New Obama Immigration Reform

[JimVaPhuong 4,863]

I'm going to do something I don't usually do on internet forums, and I'm going to pontificate on a political subject, because this particular subject has become important to me.

The best way to streamline the K visa immigration process is to eliminate the things that currently slow it down; the potential for fraud and security risks.

The potential for fraud can be eliminated by removing the motive for fraud, which is to use the K visa primarily for the purpose of immigration rather than marriage. Fraudsters like the K visa because there is no annual quota, so they can get to the US in a matter of months rather than years. The current system is based on perceived intent, and puts the onus on USCIS and DoS to determine if the intent of the petitioner and/or beneficiary are sincere. The amount of scrutiny each case receives causes a bottleneck, and slows everything down.

Why/how would there be a quota? People from different cultures meet, that's globalization, they want to live happy and decide to come to your country - how do you pick which couple is eligible? First in first served basis? Screw that - No such things as trying to control evolution -

You missed the point entirely. Most immigrant visa categories DO have quotas. K type visas are one of the few categories that do not. I'm not suggesting that be changed.

Right, I missed your point...I got mislead by your following sentence "Ok fine, leave the K visa without quota".

Ok.

Ok, fine. Leave the K visa without an annual quota, and allow beneficiary's to come to the US as quickly as possible. However, make them wait as long as other family members would have to wait before getting permanent legal status in the US. The green card should be temporary for 10 years. If they divorce during that 10 years, they have to return to their home country. If they accuse their US citizen spouse of abuse during that 10 year period (this is a HUGE loophole in the current law), then they still have to return to their home country. However, in that event, the US citizen spouse is required to pay their travel expenses, and also required to pay them spousal support (alimony) until the 10 year period is ended. USCIS can use the IRS to enforce the payments.

Green card temporary for 10 years upon what deportation if divorce/abuse happens - do you actually realize what you are saying here? What if am happy for 6 years and my wife and myself meet someone else and decide to go ahead with it - but within 3 years I was naturalized since I love it here, I am successful, and contribute to the country's prosperity - In a country built upon immigration, this is hard to swallow

Yes, I realize exactly what I'm saying. The US is a very attractive destination to people who come from countries with widespread poverty. Many people in those countries would do literally anything to be able to come to the US and stay, including paying off an American to marry them, or persuading an American that they love them and want to marry them. Fraud is widespread in poverty stricken countries, and it makes it abundantly difficult for those of us with sincere relationships with people from those countries. We have to endure having our fiance(e)'s treated like criminals by consulate staff, accused of being liars, repeated delays and demands for additional proof or documents that have already been submitted several times, and often seeing the applications denied and sent back to USCIS with the presumption that the relationship is a sham.

But, I guess that doesn't bother you much, since it's relatively easy to immigrate here from Europe.

I understand, never thought of it that way - I do not have the feeling that it's a USCIS issue though - Your solution is too radical for me but I can see something along these lines working

I agree that it's radical, but I see too many lives and relationships being ruined by the visa process in high fraud countries. I don't see any way to fix it other than remove the incentive for fraud. It's a bitter pill for those who aren't from high fraud countries, but for those who are from high fraud countries it's a minor sacrifice they would happily make.

These changes would eliminate the motive to marry a US citizen, and then promptly divorce them when they get their 10 year green card or US citizenship. It would also eliminate foreign spouses who falsely accuse their US citizen spouse of abuse just to skip the 2 year wait, and go straight to adjustment of status. No more shortcuts to permanent residency. A couple who are sincere would have no problem accepting these conditions, because they have every intention of staying together.

