Lasantha
04-14 01:53 PM
Speedo,
Yes I did call the USCIS the day prior to getting the welcome email. Now if that triggered the approval or not I can't be certain.
Lasantha, I have a similar profile like yours except for my PD will become current in May and I-485 was filed July 2nd. My question to you is that did you call the service center to inquire about your status, and that triggered approval.
EB3-ROW PD Sep 2005
I-140 approved in 2006
I-485 RD 07/02/2007
Yes I did call the USCIS the day prior to getting the welcome email. Now if that triggered the approval or not I can't be certain.
Lasantha, I have a similar profile like yours except for my PD will become current in May and I-485 was filed July 2nd. My question to you is that did you call the service center to inquire about your status, and that triggered approval.
EB3-ROW PD Sep 2005
I-140 approved in 2006
I-485 RD 07/02/2007
wallpaper Andy Warhol#39;s Wedding Portrait
anilsal
09-20 12:21 AM
waldenpond,gsc999, needhelp, chandu123, nixstor, paskal, *************MACACA**********, drona, eager2immi,logiclife,pappu, Mr.Postman(PDakwala/CA), texanmom.
Missed: tikka, libra, english_august(not present at the rally)
Missed: tikka, libra, english_august(not present at the rally)
actaccord
02-22 06:18 AM
more participation if we woke up inactive members. Please send the advocacy news letter to all members to get more participation.
Members from the mid western states - your participation is crucial in the advocacy efforts.
OH, IN, IL, TN, KY, MO, AR, KS, OK
It is very difficult to get appointments from legislative offices if no one from their constituency will be attending the meeting.
The DC Advocacy effort is for YOUR green card. Please take the time to talk to your employers now and get the required 2 days off to participate in the event.
Members from the mid western states - your participation is crucial in the advocacy efforts.
OH, IN, IL, TN, KY, MO, AR, KS, OK
It is very difficult to get appointments from legislative offices if no one from their constituency will be attending the meeting.
The DC Advocacy effort is for YOUR green card. Please take the time to talk to your employers now and get the required 2 days off to participate in the event.
2011 Prince Charles Lady Diana,
PlainSpeak
01-12 01:41 PM
1. Bill applies to anyone who got their degree in preceding 5 years or resided legally since graduating (even greater than 5 years) will be eligible under this bill.
2. Many ROW EB2 and EB3 will get visa number from the 55K if they have advanced degree here. That means more spillover.
3. Many EB2I/C forks will get visa number from the 55K if they have advanced degree here. That means more spillover.
4. There are going to be more Indian and Chinese apply for EB2? Not that easy any more. The DOL is tougher than before on PERM application. I don't believe there are going to be 55K more new EB2 applicants each year. No matter whether there is additional 55k, people are always trying to applying for Eb2 if there can. As we don't see that many new EB2 now, I don't believe we will get that many new Eb2 later either. Plus, the bill does not say the 55K visa will only go to EB2.
5. What else can we do then? It is already very tough to push this bill through. Should we modify the bill by saying that just simply applying the 55K to everyone, no matter if he/she has advanced degree? I am perfectly OK with that if the IV core think it is a better idea. Personally, I think that would make this bill even more difficult. :
I respectfully diagree with you regarding your point 4
Perm may have got tougher but EB2 applications are still being filed. Along with that there are still students coming to US from india to do MS and they are alos going to apply in EB2 (I know i am generalizing but tell me if you are about to start ur GC process will you agree for EB3 knowing how the situation is currentlY for EB3)
Regarding your point 5
Yes that would make perfect sense logically but wil not happen because don't you know that persons who did MS in US are the elite. They are the best minds and make the most money and add the most to the US economy while guys who are working in US are are well lets just say not usefull to the economy and just taking free money. So looking at this issue from US side it makes sense to explicitly provide these 55 k visas to only US educated persons so that they can add more to the ecomony. And lest sface it who cares for guys who just work here but are not educated here.
