Visa Fee increase .. it's official now !

[SMR 368]

The clause it falls under is irrelevant. The federal government has two jobs. You can lop every single duty into one of those two things. If you can't.... then they shouldn't be doing it!

I don't disagree with you in practice. All I'm saying is that if there wasn't an explicit congress-regulates-immigration clause, I would have a problem with Congress trying to regulate immigration on the basis of the interstate trade clause.

While I won't disagree with that, I will point out that my post above was in reference to a 400% increase by a township government. As someone who rents, that wouldn't affect me the same as it would a property owner. If my landlord approached me and demanded a 400% increase in rent because of tax issues he'd also have vacancy concerns.

Well, you're right if the 400% happened all at once and only in one isolated township. But that's an extreme example which doesn't really bear out in reality. In general, if it were the situation that there were various municipalities with starkly different systems and structures in close geographical proximity, then the whole vote-with-your-feet argument would have a lot more validity. I just don't see that as the reality in America today. Voting with your feet means getting a new job and moving to a different state. In does happen over the long term since it becomes a consideration when you are moving anyways. But it takes a lot for it

http://www.appleseedinfo.org

You'd think that a township that could raise property taxes 400% and get away with it wouldn't have a lot of renters, huh?

Like I said, if you're talking about a single township in the area making the change immediately, you have a point. But that's a pointless hypothetical.

In terms of appleseed, it seems like a great tradition and a lot of fun. I'd like to get involved one of these days. But unless you are planning armed takeover, I don't see it as an engine of political change (I may be wrong on this one. Let me know).

I won't disagree with that either. However, once again, I'll point out that my comments above were in relation to a fiscally-responsible department of the federal government. If that means pay to play, I'm all for it. We all pay taxes but not everyone imports a bride. For those of us that do (and use an extra service) I have no problem with paying a little extra.

This is where the government originally went off course. You can't expect "everyone" to pay for "everything." Eventually (as was pointed out above) you run out of other peoples' money. But, if those same people would pay for what they used (and only what they used) then it could be done according to budget. While I realize that's a tall order for a system of such magnitude... well, maybe therein lies the problem. You balance the family budget, right? Why can't the governemnt balance their budget?

We recently had a primary here where Trey Grayson and Rand Paul were battling it out. Trey Grayson had an attack ad out there against Rand Paul because he wouldn't support passing measures that weren't balanced. "That's just not practical." Really? And passing unbalanced budgets is?

This is what we've been spoon-fed for the past.... oh, 100 years. We've eaten so much of it some folks have actually started to think that's what it's supposed to taste like. They don't even realize that it's wrong. - But I guess it's practical.

It shouldn't be about whether it's a good deal or not. It should be about "it costs this government agency $1000 to process a visa request so we'll charge the USC who uses this service $1000."

I agree with you on the subject of balanced budgets and on the subject of paying for what you use. If that were the rule in government, I would find it more just that immigrants bear the full cost of USCIS (although still unjust as I lay out below). However, most things in the government are paid for mainly by one group and used by another group that doesn't have much of an intersection with the first group. I find that more often than not, I am a member of the first group. And when suddenly I want something, I'm paying for it anyways. That's the frustrating thing. The big problem with the paradigm is that when someone immigrates, USCIS is not providing a service to them. It is providing a service to the rest of the country by preventing an influx of dangerous people or people that use entitlement services.

The federal government balancing their budget through various agencies most certainly effects me. - And every other American for that matter. (The world too!)

No argument here.

I strongly disagree with that. While I'm against a poll tax or anything similar, I do believe folks should forfeit their voting rights when they forfeit being a productive member of society. If you're on the dole... you don't vote.

This is really just a slightly different incarnation of the same sentiment: you can't vote unless you have a dog in the fight. You both just want to make sure that your definition of a dog includes you. In my opinion, it all should depend on the way the municipality is gathering it's money. If it's a city that funds itself with property taxes, you should have to prove you either own property or have a lease on property in good standing. If it's income taxes, then you have to be paying some and not taking back in entitlement programs. But inevitably, these sorts of programs would become impracticably complicated and abused.

