dreamworld
08-17 02:22 PM
As an individual (Not as business owner)...
With H1B status and residing in USA�.
Can use W9 for income earned as commission? http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/fw9.pdf
Any advise...
With H1B status and residing in USA�.
Can use W9 for income earned as commission? http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/fw9.pdf
Any advise...
wallpaper More faceie mandy moore medium
$eeGrEeN
07-13 07:36 PM
For Christ's sake , it is LOSE , with a single O , not LOOSE
aray
09-26 02:46 PM
I think I know the answer to this, but I just wanted to make sure from the experts on this forum.
Do we need to apply for new EAD/AP if we change jobs using AC21 even if the current EAD/AP (approved when working for the GC sponsoring employer) are valid for almost 10 more months?
I think that EAD/AP are not dependent/tied to the employer.
Am I right gurus?
Do we need to apply for new EAD/AP if we change jobs using AC21 even if the current EAD/AP (approved when working for the GC sponsoring employer) are valid for almost 10 more months?
I think that EAD/AP are not dependent/tied to the employer.
Am I right gurus?
2011 short hairstyles with weave
rakesh
04-29 12:13 AM
Hi
I am masters student graduating in June 2011. I got an offer from a big company and it already started h1b premium processing(applied on Mar 31). Now, I received an offer from my dream company and I didn't mention about h1-b processing and want to work for this company. I have few questions and need your suggestions.
1. Reject the first company offer. Not sure if I have to pay, because they applied for H1-B premium processing. How much I have to pay in this case? Can I continue working on OPT in this case?
2. Inform the second company about the first company h1-b processing. What can second company do, if H1-B is already processed? What can second company do, if H1-B is not processed?
Please suggest if there are better ways to handle the situation.
-- How long does it take to get H1-B visa under premium processing, if applied in 65000 pool?
Thanks
Rakesh
I am masters student graduating in June 2011. I got an offer from a big company and it already started h1b premium processing(applied on Mar 31). Now, I received an offer from my dream company and I didn't mention about h1-b processing and want to work for this company. I have few questions and need your suggestions.
1. Reject the first company offer. Not sure if I have to pay, because they applied for H1-B premium processing. How much I have to pay in this case? Can I continue working on OPT in this case?
2. Inform the second company about the first company h1-b processing. What can second company do, if H1-B is already processed? What can second company do, if H1-B is not processed?
Please suggest if there are better ways to handle the situation.
-- How long does it take to get H1-B visa under premium processing, if applied in 65000 pool?
Thanks
Rakesh
more...
jamesingham
08-16 03:14 PM
Does anyone have any information about the number of applications that were recieved by USCIS till now ?
I didnt apply for 485 Bcoz, I am not married. So lil curious when my next chance will come
I didnt apply for 485 Bcoz, I am not married. So lil curious when my next chance will come
hanu_78
12-08 09:29 AM
Yes, as long as you have valid AP, you can re-enter and resume working on a valid EAD.
Thanks for your reply.
Thanks for your reply.
more...
virtual55
11-22 01:57 PM
Hello Gurus,
Can we change company based upon approved I140 and get a 3 H1B in the 7th year of H1
what happens if my previous employer cancels I140.
Can we change company based upon approved I140 and get a 3 H1B in the 7th year of H1
what happens if my previous employer cancels I140.
2010 Mandy Moore: Hotter in
WaitingYaar
09-10 08:47 AM
If H4 uses EAD for work with 485 pending, and if the underlying I-140 gets rejected, will this make H4 holder be out of status? what are the options for H4 holder.
more...
Macaca
12-12 10:27 AM
Pelosi vows more civil approach � next year (http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1207/7335.html) By Jim VandeHei and John F. Harris | The Politico, Dec 12, 2007
Across the ideological spectrum, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has dashed expectations.
On the right, the hope was that Pelosi would be the tallest lightning rod in Washington � playing to type as a �San Francisco liberal� and handing the Republican minority all manner of ideological openings to exploit. For the most part, that has not happened.
On the left, the hope was that Pelosi would lead the newly empowered Democrats to hijack President Bush�s agenda on the issue that matters most to party activists � ending the Iraq war.
