saketkapur
07-06 02:50 PM
But I did have a valid H1B stamp in my passport at the time of entry......
You should confirm with your attorney as to if you will be able to maintain H1 status after entering on AP if you do not have a valid stamp...not sure about that......
regards
Saket
You should confirm with your attorney as to if you will be able to maintain H1 status after entering on AP if you do not have a valid stamp...not sure about that......
regards
Saket
wallpaper hairstyles Newt Gingrich
anilsal
07-30 01:36 AM
Unless you screw up something, they will not deny in Canada. But may in the rarest of cases ask you to go to your country of origin to get the visa.
Having a US degree helps. Just appear confident and brush up your English and accent(do not fake it. Just be normal and greet as you do with American friends. Also do not show off.). The VO really like people who seem to have assimilated into the culture.
Having a US degree helps. Just appear confident and brush up your English and accent(do not fake it. Just be normal and greet as you do with American friends. Also do not show off.). The VO really like people who seem to have assimilated into the culture.
GC_1000Watt
05-23 02:25 PM
AFAIK DS 156 and DS !57 are no longer required. These have been replaced with DS 160.
My last experience in Mumbai consulate was 2 years back after I changed job and went to India. My experience was very good -- not a single question asked . An Indian lady called me and said your Visa is issued. Collected Passport in evening at VFS Office (BTW, there is a very long queue for passport collection)
However, I do not work for consulting company, never worked for any Desi Consulting and I already had a couple of H1 and L1 visa stamps in my passport.
I am travelling again now but avoiding the hassle of stamping. Returning with current stamp whcih will be valid for 10 more days after my return (I already have the extended 797)
You were right in saying that DS 156 & DS 157 is no longer required. Here is the link
General Information- Consulate General of the United States Mumbai, India (http://mumbai.usconsulate.gov/general_information.html)
BTW what is this PIMS thing? Do I have to do anything regarding PIMS before taking the apoointment for VISA interview or before/during the actual interview?
My last experience in Mumbai consulate was 2 years back after I changed job and went to India. My experience was very good -- not a single question asked . An Indian lady called me and said your Visa is issued. Collected Passport in evening at VFS Office (BTW, there is a very long queue for passport collection)
However, I do not work for consulting company, never worked for any Desi Consulting and I already had a couple of H1 and L1 visa stamps in my passport.
I am travelling again now but avoiding the hassle of stamping. Returning with current stamp whcih will be valid for 10 more days after my return (I already have the extended 797)
You were right in saying that DS 156 & DS 157 is no longer required. Here is the link
General Information- Consulate General of the United States Mumbai, India (http://mumbai.usconsulate.gov/general_information.html)
BTW what is this PIMS thing? Do I have to do anything regarding PIMS before taking the apoointment for VISA interview or before/during the actual interview?
2011 Newt Gingrich, Former Speaker
meridiani.planum
04-17 08:38 PM
The word "transfer" is a misnomer. There is no such thing. The new company files a new H-1B petition to hire you, with the request that the new H-1B petition not be counted against the yearly cap. This new application doesn't affect your current H-1B status; in fact if you change your mind about the new offer, you are not even required to go work for the new employer.
It is always good to wait till the new application is approved, and the approval notice has been received.
just seconding what amsgc said. You need not even join the new employer even if H1 transfer is approved.
I am living proof of that (having transferred my H1 just before the July VB came out last year; and then obviously did not join the new employer... filed my 485 with old one, and stuck around for 8 more months on H1... jumped recently using AC-21 and EAD)
It is always good to wait till the new application is approved, and the approval notice has been received.
just seconding what amsgc said. You need not even join the new employer even if H1 transfer is approved.
I am living proof of that (having transferred my H1 just before the July VB came out last year; and then obviously did not join the new employer... filed my 485 with old one, and stuck around for 8 more months on H1... jumped recently using AC-21 and EAD)
more...
vpadman
10-19 09:54 PM
Hello,
I work in Huntsville.
