gg_ny
08-21 09:20 AM
Is there a chance to attach SKIL provisions towards higher degree GC retrogressed applicants to this appropriation efforts?
http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/313/5789/898
Congress Quietly Tries to Craft Bill To Maintain U.S. Lead in Science
Jeffrey Mervis
In the dog days of August, while most members of Congress are back home campaigning for reelection or on holiday, a small group of staffers is at work in Washington, D.C., on legislation that could influence science spending for years to come. Their goal is to craft a broad bill aimed at bolstering U.S. competitiveness that Congress could pass before the November elections.
They face long odds. The White House has already expressed reservations about some aspects of the legislation, and the congressional calendar is short and already very crowded. Although Senate leaders say they are committed to the goal, House leaders appear less enthusiastic. But a powerful coalition of forces, including business leaders who can bend a member's ear, is keen for Congress to act. "Legislation would show the public that our nation's leaders have a long-range plan of action on U.S. competitiveness," says Susan Traiman of the Business Roundtable, a consortium of 160 CEOs from across U.S. industry.
The legislation draws upon several efforts over the past year examining the status of U.S. science and technology, including the National Academies' Rising Above the Gathering Storm report and the National Summit on Competitiveness (Science, 21 October 2005, p. 423; 16 December 2005, p. 1752). In February, the Bush Administration proposed starting a 10-year doubling of basic research at the National Science Foundation (NSF), the Department of Energy's (DOE) Office of Science, and the National Institute of Standards and Technology's (NIST) core labs (Science, 17 February, p. 929) as part of its 2007 budget request. And the initial funding for what the Administration has dubbed the American Competitiveness Initiative (ACI) is working its way through the legislative process.
Science advocates can't say enough about the importance of ACI. But they believe even more is needed to improve math and science education and enhance U.S. innovation. Taking their cue from Gathering Storm and other reports, legislators from both parties introduced a fistful of bills earlier this year that would expand existing research and education activities at several agencies and set up new programs (see table).
Unlike annual appropriations bills, which determine how much each federal agency can spend in a given year, these authorization bills set desired funding levels over several years. Although they don't provide the cash, they can build political support for ongoing spending increases. Notes one university lobbyist: "You want Congress on record and the key committees behind an authorization bill, so that they can bail out appropriators when they hit rough seas."
The goal of the quiet negotiations taking place this summer is a single bill. But the calls for increased spending are a sticking point for a Republican Party whose president, George W. Bush, has repeatedly pledged to reduce the federal deficit and whose congressional leaders hope to campaign this fall on their success in shrinking government. Several of the bills also expand NSF's role in science and math education, a position that clashes with the Administration's plans for the Department of Education to lead efforts to improve math and science education and manage all the ACI's education components.
Presidential science adviser Jack Marburger emphasized those points in hard-line letters this spring to the chairs of the committees as they prepared to vote out one of the Senate bills (S. 2802) and two House bills (HR 5356/5358). The Senate measure, Marburger warned Senator Ted Stevens (R-AK) on 17 May, "would undermine and delay" ongoing research at the three agencies, "duplicate or complicate existing education and technology programs," and "compete with private investment" in both areas. The House bills, he told Representative Sherry Boehlert (R-NY) on 5 June, "would diminish the impact" of the requested increases for the three ACI agencies.
Boehlert says he was "quite disappointed" by Marburger's letter, noting the president's declaration in his January State of the Union address that the country "must continue to lead the world in human talent and creativity." Boehlert added, "I thought that we had been working with OSTP on these issues," referring to the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy that Marburger heads.
