harish
04-23 08:06 PM
Congratulations Googler!
Hopefully we can still look forward to receiving updates from you in the future! :)
Hopefully we can still look forward to receiving updates from you in the future! :)
wallpaper stock photo : Black and white
aka
04-24 12:12 PM
Congrats Googler, you have given so much to this community. You totally deserve the good news! Have a couple of cold ones on us...
varshadas
01-23 12:18 PM
Welcome aboard Hemal.
So here is the deal. The congressman to whose district I do not belong will not entertain any requests.
I called up Mike Ferguson and Rodney P. Frelinghuysen office.
Mike Ferguson's office asked me to fax to the request to his office
and I have to write a letter to Rodney P. Frelinghuysen with details of the issue and who will be attending the meeting.
So I guess, you guys have to contact your local congressmen unlike what I had originally thought.
List of the senators and the congressmen
http://www.visi.com/juan/congress/cgi-bin/newseek.cgi?site=ctc&state=nj
To find your local representative
http://www.house.gov/writerep/
There is no schedule right now for ongoing conference calls. They are adhoc. There was a tri-state chapter call on 1/19/07. Whenever, there is a conference call, there will be a thread in the forums about it.
IV has suggested that the senators of NJ are pro-immigration and that the congressmen are divided. When you call up your local congressmen, just say that you are calling to request a personal meeting with the Congressmen to discuss the immigration legislation.
I am going to talk to IV and find out the exact contents of the letter/fax that we would be sending.
Here is the format letter that you should use to request appointment from your local congressman
Date: 01/24/2007
Dear Congressman XXXX,
I am a concerned constituent writing to you on behalf of ImmigrationVoice, a non profit organization working to get the problems of Employment based Legal Immigration to the attention of lawmakers. I would like to request for a meeting to discuss the problems that the legal high skilled immigrant community is facing.
Employment Based Legal immigration is currently facing some of the worst waiting periods in the recent past. Applicants have to wait to finish their final phase of immigration for as many as 6-7 years because of the lack of employment based green card numbers which is also called Green Card Retrogression. The reasons for these are certain bureaucratic delays, flawed practices and procedures and arcane laws which are not in tune with reality at all.
Please also note that there are more than 350,000 Labor applications pending at the Labor department to be processed. Some of them are as old as from year 2000. These applicants are waiting for certification from the US Department of Labor as high-skilled workers who are not displacing existing American workers in the market.
Subsequent to rigorous but unfruitful recruitment efforts by our employers and other processing stages by USCIS, we still have to face prolonged wait times. It is also to be noted that most of us are already working in the U.S. for the past 5-6 years and are contributing to the U.S. economy in the form of taxes etc - some of which we do not derive any benefit from. This also hurts the businesses in your constituency like my employer because they have to wait indefinitely to hire talented applicants on a permanent basis. This is a very important issue and will determine whether the United States of America remains competitive in the fields of science and technology and retains the best talent from around the world.
ImmigrationVoice is a nonprofit organization comprised of volunteers who are suffering due to these delays and wish to bring this important issue in front of their lawmakers. Hence I would request an appointment so that I can explain these problems and ask for support for some of the legislative measures that have been introduced to alleviate these problems.
I look forward to hearing back from you.
Thank you.
Sincerely,
(Place holder for your signature)
Your name:
Your address:
Your email:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You may have to make minor changes depending on how the Congressman wants the letter. One of the congressman contacted as for the number of people attending.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Thanks,
Varsha
So here is the deal. The congressman to whose district I do not belong will not entertain any requests.
I called up Mike Ferguson and Rodney P. Frelinghuysen office.
Mike Ferguson's office asked me to fax to the request to his office
and I have to write a letter to Rodney P. Frelinghuysen with details of the issue and who will be attending the meeting.
So I guess, you guys have to contact your local congressmen unlike what I had originally thought.
List of the senators and the congressmen
http://www.visi.com/juan/congress/cgi-bin/newseek.cgi?site=ctc&state=nj
To find your local representative
http://www.house.gov/writerep/
There is no schedule right now for ongoing conference calls. They are adhoc. There was a tri-state chapter call on 1/19/07. Whenever, there is a conference call, there will be a thread in the forums about it.
