WaitinginQ
Registered Users (C)
Aliens
and especially dark skinned ones.
and especially dark skinned ones.
- Home
- Forums
- Immigrant Visas (Green Cards)
- I-485 Issues
- I-485 Issues Common to All Services Centers
- General I-485 and Related Issues
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Immigration / Press
- Thread starter cinta
- Start date
Here is an excellent review of Samuel Hungtington's new book. The review is from Foreign Affairs magazine, and can be accessed vis this link:
http://www.foreignaffairs.org/20040...n-samuel-huntington-defends-the-homeland.html
Also, I would recommend reading the book.
http://www.foreignaffairs.org/20040...n-samuel-huntington-defends-the-homeland.html
Also, I would recommend reading the book.
NY Daily News
The rocky road to citizenship
Seldom have the telephones at this newspaper rung so fast and
furiously as they have since Monday, when we opened lines for
immigrants seeking citizenship advice in partnership with CUNY.
Serving readers is a pleasure, but this has been particularly gratifying
because the goal for thousands of callers was to take the U.S. oath of
allegiance.
Never let it be said that the city's immigrants have not taken America
to heart in large numbers. Said Marva Spencer, who was born in
Trinidad, "I think if I become a U.S. citizen, I will be able to voice my
opinion more. I will be able to vote."
Why, then, do too many immigrants wait so long to file for citizenship?
Some will never be comfortable shedding homeland identities, but
huge numbers are daunted by an immigration system that is a
world-class bureaucratic nightmare. One caller waited five years to be
sworn in after his citizenship interview. Another filed citizenship
applications for herself, her brother and mother a year ago and has yet
to get a case number. Those stories are not unusual.
Immigrants wait years to get the green card that grants permanent
residence. Then they wait at least five years to apply for citizenship.
Then, here in New York, they have to sit tight for an average of 17
months to get sworn, hoping they will not fall prey to lost paperwork or
other glitches. One fellow got to his swearing-in only to be sent to the
back of the citizenship line because a clerk discovered he had filed his
application a day early.
And the obstacles are getting worse. The Bureau of Citizenship and
Immigration Services has a backlog of 6.2 million citizenship and other
applications. That's up 2.3 million since 2001, partly because agents
were reassigned to security checks after 9/11.
Since then, Congress and President Bush boosted the agency's budget
by $80 million a year for five years to reduce the backlog, but the
money made only a dent. And today, the government will begin
charging immigrants higher fees with the promise of better service. The
cost to apply for citizenship is rising to $320 from $260. Let's hope
that applicants start getting their money's worth. After all, they're only
trying to do the right and patriotic thing.
You can e-mail the Daily News editors at
voicers@edit.nydailynews.com. Please include your full name,
address and phone number. The Daily News reserves the right to edit
letters. The shorter the letter, the better the chance it will be used.
Originally published on April 30, 2004
The rocky road to citizenship
Seldom have the telephones at this newspaper rung so fast and
furiously as they have since Monday, when we opened lines for
immigrants seeking citizenship advice in partnership with CUNY.
Serving readers is a pleasure, but this has been particularly gratifying
because the goal for thousands of callers was to take the U.S. oath of
allegiance.
Never let it be said that the city's immigrants have not taken America
to heart in large numbers. Said Marva Spencer, who was born in
Trinidad, "I think if I become a U.S. citizen, I will be able to voice my
opinion more. I will be able to vote."
Why, then, do too many immigrants wait so long to file for citizenship?
Some will never be comfortable shedding homeland identities, but
huge numbers are daunted by an immigration system that is a
world-class bureaucratic nightmare. One caller waited five years to be
sworn in after his citizenship interview. Another filed citizenship
applications for herself, her brother and mother a year ago and has yet
to get a case number. Those stories are not unusual.
Immigrants wait years to get the green card that grants permanent
residence. Then they wait at least five years to apply for citizenship.
Then, here in New York, they have to sit tight for an average of 17
months to get sworn, hoping they will not fall prey to lost paperwork or
other glitches. One fellow got to his swearing-in only to be sent to the
back of the citizenship line because a clerk discovered he had filed his
application a day early.
And the obstacles are getting worse. The Bureau of Citizenship and
Immigration Services has a backlog of 6.2 million citizenship and other
applications. That's up 2.3 million since 2001, partly because agents
were reassigned to security checks after 9/11.
Since then, Congress and President Bush boosted the agency's budget
by $80 million a year for five years to reduce the backlog, but the
money made only a dent. And today, the government will begin
charging immigrants higher fees with the promise of better service. The
cost to apply for citizenship is rising to $320 from $260. Let's hope
that applicants start getting their money's worth. After all, they're only
trying to do the right and patriotic thing.
You can e-mail the Daily News editors at
voicers@edit.nydailynews.com. Please include your full name,
address and phone number. The Daily News reserves the right to edit
letters. The shorter the letter, the better the chance it will be used.
Originally published on April 30, 2004
FT.com
US universities seek lighter visa demands
By Christopher Grimes in New York
Published: April 28 2004 21:59 | Last Updated: April 28 2004 21:59
US universities, alarmed by a dramatic decline in overseas applications, are lobbying Washington
for changes in student visa requirements.
At a meeting last week with Tom Ridge, homeland security secretary, four university presidents
put forward proposals to streamline the process which, some say, has become bureaucratic
and unwelcoming.
The recommendations included one that foreign students and scientists receive a security
clearance for the duration of their studies. At present, they must renew the form, known as a
visa mantis, each year.
The representations follow growing concern that higher education is losing out to foreign
competitors. The danger, some argue, is that the US is forfeiting its successful tradition of
educating and befriending the world's brightest students and probable future leaders. Foreign
applications to US graduate schools have fallen 32 per cent drop this year. Applications to study
in Britain, Canada and Australia have risen over the same period. Stricter US visa requirements,
including thorough security checks for some science students and a more rigid interviewing
process, were introduced after the terrorist attacks in 2001.
"There's a climate of zero tolerance that didn't used to be there," said Peter Briggs, director of
Michigan State University's office for international students and scholars.
Some students and faculty members have complained that the new requirements have hampered
their ability to lecture or conduct research outside the US. Lawrence Summers, Harvard
University president, has cited the case of an advanced molecular biology student who was
delayed by visa problems for five months after attending the funeral of his father in Beijing.
The proposals included allowing students to renew their visas before leaving the US to attend
academic conferences or visit family, according to a draft seen by the Financial Times.
The officials voiced concern that delays in the visa process - waits of 60 days or more are not
uncommon - were made worse by students' inability to track their applications. They asked Mr
Ridge and the State Department to create a system that would overcome this.
The State Department said improvements had been made to ease the visa process. The decline
in foreign applications was due largely to other factors, including last year's Sars outbreak and a
general downturn in foreign visitors. But university officials say that visa delays are at least part
of the problem.
US universities seek lighter visa demands
By Christopher Grimes in New York
Published: April 28 2004 21:59 | Last Updated: April 28 2004 21:59
US universities, alarmed by a dramatic decline in overseas applications, are lobbying Washington
for changes in student visa requirements.
At a meeting last week with Tom Ridge, homeland security secretary, four university presidents
put forward proposals to streamline the process which, some say, has become bureaucratic
and unwelcoming.
The recommendations included one that foreign students and scientists receive a security
clearance for the duration of their studies. At present, they must renew the form, known as a
visa mantis, each year.
The representations follow growing concern that higher education is losing out to foreign
competitors. The danger, some argue, is that the US is forfeiting its successful tradition of
educating and befriending the world's brightest students and probable future leaders. Foreign
applications to US graduate schools have fallen 32 per cent drop this year. Applications to study
in Britain, Canada and Australia have risen over the same period. Stricter US visa requirements,
including thorough security checks for some science students and a more rigid interviewing
process, were introduced after the terrorist attacks in 2001.
"There's a climate of zero tolerance that didn't used to be there," said Peter Briggs, director of
Michigan State University's office for international students and scholars.
Some students and faculty members have complained that the new requirements have hampered
their ability to lecture or conduct research outside the US. Lawrence Summers, Harvard
University president, has cited the case of an advanced molecular biology student who was
delayed by visa problems for five months after attending the funeral of his father in Beijing.
The proposals included allowing students to renew their visas before leaving the US to attend
academic conferences or visit family, according to a draft seen by the Financial Times.
The officials voiced concern that delays in the visa process - waits of 60 days or more are not
uncommon - were made worse by students' inability to track their applications. They asked Mr
Ridge and the State Department to create a system that would overcome this.
