alg
12-11 01:47 PM
The first time, my husband and I were asked all kinds of questions by the secondary CIS officer at LAX, and was asked NOT to do our own copies of the original AP, that we are not supposed to do copies of official documents. He kept and use our copies anyway. The stamp in the AP extended it for a year after this entry.
Two weeks later, upon arriving again at LAX, the secondary CIS officer did not ask any questions and did not make copies of the AP. We just got another stamp on the original one extending its validity again for one year from date of entry. It went pretty fast.
Two weeks later, upon arriving again at LAX, the secondary CIS officer did not ask any questions and did not make copies of the AP. We just got another stamp on the original one extending its validity again for one year from date of entry. It went pretty fast.
wallpaper lebron james wallpaper 2011
santa123
09-05 12:12 AM
LOL at this thread:D
waltz
08-24 02:05 PM
I'm sorry if this has been posted before, but the show is based on the following study:
************************************************
Kauffman Foundation Study Points to �Brain-Drain� of Skilled U.S. Immigrant Entrepreneurs to Home Country
Contacts:
Barbara Pruitt, 816-932-1288, bpruitt@kauffman.org, Kauffman Foundation
Tom Phillips, 212-935-4655, comptwp@aol.com, Communication Partners
More than a million skilled foreign nationals in the United States, including doctors and scientists, face mounting visa backlog
(KANSAS CITY, Mo.) Aug. 22, 2007 � More than one million skilled immigrant workers, including scientists, engineers, doctors and researchers and their families, are competing for 120,000 permanent U.S. resident visas each year, creating a sizeable imbalance likely to fuel a �reverse brain-drain� with skilled workers returning to their home country, according to a new report released today by the Ewing Marion Kauffman Foundation.
The situation is even bleaker as the number of employment visas issued to immigrants from any single country is less than 10,000 per year with a wait time of several years.
�The United States benefits from having foreign-born innovators create their ideas in this country,� said Vivek Wadhwa, Wertheim fellow with the Harvard Law School and executive in residence at Duke University. �Their departures would be detrimental to U.S. economic well-being. And, when foreigners come to the United States, collaborate with Americans in developing and patenting new ideas, and employ those ideas in business in ways they could not readily do in their home countries, the world benefits.�
Conducted by researchers at Duke University, New York University and Harvard University, the study is the third in a series of studies focusing on immigrants� contributions to the competitiveness of the U.S. economy. Earlier research revealed a dramatic increase in the contributions of foreign nationals to U.S. intellectual property over an eight-year period.
In this study, "Intellectual Property, the Immigration Backlog, and a Reverse Brain-Drain," researchers offer a more refined measure of this rise in contributions of foreign nationals to U.S. intellectual property and seek to explain this increase with an analysis of the immigrant-visa backlog for skilled workers. The key finding from this research is that the number of skilled workers waiting for visas is significantly larger than the number that can be admitted to the United States. This imbalance creates the potential for a sizeable reverse brain-drain from the United States to the skilled workers� home countries.
The earlier studies, �America�s New Immigrant Entrepreneurs� and �Entrepreneurship, Education and Immigration: America�s New Immigrant Entrepreneurs, Part II,� documented that one in four engineering and technology companies founded between 1995 and 2005 had an immigrant founder. Researchers found that these companies employed 450,000 workers and generated $52 billion in revenue in 2006. Indian immigrants founded more companies than the next four groups (from the United Kingdom, China, Taiwan and Japan) combined.
Furthermore, these companies� founders tended to be highly educated in science, technology, math and engineering-related disciplines, with 96 percent holding bachelor�s degrees and 75 percent holding master�s or PhD degrees.
Among key findings in the most recent report:
Foreign nationals residing in the United States were named as inventors or co-inventors in 25.6 percent of international patent applications filed from the United States in 2006. This represents an increase from 7.6 percent in 1998.
Foreign nationals contributed to more than half of the international patents filed by a number of large, multi-national companies, including Qualcomm (72 percent), Merck & Co. (65 percent), General Electric (64 percent), Siemens (63 percent) and Cisco (60 percent). Forty-one percent of the patents filed by the U.S. government had foreign nationals as inventors or co-inventors.
In 2006, 16.8 percent of international patent applications from the United States had an inventor or co-inventor with a Chinese-heritage name, representing an increase from 11.2 percent in 1998. The contribution of inventors with Indian-heritage names increased to 13.7 percent from 9.5 percent in the same period.
