unitednations
02-22 02:12 PM
To all Experts/Gurus, please advice on this issue.
I hold a H-1B status as well as I-485 Adjustment of Status Pending.
I am the primary applicant in this Eb-2 petition PD July 2006. I am with the same employer for the past four years and they are the sponsor of the green card petition as well.
I have got admit to PhD in EECS at MIT (Top program in US) and would like to pursue that option.
1. Can i continue full time PhD on my I-485 pending visa status? The PhD will be a natural progression of my current research job with my employer.
2. Do i need to change to a F-1 Visa? From what i understand, I think one cannot change from I-485 to F-1.
3. From what i understand, i can keep my I-485 pending status while doing full time study provided i have an offer from my current employer/other employer willing to hire me upon approval of the I-485. Is this correct?
4. Regarding the procedure to do this, do i need to get an offer in writing from my current employer/future employer before i start the full time study? Or do i need to get this written offer from the employer if and when i receive an RFE from USCIS?
5. Do i need to proactively invoke AC21 for doing this and let USCIS know?
6. How long do i need to stay with the employer once my I-485 is approved? I hear 6 months as a good period.
7. If the I-485 gets approved in the middle of a semester, how soon do i need to start working for the employer?
8. Any other creative ideas to sail through this like keep engagement with current employer say by consulting few hours a week etc.?
9. Do i have any realistic chance of I-485 approval before September 2009? From the recent infopass, i was told that name check, FP check, background check are done but my FP have expired. I was told that i will receive a FP notice but i don't know when.
These might have already been discussed in previous threads, but i would appreciate response from experts/gurus.
Thanks.
You can't change from 485 status to F-1 within the country. You can only change from non immigrant to another non immigrant visa within the country.
If you wanted to get on F-1; you would have to go for visa stamping and re-enter on F-1. However, consulate probably wouldn't give you F-1 since you have shown immigrant intent. Even if they somehow gave it to you; then uscis would deny your 485 eventually by entering on F-1 visa.
You can go full time to school while 485 is pending. You just have to be able to demonstrate that you have a permanent full time job waiting for you upon greencard approval (ie., AC21).
There was a legal case from a long time ago; where a person was getting sponsored for a particular position and he went to school full time for a totally irrelevant occupation to what he was getting sponsored for (he went to school to be a dentist). USCIS denied his case saying that they didn't believe his intent to go into the job since he was being trained/educated in a totally different field.
Long story short; was that it went to court and the candidate won...
If you want to put up with the inevitable hassles from uscis that you may get over doing this then go ahead. At the end you should prevail but USCIS likes for you to go through a bumpy road
I hold a H-1B status as well as I-485 Adjustment of Status Pending.
I am the primary applicant in this Eb-2 petition PD July 2006. I am with the same employer for the past four years and they are the sponsor of the green card petition as well.
I have got admit to PhD in EECS at MIT (Top program in US) and would like to pursue that option.
1. Can i continue full time PhD on my I-485 pending visa status? The PhD will be a natural progression of my current research job with my employer.
2. Do i need to change to a F-1 Visa? From what i understand, I think one cannot change from I-485 to F-1.
3. From what i understand, i can keep my I-485 pending status while doing full time study provided i have an offer from my current employer/other employer willing to hire me upon approval of the I-485. Is this correct?
4. Regarding the procedure to do this, do i need to get an offer in writing from my current employer/future employer before i start the full time study? Or do i need to get this written offer from the employer if and when i receive an RFE from USCIS?
5. Do i need to proactively invoke AC21 for doing this and let USCIS know?
6. How long do i need to stay with the employer once my I-485 is approved? I hear 6 months as a good period.
7. If the I-485 gets approved in the middle of a semester, how soon do i need to start working for the employer?
8. Any other creative ideas to sail through this like keep engagement with current employer say by consulting few hours a week etc.?
9. Do i have any realistic chance of I-485 approval before September 2009? From the recent infopass, i was told that name check, FP check, background check are done but my FP have expired. I was told that i will receive a FP notice but i don't know when.
These might have already been discussed in previous threads, but i would appreciate response from experts/gurus.
Thanks.
You can't change from 485 status to F-1 within the country. You can only change from non immigrant to another non immigrant visa within the country.
