prem_goel
09-09 03:54 PM
Visa Bulletin for October 2010 (http://www.travel.state.gov/visa/bulletin/bulletin_5145.html)
Looks like the dates did not retrogress. Bit of a good news :)
EB2-I 08MAY06
EB3-I 15JAN02
EB2-C 22MAY06
EB3-C 08NOV03
Looks like the dates did not retrogress. Bit of a good news :)
EB2-I 08MAY06
EB3-I 15JAN02
EB2-C 22MAY06
EB3-C 08NOV03
wallpaper Lady Gaga at the CFDA Fashion
arthsidhu
09-11 08:37 PM
Many of us repeatedly repeated the same repeating mesage to attend DC rally so that it can repeat in the EARS of all repeatedly whining GC seekers visiting repeatedly every immigration website repeatedly thinking that their GC will come some day. I have repeated the word repeat enough times but still want to repeat my message to you all, who want GC. Come to DC and contribute to IV. I repeat COME TO DC AND GET YOUR GC.
jville
11-09 02:16 PM
it is safe to go with EB3 route. You can file another one in EB2 latter and port the date.
2011 Lady Gaga attends the 2011 CFDA Fashion Awards at Alice Tully Hall,
augustus
05-01 08:50 PM
Dear Members,
Recently my husband had received an RFE on I-485 requesting information about his employment verification letter. He had sent all documents back to USCIS and today, I saw an update on my case. The message read that case processing resumed and there will be a decision or update made in 60 days.
Do you know what kind of decision they usually make? Is it normal to have such statements written up for a denial or approval?
Any words of comfort would help. My husband is the primary applicant.
Thanks a ton!
Augustus.
Recently my husband had received an RFE on I-485 requesting information about his employment verification letter. He had sent all documents back to USCIS and today, I saw an update on my case. The message read that case processing resumed and there will be a decision or update made in 60 days.
Do you know what kind of decision they usually make? Is it normal to have such statements written up for a denial or approval?
Any words of comfort would help. My husband is the primary applicant.
Thanks a ton!
Augustus.
more...
thakkarbhav
01-11 02:39 PM
I guess no complications unless USCIS asks for employment verification at the time of approving the case. He should continue to file for Income tax retrun for 2010 and also need to work for few months in 2011 to file for return.
sreenathm
10-11 09:30 AM
:confused: I got very anxious when my co lawyer told me that I got a query from INS.
I recently transfered my H1 to current employer and started working for him. Even I got receipt number. When I last tracked the number in INS web site it says mail has been sent out asking for more information.
Company lawyer told me to produce all my paystubs ever since I started to work in US.
I am wondering will this cause any issue. Is this a normal procedure ?
Please help me, if any has any kind of information. Please share with me. My Id madhyastha@yahoo.com
Thanks,
Sreenath
I recently transfered my H1 to current employer and started working for him. Even I got receipt number. When I last tracked the number in INS web site it says mail has been sent out asking for more information.
Company lawyer told me to produce all my paystubs ever since I started to work in US.
I am wondering will this cause any issue. Is this a normal procedure ?
Please help me, if any has any kind of information. Please share with me. My Id madhyastha@yahoo.com
Thanks,
Sreenath
more...
Saralayar
08-04 09:27 PM
I saw an update in my case status on July 10th.
It says, RFE received and case reprocessing started..what does this mean?
anybody else has seen this?
Did you get any RFE and responded back to USCIS?. Then your status will change like this.
It says, RFE received and case reprocessing started..what does this mean?
anybody else has seen this?
Did you get any RFE and responded back to USCIS?. Then your status will change like this.
2010 Lady Gaga at 2011 CFDA Fashion
Berkeleybee
03-24 10:51 AM
Our hard quota memo is linked on Matthew Oh's site. http://www.immigration-law.com/Canada.html
more...
gc_nebraska
02-23 03:18 PM
EB-485 processing times in NSC is FOUR (4) Months for the visa number available cases, and also pending EB-485 cases whose visa numbers are current and ready to adjudicate . So does this mean that cases with PD's not current but ready to adjudicate will get their I-485 approved by 6 months . Can some one please break it down for me .
