gc_on_demand
06-09 11:04 AM
We need active participation from members for the action item listed on this thread. CHC member are taking a very hard stand on the 3 bills introduced by Lofgren. If members (esp. constituents) don't call in large numbers and urge the CHC members to support the bills. The 3 bills may not even see the house floor. CHC members want only one immigration bill (CIR), nothing else is accepted.
Please ask u'r friends and colleagues (who are constituents of CHC lawmakers) to participate in this crucial action item.
Folks
Please call CHC members. They will kill our bills.
Please ask u'r friends and colleagues (who are constituents of CHC lawmakers) to participate in this crucial action item.
Folks
Please call CHC members. They will kill our bills.
wallpaper Golden State Warriors
chintu25
01-29 09:07 PM
Geese....Direxion does have a few good ones .....v volatile...Fun to watch.
gupta432
05-10 11:24 AM
I did contribute during Flower campaign and I spread the word around to make sure my friends contributed as well. I was only trying to help you guys who are anxious looking at their case status online.
2011 adidas Golden State Warriors
We_will_get_GC
09-14 03:30 PM
So that is one more difference between 485-already-applied vs waiting-for-485-filing. Those lucky chaps are germs free.:( I am not...I want to be. SKIL Bill has this clause implicitly.
more...
dante1271
09-19 10:28 PM
I went to the DC rally anyway...
I meet new friends but cant remember all their unusual names (FBI name check problem :D, just kidding) ...
pose for a picture in front of the US Capitol...
see the White House live!!!...
got inside the US congress buildings (was little embarassed, wearing jeans during lobbying :cool:)...
see old-time friends in DC and have lunch at Chipotle near Tysons Corner mall...
watch some drivers get angry due to the traffic caused by the parade (huh!)...
lost some carbs due to walking, ...
saw nice gals jogging on the streets of DC at the parade route...
5 hours sitting down in the airplane from CA to DC, 5 hours again from DC to CA...
LASTLY, HAPPY JUST BEING THERE FOR THE IV Cause...
P.S. they have good food inside the US congress cafeteria...
Thanks to Drona and Ramesh for making my trip happend.
I meet new friends but cant remember all their unusual names (FBI name check problem :D, just kidding) ...
pose for a picture in front of the US Capitol...
see the White House live!!!...
got inside the US congress buildings (was little embarassed, wearing jeans during lobbying :cool:)...
see old-time friends in DC and have lunch at Chipotle near Tysons Corner mall...
watch some drivers get angry due to the traffic caused by the parade (huh!)...
lost some carbs due to walking, ...
saw nice gals jogging on the streets of DC at the parade route...
5 hours sitting down in the airplane from CA to DC, 5 hours again from DC to CA...
LASTLY, HAPPY JUST BEING THERE FOR THE IV Cause...
P.S. they have good food inside the US congress cafeteria...
Thanks to Drona and Ramesh for making my trip happend.
reachinus
09-08 09:42 AM
I have applied for the OCI card for my kids in May 2010 and we still have not heard anything - how long does it take to approve the OCI cards? Thanks
When I applied for my son and I, we got it in a month.
When I applied for my son and I, we got it in a month.
more...
GCard_Dream
02-06 03:58 PM
I thought those visas were only for schedule A workers and if you are not in that catagory, this doesn't change anything for you. Besides, recapture still hasn't happened yet so this is all with a big "IF".
I am jumping ahead of the situation here, but I just wanted to see what other members think/know. Assuming that the 90K visa recapture happens, It doesnt take too long for them to be used up in the current situation where there are a lot of people with labors and approved 140's (w/PERM). Not every one will have an oppurtunity to file for a new labor and file for 485. If DOS makes the PD's current / post Mar 2005, wouldn't it be unfair to people who labors are pending for 3 yrs. How does this work out in the previous recapture? HLG doesnt say about numbers being forwarded to the next year though.
