sathyaraj
09-27 02:31 PM
Hi, My wife has started working on EAD as an individual contract employee and her employer is asking to complete W9 form. But in the form it says that only US citizen can complete that form. Also it asks for backup withholding. I am not sure what it is.
I am confused now. I know that EAD has no restriction in employment. Pl. help.
I am confused now. I know that EAD has no restriction in employment. Pl. help.
wallpaper Your Facebook Login Email
ssd_sl
07-26 10:40 AM
I applied for I485 like many others in July. I just heard my group may be spun off from its parent company and might be funded by VCs. Does this mean I cannot use my LC/I140? If/When I get my EAD will it be valid?
All ye learned people thanks in advance...
ssd_sl
All ye learned people thanks in advance...
ssd_sl
sina
01-10 09:33 AM
I have a approved I140 from my current employer with prority date of may 2006. I had applied a labor long time back in Jan 2004 with another employer. This labor is approved now. Can I apply another I140 with the old empoyer without revoking the one that I have with the current employer as I want to stay with the current employer till I get the new I140 approved? Will applying the I140 with the old affect my current I140 approval.
Please help, I have to decide soon.
Please help, I have to decide soon.
2011 Your Facebook Login Email
richclarity
09-25 02:40 PM
Hi,
I am currently a dependent E-1 on my wife's visa and currently have a valid EAD which will expire mid-2010.
We are about to file I-140 and I-485 and my question is, should I also file for a new EAD at the same time even if its still 8 months from expiry? I'm not sure what the difference is between an EAD under the E-1 visa, or an EAD when filing the I-485, or if it doesn't matter at all.
Hopefully someone can help. Thanks!
I am currently a dependent E-1 on my wife's visa and currently have a valid EAD which will expire mid-2010.
We are about to file I-140 and I-485 and my question is, should I also file for a new EAD at the same time even if its still 8 months from expiry? I'm not sure what the difference is between an EAD under the E-1 visa, or an EAD when filing the I-485, or if it doesn't matter at all.
Hopefully someone can help. Thanks!
more...
Blog Feeds
01-12 07:40 AM
While many are assuming that the public won't accept immigration reform during this recession, polling numbers tell a different story. America's Voice commissioned recent polling that shows firm support for CIR: Sixty-Five Percent of Respondents Supported Congressional Action on Comprehensive Immigration Reform in 2010. According to the December poll, 65% of voters prefer for Congress to take up the immigration issue this year rather than wait until later. Sixty-six percent of respondents supported comprehensive immigration reform before even hearing details of the plan. Support for reform continued to cut across party lines, with 69% of Democrats, 67% of independents, and...
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2010/01/poll-americans-still-firmly-in-favor-of-immigration-reform.html)
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2010/01/poll-americans-still-firmly-in-favor-of-immigration-reform.html)
mambarg
07-18 02:48 PM
Is the email printout of 140 approval enough to attach to 485 app.
I have not received the printed notice and do not want to wait for it.
I want to go ahead with attaching approved email of 140.
Is it ok ?
Thanks
I have not received the printed notice and do not want to wait for it.
I want to go ahead with attaching approved email of 140.
Is it ok ?
Thanks
more...
Macaca
08-16 05:49 PM
Graham Facing More Heat on Immigration (http://www.rollcall.com/issues/53_19/politics/19734-1.html) By Matthew Murray, ROLL CALL STAFF, August 13, 2007
For the second time this month, a local South Carolina Republican Party committee is expected to decide soon whether to formally scold Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) for supporting the Senate's now-stalled immigration overhaul proposal, putting the once-popular lawmaker on the defensive and upping the ante for a potential 2008 primary challenger.
"The frustration [with Graham] is real," said one state Republican source, who added that the state's large conservative base is "just searching for someone" to challenge Graham in next year's primary.
