JunRN
07-16 11:43 PM
LC filing- No
I-140 filing and onwards- Yes
Thanks!!! This is what I know as well. Anyway, different lawyers have different advise. I just need to confirm some information that I got from my lawyer.
I-140 filing and onwards- Yes
Thanks!!! This is what I know as well. Anyway, different lawyers have different advise. I just need to confirm some information that I got from my lawyer.
wallpaper Tags: funny jokes, jokes,
GCA
05-18 06:04 PM
Since the queue for EB3 India is very long, and if many EB3 India people change over to EB2, that will slow down EB2 India and this is what the May 2011 Visa Bulletin also says.
But shouldnt this make EB3 India go faster?
Then why do we see slow movement in EB3 India?
EB3 is currently in mid 2002. All EB3 filers till 2003 and may be early 2004 have waited enough and don't want to port at this time. till mid 2003, most of them received the GC during 2007 From my perspective, I don't even care if it ever comes. Couple of more years on EAD and I am set to go back. Having said that, I will still take the gc anytime it comes and if comes:). Just not after it.
EB3 to EB2 porting is more done by filers from 2004 thru' 2007 and for a good reason too. ( they will not get in a decade if they stay in EB3 unless recapture or other bills goes thru').
So to answer the question, porting will not easy the traffic until the date moves to end of 2003, then you can see some improvement as some of the original EB3's have made a smart choice and probably weree citizens by then.
But shouldnt this make EB3 India go faster?
Then why do we see slow movement in EB3 India?
EB3 is currently in mid 2002. All EB3 filers till 2003 and may be early 2004 have waited enough and don't want to port at this time. till mid 2003, most of them received the GC during 2007 From my perspective, I don't even care if it ever comes. Couple of more years on EAD and I am set to go back. Having said that, I will still take the gc anytime it comes and if comes:). Just not after it.
EB3 to EB2 porting is more done by filers from 2004 thru' 2007 and for a good reason too. ( they will not get in a decade if they stay in EB3 unless recapture or other bills goes thru').
So to answer the question, porting will not easy the traffic until the date moves to end of 2003, then you can see some improvement as some of the original EB3's have made a smart choice and probably weree citizens by then.
chapper
08-02 01:29 PM
I sent money order for some applications and personal checks for some.
Money Order can be tracked thru' ur bank - call them and ask how. I did and they gave a 1-800 number to call and track - it is an automated system. My money order was thru' Chase Bank
Money Order can be tracked thru' ur bank - call them and ask how. I did and they gave a 1-800 number to call and track - it is an automated system. My money order was thru' Chase Bank
2011 Cat riding invisible bike
a1b2c3
10-02 11:22 AM
SUMMARY: In accordance with the Privacy Act of 1974, the Department of Homeland Security is giving notice that it proposes to consolidate
three legacy record systems: Justice/INS-013 INS Computer Linked
Application Information Management System (CLAIMS) (67 FR 64132 October 17, 2002), Justice/INS-031 Redesigned Naturalization Application Casework System (RNACS) (67 FR 20996 April 29, 2002), and Justice/INS-033 I-551 Renewal Program Temporary Sticker Issuance I-90 Manifest System (SIIMS) (66 FR 6673 January 22, 2001) into one Department of Homeland Security/United States Citizenship and Immigration Services system of records notice titled, United States Citizenship and Immigration Services Benefits Information System. Categories of individuals, categories of records, and the routine uses of these legacy system of records notices have been consolidated and updated to better reflect the Department's immigration petition and application information record systems. This system will be included in the Department's inventory of record systems.
DATES: Written comments must be submitted on or before October 29,
2008. This new system will be effective October 29, 2008.
__________________
three legacy record systems: Justice/INS-013 INS Computer Linked
Application Information Management System (CLAIMS) (67 FR 64132 October 17, 2002), Justice/INS-031 Redesigned Naturalization Application Casework System (RNACS) (67 FR 20996 April 29, 2002), and Justice/INS-033 I-551 Renewal Program Temporary Sticker Issuance I-90 Manifest System (SIIMS) (66 FR 6673 January 22, 2001) into one Department of Homeland Security/United States Citizenship and Immigration Services system of records notice titled, United States Citizenship and Immigration Services Benefits Information System. Categories of individuals, categories of records, and the routine uses of these legacy system of records notices have been consolidated and updated to better reflect the Department's immigration petition and application information record systems. This system will be included in the Department's inventory of record systems.
