smuggymba
05-12 10:09 AM
We as a community have not even done 5 % of the hard work that DREAM act advocates have done. So such provisions are well deserved by them for the hard work they have done. If we had done enough work for our provisions, there is no doubt our provisions would have seen the day. You need to do some search on all the DREAM act advocates have done in the last few years to reach where they are now. And then compare it our community effort and you will get the answers.
We recently had an advocacy day. How many of you contributed to it. We failed to even reach a modest budget goal for such a big event. So there is no point blaming undocumented. We need to first blame ourselves for doing nothing.
Only 200 ppl contributed and now 20 new memebers from July 2007 show up everyday in the prediction thread wanting to be current.
I believe there is a mini-advocacy in July - do we need to contribute for that. Any other details?
We recently had an advocacy day. How many of you contributed to it. We failed to even reach a modest budget goal for such a big event. So there is no point blaming undocumented. We need to first blame ourselves for doing nothing.
Only 200 ppl contributed and now 20 new memebers from July 2007 show up everyday in the prediction thread wanting to be current.
I believe there is a mini-advocacy in July - do we need to contribute for that. Any other details?
wallpaper Green With Envy
anilsal
02-10 10:17 PM
a FP appointment notice.
Since I am a July 07 filer like many others, it may indicate that they are dusting the apps to generate FP notices?
Since I am a July 07 filer like many others, it may indicate that they are dusting the apps to generate FP notices?
willigetgc?
07-09 12:45 PM
Recently saw few of our members receiving green cards..... Congratulations to all of you.
I hope that you will continue to come to the IV site, and help us folks still stuck in the process.
In the meanwhile, please do share the reality that is still a dream to many of us...
I hope that you will continue to come to the IV site, and help us folks still stuck in the process.
In the meanwhile, please do share the reality that is still a dream to many of us...
2011 eyes Pretty+makeup+ideas+
Jimi_Hendrix
06-26 04:07 PM
I had asked my StateSenator to inquire about my case and the senator office got back in 2 weeks saying that the USCIS liaiason informed that all looks good on my case and that cards should be ordered within 30 days. Six days after that i.e. today I got a notice saying cards were ordered.
more...
andrei
07-10 08:35 AM
"CNN will definitely change its course and path it is taking if we start exposing Loo Dog. Once truth comes out, CNN may be worried about hurting its image and will definitely change courses."
Lou Dobbs is being attacked all the time by all kinds of people, including big organizations (La Raza, etc.). He brings in ratings, so I'm sure they have a thick skin about him over at CNN. If you're seriously considering a campaign, I would try talking to a reporter friend about 1. whether you should do it (I think it would be counterproductive); and 2. if you decide to do it anyway, how to go about it.
Having signs at the San Jose rally about Dobbs will hurt, not help. Keeping clear the distinction between legal and illegal immigration is key to any political effort, imho. Almost everyone is for legal immigration, but a majority of Americans are very concerned about illegal immigration. You start making this about illegal immigration, even implicitly, and sympathy will dry up quickly. And when you mention the word "Dobbs," the first thing that comes into the mind of the average American is "illegal immigration."
Lou Dobbs is being attacked all the time by all kinds of people, including big organizations (La Raza, etc.). He brings in ratings, so I'm sure they have a thick skin about him over at CNN. If you're seriously considering a campaign, I would try talking to a reporter friend about 1. whether you should do it (I think it would be counterproductive); and 2. if you decide to do it anyway, how to go about it.
Having signs at the San Jose rally about Dobbs will hurt, not help. Keeping clear the distinction between legal and illegal immigration is key to any political effort, imho. Almost everyone is for legal immigration, but a majority of Americans are very concerned about illegal immigration. You start making this about illegal immigration, even implicitly, and sympathy will dry up quickly. And when you mention the word "Dobbs," the first thing that comes into the mind of the average American is "illegal immigration."
bkarnik
04-10 03:26 PM
Friends:
I was just going through the Immigration and Nationality Act as posted on the USCIS webpage. http://uscis.gov/graphics/lawsregs/INA.htm (see Section 274A)
I did not find any reference to the employment authorisation document (EAD card) in the INA. The reference to the EAD occurs in the Title 8 of the CFR (http://uscis.gov/lpBin/lpext.dll/inserts/slb/slb-1/slb-10903/slb-27920?f=templates&fn=document-frame.htm#slb-cfrp274a) The CFR is defined on the USCIS website as below (emphasis added by me).
"The general provisions of laws enacted by Congress are interpreted and implemented by regulations issued by various agencies. These regulations apply the law to daily situations. After regulations are published in the Federal Register, they are collected and published in the Code of Federal Regulations, commonly referred to as the CFR. The CFR is arranged by subject title and generally parallels the structure of the United States Code. Thus, Title 8 of the CFR deals with "Aliens and Nationality", as does Title 8 of the U.S. Code."
