sounakc
05-30 07:46 AM
look at this thread hope this helps.
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/forum70-self-filing-documents-forms-directions-mailing/21995-self-filing-for-dependent-urgent.html
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/forum70-self-filing-documents-forms-directions-mailing/21995-self-filing-for-dependent-urgent.html
wallpaper Letters Love Quotes
Blog Feeds
10-15 06:30 PM
On 10/01/09, President Obama signed a continuing resolution to fund continued federal government operations through October 31, 2009. Included in the legislation were provisions to extend the E-Verify, Religious Worker, Conrad 30 and EB-5 programs.
The continuing resolution was attached to the FY10 Legislative Branch Appropriations bill (H.R. 2918), and was passed by the House of Representatives on 9/25/09 and the Senate on 9/30/09.
The E-Verify, Religious Worker, Conrad 30 and EB-5 programs have all been extended for an additional 30 days, though all they may be extended further in the coming weeks once the Senate and House conference the FY10 Homeland Security Appropriations bill (H.R. 2892).
More... (http://ashwinsharma.com/2009/10/07/latest-immigration-actions-by-pres-obama.aspx?ref=rss)
The continuing resolution was attached to the FY10 Legislative Branch Appropriations bill (H.R. 2918), and was passed by the House of Representatives on 9/25/09 and the Senate on 9/30/09.
The E-Verify, Religious Worker, Conrad 30 and EB-5 programs have all been extended for an additional 30 days, though all they may be extended further in the coming weeks once the Senate and House conference the FY10 Homeland Security Appropriations bill (H.R. 2892).
More... (http://ashwinsharma.com/2009/10/07/latest-immigration-actions-by-pres-obama.aspx?ref=rss)
vinzak
05-18 11:26 AM
My friends received Green cards in 2007. They live abroad, but make regular trips tho the Us to visit family and maintain their GC.
Unfortunaltely, they recently misplaced their green cards. They are planning a trip to the US this month, for which they have received travel letters from the US Embassy abroad.
Would anyone know what the process is afterwords? We know they have to file I-90s to replace their lost GC. Does this have to be done at the port of entry? Or is it done at a local office on reaching their final US destination?
Also, will they be called for a biometric appointment locally or can that be done at a Port of Entry. Can the biometric be done at a location abroad?
If anyone has any info on this, it'd be truly appreciated.
Unfortunaltely, they recently misplaced their green cards. They are planning a trip to the US this month, for which they have received travel letters from the US Embassy abroad.
Would anyone know what the process is afterwords? We know they have to file I-90s to replace their lost GC. Does this have to be done at the port of entry? Or is it done at a local office on reaching their final US destination?
Also, will they be called for a biometric appointment locally or can that be done at a Port of Entry. Can the biometric be done at a location abroad?
If anyone has any info on this, it'd be truly appreciated.
2011 quotes and sayings about love
kirupa
07-30 02:40 PM
Added :)
more...
ravi98
03-08 09:08 AM
Angelo Paparelli on Dysfunctional Government: Granular and Possibly Grand Immigration Reform (http://blogs.ilw.com/angelopaparelli/2011/03/granular-and-possibly-grand-immigration-reform.html)
gcspace
10-04 03:11 PM
My application reached 13 July at NSC nothing got back. Anyone in this boat?
There is a forum group "July3rd to July15th" , please add your name to the list and keep track of it. Yes, there are many people from July3rd to July16th who have not yet received anything.
There is a forum group "July3rd to July15th" , please add your name to the list and keep track of it. Yes, there are many people from July3rd to July16th who have not yet received anything.
more...
miamivice4u
05-14 02:14 PM
Does anyone know what this means?
Current Status: This case has been sent to another office for processing.
