razis123
06-16 10:13 AM
Do RFE's for qualification and requirements comes only for LC or 140? I am with a similar profile but got LC and 140 approved and already filed for 485 last year. How much probablity is there that i might get an RFE for this for my 485 adjudication?
education and experience requirements are tied to a position, not to the person. So the LC is going to look into whether the position of a systems analyst requires a masters, and if it does what kind (as the minimum requriements). At I-140 they see if YOU match the position for which the LC has been approved. If the LC said systems-analyst needs a masters in computer-science or electrical engineering, then you will have a problem.
You can potentially get two questions in the RFE:
- why does the job need a Masters (EB2 justification for LC)
- why does a masters in mechanical engineering satisfy the requirement of a masters for a system analyst position (whether you meet the requirement, at I-140 stage).
Since you yourself say the position does not require a masters, proviing it needs a masters in mech. engg might be even harder. Did you ask your company attorney about this? what do they say?
education and experience requirements are tied to a position, not to the person. So the LC is going to look into whether the position of a systems analyst requires a masters, and if it does what kind (as the minimum requriements). At I-140 they see if YOU match the position for which the LC has been approved. If the LC said systems-analyst needs a masters in computer-science or electrical engineering, then you will have a problem.
You can potentially get two questions in the RFE:
- why does the job need a Masters (EB2 justification for LC)
- why does a masters in mechanical engineering satisfy the requirement of a masters for a system analyst position (whether you meet the requirement, at I-140 stage).
Since you yourself say the position does not require a masters, proviing it needs a masters in mech. engg might be even harder. Did you ask your company attorney about this? what do they say?
wallpaper avatar the last airbender
saileshdude
07-21 09:56 AM
All you guys,
Take an Infopass appointment and tell them that you have not received FP notice. Sometimes taking infopass appt helps. So you can try that option.
Take an Infopass appointment and tell them that you have not received FP notice. Sometimes taking infopass appt helps. So you can try that option.
conundrum
02-01 07:05 AM
Keep all your documents ready and apply for ur wife as soon as your PD becomes current.
2011 The Last Airbender
smartboy75
05-01 01:11 PM
I had applied for labour in 2001 and also applied for i 140 and i 485 in 2002 .My h1 had exausted 7 years and since my i 94 was becoming in valid i was suggested by my lawyer to either stay here in usa without job and wait till i get the reciept notice and ead from uscis .Since financially my situation was very tight with a baby on the way .i decided to leave for india .Now i am here again since last 4 years .When i was in india i asked my lawyer if we can do any thing like counsalar processing etc (here in this case i had paid huge amount to the lawyer,i was paying for my gc process ).the lawyer told me that nothing can be done as he has withdrawn the i 140 .
Now after 2 years i came (or had to come back) to usa .my new employer started the ggc process this year .Since i needed full information of my previous process to complete the forms i contacted old lawyer .he send me the papers and i was so shocked to see that they did not withdraw any thing my i 140 was approved 4 months after i left and my fingerprinting is due since 2002 .I just wish my lawyer had told me the truth .we could have cp or come back .
it took a day for me to overcome the frustration of what had happened .
and now my major concern is 1.that with one case pending ,i dont know how it is going to effect the new case
2.is there any thing i can do to reopen my old case .
Hey Vikramaditya
Feel sorry for your situation. Hope you are able to use your old PD and get the GC soon.
But I would like to point out one mistake on your part that you could have avoided and that was to create a user profile on USCIS website and enabling email feature on all your pending applications. Had you done that, when ur I-140 was approved you would have got an email and could have taken appropriate steps then.
Hope you do that going forward. Even if you have approved applications it is still go to keep it in ur USCIS profile cause you never know when USCIS may open an old file and raise some flags.
All the best.
Now after 2 years i came (or had to come back) to usa .my new employer started the ggc process this year .Since i needed full information of my previous process to complete the forms i contacted old lawyer .he send me the papers and i was so shocked to see that they did not withdraw any thing my i 140 was approved 4 months after i left and my fingerprinting is due since 2002 .I just wish my lawyer had told me the truth .we could have cp or come back .
it took a day for me to overcome the frustration of what had happened .
and now my major concern is 1.that with one case pending ,i dont know how it is going to effect the new case
2.is there any thing i can do to reopen my old case .
