go_guy123
04-19 12:08 AM
Hi Folks,
My fiancee is a MS student and currently has student loan in India being charged at 13.5%. I am wondering if there is any loan that i can get here with a lower interest rate to repay off the one in india.
I would appreciate any pointers or suggestions here.
in 2007 fellow indian international students in Canada used to get loan from
https://www.isloan.org/faqs.htm
but in 2008 that was closed. However you can call and find out from them.
With the credit crisis I am not sure if they give anymore. ask if u cosign then can they give or not
My fiancee is a MS student and currently has student loan in India being charged at 13.5%. I am wondering if there is any loan that i can get here with a lower interest rate to repay off the one in india.
I would appreciate any pointers or suggestions here.
in 2007 fellow indian international students in Canada used to get loan from
https://www.isloan.org/faqs.htm
but in 2008 that was closed. However you can call and find out from them.
With the credit crisis I am not sure if they give anymore. ask if u cosign then can they give or not
wallpaper All logos, names, audio
himu73
04-13 09:18 AM
Hello
Can we a contact Indian/American organizations who can lend us support.
1. Today I read news wherein an organization of Indian Businessmen,Lawyers.Doctors are organizing fundraiser for Hilary Clinton. They are giving lot of money for her campaign. These people already have contacts with number of senators. They can help us in our cause at different level.
The Chairman of the organization in the news article Sant Singh Chatwal is a known hotilier in US.
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/NRI_group_to_raise_5_mn_for_Hillary/articleshow/1906983.cms
2. US-India Business Council is another such forum we can consider. Rediff has a news article wherein they are asking congress to increase H1s and make green card process easier. They have mentioned an address in Washington D.C
H St, Northwest headquarters in Washington, DC.
http://www.rediff.com/money/2007/apr/13visa.htm
Can we a contact Indian/American organizations who can lend us support.
1. Today I read news wherein an organization of Indian Businessmen,Lawyers.Doctors are organizing fundraiser for Hilary Clinton. They are giving lot of money for her campaign. These people already have contacts with number of senators. They can help us in our cause at different level.
The Chairman of the organization in the news article Sant Singh Chatwal is a known hotilier in US.
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/NRI_group_to_raise_5_mn_for_Hillary/articleshow/1906983.cms
2. US-India Business Council is another such forum we can consider. Rediff has a news article wherein they are asking congress to increase H1s and make green card process easier. They have mentioned an address in Washington D.C
H St, Northwest headquarters in Washington, DC.
http://www.rediff.com/money/2007/apr/13visa.htm
diptam
08-03 07:33 PM
You are OK as long is 140 is approved and 180 days have passed since Filing 485... BUT
if yor employer get to know your intention and cancel 140 between 180 and 200 days before 140 is approved , you are screwed...
Thanks,
I 140 and 485 filed concurrently.
Let's say I 140 is approved after 200 (greater than 180) days, If employer revokes I 140 after 230 days (let's say he is pissed off that i left the company using Ac 21 portability)
will it create any issue for my GC ?
if yor employer get to know your intention and cancel 140 between 180 and 200 days before 140 is approved , you are screwed...
Thanks,
I 140 and 485 filed concurrently.
Let's say I 140 is approved after 200 (greater than 180) days, If employer revokes I 140 after 230 days (let's say he is pissed off that i left the company using Ac 21 portability)
will it create any issue for my GC ?
2011 Image: Car Logos
WeShallOvercome
11-06 04:11 PM
I see that for EB2 the PD is 01 APR 2004 now. I want to know if I-485 approvals is linked to this PD date or they will work independent to these days.
Thanks,
Sury
-------------------------------
PD : Feb'07
I-140 - Pending
I-131 - Approved
I-485 - Pending
Center: TEXAS SERVICE CENTER
Recieved EAD Card and FP done.
-------------------------------
Poor guy/gal just asked a simple question.....
Sury, The PDs need to be current for I-485 filing AS WELL AS approval.
Thanks,
Sury
-------------------------------
PD : Feb'07
I-140 - Pending
I-131 - Approved
I-485 - Pending
Center: TEXAS SERVICE CENTER
Recieved EAD Card and FP done.
-------------------------------
Poor guy/gal just asked a simple question.....
Sury, The PDs need to be current for I-485 filing AS WELL AS approval.
more...
fundo14
02-19 12:36 PM
Hi All,
I wanted to share my experience at the port of entry using AP.
Just to give a quick background me and my wife have been working on H1 for last 8 years, we both were working on our H1’s at the time of leaving for vacation one month back.
Our 485/EAD/AP was filed on July 2nd, 2007; my wife is a Primary Applicant.
We have our 485 receipts/ approved EAD’s and AP’s with us.
Also, our H1 Petition’s are valid till 2010 but the stamping on passport is expired, we did not get stamping in India as we intended to enter using AP
At the Port of entry this is how it went:
Officer: Very rudely asked for our passports & I-94
We gave him our Passports, I-94 forms and Original AP’s
Officer: What’s the purpose of your visit?
