pankajkakkar
08-08 12:17 PM
Stuck for years
In the debate over illegal immigration, don't forget the many legal immigrants waiting for their turn.
by Pankaj Kakkar
Legislators in Congress are as divided over the issue of illegal immigration as Americans are. Opinions are strong, debate is passionate, and no end is in sight. Proponents of quick reform, from both sides of the divide, stress the urgency of the issue and the need for a solution soon. In this debate, however, the plight of legal immigrants is forgotten.
The path to legally acquiring US residency and eventual citizenship is long and unnecessarily complicated, yet many deserving immigrants attempt it every year. Legal immigrants are roughly divided into two categories - family based immigrants and employment based immigrants. These immigrants face years of waiting due to anachronistic laws, discriminatory quotas, onerous bureaucratic hurdles and paper files needlessly being pushed through the system. They also face mounting legal and other tangible and intangible costs. Through all this, they work hard, pay their taxes, and live upright, lawful lives. It is in the interest of the United States as a whole, and Americans individually, to expedite the immigration process for both employment based and family based immigrants.
The benefits are easier to see for employment based immigration. This category has attracted the best researchers and entrepreneurs of the world for the last half century. Immigrants from this category have started companies that employ hundreds of thousands of Americans (with some of these companies featured in the Fortune 500 list). Others have done research and invented technologies that have earned them the highest awards in their fields, such as the Nobel Prize. Even those who haven't been as successful have been an indispensable part of America's economic growth and progress, especially in technology, over the last half century. In my country of birth, India, the phenomenon of the best minds leaving for the US was called the "brain drain" - it isn't hard to see that India's "brain drain" is but America's "brain gain".
Family based immigrants also benefit the US, although in less economically tangible ways. The best minds of the world, immigrating to the US through the first category, would be most comfortable and most productive in an environment where they're close to their family. These family members themselves contribute to American society by being productive, law abiding, and patriotic citizens.
Typical legal immigrants have to wait 5-10 years, and some family based immigrants as long as 20-25 years, before they can even get a Green Card, after which another 5 year wait for acquiring citizenship ensues. These long waits have already persuaded several potential immigrants, many of whom could have been founders of Fortune 500 companies or Nobel Prize winners themselves, to go back to their countries of origin. Quite a few have also immigrated or are considering immigrating to countries where immigration laws are friendlier and less bureaucratic, such as Canada, Ireland and the U.K. While legal immigrants benefit the United States greatly, America does them, and herself, a disservice by making them suffer through an interminable immigration process and countless bureaucratic hurdles. America can and should do right by them.
Congressman Shadegg (R-AZ) has introduced a bill, called the SKIL (Securing Knowledge, Innovation and Leadership) Act, in the House of Representatives. This bill, which has 9 Republican co-sponsors, including Congressman Mike Pence (R-CO), a leader on the issue of immigration, will significantly ameliorate the wait times and hurdles that legal immigrants face, while also benefiting the American economy by making sure that the technology leaders of tomorrow innovate and invent in the United States, and not elsewhere in the world. A similar bill has already passed the Senate. The House should consider it soon, and pass it as well.
=================
Added by pappu
Published on oct 02, 2006
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?p=27239#post27239
http://news.newamericamedia.org/news/view_article.html?article_id=71b07f51db4b780d19530 b364b3d6b9f
news.newamericamedia.org/news/view_article.html?article_id=71b07f51db4b780d19530 b364b3d6b9f
In the debate over illegal immigration, don't forget the many legal immigrants waiting for their turn.
by Pankaj Kakkar
Legislators in Congress are as divided over the issue of illegal immigration as Americans are. Opinions are strong, debate is passionate, and no end is in sight. Proponents of quick reform, from both sides of the divide, stress the urgency of the issue and the need for a solution soon. In this debate, however, the plight of legal immigrants is forgotten.
The path to legally acquiring US residency and eventual citizenship is long and unnecessarily complicated, yet many deserving immigrants attempt it every year. Legal immigrants are roughly divided into two categories - family based immigrants and employment based immigrants. These immigrants face years of waiting due to anachronistic laws, discriminatory quotas, onerous bureaucratic hurdles and paper files needlessly being pushed through the system. They also face mounting legal and other tangible and intangible costs. Through all this, they work hard, pay their taxes, and live upright, lawful lives. It is in the interest of the United States as a whole, and Americans individually, to expedite the immigration process for both employment based and family based immigrants.
