indio0617
03-09 11:31 AM
So they'll probably take out schedule A workers(Nurses etc.) from EB3 category
I am assuming that will be the end result. It means they will not be counted against any VISA CAP.
I am assuming that will be the end result. It means they will not be counted against any VISA CAP.
wallpaper Photo of Mohawk Hairstyles
somegchuh
01-03 04:11 PM
I think you bring up very valid points. For a lot of ppl who have stayed away from family/extended family for so long, they may not like the constant interference.
"I miss my parents" is not quantifiable but what about the paying back the debt by supporting your aging parents? Let me make the question a little broader, isn't every immigrant divided between doing what's best for the children and supporting the parents?
for some it is money, for others it is about taking care of parents etc.
for me it is all about where I would like to live, grow and bring up my child. to me the answer is very clear. while this country is not perfect, no country on this planet is. if a human makes an objective list based on quantifiable pros and cons, the decision is very easy to make.
as for stuff like "I miss my parents" that is not quantifiable and should never figure in the discussion. what is the guarantee that you can return to your home country and live in the same city as you parents do? what happens if your kids don't want the grandparents to interfere in their lives? what happens if you cannot take constant interference from friends and extended family?
my reasons may come across as cold and calculating. however, it is an inhospitable world we live in and it is up to us to provide the best possible cocoon for our immediate family and that is exactly what I intend to do.
"I miss my parents" is not quantifiable but what about the paying back the debt by supporting your aging parents? Let me make the question a little broader, isn't every immigrant divided between doing what's best for the children and supporting the parents?
for some it is money, for others it is about taking care of parents etc.
for me it is all about where I would like to live, grow and bring up my child. to me the answer is very clear. while this country is not perfect, no country on this planet is. if a human makes an objective list based on quantifiable pros and cons, the decision is very easy to make.
as for stuff like "I miss my parents" that is not quantifiable and should never figure in the discussion. what is the guarantee that you can return to your home country and live in the same city as you parents do? what happens if your kids don't want the grandparents to interfere in their lives? what happens if you cannot take constant interference from friends and extended family?
my reasons may come across as cold and calculating. however, it is an inhospitable world we live in and it is up to us to provide the best possible cocoon for our immediate family and that is exactly what I intend to do.
qualified_trash
08-09 02:51 PM
just one correction:
Legal immigrants pay taxes at higher rates due to their immigration status
I do not think the above is true.
Legal immigrants pay taxes at higher rates due to their immigration status
I do not think the above is true.
2011 Black Braiding Hairstyles for
.jpg "curly hairstyles Pictures")
abhidos37
08-21 02:48 PM
Last week I went to Trenton with H1 extension receipt (original), letter from employer, but in vain. They need approved docs. Luckily this week I got the H1 extended and today I carried the original approved H1 I-797A and got the DL extended. I got only 2 years H1/DL extension after 6 year completion with I-140 approved and 485 in progress. Fyi
more...
rajuram
05-24 10:18 PM
Which bills are you talking about? I read most were dropped from Iraq funding bill that passed recently.
We are just drifting my friend..no direction..no hope....
Please contribute IVians. We need your support to lobby for the current bills which have been introduced.
My perspective on contributing to IV, is that I would gladly contribute $100 if there was a chance that I can get my gc a few months faster because of the efforts of IV.
Got GC Stress??
Contribute To IV Today!!
We are just drifting my friend..no direction..no hope....
Please contribute IVians. We need your support to lobby for the current bills which have been introduced.
My perspective on contributing to IV, is that I would gladly contribute $100 if there was a chance that I can get my gc a few months faster because of the efforts of IV.
Got GC Stress??
Contribute To IV Today!!
amitjoey
05-05 05:11 PM
I am on the west coast, so I call East coast senators before work (Just one or two offices) and then the rest at Lunch time. I use my cell phone.
more...
bsbawa10
09-10 12:23 PM
One thing I fail to understand, instead of flower compaign why do not we go in for letter compaign. Write letter to DOS and USCIS with copies to members of the congress highlighting all their inefficiencies and inconsistencies. USCIS does not deserve flowers for what it has done to us and what it is doing to us. Do you get flowers and info pass appointment ? Does customer service speak nicely to you and give you right answers ? Do you give flowers to anybody who mistreats you in real life ? I know Munbai ...has impressed a lot but that was a movie. Have you ever realized what would have happened, had it not been a movie ? Things would not have moved at all.
2010 Ghetto hairstyles for white
EB3_SEP04
05-18 01:58 PM
ind_game, just a heads up : when the 485 is reopened they take the op'ty to review the app for all supporting docs. meaning if you have not submitted any supporting docs like birth cert etc they would issue an RFE. They did to me, back in Jul-07 i had submitted only parents affidavit but no BC or NABC. And they gave me only 30 days (i think it used be 90 days for RFE), I had hard time collecting the required info/doc in such a short time.
more...
p_kumar
07-20 03:28 PM
I thought if we dont get the EAD after 90 days, we can walk into the US Embassy in the city nearer to us and get the EAD on the spot(more like a driver's license).:eek:
hair curly hairstyles Pictures
ArkBird
09-15 04:21 PM
Did you check the grammar of your polling question?
