gc_chahiye
09-20 05:31 AM
I am working for a MNC and I got L1 visa stamped. After marriage I got my H4 visa stamped.(After L1 stamping) But the Visa officials have not marked the L1 visa cancelled in the passport, does it mean that the Visa is still valid? Does that mean that i can still travel on my L1 visa?
If your L1 petition is still valid (not withdrawn by employer) and you intend to work for that employer (ie. fullfill all other L1 requirements) then yes, you can still travel on L1 and maintain L1 status in the US.
If your L1 petition is still valid (not withdrawn by employer) and you intend to work for that employer (ie. fullfill all other L1 requirements) then yes, you can still travel on L1 and maintain L1 status in the US.
wallpaper Hello Kitty Stenciled Macbook
indianabacklog
08-01 10:31 AM
Has anyone who filed in June and at NSC recieved any approvals for EAD/AP ?
We see TSC sending all these approvals..!!!
Please post here and we can track'em as they come.
Thanks
Have not received EAD approval for case filed in Texas in May, where are all these approvals from June??????????????
We see TSC sending all these approvals..!!!
Please post here and we can track'em as they come.
Thanks
Have not received EAD approval for case filed in Texas in May, where are all these approvals from June??????????????
ngopikrishnan
11-22 02:04 PM
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/11/21/AR2007112102419.html
2011 Hello Kitty Padded Laptop Bag
coopheal
12-30 03:17 PM
5. I will pay IV at least $5.00 a month
Change it to
5. I will pay IV at least $50 a month
Change it to
5. I will pay IV at least $50 a month
more...
sk.aggarwal
11-05 10:21 AM
A consultant in my project recently got his visa stamped in India. He didn't faced any issues. They didn't even ask for client letter. I guess he is just lucky :).
I am going to India next month and need to get my visa stamped. I work for a TARP employer ... Lets see how it goes.
I am going to India next month and need to get my visa stamped. I work for a TARP employer ... Lets see how it goes.
vikramark
10-18 08:34 AM
Hello,
Online Status for my EAD application says, RFE has been sent.....
What kind of RFE do we get on EAD?
140 Approved on 10/06/06
485/765/131 RD 07/31/07
485/765/131 ND 10/11/07
Approvals:??????
Online Status for my EAD application says, RFE has been sent.....
What kind of RFE do we get on EAD?
140 Approved on 10/06/06
485/765/131 RD 07/31/07
485/765/131 ND 10/11/07
Approvals:??????
more...
krishna_brc
08-09 10:13 AM
if PD is not current in VB? One has to wait till PD is current to file 485....
Yes, we have to wiat till PD is current to file 485
Yes, we have to wiat till PD is current to file 485
2010 Sanrio Hello Kitty Formed
Macaca
08-26 09:29 PM
Op-Chart: A New, Improved Congress? (http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/26/opinion/26mann.html) By THOMAS E. MANN, MOLLY REYNOLDS, and PETER HOEY | New York Times, August 26, 2007
Thomas E. Mann is a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution and the co-author of �The Broken Branch.� Molly Reynolds is a research assistant at Brookings. Peter Hoey is an illustrator in Arcata, Calif.
JUST before Congress adjourned for its August recess, Democrats engaged in a flurry of legislative activity, while Republicans complained about a �do-nothing� Congress�s meager policy accomplishments. Deep partisan differences, narrow majorities and a Republican in the White House have frustrated Democratic ambitions and fueled a toxic atmosphere in both chambers of Congress. The public�s low approval ratings reflect broad discontent with the direction of the country but also displeasure with Congress for failing to reverse course on Iraq and for continuing the bitter partisan warfare.
But has this really been a do-nothing Congress? The circumstances are similar to those in 1995, when a new Republican majority in both houses took office under a Democratic president. So perhaps the best question to ask is, how is this 110th Congress doing compared with the 104th Congress, in 1995?
Both new majorities began by spending more time in session, holding more committee meetings and roll call votes, and passing more substantive measures than the Congress before them had. At the same time, in both cases, the number of bills signed into law by the president from January to August dropped.
Still, the Democratic Congress�s legislative harvest this year has been bountiful compared with that of its Republican counterpart in 1995. Back then, the Republicans� Contract With America was stymied by opposition from the Senate and the president. The new Congress has enacted a far-reaching lobbying and ethics reform bill, an increase in the minimum wage, recommendations of the 9/11 Commission, foreign investment rules and a competitiveness package, and has embedded a number of major initiatives and new priorities in continuing and supplemental spending bills. Democrats also made headway on energy, children�s health insurance, college student loans, Head Start, drug safety and a farm bill � though much of this awaits action in the Senate or in conference and faces a possible veto.
