singhsa3
07-12 09:01 AM
I am trying to upload the document but it not allowing me to do so. Also, I cannot load any document on a public website as it forbidden from my place of work. Can I e-mail this to any one.
All suggestions are good but let them all collect first and we can then modify it later
All suggestions are good but let them all collect first and we can then modify it later
wallpaper Hibiscus Flower wallpaper for
skagitswimmer
November 14th, 2007, 11:15 AM
I have one of those overpriced twirly brushes sold by Arctic Butterfly but have used it exactly once. Blower bulbs work fine. If you don't have a photo store nearby you can buy exactly the same thing at a drug store - except that it is white and called an ear syringe. Make sure you follow the camera directions for sensor cleaning - you will have to lock the mirror up to be able to direct the air at the sensor.
As for formatting, I generally format the card every time I put it back into the camera rather than delete the images at the desktop. I don't believe it does anything special to prevent problems but it is a just convenient of deleting photos and folders.
I have had one card fail completely.
As for formatting, I generally format the card every time I put it back into the camera rather than delete the images at the desktop. I don't believe it does anything special to prevent problems but it is a just convenient of deleting photos and folders.
I have had one card fail completely.
cagedcactus
10-23 05:31 PM
we probably should look for the best fit option... If the website offers flexibility with availability, thats the way we should go.
You are doing a great job, WD.
Once we have the structure set, and people engaging in several crucial areas, we will have a better idea about what fits better...
You are doing a great job, WD.
Once we have the structure set, and people engaging in several crucial areas, we will have a better idea about what fits better...
2011 makeup wallpaper hd black and
meetpravee
04-19 01:14 PM
Thank you so much for all your response. I am filling up the application online now. My fathers name in existing passport is just mentioned as his first name. Should I fill in the first name alone in the renewal application or should I fill in the first name and last name. I couldnt find answer for this question in the other thread. Same question for mother's name and spouse name too.
more...
FredG
April 17th, 2004, 08:15 PM
Sounds like a soap opera to me. :rolleyes:
Fred
Fred
mzafar125
08-19 12:40 AM
Folks,
I am a July filer, I called USCIS last week and they stated that they need a new set of biometrics. I had initially given my biometrics after I filed my AOS last year in July 2007. According to what I have read USCIS should be able to retrieve my biometrics from their Biometric storage system. Should I call USCIS and argue with them which may be futile. Or should I just bite the bullet and await the new biometric appointment. I would appreciate any input.
PD: 10/2002
I-140 - Approved Jan 2007
Category - EB3, ROW
I am a July filer, I called USCIS last week and they stated that they need a new set of biometrics. I had initially given my biometrics after I filed my AOS last year in July 2007. According to what I have read USCIS should be able to retrieve my biometrics from their Biometric storage system. Should I call USCIS and argue with them which may be futile. Or should I just bite the bullet and await the new biometric appointment. I would appreciate any input.
PD: 10/2002
I-140 - Approved Jan 2007
Category - EB3, ROW
more...
alisa
07-07 12:31 PM
I gave it highest ratings. I encourage others to do the same.
2010 lotus flower wallpaper for
bekugc
06-05 10:37 PM
diptam, i think no need to worry.
i got same msg on USPS website last week for TSC ead papermail.
next day morning it was picked up by TSC and status chg to delivered.
thx
i got same msg on USPS website last week for TSC ead papermail.
next day morning it was picked up by TSC and status chg to delivered.
thx
more...
fromnaija
04-20 05:28 PM
IF you move to a different city that is not within the same Metroplolitan Area, yes you will have to restart your GC process. The good news however is that you can retain the priority date if your old I-140 is approved.
hair Black and red flower
mdforgc
02-21 06:35 PM
EB3 nepa, please do print out these links too and send to Sen Specters office
http://www.flight-capital.com/- David Heenans article
http://www.creativeclass.org/ Dr Richard Florid's site Book"Flight of the creative class"
[1] Pia M. Orrenius and Madeline Zavodny, “Does Immigration Affect Wages? A Look at Occupation-Level Evidence” Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta Working Paper No. 2003-2a, August 2003, at http://www.frbatlanta.org/filelegacydocs/wp0302a.pdf.