DATES: Written comments must be submitted on or before October 29,
2008. This new system will be effective October 29, 2008.
__________________
more...
validIV
02-03 10:40 AM
I have the same A# on my I-140 receipt, I-485 receipt and EAD. But my EAD and I-485 uses my 2nd name as my middle initial whereas it is correct on my I-140.
conchshell
08-22 08:10 PM
Got approval emails on August 14th, received approval notice by mail on August 20th, and finally got the physical green cards by mail today.:)
more...
gimme_GC2006
07-31 06:15 PM
thank you..I hope everything goes well. Hopefully will get greened this time :)
2010 Funny Cat Officer
CRAZYMONK
04-07 11:49 AM
Hi,
I signed an agreement with my employer who is holding my H1 visa. Agreement is saying I should not work for same client for 1 year. While I am on project, client is offering me pertinent job. My employer is saying I should not accept the employment offer from client. If I ignore my employer and accepts the offer from my client, I am going to be in trouble?
Thank you very much.
Regards,
Venkat.
Which state you are in?
I signed an agreement with my employer who is holding my H1 visa. Agreement is saying I should not work for same client for 1 year. While I am on project, client is offering me pertinent job. My employer is saying I should not accept the employment offer from client. If I ignore my employer and accepts the offer from my client, I am going to be in trouble?
Thank you very much.
Regards,
Venkat.
Which state you are in?
more...
uslegals
10-18 04:25 PM
Check with the attorney who has filed for 140. I guess the norm is that attorney also get RN and approval copies.
hair FUNNY Cats Video!
ardnahc
08-14 12:30 PM
https://egov.uscis.gov/cris/processTimesDisplay.do
NSC - I485 - Sep 15 2007
TSC - I485 - Aug 30 2007
Cheers,
Ardnahc
NSC - I485 - Sep 15 2007
TSC - I485 - Aug 30 2007
Cheers,
Ardnahc
more...
sobers
06-23 04:29 PM
We ought to contact lawmakers and make them see the plight of legal immigrants. There is no other way about it....even if we don't have a vote now, we have a voice...that of a LEGAL immigrant (and a future Citizen!). Each one of you find out where the meeting is going to be, and make a point to attend and atleast ask one question- It has been said that America is a nation of laws and a nation of immigrants- so Congressman, while you're working against ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS, what are you doing to help LEGAL IMMIGRANTS??? (Suggestions welcome) ...And then personalize your story with your personal troubles...backlog, retrogression, endless waits obeying the law...and not getting a dime in benefits...
See what NumbersUSA folks are doing...
======
Roy Beck, President, www.NumbersUSA.org Friday 23JUN06
More Good News ... House leaders emboldened by YOU & pushing for enforcement-only bill
SENATE BILL FOR AMNESTY AND MASSIVE IMMIGRATION INCREASE IS DEALT MORE BLOWS .......
....... Speaker of House is totally impressed by citizen pressure at a town hall meeting!!
Wait until you see the report below from a Hill staffer of the Speaker's comments in a closed session of congressmen/women.
As I predicted to you in my email Monday morning, the terrible Senate bill has further bogged down this week as U.S. House leaders have become increasingly emboldened by you citizens' phone calls, faxes, office visits and attendance at town hall meetings.
Suddenly this week, Speaker of the House Hastert announced that he wouldn't be immediately appointing House negotiators to hammer out a compromise with Senators in a joint Conference Committee. Rather, he announced a series of public hearings to be held across the country over July and August to get public feedback on the provisions of the Senate bill.
Hahahahaha.
Maybe the 63 hidden provisions in the Senate mystery bill that our Rosemary Jenks uncovered and exposed at the National Press Club (but with very little media interest) will get proper vetting from the American people.
This is such terrible news for the Kennedy/McCain/Bush open-borders folks who had hoped to ram their bill into law without the public truly discovering what was in it.
Even better, Speaker Hastert announced principles that should undergird House action and they were all about enforcement and nothing about increasing legal immigration or guestworkers.
