Blog Feeds
07-02 04:30 PM
On June 25, President Obama met with a bipartisan group of 30 key legislators beginning a dialogue that he hopes will lead to comprehensive immigration reform in 2009 or early in 2010. Among the topics discussed were border security, family reunification and reform of the outdated quota system. Following the meeting, the President stated, �but what I�m encouraged by is that after all the overheated rhetoric and the occasional demagoguery on all sides around this issue, we�ve got a responsible set of leaders sitting around the table who want to actively get something done and not put it off until...
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/carlshusterman/2009/06/president-obama-and-immigration-reform.html)
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/carlshusterman/2009/06/president-obama-and-immigration-reform.html)
wallpaper Screenshot of Anime Girls
Macaca
11-01 05:36 PM
Democrats Again Look to Change GOP Motions; After Defeats, Leaders Studying Ways to Neuter Republicans' Motions to Recommit (http://www.rollcall.com/issues/53_52/news/20763-1.html) By Jennifer Yachnin | ROLL CALL STAFF, October 31, 2007
Exasperated over Republicans' continued efforts - and occasional success - in thwarting the House floor schedule, Democratic leaders acknowledged Tuesday they are reviewing the chamber's rules to determine how to curb the minority's ability to put up roadblocks at critical moments in the legislative process.
House Rules Chairwoman Louise Slaughter (D) said the committee's Democrats have begun meeting with both current and former Parliamentarians to discuss the chamber's rules and potential changes.
The New York lawmaker said those discussions have focused in part on the motion to recommit - one of the few procedural items in the minority party's toolbox that allows them to offer legislative alternatives when a bill hits the floor, and that Republicans have used to force difficult votes on Democrats or prompted legislation to be pulled from the floor - as well as other procedures, which she declined to detail.
Slaughter said no timeline exists for the review or potential alterations, however. "Nothing is imminent. We want to take our time and do it right," she said.
But one Democratic lawmaker, who asked not to be identified, said the majority is considering neutering the motion-to-recommit process and converting it to little more than a last-chance amendment for the minority party.
Under current House rules, the minority's motion can effectively shelve legislation through minor alterations to the language of their motion - specifically designating for a bill to be returned to its committee "promptly," rather than the usual "forthwith."
Republican leaders have used that strategy to force Democrats to either vote against measures they would otherwise support or vote to kill their own bill. Earlier this month, the GOP used that procedure to target a bill governing federal wiretapping and surveillance programs, prompting Democrats to scrub an expected vote.
Another Democratic lawmaker, who also is familiar with discussions and asked not to be identified because of the sensitive nature of those conversations, said that is only one option under consideration.
"We don't want to limit the minority's ability to have legitimate motions to recommit," the Democrat said.
House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) railed against Republicans' use of that particular tactic at his weekly press conference Tuesday, echoing complaints Democrats have raised off-and-on since March.
"The Republicans continue to use the motion to recommit for political purposes, not substantive purposes. Substantive purposes would be trying to change policy. For the most part, what they do with their motions to recommit are not change policy, but try to construct difficult political votes for Members," Hoyer said. "We understand that. To some degree, we did that as well. So it is not surprising."
While Hoyer acknowledged that Democrats had at times employed the same approach in the past, he criticized Republicans for using the method 22 times thus far in the 110th Congress, asserting that Democrats used the tactic only four times between 1995 and 1998.
"This is a game. It is a relatively cynical game," Hoyer added. "That doesn't mean it is not an effective game and causes questions. So we are trying to deal with that."
Democrats earlier had sought to alter the House rules on motions to recommit in May - an unusual step, given that the chamber's rules are rarely reopened mid-session - but Republicans rebelled on the House floor, and Democratic leaders agreed to forgo the changes, at least temporarily.
Democratic leaders suggested in August that they planned to offer legislation on the House floor aimed at dissuading Republicans from offering contentious procedural amendments tied to such hot-button issues as immigration. At the same time, Democrats hoped to provide insulation to their own Members with a separate vote on those topics, but have yet to produce any such resolutions.
Republicans have succeeded in winning 21 motions to recommit - the majority of which would not shelve the legislation they amend - in the past 10 months, a point that President Bush praised in a Tuesday meeting at the White House with Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) and Minority Whip Roy Blunt (R-Mo.), according to a GOP aide.
"Republicans and Democrats alike have lived under the very same germaneness rules since 1822, and changing them won't solve the majority's inherent inability to govern," Boehner spokesman Brian Kennedy said. "This isn't a question of rules, it's one of competence."
