Bush wants to raise fee to $905!!!!

[John & Annie 0]

now about the number of refugees and Asylum seekers:

On average, USCIS annually: (1) processes over six million applications and

petitions, (2) processes close to 90,000 asylum applicants, (3) interviews approximately

70,000 refugee applicants, and (4) naturalizes approximately half a million new citizens.

Adjudication Officers review applications and often conduct interviews of the applicants

and petitioners. They have the dual responsibility of providing courteous service to the

public while being alert to the possibility of security concerns, fraud, and

misrepresentation. District Adjudications Officers are located in offices nationwide.

Service Center Adjudications Officers are located only in the following Service Centers:

St. Albans, VT; Lincoln, NE; Irving, TX; and Laguna Niguel, CA.

180,000 out of 6,000,000 or .03%

[SirLancelot 1]

now about the number of refugees and Asylum seekers:

On average, USCIS annually: (1) processes over six million applications and

petitions, (2) processes close to 90,000 asylum applicants, (3) interviews approximately

70,000 refugee applicants, and (4) naturalizes approximately half a million new citizens.

Adjudication Officers review applications and often conduct interviews of the applicants

and petitioners. They have the dual responsibility of providing courteous service to the

public while being alert to the possibility of security concerns, fraud, and

misrepresentation. District Adjudications Officers are located in offices nationwide.

Service Center Adjudications Officers are located only in the following Service Centers:

St. Albans, VT; Lincoln, NE; Irving, TX; and Laguna Niguel, CA.

180,000 out of 6,000,000 or .03%

I agree with you % wise the figure is quite low--btw, it's not .03% but 3%--but in actual $ amount, it's still quite significant. Let's just use the $905 figure that the USCIS wants to implement for I-485 processing. At 180,000 x $905 = 162,900,000

That's close to $163 million. That certainly is by no means chump change. The general US tax payers should be subsidizing this cost, not the immigrant applicants. This is basically a form of taxation without representation. The immigrants are being taxed and they have no representation.

BTW, I'm a US citizen. My point of view is not biased. I'm being quite objective.

[rebeccajo 14]

Immigrants aren't being taxed. That's kinda absurd.

They are paying a fee for a service. Like getting a car license or something.

[SirLancelot 1]

Immigrants aren't being taxed. That's kinda absurd.

They are paying a fee for a service. Like getting a car license or something.

RJ, read the posts carefully before commenting please.

Do you understand that right now, refugees and asylum seekers pay NOTHING to apply? The cost is born on the other immigrant classes. NOT the US taxpayers or the refugees and asylum seekers themselves, but the other immigrants. So yes, these other immigrants are being taxed to subsidize the refugees and asylum seekers.

Contrary to what you say, they are NOT paying a fee for service rendered. That's my point! And GnG's point. They don't pay period! The other immigrant classes are subsidizing the cost.

Edited February 2, 2007 by SirLancelot

[John & Annie 0]

now about the number of refugees and Asylum seekers:

On average, USCIS annually: (1) processes over six million applications and

petitions, (2) processes close to 90,000 asylum applicants, (3) interviews approximately

70,000 refugee applicants, and (4) naturalizes approximately half a million new citizens.

Adjudication Officers review applications and often conduct interviews of the applicants

and petitioners. They have the dual responsibility of providing courteous service to the

public while being alert to the possibility of security concerns, fraud, and

misrepresentation. District Adjudications Officers are located in offices nationwide.

Service Center Adjudications Officers are located only in the following Service Centers:

St. Albans, VT; Lincoln, NE; Irving, TX; and Laguna Niguel, CA.

180,000 out of 6,000,000 or .03%

I agree with you % wise the figure is quite low--btw, it's not .03% but 3%--but in actual $ amount, it's still quite significant. Let's just use the $905 figure that the USCIS wants to implement for I-485 processing. At 180,000 x $905 = 162,900,000

That's close to $163 million. That certainly is by no means chump change. The general US tax payers should be subsidizing this cost, not the immigrant applicants. This is basically a form of taxation without representation. The immigrants are being taxed and they have no representation.

BTW, I'm a US citizen. My point of view is not biased. I'm being quite objective.

.03% and 3% are the same.

The Congress appropriated 181,000,000 in 2007 for USCIS

You are also using the new high figures, while I know I am arguing semantics, lets use the 2007 numbers.

Realistically, if USCIS are applying the costs of these "freebies" across the board we should use the weighted average which in 2007 was $264.00 or $47,520,000 leaving a surplus of the federal funds of 133,480,000. If we wanted to use the new weighted average it is going to be $438.00 or $78,840,000 of which would be theoretically fully funded by fees. By taking the USCIS average filings of 6,000,000 which would generate 2,628,000,000. (yes that is billion) and deducting the Asylum/Refugees, this would leave 2.5 billion to operate on.

