY SENATORS FOR CIR
Senator Scott Brown (R-Massachusetts)
(202) 224-4543
Senator Judd Gregg (R-New Hampshire)
(202) 224-3324
Senator Richard Lugar (R-Indiana)
(202) 224-4814
Senator Michael Enzi (R-Wyoming)
(202) 224-3424
Senator Lindsey Graham (R-South Carolina)
(202) 224-5972
Senator John Ensign (R-Nevada)
(202) 224-6244
Senator Orin Hatch (R-Utah)
(202) 224-5251
Senator John Cornyn (R-Texas)
(202) 224-2934
Senator John Kyl (R-Texas)
(202) 224-4521
Senator Mitch Mcconnell (R-Kentuky)
(202) 224-2541
Senator Amy Klobuchar (D-Minnesota)
(202) 224-3244
Senator Claire McCaskill (D-Missouri)
(202) 224-6154
Senator Jon Tester (D-Montana)
(202) 224-2644
Senator Jim Webb (D-Virginia)
(202) 224-4024
Senator Sheldon Whitehouse (D-Rhode Island)
(202) 224-2921
What you could say to the Senator offices listed above:
When you call:
Be courteous. Tell the lawmaker office that:
--------------------------------------------
I am a high skilled immigrant and a member of Immigration Voice. I fully support the proposed comprehensive immigration reform proposal released a few days back.
I am calling to express my support for the high skilled provisions to resolve the current green card backlogs of the doctors, engineers, research scientist and professors etc. This group of highly skilled immigrants stimulates every part of the economy participating in creating economic prosperity, innovation and entrepreneurship for creating more jobs in America.
I strongly urge the Senator to please support this proposal. If it is possible, could you please share the position of the Senator on the recently released (last week) Comprehensive Immigration Reform proposal?
Thank you and I am counting on the Senator�s support for this very important issue of national importance. Please convey regards to the Senator.
--------------------------------------------
If you belong to the constituency (State) of the lawmaker, then tell them that you belong to their district/state and are calling to seek their help. If you are talking to a Senator office then tell them you are anxiously waiting for a Senators support for the immigration bill.
Then ask: What is the lawmaker�s position on immigration proposal? If the position is
- Supportive: Then thank the lawmaker office for it.
- If they oppose it: Then request them to support the high skilled green card provisions of the bill that will greatly help you. You sincerely hope that the lawmaker will reconsider his/her position and help you.
Be polite and persuasive in your message.
Question What if some Senators say they do not support amnesty. -
Answer "For last 10 years there has been no High-skilled immigration bill passed by the Congress. The world has changed in last 10 years. I understand that the Senator is a champion for creating more jobs in America. Employment based green cards will create jobs in America. I want to start my own company and hire people in America. But I cannot do that if I don't have a green card.
I would sincerely request you to please convey to the Senator if he would consider supporting some version of the immigration
giving more weight to green cards and creating jobs in America, or maybe the Senator could lead the effort for improving the proposal"
TIER II: LIST OF KEY SENATORS SPONSORING OR CO-SPONSORING CIR BILL
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (Nevada)
(202) 224-3542
Senator Dick Durbin (Illinois)
(202) 224-2152
Senator Chuck Schumer (New York)
(202) 224-6542
Senator Patrick Leahy (Vermont)
(202) 224-4242
Senator Dianne Feinstein (California)
(202) 224-3841
Senator Bob Menendez (New Jersey)
(202) 224-4744
Sen. Ben Cardin (Maryland)
(202) 224-4524
What:
When you call:
Be courteous. Tell the lawmaker office that:
--------------------------------------------
I am a high skilled immigrant and a member of Immigration Voice. I fully support the proposed comprehensive immigration reform proposal due to be introduced later in the day today.
Thank you for the Senator�s leadership on this very important issue of immigration. Please convey my gratitude, full support and regards to the Senator.
--------------------------------------------
Be polite and persuasive in your message.
Stick to the message and you will really make a big difference.
