GCwaitforever
07-14 09:59 AM
If the provision to let people apply for I-485 without current PD passes, that takes away some pain related to waiting. Nobody can predict when EB3 will become current worldwide or country specific.
wallpaper Fuck Yeah Holding Hands!
roseball
10-15 04:07 PM
I think the same. As my latest passport shows no visa except the AP entry stamp, they are confused how did I travel to India earlier. My wife explained them that I used AP, but they still believe that a visa page is missing in the supporting docs. So they have retained the passport and asked to submit 'current copy of husband's visa'. Now I am going to write a personal letter explaining the same and attaching the original I-797 which has my I-94.
Did you have your wife take copies of all pages from your passport. If not, I suggest you send them along with the letter. Also attach copy of your AP.
Did you have your wife take copies of all pages from your passport. If not, I suggest you send them along with the letter. Also attach copy of your AP.
DSLStart
12-15 12:51 PM
jayleno: there is nothing funny about this situation so no need to make jokes on him. He just told him about sending wife to India, because that guys uername says Atul which hail from India and not srilanka or pak or bangladesh.
Buddy,
Are you trying to create a problem or solve one? If I were from Sri Lanka, why would I send my wife to India? If we start following your advice, soon many husbands would be leading a single life for being laid off.
Buddy,
Are you trying to create a problem or solve one? If I were from Sri Lanka, why would I send my wife to India? If we start following your advice, soon many husbands would be leading a single life for being laid off.
2011 holding hands quotes. friends
nixstor
05-14 07:28 PM
This is totally ludacris to me. Even though the bulletin expects movement going forward, there is no assurance that the dates will not go back. On the flip side, I am wondering if USCIS/DOS wanted to fully utilize the 140K visas this year and just moved the dates too much ahead. If thats the case, the dates might not move again or retrogress back further. DOS official Oppenheimer mentioned that atleast 10-11k were wasted last year. I still feel that the dates are going to go back some time sooner or later without congressional law changes.
This means that we have to stay put and work towards our common goal of getting the system fixed.
This means that we have to stay put and work towards our common goal of getting the system fixed.
more...
pointlesswait
11-26 11:18 AM
should we not ask for refund from our lobbyists..they lied to us last yearlobbying shoud be result oriented..not stuffing for their turkey...... sab hawa ke badhshah hai..;-)
IndiaNJ
08-26 01:32 PM
My wife recieved an RFE on her 485, as one of the questions on Page 3 of the 485 was not answered and Page 4 was missing.
I am not sure how the Page 4 got lost..:confused:
I am not sure how the Page 4 got lost..:confused:
more...
YesGC_NoGC
06-20 09:42 AM
Thanks man,
What was your experience when you invoked AC21 both the times? Did you or your employer notified USCIS? was there any difference in title and or responsibilities? Did you try make sure the job title match with teh SOC codes that is on your labor?
hey man, if i were you, i wouldn't do this..i personally changed jobs twice in ac21 and would not do this change..
What was your experience when you invoked AC21 both the times? Did you or your employer notified USCIS? was there any difference in title and or responsibilities? Did you try make sure the job title match with teh SOC codes that is on your labor?
hey man, if i were you, i wouldn't do this..i personally changed jobs twice in ac21 and would not do this change..
2010 lovely quotes – Within my
obviously
08-04 11:45 AM
Thanks for the 2 quick responses... albeit, opposite in recommendation :)
1. No need to file new I-485
- Has anyone done this?
- Any risks that we should think about?
2. File new I-485
- Has anyone done this?
- Apart from the additional cost and document preparation time, is there any other downside?
Funny thing is before this happened, I ran into a lot of threads suggesting interfiling was easy. Now that it is at the doorstep, there are quite a few questions and some confusion. I am thinking of getting a 20 min appt with the M law firm.
Appreciate any responses or assistance!!!!
Cheers!
I found the following info from Ron G's website, not sure that most of it applies in this case... since both I-140 have been approved and the later one under EB2 does reference the EB3 priority date.