WHAT PERSUADED HASTERT TO DO THIS?
Rep. Hastert (R-IL) has always voted very well but has not been very helpful as a leader. He has been much too eager to please the White House when it asks for favors and to help out the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.
Nonetheless, he has often ended up helping block bad stuff in the House and was a big help in the end in passing the ban on drivers licenses for illegal aliens. But his behavior this week represents a whole new side of Hastert. And it is pretty apparent why he changed.
Check out this email from a Republican staffer to Rosemary describing the closed-door session Hastert had with Republican Members of the House.
Rosemary --
You may already have heard this, but it was too good not to pass along. In GOP conference this morning, Hastert started talking about an event he went to with several hundred of his constituents. He went on and on about this was in Illinois, in the heartland of the country, Illinois wasn't a border state -- and every question but one from his constituents was about immigration.
He then said this proves it's a national issue and not just a border state issue and it is really important. (Hastert, our fearless leader, moonlights as Captian Obvious.)
Technically everything that goes on in conference is supposed to stay confidential but my boss was going on about it and how he thought the meeting with his constituents made a huge difference to Hastert.
I thought you'd find it encouraging that all the hard work your minions are doing about bugging the hell out of these guys at public events is working.
You're outgunned, outspent, and outlobbied -- but you're winning. I am now officially cautiously optimistic.
-- (from a House GOP staffer)
As the staffer knows, we have been pushing all of you to try to attend any meeting where your Members of Congress can be found so you can ask questions, hold a sign or just applaud other people who say what you believe about immigration.
More and more of you are doing this.
Now, the entire nation owes a debt of gratitude to those northern Illinois voters who showed up at that meeting and so impressed the Speaker of the House!
We will continue to inform you on your Action Buffet corkboard every time we know your Senators or your Representative are going to be appearing somewhere in your area.
Please keep checking your corkboard at:
www.NumbersUSA.com/actionbuffet
Also, please keep telling us if you know of a meeting or appearance that appears to be something we may not know about. The only way we can inform everybody in a district about an event is if somebody tells us about the event ahead of time.
As for the hearings, some of your NumbersUSA staff have already been invited to testify. We will be sending notices to you about when and where they will occur so that many of you can attend and reinforce the position of no amnesty and reduced total immigration numbers.
Finally, I just have to note that after the Senate passed its monstrosity in late May, we got a ton of emails from people saying they were giving up and that no hope was left. You may recall that we continued to tell you that we believed we could beat this thing if we all kept fighting. Well, most of you kept fighting. Even I am a little surprised at how well things are working out at the moment. But I have no doubt that the only factor is the never-ending drum-beat of citizen complaint that Members are hearing.
Thanks for all you do,
-- ROY
www.NumbersUSA.com/donation.html
Also, don't wait on emails from me. Keep up with what is happening in Congress on immigration by checking regularly on our NumbersUSA home page:
www.NumbersUSA.com
See what NumbersUSA folks are doing...
======
Roy Beck, President, www.NumbersUSA.org Friday 23JUN06
More Good News ... House leaders emboldened by YOU & pushing for enforcement-only bill
SENATE BILL FOR AMNESTY AND MASSIVE IMMIGRATION INCREASE IS DEALT MORE BLOWS .......
....... Speaker of House is totally impressed by citizen pressure at a town hall meeting!!
Wait until you see the report below from a Hill staffer of the Speaker's comments in a closed session of congressmen/women.
As I predicted to you in my email Monday morning, the terrible Senate bill has further bogged down this week as U.S. House leaders have become increasingly emboldened by you citizens' phone calls, faxes, office visits and attendance at town hall meetings.
Suddenly this week, Speaker of the House Hastert announced that he wouldn't be immediately appointing House negotiators to hammer out a compromise with Senators in a joint Conference Committee. Rather, he announced a series of public hearings to be held across the country over July and August to get public feedback on the provisions of the Senate bill.
Hahahahaha.
Maybe the 63 hidden provisions in the Senate mystery bill that our Rosemary Jenks uncovered and exposed at the National Press Club (but with very little media interest) will get proper vetting from the American people.
This is such terrible news for the Kennedy/McCain/Bush open-borders folks who had hoped to ram their bill into law without the public truly discovering what was in it.