Our Answer: To join back at our respective work.
Officer: Work? Who’s the primary applicant?
My answer: My wife
Officer: Then how the hell you will work here, you cannot work here, only your wife can work as the petition is on her name, you are a derivative.
My answer: But I have work Authorization (showed our EAD cards)
Officer: That’s all bullhshit, does not mean anything…you can not work here.
My answer: I politely told him that sir when we left country a month ago we both were working on H1’s, now we are seeking entry on AP.
Officer: yeh but don’t do fraud, you cannot work here (Very rudely)...who told you that you can work here.
My Answer: Again I explained politely- Sir, we filed for 485 which made us eligible to get EAD’s, showed him the EAD card again (which clearly states “Authorized to work in US till validity of this card” Our EAD’s are valid till end of 2008)
Officer: listen don’t teach me law, I have been working here for “x” number of years, and you think you know laws better than me.
After this I and my wife decided to keep quite as that moron was not ready to listen and understand anything.
Officer (rudely): I will set this straight for you…then we were asked to follow him in a separate room. Many people were waiting there I guess most of them using AP
The Officer went to one other custom officer there and pointed towards us and explained him something which we could not hear.
We waited � an hour till our named was called…I was worried that they will now create lot problems for us but to my surprise we were just handed our Passports along with AP’s / I-94 stamped as “AOS” and told you are all set... Absolutely No questions asked.
I am worried if he has entered some nasty remarks on my case…not sure.
Now this entire incident makes me wonder what that officer was talking about, my guess is one of the following:
1. He assumed throughout that my wife is entering on H1 and I on H4
2. Or he did realize his mistake but was too egoistic to accept it.
3. Or he was right and I was wrong about working on EAD (being derivative)...am I missing something here??
One of my suggestion from all this experience is that anybody entering on AP always state the purpose of visit is to “Resume pending AOS”
In last 8 years I have re-entered US like 6 times but never faced such a rude Immigration officer or have been treated like this.
Guru’s please advice if there is a possibility to reinstate our status as H1, we would rather work on H1 then on EAD’s
Thanks!
I wanted to share my experience at the port of entry using AP.
Just to give a quick background me and my wife have been working on H1 for last 8 years, we both were working on our H1’s at the time of leaving for vacation one month back.
Our 485/EAD/AP was filed on July 2nd, 2007; my wife is a Primary Applicant.
We have our 485 receipts/ approved EAD’s and AP’s with us.
Also, our H1 Petition’s are valid till 2010 but the stamping on passport is expired, we did not get stamping in India as we intended to enter using AP
At the Port of entry this is how it went:
Officer: Very rudely asked for our passports & I-94
We gave him our Passports, I-94 forms and Original AP’s
Officer: What’s the purpose of your visit?
Our Answer: To join back at our respective work.
Officer: Work? Who’s the primary applicant?
My answer: My wife
Officer: Then how the hell you will work here, you cannot work here, only your wife can work as the petition is on her name, you are a derivative.
My answer: But I have work Authorization (showed our EAD cards)
Officer: That’s all bullhshit, does not mean anything…you can not work here.
My answer: I politely told him that sir when we left country a month ago we both were working on H1’s, now we are seeking entry on AP.
Officer: yeh but don’t do fraud, you cannot work here (Very rudely)...who told you that you can work here.
My Answer: Again I explained politely- Sir, we filed for 485 which made us eligible to get EAD’s, showed him the EAD card again (which clearly states “Authorized to work in US till validity of this card” Our EAD’s are valid till end of 2008)
Officer: listen don’t teach me law, I have been working here for “x” number of years, and you think you know laws better than me.
After this I and my wife decided to keep quite as that moron was not ready to listen and understand anything.
Officer (rudely): I will set this straight for you…then we were asked to follow him in a separate room. Many people were waiting there I guess most of them using AP
The Officer went to one other custom officer there and pointed towards us and explained him something which we could not hear.
We waited � an hour till our named was called…I was worried that they will now create lot problems for us but to my surprise we were just handed our Passports along with AP’s / I-94 stamped as “AOS” and told you are all set... Absolutely No questions asked.
I am worried if he has entered some nasty remarks on my case…not sure.
Now this entire incident makes me wonder what that officer was talking about, my guess is one of the following:
1. He assumed throughout that my wife is entering on H1 and I on H4
2. Or he did realize his mistake but was too egoistic to accept it.
3. Or he was right and I was wrong about working on EAD (being derivative)...am I missing something here??
One of my suggestion from all this experience is that anybody entering on AP always state the purpose of visit is to “Resume pending AOS”
In last 8 years I have re-entered US like 6 times but never faced such a rude Immigration officer or have been treated like this.