2. Many ROW EB2 and EB3 will get visa number from the 55K if they have advanced degree here. That means more spillover.
3. Many EB2I/C forks will get visa number from the 55K if they have advanced degree here. That means more spillover.
4. There are going to be more Indian and Chinese apply for EB2? Not that easy any more. The DOL is tougher than before on PERM application. I don't believe there are going to be 55K more new EB2 applicants each year. No matter whether there is additional 55k, people are always trying to applying for Eb2 if there can. As we don't see that many new EB2 now, I don't believe we will get that many new Eb2 later either. Plus, the bill does not say the 55K visa will only go to EB2.
5. What else can we do then? It is already very tough to push this bill through. Should we modify the bill by saying that just simply applying the 55K to everyone, no matter if he/she has advanced degree? I am perfectly OK with that if the IV core think it is a better idea. Personally, I think that would make this bill even more difficult. :
I respectfully diagree with you regarding your point 4
Perm may have got tougher but EB2 applications are still being filed. Along with that there are still students coming to US from india to do MS and they are alos going to apply in EB2 (I know i am generalizing but tell me if you are about to start ur GC process will you agree for EB3 knowing how the situation is currentlY for EB3)
Regarding your point 5
Yes that would make perfect sense logically but wil not happen because don't you know that persons who did MS in US are the elite. They are the best minds and make the most money and add the most to the US economy while guys who are working in US are are well lets just say not usefull to the economy and just taking free money. So looking at this issue from US side it makes sense to explicitly provide these 55 k visas to only US educated persons so that they can add more to the ecomony. And lest sface it who cares for guys who just work here but are not educated here.
more...
Hassan11
03-27 11:31 AM
having PD current and Processing time current does not mean that the applicant will get GC. the state department actually moves cutoff dates in the VB because USCIS is not productive enough (not processing applications on time) to use up all the available visas for that quarter or year and they are afraid that those visas will go to waste. so they move the cutoff date on the VB (make more people current) so Consular processing will have more applications to pull from and then approve more applications.
so now we have to have PD current processing time for that service center is current and also be lucky so an IO will pick up our application to be processed. (it is actually little depressing)
so now we have to have PD current processing time for that service center is current and also be lucky so an IO will pick up our application to be processed. (it is actually little depressing)
hai_yeh_gc
08-15 08:37 AM
Hi Guys,
Happy to say , got the CPO status last night for my EAD.
I had e-filed on May 25th. 4 days back had called up customer service, and one lady said she would send an expedite request. Probably that did the trick. I had taken info pass appmnt for Aug 25 and was planning to meet the local congresman today.
Good luck you all. I know how frustrating the wait is ..
Happy to say , got the CPO status last night for my EAD.
I had e-filed on May 25th. 4 days back had called up customer service, and one lady said she would send an expedite request. Probably that did the trick. I had taken info pass appmnt for Aug 25 and was planning to meet the local congresman today.
Good luck you all. I know how frustrating the wait is ..
more...
sands
08-06 09:57 AM
I applied mine on May 12 for renewal and did FP on May 31. still waiting. Though like everyone I would love to see the 485 approval instead!
2010 Princess Diana Wedding
niuniuxin2006
05-02 11:18 AM
I am got audited at Atlanta. and I know many Chinese like me were stuck there too.
Please open a new thread at to get more Atlanta victims here!!!
and I would like to put this url on some Chinese immigration forum to get more data. But before that, could you please let me know what the next step so that I could get more People in.
That is exactly my point that Perm Audit is not focused on Nationality, Field or EB category. If most people are from India, China, Philippines then automatically most audit cases are going to be from these countries.
Are you also being audited?
Please open a new thread at to get more Atlanta victims here!!!
and I would like to put this url on some Chinese immigration forum to get more data. But before that, could you please let me know what the next step so that I could get more People in.
That is exactly my point that Perm Audit is not focused on Nationality, Field or EB category. If most people are from India, China, Philippines then automatically most audit cases are going to be from these countries.
Are you also being audited?
more...
485Mbe4001
06-19 12:47 PM
Enforcement First
The right way to reform immigration.