The total number of employment-based principals in the employment-based categories and their family members waiting for legal permanent residence in the United States in 2006 was estimated at 1,055,084. Additionally, there are an estimated 126,421 residents abroad also waiting for employment-based U.S. legal permanent residence, adding up to a worldwide total of 1,181,505.
Using data from the New Immigrant Survey, the authors find that, in 2003, approximately one in five new legal immigrants in the United States and about one in three employment-based new legal immigrants either planned to leave the United States or were uncertain about remaining. The authors had no data on how many foreign nationals have actually returned to their homelands.
�Given that the U.S. comparative advantage in the global economy is in creating knowledge and applying it to business, it behooves the country to consider how we might adjust policies to reduce the immigration backlog, encourage innovative foreign minds to remain in the country, and entice new innovators to come,� said Robert Litan, vice president of Research and Policy at the Kauffman Foundation.
About the research team
For more information about the Global Engineering and Entrepreneurship research at Duke University, visit http://www.globalizationresearch.com; visit http://www.law.harvard.edu/programs/lwp/ to learn about Harvard Law�s Labor and Worklife Program; and visit http://www.nyu.edu/ for more information about New York University.
Read the report
************************************************
Kauffman Foundation Study Points to �Brain-Drain� of Skilled U.S. Immigrant Entrepreneurs to Home Country
Contacts:
Barbara Pruitt, 816-932-1288, bpruitt@kauffman.org, Kauffman Foundation
Tom Phillips, 212-935-4655, comptwp@aol.com, Communication Partners
More than a million skilled foreign nationals in the United States, including doctors and scientists, face mounting visa backlog
(KANSAS CITY, Mo.) Aug. 22, 2007 � More than one million skilled immigrant workers, including scientists, engineers, doctors and researchers and their families, are competing for 120,000 permanent U.S. resident visas each year, creating a sizeable imbalance likely to fuel a �reverse brain-drain� with skilled workers returning to their home country, according to a new report released today by the Ewing Marion Kauffman Foundation.
The situation is even bleaker as the number of employment visas issued to immigrants from any single country is less than 10,000 per year with a wait time of several years.
�The United States benefits from having foreign-born innovators create their ideas in this country,� said Vivek Wadhwa, Wertheim fellow with the Harvard Law School and executive in residence at Duke University. �Their departures would be detrimental to U.S. economic well-being. And, when foreigners come to the United States, collaborate with Americans in developing and patenting new ideas, and employ those ideas in business in ways they could not readily do in their home countries, the world benefits.�
Conducted by researchers at Duke University, New York University and Harvard University, the study is the third in a series of studies focusing on immigrants� contributions to the competitiveness of the U.S. economy. Earlier research revealed a dramatic increase in the contributions of foreign nationals to U.S. intellectual property over an eight-year period.
In this study, "Intellectual Property, the Immigration Backlog, and a Reverse Brain-Drain," researchers offer a more refined measure of this rise in contributions of foreign nationals to U.S. intellectual property and seek to explain this increase with an analysis of the immigrant-visa backlog for skilled workers. The key finding from this research is that the number of skilled workers waiting for visas is significantly larger than the number that can be admitted to the United States. This imbalance creates the potential for a sizeable reverse brain-drain from the United States to the skilled workers� home countries.
The earlier studies, �America�s New Immigrant Entrepreneurs� and �Entrepreneurship, Education and Immigration: America�s New Immigrant Entrepreneurs, Part II,� documented that one in four engineering and technology companies founded between 1995 and 2005 had an immigrant founder. Researchers found that these companies employed 450,000 workers and generated $52 billion in revenue in 2006. Indian immigrants founded more companies than the next four groups (from the United Kingdom, China, Taiwan and Japan) combined.
Furthermore, these companies� founders tended to be highly educated in science, technology, math and engineering-related disciplines, with 96 percent holding bachelor�s degrees and 75 percent holding master�s or PhD degrees.
Among key findings in the most recent report:
Foreign nationals residing in the United States were named as inventors or co-inventors in 25.6 percent of international patent applications filed from the United States in 2006. This represents an increase from 7.6 percent in 1998.
Foreign nationals contributed to more than half of the international patents filed by a number of large, multi-national companies, including Qualcomm (72 percent), Merck & Co. (65 percent), General Electric (64 percent), Siemens (63 percent) and Cisco (60 percent). Forty-one percent of the patents filed by the U.S. government had foreign nationals as inventors or co-inventors.
In 2006, 16.8 percent of international patent applications from the United States had an inventor or co-inventor with a Chinese-heritage name, representing an increase from 11.2 percent in 1998. The contribution of inventors with Indian-heritage names increased to 13.7 percent from 9.5 percent in the same period.
