royus77
06-27 03:37 PM
I understand that there is lot of fear among applicants that USCIS might retrogress the dates interimly sometime in july due to the expected high volume of applications filing in the begining of july.
To minimize the chance of USCIS from taking any such steps, shall we all unite and file the applications on a specific date in july probably on 30th of july? This will accomodate all applicants...so that we shall all be winners and use this opportunity to our advantage instead of competing amongst each other...where only a few will be winners and others will be loosers.
This will also reduce the pressure among applicants , attorneys and doctors.
Can the AILA cooperate? Will there be unity amongst applicants to make this possible??? any ideas ??
rajakannan Nice idea. We should wait another month so that some of our friends who didn't apply the LC will do it immediatly and all of us will file on Aug 29 .....
To minimize the chance of USCIS from taking any such steps, shall we all unite and file the applications on a specific date in july probably on 30th of july? This will accomodate all applicants...so that we shall all be winners and use this opportunity to our advantage instead of competing amongst each other...where only a few will be winners and others will be loosers.
This will also reduce the pressure among applicants , attorneys and doctors.
Can the AILA cooperate? Will there be unity amongst applicants to make this possible??? any ideas ??
rajakannan Nice idea. We should wait another month so that some of our friends who didn't apply the LC will do it immediatly and all of us will file on Aug 29 .....
wallpaper Screenshots Best Wisdom Quotes
chanduv23
07-10 09:31 AM
The idea is - use this guy and expose media that gives false news or that supresses real issues and force those types of media to bring our issue to limelight.
I have heard all media saying "We are immigrant nation", "we need skilled immigrants", "'We are not racist", etc.. then again the same media says "Immigrants are overstaying visas", "There is quota, we cannot do anything", same media has supressed microsoft's news about the Canada development center just because it involved immigration.
I am of a strong opinion that media is controlled by politicians, the reporters who said they will cover the flower campaign - chances are that their bosses may ask them not to or give them another assignment ???
I have heard all media saying "We are immigrant nation", "we need skilled immigrants", "'We are not racist", etc.. then again the same media says "Immigrants are overstaying visas", "There is quota, we cannot do anything", same media has supressed microsoft's news about the Canada development center just because it involved immigration.
I am of a strong opinion that media is controlled by politicians, the reporters who said they will cover the flower campaign - chances are that their bosses may ask them not to or give them another assignment ???
Legal
06-10 04:59 PM
I 100% agree with you about visa capture...
Additionally, they can "spill over" only in the last quarter...
So all in all, I do not see much of GC approval till the last quarter of next fiscal year; those 120k preadjudicated cases will sit in show case....
I used to like Ron Gotchers ideas and used to visit his site/blog; but after initial few months, I realized that he does not know any more than any of us...he just throws in ideas; some of which are completely base less....I feel bad about those people who believed his ideas and opted for CP while USCIS has already preadjudicated large number of applications....(he predicted at that time that July fiasco will happen every year, so do CP)
I agree with your comments about "things not adding up".
Not sure about any language specifying spillover can occur only at the end of the year.
Doubt if there is anything in the law that prevents spillover to be used every quarter.
Additionally, they can "spill over" only in the last quarter...
So all in all, I do not see much of GC approval till the last quarter of next fiscal year; those 120k preadjudicated cases will sit in show case....
I used to like Ron Gotchers ideas and used to visit his site/blog; but after initial few months, I realized that he does not know any more than any of us...he just throws in ideas; some of which are completely base less....I feel bad about those people who believed his ideas and opted for CP while USCIS has already preadjudicated large number of applications....(he predicted at that time that July fiasco will happen every year, so do CP)
I agree with your comments about "things not adding up".
Not sure about any language specifying spillover can occur only at the end of the year.
Doubt if there is anything in the law that prevents spillover to be used every quarter.
