Can We settle on These Bases?

[ficapls]

This may be a crazy idea but having a non-profit organization with a clearly defined agenda will help us gain visibility and provide a point of contact for the media.
Section 501 exemptions will also let donations be tax exempted and it will be easier for fund raising through corporate programs.

 

[lca_001]

Will immigration.com be considered as a non-profit organization? I think this portal has immense setup and active members, and it would be a shame to throw away all this to start a new organization. Of course Rajiv needs to have a huge say in this idea.

001

Originally posted by ficapls
This may be a crazy idea but having a non-profit organization with a clearly defined agenda will help us gain visibility and provide a point of contact for the media.
Section 501 exemptions will also let donations be tax exempted and it will be easier for fund raising through corporate programs.

 

[ficapls]

I didn't mean to imply anything against immigration.com. I was just raising an idea because I thought having a formal organization would -

1. Help us raise funds, even have corporate matching programs chip in . Let Corporate America fund our fights as well.

2. Sustain a fixed viewpoint and point of contact for legal immigrants. I imagine that if this is the only organization for legal immigrants, it can represent us before Congress as well.

3. Eventually give greater credibility for our efforts. As the organization becomes more established, people will understand that they need to pay attention when it gets involved in an issue.

 

[CAFourEightFive]

DHS: Improved Customer Service for Immigrants

http://uscis.gov/graphics/publicaffairs/newsrels/USCISKeyPrioritiesFINAL1of2_23_04.pdf

Priority #6: Improved Customer Service for Immigrants
----
To reduce the backlog of immigration service applications, the Department of Homeland Security will re-engineer existing systems to substantially decrease processing times and create fast track options for the bulk of applicants. The department is creating a series of new pilot programs aimed at a systematic deduction in processing times and paper flow. By May 2004, three new pilot programs will be in operation around the country. Lessons learned from these programs will be incorporated into a more wide scale overhaul of the process.

 

[ficapls]

That says it all. #6 on a prioritized list. I don't know about you guys, but anything beyond #5 usually tends to fall off my to do list.

 

[Rajiv S. Khanna]

It is already done

Originally posted by ficapls
I didn't mean to imply anything against immigration.com. I was just raising an idea because I thought having a formal organization would -

1. Help us raise funds, even have corporate matching programs chip in . Let Corporate America fund our fights as well.

2. Sustain a fixed viewpoint and point of contact for legal immigrants. I imagine that if this is the only organization for legal immigrants, it can represent us before Congress as well.

3. Eventually give greater credibility for our efforts. As the organization becomes more established, people will understand that they need to pay attention when it gets involved in an issue.

There is a new corporation ImmigrationPortal.ORG formed. They are all working on this right now. I will have them post here.

My idea is to have them do all the fundraising and spending, while we, as a community do all the neecsary advocacy work. So we are not hrowing anything away.

 

[Rajiv S. Khanna]

Re: Timeline

Originally posted by sirlurkalot
Rajiv and all,

I've been lurking here a lot over the last few months, and have nothing but admiration for your efforts.

One thing that struck me in the "settlement" proposal.

From reading the document many times over, it would appear as written that the timeline for Naturalization would only start once the "interim GC" was issued (some time in the future)... and not the many months and years since past, that would now be lost.

Shouldn't it be that the timeline should be started or "backdated" to the six months *after* the historical Filing date?

In an ideal world (no delays in processing - yeah, right! ) this would be the case anyway, so it's only as a result of the INS/BCIS/CIS delays that we are being hurt - and shouldn't the settlement bear this in mind?


Regards,

That would require change in the law by Congress.

 

[dsatish]

Originally posted by ficapls
This may be a crazy idea but having a non-profit organization with a clearly defined agenda will help us gain visibility and provide a point of contact for the media.
Section 501 exemptions will also let donations be tax exempted and it will be easier for fund raising through corporate programs.

We are there buddy. With Rajiv's help, the core team has been working for the past 3 months on this project (starting a non profit organisation for immigrants). Last week we got the organisation officially registered. It is called "immigrationportal.org". Rajiv is going to be our adviser and he has kindly agreed to donate the URL "immigrationportal.org" to us. We are going to open a bank account this week and start fund collection from this week-end. Let us make the fund collection a big success. We are currently working on developing the website, preparing the mission statement, bylaws etc. Stay tuned for more news on this exciting venture (it has been our dream project). But please do not reply to this post. Let us devote this thread to discuss the proposals that we will send to BCIS.