Guru’s please advice if there is a possibility to reinstate our status as H1, we would rather work on H1 then on EAD’s
Thanks!
diptam
05-12 11:01 PM
Generally i see such emails on Friday/Saturday late nights - hopefulgc is doing it Monday :) Just Kidding and take it EZ !!
Things are no so easy - if laws could be changed easily, lot of lobbyists have way more than 1 MM dollar - that's not any big money at US ... Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney wasted 35 MM personal fortune, Billary Clinton in strangled in 15-20 MM election debt where as Barack has created a historic fund raising record ( who single mother has raised him by taking help from Food stamp )
Everything is not just money (at least in America) - the line of money ends somewhere - even America being a Capitalist Nation. You know why Dick cheney is hated by 75% of Americans ?????:)
We need to raise a million $. Anything less is seeming to just not cut it.
Look where we are now with our half-hearted efforts.
[B][COLOR="Red"]Here is an idea: say we have roughly 500 members out of this vast array of 35000+ members who have the heart and the will to contribute. we get $2000 from each and place it in an escrow trust account that does not release money for expenditure unless we reach $1 mln
Brethren.... rise!
Things are no so easy - if laws could be changed easily, lot of lobbyists have way more than 1 MM dollar - that's not any big money at US ... Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney wasted 35 MM personal fortune, Billary Clinton in strangled in 15-20 MM election debt where as Barack has created a historic fund raising record ( who single mother has raised him by taking help from Food stamp )
Everything is not just money (at least in America) - the line of money ends somewhere - even America being a Capitalist Nation. You know why Dick cheney is hated by 75% of Americans ?????:)
We need to raise a million $. Anything less is seeming to just not cut it.
Look where we are now with our half-hearted efforts.
[B][COLOR="Red"]Here is an idea: say we have roughly 500 members out of this vast array of 35000+ members who have the heart and the will to contribute. we get $2000 from each and place it in an escrow trust account that does not release money for expenditure unless we reach $1 mln
Brethren.... rise!
more...
kicca
01-24 09:48 PM
^^
2010 really inventions are all
InTheMoment
12-04 05:04 PM
NYCGal,
I zoomed into your post when I saw DoL Withdrawn... my case shows "Withdrawn" which was apparently due to the famed computer glitch at the BEC. It should have had been returned back to it's original status (In Process) but that has not yet happened even after the DoL advisory to wait until Dec 1.
My lawyer has gotten in touch with the BEC. I was wondering how much time it took in your case for BEC to correct the error. My RIR conversion recruitement is ongoing and I wonder if the BEC will deliver on correcting in the mistake before it ends.
Time taken by BEC to correct the error in your case would help me a lot.
thanks:)
I zoomed into your post when I saw DoL Withdrawn... my case shows "Withdrawn" which was apparently due to the famed computer glitch at the BEC. It should have had been returned back to it's original status (In Process) but that has not yet happened even after the DoL advisory to wait until Dec 1.
My lawyer has gotten in touch with the BEC. I was wondering how much time it took in your case for BEC to correct the error. My RIR conversion recruitement is ongoing and I wonder if the BEC will deliver on correcting in the mistake before it ends.
Time taken by BEC to correct the error in your case would help me a lot.
thanks:)
more...
cableching
05-21 12:33 AM
The example he has given is a special case. The guy needs H1, because his son was out of status. Something is missing in the case. The child came to US 10 years back on B2 and stayed on B2 forever without extending or changing the status???
We need H1 only when we are not married or we have not filed I-485 for the dependants.
We need H1 only when we are not married or we have not filed I-485 for the dependants.
hair of fast door cars running
freeskier89
03-02 10:17 AM
Just out of curiousity, does traditional painting qualify?
more...
Pankaj
08-18 04:59 PM
If your wife's I-94, which she have received at the time of entering to USA on dependent visa was valid till the date of the starting new the job, she should be fine even if she has not started working on H1 after approval. She has maintained the H4 status during that period as per I-94.
My wife here on H4 and she go H1 but she started job after a while as employer delayed. But her status was valid. Even she told the same to the US counselor New Delhi and she got h1 stamping done. Gap of H1 approval effective date and employment was about 2 months.
If you would ask this question to any attorney, you may get same reply. But asking to attorney is advisable.
My wife here on H4 and she go H1 but she started job after a while as employer delayed. But her status was valid. Even she told the same to the US counselor New Delhi and she got h1 stamping done. Gap of H1 approval effective date and employment was about 2 months.
If you would ask this question to any attorney, you may get same reply. But asking to attorney is advisable.
hot Panoz Auto Logo
mhathi
07-20 09:15 AM
I searched for IV on orkut and got three communities back, one with 2 members and two empty.. which one are we joining?
more...
house Ford Mustang Logo | All cars
Rockford
07-17 02:47 PM
--
I couldn't help post a reply. I was trying not to add to the buzy server traffic.