To Pelosi�s regret, that has not happened either.
Appraisals of Pelosi�s first year revolve around these fallen hopes and come with still another surprise: For all her history-making status as the first woman to run the House, Pelosi has emerged as a fairly conventional leader.
This is partly to her credit.
She has run a highly disciplined operation, keeping a potentially fractious caucus unified on tough issues.
And she has restrained some of her own instincts representing one of the nation�s most liberal districts.
With a couple of prominent exceptions, she has not handed Republicans opportunities to exploit impolitic statements or legislative maneuvers.
But conventionality has come at a steep cost.
Few members of either party, when speaking privately, argue that what Congress needs most is a change of party with a continuation of the highly partisan status quo.
In many ways, that�s what Pelosi represents.
Democrats bridled at being marginalized under 12 years of Republican rule, but Pelosi has treated turnabout as fair play.
Bending a promise made to voters in the last election, the speaker has shut Republicans out of many debates by limiting their ability to offer alternative ideas on the House floor and made only modest attempts to engage Republicans on many issues, notably Iraq.
This represents a probably accurate calculation about what�s necessary to keep her own party cohesive.
But polarized government has also thwarted some of Pelosi�s own objectives.
The first of those is forcing Bush to end the war. �All of the good things that we did, which were, I mean, astounding � are eclipsed by the war in Iraq,� she said in a Politico interview.
She added that she has been surprised by Democrats� inability to peel off GOP dissenters.
�If I had to say one thing that I would have appraised differently � it would have been that I would not have expected the Republicans in Congress to stick with the president on this war this long,� she said. �Not from their personal statements to us privately or the public mood in their own districts.�
The inability to resolve the Iraq debate or tackle the other most pressing issues is one reason the number of people saying they disapprove of the performance of Congress � at 70 percent in some recent surveys � has risen 15 to 20 points or more since the start of the year.
Pelosi acknowledged she and her leadership team could have done better at managing expectations.
�Maybe we should have been thinking about how we were communicating with the public more,� she said. �Maybe I should have from the start just established what we were doing instead of having to be responsive to the press about �somebody said this, they thought you were doing that,� because this place is a total rumor mill.�
Even so, Pelosi made clear that she is fine with drawing sharp, partisan lines when necessary.
�I certainly want my speakership to be distinguished by a level of civility and bipartisanship when that�s possible,� she said. �That is what I hope to do in this next year, I really do.�
But as for this year? �I had a job to get done this year,� she said. �I had a decision to make; I had to remove obstacles to getting a job done.�
She got it done, at times.
Early in the session, Democrats moved their �six for �06� package promised in the previous election. That included raising the minimum wage, enacting homeland security upgrades and reducing student loan rates.
They also helped their members by pushing for more spending on children�s health care, a political no-brainer for many members, and demanding that Congress offset the cost of new spending with spending cuts or revenue increases elsewhere.
Along the way, the elegantly styled speaker, a grandmother of seven, proved herself a steel magnolia � a self-confident leader who projected strength in a way that caused powerful subordinates to defer to her.
Even Vice President Cheney complimented (in a distinctly backhanded way) her leadership, noting he was surprised that such old Democratic bulls of the House as Reps. John P. Murtha of Pennsylvania and John Dingell of Michigan seem to follow her lead.
�They are not carrying the big sticks I would have expected,� Cheney told Politico.
�There�s a woman who runs that place with an iron hand,� Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid told Politico in an interview. �I am sure that some people are a little disappointed [that] this diminutive, very attractive woman is bowling people over � men and women.�
Pelosi has succeeded in part by having her own team of old bulls, such as Rep. George Miller of California, and younger bulls, such as Rep. Rahm Emanuel of Illinois, on her team.
What is sometimes called a weakness � a penchant for micromanaging, for instance � has helped tighten her grip and enhance her standing.
She has muffed up on a few high-profile occasions. A trip to Syria earlier this year was ridiculed by Republicans as clumsy, freelance diplomacy.
She was forced by her Democratic colleagues to quit pushing for the Armenian genocide resolution because it was clearly complicating U.S. relations with Turkey.
