USCIS Makes DORA Pilot Program Optional for I-485 Applicants
USCIS issued a notice modifying the District Office Rapid Adjudication (DORA) pilot program so that participation is optional rather than mandatory. (72 FR 34268). Optional filing will accommodate eligible applicants who wish to file their Form I-485 application package immediately by mail under the current fee schedule, rather than wait for an Infopass appointment to file in person under the DORA pilot program and potentially be subject to higher application fees. USCIS will post the optional filing procedures under the DORA pilot program on the Web pages for the Dallas, El Paso, and Oklahoma City offices
White House Report Lauds Immigrants’ Positive Effects
By Robert Pear
The New York Times, June 20, 2007
Washington -- Hoping to influence Congressional debate, the White House issued a report on Tuesday saying, “Immigration has a positive effect on the American economy as a whole and on the income of native-born American workers.”
Edward P. Lazear, whose Council of Economic Advisers issued a report praising immigrants’ role.
But it acknowledged that some research had found “small negative effects” on the wages of the least-skilled American workers.
The report, prepared by the president’s Council of Economic Advisers, says immigrants enhance the productivity of native-born workers and increase their earnings a significant amount, estimated at $37 billion a year.
In an interview, Edward P. Lazear, a labor economist who is the council chairman, gave the example of a construction site with many immigrants working as roofers.
“They might drive down slightly the wages of roofers in the United States,” Mr. Lazear said. “But as a result of having this valuable supply of labor from abroad, other people on the construction project like carpenters and electricians are more productive. They have better people to work with, more people to work with. The cost of doing the job is lower, and some of that is passed on to consumers in the form of lower prices.”
The study reinforces President Bush’s campaign for a comprehensive immigration bill that calls for more border security, a guest worker program and a “merit-based system” of selecting immigrants that emphasizes education and job skills. The bill, pending in the Senate, would also offer legal status and work permits to most of the estimated 12 million illegal immigrants in the United States.
Many Democrats say the bill could depress the wages of American workers. Senator Byron L. Dorgan, Democrat of North Dakota, said the guest worker program would “put downward pressure” on the wages in construction, manufacturing and other industries.
The White House is entering a debate that has been raging for years.
In one study, George J. Borjas, a professor of economics at Harvard, found that “by increasing the supply of labor between 1980 and 2000 immigration reduced the average annual earnings of native-born men by an estimated $1,700, or about 4 percent.”
“Among natives without a high school education, who roughly correspond to the poorest tenth of the work force,” Professor Borjas said, “the estimated impact was even larger, reducing their wages by 7.4 percent.”
“Over time,” Professor Borjas said in an interview, “the economy adjusts to the presence of immigrants. But in the long run, after all the adjustments, the wages of low-skill workers still go down by 4 percent or 5 percent.”
The White House report is more consistent with the findings of David Card, a professor of economics at the University of California, Berkeley, who said in an interview, “The overall effect of immigration on the average wages of natives is slightly positive.”
In their report, the White House economists said, “The difficulties faced by high school dropouts are a serious policy concern.”
But the economists added, “Immigration is not a central cause of those difficulties, nor is reducing immigration a well-targeted way to help these low-wage natives.”
On another volatile question, the White House said immigrants and their children tended to have “a slightly positive fiscal impact” because, in the long run, they pay more in taxes than they consume in benefits.
The White House study acknowledged that “the positive fiscal impact tends to accrue at the federal level, while net costs tend to be concentrated at the state and local level,” where education and health care are provided.
Immigrants sometimes compete with native-born workers. But the White House said, “Immigrants tend to complement — not substitute for — natives” in the workplace.
Over all, foreign-born workers make up 15.3 percent of the civilian labor force and account for half the growth in the labor force in the last 10 years. They differ in significant ways from native-born workers.
“In contrast to their 15 percent share in the total labor force,” Mr. Lazear said, “foreign-born workers accounted for much higher proportions of workers without high school degrees and of those with Ph.D. degrees, especially for those working in scientific occupations.”
