perm2gc
06-11 10:49 AM
Send the mail ..
wallpaper dlnichols#39; 1955 Chevrolet
EB2_Jun03_dude
02-21 05:11 PM
I-485: EB2 India with PD June 2003
I was wondering why I am I getting a LUD in Feb 08? (since EB2 India is 'U').
Now I know why :) it seems USCIS is getting ready for the deluge in April 08' :D
I was wondering why I am I getting a LUD in Feb 08? (since EB2 India is 'U').
Now I know why :) it seems USCIS is getting ready for the deluge in April 08' :D
shyamkishore
02-07 07:05 PM
My Dear IV Members,
I would like to open up my house for IV members during the advocacy days. I live in Herndon, VA about 25 miles from DC. I can accommodate up to 3 or 4 members if they can manage. DC is pretty much commutable from my house using the public transport.
Due to my work situation at present I am not sure if I will be able to participate actively. But I will be trying my best to at least make it for a day.
Regards,
Shyam
I would like to open up my house for IV members during the advocacy days. I live in Herndon, VA about 25 miles from DC. I can accommodate up to 3 or 4 members if they can manage. DC is pretty much commutable from my house using the public transport.
Due to my work situation at present I am not sure if I will be able to participate actively. But I will be trying my best to at least make it for a day.
Regards,
Shyam
2011 Custom Truck Show
whiteStallion
09-10 04:27 PM
i guess they were very happy that they discussed the horse issue and they decided to take a well deserved break...as for 5882 who cares, as one poster mentioned, the horses are US citizens and they support the economy by eating grass. Republicans are happy because legal horses will be eating legal grass as opposed to illegals cutting and shipping grass to the horses. Democrats will be happy because the horses are well looked after.
Nice humour!
Nice humour!
more...
sayantan76
02-22 07:55 PM
I agree with you.
This guy googler just wants 5 minutes of fame and attention. By talking about such sensitive information on the forum, he is risking anything good that can happen for us in future. DOS can get unhappy with this official for discussing such information. I can understand the motives of lawyers for announcing on their website. They want publicity and business for themselves by showing off their connections.
Any Govt official who mentions any piece of information to a member of general public or press does it with full knowledge that the information can become public knowledge....so either the information shared by this person with googler is not sensitive (most likely the case since generic USCIS modus operandi in making available visa numbers and moving dates should be public information) or the person does not care that sensitive info gets leaked. So Googler did the right thing in sharing the info
Also - i dont understand the logic that having this information could risk any good that might be coming our way - its not that googler's source is making any special favors or moving the dates faster than they should....all he is doing is moving dates as per USCIS policy.....so even if USCIS gets pissed off with this person and replaces him - the next incumbent would also move dates in a similar manner (nothing works like "precedence" in Govt).......the only harm coming our way is that we would have lost a good info source
This guy googler just wants 5 minutes of fame and attention. By talking about such sensitive information on the forum, he is risking anything good that can happen for us in future. DOS can get unhappy with this official for discussing such information. I can understand the motives of lawyers for announcing on their website. They want publicity and business for themselves by showing off their connections.
Any Govt official who mentions any piece of information to a member of general public or press does it with full knowledge that the information can become public knowledge....so either the information shared by this person with googler is not sensitive (most likely the case since generic USCIS modus operandi in making available visa numbers and moving dates should be public information) or the person does not care that sensitive info gets leaked. So Googler did the right thing in sharing the info
Also - i dont understand the logic that having this information could risk any good that might be coming our way - its not that googler's source is making any special favors or moving the dates faster than they should....all he is doing is moving dates as per USCIS policy.....so even if USCIS gets pissed off with this person and replaces him - the next incumbent would also move dates in a similar manner (nothing works like "precedence" in Govt).......the only harm coming our way is that we would have lost a good info source
srkamath
07-12 03:40 PM
I'm killing my own joy here...... the Aug Bulletin says
"Consular officers are required to report to the Department of State documentarily qualified applicants for numerically limited visas; the Bureau of Citizenship and Immigration Services in the Department of Homeland Security reports applicants for adjustment of status."
Documentarily Qualified (DQ'd)
USCIS and Consulates submitted a list of Documentarily Qualified applicants to DOS on July 8th. The latest PD of the applicants on that list was before 01-June therefore they have set the PD at 01-June-2006.