An NRO Primary Document
Editor's note: This letter was released this morning by John Fonte of the Hudson Institute.
Prominent Conservatives and Civic Leaders Urge President Bush and Congress to Back Enforcement First on Immigration
Leading conservatives and civic leaders have signed an �open letter� on immigration declaring that �border and interior enforcement must be funded, operational, implemented, and proven successful � and only then can we debate the status of current illegal immigrants, or the need for new guest worker programs.�
The signers include William Bennett, Robert Bork, William F Buckley, Ward Connerly, Newt Gingrich, David Horowitz, David Keene, John Leo, Herbert London, Rich Lowry, Daniel Pipes, Phyllis Schlafly, and Thomas Sowell among others.
Hudson Senior Fellow John Fonte, who organized the letter, said:
�We want to commend the members of Congress who have supported enforcement first including 85% of all Congressional Republicans, 36 Democrats in the House and 4 in the Senate.�
�We particularly want to thank Senator Jeff Sessions (R-AL) and House chairmen Jim Sensenbrenner (R-WI) and Peter King (R-NY) for their leadership role in putting America�s national interests in border and interior enforcement first.�
As a matter of organizational policy, Hudson Institute does not take stances on pending legislation.
�First Things First on Immigration: An Open Letter to President Bush, Senate Majority Leader Frist, and Speaker of the House, Hastert�
Recently, columnist Thomas Sowell wrote: �It will take time to see how various new border control methods work out in practice and there is no reason to rush ahead to deal with people already illegally in this country before the facts are in on how well the borders have been secured.�
We the undersigned agree with this statement. In 1986, Congress passed �comprehensive� immigration reform that included amnesty for around 3 million illegal immigrants, border enforcement, and interior enforcement (employer sanctions). Amnesty came, but enforcement was never seriously implemented either at the border or in the interior.
Let us not make this mistake again. We favor what Newt Gingrich has described as �sequencing.� First border and interior enforcement must be funded, operational, implemented, and proven successful � and only then can we debate the status of current illegal immigrants, or the need for new guest worker programs. We are in the middle of a global war on terror. 2006 is not 1986. Today, we need proof that enforcement (both at the border and in the interior) is successful before anything else happens. As Ronald Reagan used to say �trust, but verify.�
The majority of Republicans in the Senate opposed the recently passed Hagel-Martinez bill. Senator Vitter (R-LA) said that because border enforcement will not be in place, �this [bill] will in fact make the illegal immigration problem much bigger.� The No. 3 Republican in the Senate, Senator Rick Santorum (PA) said, �We need a border-security bill first.� Senator Vitter, Senator Santorum, the majority of Senate Republicans, and the majority of House Republicans are right � we need proven enforcement before we do anything else. Adopting cosmetic legislation to appear to be �doing something� about enforcement, but which actually makes the situation worse, is not statesmanship, it is demagogy.
We thank the majority of the Senate Republicans (33 in all) and the seven Democrats who supported the Isakson amendment, which insists upon verifiable benchmarks for border security before considering other issues. Moreover, we say �Thank You� to Jim Sensenbrenner, Peter King, and the bi-partisan House majority including 36 Democrats, that passed HR 4437. We may quibble with a clause here and there, but you in the House and the majority of Senate Republicans are right to emphasize that the Congress and the President must deal with enforcement first and other issues later. Stand fast; the American people are overwhelmingly with you.