Thanks in advance
Thanks in advance
hair Lady Gaga attends the 2011
Macaca
08-05 07:42 AM
A Polarized, and Polarizing, Congress (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/08/03/AR2007080301949.html) By David S. Broder (davidbroder@washpost.com), August 5, 2007
The distinguishing characteristic of this Congress was on vivid display the other day when the House debated a bill to expand the federal program that provides health insurance for children of the working poor.
Even when it is performing a useful service, this Congress manages to look ugly and mean-spirited. So much blood has been spilled, so much bile stockpiled on Capitol Hill, that no good deed goes untarnished.
The State Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP) is a 10-year-old proven success. Originally a product of bipartisan consensus, passed by a Republican Congress and signed by President Bill Clinton, it was one of the last domestic achievements before Monica and impeachment fever seized control.
It is up for renewal this year and suddenly has become a bone of contention. President Bush underfunded it in his budget; the $4.8 billion extra he proposed spending in the next five years would not finance insurance even for all those who are currently being served.
But when the Senate Finance Committee proposed boosting the funding to $35 billion -- financed by a hefty hike in tobacco taxes -- Bush threatened a veto, and he raised the rhetorical stakes by claiming that the measure was a step toward "government health insurance."
That was surprising news to Republican Sens. Chuck Grassley of Iowa and Orrin Hatch of Utah, two staunch conservatives who had joined in sponsoring the Senate bill, which the Senate Finance Committee supported 17 to 4.
But rather than meet the president's unwise challenge with a strong bipartisan alternative, the House Democratic leadership decided to raise the partisan stakes even higher by bringing out a $50 billion bill that not only would expand SCHIP but would also curtail the private Medicare benefit delivery system that Bush favors.
To add insult to injury, House Democratic leaders then took a leaf from the old Republican playbook and brought the swollen bill to the floor with minimal time for debate and denied Republicans any opportunity to offer amendments.
The result was undisguised fury -- and some really ugly exchanges on the floor. The worst, given voice by former speaker Dennis Hastert, a Republican from Illinois, among others, was the charge that the Democrats were opening the program to illegal immigrants. The National Republican Congressional Committee distributed that distortion wholesale across the country in a flurry of news releases playing to the same kind of nativist prejudice that sank the immigration reform bill. In fact, governors of both parties support the certification system included in the bill for assuring that families meet citizenship requirements; the governors know that too many legal residents have been wrongly disqualified because they could not locate their birth certificates.
In the end, the House bill passed on a near-party-line vote, 225 to 204, far short of the margin that would be needed to override the promised Bush veto. That means the program will probably have to be given a temporary renewal before the Sept. 30 deadline, and eventually Democrats and the White House will negotiate an agreement.
So it will go down as one more example of unnecessary conflict. No rational human being could explain why a program that both parties support and both want to continue could ignite such a fight.
But that is Washington in this era of polarized politics. As Congress heads out for its August recess, it has accomplished about as much as is usually the case at this stage. It passed an overdue increase in the minimum wage and an overdue but healthy package of ethics reforms. It moved some routine legislation.
But what the public has seen and heard is mainly the ugly sound of partisan warfare. The Senate let a handful of dissident Republicans highjack the immigration bill. Its Democratic leadership marched up the hill and back down on repeated futile efforts to circumscribe American involvement in Iraq, then shamefully pulled back from a final vote when a constructive Republican alternative to the Bush policy was on offer.
The less-than-vital issue of the firing of eight U.S. attorneys has occupied more time and attention than the threat of a terrorist enclave in Pakistan -- or the unchecked growth of long-term debts that could sink Medicare and Social Security.
And when this Congress had an opportunity to take a relatively simple, incremental step to extend health insurance to a vulnerable group, the members managed to make a mess of it.
It's no wonder the approval ratings of Congress are so dismal.
The distinguishing characteristic of this Congress was on vivid display the other day when the House debated a bill to expand the federal program that provides health insurance for children of the working poor.
Even when it is performing a useful service, this Congress manages to look ugly and mean-spirited. So much blood has been spilled, so much bile stockpiled on Capitol Hill, that no good deed goes untarnished.
The State Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP) is a 10-year-old proven success. Originally a product of bipartisan consensus, passed by a Republican Congress and signed by President Bill Clinton, it was one of the last domestic achievements before Monica and impeachment fever seized control.