 

[hidden_dragon]

Dsatish, your PM box is full. I will try later, or you could PM me the conference #. Again my proposal is permanent GC in a year, stamp before that (6 month is fine). T don't think this require law changes, as we are not asking dropping security check. Hopefully Rajiv will let us know wheather he think this is too agressive.

Originally posted by dsatish
We are there buddy. With Rajiv's help, the core team has been working for the past 3 months on this project (starting a non profit organisation for immigrants). Last week we got the organisation officially registered. It is called "immigrationportal.org". Rajiv is going to be our adviser and he has kindly agreed to donate the URL "immigrationportal.org" to us. We are going to open a bank account this week and start fund collection from this week-end. Let us make the fund collection a big success. We are currently working on developing the website, preparing the mission statement, bylaws etc. Stay tuned for more news on this exciting venture (it has been our dream project). But please do not reply to this post. Let us devote this thread to discuss the proposals that we will send to BCIS.

 

[dsatish]

Conference call

hrithikroshan and hidden_dragon,
what are your locations (tell me your timezones) ? Some people from East coast has expressed that 8am will be difficult because they will be late to work and they are asking for 7.30am. Can California folks make it at 4.30am their time ? How many from CA is going to attend it(apart from 140_4ever and rk4gc) ? Can the CA guys make a little sacrifice by waking up at 4.30am for the conference call ? I think that would be better than some people going late to work. I guess most of the people are from East Coast. By today evening, i will publish the exact timing (whether 7.30am EST or 8am EST). Today, i will send the conference call phone number to some of the members here who have expressed their willingness.

PS: I just have 3 pricate messgaes (with short texts), still my PM box is getting clogged. Rajiv or "ar888" should help me in increasing the PM box size.

 

[cinta]

Link

The link explaining Permanent Admissions from CRS, used by Congress just like the GAO reports, GAO-04-309R and earlier d01488.pdf. The rollback of numbers from the Family based to EB based for 2003-04.

http://www.imwong.com/news/newsCurrent.htm

2/22/04 - Congressional Research Service (CRS) Examines U.S. Immigration Policy on Permanent Admissions
CRS issued a report on 2/18/04 on "U.S. Immigration Policy on Permanent Admissions." The report covers current
law and policy, admission trends, backlogs and waiting times and current issues and legislation, and also contains a
series of useful charts. more...

 

[cinta]

Re: #1 important thing

Originally posted by lbonneau
Just to clarify, the #1 most important thing for me is to be FREE again as soon as possible, as in 3 months vs another year, so I can change employers, start a business, go back to school, etc...
Whether this comes as an interim or conditional or plain GC or whatever form we can agree with USCIS - even just make sure USCIS will not issue employment RFE after 6 months of I-485 and will only focus on background check, is not as important to me as the knowledge I can have a life again.
In the negotiations and congressmen awareness actions, we probably also want to stress that this is important for the American economy as well (employers can promote us and "use" us better, thus getting a better value, we can start businesses and create jobs, etc...), not just for us.

Also, starting the Citizenship clock 6 months after filing I-485 is very important, since I can't see any reason why we should also be victims of 9/11 - there were enough victims already.

As for the TV ADs vs lobbying, I would rather finance lobbying, as with the current unemployement (even though lower than in many countries), the "average" american tends to think we are taking jobs away and won't care too much about our difficulties - even though my American friends have a hard time believing me when I explain I cannot change jobs.
Lobbying though, as far as I can see, is what could really help us in the long run.

Just my 2 cents.

Thank you to Rajiv and to all on this forum, it feels good to see I am not suffering alone - although it would feel much better if none of us was suffering !!!!!!
Have a great conf call, and a great negotiation with USCIS.

Well received with an exception: the conditional and/or interim GC is a new entity which could easily be used, abused, and revoked by US CIS during this interim time interval based on whatever they perceive a thread to National security.Also, the provision of this new status could actually be out of the current immigration laws..need by Congress?? I think is much better if we stick to The LAwful Permanent Status (LPS) or GC, the same fruit that generations before us tasted and future ones will hopefully!