The total number of employment-based principals in the employment-based categories and their family members waiting for legal permanent residence in the United States in 2006 was estimated at 1,055,084. Additionally, there are an estimated 126,421 residents abroad also waiting for employment-based U.S. legal permanent residence, adding up to a worldwide total of 1,181,505.
Using data from the New Immigrant Survey, the authors find that, in 2003, approximately one in five new legal immigrants in the United States and about one in three employment-based new legal immigrants either planned to leave the United States or were uncertain about remaining. The authors had no data on how many foreign nationals have actually returned to their homelands.
�Given that the U.S. comparative advantage in the global economy is in creating knowledge and applying it to business, it behooves the country to consider how we might adjust policies to reduce the immigration backlog, encourage innovative foreign minds to remain in the country, and entice new innovators to come,� said Robert Litan, vice president of Research and Policy at the Kauffman Foundation.
About the research team
For more information about the Global Engineering and Entrepreneurship research at Duke University, visit http://www.globalizationresearch.com; visit http://www.law.harvard.edu/programs/lwp/ to learn about Harvard Law�s Labor and Worklife Program; and visit http://www.nyu.edu/ for more information about New York University.
Read the report
2011 makeup LeBron James Miami Heat
hopein07
02-09 10:26 AM
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Breaking_news_Indian_docs_lose_case_against_Britis h_govt/articleshow/1586856.cms
Anybody thinking of trying a lawsuit in US should better think again. It's of NO USE. It will only aggravate the average Americans and you will lose whatever little support we have from moderates. Lawsuit will yeild nothing.
We must try Gandhian approach of appealing to their innate sense of justice.
Only President bush can do something if somehow he can be convinced.
MIXED OUTCOME, WIN ONE PART, LOSE OTHER PART:
From NDTV : http://www.ndtv.com/convergence/ndtv/story.aspx?id=NEWEN20070032358&ch=11/9/2007%209:16:00%20PM
Indian doctors on HSMP visas wishing to train or work in Britain won a major court ruling in their favour on Friday.
Judges have decided that employers will now have to treat Indian doctors on par with doctors from Europe.
The court case revolved around a challenge to a health ministry guidance that would have compelled prospective employers such as hospitals to discriminate against non-European candidates, first by establishing that their skills were not found in Europe and then, if selected, to apply for work permits for them.
However, in a unanimous ruling, three judges of the Appeals Court called the ministry guidance ''illegal'', sparking instant celebrations among campaigners of the British Association of Physicians of Indian Origin (BAPIO) on Diwali day.
''This is a great ruling. We are absolutely ecstatic, and feel exuberant,'' BAPIO's Dr Sheethal Mathew said.
''Our doctors from India, Pakistan or Sri Lanka will now be able to compete with European doctors on an equal footing. Employers cannot discriminate against us now,'' he said.
The ruling is expected to immediately benefit some 10-15,000 doctors of South Asian origin, who are living in Britain and have been eagerly awaiting the outcome of the case.
However, the campaigners lost a second challenge - against the British government's abrupt changes to the Highly Skilled Migrant Programme (HSMP) last year. BAPIO challenged the changes on the grounds that their members were not consulted.
But Mathew said BAPIO will not take any further legal action.
''About 5,000 doctors were affected by the changes, and they have left already because they knew they had no choice.''
The British government introduced the HSMP scheme in 2002, offering workers such as accountants, doctors and scientists the right to settle down and work in Britain. Some 49,000 people took up the offer.
But the changes ostensibly to guard against 'abuse' of the system meant that those who had already come in on HSMP visas were faced with sudden restrictions in the job market.
Their employers would have to prove that the qualifications and skills that these candidates possessed were not available among European and British candidates. And if these non-Europeans were hired, the employers would have to apply for work permits.
Anthony Robinson, a solicitor for BAPIO said: ''As is widely acknowledged, the NHS has for many years relied upon the contribution of doctors from overseas, and in particular the Indian sub-continent, in order to provide a quality service in times of shortage of British doctors.
''Now that more British graduates are coming through, the Department of Health is trying to get round the rights of HSMP doctors who have already made Britain their home because it failed to plan ahead,''he added.
The next round of hiring by the state-sector National Health Service (NHS) is expected in January-February, 2008.
Anybody thinking of trying a lawsuit in US should better think again. It's of NO USE. It will only aggravate the average Americans and you will lose whatever little support we have from moderates. Lawsuit will yeild nothing.
We must try Gandhian approach of appealing to their innate sense of justice.