Three weeks after the House committee passed both bills, �berstaffer Karl Rove, new domestic policy chief Karl Zinsmeister, and a score of high-tech industry and academic lobbyists met at the White House to discuss the pending legislation. Although nothing was resolved--some participants say Rove and Marburger scolded them for supporting the bills, whereas others say there was confusion over the various components--the White House told the lobbyists that its Office of Legislative Affairs, led by Candida Wolff, would be taking the lead in trying to craft an acceptable bill, pushing OSTP to the sidelines. In the Senate, lobbyists are heartened by the willingness of Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-TN) to negotiate with the three chairs whose panels must sign off on the legislation--Stevens, Senator Pete Domenici (R-NM), who leads the Energy and National Resources Committee, and Senator Mike Enzi (R-WY), who heads the Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee. Another important player, Senator Lamar Alexander (R-TN), acknowledged when he introduced a trio of bills in January that some of his colleagues "may wince at the price tag" of the legislation. But he cautioned that "maintaining America's brainpower advantage will not come on the cheap."
Although none of the staffers involved would speak on the record, several confirmed that talks are taking place "on a regular basis." They say Frist is determined to cobble together a single bill--with lower authorization levels and fewer new programs than in any of the pending versions--that the Senate could adopt during a 4-week window in September. Prospects in the House are less certain, although Boehlert says, "Hope springs eternal that we'll get an opportunity to go to the floor in September."
Optimists, who hope that all sides will view a competitiveness bill as an asset heading into the November elections, dream of an Administration that accepts a competitiveness bill in return for getting its ACI education programs authorized. Pessimists worry that the House leadership will scuttle the effort by portraying the bills as a vehicle for "wasteful spending" and "a bloated bureaucracy." And although nobody's betting that Congress will act this year, nobody has thrown in the towel.
http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/313/5789/898
Congress Quietly Tries to Craft Bill To Maintain U.S. Lead in Science
Jeffrey Mervis
In the dog days of August, while most members of Congress are back home campaigning for reelection or on holiday, a small group of staffers is at work in Washington, D.C., on legislation that could influence science spending for years to come. Their goal is to craft a broad bill aimed at bolstering U.S. competitiveness that Congress could pass before the November elections.
They face long odds. The White House has already expressed reservations about some aspects of the legislation, and the congressional calendar is short and already very crowded. Although Senate leaders say they are committed to the goal, House leaders appear less enthusiastic. But a powerful coalition of forces, including business leaders who can bend a member's ear, is keen for Congress to act. "Legislation would show the public that our nation's leaders have a long-range plan of action on U.S. competitiveness," says Susan Traiman of the Business Roundtable, a consortium of 160 CEOs from across U.S. industry.
The legislation draws upon several efforts over the past year examining the status of U.S. science and technology, including the National Academies' Rising Above the Gathering Storm report and the National Summit on Competitiveness (Science, 21 October 2005, p. 423; 16 December 2005, p. 1752). In February, the Bush Administration proposed starting a 10-year doubling of basic research at the National Science Foundation (NSF), the Department of Energy's (DOE) Office of Science, and the National Institute of Standards and Technology's (NIST) core labs (Science, 17 February, p. 929) as part of its 2007 budget request. And the initial funding for what the Administration has dubbed the American Competitiveness Initiative (ACI) is working its way through the legislative process.
Science advocates can't say enough about the importance of ACI. But they believe even more is needed to improve math and science education and enhance U.S. innovation. Taking their cue from Gathering Storm and other reports, legislators from both parties introduced a fistful of bills earlier this year that would expand existing research and education activities at several agencies and set up new programs (see table).
Unlike annual appropriations bills, which determine how much each federal agency can spend in a given year, these authorization bills set desired funding levels over several years. Although they don't provide the cash, they can build political support for ongoing spending increases. Notes one university lobbyist: "You want Congress on record and the key committees behind an authorization bill, so that they can bail out appropriators when they hit rough seas."
The goal of the quiet negotiations taking place this summer is a single bill. But the calls for increased spending are a sticking point for a Republican Party whose president, George W. Bush, has repeatedly pledged to reduce the federal deficit and whose congressional leaders hope to campaign this fall on their success in shrinking government. Several of the bills also expand NSF's role in science and math education, a position that clashes with the Administration's plans for the Department of Education to lead efforts to improve math and science education and manage all the ACI's education components.
Presidential science adviser Jack Marburger emphasized those points in hard-line letters this spring to the chairs of the committees as they prepared to vote out one of the Senate bills (S. 2802) and two House bills (HR 5356/5358). The Senate measure, Marburger warned Senator Ted Stevens (R-AK) on 17 May, "would undermine and delay" ongoing research at the three agencies, "duplicate or complicate existing education and technology programs," and "compete with private investment" in both areas. The House bills, he told Representative Sherry Boehlert (R-NY) on 5 June, "would diminish the impact" of the requested increases for the three ACI agencies.
Boehlert says he was "quite disappointed" by Marburger's letter, noting the president's declaration in his January State of the Union address that the country "must continue to lead the world in human talent and creativity." Boehlert added, "I thought that we had been working with OSTP on these issues," referring to the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy that Marburger heads.
Three weeks after the House committee passed both bills, �berstaffer Karl Rove, new domestic policy chief Karl Zinsmeister, and a score of high-tech industry and academic lobbyists met at the White House to discuss the pending legislation. Although nothing was resolved--some participants say Rove and Marburger scolded them for supporting the bills, whereas others say there was confusion over the various components--the White House told the lobbyists that its Office of Legislative Affairs, led by Candida Wolff, would be taking the lead in trying to craft an acceptable bill, pushing OSTP to the sidelines. In the Senate, lobbyists are heartened by the willingness of Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-TN) to negotiate with the three chairs whose panels must sign off on the legislation--Stevens, Senator Pete Domenici (R-NM), who leads the Energy and National Resources Committee, and Senator Mike Enzi (R-WY), who heads the Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee. Another important player, Senator Lamar Alexander (R-TN), acknowledged when he introduced a trio of bills in January that some of his colleagues "may wince at the price tag" of the legislation. But he cautioned that "maintaining America's brainpower advantage will not come on the cheap."
Although none of the staffers involved would speak on the record, several confirmed that talks are taking place "on a regular basis." They say Frist is determined to cobble together a single bill--with lower authorization levels and fewer new programs than in any of the pending versions--that the Senate could adopt during a 4-week window in September. Prospects in the House are less certain, although Boehlert says, "Hope springs eternal that we'll get an opportunity to go to the floor in September."
Optimists, who hope that all sides will view a competitiveness bill as an asset heading into the November elections, dream of an Administration that accepts a competitiveness bill in return for getting its ACI education programs authorized. Pessimists worry that the House leadership will scuttle the effort by portraying the bills as a vehicle for "wasteful spending" and "a bloated bureaucracy." And although nobody's betting that Congress will act this year, nobody has thrown in the towel.
wallpaper dark blonde hair shades. with
dummgelauft
08-20 02:06 PM
Sir, You while your ideas are defintely ground-braking, my we know, how an "apology form USCIS" will help you with the rest of the "ideas" that your goodself has proposed.
IMHO, the SINGLE most important "fix" (apart from Visa recpature and such) will be the removal of condition to remain employed, if an EB applicant's application is pending for more than 3..4..or 5 years.
This alone will bring a lot of stability and peace of mind to the thousands who are suffering.
IMHO, the SINGLE most important "fix" (apart from Visa recpature and such) will be the removal of condition to remain employed, if an EB applicant's application is pending for more than 3..4..or 5 years.
This alone will bring a lot of stability and peace of mind to the thousands who are suffering.
thirumalkn
07-23 07:31 PM
AFAIK, as long as the core duties mentioned in the LC don't change considerably (by more than 50%), the company can promote you anytime.
Thanks for the reply.
So, does that mean the title can totally change if the job responsibilities are 50% same ?
Thanks for the reply.
So, does that mean the title can totally change if the job responsibilities are 50% same ?
2011 Stunning dark blonde hair
Desi_Hydrabadi
02-20 04:34 PM
Donot panic about everyting.
HTH
Thanks texcan for your encouraging reply. What you say makes sense. Thanks.
HTH
Thanks texcan for your encouraging reply. What you say makes sense. Thanks.
more...
greyhair
09-08 12:54 PM
Ban in private company out sourcing also is very much necessary for USA. These so called multinational companies are minting money and this is not benefitting any one except the higher executives and board of directors of those companies. and of course Politricians.
PS:- If I am in India I will never say that OS is necessary, India should grow on its own pace with her talent and brains. India should have their own economy and techonology and not OS money going around.
Great OH, baan Private OS also.
India is growing of its own, using the talent and brains partially to fulfill orders outsourced from across the world. What is wrong with that? Its a fair business practice. Back in 1980s and early 90s no one in rich countries were oppose to the idea of open business between all the countries. Back then everybody in rich countries thought that since they already have well placed institutions and larger companies, they will buy out all the local companies in smaller poor countries, creating more employment for people in rich countries. No one in the rich countries was oppose to the idea of open economies back then. Guess what. We have come a full circle now. Just because it is hurting a few million people in rich countries, all of a sudden OUTSOURCING is a curse word. Get over it people, cry as you may but outsourcing aren't stopping. Ohio is playing the election gimmicks. OH government is not outsourcing any work anyways. To the contrary, if OH was outsourcing, the State government would be more productive and without deficit.
One more thing. Outsourcing is the not reason why Indian economy is doing better than others. Because some work is outsourced to India does not simply mean outsourcing is the reason for better economy. This is a simple explanation but the wrong explanation. Indian economy is doing better because during a course of many decades, people and government have spent less than what they make/produce and more importantly, instead of throwing money on the wrong wars, they spent money on the right things. Is that so difficult to understand that we must credit outsourcing for the state of Indian economy.
PS:- If I am in India I will never say that OS is necessary, India should grow on its own pace with her talent and brains. India should have their own economy and techonology and not OS money going around.
Great OH, baan Private OS also.
India is growing of its own, using the talent and brains partially to fulfill orders outsourced from across the world. What is wrong with that? Its a fair business practice. Back in 1980s and early 90s no one in rich countries were oppose to the idea of open business between all the countries. Back then everybody in rich countries thought that since they already have well placed institutions and larger companies, they will buy out all the local companies in smaller poor countries, creating more employment for people in rich countries. No one in the rich countries was oppose to the idea of open economies back then. Guess what. We have come a full circle now. Just because it is hurting a few million people in rich countries, all of a sudden OUTSOURCING is a curse word. Get over it people, cry as you may but outsourcing aren't stopping. Ohio is playing the election gimmicks. OH government is not outsourcing any work anyways. To the contrary, if OH was outsourcing, the State government would be more productive and without deficit.
One more thing. Outsourcing is the not reason why Indian economy is doing better than others. Because some work is outsourced to India does not simply mean outsourcing is the reason for better economy. This is a simple explanation but the wrong explanation. Indian economy is doing better because during a course of many decades, people and government have spent less than what they make/produce and more importantly, instead of throwing money on the wrong wars, they spent money on the right things. Is that so difficult to understand that we must credit outsourcing for the state of Indian economy.
p_kumar
02-27 12:16 PM
Ok, since your GC has been approved, it is not true you need to wait 180 days. There is nothing in the law that says that. What is true is something different. When you received your GC through your employer, the presumption is that you will remain with this employer for a long time to come as it was a permanent job offer position. Of course, under some circumstances, it is possible you can't work for the same employer any longer; for instance, the company is closing etc. But, if you receive a GC and you voluntarily leave your employer immediately or after a few months, you MAY have issues during naturalization. At that time your application can be scrutinized whether or not you really was going to work for the employer who sponsored you. I've seen this happening several times. If you left voluntarily after a short period of time, the USCIS may say it was fraud and you never intended to work for your sponsor. So, in general, it is advisable to remain with the original sponsor for some time. Some attorneys say 1 year is enough, some say 2 years is enough and some say 6 months is enough. It is up to you. The law does not specify what the period is, but be logical and careful about this. You can hold 5 jobs, but I would suggest to stay with your current employer for as long as possible. Think forward, and not backward.
Hope this makes sense.
You have seen applications being scrutinized for employment history at the time of naturalization?. can you please provide elaborate and provide examples?. Otherwise dont scare people unnecessarily.:mad:
Hope this makes sense.
You have seen applications being scrutinized for employment history at the time of naturalization?. can you please provide elaborate and provide examples?. Otherwise dont scare people unnecessarily.:mad:
more...
manchala
04-07 07:29 PM
A reputed university = very few or no gultis. TVU had only gultis...so did not qualify.....
Stupid. Don't bring up specific community here.
Stupid. Don't bring up specific community here.
2010 Dark blonde curly hairstyle.
Queen Josephine
July 15th, 2004, 01:35 PM
These are great shots. Between you and Janet, you could produce a nice book (if either of you hasn't already).
more...
jasmin45
08-08 04:49 PM
Employer not revoking your I-140 itself proves "employer intention" to hire him back on adjudication. You may have intention to work for sponsoring employer but if you are laid off its not in your control, right? Adjudicator always looks by law and there is no law which says if you are laid off within 180 days your I-485 can not be approved.
There you go now.. You are correct in saying that "laidoff" thing. If you decide to sit at home as you said earlier.. there are chances that you get doomed by IO during 485 adjudication. I already mentioned about employer initiated termination and protection under AC21 in my previous post.
There's already a thread for "laidoff" related issues.. if you have further questions or suggestions you may drop it in there. why do we have to have several thread for same issues?
There you go now.. You are correct in saying that "laidoff" thing. If you decide to sit at home as you said earlier.. there are chances that you get doomed by IO during 485 adjudication. I already mentioned about employer initiated termination and protection under AC21 in my previous post.
There's already a thread for "laidoff" related issues.. if you have further questions or suggestions you may drop it in there. why do we have to have several thread for same issues?
hair dark blonde hair shades. honey
jayleno
02-01 04:28 PM
Kumar...if you are joking please put a smiley either before or after you exclamations. Tell me if you are not...I will join right away :). Who in the world doesn't want to become a "star quickly"?? :)
Start doing AmWay or QuickStar. That is the best thing a person can do !!!!!!
Start doing AmWay or QuickStar. That is the best thing a person can do !!!!!!
more...
senthiltamil
09-22 08:48 PM
I applied for my AP on Aug 24th. I haven't seen any update on the case. May I know when you guys applied for it?
hot layered londe hairstyle
smuggymba
08-10 08:48 AM
Friends
This is my situation
My I 140 approved, my status is F1 COS to H1 B
My wife situation, B1 (Visitor) COS to H4.
Now we r planning to change my wife status from H4 TO F1.
Can anyone with their experience suggest How complicated is my Case!!!!
Can we file COS by ourself or do you suggest to Hire an Attorney.
Pl advice
Thanks
We did the COS from H4 (stamped) to F1 for my wife ourselves. It was easy, no lawyer but we got an RFE on the dollar amount so we replied again ourselves (giving an excel sheet etc). You can do it yourself.
This is my situation
My I 140 approved, my status is F1 COS to H1 B
My wife situation, B1 (Visitor) COS to H4.
Now we r planning to change my wife status from H4 TO F1.
Can anyone with their experience suggest How complicated is my Case!!!!
Can we file COS by ourself or do you suggest to Hire an Attorney.
Pl advice
Thanks
We did the COS from H4 (stamped) to F1 for my wife ourselves. It was easy, no lawyer but we got an RFE on the dollar amount so we replied again ourselves (giving an excel sheet etc). You can do it yourself.
more...
house londe hair products
waitnwatch
05-17 10:44 PM
That is true. This thing called "special handling" in common parlance is, thank god, not a hot topic of discussion. I hope this clause doesn't get weeded out given the current scenario where they have killed F4. I really wonder if "highly skilled" legal immigrants would ultimately get any benefit out of this bill. Limboland is where many people are - and at the end of the day you still get to live in Limboland and become its citizens by default.
My two cents! :( :(
My two cents! :( :(
tattoo Layered Dark Blonde Hair
calaway42
10-21 12:26 AM
heh.. i want edwin's comp!!:)
more...
pictures I have dark brown hair and I
Anders �stberg
July 15th, 2004, 03:12 PM
Thanks Nick!
I have this goal, or more of a hope really, of coming home with one "OK" shot every time I go out. It doesn't always happen, but today makes up for a couple of those not so good days. :)
I have this goal, or more of a hope really, of coming home with one "OK" shot every time I go out. It doesn't always happen, but today makes up for a couple of those not so good days. :)
dresses dark blonde hair colour ideas.
HOPE_GC_SOON
08-04 02:36 PM
Gurus / Recent GC Awardees:
Can you clarify if the following Sequence of GC Issuance PRocess is correct, once Approval process is going on .
1) Online LUD on Cases "Card Production Ordered" and subsequent Email.
2) Online LUD Change as "Welcome Notices Sent" and Emails.
3) Receiving the Paper WelcomeNotices (Are these Notices are deemed to be I485 approval notices ?? I have not yet received them)
4) Receiving the Cards.
Then What is "ADIT Processing" ? they mentioned in the Welcome Notices sent email.
Any Info or guidance from Peers is highly appreciated . :)
Thanks,
My 485 approval process is going on. and above Two Steps were done. :) after a wait of 5 years.
Can you clarify if the following Sequence of GC Issuance PRocess is correct, once Approval process is going on .
1) Online LUD on Cases "Card Production Ordered" and subsequent Email.
2) Online LUD Change as "Welcome Notices Sent" and Emails.
3) Receiving the Paper WelcomeNotices (Are these Notices are deemed to be I485 approval notices ?? I have not yet received them)
4) Receiving the Cards.
Then What is "ADIT Processing" ? they mentioned in the Welcome Notices sent email.
Any Info or guidance from Peers is highly appreciated . :)
Thanks,
My 485 approval process is going on. and above Two Steps were done. :) after a wait of 5 years.
more...
makeup natural dark blond instead
GCEB2
09-20 10:13 PM
can any one give some information on this
girlfriend dark blonde hair with
VisaVisa
09-10 10:28 AM
the rule states that you have to be present in the country when you apply for AP. It does not say anything on where you need to be when it is approved. There are many cases where the applicant left the US to have the document mailed or taken along with someone to the person out of the US. The applicants on return were not asked anything. It was business as usual.
I agree.
I have also heard that it can be picked up from a consulate. How does that work?
I agree.
I have also heard that it can be picked up from a consulate. How does that work?
hairstyles Kim Kardashian lightened her
bestofall
12-30 09:56 PM
How did you find out , that files are assigned to I/O
pool_abab
06-17 10:27 AM
yes I mean received date. There was SLUD on 05/22 and then directly got CPO mail yesterday.
Thanks for the update! Congrats!
By receipt date do you mean "received date" or "notice date"?
Was there any SLUDs prior to the CPO?
Thanks for the update! Congrats!
By receipt date do you mean "received date" or "notice date"?
Was there any SLUDs prior to the CPO?
pa_arora
05-15 07:08 PM
Just curious, why are we not including the HR 6039 - that exempts US grads from the quota?
Yes please include HR6039 as well in ur talk/discussion. It will definitely shorten the EB2 and EB1 queue.
Yes please include HR6039 as well in ur talk/discussion. It will definitely shorten the EB2 and EB1 queue.
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario