Blog Feeds
07-15 03:01 PM
On July 9, the Senate, by a vote of 84 to 6, passed a DHS funding bill which includes a variety of immigration enforcement and benefits measures. The measure now goes to a House-Senate Conference Committee which must reconcile this bill with a funding measure previously passed by the House of Representatives which contains none of the immigration amendments added by the Senate. ENFORCEMENT PROVISIONS The Senate adopted an amendment offered by Senator Jim DeMint (R-SC) to provide that the DHS must complete 700 miles of actual fencing along the U.S.- Mexican border by the end of fiscal year 2010....
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/carlshusterman/2009/07/senate-bill-includes-immigration-measures.html)
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/carlshusterman/2009/07/senate-bill-includes-immigration-measures.html)
wallpaper Dragon Age: The Stolen Throne
informvinay
12-13 02:56 PM
Hi,
I was on H1 VISA when my wife came here on H4 VISA. When I was filled her DS-157 form for H4 Stamping by mistake I put the wrong dates of employment.
Now she got her H1 Visa approved when she was here in US. She is going for H1 Visa stamping . She is filling her DS-157 again with the correct dates. Would it be a problem. Would H4 DS-157 be tied back to DS-157 for H1 while she is there for H1 Stamping.
Please any help would be appreciated.
I was on H1 VISA when my wife came here on H4 VISA. When I was filled her DS-157 form for H4 Stamping by mistake I put the wrong dates of employment.
Now she got her H1 Visa approved when she was here in US. She is going for H1 Visa stamping . She is filling her DS-157 again with the correct dates. Would it be a problem. Would H4 DS-157 be tied back to DS-157 for H1 while she is there for H1 Stamping.
Please any help would be appreciated.
Blog Feeds
12-23 04:40 PM
The cover of today's New York Times tells the extraordinary story of Cuban-born artist Carmen Herrera who has worked as an artist for decades and is finally enjoying real success. She's one of the hottest artists in New York and her paintings regularly sell for $30,000+. Her work is on display at the Museum of Modern Art and her work is now touring in England. Ms. Herrera moved to Paris with her American husband for a few years after World War II and then moved to the US where she embarked on her long career. About five years ago, her...
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2009/12/immigrant-of-the-day-carmen-herrera-artist.html)
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2009/12/immigrant-of-the-day-carmen-herrera-artist.html)
2011 Dragon Age: The Calling is the
man-woman-and-gc
08-25 12:39 PM
How quickly can we change the job safely after receiving a GC?
The next job may not be of the same job description. Are there any formalities that we need to fulfill if we are changing jobs immediately after receiving GC(withink a couple of months)
Thanks in Advance.
The next job may not be of the same job description. Are there any formalities that we need to fulfill if we are changing jobs immediately after receiving GC(withink a couple of months)
Thanks in Advance.
more...
Macaca
07-22 05:33 PM
For Real Drama, Senate Should Engage In a True Filibuster (http://www.rollcall.com/issues/53_8/ornstein/19415-1.html) By Norman Ornstein, resident scholar at American Enterprise Institute, July 18, 2007
For many Senators, this week will take them back to their college years - they'll pull an all-nighter, but this time with no final exam to follow.
To dramatize Republican obstructionism, Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) has decided to hold a mini-version of a real, old-time filibuster. In the old days, i.e., the 1950s, a real filibuster meant the Senate would drop everything, bring the place to a screeching halt, haul cots into the corridors and go around the clock with debate until one side would crack - either the intense minority or the frustrated majority. The former would be under pressure from a public that took notice of the obstructionism thanks to the drama of the repeated round-the-clock sessions.
It is a reflection of our times that the most the Senate can stand of such drama is 24 hours, maybe stretched to 48. But it also is a reflection of the dynamic of the Senate this year that Reid feels compelled to try this kind of extraordinary tactic.
This is a very different year, one on a record-shattering pace for cloture votes, one where the threat of filibuster has become routinized in a way we have not seen before. As Congressional Quarterly pointed out last week, we already have had 40 cloture votes in six-plus months; the record for a whole two-year Congress is 61.
