soumeeram
11-18 01:36 PM
Thank you for contacting me regarding the DREAM Act, which I strongly support. I value your input on this important matter.
We need a tough, smart and comprehensive approach to fix our broken immigration system. We must begin by securing our borders with investments in personnel, infrastructure and technology. We should require the undocumented in this country to register, pay a fine, learn English, and pass criminal background checks before allowing them the opportunity to become citizens.
Our immigration system is broken, and it cannot be fixed by passing one piece of reform, even a good one like the DREAM Act. We should address immigration as a whole, and that is a primary goal of mine here in the Senate.
As you may know, the DREAM Act, or Development, Relief, and Education for Alien Minors Act of 2009 (S. 729), introduced by Senator Richard Durbin of Illinois, would amend previous legislation to allow states to determine residency for higher education purposes. It also authorizes states to cancel the removal and adjust status of certain alien students who are long-term United States residents who entered the United States as children. However, minor aliens who are eligible must meet the following criteria: entered the United States before his or her 16th birthday and has been present in the United States for at least five years immediately preceding enactment of this Act; is a person of good moral character; is not inadmissible or deportable under specified grounds of the Immigration and Nationality Act; at the time of application, has been admitted to an institution of higher education or has earned a high school or equivalent diploma; from the age of 16 and older, has never been under a final order of exclusion, deportation, or removal; and was under age 35 on the date of this Act's enactment.
Currently, the DREAM Act is under consideration by the Senate Judiciary Committee. While I am not a member of this committee, I will keep your concerns in mind if this issue is brought before the full Senate for consideration.
For more information about my priorities as a U.S. Senator, I invite you to visit my website at Michael Bennet - United States Senator for Colorado : Home (http://bennet.senate.gov/). Again, thank you for contacting me.
Sincerely,
Michael Bennet
United States Senator
We need a tough, smart and comprehensive approach to fix our broken immigration system. We must begin by securing our borders with investments in personnel, infrastructure and technology. We should require the undocumented in this country to register, pay a fine, learn English, and pass criminal background checks before allowing them the opportunity to become citizens.
Our immigration system is broken, and it cannot be fixed by passing one piece of reform, even a good one like the DREAM Act. We should address immigration as a whole, and that is a primary goal of mine here in the Senate.
As you may know, the DREAM Act, or Development, Relief, and Education for Alien Minors Act of 2009 (S. 729), introduced by Senator Richard Durbin of Illinois, would amend previous legislation to allow states to determine residency for higher education purposes. It also authorizes states to cancel the removal and adjust status of certain alien students who are long-term United States residents who entered the United States as children. However, minor aliens who are eligible must meet the following criteria: entered the United States before his or her 16th birthday and has been present in the United States for at least five years immediately preceding enactment of this Act; is a person of good moral character; is not inadmissible or deportable under specified grounds of the Immigration and Nationality Act; at the time of application, has been admitted to an institution of higher education or has earned a high school or equivalent diploma; from the age of 16 and older, has never been under a final order of exclusion, deportation, or removal; and was under age 35 on the date of this Act's enactment.
Currently, the DREAM Act is under consideration by the Senate Judiciary Committee. While I am not a member of this committee, I will keep your concerns in mind if this issue is brought before the full Senate for consideration.
For more information about my priorities as a U.S. Senator, I invite you to visit my website at Michael Bennet - United States Senator for Colorado : Home (http://bennet.senate.gov/). Again, thank you for contacting me.
Sincerely,
Michael Bennet
United States Senator
wallpaper Advance happy birthday Orkut
english_august
07-09 01:01 PM
I ve sent the pdf to my local newspapers. She is interested in doing the story.
Pls call & talk to her : kcollins@newsobserver.com
Feel free to call/talk to her.
Pls call & talk to her : kcollins@newsobserver.com
Feel free to call/talk to her.
test101
08-13 02:25 PM
EB3 nepa
I do doubt it. The USCIS is still under the threat of being sued. i do no think they want to do that. however i wonder about the reason of slow processing!