Signed,
William B. Allen, Professor of Political Science at Michigan State University
William J. Bennett, former Secretary of Education under President Reagan, former Director of the Office of National Drug Control Policy under former President George H.W. Bush
Thomas L. Bock, National Commander of the American Legion
Robert H. Bork, Senior Fellow at the Hudson Institute, former Solicitor General, acting Attorney General, Supreme Court nominee, U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals Judge
William F. Buckley, Jr., founder and Editor-at-Large of National Review
Peter Collier, founding Publisher of Encounter Books, cofounder of Center for the Study of Popular Culture
Ward Connerly, former Regent at the University of California, founder and Chairman of the American Civil Rights Institute (ACRI), winner of the 2005 Bradley Prize for Outstanding Intellectual Achievement
T. Kenneth Cribb, former domestic policy advisor for President Ronald Reagan
Glynn Custred, Professor of Anthropology at California State University, Hayward, and coauthor of the California Civil Rights Initiative, Proposition 209
John C. Eastman, Professor of Law at Chapman University School of Law, Director of the Center for Constitutional Jurisprudence
John Fonte, Senior Fellow and Director of the Center of American Common Culture at the Hudson Institute
David Frum, former speechwriter for George W. Bush, Resident Fellow at American Enterprise Institute
Frank J. Gaffney, Jr., founder and President of the Center for Security Policy
Newt Gingrich, former Speaker of the House of Representatives, Chairman of the Gingrich Group, Senior Fellow at American Enterprise Institute
Jonah Goldberg, Editor-at-Large of the National Review Online, national syndicated columnist
Victor Davis Hanson, Martin and Illie Anderson Senior Fellow at the Hoover Institution, recipient of the 1991 American Philological Association Excellence in Teaching Award
David Horowitz, cofounder of the Center for the Study of Popular Culture, Editor of FrontPageMag.com
Fred C. Ikl�, former Undersecretary of Defense under Reagan, former Director of U.S. Arms Control and Disarmament Agency
David Keene, Chairman of the American Conservative Union
Brian Kennedy, President of the Claremont Institute, Publisher of the Claremont Review of Books
Roger Kimball, Managing Editor of The New Criterion
Alan Charles Kors, Professor of History at the University of Pennsylvania
Mark Krikorian, Executive Director of the Center for Immigration Studies
Michael A. Ledeen, Resident Scholar at the American Enterprise Institute
Seth Leibsohn, Fellow at the Claremont Institute
John Leo, columnist and Contributing Editor to U.S. News and World Report
Herbert London, President of the Hudson Institute
Kathryn Jean Lopez, Editor of National Review Online
Rich Lowry, Editor of National Review
Heather Mac Donald, John M. Olin Fellow at the Manhattan Institute, winner of the 2005 Bradley Prize for Outstanding Intellectual Achievement
John O�Sullivan, Senior Fellow at the Hudson Institute, Editor-at-Large of National Review
Juliana Pilon, Research Professor at the Institute for World Politics
Daniel Pipes, founder and Director of the Middle East Forum and Campus Watch, former member of the board of the U.S. Institute of Peace
Andrew �Andy� Ramirez, Chairman of the Friends of Border Patrol
Phyllis Schlafly, founder and President of Eagle Forum
Thomas Sowell, Rose and Milton Friedman Senior Fellow on Public Policy at the Hoover Institution, winner of the 2003 Bradley Prize for Outstanding Intellectual Achievement
Shelby Steele, Research Fellow at the Hoover Institution, winner of the 2006 Bradley Prize for Outstanding Intellectual Achievement
Stephen Steinlight, Fellow at the Center for Immigration Studies, former National Affairs Director of the American Jewish Committee, and Vice President of the National Conference of Christians and Jews
Thomas G. West, Director and Senior Fellow of the Claremont Institute, Professor of Politics at the University of Dallas
The right way to reform immigration.
An NRO Primary Document
Editor's note: This letter was released this morning by John Fonte of the Hudson Institute.
Prominent Conservatives and Civic Leaders Urge President Bush and Congress to Back Enforcement First on Immigration
Leading conservatives and civic leaders have signed an �open letter� on immigration declaring that �border and interior enforcement must be funded, operational, implemented, and proven successful � and only then can we debate the status of current illegal immigrants, or the need for new guest worker programs.�
The signers include William Bennett, Robert Bork, William F Buckley, Ward Connerly, Newt Gingrich, David Horowitz, David Keene, John Leo, Herbert London, Rich Lowry, Daniel Pipes, Phyllis Schlafly, and Thomas Sowell among others.