Unless, I missed something, the Secretary of the DHS has the authority to issue a regulation requiring the agencies to issue the EAD at any stage, similar to the powers the Secretary has to extend the validdity of the EAD beyond a year if he seems fit. Am I correct in my interpretation? I would welcome any person to please point out the applicable law (not regulation) which mentions that EAD can only be given after appling for adjustment of status and not before.
If I am way off base on this, then brickbats are also welcome.
I was just going through the Immigration and Nationality Act as posted on the USCIS webpage. http://uscis.gov/graphics/lawsregs/INA.htm (see Section 274A)
I did not find any reference to the employment authorisation document (EAD card) in the INA. The reference to the EAD occurs in the Title 8 of the CFR (http://uscis.gov/lpBin/lpext.dll/inserts/slb/slb-1/slb-10903/slb-27920?f=templates&fn=document-frame.htm#slb-cfrp274a) The CFR is defined on the USCIS website as below (emphasis added by me).
"The general provisions of laws enacted by Congress are interpreted and implemented by regulations issued by various agencies. These regulations apply the law to daily situations. After regulations are published in the Federal Register, they are collected and published in the Code of Federal Regulations, commonly referred to as the CFR. The CFR is arranged by subject title and generally parallels the structure of the United States Code. Thus, Title 8 of the CFR deals with "Aliens and Nationality", as does Title 8 of the U.S. Code."
Unless, I missed something, the Secretary of the DHS has the authority to issue a regulation requiring the agencies to issue the EAD at any stage, similar to the powers the Secretary has to extend the validdity of the EAD beyond a year if he seems fit. Am I correct in my interpretation? I would welcome any person to please point out the applicable law (not regulation) which mentions that EAD can only be given after appling for adjustment of status and not before.
If I am way off base on this, then brickbats are also welcome.
more...
god_bless_you
02-20 06:21 PM
Office of Communications
www.uscis.gov
Questions & Answers February 20, 2008
FBI Name Check
Q1. How has USCIS changed its national security reporting and adjudication
requirements?
A1. USCIS has not changed its background check policies as those policies related to naturalization
applications. Recently, the agency did modify its existing guidance for applications where the
immigration laws allow for the detention and removal of individuals if actionable information from a FBI
name check response is received after approval. For these types of applications, including applications
for lawful permanent residence, the adjudicators will approve the application if it is otherwise approvable
and the FBI name check request has been pending for more than 180 days. No application for lawful
permanent residence will be approved until a definitive FBI fingerprint check and Interagency Border
Inspection Services (IBIS) check are completed and resolved favorably.
Q2. Why is this policy being implemented?
A2. This policy change is in response to a 2005 DHS Inspector General recommendation that USCIS
align its background check screening policies with those of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement.
Q3. Is this policy consistent with the national security priorities of USCIS and the Department of
Homeland Security?
A3. Yes. No application for lawful permanent residence will be approved until a definitive FBI
fingerprint check and Interagency Border Inspection Services (IBIS) check are completed and resolved
favorably. In addition, in the unlikely event that DHS receives actionable information after the
application is approved, it will initiate removal proceedings. Lastly, in general these individuals have
been in the United States for some time and have previously been subjected to DHS background checks.
Q4. What applications are affected by this policy change?
A4. Applications included in this policy are:
�� I-485, Application to Register Permanent Residence or Adjust Status;
�� I-601, Application for Waiver of Ground of Inadmissibility;
�� I-687, Application for Status as a Temporary Resident Under Section 245A of the Immigration
and Nationality Act; and
�� I-698, Application to Adjust Status from Temporary to Permanent Resident (Under Section 245A
of Public Law 99-603).
Q5. How many applications for lawful permanent residence are affected by this policy change?
A3. USCIS is currently aware of approximately 47,000 applications for permanent residence (I-485) cases
that are otherwise approvable but for the fact that an FBI name check is pending. In a subset of these
case, the FBI name check request that been pending for more than 180 days. USCIS anticipates that the
majority of the cases that are subject to this policy modification will be processed by mid-March 2008.
Q5. Does this policy change affect naturalization applications?
A5. No. There is no change in the requirement that FBI name check, FBI fingerprint and IBIS check
results be obtained and resolved prior to the adjudication of an Application for Naturalization (N-400),
Q6. How long will it take for USCIS to work through these cases affected by the policy change?
A6. USCIS has begun identifying the cases affected by this policy modification in each field office and
service center. Each office will evaluate the pending cases and will adjust their workload accordingly.
USCIS anticipates that the majority of the cases that are subject to this policy modification will be
processed by mid-March 2008. We recommend that customers wait until mid-March before inquiring
about their cases. This will allow each office sufficient time to identify and adjudicate pending cases.
