redsox2009
11-18 10:10 AM
Thank you for your letter regarding the Development, Relief, and Education for Alien Minors (DREAM) Act of 2009 (S. 729). As always, I value your input on this and other issues, and strive to keep you updated on the important issues facing us today.
On March 26, 2009, the DREAM Act was introduced by Senator Richard Durbin (D-IL). This bill would authorize the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security to cancel the removal of, and give conditional permanent resident status to, an alien who entered the U.S. prior to his or her 16th birthday and has lived in the U.S. for a period of 5 years. Such a resident must also meet other requirements, such as be judged to be of good moral character, not inadmissible or deportable under the Immigration and Nationality Act, be admitted to a higher education institution or have completed high school or the equivalent, never been under a final order of deportation, and be under 35 years of age at the time of this Act�s enactment.
Furthermore, the DREAM Act sets parameters for conditional permanent resident status, and the process by which one transitions from conditional to permanent residency status. Under S. 729, an undocumented alien would also be authorized to petition the Secretary for conditional permanent residency if that individual has satisfied all of the above requirements prior to the enactment of the Act. Currently, S. 729 is before the Senate Committee on the Judiciary where it awaits further consideration. While I am not a member of this committee, I will certainly monitor the progress of this bill.
As you may know, Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) announced on September 14, 2010, that he would offer the DREAM Act as an amendment to the Fiscal Year (FY) 2011 Defense Authorization bill (S. 3454) as well as not allow a fair and open debate on the bill. I was disappointed that he chose to play politics with necessary support for our troops and national defense by trying to tack on the DREAM Act, which is unrelated to the daily operations of the Department of Defense. I remain committed to reforming our legal immigration system and streamlining the legal process; however, I have consistently opposed proposals that extend taxpayer benefits to those here illegally or give incentives for illegal immigration. On September 21, 2010, the Senate voted 56 to 43, where 60 affirmative votes were needed, not to move forward with debate on the Defense Authorization bill. I joined colleagues from both sides of the aisle to oppose this vote.
Again, thank you for sharing your views with me. As the legislative process moves forward, I will keep your thoughts in mind. If I can be of further assistance, do not hesitate to contact me or visit my website at www.scottbrown.senate.gov.
Sincerely,
Scott P. Brown
United States Senator
On March 26, 2009, the DREAM Act was introduced by Senator Richard Durbin (D-IL). This bill would authorize the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security to cancel the removal of, and give conditional permanent resident status to, an alien who entered the U.S. prior to his or her 16th birthday and has lived in the U.S. for a period of 5 years. Such a resident must also meet other requirements, such as be judged to be of good moral character, not inadmissible or deportable under the Immigration and Nationality Act, be admitted to a higher education institution or have completed high school or the equivalent, never been under a final order of deportation, and be under 35 years of age at the time of this Act�s enactment.
Furthermore, the DREAM Act sets parameters for conditional permanent resident status, and the process by which one transitions from conditional to permanent residency status. Under S. 729, an undocumented alien would also be authorized to petition the Secretary for conditional permanent residency if that individual has satisfied all of the above requirements prior to the enactment of the Act. Currently, S. 729 is before the Senate Committee on the Judiciary where it awaits further consideration. While I am not a member of this committee, I will certainly monitor the progress of this bill.
As you may know, Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) announced on September 14, 2010, that he would offer the DREAM Act as an amendment to the Fiscal Year (FY) 2011 Defense Authorization bill (S. 3454) as well as not allow a fair and open debate on the bill. I was disappointed that he chose to play politics with necessary support for our troops and national defense by trying to tack on the DREAM Act, which is unrelated to the daily operations of the Department of Defense. I remain committed to reforming our legal immigration system and streamlining the legal process; however, I have consistently opposed proposals that extend taxpayer benefits to those here illegally or give incentives for illegal immigration. On September 21, 2010, the Senate voted 56 to 43, where 60 affirmative votes were needed, not to move forward with debate on the Defense Authorization bill. I joined colleagues from both sides of the aisle to oppose this vote.
Again, thank you for sharing your views with me. As the legislative process moves forward, I will keep your thoughts in mind. If I can be of further assistance, do not hesitate to contact me or visit my website at www.scottbrown.senate.gov.
Sincerely,
Scott P. Brown
United States Senator
wallpaper Natalie Portman declared Jake
madhuvj
09-15 05:10 PM
Come on Guys,
We need more people to break the USCIS back. We can do it. It will not only help people who are currently facing the repercussion of this unreasonable USCIS actions, it will help others. Just think about, It could help your friends, relatives, brothers, sisters, cousins and all people....