If you wanted to get on F-1; you would have to go for visa stamping and re-enter on F-1. However, consulate probably wouldn't give you F-1 since you have shown immigrant intent. Even if they somehow gave it to you; then uscis would deny your 485 eventually by entering on F-1 visa.
You can go full time to school while 485 is pending. You just have to be able to demonstrate that you have a permanent full time job waiting for you upon greencard approval (ie., AC21).
There was a legal case from a long time ago; where a person was getting sponsored for a particular position and he went to school full time for a totally irrelevant occupation to what he was getting sponsored for (he went to school to be a dentist). USCIS denied his case saying that they didn't believe his intent to go into the job since he was being trained/educated in a totally different field.
Long story short; was that it went to court and the candidate won...
If you want to put up with the inevitable hassles from uscis that you may get over doing this then go ahead. At the end you should prevail but USCIS likes for you to go through a bumpy road
wallpaper Back Tattoo Designs and Tips
Edison99
03-25 03:11 PM
Congrats the_jaguar and enjoy!
Folks,
I would like to share my success story of getting my I-485 application approved with a revoked/withdrawn I-140. We received our Green Cards and Welcome Letters in the mail yesterday. If you go through my profile, you should be able to get most of the information, but here it is anyway:
1] Company A applied for my LC followed by the I-140 application. We never got a chance to file I-485.
2] After I quite company A, they withdrew my I-140 application.
3] Company B started the process again with my labor application, followed by my new I-140 application. We didn't capture the older PD at this stage, but the A# was the same as the old one.
4] When we sent in our I-485 application, we included a letter describing that we would like to retain the older PD (we sent them a snippet of page 27 of the Field Adjudicator's Manual - Yates memo). In the interest of being transparent, we mentioned that the earlier I-140 was withdrawn by the previous employer. After an unrelated RFE, our case was finally approved last Friday (03/18).
I am sharing this information so that others who are stuck in a similar situation can use this as a datapoint in their struggle against the USCIS. I wish you all the very best in your Green Card journey.
Folks,
I would like to share my success story of getting my I-485 application approved with a revoked/withdrawn I-140. We received our Green Cards and Welcome Letters in the mail yesterday. If you go through my profile, you should be able to get most of the information, but here it is anyway:
1] Company A applied for my LC followed by the I-140 application. We never got a chance to file I-485.
2] After I quite company A, they withdrew my I-140 application.
3] Company B started the process again with my labor application, followed by my new I-140 application. We didn't capture the older PD at this stage, but the A# was the same as the old one.
4] When we sent in our I-485 application, we included a letter describing that we would like to retain the older PD (we sent them a snippet of page 27 of the Field Adjudicator's Manual - Yates memo). In the interest of being transparent, we mentioned that the earlier I-140 was withdrawn by the previous employer. After an unrelated RFE, our case was finally approved last Friday (03/18).
I am sharing this information so that others who are stuck in a similar situation can use this as a datapoint in their struggle against the USCIS. I wish you all the very best in your Green Card journey.
bp333
11-05 02:18 PM
Just voted, thank you for sharing. I'll spread the word..
2011 This tattoo here was done on
reverendflash
10-21 02:18 AM
real quick...
Grateful Dead... :sleep: :sleep: :sleep:
another thread maybe...:cool:
Rev:elderly:
Grateful Dead... :sleep: :sleep: :sleep:
another thread maybe...:cool:
Rev:elderly:
more...
krishnam70
02-18 12:04 PM
currently iam working with vsginc they filed my greencard processing through different company axiom
i applied for 485 and iam past 180 days
i have never been on axiom payroll
can anybody tell me can i use ac21 portability ?
Thanks
What was your GC filed for? as a future employee? If that is the case does it still constitute a a fraudulent practice? I show the yates memo could be used as a reference if at all this case is denied.
any suggestion desi?
cheers
kris
i applied for 485 and iam past 180 days
i have never been on axiom payroll
can anybody tell me can i use ac21 portability ?
Thanks
What was your GC filed for? as a future employee? If that is the case does it still constitute a a fraudulent practice? I show the yates memo could be used as a reference if at all this case is denied.
any suggestion desi?
cheers
kris
vgc
07-26 10:37 AM
SA 2428. Mr. CORNYN submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill H.R. 2638, making appropriations for the Department of Homeland Security for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2008, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows:
At the appropriate place, insert the following:
SEC. __. EMPLOYMENT-BASED VISAS.