[2] “America Needs More, Not Fewer, Workers from Overseas,” editorial, The Wall Street Journal, August 26, 2005, at http://www.opinionjournal.com/forms/
printThis.html?id=110007166.
http://www.heritage.org/Research/GovernmentReform/wm886.cfm#_ftn1- link supporting recapture of visas
http://www.twincities.com/mld/twincities/news/state/minnesota/13614107.htm- MN Gov Pawlnety's comment on legal immigration
http://www.upi.com/NewsTrack/view.php?StoryID=20060208-105741-3392r Intel Chairman calling for more H1Bs and Green cards
http://www.migrationpolicy.org/pubs/PolicyBrief13_Jan06_13.pdf report of the migration policy institute, suggesting moving other visa cateogires to skilled EB immigration and removing country quotas.
http://www.flight-capital.com/- David Heenans article
http://www.creativeclass.org/ Dr Richard Florid's site Book"Flight of the creative class"
[1] Pia M. Orrenius and Madeline Zavodny, “Does Immigration Affect Wages? A Look at Occupation-Level Evidence” Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta Working Paper No. 2003-2a, August 2003, at http://www.frbatlanta.org/filelegacydocs/wp0302a.pdf.
[2] “America Needs More, Not Fewer, Workers from Overseas,” editorial, The Wall Street Journal, August 26, 2005, at http://www.opinionjournal.com/forms/
printThis.html?id=110007166.
http://www.heritage.org/Research/GovernmentReform/wm886.cfm#_ftn1- link supporting recapture of visas
http://www.twincities.com/mld/twincities/news/state/minnesota/13614107.htm- MN Gov Pawlnety's comment on legal immigration
http://www.upi.com/NewsTrack/view.php?StoryID=20060208-105741-3392r Intel Chairman calling for more H1Bs and Green cards
http://www.migrationpolicy.org/pubs/PolicyBrief13_Jan06_13.pdf report of the migration policy institute, suggesting moving other visa cateogires to skilled EB immigration and removing country quotas.
more...
satyakb
03-19 09:53 PM
Hi Everyone,
Our Immigration status is EAD and my wife is pregnant,
We are very happy with the news..
There is lot of possibility for us to be in India during due date, based on few important events in family.
We would like to know.. if baby is born in India then what possibilities are there for us to bring baby along with us?
(if mother stays in India for couple of more months)
can baby also get Green Card when we (parents) are allotted green card?
All your advices are always appreciated.
Thanks & Regards,
Satya.
Note: Admins if required, please close this thread and redirect to any existing ones, as i could not find one I have posted a new thread.
Our Immigration status is EAD and my wife is pregnant,
We are very happy with the news..
There is lot of possibility for us to be in India during due date, based on few important events in family.
We would like to know.. if baby is born in India then what possibilities are there for us to bring baby along with us?
(if mother stays in India for couple of more months)
can baby also get Green Card when we (parents) are allotted green card?
All your advices are always appreciated.
Thanks & Regards,
Satya.
Note: Admins if required, please close this thread and redirect to any existing ones, as i could not find one I have posted a new thread.
hot Fire Flower
eldrick
08-16 01:53 PM
Initially, when lawyer sent the documents for signature, they said we should send a $745 dollars check for spouse's form fees. So, my husband asked HR if he's gonna pay for this but HR told him no need they are gonna cover it.
But just yesterday, after my husband got his payslip they deducted 1245 fee. So, my husband complained that he was told that he's not suppose to pay even for spouse's fee.
Because of this complaint, Company sent a letter of apology for wrong information.
My question is , do we really need to pay for this + separate legal fee?
Sorry my details are incomplete in my first post.
Please help. Thanks
But just yesterday, after my husband got his payslip they deducted 1245 fee. So, my husband complained that he was told that he's not suppose to pay even for spouse's fee.
Because of this complaint, Company sent a letter of apology for wrong information.
My question is , do we really need to pay for this + separate legal fee?
Sorry my details are incomplete in my first post.