Exasperated over Republicans' continued efforts - and occasional success - in thwarting the House floor schedule, Democratic leaders acknowledged Tuesday they are reviewing the chamber's rules to determine how to curb the minority's ability to put up roadblocks at critical moments in the legislative process.
House Rules Chairwoman Louise Slaughter (D) said the committee's Democrats have begun meeting with both current and former Parliamentarians to discuss the chamber's rules and potential changes.
The New York lawmaker said those discussions have focused in part on the motion to recommit - one of the few procedural items in the minority party's toolbox that allows them to offer legislative alternatives when a bill hits the floor, and that Republicans have used to force difficult votes on Democrats or prompted legislation to be pulled from the floor - as well as other procedures, which she declined to detail.
Slaughter said no timeline exists for the review or potential alterations, however. "Nothing is imminent. We want to take our time and do it right," she said.
But one Democratic lawmaker, who asked not to be identified, said the majority is considering neutering the motion-to-recommit process and converting it to little more than a last-chance amendment for the minority party.
Under current House rules, the minority's motion can effectively shelve legislation through minor alterations to the language of their motion - specifically designating for a bill to be returned to its committee "promptly," rather than the usual "forthwith."
Republican leaders have used that strategy to force Democrats to either vote against measures they would otherwise support or vote to kill their own bill. Earlier this month, the GOP used that procedure to target a bill governing federal wiretapping and surveillance programs, prompting Democrats to scrub an expected vote.
Another Democratic lawmaker, who also is familiar with discussions and asked not to be identified because of the sensitive nature of those conversations, said that is only one option under consideration.
"We don't want to limit the minority's ability to have legitimate motions to recommit," the Democrat said.
House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) railed against Republicans' use of that particular tactic at his weekly press conference Tuesday, echoing complaints Democrats have raised off-and-on since March.
"The Republicans continue to use the motion to recommit for political purposes, not substantive purposes. Substantive purposes would be trying to change policy. For the most part, what they do with their motions to recommit are not change policy, but try to construct difficult political votes for Members," Hoyer said. "We understand that. To some degree, we did that as well. So it is not surprising."
While Hoyer acknowledged that Democrats had at times employed the same approach in the past, he criticized Republicans for using the method 22 times thus far in the 110th Congress, asserting that Democrats used the tactic only four times between 1995 and 1998.
"This is a game. It is a relatively cynical game," Hoyer added. "That doesn't mean it is not an effective game and causes questions. So we are trying to deal with that."
Democrats earlier had sought to alter the House rules on motions to recommit in May - an unusual step, given that the chamber's rules are rarely reopened mid-session - but Republicans rebelled on the House floor, and Democratic leaders agreed to forgo the changes, at least temporarily.
Democratic leaders suggested in August that they planned to offer legislation on the House floor aimed at dissuading Republicans from offering contentious procedural amendments tied to such hot-button issues as immigration. At the same time, Democrats hoped to provide insulation to their own Members with a separate vote on those topics, but have yet to produce any such resolutions.
Republicans have succeeded in winning 21 motions to recommit - the majority of which would not shelve the legislation they amend - in the past 10 months, a point that President Bush praised in a Tuesday meeting at the White House with Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) and Minority Whip Roy Blunt (R-Mo.), according to a GOP aide.
"Republicans and Democrats alike have lived under the very same germaneness rules since 1822, and changing them won't solve the majority's inherent inability to govern," Boehner spokesman Brian Kennedy said. "This isn't a question of rules, it's one of competence."
alex77
09-01 07:59 PM
No change at TSC. NSC moved by 2 days.
http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.5af9bb95919f35e66f614176543f6d1a/?vgnextoid=21f2d9bbf0cb4110VgnVCM1000004718190aRCR D
http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.5af9bb95919f35e66f614176543f6d1a/?vgnextoid=21f2d9bbf0cb4110VgnVCM1000004718190aRCR D
2011 Download Girls Wallpaper
rajeshj_18
12-29 12:32 PM
Hi,
If a H1B visa holder is in US, i know it is possible to transfer H1B to a different comapny in US. But can anyone help me understand if the same is possible if the person having the H1B visa is in india currently?
Details
Using H1B visa, the person has worked in US for first 3 years. Now the person has applied for H1B extension and still the petition papers have not yet come. After applying extension the person has gone back to India. The person's current company is hesitating to send him back to US.
Question
After getting the petition papers, can one transfer H1B visa to a different company staying in india itself and them come to US via new comapany?
Thanks in advance.
If a H1B visa holder is in US, i know it is possible to transfer H1B to a different comapny in US. But can anyone help me understand if the same is possible if the person having the H1B visa is in india currently?