The State Department said improvements had been made to ease the visa process. The decline
in foreign applications was due largely to other factors, including last year's Sars outbreak and a
general downturn in foreign visitors. But university officials say that visa delays are at least part
of the problem.
immigration programs / EB AOS comparison
Mexico Ex-Guest Workers Recall
Painful U.S. Stay
Thu Apr 29, 8:03 AM ET
By Elizabeth Fullerton
TLAXCALA, Mexico (Reuters) - President Bush (news - web sites) raised
Mexican hopes with a proposal in January for a new guest worker
program but it brought back bad memories to thousands of Mexican
laborers who say they were exploited under a similar plan in the 1940s
and 1960s.
Hundreds of thousands of men went north
across the border to earn money picking fruit
and vegetables under a plan begun in World
War II while many American workers were
fighting overseas.
The former laborers, known as "braceros"
from the Spanish "brazo" for arm, are now
causing a headache for President Vicente Fox (news - web sites) by
clamoring for money they say they are owed from those days and that
could be in Mexico.
Earlier this year, a group of former guest workers -- many now
grandfathers -- stormed Fox's ranch on horseback to press their
demands.
In the tiny central state of Tlaxcala, whose skyline is dominated by
Spanish colonial churches and the dormant La Malinche volcano,
migration is a growing trend among the young.
Between 1942 and 1964, more than 5,000 men from Tlaxcala alone went
to the United States to make their fortune but found the American dream
lacking.
"We were humiliated and exploited. I risked a lot," said Pedro Grande,
72, an ex-guest worker from Tlaxcala.
On their arrival at U.S. labor centers, the workers were stripped naked,
fumigated head to toe and given blood tests, the white-haired laborer
said from the courtyard of his adobe home where turkeys strutted
between the hanging laundry.
Work was grueling, often in extreme heat or cold. Guest workers say
they spent 12-hour shifts hunched over in fields on little sleep, and food
and pay was meager.
Today, Grande said he would discourage his grandchildren from following
in his footsteps.
More than one million Mexicans try to slip across the border every year
in search of jobs. Hundreds die of dehydration and exposure in the
attempt.
Bush in January proposed a plan to issue three-year renewable visas to
migrant workers and allow millions of illegal immigrants living in the
United States to apply for legal status for an initial three-year period if
they could prove they had jobs.
LOST MONEY
Mexico's government says it is committed to resolving the guest worker
problem but denies responsibility for the lost money.
The U.S. and Mexican governments were only involved in the original
contract for the guest worker plan, valid from 1942 to 1946, that
stipulated employers retain 10 percent of workers' wages in a savings
fund to be reimbursed on their return to Mexico.
It was unclear if the fund's purpose was to enable workers to reinvest the
money in Mexico's countryside or as an incentive for them to return
home, said Jose Antonio Plaza, part of the interior ministry team
handling the issue.
From 1946 to 1949, a modified contract still included a clause about the
fund but it was exclusively between the employer and worker. Thereafter,
it was dropped from bracero contracts.
"It could be that (employers) continued to discount the wages but they
didn't give that money to anyone, nor transfer it to any bank," said
Plaza.
Including interest, the laborers calculate they are owed billions of
dollars but the exact figure is unclear and tracking it down 60 years on
may be impossible.
Many of the workers have died, others have lost their original contracts
and in many cases the paperwork showing what transfers were made
have long been destroyed or discarded.
Plaza said a government solution might take the form of social benefits
-- for example, as of this year braceros are eligible for free medical
attention -- but financial handouts are unlikely.
That won't satisfy Tlaxcala's former guest workers.
"We are asking for justice, not alms. We gave the best years of our
lives to them," said Everardo Martinez, 64, who first went to pick cotton
in New Mexico in 1959, aged 18.
NOT ALL BAD
It was not all bad. Some of the braceros stayed on and made a life
across the border.
With the fruits of his labors, Hermenegildo Vasquez, 74, built a
two-story concrete home in the village of Santa Cruz Guadalupe
beneath La Malinche volcano.
He recognizes the benefits of his U.S. experience but says a new U.S.
guest worker plan must be more humane by including social security,
decent lodging and access to medicine.
"They have to treat people who go with respect, as humans. We are all
worthy," said Vasquez.
The former guest workers hope Bush's proposal will bring their
grievances to the spotlight and put pressure on Mexico's government to
redress them.
But analysts are skeptical Bush's proposal will ever go through after a
lukewarm reception from the U.S. Congress and opposition from the
Republican Party.
Gordon Hanson, director for the center of U.S.-Mexican studies at the
University of California at San Diego, said immigration remained a
divisive issue.
"I don't see the political space for reaching any sort of accommodation.
Certainly not before the (November U.S. presidential) elections," he
said.
Mexico Ex-Guest Workers Recall
Painful U.S. Stay
Thu Apr 29, 8:03 AM ET
By Elizabeth Fullerton
TLAXCALA, Mexico (Reuters) - President Bush (news - web sites) raised
Mexican hopes with a proposal in January for a new guest worker
program but it brought back bad memories to thousands of Mexican
laborers who say they were exploited under a similar plan in the 1940s
and 1960s.
Hundreds of thousands of men went north
across the border to earn money picking fruit
and vegetables under a plan begun in World
War II while many American workers were
fighting overseas.
The former laborers, known as "braceros"
from the Spanish "brazo" for arm, are now
causing a headache for President Vicente Fox (news - web sites) by
clamoring for money they say they are owed from those days and that
could be in Mexico.
Earlier this year, a group of former guest workers -- many now
grandfathers -- stormed Fox's ranch on horseback to press their
demands.
In the tiny central state of Tlaxcala, whose skyline is dominated by
Spanish colonial churches and the dormant La Malinche volcano,
migration is a growing trend among the young.
Between 1942 and 1964, more than 5,000 men from Tlaxcala alone went
to the United States to make their fortune but found the American dream
lacking.
"We were humiliated and exploited. I risked a lot," said Pedro Grande,
72, an ex-guest worker from Tlaxcala.
On their arrival at U.S. labor centers, the workers were stripped naked,
fumigated head to toe and given blood tests, the white-haired laborer
said from the courtyard of his adobe home where turkeys strutted
between the hanging laundry.
Work was grueling, often in extreme heat or cold. Guest workers say
they spent 12-hour shifts hunched over in fields on little sleep, and food
and pay was meager.
Today, Grande said he would discourage his grandchildren from following
in his footsteps.
More than one million Mexicans try to slip across the border every year
in search of jobs. Hundreds die of dehydration and exposure in the
attempt.
Bush in January proposed a plan to issue three-year renewable visas to
migrant workers and allow millions of illegal immigrants living in the
United States to apply for legal status for an initial three-year period if
they could prove they had jobs.
LOST MONEY
Mexico's government says it is committed to resolving the guest worker
problem but denies responsibility for the lost money.
The U.S. and Mexican governments were only involved in the original
contract for the guest worker plan, valid from 1942 to 1946, that
stipulated employers retain 10 percent of workers' wages in a savings
fund to be reimbursed on their return to Mexico.
It was unclear if the fund's purpose was to enable workers to reinvest the
money in Mexico's countryside or as an incentive for them to return
home, said Jose Antonio Plaza, part of the interior ministry team
handling the issue.
From 1946 to 1949, a modified contract still included a clause about the
fund but it was exclusively between the employer and worker. Thereafter,
it was dropped from bracero contracts.
"It could be that (employers) continued to discount the wages but they
didn't give that money to anyone, nor transfer it to any bank," said
Plaza.
Including interest, the laborers calculate they are owed billions of
dollars but the exact figure is unclear and tracking it down 60 years on
may be impossible.
Many of the workers have died, others have lost their original contracts
and in many cases the paperwork showing what transfers were made
have long been destroyed or discarded.
Plaza said a government solution might take the form of social benefits
-- for example, as of this year braceros are eligible for free medical
attention -- but financial handouts are unlikely.
That won't satisfy Tlaxcala's former guest workers.
"We are asking for justice, not alms. We gave the best years of our
lives to them," said Everardo Martinez, 64, who first went to pick cotton
in New Mexico in 1959, aged 18.
NOT ALL BAD
It was not all bad. Some of the braceros stayed on and made a life
across the border.
With the fruits of his labors, Hermenegildo Vasquez, 74, built a
two-story concrete home in the village of Santa Cruz Guadalupe
beneath La Malinche volcano.
He recognizes the benefits of his U.S. experience but says a new U.S.
guest worker plan must be more humane by including social security,
decent lodging and access to medicine.
"They have to treat people who go with respect, as humans. We are all
worthy," said Vasquez.
The former guest workers hope Bush's proposal will bring their
grievances to the spotlight and put pressure on Mexico's government to
redress them.
But analysts are skeptical Bush's proposal will ever go through after a
lukewarm reception from the U.S. Congress and opposition from the
Republican Party.
Gordon Hanson, director for the center of U.S.-Mexican studies at the
University of California at San Diego, said immigration remained a
divisive issue.
