wildcat1313
03-26 02:08 AM
Yesterday, I went for my H1b stamping but was issued a 221G. I had all documents that the VO asked for.
1. Client Letter with detailed job descriptions.
2. Vendor Letter with detailed job requirements and skillsets required
3. Contract between my company & Vendor.
4. Work-Order from client to vendor.
5. All W2/pay Slips
6. Company Tax return for last 2 years.
7. Unemployment wage report
8. Notarized copy of all employees with location, salary, start date , end date.
9. Copy of filing with USCIS.
10. All timesheets esablishing employee/employer relationship as well as billing timesheets
VO refused the visa saying he wants to see the contract between employer & end client. Vendor is saying they cannot provide it because of legal issues but are willing to provide a detailed letter stating the same.
I have been with the same employer for last 7 years and never been on bench with I-140 approved. Have worked for same client earlier for 4 years, took a break as I was bored, worked for another client for a year, came back and have been working there for last 2 years now. Client is very co-operative and is willing to help in anyway they can as they need my services.
What are my chances of getting tbe visa without the original contract?
I had to travel to India because of a family emergency. My family is in US as kids are in school. I would really appreciate if you can answer.
1. Client Letter with detailed job descriptions.
2. Vendor Letter with detailed job requirements and skillsets required
3. Contract between my company & Vendor.
4. Work-Order from client to vendor.
5. All W2/pay Slips
6. Company Tax return for last 2 years.
7. Unemployment wage report
8. Notarized copy of all employees with location, salary, start date , end date.
9. Copy of filing with USCIS.
10. All timesheets esablishing employee/employer relationship as well as billing timesheets
VO refused the visa saying he wants to see the contract between employer & end client. Vendor is saying they cannot provide it because of legal issues but are willing to provide a detailed letter stating the same.
I have been with the same employer for last 7 years and never been on bench with I-140 approved. Have worked for same client earlier for 4 years, took a break as I was bored, worked for another client for a year, came back and have been working there for last 2 years now. Client is very co-operative and is willing to help in anyway they can as they need my services.
What are my chances of getting tbe visa without the original contract?
I had to travel to India because of a family emergency. My family is in US as kids are in school. I would really appreciate if you can answer.
wallpaper oost mobile seek phone cases.
Jaime
09-07 03:05 AM
How many more before Congress acts?
COME WITH US TO WASHINGTON TO TELL CONGRESS THAT WE'VE ALREADY WAITED LONG ENOUGH!!!!
How many more of us need to leave???? Let's not wait and find out! We love the United States and want to continue to contribute to its growth, world leadership and well-being. Don't let short-sighted politicians prevent you from securing what you have rightfully earned: The Right to contribute to the U.S. in peace and freedom, without abuse, without discrimination, and without the constant threat of being uprooted and kicked out the door like a piece of used old furniture!!!
COME WITH US TO WASHINGTON TO TELL CONGRESS THAT WE'VE ALREADY WAITED LONG ENOUGH!!!!
How many more of us need to leave???? Let's not wait and find out! We love the United States and want to continue to contribute to its growth, world leadership and well-being. Don't let short-sighted politicians prevent you from securing what you have rightfully earned: The Right to contribute to the U.S. in peace and freedom, without abuse, without discrimination, and without the constant threat of being uprooted and kicked out the door like a piece of used old furniture!!!
pankajkakkar
03-01 06:46 PM
I'd like to join the conference call as well.
2011 oost mobile seek phones. oost
rolrblade
07-27 04:44 PM
do they have to attach copy of email with the application?
In my case my application was filed on 2nd July but my attorney asked me to send the email on 3rd July just for records.
you are fine : read this from USCIS website:
Attorneys and accredited representatives filing any petition or immigration benefit application on behalf of petitioners and applicants must sign Form G-28, Notice of Appearance, and include the original with the filing. USCIS will continue accepting original Form G-28 bearing the facsimile signature of the attorney or accredited representative, e.g., a stamped signature, as allowed under the regulations governing the filing of applications and petitions and longstanding operational guidance.
Legal Requirements for the Signature on Petitions and Immigration Benefit Applications
Attorneys and Accredited Representatives: The signature of any attorney or accredited representative who has been granted legal authorization to sign on behalf of the petitioner or the applicant must be in the original.
this means as long as your attorney sent the original G-28 form with their signatures, you are okay. Also the email from you is "legal authorization" to sign.
All across these forums you will read numerous posts where people have not signed anything rather their attorneys have signed. This is very general practice.
