sanojkumar
08-21 11:51 AM
bumping up??
wallpaper joseph gordon levitt.
Cataphract
02-20 10:47 AM
http://immigrationvoice.org/media/Flyer_Formated.pdf
Thanks for the flyer link - that takes out any excuse from anybody who is still on the fringe.
Thanks for the flyer link - that takes out any excuse from anybody who is still on the fringe.
EndlessWait
01-10 03:00 PM
Applied July 23rd NSC. Receipt notice July 23rd and again another receipt September once my case went to CSC and back to NSC.
Got AP and EAD issued from CA (laguna Niguel USCIS) though not without headaches (RFE on AP)
took infopass appointment last week and officer said FPs havent been issued because Background check still not cleared for me (wife cleared but she will not get FP notice until mine is cleared). This is possibly the same reason you have not received yours. looks like i am stuck for the long haul in name check clearance.
good luck to you!
even mine is 23rd july case..and is ur case status still showing "transferred to NSC blah blah..." ?
Got AP and EAD issued from CA (laguna Niguel USCIS) though not without headaches (RFE on AP)
took infopass appointment last week and officer said FPs havent been issued because Background check still not cleared for me (wife cleared but she will not get FP notice until mine is cleared). This is possibly the same reason you have not received yours. looks like i am stuck for the long haul in name check clearance.
good luck to you!
even mine is 23rd july case..and is ur case status still showing "transferred to NSC blah blah..." ?
2011 #Joseph Gordon-Levitt #Regular
Blog Feeds
10-28 12:00 AM
AILA Leadership Has Just Posted the Following:
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhGj43hulUL2Z21ZcW-bH8Qtrbo6W0TKnHCL407PJEfX4gIzAs2sArOgcOR3ae2TiUTASfLdJY17tzVflyNlpJHCJGEGhvL12aupObb95EQ0Dsgiycvzd304jeYNnxcWPX7mSX_iXAdl00/s320/Immigration+Lines.jpg (https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhGj43hulUL2Z21ZcW-bH8Qtrbo6W0TKnHCL407PJEfX4gIzAs2sArOgcOR3ae2TiUTASfLdJY17tzVflyNlpJHCJGEGhvL12aupObb95EQ0Dsgiycvzd304jeYNnxcWPX7mSX_iXAdl00/s1600-h/Immigration+Lines.jpg) I had a very upset client contact me this last week. He was angry . . . at the Visa Bulletin. He could not understand how, after the start of the new fiscal year, there was essentially no movement in the visa numbers. I tried to calm him by telling him that he just needed to be patient. Then I realized how patronizing that sounded. How much longer did he need to wait? He has an approved immigrant visa petition (EB-3) with an early 2005 priority date in the worldwide category. So, I decided to try to figure out when he might actually get his green card. I ask that you bear with me through this process. This is a LONG post, but one I think you will appreciate reading.
I have to warn you now, this math is a shot in the dark. I do NOT have all of the numbers of pending and approved cases in each category of employment based immigration. However, some estimate, based upon some pretty good numbers, is better than mere guesswork. Let me walk you through this analysis.
However, I first ask you to forgive me in advance, math is the reason I went to law school. Also, the USCIS simply has not released clear numbers (possibly for fear of letting folks know exactly how long their wait will actually be).
My focus for this analysis will be in the EB-2 and Eb-3 categories, since it is in those categories that our clients are most interested. There are four basic numbers we are looking for, NONE of them are easy to find. Let's discover the basic numbers we will be using:
First, how many approved I-140 cases are awaiting a visa number? According to AILA's recent liaison meeting with DOS, there are 198,186 "case ready" I-140 petitions awaiting visa issuance, in the EB-2 (52,584), EB-3 (139,737) and EW (5,865) categories. Case ready means (as best as we understand), that as soon as the petition is current, the Adjustment will be approved or consular processing will begin. Obviously, the EB-2 numbers are only for India and China.
Second, how many pending I-140 cases are there at the Service Centers awaiting adjudication? According to the June 2009, USCIS Production Update Report to Congress (http://www.uscis.gov/files/article/fy09q1backlog.pdf), USCIS had 85,970 pending I-140 cases awaiting adjudication. Unfortunately, USCIS does not break out the I-140 cases in this report between EB-2 and EB-3. These are the most recent numbers I could find.
Third, how many pending I-140 cases are at the District Offices? I have no idea! I cannot locate anywhere the numbers of cases at the local USCIS offices. No one knows. Really. There is no report that I can find where this number has been released. And, frankly, I do not believe that USCIS has an accurate count on this either (I do pray they get such a count soon).
Fourth, how many pending labor certifications are there at the DOL? This number is actually pretty sure. There are 62,100 pending labor certifications as of the September 22 stakeholder meeting with DOL (http://aila.org/Content/default.aspx?docid=30235) (not counting pending appeals). Unfortunately, again, we do not know which of the categories (EB-2 or EB-3) the cases will fall under.
