Step 2 of my plan to visit - Ties

[Jack2 0]

I think I will be repeating what moxcamel said; however, I agree with what I think they are trying to say...

The immigration process is broken. (not the VWP) For me to have to wait 4-6 months for the USCIS to process a form that should take two weeks to process is evidence of the bureaucratic backlog and poor leadership within the USCIS organization.

The OP and others (like me and my fiance) wouldn't have to use the VWP if the USCIS processing times were realistic.

So you would rather file, get approved & see America for the first time only when you move here?

No. We wouldn't have to use the VWP after we were engaged if the USCIS was more efficient. She has already visited several times before we submitted the I-129F...

[Jack2 0]

I think I will be repeating what moxcamel said; however, I agree with what I think they are trying to say...

The immigration process is broken. (not the VWP) For me to have to wait 4-6 months for the USCIS to process a form that should take two weeks to process is evidence of the bureaucratic backlog and poor leadership within the USCIS organization.

The OP and others (like me and my fiance) wouldn't have to use the VWP if the USCIS processing times were realistic.

an adjudicator who has 500 peitions a month can NOT possibly do one in 2 weeks. thats a deffinate dream world, a good one, but not one realistic.

So, why is Vermont able to turn around so many petitions in less than one month? ...imho, it is about running an organization efficiently. I work for the US gov't and know how bad it can be. USCIS is the worst I have ever seen. If they don't have enough adjudicator's, the leadership should be changing the manning documents to change this!

From my understanding, the actual work time for USCIS to complete a I-129F is 2 weeks or less. Backlog creates the 4-6 month wait.

I guess it is more frustrating to me because I have all kinds of background checks on myself due to my current job, and don't understand how it could take more than 5 minutes to verify my background.... (this is my personal rant)

[Sinergy 3]

I think I will be repeating what moxcamel said; however, I agree with what I think they are trying to say...

The immigration process is broken. (not the VWP) For me to have to wait 4-6 months for the USCIS to process a form that should take two weeks to process is evidence of the bureaucratic backlog and poor leadership within the USCIS organization.

The OP and others (like me and my fiance) wouldn't have to use the VWP if the USCIS processing times were realistic.

an adjudicator who has 500 peitions a month can NOT possibly do one in 2 weeks. thats a deffinate dream world, a good one, but not one realistic.

So, why is Vermont able to turn around so many petitions in less than one month? ...imho, it is about running an organization efficiently. I work for the US gov't and know how bad it can be. USCIS is the worst I have ever seen. If they don't have enough adjudicator's, the leadership should be changing the manning documents to change this!

From my understanding, the actual work time for USCIS to complete a I-129F is 2 weeks or less. Backlog creates the 4-6 month wait.

I guess it is more frustrating to me because I have all kinds of background checks on myself due to my current job, and don't understand how it could take more than 5 minutes to verify my background.... (this is my personal rant)

yea please dont think i for one dont understand, if you see my timeline i went thru CSC, took 175 days. vermont doesnt take care of as many states as California does.and as for the bolded part, NO, there is nowhere saying it takes 2 weeks to complete a petition, thats why they give a frame of 30-90 days, NEVER have they said or stated 2 weeks.

Edited September 22, 2007 by Ionescu

[Sinergy 3]

And why has this become an everyday argument. i have said this many times. WE CHOSE TO MARRY OUTSIDE OF THE US. There is a process to come into the US.and we knew this before we filed, therefore we really have no reason to complain about it. and getting a visa is a Privilege NOT a right. If you chose to marry an american you wouldnt have any probs. but we didnt, we fell in love with nonamericans and we have to go thru the process. there is a process for a reason, and i for one as im sure everyone else, KNEW before i agreed to marry my husband that i couldnt just bring him into america like i could a pack of cigs.

[TracyTN 237]

I agree. My fiance' was able to visit the United States on the VWP for 3 weeks before we sent in our I-129F... What I am saying is, that if the process was only one or two months, my fiance' would probably not be coming to visit for 80 days...

So she still would have wanted to visit, just not for 80 days. In which case, the VWP is still nice to have so that she doesn't have to apply for a tourist visa, yes?

One or two months for the entire process (petition through interview) - given the sheer numbers of people in the system - is a bit much to ask.

So, why is Vermont able to turn around so many petitions in less than one month? ...imho, it is about running an organization efficiently. I work for the US gov't and know how bad it can be. USCIS is the worst I have ever seen. If they don't have enough adjudicator's, the leadership should be changing the manning documents to change this!

From my understanding, the actual work time for USCIS to complete a I-129F is 2 weeks or less. Backlog creates the 4-6 month wait.

I guess it is more frustrating to me because I have all kinds of background checks on myself due to my current job, and don't understand how it could take more than 5 minutes to verify my background.... (this is my personal rant)

Vermont WAS able to turn around petitions that quickly for quite a while. Mainly because the numbers of petitions they adjudicated were far less than their counterparts at the California Service Center.

While it may take 2 weeks or less to complete a petition (not sure where that figure came from), that still does not take into account the number of people in line ahead of you - not only for family based visa types, but for ALL the visa types processed by the service centers.

If the USCIS is the 'worst' you have ever seen, then I would hate to see your opinion of them a few years ago. It may seem hard to believe, but they actually HAVE improved. The previous quick turnaround of petitions at Vermont would be (in my opinion) an example of that.

[Caladan 19]

A doctor's appointment doesn't count as proof of ties. Think about it-- you might break a doctor's appointment without thinking about it just because you didn't want to get out of bed that morning. How much easier would it be to break it when you have a fiancee waiting for you?

The VWP is not broken. It's actually about the only thing that makes sense. You're from a country with low risk of fraud, you have a passport, we trust the foreign government to issue you a passport, we've agreed on standards for the passport: come on in and stay for up to 90 days. Don't live here more than you live at home.

But the thing is, most people can't take 90 day vacations and with a fiance in the U.S. (i.e., every reason to stay) and a history of long visits, you run a risk of being turned around. We never had any problems in three years of visits, but our longest visit was 24 days and they never asked for proof of anything. We had a history of two-week long visits, basically.

[Caladan 19]

I'm just saying, I'm not going to chastise someone for wanting to be with their loved one and doing something about it. If someone has to use the VWP to visit their loved one, then the system is broken anyway and needs to be fixed. That's where the concern should lie, not with the few people who may technically be abusing it, but who are doing it for all the right reasons anyway. People like the OP are not the problem. The real abusers--the criminals--those are the people who are creating the real problems in the system.

Let's just throw customs & immigration rules out the window, eh?

Ah, the old "begging the question" fallacy. Because of course this is the only conclusion that can be drawn from my argument, eh?

People, just as a favor to those of us who work with arguments for a living... 'Begging the question' does not mean 'raises a question.' Put down the word 'fallacy' and back away slowly.

What you mean is, "devilette, this is not the only conclusion that can be drawn from my argument, and that's not what I meant."