Isn't it amazing, thousands of people are waiting with bated breath for the USCIS update news and some idiot opens a new threads to start a baseless rumor. And claims that news comes from Greg. This so called news as it turns out is a comment by some troll "south" on Greg's website.
Our friend here who opened this thread fails to even see the connection between the id handle "south" and his post" going south." Honestly, things like this make you wonder, how can such people call themselves highly skilled.
You are so blind with your belief that some thing positive will come out that you cant see what is happening. I have made it very clear that it was a comment in my post, and can't you see the link.
How stupid are you ? Why can't you just let it go if you don't like it ?
I couldn't help post a reply. I was trying not to add to the buzy server traffic.
Isn't it amazing, thousands of people are waiting with bated breath for the USCIS update news and some idiot opens a new threads to start a baseless rumor. And claims that news comes from Greg. This so called news as it turns out is a comment by some troll "south" on Greg's website.
Our friend here who opened this thread fails to even see the connection between the id handle "south" and his post" going south." Honestly, things like this make you wonder, how can such people call themselves highly skilled.
You are so blind with your belief that some thing positive will come out that you cant see what is happening. I have made it very clear that it was a comment in my post, and can't you see the link.
How stupid are you ? Why can't you just let it go if you don't like it ?
tattoo all the way to Full Blown
ak_manu
07-23 03:15 PM
The way EB2 is progressing now, it looks like you might get your GC in a year or two. I would definitely recommend staying with current company. Once you have GC you can choose any job you want and earn more too:-). Also, it might help you spouse with tution and job (in case no one sponsers H1). So, I would think patience is the Key.
If you really want to switch to Top company then have them sponsor in EB2 by porting priority date. If that company cannot sponsor in EB2 and you are more interesting in career the choose an other Top company that would sponsor you GC in EB2. After all they all are just consulting companies no matter big or small. If it is a client then I might grab the opportunity even though they sponsor in EB3 as at least you might be safe with them (if you are lucky!!) and don't have to travel.
Makes sense??
If you really want to switch to Top company then have them sponsor in EB2 by porting priority date. If that company cannot sponsor in EB2 and you are more interesting in career the choose an other Top company that would sponsor you GC in EB2. After all they all are just consulting companies no matter big or small. If it is a client then I might grab the opportunity even though they sponsor in EB3 as at least you might be safe with them (if you are lucky!!) and don't have to travel.
Makes sense??
more...
pictures in ADAC 24h, all cars were
GooblyWoobly
07-18 06:25 PM
Wrong! Yes, you will be the new fee but then you will pay the same fee each year you renew your EAD. No fee payment only applies if you file your I-485 with the new fee structure.
If you are not planning on using EAD and she won't either then she needs to change status to H4.
Can someone else confirm this too? For Q2, I think you are wrong. Take this case....
Primary is on H1, derivative on H4, both apply for AOS, primary goes on EAD (thus invalidating H1, and in turn spouse's H4). So, the spouse just has AOS receipt number, and no H4. Is she out of status? Of course not. This is a very common scenario.
Also, for Q1, I765 is a completely different entity in the pay schedule http://www.uscis.gov/files/nativedocuments/FinalUSCISFeeSchedule052907.pdf
So, why wouldn't I get the benefit of the higher fee if I pay that? Any source of information for you to say I will have to pay each year?
If you are not planning on using EAD and she won't either then she needs to change status to H4.
Can someone else confirm this too? For Q2, I think you are wrong. Take this case....
Primary is on H1, derivative on H4, both apply for AOS, primary goes on EAD (thus invalidating H1, and in turn spouse's H4). So, the spouse just has AOS receipt number, and no H4. Is she out of status? Of course not. This is a very common scenario.
Also, for Q1, I765 is a completely different entity in the pay schedule http://www.uscis.gov/files/nativedocuments/FinalUSCISFeeSchedule052907.pdf
So, why wouldn't I get the benefit of the higher fee if I pay that? Any source of information for you to say I will have to pay each year?
dresses car VisionD and new logo
Blog Feeds
06-27 06:50 PM
AILA Leadership Has Just Posted the Following:
President Obama and Congress members met privately at the White House on Thursday for their first major discussion of immigration reform. A Way Forward on Immigration (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/27/opinion/27sat1.html). New York Times Editorial June 27, 2009. President Obama has a lot on his plate dealing with the economy, health and energy but his approach to immigration reform indicates a clear grasp of the complex dynamic needed to win the battle. The need to reform our immigration laws now could not be more immediate or urgent. There is a crisis in immigration and the need to fix this mess has never been more critical. Immigration raids in our communities and our factories, along with the horrific conditions of detention, have created dread and anxiety within our immigrant population. The process of obtaining lawful status has become unreasonably difficult, and there are few options for the millions of immigrants, many of whom have deep roots here, but entered without visas or have expired visas. Millions of these people have U.S. citizen spouses and children, but no path to legalization. Despite decades of living in the U.S., and contributing to our economy, and whether applying for immigrant or nonimmigrant visas, the pattern is the same: restrictive adjudications coupled with outdated visa quotas that choke the system and make the attainment of lawful status virtually impossible. Whether applying through family or employment, the waiting lines are as protracted as they are preposterous. Many with advanced degrees wait for years and family visa waiting lines routinely extend a decade or longer. Due process protections that form the basis of our great democracy have been stripped from immigrants.
President Obama told a bipartisan group of lawmakers this week that Congress should begin debating a comprehensive immigration by year�s end or early next year, but Republicans said they would support a measure only if it included an expansion of guest worker programs. Republicans Focus on Guest Workers in Immigration Debate (javascript:popup(). The White House released President Obama's remarks following a meeting on June 25, 2009 with congressional leaders to discuss immigration reform, in which he expresses his administration's support for CIR and indicates a clear understanding of the issues and how to fix them. President Obama's Remarks Following June 25 Meeting on Immigration Reform with Congressional Leaders (http://www.aila.org/content/default.aspx?docid=29384)
The American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA) understand immigration in a way that only a doctor understands medical ailments or an engineer understands building bridges. We know the issues from a deep perspective and not merely from an emotional view. We believe that a sensible comprehensive immigration reform package will have to include smart enforcement, a path to citizenship for the 12 million undocumented immigrants currently living and working in the U.S., elimination of family and employment-based visa backlogs, adequate visas to meet the needs of U.S. families and businesses, a new visa program for essential workers, and due process protections to restore the rule of law in our immigration adjudications and courts. AILA Welcomes Obama's Proactive Push for Comprehensive Immigration Reform This Year (http://www.aila.org/content/default.aspx?docid=29372).
The current immigration system is broken and to allow the status quo to continue will only make things worse for the country. Until Congress deals responsibly with immigration - making taxpayers out of all immigrants, making all employers follow sensible rules, and creating a functioning legal immigration system - everything else on the President's domestic agenda is vulnerable to being dragged down. This is the year and this is the moment for a popular President to work with Congress to address a national issue in a way that benefits the American people and our economy. The Joint Center for Housing Studies of Harvard University released a new housing report which notes, �immigrants could be a key element to recovery." Immigration Impact, June 26, 2009, Immigrant Homebuyers Play Crucial Role in Housing Market Revival (javascript:popup(). The president announced that he has charged DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano with leading a bipartisan, bicameral working group to help negotiate and move a legislative package later this year, and those of us who have been championing immigration reform�and who have been training for this day�are off to the races (http://www.americanprogress.org/pressroom/statements/2009/06/White_House_immigration_meeting_statement062509.ht ml). President Kicks Off Immigration Reform (javascript:popup()"The White House meeting yesterday demonstrated that the question is no longer whether reform is necessary or whether it can be achieved this Congress. Those questions were answered squarely in the affirmative." Center for American Progress (CAP), June 26, 2009.
The CAP report articulates five principles for responsible immigration reform grounded in a belief that lasting solutions flow from policies that defend the bedrock American values of opportunity, equality, fairness, compassion, and a commitment to the common good. The nation�s broken immigration system undermines our core national values, disserves our economic and security interests, and diminishes our moral standing in the world. Congress has for years now overseen an explosion of expensive, ineffective enforcement policies that have wasted billions of taxpayer dollars, enriched criminal syndicates, divided families, disrupted communities, and battered local economies rather than confronting our failed policies with common sense solutions grounded in what is best for our nation. In short, Congress has sacrificed our national interest at the altar of a destined-to-fail, get-tough enforcement strategy.
Confronted with this crisis the United States is left with three options: 1) preserve the status quo�an option that no responsible policymaker would advance; 2) drive millions of workers and families out of our communities, which CAP estimates would run over $41 billion annually; or 3) embrace tough but fair and practical solutions.
The Center for American Progress correctly concludes that the status quo is untenable, mass deportation is contrary to our national interests and values, and the only viable approach is comprehensive immigration reform. Such reform would require immigrants to register and become legal, pay taxes, learn English, and pass criminal background checks.
Five key principles for reform should guide the president and Congress as they begin to reengage this pressing domestic priority. CAP�s principles for responsible immigration reform are grounded in a belief that lasting solutions flow from policies that defend the bedrock American values of opportunity, equality, fairness, compassion, and a commitment to the common good. They are:
Resolve the status of the undocumented
It is morally and economically unacceptable for the wealthiest nation on earth to have 12 million people living and functioning in an underground economy in the United States. Our �shining city upon a hill� is casting a dark shadow over a large class of workers. These workers and their families are interwoven in our communities, yet they are proscribed from becoming full members of our society. Their labor enhances the nation�s competitiveness and enables economic growth, but their lack of legal status exposes them and their U.S. counterparts to manipulation and exploitation. Effective reform must require those living in the United States illegally to register, pay their full share of taxes, learn English, complete background checks, and earn the privilege of citizenship. The country will in turn benefit from an expanded tax base, a more robust rule of law, a workforce less vulnerable to exploitation, and a level playing field for all workers.