I do doubt it. The USCIS is still under the threat of being sued. i do no think they want to do that. however i wonder about the reason of slow processing!
2011 Wish u Advance Happy Birthday
waitforgc123
09-05 09:54 PM
Mine was received on July 3rd, R Williams 9:03 AM - Still waiting no receipt no cashing of check.
I will share with you all as soon as I hear of some progress on this front.
thanks
PD - Apr 06
EB2
I will share with you all as soon as I hear of some progress on this front.
thanks
PD - Apr 06
EB2
more...
chanduv23
02-17 02:53 PM
Answer to this:
this:
And this:
is this:
Positive programming. Could we start it inside ourselves first? Stop ranting and lamenting?
The point is not that tri-state was crooked etc. The point is, they got the cash because they made themselves known as an entity that does some service
Same with IV. If IV is just a rant board, who will believe? We must change IV!
Well, it goes beyond that. This is a "complicated story with no sub titles".
IV website is a board where people of all kinds visit and there is no control over stuff. Just go to any blog site - we see 100 rants and crazy comments as against a few wise talk.
I guess we have to live with it and keep pushing people. Sometimes loud and sometimes gently.
this:
And this:
is this:
Positive programming. Could we start it inside ourselves first? Stop ranting and lamenting?
The point is not that tri-state was crooked etc. The point is, they got the cash because they made themselves known as an entity that does some service
Same with IV. If IV is just a rant board, who will believe? We must change IV!
Well, it goes beyond that. This is a "complicated story with no sub titles".
IV website is a board where people of all kinds visit and there is no control over stuff. Just go to any blog site - we see 100 rants and crazy comments as against a few wise talk.
I guess we have to live with it and keep pushing people. Sometimes loud and sometimes gently.
fundo14
05-30 09:56 AM
Will I need passport size photos at the time of landing (like for applying PR or any other form) and if required how many photos are required.
Hi Maag,
I don't think you need the photos for lannding.
As per my research this i the list of documents you need:
� Passport
� COPR
� Proof of Funds
� Few copies of a list stating inventory you wish to take to Canada in the future, list of "Goods to Follow" and when landing in Canada. Include Model Numbers and Serial Numbers of products if they have such numbers.
Good to have:
Birth Certificate.
� Marriage Certificate.
� Driver's License.
� International Drivers License
I am planning to do landing this weekend of early next week..just lilttle worried as i have already used AP so not ure what sort of situtation I will face while landing.
Do you know of anyone in such situation or any experiance?
Thanks
Hi Maag,
I don't think you need the photos for lannding.
As per my research this i the list of documents you need:
� Passport
� COPR
� Proof of Funds
� Few copies of a list stating inventory you wish to take to Canada in the future, list of "Goods to Follow" and when landing in Canada. Include Model Numbers and Serial Numbers of products if they have such numbers.
Good to have:
Birth Certificate.
� Marriage Certificate.
� Driver's License.
� International Drivers License
I am planning to do landing this weekend of early next week..just lilttle worried as i have already used AP so not ure what sort of situtation I will face while landing.
Do you know of anyone in such situation or any experiance?
Thanks
more...
dsairam
12-19 04:24 PM
Hi All,
I would like to know if I will get in trouble if I do this:
First, switch to a completely unrelated job after 180 days of I485 filing,
then, switch back to similar job when my priority date becomes current or close to becoming current.
Does USCIS check what other jobs have I done during the entire adjustee period or it is only concerned about the job at the time of adjudication?
Thanks in advance!
I would like to know if I will get in trouble if I do this:
First, switch to a completely unrelated job after 180 days of I485 filing,
then, switch back to similar job when my priority date becomes current or close to becoming current.
Does USCIS check what other jobs have I done during the entire adjustee period or it is only concerned about the job at the time of adjudication?
Thanks in advance!
2010 Advance happy birthday to my
ramus
07-07 10:17 PM
Please mention how many members from family..
IF we get minimum 1000 then we can talk to core members.
I think we should have a poll for DC rally and it should be on IV home page so that every visitor know about it and poll.
