sri1309
03-18 05:34 PM
I hope the admins keep this thread open and not kill it. I am not sure what the intentions of the OP ( some of you claimed that he wants to create a rift ), but this is definitely a valid concern for all the EB3(I) guys. This is a natural reaction to the frustrations of EB3(I) guys just like the mass upheaval during the July 2007 VB fiasco. Since it was across the board, there were no differences. Now since this involves only EB3(I), there is not much support from IV or others. But in my opinion, this is as much unfair as the Julay VB fiasco.
Some of the EB2(I) guys are worried that their GC dreams would get delayed if there is any Admin fix for EB3(I). For all those individuals in EB2(I) who want to oppose any kind of admin fix for EB3(I), I just want you to think about it. Is it really fair? There are individuals in EB3(I) waiting since 2001 - a total of 8+ years. Don't get me wrong - but some of the EB2(I) guys who have applied as late as 2006 and 2007 are expecting/hoping to get their GC this year if there is a spillover. And I think these are the individuals ( not all of the EB2 guys though ) who are opposing any kind of admin fix ( please dont yell at me or curse me etc...if you are not one among those mentioned, then please dont worry..this is not about you::) Ofcourse i would like each one of us to get GC as soon as possible) to EB3(I).
And I dont see why there will be a rift between EB2 and EB3 if each of us follows net etiquette in positng responses. Let's do some constuctive brainstoming - without getting into perosnal attacks or getting too emotional. Let's do what is right and not what each one of us thinks is right. Then I guess there wont be any rifts. The only thing I am asking is to get EB3(I) to advnace a little bit. I am not asking for it be on par with EB2(I). I hope some of you see a point in my frustration::))
Do you really want EB2(I) to advance to 2005/2006 while EB3(I) guys are still languishing in 2001? That's totally unfair in my opinion. I know this world is not fair but how can anyone else try to divide us if we all stand united? And to stand united, EB2 guys should be willing to support any initiative to help EB3(I) move from stone ages::))
Peace!
( I am getting ready with my body armour for all the brickbats various people are going to throw at me::))
Regards
Well said. I agree with most of you here.
This can be a move to ask for more numbers for EB3 and to be treated fairly. My EB2 friends with 2007 priority dates are hopeful to get it next year and here I am in EB3 with no hope. There is no reason to be hopeful if we go by last 3-4 years of data as to what happened with EB3,.
One guy here provided with some numbers and logic. If its true that there are many more in EB3 than in EB2, then we must ask for more numbers. Its pure nonsense that an EB2 waits for x years and Eb3 waits for 3x.
MOst importantly we must fight togheter for anything, but commonsense definitely tells some things which this greencard guy noted. As he says there is no reason to hope for anything in EB3 with spillover or anything. It will not spill into EB3. We must ask for fairness and at the same time push for removal of quotas for everyone.
There is no reason why EB2 get upset and if so, then we cant help. We cannot hold our GCs at hold to make you happy. Hope you agree.
Some of the EB2(I) guys are worried that their GC dreams would get delayed if there is any Admin fix for EB3(I). For all those individuals in EB2(I) who want to oppose any kind of admin fix for EB3(I), I just want you to think about it. Is it really fair? There are individuals in EB3(I) waiting since 2001 - a total of 8+ years. Don't get me wrong - but some of the EB2(I) guys who have applied as late as 2006 and 2007 are expecting/hoping to get their GC this year if there is a spillover. And I think these are the individuals ( not all of the EB2 guys though ) who are opposing any kind of admin fix ( please dont yell at me or curse me etc...if you are not one among those mentioned, then please dont worry..this is not about you::) Ofcourse i would like each one of us to get GC as soon as possible) to EB3(I).
And I dont see why there will be a rift between EB2 and EB3 if each of us follows net etiquette in positng responses. Let's do some constuctive brainstoming - without getting into perosnal attacks or getting too emotional. Let's do what is right and not what each one of us thinks is right. Then I guess there wont be any rifts. The only thing I am asking is to get EB3(I) to advnace a little bit. I am not asking for it be on par with EB2(I). I hope some of you see a point in my frustration::))
Do you really want EB2(I) to advance to 2005/2006 while EB3(I) guys are still languishing in 2001? That's totally unfair in my opinion. I know this world is not fair but how can anyone else try to divide us if we all stand united? And to stand united, EB2 guys should be willing to support any initiative to help EB3(I) move from stone ages::))
Peace!
( I am getting ready with my body armour for all the brickbats various people are going to throw at me::))
Regards
Well said. I agree with most of you here.
This can be a move to ask for more numbers for EB3 and to be treated fairly. My EB2 friends with 2007 priority dates are hopeful to get it next year and here I am in EB3 with no hope. There is no reason to be hopeful if we go by last 3-4 years of data as to what happened with EB3,.
One guy here provided with some numbers and logic. If its true that there are many more in EB3 than in EB2, then we must ask for more numbers. Its pure nonsense that an EB2 waits for x years and Eb3 waits for 3x.
MOst importantly we must fight togheter for anything, but commonsense definitely tells some things which this greencard guy noted. As he says there is no reason to hope for anything in EB3 with spillover or anything. It will not spill into EB3. We must ask for fairness and at the same time push for removal of quotas for everyone.
There is no reason why EB2 get upset and if so, then we cant help. We cannot hold our GCs at hold to make you happy. Hope you agree.
wallpaper Hawaii Five-O,
chanduv23
10-03 10:15 AM
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
pani_6
06-18 11:31 AM
one years wait for EAD and AP..I thought they are supposed to give us EAD in 70-90 days according to some law??...
