A commitment to Citizenship

[Kathryn41 3,205]

Editorial

A Commitment to Citizenship

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/26/opinion/...p;th&emc=th

The need to properly finance America's citizenship agency; and to keep naturalization affordable is an issue both for now and later.

Published: September 25, 2009

Here's a good federal stimulus project: citizenship. Reports this week that the United States citizenship

agency was yet again struggling with a budget shortfall, and considering raising fees on the hopeful immigrants

who are its main source of revenue, could have led any American to wonder what kind of

beacon to the world we are anymore.

Congress requires Citizenship and Immigration Services to be self-supporting. For years,

the agency languished, its ambitions and effectiveness sorely limited by the principle of

economics and government known as You Get What You Pay For. Bureaucratic backlogs

built up, as did frustrations. Would-be citizens spent years waiting for paperwork.

Their long ordeals were compounded by a notoriously surly, inattentive bureaucracy.

In 2007, the director of Citizenship and Immigration Services under former

President George W. Bush raised fees drastically and declared that the

era of bad faith and slow service was over. With the cost for services

rising more than 65 percent across the board — a $400 naturalization

now cost $675 — the agency was going to be re-energized and well

financed for the 21st century.

Just two years later, in a terrible economy, citizenship applications are down sharply,

along with requests for skilled-worker visas. Agency revenue is down by $118

million, reviving talk of budget cuts and higher fees.The agency

has made strides recently in becoming more responsive and friendlier to

the people it serves. It created a thoughtful new citizenship test,

abandoning an old emphasis on rote memorization of civic trivia.

It has just unveiled an easier-to-use, bilingual Web site that allows

immigrants to track their cases, even with e-mails and text messages to

their cellphones.But the agency is still hobbled by its

fee-based revenue stream. It deserves a direct Congressional

appropriation to supplement its budget so it can better withstand

economic downturns, keep improving services and keep fees from rising

too high for the poor and working class.

The need to properly finance America's citizenship agency — and to keep

naturalization affordable — is an issue both for now and later. At some point soon,

if President Obama and Congressional leaders keep their promise to pass a

comprehensive immigration bill, the agency will face a welcome but

overwhelming surge of Americans-in-waiting. The machinery of

citizenship needs to be ready and humming well before then, not

struggling and broken. Turning immigrants into Americans is a

mission tied intimately to this country's self-interest and identity,

if not its very soul.

Edited September 26, 2009 by Kathryn41

[zqt3344 21]

Translation - Get ready current and future immigrant applicants, your fees are about to sky rocket again! I was hoping this would not happen again until Jan 1, 2011 but looks like this is going to be a every 2 year fee increase now!

Editorial

A Commitment to Citizenship

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/26/opinion/...p;th&emc=th

The need to properly finance America's citizenship agency; and to keep naturalization affordable is an issue both for now and later.

Published: September 25, 2009

Here's a good federal stimulus project: citizenship. Reports this week that the United States citizenship

agency was yet again struggling with a budget shortfall, and considering raising fees on the hopeful immigrants

who are its main source of revenue, could have led any American to wonder what kind of

beacon to the world we are anymore.

Congress requires Citizenship and Immigration Services to be self-supporting. For years,

the agency languished, its ambitions and effectiveness sorely limited by the principle of

economics and government known as You Get What You Pay For. Bureaucratic backlogs

built up, as did frustrations. Would-be citizens spent years waiting for paperwork.

Their long ordeals were compounded by a notoriously surly, inattentive bureaucracy.

In 2007, the director of Citizenship and Immigration Services under former

President George W. Bush raised fees drastically and declared that the

era of bad faith and slow service was over. With the cost for services

rising more than 65 percent across the board — a $400 naturalization

now cost $675 — the agency was going to be re-energized and well

financed for the 21st century.

Just two years later, in a terrible economy, citizenship applications are down sharply,

along with requests for skilled-worker visas. Agency revenue is down by $118

million, reviving talk of budget cuts and higher fees.The agency

has made strides recently in becoming more responsive and friendlier to

the people it serves. It created a thoughtful new citizenship test,

abandoning an old emphasis on rote memorization of civic trivia.