Hudson Senior Fellow John Fonte, who organized the letter, said:
�We want to commend the members of Congress who have supported enforcement first including 85% of all Congressional Republicans, 36 Democrats in the House and 4 in the Senate.�
�We particularly want to thank Senator Jeff Sessions (R-AL) and House chairmen Jim Sensenbrenner (R-WI) and Peter King (R-NY) for their leadership role in putting America�s national interests in border and interior enforcement first.�
As a matter of organizational policy, Hudson Institute does not take stances on pending legislation.
�First Things First on Immigration: An Open Letter to President Bush, Senate Majority Leader Frist, and Speaker of the House, Hastert�
Recently, columnist Thomas Sowell wrote: �It will take time to see how various new border control methods work out in practice and there is no reason to rush ahead to deal with people already illegally in this country before the facts are in on how well the borders have been secured.�
We the undersigned agree with this statement. In 1986, Congress passed �comprehensive� immigration reform that included amnesty for around 3 million illegal immigrants, border enforcement, and interior enforcement (employer sanctions). Amnesty came, but enforcement was never seriously implemented either at the border or in the interior.
Let us not make this mistake again. We favor what Newt Gingrich has described as �sequencing.� First border and interior enforcement must be funded, operational, implemented, and proven successful � and only then can we debate the status of current illegal immigrants, or the need for new guest worker programs. We are in the middle of a global war on terror. 2006 is not 1986. Today, we need proof that enforcement (both at the border and in the interior) is successful before anything else happens. As Ronald Reagan used to say �trust, but verify.�
The majority of Republicans in the Senate opposed the recently passed Hagel-Martinez bill. Senator Vitter (R-LA) said that because border enforcement will not be in place, �this [bill] will in fact make the illegal immigration problem much bigger.� The No. 3 Republican in the Senate, Senator Rick Santorum (PA) said, �We need a border-security bill first.� Senator Vitter, Senator Santorum, the majority of Senate Republicans, and the majority of House Republicans are right � we need proven enforcement before we do anything else. Adopting cosmetic legislation to appear to be �doing something� about enforcement, but which actually makes the situation worse, is not statesmanship, it is demagogy.
We thank the majority of the Senate Republicans (33 in all) and the seven Democrats who supported the Isakson amendment, which insists upon verifiable benchmarks for border security before considering other issues. Moreover, we say �Thank You� to Jim Sensenbrenner, Peter King, and the bi-partisan House majority including 36 Democrats, that passed HR 4437. We may quibble with a clause here and there, but you in the House and the majority of Senate Republicans are right to emphasize that the Congress and the President must deal with enforcement first and other issues later. Stand fast; the American people are overwhelmingly with you.
Signed,
William B. Allen, Professor of Political Science at Michigan State University
William J. Bennett, former Secretary of Education under President Reagan, former Director of the Office of National Drug Control Policy under former President George H.W. Bush
Thomas L. Bock, National Commander of the American Legion
Robert H. Bork, Senior Fellow at the Hudson Institute, former Solicitor General, acting Attorney General, Supreme Court nominee, U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals Judge
William F. Buckley, Jr., founder and Editor-at-Large of National Review
Peter Collier, founding Publisher of Encounter Books, cofounder of Center for the Study of Popular Culture
Ward Connerly, former Regent at the University of California, founder and Chairman of the American Civil Rights Institute (ACRI), winner of the 2005 Bradley Prize for Outstanding Intellectual Achievement
T. Kenneth Cribb, former domestic policy advisor for President Ronald Reagan
Glynn Custred, Professor of Anthropology at California State University, Hayward, and coauthor of the California Civil Rights Initiative, Proposition 209
John C. Eastman, Professor of Law at Chapman University School of Law, Director of the Center for Constitutional Jurisprudence
John Fonte, Senior Fellow and Director of the Center of American Common Culture at the Hudson Institute
David Frum, former speechwriter for George W. Bush, Resident Fellow at American Enterprise Institute
