madooripraveen
03-25 01:52 PM
On March 12 2009 I got an query on my I-485.
Requesting discrepancy in the labor applied on Nov'7 2002 and present working place.
My company(abc ltd) applied labor on Nov'07 2002 while I was working at the clients(xyz) place in Los Angeles.
I got my I-140 approved on Feb'15 2006, while I was with the same client(xyz) at that time.
On Dec'04 2006 I moved to Detroit, started working with different client.
RFE goes like this.
The Documentation submitted with your application and/or a review of service records indicate that you no longer reside in the same state or geographical location as the underlying form i-140 immigration petitioner and /or job location specified by your intended permanent employer.
There fore submit a currently dated letter from your original form I-140 employer which which address this discrepancy.
I am still working with the same employer who filed my labor certification.
Any gurus who can suggest me on the query would be greatly appreciated.
Requesting discrepancy in the labor applied on Nov'7 2002 and present working place.
My company(abc ltd) applied labor on Nov'07 2002 while I was working at the clients(xyz) place in Los Angeles.
I got my I-140 approved on Feb'15 2006, while I was with the same client(xyz) at that time.
On Dec'04 2006 I moved to Detroit, started working with different client.
RFE goes like this.
The Documentation submitted with your application and/or a review of service records indicate that you no longer reside in the same state or geographical location as the underlying form i-140 immigration petitioner and /or job location specified by your intended permanent employer.
There fore submit a currently dated letter from your original form I-140 employer which which address this discrepancy.
I am still working with the same employer who filed my labor certification.
Any gurus who can suggest me on the query would be greatly appreciated.
wallpaper Angled Bob New Short Hairstyle
Macaca
03-08 09:19 AM
senate panel on Hold
Who Stalled the Intelligence Bill? (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/03/07/AR2007030702461.html)
Thursday, March 8, 2007
For what could become the third year in a row, the Senate on Tuesday evening did not pass an Intelligence Authorization Bill, over the objection of a lone Republican senator whose name is being protected by his colleagues.
John D. Rockefeller IV (D-W.Va.), chairman of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, called the delay "one of the more embarrassing efforts I have been associated with in my 24 years in this body." The panel's vice chairman, Sen. Christopher S. Bond (R-Mo.), took the Senate floor Tuesday and called on "any person who has a hold on this bill to come forward and find out what is in the bill."
Rockefeller and Bond have been working over several months to meet objections to items in the bill that the committee passed last May. With changes that Rockefeller and Bond worked out, the measure was reintroduced Jan. 27 and put on the unanimous consent calendar on Feb. 8.
Sen. Jim DeMint (R-S.C.), a member of the Foreign Relations Committee, was named by Congressional Quarterly yesterday as the member who put the bill on hold. A DeMint spokesman said the senator's office "does not comment on holds," but other congressional sources said that DeMint was the one.
Those sources said that they believe the hold is due to White House objections to specific provisions, including public disclosure of the national intelligence budget; a requirement for a report on secret CIA prisons; and response to information requests by the committee chairman and vice chairman within 30 days.
"We have to be able to pass authorization bills if we are to have an impact on the intelligence community," Bond said.
Who Stalled the Intelligence Bill? (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/03/07/AR2007030702461.html)
Thursday, March 8, 2007
For what could become the third year in a row, the Senate on Tuesday evening did not pass an Intelligence Authorization Bill, over the objection of a lone Republican senator whose name is being protected by his colleagues.
John D. Rockefeller IV (D-W.Va.), chairman of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, called the delay "one of the more embarrassing efforts I have been associated with in my 24 years in this body." The panel's vice chairman, Sen. Christopher S. Bond (R-Mo.), took the Senate floor Tuesday and called on "any person who has a hold on this bill to come forward and find out what is in the bill."
Rockefeller and Bond have been working over several months to meet objections to items in the bill that the committee passed last May. With changes that Rockefeller and Bond worked out, the measure was reintroduced Jan. 27 and put on the unanimous consent calendar on Feb. 8.
Sen. Jim DeMint (R-S.C.), a member of the Foreign Relations Committee, was named by Congressional Quarterly yesterday as the member who put the bill on hold. A DeMint spokesman said the senator's office "does not comment on holds," but other congressional sources said that DeMint was the one.
Those sources said that they believe the hold is due to White House objections to specific provisions, including public disclosure of the national intelligence budget; a requirement for a report on secret CIA prisons; and response to information requests by the committee chairman and vice chairman within 30 days.