Q7. USCIS Director Gonzalez pledged in his January 17, 2008, testimony regarding naturalization
backlogs before Congress not to cut corners in the adjudicative process or risk national security in
the interest of production? Does this policy comply with the Director’s pledge?
A7. Yes. There is no change in the requirement that FBI name check, FBI fingerprint and IBIS check
results be obtained and resolved prior to the adjudication of an Application for Naturalization (N-400),
For those applications for permanent residence that are affected by this policy modification, no
application will be approved until a definitive FBI fingerprint check and Interagency Border Inspection
Services (IBIS) check are completed and resolved favorably. USCIS will continue to initiate the FBI
name check requests upon receipt of the applications and will review, monitor and track cases approved
under this policy until the FBI name check is complete. In the unlikely event that DHS receives
actionable information after the application is approved, it will initiate removal proceedings.
Q8. The memorandum identifies I-485, I-601, I-687 and I-698 forms. Is there a plan to include
other forms, specifically nonimmigrant and naturalization, in this policy?
A8. No.
Q9. Should customers contact USCIS through the 1-800 customer service number or make an
INFOPASS appointment to visit their local office if they believe their application meets the criteria
of this new policy?
A9. We recommend that customers wait until mid-March before inquiring about cases affected by this
policy modification. This will allow each office sufficient time to identify and adjudicate the relevant
pending cases. If no action is taken by mid-March, we recommend inquiring with the USCIS customer
service line at 1-800-375-5283.
Q10. Will USCIS automatically notify an applicant to appear at an Application Support Center if their fingerprints have expired?
A10. Applicants will be notified through an appointment notice if new/updated fingerprint checks are
needed.
– USCIS –
www.uscis.gov
Questions & Answers February 20, 2008
FBI Name Check
Q1. How has USCIS changed its national security reporting and adjudication
requirements?
A1. USCIS has not changed its background check policies as those policies related to naturalization
applications. Recently, the agency did modify its existing guidance for applications where the
immigration laws allow for the detention and removal of individuals if actionable information from a FBI
name check response is received after approval. For these types of applications, including applications
for lawful permanent residence, the adjudicators will approve the application if it is otherwise approvable
and the FBI name check request has been pending for more than 180 days. No application for lawful
permanent residence will be approved until a definitive FBI fingerprint check and Interagency Border
Inspection Services (IBIS) check are completed and resolved favorably.
Q2. Why is this policy being implemented?
A2. This policy change is in response to a 2005 DHS Inspector General recommendation that USCIS
align its background check screening policies with those of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement.
Q3. Is this policy consistent with the national security priorities of USCIS and the Department of
Homeland Security?
A3. Yes. No application for lawful permanent residence will be approved until a definitive FBI
fingerprint check and Interagency Border Inspection Services (IBIS) check are completed and resolved
favorably. In addition, in the unlikely event that DHS receives actionable information after the
application is approved, it will initiate removal proceedings. Lastly, in general these individuals have
been in the United States for some time and have previously been subjected to DHS background checks.
Q4. What applications are affected by this policy change?
A4. Applications included in this policy are:
�� I-485, Application to Register Permanent Residence or Adjust Status;
�� I-601, Application for Waiver of Ground of Inadmissibility;
�� I-687, Application for Status as a Temporary Resident Under Section 245A of the Immigration
and Nationality Act; and
�� I-698, Application to Adjust Status from Temporary to Permanent Resident (Under Section 245A
of Public Law 99-603).
Q5. How many applications for lawful permanent residence are affected by this policy change?
A3. USCIS is currently aware of approximately 47,000 applications for permanent residence (I-485) cases
that are otherwise approvable but for the fact that an FBI name check is pending. In a subset of these
case, the FBI name check request that been pending for more than 180 days. USCIS anticipates that the
majority of the cases that are subject to this policy modification will be processed by mid-March 2008.
Q5. Does this policy change affect naturalization applications?
A5. No. There is no change in the requirement that FBI name check, FBI fingerprint and IBIS check
results be obtained and resolved prior to the adjudication of an Application for Naturalization (N-400),
Q6. How long will it take for USCIS to work through these cases affected by the policy change?
A6. USCIS has begun identifying the cases affected by this policy modification in each field office and
service center. Each office will evaluate the pending cases and will adjust their workload accordingly.
USCIS anticipates that the majority of the cases that are subject to this policy modification will be
processed by mid-March 2008. We recommend that customers wait until mid-March before inquiring
about their cases. This will allow each office sufficient time to identify and adjudicate pending cases.
Q7. USCIS Director Gonzalez pledged in his January 17, 2008, testimony regarding naturalization
backlogs before Congress not to cut corners in the adjudicative process or risk national security in
the interest of production? Does this policy comply with the Director’s pledge?