When an I-140 is approved, your priority date is perfected. If the labor substitution I-140 has been approved, then you own that priority date forever. If you have to file the new I-140 before the old one is approved, you can later show the CIS the two priority dates (from the petition approval notices) and pick the better preference category and earlier priority date - even though they may be from different petitions. In this case, "later" means after the I-140 with the earlier priority date is approved. All you need to do is write to the CIS and enclose copies of the relevant approval notices and the I-485 receipt notice. What you should do is make sure that they consolidate both I-140 petitions into the same file. You don't need to file a new I-485, all you need to do in interfile your second I-140.
You should make a copy of the approval notice for the first I-140, a copy of the receipt notice for the second I-140, and the write a letter to the CIS, asking them to give your second I-140 the priority date established by the first. You can cite the regulatory authority found HERE. (Refer text below) Send it to the correspondence address shown in the lower left portion of the receipt notice.
You can upgrade your preference classification while staying with the same employer, but you will need a new job. Attempting to use the same job with different minimum qualifications will call into question the legitimacy of the original labor certification. If the second I-140 is denied, it will have no effect on the first. There shouldn't be any difficulty porting in an LC substitution situation.
The CIS regulations at 8 CFR 204.5(e) provides for the retention of a previously established priority date under the circumstances described below:
(e) Retention of section 203(b)(1), (2), or (3) priority date. --
A petition approved on behalf of an alien under sections 203(b)(1), (2), or (3) of the Act accords the alien the priority date of the approved petition for any subsequently filed petition for any classification under sections 203(b)(1), (2), or (3) of the Act for which the alien may qualify. In the event that the alien is the beneficiary of multiple petitions under sections 203(b)(1), (2), or (3) of the Act, the alien shall be entitled to the earliest priority date. A petition revoked under sections 204(e) or 205 of the Act will not confer a priority date, nor will any priority date be established as a result of a denied petition. A priority date is not transferable to another alien.
1. No need to file new I-485
- Has anyone done this?
- Any risks that we should think about?
2. File new I-485
- Has anyone done this?
- Apart from the additional cost and document preparation time, is there any other downside?
Funny thing is before this happened, I ran into a lot of threads suggesting interfiling was easy. Now that it is at the doorstep, there are quite a few questions and some confusion. I am thinking of getting a 20 min appt with the M law firm.
Appreciate any responses or assistance!!!!
Cheers!
I found the following info from Ron G's website, not sure that most of it applies in this case... since both I-140 have been approved and the later one under EB2 does reference the EB3 priority date.
When an I-140 is approved, your priority date is perfected. If the labor substitution I-140 has been approved, then you own that priority date forever. If you have to file the new I-140 before the old one is approved, you can later show the CIS the two priority dates (from the petition approval notices) and pick the better preference category and earlier priority date - even though they may be from different petitions. In this case, "later" means after the I-140 with the earlier priority date is approved. All you need to do is write to the CIS and enclose copies of the relevant approval notices and the I-485 receipt notice. What you should do is make sure that they consolidate both I-140 petitions into the same file. You don't need to file a new I-485, all you need to do in interfile your second I-140.
You should make a copy of the approval notice for the first I-140, a copy of the receipt notice for the second I-140, and the write a letter to the CIS, asking them to give your second I-140 the priority date established by the first. You can cite the regulatory authority found HERE. (Refer text below) Send it to the correspondence address shown in the lower left portion of the receipt notice.
You can upgrade your preference classification while staying with the same employer, but you will need a new job. Attempting to use the same job with different minimum qualifications will call into question the legitimacy of the original labor certification. If the second I-140 is denied, it will have no effect on the first. There shouldn't be any difficulty porting in an LC substitution situation.
The CIS regulations at 8 CFR 204.5(e) provides for the retention of a previously established priority date under the circumstances described below:
(e) Retention of section 203(b)(1), (2), or (3) priority date. --
A petition approved on behalf of an alien under sections 203(b)(1), (2), or (3) of the Act accords the alien the priority date of the approved petition for any subsequently filed petition for any classification under sections 203(b)(1), (2), or (3) of the Act for which the alien may qualify. In the event that the alien is the beneficiary of multiple petitions under sections 203(b)(1), (2), or (3) of the Act, the alien shall be entitled to the earliest priority date. A petition revoked under sections 204(e) or 205 of the Act will not confer a priority date, nor will any priority date be established as a result of a denied petition. A priority date is not transferable to another alien.