I support this. But might to be able to help with the fee
If this is EB2, I am glad/proud/honor to be EB3
:)
People, most of us here are just afraid that they will get red dots, be ridiculed for their beliefs. But the things is; If we don't fight for our rights, who will. We have to defend our place in the queue, which at the moment is at substantial risk.
I want everybody to get their GCs. but now interfiling/porting is hurting out position in the queue.
If you are not aware, a good bunch of EB3s are now trying to interfile & port their PDs which are between 2001 - 2005 to EB2.
This will potentially put tens of thousands of people in the EB2 queue before most people in EB2 who are waiting.
These people were not eligible for EB2 when they filed their own labor.. so they should NOT BE ALLOWED TO PORT THEIR OLD PDs. Sure EB3 can Interfile .. but you will get a new PD ... the date you interfile.
If we just keep looking... there will be a huge retrogression in EB2. And its not like these EB3 people will get through with the interfiling/porting. Most of them will be issued RFEs. Their labor apps will be audited and their primary EB3 apps will be cancelled. Infact, 85% of interfiling will never successfully make it through. And its not like it will help the EB3 brothers. That queue will still be long... because they are not going to withdraw their EB3 apps.
Also, while they will not succeed in interfiling/porting, they still will have their apps with USCIS and USCIS will sit on them before eventually issuing NOID. Sad part is they will count these when giving numbers to DOS for setting visa bulletins.
This PD porting is the last "not so ethical & legal" thing after labor substitution.. that we need to Put a cork on.
If we don't act now... then we can all expect to stay in AOS for the next 5 years. This holds for both EB2 and EB3.
I want everybody to get their GCs. I also am OK with the wait.
But anything that threatens my position in the queue is not acceptable.
I support this. But might to be able to help with the fee
If this is EB2, I am glad/proud/honor to be EB3
:)
People, most of us here are just afraid that they will get red dots, be ridiculed for their beliefs. But the things is; If we don't fight for our rights, who will. We have to defend our place in the queue, which at the moment is at substantial risk.
I want everybody to get their GCs. but now interfiling/porting is hurting out position in the queue.
If you are not aware, a good bunch of EB3s are now trying to interfile & port their PDs which are between 2001 - 2005 to EB2.
This will potentially put tens of thousands of people in the EB2 queue before most people in EB2 who are waiting.
These people were not eligible for EB2 when they filed their own labor.. so they should NOT BE ALLOWED TO PORT THEIR OLD PDs. Sure EB3 can Interfile .. but you will get a new PD ... the date you interfile.
If we just keep looking... there will be a huge retrogression in EB2. And its not like these EB3 people will get through with the interfiling/porting. Most of them will be issued RFEs. Their labor apps will be audited and their primary EB3 apps will be cancelled. Infact, 85% of interfiling will never successfully make it through. And its not like it will help the EB3 brothers. That queue will still be long... because they are not going to withdraw their EB3 apps.
Also, while they will not succeed in interfiling/porting, they still will have their apps with USCIS and USCIS will sit on them before eventually issuing NOID. Sad part is they will count these when giving numbers to DOS for setting visa bulletins.
This PD porting is the last "not so ethical & legal" thing after labor substitution.. that we need to Put a cork on.
If we don't act now... then we can all expect to stay in AOS for the next 5 years. This holds for both EB2 and EB3.
I want everybody to get their GCs. I also am OK with the wait.
But anything that threatens my position in the queue is not acceptable.
more...
Devils_Advocate
07-06 03:58 PM
Actually i think you guys have misconstrued Teli's comment, he didn't make that quote himself, he just quoted what one of the ugliest Anti Indian said to us on his blog today
Life of an I.T. Grunt (http://itgrunt.com/)
BTW TunnelRats blog was pulled off from the servers for his shit langauge against Indians;)
He is now using an offshored server!
Life of an I.T. Grunt (http://itgrunt.com/)
BTW TunnelRats blog was pulled off from the servers for his shit langauge against Indians;)
He is now using an offshored server!
hot Rabu, 06 April 2011
mpadapa
08-13 05:18 PM
This the time to unite rather than giving up.
Beware of HR 5924, this bill is planning to set aside 20k EB3 visa's for nurses instead of the current 10K. If EB3 folks loose focus and fail to push for recapture bill and somehow HR 5924 is passed. EB3 will be doomed.
Getting HR 5882 / S 3414 (recapture bills) through congress is the only hope for EB3's.
Changing the spillover will not help EBI because in both the spillover interpretations EB3I is the last in the chain. The only reason EB3I benefited from earlier spillover interpretations was because there weren't any ripe EB2-I cases available and it spilled over to EB3I. Reverting to the old spillover interpretation will not benefit EBI but sure it will benefit EB3-ROW.
Let us focus on getting the recapture bills through. Call u'r congressman/senator and start pushing for the recapture bill. EB3I has been benefited until now because of the AC21 recapture. Now it is time for another recapture.