Now, it is time for the math. Assuming all pending Labor Certifications and pending I-140s are approved (yes, I know some will be denied and some are duplicates), there are at least a total of 346,256 individuals with approved or soon to be approved petitions awaiting green cards, not including their families. If we assume an average family size of 4 people (I believe this is a safe assumption), there are 1,385,024 people waiting on employment based green cards in the EB-2 and EB-3 categories.
I know the number is huge! And next we have to try to fit that number into the two separate EB categories. Unfortunately, we have two problems in doing this. The first problem we have is that we do not know how many of these I-140 cases are in the EB-2, or EB-3 categories. So, let's use a little deductive reasoning here. Using experience and best guessing based upon the division we already know about in the numbers of cases from the DOS, lets say 26% are EB-2 (360,162), and 74% are EB-3 (1,024,917).
The second problem is that we do not have a per country breakdown. (I hope the USCIS has that breakdown). How to account for this? Again, let's estimate based upon the DOS numbers, that India accounts for 70% of the EB-2 and 39% of the EB-3 numbers and that China accounts for 30% of the EB-2 and only 3% of the EB-3 numbers and the rest of the world accounts for 58% of the EB-3 numbers.
We also know the maximum numbers available in any given year for all family and employment based categories is 25,630 (with some caveats), and that there are only a total of 80,000 employment based immigrant visas in the EB-2 and EB-3 categories combined (with some flow down from other categories).
You can see we have leaped, jumped, guessed, and assumed our way to the follow conclusions:
India EB-3 wait for permanent residence for a labor certification filed today: 15.8 years. This generous estimate comes from the fact that an estimated 399,717 Indian Nationals waiting for 25,630 visas a year. This estimate completely ignores the possible immigration of any family based immigrants which would subtract from this total and increase the wait time, and the number that would flow down from other immigrant visa categories, so the wait time is probably longer.
China EB-2 wait for permanent residence for a labor certification (or NIW) filed today: 4.1 years. This estimate comes from the estimated 108,048 Chinese Nationals waiting for 25,630 visas a year. This estimate completely ignores the possible immigration of any family based immigrants that would subtract from this total and increase the wait time, and the number that would flow down from other immigrant visa categories.
Worldwide EB-3 wait for permanent residence for a labor certification filed today: Well, there are 594,451 people waiting in this queue. The limiting factor here will be the 80,000 annual limit on employment based immigration. Excluding per country limits and flow down from other employment based immigrant visa categories, this is at least a 8.1 year wait.
And these waits are from when the person STARTS the green card, not when they come into the United States.
I can now tell my client a waiting date based upon, at least, some real numbers. But, I will still be wrong. The dates are not accurate, but at least it is not made up out of whole cloth. But we now all understand that we cannot look at the Visa Bulletin and actually determine how long the wait is.
The point of this whole exercise, besides telling my client how long he still might have to wait, is to point out the consequences of these numbers.
Line? What Line? These are employment based immigrants. Every single one has a job offer, an employer, and a certification that either there are no qualified, willing and able US workers for the job, or that the individual is so good, we do not even have to test the labor market. We need these people. We want these people. How many do you think will now just give up and go home?
This delay in legal, employment based immigration is a crisis for America. If you are an intending immigrant, and your immigration option is employment based, do you have the patience the wait 15 years for your green card? Can you do better in Australia, Canada, or even back home in your home country? What is the cost to our future competitiveness of a broken legal immigration system? What is the cost to U.S. innovation?
I believe these numbers have a purpose. The purpose is immigration reform, and not just a legalization. We all know that a broken legal immigration system causes illegal immigration. We need to fix the legal immigration system now! We need to modify the process, significantly shorten the wait and increase the numbers to meet the demand. We need to not include family members in the total calculated visa numbers. And, Yes, we need to make these change even in a struggling economy. We must maintain the great benefits that positive, focused employment based immigration has delivered to America. The reality is that Congress must act to help save the future of American innovation and economic growth. And, they must do it now.
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/186823568153827945-159310338954847679?l=ailaleadership.blogspot.com
More... (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2009/10/get-in-line-what-line-tragic-tale-of.html)
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhGj43hulUL2Z21ZcW-bH8Qtrbo6W0TKnHCL407PJEfX4gIzAs2sArOgcOR3ae2TiUTASfLdJY17tzVflyNlpJHCJGEGhvL12aupObb95EQ0Dsgiycvzd304jeYNnxcWPX7mSX_iXAdl00/s320/Immigration+Lines.jpg (https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhGj43hulUL2Z21ZcW-bH8Qtrbo6W0TKnHCL407PJEfX4gIzAs2sArOgcOR3ae2TiUTASfLdJY17tzVflyNlpJHCJGEGhvL12aupObb95EQ0Dsgiycvzd304jeYNnxcWPX7mSX_iXAdl00/s1600-h/Immigration+Lines.jpg) I had a very upset client contact me this last week. He was angry . . . at the Visa Bulletin. He could not understand how, after the start of the new fiscal year, there was essentially no movement in the visa numbers. I tried to calm him by telling him that he just needed to be patient. Then I realized how patronizing that sounded. How much longer did he need to wait? He has an approved immigrant visa petition (EB-3) with an early 2005 priority date in the worldwide category. So, I decided to try to figure out when he might actually get his green card. I ask that you bear with me through this process. This is a LONG post, but one I think you will appreciate reading.