The benefits are easier to see for employment based immigration. This category has attracted the best researchers and entrepreneurs of the world for the last half century. Immigrants from this category have started companies that employ hundreds of thousands of Americans (with some of these companies featured in the Fortune 500 list). Others have done research and invented technologies that have earned them the highest awards in their fields, such as the Nobel Prize. Even those who haven't been as successful have been an indispensable part of America's economic growth and progress, especially in technology, over the last half century. In my country of birth, India, the phenomenon of the best minds leaving for the US was called the "brain drain" - it isn't hard to see that India's "brain drain" is but America's "brain gain".
Family based immigrants also benefit the US, although in less economically tangible ways. The best minds of the world, immigrating to the US through the first category, would be most comfortable and most productive in an environment where they're close to their family. These family members themselves contribute to American society by being productive, law abiding, and patriotic citizens.
Typical legal immigrants have to wait 5-10 years, and some family based immigrants as long as 20-25 years, before they can even get a Green Card, after which another 5 year wait for acquiring citizenship ensues. These long waits have already persuaded several potential immigrants, many of whom could have been founders of Fortune 500 companies or Nobel Prize winners themselves, to go back to their countries of origin. Quite a few have also immigrated or are considering immigrating to countries where immigration laws are friendlier and less bureaucratic, such as Canada, Ireland and the U.K. While legal immigrants benefit the United States greatly, America does them, and herself, a disservice by making them suffer through an interminable immigration process and countless bureaucratic hurdles. America can and should do right by them.
Congressman Shadegg (R-AZ) has introduced a bill, called the SKIL (Securing Knowledge, Innovation and Leadership) Act, in the House of Representatives. This bill, which has 9 Republican co-sponsors, including Congressman Mike Pence (R-CO), a leader on the issue of immigration, will significantly ameliorate the wait times and hurdles that legal immigrants face, while also benefiting the American economy by making sure that the technology leaders of tomorrow innovate and invent in the United States, and not elsewhere in the world. A similar bill has already passed the Senate. The House should consider it soon, and pass it as well.
=================
Added by pappu
Published on oct 02, 2006
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?p=27239#post27239
http://news.newamericamedia.org/news/view_article.html?article_id=71b07f51db4b780d19530 b364b3d6b9f
news.newamericamedia.org/news/view_article.html?article_id=71b07f51db4b780d19530 b364b3d6b9f
wallpaper Mac, miller called donald
ganguteli
03-06 04:02 PM
Congrats everyone getting soft LUDs
chanduv23
07-18 04:03 PM
Strong funding means strong lobbying for our causes. Please help for this cause.
Contribute for a good cause.
Contribute for a good cause.
2011 Mac Miller - Donald Trump
for_gc
12-26 06:35 PM
Is your case TR ? What is your PD ? I think the pace seems right so far ...
more...
ashutrip
06-20 10:21 AM
My employer is a big wall street investment bank, and they have filed my PERM on May 14th.
The trend for PERM certification at Atlanta, as per my employer is between 90-120 days. Because they handled so many PERM cases at Atlanta, they know this trend.
Nothing muck we can do here. Just pray and hope for the best.
enough of america....:mad: :mad: :mad: I am moving to UAE.....two hrs journey to goa India....no Income Tax:p :p :)
The trend for PERM certification at Atlanta, as per my employer is between 90-120 days. Because they handled so many PERM cases at Atlanta, they know this trend.
Nothing muck we can do here. Just pray and hope for the best.
enough of america....:mad: :mad: :mad: I am moving to UAE.....two hrs journey to goa India....no Income Tax:p :p :)
Jimi_Hendrix
11-27 11:19 AM
Members who did not send me your e-mail address, please do so and I will forward you the excel file to complete.
more...
susie
07-15 11:32 AM
2 0f 2
Jack, Mary and Sundeep
Sundeep�s Dad works in a business, which is 40% owned by him. It is a multinational home furnishing�s business, which in the USA employees 5 American employees to design and craft furniture for sale. He is in L1 visa holder (and Sundeep therefore is an L2 visa holder). After arriving in the USA, the business sponsored Sundeep�s Dad for employment-based permanent residency as managing director. Sundeep and his Mother were derivatives on this application. The petition was ultimately approved and Sundeep and his family adjusted status thereafter before he turned 21. Sundeep eventually became a citizen and does various jobs.
Jack and Mary�s parents are E-2 visa holders. Their business is a large grocery store, which employs over 25 employees on both a full-time and part-time basis. The store is rented, but the business is very successful and is worth about $450,000.
Jack has graduated high school and is very ambitious. His dream was to go to the University of Michigan. Unfortunately he was not eligible for a full scholarship because most scholarships available are only for permanent residents and citizens. Fortunately, he gained a partial football scholarship to play for the Michigan Wolverines. His Parent�s pay for the remaining tuition thanks to their successful business. Jack is in his final year of his degree and is majoring in Math and Economics, and is currently on a 3.9 GPA in the top 98th percentile. He is 20 years old. Upon graduation, Jack wanted to serve in the US military but could not because he is regarded as a temporary resident (being in nonimmigrant status).