Frank J. Gaffney, Jr., founder and President of the Center for Security Policy
Newt Gingrich, former Speaker of the House of Representatives, Chairman of the Gingrich Group, Senior Fellow at American Enterprise Institute
Jonah Goldberg, Editor-at-Large of the National Review Online, national syndicated columnist
Victor Davis Hanson, Martin and Illie Anderson Senior Fellow at the Hoover Institution, recipient of the 1991 American Philological Association Excellence in Teaching Award
David Horowitz, cofounder of the Center for the Study of Popular Culture, Editor of FrontPageMag.com
Fred C. Ikl�, former Undersecretary of Defense under Reagan, former Director of U.S. Arms Control and Disarmament Agency
David Keene, Chairman of the American Conservative Union
Brian Kennedy, President of the Claremont Institute, Publisher of the Claremont Review of Books
Roger Kimball, Managing Editor of The New Criterion
Alan Charles Kors, Professor of History at the University of Pennsylvania
Mark Krikorian, Executive Director of the Center for Immigration Studies
Michael A. Ledeen, Resident Scholar at the American Enterprise Institute
Seth Leibsohn, Fellow at the Claremont Institute
John Leo, columnist and Contributing Editor to U.S. News and World Report
Herbert London, President of the Hudson Institute
Kathryn Jean Lopez, Editor of National Review Online
Rich Lowry, Editor of National Review
Heather Mac Donald, John M. Olin Fellow at the Manhattan Institute, winner of the 2005 Bradley Prize for Outstanding Intellectual Achievement
John O�Sullivan, Senior Fellow at the Hudson Institute, Editor-at-Large of National Review
Juliana Pilon, Research Professor at the Institute for World Politics
Daniel Pipes, founder and Director of the Middle East Forum and Campus Watch, former member of the board of the U.S. Institute of Peace
Andrew �Andy� Ramirez, Chairman of the Friends of Border Patrol
Phyllis Schlafly, founder and President of Eagle Forum
Thomas Sowell, Rose and Milton Friedman Senior Fellow on Public Policy at the Hoover Institution, winner of the 2003 Bradley Prize for Outstanding Intellectual Achievement
Shelby Steele, Research Fellow at the Hoover Institution, winner of the 2006 Bradley Prize for Outstanding Intellectual Achievement
Stephen Steinlight, Fellow at the Center for Immigration Studies, former National Affairs Director of the American Jewish Committee, and Vice President of the National Conference of Christians and Jews
Thomas G. West, Director and Senior Fellow of the Claremont Institute, Professor of Politics at the University of Dallas
hair wedding cake diana charles
amitjoey
01-05 11:39 AM
Lets not get stuck in debating and talking all the new news about legislation being introduced, Skil/CIR. The most important thing is to create awareness about problems we are facing (EB immigrants).
Time again we have seen that because of low awareness amongst all the peoples-reps (congressmen, senators, all others) our provisions have been dropped at the last minute.
The need of the hour is to keep working together as a unified team, we all do a good job as a team. We have seen that during the lame duck and also before in May, 2006.
IV core as a team exactly knows what is best for all of us. We have to trust them and help them do their thing, meanwhile we can all concentrate on
1)raising awareness, writing op/eds. writing to editors
2) Inviting other people who are stuck like us (to be IV members). Strength is in the numbers.
3) Creating a huge fund to help lobby/or other such activity that we need it for.
Some new members might doubt the intentions and the commitment of the core team. Also it is very easy to be skeptical of people asking for funds. When I was new to the IV team, I had the intitial skepticism about people on the forum asking for funds and contributing. It took me a good 2 weeks of being a guest on the site to register and then another 10-12 days to give my first contribution. So from that standpoint, I know that new people on the forum are going to take some time to trust IV and have faith in the core leadership. All we can do is to get new members (So many thousands stuck in retrogression). New members inturn will become active in a short time, Bigger and stronger IV with a 10,000+ membership will ensure being noticed and also will have the required funds to make it happen this year.
Time again we have seen that because of low awareness amongst all the peoples-reps (congressmen, senators, all others) our provisions have been dropped at the last minute.
The need of the hour is to keep working together as a unified team, we all do a good job as a team. We have seen that during the lame duck and also before in May, 2006.