It is up for renewal this year and suddenly has become a bone of contention. President Bush underfunded it in his budget; the $4.8 billion extra he proposed spending in the next five years would not finance insurance even for all those who are currently being served.
But when the Senate Finance Committee proposed boosting the funding to $35 billion -- financed by a hefty hike in tobacco taxes -- Bush threatened a veto, and he raised the rhetorical stakes by claiming that the measure was a step toward "government health insurance."
That was surprising news to Republican Sens. Chuck Grassley of Iowa and Orrin Hatch of Utah, two staunch conservatives who had joined in sponsoring the Senate bill, which the Senate Finance Committee supported 17 to 4.
But rather than meet the president's unwise challenge with a strong bipartisan alternative, the House Democratic leadership decided to raise the partisan stakes even higher by bringing out a $50 billion bill that not only would expand SCHIP but would also curtail the private Medicare benefit delivery system that Bush favors.
To add insult to injury, House Democratic leaders then took a leaf from the old Republican playbook and brought the swollen bill to the floor with minimal time for debate and denied Republicans any opportunity to offer amendments.
The result was undisguised fury -- and some really ugly exchanges on the floor. The worst, given voice by former speaker Dennis Hastert, a Republican from Illinois, among others, was the charge that the Democrats were opening the program to illegal immigrants. The National Republican Congressional Committee distributed that distortion wholesale across the country in a flurry of news releases playing to the same kind of nativist prejudice that sank the immigration reform bill. In fact, governors of both parties support the certification system included in the bill for assuring that families meet citizenship requirements; the governors know that too many legal residents have been wrongly disqualified because they could not locate their birth certificates.
In the end, the House bill passed on a near-party-line vote, 225 to 204, far short of the margin that would be needed to override the promised Bush veto. That means the program will probably have to be given a temporary renewal before the Sept. 30 deadline, and eventually Democrats and the White House will negotiate an agreement.
So it will go down as one more example of unnecessary conflict. No rational human being could explain why a program that both parties support and both want to continue could ignite such a fight.
But that is Washington in this era of polarized politics. As Congress heads out for its August recess, it has accomplished about as much as is usually the case at this stage. It passed an overdue increase in the minimum wage and an overdue but healthy package of ethics reforms. It moved some routine legislation.
But what the public has seen and heard is mainly the ugly sound of partisan warfare. The Senate let a handful of dissident Republicans highjack the immigration bill. Its Democratic leadership marched up the hill and back down on repeated futile efforts to circumscribe American involvement in Iraq, then shamefully pulled back from a final vote when a constructive Republican alternative to the Bush policy was on offer.
The less-than-vital issue of the firing of eight U.S. attorneys has occupied more time and attention than the threat of a terrorist enclave in Pakistan -- or the unchecked growth of long-term debts that could sink Medicare and Social Security.
And when this Congress had an opportunity to take a relatively simple, incremental step to extend health insurance to a vulnerable group, the members managed to make a mess of it.
It's no wonder the approval ratings of Congress are so dismal.
more...
jayaprabha
08-14 01:38 AM
Hi
I got laid-off in Jan'09 and was not able to get a job. I returned back to India on 01-May-2009. I would like to come back to US since the economy is coming-up. Below is my situation:
Filed I-485 and it is in Pending status (Priority Date is May-2007). I-140 approved in Jan 2008.
Renewed EAD which is valid till July 2010. But AP got expired by 15-July-2009.
6 years of H1B expired by 31-May-2009.
1. What are my options now to come back to US?
2. When can I file for my new H1B? I heard there should be 1 year gap between H1B.
3. Will I be considered in regular quota OR I will get H1B on previously held quota?
Your suggestion will greatly help. Appreciate it.
Thanks,
Jayaprabha
I got laid-off in Jan'09 and was not able to get a job. I returned back to India on 01-May-2009. I would like to come back to US since the economy is coming-up. Below is my situation:
Filed I-485 and it is in Pending status (Priority Date is May-2007). I-140 approved in Jan 2008.
Renewed EAD which is valid till July 2010. But AP got expired by 15-July-2009.
6 years of H1B expired by 31-May-2009.
1. What are my options now to come back to US?
2. When can I file for my new H1B? I heard there should be 1 year gap between H1B.
3. Will I be considered in regular quota OR I will get H1B on previously held quota?
Your suggestion will greatly help. Appreciate it.