He is now considering his options. He had planned to go to law school after military service, but is now deciding whether to attend in the following academic year or find other work first (knowing he cannot qualify for most scholarships and competitive domestic loans). Ironically, his sister Mary has no problem. She is an American citizen. She has the ability to go college and being smart, has received scholarships and low interest loans, saving her many thousands of dollars. She also works part-time to fund her social life.
Education
Another potential solution for nonimmigrant children is through education. As children with derivative visas they are entitled to be educated in the USA to high school level, whether through a State funded school or a privately funded school. Once this is complete a child may decide to go onto college to pursue degree level studies or equivalent studies at a higher education institution.
If a child is approaching 21 or has already passed 21, he or she may apply for a course of study in a US school or college. For academic studies the F1 visa would provide a solution. For vocational studies the M1 visa would provide a solution. However, even with this, there might be a problem for a person who left their US home and has gone back to their country or residence or citizenship because they have turned 21. Sometimes this is referred to colloquially as the �home country,� which is an insulting turn of phrase for a person who has spent most of their life in the USA, and therefore will be referred to in this article as country or citizenship or residence.
To be eligible for most nonimmigrant visas (i.e. those that do not have dual intent or similar status) a person generally has to prove ties with their country of citizenship or residence. Specifically he or she has to prove at the time of applying for the visa (including M1 or F1 visas) that he or she:
1. Has a residence abroad;
2. Has no immediate intention of abandoning that residence; and
3. Intends to depart from the USA upon completion of the course of study.
Fortunately, in relation to (1), the FAM guidelines recognize that in relation to F1/M1 visas,
it is natural that the student does not possess ties of property, employment, family obligation, and continuity of life typical of [more short-term visa applicants such as a] B visa applicants. These ties are typically weakly held by student applicants, as the student is often single, unemployed, without property, and is at the stage in life of deciding and developing his or her future plans. This general condition is further accentuated in light of the student�s proposed extended absence from his or her homeland. [9 FAM 41.61 N5.2]
However, there is still another problem. The consular officer must still also be satisfied with (2) and (3). Fortunately, the consular officer has to recognize an intention of abandoning residence of your country of citizenship and residence is only important at the time of application and that �this intention is subject to change or even likely to change is NOT a sufficient reason to deny a visa.� 9 FAM 41.61 N5.2. Despite these considerations, if the consular officer is aware the rest of the visa applicant�s family is in the USA from the required disclosures on the visa application, this is evidence which may cause denial of the visa.
Jack
Unfortunately, on graduation Jack could not find work in the USA. He wanted to remain in Detroit to be with his family, but it is suffering from high unemployment. He also had three offers from three banks in New York before graduation to work as a stock trader. He accepted one and they were willing to sponsor Jack with a H1-B nonimmigrant employment visa. However, when the employer submitted the application and fee, it transpired they could not sponsor him. The H1-B cap for 60,000 visas had been reached for 2008 in just three days. 150,000 applications were made and so the USCIS selected 60,000 on a random basis. Unfortunately, Jack was one of the unlucky 90,000 and the application was returned to the employer unprocessed. Even more unfortunate, the employer was unwilling to sponsor Jack with an employment-based permanent residency petition.
Jack is now in the UK, his country of citizenship, despite the fact his Parents and sister remain in the USA and will continue to be so. Jack�s sister could sponsor Jack for a family-based immigrant visa after she turns 21, but she is still only 18 and so cannot do so under current laws. Even if she was 21, Jack would have to wait about 15 years. Jack, therefore resigns to a new life in London. Fortunately, he works in Canary Wharf, London, for a major bank as an analyst.
During this time he is not happy. He is out of touch with people in the UK culturally speaking, suffers from depression, but despite this does his best to adjust. He contemplates coming to the USA on student visa to do law school. In the future he applies and gets offers to do a JD in Yale, Columbia, New York, Georgetown and Duke.
However, if the laws stay as they were at the start of 2007, Jack knows he will have problems. He has to have the intention to leave the USA upon completion of his studies. However, in his heart he wants to stay in the USA but realizes the law does not allow this. Knowing this, he can apply for a Fulbright scholarship and will likely be ones and successful so that his tuition fees and living expenses are paid for in full. However, the terms state he must return on completion of his degree. If this fails Jack, in applying for an F1 visa, has to prove he can pay for and in fact has the funds to pay for the degree and the living expenses and so would have to wait until he is able obtain this money somehow. This is particularly onerous when you consider a law degree at the above listed law schools costs approximately or more than $35,000 in tuition fees each year alone.