On May 14, 2007, we transferred this I485 APPLICATION TO REGISTER PERMANENT RESIDENCE OR TO ADJUST STATUS to our NATIONAL BENEFITS CENTER location for processing and sent you a notice explaining this action. Please follow any instructions on this notice. You will be notified by mail when a decision is made, or if the office needs something from you. If you move while this case is pending, call customer service. We process cases in the order we receive them. You can use our processing dates to estimate when this case will be done. This case has been sent to our NATIONAL BENEFITS CENTER location. Follow the link below to check processing dates. You can also receive automatic e-mail updates as we process your case. Just follow the link below to register.
Current Status: This case has been sent to another office for processing.
On May 14, 2007, we transferred this I485 APPLICATION TO REGISTER PERMANENT RESIDENCE OR TO ADJUST STATUS to our NATIONAL BENEFITS CENTER location for processing and sent you a notice explaining this action. Please follow any instructions on this notice. You will be notified by mail when a decision is made, or if the office needs something from you. If you move while this case is pending, call customer service. We process cases in the order we receive them. You can use our processing dates to estimate when this case will be done. This case has been sent to our NATIONAL BENEFITS CENTER location. Follow the link below to check processing dates. You can also receive automatic e-mail updates as we process your case. Just follow the link below to register.
2010 funny quotes sayings
zamoo
06-28 12:39 PM
Hello All,
Being on H-1 never allowed you to get promoted unless the employer did all the necessary paperwork with USCIS/DOL. EAD being work authorization not limited to current employer, can EAD mean a little more freedom to waiting-for-GC H-1Bs in terms of being able to get promoted within the organization, get different job titles, etc ?
Also, I have 140 approved and H-1B ext was granted for 3 years (till 2010). Does it make any sense to apply for EAD alongwith 485 ? If EAD gives the career advancement opportunities, can I apply for it but keep using my H-1B to re-enter US till 2010 if needed ?
Thanks
Being on H-1 never allowed you to get promoted unless the employer did all the necessary paperwork with USCIS/DOL. EAD being work authorization not limited to current employer, can EAD mean a little more freedom to waiting-for-GC H-1Bs in terms of being able to get promoted within the organization, get different job titles, etc ?
Also, I have 140 approved and H-1B ext was granted for 3 years (till 2010). Does it make any sense to apply for EAD alongwith 485 ? If EAD gives the career advancement opportunities, can I apply for it but keep using my H-1B to re-enter US till 2010 if needed ?
Thanks
more...
Knicker
02-09 03:54 PM
Hi
I came to US on L1 in 2005 thru COMPANY-A and then applied for H1B thru COMPANY-B in 2006 and got approval under 2007 CAP. But I didn't start working for COMPANY-B(H1B) and went to India after H1B approval but came to US on L1B again to continue my work with COMPANY-A(Did a leapfrog).
In 2009 I transferred my H1B from COMPANY-B to COMPANY-C and got the petition approval. So I have a valid H1B petition with COMPANY-C.
In the same year my COMPANY-A(L1B holder) applied for COS to H1B under new 2010 CAP and got approval. So my status has been changed from L1 to H1B with COMPANY-A.
Now I have 2 approved valid petitions, one with COMPANY-A and the other with COMPANY-C, my question is if I get an offer from COMPANY-C can I start working with them with out any H1 transfer application ?
or can I transfer my H1B from COMPANY-C to another COMPANY-D ?
Thanks for your help,
Nick.
I came to US on L1 in 2005 thru COMPANY-A and then applied for H1B thru COMPANY-B in 2006 and got approval under 2007 CAP. But I didn't start working for COMPANY-B(H1B) and went to India after H1B approval but came to US on L1B again to continue my work with COMPANY-A(Did a leapfrog).
In 2009 I transferred my H1B from COMPANY-B to COMPANY-C and got the petition approval. So I have a valid H1B petition with COMPANY-C.
In the same year my COMPANY-A(L1B holder) applied for COS to H1B under new 2010 CAP and got approval. So my status has been changed from L1 to H1B with COMPANY-A.