2011 Park On #39;Hawaii Five-0#39;
belmontboy
03-15 11:26 PM
Comtting a crime and trying to blame it on others for that....
is that what you are supporting?
Don't jump without understanding my comments.
what makes you come to conclusion that i am supporting him?
we shouldnot judge others without understanding circumstances. Even if he has intentionally comitted crime, he is going to answer to God for this sooner for later.
some "shoplifters" are not theives.
is that what you are supporting?
Don't jump without understanding my comments.
what makes you come to conclusion that i am supporting him?
we shouldnot judge others without understanding circumstances. Even if he has intentionally comitted crime, he is going to answer to God for this sooner for later.
some "shoplifters" are not theives.
more...
franklin
07-20 05:49 PM
Before people start slamming this lawmaker and that, please read the full context of the bills and amendments.
GCmuddu_H1BVaddu
03-26 09:10 PM
Man, everyone gave me REDs for opening this thread and I am surprised it is keep coming to the top. I can see this going to several pages :confused::confused:
more...
srisra
01-21 02:22 PM
i am getting frustrated to see the bulletin everymonth and it never moves.
people applied in 2006 got their GCs. one of collegue ROW got when applied in 2007.
dont know whom to blame. why cant they understand our problems.
r they least bothered.
my PD is oct 2003-EB3
people applied in 2006 got their GCs. one of collegue ROW got when applied in 2007.
dont know whom to blame. why cant they understand our problems.
r they least bothered.
my PD is oct 2003-EB3
2010 La serie #39;Hawaii 5.0′ continua
coopheal
12-16 11:25 AM
Go ahead and make 50/100$ contribution (and try to do same every month). you will feel better of yourself for being part of something good.
Hello there,
I have been wanting to make an IV contribution for a long time and here is my problem..I probably can be labeled a miseror a magpie! ..Whenever I go to the IV link to contribute and see the $50 or $100 option I panic and get out..yes I do!
I have some desi colleagues and was discussing this issue with them at work..and they had the exact same experience..wow..I am not the only magpie..
But hey is'nt IV the one which is at the receiving end not getting our contributions..
I speak from my own experience and call me a mapie or a miser..or whatever..I cant make myself make a $50 or more contribution .. thats the way I am..But I can sure make a smaller contribution (like a monthly recurring $10 contribution which really is easier to make) and I am quite sure IV will benefit from my small contributions as well as i think a lot more people will not hesitate making contributions in smaller denominations than a whopper $50+
And really this is not related to IV effort but more to do with my own way of thinking about parting with my money..I love my money..:)...
My history - Made $0 contributions so far..and have been wanting to contribute for a long time now..but keep backing away..
Hello there,
I have been wanting to make an IV contribution for a long time and here is my problem..I probably can be labeled a miseror a magpie! ..Whenever I go to the IV link to contribute and see the $50 or $100 option I panic and get out..yes I do!
I have some desi colleagues and was discussing this issue with them at work..and they had the exact same experience..wow..I am not the only magpie..
But hey is'nt IV the one which is at the receiving end not getting our contributions..
I speak from my own experience and call me a mapie or a miser..or whatever..I cant make myself make a $50 or more contribution .. thats the way I am..But I can sure make a smaller contribution (like a monthly recurring $10 contribution which really is easier to make) and I am quite sure IV will benefit from my small contributions as well as i think a lot more people will not hesitate making contributions in smaller denominations than a whopper $50+
And really this is not related to IV effort but more to do with my own way of thinking about parting with my money..I love my money..:)...
My history - Made $0 contributions so far..and have been wanting to contribute for a long time now..but keep backing away..
more...
eb3_nepa
05-11 03:07 PM
Guys,
I keep hearing that "STEM will be exempt from the quota". What EXACTLY does that mean? Does it mean that:
1) STEM's can apply for 485 straight away if labor is approved regardless of PD?
2) STEM's still Cannot apply until PD is current, but after that no more waiting for the country quota
I keep hearing that "STEM will be exempt from the quota". What EXACTLY does that mean? Does it mean that:
1) STEM's can apply for 485 straight away if labor is approved regardless of PD?
2) STEM's still Cannot apply until PD is current, but after that no more waiting for the country quota
hair episode of quot;Hawaii Five-0quot;
![hawaii five o girl. Hawaii Five-O [TV Series]](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEghupb_jN69F_I6F_GffyBUJKh8qqMVi7LHXoOM60MDlgGn7LwgTsrrJ7ErCbak68QRQkqqgakku1CJv5waV0-3wiU-LLRlWlYYPyaCSY-D6el5_fkl2rj9vE5oeYqimAGNR433AcKmbmSB/s1600/grace-park.jpg "Hawaii Five-O [TV Series]")
mirage
04-16 12:30 PM
Senior guys, if you don't like a thread, ignore it, the thread may be of interest to some people on the forum. So let those people talk. Also since nothing is happening on the immigration, what else public will do other than 'Time pass'???
more...
bugmenot
04-25 08:40 PM
Should watch AILA's stand on this. One group who would benefit immensely with this system would be immi lawyers, at least for first 10 years after which it would be more established. A perfectly intelligent delaying technique moving the issue away from its solution at least by 2 full years. This idea appears to be so full of holes, it seems as though coming from WH itself. Soemtime Logiclife nicely argued against such a suggestion, it would help to dig out those comments and post them here...
on the contrary, the point based system completely eliminates the need of a lawyer, with the canadian and australian system u just need to do the work urself online and the balls starts rolling then, it'll be interesting how they react to this
on the contrary, the point based system completely eliminates the need of a lawyer, with the canadian and australian system u just need to do the work urself online and the balls starts rolling then, it'll be interesting how they react to this
hot Hawaii Five-0 - Drink It Down
Macaca
08-12 11:17 AM
From Immigration rules may hurt economy (http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showpost.php?p=144955&postcount=66) Crackdown on employers could cause havoc in agriculture, healthcare and other industries, Chertoff acknowledges By Nicole Gaouette (nicole.gaouette@latimes.com ), Los Angeles Times Staff Writer, August 11, 2007
Others expressed skepticism about the Department of Homeland Security's ability to enforce the measures, pointing out that the department cannot even come up with the number of high-skilled visa-holders in the country. "The agency that can't count is now going to go on this enforcement gig," said Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-San Jose), chairwoman of the House immigration subcommittee. "We'll see how they do."