Judge Halts Texas City's Immigration Law
June 20, 2007
By Anabelle Gray, Associated Press Writer
DALLAS (AP) - A federal judge on Tuesday blocked the Dallas suburb of Farmers Branch from enforcing a voter-approved law prohibiting apartment rentals to illegal immigrants until a legal challenge is resolved.
U.S. District Judge Sam Lindsay had previously issued a temporary restraining order in May, blocking the law a day before it was to take effect. He issued a preliminary injunction Tuesday.
``Farmers Branch, rather than deferring to the federal government's determination of immigration status, has created its own classification scheme for determining which noncitizens may rent an apartment,'' Lindsay wrote.
The law would have required apartment managers to verify that renters are U.S. citizens or legal immigrants before leasing to them, with a few exceptions. Landlords would have faced fines of up to $500 for violating the measure with each day considered as a separate violation.
``Today's decision should serve as a cautionary tale for other Texas municipalities that have considered similar ordinances,'' said Lisa Graybill, legal director for the American Civil Liberties Union of Texas, which is suing the city. She said the towns should concentrate on local issues such as schools and law enforcement.
Opponents of the law are preparing for a trial, said William A. Brewer III, lead counsel for three apartment complexes suing Farmers Branch. They plan to seek damages in the millions for the business they've lost since the ordinance was announced, plus legal fees, Brewer said.
Calls placed to city officials and one of the city's attorneys were not immediately returned Tuesday.
Farmers Branch voters endorsed the ordinance 2-to-1 in May during the nation's first public vote on a local government measure meant to combat illegal immigration. City council members unanimously approved the measure last year, saying it was necessary to protect the safety and well-being of residents.
Opponents of the ordinance have argued that it is unconstitutional, discriminatory and too vague.
They say apartment managers, and not immigration authorities, would determine who is eligible to live in Farmers Branch and face the legal repercussions of those decisions. The law also prevents U.S. citizen children and their undocumented immigrant parents from living together in Farmers Branch, opponents say.
Attorneys for the city argued the ordinance simply determines who should or should not be in the country, but does not regulate immigration.
During a hearing this month, lawyers for Farmers Branch acknowledged there were still ``drafting issues'' with the ordinance. They presented a document outlining how the ordinance could be salvaged if the court finds portions of it are flawed, but Lindsay said that would require the court to cross into legislative territory.
Nationwide, more than 90 cities or counties have proposed, passed or rejected laws prohibiting landlords from leasing to illegal immigrants, penalizing businesses that employ undocumented workers, or training police to enforce immigration laws.
``Around the nation, every judge who has reviewed these local anti-immigrant ordinances has put a stop to them,'' said Nina Perales, the regional counsel for the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund who argued for the preliminary injunction.
Pelosi Expresses Optimism for House Action on Immigration Law
By Laura Litvan
The Bloomberg News, June 15, 2007
Speaker Nancy Pelosi expressed optimism the House would approve a plan to overhaul U.S. immigration law if it gets through the Senate first.
``We want it to be bipartisan and comprehensive,'' Pelosi said in an interview on Bloomberg Television's ``Political Capital with Al Hunt,'' airing this weekend. Asked if the House would pass the measure currently before the Senate, she said, ``with some modification. But we'll work together in a bipartisan way.''
Pelosi, a California Democrat, said the legislation must get the support of 50 to 70 Republicans in the House. That doesn't mean an equal number of Democrats would withhold support, she added. ``It just means we'd like to see a show of bipartisanship.''
Democrats control the House by a margin of 232-201 with two vacancies. House leaders say there are now about 40 Republicans who would back a comprehensive immigration package.
President George W. Bush must continue to play an active role in lining up Republican support, Pelosi said, praising him for his leadership so far. ``I have to commend President Bush,'' she said. ``He has been very courageous on this issue.''
Bush helped break a Senate stalemate on the legislation this week by making a rare visit to Capitol Hill and endorsing a $4.4 billion fund to tighten enforcement and increase patrols along the U.S. border with Mexico to prevent illegal immigration.