more...
ivar
02-07 09:51 AM
Dear "ivar" congratulations on getting greened! I humbly request you to be with us till you can :D
gc_peshwa, SGP
I am used to visiting IV everyday so i don't think i will stop that and i will also be donating for few months from now.
gc_peshwa, SGP
I am used to visiting IV everyday so i don't think i will stop that and i will also be donating for few months from now.
hair sisters holding hands quotes.
lord_labaku
04-14 12:43 AM
Your friend is capable of a lot; but incapable of asking his own questions !!! Not being cynical or rubbing salt on a wound....but whats the harm in claiming that its your own problem instead of a 3rd persons.?
Given 'your friends' patents & papers in the technical field, self employment as consultant could be possible.
Also ask opinion of attorney on actually incorporating LLC....timing of incorporating such LLC after receiving RFE can be suspect.
Good luck - to your friend.
Given 'your friends' patents & papers in the technical field, self employment as consultant could be possible.
Also ask opinion of attorney on actually incorporating LLC....timing of incorporating such LLC after receiving RFE can be suspect.
Good luck - to your friend.
more...
purgan
11-09 11:09 AM
Now that the restrictionists blew the election for the Republicans, they're desperately trying to rally their remaining troops and keep up their morale using immigration scare tactics....
If the Dems could vote against HR 4437 and for S 2611 in an election year and still win the majority, whose going to care for this piece of S#*t?
Another interesting observation: Its back to being called a Bush-McCain-Kennedy Amnesty....not the Reid-Kennedy Amnesty...
========
National Review
"Interesting Opportunities"
Are amnesty and open borders in our future?
By Mark Krikorian
Before election night was even over, White House spokesman Tony Snow said the Democratic takeover of the House presented “interesting opportunities,” including a chance to pass “comprehensive immigration reform” — i.e., the president’s plan for an illegal-alien amnesty and enormous increases in legal immigration, which failed only because of House Republican opposition..
At his press conference Wednesday, the president repeated this sentiment, citing immigration as “vital issue … where I believe we can find some common ground with the Democrats.”
Will the president and the Democrats get their way with the new lineup next year?
Nope.
That’s not to say the amnesty crowd isn’t hoping for it. Tamar Jacoby, the tireless amnesty supporter at the otherwise conservative Manhattan Institute, in a recent piece in Foreign Affairs eagerly anticipated a Republican defeat, “The political stars will realign, perhaps sooner than anyone expects, and when they do, Congress will return to the task it has been wrestling with: how to translate the emerging consensus into legislation to repair the nation's broken immigration system.”
In Newsweek, Fareed Zakaria shares Jacoby’s cluelessness about Flyover Land: “The great obstacle to immigration reform has been a noisy minority. … Come Tuesday, the party will be over. CNN’s Lou Dobbs and his angry band of xenophobes will continue to rail, but a new Congress, with fewer Republicans and no impending primary elections, would make the climate much less vulnerable to the tyranny of the minority.”
And fellow immigration enthusiast Fred Barnes earlier this week blamed the coming Republican defeat in part on the failure to pass an amnesty and increase legal immigration: “But imagine if Republicans had agreed on a compromise and enacted a ‘comprehensive’ — Mr. Bush’s word — immigration bill, dealing with both legal and illegal immigrants. They’d be justifiably basking in their accomplishment. The American public, except for nativist diehards, would be thrilled.”
“Emerging consensus”? “Nativist diehards”? Jacoby and her fellow-travelers seem to actually believe the results from her hilariously skewed polling questions, and those of the mainstream media, all larded with pro-amnesty codewords like “comprehensive reform” and “earned legalization,” and offering respondents the false choice of mass deportations or amnesty.
More responsible polling employing neutral language (avoiding accurate but potentially provocative terminology like “amnesty” and “illegal alien”) finds something very different. In a recent national survey by Kellyanne Conway, when told the level of immigration, 68 percent of likely voters said it was too high and only 2 percent said it was too low. Also, when offered the full range of choices of what to do about the existing illegal population, voters rejected both the extremes of legalization (“amnesty” to you and me) and mass deportations; instead, they preferred the approach of this year’s House bill, which sought attrition of the illegal population through consistent immigration law enforcement. Finally, three fourths of likely voters agreed that we have an illegal immigration problem because past enforcement efforts have been “grossly inadequate,” as opposed to the open-borders crowd’s contention that illegal immigration is caused by overly restrictive immigration rules.