"I don't see the political space for reaching any sort of accommodation.
Certainly not before the (November U.S. presidential) elections," he
said.
The "other" side of the story: FOX
U.S. Tech Workers Bear Brunt of Immigration Policy
Thursday, April 29, 2004
By Matt Hayes
In April, 2003, Kevin Flanagan, a computer programmer with Bank of America (search), was
fired from his job after being forced to train his replacement, an Indian worker who was
taking over Flanagan's job as part of Bank of America's effort to replace its American
workforce with foreign labor.
Flanagan walked outside into his office parking lot and shot himself to death.
A year later, it's no surprise that the impact of foreign labor (search) on American workers has become
a potent political issue this campaign season. What Americans need to understand is how complicit the
U.S. government has been in helping large corporations secure cheap foreign labor, and the impact that
has had not just on American workers, but on the foreign laborers doing their jobs for a fraction of their
wages.
In 2000, with the economy entering a full recession, America imported 650,263 foreign workers
under two employer-friendly visa programs, H-1B (search) and L-1 (search). In 2001, with the
economy still struggling and the tech industry laying off 500,000 American workers, Congress responded
to heavy lobbying by business interests by signing off on another 712, 671 employment-related visas for
the year -- a surge of nearly 10 percent in labor imports.
Even a 2002 report by the undersecretary for technology at the Department of Commerce, which
found that several years of data did not support the IT industry lobbyists’ claims of a critical worker
shortage, could not stop Congress from issuing another 684,189 H-1B and L-1 visas that year.
The flood continued into 2003. As top-dollar lobbyists made the rounds on Capitol Hill with the story
that technology corporations couldn't find American computer programmers (and those corporations
dumped money into Washington -- $201 million in 2000 alone), American IT workers across the country
were being laid off.
And while some members of Congress, fresh from depositing their campaign contribution checks, were
justifying their pro-industry votes with the industry line that Americans -- the people who invented
computers -- were just too lacking in skills to program them, story after story emerged of middle-aged
American IT workers fired and replaced with 25-year-old foreign nationals.
As a final indignity, these American workers -- many with families, American mortgages to pay, and
college tuitions to save -- are often required to train their own replacements in order to receive their
desperately needed severance packages.
Since Congress raised the H-1b visa cap in 2000, over two million employment-related visas have been
issued. But it isn't only Americans who are suffering.
The replacement workers are also often victims. Not only does the foreign replacement worker earn
about half what the American he or she replaced did, but Congress lets the worker's American
boss control the visa -- ensuring a workforce as compliant as it is cheap. If the foreign worker complains
about low wages, unpaid overtime, lack of health care or deplorable living conditions, the boss can yank
the visa.
Remarkably, in spite of the number of
Americans devastated by the
employment visa programs, and despite the fact that the injustices would seem to make scrapping them
an easy moral call, some of those in Congress continue to work aggressively to import even higher
numbers of both skilled and unskilled foreign workers.
Rep. Chris Cannon, R-Utah, has in many ways taken the leadership role in increasing immigration (a role
he took from former Michigan Sen. Spencer Abraham, whose immigration policies played a major role in
his 2000 defeat.) The Washington Post has called Cannon the "point man" in Congress for Bush
administration efforts to push for an illegal aliens amnesty
In an October 2000 press release titled “Cannon Manages House Passage of High Tech Visa Bill," Rep.
Cannon took credit for passing the American Competitiveness in the Twenty-First Century Act of
2000 (search), the very act that marked the onset of the current flood.
In the four years since the passage of the bill, stories like Kevin Flanagan's don't seem to have dampened
enthusiasm. This year, Cannon has signed on to several bills that would increase immigration, and
introduced a couple of his own. His AgJOBS bill (search), which is both a massive new amnesty for
illegal aliens and a major new guest worker program, has drawn the enthusiastic endorsement of some four
hundred groups and organizations -- overwhelmingly business interests. His efforts have earned him awards
of appreciation from immigration lawyers' interests and ethnic-identity organizations.
As the impact on Americans grows more severe, however, a political backlash becomes increasingly
likely. Even cynical veterans of the anti-H-1b wars, who for years have been resigned to the influence of
corporate interests in American politics, are beginning to talk about real signs of a major shift.
Chris Cannon is at the center of much of this talk. Once considered one of the safest Republicans in
Congress -- a 10-year incumbent in the most Republican district of the most Republican state in the
country--Cannon's history on immigration issues has become a political hot potato in Utah. One of his
challengers, Matt Throckmorton (search), an up-and-coming former state legislator, has been a
long-time critic of Cannon's immigration policies and his message has struck home. Cannon has been
forced into either defending his amnesty bills (a policy opposed by four out of five Americans), or flat out
denying he supports amnesties (which his record makes impossible).
Meanwhile, a disgruntled former IT worker has gathered compelling evidence of what appears to be
questionable financial arrangements between Cannon and those who profit by his cheap labor votes in
Congress. Salt Lake City's Deseret News printed a letter from the worker detailing the evidence, which was
picked up by the RescueAmericanJobs Web site. On Monday, the former IT worker filed a formal
ethics complaint.
Nevertheless, it remains to be seen whether any of this will result in change in Washington.
Yet somewhere in America, a middle-aged American will be training his replacement how to do his job at
half the cost, and wondering what will happen to his family once the severance money runs out. As he
cleans out his desk, another group of smart, young lobbyists in thousand-dollar suits will be telling some
member of Congress how their client, an IT giant, has really, really tried to find an American who can
program computers.
Matt Hayes began practicing immigration law shortly after graduating from Pace University School of
Law in 1994, representing new immigrants in civil and criminal matters. He is the author of The New
Immigration Law and Practice, to be published in October.
U.S. Tech Workers Bear Brunt of Immigration Policy
Thursday, April 29, 2004
By Matt Hayes
In April, 2003, Kevin Flanagan, a computer programmer with Bank of America (search), was
fired from his job after being forced to train his replacement, an Indian worker who was
taking over Flanagan's job as part of Bank of America's effort to replace its American
workforce with foreign labor.
Flanagan walked outside into his office parking lot and shot himself to death.
A year later, it's no surprise that the impact of foreign labor (search) on American workers has become
a potent political issue this campaign season. What Americans need to understand is how complicit the
U.S. government has been in helping large corporations secure cheap foreign labor, and the impact that
has had not just on American workers, but on the foreign laborers doing their jobs for a fraction of their
wages.
In 2000, with the economy entering a full recession, America imported 650,263 foreign workers
under two employer-friendly visa programs, H-1B (search) and L-1 (search). In 2001, with the
economy still struggling and the tech industry laying off 500,000 American workers, Congress responded
to heavy lobbying by business interests by signing off on another 712, 671 employment-related visas for
the year -- a surge of nearly 10 percent in labor imports.
Even a 2002 report by the undersecretary for technology at the Department of Commerce, which
found that several years of data did not support the IT industry lobbyists’ claims of a critical worker
shortage, could not stop Congress from issuing another 684,189 H-1B and L-1 visas that year.
The flood continued into 2003. As top-dollar lobbyists made the rounds on Capitol Hill with the story
that technology corporations couldn't find American computer programmers (and those corporations
dumped money into Washington -- $201 million in 2000 alone), American IT workers across the country
were being laid off.
And while some members of Congress, fresh from depositing their campaign contribution checks, were
justifying their pro-industry votes with the industry line that Americans -- the people who invented
computers -- were just too lacking in skills to program them, story after story emerged of middle-aged
American IT workers fired and replaced with 25-year-old foreign nationals.
As a final indignity, these American workers -- many with families, American mortgages to pay, and
college tuitions to save -- are often required to train their own replacements in order to receive their
desperately needed severance packages.
Since Congress raised the H-1b visa cap in 2000, over two million employment-related visas have been
issued. But it isn't only Americans who are suffering.
The replacement workers are also often victims. Not only does the foreign replacement worker earn
about half what the American he or she replaced did, but Congress lets the worker's American
boss control the visa -- ensuring a workforce as compliant as it is cheap. If the foreign worker complains
about low wages, unpaid overtime, lack of health care or deplorable living conditions, the boss can yank
the visa.
Remarkably, in spite of the number of
Americans devastated by the
employment visa programs, and despite the fact that the injustices would seem to make scrapping them
an easy moral call, some of those in Congress continue to work aggressively to import even higher
numbers of both skilled and unskilled foreign workers.
Rep. Chris Cannon, R-Utah, has in many ways taken the leadership role in increasing immigration (a role
he took from former Michigan Sen. Spencer Abraham, whose immigration policies played a major role in
his 2000 defeat.) The Washington Post has called Cannon the "point man" in Congress for Bush
administration efforts to push for an illegal aliens amnesty
In an October 2000 press release titled “Cannon Manages House Passage of High Tech Visa Bill," Rep.