In my case my application was filed on 2nd July but my attorney asked me to send the email on 3rd July just for records.
you are fine : read this from USCIS website:
Attorneys and accredited representatives filing any petition or immigration benefit application on behalf of petitioners and applicants must sign Form G-28, Notice of Appearance, and include the original with the filing. USCIS will continue accepting original Form G-28 bearing the facsimile signature of the attorney or accredited representative, e.g., a stamped signature, as allowed under the regulations governing the filing of applications and petitions and longstanding operational guidance.
Legal Requirements for the Signature on Petitions and Immigration Benefit Applications
Attorneys and Accredited Representatives: The signature of any attorney or accredited representative who has been granted legal authorization to sign on behalf of the petitioner or the applicant must be in the original.
this means as long as your attorney sent the original G-28 form with their signatures, you are okay. Also the email from you is "legal authorization" to sign.
All across these forums you will read numerous posts where people have not signed anything rather their attorneys have signed. This is very general practice.
more...
smuggymba
09-24 04:22 PM
Hi All,
Is there anyone planning to get H1-B/any visa stamping in Matamoras, Mexico in the next couple months? (I'm from dallas)
Is there anyone who already went for stamping in matamoras recently....
Please share your thoughts...
I'm planning to get my H1-B renewal stamping next month...
Thanks for all your replies in advance!!!
Thanks,
Raghu.
It's nice to see many ppl going to Mexico and getting renewals....I have my renewal coming up next year and this seems to be a good idea. Saves the hassle of travelling to India and getting stamping.
Is there anyone planning to get H1-B/any visa stamping in Matamoras, Mexico in the next couple months? (I'm from dallas)
Is there anyone who already went for stamping in matamoras recently....
Please share your thoughts...
I'm planning to get my H1-B renewal stamping next month...
Thanks for all your replies in advance!!!
Thanks,
Raghu.
It's nice to see many ppl going to Mexico and getting renewals....I have my renewal coming up next year and this seems to be a good idea. Saves the hassle of travelling to India and getting stamping.
BMS1
08-21 10:24 PM
Congrats. on getting out of the queue!
Was your a physician HPSA NIW or another type of NIW?
No my NIW area was engineering (technology - data security)
Was your a physician HPSA NIW or another type of NIW?
No my NIW area was engineering (technology - data security)
more...
jonty_11
10-30 06:21 PM
if they ask explain teh situation calmly....and tell them your attorney has filed to get u a new approval after he dsicovered ur mistake..Keep phone numbers of ur employer, attorney handy if needed to call them and confirm u are legit!!
2010 Samsung Seek is Boost Mobile#39;s
gc_wannabe
06-17 08:40 AM
Years and years of waiting? no kidding. Look at my priority date. And there are people waiting before me. You used a pre-approved labor and have been waiting in the GC queue from what 2006? Dude, in today's world, a reasonable wait for eb3-is anywhere between 10-15 years and eb2 is atleast 5-6 years. I am not mad that you used a pre-approved labor, though in my personal opinion, its a taboo. I am just saying you are lucky enough that you may get your green card much quickly than people like us who have been waiting atleast 8-10 years and trust me, people like your case, usually should be happy.
I can empathize. I might me more luckier than you, and there are people *luckier* than me. (You know what I mean..) But, if for some reason I don't get my GC, and you get your GC in a few years, me being lucky to start with is of no use. Nothing is sure till GC is on-hand for anyone.
So, I would appreciate if someone could let me know if there are any disadvantages process-wise when it comes to I-485 adjudication on a pre-approved labor.
Thanks.
I can empathize. I might me more luckier than you, and there are people *luckier* than me. (You know what I mean..) But, if for some reason I don't get my GC, and you get your GC in a few years, me being lucky to start with is of no use. Nothing is sure till GC is on-hand for anyone.
So, I would appreciate if someone could let me know if there are any disadvantages process-wise when it comes to I-485 adjudication on a pre-approved labor.
Thanks.
more...
Marphad
01-12 12:21 PM
I concur with you, Marphad.
Its illegal to mail passport cross border.
My bad! You are right.
Its illegal to mail passport cross border.
My bad! You are right.
hair oost mobile seek phone cases.
Jen2010
12-06 04:55 PM
Dear BimmerFan,
Thank you very much for sharing your experience !!
I am in F-1 Visa and finishing my PhD and I have recently received a job offer to start next June.
The J1 waiver process is related to two visas J-1 that I had before I applied to the PhD program: I came to US in 2006 as exchange visitor scholar to do a research project for six months at X University with a J-1 visa, after this I came back to my country for 1 month and applied to another J-1 visa from August'06 through Dec'06 because I was invited again to continue doing research at this university (while applying to the PhD); after this I went my country and changed my visa to F-1 to start my PhD studies. I was aware that all J-1 visas have a restriction called two-year rule "INA 212(e)" but I did not have any problem to issue my F-1 visa in 12/2006.