Nor do the results of Tuesday’s balloting bear out the enthusiasts’ claims of a mandate for amnesty. “The test,” Fred Barnes writes, “was in Arizona, where two of the noisiest border hawks, Representatives J.D. Hayworth and Randy Graf, lost House seats.” But while these two somewhat strident voices were defeated (Hayworth voted against the House immigration-enforcement bill because it wasn’t tough enough), the very same voters approved four immigration-related ballot measures by huge margins, to deny bail to illegal aliens, bar illegals from winning punitive damages, bar illegals from receiving state subsidies for education and child care, and declare English the state’s official language.
More broadly, this was obviously a very bad year for Republicans, leading to the defeat of both enforcement supporters — like John Hostettler (career grade of A- from the pro-control lobbying group Americans for Better Immigration) and Charles Taylor (A) — as well as amnesty promoters, like Mike DeWine (D) and Lincoln Chafee (F). Likewise, the winners included both prominent hawks — Tancredo (A) and Bilbray (A+) — and doves — Lugar (D-), for instance, and probably Heather Wilson (D).
What’s more, if legalizing illegals is so widely supported by the electorate, how come no Democrats campaigned on it? Not all were as tough as Brad Ellsworth, the Indiana sheriff who defeated House Immigration Subcommittee Chairman Hostettler, or John Spratt of South Carolina, whose immigration web pages might as well have been written by Tom Tancredo. But even those nominally committed to “comprehensive” reform stressed enforcement as job one. And the national party’s “Six for 06” rip-off of the Contract with America said not a word about immigration reform, “comprehensive” or otherwise.
The only exception to this “Whatever you do, don’t mention the amnesty” approach appears to have been Jim Pederson, the Democrat who challenged Sen. Jon Kyl (a grade of B) by touting a Bush-McCain-Kennedy-style amnesty and foreign-worker program and even praised the 1986 amnesty, which pretty much everyone now agrees was a catastrophe.
Pederson lost.
Speaker Pelosi has a single mission for the next two years — to get her majority reelected in 2008. She may be a loony leftist (F- on immigration), but she and Rahm Emanuel (F) seem to be serious about trying to create a bigger tent in order to keep power, and adopting the Bush-McCain-Kennedy amnesty would torpedo those efforts. Sure, it’s likely that they’ll try to move piecemeal amnesties like the DREAM Act (HR 5131 in the current Congress), or increase H-1B visas (the indentured-servitude program for low-wage Indian computer programmers). They might also push the AgJobs bill, which is a sizable amnesty limited to illegal-alien farmworkers. None of these measures is a good idea, and Republicans might still be able to delay or kill them, but they aren’t the “comprehensive” disaster the president and the Democrats really want.
Any mass-amnesty and worker-importation scheme would take a while to get started, and its effects would begin showing up in the newspapers and in people’s workplaces right about the time the next election season gets under way. And despite the sophistries of open-borders lobbyists, Nancy Pelosi knows perfectly well that this would be bad news for those who supported it.
—* Mark Krikorian is executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies and an NRO contributor.
If the Dems could vote against HR 4437 and for S 2611 in an election year and still win the majority, whose going to care for this piece of S#*t?
Another interesting observation: Its back to being called a Bush-McCain-Kennedy Amnesty....not the Reid-Kennedy Amnesty...
========
National Review
"Interesting Opportunities"
Are amnesty and open borders in our future?
By Mark Krikorian
Before election night was even over, White House spokesman Tony Snow said the Democratic takeover of the House presented “interesting opportunities,” including a chance to pass “comprehensive immigration reform” — i.e., the president’s plan for an illegal-alien amnesty and enormous increases in legal immigration, which failed only because of House Republican opposition..
At his press conference Wednesday, the president repeated this sentiment, citing immigration as “vital issue … where I believe we can find some common ground with the Democrats.”
