Dipika
10-27 02:41 PM
For all of you who have got standard responses from USCIS, please do something about it. Call the local senator, file DHS-7001 with CIS Ombudsman, send a letter to USCIS secretary Napolatino, call TSC using POJ method, etc, etc.
If you are current, they need to look at your file. Case under review means nothing at all....my case was under review since July 20, 2009. Finally, i found out that my file was sitting in the storage and collecting dust.
As other previous posters have mentioned, you should try calling TSC/NSC on Thursday/Friday evening. I found out that the IOs were in a better mood, as compared to my calls on other days (specially in the morning/afternoon).
If you need details on the IO I talked to, I can provide it to you offline. I am still trying to reach that IO (need to say a big thank you) but have been unable to talk to him/her so far.
you are right. i sent letter to senator before 2 month, no response yet. i have sent letter to congress man before 2 weeks and sent letter to USCIS secretary Napolatino. let's see what happen.
If you are current, they need to look at your file. Case under review means nothing at all....my case was under review since July 20, 2009. Finally, i found out that my file was sitting in the storage and collecting dust.
As other previous posters have mentioned, you should try calling TSC/NSC on Thursday/Friday evening. I found out that the IOs were in a better mood, as compared to my calls on other days (specially in the morning/afternoon).
If you need details on the IO I talked to, I can provide it to you offline. I am still trying to reach that IO (need to say a big thank you) but have been unable to talk to him/her so far.
you are right. i sent letter to senator before 2 month, no response yet. i have sent letter to congress man before 2 weeks and sent letter to USCIS secretary Napolatino. let's see what happen.
wallpaper 1965 Aston Martin DB6
surabhi
08-26 12:56 AM
another common tactic is to bounce checks on pretext that signature on check does not match that on signature card.
one more is to freeze the accoutn for inactivity > 90 days.
I have been victim on more than 1 occasion for each of above tactics. Each time its annoyance ( writing letter. nothing gets done online), fees charged and increased blood pressure.
Unfortunately switching costs are high due to time taken to open new accounts and there is no guarantee that others are any better.
one more is to freeze the accoutn for inactivity > 90 days.
I have been victim on more than 1 occasion for each of above tactics. Each time its annoyance ( writing letter. nothing gets done online), fees charged and increased blood pressure.
Unfortunately switching costs are high due to time taken to open new accounts and there is no guarantee that others are any better.
mbawa2574
11-02 11:29 AM
I would like to share my experience and it may help some people here.
My H1 was sponsored by company A when I was working with them on OPT. I paid $3000 for H1 filing and attorney fees and company A gave me the H1 approval notice only after I signed an agreement that I would work for atleast one year with them.
Afetr 1 month of my H1 approval, I got a better job offer from company B and I got the H1 transferred. I notified my client and company A who threatened to revoke my H1, take me to court etc etc. They also withheld 4 weeks of my pay.
After joining company B, I filed a complaint against company A with DOL that they withheld my salary and also they demanded H1 fees from me. After 2 weeks of that complaint, my salary was deposited into my account and DOL was looking into my complaint about H1 fees. This case finally got resolved last week after about 18 months, when DOL finally persuaded company A to pay $3000 back to me.
I would request everyone who is a victim of these blood sucking employers to
take every possible action against them. There's a very little chance that they would go to court because they are themselves involved in gross irregularities.
Hats off to you. We can clean these bodyshops if everyone follows this path.
My H1 was sponsored by company A when I was working with them on OPT. I paid $3000 for H1 filing and attorney fees and company A gave me the H1 approval notice only after I signed an agreement that I would work for atleast one year with them.
Afetr 1 month of my H1 approval, I got a better job offer from company B and I got the H1 transferred. I notified my client and company A who threatened to revoke my H1, take me to court etc etc. They also withheld 4 weeks of my pay.