In its Response to the Ombudsman’s 2006 Annual Report recommendation (AR 2006 – 01), USCIS agreed in principle to provide a breakdown of all incomplete cases by the number of months pending and application type, and stated (at p. 7):
Given the constraints of existing legacy case management systems, USCIS would today need to perform a cumbersome, labor intensive, recurring manual audit of all pending files in order to compile the suggested data. Such audits would be cost prohibitive. (page 13)
USCIS has opted not to use its limited financial resources to extract data from current systems and prefers to spend it on prospective systems that are years in the planning. For example, USCIS has not made corrections to the CLAIMS 3 system to capture data on applicants’ priority date information, country of nationality, and the preference category under which the application is filed that USCIS must review before the application is accepted for green card processing. (page 13)
Failing to correct the system annually results in hundreds, if not thousands, of wasted hours by all levels of USCIS leadership in trying to account for an often asked question by Congress, the Ombudsman, stakeholders, and others: “Exactly how many employment-based green card applications does the agency have pending?” USCIS still cannot answer that question today with certainty. (page 13)
Others expressed skepticism about the Department of Homeland Security's ability to enforce the measures, pointing out that the department cannot even come up with the number of high-skilled visa-holders in the country. "The agency that can't count is now going to go on this enforcement gig," said Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-San Jose), chairwoman of the House immigration subcommittee. "We'll see how they do."
In its Response to the Ombudsman’s 2006 Annual Report recommendation (AR 2006 – 01), USCIS agreed in principle to provide a breakdown of all incomplete cases by the number of months pending and application type, and stated (at p. 7):
Given the constraints of existing legacy case management systems, USCIS would today need to perform a cumbersome, labor intensive, recurring manual audit of all pending files in order to compile the suggested data. Such audits would be cost prohibitive. (page 13)
USCIS has opted not to use its limited financial resources to extract data from current systems and prefers to spend it on prospective systems that are years in the planning. For example, USCIS has not made corrections to the CLAIMS 3 system to capture data on applicants’ priority date information, country of nationality, and the preference category under which the application is filed that USCIS must review before the application is accepted for green card processing. (page 13)
Failing to correct the system annually results in hundreds, if not thousands, of wasted hours by all levels of USCIS leadership in trying to account for an often asked question by Congress, the Ombudsman, stakeholders, and others: “Exactly how many employment-based green card applications does the agency have pending?” USCIS still cannot answer that question today with certainty. (page 13)
more...
house tagged Hawaii Five-0 Scott
coopheal
10-02 07:46 AM
Thanks for the info.
I think so
Link:
http://www.regulations.gov/fdmspublic/component/main?main=DocumentDetail&o=090000648072c5eb
I think so
Link:
http://www.regulations.gov/fdmspublic/component/main?main=DocumentDetail&o=090000648072c5eb
tattoo Hawaii Five-0 - Not the Dog#39;s
msp1976
10-16 10:50 AM
I thought i wouldn't marry till i get ma GC coz i didn't wanna gal to come n rot here without a job being on H4.
but now i've gotten so freakin old waitin for the GC n still waitin that i might not get a gal to marry.:eek: :eek:
well there are always other things to do for a H4 ..
At present My wife on her H4 is pursuing her Master's degree ... I donot need to tell you that I got a deep hole in my pocket..
Also I have heard some H4 spouses doing volunteering work..
Also you can have kids and get another piece of 'work' out of the way...If anyone has more ways of making the better of the situation let me know...
:p :D :cool: :cool: ;) :D
but now i've gotten so freakin old waitin for the GC n still waitin that i might not get a gal to marry.:eek: :eek:
well there are always other things to do for a H4 ..
At present My wife on her H4 is pursuing her Master's degree ... I donot need to tell you that I got a deep hole in my pocket..
Also I have heard some H4 spouses doing volunteering work..
Also you can have kids and get another piece of 'work' out of the way...If anyone has more ways of making the better of the situation let me know...
:p :D :cool: :cool: ;) :D
more...
pictures Band meets HAWAII-FIVE-O.
Hassan11
07-20 02:45 PM
The short answer is most republicans voted yes for the senator Cornyn's bill to recapture the unused employment -based visas from previous years and almost all Democrats voted No (except Murray democrat from Washington voted yes for the bill. I guess Microsoft does have influencial power on the senator from Washington state)
see the info here about bill: http://www.immigration-law.com/Canada.html
Yesterday, Senator Cornyn introduced on the Senate floor Amendment 2339 to H.R. 2669, FY 2008 Budget, proposing the following temporaary relieffor the employment-based immigrants. Sadly, the bill was rejected by 55 Nays, 40 Yeas, and one No Vote. Do your want to know who voted against this bill? Click here.
SEC. __. EMPLOYMENT-BASED VISAS.