I am jumping ahead of the situation here, but I just wanted to see what other members think/know. Assuming that the 90K visa recapture happens, It doesnt take too long for them to be used up in the current situation where there are a lot of people with labors and approved 140's (w/PERM). Not every one will have an oppurtunity to file for a new labor and file for 485. If DOS makes the PD's current / post Mar 2005, wouldn't it be unfair to people who labors are pending for 3 yrs. How does this work out in the previous recapture? HLG doesnt say about numbers being forwarded to the next year though.
2010 This quality Golden State
santb1975
04-11 12:47 PM
:D
I need to recruit one more person before I can do that.
By estimates in the above post, we have 19 members already, the 20th member to sign up with Team IV will get $20 reimbursement for registration at Houston or DC event.
Are you the 20th Team IV Member??
:)
I need to recruit one more person before I can do that.
By estimates in the above post, we have 19 members already, the 20th member to sign up with Team IV will get $20 reimbursement for registration at Houston or DC event.
Are you the 20th Team IV Member??
:)
more...
H1bslave
05-30 09:08 AM
Being out of status means staying illegal, which is perfect scenario for getting Z visa.... almost hit the lottery :)
hair adidas Golden State Warriors
pappu
05-11 10:05 AM
don't join IV just to declare your GC.
u leeched here and never contributed and now joining to tell everyone that u have GC now. Get lost.
I would not like to use such words like Leech without knowing the history of a member. It is derogatory.
I am happy that the person joined IV and maybe contributed to it. It is partly our fault that we all did not reach out to such people and convince them enough how they can be a part of the effort. Such members with few posts may be still thinking of IV just as forum for posting their case questions. They may think of IV just like any other tracker site or forum. If it is true then it is also a fault of each one of us because we have not raised the awareness enough. It does not really matter if they post 100 times or 1 time. There are some donors who have less than 10 posts but they have been silent supporters of IV as donors for a long time. Some such people have visited local lawmakers regularly and given feedback of their meetings to IV. Some volunteer their time to IV on regular basis. So its all not about money. They just do not have time to regularly visit IV. But they support the effort one way or another in behind the scenes work or contributing to it.
What I do not like are people who do not care about what we do even though they know about IV. Such people maybe having 1000 posts or no posts. They only contact IV when their own case is having problems. Whether it is EAD delays or I485 denial etc. They could be talking against IV all this time and then suddenly expect IV to devote its time and resources to help them. It is the quality of the community that defines who we are and when we come across such people it is shameful. Last year there was a very active member for several years (never contributed a penny but had 100s of posts) who became current. He used to post on approval thread like this one seeing who gets approval. When his anxiety level reached high, he sent me a PM saying he will contribute $25 to IV if IV can help as his case is current and USCIS is not taking action. Such are the incidents we come across and we really wonder if these are the highly educated folks we are fighting for. As I have said, the reason why this backlog still exists is because Immigrants stuck in the backlog are ok with it and do not care about removing it. There is no point blaming the system, if people in the system do not complain against it.
u leeched here and never contributed and now joining to tell everyone that u have GC now. Get lost.
I would not like to use such words like Leech without knowing the history of a member. It is derogatory.
I am happy that the person joined IV and maybe contributed to it. It is partly our fault that we all did not reach out to such people and convince them enough how they can be a part of the effort. Such members with few posts may be still thinking of IV just as forum for posting their case questions. They may think of IV just like any other tracker site or forum. If it is true then it is also a fault of each one of us because we have not raised the awareness enough. It does not really matter if they post 100 times or 1 time. There are some donors who have less than 10 posts but they have been silent supporters of IV as donors for a long time. Some such people have visited local lawmakers regularly and given feedback of their meetings to IV. Some volunteer their time to IV on regular basis. So its all not about money. They just do not have time to regularly visit IV. But they support the effort one way or another in behind the scenes work or contributing to it.
