akashintouch
03-17 03:18 PM
Hi,
Did they took one of your approval.
Bcos they took one of my approval and gave me back the other one with a stamp on that, please let me know
Thanks
Did they took one of your approval.
Bcos they took one of my approval and gave me back the other one with a stamp on that, please let me know
Thanks
wallpaper April 8th – Zurich
HRPRO
02-23 04:17 PM
My question involves employment and labor law for the state of: CA
I have worked with a company on h1b from 1st jul to 12 nov in 2007 on h1b visa. They did not pay me for last 45 working days. My employer is telling about the following clause in in my offer letter:
SALARY: You will be paid an amount equal to a 70% basis of your bill rate based on the understanding that you will work with us for a period of at least one year. If you leave Company before completing 1 year of employment your compensation will be adjusted to a $55,000 per year basis and the excess amount paid to you will be deducted from the last two months of your salary.
Please let me know whether this is legal to have this kinda clause in offer letter. Is there any way to get my salary?
Thanks much!
anancish
CA Law very clearly states all employee dues including vacation payouts will have to be cleared within 72 hours of the employees last day. Unless you have signed any agreement to withhold your salary, your employer has no right to withhold the amount.
Even if you signed such an agreement and they withheld a penny more, feel free to call the DoL and your ex-employer will become an ex-employer
I have worked with a company on h1b from 1st jul to 12 nov in 2007 on h1b visa. They did not pay me for last 45 working days. My employer is telling about the following clause in in my offer letter:
SALARY: You will be paid an amount equal to a 70% basis of your bill rate based on the understanding that you will work with us for a period of at least one year. If you leave Company before completing 1 year of employment your compensation will be adjusted to a $55,000 per year basis and the excess amount paid to you will be deducted from the last two months of your salary.
Please let me know whether this is legal to have this kinda clause in offer letter. Is there any way to get my salary?
Thanks much!
anancish
CA Law very clearly states all employee dues including vacation payouts will have to be cleared within 72 hours of the employees last day. Unless you have signed any agreement to withhold your salary, your employer has no right to withhold the amount.
Even if you signed such an agreement and they withheld a penny more, feel free to call the DoL and your ex-employer will become an ex-employer
vgayalu
03-02 07:38 PM
After my contribution I asked two more friends to contribute at least for small amounts.One contributed $200- 00. The other one also promised .
Please encourage others. It is our own work. Let us gear up in contributions and spirit.
vgayulu
Please encourage others. It is our own work. Let us gear up in contributions and spirit.
vgayulu
2011 Yesterday JUSTiN BiEBER
belmontboy
05-01 09:36 PM
If all members of this community pay 100 grand , we can buy a country in africa and build our own country!!
This could be good substitute for buying houses here worth 500-1000k$
What do u think!?:D
don't we have our own country already?:D
This could be good substitute for buying houses here worth 500-1000k$
What do u think!?:D
don't we have our own country already?:D
more...
god_bless_you
03-28 08:25 AM
I am a Chemical Engineer ( 16 years in India as a Senior Guy + more than 5 years in US )
I am a founder team member of a high technology advanced material company, created with the help from a VC & active support of local congressman. We literally reopened a closed factory in Ohio to start this R&D / manufacturing company. ( Politicians have been making a lot of noise to revive manufacturing economy in Midwest)
We have hired about 18 people till now & we are NOT an IT company
I was accorded honorary citizenship by the mayor of city of Clinton, MS in 1989 for my extracurricular activities but did not move to US untill 2000
For last five years I have been through this immigration circus & had to file L/C multiple times. Currently, I am not able to file I-485 & I am in my 6th Year of H1-B
PCS case is more useful as he is not purely from IT/Software
Every body else have misconception that retrogression -- backlog is affecting only software professionals(yes we are more number of affected people)
seems he is a senior mature guy and can represent our concerns corrctly., did one one from IV talk with him personally?