Enhance legal immigration channels and labor mobility
Globalization has made it increasingly more efficient to move capital, goods, and services across national borders. Yet legal channels facilitating movement of labor have not kept pace with this rapid development, even though immigration is an integral part of the American economy. The demands of global competitiveness require increased overall levels of legal immigration. Immigrants serve important roles in the success of the nation�s economy in boardrooms and corn fields, in Silicon Valley and the San Fernando Valley. Demographic trends show that an aging United States will need more workers across all occupation levels. Employment-based immigration and family-based immigration complement each other and should not be pitted against one another in a zero-sum game. Target levels should be adjusted to acknowledge that immigration is an engine of economic dynamism and to ensure that close families are not separated for years by outdated limitations. The United States must embrace the inevitable shift toward a well-regulated, legal, global labor market in order to retain our economic leadership.
Protect U.S. workers
Comprehensive immigration reform will benefit all U.S. workers. A program that brings undocumented immigrants out of the shadows will improve accountability for all employers. And a clear but rigorous path toward citizenship would diminish U.S. workers� vulnerability to unscrupulous employers. This creates fair, not exploitative, competition.
Any reforms must also protect American workers by safeguarding their ability to defend their rights, including the rights to change jobs freely and organize without fear, and to earn a fair wage. Millions of American workers are experiencing unemployment or underemployment in today�s economy, and we should strive to provide just wages for all workers and terminate policies that enable employers to participate in a race to the bottom of the wage ladder.
Foster an inclusive American identity
Our country�s identity is shaped by core values of equality, freedom, and opportunity. Immigration and the process of assimilation constantly tests and ultimately strengthens and deepens our commitment to those values. We must be vigilant, however, to ensure that newcomers have access to programs�language and civic education�that facilitate their integration into the nation�s social and cultural fabric. Naturalization, the cornerstone of integration and first step in civic participation for new citizens, must be accessible and encouraged.
Adopt smart enforcement policies and safeguards
The U.S. Border Patrol�s annual budget has more than quintupled since 1993 while the number of undocumented immigrants in the United States has tripled to approximately 12 million during that same time period. Militarization of the border has obviously failed as an immigration control strategy.
CAP has a clear grasp of the essential ingredients to reforming our immigration laws and the American public gets it. More than 80 percent (http://amvoice.3cdn.net/ea94778f39d6c895c3_zvm6beppq.pdf) of Americans across the country, across party lines, and across nearly all demographic cross-sections, want comprehensive immigration reform that secures our borders, makes employers accountable, and requires undocumented workers to register, learn English, and pay taxes.
The president and Congress must move forward on the path they laid out this week and the American public is clearly behind the popular president.https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/186823568153827945-1584438715913274381?l=ailaleadership.blogspot.com
More... (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2009/06/immigration-reform-now-reality.html)
President Obama and Congress members met privately at the White House on Thursday for their first major discussion of immigration reform. A Way Forward on Immigration (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/27/opinion/27sat1.html). New York Times Editorial June 27, 2009. President Obama has a lot on his plate dealing with the economy, health and energy but his approach to immigration reform indicates a clear grasp of the complex dynamic needed to win the battle. The need to reform our immigration laws now could not be more immediate or urgent. There is a crisis in immigration and the need to fix this mess has never been more critical. Immigration raids in our communities and our factories, along with the horrific conditions of detention, have created dread and anxiety within our immigrant population. The process of obtaining lawful status has become unreasonably difficult, and there are few options for the millions of immigrants, many of whom have deep roots here, but entered without visas or have expired visas. Millions of these people have U.S. citizen spouses and children, but no path to legalization. Despite decades of living in the U.S., and contributing to our economy, and whether applying for immigrant or nonimmigrant visas, the pattern is the same: restrictive adjudications coupled with outdated visa quotas that choke the system and make the attainment of lawful status virtually impossible. Whether applying through family or employment, the waiting lines are as protracted as they are preposterous. Many with advanced degrees wait for years and family visa waiting lines routinely extend a decade or longer. Due process protections that form the basis of our great democracy have been stripped from immigrants.
President Obama told a bipartisan group of lawmakers this week that Congress should begin debating a comprehensive immigration by year�s end or early next year, but Republicans said they would support a measure only if it included an expansion of guest worker programs. Republicans Focus on Guest Workers in Immigration Debate (javascript:popup(). The White House released President Obama's remarks following a meeting on June 25, 2009 with congressional leaders to discuss immigration reform, in which he expresses his administration's support for CIR and indicates a clear understanding of the issues and how to fix them. President Obama's Remarks Following June 25 Meeting on Immigration Reform with Congressional Leaders (http://www.aila.org/content/default.aspx?docid=29384)
The American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA) understand immigration in a way that only a doctor understands medical ailments or an engineer understands building bridges. We know the issues from a deep perspective and not merely from an emotional view. We believe that a sensible comprehensive immigration reform package will have to include smart enforcement, a path to citizenship for the 12 million undocumented immigrants currently living and working in the U.S., elimination of family and employment-based visa backlogs, adequate visas to meet the needs of U.S. families and businesses, a new visa program for essential workers, and due process protections to restore the rule of law in our immigration adjudications and courts. AILA Welcomes Obama's Proactive Push for Comprehensive Immigration Reform This Year (http://www.aila.org/content/default.aspx?docid=29372).