A7. Yes. There is no change in the requirement that FBI name check, FBI fingerprint and IBIS check
results be obtained and resolved prior to the adjudication of an Application for Naturalization (N-400),
For those applications for permanent residence that are affected by this policy modification, no
application will be approved until a definitive FBI fingerprint check and Interagency Border Inspection
Services (IBIS) check are completed and resolved favorably. USCIS will continue to initiate the FBI
name check requests upon receipt of the applications and will review, monitor and track cases approved
under this policy until the FBI name check is complete. In the unlikely event that DHS receives
actionable information after the application is approved, it will initiate removal proceedings.
Q8. The memorandum identifies I-485, I-601, I-687 and I-698 forms. Is there a plan to include
other forms, specifically nonimmigrant and naturalization, in this policy?
A8. No.
Q9. Should customers contact USCIS through the 1-800 customer service number or make an
INFOPASS appointment to visit their local office if they believe their application meets the criteria
of this new policy?
A9. We recommend that customers wait until mid-March before inquiring about cases affected by this
policy modification. This will allow each office sufficient time to identify and adjudicate the relevant
pending cases. If no action is taken by mid-March, we recommend inquiring with the USCIS customer
service line at 1-800-375-5283.
Q10. Will USCIS automatically notify an applicant to appear at an Application Support Center if their fingerprints have expired?
A10. Applicants will be notified through an appointment notice if new/updated fingerprint checks are
needed.
– USCIS –
2010 or green, eyes choose
pappu
12-31 01:30 PM
This thread seems to express my thoughts.
I used to wait till my dates got current. With my dates being current since November, I still wait with no sign of improvement.
I tried calling the 1-800 number. But, did not get any useful information.
Took an Infopass appointment couple of weeks back. But, it was of no use.
The officer at the local office read the same status that I see online.
She said that my case was transfered to Texas center. (I knew this since October 2007). Only additional information she gave me was that my namecheck got clreared. (Though this is important, I dont think this really matters to get my case processed).
I told her that I have been waiting since years and some of friends who filed later than me already got their GCs, she felt sorry for me but she said there is nothing she can do for me. Not even a Service Request since my dates are within the processing times.
Its getting difficult for me......Also, in this economy its getting tough everyday to hold on to the job. Who knows may be this year quota might be over too. It will definitely be a big relief if we get the GC.
I thought there is nothing I can do now till my dates goes outside the processing times. Please advice.
Good Luck to everyone.
Try Senator/congressman + Ombudsman inquiry now. If you do not get a response or nothing happens, contact me. Let us see what we can do for people who are current since a long time.
I used to wait till my dates got current. With my dates being current since November, I still wait with no sign of improvement.
I tried calling the 1-800 number. But, did not get any useful information.
Took an Infopass appointment couple of weeks back. But, it was of no use.
The officer at the local office read the same status that I see online.
She said that my case was transfered to Texas center. (I knew this since October 2007). Only additional information she gave me was that my namecheck got clreared. (Though this is important, I dont think this really matters to get my case processed).
I told her that I have been waiting since years and some of friends who filed later than me already got their GCs, she felt sorry for me but she said there is nothing she can do for me. Not even a Service Request since my dates are within the processing times.
Its getting difficult for me......Also, in this economy its getting tough everyday to hold on to the job. Who knows may be this year quota might be over too. It will definitely be a big relief if we get the GC.
I thought there is nothing I can do now till my dates goes outside the processing times. Please advice.
Good Luck to everyone.
Try Senator/congressman + Ombudsman inquiry now. If you do not get a response or nothing happens, contact me. Let us see what we can do for people who are current since a long time.
more...
YesGC_NoGC
12-12 01:24 PM
boreal
why not India ?
why not India ?
hair makeup oct pretty green
jsb
01-14 11:01 AM
Tired of waiting ( PD: August 2001) I finally wrote to both my local congressman and Senator today. My senator is on senate Immigration commitee so lets see what happens. Hopefully something will move.
If this doesnt help I will try Ombudsman next after couple of months. The Ombudsman form has a question of if you have tried through Congressman etc first so we can try and see that.
Guys its so funny when you see ppl with PD of 2003 and 2005 complaining and bitching. Here we have waited 7 + yrs our PD's are current and we are doing OK. Wait sure brings maturity :)
USCIS does not process cases in PD order, because they can't. Thousands of files they receive, are sequenced in order they receive them at Centers. They claim that cases are processed in order they receive them. "Receive Date" is not what you see on your receipt, it is the date they physically received the case on (thus if case is moved from one center to another, true Receive Date is the date it was recieved by the last center). You see this data online status as "...we received (or transferred) your case on ...".