Please post the outcome of your call on this thread. For more information please contact IV.
Thank You,
Immigration Voice
more...
tikka
07-18 04:22 PM
Made my first (small) contribution of $100 today !!
Google order no. - 952531454379821
Many thanks to all of IV members !!!
Thank you so much for your contribution:)
Google order no. - 952531454379821
Many thanks to all of IV members !!!
Thank you so much for your contribution:)
2010 Phillies and Cardinals.
yabadaba
08-02 08:15 PM
Pappu...emailed it to u. Core IV let me knoe if u want it.
more...
NKR
06-25 03:38 PM
This is thread for What America is loosing...
I find it out of context. Please elaborate - I feel some hiddem message is there - needs to clearly come out.
Why is loosing such a loosely used word?. Guys, it is losing not loosing. Lose and loose have different meanings.
I find it out of context. Please elaborate - I feel some hiddem message is there - needs to clearly come out.
Why is loosing such a loosely used word?. Guys, it is losing not loosing. Lose and loose have different meanings.
hair The Phillies, with Kyle
baburob2
03-15 06:25 PM
Overall no big progress w.r.t our title's though Brownback's comment on immigration numbers is good.
Senate Judiciary Committee Continues Slow Progress in Markup of Immigration Reform Legislation
Cite as "AILA InfoNet Doc. No. 06031540 (posted Mar. 15, 2006)"
The Senate Judiciary Committee continued its consideration today of draft legislation on comprehensive immigration reform sponsored by Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter. The Committee officially took up the bill, known as the �Chairman�s Mark,� on March 2 but has made very slow progress to date.
The following is a very brief summary of the amendments that were addressed during today�s session. See our previous update on last week�s markup sessions. We will continue to update you as action on the bill continues.
1. The Committee passed by a voice vote a compromise amendment by Feingold that would preserve some level of judicial review over naturalization applications.
2. A Specter 2nd degree amendment to a Sessions amendment on evading inspection passed.
3. A Leahy amendment on security-related issues passed by voice vote.
4. A Kennedy amendment to ameliorate the Mark�s retroactive provisions was debated and deferred.
5. A Feinstein amendment to modify the provisions of the Mark relating to border security was deferred for future action.
6. A Durbin amendment to strike the Mark�s criminalization of unlawful status was once again deferred for future consideration. Feinstein attempted to offer a 2nd degree amendment that would provide aliens with a 60-day grace period for visa overstays before they are subject to criminal prosecution under INA � 275(a), but Specter would not allow it since Durbin�s underlying amendment was set aside.
7. A Durbin amendment to ameliorate the Mark�s smuggling provision so as not to criminalize humanitarian assistance was once again debated and deferred. Kyl spoke in opposition to the amendment. Cornyn had a second degree that Hatch thought was insufficient. Hatch, Schumer and Biden spoke in opposition to Cornyn�s 2nd degree. Cornyn was not convincing, but Kyl did some damage.
8. A Sessions amendment to affirm the inherent authority of state and local law enforcement personnel to enforce federal civil immigration laws during the normal course of carrying out their duties was discussed. Specter offered a 2nd degree that would limit the inherent authority of states and localities to the enforcement of the criminal provisions of the immigration laws. Sessions would only support the 2nd degree if the provisions of the Mark criminalizing unlawful presence remain intact. Thus, if the Durbin amendment to strike those provisions passes, Sessions wants to revisit the Specter 2nd degree. Specter�s 2nd degree passed by voice vote.
9. A Sessions amendment that would require the Secretary of Homeland Security to provide information to the National Crime Information Center (NCIC) related to aliens who may have violated certain immigration laws passed by a voice vote. The broadly worded amendment would encompass visa overstayers, other civil violators, and even members of vulnerable populations such as asylum-seekers who are improperly documented but seeking relief. Leahy and Kennedy voted against the amendment and Leahy spoke in opposition to overloading the NCIC database with individuals who do not belong in it. A Specter 2nd degree amendment that would provide a procedure for requesting removal from the database and modify the group of individuals included in it passed by voice vote.
