belmontboy
04-18 06:51 PM
Can someone work for company A (with green card pending for 8 years) and start green card process thru other company to port to EB2(part time employment). Can they do that. I mean basically working for two companies until you get your green card, then quit company B and continue working for company A. Did anyone do this? Is this a possible scenario?
Quitting company B right after getting GC would be fraud/misrepresentation.
After getting GC through B, he/she needs to work for B (usually 6 months or so...)
Quitting company B right after getting GC would be fraud/misrepresentation.
After getting GC through B, he/she needs to work for B (usually 6 months or so...)
wallpaper Black Updo Hairstyles Prom
dpp
06-12 11:06 PM
Are you sick?
Go and check how many EB3 India and EB2 India applications approved each year. They are approving double or triple the number of EB3 applications than they approve EB2. Go back to past and ask people not to apply in EB3, then only it solves your problem.
Its all because of toooooooooo many EB3 india applications in past. So, live with that fact.
I believe that there is a great flaw in the way the USCIS allocates VISA NUMBERS among EB1, EB2 and EB3 which is very much evident and if we can stand united we can get something done.
After carefully observing the trend in VISA approval and VISA bulletins, It is a reality that EB3-I is not moving and at the same time EB2 and EB1 are moving fast in relative terms and probably may even become current ( EB1 is already current ), But one thing USCIS is clearly not considering is the Priority Date, which basically means that they are not giving a damn thing about how long the person from EB3-I is waiting for. Here is my suggestion and some of the IV representatives need to analyse what Iam gonna say and see if they can stand up. Being an EB3-I india myself, i totally agree that EB1 and EB2 should be given a weightage and some preference over EB3, but I dont agree to what USCIS is currently following, EB2 With priority 2006 getting ahead of EB3-I with priority date 2001. This is ridiculous and to even think about it, it just sounds stupid. What they can do is , They can move the Dates in both Categories while giving preference to EB1 and EB2 first.
Please dont jump up & down before i complete. Iam just giving you an example of how things should work and how they can move dates forward for all 3 categories while maintaining that EB1 and EB2 gets preference over EB3. Let us ignore Eb1, since it is already current. Now Coming to Eb2, the priority Date is 2004 for them.Ideally speaking, They should not move them ahead until atleast EB3 reaches 2004. But once Both EB2 and EB3 reaches the priority date of 2004, Obviously EB2 gets the preference over Eb3 and EB2 will start to move ahead but not by much, let us say 1 year. Now, Clearly, EB2 is still given the extra preference over EB3 but at the same time, we are maintaining the priority dates between EB2 and EB3 as close as possible so that the system is not totally unfair to EB3 filers. I think, as one of the un-biased Organisation we should stand up against this unfair treatment in general. I hope even EB-2 will understand what iam trying to say.
let me know if iam making any sense. If am wrong, also let me know. So that i can get a better understanding of things and correct myself.
Go and check how many EB3 India and EB2 India applications approved each year. They are approving double or triple the number of EB3 applications than they approve EB2. Go back to past and ask people not to apply in EB3, then only it solves your problem.
Its all because of toooooooooo many EB3 india applications in past. So, live with that fact.
I believe that there is a great flaw in the way the USCIS allocates VISA NUMBERS among EB1, EB2 and EB3 which is very much evident and if we can stand united we can get something done.
After carefully observing the trend in VISA approval and VISA bulletins, It is a reality that EB3-I is not moving and at the same time EB2 and EB1 are moving fast in relative terms and probably may even become current ( EB1 is already current ), But one thing USCIS is clearly not considering is the Priority Date, which basically means that they are not giving a damn thing about how long the person from EB3-I is waiting for. Here is my suggestion and some of the IV representatives need to analyse what Iam gonna say and see if they can stand up. Being an EB3-I india myself, i totally agree that EB1 and EB2 should be given a weightage and some preference over EB3, but I dont agree to what USCIS is currently following, EB2 With priority 2006 getting ahead of EB3-I with priority date 2001. This is ridiculous and to even think about it, it just sounds stupid. What they can do is , They can move the Dates in both Categories while giving preference to EB1 and EB2 first.