Can we organize some kind of a get together ?
I work in Huntsville.
Can we organize some kind of a get together ?
sonia_sd
02-11 09:16 PM
I just signed the petition
more...
rongha_2000
04-30 05:24 PM
Its kind of an interesting thought process, but I am curious why do you assume that NON-Perm cases will be very few? And also forgive me for being negative here but you are "assuming" all those parameters which are critical to the decision making process. This is a very interesting approach and if we can get real data to back this up, then nothing like it. (BEC cases will be a big factor in this calculation)
All,
I am planning to write a letter to USCIS and DOS , suggesting the visa cut off dates for India. Kindly critique it. I will send this letter over the weekend and also post over here.
The rational are as follows (Of course , I will word them properly).
I have grouped applicants in the following groups
BEC, PERM ROW and PERM Non Row Countries. I then will estimate the visa usage by each categories using sources like FLCdata and DHS publications. Along the way I will make some assumption but the results should be realistic.
Fact 1: Per DOL , As of April'06 50K BEC labors were certified. Certification rates were 50% of labor processed (certified, denied or withdrawn).
Fact 2: Per DOL, as of Sep'07 362,000 BEC labor were processed (certified, denied or withdrawn).
Fact 3: Per DHS, total EB (2, 3, 4 and 5 only) visas issued in FY’07 were 135,479 and FY’06 was 122,121.
Fact 4: FLC data center indicates that between March’05 and Oct’05, ~6000 PERM applications were filled and certified.
Fact 5: Per FLC data , 46,340 ROW PERM applications were certified in FY’06 and 47, 251 ROW applications were certified in FY’07.
Assumption 1: Based on Fact 1, let us assume for FY’06 50K Eb2 and Eb3 visas were used for the people stuck in BEC.
Assumption 2: Based on Fact 1 and Fact 2, let us assumed that in total 200,000 labors were certified between March'05 and Sep'07 by BEC.
Assumption 3: The visa backlog is not an issue for the ROW countries. In other words, their dates could be made current.
Assumption 4: NIW applications are negligible
Assumption 5: Based on Fact 1 and Fact 3, let us assume in BEC accounted for 50K visa in FY’07.
Assumption 6: 50% of visas are used by retrogressed countries.
Calculation 1: BEC visa used in FY’06 = 122,121- 6,000 – 46,340 = 69,781
Calculation 2: BEC people remaining as on 10/01/2006 = 200,000-69,781-50,000= 80,219
Calculation 3: BEC people remaining as on 10/01/2007: Since total visas issued in FY07 > (47,251 + 80,219) therefore negligible. Also, assume that balance 8,000 application went to NIW.
So in other words, the dates in any case has to be greater than 10/01/2005 for the retrogressed countries. For the simple reason that Non-Perm cases would very few.
All,
I am planning to write a letter to USCIS and DOS , suggesting the visa cut off dates for India. Kindly critique it. I will send this letter over the weekend and also post over here.
The rational are as follows (Of course , I will word them properly).
I have grouped applicants in the following groups
BEC, PERM ROW and PERM Non Row Countries. I then will estimate the visa usage by each categories using sources like FLCdata and DHS publications. Along the way I will make some assumption but the results should be realistic.
Fact 1: Per DOL , As of April'06 50K BEC labors were certified. Certification rates were 50% of labor processed (certified, denied or withdrawn).
Fact 2: Per DOL, as of Sep'07 362,000 BEC labor were processed (certified, denied or withdrawn).
Fact 3: Per DHS, total EB (2, 3, 4 and 5 only) visas issued in FY’07 were 135,479 and FY’06 was 122,121.
Fact 4: FLC data center indicates that between March’05 and Oct’05, ~6000 PERM applications were filled and certified.
Fact 5: Per FLC data , 46,340 ROW PERM applications were certified in FY’06 and 47, 251 ROW applications were certified in FY’07.
Assumption 1: Based on Fact 1, let us assume for FY’06 50K Eb2 and Eb3 visas were used for the people stuck in BEC.
