Project "Ocean" : Become a U.S. Citizen by 2008 Election !!

[kashmir]

I talked with Ms. Alis working on Immigration policy at Anna Eshoo's Washington D.C. office today.
We will discuss again on Monday morning.

If you have a specific item, let me know by Saturday evening.
-kashmir

Originally posted by kashmir
I started contacting one of staff working on immigration policy at Anna Eshoo's Washington DC office.
-kashmir

[kadamtal]

Hi Kashmir,

There are couple of questions
1) How do i know which district i am in
2) If i am from 15 what are the specifications of the points you listed. Like, you said modifying INA, what is that all about. Although, I understand the Backlog stuff.

I guess you should list out what you generally talk with these guys and how you approach them, for dummies like me to know better so i can help if i am the one.

[georgi]

To both sen Feinstein and sen Boxer

[kashmir]

Originally posted by kadamtal
Hi Kashmir,

There are couple of questions
1) How do i know which district i am in
2) If i am from 15 what are the specifications of the points you listed. Like, you said modifying INA, what is that all about. Although, I understand the Backlog stuff.

I guess you should list out what you generally talk with these guys and how you approach them, for dummies like me to know better so i can help if i am the one.

Hi, kadamtal,
1)
a) Go to http://www.house.gov/
b) Enter you zip code.

2) I'm looking for a person in CA 13th or 15th District right now.

3) I will post the list later, but I have no time right now.
However, if you read all messages of this thread and supporting thread, I think you can understand what I am doing.
-kashmir

[kashmir]

The USCIS FY2004 budget had been already announced, and no exciting news at all.
Even though $100 million was still assigned for backlog reduction,
it totally relies on IT (information technology) and it is tagetted by the end of FY2006.
It is not a short-term solution, and usually this kind of attempt by the government would fail.

Considering about our EB I-485 cases filed at the CSC,
we definitely need at least 15 officers to adjudicate only EB I-485 cases at the CSC right now,
and they should not be taken away for any reason until backlog being eliminated.
However, it would be miracle that adjudicators were assigned only because FY2004 had started.

U.S. Goverment consists of three branches.
As USCIS, DHS belongs to the Executive Branch,
we need to attack it through the Legislative Branch and the Judicial Branch.

The later one may be a lawsuit.
(The main stream at the VSC is this one.)

Now, I am trying the first one at this project.
-kashmir

[kashmir]

Our community consisting of EB I-485 applicants is very weak because
1) the total number is very small
2) one would leave once one got approved
3) we cannot make a donation
4) we cannot vote.
So, the chance that Congressional member listens to our request is very small.

This is why I am focusing 6th request of the petition that I had originally proposed at the VSC forum.
Amending INA for Naturalization requirement will give the benefit to not only us but also many people such as
1) former EB I-485 applicants who had already got approved
2) Family based immigrants
3) illegal immigrants
4) future immigrants
and it is reasonable.

A half of us have been already waiting for more than one year,
and most of us will have to wait for two to four years or more.
We need to take back this long-waiting time before we become U.S. Citizens.

It is not so easy, but if we can get one Congresperson to introduce a bill,
we may have a chance to incorporate it into another bill such as H.R.3271.
-kashmir

[kashmir]

So, my current short-term objectives are:
1) contact several Congressional offices
2) get a staff working on immigration policy at Congressional office
3) start discussing about a bill to be introduced.

The currrent status are:
CA 13th - 1)
CA 14th - 2) done ... 3)
CA 15th - 1)
CA 16th - 1) done ... 2)

As I live in CA 14th District,
I need a participant in another congressional districts.
Just sending the petition is not enough for 2).
We need to visit the office to request a meeting with Congressperson.
-kashmir

[kuldeepc]

how do I know which district i live in? I can probably help depending on my calendar but not sure.

[kashmir]

Even though I am focusing Naturalization requirement, our request is not limited to that one.

For instance, jokerpoker_us's different approach to reduce backlog may be incorporated.
Again, I definitely need participants working on these additional requests.
-kashmir

[rk4gc]

I faxed the petetion to Senator Boxer with a cover letter.

