nk2006
09-22 02:37 PM
I called all reps but still dont see any news related to schedule on calendar. Tried diff browser and cleard cache.
It is there on house judiciary committee page - its the first item. Scheduled for 1PM - one of the bills is HR5882.
It is there on house judiciary committee page - its the first item. Scheduled for 1PM - one of the bills is HR5882.
wallpaper Youcombined emolove scraps,love , background picture and video labels Wanted
skynet2500
07-13 07:53 PM
Fourth Option seems to be the one that IV is pursuing. All the best to IV core in making this happen.
kumar1
03-18 12:36 PM
Correct !
I agree with you. :D
Incorrect!
One can start working as soon as H-1B transfer is filed, if the beneficiary has (or had) H-1B status in past. Google for H-1B porting.
________________
Not a legal advice.
I agree with you. :D
Incorrect!
One can start working as soon as H-1B transfer is filed, if the beneficiary has (or had) H-1B status in past. Google for H-1B porting.
________________
Not a legal advice.
2011 hair emo lovers cartoons. emo
number30
04-09 05:33 PM
I got RFE through attorney. It is asking following details
1. Emloyment verification letter with present and intended permanent employer
2. Last two months pay slips
3. "Although your I 140 petitioner indicated in your initial I485 filing that you were employed by company A at that time, your Form G325 indicated that you were employed by company B and you were authorized by B at that time, please explain discrepancy"
I am bit worried about question 3. I worked for company A and labor, I140 applied when I was with A.
But during I485 filing I was with company B and in G325 I mentioned that.
It looks like company A by mistake mentioned that I was still with them.
I called my attorney he said its upto me decide which company I should work for.
But I am not sure company A provides an employment letter for me because I am working for comapny B now.
If B provides employment letter since it is >180 days since I 485 applied, will there be any issues?
Please give your opinions...
Did you put employment letter or offer letter from employer A while filing the I485?
1. Emloyment verification letter with present and intended permanent employer
2. Last two months pay slips
3. "Although your I 140 petitioner indicated in your initial I485 filing that you were employed by company A at that time, your Form G325 indicated that you were employed by company B and you were authorized by B at that time, please explain discrepancy"
I am bit worried about question 3. I worked for company A and labor, I140 applied when I was with A.
But during I485 filing I was with company B and in G325 I mentioned that.
It looks like company A by mistake mentioned that I was still with them.
I called my attorney he said its upto me decide which company I should work for.
But I am not sure company A provides an employment letter for me because I am working for comapny B now.
If B provides employment letter since it is >180 days since I 485 applied, will there be any issues?
Please give your opinions...
Did you put employment letter or offer letter from employer A while filing the I485?
more...
bigboy007
11-19 04:53 PM
enough is enough on good old Divide and conquer policy... collective we are will achieve something divided we are Definitely we will achieve some thing which is nothing. I support backlog elimination via recapture and removal of per-country limits . PERIOD. No STEM or LEAF or TREE... These are there for distraction..
gcnirvana
05-17 04:15 PM
Gurus,
I need your help in this scenario. I went to India during Mar 06 and got a stamping on my passport till Jun 2010 (based on my I140 approval). But at the POE, the officer stamped my I-94 till Jun 07 as he could only stamp the date that was on my current I-797. He also told me that I can goto the local USCIS office and extend my I-94 till 2010. Is it true? and if so, how would I go about doing that??
Thanks in Advance for all your help.
I need your help in this scenario. I went to India during Mar 06 and got a stamping on my passport till Jun 2010 (based on my I140 approval). But at the POE, the officer stamped my I-94 till Jun 07 as he could only stamp the date that was on my current I-797. He also told me that I can goto the local USCIS office and extend my I-94 till 2010. Is it true? and if so, how would I go about doing that??
Thanks in Advance for all your help.
more...
knnmbd
06-23 10:18 AM
If the minister talks to the US President regarding VISA retrogression problem,How the outside world will come to know ? The discussions will be kept confidential ! I don't think everything will be disclosed to the press. VISA revalidation is another thing he can talk to US Secretary of State.
I have seen a lot of ridiculous ideas suggested on this forum, but this one takes the cake and icing too.