For Reid, the past six months have been especially frustrating because the minority Republicans have adopted a tactic of refusing to negotiate time agreements on a wide range of legislation, something normally done in the Senate via unanimous consent, with the two parties setting a structure for debate and amendments. Of course, many of the breakdowns have been on votes related to the Iraq War, the subject of the all-night debate and the overwhelming focus of the 110th Congress. On Iraq, the Republican leaders long ago decided to try to block the Democrats at every turn to negate any edge the majority might have to seize the agenda, force the issue and put President Bush on the defensive.
But the obstructionist tactics have gone well beyond Iraq, to include things such as the 9/11 commission recommendations and the increase in the minimum wage, intelligence authorization, prescription drugs and many other issues.
Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) and his deputy, Minority Whip Trent Lott (R-Miss.), have instead decided to create a very different standard in the Senate than we have seen before, with 60 votes now the norm for nearly all issues, instead of the exception. In our highly polarized environment, where finding the center is a desirable outcome, that is not necessarily a bad thing. But a closer examination of the way this process has worked so far suggests that more often than not, the goal of the Republican leaders is to kill legislation or delay it interminably, not find a middle and bipartisan ground.
If Bush were any stronger, and were genuinely determined to burnish his legacy by enacting legislation in areas such as health, education and the environment, we might see a different dynamic and different outcomes. But the president's embarrassing failure on immigration reform - securing only 12 of 49 Senators from his party for his top domestic priority - has pretty much put the kibosh on a presidentially led bipartisan approach to policy action.
Republican leaders have responded to any criticism of their tactics by accusing Reid and his deputy, Majority Whip Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), of trying to squelch debate and kill off their amendments by filing premature cloture motions, designed to pre-empt the process and foreclose many amendments. There is some truth to this; early on, especially, Reid wanted to get the Senate jump-started and pushed sometimes prematurely to resolve issues.
But the fact is that on many of the issues mentioned above, Reid has been quite willing to allow Republican amendments and quite willing to negotiate a deal with McConnell to move business along. That has not been enough. As Roll Call noted last week, on both the intelligence bill and the Medicare prescription drug measure, Republicans were fundamentally opposed to the underlying bills and wanted simply to kill them.
The problem actually goes beyond the sustained effort to raise the bar routinely to 60 votes. The fact is that obstructionist tactics have been applied successfully to many bills that have far more than 60 Senators supporting them. The most visible issue in this category has been the lobbying and ethics reform bill that passed the Senate early in the year by overwhelming margins.
Every time Reid has moved to appoint conferees to get to the final stages on the issue, a Republican Senator has objected. After months of dispute over who was really behind the blockage, Sen. Jim DeMint of South Carolina emerged as the bte noire. But Republican leaders have been more than willing to carry DeMint's water to keep that bill from coming up.
The problem Reid faces on this issue is that to supersede the unanimous consent denial, he would have to go through three separate cloture fights, each one allowing substantial sustained debate, including 30 hours worth after cloture is invoked. In the meantime, a badly needed reform is blocked, and the minority can blame the majority for failing to fulfill its promise to reform the culture of corruption. It may work politically, but the institution and the country both suffer along the way.
Is this obstructionism? Yes, indeed - according to none other than Lott. The Minority Whip told Roll Call, "The strategy of being obstructionist can work or fail. For [former Senate Minority Leader Tom] Daschle, it failed. For Reid it succeeded, and so far it's working for us." Lott's point was that a minority party can push as far as it wants until the public blames them for the problem, and so far that has not happened.
The war is a different issue from any other. McConnell's offer to Reid to set the bar at 60 for all amendments related to Iraq, thereby avoiding many of the time-consuming procedural hurdles, is actually a fair one - nothing is going to be done, realistically, to change policy on the war without a bipartisan, 60-vote-plus coalition. But other issues should not be routinely subject to a supermajority hurdle.
