Harsh Question

[Andy_R 12]

Anyone trying to support themselves or another on 125% of the poverty level is kidding themselves. The line has nothing to do with "having enough" to live on, it has ONLY to do with having enough income for the government to confiscate if your fiancee becomes a public charge.

That said, provided it costs ME nothing, I could not possibly care less if someone else is prepared for their wife or husband. Make your bed, lay down and STFU! Not my business. I make no judgement. I do not care. I have enough to do to keep my own @ss afloat.

If you ask me they should do away with the Affidavits of Support altogether and simply make it impossible for a family based immigrant to collect ANY means tested benefits until they are citizens. Job done.

[Diana and Chris 25]

I'm not sure if the income level to be a sponsor should be raised. Maybe a little, but certainly not to 200% of poverty guidelines. My husband's a PhD, and he doesn't even make 200%... If the required level had been so high, well I think we would just have moved to another country, and the US would have lost a scientist they spent thousands of dollars to educate.

However, I do think that the level of debt should be taken into account. Someone can live off a low salary if they have not debt and have their house paid for.

On the other hand, I know people in the US who make very good money with a good job, but who are still living with their parents although they're over 30, just because all their money go to paying back the student loans and credit card balance.

Following USCIS rules, these people could sponsor a family of 5 or more...

I see other changes that need to be done. One would be to process immediate relative visas with a priority over K visas. When a USC petitions for a spouse, they are already legally bound through marriage and obligated to provide assistance to each other, and could claim that physical separation during the immigration process is causing them not to be able to perform their legal duties.

In the case of a fiancé, the USC and the foreigner are legally nothing to each other, and don't owe each other anything. The only "link" is the letter of intent to marry, and it doesn't create any legal obligations.

So from a purely legal point of view, the US government owes due diligence in processing immediate relative applications, however fiancé applications could wait without any detrimental effect on the USC's rights or obligations towards their family.

It is a little unfair for somebody that had all the opportunities of living with his other half in the United States write such a statement. If I had married my love before my K1, he would have had to give up college, had to have lived in a third world country such as my Guatemala because I needed a visa to just visit him in the USA. Because I do not live in a country like France not only should he had to live a life many don't even dare of thinking of in my country, but according to you, I should of waited even more than you (that I assume has the same capacity to love than I do, the same level of nostalgia and sadness from parting than I do, even if my ties to him -according to you- were merely on a intent to marry) to begin a life with him.

[Gigli2008 70]

I can support that. However, will you let immigrants die if they are sick? Of course not. We can discuss how we can remove all these benefits but in the end of the day we let even illegal immigrants to get medical care, get education, etc. Unfortunately, this is utopia.

As far as I know diversity lottery winners also need to provide either financial documents that they an support themselves or I864 from USC or GC holder.

Not true. My friend did not know a single soul when she landed in the US. Most people I know who've won those lotteries come here the same way. Also, it is not a requirement of playing the greencard lottery. All my friend had was an address of someone she had not even met, but who was vetted by friends. However, she may have shown financial documents (to the Embassy) belonging to some family abroad and I know that may be a requirement. But that would be foreign money (which could belong to anyone), not US verifiable income. Plus, that foreign money has no way of being enforced here in the US should the green card lottery winner use govt. benefits that is meant for USCs. The way I see it, the US has lopsided requirements that some have to follow but others don't have to. If you are married to someone who lives in the US, you will eat what they eat and sleep where they sleep. That you are working, at least a minimum wage, should be enough. Setting a poverty threshhold that is higher than the minimum wage just keeps families apart unnecessarily. If the US expects its own citizens to be able to live on a minimum wage, then the same standard should be held for those with spouses/children they are trying to bring to the US. Husbands and children should be exempt from that poverty threshhold, those are vital ties, that no amount of money should keep apart. For brothers, parents, grandparents is different.

Edited February 24, 2012 by Gigli2008

[Deputy Purple 1,294]

I am an American citizen, covered by my 4th amendment right to pursue life, liberty and happiness. In this case I consider having my wife with me here as 'pursuing my happiness'.

As a veteran who has served this country and at one point I technically wrote an open check that included up to and including my life; I believe I should enjoy the same benefits that are FREELY and OPENLY given to all of the illegal aliens who step one foot on US soil, and they are entitled to FREE education, healthcare, welfare, and they are protected with anchor babies.

First let's get the 4th Amendment correct, it's "Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness". Life & Liberty are protected as is your pursuit of but not successful obtaining "happiness", this difference means simply that you have the right to try to be happy. Immigration is a privilege not a right. In the pursuit of happiness you can marry whom ever you please regardless of where they live and you can even attempt to immigrate them to the US or you can choose to live in their country.

As for enjoying the same benefits as an illegal alien, that's a crock... Any program that takes money from me and my fellow Americans should require Legal presence in the US before any benefit is given.

Edited February 24, 2012 by Bob 4 Anna

[Samantha78 117]

So basically you're saying that not all people are responsible, therefore we need to assume everyone is irresponsible and have the government step in and decide who gets married. Nice.

Obviously thats not what I said, because if that were the case, I would have said it much clearer. The point is, there are many irresponsible people and that's a fact. There are many that mooch off the government - that's a fact. And the reason behind this is due to loopholes and rules that aren't strict enough. So, things should be changed. it's very simple.

[Andy_R 12]

I couldn't disagree with you more.

I am an American citizen, covered by my 4th amendment right to pursue life, liberty and happiness. In this case I consider having my wife with me here as 'pursuing my happiness'.

As a veteran who has served this country and at one point I technically wrote an open check that included up to and including my life; I believe I should enjoy the same benefits that are FREELY and OPENLY given to all of the illegal aliens who step one foot on US soil, and they are entitled to FREE education, healthcare, welfare, and they are protected with anchor babies.

But such is not the case. Instead I have to prove that I can support my wife before she is allowed to come here.

I have to prove she will not obtain any government services, that I am a USC am already entitled to.

Amen!!

I find it deplorable that anyone would use welfare as an excuse to deprive other people of their basic liberties. The popular outcry against "welfare dependency" is a complete myth anyway.

[Andy_R 12]

Obviously thats not what I said, because if that were the case, I would have said it much clearer. The point is, there are many irresponsible people and that's a fact. There are many that mooch off the government - that's a fact. And the reason behind this is due to loopholes and rules that aren't strict enough. So, things should be changed. it's very simple.

Is it worth compromising our liberty to keep some people from mooching?

Edited February 24, 2012 by Andy_R

[Laure&Colin 558]

It is a little unfair for somebody that had all the opportunities of living with his other half in the United States write such a statement. If I had married my love before my K1, he would have had to give up college, had to have lived in a third world country such as my Guatemala because I needed a visa to just visit him in the USA. Because I do not live in a country like France not only should he had to live a life many don't even dare of thinking of in my country, but according to you, I should of waited even more than you (that I assume has the same capacity to love than I do, the same level of nostalgia and sadness from parting than I do, even if my ties to him -according to you- were merely on a intent to marry) to begin a life with him.

Immigration policies do not take love, sadness and fairness into account. What they do take into account is the established link between the petitioner and the beneficiary, and it's definitely weaker in a fiancé case, since strictly legally speaking, no family link exists.

I'm not sure what you mean by saying your fiancé would have come to live with you in Guatemala. Do you mean that a US citizen can't marry a Guatemala citizen if they are not residents? I understand that you might not be granted a tourist visa to go to the US, but is your fiancé not allowed to come to Guatemala to marry you and go back to the states to file a CR1 for you?

[easyriders2011 14]

'World Stage'... what is that? Why is this important? Just some Buzz Words being thrown around.

When ever some tragedy happens in the world, and the world takes notice, who does the world collectively look to? Such as the 2004 Tsunami - Did the world look to Sweden or Zimbabwe or Russia to help? No, the first response was where were the carriers, where was the US?

When things go to ####### in a handbasket... Who does the world look for in terms of leadership and protection? Venezuela? Argentina? Greece? No, the worlds looks for the US to ride in there and clean up the mess. Often when it does us absolutely no good. Because just like the old adage says "no good deed goes unpunished".

Freedom of Speech is a common freedom in the developed world. Nothing special there.

Unemployment is relatively high, that's not great?

Well look back at your history (I would say books but we all know just google it).

When Europe was bogged down in the 80's - early 2000 with perpetually high unemployment rates of 10% or more,

it was the vitality of the US system that was the beacon of the world. In the US, you are limited only by your own skills and drive. There is no caste system like in India or England for that matter where you are expected to be a member of this sect and you'd damn well better stay there. That is why you have college drop outs who have gone on to create the two largest companies in the US - Apple and Microsoft. Why you have presidents who came from single family homes (Bill Clinton) or other walks of life (not the ruling elites like of Europe).

People are protesting 24/7 on Wall St, and in other cities around the country. They must be upset about something.

Why is it that these protesters are protesting the major companies, yet they use apple computers and drink starbucks, etc? America was built on the philosophy that you pull yourself up by your boot straps. If you get knocked down, you figure out why and you fix it.

If you don't have a college degree... in today's world you need it.

If you have one, but its in a generic discipline, say psychology, and you are having to work as a barista at starbucks, for $10/hr then who is to blame that you are only making $10/hr? You or the company who is looking for someone with a skill?

If you have a technical skill, but you have let it get stale, and now can't find work. Who is ultimately to blame for your condition? The company because the technology has evolved past your skill set? or is it you because you have not went back to get a relevant new skill to make yourself marketable?

[ I find myself in a similar situation. I don't like it, but in the end you have to look yourself in the mirror and acknowledge your own past poor decisions and find a way to get to the other side. But now this is a circular argument, because that leads us back to this being the greatest country and you have the opportunities to achieve those changes if you pursue them.]

Gay marriage is ILLEGAL... that's fair, and equal?

So if you condemn the concept that marriage has been a concept of a union of a man and a woman then I guess the next group that comes along to expand you're already expanded definition to include poligamy or beastiality, you will be ok with expanding the definition because of the fairness clause. How about arranged marriages for kids to old men? some cultures still do this? If you are going to open the door way to anything goes, then you have to be ready for all of the ####### that seeps in along with it.

The 'News' is biased. Just turn on Fox.

So why do independent polls show that 90% of reporters are democrats? Until Fox came along and 90% of reporters are democrats/liberals, then where was the bias then? Grow up.

Per capita income?? As of September 2011: 'the number of Americans living below the official poverty line, 46.2 million people, was the highest number in the 52 years'. Tell those people how great the 'per capita income' is.

And what happened before those 52 years? It was called the Great Depression. Well in the history books years from now, this period also will have a catchy name for it. Look around the world. There are problems boiling up on every front, Western Europe and it socialist welfare - cradle to grave - entitlements, where the companies can not hire anyone because once they do they are stuck with that individual for life (damn near). The rising economies, India, China, are rising due to better negotiating skills on the part of their politicians. They make their money off of the US economy, just like the vast majority of the rest of the world does. Our politicians sell out the US day in and day out. Even a country as small as Columbia has a $4M trade surplus with the US. So multiply that with a larger Western European or Chinese economy.

'Greatest Country in the World'....

Really?

Why do you think it takes so long to get processed for immigration visas? Try playing with your NOA1 number and see how many 100's of thousands you have to go back for a month prior to your priority date. That shows you just how many people are clamoring to get into the US. Why are they trying to come here and not in their own country? Because they, unlike your type, know this country is the land of opportunity. You can achieve greatness but you are going to have to do it on your own. Historically big government wasn't sitting there with their knee on your throat hampering your ability to succeed. Take a look at the restrictions and things that have become illegal to do in the last 40 years. Big Government stealing our liberty one act at a time.

For example. kids today are not grouped by their cognitive abilities like they were in days past. Because they will be stigmatized because they are put together in the 'dumb kids class' or other nonsense, (instead of viewing it as the kids are at this level and are taught at this particular pace), so now the kids are disbursed into the regular classroom and the teacher is forced to teach at the LCD (lowest common denominator) pace to the benefit of that one child at the expense of the rest. Our education schools have nose dived in direct relation to the implementation of this feel good philosophy. (google it! - there i quoted Rosie for you).

No other country in the world has as many diverse groups of people vying to get inside their country like the US does.

If you hate this country so much. You have my permission to find a more appealing one that more suits your tastes.

Edited February 24, 2012 by easyriders2011

[Gigli2008 70]

1) I have the right to chose freely whom I love and where I find her. Been there done that, and you can keep the American female attitude. No thanks.

2) I have an engineering degree and an MBA so I can provide for my family thank you.

But the mere fact that I have to prove to my government that I can do this on one hand, when the other hand is giving away benefits to the millions who didn't follow the rules is my point, that you missed. The same government, doesn't make those folks return home and wait the months or years for bro/sis's that legitimate immigrants have to suffer through.