After joining company B, I filed a complaint against company A with DOL that they withheld my salary and also they demanded H1 fees from me. After 2 weeks of that complaint, my salary was deposited into my account and DOL was looking into my complaint about H1 fees. This case finally got resolved last week after about 18 months, when DOL finally persuaded company A to pay $3000 back to me.
I would request everyone who is a victim of these blood sucking employers to
take every possible action against them. There's a very little chance that they would go to court because they are themselves involved in gross irregularities.
Hats off to you. We can clean these bodyshops if everyone follows this path.
2011 Aston Martin DB6 (1965)
franklin
07-12 10:24 PM
This is the press release prepared with help from the Core. Please send it out to your friends, journalists and other contacts.
http://www.touchdownusa.org/SanJose/SanJoseRallyPR.pdf
Best of Luck for the rally.
Wonderful - thank you so much!
http://www.touchdownusa.org/SanJose/SanJoseRallyPR.pdf
Best of Luck for the rally.
Wonderful - thank you so much!
more...
Libra
07-18 11:53 AM
Date Delivered To USCIS: July 2nd
Time Delivered To USCIS: 9:01am
Service Center: NSC
Status: None
Time Delivered To USCIS: 9:01am
Service Center: NSC
Status: None
chanduv23
07-19 10:24 AM
We would be happy to know from core that your expenses have been reimbursed. I am sure, Jwalant, Himanshu, Prsatik etc.. all have contributed apart from Aman.
Offcourse the time spent cannot be reimbursed, but definitely money can. Its wrong on part that one has to shed so much money.
Offcourse the time spent cannot be reimbursed, but definitely money can. Its wrong on part that one has to shed so much money.
more...
diptam
07-16 12:02 PM
Guys,
Need more signature and comments...
signed...
Need more signature and comments...
signed...
2010 1965 Aston Martin DB6 Volante
Almond
01-08 05:02 PM
They moved from 8/1/2002 to 9/22/2002.
According to the I485 inventory they published, there is what.. 400 cases between these two date, why only move 400 cases per month = 4800 per year when the annual quota for EB3 ROW is what.. around 30,000?
Never mind the spillover, can ROW just get its normal quota at least?
Yeah, exactly, that's what I don't get either. We know it's not a huge amount of cases they've got in that time frame, so what is the slowdown. This is maddening.
According to the I485 inventory they published, there is what.. 400 cases between these two date, why only move 400 cases per month = 4800 per year when the annual quota for EB3 ROW is what.. around 30,000?
Never mind the spillover, can ROW just get its normal quota at least?
Yeah, exactly, that's what I don't get either. We know it's not a huge amount of cases they've got in that time frame, so what is the slowdown. This is maddening.
more...
shawine
07-17 10:14 PM
This is not a waste of time. CNN really cares about rating and I am pretty sure for many people like you and me, CNN is the first stop for news. If they realize that we are a force to reckon with, they will think twice before airing such shows. By signing nobody is expecting, CNN firing Lou Dobb's but at least CNN will be careful airing these baseless facts..That's all we need..attention and fairness..espeacilly when they claim they are the most trusted name in the news..
hair 1965 Aston Martin DB6 Mirror
gsvisu
07-15 06:46 PM
done
more...
StuckInTheMuck
04-28 10:39 AM
One more point:
Know when your GC and passport expires so that you can renew it. :)
Getting a GC does not mean you can ignore all your immigration issues.
Abso-lute-ly :) Thanks pappu, your point is added.
Know when your GC and passport expires so that you can renew it. :)
Getting a GC does not mean you can ignore all your immigration issues.