I have to warn you now, this math is a shot in the dark. I do NOT have all of the numbers of pending and approved cases in each category of employment based immigration. However, some estimate, based upon some pretty good numbers, is better than mere guesswork. Let me walk you through this analysis.
However, I first ask you to forgive me in advance, math is the reason I went to law school. Also, the USCIS simply has not released clear numbers (possibly for fear of letting folks know exactly how long their wait will actually be).
My focus for this analysis will be in the EB-2 and Eb-3 categories, since it is in those categories that our clients are most interested. There are four basic numbers we are looking for, NONE of them are easy to find. Let's discover the basic numbers we will be using:
First, how many approved I-140 cases are awaiting a visa number? According to AILA's recent liaison meeting with DOS, there are 198,186 "case ready" I-140 petitions awaiting visa issuance, in the EB-2 (52,584), EB-3 (139,737) and EW (5,865) categories. Case ready means (as best as we understand), that as soon as the petition is current, the Adjustment will be approved or consular processing will begin. Obviously, the EB-2 numbers are only for India and China.
Second, how many pending I-140 cases are there at the Service Centers awaiting adjudication? According to the June 2009, USCIS Production Update Report to Congress (http://www.uscis.gov/files/article/fy09q1backlog.pdf), USCIS had 85,970 pending I-140 cases awaiting adjudication. Unfortunately, USCIS does not break out the I-140 cases in this report between EB-2 and EB-3. These are the most recent numbers I could find.
Third, how many pending I-140 cases are at the District Offices? I have no idea! I cannot locate anywhere the numbers of cases at the local USCIS offices. No one knows. Really. There is no report that I can find where this number has been released. And, frankly, I do not believe that USCIS has an accurate count on this either (I do pray they get such a count soon).
Fourth, how many pending labor certifications are there at the DOL? This number is actually pretty sure. There are 62,100 pending labor certifications as of the September 22 stakeholder meeting with DOL (http://aila.org/Content/default.aspx?docid=30235) (not counting pending appeals). Unfortunately, again, we do not know which of the categories (EB-2 or EB-3) the cases will fall under.
Now, it is time for the math. Assuming all pending Labor Certifications and pending I-140s are approved (yes, I know some will be denied and some are duplicates), there are at least a total of 346,256 individuals with approved or soon to be approved petitions awaiting green cards, not including their families. If we assume an average family size of 4 people (I believe this is a safe assumption), there are 1,385,024 people waiting on employment based green cards in the EB-2 and EB-3 categories.
I know the number is huge! And next we have to try to fit that number into the two separate EB categories. Unfortunately, we have two problems in doing this. The first problem we have is that we do not know how many of these I-140 cases are in the EB-2, or EB-3 categories. So, let's use a little deductive reasoning here. Using experience and best guessing based upon the division we already know about in the numbers of cases from the DOS, lets say 26% are EB-2 (360,162), and 74% are EB-3 (1,024,917).
The second problem is that we do not have a per country breakdown. (I hope the USCIS has that breakdown). How to account for this? Again, let's estimate based upon the DOS numbers, that India accounts for 70% of the EB-2 and 39% of the EB-3 numbers and that China accounts for 30% of the EB-2 and only 3% of the EB-3 numbers and the rest of the world accounts for 58% of the EB-3 numbers.
We also know the maximum numbers available in any given year for all family and employment based categories is 25,630 (with some caveats), and that there are only a total of 80,000 employment based immigrant visas in the EB-2 and EB-3 categories combined (with some flow down from other categories).
You can see we have leaped, jumped, guessed, and assumed our way to the follow conclusions:
India EB-3 wait for permanent residence for a labor certification filed today: 15.8 years. This generous estimate comes from the fact that an estimated 399,717 Indian Nationals waiting for 25,630 visas a year. This estimate completely ignores the possible immigration of any family based immigrants which would subtract from this total and increase the wait time, and the number that would flow down from other immigrant visa categories, so the wait time is probably longer.
China EB-2 wait for permanent residence for a labor certification (or NIW) filed today: 4.1 years. This estimate comes from the estimated 108,048 Chinese Nationals waiting for 25,630 visas a year. This estimate completely ignores the possible immigration of any family based immigrants that would subtract from this total and increase the wait time, and the number that would flow down from other immigrant visa categories.
