Anti-illegal immigration tone alienating Hispanics

[Bad_Daddy 2,209]

Of course it's not ok. It's the way some propose we deal with the problem that I don't agree with.

My husband and I were just having this convo earlier, too. I don't believe we have to shoot at people at the border to keep them out. They wouldn't come in the first place if there was no work for them here.

Your husband is right imo. After reading post on here the past year the best way to fix this problem is go after the employer. Repubs and Dems keep resisting it though. Repubs own those businesses and Dems get the votes, so illegals are helping them both.

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

Your husband is right imo. After reading post on here the past year the best way to fix this problem is go after the employer. Repubs and Dems keep resisting it though. Repubs own those businesses and Dems get the votes, so illegals are helping them both.

They wouldn't need to come here if American's were not so lazy that they can't get off the couch to look for work.

[spookyturtle 9,465]

The law should stay as it currently stands, IMHO. Speeding up the process is fine, but allowing someone to stay here until they know if they will be approved or not? Who the hell is going to leave if they are told they won't get the waiver? As it currently stands, it is a gamble and a lengthy, involved no guarantees process. Some countries have higher success rates than others depending upon the adjudicating office.

If someone applies for a waiver while still here and is told no, they aren't going to leave. I say leave it as it is and take your chances while documenting your case.

[Obama 2012 1,714]

The law should stay as it currently stands, IMHO. Speeding up the process is fine, but allowing someone to stay here until they know if they will be approved or not? Who the hell is going to leave if they are told they won't get the waiver? As it currently stands, it is a gamble and a lengthy, involved no guarantees process. Some countries have higher success rates than others depending upon the adjudicating office.

If someone applies for a waiver while still here and is told no, they aren't going to leave. I say leave it as it is and take your chances while documenting your case.

who the hell are you, and what have you done with spooks?

[spookyturtle 9,465]

who the hell are you, and what have you done with spooks?

:lol:

[Bad_Daddy 2,209]

who the hell are you, and what have you done with spooks?

[Ban Hammer 12,899]

one post removed for negative stereotyping of countries south of the border.

[Bad_Daddy 2,209]

They wouldn't need to come here if American's were not so lazy that they can't get off the couch to look for work.

Are you stereotyping Americans?

[spookyturtle 9,465]

Are you stereotyping Americans?

Is that against TOS?

[Bad_Daddy 2,209]

Is that against TOS?

Only the VJ FB group could answer that question.

[spookyturtle 9,465]

Only the VJ FB group could answer that question.

I'm not on FB. Left out in the cold again. Damn.

[Bad_Daddy 2,209]

I'm not on FB. Left out in the cold again. Damn.

Trust me...your better off this way.

[MyLittlePony 340]

Yes i was once part of the FB club i got the boot no big lost to me.

[Used to be broken 146]

When you actually get a clue on the US immigration process then feel free to come back here and post with the big kids. As it is that bill does nothing but reward people that knowingly and willingly broke the laws of the United States of America by entering this country illegally. It's nothing more than a cheap sick play for votes while p*ssing on every one of us who made the decision to go through the US immigration process legally.

While I will not disagree that the timing of this announcement is politically dubious... I do disagree that it is a spit in the face of those who made the decision to go through the process legally. they are also utilizing the legal process within the current existing law. Congress provided a Hardship waiver within the law to alleviate the suffering of US Citizens married to or the children of those who would be affected by it. The Waiver procedure is a mechanism for Legal Immigration for those who are out of status for a number of reasons many of whom entered the country legally.

The proposed process change is not changing the law regarding the 3/10 year bars, nor is it changing the Hardship Standard. Nothing is changing but administrative details like the location of the adjudicating office for the waiver and allowing the concurrent filing of the waiver with the I130. Painting this as some kind of break or amnesty is a misinformation campaign designed to fire up people who are easily confused and do not understand the law into thinking the Administration is granting some kind of amnesty.

There was never a logical or legitimate reason to separate the filing locations, and this proposed change just streamlines processing but does not change any law on the books. There is no evidence at this point it will speed things up for waiver applicants or slow things down for other types of applications. Its a simple change in processing location of a certain type of LEGAL application for a certain type of alien who has a legal channel for immigration within existing law.

The proposed change in procedure changes the location of adjudication of the waiver from overseas USCIS offices to stateside USCIS offices which is a tremendous cost savings to the US Government As you know there was also a change in location filing for the I130 for DCF this accomplishes a similar purpose which is cost savings via consolidation of resources and centralized management capability. The proposed procedure also allows concurrent filing of the I601 with the I130 creating a time saving for the applicant as well as a cost savings to the government.

The proposed procedure does not put these applicants on similar footing to tourists who marry and AOS here (intentionally to evade the CR1 process or "accidentally who fell in love on vacation In these cases the waiver applicant will still have to travel to a foreign consulate to finalize his/her VISA as well as deal with any shenanigans and delays the consulate might cause.

These applicants have always had a legal channel to immigrate to the US just as most of the folks on this board but have a bar which delays that channel by 3/10 years. I will not get into a discussion of the draconian nature of this bar, the discriminatory application of it to only certain categories of VISA overstayers ...ie VISA Waiver countries vs non-visa waiver countries or the disproportionate punishment it metes out on those affected by it. In the final analysis it is not Amnesty or any form of it.

All in all its positive if the politics are left out. Family reunification is the reasoning and it saves not only the US Citizen money and allieviate's a number of problems but it reduces the burden on communities to support many of these families that are hobbled by this process.

To reiterate there is no change in the law there is a proposed change in the processing procedures for a small category of aliens with no criminal history who are married to US Citizens.

Edited January 17, 2012 by Used to be broken

[Used to be broken 146]

The last paragraph (which you referenced) sums it up quite nicely- you need it done for you again? Someone who reflexively throws the race card onto the table is probably the one who needs to be better informed....just sayin' You pedantically pop off about summarizing and becoming more well-informed, and your response to this entire piece is to call the poster a racist. I'm sure the irony escapes you.

This particular modification to our existing legislation (existing law, passed by the legislature) is simply the tip of the spear. Search Thomas for the 100 plus private bills (proposed legislation) for the relief of individual illegal aliens.... when you are better informed, just keep it to yourself.

As stated by myself and others there is no change to the exisiting law or a "special waiver" for illegal immigrants. Its a proposed rule change to modify the location and process of WHERE qualified applicants for US Immigration benefits will have their paperwork processed. Like Canadian citizens who currently have their I601 paperwork processed in Vermont, all I601 applicants will be allowed to file and have their applications processed in the US then wait to proceed overseas to complete it. This will cause all I601 applications to have similar "goal processing times" of around 6 months eventually instead of the situation currently where there are some overseas offices processing in 2-4 weeks while others process in as long as 18 months.

There is no change in the law. The waiver is based on Hardship to a US Citizen and it serves that purpose well. If you think that US Immigration law should impose a hardship on US Citizens than you might be out of step with your largely Hispanic community.

Please continue your research on private immigration bills we will all be fascinated to find out if any of them passed I think you will have a hard time finding evidence of any successful private immigration bills or evidence of a trend to subvert current immigration law by private bill fiat.