IV has suggested that the senators of NJ are pro-immigration and that the congressmen are divided. When you call up your local congressmen, just say that you are calling to request a personal meeting with the Congressmen to discuss the immigration legislation.
I am going to talk to IV and find out the exact contents of the letter/fax that we would be sending.
Here is the format letter that you should use to request appointment from your local congressman
Date: 01/24/2007
Dear Congressman XXXX,
I am a concerned constituent writing to you on behalf of ImmigrationVoice, a non profit organization working to get the problems of Employment based Legal Immigration to the attention of lawmakers. I would like to request for a meeting to discuss the problems that the legal high skilled immigrant community is facing.
Employment Based Legal immigration is currently facing some of the worst waiting periods in the recent past. Applicants have to wait to finish their final phase of immigration for as many as 6-7 years because of the lack of employment based green card numbers which is also called Green Card Retrogression. The reasons for these are certain bureaucratic delays, flawed practices and procedures and arcane laws which are not in tune with reality at all.
Please also note that there are more than 350,000 Labor applications pending at the Labor department to be processed. Some of them are as old as from year 2000. These applicants are waiting for certification from the US Department of Labor as high-skilled workers who are not displacing existing American workers in the market.
Subsequent to rigorous but unfruitful recruitment efforts by our employers and other processing stages by USCIS, we still have to face prolonged wait times. It is also to be noted that most of us are already working in the U.S. for the past 5-6 years and are contributing to the U.S. economy in the form of taxes etc - some of which we do not derive any benefit from. This also hurts the businesses in your constituency like my employer because they have to wait indefinitely to hire talented applicants on a permanent basis. This is a very important issue and will determine whether the United States of America remains competitive in the fields of science and technology and retains the best talent from around the world.
ImmigrationVoice is a nonprofit organization comprised of volunteers who are suffering due to these delays and wish to bring this important issue in front of their lawmakers. Hence I would request an appointment so that I can explain these problems and ask for support for some of the legislative measures that have been introduced to alleviate these problems.
I look forward to hearing back from you.
Thank you.
Sincerely,
(Place holder for your signature)
Your name:
Your address:
Your email:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You may have to make minor changes depending on how the Congressman wants the letter. One of the congressman contacted as for the number of people attending.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Thanks,
Varsha
2011 pattern background black and
jerez_z
03-12 08:41 PM
It was a hard choice between Thirdworldman and Eilsoe... I had to go with Third cause his lighting was cool, and the setup was nice.
more...
cal_dood
07-05 01:43 PM
I'll just go back to forums of the leading lady immigration lawyer....
rajuram
01-25 01:26 AM
For my part, I send an email everyday to the white house and the state dept. This is probably not enough.....but may be some day it will work.
BTW, my apologies if the members thought that this thread was accusatory. Still the question remains, what next?
Ok, I understand, no use bringing it up again, sorry, let me go back and read other interesting threads on "investments" and "buying houses"...
How about we start writing letters to the WhiteHouse/President on
(i) Eliminate per country quota limits
(ii) Recapture the lost visas
(iii) Porcessing dates cannot go back
for administrative fixes ?
BTW, my apologies if the members thought that this thread was accusatory. Still the question remains, what next?
Ok, I understand, no use bringing it up again, sorry, let me go back and read other interesting threads on "investments" and "buying houses"...
How about we start writing letters to the WhiteHouse/President on
(i) Eliminate per country quota limits
(ii) Recapture the lost visas
(iii) Porcessing dates cannot go back
for administrative fixes ?
more...
calgirl
07-12 05:53 PM
sammas..
Ahh.. Thought I missed something in the loong document..
Thanks..
Ahh.. Thought I missed something in the loong document..
Thanks..
2010 pattern background black and white. pattern and lack and white
nixstor
09-19 11:14 AM
Hi,
I was one of the marshalls, reached Los Angeles like an hour ago. The rally was a huge success, but not upto the expectations from the locals. There is no doubt there is more participation from CA members in both days 17, & 18th and I am not sure what stopped locals attending the rally when they have excellent commuting options to the monument and the capitol area unlike the west coast where we're forced to drive.