Senate Agreement
Senators last night reached a tentative agreement to revive the measure, which was stalled by a dispute over how many amendments will be considered. The overhaul would offer legal status to 12 million undocumented aliens and create a guest- worker program championed by Bush.
White House spokesman Scott Stanzel, traveling today with Bush to an appearance in Wichita, Kansas, told reporters that the administration is ``encouraged'' that the Senate will act on the legislation.
Reid Presses Bush Over GOP Votes
By Stephen Dinan
The Washington Times, June 12, 2007
The top Senate Democrat said yesterday that President Bush must prove he can deliver more Republican votes before Democrats will put the immigration bill, which collapsed last week, back on the Senate schedule.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid told Mr. Bush that the only hope for the bill is if he delivers the votes of more than 20 Republican senators to break a filibuster and pass the measure.
The Nevada Democrat had a frank assessment of the bill's prospects, saying the 51-member Democratic caucus was 'about maxed out' at the 38 votes they delivered on a test vote on the bill last week 22 short of breaking a filibuster. They were joined by just seven Republicans one-third of the number Mr. Reid says the president must deliver.
'It's the president's bill,' Mr. Reid said, adding that if Democrats are being counted on to supply the additional votes, 'it won't happen.'
Mr. Bush, who will visit with Senate Republicans in a closed-door meeting today to try to rally support, is optimistic, even to the point of sounding jaunty.
'I believe we can get it done. I'll see you at the bill signing,' he told reporters at a press conference in Bulgaria yesterday.
Democrats and White House officials who both say they are working toward getting a bill passed spent the weekend pointing fingers at each other. Mr. Bush, who was traveling in Europe, named Mr. Reid in his weekly radio address, and in TV appearances several administration officials fingered the Democratic leader as the roadblock.
Yesterday, Democrats fired back with a letter saying Mr. Bush has worked with them so far but now needs to show 'stronger leadership.'
'Simply put, we need many more than seven Republicans to vote for cloture and final passage of this bill,' Mr. Reid and the rest of his Senate leadership team wrote.
The letter offers no indication of how Mr. Bush can prove he has earned enough support, and Republican aides said it was a move to try to conceal Mr. Reid's own efforts to sink the chances for a bill.
The immigration bill is the result of a 'grand bargain' negotiated behind closed doors by a small bipartisan group of senators and the Bush administration. It includes a path to citizenship for most of the estimated 12 million to 20 million illegal aliens, a temporary-worker program for future foreign workers, and a rewrite of immigration rules to favor those with needed skills or educational attainment.
Those who negotiated the bill spent the past two weeks the Senate was in session trying to fend off amendments from both sides. Democrats wanted to end the temporary-worker program, seeing it as exploitative, and expand family-based immigration; Republicans sought to improve enforcement and make the administration prove it has first secured the border.
But the bargain collapsed last week. First, the Senate adopted a Democrat-led amendment that ended the temporary-worker program after five years and a Republican-led amendment that would allow those who don't qualify for legalization to be deported. Then, the Senate voted 50-45 against cutting off debate falling 15 votes shy of the 60 votes needed.
As the bill was foundering, senators floated a number of ideas to try to break the stalemate and win more votes, including what became known as the 'magic amendment' that would have undone some of the amendments that passed and could have included other changes designed to earn extra support.
But those involved in the 'grand bargain' said they are taking a different approach this week.
'Humpty Dumpty fell off and we're going to put Humpty Dumpty back together, but it isn't going to be done the same way that we were dealing with last week,' said Sen. Jon Kyl, Arizona Republican. 'Some of the things that were kind of in play last week may not be quite the same now.'
His counterpart, Sen Edward M. Kennedy of Massachusetts, the Democrats' chief negotiator in the grand bargain, said he saw good signs from statements over the weekend and said Mr. Bush has the chance to be convincing today.
'There's nothing more persuasive than sincerity, and I think the president on this issue has demonstrated knowledge, awareness and sincerity, and I think that's a powerful message,' he said.
Mr. Bush will likely find a polite but wary audience behind the closed doors. Many Senate Republicans think he is making a political and policy mistake by pressing for this immigration bill, and some accuse him of caving on key principles.
Sen. Jeff Sessions, Alabama Republican and an opponent of the bill, said Mr. Bush has even backed off of the principles he floated earlier this year in a Powerpoint presentation when the grand bargain was being formed.
'The principles that were stated in the Powerpoint presentation got watered down in every way,' he said. 'The bill does not do what it needs to do. It is a political compromise.'
It will be difficult to find enough support among senators to break the filibuster.
In a test vote last week, 38 Republicans, joined by 11 Democrats and one independent, voted to filibuster the immigration bill. Just seven Republicans joined 37 Democrats and one independent in voting to limit the debate and force a final up-or-down vote.
Last week, Sen. Charles E. Schumer, New York Democrat, said he thought the vote on a final bill would be similar to the test vote. If so, that's bad news for the bill's backers, since the test vote garnered 50 votes in opposition enough to kill the bill.
Bush Says Immigration Bill Will Survive
By Jennifer Loven
The Associated Press, June 11, 2007
SOFIA, Bulgaria (AP) -- President Bush, turning from adulation in the Balkans to difficulties back home, said Monday that his stalled immigration overhaul would be revived and his embattled attorney general would not fall under a Senate vote of no-confidence.
'I'll see you at the bill signing,' Bush said confidently about an immigration bill that has run into deep trouble on Capitol Hill.
Bush, who left for Washington later Monday, plans to trek to Capitol Hill on Tuesday to have lunch with Republican senators, part of a hands-on approach to persuading party conservatives that the bill is better than the status quo.
. . .
Bush's comments on immigration reflected his determination to pass a bill to give millions of unlawful immigrants a path to citizenship. It is a top priority for the remainder of his presidency, but a fragile bipartisan compromise on the issue has unraveled.
He has been criticized for not doing enough for the bill, which is bitterly opposed by many conservatives in his party. Some lawmakers claim it is dead for the year, but Bush said it was only one step back after 'two steps forward' and vowed to push ahead.
'I believe we can get it done,' he said.
Immigration Bill Fails Key Test-Vote
By Julie Hirschfeld Davis
The Associated Press, June 7, 2007
A fragile bipartisan compromise that would legalize millions of unlawful immigrants suffered a setback Thursday when it failed a test vote, leaving its prospects uncertain.
Still, the measure — a top priority for President Bush that's under attack from the right and left — got a reprieve when Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., said he would give it more time before yanking the bill and moving on to other matters.
'We need to complete this marathon,' Reid said.
His decision set the stage for yet another procedural vote later Thursday that will measure lawmakers' appetite for a so-called 'grand bargain' between liberals and conservatives on immigration.
By a vote of 33-63, the Senate fell far short of the 60 votes that would have been needed to limit debate on the immigration measure and put it on a path to passage. Republicans — even those who helped craft the measure and are expected to support it — banded together to oppose that move, while a majority of Democrats backed it.
Republicans were seeking assurances they would get chances to add several conservative-backed changes that would toughen the measure.
Proponents in both parties were scrambling to find a way of reversing a blow their compromise sustained earlier Thursday, when the Senate voted to phase out the bill's temporary worker program after five years.
Amendment To Hike H-1B Fees Passes In Senate
The U.S. Senate on Thursday passed an amendment that could more than triple the fees employers pay for each H-1B visa petition if the controversial immigration reform bill being wrangled in Congress is signed into law.
The amendment sponsored by Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., had originally proposed raising fees from the current $1,500 to $8,500 per H-1B visa. However, the version of the amendment that passed the Senate 59 to 35 calls for an increase in fees to $5,000 per H-1B visa.
The fees are earmarked to fund a new scholarship program for American students pursuing degrees in fields related to mathematics, technology, and health care.
In a statement, Compete America, a coalition of U.S. tech companies, called the passage of the Sanders amendment 'an outrageous and onerous tax increase on our nation's most innovative companies, and could make the H-1B program cost-prohibitive, especially for smaller businesses.'
Compete America predicts the amendment will 'accelerate outsourcing and undermine U.S. economic growth.'