Beware of HR 5924, this bill is planning to set aside 20k EB3 visa's for nurses instead of the current 10K. If EB3 folks loose focus and fail to push for recapture bill and somehow HR 5924 is passed. EB3 will be doomed.
Getting HR 5882 / S 3414 (recapture bills) through congress is the only hope for EB3's.
Changing the spillover will not help EBI because in both the spillover interpretations EB3I is the last in the chain. The only reason EB3I benefited from earlier spillover interpretations was because there weren't any ripe EB2-I cases available and it spilled over to EB3I. Reverting to the old spillover interpretation will not benefit EBI but sure it will benefit EB3-ROW.
Let us focus on getting the recapture bills through. Call u'r congressman/senator and start pushing for the recapture bill. EB3I has been benefited until now because of the AC21 recapture. Now it is time for another recapture.
more...
house Mohawkapril , best short haircuts and instead Punk trendy punkfeb , mohawka
santa123
07-11 08:26 AM
Any movement for any EB is good news for all EB.:D
If EB2 cases are processed heavily till Oct 08, then the chances are high on significant movement for EB3 in Oct (jus a few months from now). For EB3-ers its time to prepare and hope for the best. Best wishes to all Eb2-ers who are current...
If EB2 cases are processed heavily till Oct 08, then the chances are high on significant movement for EB3 in Oct (jus a few months from now). For EB3-ers its time to prepare and hope for the best. Best wishes to all Eb2-ers who are current...
tattoo short lack women haircuts.
saimrathi
09-27 01:48 PM
Got our DL and State IDs renewed today in PA.. I had my pp, I-129 approval, spouse's pp, I-539 approval, Address proofs, employment letter, most recent paystub, letter from Social Security office for spouse.. They didn't have any problems renewing my DL as I already had a SSN.. but since my spouse doesn't have SSN they had to get some verification from USCIS online.. The only trouble with that was they didn't remember their login info, but once they found that, it took them only minutes to find what they needed and processed my spouse's renewal... So we dont have to worry about this for 3 years (actually our state ID has been renewed for 4 years, strange)...
more...
pictures of lack girls Pictures
gc_maine2
04-04 10:27 AM
:confused::confused:
I am excerpting Internal Revenue Code Section 1361 below:
Internal Revenue Code
� 1361 S corporation defined.
(a) S corporation defined.
(1) In general.
For purposes of this title, the term �S corporation� means, with respect to any taxable year, a small business corporation for which an election under section 1362(a) is in effect for such year.
(2) C corporation.
For purposes of this title, the term �C corporation� means, with respect to any taxable year, a corporation which is not an S corporation for such year.
(b) Small business corporation.
(1) In general.
For purposes of this subchapter, the term �small business corporation� means a domestic corporation which is not an ineligible corporation and which does not�
(A) have more than 100 shareholders,
(B) have as a shareholder a person (other than an estate, a trust described in subsection (c)(2) , or an organization described in subsection (c)(6) ) who is not an individual,
(C) have a nonresident alien as a shareholder, and
(D) have more than 1 class of stock.
(2) Ineligible corporation defined.
For purposes of paragraph (1) , the term �ineligible corporation� means any corporation which is�
(A) a financial institution which uses the reserve method of accounting for bad debts described in section 585 ,
(B) an insurance company subject to tax under subchapter L,
(C) a corporation to which an election under section 936 applies, or
(D) a DISC or former DISC.
There is no mention here that the "resident" must be a permanent resident.
Here is an excerpt of the Federal Regulation that defines who is a "resident alien" for taxation purposes:
Reg �1.871-2. Determining residence of alien individuals.
Caution: The Treasury has not yet amended Reg � 1.871-2 to reflect changes made by P.L. 108-357
(a) General. The term �nonresident alien individual� means an individual whose residence is not within the United States, and who is not a citizen of the United States. The term includes a nonresident alien fiduciary. For such purpose the term �fiduciary� shall have the meaning assigned to it by section 7701(a)(6) and the regulations in Part 301 of this chapter (Regulations on Procedure and Administration). For presumption as to an alien's nonresidence, see paragraph (b) of �1.871-4.
(b) Residence defined. An alien actually present in the United States who is not a mere transient or sojourner is a resident of the United States for purposes of the income tax. Whether he is a transient is determined by his intentions with regard to the length and nature of his stay. A mere floating intention, indefinite as to time, to return to another country is not sufficient to constitute him a transient. If he lives in the United States and has no definite intention as to his stay, he is a resident. One who comes to the United States for a definite purpose which in its nature may be promptly accomplished is a transient; but, if his purpose is of such a nature that an extended stay may be necessary for its accomplishment, and to that end the alien make his home temporarily in the United States, he becomes a resident, though it may be his intention at all times to return to his domicile abroad when the purpose for which he came has been consummated or abandoned. An alien whose stay in the United States is limited to a definite period by the immigration laws is not a resident of the United States within the meaning of this section, in the absence of exceptional circumstances.