I have seen a lot of ridiculous ideas suggested on this forum, but this one takes the cake and icing too.
2010 emo love i give you my heart
ajcates
03-18 01:28 PM
I don't at all like what it implies, but "Have you?" is rather beautifully designed. Got my vote.
What do you think it implies? I think what makes it so interesting is the fact that its a little controversial and actually makes you think.
It got my vote as well.
What do you think it implies? I think what makes it so interesting is the fact that its a little controversial and actually makes you think.
It got my vote as well.
more...
pappu
12-11 12:40 PM
At this time we do not have any one assigned member by IV to lead the chapter. However in the interest of getting things started I request the chapter members to organize a confrence call. If 'williblucky' would like to set it up and send messags to everyone, pls go ahead. If there is anyone else willing to volunteer to set up a call for a weekend pls go ahead. Make sure you send PM's to each member on this thread and inform them about the time for the call. It is important that we have the state chapter active.
hair Love Heart Drawings In Pencil.
dewdrop
07-19 03:31 PM
Another thought i had was...Before all of us june,july,august folks land up in the blackhole of FBI namechecks...Can we lobby for some kind of transparency?What in the world can make them take 4 yrs to check a persons name?Can they at least maintain a website that they update as and when a name check is completed...Please core and members,do something about this...something as effective as the campaign to accept july applicants!!while they are overhauling the system let them get it right all the way!!
more...
crzyBanker
12-15 02:53 PM
Hi I live in NW Suburbs of Chicago. Count me in.
hot cool love heart drawings. Two hearts drawing; Two hearts drawing
gc_dreamer_2010
01-27 05:36 PM
I tweeted to the ones that had twitter accounts. I will also give these guys a call and post letters.
@JudgeTedPoe Sir.Please vote 4 HR 43 to amend the Immigration and Nationality Act in helping Employment based advanced degree immigrants
4 minutes ago Favorite Reply Delete
@louiegohmert Sir.Please vote 4 HR 43 to amend the Immigration and Nationality Act in helping Employment based advanced degree immigrants
5 minutes ago
@SteveKingIA Sir.Please vote 4 HR 43 to amend the Immigration and Nationality Act in helping Employment based advanced degree immigrants
6 minutes ago
@eltongallegly24 Sir.Please vote 4 HR 43 to amend the Immigration and Nationality Act in helping Employment based advanced degree immigrants
@JudgeTedPoe Sir.Please vote 4 HR 43 to amend the Immigration and Nationality Act in helping Employment based advanced degree immigrants
4 minutes ago Favorite Reply Delete
@louiegohmert Sir.Please vote 4 HR 43 to amend the Immigration and Nationality Act in helping Employment based advanced degree immigrants
5 minutes ago
@SteveKingIA Sir.Please vote 4 HR 43 to amend the Immigration and Nationality Act in helping Employment based advanced degree immigrants
6 minutes ago
@eltongallegly24 Sir.Please vote 4 HR 43 to amend the Immigration and Nationality Act in helping Employment based advanced degree immigrants
more...
house Emo+love+heart+drawings
rajenk
03-24 07:04 PM
I also did switch job back in July 08. Immediately after the switch the new company had sent all documents necessary for AC21 with the help of their lawyer. USCIS have reviewed my application in October and in February for pre-adjudication. How I am sure about that is because in Feb my wife got an RFE for Medical and mine was fine. Unless the primary is fine they will not touch dependent.
So here is what you should do.
1. Contact your current company lawyers.
2. Educate them what AC21 is, I guess there was an updated AC21 Memo in May 08. My lawyer included the whole memo highlighting the clause under which I am eligible to switch job (Same or similar , I was a Senior Software Engineer, now I am Software Engineer IV, each company has its own classification).
3. Submit EVL (Employment Verification Letter) from your current employer.
4. Submit a letter explaining your eligibility for AC21.
*****Very important******
5. Submit a G28 (Change of representation) for you and all your dependents. Along with that submit the AC21 documents only then the AC21 documents will reach your file. The same is recommended by attorney Murthy.
*****Very important******
<EDIT>
Forgot your RFE in the first submission. You can include all of these as a RFE response.
</EDIT>
You should be all fine then. In my experience and what people had seen it is best to report it.
Good luck.:)
So here is what you should do.
1. Contact your current company lawyers.
2. Educate them what AC21 is, I guess there was an updated AC21 Memo in May 08. My lawyer included the whole memo highlighting the clause under which I am eligible to switch job (Same or similar , I was a Senior Software Engineer, now I am Software Engineer IV, each company has its own classification).
3. Submit EVL (Employment Verification Letter) from your current employer.
4. Submit a letter explaining your eligibility for AC21.
*****Very important******
5. Submit a G28 (Change of representation) for you and all your dependents. Along with that submit the AC21 documents only then the AC21 documents will reach your file. The same is recommended by attorney Murthy.
*****Very important******
<EDIT>
Forgot your RFE in the first submission. You can include all of these as a RFE response.
</EDIT>
You should be all fine then. In my experience and what people had seen it is best to report it.
Good luck.:)
tattoo Sad,emosee the human heart
Slowhand
08-16 04:57 PM
It is known that many employers and their attorneys do not provide their employees with the 485 receipt number. To avoid unnecessary trauma and strain on the employer-employee relationship, we should request USCIS to send a copy to the applicant whether 485 was filed with or without G28.
more...
pictures cute emo love heart
meridiani.planum
12-14 02:41 AM
Can somebody explain how unused visas are recaptured?
Will unused RoW EB-1 be given to the most retrogressed category (EB-2 India)? Or will they go to EB-2 RoW? What does the law state? Will per-country quotas apply when unused visas are used?
There is no clearcut guideline on how overflow is supposed to work. From people's experiences this is what USCIS has been doing:
unused RoW EB-1 goes to RoW EB-2
unused RoW eb-2 goes to RoW EB-3
until the last quarter of the year unused RoW EB-3 stayed unused.
In the last quarter, unused RoW EB-3 spill over into all other countries irrespective of whether the country has hit its cap or not. a complete free-for-all...
Will unused RoW EB-1 be given to the most retrogressed category (EB-2 India)? Or will they go to EB-2 RoW? What does the law state? Will per-country quotas apply when unused visas are used?
There is no clearcut guideline on how overflow is supposed to work. From people's experiences this is what USCIS has been doing:
unused RoW EB-1 goes to RoW EB-2
unused RoW eb-2 goes to RoW EB-3
until the last quarter of the year unused RoW EB-3 stayed unused.
In the last quarter, unused RoW EB-3 spill over into all other countries irrespective of whether the country has hit its cap or not. a complete free-for-all...
dresses hairstyles emo love heart
crazy_apple
07-15 02:57 PM
With USCIS what isnt odd! :).
I managed to find the NSC processing time archive from AILA - http://aila.org/content/default.aspx?bc=1016|8767|6739
See the 485 EB based processing timeline.
12/15/2007 - 04/24/2007
01/15/2008 - 07/19/2007
02/15/2008 - 07/30/2007
03/15/2008 - ?
04/15/2008 - 07/11/2007
05/15/2008 - 07/14/2007
06/15/2008 - 07/28/2007
This means that even processing dates go back and forward like priority dates! I dont think the July status is posted yet, but this definitely is interesting.
Hello,
I am sure others might have noticed that 485 processing dates at NSC (for example) have literally crawled from the beginning of the year to now. Here are the processing dates (per USCIS status).
https://egov.uscis.gov/cris/jsps/Processtimes.jsp?SeviceCenter=NSC
12/15/2007 Status - 04/24/2007
01/15/2008 - 07/19/2007
06/15/2008 - 07/28/2008
Thats roughly 9/10 days worth of 485 processing from mid-Jan to mid-Jun 2008. I wonder what the processing date looks like for the mid-July status update (which should probably be out tomorrow).
I managed to find the NSC processing time archive from AILA - http://aila.org/content/default.aspx?bc=1016|8767|6739
See the 485 EB based processing timeline.
12/15/2007 - 04/24/2007
01/15/2008 - 07/19/2007
02/15/2008 - 07/30/2007
03/15/2008 - ?
04/15/2008 - 07/11/2007
05/15/2008 - 07/14/2007
06/15/2008 - 07/28/2007
This means that even processing dates go back and forward like priority dates! I dont think the July status is posted yet, but this definitely is interesting.