(a) Recapture of Unused Employment-Based Immigrant Visas.--Section 106(d) of the American Competitiveness in the Twenty-first Century Act of 2000 (Public Law 106-313; 8 U.S.C. 1153 note) is amended--
(1) in paragraph (1)--
(A) by inserting ``1994, 1996, 1997, 1998,'' after ``available in fiscal year'';
(B) by striking ``or 2004'' and inserting ``2004, or 2006''; and
(C) by striking ``be available'' and all that follows and inserting the following: ``be available only to--
``(A) employment-based immigrants under paragraphs (1), (2), and (3) of section 203(b) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1153(b));
``(B) the family members accompanying or following to join such employment-based immigrants under section 203(d) of such Act; and
``(C) those immigrant workers who had petitions approved based on Schedule A, Group I under section 656.5 of title 20, Code of Federal Regulations, as promulgated by the Secretary of Labor.''; and
(2) in paragraph (2)--
(A) in subparagraph (A), by striking ``1999 through 2004'' and inserting ``1994, 1996 through 1998, 2001 through 2004, and 2006''; and
(B) in subparagraph (B), by amending clause (ii) to read as follows:
``(ii) DISTRIBUTION OF VISAS.--The total number of visas made available under paragraph (1) from unused visas from fiscal years 1994, 1996 through 1998, 2001 through 2004, and 2006 shall be distributed as follows:
``(I) The total number of visas made available for immigrant workers who had petitions approved based on Schedule A, Group I under section 656.5 of title 20, Code of Federal Regulations, as promulgated by the Secretary of Labor shall be 61,000.
``(II) The visas remaining from the total made available under subclause (I) shall be allocated equally among employment-based immigrants with approved petitions under paragraph (1), (2), or (3) of section 203(b) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (and their family members accompanying or following to join).''.
(b) H-1B Visa Availability.--Section 214(g)(1)(A) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1184(g)(1)(A)) is amended--
(1) in clause (vi), by striking ``and'' at the end;
(2) by redesignating clause (vii) as clause (ix); and
(3) by inserting after clause (vi) the following:
``(vii) 65,000 in each of fiscal years 2004 through 2007
``(viii) 115,000 in fiscal year 2008; and''.
This reporter asks the readers to join him to extend our "THANK YOU" to the Senator Cornyn for continuously supporting the American businesses, foreign brains, and employment-based immigration. This reporter also urges the readers to send a thank-you email for his support.
We are proud of the Senators from Minnesota, Norm Coleman (R) and Amy Klochubar, by setting aside the partisan politics and casting bi-parisan support for this bill. THANK YOU, and THANK!!
here is the list of the senators of their votes:
U.S. Senate Roll Call Votes 110th Congress - 1st Session
as compiled through Senate LIS by the Senate Bill Clerk under the direction of the Secretary of the Senate
Vote Summary
Question: On the Motion (Motion to Waive Cornyn Amdt No. 2339 )
Vote Number: 266 Vote Date: July 19, 2007, 11:00 PM
Required For Majority: 3/5 Vote Result: Motion Rejected
Amendment Number: S.Amdt. 2339 to S.Amdt. 2327 to H.R. 2669 (College Cost Reduction Act of 2007 )
Statement of Purpose: To provide interim relief for shortages in employment-based visas for aliens with extraordinary ability and advanced degrees and for nurses.
Vote Counts: YEAs 55
NAYs 40
Not Voting 5
Vote Summary By Senator Name By Vote Position By Home State
Alphabetical by Senator Name Akaka (D-HI), Nay
Alexander (R-TN), Yea
Allard (R-CO), Yea
Barrasso (R-WY), Yea
Baucus (D-MT), Yea
Bayh (D-IN), Yea
Bennett (R-UT), Yea
Biden (D-DE), Nay
Bingaman (D-NM), Nay
Bond (R-MO), Yea
Boxer (D-CA), Nay
Brown (D-OH), Nay
Brownback (R-KS), Not Voting
Bunning (R-KY), Yea
Burr (R-NC), Yea
Byrd (D-WV), Not Voting
Cantwell (D-WA), Yea
Cardin (D-MD), Nay
Carper (D-DE), Nay
Casey (D-PA), Nay
Chambliss (R-GA), Yea
Clinton (D-NY), Nay
Coburn (R-OK), Yea
Cochran (R-MS), Yea
Coleman (R-MN), Yea
Collins (R-ME), Yea
Conrad (D-ND), Nay
Corker (R-TN), Yea
Cornyn (R-TX), Yea
Craig (R-ID), Yea
Crapo (R-ID), Yea
DeMint (R-SC), Yea
Dodd (D-CT), Nay
Dole (R-NC), Yea
Domenici (R-NM), Yea
Dorgan (D-ND), Nay
Durbin (D-IL), Nay
Ensign (R-NV), Yea
Enzi (R-WY), Yea
Feingold (D-WI), Nay
Feinstein (D-CA), Nay
Graham (R-SC), Yea
Grassley (R-IA), Yea
Gregg (R-NH), Yea
Hagel (R-NE), Yea
Harkin (D-IA), Nay
Hatch (R-UT), Yea
Hutchison (R-TX), Yea
Inhofe (R-OK), Yea
Inouye (D-HI), Nay
Isakson (R-GA), Yea
Johnson (D-SD), Not Voting
Kennedy (D-MA), Nay
Kerry (D-MA), Nay
Klobuchar (D-MN), Yea
Kohl (D-WI), Nay
Kyl (R-AZ), Yea
Landrieu (D-LA), Yea
Lautenberg (D-NJ), Nay
Leahy (D-VT), Nay
Levin (D-MI), Nay
Lieberman (ID-CT), Yea
Lincoln (D-AR), Nay
Lott (R-MS), Not Voting
Lugar (R-IN), Yea
Martinez (R-FL), Yea
McCain (R-AZ), Yea
McCaskill (D-MO), Nay
McConnell (R-KY), Yea
Menendez (D-NJ), Nay
Mikulski (D-MD), Nay
Murkowski (R-AK), Yea
Murray (D-WA), Yea
Nelson (D-FL), Nay
Nelson (D-NE), Yea
Obama (D-IL), Not Voting
Pryor (D-AR), Nay
Reed (D-RI), Nay
Reid (D-NV), Nay
Roberts (R-KS), Yea
Rockefeller (D-WV), Nay
Salazar (D-CO), Nay
Sanders (I-VT), Nay
Schumer (D-NY), Yea
Sessions (R-AL), Nay
Shelby (R-AL), Yea
Smith (R-OR), Yea
Snowe (R-ME), Yea
Specter (R-PA), Yea
Stabenow (D-MI), Nay
Stevens (R-AK), Yea
Sununu (R-NH), Yea
Tester (D-MT), Nay
Thune (R-SD), Yea
Vitter (R-LA), Yea
Voinovich (R-OH), Nay
Warner (R-VA), Yea
Webb (D-VA), Nay
Whitehouse (D-RI), Nay
Wyden (D-OR), Yea
Vote Summary By Senator Name By Vote Position By Home State
see the info here about bill: http://www.immigration-law.com/Canada.html
Yesterday, Senator Cornyn introduced on the Senate floor Amendment 2339 to H.R. 2669, FY 2008 Budget, proposing the following temporaary relieffor the employment-based immigrants. Sadly, the bill was rejected by 55 Nays, 40 Yeas, and one No Vote. Do your want to know who voted against this bill? Click here.