Now I have 2 approved valid petitions, one with COMPANY-A and the other with COMPANY-C, my question is if I get an offer from COMPANY-C can I start working with them with out any H1 transfer application ?
or can I transfer my H1B from COMPANY-C to another COMPANY-D ?
Thanks for your help,
Nick.
hair hot family quotes and sayings.
chanukya
08-08 10:53 AM
FAQ's---AC21--Check this link out
http://www.murthy.com/news/UDac21qa.html
http://www.murthy.com/news/UDac21qa.html
more...
number30
03-16 04:53 PM
I believe working on 1099 is allowed when you have the full time work on H1B going.
There are different types of 1099. 1099-Misc is not allowed. 1099-Int , 1099-G are the examples of allowed 1099s
There are different types of 1099. 1099-Misc is not allowed. 1099-Int , 1099-G are the examples of allowed 1099s
hot love quotes and sayings
Macaca
06-12 07:33 AM
The System at Work (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/06/11/AR2007061101859.html) By E. J. Dionne Jr. (http://projects.washingtonpost.com/staff/email/e.+j.+dionne+jr./) (postchat@aol.com), Tuesday, June 12, 2007
We have become political hypochondriacs. We seem eager to declare that "the system" has come down with some dread disease, to proclaim that an ideological "center" blessed by the heavens no longer exists, and woe unto us. An imperfect immigration bill is pulled from the Senate floor, and you'd think the Capitol dome had caved in.
It's all nonsense, but it is not harmless nonsense. The tendency to blame the system is a convenient way of leaving no one accountable. Those who offer this argument can sound sage without having to grapple with the specifics of any piece of legislation. There is the unspoken assumption that wisdom always lies in the political middle, no matter how unsavory the recipe served up by a given group of self-proclaimed centrists might be.
And when Republicans and Democrats are battling each other with particular ferocity, there is always a call for the appearance of an above-the-battle savior who will seize the presidency as an independent. This messiah, it is said, will transcend such "petty" concerns as philosophy or ideology.
Finally, those who attack the system don't actually want to change it much. For example, there's a very good case for abolishing the U.S. Senate. It often distorts the popular will since senators representing 18 percent of the population can cast a majority of the Senate's votes. And as Sen. John McCain said over the weekend, "The Senate works in a way that relatively small numbers can block legislation."
But many of the system-blamers in fact love Senate rules that, in principle, push senators toward the middle in seeking solutions. So they actually like the system more than they let on.
As it happens, I wish the immigration bill's supporters had gotten it through -- not because I think this is great legislation but because some bill has to get out of the Senate so real discussions on a final proposal can begin.
Notice how tepid that paragraph is. The truth is that most supporters of this bill find a lot of things in it they don't like. The guest-worker program, in particular, strikes me as terribly flawed. The bill's opponents, on the other hand, absolutely hate it because they see it as an effective amnesty for 12 million illegal immigrants. And, boy, did those opponents mobilize. In well-functioning democracies, mobilized minorities often defeat unenthusiastic majorities.
And some "centrist" compromises are more coherent and politically salable than others. Neither side on the immigration issue has the popular support to get exactly what it wants. So a bill aimed at creating a path to citizenship for illegal immigrants is full of grudging concessions to the anti-immigration side. These have the effect of demobilizing the very groups that support the underlying principles of this bill. That's not a system problem. It just happens that immigration is a hard issue that arouses real passion.
Typically, advocates of the system-breakdown theory move quickly from immigration to the failure of President Bush's Social Security proposals. Why, they ask, can't the system "fix" entitlements?
The simple truth is that a majority of Americans (I'm one of them) came to oppose Bush's privatization ideas. That reflected both a principled stand and a practical judgment. From our perspective, a proposal to cut benefits and create private accounts was radical, not centrist.
An authentically "centrist" solution to this problem would involve some modest benefit cuts and some modest tax increases. It will happen someday. But for now, conservatives don't want to support any tax increases. I think the conservatives are wrong, and they'd argue that they're principled. What we have here is a political disagreement, not a system problem. We have these things called elections to settle political disagreements.