10. A Sessions amendment that would require at least one law enforcement agency in each state to enter into a � 287(g) cooperative enforcement agreement to enforce immigration laws against alien smugglers was considered. Sessions accepted a Coburn 2nd degree amendment that would clarify: (1) that such agreements would be purely voluntary, and (2) that the �287(g) enforcement authority would not be limited to alien smuggling. There was no quorum to vote on these, however, and they were set aside.
Part way through the markup, Specter attempted to jump to a debate on the issue of the undocumented population, noting that he has reiterated to Senate Majority Leader Frist that he (Specter) opposes bringing immigration reform to the Senate Floor before the Senate Judiciary Committee had completed its consideration of the Chairman�s Mark. Biden and Kennedy voiced their support of Specter�s desire to complete work in Committee. Kennedy added, �this issue is NOT going away, like some other issues,� and urged deferral of the Title VI discussion until tomorrow (Title VI contains the provisions dealing with the undocumented population). He added that we need to deal with ALL aspects of reform to have real, lasting border security�going forward with any of these components alone will fail.
Durbin said that, to defeat the House bill (H.R. 4437), the Committee needs to pass a strong bipartisan bill with the support of about 12 members. He feels the Committee should do an extra markup session on a day when there is no other Senate business. �We need to watch the House,� noted Durbin, adding: �They have a bill we need to fight at all costs. We need bipartisan support out of this Committee.�
Brownback stated that the Committee has started a process to create broad bipartisan support for good policy, and that this is the most significant legislation of the year. �We have serious problems with immigrant numbers,� he said. �We can�t live with these and need to change them. McCain/Kennedy would deal with this. How do we get the Mark to deal with these numbers? We need a way NOT to end up here again after 10 years. We can�t move too quickly.�
Cornyn described the process as akin to �digging out of a big hole,� noting that with enforcement done first, other issues would get simpler. He believes we need to impose circularity---not permanent immigration.
Coburn said that, like it or not, we have to deal with issue of the undocumented population. He urged the Committee to split the bill in two and do enforcement first, and work to reach consensus on other parts later in the year. �No one in the country trusts us on this issue because we haven�t enforced our existing laws,� he said.
Feinstein stated her concerns about the process, and also spoke out against comprehensive immigration reform and in favor of her more limited agricultural pilot program idea. She said she had met with Senator Craig (the sponsor of AgJobs) yesterday to see if they could work out their differences but there has been no resolution yet. She also expressed much frustration with Frist�s artificial timeline. She indicated her opposition to the House bill, and said that consensus was needed in the Committee (she believes the Committee has come to some consensus on the enforcement pieces but little else). She urged Specter to go back to Frist and ask for more time.
Sessions said we need to focus on enforcement now, and then have a national discussion later on the other elements of immigration reform. He believes Congress needs to focus on enforcement to build credibility with the public. �I�m not prepared to repeat 1986,� he said. �We should slow down.�
Specter repeatedly voiced his concern about �line-jumping,� arguing that the McCain/Kennedy bill would �leap frog� the current undocumented population over individuals who have been waiting in the backlogs. He also said that he�d prefer it if the legislation contained a path to citizenship but, as Chair, was trying to balance both sides.
In other hurdles to the Judiciary Committee�s completion of work on the bill, Senate Finance Committee Chairman Grassley, who is also a member of the Judiciary Committee, argued that the Finance Committee should have jurisdiction over the provisions of the Mark relating to the Social Security Act, adding that the IRS has raised serious concerns about some of these amendments. However, several other senators argued for consideration of these provisions in the Judiciary Committee. It is also possible that Grassley could exercise the Finance Committee�s authority by managing those amendments during floor debate.