SEC. __. EMPLOYMENT-BASED VISAS.
(a) Recapture of Unused Employment-Based Immigrant Visas.--Section 106(d) of the American Competitiveness in the Twenty-first Century Act of 2000 (Public Law 106-313; 8 U.S.C. 1153 note) is amended--
(1) in paragraph (1)--
(A) by inserting ``1994, 1996, 1997, 1998,'' after ``available in fiscal year'';
(B) by striking ``or 2004'' and inserting ``2004, or 2006''; and
(C) by striking ``be available'' and all that follows and inserting the following: ``be available only to--
``(A) employment-based immigrants under paragraphs (1), (2), and (3) of section 203(b) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1153(b));
``(B) the family members accompanying or following to join such employment-based immigrants under section 203(d) of such Act; and
``(C) those immigrant workers who had petitions approved based on Schedule A, Group I under section 656.5 of title 20, Code of Federal Regulations, as promulgated by the Secretary of Labor.''; and
(2) in paragraph (2)--
(A) in subparagraph (A), by striking ``1999 through 2004'' and inserting ``1994, 1996 through 1998, 2001 through 2004, and 2006''; and
(B) in subparagraph (B), by amending clause (ii) to read as follows:
``(ii) DISTRIBUTION OF VISAS.--The total number of visas made available under paragraph (1) from unused visas from fiscal years 1994, 1996 through 1998, 2001 through 2004, and 2006 shall be distributed as follows:
``(I) The total number of visas made available for immigrant workers who had petitions approved based on Schedule A, Group I under section 656.5 of title 20, Code of Federal Regulations, as promulgated by the Secretary of Labor shall be 61,000.
``(II) The visas remaining from the total made available under subclause (I) shall be allocated equally among employment-based immigrants with approved petitions under paragraph (1), (2), or (3) of section 203(b) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (and their family members accompanying or following to join).''.
(b) H-1B Visa Availability.--Section 214(g)(1)(A) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1184(g)(1)(A)) is amended--
(1) in clause (vi), by striking ``and'' at the end;
(2) by redesignating clause (vii) as clause (ix); and
(3) by inserting after clause (vi) the following:
``(vii) 65,000 in each of fiscal years 2004 through 2007
``(viii) 115,000 in fiscal year 2008; and''.
This reporter asks the readers to join him to extend our "THANK YOU" to the Senator Cornyn for continuously supporting the American businesses, foreign brains, and employment-based immigration. This reporter also urges the readers to send a thank-you email for his support.
We are proud of the Senators from Minnesota, Norm Coleman (R) and Amy Klochubar, by setting aside the partisan politics and casting bi-parisan support for this bill. THANK YOU, and THANK!!
here is the list of the senators of their votes:
U.S. Senate Roll Call Votes 110th Congress - 1st Session
as compiled through Senate LIS by the Senate Bill Clerk under the direction of the Secretary of the Senate
Vote Summary
Question: On the Motion (Motion to Waive Cornyn Amdt No. 2339 )
Vote Number: 266 Vote Date: July 19, 2007, 11:00 PM
Required For Majority: 3/5 Vote Result: Motion Rejected
Amendment Number: S.Amdt. 2339 to S.Amdt. 2327 to H.R. 2669 (College Cost Reduction Act of 2007 )
Statement of Purpose: To provide interim relief for shortages in employment-based visas for aliens with extraordinary ability and advanced degrees and for nurses.