Abso-lute-ly :) Thanks pappu, your point is added.
hot 1965 Aston Martin DB6 Dash
getgreensoon1
04-20 11:33 AM
Hey Bel -
Quite honestly I think the best value from an MBA is derived from the timing, i.e. where one is in his / her career. I had a B Com (Accounting) from University of Sydney, an American CPA, combined with 10 years of work experience whilst enrolling for the MBA. I knew ahead, the curriculum wasn't going to bring added technical knowledge, however, it did bring some new ways of approaching the business community. Having the opportunity to sit in a class room and share / hear experiences from some of the successful executives does broaden the thought process. The program also helps build / expand the network. Again, I didn't feel I learnt something groundbreaking on the technical aspects of accounting / financial analysis, or the everyday business etc, but I wouldn't say it was completely useless. Plus for some reason, the "tag" does help.
BTW, I'm not sure the background of those who provided you feedback. My sentiments are shared at least by 3 good friends. One is a Wharton Alum and the other two, from University of Toronto. All of whom had at least 14 years of work experience, and were Canadian Chartered Accountants at the time of enrollment. The feedback could vary depending on the backgrounds.
May be that is the reason you took offense when people commented on Bcom thing. An MBA is valuable only if your bachelors degree is valuable. Many people have this wrong notion that it does not matter what you have in your bachelors, if you get an MBA everything is all set. Companies need engineer + MBA combination. Very few companies hire MBAs for accounting work. DOn't confuse accounting with finance, they are different. I can tell you that for sure, as i work in finance.
Contents of MBA also matter, most people take easy way out by taking all bluff management, marketing and strategy courses. Very few take the hardcore finance courses such as derivatives, fixed income, and valuations (these courses could differ in level of difficulty based on school).
Quite honestly I think the best value from an MBA is derived from the timing, i.e. where one is in his / her career. I had a B Com (Accounting) from University of Sydney, an American CPA, combined with 10 years of work experience whilst enrolling for the MBA. I knew ahead, the curriculum wasn't going to bring added technical knowledge, however, it did bring some new ways of approaching the business community. Having the opportunity to sit in a class room and share / hear experiences from some of the successful executives does broaden the thought process. The program also helps build / expand the network. Again, I didn't feel I learnt something groundbreaking on the technical aspects of accounting / financial analysis, or the everyday business etc, but I wouldn't say it was completely useless. Plus for some reason, the "tag" does help.
BTW, I'm not sure the background of those who provided you feedback. My sentiments are shared at least by 3 good friends. One is a Wharton Alum and the other two, from University of Toronto. All of whom had at least 14 years of work experience, and were Canadian Chartered Accountants at the time of enrollment. The feedback could vary depending on the backgrounds.
May be that is the reason you took offense when people commented on Bcom thing. An MBA is valuable only if your bachelors degree is valuable. Many people have this wrong notion that it does not matter what you have in your bachelors, if you get an MBA everything is all set. Companies need engineer + MBA combination. Very few companies hire MBAs for accounting work. DOn't confuse accounting with finance, they are different. I can tell you that for sure, as i work in finance.
Contents of MBA also matter, most people take easy way out by taking all bluff management, marketing and strategy courses. Very few take the hardcore finance courses such as derivatives, fixed income, and valuations (these courses could differ in level of difficulty based on school).
more...
house 1965 Aston Martin DB5 picture,
Abhinaym
09-17 01:35 PM
Why not? I know Bill clinton was hooked up to some Indian restaurants in DC/NVA.
Yup, there are good ones in NoVa and MD, but nothing of repute in DC.
I wonder how Bill Clinton managed to go those ones... traffic is such a bitch here...
Yup, there are good ones in NoVa and MD, but nothing of repute in DC.
I wonder how Bill Clinton managed to go those ones... traffic is such a bitch here...
tattoo 1965 Aston Martin Db6. 1965
Jyothi
02-02 09:52 AM
Please see the response that I received from VisaLaw.com
The SKIL Bill is a proposed piece of legislation that would increase the
number of H-1Bs and green cards. It is included in the comprehensive
immigration bill Congress is likely to consider this spring and will
hopefully pass in the fall.