Here is the relevant Federal Regulation on Proof of Residence for determining status for tax purposes:
Reg �1.871-4. Proof of residence of aliens.
(a) Rules of evidence. The following rules of evidence shall govern in determining whether or not an alien within the United States has acquired residence therein for purposes of the income tax.
(b) Nonresidence presumed. An alien, by reason of his alienage, is presumed to be a nonresident alien.
(c) Presumption rebutted.
(1) Departing alien. In the case of an alien who presents himself for determination of tax liability before departure from the United States, the presumption as to the alien's nonresidence may be overcome by proof�
(i) That the alien, at least six months before the date he so presents himself, has filed a declaration of his intention to become a citizen of the United States under the naturalization laws; or
(ii) That the alien, at least six months before the date he so presents himself, has filed Form 1078 or its equivalent; or
(iii) Of acts and statements of the alien showing a definite intention to acquire residence in the United States or showing that his stay in the United States has been of such an extended nature as to constitute him a resident.
(2) Other aliens. In the case of other aliens, the presumption as to the alien's nonresidence may be overcome by proof�
(i) That the alien has filed a declaration of his intention to become a citizen of the United States under the naturalization laws; or
(ii) That the alien has filed Form 1078 or its equivalent; or
(iii) Of acts and statements of the alien showing a definite intention to acquire residence in the United States or showing that his stay in the United States has been of such an extended nature as to constitute him a resident.
(d) Certificate. If, in the application of paragraphs (c)(1)(iii) or (2)(iii) of this section, the internal revenue officer or employee who examines the alien is in doubt as to the facts, such officer or employee may, to assist him in determining the facts, require a certificate or certificates setting forth the facts relied upon by the alien seeking to overcome the presumption. Each such certificate, which shall contain, or be verified by, a written declaration that it is made under the penalties of perjury, shall be executed by some credible person or persons, other than the alien and members of his family, who have known the alien at least six months before the date of execution of the certificate or certificates.
(c) Application and effective dates. Unless the context indicates otherwise, ��1.871-2 through 1.871-5 apply to determine the residence of aliens for taxable years beginning before January 1, 1985. To determine the residence of aliens for taxable years beginning after December 31, 1984, see section 7701(b) and ��301.7701(b)-1 through 301.7701(b)-9 of this chapter. However, for purposes of determining whether an individual is a qualified individual under section 911(d)(1)(A), the rules of ��1.871-2 and 1.871-5 shall continue to apply for taxable years beginning after December 31, 1984. For purposes of determining whether an individual is a resident of the United States for estate and gift tax purposes, see �20.0-1(b)(1) and (2) and � 25.2501-1(b) of this chapter, respectively.
In summary, I submit to you that if you work in the US for more than 6 months out of a given year, you are a resident alien, and therefore are eligible to set up an S-Corp.
Since I am still learning about this, any input/feedback/logical arguments with relevant proof/citations would be appreciated!
Very good info, thanks for the posting. BUt its still not clear whether the spouse who is on EAD and does not work at all or for that matter 6 months in a given year, will she/he be eligible for setting up a S -corp??
Thanks
sree
I am excerpting Internal Revenue Code Section 1361 below:
Internal Revenue Code
� 1361 S corporation defined.
(a) S corporation defined.
(1) In general.
For purposes of this title, the term �S corporation� means, with respect to any taxable year, a small business corporation for which an election under section 1362(a) is in effect for such year.
(2) C corporation.
For purposes of this title, the term �C corporation� means, with respect to any taxable year, a corporation which is not an S corporation for such year.
(b) Small business corporation.
(1) In general.
For purposes of this subchapter, the term �small business corporation� means a domestic corporation which is not an ineligible corporation and which does not�
(A) have more than 100 shareholders,
(B) have as a shareholder a person (other than an estate, a trust described in subsection (c)(2) , or an organization described in subsection (c)(6) ) who is not an individual,
(C) have a nonresident alien as a shareholder, and
(D) have more than 1 class of stock.
(2) Ineligible corporation defined.
For purposes of paragraph (1) , the term �ineligible corporation� means any corporation which is�
(A) a financial institution which uses the reserve method of accounting for bad debts described in section 585 ,
(B) an insurance company subject to tax under subchapter L,
(C) a corporation to which an election under section 936 applies, or
(D) a DISC or former DISC.
There is no mention here that the "resident" must be a permanent resident.
Here is an excerpt of the Federal Regulation that defines who is a "resident alien" for taxation purposes:
Reg �1.871-2. Determining residence of alien individuals.
Caution: The Treasury has not yet amended Reg � 1.871-2 to reflect changes made by P.L. 108-357
(a) General. The term �nonresident alien individual� means an individual whose residence is not within the United States, and who is not a citizen of the United States. The term includes a nonresident alien fiduciary. For such purpose the term �fiduciary� shall have the meaning assigned to it by section 7701(a)(6) and the regulations in Part 301 of this chapter (Regulations on Procedure and Administration). For presumption as to an alien's nonresidence, see paragraph (b) of �1.871-4.
(b) Residence defined. An alien actually present in the United States who is not a mere transient or sojourner is a resident of the United States for purposes of the income tax. Whether he is a transient is determined by his intentions with regard to the length and nature of his stay. A mere floating intention, indefinite as to time, to return to another country is not sufficient to constitute him a transient. If he lives in the United States and has no definite intention as to his stay, he is a resident. One who comes to the United States for a definite purpose which in its nature may be promptly accomplished is a transient; but, if his purpose is of such a nature that an extended stay may be necessary for its accomplishment, and to that end the alien make his home temporarily in the United States, he becomes a resident, though it may be his intention at all times to return to his domicile abroad when the purpose for which he came has been consummated or abandoned. An alien whose stay in the United States is limited to a definite period by the immigration laws is not a resident of the United States within the meaning of this section, in the absence of exceptional circumstances.
Here is the relevant Federal Regulation on Proof of Residence for determining status for tax purposes:
Reg �1.871-4. Proof of residence of aliens.
(a) Rules of evidence. The following rules of evidence shall govern in determining whether or not an alien within the United States has acquired residence therein for purposes of the income tax.
(b) Nonresidence presumed. An alien, by reason of his alienage, is presumed to be a nonresident alien.
(c) Presumption rebutted.
(1) Departing alien. In the case of an alien who presents himself for determination of tax liability before departure from the United States, the presumption as to the alien's nonresidence may be overcome by proof�
(i) That the alien, at least six months before the date he so presents himself, has filed a declaration of his intention to become a citizen of the United States under the naturalization laws; or
(ii) That the alien, at least six months before the date he so presents himself, has filed Form 1078 or its equivalent; or
(iii) Of acts and statements of the alien showing a definite intention to acquire residence in the United States or showing that his stay in the United States has been of such an extended nature as to constitute him a resident.
(2) Other aliens. In the case of other aliens, the presumption as to the alien's nonresidence may be overcome by proof�
(i) That the alien has filed a declaration of his intention to become a citizen of the United States under the naturalization laws; or
(ii) That the alien has filed Form 1078 or its equivalent; or
(iii) Of acts and statements of the alien showing a definite intention to acquire residence in the United States or showing that his stay in the United States has been of such an extended nature as to constitute him a resident.
(d) Certificate. If, in the application of paragraphs (c)(1)(iii) or (2)(iii) of this section, the internal revenue officer or employee who examines the alien is in doubt as to the facts, such officer or employee may, to assist him in determining the facts, require a certificate or certificates setting forth the facts relied upon by the alien seeking to overcome the presumption. Each such certificate, which shall contain, or be verified by, a written declaration that it is made under the penalties of perjury, shall be executed by some credible person or persons, other than the alien and members of his family, who have known the alien at least six months before the date of execution of the certificate or certificates.
(c) Application and effective dates. Unless the context indicates otherwise, ��1.871-2 through 1.871-5 apply to determine the residence of aliens for taxable years beginning before January 1, 1985. To determine the residence of aliens for taxable years beginning after December 31, 1984, see section 7701(b) and ��301.7701(b)-1 through 301.7701(b)-9 of this chapter. However, for purposes of determining whether an individual is a qualified individual under section 911(d)(1)(A), the rules of ��1.871-2 and 1.871-5 shall continue to apply for taxable years beginning after December 31, 1984. For purposes of determining whether an individual is a resident of the United States for estate and gift tax purposes, see �20.0-1(b)(1) and (2) and � 25.2501-1(b) of this chapter, respectively.
In summary, I submit to you that if you work in the US for more than 6 months out of a given year, you are a resident alien, and therefore are eligible to set up an S-Corp.
Since I am still learning about this, any input/feedback/logical arguments with relevant proof/citations would be appreciated!
Very good info, thanks for the posting. BUt its still not clear whether the spouse who is on EAD and does not work at all or for that matter 6 months in a given year, will she/he be eligible for setting up a S -corp??
Thanks
sree
dresses Braided Mohawk Hairstyle has
chanduv23
11-17 05:16 PM
Update: Googling and found the muthy forums thread what I was mentioned earlier.
http://murthyforum.atinfopop.com/4/OpenTopic?a=tpc&s=1024039761&f=2704080912&m=3031070961
some ppl reported succssfully renewed EAD, AP while appeal to 485 denial was pending.
Desi we definitely need to get clarification on this. Can you post a message with interpretations from differnet lawyers? Maybe we can get more people to ask their lawyers like Fragomen, Shusterman, Siskind ..... we will then match.
http://murthyforum.atinfopop.com/4/OpenTopic?a=tpc&s=1024039761&f=2704080912&m=3031070961
some ppl reported succssfully renewed EAD, AP while appeal to 485 denial was pending.
Desi we definitely need to get clarification on this. Can you post a message with interpretations from differnet lawyers? Maybe we can get more people to ask their lawyers like Fragomen, Shusterman, Siskind ..... we will then match.
more...
makeup hair Rhianna Mohawk Hairstyle.
snathan
08-24 02:22 PM
One of my points: "loopholes" are NOT what we are here to fight against. Now, is the rest of your reply relevant?
