Looks like the NYT struck a raw nerve with good ol' Emilio!
http://www.dhs.gov/journal/leadership/2008/03/fit-to-print.html
http://www.dhs.gov/journal/leadership/2008/03/fit-to-print.html
Gonzalez's Response to a Recent New York Times Article
- Thread starter Vorpal
- Start date
Dubya also thinks he's doing a good job. In a typical fashion for a politician, Gonzalez will NEVER admit the truth.
nyc_naturalizer
Registered Users (C)
And well it should.
Gonzalez is responding to the following editorial:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/19/o...milio+Gonzalez&st=nyt&oref=slogin&oref=slogin
(There's a thread on that article: http://immigrationportal.com/showthread.php?t=276222).
Personally, I thought the Times gave a very fair assessment, and willing to look past the baseless statistics that USCIS typically offers the media.
Gonzalez's response, on the other hand, misleads on many points:
If the Times seeks to add legitimacy to its editorial, they should first get the facts straight. USCIS received more than 600,000 applications for citizenship in June and July of 2007 - a 350 percent increase from the same time the year before. While this surge was substantial, it isn’t close to the “perhaps a million empty promises” the Times suggests.
The figure cited in the editorial clearly refers to the total number of pending naturalization cases, not just the July surge: it says, "That’s about how many people are stuck waiting to have their citizenship petitions approved by the agency." This figure is in fact slightly more than a million.
Further, all applications received during that time have been opened, issued receipts, and entered into our processing queue.
Wow. It's March 2008, and all applications from last summer have been opened? Thanks, Emilio. As for their "processing queue," we all know how efficient, fair and reliable that is.
What the writer failed to mention, and what I personally conveyed to the Times, is that more than half of all the citizenship applications received in June and July will be completed by September 30.
Actually, the writer didn't fail to mention this. The editorial states that "The five-month wait for citizenship that Mr. Gonzalez promised is now 14 months to 16 months." That is essentially the same as stating a September 30 completion date. The point is, that's NOT GOOD ENOUGH DUDE.
Anyway, does anyone believe that an outgoing director "personally conveying" such a date will really have any impact on processing times? It doesn't have the force of law or even of a policy.The fact is, last year we anticipated an application surge, and dedicated USCIS employees at our Service Centers worked hard and long hours to process the increased number of applications received before fees were raised in July.
Could you be any more disingenuous, Emilio? Clearly, you did not anticipate the surge (at least, anything close to the surge you got) or the staffing needed to cover it. The editorial has it more accurately, that you've left behind "a gummed-up bureaucracy."Modernization efforts to build a fully-electronic immigration platform continue to move forward. More than 34 USCIS facilities will be renovated or replaced nationwide, and more than 3,000 new employees will join our ranks by the end of this year.
The future tense: the official tense of USCIS. They've been saying all this for ages.
My posting today demonstrates to the more than 700,000 newly naturalized citizens that this country embraces free and open debate.
Apparently Emilio is singlehandedly responsible for teaching us the value of free speech. Thanks again.
Our workforce will continue to do everything possible to assist immigrants on the path to legal residency or citizenship, facilitate the smooth transit of others who wish to work here temporarily, and safeguard the security of the United States through the integrity of our immigration system.
For an example of this integrity and commitment to fairly assisting immigrants, see this: http://immigrationportal.com/showthread.php?t=276317
What the writer failed to mention, and what I personally conveyed to the Times, is that more than half of all the citizenship applications received in June and July will be completed by September 30.
Actually, the writer didn't fail to mention this. The editorial states that "The five-month wait for citizenship that Mr. Gonzalez promised is now 14 months to 16 months." That is essentially the same as stating a September 30 completion date. The point is, that's NOT GOOD ENOUGH DUDE.
The fact is, last year we anticipated an application surge, and dedicated USCIS employees at our Service Centers worked hard and long hours to process the increased number of applications received before fees were raised in July.
[/url]
To me the above implies that I may have to wait at least till the end of this year to be done because this guy is admitting to be able to complete 50% July apps by 9/30. The reason I believe him on this is because usually they are very good at sending out bad news. Good news is harder to believe from USCIS. Besides, NYC DO has max workload.
He says that they added extra staff in anticipation of the surge, which clearly is having no effect on NYC DO. Maybe they added extra staff in Ohio, Albany, Buffalo etc from where we are already noticing ILs being issued even for '08 applicants. Clearly, if they added extra staff they didn't add to the right place where the load was going to be more than other DOs.
nyc_naturalizer
Registered Users (C)
Like I said in the other thread, I wouldn't make predictions based on anything he says--you'll notice that he's packaging it as though it's good news. I'm not saying that this timeline won't be true in some cases (hopefully not yours), just that Gonzalez is all about PR or protecting his agency from lawsuits--the figures he cites are rarely based on hard statistics, or if they are, they're usually out of context. Also note that this article isn't about NYC in particular. There have been some reports of ILs in NYC for August and December (!) applicants.
I think the announcement regarding expanded interview scheduling may actually be cause for hope. But who knows whether it applies to all DOs.
Well, here we are five to seven months after applied for Citizenship. thing has happened yet and won't happen for a while as we all can see, but USCIS or whoever is behind all these puppets, made a fortune.
We all know these are all fake speeches to keep us quiet. I am hoping that USCIS's employees won't strike till everything is settled.
Let’s hope for something.
We all know these are all fake speeches to keep us quiet. I am hoping that USCIS's employees won't strike till everything is settled.
Let’s hope for something.
nyc_naturalizer
Registered Users (C)
Funny article on Gonzalez's response on wonkette.com:http://wonkette.com/371588/us-immigration-director-whines-about-liberal-media-on-his-blog
Sure its funny.
But when I think more and look at my screwed up life and situation I feel bad for everybody which have threatened like a lab mice. They mad all these money form us and they are giving it back to everybody as a TAX rebate? $1010 for GreenCard is funny!
But when I think more and look at my screwed up life and situation I feel bad for everybody which have threatened like a lab mice. They mad all these money form us and they are giving it back to everybody as a TAX rebate? $1010 for GreenCard is funny!
nyc_naturalizer
Registered Users (C)
That's what I like about the letter to Chertoff from Kennedy, Schumer, and Leahy. They don't let USCIS of the hook on the financial question, which is at the core of the crisis:
However, the USCIS recently announced that it will take 14-16 months to process naturalization applications filed after June 2007. In other words, for naturalization applications filed after the fee increase, USCIS is now charging almost twice as much for a service that takes twice as long.
The agency has responded to previous Congressional inquiries on this issue by stating that it could not have foreseen this surge in applications. We do not find that argument persuasive. Every previous naturalization fee increase has had the same effect. Preceding each of the naturalization fee increases in 1998, 2002 and 2004, a large surge in applications took place. It should have come as no surprise that the agency received 1.4 million naturalization applications in FY 2007, nearly double the volume received in the previous fiscal year. Despite knowledge that the fee increase would bring a surge in applications, the agency apparently did nothing to prepare for it. Clearly, a work plan should have been put in place well before the fee increase was implemented.
Then, among other pieces of information, they demand to know how much it will cost to fix the situation:
In the Department' best estimation, how much would it cost to clear the naturalization application (N-400) processing backlog by the end of FY 2008?
This is a smart tactic, because forcing USCIS to attach a figure to clearing the backlog would
(A) reveal the inadequacy of the statistics they like to throw around, such as the paltry number of ajudicators being hired (at some undetermined point in the future), shifting the question instead to why the government isn't allocating sufficient resources to this crisis
(B) reveal the discrepancy between this figure and the net gains of the fee increase, which I suspect would show that the fee increase was an utter failure, fiscally speaking