PD critieria is limited to certain countries only. Therefore, by and large, "cases are processed in order they are received..." works well. However, for India, China etc. where PD cutoff has to be factored, it is used merely to decide to work or skip a file (when seen in the receive date order). If PD cutoff date is very restricted, they will have to skip a lot of cases, which slows them down. That's the reason every July they ask for wider PD cutoff dates so that they can consume a lot of visas, as they don't have to skip that many cases.
This process is a mockery of the PD cutoff dates, but that's how it works. If you sent your case on June 28, 07, with July 2, 07 as the printed Receive Data on your receipt, but the case where it finally rested, was entered in their database on Oct. 28, '07 (with a Notice Date soon thereafter), you case will not be looked at, no matter what the PD cutoff date is, unless all cases received before Oct. 28, '07 have been reviewed.
If this doesnt help I will try Ombudsman next after couple of months. The Ombudsman form has a question of if you have tried through Congressman etc first so we can try and see that.
Guys its so funny when you see ppl with PD of 2003 and 2005 complaining and bitching. Here we have waited 7 + yrs our PD's are current and we are doing OK. Wait sure brings maturity :)
USCIS does not process cases in PD order, because they can't. Thousands of files they receive, are sequenced in order they receive them at Centers. They claim that cases are processed in order they receive them. "Receive Date" is not what you see on your receipt, it is the date they physically received the case on (thus if case is moved from one center to another, true Receive Date is the date it was recieved by the last center). You see this data online status as "...we received (or transferred) your case on ...".
PD critieria is limited to certain countries only. Therefore, by and large, "cases are processed in order they are received..." works well. However, for India, China etc. where PD cutoff has to be factored, it is used merely to decide to work or skip a file (when seen in the receive date order). If PD cutoff date is very restricted, they will have to skip a lot of cases, which slows them down. That's the reason every July they ask for wider PD cutoff dates so that they can consume a lot of visas, as they don't have to skip that many cases.
This process is a mockery of the PD cutoff dates, but that's how it works. If you sent your case on June 28, 07, with July 2, 07 as the printed Receive Data on your receipt, but the case where it finally rested, was entered in their database on Oct. 28, '07 (with a Notice Date soon thereafter), you case will not be looked at, no matter what the PD cutoff date is, unless all cases received before Oct. 28, '07 have been reviewed.
more...
vin13
06-24 01:32 PM
Source: Frank Sharry: Memo to the President: Yes, Move Immigration Reform This Year (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/frank-sharry/memo-to-the-president-yes_b_220072.html)
On June 25th, President Obama is convening a bi-partisan meeting to discuss the prospects for moving on comprehensive immigration reform later this year. If he asked me about the politics of immigration reform in this economic climate, this is the memo I would send to him:
Mr. President, with so many challenges facing America, is it too much to tackle immigration reform this year?
Reform advocates point to the pledge you made on the campaign trail, to make immigration reform a "top priority in my first year." Yet skeptics argue that the economic crisis makes your campaign promise moot. They believe you should delay immigration legislation and focus on the economy and your other legislative priorities. While addressing immigration may seem to be heaping another issue onto an already-full plate of priorities, there are four compelling reasons for you to move forward with reform this year.
First, the public support for immigration reform is growing stronger notwithstanding the conventional wisdom advanced by the political class. For a big majority of Americans, the failure to address immigration is a symbol of Washington's failure to confront and solve tough problems. Comprehensive immigration reform - the key elements of which require strong enforcement at the borders and in the workplace, coupled with a mechanism for unauthorized immigrants to get legal, learn English and pay taxes - is viewed by the majority of Americans as the most practical approach to addressing this complicated problem.
And in this economic downturn, voters are actually more supportive of immigration reform than at any other time. As pollster Celinda Lake tells it, "voters are very focused on finding solutions to our problems. They support comprehensive immigration reform as a practical, common-sense solution and have no patience for politicians who want to point fingers and score points rather than fix the problem."
The evidence for this point of view is growing. A Washington Post/ABC News poll showed 61% support for giving undocumented immigrants the right to live in the U.S. "if they pay a fine and meet other requirements," a 12% increase since 2007. The Pew Research Center recently found that 63% of respondents supported a pathway to citizenship, up 5% from 2007.
In polling conducted in May by Pete Brodnitz of Benenson Strategies for the organization I direct, 64% of voters support comprehensive immigration reform before it is described, and a whopping 86% support comprehensive reform after it is described. In response to a head-to-head question that pits comprehensive reform against the enforcement-only approach favored by most Republicans and some conservative Democrats, comprehensive wins 67% to 31%. Among those voters who describe themselves as undecided for the 2010 Congressional elections, they not only favor comprehensive reform at the same levels as Democratic voters, by a 69% - 28% they want their elected leaders to tackle immigration reform this year.
