Dems fight plan to raise immigrant fees.

[peejay 327]

Why should the US taxpayer pay for services that benefits the immigrant? We shouldn't be subsidizing immigration. The truth is that statistically immigrants tend to vote Democratic. No wonder the Democrats want the US taxpayer to buy more votes for them.

Dems fight plan to raise immigrant fees

By MICHELLE MITTELSTADT

2007 Houston Chronicle Washington Bureau

WASHINGTON — The Bush administration's plan to sharply raise fees to become a citizen, get a work permit or obtain other immigration services could hit a bump in the road.

The chairwoman of the House immigration subcommittee and other congressional Democrats are questioning the Citizenship and Immigration Service's bid to raise application fees by an average 66 percent starting as early as June.

Also, Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., and his allies said Wednesday that the federal government should fund the delivery of immigration services rather than make applicants pay the entire costs.

Unlike most federal agencies, Citizenship and Immigration Services is overwhelmingly funded by application fees. They account for 90 percent of its $2 billion budget this year.

Obama, a presidential contender, and other Democrats argued that Congress should provide the money for part of the agency's budget. Hiking fees could price citizenship out of the reach of immigrants obeying immigration laws, they said.

"We want to reward you for playing by the rules, not punish you with higher fees," Obama said at a Capitol news conference with leaders of several immigrant-rights groups.

Amplifying the Washington message, the National Association of Latino Elected Officials protested the fee increases at news conferences Wednesday in Houston and other cities.

The immigration agency wants a near-doubling of the citizenship fee, to $595 from $330, and a hike in the application for legal permanent residence, to $905 from $325.

The fee increases, estimated to raise $1 billion annually, would be used to hire and train more staff, upgrade computer systems and offices and cut processing times by 20 percent, CIS Director Emilio Gonzalez said in January.

But Rep. Luis Gutierrez, D-Ill., questioned the concept.

"The proposed fee hikes are a glaring example of the government imposing higher prices on its customers while continuing to offer inadequate, inefficient and ineffective services," he said.

Obama and Gutierrez are offering a bill that would allow the agency to seek increased appropriations from Congress as well as funds for citizenship promotion and education programs.

Sen. John Cornyn, the Texan who is the top Republican on the Senate immigration subcommittee, said the burden should not shift to the taxpayer.

"User fees are entirely appropriate,'' Cornyn said in an interview. "The idea that people who don't directly benefit — the taxpayers — would bear the expense that really benefits only the immigrant is to me not a desirable solution."

The immigration service is in the midst of a 60-day public comment period on its fee proposal and will review the reaction before making the plan final. More than 1,600 comments have been received.

Rep. Zoe Lofgren, the California Democrat who chairs the House immigration subcommittee, said Gonzalez may be bending on the plan's details.

"He has told me that they are looking to redo the proposal," Lofgren said in an interview. "They are trying to redo it to make it work for families."

Agency spokesman Bill Wright denied any wholesale revision of the plan. "We are not backpedaling at all," he said, adding that the agency would make adjustments after April 2, when all comments are due.

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/headli...on/4611240.html

[Heracles 417]

Why should the US taxpayer pay for services that benefits the immigrant? We shouldn't be subsidizing immigration. The truth is that statistically immigrants tend to vote Democratic. No wonder the Democrats want the US taxpayer to buy more votes for them.

Also, Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., and his allies said Wednesday that the federal government should fund the delivery of immigration services rather than make applicants pay the entire costs.

Obama, a presidential contender, and other Democrats argued that Congress should provide the money for part of the agency's budget. Hiking fees could price citizenship out of the reach of immigrants obeying immigration laws, they said.

Sen. John Cornyn, the Texan who is the top Republican on the Senate immigration subcommittee, said the burden should not shift to the taxpayer.

"User fees are entirely appropriate,'' Cornyn said in an interview. "The idea that people who don't directly benefit — the taxpayers — would bear the expense that really benefits only the immigrant is to me not a desirable solution."

Why am I not surprised.

The US taxpayer is already wasting Billions on the true cost of illegal immigrants. Now a group of idiots is promoting they fund all other immigrants. What fantasy world do these idiots live in? Why don't they try to migrate to any other developed country and see how much they will have to pay to move there??

[Dan J 277]

The irony is, with the right immigrants, the government would actually make more money in taxes. Especially those that come here as a skilled worker.

But I wouldn't suggest removing all fees from the process, fees do prevent people from filing frivolous applications and slowing the entire process down.

Doubling or more the cost to file vs a possible 20% gain in processing time doesn't seem like a good tradeoff.

Edited March 8, 2007 by Dan + Gemvita

[Ban Hammer 12,829]

more pandering to the illegals.

[mawilson 2,133]

more pandering to the illegals.

I doubt it - the illegals don't pay any fees

[peejay 327]

more pandering to the illegals.