"We have to be able to pass authorization bills if we are to have an impact on the intelligence community," Bond said.
stuck07
03-03 02:08 PM
My wife works for a University on her CPT. The University received a prevailing wage for her for her H-1B from the state agency on December 31, 2009 and it is still valid.
1. So when the University files for the LCA, can they use the prevailing wage from the state agency or do they have to use I-CERT for prevailing wage (ETA Form 9141)? Can the University use any other source for prevailing wage?
2. How long it is taking now to get the LCA certified?
Thanks.
1. So when the University files for the LCA, can they use the prevailing wage from the state agency or do they have to use I-CERT for prevailing wage (ETA Form 9141)? Can the University use any other source for prevailing wage?
2. How long it is taking now to get the LCA certified?
Thanks.
2011 New Long Hairstyles 2011: Bob
vinabath
07-02 03:55 PM
I do not have anything to say. But I hope your consulate has some saved/extra numbers that it can give it you. Good Luck Captain!!
more...
sembat
06-15 01:45 PM
I have 2 questions.
- With the PD becoming current, my wife's 485 will get applied anytime within the next month or so by her company lawyers. My GC is just about to be started. I will be adding my name to the 485 application of my wife. Does my GC application date has to do anything with this? I mean if my GC is applied before my wife's 485 (and my name added) or after my wife's 485(my name added), does it have any affect on either one's processing?
- Another question is does the H1-B extention for 3 years can happen after I-140 application or I-140 approval?
Thanks in advance for your comments.
--sembat
- With the PD becoming current, my wife's 485 will get applied anytime within the next month or so by her company lawyers. My GC is just about to be started. I will be adding my name to the 485 application of my wife. Does my GC application date has to do anything with this? I mean if my GC is applied before my wife's 485 (and my name added) or after my wife's 485(my name added), does it have any affect on either one's processing?
- Another question is does the H1-B extention for 3 years can happen after I-140 application or I-140 approval?
Thanks in advance for your comments.
--sembat
footballfan_kb
08-22 10:46 AM
Hi,
Just wondering if the transcript been posted as I was unable to find it online. Can you please post the link of the transcript?
Thanks
Just wondering if the transcript been posted as I was unable to find it online. Can you please post the link of the transcript?
Thanks
more...
WeShallOvercome
11-01 01:14 PM
I sent my EAD application on 10/24(Wednesday), reached NSC on 10/26(Friday), Notice date 10/29(Monday), Check cashed 10/30(Tuesday)..Already got I-485 receipts back in August.
So they are Current now.... But what about those July/Aug filers who are still waiting for their receipts? Very unfair to them. I could wait for 2 months to get my EAD receipt if they could first receipt all july august filers...
They are really unpredictable..
So they are Current now.... But what about those July/Aug filers who are still waiting for their receipts? Very unfair to them. I could wait for 2 months to get my EAD receipt if they could first receipt all july august filers...
They are really unpredictable..
2010 ideal hairstyle for women
vidyamanne
10-09 11:55 PM
Dear Sir/Madam,
I am in virginia on H1 status and my husband got H4 stamping in India recently.And now i am willing to transfer my H1 from XXX employer to YYY employer.
did my husband can enter the USA with that same H4 stamp after my H1 trasnfer also or not? or does he required to to take new H4 stamp with new employer name of prinicpal applicant before coming to USA.
Is there any Port of entry problem for him in case if he travel on H4 visa showing the Old employer of Principal aplicant.
Kindly give me the reply ASAP.
Many Thanks In advance
I am in virginia on H1 status and my husband got H4 stamping in India recently.And now i am willing to transfer my H1 from XXX employer to YYY employer.
did my husband can enter the USA with that same H4 stamp after my H1 trasnfer also or not? or does he required to to take new H4 stamp with new employer name of prinicpal applicant before coming to USA.
Is there any Port of entry problem for him in case if he travel on H4 visa showing the Old employer of Principal aplicant.
Kindly give me the reply ASAP.
Many Thanks In advance
more...
shana04
07-23 11:24 AM
Hi,
Can the invitation letter and the letter to the consulate be faxed to my parents to present to the consulate, or do I need to courier the original signed letters over?
Thanks!
I did the same yesterday. used courier to send the original signed letters.
Can the invitation letter and the letter to the consulate be faxed to my parents to present to the consulate, or do I need to courier the original signed letters over?
Thanks!
I did the same yesterday. used courier to send the original signed letters.
hair This ob haircut
rbharol
07-21 09:40 AM
I heard that there was a deadline to send 45 day letter before end of June this year. And I have seen 45 day letters coming to my friends and me.
