chanduy9
07-03 03:09 PM
http://digg.com/politics/Rep_Lofgren_Issues_Statement_on_Updated_Visa_Bulle tin
This is good news..some one responded...if we send flowers to USICS it will make more impact....
just my idea...
This is good news..some one responded...if we send flowers to USICS it will make more impact....
just my idea...
wallpaper hot Short Wedding Hairstyles with short hair wedding styles with veil.
h1dedorebaba
05-24 12:09 PM
Hi,
I guess it is taking too much of time to get the receipt notice for H1 transfers/ext due to backlog. Let us fill out the following details and it will help everyone who is waiting for the receipt notice..
I saw one more thread like this but it was purely for premium cases.
Please fill in the following details:
Date Sent:
Receipt notice date:
Service Center: CSC/VSC/NSC/TSC
Approval date:
Processing type: Premium/Regular
Thanks.
Mine:
H1 Transfer
Date Sent: 05/22/07
Receipt notice date: Waiting
Service Center: CSC
Approval date: Waiting
Processing type: Regular
I guess it is taking too much of time to get the receipt notice for H1 transfers/ext due to backlog. Let us fill out the following details and it will help everyone who is waiting for the receipt notice..
I saw one more thread like this but it was purely for premium cases.
Please fill in the following details:
Date Sent:
Receipt notice date:
Service Center: CSC/VSC/NSC/TSC
Approval date:
Processing type: Premium/Regular
Thanks.
Mine:
H1 Transfer
Date Sent: 05/22/07
Receipt notice date: Waiting
Service Center: CSC
Approval date: Waiting
Processing type: Regular
ArkBird
08-01 02:56 AM
Try quicken loans. They didn't asked me single question/document about my status and I am on H1/EAD
Hope this helps.
ArkBird
Could anyone share their experience/knowledge about getting home loan on EAD? My bank says that, for non-FHA loans, you need to be in any of the visa categories like H1, TN1, GC, ... But its list doesn't include EAD or Adjustment of Status. Can that list be challenged to include EAD? That is, how to convince the bank/lending inst that EAD is a legal/legitimate status like H1?
Hope this helps.
ArkBird
Could anyone share their experience/knowledge about getting home loan on EAD? My bank says that, for non-FHA loans, you need to be in any of the visa categories like H1, TN1, GC, ... But its list doesn't include EAD or Adjustment of Status. Can that list be challenged to include EAD? That is, how to convince the bank/lending inst that EAD is a legal/legitimate status like H1?
2011 wedding hair with gown hairdo
Macaca
08-16 05:40 PM
Is the Senate Germane? Majority Leader Reid's Lament (http://www.rollcall.com/issues/53_19/procedural_politics/19719-1.html) By Don Wolfensberger | Roll Call, August 13, 2007
Don Wolfensberger is director of the Congress Project at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars and former staff director of the House Rules Committee.
The story is told that shortly after Thomas Jefferson returned from Paris in 1789, he asked President George Washington why the new Constitution created a Senate. Washington reportedly replied that it was for the same reason Jefferson poured his coffee into a saucer: to cool the hot legislation from the House.
Little could they have known then just how cool the Senate could be. Today, the "world's greatest deliberative body" resembles an iceberg. Bitter partisanship has chilled relationships and slowed legislation to a glacial pace.
The Defense authorization bill is pulled in pique because the Majority Leader cannot prevail on an Iraq amendment; only one of the 12 appropriations bills has cleared the Senate (Homeland Security); an immigration bill cannot even secure a majority vote for consideration; and common courtesies in floor debate are tossed aside in favor of angry barb-swapping. This is not your grandfather's world-class debating society.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid's (D-Nev.) frustration level is code red. Minority Leader Mitch McConnell's (R-Ky.) input level is code dead. The chief source of all this animosity and gridlock is the Democrats' intentional strategy to pursue partisan votes on Iraq to pressure the administration and embarrass vulnerable Republican Senators. The predictable side effects have been to poison the well for other legislation and exacerbate already frayed inter-party relationships.