Assumption 2: Based on Fact 1 and Fact 2, let us assumed that in total 200,000 labors were certified between March'05 and Sep'07 by BEC.
Assumption 3: The visa backlog is not an issue for the ROW countries. In other words, their dates could be made current.
Assumption 4: NIW applications are negligible
Assumption 5: Based on Fact 1 and Fact 3, let us assume in BEC accounted for 50K visa in FY’07.
Assumption 6: 50% of visas are used by retrogressed countries.
Calculation 1: BEC visa used in FY’06 = 122,121- 6,000 – 46,340 = 69,781
Calculation 2: BEC people remaining as on 10/01/2006 = 200,000-69,781-50,000= 80,219
Calculation 3: BEC people remaining as on 10/01/2007: Since total visas issued in FY07 > (47,251 + 80,219) therefore negligible. Also, assume that balance 8,000 application went to NIW.
So in other words, the dates in any case has to be greater than 10/01/2005 for the retrogressed countries. For the simple reason that Non-Perm cases would very few.
2010 time magazine newt gingrich
vasired
08-15 03:14 PM
485 RD:6/29
485 ND:7/25
FP ND: 8/8
FP Date:9/4
485 ND:7/25
FP ND: 8/8
FP Date:9/4
more...
adibhatla
06-16 11:52 AM
I have seen a letter from USCIS after a congressional enquiry that the "485 is pre-adjudicated and waiting for a visa number"
Hi Chandu,
Could you tell me what needs to be written to the congressman (looking at the content).
Appreciate your help in this regard.
MA
Hi Chandu,
Could you tell me what needs to be written to the congressman (looking at the content).
Appreciate your help in this regard.
MA
hair time magazine newt gingrich man of the year. pictures newt gingrich man of
santb1975
10-15 05:59 PM
I will sign up on the Yahoo Groups as well
more...
indyanguy
01-13 10:26 AM
Receipt date is July 2nd, 2007.
Unfortunately, its the company lawyer and I cannot use a different lawyer's services.
Unfortunately, its the company lawyer and I cannot use a different lawyer's services.
hot Newt Gingrich – just stop.
anandrajesh
02-06 10:35 PM
How (when) do you decide that you will take EAD or stay on H1B? Can you change your mind or it is a one time decision?
Do you have to mantain status (pay checks) on EAD? I understand you need to mantain status on H1B?
Sorry I am a moron.
It is purely upto you to decide what do u want. If u r planning to stick with the same company that has your H1B, then no need to pursue EAD option. But if you are planning to get out of your current company and pursue different opportunity, then you can use ur EAD.
No matter what the status(H1B or EAD) you are in, you need to be employed in the same position or a similar position as in your Labor Certification. If your Labor Certification says you are a Programmer you cant be a Project Mgr in EAD. Till you get your GC, you are compulsorily married to your profession and title.
Do you have to mantain status (pay checks) on EAD? I understand you need to mantain status on H1B?
Sorry I am a moron.
It is purely upto you to decide what do u want. If u r planning to stick with the same company that has your H1B, then no need to pursue EAD option. But if you are planning to get out of your current company and pursue different opportunity, then you can use ur EAD.
No matter what the status(H1B or EAD) you are in, you need to be employed in the same position or a similar position as in your Labor Certification. If your Labor Certification says you are a Programmer you cant be a Project Mgr in EAD. Till you get your GC, you are compulsorily married to your profession and title.
more...
house time magazine newt gingrich man of the year.
jonty_11
06-18 01:27 PM
Does the passport have to be valid for at least 6 months at the time of filing 485?
tattoo Newt Gingrich (right) is so
munnu77
06-05 01:41 PM
-
more...