Thanks,
Jayaprabha
hot Lady Gaga CFDA Fashion Awards
jonty_11
03-22 11:17 AM
If She herself would be asking teh question.. u would probably get some response.
more...
house lady gaga 2011 cfda fashion
Macaca
06-05 07:40 PM
Discontent Over Iraq Increasing, Poll Finds (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/06/04/AR2007060401230.html) Americans Also Unhappy With Congress, By Dan Balz and Jon Cohen (http://projects.washingtonpost.com/staff/email/dan+balz+and+jon+cohen/), Washington Post Staff Writers, Tuesday, June 5, 2007
Growing frustration with the performance of the Democratic Congress, combined with widespread public pessimism over President Bush's temporary troop buildup in Iraq, has left satisfaction with the overall direction of the country at its lowest point in more than a decade, according to a new Washington Post-ABC News poll.
Almost six in 10 Americans said they do not think the additional troops sent to Iraq since the beginning of the year will help restore civil order there, and 53 percent -- a new high in Post-ABC News polls -- said they do not believe that the war has contributed to the long-term security of the United States.
Disapproval of Bush's performance in office remains high, but the poll highlighted growing disapproval of the new Democratic majority in Congress. Just 39 percent said they approve of the job Congress is doing, down from 44 percent in April, when the new Congress was about 100 days into its term. More significant, approval of congressional Democrats dropped 10 percentage points over that same period, from 54 percent to 44 percent.
Much of that drop was fueled by lower approval ratings of the Democrats in Congress among strong opponents of the war, independents and liberal Democrats. While independents were evenly split on the Democrats in Congress in April (49 percent approved, 48 percent disapproved), now 37 percent said they approved and 54 percent disapproved. Among liberal Democrats, approval of congressional Democrats dropped 18 points.
Bush's overall job-approval rating stands at 35 percent, unchanged from April.
Many Democratic activists have complained that the 2006 midterm election results represented a call for a course change in Iraq and that so far the Democratic-controlled Congress has failed to deliver.
Deep public skepticism about Iraq, concerns about the Democrats and Bush, and near-record-high gasoline prices appear to have combined to sour the overall mood in the country. In the new poll, 73 percent of Americans said the country is pretty seriously on the wrong track, while 25 percent said things are going in the right direction.
That gap is marginally wider than it was at the beginning of the year and represents the most gloomy expression of public sentiment since January 1996, when a face-off between President Bill Clinton and a Republican-controlled Congress over the budget led to an extended shutdown of the federal government.
Among the nearly three-quarters of Americans expressing a pessimistic viewpoint, about one in five blamed the war for their negative outlook, and about the same ratio mentioned the economy, gas prices, jobs or debt as the main reason for their dissatisfaction with the country's direction. Eleven percent cited "problems with Bush," and another 11 percent said "everything" led them to their negative opinion.
The new poll showed that Americans have recalibrated their view of who is taking the lead in Washington. Earlier this year, majorities of Americans said they believed that the Democrats were taking the initiative in the capital, but now there is an even split, with 43 percent saying Bush is taking the stronger leadership role and 45 percent saying the Democrats are.
That shift occurred across the political spectrum. In April, 59 percent of independents said Democrats were taking a stronger role, but that figure has dropped 15 points, to 44 percent.
The political machinations over the Iraq war funding bill have been the dominant news event in Congress for much of the spring, and the Democrats' removal of the provision linking funding to a withdrawal deadline came shortly before the poll was taken.
In April, the public, by a 25-point margin, trusted the Democrats over Bush to handle the situation in Iraq. In this poll, Democrats maintained an advantage, but by 16 points. There has been an erosion of support for Democrats on this issue, but not a corresponding movement to Bush. Among independents, trust for the Democrats is down eight points, mostly because of a six-point bump in the percentage who said they trust "neither."
Congressional Democrats also are preferred over Bush -- whose own approval ratings remain near career lows -- on immigration (by 17 percentage points), the economy (by 18 points) and even, albeit narrowly, on handling the U.S. campaign against terrorism (by six points).
But it is the war in Iraq -- the most important issue in the 2006 campaign -- that has the most potential to reshape the political landscape.