The frustration experienced by Senate Majority Leaders is nothing new and has been amply expressed by former Leaders of both parties. The job has been likened to "herding cats" and "trying to put bullfrogs in a wheelbarrow." But there does seem to be a degree of difference in this Congress for a variety of reasons.
While Iraq certainly is the major factor, the newness of Reid on the job is another. It takes time to get a feel for the wheel. Meanwhile, there will be jerky veers into the ditch. Moreover, McConnell also is new to his job as Minority Leader. So both Leaders are groping for a rock shelf on which to build a workable relationship. Add to this the resistance from the White House at every turn and you have the perfect ice storm.
Reid's big complaint has been the multitude of amendments that slow down work on most bills - especially non-germane amendments - and the way the Senate skips back and forth on amendments with no logical sequence. These patterns and complaints also are not new, but they are a growing obstacle to the orderly management of Senate business.
Reid has asked Rules and Administration Chairwoman Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) to look into expanding the germaneness rule. The existing rule applies only to general appropriations bills, post-cloture amendments and certain budget matters. The committee previously looked at broadening the germaneness rule back in 1988 and recommended an "extraordinary" majority vote (West Virginia Democratic Sen. Robert Byrd suggested three-fifths) for applying a germaneness test on specified bills. But the Senate never considered the change.
The House, by contrast, adopted a germaneness rule in the first Congress on April 7, 1789, drawn directly from a rule invented on the fly and out of desperation by the Continental Congress: "No motion or proposition on a subject different from that under consideration shall be admitted under color of amendment." According to a footnote in the House manual, the rule "introduced a principle not then known to the general parliamentary law, but of high value in the procedure of the House." The Senate chose to remain willfully and blissfully ignorant of the innovation - at least until necessity forced it to apply a germaneness test to appropriations amendments beginning in 1877.
Reid's suggestion to extend the rule to other matters sounds reasonable enough but is bound to meet bipartisan resistance. Any attempt to alter traditional ways in "the upper house" is viewed by many Senators as destructive of the institution. The worst slur is, "You're trying to make the Senate more like the House." Already, Reid's futile attempts to impose restrictive unanimous consent agreements that shut out most, if not all, amendments on important bills are mocked as tantamount to being a one-man House Rules Committee.
What are the chances of the Senate applying a germaneness rule to all floor amendments? History and common sense tell us they are somewhere between nil and none. Senators have little incentive to give up their freedom to offer whatever amendments they want, whenever they want. Others cite high public disapproval ratings of Congress as an imperative for reform. However, there is no evidence the public gives a hoot about non-germane amendments. Only if such amendments are tied directly to blocking urgently needed legislation might public ire be aroused sufficiently to bring pressure for change; and that case has yet to be made.
Nevertheless, the Majority Leader's lament should not be dismissed out of hand. It may well be time for the Senate to undergo another self-examination through public hearings in Feinstein's committee. When Sen. Trent Lott (R-Miss.) chaired that committee in the previous two Congresses, he showed a willingness to publicly air, and even sponsor, suggested changes in Senate rules. One such idea, to make secret "holds" public, has just been adopted as part of the lobby reform bill.
The ultimate barrier to any change in Senate rules is the super-majority needed to end a filibuster. Although, in 1975, the Senate reduced the number of votes required for cloture on most matters from two-thirds of those present and voting to three-fifths of the membership (60), they left the two-thirds threshold in place for ending debates on rules changes. That means an extraordinary bipartisan consensus is necessary for any significant reform. In the present climate that's as likely as melting the polar ice caps. Then again ...
Don Wolfensberger is director of the Congress Project at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars and former staff director of the House Rules Committee.
The story is told that shortly after Thomas Jefferson returned from Paris in 1789, he asked President George Washington why the new Constitution created a Senate. Washington reportedly replied that it was for the same reason Jefferson poured his coffee into a saucer: to cool the hot legislation from the House.
Little could they have known then just how cool the Senate could be. Today, the "world's greatest deliberative body" resembles an iceberg. Bitter partisanship has chilled relationships and slowed legislation to a glacial pace.