In response I received a letter from Senator Boxer's office. It asks me to send more info regarding my current immigration status and my case info to assist me.

Any body else got letter like this. How did you respond?

In my case I filed concurrently on Aug 1st, 2003. Obviousely its not a case that needs her attension right away. In fact my I-140 is yet to be approved.

I wonder what to do now?

1. Let her office know that its not about my individual case but for the all the employment based immigration processing backlogs at CIS.

or

2. Just keep quite and do not respond.

or

3. Respond with my case details. I'm already in my 6th year, so I can say "I'm worried that I may not get green card in time as I'm at the end of my 6th year."


TIA,

[kashmir]

Originally posted by rk4gc
I faxed the petetion to Senator Boxer with a cover letter.
In response I received a letter from Senator Boxer's office. It asks me to send more info regarding my current immigration status and my case info to assist me.
Any body else got letter like this. How did you respond?
In my case I filed concurrently on Aug 1st, 2003. Obviousely its not a case that needs her attension right away. In fact my I-140 is yet to be approved.
I wonder what to do now?
1. Let her office know that its not about my individual case but for the all the employment based immigration processing backlogs at CIS.
or
2. Just keep quite and do not respond.
or
3. Respond with my case details. I'm already in my 6th year, so I can say "I'm worried that I may not get green card in time as I'm at the end of my 6th year."
TIA,

Hi, rk4gc,
Thanks for your updating the status from U.S. Senator Barbara Boxer.
I have not received any letter from her office yet.

For your question, my recommendation is 1) considering your request date,
however it is really up to you.

If you choose 1), I'd like you to add specific request items to Senator.

Anyway, I am planning to start contacting Senators from next week, too.
-kashmir

[kashmir]

I will be at Fremont Senior Center at 8:30am tomorrow (10/18/2003).
I prepared two sets of documents:
1) cover letter
2) petition
3) list of 2,827 signatures (125 pages)
See you tomorrow,
-kashmir

FREMONT
9:00am - 10:00am
Fremont Senior Center
40086 Paseo Padre Parkway

Originally posted by kashmir
I plan to visit Fremont at 8:30am to attend the town hall meeting on this coming Saturday.

1) I'd like at least one person in CA 13th District to attend the town hall meeting
because I live in CA 14th District, and kash777 filed at VSC.
If you want to attend the second or third one,
I may change my schedule.

2) I'd like a couple of more petitions to be faxed to Pete Stark's office.
It's OK from even oustside of CA 13th District.

Congressman Pete Stark (D CA 13th)

Town Meetings
SATURDAY, OCTOBER 18, 2003

• FREMONT
  9:00am - 10:00am
  Fremont Senior Center
  40086 Paseo Padre Parkway
• SAN LORENZO
  10:30am - 11:30am
  San Lorenzo Village Homes Association
  Community Hall
  377 Paseo Grande
• ALAMEDA
  Noon - 1:00pm
  Alameda City Hall
  Council Chambers
  2263 Santa Clara Avenue

Offices
FREMONT
39300 Civic Center Dr.
Suite 220
Fremont, CA 94538
Phone: (510) 494-1388
Fax: (510) 494-5852

WASHINGTON, DC
239 Cannon Building
Washington, DC 20515
Phone: (202) 225-5065
Fax: (202) 226-3805

[rk4gc]

Originally posted by kashmir
Hi, rk4gc,

If you choose 1), I'd like you to add specific request items to Senator.

Kashmir,
I'll go with 1) let me know what do you have to add, and its helpful if you can come up with whats the best way to put the letter.

many thanks for your help.

[kashmir]

Originally posted by rk4gc
Kashmir,
I'll go with 1) let me know what do you have to add, and its helpful if you can come up with whats the best way to put the letter.
many thanks for your help.

I think we should ask her:
1) to have a meeting with us in San Francisco Bay Area
2) to request strongly to the Director of CSC to allocate (at least) 15 officers to adjudicate only EB I-485 cases.
We can emphasize that we have started discussing with Congresspersons in Bay Area, especially CA 13th, 14th, 15th, and 16th Districts.
-kashmir

[kashmir]

Originally posted by kuldeepc
how do I know which district i live in? I can probably help depending on my calendar but not sure.