Supporters of the amendment, including U.S. IT worker advocacy groups, however, characterized the amendment as a step in the right direction for making it more difficult for companies to displace American workers with lower-paid foreign talent.
NOTE: The Roll Call vote for Sen. Sander's amendment is available on line at
http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=110&session=1&vote=00179
USCIS Sets Final Fee Schedule to Build an Immigration Service for the 21st Century (Q&A)
May 29, 2007
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) today announced a new fee schedule for immigration benefit applications and petitions. In consideration of public comments received, USCIS has made some substantive changes that will benefit some families with children applying for adjustment of status and prospective adoptive parents who experience delays in finalizing their adoptions. The new fee schedule rule also expands the availability of waivers and exemptions. The final schedule, effective on July 30, 2007, largely implements the fee structure described in the proposed rule published on Feb. 1, 2007.Even with the changes, the new schedule will ensure that USCIS will have sufficient funding to fully recover its costs of doing business and also enable USCIS to meet national security and public safety concerns, prevent and detect fraud, and invest in comprehensive transformation efforts – all leading to a more efficient and effective immigration system.
BACKGROUND
USCIS last updated its fees on October 26, 2005, based solely on inflationary increases. Early in 2006, theagency completed its first comprehensive fee review in more than ten years and, as a result, found that current fee revenues were insufficient to recover full operating costs. Based on that review, USCIS published a proposed fee structure in the Federal Register on Feb. 1, 2007 seeking comments from the public. In addition to publication of the proposed rule, during the 60-day public comment period, USCIS leadership reached out to the community to encourage the public to submit comments on the rule to make sure their views were known to USCIS. USCIS Director Emilio Gonzalez also testified on February 14thbefore a Congressional subcommittee to discuss the proposed fee structure. USCIS received comments from more than 3,900 individuals and organizations – including refugee and immigrant service and advocacy organizations, public policy groups, state and local governmental entities, educational and other not-for-profit institutions, Members of Congress, corporations, and the general public.
QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS
Q. Please explain the revisions to the final rule from that which was proposed in February.
A. The agency received more than 3,900 comments on the proposed fee schedule. The final rule includes some substantive changes from the February fee proposal, without sacrificing the funding necessary for USCIS to strengthen the security and integrity of the immigration system, improve customer service, and modernize business operations for the 21st century. A more thorough discussion of these changes are found in the final rule – however, below is a synopsis:
• Children who are filing a concurrent Form I-485 (Adjustment of Status to Permanent Residence) with their parents will see a 25 percent reduction from the proposed filing fee;
• Prospective Adoptive Parents may now receive one free extension of the approval of FormI-600A (Application for Advance Processing of Orphan Petition) if they have not submitted a Form I-600 (Petition to Classify Orphan as Immediate Relative) for an orphan;
• Fee waivers may be requested by Form I-485 filers if their eligibility stems from asylum status, victims of human trafficking, certain juvenile immigrants, or self-petitioners under the Violence Against Women Act; • Fee waivers may be requested for Form I-485 filers if they apply under programs where, by law, they do not have to demonstrate that they will not be a public charge;
• Added “Special Immigrant-Juvenile” as a category of applicants exempt from the $375 filing fee for Form I-360 (Petition for Amerasian, Widow(er), or Special Immigrant); and
• USCIS officials will now be able to waive the $80 biometric fee for individuals who have been granted a fee waiver for their respective application/petition.
It is important to note that these changes, in particular the filing fee reduction for children filing with a concurrent Form I-485 with their parents, are in line with the Administration’s policy that each application fee should be set at the level to recover the costs of processing and adjudicating that application. In the case of I-485s for children filed with their parents, the costs of processing that application is less because the large majority of Form I-485s are filed by persons older than 14. Our analysis found a 35 percent difference in the average time it takes to process an I-485 by someone under fourteen years of age, as compared to the time it takes to process a case filed by someone older.
Q. When will the new fee schedule become effective?
A. The new fee schedule will be effective on July 30, 2007. Applications or petitions postmarked or filed on or after that date will require the new fees.