I am sure that the local chapter leaders such as Arun, Sukhvinder, Sivakanth, & others put a lot of time, effort, & money into getting the permits from different authorities, display matertials prepared and delivered on time, and other logistics.
At the same time, having 6 weeks time for the rally, I think the local chapters in DC, VA, MD, & DE should have taken a bigger initiative in conducting chapter meetings to improve the participation, and volunteer efforts in receiving people from the airports and/or providing accommodations.
I spoke to one person from CA who came with all the checks written with the names & amounts in advance, and handing them over to the respective members who sponsered others for the rally.
Thanks to all who made the rally a big success.
I do support in changing the organization name to "Legal Immigration Voice" immediately.
I will be writing more in the morning,
Chandra.
What ever stopped the people in MA/NY/NJ to board the buses stopped the people in DC/VA/MD to get on to the Metro train and come to the rally. Its not the distance, as it may seem to you and me, But Its the lack of will, lack of commitment.
If people think about San Jose rally and think it was a huge success, people showed up in 2 days yada yada.., there is a diff reason. Does it even need to be mentioned?
All that I can tell you guys is we did more than our best to get the locals to get to the rally. We can only call/email them or give flyers and let them notify. The final 6 days, our active members had stood out at every place they could and distributed flyers to 3000-3500 people. All the six weeks they have been doing spreading the word.
I hope your message was just expressing disappointment by the turn out an was not actually questioning the commitment of the people who worked on this.
I was one of the marshalls, reached Los Angeles like an hour ago. The rally was a huge success, but not upto the expectations from the locals. There is no doubt there is more participation from CA members in both days 17, & 18th and I am not sure what stopped locals attending the rally when they have excellent commuting options to the monument and the capitol area unlike the west coast where we're forced to drive.
I am sure that the local chapter leaders such as Arun, Sukhvinder, Sivakanth, & others put a lot of time, effort, & money into getting the permits from different authorities, display matertials prepared and delivered on time, and other logistics.
At the same time, having 6 weeks time for the rally, I think the local chapters in DC, VA, MD, & DE should have taken a bigger initiative in conducting chapter meetings to improve the participation, and volunteer efforts in receiving people from the airports and/or providing accommodations.
I spoke to one person from CA who came with all the checks written with the names & amounts in advance, and handing them over to the respective members who sponsered others for the rally.
Thanks to all who made the rally a big success.
I do support in changing the organization name to "Legal Immigration Voice" immediately.
I will be writing more in the morning,
Chandra.
What ever stopped the people in MA/NY/NJ to board the buses stopped the people in DC/VA/MD to get on to the Metro train and come to the rally. Its not the distance, as it may seem to you and me, But Its the lack of will, lack of commitment.
If people think about San Jose rally and think it was a huge success, people showed up in 2 days yada yada.., there is a diff reason. Does it even need to be mentioned?
All that I can tell you guys is we did more than our best to get the locals to get to the rally. We can only call/email them or give flyers and let them notify. The final 6 days, our active members had stood out at every place they could and distributed flyers to 3000-3500 people. All the six weeks they have been doing spreading the word.
I hope your message was just expressing disappointment by the turn out an was not actually questioning the commitment of the people who worked on this.
more...
meimmi
03-10 04:25 PM
Yes, for e-file you need to send the supporting docs by mail. In my case, I sent the copy of I-485 ASC biometrics notice which has mention of the receipt # and A # as proof of my AOS pending, copy of I-94, copy of the e-filing confirmation (Printout). You do not need to send photo as that will be taken during fingerprinting. The separate fingerprint is needed for e-file only. They take print of 1 finger. If you send your EAD papers with I-485, the 485 fingerprnt covers all I think. I do not think we need to go for fingerprint again for EAD renewal, though with USCIS that may be possible. ;)
hair pattern background black
deepimpact
09-10 01:53 PM
If USCIS wants to do another JULY 2007 they never learnt their lession. With the Quarterly/annual quota I dont think USCIS legally can make EB2 current. I hate another JULY 2007 for sure.