For this reason, I support the fair tax. It would insure that everyone has to pay and would negate the need for such a complicated system.

As Gary alluded to, home ownership in America is somewhat of a myth (how many people do you know that actually own their own house outright) and often a bad decision. I have recently looked into home ownership for myself. In spite of record low interest rates and the home buyers tax break (which recently expired) which would cover the cost of closing and other incidentals to the move, if I were to buy even a modest home, I would be paying far more in property taxes and interest than I am currently paying in rent for at least the next 5-10 years. And even when I own the home outright, I will be paying some ridiculous property taxes (my county has the 2nd highest property taxes of any in the nation). On top of that, I have to pay for homeowners insurance, maintenance, higher heating and energy costs, pay a water and trash bill (which are currently wrapped up in my rent), closing fees, etc., and a ton of other incidentals. I'm much better off paying the rent and putting the money I save in the bank and other investments. I actually build equity/value a lot faster this way.

The only thing that home ownership has going for it is that if home prices start to rise significantly, you can build virtual equity based on the higher price. But as many found out recently, that's funny money and shouldn't be relied on, especially if it's your residence and not an investment. It doesn't change the amount you owe and you can't really cash it out unless you decide to start renting. You can sell the house but then you will have to buy another which will likely also be at a higher price (or else be a worse house, which also has its obvious problems).

[LvivLovers 39]

I strongly disagree with that. While I'm against a poll tax or anything similar, I do believe folks should forfeit their voting rights when they forfeit being a productive member of society. If you're on the dole... you don't vote.

I'm in favor of folks having to pass an IQ test before being allowed to vote! But perhaps a productivity test would accomplish the same thing?

[1HappyGuy 45]

Directly off the State Department web site:

Important Notice - New Nonimmigrant Application Fees: The Nonimmigrant visa application processing fees will increase on June 4, 2010 and will be tiered, as shown below. (There will no longer be one single visa application fee for all nonimmigrant categories.) See the Press Release. Applicants will have to pay the full fee in effect on the day they apply, regardless of when they pay. (Review additional information, including a cost of service study on the www.Regulations.gov website.)

Description of Service and Fee Amount

Nonimmigrant visa application and border crossing card processing fees (per person):

· Nonimmigrant visa application processing fee (non-refundable), DS-160 or Form DS-156 for all categories below:

o Non-petition-based nonimmigrant visa (except E): $140.00

o H, L, O, P, Q and R category visa: $150.00

o E category visa: $390.00

o K category visa: $350.00

Enough said?

[slim 1,514]

if there wasn't an explicit congress-regulates-immigration clause, I would have a problem with Congress trying to regulate immigration on the basis of the interstate trade clause.

Kind of like how they try to regulate everything else?

Voting with your feet means getting a new job and moving to a different state.

Why not just move to a different township or rent from a different landlord? While I realize there are significantly more options here in Cincinnati than in, say, Vermont, the premise is the same. I refuse to pay a 400% increase in property taxes from my local government.

Like I said, if you're talking about a single township in the area making the change immediately, you have a point. But that's a pointless hypothetical.

Keep in mind this wasn't my pointless hypothetical, someone else brought it up. But yes, it's kind of like a single township in an area raising rates. If you don't like it either don't participate in it or go a different route. If you don't think it's right that the government is raising visa fees to cover costs, go marry a fat girl. There are plenty of them here.

In terms of appleseed, it seems like a great tradition and a lot of fun. I'd like to get involved one of these days. But unless you are planning armed takeover, I don't see it as an engine of political change (I may be wrong on this one. Let me know).

That's the beauty of Appleseed! It's "real" purpose is to politically charge otherwise apathetic and inactive Americans to participate in their government.

The armed part is actually a little misleading. Sure, we get people out to the range, get them shooting - but the promise of a fun day at the range is only the bait. The hook, line and sinker is once they're there, they learn about the events of Apr. 19th, 1775 and the armed struggle our forefathers persevered through to gain our independence.

Yes, we teach them the best rifle marksmanship program in the country and make them aware of their uniquely American heritage as marksmen, but most importantly, somewhere along the way they see that armed struggle, risking one's own life, friends, family and loved ones is not the way to honor the sacrifice of those who've given so much for us in the cause of liberty.