The Spartanburg County Republican Party is expected to vote Aug. 23 on a resolution officially rebuking Graham for supporting his chamber's immigration bill. Criticism of the reform package, which was shelved last month after failing to gather the 60 votes necessary to cut off debate in the Senate, has raged throughout the country and particularly in states such as South Carolina, where AM talk-radio hosts have bloodied the Senate proposal and said it tries to reward those who have broken the law.
Rick Beltram, chairman of the Spartanburg County Republican Party, said he doubts a resolution criticizing Graham's stance on immigration would pass by a wide margin. But should the measure come up for a vote, Beltram already has developed a game plan to manage what likely will be an angry lot.
"This being as explosive as it is, we would ask for a secret ballot so 30 or 40 Rep. Ron Paul [R-Texas] people yelling in the background wouldn't have an influence on the election," Beltram said.
Last week, the Greenville County Republican Party passed a resolution censuring Graham for continuing to "adamantly support legalization of illegal immigrants." In addition to immigration, local party officials reprimanded Graham for supporting campaign finance reform and participating two years ago in the "Gang of 14," a bipartisan Senate group that negotiated a compromise on controversial federal judicial nominations.
The resolution also criticized Graham's recent statements before the National Council of La Raza, which were captured by cable news networks.
"We are not going to run people down. We are not going to scapegoat people. We are going to tell the bigots to shut up and we're going to get this right," Graham told the crowd.
Samuel Harms, the Greenville GOP chairman whose group adopted a resolution in 2001 "opposing any legalization of illegal immigration," said Graham's speech to La Raza was the "straw that broke the camel's back." He added that the resolution was "about informing people that Lindsey Graham called the good people of Greenville bigots and that we need to be told to shut up."
A successful censure vote next week in Spartanburg may signal a widening opportunity for a potential Graham challenger next year. So far, Graham faces only token primary opposition and last month he dodged a potential bullet when popular state Treasurer Thomas Ravenel (R), who was considering a run, was arrested for allegedly distributing cocaine.
Democrats have yet to find a challenger to the first-term Senator.
After recapturing some of the love lost during his Gang of 14 days, a GOP source said Graham's recent bruising for supporting the immigration bill may convince some conservative party activists that an opportunity is again at hand. Also, Graham's support of tanking presidential candidate Sen. John McCain's (R-Ariz.) campaign, the source said, is not helping his cause.
"The immigration issue reignited the ember," the source said.
Still, with Graham sitting on $4 million in the bank, potential primary challengers face a steep uphill battle contending with an incumbent who may have twice that total squirrelled away before the year's end. Lt. Gov. Andr� Bauer (R), frequently said to be mulling a run, told Roll Call last week that he has not ruled out the possibility of challenging Graham.
"I would never say never," Bauer said. "But I don't have any plans to run against him."
But Bauer does plan to appear at the Aug. 23 meeting of the Spartanburg County GOP.
Katon Dawson, chairman of the South Carolina Republican Party, said that while it's unusual for party activists to go to such extremes with federal officeholders, the immigration issue has struck a nerve with the party's base.
"You can't bluff it, you can't beat around the bush about it, it's there and it's real," he said. "Lindsey has a different philosophy on immigration and there's no question it's hurting him."
For now, Graham appears to be resting on his conservative laurels and betting that the controversy will pass. Graham currently is out of the country, his campaign said Friday, but will return to the state to campaign later this month.
"Lindsey Graham is a strong conservative voice in the U.S. Senate with a lifetime conservative rating of 91," according to a statement provided by spokesman Scott Farmer. "He will seek re-election based on his conservative voting record and willingness to tackle the hard problems facing our nation."
Whit Ayers, a Republican pollster, said immigration undoubtedly is a challenging issue, but one that plays to Graham's strengths. Even more, despite the current controversy, Ayers said voters ultimately respect lawmakers who take principled positions.
"Sen. Graham is a remarkedly adept politician who will be able to be very persuasive about the reasons why he's done the things he's done," Ayers said. "I don't think we would expect our politicians to be in lock step on every single issue that comes up."
He added: "There's no question that Lindsey Graham is right where most Republican voters in South Carolina are on God, guns, gays and taxes."