Vote Counts: YEAs 55
NAYs 40
Not Voting 5
Vote Summary By Senator Name By Vote Position By Home State
Alphabetical by Senator Name Akaka (D-HI), Nay
Alexander (R-TN), Yea
Allard (R-CO), Yea
Barrasso (R-WY), Yea
Baucus (D-MT), Yea
Bayh (D-IN), Yea
Bennett (R-UT), Yea
Biden (D-DE), Nay
Bingaman (D-NM), Nay
Bond (R-MO), Yea
Boxer (D-CA), Nay
Brown (D-OH), Nay
Brownback (R-KS), Not Voting
Bunning (R-KY), Yea
Burr (R-NC), Yea
Byrd (D-WV), Not Voting
Cantwell (D-WA), Yea
Cardin (D-MD), Nay
Carper (D-DE), Nay
Casey (D-PA), Nay
Chambliss (R-GA), Yea
Clinton (D-NY), Nay
Coburn (R-OK), Yea
Cochran (R-MS), Yea
Coleman (R-MN), Yea
Collins (R-ME), Yea
Conrad (D-ND), Nay
Corker (R-TN), Yea
Cornyn (R-TX), Yea
Craig (R-ID), Yea
Crapo (R-ID), Yea
DeMint (R-SC), Yea
Dodd (D-CT), Nay
Dole (R-NC), Yea
Domenici (R-NM), Yea
Dorgan (D-ND), Nay
Durbin (D-IL), Nay
Ensign (R-NV), Yea
Enzi (R-WY), Yea
Feingold (D-WI), Nay
Feinstein (D-CA), Nay
Graham (R-SC), Yea
Grassley (R-IA), Yea
Gregg (R-NH), Yea
Hagel (R-NE), Yea
Harkin (D-IA), Nay
Hatch (R-UT), Yea
Hutchison (R-TX), Yea
Inhofe (R-OK), Yea
Inouye (D-HI), Nay
Isakson (R-GA), Yea
Johnson (D-SD), Not Voting
Kennedy (D-MA), Nay
Kerry (D-MA), Nay
Klobuchar (D-MN), Yea
Kohl (D-WI), Nay
Kyl (R-AZ), Yea
Landrieu (D-LA), Yea
Lautenberg (D-NJ), Nay
Leahy (D-VT), Nay
Levin (D-MI), Nay
Lieberman (ID-CT), Yea
Lincoln (D-AR), Nay
Lott (R-MS), Not Voting
Lugar (R-IN), Yea
Martinez (R-FL), Yea
McCain (R-AZ), Yea
McCaskill (D-MO), Nay
McConnell (R-KY), Yea
Menendez (D-NJ), Nay
Mikulski (D-MD), Nay
Murkowski (R-AK), Yea
Murray (D-WA), Yea
Nelson (D-FL), Nay
Nelson (D-NE), Yea
Obama (D-IL), Not Voting
Pryor (D-AR), Nay
Reed (D-RI), Nay
Reid (D-NV), Nay
Roberts (R-KS), Yea
Rockefeller (D-WV), Nay
Salazar (D-CO), Nay
Sanders (I-VT), Nay
Schumer (D-NY), Yea
Sessions (R-AL), Nay
Shelby (R-AL), Yea
Smith (R-OR), Yea
Snowe (R-ME), Yea
Specter (R-PA), Yea
Stabenow (D-MI), Nay
Stevens (R-AK), Yea
Sununu (R-NH), Yea
Tester (D-MT), Nay
Thune (R-SD), Yea
Vitter (R-LA), Yea
Voinovich (R-OH), Nay
Warner (R-VA), Yea
Webb (D-VA), Nay
Whitehouse (D-RI), Nay
Wyden (D-OR), Yea
Vote Summary By Senator Name By Vote Position By Home State
dresses Tags: hawaii five-0
somegchuh
07-21 12:49 PM
All I can say is that everyone has their personal reasons for the decisions they make. This thread is information exchange thread for those who are looking to move to Canada. This isn't about why one should go one place vs another.
I welcome you to start another thread where ppl can debate whether they should move to India or consider moving elsewhere. In fact, I will be happy to discuss the options there. But I request ppl to not divert the focus of this thread.
Why don't you start a similar forum for "going back to India" ? I hate to burst your "bubble of hope" but Canadian population and job market is limited and the opportunities for professionals like us are limited. Why not consider going back to India and taking up some of the lucrative opportunities in middle management in the IT industry.
The Indian economy is booming and the salaries are excellent. You just need to make some adjustments with quality of life (pollution, traffic). Atleast its better than going to Canada, living in limbo while looking for suitable jobs for a long-time, sometimes even doing odd jobs just to make ends meet. I hate our Indian mentality that "every place in the world is better than our own country". Give me a break guys.
My plan of action is very clear: Go back to India and live there happily. If there are other opportunities in US then come back.
Cheers.
I welcome you to start another thread where ppl can debate whether they should move to India or consider moving elsewhere. In fact, I will be happy to discuss the options there. But I request ppl to not divert the focus of this thread.
Why don't you start a similar forum for "going back to India" ? I hate to burst your "bubble of hope" but Canadian population and job market is limited and the opportunities for professionals like us are limited. Why not consider going back to India and taking up some of the lucrative opportunities in middle management in the IT industry.
The Indian economy is booming and the salaries are excellent. You just need to make some adjustments with quality of life (pollution, traffic). Atleast its better than going to Canada, living in limbo while looking for suitable jobs for a long-time, sometimes even doing odd jobs just to make ends meet. I hate our Indian mentality that "every place in the world is better than our own country". Give me a break guys.
My plan of action is very clear: Go back to India and live there happily. If there are other opportunities in US then come back.
Cheers.
more...
makeup Not a big fan of the new girl.
bkarnik
05-11 02:44 PM
I am not so sure if the CIR bill will help us. Allowing 12+ million illegals into the same system that we are in will totally screw up our chances of getting green cards. Does the bill mention anything about increasing budget and manpower for the USCIS department to handle 12+ million potential applications? Considering that large numbers of the illegals are from a country which also has a specific country quota in the GC lines, will the bill increase drastically the number of Visa Numbers available??
This bill favors the illegals so much that even reading it makes me wonder how fair the system is to those of us who follow laws and file documents on time. What's the point? All of us should just forget about the rules and go do whatever job we want to do.
Friends...please...the CIR is still better than the present situation we are in. It increases the H1B numbers, it increases the amount of GCs availbale per year, it excludes dependents from the quota, it excludes STEM advanced degrees (currently employed as well as future students) from the quota, it does require the illegals to wait at least 6 years before they can file papers for their GCs and then thay get to be at the back of the line, additionally, if the SKIL bill provisions are also included as amendments, it will also provide a premium processing facility for I485. The SKIL bill also mandates the DOL to clear all backlog within 6 months. The thinking is that by the time the undocumented aliens (somehow, I do not like the word illegal) enter the pipeline, the current backlog will be cleared and all dates will be current.
Given, the uncertainity in the process right now, I still feel that CIR is the way to go. Also, if it were not for the issue of the undocumented aliens, there would have been no incentive or push to do anything about the system and we would be stuck with this system. As far as the USCIS efficiency is concerned, I would not underestimate them either, the USCIS is known to be very efficient when it needs to (prime example the spectacularly efficient and successful H1 B premium processing system) so keep the faith and help yourselves achieve your dreams :)
This bill favors the illegals so much that even reading it makes me wonder how fair the system is to those of us who follow laws and file documents on time. What's the point? All of us should just forget about the rules and go do whatever job we want to do.
Friends...please...the CIR is still better than the present situation we are in. It increases the H1B numbers, it increases the amount of GCs availbale per year, it excludes dependents from the quota, it excludes STEM advanced degrees (currently employed as well as future students) from the quota, it does require the illegals to wait at least 6 years before they can file papers for their GCs and then thay get to be at the back of the line, additionally, if the SKIL bill provisions are also included as amendments, it will also provide a premium processing facility for I485. The SKIL bill also mandates the DOL to clear all backlog within 6 months. The thinking is that by the time the undocumented aliens (somehow, I do not like the word illegal) enter the pipeline, the current backlog will be cleared and all dates will be current.
Given, the uncertainity in the process right now, I still feel that CIR is the way to go. Also, if it were not for the issue of the undocumented aliens, there would have been no incentive or push to do anything about the system and we would be stuck with this system. As far as the USCIS efficiency is concerned, I would not underestimate them either, the USCIS is known to be very efficient when it needs to (prime example the spectacularly efficient and successful H1 B premium processing system) so keep the faith and help yourselves achieve your dreams :)
girlfriend AUSSIE FIVE-O: Actress Claire
bkam
05-11 12:09 PM
...So everythings gonna be OK. Lets go party. Just leave money for the plane tickets.
Guys, why don't we open a page "Bets" ? There we can place bets if a bill will pass, if our ammendments will be included, if something at all will happen... This will make our life more interesting and we will be in a better mood. To wait for another 5-6 years for the GC :-)
Long Live USCIS "Las Vegas" establishment :-)
Guys, why don't we open a page "Bets" ? There we can place bets if a bill will pass, if our ammendments will be included, if something at all will happen... This will make our life more interesting and we will be in a better mood. To wait for another 5-6 years for the GC :-)
Long Live USCIS "Las Vegas" establishment :-)
hairstyles Hawaii Five-0 “Ho#39;ohuli Na#39;au”
kamakya
10-03 12:34 AM
I applied for PIO card for my son and daughter and both was rejected as both me and my wife are Indian citizens. I was under the impression that kids who hold PIO card need not have to pay NRI fees during college. Is this something true?
mundada
05-29 12:31 PM
This whole spelling bee thing is the stupidest thing I have ever heard of. By any standards, it is pure and simple torture to subject the kids to memorizing thousands of words and their stupid spellings. And what use is that? Have they never heard of something called SPELL-CHECK in Microsoft Word and other email services ?
Or are they afraid that their kid will go to a job interview and someone might ask them to spell the word that no one on the planet ever uses and is only present in the Oxford Dictionary.
Those who subject their kids to such a regimented, rigorous, scripted childhood are preparing a next generation of work-force that would only know how to follow the orders and accept directions.
85 % of the fortune 500 CEOs are not MBAs. And the other 15% that have an MBA, only 3 of the 15 have done MBA from an IVY LEAGUE school.
What that tells you is that too much education and scholarly childhood increases your job security, in that sense that you will never be unemployed, but it decreases the chances that you will be on the top or you will be a billionaire.
The biggest prize goes NOT TO people who can follow directions and know everything, but who can GIVE directions and get things done.
It's like saying if I owned only one company's stock then I could be the richest person in world. Why do people diversify among stocks and then bonds? The moment you diversify you lose your chance to become the richest person in world.
A higher education betters your risk assessment. Your statistics may be correct but what your numbers don't say is the opposite side of coin? What is the percentage of people who don't have high school degree and earn less than $100,000 at the age of 35? Now what is that percentage for MBAs? What is the percentage of people who don't have at least a bachelors degree and are better than Project Manager by age of 35? Now what is that percentage for those who have at least a bachelors? The reason Sachin Tendulkar cannot hit fastest century but can score many centuries is because he is properly trained. He can assess risk better than Shahid Afridi can. Even though Shahid Afridi once had fastest century he was nowhere close to Sachin. Finally, a look at GM and Ford history from 1920 to 1940reveals the reason behind a need for a better risk assessment.
I don't see why everyone should strive to be the richest person or C-person in the world. Everyone has different value system. Some may like 9 to 5 job because they can enjoy other things in life... like lying down on beach, watching your child take first few steps, etc. Some moments never return in one's life.