Hey Vikramaditya
Feel sorry for your situation. Hope you are able to use your old PD and get the GC soon.
But I would like to point out one mistake on your part that you could have avoided and that was to create a user profile on USCIS website and enabling email feature on all your pending applications. Had you done that, when ur I-140 was approved you would have got an email and could have taken appropriate steps then.
Hope you do that going forward. Even if you have approved applications it is still go to keep it in ur USCIS profile cause you never know when USCIS may open an old file and raise some flags.
All the best.
more...
pappu
07-18 02:14 PM
=======================
Message from IV
IV does not recommend any such actions.
We are aware of the issue and if there is any acion item, we will post it.
also be aware of what we posted earlier on this issue:
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=6084
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?p=100024#post100024
=========================
Message from IV
IV does not recommend any such actions.
We are aware of the issue and if there is any acion item, we will post it.
also be aware of what we posted earlier on this issue:
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=6084
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?p=100024#post100024
=========================
tinoue
09-27 08:24 AM
Hi All,
I received the I-485 reciept notice yesterday from my lawyer (see below for my info), but the alien number on I-485 is different from the number on my approved I-140. My I-140 has a number starting with A099, but my I-485 reciept notice has a number starting with A088. Someone in this forum mentioned that A099 is for the primary applicant and A088 is for the dependant. I am the primary applicant for I-485, so if it is true, I should get A099, not A088. I am not sure if I can have two different alien numbers or if this is a mistake by USCIS. Is anyone in the same situation?
I am sorry if this issue is discussed previously (I couldn't find the related thread). I would greatly appreciate your input.
Thank you very much.
-------------------------------------------------------------
EB1 ROW
PD: 08/2006
140: approved in 06/2007 (NSC)
485 (self and spouse): RD: 07/06/2007; RN: 09/12/07 (NSC)
765 (self and spouse): RD: 07/06/2007; RN: 09/12/07 (NSC)
131 (self and spouse): RD: 07/06/2007; RN: 09/12/07 (NSC)
FP notice recieved on 09/24/07
FP appointment (self and spouse): 10/16/07
I received the I-485 reciept notice yesterday from my lawyer (see below for my info), but the alien number on I-485 is different from the number on my approved I-140. My I-140 has a number starting with A099, but my I-485 reciept notice has a number starting with A088. Someone in this forum mentioned that A099 is for the primary applicant and A088 is for the dependant. I am the primary applicant for I-485, so if it is true, I should get A099, not A088. I am not sure if I can have two different alien numbers or if this is a mistake by USCIS. Is anyone in the same situation?
I am sorry if this issue is discussed previously (I couldn't find the related thread). I would greatly appreciate your input.
Thank you very much.
-------------------------------------------------------------
EB1 ROW
PD: 08/2006
140: approved in 06/2007 (NSC)
485 (self and spouse): RD: 07/06/2007; RN: 09/12/07 (NSC)
765 (self and spouse): RD: 07/06/2007; RN: 09/12/07 (NSC)
131 (self and spouse): RD: 07/06/2007; RN: 09/12/07 (NSC)
FP notice recieved on 09/24/07
FP appointment (self and spouse): 10/16/07
more...
gconmymind
09-29 03:35 PM
I also have soft LUD on 09/26 and 09/29...But i dont know what to read into it.
Hope there are a few more approvals today and tomorrow before dates retrogress...
Hope there are a few more approvals today and tomorrow before dates retrogress...
2010 2011 Zuko vs Katara avatar
gparr
March 15th, 2004, 11:10 AM
Steven brings up a good point about those camera phones. I fear them to a degree. Someone told me recently that they had read/heard advice that when you're using a credit card at a store make sure you keep the numbers covered up. Apparently, people with camera phones have been known to take a picture of your card to get the numbers and expiration date.
Gary
Gary
more...
ajay
02-10 10:14 AM
US experience won't count much unless you are from fortune 500 company. These days anyone even with Aptech certificate can get a chance to come and work in USA on L visa for short assignments. So if your experience is in a desi consulting firm, I do not think your resume will be attractive.
The figures shown are all looking good for experienced people in good companies. But it is not easy to get jobs as senior people in top companies. Also remember you have to work much more than you work here. You also have to work on Saturdays in a lot of companies. If your clients are in USA you may also need work in the night too to interact with your people in USA. Also remember in small companies you rarely get to do cutting edge world class work or new idea or planning. You will hardly learn or get special trainings.