Please help. Thanks
more...
house HD Flower Wallpaper
kurtz_wolfgang
08-15 01:05 PM
Please explain, Why did I get red? Is it for asking question? Guys, I am new.
tattoo Free Aqua Flower Wallpapers
indyanguy
12-19 06:13 PM
Husband + Wife - 1 Application
Wife - Seperate Appln. ( Will do follow to join incase by chance the first one gets stuck
Can you explain how "follow to join" works? Thanks
Wife - Seperate Appln. ( Will do follow to join incase by chance the first one gets stuck
Can you explain how "follow to join" works? Thanks
more...
pictures Flowering Plants - HD Flower
vin13
11-30 09:38 AM
It seems odd that there has been so many RFE for photos. I am not sure if the request for photographs is because USCIS is simply loosing them.
I got photos taken from a professional place and met all the specs. But yet i got an RFE for additional photos.
I have bought tickets for travel in 2 weeks. I may have to postpone my trip now because of this RFE delay.
It took 2 weeks for the RFE to arrive by mail. Too much time is getting wasted....
I wonder why they cannot combine the EAD and AP as one document.
I got photos taken from a professional place and met all the specs. But yet i got an RFE for additional photos.
I have bought tickets for travel in 2 weeks. I may have to postpone my trip now because of this RFE delay.
It took 2 weeks for the RFE to arrive by mail. Too much time is getting wasted....
I wonder why they cannot combine the EAD and AP as one document.
dresses Free-Samsung-Omnia-HD-
Blog Feeds
02-25 07:20 PM
AILA Leadership Has Just Posted the Following:
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhfntiAbcNp5R1zLPe-Fpkcs4BlNlUjjBLBoRG5LGZ-3Ofp5tJb9gFX5pjnhcH7gvdHCdG_kZ5rVKTTt92I3ZTIFu7Ej963haADeiKHIel923Eii5MwE7iouBBCNQmD_M9Meva44SFUI8s/s320/2010-02-23+Magnifying+Glass.jpg (https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhfntiAbcNp5R1zLPe-Fpkcs4BlNlUjjBLBoRG5LGZ-3Ofp5tJb9gFX5pjnhcH7gvdHCdG_kZ5rVKTTt92I3ZTIFu7Ej963haADeiKHIel923Eii5MwE7iouBBCNQmD_M9Meva44SFUI8s/s1600-h/2010-02-23+Magnifying+Glass.jpg)
By Eleanor Pelta, AILA First Vice President
The latest salvo in the war against H-1B workers and their employers (and this time, they�ve thrown L-1�s in just for fun,) is the Economic Policy Institute�s briefing paper by Ron Hira, released last week, which concludes that the practice of using H-1B and L-1 workers and then sending them back to their home countries is bad for the economy. While Hira�s findings are certainly headline-grabbing, the road that Hira takes to get there is filled with twists, turns and manipulations and simply lacks real data.
Hira starts with the premise that some employers use H-1B�s and L visas as a bridge to permanent residence, and some employers use those categories for temporary worker mobility. (His particular political bent is belied by his constant usage of the term �guest-worker status��a term that brings with it the politically charged connotations of the European guest worker programs for unskilled workers�for the practice of bringing H-1B�s and L�s in to the U.S. on a temporary basis.) After examining his �data,� he divides the world of employers into two broad categories:
� Bad guys (generally foreign employers, no surprise, or U.S. employers with off-shore companies in India) that bring in H-1B and L workers for temporary periods, exploit them, underpay them and send them home after they get training from the American workers whose jobs they will outsource when they return home
� Good guys (U.S. corporations �Hira uses the more genteel label, �firms with traditional business models�) that bring H-1B and L workers to the U.S., pay them adequate wages, and sponsor them for permanent residence, thereby effecting a knowledge transfer to American colleagues that is good for the economy
Hira�s tool, a statistic he calls �immigration yield,� is simply a comparison of H-1B and L usage and the number of PERM applications filed by the highest users of those visas. He essentially concludes that because the highest users of H-1B�s and L�s are Indian consulting companies, and these companies have only a minimal number of PERM�s certified, they are using H�s and L�s as cheap temporary labor. He is unable to explain away the high number PERM filings of one of the IT consulting companies, and so he addresses this anomaly by saying �part of the explanation might be that it is headquartered in the United States.�
There are too many things wrong with this analysis to list in this blog, but here are a just a few ways in which Hira�s study is problematic:
Hira�s clear implication is that companies that don�t sponsor H-1B�s and L�s for PERM are using these workers instead of more expensive American labor. He ignores that fact the H-1B program has rules in place requiring payment of the prevailing wage to these workers. But even worse, he has not presented any data whatsoever on the average wages paid to these workers. He also doesn�t address the expense of obtaining such visas. He simply concludes that because they are here temporarily, they are underpaid.