2011 Quotes”, sharing knowledge
brugen
08-19 08:51 PM
PD, looks like you are going from doing the work to supervising the work within the same job criteria. If the company you are transferring to uses a law firm for their immigration, ask if the attorney can review to verify that you are eligible on AC21 based on the criteria.
more...
webm
12-27 09:29 PM
my PD is april 2001
and still waiting , & when we call ins we get a letter
still in processing time :(
what can we do?
Its shocking..really you deserve to get GC soon..
BTW,what is your 485 RD/ND and service center?? and they say still in processing time:confused:
and still waiting , & when we call ins we get a letter
still in processing time :(
what can we do?
Its shocking..really you deserve to get GC soon..
BTW,what is your 485 RD/ND and service center?? and they say still in processing time:confused:
nag2007
10-11 04:48 PM
Well that depends on lots of things. If your assumption is that the PD is gonna move slowly and gradually forward, then what you are saying is true. Again, once he/she files 485, his 485 is not going to be processed immediately. AP, EAD may be issued but it may take 6-9 months for 485 to get processed.
However, if PD moves so much ahead that your PD is also current, then you will get your GC (if other processes are complete) whereas he/she would have just filed 485.
I completely agree with you. Without all these process, u cannot get GC even if you have PD. I think we all are in a fix.
However, if PD moves so much ahead that your PD is also current, then you will get your GC (if other processes are complete) whereas he/she would have just filed 485.
I completely agree with you. Without all these process, u cannot get GC even if you have PD. I think we all are in a fix.
more...
laborday
07-17 10:56 AM
OK, anyone who can help me here? I am still getting June.
For NSC
--------
I-765 Application for Employment Authorization Based on a pending I-485 adjustment application [(c)(9)] March 26, 2007
For NSC
--------
I-765 Application for Employment Authorization Based on a pending I-485 adjustment application [(c)(9)] March 26, 2007
2010 quotes, wisdom, knowledge,
dummgelauft
07-28 10:52 PM
There is a question about removing per country limit at the end.These morons are very concerned that no single country (meaning China and India) overwhelm the supply of immigrant visa's. I wonder if they will consider applying country limits when passing amnesty :D
.limit or no limit..they WILL end up with more Chinese and Indians anyways than other nationalities..just because of the sheer numbers, from these two countries....
.limit or no limit..they WILL end up with more Chinese and Indians anyways than other nationalities..just because of the sheer numbers, from these two countries....
more...
perm2gc
05-22 04:12 PM
When the one of the IV leaders is seriously considering going out of status in order to benefit from the great amnesty, you know that something is seriously messed up. Even so, I didn't expect you guys to be the first ones to give up...
Didn't you read the bill. They didn't give up but asking our fellow 400,000 highly skilled immigrants to wakeup and be part of our struggle.Many people i talked don't know about the bill itself.What a pitty !!!:mad:
Didn't you read the bill. They didn't give up but asking our fellow 400,000 highly skilled immigrants to wakeup and be part of our struggle.Many people i talked don't know about the bill itself.What a pitty !!!:mad:
hair best quotes
gsc999
10-12 10:38 AM
My Priority Date Sep 2002 EB3
According to LC, my labor got approved on Aug 9th, but we received actual paper on Sep 9th .. So lost the chance to FILE 485
DOL took more than a month TO send papers ..
There is no point in blaming IV . They are the BEST ..
It is US Govt agencies who are lazy and ineptitude.
US did not get Civil Rights in one year .. it took decades of fight ...
IV is fighting for every one ..
---
Yes, this issue is on IV's agenda and we will not rest till we fix it.
On 7th July, when Fightnow, had organized a small rally in San Jose.
Another IV member had asked me a similar question, Karthik are you reading this? Yes, we care, was my answer then and now.
According to LC, my labor got approved on Aug 9th, but we received actual paper on Sep 9th .. So lost the chance to FILE 485
DOL took more than a month TO send papers ..
There is no point in blaming IV . They are the BEST ..
It is US Govt agencies who are lazy and ineptitude.
US did not get Civil Rights in one year .. it took decades of fight ...