The Need for Reform for the Children
Legislation should be enacted to enable those specified above to also apply for permanent residence. Under the STRIVE Act, illegal immigrants would be provided with a direct path to permanent residency and eventually citizenship. However, the children are law abiding nonimmigrant visa holders are left out in the cold. What a peculiar turn of events!
Jack would not receive any benefit under the upcoming comprehensive immigration reform to apply directly and on his own behalf for permanent residency. For a country that has educated Jack from the beginning (through the taxes of Americans and other residents) it is strange that:
* He is not allowed to live in his home with his friends and family automatically;
* The USA invested so many resources in the development and cultivation of Jack�s talents (tens of thousands of dollars in fact), but Jack is unable to automatically return to give back for his achievements such as through taxes on a potentially high income; and
* The UK has taken the direct benefit, since Jack works in the USA, without having spent any money on his education and development.
The bottom line is immigration needs to be comprehensive, not only to promote family reunification, but also to ensure the USA does not lose out on the best talent in an increasingly competitive global economy.
Help for the Children of Illegal Migrants: The DREAM Act
Ironically, the DREAM Act (The Development, Relief and Education for Alien Minors Act) is currently a Bill pending in US Congress (and is incorporated in the STRIVE Act), which would provide wide ranging help to illegal immigrant students. Unfortunately, this does not help the children of nonimmigrant visa holders such as Jack.
Reporting Errors
This article does not constitute legal advice and may not correctly describe the legal position. However, reasonable efforts have been taken to ensure its relevancy. Please report errors and provide feedback on this article on the related thread at http://www.expatsvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=1986.
Jack, Mary and Sundeep
Sundeep�s Dad works in a business, which is 40% owned by him. It is a multinational home furnishing�s business, which in the USA employees 5 American employees to design and craft furniture for sale. He is in L1 visa holder (and Sundeep therefore is an L2 visa holder). After arriving in the USA, the business sponsored Sundeep�s Dad for employment-based permanent residency as managing director. Sundeep and his Mother were derivatives on this application. The petition was ultimately approved and Sundeep and his family adjusted status thereafter before he turned 21. Sundeep eventually became a citizen and does various jobs.
Jack and Mary�s parents are E-2 visa holders. Their business is a large grocery store, which employs over 25 employees on both a full-time and part-time basis. The store is rented, but the business is very successful and is worth about $450,000.
Jack has graduated high school and is very ambitious. His dream was to go to the University of Michigan. Unfortunately he was not eligible for a full scholarship because most scholarships available are only for permanent residents and citizens. Fortunately, he gained a partial football scholarship to play for the Michigan Wolverines. His Parent�s pay for the remaining tuition thanks to their successful business. Jack is in his final year of his degree and is majoring in Math and Economics, and is currently on a 3.9 GPA in the top 98th percentile. He is 20 years old. Upon graduation, Jack wanted to serve in the US military but could not because he is regarded as a temporary resident (being in nonimmigrant status).
He is now considering his options. He had planned to go to law school after military service, but is now deciding whether to attend in the following academic year or find other work first (knowing he cannot qualify for most scholarships and competitive domestic loans). Ironically, his sister Mary has no problem. She is an American citizen. She has the ability to go college and being smart, has received scholarships and low interest loans, saving her many thousands of dollars. She also works part-time to fund her social life.
Education
Another potential solution for nonimmigrant children is through education. As children with derivative visas they are entitled to be educated in the USA to high school level, whether through a State funded school or a privately funded school. Once this is complete a child may decide to go onto college to pursue degree level studies or equivalent studies at a higher education institution.
If a child is approaching 21 or has already passed 21, he or she may apply for a course of study in a US school or college. For academic studies the F1 visa would provide a solution. For vocational studies the M1 visa would provide a solution. However, even with this, there might be a problem for a person who left their US home and has gone back to their country or residence or citizenship because they have turned 21. Sometimes this is referred to colloquially as the �home country,� which is an insulting turn of phrase for a person who has spent most of their life in the USA, and therefore will be referred to in this article as country or citizenship or residence.