I am a founder team member of a high technology advanced material company, created with the help from a VC & active support of local congressman. We literally reopened a closed factory in Ohio to start this R&D / manufacturing company. ( Politicians have been making a lot of noise to revive manufacturing economy in Midwest)
We have hired about 18 people till now & we are NOT an IT company
I was accorded honorary citizenship by the mayor of city of Clinton, MS in 1989 for my extracurricular activities but did not move to US untill 2000
For last five years I have been through this immigration circus & had to file L/C multiple times. Currently, I am not able to file I-485 & I am in my 6th Year of H1-B
PCS case is more useful as he is not purely from IT/Software
Every body else have misconception that retrogression -- backlog is affecting only software professionals(yes we are more number of affected people)
seems he is a senior mature guy and can represent our concerns corrctly., did one one from IV talk with him personally?
lskreddy
05-21 12:49 PM
If they state their reasoning behind these processing times and let us know in writing that only apps with current priority dates are being considered, that will put to rest a lot of our anxiety.
As much as I am anxious to know about the application being approved, the lack of transparency is what frustrates me the most. They create the rules and they bend it as and when it suits them.
I wish they would only state the true state of affairs.
As much as I am anxious to know about the application being approved, the lack of transparency is what frustrates me the most. They create the rules and they bend it as and when it suits them.
I wish they would only state the true state of affairs.
more...
spicy_guy
05-21 01:13 PM
I copied and pasted the post and sent it to few friends who live in DC and in tri-state area.
I think we can post it on the active immigration related forums...
It can be by any active member of such forums.. (Murthy.com, .com, immigrationlist.com, etc)
I think we can post it on the active immigration related forums...
It can be by any active member of such forums.. (Murthy.com, .com, immigrationlist.com, etc)
2010 Justin Bieber concert Zurich
docwa
08-04 05:40 PM
If the suspense is killing anyone, like it was to me; its easy to call the USCIS #, and ask the cust service person if the application has been pre-adjudicated. He/She will ask for SRC/LIN # again, and tell you yes/No and date of pre-adjudication.
If the first officer does not help, call another, and the next one will.
If the first officer does not help, call another, and the next one will.
more...
ItIsNotFunny
03-11 12:16 PM
Lets find real information. Don't start guessing game (unless you just love the mess you are in). Please contribute on FOIA thread.
hair proof that justin bieber is a
Widget
11-09 06:24 PM
1/09/2006: Priorities for Lameduck Congress
* Report indicates that overhauling immigration may be in the list of the Democrats priority and President Bush has also expressed his readiness and willingness to go along with the Democrats on the legislation. Immediately after the result of the election became obvious, apparently the President called into the White House the leaders of GOP to discuss the priorities for the Lameduck session.
* Taking such discussion and the President's meeting with Rep. Pelosi, future Speaker of the House and exhange views on priorities for the two parties as a positive signial, the immigration stakeholders started igniting some hope, albeit uncertain, for potential action by the Congress and are cautiously preparing for their move in support of the immigration legislation. For the report on meeting between the President Bush and Rep.
* Report indicates that overhauling immigration may be in the list of the Democrats priority and President Bush has also expressed his readiness and willingness to go along with the Democrats on the legislation. Immediately after the result of the election became obvious, apparently the President called into the White House the leaders of GOP to discuss the priorities for the Lameduck session.
* Taking such discussion and the President's meeting with Rep. Pelosi, future Speaker of the House and exhange views on priorities for the two parties as a positive signial, the immigration stakeholders started igniting some hope, albeit uncertain, for potential action by the Congress and are cautiously preparing for their move in support of the immigration legislation. For the report on meeting between the President Bush and Rep.
more...
NKR
07-04 12:21 PM
I agree, if you are past 180 days since you applied for 485 and if your 140 is approved, it shouldn't matter if your ex employer withdraws 140 now, though I doubt he would.
This is another example of a bad desi employer trying to screw an employee. these stories make me puke. the employer did not have a problem when you found a project, when you negotiated rates and when you worked with the same client for 3 years and now all of a sudden he is holding you accountable. totally unprofessional . sic.