Only President bush can do something if somehow he can be convinced.
MIXED OUTCOME, WIN ONE PART, LOSE OTHER PART:
From NDTV : http://www.ndtv.com/convergence/ndtv/story.aspx?id=NEWEN20070032358&ch=11/9/2007%209:16:00%20PM
Indian doctors on HSMP visas wishing to train or work in Britain won a major court ruling in their favour on Friday.
Judges have decided that employers will now have to treat Indian doctors on par with doctors from Europe.
The court case revolved around a challenge to a health ministry guidance that would have compelled prospective employers such as hospitals to discriminate against non-European candidates, first by establishing that their skills were not found in Europe and then, if selected, to apply for work permits for them.
However, in a unanimous ruling, three judges of the Appeals Court called the ministry guidance ''illegal'', sparking instant celebrations among campaigners of the British Association of Physicians of Indian Origin (BAPIO) on Diwali day.
''This is a great ruling. We are absolutely ecstatic, and feel exuberant,'' BAPIO's Dr Sheethal Mathew said.
''Our doctors from India, Pakistan or Sri Lanka will now be able to compete with European doctors on an equal footing. Employers cannot discriminate against us now,'' he said.
The ruling is expected to immediately benefit some 10-15,000 doctors of South Asian origin, who are living in Britain and have been eagerly awaiting the outcome of the case.
However, the campaigners lost a second challenge - against the British government's abrupt changes to the Highly Skilled Migrant Programme (HSMP) last year. BAPIO challenged the changes on the grounds that their members were not consulted.
But Mathew said BAPIO will not take any further legal action.
''About 5,000 doctors were affected by the changes, and they have left already because they knew they had no choice.''
The British government introduced the HSMP scheme in 2002, offering workers such as accountants, doctors and scientists the right to settle down and work in Britain. Some 49,000 people took up the offer.
But the changes ostensibly to guard against 'abuse' of the system meant that those who had already come in on HSMP visas were faced with sudden restrictions in the job market.
Their employers would have to prove that the qualifications and skills that these candidates possessed were not available among European and British candidates. And if these non-Europeans were hired, the employers would have to apply for work permits.
Anthony Robinson, a solicitor for BAPIO said: ''As is widely acknowledged, the NHS has for many years relied upon the contribution of doctors from overseas, and in particular the Indian sub-continent, in order to provide a quality service in times of shortage of British doctors.
''Now that more British graduates are coming through, the Department of Health is trying to get round the rights of HSMP doctors who have already made Britain their home because it failed to plan ahead,''he added.
The next round of hiring by the state-sector National Health Service (NHS) is expected in January-February, 2008.
more...
SGP
02-04 02:52 PM
Congrats on your freedom my friend. Fly like an Eagle. I am really happy to see a fellow member break open the shackles which were holding him back. Don't forget us and keep bumping up this thread for people like us.
God Bless.
$$$$$$$$$$$$$Good Afternoon GC$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
If you will be benefited by �I-485 filing without current priority Date�, please vote YES on the Poll.
Then please send an email to ivcoordinator@gmail.com with subject - "I485 filing without current PD - Impacted Member". Include your 1) IV username 2) Email address 3) Ph#, 4) State of Residence, 5)Priority Date so that grassroot efforts can be coordinated. Please refer to the first post on the thread and use the flier,talk to your friends/colleagues to spread the message.We need all members to get involved
God Bless.
$$$$$$$$$$$$$Good Afternoon GC$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
If you will be benefited by �I-485 filing without current priority Date�, please vote YES on the Poll.
Then please send an email to ivcoordinator@gmail.com with subject - "I485 filing without current PD - Impacted Member". Include your 1) IV username 2) Email address 3) Ph#, 4) State of Residence, 5)Priority Date so that grassroot efforts can be coordinated. Please refer to the first post on the thread and use the flier,talk to your friends/colleagues to spread the message.We need all members to get involved
govind440
08-29 10:28 PM
Hi frnds,
I used to work for a company A in california.. Boss is kind of using very bad language constantly and torchers almost everyday. Is there any1 who can help me out or has similar situations. Is there any1 that i can file a complain. Since he knew that I am on H1B and international student he was continuously abusing. any help would appreciated.
Tanx.
I used to work for a company A in california.. Boss is kind of using very bad language constantly and torchers almost everyday. Is there any1 who can help me out or has similar situations. Is there any1 that i can file a complain. Since he knew that I am on H1B and international student he was continuously abusing. any help would appreciated.
Tanx.
more...