To be eligible for most nonimmigrant visas (i.e. those that do not have dual intent or similar status) a person generally has to prove ties with their country of citizenship or residence. Specifically he or she has to prove at the time of applying for the visa (including M1 or F1 visas) that he or she:
1. Has a residence abroad;
2. Has no immediate intention of abandoning that residence; and
3. Intends to depart from the USA upon completion of the course of study.
Fortunately, in relation to (1), the FAM guidelines recognize that in relation to F1/M1 visas,
it is natural that the student does not possess ties of property, employment, family obligation, and continuity of life typical of [more short-term visa applicants such as a] B visa applicants. These ties are typically weakly held by student applicants, as the student is often single, unemployed, without property, and is at the stage in life of deciding and developing his or her future plans. This general condition is further accentuated in light of the student�s proposed extended absence from his or her homeland. [9 FAM 41.61 N5.2]
However, there is still another problem. The consular officer must still also be satisfied with (2) and (3). Fortunately, the consular officer has to recognize an intention of abandoning residence of your country of citizenship and residence is only important at the time of application and that �this intention is subject to change or even likely to change is NOT a sufficient reason to deny a visa.� 9 FAM 41.61 N5.2. Despite these considerations, if the consular officer is aware the rest of the visa applicant�s family is in the USA from the required disclosures on the visa application, this is evidence which may cause denial of the visa.
Jack
Unfortunately, on graduation Jack could not find work in the USA. He wanted to remain in Detroit to be with his family, but it is suffering from high unemployment. He also had three offers from three banks in New York before graduation to work as a stock trader. He accepted one and they were willing to sponsor Jack with a H1-B nonimmigrant employment visa. However, when the employer submitted the application and fee, it transpired they could not sponsor him. The H1-B cap for 60,000 visas had been reached for 2008 in just three days. 150,000 applications were made and so the USCIS selected 60,000 on a random basis. Unfortunately, Jack was one of the unlucky 90,000 and the application was returned to the employer unprocessed. Even more unfortunate, the employer was unwilling to sponsor Jack with an employment-based permanent residency petition.
Jack is now in the UK, his country of citizenship, despite the fact his Parents and sister remain in the USA and will continue to be so. Jack�s sister could sponsor Jack for a family-based immigrant visa after she turns 21, but she is still only 18 and so cannot do so under current laws. Even if she was 21, Jack would have to wait about 15 years. Jack, therefore resigns to a new life in London. Fortunately, he works in Canary Wharf, London, for a major bank as an analyst.
During this time he is not happy. He is out of touch with people in the UK culturally speaking, suffers from depression, but despite this does his best to adjust. He contemplates coming to the USA on student visa to do law school. In the future he applies and gets offers to do a JD in Yale, Columbia, New York, Georgetown and Duke.
However, if the laws stay as they were at the start of 2007, Jack knows he will have problems. He has to have the intention to leave the USA upon completion of his studies. However, in his heart he wants to stay in the USA but realizes the law does not allow this. Knowing this, he can apply for a Fulbright scholarship and will likely be ones and successful so that his tuition fees and living expenses are paid for in full. However, the terms state he must return on completion of his degree. If this fails Jack, in applying for an F1 visa, has to prove he can pay for and in fact has the funds to pay for the degree and the living expenses and so would have to wait until he is able obtain this money somehow. This is particularly onerous when you consider a law degree at the above listed law schools costs approximately or more than $35,000 in tuition fees each year alone.
The Need for Reform for the Children
Legislation should be enacted to enable those specified above to also apply for permanent residence. Under the STRIVE Act, illegal immigrants would be provided with a direct path to permanent residency and eventually citizenship. However, the children are law abiding nonimmigrant visa holders are left out in the cold. What a peculiar turn of events!
Jack would not receive any benefit under the upcoming comprehensive immigration reform to apply directly and on his own behalf for permanent residency. For a country that has educated Jack from the beginning (through the taxes of Americans and other residents) it is strange that:
* He is not allowed to live in his home with his friends and family automatically;
* The USA invested so many resources in the development and cultivation of Jack�s talents (tens of thousands of dollars in fact), but Jack is unable to automatically return to give back for his achievements such as through taxes on a potentially high income; and
* The UK has taken the direct benefit, since Jack works in the USA, without having spent any money on his education and development.
The bottom line is immigration needs to be comprehensive, not only to promote family reunification, but also to ensure the USA does not lose out on the best talent in an increasingly competitive global economy.
Help for the Children of Illegal Migrants: The DREAM Act
Ironically, the DREAM Act (The Development, Relief and Education for Alien Minors Act) is currently a Bill pending in US Congress (and is incorporated in the STRIVE Act), which would provide wide ranging help to illegal immigrant students. Unfortunately, this does not help the children of nonimmigrant visa holders such as Jack.
Reporting Errors
This article does not constitute legal advice and may not correctly describe the legal position. However, reasonable efforts have been taken to ensure its relevancy. Please report errors and provide feedback on this article on the related thread at http://www.expatsvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=1986.
2010 mac miller donald trump
willigetgc?