This is another example of a bad desi employer trying to screw an employee. these stories make me puke. the employer did not have a problem when you found a project, when you negotiated rates and when you worked with the same client for 3 years and now all of a sudden he is holding you accountable. totally unprofessional . sic.
hot ZURICH, SWITZERLAND - APRIL 08: Justin Bieber performs at the Hallenstadion
BharatPremi
10-25 10:37 AM
Vkkkk,
Look at this thread...He got the RFE on I-140(NSC) in august and the I-140 approved in sept. You never know with USCIS..I know few guys who got lucky with their I-140s. i don't think he was planning to play with our feelings since septemebr...Do you?
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=12905
Shimul999 may not be trying to play or may be doing so, only Shimul999 knows. But there are legitimate observations such as below (Assuming s/he provided all information for his/her case correctly) can lead any person like VKKKK to believe that.
1) He is claiming labor filed in Feb 06 and he got approval in May 06 (As per
his signature). Now if his file is in BEC this would not have happened so it is
safe to assume that either he might have used substitution labor OR his file
is filed in PERM. Now Feb 06 was the initial stage of PERM and during that
period there were lot many software glitches in the PERM system so many
lawyers were almost hesitant to file under PERM. But assuming that his
lawyer took decision to file under PERM, end to end process was almost 4
months for PERM so either his file was reached before Feb 06 then only he
could have labor approval in May 06. So there is definately something
wrong there.
2) If my labor is approved in May 06 why would I wait to file I-140 till Feb 07
(His signature)?
Now 1st point, considering Shimul lucky even that time one can assume it might have happened. For second point one can assume any reason for that long wait so it is not necessary that by looking to these both points we can fairly say that s/he is not representing the fact. It can be a fact and in that case s/he deserves our congratulations.
Look at this thread...He got the RFE on I-140(NSC) in august and the I-140 approved in sept. You never know with USCIS..I know few guys who got lucky with their I-140s. i don't think he was planning to play with our feelings since septemebr...Do you?
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=12905
Shimul999 may not be trying to play or may be doing so, only Shimul999 knows. But there are legitimate observations such as below (Assuming s/he provided all information for his/her case correctly) can lead any person like VKKKK to believe that.
1) He is claiming labor filed in Feb 06 and he got approval in May 06 (As per
his signature). Now if his file is in BEC this would not have happened so it is
safe to assume that either he might have used substitution labor OR his file
is filed in PERM. Now Feb 06 was the initial stage of PERM and during that
period there were lot many software glitches in the PERM system so many
lawyers were almost hesitant to file under PERM. But assuming that his
lawyer took decision to file under PERM, end to end process was almost 4
months for PERM so either his file was reached before Feb 06 then only he
could have labor approval in May 06. So there is definately something
wrong there.
2) If my labor is approved in May 06 why would I wait to file I-140 till Feb 07
(His signature)?
Now 1st point, considering Shimul lucky even that time one can assume it might have happened. For second point one can assume any reason for that long wait so it is not necessary that by looking to these both points we can fairly say that s/he is not representing the fact. It can be a fact and in that case s/he deserves our congratulations.
more...
house Fans react as Justin Bieber
ksrk
10-07 01:52 PM
USCIS has specified that they would have processed all the records into a single database by 29th October.
Does this not mean that there could be a forward movement in the Nov bullietin ?
Based on this (although not sure where USCIS posted this date), the DOS wouldn't be able to use that data till the end of October (at the earliest) or early November (likely). Meaning that the December bulletin (issued ~mid-Nov) might be the one to watch for any movement (forward or backward).
Does this not mean that there could be a forward movement in the Nov bullietin ?
Based on this (although not sure where USCIS posted this date), the DOS wouldn't be able to use that data till the end of October (at the earliest) or early November (likely). Meaning that the December bulletin (issued ~mid-Nov) might be the one to watch for any movement (forward or backward).
tattoo makeup justin bieber zurich.
javaconsultant
02-04 12:07 AM
I signed up for recurring contribution for IV for 20/month.