Q. If an applicant files a Form I-485 to adjust status before the rule is effective, will he/she have to pay for future interim benefits?
A. Yes. An applicant for adjustment of status who applies before the fee rule becomes effective will continue to have to file separate applications with fees for employment and travel authorization. Those who file an adjustment of status application (Form I-485) after the new fee schedule is effective will not have to pay the additional fees for employment and travel authorization as these costs have been included in the new adjustment of status application fee.
Q. How did USCIS engage with the public on the proposed fee schedule?
A. The comment period included not only an opportunity for the public to respond in writing, but also allowed USCIS leadership to meet with stakeholders throughout the country. USCIS officials conducted “question and answer” sessions in Washington, D.C., Los Angeles, New York, Chicago, Detroit, Boston, San Francisco, San Jose, Calif., Dallas, Phoenix and Denver. USCIS also discussed the issue through media interviews and with community-based organizations. Throughout this effort, it has been USCIS’ intent to inform the public about this rule and encourage them to submit comments. We believe we were successful given not only the volume of comments received, but also the value and usefulness of those comments.
Q. Are the public comments still available for public viewing?
A. Yes. The public comments are available on www.regulations.gov under docket #USCIS-2006-0044. A synopsis of those comments is also available in the fee rule itself, available for viewing at www.uscis.gov.
Q. Why is USCIS allowing fee waivers for certain classes of applicants filing for adjustment of status? Isn’t a need-based fee waiver inconsistent with the status or benefit being sought?
A. After considering the humanitarian purposes of certain statutes and reviewing the potential numbers of such applicants, USCIS decided to provide that a Form I-485 may be subject to a fee waiver when the person’s eligibility for adjustment of status stems from asylum status, ‘T’ status (victims of human trafficking) and self petitioners under the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA), or where by law the person otherwise is not required to demonstrate that he or she will not become a public charge, including but notlimited to, Adjustment of Status Applications for Special Immigrant – Juveniles, or based on the Cuban Adjustment Act, Haitian Refugee Immigration Fairness Act, and the Nicaraguan Adjustment and Central American Relief Act. Because an Adjustment of Status Application cannot be filed until some time after an alien has been granted ‘T’ or VAWA status, the final rule does not provide any blanket exemptions from the fee for filing Form I-485 since that time in the United States may have provided the alien some financial capabilities. Also, because additional fee waivers would have been inconsistent with the financial capability requirements for adjustment of status, the final rule does not expand fee waiver eligibility in such cases anyfurther. The changes made to the fee waiver and exemption eligibility criteria did increase fee waiver and exemption costs, but this increased cost did not cause an overall increase in fees because of the small number of affected applications and petitions.
Q. Many comments recommended alternative funding sources such as appropriated funds. Why didn’t you consider this?
A. Law and policy have long supported the proposition that those applying for immigration benefits should bear the costs of their processing. Thus, in this final rule, USCIS continues to adopt a fee schedule to recover its costs through user fees. While it is true that Congress has, in the past, enacted intermittent appropriations to subsidize the operations of USCIS, the President’s budget for FY 2008 does not request an appropriated subsidy, except for specific funds for the expansion of the Employment Eligibility Verification program. Even if an appropriation were requested, USCIS doubts that it would receive all of the necessary funding required to meet its mission responsibilities. Continuing to recover full costs at this time is necessary so as not to delay service delivery to applicants and petitioners. Further, using appropriated funds to support USCIS is risky because the demand for immigration benefits may change rapidly with little notice. For example, appropriated funds provided for naturalization benefits could likely be insufficient if there was an increase in the number of naturalization application benefits submitted. In this instance, USCIS would have to cut back on services (which would increase processing times) to cover the costs of processing the additional applications. Reliance on appropriations in the past has contributed to the funding problems USCIS has faced recently. USCIS’ new fee rule eliminates this problembecause the fees are based on a robust model that incorporates all costs relating to services thereby providing a more stable source of funding.
Q. How long before applicants and petitioners begin seeing improvements in USCIS service as a result of this new fee schedule?