(a) Recapture of Unused Employment-Based Immigrant Visas.--Section 106(d) of the American Competitiveness in the Twenty-first Century Act of 2000 (Public Law 106-313; 8 U.S.C. 1153 note) is amended--
(1) in paragraph (1)--
(A) by inserting ``1994, 1996, 1997, 1998,'' after ``available in fiscal year'';
(B) by striking ``or 2004'' and inserting ``2004, or 2006''; and
(C) by striking ``be available'' and all that follows and inserting the following: ``be available only to--
``(A) employment-based immigrants under paragraphs (1), (2), and (3) of section 203(b) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1153(b));
``(B) the family members accompanying or following to join such employment-based immigrants under section 203(d) of such Act; and
``(C) those 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.''; and
(2) in paragraph (2)--
(A) in subparagraph (A), by striking ``1999 through 2004'' and inserting ``1994, 1996 through 1998, 2001 through 2004, and 2006''; and
(B) in subparagraph (B), by amending clause (ii) to read as follows:
``(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 to 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:
[Page: S9966] GPO's PDF ``(vii) 65,000 in each of fiscal years 2004 through 2007;
``(viii) 115,000 in fiscal year 2008; and''.
At the appropriate place, insert the following:
SEC. __. EMPLOYMENT-BASED VISAS.
(a) Recapture of Unused Employment-Based Immigrant Visas.--Section 106(d) of the American Competitiveness in the Twenty-first Century Act of 2000 (Public Law 106-313; 8 U.S.C. 1153 note) is amended--
(1) in paragraph (1)--
(A) by inserting ``1994, 1996, 1997, 1998,'' after ``available in fiscal year'';
(B) by striking ``or 2004'' and inserting ``2004, or 2006''; and
(C) by striking ``be available'' and all that follows and inserting the following: ``be available only to--
``(A) employment-based immigrants under paragraphs (1), (2), and (3) of section 203(b) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1153(b));
``(B) the family members accompanying or following to join such employment-based immigrants under section 203(d) of such Act; and
``(C) those 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.''; and
(2) in paragraph (2)--
(A) in subparagraph (A), by striking ``1999 through 2004'' and inserting ``1994, 1996 through 1998, 2001 through 2004, and 2006''; and
(B) in subparagraph (B), by amending clause (ii) to read as follows:
``(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 to 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:
[Page: S9966] GPO's PDF ``(vii) 65,000 in each of fiscal years 2004 through 2007;
``(viii) 115,000 in fiscal year 2008; and''.
more...
cnag
03-24 03:07 PM
Thanks for the news vinabath. You know what?
Indian cricket team won the world cup last night. They beat West Indies.
Congratulate Kapil, Srikanth, Ravi shastri, Gavaskar, Mohindar Amarnath and other team members.
Refugee_New, I consider this the mother of all jokes. After a long time, I had a good hearty laugh reading your post. Thanks buddy!!!
Indian cricket team won the world cup last night. They beat West Indies.
Congratulate Kapil, Srikanth, Ravi shastri, Gavaskar, Mohindar Amarnath and other team members.
Refugee_New, I consider this the mother of all jokes. After a long time, I had a good hearty laugh reading your post. Thanks buddy!!!
2010 Photo by cheddarfish
ronhira
09-18 09:42 PM
USCIS admits to a backlog of 190K but most are in EB2-I/C and EB3 with a PD earlier than Aug 2007. No one knows how many people are waiting in these categories with approved I-140s from Aug2007-Sep2010. It could be another 150-200K. S0 even if the backlog is not 800K, but its around 400K.
uscis definition of backlog is pending AOS applications that have been processed and have visa dates current...... they do not account for application with non-current dates as backlog..... so that's y they say the backlog is 190K..... but in reality the backlog size is many folder higher than 190K.....
u may want to look for uscis definition of backlog....
uscis definition of backlog is pending AOS applications that have been processed and have visa dates current...... they do not account for application with non-current dates as backlog..... so that's y they say the backlog is 190K..... but in reality the backlog size is many folder higher than 190K.....
u may want to look for uscis definition of backlog....
more...
RedHat
08-29 11:41 PM
Today i got REF regarding my GC .