They can make a category current when Demand < Supply. So once all I-485s prior to 2007 are approved the monthly demand data they publish will show demand Prior to CY2011 = 200. So unless they use approved I-140 to determine demand , DOS will make the dates current(even if for 1 month). As long as USCIS uses pending I-485 data to determine demand, the July 2007 fiasco will keep on repeating every 3-4 years. The key here is to have USCIS provide the actual demand (people with approved I-140s). It was mentioned somewhere that the current USCIS database is not capable of sorting the I-140s by country of chargebility and hence the I-140 data can't be used to determine per country demand.
They can make a category current when Demand < Supply. So once all I-485s prior to 2007 are approved the monthly demand data they publish will show demand Prior to CY2011 = 200. So unless they use approved I-140 to determine demand , DOS will make the dates current(even if for 1 month). As long as USCIS uses pending I-485 data to determine demand, the July 2007 fiasco will keep on repeating every 3-4 years. The key here is to have USCIS provide the actual demand (people with approved I-140s). It was mentioned somewhere that the current USCIS database is not capable of sorting the I-140s by country of chargebility and hence the I-140 data can't be used to determine per country demand.
more...
alanoconnor
08-15 03:57 PM
All
Charge-ability
Areas
Except
Those
Listed
CHINA-
mainland born INDIA MEXICO PHILIP-PINES
Employ-ment
-Based
1st 01JAN07 01JAN07 01JAN07 01JAN07 01JAN07
2nd 01JAN07 01JAN06 01APR04 01JAN07 01JAN07
3rd 01AUG02 U U U 01AUG02
Other
Workers U U U U U
4th 01JAN07 01JAN07 01JAN07 01JAN07 01JAN07
Certain Religious Workers 01JAN07 01JAN07 01JAN07 01JAN07 01JAN07
5th 01JAN07 01JAN07 01JAN07 01JAN07 01JAN07
Targeted Employ-ment Areas/
Regional Centers 01JAN07 01JAN07 01JAN07 01JAN07 01JAN07
Charge-ability
Areas
Except
Those
Listed
CHINA-
mainland born INDIA MEXICO PHILIP-PINES
Employ-ment
-Based
1st 01JAN07 01JAN07 01JAN07 01JAN07 01JAN07
2nd 01JAN07 01JAN06 01APR04 01JAN07 01JAN07
3rd 01AUG02 U U U 01AUG02
Other
Workers U U U U U
4th 01JAN07 01JAN07 01JAN07 01JAN07 01JAN07
Certain Religious Workers 01JAN07 01JAN07 01JAN07 01JAN07 01JAN07
5th 01JAN07 01JAN07 01JAN07 01JAN07 01JAN07
Targeted Employ-ment Areas/
Regional Centers 01JAN07 01JAN07 01JAN07 01JAN07 01JAN07
hot hot Seamless pattern with lack pattern background black. white pattern
gsc999
04-21 10:49 PM
I stayed till 6:30 p.m. and got an opportunity to briefly talk about Immigration Voice and commended his initiative on solving this issue.
Here is my take:
- Lot of IV members showed up, around 50. Please correct me if I get that right.
- Per my understanding Gutierrez came to CA, even though he is from Illinois to seek and reinforce support from California representatives, since CA is the swing state as far as immigration is concerned. Legal as well as undocumented.
- A lot of Latino origin people showed up. Well, no surprises there. Most of STRIVE does deal with undocumented immigration. Infact, it might be better that way. We keep low public profile but hard and strong lobbying.
- I asked Rep. Gutierrez if STRIVE bill had enough Republican support to pass the House. He mentioned that he is working to do that.He wants us to contact Republicans reps., not just the Democrats.
- It was good learning experience. I wasn't expecting a structured Q&A session. A suggestion: It would be great if we can trash out a strategy among ourselves and designate a spokesperson.
- I gave a brief interview video interview to the office of a State Senator from Sacramento. I mentioned about IV and our goals.
- It did looked like a Spanish affair but it is our preogative to speak up.
Here is my take:
- Lot of IV members showed up, around 50. Please correct me if I get that right.
- Per my understanding Gutierrez came to CA, even though he is from Illinois to seek and reinforce support from California representatives, since CA is the swing state as far as immigration is concerned. Legal as well as undocumented.