A. USCIS is focused on continuous improvement. For example, we are committed to substantial reductions in processing times by the end of FY 2008 for four key applications: (1) Form I-90, Application to Renew or Replace a Permanent Resident Card; (2) Form I-485, Application to Register Permanent Residence or Adjust Status; (3) Form I-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker; and (4) Form N-400, Application for Naturalization. These four products represent almost one-third of USCIS’ total workload. By the end of FY 2008 (Sept. 30, 2008), USCIS plans to reduce processing times for each of these from six months to four
months. Applications for naturalization are projected to be reduced from seven months to five (when the ceremony at which a person takes the Oath of Allegiance is included as part of the process). Thus, our customers will see a significant improvement in the first full fiscal year following the fee adjustments. Also, by the end of FY 2009, we intend to reduce by 20 percent the average case processing times across the spectrum of applications and petitions. Premium processing fees will be used to transform USCIS from a paper-based process to an electronic environment, making it possible to incorporate more effective processing of low risk applicants and better identification of higher risk individuals. The new operational concept will be based on the types of online customer accounts used in the private sector in order to facilitate transactions, track activities, and reduce identity fraud. The solution will also help to meet customer expectations for on-demand information and immediate real-time electronic service over the Internet.
Q. You’ve raised fees before with the promise of improving service. What’s the difference between now and then?
A. The clear distinction between this new fee schedule and prior fee schedules is that the new fee schedule does not simply reflect costs and performance retrospectively, locking USCIS into a revenue stream that at best allows it to maintain the status quo. Instead the new fee schedule is designed to provide for an adequate and sustainable level of investment in staff, infrastructure, and processes to improve USCIS’ administration of the nation’s immigration laws. USCIS plans to review fees every two years to ensure that it is recovering the full cost of processing immigration benefit petitions/applications. USCIS is committed to update its fees through a similar analysis at least once every two years. In comparison to fee reviews over the last decade, which essentially made retrospective adjustments on a narrowly calculated fee review, future fee reviews will combine assumptions from recent experiences and incorporate productivity gains resulting from the modernization of operations (which may allow for cost reductions) and from prospective activity changes (such as those that may arise from additional security measures or performance changes).USCIS continues to seek ways to improve productivity while decreasing costs. USCIS is firmly committed to seeking new ways of doing business and reengineering processes in order to contain costs and pass on the savings to all of its customers. Large portions of this fee restructuring are designed to invest revenue in improvements to improve efficiency and effectiveness that will help reduce agency costs. Additionally, forthe first time, USCIS has incorporated a productivity measure into the fee model to ensure that productivity gains resulting from automated business processes and better technology will be factored into future fee reviews.
Q. Will the changes in the final rule affect USCIS’ ability to recover the full costs of operations and achieve promised service improvements?
A. No. The overall amount of the fee increase is the same as what was proposed even with its changes. The changes made to the Form I-485 fee, for example, merely redistribute the same costs as proposed within the population of applicants for this benefit in order to reduce the fees for families filing for adjustment of status. The other changes made had no impact on the fee schedule given the fairly small volume numbers associatedwith the affected applications and petitions. For example, USCIS did not reduce the naturalization fee, as doing so would increase the fees for other immigration benefit applications and petitions. In sum, the new fee schedule will not sacrifice the funding necessary for USCIS to strengthen the security and integrity of the immigration system, improve customer service, and modernize business operations for the 21st century.
Q. How can I obtain detailed information about the comments you received and how you responded?
A. Discussion of the public comments is featured in the final fee rule, available for review on USCIS’ Web
site at www.uscis.gov. While the number of comments received was relatively large, many were similar in content and issue. Accordingly, we were able to group the comments into the following categories: (a) Relative Amount of Fees (including recovery of additional costs and enhancements, improvement in service and reduction in inefficiencies, level of fees, multiple biometric data requests, premium processing, etc.; (b) Alternative Sources of Funding (includes appropriated funds); (c) Specific Benefit Application and Petition Fees (e.g., naturalization application, application to adjust status, employment authorization for students, etc.; (d) Fee Waivers and Exemptions (including victims and asylee adjustments, special immigrant – juvenile, and biometric fees); (e) Authority to Set and Collect Fees (includes discussion on the agency’s general authority for charging fees); and (f) Methods Used to Determine Fee Amounts (e.g., methodology, alternative budget modeling, calculating specific processing requirements, etc.).