Grass is always green on the other side
I was reading this thread and found something that I haven't found here also. In US also I haven't found any companies give much exposure to consultants for world class work or new idea or planning. I also haven't found any companies that provide special training to the consultants.
Fortune 500 companies may be an exception though from the above.
What I feel is it all depends on the individual how much of exposure one can get regardless where s/he is working. Technology is seamless and it is available from anywhere.
The figures shown are all looking good for experienced people in good companies. But it is not easy to get jobs as senior people in top companies. Also remember you have to work much more than you work here. You also have to work on Saturdays in a lot of companies. If your clients are in USA you may also need work in the night too to interact with your people in USA. Also remember in small companies you rarely get to do cutting edge world class work or new idea or planning. You will hardly learn or get special trainings.
Grass is always green on the other side
I was reading this thread and found something that I haven't found here also. In US also I haven't found any companies give much exposure to consultants for world class work or new idea or planning. I also haven't found any companies that provide special training to the consultants.
Fortune 500 companies may be an exception though from the above.
What I feel is it all depends on the individual how much of exposure one can get regardless where s/he is working. Technology is seamless and it is available from anywhere.
hair Youth, zuko avatar the
LostInGCProcess
09-04 11:07 AM
I beg to disagree on this thought: If you are on H1B until Dec 2009, you will have to file H1B Extention for 7th Year (I am guessing you are in your second h1B renewal). For any reason if you get denial for I-485, your H1B extention will also be cancelled, remember extention was given to you on the basis of pending I-485 (GC).
so after DEC 2009 , it's the same wheather you are on EAD or H1B Extention.
I think in the above scenario, they do not invalidate your H1. You can continue till the end-date on the H1, even though it was approved based on pending I-485. I suggest you consult an attorney on this specific scenario.
so after DEC 2009 , it's the same wheather you are on EAD or H1B Extention.
I think in the above scenario, they do not invalidate your H1. You can continue till the end-date on the H1, even though it was approved based on pending I-485. I suggest you consult an attorney on this specific scenario.
more...
hopefulgc
12-08 01:58 PM
my cousin (think immi.com handle gcapnekbohi ) got his masters 1.5 years ago from university of phoenix .. through online program.
Soon after he tried to interfile his eb3 app for eb2 and he is currently appealing his NOID... reason 'inequality of credit weights from online masters since they are not transferable'.
Anybody know of anyone who has successfully gotten through to eb2 using an online masters? please pm me..thanks in advance.
You should qualify for EB2. It doesn't matter even if it's online.
Soon after he tried to interfile his eb3 app for eb2 and he is currently appealing his NOID... reason 'inequality of credit weights from online masters since they are not transferable'.
Anybody know of anyone who has successfully gotten through to eb2 using an online masters? please pm me..thanks in advance.
You should qualify for EB2. It doesn't matter even if it's online.
hot Avatar The Last Airbender
nk2006
04-03 07:16 PM
I am not sure if we are still updating the document to cite more examples. If so one another good candidate: Jeong H. Kim, President of Bell Laboratories. One of the most influential Asian American Technologist/Enterpreuner. http://www.achievement.org/autodoc/page/kim1bio-1
http://www.lucent.com/corpinfo/bios/kim.html
I am sure we can give many more examples (I can think of a few immediately in my area, Pradeep Sandhu founder of Juniper which employes thousands now; Desh Deshpande who co-founded Cascade/Sycamore etc; Hassan Mohammad, CEO of Sonus; Arun Netravali, former president of Bell Labs; Krish Prabhu, CEO of Telllabs etc.etc.etc.etc.)
http://www.lucent.com/corpinfo/bios/kim.html
I am sure we can give many more examples (I can think of a few immediately in my area, Pradeep Sandhu founder of Juniper which employes thousands now; Desh Deshpande who co-founded Cascade/Sycamore etc; Hassan Mohammad, CEO of Sonus; Arun Netravali, former president of Bell Labs; Krish Prabhu, CEO of Telllabs etc.etc.etc.etc.)
more...
house +last+airbender+zuko+and+
kittu1991
02-27 02:05 PM
In fiscal year 2006, there were 5 Indian firms in the top 10 users of H1B visa.
http://www.networkworld.com/community/?q=node/15273
However, when it comes to PERM filing there is only 1 Indian company in the top 10 list of PERM filers. That is very interesting. Does it mean that Indian companies do not encourage or support GC process as much as the American companies do? I sure hope that's not the case and employees of those Indian companies are getting a fare shot at the Greencard.