The Committee disbanded about noon, due to a number of votes on the Senate Floor and the attendant low probability of maintaining a voting quorum in the Committee.
http://www.aila.org/content/default.aspx?docid=18835
Senate Judiciary Committee Continues Slow Progress in Markup of Immigration Reform Legislation
Cite as "AILA InfoNet Doc. No. 06031540 (posted Mar. 15, 2006)"
The Senate Judiciary Committee continued its consideration today of draft legislation on comprehensive immigration reform sponsored by Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter. The Committee officially took up the bill, known as the �Chairman�s Mark,� on March 2 but has made very slow progress to date.
The following is a very brief summary of the amendments that were addressed during today�s session. See our previous update on last week�s markup sessions. We will continue to update you as action on the bill continues.
1. The Committee passed by a voice vote a compromise amendment by Feingold that would preserve some level of judicial review over naturalization applications.
2. A Specter 2nd degree amendment to a Sessions amendment on evading inspection passed.
3. A Leahy amendment on security-related issues passed by voice vote.
4. A Kennedy amendment to ameliorate the Mark�s retroactive provisions was debated and deferred.
5. A Feinstein amendment to modify the provisions of the Mark relating to border security was deferred for future action.
6. A Durbin amendment to strike the Mark�s criminalization of unlawful status was once again deferred for future consideration. Feinstein attempted to offer a 2nd degree amendment that would provide aliens with a 60-day grace period for visa overstays before they are subject to criminal prosecution under INA � 275(a), but Specter would not allow it since Durbin�s underlying amendment was set aside.
7. A Durbin amendment to ameliorate the Mark�s smuggling provision so as not to criminalize humanitarian assistance was once again debated and deferred. Kyl spoke in opposition to the amendment. Cornyn had a second degree that Hatch thought was insufficient. Hatch, Schumer and Biden spoke in opposition to Cornyn�s 2nd degree. Cornyn was not convincing, but Kyl did some damage.
8. A Sessions amendment to affirm the inherent authority of state and local law enforcement personnel to enforce federal civil immigration laws during the normal course of carrying out their duties was discussed. Specter offered a 2nd degree that would limit the inherent authority of states and localities to the enforcement of the criminal provisions of the immigration laws. Sessions would only support the 2nd degree if the provisions of the Mark criminalizing unlawful presence remain intact. Thus, if the Durbin amendment to strike those provisions passes, Sessions wants to revisit the Specter 2nd degree. Specter�s 2nd degree passed by voice vote.
9. A Sessions amendment that would require the Secretary of Homeland Security to provide information to the National Crime Information Center (NCIC) related to aliens who may have violated certain immigration laws passed by a voice vote. The broadly worded amendment would encompass visa overstayers, other civil violators, and even members of vulnerable populations such as asylum-seekers who are improperly documented but seeking relief. Leahy and Kennedy voted against the amendment and Leahy spoke in opposition to overloading the NCIC database with individuals who do not belong in it. A Specter 2nd degree amendment that would provide a procedure for requesting removal from the database and modify the group of individuals included in it passed by voice vote.
10. A Sessions amendment that would require at least one law enforcement agency in each state to enter into a � 287(g) cooperative enforcement agreement to enforce immigration laws against alien smugglers was considered. Sessions accepted a Coburn 2nd degree amendment that would clarify: (1) that such agreements would be purely voluntary, and (2) that the �287(g) enforcement authority would not be limited to alien smuggling. There was no quorum to vote on these, however, and they were set aside.
Part way through the markup, Specter attempted to jump to a debate on the issue of the undocumented population, noting that he has reiterated to Senate Majority Leader Frist that he (Specter) opposes bringing immigration reform to the Senate Floor before the Senate Judiciary Committee had completed its consideration of the Chairman�s Mark. Biden and Kennedy voiced their support of Specter�s desire to complete work in Committee. Kennedy added, �this issue is NOT going away, like some other issues,� and urged deferral of the Title VI discussion until tomorrow (Title VI contains the provisions dealing with the undocumented population). He added that we need to deal with ALL aspects of reform to have real, lasting border security�going forward with any of these components alone will fail.