Even better, Speaker Hastert announced principles that should undergird House action and they were all about enforcement and nothing about increasing legal immigration or guestworkers.
WHAT PERSUADED HASTERT TO DO THIS?
Rep. Hastert (R-IL) has always voted very well but has not been very helpful as a leader. He has been much too eager to please the White House when it asks for favors and to help out the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.
Nonetheless, he has often ended up helping block bad stuff in the House and was a big help in the end in passing the ban on drivers licenses for illegal aliens. But his behavior this week represents a whole new side of Hastert. And it is pretty apparent why he changed.
Check out this email from a Republican staffer to Rosemary describing the closed-door session Hastert had with Republican Members of the House.
Rosemary --
You may already have heard this, but it was too good not to pass along. In GOP conference this morning, Hastert started talking about an event he went to with several hundred of his constituents. He went on and on about this was in Illinois, in the heartland of the country, Illinois wasn't a border state -- and every question but one from his constituents was about immigration.
He then said this proves it's a national issue and not just a border state issue and it is really important. (Hastert, our fearless leader, moonlights as Captian Obvious.)
Technically everything that goes on in conference is supposed to stay confidential but my boss was going on about it and how he thought the meeting with his constituents made a huge difference to Hastert.
I thought you'd find it encouraging that all the hard work your minions are doing about bugging the hell out of these guys at public events is working.
You're outgunned, outspent, and outlobbied -- but you're winning. I am now officially cautiously optimistic.
-- (from a House GOP staffer)
As the staffer knows, we have been pushing all of you to try to attend any meeting where your Members of Congress can be found so you can ask questions, hold a sign or just applaud other people who say what you believe about immigration.
More and more of you are doing this.
Now, the entire nation owes a debt of gratitude to those northern Illinois voters who showed up at that meeting and so impressed the Speaker of the House!
We will continue to inform you on your Action Buffet corkboard every time we know your Senators or your Representative are going to be appearing somewhere in your area.
Please keep checking your corkboard at:
www.NumbersUSA.com/actionbuffet
Also, please keep telling us if you know of a meeting or appearance that appears to be something we may not know about. The only way we can inform everybody in a district about an event is if somebody tells us about the event ahead of time.
As for the hearings, some of your NumbersUSA staff have already been invited to testify. We will be sending notices to you about when and where they will occur so that many of you can attend and reinforce the position of no amnesty and reduced total immigration numbers.
Finally, I just have to note that after the Senate passed its monstrosity in late May, we got a ton of emails from people saying they were giving up and that no hope was left. You may recall that we continued to tell you that we believed we could beat this thing if we all kept fighting. Well, most of you kept fighting. Even I am a little surprised at how well things are working out at the moment. But I have no doubt that the only factor is the never-ending drum-beat of citizen complaint that Members are hearing.
Thanks for all you do,
-- ROY
www.NumbersUSA.com/donation.html
Also, don't wait on emails from me. Keep up with what is happening in Congress on immigration by checking regularly on our NumbersUSA home page:
www.NumbersUSA.com
hot Funny Cats Part One
pd_recapturing
09-24 10:06 AM
My app was received by NSC on 24th July and looks like NSC is processing August apps. Even, if my app got transferred to TSC, it should have been processed by now according to USCIS report on RN processing. I am not sure, what to do ?
more...
house 2011 best funny Cats pictures
manfrmind
03-30 01:09 PM
I am not 100% sure about this issue but� I do see couple of emails from attorneys regarding denying port of entry in NJ airport. If you come across of any cases please share.
tattoo of every funny cat site on
chris
10-17 04:37 AM
Hi Kitiara,
I get asked to make quite a few banners for different companies and through trial and error I have found that once you have created your images in photoshop and saved them at the lowest file size as possible without losing any quality, open the images up in fireworks and create the animation there using frames as I find fireworks optimises gifs muchbetter than photoshop,
(And believe me it hurts me to say that as i'm a big photoshop fan).
I'm sure your aware also that the more frames you use the bigger the file size is going to be so its always best to use the least ammount of frames needed and adjust the frame speed of each frame to get the required effect.
