Campaign / Companies

MIRA, MA

DHS, ONE YEAR LATER, IMMIGRANT SERVICES GET FAILING GRADES
DHS Citizenship and Immigration Services, First-Year Report Card
Subject
Grade
Backlogs and Delays
F
Application Fee Hike
F
Naturalization Exam Redesign
I (Improvement Needed)
Rhetoric
A

On March 1st, 2003, all immigration functions formerly under the Immigration and Naturalization Service were transferred to the Department of Homeland Security. Immigration service functions, such as processing and adjudication of green-card and naturalization applications, were taken over by the Citizenship and Immigration Services bureau (USCIS), while enforcement functions were split between Customs and Border Protection (CBP) and Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). At the time, immigrant advocates had warned that a
“perfect storm” of factors – such as staffing shortages, insufficient funding, administrative confusion, and laborious new policies and procedures of questionable security value – could
cause breakdowns in applications processing and create even longer backlogs. Those predictions, unfortunately, have largely turned out to be accurate.

Backlogs and Processing Delays, Final Grade: F

As advocates had predicted, immigration backlogs and processing delays have continued to worsen since DHS/USCIS assumed responsibility for immigration services one year ago.
USCIS reports that average application processing times, nationally, have increased significantly during fiscal year 2003. For example, I-485 adjustment-of-status processing times increased from 13 months in FY 2002 to 33 months in FY 2003. Average processing times for I-130 family-based petitions increased from 25 months in FY 2002 to 51 months in FY 2003. N-400 naturalization processing times rose from 10 months in FY 2002 to 14 months in FY 2003. I-90 applications to replace green cards took 9 months to process in FY 2002 but 19 months in FY 2003.

Processing delays and backlogs have grown worse for a variety of factors. One major reason is the diversion of staff resources away from applications processing in order conduct inefficient and redundant security checks and resource-intensive enforcement programs such as Special Registration. As a result of time-consuming IBIS security checks, diversion of
resources, chronic understaffing, and inadequate funding, the backlog of I-485 adjustment-of-status applications has reached an all-time high of 1,242,783 pending cases nationwide as of December 31, 2003.

Application Fee Hikes, Final Grade: F

On February 3rd, USCIS announced significant proposed increases in immigration application fees, amounting to an average increase of $55 for immigration applications and an increase
of $20 for the biometric (fingerprinting) fee. The new fee schedule could go into effect shortly after the conclusion of a 30-day comment period.

As a result, filing fees for N-400 naturalization applications could rise to $320, up from $260; N-600 application for citizenship certification fees could increase to $240, up from $185;
and I-765 work authorization application fees could increase to $175, up from $120. The proposal also calls for annual fee increases coming into effect on October 1st of each year,
beginning in FY 2006, based upon the inflationary rate enacted by Congress.

While USCIS certainly needs more funding in order to reduce the backlog and improve customer service, it is unconscionable that USCIS plans to make tax-paying immigrants bear this burden alone. USCIS proposes to hike up application fees while simultaneously proposing deep cuts in discretionary appropriations from Congress in its FY2005 budget. USCIS’s FY2005 budget proposal requests only $140 million in discretionary appropriations, down from $235 million in FY2004. USCIS plans to eliminate the discretionary appropriation that normally covers its administrative support costs, shifting the entire amount ($157 million) to application fee-payers.

Naturalization Exam Redesign, Final Grade: I (Improvement Neded)

DHS/USCIS is in the process of redesigning the English language and history and government examinations that are part of the naturalization process. USCIS and its director Eduardo
Aguirre have consistently stated that the purpose of redesigning the examination is to make it more standardized and meaningful, but that the redesigned exam should not become more difficult, should not change the current pass/fail rate, and should not disparately impact any particular immigrant group.

Advocates are extremely concerned that the redesigned exam will, in fact, be considerably more difficult than the current one, and that it will impose stricter requirements for a basic
knowledge of English and U.S. history and government than is required by law. The redesigned exam, as currently envisioned, would take much more time to complete. It would be far
more reading-intensive and would require a greater measure of test-taking skills. The English language portions of the exam were tried out in a pilot exam in 2003. Applicants were asked to take one section of the pilot exam, which tested spoken or written English, or reading comprehension. Data from that pilot indicate that Spanish and Vietnamese speakers and the elderly were more likely to perform poorly on the current redesign of the English exam than other immigrant populations. The data also indicated that approximately 10 percent of persons who are passing the current exam would likely fail the redesigned English exam.

This data is very troubling. Spanish-speaking applicants, who constitute by far the largest group of immigrants currently eligible to naturalize, appear to be disparately impacted by at least the pilot English exam. In addition, even though only single portions of the English exam were tested in the pilot, 10 percent of people did poorly, indicating that the redesigned
exam is more difficult.

While USCIS has taken positive steps recently to increase the participation of community-based organizations in the redesign process, a great deal of work must be done to ensure that, at
the end of the day, the exam is both standard and does not increase in difficulty. For this to happen, USCIS must be willing to make some fundamental changes to the way the redesign
is currently conceived and structured, and be willing to take into account the abilities of the large pool of potential applicants and the test must tailor to the needs of the applicant pool.