Hira makes the argument that companies who use H-1B and L workers as temporary workers generally use their U.S. operations as a training ground for these workers and then send then back to their home countries to do the job that was once located here. Again, this assertion is not supported by any real statistical data about, or serious review of, the U.S. activities of such workers, but rather by anecdotal evidence and quotes from news stories taken out of context.
With respect to the fact that the L-1B visa requires specialized knowledge and so would normally preclude entry to the U.S. for the purpose of gaining training, Hira cites and outdated OIG report that alleges that adjudicators will approve any L-1B petition, because the standards are so broad. Those of use in the field struggling with the 10 page RFE�s typically issued automatically on any specialized knowledge petition would certainly beg to differ with that point.
Hira clearly implies that American jobs are lost because of H-1B and L �guest workers,� but has no direct statistical evidence of such job loss.
The fact is that usage of H-1B and L visas varies with the needs of the employer. Some employers use these programs to rotate experienced, professional workers into the United States and then send the workers abroad to continue their careers. Some employers bring H-1B�s and L�s into the U.S. to rely on their skills on a permanent basis. Judging from the fraud statistics as well as DOL enforcement actions, the majority of employers who use H-1B workers pay these workers adequate wages and comply with all of the DOL rules regarding use of these workers, whether the employers bring them in for temporary purposes or not. By the same token, the minority of employers who seek to abuse H and L workers may well do so, whether they intend to sponsor them for permanent residence or not. Indeed, arguably, the potential for long-term abuse is much worse in the situation in which a real �bad guy� employer is sponsoring an employee for a green card, because of the inordinate length of time it takes for many H-1B and L workers to obtain permanent residency due to backlogs.
Hira does make that last point, and it is just about the only one we agree on. Congress needs to create a streamlined way for employers to access and retain in the U.S. foreign expertise and talent, without at 10-15 year wait for permanent residence. But our economy still needs the ability for business to nimbly move talent to the U.S. on a temporary basis when needed, or to rotate key personnel internationally. In a world where global mobility means increased competitiveness, Hira�s �statistics� simply don�t support elimination of these crucial capability.https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/186823568153827945-6000198492670312275?l=ailaleadership.blogspot.com
More... (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2010/02/epis-latest-study-of-h-1b-and-l-usage.html)
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhfntiAbcNp5R1zLPe-Fpkcs4BlNlUjjBLBoRG5LGZ-3Ofp5tJb9gFX5pjnhcH7gvdHCdG_kZ5rVKTTt92I3ZTIFu7Ej963haADeiKHIel923Eii5MwE7iouBBCNQmD_M9Meva44SFUI8s/s320/2010-02-23+Magnifying+Glass.jpg (https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhfntiAbcNp5R1zLPe-Fpkcs4BlNlUjjBLBoRG5LGZ-3Ofp5tJb9gFX5pjnhcH7gvdHCdG_kZ5rVKTTt92I3ZTIFu7Ej963haADeiKHIel923Eii5MwE7iouBBCNQmD_M9Meva44SFUI8s/s1600-h/2010-02-23+Magnifying+Glass.jpg)
By Eleanor Pelta, AILA First Vice President
The latest salvo in the war against H-1B workers and their employers (and this time, they�ve thrown L-1�s in just for fun,) is the Economic Policy Institute�s briefing paper by Ron Hira, released last week, which concludes that the practice of using H-1B and L-1 workers and then sending them back to their home countries is bad for the economy. While Hira�s findings are certainly headline-grabbing, the road that Hira takes to get there is filled with twists, turns and manipulations and simply lacks real data.