- A lot of Latino origin people showed up. Well, no surprises there. Most of STRIVE does deal with undocumented immigration. Infact, it might be better that way. We keep low public profile but hard and strong lobbying.
- I asked Rep. Gutierrez if STRIVE bill had enough Republican support to pass the House. He mentioned that he is working to do that.He wants us to contact Republicans reps., not just the Democrats.
- It was good learning experience. I wasn't expecting a structured Q&A session. A suggestion: It would be great if we can trash out a strategy among ourselves and designate a spokesperson.
- I gave a brief interview video interview to the office of a State Senator from Sacramento. I mentioned about IV and our goals.
- It did looked like a Spanish affair but it is our preogative to speak up.
more...
house pattern in lack and white
reddymjm
09-10 01:38 PM
Here is a brief calculation of EB2 Demand till date (Today's Date)
The total demand till date is ~ 120K which is
Demand up to Aug 2007 = 45K
Sep 2007 to Dec 2008 = 16 * 2.5K Perm Month = 40K
Jan 2009 to Oct 2010 = 22 * 1.5K per month = 33K
New PD porting after Aug 2007 (Current Eb3 Inventory is 60K till Aug 2007) = 10K
Total 45 + 40 + 33 + 10 = 128K. This may be inflated but it is atleast 120K.
By giving these numbers I don�t mean to scare anybody but it�s better to have a tryst with true reality rather than be ignorant. It is better to have an understanding of the backlog rather than feeling bad VB after VB, nothing will change soon because the backlog is so huge.
If you look at the numbers it is very unlikely that EB2 will literally become current any time soon, the end of the pre-adjudicated numbers is just a tipping point and when this happens anything could happen 1) Make dates current (I personally welcome that atleast everybody gets a chance to file for I485) 2) Keep accepting applications in a controlled manner so as to approve in quarter or year. 3) Grant spillover to EB3 ROW (EB3 ROW backlog is so huge like EB2 - I in the same range 100-120K that the spillover will disappear in no time, also note that EB3 ROW incremental demand is much higher than EB2 ROW).
The spillover is a happening of the present time when the economy is bad, the moment this changes everything will disappear and there will be no difference between EB2 and EB3 if you belong to a retrogressed country we will all be at 3K Per annum and EB5 contribution if any will be consumed by PD porting which will increase manifold as EB3-I folks waiting for 10 years is simply unacceptable, currently there a 60K folks here just till 2007. I strongly favor porting waiting for 10 years is unacceptable. Also being without EAD / AP is very hard, great that we have a IV campaign initiated for this the efforts in this direction are laudable. Actually as Pappu, Admin2 and others have been saying EB3-EB2 even though may be relevant now is actually meaningless this is relevant only in this temporary phase of time fighting on these lines will not help to attain any objective rather it will kill chances of EB3 friends with later PD to port. The biggest issue is the per country limits which equate talent pools like India and China and give them the same cap as countries which have 1/1000th population, if they cannot be eliminated atleast should be proportionate to population for larger countries and be at 7% for the smaller ones. PS - I have nothing personal against ROW friends.
If USCIS wants to do another JULY 2007 they never learnt their lession. With the Quarterly/annual quota I dont think USCIS legally can make EB2 current. I hate another JULY 2007 for sure.
The total demand till date is ~ 120K which is
Demand up to Aug 2007 = 45K
Sep 2007 to Dec 2008 = 16 * 2.5K Perm Month = 40K
Jan 2009 to Oct 2010 = 22 * 1.5K per month = 33K
New PD porting after Aug 2007 (Current Eb3 Inventory is 60K till Aug 2007) = 10K
Total 45 + 40 + 33 + 10 = 128K. This may be inflated but it is atleast 120K.
By giving these numbers I don�t mean to scare anybody but it�s better to have a tryst with true reality rather than be ignorant. It is better to have an understanding of the backlog rather than feeling bad VB after VB, nothing will change soon because the backlog is so huge.
If you look at the numbers it is very unlikely that EB2 will literally become current any time soon, the end of the pre-adjudicated numbers is just a tipping point and when this happens anything could happen 1) Make dates current (I personally welcome that atleast everybody gets a chance to file for I485) 2) Keep accepting applications in a controlled manner so as to approve in quarter or year. 3) Grant spillover to EB3 ROW (EB3 ROW backlog is so huge like EB2 - I in the same range 100-120K that the spillover will disappear in no time, also note that EB3 ROW incremental demand is much higher than EB2 ROW).