Guys and Gals--------pls contribute to IV as much you can.Even little amount would help it....its our only hope to get out this GC mess.
Guys and Gals--------pls contribute to IV as much you can.Even little amount would help it....its our only hope to get out this GC mess.
more...
pictures Justin Bieber amp;amp; Chris
kumaabh
10-23 11:50 PM
His 485 was approved because he is from bangladesh.
dresses Justin Bieber
kopra
09-08 07:08 PM
Dear valuablehurdle,
You need to understand why your company is paying only 85K. Your base compensation is 85K, then you have another 10% on top of that as bonus. Also your Health/Dental/vision Insurance will be close to 15K payed by the employer. Also they pay Social Security at 8% base pay + Your H1B and other legal Expense for you and family. This will put your total rewards/compensation well above 100K.
I am not trying to say that your present company is perfect, but these are the common expenses for a company , Thats the reason even if you get hired by the direct client your salary will not increase very much. Companies pay 180$ to the consulting companies for the following reason
1) You are not their employee, so $180 per hour is all they pay ( No benefits, No H1b Legal hassles etc)
2) They Hire consultants for a particular project for a set period of time. After the project is over, they can have the consultant "released" from the project.
3) They dont want to hire independent contractors, cos, if the guy leaves in between the project, its the responsibility of the consulting company to replace your position with another qualified person.In your case, they need to find another candidate with your technical expertise, which is not very easy.Very few Companies wants to take that risk.
You need to look at the total compensation rather than your base pay
It was Hard-Hitting, Sanju !!!
Anyway, I feel there are bad apples......but not all take commissions.
Still, I am at a loss to understand the same company that pays $180 per hour to the American Consulting company will pay me only as much as $50/hr.
What would be their logic?
I would appreciate your replies...
You need to understand why your company is paying only 85K. Your base compensation is 85K, then you have another 10% on top of that as bonus. Also your Health/Dental/vision Insurance will be close to 15K payed by the employer. Also they pay Social Security at 8% base pay + Your H1B and other legal Expense for you and family. This will put your total rewards/compensation well above 100K.
I am not trying to say that your present company is perfect, but these are the common expenses for a company , Thats the reason even if you get hired by the direct client your salary will not increase very much. Companies pay 180$ to the consulting companies for the following reason
1) You are not their employee, so $180 per hour is all they pay ( No benefits, No H1b Legal hassles etc)
2) They Hire consultants for a particular project for a set period of time. After the project is over, they can have the consultant "released" from the project.
3) They dont want to hire independent contractors, cos, if the guy leaves in between the project, its the responsibility of the consulting company to replace your position with another qualified person.In your case, they need to find another candidate with your technical expertise, which is not very easy.Very few Companies wants to take that risk.
You need to look at the total compensation rather than your base pay
It was Hard-Hitting, Sanju !!!
Anyway, I feel there are bad apples......but not all take commissions.
Still, I am at a loss to understand the same company that pays $180 per hour to the American Consulting company will pay me only as much as $50/hr.
What would be their logic?
I would appreciate your replies...
more...
makeup 2 Stehplätze Justin Bieber
Hassan11
07-20 02:45 PM
The short answer is most republicans voted yes for the senator Cornyn's bill to recapture the unused employment -based visas from previous years and almost all Democrats voted No (except Murray democrat from Washington voted yes for the bill. I guess Microsoft does have influencial power on the senator from Washington state)
see the info here about bill: http://www.immigration-law.com/Canada.html
Yesterday, Senator Cornyn introduced on the Senate floor Amendment 2339 to H.R. 2669, FY 2008 Budget, proposing the following temporaary relieffor the employment-based immigrants. Sadly, the bill was rejected by 55 Nays, 40 Yeas, and one No Vote. Do your want to know who voted against this bill? Click here.