Durbin said that, to defeat the House bill (H.R. 4437), the Committee needs to pass a strong bipartisan bill with the support of about 12 members. He feels the Committee should do an extra markup session on a day when there is no other Senate business. �We need to watch the House,� noted Durbin, adding: �They have a bill we need to fight at all costs. We need bipartisan support out of this Committee.�
Brownback stated that the Committee has started a process to create broad bipartisan support for good policy, and that this is the most significant legislation of the year. �We have serious problems with immigrant numbers,� he said. �We can�t live with these and need to change them. McCain/Kennedy would deal with this. How do we get the Mark to deal with these numbers? We need a way NOT to end up here again after 10 years. We can�t move too quickly.�
Cornyn described the process as akin to �digging out of a big hole,� noting that with enforcement done first, other issues would get simpler. He believes we need to impose circularity---not permanent immigration.
Coburn said that, like it or not, we have to deal with issue of the undocumented population. He urged the Committee to split the bill in two and do enforcement first, and work to reach consensus on other parts later in the year. �No one in the country trusts us on this issue because we haven�t enforced our existing laws,� he said.
Feinstein stated her concerns about the process, and also spoke out against comprehensive immigration reform and in favor of her more limited agricultural pilot program idea. She said she had met with Senator Craig (the sponsor of AgJobs) yesterday to see if they could work out their differences but there has been no resolution yet. She also expressed much frustration with Frist�s artificial timeline. She indicated her opposition to the House bill, and said that consensus was needed in the Committee (she believes the Committee has come to some consensus on the enforcement pieces but little else). She urged Specter to go back to Frist and ask for more time.
Sessions said we need to focus on enforcement now, and then have a national discussion later on the other elements of immigration reform. He believes Congress needs to focus on enforcement to build credibility with the public. �I�m not prepared to repeat 1986,� he said. �We should slow down.�
Specter repeatedly voiced his concern about �line-jumping,� arguing that the McCain/Kennedy bill would �leap frog� the current undocumented population over individuals who have been waiting in the backlogs. He also said that he�d prefer it if the legislation contained a path to citizenship but, as Chair, was trying to balance both sides.
In other hurdles to the Judiciary Committee�s completion of work on the bill, Senate Finance Committee Chairman Grassley, who is also a member of the Judiciary Committee, argued that the Finance Committee should have jurisdiction over the provisions of the Mark relating to the Social Security Act, adding that the IRS has raised serious concerns about some of these amendments. However, several other senators argued for consideration of these provisions in the Judiciary Committee. It is also possible that Grassley could exercise the Finance Committee�s authority by managing those amendments during floor debate.
The Committee disbanded about noon, due to a number of votes on the Senate Floor and the attendant low probability of maintaining a voting quorum in the Committee.
http://www.aila.org/content/default.aspx?docid=18835
more...
texanmom
09-12 12:23 PM
Please post a draft of all the letters here so we can use them/ modify them if necessary.
hot Funny: Phillies Fan Purposely Puked on Cop#39;s Daughter
rcahk
04-09 02:55 PM
Wow. That must be a record...:eek: Maybe you should call Guiness World records, and claim the title "slowest Green Card process in history". ;)
No, unfortunatelly, there are many thousands like me.
No, unfortunatelly, there are many thousands like me.
more...
house 2009.0408.phillies.ws.ring.jpg
singhsa3
09-11 05:18 PM
What about the issues like not following RD or PD?
What about being rude on the call?
What about the wild fluctuation in the bulletein?
Should we let these thing to continue?
What we are expecting after this calc. camp ? I dont think so they will revise bulletin nor they will give single extra visa above 140k. I think we should focus on HR 5882 .. We should send something to lawmakers.
Just a thought.
What about being rude on the call?
What about the wild fluctuation in the bulletein?
Should we let these thing to continue?
What we are expecting after this calc. camp ? I dont think so they will revise bulletin nor they will give single extra visa above 140k. I think we should focus on HR 5882 .. We should send something to lawmakers.