The final verdict on her handling of the Iraq debate awaits the year ahead � whether Democrats can either force a change in policy or make Republicans pay a heavy price in the 2008 elections.
For now, the best grade Pelosi can get is incomplete: Democrats have had no substantive success in changing policy.
One what-if echoes. Some members say Democrats missed a golden opportunity early in the summer to find compromise and split Republicans from Bush, laying the groundwork for limits on the military operation.
Pelosi instead pursued an unyielding approach that turned off even the war skeptics inside the GOP.
In a sign of the pressures Pelosi is under, however, it is the anti-war liberals in her own party who offer the harshest assessment of the Pelosi reign so far.
�When you look back at this year, it will be defined as the year of lost opportunities,� said Ohio Rep. Dennis J. Kucinich, a long-shot presidential candidate. �This was the time to use the power of the majority to chart a new direction. So far it�s been � not only a missed opportunity but a failure.�
California Rep. Lynn Woolsey added: �I personally don�t think [the strategy] worked. As a result, everything we�ve done on student loans, minimum wage, the six in �06 agenda gets lost.�
By one standard, however, Pelosi can look back on 2007 as a clear success. Her party is as well-organized, and her own position within it more secure, at year�s end compared with year�s start.
�I am not going to let one issue blow up this caucus,� she said. �We always strive for unity.�
Across the ideological spectrum, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has dashed expectations.
On the right, the hope was that Pelosi would be the tallest lightning rod in Washington � playing to type as a �San Francisco liberal� and handing the Republican minority all manner of ideological openings to exploit. For the most part, that has not happened.
On the left, the hope was that Pelosi would lead the newly empowered Democrats to hijack President Bush�s agenda on the issue that matters most to party activists � ending the Iraq war.
To Pelosi�s regret, that has not happened either.
Appraisals of Pelosi�s first year revolve around these fallen hopes and come with still another surprise: For all her history-making status as the first woman to run the House, Pelosi has emerged as a fairly conventional leader.
This is partly to her credit.
She has run a highly disciplined operation, keeping a potentially fractious caucus unified on tough issues.
And she has restrained some of her own instincts representing one of the nation�s most liberal districts.
With a couple of prominent exceptions, she has not handed Republicans opportunities to exploit impolitic statements or legislative maneuvers.
But conventionality has come at a steep cost.
Few members of either party, when speaking privately, argue that what Congress needs most is a change of party with a continuation of the highly partisan status quo.
In many ways, that�s what Pelosi represents.
Democrats bridled at being marginalized under 12 years of Republican rule, but Pelosi has treated turnabout as fair play.
Bending a promise made to voters in the last election, the speaker has shut Republicans out of many debates by limiting their ability to offer alternative ideas on the House floor and made only modest attempts to engage Republicans on many issues, notably Iraq.
This represents a probably accurate calculation about what�s necessary to keep her own party cohesive.
But polarized government has also thwarted some of Pelosi�s own objectives.
The first of those is forcing Bush to end the war. �All of the good things that we did, which were, I mean, astounding � are eclipsed by the war in Iraq,� she said in a Politico interview.
She added that she has been surprised by Democrats� inability to peel off GOP dissenters.
�If I had to say one thing that I would have appraised differently � it would have been that I would not have expected the Republicans in Congress to stick with the president on this war this long,� she said. �Not from their personal statements to us privately or the public mood in their own districts.�
The inability to resolve the Iraq debate or tackle the other most pressing issues is one reason the number of people saying they disapprove of the performance of Congress � at 70 percent in some recent surveys � has risen 15 to 20 points or more since the start of the year.
Pelosi acknowledged she and her leadership team could have done better at managing expectations.
�Maybe we should have been thinking about how we were communicating with the public more,� she said. �Maybe I should have from the start just established what we were doing instead of having to be responsive to the press about �somebody said this, they thought you were doing that,� because this place is a total rumor mill.�
Even so, Pelosi made clear that she is fine with drawing sharp, partisan lines when necessary.