Hi, kuldeepc,
a) Go to http://www.house.gov/
b) Enter you zip code.
-kashmir

[kashmir]

I am back from Fremont over the Dumbarton Bridge.
I will report the detail later
because I have to complete the proposal to Ms. Alis, one of Anna Eshoo's Washington D.C. office working on Immigration policy, at first.
-kashmir
P.S.
I may have no time for Project Kashmir this weekend.

Originally posted by kashmir
I will be at Fremont Senior Center at 8:30am tomorrow (10/18/2003).
I prepared two sets of documents:
1) cover letter
2) petition
3) list of 2,827 signatures (125 pages)
See you tomorrow,
-kashmir

FREMONT
9:00am - 10:00am
Fremont Senior Center
40086 Paseo Padre Parkway

[kashmir]

(originally posted at VSC forum by kash777)

Today's Town meeting details with Congressman Pete Stark

kashmir and I attended . Location : CA , bay area

Kashmir was very nice to bring two sets of petition and signature page copies here. we handed over to secretaries of congressman. I really appreciate kashmir's efforts and thanks for his helping me to contribute here.

I did ask specific questions about immigration backlogs and that to specifically employment based GC.

Answer was no. Congressman replied, he do not expect delay in backlogs to improve in near future ,no matter how many applications are piling up day by day as they are well aware about people coming in this country with forge documents and now they wants to get this scrutinized/authenticated from all the angles including contacting applicants home country consulate etc.
However he himeself is not sure how it is going to help them.

so guys no good news .

However Congressman's office was very nice when I visited last week ,they wrote a letter and mailed/couriered our petition and my individual request of expidiating my case last week to BCIS .

Atleast Congressman's office is helping to write letters . Time will tell how and if that is helping . If any one has experience please share .

Thanks.

18th October 2003 01:43 PM

[novis]

great effort guys. i am sure the efforts will never go to waste.

[kashmir]

