arnab221
06-26 12:11 PM
Folks,
If your petition has been physically "Mailed" to the Atlanta Service center . Do they give you a tracking number . Can such cases be viewed online on the website http://www.plc.doleta.gov ? How much time does the Atlanta service center take to acknowledge the reciept of such application ?
If your petition has been physically "Mailed" to the Atlanta Service center . Do they give you a tracking number . Can such cases be viewed online on the website http://www.plc.doleta.gov ? How much time does the Atlanta service center take to acknowledge the reciept of such application ?
wallpaper Jessica Alba amp; Cash Warren
Macaca
10-22 08:07 AM
Can Washington Be Fixed? (http://www.usnews.com/articles/news/politics/2007/10/19/can-washington-be-fixed.html) The war. Healthcare. Airline delays. Katrina. Americans are fed up with inaction�and demanding change By Kenneth T. Walsh, October 19, 2007
There they go again.
The White House and Congress are in a nasty stalemate over expanding access to children's healthcare. President Bush predicts a "fiscal showdown" this fall with Democratic legislators over virtually all his spending priorities. "We're now more than halfway through October, and the new leaders in Congress have had more than nine months to get things done for the American people," Bush told a news conference last week. "Unfortunately, they haven't managed to pass many important bills. Now the clock is winding down, and in some key areas, Congress is just getting started." In a familiar tit for tat, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi shot back: "There is no better example of why Washington is not working for the American people than the president claiming to seek common ground at the same time he is bitterly attacking Congress."
Beyond that, no solution has emerged for the subprime mortgage meltdown that may cost hundreds of thousands of Americans their homes and endangers the wider economy. The Iraq war grinds on, with no apparent end in sight. Idaho Sen. Larry Craig is reviving the sleaze-factor saga that has been so damaging to Washington by trying to withdraw his guilty plea to disorderly conduct stemming from a restroom sex sting.
It's the constant refrain from the presidential candidates, political scientists, and, most important of all, everyday Americans: Washington is broken. Rancorous partisanship has nearly paralyzed the government. The nation's leaders have lost touch with the people. Above all, it's time for a change. Historians and pollsters say the zeitgeist is clear. Americans are more frustrated with their government today than they have been in a long time, even more so than during the Watergate scandal. And those negative feelings have become the subtext of the 2008 presidential race. "Distrust of politicians and politics are part of American culture," says Princeton historian Julian Zelizer. "But the distrust is getting worse."
With good reason. The government can't seem to solve any of its major problems, from reforming Social Security to illegal immigration. "Anytime there is a major policy failure," such as the disastrous government response to Hurricane Katrina, Zelizer says, "it decreases Americans' belief that government can do good." The Democrats and Republicans are increasingly relying on their base voters and aren't reaching out to anyone else, making compromise nearly impossible. Corruption scandals have increased public cynicism. The 24-hour news cycle emphasizes conflict and wrongdoing more than ever. The Iraq war has deepened the nation's anxiety. President Bush and Congress endure record-low approval ratings. In fact, 7 out of 10 Americans now say the country is headed in the wrong direction. "People feel nothing gets done in Washington, that the hot air of summer has become a permanent condition," says Kenneth Duberstein, former White House chief of staff for Ronald Reagan.
The need for change is such a dominant theme that all the main presidential contenders are calling for an end to business as usual. The Democrats, trying to draw contrasts with the GOP White House of George W. Bush, are the most pointed. Front-runner Hillary Clinton says her experience as first lady and as a senator from New York enables her to bring more positive and effective change than her rivals. "She has represented change all her life," says Mark Penn, her chief strategist , "and she's been fighting the special interests all her life." Illinois Sen. Barack Obama goes further. "There are those who tout their experience working the system in Washington," Obama says. "But the problem is the system in Washington isn't working for us, and it hasn't been for a very long time." And John Edwards told U.S. News: "Washington is severely broken. And I think the system is rigged, and I think it's rigged against the American people and it's rigged by powerful interests and their lobbyists in Washington."