IF we get minimum 1000 then we can talk to core members.
I think we should have a poll for DC rally and it should be on IV home page so that every visitor know about it and poll.
more...
dreamworld
12-13 03:36 PM
I had long dely in gettting my 485/EAD/AP receipts from USCIS and I wrote to my local congressman. It really worked and got the receipt numbers from congressman office.
Try to write to your local congressman and explain your situation in one page.
-----------------------
BTW: Funding thread crossed 100 pages and it is a history for a funding thread. Let’s keep this spirit.
Finish this year 2007 with your support to IV lobby efforts. Show your generosity to your own cause.
Try to write to your local congressman and explain your situation in one page.
-----------------------
BTW: Funding thread crossed 100 pages and it is a history for a funding thread. Let’s keep this spirit.
Finish this year 2007 with your support to IV lobby efforts. Show your generosity to your own cause.
hair irthday wishes to sister
rmdsouza
06-24 04:21 PM
100% of anti-immigrant poll questions focus only on the Undocumented. We are only addressed as an afterthought.. mostly in the analysis nowhere else NADA. Here is a sampling of NumbersUSA poll questions..
Here is a sampling of the questions..
Public Opinion
NumbersUSA.com's goal of reducing annual legal and illegal immigration to more traditional numerical levels enjoys broad based public support. Virtually every major poll that has been conducted in the past decade finds that a majority of Americans support lower immigration numbers. As many of the following polls suggest, what we are for is the same thing a majority of Americans are for. CLICK HERE for our Public Opinion Archive.
Prefer Lower Numbers
Sixty-seven percent of Americans approve of the U.S. government deporting illegal immigrants to the country they came from.
Opinion Research Corporation/Lou Dobbs poll, June 8-11, 2006
Sixty-seven percent of Americans would you like to see the number of illegal immigrants currently in this country decreased.
Opinion Research Corporation/Lou Dobbs poll, June 8-11, 2006
Fifty-seven percent of registered voters believe the illegal immigration situation in the United States is "very serious" and twenty-nine percent believe it is "somewhat serious."
FOX News/Opinion Dynamics Poll, May 16-18, 2006
Fifty-five percent of registered voters "favor" trying to send as many illegal immigrants back to their home countries as possible.
FOX News/Opinion Dynamics Poll, May 16-18, 2006
Seventy-seven percent of Americans think the United States is not doing enough to keep illegal immigrants from coming into this country.
ABC News/Washington Post Poll, May 11-15, 2006
Fifty-seven percent of Americans think the May 1, 2006 illegal alien solidarity protests did more to hurt their cause than help.
NBC News/Wall Street Journal Poll, April 21-24, 2006
Informed that U.S. population is projected to grow to 420 million by 2050, fifty-seven percent of respondents believed that the present U.S. population of 300 million or less would be best for the country in the long run.
Roper ASW Poll conducted for Negative Population Growth (NPG), April 14-16, 2006
Six of ten Americans, according to the poll, favor annual immigration (now one million yearly) of less than 600,000 a year. Forty-five percent of respondents favored annual immigration of less than 300,000. Overall, seventy-two percent of respondents favor an annual immigration level that is less than the current one million.
Roper ASW Poll conducted for Negative Population Growth (NPG), April 14-16, 2006
Fifty-six percent of Americans agree that a practical way to reduce to near zero the number of resident illegal aliens is legislation making penalties for illegal presence so severe that illegal immigrants would leave voluntarily rather than run the risk of being caught and penalized.
Roper ASW Poll conducted for Negative Population Growth (NPG), April 14-16, 2006
They have effectively blocked our goals by muddying the issue of undocumented and legals. To the average Joe on the street.. immigrant == undocumented
Id like to see how many people will say No to the question " Do you support increase of Green Cards to immigrants already here playing by the rules, paying taxes, Soc Sec etc without benefits, and waiting in line for an average of 6-7 years"
Hell, quite a few of the poll questions say the "amnesty" is unfair to those people who play by the rules...