IV is fighting for every one ..
---
Yes, this issue is on IV's agenda and we will not rest till we fix it.
On 7th July, when Fightnow, had organized a small rally in San Jose.
Another IV member had asked me a similar question, Karthik are you reading this? Yes, we care, was my answer then and now.
more...
mpadapa
02-11 02:03 PM
Thanks for the comments. Its not my assumptions, it is the law.
Please checkout how the spillovers between EB and FB are arrived. Here is the link
http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/uscode08/usc_sec_08_00001151----000-.html
I personally think Mr. MPADAPA's assumption is wrong. Last year (2008), the spillover came from Family quota of 2008. Spillover from Family or Employment quota of a particular year cannot be given to the following year. So the fact that there is nothing left from the family quota of 2008 doesn't change any situation here.
So, this year the spillover that Employment category can get from Family quota will be the unused numbers of 2009 Family quota.
This is just my thought!
Please checkout how the spillovers between EB and FB are arrived. Here is the link
http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/uscode08/usc_sec_08_00001151----000-.html
I personally think Mr. MPADAPA's assumption is wrong. Last year (2008), the spillover came from Family quota of 2008. Spillover from Family or Employment quota of a particular year cannot be given to the following year. So the fact that there is nothing left from the family quota of 2008 doesn't change any situation here.
So, this year the spillover that Employment category can get from Family quota will be the unused numbers of 2009 Family quota.
This is just my thought!
hot Quotes About Knowledge.
meridiani.planum
06-04 05:32 PM
Ron,
"
E. EMPLOYMENT THIRD PREFERENCE VISA AVAILABILITY
Demand for numbers, primarily by Citizenship and Immigration Services Offices for adjustment of status cases, is expected to bring the Employment Third preference category very close to the annual numerical limit in June. As a result, this category is likely to experience retrogressions or visa unavailability beginning in July. Such action would only be temporary, however, and a complete recovery of the cut-off dates would occur for October, the first month of the new fiscal year.
"
How do you see above message in the June Visa Bulletin? This means it is illegal to use all of them with in 3 quarters????
I don't wish to sound like Bill Clinton, but it depends on how you define "is." In this case, if they are using "annual limit" to mean the entire annual quota, then they are admitting that they have broken the law and issued too many visas in the first three quarters. Worse, they offer no explanation for having broken the law.[/COLOR]
Well, they could be talking about a subset of the annual quota, such as the quarterly quota. From the context, I don't think that is the case, but I'm also not used to seeing the State Department flat out admit illegality, either.
Well, if they do broke the law, can we do something about it? Like class action law suite???
Let's see if they did, first.
class action lawsuit?? for using up too many visa's too fast?
wow. for once (& only once) I feel sad for USCIS. They are damned if they do, and damned if they dont. Usually all talk of class action lawsuits have been for visa numbers that they wasted by approving too slowly. Now another one for going too fast... :D
"
E. EMPLOYMENT THIRD PREFERENCE VISA AVAILABILITY
Demand for numbers, primarily by Citizenship and Immigration Services Offices for adjustment of status cases, is expected to bring the Employment Third preference category very close to the annual numerical limit in June. As a result, this category is likely to experience retrogressions or visa unavailability beginning in July. Such action would only be temporary, however, and a complete recovery of the cut-off dates would occur for October, the first month of the new fiscal year.
"
How do you see above message in the June Visa Bulletin? This means it is illegal to use all of them with in 3 quarters????
I don't wish to sound like Bill Clinton, but it depends on how you define "is." In this case, if they are using "annual limit" to mean the entire annual quota, then they are admitting that they have broken the law and issued too many visas in the first three quarters. Worse, they offer no explanation for having broken the law.[/COLOR]
Well, they could be talking about a subset of the annual quota, such as the quarterly quota. From the context, I don't think that is the case, but I'm also not used to seeing the State Department flat out admit illegality, either.
