Entertaining Reading

nyc_naturalizer

Registered Users (C)
It's been nearly a year since USCIS announced the fee increase. In retrospect, it's pretty funny reading, particularly the Q&A.

May 29, 2007

USCIS Sets Final Fee Schedule to Build an Immigration Service for the 21st Century

U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) today announced a new fee schedule for immigration benefit applications and petitions.

Even with the changes, the new schedule will ensure that USCIS will have sufficient funding to fully recover its costs of doing business and also enable USCIS to meet national security and public safety concerns, prevent and detect fraud, and invest in comprehensive transformation efforts – all leading to a more efficient and effective immigration system.

Q. How long before applicants and petitioners begin seeing improvements in USCIS service as a result of this new fee schedule?

A. USCIS is focused on continuous improvement. For example, we are committed to substantial reductions in processing times by the end of FY 2008 for four key applications: (1) Form I-90, Application to Renew or Replace a Permanent Resident Card; (2) Form I-485, Application to Register Permanent Residence or Adjust Status; (3) Form I-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker; and (4) Form N-400, Application for Naturalization. These four products represent almost one-third of USCIS’ total workload. By the end of FY 2008 (Sept. 30, 2008), USCIS plans to reduce processing times for each of these from six months to four months. Applications for naturalization are projected to be reduced from seven months to five (when the ceremony at which a person takes the Oath of Allegiance is included as part of the process). Thus, our customers will see a significant improvement in the first full fiscal year following the fee adjustments. Also, by the end of FY 2009 we intend to reduce by 20 percent the average case processing times across the spectrum of applications and petitions.

Premium processing fees will be used to transform USCIS from a paper-based process to an electronic environment, making it possible to incorporate more effective processing of low risk applicants and better identification of higher risk individuals. The new operational concept will be based on the types of online customer accounts used in the private sector in order to facilitate transactions, track activities, and reduce identity fraud. The solution will also help to meet customer expectations for on-demand information and immediate real-time electronic service over the Internet.

Q. Many comments recommended alternative funding sources such as appropriated funds. Why didn’t you consider this?

A. Law and policy have long supported the proposition that those applying for immigration benefits should bear the costs of their processing. Thus, in this final rule, USCIS continues to adopt a fee schedule to recover its costs through user fees. While it is true that Congress has, in the past, enacted intermittent appropriations to subsidize the operations of USCIS, the President’s budget for FY 2008 does not request an appropriated subsidy, except for specific funds for the expansion of the Employment Eligibility Verification program. Even if an appropriation were requested, USCIS doubts that it would receive all of the necessary funding required to meet its mission responsibilities. Continuing to recover full costs at this time is necessary so as not to delay service delivery to applicants and petitioners.

Further, using appropriated funds to support USCIS is risky because the demand for immigration benefits may change rapidly with little notice. For example, appropriated funds provided for naturalization benefits could likely be insufficient if there was an increase in the number of naturalization application benefits submitted. In this instance, USCIS would have to cut back on services (which would increase processing times) to cover the costs of processing the additional applications. Reliance on appropriations in the past has contributed to the funding problems USCIS has faced recently. USCIS’ new fee rule eliminates this problem because the fees are based on a robust model that incorporates all costs relating to services thereby providing a more stable source of funding.

http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrelease/FinalFeeRuleQsAs052907.pdf
 
The thing they failed to mention is that the 4 month processing target only applies to application filed after March 2008 since they pick low hanging fruit ( newer applications) first and leave the older ones to rot on the tree. ;)
 
Very entertaining, indeed!

It's very nice of them to plan to reduce processing of N-400s from 7 to 5 months; however, shouldn't they first reduce processing of N-400s to 7 months from however many months it's curently taking? The usual USCIS drivel...
 
The thing they failed to mention is that the 4 month processing target only applies to application filed after March 2008 since they pick low hanging fruit ( newer applications) first and leave the older ones to rot on the tree. ;)

That's true, those customers will see improvement by the end of FY 2008.:rolleyes:

What I really like is the way that they blame congressional appropriated funding for precisely the problem that they created with the fee increase.:rolleyes:
 
Guys - look at the article date - May 2007! This was part of Mr. Gonzalez's propaganda to justify the hike in fees. WE all know how that turned out!
 