�I certainly want my speakership to be distinguished by a level of civility and bipartisanship when that�s possible,� she said. �That is what I hope to do in this next year, I really do.�
But as for this year? �I had a job to get done this year,� she said. �I had a decision to make; I had to remove obstacles to getting a job done.�
She got it done, at times.
Early in the session, Democrats moved their �six for �06� package promised in the previous election. That included raising the minimum wage, enacting homeland security upgrades and reducing student loan rates.
They also helped their members by pushing for more spending on children�s health care, a political no-brainer for many members, and demanding that Congress offset the cost of new spending with spending cuts or revenue increases elsewhere.
Along the way, the elegantly styled speaker, a grandmother of seven, proved herself a steel magnolia � a self-confident leader who projected strength in a way that caused powerful subordinates to defer to her.
Even Vice President Cheney complimented (in a distinctly backhanded way) her leadership, noting he was surprised that such old Democratic bulls of the House as Reps. John P. Murtha of Pennsylvania and John Dingell of Michigan seem to follow her lead.
�They are not carrying the big sticks I would have expected,� Cheney told Politico.
�There�s a woman who runs that place with an iron hand,� Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid told Politico in an interview. �I am sure that some people are a little disappointed [that] this diminutive, very attractive woman is bowling people over � men and women.�
Pelosi has succeeded in part by having her own team of old bulls, such as Rep. George Miller of California, and younger bulls, such as Rep. Rahm Emanuel of Illinois, on her team.
What is sometimes called a weakness � a penchant for micromanaging, for instance � has helped tighten her grip and enhance her standing.
She has muffed up on a few high-profile occasions. A trip to Syria earlier this year was ridiculed by Republicans as clumsy, freelance diplomacy.
She was forced by her Democratic colleagues to quit pushing for the Armenian genocide resolution because it was clearly complicating U.S. relations with Turkey.
The final verdict on her handling of the Iraq debate awaits the year ahead � whether Democrats can either force a change in policy or make Republicans pay a heavy price in the 2008 elections.
For now, the best grade Pelosi can get is incomplete: Democrats have had no substantive success in changing policy.
One what-if echoes. Some members say Democrats missed a golden opportunity early in the summer to find compromise and split Republicans from Bush, laying the groundwork for limits on the military operation.
Pelosi instead pursued an unyielding approach that turned off even the war skeptics inside the GOP.
In a sign of the pressures Pelosi is under, however, it is the anti-war liberals in her own party who offer the harshest assessment of the Pelosi reign so far.
�When you look back at this year, it will be defined as the year of lost opportunities,� said Ohio Rep. Dennis J. Kucinich, a long-shot presidential candidate. �This was the time to use the power of the majority to chart a new direction. So far it�s been � not only a missed opportunity but a failure.�
California Rep. Lynn Woolsey added: �I personally don�t think [the strategy] worked. As a result, everything we�ve done on student loans, minimum wage, the six in �06 agenda gets lost.�
By one standard, however, Pelosi can look back on 2007 as a clear success. Her party is as well-organized, and her own position within it more secure, at year�s end compared with year�s start.
�I am not going to let one issue blow up this caucus,� she said. �We always strive for unity.�
hair Cool Short Buzz Haircut from
ckpas
01-07 10:22 AM
When my employer looked up my case number on the DOL site, the case status showed as "certified" and apparently when he downloaded the certified ETA 9089 the section where it says "Signature of the certifying officer" doesn't bear CO's any stamping/signature.
My employer came to know this only yesterday obviously 'coz he overlooked and we just have two more months remaining on this PERM validity. My employer also said he can't file for I-140 unless we hear back from the DOL on the CO signature issue.
He has apparently emailed DOL asking for clarifction on this.
1. Would DOL even bother to look at the incoming emails after the case has been approved?.
2. Does CO's rubber stamp signature really required for 140?. What if we don't hear back from DOL on time, can we just go ahead with 140 filing?.
3. I am on my 6th year of H1b.
Any response on this matter is truly appreciated.
Thanks a lot to everyone.
My employer came to know this only yesterday obviously 'coz he overlooked and we just have two more months remaining on this PERM validity. My employer also said he can't file for I-140 unless we hear back from the DOL on the CO signature issue.