I say.. focus our efforts on us for the time being.. differentiate ourselves from the undocumented..
Here is a sampling of the questions..
Public Opinion
NumbersUSA.com's goal of reducing annual legal and illegal immigration to more traditional numerical levels enjoys broad based public support. Virtually every major poll that has been conducted in the past decade finds that a majority of Americans support lower immigration numbers. As many of the following polls suggest, what we are for is the same thing a majority of Americans are for. CLICK HERE for our Public Opinion Archive.
Prefer Lower Numbers
Sixty-seven percent of Americans approve of the U.S. government deporting illegal immigrants to the country they came from.
Opinion Research Corporation/Lou Dobbs poll, June 8-11, 2006
Sixty-seven percent of Americans would you like to see the number of illegal immigrants currently in this country decreased.
Opinion Research Corporation/Lou Dobbs poll, June 8-11, 2006
Fifty-seven percent of registered voters believe the illegal immigration situation in the United States is "very serious" and twenty-nine percent believe it is "somewhat serious."
FOX News/Opinion Dynamics Poll, May 16-18, 2006
Fifty-five percent of registered voters "favor" trying to send as many illegal immigrants back to their home countries as possible.
FOX News/Opinion Dynamics Poll, May 16-18, 2006
Seventy-seven percent of Americans think the United States is not doing enough to keep illegal immigrants from coming into this country.
ABC News/Washington Post Poll, May 11-15, 2006
Fifty-seven percent of Americans think the May 1, 2006 illegal alien solidarity protests did more to hurt their cause than help.
NBC News/Wall Street Journal Poll, April 21-24, 2006
Informed that U.S. population is projected to grow to 420 million by 2050, fifty-seven percent of respondents believed that the present U.S. population of 300 million or less would be best for the country in the long run.
Roper ASW Poll conducted for Negative Population Growth (NPG), April 14-16, 2006
Six of ten Americans, according to the poll, favor annual immigration (now one million yearly) of less than 600,000 a year. Forty-five percent of respondents favored annual immigration of less than 300,000. Overall, seventy-two percent of respondents favor an annual immigration level that is less than the current one million.
Roper ASW Poll conducted for Negative Population Growth (NPG), April 14-16, 2006
Fifty-six percent of Americans agree that a practical way to reduce to near zero the number of resident illegal aliens is legislation making penalties for illegal presence so severe that illegal immigrants would leave voluntarily rather than run the risk of being caught and penalized.
Roper ASW Poll conducted for Negative Population Growth (NPG), April 14-16, 2006
They have effectively blocked our goals by muddying the issue of undocumented and legals. To the average Joe on the street.. immigrant == undocumented
Id like to see how many people will say No to the question " Do you support increase of Green Cards to immigrants already here playing by the rules, paying taxes, Soc Sec etc without benefits, and waiting in line for an average of 6-7 years"
Hell, quite a few of the poll questions say the "amnesty" is unfair to those people who play by the rules...
I say.. focus our efforts on us for the time being.. differentiate ourselves from the undocumented..
more...
kondur_007
07-28 02:08 PM
As I mentioned in my previous post in this thread, I am now posting information that explains why this "horizontal" spill occurred and no amount of campaign will reverse it (other than change in law).
If this is repetition of what has already been discussed elsewhere on the site, I apologize.
First, let me point out when and how the interpretation changed:
Following is from immigration-information.com site (Ron Gotcher):
�Last week, I wrote to Charles Oppenheim of the State Department, asking several specific questions. This morning, I had a long talk with him, when he very graciously called to respond to the questions I e-mailed him earlier. In the course of our discussion, I learned a great deal about the present backlog situation and what is being done about it. First, let me deal with the questions I had asked.