By the way I love looking at the images you create when you post them do you have a tutorial website where I could create one for my nickname of The Bandit:bandit:
I get asked to make quite a few banners for different companies and through trial and error I have found that once you have created your images in photoshop and saved them at the lowest file size as possible without losing any quality, open the images up in fireworks and create the animation there using frames as I find fireworks optimises gifs muchbetter than photoshop,
(And believe me it hurts me to say that as i'm a big photoshop fan).
I'm sure your aware also that the more frames you use the bigger the file size is going to be so its always best to use the least ammount of frames needed and adjust the frame speed of each frame to get the required effect.
By the way I love looking at the images you create when you post them do you have a tutorial website where I could create one for my nickname of The Bandit:bandit:
more...
pictures Cats Resting middot; Funny Cat
GreenCardLegion
03-01 05:26 PM
I am in the same boat as you. I landed in Sep 2006 and have valid Canadian PR till Sep 2011. My 3 year expiry is nearing. And I am really confused with my EB3 India 2004 PD in retro. But also I have gotten married and not applied my wife on my Canadian PR at all. So that is another problem. I intend to voluntarily relinquish my Canadian PR status and then re-apply brand new with my wife this year as US H1B and GC process rules with USCIS is getting weirder by the day.
Also you can absolutely without any problem go and stay for next two years (730 days) before your first PR card expires even though you were out of Canada or were never resident there for first 3 years and retain your Canadian PR status. I know it for sure.
Also you can absolutely without any problem go and stay for next two years (730 days) before your first PR card expires even though you were out of Canada or were never resident there for first 3 years and retain your Canadian PR status. I know it for sure.
dresses part two of funny cats.
nk2006
07-04 04:00 PM
Another possible example here: I heard a case where one labor led to TWO green cards. My understanding this is not possible and might have happened because of the rush USCIS was approving cases.
A friend of mine got 485 approval on June 29th. He was not expecting it to be approved for a specific reason: his company applied his GC using a pre-approved labor. The original labor was with a differnet person who left the company after his 485 was pending for six months (during retrogession time). That person later joined a company and eventually got his 485 approved. Meanwhile the company applied for the I140 withdrawal and simultaneously went ahead applying for I140 and 485 for my friend (he played along since nothing worse going to happen to anyone; and he had a complicated visa situation). They were not hopeful of approval but suddenly they saw the approval on June 29th.
Who knows how many more irregularities happened there during last two weeks.
A friend of mine got 485 approval on June 29th. He was not expecting it to be approved for a specific reason: his company applied his GC using a pre-approved labor. The original labor was with a differnet person who left the company after his 485 was pending for six months (during retrogession time). That person later joined a company and eventually got his 485 approved. Meanwhile the company applied for the I140 withdrawal and simultaneously went ahead applying for I140 and 485 for my friend (he played along since nothing worse going to happen to anyone; and he had a complicated visa situation). They were not hopeful of approval but suddenly they saw the approval on June 29th.
Who knows how many more irregularities happened there during last two weeks.
more...
makeup funny cats video. funny cats
prom2
09-28 08:18 AM
Hi Everyone
I got an RFE for my I140 filed in September 2006. They asked me to show my W2 for 2006 and also show that the employer had the ability to pay the offered wage in case my W2 is less than the offered wage.
My W2 has 8k less than the offered wage. My company has not yet filed 2006 Taxes. Can you tell me whats the best thing to do? My employer has good revenue, but I guess he has been showing a net loss every year.
Please help me out. Tell me if any of you have gone through similar issues.
Thanks!
1) Find a good lawyer with experience in ability to pay issues.
2) The company should prove ability to pay your LC salary since PD.
3) Because you are currently working for them, and your salary is 8k below, they should prove they have been paying your salary (W2) and also ability to pay the extra 8K/yr.
4) If the company had losses in 2006, but their net current assets were over 8K, it is ok.
BTW, what is your PD?
It is just an opinion, not an advise, please consult a lawyer with experience.
Good luck.
I got an RFE for my I140 filed in September 2006. They asked me to show my W2 for 2006 and also show that the employer had the ability to pay the offered wage in case my W2 is less than the offered wage.
My W2 has 8k less than the offered wage. My company has not yet filed 2006 Taxes. Can you tell me whats the best thing to do? My employer has good revenue, but I guess he has been showing a net loss every year.