It has just unveiled an easier-to-use, bilingual Web site that allows

immigrants to track their cases, even with e-mails and text messages to

their cellphones.But the agency is still hobbled by its

fee-based revenue stream. It deserves a direct Congressional

appropriation to supplement its budget so it can better withstand

economic downturns, keep improving services and keep fees from rising

too high for the poor and working class.

The need to properly finance America's citizenship agency — and to keep

naturalization affordable — is an issue both for now and later. At some point soon,

if President Obama and Congressional leaders keep their promise to pass a

comprehensive immigration bill, the agency will face a welcome but

overwhelming surge of Americans-in-waiting. The machinery of

citizenship needs to be ready and humming well before then, not

struggling and broken. Turning immigrants into Americans is a

mission tied intimately to this country's self-interest and identity,

if not its very soul.

[justashooter 430]

Turning immigrants into Americans is a

mission tied intimately to this country's self-interest and identity,

if not its very soul.

unfortunately, it is not done by collecting $675 from just any joe. immigrants who obtain US citizenship are often not "Americans". they are just foreigners with a US citizenship. "Americans" are loyal only to the USA, have the interests of America at heart, and are willing to adapt to US standards and ethics in all respects. I have met many people with US citizenship that are not "Americans".

[JoeCanuk 3]

Turning immigrants into Americans is a

mission tied intimately to this country's self-interest and identity,

if not its very soul.

unfortunately, it is not done by collecting $675 from just any joe. immigrants who obtain US citizenship are often not "Americans". they are just foreigners with a US citizenship. "Americans" are loyal only to the USA, have the interests of America at heart, and are willing to adapt to US standards and ethics in all respects. I have met many people with US citizenship that are not "Americans".

What?

[Kathryn41 3,205]

Turning immigrants into Americans is a

mission tied intimately to this country's self-interest and identity,

if not its very soul.

unfortunately, it is not done by collecting $675 from just any joe. immigrants who obtain US citizenship are often not "Americans". they are just foreigners with a US citizenship. "Americans" are loyal only to the USA, have the interests of America at heart, and are willing to adapt to US standards and ethics in all respects. I have met many people with US citizenship that are not "Americans".

I think that is a valid observation. There are certainly some naturalized US citizens who do not embrace the American ideology nor commit without reservation to their US home. While they are technically 'Americans' , it is more on the surface than ingrained into the bone. There is a middle ground between '"all-out loyal only to the US" Americans and 'in name only", Americans, though, and I suspect a lot of dual citizens and naturalized Americans fall in between rather than at either pole.

[Gemmie 142]

While I agree that you can have US citizenship whilst not being an "American" (though I hate generalizing), I'd like to point out that it goes both ways.

There are people in my country that are born UK citizens but according to your definition, are not really "British" (as I know people that are not only loyal to the UK and aren't willing to adapt to UK standards and ethics at all times - that sounds more like the definition of patriotism to me, and I don't think that you must be patriotic to be a nationality). And I know people here in the US that feel the same about their country and therefore being a natural citizen doesn't automatically give you those ideologies.

Edited November 6, 2009 by Gemmie

[JoeCanuk 3]

Turning immigrants into Americans is a

mission tied intimately to this country's self-interest and identity,

if not its very soul.

unfortunately, it is not done by collecting $675 from just any joe. immigrants who obtain US citizenship are often not "Americans". they are just foreigners with a US citizenship. "Americans" are loyal only to the USA, have the interests of America at heart, and are willing to adapt to US standards and ethics in all respects. I have met many people with US citizenship that are not "Americans".

I think that is a valid observation. There are certainly some naturalized US citizens who do not embrace the American ideology nor commit without reservation to their US home. While they are technically 'Americans' , it is more on the surface than ingrained into the bone. There is a middle ground between '"all-out loyal only to the US" Americans and 'in name only", Americans, though, and I suspect a lot of dual citizens and naturalized Americans fall in between rather than at either pole.