The second reason you should move forward is that your commitment to move on immigration reform has created enormous expectations in the Latino community. Your campaign promise was a galvanizing factor in motivating Latinos - especially Latino immigrant voters - to turn out in record numbers in 2008 and swing decisively to the Democratic column. These new voters helped flip at least four states that voted for George W. Bush in 2004 to Obama states in 2008 (Florida, Colorado, New Mexico, and Nevada).
While some like to point out that polls of Hispanics put issues related to the economy as higher on the priority list than immigration reform, the fact is that Immigration reform is a defining issue for Latinos the way civil rights is for many African-American voters, choice is for many female voters, and Israel is for many Jewish voters. For example, in a recent poll of Latino voters conducted by Bendixen and Associates on behalf of America's Voice, 82% called the issue personally important and 87% said they would not consider voting for a Congressional candidate who favors forcing most of those in the U.S. illegally to leave the country. Moreover, expectations are sky-high: three out of four Latino voters expect you to keep your pledge to move on immigration reform in the first year.
The third reason you should move forward is that fixing immigration is a critical component of fixing the economy. Immigration reform will benefit American taxpayers by requiring workers and their employers to get legal and comply with their tax obligations; it will benefit American workers whose wages and working conditions are depressed by unscrupulous employers who exploit unauthorized workers; and it will benefit law-abiding employers currently undercut by bad-actor competitors by significantly reducing the incentive to underpay workers and pay them off the books in order to win business. As for increased revenues, get this: a Congressional Budget Office study of a legalization component included in the 2006 McCain-Kennedy bill projected increased revenues over 10 years totaling $66 billion. Not bad at a time of squeezed budgets.
Finally, the moral stakes are high and getting higher. How we as a nation deal with illegal immigration has become a defining moral issue for our nation. Ultimately, the question we face is this: are we going to allow hardliners who want nothing less than the expulsion of millions of immigrant families already living in our communities to dominate the debate? Or are we going to live up to our tradition as both a nation of immigrants and a nation of laws and write a new chapter in the American story of how including "them" makes for a stronger "us?"
Immigration reform will not be easy, and yet, this is the kind of big issue that led you to proclaim the fierce urgency of now and run for President.
This is your kind of fight, Mr. President. History is calling.
On June 25th, President Obama is convening a bi-partisan meeting to discuss the prospects for moving on comprehensive immigration reform later this year. If he asked me about the politics of immigration reform in this economic climate, this is the memo I would send to him:
Mr. President, with so many challenges facing America, is it too much to tackle immigration reform this year?
Reform advocates point to the pledge you made on the campaign trail, to make immigration reform a "top priority in my first year." Yet skeptics argue that the economic crisis makes your campaign promise moot. They believe you should delay immigration legislation and focus on the economy and your other legislative priorities. While addressing immigration may seem to be heaping another issue onto an already-full plate of priorities, there are four compelling reasons for you to move forward with reform this year.
First, the public support for immigration reform is growing stronger notwithstanding the conventional wisdom advanced by the political class. For a big majority of Americans, the failure to address immigration is a symbol of Washington's failure to confront and solve tough problems. Comprehensive immigration reform - the key elements of which require strong enforcement at the borders and in the workplace, coupled with a mechanism for unauthorized immigrants to get legal, learn English and pay taxes - is viewed by the majority of Americans as the most practical approach to addressing this complicated problem.
And in this economic downturn, voters are actually more supportive of immigration reform than at any other time. As pollster Celinda Lake tells it, "voters are very focused on finding solutions to our problems. They support comprehensive immigration reform as a practical, common-sense solution and have no patience for politicians who want to point fingers and score points rather than fix the problem."
The evidence for this point of view is growing. A Washington Post/ABC News poll showed 61% support for giving undocumented immigrants the right to live in the U.S. "if they pay a fine and meet other requirements," a 12% increase since 2007. The Pew Research Center recently found that 63% of respondents supported a pathway to citizenship, up 5% from 2007.
In polling conducted in May by Pete Brodnitz of Benenson Strategies for the organization I direct, 64% of voters support comprehensive immigration reform before it is described, and a whopping 86% support comprehensive reform after it is described. In response to a head-to-head question that pits comprehensive reform against the enforcement-only approach favored by most Republicans and some conservative Democrats, comprehensive wins 67% to 31%. Among those voters who describe themselves as undecided for the 2010 Congressional elections, they not only favor comprehensive reform at the same levels as Democratic voters, by a 69% - 28% they want their elected leaders to tackle immigration reform this year.
The second reason you should move forward is that your commitment to move on immigration reform has created enormous expectations in the Latino community. Your campaign promise was a galvanizing factor in motivating Latinos - especially Latino immigrant voters - to turn out in record numbers in 2008 and swing decisively to the Democratic column. These new voters helped flip at least four states that voted for George W. Bush in 2004 to Obama states in 2008 (Florida, Colorado, New Mexico, and Nevada).