The Inidian firms use H1B for short term assingments of 2 to 3 yrs. And now a days Greencard is not an attractive carrot for Indian SW engineers.
http://www.networkworld.com/community/?q=node/15273
However, when it comes to PERM filing there is only 1 Indian company in the top 10 list of PERM filers. That is very interesting. Does it mean that Indian companies do not encourage or support GC process as much as the American companies do? I sure hope that's not the case and employees of those Indian companies are getting a fare shot at the Greencard.
The Inidian firms use H1B for short term assingments of 2 to 3 yrs. And now a days Greencard is not an attractive carrot for Indian SW engineers.
tattoo Zutara (Zuko and Katara
ch_murthy
06-08 01:52 PM
My Labor was filed in Aug, 2004 under EB3 (Traditional); pending at Phil BEC. Again filed in Dec, 2005 under EB2 (PERM); I-140 Approved. Can I change my EB3 PD to EB2? If so, please let me know my options. I am in 7th year now. I will talk to my lawyer, without me knowing all the things; this attorney is not ready to talk to me. Thanks for your help.
more...
pictures Zutara (Zuko and Katara
DDLMODES
10-09 07:47 PM
Service request ?? What is that ??
Anyway, I understand that many people are in the same situation and that makes it a bit better. I will wait... Thanks for the replies...
Its just scary that after all these years they might consider the case abandoned if you don't receive the damn FP letter. Some guys didn't even get the receipts yet. I feel for those...
P.S.: Anybody got the case closed because they missed the FP appointment ? Is there a way to reopen it ?
Thanks again guys !
Anyway, I understand that many people are in the same situation and that makes it a bit better. I will wait... Thanks for the replies...
Its just scary that after all these years they might consider the case abandoned if you don't receive the damn FP letter. Some guys didn't even get the receipts yet. I feel for those...
P.S.: Anybody got the case closed because they missed the FP appointment ? Is there a way to reopen it ?
Thanks again guys !
dresses Which Avatar:the last
tyson
01-11 11:38 AM
Guys: One way to get involved is to find Congressional candidates (especially Republicans) and educate them. If you really want to push them along, ask can you help with their campaign.
For example, Eddie Adams in the Tampa Bay Area, is more open to discussion than the current incumbent. And, if he can be found open to backing legislation to expedite the Green Card process; then this movement has a new friend.
He is certainly (like most Republicans) no friend of illegal immigration. But, he might be open to pressuring the USCIS to move the legal immigration applications along.
For example, Eddie Adams in the Tampa Bay Area, is more open to discussion than the current incumbent. And, if he can be found open to backing legislation to expedite the Green Card process; then this movement has a new friend.
He is certainly (like most Republicans) no friend of illegal immigration. But, he might be open to pressuring the USCIS to move the legal immigration applications along.
more...
makeup Avatar+the+last+airbender+
admin
04-03 07:37 AM
Great fact sheet. It should list people like Andy Grove, Jerry Yang, and Sergey Brin - Hungarian, Chinese and Russian co-founders of Intel, Yahoo and Google - all immigrants.
Morpheus,
Thanks for your interest. We did consider all three of them but when we did more research, we found that all three of them did not get their Green Card on EB category. They had come here because their parents had come here.
qvadis, Thanks for pointing out Andy Bechtolsheim and Safi Qureshey.
Morpheus,
Thanks for your interest. We did consider all three of them but when we did more research, we found that all three of them did not get their Green Card on EB category. They had come here because their parents had come here.
qvadis, Thanks for pointing out Andy Bechtolsheim and Safi Qureshey.
girlfriend +the+last+airbender+zuko+
ujjvalkoul
01-18 11:19 AM
Mine was at Texas Service Center.
I guess they have morons working all over. I cannot understnad how anybody in his/her right senses can make such a blatant mistake.
I guess they have morons working all over. I cannot understnad how anybody in his/her right senses can make such a blatant mistake.
hairstyles house avatar last airbender
purgan
11-09 11:09 AM
Now that the restrictionists blew the election for the Republicans, they're desperately trying to rally their remaining troops and keep up their morale using immigration scare tactics....