Please dont jump up & down before i complete. Iam just giving you an example of how things should work and how they can move dates forward for all 3 categories while maintaining that EB1 and EB2 gets preference over EB3. Let us ignore Eb1, since it is already current. Now Coming to Eb2, the priority Date is 2004 for them.Ideally speaking, They should not move them ahead until atleast EB3 reaches 2004. But once Both EB2 and EB3 reaches the priority date of 2004, Obviously EB2 gets the preference over Eb3 and EB2 will start to move ahead but not by much, let us say 1 year. Now, Clearly, EB2 is still given the extra preference over EB3 but at the same time, we are maintaining the priority dates between EB2 and EB3 as close as possible so that the system is not totally unfair to EB3 filers. I think, as one of the un-biased Organisation we should stand up against this unfair treatment in general. I hope even EB-2 will understand what iam trying to say.
let me know if iam making any sense. If am wrong, also let me know. So that i can get a better understanding of things and correct myself.
gcretroiv
03-14 07:41 AM
All the drama people... If you do not know much about eb3_nepa...Pls read this
Eb3Nepa is very much here from initial days of this organization and supported the cause alot, even more than main members(So called..) here.
That is how he knows the core team members names/handles, even lot of you do not know them...
Only 1 or 2 members are here from initial 12+ core members..That is another thing though.
Anyway, as others mentioned, people have to move on..and this movement is just not by core members but by all. Core members comes/goes, after their journey, unless they have some agendas. (In the +ve way)
Hope, you do not start another storm here...
Eb3Nepa, congrats on your green card.
You must be enjoying the time now after GC.
How is the life after GC. Is it same like earlier or any change.
Because we are still in the queue, hoping to get it in 1,2 months as per time lines.
- gcretroiv
Eb3Nepa is very much here from initial days of this organization and supported the cause alot, even more than main members(So called..) here.
That is how he knows the core team members names/handles, even lot of you do not know them...
Only 1 or 2 members are here from initial 12+ core members..That is another thing though.
Anyway, as others mentioned, people have to move on..and this movement is just not by core members but by all. Core members comes/goes, after their journey, unless they have some agendas. (In the +ve way)
Hope, you do not start another storm here...
Eb3Nepa, congrats on your green card.
You must be enjoying the time now after GC.
How is the life after GC. Is it same like earlier or any change.
Because we are still in the queue, hoping to get it in 1,2 months as per time lines.
- gcretroiv
2011 hairstyles for prom curly
desi3933
08-21 08:21 AM
I am an early 2004 EB2 filer. I am hoping that mine would get approved at least before Oct. My EAD, AP, H1 and DL is getting expired in Oct. Glad to know that citizenship is making a difference in your life. I am happy for you. Good Luck
Thanks so much NKR.
I think, your GC approval should happen anyday. Wish you the very best!
Thanks so much NKR.
I think, your GC approval should happen anyday. Wish you the very best!
more...
greencard_fever
08-19 01:47 PM
Finally I am a US citizen after being 10+ years in this country. This is one of my biggest fulfillments and it means everything to me. US is just not home anymore for me, it is my country.
I wish everyone the best and hope they get GC very soon.
Proud to be an indian-american and legal immigrant.
Good Luck!
Why are you so PROUD to be an American? Just be happy for it...its just your need so that you can live in this country for as many year as you want and of course its good achievement and i am happy for you, you just lived here for 10+ yrs and you forgot your Home country where you were born and gave you a good education with you had an opportunity to come here and make your life based on that..you should be PROUD of that country no matter where you go and what you achieve its all because of you Home Country
If you are form INDIA then you should say "Mera Barath Mahan" first and then "God Bless America"
Many Congrats!! to you on your American Citizenship Good Luck!!
I wish everyone the best and hope they get GC very soon.
Proud to be an indian-american and legal immigrant.
Good Luck!