Regards,
Greg Siskind
Gregory Siskind, Attorney at Law
Siskind Susser Bland - Immigration Lawyers
Telephone: 800-748-3819 or 901-682-6455
Fax: 800-684-1267 or 901-339-9604
Email: gsiskind@visalaw.com
Web: www.visalaw.com
The SKIL Bill is a proposed piece of legislation that would increase the
number of H-1Bs and green cards. It is included in the comprehensive
immigration bill Congress is likely to consider this spring and will
hopefully pass in the fall.
Regards,
Greg Siskind
Gregory Siskind, Attorney at Law
Siskind Susser Bland - Immigration Lawyers
Telephone: 800-748-3819 or 901-682-6455
Fax: 800-684-1267 or 901-339-9604
Email: gsiskind@visalaw.com
Web: www.visalaw.com
more...
pictures 1966 aston martin db6 for
chanduv23
07-19 10:24 AM
We would be happy to know from core that your expenses have been reimbursed. I am sure, Jwalant, Himanshu, Prsatik etc.. all have contributed apart from Aman.
Offcourse the time spent cannot be reimbursed, but definitely money can. Its wrong on part that one has to shed so much money.
Offcourse the time spent cannot be reimbursed, but definitely money can. Its wrong on part that one has to shed so much money.
dresses The Aston Martin DB6 was a
desi485
11-24 05:49 PM
this means EVERYONE should go with EAD
There are both advantages and disadvantages, but if you haven't consumed full 6 years of H1B, going on EAD has certain advantages.
There are both advantages and disadvantages, but if you haven't consumed full 6 years of H1B, going on EAD has certain advantages.
more...
makeup 1965-1970 ASTON MARTIN DB6 Car
rheoretro
11-13 02:46 PM
- First, it is highly unlikely that Hastert will ever, ever support CIR. That itself is a "red flag" from a post by "Red card."
- Actions speak louder than words. If Murtha becomes the majority leader in house than Democrat agenda for 2008 presidential agenda will be Iraq not immigration. That doesn't mean no immigration reform, just not in the "lame-duck" session.
- Lets wait for next year for any progress on immigration.
GCS999 - excellent points! I asked someone yesterday why they even care about Hastert. He's toast, anyway.There's a very revealing article in the Washington Post today, which says that the Dems will tread cautiously, and perhaps even slowly, on immigration. And they have bigger fish to fry, the number one being Iraq. Not sure what the needless hullabaloo about the lame duck session is. People need to stop crying wolf.
Democrats May Proceed With Caution on Immigration
Explosive Issue Not A Top Priority For Incoming Leaders
By Darryl Fears and Spencer S. Hsu
Washington Post Staff Writers
Monday, November 13, 2006; A03
When election results started rolling in Tuesday, Cecilia Mu�oz said that she and other immigration advocates were "holding our breath." One by one, Republicans who had fought tooth and nail for stricter immigration laws fell, turning control of Congress over to the Democrats.
By morning, a 700-mile Mexican border fence passed by Republicans in a pre-election gambit had fallen flat with voters. A sharply worded GOP bill that targeted illegal immigrants and spurred marches by millions of Latinos in the spring appeared likely to fade into memory.
"I think this is the best environment we've had on the issue in quite some time," said Cassandra Q. Butts, a senior vice president for the pro-immigration Center for American Progress.
But when it comes to immigration, things are never easy. In the days after the election, Democratic leaders surprised pro-immigration groups by not including the issue on their list of immediate priorities. Experts said the issue is so complicated, so sensitive and so explosive that it could easily blow up in the Democrats' faces and give control of Congress back to Republicans in the next election two years from now. And a number of Democrats who took a hard line on illegal immigration were also elected to Congress.
"It's not without its challenges, for sure," said Jeanne Butterfield, executive director of the American Immigration Lawyers Association. "You've got opposition in both parties. You still have restrictionists in the Republican Party. You have Democrats who've been reluctant to move on any kind of worker program."