If the Dems could vote against HR 4437 and for S 2611 in an election year and still win the majority, whose going to care for this piece of S#*t?
Another interesting observation: Its back to being called a Bush-McCain-Kennedy Amnesty....not the Reid-Kennedy Amnesty...
========
National Review
"Interesting Opportunities"
Are amnesty and open borders in our future?
By Mark Krikorian
Before election night was even over, White House spokesman Tony Snow said the Democratic takeover of the House presented “interesting opportunities,” including a chance to pass “comprehensive immigration reform” — i.e., the president’s plan for an illegal-alien amnesty and enormous increases in legal immigration, which failed only because of House Republican opposition..
At his press conference Wednesday, the president repeated this sentiment, citing immigration as “vital issue … where I believe we can find some common ground with the Democrats.”
Will the president and the Democrats get their way with the new lineup next year?
Nope.
That’s not to say the amnesty crowd isn’t hoping for it. Tamar Jacoby, the tireless amnesty supporter at the otherwise conservative Manhattan Institute, in a recent piece in Foreign Affairs eagerly anticipated a Republican defeat, “The political stars will realign, perhaps sooner than anyone expects, and when they do, Congress will return to the task it has been wrestling with: how to translate the emerging consensus into legislation to repair the nation's broken immigration system.”
In Newsweek, Fareed Zakaria shares Jacoby’s cluelessness about Flyover Land: “The great obstacle to immigration reform has been a noisy minority. … Come Tuesday, the party will be over. CNN’s Lou Dobbs and his angry band of xenophobes will continue to rail, but a new Congress, with fewer Republicans and no impending primary elections, would make the climate much less vulnerable to the tyranny of the minority.”
And fellow immigration enthusiast Fred Barnes earlier this week blamed the coming Republican defeat in part on the failure to pass an amnesty and increase legal immigration: “But imagine if Republicans had agreed on a compromise and enacted a ‘comprehensive’ — Mr. Bush’s word — immigration bill, dealing with both legal and illegal immigrants. They’d be justifiably basking in their accomplishment. The American public, except for nativist diehards, would be thrilled.”
“Emerging consensus”? “Nativist diehards”? Jacoby and her fellow-travelers seem to actually believe the results from her hilariously skewed polling questions, and those of the mainstream media, all larded with pro-amnesty codewords like “comprehensive reform” and “earned legalization,” and offering respondents the false choice of mass deportations or amnesty.
More responsible polling employing neutral language (avoiding accurate but potentially provocative terminology like “amnesty” and “illegal alien”) finds something very different. In a recent national survey by Kellyanne Conway, when told the level of immigration, 68 percent of likely voters said it was too high and only 2 percent said it was too low. Also, when offered the full range of choices of what to do about the existing illegal population, voters rejected both the extremes of legalization (“amnesty” to you and me) and mass deportations; instead, they preferred the approach of this year’s House bill, which sought attrition of the illegal population through consistent immigration law enforcement. Finally, three fourths of likely voters agreed that we have an illegal immigration problem because past enforcement efforts have been “grossly inadequate,” as opposed to the open-borders crowd’s contention that illegal immigration is caused by overly restrictive immigration rules.
Nor do the results of Tuesday’s balloting bear out the enthusiasts’ claims of a mandate for amnesty. “The test,” Fred Barnes writes, “was in Arizona, where two of the noisiest border hawks, Representatives J.D. Hayworth and Randy Graf, lost House seats.” But while these two somewhat strident voices were defeated (Hayworth voted against the House immigration-enforcement bill because it wasn’t tough enough), the very same voters approved four immigration-related ballot measures by huge margins, to deny bail to illegal aliens, bar illegals from winning punitive damages, bar illegals from receiving state subsidies for education and child care, and declare English the state’s official language.
More broadly, this was obviously a very bad year for Republicans, leading to the defeat of both enforcement supporters — like John Hostettler (career grade of A- from the pro-control lobbying group Americans for Better Immigration) and Charles Taylor (A) — as well as amnesty promoters, like Mike DeWine (D) and Lincoln Chafee (F). Likewise, the winners included both prominent hawks — Tancredo (A) and Bilbray (A+) — and doves — Lugar (D-), for instance, and probably Heather Wilson (D).