Well, if they do broke the law, can we do something about it? Like class action law suite???
Let's see if they did, first.
class action lawsuit?? for using up too many visa's too fast?
wow. for once (& only once) I feel sad for USCIS. They are damned if they do, and damned if they dont. Usually all talk of class action lawsuits have been for visa numbers that they wasted by approving too slowly. Now another one for going too fast... :D
more...
house Knowledge Quotes
seahawks
08-10 10:16 PM
LS is not illegal until the employers sell the labor. LS is legal channel where in employer fill the position with somebody else, if primary applicant it not available for some reason.
But some employers are exploiting the law and selling it. This is ILLEGAL. I agree with that LS is LEGAL until it goes in a legal way. But selling or getting other benefits/gifts from the employee is completely ILLEGAL.
Since USCIS cannot find who is selling and who is not selling, they banned it. It is a good move from USCIS, but it is too late. Too many got like this and enjoying the benefits leaving other poor souls who are waiting in line from years.
I had a friend who came here after me, say I think in 2001, he got laid off and had gaps in his employment, he married this girl who joined a company head quartered in IOWA, the payroll stubs used to be in excel sheets. He was probably in the point where if we went to India, they would not have let him come back on H1. They paid 10K to get LS (adjusted through employment for 1 year) and when I-140 and 485 were being allowed for consecutive filing I believe Dec2004, filed it. He called me a month back saying they got their physical card. His PD date somewhere 2004 EB3. My PD March 21 2003, am I frustrated of course, but I am frustrated with the system that has loop holes, as pointed out there are hundred of people who have legitimately used LS.. there is no point losing sleep over it.
The need of the hour is this, to be together and fight together, not among each other. IV does not differentiate between LS and non LS, or degrees or anyone's individual cases or scenarios. IV's goal is very simple, GC process should not take more that 2 years and anything that reduces the total time frame, that is what IV stands for. Time is key, lost time cannot be regained, what is in for is now and the future, lets stick together and think about how we can help IV meet this goal, that none of us should be waiting many many more years to come. Can we all agree on this and go forward please?
Thanks and appreciate everyone's understanding.
But some employers are exploiting the law and selling it. This is ILLEGAL. I agree with that LS is LEGAL until it goes in a legal way. But selling or getting other benefits/gifts from the employee is completely ILLEGAL.
Since USCIS cannot find who is selling and who is not selling, they banned it. It is a good move from USCIS, but it is too late. Too many got like this and enjoying the benefits leaving other poor souls who are waiting in line from years.
I had a friend who came here after me, say I think in 2001, he got laid off and had gaps in his employment, he married this girl who joined a company head quartered in IOWA, the payroll stubs used to be in excel sheets. He was probably in the point where if we went to India, they would not have let him come back on H1. They paid 10K to get LS (adjusted through employment for 1 year) and when I-140 and 485 were being allowed for consecutive filing I believe Dec2004, filed it. He called me a month back saying they got their physical card. His PD date somewhere 2004 EB3. My PD March 21 2003, am I frustrated of course, but I am frustrated with the system that has loop holes, as pointed out there are hundred of people who have legitimately used LS.. there is no point losing sleep over it.
The need of the hour is this, to be together and fight together, not among each other. IV does not differentiate between LS and non LS, or degrees or anyone's individual cases or scenarios. IV's goal is very simple, GC process should not take more that 2 years and anything that reduces the total time frame, that is what IV stands for. Time is key, lost time cannot be regained, what is in for is now and the future, lets stick together and think about how we can help IV meet this goal, that none of us should be waiting many many more years to come. Can we all agree on this and go forward please?
Thanks and appreciate everyone's understanding.
tattoo Quotes About Knowledge.
ashneels2001
12-12 08:46 AM
Eagle,
I have been reading all the valuable suggestions being provided to you by the senior and exisiting members of immigrationvoice.org. I feel your pain and frustation. I would like to point out a few things which no other member did so far for you:
Your application has been denied. I am sure you have already filed an MTR unless its ready to go out in the mail. If you are lucky your MTR will get approved or it will be sent to AAO office which is taking roughly 18 months for a decision.
My advice to you is to file a brand new I140 EB3 application along with your MTR as that will allow you to maintain your priority date and start a new I140 application. Consult my advice with your attorney and see if he agrees to what I suggested. If he does then he should not charge you a consultancy fee as that advice would have come from you not him.
There is no way any credential evaluation agency can equate a Indian BCOM degree to Bachelors in Business Administration in USA. If you center was NSC they are known to deny cases such as yours. TSC is following their footsteps.
In your appeal you need to concentrate on your Masters Degree as that was the requirement for your job profile on your LC.
You need a strong lawyer in your case who can justify and question USCIS decision. Feel free to ask me any other questions related to my advice.
My best wishes to you!
I have been reading all the valuable suggestions being provided to you by the senior and exisiting members of immigrationvoice.org. I feel your pain and frustation. I would like to point out a few things which no other member did so far for you:
Your application has been denied. I am sure you have already filed an MTR unless its ready to go out in the mail. If you are lucky your MTR will get approved or it will be sent to AAO office which is taking roughly 18 months for a decision.
My advice to you is to file a brand new I140 EB3 application along with your MTR as that will allow you to maintain your priority date and start a new I140 application. Consult my advice with your attorney and see if he agrees to what I suggested. If he does then he should not charge you a consultancy fee as that advice would have come from you not him.
There is no way any credential evaluation agency can equate a Indian BCOM degree to Bachelors in Business Administration in USA. If you center was NSC they are known to deny cases such as yours. TSC is following their footsteps.
In your appeal you need to concentrate on your Masters Degree as that was the requirement for your job profile on your LC.
You need a strong lawyer in your case who can justify and question USCIS decision. Feel free to ask me any other questions related to my advice.
My best wishes to you!
more...
pictures Quotes”, sharing knowledge
jgh_res
08-10 01:55 PM
u wud have reported a LS guy to USCIS??????
I think USCIS or DOL is the one which approves cases based on LS. They have a big database of people who used that....
How many of the ppl who r disgusted by LS have contributed anything to IV or its cause, but are very happy to file their 485. Dude, nobody is a Mahatma Gandhi here....
I have never met someone on LS... but I can assure you, if I ever find one of them, I will report USCIS and other authorities.. that is for sure.:mad:
I think USCIS or DOL is the one which approves cases based on LS. They have a big database of people who used that....
How many of the ppl who r disgusted by LS have contributed anything to IV or its cause, but are very happy to file their 485. Dude, nobody is a Mahatma Gandhi here....
I have never met someone on LS... but I can assure you, if I ever find one of them, I will report USCIS and other authorities.. that is for sure.:mad:
dresses View more quotes on Knowledge
Berkeleybee
04-10 06:55 PM
Friends:
I was just going through the Immigration and Nationality Act as posted on the USCIS webpage. http://uscis.gov/graphics/lawsregs/INA.htm (see Section 274A)
I did not find any reference to the employment authorisation document (EAD card) in the INA. The reference to the EAD occurs in the Title 8 of the CFR (http://uscis.gov/lpBin/lpext.dll/inserts/slb/slb-1/slb-10903/slb-27920?f=templates&fn=document-frame.htm#slb-cfrp274a) The CFR is defined on the USCIS website as below (emphasis added by me).
"The general provisions of laws enacted by Congress are interpreted and implemented by regulations issued by various agencies. These regulations apply the law to daily situations. After regulations are published in the Federal Register, they are collected and published in the Code of Federal Regulations, commonly referred to as the CFR. The CFR is arranged by subject title and generally parallels the structure of the United States Code. Thus, Title 8 of the CFR deals with "Aliens and Nationality", as does Title 8 of the U.S. Code."