Recently, I have found out that I need to issue a waiver for the two-year rule in order to be able to apply to a visa H-1B that my employer will sponsor after my OPT. I am preparing to apply now to the waiver, asking a No Objection Statement (NOS) from my embassy, I was planning to send the application next week to so that it doesn't delay my H-1 visa application next year and I don't have money to pay an attorney so I wanted to send it myself.
I am not sure if I should mention or not my offer of employment as one of the reasons of requesting the waiver ? Do you think it could be good or bad ??
Do you think I should pay an attorney ? of it is okay to do it independently ?
I do not have any commitment with my home country and I have not received any sponsorship from my country or US government during these programs. This rule applied to me because my profession is written in the Exchange Visitor Skill List of the US. Department of State.
Please advise,
Thanks !!!
Thank you very much for sharing your experience !!
I am in F-1 Visa and finishing my PhD and I have recently received a job offer to start next June.
The J1 waiver process is related to two visas J-1 that I had before I applied to the PhD program: I came to US in 2006 as exchange visitor scholar to do a research project for six months at X University with a J-1 visa, after this I came back to my country for 1 month and applied to another J-1 visa from August'06 through Dec'06 because I was invited again to continue doing research at this university (while applying to the PhD); after this I went my country and changed my visa to F-1 to start my PhD studies. I was aware that all J-1 visas have a restriction called two-year rule "INA 212(e)" but I did not have any problem to issue my F-1 visa in 12/2006.
Recently, I have found out that I need to issue a waiver for the two-year rule in order to be able to apply to a visa H-1B that my employer will sponsor after my OPT. I am preparing to apply now to the waiver, asking a No Objection Statement (NOS) from my embassy, I was planning to send the application next week to so that it doesn't delay my H-1 visa application next year and I don't have money to pay an attorney so I wanted to send it myself.
I am not sure if I should mention or not my offer of employment as one of the reasons of requesting the waiver ? Do you think it could be good or bad ??
Do you think I should pay an attorney ? of it is okay to do it independently ?
I do not have any commitment with my home country and I have not received any sponsorship from my country or US government during these programs. This rule applied to me because my profession is written in the Exchange Visitor Skill List of the US. Department of State.
Please advise,
Thanks !!!
more...
kevinkris
04-21 01:53 PM
Hi greeta,
I am not sure about time frame for GC but FREEDOM is more important for me. The market is not good, if you loose the job in L1 then you have to leave
to your home country and cannot transfer your visa. If it's H1 you can always do that.
If at all there is a difference in processing times for GC for L1, i don't see any drastic difference. Instead of 6 years it may be 5 years (6 years for GC? Are you kidding me?). No big deal.
Good luck.
Rgds,
Kris
Hi,
I am working in US on L1 and my company would start my green card filling in next few months.
I also have valid H1B pettion stamped and can switch to H1B which would mean that I can work freely here at US.
But many of my friends told me that green card processing is faster on L1.
I am not able to make decision whether I should continue working on L1 or change my status to H1 to get better hike and more opportunity.
Pls can anyone tell me which would be wise choice. Is green card processing for L1 visa is faster?
Thanks in advance.
~Greeta
I am not sure about time frame for GC but FREEDOM is more important for me. The market is not good, if you loose the job in L1 then you have to leave
to your home country and cannot transfer your visa. If it's H1 you can always do that.
If at all there is a difference in processing times for GC for L1, i don't see any drastic difference. Instead of 6 years it may be 5 years (6 years for GC? Are you kidding me?). No big deal.
Good luck.
Rgds,
Kris
Hi,
I am working in US on L1 and my company would start my green card filling in next few months.
I also have valid H1B pettion stamped and can switch to H1B which would mean that I can work freely here at US.
But many of my friends told me that green card processing is faster on L1.
I am not able to make decision whether I should continue working on L1 or change my status to H1 to get better hike and more opportunity.
Pls can anyone tell me which would be wise choice. Is green card processing for L1 visa is faster?
Thanks in advance.
~Greeta
hot oost mobile logo vector. oost
Gravitation
07-20 02:19 PM
I'm confused - what is the point of applying for AP if you aren't also applying for EAD?
Yes, I believe you can apply for EAD yourself
AP is a must. If you travel out of the country and your GC gets approved while you're away... your H1 becomes invalid and you cannot use it enter US. The only way to return then is AP.