Please help me out. Tell me if any of you have gone through similar issues.
Thanks!
1) Find a good lawyer with experience in ability to pay issues.
2) The company should prove ability to pay your LC salary since PD.
3) Because you are currently working for them, and your salary is 8k below, they should prove they have been paying your salary (W2) and also ability to pay the extra 8K/yr.
4) If the company had losses in 2006, but their net current assets were over 8K, it is ok.
BTW, what is your PD?
It is just an opinion, not an advise, please consult a lawyer with experience.
Good luck.
girlfriend Cute cats | Funny Videos and
uma001
11-04 04:35 PM
From 1998 - till date, How many times EB3 priority dates were made current
hairstyles video very funny cats catz
beppenyc
03-20 08:15 PM
http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories.pl?ACCT=104&STORY=/www/story/03-20-2006/0004323801&EDATE=
Q Okay. My question is, since 9/11, one of the key things that we need
is immigration reform, including comprehensive immigration reform that is
right now in front of Senator Specter's committee in the Judiciary. There are
two principles I'm hoping that you would support: One, the good people, the
engineers, the PhDs, the doctors, the nurses, the people in the system who
have followed the rules, will go to the head of the line in any form of
immigration reform. That's Title IVz of the bill.
Secondly, the illegals who have not followed the rules -- I understand the
debate, I appreciate your statements about immigration reform, but isn't it
better that we know who they are, have them finger-printed and photographed,
and allow some form of 245I to come back so --
THE PRESIDENT: Tell people what that is. Tell people what 245I is.
Q Okay -- 245I is a partial amnesty program that expired back in 2001,
in fact, was going to be voted on on 9/11, unfortunately. But those -- it was
a small segment of the illegal population where they would pay the $1,000 fine
and, for example, coming in illegally, then marrying an American citizen,
could somehow legalize their status.
THE PRESIDENT: Okay. Let me give you some broad principles on
immigration reform as I see them. First of all, we do need to know who's
coming into our country and whether they're coming in illegally, or not
legally -- legally or not legally -- and whether they're coming in or going
out. And part of reforms after September the 11th was a better system of
finding out who's coming here.
Secondly, we have a big border between Texas and Mexico that's really hard
to enforce. We got to do everything we can to enforce the border,
particularly in the south. I mean, it's the place where people are pouring
across in order to find work. We have a situation in our own neighborhood
where there are way -- disparities are huge, and there are jobs in America
that people won't do. That's just a fact. I met an onion grower today at the
airport when I arrived, and he said, you got to help me find people that will
grow onions -- pluck them, or whatever you do with them, you know.
(Laughter.) There are jobs that just simply aren't getting done because
Americans won't do them. And yet, if you're making 50 cents an hour in
Mexico, and you can make a lot more in America, and you got mouths to feed,
you're going to come and try to find the work. It's a big border, of which --
across which people are coming to provide a living for their families.
Step one of any immigration policy is to enforce our border in practical
ways. We are spending additional resources to be able to use different
detection devices, unmanned UAVs, to help -- and expand Border Patrol, by the
way, expand the number of agents on the border, to make sure we're getting
them the tools necessary to stop people from coming across in the first place.
Secondly, part of the issue we've had in the past is we've had -- for lack
of a better word -- catch and release; the Border Patrol would find people
sneaking in; they would then hold them for a period of time; they'd say, come
back and check in with us 45 days later, and then they wouldn't check in 45
days later. And they would disappear in society to do the work that some
Americans will not do.
And so we're changing catch and release. We're particularly focusing on
those from Central America who are coming across Mexico's southern border,
ending up in our own -- it's a long answer, but it's an important question:
How do we protect our borders, and at the same time, be a humane society?
Anyway, step one, focus on enforcing border; when we find people, send
them home, so that the work of our Border Patrol is productive work.
Secondly, it seems like to me that part of having a border security
program is to say to people who are hiring people here illegally, we're going
to hold you to account. The problem is our employers don't know whether
they're hiring people illegally because there's a whole forgery industry
around people being smuggled into the United States. There's a smuggling
industry and a forgery industry. And it's hard to ask our employers, the
onion guy out there, whether or not he's got -- whether or not the documents
that he's being shown that look real are real.