This effort is to raise our voice towards the unfair treatment we have been receiving from USCIS since 2002. The First was the huge labor backlog, then came the ever-pending NameChecks, then came the July 2007 fiasco, then the approval of cases based on 485 ND and RD when people with PD < 2004 are waiting for years, then the frequent retrogressions. There are lot of people who got a single year EAD because PD was current till 2006 until last month. Now the dates have gone back to 2003 and no one knows when it will reach 2006 again. This is ridiculous. We need to raise our voice, otherwise, we will not see any light in the future. This is a nice opportunity to come together guys. COME UNITED guys.
We need more people to break the USCIS back. We can do it. It will not only help people who are currently facing the repercussion of this unreasonable USCIS actions, it will help others. Just think about, It could help your friends, relatives, brothers, sisters, cousins and all people....
This effort is to raise our voice towards the unfair treatment we have been receiving from USCIS since 2002. The First was the huge labor backlog, then came the ever-pending NameChecks, then came the July 2007 fiasco, then the approval of cases based on 485 ND and RD when people with PD < 2004 are waiting for years, then the frequent retrogressions. There are lot of people who got a single year EAD because PD was current till 2006 until last month. Now the dates have gone back to 2003 and no one knows when it will reach 2006 again. This is ridiculous. We need to raise our voice, otherwise, we will not see any light in the future. This is a nice opportunity to come together guys. COME UNITED guys.
lsbk
10-02 04:10 PM
And what time? Hopefully, I will be in that box.
:(Iam so sorry GKBest. I did ask my attorney's office about who received it and at what time. But they did not provide me any details about it and just said it was received at Nebraska on July 3rd morning. Hope you get your receipts soon.
:(Iam so sorry GKBest. I did ask my attorney's office about who received it and at what time. But they did not provide me any details about it and just said it was received at Nebraska on July 3rd morning. Hope you get your receipts soon.
2011 Lately Jake Gyllenhaal said
reddymjm
06-08 06:07 PM
My case was received by NSC on JUN 1st. They issued the recipt numbers on JUN 5th. I am still waiting on my wifes. They could clear on Monday.. Looks like NSC is also trying to speed up things. They are just one day slower than TSC in issuing recepts.
more...
eb3_nepa
06-26 04:30 PM
Umm, Eb3_Nepa, speeding is breaking the law. A speed limit is the law. In pointing out that a speeder is fined but an illegal immigrant is deported, you are pointing out the difference in punishment for breaking the law. The punishment is man's decree, nothing more, nothing less. One could argue that a speeder can cause more harm to society (by driving way faster than conditions permit, for instance) than an illegal immigrant. Yes, an illegal immigrant is breaking the law, but who knows what we would do if we had a bad life and made $1 a day and someone promises a better paying job in some other country. So let us not point fingers here, but focus instead on the value we add.
You are getting into this discussion late and I have edited/deleted posts, but from my comments you have an idea of what was said. It wasn't productive.
Stucklabour i am not going deep into the illegals issue here. What i am saying is, that if some members sympathise with the illegals, that is perfectly fine with me, you may be more humanitarian than i am and you have a right to be. My point was, that being in the country illegally is considered more of an offence than a speeding violation not by you, or me, or anyone BUT by the US Govt.
Also just to let everyone know i am not pointing any fingers at anyone here. I dont know about you, but let me tell you why I came here. It was not money particularly that brought me here. It was the fact that inspite of doing an Engineering degree, jobs were almost impossible to come by. Inspite of being a BE from a Fairly decent Engineering college in India, i have had to work in conditions Far worse than some of the workers in that company would have to (and this was after holding a supervisor's position). My family could not afford to send me here to study outright, so we scrambled for loans and scholarships. That being done I changed professions to do a Master's in IT and completely change fields. My point is, i did all that by staying WELL under the umbrella of the law. I speak for the many many master's students who come here after studying in India and go thru faily poor student life conditions due to lack of money during college. Once again we did it the LEGAL way. We waited for our turns. You gave me a figure of $1/day that illegals make. I was making Indian Rs 4,500/month (after doing a 4 year bachelors in Engineering) which is abt $3.00/day. I also knew my batch mates making even less than that a month. So does that mean that if i came to the US illegally, i would be justified in doing so coz we were making really less money? Also while staying here, we were 3 roommates accompanied by 3 mice in our apartment and abt 2000 roaches coz the apartment was REALLY old. :) Even there i know lots of my batch mates who underwent similar and worse problems.
Please dont take my post the wrong way, i am sure there are many many more like me who have had it MUCH worse than i did. I dont want to bring my personal problems in public. But when i read things like, "lets put ourselves in their shoes" argument, i could not just sit back and and pretend like it is ok to break the law and actually be rewarded for it.
