Political Organizing to Protest USCIS Delays

[Ilya R. 0]

Wouldnt be the first time, when a report by goverment agency wasnt "accurate"

You can prove it to yourself by reading the Ombudsman's Report, wherein you will find reportings of the actual hardware on adjudicator's desks.

A dubious claim it is you have, prove it.

USCIS could cut the time down to a fraction of what it is now if they would go 100% electronic on petition submittals. Their is no reason every petition could be filed electronically.

There is a reason - the USCIS' current system would not support that. That's what they're supposed to be working towards after the fee increase, but the wheels of govt turn slow. We'll have to see how that develops over time.

Just Reading Reports doesnt mean its true. Bush's Sources reported that IRAQ had WMDs, but I guess they were wrong..... And Ombudsman is just a non working agency.... kinda like BBB for corporations, good in theory bad in practice...

So you are saying the Ombudsman would incorrectly report about the technology USCIS presently has available in order to justify deliberately NOT immediately switching to electronic processing?

[Gaby&Talbert 1]

Wouldnt be the first time, when a report by goverment agency wasnt "accurate"

You can prove it to yourself by reading the Ombudsman's Report, wherein you will find reportings of the actual hardware on adjudicator's desks.

A dubious claim it is you have, prove it.

USCIS could cut the time down to a fraction of what it is now if they would go 100% electronic on petition submittals. Their is no reason every petition could be filed electronically.

There is a reason - the USCIS' current system would not support that. That's what they're supposed to be working towards after the fee increase, but the wheels of govt turn slow. We'll have to see how that develops over time.

Just Reading Reports doesnt mean its true. Bush's Sources reported that IRAQ had WMDs, but I guess they were wrong..... And Ombudsman is just a non working agency.... kinda like BBB for corporations, good in theory bad in practice...

So you are saying the Ombudsman would incorrectly report about the technology USCIS presently has available in order to justify deliberately NOT immediately switching to electronic processing?

Just think of the time it takes for people to get the mail, open the mail, enter data into the computer from the petition, make sure everything is correct on the form, make sure they sent the correct fee, and so on. This time and cost would be eliminated. Time also would be saved in transferring and reviewing documents because a central dadabase could be used. The savings in employees for data entry could then be used for more adjudicators which also would speed up the process.

[Ilya R. 0]

Wouldnt be the first time, when a report by goverment agency wasnt "accurate"

You can prove it to yourself by reading the Ombudsman's Report, wherein you will find reportings of the actual hardware on adjudicator's desks.

A dubious claim it is you have, prove it.

USCIS could cut the time down to a fraction of what it is now if they would go 100% electronic on petition submittals. Their is no reason every petition could be filed electronically.

There is a reason - the USCIS' current system would not support that. That's what they're supposed to be working towards after the fee increase, but the wheels of govt turn slow. We'll have to see how that develops over time.

Just Reading Reports doesnt mean its true. Bush's Sources reported that IRAQ had WMDs, but I guess they were wrong..... And Ombudsman is just a non working agency.... kinda like BBB for corporations, good in theory bad in practice...

So you are saying the Ombudsman would incorrectly report about the technology USCIS presently has available in order to justify deliberately NOT immediately switching to electronic processing?

Just think of the time it takes for people to get the mail, open the mail, enter data into the computer from the petition, make sure everything is correct on the form, make sure they sent the correct fee, and so on. This time and cost would be eliminated. Time also would be saved in transferring and reviewing documents because a central dadabase could be used. The savings in employees for data entry could then be used for more adjudicators which also would speed up the process.

Okay, thought about....

please do this. Compare the amount of paperwork sent for K-1 Visa vs K-3/Cr-1.... Now why in the world is K-1 a faster aproval? by like 5 months faster too...

[Kevin and 10]

Beyond that, have you ever known the government to implement anything quickly? Common sense alone should tell you it would take some time.

It didn't take long for the Patriot Act or the formation of DHS

[rebeccajo 14]

Okay, thought about....

please do this. Compare the amount of paperwork sent for K-1 Visa vs K-3/Cr-1.... Now why in the world is K-1 a faster aproval? by like 5 months faster too...

Do you fully understand what a CR1 visa comes with? It includes greencard processing. That is why it takes longer.

K3 does not take as long as CR1, although it does take longer than K1.

It's fine and well to question the process and want improvement.

But IMO you don't know enough about the process to be criticizing it at all.

I would suggest again that you read the Ombudsman's Report. His work is third-party and independant, and the annual report consists of findings regarding inadequacies of the service and where improvement needs to be made. It's hardly comparative at all to the CIA/Bush debacle in the Middle East. The Ombudsman is a DHS/USCIS critic.

Regarding electronic processing, there will still need to be 'follow up' paper to these petitions. USCIS already processes EAD's electronically, but there are still passport photos and a couple of other documents the petitioner needs to provide to the service. It is highly unlikely that pushing a button to send a petition is all the petitioner will ever need to do. Original documents such as birth certificates will always be required. As they should be.

[rebeccajo 14]

Beyond that, have you ever known the government to implement anything quickly? Common sense alone should tell you it would take some time.

It didn't take long for the Patriot Act or the formation of DHS

Since you have an opinion, why don't you enlighten us as to how long it did take?

And how well (or not) each functions now.

If it's your conclusion that DHS isn't functioning well, is it because it happened to quickly? Because it wasn't well thought out?

[Kevin and 10]

Beyond that, have you ever known the government to implement anything quickly? Common sense alone should tell you it would take some time.

It didn't take long for the Patriot Act or the formation of DHS

Since you have an opinion, why don't you enlighten us as to how long it did take?

And how well (or not) each functions now.