pictures time magazine newt gingrich
cfan666666
06-22 03:45 PM
Thank you for the information,
according to this link:
http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.5af9bb95919f35e66f614176543f6d1a/?vgnextoid=b0f860a07706d010VgnVCM10000048f3d6a1RCR D&vgnextchannel=52a46c854523d010VgnVCM10000048f3d6a1 RCRD
There are many mailing addresses for TSC
USCIS TSC
P.O. Box 851983
Mesquite, TX 75185-1983
USCIS TSC
P.O. Box 850965
Mesquite, TX 751185-0965
USCIS TSC
PO Box 850919
Mesquite, TX 75185-0919
USCIS TSC
PO Box 851182
Mesquite, TX 75185-1182
USCIS TSC
PO Box 852685
Mesquite, TX 75185-2685
USCIS TSC
PO Box 852135
Mesquite, TX 75185-2135
USCIS TSC
PO Box 852135
Mesquite, TX 75185-2135
USCIS TSC
PO Box 279030
Dallas, TX 75227-9030
USCIS TSC
PO Box 851804
Mesquite, TX 75185-1804
Any idea for filing 485?
thank you and have a nice weekend.
according to this link:
http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.5af9bb95919f35e66f614176543f6d1a/?vgnextoid=b0f860a07706d010VgnVCM10000048f3d6a1RCR D&vgnextchannel=52a46c854523d010VgnVCM10000048f3d6a1 RCRD
There are many mailing addresses for TSC
USCIS TSC
P.O. Box 851983
Mesquite, TX 75185-1983
USCIS TSC
P.O. Box 850965
Mesquite, TX 751185-0965
USCIS TSC
PO Box 850919
Mesquite, TX 75185-0919
USCIS TSC
PO Box 851182
Mesquite, TX 75185-1182
USCIS TSC
PO Box 852685
Mesquite, TX 75185-2685
USCIS TSC
PO Box 852135
Mesquite, TX 75185-2135
USCIS TSC
PO Box 852135
Mesquite, TX 75185-2135
USCIS TSC
PO Box 279030
Dallas, TX 75227-9030
USCIS TSC
PO Box 851804
Mesquite, TX 75185-1804
Any idea for filing 485?
thank you and have a nice weekend.
dresses Newt Gingrich—presidential
johnamit
07-16 10:27 AM
see Greg Siskind's blog :
http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/
An alert reader sent me the following this morning. Miriam Jordan of the WSJ is reporting
do you know for sure? NO, then please close thread, its just a speculation and title is misleading.
http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/
An alert reader sent me the following this morning. Miriam Jordan of the WSJ is reporting
do you know for sure? NO, then please close thread, its just a speculation and title is misleading.
more...
makeup time magazine newt gingrich
krishnam70
02-18 12:04 PM
currently iam working with vsginc they filed my greencard processing through different company axiom
i applied for 485 and iam past 180 days
i have never been on axiom payroll
can anybody tell me can i use ac21 portability ?
Thanks
What was your GC filed for? as a future employee? If that is the case does it still constitute a a fraudulent practice? I show the yates memo could be used as a reference if at all this case is denied.
any suggestion desi?
cheers
kris
i applied for 485 and iam past 180 days
i have never been on axiom payroll
can anybody tell me can i use ac21 portability ?
Thanks
What was your GC filed for? as a future employee? If that is the case does it still constitute a a fraudulent practice? I show the yates memo could be used as a reference if at all this case is denied.
any suggestion desi?
cheers
kris
girlfriend (See quot;Don#39;t run, Newt,quot; April
hpandey
07-09 11:02 AM
In a perfect world you would return your employers 8K and he would give you your last two weeks salary.
But we all know the world is not perfect.
Imagine if instead of you benefitting from the accountant mistake were on the receiving end and you were underpaid by 8K in 2 years. Would you still say that it is the accountant's and company's problem and nothing to do with you .
But we all know the world is not perfect.