What is documentarily qualified?
"Consular officers are required to report to the Department of State documentarily qualified applicants for numerically limited visas; the Bureau of Citizenship and Immigration Services in the Department of Homeland Security reports applicants for adjustment of status."
Documentarily Qualified (DQ'd)
USCIS and Consulates submitted a list of Documentarily Qualified applicants to DOS on July 8th. The latest PD of the applicants on that list was before 01-June therefore they have set the PD at 01-June-2006.
What is documentarily qualified?
more...
varshadas
12-13 09:39 AM
I have scheduled the conference. This is a free conference. I set it up at 9.00 PM on 12/14/2006 since we have to dial a long distance number and our cell phone charges would be free at that time.
Conference Details
Date: Thursday, December 14, 2006
Start Time: 9:00 PM Eastern Std Time
End Time: 10:55 PM Eastern Std Time
Participants: 25
Type of Conference Web-Scheduled Standard
Dial-in Number: 1-605-725-1900 (South Dakota)
Organizer Access Code: *938581 (you must include the leading star key)
Participant Access Code 73141
Thanks,
Varsha
Conference Details
Date: Thursday, December 14, 2006
Start Time: 9:00 PM Eastern Std Time
End Time: 10:55 PM Eastern Std Time
Participants: 25
Type of Conference Web-Scheduled Standard
Dial-in Number: 1-605-725-1900 (South Dakota)
Organizer Access Code: *938581 (you must include the leading star key)
Participant Access Code 73141
Thanks,
Varsha
2010 blue 1955 Chevy Truck.
bijualex29
07-24 09:31 AM
I think that is a very good idea, we should have several backup plans.
I never thought that �Ability to file I-485� is within USCIS power.
I too have researched and found out that the just � Memo � was issued to change the procedure to file I-485/I-140 concurrent filing.
Here � Ability to file will be within USCIS power� , but granting a green card is controlled by law.
I never thought that �Ability to file I-485� is within USCIS power.
I too have researched and found out that the just � Memo � was issued to change the procedure to file I-485/I-140 concurrent filing.
Here � Ability to file will be within USCIS power� , but granting a green card is controlled by law.
more...
singhsa3
03-16 01:57 PM
Your are not wanted here and no one likes you. You are an anti-social element and should be banned now.
dont "warn" me..........you think i give a damn about your "warning"??
the right to speak is MINE. all YOU can do from your high horse is ban me from the forum.
i really dont care, i still think interfilers and substituters should get what they derserve. every single bit of it. may they really, truly, go to hell, and stay there indefinitely.
and NO, dont preach to me about trying to "fix" the system. the agenda here is mostly EB3, and mostly Indian, at best. the multitudes of diploma holders get pissed when i call them out for what they are...........why are THEY so sensitive and ashamed???
i have a RIGHT to be in the proper EB queue, which i EARNED, and did not employ cheap desi-employer tricks and other games to get into........if that does not answer your doubts my friend, then as i said earlier, ban me..........i dont really care either way.
i dont advertise what i have done or can do for IV. somehow, that is a little demeaning. sort of like going to a temple and offering some money and then coming out and proclaiming to one and all how generous a give you are....
dont "warn" me..........you think i give a damn about your "warning"??
the right to speak is MINE. all YOU can do from your high horse is ban me from the forum.
i really dont care, i still think interfilers and substituters should get what they derserve. every single bit of it. may they really, truly, go to hell, and stay there indefinitely.
and NO, dont preach to me about trying to "fix" the system. the agenda here is mostly EB3, and mostly Indian, at best. the multitudes of diploma holders get pissed when i call them out for what they are...........why are THEY so sensitive and ashamed???
i have a RIGHT to be in the proper EB queue, which i EARNED, and did not employ cheap desi-employer tricks and other games to get into........if that does not answer your doubts my friend, then as i said earlier, ban me..........i dont really care either way.
i dont advertise what i have done or can do for IV. somehow, that is a little demeaning. sort of like going to a temple and offering some money and then coming out and proclaiming to one and all how generous a give you are....
hair 1955 Chevy 3100 Pickup Truck
gccube
03-17 01:18 PM
Current as per the April'08 bulletin
more...