Details
Using H1B visa, the person has worked in US for first 3 years. Now the person has applied for H1B extension and still the petition papers have not yet come. After applying extension the person has gone back to India. The person's current company is hesitating to send him back to US.
Question
After getting the petition papers, can one transfer H1B visa to a different company staying in india itself and them come to US via new comapany?
Thanks in advance.
more...
Blog Feeds
09-02 10:10 PM
Pew confirms what we've already assumed is happening. The number of illegally present immigrants has dropped 8% since 2007. The number is now about 11 million, down from peaking at 12 million. The annual migration of illegally present immigrants has dropped from about 850,000 a year a few years ago to just 300,000 a year today. Why? Probably a combination of a lousy economy and much more vigorous enforcement, particularly at the border. Here is the report for your viewing pleasure: pew hispanic study 08-2010 -
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2010/09/pew-study-illegal-immigraton-down-sharply.html)
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2010/09/pew-study-illegal-immigraton-down-sharply.html)
ramzi1978
12-18 10:56 PM
Hello,
I have an "intend to deny" on my GC as EB1 that I got by applying myself as primary and wife as secondary. wife is on h1b and me on h4.we got EADs and if the GC is denied, we will lose the EAD.
I want to incorporate for several reasons hence i will be using the EAD for that.
using EAD invalidates H4 ? but H4 is automatic status based on H1b .
My wife did not apply for GC as primary and me on secondary but we intend to that in 3 years when it becomes current as EB3.
I have an "intend to deny" on my GC as EB1 that I got by applying myself as primary and wife as secondary. wife is on h1b and me on h4.we got EADs and if the GC is denied, we will lose the EAD.
I want to incorporate for several reasons hence i will be using the EAD for that.
using EAD invalidates H4 ? but H4 is automatic status based on H1b .
My wife did not apply for GC as primary and me on secondary but we intend to that in 3 years when it becomes current as EB3.
more...
hyddsnr
05-21 06:25 PM
One of my close friends got RFE on I-485. He is working for the Company A, but his labour and I-140 applied in June 07 from company B as substitution. Currently his I-140 got approved. But he got query as mentioned below. Can some one send sample letter .
You must submit a currently dated letter from your intended permanent employer, describing your present job duties and position in the organization, you proffered position (if different from your current date), the date you began employment and the offered salary or wage. This letter should be in the original and signed by an executive or officer of the organization who is authorized to make or confirm an offere of permanent
employment. The letter must also indicate whether the terms and conditions of your employment-based visa petition continue to exist.
You must submit a currently dated letter from your intended permanent employer, describing your present job duties and position in the organization, you proffered position (if different from your current date), the date you began employment and the offered salary or wage. This letter should be in the original and signed by an executive or officer of the organization who is authorized to make or confirm an offere of permanent
employment. The letter must also indicate whether the terms and conditions of your employment-based visa petition continue to exist.
2010 hair Cute Anime Girl Wallpaper
brat15
08-01 02:28 PM
This was quoted on Numbers USA site -
Sen. Robert Menendez (D-N.J.) is still holding hostage E-Verify reauthorization legislation in the Senate until he gets 500,000 additional permanent foreign worker visas. These are simple "skilled" visas, where an individual doesn't need any specialized training or education (other than two years of college). As such, the legislation would keep a half-million Americans out of work. Senate leadership is considering taking up the E-Verify reauthorization bill today before members depart for summer recess, so Senators are negotiating with Menendez in order to reach an accommodation.
Is there any direction from Members on this.
Sen. Robert Menendez (D-N.J.) is still holding hostage E-Verify reauthorization legislation in the Senate until he gets 500,000 additional permanent foreign worker visas. These are simple "skilled" visas, where an individual doesn't need any specialized training or education (other than two years of college). As such, the legislation would keep a half-million Americans out of work. Senate leadership is considering taking up the E-Verify reauthorization bill today before members depart for summer recess, so Senators are negotiating with Menendez in order to reach an accommodation.
Is there any direction from Members on this.
more...
nhfirefighter13
June 1st, 2005, 07:11 PM
Hi Tracey,
Looks like you're off to a good start. The white flower is slightly out of focus. I'm not familiar with the Easyshare but I'm guessing you might have been inside of its minimum focal distance.
The first baby photo also seems to be a little on the soft side but I can't tell if it's due to camera shake or just from resizing the image.
Welcome to the site.
Chris
Looks like you're off to a good start. The white flower is slightly out of focus. I'm not familiar with the Easyshare but I'm guessing you might have been inside of its minimum focal distance.
The first baby photo also seems to be a little on the soft side but I can't tell if it's due to camera shake or just from resizing the image.
Welcome to the site.
Chris