He has apparently emailed DOL asking for clarifction on this.
1. Would DOL even bother to look at the incoming emails after the case has been approved?.
2. Does CO's rubber stamp signature really required for 140?. What if we don't hear back from DOL on time, can we just go ahead with 140 filing?.
3. I am on my 6th year of H1b.
Any response on this matter is truly appreciated.
Thanks a lot to everyone.
more...
ink_123
08-24 12:21 AM
Hi,
I had applied for 485 without EAD/AP since we wanted to file it on July 2nd. Still waiting for the receipt. Recently our lawyer sent the EAD/AP application based on the new rule, with just the FEDEX receipt confirmation of the 485 application. However, he sent the application to CA Service Center stating that based on the new direct filing rule, it can be sent to the local Service Center.
Is that right? Anyone with similar experience or insights. As far as I know it has to be sent to the same service center where we applied for 485 (NSC).
Any document or FAQ from USCIS that can clarify this issue?
Thanks
I had applied for 485 without EAD/AP since we wanted to file it on July 2nd. Still waiting for the receipt. Recently our lawyer sent the EAD/AP application based on the new rule, with just the FEDEX receipt confirmation of the 485 application. However, he sent the application to CA Service Center stating that based on the new direct filing rule, it can be sent to the local Service Center.
Is that right? Anyone with similar experience or insights. As far as I know it has to be sent to the same service center where we applied for 485 (NSC).
Any document or FAQ from USCIS that can clarify this issue?
Thanks
hot mandy moore hair styles
senthil1
12-27 06:07 PM
Can do two jobs if he has 2 H1bs one for full time and other for part time
can a person on H1B do two jobs?e.g one full time and one part time.please give advice, thanks in advance.
can a person on H1B do two jobs?e.g one full time and one part time.please give advice, thanks in advance.
more...
house Mandy Moore, Jaime Pressly
stormrider0610
November 15th, 2008, 09:51 PM
Hey guys, I was wondering what program you guys use to view RAW files from your Sony (Alpha 200 in my case)?
I am particularly interested in a viewer where I can scroll throw a folder of images quickly full scree, using the arrow keys on the keyboard, possibly with an option to zoom in 100% and also possibly where I can easily delete the image with a press of the Delete button. You guys know of any freebie utility viewer like that? I tried MaxView from Faststone but it does not seem to display the pic in high quality. Thanks.
I am particularly interested in a viewer where I can scroll throw a folder of images quickly full scree, using the arrow keys on the keyboard, possibly with an option to zoom in 100% and also possibly where I can easily delete the image with a press of the Delete button. You guys know of any freebie utility viewer like that? I tried MaxView from Faststone but it does not seem to display the pic in high quality. Thanks.
tattoo Strict graphically haircut
bottlemani
11-01 04:51 PM
http://travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/bulletin/bulletin_1770.html
more...
pictures quot;mandy moore haircutsquot;,
coolfun
01-28 12:49 AM
Hi,
Gurus - I have few questions and I need your help:
1. My EAD/AP expires in June/July '08. Can I apply for their renewal now?
2. Will there be a finger-printing requirement for the renewal? We had finger print in June 2007 when we applied 485/765/131 together?
3. Is it better to efile or paper file?
4. I will be in India from April to June this year. I have an AP valid till end June. Can I file for EAD/AP renewal and leave for India in April. Is there any risk? I can still use my current AP to enter when I come in early June, right?
Thanks so much.
Gurus - I have few questions and I need your help:
1. My EAD/AP expires in June/July '08. Can I apply for their renewal now?
2. Will there be a finger-printing requirement for the renewal? We had finger print in June 2007 when we applied 485/765/131 together?
3. Is it better to efile or paper file?
4. I will be in India from April to June this year. I have an AP valid till end June. Can I file for EAD/AP renewal and leave for India in April. Is there any risk? I can still use my current AP to enter when I come in early June, right?