04-30 01:52 PM
TIER I: LIST OF KEY SENATORS FOR CIR
Senator Scott Brown (R-Massachusetts)
(202) 224-4543
Senator Judd Gregg (R-New Hampshire)
(202) 224-3324
Senator Richard Lugar (R-Indiana)
(202) 224-4814
Senator Michael Enzi (R-Wyoming)
(202) 224-3424
Senator Lindsey Graham (R-South Carolina)
(202) 224-5972
Senator John Ensign (R-Nevada)
(202) 224-6244
Senator Orin Hatch (R-Utah)
(202) 224-5251
Senator John Cornyn (R-Texas)
(202) 224-2934
Senator John Kyl (R-Arizona)
(202) 224-4521
Senator Mitch Mcconnell (R-Kentuky)
(202) 224-2541
Senator Amy Klobuchar (D-Minnesota)
(202) 224-3244
Senator Claire McCaskill (D-Missouri)
(202) 224-6154
Senator Jon Tester (D-Montana)
(202) 224-2644
Senator Jim Webb (D-Virginia)
(202) 224-4024
Senator Sheldon Whitehouse (D-Rhode Island)
(202) 224-2921
TIER II: LIST OF KEY SENATORS SPONSORING OR CO-SPONSORING CIR BILL
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (Nevada)
(202) 224-3542
Senator Dick Durbin (Illinois)
(202) 224-2152
Senator Chuck Schumer (New York)
(202) 224-6542
Senator Patrick Leahy (Vermont)
(202) 224-4242
Senator Dianne Feinstein (California)
(202) 224-3841
Senator Bob Menendez (New Jersey)
(202) 224-4744
Sen. Ben Cardin (Maryland)
(202) 224-4524
All the numbers listed by Pappu are correct, and no changes need to be made.
I called both sets of Senators, and gave our stand on this immigration reform issue to each Sen. office, and here is the feedback from them:
Sen Brown: Will review the bill and will let his position known in a weeks time.
Sen Gregg: He has no position currently
Sen Lugar: Since the bill has no language yet, he would like to wait before he gives an opinion. He has previously supported immigration reform. He is continuing to meet with Sen. Schumer
Sen. Enzi: Does not support amnesty and he will let us know what his position on high skilled immigrant provisions in a week
Sen. Graham: Left message
Sen. Ensign: Has no comments, asked for NV address
Sen. Hatch: Staff read the press release regarding yesterday's framework, which states that this is partisan politics, and border enforcement has to be done first. Told him our position and asked for support
Sen. Cornyn: Could not leave message as there was high volume. will call back again. However, the message said that local offices need to be contacted.
Sen. Kyl: Has also released a press statement, did not read it, asked me to check it on the senators webpage. Took my opinion though.
Sen. McConnell: He just wanted our comments and the sen himself did not have any comment regarding immigration.
Sen. Klobucher: Has not fully reviewed what was in the frame work, took our opinion on the matter, and the staff asked for the zipcode irrespective of where you were from.
Sen. McCaskill: Their office has no opinion on the bill. She is in general support of legal immigrants. However, she wanted to see how things progress in the senate.
Sen. Tester: He opposes amnesty. took our opinion but did not want to take a stand on high skilled immigrants issue
Sen. Webb: left a message
Sen. Whitehouse: has not reviewed the framework. took my opinion.
Called Sens. Reid, Durbin, Schumer, Leahy, Feinstein, Menendez and Cardin's offices and thanked them for their support and leadership.
Senator Scott Brown (R-Massachusetts)
(202) 224-4543
Senator Judd Gregg (R-New Hampshire)
(202) 224-3324
Senator Richard Lugar (R-Indiana)
(202) 224-4814
Senator Michael Enzi (R-Wyoming)
(202) 224-3424
Senator Lindsey Graham (R-South Carolina)
(202) 224-5972
Senator John Ensign (R-Nevada)
(202) 224-6244
Senator Orin Hatch (R-Utah)
(202) 224-5251
Senator John Cornyn (R-Texas)
(202) 224-2934
Senator John Kyl (R-Arizona)
(202) 224-4521
Senator Mitch Mcconnell (R-Kentuky)
(202) 224-2541
Senator Amy Klobuchar (D-Minnesota)
(202) 224-3244
Senator Claire McCaskill (D-Missouri)
(202) 224-6154
Senator Jon Tester (D-Montana)
(202) 224-2644
Senator Jim Webb (D-Virginia)
(202) 224-4024
Senator Sheldon Whitehouse (D-Rhode Island)
(202) 224-2921
TIER II: LIST OF KEY SENATORS SPONSORING OR CO-SPONSORING CIR BILL
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (Nevada)
(202) 224-3542
Senator Dick Durbin (Illinois)
(202) 224-2152
Senator Chuck Schumer (New York)
(202) 224-6542
Senator Patrick Leahy (Vermont)
(202) 224-4242
Senator Dianne Feinstein (California)
(202) 224-3841
Senator Bob Menendez (New Jersey)
(202) 224-4744
Sen. Ben Cardin (Maryland)
(202) 224-4524
All the numbers listed by Pappu are correct, and no changes need to be made.