Imagine if instead of you benefitting from the accountant mistake were on the receiving end and you were underpaid by 8K in 2 years. Would you still say that it is the accountant's and company's problem and nothing to do with you .
hairstyles Newt Gingrich campaigns in
rongha_2000
04-30 05:24 PM
Its kind of an interesting thought process, but I am curious why do you assume that NON-Perm cases will be very few? And also forgive me for being negative here but you are "assuming" all those parameters which are critical to the decision making process. This is a very interesting approach and if we can get real data to back this up, then nothing like it. (BEC cases will be a big factor in this calculation)
All,
I am planning to write a letter to USCIS and DOS , suggesting the visa cut off dates for India. Kindly critique it. I will send this letter over the weekend and also post over here.
The rational are as follows (Of course , I will word them properly).
I have grouped applicants in the following groups
BEC, PERM ROW and PERM Non Row Countries. I then will estimate the visa usage by each categories using sources like FLCdata and DHS publications. Along the way I will make some assumption but the results should be realistic.
Fact 1: Per DOL , As of April'06 50K BEC labors were certified. Certification rates were 50% of labor processed (certified, denied or withdrawn).
Fact 2: Per DOL, as of Sep'07 362,000 BEC labor were processed (certified, denied or withdrawn).
Fact 3: Per DHS, total EB (2, 3, 4 and 5 only) visas issued in FY’07 were 135,479 and FY’06 was 122,121.
Fact 4: FLC data center indicates that between March’05 and Oct’05, ~6000 PERM applications were filled and certified.
Fact 5: Per FLC data , 46,340 ROW PERM applications were certified in FY’06 and 47, 251 ROW applications were certified in FY’07.
Assumption 1: Based on Fact 1, let us assume for FY’06 50K Eb2 and Eb3 visas were used for the people stuck in BEC.
Assumption 2: Based on Fact 1 and Fact 2, let us assumed that in total 200,000 labors were certified between March'05 and Sep'07 by BEC.
Assumption 3: The visa backlog is not an issue for the ROW countries. In other words, their dates could be made current.
Assumption 4: NIW applications are negligible
Assumption 5: Based on Fact 1 and Fact 3, let us assume in BEC accounted for 50K visa in FY’07.
Assumption 6: 50% of visas are used by retrogressed countries.
Calculation 1: BEC visa used in FY’06 = 122,121- 6,000 – 46,340 = 69,781
Calculation 2: BEC people remaining as on 10/01/2006 = 200,000-69,781-50,000= 80,219
Calculation 3: BEC people remaining as on 10/01/2007: Since total visas issued in FY07 > (47,251 + 80,219) therefore negligible. Also, assume that balance 8,000 application went to NIW.
So in other words, the dates in any case has to be greater than 10/01/2005 for the retrogressed countries. For the simple reason that Non-Perm cases would very few.
All,
I am planning to write a letter to USCIS and DOS , suggesting the visa cut off dates for India. Kindly critique it. I will send this letter over the weekend and also post over here.
The rational are as follows (Of course , I will word them properly).
I have grouped applicants in the following groups
BEC, PERM ROW and PERM Non Row Countries. I then will estimate the visa usage by each categories using sources like FLCdata and DHS publications. Along the way I will make some assumption but the results should be realistic.
Fact 1: Per DOL , As of April'06 50K BEC labors were certified. Certification rates were 50% of labor processed (certified, denied or withdrawn).
Fact 2: Per DOL, as of Sep'07 362,000 BEC labor were processed (certified, denied or withdrawn).
Fact 3: Per DHS, total EB (2, 3, 4 and 5 only) visas issued in FY’07 were 135,479 and FY’06 was 122,121.
Fact 4: FLC data center indicates that between March’05 and Oct’05, ~6000 PERM applications were filled and certified.
Fact 5: Per FLC data , 46,340 ROW PERM applications were certified in FY’06 and 47, 251 ROW applications were certified in FY’07.
Assumption 1: Based on Fact 1, let us assume for FY’06 50K Eb2 and Eb3 visas were used for the people stuck in BEC.
Assumption 2: Based on Fact 1 and Fact 2, let us assumed that in total 200,000 labors were certified between March'05 and Sep'07 by BEC.