For the second time this month, a local South Carolina Republican Party committee is expected to decide soon whether to formally scold Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) for supporting the Senate's now-stalled immigration overhaul proposal, putting the once-popular lawmaker on the defensive and upping the ante for a potential 2008 primary challenger.
"The frustration [with Graham] is real," said one state Republican source, who added that the state's large conservative base is "just searching for someone" to challenge Graham in next year's primary.
The Spartanburg County Republican Party is expected to vote Aug. 23 on a resolution officially rebuking Graham for supporting his chamber's immigration bill. Criticism of the reform package, which was shelved last month after failing to gather the 60 votes necessary to cut off debate in the Senate, has raged throughout the country and particularly in states such as South Carolina, where AM talk-radio hosts have bloodied the Senate proposal and said it tries to reward those who have broken the law.
Rick Beltram, chairman of the Spartanburg County Republican Party, said he doubts a resolution criticizing Graham's stance on immigration would pass by a wide margin. But should the measure come up for a vote, Beltram already has developed a game plan to manage what likely will be an angry lot.
"This being as explosive as it is, we would ask for a secret ballot so 30 or 40 Rep. Ron Paul [R-Texas] people yelling in the background wouldn't have an influence on the election," Beltram said.
Last week, the Greenville County Republican Party passed a resolution censuring Graham for continuing to "adamantly support legalization of illegal immigrants." In addition to immigration, local party officials reprimanded Graham for supporting campaign finance reform and participating two years ago in the "Gang of 14," a bipartisan Senate group that negotiated a compromise on controversial federal judicial nominations.
The resolution also criticized Graham's recent statements before the National Council of La Raza, which were captured by cable news networks.
"We are not going to run people down. We are not going to scapegoat people. We are going to tell the bigots to shut up and we're going to get this right," Graham told the crowd.
Samuel Harms, the Greenville GOP chairman whose group adopted a resolution in 2001 "opposing any legalization of illegal immigration," said Graham's speech to La Raza was the "straw that broke the camel's back." He added that the resolution was "about informing people that Lindsey Graham called the good people of Greenville bigots and that we need to be told to shut up."
A successful censure vote next week in Spartanburg may signal a widening opportunity for a potential Graham challenger next year. So far, Graham faces only token primary opposition and last month he dodged a potential bullet when popular state Treasurer Thomas Ravenel (R), who was considering a run, was arrested for allegedly distributing cocaine.
Democrats have yet to find a challenger to the first-term Senator.
After recapturing some of the love lost during his Gang of 14 days, a GOP source said Graham's recent bruising for supporting the immigration bill may convince some conservative party activists that an opportunity is again at hand. Also, Graham's support of tanking presidential candidate Sen. John McCain's (R-Ariz.) campaign, the source said, is not helping his cause.
"The immigration issue reignited the ember," the source said.
Still, with Graham sitting on $4 million in the bank, potential primary challengers face a steep uphill battle contending with an incumbent who may have twice that total squirrelled away before the year's end. Lt. Gov. Andr� Bauer (R), frequently said to be mulling a run, told Roll Call last week that he has not ruled out the possibility of challenging Graham.
"I would never say never," Bauer said. "But I don't have any plans to run against him."
But Bauer does plan to appear at the Aug. 23 meeting of the Spartanburg County GOP.
Katon Dawson, chairman of the South Carolina Republican Party, said that while it's unusual for party activists to go to such extremes with federal officeholders, the immigration issue has struck a nerve with the party's base.
"You can't bluff it, you can't beat around the bush about it, it's there and it's real," he said. "Lindsey has a different philosophy on immigration and there's no question it's hurting him."
For now, Graham appears to be resting on his conservative laurels and betting that the controversy will pass. Graham currently is out of the country, his campaign said Friday, but will return to the state to campaign later this month.