Mr. Oppenheim explained that while the Visa Office initially took the view that visa numbers had to fall down into employment third preference before the could fall across to the individual country quotas, but after further review, additional legislation, and consultation with Congress, they concluded that they have to allocate the fall across within individual preference petitions first.�
Direct link to above post:
http://immigration-information.com/forums/showthread.php?t=5456
Some more information from Ron Gotcher�s site can be found at following link
http://immigration-information.com/forums/showthread.php?t=5703
Now, let�s look at the actual law on this (above is only the interpretation from Mr Oppenheim, following is the actual text of the law: (my comment is in italics)
8 CFR Sec 202(a)
(5) 2/ RULES FOR EMPLOYMENT-BASED IMMIGRANTS-
(A) EMPLOYMENT-BASED IMMIGRANTS NOT SUBJECT TO PER COUNTRY LIMITATION IF ADDITIONAL VISAS AVAILABLE- If the total number of visas available under paragraph (1), (2), (3), (4), or (5) of section 203(b) for a calendar quarter exceeds the number of qualified immigrants who may otherwise be issued such visas, the visas made available under that paragraph (read as under that EB category: if it is EB1, it goes to EB1 and if it is EB2 it goes to EB2) shall be issued without regard to the numerical limitation under paragraph (2) of this subsection during the remainder of the calendar quarter.
Read the entire Sec 202 (a) here:
http://www.uscis.gov/propub/ProPubVAP.jsp?dockey=cb90c19a50729fb47fb0686648558 dbe
A glimpse of Sec 203(b) is:
b) Preference Allocation for Employment-Based Immigrants. - Aliens subject to the worldwide level specified in section 201(d) for employment-based immigrants in a fiscal year shall be allotted visas as follows:
(1) Priority workers. - Visas shall first be made available in a number not to exceed 28.6 percent of such worldwide level, plus any visas not required for the classes specified in paragraphs (4) and (5), to qualified immigrants who are aliens described in any of the following subparagraphs (A) through (C): �.
Please read the entire section 203(b) here:
http://www.uscis.gov/propub/ProPubVAP.jsp?dockey=cb90c19a50729fb47fb0686648558 dbe
So, in nutshell:
1. The law is actually clear on this.
2. Now Mr. Oppenheim has interpreted it correctly as well.
3. It don�t think we can convince anyone to change the interpretation (because interpretation appears to be correct. If it was interpreted differently in past, then that was a mistake).
4. The only way to deal with it is to CHANGE THE LAW.
5. More importantly, push for bills to increase overall numbers (recapture, STEM exemption) etc�
6. The big picture: All these is likely to look completely different once CIR comes in, and we need to include our agenda in CIR that would benefit every category for several years to come (not just my GC or your GC).
If this is repetition of what has already been discussed elsewhere on the site, I apologize.
First, let me point out when and how the interpretation changed:
Following is from immigration-information.com site (Ron Gotcher):
�Last week, I wrote to Charles Oppenheim of the State Department, asking several specific questions. This morning, I had a long talk with him, when he very graciously called to respond to the questions I e-mailed him earlier. In the course of our discussion, I learned a great deal about the present backlog situation and what is being done about it. First, let me deal with the questions I had asked.
Mr. Oppenheim explained that while the Visa Office initially took the view that visa numbers had to fall down into employment third preference before the could fall across to the individual country quotas, but after further review, additional legislation, and consultation with Congress, they concluded that they have to allocate the fall across within individual preference petitions first.�
Direct link to above post:
http://immigration-information.com/forums/showthread.php?t=5456
Some more information from Ron Gotcher�s site can be found at following link
http://immigration-information.com/forums/showthread.php?t=5703
Now, let�s look at the actual law on this (above is only the interpretation from Mr Oppenheim, following is the actual text of the law: (my comment is in italics)
8 CFR Sec 202(a)
(5) 2/ RULES FOR EMPLOYMENT-BASED IMMIGRANTS-
(A) EMPLOYMENT-BASED IMMIGRANTS NOT SUBJECT TO PER COUNTRY LIMITATION IF ADDITIONAL VISAS AVAILABLE- If the total number of visas available under paragraph (1), (2), (3), (4), or (5) of section 203(b) for a calendar quarter exceeds the number of qualified immigrants who may otherwise be issued such visas, the visas made available under that paragraph (read as under that EB category: if it is EB1, it goes to EB1 and if it is EB2 it goes to EB2) shall be issued without regard to the numerical limitation under paragraph (2) of this subsection during the remainder of the calendar quarter.