In addition, an adequate plan to broadly distribute the exam and to ensure the necessary funds for instruction on the new exam does not appear to exist. The new Office of Citizenship,
which has been charged with this job, must step up to the plate and create a plan.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
AILA EVENT

Tuesday, May 4, 2004:
Strategies to Deal with
Severe Backlogs

2:00 pm – 3:30 pm eastern time

Program

Faculty

Registration

Additional Resources




Program

The discussion will cover a variety of topics, including the following:

Using the AILA Liaison System Effectively to Resolve Problem
Congressional Liaison--What Congressional Staffers Can and Cannot Accomplish for Your
Clients!
Mandamus Actions--Going to Court to Compel Adjudication
Legislative Fixes Under Consideration
Class Action Challenges to Backlogs






Faculty

Kathrin S. Mautino, Mautino & Mautino, San Diego, CA
Ms. Mautino is a partner in the San Diego firm of Mautino and Mautino, and is a Certified Specialist
in immigration and nationality law by the State Bar of California. She speaks and writes frequently on
immigration and citizenship issues for local, regional and national organizations and programs. Ms.
Mautino served as a member of the 2003 AILA Annual Conference Program Committee.

Lisa D. Duran, Quarles & Brady Streich Lang, Phoenix, AZ
Ms. Duran is a partner with the Phoenix, Arizona, office of Quarles & Brady. In addition to a general
commercial litigation practice, she practices employment, family, and immigration-related litigation.
She currently serves as the Chair of AILA's California Service Center Liaison Committee.

Bruce A. Coane, Coane and Associates, Houston, TX
Mr. Coane received a Bachelor of Arts Degree with Honors from Penn State University in 1979. He
received his Juris Doctor Degree in Law from the University of Houston in 1981. He is the founder
and past president of the National Employment Lawyers Association-Houston Chapter and he is
Board Certified in Immigration and Nationality Law by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization. He
is the Past-President of the American Immigration Lawyers Association-Texas, New Mexico &
Oklahoma Chapter. His memberships have included being a member of the State Bar of Texas
Labor and Employment Law section and the State Bar of Texas School Law section. Mr. Coane is
Board Certified in Immigration and Nationality Law by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization.

Ela Pestano, Congressman Lincoln Diaz-Balart's (R-FL) Office, Miami, FL






Registration

Two convenient ways to register! AILA members may register securely online using their Visa,
MasterCard, American Express or Discover card. Please note that if you use the online registration,
you do not need to download the registration form and send it in.

AILA members and nonmembers interested in attending may download and complete the registration
form. Please fax the completed form with payment information to the AILA National Office.

Registration Deadline: The deadline to register is Friday, April 30th.Â_
 
Roll Call

Diverse Alliance Supports Comprehensive Immigration Reform in Roll Call



April 21, 2004

Washington, DC – Today, a remarkable alliance of business, labor, religious, ethnic, and immigrant advocacy groups ran a full-page ad in Roll Call, the newspaper of Congress, signaling their support for comprehensive immigration reform. The groups represent a broad, bipartisian, multi-sector constiuecy for fixing America’s broken immigration system, even if the details of reform are yet to be worked out.

The ad text reads in part: “We congratulate President Bush for raising the issue of comprehensive immigration reform, and we are encouraged by the interest his announcement is generating among members of Congress from both sides of the political aisle.”

Finally, the ad states: “We have different views on some aspects of the President’s proposal, but we are united in our call to the leaders of both political parties to come together in a bipartisan fashion to enact balanced comprehensive immigration reform as soon as possible…We think it’s time to roll up our sleeves, get to work, and get it right.”

The ad was signed by 24 organizations representing key constituencies covering the political spectrum:

Business: American Health Care Association; American Hotel & Lodging Association; American Nursery & Landscape Association; International Franchise Association; National Council of Chain Restaurants; National Restaurant Association; and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.

Labor: American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFL-CIO); Hotel Employees and Restaurant Employees International Union; Laborers’ International Union of North America; Service Employees International Union; UNITE! (Union of Needletrades, Industrial and Textile Employees); United Farmworkers of America; and the United Food and Commercial Workers.

Religious: American Jewish Committee; Lutheran Immigration and Refugee Service; and the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops.

Ethnic: Hispanic Alliance for Progress; The Latino Coalition; League of United Latin American Citizens; Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund; and the National Council of La Raza.

Immigrant Advocacy: American Immigration Lawyers Association and the National Immigration Forum.

The ad was paid for by the Statue of Liberty Campaign, a coalition that includes the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the Service Employees International Union, the National Restaurant Association, the American Immigration Lawyers Association, the Essential Worker Immigration Coalition, the National Council of La Raza, and the National Immigration Forum.

Go to http://www.immigrationforum.org/press/articles/RolCalADfinl.pdf to view the ad.
 
NALEO

Immigration Application Fees to Increase

By SUZANNE GAMBOA
The Associated Press
Thursday, April 29, 2004; 1:57 PM

WASHINGTON - Beginning Friday immigrants will pay more to become citizens, live as legal residents or apply for other benefits. The Bush administration announced the increases in January and said they are needed to cover the costs of increased security checks on applicants and rising
administration expenses.

"Congress requires us to do a fee study to determine if we are covering the cost of doing business. When we did, we found we are losing $1 million a day, " said Chris Bentley, Citizenship and Immigration Services spokesman.

Under the new fee schedule, the cost of becoming a citizen is $320, up from $260. For immigrants who want to become legal permanent residents, the cost will be $315, up from $255.

Petitioning to bring in a fiance who is an immigrant now costs $165, an increase of $55. Replacing or renewing a permanent residency card, also known as a green card, costs $185, up from $130.

Also, most applicants will have to pay a $70 fingerprinting fee, an increase of $20.

Critics of the fee increases say the agency is charging more to pay for mismanagement that led to a backlog of millions of pending immigration benefits applications.

The increases, without improved service, will keep people from pursuing citizenship, said Larry Gonzalez, Washington director for the National
Association of Latino Elected and Appointed Officials Educational Fund.

An analysis conducted for NALEO estimates that about 4.2 million Latinos are eligible for U.S. citizenship.

"How ironic that we have all these folks eligible for citizenship and yet we have a service agency that continues to create barriers to citizenship," said Gonzalez. His organization works to bring more Latinos into elected office and the political process, in part by promoting citizenship.

"Everyone wants to talk about immigration reform and illegal immigrants, " Gonzalez said. "Not that those are not important, but at the same time we
have the issue here of people playing by the rules and doing it right and we have a system that is broken."

---

On the Net: Citizenship and Immigration Services new fee schedule:http://uscis.gov

National Association of Latino Elected and Appointed Officials Educational Fund:http://www.naleo.org

© 2004 The Associated Press
 
Last edited by a moderator:
NCLR

ress Release - National Council of La Raza

NCLR Critical of Fee Increases For Immigration Services
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
April 16, 2004
Lisa Navarrette
(202) 785-1670 Telephone

This week the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services
(USCIS) announced
a new fee structure for immigration benefit applications and petitions as well as for capturing
biometric information of those who apply for certain immigration benefits. The new fees, which will
go into effect on April 30,
will increase by as much as $60 per application.

These fee increases mean that immigrants and U.S. citizens are being asked
to pay larger fees for applications at the same time that they are experiencing a deterioration in the
timeliness and quality of the services they receive. Due to inadequate resources, countless
American families are languishing in USCIS processing backlogs waiting to be reunited with
immediate family members. A January 2004 General Accounting Office report claims that 6.2 million
applications for immigration benefits are pending
as of September 2003. This constitutes a 59% increase in the last two
years.

These severe backlogs have real effects on American families. For
example, U.S. citizens who petition for unmarried children over 21 years
old from Mexico must wait as long as nine years to be reunited. Legal
permanent residents from Mexico who petition for their immediate family
members (spouses and minor unmarried children) may wait as long as seven
years. Furthermore, noncitizens awaiting visa extensions and other
immigration services are left vulnerable to immigration enforcement agents
while their papers are being processed. The poor and slow service has
potentially far-reaching effects on people who find themselves out of
status due to inefficiencies at USCIS. Moreover, the exorbitant fees place
an unfair and unreasonable burden on persons seeking U.S. citizenship and
other immigration services. Many immigrants will not be able to afford the
increased fees.

NCLR strongly believes that the USCIS fills a very important function for
the Latino community and the entire immigrant community and, as such, we
believe USCIS must receive adequate funding to perform its vital functions.
However, increased fees are not justified in the current context of
processing backlogs and poor service. It is also clear to us that fee
increases alone will not resolve the financial problems faced by USCIS and
will not result in better service. Congress must appropriate direct funds
to supplement the user fees. We call upon Congress and the Administration
to look beyond application fees and work together to ensure that the
important work of USCIS be adequately funded and that the services USCIS
provides be improved.




LCCR supports strong due process and civil rights protections in the nation's immigration laws. To
learn more about this issue, contact Rob Randhava
.
 
NAFSA

NAFSA: Association of International Educators
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
CONTACT: Ursula Oaks, 202.737.3699 ext. 253; ursulao@nafsa.org

FOCUS ON U.S. VISA POLICY SHARPENS AS CONCERN ABOUT
ACCESS FOR FOREIGN STUDENTS AND SCHOLARS PERSISTS

NAFSA proposal identifies problems, sets out recommendations for
balanced policy

WASHINGTON, April 29, 2004 - NAFSA: Association of International
Educators today issued a comprehensive road map for a U.S. visa policy
that articulates the national interest in both protecting the nation
against those who would do harm and ensuring its openness to the
scientific and educational exchanges on which the future of U.S.
international leadership and security depends. "This document is the
result of extensive consultations with administration officials," said
NAFSA Executive Director and CEO Marlene Johnson. "We share their goal
of implementing a visa policy that enhances our national security by
better focusing scarce resources and addressing fundamental problem
areas in visa processing.

The increasingly negative - albeit unintentional - impact of current visa
policy on international scientific and educational exchanges has captured
the attention of officials at the highest levels of the U.S. government.
Cabinet members, consular officials, White House advisors, and others
recognize that the United States must take decisive steps to prevent
further damage to the country's position as the academic destination of
choice for the world's future leaders and best minds.

A February 2004 survey by NAFSA and four other higher education
associations identified the alarming extent to which international
students are apparently voting with their feet by not submitting
applications to U.S. higher education institutions for this fall. That survey
found that the problem is particularly acute at the nation's doctoral and
research institutions, and among the 25 research institutions that enroll
the most international students. In recent months, attention has focused
on the prospect of an impending "reverse brain drain," in which the
United States could lose increasing numbers of gifted foreign scientists
to more welcoming countries. Meanwhile, officials in Australia, Canada,
and the United Kingdom have openly expressed their belief that their
recruitment efforts to woo the most talented internationally mobile
students and scholars have benefited from the growing perception of an
unwelcoming climate in the United States.

NAFSA's policy proposal, "A National-Interest-Based Visa Policy for
Students and Scholars," identifies and sets out recommendations to
address four major problem areas in the current U.S. visa system: the
absence of an overarching visa policy to guide visa decision-making; an
unfocused approach to reviews that results in repetitive processing of
routine cases and takes resources away from cases that require more
scrutiny; a need for clear time guidelines to prevent visa applications
from being indefinitely lost in the review process; and a lack of balance
between resources and responsibilities for those charged with carrying
out visa policy.

"A National-Interest-Based Visa Policy for Students and Scholars"
Introduction and Summary
Visa Policy Recommendations

____

With 9,000 members, NAFSA: Association of International Educators is
the world's largest nonprofit association dedicated to international
education.
 
Compete America

Compete America

http://www.competeamerica.org/news/...rage/index.html

A coalition that includes businesses and trade associations on Wednesday asked
Congress to reform the H-1B visa program, arguing that foreign nationals who have
earned masters and doctorate degrees from U.S. universities should be exempt from the
program's annual cap. In February, the government said it had received enough
applications to reach this fiscal year's cap of 65,000 visas, which allow skilled workers to
remain in the country for up to six years. According to the Compete America coalition,
the reform is vital for American employers to remain competitive. The group said that in
the physical sciences and engineering, nearly 50 percent of all masters and doctorate
degrees awarded by U.S. schools are earned by foreign nationals.

Critics of the H-1B program
argue that highly educated
U.S. workers are available
for jobs and that the visas
fuel the shift of technology
work offshore. Already,
there are some exemptions
to the cap.
 
Nsf

NSF PR 04-061 - May 04, 2004

Media contact:
David Hart, NSF
(703) 292-7737
dhart@nsf.gov
Program contact:
Rolf Lehming, NSF
(703) 292-7810
rlehming@nsf.gov


United States Still Leads in Science and Engineering, But Uncertainties Complicate Outlook
National Science Board highlights workforce issues in its release of S&E Indicators 2004

ARLINGTON, Va.—The United States remains the world's leading producer of and a net
exporter of high-technology products and ranks among the global leaders in research and
development (R&D) spending. However, ongoing economic and workforce changes make the
outlook for the future uncertain, according to Science and Engineering (S&E) Indicators
2004, a biennial report of the National Science Board (NSB) to the president.

"The United States is in a long-distance race to retain its essential global advantage in S&E
human resources and sustain our world leadership in science and technology," said NSB
Chair Warren M. Washington. "For many years we have benefited from minimal competition
in the global S&E labor market, but attractive and competitive alternatives are now
expanding around the world. We must develop more fully our native talent."

S&E Indicators, which this year contains a new chapter with a state-by-state breakdown of
two dozen science and technology indicators, is considered the nation's most authoritative
source for national and international science and engineering trends in education, the labor
force, academia and the global marketplace, as well as nationwide and statewide
expenditures for research and development.

In a companion piece to Indicators 2004, the NSB observes in the available statistics an
"emerging and critical problem" for the U.S. science and engineering labor force. A
contributing factor, paradoxically, is the nation's economic success, which leads to an
increasing demand for employees trained in science and engineering fields.

The looming problem lies in current trends that, if left unchecked, show the number of U.S.
citizens qualified for science and engineering jobs will be level "at best," the NSB notes. At
the same time, the nation may be unable to rely on foreign citizens to fill the gap, either
because of limits to entry or because of intense foreign competition for those skills.

Indicators 2004 shows, for example, that the United States now ranks 17th among nations
surveyed in the proportion of its 18-24-year-olds earning natural science and engineering
degrees. In 1975, the United States ranked third.

Record levels of foreign-born S&E workers have helped make possible the rising U.S. S&E
employment in the past several decades. Indicators 2004 highlights U.S. Census data from 2000 showing about 17 percent of
bachelor's degree holders, 29 percent of master's degree holders, and 38 percent of doctorate holders employed in S&E
occupations are foreign-born.

The latest data in Indicators 2004 paint a more detailed picture. The percentage of foreign-born mathematicians and computer
scientists in the U.S workforce, for example, has nearly doubled since 1990. In addition, foreign-born students constituted more
than 50 percent of U.S. engineering and computer science graduate students in 2001.

On the other hand, the number of high-skill-related visas issued to students, exchange visitors and others has declined
significantly since 2001. These numbers reflect both a drop in applications and higher U.S. State Department refusal rates.

On the economic front, the United States and the G-7 nations continue to account for the lion's share of global R&D expenditures,
according to Indicators 2004. The U.S. global high-tech market share held steady in the 1990s, and foreign-owned firms' R&D
expenditures in the United States continue to exceed the amount U.S. firms spend overseas.

However, a number of countries are positioned to become more prominent in technology development because of their large,
ongoing investments in S&E education and R&D. In the 1990s, China and South Korea increased their high-technology market
shares to the point that their combined share has surpassed that of Japan. And U.S. firms spend more R&D dollars in Asia than
Asian firms spend in the United States—the only global region where the United States shows such a deficit.

In high-tech exports, the U.S. and Japanese global shares have declined, while the share from other Asian countries, led largely by
China and South Korea, has climbed to nearly 30 percent. A growing number of journal articles from East Asia suggests an
accompanying increased presence in basic R&D.

Other new trends and findings

S&E Indicators 2004 data show that U.S.-based authors continue to produce the largest share of scientific journal articles, but
U.S. article output has flattened since 1992, a trend that has not been observed in other developed countries. The National
Science Foundation (NSF) is engaged in an in-depth study of worldwide trends in article production and how and why they may be
changing (Chapter 5).

The report features data from a 2001 NSF survey that looks at characteristics of innovative companies and their use of information
technology. The results show that companies providing computer-related services were more innovative than computer hardware
manufacturers and that process innovation typically generated more revenue than did product innovation (Chapter 6).

Almost all Americans think that science and technology are playing a critical role in national security and meeting future terrorist
threats. Similarly, 9 in 10 Americans agreed that scientific literacy is important to help the average citizen understand and deal with
terrorism (Chapter 7).

For the first time, the report devotes an entire chapter to a state-by-state breakdown of key S&E indicators. For more details on
state indicators, see the related press release (Chapter 8).

-NSF-

NSF PR 04-61 (NSB 04-86)

Science and Engineering Indicators 2004: http://www.nsf.gov/sbe/srs/seind04/

The National Science Foundation (NSF) is an independent federal agency that supports fundamental research and education
across all fields of science and engineering, with an annual budget of nearly $5.58 billion. NSF funds reach all 50 states through
grants to nearly 2,000 universities and institutions. Each year, NSF receives about 40,000 competitive requests for funding, and
makes about 11,000 new funding awards. The NSF also awards over $200 million in professional and service contracts yearly.

Receive official NSF news electronically through the e-mail delivery system, NSFnews. To subscribe, send an e-mail message to
join-nsfnews@lists.nsf.gov. In the body of the message, type "subscribe nsfnews" and then type your name. (Ex.: "subscribe
nsfnews John Smith")

Useful NSF Web Sites:
NSF Home Page: http://www.nsf.gov
News Highlights: http://www.nsf.gov/od/lpa
Newsroom: http://www.nsf.gov/od/lpa/news/media/start.htm
Science Statistics: http://www.nsf.gov/sbe/srs/stats.htm
Awards Searches: http://www.fastlane.nsf.gov/a6/A6Start.htm


National Science Foundation
Office of Legislative and Public Affairs
4201 Wilson Boulevard
Arlington, Virginia 22230, USA
Tel: 703-292-8070
FIRS: 800-877-8339 | TDD: 703-292-5090
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Nafsa

Courtesy of :www.immigration-law.com".

05/15/2004: NAFSA, Model for Immigration Advocacy Organization

NAFSA is National Association of Foreign Student Advisors covering educational institutions. It has a huge network of members covering schools and serves the foreign employees and students.
In serving its constituents, the organization has superbly performed its functions and roles. One of its functions which should be modelled after by other immigrant organizations is its liaison
activities with the government agencies. The bi-weekly liaison conference with the DHS agencies plays two critical roles: (1) First, unlike other organizations, it promptly reports the liaison minutes,
feeding the foreign employees and foreign students valuable information and most importantly "timely." (2) Secondly, NAFSA has a very sophiscated network of liaison members that are able to
articulate the issues which are concerns to its constituents at a given time, which is followed by its advocacy activities. The constituents are well served. They should be thankful to the leadership
of the organization. This web site also wishes to send "congratulations" to the organization for the job well done.
 
Migration Policy / Event / Security, Backlogs

First Annual Law and Policy Conference
Events > Event Announcement



Tuesday, May 18, 2004
Georgetown University Law Center – Moot Court Room
400 New Jersey Avenue, NW, Washington, DC

Pre-registration is required. Please click here for a registration form.

Conference Agenda

9:00 – 9:15 a.m. Opening Remarks
Donald Kerwin, Executive Director, Catholic Legal Immigration Network, Inc. (CLINIC)

9:15 – 10:45 a.m. Panel One: The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) – One Year Later
This panel will review key issues related to the transfer of the U.S. immigration function to DHS. Topics will include: (1) customer service, backlog,
and application adjudication issues; (2) inter-agency coordination; (3) the status and efficacy of “national security†changes in immigration law and
procedure, including “special registrationâ€, U.S.-Visit, inter-agency information sharing, and other developments; (4) ongoing concerns of Arab- and
Muslim-American communities; (5) DHS legal coordination issues and gaps in rule-making and administrative directives.

Moderator:
Christina DeConcini (confirmed), Director of Public Education and Advocacy, CLINIC

Speakers:
Jeanne Butterfield (confirmed), Executive Director, American Immigration Lawyers Association.
Doris Meissner (confirmed), Senior Fellow, MPI, former Commissioner of the Immigration and Naturalization Service.
Mary Rose Oaker (confirmed), Executive Director, American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee.
Baruch Weiss (confirmed), Associate General Counsel for Border and Transportation Security and Citizenship and Immigration Services, DHS.

11:00 a.m. – 12:30 p.m. Panel Two: Temporary Worker and Legalization Issues
This panel will analyze: (1) temporary worker and legalization proposals; (2) the lessons of the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986; (3) the
experience of the United States and other nations with guest worker programs.

Moderator:
Charles Wheeler (confirmed), Director of Training and Technical Support, CLINIC

Speakers:
Beatriz Maya (confirmed), Director, Dignity and Amnesty for Immigrants
Frank Sharry (confirmed), Executive Director, National Immigration Forum
Cecilia Muñoz (confirmed), Vice President for Research, Advocacy, and Legislation, National Council of La Raza.

Michael Hill (confirmed), Office of Government Liaison, United States Conference of Catholic Bishops.

12:30 - 1:15 p.m. LUNCH

1:15 – 2:45 p.m. Panel Three: National Security and Immigration Litigation
This panel will review legal challenges and considerations related to post-9/11 immigration and national security measures.

Moderator:
T. Alexander Aleinikoff (confirmed), Dean-designate of Georgetown University School of Law, former General Counsel of the Immigration and
Naturalization Service.

Speakers:
Viet Dinh (confirmed), Georgetown University School of Law, former Assistant Attorney General
David Cole (confirmed), Georgetown University School of Law
Neal Katyal (invited), Georgetown University School of Law

3:00 – 4:30 p.m. Panel Four: Detention, Interdiction, and Enforcement Issues
This panel will discuss a range of immigration enforcement issues, including: (1) pre-charge, preventive, mandatory and indefinite detention; (2)
alternatives to detention; (3) interdiction and migrant interception programs; (4) other protection issues.

Moderator:
Andy Schoenholtz (confirmed), Director of Law and Policy Study, Institute for the Study of International Migration

Speakers:
Kathleen Sullivan (confirmed), Director of Special Projects, CLINIC
Victor Cerda (invited), Counsel to the Director of the Bureau of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), DHS.
Bill Frelick (confirmed), Director, Refugee Programs, Amnesty International.
Judy Rabinovitz (invited), Senior Staff Counsel, American Civil Liberties Foundation, Immigrants’Rights Project

For questions, please contact Kimberly Neely at the Catholic Legal Immigration Network Inc. (CLINIC) at kneely@cliniclegal.org or 202/756-5548.

Pre-registration is required. Please click here for a registration form.
 
AILA Conference / June

Top Government Officials Confirm
Attendance at 2004 AILA Annual
Conference
5/7/2004

In just a little more than a month, thousands of AILA members
and government officials will gather in Philadelphia for the 2004
AILA Annual Conference. The educational program is
top-notch, with sessions covering everything you need to
know for your immigration law practice - from beginner, to
intermediate to masters-level.

This year more than 30 government officials representing 8 key
immigration agencies will be speaking on panels. We are
pleased to report the following individuals have confirmed their
attendance: Charles Adkins-Blanch, General Counsel, EOIR;
Morrie Berez, Senior Adjudications Officer, USCIS; Robyn M.
Bishop, Minister Counselor for Consular Affairs, DOS; Darrell
Blevins, Division Director, Office of Eligibility and Enumeration,
SSA; Nieves Cardinale, Port Director, CBP; William Carlson,
Chief, Division of Foreign Labor Certification, DOL; Dea Carpenter, Chief Counsel, USCIS;
Victor Cerda, Chief Counsel, ICE; Laura Dawkins, Adjudications Officer, DHS;
Immigration Judge, EOIR; Ellen Gallagher-Holmes, Associate General Counsel, USCIS;
Charlene Giles, Chief, Agricultural Labor Certification Unit, DOL; William Howard,
Principal Legal, Advisor, ICE; the Honorable Charles Honeyman, Immigration Judge,
EOIR; Gerald Hurwitz, Member, Board of Immigration Appeals, EOIR; Carlos Iturregui,
Chief, Office of Policy & Strategy, USCIS; Walter Laramie, Vermont Service Center,
USCIS; Alexander Lopes, Bureau of Industry and Security, Department of Commerce;
Linda Loveless, Acting Director, Immigration Policy & Programs, Office of Field Operations,
CBP; Lynden Melmed, Office of the General Counsel; Fujie Ohata, Associate
Commissioner, Service Center Operations, USCIS; Terry O'Reilly, Acting Director, Area
Operations, USCIS; Jack Perkins, Chief, OCAHO, EOIR; Jim Pritchett, DOS; Thomas
Pullen, Immigration Judge, EOIR; Harry Sheinfeld, Litigation Counsel, Employment &
Training Service, DOL; Stephen Stefanko, Certifying Officer, DOL; Dan Sutherland,
Officer for Civil Rights and Civil Liberties, DHS; and William Yates, Associate Director,
Operations, USCIS. Many other officials have been invited and we expect to receive
confirmation within the next few days.
 
Ombudsman

Courtesy of "www.naleo.org"

Ombudsman: The newly-created Ombudsman’s Office is responsible for assisting individuals and em-ployers
in resolving problems with immigration services. You can help constituents with concerns or
complaints about the service they have received from the USCIS by contacting the central
Ombudsman’s Office at CISO@DHS.gov or Department of Homeland Security, Office of the CIS
Ombudsman, Washington, DC 20528.

Also: Prakash.khatri@dhs.gov
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Indian Lobby / USINPAC

Courtesy of "stuka".

USINPAC TO HAVE HISTORIC IMMIGRATION DIALOGUE ON CAPITOL HILL


We Want Your Input!




Immigration issues continue to dominate the concerns of the ever-growing Indian-American community. USINPAC, the largest political action
committee representing the voice of Indian-Americans on Capitol Hill, has scheduled a rare and historic direct face-to-face dialogue at the
US Capitol with a member of Congress and the INS Commissioner. Congresswoman Sheila Jackson-Lee (D-TX), Ranking Member of the
Subcommittee of Immigration, Border Security and Claims of the House Judiciary Committee and the Honorable Eduardo Aguirre, Director of
Citizenship and Immigration Services, Department of Home Land Security will meet with USINPAC to discuss:

Educating the public about the immigration application process

Expediting visa applications and clearing up backlogs

Case-by-case analysis of glitches in immigration enforcement

Improving and expediting the immigration process

This historic meeting is scheduled to be held on June 15, 2004. Your input is important to us as we discuss the concerns of our community.
To attend this meeting, please contact Dr. Surabhi Garg at sgarg@usinpac.com by June 11, 2004. If you cannot attend the meeting, please
let us know which issues you would like addressed. As the meeting is fast approaching, we request that you promptly submit your questions
to Manish Antani at mantani@usinpac.com.




Please do not reply to this e-mail. To communicate any concerns to USINPAC, please write mail to info@usinpac.com





--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

USINPAC is a united, strong and clear voice representing the Indian American community on Capitol Hill and the White House. We promote
issues that are shaped by the emerging concerns of our community. Our mission is to ensure effective representation on issues of concern
to Indian Americans. To that end, we provide bipartisan support to candidates for public office who address the community's concerns.



PO Box 222424 Chantilly, VA 20153
Fax: (703) 802-6125 Phone: (703) 488-6880
Email: info@usinpac.com
http://www.usinpac.com
 
AILA liaisons info

After a number of complaints from people claiming to have had filings at the Texas Service Center that were postmarked before April 30, 2004 either rejected or subjected to a “balance due” bill for the new fees, the TSC has announced that it has traced the source of the error and corrected it. Those that have a case that the TSC should have accepted with the old fee but did not should send a copy of the rejection notice and proof of the timely filing of the package to AILA's TSC Liaison Chair, Shawn Orme, at sorme@jenkens.com or fax at (214) 855-4300.



The USCIS regulation implementing the new fees indicated that, as long as the petition or application was postmarked before the April 30 effective date, the old fees would apply.
 
Visa delays / LA Times

Visa Delays Cost Firms $31 Billion, Survey Says

By Evelyn Iritani
Times Staff Writer

June 2, 2004

Tighter border controls and visa delays have cost U.S. firms tens of billions of dollars in lost contracts and added expenses, particularly in fast-growing new markets in China and other developing countries, according to a study to be released today.

The analysis by eight leading business groups represents the first corporate effort to quantify the economic effect of the tightening of America's borders after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.

Companies have been reluctant to publicly criticize the U.S. homeland security campaign, in part because they fear they would be accused of jeopardizing America's safety or would run afoul of government officials.

But nearly three years after the attacks, U.S. executives who were surveyed said they were concerned that the Bush administration had cast its security net too wide, keeping out legitimate foreign businesspeople, students and tourists and breeding resentment just as U.S. firms are increasingly global.

The analysis by Santangelo Group Inc., a Washington consulting firm, was based on responses from 141 companies in eight business groups, whose members include Boeing Co., Microsoft Corp. and other leading exporters.

The study estimated that visa processing problems cost U.S. firms $30.7 billion in revenues and indirect expenses between July 2002 and March 2004. That sum doesn't reflect the broader costs of border tightening, such as airport delays or increased screening of shipping containers.

The survey's findings about problems employers have with visas are consistent with anecdotal evidence that homeland security in general is imposing widespread and often unforeseen costs.

The concerns of the business community were echoed in a statement released two weeks ago by more than 20 of the nation's leading scientific and academic organizations..

If action isn't taken quickly, they warned, U.S. academic institutions could lose not only millions of dollars in tuition and other revenue from foreign students but also the brainpower that has helped keep the U.S. at the forefront of science and technology.

Secretary of State Colin L. Powell and other top U.S. officials have acknowledged that the country must act more forcefully to combat the growing perception overseas that America has closed its doors to foreign visitors and business people.