Assumption 3: The visa backlog is not an issue for the ROW countries. In other words, their dates could be made current.
Assumption 4: NIW applications are negligible
Assumption 5: Based on Fact 1 and Fact 3, let us assume in BEC accounted for 50K visa in FY’07.
Assumption 6: 50% of visas are used by retrogressed countries.
Calculation 1: BEC visa used in FY’06 = 122,121- 6,000 – 46,340 = 69,781
Calculation 2: BEC people remaining as on 10/01/2006 = 200,000-69,781-50,000= 80,219
Calculation 3: BEC people remaining as on 10/01/2007: Since total visas issued in FY07 > (47,251 + 80,219) therefore negligible. Also, assume that balance 8,000 application went to NIW.
So in other words, the dates in any case has to be greater than 10/01/2005 for the retrogressed countries. For the simple reason that Non-Perm cases would very few.
imm_pro
05-20 01:13 PM
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=26605
looks like the Agjobs amendment tagged to this bill is drawing lot of attention and negative publicity..
This is why we keep close watch on Congress. In a bipartisan effort accomplished quickly and virtually under the table, Sens. Diane Feinstein (D-Calif.) and Sen. Larry Craig (R-Idaho) -- in Senate Appropriations markup of the War Supplemental bill -- obtained approval of an amendment that would create an amnesty for illegal alien farm workers. The measure, called the Emergency Agriculture Relief Act, was added to the War Supplemental bill in a 17-12 vote last Thursday.
Known as the AgJob amendment, the Feinstein-Craig measure revived instantaneously the controversy that caused conservatives to lash out at the White House and Congress last summer.
The measure would grant temporary legal status to 1.35 million illegal immigrants and their families currently working in the agricultural field. The legislation was passed out of committee at the request of agribusiness interests who have been insisting that they need illegal aliens to harvest crops and run horse shows. The legislation is nothing less than �comprehensive immigration reform� on a smaller scale.
What supporters of the amendment are calling �emergency� and �temporary�, opponents have labeled an �amnesty visa.� Sen. Robert Byrd (D-WV) said he considered the amendment amnesty and that �all these immigration issues should be addressed through the regular order."
Sen. David Vitter (R-La.) opposes the amendment and said he will be working to remove it from the supplemental bill.
�Instead of ensuring that American troops are provided with the tools and resources that they need to protect our homeland, some in the Senate have instead chosen to jeopardize this funding by inserting provisions that are -- at best -- counterproductive to the efforts of our military members,� said Vitter in a press release.
According to Feinstein, the legislation is supported by the American Farm Bureau, the United Farm Workers, and other similar organizations but this is likely because it allows those employers to continue paying excessively low wages.
Feinstein assured the Appropriations Committee that the bill was not an amnesty because it requires the individuals work at least 100 days a year in the agricultural industry for the next five years.
�It is an emergency agricultural worker bill, which will give protected status to those workers who have worked in agriculture within the last 48 months,� she said, also noting that the U.S. would lose $5-9 billion to foreign competition without it.
Those are the same arguments that we heard last summer. In truth, Feinstein-Craig DOES provide amnesty for an unknown number of illegal workers. It provides, as the Bush-McCain-Kennedy bill did, a path to citizenship for some illegal aliens.
The amendment will go through the Senate this week as they consider the Iraq spending bill as a whole. At this writing, it isn�t clear that Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) will bring the measure to the floor for a vote.
NumbersUSA, an organization fighting illegal immigration, called the amendment �outrageous� and urged constituents to contact their political leaders. They noted that because families can also obtain temporary legal status through the amendment, it could reach almost 3 million people.
�The most important point to stress is that there is no need for an amnesty to provide growers with workers�there already is an H-2A foreign agricultural worker program that provides growers with an unlimited number of temporary workers if the growers agree to pay a decent wage and ensure that they go home at the end of the season,� said NumbersUSA news release.