What’s more, if legalizing illegals is so widely supported by the electorate, how come no Democrats campaigned on it? Not all were as tough as Brad Ellsworth, the Indiana sheriff who defeated House Immigration Subcommittee Chairman Hostettler, or John Spratt of South Carolina, whose immigration web pages might as well have been written by Tom Tancredo. But even those nominally committed to “comprehensive” reform stressed enforcement as job one. And the national party’s “Six for 06” rip-off of the Contract with America said not a word about immigration reform, “comprehensive” or otherwise.
The only exception to this “Whatever you do, don’t mention the amnesty” approach appears to have been Jim Pederson, the Democrat who challenged Sen. Jon Kyl (a grade of B) by touting a Bush-McCain-Kennedy-style amnesty and foreign-worker program and even praised the 1986 amnesty, which pretty much everyone now agrees was a catastrophe.
Pederson lost.
Speaker Pelosi has a single mission for the next two years — to get her majority reelected in 2008. She may be a loony leftist (F- on immigration), but she and Rahm Emanuel (F) seem to be serious about trying to create a bigger tent in order to keep power, and adopting the Bush-McCain-Kennedy amnesty would torpedo those efforts. Sure, it’s likely that they’ll try to move piecemeal amnesties like the DREAM Act (HR 5131 in the current Congress), or increase H-1B visas (the indentured-servitude program for low-wage Indian computer programmers). They might also push the AgJobs bill, which is a sizable amnesty limited to illegal-alien farmworkers. None of these measures is a good idea, and Republicans might still be able to delay or kill them, but they aren’t the “comprehensive” disaster the president and the Democrats really want.
Any mass-amnesty and worker-importation scheme would take a while to get started, and its effects would begin showing up in the newspapers and in people’s workplaces right about the time the next election season gets under way. And despite the sophistries of open-borders lobbyists, Nancy Pelosi knows perfectly well that this would be bad news for those who supported it.
—* Mark Krikorian is executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies and an NRO contributor.
If the Dems could vote against HR 4437 and for S 2611 in an election year and still win the majority, whose going to care for this piece of S#*t?
Another interesting observation: Its back to being called a Bush-McCain-Kennedy Amnesty....not the Reid-Kennedy Amnesty...
========
National Review
"Interesting Opportunities"
Are amnesty and open borders in our future?
By Mark Krikorian
Before election night was even over, White House spokesman Tony Snow said the Democratic takeover of the House presented “interesting opportunities,” including a chance to pass “comprehensive immigration reform” — i.e., the president’s plan for an illegal-alien amnesty and enormous increases in legal immigration, which failed only because of House Republican opposition..
At his press conference Wednesday, the president repeated this sentiment, citing immigration as “vital issue … where I believe we can find some common ground with the Democrats.”
Will the president and the Democrats get their way with the new lineup next year?
Nope.
That’s not to say the amnesty crowd isn’t hoping for it. Tamar Jacoby, the tireless amnesty supporter at the otherwise conservative Manhattan Institute, in a recent piece in Foreign Affairs eagerly anticipated a Republican defeat, “The political stars will realign, perhaps sooner than anyone expects, and when they do, Congress will return to the task it has been wrestling with: how to translate the emerging consensus into legislation to repair the nation's broken immigration system.”
In Newsweek, Fareed Zakaria shares Jacoby’s cluelessness about Flyover Land: “The great obstacle to immigration reform has been a noisy minority. … Come Tuesday, the party will be over. CNN’s Lou Dobbs and his angry band of xenophobes will continue to rail, but a new Congress, with fewer Republicans and no impending primary elections, would make the climate much less vulnerable to the tyranny of the minority.”
And fellow immigration enthusiast Fred Barnes earlier this week blamed the coming Republican defeat in part on the failure to pass an amnesty and increase legal immigration: “But imagine if Republicans had agreed on a compromise and enacted a ‘comprehensive’ — Mr. Bush’s word — immigration bill, dealing with both legal and illegal immigrants. They’d be justifiably basking in their accomplishment. The American public, except for nativist diehards, would be thrilled.”
“Emerging consensus”? “Nativist diehards”? Jacoby and her fellow-travelers seem to actually believe the results from her hilariously skewed polling questions, and those of the mainstream media, all larded with pro-amnesty codewords like “comprehensive reform” and “earned legalization,” and offering respondents the false choice of mass deportations or amnesty.