And anyone who irritates you is a troll. So be it. This troll is there to prevent nonsensical ideas
All this will feed the anti's and true trolls. Why don't we focus on our objectives?
Don't we?
I posted long time back to stop this argument. You are the one keep posting the irrelavent informaiton.
Peace...
And anyone who irritates you is a troll. So be it. This troll is there to prevent nonsensical ideas
All this will feed the anti's and true trolls. Why don't we focus on our objectives?
Don't we?
I posted long time back to stop this argument. You are the one keep posting the irrelavent informaiton.
Peace...
girlfriend Natural Mohawk Hairstyle
john2255
07-20 04:35 PM
Kindly understand that
Yea- YES
Nay- NO
Not- Absent from voting.
Obama was absent from voting- A clever diplomacy.
Hilary Clinton- Nay(double talk)
Senators from California- both no ( Big Surprise)
http://senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=110&session=1&vote=00266
Text of the amemdment.
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?r110:1:./temp/~r110xIKs1t:e32253:
Here is the Senators and their voting pattern.
Alabama: Sessions (R-AL), Nay Shelby (R-AL), Yea
Alaska: Murkowski (R-AK), Yea Stevens (R-AK), Yea
Arizona: Kyl (R-AZ), Yea McCain (R-AZ), Yea
Arkansas: Lincoln (D-AR), Nay Pryor (D-AR), Nay
California: Boxer (D-CA), Nay Feinstein (D-CA), Nay
Colorado: Allard (R-CO), Yea Salazar (D-CO), Nay
Connecticut: Dodd (D-CT), Nay Lieberman (ID-CT), Yea
Delaware: Biden (D-DE), Nay Carper (D-DE), Nay
Florida: Martinez (R-FL), Yea Nelson (D-FL), Nay
Georgia: Chambliss (R-GA), Yea Isakson (R-GA), Yea
Hawaii: Akaka (D-HI), Nay Inouye (D-HI), Nay
Idaho: Craig (R-ID), Yea Crapo (R-ID), Yea
Illinois: Durbin (D-IL), Nay Obama (D-IL), Not Voting
Indiana: Bayh (D-IN), Yea Lugar (R-IN), Yea
Iowa: Grassley (R-IA), Yea Harkin (D-IA), Nay
Kansas: Brownback (R-KS), Not Voting Roberts (R-KS), Yea
Kentucky: Bunning (R-KY), Yea McConnell (R-KY), Yea
Louisiana: Landrieu (D-LA), Yea Vitter (R-LA), Yea
Maine: Collins (R-ME), Yea Snowe (R-ME), Yea
Maryland: Cardin (D-MD), Nay Mikulski (D-MD), Nay
Massachusetts: Kennedy (D-MA), Nay Kerry (D-MA), Nay
Michigan: Levin (D-MI), Nay Stabenow (D-MI), Nay
Minnesota: Coleman (R-MN), Yea Klobuchar (D-MN), Yea
Mississippi: Cochran (R-MS), Yea Lott (R-MS), Not Voting
Missouri: Bond (R-MO), Yea McCaskill (D-MO), Nay
Montana: Baucus (D-MT), Yea Tester (D-MT), Nay
Nebraska: Hagel (R-NE), Yea Nelson (D-NE), Yea
Nevada: Ensign (R-NV), Yea Reid (D-NV), Nay
New Hampshire: Gregg (R-NH), Yea Sununu (R-NH), Yea
New Jersey: Lautenberg (D-NJ), Nay Menendez (D-NJ), Nay
New Mexico: Bingaman (D-NM), Nay Domenici (R-NM), Yea
New York: Clinton (D-NY), Nay Schumer (D-NY), Yea
North Carolina: Burr (R-NC), Yea Dole (R-NC), Yea
North Dakota: Conrad (D-ND), Nay Dorgan (D-ND), Nay
Ohio: Brown (D-OH), Nay Voinovich (R-OH), Nay
Oklahoma: Coburn (R-OK), Yea Inhofe (R-OK), Yea
Oregon: Smith (R-OR), Yea Wyden (D-OR), Yea
Pennsylvania: Casey (D-PA), Nay Specter (R-PA), Yea
Rhode Island: Reed (D-RI), Nay Whitehouse (D-RI), Nay
South Carolina: DeMint (R-SC), Yea Graham (R-SC), Yea
South Dakota: Johnson (D-SD), Not Voting Thune (R-SD), Yea
Tennessee: Alexander (R-TN), Yea Corker (R-TN), Yea
Texas: Cornyn (R-TX), Yea Hutchison (R-TX), Yea
Utah: Bennett (R-UT), Yea Hatch (R-UT), Yea
Vermont: Leahy (D-VT), Nay Sanders (I-VT), Nay
Virginia: Warner (R-VA), Yea Webb (D-VA), Nay
Washington: Cantwell (D-WA), Yea Murray (D-WA), Yea
West Virginia: Byrd (D-WV), Not Voting Rockefeller (D-WV), Nay
Wisconsin: Feingold (D-WI), Nay Kohl (D-WI), Nay
Wyoming: Barrasso (R-WY), Yea Enzi (R-WY), Yea
That means we have lost around 2,40,000 unused visas. I heard that there is a total amount of 3,00,000 unused employment visas of the previous years due to the great efficiency of USCIS. Out of this 61,000 is kept apart for Schedule A nurses and PT's and the remaining 2,40,000 thousand would have been divided amoung employment catagories if the amendment had passed,clearing lot of our backloggs.