Hira starts with the premise that some employers use H-1B�s and L visas as a bridge to permanent residence, and some employers use those categories for temporary worker mobility. (His particular political bent is belied by his constant usage of the term �guest-worker status��a term that brings with it the politically charged connotations of the European guest worker programs for unskilled workers�for the practice of bringing H-1B�s and L�s in to the U.S. on a temporary basis.) After examining his �data,� he divides the world of employers into two broad categories:
� Bad guys (generally foreign employers, no surprise, or U.S. employers with off-shore companies in India) that bring in H-1B and L workers for temporary periods, exploit them, underpay them and send them home after they get training from the American workers whose jobs they will outsource when they return home
� Good guys (U.S. corporations �Hira uses the more genteel label, �firms with traditional business models�) that bring H-1B and L workers to the U.S., pay them adequate wages, and sponsor them for permanent residence, thereby effecting a knowledge transfer to American colleagues that is good for the economy
Hira�s tool, a statistic he calls �immigration yield,� is simply a comparison of H-1B and L usage and the number of PERM applications filed by the highest users of those visas. He essentially concludes that because the highest users of H-1B�s and L�s are Indian consulting companies, and these companies have only a minimal number of PERM�s certified, they are using H�s and L�s as cheap temporary labor. He is unable to explain away the high number PERM filings of one of the IT consulting companies, and so he addresses this anomaly by saying �part of the explanation might be that it is headquartered in the United States.�
There are too many things wrong with this analysis to list in this blog, but here are a just a few ways in which Hira�s study is problematic:
Hira�s clear implication is that companies that don�t sponsor H-1B�s and L�s for PERM are using these workers instead of more expensive American labor. He ignores that fact the H-1B program has rules in place requiring payment of the prevailing wage to these workers. But even worse, he has not presented any data whatsoever on the average wages paid to these workers. He also doesn�t address the expense of obtaining such visas. He simply concludes that because they are here temporarily, they are underpaid.
Hira makes the argument that companies who use H-1B and L workers as temporary workers generally use their U.S. operations as a training ground for these workers and then send then back to their home countries to do the job that was once located here. Again, this assertion is not supported by any real statistical data about, or serious review of, the U.S. activities of such workers, but rather by anecdotal evidence and quotes from news stories taken out of context.
With respect to the fact that the L-1B visa requires specialized knowledge and so would normally preclude entry to the U.S. for the purpose of gaining training, Hira cites and outdated OIG report that alleges that adjudicators will approve any L-1B petition, because the standards are so broad. Those of use in the field struggling with the 10 page RFE�s typically issued automatically on any specialized knowledge petition would certainly beg to differ with that point.
Hira clearly implies that American jobs are lost because of H-1B and L �guest workers,� but has no direct statistical evidence of such job loss.
The fact is that usage of H-1B and L visas varies with the needs of the employer. Some employers use these programs to rotate experienced, professional workers into the United States and then send the workers abroad to continue their careers. Some employers bring H-1B�s and L�s into the U.S. to rely on their skills on a permanent basis. Judging from the fraud statistics as well as DOL enforcement actions, the majority of employers who use H-1B workers pay these workers adequate wages and comply with all of the DOL rules regarding use of these workers, whether the employers bring them in for temporary purposes or not. By the same token, the minority of employers who seek to abuse H and L workers may well do so, whether they intend to sponsor them for permanent residence or not. Indeed, arguably, the potential for long-term abuse is much worse in the situation in which a real �bad guy� employer is sponsoring an employee for a green card, because of the inordinate length of time it takes for many H-1B and L workers to obtain permanent residency due to backlogs.