Read the entire Sec 202 (a) here:
http://www.uscis.gov/propub/ProPubVAP.jsp?dockey=cb90c19a50729fb47fb0686648558 dbe
A glimpse of Sec 203(b) is:
b) Preference Allocation for Employment-Based Immigrants. - Aliens subject to the worldwide level specified in section 201(d) for employment-based immigrants in a fiscal year shall be allotted visas as follows:
(1) Priority workers. - Visas shall first be made available in a number not to exceed 28.6 percent of such worldwide level, plus any visas not required for the classes specified in paragraphs (4) and (5), to qualified immigrants who are aliens described in any of the following subparagraphs (A) through (C): �.
Please read the entire section 203(b) here:
http://www.uscis.gov/propub/ProPubVAP.jsp?dockey=cb90c19a50729fb47fb0686648558 dbe
So, in nutshell:
1. The law is actually clear on this.
2. Now Mr. Oppenheim has interpreted it correctly as well.
3. It don�t think we can convince anyone to change the interpretation (because interpretation appears to be correct. If it was interpreted differently in past, then that was a mistake).
4. The only way to deal with it is to CHANGE THE LAW.
5. More importantly, push for bills to increase overall numbers (recapture, STEM exemption) etc�
6. The big picture: All these is likely to look completely different once CIR comes in, and we need to include our agenda in CIR that would benefit every category for several years to come (not just my GC or your GC).
hot girlfriend Happy Birthday In
english_august
07-05 12:18 AM
Hey Friends -
We need to keep a track of the number of flowers being sent. So if you are sending flowers, then make sure that you respond appropriately to the poll in this thread. It is very difficult to go through all the posts individually to figure out the total count.
Let us please keep just this single thread active:
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?p=99731
We need to keep a track of the number of flowers being sent. So if you are sending flowers, then make sure that you respond appropriately to the poll in this thread. It is very difficult to go through all the posts individually to figure out the total count.
Let us please keep just this single thread active:
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?p=99731
more...
house advance happy birthday.
EB3_SEP04
08-13 06:30 PM
Navyug, 2ndJuly,
Congrats and thanks for the update. I feel better now! (no i wasn't sick :D)
Congrats and thanks for the update. I feel better now! (no i wasn't sick :D)
tattoo happy birthday in advance.
mannubhai
11-18 11:13 AM
Done
more...
pictures advance happy birthday.
GCStatus
09-16 04:36 PM
http://www.immigration-information.com/forums/showthread.php?t=5701
GCStatus, I like your enthusiasm, but am a little skeptical regarding whether a class-action lawsuit is really feasible here.
Thanks for this great note, Map boiler. Just think alone for a second, what your comment has contributed, if at all it did.
GCStatus, I like your enthusiasm, but am a little skeptical regarding whether a class-action lawsuit is really feasible here.
Thanks for this great note, Map boiler. Just think alone for a second, what your comment has contributed, if at all it did.
dresses Happy Birthday in advance
wizkid732
08-23 12:02 PM
Hi Guys got a senotors response. Did anyone get a response like this. What does this mean? Appreciate your feedback..
�This case is currently in an extended security review area. I contacted this area and the Officer advised that it cannot be released at this time. The Service is aware that there is a visa available, however, since it is still being reviewed for security issues it cannot be released at this time.�
�This case is currently in an extended security review area. I contacted this area and the Officer advised that it cannot be released at this time. The Service is aware that there is a visa available, however, since it is still being reviewed for security issues it cannot be released at this time.�
more...
makeup dresses Happy birthday to both
eastindia
01-14 09:58 AM
Has anyone been checking all the predictions if they are now true after 4 months?
girlfriend Advance Happy Birthday
Macaca
07-10 10:13 AM
Thanks for posting this link. This is a must read on AOS.