Butterfield predicted that lobbyists and Democrats have less than a year to move legislation that could put some 12 million illegal immigrants on a path to legal residency, before the looming 2008 elections make a deal politically impossible. And analysts say the fate of President Bush's proposal to create a temporary worker program for 200,000 immigrants is in doubt, with labor's allies in charge.
In recent days, advocates have been burning up the phone lines talking to one another and to try to determine whom House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), the presumed speaker of the next Congress, will appoint to key committees, and how the new Democratically controlled Congress will approach the issue.
Major challenges lay ahead. The Mexican border remains a sieve where an estimated 100,000 immigrants sneak into the country every year. Conservatives in the House, and some Democrats, want the border sealed with manpower, fencing and technological gadgets before they will even consider guest workers.
Mark Krikorian, executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies, which opposes increased immigration, said Democrats should implement an enforcement program first. Anything else might be political suicide.
"The Democrats need to get their majority reelected in the next two years," Krikorian said. "My sense is that the Democrats have grown up enough to know they can't get reelected trying to get everything they want."
Immigration experts are on the lookout for the kind of compromises that led to the flawed immigration reform laws of 1986 and 1996. In those years, a White House and Congress split between the two parties passed watered-down laws requiring employers to check the legal status of new hires to satisfy businesses and immigration advocates. They also failed to give enforcement agencies the money, staff, technology or practical ability to do the job.
The miscues paved the way for an explosion of illegal immigration.
"The question is, will this just be another split-the-baby approach, such as we saw in 1986," said Robert Bonner, commissioner of U.S. Customs and Border Protection from 2003 to 2005, "or are we actually going to do something that is going to seriously achieve the objectives of controlling the border?"
At the White House Friday, the Bush administration struck a bipartisan chord, trumpeting both border enforcement and a guest worker initiative. "The President believes a temporary guest worker program, where you will know if you're in or you're out, is going to relieve pressure on the border and also reduce the incentive for people to travel from Central America through Mexico in search of such jobs," said White House spokesman Tony Snow.
Bush supports a proposal by Sens. John McCain (R-Ariz.) and Edward M. Kennedy (D-Mass.) to allow foreign nationals currently outside the country to work in the United States temporarily. Illegal immigrants now in the country could work too, but only if they pay a $2,000 penalty for breaking the law, pay back taxes, undergo a criminal check, learn English, take civics lessons, go to the back of the employment line and then work six years with no legal problems.
The McCain-Kennedy bill would also strengthen the border and create a computerized system to check the legal status of workers. The Senate bill would authorize spending $400 million to expand a pilot program used by 5,000 employers to cover new hires by more than 8 million U.S. companies within 18 months.
But some experts are skeptical. The non-partisan Migration Policy Institute has said that the pilot system is flawed, will take at least three years to implement, and will fail unless it is made much more accurate. The MPI panel, co-chaired by former congressman Lee H. Hamilton (D-Ind.) and former senator Spencer Abraham (R-Mich.) also said other steps are needed, such as producing tamper-proof Social Security or other employment ID card based on fingerprints or other unique identifying features.
Others say thousands of immigration investigators are needed to verify legal workers and track down those who remain in the country illegally.
James W. Ziglar, former commissioner of the Immigration and Naturalization Service, said if Congress does take up an overhaul, "the recognition that enforcement has to be of equal stature is something that will occur this time, because the lessons learned from the 1986 act are still burning very brightly in the minds of people on both sides of the debate."
Mu�oz, a vice president at the National Council of La Raza, the nation's largest Latino civil rights group, said Democrats should move carefully ahead with a plan that satisfies both sides.
"This notion that it's dangerous to vote to support comprehensive immigration reform I believe to be false," she said. In Arizona, she said, voters rejected anti-immigration Republicans Randy Graf and Rep. J.D. Hayworth.
But, to show how complicated the issue is, Arizona voters also approved three referenda to make life tougher for illegal immigrants.