The Defense authorization bill is pulled in pique because the Majority Leader cannot prevail on an Iraq amendment; only one of the 12 appropriations bills has cleared the Senate (Homeland Security); an immigration bill cannot even secure a majority vote for consideration; and common courtesies in floor debate are tossed aside in favor of angry barb-swapping. This is not your grandfather's world-class debating society.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid's (D-Nev.) frustration level is code red. Minority Leader Mitch McConnell's (R-Ky.) input level is code dead. The chief source of all this animosity and gridlock is the Democrats' intentional strategy to pursue partisan votes on Iraq to pressure the administration and embarrass vulnerable Republican Senators. The predictable side effects have been to poison the well for other legislation and exacerbate already frayed inter-party relationships.
The frustration experienced by Senate Majority Leaders is nothing new and has been amply expressed by former Leaders of both parties. The job has been likened to "herding cats" and "trying to put bullfrogs in a wheelbarrow." But there does seem to be a degree of difference in this Congress for a variety of reasons.
While Iraq certainly is the major factor, the newness of Reid on the job is another. It takes time to get a feel for the wheel. Meanwhile, there will be jerky veers into the ditch. Moreover, McConnell also is new to his job as Minority Leader. So both Leaders are groping for a rock shelf on which to build a workable relationship. Add to this the resistance from the White House at every turn and you have the perfect ice storm.
Reid's big complaint has been the multitude of amendments that slow down work on most bills - especially non-germane amendments - and the way the Senate skips back and forth on amendments with no logical sequence. These patterns and complaints also are not new, but they are a growing obstacle to the orderly management of Senate business.
Reid has asked Rules and Administration Chairwoman Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) to look into expanding the germaneness rule. The existing rule applies only to general appropriations bills, post-cloture amendments and certain budget matters. The committee previously looked at broadening the germaneness rule back in 1988 and recommended an "extraordinary" majority vote (West Virginia Democratic Sen. Robert Byrd suggested three-fifths) for applying a germaneness test on specified bills. But the Senate never considered the change.
The House, by contrast, adopted a germaneness rule in the first Congress on April 7, 1789, drawn directly from a rule invented on the fly and out of desperation by the Continental Congress: "No motion or proposition on a subject different from that under consideration shall be admitted under color of amendment." According to a footnote in the House manual, the rule "introduced a principle not then known to the general parliamentary law, but of high value in the procedure of the House." The Senate chose to remain willfully and blissfully ignorant of the innovation - at least until necessity forced it to apply a germaneness test to appropriations amendments beginning in 1877.
Reid's suggestion to extend the rule to other matters sounds reasonable enough but is bound to meet bipartisan resistance. Any attempt to alter traditional ways in "the upper house" is viewed by many Senators as destructive of the institution. The worst slur is, "You're trying to make the Senate more like the House." Already, Reid's futile attempts to impose restrictive unanimous consent agreements that shut out most, if not all, amendments on important bills are mocked as tantamount to being a one-man House Rules Committee.
What are the chances of the Senate applying a germaneness rule to all floor amendments? History and common sense tell us they are somewhere between nil and none. Senators have little incentive to give up their freedom to offer whatever amendments they want, whenever they want. Others cite high public disapproval ratings of Congress as an imperative for reform. However, there is no evidence the public gives a hoot about non-germane amendments. Only if such amendments are tied directly to blocking urgently needed legislation might public ire be aroused sufficiently to bring pressure for change; and that case has yet to be made.
Nevertheless, the Majority Leader's lament should not be dismissed out of hand. It may well be time for the Senate to undergo another self-examination through public hearings in Feinstein's committee. When Sen. Trent Lott (R-Miss.) chaired that committee in the previous two Congresses, he showed a willingness to publicly air, and even sponsor, suggested changes in Senate rules. One such idea, to make secret "holds" public, has just been adopted as part of the lobby reform bill.