As I stated...there is a method to this madness. Statistically immigrants tend to vote Democrat. Teddy Kennedy has legislation pending now in the US Senate to give amnesty and a pathway to citizenship for almost all the illegal aliens in America. And these lunatics want to put more sugar on the cream by having the taxpayer foot the bill for their citizenship. These people are insane...but not as insane as the fools that vote for them.

I'm no fan of the Republicans either. Most of these illegals somehow managed to sneak into the USA with a Republican President, Senate, and House in the driver's seat. They were all too willing to help out their crooked buddies in corporate America to get as much cheap illegal labor as possible subsidized by the taxpayer.

Cheap votes and cheap labor. The whole lot of these idiots need to be run out of office.

[Ban Hammer 12,829]

more pandering to the illegals.

I doubt it - the illegals don't pay any fees

coming soon to a senate near you

[dalegg 143]

Why am I not surprised.

You shouldn't be surprised by our Government at all. Here's one I found out yesterday- apparantly Digital TV is now a basic right of American Citizens. So much so that they are setting aside up to $1,500,000,000-- that's 1.5 BILLION dollars-- to buy anyone who has not converted to digital by 2009 a digital converter for their television set. This all comes under a bill- signed by that seriously fiscally conservative Republican George Bush called "DEFICIT REDUCTION ACT OF 2005" Source

See SEC. 3005. DIGITAL-TO-ANALOG CONVERTER BOX PROGRAM, under the "‘Digital Television Transition and Public Safety Act of 2005’’ (apparantly analog television is also a public safety hazard)

Edited March 9, 2007 by dalegg

[mawilson 2,133]

apparantly Digital TV is now a basic right of American Citizens

Damn right!

[Dan J 277]

Why am I not surprised.

You shouldn't be surprised by our Government at all. Here's one I found out yesterday- apparantly Digital TV is now a basic right of American Citizens. So much so that they are setting aside up to $1,500,000,000-- that's 1.5 BILLION dollars-- to buy anyone who has not converted to digital by 2009 a digital converter for their television set. This all comes under a bill- signed by that seriously fiscally conservative Republican George Bush called "DEFICIT REDUCTION ACT OF 2005" Source

See SEC. 3005. DIGITAL-TO-ANALOG CONVERTER BOX PROGRAM, under the "'Digital Television Transition and Public Safety Act of 2005'' (apparantly analog television is also a public safety hazard)

I hope they plan to pay for that with the sale of the frequencies they supposedly will free up.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

I wonder if the fee increases will result in a measurably more efficient system.

I called the customer service number last week and was surprised that you are now able to talk with people who actually know what they're talking about. Unfortunately you still have to go through the "front line" call center staff who are still idiots and are still giving contradictory and inaccurate information.

That said $950 for an LPR application (up from $325) seems a bit steep to me...

[Alex+R 0]

I think it makes sense. It's a government service, and it usually benefits USCs (employers, FAMILY MEMBERS, AHEM, or others who brought the immigrants here in the first place) to get these people benefits. The U.S. shouldn't choose who gets to become a citizen or permanent resident based on who has the most money. That's not what this country is (supposed to be) about, and I wonder if that has anything to do with the Dems' fighting the immigration fee hike.

[Ban Hammer 12,829]

I think it makes sense. It's a government service, and it usually benefits USCs (employers, FAMILY MEMBERS, AHEM, or others who brought the immigrants here in the first place) to get these people benefits. The U.S. shouldn't choose who gets to become a citizen or permanent resident based on who has the most money. That's not what this country is (supposed to be) about, and I wonder if that has anything to do with the Dems' fighting the immigration fee hike.

if it's not, then why are so many up in arms about illegal immigrants from mexico?

it's always a country's right to pick and choose who immigrats. fact of life. and given that, why not pick the best, the brightest, the most to offer, and those with money or the ability to make money? they'll be less of a burden on the rest of the taxpayers. everyone on vj has the right to bring their foreign born SO or spouse to the usa, but don't go making it sound like the taxpayer should subsidize that choice.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Is it really about subsidisation or simply determining what is a 'fair' price for the service?

I can't see much of a justification for a 300% markup on an LPR application if the service doesn't improve in equal measure. Otherwise its money for nothing - in much the same way that monies taken at toll roads and state tax don't seem to translate into improving the existing infrastructure in any meaningful way.

[rebeccajo 14]

I wonder if the fee increases will result in a measurably more efficient system.

I called the customer service number last week and was surprised that you are now able to talk with people who actually know what they're talking about. Unfortunately you still have to go through the "front line" call center staff who are still idiots and are still giving contradictory and inaccurate information.

That said $950 for an LPR application (up from $325) seems a bit steep to me...

The new fee ($950 or so) includes the AOS, EAD and AP.