9/23/2003 kashmir - Dianne Feinstein (CA) - fax - the petition letter 
9/23/2003 kashmir - Barbara Boxer (CA) - fax - the petition letter
9/23/2003 kashmir - Anna Eshoo (CA 14th) - fax - the petition letter
9/29/2003 kashmir - Barbara Boxer (CA) - fax - the petition and 362 CA singnatures
9/30/2003 kashmir - Dianne Feinstein (CA) - fax - the petition and 362 CA signatures
=
10/6/2003 kashmir - Zoe Lofgren (CA 16th) - fax - petition and 394 CA signatures
10/6/2003 kashmir - Anna Eshoo (CA 14th) - fax - petition and 394 CA signatures
10/6/2003 kashmir - Mike Honda (CA 15th) - fax - petition and 394 CA signatures
10/6/2003 yih - Mike Honda (CA 15th) - fax - petition
10/6/2003 yih - Dianne Feinstein (CA) - fax - petition
10/6/2003 yih - Barbara Boxer (CA) - fax - petition
10/6/2003 kuldeepc - Anna Eshoo (CA 14th) - fax - petition
10/6/2003 kuldeepc - Dianne Feinstein (CA) - fax - petition
10/6/2003 kuldeepc - Barbara Boxer (CA) - fax - petition
10/6/2003 1amShantanuA  - ? - fax - petition
10/6/2003 lareds - ? - fax? - petition
10/6/2003 rk4gc - Zoe Lofgren (CA 16th) - fax - petition
10/7/2003 kashmir - Anna Eshoo (CA 14th) - office - petition and 2,491 all signatures
10/7/2003 kashmir - Zoe Lofgren (CA 16th) - office - petition and 2,491 all signatures
10/7/2003 vg0405 - Dianne Feinstein (CA) - fax - petition
10/7/2003 vg0405 - Barbara Boxer (CA) - fax - petition
10/7/2003 vg0405 - congressperson (CA ?) - fax - petition
10/7/2003 CS485 - Dianne Feinstein (CA) - fax - petition
10/7/2003 CS485 - Barbara Boxer (CA) - fax - petition
10/7/2003 CS485 - Ed Royce (R-CA 40th) - fax - petition
10/7/2003 LC66 - congresswoman (CA ?) - fax - petition
10/8/2003 kashmir - Anna Eshoo (CA 14th) - fax - petition
10/8/2003 kashmir - Zoe Lofgren (CA 16th) - fax - petition
10/8/2003 Arz - Zoe Lofgren (CA 16th) - fax - petition
10/8/2003 Dadagiri - Mike Honda (CA 15th) - fax - petition
10/9/2003 kash777 - Pete Stark (CA 13th) - office - petition
10/9/2003 rk4gc - Zoe Lofgren (CA 16th) - fax - petition
10/9/2003 rk4gc - Barbara Boxer (CA) - fax - petition => 10/17/2003 LETTER
10/10/2003 rk4gc - Dianne Feinstein (CA) - fax - petition
10/10/2003 CS485's friends - Barbara Boxer (CA) - fax - petition
10/10/2003 CS485's friends - Dianne Feinstein (CA) - fax - petition
10/10/2003 CS485's friends - Christopher Cox (CA 48th) - fax - petition
10/10/2003 gettingclosernow - Christopher Cox (CA 48th) - fax - petition
10/10/2003 gettingclosernow - Barbara Boxer (CA) - fax - petition
10/10/2003 gettingclosernow - Dianne Feinstein (CA) - fax - petition
10/10/2003 yih - Mike Honda (CA 15th) - USPS priority - petition and all signature (100+ pages)
10/10/2003 budhram - ? - fax - petition
10/10/2003 kash777 - Dianne Feinstein - fax - petition
10/11/2003 rk4gc - Zoe Lofgren (CA 16th) - townhall - petition, 2,627 all signatures, and meeting request
10/11/2003 kashmir - Zoe Lofgren (CA 16th) - townhall - petition and 2,627 all signatures
=
10/13/2003 kashmir - Anna Eshoo (CA 14th) - fax - meeting request and petition => 10/15/2003 CALL
10/13/2003 kashmir - Pete Stark (CA 13th) - fax - petition
10/13/2003 ganshm - (R CA 41st) - fax - petition
10/13/2003 kadamtal - Anna Eshoo (CA 14th) - fax - petition
10/13/2003 spyder - Anna Eshoo (CA 14th) - fax - petition
10/13/2003 hero123 - Anna Eshoo (CA 14th) - fax - petition
10/14/2003 kashmir - Anna Eshoo (CA 14th) - office - meeting request and petition
10/14/2003 kadamtal - Dianne Feinstein (CA) - fax - petition
10/14/2003 spyder - Dianne Feinstein (CA) - fax - petition
10/14/2003 hero123 - Dianne Feinstein (CA) - fax - petition
10/14/2003 kadamtal - Barbara Boxer (CA) - fax - petition
10/14/2003 spyder - Barbara Boxer (CA) - fax - petition
10/14/2003 hero123 - Barbara Boxer (CA) - fax - petition
10/15/2002 sri3440 - Dianne Feinstein (CA) - USPS - petition
10/15/2002 sri3440 - Dianne Feinstein (CA) - fax - petition
10/15/2002 sri3440 - Barbara Boxer (CA) - fax - petition
10/15/2002 sri3440 - congressperson (CA ?) - fax - petition
10/16/2003 kashmir - Anna Eshoo (CA 14th) - phone -
10/16/2002 georgi - Dianne Feinstein (CA) - fax - petition
10/16/2002 georgi - Barbara Boxer (CA) - fax - petition
10/18/2003 kash777 - Pete Stark (CA 13th) - townhall - petition and 2,827 all signatures 
10/18/2003 kashmir - Pete Stark (CA 13th) - townhall - petition and 2,827 all signatures
10/18/2003 kashmir - Anna Eshoo (CA 14th) - fax - proposal

[kashmir]

I will talk with Ms. Alis tomorrow (10/20/2003) morning.
I will focus the 6th request of our petition "Amend Naturalization Requirements".
-kashmir

Originally posted by kashmir
I talked with Ms. Alis working on Immigration policy at Anna Eshoo's Washington D.C. office today.
We will discuss again on Monday morning.