Guys - look at the article date - May 2007! This was part of Mr. Gonzalez's propaganda to justify the hike in fees. WE all know how that turned out!

Right, that's the point. This was my tribute to "how it turned out." :)

It's been nearly a year since USCIS announced the fee increase. In retrospect, it's pretty funny reading, particularly the Q&A.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Right, that's the point. This was my tribute to "how it turned out." :)

HA! You'll get mixed reviews on that one. As was previously mentioned those who applied in 2008 and got their interviews done in less than 3 months are happy. The rest of us who had to deal with prolonged delays aren't. Who wins the argument?! Especially if those being processed in 2008 far outnumber those who are 'stuck' in the backlog? :rolleyes:
 
HA! You'll get mixed reviews on that one. As was previously mentioned those who applied in 2008 and got their interviews done in less than 3 months are happy. The rest of us who had to deal with prolonged delays aren't. Who wins the argument?! Especially if those being processed in 2008 far outnumber those who are 'stuck' in the backlog? :rolleyes:

This brings us back to a previously discussed theory: would it make sense to withdraw a backlogged application and reapply?
 
This brings us back to a previously discussed theory: would it make sense to withdraw a backlogged application and reapply?

Withdrawing a backlogged application and reapplying triggers an automatic process with USCIS, whereby everyone with your old PD gets processed instantly, and everyone with your new PD goes to the back of the queue.:rolleyes:
 
Withdrawing a backlogged application and reapplying triggers an automatic process with USCIS, whereby everyone with your old PD gets processed instantly, and everyone with your new PD goes to the back of the queue.:rolleyes:

Of course it does, why didn't I think of that?:D

Considering all the inefficiencies of the USCIS, I wonder if the federal government has ever considered privatizing it?
 
Of course it does, why didn't I think of that?:D

Considering all the inefficiencies of the USCIS, I wonder if the federal government has ever considered privatizing it?

There are obvious problems in principle with taking citizenship and immigration out of the public sector. That said, I could see the current government handing the contract over to Haliburton. :D

Bottom line is, the government sits on the problem because there is an unspoken understanding that inefficiencies in the immigration system are a good thing.
 
Bottom line is, the government sits on the problem because there is an unspoken understanding that inefficiencies in the immigration system are a good thing.

That's absolutely true. There have been numerous reports of passports being processed within a week or two, and that's with regular processing! If they can issue passports with such efficiency (that was NOT a sarcastic comment), I'm sure they can issue immigration benefits with equal efficiency...if they wanted to, that is.
 
By the end of FY 2008 (Sept. 30, 2008), ... Applications for naturalization are projected to be reduced from seven months to five (when the ceremony at which a person takes the Oath of Allegiance is included as part of the process). Thus, our customers will see a significant improvement in the first full fiscal year following the fee adjustments. Also, by the end of FY 2009 we intend to reduce by 20 percent the average case processing times across the spectrum of applications and petitions.

The solution will also help to meet customer expectations for on-demand information and immediate real-time electronic service over the Internet.

Reliance on appropriations in the past has contributed to the funding problems USCIS has faced recently. USCIS’ new fee rule eliminates this problem because the fees are based on a robust model that incorporates all costs relating to services thereby providing a more stable source of funding.

http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrelease/FinalFeeRuleQsAs052907.pdf

hilarious!! :D:D:D:D:D:D:D

NYC_naturalizer, where did you find this priceless piece of information???
 
By the end of FY 2008 (Sept. 30, 2008), USCIS plans to reduce processing times for each of these from six months to four months. Applications for naturalization are projected to be reduced from seven months to five (when the ceremony at which a person takes the Oath of Allegiance is included as part of the process). Thus, our customers will see a significant improvement in the first full fiscal year following the fee adjustments.

The USCIS is also "projecting" to process summer 2007 NYC applications in 10.1 months. :rolleyes:

I wonder what other things they "project" that we don't know about.
 
There really more interesting part is that those who paid the $675 and don't get anything for it got screwed big time with no excuse/refund.

I don't care, if they "eventually" get their ducks lined up. I paid for a service that wasn't delivered. (Well, I should shut up since my timeline is 7 month). Point being is that many pay for service and none is delivered. If that isn't a rip-off, I don't know what is.
 
Top