The Republicans are more restrained in attacking Bush, the titular head of their party, but they realize that public resentment of the status quo runs deep. "When, every day, Americans are being shot and Iraqis are being blown up, it feels lousy," says former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney. "I happen to think that the failures in Iraq have a great deal to do with the wrong-track sentiment that exists in the country today."
Can't say no. Beyond Iraq, other reasons for public frustration with Washington include anxiety about job security, wage stagnation, retirement, and access to affordable healthcare�all situations that the White House and Congress have failed to improve. "Because the two parties are so evenly balanced, it's not possible for one party to pass its own agenda," says conservative strategist Grover Norquist. "When you've got a fifty-fifty balance, each team needs all its most motivated players and each team can't say no to its radical special interests."
There they go again.
The White House and Congress are in a nasty stalemate over expanding access to children's healthcare. President Bush predicts a "fiscal showdown" this fall with Democratic legislators over virtually all his spending priorities. "We're now more than halfway through October, and the new leaders in Congress have had more than nine months to get things done for the American people," Bush told a news conference last week. "Unfortunately, they haven't managed to pass many important bills. Now the clock is winding down, and in some key areas, Congress is just getting started." In a familiar tit for tat, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi shot back: "There is no better example of why Washington is not working for the American people than the president claiming to seek common ground at the same time he is bitterly attacking Congress."
Beyond that, no solution has emerged for the subprime mortgage meltdown that may cost hundreds of thousands of Americans their homes and endangers the wider economy. The Iraq war grinds on, with no apparent end in sight. Idaho Sen. Larry Craig is reviving the sleaze-factor saga that has been so damaging to Washington by trying to withdraw his guilty plea to disorderly conduct stemming from a restroom sex sting.
It's the constant refrain from the presidential candidates, political scientists, and, most important of all, everyday Americans: Washington is broken. Rancorous partisanship has nearly paralyzed the government. The nation's leaders have lost touch with the people. Above all, it's time for a change. Historians and pollsters say the zeitgeist is clear. Americans are more frustrated with their government today than they have been in a long time, even more so than during the Watergate scandal. And those negative feelings have become the subtext of the 2008 presidential race. "Distrust of politicians and politics are part of American culture," says Princeton historian Julian Zelizer. "But the distrust is getting worse."
With good reason. The government can't seem to solve any of its major problems, from reforming Social Security to illegal immigration. "Anytime there is a major policy failure," such as the disastrous government response to Hurricane Katrina, Zelizer says, "it decreases Americans' belief that government can do good." The Democrats and Republicans are increasingly relying on their base voters and aren't reaching out to anyone else, making compromise nearly impossible. Corruption scandals have increased public cynicism. The 24-hour news cycle emphasizes conflict and wrongdoing more than ever. The Iraq war has deepened the nation's anxiety. President Bush and Congress endure record-low approval ratings. In fact, 7 out of 10 Americans now say the country is headed in the wrong direction. "People feel nothing gets done in Washington, that the hot air of summer has become a permanent condition," says Kenneth Duberstein, former White House chief of staff for Ronald Reagan.
The need for change is such a dominant theme that all the main presidential contenders are calling for an end to business as usual. The Democrats, trying to draw contrasts with the GOP White House of George W. Bush, are the most pointed. Front-runner Hillary Clinton says her experience as first lady and as a senator from New York enables her to bring more positive and effective change than her rivals. "She has represented change all her life," says Mark Penn, her chief strategist , "and she's been fighting the special interests all her life." Illinois Sen. Barack Obama goes further. "There are those who tout their experience working the system in Washington," Obama says. "But the problem is the system in Washington isn't working for us, and it hasn't been for a very long time." And John Edwards told U.S. News: "Washington is severely broken. And I think the system is rigged, and I think it's rigged against the American people and it's rigged by powerful interests and their lobbyists in Washington."
The Republicans are more restrained in attacking Bush, the titular head of their party, but they realize that public resentment of the status quo runs deep. "When, every day, Americans are being shot and Iraqis are being blown up, it feels lousy," says former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney. "I happen to think that the failures in Iraq have a great deal to do with the wrong-track sentiment that exists in the country today."