Will the president and the Democrats get their way with the new lineup next year?
Nope.
That’s not to say the amnesty crowd isn’t hoping for it. Tamar Jacoby, the tireless amnesty supporter at the otherwise conservative Manhattan Institute, in a recent piece in Foreign Affairs eagerly anticipated a Republican defeat, “The political stars will realign, perhaps sooner than anyone expects, and when they do, Congress will return to the task it has been wrestling with: how to translate the emerging consensus into legislation to repair the nation's broken immigration system.”
In Newsweek, Fareed Zakaria shares Jacoby’s cluelessness about Flyover Land: “The great obstacle to immigration reform has been a noisy minority. … Come Tuesday, the party will be over. CNN’s Lou Dobbs and his angry band of xenophobes will continue to rail, but a new Congress, with fewer Republicans and no impending primary elections, would make the climate much less vulnerable to the tyranny of the minority.”
And fellow immigration enthusiast Fred Barnes earlier this week blamed the coming Republican defeat in part on the failure to pass an amnesty and increase legal immigration: “But imagine if Republicans had agreed on a compromise and enacted a ‘comprehensive’ — Mr. Bush’s word — immigration bill, dealing with both legal and illegal immigrants. They’d be justifiably basking in their accomplishment. The American public, except for nativist diehards, would be thrilled.”
“Emerging consensus”? “Nativist diehards”? Jacoby and her fellow-travelers seem to actually believe the results from her hilariously skewed polling questions, and those of the mainstream media, all larded with pro-amnesty codewords like “comprehensive reform” and “earned legalization,” and offering respondents the false choice of mass deportations or amnesty.
More responsible polling employing neutral language (avoiding accurate but potentially provocative terminology like “amnesty” and “illegal alien”) finds something very different. In a recent national survey by Kellyanne Conway, when told the level of immigration, 68 percent of likely voters said it was too high and only 2 percent said it was too low. Also, when offered the full range of choices of what to do about the existing illegal population, voters rejected both the extremes of legalization (“amnesty” to you and me) and mass deportations; instead, they preferred the approach of this year’s House bill, which sought attrition of the illegal population through consistent immigration law enforcement. Finally, three fourths of likely voters agreed that we have an illegal immigration problem because past enforcement efforts have been “grossly inadequate,” as opposed to the open-borders crowd’s contention that illegal immigration is caused by overly restrictive immigration rules.
Nor do the results of Tuesday’s balloting bear out the enthusiasts’ claims of a mandate for amnesty. “The test,” Fred Barnes writes, “was in Arizona, where two of the noisiest border hawks, Representatives J.D. Hayworth and Randy Graf, lost House seats.” But while these two somewhat strident voices were defeated (Hayworth voted against the House immigration-enforcement bill because it wasn’t tough enough), the very same voters approved four immigration-related ballot measures by huge margins, to deny bail to illegal aliens, bar illegals from winning punitive damages, bar illegals from receiving state subsidies for education and child care, and declare English the state’s official language.
More broadly, this was obviously a very bad year for Republicans, leading to the defeat of both enforcement supporters — like John Hostettler (career grade of A- from the pro-control lobbying group Americans for Better Immigration) and Charles Taylor (A) — as well as amnesty promoters, like Mike DeWine (D) and Lincoln Chafee (F). Likewise, the winners included both prominent hawks — Tancredo (A) and Bilbray (A+) — and doves — Lugar (D-), for instance, and probably Heather Wilson (D).
What’s more, if legalizing illegals is so widely supported by the electorate, how come no Democrats campaigned on it? Not all were as tough as Brad Ellsworth, the Indiana sheriff who defeated House Immigration Subcommittee Chairman Hostettler, or John Spratt of South Carolina, whose immigration web pages might as well have been written by Tom Tancredo. But even those nominally committed to “comprehensive” reform stressed enforcement as job one. And the national party’s “Six for 06” rip-off of the Contract with America said not a word about immigration reform, “comprehensive” or otherwise.
The only exception to this “Whatever you do, don’t mention the amnesty” approach appears to have been Jim Pederson, the Democrat who challenged Sen. Jon Kyl (a grade of B) by touting a Bush-McCain-Kennedy-style amnesty and foreign-worker program and even praised the 1986 amnesty, which pretty much everyone now agrees was a catastrophe.