Worldwide EB-3 wait for permanent residence for a labor certification filed today: Well, there are 594,451 people waiting in this queue. The limiting factor here will be the 80,000 annual limit on employment based immigration. Excluding per country limits and flow down from other employment based immigrant visa categories, this is at least a 8.1 year wait.
And these waits are from when the person STARTS the green card, not when they come into the United States.
I can now tell my client a waiting date based upon, at least, some real numbers. But, I will still be wrong. The dates are not accurate, but at least it is not made up out of whole cloth. But we now all understand that we cannot look at the Visa Bulletin and actually determine how long the wait is.
The point of this whole exercise, besides telling my client how long he still might have to wait, is to point out the consequences of these numbers.
Line? What Line? These are employment based immigrants. Every single one has a job offer, an employer, and a certification that either there are no qualified, willing and able US workers for the job, or that the individual is so good, we do not even have to test the labor market. We need these people. We want these people. How many do you think will now just give up and go home?
This delay in legal, employment based immigration is a crisis for America. If you are an intending immigrant, and your immigration option is employment based, do you have the patience the wait 15 years for your green card? Can you do better in Australia, Canada, or even back home in your home country? What is the cost to our future competitiveness of a broken legal immigration system? What is the cost to U.S. innovation?
I believe these numbers have a purpose. The purpose is immigration reform, and not just a legalization. We all know that a broken legal immigration system causes illegal immigration. We need to fix the legal immigration system now! We need to modify the process, significantly shorten the wait and increase the numbers to meet the demand. We need to not include family members in the total calculated visa numbers. And, Yes, we need to make these change even in a struggling economy. We must maintain the great benefits that positive, focused employment based immigration has delivered to America. The reality is that Congress must act to help save the future of American innovation and economic growth. And, they must do it now.
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/186823568153827945-159310338954847679?l=ailaleadership.blogspot.com
More... (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2009/10/get-in-line-what-line-tragic-tale-of.html)
more...
milind70
11-03 12:54 PM
From first hand experiences of fellow friends and collegues who tried to extend the visitors visa for their parents or their in laws ,99 percent of the time they have been denied reentry . I personally know a case where a friends mother in law successfully extended her stay for another 3 months after initial grant of 6 months. After that vist she was denied reentry for 3 times atleast that i know of. One thing here is to note that whether to grant entry or not is in the hands of the IO at POE. By extending your stay plants seeds of doubts about overstay. Also medical reasons and taking care of child are not considered strong reason for extension unless the medical condition is very serious
pani_6
03-25 02:08 PM
I am hoping to travel via emirates to bangalore..I have avoided other airlines due to transit visa issues...any experince using Emirates??.
more...
vin13
01-16 11:52 AM
Yes, it would be part of the lottery system (for company C)
Yes, there is a chance of H1 not going through.
It is as good as you applying for the H1-B for the first time.
Yes, there is a chance of H1 not going through.
It is as good as you applying for the H1-B for the first time.
2010 gordon-levitt Shirtless on
nixstor
08-08 09:53 PM
I guess he is trying to lift the sunken spirits of the IV members. But I feel that if SKIL goes through, we will be fine. It all depends on SKIL
more...
vedicman
01-04 08:34 AM
Ten years ago, George W. Bush came to Washington as the first new president in a generation or more who had deep personal convictions about immigration policy and some plans for where he wanted to go with it. He wasn't alone. Lots of people in lots of places were ready to work on the issue: Republicans, Democrats, Hispanic advocates, business leaders, even the Mexican government.
Like so much else about the past decade, things didn't go well. Immigration policy got kicked around a fair bit, but next to nothing got accomplished. Old laws and bureaucracies became increasingly dysfunctional. The public grew anxious. The debates turned repetitive, divisive and sterile.
The last gasp of the lost decade came this month when the lame-duck Congress - which struck compromises on taxes, gays in the military andarms control - deadlocked on the Dream Act.
The debate was pure political theater. The legislation was first introduced in 2001 to legalize the most virtuous sliver of the undocumented population - young adults who were brought here as children by their parents and who were now in college or the military. It was originally designed to be the first in a sequence of measures to resolve the status of the nation's illegal immigrants, and for most of the past decade, it was often paired with a bill for agricultural workers. The logic was to start with the most worthy and economically necessary. But with the bill put forward this month as a last-minute, stand-alone measure with little chance of passage, all the debate accomplished was to give both sides a chance to excite their followers. In the age of stalemate, immigration may have a special place in the firmament.
The United States is in the midst of a wave of immigration as substantial as any ever experienced. Millions of people from abroad have settled here peacefully and prosperously, a boon to the nation. Nonetheless, frustration with policy sours the mood. More than a quarter of the foreign-born are here without authorization. Meanwhile, getting here legally can be a long, costly wrangle. And communities feel that they have little say over sudden changes in their populations. People know that their world is being transformed, yet Washington has not enacted a major overhaul of immigration law since 1965. To move forward, we need at least three fundamental changes in the way the issue is handled.
