GMAT books. - 5550Rs
ushkand
07-24 11:57 AM
Simply_GC:
yes there is an option for you. When you get the I-485 receipot, mail in the employment letter along with copy of 485 receipt (just so they can track) and a another letter stating the oversight.
Doesn't receipting an application automatically mean they accepted the application?
yes there is an option for you. When you get the I-485 receipot, mail in the employment letter along with copy of 485 receipt (just so they can track) and a another letter stating the oversight.
Doesn't receipting an application automatically mean they accepted the application?
wallpaper GMAT books. - 5550Rs
Keys To Manhattan (Portable)
bkarnik
07-25 06:46 PM
Thanks a lot, please keep us posted about the outcome, even if we have one percent of hope, there is no harm trying that.
Guys,
This argument is not new. I had started a thread a while back http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=556&highlight=bkarnik
which met with essentially the same reply from the IV moderators. My underlying issue is that the term "EAD" or anything remotely similar does not even appear in the INA unless I missed it and if so, I would really appreciate it if someone show me where it is.
Anyways, I sent the following email to my lawyer, the entire chain with names deleted is reproduced here for your reading pleasure. This exchange highlights the apathy with which the legal community (at least my lawyer) view the issue and their knowledge of the law.... enjoy.. :(
From: Attorney
Sent: Monday, April 17, 2006 4:57 PM
To: Bkarnik
Subject: RE: Question..
I see your point. You should contact the American Immigration Lawyers Association with your question. If the issue has not already been addressed by this organization, I'm sure they will readily champion your cause.
-----Original Message-----
From: Bkarnik
Sent: Tuesday, April 18, 2006 6:49 AM
To: attorney
Subject: Question..
Dear Attorney:
Thank you for your time and the quick turnaround. However, the question still remains. If you notice in the link sent by you below, the USCIS refers to the US 8 CFR 274a.12(a) and (c) According to the USCIS, the CFR is the interpretation made by the agencies of the INA as passed and amended by Congress. The INA itself does not seem to have any clause relating to EAD for employment based categories because I believe the Congress never foresaw a situation where it will take up to 5-6 years for the process to complete.
I know that the USCIS has on many occasions by using the Federal Register or by Memorandums modified the CFR or changed the regulations governing the validity of the EAD, and I am wondering if something similar can be achieved in this case, wherein an appeal is made to the USCIS to change the rules governing eligibility for issuing an EAD.
Thanks once again.
Bkarnik.
-----Original Message-----
From: AttorneySent: Monday, April 17, 2006 4:57 PM
To: Bkarnik
Subject: RE: Question..
Hello BKarnik,
Your argument is sound, however, U.S. Immigration does indeed adjudicate
I-765 EAD applications based upon eligibility for filing. Please click this
link: http://uscis.gov/graphics/formsfee/forms/i-765.htm. It will take you to the USCIS web site where you can download form I-765. Included with the form is an instruction sheet. In the section entitled "Eligibility Categories", U.S. Immigration spells out the categories for which form I-765 may be filed. For example, under the "Foreign Students" title, you can see that an F-1 OPT student is eligible to obtain EAD work authorization pursuant to subsection (c)(3)(i). Your eligibility for EAD work authorization will fall under the "EAD Applicants Who Have Filed for Adjustment of Status" title under subsection (c)(9). Unfortunately, there is no eligibility category for I-140 IVP applicants or for IVP approval notice holders.
I hope this answers your questions.
Attorney
________________________________
From: Bkarnik
Sent: Monday, April 17, 2006 2:16 PM
To: Attorney
Subject: Question..
Dear Attorney:
I had a question for you (actually, it is a series of sub questions).
However, this has nothing to with my employer or my GC, so if you feel that replying to this question will take up an inordinate amount of time or of you think that this is something that is worthwhile in pursuing, please let me know what your charges will be and I will let you know if I can afford them :)) With that out of the way, here goes:
The question is about getting an EAD before filing the I-485. I was perusing the INA as posted on the USCIS website. I did not find any applicable law that directs the USCIS when it can issue EADs. It is quite likely that I missed the section as I am not a student of laws as you are.