And so here's a better proposal than what we're doing today, which is to
say, if you're going to come to do a job an American won't do, you ought to be
given a foolproof card that says you can come for a limited period of time and
do work in a job an American won't do. That's border security because it
means that people will be willing to come in legally with a card to do work on
a limited basis, and then go home. And so the agents won't be chasing people
being smuggled in 18-wheelers or across the Arizona desert. They'll be able
to focus on drugs and terrorists and guns.
The fundamental question that he is referring to is, what do we do about -
- there's two questions -- one, should we have amnesty? And the answer, in my
judgment, is, no, we shouldn't have amnesty. In my judgment, granting
amnesty, automatic citizenship -- that's what amnesty means -- would cause
another 11 million people, or however many are here, to come in the hopes of
becoming a United States citizen. We shouldn't have amnesty. We ought to
have a program that says, you get in line like everybody else gets in line;
and that if the Congress feels like there needs to be higher quotas on certain
nationalities, raise the quotas. But don't let people get in front of the
line for somebody who has been playing by the rules. (Applause.)
And so, anyway, that's my ideas on good immigration policy. Obviously,
there's going to be some questions we have to answer: What about the person
who's been here since 1987 -- '86 was the last attempt at coming up with
immigration reform -- been here for a long period of time. They've raised a
family here. And my only advice for the Congress and for people in the debate
is understand what made America. We're a land of immigrants. This guy is
from Hungary, you know. (Applause.) And we got to treat people fairly.
We've got to have a system of law that is respectful for people.
I mean, the idea of having a program that causes people to get stuck in
the back of 18-wheelers, to risk their lives to sneak into America to do work
that some people won't do is just not American, in my judgment. And so I
would hope the debate would be civil and uphold the honor of this country.
And remember, we've been through these periods before, where the immigration
debate can get harsh. And it should not be harsh. And I hope -- my call for
people is to be rational about the debate and thoughtful about what words can
mean during this debate.
Final question, sir. You're paying me a lot of money and I got to go back
to work. (Laughter.)
PS I did not know about the story of I-245 on 9/11....
Q Okay. My question is, since 9/11, one of the key things that we need
is immigration reform, including comprehensive immigration reform that is
right now in front of Senator Specter's committee in the Judiciary. There are
two principles I'm hoping that you would support: One, the good people, the
engineers, the PhDs, the doctors, the nurses, the people in the system who
have followed the rules, will go to the head of the line in any form of
immigration reform. That's Title IVz of the bill.
Secondly, the illegals who have not followed the rules -- I understand the
debate, I appreciate your statements about immigration reform, but isn't it
better that we know who they are, have them finger-printed and photographed,
and allow some form of 245I to come back so --
THE PRESIDENT: Tell people what that is. Tell people what 245I is.
Q Okay -- 245I is a partial amnesty program that expired back in 2001,
in fact, was going to be voted on on 9/11, unfortunately. But those -- it was
a small segment of the illegal population where they would pay the $1,000 fine
and, for example, coming in illegally, then marrying an American citizen,
could somehow legalize their status.
THE PRESIDENT: Okay. Let me give you some broad principles on
immigration reform as I see them. First of all, we do need to know who's
coming into our country and whether they're coming in illegally, or not
legally -- legally or not legally -- and whether they're coming in or going
out. And part of reforms after September the 11th was a better system of
finding out who's coming here.
Secondly, we have a big border between Texas and Mexico that's really hard
to enforce. We got to do everything we can to enforce the border,
particularly in the south. I mean, it's the place where people are pouring
across in order to find work. We have a situation in our own neighborhood
where there are way -- disparities are huge, and there are jobs in America
that people won't do. That's just a fact. I met an onion grower today at the
airport when I arrived, and he said, you got to help me find people that will
grow onions -- pluck them, or whatever you do with them, you know.
(Laughter.) There are jobs that just simply aren't getting done because
Americans won't do them. And yet, if you're making 50 cents an hour in
Mexico, and you can make a lot more in America, and you got mouths to feed,
you're going to come and try to find the work. It's a big border, of which --
across which people are coming to provide a living for their families.