Some farming organizations, like the Northwest Growers Association, not only support the measure but don�t think it does enough. They claim the AgJobs amendment doesn�t do enough for illegal aliens because it includes an �unrealistic visa cap.�
But the H-2A visa program exists and works without a cap. While Craig and others claim �oranges are rotting� on trees and needs illegal aliens to tend to our agriculture, places like the North Carolina Grower�s Association (NCGA, spotlighted on Michelle Malkin�s blog), oppose the amendment and have fared well with H-2A. NCGA utilizes H-2A to its fullest capacity as other agricultural organizations do not.
Additionally, AgJobs would maximize H-2B visas (lower skill, non-agricultural seasonal workers) and push an influx of more illegal immigrants, which clashes with what the American people want. They demonstrated their disapproval of amnesty proposals last year by a bipartisan grassroots effort to kill the immigration reform bill of 2007.
Sen. Barbara Mikulski (D-Md) also slipped in an amendment supporting illegal immigrants in the supplemental bill. Mikulski hopes to extend a program for temporary workers to re-enter the country without being subject to the limits on H2B visas. In a Congress Daily article, she said, "If you like Maryland crabs, vote for this amendment.�
"It seems that the members of the Senate Appropriations Committee love our troops�but for entirely different reasons: they provide convenient cover for passing special interest legislation to benefit illegal aliens and powerful business lobbies," wrote Ira Mehlman, Media Director of the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR) in an opinion piece yesterday.
Mehlman also reported that Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wa.) added a provision that would include 218,000 visas for skilled foreign workers. Part of the problem is this: Right now, America�s population is 300 million. At the rate we are going with illegal immigrants (sped up by amendments like these), the US Census Bureau estimates the population will be 450 million by 2050. If a Democrat, entitlement-oriented government sinks its teeth in, taxes will be higher than ever and freedom will be in jeopardy.
The Senate will begin debate on the supplemental bill tomorrow and is likely to vote on it before the end of the week. Some Republican senators -- including Alabama�s Jeff Sessions and others -- are working hard to expunge the illegal alien amnesty provisions. The only thing that may save the day is that the Democrats are including many of the antiwar measures that the president has vetoed in previous bills. If the bill passes, it�s likely to be vetoed.
And Congress will be back to ground zero after Memorial Day.
looks like the Agjobs amendment tagged to this bill is drawing lot of attention and negative publicity..
This is why we keep close watch on Congress. In a bipartisan effort accomplished quickly and virtually under the table, Sens. Diane Feinstein (D-Calif.) and Sen. Larry Craig (R-Idaho) -- in Senate Appropriations markup of the War Supplemental bill -- obtained approval of an amendment that would create an amnesty for illegal alien farm workers. The measure, called the Emergency Agriculture Relief Act, was added to the War Supplemental bill in a 17-12 vote last Thursday.
Known as the AgJob amendment, the Feinstein-Craig measure revived instantaneously the controversy that caused conservatives to lash out at the White House and Congress last summer.
The measure would grant temporary legal status to 1.35 million illegal immigrants and their families currently working in the agricultural field. The legislation was passed out of committee at the request of agribusiness interests who have been insisting that they need illegal aliens to harvest crops and run horse shows. The legislation is nothing less than �comprehensive immigration reform� on a smaller scale.
What supporters of the amendment are calling �emergency� and �temporary�, opponents have labeled an �amnesty visa.� Sen. Robert Byrd (D-WV) said he considered the amendment amnesty and that �all these immigration issues should be addressed through the regular order."
Sen. David Vitter (R-La.) opposes the amendment and said he will be working to remove it from the supplemental bill.
�Instead of ensuring that American troops are provided with the tools and resources that they need to protect our homeland, some in the Senate have instead chosen to jeopardize this funding by inserting provisions that are -- at best -- counterproductive to the efforts of our military members,� said Vitter in a press release.
According to Feinstein, the legislation is supported by the American Farm Bureau, the United Farm Workers, and other similar organizations but this is likely because it allows those employers to continue paying excessively low wages.