Unless, I missed something, the Secretary of the DHS has the authority to issue a regulation requiring the agencies to issue the EAD at any stage, similar to the powers the Secretary has to extend the validdity of the EAD beyond a year if he seems fit. Am I correct in my interpretation? I would welcome any person to please point out the applicable law (not regulation) which mentions that EAD can only be given after appling for adjustment of status and not before.
If I am way off base on this, then brickbats are also welcome.
bkarnik,
Excellent, creative question. Alas, the answer to this lies not in the INA itself but the Code of Federal Regulations.
To be specific, 8 CFR 274 a.12(c) (9) (http://a257.g.akamaitech.net/7/257/2422/01jan20061500/edocket.access.gpo.gov/cfr_2006/janqtr/pdf/8cfr274a.12.pdf) is what allows employment authorization at the adjustment of status stage. See page 658 of the linked document.
I was about to write an explanation of 8 CFR 274, but then I found this excellent summary which describes the regulation of the employment of aliens http://www.coane.com/pdfs/workpermits.pdf
Now how do we go about changing this provision to include I-140 -- not sure.
However, it is simply a case of moving the ball around --
either you ask that people be able to file adjustment of status even if visa numbers are not available
OR
you ask that 8 CFR 274 a.12(c) (9) be amended so that people with approved I-140s be allowed to get EADs and Advance Parole.
I was just going through the Immigration and Nationality Act as posted on the USCIS webpage. http://uscis.gov/graphics/lawsregs/INA.htm (see Section 274A)
I did not find any reference to the employment authorisation document (EAD card) in the INA. The reference to the EAD occurs in the Title 8 of the CFR (http://uscis.gov/lpBin/lpext.dll/inserts/slb/slb-1/slb-10903/slb-27920?f=templates&fn=document-frame.htm#slb-cfrp274a) The CFR is defined on the USCIS website as below (emphasis added by me).
"The general provisions of laws enacted by Congress are interpreted and implemented by regulations issued by various agencies. These regulations apply the law to daily situations. After regulations are published in the Federal Register, they are collected and published in the Code of Federal Regulations, commonly referred to as the CFR. The CFR is arranged by subject title and generally parallels the structure of the United States Code. Thus, Title 8 of the CFR deals with "Aliens and Nationality", as does Title 8 of the U.S. Code."
Unless, I missed something, the Secretary of the DHS has the authority to issue a regulation requiring the agencies to issue the EAD at any stage, similar to the powers the Secretary has to extend the validdity of the EAD beyond a year if he seems fit. Am I correct in my interpretation? I would welcome any person to please point out the applicable law (not regulation) which mentions that EAD can only be given after appling for adjustment of status and not before.
If I am way off base on this, then brickbats are also welcome.
bkarnik,
Excellent, creative question. Alas, the answer to this lies not in the INA itself but the Code of Federal Regulations.
To be specific, 8 CFR 274 a.12(c) (9) (http://a257.g.akamaitech.net/7/257/2422/01jan20061500/edocket.access.gpo.gov/cfr_2006/janqtr/pdf/8cfr274a.12.pdf) is what allows employment authorization at the adjustment of status stage. See page 658 of the linked document.
I was about to write an explanation of 8 CFR 274, but then I found this excellent summary which describes the regulation of the employment of aliens http://www.coane.com/pdfs/workpermits.pdf
Now how do we go about changing this provision to include I-140 -- not sure.
However, it is simply a case of moving the ball around --
either you ask that people be able to file adjustment of status even if visa numbers are not available
OR
you ask that 8 CFR 274 a.12(c) (9) be amended so that people with approved I-140s be allowed to get EADs and Advance Parole.
more...
makeup Knowledge Quotes lt;/agt;
desi3933
06-20 05:24 PM
This is a very valid point. If employer or his lawyer asks more money in fees for filing I485 it is always better to go thro employer if he files I485 promptly. But if the delay is intention of the employer then use your own Lawyer.
USCIS can deny I-485 application if it is missing "initial evidence". In this case it is approved & active I-140 and Employment Verification Letter from GC Employer.