Administrator2
04-20 07:38 PM
Thank you for offering to volunteer for calling members in CA. Now we need 2 more volunteers to give 30-45 minutes to make the phone calls. This is a very important initiative. Kindly send me a private message if you would like to volunteer.
hot 1955 Chevy Batesville
GC_Waiter_2000
07-12 06:08 PM
Current again after 2 Years.
Is it necessary to act (like opening SR, Info-pass, meeting Senators, Congressman etc..) so that I can get a seat in the Bus at least this time? Not to mention there is no proper queue this system (FIFO) here.
Thanks
Is it necessary to act (like opening SR, Info-pass, meeting Senators, Congressman etc..) so that I can get a seat in the Bus at least this time? Not to mention there is no proper queue this system (FIFO) here.
Thanks
more...
house is a 1955 Chevy Pickup.
msgrewal81
02-19 12:20 PM
well said Jaime...We should support this bill..
Read this carefully before you comment here:
"fingerprints for information relating to criminal, national security, or other law enforcement actions that would render the alien ineligible for adjustment of status under this section".
This is just to verify if the guys is in database for any criminal activity. ofcourse they will not give an illegal guy a GC if they have his record in database for criminal activity in US. This is just a formal requirement to keep illegal law brokers out because there are thousands illegals who came here from southern border and have committed crimes. There are some even in the America's Top 10 Wanted list. My uncles(came illegally here) went through all criminal checks by FBI for breaking any law,when Reagan gave amnesty for >5 years. Same criminal checks were done on illegals when Clinton helped legalalization of illegals. Fingerprints, etc are just for other criminal history check not to check if the person crossed the border illegally, ofcouse he did and broke the law: that's the whole point for him being illegal.
In fact >5year rule has been a standard to give immigration to illegals as is clear by Reagan amnesty. If 5 year rule is not for illegals, then what do you think is there in this bill for 11 million illegals. Itn't that logical. Infact main purpose of this bill is to fix illegal immigrants not legals. If you think >5 years rule is just for legals, you need to read history books, read text carefully and be more logical: not blinded by desire to get your own GC if you are here >5years.
Either way: I never said we should oppose the 5 year requirement. I just said that rules for "Legal <5 years" should be easier than rules for "illegal>5" years and please don't propagate false rumors here that this bill is just for legals in a blind desire for your own GC.
Read this carefully before you comment here:
"fingerprints for information relating to criminal, national security, or other law enforcement actions that would render the alien ineligible for adjustment of status under this section".
This is just to verify if the guys is in database for any criminal activity. ofcourse they will not give an illegal guy a GC if they have his record in database for criminal activity in US. This is just a formal requirement to keep illegal law brokers out because there are thousands illegals who came here from southern border and have committed crimes. There are some even in the America's Top 10 Wanted list. My uncles(came illegally here) went through all criminal checks by FBI for breaking any law,when Reagan gave amnesty for >5 years. Same criminal checks were done on illegals when Clinton helped legalalization of illegals. Fingerprints, etc are just for other criminal history check not to check if the person crossed the border illegally, ofcouse he did and broke the law: that's the whole point for him being illegal.
In fact >5year rule has been a standard to give immigration to illegals as is clear by Reagan amnesty. If 5 year rule is not for illegals, then what do you think is there in this bill for 11 million illegals. Itn't that logical. Infact main purpose of this bill is to fix illegal immigrants not legals. If you think >5 years rule is just for legals, you need to read history books, read text carefully and be more logical: not blinded by desire to get your own GC if you are here >5years.
Either way: I never said we should oppose the 5 year requirement. I just said that rules for "Legal <5 years" should be easier than rules for "illegal>5" years and please don't propagate false rumors here that this bill is just for legals in a blind desire for your own GC.
tattoo 1955 Chevy Pickup
reddymjm
09-10 12:58 PM
My PD is March 2010 EB2 so i'm not even in this race yet but help me in understanding one thing.
Was EB3 current in July 2007? If yes, I'm assuming atleast 95% EB3 folks have EAD and their spouse can work. The really big problem in post 2007 EB3.
Since dates were current in July 2007, Eb2 and Eb3 can atleast enjoy EAD/spouse working benefits. Why do ppl complain when they have EAD etc whose PD is before 2007.
Yes EB3 was in Jun 2003 in Jun 2007 bulliten and July 2007 all were Current. EB3 was in 2001 or so till May 2007 Bulliten. Most of them waited few years to file 485.
Was EB3 current in July 2007? If yes, I'm assuming atleast 95% EB3 folks have EAD and their spouse can work. The really big problem in post 2007 EB3.
Since dates were current in July 2007, Eb2 and Eb3 can atleast enjoy EAD/spouse working benefits. Why do ppl complain when they have EAD etc whose PD is before 2007.
Yes EB3 was in Jun 2003 in Jun 2007 bulliten and July 2007 all were Current. EB3 was in 2001 or so till May 2007 Bulliten. Most of them waited few years to file 485.
more...
pictures 1955 Chevy truck, 350,
AirWaterandGC
07-15 03:39 PM
Talk to an attorney soon then.
I have been given a month to respond for this RFE. I dont have to provide any paystubs. Also the guy who told me that my 140 was revoked doesnt have first hand information. He is just an employee of the company. He is involved when company applies for H-1B's, 140's EAD, AP. He is never involved in revocation cases. I am trying to get a hold of the owner to see if I can get some facts about my 140.
I have no intention of doing any fraud. I will present a letter from my ex employer in case he hasnt revoked the 140. In case he did, I will send a letter from my current employer.
I plan to speak with a competent attorney once I know for sure the 140 revocation history.
I have been given a month to respond for this RFE. I dont have to provide any paystubs. Also the guy who told me that my 140 was revoked doesnt have first hand information. He is just an employee of the company. He is involved when company applies for H-1B's, 140's EAD, AP. He is never involved in revocation cases. I am trying to get a hold of the owner to see if I can get some facts about my 140.
I have no intention of doing any fraud. I will present a letter from my ex employer in case he hasnt revoked the 140. In case he did, I will send a letter from my current employer.
I plan to speak with a competent attorney once I know for sure the 140 revocation history.
dresses Nationals 1955 Chevy Truck
srkamath
07-13 12:34 PM
Mnay July 07 filers have reported LUDs and RFE on their 485 this past year when their priority dates were not current. This means all the files that were received in or before July 27th 2007 at NSC have already been reviewed.
I'm sure most cases have recd at least a computerized review by now, many of the LUDs are for fingerprinting, name checks, change of processing centers etc. Yes there is definitely activity.
However, it does not mean that all pre Jun06 cut-off cases have been pre-adjudicated.
I'm sure most cases have recd at least a computerized review by now, many of the LUDs are for fingerprinting, name checks, change of processing centers etc. Yes there is definitely activity.
However, it does not mean that all pre Jun06 cut-off cases have been pre-adjudicated.
more...
makeup Modified 1955 Chevrolet 3100
kk_kk
06-10 04:53 PM
Sent
girlfriend 1955 Chevy 3100 Pickup Truck
msp1976
07-13 10:12 AM
All,
Discrediting attorney Murthy does not serve our purpose.
If she is doing something good, that is generating more pressure on USCIS, then let's stop criticizing her.
Though she is taking the step a few days late, it is a step in right direction and lets support and thank her...
Everyone has their motives...What matters is the end product...
Discrediting attorney Murthy does not serve our purpose.
If she is doing something good, that is generating more pressure on USCIS, then let's stop criticizing her.
Though she is taking the step a few days late, it is a step in right direction and lets support and thank her...
Everyone has their motives...What matters is the end product...
hairstyles 1955 Chevy Truck - Readers#39;
jonty_11
07-05 03:47 PM
Thx for the update Pappu...
Go IV go!
Go IV go!
nitlsu
06-12 08:45 AM
Done for me and spouse. We also had ~20 other people in my neighborhood including citizens/GC send this.
logiclife
04-23 05:29 PM
Everyone, calm down.
Gautam: We understand that you are not an IV member and you attended a public event and asked the congressman a question and got a dissatisfactory answer to your question.
It was a public event and it was well within your rights to ask your question. Fine.
Here is the issue with your questions and expectation and also with expectation of other members who have been thoroughly dissatisfied on Saturday:
1). Need to temper expectations, lawmakers are not really experts in Immigration law or any law...they set policy...they dont practice law everyday...
Firstly, your question is such that it is beyond congressman's capacity to answer. You asked about the non-immigrant intent tied to the student visa and you said that it doesnt make sense to have that non-immigrant intent on student visas and its prevent you from getting a degree from your school where you are getting/got admission.
You have to realize that these are highly technical issues and no Congressman or Senator....NONE...not even Ted Kennedy, not even John McCain (they have spent good part of this decade coming up with comprehensive bill last year) would understand deeply technical legal issues like "Non Immigrant Intent" in the law and the bills. NOT EVEN JOHN CORNYN who has spend huge time on skilled immigration and whose previous bill actually has stuff to remove the non-immigrant intent from student visa adjudication in consulates. Lawmakers work at policy level and THEIR STAFF works the details. The kind of question you asked was something that you can get answers on from a staff member. And not just any staff member, it has to the the JUDICIARY COUNSEL of the congressman or the Senator. Otherwise, they would not know the different between H1 and F1 and the difference between GC quota (140,000) and H1 Quota (65,000).
Congress passes thousands of bills each year. Each day in session, Congressmen vote on over a dozen bills. For each bill they vote, they get a 5-10 line brief description. So never expect lawmakers to know your issues in that great details.
2). Need to have a polite tone.
This point I am making is not just pertinent to you (Gautam), but to everyone. When you are dealing with a lawmaker so closely involved with a 700-page bill of which 98% is dealing with sparing the lives of 11 million illegals who are living in fear of deportation, prison, raids and separation from their children, you have to be VERY VERY CAREFUL when asking for things like "I am not getting GC therefore, I cant get promotion", "I am making only 80K and with GC I can make 120K", "I cannot go to Ivy league school for next 2 years"... Not that these arent legit issues. They are. But when a person sees questions from the undocumented community, some of them were breaking into tears when asking questions...your questions and your tone has to be very careful. I dont know if anyone stayed thru the end. I and Pratik were there till the end and we talked to Congressman after the crowd dispersed and there were just some reporters, organizers etc at around 7:45 PM. Some questions towards the end,...people were breaking into tears when asking..."my son cannot go to school anywhere next year when he grads from highschool"..."When are the raids going to stop"...etc. These guys are plucked from their homes and workplace and their Kids actually end up on the streets as it recently happened in New Bedford, Massachussetts. Kids were unable to go home (http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2007/03/07/children_stranded_after_immigration_raid/)beause their parents didnt come from work (http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2007/03/07/350_are_held_in_immigration_raid/)and there wasnt anyone from social services notified about the parents being picked up by Immigration enforcement.
In the environment, when children possibly become homeless/lost/kidnapped because their parents are in jail suddenly, (read news articles on raids in New Bedford Massachussets (http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2007/03/07/children_stranded_after_immigration_raid/)), IF YOU DONT HAVE A VERY SOFT AND POLITE TONE and a very compelling story, your point is going to backfire and you will risk looking like RICH SPOILED AND PRIVILEGED KIDS who ALREADY HAVE LEGAL STATUS and ALREADY HAVE PATH TO CITIZENSHIP and are yelling on top of their lungs to speed that up.
Your case is legit, not doubt, but WHEN IN CONTRAST with undocumented, you run the risk of looking like snobs and elitists. That's just how it is. And lawmakers dont exactly get goosebumps when you name-drop words like "Harvard", "Stanford" and "Berkeley" and "U Penn". Its not like they are going to go weak on their knees when you say "I went to harvard and how dare you dont get me a Greencard. I will go back to India/China". It doesnt really make a difference to them. They have people WORKING FOR THEM in their staff who went to Ivy league schools.
And frankly, Gautam, your tone of asking the question was..."what are you doing about this...you dont understand what you are losing , you will lose us to India and China and France"....is THE WRONG TONE. It was nowhere near polite or calm. It was pretty "WTF" attitude like you said we should all use, and IT WONT WORK. If shouting out, yelling, soundbites and rhetoric would have worked, we would have gotten the job done a long time ago.
Merits of the issue and argument is one thing...no matter how strong your point is YOU HAVE TO be POLITE and be FRIENDLY and ask nicely. Otherwise you will really get nothing back from your lawmakers.
Its not like you are going to threaten to vote against them. YOU HAVE NO VOTING power for next 15 years.
Gautam: We understand that you are not an IV member and you attended a public event and asked the congressman a question and got a dissatisfactory answer to your question.
It was a public event and it was well within your rights to ask your question. Fine.
Here is the issue with your questions and expectation and also with expectation of other members who have been thoroughly dissatisfied on Saturday:
1). Need to temper expectations, lawmakers are not really experts in Immigration law or any law...they set policy...they dont practice law everyday...
Firstly, your question is such that it is beyond congressman's capacity to answer. You asked about the non-immigrant intent tied to the student visa and you said that it doesnt make sense to have that non-immigrant intent on student visas and its prevent you from getting a degree from your school where you are getting/got admission.
You have to realize that these are highly technical issues and no Congressman or Senator....NONE...not even Ted Kennedy, not even John McCain (they have spent good part of this decade coming up with comprehensive bill last year) would understand deeply technical legal issues like "Non Immigrant Intent" in the law and the bills. NOT EVEN JOHN CORNYN who has spend huge time on skilled immigration and whose previous bill actually has stuff to remove the non-immigrant intent from student visa adjudication in consulates. Lawmakers work at policy level and THEIR STAFF works the details. The kind of question you asked was something that you can get answers on from a staff member. And not just any staff member, it has to the the JUDICIARY COUNSEL of the congressman or the Senator. Otherwise, they would not know the different between H1 and F1 and the difference between GC quota (140,000) and H1 Quota (65,000).
Congress passes thousands of bills each year. Each day in session, Congressmen vote on over a dozen bills. For each bill they vote, they get a 5-10 line brief description. So never expect lawmakers to know your issues in that great details.
2). Need to have a polite tone.
This point I am making is not just pertinent to you (Gautam), but to everyone. When you are dealing with a lawmaker so closely involved with a 700-page bill of which 98% is dealing with sparing the lives of 11 million illegals who are living in fear of deportation, prison, raids and separation from their children, you have to be VERY VERY CAREFUL when asking for things like "I am not getting GC therefore, I cant get promotion", "I am making only 80K and with GC I can make 120K", "I cannot go to Ivy league school for next 2 years"... Not that these arent legit issues. They are. But when a person sees questions from the undocumented community, some of them were breaking into tears when asking questions...your questions and your tone has to be very careful. I dont know if anyone stayed thru the end. I and Pratik were there till the end and we talked to Congressman after the crowd dispersed and there were just some reporters, organizers etc at around 7:45 PM. Some questions towards the end,...people were breaking into tears when asking..."my son cannot go to school anywhere next year when he grads from highschool"..."When are the raids going to stop"...etc. These guys are plucked from their homes and workplace and their Kids actually end up on the streets as it recently happened in New Bedford, Massachussetts. Kids were unable to go home (http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2007/03/07/children_stranded_after_immigration_raid/)beause their parents didnt come from work (http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2007/03/07/350_are_held_in_immigration_raid/)and there wasnt anyone from social services notified about the parents being picked up by Immigration enforcement.
In the environment, when children possibly become homeless/lost/kidnapped because their parents are in jail suddenly, (read news articles on raids in New Bedford Massachussets (http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2007/03/07/children_stranded_after_immigration_raid/)), IF YOU DONT HAVE A VERY SOFT AND POLITE TONE and a very compelling story, your point is going to backfire and you will risk looking like RICH SPOILED AND PRIVILEGED KIDS who ALREADY HAVE LEGAL STATUS and ALREADY HAVE PATH TO CITIZENSHIP and are yelling on top of their lungs to speed that up.
Your case is legit, not doubt, but WHEN IN CONTRAST with undocumented, you run the risk of looking like snobs and elitists. That's just how it is. And lawmakers dont exactly get goosebumps when you name-drop words like "Harvard", "Stanford" and "Berkeley" and "U Penn". Its not like they are going to go weak on their knees when you say "I went to harvard and how dare you dont get me a Greencard. I will go back to India/China". It doesnt really make a difference to them. They have people WORKING FOR THEM in their staff who went to Ivy league schools.
And frankly, Gautam, your tone of asking the question was..."what are you doing about this...you dont understand what you are losing , you will lose us to India and China and France"....is THE WRONG TONE. It was nowhere near polite or calm. It was pretty "WTF" attitude like you said we should all use, and IT WONT WORK. If shouting out, yelling, soundbites and rhetoric would have worked, we would have gotten the job done a long time ago.
Merits of the issue and argument is one thing...no matter how strong your point is YOU HAVE TO be POLITE and be FRIENDLY and ask nicely. Otherwise you will really get nothing back from your lawmakers.
Its not like you are going to threaten to vote against them. YOU HAVE NO VOTING power for next 15 years.