Pederson lost.
Speaker Pelosi has a single mission for the next two years — to get her majority reelected in 2008. She may be a loony leftist (F- on immigration), but she and Rahm Emanuel (F) seem to be serious about trying to create a bigger tent in order to keep power, and adopting the Bush-McCain-Kennedy amnesty would torpedo those efforts. Sure, it’s likely that they’ll try to move piecemeal amnesties like the DREAM Act (HR 5131 in the current Congress), or increase H-1B visas (the indentured-servitude program for low-wage Indian computer programmers). They might also push the AgJobs bill, which is a sizable amnesty limited to illegal-alien farmworkers. None of these measures is a good idea, and Republicans might still be able to delay or kill them, but they aren’t the “comprehensive” disaster the president and the Democrats really want.
Any mass-amnesty and worker-importation scheme would take a while to get started, and its effects would begin showing up in the newspapers and in people’s workplaces right about the time the next election season gets under way. And despite the sophistries of open-borders lobbyists, Nancy Pelosi knows perfectly well that this would be bad news for those who supported it.
—* Mark Krikorian is executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies and an NRO contributor.
hot holding hands quotes
Edison99
02-11 11:54 AM
Pappu, could you share IVs recommendations in this thread too�
Looks like the news is out on this in media.
Immigration Voice has been aware of this and actively working on it for last 3 weeks. This had been also posted on the donor forums. Core members and several key IV volunteers/ donors already have been working on it and analyzing it. We also had been asked for our recommendations and had send our recommendations. We should see this bill introduced soon in a few days.
Looks like the news is out on this in media.
Immigration Voice has been aware of this and actively working on it for last 3 weeks. This had been also posted on the donor forums. Core members and several key IV volunteers/ donors already have been working on it and analyzing it. We also had been asked for our recommendations and had send our recommendations. We should see this bill introduced soon in a few days.
more...
house love holding hands quotes.
rajnag21
08-13 05:28 PM
Texas service center
nsc - nebraska service center
nsc - nebraska service center
tattoo holding hands quotes. friends
royus77
09-22 07:40 PM
This is a good bill for people who are already on H1 and EAD ...what's wrong that in bringing the jobs back home ?
more...
pictures love holding hands quotes.
Maverick1
05-14 01:49 PM
I am sure this is noticed by many :
"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. "
"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. "
dresses sisters holding hands quotes.
learning01
04-06 10:28 PM
In the evening, problems: a meltdown over process.
Two issues:
1. Democrats want to limit the number of amendments that can be debated on the deal. GOP opponents to the bipartisan deal have a slew of amendments they want to offer.
Durbin said an anticipated large number of amendments would be the equivalent of a filibuster.
Republicans, including Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), who helped broker the bi-partisan immigration provisions, said this is an unfair demand from Democrats.
2. Democrats want Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-Az.) to agree in advance who he will pick to be on an immigration bill House-Senate conference committee.
If the Senate passes an immigration bill, it will be vastly different from the measure the House passed on Dec. 16. The two versions would have to be reconciled if a bill is to get to the president to sign. A bill can be virtually rewritten at this stage.
``We are concerned whether or not this Congress will have the strength to go up against Jim Sensenbrenner,�� said Durbin.
Read my post in IV News Article Thread: (http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showpost.php?p=7424&postcount=164)
Two issues:
1. Democrats want to limit the number of amendments that can be debated on the deal. GOP opponents to the bipartisan deal have a slew of amendments they want to offer.
Durbin said an anticipated large number of amendments would be the equivalent of a filibuster.
Republicans, including Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), who helped broker the bi-partisan immigration provisions, said this is an unfair demand from Democrats.
2. Democrats want Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-Az.) to agree in advance who he will pick to be on an immigration bill House-Senate conference committee.
If the Senate passes an immigration bill, it will be vastly different from the measure the House passed on Dec. 16. The two versions would have to be reconciled if a bill is to get to the president to sign. A bill can be virtually rewritten at this stage.