Being honest about our circumstances is always a good place to start. There might once have been a time to ponder the ideal immigration system for the early 21st century, but surely that time has passed. The immediate task is to clean up the mess caused by inaction, and that is going to require compromises on all sides. Next, we should reexamine the scope of policy proposals. After a decade of sweeping plans that went nowhere, working piecemeal is worth a try at this point. Finally, the politics have to change. With both Republicans and Democrats using immigration as a wedge issue, the chances are that innocent bystanders will get hurt - soon.
The most intractable problem by far involves the 11 million or so undocumented immigrants currently living in the United States. They are the human legacy of unintended consequences and the failure to act.
Advocates on one side, mostly Republicans, would like to see enforcement policies tough enough to induce an exodus. But that does not seem achievable anytime soon, because unauthorized immigrants have proved to be a very durable and resilient population. The number of illegal arrivals dropped sharply during the recession, but the people already here did not leave, though they faced massive unemployment and ramped-up deportations. If they could ride out those twin storms, how much enforcement over how many years would it take to seriously reduce their numbers? Probably too much and too many to be feasible. Besides, even if Democrats suffer another electoral disaster or two, they are likely still to have enough votes in the Senate to block an Arizona-style law that would make every cop an alien-hunter.
Advocates on the other side, mostly Democrats, would like to give a path to citizenship to as many of the undocumented as possible. That also seems unlikely; Republicans have blocked every effort at legalization. Beyond all the principled arguments, the Republicans would have to be politically suicidal to offer citizenship, and therefore voting rights, to 11 million people who would be likely to vote against them en masse.
So what happens to these folks? As a starting point, someone could ask them what they want. The answer is likely to be fairly limited: the chance to live and work in peace, the ability to visit their countries of origin without having to sneak back across the border and not much more.
Would they settle for a legal life here without citizenship? Well, it would be a huge improvement over being here illegally. Aside from peace of mind, an incalculable benefit, it would offer the near-certainty of better jobs. That is a privilege people will pay for, and they could be asked to keep paying for it every year they worked. If they coughed up one, two, three thousand dollars annually on top of all other taxes, would that be enough to dent the argument that undocumented residents drain public treasuries?
There would be a larger cost, however, if legalization came without citizenship: the cost to the nation's political soul of having a population deliberately excluded from the democratic process. No one would set out to create such a population. But policy failures have created something worse. We have 11 million people living among us who not only can't vote but also increasingly are afraid to report a crime or to get vaccinations for a child or to look their landlord in the eye.
�
Much of the debate over the past decade has been about whether legalization would be an unjust reward for "lawbreakers." The status quo, however, rewards everyone who has ever benefited from the cheap, disposable labor provided by illegal workers. To start to fix the situation, everyone - undocumented workers, employers, consumers, lawmakers - has to admit their errors and make amends.
The lost decade produced big, bold plans for social engineering. It was a 10-year quest for a grand bargain that would repair the entire system at once, through enforcement, ID cards, legalization, a temporary worker program and more. Fierce cloakroom battles were also fought over the shape and size of legal immigration. Visa categories became a venue for ideological competition between business, led by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, and elements of labor, led by the AFL-CIO, over regulation of the labor market: whether to keep it tight to boost wages or keep it loose to boost growth.
But every attempt to fix everything at once produced a political parabola effect. As legislation reached higher, its base of support narrowed. The last effort, and the biggest of them all, collapsed on the Senate floor in July 2007. Still, the idea of a grand bargain has been kept on life support by advocates of generous policies. Just last week, President Obama and Hispanic lawmakers renewed their vows to seek comprehensive immigration reform, even as the prospects grow bleaker. Meanwhile, the other side has its own designs, demanding total control over the border and an enforcement system with no leaks before anything else can happen.
Perhaps 10 years ago, someone like George W. Bush might reasonably have imagined that immigration policy was a good place to resolve some very basic social and economic issues. Since then, however, the rhetoric around the issue has become so swollen and angry that it inflames everything it touches. Keeping the battles small might increase the chance that each side will win some. But, as we learned with the Dream Act, even taking small steps at this point will require rebooting the discourse.
Not long ago, certainly a decade ago, immigration was often described as an issue of strange bedfellows because it did not divide people neatly along partisan or ideological lines. That world is gone now. Instead, elements of both parties are using immigration as a wedge issue. The intended result is cleaving, not consensus. This year, many Republicans campaigned on vows, sometimes harshly stated, to crack down on illegal immigration. Meanwhile, many Democrats tried to rally Hispanic voters by demonizing restrictionists on the other side.
Immigration politics could thus become a way for both sides to feed polarization. In the short term, they can achieve their political objectives by stoking voters' anxiety with the scariest hobgoblins: illegal immigrants vs. the racists who would lock them up. Stumbling down this road would produce a decade more lost than the last.