The current immigration system is broken and to allow the status quo to continue will only make things worse for the country. Until Congress deals responsibly with immigration - making taxpayers out of all immigrants, making all employers follow sensible rules, and creating a functioning legal immigration system - everything else on the President's domestic agenda is vulnerable to being dragged down. This is the year and this is the moment for a popular President to work with Congress to address a national issue in a way that benefits the American people and our economy. The Joint Center for Housing Studies of Harvard University released a new housing report which notes, �immigrants could be a key element to recovery." Immigration Impact, June 26, 2009, Immigrant Homebuyers Play Crucial Role in Housing Market Revival (javascript:popup(). The president announced that he has charged DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano with leading a bipartisan, bicameral working group to help negotiate and move a legislative package later this year, and those of us who have been championing immigration reform�and who have been training for this day�are off to the races (http://www.americanprogress.org/pressroom/statements/2009/06/White_House_immigration_meeting_statement062509.ht ml). President Kicks Off Immigration Reform (javascript:popup()"The White House meeting yesterday demonstrated that the question is no longer whether reform is necessary or whether it can be achieved this Congress. Those questions were answered squarely in the affirmative." Center for American Progress (CAP), June 26, 2009.
The CAP report articulates five principles for responsible immigration reform grounded in a belief that lasting solutions flow from policies that defend the bedrock American values of opportunity, equality, fairness, compassion, and a commitment to the common good. The nation�s broken immigration system undermines our core national values, disserves our economic and security interests, and diminishes our moral standing in the world. Congress has for years now overseen an explosion of expensive, ineffective enforcement policies that have wasted billions of taxpayer dollars, enriched criminal syndicates, divided families, disrupted communities, and battered local economies rather than confronting our failed policies with common sense solutions grounded in what is best for our nation. In short, Congress has sacrificed our national interest at the altar of a destined-to-fail, get-tough enforcement strategy.
Confronted with this crisis the United States is left with three options: 1) preserve the status quo�an option that no responsible policymaker would advance; 2) drive millions of workers and families out of our communities, which CAP estimates would run over $41 billion annually; or 3) embrace tough but fair and practical solutions.
The Center for American Progress correctly concludes that the status quo is untenable, mass deportation is contrary to our national interests and values, and the only viable approach is comprehensive immigration reform. Such reform would require immigrants to register and become legal, pay taxes, learn English, and pass criminal background checks.
Five key principles for reform should guide the president and Congress as they begin to reengage this pressing domestic priority. CAP�s principles for responsible immigration reform are grounded in a belief that lasting solutions flow from policies that defend the bedrock American values of opportunity, equality, fairness, compassion, and a commitment to the common good. They are:
Resolve the status of the undocumented
It is morally and economically unacceptable for the wealthiest nation on earth to have 12 million people living and functioning in an underground economy in the United States. Our �shining city upon a hill� is casting a dark shadow over a large class of workers. These workers and their families are interwoven in our communities, yet they are proscribed from becoming full members of our society. Their labor enhances the nation�s competitiveness and enables economic growth, but their lack of legal status exposes them and their U.S. counterparts to manipulation and exploitation. Effective reform must require those living in the United States illegally to register, pay their full share of taxes, learn English, complete background checks, and earn the privilege of citizenship. The country will in turn benefit from an expanded tax base, a more robust rule of law, a workforce less vulnerable to exploitation, and a level playing field for all workers.
Enhance legal immigration channels and labor mobility
Globalization has made it increasingly more efficient to move capital, goods, and services across national borders. Yet legal channels facilitating movement of labor have not kept pace with this rapid development, even though immigration is an integral part of the American economy. The demands of global competitiveness require increased overall levels of legal immigration. Immigrants serve important roles in the success of the nation�s economy in boardrooms and corn fields, in Silicon Valley and the San Fernando Valley. Demographic trends show that an aging United States will need more workers across all occupation levels. Employment-based immigration and family-based immigration complement each other and should not be pitted against one another in a zero-sum game. Target levels should be adjusted to acknowledge that immigration is an engine of economic dynamism and to ensure that close families are not separated for years by outdated limitations. The United States must embrace the inevitable shift toward a well-regulated, legal, global labor market in order to retain our economic leadership.