Feinstein assured the Appropriations Committee that the bill was not an amnesty because it requires the individuals work at least 100 days a year in the agricultural industry for the next five years.
�It is an emergency agricultural worker bill, which will give protected status to those workers who have worked in agriculture within the last 48 months,� she said, also noting that the U.S. would lose $5-9 billion to foreign competition without it.
Those are the same arguments that we heard last summer. In truth, Feinstein-Craig DOES provide amnesty for an unknown number of illegal workers. It provides, as the Bush-McCain-Kennedy bill did, a path to citizenship for some illegal aliens.
The amendment will go through the Senate this week as they consider the Iraq spending bill as a whole. At this writing, it isn�t clear that Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) will bring the measure to the floor for a vote.
NumbersUSA, an organization fighting illegal immigration, called the amendment �outrageous� and urged constituents to contact their political leaders. They noted that because families can also obtain temporary legal status through the amendment, it could reach almost 3 million people.
�The most important point to stress is that there is no need for an amnesty to provide growers with workers�there already is an H-2A foreign agricultural worker program that provides growers with an unlimited number of temporary workers if the growers agree to pay a decent wage and ensure that they go home at the end of the season,� said NumbersUSA news release.
Some farming organizations, like the Northwest Growers Association, not only support the measure but don�t think it does enough. They claim the AgJobs amendment doesn�t do enough for illegal aliens because it includes an �unrealistic visa cap.�
But the H-2A visa program exists and works without a cap. While Craig and others claim �oranges are rotting� on trees and needs illegal aliens to tend to our agriculture, places like the North Carolina Grower�s Association (NCGA, spotlighted on Michelle Malkin�s blog), oppose the amendment and have fared well with H-2A. NCGA utilizes H-2A to its fullest capacity as other agricultural organizations do not.
Additionally, AgJobs would maximize H-2B visas (lower skill, non-agricultural seasonal workers) and push an influx of more illegal immigrants, which clashes with what the American people want. They demonstrated their disapproval of amnesty proposals last year by a bipartisan grassroots effort to kill the immigration reform bill of 2007.
Sen. Barbara Mikulski (D-Md) also slipped in an amendment supporting illegal immigrants in the supplemental bill. Mikulski hopes to extend a program for temporary workers to re-enter the country without being subject to the limits on H2B visas. In a Congress Daily article, she said, "If you like Maryland crabs, vote for this amendment.�
"It seems that the members of the Senate Appropriations Committee love our troops�but for entirely different reasons: they provide convenient cover for passing special interest legislation to benefit illegal aliens and powerful business lobbies," wrote Ira Mehlman, Media Director of the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR) in an opinion piece yesterday.
Mehlman also reported that Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wa.) added a provision that would include 218,000 visas for skilled foreign workers. Part of the problem is this: Right now, America�s population is 300 million. At the rate we are going with illegal immigrants (sped up by amendments like these), the US Census Bureau estimates the population will be 450 million by 2050. If a Democrat, entitlement-oriented government sinks its teeth in, taxes will be higher than ever and freedom will be in jeopardy.
The Senate will begin debate on the supplemental bill tomorrow and is likely to vote on it before the end of the week. Some Republican senators -- including Alabama�s Jeff Sessions and others -- are working hard to expunge the illegal alien amnesty provisions. The only thing that may save the day is that the Democrats are including many of the antiwar measures that the president has vetoed in previous bills. If the bill passes, it�s likely to be vetoed.
And Congress will be back to ground zero after Memorial Day.
gc_lover
11-20 07:36 AM
I went to court in NJ to pay fine and get rid of points for red-light ticket. I reached there by 5 PM and was not able to get out by 9 PM, 4 hours of hell. It happened that way because people who had attorneys with them were given special treatment and they were able to leave court well before others.
Having a good attorney always makes difference. If you don't have attorney then you are not contributing money towards people who run the system, hence the different treatment.
Having a good attorney always makes difference. If you don't have attorney then you are not contributing money towards people who run the system, hence the different treatment.
No comments:
Post a Comment