Is Washington a mess? In many ways it is. The simplest explanation has to do with some bad choices made by President Bush. He started a misguided war that is now sapping his influence; he has treated Democrats as if they were infected with tuberculosis and Republicans in Congress as if they were his valets. No wonder he's having trouble pushing through a bill whose main opponents are his own ideological allies.
Maybe you would place blame elsewhere. But please identify some real people or real political forces and not just some faceless entity that you call the system. Please be specific, bearing in mind that when hypochondriacs misdiagnose vague ailments they don't have, they often miss the real ones.
We have become political hypochondriacs. We seem eager to declare that "the system" has come down with some dread disease, to proclaim that an ideological "center" blessed by the heavens no longer exists, and woe unto us. An imperfect immigration bill is pulled from the Senate floor, and you'd think the Capitol dome had caved in.
It's all nonsense, but it is not harmless nonsense. The tendency to blame the system is a convenient way of leaving no one accountable. Those who offer this argument can sound sage without having to grapple with the specifics of any piece of legislation. There is the unspoken assumption that wisdom always lies in the political middle, no matter how unsavory the recipe served up by a given group of self-proclaimed centrists might be.
And when Republicans and Democrats are battling each other with particular ferocity, there is always a call for the appearance of an above-the-battle savior who will seize the presidency as an independent. This messiah, it is said, will transcend such "petty" concerns as philosophy or ideology.
Finally, those who attack the system don't actually want to change it much. For example, there's a very good case for abolishing the U.S. Senate. It often distorts the popular will since senators representing 18 percent of the population can cast a majority of the Senate's votes. And as Sen. John McCain said over the weekend, "The Senate works in a way that relatively small numbers can block legislation."
But many of the system-blamers in fact love Senate rules that, in principle, push senators toward the middle in seeking solutions. So they actually like the system more than they let on.
As it happens, I wish the immigration bill's supporters had gotten it through -- not because I think this is great legislation but because some bill has to get out of the Senate so real discussions on a final proposal can begin.
Notice how tepid that paragraph is. The truth is that most supporters of this bill find a lot of things in it they don't like. The guest-worker program, in particular, strikes me as terribly flawed. The bill's opponents, on the other hand, absolutely hate it because they see it as an effective amnesty for 12 million illegal immigrants. And, boy, did those opponents mobilize. In well-functioning democracies, mobilized minorities often defeat unenthusiastic majorities.
And some "centrist" compromises are more coherent and politically salable than others. Neither side on the immigration issue has the popular support to get exactly what it wants. So a bill aimed at creating a path to citizenship for illegal immigrants is full of grudging concessions to the anti-immigration side. These have the effect of demobilizing the very groups that support the underlying principles of this bill. That's not a system problem. It just happens that immigration is a hard issue that arouses real passion.
Typically, advocates of the system-breakdown theory move quickly from immigration to the failure of President Bush's Social Security proposals. Why, they ask, can't the system "fix" entitlements?
The simple truth is that a majority of Americans (I'm one of them) came to oppose Bush's privatization ideas. That reflected both a principled stand and a practical judgment. From our perspective, a proposal to cut benefits and create private accounts was radical, not centrist.
An authentically "centrist" solution to this problem would involve some modest benefit cuts and some modest tax increases. It will happen someday. But for now, conservatives don't want to support any tax increases. I think the conservatives are wrong, and they'd argue that they're principled. What we have here is a political disagreement, not a system problem. We have these things called elections to settle political disagreements.
Is Washington a mess? In many ways it is. The simplest explanation has to do with some bad choices made by President Bush. He started a misguided war that is now sapping his influence; he has treated Democrats as if they were infected with tuberculosis and Republicans in Congress as if they were his valets. No wonder he's having trouble pushing through a bill whose main opponents are his own ideological allies.