Hira does make that last point, and it is just about the only one we agree on. Congress needs to create a streamlined way for employers to access and retain in the U.S. foreign expertise and talent, without at 10-15 year wait for permanent residence. But our economy still needs the ability for business to nimbly move talent to the U.S. on a temporary basis when needed, or to rotate key personnel internationally. In a world where global mobility means increased competitiveness, Hira�s �statistics� simply don�t support elimination of these crucial capability.https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/186823568153827945-6000198492670312275?l=ailaleadership.blogspot.com
More... (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2010/02/epis-latest-study-of-h-1b-and-l-usage.html)
more...
makeup full hd wallpapers flowers
tonyHK12
01-11 09:28 AM
The second part also sounds pretty reasonable to me:
This PAV would be issued upon successful completion of an application process that would involve the following:
1. Providing documentary evidence (school records, doctor�s records, etc.) that the applicant was in the United States before he or she reached their thirteenth birthday and be no older than twenty-five at the time they file their application;
2. Background checks for any prior convictions involving fraud, assault, reckless driving or DWI, failure to appear at any immigration hearing, or any past record of voluntary or involuntary deportation. Any such convictions would lead to a presumption of an unsuccessful application;
3. Evidence of the withholding of any relevant information, or submitting false information would result in the automatic failure of an application. Any failure of an application would result in the applicant returning to his previous immigration status;
4. Failure of an application due to withholding information or providing false information would subject the applicant to expedited removal proceedings;
5. Waivers of any requirement connected with the application process could only be made on a case by case basis by the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security setting out in detail the "compelling evidence" underlying such a waiver and the evidence used to support such a determination.
The Permanent Administrative Visa would carry with it the following authorizations:
1. PAV holders would be allowed to legally work and obtain a U.S. passport (on the condition of turning in any other passports) for foreign travel;
2. It would allow holders to establish residency in any state according to that state's requirements and be on equal footing with other legal immigrants with regard to state and local laws and policies;
The Permanent Administrative Visa would carry with it the following prohibitions:
1. Holders of the PAV would not be able to sponsor family members and relatives for LPR status;
2. Holding an PAV would not imply any safe harbor for applicant's family members;
3. Holders of PAVs would not be eligible to receive means-tested public welfare benefits;
4. Holders of PAVs would not be able to adjust their immigration status for a period of 10 years and then only through an administrative hearing in which the holder presented compelling evidence that such an adjustment is in the public interest. Such evidence would consist of, but not be limited to, applicant's work history, community service, military service, family circumstances, and the results of policy and security checks.
A One-time Only Policy: Consistent with the knowledge that adjusting the status of illegal immigrants brings with it the expectation that adjustments of the same kind will be made in the future, the language authorizing this initiative will explicitly state that:
1. That no further adjustments to legal status will be made for children brought into the country illegally after the date on which this bill becomes law;
2. That parents who bring their young children into the country illegally after the date of enactment will be subject to expedited removal proceedings.
This PAV would be issued upon successful completion of an application process that would involve the following:
1. Providing documentary evidence (school records, doctor�s records, etc.) that the applicant was in the United States before he or she reached their thirteenth birthday and be no older than twenty-five at the time they file their application;
2. Background checks for any prior convictions involving fraud, assault, reckless driving or DWI, failure to appear at any immigration hearing, or any past record of voluntary or involuntary deportation. Any such convictions would lead to a presumption of an unsuccessful application;
3. Evidence of the withholding of any relevant information, or submitting false information would result in the automatic failure of an application. Any failure of an application would result in the applicant returning to his previous immigration status;
4. Failure of an application due to withholding information or providing false information would subject the applicant to expedited removal proceedings;
5. Waivers of any requirement connected with the application process could only be made on a case by case basis by the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security setting out in detail the "compelling evidence" underlying such a waiver and the evidence used to support such a determination.
The Permanent Administrative Visa would carry with it the following authorizations:
1. PAV holders would be allowed to legally work and obtain a U.S. passport (on the condition of turning in any other passports) for foreign travel;
2. It would allow holders to establish residency in any state according to that state's requirements and be on equal footing with other legal immigrants with regard to state and local laws and policies;
The Permanent Administrative Visa would carry with it the following prohibitions:
1. Holders of the PAV would not be able to sponsor family members and relatives for LPR status;
2. Holding an PAV would not imply any safe harbor for applicant's family members;
3. Holders of PAVs would not be eligible to receive means-tested public welfare benefits;
4. Holders of PAVs would not be able to adjust their immigration status for a period of 10 years and then only through an administrative hearing in which the holder presented compelling evidence that such an adjustment is in the public interest. Such evidence would consist of, but not be limited to, applicant's work history, community service, military service, family circumstances, and the results of policy and security checks.