Just a thought.
tattoo already crown the Phillies
gccube
07-18 07:10 PM
Lets say your PD is/was current in March, April, June and July. You decided not to apply in the previous months and you finally submitted at the end of July. On the other hand i had my PD current on July and i applied. After i applied and before you applied there could be 10k(for example) applications. Now when its time to process application which one they should process yours or mine?. Obviously they will process the one that they got first. They not going to look for the PD and pull out your's from the pile of applications. Its your fault that you have not applied early enough even though your PD was current.
what happens when dates retrogress? If my PD is 2000 Jan (assume) and some one else has 2001 Jan (assume) with RDs July/2007 and Mar/2007 respectively and in August 2007 PD cut off date went back to 2000 Feb (assume) then does it mean that 2000 Jan PD is ineligible to get the adjudication before the guy with PD 2001 Jan because the RD is later for this case? Again if the answer to this question is yes then ,when the PD is set at 2000 Feb why are they accepting new AOS apps which satisfy this PD cutoff date because if they process by RD(at all times) they are not likely to consider these for adjudication anyway? Is it just for our benifit that we can get an EAD? If I go down this path I donot understand the purpose of the whole PD in this process.
The thing I am trying to understand is 'if PD is not significant in AOS why is it there at all in the visa bulletin'. If RD overrides the PD at the AOS stage then instead of specifying a PD in the Visa bulletin they can just say that
"We are accepting new AOS applications" and then adjudicate them in the order of the RD.
These are all just my thoughts and am trying to put them together. I may very well be wrong in my basic understanding of this process. Thank you for your previous reply. That was helpful.
what happens when dates retrogress? If my PD is 2000 Jan (assume) and some one else has 2001 Jan (assume) with RDs July/2007 and Mar/2007 respectively and in August 2007 PD cut off date went back to 2000 Feb (assume) then does it mean that 2000 Jan PD is ineligible to get the adjudication before the guy with PD 2001 Jan because the RD is later for this case? Again if the answer to this question is yes then ,when the PD is set at 2000 Feb why are they accepting new AOS apps which satisfy this PD cutoff date because if they process by RD(at all times) they are not likely to consider these for adjudication anyway? Is it just for our benifit that we can get an EAD? If I go down this path I donot understand the purpose of the whole PD in this process.
The thing I am trying to understand is 'if PD is not significant in AOS why is it there at all in the visa bulletin'. If RD overrides the PD at the AOS stage then instead of specifying a PD in the Visa bulletin they can just say that
"We are accepting new AOS applications" and then adjudicate them in the order of the RD.
These are all just my thoughts and am trying to put them together. I may very well be wrong in my basic understanding of this process. Thank you for your previous reply. That was helpful.
more...
pictures philadelphia phillies baseball
anilnag
02-23 02:09 PM
At NSC I am seeing the following entry
-----
I-485 Application to Register Permanent Residence or to Adjust Status Employment-based adjustment applications 4 Months
-----
What does 4 months mean?
It means USCIS has pre-adjudicated your I-485 if it was filed before october 2008.
-----
I-485 Application to Register Permanent Residence or to Adjust Status Employment-based adjustment applications 4 Months
-----
What does 4 months mean?
It means USCIS has pre-adjudicated your I-485 if it was filed before october 2008.
dresses roomphiladelphia phillies
nk2006
10-17 10:13 AM
Thanks to everyone who sent the letters already. Please continue to do the same and encourage your friends to do the same.
sounakc, sw33t - it seems you need more info to decide. Please post here about the info you need. We have many people who are pretty knowledgeable on matters related to AC21 (like chaduv) who might be able to answer them. If it is something about this campaign and have questions - please shoot, will try to explain why we are considering it is a serious one and can affect anyone.
Everything related to EB immigration is grim for last couple years - the only two things that made some positive impact on us are July 07 fiasco and admin reforms. IV made great efforts to achieve them against all odds (just like RedSox win yesterday :)) - those two combined with AC21 regulations provided many of us the flexibility and career advancement that we missed because of this cesspool called GC. Now that flexibility is at stake. What is the use of AC21 regulations and EAD if we are not certain about whether our I485 will not be denied later.