I see what you're saying. I myself would fall in the middle because I don't think I would ever cheer for the U.S. olympic hockey team over Canada. One can take on American citizenship and still hold some pride in their other citizenship as well. I just don't think it's that big of an issue. It only matters to each individual; it's not my business how others feel.

While I agree that you can have US citizenship whilst not being an "American" (though I hate generalizing), I'd like to point out that it goes both ways.

There are people in my country that are born UK citizens but according to your definition, are not really "British" (as I know people that are not only loyal to the UK and aren't willing to adapt to UK standards and ethics at all times - that sounds more like the definition of patriotism to me, and I don't think that you must be patriotic to be a nationality). And I know people here in the US that feel the same about their country and therefore being a natural citizen doesn't automatically give you those ideologies.

Good point. Should we say that "African Americans" aren't Americans because they use the term African?

[justashooter 430]

Good point. Should we say that "African Americans" aren't Americans because they use the term African?

there is no such thing as a "hyphenated american". you are either American, or you are not. make up your mind, one way or another, and be honest about it.

a little story:

i was homebound in late 2008 after 3 months in henan, on board a united flight from beijing to dulles. i was flying coach because the company had recently announced a cost cutting policy requiring all persons to fly coach (yeah, right). i had over 500K miles on united at the time, and had "premier executive" status, so could have upgraded, but chose to save the airmiles for my wife.

i was seated in the front row of the coach cabin next to an older couple. the plane was 75% full, and there was one person dead left in the row of 5 seats behind us. the older couple explained that the husband had bad circulation and asked if i would mind moving so that he could stretch out. of course, i complied.

when the plane left the ground the chinese woman on the other end of the 5 seats stretched out on her seat and the 3 between us. i told her that she could have 2 or 3 of the 5, but not 4. she began screaming at me that she was traveling "executive", and that i wasn't even assigned to the row, so that all 5 seats were hers. i replied calmly that we were on a US plane, so that chinese rules did not apply. she loudly screamed that she had a Phd and had lived in America for 15 years, and that i should jump out the window.

i told her that i had lived in china for 5 years, and had only seen such rude behaviour from uneducated anhui province farmers. i reminded that she was "losing face" by losing temper in front of the entire plane, and that the chinese around her were obviously ashamed at her loud voice. i also remarked that her english was poor for someone who had lived in America for 15 years, and suggested that we converse in chinese.

i asked a flight attendant (who i was conveniently familiar with due to my frequent use of the route) to settle the issue, explaining why i was seated where i was. the flight attendant reminded the woman that she had paid for only 1 seat. done deal.

was the woman "American"? not in any sense of the word. she was a typical uneducated Phd chinese. "you can take the boy out of the country, but you can't take the country out of the boy".

[spectheintro 18]

there is no such thing as a "hyphenated american". you are either American, or you are not. make up your mind, one way or another, and be honest about it.

a little story...

Unless you define "American" as "polite," there's no reason to believe she's any less American than you. As Americans go, she seems to fall into one of our prominent categories: a self-righteous, entitled jerk. We've got plenty of those.

Regarding hyphenated nationalities, I'm on the fence. I am an Iranian-American, but if anyone asks me, point blank, "What nationality are you?". I always respond with: "My parents were born in Iran, but I was born and raised in America." I use the hyphenated description to give people a heads-up on my perspective and background, generally when we're discussing issues where that background could be relevant. And I cannot (and will not) deny my pride in my Iranian heritage and culture--there are a lot of things that suck about American culture that I am glad I did not inherit from American parents.

With that said, I am an American, without any reservations. I love this country, and I strongly believe it to be the best country in the world. I also believe that my Iranian heritage makes me a better American--having been to Iran frequently, I'm eternally grateful for all of America's freedoms.

[C0881 2]

Justashooter, I am sorry to hear that you were mistreated by the Chinese PhD lady. I am ashamed of what she did to you cause I am from China too (Hong Kong). I am disappointed to read that she doesn't learn better to respect other people after all these years of tertiary education. But I want to assure you that not all Chinese people are like her. There are both good and bad Chinese people. In fact, our tradition make us less argumentative and confrontational...I am really sorry about your experience on the flight.

Regarding truly being an American after naturalization, I think this doesn't clash with retaining the culture and values of one's original heritage. Of course this should not involve any bad intentions towards other people. To me, USA is an immigration country and it is doing very well in embracing different cultures of its citizens. For example, libraries hold Spanish heritage / African heritage / Asian heritage events every year. Airlines have bilingual staff at the POE to help visitors/citizens get in the right lane. Citizenship, to me, is the right to enjoy US national benefits and the responsibility to protect US interest at best. The Chinese PhD lady's bad manner has something to do with her individual personality rather than not representing American's spirit after 15 years of residency..... nor does this represent general Chinese characteristics...

I had an bad experience at a CVS pharmacy . I was there at a CVS one day checking out at the lane. The store management trainee (white caucasian)was giving me back some change but he dropped one onto the desk. I was expecting him to pick up the coin and give it back to me. He looked at me for a moment and I looked at him for a moment. He did nothing. I was unhappy and had to pick up the coin by myself from his desk. After I picked up the coin, he said "thank you having a nice day". His look didnt look like he was giving quality customer service. It was him who dropped the coin. Was he doing that against me because I am a Chinese immigrant? Or because it's just the way he is to every customer? I don't know. But as an immigrant, I feel extra sensitive about this. There was also one time. I had local American customers looking at me constantly while I was waiting on a lane at the bank. I was uncomfortable, so I looked back at her and she looked around. After that I sensed that she looked at me again (I am the only one person waiting on that lane so I am sure she wasn't looking at somebody else)... well, I am sure there are good Americans and bad Americans. If local people don't treat immigrants differently, I am optimistic that naturalized citizens can have a better chance of having "American Spirit". If I am not at least treated with respect by American people, how can I feel like living the American way / Spirit... Have you ever felt that you don't belong there when you were at that place?

This topic is very complicated and I don't think it's solely the problem of the immigrant him/herself... I am not starting a fight here but if my English is not good that I did use some words right or my tone...please excuse me for my grammar..Thanks!

[justashooter 430]

cls0881,

i was making a point about one part of chinese culture, half joking. central plains chinese culture (zhong guo) is very different from fujian culture, from HK culture, etc. everybody know that zhong guo are simple farmers, shanghainese are greedy, fujianese are sneaky, beijing people are too much face, etc. each kind chinese have it's weak point, which also it's great strength.

zhong guo people very open and honest, say exactly what think in times westerners keep mouth shut. this why i like zhong guo ren so much. always know where you are relation to them. you are accepted in family, you know (lucky i am). you are rejected by family, you know (wife's brother's girlfriend). you are not known to them, you have no status at all, and are like some object to be push out of way as quickly as possible to get what they want before is all gone. because this, when i am in luoyang i work very hard to know everybody, so nobody push me out of way. live there as a panda is very easy. sometime so easy i take the same life and wear helmet on motorbike so nobody see i am lao wai. every zhong guo want to be famous. every lao wai there want not be seen.

chinese people come in all kind of ways. but most require you to be known to have status. this why i am always careful to find some local business or family relation to introduce me, and keep the card with one side english, one side character. almost all chinese who have my introduction are very polite, and never give confrontation. this strength also strong weakness. it makes the relation complicate, because i do not always know to tell polite behaviour from agreement. i am only "half chinese".

i am happy to hear you are doing so well in America, "gong xi fa tai". as for being stared at in stores, and people knowing you are different, you should remember that you are the lao wai in America. you are the panda bear. my wife have the same problem living in middle of pennsylvania. most of the very few chinese here are fujian restaraunt people, or graduate degreed H1b in engineering, and few have lao wai husband. does not help that she is also very pretty. she look very much like zhang xin yu, so get lot of attention, and people always stare.

your english writing is the best i have seen from chinese in all my years.