SEC. __. EMPLOYMENT-BASED VISAS.
(a) Recapture of Unused Employment-Based Immigrant Visas.--Section 106(d) of the American Competitiveness in the Twenty-first Century Act of 2000 (Public Law 106-313; 8 U.S.C. 1153 note) is amended--
(1) in paragraph (1)--
(A) by inserting ``1994, 1996, 1997, 1998,'' after ``available in fiscal year'';
(B) by striking ``or 2004'' and inserting ``2004, or 2006''; and
(C) by striking ``be available'' and all that follows and inserting the following: ``be available only to--
``(A) employment-based immigrants under paragraphs (1), (2), and (3) of section 203(b) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1153(b));
``(B) the family members accompanying or following to join such employment-based immigrants under section 203(d) of such Act; and
``(C) those immigrant workers who had petitions approved based on Schedule A, Group I under section 656.5 of title 20, Code of Federal Regulations, as promulgated by the Secretary of Labor.''; and
(2) in paragraph (2)--
(A) in subparagraph (A), by striking ``1999 through 2004'' and inserting ``1994, 1996 through 1998, 2001 through 2004, and 2006''; and
(B) in subparagraph (B), by amending clause (ii) to read as follows:
``(ii) DISTRIBUTION OF VISAS.--The total number of visas made available under paragraph (1) from unused visas from fiscal years 1994, 1996 through 1998, 2001 through 2004, and 2006 shall be distributed as follows:
``(I) The total number of visas made available for immigrant workers who had petitions approved based on Schedule A, Group I under section 656.5 of title 20, Code of Federal Regulations, as promulgated by the Secretary of Labor shall be 61,000.
``(II) The visas remaining from the total made available under subclause (I) shall be allocated equally among employment-based immigrants with approved petitions under paragraph (1), (2), or (3) of section 203(b) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (and their family members accompanying or following to join).''.
(b) H-1B Visa Availability.--Section 214(g)(1)(A) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1184(g)(1)(A)) is amended--
(1) in clause (vi), by striking ``and'' at the end;
(2) by redesignating clause (vii) as clause (ix); and
(3) by inserting after clause (vi) the following:
``(vii) 65,000 in each of fiscal years 2004 through 2007
``(viii) 115,000 in fiscal year 2008; and''.
This reporter asks the readers to join him to extend our "THANK YOU" to the Senator Cornyn for continuously supporting the American businesses, foreign brains, and employment-based immigration. This reporter also urges the readers to send a thank-you email for his support.
We are proud of the Senators from Minnesota, Norm Coleman (R) and Amy Klochubar, by setting aside the partisan politics and casting bi-parisan support for this bill. THANK YOU, and THANK!!
here is the list of the senators of their votes:
U.S. Senate Roll Call Votes 110th Congress - 1st Session
as compiled through Senate LIS by the Senate Bill Clerk under the direction of the Secretary of the Senate
Vote Summary
Question: On the Motion (Motion to Waive Cornyn Amdt No. 2339 )
Vote Number: 266 Vote Date: July 19, 2007, 11:00 PM
Required For Majority: 3/5 Vote Result: Motion Rejected
Amendment Number: S.Amdt. 2339 to S.Amdt. 2327 to H.R. 2669 (College Cost Reduction Act of 2007 )
Statement of Purpose: To provide interim relief for shortages in employment-based visas for aliens with extraordinary ability and advanced degrees and for nurses.