The ultimate barrier to any change in Senate rules is the super-majority needed to end a filibuster. Although, in 1975, the Senate reduced the number of votes required for cloture on most matters from two-thirds of those present and voting to three-fifths of the membership (60), they left the two-thirds threshold in place for ending debates on rules changes. That means an extraordinary bipartisan consensus is necessary for any significant reform. In the present climate that's as likely as melting the polar ice caps. Then again ...
more...
sab
07-27 09:46 AM
bump up
sam_hoosier
07-19 02:14 PM
No issues, since her H1B is independent of your I-485. As long as she was in her old job/the job mentioned on her G-325 on the day you filed your app. you should be okay.
more...
JamesBB
08-26 09:17 AM
Hello,
Our H1B/H4 status has been approved with 3 yr extension. We have an approved AP also. As of today, I am on H1 (don't want to use it) and my spouse is working using EAD (got the EAD as a resultant of my 485 dependent).
Now, I have two Q's?
1. Since she is working using EAD and now that her H4 extension is approved, will this approval invalidate her EAD ?
2. If we go for stamping (and that our H1/H4 will be stamped), will that stamping also invalidate my spouse's EAD ? We can very well come back using Advance Parole, but to be on safe side we want to get the stamping done (as others suggest). Don't know what would be the correct and best way. Appreciate your response and advice.
Thanks ~
Our H1B/H4 status has been approved with 3 yr extension. We have an approved AP also. As of today, I am on H1 (don't want to use it) and my spouse is working using EAD (got the EAD as a resultant of my 485 dependent).
Now, I have two Q's?
1. Since she is working using EAD and now that her H4 extension is approved, will this approval invalidate her EAD ?
2. If we go for stamping (and that our H1/H4 will be stamped), will that stamping also invalidate my spouse's EAD ? We can very well come back using Advance Parole, but to be on safe side we want to get the stamping done (as others suggest). Don't know what would be the correct and best way. Appreciate your response and advice.
Thanks ~
2010 Beautiful Wedding Hairstyles
Macaca
11-13 08:06 PM
GOP tacks right after Democratic gains (http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1107/6829.html) By Martin Kady II | Politico, Nov 12, 2007
Republicans may trail in the polls on virtually every issue, but conservative influence is surging in both chambers of Congress as the GOP tries to find its soul again.
It�s a risky strategy to tack to the right while Democrats have momentum in most polls, but Republicans clearly believe that they need to recapture their base before they recapture the majority.
When Republicans ran Congress, hardened fiscal conservatives often had a lone voice-in-the-wilderness feel about them.
Whether it was Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) filibustering on earmarks or Rep. Jeb Hensarling (R-Texas) making a late-night speech about runaway government spending, the conservative caucus had a sympathetic ear from GOP leaders yet rarely prevailed on strategy or party message.
But now that they�ve been thrust into the minority, the conservative agitators have a front-row seat with Republican leaders, and the number of lawmakers who describe themselves as conservatives continues to grow while moderates appear to be a dying breed among Republicans on Capitol Hill.
In the House, the conservative Republican Study Committee has led the caucus in promising to sustain vetoes of children�s health care legislation and spending bills.
In the Senate, the conservative Republican Steering Committee, led by Sen. Jim DeMint (R-S.C.), is now being invited to weekly Republican leadership meetings on appropriations, a departure from tradition.
The top members of the Senate steering committee also had an exclusive meeting recently with President Bush, who himself is trying to launch a sort of renaissance of fiscal conservatism by vetoing popular spending bills.
The Republican Study Committee now has 104 members, up 50 percent in the past five years.
And 12 of the 15 Republican freshman lawmakers joined the group this year, a clear sign that the small rookie class of Republicans still believes in a conservative future, even while its party struggles nationally.
In contrast, the moderate Republican Main Street Partnership has seen its membership decline 20 percent, from 59 lawmakers in the last Congress to 47 this year.
And seven of those moderates are retiring, further diminishing the power of the middle.
�We don�t need to be shy about what we believe in,� DeMint said in an interview. �We�re starting to act as Republicans around core principles, whether it�s SCHIP or earmarks.�
Democrats are happy to see the Republicans taking a sharp right turn, believing it makes winning independents in 2008 that much easier.