You are a moderator and by that right you may delete my post, but just to clear matters, i am not againt any community in particular, just against people being rewarded for breaking the law on grounds that they were making less money.
You are getting into this discussion late and I have edited/deleted posts, but from my comments you have an idea of what was said. It wasn't productive.
Stucklabour i am not going deep into the illegals issue here. What i am saying is, that if some members sympathise with the illegals, that is perfectly fine with me, you may be more humanitarian than i am and you have a right to be. My point was, that being in the country illegally is considered more of an offence than a speeding violation not by you, or me, or anyone BUT by the US Govt.
Also just to let everyone know i am not pointing any fingers at anyone here. I dont know about you, but let me tell you why I came here. It was not money particularly that brought me here. It was the fact that inspite of doing an Engineering degree, jobs were almost impossible to come by. Inspite of being a BE from a Fairly decent Engineering college in India, i have had to work in conditions Far worse than some of the workers in that company would have to (and this was after holding a supervisor's position). My family could not afford to send me here to study outright, so we scrambled for loans and scholarships. That being done I changed professions to do a Master's in IT and completely change fields. My point is, i did all that by staying WELL under the umbrella of the law. I speak for the many many master's students who come here after studying in India and go thru faily poor student life conditions due to lack of money during college. Once again we did it the LEGAL way. We waited for our turns. You gave me a figure of $1/day that illegals make. I was making Indian Rs 4,500/month (after doing a 4 year bachelors in Engineering) which is abt $3.00/day. I also knew my batch mates making even less than that a month. So does that mean that if i came to the US illegally, i would be justified in doing so coz we were making really less money? Also while staying here, we were 3 roommates accompanied by 3 mice in our apartment and abt 2000 roaches coz the apartment was REALLY old. :) Even there i know lots of my batch mates who underwent similar and worse problems.
Please dont take my post the wrong way, i am sure there are many many more like me who have had it MUCH worse than i did. I dont want to bring my personal problems in public. But when i read things like, "lets put ourselves in their shoes" argument, i could not just sit back and and pretend like it is ok to break the law and actually be rewarded for it.
You are a moderator and by that right you may delete my post, but just to clear matters, i am not againt any community in particular, just against people being rewarded for breaking the law on grounds that they were making less money.
bobzibub
07-08 12:13 AM
It gets interesting. Doesn't it? Even if the court agrees that this is a fiasco and would like to compensate the beneficiaries by allowing us to file for 485, it would be in direct violation of the law that " there must be a number available on the day of filing ".We don't have any numbers. Do we? My point is, will a judicial system go out of the box and allow us to file when there are no visa numbers available? The only way is get numbers and make every one file and the only way for that is to undo what the USCIS has done in the last 2 weeks of June. Just my thoughts. I am ready to take anything positive out of this because I have least hopes pegged on the law suit.
If there must be a number at the day of filing, who's responsibility is it to manage that then? The applicant's? I filed my eb-485 based upon *their* indication that there were numbers available. I relied upon them in good faith that there were. Now I understand that they did their best to use them up as soon as they issued the visa bulletin--probably because the July 485s would not be at the higher fee schedule.
I think a judge would have no option but to allow the filings. It is not that allowing the 485s to stand would break the "numbers must be available" law. That law has already been broken, when they put Cs all over the visa bulletin.
Cheers,
-b
If there must be a number at the day of filing, who's responsibility is it to manage that then? The applicant's? I filed my eb-485 based upon *their* indication that there were numbers available. I relied upon them in good faith that there were. Now I understand that they did their best to use them up as soon as they issued the visa bulletin--probably because the July 485s would not be at the higher fee schedule.
I think a judge would have no option but to allow the filings. It is not that allowing the 485s to stand would break the "numbers must be available" law. That law has already been broken, when they put Cs all over the visa bulletin.
Cheers,
-b
more...
psaxena
02-09 10:13 AM
Your transaction ID for this payment is: 32R78275M69540623.
donated $50
I will be in India around that time so cannot attend the campaign in person.
All the best to IV .. hope we get the justice ASAP.
donated $50
I will be in India around that time so cannot attend the campaign in person.
All the best to IV .. hope we get the justice ASAP.
2010 jake gyllenhaal natalie portman dating. Jude Law amp; Natalie Portman
glus
05-23 12:01 PM
This is awesome, glus. Thanks again for putting these fax numbers together.