Vote Counts: YEAs 55
NAYs 40
Not Voting 5
Vote Summary By Senator Name By Vote Position By Home State
Alphabetical by Senator Name Akaka (D-HI), Nay
Alexander (R-TN), Yea
Allard (R-CO), Yea
Barrasso (R-WY), Yea
Baucus (D-MT), Yea
Bayh (D-IN), Yea
Bennett (R-UT), Yea
Biden (D-DE), Nay
Bingaman (D-NM), Nay
Bond (R-MO), Yea
Boxer (D-CA), Nay
Brown (D-OH), Nay
Brownback (R-KS), Not Voting
Bunning (R-KY), Yea
Burr (R-NC), Yea
Byrd (D-WV), Not Voting
Cantwell (D-WA), Yea
Cardin (D-MD), Nay
Carper (D-DE), Nay
Casey (D-PA), Nay
Chambliss (R-GA), Yea
Clinton (D-NY), Nay
Coburn (R-OK), Yea
Cochran (R-MS), Yea
Coleman (R-MN), Yea
Collins (R-ME), Yea
Conrad (D-ND), Nay
Corker (R-TN), Yea
Cornyn (R-TX), Yea
Craig (R-ID), Yea
Crapo (R-ID), Yea
DeMint (R-SC), Yea
Dodd (D-CT), Nay
Dole (R-NC), Yea
Domenici (R-NM), Yea
Dorgan (D-ND), Nay
Durbin (D-IL), Nay
Ensign (R-NV), Yea
Enzi (R-WY), Yea
Feingold (D-WI), Nay
Feinstein (D-CA), Nay
Graham (R-SC), Yea
Grassley (R-IA), Yea
Gregg (R-NH), Yea
Hagel (R-NE), Yea
Harkin (D-IA), Nay
Hatch (R-UT), Yea
Hutchison (R-TX), Yea
Inhofe (R-OK), Yea
Inouye (D-HI), Nay
Isakson (R-GA), Yea
Johnson (D-SD), Not Voting
Kennedy (D-MA), Nay
Kerry (D-MA), Nay
Klobuchar (D-MN), Yea
Kohl (D-WI), Nay
Kyl (R-AZ), Yea
Landrieu (D-LA), Yea
Lautenberg (D-NJ), Nay
Leahy (D-VT), Nay
Levin (D-MI), Nay
Lieberman (ID-CT), Yea
Lincoln (D-AR), Nay
Lott (R-MS), Not Voting
Lugar (R-IN), Yea
Martinez (R-FL), Yea
McCain (R-AZ), Yea
McCaskill (D-MO), Nay
McConnell (R-KY), Yea
Menendez (D-NJ), Nay
Mikulski (D-MD), Nay
Murkowski (R-AK), Yea
Murray (D-WA), Yea
Nelson (D-FL), Nay
Nelson (D-NE), Yea
Obama (D-IL), Not Voting
Pryor (D-AR), Nay
Reed (D-RI), Nay
Reid (D-NV), Nay
Roberts (R-KS), Yea
Rockefeller (D-WV), Nay
Salazar (D-CO), Nay
Sanders (I-VT), Nay
Schumer (D-NY), Yea
Sessions (R-AL), Nay
Shelby (R-AL), Yea
Smith (R-OR), Yea
Snowe (R-ME), Yea
Specter (R-PA), Yea
Stabenow (D-MI), Nay
Stevens (R-AK), Yea
Sununu (R-NH), Yea
Tester (D-MT), Nay
Thune (R-SD), Yea
Vitter (R-LA), Yea
Voinovich (R-OH), Nay
Warner (R-VA), Yea
Webb (D-VA), Nay
Whitehouse (D-RI), Nay
Wyden (D-OR), Yea
Vote Summary By Senator Name By Vote Position By Home State
see the info here about bill: http://www.immigration-law.com/Canada.html
Yesterday, Senator Cornyn introduced on the Senate floor Amendment 2339 to H.R. 2669, FY 2008 Budget, proposing the following temporaary relieffor the employment-based immigrants. Sadly, the bill was rejected by 55 Nays, 40 Yeas, and one No Vote. Do your want to know who voted against this bill? Click here.
SEC. __. EMPLOYMENT-BASED VISAS.
