S. 1932 Status

Check this out guys it might be interesting news

UNANIMOUS-CONSENT AGREEMENT--S. 1932 -- (Senate - December 13, 2005)


[Page: S13507] GPO's PDF
--- Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that on Wednesday, following morning business, the Chair lay before the Senate a message from the House to accompany S . 1932 , the deficit reduction bill. I further ask consent that the Senate disagree to the amendment of the House, request a conference with the House, and that the Chair be authorized to appoint conferees on the part of the Senate with the ratio of 11 to 9; provided further that before the Chair appoints conferees, the following motions to instruct be the only motions in order and that they be considered under the following limitations: Kennedy, higher education, 60 minutes equally divided; Baucus, Medicaid, 5 minutes equally divided; DeWine, trade, 60 minutes equally divided; Kohl, child support enforcement, 60 minutes equally divided; Carper, TANF, 5 minutes equally divided; Harkin, food stamps, 5 minutes equally divided; and Reed, LIHEAP, 60 minutes equally divided.

I further ask consent that no amendments be in order to the motions and the only debate in order under the statute other than debate on the motions be 30 minutes equally divided for general debate, divided between the chairman and ranking member; further, that all motions be debated on Tuesday and Wednesday and that the vote occur in relation to the motions in the stacked sequence at a time determined by the majority leader after consultation with the Democratic leader; finally, that any votes which do not occur prior to 1 p.m. on Wednesday be stacked to occur beginning at 3:30 on Thursday, December 15.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?r109:6:./temp/~r109WHBeSa::
 
Welll...


What does this mean? That they are not talkign anything about immigration because it is not debated and will be included int eh form that the Senate passed its version of S. 1932


OR

Does it mean that it is not debated because it is not even there (taken out during the backdoor negotiations)????

Cant figure out what this means!

-Santosh
 
Can Attorney Khanna give us some idea as to what is happening

Can Attorney R. S. Khanna please give his opinion about the fate of Section 8001 & 8002 from the happenings today in bill S.1932
 
Sandeep_N said:
http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/vote_menu_109_1.htm

Shows three motions "To Instruct Conferees on S. 1932" have been "agreed to" today. Hope this does not turn out to be a long drawn out affair with lots of suggestions and votes.
Click to expand...

Guys, I think it is time to focus on other ways of getting the retrogression issue addressed. S. 1932 I guess is a closed chapter for us and the debates going on in the houses are for matters not relevant to our issue.

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?c109:3:./temp/~c109wsBVd9::

S. 1932 itself has been amended and Sec. 8001 has gone. I guess the conference committee reconciliation never happened OR it happened and we did not know about it.
 
concorde said:
Guys, I think it is time to focus on other ways of getting the retrogression issue addressed. S. 1932 I guess is a closed chapter for us and the debates going on in the houses are for matters not relevant to our issue.

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?c109:3:./temp/~c109wsBVd9::

S. 1932 itself has been amended and Sec. 8001 has gone. I guess the conference committee reconciliation never happened OR it happened and we did not know about it.
Click to expand...


Link doesn't work. Can u pls repaste?
 
Guys:

We are just speculating here. We will not know the outcome until we get to read the final version of the Bill. I am not vry optimistic about the way things are going.

As far as Rajiv Khanna. goes, after he said that he will try to help us on Spe 15tha dn Sep 21st, he hasnt made a single update on his sticky note. Only person I see who actively follows it day-by-day is Mr. OH of the Oh law firm (www.immigration-law.com) and it really seems like he cares about all this. The rest have either given up or realized the comemrical potential in this opportunity, Sheela Murhty clearly being the latter case. She also has the gall to publish an article called "Benefits of Retrogression".

Its the hard truth. We do not have representation. And we will suffer. If it is not retrogression, it will be name check. if not name check, then something else. This is a circus and we are the clowns for entertainment.

Santosh
 
I dont think EB3 for non schedule A is priority :-(. And reagrding murthy you are right !!! She doesnt give any information if you call her (shes my lawyer :( ). Says she cannot say aythig. They have been lawyers for such a long time. Dont they have any contacts within the immigration department ? Highly unbelievable!
 
Why do you think lawyers have to care about me, you and others? You care about yourself, they care about their business. Seems, like 8001 is not that interesting for some of them. Any kind of amnesty will give them much more money. That's why they do (almost) nothing for this bill.
However, Mr. Khanna supports this site and it's a real great contribution.

santosh_30 said:
As far as Rajiv Khanna. goes, after he said that he will try to help us on Spe 15tha dn Sep 21st, he hasnt made a single update on his sticky note. Only person I see who actively follows it day-by-day is Mr. OH of the Oh law firm (www.immigration-law.com) and it really seems like he cares about all this. The rest have either given up or realized the comemrical potential in this opportunity, Sheela Murhty clearly being the latter case. She also has the gall to publish an article called "Benefits of Retrogression".
Santosh
Click to expand...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I have sent a long e-mail to NPR about retrogression and the long name checks for their "All things considered" program. Lets see what they do

Santosh
 
Canadian_Dream said:
The link posted is S.1932 as agreed by house, in text it is exactly same as HR.4241. The original S.1932 still has 8001/8002 and Senate will go to conference with that version along with what is disagreed upon in the motion to instruct the confrees.
In general whichever chamber is second to vote amends the previous ones Bill. That why conference is needed.

Please check this link:

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query...p/~r109WHBeSa::
I further ask consent that the Senate disagree to the amendment of the House, request a conference with the House, and that the Chair be authorized to appoint conferees on the part of the Senate with the ratio of 11 to 9;
Click to expand...
Canadian_Dream,

I think you are right. I am sorry that I misinterpreted and created confusion. Sunjoshi, the links from thomas.loc.gov seem to be dynamically generated which is why they probably don't work. Please try this -
1) Go to http://thomas.loc.gov/bss/109search.html
2) Put in S. 1932 in the text box and hit search.
3) In the page that comes up read the 2nd one; H.R. 4241. That in turn links to S. 1932.
4) Now, Canadian_Dream is right; House and Senate have both passed "budget" bills now having the same number S. 1932 but with differences in the versions they have passed. This is where the conference seems to come in. Seems to me like "merging" changes of two developers on the same file in source control.
 
Why should these people bother?

We pay taxes, SSN, everything. But we get nothing :mad: :mad: :mad:
santosh_30 said:
Guys:

We are just speculating here. We will not know the outcome until we get to read the final version of the Bill. I am not vry optimistic about the way things are going.

As far as Rajiv Khanna. goes, after he said that he will try to help us on Spe 15tha dn Sep 21st, he hasnt made a single update on his sticky note. Only person I see who actively follows it day-by-day is Mr. OH of the Oh law firm (www.immigration-law.com) and it really seems like he cares about all this. The rest have either given up or realized the comemrical potential in this opportunity, Sheela Murhty clearly being the latter case. She also has the gall to publish an article called "Benefits of Retrogression".

Its the hard truth. We do not have representation. And we will suffer. If it is not retrogression, it will be name check. if not name check, then something else. This is a circus and we are the clowns for entertainment.

Santosh
Click to expand...
 
Whats the status..keeping the hope

Guys,
I saw this on the thomas website..on yesterdays proceedings. Though I dont get the terminology that they use. Todays daily digest is not yet out so we will probaly know more info tomorrow.

Deficit Reduction Act--Agreement: A unanimous-consent-time agreement was reached providing that following morning business on Wednesday, December 14, 2005, Senate begin consideration of a message from the House of Representatives to accompany S. 1932, to provide for reconciliation pursuant to section 202(a) of the concurrent resolution on the budget for fiscal year 2006 (H. Con. Res. 95), that the Senate disagree to the amendment of the House and request a conference with the House thereon; that only certain motions to instruct the conferees be in order; that the Chair be authorized to appoint conferees on the part of the Senate; that no amendments be in order to the motions to instruct; that the only debate in order under the statute, other than debate on the motions, be 30 minutes equally divided for general debate between the Chairman and Ranking Member of the Committee on the Budget; that all motions be debated on Wednesday, and that the votes occur in relation to the motions in a stacked sequence at a time to be determined; provided further, that any votes which do not occur prior to 1 p.m. on Wednesday, December 14, 2005, be stacked to occur beginning at 3:30 p.m. on Thursday, December 15, 2005.
Click to expand...

Links..
Daily Digest:
http://thomas.loc.gov/r109/r109.html

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/B?r109:mad:FIELD(FLD003+d)+@FIELD(DDATE+20051213)
 
IMMIGRATION and BORDER ENFORCEMENT Tomorrow in House

BommiDP said:
We pay taxes, SSN, everything. But we get nothing :mad: :mad: :mad:
Click to expand...


Immigration and border enforcement will be discussed tomorrow in House, as per running text briefs on C-SPAN 1.
Remain tuned and watch tomorrow.
 
Looks like they discuss Illegal Immigration tomorrow (Not legal immigration)

On http://www.c-span.org/ home page:--

Thursday, December 15
Border Protection, Antiterrorism, and Illegal Immigration Control Act of 2005, in the U.S. House
On C-SPAN, starting at 10am ET
 
http://www.immigration-law.com/Canada.html

12/14/2005: Uncertainty of the Fate of Immigration Packet in Senate Instructions to S. 1932 Conferees

Today's debate has yet to be relased, but the text of the Senate's motion to limit the instructions to certainly issues only raises a question as to whether the Senate would disagree with the House on the immigration packets. The following is the Senate Majority Leader's motion which was adopted by the full Senate yesterday:
Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that on Wednesday, following morning business, the Chair lay before the Senate a message from the House to accompany S. 1932, the deficit reduction bill. I further ask consent that the Senate disagree to the amendment of the House, request a conference with the House, and that the Chair be authorized to appoint conferees on the part of the Senate with the ratio of 11 to 9; provided further that before the Chair appoints conferees, the following motions to instruct be the only motions in order and that they be considered under the following limitations: Kennedy, higher education, 60 minutes equally divided; Baucus, Medicaid, 5 minutes equally divided; DeWine, trade, 60 minutes equally divided; Kohl, child support enforcement, 60 minutes equally divided; Carper, TANF, 5 minutes equally divided; Harkin, food stamps, 5 minutes equally divided; and Reed, LIHEAP, 60 minutes equally divided. I further ask consent that no amendments be in order to the motions and the only debate in order under the statute other than debate on the motions be 30 minutes equally divided for general debate, divided between the chairman and ranking member; further, that all motions be debated on Tuesday and Wednesday and that the vote occur in relation to the motions in the stacked sequence at a time determined by the majority leader after consultation with the Democratic leader; finally, that any votes which do not occur prior to 1 p.m. on Wednesday be stacked to occur beginning at 3:30 on Thursday, December 15.
On top of the uncertain Senate position, report indicates that the Acting Majority Leader in the House may not even agree to the conference before they go into the year-end recess. The House development is still fluid, but report indicates that once S. 1932 fails to pass this year, the survivial of this bill in the next session of the Congress is dubious. Read on.
We will report the details as soon as the Senate's debate of today is released. Please stay tuned.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top