During the first seven months of 1995, Congressional oversight of the executive branch increased modestly in the Senate but not at all in the House. But this year Congress, especially the House, has intensified its oversight, following years of inattention and deference by its Republican predecessor.
Democratic promises to restore civility and regular parliamentary procedure by allowing the minority party a larger role in deliberations have foundered. The number of restrictive rules for debate has increased, and the conference process has been short-circuited on various occasions.
In the Senate, Republicans have made the filibuster, or the threat of filibuster, routine, setting a 60-vote hurdle for all contested legislative matters. This has led Harry Reid of Nevada, the majority leader, to file many more petitions for cloture than Bob Dole, his counterpart in 1995, did.
The chart below shows what the 110th Congress accomplished before it closed for its August recess, compared with its immediate predecessor and with the Republican Congress that took office in 1995.
Thomas E. Mann is a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution and the co-author of �The Broken Branch.� Molly Reynolds is a research assistant at Brookings. Peter Hoey is an illustrator in Arcata, Calif.
JUST before Congress adjourned for its August recess, Democrats engaged in a flurry of legislative activity, while Republicans complained about a �do-nothing� Congress�s meager policy accomplishments. Deep partisan differences, narrow majorities and a Republican in the White House have frustrated Democratic ambitions and fueled a toxic atmosphere in both chambers of Congress. The public�s low approval ratings reflect broad discontent with the direction of the country but also displeasure with Congress for failing to reverse course on Iraq and for continuing the bitter partisan warfare.
But has this really been a do-nothing Congress? The circumstances are similar to those in 1995, when a new Republican majority in both houses took office under a Democratic president. So perhaps the best question to ask is, how is this 110th Congress doing compared with the 104th Congress, in 1995?
Both new majorities began by spending more time in session, holding more committee meetings and roll call votes, and passing more substantive measures than the Congress before them had. At the same time, in both cases, the number of bills signed into law by the president from January to August dropped.
Still, the Democratic Congress�s legislative harvest this year has been bountiful compared with that of its Republican counterpart in 1995. Back then, the Republicans� Contract With America was stymied by opposition from the Senate and the president. The new Congress has enacted a far-reaching lobbying and ethics reform bill, an increase in the minimum wage, recommendations of the 9/11 Commission, foreign investment rules and a competitiveness package, and has embedded a number of major initiatives and new priorities in continuing and supplemental spending bills. Democrats also made headway on energy, children�s health insurance, college student loans, Head Start, drug safety and a farm bill � though much of this awaits action in the Senate or in conference and faces a possible veto.
During the first seven months of 1995, Congressional oversight of the executive branch increased modestly in the Senate but not at all in the House. But this year Congress, especially the House, has intensified its oversight, following years of inattention and deference by its Republican predecessor.
Democratic promises to restore civility and regular parliamentary procedure by allowing the minority party a larger role in deliberations have foundered. The number of restrictive rules for debate has increased, and the conference process has been short-circuited on various occasions.
In the Senate, Republicans have made the filibuster, or the threat of filibuster, routine, setting a 60-vote hurdle for all contested legislative matters. This has led Harry Reid of Nevada, the majority leader, to file many more petitions for cloture than Bob Dole, his counterpart in 1995, did.
The chart below shows what the 110th Congress accomplished before it closed for its August recess, compared with its immediate predecessor and with the Republican Congress that took office in 1995.
more...
martinvisalaw
06-24 02:52 PM
There is a perception that CIS issues more RFEs for PP cases, but I don't think that is true any more.
hair hello kitty laptop sleeve
ras
04-22 12:04 PM
There was a thread couple of days back asking members to contact their attorneys to answer IV member questions. I have contacted and few of them are willing to answer the questions on IV. Can some one point me to that thread..
Also they want to know how the whole system works.
Also they want to know how the whole system works.
more...
Vic
11-26 09:07 AM
I dont think this means anything. With the huge influx of AP and EAD applications - I am quite certain that the last thing on USCIS's mind was making sure that the LUD was kept updated for the 485 apps. The important thing is that you have your 485 receipt and that is the acknowledgment that they have recieved the application and its in order.
hot laptop case for sale
Blog Feeds
06-15 03:00 AM
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) announced today that a new version of the Application to Replace Permanent Resident Card (Form I-90), is available on the USCIS website. The new version of the form is dated 8/10/09 and contains more user-friendly features.
