acecupid
07-15 06:14 PM
Here is the actual text of the visa distribution law. Also available on USCIS website.
INA: ACT 202 - NUMERICAL LIMITATION TO ANY SINGLE FOREIGN STATE
Sec. 202. [8 U.S.C. 1152]
(a) Per Country Level. -
(1) Nondiscrimination. -
(A) Except as specifically provided in paragraph (2) and in sections 101(a)(27) , 201(b)(2)(A)(i) , and 203, no person shall receive any preference or priority or be discriminated against in the issuance of an immigrant visa because of the person's race, sex, nationality, place of birth, or place of residence.
(B) 1/ Nothing in this paragraph shall be construed to limit the authority of the Secretary of State to determine the procedures for the processing of immigrant visa applications or the locations where such applications will be processed.
(2) Per country levels for family-sponsored and employment-based immigrants. - Subject to 1a/ paragraphs (3), (4), and (5) the total number of immigrant visas made available to natives of any single foreign state or dependent area under subsections (a) and (b) of section 203 in any fiscal year may not exceed 7 percent (in the case of a single foreign state) or 2 percent (in the case of a dependent area) of the total number of such visas made available under such subsections in that fiscal year.
(3) Exception if additional visas available. - If because of the application of paragraph (2) with respect to one or more foreign states or dependent areas, the total number of visas available under both subsections (a) and (b) of section 203 for a calendar quarter exceeds the number of qualified immigrants who otherwise may be issued such a visa, paragraph (2) shall not apply to visas made available to such states or areas during the remainder of such calendar quarter.
(5) 2/ RULES FOR EMPLOYMENT-BASED IMMIGRANTS-
(A) EMPLOYMENT-BASED IMMIGRANTS NOT SUBJECT TO PER COUNTRY LIMITATION IF ADDITIONAL VISAS AVAILABLE- If the total number of visas available under paragraph (1), (2), (3), (4), or (5) of section 203(b) for a calendar quarter exceeds the number of qualified immigrants who may otherwise be issued such visas, the visas made available under that paragraph shall be issued without regard to the numerical limitation under paragraph (2) of this subsection during the remainder of the calendar quarter.
(B) LIMITING FALL ACROSS FOR CERTAIN COUNTRIES SUBJECT TO SUBSECTION (e)- In the case of a foreign state or dependent area to which subsection (e) applies, if the total number of visas issued under section 203(b) exceeds the maximum number of visas that may be made available to immigrants of the state or area under section 203(b)consistent with subsection (e) (determined without regard to this paragraph),in applying subsection (e) all visas shall be deemed to have been required for the classes of aliens specified in section 203(b).
(b) Rules for Chargeability. - Each independent country, self-governing dominion, mandated territory, and territory under the international trusteeship system of the United Nations, other than the United States and its outlying possessions, shall be treated as a separate foreign state for the purposes of a numerical level established under subsection (a)(2) when approved by the Secretary of State. All other inhabited lands shall be attributed to a foreign state specified by the Secretary of State. F or the purposes of this Act the foreign state to which an immigrant is chargeable shall be determined by birth within such foreign state except that-
(1) an alien child, when accompanied by or following to join his alien parent or parents, may be charged to the foreign state of either parent if such parent has received or would be qualified for an immigrant visa, if necessary to prevent the separation of the child from the parent or parents, and if immigration charged to the foreign state to which such parent has been or would be chargeable has not reached a numerical level established under subsection (a)(2) for that fiscal year;
(2) if an alien is chargeable to a different foreign state from that of his spouse, the foreign state to which such alien is chargeable may, if necessary to prevent the separation of husband and wife, be determined by the foreign state of the spouse he is accompanying or following to join, if such spouse has received or would be qualified for an immigrant visa and if immigration charged to the foreign state to which such spouse has been or would be chargeable has not reached a numerical level estab lished under subsection (a)(2) for that fiscal year; (3) an alien born in the United States shall be considered as having been born in the country of which he is a citizen or subject, or, if he is not a citizen or subject of any country, in the last foreign country in which he had his residence as determined by the consular officer; and (4) an alien born within any foreign state in which neither of his parents was born and in which neither of his parents had a residence at the time of such alien's birth may be charged to the foreign state of either parent.
(c) Chargeability for Dependent Areas. - Any immigrant born in a colony or other component or dependent area of a foreign state overseas from the foreign state, other than an alien described in section 201(b) , shall be chargeable for the purpose of the limitation set forth in subsection (a), to the foreign state.
(d) Changes in Territory. - In the case of any change in the territorial limits of foreign states, the Secretary of State shall, upon recognition of such change, issue appropriate instructions to all diplomatic and consular offices.
(e) Special Rules for Countries at Ceiling. - If it is determined that the total number of immigrant visas made available under subsections (a) and (b) of section 203 to natives of any single foreign state or dependent area will exceed the numerical limitation specified in subsection (a)(2) in any fiscal year, in determining the allotment of immigrant visa numbers to natives under subsections (a) and (b) of section 203, visa numbers with respect to natives of that state or area shall be allocated (to the extent practicable and otherwise consistent with this section and section 203) in a manner so that -
(1) the ratio of the visa numbers made available under section 203(a) to the visa numbers made available under section 203(b) is equal to the ratio of the worldwide level of immigration under section 201(c) to such level under section 201 (d);
(2) except as provided in subsection (a)(4), the proportion of the visa numbers made available under each of paragraphs (1) through (4) of section 203(a) is equal to the ratio of the total number of visas made available under the respective paragraph to the total number of visas made available under section 203(a), and
(3) 3/ except as provided in subsection (a)(5), the proportion of the visa numbers made available under each of paragraphs (1) through (5) of section 203(b) is equal to the ratio of the total number of visas made available under the respective paragraph to the total number of visas made available under section 203(b).
Nothing in this subsection shall be construed as limiting the number of visas that may be issued to natives of a foreign state or dependent area under section 203(a) or 203(b) if there is insufficient demand for visas for such natives under section 203(b) or 203(a), respectively, or as limiting the number of visas that may be issued under section 203(a)(2)(A) pursuant to subsection (a)(4)(A).
Nothing in this subsection shall be construed as limiting the number of visas that may be issued to natives of a foreign state or dependent area under section 203(a) or 203(b) if there is insufficient demand for visas for such natives under section 203(b) or 203(a) , respectively, or as limiting the number of visas that may be issued under section 203(a)(2)(A) pursuant to subsection (a)(4)(A).
INA: ACT 202 - NUMERICAL LIMITATION TO ANY SINGLE FOREIGN STATE
Sec. 202. [8 U.S.C. 1152]
(a) Per Country Level. -
(1) Nondiscrimination. -
(A) Except as specifically provided in paragraph (2) and in sections 101(a)(27) , 201(b)(2)(A)(i) , and 203, no person shall receive any preference or priority or be discriminated against in the issuance of an immigrant visa because of the person's race, sex, nationality, place of birth, or place of residence.
(B) 1/ Nothing in this paragraph shall be construed to limit the authority of the Secretary of State to determine the procedures for the processing of immigrant visa applications or the locations where such applications will be processed.
(2) Per country levels for family-sponsored and employment-based immigrants. - Subject to 1a/ paragraphs (3), (4), and (5) the total number of immigrant visas made available to natives of any single foreign state or dependent area under subsections (a) and (b) of section 203 in any fiscal year may not exceed 7 percent (in the case of a single foreign state) or 2 percent (in the case of a dependent area) of the total number of such visas made available under such subsections in that fiscal year.
(3) Exception if additional visas available. - If because of the application of paragraph (2) with respect to one or more foreign states or dependent areas, the total number of visas available under both subsections (a) and (b) of section 203 for a calendar quarter exceeds the number of qualified immigrants who otherwise may be issued such a visa, paragraph (2) shall not apply to visas made available to such states or areas during the remainder of such calendar quarter.
(5) 2/ RULES FOR EMPLOYMENT-BASED IMMIGRANTS-
(A) EMPLOYMENT-BASED IMMIGRANTS NOT SUBJECT TO PER COUNTRY LIMITATION IF ADDITIONAL VISAS AVAILABLE- If the total number of visas available under paragraph (1), (2), (3), (4), or (5) of section 203(b) for a calendar quarter exceeds the number of qualified immigrants who may otherwise be issued such visas, the visas made available under that paragraph shall be issued without regard to the numerical limitation under paragraph (2) of this subsection during the remainder of the calendar quarter.
(B) LIMITING FALL ACROSS FOR CERTAIN COUNTRIES SUBJECT TO SUBSECTION (e)- In the case of a foreign state or dependent area to which subsection (e) applies, if the total number of visas issued under section 203(b) exceeds the maximum number of visas that may be made available to immigrants of the state or area under section 203(b)consistent with subsection (e) (determined without regard to this paragraph),in applying subsection (e) all visas shall be deemed to have been required for the classes of aliens specified in section 203(b).
(b) Rules for Chargeability. - Each independent country, self-governing dominion, mandated territory, and territory under the international trusteeship system of the United Nations, other than the United States and its outlying possessions, shall be treated as a separate foreign state for the purposes of a numerical level established under subsection (a)(2) when approved by the Secretary of State. All other inhabited lands shall be attributed to a foreign state specified by the Secretary of State. F or the purposes of this Act the foreign state to which an immigrant is chargeable shall be determined by birth within such foreign state except that-
(1) an alien child, when accompanied by or following to join his alien parent or parents, may be charged to the foreign state of either parent if such parent has received or would be qualified for an immigrant visa, if necessary to prevent the separation of the child from the parent or parents, and if immigration charged to the foreign state to which such parent has been or would be chargeable has not reached a numerical level established under subsection (a)(2) for that fiscal year;
(2) if an alien is chargeable to a different foreign state from that of his spouse, the foreign state to which such alien is chargeable may, if necessary to prevent the separation of husband and wife, be determined by the foreign state of the spouse he is accompanying or following to join, if such spouse has received or would be qualified for an immigrant visa and if immigration charged to the foreign state to which such spouse has been or would be chargeable has not reached a numerical level estab lished under subsection (a)(2) for that fiscal year; (3) an alien born in the United States shall be considered as having been born in the country of which he is a citizen or subject, or, if he is not a citizen or subject of any country, in the last foreign country in which he had his residence as determined by the consular officer; and (4) an alien born within any foreign state in which neither of his parents was born and in which neither of his parents had a residence at the time of such alien's birth may be charged to the foreign state of either parent.
(c) Chargeability for Dependent Areas. - Any immigrant born in a colony or other component or dependent area of a foreign state overseas from the foreign state, other than an alien described in section 201(b) , shall be chargeable for the purpose of the limitation set forth in subsection (a), to the foreign state.
(d) Changes in Territory. - In the case of any change in the territorial limits of foreign states, the Secretary of State shall, upon recognition of such change, issue appropriate instructions to all diplomatic and consular offices.
(e) Special Rules for Countries at Ceiling. - If it is determined that the total number of immigrant visas made available under subsections (a) and (b) of section 203 to natives of any single foreign state or dependent area will exceed the numerical limitation specified in subsection (a)(2) in any fiscal year, in determining the allotment of immigrant visa numbers to natives under subsections (a) and (b) of section 203, visa numbers with respect to natives of that state or area shall be allocated (to the extent practicable and otherwise consistent with this section and section 203) in a manner so that -
(1) the ratio of the visa numbers made available under section 203(a) to the visa numbers made available under section 203(b) is equal to the ratio of the worldwide level of immigration under section 201(c) to such level under section 201 (d);
(2) except as provided in subsection (a)(4), the proportion of the visa numbers made available under each of paragraphs (1) through (4) of section 203(a) is equal to the ratio of the total number of visas made available under the respective paragraph to the total number of visas made available under section 203(a), and
(3) 3/ except as provided in subsection (a)(5), the proportion of the visa numbers made available under each of paragraphs (1) through (5) of section 203(b) is equal to the ratio of the total number of visas made available under the respective paragraph to the total number of visas made available under section 203(b).
Nothing in this subsection shall be construed as limiting the number of visas that may be issued to natives of a foreign state or dependent area under section 203(a) or 203(b) if there is insufficient demand for visas for such natives under section 203(b) or 203(a), respectively, or as limiting the number of visas that may be issued under section 203(a)(2)(A) pursuant to subsection (a)(4)(A).
Nothing in this subsection shall be construed as limiting the number of visas that may be issued to natives of a foreign state or dependent area under section 203(a) or 203(b) if there is insufficient demand for visas for such natives under section 203(b) or 203(a) , respectively, or as limiting the number of visas that may be issued under section 203(a)(2)(A) pursuant to subsection (a)(4)(A).
wallpaper chelsea kane dancing with stars. Chelsea Kane Season 12
gbof
06-10 02:55 PM
question to experts. will they send RFE's if they have already sent one and have pre-adjudicated? I hope not...
Look forward for your GC...man...donot think of RFE at this stage
Look forward for your GC...man...donot think of RFE at this stage
saravanaraj.sathya
07-18 09:04 AM
I also have the same issue. Can we get some help on resolving this. I think USCIS should accept with some proof that I-140 is already filed.
2011 chelsea kane dancing with stars hair. Dancing with the stars 2011
go_guy123
08-09 11:12 AM
Hi all,
This discussion is very valuble for people like me deciding between living in Canada as PR vs H1B USA .We all know that salaries in USA are slightly better than Canada .But now the exchange rate is almost equal.
Salary:
Can a person with family(2 kids) survive in Canada with CAD 50,000 / year salary in a place like Toronto.? I heard in Canada you pay 13 % tax on anything you buy .Does 50 % of your income goes in taxes ?
HealthCare:
Also is the government sponsored health care good compared to USA .I mean do you have any wait to see specialists.Is healthcare comparable to USA.
Immigration:
In USA anyone can get a Greencard regardless of their qualifications and it depends how early you enter the GC queue.But looks like in Canada they value your educations and other qualifications.Can IT professionals (non-managers) apply for Canada PR without a job or Canadian education?
Canadian Citizenship:
Many people want to get Canadian citizenship and return to USA with TN Visa .In future ,could USA put restrictions on this .?
Please share your thoughts .
Thankyou
Yes salaries and opportunities are greater in US. I am not denying that. Actually
an Indian family friend of mine here in U of T, his wife happens to be born outside
India. I always advice them to keep an eye on opportunities in US, GC is worth the hassle for him.
With 2 kids you get tax benefits from Govt. Yes its hard. But its even harder and risky with
H1B in US. Taxes are high and so I am now planning to work as sole proprietorship
, something that I am not allowed to do in US.
Socialist Health care can never be equal to privatized health care in US.
In Canada you pay in terms of wait times (but not as bad as the private insurance lobby is portraying in US nowadays)
But if it is non emergency and needs long waiting I can get that done in India as well.
Skilled immigration is closed for non IT managers now.
Actually US has lately liberalized the TN1 visa for Canadians. It used to be 1 year but lately increased to 3 years. As H1Bs are squeezed out of US, the demand for non H1B needing people will increase and that can benefit TN1 visa holders.
This discussion is very valuble for people like me deciding between living in Canada as PR vs H1B USA .We all know that salaries in USA are slightly better than Canada .But now the exchange rate is almost equal.
Salary:
Can a person with family(2 kids) survive in Canada with CAD 50,000 / year salary in a place like Toronto.? I heard in Canada you pay 13 % tax on anything you buy .Does 50 % of your income goes in taxes ?
HealthCare:
Also is the government sponsored health care good compared to USA .I mean do you have any wait to see specialists.Is healthcare comparable to USA.
Immigration:
In USA anyone can get a Greencard regardless of their qualifications and it depends how early you enter the GC queue.But looks like in Canada they value your educations and other qualifications.Can IT professionals (non-managers) apply for Canada PR without a job or Canadian education?
Canadian Citizenship:
Many people want to get Canadian citizenship and return to USA with TN Visa .In future ,could USA put restrictions on this .?
Please share your thoughts .
Thankyou
Yes salaries and opportunities are greater in US. I am not denying that. Actually
an Indian family friend of mine here in U of T, his wife happens to be born outside
India. I always advice them to keep an eye on opportunities in US, GC is worth the hassle for him.
With 2 kids you get tax benefits from Govt. Yes its hard. But its even harder and risky with
H1B in US. Taxes are high and so I am now planning to work as sole proprietorship
, something that I am not allowed to do in US.
Socialist Health care can never be equal to privatized health care in US.
In Canada you pay in terms of wait times (but not as bad as the private insurance lobby is portraying in US nowadays)
But if it is non emergency and needs long waiting I can get that done in India as well.
Skilled immigration is closed for non IT managers now.
Actually US has lately liberalized the TN1 visa for Canadians. It used to be 1 year but lately increased to 3 years. As H1Bs are squeezed out of US, the demand for non H1B needing people will increase and that can benefit TN1 visa holders.
more...
nonimmi
03-13 04:06 PM
EB3 (India) moved 2 months. Good news. But then?
What you expect for Eb3 guys? What may be the trend in coming months?
2002....2003....2004.....?
What you expect for Eb3 guys? What may be the trend in coming months?
2002....2003....2004.....?
mrjonie
05-21 08:21 PM
Awesome !!!..Such an easy way to send email....Good Job IV, !!!...
more...
chmur
04-11 11:50 PM
Historically, 5 years for end-to-end GC process is not considered as catastrophic delay...
There is a good chance that 2005 PD might get approved in 2010 summer , even with current system unless USCIS looses more visa #s. So IV and all of us have to scream at high pitch and frequently so that no more Visa #s are lost. I think it is happening
2003 this summer , 2004 in 09 and 2005 in 2010 is quite possible.
Now if we all contribute more $$$ to IV we can expedite the above time table.
data indicates some movement in approvals for EB3-I in last 3 weeks. sorry IV , unless sorting issue is fixed, rich data is not of much use . Example: sort by PD's does string sorting instead of date sorting .
Cheer up ...it will happen
There is a good chance that 2005 PD might get approved in 2010 summer , even with current system unless USCIS looses more visa #s. So IV and all of us have to scream at high pitch and frequently so that no more Visa #s are lost. I think it is happening
2003 this summer , 2004 in 09 and 2005 in 2010 is quite possible.
Now if we all contribute more $$$ to IV we can expedite the above time table.
data indicates some movement in approvals for EB3-I in last 3 weeks. sorry IV , unless sorting issue is fixed, rich data is not of much use . Example: sort by PD's does string sorting instead of date sorting .
Cheer up ...it will happen
2010 chelsea kane dancing with stars hair. Chelsea Kane at the 8th Annual
ram04
12-08 07:09 PM
Thanks to all the moral support given by Chandvu,Pd Recapturing and all others.
With all your wishes and almighty blessings today I got MTR approval and I485 into reopen status.
My earlier employer revoked I 140 in Sept 08 . Applied MTR in OCT and got MTR approval and 485 reopened notification today.
However online still not updated - may be site is still down.
Thanks again.
- Ram
With all your wishes and almighty blessings today I got MTR approval and I485 into reopen status.
My earlier employer revoked I 140 in Sept 08 . Applied MTR in OCT and got MTR approval and 485 reopened notification today.
However online still not updated - may be site is still down.
Thanks again.
- Ram
more...
yabadaba
03-20 03:53 PM
i dont think its a controversy. mr. Gotcher does not agree with the interpretation. Maybe its a way to generate some additional revenues for his firm by increased traffic to the blog and potentially a class action lawsuit on behalf of the ROW people.
hair this cycle#39;s Chelsea Kane
delhiguy79
07-20 11:26 AM
the funnies thing is that NSC update for Nov 20 is just found on Immigration.com and no where else .....SO whats the reliability of that document ?
thats true svam77....thats why i m so concerned...
even my employer is playing games, i think they dont want to do it...i hope atleast they give me my receipt notice...
thats true svam77....thats why i m so concerned...
even my employer is playing games, i think they dont want to do it...i hope atleast they give me my receipt notice...
more...
geesee
07-24 10:19 PM
Pappu - Thanks for removing the ban!
OP - I honestly feel very sorry for all the people out there who are stuck at PBEC... Its the most unfortunate thing in the whole GC process. And I truly believe that IV Core should treat labor backlog issue as one of their top priority items.