The spillover is a happening of the present time when the economy is bad, the moment this changes everything will disappear and there will be no difference between EB2 and EB3 if you belong to a retrogressed country we will all be at 3K Per annum and EB5 contribution if any will be consumed by PD porting which will increase manifold as EB3-I folks waiting for 10 years is simply unacceptable, currently there a 60K folks here just till 2007. I strongly favor porting waiting for 10 years is unacceptable. Also being without EAD / AP is very hard, great that we have a IV campaign initiated for this the efforts in this direction are laudable. Actually as Pappu, Admin2 and others have been saying EB3-EB2 even though may be relevant now is actually meaningless this is relevant only in this temporary phase of time fighting on these lines will not help to attain any objective rather it will kill chances of EB3 friends with later PD to port. The biggest issue is the per country limits which equate talent pools like India and China and give them the same cap as countries which have 1/1000th population, if they cannot be eliminated atleast should be proportionate to population for larger countries and be at 7% for the smaller ones. PS - I have nothing personal against ROW friends.
If USCIS wants to do another JULY 2007 they never learnt their lession. With the Quarterly/annual quota I dont think USCIS legally can make EB2 current. I hate another JULY 2007 for sure.
tattoo pattern background black and
prakashv44
09-21 02:51 PM
I am with you
more...
pictures stock photo : A large lack
Jello
04-05 08:39 AM
Has any body got any news or latest development about FBI name check?
dresses European pattern background
ckichannagari
12-13 08:49 AM
That's a good idea. A good way of generating funds for IV also. This way it would seem less burden for all of the members and they will be willing to come forward.
more...
makeup Black and white vintage
WeldonSprings
03-19 05:02 PM
Can EB2 move to March 06?
I hope this happens. :)
I hope this happens. :)
girlfriend pattern background black and
ItIsNotFunny
10-15 02:51 PM
I wrote this once before and I will say it one last time. Pulling stunts such as the flower campaign is PLAIN STUPID. May be not to the extent we feel it should, but USCIS does realize that there are issues with how it is handling cases. It is doing the best it can with the limited resources it is being provided. Please dont embarrass USCIS anymore. Would you keep calling a blind person, blind? Please stop this childish behavior. If anything lets start thinking about CIR and how we can influence changes to favor legal immigrants. We have the time now so start lobbying for changes.
Kindly note that you are dealing with a established government entity. Stop adopting hindi movie ideas when interacting with USCIS. If it were so easy why not arrange "naach-gana" for USCIS everyday. We can invite Malaika Sherawat for half the price we are paying to lobby. Skimpy clothes, raunchy songs, and alcohol may mesmerize the visa officer into stamping 100 K greencards everyday.
One last thing, if anybody believes that a dozen flowers did the trick last time, let me judge your intelligence for you. You are borderline RETARTDED. I bet there were a good number of closed door meetings, lobbying, and lets throw a bone to keep them quiet for sometime- discussions that translated into the July fiasco.
I believe we are educated and sane people, so lets start doing the right thing.
Enough said.
You have difference of opinion and I respect that. What you are underestimating is power of peaceful protest. One more thing, pardon me on this but I hardly understood anything where you are going in second paragraph.
One more thing, your message may be right but language was too strong :)
Kindly note that you are dealing with a established government entity. Stop adopting hindi movie ideas when interacting with USCIS. If it were so easy why not arrange "naach-gana" for USCIS everyday. We can invite Malaika Sherawat for half the price we are paying to lobby. Skimpy clothes, raunchy songs, and alcohol may mesmerize the visa officer into stamping 100 K greencards everyday.
One last thing, if anybody believes that a dozen flowers did the trick last time, let me judge your intelligence for you. You are borderline RETARTDED. I bet there were a good number of closed door meetings, lobbying, and lets throw a bone to keep them quiet for sometime- discussions that translated into the July fiasco.
I believe we are educated and sane people, so lets start doing the right thing.
Enough said.