Cannon took credit for passing the American Competitiveness in the Twenty-First Century Act of
2000 (search), the very act that marked the onset of the current flood.
In the four years since the passage of the bill, stories like Kevin Flanagan's don't seem to have dampened
enthusiasm. This year, Cannon has signed on to several bills that would increase immigration, and
introduced a couple of his own. His AgJOBS bill (search), which is both a massive new amnesty for
illegal aliens and a major new guest worker program, has drawn the enthusiastic endorsement of some four
hundred groups and organizations -- overwhelmingly business interests. His efforts have earned him awards
of appreciation from immigration lawyers' interests and ethnic-identity organizations.
As the impact on Americans grows more severe, however, a political backlash becomes increasingly
likely. Even cynical veterans of the anti-H-1b wars, who for years have been resigned to the influence of
corporate interests in American politics, are beginning to talk about real signs of a major shift.
Chris Cannon is at the center of much of this talk. Once considered one of the safest Republicans in
Congress -- a 10-year incumbent in the most Republican district of the most Republican state in the
country--Cannon's history on immigration issues has become a political hot potato in Utah. One of his
challengers, Matt Throckmorton (search), an up-and-coming former state legislator, has been a
long-time critic of Cannon's immigration policies and his message has struck home. Cannon has been
forced into either defending his amnesty bills (a policy opposed by four out of five Americans), or flat out
denying he supports amnesties (which his record makes impossible).
Meanwhile, a disgruntled former IT worker has gathered compelling evidence of what appears to be
questionable financial arrangements between Cannon and those who profit by his cheap labor votes in
Congress. Salt Lake City's Deseret News printed a letter from the worker detailing the evidence, which was
picked up by the RescueAmericanJobs Web site. On Monday, the former IT worker filed a formal
ethics complaint.
Nevertheless, it remains to be seen whether any of this will result in change in Washington.
Yet somewhere in America, a middle-aged American will be training his replacement how to do his job at
half the cost, and wondering what will happen to his family once the severance money runs out. As he
cleans out his desk, another group of smart, young lobbyists in thousand-dollar suits will be telling some
member of Congress how their client, an IT giant, has really, really tried to find an American who can
program computers.
Matt Hayes began practicing immigration law shortly after graduating from Pace University School of
Law in 1994, representing new immigrants in civil and criminal matters. He is the author of The New
Immigration Law and Practice, to be published in October.
washington Post, AP / Fee increase / NALEO
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A53411-2004Apr29.html
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A53411-2004Apr29.html
NY Daily News
10 key citizenship questions
You asked & we answered
More than 6,000 callers took advantage
of our hugely successful citizenship
phone-in, organized with CUNY. From
Monday through Friday of last week, our
team of experts offered free advice on
naturalization and other immigration
matters. These were the top 10 questions
you asked.
1. I'm a permanent resident. When can I
apply for U.S. citizenship?
Most naturalization applicants must have
five continuous years in the U.S. to
naturalize. You qualify after only three
years if you have been married to and
living with the same U.S. citizen spouse for those three years.
"Continuous" means that you were never out of the U.S. for more than
365 days. If you go abroad on business, to do religious work or to work
for the U.S. government, United States Citizenship and Immigration
Services (USCIS) will sometimes excuse your absence.
Permanent residents serving in the military at any time beginning Sept.
11, 2001, qualify for naturalization no matter how long they have been
a permanent resident. Other military veterans qualify after three years
as a green card holder.
2. I want to naturalize, how do I get started?
First, get an Application for Naturalization, USCIS form N-400, by
calling (800) 870-3676 or from the USCIS Web site,
http://uscis.gov/graphics/formsfee/forms/.
3. How much is the filing fee?
As of Friday, $390. It's $320 for the application, plus $70 for the
fingerprints - which is now called a biometric fee. You may send one
check or money order made out to the USCIS.
The agency can waive your naturalization filing fee, but not the
biometric. To get the waiver, you must prove an "inability to pay." The
USCIS will consider whether you have a disability, your household
income and whether you have received public benefits. Unlike most
applications for permanent residence, to naturalize you need not prove
you can support yourself without public assistance. You can become a
citizen even if you are poor or on welfare. If the USCIS denies your fee
waiver request, the agency will send your application back asking that
you pay the fee.
4. I've traveled a lot since becoming a permanent resident. Can I still
naturalize?
To naturalize you must have spent half the five years of continuous
residence physically present in the U.S. - or half the three years,
depending which applies in your case.
The USCIS counts back from the time it receives your application. Trips
abroad of less than six months are rarely a problem. If you travel
abroad for more than six months, the USCIS may make you prove that
the U.S. remained your primary place of residence.
5. My mother says she is too old to learn English. Is there anyway she
can naturalize?
Most applicants must be able to read, write, speak and understand
simple English to get U.S. citizenship. If your mother can answer the
questions on the naturalization application and write a simple sentence
such as "I like my job," she can probably pass the English language
exam. If she is at least 50 years old, with 20 or more years permanent
residence, she is exempt from the English language requirement. She
also is exempt if she is at least 55, and has been a green card holder for
15 or more years. If she has a mental or physical disability that
prevents her from learning how to read, write or speak English, USCIS
may drop the language requirement.
6. Where can I get a copy of the questions the USCIS will likely ask me
about U.S. history and government?
You can get the 100 "civic knowledge" questions at the City University
of New York Web site, www.cuny.edu/citizenshipnow, or at your local
library.
7. My green card expired. I applied for a new one almost a year ago,
but I still haven't heard from the USCIS. I have been a permanent
resident for more than five years. Can I naturalize?
Definitely. Your card having expired has no effect on your eligibility
for U.S. citizenship. Even people who have lost their cards can apply.
8. I never received the notice to appear for my naturalization
interview, so I didn't go. I found this out when I inquired about my
case, and a USCIS agent said my application had been denied. Will they
reopen my case?
It's possible you can get the USCIS to reopen your case, but it's
unlikely. It may not be fair, but the fastest way for you to get
citizenship is to file again, paying the fees and waiting for a new
interview.
9. My mother naturalized when I was 17. I am now 19. At the time my
mother got her citizenship, I was a permanent resident. What is my
status?
You are a U.S. citizen. You got "derivative" or automatic citizenship the
moment your mother was sworn in as a citizen. To get proof, apply for
a U.S. passport. Take your mother's naturalization certificate, your
permanent resident card and your birth certificate to a passport
acceptance facility.
The derivative citizenship rules are complicated. If you are not sure
whether you got citizenship when your parent naturalized, see an
expert.
Children not yet 18 on Feb. 27, 2001, get derivative citizenship if the
following four conditions are true:
At least one parent of the child is a citizen of the U.S., whether by
birth or naturalization.
The child is under the age of 18.
The child is residing in the U.S. in the legal and physical custody of
the citizen parent.
The child is a permanent resident.
The order of events makes no difference. Derivative citizenship is
automatic. If you naturalize and then your child gets permanent
residence, the child becomes a U.S. citizen the moment he or she
becomes a green card holder, so long as that happens before the child
is 18.....................
Complete: http://www.nydailynews.com/city_lif...9p-163891c.html
10 key citizenship questions
You asked & we answered
More than 6,000 callers took advantage
of our hugely successful citizenship
phone-in, organized with CUNY. From
Monday through Friday of last week, our
team of experts offered free advice on
naturalization and other immigration
matters. These were the top 10 questions
you asked.
1. I'm a permanent resident. When can I
apply for U.S. citizenship?
Most naturalization applicants must have
five continuous years in the U.S. to
naturalize. You qualify after only three
years if you have been married to and
living with the same U.S. citizen spouse for those three years.
"Continuous" means that you were never out of the U.S. for more than
365 days. If you go abroad on business, to do religious work or to work
for the U.S. government, United States Citizenship and Immigration
Services (USCIS) will sometimes excuse your absence.
Permanent residents serving in the military at any time beginning Sept.
11, 2001, qualify for naturalization no matter how long they have been
a permanent resident. Other military veterans qualify after three years
as a green card holder.
2. I want to naturalize, how do I get started?
First, get an Application for Naturalization, USCIS form N-400, by
calling (800) 870-3676 or from the USCIS Web site,
http://uscis.gov/graphics/formsfee/forms/.
3. How much is the filing fee?
As of Friday, $390. It's $320 for the application, plus $70 for the
fingerprints - which is now called a biometric fee. You may send one
check or money order made out to the USCIS.
The agency can waive your naturalization filing fee, but not the
biometric. To get the waiver, you must prove an "inability to pay." The
USCIS will consider whether you have a disability, your household
income and whether you have received public benefits. Unlike most
applications for permanent residence, to naturalize you need not prove
you can support yourself without public assistance. You can become a
citizen even if you are poor or on welfare. If the USCIS denies your fee
waiver request, the agency will send your application back asking that
you pay the fee.
4. I've traveled a lot since becoming a permanent resident. Can I still
naturalize?
To naturalize you must have spent half the five years of continuous
residence physically present in the U.S. - or half the three years,
depending which applies in your case.
The USCIS counts back from the time it receives your application. Trips
abroad of less than six months are rarely a problem. If you travel
abroad for more than six months, the USCIS may make you prove that
the U.S. remained your primary place of residence.
5. My mother says she is too old to learn English. Is there anyway she
can naturalize?
Most applicants must be able to read, write, speak and understand
simple English to get U.S. citizenship. If your mother can answer the
questions on the naturalization application and write a simple sentence
such as "I like my job," she can probably pass the English language
exam. If she is at least 50 years old, with 20 or more years permanent
residence, she is exempt from the English language requirement. She
also is exempt if she is at least 55, and has been a green card holder for
15 or more years. If she has a mental or physical disability that
prevents her from learning how to read, write or speak English, USCIS
may drop the language requirement.
6. Where can I get a copy of the questions the USCIS will likely ask me
about U.S. history and government?
You can get the 100 "civic knowledge" questions at the City University
of New York Web site, www.cuny.edu/citizenshipnow, or at your local
library.
7. My green card expired. I applied for a new one almost a year ago,
but I still haven't heard from the USCIS. I have been a permanent
resident for more than five years. Can I naturalize?
Definitely. Your card having expired has no effect on your eligibility
for U.S. citizenship. Even people who have lost their cards can apply.
8. I never received the notice to appear for my naturalization
interview, so I didn't go. I found this out when I inquired about my
case, and a USCIS agent said my application had been denied. Will they
reopen my case?
It's possible you can get the USCIS to reopen your case, but it's
unlikely. It may not be fair, but the fastest way for you to get
citizenship is to file again, paying the fees and waiting for a new
interview.
9. My mother naturalized when I was 17. I am now 19. At the time my
mother got her citizenship, I was a permanent resident. What is my
status?
You are a U.S. citizen. You got "derivative" or automatic citizenship the
moment your mother was sworn in as a citizen. To get proof, apply for
a U.S. passport. Take your mother's naturalization certificate, your
permanent resident card and your birth certificate to a passport
acceptance facility.
The derivative citizenship rules are complicated. If you are not sure
whether you got citizenship when your parent naturalized, see an
expert.
Children not yet 18 on Feb. 27, 2001, get derivative citizenship if the
following four conditions are true:
At least one parent of the child is a citizen of the U.S., whether by
birth or naturalization.
The child is under the age of 18.
The child is residing in the U.S. in the legal and physical custody of
the citizen parent.
The child is a permanent resident.
The order of events makes no difference. Derivative citizenship is
automatic. If you naturalize and then your child gets permanent
residence, the child becomes a U.S. citizen the moment he or she
becomes a green card holder, so long as that happens before the child
is 18.....................
Complete: http://www.nydailynews.com/city_lif...9p-163891c.html
Last edited by a moderator:
Democrats
Mass migration favors Democrats.
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2004/5/18/200902.shtml
Mass migration favors Democrats.
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2004/5/18/200902.shtml
Foreign correspondent of Washington Post
Green-Card Blues for America's Image
By Tom Carver
Thursday, May 20, 2004; Page A29
Next week my father will be 90. Born in that final Edwardian summer of 1914, he fought throughout World War II, escaped from prison camp and was wounded on the beaches of Normandy.
Five of his six children will gather in Scotland with numerous grandchildren to celebrate his birthday. I, his youngest son, will not be able to attend because the Department of Homeland Security has removed my freedom to travel.
Or to be absolutely accurate, I am free to go. But, if I do, I will not be allowed to return to my wife and children here in Washington. That's one of those choices that is not a choice at all.
Like 700,000 others, I am stuck in green-card hell.
Since Sept. 11, 2001, the average waiting time for a green card has ballooned from 18 months to nearly three years. It's understandable that the Bush administration needs to do additional background checks on applicants, but in the process it is making the lives of green-card applicants a misery. More important, it's destroying a valuable opportunity to restore America's battered reputation abroad.
People who apply for green cards do so because they support the values of the United States and want to participate more fully in U.S. society. With a green card, they can travel back to their home countries. There they talk about the freedom and opportunities they have in America. They spread the gospel of the American dream among relatives and friends.
In the war of ideas that the administration is so fond of talking about, there are few better foot soldiers than green-card holders. Yet since Sept. 11, instead of encouraging those who aspire to green cards, the Department of Homeland Security has treated applicants with greater and greater suspicion.
While you wait the three years for the bureaucratic mills to grind through your application, you need a document called an "advanced parole" to travel. Like a parole from jail, an advanced parole is a small sheaf of papers adorned with stamps and circuitous language that wouldn't have looked out of place in the pouch of an 18th-century Venetian nobleman. I was warned that if I lost mine, I would not be issued a replacement. Why not? In this computer age, no document, certainly not one as mundane as this, is irreplaceable.
A while ago, I tried to get my advanced parole renewed. When it failed to materialize in the mail, I took my place at 5 a.m. in a long line outside the local office of the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (formerly known as the Immigration and Naturalization Service).
After three hours of waiting, I was finally summoned to a counter. The man behind the glass informed me that my application was being handled by the CIS office in Vermont. They could do nothing to help me in this office, he said. I asked for the phone number of the Vermont office. There is no publicly available number. I asked for the address. I would happily fly to Vermont if it meant I could see my father. "They don't allow visitors," said the man. My only resort was to send an appeal to an anonymous fax number.
The next day, my fax machine spat out the reply:"Your request for an expedited Advanced Parole has been rejected." And that's where I sit today.
That sort of Kafkaesque behavior is more worthy of some former Soviet satellite than a country that supposedly ranks customer service just below godliness. The CIS gets away with it because its clients are not Americans. If you are American, you never have to enter this world.
I realize that a father's 90th birthday is not the most urgent reason for travel. But why should I have to give any reason for traveling? I have done nothing wrong. Before I entered this bureaucratic labyrinth, I was free to come and go as I wished.
There will always be people willing to freeze in the pre-dawn chill outside a CIS office and be cold-shouldered by the bureaucrats inside, because however badly the Department of Homeland Security treats them, it can never be as bad as the persecution and the nightmares that they left behind.
But a lot of other applicants -- the educated and the most productive -- may well decide they've had enough. You can hardly blame them. Why should they endure such a degrading application process when there are many other countries that would welcome their talents?
To regain the respect of the world, the United States needs to demonstrate that it still possesses those qualities people have always admired: openness, freedom, tolerance. Nearly everyone in this land is the descendant of immigrants. Treating would-be immigrants of today as suspects is not going to help America win the war of ideas.
The writer is a foreign correspondent based in Washington. His e-mail address is tomcarver@mindspring.com. He will be online today at noon at
www.washingtonpost.com to discuss immigrant freedom in America.
© 2004 The Washington Post Company
Green-Card Blues for America's Image
By Tom Carver
Thursday, May 20, 2004; Page A29
Next week my father will be 90. Born in that final Edwardian summer of 1914, he fought throughout World War II, escaped from prison camp and was wounded on the beaches of Normandy.
Five of his six children will gather in Scotland with numerous grandchildren to celebrate his birthday. I, his youngest son, will not be able to attend because the Department of Homeland Security has removed my freedom to travel.
Or to be absolutely accurate, I am free to go. But, if I do, I will not be allowed to return to my wife and children here in Washington. That's one of those choices that is not a choice at all.
Like 700,000 others, I am stuck in green-card hell.
Since Sept. 11, 2001, the average waiting time for a green card has ballooned from 18 months to nearly three years. It's understandable that the Bush administration needs to do additional background checks on applicants, but in the process it is making the lives of green-card applicants a misery. More important, it's destroying a valuable opportunity to restore America's battered reputation abroad.
People who apply for green cards do so because they support the values of the United States and want to participate more fully in U.S. society. With a green card, they can travel back to their home countries. There they talk about the freedom and opportunities they have in America. They spread the gospel of the American dream among relatives and friends.
In the war of ideas that the administration is so fond of talking about, there are few better foot soldiers than green-card holders. Yet since Sept. 11, instead of encouraging those who aspire to green cards, the Department of Homeland Security has treated applicants with greater and greater suspicion.
While you wait the three years for the bureaucratic mills to grind through your application, you need a document called an "advanced parole" to travel. Like a parole from jail, an advanced parole is a small sheaf of papers adorned with stamps and circuitous language that wouldn't have looked out of place in the pouch of an 18th-century Venetian nobleman. I was warned that if I lost mine, I would not be issued a replacement. Why not? In this computer age, no document, certainly not one as mundane as this, is irreplaceable.