Anti-immigration Rep. Tom Tancredo (R-Colo.), who was distraught after the election, believing a guest worker program was inevitable under the Democrats, now says he's changed his mind.
"It seemed to me that it was not going to be as easy for them as I had anticipated or feared," Tancredo said. "They're not putting it out there as their number one, out-of-the-box issue."
The more he thought about the issue, the more cloudy the future seemed.
"I don't know," he said. A temporary guest worker program "could certainly happen. I may be just skipping past the graveyard."
- Actions speak louder than words. If Murtha becomes the majority leader in house than Democrat agenda for 2008 presidential agenda will be Iraq not immigration. That doesn't mean no immigration reform, just not in the "lame-duck" session.
- Lets wait for next year for any progress on immigration.
GCS999 - excellent points! I asked someone yesterday why they even care about Hastert. He's toast, anyway.There's a very revealing article in the Washington Post today, which says that the Dems will tread cautiously, and perhaps even slowly, on immigration. And they have bigger fish to fry, the number one being Iraq. Not sure what the needless hullabaloo about the lame duck session is. People need to stop crying wolf.
Democrats May Proceed With Caution on Immigration
Explosive Issue Not A Top Priority For Incoming Leaders
By Darryl Fears and Spencer S. Hsu
Washington Post Staff Writers
Monday, November 13, 2006; A03
When election results started rolling in Tuesday, Cecilia Mu�oz said that she and other immigration advocates were "holding our breath." One by one, Republicans who had fought tooth and nail for stricter immigration laws fell, turning control of Congress over to the Democrats.
By morning, a 700-mile Mexican border fence passed by Republicans in a pre-election gambit had fallen flat with voters. A sharply worded GOP bill that targeted illegal immigrants and spurred marches by millions of Latinos in the spring appeared likely to fade into memory.
"I think this is the best environment we've had on the issue in quite some time," said Cassandra Q. Butts, a senior vice president for the pro-immigration Center for American Progress.
But when it comes to immigration, things are never easy. In the days after the election, Democratic leaders surprised pro-immigration groups by not including the issue on their list of immediate priorities. Experts said the issue is so complicated, so sensitive and so explosive that it could easily blow up in the Democrats' faces and give control of Congress back to Republicans in the next election two years from now. And a number of Democrats who took a hard line on illegal immigration were also elected to Congress.
"It's not without its challenges, for sure," said Jeanne Butterfield, executive director of the American Immigration Lawyers Association. "You've got opposition in both parties. You still have restrictionists in the Republican Party. You have Democrats who've been reluctant to move on any kind of worker program."
Butterfield predicted that lobbyists and Democrats have less than a year to move legislation that could put some 12 million illegal immigrants on a path to legal residency, before the looming 2008 elections make a deal politically impossible. And analysts say the fate of President Bush's proposal to create a temporary worker program for 200,000 immigrants is in doubt, with labor's allies in charge.
In recent days, advocates have been burning up the phone lines talking to one another and to try to determine whom House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), the presumed speaker of the next Congress, will appoint to key committees, and how the new Democratically controlled Congress will approach the issue.
Major challenges lay ahead. The Mexican border remains a sieve where an estimated 100,000 immigrants sneak into the country every year. Conservatives in the House, and some Democrats, want the border sealed with manpower, fencing and technological gadgets before they will even consider guest workers.
Mark Krikorian, executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies, which opposes increased immigration, said Democrats should implement an enforcement program first. Anything else might be political suicide.
"The Democrats need to get their majority reelected in the next two years," Krikorian said. "My sense is that the Democrats have grown up enough to know they can't get reelected trying to get everything they want."
Immigration experts are on the lookout for the kind of compromises that led to the flawed immigration reform laws of 1986 and 1996. In those years, a White House and Congress split between the two parties passed watered-down laws requiring employers to check the legal status of new hires to satisfy businesses and immigration advocates. They also failed to give enforcement agencies the money, staff, technology or practical ability to do the job.