I really do not see an issue. IMHO

[rebeccajo 14]

Immigrants aren't being taxed. That's kinda absurd.

They are paying a fee for a service. Like getting a car license or something.

RJ, read the posts carefully before commenting please.

Do you understand that right now, refugees and asylum seekers pay NOTHING to apply? The cost is born on the other immigrant classes. NOT the US taxpayers or the refugees and asylum seekers themselves, but the other immigrants. So yes, these other immigrants are being taxed to subsidize the refugees and asylum seekers.

Contrary to what you say, they are NOT paying a fee for service rendered. That's my point! And GnG's point. They don't pay period! The other immigrant classes are subsidizing the cost.

I can read Lancelot.

A subsidy can come from anywhere. It doesn't have to come from a tax.

[John & Annie 0]

Immigrants aren't being taxed. That's kinda absurd.

They are paying a fee for a service. Like getting a car license or something.

No, immigrants are not being "taxed"

The USCIS is waiving the fees associated with filing on a case by case basis and using the operating capitol from the total fees paid to the agency. This combined with the federal subsidy had historically paid for asylum seekers and refugees.

Again, they are means tested to see if they can pay fees.

[SirLancelot 1]

now about the number of refugees and Asylum seekers:

On average, USCIS annually: (1) processes over six million applications and

petitions, (2) processes close to 90,000 asylum applicants, (3) interviews approximately

70,000 refugee applicants, and (4) naturalizes approximately half a million new citizens.

Adjudication Officers review applications and often conduct interviews of the applicants

and petitioners. They have the dual responsibility of providing courteous service to the

public while being alert to the possibility of security concerns, fraud, and

misrepresentation. District Adjudications Officers are located in offices nationwide.

Service Center Adjudications Officers are located only in the following Service Centers:

St. Albans, VT; Lincoln, NE; Irving, TX; and Laguna Niguel, CA.

180,000 out of 6,000,000 or .03%

I agree with you % wise the figure is quite low--btw, it's not .03% but 3%--but in actual $ amount, it's still quite significant. Let's just use the $905 figure that the USCIS wants to implement for I-485 processing. At 180,000 x $905 = 162,900,000

That's close to $163 million. That certainly is by no means chump change. The general US tax payers should be subsidizing this cost, not the immigrant applicants. This is basically a form of taxation without representation. The immigrants are being taxed and they have no representation.

BTW, I'm a US citizen. My point of view is not biased. I'm being quite objective.

.03% and 3% are the same.

The Congress appropriated 181,000,000 in 2007 for USCIS

You are also using the new high figures, while I know I am arguing semantics, lets use the 2007 numbers.

Realistically, if USCIS are applying the costs of these "freebies" across the board we should use the weighted average which in 2007 was $264.00 or $47,520,000 leaving a surplus of the federal funds of 133,480,000. If we wanted to use the new weighted average it is going to be $438.00 or $78,840,000 of which would be theoretically fully funded by fees. By taking the USCIS average filings of 6,000,000 which would generate 2,628,000,000. (yes that is billion) and deducting the Asylum/Refugees, this would leave 2.5 billion to operate on.

I really do not see an issue. IMHO

I don't know where you got your education John, but I don't know of a single math teacher/professor who would agree with .03% = 3%.

You might have meant ".03" = 3% but ".03%" certainly does not mean 3%. ".03%" = .0003

The funding you're talking about from fiscal year 2001 to 2006 has nothing to do with paying for refugee and asylum seeker fees. It has everything to do with backlog reduction. I have read the reports from the GOA and the USCIS Ombudsman. I am well aware of the additional funding that's been approved by Congress in the past. That doesn't change one bit the mandate that Congress forced onto USCIS--which was to make sure USCIS obtain all its funding from the immigrants, and NOT the US taxpayers.

What GnG brought up is 100% valid and nothing that has been brought up thus far in this thread has alleviated his concerns. The rest of the immigrant classes will be subsidizing essentially $183 million in fees for the refugee and asylum seekers. Certainly it's clear to me that this is not fair nor right. As Congress approved these refugee and asylum seekers to seek haven in the US, it should be Congress/US citizens who pay for their application fees, not the other immigrant classes.

[WifeOHunkyJohn 2]

now about the number of refugees and Asylum seekers:

On average, USCIS annually: (1) processes over six million applications and

petitions, (2) processes close to 90,000 asylum applicants, (3) interviews approximately

70,000 refugee applicants, and (4) naturalizes approximately half a million new citizens.