IV core as a team exactly knows what is best for all of us. We have to trust them and help them do their thing, meanwhile we can all concentrate on
1)raising awareness, writing op/eds. writing to editors
2) Inviting other people who are stuck like us (to be IV members). Strength is in the numbers.
3) Creating a huge fund to help lobby/or other such activity that we need it for.
Some new members might doubt the intentions and the commitment of the core team. Also it is very easy to be skeptical of people asking for funds. When I was new to the IV team, I had the intitial skepticism about people on the forum asking for funds and contributing. It took me a good 2 weeks of being a guest on the site to register and then another 10-12 days to give my first contribution. So from that standpoint, I know that new people on the forum are going to take some time to trust IV and have faith in the core leadership. All we can do is to get new members (So many thousands stuck in retrogression). New members inturn will become active in a short time, Bigger and stronger IV with a 10,000+ membership will ensure being noticed and also will have the required funds to make it happen this year.
more...
atlfp
06-08 10:31 AM
The very very first, if not only reason for both party to work on this issue is to gain their vote. What do you gain by giving them goodies but does not offer them a chance to appreciate you back (vote)?
I don�t know what is so hard about this deadlock. Don�t they know that if:
1. Illegals are given temporary visas for them to return after a number of years, no-body would come forward. The illegals would see this as shooting themselves in the foot. They would prefer to remain in the dark and live here permanently. Purpose defeated.
2. A tough enforcement only bill is passed, with the hope that there would be attrition after a while: How long would it take for all 12 million illegals to finally leave? 1 million per year? 500K per year? 24 years? Yeah right! Ok assuming they leave at a rate of 500K per year (which I know wouldn�t happen) what would be the rate of inflow of more illegals?? What would be the balance of illegals after say 10 years? Think about it.
3. Give them a path to citizenship. Well they are here anyways but this idea might jeopardize the bill.
So my proposal is: Since �a path to citizenship� is the major road block to this bill, make a law that gives the Illegals an opportunity for GC but include in the law that �Anybody that ever comes into the country illegally CAN NOT become a citizen�. i.e they can get a green card but they can never be eligible for citizenship. I am sure this is a reasonable middle ground�. a path to PR but not citizenship. I am sure those illegals don�t care about citizenship anyways. They just want to be free and be mobile.
Just my thots.
I don�t know what is so hard about this deadlock. Don�t they know that if:
1. Illegals are given temporary visas for them to return after a number of years, no-body would come forward. The illegals would see this as shooting themselves in the foot. They would prefer to remain in the dark and live here permanently. Purpose defeated.
2. A tough enforcement only bill is passed, with the hope that there would be attrition after a while: How long would it take for all 12 million illegals to finally leave? 1 million per year? 500K per year? 24 years? Yeah right! Ok assuming they leave at a rate of 500K per year (which I know wouldn�t happen) what would be the rate of inflow of more illegals?? What would be the balance of illegals after say 10 years? Think about it.
3. Give them a path to citizenship. Well they are here anyways but this idea might jeopardize the bill.
So my proposal is: Since �a path to citizenship� is the major road block to this bill, make a law that gives the Illegals an opportunity for GC but include in the law that �Anybody that ever comes into the country illegally CAN NOT become a citizen�. i.e they can get a green card but they can never be eligible for citizenship. I am sure this is a reasonable middle ground�. a path to PR but not citizenship. I am sure those illegals don�t care about citizenship anyways. They just want to be free and be mobile.
Just my thots.
hot Prince Charles and Princess
abracadabra102
08-28 06:58 PM
yeah but thats not the kind of training NIIT would provide you (Assembly level stuff, parallel programming concepts etc). Such training institutes teach you programming, what mundada was talking about is software engineering.
I stand corrected. I misunderstood his statement. I thought he was referring to a non-US degree. Yes, I agree, a sound theoretical foundation goes a long way.