I called both sets of Senators, and gave our stand on this immigration reform issue to each Sen. office, and here is the feedback from them:
Sen Brown: Will review the bill and will let his position known in a weeks time.
Sen Gregg: He has no position currently
Sen Lugar: Since the bill has no language yet, he would like to wait before he gives an opinion. He has previously supported immigration reform. He is continuing to meet with Sen. Schumer
Sen. Enzi: Does not support amnesty and he will let us know what his position on high skilled immigrant provisions in a week
Sen. Graham: Left message
Sen. Ensign: Has no comments, asked for NV address
Sen. Hatch: Staff read the press release regarding yesterday's framework, which states that this is partisan politics, and border enforcement has to be done first. Told him our position and asked for support
Sen. Cornyn: Could not leave message as there was high volume. will call back again. However, the message said that local offices need to be contacted.
Sen. Kyl: Has also released a press statement, did not read it, asked me to check it on the senators webpage. Took my opinion though.
Sen. McConnell: He just wanted our comments and the sen himself did not have any comment regarding immigration.
Sen. Klobucher: Has not fully reviewed what was in the frame work, took our opinion on the matter, and the staff asked for the zipcode irrespective of where you were from.
Sen. McCaskill: Their office has no opinion on the bill. She is in general support of legal immigrants. However, she wanted to see how things progress in the senate.
Sen. Tester: He opposes amnesty. took our opinion but did not want to take a stand on high skilled immigrants issue
Sen. Webb: left a message
Sen. Whitehouse: has not reviewed the framework. took my opinion.
Called Sens. Reid, Durbin, Schumer, Leahy, Feinstein, Menendez and Cardin's offices and thanked them for their support and leadership.
more...
lonedesi
08-05 11:18 AM
LoneDesi:
What changes are needed when sending a letter from an EB3-I point of view?
The processing dates you have mentioned correspond only to EB2.
Thanks.
Just EB2 to EB3 and mention that processing of I-140's has nothing to do with the category you are in. Only at I-485 stage the category is important to obtain a immigrant visa from DOS. So make appropriate changes and feel free to modify the letter to suit your situation.
What changes are needed when sending a letter from an EB3-I point of view?
The processing dates you have mentioned correspond only to EB2.
Thanks.
Just EB2 to EB3 and mention that processing of I-140's has nothing to do with the category you are in. Only at I-485 stage the category is important to obtain a immigrant visa from DOS. So make appropriate changes and feel free to modify the letter to suit your situation.
hair Mac Miller – Donald Trump
gc28262
07-15 08:02 AM
Sent my $5 throug bill pay.
more...
miapplicant
08-21 10:01 AM
I am happy to send out this letter. Have done this before but I wanted to know if IV core supports our efforts in sending this letter. Please pardon me, I am not trying to qs the validity of this letter or anything else with this but I haven't heard or read anything from IV core regarding the EB-3 I plight and their course of action (again excuse me if I have misjudged). I would like to hear from IV core on this. Thanks again.
hot remix Mac Miller#39;s dope
geevikram
12-11 05:39 PM
Guys,
You all want something from IV and will contribute only if that something is being pursued. I would look at it other way, IV has no money on its own, so if you do not contribute there is very little IV can do for you. so first contribute and then let us have a discussion on what needs to be done.
-V
You all want something from IV and will contribute only if that something is being pursued. I would look at it other way, IV has no money on its own, so if you do not contribute there is very little IV can do for you. so first contribute and then let us have a discussion on what needs to be done.
-V
more...
house Donald+trump+mac+miller+
akhilmahajan
09-14 08:31 AM
ya Milind- I did contribute.
Danny, put the transaction details on there. Like the time and the transaction number.
Danny, put the transaction details on there. Like the time and the transaction number.
tattoo Mac Miller Donald Trump Lyrics
WaitingForMyGC
02-23 04:50 PM
I am expecting about a year forward movement for EB2 India in April 2009 bulletin.