Applicants may file Form I-90 electronically (through e-filing), or through the mail to the USCIS Phoenix Lockbox facility.
More... (http://www.visalawyerblog.com/2010/06/new_form_i90_application_to_re.html)
Applicants may file Form I-90 electronically (through e-filing), or through the mail to the USCIS Phoenix Lockbox facility.
More... (http://www.visalawyerblog.com/2010/06/new_form_i90_application_to_re.html)
more...
house Sanrio Hello Kitty Formed
gtg506p
10-23 08:21 AM
No. I havent applied for my 485 yet (personal reasons didnt apply simultaneously). I will apply now.
tattoo Hello Kitty Laptop Case for
Macaca
06-10 05:53 AM
Why Washington Can�t Get Much Done (http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/10/weekinreview/10broder.html?_r=1&oref=slogin) By JOHN M. BRODER (http://www.nytimes.com/gst/emailus.html), June 10, 2007
MEMBERS of Congress � with the possible exceptions of Senator Robert C. Byrd and Representative John D. Dingell � come and go. So do presidents and even Supreme Court justices.
But some big issues come to the nation�s capital and never leave, despite the politicians� best efforts to wrap them up and send them packing. Immigration is one.
Efforts to craft a grand compromise on the perennially nettlesome issue of how to deal with the millions who want to settle in this country collapsed in the Senate in spectacular fashion Thursday night, even though President Bush and the Senate leadership desperately wanted a deal. Almost everyone in Washington believes that America�s immigration laws are an unenforceable mess. But confronted with real legislation built on real compromises, the Senate sank beneath murderous political, geographic and ideological crosscurrents. Despite vows of senators to resuscitate the bill, it may be months � or years � before Congress again comes close to passing a major overhaul of immigration law.
But immigration is only one of several major policy matters on which virtually all Americans agree that something has to be done, even as Washington seems mired in dysfunction. What will happen when Congress turns next to energy legislation? Or global warming? Health care? Social Security?
It sometimes seems that it takes a catastrophe to create consensus. The Great Depression, Pearl Harbor and Sept. 11 all shattered partisan divisions and led, at least for a time, to enhanced presidential power and a rush of bipartisan lawmaking (some of which political leaders later came to regret). Today, however, the partisan chasm in Washington is deeper than it has been in 100 years, according to some academic studies, as moderate blocs in both parties have all but vanished.
�Remember,� said Thomas E. Mann, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution, �these are really big problems and they�re really tough. Solving them is going to involve some major changes in the way we live, the way we tax ourselves, the way we get our health care and the way we transport ourselves.�
He added: �Many of these questions are caught up in ideological differences that really are quite fundamental. On all of them right now there is no consensus in the country and therefore the political system has to try to create one where none now exists.�
A sign of how hard it is to fashion a compromise on these big questions is the length of time between major legislative actions on them. It took almost a decade from the collapse of the Clinton administration�s health care initiative in 1994 to the passage of the new Medicare prescription-drug benefit. The federal minimum wage went unchanged for 10 years until this spring. The last major overhaul of immigration law passed in 1986. The most recent significant revision to Social Security came in 1983.
Even the relatively new issue of global warming has been batted around since 1988, when Al Gore began talking about its potentially dire effects. Now, despite a foot-high stack of proposed legislation on the subject, virtually nothing has been done.
Mr. Gore said it was extremely difficult to move the political system when it is paralyzed by partisan passion and beset by well-financed and well-organized interests. He refers to the combination of the oil, coal and automobile industries as the �carbon lobby,� which he said is very difficult to defeat.
Washington, he said, has also failed to act on global warming for much the same reason that it has not tackled the possible future insolvency of Social Security or the problem of 45 million Americans who lack health insurance. �There�s just garden-variety denial,� he said. �It�s unpleasant to think about and easy to push it off.�
Washington often serves as a trailing indicator of public sentiment on an issue, following action in state capitals or responding belatedly to a growing public outcry. Congress and the White House did not seriously begin to move on immigration until two years ago, after the Minutemen, a civilian group, started patrolling the borders and Southwestern state governors declared states of emergency to deal with hundreds of thousands of undocumented migrants stealing in from Mexico.