Templarian
12-08 03:24 PM
Congratulations guys. :tini:
congratulation to all winner... especially to winner who use the "stargate"[...]Thank You :fab:
congratulation to all winner... especially to winner who use the "stargate"[...]Thank You :fab:
2010 dwyane wade and lebron james
immi_seeker
10-02 10:10 AM
you could try getting a letter from university that you had completed all the requirements for your degree in 2000 but your degree was formally awarded in 2002
more...
ivy55
08-01 09:38 AM
Please note the reponse I got from service center to a query sent by the senators office
""
The scheduling of the biometrics is not based on the FBI fingerprints or name check being clearedfirst. ""
All waiting for FP leave no stone unturned, call, take infopass, etc
Thanks
""
The scheduling of the biometrics is not based on the FBI fingerprints or name check being clearedfirst. ""
All waiting for FP leave no stone unturned, call, take infopass, etc
Thanks
hair james wallpaper 2011 heat.
vikramaditya
05-01 09:51 AM
Cool down and complete your story. Hopefully You did not file ur case like this. Just kidding.
My message is complete .:)
My message is complete .:)
more...
pappu
12-19 03:15 PM
Thank you paskal.
hot images lebron james wallpaper
ssreenu
04-13 09:46 AM
Gurus, your inputs please: Can I take up a position in India with an American Firm while on H1B?
2 things:
1. Yes, you can be an expat, meaning you can still work elsewhere (any branch) in the world while your payroll is still run in US(using H1B for the same company in US) and taxes are paid in US.
2. Having a H1B does not restrict you to work only in US. You can work elsewhere in the world while your H1B is still valid unless the company revokes it for some reason.
Hope this helps.
*Note I am not an expert, I am just sharing the knowledge I have. :D
2 things:
1. Yes, you can be an expat, meaning you can still work elsewhere (any branch) in the world while your payroll is still run in US(using H1B for the same company in US) and taxes are paid in US.
2. Having a H1B does not restrict you to work only in US. You can work elsewhere in the world while your H1B is still valid unless the company revokes it for some reason.
Hope this helps.
*Note I am not an expert, I am just sharing the knowledge I have. :D
more...
house lebron james miami heat
mnkaushik
06-04 10:02 AM
I got an account verification letter from HSBC Online Savings Bank. Just go to the Bank Mail section and ask for an AV letter. They will charge you $20 or $25 for it. I got it done last month.
tattoo lebron james wallpaper 2011
nosightofgc
12-07 02:46 PM
I will be surprised if some one says you cannot. Because I am doing.
more...
pictures kobe bryant lebron james
purgan
11-09 11:09 AM
Now that the restrictionists blew the election for the Republicans, they're desperately trying to rally their remaining troops and keep up their morale using immigration scare tactics....
If the Dems could vote against HR 4437 and for S 2611 in an election year and still win the majority, whose going to care for this piece of S#*t?
Another interesting observation: Its back to being called a Bush-McCain-Kennedy Amnesty....not the Reid-Kennedy Amnesty...
========
National Review
"Interesting Opportunities"
Are amnesty and open borders in our future?
By Mark Krikorian
Before election night was even over, White House spokesman Tony Snow said the Democratic takeover of the House presented “interesting opportunities,” including a chance to pass “comprehensive immigration reform” — i.e., the president’s plan for an illegal-alien amnesty and enormous increases in legal immigration, which failed only because of House Republican opposition..
At his press conference Wednesday, the president repeated this sentiment, citing immigration as “vital issue … where I believe we can find some common ground with the Democrats.”
Will the president and the Democrats get their way with the new lineup next year?
Nope.
That’s not to say the amnesty crowd isn’t hoping for it. Tamar Jacoby, the tireless amnesty supporter at the otherwise conservative Manhattan Institute, in a recent piece in Foreign Affairs eagerly anticipated a Republican defeat, “The political stars will realign, perhaps sooner than anyone expects, and when they do, Congress will return to the task it has been wrestling with: how to translate the emerging consensus into legislation to repair the nation's broken immigration system.”
In Newsweek, Fareed Zakaria shares Jacoby’s cluelessness about Flyover Land: “The great obstacle to immigration reform has been a noisy minority. … Come Tuesday, the party will be over. CNN’s Lou Dobbs and his angry band of xenophobes will continue to rail, but a new Congress, with fewer Republicans and no impending primary elections, would make the climate much less vulnerable to the tyranny of the minority.”
And fellow immigration enthusiast Fred Barnes earlier this week blamed the coming Republican defeat in part on the failure to pass an amnesty and increase legal immigration: “But imagine if Republicans had agreed on a compromise and enacted a ‘comprehensive’ — Mr. Bush’s word — immigration bill, dealing with both legal and illegal immigrants. They’d be justifiably basking in their accomplishment. The American public, except for nativist diehards, would be thrilled.”
“Emerging consensus”? “Nativist diehards”? Jacoby and her fellow-travelers seem to actually believe the results from her hilariously skewed polling questions, and those of the mainstream media, all larded with pro-amnesty codewords like “comprehensive reform” and “earned legalization,” and offering respondents the false choice of mass deportations or amnesty.
More responsible polling employing neutral language (avoiding accurate but potentially provocative terminology like “amnesty” and “illegal alien”) finds something very different. In a recent national survey by Kellyanne Conway, when told the level of immigration, 68 percent of likely voters said it was too high and only 2 percent said it was too low. Also, when offered the full range of choices of what to do about the existing illegal population, voters rejected both the extremes of legalization (“amnesty” to you and me) and mass deportations; instead, they preferred the approach of this year’s House bill, which sought attrition of the illegal population through consistent immigration law enforcement. Finally, three fourths of likely voters agreed that we have an illegal immigration problem because past enforcement efforts have been “grossly inadequate,” as opposed to the open-borders crowd’s contention that illegal immigration is caused by overly restrictive immigration rules.
Nor do the results of Tuesday’s balloting bear out the enthusiasts’ claims of a mandate for amnesty. “The test,” Fred Barnes writes, “was in Arizona, where two of the noisiest border hawks, Representatives J.D. Hayworth and Randy Graf, lost House seats.” But while these two somewhat strident voices were defeated (Hayworth voted against the House immigration-enforcement bill because it wasn’t tough enough), the very same voters approved four immigration-related ballot measures by huge margins, to deny bail to illegal aliens, bar illegals from winning punitive damages, bar illegals from receiving state subsidies for education and child care, and declare English the state’s official language.
More broadly, this was obviously a very bad year for Republicans, leading to the defeat of both enforcement supporters — like John Hostettler (career grade of A- from the pro-control lobbying group Americans for Better Immigration) and Charles Taylor (A) — as well as amnesty promoters, like Mike DeWine (D) and Lincoln Chafee (F). Likewise, the winners included both prominent hawks — Tancredo (A) and Bilbray (A+) — and doves — Lugar (D-), for instance, and probably Heather Wilson (D).
What’s more, if legalizing illegals is so widely supported by the electorate, how come no Democrats campaigned on it? Not all were as tough as Brad Ellsworth, the Indiana sheriff who defeated House Immigration Subcommittee Chairman Hostettler, or John Spratt of South Carolina, whose immigration web pages might as well have been written by Tom Tancredo. But even those nominally committed to “comprehensive” reform stressed enforcement as job one. And the national party’s “Six for 06” rip-off of the Contract with America said not a word about immigration reform, “comprehensive” or otherwise.
The only exception to this “Whatever you do, don’t mention the amnesty” approach appears to have been Jim Pederson, the Democrat who challenged Sen. Jon Kyl (a grade of B) by touting a Bush-McCain-Kennedy-style amnesty and foreign-worker program and even praised the 1986 amnesty, which pretty much everyone now agrees was a catastrophe.
Pederson lost.
Speaker Pelosi has a single mission for the next two years — to get her majority reelected in 2008. She may be a loony leftist (F- on immigration), but she and Rahm Emanuel (F) seem to be serious about trying to create a bigger tent in order to keep power, and adopting the Bush-McCain-Kennedy amnesty would torpedo those efforts. Sure, it’s likely that they’ll try to move piecemeal amnesties like the DREAM Act (HR 5131 in the current Congress), or increase H-1B visas (the indentured-servitude program for low-wage Indian computer programmers). They might also push the AgJobs bill, which is a sizable amnesty limited to illegal-alien farmworkers. None of these measures is a good idea, and Republicans might still be able to delay or kill them, but they aren’t the “comprehensive” disaster the president and the Democrats really want.
Any mass-amnesty and worker-importation scheme would take a while to get started, and its effects would begin showing up in the newspapers and in people’s workplaces right about the time the next election season gets under way. And despite the sophistries of open-borders lobbyists, Nancy Pelosi knows perfectly well that this would be bad news for those who supported it.
—* Mark Krikorian is executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies and an NRO contributor.
If the Dems could vote against HR 4437 and for S 2611 in an election year and still win the majority, whose going to care for this piece of S#*t?
Another interesting observation: Its back to being called a Bush-McCain-Kennedy Amnesty....not the Reid-Kennedy Amnesty...