Some have pointed out that this will not affect them or that their previous employer will not revoke I140. First of all - never assume your I140 will not be revoked - it can happen in many circumstances even if you had good relations with employer. And even if you are not planning to use AC21 right now, think about this: we are all in this together to make EB immigration better. When things are tough to make any change (legislatively or administratively) - we cannot afford to lose one of the very few positive things that happened to us. IV core fought for us - spending their time and even money - lets take some inspiration from their acts, and show them that we volunteers are serious when we say that we want to contribute to IV and make a difference to EB laws or USCIS functioning.
sounakc, sw33t - it seems you need more info to decide. Please post here about the info you need. We have many people who are pretty knowledgeable on matters related to AC21 (like chaduv) who might be able to answer them. If it is something about this campaign and have questions - please shoot, will try to explain why we are considering it is a serious one and can affect anyone.
Everything related to EB immigration is grim for last couple years - the only two things that made some positive impact on us are July 07 fiasco and admin reforms. IV made great efforts to achieve them against all odds (just like RedSox win yesterday :)) - those two combined with AC21 regulations provided many of us the flexibility and career advancement that we missed because of this cesspool called GC. Now that flexibility is at stake. What is the use of AC21 regulations and EAD if we are not certain about whether our I485 will not be denied later.
Some have pointed out that this will not affect them or that their previous employer will not revoke I140. First of all - never assume your I140 will not be revoked - it can happen in many circumstances even if you had good relations with employer. And even if you are not planning to use AC21 right now, think about this: we are all in this together to make EB immigration better. When things are tough to make any change (legislatively or administratively) - we cannot afford to lose one of the very few positive things that happened to us. IV core fought for us - spending their time and even money - lets take some inspiration from their acts, and show them that we volunteers are serious when we say that we want to contribute to IV and make a difference to EB laws or USCIS functioning.
more...
makeup http://www.phawker.com/wp-
singhsa3
07-20 12:37 PM
Not really, The PD will be stuck sometime in 02 or 03. Thus, unless there are some changes in law, we are looking at 5-7 years wait.
Also, I am not fabricating 750,000 number. This is the anticpated applicants, per Matthew Oh.
750,000 applications ? Does that mean the PD will be 01 Jan 1900 after October ? I think you grossly overestimated the number of applications . If the GC quota is 9800 for India then to process 750,00 applications ( most of them will be India I am sure ) will take like 20 years . Thats impossible man !!!
Also, I am not fabricating 750,000 number. This is the anticpated applicants, per Matthew Oh.
750,000 applications ? Does that mean the PD will be 01 Jan 1900 after October ? I think you grossly overestimated the number of applications . If the GC quota is 9800 for India then to process 750,00 applications ( most of them will be India I am sure ) will take like 20 years . Thats impossible man !!!
