Macaca
03-11 06:42 PM
Some paras from Securing Iraq Votes, One at a Time (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/03/10/AR2007031001300.html) -- House Democratic Leaders Methodically Build Support for War Plan
By Jonathan Weisman, Washington Post Staff Writer, Sunday, March 11, 2007
Rep. Jerry Nadler was the only lawmaker at a meeting of all House Democrats on Thursday to stand up and declare that he could not support a compromise plan to fund the Iraq war with a timeline to end the conflict. So some party leaders had written him off even as he joined House Speaker Nancy Pelosi for a private meeting.
In the confines of the speaker's suite, Nadler (N.Y.) could be specific. He sought assurances from Pelosi (Calif.) that President Bush would be compelled to withdraw all troops from combat by August 2008, as the legislation proposed. He wanted to know: "What is the legal compulsion to follow this timeline?"
A Pelosi aide disappeared from the meeting for a few minutes and returned with a few lines of legislative text offering what Nadler wanted to hear: Once troops are out of Iraq, no money would be available to put them back in, outside the narrow exceptions of targeted counterterrorism operations, embassy protection and efforts to train Iraqis.
"You know," Nadler said after a pause, "I think that's okay."
Nadler's conversion was a sign of the member-by-member, slow but deliberate headway Democratic leaders say they are making in their efforts to cobble together the 218 supporters they need to pass one of the most consequential pieces of defense legislation in decades, a $105 billion war-funding bill that would impose strict standards of rest and readiness for the military, establish clear benchmarks for the government of Iraq and set a timeline to end U.S. involvement in the war.
Through closed-door meetings, pep rallies, private phone conversations and horse trading, Democratic leaders are moving outward from the 180 solid votes in the party's political center to win the votes on the party's left and right that will be needed to pass the bill later this month.
The cajoling will continue tomorrow as lawmakers return to Washington and the legislation is readied for markup later in the week. But there are roadblocks: Rep. Allen Boyd (D-Fla.) said some conservatives are withholding their support until the language McDermott wanted is removed.
As Democratic leaders balance those demands, the calculus is fairly straightforward, said one conservative Democrat involved in the process. Leaders are counting on winning all but a dozen of the 43 conservative Blue Dog Democrats and all but a dozen of the 75 or so members of the liberal Out of Iraq Caucus. Then, Democratic leaders are hoping, enough Republicans will break ranks to put them over the top.
By last week's end, House Democratic Caucus Chairman Rahm Emanuel (Ill.) said, they had secured about 200 votes.
But the last 18 votes will not be easy. That point was brought home Thursday morning, during the closed-door meeting in which the legislation was detailed for Democratic members. As Pelosi gave her pitch, Reps. Lynn Woolsey (Calif.), Barbara Lee (Calif.), Lloyd Doggett (Tex.) and Nadler stood up to leave for a news conference of their own. After an uncomfortable pause, Pelosi growled that she wished Democrats would be courteous enough to hear her out before talking to the media. Nadler sat down. The rest walked out.
Democratic aides concede that some party members, including Woolsey, Lee and Doggett, are all but lost. But they are not giving up.
"There's nothing guaranteed in life, but I feel very good," Emanuel said.
By Jonathan Weisman, Washington Post Staff Writer, Sunday, March 11, 2007
Rep. Jerry Nadler was the only lawmaker at a meeting of all House Democrats on Thursday to stand up and declare that he could not support a compromise plan to fund the Iraq war with a timeline to end the conflict. So some party leaders had written him off even as he joined House Speaker Nancy Pelosi for a private meeting.
In the confines of the speaker's suite, Nadler (N.Y.) could be specific. He sought assurances from Pelosi (Calif.) that President Bush would be compelled to withdraw all troops from combat by August 2008, as the legislation proposed. He wanted to know: "What is the legal compulsion to follow this timeline?"
A Pelosi aide disappeared from the meeting for a few minutes and returned with a few lines of legislative text offering what Nadler wanted to hear: Once troops are out of Iraq, no money would be available to put them back in, outside the narrow exceptions of targeted counterterrorism operations, embassy protection and efforts to train Iraqis.
"You know," Nadler said after a pause, "I think that's okay."
Nadler's conversion was a sign of the member-by-member, slow but deliberate headway Democratic leaders say they are making in their efforts to cobble together the 218 supporters they need to pass one of the most consequential pieces of defense legislation in decades, a $105 billion war-funding bill that would impose strict standards of rest and readiness for the military, establish clear benchmarks for the government of Iraq and set a timeline to end U.S. involvement in the war.
Through closed-door meetings, pep rallies, private phone conversations and horse trading, Democratic leaders are moving outward from the 180 solid votes in the party's political center to win the votes on the party's left and right that will be needed to pass the bill later this month.
The cajoling will continue tomorrow as lawmakers return to Washington and the legislation is readied for markup later in the week. But there are roadblocks: Rep. Allen Boyd (D-Fla.) said some conservatives are withholding their support until the language McDermott wanted is removed.
As Democratic leaders balance those demands, the calculus is fairly straightforward, said one conservative Democrat involved in the process. Leaders are counting on winning all but a dozen of the 43 conservative Blue Dog Democrats and all but a dozen of the 75 or so members of the liberal Out of Iraq Caucus. Then, Democratic leaders are hoping, enough Republicans will break ranks to put them over the top.
By last week's end, House Democratic Caucus Chairman Rahm Emanuel (Ill.) said, they had secured about 200 votes.
But the last 18 votes will not be easy. That point was brought home Thursday morning, during the closed-door meeting in which the legislation was detailed for Democratic members. As Pelosi gave her pitch, Reps. Lynn Woolsey (Calif.), Barbara Lee (Calif.), Lloyd Doggett (Tex.) and Nadler stood up to leave for a news conference of their own. After an uncomfortable pause, Pelosi growled that she wished Democrats would be courteous enough to hear her out before talking to the media. Nadler sat down. The rest walked out.
Democratic aides concede that some party members, including Woolsey, Lee and Doggett, are all but lost. But they are not giving up.
"There's nothing guaranteed in life, but I feel very good," Emanuel said.
wallpaper Angelina Jolie at Moscow Salt
highaimer
01-23 07:54 PM
Hi All,
I am in EB3 with priority date of 2003 nov, I have a masters degree in US. Because of my negligence I applied in eb3. my i140 is cleared in eb3. waiting for priority date. Now I am planning to file eb2 perm and make us of the old priority date. Before joining for work I completed all the course work but didnt get the degree. I got the degree one year after I joined for work. My graduation date in the degree certificate is 5 months after my priority date. Will this raise red flags in the eb2 I-140 stage. Would it be safer for me to go for regular i-140 or premium processing. Any help or suggestion will be deeply appreciated.
Thanks in advance
I am in EB3 with priority date of 2003 nov, I have a masters degree in US. Because of my negligence I applied in eb3. my i140 is cleared in eb3. waiting for priority date. Now I am planning to file eb2 perm and make us of the old priority date. Before joining for work I completed all the course work but didnt get the degree. I got the degree one year after I joined for work. My graduation date in the degree certificate is 5 months after my priority date. Will this raise red flags in the eb2 I-140 stage. Would it be safer for me to go for regular i-140 or premium processing. Any help or suggestion will be deeply appreciated.
Thanks in advance
pointlesswait
09-11 04:53 PM
I had a quick Q:
a.) DO you need latest paystubs for filing for 485.
Suppose, i am working for company A and company B has filed for my GC, then how can this be provided.
b.) Even if i am working for company A, do i still need pay stubs or will a letter stating that "this job is available for the immigrant" suffice.
thanks in advance.
<DING>..inputs plz...
a.) DO you need latest paystubs for filing for 485.
Suppose, i am working for company A and company B has filed for my GC, then how can this be provided.
b.) Even if i am working for company A, do i still need pay stubs or will a letter stating that "this job is available for the immigrant" suffice.
thanks in advance.
<DING>..inputs plz...
2011 Salt Premiere in Moscow:
martinvisalaw
06-03 06:12 PM
Yes, you can ask CIS to extend the RFE deadline and explain the circumstances. It is critical to make this request before the first deadline has passed.
more...
green.card
12-10 09:59 PM
Guys,
Please help me...I do not have much knowledge about GC process. I am working on H1B visa from last 3 years with my current employer and they are ready to apply for GC but, I know that for GC in the same position I cannot use the experience gained during past 3 years. But if I apply for GC for the next level (as GC is for future employment) with the current experience and keep working in my current role until my GC is approved, do you guys see any problem with that? GC approval will easily take 4-5 years and during this time I can keep working in my current position and once GC is approved I can switch to the next level which is kind of promotion.
Thanks in advance for your suggestions.
Please help me...I do not have much knowledge about GC process. I am working on H1B visa from last 3 years with my current employer and they are ready to apply for GC but, I know that for GC in the same position I cannot use the experience gained during past 3 years. But if I apply for GC for the next level (as GC is for future employment) with the current experience and keep working in my current role until my GC is approved, do you guys see any problem with that? GC approval will easily take 4-5 years and during this time I can keep working in my current position and once GC is approved I can switch to the next level which is kind of promotion.
Thanks in advance for your suggestions.
anilnair
05-24 08:47 PM
Hi I am going to india on july and I need to get my h1 visa stamped as the previous one expired and at the same time my wife needs to get her h4 visa stamped
now when i return back i am planning to bring my parents on short trip
my question
1.Is it possible to book appoinments for h1,h4,b1 at one shot (one day)
2. Will there be any issue if we go in group in combination of many visa
requesting your valuable inputs
Thanks
Anil
now when i return back i am planning to bring my parents on short trip
my question
1.Is it possible to book appoinments for h1,h4,b1 at one shot (one day)
2. Will there be any issue if we go in group in combination of many visa
requesting your valuable inputs
Thanks
Anil
more...
kirupa
05-10 03:22 PM
Your post is extremely scarce on details :) What exactly are you trying to do?
2010 Angelina Jolie - Russian Spy
jindhal
10-05 01:16 AM
EB2 - NIW National Interest Waiver (Special Considerations for a green card)
more...
131313
August 29th, 2005, 08:05 PM
Billy Joe Armstrong is a man of endless expressions, is he not?
Nice work!!
Nice work!!