I work with different Managing Directors, they earn a decent $250+ salaries but none of them even want to become CEO or for that matter any C-titled manager. I know one MD, in early 50s, who passed the C job because he wanted to go fishing with his 4 sons at his vacation home in New England... At that time he told me, "Once these bastards leave me I guess I will cherish spending time with them fishing at my vacation home more than counting big dollars in my bank account".
Or are they afraid that their kid will go to a job interview and someone might ask them to spell the word that no one on the planet ever uses and is only present in the Oxford Dictionary.
Those who subject their kids to such a regimented, rigorous, scripted childhood are preparing a next generation of work-force that would only know how to follow the orders and accept directions.
85 % of the fortune 500 CEOs are not MBAs. And the other 15% that have an MBA, only 3 of the 15 have done MBA from an IVY LEAGUE school.
What that tells you is that too much education and scholarly childhood increases your job security, in that sense that you will never be unemployed, but it decreases the chances that you will be on the top or you will be a billionaire.
The biggest prize goes NOT TO people who can follow directions and know everything, but who can GIVE directions and get things done.
It's like saying if I owned only one company's stock then I could be the richest person in world. Why do people diversify among stocks and then bonds? The moment you diversify you lose your chance to become the richest person in world.
A higher education betters your risk assessment. Your statistics may be correct but what your numbers don't say is the opposite side of coin? What is the percentage of people who don't have high school degree and earn less than $100,000 at the age of 35? Now what is that percentage for MBAs? What is the percentage of people who don't have at least a bachelors degree and are better than Project Manager by age of 35? Now what is that percentage for those who have at least a bachelors? The reason Sachin Tendulkar cannot hit fastest century but can score many centuries is because he is properly trained. He can assess risk better than Shahid Afridi can. Even though Shahid Afridi once had fastest century he was nowhere close to Sachin. Finally, a look at GM and Ford history from 1920 to 1940reveals the reason behind a need for a better risk assessment.
I don't see why everyone should strive to be the richest person or C-person in the world. Everyone has different value system. Some may like 9 to 5 job because they can enjoy other things in life... like lying down on beach, watching your child take first few steps, etc. Some moments never return in one's life.
I work with different Managing Directors, they earn a decent $250+ salaries but none of them even want to become CEO or for that matter any C-titled manager. I know one MD, in early 50s, who passed the C job because he wanted to go fishing with his 4 sons at his vacation home in New England... At that time he told me, "Once these bastards leave me I guess I will cherish spending time with them fishing at my vacation home more than counting big dollars in my bank account".
gc101
07-19 01:57 PM
My company lawyer addressed this part. The way it works is that they will work on your file only when your PD is current. So even if you apply now, they most likely wont work on it after July as your PD wont be current. Then when next time (say in Jan 2008) when your PD becomes current, they will pick up all the files for that month and start working on it. It might be that they will work on your file on Jan1st or Jan 31st. You can send your wife AOS the moment your PD becomes current. So you want to make sure that it reaches there before they approve your AOS. In case you are extremely unlucky, then they would start working on your file on 1st day of the month and finish it before end of that day, making it impossible for your wife's application to go through. Thats rare though. So if you can make sure that her app reaches on 1st day of the month in which PD is current, then they should most likely add her to your AOS and work on those together and make your life go forward....its a chance which you will be taking...But again life is a chance
If you are single and are in a position not to get married b4 August 17th please think b4 applying for 485. It is of no use to you unless you want to switch jobs on EAD which is a HUGE RISK!!My guess is you are going to get married at some point of time(Barring guys who are already in their midlife crisis b4 marriage) and would apply for your wife's Adjustment of Status. Please apply 485 togather when the PD bcomes current again. Bear in mind that even if you apply now b4 marriage you have to maintain your H1-B status. It will only make it worse when one had already applied for I-485 coz you could only get 1 year extensions as opposed to 3 years when you have an approved I-140 and have not filed for 485. Don't get overzealous and apply now and regret later!!
gunsnkars/raj2078 or anybody,
Can you please read Raj3078's response earlier in the thread and then your suggestion? As I understood them they are mutually exclusive things. One is apply for 485 and one is wait. I want to know one thing among other things.
Is the ONLY benefit for applying 485 , for me, is to get EAD? I mean, if I don't apply for AOS now, I am assured that me and my spouse can file together when PD becomes current and they will approve ONLY if my PD is current. Isn't that right? That could be five years away, but, my spouse will be able to piggyback on my GC processing.
Please remember that my fiancee is already on H1-B currently in India. I am from India too.
Thank you,
gc101
If you are single and are in a position not to get married b4 August 17th please think b4 applying for 485. It is of no use to you unless you want to switch jobs on EAD which is a HUGE RISK!!My guess is you are going to get married at some point of time(Barring guys who are already in their midlife crisis b4 marriage) and would apply for your wife's Adjustment of Status. Please apply 485 togather when the PD bcomes current again. Bear in mind that even if you apply now b4 marriage you have to maintain your H1-B status. It will only make it worse when one had already applied for I-485 coz you could only get 1 year extensions as opposed to 3 years when you have an approved I-140 and have not filed for 485. Don't get overzealous and apply now and regret later!!
gunsnkars/raj2078 or anybody,
Can you please read Raj3078's response earlier in the thread and then your suggestion? As I understood them they are mutually exclusive things. One is apply for 485 and one is wait. I want to know one thing among other things.
Is the ONLY benefit for applying 485 , for me, is to get EAD? I mean, if I don't apply for AOS now, I am assured that me and my spouse can file together when PD becomes current and they will approve ONLY if my PD is current. Isn't that right? That could be five years away, but, my spouse will be able to piggyback on my GC processing.
Please remember that my fiancee is already on H1-B currently in India. I am from India too.
Thank you,
gc101