If you have a specific item, let me know by Saturday evening.
-kashmir

6. Amend Naturalization Requirements:
Immigration & Nationality Act (INA) Sec. 316. [8 U.S.C. 1427] states that “ No person, except as otherwise provided in this title, shall be naturalized, unless such applicant, (1) immediately preceding the date of filing his application for naturalization has resided continuously, after being lawfully admitted for permanent residence, within the United States for at least five years”.
The INA should be amended so that, for people who had obtained the permanent residency through Employment, the five year lawful residency requirement should start from the day adjustment of status application (I-485) was filed with USCIS. ...

Two words "through Employment" might be removed.

[kashmir]

Here are the 3rd and 5th requests of our petition.

3. Remove Restrictions on EB I-485 applicants:
One of the main problems being faced by employment based I-485 applicants is the restriction on job portability. Though " The American Competitiveness in the Twenty-first Century Act (AC21)" tried to address these concerns, it failed to remove all the restrictions on job portability. The applicants requests Congress to remove all the restrictions on job portability after 6 months from the date of filing the I-485 application. The current restrictions require that an applicant can change the job provided the new job is a similar job with similar job duties. This leaves a wide scope for interpretation for USCIS.

5. Approve permanent resident application of dependents if the primary applicant dies:
During the Adjustment Of Status (AOS) period, if the Primary applicant dies, all their dependents are denied the permanent resident status and removal proceedings are most likely initiated against them. This is highly inequitable. To uproot families of honest, tax paying, hard working people because the primary bread earner has passed on is highly egregious. The immigration benefits applicants request you to change the existing laws so that, during the Adjustment Of Status, if the Primary applicant dies any time after six months of the date of Receipt, the dependents’ applications should not be rejected. The dependents must not be penalized for the processing delays at USCIS.

I want to simplify our request items.
My suggestion is:
Remove any restriction (except securiy check) once 180 days passed after AOS filed.
I believe it covers both 3rd and 5th requests.
If you had a comment, please post it here.
-kashmir

[qwerty123]

Hi Kashmir,

First off, I am sure that many people will agree with me when I say that we sincerely appreciate your and others efforts with regards to Projects' Ocean and Kashmir.

I do have a comment on request #3 in your previous message. After reading the request, here are my thoughts:

1. the green card is for future employment predicated on an approved LC in a specific job function, and

2. as specified in AC21, the USCIS "should" reduce AOS (and other application) processing times to 6 months or less,

Therefore, with regard to removing all restrictions on job portability, we may have a better argument if we request removal of restrictions after a period beyond the initial 6 months of AOS filing, say 12 months after AOS filing. Then for people who have waited more than a year for AOS approval, we can argue that had the AOS application been processed within 6 months, as mandated by AC21, those people would already have been working in their "future" employment for a reasonable period of time, and therefore would have been free to change jobs without the restrictions of AC21.

I think we will be required to compromise in our efforts, but also to be specific in our requests, so it may be better to keep the requests separate rather than combining them. You may or may not agree with my opinions, but anyway good luck for tomorrow.

P.S. I agree with keeping the security check restrictions for the duration of the pending application.

[kashmir]

Hi, qwerty123,
Thanks for your comment.

I think your comments are reasonable.
But honestly speaking, I am not familier with AC21 and job portability because it is not my major concern.
I am rather intersted in #5 as posted before
However, I understand #3 is the largest concern for most of EB I-485 applicants due to the current economy condition.

On the other hand, we have to work with one of Congressional staffs.
Usually, she is not familier with AC21 related issues, too.
Also, I believe it is not a good idea to emphasize "we are Employment based (so legal, also paying tax, etc.)" too much.
Most of people including Congressional staffs really don't care, and it would make our request complicated, and it would reduce the chance to be enacted.

So, my strategy is:
to propose simply and generally at first:
Remove any restriction (except securiy check) once 180 days passed after AOS filed.
then, to incorporate it into another strong bill.
If the detail discussion would be really required after that,
we shuold discuss it at that time.