 

[CloseToGod]

Re: PROPOSALS

Originally posted by dsatish
Some of my thoughts on the Proposals :
1) It's better to drop the word "conditional" GC.It will create more problems. Let us ask for immediate I-551 stamping for every one who is waiting for more than 1 yr and whose security check is cleared(i know we are all along talking about 6 months, but a talk of 1 yr should be a strategic one because it sounds more convincing and it makes BCIS very difficult to refuse because they can't ask us to wait any more). The Green card should be issued automatically (as is the current practice) within 6 to 8 weeks of stamping. This proposal broadly means that BCIS should immediately publish a Memo to all its district offices with appropriate directions. In future if they need any clarifications from us regarding the documentation, then they can always call us and if they find anything wrong, they can take action. They should treat every one as not guilty unless otherwise found
2) They should promise to bring the I140 processing time to 6 months. The ombudsman should be the arbitrar between the two parties (bcis versus us) to see that bcis implements it's promise.
I140 premium processing looks like a good idea but there may be some cons to it (bcis may delay other works including normal I140. They may introduce premium processing for every type of application whereby making it a big scam). This premium processing idea is a SCAM. Otherwise how can any one believe that the world's richest country don't have money to process immigrant applications (that too after collecting fees from us
)

I agree with you on dropping the word 'conditional'. However, I still think that we should stick to 6-month time frame for I-551 stamping, instead of raising it to one year. I believe that 6 months is long enough time for BCIS to process the application, except security checks. They can take longer to complete security checks. Rajiv put '6-months' in the proposal after much thought, and we must stick to that unless somebody could elaborate some very strong reasons for modifying it. Also, this is only a proposal; let BCIS consider it and make a counter-proposal, if they need to.

Thanks.

 

[cinta]

6 months

Good point about the six months. (my I-485 is pending for 20 months). Historically there is something about this SIX MONTH rules. Let us follow history!

http://www.hammondlawfirm.com/other_publications.htm
180 Days In Immigration Law

From "www.ilw.com". Ombudsman, The culture of "NO", and Customer Service.

http://www.ilw.com/cgi-shl/pr.pl

http://www.ilw.com/lawyers/articles/2004,0224-katriltr.pdf Lawyer's letter to Ombudsman

http://www.ilw.com/lawyers/articles/2004,0224-memor.pdf the culture of "NO"

Editor's Comments
Improved Customer Service At DHS
The Department of Homeland Security has identified improved customer service for immigration benefit processing as priority #6 in its strategic plan. Sadly, DHS today operates in a "culture of No". In contrast, a Legacy INS memo from 1980 says "[Adjudicators] with [their] broad knowledge of law and policy, [should all] approach [applications and petitions] attitudinally, in a friendly professional manner, looking for a way to approve them." While no sane person would have any quarrel with strict security measures to guard against terrorists, it is merely stating the obvious to note that more than 99.99% of immigrants to our shores are not terrorists and simply wish to achieve the American dream by casting their lot with us. The "culture of No" is simply an anti-immigration agenda masquerading in the guise of security for our homeland. This gem of a memo is the subject of today's Featured Article, "Combatting The 'Culture Of No' In Immigration" by Angelo Paparelli. For all items, see below.



http://www.ilw.com/lawyers/immigdaily/doj_news/2004,0224-strategicplan.shtm Customer Service is #6 to DHS


And the Ombudsman's e-mail is :

prakash.khatri@dhs.gov

Other people within dhs should have the same structured e-mail.

 

[lca_001]

Re: Conference call

Hi dsatish,

I am from CA (PST), please PM the information to me- 4:30 should be a good time - if I can make it to 5:00, I will be able to make it for 4:30

001

Originally posted by dsatish
hrithikroshan and hidden_dragon,
what are your locations (tell me your timezones) ? Some people from East coast has expressed that 8am will be difficult because they will be late to work and they are asking for 7.30am. Can California folks make it at 4.30am their time ? How many from CA is going to attend it(apart from 140_4ever and rk4gc) ? Can the CA guys make a little sacrifice by waking up at 4.30am for the conference call ? I think that would be better than some people going late to work. I guess most of the people are from East Coast. By today evening, i will publish the exact timing (whether 7.30am EST or 8am EST). Today, i will send the conference call phone number to some of the members here who have expressed their willingness.

PS: I just have 3 pricate messgaes (with short texts), still my PM box is getting clogged. Rajiv or "ar888" should help me in increasing the PM box size.