A One-time Only Policy: Consistent with the knowledge that adjusting the status of illegal immigrants brings with it the expectation that adjustments of the same kind will be made in the future, the language authorizing this initiative will explicitly state that:
1. That no further adjustments to legal status will be made for children brought into the country illegally after the date on which this bill becomes law;
2. That parents who bring their young children into the country illegally after the date of enactment will be subject to expedited removal proceedings.
girlfriend flower wallpaper hd. lilac
nortam1
09-17 04:15 PM
My receipts say the same...
Anybody knows what it is?
Anybody knows what it is?
hairstyles Beautiful Flower HD Wallpaper
pal351
11-21 05:41 PM
Please share your experiences.
Thanks.
Thanks.
suriajay12
05-07 07:31 AM
ganguteli,
there was a donor conference call a couple of weeks back, in which aman, pappu etc participated.
your thoughts of rally was discussed, but unfortunately the numbers are not quiet adding up as it did during the July 2007 fiasco.
As per what I learned from that discussion was when IV sees the "thousands" as per your quote they are willing to support the rally idea. Otherwise, it may not make the noise as we expect it to do.
Yes, I agree with IV core's line of thought in the "rally" idea. I too wish we can do a "rally" but...:-(
It works more easily the other way. If IV core endorses and supports a rally, then the numbers build up. If you dont start a campaign type of thread, where will the numbers come from. They will scatter here and there. Isnt that the case now.
there was a donor conference call a couple of weeks back, in which aman, pappu etc participated.
your thoughts of rally was discussed, but unfortunately the numbers are not quiet adding up as it did during the July 2007 fiasco.
As per what I learned from that discussion was when IV sees the "thousands" as per your quote they are willing to support the rally idea. Otherwise, it may not make the noise as we expect it to do.
Yes, I agree with IV core's line of thought in the "rally" idea. I too wish we can do a "rally" but...:-(
It works more easily the other way. If IV core endorses and supports a rally, then the numbers build up. If you dont start a campaign type of thread, where will the numbers come from. They will scatter here and there. Isnt that the case now.
Berkeleybee
05-24 11:33 PM
To reinforce our fax campaign, we should start calling the senators and start reinforcing our message to them. Please do not hesitate or be shy of doing this. Now is the time that you can make a difference.
Please stick to directions and talking points, stay on message and be calm, polite. Avoid sarcasm and rhetoric at all costs even if they disagree with you completely.
Here are the instructions of what you should do
Call the Washington DC Phone numbers of the following Senators. Check this post during the day because we may add to this list:
We want to reach them as early as possible before the vote on the Bingaman Amendments S.A. 4181 and 4182 take place. The Senate reconvenes at 9:15 am tomorrow (May 25, Thursday), we do not know at when the vote on these amendments will take place, so call as early as possible:
• John Cornyn (TX) - 202-224-2934
• Ed Kennedy (MA) – 202-224-4543
• Arlen Specter (PA) – 202-224-4254
• John McCain (AZ) – 202-224-2235
• Larry Craig (ID)– 202-224-2752
• Lindsey Graham (SC) –202-224-5972
• Jeff Bingaman (NM) - (202) 224-5521
• Dick Durbin (IL) – 202-224-2152
WHY IT IS OK TO CALL SENATORS WHO ARE NOT FROM YOUR STATE
Even if a senator is not from your state and if that questions comes up during phone call, explain the reason for calling by saying that "Since Immigration laws are federal laws and every senator's vote affects us in all 50 states, your time and the senators support would be highly appreciated".
Once they pick up the phone:
1. Introduce yourself
My name is _______ I am a member of a volunteer organization called Immigration Voice which advocates legislative changes for improving the GC processing for legal immigrants.
I have been a legal resident of the USA for x years and my employer is sponsoring me for a greencard.