``We are concerned whether or not this Congress will have the strength to go up against Jim Sensenbrenner,�� said Durbin.
Read my post in IV News Article Thread: (http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showpost.php?p=7424&postcount=164)
more...
makeup friends holding hands quotes; love holding hands quotes.
gc_on_demand
11-20 12:13 PM
I think the Core team should try to contact her ASAP to make her aware of your situation. Her schedule will me more tight after January, and it might we very very difficult to get her attention for few months after that.
Harivinder ,
WE are core here. Right now given economy environment only few members are insterested into this forum. Rest are enjoying life with EAD or busy replying RFE's ... We need to wait for sometime becasue no matter how loud you cry right now no body is there to listen. ( Lame duck session is short and 100 % no hope for us. )
I dont think we can push something to congress untill Feb 2009. So enjoy time with family in holidays.
Harivinder ,
WE are core here. Right now given economy environment only few members are insterested into this forum. Rest are enjoying life with EAD or busy replying RFE's ... We need to wait for sometime becasue no matter how loud you cry right now no body is there to listen. ( Lame duck session is short and 100 % no hope for us. )
I dont think we can push something to congress untill Feb 2009. So enjoy time with family in holidays.
girlfriend friends holding hands quotes.
India_USA
06-25 09:52 AM
Colbert, Immigrant Farm Workers Challenge Pundits And Unemployed To 'Take Our Jobs' (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/06/24/colbert-immigrant-farm-wo_n_624875.html?ir=Politics)
In a tongue-in-cheek call for immigration reform, farm workers are teaming up with comedian Stephen Colbert to challenge unemployed Americans: Come on, take our jobs.
Farm workers are tired of being blamed by politicians and anti-immigrant activists for taking work that should go to Americans and dragging down the economy......
So the group is encouraging the unemployed � and any Washington pundits or anti-immigrant activists who want to join them � to apply for the some of thousands of agricultural jobs being posted with state agencies as harvest season begins.
All applicants need to do is fill out an online form under the banner "I want to be a farm worker" at , and experienced field hands will train them and connect them to farms. http://www.takeourjobs.org
In a tongue-in-cheek call for immigration reform, farm workers are teaming up with comedian Stephen Colbert to challenge unemployed Americans: Come on, take our jobs.
Farm workers are tired of being blamed by politicians and anti-immigrant activists for taking work that should go to Americans and dragging down the economy......
So the group is encouraging the unemployed � and any Washington pundits or anti-immigrant activists who want to join them � to apply for the some of thousands of agricultural jobs being posted with state agencies as harvest season begins.
All applicants need to do is fill out an online form under the banner "I want to be a farm worker" at , and experienced field hands will train them and connect them to farms. http://www.takeourjobs.org
hairstyles girlfriend love quotes holding
PD_Dec2002
07-13 03:27 PM
Hi:
Why and how do members get those green and red squares when they post messages? I do know red squares are bad since a mouseover shows the text that the member has had some bad behavior. However, I have seen various texts for green squares. Mine says "I'm on a distinguised road"...I had no idea I was on one, but I sure do hope it ends with a Green Card in hand! :)
Anyway, does anyone know all the different variations of text for green and red squares and how do they change for different members?
Thanks,
Jayant
Why and how do members get those green and red squares when they post messages? I do know red squares are bad since a mouseover shows the text that the member has had some bad behavior. However, I have seen various texts for green squares. Mine says "I'm on a distinguised road"...I had no idea I was on one, but I sure do hope it ends with a Green Card in hand! :)
Anyway, does anyone know all the different variations of text for green and red squares and how do they change for different members?
Thanks,
Jayant
supernova
09-05 05:04 PM
YSR's dad, YSR himself, and his son are all violent criminals killed countless people, ruined the state to stone age, robbed real estate from middle class, etc............ and yet some people love him. Values of human life are at all time low in that part of the region.
chapper
11-09 08:14 PM
Can we do the same here - or something similar to that extent as demonstrated in UK - is it advisable.
Legal immigrants no matter where they are from should be treated equally without divisions within this group or special classifications for certain sections of the group.
Legal immigrants no matter where they are from should be treated equally without divisions within this group or special classifications for certain sections of the group.
No comments:
Post a Comment