Appleseed is about getting sleeping Americans up off their couches and getting involved in effecting positive change. Actually doing something... instead of just talking about it.

most things in the government are paid for mainly by one group and used by another group that doesn't have much of an intersection with the first group. I find that more often than not, I am a member of the first group. And when suddenly I want something, I'm paying for it anyways. That's the frustrating thing. The big problem with the paradigm is that when someone immigrates, USCIS is not providing a service to them. It is providing a service to the rest of the country by preventing an influx of dangerous people or people that use entitlement services.

I got'cha. It frustrates me as well.

However I'd have to say that while we're not being provided a service, we're using an agency that otherwise wouldn't need to exist. Border security and immigration could be covered under defense yet we're petitioning the government to allow an alien to join us here. They have to process that request.

you can't vote unless you have a dog in the fight. You both just want to make sure that your definition of a dog includes you. In my opinion, it all should depend on the way the municipality is gathering it's money. If it's a city that funds itself with property taxes, you should have to prove you either own property or have a lease on property in good standing. If it's income taxes, then you have to be paying some and not taking back in entitlement programs. But inevitably, these sorts of programs would become impracticably complicated and abused.

For this reason, I support the fair tax. It would insure that everyone has to pay and would negate the need for such a complicated system.

First of all, no, I'm not trying to make sure I'm included based on my definition of a dog in the fight. What I'm trying to do is assert that those who don't have a license for their dog, pay vet fees or clean up their dogs' poop - yet continue to have puppies they can't afford to pay for - don't get to disproportionately vote for the continuation of that process.

Under the fair tax, those who are beneficiaries of entitlement programs continue to vote to extend their entitlements. Changing the tax system has nothing to do with changing the voting system or discontinuing the problem that's running our country into bankruptcy. Would it help? Sure. I'd support it as well. But, there really is no such thing as a "fair" tax because those who don't chip in at the same rate (in other words those who are only paid and not contributing) aren't "fairly" represented.

As Gary alluded to, home ownership in America is somewhat of a myth

Which is why I rent. I've had numerous detractors over the years who've told me how stupid it was for me to keep "wasting all that money renting" while they paid insane amounts of interest on property they didn't truly own.

The last couple years they've been pretty quiet about their "investment skills."

[JVF 0]

Directly off the State Department web site:

Important Notice - New Nonimmigrant Application Fees: The Nonimmigrant visa application processing fees will increase on June 4, 2010 and will be tiered, as shown below. (There will no longer be one single visa application fee for all nonimmigrant categories.) See the Press Release. Applicants will have to pay the full fee in effect on the day they apply, regardless of when they pay. (Review additional information, including a cost of service study on the www.Regulations.gov website.)

Description of Service and Fee Amount

Nonimmigrant visa application and border crossing card processing fees (per person):

· Nonimmigrant visa application processing fee (non-refundable), DS-160 or Form DS-156 for all categories below:

o Non-petition-based nonimmigrant visa (except E): $140.00

o H, L, O, P, Q and R category visa: $150.00

o E category visa: $390.00

o K category visa: $350.00

Enough said?

What are those categories mean? Which category do we fall in?

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

What are those categories mean? Which category do we fall in?

The only non-immigrant category affecting anyone on this site is the K visas. CR and IR visas are immigrant visas and are not affected by the fee increase (they are already $400 though)

[JVF 0]

The only non-immigrant category affecting anyone on this site is the K visas. CR and IR visas are immigrant visas and are not affected by the fee increase (they are already $400 though)

Got it. Thanks.

I heard USCIS is going to focus on student and work visas, so they can get people in before Fall 2010 semester starts. That makes sense why processing time went up on USCIS site went up from 5 to 6 months

[JVF 0]

Does this mean they going to speed up processing of our applications?

USCIS Transitions the Intake Function to Lockbox Network for Several Benefit Requests

May 25th, 2010

WASHINGTON – U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) today announced that it will be transitioning the intake function of several more forms from the Service Centers to its Lockbox network. By centralizing form and fee intake to a Lockbox environment, USCIS will improve consistency and integrity in the intake process.