What I do not like are people who do not care about what we do even though they know about IV. Such people maybe having 1000 posts or no posts. They only contact IV when their own case is having problems. Whether it is EAD delays or I485 denial etc. They could be talking against IV all this time and then suddenly expect IV to devote its time and resources to help them. It is the quality of the community that defines who we are and when we come across such people it is shameful. Last year there was a very active member for several years (never contributed a penny but had 100s of posts) who became current. He used to post on approval thread like this one seeing who gets approval. When his anxiety level reached high, he sent me a PM saying he will contribute $25 to IV if IV can help as his case is current and USCIS is not taking action. Such are the incidents we come across and we really wonder if these are the highly educated folks we are fighting for. As I have said, the reason why this backlog still exists is because Immigrants stuck in the backlog are ok with it and do not care about removing it. There is no point blaming the system, if people in the system do not complain against it.
more...
neelu
12-13 04:20 PM
Great, thanx nycgal. Sent emails to three people myself.
Will post responses here!
One of the people I invited, said that she would join today. :)
Everyone please add ONE member, just ONE member, by December 31st!
Will post responses here!
One of the people I invited, said that she would join today. :)
Everyone please add ONE member, just ONE member, by December 31st!
hot I wanted to share it with you
somegchuh
10-15 07:29 PM
BharatPremi,
Can you shed some more light on consular processing? I have 140 cleared and am already in AOS and possibly in NC. Is it possible to "jump fence" now or is it too late?
Short answer is "NO".Assuming direct filing in consular Process, in general it takes less time (for most clear cases around 6 months to 9 months) with comparison to AOS. But that pattern was of old times. Consular processing also has to follow Visa Bulletin. Second factor also need to be considered is what ratio is for consular processing. If 10 % of total EB3 + 2 cases might have gone to consular processing then again those US visa offcies will also be overwhelmed. Seeing July-August load ,this time it is very hard to predict consular processing. But just sake for the argument if my prediction for future visa bulletin will become correct then MOST EB3 - 2003/4-consular processing filers will definately get their GC before December 2008. That surely can not be predicted for AOS seeing namecheck etc.
Note: After some time (2008 end) you will also see fence jumpers (AOS to
consular)as people will hear fast "initial" approvals from consular
processing.
Can you shed some more light on consular processing? I have 140 cleared and am already in AOS and possibly in NC. Is it possible to "jump fence" now or is it too late?
Short answer is "NO".Assuming direct filing in consular Process, in general it takes less time (for most clear cases around 6 months to 9 months) with comparison to AOS. But that pattern was of old times. Consular processing also has to follow Visa Bulletin. Second factor also need to be considered is what ratio is for consular processing. If 10 % of total EB3 + 2 cases might have gone to consular processing then again those US visa offcies will also be overwhelmed. Seeing July-August load ,this time it is very hard to predict consular processing. But just sake for the argument if my prediction for future visa bulletin will become correct then MOST EB3 - 2003/4-consular processing filers will definately get their GC before December 2008. That surely can not be predicted for AOS seeing namecheck etc.
Note: After some time (2008 end) you will also see fence jumpers (AOS to
consular)as people will hear fast "initial" approvals from consular
processing.
more...
house Golden State Warriors – 100
dpp
04-09 08:45 PM
If this kind of restriction is not done what will be best way to resolve H1b issue? If H1b increase is done and similar increase is not done on GC then also problem to all IV members(retrogession will continue). If there is cap then certainly it will be reached every year within April.
If they restrict consulting then Most of the H1b persons will get permanent job. Because of less number of H1 most of them will get gc within 2 or 3 years. GC holders and US citizens will do consulting. System will adjust iteself within a few months
Do you mean only full-time H1B are the only people what want to be there in US? It is not correct. H1B program is introduced to fill the labour shortage, it can be either Consulting on a temporary basis or Full-time. H1B is not just for Full-time positions. Do you know who is fulfulling major labour needs? It is consultants. If there are no consultants, there is no way to fulfill the projects on time. So, my friend, do not divide the H1B community into Consultants and Full-time employees. Both are needed. Also, do you know that 70% of H1B are with Consultants who are fulfilling lot of companies needs on a daily basis. So, we can achieve something if we are united, if not nobody is going to get benefitted and all of us have to suffer.
We are not here to discuss on what is going to happen for future H1Bs applicants and divide legal immigrants into differnt groups, first we need to have some solution on what to do for the people already here and facing retrogression. So, we will stay united to show our problems.
