Not all K1's going to CSC

[Mayra22 1]

Thank you so much! Good luck to you!

[wbeem 568]

Do cartwheels, bang some drums, happy dance, and shout it from the rooftops!

I vote for the drums.

[Kyle and Linh 64]

My political two cents.

People on here wrote their congressmen and moved the ball. Congrats to that group!!! We had changes made. But be careful what you wish for.....

We are in the middle of a political football:

On one side we have a political party that is wanting to accelerate immigration and citizenship and voters for them. They are doing it by Presidential decrees because they don't control everything

The other side is the party that controls the purse strings (look it up if you didn't get civics in high school, cause your fiancé will sure learn this when they apply to be citizens). They are fighting the President with limiting what he can spend, and thereby slowing immigration and voters of the other side by having USCIS on a tight budget.... why? because they don't control everything.

In the middle is the USCIS. I feel sorry for them, because like us they are being a political football in this whole process being told to do more with less.

Good Luck to everyone's journey. As you all know if you have foreign fiancés, the USA is still the best place in the world!!!

Edited April 14, 2015 by Kyle and Linh

[yuna628 9,677]

My political two cents.

People on here wrote their congressmen and moved the ball. Congrats to that group!!! We had changes made. But be careful what you wish for.....

We are in the middle of a political football:

On one side we have a political party that is wanting to accelerate immigration and citizenship and voters for them. They are doing it by Presidential decrees because they don't control everything

The other side is the party that controls the purse strings (look it up if you didn't get civics in high school, cause your fiancé will sure learn this when they apply to be citizens). They are fighting the President with limiting what he can spend, and thereby slowing immigration and voters of the other side by having USCIS on a tight budget.... why? because they don't control everything.

In the middle is the USCIS. I feel sorry for them, because like us they are being a political football in this whole process being told to do more with less.

Good Luck to everyone's journey. As you all know if you have foreign fiancés, the USA is still the best place in the world!!!

Well, Here's the thing, and I won't get into the assumption that more immigrants means more voters for one particular side, because frankly I find that logic a bit skewed... but since you've brought up the civics side of things let's review something about what Congress does and does not control with regard to USCIS.

The USCIS is one of the unique agencies that is NOT funded through congress, and what money may end up there is so tiny, if pulled the effect is negligible.

Under the previous Administration, the fiscal year budget accounted for only 1% of the entire appropriations funding. The rest was entirely self funded.

Attempts by Republicans to destabilize the USCIS as it relates to 'amnesty' or DACA if you will, were things like the Aderholt/Barletta/Mulvaney amendment or the Blackburn amendment as it related to the DHS, or just not passing a budget. DHS money, congress can sort of have sway with. The last time the yelling about 'defunding' was related to the E-verify scheme. An important one for all immigrants that need to work, and it's a shame for legal residents to be held hostage like that.

These amendments would have forced the USCIS to put a hold on any fees collected from users as it relates to DACA and not use them. Of course 'supposedly' they can't use them anyway since the court order.

The Schock amendment was the best one of course, which would of actually made legal applications take precedent over those filing through DACA (something that we can see on directives are true - family based applications are not a priority). Something a few senators attempted to get at during the March 3rd Sen Sessions hearing with the USCIS.

The problem with the USCIS has existed from administration to administration, and like our infrastructure is going down the crapper. It's a fledging agency that Congress has little control over, has not updated it's slow technology, we the people are forced into having little recourse, and ultimately - the buck stops at the President. If he wanted things to change with it, he could do so operationally, without anyone else 'butting in'. I think that was made clear with the current 'workload balance' going on. Congress can opine on tv that they can force the USCIS to do this and that, but it's all political grand-standing -- and the directors know it.

Edited April 14, 2015 by yuna628

[Kyle and Linh 64]

yuna: Thank you for schooling me. I get what I hear from talking heads on both sides, logic and blogs.

It stinks... all to blame, and could be cleaned up in a minute if the 535 + 25 in DC focused on it. Its politics as usual and we are the football getting kicked around in the game.

[KD_Wright 2]

Hello Everyone,

Is it really necessary that my sponsor will send our proof of relationship (board passes, pictures, receipts of sending money, chat logs, and etc.) when sending the documents to USCIS?

Thanks!

[wbeem 568]

Hello Everyone,

Is it really necessary that my sponsor will send our proof of relationship (board passes, pictures, receipts of sending money, chat logs, and etc.) when sending the documents to USCIS?

Thanks!

Yes. Send what you have. If you're worried that it won't be enough, do what you can to gather more such evidence while you wait for your petition to be adjudicated so that you have it if you receive an RFE.

Evidence of having met face to face on the last two years is a requirement, not an option.