Given the failure of the 1986 immigration legislation to stem the illegal flow, the public is wary of any new government effort to control the borders, said Merle Black, a professor of political science at Emory University in Atlanta. And many lawmakers fear that if they support the current legislation they will be blamed if it fails to live up to its promises. After all, the Medicare drug benefit, too, was a much-heralded attempt to lower the costs of medicines for the elderly, but it created mountains of burdensome paperwork and huge unanticipated costs for the government.
�The public has seen a whole series of performance failures, whether it was the war in Iraq or the response to Katrina,� Professor Black said. �It makes different groups of individuals very skeptical about politicians offering solutions. On top of that, Bush�s approval ratings are so low that he can�t exert any leadership even within his own party.�
Government stasis was not unintended. The Founding Fathers designed the American system of government to cool public passions and created numerous impediments to rash action. They might not be surprised that two decades passed between significant action on immigration law or government old-age pensions. But they might have had trouble conceiving the complexity of the issues facing modern Washington, like global warming or the need to find a way to provide even basic medical care to one in seven Americans.
�It was a pretty simple world Madison was dealing with when he wrote the Federalist Papers,� said Morris P. Fiorina, professor of political science at Stanford University. �His focus was on land, labor and commerce. He was clearly aware of the need to defend the borders, but he was more concerned that you had to limit the reach of government and insure that transitory majorities can�t have their way.�
The molasses pace of governance in America is frustrating to many in and outside Washington. But the framers recognized that the dangers of succumbing to fleeting enthusiasms are often far greater than the slow process of fashioning a consensus from the competing interests of a sectional country.
�I agree that it is a bad thing for it to take an extraordinarily long time to deal with problems,� said Mickey Edwards, a former Republican representative from Oklahoma and now a vice president of the Aspen Institute and a lecturer in government at the Woodrow Wilson School at Princeton. �But I think it is a worse thing to rush into solutions when you�re dealing with a nation of 300 million people.�
He cited Prohibition and the Medicare drug benefit as examples of laws that carried large and unintended consequences.
�I don�t suggest that given enough time you can make everything perfect,� Mr. Edwards said. �But you do need enough time to make sure all views are heard and you can avoid the unforeseen circumstances that plague so many things.�
�You don�t just want them to act,� he said. �You want them to act responsibly.�
MEMBERS of Congress � with the possible exceptions of Senator Robert C. Byrd and Representative John D. Dingell � come and go. So do presidents and even Supreme Court justices.
But some big issues come to the nation�s capital and never leave, despite the politicians� best efforts to wrap them up and send them packing. Immigration is one.
Efforts to craft a grand compromise on the perennially nettlesome issue of how to deal with the millions who want to settle in this country collapsed in the Senate in spectacular fashion Thursday night, even though President Bush and the Senate leadership desperately wanted a deal. Almost everyone in Washington believes that America�s immigration laws are an unenforceable mess. But confronted with real legislation built on real compromises, the Senate sank beneath murderous political, geographic and ideological crosscurrents. Despite vows of senators to resuscitate the bill, it may be months � or years � before Congress again comes close to passing a major overhaul of immigration law.
But immigration is only one of several major policy matters on which virtually all Americans agree that something has to be done, even as Washington seems mired in dysfunction. What will happen when Congress turns next to energy legislation? Or global warming? Health care? Social Security?
It sometimes seems that it takes a catastrophe to create consensus. The Great Depression, Pearl Harbor and Sept. 11 all shattered partisan divisions and led, at least for a time, to enhanced presidential power and a rush of bipartisan lawmaking (some of which political leaders later came to regret). Today, however, the partisan chasm in Washington is deeper than it has been in 100 years, according to some academic studies, as moderate blocs in both parties have all but vanished.
�Remember,� said Thomas E. Mann, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution, �these are really big problems and they�re really tough. Solving them is going to involve some major changes in the way we live, the way we tax ourselves, the way we get our health care and the way we transport ourselves.�
He added: �Many of these questions are caught up in ideological differences that really are quite fundamental. On all of them right now there is no consensus in the country and therefore the political system has to try to create one where none now exists.�
A sign of how hard it is to fashion a compromise on these big questions is the length of time between major legislative actions on them. It took almost a decade from the collapse of the Clinton administration�s health care initiative in 1994 to the passage of the new Medicare prescription-drug benefit. The federal minimum wage went unchanged for 10 years until this spring. The last major overhaul of immigration law passed in 1986. The most recent significant revision to Social Security came in 1983.