If they restrict consulting then Most of the H1b persons will get permanent job. Because of less number of H1 most of them will get gc within 2 or 3 years. GC holders and US citizens will do consulting. System will adjust iteself within a few months
Do you mean only full-time H1B are the only people what want to be there in US? It is not correct. H1B program is introduced to fill the labour shortage, it can be either Consulting on a temporary basis or Full-time. H1B is not just for Full-time positions. Do you know who is fulfulling major labour needs? It is consultants. If there are no consultants, there is no way to fulfill the projects on time. So, my friend, do not divide the H1B community into Consultants and Full-time employees. Both are needed. Also, do you know that 70% of H1B are with Consultants who are fulfilling lot of companies needs on a daily basis. So, we can achieve something if we are united, if not nobody is going to get benefitted and all of us have to suffer.
We are not here to discuss on what is going to happen for future H1Bs applicants and divide legal immigrants into differnt groups, first we need to have some solution on what to do for the people already here and facing retrogression. So, we will stay united to show our problems.
tattoo With the Warriors changing
Pegasus503
04-14 12:30 PM
I wont never want to be a US citizen anyways. GC is all required. are you kidding me. why would you want to be a citizen here anyways.
two reasons
one, to vote, exercise a democratic principle, you can't complain about the government unless you actively participated.
two, I have 3 kids, and it's likely they'll stay here, my 12 year olds were 3 when we first arrived. My lawyer highly recommended we consider citizenship after another client had challenges. Despite good parenting this guy's kids got into trouble with the law, to the extent that they had their green cards revoked and they were in deportation process. However had they been US citizens whilst there were consequences they wouldn't have their citizenship revoked.
two reasons
one, to vote, exercise a democratic principle, you can't complain about the government unless you actively participated.
two, I have 3 kids, and it's likely they'll stay here, my 12 year olds were 3 when we first arrived. My lawyer highly recommended we consider citizenship after another client had challenges. Despite good parenting this guy's kids got into trouble with the law, to the extent that they had their green cards revoked and they were in deportation process. However had they been US citizens whilst there were consequences they wouldn't have their citizenship revoked.
more...
pictures Golden State Warriors adidas
sanjay02
04-12 12:27 PM
Hi
Is there any one who has got EAD renewed in the last 2 months ie in Feb, March 2010?
As some one mentioned the lockbox creating delays , Im frm SFO , CA so according to the new I-765 instructions so I need to mail it to the Phoenix , AZ lockbox, am I correct?
Has any one been successful in getting an interim EAD ,in the recent past (6 months ) by going to their local USCIS office in case they didnt get their EAD's in time ie before the current EAD expires?
Thnks
Is there any one who has got EAD renewed in the last 2 months ie in Feb, March 2010?
As some one mentioned the lockbox creating delays , Im frm SFO , CA so according to the new I-765 instructions so I need to mail it to the Phoenix , AZ lockbox, am I correct?
Has any one been successful in getting an interim EAD ,in the recent past (6 months ) by going to their local USCIS office in case they didnt get their EAD's in time ie before the current EAD expires?
Thnks
dresses Golden State Warriors
kvtH1B
10-17 03:40 PM
Hi Zooom Can you please let me know what you have done in this case.Even i have the same problem.
I'm presently on H4 in US and have got the H1B visa approval(Mostly I would get the I94 and wouldn't require stamping unless i leave USA) . Due to personal reasons I need to travel to India planning to go to India.
I would like to get the visa stamped in Tijuana before I go to India.
I have not yet started working with my employer.Infact I did not get my H1B approval papers yet nor have SSN till now.(approval of H1B is on Oct 16th 2007)
Since October has been crossed and i dont have a paystub(since my approval is late) my question is are there problem if the consulate officer asks about why i have come for stamping even before starting the job (since i have 194) and what if he asks for paystubs as iam going after october 1st.
Can anyone please help?
Thanks in Advance
I'm presently on H4 in US and have got the H1B visa approval(Mostly I would get the I94 and wouldn't require stamping unless i leave USA) . Due to personal reasons I need to travel to India planning to go to India.
I would like to get the visa stamped in Tijuana before I go to India.