Overall, 61 percent in this poll said the war was not worth fighting, and nearly two-thirds said the United States is not making significant progress restoring civil order in Iraq. However, there is no such general agreement about what to do.
In this poll, 55 percent -- a new high -- said the number of U.S. military forces in Iraq should be decreased, but only 15 percent advocated an immediate withdrawal of American troops. An additional 12 percent said U.S. forces should be out of Iraq sometime this year.
Since the Iraqi parliamentary elections in November 2005, consistent majorities of Americans have said U.S. troops should be drawn down; support for an immediate, complete withdrawal has also remained relatively stable, never exceeding two in 10. And there similarly has been little change across party lines: 25 percent of the Democrats surveyed wanted all American military forces out of Iraq now, compared with 13 percent of independents and 6 percent of Republicans, with all percentages about the same as in late 2005. Support for the immediate removal of U.S. forces peaked at 32 percent among African Americans.
Public attitudes about the size of U.S. military forces in Iraq and about the war more generally are closely related to views about the centrality of the situation in Iraq to the broader battle against terrorism, another flashpoint between Bush and congressional Democrats. (In this poll, nearly six in 10 agreed with the Democratic position that the two are separate issues.) Overall, more than seven in 10 of those who said Iraq is an essential component of the terrorism fight wanted U.S. troop levels in Iraq to be increased or kept the same, while more than seven in 10 of those seeing the issues as separate thought that some or all troops should be withdrawn. Among independents who said the United States can succeed against terrorism without winning in Iraq, 70 percent supported decreasing troop levels, compared with 23 percent of those who saw victory in Iraq as pivotal.
This Post-ABC News poll was conducted by telephone May 29 to June 1 among a random sample of 1,205 adults. Results from the full poll have a margin of error of plus or minus three percentage points. Sampling error margins are higher for subgroups.
Washington Post-ABC News Poll (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/polls/postpoll_060307.html)
The Washington Post - ABC News Poll: Iraq War Apprehension (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/graphic/2007/06/05/GR2007060500108.html)
Growing frustration with the performance of the Democratic Congress, combined with widespread public pessimism over President Bush's temporary troop buildup in Iraq, has left satisfaction with the overall direction of the country at its lowest point in more than a decade, according to a new Washington Post-ABC News poll.
Almost six in 10 Americans said they do not think the additional troops sent to Iraq since the beginning of the year will help restore civil order there, and 53 percent -- a new high in Post-ABC News polls -- said they do not believe that the war has contributed to the long-term security of the United States.
Disapproval of Bush's performance in office remains high, but the poll highlighted growing disapproval of the new Democratic majority in Congress. Just 39 percent said they approve of the job Congress is doing, down from 44 percent in April, when the new Congress was about 100 days into its term. More significant, approval of congressional Democrats dropped 10 percentage points over that same period, from 54 percent to 44 percent.
Much of that drop was fueled by lower approval ratings of the Democrats in Congress among strong opponents of the war, independents and liberal Democrats. While independents were evenly split on the Democrats in Congress in April (49 percent approved, 48 percent disapproved), now 37 percent said they approved and 54 percent disapproved. Among liberal Democrats, approval of congressional Democrats dropped 18 points.
Bush's overall job-approval rating stands at 35 percent, unchanged from April.
Many Democratic activists have complained that the 2006 midterm election results represented a call for a course change in Iraq and that so far the Democratic-controlled Congress has failed to deliver.
Deep public skepticism about Iraq, concerns about the Democrats and Bush, and near-record-high gasoline prices appear to have combined to sour the overall mood in the country. In the new poll, 73 percent of Americans said the country is pretty seriously on the wrong track, while 25 percent said things are going in the right direction.
That gap is marginally wider than it was at the beginning of the year and represents the most gloomy expression of public sentiment since January 1996, when a face-off between President Bill Clinton and a Republican-controlled Congress over the budget led to an extended shutdown of the federal government.
Among the nearly three-quarters of Americans expressing a pessimistic viewpoint, about one in five blamed the war for their negative outlook, and about the same ratio mentioned the economy, gas prices, jobs or debt as the main reason for their dissatisfaction with the country's direction. Eleven percent cited "problems with Bush," and another 11 percent said "everything" led them to their negative opinion.
The new poll showed that Americans have recalibrated their view of who is taking the lead in Washington. Earlier this year, majorities of Americans said they believed that the Democrats were taking the initiative in the capital, but now there is an even split, with 43 percent saying Bush is taking the stronger leadership role and 45 percent saying the Democrats are.
That shift occurred across the political spectrum. In April, 59 percent of independents said Democrats were taking a stronger role, but that figure has dropped 15 points, to 44 percent.
The political machinations over the Iraq war funding bill have been the dominant news event in Congress for much of the spring, and the Democrats' removal of the provision linking funding to a withdrawal deadline came shortly before the poll was taken.
In April, the public, by a 25-point margin, trusted the Democrats over Bush to handle the situation in Iraq. In this poll, Democrats maintained an advantage, but by 16 points. There has been an erosion of support for Democrats on this issue, but not a corresponding movement to Bush. Among independents, trust for the Democrats is down eight points, mostly because of a six-point bump in the percentage who said they trust "neither."
Congressional Democrats also are preferred over Bush -- whose own approval ratings remain near career lows -- on immigration (by 17 percentage points), the economy (by 18 points) and even, albeit narrowly, on handling the U.S. campaign against terrorism (by six points).
But it is the war in Iraq -- the most important issue in the 2006 campaign -- that has the most potential to reshape the political landscape.
Overall, 61 percent in this poll said the war was not worth fighting, and nearly two-thirds said the United States is not making significant progress restoring civil order in Iraq. However, there is no such general agreement about what to do.
In this poll, 55 percent -- a new high -- said the number of U.S. military forces in Iraq should be decreased, but only 15 percent advocated an immediate withdrawal of American troops. An additional 12 percent said U.S. forces should be out of Iraq sometime this year.
Since the Iraqi parliamentary elections in November 2005, consistent majorities of Americans have said U.S. troops should be drawn down; support for an immediate, complete withdrawal has also remained relatively stable, never exceeding two in 10. And there similarly has been little change across party lines: 25 percent of the Democrats surveyed wanted all American military forces out of Iraq now, compared with 13 percent of independents and 6 percent of Republicans, with all percentages about the same as in late 2005. Support for the immediate removal of U.S. forces peaked at 32 percent among African Americans.
Public attitudes about the size of U.S. military forces in Iraq and about the war more generally are closely related to views about the centrality of the situation in Iraq to the broader battle against terrorism, another flashpoint between Bush and congressional Democrats. (In this poll, nearly six in 10 agreed with the Democratic position that the two are separate issues.) Overall, more than seven in 10 of those who said Iraq is an essential component of the terrorism fight wanted U.S. troop levels in Iraq to be increased or kept the same, while more than seven in 10 of those seeing the issues as separate thought that some or all troops should be withdrawn. Among independents who said the United States can succeed against terrorism without winning in Iraq, 70 percent supported decreasing troop levels, compared with 23 percent of those who saw victory in Iraq as pivotal.
This Post-ABC News poll was conducted by telephone May 29 to June 1 among a random sample of 1,205 adults. Results from the full poll have a margin of error of plus or minus three percentage points. Sampling error margins are higher for subgroups.
Washington Post-ABC News Poll (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/polls/postpoll_060307.html)
The Washington Post - ABC News Poll: Iraq War Apprehension (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/graphic/2007/06/05/GR2007060500108.html)
tattoo Lady Gaga CFDA Fashion Awards
Macaca
07-11 08:13 AM
Unpopular Congress enduring tough times (http://www.reuters.com/article/topNews/idUSN0923700020070710) By Steve Holland Reuters, Jul 10, 2007
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - These are tough times for the Democratic-led U.S. Congress, where partisan battles have led to little progress on big issues and have made lawmakers collectively less popular than President George W. Bush.
Congress, typically never all that popular to begin with, starts the second half of 2007 with an anemic job approval rating of about 25 percent, down from 43 percent in January, with one Gallup poll ranking lawmakers at 14 percent.
Experts attribute the woeful rankings to an inability to force a change in direction in Iraq, the priority Democrats campaigned on to gain power in both the House of Representatives and the Senate in last November's elections.
But that is not all. There has been little to show on other priorities, including a change in Social Security and other entitlement programs that will run out of money in the years ahead, in addition to overhauling a health care system that has left millions uninsured and a broken immigration policy.