I stand corrected. I misunderstood his statement. I thought he was referring to a non-US degree. Yes, I agree, a sound theoretical foundation goes a long way.
more...
house Diana and Prince Charles
girijas
04-15 02:41 PM
It is generally a good idea to be able to maintain a conversation when you jog. The same rule applies to walking. So walk at a pace which allows you to talk to yourself as you walk:)
Yeah I started off faster than normal and for the last five minutes I did a stroll.. Its gone now, I don't feel it anymore.
Yeah I started off faster than normal and for the last five minutes I did a stroll.. Its gone now, I don't feel it anymore.
tattoo Prince Charles and Princess
madras1
02-23 09:14 AM
All,
I cannot find any information the location where we are going to meet in DC. It would help me to find accomadation or public transport to the event location. I am planning to attend this event.
Thanks
I cannot find any information the location where we are going to meet in DC. It would help me to find accomadation or public transport to the event location. I am planning to attend this event.
Thanks
more...
pictures Prince Charles and Princess
StuckInTheMuck
07-30 09:51 AM
Same for me too!!! i got second e-mail today also. I got another e-mail on july 14th with same content. My EAD expires in 15 days and i am on EAD. I don't know What the hell is going on. I e-filed on May 8th.
Hope this does not push your place at the print queue all the way back.
Hope this does not push your place at the print queue all the way back.
dresses Prince Charles and Princess
Forcechaos
05-02 05:35 PM
Applied for labor# May 30, 2007
Audit Date# October 04, 2007
Reply Date# October 18, 2007
Status# Pending
Audit Reason: Business Necessity
Audit Date# October 04, 2007
Reply Date# October 18, 2007
Status# Pending
Audit Reason: Business Necessity
more...
makeup Prince Charles Lady Diana
hellomms
05-09 06:03 PM
My attorney sent an email inquiry to DOL regarding my case. Within less than 12 hours a response was received -
It sounds like a pre-written text that goes to every inquiry they get.
Thanks for sharing your experience, I dont buy into their FIFO process. May be its applicable in the Non-Audit cases but cases that get audited are just being piled up at someone's desk and that person is most likely dead (does not exist) :mad:
It sounds like a pre-written text that goes to every inquiry they get.
Thanks for sharing your experience, I dont buy into their FIFO process. May be its applicable in the Non-Audit cases but cases that get audited are just being piled up at someone's desk and that person is most likely dead (does not exist) :mad:
girlfriend Prince Charles and Princess
pappu
12-26 03:29 PM
I will add my $100 & send the checks. One more co-worker will put in $50 through the credit card.
Let us all try like this from our co workers. I think guys do not mind paying but are too lazy to write the check. So we need to chase them...
One more technique, I have used.... give your friend $10 or $20 in cash & ask him to go online and contribute an amount by adding some money to your cash contribution...
Thanks for your efforts
Let us all try like this from our co workers. I think guys do not mind paying but are too lazy to write the check. So we need to chase them...
One more technique, I have used.... give your friend $10 or $20 in cash & ask him to go online and contribute an amount by adding some money to your cash contribution...
Thanks for your efforts
hairstyles Princess Diana Wedding Dress
illusions
04-01 11:03 AM
Not necessarily. Remember JULY 2nd.
July 2nd has to be cleared before July 7th!
gc4me, i had made a mistake, i was looking at the "Application Mailed" date instead of the PD, and got all excited.... i have since edited my response.
July 2nd has to be cleared before July 7th!
gc4me, i had made a mistake, i was looking at the "Application Mailed" date instead of the PD, and got all excited.... i have since edited my response.
elfreda80
09-17 11:51 AM
Hi,
My H1B is also approved for Oct '07 and I had applied for H4 in July, but I have not got my approval notice. Now I have to travel to India in Nov. Is it possible to premium process H4 and then get it stamped from India?
Thanks for your help!
Elfreda
My H1B is also approved for Oct '07 and I had applied for H4 in July, but I have not got my approval notice. Now I have to travel to India in Nov. Is it possible to premium process H4 and then get it stamped from India?
Thanks for your help!
Elfreda
vls
05-15 04:13 PM
Ours was around 30 days after receiving the I-485 receipt.