�Republicans can�t try to make fiscal responsibility their mantle when they are responsible for turning record surpluses into record deficits,� said Sarah Feinberg, spokeswoman for the House Democratic Caucus.
�They can�t whine about earmarks when earmarks exploded under their leadership and Democrats have cut them in half and brought accountability to the earmark process.�
The renewed influence by conservatives in the House and Senate Republican caucuses appears to be disconnected from recent poll results.
According to a Washington Post/ABC News poll released Nov. 4, Americans favor Democrats in handling the economy, 50 percent to 35 percent, and on taxes, 46 percent to 40 percent, showing that Democrats have gained an edge on fiscal issues usually dominated by Republicans.
Independents are also disgruntled. In a Fox News/Opinion Dynamics poll last month, 63 percent of independents disapproved of the president�s performance.
Some Republican congressional aides privately admit that the energized push for conservative issues amounts to a �minority strategy� in which the party must reclaim its identity after being thrown out of power on Capitol Hill before making a serious run at regaining the majority.
�The far right is not going to bring the Republican Party back to power,� said Charlie Bass, president of the Main Street Republican Partnership and a former GOP House member from New Hampshire.
�The districts that were lost were moderate districts. The far right is big on bluster but short on results.�
Congressional Republican leaders, meanwhile, have been coordinating their efforts with some of the leading minds of the party, including pollsters Frank Luntz and David Winston, and Pat Toomey, president of the conservative Club for Growth.
Republican aides say they�ve also had strategy meetings with former House Speaker Newt Gingrich (R-Ga.).
At its core, this is an effort to re-energize a party demoralized after last year�s elections.
�We need to do a better job of communicating our core beliefs,� said Danny Diaz, a spokesman for the Republican National Committee. �We had strayed from the core beliefs that got us the majority.�
Still, the strategy of flexing conservative credentials at the expense of the middle carries great risk.
�The image of the party message being dictated by a small group of doctrinaire senators is not something that people at the top of the ticket are going to want,� said Ross K. Baker, a political science professor and congressional expert at Rutgers University.
�This [strategy] springs up when a party is in the minority and prospects are bleak, so it�s unsurprising they�re having a reawakening.�
Indeed, Republicans are finding it easier to create a unified front on spending, immigration and national security as the minority party because they don�t have to legislate, don�t control the congressional schedule and are outnumbered at virtually every turn.
�There were times in the majority when conservatives disagreed with leadership, but there have been very few of those times this year,� said Hensarling, chairman of the Republican Study Committee.
�There�s nothing like getting hit over the head with a two-by-four to get someone�s attention. The American people thought Republicans weren�t acting like Republicans.�
To be sure, conservatives have always had significant influence within the Republican leadership in both chambers.
But when it came time to cut deals on spending or to craft bipartisan legislation, they often felt like they were cut out of the process.
Many Republicans still regret the arm twisting on their side of the aisle that led them to vote in favor of the Medicare prescription drug benefit in 2003, creating one of the biggest entitlement programs of all time.
Now Republicans are getting their sea legs as a minority party on Capitol Hill, and their rabble-rousers serve a useful purpose in opposing the Democratic majority, especially on spending bills.
Democrats have little chance to override any of the president�s threatened vetoes of appropriations measures, thanks in large part to Republican unity on the issue.
�These fights on spending are important for us to re-establish our credentials,� said House Minority Whip Roy Blunt (R-Mo.). �The Democrats have made it easy for us to engage in that fight.�
Democrats have indeed been frustrated in both chambers by Republican procedural maneuvers, but they believe voters will see this as obstructionism.
�It became evident months ago that the only play left in their playbook was to attack Democrats on taxing and spending,� said Jim Manley, a spokesman for Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.).
�They needed to shore up what�s left of their base. President Bush and Republicans have engaged in a hypocritical series of attacks on spending issues. The president only recently rediscovered the veto.�
Republicans may trail in the polls on virtually every issue, but conservative influence is surging in both chambers of Congress as the GOP tries to find its soul again.