Further comments are welcome.
-kashmir

[kashmir]

Since I had no call from Alis at 10am,
I called her at 10:15am, but she was in a meeting.
Again, I called her at 12:20pm, then it was connected.

I found that she did not have my latest letter that I had faxed on Saturday,
so I had to explain her from the beginning...

After I requested amendment of Naturalization requiment,
she seemed to have no idea,
but she told me that she would ask to Congresswoman and call me back later.

Also, she mentioned that Anna Eshoo didn't belong to Immigration related committee,
so she had no experience to introduce an immigration related bill.

Anyway, she had not seen our faxed petitions yet.
I think we need to follow up.
-kashmir

Originally posted by kashmir
I will talk with Ms. Alis tomorrow (10/20/2003) morning.
I will focus the 6th request of our petition "Amend Naturalization Requirements".
-kashmir
6. Amend Naturalization Requirements:
Immigration & Nationality Act (INA) Sec. 316. [8 U.S.C. 1427] states that “ No person, except as otherwise provided in this title, shall be naturalized, unless such applicant, (1) immediately preceding the date of filing his application for naturalization has resided continuously, after being lawfully admitted for permanent residence, within the United States for at least five years”.
The INA should be amended so that, for people who had obtained the permanent residency through Employment, the five year lawful residency requirement should start from the day adjustment of status application (I-485) was filed with USCIS. ...

Two words "through Employment" might be removed.

[kashmir]

Can you fax one page of your letter like the following ?
Your residential address doesn't matter.
Then, please post at the subproject thread once you had faxed.
-kashmir


October 20, 2003

Congresswoman Anna Eshoo
Attn: Ms. Alis Aguirre
205 Cannon Building
Washington, DC 20515-0514
Fax: (202) 225-8890

Re: Petition by ImmigrationPortal.Com

Dear Alis Aquirre;

(sample)
I am a member of ImmigratinPortal.Com.
Could you please take our petition into consideration,
especially amendment of Naturalization requiment ?

Best regards,

(your signature)
(your name)
(your address)

Originally posted by kashmir
Since I had no call from Alis at 10am,
I called her at 10:15am, but she was in a meeting.
Again, I called her at 12:20pm, then it was connected.

I found that she did not have my latest letter that I had faxed on Saturday,
so I had to explain her from the beginning...

After I requested amendment of Naturalization requiment,
she seemed to have no idea,
but she told me that she would ask to Congresswoman and call me back later.

Also, she mentioned that Anna Eshoo didn't belong to Immigration related committee,
so she had no experience to introduce an immigration related bill.

Anyway, she had not seen our faxed petitions yet.
I think we need to follow up.
-kashmir

[rk4gc]

I got this letter from the Constituent Representative, so I addressed him in the letter.

I gave my detials and explained what kind of problems an immigrant like me will face because of backlogs.

1. Cannot take any major decisions like buying a home, or doing a major investment in US. (I'm in 6th year if there is any problem with my application I may end up going back to my home country)

2. Without an AP in hand cannot leave USA to visit home country or any other place unless its an immidiate family emergency (assuming using EAD). Mentioned now AP is taking about 150 to 180 days.

also asked if he can help in

1. Arranging a meeting with Senator Barbara Boxer to discuss in detail the problems of immigration community.
2. Convey our request to Senator Barbara Boxer to request Director of CSC (California Service Center of BCIS) to allocate at least 15 officers to adjudicate only EB I-485 cases.

And attached the petition again.

Lets keep the ball rolling guys. Lets hope that all these good people listen to us and help us.

[kashmir]

Originally posted by rk4gc
I got this letter from the Constituent Representative, so I addressed him in the letter.
...
Lets keep the ball rolling guys. Lets hope that all these good people listen to us and help us.

Hi, rk4gc,
I'm very pleased to hear that you have faxed reply to U.S. Senator Barbara Boxer's office.

I am also planning to fax to both Senators later this week to follow up the current activity to Anna Eshoo and your letter.
-kashmir

[rk4gc]

Received reply from Congress Woman Zoe Lofgren for my fax asking for more details. I've to send them to the concerned employee in her office. I'll send the reply in Weeknd.