"Lindsey Graham is a strong conservative voice in the U.S. Senate with a lifetime conservative rating of 91," according to a statement provided by spokesman Scott Farmer. "He will seek re-election based on his conservative voting record and willingness to tackle the hard problems facing our nation."
Whit Ayers, a Republican pollster, said immigration undoubtedly is a challenging issue, but one that plays to Graham's strengths. Even more, despite the current controversy, Ayers said voters ultimately respect lawmakers who take principled positions.
"Sen. Graham is a remarkedly adept politician who will be able to be very persuasive about the reasons why he's done the things he's done," Ayers said. "I don't think we would expect our politicians to be in lock step on every single issue that comes up."
He added: "There's no question that Lindsey Graham is right where most Republican voters in South Carolina are on God, guns, gays and taxes."
2010 the Facebook login/logout
anyluck?
01-24 10:23 PM
Hi ,
My wife has H1 visa approved under Consular Processing from Company A, so she is still under H4. She got another offer from Company B so we applied for another H1B before H1B quota expired. It is under process.
1 ) we applied for COS from H4 to H1 By Company A by premium processing.
2 ) Company B H1B from H4 is also under process.
Does the order of outcome from either petetions affect another petetion. For example if companie A petetion is approved and then afterwards company B petetion is rejected. will she be in H1 status.
Thanks
My wife has H1 visa approved under Consular Processing from Company A, so she is still under H4. She got another offer from Company B so we applied for another H1B before H1B quota expired. It is under process.
1 ) we applied for COS from H4 to H1 By Company A by premium processing.
2 ) Company B H1B from H4 is also under process.
Does the order of outcome from either petetions affect another petetion. For example if companie A petetion is approved and then afterwards company B petetion is rejected. will she be in H1 status.
Thanks
more...
gina_raluca
03-16 03:17 PM
There has been an error in the processing of my I-130 petition for my mother. It was approved and now I am being asked to submit form I-485 or form I-824. The problem is that my mother is not and has never been to the US. I called CIS and talked to a representative about the error. She said she would send a letter to the CIS about it and that I should hear back from CIS in 5 days. I am just wondering if this timeline is realistic or I should expect it to take more time. Should I contact my senator and ask for assistance in facilitating this process? Would hiring a lawyer expedite this process? I know that the petition should then go to the NVC. Would a lawyer help?
Thank you very much.
Thank you very much.
hair The fake Facebook login page
raysaikat
03-05 11:06 AM
Hi,
My visa expires in May 2009. I applied for OPT and starting date will be from June 1st 2009. I want to go to India in the last quarter of 2009. How do I get a valid visa. Should I get a new F1 Visa? Please help me..
OPT is a part of F1, it is not a new status. Technically you can get a VISA stamp for your F1 during OPT, and many do get, but you need to prove "no intent to immigrate" during your VISA interview and that's harder to do when you are on OPT and working for some company.
My visa expires in May 2009. I applied for OPT and starting date will be from June 1st 2009. I want to go to India in the last quarter of 2009. How do I get a valid visa. Should I get a new F1 Visa? Please help me..
OPT is a part of F1, it is not a new status. Technically you can get a VISA stamp for your F1 during OPT, and many do get, but you need to prove "no intent to immigrate" during your VISA interview and that's harder to do when you are on OPT and working for some company.
more...
Blog Feeds
11-18 03:00 PM
USCIS is reporting that as of November 6th, 54,900 H-1Bs had been issued against the 65,000 annual quota. While this represents a dramatic drop in H-1B applications over previous years. In 2007, nearly 200,000 applications were filed in the first week applications were open and in 2009, the application period is now in its seventh month. Usage seems to be about 1,000 cases a week so we're probably looking at January or February to run out of numbers. Incidentally, yesterday I was the moderator of a panel on the impact of the global recession on national migration policies in Amsterdam....