I had filed 2 labor apps in 2004. One from NJ in Jun 2004 and other one from IL in Nov. 2004.. I consider myself lucky to get my IL labor approval. Dont know the status of NJ labor.. I think it might be stuck in backlog too!
OP - I honestly feel very sorry for all the people out there who are stuck at PBEC... Its the most unfortunate thing in the whole GC process. And I truly believe that IV Core should treat labor backlog issue as one of their top priority items.
I had filed 2 labor apps in 2004. One from NJ in Jun 2004 and other one from IL in Nov. 2004.. I consider myself lucky to get my IL labor approval. Dont know the status of NJ labor.. I think it might be stuck in backlog too!
hot chelsea kane dancing with
gcfunstarts
06-24 11:18 AM
Called and took only few seconds, no waiting :)
She knew the bills that I was going to support and noted down my zip code.
Please call and express your support, it is the easiest thing you can do to show your support and make a difference!
Regards.
She knew the bills that I was going to support and noted down my zip code.
Please call and express your support, it is the easiest thing you can do to show your support and make a difference!
Regards.
more...
house chelsea kane dancing with stars hair. Chelsea Kane Confirms She#39;smiloSep
kate123
02-14 10:26 AM
can you PM me the email. we can prepare final draft and send across to DHS secretary.
If the format is good... then we can use the same letter with out any edits.
Once the format is final, I can open a new thread and start a poll. we can also post the link in other websites (tractitt, murthy, imminfo, etc)
Thank you guys,
Please PM me the Email you sent to CISOmbudsman.
Don't let others to HIJACK this thread they have developed habit.
We gotta follow this to the end.
Thank's
MDix
If the format is good... then we can use the same letter with out any edits.
Once the format is final, I can open a new thread and start a poll. we can also post the link in other websites (tractitt, murthy, imminfo, etc)
Thank you guys,
Please PM me the Email you sent to CISOmbudsman.
Don't let others to HIJACK this thread they have developed habit.
We gotta follow this to the end.
Thank's
MDix
tattoo chelsea kane dancing with stars hair. DANCING WITH THE STARS
perm2gc
12-01 07:15 PM
Can we organize a hunger strike in front of CAPITOL HILL ,just for one day ?
IV can co-ordinate the event. It will give BIG media attention in DC. It will open the eyes of American people !
Are you kidding.???
IV can co-ordinate the event. It will give BIG media attention in DC. It will open the eyes of American people !
Are you kidding.???
more...
pictures Chelsea Kane, Mark Ballas and
Administrator2
02-13 03:00 PM
Indeed it seems very few people are interested as most member may have their 485 submitted already. EB immigrants are a small minority of this country, yet we are only a small portion of this small minority. It is a sad fact, but it should not stop us from fighting..
Dear jchan,
We are very interested in this provision. Immigration Voice has heavily invested in this measure, both, legislatively and administrative. We have consistenly advocated for this provision which we believe will curb arm twisting by bad employers, that are like few bad apples in the big basket. Such a provision will help everyone including USCIS, lawyers, genuine companies, and direct+indirect beneficiary. Its a win-win for all.
.
Dear jchan,
We are very interested in this provision. Immigration Voice has heavily invested in this measure, both, legislatively and administrative. We have consistenly advocated for this provision which we believe will curb arm twisting by bad employers, that are like few bad apples in the big basket. Such a provision will help everyone including USCIS, lawyers, genuine companies, and direct+indirect beneficiary. Its a win-win for all.
.
dresses chelsea kane dancing with
sands2007
03-21 02:42 PM
My current H1B was sponosred through an educational institution and was hence cap exempt. Will I be able to transfer my current H1B if I decide to move to a private company?
Thanks!
Thanks!
more...
makeup stars Chelsea+kane+dancing
garybanz
09-20 02:12 PM
Good Idea, Jayram.
Having even a couple of fill time staffers will make a big difference...but will also require bigger budget.
Does any one know how much IV collets in recurring contributions? How much did we collect for the DC rally and how much did we spend?
San Jose was a local CA event planned almost spontaneously. DC was an event planned months in advance. People were offered Free ride, Free plane fare, Free food (in Gurdwaras). Yet how many participated?
I have been refraining from posting on this point, as I wouldn't like to belittle the contributions of the strong team from California and the numbers they brought to the rally.
But let's face it. CA has more EB immigrants than the next three. Look at the recent 2006 Performance report from DoL (available at Mathew Oh website). CA had 21,000+ labor petitions compared to NY - 7,000, NJ - 7,000(?) , TX - 5000. As you can see CA scores more than the next three states put together.
If 40 people participate from NY, it's as good as 120 from Cal. Percentagewise it would be the same. If 40 peope walk in Michigan ( 2000 Labor petitions) statistically it would surpass CA, percentagewise.
It's a known thing that only 5%-10% of the population participates actively in the most successful movements be it American Revolution or struggle for Indian Independence. We haven't reached that critical mass yet ( at the regional level)
There is an enthusiasm right now. But how long before the fatigue sets in? Rallies need to be minimal, held with certain strategic target and should serve some specific purpose.