If so, can you let me know where to find it? As you know, the EAD issue is mentioned in the US 8 CFR sec. 274a. Now, the USCIS website explains that the CFR thus: The general provisions of laws enacted by Congress are interpreted and implemented by regulations issued by various agencies.
These
regulations apply the law to daily situations. Thus, the CFR is the interpretation of the law by the USCIS for application in daily life.
If
that is the case, what prevents the USCIS from issuing EADs upon the approval of Form I-140? Especially, since as you very well know, the Form I-140 is an application made by the employer to the USCIS to petition for an alien worker to become a permanent resident in the United States.
Therefore,
the form requires the employer to fill in all the pertinent information about the alien and his dependents. An approval of the Form I-140 indicates (at least to me) that the USCIS has agreed with the employee that the labor certification is good and the alien is approvable as a permanent employee.
I guess that is one of the reasons, the USCIS allows concurrent filing of the I-140/I-485.
With the current retrogression concurrent filing of I-140/I-485 is not possible, if the USCIS were to be agreeable to issue EADs to persons with approved I-140 it would make life a lot easier for all while at the same time not impacting the green card process itself. All we are asking is that the EAD be issued after I-140 approval, because it does not make sense to tell an employer that the alien is approved for permanent employment, but at the same time asking the employer to keep the employee in a H1B (i.e.
temporary status) at no fault of the employer/employee. Can you let me know if my argument is flawed? If not, do you think we have a way by which we can ask the USCIS for its interpretation or opinion on the issue? If we can, and you are willing to take the matter, can you let me know your fees?
I know that you are very busy, and may not be able to take on the matter even if you find merit in it. In that case, would know of a competent person willing to take it up?
Thank you for your time and patience,
Sincerely,
Bkarnik
Guys,
This argument is not new. I had started a thread a while back http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=556&highlight=bkarnik
which met with essentially the same reply from the IV moderators. My underlying issue is that the term "EAD" or anything remotely similar does not even appear in the INA unless I missed it and if so, I would really appreciate it if someone show me where it is.
Anyways, I sent the following email to my lawyer, the entire chain with names deleted is reproduced here for your reading pleasure. This exchange highlights the apathy with which the legal community (at least my lawyer) view the issue and their knowledge of the law.... enjoy.. :(
From: Attorney
Sent: Monday, April 17, 2006 4:57 PM
To: Bkarnik
Subject: RE: Question..
I see your point. You should contact the American Immigration Lawyers Association with your question. If the issue has not already been addressed by this organization, I'm sure they will readily champion your cause.
-----Original Message-----
From: Bkarnik
Sent: Tuesday, April 18, 2006 6:49 AM
To: attorney
Subject: Question..
Dear Attorney:
Thank you for your time and the quick turnaround. However, the question still remains. If you notice in the link sent by you below, the USCIS refers to the US 8 CFR 274a.12(a) and (c) According to the USCIS, the CFR is the interpretation made by the agencies of the INA as passed and amended by Congress. The INA itself does not seem to have any clause relating to EAD for employment based categories because I believe the Congress never foresaw a situation where it will take up to 5-6 years for the process to complete.
I know that the USCIS has on many occasions by using the Federal Register or by Memorandums modified the CFR or changed the regulations governing the validity of the EAD, and I am wondering if something similar can be achieved in this case, wherein an appeal is made to the USCIS to change the rules governing eligibility for issuing an EAD.
Thanks once again.
Bkarnik.
-----Original Message-----
From: AttorneySent: Monday, April 17, 2006 4:57 PM
To: Bkarnik
Subject: RE: Question..