8 CFR PART 245 -- ADJUSTMENT OF STATUS TO THAT OF PERSON ADMITTED FOR PERMANENT RESIDENCE (http://www.uscis.gov/propub/ProPubVAP.jsp?dockey=cf90b70814c3464912a08093ce96e 83c)
This link is for section 245 in TITLE 8 OF CODE OF FEDERAL REGULATIONS (8 CFR) (I think!) . This CFR may have other sections of use for us. For example, there may be section 240 that explains some other GC stage.
Please post a link that is table of contents of CFR. That is, it gives all section titles in CFR: Sec 1, Sec 2, .. Sec 245, Sec 246, ... Thanks!
8 CFR PART 245 -- ADJUSTMENT OF STATUS TO THAT OF PERSON ADMITTED FOR PERMANENT RESIDENCE (http://www.uscis.gov/propub/ProPubVAP.jsp?dockey=cf90b70814c3464912a08093ce96e 83c)
This link is for section 245 in TITLE 8 OF CODE OF FEDERAL REGULATIONS (8 CFR) (I think!) . This CFR may have other sections of use for us. For example, there may be section 240 that explains some other GC stage.
Please post a link that is table of contents of CFR. That is, it gives all section titles in CFR: Sec 1, Sec 2, .. Sec 245, Sec 246, ... Thanks!
hairstyles Happy birthday in advance
rmdsouza
06-24 04:21 PM
100% of anti-immigrant poll questions focus only on the Undocumented. We are only addressed as an afterthought.. mostly in the analysis nowhere else NADA. Here is a sampling of NumbersUSA poll questions..
Here is a sampling of the questions..
Public Opinion
NumbersUSA.com's goal of reducing annual legal and illegal immigration to more traditional numerical levels enjoys broad based public support. Virtually every major poll that has been conducted in the past decade finds that a majority of Americans support lower immigration numbers. As many of the following polls suggest, what we are for is the same thing a majority of Americans are for. CLICK HERE for our Public Opinion Archive.
Prefer Lower Numbers
Sixty-seven percent of Americans approve of the U.S. government deporting illegal immigrants to the country they came from.
Opinion Research Corporation/Lou Dobbs poll, June 8-11, 2006
Sixty-seven percent of Americans would you like to see the number of illegal immigrants currently in this country decreased.
Opinion Research Corporation/Lou Dobbs poll, June 8-11, 2006
Fifty-seven percent of registered voters believe the illegal immigration situation in the United States is "very serious" and twenty-nine percent believe it is "somewhat serious."
FOX News/Opinion Dynamics Poll, May 16-18, 2006
Fifty-five percent of registered voters "favor" trying to send as many illegal immigrants back to their home countries as possible.
FOX News/Opinion Dynamics Poll, May 16-18, 2006
Seventy-seven percent of Americans think the United States is not doing enough to keep illegal immigrants from coming into this country.
ABC News/Washington Post Poll, May 11-15, 2006
Fifty-seven percent of Americans think the May 1, 2006 illegal alien solidarity protests did more to hurt their cause than help.
NBC News/Wall Street Journal Poll, April 21-24, 2006
Informed that U.S. population is projected to grow to 420 million by 2050, fifty-seven percent of respondents believed that the present U.S. population of 300 million or less would be best for the country in the long run.
Roper ASW Poll conducted for Negative Population Growth (NPG), April 14-16, 2006
Six of ten Americans, according to the poll, favor annual immigration (now one million yearly) of less than 600,000 a year. Forty-five percent of respondents favored annual immigration of less than 300,000. Overall, seventy-two percent of respondents favor an annual immigration level that is less than the current one million.
Roper ASW Poll conducted for Negative Population Growth (NPG), April 14-16, 2006
Fifty-six percent of Americans agree that a practical way to reduce to near zero the number of resident illegal aliens is legislation making penalties for illegal presence so severe that illegal immigrants would leave voluntarily rather than run the risk of being caught and penalized.