It�s a risky strategy to tack to the right while Democrats have momentum in most polls, but Republicans clearly believe that they need to recapture their base before they recapture the majority.
When Republicans ran Congress, hardened fiscal conservatives often had a lone voice-in-the-wilderness feel about them.
Whether it was Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) filibustering on earmarks or Rep. Jeb Hensarling (R-Texas) making a late-night speech about runaway government spending, the conservative caucus had a sympathetic ear from GOP leaders yet rarely prevailed on strategy or party message.
But now that they�ve been thrust into the minority, the conservative agitators have a front-row seat with Republican leaders, and the number of lawmakers who describe themselves as conservatives continues to grow while moderates appear to be a dying breed among Republicans on Capitol Hill.
In the House, the conservative Republican Study Committee has led the caucus in promising to sustain vetoes of children�s health care legislation and spending bills.
In the Senate, the conservative Republican Steering Committee, led by Sen. Jim DeMint (R-S.C.), is now being invited to weekly Republican leadership meetings on appropriations, a departure from tradition.
The top members of the Senate steering committee also had an exclusive meeting recently with President Bush, who himself is trying to launch a sort of renaissance of fiscal conservatism by vetoing popular spending bills.
The Republican Study Committee now has 104 members, up 50 percent in the past five years.
And 12 of the 15 Republican freshman lawmakers joined the group this year, a clear sign that the small rookie class of Republicans still believes in a conservative future, even while its party struggles nationally.
In contrast, the moderate Republican Main Street Partnership has seen its membership decline 20 percent, from 59 lawmakers in the last Congress to 47 this year.
And seven of those moderates are retiring, further diminishing the power of the middle.
�We don�t need to be shy about what we believe in,� DeMint said in an interview. �We�re starting to act as Republicans around core principles, whether it�s SCHIP or earmarks.�
Democrats are happy to see the Republicans taking a sharp right turn, believing it makes winning independents in 2008 that much easier.
�Republicans can�t try to make fiscal responsibility their mantle when they are responsible for turning record surpluses into record deficits,� said Sarah Feinberg, spokeswoman for the House Democratic Caucus.
�They can�t whine about earmarks when earmarks exploded under their leadership and Democrats have cut them in half and brought accountability to the earmark process.�
The renewed influence by conservatives in the House and Senate Republican caucuses appears to be disconnected from recent poll results.
According to a Washington Post/ABC News poll released Nov. 4, Americans favor Democrats in handling the economy, 50 percent to 35 percent, and on taxes, 46 percent to 40 percent, showing that Democrats have gained an edge on fiscal issues usually dominated by Republicans.
Independents are also disgruntled. In a Fox News/Opinion Dynamics poll last month, 63 percent of independents disapproved of the president�s performance.
Some Republican congressional aides privately admit that the energized push for conservative issues amounts to a �minority strategy� in which the party must reclaim its identity after being thrown out of power on Capitol Hill before making a serious run at regaining the majority.
�The far right is not going to bring the Republican Party back to power,� said Charlie Bass, president of the Main Street Republican Partnership and a former GOP House member from New Hampshire.
�The districts that were lost were moderate districts. The far right is big on bluster but short on results.�
Congressional Republican leaders, meanwhile, have been coordinating their efforts with some of the leading minds of the party, including pollsters Frank Luntz and David Winston, and Pat Toomey, president of the conservative Club for Growth.
Republican aides say they�ve also had strategy meetings with former House Speaker Newt Gingrich (R-Ga.).
At its core, this is an effort to re-energize a party demoralized after last year�s elections.
�We need to do a better job of communicating our core beliefs,� said Danny Diaz, a spokesman for the Republican National Committee. �We had strayed from the core beliefs that got us the majority.�
Still, the strategy of flexing conservative credentials at the expense of the middle carries great risk.
�The image of the party message being dictated by a small group of doctrinaire senators is not something that people at the top of the ticket are going to want,� said Ross K. Baker, a political science professor and congressional expert at Rutgers University.