This entire immigration situation stinks beyond comprehension. It's completely bass ackwards, where the people who play by the rules are punished, yet we bend over backwards to give the freebies to people who don't even want to become a USC. They only want the paycheck.

But having said that. There are situations, especially in this economy, where you have a proven track record of working for decades, for being way over the poverty line, yet due to situations beyond your control you're in a situation where you're temporarily under that threshold of 125%. Should that reason alone be the deciding factor in bringing your spouse here? I don't think so. It should be the totality of the circumstances.

What is your track record, what is your potential to earn. These things give a more complete picture of whether the person will be a ward of the state versus, what they were making $18k a year at the time you filed your petition.

As far as the veteran issue. Yeah, it goes with the job, putting your life on the line, but since only 1% of the US population ever steps up to the plate in the defense of the freedoms this country provides. Especially when we are asking these veterans to return multiple times into the furnace I believe they deserve a hell of a lot more than the average citizen in terms of front of the queue, etc. But that wasn't my point earlier anyways. My point was as a USC I am already entitled to these same programs they are basing their judgement as to whether my wife should be allowed to come here. Couple that with the fact the same government does a complete flip-flop and gives away the damn store to people who have zero status here, and no questions are asked makes me feel that if you're not going to enforce the rules evenly, then stop busting the chops of the people who try to do the right thing and do it legally.

You said it!

[Harpa Timsah 13,258]

Wow, there are some real nutjobs on this forum.

[Dan & Jenni 457]

Because they, unlike your type,

No other country in the world has as many diverse groups of people vying to get inside their country like the US does.

and what type is that exactly????

have you ever been to the UK??

Wow, there are some real nutjobs on this forum.

[Diana and Chris 25]

Immigration policies do not take love, sadness and fairness into account. What they do take into account is the established link between the petitioner and the beneficiary, and it's definitely weaker in a fiancé case, since strictly legally speaking, no family link exists.

I'm not sure what you mean by saying your fiancé would have come to live with you in Guatemala. Do you mean that a US citizen can't marry a Guatemala citizen if they are not residents? I understand that you might not be granted a tourist visa to go to the US, but is your fiancé not allowed to come to Guatemala to marry you and go back to the states to file a CR1 for you?

USCIS as it is does not make much of a distinction as it is between married or fiance -priority wise-. So be it as it is, a reason for that there must be.

How would you of seen this if you were an interviewer for my CR1? "-Yes we married and lived together for 2 weeks." Would I of gotten a approval without them thinking of a red flag? -Remember there are even "red flag" countries, that again, comes with the whole context of the country.-

[karalynn1971 26]

I couldn't disagree more.

The US is a country of immigrants, yet your forefathers and mine could not legally have come to this country under today's rules. Diversity is one of the reasons we are the greatest country in the world and one which people want to immigrate too. We should make it far easier and quicker to legally immigrate to this country. I also see no reason why the work done in Vermont and California could not be outsourced to a private company. Doing so would surely cut the process time by 75%. They should also add a service for expedited applications at a premium, say double the normal fee.

Yes, increase the salary requirements for K-1 Visas to 200% and eliminate co-sponsors (Active military should not be subject to these rules). If you are poor, you need to get better job or better education before you try to raise a family. Countries who routinely threaten the USA should have severe immigrations restrictions. No K-1 / CR-1 Visas for countries like Iran, Iraq, Libya, Syria, Afghanistan, or Pakistan (except for active military).

People who have bona fide skills we need in this country should have a fast track to immigrate here. We should be attracting some of those Chinese engineering students and Filipino nurses. First generation immigrants as a group are the most successful entrepreneurs in America.

I disagree with you. You cannot say that entire countries are bad. Do you think the United States has never done anything wrong? No. Yes, we have had trouble with those countries, but banning an entire country (which most of the people are very good hearted, sweet people)is just wrong. That is very close-minded.

Edited February 24, 2012 by karalynn1971

[Kevin_USA 9]

Why is the military so important to this argument?

By using that Argument, North Korea would be up there as one of the 'Greatest countries in the World'.

Because armies shape the world we live in. North Korea is an excellent example of a small country that has impact on the world because of their military.

Of course, North Korea would just be Korea, were it not for the US Army. And North Korea would not exist at all had China not intervened. A 2-million man army with WWII vintage armament is a threat but should they attack the South, I expect the same 10 to 1 loss ratio as we saw in the Korean war. I really could not have choosen a better example of why the military matters.

As I said, your parameters may vary.