Maybe you would place blame elsewhere. But please identify some real people or real political forces and not just some faceless entity that you call the system. Please be specific, bearing in mind that when hypochondriacs misdiagnose vague ailments they don't have, they often miss the real ones.
more...
house love quotes and sayings for
phillyag
02-13 12:25 PM
Which Form should I look for getting this information?
I was using ETA Form 9089 page 11 0 Job duties. Is that the correct place to looks for ?
My company
I was using ETA Form 9089 page 11 0 Job duties. Is that the correct place to looks for ?
My company
tattoo love you quotes sayings. i
rm_1000
03-13 10:41 PM
Hi,
I have filed for my I-485 application (based on a approved I-140) in July 2007. At that time I also filed for another I-140 based on a substitute labor that I got which had a earlier priority date.
Now that new I-140 that I filed with substitute labor is approved. I am looking at possibility how I can use this new I-140.
I heard there is something called changing underlying I-140 application. Can someone explain this and tell me how I can use it in my case please.
Thanks
I have filed for my I-485 application (based on a approved I-140) in July 2007. At that time I also filed for another I-140 based on a substitute labor that I got which had a earlier priority date.
Now that new I-140 that I filed with substitute labor is approved. I am looking at possibility how I can use this new I-140.
I heard there is something called changing underlying I-140 application. Can someone explain this and tell me how I can use it in my case please.
Thanks
more...
pictures quotes and sayings
trump_gc
02-05 11:39 AM
Current VISA availability date is 01AUG02. So u r looking at 5-9 yrs ,,may be worse, or may be even better with any law comin in
dresses dresses love quotes sayings.
ivdude
03-13 02:28 PM
shouldn't be a problem.
more...
makeup letting go quotes sayings.
ektha123
01-02 09:55 AM
please guys
girlfriend quotes and sayings about god
gc2
10-08 08:48 AM
take an infopass and ask for an update on your case. you need to take action to get your case up for approval.
contact your senator and state your case.
contact your senator and state your case.
hairstyles emo quotes and sayings.
B+ve
08-28 04:33 PM
Anybody else has any clue ???
Macaca
05-05 07:15 AM
Democrats' Momentum Is Stalling (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/05/04/AR2007050402262.html) Amid Iraq Debate, Priorities On Domestic Agenda Languish By Jonathan Weisman and Lyndsey Layton (http://projects.washingtonpost.com/staff/email/jonathan+weisman+and+lyndsey+layton/) Washington Post Staff Writers, Saturday, May 5, 2007
In the heady opening weeks of the 110th Congress, the Democrats' domestic agenda appeared to be flying through the Capitol: Homeland security upgrades, a higher minimum wage and student loan interest rate cuts all passed with overwhelming bipartisan support.
But now that initial progress has foundered as Washington policymakers have been consumed with the debate over the Iraq war. Not a single priority on the Democrats' agenda has been enacted, and some in the party are growing nervous that the "do nothing" tag they slapped on Republicans last year could come back to haunt them.
"We cannot be a one-trick pony," said House Democratic Caucus Chairman Rahm Emanuel (Ill.), who helped engineer his party's takeover of Congress as head of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee. "People voted for change, but Iraq, the economy and Washington, D.C., [corruption] all tied for first place. We need to do them all."
The "Six for '06" policy agenda on which Democrats campaigned last year was supposed to consist of low-hanging fruit, plucked and put in the basket to allow Congress to move on to tougher targets. House Democrats took just 10 days to pass a minimum-wage increase, a bill to implement most of the homeland security recommendations of the Sept. 11 commission, a measure allowing federal funding for stem cell research, another to cut student-loan rates, a bill allowing the federal government to negotiate drug prices under Medicare, and a rollback of tax breaks for oil and gas companies to finance alternative-energy research.
The Senate struck out on its own, with a broad overhaul of the rules on lobbying Congress.