girlfriend Watch quot;Horny Phillies Fan on
Macaca
09-12 04:13 PM
JoAnne Allen: joanne.allen@reuters.com *
Eric Auchard
Luke Baker
Matthew Bigg
Mike Conlon
Richard Cowan
Bernd Debusmann
Allan Dowd
Paul Eckert
Robin Emmott
Stephen Farber
Jim Finkle
Dana Ford
Jim Forsyth
Adriana Garcia
Tim Gaynor
Daniel Gilbert
Steve Gorman
Steve Holland steve.holland@reuters.com
Jon Hurdle
Emily Kaiser
Glenn Kessler
Bappa Majumdar
Lucy Nalpathanchil
Michelle Nichols
Claudia Parsons
Jeremy Pelofsky jeremy.pelofsky@reuters.com
Kemp Powers
Simon Rabinovitch
Missy Ryan
David Schwartz
Jill Serjeant
Donna Smith donna.smith@reuters.com
Matt Spetalnick
Ed Stoddard
Andy Sullivan
Daisuke Wakabayashi: Daisuke.Wakabayashi@reuters.com
Dan Whitcomb
Tabassum Zakaria
Email pattern: firstName.lastName@reuters.com
Eric Auchard
Luke Baker
Matthew Bigg
Mike Conlon
Richard Cowan
Bernd Debusmann
Allan Dowd
Paul Eckert
Robin Emmott
Stephen Farber
Jim Finkle
Dana Ford
Jim Forsyth
Adriana Garcia
Tim Gaynor
Daniel Gilbert
Steve Gorman
Steve Holland steve.holland@reuters.com
Jon Hurdle
Emily Kaiser
Glenn Kessler
Bappa Majumdar
Lucy Nalpathanchil
Michelle Nichols
Claudia Parsons
Jeremy Pelofsky jeremy.pelofsky@reuters.com
Kemp Powers
Simon Rabinovitch
Missy Ryan
David Schwartz
Jill Serjeant
Donna Smith donna.smith@reuters.com
Matt Spetalnick
Ed Stoddard
Andy Sullivan
Daisuke Wakabayashi: Daisuke.Wakabayashi@reuters.com
Dan Whitcomb
Tabassum Zakaria
Email pattern: firstName.lastName@reuters.com
hairstyles Andy Martino of Phillies Zone,
eb3_nepa
04-25 01:04 PM
So what happens to people who already have a PD based on the labor(LC) date?
I dont want to go a step back in the line just cuz someone who had been lethargic all his life just woke up on his last day of his 6th year and goes "Ohh you know what I think I might be interested in a GC" ,when I had planned or had the *intent* to apply for a GC a few years before by applying for LC.
I agree. Also it will be a MONUMENTAL fiasco at the UCSIS and DOL. How do we forsee changing existing applicants' PDs. That will be atleast a 4-6 month backlog and i am being optimistic here.
I dont want to go a step back in the line just cuz someone who had been lethargic all his life just woke up on his last day of his 6th year and goes "Ohh you know what I think I might be interested in a GC" ,when I had planned or had the *intent* to apply for a GC a few years before by applying for LC.
I agree. Also it will be a MONUMENTAL fiasco at the UCSIS and DOL. How do we forsee changing existing applicants' PDs. That will be atleast a 4-6 month backlog and i am being optimistic here.
Caliber
03-12 12:58 PM
I support the donor idea. But there is no transperency to who is leading what initative. If i want to contribute my time, i have to read through the posts every day for several hours to find who is leading the effort so i can discuss with them. Sometimes i feel there is so much more talk. Why don't we list out the initiatives that is being considered or worked on. Along with some contact information so people can discuss offline with them. I cannot be online for several hours and read through all the discussions and still not find out who is coordinating the efforts.
Dear Vin13,
Thanks for the idea. May I request you to please inform every one here, number of hours that you can spend volunteering for IV? I ONLY contributed DOLLARS, but never contributed TIME and I feel ashamed of that. There are many people who have contributed both dollars and time.
If you promise some time volunteering to IV for all the ideas that you listed, I am PROMISING to contribute DOLLARS for you. Are you ready? If so, please send email to IV core.
Thanks again for the idea.
Dear Vin13,
Thanks for the idea. May I request you to please inform every one here, number of hours that you can spend volunteering for IV? I ONLY contributed DOLLARS, but never contributed TIME and I feel ashamed of that. There are many people who have contributed both dollars and time.
If you promise some time volunteering to IV for all the ideas that you listed, I am PROMISING to contribute DOLLARS for you. Are you ready? If so, please send email to IV core.
Thanks again for the idea.
gnrajagopal
01-10 02:07 PM
I am going back in a few years!..this in Bhoga Bhumi(Land of material pleasures)...my land Bharath is Punya Bhommi(Land of Good Karma).I am heading home no matter what!
Interesting comment.....
I think as much punya is done in this country as there is a quest of bhoga
Interesting comment.....
I think as much punya is done in this country as there is a quest of bhoga
No comments:
Post a Comment