Weekend rallies attracting bigger crowds is a myth. Be prepared to listen to reasons like - Shucks I have to mow the lawn, take kids to Bharatanatyam dance classes, I have relatives over for lunch etc.
With that logic if we hold rallies over the LONG weekends, we should attract bigger crowd, since people have 2-3 days to relax afterwards. And since people already plan to visit Orlando, LA etc to visit Disneyland, Universal etc., if we can hold rallies there we should attract the highest possible crowd. Do you think my idea will work?
I agree with you 100%. Question is - who'll bell the cat? Who will take the lead and sacrifice their time, family life etc. to plan, organize and conduct these?
We need a fearless leader like Aman Kapoor, who can motivate and inspire people to participate, in every state. Where can we find them?
How about taking this to the next step and hire paid fulltime staff who can
1) call people and request donations
2) organize meetings
3) stimulate the local chapters
4) promote IV
..... and the list can go on.....and do all the things necessary to convert all propects to customers.
How about having full time offices in DC? This office will run on donations.
Finally, how about instead of anonymous members make this a place where everyone has to provide their personal details etc.
Anyways, I am just ranting.
Having even a couple of fill time staffers will make a big difference...but will also require bigger budget.
Does any one know how much IV collets in recurring contributions? How much did we collect for the DC rally and how much did we spend?
San Jose was a local CA event planned almost spontaneously. DC was an event planned months in advance. People were offered Free ride, Free plane fare, Free food (in Gurdwaras). Yet how many participated?
I have been refraining from posting on this point, as I wouldn't like to belittle the contributions of the strong team from California and the numbers they brought to the rally.
But let's face it. CA has more EB immigrants than the next three. Look at the recent 2006 Performance report from DoL (available at Mathew Oh website). CA had 21,000+ labor petitions compared to NY - 7,000, NJ - 7,000(?) , TX - 5000. As you can see CA scores more than the next three states put together.
If 40 people participate from NY, it's as good as 120 from Cal. Percentagewise it would be the same. If 40 peope walk in Michigan ( 2000 Labor petitions) statistically it would surpass CA, percentagewise.
It's a known thing that only 5%-10% of the population participates actively in the most successful movements be it American Revolution or struggle for Indian Independence. We haven't reached that critical mass yet ( at the regional level)
There is an enthusiasm right now. But how long before the fatigue sets in? Rallies need to be minimal, held with certain strategic target and should serve some specific purpose.
Weekend rallies attracting bigger crowds is a myth. Be prepared to listen to reasons like - Shucks I have to mow the lawn, take kids to Bharatanatyam dance classes, I have relatives over for lunch etc.
With that logic if we hold rallies over the LONG weekends, we should attract bigger crowd, since people have 2-3 days to relax afterwards. And since people already plan to visit Orlando, LA etc to visit Disneyland, Universal etc., if we can hold rallies there we should attract the highest possible crowd. Do you think my idea will work?
I agree with you 100%. Question is - who'll bell the cat? Who will take the lead and sacrifice their time, family life etc. to plan, organize and conduct these?
We need a fearless leader like Aman Kapoor, who can motivate and inspire people to participate, in every state. Where can we find them?
How about taking this to the next step and hire paid fulltime staff who can
1) call people and request donations
2) organize meetings
3) stimulate the local chapters
4) promote IV
..... and the list can go on.....and do all the things necessary to convert all propects to customers.
How about having full time offices in DC? This office will run on donations.
Finally, how about instead of anonymous members make this a place where everyone has to provide their personal details etc.
Anyways, I am just ranting.
girlfriend Chelsea Kane Shoes
TheOmbudsman
11-08 12:42 PM
Hello NyCgal369,
Please do not take that as an offense.
I think you misunderstood my previous comments then. I always knew that Democrats are pro amnesty/CIR. How could I argue against that ?
Read article below from WorldDailynews. It is in line with my line of thought. My perspectives are solely based in facts. It was before and it will be now. I am here to help this organization flow in the right direction.
Regards,
The Ombudsman
Why the GOP is losing
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: November 3, 2006
1:00 a.m. Eastern
Entering the weekend before his midterms, George Bush and his party appear fated to lose the House they have held for a dozen years. The Senate is on a knife's edge.
The latest polls continue to show that by 52 percent to 37 percent Americans wish to see a Democratic takeover. Approval of Congress has never been lower. Americans think the nation is on the wrong track. Support for the war in Iraq has collapsed to a third of the nation.
What went wrong? Certainly, on three traditional Republican issues � strong military, conservative judges and lower taxes � the GOP remains America's Party.
(Column continues below)
How do we know? Because no Democrat in a close race is calling, Mondale-like, for higher taxes or attacking Bush for elevating judges John Roberts and Sam Alito to the Supreme Court. In the tight Senate races in Tennessee and Virginia, Democratic nominees Harold Ford and Jim Webb are outspokenly pro-defense.
On immigration, where Bush aligns with Kennedy-McCain, his party has abandoned him. The Republican House stands for border security, no amnesty and no new guest-worker program. Nor is this a losing issue. Even Hillary Clinton voted for 700 miles of security fence on the Mexican border.
What, then, are the causes of Republican malaise?