What can Reid do? An all-nighter might help a little. But the then-majority Republicans tried the faux-filibuster approach a couple of years ago when they wanted to stop minority Democrats from blocking Bush's judicial nominees, and it went nowhere. The real answer here is probably one Senate Democrats don't want to face: longer hours, fewer recesses and a couple of real filibusters - days and nights and maybe weeks of nonstop, round-the-clock debate, bringing back the cots and bringing the rest of the agenda to a halt to show the implications of the new tactics.
At the moment, I don't see enough battle-hardened veterans in the Senate willing to take on that pain.
For many Senators, this week will take them back to their college years - they'll pull an all-nighter, but this time with no final exam to follow.
To dramatize Republican obstructionism, Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) has decided to hold a mini-version of a real, old-time filibuster. In the old days, i.e., the 1950s, a real filibuster meant the Senate would drop everything, bring the place to a screeching halt, haul cots into the corridors and go around the clock with debate until one side would crack - either the intense minority or the frustrated majority. The former would be under pressure from a public that took notice of the obstructionism thanks to the drama of the repeated round-the-clock sessions.
It is a reflection of our times that the most the Senate can stand of such drama is 24 hours, maybe stretched to 48. But it also is a reflection of the dynamic of the Senate this year that Reid feels compelled to try this kind of extraordinary tactic.
This is a very different year, one on a record-shattering pace for cloture votes, one where the threat of filibuster has become routinized in a way we have not seen before. As Congressional Quarterly pointed out last week, we already have had 40 cloture votes in six-plus months; the record for a whole two-year Congress is 61.
For Reid, the past six months have been especially frustrating because the minority Republicans have adopted a tactic of refusing to negotiate time agreements on a wide range of legislation, something normally done in the Senate via unanimous consent, with the two parties setting a structure for debate and amendments. Of course, many of the breakdowns have been on votes related to the Iraq War, the subject of the all-night debate and the overwhelming focus of the 110th Congress. On Iraq, the Republican leaders long ago decided to try to block the Democrats at every turn to negate any edge the majority might have to seize the agenda, force the issue and put President Bush on the defensive.
But the obstructionist tactics have gone well beyond Iraq, to include things such as the 9/11 commission recommendations and the increase in the minimum wage, intelligence authorization, prescription drugs and many other issues.
Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) and his deputy, Minority Whip Trent Lott (R-Miss.), have instead decided to create a very different standard in the Senate than we have seen before, with 60 votes now the norm for nearly all issues, instead of the exception. In our highly polarized environment, where finding the center is a desirable outcome, that is not necessarily a bad thing. But a closer examination of the way this process has worked so far suggests that more often than not, the goal of the Republican leaders is to kill legislation or delay it interminably, not find a middle and bipartisan ground.
If Bush were any stronger, and were genuinely determined to burnish his legacy by enacting legislation in areas such as health, education and the environment, we might see a different dynamic and different outcomes. But the president's embarrassing failure on immigration reform - securing only 12 of 49 Senators from his party for his top domestic priority - has pretty much put the kibosh on a presidentially led bipartisan approach to policy action.
Republican leaders have responded to any criticism of their tactics by accusing Reid and his deputy, Majority Whip Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), of trying to squelch debate and kill off their amendments by filing premature cloture motions, designed to pre-empt the process and foreclose many amendments. There is some truth to this; early on, especially, Reid wanted to get the Senate jump-started and pushed sometimes prematurely to resolve issues.
But the fact is that on many of the issues mentioned above, Reid has been quite willing to allow Republican amendments and quite willing to negotiate a deal with McConnell to move business along. That has not been enough. As Roll Call noted last week, on both the intelligence bill and the Medicare prescription drug measure, Republicans were fundamentally opposed to the underlying bills and wanted simply to kill them.
The problem actually goes beyond the sustained effort to raise the bar routinely to 60 votes. The fact is that obstructionist tactics have been applied successfully to many bills that have far more than 60 Senators supporting them. The most visible issue in this category has been the lobbying and ethics reform bill that passed the Senate early in the year by overwhelming margins.
Every time Reid has moved to appoint conferees to get to the final stages on the issue, a Republican Senator has objected. After months of dispute over who was really behind the blockage, Sen. Jim DeMint of South Carolina emerged as the bte noire. But Republican leaders have been more than willing to carry DeMint's water to keep that bill from coming up.
The problem Reid faces on this issue is that to supersede the unanimous consent denial, he would have to go through three separate cloture fights, each one allowing substantial sustained debate, including 30 hours worth after cloture is invoked. In the meantime, a badly needed reform is blocked, and the minority can blame the majority for failing to fulfill its promise to reform the culture of corruption. It may work politically, but the institution and the country both suffer along the way.
Is this obstructionism? Yes, indeed - according to none other than Lott. The Minority Whip told Roll Call, "The strategy of being obstructionist can work or fail. For [former Senate Minority Leader Tom] Daschle, it failed. For Reid it succeeded, and so far it's working for us." Lott's point was that a minority party can push as far as it wants until the public blames them for the problem, and so far that has not happened.
The war is a different issue from any other. McConnell's offer to Reid to set the bar at 60 for all amendments related to Iraq, thereby avoiding many of the time-consuming procedural hurdles, is actually a fair one - nothing is going to be done, realistically, to change policy on the war without a bipartisan, 60-vote-plus coalition. But other issues should not be routinely subject to a supermajority hurdle.
What can Reid do? An all-nighter might help a little. But the then-majority Republicans tried the faux-filibuster approach a couple of years ago when they wanted to stop minority Democrats from blocking Bush's judicial nominees, and it went nowhere. The real answer here is probably one Senate Democrats don't want to face: longer hours, fewer recesses and a couple of real filibusters - days and nights and maybe weeks of nonstop, round-the-clock debate, bringing back the cots and bringing the rest of the agenda to a halt to show the implications of the new tactics.
At the moment, I don't see enough battle-hardened veterans in the Senate willing to take on that pain.
gcformeornot
08-04 01:05 PM
but rememeber if you sin god (and should I say USCIS) is looking at you
Good luck
Good luck
more...
Head2GC
02-05 02:49 PM
Hello,
My I-140 was approved in August 2009 and my PD is Jan-2004 (EB3). I want to know when i can apply for I-485, should i have to wait till my PD becomes Current or is there any other way by which i can file the I-485. Please shed some light on this topic and thanks for your time and effort.
Thanks ! ! :confused: :rolleyes:
My I-140 was approved in August 2009 and my PD is Jan-2004 (EB3). I want to know when i can apply for I-485, should i have to wait till my PD becomes Current or is there any other way by which i can file the I-485. Please shed some light on this topic and thanks for your time and effort.
Thanks ! ! :confused: :rolleyes:
2010 Dragon Age Origins - Trailer
Pagal
04-26 03:05 PM
Hello,
Please report your employer to DOL for discriminatory pay practice, if you think the pay difference is solely 'cause of your immigration status.
And yes, you can change your job when you want through AC 21.. please browse the forum for AC21 process...good luck!
Please report your employer to DOL for discriminatory pay practice, if you think the pay difference is solely 'cause of your immigration status.
And yes, you can change your job when you want through AC 21.. please browse the forum for AC21 process...good luck!
more...
ml0202
02-05 05:00 PM
Friends,
At the time of granting Green Card, USCIS may RFE request for evidence. What exactly do they need me to provde, in particular when AC21 is involved?
Just employment letters? Or do they need pay stubs from the NEW employer as well? Then only the most recent paycheck or the whole history of payroll information with the NEW employer?
Appreciate your help.
In my case, I-140 was approved, and I-485 submitted over 180 days. Then I plan to invoke AC21 working for a new employer with similar job.
ML 2/25/08
At the time of granting Green Card, USCIS may RFE request for evidence. What exactly do they need me to provde, in particular when AC21 is involved?
Just employment letters? Or do they need pay stubs from the NEW employer as well? Then only the most recent paycheck or the whole history of payroll information with the NEW employer?