No problem...I think fax can be a strong messages since it is a hard copy and it has greater chances to get read quicker than e-mails.. Please take some time and fax them. Fax takes a minute to send if the line is not busy. Keep trying and fax them.
No problem...I think fax can be a strong messages since it is a hard copy and it has greater chances to get read quicker than e-mails.. Please take some time and fax them. Fax takes a minute to send if the line is not busy. Keep trying and fax them.
more...
Prashant
07-10 10:30 AM
A shipment of 100 Blooms of Peruvian Lilies, ProFlowers order# EGONZA0*****, was delivered by FedEx for Emilio Gonzalez at the requested address of
20 Massachusetts Avenue, NW ,
Washington, DC 20529
on 7/10/2007.
20 Massachusetts Avenue, NW ,
Washington, DC 20529
on 7/10/2007.
hair Jake Gyllenhaal reportedly
rdehar
04-30 01:00 PM
Are we going to see the bulletin move to 2002,2003,2004,2005 ? in the next year .. wow its backed up 7 yrs..
Any realistic numbers how many EB3 India pending cases are there with PDs in each of 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004 ...
Anyone know any links, USCIS keeps on posting some data all the time.
Any realistic numbers how many EB3 India pending cases are there with PDs in each of 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004 ...
Anyone know any links, USCIS keeps on posting some data all the time.
more...
pani_6
09-09 09:12 PM
Assume that we convert to EB2 from next week..how long would it take to get to the I-485 stage.??..given an ideal scenario of no audits..PERM 3-6 months and I-1140 can we expidite??. in 15 days..
Please help with answers..:)
Please help with answers..:)
hot Natalie Portman#39;s child will
sledge_hammer
02-12 12:33 PM
I never claimed I'm going to refrain from going ballistic with words when insults are hurled at me! Maintaining high moral standards and bad language usage doesn't always have to be mutually exclusive. Your logic is waaaayyyyyy flawed if you think they are, my friend!
Coming to your point about F1 status, I can speak for myself that I did come to the US with the intention of going back. I was offered a job while I was still in school and I changed my mind only then. My statement earlier is not conveying my intentions clearly.
It is also true that if USCIS needed to enforce that students are requried to go back to their home country after school, then they should not issue a COS with the H-1B approval, forcing the student to re-enter.
Many of your posts are sensible but you use language which does not befit your self-imposed imaginary high standards. Anyways, the quoted statement itself shows moral contradictions and you have misrepresented your intentions when you went to the consulate. F1 is a non-immigrant visa with the underlying implication that you return to your home country. Please get off your high horse.
Coming to your point about F1 status, I can speak for myself that I did come to the US with the intention of going back. I was offered a job while I was still in school and I changed my mind only then. My statement earlier is not conveying my intentions clearly.
It is also true that if USCIS needed to enforce that students are requried to go back to their home country after school, then they should not issue a COS with the H-1B approval, forcing the student to re-enter.
Many of your posts are sensible but you use language which does not befit your self-imposed imaginary high standards. Anyways, the quoted statement itself shows moral contradictions and you have misrepresented your intentions when you went to the consulate. F1 is a non-immigrant visa with the underlying implication that you return to your home country. Please get off your high horse.
more...
house Portman will play Jane Foster.
yetanotherguyinline
11-17 05:55 PM
Done, good luck.
tattoo Natalie Portman has confessed
bingl
08-21 04:41 AM
Which service center??? NSC or TSC ?
RD - 16 th August
ND- 1 oct
NSC
RD - 16 th August
ND- 1 oct
NSC
more...
pictures Jake gyllenhaal natalie portman dating images
surabhi
04-23 05:18 PM
There is moral obligation too. Whenever you hire H-1s make sure most of them have dreams to get GC and settle down. Dont take risks in such a ways their dreams get shattered because of poor business practices. just to hire people dont run in your businesses on losses and in turn force yourself to shut down the business.
I think there is difference of opinion here. Since there is chance here that the thread is frequented by current and would-be employers I will try to articulate once again.
1. H1B is a legitimate business expense. It should be factored in as such by the employers.
2. Same is case with GC. But given the fact tht after I-140 it becomes portable, it is perfectly ethical in my opinon to ask employee to put up the expense.
3. H1B or not, employment is at will in US. USICS granting 3 year H1B does not imply employee is bound for 3 years either in letter or spirit of law.
4. Unless the business produces IPR or the employee is in position to lure away exisitng clientele, non-compete doesnt hold water. Employers should refrain from using non-compete as scare tactic.
5. As a corollary to point #3, having term around employment in lieu of h1b processing is illegal. The point of lost business because of employee left doesnt hold good. Employers can only claim non-compete or non-solicitation if the case is geniune. Lost business because employee left will never be upheld.
6. Unless doing revenue sharing (80-20 etc), it is illegal to withold , not pay wages.
7. If employee requests running payroll while not on project in revenue sharing mode ( see #6 above) it should be on cost to employee including employer contribution of taxes. this is indeed a favor to employee.
8. If business needs to let go an employee and employee wants to continue for immigration reasons, it should be on cost to employee including employer contribution of taxes. this is indeed a favor to employee.
I think there is difference of opinion here. Since there is chance here that the thread is frequented by current and would-be employers I will try to articulate once again.
1. H1B is a legitimate business expense. It should be factored in as such by the employers.
2. Same is case with GC. But given the fact tht after I-140 it becomes portable, it is perfectly ethical in my opinon to ask employee to put up the expense.
3. H1B or not, employment is at will in US. USICS granting 3 year H1B does not imply employee is bound for 3 years either in letter or spirit of law.
4. Unless the business produces IPR or the employee is in position to lure away exisitng clientele, non-compete doesnt hold water. Employers should refrain from using non-compete as scare tactic.
5. As a corollary to point #3, having term around employment in lieu of h1b processing is illegal. The point of lost business because of employee left doesnt hold good. Employers can only claim non-compete or non-solicitation if the case is geniune. Lost business because employee left will never be upheld.
6. Unless doing revenue sharing (80-20 etc), it is illegal to withold , not pay wages.
7. If employee requests running payroll while not on project in revenue sharing mode ( see #6 above) it should be on cost to employee including employer contribution of taxes. this is indeed a favor to employee.
8. If business needs to let go an employee and employee wants to continue for immigration reasons, it should be on cost to employee including employer contribution of taxes. this is indeed a favor to employee.
dresses natalie portman ballet
grupak
12-16 10:47 AM
Been in the US since 1998, have an EB-2 PD of 2001, have played by the rules all along. Still no GC... And, the dates are going back to 2000 from the new year.. I've lost hopes...
I'm pretty close to getting clinical depression because of this game played by USCIS, Labor Dept, FBI and my own bad luck.
SKILL bill, OMNIBUS, etc. comes and goes. IV does seem to be doing things to lobby for the community, but let's face one reality. Like a news article said, no one in congress or senate wants to touch immigration even with a long pole until 2009.
The US has been very good to me (other than the GC part), more than my home country (India) which is why I'm still here.
Have invested too much of time in this country to just pack up and go. Just curious if any of you feel this way? How do you handle such depressing feelings?
The situation is depressing but I don't intent to accept it laying back. I want to fight it. Years from now looking back I will be happy that I did what I could to fight it.
IV gives me the framework to fight effectively.
I'm pretty close to getting clinical depression because of this game played by USCIS, Labor Dept, FBI and my own bad luck.
SKILL bill, OMNIBUS, etc. comes and goes. IV does seem to be doing things to lobby for the community, but let's face one reality. Like a news article said, no one in congress or senate wants to touch immigration even with a long pole until 2009.
The US has been very good to me (other than the GC part), more than my home country (India) which is why I'm still here.
Have invested too much of time in this country to just pack up and go. Just curious if any of you feel this way? How do you handle such depressing feelings?
The situation is depressing but I don't intent to accept it laying back. I want to fight it. Years from now looking back I will be happy that I did what I could to fight it.
IV gives me the framework to fight effectively.
more...
makeup Jake Gyllenhaal: Natalie
jung.lee
03-25 05:08 PM
You will get it this Calendar Year. Trust me.
Basis for this "trust", please?
Basis for this "trust", please?
girlfriend Natalie Portman wowed the
waitnwatch
06-20 01:21 AM
I have a fundamental question here. What exactly has to happen to actually say that the CIR has died? Will the house have to vote and kill it? I guess there are no legal time lines for a bill to lapse - or is there one? Does the bill automatically die when the present congress' term ends?
Could anybody more knowledgeable than me throw some light.
Could anybody more knowledgeable than me throw some light.
hairstyles Jake Gyllenhaal#39;s Dating
mygoodluck
08-14 11:57 AM
^bump^
any updates where last date stands for NSC to TSC transfer cases?
any updates where last date stands for NSC to TSC transfer cases?
delhiguy
07-07 08:53 AM
Please go back .Why wait for the change in law .No one is stopping you . Dont discourage
I am not discouraging , i said "i wish i am proven wrong"
Even Attorney Khanna said the same.
I am not discouraging , i said "i wish i am proven wrong"
Even Attorney Khanna said the same.
rssb
11-17 04:29 PM
Done
No comments:
Post a Comment