The forms scheduled for the transition:

– I-817, Application for Family Unity Benefits (If filing under section 301 of the Immigration Act of 1990);

– I-526, Immigrant Petition by Alien Entrepreneur ;

– I-539, Application to Extend/Change Nonimmigrant Status (Only those filed separately from the I-129);

– I-129F, Petition for Alien Fiance ;

– I-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker.

The transition will start mid-May with the Service Centers forwarding applications to the USCIS Dallas and Phoenix Lockbox facilities for processing. In June, USCIS will post the revised filing instructions, update the web page for each form, and announce the address change with a USCIS Update.

Throughout the transition period and up to the point where USCIS formally announces the new filing addresses, customers with concerns should contact the National Customer Service Center at 1-800-375-5283.

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

Got it. Thanks.

I heard USCIS is going to focus on student and work visas, so they can get people in before Fall 2010 semester starts. That makes sense why processing time went up on USCIS site went up from 5 to 6 months

Not unusual. For whatever reason, the VSC at least, cannot ever seem to get on an even keel and they run from concentrating on one type of visa to another, they WILL keep a few adjudicators working on other than what they are focused on at a given moment. They continually say they will get "back to normal" but this seems to be the normal. Last September they focused on K-1s for about 6 weeks and were popping them out in 10 days! After some people had waied 6 months, people filing in late September got theirs approved in 10-30 days! Go figure. They play fast and loose with the "first in first out" rule. But I guess they do get swamped with certain types of visas at certain times. As I recall the K visas peak in late summer (check the pinned topic at the top of the K-1 forum)

The bottom line is, it is the government, they have the visas, no one else does, they will do it when they are ready, you will wait patiently and you WILL LIKE IT!!!!!!!! If you do not like it, too bad. So sad.

Now they will be doing our healthcare.

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

Does this mean they going to speed up processing of our applications?

USCIS Transitions the Intake Function to Lockbox Network for Several Benefit Requests

May 25th, 2010

WASHINGTON – U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) today announced that it will be transitioning the intake function of several more forms from the Service Centers to its Lockbox network. By centralizing form and fee intake to a Lockbox environment, USCIS will improve consistency and integrity in the intake process.

The forms scheduled for the transition:

– I-817, Application for Family Unity Benefits (If filing under section 301 of the Immigration Act of 1990);

– I-526, Immigrant Petition by Alien Entrepreneur ;

– I-539, Application to Extend/Change Nonimmigrant Status (Only those filed separately from the I-129);

– I-129F, Petition for Alien Fiance ;

– I-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker.

The transition will start mid-May with the Service Centers forwarding applications to the USCIS Dallas and Phoenix Lockbox facilities for processing. In June, USCIS will post the revised filing instructions, update the web page for each form, and announce the address change with a USCIS Update.

Throughout the transition period and up to the point where USCIS formally announces the new filing addresses, customers with concerns should contact the National Customer Service Center at 1-800-375-5283.

It may, at first, slow the process. The lockbox works thusly....applications, petitions are sent to the "lockboxes" and from there are forwarded to service centers for processing. In theory the service centers report to the central lockbox system and the central systems decides where to send your petition/application to best meet THEIR guidelines for processing. Keep in mind the guideline for processing an I-129f is 5 months and not considered "late" until 6 months. While this may speed thinsg up, it is designed to make sure they meet the 5 month processing time.

These changes (and the fee increases not yet announced) are being done in preparation of an anticipated amnesty program which will result in millions of new applications. This system has, more or less, been in effect for some time. VSC has been sending petitions and applications to other service centers for some time and using outside, contracted ajudicators.

In one way, this is little more than a change of mailing address, but I suspect that it will eventually result in better service as the number of places handling petitions/applications increases. IF it increases.

Fiancee/Spouse petitions are a very tiny amount of the volume handled by USCIS. As much as our beautiful, wonderful RUB wives have to offer, the average American cannot name a country that begins with "U" and is still marrying domestic women without USCIS approval. Fools.