Also, the USCIS published a new rule that allows the USCIS to have more discretion over shortening of the time frame for responses to RFE from previous 12 weeks to any period of time which they see fit.
Google for USCIS Announces Flexible Response Times
USCIS can deny I-485 application if it is missing "initial evidence". In this case it is approved & active I-140 and Employment Verification Letter from GC Employer.
Also, the USCIS published a new rule that allows the USCIS to have more discretion over shortening of the time frame for responses to RFE from previous 12 weeks to any period of time which they see fit.
Google for USCIS Announces Flexible Response Times
girlfriend quotes on knowledge.
rajakannan
06-26 08:56 PM
I understand that there is lot of fear among applicants that USCIS might retrogress the dates interimly sometime in july due to the expected high volume of applications filing in the begining of july.
To minimize the chance of USCIS from taking any such steps, shall we all unite and file the applications on a specific date in july probably on 30th of july? This will accomodate all applicants...so that we shall all be winners and use this opportunity to our advantage instead of competing amongst each other...where only a few will be winners and others will be loosers.
This will also reduce the pressure among applicants , attorneys and doctors.
Can the AILA cooperate? Will there be unity amongst applicants to make this possible??? any ideas ??
To minimize the chance of USCIS from taking any such steps, shall we all unite and file the applications on a specific date in july probably on 30th of july? This will accomodate all applicants...so that we shall all be winners and use this opportunity to our advantage instead of competing amongst each other...where only a few will be winners and others will be loosers.
This will also reduce the pressure among applicants , attorneys and doctors.
Can the AILA cooperate? Will there be unity amongst applicants to make this possible??? any ideas ??
hairstyles Knowledge Quotes
gcseeker2002
03-02 02:51 PM
Did you wire transfer funds too many times in larger amounts?
this is absurd, why would wire transferring money have immigration officer visit the candidate, if they dont want to give us GCs then most people will continue to transfer money.
this is absurd, why would wire transferring money have immigration officer visit the candidate, if they dont want to give us GCs then most people will continue to transfer money.
xbohdpukc
03-18 01:49 PM
Hello Everybody
This is my first post. I worked my ass off to get a favorable
solution for retrogression during the budget bill. But as everyone knows it was defeated in the house reconcilation. I'm not being pessimistic but my gut feeling is that eventhough senate comes with something, the chances are slim that the house would agree to it. Sensenbrenners bill which house passed has no provisions for EB immigrants and backlogs. I'm pretty sure all of you are aware of Mr. Tancredo's fury against immigrants too.
Having said that I dont mean we have no way out. We have to work very very hard. We have to raise money and do some hard lobbying. But above all we have to get our employers to back this issue. With all of the above reasons I think it might be a very bad idea to guess we would have any favorable legislation in a shorter span of time. So we have to plan something for a longer period of time and execute it very diligantly, I guess.
I think Immigrationvoice is on the right path... Lets face it people!!!
thanks
babu.
EB immigrants are not a hot political issue with the House, when the illegals are. Nowhere do the house representatives, except Tancredo and the likes, voiced their opposition to expanding EB immigration and providing some sort of relief for people caught in the backlog. I believe that the immigration provisions were dropped from S.1932 just because it was a wrong bill. The pork got chopped off and this pork was too easy to compromise as there were much more important issues to fight for, like drilling in Alaska and Medicare. This bill IS about immigration issues and is about border security issues as well. The fact that Frist's bill drops the very controversial guest worker program can be considered as both a good and a bad thing. It is good since the bill will sail more smoothly through the Senate and hopefully the conference. On the other hand it is bad since Senate representatives in the conference now will not have this guest worker program to trade and drop when House reps will demand to drop something off the bill. To my understanding the way the conferences work, they need to meet somewhere in the middle in between the versions of the bill and since we have the very minimalistic bill passed by the House it is the Senate which will need to compromise and drop provisions from its bill.