Step one of any immigration policy is to enforce our border in practical
ways. We are spending additional resources to be able to use different
detection devices, unmanned UAVs, to help -- and expand Border Patrol, by the
way, expand the number of agents on the border, to make sure we're getting
them the tools necessary to stop people from coming across in the first place.
Secondly, part of the issue we've had in the past is we've had -- for lack
of a better word -- catch and release; the Border Patrol would find people
sneaking in; they would then hold them for a period of time; they'd say, come
back and check in with us 45 days later, and then they wouldn't check in 45
days later. And they would disappear in society to do the work that some
Americans will not do.
And so we're changing catch and release. We're particularly focusing on
those from Central America who are coming across Mexico's southern border,
ending up in our own -- it's a long answer, but it's an important question:
How do we protect our borders, and at the same time, be a humane society?
Anyway, step one, focus on enforcing border; when we find people, send
them home, so that the work of our Border Patrol is productive work.
Secondly, it seems like to me that part of having a border security
program is to say to people who are hiring people here illegally, we're going
to hold you to account. The problem is our employers don't know whether
they're hiring people illegally because there's a whole forgery industry
around people being smuggled into the United States. There's a smuggling
industry and a forgery industry. And it's hard to ask our employers, the
onion guy out there, whether or not he's got -- whether or not the documents
that he's being shown that look real are real.
And so here's a better proposal than what we're doing today, which is to
say, if you're going to come to do a job an American won't do, you ought to be
given a foolproof card that says you can come for a limited period of time and
do work in a job an American won't do. That's border security because it
means that people will be willing to come in legally with a card to do work on
a limited basis, and then go home. And so the agents won't be chasing people
being smuggled in 18-wheelers or across the Arizona desert. They'll be able
to focus on drugs and terrorists and guns.
The fundamental question that he is referring to is, what do we do about -
- there's two questions -- one, should we have amnesty? And the answer, in my
judgment, is, no, we shouldn't have amnesty. In my judgment, granting
amnesty, automatic citizenship -- that's what amnesty means -- would cause
another 11 million people, or however many are here, to come in the hopes of
becoming a United States citizen. We shouldn't have amnesty. We ought to
have a program that says, you get in line like everybody else gets in line;
and that if the Congress feels like there needs to be higher quotas on certain
nationalities, raise the quotas. But don't let people get in front of the
line for somebody who has been playing by the rules. (Applause.)
And so, anyway, that's my ideas on good immigration policy. Obviously,
there's going to be some questions we have to answer: What about the person
who's been here since 1987 -- '86 was the last attempt at coming up with
immigration reform -- been here for a long period of time. They've raised a
family here. And my only advice for the Congress and for people in the debate
is understand what made America. We're a land of immigrants. This guy is
from Hungary, you know. (Applause.) And we got to treat people fairly.
We've got to have a system of law that is respectful for people.
I mean, the idea of having a program that causes people to get stuck in
the back of 18-wheelers, to risk their lives to sneak into America to do work
that some people won't do is just not American, in my judgment. And so I
would hope the debate would be civil and uphold the honor of this country.
And remember, we've been through these periods before, where the immigration
debate can get harsh. And it should not be harsh. And I hope -- my call for
people is to be rational about the debate and thoughtful about what words can
mean during this debate.
Final question, sir. You're paying me a lot of money and I got to go back
to work. (Laughter.)
PS I did not know about the story of I-245 on 9/11....
chi_shark
12-03 04:28 PM
Hopefully your attitude is a little better towards actual potential customers, who are business people, who need marketing help in the specific industry that you are in.
o lord! right back at you! thanks for your concern...
o lord! right back at you! thanks for your concern...
EB3June03
06-15 04:55 PM
I got an email from my lawyer who indicates the RFE is related to my medical missing from the 483 package we sent. I am pretty positive we sent it, but seems like USCIS has some way to firing a RFE.
Anyway, my lawyer is asking me that getting a new medical done would be better as that is quick and more pratical. Don't know if that might be true.
Any ideas for those who got RFE for medical?
Anyway, my lawyer is asking me that getting a new medical done would be better as that is quick and more pratical. Don't know if that might be true.
Any ideas for those who got RFE for medical?
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario