What if you could pay to expedite N400 processing?

[CarlHamilton 252]

5 minutes ago, geowrian said:

Without going further down the hole...what is the point of this thread? Was it to get opinions on an option to expedite, or to litigate the pros/cons of doing so? The original post implies the former but it's looking like the latter was the intent.

Why not both?  I look forward to hearing other voices too. 

[leymanai 60]

1 hour ago, NuestraUnion said:

To answer your question, yes i would pay extra for "premium" service. Not thousands extra though. Maybe a couple hundred more than the original fee.

 

HOWEVER...

 

'Tis NOT gonna happen. Offering this would give an unfair advantage. There are people who struggle to come up with the current fees as they are now. also, the people involved with reviewing cases need the appropriate time to make sure all checks and balances are done. I know most are used to having other faster services offered but there is a reason all cases are handled with no special priority (unless reasons for expedite outline by USCIS) when dealing immigration. 

I wouldn’t pay . I’m sorry  but honestly, in my opinion, for fees they are asking, they should already be providing an expedited service. I may be wrong, but this is not hard at all to review applications and decide whether to approve it or deny it. Obviously I am talking about easy cases. I just don’t get it. I am sure most of cases are easy. Read, review for couple of days, stamp. Moreover they should low down fees instead of raising them if they planning on making service worse. I know I don’t plan on naturalization yet. But I my ready EAD is in uscs after it got undeliverable since November.  It’s 6 months. to remail. Whats  so hard about that

[poolemit 25]

1 hour ago, NuestraUnion said:

Offering this would give an unfair advantage. There are people who struggle to come up with the current fees as they are now.

Hmm.  Life is unfair. 

 

Naturalization is not required, so the unfairness argument goes out the window.  Really don't have to do it if you can't afford it, much less how does that even relate to the fact that there might people who could afford it that want to get it done faster...  Some might even need it faster for clearances or other purposes, statelessness, etc., so I say bring it on. 

 

It probably won't happen either way and this thread likely won't go anywhere but money/fees/taxes are never truly fair simply because people don't make the same amount and don't have the same expenses.  It's kinda like saying that the waivers aren't fair then, since some pay $0 while others have to pay >$700......

[Unidentified 2,930]

1 hour ago, shomer said:

Passports can be expedited for a fee and I haven't heard anyone complain that's unfair.  Same goes for certain types of visas (although that's changing for other reasons).  The money could be used to hire more staffers and invest in better technology so the process goes faster for everyone.  

The reason people are not complaining about passports is that the people who doesn't pay extra for an expedite are not planning on travelling within a short time frame. People who are expediting are either suddenly travelling for some reason, either a family emergency or they decided to book a flight kind of last minute and realized their passport expired. 

 

So yeah, you can't really compare the two. 

[Unlockable 7,314]

25 minutes ago, leymanai said:

Obviously I am talking about easy cases. I just don’t get it. I am sure most of cases are easy. Read, review for couple of days, stamp.

I read a news article last year on a woman getting deported. She was applying for naturalization and they found out that she voted in a couple of elections. I don't think there are quick cases if they are doing extensive background checks like that on everyone. The person reviewing your case would have to check at every local and state court and law office of every place you have lived. But I do agree that there are cases that has less ground to cover than others.

 

22 minutes ago, poolemit said:

Naturalization is not required, so the unfairness argument goes out the window. 

The fairness that all applying will be treated the same is to those who choose to go that route. Obviously, if a person does not choose to naturalize, it does not apply to them.

Edited April 12, 2018 by NuestraUnion

[poolemit 25]

16 minutes ago, NuestraUnion said:

The fairness that all applying will be treated the same is to those who choose to go that route. Obviously, if a person does not choose to naturalize, it does not apply to them.

That's not what it sounded like when you were mentioning people struggling to pay for it.  I still don't see how "poor(er) people pay $0 and still get it" is much different than "rich(er) people pay more and get it faster", where of course poor/rich is somewhat subjective despite the poverty guidelines.

 

Oh, to actually answer OP's question - yes, I would pay to expedite, whatever the fee is (within reason).

Edited April 12, 2018 by poolemit
forgot to answer first question

[leymanai 60]

2 hours ago, shomer said:

Passports can be expedited for a fee and I haven't heard anyone complain that's unfair.  Same goes for certain types of visas (although that's changing for other reasons).  The money could be used to hire more staffers and invest in better technology so the process goes faster for everyone.  

Well. I paid for expedite service when I was applying for UK visa in China. And received my visa 2 months later than I was supposed to. When I was applying for German visa, paid extra 50 euros and I got my visa the next day. It is a game you never win. You may, you may not receive what you need in short amount of time. There were tons of cases when people were eligible for expedited service, even with USCIS. But still had to wait more than 6 month to get any update 

[CarlHamilton 252]

Re: background checks, you can design the system so "extreme vetting" cases get their expedite fee reimbursed and are placed in the general queue if their background checks take more than 3 months (arbitrary deadline).  Most expedited applicants could probably be processed faster than that - many users here report their status changing to "we have reviewed your biometrics" in a matter of weeks, sometimes days after fingerprinting.

Edited April 12, 2018 by shomer

[CarlHamilton 252]

2 hours ago, NuestraUnion said:

 With the current administration, they want to cut rather than add. Meaning they want to cut the amount of visas that are handed out per year and cut some of the categories (sibling, DV lottery, and possibly parents) instead of highering more staff.

Or maybe not.  The LA field office is working weekends to clear the backlog, and pays for it with the increased application fees:http://www.latimes.com/local/la-me-immigration-pg-photogallery.html

[CarlHamilton 252]

1 hour ago, Unidentified said:

The reason people are not complaining about passports is that the people who doesn't pay extra for an expedite are not planning on travelling within a short time frame. People who are expediting are either suddenly travelling for some reason, either a family emergency or they decided to book a flight kind of last minute and realized their passport expired. 

 

So yeah, you can't really compare the two. 

Well, some N400 applicants don't care how long it takes and some want/need to get it done very quickly (job requirements, voting, what have you).   Now can I compare the two?

[Going through 5,671]

It took me 96 days to complete my naturalization.  That said, while I was pleased with the speed of it (especially since I filed from NY, which is notoriously backlogged at times), I wouldn't have paid any extra for expedited service----I'm happy to wait however long it takes for USCIS to run their background checks, etc. because I know it's done in the best interests of national security.

 

Speeding up the process also means speeding up those checks for everyone, and then immigration becomes more of a "bottom-dollar industry" rather than making sure all the i's are dotted and all the t's are crossed in terms of eligibility, security, evidence, etc.

 

I should add for clarification----I was also in no  hurry to Naturalize....had been a GC holder for almost 13 years by the time I filled out the N400.

Edited April 12, 2018 by Going through

[usmsbow 801]

1 hour ago, shomer said:

Well, some N400 applicants don't care how long it takes and some want/need to get it done very quickly (job requirements, voting, what have you).   Now can I compare the two?

 

Passports also take rarely more than 6 weeks to process. The State Dept is a lot more efficient than USCIS. If USCIS were as "reliable" as the State Dept is with passports, this wouldn't even be an issue... But, yes, perhaps one reason passport processing is more efficient is because it does have the expedite option! Hmm...

 

 

Edited April 12, 2018 by usmsbow

[Kevo 69]

I wouldn't pay.  My wife's green card still has about 7 years left so we feel no need to rush.  

 

Now K-1 visa, even though ours got done super fast I would've paid big money.  

[N-o-l-a 7,167]

Nope.  Why would we care if it takes 3 months or over a year (that is our reasonable estimate)?  We've already waited until the 5 year rule came into play.  There's no rush besides just not wanting to pay another fee for a greencard at the 10 year point.  In fact, it ended up working out well that the interview wasn't right away because it is 5.5 hours away and would require several days off of work between the interview and oath ceremony.

 

Would I have paid money to rush the CR1?  Yes x 1000000, but mainly for personal financial reasons as we were already living together abroad.

 

 

[IslAmy 122]

Does anyone actually NEED citizenship if they are a permanent resident?  I think a paid expedite is unfair for processes everyone has to go through like K1/IR1 and ROC, but for the N400 I see it as the "bonus/extra credit process".  

 

I would definitely be willing to pay for an expedited process. I don't think it's plausible because their staff is overloaded already, but we can dream.