Roper ASW Poll conducted for Negative Population Growth (NPG), April 14-16, 2006
They have effectively blocked our goals by muddying the issue of undocumented and legals. To the average Joe on the street.. immigrant == undocumented
Id like to see how many people will say No to the question " Do you support increase of Green Cards to immigrants already here playing by the rules, paying taxes, Soc Sec etc without benefits, and waiting in line for an average of 6-7 years"
Hell, quite a few of the poll questions say the "amnesty" is unfair to those people who play by the rules...
I say.. focus our efforts on us for the time being.. differentiate ourselves from the undocumented..
Here is a sampling of the questions..
Public Opinion
NumbersUSA.com's goal of reducing annual legal and illegal immigration to more traditional numerical levels enjoys broad based public support. Virtually every major poll that has been conducted in the past decade finds that a majority of Americans support lower immigration numbers. As many of the following polls suggest, what we are for is the same thing a majority of Americans are for. CLICK HERE for our Public Opinion Archive.
Prefer Lower Numbers
Sixty-seven percent of Americans approve of the U.S. government deporting illegal immigrants to the country they came from.
Opinion Research Corporation/Lou Dobbs poll, June 8-11, 2006
Sixty-seven percent of Americans would you like to see the number of illegal immigrants currently in this country decreased.
Opinion Research Corporation/Lou Dobbs poll, June 8-11, 2006
Fifty-seven percent of registered voters believe the illegal immigration situation in the United States is "very serious" and twenty-nine percent believe it is "somewhat serious."
FOX News/Opinion Dynamics Poll, May 16-18, 2006
Fifty-five percent of registered voters "favor" trying to send as many illegal immigrants back to their home countries as possible.
FOX News/Opinion Dynamics Poll, May 16-18, 2006
Seventy-seven percent of Americans think the United States is not doing enough to keep illegal immigrants from coming into this country.
ABC News/Washington Post Poll, May 11-15, 2006
Fifty-seven percent of Americans think the May 1, 2006 illegal alien solidarity protests did more to hurt their cause than help.
NBC News/Wall Street Journal Poll, April 21-24, 2006
Informed that U.S. population is projected to grow to 420 million by 2050, fifty-seven percent of respondents believed that the present U.S. population of 300 million or less would be best for the country in the long run.
Roper ASW Poll conducted for Negative Population Growth (NPG), April 14-16, 2006
Six of ten Americans, according to the poll, favor annual immigration (now one million yearly) of less than 600,000 a year. Forty-five percent of respondents favored annual immigration of less than 300,000. Overall, seventy-two percent of respondents favor an annual immigration level that is less than the current one million.
Roper ASW Poll conducted for Negative Population Growth (NPG), April 14-16, 2006
Fifty-six percent of Americans agree that a practical way to reduce to near zero the number of resident illegal aliens is legislation making penalties for illegal presence so severe that illegal immigrants would leave voluntarily rather than run the risk of being caught and penalized.
Roper ASW Poll conducted for Negative Population Growth (NPG), April 14-16, 2006
They have effectively blocked our goals by muddying the issue of undocumented and legals. To the average Joe on the street.. immigrant == undocumented
Id like to see how many people will say No to the question " Do you support increase of Green Cards to immigrants already here playing by the rules, paying taxes, Soc Sec etc without benefits, and waiting in line for an average of 6-7 years"
Hell, quite a few of the poll questions say the "amnesty" is unfair to those people who play by the rules...
I say.. focus our efforts on us for the time being.. differentiate ourselves from the undocumented..
GCStatus
09-16 10:16 PM
http://www.newsobserver.com/news/story/628939.html
cooldude0807
11-21 05:05 PM
Hi Mehul, i'm really sorry to hear your situation. I was researching some stuff & since you are from Fiji & with the political unrest in your home country, can you take political asylum since you were kinda forced to leave the country. I mean everyone knows about the coup that took place in your country. below is a link that gives you more information on Political Asylum maybe this would expedite the process for you.
http://trac.syr.edu/immigration/reports/161/
Let me know if i can help you in any other way!!!
thanx
http://trac.syr.edu/immigration/reports/161/
Let me know if i can help you in any other way!!!
thanx
No comments:
Post a Comment