Why are you so PROUD to be an American? Just be happy for it...its just your need so that you can live in this country for as many year as you want and of course its good achievement and i am happy for you, you just lived here for 10+ yrs and you forgot your Home country where you were born and gave you a good education with you had an opportunity to come here and make your life based on that..you should be PROUD of that country no matter where you go and what you achieve its all because of you Home Country
If you are form INDIA then you should say "Mera Barath Mahan" first and then "God Bless America"
Many Congrats!! to you on your American Citizenship Good Luck!!
Green.Tech
06-05 10:25 PM
Folks - Our strength in numbers is going to matter in the end. 40 people calling the representatives is not going to cut it. We need all the registered members to come forward at this time and make these ever important calls. The whole process does not take more than 10 minutes. People in these offices are really nice and easy to talk to. They will note down your message and pass it on to the representatives. Most of them are not even asking for your name or phone number or address.
For all those who are content with EAD's or not content with EAD's, ffor all those who want to switch jobs or careers and can't, for all those who want to get GC's sooner than later, each one of us needs to stand up for himself/herself because if you don't, no one else will.
Please pick up the phones and let your voices be heard!
For all those who are content with EAD's or not content with EAD's, ffor all those who want to switch jobs or careers and can't, for all those who want to get GC's sooner than later, each one of us needs to stand up for himself/herself because if you don't, no one else will.
Please pick up the phones and let your voices be heard!
more...
gc28262
01-28 04:39 PM
I didn't find where in the PDF AILA is saying the definition is illegal!
They provide one example a court ruling where the EE definition was established in the case of an insurance agent. But such an issue has already been address by the EE memo by USCIS (Temporary/Occasional Off-Site Employment).
Is it your own interpretation that the EE definition in the memo is illegal or did you read it somewhere in AILA's response?
AILA Memo (http://www.laborimmigration.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/01/AILA-Memo-Seeking-Revokation-of-Neufeld-Memorandum.pdf)
Page 3
The AAO�s analysis contained in non-precedent decisions but cited repeatedly by adjudicators to justify RFEs, NOIDs and Denials -- and now expressed in the AFM revisions regarding H-1B petitions -- begins with the proposition that the beneficiary in any employment-based nonimmigrant or immigrant petition must be an �employee� of the petitioning employer. The AAO then notes that the term �employee� is not clearly defined anywhere in the INA and concludes that absent such a definition, under Darden and Clackamas, it must look to the common law definition of employee to determine who is and is not eligible for employment-based benefits under the INA.2 While the common law definition employs a multi-factor test, the AAO and subsequent adjudications, and the Neufeld Memorandum, have focused almost exclusively on one element: control.
AILA memo deals with multiple issues in the memo, not just consulting company scenario. (L1, Self sponsoring employee etc) Hence we can get lost while reading the memo. Central to the argument is "Common Law" that AILA hasn't gone in depth.
desi3933,
Please refer AILA memo (http://www.laborimmigration.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/01/AILA-Memo-Seeking-Revokation-of-Neufeld-Memorandum.pdf) as they have already detailed the law points in it.
Also you seem to be quoting USCIS documents. If USCIS was clear about the law, they wouldn't have issued this memo in the first place. If USCIS memo contradicts INA, INA prevails.
They provide one example a court ruling where the EE definition was established in the case of an insurance agent. But such an issue has already been address by the EE memo by USCIS (Temporary/Occasional Off-Site Employment).
Is it your own interpretation that the EE definition in the memo is illegal or did you read it somewhere in AILA's response?
AILA Memo (http://www.laborimmigration.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/01/AILA-Memo-Seeking-Revokation-of-Neufeld-Memorandum.pdf)
Page 3
The AAO�s analysis contained in non-precedent decisions but cited repeatedly by adjudicators to justify RFEs, NOIDs and Denials -- and now expressed in the AFM revisions regarding H-1B petitions -- begins with the proposition that the beneficiary in any employment-based nonimmigrant or immigrant petition must be an �employee� of the petitioning employer. The AAO then notes that the term �employee� is not clearly defined anywhere in the INA and concludes that absent such a definition, under Darden and Clackamas, it must look to the common law definition of employee to determine who is and is not eligible for employment-based benefits under the INA.2 While the common law definition employs a multi-factor test, the AAO and subsequent adjudications, and the Neufeld Memorandum, have focused almost exclusively on one element: control.