While some like to point out that polls of Hispanics put issues related to the economy as higher on the priority list than immigration reform, the fact is that Immigration reform is a defining issue for Latinos the way civil rights is for many African-American voters, choice is for many female voters, and Israel is for many Jewish voters. For example, in a recent poll of Latino voters conducted by Bendixen and Associates on behalf of America's Voice, 82% called the issue personally important and 87% said they would not consider voting for a Congressional candidate who favors forcing most of those in the U.S. illegally to leave the country. Moreover, expectations are sky-high: three out of four Latino voters expect you to keep your pledge to move on immigration reform in the first year.
The third reason you should move forward is that fixing immigration is a critical component of fixing the economy. Immigration reform will benefit American taxpayers by requiring workers and their employers to get legal and comply with their tax obligations; it will benefit American workers whose wages and working conditions are depressed by unscrupulous employers who exploit unauthorized workers; and it will benefit law-abiding employers currently undercut by bad-actor competitors by significantly reducing the incentive to underpay workers and pay them off the books in order to win business. As for increased revenues, get this: a Congressional Budget Office study of a legalization component included in the 2006 McCain-Kennedy bill projected increased revenues over 10 years totaling $66 billion. Not bad at a time of squeezed budgets.
Finally, the moral stakes are high and getting higher. How we as a nation deal with illegal immigration has become a defining moral issue for our nation. Ultimately, the question we face is this: are we going to allow hardliners who want nothing less than the expulsion of millions of immigrant families already living in our communities to dominate the debate? Or are we going to live up to our tradition as both a nation of immigrants and a nation of laws and write a new chapter in the American story of how including "them" makes for a stronger "us?"
Immigration reform will not be easy, and yet, this is the kind of big issue that led you to proclaim the fierce urgency of now and run for President.
This is your kind of fight, Mr. President. History is calling.
hot Green eyes are super
amitjoey
01-31 12:43 PM
I hope with this funding mechanism they could hire more efficient people and get things done fast.
rb_248, Last time there was an increase a year back or so, I felt that it is good to have an increase in USCIS Fees, because it will bring the necessary funds that they say they lack for efficiency. I have been proved wrong. There is no accountability.
rb_248, Last time there was an increase a year back or so, I felt that it is good to have an increase in USCIS Fees, because it will bring the necessary funds that they say they lack for efficiency. I have been proved wrong. There is no accountability.
more...
house This effect is pretty amazing
mygoodluck
08-13 04:11 PM
Just wanted to see how many duplicate application USCIS will get this week.
My lawyer has specifically recommended against re-filing. He said exact duplicate applications in the system is a really bad idea and could get to both being rejected. This is different from the case that if one has missed something in the first one, he can re-file.
My lawyer has specifically recommended against re-filing. He said exact duplicate applications in the system is a really bad idea and could get to both being rejected. This is different from the case that if one has missed something in the first one, he can re-file.
tattoo have darker green eyes,
maximus777
11-20 02:00 PM
a self serving proposal..
MS is just a pretext for many who are here. MS is worthless if you are a software engineer.. you don't need MS to be coding in Java or .NET...
MS from some vague sidey backstreet community college cannot be compared to MS from other better off schools.
your proposal is distracting from the main agenda. CIR or other relief measures.
Agreed, but still there is a quota in place for STEM graduates in H1-B regardless of the university rating/quality. The law makers/USCIS approved it - so there must be something in it that appeals to them. In my opinion, it would be much easier to work on extending this benefit to GC process as well (its mutually acceptable for both the establishment and applicants since we already have a precedent in the H1-B system). Hypothetically speaking if an additional quota of 20K is created for STEM graduates, it will help every one involved. Not the perfect solution, but probably one of the most practical and likely to be approved one.
People with STEM degrees will probably get their GCs done faster which to some may appear unfair. But under the cuurent circumstances, what other options do we have?!?Status quo which means, every one is stuck or a separate quota so that at least the queue keeps moving?
:rolleyes:
MS is just a pretext for many who are here. MS is worthless if you are a software engineer.. you don't need MS to be coding in Java or .NET...
MS from some vague sidey backstreet community college cannot be compared to MS from other better off schools.
your proposal is distracting from the main agenda. CIR or other relief measures.
Agreed, but still there is a quota in place for STEM graduates in H1-B regardless of the university rating/quality. The law makers/USCIS approved it - so there must be something in it that appeals to them. In my opinion, it would be much easier to work on extending this benefit to GC process as well (its mutually acceptable for both the establishment and applicants since we already have a precedent in the H1-B system). Hypothetically speaking if an additional quota of 20K is created for STEM graduates, it will help every one involved. Not the perfect solution, but probably one of the most practical and likely to be approved one.