 

[ECGC]

I wholeheartedly agree with dropping the "conditional" GC and shoot for a 1 year processing of 485. The initial proposal, in my opinion has to be as tight as possible so that when the BCIS representatives "negotiate", we will have some room to "yield" thereby everyone is happy with the outcome.

Here is a totally different point of view: We all assume that we represent the immigrant community as a whole and therefore have the right to set terms for negotiations with the BCIS. What about the immigration aspirants who are not part of this portal? If BCIS agrees to a blanket policy of "conditional" approvals because we brought it up, won't we be imposing that on the non-members/partcipants of this forum? For the same reason, I request all of you, especially Mr.Khanna and the core group to reconsider dropping the "conditional" GC and ask for adjudigation within a "reasonable" time frame. I think a reasonable time frame is 1 year. I think dsathish will agree. What about the rest of the gang?
cheers!!

 

[Edison]

Please see the reply from Rajiv for Conditional GC. I think this clarifies the confusion.

http://boards.immigration.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=114165&perpage=15&pagenumber=1

Originally posted by Edison

Can We settle on These Bases?
>>>>> I-551 stamp is acceptable solution, if the case has been pending for more than 180 days. I-551 for 5 years is most welcome since currently CIS is stamping I-551 after approving I-485 for only 1 year.
But I-751 (Petition to remove the conditions on residence) has to be applied if GC is approved with condition(pending security check). So backlog queue will shift from I-485 to I-751.

Originally posted by operations
Oh, no I-751. This is an unconditional approval execpt for sceurity grounds.

 

[Jharkhandi]

They may like to redefine the extent of 'conditional'. In this context:

I belv dropping 'conditional' should be based on time frame - if they agree to negotiate on it. For the time being - we should go with Rajiv's proposal. Most likely I see a lawsuit going ahead. They failed to see our point or rather feel much secure with their own positions. We need to shake them once and forever. Lawsuit is the way to go.

I would also like to put pressure from other end, so would like to see immigrationportal.org fully functional. Democracy is not new for most of us and vote pressure gives us weight(Follows my previous post on uniting American citizens of Indian origin with rest of the group). Most of us can spare money for a cause. We have to learn from history. No immigrant group has ever got rights without lobbying - those groups have been brought in as slaves and remained so for generations. I would not like to mention lobbys in USA, they are known to most of us and how it works. We need group to form ASAP - in order to raise money and help Rajiv fight the cause and also to create awareness among people here. This will help getting people united under one name. There will be differences but where is not one under sun? But then this organization will help people focus on issues pertaining to community in general. We have to start one after that leaders will keep it going. They need to see a united force.

Also let us wait for Rajiv opinion. He has much broader view of issue and has seen all this going on for much longer than any of us. Rajiv...

 

[ECGC]

I agree with jharkhandi. Lobbying gets us clout and it needs $$$. Also, we should compensate Mr.Khanna for his time and efforts.This is truly an outstanding effort he has undertaken.I am more than happy to do my part.
Cheers!!

 

[cinta]

Originally posted by Edison
Please see the reply from Rajiv for Conditional GC. I think this clarifies the confusion.

http://boards.immigration.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=114165&perpage=15&pagenumber=1

Edison and all other fellows,

I think there is no need to introduce "conditional" GC even with security checks pending. We give US CIS too much playing ground.
Also there is no need to suggest validity for the stamp to five years. Instead we should ask for a six month validity and the card should be furnished within this time frame. We should also demand the adjudication of I-485 in a maximum of six months as suggested by the Congress in the DHS Act and earlier AC-21. If we give them five years, believe me people will be receiving their cards after five years and six months pending security checks (see Angello Paparelli letter in my reference). We have to understand that we are dealing with a new culture of "NO" and no sincere acknowlegement of the problem so far. The director of US CIS (as noted earlier)in his latest comments in the Senate (usis web page)merely repeated the song "every applicant will receive the right benefit in the right amount of time" and in the area of Backlog reduction he mentioned the Adopted Children backlog elimination (for Citizens). This is a department that spent huge amounts of money in conferences about the Citizenship Oath...that tells us their priorities...
If they have doubts about one's GC let them make notes and follow up later with the appropriate DOJ personnel, not the adjudicators. Fraud has been around for a long time, but that does not mean immigration should stop.. (GAO fraud analysis GAO-02-972). In the same Senate commentary the Director pointed out a sex criminal arrest and a murderer as a success for the Front-back security checks..We all should be fools or so somebody thought..