USCIS is asking me to provide following:
1)All Documents pertaining to US immegration status. Including most recent I-94 , EAD, and all my H1 copies
2)Copies of all US Federal Tax retuns ever filed.
3)Copies of first and last pay stubs of all US employers.
4)Birth Ceritificatates
5)Marriage cetificate and cermony photos.
I have all documents except my first paycheck of the first employer.
I came to USA in the year of 1999 without my employer permision.
I stayed with frieds help without informing the my employer(who filed the H1B was not interested to bring me usa becuase market was not good). It took 8 months to get job after that i contact my employer and i was with him for 6 months and joined another company.
Only problem is , i stayed 8 months in the USA without job(without status).
Between 1999 to 2007 i visited inida 4 times without any issues.
USCIS is asking me submit my first paycheck. - I did not work first 8 months
Anyone can guide me how to handle this case?.
If i tell my employer was not paid first 8 months will that be any problem?
And what are chances of get my GC.
Please help!
USCIS is asking me to provide following:
1)All Documents pertaining to US immegration status. Including most recent I-94 , EAD, and all my H1 copies
2)Copies of all US Federal Tax retuns ever filed.
3)Copies of first and last pay stubs of all US employers.
4)Birth Ceritificatates
5)Marriage cetificate and cermony photos.
I have all documents except my first paycheck of the first employer.
I came to USA in the year of 1999 without my employer permision.
I stayed with frieds help without informing the my employer(who filed the H1B was not interested to bring me usa becuase market was not good). It took 8 months to get job after that i contact my employer and i was with him for 6 months and joined another company.
Only problem is , i stayed 8 months in the USA without job(without status).
Between 1999 to 2007 i visited inida 4 times without any issues.
USCIS is asking me submit my first paycheck. - I did not work first 8 months
Anyone can guide me how to handle this case?.
If i tell my employer was not paid first 8 months will that be any problem?
And what are chances of get my GC.
Please help!
hair new infrared camera
njboy
06-09 10:12 AM
Imagine if it takes 3-4 years to process an H1B..the only option we'll have, is to go premium processing. That way, premium processing becomes the rule, not the exception. If they want to be really "capitalistic", they can say, how much is the H1B worker ready to pay out of their salary for the H1? 10,000 dollars a year? Shouldnt they charge us that, if they think they can get away with it? Afterall, its good old capitalism right? Everyone should be concerned about their bottom line..why not the BCIS? Im sure most of these already exploited H1B's will shell out 10K extra per year just to keep their H1's. Does that sound like a good business proposition? It does..to me. Just like people pay extra to get their mail delivered next day Fedex, the BCIS should charge us 1000$ extra if we want the H1B processed in a reasonable time, another $1000.00 to get I-130 processed etc. Why the figure of $1000.00? Was it arrived based on some calculation? Why not..$5000, or even $7000? After all, market pricing should be based on demand supply, and since H1B is marketed as a premium product, this should be reflected in the prices otherwise it will lose its brand image..right?
more...
a_yaja
09-13 03:14 PM
Hi pd052009,
Thank you for your help. I am just confused about one issue. I thought by porting my PD from and old EB2+ perm case to a new EB2+perm will save me time in waiting for the PD. Now you mentioned that if I port my PD from an old EB2 to a new EB2 (same category), I will not save any time. Please clarify.
Thanks.
To give you an example, consider the following:
1. From employer A, your EB2 Priority Date is July 7th, 2006 and your country of chargeability is India. Per the Oct. 2010 visa bulletin, your date is not current.
2. You change employer to employer B who files your PERM on July 17th, 2010 and you get it approved followed by I-140 approval as well (premium processing)
3. PD from second employer's EB2 GC process is July 17th, 2010 - but due to earlier approved I-140 you are able to port your PD and hence the PD on your second I-140 approval is July 7th, 2006 (assuming that the attorney asked for porting of PD).
4. From both your approved I-140 - your priority date is still July 7th, 2006. However, from Oct. 2010 visa bulletin, cut off date is May 8th, 2006. So your date is still not current. For your date to be current, the cut-off date has to be July 8th, 2010 or later.
Hope this helps.
Thank you for your help. I am just confused about one issue. I thought by porting my PD from and old EB2+ perm case to a new EB2+perm will save me time in waiting for the PD. Now you mentioned that if I port my PD from an old EB2 to a new EB2 (same category), I will not save any time. Please clarify.
Thanks.
To give you an example, consider the following:
1. From employer A, your EB2 Priority Date is July 7th, 2006 and your country of chargeability is India. Per the Oct. 2010 visa bulletin, your date is not current.
2. You change employer to employer B who files your PERM on July 17th, 2010 and you get it approved followed by I-140 approval as well (premium processing)
3. PD from second employer's EB2 GC process is July 17th, 2010 - but due to earlier approved I-140 you are able to port your PD and hence the PD on your second I-140 approval is July 7th, 2006 (assuming that the attorney asked for porting of PD).
4. From both your approved I-140 - your priority date is still July 7th, 2006. However, from Oct. 2010 visa bulletin, cut off date is May 8th, 2006. So your date is still not current. For your date to be current, the cut-off date has to be July 8th, 2010 or later.
Hope this helps.
hot Camera Tattoo Step 3 by
parablergh
09-02 04:13 PM
The officer is incorrect. The H-1B visa stamp only allows for reentry into the U.S. from abroad, it does not control your status. You can either go back and explain that the I-94 card attached to the approval notice isn't the most recent, and therefore isn't your current expiration or follow one of the other options presented above.
more...
house tattoo flower designs.
nixstor
10-30 04:32 PM
I was reading the USA Today articles and I have a suggestion...guys please try to do spell check before you submit to such forums. It looks bad on us especially when we call ourselves skilled immigrants.
One glaring error that I saw was this guy with a MBA from Stanford Univ and he wrote it as "Standford Univ"......Is there a univ called "Standford"???? I tried googling it but did not find it...I hope it was not somebody from our group....
I understand what you are saying but its difficult for people to check their typos when posting online. I mean not every one has that time when they are juggling things. It's not M$oft outlook right :) B T W, I am not the one who posted it.
One glaring error that I saw was this guy with a MBA from Stanford Univ and he wrote it as "Standford Univ"......Is there a univ called "Standford"???? I tried googling it but did not find it...I hope it was not somebody from our group....
I understand what you are saying but its difficult for people to check their typos when posting online. I mean not every one has that time when they are juggling things. It's not M$oft outlook right :) B T W, I am not the one who posted it.
tattoo my camera tattoo step 2 by
ggc
10-16 04:41 PM
No, I received interview cancellation letter for the interview that scheduled in 2009. Reason not mentioned in that letter. We moved to CA, this year and San Jose field office scheduled interview
more...
pictures This tattoo was my first,
dixie
07-18 06:28 PM
I have a few questions and much thanks for those who answer.
1. I have had a H1-B in 2002, but I did not get a stamping. I quit my job and went back to school. I'm out of school now, do not have an OPT (second masters) and worried about the cap.
I heard that people who have held H1-B's in the past do not come under the cap. Is this true?
2. A company is interested in hiring me but only in the muiddle of August (they want to conduct a few more interviews). The cap would most likely be reached by then. Do I have any other options?
Thanks,
Much worried.
No, only contiguous H1-B renewals(after 3 years or yearly extensions after 6 years) are exempted from the cap. If you go back to school and apply for a fresh H1, then it is very much counted against the cap. Apart from falling back to H4 or F2(if you are married and your spouse is on H1/F1), i dont see too many options if you cannot get one of the masters quota H1. BTW, if you dont have an OPT and are out of school, then how are you still here ?
1. I have had a H1-B in 2002, but I did not get a stamping. I quit my job and went back to school. I'm out of school now, do not have an OPT (second masters) and worried about the cap.
I heard that people who have held H1-B's in the past do not come under the cap. Is this true?
2. A company is interested in hiring me but only in the muiddle of August (they want to conduct a few more interviews). The cap would most likely be reached by then. Do I have any other options?
Thanks,
Much worried.
No, only contiguous H1-B renewals(after 3 years or yearly extensions after 6 years) are exempted from the cap. If you go back to school and apply for a fresh H1, then it is very much counted against the cap. Apart from falling back to H4 or F2(if you are married and your spouse is on H1/F1), i dont see too many options if you cannot get one of the masters quota H1. BTW, if you dont have an OPT and are out of school, then how are you still here ?
dresses tattoo tuesday.
venky_handsy
09-10 10:31 PM
your employer while applying the h1b , they did not applied for change of status to h1b. they just applied for h1b only. so you did not got the i-94.
so until you out of the country and get it stamped h1b and re-enter you h1b will not be activated.
since you have your f1 valid until december...you can go for stamping before that date or you can also amend h1b for change of status thru your employer also.
hope this helps
so until you out of the country and get it stamped h1b and re-enter you h1b will not be activated.
since you have your f1 valid until december...you can go for stamping before that date or you can also amend h1b for change of status thru your employer also.
hope this helps
more...
makeup Camera Tattoo amp;lt;3 8.4.2010
arnet
10-31 04:05 PM
my lawyer said that if anyone uses EAD to work or planning to use EAD soon (not H1B) then it is better to apply for EAD renewal before 6 months of current one expires. If you are in H1B not planning to use EAD even in future then you can renew it 3-4 months before expiry.
girlfriend cat eyes tattoo
imm_pro
05-20 01:13 PM
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=26605
looks like the Agjobs amendment tagged to this bill is drawing lot of attention and negative publicity..
This is why we keep close watch on Congress. In a bipartisan effort accomplished quickly and virtually under the table, Sens. Diane Feinstein (D-Calif.) and Sen. Larry Craig (R-Idaho) -- in Senate Appropriations markup of the War Supplemental bill -- obtained approval of an amendment that would create an amnesty for illegal alien farm workers. The measure, called the Emergency Agriculture Relief Act, was added to the War Supplemental bill in a 17-12 vote last Thursday.
Known as the AgJob amendment, the Feinstein-Craig measure revived instantaneously the controversy that caused conservatives to lash out at the White House and Congress last summer.
The measure would grant temporary legal status to 1.35 million illegal immigrants and their families currently working in the agricultural field. The legislation was passed out of committee at the request of agribusiness interests who have been insisting that they need illegal aliens to harvest crops and run horse shows. The legislation is nothing less than �comprehensive immigration reform� on a smaller scale.
What supporters of the amendment are calling �emergency� and �temporary�, opponents have labeled an �amnesty visa.� Sen. Robert Byrd (D-WV) said he considered the amendment amnesty and that �all these immigration issues should be addressed through the regular order."
Sen. David Vitter (R-La.) opposes the amendment and said he will be working to remove it from the supplemental bill.
�Instead of ensuring that American troops are provided with the tools and resources that they need to protect our homeland, some in the Senate have instead chosen to jeopardize this funding by inserting provisions that are -- at best -- counterproductive to the efforts of our military members,� said Vitter in a press release.
According to Feinstein, the legislation is supported by the American Farm Bureau, the United Farm Workers, and other similar organizations but this is likely because it allows those employers to continue paying excessively low wages.
Feinstein assured the Appropriations Committee that the bill was not an amnesty because it requires the individuals work at least 100 days a year in the agricultural industry for the next five years.
�It is an emergency agricultural worker bill, which will give protected status to those workers who have worked in agriculture within the last 48 months,� she said, also noting that the U.S. would lose $5-9 billion to foreign competition without it.
Those are the same arguments that we heard last summer. In truth, Feinstein-Craig DOES provide amnesty for an unknown number of illegal workers. It provides, as the Bush-McCain-Kennedy bill did, a path to citizenship for some illegal aliens.
The amendment will go through the Senate this week as they consider the Iraq spending bill as a whole. At this writing, it isn�t clear that Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) will bring the measure to the floor for a vote.
NumbersUSA, an organization fighting illegal immigration, called the amendment �outrageous� and urged constituents to contact their political leaders. They noted that because families can also obtain temporary legal status through the amendment, it could reach almost 3 million people.
�The most important point to stress is that there is no need for an amnesty to provide growers with workers�there already is an H-2A foreign agricultural worker program that provides growers with an unlimited number of temporary workers if the growers agree to pay a decent wage and ensure that they go home at the end of the season,� said NumbersUSA news release.
Some farming organizations, like the Northwest Growers Association, not only support the measure but don�t think it does enough. They claim the AgJobs amendment doesn�t do enough for illegal aliens because it includes an �unrealistic visa cap.�
But the H-2A visa program exists and works without a cap. While Craig and others claim �oranges are rotting� on trees and needs illegal aliens to tend to our agriculture, places like the North Carolina Grower�s Association (NCGA, spotlighted on Michelle Malkin�s blog), oppose the amendment and have fared well with H-2A. NCGA utilizes H-2A to its fullest capacity as other agricultural organizations do not.