�This [strategy] springs up when a party is in the minority and prospects are bleak, so it�s unsurprising they�re having a reawakening.�
Indeed, Republicans are finding it easier to create a unified front on spending, immigration and national security as the minority party because they don�t have to legislate, don�t control the congressional schedule and are outnumbered at virtually every turn.
�There were times in the majority when conservatives disagreed with leadership, but there have been very few of those times this year,� said Hensarling, chairman of the Republican Study Committee.
�There�s nothing like getting hit over the head with a two-by-four to get someone�s attention. The American people thought Republicans weren�t acting like Republicans.�
To be sure, conservatives have always had significant influence within the Republican leadership in both chambers.
But when it came time to cut deals on spending or to craft bipartisan legislation, they often felt like they were cut out of the process.
Many Republicans still regret the arm twisting on their side of the aisle that led them to vote in favor of the Medicare prescription drug benefit in 2003, creating one of the biggest entitlement programs of all time.
Now Republicans are getting their sea legs as a minority party on Capitol Hill, and their rabble-rousers serve a useful purpose in opposing the Democratic majority, especially on spending bills.
Democrats have little chance to override any of the president�s threatened vetoes of appropriations measures, thanks in large part to Republican unity on the issue.
�These fights on spending are important for us to re-establish our credentials,� said House Minority Whip Roy Blunt (R-Mo.). �The Democrats have made it easy for us to engage in that fight.�
Democrats have indeed been frustrated in both chambers by Republican procedural maneuvers, but they believe voters will see this as obstructionism.
�It became evident months ago that the only play left in their playbook was to attack Democrats on taxing and spending,� said Jim Manley, a spokesman for Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.).
�They needed to shore up what�s left of their base. President Bush and Republicans have engaged in a hypocritical series of attacks on spending issues. The president only recently rediscovered the veto.�
more...
gchopefull
10-03 12:45 PM
what is the best bet after I-140 denied?
I mean does it make any difference far as 485/EAD if the employer does appeal or MTR?
I mean is there a possibility of keeping the 485 and EAD alive after I-140 denied if employer appeal or Motion to Reopen?
need help.
thanks
I mean does it make any difference far as 485/EAD if the employer does appeal or MTR?
I mean is there a possibility of keeping the 485 and EAD alive after I-140 denied if employer appeal or Motion to Reopen?
need help.
thanks
hair Wedding hairstyles for long and short hair
MDix
01-08 11:31 AM
http://www.dol.gov/dol/budget/2009/PDF/CBJ-2009-V1-10.pdf
Thanks,
MDix
Thanks,
MDix
more...
desigirl
08-31 10:05 AM
Senate Democrat: Immigration reform not happening this year - The Hill's Blog Briefing Room (http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/116321-dem-senator-immigration-reform-isnt-happening-this-year)
The party did move in recent weeks, though, to make itself seem tougher on immigration, with the Senate coming back to convene a special session to advance a $600 million bill to boost border security that the House had passed in a special session of its own.
At LEGAL IMMIGRANTS expense :eek:!!!
The party did move in recent weeks, though, to make itself seem tougher on immigration, with the Senate coming back to convene a special session to advance a $600 million bill to boost border security that the House had passed in a special session of its own.
At LEGAL IMMIGRANTS expense :eek:!!!
hot Wedding Hairstyles – Pictures
summitpointe
05-06 12:03 PM
I need the Texas service centre address for mailing the EAD reneval application form. I'm confused with lot of address. If I need to send by USPS which address and by FedEx or UPS which address.
more...
house short hairstyles for men with thick hair
panchotronera
06-25 03:12 PM
Dear All,
Can someone tell me how long it takes to get 485 filing receipt? Who gets it ,you or the lawyer? What information should a responsible lawyer pass to you after 485 is filed?
Please let me know. It would be good information for everyone.
The thread "June 1st filers" has the responses to your question.
Can someone tell me how long it takes to get 485 filing receipt? Who gets it ,you or the lawyer? What information should a responsible lawyer pass to you after 485 is filed?