"I think Americans were expecting a great deal from the new Congress, and Congress has always been held in low esteem, but Congress really hasn't delivered on what it promised, especially on Iraq," said Paul Light, a congressional expert who is a professor at New York University.
Democrats in charge of Congress insist they have made progress on several issues, like increasing the minimum hourly wage and getting money for victims of the 2005 Katrina hurricane. They blame the Republican minority for a failure on others such as immigration, greater energy independence, and on negotiation of lower-priced drugs for Medicare.
"I'm not really much for polls," said Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada. "We're going to continue doing what we think is the right thing for the American public in spite of a White House and the Republicans who are stalling every step of the way."
IRAQ DEBATE
Democrats drew a line in the sand over Iraq in the spring, using a $100 billion war spending bill to try to force Bush to accept a troop withdrawal date.
The effort failed miserably, with Bush finally getting what he wanted with no strings attached, and the White House saw the fractious debate as taking time away from work on other priorities.
"They've proven that they're not capable of taking on big issues," an administration official said.
Democrats beg to differ, pointing out that under their stewardship the Congress has resumed its traditional watchdog role over an administration they feel got off scot-free under Republican leadership.
"I would say in the first six months, gauging how things operate here from the majority, that we had some important work to do," said House Speaker Nancy Pelosi of California. "We had to drain the swamp. We had to create the oversight."
With American patience running thin over the Iraq war and casualties rising, Democrats may eventually force a change in direction in the unpopular war, an effort being renewed this week on Capitol Hill.
The Iraq situation has so infuriated the Democratic left that Cindy Sheehan, the California liberal who began a long protest against Bush after her soldier son Casey was killed in Iraq, is talking about running against Pelosi in 2008.
"I think the decline in support (for Congress) since the Democrats took over reflects in part the unhappiness of the base in the inability of Democrats to immediately stop the war in Iraq," said Thomas Mann, a congressional expert at the Brookings Institution.
The analysts say Congress' low poll numbers also reflect an altogether negative mood among Americans who are tired of the war, fed up with rising gasoline prices and worried about their jobs in a changing economy.
But how all this plays out in the 2008 election is hard to say. Incumbent lawmakers, while collectively held in low esteem, rarely fail to win re-election.
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - These are tough times for the Democratic-led U.S. Congress, where partisan battles have led to little progress on big issues and have made lawmakers collectively less popular than President George W. Bush.
Congress, typically never all that popular to begin with, starts the second half of 2007 with an anemic job approval rating of about 25 percent, down from 43 percent in January, with one Gallup poll ranking lawmakers at 14 percent.
Experts attribute the woeful rankings to an inability to force a change in direction in Iraq, the priority Democrats campaigned on to gain power in both the House of Representatives and the Senate in last November's elections.
But that is not all. There has been little to show on other priorities, including a change in Social Security and other entitlement programs that will run out of money in the years ahead, in addition to overhauling a health care system that has left millions uninsured and a broken immigration policy.
"I think Americans were expecting a great deal from the new Congress, and Congress has always been held in low esteem, but Congress really hasn't delivered on what it promised, especially on Iraq," said Paul Light, a congressional expert who is a professor at New York University.
Democrats in charge of Congress insist they have made progress on several issues, like increasing the minimum hourly wage and getting money for victims of the 2005 Katrina hurricane. They blame the Republican minority for a failure on others such as immigration, greater energy independence, and on negotiation of lower-priced drugs for Medicare.
"I'm not really much for polls," said Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada. "We're going to continue doing what we think is the right thing for the American public in spite of a White House and the Republicans who are stalling every step of the way."
IRAQ DEBATE
Democrats drew a line in the sand over Iraq in the spring, using a $100 billion war spending bill to try to force Bush to accept a troop withdrawal date.
The effort failed miserably, with Bush finally getting what he wanted with no strings attached, and the White House saw the fractious debate as taking time away from work on other priorities.
"They've proven that they're not capable of taking on big issues," an administration official said.
Democrats beg to differ, pointing out that under their stewardship the Congress has resumed its traditional watchdog role over an administration they feel got off scot-free under Republican leadership.