More responsible polling employing neutral language (avoiding accurate but potentially provocative terminology like “amnesty” and “illegal alien”) finds something very different. In a recent national survey by Kellyanne Conway, when told the level of immigration, 68 percent of likely voters said it was too high and only 2 percent said it was too low. Also, when offered the full range of choices of what to do about the existing illegal population, voters rejected both the extremes of legalization (“amnesty” to you and me) and mass deportations; instead, they preferred the approach of this year’s House bill, which sought attrition of the illegal population through consistent immigration law enforcement. Finally, three fourths of likely voters agreed that we have an illegal immigration problem because past enforcement efforts have been “grossly inadequate,” as opposed to the open-borders crowd’s contention that illegal immigration is caused by overly restrictive immigration rules.
Nor do the results of Tuesday’s balloting bear out the enthusiasts’ claims of a mandate for amnesty. “The test,” Fred Barnes writes, “was in Arizona, where two of the noisiest border hawks, Representatives J.D. Hayworth and Randy Graf, lost House seats.” But while these two somewhat strident voices were defeated (Hayworth voted against the House immigration-enforcement bill because it wasn’t tough enough), the very same voters approved four immigration-related ballot measures by huge margins, to deny bail to illegal aliens, bar illegals from winning punitive damages, bar illegals from receiving state subsidies for education and child care, and declare English the state’s official language.
More broadly, this was obviously a very bad year for Republicans, leading to the defeat of both enforcement supporters — like John Hostettler (career grade of A- from the pro-control lobbying group Americans for Better Immigration) and Charles Taylor (A) — as well as amnesty promoters, like Mike DeWine (D) and Lincoln Chafee (F). Likewise, the winners included both prominent hawks — Tancredo (A) and Bilbray (A+) — and doves — Lugar (D-), for instance, and probably Heather Wilson (D).
What’s more, if legalizing illegals is so widely supported by the electorate, how come no Democrats campaigned on it? Not all were as tough as Brad Ellsworth, the Indiana sheriff who defeated House Immigration Subcommittee Chairman Hostettler, or John Spratt of South Carolina, whose immigration web pages might as well have been written by Tom Tancredo. But even those nominally committed to “comprehensive” reform stressed enforcement as job one. And the national party’s “Six for 06” rip-off of the Contract with America said not a word about immigration reform, “comprehensive” or otherwise.
The only exception to this “Whatever you do, don’t mention the amnesty” approach appears to have been Jim Pederson, the Democrat who challenged Sen. Jon Kyl (a grade of B) by touting a Bush-McCain-Kennedy-style amnesty and foreign-worker program and even praised the 1986 amnesty, which pretty much everyone now agrees was a catastrophe.
Pederson lost.
Speaker Pelosi has a single mission for the next two years — to get her majority reelected in 2008. She may be a loony leftist (F- on immigration), but she and Rahm Emanuel (F) seem to be serious about trying to create a bigger tent in order to keep power, and adopting the Bush-McCain-Kennedy amnesty would torpedo those efforts. Sure, it’s likely that they’ll try to move piecemeal amnesties like the DREAM Act (HR 5131 in the current Congress), or increase H-1B visas (the indentured-servitude program for low-wage Indian computer programmers). They might also push the AgJobs bill, which is a sizable amnesty limited to illegal-alien farmworkers. None of these measures is a good idea, and Republicans might still be able to delay or kill them, but they aren’t the “comprehensive” disaster the president and the Democrats really want.
Any mass-amnesty and worker-importation scheme would take a while to get started, and its effects would begin showing up in the newspapers and in people’s workplaces right about the time the next election season gets under way. And despite the sophistries of open-borders lobbyists, Nancy Pelosi knows perfectly well that this would be bad news for those who supported it.
—* Mark Krikorian is executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies and an NRO contributor.
Lill
03-02 03:59 AM
oi :D im gonna join too if i can.. when are the last day for submission? (or what its called in english XD hehe)
seekerofpeace
07-20 08:12 AM
I asked my lawyer specifically about this W2/bank statement/tax forms etc...All he needed was a employment verification letter.
He won't send items which are not needed. Sending extra items doesn't improve or better your chances..................send them what they need if there is an RFE then only you are supposed to send supplementary documents.
He won't send items which are not needed. Sending extra items doesn't improve or better your chances..................send them what they need if there is an RFE then only you are supposed to send supplementary documents.
No comments:
Post a Comment