First is the perception the GOP is no longer a virtuous party that seeks to live up to principles and a high standard of public ethics. The adventures of the Abramoff Gang, Mark Foley, Duke Cunningham and his poker-party pals, of pork barrel and bridges to nowhere have demoralized the Republican base and disgusted Middle America. There is a feeling, even on the right, that if this crowd is run out of Dodge, its expulsion will not be unwarranted.
Second, while the macro economy seems to be firing on all eight cylinders � the Dow has risen above 12,000, and the Misery Index of inflation plus unemployment has fallen to the lowest levels in modern times � not all Americans are participating in the prosperity.
Employment in health care has grown by almost 2 million, but some 3 million manufacturing jobs have vanished. There has been a population explosion among billionaires, but the real median wage of a male worker has not risen in decades. The daily closure of factories here, as more and more Chinese goods show up at Wal-Mart, points to inescapable consequences: The price of the GOP's free-trade-uber-alles ideology is the loss of the Reagan Democrats.
In Ohio, which was indispensable to Bush is 2000 and 2004, free trade is a millstone around the GOP neck. If Bush loses the House or Senate, free-trade globalism goes on the shelf. Not only will Bush fail to win congressional support of a Doha Round trade treaty, he will be denied any renewal of fast-track authority. The new Congress will not rubber stamp trade treaties, but demand a voice and votes on any new deal the Bushites negotiate on behalf of Corporate America.
But if Republicans are swept from power, the reason will be Iraq. By two to one, Americans have reached the conclusion that the war was a mistake, that taking down Saddam was not worth the price in blood, that the management of the war has been as botched as John Kerry's joke, that it is time to bring the troops home and let Iraqis do the fighting for their own freedom, democracy and independence.
And the more seats Republicans lose Tuesday, the greater will be the pressure on the party and president to find an early exit.
Yet about the war, America remains divided and conflicted. For the roaring Republican reception to Bush's calls for "victory" testifies to another truth. While most American wish we had never gone in and want out, America does not want to lose the war as we lost Vietnam.
Neither party knows a way to accomplish what America wants: to leave Iraq without losing the war. And the reason neither party knows how to do it is because it cannot be done. Like a patient suffering from cancer, we want an end to the "chemo" � the awful news daily coming out of Iraq � but we do not want the consequences.
What, then, has cost the Republican Party its patrimony?
The answer is, first, hubris. Dominating Congress for a dozen years, the GOP began to behave with the same haughtiness as those they displaced. They forgot who sent them here, and why.
Second, ideology. Bush Republicans refuse even to reconsider, despite contradictory evidence, what their ideology teaches: that free trade is best, that U.S. power is invincible, that all the world wants to be like us, that our motives are always pure and theirs malevolent.
Tuesday will bring the party back to earth. But it will not solve the crises that beset the country. For while the Democrats may be the political alternative, the Democrats' ideology of big government liberalism is even more bankrupt.
yes for once you are correct: you are clearly neither my buddy, or apparently not a buddy of anyone on this site.
actually that is not all you said, you were talking about immigration not being part of the Dems mandate. pls refresh your memory by reading your own previous posts.
and now you have just contradicted yourself by saying that "probably you will hear more good news for those who believe that amnesty is the way to go", since you are now implying that in fact dems will be moving forward with amnesty. isnt that then part of their mandate?
also your claims of being "realistic" are actually not realistic at all, just negative.
and I for one do not consider you to be my ombudsman, and would prefer not to read your "reports" which are mostly thoroughly misinformed opinions.
Please do not take that as an offense.
I think you misunderstood my previous comments then. I always knew that Democrats are pro amnesty/CIR. How could I argue against that ?
Read article below from WorldDailynews. It is in line with my line of thought. My perspectives are solely based in facts. It was before and it will be now. I am here to help this organization flow in the right direction.
Regards,
The Ombudsman
Why the GOP is losing
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: November 3, 2006
1:00 a.m. Eastern
Entering the weekend before his midterms, George Bush and his party appear fated to lose the House they have held for a dozen years. The Senate is on a knife's edge.
The latest polls continue to show that by 52 percent to 37 percent Americans wish to see a Democratic takeover. Approval of Congress has never been lower. Americans think the nation is on the wrong track. Support for the war in Iraq has collapsed to a third of the nation.
What went wrong? Certainly, on three traditional Republican issues � strong military, conservative judges and lower taxes � the GOP remains America's Party.
(Column continues below)
How do we know? Because no Democrat in a close race is calling, Mondale-like, for higher taxes or attacking Bush for elevating judges John Roberts and Sam Alito to the Supreme Court. In the tight Senate races in Tennessee and Virginia, Democratic nominees Harold Ford and Jim Webb are outspokenly pro-defense.
On immigration, where Bush aligns with Kennedy-McCain, his party has abandoned him. The Republican House stands for border security, no amnesty and no new guest-worker program. Nor is this a losing issue. Even Hillary Clinton voted for 700 miles of security fence on the Mexican border.
What, then, are the causes of Republican malaise?