Even the relatively new issue of global warming has been batted around since 1988, when Al Gore began talking about its potentially dire effects. Now, despite a foot-high stack of proposed legislation on the subject, virtually nothing has been done.
Mr. Gore said it was extremely difficult to move the political system when it is paralyzed by partisan passion and beset by well-financed and well-organized interests. He refers to the combination of the oil, coal and automobile industries as the �carbon lobby,� which he said is very difficult to defeat.
Washington, he said, has also failed to act on global warming for much the same reason that it has not tackled the possible future insolvency of Social Security or the problem of 45 million Americans who lack health insurance. �There�s just garden-variety denial,� he said. �It�s unpleasant to think about and easy to push it off.�
Washington often serves as a trailing indicator of public sentiment on an issue, following action in state capitals or responding belatedly to a growing public outcry. Congress and the White House did not seriously begin to move on immigration until two years ago, after the Minutemen, a civilian group, started patrolling the borders and Southwestern state governors declared states of emergency to deal with hundreds of thousands of undocumented migrants stealing in from Mexico.
Given the failure of the 1986 immigration legislation to stem the illegal flow, the public is wary of any new government effort to control the borders, said Merle Black, a professor of political science at Emory University in Atlanta. And many lawmakers fear that if they support the current legislation they will be blamed if it fails to live up to its promises. After all, the Medicare drug benefit, too, was a much-heralded attempt to lower the costs of medicines for the elderly, but it created mountains of burdensome paperwork and huge unanticipated costs for the government.
�The public has seen a whole series of performance failures, whether it was the war in Iraq or the response to Katrina,� Professor Black said. �It makes different groups of individuals very skeptical about politicians offering solutions. On top of that, Bush�s approval ratings are so low that he can�t exert any leadership even within his own party.�
Government stasis was not unintended. The Founding Fathers designed the American system of government to cool public passions and created numerous impediments to rash action. They might not be surprised that two decades passed between significant action on immigration law or government old-age pensions. But they might have had trouble conceiving the complexity of the issues facing modern Washington, like global warming or the need to find a way to provide even basic medical care to one in seven Americans.
�It was a pretty simple world Madison was dealing with when he wrote the Federalist Papers,� said Morris P. Fiorina, professor of political science at Stanford University. �His focus was on land, labor and commerce. He was clearly aware of the need to defend the borders, but he was more concerned that you had to limit the reach of government and insure that transitory majorities can�t have their way.�
The molasses pace of governance in America is frustrating to many in and outside Washington. But the framers recognized that the dangers of succumbing to fleeting enthusiasms are often far greater than the slow process of fashioning a consensus from the competing interests of a sectional country.
�I agree that it is a bad thing for it to take an extraordinarily long time to deal with problems,� said Mickey Edwards, a former Republican representative from Oklahoma and now a vice president of the Aspen Institute and a lecturer in government at the Woodrow Wilson School at Princeton. �But I think it is a worse thing to rush into solutions when you�re dealing with a nation of 300 million people.�
He cited Prohibition and the Medicare drug benefit as examples of laws that carried large and unintended consequences.
�I don�t suggest that given enough time you can make everything perfect,� Mr. Edwards said. �But you do need enough time to make sure all views are heard and you can avoid the unforeseen circumstances that plague so many things.�
�You don�t just want them to act,� he said. �You want them to act responsibly.�
more...
pictures Hello Kitty Sanrio drink water
thomachan72
04-12 09:21 AM
I had started my anual subscribtion this Friday (4/10/09). How long does it take to be admitted into the donors forum? I have sent the email with details that same day itself. I have not yet recieved a reciept or any RFEs. Hope there is no backlog:D:D:D
dresses This compact and lightweight laptop bag / liner is the use of highly elastic
Blog Feeds
07-20 03:40 PM
Belgian-born Diane Von Furstenberg was profiled yesterday in the New York Times as an example of a fashion designer who is actually doing well despite the economic downturn. Furstenberg has been a major figure in American fashion design for nearly four decades. Her designs are worn by famous women like Jessica Alba, Madonna and Jennifer Lopez. Von Furstenberg gave some common sense advice in the interview that is worth repeating: �It�s more important than ever to have confidence. Everyone else is insecure. If you start to take a little bit of everyone else�s insecurity � forget it.�
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2009/07/immigrant-of-the-day-diane-von-furstenberg-fashion-designer.html)
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2009/07/immigrant-of-the-day-diane-von-furstenberg-fashion-designer.html)
more...
makeup Kitty Laptop Case Computer
sounakc
05-30 07:46 AM
look at this thread hope this helps.