REMEMBER, THE RECAPTURE OF UNUSED VISAS IS ONE OF THE MOST IMPORTANT PRIORITIES OF CORE AND THE DOOR IS SLAMMED ON OUR FACES AGAIN BY HYPOCRITES LIKE HILARY AND CALIFORNIA SENATORS.
Its the high time we convince the senators who said NAYS. Lets start SOME KIND OF CAMPAIN aiming these guys. I am sure that core's hands are there behind this amendment. Well done IV. Don't get dissappointed, keep trying for Skill bill or for similar amendments. Its really unfortunate that we lost a very very big chance. Lets do something immediately.
Following is the text of amendment.
`(ii) DISTRIBUTION OF VISAS.--The total number of visas made available under paragraph (1) from unused visas from fiscal years 1994, 1996 through 1998, 2001 through 2004, and 2006 shall be distributed as follows:
``(I) The total number of visas made available for immigrant workers who had petitions approved based on Schedule A, Group I under section 656.5 of title 20, Code of Federal Regulations, as promulgated by the Secretary of Labor shall be 61,000.
``(II) The visas remaining from the total made available under subclause (I) shall be allocated equally among employment-based immigrants with approved petitions under paragraph (1), (2), or (3) of section 203(b) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (and their family members accompanying or following to join).''.
(b) H-1B Visa Availability.--Section 214(g)(1)(A) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1184(g)(1)(A)) is amended--
(1) in clause (vi), by striking ``and'' at the end;
(2) by redesignating clause (vii) as clause (ix); and
(3) by inserting after clause (vi) the following:
``(vii) 65,000 in each of fiscal years 2004 through 2007;
``(viii) 115,000 in fiscal year 2008; and''.
Yea- YES
Nay- NO
Not- Absent from voting.
Obama was absent from voting- A clever diplomacy.
Hilary Clinton- Nay(double talk)
Senators from California- both no ( Big Surprise)
http://senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=110&session=1&vote=00266
Text of the amemdment.
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?r110:1:./temp/~r110xIKs1t:e32253:
Here is the Senators and their voting pattern.
Alabama: Sessions (R-AL), Nay Shelby (R-AL), Yea
Alaska: Murkowski (R-AK), Yea Stevens (R-AK), Yea
Arizona: Kyl (R-AZ), Yea McCain (R-AZ), Yea
Arkansas: Lincoln (D-AR), Nay Pryor (D-AR), Nay
California: Boxer (D-CA), Nay Feinstein (D-CA), Nay
Colorado: Allard (R-CO), Yea Salazar (D-CO), Nay
Connecticut: Dodd (D-CT), Nay Lieberman (ID-CT), Yea
Delaware: Biden (D-DE), Nay Carper (D-DE), Nay
Florida: Martinez (R-FL), Yea Nelson (D-FL), Nay
Georgia: Chambliss (R-GA), Yea Isakson (R-GA), Yea
Hawaii: Akaka (D-HI), Nay Inouye (D-HI), Nay
Idaho: Craig (R-ID), Yea Crapo (R-ID), Yea
Illinois: Durbin (D-IL), Nay Obama (D-IL), Not Voting
Indiana: Bayh (D-IN), Yea Lugar (R-IN), Yea
Iowa: Grassley (R-IA), Yea Harkin (D-IA), Nay
Kansas: Brownback (R-KS), Not Voting Roberts (R-KS), Yea
Kentucky: Bunning (R-KY), Yea McConnell (R-KY), Yea
Louisiana: Landrieu (D-LA), Yea Vitter (R-LA), Yea
Maine: Collins (R-ME), Yea Snowe (R-ME), Yea
Maryland: Cardin (D-MD), Nay Mikulski (D-MD), Nay
Massachusetts: Kennedy (D-MA), Nay Kerry (D-MA), Nay
Michigan: Levin (D-MI), Nay Stabenow (D-MI), Nay
Minnesota: Coleman (R-MN), Yea Klobuchar (D-MN), Yea
Mississippi: Cochran (R-MS), Yea Lott (R-MS), Not Voting
Missouri: Bond (R-MO), Yea McCaskill (D-MO), Nay
Montana: Baucus (D-MT), Yea Tester (D-MT), Nay
Nebraska: Hagel (R-NE), Yea Nelson (D-NE), Yea
Nevada: Ensign (R-NV), Yea Reid (D-NV), Nay
New Hampshire: Gregg (R-NH), Yea Sununu (R-NH), Yea
New Jersey: Lautenberg (D-NJ), Nay Menendez (D-NJ), Nay
New Mexico: Bingaman (D-NM), Nay Domenici (R-NM), Yea
New York: Clinton (D-NY), Nay Schumer (D-NY), Yea
North Carolina: Burr (R-NC), Yea Dole (R-NC), Yea
North Dakota: Conrad (D-ND), Nay Dorgan (D-ND), Nay
Ohio: Brown (D-OH), Nay Voinovich (R-OH), Nay
Oklahoma: Coburn (R-OK), Yea Inhofe (R-OK), Yea
Oregon: Smith (R-OR), Yea Wyden (D-OR), Yea
Pennsylvania: Casey (D-PA), Nay Specter (R-PA), Yea
Rhode Island: Reed (D-RI), Nay Whitehouse (D-RI), Nay