AILA memo deals with multiple issues in the memo, not just consulting company scenario. (L1, Self sponsoring employee etc) Hence we can get lost while reading the memo. Central to the argument is "Common Law" that AILA hasn't gone in depth.
desi3933,
Please refer AILA memo (http://www.laborimmigration.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/01/AILA-Memo-Seeking-Revokation-of-Neufeld-Memorandum.pdf) as they have already detailed the law points in it.
Also you seem to be quoting USCIS documents. If USCIS was clear about the law, they wouldn't have issued this memo in the first place. If USCIS memo contradicts INA, INA prevails.
2010 hairstyles Model Prom Updo
arkrish68
03-10 11:49 PM
As per the link there are around 620,249 I-485 applications to adjust status. Here is the link.
http://www.uscis.gov/files/article/APPLICATIONS%20FOR%20IMMIGRATION%20BENEFITS_Januar y09.pdf
Here is the actual verbage from the document.
Major volumes of pending applications at the end of January 2009 include: 1,417,978 I-130 immediate/all other petitions; 620,249 I-485 applications to adjust status; 286,701 I-765 employment authorizations; 190,238 I-90 green card renewals/replacements; 163,015 I-821 temporary protected status; 147,951 I-751 remove conditions spouse jointly/waiver.
Footnote: �Initial Receipts data only reflects the number of applications that USCIS was able to fee receipt and/or data enter into a case processing system. Applications currently held in USCIS mailroom facilities but not processed to the point of recognition as Initial Receipts are deemed frontlog cases. These frontlog cases are also not reflected in Pending figures.�
http://www.uscis.gov/files/article/APPLICATIONS%20FOR%20IMMIGRATION%20BENEFITS_Januar y09.pdf
Here is the actual verbage from the document.
Major volumes of pending applications at the end of January 2009 include: 1,417,978 I-130 immediate/all other petitions; 620,249 I-485 applications to adjust status; 286,701 I-765 employment authorizations; 190,238 I-90 green card renewals/replacements; 163,015 I-821 temporary protected status; 147,951 I-751 remove conditions spouse jointly/waiver.
Footnote: �Initial Receipts data only reflects the number of applications that USCIS was able to fee receipt and/or data enter into a case processing system. Applications currently held in USCIS mailroom facilities but not processed to the point of recognition as Initial Receipts are deemed frontlog cases. These frontlog cases are also not reflected in Pending figures.�
more...
chanduv23
04-28 08:49 PM
AC21 is a law. However, USCIS not yet published the regulation since year 2000, that binds everyone. All these memos since 2000, are internal to USCIS and not binding. They are very clear in the memo that revokation (except on fraud) of an already approved 140 by the petitioner, after 180 days of pending of 485, will not stop the approval of 485, if employee changes to similar occupation. This is just a non bining internal standard of USCIS. It does not have teeth, as it is not a public regulation. However, this internal standard can be changed by any time with/without public notice or through a regulation. Also, one should remember that, they mentioned in one of their memos that, regulation will be much tougher than memo.
Therefore, as some one is mentioned that, an approved immigrant visa pettion should be always available at the time of issuing GC. That is also a law. This law also need to be met at the time of approval of 485. Therfore AC21 and requirement for availability of approved 140 is two different and counteracting issues.
In practical situation, the employee has no control over 140 in any stage as it is employer's petition. Therefore, if employee leaves the job as per the AC21 law, employer verywell withdraw the 140 even after 180 days of 485 pending and create a situation of unavailability of approved immigrat visa petion for the employee. Therefore, in the final regulation they will make a rule that favours the employee, if everything was bonafide. It is like a aboundened spouse in family catagory.
I think, USCIS is currently taking the tough standard to weed out the consulting compaines (to put a leash on GC factories/body shoppers), as they are the one mostly abusing the EB system. Only those people working in GC factories need to worry. It may be mainly due the current economic situation. I feel thats why they are delaying the regulation. Others need not worry.
Well, 485 denials on ac21 where 140 was revoked has always been happening.
Your interpretation might be right about consulting companies but these denials not necessarily happening to people in consulting companies, they happen to anyone whose 140 was revoked.
Therefore, as some one is mentioned that, an approved immigrant visa pettion should be always available at the time of issuing GC. That is also a law. This law also need to be met at the time of approval of 485. Therfore AC21 and requirement for availability of approved 140 is two different and counteracting issues.
In practical situation, the employee has no control over 140 in any stage as it is employer's petition. Therefore, if employee leaves the job as per the AC21 law, employer verywell withdraw the 140 even after 180 days of 485 pending and create a situation of unavailability of approved immigrat visa petion for the employee. Therefore, in the final regulation they will make a rule that favours the employee, if everything was bonafide. It is like a aboundened spouse in family catagory.
I think, USCIS is currently taking the tough standard to weed out the consulting compaines (to put a leash on GC factories/body shoppers), as they are the one mostly abusing the EB system. Only those people working in GC factories need to worry. It may be mainly due the current economic situation. I feel thats why they are delaying the regulation. Others need not worry.
Well, 485 denials on ac21 where 140 was revoked has always been happening.
Your interpretation might be right about consulting companies but these denials not necessarily happening to people in consulting companies, they happen to anyone whose 140 was revoked.
hair prom hairstyles half up and
paskal
11-01 08:27 PM
but try what?
go back? or pretend to go back?
and what after that?
if you go, it's over. if you don't you have no credibility.
i'm not sure i understand. but maybe i'm not good enough for "reverse brain drain" and to those who voted "yes", please confirm July 4 that you are leaving. i saw some of you tracking receipts in desperation? why, why for god's sake? if you are ready and willing to leave in 6-8 months did you care so much? wish there was a way to hold each one of you to your words.
and anyway, what are you doing for that "freedom and independence"? how many of you are actively helping in iv's lobbying effort? just sitting around and watching or criticizing is hardly winning any "respect". please don't make me point out individuals and start pasting their previous posts here...
go back? or pretend to go back?
and what after that?
if you go, it's over. if you don't you have no credibility.
i'm not sure i understand. but maybe i'm not good enough for "reverse brain drain" and to those who voted "yes", please confirm July 4 that you are leaving. i saw some of you tracking receipts in desperation? why, why for god's sake? if you are ready and willing to leave in 6-8 months did you care so much? wish there was a way to hold each one of you to your words.
and anyway, what are you doing for that "freedom and independence"? how many of you are actively helping in iv's lobbying effort? just sitting around and watching or criticizing is hardly winning any "respect". please don't make me point out individuals and start pasting their previous posts here...
more...
gc2005
11-16 12:05 PM
the one going on currently...SKIL bill will definetly help us stuck for years in waiting
hot prom hairstyles long hair
sanju
01-30 05:22 PM
I would like to share an observation.
Forum member mike232 always appear to vote against anything that is likely bring our issues to limelight. If you see the history of his vote, he will always vote against anything which could be useful for our issue. Here is my question to him -
MIKE232,
ARE YOU ANTI-EMPLOYMENT BASED GREEN CARD OR A DESI-BODYSHOP EMPLOYER? WHICH ONE?
Forum member mike232 always appear to vote against anything that is likely bring our issues to limelight. If you see the history of his vote, he will always vote against anything which could be useful for our issue. Here is my question to him -
MIKE232,
ARE YOU ANTI-EMPLOYMENT BASED GREEN CARD OR A DESI-BODYSHOP EMPLOYER? WHICH ONE?
more...
house Black Updo Hairstyles Prom
i4u
11-23 11:57 AM
Thank you for your inputs....However, not sure if it helps. I have to get my mother here - if not immediately, sometime in the near future. She has diabetes and almost every thing that happens medically, it can be related to diabetes technically! Which is why I have to have insurance.