Please let me know. It would be good information for everyone.
The thread "June 1st filers" has the responses to your question.
tattoo celebrity wedding hairstyle. Hair updos provide perfect for any occasion.
mp.Designs
11-03 10:05 PM
I can vouch for Jeremy here. He has some pretty nice skills, and wont run away with the money or anything. If u want proof of his AS skills, ask for his Isometric 3d engine. its amazing :)
more...
pictures A eautiful Hairstyle can
nick1306
01-20 01:34 PM
My friend H1b visa and status has expired. How can he stay the US? Please help he is in dire need.
dresses wedding hairstyle for long hair. Wedding Hairstyles For Medium
ivgclive
10-15 02:35 PM
People who complain about embassys, consulates abroad are assured that despite what country it is, the foreign offices are working in the same way.
more...
makeup short hair, Short Haircuts
bijualex29
05-29 02:09 PM
Where is the county Cap in this bill?
girlfriend wedding hairstyle for long hair. The Long Hair Community - Help picking a
loyalimmi
08-08 03:29 AM
Hi all,
I am going to US this year December. I also took Tickets for my Travel with the same name as in Passport. And in my Passport, my Surname & Firstname are completely mensioned. But my name in all my certificates is in short form like ( S H V My Name). Will this cause any problem in future if I apply for H1B??
Thanks,
Loyalimmi
I am going to US this year December. I also took Tickets for my Travel with the same name as in Passport. And in my Passport, my Surname & Firstname are completely mensioned. But my name in all my certificates is in short form like ( S H V My Name). Will this cause any problem in future if I apply for H1B??
Thanks,
Loyalimmi
hairstyles Another wedding hairstyle is
kamlesh
12-19 05:36 PM
I am on L1 visa since May 10, and have plans to switch to H1 without going back to India. My employer is not ready to provide experience and relieving letters, if I dont resign and I cant resign, since I need to pay 5000$.
1) So, does it make a problem while applying for GC, If I dont have these letters from present employer.
2) Inlcuding present company's experience only , I will be able to qualify for EB2 category. But I will not be having letters from my present employer to show that I am having 5 years experience.
Is it must to have experience and reliving letters from all my employers? What are the options for me now? :confused:
1) So, does it make a problem while applying for GC, If I dont have these letters from present employer.
2) Inlcuding present company's experience only , I will be able to qualify for EB2 category. But I will not be having letters from my present employer to show that I am having 5 years experience.
Is it must to have experience and reliving letters from all my employers? What are the options for me now? :confused:
HaveQuestions
02-03 11:36 AM
My H1B was refused under section 221(g) (petitioner is not able or willing to provide employment....) and case has reached USCIS for review. The lawyers however are asking me to travel on H4 and then convert to H1 in US and they say this can be done in 2 weeks. I am so very skeptical about this! How is this even possible?
Their response is that i have an H1B from earlier quota, so i can get a new petition filed and start working on it once its approved.How come people dont do this if its valid?
My questions if anybody can help me are
1) Can i go on H4 visa without revoking my H1B petition which is under review with USCIS? Or will consulate ask me to revoke my H1B petition?
2) If i go on H4, can i really get a COS to H1 in US i.e. not the April 2011 quota but in the already assigned quota and i can start working within a few days of approval?
Their response is that i have an H1B from earlier quota, so i can get a new petition filed and start working on it once its approved.How come people dont do this if its valid?
My questions if anybody can help me are
1) Can i go on H4 visa without revoking my H1B petition which is under review with USCIS? Or will consulate ask me to revoke my H1B petition?
2) If i go on H4, can i really get a COS to H1 in US i.e. not the April 2011 quota but in the already assigned quota and i can start working within a few days of approval?
kaisersose
11-29 01:37 PM
Yes. The old labor is valid for 180 days after July 16th.
If your lawyer can establish that A is still alive in some form, then this is possible. The new avatar of A (B or AB) can apply for 140.
If your lawyer can establish that A is still alive in some form, then this is possible. The new avatar of A (B or AB) can apply for 140.