2. Ask for the Immigration Counsel/ Staffer
3. Talking Points
• Very Briefly Express Overall Support for the Bill
Request the Senator to support the Comprehensive Immigration Bill, especially those provisions that support the highly skilled immigrants. Reiterate that all of us are LEGAL immigrants and have obeyed the laws of immigration at all times. Reiterate the fact that many of us have been waiting here for more than 5 years to get our green cards.
• Oppose the Bingaman Amendments S.A. 4181 and S.A. 4182
At present the CIR bill has a provision of not counting dependents against the cap. This is the way it should be because employment based visa quotas are properly meant for essential highly skilled workers, they shouldn’t be wasted on their dependents. After all the American business that is trying to stay competitive by hiring this workers is petitioning to get a skilled worker, not a dependent child.
The Bingaman Amendments S.A. 4181 and S.A. 4182 try to once again include dependents in the calculations of the annual quota for employment based highly skilled workers. This is harmful for American competitiveness, and will waste visas meant for highly skilled essential workers on their dependents.
Urge the Senator to vote against these amendments. Remind them that Sen Bingaman’s own PACE Education bill (S. 2198) does not include dependents in the calculation of the annual quota for high skilled workers.
• Thank the staffer for their time.
Post Here. Once you have called these senators, post back here so that it will motivate others to do the same.
Please stick to directions and talking points, stay on message and be calm, polite. Avoid sarcasm and rhetoric at all costs even if they disagree with you completely.
Here are the instructions of what you should do
Call the Washington DC Phone numbers of the following Senators. Check this post during the day because we may add to this list:
We want to reach them as early as possible before the vote on the Bingaman Amendments S.A. 4181 and 4182 take place. The Senate reconvenes at 9:15 am tomorrow (May 25, Thursday), we do not know at when the vote on these amendments will take place, so call as early as possible:
• John Cornyn (TX) - 202-224-2934
• Ed Kennedy (MA) – 202-224-4543
• Arlen Specter (PA) – 202-224-4254
• John McCain (AZ) – 202-224-2235
• Larry Craig (ID)– 202-224-2752
• Lindsey Graham (SC) –202-224-5972
• Jeff Bingaman (NM) - (202) 224-5521
• Dick Durbin (IL) – 202-224-2152
WHY IT IS OK TO CALL SENATORS WHO ARE NOT FROM YOUR STATE
Even if a senator is not from your state and if that questions comes up during phone call, explain the reason for calling by saying that "Since Immigration laws are federal laws and every senator's vote affects us in all 50 states, your time and the senators support would be highly appreciated".
Once they pick up the phone:
1. Introduce yourself
My name is _______ I am a member of a volunteer organization called Immigration Voice which advocates legislative changes for improving the GC processing for legal immigrants.
I have been a legal resident of the USA for x years and my employer is sponsoring me for a greencard.
2. Ask for the Immigration Counsel/ Staffer
3. Talking Points
• Very Briefly Express Overall Support for the Bill
Request the Senator to support the Comprehensive Immigration Bill, especially those provisions that support the highly skilled immigrants. Reiterate that all of us are LEGAL immigrants and have obeyed the laws of immigration at all times. Reiterate the fact that many of us have been waiting here for more than 5 years to get our green cards.
• Oppose the Bingaman Amendments S.A. 4181 and S.A. 4182
At present the CIR bill has a provision of not counting dependents against the cap. This is the way it should be because employment based visa quotas are properly meant for essential highly skilled workers, they shouldn’t be wasted on their dependents. After all the American business that is trying to stay competitive by hiring this workers is petitioning to get a skilled worker, not a dependent child.
The Bingaman Amendments S.A. 4181 and S.A. 4182 try to once again include dependents in the calculations of the annual quota for employment based highly skilled workers. This is harmful for American competitiveness, and will waste visas meant for highly skilled essential workers on their dependents.
Urge the Senator to vote against these amendments. Remind them that Sen Bingaman’s own PACE Education bill (S. 2198) does not include dependents in the calculation of the annual quota for high skilled workers.
• Thank the staffer for their time.
Post Here. Once you have called these senators, post back here so that it will motivate others to do the same.
No comments:
Post a Comment