Yes, I believe you can apply for EAD yourself
AP is a must. If you travel out of the country and your GC gets approved while you're away... your H1 becomes invalid and you cannot use it enter US. The only way to return then is AP.
more...
house hot oost mobile seek phone
drirshad
04-18 11:18 PM
http://hammondlawgroup.blogspot.com/
Friday, April 13, 2007
Bills Introduced
There have been two bills introduced which may help our cause and are surely of interest to readers of this Blog.
The first is a re-introduction of the SKIL Bill (S. 1083). The text of the bill has not yet been released to the public. It is expected that this will contain the same retrogression-elimination language that was contained in the 2006 version of the bill. The bill was introduced by Senator Cornyn and cosponsors include Senators Allard (R-CO), Bennett (R-UT), Hutchison (R-TX), and Lott (R-MS). As readers of this blog may be aware, Sen. Hutchison has long been a leader on Schedule A visa reform.
The second bill (S. 1092) seeks to immediately raise the H-1 quota, and was proposed directly as a result of last week�s immediately-reached H-1 visa cap. Sen. Hagel is the sponsor of this bill. The text of this bill is unavailable at this time as well.
Both bills shortly should be available on THOMAS.
UPDATE: As expected the 2007 version of the SKIL Bill contains favorable language.
Friday, April 13, 2007
Bills Introduced
There have been two bills introduced which may help our cause and are surely of interest to readers of this Blog.
The first is a re-introduction of the SKIL Bill (S. 1083). The text of the bill has not yet been released to the public. It is expected that this will contain the same retrogression-elimination language that was contained in the 2006 version of the bill. The bill was introduced by Senator Cornyn and cosponsors include Senators Allard (R-CO), Bennett (R-UT), Hutchison (R-TX), and Lott (R-MS). As readers of this blog may be aware, Sen. Hutchison has long been a leader on Schedule A visa reform.
The second bill (S. 1092) seeks to immediately raise the H-1 quota, and was proposed directly as a result of last week�s immediately-reached H-1 visa cap. Sen. Hagel is the sponsor of this bill. The text of this bill is unavailable at this time as well.
Both bills shortly should be available on THOMAS.
UPDATE: As expected the 2007 version of the SKIL Bill contains favorable language.
tattoo oost mobile galaxy. oost
pappu
11-06 10:13 AM
I see that for EB2 the PD is 01 APR 2004 now. I want to know if I-485 approvals is linked to this PD date or they will work independent to these days.
Thanks,
Sury
-------------------------------
PD : Feb'07
I-140 - Pending
I-131 - Approved
I-485 - Pending
Center: TEXAS SERVICE CENTER
Recieved EAD Card and FP done.
-------------------------------
with a PD of Feb'07, be prepared for a several years of wait time. Unless any law passes.
However there is a silver lining:
You should thank IV members whose hard work enabled the I485 filing for everyone. Even people with PD of 2007, could file their AOS. You can enjoy your EAD and its benefits.
Thanks,
Sury
-------------------------------
PD : Feb'07
I-140 - Pending
I-131 - Approved
I-485 - Pending
Center: TEXAS SERVICE CENTER
Recieved EAD Card and FP done.
-------------------------------
with a PD of Feb'07, be prepared for a several years of wait time. Unless any law passes.
However there is a silver lining:
You should thank IV members whose hard work enabled the I485 filing for everyone. Even people with PD of 2007, could file their AOS. You can enjoy your EAD and its benefits.
more...
pictures BOOST MOBILE SAMSUNG SEEK
eb3_nepa
08-14 02:42 PM
to send separate checks so they can generate LIN/SRC numbers against each application.:(
I sent in one cheque for all 6 applications (my wife and myself). I also just called a USCIS rep and he said one check should be fine.
I sent in one cheque for all 6 applications (my wife and myself). I also just called a USCIS rep and he said one check should be fine.
dresses BOOST MOBILE i465 CLUTCH SOFT
gc_bulgaria
02-12 02:50 PM
I've been trying to find out the same info for a while now. Has anyone been successful trying to make use of cross chargeability? I had read sometime back that when you file for ur 485 you could provide a covering letter to say "Please consider Cross Chargeability", but isnt there a better way of doing it?
These are the following I used on top of the stupid cover letter that I am sure they dont see.
1. Talk to Congressman's office
2. Letters and faxes to USCIS
3. AILA liason (through your lawyer).
In my case the lawyer's connections helped. Even though my PD is current now as per VB, till they reach my notice date, they will not touch it.
These are the following I used on top of the stupid cover letter that I am sure they dont see.
1. Talk to Congressman's office
2. Letters and faxes to USCIS
3. AILA liason (through your lawyer).
In my case the lawyer's connections helped. Even though my PD is current now as per VB, till they reach my notice date, they will not touch it.
more...
makeup oost mobile incognito cases.
gc_chahiye
11-13 12:13 PM
I would appreciate if any of you could shed light on the following scenario:
If 485 is pending for over six months and someone switched the job using AC21 for a position which would require extended stay [upto 2-3 years] outside the US. Would it any way impact the GC process? Given that priority date is 2007, it is unlikely(?) that 485 would be adjusted in that time.
Thanks
you will need to come back to atleast get AP approvals (AP expires every year), and if you are served a fingerprint notice, then come back for that. If you are going to be definately out for the next few years, another option is to do consular processing; talk to a lawyer it depends a lot on your specific case.
If 485 is pending for over six months and someone switched the job using AC21 for a position which would require extended stay [upto 2-3 years] outside the US. Would it any way impact the GC process? Given that priority date is 2007, it is unlikely(?) that 485 would be adjusted in that time.
Thanks
you will need to come back to atleast get AP approvals (AP expires every year), and if you are served a fingerprint notice, then come back for that. If you are going to be definately out for the next few years, another option is to do consular processing; talk to a lawyer it depends a lot on your specific case.
girlfriend BOOST MOBILE SANYO MIRRO 3810
seba
09-24 10:35 AM
Hi all,
I am sure there are people here who started the green card application process but also wanted to go to school (e.g., for MBA) during the green card process. Is it possible to get an F-1 visa to attend school full-time while your green card is still pending?
I heard during a lawyer's presentation that it is very hard (almost impossible) to get an F-1 visa if you have started the green card application process, since by starting it, you have declared an intent to immigrate.
However, I have also heard that it is easy to get an F-1 visa even after starting the green card application process, but your green card application will be canceled.
Please let me know if you have any knowledge or experience in this. Thanks.
I am sure there are people here who started the green card application process but also wanted to go to school (e.g., for MBA) during the green card process. Is it possible to get an F-1 visa to attend school full-time while your green card is still pending?
I heard during a lawyer's presentation that it is very hard (almost impossible) to get an F-1 visa if you have started the green card application process, since by starting it, you have declared an intent to immigrate.
However, I have also heard that it is easy to get an F-1 visa even after starting the green card application process, but your green card application will be canceled.
Please let me know if you have any knowledge or experience in this. Thanks.
hairstyles oost mobile. oost mobile seek
mbartosik
11-08 03:33 PM
It looks like this including dependents -- good news.
According to:
http://www.uscis.gov/files/nativedocuments/AILAQandASept2007.pdf
there were about 320K applications (likely primary applications). Remember that July fiasco only affected EB (not family based).
quote: "While we continue to receipt the work we recently received, we project that we received over 320,000 adjustment applications due to the July visa bulletin."
So that's only 5 years to clear the backlog, assuming minimal lost GC, and no new applications by ROW (thus reducing or stopping spill over). Of course ROW will continue to create new applications.
According to:
http://www.uscis.gov/files/nativedocuments/AILAQandASept2007.pdf
there were about 320K applications (likely primary applications). Remember that July fiasco only affected EB (not family based).
quote: "While we continue to receipt the work we recently received, we project that we received over 320,000 adjustment applications due to the July visa bulletin."
So that's only 5 years to clear the backlog, assuming minimal lost GC, and no new applications by ROW (thus reducing or stopping spill over). Of course ROW will continue to create new applications.
retropain
09-01 11:08 AM
What's particularly interesting is the number of 'scare words' used in this selected testimony on aspects of the CIR bill. Its a lot like Loo Dobbs "War" on the middle class. Its clear CIS, Nusa, FAIR provide the script to him on immigration matters. I knew Loo wasn't that creative in the first place
=---
TESTIMONY OF MICHAEL W. CUTLER
SEPTEMBER 1, 2006
HOUSE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE
Chairmen Sensenbrenner and Hostettler, Ranking Members Conyers and Jackson Lee, members of Congress, distinguished members of the panel, ladies and gentlemen. It is a distinct honor and privilege to provide testimony at this hearing because the topic of the hearing is of truly critical significance. We are here to avert what I believe would be a catastrophe for the United States. The United States Senate passed a bill, S. 2611, that would provide incentives for a massive influx of illegal aliens, aided, abetted and induced to violate our nation’s immigration laws at a time that our nation is confronting the continuing threat of terrorism and the increasing involvement of violent gangs, comprised predominantly of deportable aliens, in a wide variety of violent crimes committed against our nation’s citizens. It is of critical importance that this hearing and others like it, illuminate why S. 2611 would expose our nation to unreasonable vulnerabilities especially in the post-9/11 world.
A nation’s primary responsibility is to provide for the safety and security of its citizens and yet, for reasons I cannot begin to fathom, the members of the Senate who voted for S. 2611 are seemingly oblivious to the lessons that the disastrous amnesty of the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 (IRCA) should have taught us. That piece of legislation lead to the greatest influx of illegal aliens in the history of our nation. Fraud and a lack of integrity of the immigration system not only flooded our nation with illegal aliens who ran our borders, hoping that what had been billed as a “one time” amnesty would be repeated, but it also enabled a number of terrorists and many criminals to enter the United States and then embed themselves in the United States.
A notable example of such a terrorist can be found in a review of the facts concerning Mahmud Abouhalima, a citizen of Egypt who entered the United States on a tourist visa, overstayed his authorized period of admission and then applied for amnesty under the agricultural worker provisions of IRCA. He succeeded in obtaining resident alien status through this process. During a 5 year period he drove a cab and had his license suspended numerous times for violations of law and ultimately demonstrated his appreciation for our nation’s generosity by participating in the first attack on the World Trade Center in 1993 that left 6 people dead, hundreds of people injured and an estimated one half billion dollars in damage inflicted, on that iconic, ill-fated complex. America had opened its doors to him so that he might participate in the “American Dream.” He turned that dream into our worst nightmare. The other terrorists who attacked our nation on subsequent attacks, including the attacks of September 11, 2001, similarly exploited our generosity, seeing in our nation’s kindness, weakness, gaming the immigration system to enter our country and then, hide in plain sight, among us.
As I recall, when IRCA was proposed, one of the selling points was that along with amnesty for what was believed to have been a population of some 1.5 million illegal aliens would be a new approach to turn off what has been described as the “magnet” that draws the majority of illegal aliens into the United States in the first place, the prospect of securing employment in the United States. In order to accomplish this important goal, IRCA imposed penalties against those unscrupulous employers who knowingly hired illegal aliens. My former colleagues and I were pleased to see that under the employer sanctions of IRCA, the unscrupulous employers of illegal aliens would be made accountable, or so we thought. We were frustrated that we had seen all too many employers hire illegal aliens and treat them horrendously They paid them sub-standard wages and created unsafe, indeed hazardous working conditions for the illegal aliens they hired, knowing full well that these aliens would not complain because they feared being reported to the INS. Meanwhile the employer would not face any penalty for his outrageous conduct. Finally, it seemed that the employer sanctions provisions of IRCA would discourage employers from hiring illegal aliens and would also make it less likely they would treat their employees as miserably as some of these employers did.
Of course, we now know that the relative handful of special agents who were assigned to conduct investigations of employers who hired illegal aliens made it unlikely that employers would face a significant risk of being caught violating these laws and that they would face an even smaller chance of being seriously fined. Furthermore, the way that the amnesty provisions of the law were enacted simply created a cottage industry of fraud document vendors who provided illegal aliens with counterfeit or altered identity documents and supporting documents to enable the illegal alien population to circumvent the immigration laws. Ultimately approximately 3.5 million illegal aliens emerged from the infamous shadows to participate in the amnesty program of 1986. I have never seen an explanation for the reason that more than twice as many aliens took advantage of the 1986 amnesty than was initially believed would but I believe that two factors came into play. It may well be that the number of illegal aliens in the country was underestimated. I also believe, however, that a large number of illegal aliens were able to gain entry into the United States long after the cutoff point and succeeded in making false claims that they had been present in the country for the requisite period of time.
To put this in perspective, I have read various estimates about the number of illegal aliens who are currently present in the United States. These estimates range from a low of 12 million to a high of 20 million. If, for argument sake, we figure on a number of 15 million illegal aliens, or ten times the number that had been estimated prior to the amnesty of 1986, and if the same sort of under counting occurs and if a comparable percentage of aliens succeed in racing into the United States and making a false claims that they had been here for the necessary period of time to be eligible to participate in the amnesty program that the Reid-Kennedy provisions would reward illegal aliens with, then we might expect some 35 million illegal aliens will ultimately participate in this insane program. Once they become citizens they would then be eligible to file applications to bring their family members to the United States, flooding our nation with tens of millions of additional new lawful immigrations while our nation’s porous borders, visa waiver program and extreme lack of resources to enforce the immigration laws from within the interior of the United States would allow many millions of illegal aliens to continue to enter the United States in violation of law.
The utterly inept and incompetent USCIS, which is now unable to carry out it’s most basic missions with even a modicum of integrity would undoubtedly disintegrate. The system would simply implode, crushed by the burden of its vicious cycle of attempting to deal with an ever increasing spiral of rampant fraud thereby encouraging still more fraudulent applications to be filed. Terrorists would not find gaming this system the least bit challenging and our government will have become their unwitting ally, providing them with official identity documents in false names and then, ultimately, providing them with the keys to the kingdom by conferring resident aliens status and then, United States citizenship upon those who would destroy our nation and slaughter our citizens.
I hope that this doomsday scenario will not be permitted to play out.
Insanity has been described as doing the same things the same way and expecting a different result. Where our nation’s security is concerned it would be indeed, insane to ignore the lessons of IRCA.
When I was a boy my dad used to tell me that there were no mistakes in life, only lessons, provided we learn from what goes wrong and make the appropriate changes in the way we do things. However, to repeat the same mistakes was to him and to me, simply unforgivable.
Chairmen Sensenbrenner and Hostettler, I commend your leadership in calling this hearing to make certain that these concerns are made public and are taken into account, especially as we approach the anniversary of the fifth anniversary of the attacks of September 11 and our nation continues to grapple with the immigration crisis.
America is at historic crossroads at this moment in time. Courageous decisions need to be made by our nation’s leaders. If our nation fails to select the proper path, there will be no going back. If our nation decides to provide amnesty to millions of undocumented and illegal aliens, I fear that our national security will suffer irreparable harm as we aid and abet alien terrorists who seek to enter our country and embed themselves within it in preparation for the deadly attacks they would carry out. The priority must be clear, national security must be given the highest consideration and priority where the security of our nation’s borders and the integrity of the immigration system are concerned.
=---
TESTIMONY OF MICHAEL W. CUTLER
SEPTEMBER 1, 2006
HOUSE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE
Chairmen Sensenbrenner and Hostettler, Ranking Members Conyers and Jackson Lee, members of Congress, distinguished members of the panel, ladies and gentlemen. It is a distinct honor and privilege to provide testimony at this hearing because the topic of the hearing is of truly critical significance. We are here to avert what I believe would be a catastrophe for the United States. The United States Senate passed a bill, S. 2611, that would provide incentives for a massive influx of illegal aliens, aided, abetted and induced to violate our nation’s immigration laws at a time that our nation is confronting the continuing threat of terrorism and the increasing involvement of violent gangs, comprised predominantly of deportable aliens, in a wide variety of violent crimes committed against our nation’s citizens. It is of critical importance that this hearing and others like it, illuminate why S. 2611 would expose our nation to unreasonable vulnerabilities especially in the post-9/11 world.
A nation’s primary responsibility is to provide for the safety and security of its citizens and yet, for reasons I cannot begin to fathom, the members of the Senate who voted for S. 2611 are seemingly oblivious to the lessons that the disastrous amnesty of the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 (IRCA) should have taught us. That piece of legislation lead to the greatest influx of illegal aliens in the history of our nation. Fraud and a lack of integrity of the immigration system not only flooded our nation with illegal aliens who ran our borders, hoping that what had been billed as a “one time” amnesty would be repeated, but it also enabled a number of terrorists and many criminals to enter the United States and then embed themselves in the United States.
A notable example of such a terrorist can be found in a review of the facts concerning Mahmud Abouhalima, a citizen of Egypt who entered the United States on a tourist visa, overstayed his authorized period of admission and then applied for amnesty under the agricultural worker provisions of IRCA. He succeeded in obtaining resident alien status through this process. During a 5 year period he drove a cab and had his license suspended numerous times for violations of law and ultimately demonstrated his appreciation for our nation’s generosity by participating in the first attack on the World Trade Center in 1993 that left 6 people dead, hundreds of people injured and an estimated one half billion dollars in damage inflicted, on that iconic, ill-fated complex. America had opened its doors to him so that he might participate in the “American Dream.” He turned that dream into our worst nightmare. The other terrorists who attacked our nation on subsequent attacks, including the attacks of September 11, 2001, similarly exploited our generosity, seeing in our nation’s kindness, weakness, gaming the immigration system to enter our country and then, hide in plain sight, among us.
As I recall, when IRCA was proposed, one of the selling points was that along with amnesty for what was believed to have been a population of some 1.5 million illegal aliens would be a new approach to turn off what has been described as the “magnet” that draws the majority of illegal aliens into the United States in the first place, the prospect of securing employment in the United States. In order to accomplish this important goal, IRCA imposed penalties against those unscrupulous employers who knowingly hired illegal aliens. My former colleagues and I were pleased to see that under the employer sanctions of IRCA, the unscrupulous employers of illegal aliens would be made accountable, or so we thought. We were frustrated that we had seen all too many employers hire illegal aliens and treat them horrendously They paid them sub-standard wages and created unsafe, indeed hazardous working conditions for the illegal aliens they hired, knowing full well that these aliens would not complain because they feared being reported to the INS. Meanwhile the employer would not face any penalty for his outrageous conduct. Finally, it seemed that the employer sanctions provisions of IRCA would discourage employers from hiring illegal aliens and would also make it less likely they would treat their employees as miserably as some of these employers did.
Of course, we now know that the relative handful of special agents who were assigned to conduct investigations of employers who hired illegal aliens made it unlikely that employers would face a significant risk of being caught violating these laws and that they would face an even smaller chance of being seriously fined. Furthermore, the way that the amnesty provisions of the law were enacted simply created a cottage industry of fraud document vendors who provided illegal aliens with counterfeit or altered identity documents and supporting documents to enable the illegal alien population to circumvent the immigration laws. Ultimately approximately 3.5 million illegal aliens emerged from the infamous shadows to participate in the amnesty program of 1986. I have never seen an explanation for the reason that more than twice as many aliens took advantage of the 1986 amnesty than was initially believed would but I believe that two factors came into play. It may well be that the number of illegal aliens in the country was underestimated. I also believe, however, that a large number of illegal aliens were able to gain entry into the United States long after the cutoff point and succeeded in making false claims that they had been present in the country for the requisite period of time.
To put this in perspective, I have read various estimates about the number of illegal aliens who are currently present in the United States. These estimates range from a low of 12 million to a high of 20 million. If, for argument sake, we figure on a number of 15 million illegal aliens, or ten times the number that had been estimated prior to the amnesty of 1986, and if the same sort of under counting occurs and if a comparable percentage of aliens succeed in racing into the United States and making a false claims that they had been here for the necessary period of time to be eligible to participate in the amnesty program that the Reid-Kennedy provisions would reward illegal aliens with, then we might expect some 35 million illegal aliens will ultimately participate in this insane program. Once they become citizens they would then be eligible to file applications to bring their family members to the United States, flooding our nation with tens of millions of additional new lawful immigrations while our nation’s porous borders, visa waiver program and extreme lack of resources to enforce the immigration laws from within the interior of the United States would allow many millions of illegal aliens to continue to enter the United States in violation of law.
The utterly inept and incompetent USCIS, which is now unable to carry out it’s most basic missions with even a modicum of integrity would undoubtedly disintegrate. The system would simply implode, crushed by the burden of its vicious cycle of attempting to deal with an ever increasing spiral of rampant fraud thereby encouraging still more fraudulent applications to be filed. Terrorists would not find gaming this system the least bit challenging and our government will have become their unwitting ally, providing them with official identity documents in false names and then, ultimately, providing them with the keys to the kingdom by conferring resident aliens status and then, United States citizenship upon those who would destroy our nation and slaughter our citizens.
I hope that this doomsday scenario will not be permitted to play out.
Insanity has been described as doing the same things the same way and expecting a different result. Where our nation’s security is concerned it would be indeed, insane to ignore the lessons of IRCA.
When I was a boy my dad used to tell me that there were no mistakes in life, only lessons, provided we learn from what goes wrong and make the appropriate changes in the way we do things. However, to repeat the same mistakes was to him and to me, simply unforgivable.
Chairmen Sensenbrenner and Hostettler, I commend your leadership in calling this hearing to make certain that these concerns are made public and are taken into account, especially as we approach the anniversary of the fifth anniversary of the attacks of September 11 and our nation continues to grapple with the immigration crisis.
America is at historic crossroads at this moment in time. Courageous decisions need to be made by our nation’s leaders. If our nation fails to select the proper path, there will be no going back. If our nation decides to provide amnesty to millions of undocumented and illegal aliens, I fear that our national security will suffer irreparable harm as we aid and abet alien terrorists who seek to enter our country and embed themselves within it in preparation for the deadly attacks they would carry out. The priority must be clear, national security must be given the highest consideration and priority where the security of our nation’s borders and the integrity of the immigration system are concerned.
edaltsis
11-12 01:23 PM
You can submit the current (new) company paystub. They will ask for the most recent/current paystub but not the past one. But however it cannot be ruled out that they will not ask previous ones, it all depends on the officer.
No comments:
Post a Comment