Hello BKarnik,
Your argument is sound, however, U.S. Immigration does indeed adjudicate
I-765 EAD applications based upon eligibility for filing. Please click this
link: http://uscis.gov/graphics/formsfee/forms/i-765.htm. It will take you to the USCIS web site where you can download form I-765. Included with the form is an instruction sheet. In the section entitled "Eligibility Categories", U.S. Immigration spells out the categories for which form I-765 may be filed. For example, under the "Foreign Students" title, you can see that an F-1 OPT student is eligible to obtain EAD work authorization pursuant to subsection (c)(3)(i). Your eligibility for EAD work authorization will fall under the "EAD Applicants Who Have Filed for Adjustment of Status" title under subsection (c)(9). Unfortunately, there is no eligibility category for I-140 IVP applicants or for IVP approval notice holders.
I hope this answers your questions.
Attorney
________________________________
From: Bkarnik
Sent: Monday, April 17, 2006 2:16 PM
To: Attorney
Subject: Question..
Dear Attorney:
I had a question for you (actually, it is a series of sub questions).
However, this has nothing to with my employer or my GC, so if you feel that replying to this question will take up an inordinate amount of time or of you think that this is something that is worthwhile in pursuing, please let me know what your charges will be and I will let you know if I can afford them :)) With that out of the way, here goes:
The question is about getting an EAD before filing the I-485. I was perusing the INA as posted on the USCIS website. I did not find any applicable law that directs the USCIS when it can issue EADs. It is quite likely that I missed the section as I am not a student of laws as you are.
If so, can you let me know where to find it? As you know, the EAD issue is mentioned in the US 8 CFR sec. 274a. Now, the USCIS website explains that the CFR thus: The general provisions of laws enacted by Congress are interpreted and implemented by regulations issued by various agencies.
These
regulations apply the law to daily situations. Thus, the CFR is the interpretation of the law by the USCIS for application in daily life.
If
that is the case, what prevents the USCIS from issuing EADs upon the approval of Form I-140? Especially, since as you very well know, the Form I-140 is an application made by the employer to the USCIS to petition for an alien worker to become a permanent resident in the United States.
Therefore,
the form requires the employer to fill in all the pertinent information about the alien and his dependents. An approval of the Form I-140 indicates (at least to me) that the USCIS has agreed with the employee that the labor certification is good and the alien is approvable as a permanent employee.
I guess that is one of the reasons, the USCIS allows concurrent filing of the I-140/I-485.
With the current retrogression concurrent filing of I-140/I-485 is not possible, if the USCIS were to be agreeable to issue EADs to persons with approved I-140 it would make life a lot easier for all while at the same time not impacting the green card process itself. All we are asking is that the EAD be issued after I-140 approval, because it does not make sense to tell an employer that the alien is approved for permanent employment, but at the same time asking the employer to keep the employee in a H1B (i.e.
temporary status) at no fault of the employer/employee. Can you let me know if my argument is flawed? If not, do you think we have a way by which we can ask the USCIS for its interpretation or opinion on the issue? If we can, and you are willing to take the matter, can you let me know your fees?
I know that you are very busy, and may not be able to take on the matter even if you find merit in it. In that case, would know of a competent person willing to take it up?
Thank you for your time and patience,
Sincerely,
Bkarnik
Manhattan Samourai (2011)
sapota
08-15 04:55 PM
Surprised by visa bulletin mentioning cutoff dates for EB1, EB2 & EB3 ROW & philipines instead of U.
Does this mean EB1, EB2 & EB3 ROW cases are not backlogged ? (i.e USCIS approved all it could on July1st 2007 but still visa numbers left?)
Or were these cases waiting for FBI check so could not use up visa numbers??
Either way, in a month or so (after all July VB cases are entered into database, USCIS would know its true backlog). Wish it would announce such a backlog number and make realistic predictions for when cases will be approved.
Given the recent announcement from whitehouse regarding expedited FBI checks, maybe there is some light at the end of the tunnel.
But hey, lets keep pushing, we dont want hope to be a mirage do we.