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2009/11/h1b-numbers-down-to-final-10000.html)
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2009/11/h1b-numbers-down-to-final-10000.html)
hot Facebook+login+welcome
julsun
01-20 10:26 PM
Hi All,
We had filed for AP from NSC for my wife in Oct. She needs to travel on 1st Feb, so we took a local infopass appointment hoping to have local office issue AP. Two days before our local Infopass appointment, online status for my wife's AP said that they have requested further evidence. We are yet to receive the document for same so do not know what evidence they are asking for.
On Friday, when my wife went to local Infopass office, she was told that they can not issue local AP if her case has an RFE at NSC center, and was told to wait for the document. We are in a bind right now as she needs to travel and local office wont issue AP.
Any suggestions for this one? Have already contacted NSC twice to get details on RFE but they are also saying wait for the letter :-(
Thanks
We had filed for AP from NSC for my wife in Oct. She needs to travel on 1st Feb, so we took a local infopass appointment hoping to have local office issue AP. Two days before our local Infopass appointment, online status for my wife's AP said that they have requested further evidence. We are yet to receive the document for same so do not know what evidence they are asking for.
On Friday, when my wife went to local Infopass office, she was told that they can not issue local AP if her case has an RFE at NSC center, and was told to wait for the document. We are in a bind right now as she needs to travel and local office wont issue AP.
Any suggestions for this one? Have already contacted NSC twice to get details on RFE but they are also saying wait for the letter :-(
Thanks
more...
house Facebook Email Signup amp; Login
kirupa
12-20 04:08 AM
I think MVVM is good for the type of apps people are building right now. The way I see it, patterns usually evolve as the type of applications they help build evolve. Many applications even today do not strictly follow a view/model separation even today :P
tattoo fwrite($file,$email.quot;:quot;.
wc_user
11-15 10:53 PM
My Title is different in H1-B and GC, though it is in the same field.. I am going for stamping to Chennai in January.. Will this be a problem ? Will they ask questions about I-485 filing in H1-B stamping ?
more...
pictures Facebook+login+page+
sury
02-05 08:53 PM
My friend is having a software consulting company and is also planning to launch a Jobsite. He was confused he can do so as he is running software company..
Please advise..
Please advise..
dresses to facebook, login login
naveenk_m
04-16 11:51 AM
Hi All:
Usually I check status of my case online using USCIS website. I got the following error what does this mean?. I got the same mssage few months back and after day or two it was alright.
Validation Error(s)
You must correct the following error(s) before proceeding:
Login failed. Your User ID and/or Password are invalid.
Multiple duplicate SRs already exist for the customer
It sounds like they have multiple SR's on my case.
1) What does this mean?.
2) or Did any one got same kind of error?.
Thanks,
Usually I check status of my case online using USCIS website. I got the following error what does this mean?. I got the same mssage few months back and after day or two it was alright.
Validation Error(s)
You must correct the following error(s) before proceeding:
Login failed. Your User ID and/or Password are invalid.
Multiple duplicate SRs already exist for the customer
It sounds like they have multiple SR's on my case.
1) What does this mean?.
2) or Did any one got same kind of error?.
Thanks,
more...
makeup Log in using. Login:(email)
maryann
10-20 12:35 PM
Hi,
Would anyone know how to make columns within a textblock whereby the text content will automatically flow between the columns (like in a newspaper)?
Thanks very much,
Maryann
Would anyone know how to make columns within a textblock whereby the text content will automatically flow between the columns (like in a newspaper)?
Thanks very much,
Maryann
girlfriend They had sent an email to my
martinvisalaw
07-09 05:53 PM
No, you don't need the I-864. The interview letter that you got might refer to an I-864, but this is often because the local district office has standard interview letters and they are more often for family cases than employment cases. I've seen this happen often.
hairstyles If your Facebook email address
vivek_k
11-18 10:37 AM
Hi! My company is moving to another address. My I-140 was filed on July 2, 2007 (USCIS receipt date August 20, 2007). My H-1B 6th year will end on July 1, 2009. My lawyer wants to file for the change of address and the H-1B extension together. He is asking for about $2k+ for self and family (incl atty fee and filing fees).