Question is: Is there any deadline for them to complete processing all cases???
Another concern. When they are done processing all 350K cases, think of retrogression!
Question is: Is there any deadline for them to complete processing all cases???
Another concern. When they are done processing all 350K cases, think of retrogression!
more...
kondur_007
04-20 08:43 PM
My wife is planning on going to India in summer, and she has either misplaced or lost her i94 card. What should i do now?
Was it at I 94 given at the airport or was it something that came attached to approval notice with extension/change of status?
Do you know for sure that it was not expired?
Do you have a copy of it?
When is your wife coming back from India (for how long she is visiting)?
Was it at I 94 given at the airport or was it something that came attached to approval notice with extension/change of status?
Do you know for sure that it was not expired?
Do you have a copy of it?
When is your wife coming back from India (for how long she is visiting)?
hot New Inverted Bob
CanadianGuy
11-24 08:16 PM
Are you trying to mac this girl?
more...
house Aniston#39;s new hairstyle in
kirupa
02-28 04:15 PM
Added!
tattoo Shag Bob Short Haircut New
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.�
more...
pictures Bob type hairstyles can vary
Milind123
09-11 09:55 PM
I repeat COME TO DC AND GET YOUR GC.
Yes people, only three little steps ... DC EC FC and finally GC.
Yes people, only three little steps ... DC EC FC and finally GC.
dresses layered ob hairstyle.
kumar1
08-17 11:40 PM
I also received RFE. It was related to TB chest X-ray. In '07 doctor said, it is not requited but USCIS feels other way.
more...
makeup Paris Hilton Bob Haircut
RadioactveChimp
05-01 10:04 PM
haha nice man. a few things though
1) i don't like how the sort of "radiation" coming from his face stops abruptly
2) it looks like you were going to put "1.00" but forgot the ".", it has a weird spacing
-Dean
1) i don't like how the sort of "radiation" coming from his face stops abruptly
2) it looks like you were going to put "1.00" but forgot the ".", it has a weird spacing
-Dean
girlfriend Has Short New Bob Haircut
venky08
10-29 01:09 PM
can somebody please post this on the forum. thanks
hairstyles latest new angled ob haircut
Macaca
05-25 08:10 PM
Making History, Reluctantly (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/05/24/AR2007052402069.html) In a Hill Anomaly, Pelosi Shepherds Iraq Bill She Opposes, By Jonathan Weisman (http://projects.washingtonpost.com/staff/email/jonathan+weisman/) Washington Post Staff Writer, Friday, May 25, 2007
In public, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) had done nothing to suppress her frustration as she assented to funding the Iraq war without a deadline to end it. But behind closed doors Wednesday night, she was all business.
With its members gathered in her office, she told the House's "Progressive Caucus" that she would vote against the war funding bill, but that she also had no choice but to facilitate its passage. Funds were running out for the troops, and she had promised to protect them. The Memorial Day break loomed, and without the money President Bush would have a week to hammer her party for taking a vacation while the Pentagon scrambled to keep its soldiers fed.
Was she agonized over the situation? Sure, said Rep. Maurice D. Hinchey (D-N.Y.), who attended the meeting. But "we all feel that way," he added. "I feel that way, too. Are we going to just walk away now, or are we going to continue this process, to keep the pressure on?"
Yesterday's vote to fund the war through September was a historical rarity: the passage of a bill opposed by the speaker of the House and a majority of the speaker's party.
Two years ago to the day, then-Speaker J. Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) violated the "Hastert rule" -- that only bills supported by a majority of the majority can come up -- by bringing up legislation to allow federal funding for stem cell research. The majority of the Republican majority opposed the law. He voted against it, but he knew it would never become law over President Bush's signature.
Over his objections and the opposition of most Republicans, Hastert did allow passage of campaign finance reform in 2002, but only because a petition drive was about to force the bill to the floor. The North American Free Trade Agreement passed in 1993, over the objections of most Democrats, who were then in the majority. But NAFTA did have the support of then-Speaker Thomas S. Foley (D-Wash.), as well as the Democratic president, Bill Clinton.
In contrast, the Iraq funding bill was not only opposed by the majority of House Democrats, it was also ardently opposed by the speaker and even the lawmaker who drafted it, Appropriations Committee Chairman David R. Obey (D-Wis.). And it is destined to become law.
"We don't relish bringing a package to the floor that we're not going to vote for," Obey conceded before last night's vote.