Appreciate your help.
In my case, I-140 was approved, and I-485 submitted over 180 days. Then I plan to invoke AC21 working for a new employer with similar job.
ML 2/25/08
hair in my Dragon Age fiction
sounakc
11-15 05:26 AM
^^^^
more...
IneedAllGreen
04-06 08:59 AM
He is my attorney for my GC process. He had successfully done my PERM application last year and now we are processing I-140 from last 4 months. Best thing is that he is quick and his paralegal call/email you whenever they miss any document instead of waiting for long time and going thru employer channel which consumes lots of time in between.
Visit www.greencardmaker.com for more review/information on Keshab Raj Seadie's office. oh yeah his offices are in NYC and in NJ.
Thanks
INeedAllGreen
Visit www.greencardmaker.com for more review/information on Keshab Raj Seadie's office. oh yeah his offices are in NYC and in NJ.
Thanks
INeedAllGreen
hot It would be madness to say that Dragon Age II is a bad game.
jthomas
03-13 07:11 PM
I got my first H1B transfer through a lawyer. The lawyer charged $3500/- out of which approx $2500 has to be paid by the employer as per law the lawyers charges would be around 1000 dollars for some paper work.
My second H1B transfer costed be 1200 dollars as lawyers fee and all other charges has to be paid by the employer as per law.
Its best to get an immigration lawyer involved since you can have a peace of mind. There is no need of premium processing. Once you get the receipt you can join the other firm. You don't have to wait till the process gets completed.
My second H1B transfer costed be 1200 dollars as lawyers fee and all other charges has to be paid by the employer as per law.
Its best to get an immigration lawyer involved since you can have a peace of mind. There is no need of premium processing. Once you get the receipt you can join the other firm. You don't have to wait till the process gets completed.
more...
house (Dragon Age: Origins - Dragon
sk017
08-03 11:06 PM
My I-485 is pending with PD of Oct 11 2006(EB2 India). I have been on H1 as was not able to add my spouse to my initial 485 application. As my H1 expires on Sep 6, we recently filed for H1/4 extension and received an RFE for Employee-Employer relationship. We have to answer this by Sep 13. As a Plan B, What we did in June 2010 was
a) I filed for my EAD
b) My spouse got admitted into a school here and applied for COS from H4 to F1 with a valid I-20.
Both of these cases are currently pending.. My questions are:
1) As our H1/4 and I-94 expires on Sep 6, Would we still be in legal status after Sep 6 as both of our cases (EAD and COS) are pending?
2) After answering the RFE, if it is denied, would it impact my GC processing?
3) I understand that even if my H1 is denied, As I have a pending EAD, my status would be okay but what options would we have if my Wife's case is denied.
Thanks in Advance!
a) I filed for my EAD
b) My spouse got admitted into a school here and applied for COS from H4 to F1 with a valid I-20.
Both of these cases are currently pending.. My questions are:
1) As our H1/4 and I-94 expires on Sep 6, Would we still be in legal status after Sep 6 as both of our cases (EAD and COS) are pending?
2) After answering the RFE, if it is denied, would it impact my GC processing?
3) I understand that even if my H1 is denied, As I have a pending EAD, my status would be okay but what options would we have if my Wife's case is denied.
Thanks in Advance!
tattoo You may have noticed the lack of a full Dragon Age II review on RPS.
chriskalani
11-09 01:09 AM
I don't think anyone ever even gets jobs from posting here....
more...
pictures If this weren#39;t a BioWare game, weren#39;t a sequel to Dragon Age,
ameerka_dream
03-31 08:13 AM
Giving I-485 benefits to people without current PDs is a bad idea.
so what 's good idea to you......putting all of EB applicants who are waiting to file 485 in waiting state until you get your GC is a good idea?
First of all, why are you being worried about this action item being EB1 applicant and you will get your GC in no time...