First is the perception the GOP is no longer a virtuous party that seeks to live up to principles and a high standard of public ethics. The adventures of the Abramoff Gang, Mark Foley, Duke Cunningham and his poker-party pals, of pork barrel and bridges to nowhere have demoralized the Republican base and disgusted Middle America. There is a feeling, even on the right, that if this crowd is run out of Dodge, its expulsion will not be unwarranted.
Second, while the macro economy seems to be firing on all eight cylinders � the Dow has risen above 12,000, and the Misery Index of inflation plus unemployment has fallen to the lowest levels in modern times � not all Americans are participating in the prosperity.
Employment in health care has grown by almost 2 million, but some 3 million manufacturing jobs have vanished. There has been a population explosion among billionaires, but the real median wage of a male worker has not risen in decades. The daily closure of factories here, as more and more Chinese goods show up at Wal-Mart, points to inescapable consequences: The price of the GOP's free-trade-uber-alles ideology is the loss of the Reagan Democrats.
In Ohio, which was indispensable to Bush is 2000 and 2004, free trade is a millstone around the GOP neck. If Bush loses the House or Senate, free-trade globalism goes on the shelf. Not only will Bush fail to win congressional support of a Doha Round trade treaty, he will be denied any renewal of fast-track authority. The new Congress will not rubber stamp trade treaties, but demand a voice and votes on any new deal the Bushites negotiate on behalf of Corporate America.
But if Republicans are swept from power, the reason will be Iraq. By two to one, Americans have reached the conclusion that the war was a mistake, that taking down Saddam was not worth the price in blood, that the management of the war has been as botched as John Kerry's joke, that it is time to bring the troops home and let Iraqis do the fighting for their own freedom, democracy and independence.
And the more seats Republicans lose Tuesday, the greater will be the pressure on the party and president to find an early exit.
Yet about the war, America remains divided and conflicted. For the roaring Republican reception to Bush's calls for "victory" testifies to another truth. While most American wish we had never gone in and want out, America does not want to lose the war as we lost Vietnam.
Neither party knows a way to accomplish what America wants: to leave Iraq without losing the war. And the reason neither party knows how to do it is because it cannot be done. Like a patient suffering from cancer, we want an end to the "chemo" � the awful news daily coming out of Iraq � but we do not want the consequences.
What, then, has cost the Republican Party its patrimony?
The answer is, first, hubris. Dominating Congress for a dozen years, the GOP began to behave with the same haughtiness as those they displaced. They forgot who sent them here, and why.
Second, ideology. Bush Republicans refuse even to reconsider, despite contradictory evidence, what their ideology teaches: that free trade is best, that U.S. power is invincible, that all the world wants to be like us, that our motives are always pure and theirs malevolent.
Tuesday will bring the party back to earth. But it will not solve the crises that beset the country. For while the Democrats may be the political alternative, the Democrats' ideology of big government liberalism is even more bankrupt.
yes for once you are correct: you are clearly neither my buddy, or apparently not a buddy of anyone on this site.
actually that is not all you said, you were talking about immigration not being part of the Dems mandate. pls refresh your memory by reading your own previous posts.
and now you have just contradicted yourself by saying that "probably you will hear more good news for those who believe that amnesty is the way to go", since you are now implying that in fact dems will be moving forward with amnesty. isnt that then part of their mandate?
also your claims of being "realistic" are actually not realistic at all, just negative.
and I for one do not consider you to be my ombudsman, and would prefer not to read your "reports" which are mostly thoroughly misinformed opinions.
hairstyles chelsea kane dancing with the
pmmo
10-27 07:08 PM
I tend to agree with all the view points expressed here. I don't think we are supposed to know every immigration details (and, I guess, that is what the immigration lawyers are for), but USCIS always will reserve the right to do anything anytime. So, I think, it is better to be educated and over cautious on such matters. It is totally USCIS' fault to issue a wrong approval (if that indeed is what happened in my case-we will find out) and I hope they make amends for it by giving me an expedited EAD and AP so I can rest peacefully (and wait, I don't know, may be another 7 years to get a "real" approval).
TravInd, please let me know the attorney you used in your case, if you don't mind sharing that information. I feel like my attorney is not very responsive.
TravInd, please let me know the attorney you used in your case, if you don't mind sharing that information. I feel like my attorney is not very responsive.
kalyan
05-05 09:34 AM
I think we can work as a Group on this Issue. I am ready to lead or Join this Group.
We can file in Court if required as a Group to get a greater exposure and success.
Least but not last, the contributions can be very very minimum. We can get more people join this site in less time with this issue.
Requesting IV core team to advise on it.
Thanks
We can file in Court if required as a Group to get a greater exposure and success.
Least but not last, the contributions can be very very minimum. We can get more people join this site in less time with this issue.
Requesting IV core team to advise on it.
Thanks
paskal
09-22 11:45 AM
... and it also means those who do not want to attent are free not to attend.
c'mon gc_lover let's not get into a self defeating spiral. i believe you are a rational person with good motivation to help reach the goals that iv has set.
let's find ways forward. how can i help you get more involved with local stuff?
c'mon gc_lover let's not get into a self defeating spiral. i believe you are a rational person with good motivation to help reach the goals that iv has set.
let's find ways forward. how can i help you get more involved with local stuff?
No comments:
Post a Comment