Thanks so much.
dresses quot;moore mandy haircutsquot;,
brahmam
05-16 07:44 PM
Hi,
Once our 140 is approved in the sixth year of H1B, I learnt that we can seek a 3 yr extension. If that's the case, can we change companies during that 3 yr period or are we stuck with the same company that sponsored the 3 yr extension?
Thanks
Once our 140 is approved in the sixth year of H1B, I learnt that we can seek a 3 yr extension. If that's the case, can we change companies during that 3 yr period or are we stuck with the same company that sponsored the 3 yr extension?
Thanks
more...
makeup mandy moore short hair pics
transpass
11-13 04:19 PM
All those antis who are really xenophobic can hardly understand the contributions of immigrants to American society...Especially organizations like programmer's guild who are against H1B...Open your eyes and check the following interesting link...
Pattie Maes and Pranav Mistry demo SixthSense | Video on TED.com (http://www.ted.com/talks/pattie_maes_demos_the_sixth_sense.html)
Here is the bio...
Pranav Mistry (http://www.pranavmistry.com/)
The dude has been cranking out research papers, has bunch of patents and BTW, would be an H1B. Every univ gets fed funding one way or the other. Does it mean the dude cannot be hired by a US univ? Otherwise, he is gonna take all that stuff back home...Do you see Mr. chuck grassley,what you are doing? Open your eyes, ron hira and guild fellas...:D
Agreed, not every H1 is a genius, but every H1 is an immigrant who works his/her ass off, everyday contributing to americans' social security, medicare funds...
Pattie Maes and Pranav Mistry demo SixthSense | Video on TED.com (http://www.ted.com/talks/pattie_maes_demos_the_sixth_sense.html)
Here is the bio...
Pranav Mistry (http://www.pranavmistry.com/)
The dude has been cranking out research papers, has bunch of patents and BTW, would be an H1B. Every univ gets fed funding one way or the other. Does it mean the dude cannot be hired by a US univ? Otherwise, he is gonna take all that stuff back home...Do you see Mr. chuck grassley,what you are doing? Open your eyes, ron hira and guild fellas...:D
Agreed, not every H1 is a genius, but every H1 is an immigrant who works his/her ass off, everyday contributing to americans' social security, medicare funds...
girlfriend Haircut, Mandy Moore Long
gtg506p
10-23 08:21 AM
No. I havent applied for my 485 yet (personal reasons didnt apply simultaneously). I will apply now.
hairstyles short hairstyles two tone
kirupa
07-11 04:36 PM
Added!
Macaca
10-28 09:52 AM
It's time we seriously ponder fixing the Constitution (http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2007/10/28/INCHSUV9I.DTL&hw=immigration&sn=008&sc=247) By Larry J. Sabato | San Francisco Chronicle, October 28, 2007
Professor Larry J. Sabato is the author of "A More Perfect Constitution: 23 Proposals to Revitalize Our Constitution and Make America a Fairer Country" (Walker & Company, 2007). He is the founder and director of the Center for Politics at the University of Virginia. Contact us at insight@sfchronicle.com.
What is the undisturbed and unaddressed source of many of the nation's current difficulties? It's the Constitution of the United States.
The Constitution has become a secularly sacred document, as though God handed it to Moses in a third tablet on the Mount. The 2008 presidential candidates have been offering us prescriptions for everything from Iraq to health care over the past several months. But here is the problem: Their fixes are situational and incremental. In the meantime, underlying structural problems with America's governmental and political system are preventing us from solving our most intractable challenges.
If progress as a society is to be made, it is time for elemental change. The last place we look to understand why the U.S. system isn't working well anymore - the Constitution - should be the first place. A careful look at constitutional reform should begin now and culminate in a new Constitutional Convention.
Does this sound radical? If so, then the framers were radicals, too. They would be both disappointed and amazed that after 220 years, the inheritors of their Constitution had not tried to adapt to new developments they could never have anticipated in Philadelphia in 1787. Urging his future countrymen to take advantage of their own experiences with government, George Washington declared, "I do not think we are more inspired, have more wisdom, or possess more virtue, than those who will come after us."
Thomas Jefferson insisted that "No society can make a perpetual Constitution. ... The earth belongs always to the living generation. ... Every Constitution ... naturally expires at the end of 19 years," the length of a generation in Jefferson's time.
The overall design of the Constitution remains brilliant and sound with respect to the Bill of Rights and the separation of powers. But there are numerous archaic provisions that inhibit constructive change and adaptation to a 21st century world unimaginable to the framers.
Let's explore a few: More than 14 million U.S. citizens are automatically and irrevocably barred from holding the office of president simply because they were not born in the United States - either they are immigrants or their U.S. mothers gave birth to them while outside U.S. territory. This exclusion creates a noxious form of second-class citizenship. The requirement that the president must be a "natural born citizen" should be replaced with a condition that a candidate must be a U.S. citizen for at least 20 years before election to the presidency.
Both the Vietnam and Iraq conflicts have illustrated a modern imbalance in the constitutional power to wage war. Once Congress consented to these wars, presidents were able to continue them for many years long after popular support had drastically declined. Limit the president's war-making authority by creating a provision that requires Congress to vote affirmatively every six months to continue U.S. military involvement. Debate in both houses would be limited so that the vote could not be delayed. If either house of Congress voted to end a war, the president would have one year to withdraw all combat troops.
If the 26 least populated states voted as a bloc, they would control the U.S. Senate with a total of just under 17 percent of the country's population. This small-state stranglehold is not merely a bump in the road; it is a massive roadblock to fairness that can, and often does, stop all progressive traffic. We should give each of the 10 most populated states two additional Senate seats and give each of the next 15 most populated states one additional seat. Sparsely populated states will still be disproportionately represented, but the ridiculous tilt to them in today's system can be a thing of the past.
If someone purposefully tried to conjure up the most random and illogical method of nominating presidential candidates, the resulting system would probably look much as ours does today. The incoherent lineup of primaries and caucuses forces candidates to campaign at least a year before the first nomination contest so they can become known nationwide and raise the money needed to compete. Congress should be constitutionally required to designate four regions of contiguous states; the regions would hold their nominating events in successive months, beginning in April and ending in July. A U.S. Election Lottery, to be held on Jan. 1 of the presidential election year, would determine the order of regional events. The new system would add an element of drama to the beginning of a presidential year while also shortening the campaign: No one would know in which region the contest would begin until New Year's Day.
Excessive authority has accrued to the federal courts, especially the Supreme Court - so much so that had the framers realized the courts' eventual powers, they would have limited judicial authority. The insularity of lifetime tenure, combined with the appointments of relatively young attorneys who give long service on the bench, produces senior judges representing the views of past generations better than views of the current day. A nonrenewable term limit of 15 years should apply to all federal judges, from the district courts all the way up to the Supreme Court.
This all is just a mere scratch on the surface in identifying long-overdue constitutional reforms. There are dozens of other worthy proposals than can and ought to be discussed, if we but have the will to imagine a better Constitution. No rational person will rush to change the Constitution, and it will take many years of thorough-going work. But let's at least start the discussion, and begin thinking about the generation-long process that could lead to a new constitutional convention sometime this century.
Professor Larry J. Sabato is the author of "A More Perfect Constitution: 23 Proposals to Revitalize Our Constitution and Make America a Fairer Country" (Walker & Company, 2007). He is the founder and director of the Center for Politics at the University of Virginia. Contact us at insight@sfchronicle.com.
What is the undisturbed and unaddressed source of many of the nation's current difficulties? It's the Constitution of the United States.
The Constitution has become a secularly sacred document, as though God handed it to Moses in a third tablet on the Mount. The 2008 presidential candidates have been offering us prescriptions for everything from Iraq to health care over the past several months. But here is the problem: Their fixes are situational and incremental. In the meantime, underlying structural problems with America's governmental and political system are preventing us from solving our most intractable challenges.
If progress as a society is to be made, it is time for elemental change. The last place we look to understand why the U.S. system isn't working well anymore - the Constitution - should be the first place. A careful look at constitutional reform should begin now and culminate in a new Constitutional Convention.