Does this mean EB1, EB2 & EB3 ROW cases are not backlogged ? (i.e USCIS approved all it could on July1st 2007 but still visa numbers left?)
Or were these cases waiting for FBI check so could not use up visa numbers??
Either way, in a month or so (after all July VB cases are entered into database, USCIS would know its true backlog). Wish it would announce such a backlog number and make realistic predictions for when cases will be approved.
Given the recent announcement from whitehouse regarding expedited FBI checks, maybe there is some light at the end of the tunnel.
But hey, lets keep pushing, we dont want hope to be a mirage do we.
2011 Keys To Manhattan (Portable)
Manhattan gmat necessary as a
walker15
09-10 03:28 PM
Still HR5882 not yet tabled, please stay tuned I will update whatever is happening.
Still they are discussing HR6020(Illegal Alien left over at Iraq while on duty :)) and it looks like this will drag a bit. So Rep. Zoe Lofgren is fighting for that family.
Hope there will be sufficient time to discuss HR5882.
Still they are discussing HR6020(Illegal Alien left over at Iraq while on duty :)) and it looks like this will drag a bit. So Rep. Zoe Lofgren is fighting for that family.
Hope there will be sufficient time to discuss HR5882.
more...
Manhattan GMAT: Textbooks
gc_on_demand
11-12 03:24 PM
Under the regulation No reference to Calendar year. It mentions explicitly calendar quarter.
Immigration and Nationality Act: Section ACT 202 - Numerical Limitation to any single foreign state under Sec. 202. [8 U.S.C. 1152]
(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).
Isn't there a limit of 27% of visas per quarter per country per calendar year ? If that limit is there then who will take precedence ? Quarterly Spill over or that limit ?
To me I think DOS is doing 27% quota limit for first 3 quarters then they are doing spill over so there is no quarterly spill. What if they will show us that there is a limit per quarter in law and they have to follow it. Is it something like deadlock. that trying to follow one law breaks another one.
What if we end up getting response that there is some action needed from Lawmakers to correct law..
just random thoughts.
Immigration and Nationality Act: Section ACT 202 - Numerical Limitation to any single foreign state under Sec. 202. [8 U.S.C. 1152]
(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).
Isn't there a limit of 27% of visas per quarter per country per calendar year ? If that limit is there then who will take precedence ? Quarterly Spill over or that limit ?
To me I think DOS is doing 27% quota limit for first 3 quarters then they are doing spill over so there is no quarterly spill. What if they will show us that there is a limit per quarter in law and they have to follow it. Is it something like deadlock. that trying to follow one law breaks another one.
What if we end up getting response that there is some action needed from Lawmakers to correct law..
just random thoughts.
Manhattan GMAT
ak_2006
09-09 02:37 PM
I feel like there will be no special help from anybody including IV. I am not blaming IV for this as they have to fight for all. We (EBI) need lead the fight to do something.
But many of us not willing to do spend time/money for this cause. If a person can't do those, switch jobs, and find jobs where we can start processing in EB2, or ask current employers to apply in EB2.
But many of us not willing to do spend time/money for this cause. If a person can't do those, switch jobs, and find jobs where we can start processing in EB2, or ask current employers to apply in EB2.
more...
Manhattan Review#39;s
crazyghoda
01-30 01:50 PM
Yes I filed on July 5th 2007.
When do the medical tests run out. I did mine sometime in June 2007. I recall someone mentioning that you need to keep doing those every "x" months or something. Is that true?
When did you file ur 485, i mean exact date? If you filed very early during July'07 fiasco, probably they started pre-adjudication process based on the receipt date.
When do the medical tests run out. I did mine sometime in June 2007. I recall someone mentioning that you need to keep doing those every "x" months or something. Is that true?
When did you file ur 485, i mean exact date? If you filed very early during July'07 fiasco, probably they started pre-adjudication process based on the receipt date.