The miscues paved the way for an explosion of illegal immigration.
"The question is, will this just be another split-the-baby approach, such as we saw in 1986," said Robert Bonner, commissioner of U.S. Customs and Border Protection from 2003 to 2005, "or are we actually going to do something that is going to seriously achieve the objectives of controlling the border?"
At the White House Friday, the Bush administration struck a bipartisan chord, trumpeting both border enforcement and a guest worker initiative. "The President believes a temporary guest worker program, where you will know if you're in or you're out, is going to relieve pressure on the border and also reduce the incentive for people to travel from Central America through Mexico in search of such jobs," said White House spokesman Tony Snow.
Bush supports a proposal by Sens. John McCain (R-Ariz.) and Edward M. Kennedy (D-Mass.) to allow foreign nationals currently outside the country to work in the United States temporarily. Illegal immigrants now in the country could work too, but only if they pay a $2,000 penalty for breaking the law, pay back taxes, undergo a criminal check, learn English, take civics lessons, go to the back of the employment line and then work six years with no legal problems.
The McCain-Kennedy bill would also strengthen the border and create a computerized system to check the legal status of workers. The Senate bill would authorize spending $400 million to expand a pilot program used by 5,000 employers to cover new hires by more than 8 million U.S. companies within 18 months.
But some experts are skeptical. The non-partisan Migration Policy Institute has said that the pilot system is flawed, will take at least three years to implement, and will fail unless it is made much more accurate. The MPI panel, co-chaired by former congressman Lee H. Hamilton (D-Ind.) and former senator Spencer Abraham (R-Mich.) also said other steps are needed, such as producing tamper-proof Social Security or other employment ID card based on fingerprints or other unique identifying features.
Others say thousands of immigration investigators are needed to verify legal workers and track down those who remain in the country illegally.
James W. Ziglar, former commissioner of the Immigration and Naturalization Service, said if Congress does take up an overhaul, "the recognition that enforcement has to be of equal stature is something that will occur this time, because the lessons learned from the 1986 act are still burning very brightly in the minds of people on both sides of the debate."
Mu�oz, a vice president at the National Council of La Raza, the nation's largest Latino civil rights group, said Democrats should move carefully ahead with a plan that satisfies both sides.
"This notion that it's dangerous to vote to support comprehensive immigration reform I believe to be false," she said. In Arizona, she said, voters rejected anti-immigration Republicans Randy Graf and Rep. J.D. Hayworth.
But, to show how complicated the issue is, Arizona voters also approved three referenda to make life tougher for illegal immigrants.
Anti-immigration Rep. Tom Tancredo (R-Colo.), who was distraught after the election, believing a guest worker program was inevitable under the Democrats, now says he's changed his mind.
"It seemed to me that it was not going to be as easy for them as I had anticipated or feared," Tancredo said. "They're not putting it out there as their number one, out-of-the-box issue."
The more he thought about the issue, the more cloudy the future seemed.
"I don't know," he said. A temporary guest worker program "could certainly happen. I may be just skipping past the graveyard."
girlfriend 1965-1970 Aston Martin DB6
chicago60607
09-17 02:20 PM
Seems like Zoe is loosing patience. She is starting to accept a lot of amendments and is some how trying get it wrapped up.
hairstyles 5 Aston Martin DB6 (1965-71)
chanukya
02-13 05:48 PM
Can we have some kind of time line that IV core/lobbying firm has knowledge of about S .9 and what might or will happen in March, just in another 15 days.
If I call the IV number, can we get the future time line.
If I call the IV number, can we get the future time line.
santb1975
01-30 09:04 PM
Let us bring our questions up. Have your spouses vote as well
guchi472000
04-06 07:10 PM
:confused:No LUD but got RFE on I-485(Employment Verification from employer)
No comments:
Post a Comment