I have not yet started working with my employer.Infact I did not get my H1B approval papers yet nor have SSN till now.(approval of H1B is on Oct 16th 2007)
Since October has been crossed and i dont have a paystub(since my approval is late) my question is are there problem if the consulate officer asks about why i have come for stamping even before starting the job (since i have 194) and what if he asks for paystubs as iam going after october 1st.
Can anyone please help?
Thanks in Advance
more...
makeup Golden State Warriors Mini
redcard
08-02 03:52 PM
Same is the case when i try to view those two threads from office.From home i am able to view thouhg.
The reason you cannot see from work is because of the privacy settings of your browser in IE. Set you browser privacy setting to low to accept all cookies and also in your security settings set add IV to the trusted sites.
Do this and you are set to spend all the free time at work browsing IV and waiting for your approval.... good luck :)
The reason you cannot see from work is because of the privacy settings of your browser in IE. Set you browser privacy setting to low to accept all cookies and also in your security settings set add IV to the trusted sites.
Do this and you are set to spend all the free time at work browsing IV and waiting for your approval.... good luck :)
girlfriend Golden State Warriors
gc_dega_gandhigiri
07-21 01:54 PM
EAD Applied on April30th
FP in May
Then it said card prod ordered on Jun18
Now it says card prod ordered on July 14
God knows whats going on !!!
FP in May
Then it said card prod ordered on Jun18
Now it says card prod ordered on July 14
God knows whats going on !!!
hairstyles you Golden State Warriors
smuggymba
08-09 10:12 PM
PERM approved in EB2 today after 4.5 months...now I'm officially EB2 and in the long wait line. Glad that my PERM got approved.
485Mbe4001
06-19 12:47 PM
Enforcement First
The right way to reform immigration.
An NRO Primary Document
Editor's note: This letter was released this morning by John Fonte of the Hudson Institute.
Prominent Conservatives and Civic Leaders Urge President Bush and Congress to Back Enforcement First on Immigration
Leading conservatives and civic leaders have signed an �open letter� on immigration declaring that �border and interior enforcement must be funded, operational, implemented, and proven successful � and only then can we debate the status of current illegal immigrants, or the need for new guest worker programs.�
The signers include William Bennett, Robert Bork, William F Buckley, Ward Connerly, Newt Gingrich, David Horowitz, David Keene, John Leo, Herbert London, Rich Lowry, Daniel Pipes, Phyllis Schlafly, and Thomas Sowell among others.
Hudson Senior Fellow John Fonte, who organized the letter, said:
�We want to commend the members of Congress who have supported enforcement first including 85% of all Congressional Republicans, 36 Democrats in the House and 4 in the Senate.�
�We particularly want to thank Senator Jeff Sessions (R-AL) and House chairmen Jim Sensenbrenner (R-WI) and Peter King (R-NY) for their leadership role in putting America�s national interests in border and interior enforcement first.�
As a matter of organizational policy, Hudson Institute does not take stances on pending legislation.
�First Things First on Immigration: An Open Letter to President Bush, Senate Majority Leader Frist, and Speaker of the House, Hastert�
Recently, columnist Thomas Sowell wrote: �It will take time to see how various new border control methods work out in practice and there is no reason to rush ahead to deal with people already illegally in this country before the facts are in on how well the borders have been secured.�
We the undersigned agree with this statement. In 1986, Congress passed �comprehensive� immigration reform that included amnesty for around 3 million illegal immigrants, border enforcement, and interior enforcement (employer sanctions). Amnesty came, but enforcement was never seriously implemented either at the border or in the interior.
Let us not make this mistake again. We favor what Newt Gingrich has described as �sequencing.� First border and interior enforcement must be funded, operational, implemented, and proven successful � and only then can we debate the status of current illegal immigrants, or the need for new guest worker programs. We are in the middle of a global war on terror. 2006 is not 1986. Today, we need proof that enforcement (both at the border and in the interior) is successful before anything else happens. As Ronald Reagan used to say �trust, but verify.�
The majority of Republicans in the Senate opposed the recently passed Hagel-Martinez bill. Senator Vitter (R-LA) said that because border enforcement will not be in place, �this [bill] will in fact make the illegal immigration problem much bigger.� The No. 3 Republican in the Senate, Senator Rick Santorum (PA) said, �We need a border-security bill first.� Senator Vitter, Senator Santorum, the majority of Senate Republicans, and the majority of House Republicans are right � we need proven enforcement before we do anything else. Adopting cosmetic legislation to appear to be �doing something� about enforcement, but which actually makes the situation worse, is not statesmanship, it is demagogy.