On another note, I have a friend who is very close to a doctor - and I hear from my friend that many of the doctors help out (if they know them - outside of the office). Is this something anyone in this forum have experienced or heard?
On another note, I have a friend who is very close to a doctor - and I hear from my friend that many of the doctors help out (if they know them - outside of the office). Is this something anyone in this forum have experienced or heard?
tattoo 2008 Prom Celebrity Updo
skv
07-16 10:42 AM
I plan to send this petition to all senior executives of Time Warner Inc by Priority Mail and Fax. CNN is a fully owned subsidiary of Time Warner Inc.
http://www.petitionspot.com/petitions/loudobbs
Signed. Wishing bad luck to Lou Dobbs!! ;-)
http://www.petitionspot.com/petitions/loudobbs
Signed. Wishing bad luck to Lou Dobbs!! ;-)
more...
pictures Prom hairstyle must match your
vinoddas
07-11 08:08 PM
BTW, if you guys use Facebook, I created an event on Facebook as well:
http://www.facebook.com/event.php?eid=2411444328
http://www.facebook.com/event.php?eid=2411444328
dresses updo hairstyles
angelfire76
10-04 05:49 PM
It may not be popular here, but IMHO PD porting within the same filing category can be allowed, but not retaining the same PD if you are "upgrading" to another category.
I remember one person giving an analogy of a queue in a grocery store. I would like to give a different take on it. One express line and another regular line. Lets say the regular line moves real slow and the express line is well express. However the express line slows down, but is not as slow as the regular line. The person waiting in a regular line decides enough is enough, moves to express line (by dumping the items that exceed the express line limit).
How would the people in the express line react if the person from the regular line tries to "retain" his or her position by cutting into the express line, stating that he/she was before them, but only in a different line?
If you think logically, that is the case we have here with category interfiling.
I would recommend some sort of compromise, as its not fair either to ask EB3 people to move to the end of queue, as all said and done they've been able to bargain with their employer to apply for their GC, while we did enjoy a bit in grad school, and came out with a sense of entitlement. :D
Some intermediary date, lets say determined by a mathematical algorithm (hopefully not designed by gctest) or whatever is deemed to be a fair date. But retaining the original timestamp in the regular queue is unacceptable to those who have qualified for EB2 before the one porting his/her date to EB2.
I remember one person giving an analogy of a queue in a grocery store. I would like to give a different take on it. One express line and another regular line. Lets say the regular line moves real slow and the express line is well express. However the express line slows down, but is not as slow as the regular line. The person waiting in a regular line decides enough is enough, moves to express line (by dumping the items that exceed the express line limit).
How would the people in the express line react if the person from the regular line tries to "retain" his or her position by cutting into the express line, stating that he/she was before them, but only in a different line?
If you think logically, that is the case we have here with category interfiling.
I would recommend some sort of compromise, as its not fair either to ask EB3 people to move to the end of queue, as all said and done they've been able to bargain with their employer to apply for their GC, while we did enjoy a bit in grad school, and came out with a sense of entitlement. :D
Some intermediary date, lets say determined by a mathematical algorithm (hopefully not designed by gctest) or whatever is deemed to be a fair date. But retaining the original timestamp in the regular queue is unacceptable to those who have qualified for EB2 before the one porting his/her date to EB2.
more...
makeup half up half down hairstyles.
theshiningsun
07-24 02:40 PM
excellent response qasleuth! raji's Q's seem to be genuine and merit answers. ur response covers details of what can/cannot be covered in a public forum n why n what r the other options to work across it. one of the best responses i hv seen regarding how IV works.
thx,
thx,
girlfriend black updo hairstyles for prom
Vexir
06-19 10:36 PM
Bah. Skinned the stupid click wheel. What is it with you guys and the click wheel.. IT DOESNT WANT TO BE PAINTED
hairstyles Updo Hairstyles for Prom
sledge_hammer
02-01 03:54 PM
Actually I know a guy who lost his job and joined a restaurant as a cook or something and applied GC, then after 1 yr or so got job again and used the EAD to change to the Tech Field again and at a different location.....I hear he is indeed facing some problems now.