I don't think you are from EB1 category...You are selfish mind who holds EAD and doesn't want other EB applicants to come in to 485 waiting line.
would you have had the same thought if there was no July 07 fiasco and if you would need to wait in the line........selfish minds like you can't stop this action item.
Stop opposing this item here. &&%^%^%$$#####
so what 's good idea to you......putting all of EB applicants who are waiting to file 485 in waiting state until you get your GC is a good idea?
First of all, why are you being worried about this action item being EB1 applicant and you will get your GC in no time...
I don't think you are from EB1 category...You are selfish mind who holds EAD and doesn't want other EB applicants to come in to 485 waiting line.
would you have had the same thought if there was no July 07 fiasco and if you would need to wait in the line........selfish minds like you can't stop this action item.
Stop opposing this item here. &&%^%^%$$#####
dresses Flemeth#39;s Hut - Dragon Age
CaveMan232
12-16 02:00 AM
I have a valid Visitor(B1/B2) visa stamp in my passport. I previously entered the country on H1B visa stamp which has already expired. Can I come back to US based on the valid Visitor(B1/B2) visa stamp?
more...
makeup In the end Dragon Age II has nothing to say about slavery, subjugation,
Edison99
01-18 09:21 AM
Let's keep our fingers crossed and hope for the best...
There are some positive signs over the last few days but I'm not sure I'd be as optimistic as Stewart Lawrence, but he's made some interesting observations.
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2011/01/gop-moving-back-to-center-on-immigration.html)
There are some positive signs over the last few days but I'm not sure I'd be as optimistic as Stewart Lawrence, but he's made some interesting observations.
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2011/01/gop-moving-back-to-center-on-immigration.html)
girlfriend (Dragon Age: Origins - Dragon
Yas
03-24 10:42 PM
My employer was planning on sponsoring me, and paying all the filing fees, but the deal was that I was going to pay the lawyer directly for the legal fees. I just found out from a second lawyer that technically we can't do that because it will drop my salary below the prevailing wage. Is there anything I can do to get around this, and still pay the legal fees? Is it completely against the law for me to pay them or is that just an "interpretation of the law"? The other possibility is my husband could pay the fees, but I don't know if that's allowed either.
Let me know if you have any advice - we have to have everything signed by this Friday.
Let me know if you have any advice - we have to have everything signed by this Friday.
hairstyles The imperial robes of the last
Adaam
01-30 11:57 PM
Just asking out of curiosity because when an illegal alien lives and possibly runs from cops from place to place for a period of time then they are qualifed for a green card and eventually citizenship.
Why would they become nice to them after a certain period of time? It is illegal.
Why would they become nice to them after a certain period of time? It is illegal.
Sakthisagar
07-28 03:33 PM
Looks like Indian Politicans says.
"Gareebhi Hatayenge" aage badayenge" badayi karenge woh karenge yeh karenge
President's view of immigration is same like Indian Politicans
President Obama’s Take on Immigration � Row 2, Seat 4 (http://whitehouse.blogs.foxnews.com/2010/07/28/president-obamas-take-on-immigration/)
"Gareebhi Hatayenge" aage badayenge" badayi karenge woh karenge yeh karenge
President's view of immigration is same like Indian Politicans
President Obama’s Take on Immigration � Row 2, Seat 4 (http://whitehouse.blogs.foxnews.com/2010/07/28/president-obamas-take-on-immigration/)
Rudy2098
08-08 06:38 PM
I got my visa B-1, B-2 on march 2000 since them i stay here but before i was here ilegal ( not visa) but i had two children 1990 and 1994 here and both are american. I got married now and my husband is going to the document !-130 ,1-485 ectt...
THIS IS MY QUESTION I COME LEGALY BUT WITH MY CHILDREN the will know that was ilegal from 1990 to 1990. what will happen to my . any case similar case:(:( like my. please PLEASE HELP ME .
THIS IS MY QUESTION I COME LEGALY BUT WITH MY CHILDREN the will know that was ilegal from 1990 to 1990. what will happen to my . any case similar case:(:( like my. please PLEASE HELP ME .
No comments:
Post a Comment