Not one of those bills has been signed into law. President Bush signed 16 measures into law through April, six more than were signed by this time in the previous Congress. But beyond a huge domestic spending bill that wrapped up work left undone by Republicans last year, the list of achievements is modest: a beefed-up board to oversee congressional pages in the wake of the Mark Foley scandal, and the renaming of six post offices, including one for Gerald R. Ford in Vail, Colo., as well as two courthouses, including one for Rush Limbaugh Sr. in Cape Girardeau, Mo.
The minimum-wage bill got stalled in a fight with the Senate over tax breaks to go along with the wage increase. In frustration, Democratic leaders inserted a minimum-wage agreement into a bill to fund the Iraq war, only to see it vetoed.
Similar homeland security bills were passed by the House and the Senate, only to languish as attention shifted to the Iraq debate. Last week, family members of those killed on Sept. 11, 2001, gathered in Washington to demand action.
"We've waited five and a half years since 9/11," said Carie Lemack, whose mother died aboard one of the planes that crashed into the World Trade Center in New York. "We waited three years since the 9/11 commission. We can't wait anymore."
House and Senate staff members have begun meeting, with the goal of reporting out a final bill by Memorial Day, but they concede that the deadline is likely to slip, in part because members of the homeland security committees of both chambers, the House Energy and Commerce Committee and the two intelligence committees all want their say. The irony, Lemack said, is that such cumbersomeness is precisely why the Sept. 11 commission recommended the creation of powerful umbrella security committees with such broad jurisdiction that other panels could not muscle their way in. That was one recommendation Congress largely disregarded.
The Medicare drug-negotiations bill died in the Senate, after Republicans refused to let it come up for debate. House Democrats are threatening to attach the bill to must-pass government funding bills.
Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (D-Mass.), chairman of the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions, has proposed his own student-loan legislation, but it is to be part of a huge higher-education bill that may not reach the committee until June.
The House's relatively simple energy bill faces a similar fate. The Senate has in mind a much larger bill that would ease bringing alternative fuels to market, regulate oil and gas futures trading, raise vehicle and appliance efficiency standards, and reform federal royalty payments to finance new energy technologies.
The voters seem to have noticed the stall. An ABC News-Washington Post poll last month found that 73 percent of Americans believe Congress has done "not too much" or "nothing at all." A memo from the Democratic polling firm Democracy Corps warned last month that the stalemate between Congress and Bush over the war spending bill has knocked down the favorable ratings of Congress and the Democrats by three percentage points and has taken a greater toll on the public's hope for a productive Congress.
"The primary message coming out of the November election was that the American people are sick and tired of the fighting and the gridlock, and they want both the president and Congress to start governing the country," warned Leon E. Panetta, a chief of staff in Bill Clinton's White House. "It just seems to me the Democrats, if they fail for whatever reason to get a domestic agenda enacted . . . will pay a price."
Republicans are already trying to extract that price. Sen. Jon Kyl (Ariz.), chairman of the Senate Republican Conference, said Democrats are just "trying to score political points on the war. . . . Part of their party can't conceive of anything else to talk about but the war."
Norman J. Ornstein, a Congress watcher at the American Enterprise Institute, said a Congress's productivity is not measured solely on the number of bills signed into law. Bills and resolutions approved by either chamber totaled 165 during the first four months of this Congress, compared with 72 in 2005. And Congress recorded 415 roll-call votes, compared with 264 when Republicans were in charge and the House GOP leaders struggled to impose their agenda on a closely divided Senate.
Democratic leaders remain hopeful that a burst of activity will put the doubts about them to rest. They have promised to pass a war funding bill and a minimum-wage increase that Bush can sign, to complete a budget blueprint and to finish the homeland security bill by Memorial Day. The House wants to pass defense and intelligence bills, its own lobbying measure and the first gun-control legislation since 1994, which would tighten the national instant-check system for gun purchases. The Senate hopes to complete a comprehensive overhaul of immigration laws.