Is the change of address on H-1B that big a deal? Can anyone please advise? Is it not a simple AR-11 form that has to be filed? Are the requirements for change of address different once labor certification is done.
Thanks.
Is the change of address on H-1B that big a deal? Can anyone please advise? Is it not a simple AR-11 form that has to be filed? Are the requirements for change of address different once labor certification is done.
Thanks.
Macaca
07-31 05:23 PM
It's Time to End Or Reduce The Cloture Clog (http://rollcall.com/issues/53_15/guest/19599-1.html) By Robert Weiner and John Larmett, July 31 2007
Robert Weiner, president of Robert Weiner Associates Public Affairs, worked for 16 years in the House of Representatives and for six years in the Clinton White House. John Larmett, senior policy analyst at Robert Weiner Associates, was legislative assistant/press secretary to Rep. Jim McDermott (D-Wash.) and former Sen. Gaylord Nelson (D-Wis.).
The Senate's cloture rule defeats democracy. It lets public servants hide and obfuscate behind a parliamentary quirk never intended by the framers of the Constitution. It's time to end or significantly change the cloture rule, as was last done in 1975, and move to a true democracy so that the House and Senate equally represent the American people.
There are checks and balances, the only ones the Founding Fathers stated and intended: a presidential veto, which Congress can override with two-thirds, the only supermajority specified in the Constitution; the courts; and elections. No one ever foresaw parliamentary sleight of hand as a block of the will of the majority. If Congress wants to restore Americans' confidence in its work from the current all-time lows, it needs to allow the system to work as common sense, the Constitution and the framers dictate.
During the April-May 2005 "crisis" on judicial nominations, the "Gang of 14," seven Democratic and seven Republican Senators, agreed to oppose the constitutional or "nuclear" option and to oppose filibusters of judicial nominations except in "extraordinary circumstances." However, the Senate has failed to cut off debate on other issues 57 times since then, making clear that the system has failed.
Democrats are right to scream Republican "obstructionism," but Republicans, when they were in the majority, also were right to scream Democratic obstructionism. Both sides use and abuse the rule when they are in the minority to create some supermajority fantasy the public will not understand - and then blame the other side for not getting a legislative agenda accomplished.
In last year's campaigns, House Democrats promised to change the way Congress does business - and do it within the first 100 hours they were in session. With a majority of 30-60 votes, but no supermajority requirement, the House passed its entire agenda. Despite majority support, hindered by the supermajority "cloture," the Senate has struggled all year just to pass a few bills. The American people get the feeling the Senate is a train that never quite leaves the station.
The slow train continued July 17-18 when Republicans scuttled a Democratic proposal ordering troop withdrawals from Iraq in a showdown capping an all-night debate. The 52-47 vote fell short of the 60 votes needed to invoke cloture, the 27th time this year alone that body has been unable to proceed on significant pieces of legislation. In the previous Congress (controlled by Republicans), Democrats were successful 34 times in blocking Republican legislation. Cloture has become the third rail of Congressional politics. It's time for the train to move on a different track.
Everyone has been properly complaining about obstructionism, but no one has said anything about changing the Senate rule on cloture. Since Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) is talking about changing Senate rules to make it easier to restrict amendments on the floor, then why shouldn't the Senate also start the discussion about changing the cloture rule right now? It could be the difference in getting bills passed.
In early July, the minority's decision to filibuster the amendment by Sen. Jim Webb (D-Va.), which stated that men and women serving in the military deserved the same amount of time at home that they served overseas, died on a 56-41 failed cloture vote - a majority supporting it but the media saying it "failed."
In 1975, the Senate reduced the number of votes required for cloture from two-thirds to three-fifths, and it should change it again. If not an end outright, the best approach to guarantee the will of the majority, why not at least drop the requirement to 55 votes - necessitating just a little bit of extra consensus to end debate. Let the will of the American people, and of a majority of the Senate itself, be acted upon.
It's time to end the cloture clog, regardless of who's in charge.