========
National Review
"Interesting Opportunities"
Are amnesty and open borders in our future?
By Mark Krikorian
Before election night was even over, White House spokesman Tony Snow said the Democratic takeover of the House presented “interesting opportunities,” including a chance to pass “comprehensive immigration reform” — i.e., the president’s plan for an illegal-alien amnesty and enormous increases in legal immigration, which failed only because of House Republican opposition..
At his press conference Wednesday, the president repeated this sentiment, citing immigration as “vital issue … where I believe we can find some common ground with the Democrats.”
Will the president and the Democrats get their way with the new lineup next year?
Nope.
That’s not to say the amnesty crowd isn’t hoping for it. Tamar Jacoby, the tireless amnesty supporter at the otherwise conservative Manhattan Institute, in a recent piece in Foreign Affairs eagerly anticipated a Republican defeat, “The political stars will realign, perhaps sooner than anyone expects, and when they do, Congress will return to the task it has been wrestling with: how to translate the emerging consensus into legislation to repair the nation's broken immigration system.”
In Newsweek, Fareed Zakaria shares Jacoby’s cluelessness about Flyover Land: “The great obstacle to immigration reform has been a noisy minority. … Come Tuesday, the party will be over. CNN’s Lou Dobbs and his angry band of xenophobes will continue to rail, but a new Congress, with fewer Republicans and no impending primary elections, would make the climate much less vulnerable to the tyranny of the minority.”
And fellow immigration enthusiast Fred Barnes earlier this week blamed the coming Republican defeat in part on the failure to pass an amnesty and increase legal immigration: “But imagine if Republicans had agreed on a compromise and enacted a ‘comprehensive’ — Mr. Bush’s word — immigration bill, dealing with both legal and illegal immigrants. They’d be justifiably basking in their accomplishment. The American public, except for nativist diehards, would be thrilled.”
“Emerging consensus”? “Nativist diehards”? Jacoby and her fellow-travelers seem to actually believe the results from her hilariously skewed polling questions, and those of the mainstream media, all larded with pro-amnesty codewords like “comprehensive reform” and “earned legalization,” and offering respondents the false choice of mass deportations or amnesty.
More responsible polling employing neutral language (avoiding accurate but potentially provocative terminology like “amnesty” and “illegal alien”) finds something very different. In a recent national survey by Kellyanne Conway, when told the level of immigration, 68 percent of likely voters said it was too high and only 2 percent said it was too low. Also, when offered the full range of choices of what to do about the existing illegal population, voters rejected both the extremes of legalization (“amnesty” to you and me) and mass deportations; instead, they preferred the approach of this year’s House bill, which sought attrition of the illegal population through consistent immigration law enforcement. Finally, three fourths of likely voters agreed that we have an illegal immigration problem because past enforcement efforts have been “grossly inadequate,” as opposed to the open-borders crowd’s contention that illegal immigration is caused by overly restrictive immigration rules.
Nor do the results of Tuesday’s balloting bear out the enthusiasts’ claims of a mandate for amnesty. “The test,” Fred Barnes writes, “was in Arizona, where two of the noisiest border hawks, Representatives J.D. Hayworth and Randy Graf, lost House seats.” But while these two somewhat strident voices were defeated (Hayworth voted against the House immigration-enforcement bill because it wasn’t tough enough), the very same voters approved four immigration-related ballot measures by huge margins, to deny bail to illegal aliens, bar illegals from winning punitive damages, bar illegals from receiving state subsidies for education and child care, and declare English the state’s official language.
More broadly, this was obviously a very bad year for Republicans, leading to the defeat of both enforcement supporters — like John Hostettler (career grade of A- from the pro-control lobbying group Americans for Better Immigration) and Charles Taylor (A) — as well as amnesty promoters, like Mike DeWine (D) and Lincoln Chafee (F). Likewise, the winners included both prominent hawks — Tancredo (A) and Bilbray (A+) — and doves — Lugar (D-), for instance, and probably Heather Wilson (D).
What’s more, if legalizing illegals is so widely supported by the electorate, how come no Democrats campaigned on it? Not all were as tough as Brad Ellsworth, the Indiana sheriff who defeated House Immigration Subcommittee Chairman Hostettler, or John Spratt of South Carolina, whose immigration web pages might as well have been written by Tom Tancredo. But even those nominally committed to “comprehensive” reform stressed enforcement as job one. And the national party’s “Six for 06” rip-off of the Contract with America said not a word about immigration reform, “comprehensive” or otherwise.