Kelly Shannon, a spokeswoman for the Bureau of Consular Affairs, said the agency had added consular officers and invested $1 million in a new computer system so visa applications sent to Washington could be reviewed immediately. More than 80% of visa applications requiring extra screening are now processed within three weeks, she said.

But Shannon said the U.S. government had also increased the scrutiny of foreigners seeking to enter the country, doubling the number of people listed in its Consular Lookout and Support System who are believed to be ineligible for entry because of money laundering, terrorism, drug trafficking or other crimes.

U.S. firms said visa processing delays and tighter screening had made it very difficult to get even longtime foreign customers or employees into the United States. That has increased pressure for firms to outsource work or set up offices abroad, according to William Reinsch, president of the National Foreign Trade Council, a survey sponsor.

Reinsch said American firms hadn't seen a noticeable improvement in recent months, particularly in China and other developing countries where visa applicants are often denied entry because they are considered an immigration risk.

Visa applicants from China, India and Russia also are more likely to get flagged under a screening program designed to protect U.S. technology.

"The issue is trying to find a balance," said Reinsch, formerly a top export control official in the Clinton administration.

Other groups participating in the survey included the Aerospace Industries Assn., the American Council on International Personnel and the U.S.-China Business Council. Their members include top exporters as well as smaller companies.

Reinsch said the burden of visa processing delays fell hardest on small and medium-size companies because they don't have the resources to "work around" problems.

Sixty percent of survey respondents said they had suffered a "material impact" from business visa processing delays, and 51% said the problem was worse today than a year ago.


The U.S.-China Business Council, a Washington trade group, has gathered testimony from dozens of U.S. firms reporting lost contracts or other costs because of visa problems. Businesses also said they were forced to delay delivery of airplanes and expensive machinery or to postpone projects.

Len Chaloux, an executive at Moore Nanotechnology Systems, a New Hampshire producer of machine tools to produce optical lenses, said his firm lost a $500,000 deal after it took more than five months to get a visa for the Chinese customer. He said it was "extremely frustrating" because his firm's chief British competitor had landed at least 15 contracts in China, the world's hottest market for optical technology equipment.

The business groups have recommended streamlining the visa processing system to focus on the most serious security threats, and increasing resources of agencies involved in the review process.

Gary Hufbauer, an international trade expert at the Institute for International Economics in Washington, questioned the estimated losses, which were larger than he would have predicted. But he said the survey represented a good "opening shot."
 
Last edited by a moderator:
FT.com

Visa delays have 'cost US $30bn in 2 years'
By Edward Alden in Washington
Published: June 2 2004 8:10 | Last Updated: June 2 2004 8:10

Corporate America has suffered $30.7bn (£16.8bn) in lost revenue and other costs over the
past two years as a result of delays in visas for foreign business travellers, according to eight
US business organisations.

The finding marks the first serious effort by US business to quantify the impact of security
restrictions put in place since the September 11 terrorist attacks.

A survey, to be published on Wednesday, found that nearly three-quarters of companies had
experienced unexpected delays or arbitrary denials of business visa applications, while 60 per
cent said the delays had hurt their companies through increased costs or lost sales.

In addition, more than half the 734 companies surveyed said the visa process was worse today
than a year ago.

"Our companies have expressed growing frustration to government officials and Congress for
nearly two years over the broken business visa system, to no avail," said Bill Reinsch, president
of the National Foreign Trade Council, which represents many large US companies. The survey's
sponsors include the Aerospace Industries Association and business councils representing US
companies in Russia, China and Vietnam.

The findings come as the Bush administration is close to completing a review of visa restrictions
that government officials say is likely to result in some streamlining of the procedures to address
growing concerns from universities, business, and the travel industry.

In the wake of the September 11 attacks, the US began to require time-consuming security
checks of a variety of potential travellers to the US.

The severest impact on business has come from procedures implemented in July 2002 that
require background checks of anyone, including potential foreign business customers, who is
working with technologies deemed sensitive for national security reasons, such as aerospace,
chemicals or advanced computers. About 14,000 visa applicants were reviews under that
programme last year.

The US government has acknowledged problems arising from visa delays, but says the situation
is improving.

Janice Jacobs, deputy assistant secretary of state for consular affairs, said that while serious
backlogs occurred in 2002, "we are much, much better than we were".

She said that average processing times for visas that required security reviews had been cut in
half, and about 80 per cent were decided within three weeks.

But she said that the technology-related background checks "have figured prominently" in the
administration's current review of its visa policies.

The survey showed most delays involved business travellers from China, India and Russia, none
of which is considered a potential source of terrorists. The next hardest hit were Malaysia,
Indonesia and South Korea.

Of the companies surveyed, the total financial impact was put at $45m. The figure of $30.7bn
over nearly two years was reached by estimating the impact across the economy.

Medium-sized companies were hit harder than large companies, most likely because many
cannot afford to hire immigration law yers to help expedite visa applications.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
NY, NJ Organisations

Immigration help / Contacts:

A. Try calling the Catholic Legal Immigration Network in New York or Catholic Community Services in New Jersey. These are among the few not-for-profit organizations that handle employment-based immigration cases. In New Jersey call (973) 733-3516. In New York, (212) 826-6251. These organizations charge, but fees are lower than those of private attorneys.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top