Suro in Wasahington Post
Roberto Suro is a professor of journalism and public policy at the University of Southern California. surorob@gmail.com
Like so much else about the past decade, things didn't go well. Immigration policy got kicked around a fair bit, but next to nothing got accomplished. Old laws and bureaucracies became increasingly dysfunctional. The public grew anxious. The debates turned repetitive, divisive and sterile.
The last gasp of the lost decade came this month when the lame-duck Congress - which struck compromises on taxes, gays in the military andarms control - deadlocked on the Dream Act.
The debate was pure political theater. The legislation was first introduced in 2001 to legalize the most virtuous sliver of the undocumented population - young adults who were brought here as children by their parents and who were now in college or the military. It was originally designed to be the first in a sequence of measures to resolve the status of the nation's illegal immigrants, and for most of the past decade, it was often paired with a bill for agricultural workers. The logic was to start with the most worthy and economically necessary. But with the bill put forward this month as a last-minute, stand-alone measure with little chance of passage, all the debate accomplished was to give both sides a chance to excite their followers. In the age of stalemate, immigration may have a special place in the firmament.
The United States is in the midst of a wave of immigration as substantial as any ever experienced. Millions of people from abroad have settled here peacefully and prosperously, a boon to the nation. Nonetheless, frustration with policy sours the mood. More than a quarter of the foreign-born are here without authorization. Meanwhile, getting here legally can be a long, costly wrangle. And communities feel that they have little say over sudden changes in their populations. People know that their world is being transformed, yet Washington has not enacted a major overhaul of immigration law since 1965. To move forward, we need at least three fundamental changes in the way the issue is handled.
Being honest about our circumstances is always a good place to start. There might once have been a time to ponder the ideal immigration system for the early 21st century, but surely that time has passed. The immediate task is to clean up the mess caused by inaction, and that is going to require compromises on all sides. Next, we should reexamine the scope of policy proposals. After a decade of sweeping plans that went nowhere, working piecemeal is worth a try at this point. Finally, the politics have to change. With both Republicans and Democrats using immigration as a wedge issue, the chances are that innocent bystanders will get hurt - soon.
The most intractable problem by far involves the 11 million or so undocumented immigrants currently living in the United States. They are the human legacy of unintended consequences and the failure to act.
Advocates on one side, mostly Republicans, would like to see enforcement policies tough enough to induce an exodus. But that does not seem achievable anytime soon, because unauthorized immigrants have proved to be a very durable and resilient population. The number of illegal arrivals dropped sharply during the recession, but the people already here did not leave, though they faced massive unemployment and ramped-up deportations. If they could ride out those twin storms, how much enforcement over how many years would it take to seriously reduce their numbers? Probably too much and too many to be feasible. Besides, even if Democrats suffer another electoral disaster or two, they are likely still to have enough votes in the Senate to block an Arizona-style law that would make every cop an alien-hunter.
Advocates on the other side, mostly Democrats, would like to give a path to citizenship to as many of the undocumented as possible. That also seems unlikely; Republicans have blocked every effort at legalization. Beyond all the principled arguments, the Republicans would have to be politically suicidal to offer citizenship, and therefore voting rights, to 11 million people who would be likely to vote against them en masse.
So what happens to these folks? As a starting point, someone could ask them what they want. The answer is likely to be fairly limited: the chance to live and work in peace, the ability to visit their countries of origin without having to sneak back across the border and not much more.
Would they settle for a legal life here without citizenship? Well, it would be a huge improvement over being here illegally. Aside from peace of mind, an incalculable benefit, it would offer the near-certainty of better jobs. That is a privilege people will pay for, and they could be asked to keep paying for it every year they worked. If they coughed up one, two, three thousand dollars annually on top of all other taxes, would that be enough to dent the argument that undocumented residents drain public treasuries?
There would be a larger cost, however, if legalization came without citizenship: the cost to the nation's political soul of having a population deliberately excluded from the democratic process. No one would set out to create such a population. But policy failures have created something worse. We have 11 million people living among us who not only can't vote but also increasingly are afraid to report a crime or to get vaccinations for a child or to look their landlord in the eye.
�
Much of the debate over the past decade has been about whether legalization would be an unjust reward for "lawbreakers." The status quo, however, rewards everyone who has ever benefited from the cheap, disposable labor provided by illegal workers. To start to fix the situation, everyone - undocumented workers, employers, consumers, lawmakers - has to admit their errors and make amends.
The lost decade produced big, bold plans for social engineering. It was a 10-year quest for a grand bargain that would repair the entire system at once, through enforcement, ID cards, legalization, a temporary worker program and more. Fierce cloakroom battles were also fought over the shape and size of legal immigration. Visa categories became a venue for ideological competition between business, led by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, and elements of labor, led by the AFL-CIO, over regulation of the labor market: whether to keep it tight to boost wages or keep it loose to boost growth.
But every attempt to fix everything at once produced a political parabola effect. As legislation reached higher, its base of support narrowed. The last effort, and the biggest of them all, collapsed on the Senate floor in July 2007. Still, the idea of a grand bargain has been kept on life support by advocates of generous policies. Just last week, President Obama and Hispanic lawmakers renewed their vows to seek comprehensive immigration reform, even as the prospects grow bleaker. Meanwhile, the other side has its own designs, demanding total control over the border and an enforcement system with no leaks before anything else can happen.
Perhaps 10 years ago, someone like George W. Bush might reasonably have imagined that immigration policy was a good place to resolve some very basic social and economic issues. Since then, however, the rhetoric around the issue has become so swollen and angry that it inflames everything it touches. Keeping the battles small might increase the chance that each side will win some. But, as we learned with the Dream Act, even taking small steps at this point will require rebooting the discourse.
Not long ago, certainly a decade ago, immigration was often described as an issue of strange bedfellows because it did not divide people neatly along partisan or ideological lines. That world is gone now. Instead, elements of both parties are using immigration as a wedge issue. The intended result is cleaving, not consensus. This year, many Republicans campaigned on vows, sometimes harshly stated, to crack down on illegal immigration. Meanwhile, many Democrats tried to rally Hispanic voters by demonizing restrictionists on the other side.
Immigration politics could thus become a way for both sides to feed polarization. In the short term, they can achieve their political objectives by stoking voters' anxiety with the scariest hobgoblins: illegal immigrants vs. the racists who would lock them up. Stumbling down this road would produce a decade more lost than the last.
Suro in Wasahington Post
Roberto Suro is a professor of journalism and public policy at the University of Southern California. surorob@gmail.com
hair Joeseph Gordon Levitt, star of
sonia_sd
09-24 06:21 PM
I checked the site, couldn't find this info any more, probably its got archived. Thanks for your efforts in letting the group know.
No worries,
go and check here: The Oh Law Firm (http://www.immigration-law.com/Canada.html)
in the above link go locating the following news line, read and enjoy
""08/14/2009: Will USCIS Discontinue Concurrent I-140/485 Filing Procedure, Replaced by Preregistration and Two-Tier Filing System? ""
No worries,
go and check here: The Oh Law Firm (http://www.immigration-law.com/Canada.html)
in the above link go locating the following news line, read and enjoy
""08/14/2009: Will USCIS Discontinue Concurrent I-140/485 Filing Procedure, Replaced by Preregistration and Two-Tier Filing System? ""
more...
mallikonnet
07-06 10:41 AM
Jayant,
Thanks. I will have to return to China because my husband is chinese. If he can not stay here, he would like to go back there and so do I.
Once again thanks for the advice. Let me rephrase my question:
(a) At this point can I file for PERM processing (five months left on H1)?
(b) Case I : If labour does not get cleared within next five months,can I apply for H1 B extension?
(c) Case II : If labour gets cleared within next five months, can I apply for H1B extension?
At this point, I am loooking for extension of one year. Is there any way I can do this?
Thanks a lot again,
Savitri Bhave
hi you waited too long to file PERM. To apply for PERM lawyer need considerable time for advertising and other stuff. I would recommend to meet a lawyer since 5 months is too short for both advertising and filing. if your PERM pending more than 365 days then you will be able to extend H1B visa. Even if you were able to file PERM there is no premium I-140 right now
Another option is to go back to china for 1 year and then coming back again on another 6 year H1B visa term(3 years at a time)
best thing is to consult your company lawyer
goodluck
Thanks. I will have to return to China because my husband is chinese. If he can not stay here, he would like to go back there and so do I.
Once again thanks for the advice. Let me rephrase my question:
(a) At this point can I file for PERM processing (five months left on H1)?
(b) Case I : If labour does not get cleared within next five months,can I apply for H1 B extension?
(c) Case II : If labour gets cleared within next five months, can I apply for H1B extension?
At this point, I am loooking for extension of one year. Is there any way I can do this?
Thanks a lot again,
Savitri Bhave
hi you waited too long to file PERM. To apply for PERM lawyer need considerable time for advertising and other stuff. I would recommend to meet a lawyer since 5 months is too short for both advertising and filing. if your PERM pending more than 365 days then you will be able to extend H1B visa. Even if you were able to file PERM there is no premium I-140 right now
Another option is to go back to china for 1 year and then coming back again on another 6 year H1B visa term(3 years at a time)
best thing is to consult your company lawyer
goodluck
hot Joseph Gordon-Levitt
ganguteli
03-06 02:53 PM
I'll urge people from especially from California and Texas send out the letters and call up their lawmakers...Despite the Anti-immigrant climate prevailing in the country, congresswoman Zoe Logfren was able to get her bill passed on wednesday....If we can proove to them that we are not asking new green card numbers and not ask for recapturing green card numbers, they'll certainly hear us, but we need to speak up...
So your strategy is to go against her own bill to recapture greencards that she introduced for us last year.
I think this is wrong.
Recapture is a good option if you want to do it right. Otherwise all ROW will oppose you. How are you different than the guys who open threads against Telgus or EB3 vs EB2 or against Muslims.
What you are doing is only dividng the community. My collegues who are also IV members are mad reading that someone in IV is pursuing a one point agenda against ROW. We need to stop such threads. A lot of ROW are quiet members on IV forum and they will be upset.
Country caps can only be supported if there is recapture or increase in visa numbers.
So your strategy is to go against her own bill to recapture greencards that she introduced for us last year.
I think this is wrong.
Recapture is a good option if you want to do it right. Otherwise all ROW will oppose you. How are you different than the guys who open threads against Telgus or EB3 vs EB2 or against Muslims.
What you are doing is only dividng the community. My collegues who are also IV members are mad reading that someone in IV is pursuing a one point agenda against ROW. We need to stop such threads. A lot of ROW are quiet members on IV forum and they will be upset.
Country caps can only be supported if there is recapture or increase in visa numbers.
more...
house Taylor Lautner Taking On
GCDelay
11-30 02:36 PM
xxx
tattoo joseph gordon-levitt
aadimanav
10-26 01:43 AM
It looks like the posts under the IV Home Page Rcent Forum Posts Section no longer show up in descending order of last-update date. Is this intentional?
more...
pictures Joseph Gordon-Levitt
tinku01
03-26 01:05 PM
in Coming may bulletin EB2 will go upto July 2004
dresses Natalie Portman amp; Joseph Gordon-Levitt Filming Hesher in LA! 10
pani_6
01-16 05:17 PM
Letter is attached
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=22793
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=22793
more...
makeup (via, via)
SunnySurya
08-03 09:42 PM
I think thousand is over exagerated. Most people have filled their application at NSC.
I also have a consiparacy theory now. The dates porbably have moved out because of TSC as they did not have enough cases to process.
Not only July 2nd but probably 1000s of 2004 PDs with July 2 as RD are waiting......Its great to see 2006 approvals - at least USCIS is working......but FIFO does not exist in their dictionary.....Its probably LIFO....
I also have a consiparacy theory now. The dates porbably have moved out because of TSC as they did not have enough cases to process.
Not only July 2nd but probably 1000s of 2004 PDs with July 2 as RD are waiting......Its great to see 2006 approvals - at least USCIS is working......but FIFO does not exist in their dictionary.....Its probably LIFO....
girlfriend Labels: Joseph Gordon-Levitt
chi_shark
02-18 05:06 PM
You are W2 or 1099.
if he is working for himself, he has to be a w2 on his own payroll as the president of the company or employee as it is in his case...
if he is working for himself, he has to be a w2 on his own payroll as the president of the company or employee as it is in his case...
hairstyles Joseph Gordon-Levitt
jay75
05-06 11:23 PM
Both my wife and myself got soft LUD today on 485. Aug'07 filed, EB3 India, PD 2004.
NKR
02-13 03:56 PM
Folks,
Need a little advice. We (my husband and I) filed our 485 on July 2 under EB-3and have received AP, EAD, FP etc. Our PD date (July 7, 2001) got current in the March bulletin:). I wanted to check if there is way to find out if our cases have been adjudicated and are ready for approval as and when a visa # is allocated in March.
Thanks
You guys deserve it after waiting for so long. The only way to check if the case has been adjudicated or not is to keep checking the LUDS, if it changes see what the status says. After being patient for so many years, if you are feeling a little impatient now call USCIS and check the status.
Need a little advice. We (my husband and I) filed our 485 on July 2 under EB-3and have received AP, EAD, FP etc. Our PD date (July 7, 2001) got current in the March bulletin:). I wanted to check if there is way to find out if our cases have been adjudicated and are ready for approval as and when a visa # is allocated in March.
Thanks
You guys deserve it after waiting for so long. The only way to check if the case has been adjudicated or not is to keep checking the LUDS, if it changes see what the status says. After being patient for so many years, if you are feeling a little impatient now call USCIS and check the status.
legal_la
06-25 03:39 PM
Guys,
here's my thoughts on this; If her h1 gets stamped she doesn't need AP. however if H1 gets rejected for some reason, in that case she can stay back in India until I recieve the AP documents. I send it to her then she can travel back on AP. ??
Any Suggestions or gyan on this !!!
-shree
I dont think you will be able to do this, I am not sure but I think one should be present in US at the time of AP approval only then they can use that Advance parole to leave and re enter.
May be converting back to H4 and attend for visa as dependent is an option. Ask your lawyer.
here's my thoughts on this; If her h1 gets stamped she doesn't need AP. however if H1 gets rejected for some reason, in that case she can stay back in India until I recieve the AP documents. I send it to her then she can travel back on AP. ??
Any Suggestions or gyan on this !!!
-shree
I dont think you will be able to do this, I am not sure but I think one should be present in US at the time of AP approval only then they can use that Advance parole to leave and re enter.
May be converting back to H4 and attend for visa as dependent is an option. Ask your lawyer.
No comments:
Post a Comment