Adjudication Officers review applications and often conduct interviews of the applicants

and petitioners. They have the dual responsibility of providing courteous service to the

public while being alert to the possibility of security concerns, fraud, and

misrepresentation. District Adjudications Officers are located in offices nationwide.

Service Center Adjudications Officers are located only in the following Service Centers:

St. Albans, VT; Lincoln, NE; Irving, TX; and Laguna Niguel, CA.

180,000 out of 6,000,000 or .03%

I agree with you % wise the figure is quite low--btw, it's not .03% but 3%--but in actual $ amount, it's still quite significant. Let's just use the $905 figure that the USCIS wants to implement for I-485 processing. At 180,000 x $905 = 162,900,000

That's close to $163 million. That certainly is by no means chump change. The general US tax payers should be subsidizing this cost, not the immigrant applicants. This is basically a form of taxation without representation. The immigrants are being taxed and they have no representation.

BTW, I'm a US citizen. My point of view is not biased. I'm being quite objective.

.03% and 3% are the same.

The Congress appropriated 181,000,000 in 2007 for USCIS

You are also using the new high figures, while I know I am arguing semantics, lets use the 2007 numbers.

Realistically, if USCIS are applying the costs of these "freebies" across the board we should use the weighted average which in 2007 was $264.00 or $47,520,000 leaving a surplus of the federal funds of 133,480,000. If we wanted to use the new weighted average it is going to be $438.00 or $78,840,000 of which would be theoretically fully funded by fees. By taking the USCIS average filings of 6,000,000 which would generate 2,628,000,000. (yes that is billion) and deducting the Asylum/Refugees, this would leave 2.5 billion to operate on.

I really do not see an issue. IMHO

I don't know where you got your education John, but I don't know of a single math teacher/professor who would agree with .03% = 3%.

You might have meant ".03" = 3% but ".03%" certainly does not mean 3%. ".03%" = .0003

The funding you're talking about from fiscal year 2001 to 2006 has nothing to do with paying for refugee and asylum seeker fees. It has everything to do with backlog reduction. I have read the reports from the GOA and the USCIS Ombudsman. I am well aware of the additional funding that's been approved by Congress in the past. That doesn't change one bit the mandate that Congress forced onto USCIS--which was to make sure USCIS obtain all its funding from the immigrants, and NOT the US taxpayers.

What GnG brought up is 100% valid and nothing that has been brought up thus far in this thread has alleviated his concerns. The rest of the immigrant classes will be subsidizing essentially $183 million in fees for the refugee and asylum seekers. Certainly it's clear to me that this is not fair nor right. As Congress approved these refugee and asylum seekers to seek haven in the US, it should be Congress/US citizens who pay for their application fees, not the other immigrant classes.

Then lets start something to put it right...

[John & Annie 0]

I don't know where you got your education John, but I don't know of a single math teacher/professor who would agree with .03% = 3%.

You might have meant ".03" = 3% but ".03%" certainly does not mean 3%. ".03%" = .0003

The funding you're talking about from fiscal year 2001 to 2006 has nothing to do with paying for refugee and asylum seeker fees. It has everything to do with backlog reduction. I have read the reports from the GOA and the USCIS Ombudsman. I am well aware of the additional funding that's been approved by Congress in the past. That doesn't change one bit the mandate that Congress forced onto USCIS--which was to make sure USCIS obtain all its funding from the immigrants, and NOT the US taxpayers.

What GnG brought up is 100% valid and nothing that has been brought up thus far in this thread has alleviated his concerns. The rest of the immigrant classes will be subsidizing essentially $183 million in fees for the refugee and asylum seekers. Certainly it's clear to me that this is not fair nor right. As Congress approved these refugee and asylum seekers to seek haven in the US, it should be Congress/US citizens who pay for their application fees, not the other immigrant classes.

OK, you got me .03 = 3% oops, you are the man. (you knew what i meant) It is not 183 million in fees.

i can alleviate the concern, USCIS pays for refugees and Asylum Seekers out of the funds that I, The US citizen paid for my wifes immigration fees with. That is the choice of the USCIS, either it can be paid for by taxes or by the immigration process itself. I choose the immigration process.

I am ok with this. I will support this. I see no reason why I can not support someone who is trying to get to country to allow them to have a better life when I can afford to bring the woman I love over to live here.

Edited February 3, 2007 by John & Annie

[John & Annie 0]

My wife just brought up an excellent point.

We are talking about a fee for a petition, not supporting these people to live, like in the UK.

Trust me, I am very outraged that my taxes go to pay for medical care of illegal aliens.

Refugees and asylum seekers, once here they can work legally and support themselves.

If we were like the UK and supported them to live while they were going through the process, i could understand.

But we are talking about a fee for someone is trying to make a better life for themselves.