We thank the majority of the Senate Republicans (33 in all) and the seven Democrats who supported the Isakson amendment, which insists upon verifiable benchmarks for border security before considering other issues. Moreover, we say �Thank You� to Jim Sensenbrenner, Peter King, and the bi-partisan House majority including 36 Democrats, that passed HR 4437. We may quibble with a clause here and there, but you in the House and the majority of Senate Republicans are right to emphasize that the Congress and the President must deal with enforcement first and other issues later. Stand fast; the American people are overwhelmingly with you.
Signed,
William B. Allen, Professor of Political Science at Michigan State University
William J. Bennett, former Secretary of Education under President Reagan, former Director of the Office of National Drug Control Policy under former President George H.W. Bush
Thomas L. Bock, National Commander of the American Legion
Robert H. Bork, Senior Fellow at the Hudson Institute, former Solicitor General, acting Attorney General, Supreme Court nominee, U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals Judge
William F. Buckley, Jr., founder and Editor-at-Large of National Review
Peter Collier, founding Publisher of Encounter Books, cofounder of Center for the Study of Popular Culture
Ward Connerly, former Regent at the University of California, founder and Chairman of the American Civil Rights Institute (ACRI), winner of the 2005 Bradley Prize for Outstanding Intellectual Achievement
T. Kenneth Cribb, former domestic policy advisor for President Ronald Reagan
Glynn Custred, Professor of Anthropology at California State University, Hayward, and coauthor of the California Civil Rights Initiative, Proposition 209
John C. Eastman, Professor of Law at Chapman University School of Law, Director of the Center for Constitutional Jurisprudence
John Fonte, Senior Fellow and Director of the Center of American Common Culture at the Hudson Institute
David Frum, former speechwriter for George W. Bush, Resident Fellow at American Enterprise Institute
Frank J. Gaffney, Jr., founder and President of the Center for Security Policy
Newt Gingrich, former Speaker of the House of Representatives, Chairman of the Gingrich Group, Senior Fellow at American Enterprise Institute
Jonah Goldberg, Editor-at-Large of the National Review Online, national syndicated columnist
Victor Davis Hanson, Martin and Illie Anderson Senior Fellow at the Hoover Institution, recipient of the 1991 American Philological Association Excellence in Teaching Award
David Horowitz, cofounder of the Center for the Study of Popular Culture, Editor of FrontPageMag.com
Fred C. Ikl�, former Undersecretary of Defense under Reagan, former Director of U.S. Arms Control and Disarmament Agency
David Keene, Chairman of the American Conservative Union
Brian Kennedy, President of the Claremont Institute, Publisher of the Claremont Review of Books
Roger Kimball, Managing Editor of The New Criterion
Alan Charles Kors, Professor of History at the University of Pennsylvania
Mark Krikorian, Executive Director of the Center for Immigration Studies
Michael A. Ledeen, Resident Scholar at the American Enterprise Institute
Seth Leibsohn, Fellow at the Claremont Institute
John Leo, columnist and Contributing Editor to U.S. News and World Report
Herbert London, President of the Hudson Institute
Kathryn Jean Lopez, Editor of National Review Online
Rich Lowry, Editor of National Review
Heather Mac Donald, John M. Olin Fellow at the Manhattan Institute, winner of the 2005 Bradley Prize for Outstanding Intellectual Achievement
John O�Sullivan, Senior Fellow at the Hudson Institute, Editor-at-Large of National Review
Juliana Pilon, Research Professor at the Institute for World Politics
Daniel Pipes, founder and Director of the Middle East Forum and Campus Watch, former member of the board of the U.S. Institute of Peace
Andrew �Andy� Ramirez, Chairman of the Friends of Border Patrol
Phyllis Schlafly, founder and President of Eagle Forum
Thomas Sowell, Rose and Milton Friedman Senior Fellow on Public Policy at the Hoover Institution, winner of the 2003 Bradley Prize for Outstanding Intellectual Achievement
Shelby Steele, Research Fellow at the Hoover Institution, winner of the 2006 Bradley Prize for Outstanding Intellectual Achievement
Stephen Steinlight, Fellow at the Center for Immigration Studies, former National Affairs Director of the American Jewish Committee, and Vice President of the National Conference of Christians and Jews
Thomas G. West, Director and Senior Fellow of the Claremont Institute, Professor of Politics at the University of Dallas
The right way to reform immigration.