"I would say in the first six months, gauging how things operate here from the majority, that we had some important work to do," said House Speaker Nancy Pelosi of California. "We had to drain the swamp. We had to create the oversight."
With American patience running thin over the Iraq war and casualties rising, Democrats may eventually force a change in direction in the unpopular war, an effort being renewed this week on Capitol Hill.
The Iraq situation has so infuriated the Democratic left that Cindy Sheehan, the California liberal who began a long protest against Bush after her soldier son Casey was killed in Iraq, is talking about running against Pelosi in 2008.
"I think the decline in support (for Congress) since the Democrats took over reflects in part the unhappiness of the base in the inability of Democrats to immediately stop the war in Iraq," said Thomas Mann, a congressional expert at the Brookings Institution.
The analysts say Congress' low poll numbers also reflect an altogether negative mood among Americans who are tired of the war, fed up with rising gasoline prices and worried about their jobs in a changing economy.
But how all this plays out in the 2008 election is hard to say. Incumbent lawmakers, while collectively held in low esteem, rarely fail to win re-election.
more...
pictures Fashion Icon Award winner Lady
Green.Tech
10-01 02:13 PM
^^^^^^^^^
dresses at the CFDA Fashion awards
Jagadish1978
07-19 07:52 PM
I have these below queries on Green card processing
My Green card processing background
My labor and I140 are approved and have priority date of May 2006 under EB3 category.
The reason for these questions is that I am planning to change the company that I am working with.
Questions.
1. Can I port the priority date (March 2006) when applying for new green card with new employer.
2. If possible to port the priority date can I apply under EB2 category assuming all other criteria satisfy for EB2 category and use the same (May 2006) priority date.
My Green card processing background
My labor and I140 are approved and have priority date of May 2006 under EB3 category.
The reason for these questions is that I am planning to change the company that I am working with.
Questions.
1. Can I port the priority date (March 2006) when applying for new green card with new employer.
2. If possible to port the priority date can I apply under EB2 category assuming all other criteria satisfy for EB2 category and use the same (May 2006) priority date.
more...
makeup Actress Lucy Liu arrives at the CFDA Fashion awards at the Lincoln Center#39;s
thamarai
09-25 06:52 PM
I am in L2 visa right now and I have an EAD to work. I got a job that I need to start on oct 01.
My spouse status will change from L1 to H1B from oct 01, as his employer filled for H1B.
Our L1 & L2 are valid until Aug 2011.
I don't have H4 yet.
What are the various options available for me to work?
1. Can I use my EAD to work which is valid until aug 2011?
2. Can I apply for H1B for me? If yes when I can start working with my H1B.
3. Is there is any way to maintain my husband L1 status until it's validity(Aug 2011) and then switching to H1B after L1 expires?
My spouse status will change from L1 to H1B from oct 01, as his employer filled for H1B.
Our L1 & L2 are valid until Aug 2011.
I don't have H4 yet.
What are the various options available for me to work?
1. Can I use my EAD to work which is valid until aug 2011?
2. Can I apply for H1B for me? If yes when I can start working with my H1B.
3. Is there is any way to maintain my husband L1 status until it's validity(Aug 2011) and then switching to H1B after L1 expires?
girlfriend Jun 7. Lady Gaga shoes at the
curiosity_76
08-15 11:50 AM
i remember there are about 40,000 file to TSC on July 2nd, while 35,000 file to NSC. Why no one say something?
hairstyles 2011 CFDA Fashion Awards:
chrisclick
08-22 08:46 AM
Nice. Like the last one :)
gc_73
07-10 02:05 AM
Hi,
I have applied for COS from L1-B to L1-A and received an RFE which we have responded to.
The application is still pending with USCIS, while my I-94 is expiring on 07/31
What will happen if I do not receive decision before expiry of my I-94? Will I be out of status after the I-94 expiry date.
I have my I-485 pending as well (I-140 approved) and have EAD but not used.
Thanks
I have applied for COS from L1-B to L1-A and received an RFE which we have responded to.
The application is still pending with USCIS, while my I-94 is expiring on 07/31
What will happen if I do not receive decision before expiry of my I-94? Will I be out of status after the I-94 expiry date.
I have my I-485 pending as well (I-140 approved) and have EAD but not used.
Thanks
chanduv23
11-26 09:17 PM
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
No comments:
Post a Comment