(a) Recapture of Unused Employment-Based Immigrant Visas.--Section 106(d) of the American Competitiveness in the Twenty-first Century Act of 2000 (Public Law 106-313; 8 U.S.C. 1153 note) is amended--
(1) in paragraph (1)--
(A) by inserting ``1994, 1996, 1997, 1998,'' after ``available in fiscal year'';
(B) by striking ``or 2004'' and inserting ``2004, or 2006''; and
(C) by striking ``be available'' and all that follows and inserting the following: ``be available only to--
``(A) employment-based immigrants under paragraphs (1), (2), and (3) of section 203(b) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1153(b));
``(B) the family members accompanying or following to join such employment-based immigrants under section 203(d) of such Act; and
``(C) those immigrant workers who had petitions approved based on Schedule A, Group I under section 656.5 of title 20, Code of Federal Regulations, as promulgated by the Secretary of Labor.''; and
(2) in paragraph (2)--
(A) in subparagraph (A), by striking ``1999 through 2004'' and inserting ``1994, 1996 through 1998, 2001 through 2004, and 2006''; and
(B) in subparagraph (B), by amending clause (ii) to read as follows:
``(ii) DISTRIBUTION OF VISAS.--The total number of visas made available under paragraph (1) from unused visas from fiscal years 1994, 1996 through 1998, 2001 through 2004, and 2006 shall be distributed as follows:
``(I) The total number of visas made available for immigrant workers who had petitions approved based on Schedule A, Group I under section 656.5 of title 20, Code of Federal Regulations, as promulgated by the Secretary of Labor shall be 61,000.
``(II) The visas remaining from the total made available under subclause (I) shall be allocated equally among employment-based immigrants with approved petitions under paragraph (1), (2), or (3) of section 203(b) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (and their family members accompanying or following to join).''.
(b) H-1B Visa Availability.--Section 214(g)(1)(A) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1184(g)(1)(A)) is amended--
(1) in clause (vi), by striking ``and'' at the end;
(2) by redesignating clause (vii) as clause (ix); and
(3) by inserting after clause (vi) the following:
``(vii) 65,000 in each of fiscal years 2004 through 2007
``(viii) 115,000 in fiscal year 2008; and''.
This reporter asks the readers to join him to extend our "THANK YOU" to the Senator Cornyn for continuously supporting the American businesses, foreign brains, and employment-based immigration. This reporter also urges the readers to send a thank-you email for his support.
We are proud of the Senators from Minnesota, Norm Coleman (R) and Amy Klochubar, by setting aside the partisan politics and casting bi-parisan support for this bill. THANK YOU, and THANK!!
here is the list of the senators of their votes:
U.S. Senate Roll Call Votes 110th Congress - 1st Session
as compiled through Senate LIS by the Senate Bill Clerk under the direction of the Secretary of the Senate
Vote Summary
Question: On the Motion (Motion to Waive Cornyn Amdt No. 2339 )
Vote Number: 266 Vote Date: July 19, 2007, 11:00 PM
Required For Majority: 3/5 Vote Result: Motion Rejected
Amendment Number: S.Amdt. 2339 to S.Amdt. 2327 to H.R. 2669 (College Cost Reduction Act of 2007 )
Statement of Purpose: To provide interim relief for shortages in employment-based visas for aliens with extraordinary ability and advanced degrees and for nurses.