Protect U.S. workers
Comprehensive immigration reform will benefit all U.S. workers. A program that brings undocumented immigrants out of the shadows will improve accountability for all employers. And a clear but rigorous path toward citizenship would diminish U.S. workers� vulnerability to unscrupulous employers. This creates fair, not exploitative, competition.
Any reforms must also protect American workers by safeguarding their ability to defend their rights, including the rights to change jobs freely and organize without fear, and to earn a fair wage. Millions of American workers are experiencing unemployment or underemployment in today�s economy, and we should strive to provide just wages for all workers and terminate policies that enable employers to participate in a race to the bottom of the wage ladder.
Foster an inclusive American identity
Our country�s identity is shaped by core values of equality, freedom, and opportunity. Immigration and the process of assimilation constantly tests and ultimately strengthens and deepens our commitment to those values. We must be vigilant, however, to ensure that newcomers have access to programs�language and civic education�that facilitate their integration into the nation�s social and cultural fabric. Naturalization, the cornerstone of integration and first step in civic participation for new citizens, must be accessible and encouraged.
Adopt smart enforcement policies and safeguards
The U.S. Border Patrol�s annual budget has more than quintupled since 1993 while the number of undocumented immigrants in the United States has tripled to approximately 12 million during that same time period. Militarization of the border has obviously failed as an immigration control strategy.
CAP has a clear grasp of the essential ingredients to reforming our immigration laws and the American public gets it. More than 80 percent (http://amvoice.3cdn.net/ea94778f39d6c895c3_zvm6beppq.pdf) of Americans across the country, across party lines, and across nearly all demographic cross-sections, want comprehensive immigration reform that secures our borders, makes employers accountable, and requires undocumented workers to register, learn English, and pay taxes.
The president and Congress must move forward on the path they laid out this week and the American public is clearly behind the popular president.https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/186823568153827945-1584438715913274381?l=ailaleadership.blogspot.com
More... (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2009/06/immigration-reform-now-reality.html)
more...
makeup Wet car march ,may
fromnaija
07-20 05:30 PM
Assuming that her 485 is not approved by the time they bring the child into the US, she could file AOS for the baby when her PD becomes current again.
NO, the child will not have to file family based and will not have to go out of country to get GC.
her priority date is march 2005 .and they filed for AoS on july 2nd.Her due date is november of this year. I am guessingt hat their 485 will not be approved november of this year.So, they can bring the child on h4 into the country. but then if their 485 gets approved in a year of 18 months-- what happens to the child? How does the child apply ?family based? in that case, the child will ahve to go out of the country for a long time, till the GC is approved- right?
NO, the child will not have to file family based and will not have to go out of country to get GC.
her priority date is march 2005 .and they filed for AoS on july 2nd.Her due date is november of this year. I am guessingt hat their 485 will not be approved november of this year.So, they can bring the child on h4 into the country. but then if their 485 gets approved in a year of 18 months-- what happens to the child? How does the child apply ?family based? in that case, the child will ahve to go out of the country for a long time, till the GC is approved- right?
girlfriend Repairs and Services all Makes
hopefulgc
12-08 01:58 PM
my cousin (think immi.com handle gcapnekbohi ) got his masters 1.5 years ago from university of phoenix .. through online program.
Soon after he tried to interfile his eb3 app for eb2 and he is currently appealing his NOID... reason 'inequality of credit weights from online masters since they are not transferable'.
Anybody know of anyone who has successfully gotten through to eb2 using an online masters? please pm me..thanks in advance.
You should qualify for EB2. It doesn't matter even if it's online.
Soon after he tried to interfile his eb3 app for eb2 and he is currently appealing his NOID... reason 'inequality of credit weights from online masters since they are not transferable'.
Anybody know of anyone who has successfully gotten through to eb2 using an online masters? please pm me..thanks in advance.
You should qualify for EB2. It doesn't matter even if it's online.
hairstyles World Logos - graphics for
nk2006
12-07 02:40 PM
Friends,
I apoligizeif I was posting this message in the wrong section.
I'm on H1B and filed my 140/485 concurrently in Aug 2007. Can I do ONLINE MBA with out affecting GC process?
Yes.
I think you can take classes (online or even regular in-class) as long as you maintian your primary H1B status - i.e. continue to work with the employer on the specified job/number of hours etc.
(note: I am not a lawyer)
I apoligizeif I was posting this message in the wrong section.
I'm on H1B and filed my 140/485 concurrently in Aug 2007. Can I do ONLINE MBA with out affecting GC process?
Yes.
I think you can take classes (online or even regular in-class) as long as you maintian your primary H1B status - i.e. continue to work with the employer on the specified job/number of hours etc.
(note: I am not a lawyer)
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.
GCaspirations
10-02 11:53 AM
Can one apply for Social Security # after getting EAD card ?
Once you received your EAD card, you can apply for SSN.
Once you received your EAD card, you can apply for SSN.
No comments:
Post a Comment