Pelosi's agonized decision put her in the company of Foley, who in 1991 brought to the floor the resolution authorizing the Persian Gulf War and then voted against it, and Thomas Brackett Reed, a speaker in the 1890s who voted against the annexation of Hawaii, and then against the Spanish-American War, but allowed both to go forward.
"To have the chairman and the speaker vote against a bill like this, I've never heard of it," Hastert said.
But while protesters outside the Capitol condemned what they saw as a capitulation, Democrats inside were remarkably understanding of their speaker's contortions.
Party leaders jury-rigged the votes yesterday to give all Democrats something to brag about. A parliamentary vote to bring the Iraq funding legislation to the floor included language demanding a showdown vote in September over further funding. A second vote allowed Democrats to vote in favor of funds for Gulf Coast hurricane recovery, agricultural drought relief and children's health insurance. Finally, the House got around to funding the war.
Republicans cried foul over what they saw as an abuse of the legislative system, but Democrats saw brilliance in the legerdemain. And with such contortions came more appreciation for the efforts Pelosi was making to fund the war in a fashion most palatable to angry Democrats.
"It was the responsible thing to do, and she's a responsible speaker," said Rep. Anna G. Eshoo (D-Calif.), who is personally close to Pelosi. "You can't just walk away."
In public, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) had done nothing to suppress her frustration as she assented to funding the Iraq war without a deadline to end it. But behind closed doors Wednesday night, she was all business.
With its members gathered in her office, she told the House's "Progressive Caucus" that she would vote against the war funding bill, but that she also had no choice but to facilitate its passage. Funds were running out for the troops, and she had promised to protect them. The Memorial Day break loomed, and without the money President Bush would have a week to hammer her party for taking a vacation while the Pentagon scrambled to keep its soldiers fed.
Was she agonized over the situation? Sure, said Rep. Maurice D. Hinchey (D-N.Y.), who attended the meeting. But "we all feel that way," he added. "I feel that way, too. Are we going to just walk away now, or are we going to continue this process, to keep the pressure on?"
Yesterday's vote to fund the war through September was a historical rarity: the passage of a bill opposed by the speaker of the House and a majority of the speaker's party.
Two years ago to the day, then-Speaker J. Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) violated the "Hastert rule" -- that only bills supported by a majority of the majority can come up -- by bringing up legislation to allow federal funding for stem cell research. The majority of the Republican majority opposed the law. He voted against it, but he knew it would never become law over President Bush's signature.
Over his objections and the opposition of most Republicans, Hastert did allow passage of campaign finance reform in 2002, but only because a petition drive was about to force the bill to the floor. The North American Free Trade Agreement passed in 1993, over the objections of most Democrats, who were then in the majority. But NAFTA did have the support of then-Speaker Thomas S. Foley (D-Wash.), as well as the Democratic president, Bill Clinton.
In contrast, the Iraq funding bill was not only opposed by the majority of House Democrats, it was also ardently opposed by the speaker and even the lawmaker who drafted it, Appropriations Committee Chairman David R. Obey (D-Wis.). And it is destined to become law.
"We don't relish bringing a package to the floor that we're not going to vote for," Obey conceded before last night's vote.
Pelosi's agonized decision put her in the company of Foley, who in 1991 brought to the floor the resolution authorizing the Persian Gulf War and then voted against it, and Thomas Brackett Reed, a speaker in the 1890s who voted against the annexation of Hawaii, and then against the Spanish-American War, but allowed both to go forward.
"To have the chairman and the speaker vote against a bill like this, I've never heard of it," Hastert said.
But while protesters outside the Capitol condemned what they saw as a capitulation, Democrats inside were remarkably understanding of their speaker's contortions.
Party leaders jury-rigged the votes yesterday to give all Democrats something to brag about. A parliamentary vote to bring the Iraq funding legislation to the floor included language demanding a showdown vote in September over further funding. A second vote allowed Democrats to vote in favor of funds for Gulf Coast hurricane recovery, agricultural drought relief and children's health insurance. Finally, the House got around to funding the war.
Republicans cried foul over what they saw as an abuse of the legislative system, but Democrats saw brilliance in the legerdemain. And with such contortions came more appreciation for the efforts Pelosi was making to fund the war in a fashion most palatable to angry Democrats.
"It was the responsible thing to do, and she's a responsible speaker," said Rep. Anna G. Eshoo (D-Calif.), who is personally close to Pelosi. "You can't just walk away."
anilsal
12-26 11:00 PM
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=2708
Anti-immigrants are not welcome.
Anti-immigrants are not welcome.
Nil
03-08 06:54 PM
i am also interested in having an experienced answer to this Pls.
No comments:
Post a Comment