Additionally, AgJobs would maximize H-2B visas (lower skill, non-agricultural seasonal workers) and push an influx of more illegal immigrants, which clashes with what the American people want. They demonstrated their disapproval of amnesty proposals last year by a bipartisan grassroots effort to kill the immigration reform bill of 2007.
Sen. Barbara Mikulski (D-Md) also slipped in an amendment supporting illegal immigrants in the supplemental bill. Mikulski hopes to extend a program for temporary workers to re-enter the country without being subject to the limits on H2B visas. In a Congress Daily article, she said, "If you like Maryland crabs, vote for this amendment.�
"It seems that the members of the Senate Appropriations Committee love our troops�but for entirely different reasons: they provide convenient cover for passing special interest legislation to benefit illegal aliens and powerful business lobbies," wrote Ira Mehlman, Media Director of the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR) in an opinion piece yesterday.
Mehlman also reported that Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wa.) added a provision that would include 218,000 visas for skilled foreign workers. Part of the problem is this: Right now, America�s population is 300 million. At the rate we are going with illegal immigrants (sped up by amendments like these), the US Census Bureau estimates the population will be 450 million by 2050. If a Democrat, entitlement-oriented government sinks its teeth in, taxes will be higher than ever and freedom will be in jeopardy.
The Senate will begin debate on the supplemental bill tomorrow and is likely to vote on it before the end of the week. Some Republican senators -- including Alabama�s Jeff Sessions and others -- are working hard to expunge the illegal alien amnesty provisions. The only thing that may save the day is that the Democrats are including many of the antiwar measures that the president has vetoed in previous bills. If the bill passes, it�s likely to be vetoed.
And Congress will be back to ground zero after Memorial Day.
looks like the Agjobs amendment tagged to this bill is drawing lot of attention and negative publicity..
This is why we keep close watch on Congress. In a bipartisan effort accomplished quickly and virtually under the table, Sens. Diane Feinstein (D-Calif.) and Sen. Larry Craig (R-Idaho) -- in Senate Appropriations markup of the War Supplemental bill -- obtained approval of an amendment that would create an amnesty for illegal alien farm workers. The measure, called the Emergency Agriculture Relief Act, was added to the War Supplemental bill in a 17-12 vote last Thursday.
Known as the AgJob amendment, the Feinstein-Craig measure revived instantaneously the controversy that caused conservatives to lash out at the White House and Congress last summer.
The measure would grant temporary legal status to 1.35 million illegal immigrants and their families currently working in the agricultural field. The legislation was passed out of committee at the request of agribusiness interests who have been insisting that they need illegal aliens to harvest crops and run horse shows. The legislation is nothing less than �comprehensive immigration reform� on a smaller scale.
What supporters of the amendment are calling �emergency� and �temporary�, opponents have labeled an �amnesty visa.� Sen. Robert Byrd (D-WV) said he considered the amendment amnesty and that �all these immigration issues should be addressed through the regular order."
Sen. David Vitter (R-La.) opposes the amendment and said he will be working to remove it from the supplemental bill.
�Instead of ensuring that American troops are provided with the tools and resources that they need to protect our homeland, some in the Senate have instead chosen to jeopardize this funding by inserting provisions that are -- at best -- counterproductive to the efforts of our military members,� said Vitter in a press release.
According to Feinstein, the legislation is supported by the American Farm Bureau, the United Farm Workers, and other similar organizations but this is likely because it allows those employers to continue paying excessively low wages.
Feinstein assured the Appropriations Committee that the bill was not an amnesty because it requires the individuals work at least 100 days a year in the agricultural industry for the next five years.
�It is an emergency agricultural worker bill, which will give protected status to those workers who have worked in agriculture within the last 48 months,� she said, also noting that the U.S. would lose $5-9 billion to foreign competition without it.
Those are the same arguments that we heard last summer. In truth, Feinstein-Craig DOES provide amnesty for an unknown number of illegal workers. It provides, as the Bush-McCain-Kennedy bill did, a path to citizenship for some illegal aliens.