People with STEM degrees will probably get their GCs done faster which to some may appear unfair. But under the cuurent circumstances, what other options do we have?!?Status quo which means, every one is stuck or a separate quota so that at least the queue keeps moving?
:rolleyes:
more...
pictures dark smokey green eyes and
ramus
06-20 07:44 AM
Great.... Thanks.
Today is the next day of my GC freedom, and I am still on this forum, I didnot mean to leave the Forum, I still support IV with all my heart.......:D
Today is the next day of my GC freedom, and I am still on this forum, I didnot mean to leave the Forum, I still support IV with all my heart.......:D
dresses Green from the Mehron pastel
Chiwere
06-12 03:25 PM
Interesting reading. Wonder what is it about eugenics that still appeal to some people: Just get some geniuses and they will build heaven as opposed to people who are actually providing vital service to the community. I guess I should get my IQ results translated to English first.
Testimony from anti immigrants like Krikorian just highlights their own low IQ, one of the touchstones he proposes to identify the "Einsteins". He said bringing workers from outside decouples industry from US education system, but supports allowing foreign trained(with BS/BTech or higher) geniuses in.
Perhaps there should be separate EB category for anti-immigrant immigrants. At least we will have smarter bigots to contend with. :D
Testimony from anti immigrants like Krikorian just highlights their own low IQ, one of the touchstones he proposes to identify the "Einsteins". He said bringing workers from outside decouples industry from US education system, but supports allowing foreign trained(with BS/BTech or higher) geniuses in.
Perhaps there should be separate EB category for anti-immigrant immigrants. At least we will have smarter bigots to contend with. :D
more...
makeup and green eyes. Her makeup
NKR
02-12 09:54 AM
It's UNJUST(ified) business
girlfriend Eyes. products+used+eyes Pretty Green Eye Makeup Tutorial
snathan
03-26 10:42 AM
Hi Guys,
I am not sure if this is the trend everywhere only in TX. The DPS - Department of public Safety which is issuing Driving License started asking for the Employment Verification or latest Pay Slip. I asked the officer if its the new requirement and she replied Yes, its started recently. If you are in H1 or H4 visa, you need to prove that you are still in job and getting paid. One more nail in the coffin.
Thanks
I am not sure if this is the trend everywhere only in TX. The DPS - Department of public Safety which is issuing Driving License started asking for the Employment Verification or latest Pay Slip. I asked the officer if its the new requirement and she replied Yes, its started recently. If you are in H1 or H4 visa, you need to prove that you are still in job and getting paid. One more nail in the coffin.
Thanks
hairstyles products for green eyes
asindu
07-14 09:07 PM
Please dont talk BS if you do not even know who i am...i'm a member of this group since the start!!! So you have no right to say stuff you don't even know..i'm really tired of people being selfish and not caring about kids who do age out. Some children need this because they do become illegal, like myslef eventhough we we're legal...it doesnt harm you guys...so please help the dream act effort!!!
senthil1
02-11 11:18 AM
Eb2 will move gradually but it may move up to 2006 or 2007 as Eb1 spill over and Eb1 and Eb2 spillover from other countries will be transferred to Indian and Chinese Eb2. Again it depends on how many people are waiting in Eb2
sachung22,
Approximately what cut off dates your expect for EB2/3 by Aug'09?
sachung22,
Approximately what cut off dates your expect for EB2/3 by Aug'09?
JunRN
08-25 06:33 PM
To tell you honestly, my primary reason for joining this forum is to learn from others' experiences - whether it be good or bad.
I can also see the opinion of others regarding matters of my personal and general interests. It is my own judgment to believe some of it or not.
Joining the rally or givin' contribution is last in my interest as I do not have a job yet and no income.
We should start respecting one's opinion and one's life. Each of us has its own case and unique to each other. My suggestion to those inviting to the rally or seeking for contribution to do it via private message. That is a nice way of doing it.
When somebody starts a thread that you do not like, just ignore it instead of posting 'close this thread'. The thread has a life of its own. If it is not popular, then it will go down to the bottom of the line. If it is very interesting, many will subscribe to it and you will find it at the first page.
Cheers to all...we all have our own problems...some are here just to find comfort...
I can also see the opinion of others regarding matters of my personal and general interests. It is my own judgment to believe some of it or not.
Joining the rally or givin' contribution is last in my interest as I do not have a job yet and no income.
We should start respecting one's opinion and one's life. Each of us has its own case and unique to each other. My suggestion to those inviting to the rally or seeking for contribution to do it via private message. That is a nice way of doing it.
When somebody starts a thread that you do not like, just ignore it instead of posting 'close this thread'. The thread has a life of its own. If it is not popular, then it will go down to the bottom of the line. If it is very interesting, many will subscribe to it and you will find it at the first page.
Cheers to all...we all have our own problems...some are here just to find comfort...