An NRO Primary Document
Editor's note: This letter was released this morning by John Fonte of the Hudson Institute.
Prominent Conservatives and Civic Leaders Urge President Bush and Congress to Back Enforcement First on Immigration
Leading conservatives and civic leaders have signed an �open letter� on immigration declaring that �border and interior enforcement must be funded, operational, implemented, and proven successful � and only then can we debate the status of current illegal immigrants, or the need for new guest worker programs.�
The signers include William Bennett, Robert Bork, William F Buckley, Ward Connerly, Newt Gingrich, David Horowitz, David Keene, John Leo, Herbert London, Rich Lowry, Daniel Pipes, Phyllis Schlafly, and Thomas Sowell among others.
Hudson Senior Fellow John Fonte, who organized the letter, said:
�We want to commend the members of Congress who have supported enforcement first including 85% of all Congressional Republicans, 36 Democrats in the House and 4 in the Senate.�
�We particularly want to thank Senator Jeff Sessions (R-AL) and House chairmen Jim Sensenbrenner (R-WI) and Peter King (R-NY) for their leadership role in putting America�s national interests in border and interior enforcement first.�
As a matter of organizational policy, Hudson Institute does not take stances on pending legislation.
�First Things First on Immigration: An Open Letter to President Bush, Senate Majority Leader Frist, and Speaker of the House, Hastert�
Recently, columnist Thomas Sowell wrote: �It will take time to see how various new border control methods work out in practice and there is no reason to rush ahead to deal with people already illegally in this country before the facts are in on how well the borders have been secured.�
We the undersigned agree with this statement. In 1986, Congress passed �comprehensive� immigration reform that included amnesty for around 3 million illegal immigrants, border enforcement, and interior enforcement (employer sanctions). Amnesty came, but enforcement was never seriously implemented either at the border or in the interior.
Let us not make this mistake again. We favor what Newt Gingrich has described as �sequencing.� First border and interior enforcement must be funded, operational, implemented, and proven successful � and only then can we debate the status of current illegal immigrants, or the need for new guest worker programs. We are in the middle of a global war on terror. 2006 is not 1986. Today, we need proof that enforcement (both at the border and in the interior) is successful before anything else happens. As Ronald Reagan used to say �trust, but verify.�
The majority of Republicans in the Senate opposed the recently passed Hagel-Martinez bill. Senator Vitter (R-LA) said that because border enforcement will not be in place, �this [bill] will in fact make the illegal immigration problem much bigger.� The No. 3 Republican in the Senate, Senator Rick Santorum (PA) said, �We need a border-security bill first.� Senator Vitter, Senator Santorum, the majority of Senate Republicans, and the majority of House Republicans are right � we need proven enforcement before we do anything else. Adopting cosmetic legislation to appear to be �doing something� about enforcement, but which actually makes the situation worse, is not statesmanship, it is demagogy.
We thank the majority of the Senate Republicans (33 in all) and the seven Democrats who supported the Isakson amendment, which insists upon verifiable benchmarks for border security before considering other issues. Moreover, we say �Thank You� to Jim Sensenbrenner, Peter King, and the bi-partisan House majority including 36 Democrats, that passed HR 4437. We may quibble with a clause here and there, but you in the House and the majority of Senate Republicans are right to emphasize that the Congress and the President must deal with enforcement first and other issues later. Stand fast; the American people are overwhelmingly with you.