But taking the guest worker program off the bill is a good start I guess.
This is my first post. I worked my ass off to get a favorable
solution for retrogression during the budget bill. But as everyone knows it was defeated in the house reconcilation. I'm not being pessimistic but my gut feeling is that eventhough senate comes with something, the chances are slim that the house would agree to it. Sensenbrenners bill which house passed has no provisions for EB immigrants and backlogs. I'm pretty sure all of you are aware of Mr. Tancredo's fury against immigrants too.
Having said that I dont mean we have no way out. We have to work very very hard. We have to raise money and do some hard lobbying. But above all we have to get our employers to back this issue. With all of the above reasons I think it might be a very bad idea to guess we would have any favorable legislation in a shorter span of time. So we have to plan something for a longer period of time and execute it very diligantly, I guess.
I think Immigrationvoice is on the right path... Lets face it people!!!
thanks
babu.
EB immigrants are not a hot political issue with the House, when the illegals are. Nowhere do the house representatives, except Tancredo and the likes, voiced their opposition to expanding EB immigration and providing some sort of relief for people caught in the backlog. I believe that the immigration provisions were dropped from S.1932 just because it was a wrong bill. The pork got chopped off and this pork was too easy to compromise as there were much more important issues to fight for, like drilling in Alaska and Medicare. This bill IS about immigration issues and is about border security issues as well. The fact that Frist's bill drops the very controversial guest worker program can be considered as both a good and a bad thing. It is good since the bill will sail more smoothly through the Senate and hopefully the conference. On the other hand it is bad since Senate representatives in the conference now will not have this guest worker program to trade and drop when House reps will demand to drop something off the bill. To my understanding the way the conferences work, they need to meet somewhere in the middle in between the versions of the bill and since we have the very minimalistic bill passed by the House it is the Senate which will need to compromise and drop provisions from its bill.
But taking the guest worker program off the bill is a good start I guess.
mhathi
10-12 08:31 AM
May I ask what was your contribution to make a difference?
Maybe if armchair critiques showed up to the rally rather than shoot bogus messages from their desks we could have had a much larger turnout.
Nothing came from the rally, huh? There was no letter to pelosi by republican congressmen to increase EB visas, no letter from IEEE-usa and SIA to leading senators and congressmen for the same or no media coverage at all.. right?
Read the news buddy! If you mean legislative changes from the rally... then take a civics lesson. It has not even been one month since the rally yet. These things take time, but momentum is building (see previous paragraph). Did you expect president Bush to come out in the rally and distribute green cards to all present? If you did, come back to reality...
The September rally was a disaster!!!! We were promised CIR reform in the beginining of this year. Even after a rally, what has been achieved? Nothing!
I am sorry for sounding pessimistic, but despite all attempts we have been successful. Is this because of our cause getting mixed up with illegal immigration? Is it due to inaction on part of lawmakers? Is it due to ineffective lobbying by IV? Or is there a need to change the IV strategy and leadership?
What is the cause, people?
Maybe if armchair critiques showed up to the rally rather than shoot bogus messages from their desks we could have had a much larger turnout.
Nothing came from the rally, huh? There was no letter to pelosi by republican congressmen to increase EB visas, no letter from IEEE-usa and SIA to leading senators and congressmen for the same or no media coverage at all.. right?
Read the news buddy! If you mean legislative changes from the rally... then take a civics lesson. It has not even been one month since the rally yet. These things take time, but momentum is building (see previous paragraph). Did you expect president Bush to come out in the rally and distribute green cards to all present? If you did, come back to reality...
The September rally was a disaster!!!! We were promised CIR reform in the beginining of this year. Even after a rally, what has been achieved? Nothing!
I am sorry for sounding pessimistic, but despite all attempts we have been successful. Is this because of our cause getting mixed up with illegal immigration? Is it due to inaction on part of lawmakers? Is it due to ineffective lobbying by IV? Or is there a need to change the IV strategy and leadership?
What is the cause, people?