Hello,
I am sure others might have noticed that 485 processing dates at NSC (for example) have literally crawled from the beginning of the year to now. Here are the processing dates (per USCIS status).
https://egov.uscis.gov/cris/jsps/Processtimes.jsp?SeviceCenter=NSC
12/15/2007 Status - 04/24/2007
01/15/2008 - 07/19/2007
06/15/2008 - 07/28/2008
Thats roughly 9/10 days worth of 485 processing from mid-Jan to mid-Jun 2008. I wonder what the processing date looks like for the mid-July status update (which should probably be out tomorrow).
more...
makeup Emo+love+heart+drawings
desi3933
09-17 09:25 AM
.....
Just Pointing things out as I See it
......
Can I ask you a question? How much your corp usually pays if you are billing at $80 per hour? 55k per year or 95k per year as Salary + Benefits. (BTW - Just to make things clear, I am not looking for job as I am independent IT consultant with my own corp).
I have seen many cases where consultant is billed at 80-90 per hours and gets paid only 50 to 60k (based on his/her "negotiation" power).
In one case, this agency had two consultants at same client (one of the large banks) and were getting billed at $80 per hour. The H1-B person was getting 56k/year and green card holder was making 95k per year. This is the reason why many people want to jump for another job when they have EAD or GC.
My 2 cents.
Just Pointing things out as I See it
......
Can I ask you a question? How much your corp usually pays if you are billing at $80 per hour? 55k per year or 95k per year as Salary + Benefits. (BTW - Just to make things clear, I am not looking for job as I am independent IT consultant with my own corp).
I have seen many cases where consultant is billed at 80-90 per hours and gets paid only 50 to 60k (based on his/her "negotiation" power).
In one case, this agency had two consultants at same client (one of the large banks) and were getting billed at $80 per hour. The H1-B person was getting 56k/year and green card holder was making 95k per year. This is the reason why many people want to jump for another job when they have EAD or GC.
My 2 cents.
girlfriend 2011 love heart drawings.
dskhabra
05-28 01:14 PM
Paper filing. Sent on 5/2. No FP. EAD approved on 5/26. Waiting for the card.
hairstyles broken heart poems for
av2004
05-30 11:30 PM
HateIV,
If you think donations are a requirement to be the members, I have not paid IV a dime so far. Donating is not the only way to help IV. For example there is a call campaign, where you can call and leave a message as a fellow future immigrant. You can help IV that way. Please note that we are all here to have our collective voice heard by the USCIS and the government so that the immigration processes can be expedited. A whole lot of others come here to pose questions for their tricky or troubled situations and get help from the experienced. It seems that all you need to have is a civil tongue to not be banned. Is that tough to do? Even on a public Web site like this? What other choice do you leave to the administrators if that is the case?
So, please be a good samaritan and try to help others if you can OR get help from others. Otherwise, I don't see a point in being a member here.
av2004
If you think donations are a requirement to be the members, I have not paid IV a dime so far. Donating is not the only way to help IV. For example there is a call campaign, where you can call and leave a message as a fellow future immigrant. You can help IV that way. Please note that we are all here to have our collective voice heard by the USCIS and the government so that the immigration processes can be expedited. A whole lot of others come here to pose questions for their tricky or troubled situations and get help from the experienced. It seems that all you need to have is a civil tongue to not be banned. Is that tough to do? Even on a public Web site like this? What other choice do you leave to the administrators if that is the case?
So, please be a good samaritan and try to help others if you can OR get help from others. Otherwise, I don't see a point in being a member here.
av2004
logiclife
06-30 11:07 AM
(7/1/2006)UPDATE
THERE WILL BE ANOTHER INTERVIEW NEXT WEEK ON JUL 8TH (Saturday), ON LEGAL IMMIGRATION ON SAME CHANNEL AT 4:00 EST ON SAME PROGRAM "COURTYARD" on KPFK. PLEASE SEE BELOW ON THE DETAILS AND VARIOUS OPTIONS TO LISTEN INTO THE PROGRAM AS WELL AS CALL-IN FOR QUESTIONS/COMMENTS. TODAY'S INTERVIEW WENT WELL AND WE THANK STUART, RAJIV AND CARL WITH PROVIDING THEIR INSIGHT ON THIS ISSUE
----------------------------------------
(6/29/2006):
4 Immigration Voice members and 3 law and policy experts will be in a exhaustive live interview on Radio this saturday(Jul 1st) between 4:15 EST and 5:00 EST. The Radio station is Pacifica Radio for Southern California (http://www.kpfk.org/), which is broadcast in CA, TX, FL etc and a few dozen affiliates. Reportedly, it has a million regular listeners.
Most likely, the host may open up phone lines to invite listeners to chip in with opinions or questions, so that is also an opportunity for everyone to make their opinions/displeasure over current immigration limbo heard by everyone.
The name of the program is The Courtyard (http://www.kpfk.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=category§ionid=16&id=182&Itemid=79&lang=en)
Another interview in the same series will be on the following saturday July 8th between 4:00 and 5:00 EST.
On the panel:
Stuart Anderson ( Policy Expert, www.nfap.org (http://www.nfap.org) )
Carl Shusterman ( Immigration lawyer, www.shusterman.com (http://www.shusterman.com) )
Rajiv Khanna ( Immigration lawyer, www.immigration.com (http://www.immigration.com) )
Aman (IV)
Ashish (IV)
Swadha (IV)
Jay(IV)
Interview by
Debo Kotun
How to listen:
Sister Stations:
KPFA (http://www.pacifica.org/stations/#kpfa) (94.1 FM in Berkeley) www.KPFA.org (http://www.kpfa.org/)
KPFK (http://www.pacifica.org/stations/#kpfk) (90.7 FM in Los Angeles, 98.7 FM in Santa Barbara) www.KPFK.org (http://www.kpfk.org/)
KPFT (http://www.pacifica.org/stations/#kpft) (90.1 FM in Houston) www.KPFT.org (http://www.kpft.org/)
WBAI (http://www.pacifica.org/stations/#wbai) (99.5 FM in New York) www.WBAI.org (http://www.WBAI.org)
WPFW (http://www.pacifica.org/stations/#wpfw) (89.3 FM in Washington DC) www.WPFW.org (http://www.WPFW.org)
Affiliates and Internet Stations:
All the local Affiliates (http://www.pacifica.org/stations/affiliates/) of KPFK Pacifica.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v92/mbryan/kpfk.png
THERE WILL BE ANOTHER INTERVIEW NEXT WEEK ON JUL 8TH (Saturday), ON LEGAL IMMIGRATION ON SAME CHANNEL AT 4:00 EST ON SAME PROGRAM "COURTYARD" on KPFK. PLEASE SEE BELOW ON THE DETAILS AND VARIOUS OPTIONS TO LISTEN INTO THE PROGRAM AS WELL AS CALL-IN FOR QUESTIONS/COMMENTS. TODAY'S INTERVIEW WENT WELL AND WE THANK STUART, RAJIV AND CARL WITH PROVIDING THEIR INSIGHT ON THIS ISSUE
----------------------------------------
(6/29/2006):
4 Immigration Voice members and 3 law and policy experts will be in a exhaustive live interview on Radio this saturday(Jul 1st) between 4:15 EST and 5:00 EST. The Radio station is Pacifica Radio for Southern California (http://www.kpfk.org/), which is broadcast in CA, TX, FL etc and a few dozen affiliates. Reportedly, it has a million regular listeners.
Most likely, the host may open up phone lines to invite listeners to chip in with opinions or questions, so that is also an opportunity for everyone to make their opinions/displeasure over current immigration limbo heard by everyone.
The name of the program is The Courtyard (http://www.kpfk.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=category§ionid=16&id=182&Itemid=79&lang=en)
Another interview in the same series will be on the following saturday July 8th between 4:00 and 5:00 EST.
On the panel:
Stuart Anderson ( Policy Expert, www.nfap.org (http://www.nfap.org) )
Carl Shusterman ( Immigration lawyer, www.shusterman.com (http://www.shusterman.com) )
Rajiv Khanna ( Immigration lawyer, www.immigration.com (http://www.immigration.com) )
Aman (IV)
Ashish (IV)
Swadha (IV)
Jay(IV)
Interview by
Debo Kotun
How to listen:
Sister Stations:
KPFA (http://www.pacifica.org/stations/#kpfa) (94.1 FM in Berkeley) www.KPFA.org (http://www.kpfa.org/)
KPFK (http://www.pacifica.org/stations/#kpfk) (90.7 FM in Los Angeles, 98.7 FM in Santa Barbara) www.KPFK.org (http://www.kpfk.org/)
KPFT (http://www.pacifica.org/stations/#kpft) (90.1 FM in Houston) www.KPFT.org (http://www.kpft.org/)
WBAI (http://www.pacifica.org/stations/#wbai) (99.5 FM in New York) www.WBAI.org (http://www.WBAI.org)
WPFW (http://www.pacifica.org/stations/#wpfw) (89.3 FM in Washington DC) www.WPFW.org (http://www.WPFW.org)
Affiliates and Internet Stations:
All the local Affiliates (http://www.pacifica.org/stations/affiliates/) of KPFK Pacifica.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v92/mbryan/kpfk.png
GCOP
09-11 01:33 PM
Very Good Research. I just gave you Green.
Since there was talk of the HR 5882 being taken up in two months time in a lame duck session, I thought it might be helpful to have this on this page.
Source = http://usgovinfo.about.com/od/uscongress/a/lameduck.htm
Lame Duck Sessions of the U.S. Congress
Once rare, now commonplace
By Robert Longley, About.com
Lame duck sessions of the U.S. Congress happen in even numbered years when Congress has to reconvene following the November general election to take care of unfinished legislation. Some lawmakers who return for this session lost their bids for reelection and will not be in the next Congress. Hence, they are informally called "lame duck" members participating in a "lame duck" session.
The possibility of lame duck sessions of Congress began in 1935, when the 20th Amendment1 to the U.S. Constitution2 took effect. Under this amendment, ratified in 1933, regular sessions of Congress begin on January 3 of each year, unless Congress passes a law in the previous session changing the date. Also, the terms of members begin and end on January 3 of odd-numbered years. Under these arrangements, any meeting of Congress between election day in an even-numbered year and the following January 3 is considered a lame duck session.
Why lame duck sessions are bad
Lame duck sessions are never desirable. Defeated lame duck lawmakers, knowing they will not have jobs in the new Congress, either tend to "just go through the motions" while debating and voting on remaining important legislation or, in worse cases, attempt to hinder or even damage the lawmaking process. On the state level, the legislatures of only 11 states even allow lame duck sessions.
By far the most dismal scenario for a lame duck session is whenever one of the two major political parties has taken away majority control of one or both houses of Congress from the other party, as happened after the 2006 mid-term election, when the Democrats won control of both the House and Senate from the Republicans. In these instances, with political tempers already running hot, the temptation for lame duck members to vent their frustrations by working to stall good bills, while turning bad bills into worse laws, becomes even greater.
Why lame duck sessions happen
Once rare, lame duck sessions have become all too common. The final days of the 109th Congress in November and December of 2006 became the 16th lame duck session since 1940.
The typical "target" date for the annual adjournment of each session of Congress is during the first week in October. The target adjournment date has become a total myth in recent years. The first session of the 109th Congress, for example, did not achieve final adjournment until Dec. 22, 2005.
During far too many recent years, the main reason for lame duck sessions has been Congress' failure to complete its work on the spending, or "appropriations" bills that form the basis of the annual federal budget. By law, the federal budget process3, including passage of the spending bills, begins the first Monday in February of each year and should be concluded by October 1st, the start of the federal government's Federal Fiscal Year. Failing to pass the spending bill by October 1, Congress is compelled to pass "continuing resolutions4," legislation that allows the government operate temporarily without an approved budget at the previous year's spending levels.
Lame duck sessions: some bad, some not so bad
Some sessions are not particularly productive, often because of political disputes and the difficulties of reaching legislative decisions in a post-election environment. In 1982 and 2002, for example, Congress returned after the November election in part to complete work on most of the spending bills. In each case, it failed to do so and the new Congress had to enact large continuing resolutions to fund government operations for the fiscal year already in progress.
Other lame duck sessions, such as the one held in 1980, have been more productive. On that occasion, Congress approved budget resolution and reconciliation measures, five regular appropriations bills and a continuing resolution, an Alaska lands bill, a landmark environmental cleanup "superfund" bill, a measure extending revenue sharing, a revision of military pay and other benefits, and a bill changing the appointment power of the Senate President pro tempore.
This About.com page has been optimized for print. To view this page in its original form, please visit: http://usgovinfo.about.com/od/uscongress/a/lameduck.htm
�2008 About.com, Inc., a part of The New York Times Company. All rights reserve
Since there was talk of the HR 5882 being taken up in two months time in a lame duck session, I thought it might be helpful to have this on this page.
Source = http://usgovinfo.about.com/od/uscongress/a/lameduck.htm
Lame Duck Sessions of the U.S. Congress
Once rare, now commonplace
By Robert Longley, About.com
Lame duck sessions of the U.S. Congress happen in even numbered years when Congress has to reconvene following the November general election to take care of unfinished legislation. Some lawmakers who return for this session lost their bids for reelection and will not be in the next Congress. Hence, they are informally called "lame duck" members participating in a "lame duck" session.
The possibility of lame duck sessions of Congress began in 1935, when the 20th Amendment1 to the U.S. Constitution2 took effect. Under this amendment, ratified in 1933, regular sessions of Congress begin on January 3 of each year, unless Congress passes a law in the previous session changing the date. Also, the terms of members begin and end on January 3 of odd-numbered years. Under these arrangements, any meeting of Congress between election day in an even-numbered year and the following January 3 is considered a lame duck session.
Why lame duck sessions are bad
Lame duck sessions are never desirable. Defeated lame duck lawmakers, knowing they will not have jobs in the new Congress, either tend to "just go through the motions" while debating and voting on remaining important legislation or, in worse cases, attempt to hinder or even damage the lawmaking process. On the state level, the legislatures of only 11 states even allow lame duck sessions.
By far the most dismal scenario for a lame duck session is whenever one of the two major political parties has taken away majority control of one or both houses of Congress from the other party, as happened after the 2006 mid-term election, when the Democrats won control of both the House and Senate from the Republicans. In these instances, with political tempers already running hot, the temptation for lame duck members to vent their frustrations by working to stall good bills, while turning bad bills into worse laws, becomes even greater.
Why lame duck sessions happen
Once rare, lame duck sessions have become all too common. The final days of the 109th Congress in November and December of 2006 became the 16th lame duck session since 1940.
The typical "target" date for the annual adjournment of each session of Congress is during the first week in October. The target adjournment date has become a total myth in recent years. The first session of the 109th Congress, for example, did not achieve final adjournment until Dec. 22, 2005.
During far too many recent years, the main reason for lame duck sessions has been Congress' failure to complete its work on the spending, or "appropriations" bills that form the basis of the annual federal budget. By law, the federal budget process3, including passage of the spending bills, begins the first Monday in February of each year and should be concluded by October 1st, the start of the federal government's Federal Fiscal Year. Failing to pass the spending bill by October 1, Congress is compelled to pass "continuing resolutions4," legislation that allows the government operate temporarily without an approved budget at the previous year's spending levels.
Lame duck sessions: some bad, some not so bad
Some sessions are not particularly productive, often because of political disputes and the difficulties of reaching legislative decisions in a post-election environment. In 1982 and 2002, for example, Congress returned after the November election in part to complete work on most of the spending bills. In each case, it failed to do so and the new Congress had to enact large continuing resolutions to fund government operations for the fiscal year already in progress.
Other lame duck sessions, such as the one held in 1980, have been more productive. On that occasion, Congress approved budget resolution and reconciliation measures, five regular appropriations bills and a continuing resolution, an Alaska lands bill, a landmark environmental cleanup "superfund" bill, a measure extending revenue sharing, a revision of military pay and other benefits, and a bill changing the appointment power of the Senate President pro tempore.
This About.com page has been optimized for print. To view this page in its original form, please visit: http://usgovinfo.about.com/od/uscongress/a/lameduck.htm
�2008 About.com, Inc., a part of The New York Times Company. All rights reserve