Rep. Chris Van Hollen (Md.), chairman of the House Democratic campaign committee, said his party needs to get some achievements under its belt, but not until voters begin to focus on the campaigns next year. "People understand the Democrats in Congress are doing everything in their power to move an agenda forward, doing everything possible to change direction in the war in Iraq, and the president is standing in the way," he said.
Kyl was not so sanguine. If accomplishments are not in the books by this fall, he said, the Democrats will find their achievements eclipsed by the 2008 presidential race. Panetta agreed.
"This leadership, these Democrats have shown that they can fight," he said. "Now they have to show they can govern."
In the heady opening weeks of the 110th Congress, the Democrats' domestic agenda appeared to be flying through the Capitol: Homeland security upgrades, a higher minimum wage and student loan interest rate cuts all passed with overwhelming bipartisan support.
But now that initial progress has foundered as Washington policymakers have been consumed with the debate over the Iraq war. Not a single priority on the Democrats' agenda has been enacted, and some in the party are growing nervous that the "do nothing" tag they slapped on Republicans last year could come back to haunt them.
"We cannot be a one-trick pony," said House Democratic Caucus Chairman Rahm Emanuel (Ill.), who helped engineer his party's takeover of Congress as head of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee. "People voted for change, but Iraq, the economy and Washington, D.C., [corruption] all tied for first place. We need to do them all."
The "Six for '06" policy agenda on which Democrats campaigned last year was supposed to consist of low-hanging fruit, plucked and put in the basket to allow Congress to move on to tougher targets. House Democrats took just 10 days to pass a minimum-wage increase, a bill to implement most of the homeland security recommendations of the Sept. 11 commission, a measure allowing federal funding for stem cell research, another to cut student-loan rates, a bill allowing the federal government to negotiate drug prices under Medicare, and a rollback of tax breaks for oil and gas companies to finance alternative-energy research.
The Senate struck out on its own, with a broad overhaul of the rules on lobbying Congress.
Not one of those bills has been signed into law. President Bush signed 16 measures into law through April, six more than were signed by this time in the previous Congress. But beyond a huge domestic spending bill that wrapped up work left undone by Republicans last year, the list of achievements is modest: a beefed-up board to oversee congressional pages in the wake of the Mark Foley scandal, and the renaming of six post offices, including one for Gerald R. Ford in Vail, Colo., as well as two courthouses, including one for Rush Limbaugh Sr. in Cape Girardeau, Mo.
The minimum-wage bill got stalled in a fight with the Senate over tax breaks to go along with the wage increase. In frustration, Democratic leaders inserted a minimum-wage agreement into a bill to fund the Iraq war, only to see it vetoed.
Similar homeland security bills were passed by the House and the Senate, only to languish as attention shifted to the Iraq debate. Last week, family members of those killed on Sept. 11, 2001, gathered in Washington to demand action.
"We've waited five and a half years since 9/11," said Carie Lemack, whose mother died aboard one of the planes that crashed into the World Trade Center in New York. "We waited three years since the 9/11 commission. We can't wait anymore."
House and Senate staff members have begun meeting, with the goal of reporting out a final bill by Memorial Day, but they concede that the deadline is likely to slip, in part because members of the homeland security committees of both chambers, the House Energy and Commerce Committee and the two intelligence committees all want their say. The irony, Lemack said, is that such cumbersomeness is precisely why the Sept. 11 commission recommended the creation of powerful umbrella security committees with such broad jurisdiction that other panels could not muscle their way in. That was one recommendation Congress largely disregarded.
The Medicare drug-negotiations bill died in the Senate, after Republicans refused to let it come up for debate. House Democrats are threatening to attach the bill to must-pass government funding bills.
Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (D-Mass.), chairman of the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions, has proposed his own student-loan legislation, but it is to be part of a huge higher-education bill that may not reach the committee until June.
The House's relatively simple energy bill faces a similar fate. The Senate has in mind a much larger bill that would ease bringing alternative fuels to market, regulate oil and gas futures trading, raise vehicle and appliance efficiency standards, and reform federal royalty payments to finance new energy technologies.
The voters seem to have noticed the stall. An ABC News-Washington Post poll last month found that 73 percent of Americans believe Congress has done "not too much" or "nothing at all." A memo from the Democratic polling firm Democracy Corps warned last month that the stalemate between Congress and Bush over the war spending bill has knocked down the favorable ratings of Congress and the Democrats by three percentage points and has taken a greater toll on the public's hope for a productive Congress.
"The primary message coming out of the November election was that the American people are sick and tired of the fighting and the gridlock, and they want both the president and Congress to start governing the country," warned Leon E. Panetta, a chief of staff in Bill Clinton's White House. "It just seems to me the Democrats, if they fail for whatever reason to get a domestic agenda enacted . . . will pay a price."
Republicans are already trying to extract that price. Sen. Jon Kyl (Ariz.), chairman of the Senate Republican Conference, said Democrats are just "trying to score political points on the war. . . . Part of their party can't conceive of anything else to talk about but the war."
Norman J. Ornstein, a Congress watcher at the American Enterprise Institute, said a Congress's productivity is not measured solely on the number of bills signed into law. Bills and resolutions approved by either chamber totaled 165 during the first four months of this Congress, compared with 72 in 2005. And Congress recorded 415 roll-call votes, compared with 264 when Republicans were in charge and the House GOP leaders struggled to impose their agenda on a closely divided Senate.
Democratic leaders remain hopeful that a burst of activity will put the doubts about them to rest. They have promised to pass a war funding bill and a minimum-wage increase that Bush can sign, to complete a budget blueprint and to finish the homeland security bill by Memorial Day. The House wants to pass defense and intelligence bills, its own lobbying measure and the first gun-control legislation since 1994, which would tighten the national instant-check system for gun purchases. The Senate hopes to complete a comprehensive overhaul of immigration laws.
Rep. Chris Van Hollen (Md.), chairman of the House Democratic campaign committee, said his party needs to get some achievements under its belt, but not until voters begin to focus on the campaigns next year. "People understand the Democrats in Congress are doing everything in their power to move an agenda forward, doing everything possible to change direction in the war in Iraq, and the president is standing in the way," he said.
Kyl was not so sanguine. If accomplishments are not in the books by this fall, he said, the Democrats will find their achievements eclipsed by the 2008 presidential race. Panetta agreed.
"This leadership, these Democrats have shown that they can fight," he said. "Now they have to show they can govern."
pd_recapturing
04-22 04:39 PM
This is what, I saw on Ron's forum. We would need to continue what IV has been suggesting since long .....
Can USCIS be sued for picking files in random ( the only time they budge is when a federal judge put an order ).
Ron Gotcher: Anyone can be sued for anything. In the absence of a large, well funded group of plaintiffs, however, I don't see this kind of suit going anywhere. For now, the remedy is Congress. Organize a group to initiate a letter writing campaign to Congress. Write to your own Congressman, your two Senators, and the chairs of the Senate (Kennedy) and House (Loftgren) immigration sub-committees. Get the facts straight and offer as much emprical evidence as possible. If Congress were to receive 100,000 such letters, they would definitely do something about this problem.
Can USCIS be sued for picking files in random ( the only time they budge is when a federal judge put an order ).
Ron Gotcher: Anyone can be sued for anything. In the absence of a large, well funded group of plaintiffs, however, I don't see this kind of suit going anywhere. For now, the remedy is Congress. Organize a group to initiate a letter writing campaign to Congress. Write to your own Congressman, your two Senators, and the chairs of the Senate (Kennedy) and House (Loftgren) immigration sub-committees. Get the facts straight and offer as much emprical evidence as possible. If Congress were to receive 100,000 such letters, they would definitely do something about this problem.
No comments:
Post a Comment