A while ago, I tried to get my advanced parole renewed. When it failed to materialize in the mail, I took my place at 5 a.m. in a long line outside the local office of the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (formerly known as the Immigration and Naturalization Service).
After three hours of waiting, I was finally summoned to a counter. The man behind the glass informed me that my application was being handled by the CIS office in Vermont. They could do nothing to help me in this office, he said. I asked for the phone number of the Vermont office. There is no publicly available number. I asked for the address. I would happily fly to Vermont if it meant I could see my father. "They don't allow visitors," said the man. My only resort was to send an appeal to an anonymous fax number.
The next day, my fax machine spat out the reply:"Your request for an expedited Advanced Parole has been rejected." And that's where I sit today.
That sort of Kafkaesque behavior is more worthy of some former Soviet satellite than a country that supposedly ranks customer service just below godliness. The CIS gets away with it because its clients are not Americans. If you are American, you never have to enter this world.
I realize that a father's 90th birthday is not the most urgent reason for travel. But why should I have to give any reason for traveling? I have done nothing wrong. Before I entered this bureaucratic labyrinth, I was free to come and go as I wished.
There will always be people willing to freeze in the pre-dawn chill outside a CIS office and be cold-shouldered by the bureaucrats inside, because however badly the Department of Homeland Security treats them, it can never be as bad as the persecution and the nightmares that they left behind.
But a lot of other applicants -- the educated and the most productive -- may well decide they've had enough. You can hardly blame them. Why should they endure such a degrading application process when there are many other countries that would welcome their talents?
To regain the respect of the world, the United States needs to demonstrate that it still possesses those qualities people have always admired: openness, freedom, tolerance. Nearly everyone in this land is the descendant of immigrants. Treating would-be immigrants of today as suspects is not going to help America win the war of ideas.
The writer is a foreign correspondent based in Washington. His e-mail address is tomcarver@mindspring.com. He will be online today at noon at
www.washingtonpost.com to discuss immigrant freedom in America.
© 2004 The Washington Post Company
Last edited by a moderator:
NewsMAx
Solving the Immigration problem:
One view from FAIR. FAIR is described as anti-immigration lobby. The pro-immigration lobbies did not help us so far either!
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2004/5/19/221402.shtml
Solving the Immigration problem:
One view from FAIR. FAIR is described as anti-immigration lobby. The pro-immigration lobbies did not help us so far either!
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2004/5/19/221402.shtml
Washington Post
Adjust the Adjustments
Friday, May 21, 2004; Page A24
YESTERDAY WE PUBLISHED on the opposite page a description of the "green-card hell" experienced by a British subject living in Washington who -- thanks to pointless immigration red tape -- was unable to leave this country to celebrate his father's 90th birthday. It's only one story, but there are many similar ones having to do with immigration to this country since the rules changed after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks. Over the past two years, nuclear physicists, wealthy business executives and ordinary tourists have been subjected to unreasonable delays and inexplicable refusals from the immigration service. Foreign students are afraid to return home for brief visits, their colleagues no longer wish to study here at all and America's reputation as an open society has been badly damaged.
Until now, the Bush administration has seemed largely unmoved by these stories, apparently viewing the bad publicity they generate abroad as a necessary byproduct of the war on terrorism. In an interview with editors and reporters of The Post this week, however, Tom Ridge, the secretary of homeland security, agreed that the current situation is "not in the best interests of a country that has a tradition of being open and welcoming and diverse."
Mr. Ridge said that whenever he goes abroad, visa policy is the first thing U.S. ambassadors want to discuss with him. That situation has, he said, led him to feel it is time to reexamine some of the adjustments to visa policy that were made after Sept. 11, including, among other things, bringing back a modified form of transit visa.
We encourage him in his efforts to "adjust the adjustments," and look forward to hearing more about them.
© 2004 The Washington Post Company
Adjust the Adjustments
Friday, May 21, 2004; Page A24
YESTERDAY WE PUBLISHED on the opposite page a description of the "green-card hell" experienced by a British subject living in Washington who -- thanks to pointless immigration red tape -- was unable to leave this country to celebrate his father's 90th birthday. It's only one story, but there are many similar ones having to do with immigration to this country since the rules changed after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks. Over the past two years, nuclear physicists, wealthy business executives and ordinary tourists have been subjected to unreasonable delays and inexplicable refusals from the immigration service. Foreign students are afraid to return home for brief visits, their colleagues no longer wish to study here at all and America's reputation as an open society has been badly damaged.
Until now, the Bush administration has seemed largely unmoved by these stories, apparently viewing the bad publicity they generate abroad as a necessary byproduct of the war on terrorism. In an interview with editors and reporters of The Post this week, however, Tom Ridge, the secretary of homeland security, agreed that the current situation is "not in the best interests of a country that has a tradition of being open and welcoming and diverse."
Mr. Ridge said that whenever he goes abroad, visa policy is the first thing U.S. ambassadors want to discuss with him. That situation has, he said, led him to feel it is time to reexamine some of the adjustments to visa policy that were made after Sept. 11, including, among other things, bringing back a modified form of transit visa.
We encourage him in his efforts to "adjust the adjustments," and look forward to hearing more about them.
© 2004 The Washington Post Company
India Times
Fewer jobs for Indians in the US
ECONOMICTIMES.COM[ TUESDAY, JUNE 01, 2004 11:51:03 PM ]
Much ink has been spilled over the loss of American jobs to Indians, either
by way of outsourcing or due to the rising number of immigrant workers.
Consequently, alarm bells have started ringing, sending jitters about jobs
being shipped overseas and crippling the local industry.
However, there is a thin red line between reality and perceived reality.
The United States of America has been home to millions from different parts
of the world. And at a time when free trade and non-protectionist forces are
becoming integral forces of the world economy, a check on the number of
students and workers entering America will eventually spell bad news for the
nation.
Are you surprised? Don’t be.
In spite of visa regulations looming large over Indians willing to emigrate to
American shores , the United States continues to lure our desi students
wanting to pursue higher education. Statistics revealed by an education
agency show that the last two years witnessed the number of Indian
students in the US climbing by almost 58 per cent.
India has also surpassed China as the leading country of origin for
international students in the US, the Open Doors 2002 report, published by
the Institute of International Education (IIE) said.
The agency also tabulated that out of the total number of Indian students
visiting the US, nearly 75 per cent come for graduate studies and the rest for
undergraduate studies. Interestingly, around 30 per cent of the visiting Indian
students are women.
The report released by the IIE observed that more than 67,000 Indians are
currently enrolled in the institutions of higher learning, with the Chinese
closely following with 63,000. In 2003 itself, nearly 90,000 Indian students
enrolled in American colleges. Overall, India accounts for 11.5 per cent of
international students enrolled in American universities.
The report further states that while California is the leading host state for
international students, the largest number of Indian students study in Texas.
With Indian enrollments on the rise generally, this concentration of Indians
in Texas helps explain the finding in Open Doors 2002 that Texas had the
strongest growth (+17%) in international student enrollment from 2000-01 to
2001-02.
Post the September 11 terror attacks, America was badly hit by recession.
For the slump-hit US economy, international education meant big business
in terms of revenue. Understandably, foreign students now contribute almost
$12 billion annually to the US economy, with higher education being the fifth
largest service sector export in the US.
Studies reveal that almost 90 per cent of foreign students stay back in the
US because immediately after completing education, they are allowed to
work legally for a year to gain 'practical work experience'. During this period,
most students seek employers' help in converting their visa from student
visa to H1 visa , whereby they can work for three years, extendable by
another three years.
In such a scenario, a freeze on visas signifies that eventually, the rate of
growth of the American economy will be inversely affected as Indians and
non-Americans comprise a huge chunk of the potential workforce.
Tightening of visa norms post-September 11, an outcry against US jobs
being filled by Indians and reducing the cap on H1-B visas maybe America’s
way of safeguarding jobs.
However, in the long-run, it spells a huge loss for America. Stringent visa
norms and receding job opportunities means that Indian students graduating
from US universities will have to look elsewhere, in order to be able to strike
it big, signifying a loss of wealth for the US economy as manpower and
resources will be lessened. This will leave the US economy facing a paucity
of skilled workers – be it doctors, teachers, nurses, software engineers,
tech professionals or engineers.
The governments of the UK and Australia, on the other hand, have been at
the forefront to remove employment hassles after completion of a degree.
Following their example, the German government, too, has relaxed several
provisions, including visa norms and part-time work, aimed at attracting
Indian students heading offshore.