How do you justify that I am allowed to be part of a country with no right to vote in federal/national elections where a good portion of the population would be in the same case - about the fake abuses, who other than psychiatrists are able to judge - let's put that in place - For the sincere couple being to accept these terms - I wouldn't be, I can't sit on my civil rights for 10 years, this is against my definition of immigration

You're being allowed to be here does not equate to your having the right to be here. That right must be earned. Family members other than spouses and fiances from poor countries often wait more than a decade before they can come here and begin to earn that right. For example, if you were a naturalized US citizen with an adult sister born and living in the Philippines, you'd have to have applied for her visa in 1986 or before in order for her to be eligible to come here now and adjust status. This is because of the quota system I mentioned, that sets a cap on the total number of visas issued to 4th class family members (your sister would be 4th class), and limits the number from any one country to 7% of the total. That gives your sister a VERY strong motive to marry an American. There are a lot of girls in those countries ready and willing to engage in visa fraud to come here. I'm suggesting a system that would allow them to come to the US and spend that time waiting here instead of there. If they're genuinely in love, they'll happily wait for permanent legal status as long as they can wait in the US with their love. If they're a fraudster, they'd just as soon wait for the F class visa.

I see your point, I was just saying that I don't want to have to wait 10 years to get the "rights" of being here, it creates integration problems as I wouldn't feel part of a country that I chose to be part of. But maybe you guys are not bothered by your right of vote, I am

I understand. By the same token, I don't like the idea that these rights are being conferred on people who came here with fraudulent intentions, and they're getting these rights in only a few short years. How do you separate the sincere immigrants who want to make America a better country from the insincere immigrants who only came here for personal financial gain? Would you want the latter to have a say in the outcome of elections?

As far as fake claims of abuse, do a google search for "vawa immigration fraud". This problem is huge, and it's very often women from poverty stricken countries who perpetrate the fraud. This is a sticky problem to solve. Spouses need to be protected from abuse, but it's just too easy to use VAWA laws to nullify a sham marriage and still keep the immigration benefits. You think 10 years is a long time? These girls won't even wait two or three years! The only compromise I could think of was to make the US citizen pay support while still supporting the foreign spouse (or ex spouse). If you've got a better solution, I'd love to hear it.

Is there any structure for the spouse to report a fraudulent VAWA claim? That would be my starting point maybe, creating such authority, in charge of assessing and investigating each individual cases - during the investigation, the VAWA fraudster could not remain in the country until proven non fraudulent.

First and foremost, VAWA laws are intended to protect battered spouses. I agree with this 100%, and this should not change. This means that automatic measures are taken when a claim of abuse is filed. This includes a restraining order against the accused spouse. I don't think you can adequately protect a spouse who is actually being abused without these automatic measures.

I'm not suggesting that a foreign spouse who files a claim of abuse against his/her spouse should automatically be deported. I'm saying that a claim of abuse should NOT mean an automatic green card for the accuser, which is how the current system works. This is a huge loophole in the immigration law. A spouse who doesn't want to wait out the few years it takes to get a permanent green card can simply accuse their spouse of abuse, and they move automatically to the head of the line. I've seen girls on forums for southeast Asian immigrants discussing the finer points of the VAWA act before they've even come to the US! Claims of abuse should not have any effect on the immigration process. The end of the relationship is what should have an effect on the immigration process. By way of compensation, I'm suggesting that an abused spouse should be supported by the abuser, even after they return to their home country.

A couple would no longer have to provide proof of ongoing relationship, nor have such proof scrutinized by the consulate. They're signing a contract to stay together for 10 years or abandon their claim to permanent residency. That should establish their intent to have a long term relationship, and it should be accepted without question by the consulate.

hahahahhahahha, sure, think about it more than 10seconds next time

When you're done laughing feel free to elaborate.

Unfortunately this doesn't prove intent at all - And I can see how, to go back to your fraud issue, this would create situations where people could get paid during 10 years to bring someone over here and remain legally married. Also, how do you address the issue of couples that just don't last that much, and what about in case of the death of the USC?

Yes, it doesn't prove intent. The truth is that nothing can prove intent. Yes, it's still possible for an American to be paid to wait out the 10 year term in a sham marriage, but it's far less likely. Most of the fraudsters are from poor countries. Americans who would be complicit in a fraud like this are generally low income US citizens who are being paid, directly or indirectly, by the family of the foreign beneficiary living in the US. Let's face it, if a poor girl in the Philippines could afford to buy off an American to marry her for a few years, why would she want to come to the US? An American wouldn't give up two years of his life for a couple thousand dollars. These scams involve tens of thousands of dollars. How much would it cost to pay an American to give up 10 years of his life? How many fraudsters would be willing to wait 10 years in a sham marriage for legal status?

No, it's not perfect, but it would cut down dramatically on fraud. Consulates would have a much higher degree of confidence that a relationship was genuine. Proof of intent wouldn't be needed. It could just be assumed that the relationship was genuine.

For security, require the beneficiary's country of origin to provide a guarantee that the beneficiary is not a security threat. This would work like a credit system. Where there is a low incidence of immigrants from a particular country getting into any legal trouble in the US, the country of origin would have a high security credit rating, meaning their security guarantee would be given a high degree of credibility. The more immigrants from a particular country get in trouble in the US, the lower the security credit rating of that country goes, and the less credibility their guarantee is given. At some threshold, the guarantee becomes worthless, and lengthy security checks go into force. This system would give the benefit of the doubt to countries that rarely send security problems to the US.

The so famous and reliable credit system based on your so secret SSN - Let me catch my breath - And I suppose that countries that disagree with the US would be high risk? Good stuff, I hope Nicolas Sarkozy will always be in sync...How about countries were the US has no experience with? how about countries that are not recognized ny the UN, but are still legal states - are they out of status?

Were are you getting this stuff? I say "credit", and you presume I'm talking about the FICO score system?

By the way, the FICO system is not "based" on your SSN. It uses the SSN to identify the person. The FICO system was originally developed by the Fair Isaac Corporation (FICO) in the 1950's as a way of ranking bank credit. The three PRIVATE credit rating bureaus in the US use a similar system to rate personal credit.

The system I'm suggesting is not too much different from the system that's being used now. Beneficiaries in high risk countries are automatically placed in AP for security checks. Beneficiaries from low risk countries (like yours) pretty much sail through. Unfortunately, a lot of harmless people from middle eastern and south Asian countries are needlessly help up, while it's perfectly possible to import a dangerous terrorist from FRANCE! What I'm suggesting is to let the government of the foreign country assist in screening applicants. The credit system I suggested would be used to rate the RELIABILITY of the reports the US government receives from each country.

Just to clarify on the credit system being based on your SSN - If someone get my SSN, he can easily screw my credit - It's enough for me to say that it's based on my SSN, although in essence you are right it's not. I just feel that it's a prehistoric and unfair rating system and the recent events are the best examples to support my argument.

Now, what would be the incentive for my/any government to help the US in the immigration process? This is costly and has no added value for the country of origin. How do you deal with corruption, it's everywhere, in any country, I don't see how you can rate the "reliability"

The credit rating system was devised by private financial institutions, and is still operated privately. The government has nothing to do with it. The SSN is used for identification because it's the only national identification number we have in the US. We don't have national ID cards.

I presume most countries already have a national security agency of some sort, like the FBI in the US. I'm not suggesting that create a new agency for this. I'm suggesting that existing agencies share what they know about intending immigrants. The current system of police reports only shares information about criminal convictions, but people who are real security risks often don't have criminal records. On the other hand, the national security agency in the foreign country is often aware of their involvement in high risk groups. Currently, the US has to conduct it's own security investigations and request this information from the foreign government.

The rating system would be based on the number of immigrants who came to the US from a particular country with a "no risk" assessment, and got into trouble in the US. This would lower the reliability of the "no risk" reports from that country.

A special exemption should be provided for foreign beneficiaries who've been convicted of political or other crimes that would NOT be considered crimes in the US. In these cases, the normal system of examining police reports would go into effect.

lol, so kind of you

I think these changes would get the K visa process down to a couple of months for most people, since the documents would only need to be rubber stamped in many cases.

Feel free to rip these ideas to shreds!

See my comments above.

I am ready to be shredded to0

Good, I'm glad you were entertained.

It's actually an interesting topic

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

I'm going to do something I don't usually do on internet forums, and I'm going to pontificate on a political subject, because this particular subject has become important to me.

The best way to streamline the K visa immigration process is to eliminate the things that currently slow it down; the potential for fraud and security risks.

The potential for fraud can be eliminated by removing the motive for fraud, which is to use the K visa primarily for the purpose of immigration rather than marriage. Fraudsters like the K visa because there is no annual quota, so they can get to the US in a matter of months rather than years. The current system is based on perceived intent, and puts the onus on USCIS and DoS to determine if the intent of the petitioner and/or beneficiary are sincere. The amount of scrutiny each case receives causes a bottleneck, and slows everything down.

Ok, fine. Leave the K visa without an annual quota, and allow beneficiary's to come to the US as quickly as possible. However, make them wait as long as other family members would have to wait before getting permanent legal status in the US. The green card should be temporary for 10 years. If they divorce during that 10 years, they have to return to their home country. If they accuse their US citizen spouse of abuse during that 10 year period (this is a HUGE loophole in the current law), then they still have to return to their home country. However, in that event, the US citizen spouse is required to pay their travel expenses, and also required to pay them spousal support (alimony) until the 10 year period is ended. USCIS can use the IRS to enforce the payments.

These changes would eliminate the motive to marry a US citizen, and then promptly divorce them when they get their 10 year green card or US citizenship. It would also eliminate foreign spouses who falsely accuse their US citizen spouse of abuse just to skip the 2 year wait, and go straight to adjustment of status. No more shortcuts to permanent residency. A couple who are sincere would have no problem accepting these conditions, because they have every intention of staying together.

A couple would no longer have to provide proof of ongoing relationship, nor have such proof scrutinized by the consulate. They're signing a contract to stay together for 10 years or abandon their claim to permanent residency. That should establish their intent to have a long term relationship, and it should be accepted without question by the consulate.

Also, eliminate all of the ####### required to prove that the couple have physically met within two years. Have the US consulate or embassy in the beneficiary's country issue a certification at the US citizens services unit. The couple only needs to go to the embassy or consulate together and get the certificate - bingo, they have proof they've met.

For security, require the beneficiary's country of origin to provide a guarantee that the beneficiary is not a security threat. This would work like a credit system. Where there is a low incidence of immigrants from a particular country getting into any legal trouble in the US, the country of origin would have a high security credit rating, meaning their security guarantee would be given a high degree of credibility. The more immigrants from a particular country get in trouble in the US, the lower the security credit rating of that country goes, and the less credibility their guarantee is given. At some threshold, the guarantee becomes worthless, and lengthy security checks go into force. This system would give the benefit of the doubt to countries that rarely send security problems to the US.

A special exemption should be provided for foreign beneficiaries who've been convicted of political or other crimes that would NOT be considered crimes in the US. In these cases, the normal system of examining police reports would go into effect.

I think these changes would get the K visa process down to a couple of months for most people, since the documents would only need to be rubber stamped in many cases.

Feel free to rip these ideas to shreds!

What about if a US citizen gets married with a non US citizen, they are truly in love, have baby(ies) and then after 5 years they don't want to be together anymore ? Do you want the mom or the dad (non US citizen) to go back to his/her country ? What about the children ????????

Non-issue. After 5 years the non-USC citizen can BE a citizen or have an un-conditional green card. What's the problem? I EXPECT grown ups to be responsible for their actions when they do things like MAKE BABIES!!!!!! Silly me. It sure as heck ought not be our problem or the government's.

[JimVaPhuong 4,863]

Gary, I think he was referring to my long winded proposal that wouldn't allow the non-citizen to get either citizenship or a unconditional green card for 10 years. In that context, it's a valid question.

[scandal 951]

I know President Obama is working to reform our immigration system.

Have anyone experience any different so far? Or heard of anything in regard to speeding up the immigration visa process?

Here is the current Administration statement regarding Immigration reform

http://www.whitehouse.gov/issues/immigration/

President Obama believes that our broken immigration system can only be fixed by putting politics aside and offering a complete solution that secures our border, enforces our laws, and reaffirms our heritage as a nation of immigrants. He believes our immigration policy should be driven by our best judgment of what is in the economic interest of the United States and what is in the best interest of the American worker. President Obama recognizes that an orderly, controlled border and an immigration system designed to meet our economic needs are important pillars of a healthy and robust economy.

Strengthen Border Control

President Obama will protect the integrity of our borders by investing in additional personnel, infrastructure, and technology on the border and at our ports of entry.

Improve Our Immigration System

President Obama will fix the dysfunctional immigration bureaucracy and enable legal immigration so that families can stay together.

Remove Incentives to Enter Illegally

President Obama will remove incentives to enter the country illegally by preventing employers from hiring undocumented workers and enforcing the law.

Bring People Out of the Shadows

President Obama supports a system that allows undocumented immigrants who are in good standing to pay a fine, learn English, and go to the back of the line for the opportunity to become citizens.

Work with Mexico

President Obama will promote economic development in Mexico to decrease the economic desperation that leads to illegal immigration.

Not surprisingly, most of the focus is on illegal immigration. But note that there is some attention given to addressing "the dysfunctional immigration bureaucracy".

What everyone needs to understand is that the Administration can only propose candidate bills, or target legislation.

It will be up to Congress to see if we get any kind of immigration bill at all, or what measures it will contain.

Both the House and Senate will need to pass a bill and get it before the President for signing to make this happen.

Whether this can happen this year - or in any year of Obama's first term - is really anybody's guess.

There are so many priorities going on - health care reform, Sotomayor confirmation hearings, Guantanamo closure, 2010 budget, ... Congress is going to be up to its eyeballs in legislative measures this year. The likelihood of a bicameral bill on Immigration is slim-to-possible. The contents of such a bill are just speculation until we see draft legislation.

All of us who are interested in reform.. the right thing to do is get involved. Write or call your Congressman and Senators. Let them know you want to see a measure THIS YEAR to address "the dysfunctional immigration bureaucracy" and to streamline the reunification of families.

[justashooter 430]

If they accuse their US citizen spouse of abuse during that 10 year period (this is a HUGE loophole in the current law), then they still have to return to their home country. However, in that event, the US citizen spouse is required to pay their travel expenses, and also required to pay them spousal support (alimony) until the 10 year period is ended. USCIS can use the IRS to enforce the payments.

Feel free to rip these ideas to shreds!

shread, shread, shread.

spousal support from a USC is more than the average professional salary in most countries people are getting K1 from.

shread, shread, shread.

you ain't the pope.

[TBoneTX 45,287]

JimVa, how would your proposed system offer, let alone ensure, safeguards against foreigners who enter to marry (or by virtue of marriage to) USCs and then promptly disappear within the U.S., never to be seen again? Please develop this aspect of your idea further. Also, I find the earlier argument, about other countries' security assurances' being subject to corruption, highly persuasive.

Another aspect to discuss is whether DHS should have entire authority over the immigration process, start-to-finish, or whether DoS (the consulates) should still have a finger in the pie. The relationship between the two agencies vis-a-vis immigration procedure has been uneasy even during the 2000s.

[OKIE2 0]

JimVa, how would your proposed system offer, let alone ensure, safeguards against foreigners who enter to marry (or by virtue of marriage to) USCs and then promptly disappear within the U.S., never to be seen again? Please develop this aspect of your idea further. Also, I find the earlier argument, about other countries' security assurances' being subject to corruption, highly persuasive.

Another aspect to discuss is whether DHS should have entire authority over the immigration process, start-to-finish, or whether DoS (the consulates) should still have a finger in the pie. The relationship between the two agencies vis-a-vis immigration procedure has been uneasy even during the 2000s.

In any fraud case why is it that the us citizen always has to end being the victim。

as it is now we have no protection at all !

I was in one with a woman from Russia the only thing that saved me was I got her citizenship as quick as possible

this released me from the I-134 then I devorced her asap

now she is back in Russia where she belongs. Sure she can come back any time she wants but I don't have to support her any more. she don't have a home or a job here to help her do it either. So I really doubt she will ever be back. she has no one or anything to come back too.

[JimVaPhuong 4,863]

JimVa, how would your proposed system offer, let alone ensure, safeguards against foreigners who enter to marry (or by virtue of marriage to) USCs and then promptly disappear within the U.S., never to be seen again? Please develop this aspect of your idea further.

What I proposed doesn't address this at all. Is this a common problem? Does the current system do anything to prevent it? I'm sorry, but this isn't something I've heard much about, other than with illegal immigrants who walk across our southern border. I didn't think someone would go to all the effort to get approved to come here and have the opportunity to eventually get permanent legal status, and then walk away from that opportunity and live like an illegal.

Also, I find the earlier argument, about other countries' security assurances' being subject to corruption, highly persuasive.

Yes, and those countries would quickly lose their rating, and their security reports would be rated "highly unreliable". The point is that a lot of people are being held up needlessly simply because of the country they come from, and we depend entirely on our own security apparatus to weed out the "bad guys". They get cooperation from the foreign security agencies when they specifically request it on a per case basis. I'm suggesting this cooperation should be automatic and ongoing. I don't mean to belittle our security agencies, but they often don't seem to be able to collect reliable intelligence in foreign countries, and they move slower than molasses flowing uphill on a winter day.

Joe Schmoe from middle eastern country "X" might be well know to his own government's security agency as an activist or terrorist sympathizer, but unless our government specifically asks the foreign government for this information then they won't know. On the other hand, Joe Schmoe might be known to his government to be a peaceful law abiding citizen, and yet we put Joe's application in AP for a year or more because the name "J. Schmoe" happens to be on a terrorist watch list.

But, as long as we're pontificating, let's see if we can come up with an even BETTER way to do it. Got any ideas?

Another aspect to discuss is whether DHS should have entire authority over the immigration process, start-to-finish, or whether DoS (the consulates) should still have a finger in the pie. The relationship between the two agencies vis-a-vis immigration procedure has been uneasy even during the 2000s.

I don't know the entire history behind this, but I'm guessing DoS has their "finger in the pie" because they already have the offices in most foreign countries. I was focusing more on policy than on who would be responsible for implementing that policy, but if you've got some suggestions then throw them into the ring.

[JimVaPhuong 4,863]

If they accuse their US citizen spouse of abuse during that 10 year period (this is a HUGE loophole in the current law), then they still have to return to their home country. However, in that event, the US citizen spouse is required to pay their travel expenses, and also required to pay them spousal support (alimony) until the 10 year period is ended. USCIS can use the IRS to enforce the payments.

Feel free to rip these ideas to shreds!

shread, shread, shread.

spousal support from a USC is more than the average professional salary in most countries people are getting K1 from.

shread, shread, shread.

Thanks for the input!

Yes, I realize this. I suppose it's possible that a fraudster could still use the VAWA act to get a free ride back to their home country and a 10 year (or less) meal ticket.

The fact is that the spousal support can be ordered under the current laws, and the I-864 obligates the US citizen sponsor to guarantee the support of the immigrant beneficiary for 10 years. Divorce does not nullify this obligation. The difference is that, under current law, the immigrant beneficiary who accuses their spouse of abuse will ALSO get their residency automatically. What I'm suggesting is that the accusation of abuse should have no affect on their immigration status, and if their marriage ultimately breaks up then they have to return to their home country. I threw in the spousal support as a way of compensation for a spouse who was actually being abused.

On further reflection, I think there's still one remaining motive for a false accusation of abuse. If the foreign spouse is fairly certain that their marriage is on the rocks, and they know that they're facing deportation, then they might make a false accusation of abuse just to get some cash out of the deal. I guess some thought would need to be put into how to remove this particular motive for abuse.

Still, it's nowhere near a strong as the motive for a false accusation under current law. A fraudster gets everything they wanted - an end to the sham marriage, an automatic unconditional green card, and they STILL can get court ordered spousal support. The falsely accused US citizen sponsor gets a police record for spousal abuse, and is on the hook to support the fraudster for 10 years. Every one of us who marries a foreigner and sponsors them to come to the US is at risk from this particular scheme, and it does happen - a LOT.

you ain't the pope.

I have no idea what this is supposed to mean.

Edited June 1, 2009 by JimVaPhuong

[Kinito_2k3 5]

Also, I find the earlier argument, about other countries' security assurances' being subject to corruption, highly persuasive.

Yes, and those countries would quickly lose their rating, and their security reports would be rated "highly unreliable". The point is that a lot of people are being held up needlessly simply because of the country they come from, and we depend entirely on our own security apparatus to weed out the "bad guys". They get cooperation from the foreign security agencies when they specifically request it on a per case basis. I'm suggesting this cooperation should be automatic and ongoing. I don't mean to belittle our security agencies, but they often don't seem to be able to collect reliable intelligence in foreign countries, and they move slower than molasses flowing uphill on a winter day.

Joe Schmoe from middle eastern country "X" might be well know to his own government's security agency as an activist or terrorist sympathizer, but unless our government specifically asks the foreign government for this information then they won't know. On the other hand, Joe Schmoe might be known to his government to be a peaceful law abiding citizen, and yet we put Joe's application in AP for a year or more because the name "J. Schmoe" happens to be on a terrorist watch list.

But, as long as we're pontificating, let's see if we can come up with an even BETTER way to do it. Got any ideas?

Good Morning -

I surely understand your point here, but as I said, what is the incentive for the foreign country to "assist" the US in this process? I can't see any. Lets assume that some would be ready to do so, let's say the international allies - how do you motivate hostile countries to do so? I really don't see that feasible.

[sara..... 371]

the way i see it, it does not matter what they do to try to get rid of the fraud.

if a person is dead set on committing fraud and they change the way that visa's, divorce after getting to the states or any other thing is done, it wont matter if a person is that determined they will find the way, and keep messing it up for those of us that sit and wait ridicules years of time of our life legally trying to bring our fiances or spouses home!

anytime i see a politician even our prez. state they are going to reform immigration, it means for me longer waiting time for perviz to come home, or even be given permission to apply for k1 visa, and amnesty for illegals from our southern boarders.

sorry but thats how i see it

sara

[Kinito_2k3 5]

the way i see it, it does not matter what they do to try to get rid of the fraud.

if a person is dead set on committing fraud and they change the way that visa's, divorce after getting to the states or any other thing is done, it wont matter if a person is that determined they will find the way, and keep messing it up for those of us that sit and wait ridicules years of time of our life legally trying to bring our fiances or spouses home!

anytime i see a politician even our prez. state they are going to reform immigration, it means for me longer waiting time for perviz to come home, or even be given permission to apply for k1 visa, and amnesty for illegals from our southern boarders.

sorry but thats how i see it

sara

Yes, the ones that are "dead committed" to commit fraud will find their way. But I think that what is suggested is that the fraud should be made less easy. Of course there will always be fraud, but by increasing the complexity of committing it you will for sure witness a drop in the numbers.

[sara..... 371]

the way i see it, it does not matter what they do to try to get rid of the fraud.

if a person is dead set on committing fraud and they change the way that visa's, divorce after getting to the states or any other thing is done, it wont matter if a person is that determined they will find the way, and keep messing it up for those of us that sit and wait ridicules years of time of our life legally trying to bring our fiances or spouses home!

anytime i see a politician even our prez. state they are going to reform immigration, it means for me longer waiting time for perviz to come home, or even be given permission to apply for k1 visa, and amnesty for illegals from our southern boarders.

sorry but thats how i see it

sara

Yes, the ones that are "dead committed" to commit fraud will find their way. But I think that what is suggested is that the fraud should be made less easy. Of course there will always be fraud, but by increasing the complexity of committing it you will for sure witness a drop in the numbers.

they have changed immigration so much over the years but has it really made a difference? i think the only difference it has made is for the people that are trying to do everything legally. it has made it harder for us, the scums always find a different route even if they have to play a long game.

could be changing it like has been stated here just means that the poor usa person that gets hooked will have to suffer more for a longer period of time because the cheater will play the game longer than they have to now, just think of how much financial damage and emotional damage that could be done in that period of time.

sara

[Kinito_2k3 5]

the way i see it, it does not matter what they do to try to get rid of the fraud.

if a person is dead set on committing fraud and they change the way that visa's, divorce after getting to the states or any other thing is done, it wont matter if a person is that determined they will find the way, and keep messing it up for those of us that sit and wait ridicules years of time of our life legally trying to bring our fiances or spouses home!

anytime i see a politician even our prez. state they are going to reform immigration, it means for me longer waiting time for perviz to come home, or even be given permission to apply for k1 visa, and amnesty for illegals from our southern boarders.

sorry but thats how i see it

sara

Yes, the ones that are "dead committed" to commit fraud will find their way. But I think that what is suggested is that the fraud should be made less easy. Of course there will always be fraud, but by increasing the complexity of committing it you will for sure witness a drop in the numbers.

they have changed immigration so much over the years but has it really made a difference? i think the only difference it has made is for the people that are trying to do everything legally. it has made it harder for us, the scums always find a different route even if they have to play a long game.

could be changing it like has been stated here just means that the poor usa person that gets hooked will have to suffer more for a longer period of time because the cheater will play the game longer than they have to now, just think of how much financial damage and emotional damage that could be done in that period of time.

sara

Do you have any solid arguments to backup your thinking? I THINK that the changes over the years have drastically improved the process (can't prove it though ) - But what screw the system up is the huge shift in demand - if you think about it, if the number of application was lower, the system would work very well - now, government are rarely proactive and often reactive, that's why this reform comes in that late, and I am sure it will help the system for everyone:

- If you identify fraud at an early stage, waiting time gets reduced for the "real applicants"

- If fraud is less, it would allow a switch in resource allocation towards application processing rather than fraud investigation, I see that as a win/win situation

Gotta get ready to go to work... voluntary work

[JimVaPhuong 4,863]

Also, I find the earlier argument, about other countries' security assurances' being subject to corruption, highly persuasive.

Yes, and those countries would quickly lose their rating, and their security reports would be rated "highly unreliable". The point is that a lot of people are being held up needlessly simply because of the country they come from, and we depend entirely on our own security apparatus to weed out the "bad guys". They get cooperation from the foreign security agencies when they specifically request it on a per case basis. I'm suggesting this cooperation should be automatic and ongoing. I don't mean to belittle our security agencies, but they often don't seem to be able to collect reliable intelligence in foreign countries, and they move slower than molasses flowing uphill on a winter day.

Joe Schmoe from middle eastern country "X" might be well know to his own government's security agency as an activist or terrorist sympathizer, but unless our government specifically asks the foreign government for this information then they won't know. On the other hand, Joe Schmoe might be known to his government to be a peaceful law abiding citizen, and yet we put Joe's application in AP for a year or more because the name "J. Schmoe" happens to be on a terrorist watch list.

But, as long as we're pontificating, let's see if we can come up with an even BETTER way to do it. Got any ideas?

Good Morning -

I surely understand your point here, but as I said, what is the incentive for the foreign country to "assist" the US in this process? I can't see any. Lets assume that some would be ready to do so, let's say the international allies - how do you motivate hostile countries to do so? I really don't see that feasible.

I guess it depends on the country. Countries that are our strongest allies actually have the least incentive because they have nothing to gain from the immigration of their citizens to the US, since most of those countries are reasonably affluent. The countries that have the most to gain are the ones with the highest levels of poverty and lowest GDP. Money sent home from ex-pats constitutes a sizable portion of the revenues that flow into those countries. Their biggest cash export is their own citizens.

I'm not claiming my proposal is an ideal solution, but it's the best I could think of. The current system is obviously broken. It shouldn't take 18 to 24 months to figure out if someone is a security risk. If you can think of a different way to fix this, by all means let's hear it.