South Carolina: DeMint (R-SC), Yea Graham (R-SC), Yea
South Dakota: Johnson (D-SD), Not Voting Thune (R-SD), Yea
Tennessee: Alexander (R-TN), Yea Corker (R-TN), Yea
Texas: Cornyn (R-TX), Yea Hutchison (R-TX), Yea
Utah: Bennett (R-UT), Yea Hatch (R-UT), Yea
Vermont: Leahy (D-VT), Nay Sanders (I-VT), Nay
Virginia: Warner (R-VA), Yea Webb (D-VA), Nay
Washington: Cantwell (D-WA), Yea Murray (D-WA), Yea
West Virginia: Byrd (D-WV), Not Voting Rockefeller (D-WV), Nay
Wisconsin: Feingold (D-WI), Nay Kohl (D-WI), Nay
Wyoming: Barrasso (R-WY), Yea Enzi (R-WY), Yea
That means we have lost around 2,40,000 unused visas. I heard that there is a total amount of 3,00,000 unused employment visas of the previous years due to the great efficiency of USCIS. Out of this 61,000 is kept apart for Schedule A nurses and PT's and the remaining 2,40,000 thousand would have been divided amoung employment catagories if the amendment had passed,clearing lot of our backloggs.
REMEMBER, THE RECAPTURE OF UNUSED VISAS IS ONE OF THE MOST IMPORTANT PRIORITIES OF CORE AND THE DOOR IS SLAMMED ON OUR FACES AGAIN BY HYPOCRITES LIKE HILARY AND CALIFORNIA SENATORS.
Its the high time we convince the senators who said NAYS. Lets start SOME KIND OF CAMPAIN aiming these guys. I am sure that core's hands are there behind this amendment. Well done IV. Don't get dissappointed, keep trying for Skill bill or for similar amendments. Its really unfortunate that we lost a very very big chance. Lets do something immediately.
Following is the text of amendment.
`(ii) DISTRIBUTION OF VISAS.--The total number of visas made available under paragraph (1) from unused visas from fiscal years 1994, 1996 through 1998, 2001 through 2004, and 2006 shall be distributed as follows:
``(I) The total number of visas made available for immigrant workers who had petitions approved based on Schedule A, Group I under section 656.5 of title 20, Code of Federal Regulations, as promulgated by the Secretary of Labor shall be 61,000.
``(II) The visas remaining from the total made available under subclause (I) shall be allocated equally among employment-based immigrants with approved petitions under paragraph (1), (2), or (3) of section 203(b) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (and their family members accompanying or following to join).''.
(b) H-1B Visa Availability.--Section 214(g)(1)(A) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1184(g)(1)(A)) is amended--
(1) in clause (vi), by striking ``and'' at the end;
(2) by redesignating clause (vii) as clause (ix); and
(3) by inserting after clause (vi) the following:
``(vii) 65,000 in each of fiscal years 2004 through 2007;
``(viii) 115,000 in fiscal year 2008; and''.
hairstyles short shaved hairstyles for
dpp
07-06 12:26 PM
I dont understand how organizations like DOS , USCIS can do such
Ping-pong childish things in their official website.
Save us God !
It is sure something internally happening in DOS and USCIS on this mess. They are Scared of consequences and so trying to cover all loopholes.
Ping-pong childish things in their official website.
Save us God !
It is sure something internally happening in DOS and USCIS on this mess. They are Scared of consequences and so trying to cover all loopholes.
amitga
07-06 02:28 PM
Guys for sake of transparency and moving ahead with a change, we should hold elections for the core team. Lobbying efforts are not working at all.
People are willing to write a letter or particiapte in a call, let alone spent time in meeting lawmakers and spent time in running IV on a daily basis. Please accumlate few candidates and voters. Let's see if the count of voters even reach beyond few hundreds let alone thousands.
People are willing to write a letter or particiapte in a call, let alone spent time in meeting lawmakers and spent time in running IV on a daily basis. Please accumlate few candidates and voters. Let's see if the count of voters even reach beyond few hundreds let alone thousands.
amit1234
09-11 10:11 AM
A little contribution of $100 for a great effort by IV
Google Order #720968632428178
Google Order #720968632428178
No comments:
Post a Comment