Robert Weiner, president of Robert Weiner Associates Public Affairs, worked for 16 years in the House of Representatives and for six years in the Clinton White House. John Larmett, senior policy analyst at Robert Weiner Associates, was legislative assistant/press secretary to Rep. Jim McDermott (D-Wash.) and former Sen. Gaylord Nelson (D-Wis.).
The Senate's cloture rule defeats democracy. It lets public servants hide and obfuscate behind a parliamentary quirk never intended by the framers of the Constitution. It's time to end or significantly change the cloture rule, as was last done in 1975, and move to a true democracy so that the House and Senate equally represent the American people.
There are checks and balances, the only ones the Founding Fathers stated and intended: a presidential veto, which Congress can override with two-thirds, the only supermajority specified in the Constitution; the courts; and elections. No one ever foresaw parliamentary sleight of hand as a block of the will of the majority. If Congress wants to restore Americans' confidence in its work from the current all-time lows, it needs to allow the system to work as common sense, the Constitution and the framers dictate.
During the April-May 2005 "crisis" on judicial nominations, the "Gang of 14," seven Democratic and seven Republican Senators, agreed to oppose the constitutional or "nuclear" option and to oppose filibusters of judicial nominations except in "extraordinary circumstances." However, the Senate has failed to cut off debate on other issues 57 times since then, making clear that the system has failed.
Democrats are right to scream Republican "obstructionism," but Republicans, when they were in the majority, also were right to scream Democratic obstructionism. Both sides use and abuse the rule when they are in the minority to create some supermajority fantasy the public will not understand - and then blame the other side for not getting a legislative agenda accomplished.
In last year's campaigns, House Democrats promised to change the way Congress does business - and do it within the first 100 hours they were in session. With a majority of 30-60 votes, but no supermajority requirement, the House passed its entire agenda. Despite majority support, hindered by the supermajority "cloture," the Senate has struggled all year just to pass a few bills. The American people get the feeling the Senate is a train that never quite leaves the station.
The slow train continued July 17-18 when Republicans scuttled a Democratic proposal ordering troop withdrawals from Iraq in a showdown capping an all-night debate. The 52-47 vote fell short of the 60 votes needed to invoke cloture, the 27th time this year alone that body has been unable to proceed on significant pieces of legislation. In the previous Congress (controlled by Republicans), Democrats were successful 34 times in blocking Republican legislation. Cloture has become the third rail of Congressional politics. It's time for the train to move on a different track.
Everyone has been properly complaining about obstructionism, but no one has said anything about changing the Senate rule on cloture. Since Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) is talking about changing Senate rules to make it easier to restrict amendments on the floor, then why shouldn't the Senate also start the discussion about changing the cloture rule right now? It could be the difference in getting bills passed.
In early July, the minority's decision to filibuster the amendment by Sen. Jim Webb (D-Va.), which stated that men and women serving in the military deserved the same amount of time at home that they served overseas, died on a 56-41 failed cloture vote - a majority supporting it but the media saying it "failed."
In 1975, the Senate reduced the number of votes required for cloture from two-thirds to three-fifths, and it should change it again. If not an end outright, the best approach to guarantee the will of the majority, why not at least drop the requirement to 55 votes - necessitating just a little bit of extra consensus to end debate. Let the will of the American people, and of a majority of the Senate itself, be acted upon.
It's time to end the cloture clog, regardless of who's in charge.
Blog Feeds
08-11 10:10 AM
My friend Tom Roach in Washington State forwarded this letter from the Arizona Catholic Conference which was released after Judge Bolton's decision in the Arizona case. I'm posting it because it has some language that I think is very helpful in the debate. The Bishops say There must be a process - but not amnesty - for persons who have entered our country illegally to pursue legal status. This process must have proportionate consequences for the act of illegal entry, consequences that would include fines, learning English, and going to the "back of the line" to seek citizenship. The idea...
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2010/08/proportional-consequences.html)
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2010/08/proportional-consequences.html)
No comments:
Post a Comment