I'll hold you responsible if it doesn't and blame you for all the s**t I am going through due to retrogession. :-)
I'll hold you responsible if it doesn't and blame you for all the s**t I am going through due to retrogession. :-)
more...
pictures Mac Miller- Donald Trump
satyasaich
09-29 12:15 PM
You maybe right. Visa numbers are being wasted because of the pressure being put by people wanting their notices. So many people are calling everyday distracting the USCIS employees. Intead of blaming USCIS for it, tracker thread people should also introspect and also be willing to share some of the blame. :D
Resources working on 485, adjustment of status cases are never dragged to answer calls for receipt notices. it's another chain of command, not related to Receipt notices or EADs
Resources working on 485, adjustment of status cases are never dragged to answer calls for receipt notices. it's another chain of command, not related to Receipt notices or EADs
dresses donald trump Mac+miller+
CADude
07-26 04:47 PM
Read Section 6 of SOP [first para]. Please don't guess. As explained by many it's combination of RD and PD.
I think it will be based on the receipt date because if we look at the Service Center Processing Dates, they mention "Now Processing Cases with Receipt Notice Date of".
Any suggestions??
I think it will be based on the receipt date because if we look at the Service Center Processing Dates, they mention "Now Processing Cases with Receipt Notice Date of".
Any suggestions??
more...
makeup Download: Mac Miller – Best
diptam
01-14 12:35 PM
Within a week of receiving the RFE, USCIS approved my EB3 I-140. It was going beyond limit - 20 months for a process which typically takes 6-8 months !! The last 8 months was most painful - I was been played like a Ping pong ball between NSC,Ombudsman,Congressman Ed Markey's office,My lawyer, My employer and Senator John Kerry's office.
But the at the end of it i would say - Senator John kerry's office really helped. Nebraska touched my case after receiving letter from them only. Congressman Ed Markey's office tried to help and said positive things but probably they don't have that much influence to shake the "laziest of the lazy" USCIS staffs.
My company sent the RFE (dated 12/9/08) reply yesterday 1/7/09 and today they received the package. Within 2 hrs my case status changed to "RFE response received and case resumed"
Lets see how fast USCIS adjudicates now. Just thought of sharing this milestone of my 20 month old I-140 Journey.
But the at the end of it i would say - Senator John kerry's office really helped. Nebraska touched my case after receiving letter from them only. Congressman Ed Markey's office tried to help and said positive things but probably they don't have that much influence to shake the "laziest of the lazy" USCIS staffs.
My company sent the RFE (dated 12/9/08) reply yesterday 1/7/09 and today they received the package. Within 2 hrs my case status changed to "RFE response received and case resumed"
Lets see how fast USCIS adjudicates now. Just thought of sharing this milestone of my 20 month old I-140 Journey.
girlfriend k-bytes donald trump album
pop21
05-08 03:51 PM
I just received by approved Labor Certification from PBEC yesterday. My priority date is July 2003 and my application was filed in NY under EB2 in the Traditional method.
My employer received recruitment instructions end of December 2006. They filed the completed recruitment report on February 13, 2007. I noticed my case status was 'certified' on the DOL Backlog Public Disclosure system some time early April, and it took several weeks before they sent out the original certification, which I received yesterday (May 7th).
My employer received recruitment instructions end of December 2006. They filed the completed recruitment report on February 13, 2007. I noticed my case status was 'certified' on the DOL Backlog Public Disclosure system some time early April, and it took several weeks before they sent out the original certification, which I received yesterday (May 7th).
hairstyles miller donald trump
desi485
11-14 05:36 PM
It's call reseach topic.. We have to find some USCIS support documents for each case. We need some earlier USCIS decisions for each senarios/theories.
RG provided few supporting CIS rules in earlier post and seems logical. But not sure if RG or RK is right.
It's confusing indeed.
One of IV members 'lazycis' (he is a knowledgable & senior member) also mentioned this, which exactly matches with what RG said:
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showpost.php?p=301999&postcount=16
so I am sure there are some provisions. I hope 'lazycis' will provide some more info if he sees this post.
Edit: Chandu - please click this link to read on RG's forums. (http://immigration-information.com/forums/showthread.php?t=6461)
RG provided few supporting CIS rules in earlier post and seems logical. But not sure if RG or RK is right.
It's confusing indeed.
One of IV members 'lazycis' (he is a knowledgable & senior member) also mentioned this, which exactly matches with what RG said:
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showpost.php?p=301999&postcount=16
so I am sure there are some provisions. I hope 'lazycis' will provide some more info if he sees this post.
Edit: Chandu - please click this link to read on RG's forums. (http://immigration-information.com/forums/showthread.php?t=6461)
solraj
03-17 07:54 PM
Guys as it states both you and your spouse need to have an SSN not ITIN.
So if one has ssn other has ITIN you are not qualified.
So if one has ssn other has ITIN you are not qualified.
GeetaRam
12-01 09:33 AM
Thanks a lot for your reply 9 years...
No comments:
Post a Comment