If it's your conclusion that DHS isn't functioning well, is it because it happened to quickly? Because it wasn't well thought out?

If the Gov't wanted to implement a change they can do it over night. But like most everything they do, slow or fast changes, it isn't well thought out.

[NickD 202]

Key problem is we are in the minority on the immigration issue, 65K come in on HIB's, 50K from the lottery, 140K from marriages, and have no idea where these 600K came in to apply for US citizenship before the rates went up which seems to be the major excuse for the delays. But apparently congress was putting the screws to the USCIS as they wanted more people to vote. Just doesn't sound right.

With a nominal load of 240K applications and a work force of 3K leaves an average of 80 applications per USCIS employer to fill per year, ha, where do I sign up for this job? And if a form states to allow 90 days for processing, should be within 90 days, not 18-24 months!

As we have a government by representation, only recourse we have is to contact our representatives, and I have been doing that, I am fighting for my family! but in regards to making this a national issue, have doubts, 200K people among 300 million is not very much, and our little problems are nothing compared to a nation at war and an economy that is just about ready to be flushed down the toilet.

All I can suggest is putting pressure on your congressman, and I hate hearing from a USCIS officer that I have to be happy with the processing dates, and told our application is undergoing a background check when we already had an extensive background check for a previous application with nothing said about a background check for our current application that is taking years.

But you have to be nice and patient. Not to say anything about the 20 million illegals here that seem to be ignored. Hear about one or two here or there being deported, but since we are doing it legally, they have our names, so we would be on top of their list.

Edited April 12, 2008 by NickD

[gogo 6]

Hey Kevin and Tuyen, did you also send a "letter of evolution relationship" when you were at the interview.. I see lots of people getting blue slips because they don't have one of those.. it is basically a timeline and letter stating how you met, and the different times and what you did.. I have written it up already (1 1/2 pages), but I haven't even been approved yet.. haha, I know what do look out for , except I'm not there yet.. I'm giving them until the end of the year before I move back to China.. =(

[Jack and Barbara 0]

Beyond that, have you ever known the government to implement anything quickly? Common sense alone should tell you it would take some time.

It didn't take long for the Patriot Act or the formation of DHS

Since you have an opinion, why don't you enlighten us as to how long it did take?

And how well (or not) each functions now.

If it's your conclusion that DHS isn't functioning well, is it because it happened to quickly? Because it wasn't well thought out?

Formation of DHS took a couple of years to put together, which is relatively quick to put together an agency. At the same time, it brought different subagencies from other agencies. Examples include INS from DOJ, TSA from Transportation and Customs from Treasury. These were then combined into the subagencies of DHS (i.e. ICE, CIS, CBP, TSA, etc).

In sum, it didn't take long to form DHS, but that might be part of the reason DHS has been heavily criticized. Some subagencies were not planned out sufficiently beforehand.

Edited April 13, 2008 by Jack and Barbara

[Jack and Barbara 0]

Key problem is we are in the minority on the immigration issue, 65K come in on HIB's, 50K from the lottery, 140K from marriages, and have no idea where these 600K came in to apply for US citizenship before the rates went up which seems to be the major excuse for the delays. But apparently congress was putting the screws to the USCIS as they wanted more people to vote. Just doesn't sound right.

Possibly illegal immigrants, those who had no reason/incentive to apply before, or those who didn't have the money at the time to apply. For the illegal immigrant part, I think there is a a rule that if a person had been in this country for a long enough period, he or she could be granted citizenship. Am I correct on this one?

[rebeccajo 14]

***

Edited April 13, 2008 by rebeccajo

[rebeccajo 14]

"General Naturalization Requirements

Age

Applicants must be at least 18 years old.

Refer to the section, Naturalized Citizen's Children under Waivers, Exceptions, and Special Cases for information on applicants who are less than 18 years old.

Residency

An applicant must have been lawfully admitted to the United States for permanent residence. Lawfully admitted for permanent residence means having been legally accorded the privilege of residing permanently in the United States as an immigrant in accordance with the immigration laws. Individuals who have been lawfully admitted as permanent residents will be asked to produce an I-551, Alien Registration Receipt Card, as proof of their status."

Etc. Etc. can be read here:

http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/men...00045f3d6a1RCRD

http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/men...00048f3d6a1RCRD

[Kevin and 10]

Hey Kevin and Tuyen, did you also send a "letter of evolution relationship" when you were at the interview.. I see lots of people getting blue slips because they don't have one of those.. it is basically a timeline and letter stating how you met, and the different times and what you did.. I have written it up already (1 1/2 pages), but I haven't even been approved yet.. haha, I know what do look out for , except I'm not there yet.. I'm giving them until the end of the year before I move back to China.. =(

Hi Gogo, yes I did send a letter of our relationship timeline nd other documents they requested.

As far as pressure on my Reps. I have been in contact with my Congressperson and both Senators. All three get the same response from the USCIS. It could be up to two years before they get around to reviewing our case.

From what I am told, way the rules are set up in the Congress, they can't intervine on behalf of a constituent. All they can do is monitor the progress of a petition or case of a Visa.

[TracyTN 237]

Beyond that, have you ever known the government to implement anything quickly? Common sense alone should tell you it would take some time.

It didn't take long for the Patriot Act or the formation of DHS

I would venture to say that the main reason for that was the extreme circumstances from which those were both born. Apples/oranges.

Unfortunately, Joe Q. American doesn't see immigration as something requiring immediate attention It's only those of us with foreign spouses or relatives (who are paying the now higher fees) that give a tinker's damn about how fast the immigration process is (or isn't). Sad but true.

*edited for clarity*

Edited April 14, 2008 by TracyTN