2010 Manhattan Samourai (2011)
manhattan gmat strategy guides
pmb76
03-18 06:47 PM
Now for the rest of this year the EB2 queues for China and India are merged. Visa allocations will be solely based on Priority date. So for example if India has many priority dates that are before China's, India may end up getting more visa allocations. The same holds true if China has earlier priority dates than India does. That's how I inderstood it and I thought I would try to explain it to some who did not. Otherwise sorry for stating the obvious.
more...
Manhattan GMAT - Elluminate
amsgc
03-16 05:40 PM
Well, the fuss is not just about the wait - it about the seemingly interminable wait. Why should there be a wait of 5-6 years to get a green card, when you can get EAD in less than 3 months, or a visa to work in less than 2 weeks?
If the US govt. can decide that you have the qualifications to do a job (H1B premium), in 2 weeks flat, then why should a green card based on the same employment take 5-6 years?
Why should the wait for an Indian or Chinese be 5-6 years, but others be less than a year? At the moment, a cook from bangladesh is getting the GC before a doctor from India. Was this the intent of those who designed the EB "preference" system?
If you have infinite patience for GC, then that is good for you. But just waiting and scratching is not in my character, nor is it in 99% of fellow IVians.
i just don't see what the fuss is about. people from india usually waited 5-6 years for a GC historically, and it's about the same, give or take one year, even now. so i don't see why 4 years of wait after i-485 is being made out to be such a big deal only NOW.......????
If the US govt. can decide that you have the qualifications to do a job (H1B premium), in 2 weeks flat, then why should a green card based on the same employment take 5-6 years?
Why should the wait for an Indian or Chinese be 5-6 years, but others be less than a year? At the moment, a cook from bangladesh is getting the GC before a doctor from India. Was this the intent of those who designed the EB "preference" system?
If you have infinite patience for GC, then that is good for you. But just waiting and scratching is not in my character, nor is it in 99% of fellow IVians.
i just don't see what the fuss is about. people from india usually waited 5-6 years for a GC historically, and it's about the same, give or take one year, even now. so i don't see why 4 years of wait after i-485 is being made out to be such a big deal only NOW.......????
hair Manhattan gmat necessary as a
Edition by Manhattan GMAT,
zerozerozeven
03-09 12:17 PM
let the waiting start for the May bulletin....
more...
by Manhattan GMAT
ash123
02-12 04:04 PM
We have to wake-up before same continue while EAD/AP renewal
hot Manhattan GMAT: Textbooks
2007 Manhattan GMAT Complete
onemaveric
09-26 09:31 AM
This is bad what has happened. They need to be educated about the protest.
Is there any email address to the CNN editor? I can writeup a message about this.
Is there any email address to the CNN editor? I can writeup a message about this.
more...
house (3) Manhattan GMAT Strategy
Manhattan GMAT Question Bank
PresidentO
02-03 05:07 PM
So naive of you to think that Senator-elect (Is she sworn in yet?) Gillibrand would be the person to do this. She is already labeled a flip flopper for courting hispanic groups.
AFAIK, The 8 year wait time she was referring to was not EB wait times. That was posted here on IV, discussed and proved that she was talking in general. Actions speak louder than talk. Talk is free, action is risk for politicians.
Good luck!
AFAIK, The 8 year wait time she was referring to was not EB wait times. That was posted here on IV, discussed and proved that she was talking in general. Actions speak louder than talk. Talk is free, action is risk for politicians.
Good luck!
tattoo Manhattan GMAT
GMAT 2nd Edition Quantitative
sanatshah
08-10 02:52 PM
Count me in.
more...
pictures Manhattan Review#39;s
GMAT Strategy Supplement
rbharol
12-26 04:05 PM
We cannot save for our children's college in college savings plan as every plan needs a GC.
You mean 529? Thanks of telling. I was planning to open an account for my kid's college.
Are you sure they wont let you open an account even if the kid is american citizen by birth?
You mean 529? Thanks of telling. I was planning to open an account for my kid's college.