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/forum70-self-filing-documents-forms-directions-mailing/21995-self-filing-for-dependent-urgent.html
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/forum70-self-filing-documents-forms-directions-mailing/21995-self-filing-for-dependent-urgent.html
girlfriend Laptop Sleeve 13 inch Case
sembat
06-15 01:45 PM
I have 2 questions.
- With the PD becoming current, my wife's 485 will get applied anytime within the next month or so by her company lawyers. My GC is just about to be started. I will be adding my name to the 485 application of my wife. Does my GC application date has to do anything with this? I mean if my GC is applied before my wife's 485 (and my name added) or after my wife's 485(my name added), does it have any affect on either one's processing?
- Another question is does the H1-B extention for 3 years can happen after I-140 application or I-140 approval?
Thanks in advance for your comments.
--sembat
- With the PD becoming current, my wife's 485 will get applied anytime within the next month or so by her company lawyers. My GC is just about to be started. I will be adding my name to the 485 application of my wife. Does my GC application date has to do anything with this? I mean if my GC is applied before my wife's 485 (and my name added) or after my wife's 485(my name added), does it have any affect on either one's processing?
- Another question is does the H1-B extention for 3 years can happen after I-140 application or I-140 approval?
Thanks in advance for your comments.
--sembat
hairstyles Hello Kitty Laptop Case for
Macaca
05-15 10:07 AM
Congress's Start (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/05/12/AR2007051201099.html) -- It's time to begin recording concrete achievements, Sunday, May 13, 2007
FOUR MONTHS into the 110th Congress is too early to assign grades to the new Democratic majority -- but not too soon to remind lawmakers that most of their self-assigned tasks remain undone; that progress in the next few months on immigration, trade and lobbying reform is critical; and that this Congress will be judged on what it accomplished -- and on where it punted.
The biggest punt thus far concerns entitlement spending, an issue on which the administration, chiefly Treasury Secretary Henry M. Paulson Jr., has been seeking to jump-start discussions. This is an auspicious moment that Democrats seem determined to squander. First, the Democratic Congress has a lame-duck Republican president who could take, or at least share, the blame for cuts that will have to be part of any solution. Second, as members of Congress well know, the longer they wait to take on Medicare and, particularly, Social Security, the harder the problem they will face.
Democrats have seized on Vice President Cheney's comments to Fox News in January about raising payroll taxes -- "This president has been very, very clear on his position on taxes, and nothing's changed" -- as a rationale for why they can't risk bargaining with the administration. But this is an excuse, not a legitimate basis for inaction. After all, Mr. Cheney also said there would be "no preconditions."
Meanwhile, lawmakers for the most part have used their oversight powers usefully, though we wish more energy were spent examining torture policies, for instance, and less on subpoenaing the secretary of state. Although the budget process has yet to play itself out, the adoption of tough pay-as-you-go rules to constrain new mandatory spending has had a surprisingly beneficial effect in restraining demands for new programs. The Senate's passage of a measure to strengthen the Food and Drug Administration's regulatory powers is an important step.
Still unanswered is whether Democrats will deliver on their campaign promises and whether both sides will find ways to forge consensus on issues of common concern. House Democrats' "Six for '06" campaign pledge has so far amounted to "None in '07." Much of this (federal funding for embryonic stem cell research, for instance) is out of Democrats' control, given the Senate's supermajority rules and President Bush's veto pen; in some cases (having Medicare negotiate drug prices, for example), that's just as well. But even such relatively noncontroversial matters as increasing the minimum wage remain undone. Voters are starting to notice, and the coming weeks will be crucial for Democrats to put some actual accomplishments on the board.
On a matter that is within their control, it's still uncertain whether House Democrats will produce a lobbying and ethics reform package worthy of their campaign pledges to end the "culture of corruption." The key tests will be whether lawmakers require lobbyists to disclose the bundles of campaign cash they deliver (as the Senate version of the measure has done) and whether the House will create a more credible ethics process, including some kind of independent arm to assess and investigate ethics allegations.