Signed,
William B. Allen, Professor of Political Science at Michigan State University
William J. Bennett, former Secretary of Education under President Reagan, former Director of the Office of National Drug Control Policy under former President George H.W. Bush
Thomas L. Bock, National Commander of the American Legion
Robert H. Bork, Senior Fellow at the Hudson Institute, former Solicitor General, acting Attorney General, Supreme Court nominee, U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals Judge
William F. Buckley, Jr., founder and Editor-at-Large of National Review
Peter Collier, founding Publisher of Encounter Books, cofounder of Center for the Study of Popular Culture
Ward Connerly, former Regent at the University of California, founder and Chairman of the American Civil Rights Institute (ACRI), winner of the 2005 Bradley Prize for Outstanding Intellectual Achievement
T. Kenneth Cribb, former domestic policy advisor for President Ronald Reagan
Glynn Custred, Professor of Anthropology at California State University, Hayward, and coauthor of the California Civil Rights Initiative, Proposition 209
John C. Eastman, Professor of Law at Chapman University School of Law, Director of the Center for Constitutional Jurisprudence
John Fonte, Senior Fellow and Director of the Center of American Common Culture at the Hudson Institute
David Frum, former speechwriter for George W. Bush, Resident Fellow at American Enterprise Institute
Frank J. Gaffney, Jr., founder and President of the Center for Security Policy
Newt Gingrich, former Speaker of the House of Representatives, Chairman of the Gingrich Group, Senior Fellow at American Enterprise Institute
Jonah Goldberg, Editor-at-Large of the National Review Online, national syndicated columnist
Victor Davis Hanson, Martin and Illie Anderson Senior Fellow at the Hoover Institution, recipient of the 1991 American Philological Association Excellence in Teaching Award
David Horowitz, cofounder of the Center for the Study of Popular Culture, Editor of FrontPageMag.com
Fred C. Ikl�, former Undersecretary of Defense under Reagan, former Director of U.S. Arms Control and Disarmament Agency
David Keene, Chairman of the American Conservative Union
Brian Kennedy, President of the Claremont Institute, Publisher of the Claremont Review of Books
Roger Kimball, Managing Editor of The New Criterion
Alan Charles Kors, Professor of History at the University of Pennsylvania
Mark Krikorian, Executive Director of the Center for Immigration Studies
Michael A. Ledeen, Resident Scholar at the American Enterprise Institute
Seth Leibsohn, Fellow at the Claremont Institute
John Leo, columnist and Contributing Editor to U.S. News and World Report
Herbert London, President of the Hudson Institute
Kathryn Jean Lopez, Editor of National Review Online
Rich Lowry, Editor of National Review
Heather Mac Donald, John M. Olin Fellow at the Manhattan Institute, winner of the 2005 Bradley Prize for Outstanding Intellectual Achievement
John O�Sullivan, Senior Fellow at the Hudson Institute, Editor-at-Large of National Review
Juliana Pilon, Research Professor at the Institute for World Politics
Daniel Pipes, founder and Director of the Middle East Forum and Campus Watch, former member of the board of the U.S. Institute of Peace
Andrew �Andy� Ramirez, Chairman of the Friends of Border Patrol
Phyllis Schlafly, founder and President of Eagle Forum
Thomas Sowell, Rose and Milton Friedman Senior Fellow on Public Policy at the Hoover Institution, winner of the 2003 Bradley Prize for Outstanding Intellectual Achievement
Shelby Steele, Research Fellow at the Hoover Institution, winner of the 2006 Bradley Prize for Outstanding Intellectual Achievement
Stephen Steinlight, Fellow at the Center for Immigration Studies, former National Affairs Director of the American Jewish Committee, and Vice President of the National Conference of Christians and Jews
Thomas G. West, Director and Senior Fellow of the Claremont Institute, Professor of Politics at the University of Dallas
bbct
06-28 10:04 AM
I have H1-b petition approval but i dont have h1-I-94 card.
Is it legal to work without h1-I-94 Card?
Do i need to travel out side of country ?
Is it legal to work without h1-I-94 Card?
Do i need to travel out side of country ?