Are you sure they wont let you open an account even if the kid is american citizen by birth?
dresses 2007 Manhattan GMAT Complete
Manhattan GMAT Forums
veerug
07-04 05:49 PM
........
more...
makeup Manhattan GMAT - Elluminate
(3) Manhattan GMAT Strategy
needhelp!
09-18 11:47 PM
I agree,I was a bit annoyed when the congressman started talking about the illegals.. it was totally not related to us.
girlfriend GMAT 2nd Edition Quantitative
(3) Manhattan GMAT Strategy
GCAmigo
12-13 10:11 AM
for contacting/fax etc..
hairstyles by Manhattan GMAT
You don#39;t need new ooks to do
Suva
03-12 10:26 AM
I support this.
To all those who are screaming and shouting about "IV collecting Donations and doing nothing", I am not a donor myself, but we have to understand that IV IS THE ONLY platform we (EB community) have. However shaky or small the platform is. It takes a different kind of person to doggedly keep at something as insipid and difficult and immigration relief for EB and to put up with all the brickbats that armchair immigration proponents and to be beneficiaries like us throw at the IV core.
Pappu, I have put forth this idea many times, and will do so again, let IV be a members only forum, with a REASONABLE annual subscrition amount (say equal to themonthly cost of a decent cable/satellite subscription:-)..
This will achieve the following:
(1) Assured, stable fund collection for IV activities
(2) Only genuine IV supporters will sign up.
(3) To some extent, may be, will keep antis away (this is not assured, but may happen)
...Its Friday, so pickup a 6-pack, 12 pack or whatever pack on your way home, and relax...
To all those who are screaming and shouting about "IV collecting Donations and doing nothing", I am not a donor myself, but we have to understand that IV IS THE ONLY platform we (EB community) have. However shaky or small the platform is. It takes a different kind of person to doggedly keep at something as insipid and difficult and immigration relief for EB and to put up with all the brickbats that armchair immigration proponents and to be beneficiaries like us throw at the IV core.
Pappu, I have put forth this idea many times, and will do so again, let IV be a members only forum, with a REASONABLE annual subscrition amount (say equal to themonthly cost of a decent cable/satellite subscription:-)..
This will achieve the following:
(1) Assured, stable fund collection for IV activities
(2) Only genuine IV supporters will sign up.
(3) To some extent, may be, will keep antis away (this is not assured, but may happen)
...Its Friday, so pickup a 6-pack, 12 pack or whatever pack on your way home, and relax...
bayarea07
09-10 02:24 PM
HR5882 will be presented next after HR6020 :-)
I do see some action now on http://judiciary.house.gov/hearings/calendar.html
HR6020 is being presented right now
I do see some action now on http://judiciary.house.gov/hearings/calendar.html
HR6020 is being presented right now
24fps
02-19 07:42 AM
this bill will never pass at-least in the next 2 years! i can give you a guarantee on that!
these are just bills that the politicians introduce to showcase their views , there are already a few bills in the house that would eliminate extended family immigration etc, never gonna happen
no immigration bill is going to pass before 2010 ,and even after that it'll fall into election time
and become a political issue like in 2007
if there was no recession there would surely have been a serious immigration bill doing the rounds and would have pretty much cleared through ( after GOP figuring out that their screw up on CIR 2007 cost them the elections) but now with the F**K**D Recession everythings gone down the drain
Bad luck Bad timing
these are just bills that the politicians introduce to showcase their views , there are already a few bills in the house that would eliminate extended family immigration etc, never gonna happen
no immigration bill is going to pass before 2010 ,and even after that it'll fall into election time
and become a political issue like in 2007
if there was no recession there would surely have been a serious immigration bill doing the rounds and would have pretty much cleared through ( after GOP figuring out that their screw up on CIR 2007 cost them the elections) but now with the F**K**D Recession everythings gone down the drain
Bad luck Bad timing
No comments:
Post a Comment