On immigration, Senate Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.) is right to bring to the floor last year's measure, which won the support of 23 Republicans. The clock is ticking on this incendiary topic, and the administration has not improved matters by pushing an unbalanced and punitive plan. If Mr. Bush is looking for a legacy issue beyond Iraq, this could be it, but he is, so far, blowing the chance.
On trade, an agreement that seems to clear the way for approval of trade pacts with Peru and Panama is a start, but only that. Much more important is the passage of deals with Colombia and South Korea, and extension of presidential trade negotiating authority, which is needed to complete a new global trade treaty. Congressional leaders should work with Mr. Bush to extend the authority -- not because they like or trust him but because doing so will be better for the economy in which they, too, have an important stake.
FOUR MONTHS into the 110th Congress is too early to assign grades to the new Democratic majority -- but not too soon to remind lawmakers that most of their self-assigned tasks remain undone; that progress in the next few months on immigration, trade and lobbying reform is critical; and that this Congress will be judged on what it accomplished -- and on where it punted.
The biggest punt thus far concerns entitlement spending, an issue on which the administration, chiefly Treasury Secretary Henry M. Paulson Jr., has been seeking to jump-start discussions. This is an auspicious moment that Democrats seem determined to squander. First, the Democratic Congress has a lame-duck Republican president who could take, or at least share, the blame for cuts that will have to be part of any solution. Second, as members of Congress well know, the longer they wait to take on Medicare and, particularly, Social Security, the harder the problem they will face.
Democrats have seized on Vice President Cheney's comments to Fox News in January about raising payroll taxes -- "This president has been very, very clear on his position on taxes, and nothing's changed" -- as a rationale for why they can't risk bargaining with the administration. But this is an excuse, not a legitimate basis for inaction. After all, Mr. Cheney also said there would be "no preconditions."
Meanwhile, lawmakers for the most part have used their oversight powers usefully, though we wish more energy were spent examining torture policies, for instance, and less on subpoenaing the secretary of state. Although the budget process has yet to play itself out, the adoption of tough pay-as-you-go rules to constrain new mandatory spending has had a surprisingly beneficial effect in restraining demands for new programs. The Senate's passage of a measure to strengthen the Food and Drug Administration's regulatory powers is an important step.
Still unanswered is whether Democrats will deliver on their campaign promises and whether both sides will find ways to forge consensus on issues of common concern. House Democrats' "Six for '06" campaign pledge has so far amounted to "None in '07." Much of this (federal funding for embryonic stem cell research, for instance) is out of Democrats' control, given the Senate's supermajority rules and President Bush's veto pen; in some cases (having Medicare negotiate drug prices, for example), that's just as well. But even such relatively noncontroversial matters as increasing the minimum wage remain undone. Voters are starting to notice, and the coming weeks will be crucial for Democrats to put some actual accomplishments on the board.
On a matter that is within their control, it's still uncertain whether House Democrats will produce a lobbying and ethics reform package worthy of their campaign pledges to end the "culture of corruption." The key tests will be whether lawmakers require lobbyists to disclose the bundles of campaign cash they deliver (as the Senate version of the measure has done) and whether the House will create a more credible ethics process, including some kind of independent arm to assess and investigate ethics allegations.
On immigration, Senate Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.) is right to bring to the floor last year's measure, which won the support of 23 Republicans. The clock is ticking on this incendiary topic, and the administration has not improved matters by pushing an unbalanced and punitive plan. If Mr. Bush is looking for a legacy issue beyond Iraq, this could be it, but he is, so far, blowing the chance.
On trade, an agreement that seems to clear the way for approval of trade pacts with Peru and Panama is a start, but only that. Much more important is the passage of deals with Colombia and South Korea, and extension of presidential trade negotiating authority, which is needed to complete a new global trade treaty. Congressional leaders should work with Mr. Bush to extend the authority -- not because they like or trust him but because doing so will be better for the economy in which they, too, have an important stake.
gcmaker
04-01 10:21 AM
I think there was a change in the rules for re-entry permits - you have to submit for biometrics before you leave the U.S. - so the auntie may not be able to apply for re-entry permit if she is outside the U.S.
http://www.laborimmigration.com/2008/03/new-biometric-requirements-for-re-entry-permits/
http://www.laborimmigration.com/2008/03/new-biometric-requirements-for-re-entry-permits/
kartikiran
04-22 12:58 PM
The link http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=25059 explains everything you are looking for.
No comments:
Post a Comment