Fewer jobs for Indians in the US
ECONOMICTIMES.COM[ TUESDAY, JUNE 01, 2004 11:51:03 PM ]
Much ink has been spilled over the loss of American jobs to Indians, either
by way of outsourcing or due to the rising number of immigrant workers.
Consequently, alarm bells have started ringing, sending jitters about jobs
being shipped overseas and crippling the local industry.
However, there is a thin red line between reality and perceived reality.
The United States of America has been home to millions from different parts
of the world. And at a time when free trade and non-protectionist forces are
becoming integral forces of the world economy, a check on the number of
students and workers entering America will eventually spell bad news for the
nation.
Are you surprised? Don’t be.
In spite of visa regulations looming large over Indians willing to emigrate to
American shores , the United States continues to lure our desi students
wanting to pursue higher education. Statistics revealed by an education
agency show that the last two years witnessed the number of Indian
students in the US climbing by almost 58 per cent.
India has also surpassed China as the leading country of origin for
international students in the US, the Open Doors 2002 report, published by
the Institute of International Education (IIE) said.
The agency also tabulated that out of the total number of Indian students
visiting the US, nearly 75 per cent come for graduate studies and the rest for
undergraduate studies. Interestingly, around 30 per cent of the visiting Indian
students are women.
The report released by the IIE observed that more than 67,000 Indians are
currently enrolled in the institutions of higher learning, with the Chinese
closely following with 63,000. In 2003 itself, nearly 90,000 Indian students
enrolled in American colleges. Overall, India accounts for 11.5 per cent of
international students enrolled in American universities.
The report further states that while California is the leading host state for
international students, the largest number of Indian students study in Texas.
With Indian enrollments on the rise generally, this concentration of Indians
in Texas helps explain the finding in Open Doors 2002 that Texas had the
strongest growth (+17%) in international student enrollment from 2000-01 to
2001-02.
Post the September 11 terror attacks, America was badly hit by recession.
For the slump-hit US economy, international education meant big business
in terms of revenue. Understandably, foreign students now contribute almost
$12 billion annually to the US economy, with higher education being the fifth
largest service sector export in the US.
Studies reveal that almost 90 per cent of foreign students stay back in the
US because immediately after completing education, they are allowed to
work legally for a year to gain 'practical work experience'. During this period,
most students seek employers' help in converting their visa from student
visa to H1 visa , whereby they can work for three years, extendable by
another three years.
In such a scenario, a freeze on visas signifies that eventually, the rate of
growth of the American economy will be inversely affected as Indians and
non-Americans comprise a huge chunk of the potential workforce.
Tightening of visa norms post-September 11, an outcry against US jobs
being filled by Indians and reducing the cap on H1-B visas maybe America’s
way of safeguarding jobs.
However, in the long-run, it spells a huge loss for America. Stringent visa
norms and receding job opportunities means that Indian students graduating
from US universities will have to look elsewhere, in order to be able to strike
it big, signifying a loss of wealth for the US economy as manpower and
resources will be lessened. This will leave the US economy facing a paucity
of skilled workers – be it doctors, teachers, nurses, software engineers,
tech professionals or engineers.
The governments of the UK and Australia, on the other hand, have been at
the forefront to remove employment hassles after completion of a degree.
Following their example, the German government, too, has relaxed several
provisions, including visa norms and part-time work, aimed at attracting
Indian students heading offshore.
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."
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."
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.
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.
NY Daily News
New York Daily News - http://www.nydailynews.com
Clarifying who gets to alter status
Thursday, June 3rd, 2004
Q. If I marry my out-of-status girlfriend, will the government deport her?
I am a U.S. citizen. The woman I want to marry came here as an international student. She has been out-of-status for three years now. If I marry her, can she get her green card? Will the CIS interview her here?
K.A., Bronx
A. If you marry her, your girlfriend can interview here for permanent residence. It is very unlikely that the government will try to deport her. Because she would qualify for permanent residence as an immediate relative of a U.S. citizen who entered legally, the Citizenship and Immigration Service will forgive her for having overstayed.
Because it has been a while since I addressed the matter of who can interview here for permanent residence, the process called adjustment of status, I'll write a bit more about it. Readers may want to clip and save this column.
Applicants for permanent residence can adjust status if they:
1. Were inspected by a federal officer upon entry and qualify as an "immediate relative of a U.S. citizen." The immediate relative category includes the spouse of a U.S. citizen, unmarried children under 21 of U.S. citizens, the parents of U.S. citizens over 21, and certain spouses of deceased U.S. citizens;
2. Were inspected by a federal officer upon entry into the U.S., were never out of status, and never worked without permission;
3. Are applying based on status as a refugee or asylee; or
4. Are an employment-based immigrant visa applicant or a special immigrant religious worker, entered the U.S. lawfully and were not out of status more than 180 days since their last entry. Under what many call the "245(i) grandfather clause," applicants can adjust status if they pay a $1,000 filing penalty and,
A. They are applying as family-based immigrants or in the employment-based category and a relative or employer started a case for them on or before Jan. 14, 1998;
B. A relative petitioned for them or they started an employment-based case on or before April 30, 2001, and were in the U.S. on Dec. 21, 2000; or
C. They are a "derivative beneficiaries" of a "245(i) grandfathered" individual. The law defines derivative beneficiary as the spouse or unmarried child, under 21 of a family or employment-based preference category applicant.
He forgot his middle name
Q. I'm concerned because I didn't include my middle name on my immigration application. My employer filed a labor certification for me and I'm waiting to hear back from the department of labor. How can I fix my record?
Ewa Rzepka, Brooklyn
A. Don't be concerned. If you want your permanent resident card to note your middle name, include it when you apply for permanent residence.
Finding affordable legal help
Q. Can you recommend a not-for-profit organization that can help with my employment-based immigration case? I am working here in H-1B temporary worker status as a researcher on multiple sclerosis. My employer wants to sponsor me, but the lawyer's fees are too high. Can you recommend an organization to help?
Docbeng, Piscataway, N.J.
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.
New York Daily News - http://www.nydailynews.com
Clarifying who gets to alter status
Thursday, June 3rd, 2004
Q. If I marry my out-of-status girlfriend, will the government deport her?
I am a U.S. citizen. The woman I want to marry came here as an international student. She has been out-of-status for three years now. If I marry her, can she get her green card? Will the CIS interview her here?
K.A., Bronx
A. If you marry her, your girlfriend can interview here for permanent residence. It is very unlikely that the government will try to deport her. Because she would qualify for permanent residence as an immediate relative of a U.S. citizen who entered legally, the Citizenship and Immigration Service will forgive her for having overstayed.
Because it has been a while since I addressed the matter of who can interview here for permanent residence, the process called adjustment of status, I'll write a bit more about it. Readers may want to clip and save this column.
Applicants for permanent residence can adjust status if they:
1. Were inspected by a federal officer upon entry and qualify as an "immediate relative of a U.S. citizen." The immediate relative category includes the spouse of a U.S. citizen, unmarried children under 21 of U.S. citizens, the parents of U.S. citizens over 21, and certain spouses of deceased U.S. citizens;
2. Were inspected by a federal officer upon entry into the U.S., were never out of status, and never worked without permission;
3. Are applying based on status as a refugee or asylee; or
4. Are an employment-based immigrant visa applicant or a special immigrant religious worker, entered the U.S. lawfully and were not out of status more than 180 days since their last entry. Under what many call the "245(i) grandfather clause," applicants can adjust status if they pay a $1,000 filing penalty and,
A. They are applying as family-based immigrants or in the employment-based category and a relative or employer started a case for them on or before Jan. 14, 1998;
B. A relative petitioned for them or they started an employment-based case on or before April 30, 2001, and were in the U.S. on Dec. 21, 2000; or
C. They are a "derivative beneficiaries" of a "245(i) grandfathered" individual. The law defines derivative beneficiary as the spouse or unmarried child, under 21 of a family or employment-based preference category applicant.
He forgot his middle name
Q. I'm concerned because I didn't include my middle name on my immigration application. My employer filed a labor certification for me and I'm waiting to hear back from the department of labor. How can I fix my record?
Ewa Rzepka, Brooklyn
A. Don't be concerned. If you want your permanent resident card to note your middle name, include it when you apply for permanent residence.
Finding affordable legal help
Q. Can you recommend a not-for-profit organization that can help with my employment-based immigration case? I am working here in H-1B temporary worker status as a researcher on multiple sclerosis. My employer wants to sponsor me, but the lawyer's fees are too high. Can you recommend an organization to help?
Docbeng, Piscataway, N.J.
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.