Vote Counts: YEAs 55
NAYs 40
Not Voting 5
Vote Summary By Senator Name By Vote Position By Home State
Alphabetical by Senator Name Akaka (D-HI), Nay
Alexander (R-TN), Yea
Allard (R-CO), Yea
Barrasso (R-WY), Yea
Baucus (D-MT), Yea
Bayh (D-IN), Yea
Bennett (R-UT), Yea
Biden (D-DE), Nay
Bingaman (D-NM), Nay
Bond (R-MO), Yea
Boxer (D-CA), Nay
Brown (D-OH), Nay
Brownback (R-KS), Not Voting
Bunning (R-KY), Yea
Burr (R-NC), Yea
Byrd (D-WV), Not Voting
Cantwell (D-WA), Yea
Cardin (D-MD), Nay
Carper (D-DE), Nay
Casey (D-PA), Nay
Chambliss (R-GA), Yea
Clinton (D-NY), Nay
Coburn (R-OK), Yea
Cochran (R-MS), Yea
Coleman (R-MN), Yea
Collins (R-ME), Yea
Conrad (D-ND), Nay
Corker (R-TN), Yea
Cornyn (R-TX), Yea
Craig (R-ID), Yea
Crapo (R-ID), Yea
DeMint (R-SC), Yea
Dodd (D-CT), Nay
Dole (R-NC), Yea
Domenici (R-NM), Yea
Dorgan (D-ND), Nay
Durbin (D-IL), Nay
Ensign (R-NV), Yea
Enzi (R-WY), Yea
Feingold (D-WI), Nay
Feinstein (D-CA), Nay
Graham (R-SC), Yea
Grassley (R-IA), Yea
Gregg (R-NH), Yea
Hagel (R-NE), Yea
Harkin (D-IA), Nay
Hatch (R-UT), Yea
Hutchison (R-TX), Yea
Inhofe (R-OK), Yea
Inouye (D-HI), Nay
Isakson (R-GA), Yea
Johnson (D-SD), Not Voting
Kennedy (D-MA), Nay
Kerry (D-MA), Nay
Klobuchar (D-MN), Yea
Kohl (D-WI), Nay
Kyl (R-AZ), Yea
Landrieu (D-LA), Yea
Lautenberg (D-NJ), Nay
Leahy (D-VT), Nay
Levin (D-MI), Nay
Lieberman (ID-CT), Yea
Lincoln (D-AR), Nay
Lott (R-MS), Not Voting
Lugar (R-IN), Yea
Martinez (R-FL), Yea
McCain (R-AZ), Yea
McCaskill (D-MO), Nay
McConnell (R-KY), Yea
Menendez (D-NJ), Nay
Mikulski (D-MD), Nay
Murkowski (R-AK), Yea
Murray (D-WA), Yea
Nelson (D-FL), Nay
Nelson (D-NE), Yea
Obama (D-IL), Not Voting
Pryor (D-AR), Nay
Reed (D-RI), Nay
Reid (D-NV), Nay
Roberts (R-KS), Yea
Rockefeller (D-WV), Nay
Salazar (D-CO), Nay
Sanders (I-VT), Nay
Schumer (D-NY), Yea
Sessions (R-AL), Nay
Shelby (R-AL), Yea
Smith (R-OR), Yea
Snowe (R-ME), Yea
Specter (R-PA), Yea
Stabenow (D-MI), Nay
Stevens (R-AK), Yea
Sununu (R-NH), Yea
Tester (D-MT), Nay
Thune (R-SD), Yea
Vitter (R-LA), Yea
Voinovich (R-OH), Nay
Warner (R-VA), Yea
Webb (D-VA), Nay
Whitehouse (D-RI), Nay
Wyden (D-OR), Yea
Vote Summary By Senator Name By Vote Position By Home State
girlfriend Justin+ieber+new+photos+
sidbee
03-11 01:05 PM
Is this some kind of a joke.
Please stop predicting...
Please stop predicting...
hairstyles Justin Bieber may be hosting
akred
04-15 05:57 PM
^
bheemi
04-03 10:53 AM
Thanks Admin..I can understand..we can only try ..I am happy that IV is trying..\
syzygy
07-10 09:13 AM
Lets not hope for results just act. If Gandhi could drive Britishers out of India using this approach, USCIS is also made of human people and sure they will do something to lessen our pains.
I seriously hope that the Director of the USCIS understands our "Gandhigiiri".
We dont want the Americans thinking, "hey lets keep screwing these immigrants and getting stuff like free flowers and free blood from them"
I seriously hope that the Director of the USCIS understands our "Gandhigiiri".
We dont want the Americans thinking, "hey lets keep screwing these immigrants and getting stuff like free flowers and free blood from them"
No comments:
Post a Comment