You have difference of opinion and I respect that. What you are underestimating is power of peaceful protest. One more thing, pardon me on this but I hardly understood anything where you are going in second paragraph.
One more thing, your message may be right but language was too strong :)
hairstyles lack and white pattern.
Berkeleybee
02-14 01:17 PM
Retrohatao,
Also want to tell you that as the CA team meets lawmakers we give them an informational packet that includes:
(1) Our presentation
(2) CIS Ombudsman's Report:
http://www.dhs.gov/interweb/assetlibrary/CIS_AnnualReport_2005.pdf
(3) GAO Report on Backlogs at USCIS
http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d0620.pdf
(4) Exec Summary of NAS Rising Above a Gathering Storm
http://fermat.nap.edu/catalog/11463.html
(5) How Visa Date Cutoffs Are Established from July 2000 Bulletin
http://dosfan.lib.uic.edu/ERC/visa_bulletin/2000-07bulletin.html
Number (3), the GAO report describes the security check problem in tremendous detail. We give this report to lawmakers to remind them of the farcical nature of the security check problem. Note also that the CIS Ombudsman's report also includes critical commentary on the security check problem.
To reiterate, we are committed to removing ALL the hurdles in the process, not pick and choose between them.
best,
Berkeleybee
Also want to tell you that as the CA team meets lawmakers we give them an informational packet that includes:
(1) Our presentation
(2) CIS Ombudsman's Report:
http://www.dhs.gov/interweb/assetlibrary/CIS_AnnualReport_2005.pdf
(3) GAO Report on Backlogs at USCIS
http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d0620.pdf
(4) Exec Summary of NAS Rising Above a Gathering Storm
http://fermat.nap.edu/catalog/11463.html
(5) How Visa Date Cutoffs Are Established from July 2000 Bulletin
http://dosfan.lib.uic.edu/ERC/visa_bulletin/2000-07bulletin.html
Number (3), the GAO report describes the security check problem in tremendous detail. We give this report to lawmakers to remind them of the farcical nature of the security check problem. Note also that the CIS Ombudsman's report also includes critical commentary on the security check problem.
To reiterate, we are committed to removing ALL the hurdles in the process, not pick and choose between them.
best,
Berkeleybee
jambapamba
07-13 07:56 AM
Yes, please correct the spelling....
Please correct your spelling of Murthy. I thought some senator or Congressman Murphy wrote to DOS. If it was murthy I wouldn't have bothered to come on this thread. She is a big time crook. Shamelessly she's trying to take credit of everything that we are doing here under 1 banner called immigrationvoice she will take credit of Zoe Lofgren and everybody else. She has never ever mentioned immigrationvoice for anything in her so called updates.
Please correct your spelling of Murthy. I thought some senator or Congressman Murphy wrote to DOS. If it was murthy I wouldn't have bothered to come on this thread. She is a big time crook. Shamelessly she's trying to take credit of everything that we are doing here under 1 banner called immigrationvoice she will take credit of Zoe Lofgren and everybody else. She has never ever mentioned immigrationvoice for anything in her so called updates.
kaisersose
09-18 11:15 PM
I had to reluctantly stay away from the rally due to a brand new baby at home, but I sure hope to be part of future efforts.
And I totally agree that Legal is the keyword. Most Americans are not clear about Legals v Illegals and lump them together. Of course, some just do not care and do not see a need to differentiate between the two. They would just like to see Asian and South Asian folks get out of the country.
And I also am not in favor of asking for an increase in GC quota. Instead I am in favor of not counting spouse and kids against the quota. This itself will effectively inrease the quota to over 350K per year. Directly asking for quota increase always leaves a bad taste for skeptics and will slow down any possible action.
And I totally agree that Legal is the keyword. Most Americans are not clear about Legals v Illegals and lump them together. Of course, some just do not care and do not see a need to differentiate between the two. They would just like to see Asian and South Asian folks get out of the country.
And I also am not in favor of asking for an increase in GC quota. Instead I am in favor of not counting spouse and kids against the quota. This itself will effectively inrease the quota to over 350K per year. Directly asking for quota increase always leaves a bad taste for skeptics and will slow down any possible action.
No comments:
Post a Comment