There you go ...
There you go ...
hyddsnr
05-01 03:10 PM
No dude, its not 6 months, it more like 15 years...tough crap dude..you are now a bonded slave....:-(
Hi,
Looks like you are used to work as a bonded slave, and expecting same from others. Be a free bird at least after getting GC.
Hi,
Looks like you are used to work as a bonded slave, and expecting same from others. Be a free bird at least after getting GC.
Macaca
03-09 07:09 PM
He quipped me back saying that he is aware of IV and IV is NOT "like-minded" group but "Money-minded" group of people, keeping on asking money all the time....Definately, its sending wrong signal...
My prioriy date has moved 1 week in 1 year. This is sufficient evidence for legislation (http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=3317&highlight=legislation) that requires Hill lobbying (http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=3255&highlight=legislation) which requires money.
Like minded
I had no understanding about legislation, politics, lobbying and money when I joined IV in Dec 2006. I used to wonder what core is talking about. However, I checked every statement against reliable media reported facts (NOT law firm blogs). I have not found a single contradiction. So I am very strongly like minded with core's direction.
Here is an example. In Dec 2006, Jeff Sessions was cited by core as the reason to derail the SKILL Bill. Here (http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showpost.php?p=51718&postcount=21) is a recent example of an anonymous person derailing a Bill.
Money minded
Lobbying firm is the most important reason for existence of IV; grass root lobbying can be done without IV. IV paid QGA 80K (http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showpost.php?p=50347&postcount=4) in the first quarter of 2006; this is just one expenditure but has a public record. IV has to pay a similar amount to Patton Boggs. About 260*20/month was collected in 45 days in Jan/Feb 2007.
Why can IV ignore talking about money (when balancing this deficit is very important)?
How can IV ignore talking about money ALL THE TIME (when it takes 45 days to collect 260*20)?
State Chapter Participation
You missed this. We also ask members (ALL THE TIME (http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=3482&highlight=Wisconsin)) to participate in State Chapters.
Conclusions
Some (non) members are ignorant about GC problems, legislation, politics, lobbying and IV's activities. It is not possible to understand all of them even in a month. They have to put effort to educate themselves. Hence, the quotes
Most people struggle with life balance simply because they haven't paid the price to decide what is really important to them.
If we keep doing what we're doing, we're going to keep getting what we're getting.
My prioriy date has moved 1 week in 1 year. This is sufficient evidence for legislation (http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=3317&highlight=legislation) that requires Hill lobbying (http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=3255&highlight=legislation) which requires money.
Like minded
I had no understanding about legislation, politics, lobbying and money when I joined IV in Dec 2006. I used to wonder what core is talking about. However, I checked every statement against reliable media reported facts (NOT law firm blogs). I have not found a single contradiction. So I am very strongly like minded with core's direction.
Here is an example. In Dec 2006, Jeff Sessions was cited by core as the reason to derail the SKILL Bill. Here (http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showpost.php?p=51718&postcount=21) is a recent example of an anonymous person derailing a Bill.
Money minded
Lobbying firm is the most important reason for existence of IV; grass root lobbying can be done without IV. IV paid QGA 80K (http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showpost.php?p=50347&postcount=4) in the first quarter of 2006; this is just one expenditure but has a public record. IV has to pay a similar amount to Patton Boggs. About 260*20/month was collected in 45 days in Jan/Feb 2007.
Why can IV ignore talking about money (when balancing this deficit is very important)?
How can IV ignore talking about money ALL THE TIME (when it takes 45 days to collect 260*20)?
State Chapter Participation
You missed this. We also ask members (ALL THE TIME (http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=3482&highlight=Wisconsin)) to participate in State Chapters.
Conclusions
Some (non) members are ignorant about GC problems, legislation, politics, lobbying and IV's activities. It is not possible to understand all of them even in a month. They have to put effort to educate themselves. Hence, the quotes
Most people struggle with life balance simply because they haven't paid the price to decide what is really important to them.
If we keep doing what we're doing, we're going to keep getting what we're getting.