The amendment will go through the Senate this week as they consider the Iraq spending bill as a whole. At this writing, it isn�t clear that Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) will bring the measure to the floor for a vote.
NumbersUSA, an organization fighting illegal immigration, called the amendment �outrageous� and urged constituents to contact their political leaders. They noted that because families can also obtain temporary legal status through the amendment, it could reach almost 3 million people.
�The most important point to stress is that there is no need for an amnesty to provide growers with workers�there already is an H-2A foreign agricultural worker program that provides growers with an unlimited number of temporary workers if the growers agree to pay a decent wage and ensure that they go home at the end of the season,� said NumbersUSA news release.
Some farming organizations, like the Northwest Growers Association, not only support the measure but don�t think it does enough. They claim the AgJobs amendment doesn�t do enough for illegal aliens because it includes an �unrealistic visa cap.�
But the H-2A visa program exists and works without a cap. While Craig and others claim �oranges are rotting� on trees and needs illegal aliens to tend to our agriculture, places like the North Carolina Grower�s Association (NCGA, spotlighted on Michelle Malkin�s blog), oppose the amendment and have fared well with H-2A. NCGA utilizes H-2A to its fullest capacity as other agricultural organizations do not.
Additionally, AgJobs would maximize H-2B visas (lower skill, non-agricultural seasonal workers) and push an influx of more illegal immigrants, which clashes with what the American people want. They demonstrated their disapproval of amnesty proposals last year by a bipartisan grassroots effort to kill the immigration reform bill of 2007.
Sen. Barbara Mikulski (D-Md) also slipped in an amendment supporting illegal immigrants in the supplemental bill. Mikulski hopes to extend a program for temporary workers to re-enter the country without being subject to the limits on H2B visas. In a Congress Daily article, she said, "If you like Maryland crabs, vote for this amendment.�
"It seems that the members of the Senate Appropriations Committee love our troops�but for entirely different reasons: they provide convenient cover for passing special interest legislation to benefit illegal aliens and powerful business lobbies," wrote Ira Mehlman, Media Director of the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR) in an opinion piece yesterday.
Mehlman also reported that Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wa.) added a provision that would include 218,000 visas for skilled foreign workers. Part of the problem is this: Right now, America�s population is 300 million. At the rate we are going with illegal immigrants (sped up by amendments like these), the US Census Bureau estimates the population will be 450 million by 2050. If a Democrat, entitlement-oriented government sinks its teeth in, taxes will be higher than ever and freedom will be in jeopardy.
The Senate will begin debate on the supplemental bill tomorrow and is likely to vote on it before the end of the week. Some Republican senators -- including Alabama�s Jeff Sessions and others -- are working hard to expunge the illegal alien amnesty provisions. The only thing that may save the day is that the Democrats are including many of the antiwar measures that the president has vetoed in previous bills. If the bill passes, it�s likely to be vetoed.
And Congress will be back to ground zero after Memorial Day.
hairstyles to have a camera tattoo.
vandanaverdia
09-09 01:57 PM
^^^ bump ^^^
trueguy
08-08 06:18 PM
^^^^^^^
bump
^^^^^^^
bump
^^^^^^^
texcan
12-19 04:32 PM
My h1 got approved in june 2008. I did travel to China in September & entered back on Sep 10 using H4. Is it possible that my entry changed my latest status to H4?
Thanks,
LG.
Come on...you entered using h4, this is the last status INS has for you.
People with mulitple visas have to choose a status when they enter back in USA.
where have you been sleeping.
its ok, no biggie....
One solution i will do in this case is, if you have a h1 visa stampled...then go out of country and come back on h1 status. Make sure you claim the days you were on h4 to be not counted against h1 days.
If you donot have a h1 visa already, then talk to lawyer get all paper work and go to canada/mexico get a visa and come back on right status.
Thanks,
LG.
Come on...you entered using h4, this is the last status INS has for you.
People with mulitple visas have to choose a status when they enter back in USA.
where have you been sleeping.
its ok, no biggie....
One solution i will do in this case is, if you have a h1 visa stampled...then go out of country and come back on h1 status. Make sure you claim the days you were on h4 to be not counted against h1 days.
If you donot have a h1 visa already, then talk to lawyer get all paper work and go to canada/mexico get a visa and come back on right status.
No comments:
Post a Comment