10/6/2003 rk4gc - Zoe Lofgren (CA 16th) - fax - petition

[Huracan]

Hi,

I have tried to skim over all the posts in this thread, and I couldn't find a word of disagreement. Although I agree with the general idea of the petition there are a few points in which I disagree. First, it seems that the petition is written to fit Mr. Kashmir personal situation (on the matter of naturalization requirements).

Why the need to put the 8 years requirement? What about people who got green card through consular processing from outside the country? Are you going to make them wait another three years more, just because you got stuck on your adjustment of status. If my interpretation of your petition is correct, it seems selfish to me.

I would propose to reduce the number of years from 5 to 3, not only to employment based green cards, but for everyone. This simplifies the law, no more special married to U.S. citizen case. I would suggest to do as in Canada, and count time spent in the country prior to acquire permanent resident status as half time towards the three years requirement. I would require that time in the country to have been in legal status. Please note I am not saying legal working status, as your petition seems to discriminate against dependents of permanent resident (H4 and the like).

I applaud your effort to get legislation changes, but I firmly believe that your effort towards making changes to the naturalization requirements is misguided.


My 2 cents.
Huracan

[kashmir]

Hi, Huracan,
Thanks for your suggestive comment,
especially I agree on your proposal of third paragraph.

> it seems that the petition is written to fit Mr. Kashmir personal situation

The petition was originally written by several core members at the VSC forum.
Actually, I suggested not to emphasize "Employment Based" too much,
but other members wanted to appeal the right of legal workers.

> Why the need to put the 8 years requirement?

This is not requirement.
It is an alternative proposal in case the first proposal "5 years from AOS filing" is not accepted.
Although this alternative item was added by the VSC forum,
I want to remove it.

> What about people who got green card through consular processing from outside the country?

It is a good question.
The proposal must be updated condering CP cases.

> Are you going to make them wait another three years more, just because you got stuck on your adjustment of status.

I think you mean the above "8 years requirement", but it is not a case.

> If my interpretation of your petition is correct, it seems selfish to me.

I am not a volunteer for this forum nor Immigrants.
I am working on Immigration issues for myself at first,
so somebody may think I am selfish although I don't care.
However, I believe that some works such as Project Kashmir and this project would benefit not only myself but also other people.
This is why I have been posting my messages here.
If some of people would support this project with endorsement, I am very pleased.

> I would propose to reduce the number of years from 5 to 3, not only to employment based green cards, but for everyone.
> This simplifies the law, no more special married to U.S. citizen case.

I really like this proposal.
I will discuss this proposal when I talk to the staff of Anna Eshoo next time.

> I would suggest to do as in Canada, and count time spent in the country prior to acquire permanent resident status as half time towards the three years requirement.

I think this is also nice to have,
but I'm afraid that it makes our request complicated.
I'd like to keep our proposal simple.

> I would require that time in the country to have been in legal status.
> Please note I am not saying legal working status, as your petition seems to discriminate against dependents of permanent resident (H4 and the like).

I agree on this item.

If you had a further comment, it would be welcome.
Thanks again,
-kashmir

Originally posted by Huracan
Hi,

I have tried to skim over all the posts in this thread, and I couldn't find a word of disagreement. Although I agree with the general idea of the petition there are a few points in which I disagree. First, it seems that the petition is written to fit Mr. Kashmir personal situation (on the matter of naturalization requirements).

Why the need to put the 8 years requirement? What about people who got green card through consular processing from outside the country? Are you going to make them wait another three years more, just because you got stuck on your adjustment of status. If my interpretation of your petition is correct, it seems selfish to me.

I would propose to reduce the number of years from 5 to 3, not only to employment based green cards, but for everyone. This simplifies the law, no more special married to U.S. citizen case. I would suggest to do as in Canada, and count time spent in the country prior to acquire permanent resident status as half time towards the three years requirement. I would require that time in the country to have been in legal status. Please note I am not saying legal working status, as your petition seems to discriminate against dependents of permanent resident (H4 and the like).

I applaud your effort to get legislation changes, but I firmly believe that your effort towards making changes to the naturalization requirements is misguided.

My 2 cents.
Huracan