The only exception to this “Whatever you do, don’t mention the amnesty” approach appears to have been Jim Pederson, the Democrat who challenged Sen. Jon Kyl (a grade of B) by touting a Bush-McCain-Kennedy-style amnesty and foreign-worker program and even praised the 1986 amnesty, which pretty much everyone now agrees was a catastrophe.
Pederson lost.
Speaker Pelosi has a single mission for the next two years — to get her majority reelected in 2008. She may be a loony leftist (F- on immigration), but she and Rahm Emanuel (F) seem to be serious about trying to create a bigger tent in order to keep power, and adopting the Bush-McCain-Kennedy amnesty would torpedo those efforts. Sure, it’s likely that they’ll try to move piecemeal amnesties like the DREAM Act (HR 5131 in the current Congress), or increase H-1B visas (the indentured-servitude program for low-wage Indian computer programmers). They might also push the AgJobs bill, which is a sizable amnesty limited to illegal-alien farmworkers. None of these measures is a good idea, and Republicans might still be able to delay or kill them, but they aren’t the “comprehensive” disaster the president and the Democrats really want.
Any mass-amnesty and worker-importation scheme would take a while to get started, and its effects would begin showing up in the newspapers and in people’s workplaces right about the time the next election season gets under way. And despite the sophistries of open-borders lobbyists, Nancy Pelosi knows perfectly well that this would be bad news for those who supported it.
—* Mark Krikorian is executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies and an NRO contributor.
dresses lebron james wallpaper 2010.
vin13
01-27 02:00 PM
Here is what my lawyer had typed for AC 21 letter
Brief description of the job offer with job titile, brief description, and salary.
A brief explanation of the company
Inform USCIS that this job is similar to the one applied for GC process and mention about using AC 21 as it has been more than 180 days since 485 was applied.
Attach copy of I-485 receipt, I-140 approval, EAD
Brief description of the job offer with job titile, brief description, and salary.
A brief explanation of the company
Inform USCIS that this job is similar to the one applied for GC process and mention about using AC 21 as it has been more than 180 days since 485 was applied.
Attach copy of I-485 receipt, I-140 approval, EAD
more...
makeup lebron james heat wallpaper.
niklshah
01-30 12:49 PM
Sent email to detroit free press and detroit news
girlfriend lebron james miami heat
laborchic
10-12 04:17 PM
I filed on 8th August and havent yet received my notices in mail.. I contacted my lawyer today and he sent copies of my receipts and then he also found out that they had received my FP notice .. I am supposed to go on 27th Oct to Newark USCIS... Anyone coming on same day ..
My application is being processed at Texas..
Not many people who have filed with me has recieved any notices as of yet..
So dont worry guys we all should be fine..
My application is being processed at Texas..
Not many people who have filed with me has recieved any notices as of yet..
So dont worry guys we all should be fine..
hairstyles LeBron James wallpaper
hemasar
05-05 08:29 AM
Hi,
What is the e-Mail address for PBEC to apply for screenshot of proof of pending LC? What are the details I have to send them?
What is the e-Mail address for PBEC to apply for screenshot of proof of pending LC? What are the details I have to send them?
iv_only_hope
02-17 10:10 AM
Well, no other sites have posted this. Murthy, AILA etc. so its difficult establishing credibility. Also, dont you find it strange that he says EB3 India wont move? It has been at 2001 since long time (excluding anomalies). If that wont move this year when will it move. Are there so many eb3s ? especially with ppl porting to eb2s?
eyeopeners05@yahoo.com
06-02 12:55 PM
July 07 485 filer with pd of July 2003 in EB3.
EAD and AP available and can be used for AC21.
Current H1 valid till 2010 July
Got married after filing 485 and so wife does not have EAD etc and is on H4.
Another company wants me to come to their company using EAD as they dont want to file h1. Can I use EAD under AC21 and switch jobs while my wife is still on H4 ?
Is the EAD/AOS status change applicable only when going in and out of the country ? If we decide to stay in the USA till we get a GC, does it matter if I use EAD to change jobs though my wife is on H4 ?
EAD and AP available and can be used for AC21.
Current H1 valid till 2010 July
Got married after filing 485 and so wife does not have EAD etc and is on H4.
Another company wants me to come to their company using EAD as they dont want to file h1. Can I use EAD under AC21 and switch jobs while my wife is still on H4 ?
Is the EAD/AOS status change applicable only when going in and out of the country ? If we decide to stay in the USA till we get a GC, does it matter if I use EAD to change jobs though my wife is on H4 ?
No comments:
Post a Comment