The Moscow Times.com
Poll: U.S. Visa Rules Hit Businesses Hard
By Carl Schreck
Staff Writer
Russian business travelers are among the worst hit by stringent U.S. visa policies that have cost American
businesses $30 billion over the last two years, a survey has found. The report, based on a survey of 734 U.S. exporters conducted by Washington-based consultant The Santangelo Group, estimated that companies suffered $30.7 billion in financial impact between July 2002 and March 2004 due to processing delays and denials of business visas. The figure represented $25.53 billion in revenue loss and indirect costs of $5.15 billion, the report concluded.
Eight international trade associations, including the U.S.-Russia Business Council, sponsored the survey.
"It's been a sizable problem ever since the Sept. 11 attacks," USRBC president Eugene Lawson said by
telephone from Washington, referring to tightened U.S. visa policy since the 2001 terrorist attacks.
"But this is not about terrorists. All businesses support security, and we need to do a better job to achieve a balance. It's very damaging with no possibility for workers to go back and forth." Lawson, along with the heads of the other trade associations, has sent the survey's results to the U.S. departments of State, Homeland Security and Commerce with recommendations including a goal of 48-hour visa processing with a limit of 30 days and greater transparency provided to U.S. companies by consular offices. Because the report offered no country breakdown on losses, it is unclear exactly how much money U.S. exporters active in Russia lost as a result of visa difficulties. But Russia was ranked third, behind China and India, in an analysis of which countries' business visa applications present the most significant problems, primarily because of the number of experts in high-tech industries coming from these countries, Lawson said.
A member survey conducted last month by the American Chamber of Commerce in Russia offers some
anecdotal evidence on the financial repercussions of visa delays. "One company reported $7 million in lost sales last year," said AmCham president Andrew Somers. A copy of the report provided to The Moscow Times highlights a range of visa delays and difficulties, from a company president who has been waiting since November to visit his company's head office in the United States, to IT specialists who have missed training sessions because of visa delays. "The problem is not with rejections," Somers said. "A lot of people are being cleared, but it's just too late. They are missing meetings and trainings." According to Maura Harty, U.S assistant secretary of state for consular affairs, the U.S. government last year handled more than 7 million nonimmigrant visas, Bloomberg reported. Of those applications, visa officers referred 2.2 percent back to Washington for further checks by government agencies, and responses for 80 percent were provided within three weeks, down from an average of two months last year, she said. Somers said the consular section of the U.S. Embassy in Moscow had made positive strides in recent years to speed up the processing of applications, but that the problem lay with flagged applications sent back to Washington for review. Applications from persons working in high-tech, defense or sensitive areas related to nonproliferation may be subjected to reviews by federal agencies, said U.S. Consul General James Pettit. Somers and Lawson called for more resources to be allocated to these agencies to help speed up reviews. "I understand that at least one [agency] is still not computerized," Somers said. Pettit said that in recent weeks review agencies have begun issuing visa clearances electronically, whereas before such clearances were sent by cable. "This highlights a new streamlined approach," Pettit said.
Poll: U.S. Visa Rules Hit Businesses Hard
By Carl Schreck
Staff Writer
Russian business travelers are among the worst hit by stringent U.S. visa policies that have cost American
businesses $30 billion over the last two years, a survey has found. The report, based on a survey of 734 U.S. exporters conducted by Washington-based consultant The Santangelo Group, estimated that companies suffered $30.7 billion in financial impact between July 2002 and March 2004 due to processing delays and denials of business visas. The figure represented $25.53 billion in revenue loss and indirect costs of $5.15 billion, the report concluded.
Eight international trade associations, including the U.S.-Russia Business Council, sponsored the survey.
"It's been a sizable problem ever since the Sept. 11 attacks," USRBC president Eugene Lawson said by
telephone from Washington, referring to tightened U.S. visa policy since the 2001 terrorist attacks.
"But this is not about terrorists. All businesses support security, and we need to do a better job to achieve a balance. It's very damaging with no possibility for workers to go back and forth." Lawson, along with the heads of the other trade associations, has sent the survey's results to the U.S. departments of State, Homeland Security and Commerce with recommendations including a goal of 48-hour visa processing with a limit of 30 days and greater transparency provided to U.S. companies by consular offices. Because the report offered no country breakdown on losses, it is unclear exactly how much money U.S. exporters active in Russia lost as a result of visa difficulties. But Russia was ranked third, behind China and India, in an analysis of which countries' business visa applications present the most significant problems, primarily because of the number of experts in high-tech industries coming from these countries, Lawson said.
A member survey conducted last month by the American Chamber of Commerce in Russia offers some
anecdotal evidence on the financial repercussions of visa delays. "One company reported $7 million in lost sales last year," said AmCham president Andrew Somers. A copy of the report provided to The Moscow Times highlights a range of visa delays and difficulties, from a company president who has been waiting since November to visit his company's head office in the United States, to IT specialists who have missed training sessions because of visa delays. "The problem is not with rejections," Somers said. "A lot of people are being cleared, but it's just too late. They are missing meetings and trainings." According to Maura Harty, U.S assistant secretary of state for consular affairs, the U.S. government last year handled more than 7 million nonimmigrant visas, Bloomberg reported. Of those applications, visa officers referred 2.2 percent back to Washington for further checks by government agencies, and responses for 80 percent were provided within three weeks, down from an average of two months last year, she said. Somers said the consular section of the U.S. Embassy in Moscow had made positive strides in recent years to speed up the processing of applications, but that the problem lay with flagged applications sent back to Washington for review. Applications from persons working in high-tech, defense or sensitive areas related to nonproliferation may be subjected to reviews by federal agencies, said U.S. Consul General James Pettit. Somers and Lawson called for more resources to be allocated to these agencies to help speed up reviews. "I understand that at least one [agency] is still not computerized," Somers said. Pettit said that in recent weeks review agencies have begun issuing visa clearances electronically, whereas before such clearances were sent by cable. "This highlights a new streamlined approach," Pettit said.
NY Newsday
Report: New York has backlog of 100,000
citizenship applications
June 11, 2004, 2:36 AM EDT
NEW YORK -- New York has a backlog of more than 100,000 citizenship
applications, forcing immigrants to wait up to a year and a half for their cases to be
handled, according to a published report.
The wait for applications to be processed in New York is roughly triple that in San
Antonio, Tex., where it takes about six months, The New York Times reported Friday.
Processing times vary
widely throughout the
country, with the longest
wait time in Cleveland,
where applicants can
wait more than three
years.
In West Palm Beach,
processing takes about
19 months, while
applications in Seattle
are typically handled in
seven months, the Times
said, citing unpublicized
government figures.
The Times said experts
offered varying
explanations for the
delays, including
personnel shifts resulting
from a now-defunct program to register Arab and Muslim men, along with a growing
pool of applicants and new fingerprinting and background check policies.
Immigrants whose applications are stuck in the backlog will likely not be able to
vote in the November election, leading at least one immigration advocate to
question the regional disparity.
"What is the difference in Texas?" Celeste Douglas, the New York citizenship
coordinator for the health care workers' union, told the Times. "Does it have
anything to do with Mexican immigrants and assumptions about the Latino vote?
Are there assumptions about immigrants in New York and how they're going to
vote?"
Christopher Bentley, a spokesman for Citizenship and Immigration Services, said
the varying wait times were not related to voter registration.
"There is absolutely, positively no connection between the amount of time it takes
for someone to naturalize and any voter registration system," Bentley told the Times.
Report: New York has backlog of 100,000
citizenship applications
June 11, 2004, 2:36 AM EDT
NEW YORK -- New York has a backlog of more than 100,000 citizenship
applications, forcing immigrants to wait up to a year and a half for their cases to be
handled, according to a published report.
The wait for applications to be processed in New York is roughly triple that in San
Antonio, Tex., where it takes about six months, The New York Times reported Friday.
Processing times vary
widely throughout the
country, with the longest
wait time in Cleveland,
where applicants can
wait more than three
years.
In West Palm Beach,
processing takes about
19 months, while
applications in Seattle
are typically handled in
seven months, the Times
said, citing unpublicized
government figures.
The Times said experts
offered varying
explanations for the
delays, including
personnel shifts resulting
from a now-defunct program to register Arab and Muslim men, along with a growing
pool of applicants and new fingerprinting and background check policies.
Immigrants whose applications are stuck in the backlog will likely not be able to
vote in the November election, leading at least one immigration advocate to
question the regional disparity.
"What is the difference in Texas?" Celeste Douglas, the New York citizenship
coordinator for the health care workers' union, told the Times. "Does it have
anything to do with Mexican immigrants and assumptions about the Latino vote?
Are there assumptions about immigrants in New York and how they're going to
vote?"
Christopher Bentley, a spokesman for Citizenship and Immigration Services, said
the varying wait times were not related to voter registration.
"There is absolutely, positively no connection between the amount of time it takes
for someone to naturalize and any voter registration system," Bentley told the Times.