Can't say no. Beyond Iraq, other reasons for public frustration with Washington include anxiety about job security, wage stagnation, retirement, and access to affordable healthcare�all situations that the White House and Congress have failed to improve. "Because the two parties are so evenly balanced, it's not possible for one party to pass its own agenda," says conservative strategist Grover Norquist. "When you've got a fifty-fifty balance, each team needs all its most motivated players and each team can't say no to its radical special interests."
lazarus741
05-20 04:53 AM
I just can't get Swift 3d to work. I followed your tutorial, but my Animations library always says "no animations available" :(
Any explanation?
Any explanation?
2011 Jessica Alba and Cash
GCBy3000
07-27 09:33 PM
Good if this works out.
more...
godbless
08-05 06:17 PM
While most of the folks are busy working on I485, EAD, AP stuff, does anyone has any information about the h1b filing that would begin in April 2008. Is there any policy program, the govt. is coming out with to let the chaos of April 2007 not happen again?
chintu25
07-08 09:36 AM
Postthe names and numbers of Immigrant friendlies in senate so we may request them to appeal
more...
connect0123
04-05 01:00 AM
Nice Design!
Keep it up.
U can also take more information by visit our site
Keep it up.
U can also take more information by visit our site
2010 jessica alba and cash warren
wantMyGC
01-02 04:33 PM
I received an RFE on my I-140 and we responded back with the company tax statements on Dec 2nd 2007. We saw LUDs on I-140 on Dec 4th, Dec 5th 2007.
There were simultaneous LUDs on 12/12/2007 on my pending 485, my wife's pending 485 and my wife's pending advance parole after the FP LUD. Is it common ?
Today (1/2/208), we checked the status and found that they mailed the Advance parole document for my wife. Note that I got the AP and EAD and my wife got EAD earlier.
Please let me know if anyone faced the similar pattern.
Thanks for your advice in advance
There were simultaneous LUDs on 12/12/2007 on my pending 485, my wife's pending 485 and my wife's pending advance parole after the FP LUD. Is it common ?
Today (1/2/208), we checked the status and found that they mailed the Advance parole document for my wife. Note that I got the AP and EAD and my wife got EAD earlier.
Please let me know if anyone faced the similar pattern.
Thanks for your advice in advance
more...
gxr
11-23 07:16 PM
Got LUD on I-485 one month after EAD/AP approval. What could this mean?
I got a soft LUD with no change in case status on I-485. PD is July 2006.
-gxr
I got a soft LUD with no change in case status on I-485. PD is July 2006.
-gxr
hair Jessica+alba+honor+warren
Blog Feeds
04-08 08:40 AM
Nina Bernstein, one of the country's best immigration reporters, has a front page story in this morning's Times regarding 30 survivors of the January Haiti earthquake who were airlifted by Marines to the United States and are now sitting in detentions centers in Florida. According to the Times, these individuals were pulled from the rubble and were seeking food, safety or medical care at the airport in Port-au-Prince. When aftershocks struck, the Marines quickly evacuated people via military transports and did not bother with immigration processing. Because these individuals landed without visas, they were taken by DHS into custody and...
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2010/04/ny-times-us-jailing-haitians-it-airlifted-to-the-us.html)
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2010/04/ny-times-us-jailing-haitians-it-airlifted-to-the-us.html)
more...
kirupa
07-13 03:39 AM
Added! :)
hot Jessica Alba , Cash Warren and
mojo_jojo
02-24 08:26 PM
what do I have to do?
Will I be contacted by the Goverment via snail mail?
In general, how long more do I have to wait?
:confused::(
Will I be contacted by the Goverment via snail mail?
In general, how long more do I have to wait?
:confused::(
more...
house Warren, Wedding, Jessica, Alba
Macaca
07-23 07:38 PM
Sheehan: I will beat Pelosi (http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/sheehan-i-will-beat-pelosi-2007-07-23.html) By Jeremy Jacobs, July 23, 2007
If Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) refuses to bring articles of impeachment against President Bush to the floor of the House, anti-war activist Cindy Sheehan said Monday, Sheehan not only will challenge the Speaker in the next election but also will defeat her.
Discussing President Bush and Vice President Cheney, Sheehan said, �We put them there. We can fire them. If Nancy Pelosi doesn't do her constitutionally mandated job by midnight tonight, tomorrow I will announce that I'm going to run against her.
�And not only am I going to run against her, but I will beat her,� Sheehan added.
A spokesman for Pelosi, Nadeam Elshami, said the Speaker and House Democrats are working toward their goals this Congress and would not address Sheehan�s proclamation.
�The Speaker and House Democrats are focused on ending the war in Iraq, holding the Bush administration accountable and delivering a new direction for the American people,� Elshami said.�Those are the priorities of the Speaker and the Democrats.�
Sheehan seized the anti-war spotlight during her extended protest outside the president�s ranch in Crawford, Texas in 2005, after her 24-year-old son, Casey, was killed in Iraq. Speaking at a demonstration at Arlington National Cemetery, Sheehan argued that it is Pelosi�s constitutional obligation to impeach the president.
�The administration has abused our soldiers. They've abused our freedoms,� Sheehan said. �They have killed my son and countless others. And they must be held accountable.
�Impeachment is not a fringe movement. It is mandated in our Constitution. Nancy Pelosi had no authority to take it off the table,� Sheehan said.
Sheehan Arrested in Impeachment Protest (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/07/23/AR2007072300697.html?hpid=moreheadlines) By NATASHA T. METZLER The Associated Press, July 23, 2007
WASHINGTON -- Anti-war activist Cindy Sheehan was arrested Monday at the Capitol for disorderly conduct, shortly after saying she would run against House Speaker Nancy Pelosi over the California Democrat's refusal to try to impeach President Bush.
Sheehan was taken into custody inside Rep. John Conyers' office, where she had spent an hour imploring him to launch impeachment proceedings against Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney. Conyers, D-Mich., chairs the House Judiciary Committee, where any impeachment effort would have to begin.
"The Democrats will not hold this administration accountable, so we have to hold the Democrats accountable," Sheehan said outside of Conyers' office after the meeting. "And I for one am going to step up to the plate and run against Nancy Pelosi."
Sheehan and about 200 other protesters had walked to Conyers' office from Arlington National Cemetery. She said Conyers told her there weren't enough votes for impeachment to move forward on the issue.
Forty-five of Sheehan's fellow protesters also were arrested. Capitol Police spokeswoman Sgt. Kimberly Schneider said that after they are processed, the arrested activists could each pay a $50 fine to be released.
"Impeachment is not a fringe movement, it is mandated in our Constitution. Nancy Pelosi had no authority to take it off the table," Sheehan told her group of orange-clad activists before they began their march from the national cemetery.
Sheehan, whose 24-year-old son, Casey, was killed in Iraq, has been saying for two weeks that she would seek to oust Pelosi from office by running against her as an independent in her San Francisco district if Pelosi didn't change her mind by July 23 on trying to impeach Bush.
Conyers introduced a bill last term calling on Congress to determine whether there are grounds for impeaching Bush. Pelosi has steadfastly dismissed any talk of impeachment, saying Democrats should focus their efforts on ending the war in Iraq.
If Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) refuses to bring articles of impeachment against President Bush to the floor of the House, anti-war activist Cindy Sheehan said Monday, Sheehan not only will challenge the Speaker in the next election but also will defeat her.
Discussing President Bush and Vice President Cheney, Sheehan said, �We put them there. We can fire them. If Nancy Pelosi doesn't do her constitutionally mandated job by midnight tonight, tomorrow I will announce that I'm going to run against her.
�And not only am I going to run against her, but I will beat her,� Sheehan added.
A spokesman for Pelosi, Nadeam Elshami, said the Speaker and House Democrats are working toward their goals this Congress and would not address Sheehan�s proclamation.
�The Speaker and House Democrats are focused on ending the war in Iraq, holding the Bush administration accountable and delivering a new direction for the American people,� Elshami said.�Those are the priorities of the Speaker and the Democrats.�
Sheehan seized the anti-war spotlight during her extended protest outside the president�s ranch in Crawford, Texas in 2005, after her 24-year-old son, Casey, was killed in Iraq. Speaking at a demonstration at Arlington National Cemetery, Sheehan argued that it is Pelosi�s constitutional obligation to impeach the president.
�The administration has abused our soldiers. They've abused our freedoms,� Sheehan said. �They have killed my son and countless others. And they must be held accountable.
�Impeachment is not a fringe movement. It is mandated in our Constitution. Nancy Pelosi had no authority to take it off the table,� Sheehan said.
Sheehan Arrested in Impeachment Protest (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/07/23/AR2007072300697.html?hpid=moreheadlines) By NATASHA T. METZLER The Associated Press, July 23, 2007
WASHINGTON -- Anti-war activist Cindy Sheehan was arrested Monday at the Capitol for disorderly conduct, shortly after saying she would run against House Speaker Nancy Pelosi over the California Democrat's refusal to try to impeach President Bush.
Sheehan was taken into custody inside Rep. John Conyers' office, where she had spent an hour imploring him to launch impeachment proceedings against Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney. Conyers, D-Mich., chairs the House Judiciary Committee, where any impeachment effort would have to begin.
"The Democrats will not hold this administration accountable, so we have to hold the Democrats accountable," Sheehan said outside of Conyers' office after the meeting. "And I for one am going to step up to the plate and run against Nancy Pelosi."
Sheehan and about 200 other protesters had walked to Conyers' office from Arlington National Cemetery. She said Conyers told her there weren't enough votes for impeachment to move forward on the issue.
Forty-five of Sheehan's fellow protesters also were arrested. Capitol Police spokeswoman Sgt. Kimberly Schneider said that after they are processed, the arrested activists could each pay a $50 fine to be released.
"Impeachment is not a fringe movement, it is mandated in our Constitution. Nancy Pelosi had no authority to take it off the table," Sheehan told her group of orange-clad activists before they began their march from the national cemetery.
Sheehan, whose 24-year-old son, Casey, was killed in Iraq, has been saying for two weeks that she would seek to oust Pelosi from office by running against her as an independent in her San Francisco district if Pelosi didn't change her mind by July 23 on trying to impeach Bush.
Conyers introduced a bill last term calling on Congress to determine whether there are grounds for impeaching Bush. Pelosi has steadfastly dismissed any talk of impeachment, saying Democrats should focus their efforts on ending the war in Iraq.
tattoo Jessica Alba and Cash Warren
javadeveloper
10-09 10:58 AM
My wife did not have SSN when her FP was done. I would not suggest writing ITIN either.
But must write the A# from FP notice onto the form.
But I believe my wife used her ITIN# in place of SSN in some other GC related forms , Is this going to be an Issue??
But must write the A# from FP notice onto the form.
But I believe my wife used her ITIN# in place of SSN in some other GC related forms , Is this going to be an Issue??
more...
pictures jessica alba and cash warren
Macaca
07-24 08:04 AM
Reform, the FDR way (http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-shlaes23jul23,1,2603353.story) Democrats are right to revere Roosevelt, but even he knew when to reform his own reforms. By Amity Shlaes, AMITY SHLAES is the author of "The Forgotten Man: A New History of the Great Depression," a syndicated columnist for Bloomberg News and a senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations. July 23, 2007
WHERE'S the fun? That's the feeling you get watching the Democrats in Washington this summer. Gone is the happy plan for a frenzy of lawmaking, the "Hundred Hours" of action Speaker Nancy Pelosi promised when the Democrats took the House. The speaker's artful allusion to Franklin D. Roosevelt's "Hundred Days" quickly became an ironic echo. During that first euphoric legislative period, Roosevelt managed to rescue the banking system from disaster, assist bankrupted farmers, rewrite the economics of agriculture and the rules for flailing businesses, bring back beer � you name it. Contemporary leaders can't even act on pressing issues such as agriculture and immigration, not to mention Social Security.
Why can't politicians be Roosevelts today? For an answer, let's look to the middle of 1935, about two years into FDR's New Deal and the equivalent of about now in the election cycle. The federal government was still smaller than the nation's state and local governments combined. Two out of 10 men were unemployed. FDR took the economic emergency as a powerful mandate for further lawmaking. He jumped into the project with all the glee of a boy leaping into a sandbox. The papers reported that he was going to "blast out of committee" yet another round of bills, and blast he did � that year the country's premier labor law, the Wagner Act, was passed, as was Social Security.
At about the same time, Roosevelt slapped together the Rural Electrification Administration, which came on top of the New Deal's large farm subsidies. For construction workers, artists and writers, he created � also in mid-1935 � the Works Progress Administration, which hired the unemployed, including artists, craftsmen and journalists. To appreciate the size of that gift, imagine a contemporary politician responding to a market crash by putting ex-employees of Google on the federal payroll. The president also built on to an already large structure, the Public Works Administration, which funded town halls, grammar schools and swimming pools in 3,000 counties. The money? Roosevelt passed a tax increase that opponents called the "soak the rich" act. It contained an estate tax rate hike that would make John Edwards drool. By 1936, the government took up more than 9% of gross domestic product. For the first peacetime year in U.S. history, Washington had edged past the state and local governments in size to become a larger part of the national economy. (Just a few years earlier, state and local governments had been twice as large as Washington.) FDR had reversed the old crucial ratio of federalism, and Washington has dominated the country ever since.
Those early commitments set a trend of promises. Some of them became what we now call entitlements. Lyndon Johnson in the 1960s layered on governmental commitments with the Great Society. President Bush has heaped on more, with a new entitlement: prescription drugs for seniors. Only a narrow part of the federal budget remains for discretionary spending � the part left over for new ideas. And setting aside the question of whether an individual program is good, bad or simply in need of an overhaul, we've found as a country that old commitments are simply too hard to undo.
This is partly because of the way the political game works. When you seek to take away a benefit from one targeted recipient, he will fight like crazy to keep it � think of the ferocious battles the farm lobby wages over even tiny reductions in agricultural subsidies. Those who gain from reducing the size of the handout, however, are members of the lobbyless general public who will receive only an incremental advantage, maybe the equivalent of a penny or two apiece. So the rest of us don't have the incentive or ability to apply countervailing pressure. Yet that's exactly what we need today: the energy and exhilaration of FDR in his first term.
Today's timidity would have disturbed FDR, who had no trouble knocking down the sandcastles he had made. Early in the 1930s, he created 4 million jobs with the Civilian Works Administration, then uncreated them when he decided the CWA was too close to the English dole. When he tired of Harold Ickes' Public Works Administration, he scaled it back, and finally abolished it in 1941. As for Ickes' Department of the Interior, FDR decided that it was time to revise it into "a real Conservation Department" � a change many would welcome today.
A few leaders since FDR have persuaded Congress to help them bring about changes on this scale � Ronald Reagan's bipartisan tax reform of 1986 and Bill Clinton's welfare reform a decade later come to mind. These presidents were truer to FDR's spirit than the hesitating Congress of today. Clearing some blank space for new institutions is possible. But lawmakers won't do it if they honor Rooseveltian edifices more than Roosevelt did himself.
WHERE'S the fun? That's the feeling you get watching the Democrats in Washington this summer. Gone is the happy plan for a frenzy of lawmaking, the "Hundred Hours" of action Speaker Nancy Pelosi promised when the Democrats took the House. The speaker's artful allusion to Franklin D. Roosevelt's "Hundred Days" quickly became an ironic echo. During that first euphoric legislative period, Roosevelt managed to rescue the banking system from disaster, assist bankrupted farmers, rewrite the economics of agriculture and the rules for flailing businesses, bring back beer � you name it. Contemporary leaders can't even act on pressing issues such as agriculture and immigration, not to mention Social Security.
Why can't politicians be Roosevelts today? For an answer, let's look to the middle of 1935, about two years into FDR's New Deal and the equivalent of about now in the election cycle. The federal government was still smaller than the nation's state and local governments combined. Two out of 10 men were unemployed. FDR took the economic emergency as a powerful mandate for further lawmaking. He jumped into the project with all the glee of a boy leaping into a sandbox. The papers reported that he was going to "blast out of committee" yet another round of bills, and blast he did � that year the country's premier labor law, the Wagner Act, was passed, as was Social Security.
At about the same time, Roosevelt slapped together the Rural Electrification Administration, which came on top of the New Deal's large farm subsidies. For construction workers, artists and writers, he created � also in mid-1935 � the Works Progress Administration, which hired the unemployed, including artists, craftsmen and journalists. To appreciate the size of that gift, imagine a contemporary politician responding to a market crash by putting ex-employees of Google on the federal payroll. The president also built on to an already large structure, the Public Works Administration, which funded town halls, grammar schools and swimming pools in 3,000 counties. The money? Roosevelt passed a tax increase that opponents called the "soak the rich" act. It contained an estate tax rate hike that would make John Edwards drool. By 1936, the government took up more than 9% of gross domestic product. For the first peacetime year in U.S. history, Washington had edged past the state and local governments in size to become a larger part of the national economy. (Just a few years earlier, state and local governments had been twice as large as Washington.) FDR had reversed the old crucial ratio of federalism, and Washington has dominated the country ever since.
Those early commitments set a trend of promises. Some of them became what we now call entitlements. Lyndon Johnson in the 1960s layered on governmental commitments with the Great Society. President Bush has heaped on more, with a new entitlement: prescription drugs for seniors. Only a narrow part of the federal budget remains for discretionary spending � the part left over for new ideas. And setting aside the question of whether an individual program is good, bad or simply in need of an overhaul, we've found as a country that old commitments are simply too hard to undo.
This is partly because of the way the political game works. When you seek to take away a benefit from one targeted recipient, he will fight like crazy to keep it � think of the ferocious battles the farm lobby wages over even tiny reductions in agricultural subsidies. Those who gain from reducing the size of the handout, however, are members of the lobbyless general public who will receive only an incremental advantage, maybe the equivalent of a penny or two apiece. So the rest of us don't have the incentive or ability to apply countervailing pressure. Yet that's exactly what we need today: the energy and exhilaration of FDR in his first term.
Today's timidity would have disturbed FDR, who had no trouble knocking down the sandcastles he had made. Early in the 1930s, he created 4 million jobs with the Civilian Works Administration, then uncreated them when he decided the CWA was too close to the English dole. When he tired of Harold Ickes' Public Works Administration, he scaled it back, and finally abolished it in 1941. As for Ickes' Department of the Interior, FDR decided that it was time to revise it into "a real Conservation Department" � a change many would welcome today.
A few leaders since FDR have persuaded Congress to help them bring about changes on this scale � Ronald Reagan's bipartisan tax reform of 1986 and Bill Clinton's welfare reform a decade later come to mind. These presidents were truer to FDR's spirit than the hesitating Congress of today. Clearing some blank space for new institutions is possible. But lawmakers won't do it if they honor Rooseveltian edifices more than Roosevelt did himself.
dresses CASH WARREN and Jessica Alba
4046
04-11 02:28 PM
Is it possible to group and ungroup those rectangles? I mean, it should be possible that since you did it (I believe) but how did you? And is there a way to undo it?
more...
makeup Jessica Alba amp; Cash Warren
sam_hoosier
01-05 02:29 PM
A survey of top employers reveals that they would be hiring more if they could just find the skilled workers they need -
http://money.cnn.com/2007/01/04/news/economy/jobs_outlook/index.htm?postversion=20070
http://money.cnn.com/2007/01/04/news/economy/jobs_outlook/index.htm?postversion=20070
girlfriend Happy day: Jessica Alba joins
aillarramendi
08-31 11:32 AM
Bump!!!
hairstyles Jessica Alba watched her
subba
04-12 08:23 PM
Hello,
I sent you a PM with some info.
Hope you find it useful.
Thanks,
Subba
I sent you a PM with some info.
Hope you find it useful.
Thanks,
Subba
fromnaija
07-18 12:27 PM
Ron Gotcher talked about USCIS processing times here:
http://www.immigration-information.com/forums/showthread.php?p=20705#post20705
http://www.immigration-information.com/forums/showthread.php?p=20705#post20705
vik123
02-14 03:16 PM
Read the House Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers, Jr statement
http://judiciary.house.gov/OversightOpeningStatement.aspx?ID=89
http://judiciary.house.gov/OversightOpeningStatement.aspx?ID=89
No comments:
Post a Comment