Does this sound radical? If so, then the framers were radicals, too. They would be both disappointed and amazed that after 220 years, the inheritors of their Constitution had not tried to adapt to new developments they could never have anticipated in Philadelphia in 1787. Urging his future countrymen to take advantage of their own experiences with government, George Washington declared, "I do not think we are more inspired, have more wisdom, or possess more virtue, than those who will come after us."
Thomas Jefferson insisted that "No society can make a perpetual Constitution. ... The earth belongs always to the living generation. ... Every Constitution ... naturally expires at the end of 19 years," the length of a generation in Jefferson's time.
The overall design of the Constitution remains brilliant and sound with respect to the Bill of Rights and the separation of powers. But there are numerous archaic provisions that inhibit constructive change and adaptation to a 21st century world unimaginable to the framers.
Let's explore a few: More than 14 million U.S. citizens are automatically and irrevocably barred from holding the office of president simply because they were not born in the United States - either they are immigrants or their U.S. mothers gave birth to them while outside U.S. territory. This exclusion creates a noxious form of second-class citizenship. The requirement that the president must be a "natural born citizen" should be replaced with a condition that a candidate must be a U.S. citizen for at least 20 years before election to the presidency.
Both the Vietnam and Iraq conflicts have illustrated a modern imbalance in the constitutional power to wage war. Once Congress consented to these wars, presidents were able to continue them for many years long after popular support had drastically declined. Limit the president's war-making authority by creating a provision that requires Congress to vote affirmatively every six months to continue U.S. military involvement. Debate in both houses would be limited so that the vote could not be delayed. If either house of Congress voted to end a war, the president would have one year to withdraw all combat troops.
If the 26 least populated states voted as a bloc, they would control the U.S. Senate with a total of just under 17 percent of the country's population. This small-state stranglehold is not merely a bump in the road; it is a massive roadblock to fairness that can, and often does, stop all progressive traffic. We should give each of the 10 most populated states two additional Senate seats and give each of the next 15 most populated states one additional seat. Sparsely populated states will still be disproportionately represented, but the ridiculous tilt to them in today's system can be a thing of the past.
If someone purposefully tried to conjure up the most random and illogical method of nominating presidential candidates, the resulting system would probably look much as ours does today. The incoherent lineup of primaries and caucuses forces candidates to campaign at least a year before the first nomination contest so they can become known nationwide and raise the money needed to compete. Congress should be constitutionally required to designate four regions of contiguous states; the regions would hold their nominating events in successive months, beginning in April and ending in July. A U.S. Election Lottery, to be held on Jan. 1 of the presidential election year, would determine the order of regional events. The new system would add an element of drama to the beginning of a presidential year while also shortening the campaign: No one would know in which region the contest would begin until New Year's Day.
Excessive authority has accrued to the federal courts, especially the Supreme Court - so much so that had the framers realized the courts' eventual powers, they would have limited judicial authority. The insularity of lifetime tenure, combined with the appointments of relatively young attorneys who give long service on the bench, produces senior judges representing the views of past generations better than views of the current day. A nonrenewable term limit of 15 years should apply to all federal judges, from the district courts all the way up to the Supreme Court.
This all is just a mere scratch on the surface in identifying long-overdue constitutional reforms. There are dozens of other worthy proposals than can and ought to be discussed, if we but have the will to imagine a better Constitution. No rational person will rush to change the Constitution, and it will take many years of thorough-going work. But let's at least start the discussion, and begin thinking about the generation-long process that could lead to a new constitutional convention sometime this century.
omega
06-25 02:18 PM
I am panning to file I 485 before July 31st. Also I am planning to go on vacation to India around Aug 10th. The trip to India is unavoidable.
Experts please answer the following question:
1) Both me and my wife are on H1 and it has to be stamped. Will I 485 Filing have any adverse impact on the H1 Stamping ?
2) Will leaving the country for vacation without the I 485 receipt have any impact on the I 485 process.
Thanks
Omega
Experts please answer the following question:
1) Both me and my wife are on H1 and it has to be stamped. Will I 485 Filing have any adverse impact on the H1 Stamping ?
2) Will leaving the country for vacation without the I 485 receipt have any impact on the I 485 process.
Thanks
Omega
No comments:
Post a Comment