Q. Where can I obtain more information on fee waivers?
A. Fee waiver information is available on USCIS’ Web site at www.uscis.gov (click on “Immigration Forms” in the banner, then “Fee Waiver Guidance” under Related Links.
Q. Where can I obtain more information about the new fee schedule?
A. The final rule is available on USCIS’ Web site atwww.uscis.gov, in addition to a detailed chart that identifies the new fees for immigration benefit applications and petitions.
Immigration Compromise Moves Closer
By David Rogers
The Wall Street Journal, April 18, 2007; Page A7
Washington -- Hoping to jump-start comprehensive immigration overhaul, the White House and Senate Democrats are embracing a two-step approach aimed at assuring wary conservatives that key border-security provisions will be put in place first.
Last year, a similar 'trigger' proposal was defeated 55-40 in the Senate for fear it would effectively kill any chance of carrying out the next steps, such as guest-worker programs or adjusting the legal status of millions of undocumented people now in the U.S.
Since then, its chief supporter, Sen. Johnny Isakson (R., Ga.), has been courted by Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff, who has supported reviving the trigger to help broaden support. Democrats, now in control of Congress, say they also are open to the idea in a new immigration bill, if it wins Republican votes.
'It's going to take some time to develop the systems that we're creating in the immigration bill, and so we are looking at what triggers could apply that would satisfy someone like Sen. Isakson,' said Sen. Ken Salazar (D., Colo.). 'It is a change of position, and there are lots of different changes as we try to accommodate.'
Major obstacles remain, such as the treatment of agricultural workers and how to clear the backlog of legal immigrants who have applied for permanent residency in the U.S. But by reviving the trigger proposal, however modest, both sides show they want to avoid the kind of bitter clash that doomed last year's effort.
'This is a whole different ballgame than it was a year ago,' Mr. Isakson said. 'Last year, it was a train coming down the track with the lights on, and if you got in the way, it was your fault. This year, it's the train is leaving in the next month or so, and tell us what it needs to do for you to be on board.'
'It's been tough going,' said Sen. Lindsey Graham (R., S.C.). 'I still say it's 50-50. But last year, people were talking about what divided them. Now, we're talking about how to solve the problem.'
With Commerce Secretary Carlos Gutierrez, Mr. Chertoff has participated in weeks of meetings, first with Senate Republicans and now members of both parties. Senior White House aides are part of the talks, which sometimes resemble political focus groups, as the administration tries to find the right formula to bring in Republican support. But Mr. Chertoff -- who would have to certify that the border-security requirements have been met -- is the most crucial player.
The administration believes these goals can be met 18 months after enactment. As important for Democrats is the time required to clear the backlog of legal immigrants seeking entree to the U.S. now so undocumented workers -- already here -- can apply for permanent residency. Clearing this backlog could take eight years, and one question is whether this can begin while the trigger period is running.
Democrats are impressed by Mr. Chertoff but say hard questions won't be answered until the talks move past concepts, and bill-writing begins. There is time pressure, too, since Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D., Nev.) has cleared the Senate schedule for a full-fledged floor debate on immigration in the last two weeks of May. Democrats believe the Senate must act in that window, so the House can follow this summer and keep alive the hope of an agreement before all of Washington is overtaken by the presidential politics of 2008.
Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy (D., Vt.), who is waging his own battles with the administration over the firing of federal prosecutors, signaled he might prefer the immigration bill go directly to the Senate floor, not through his panel. But Sen. Edward Kennedy (D., Mass.) wants to see a full committee markup that would help vet the package and build confidence going to the floor.
USCIS REACHES FY 2008 H-1B CAP
WASHINGTON
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) announced today that it has received enough H-1B petitions to meet the congressionally mandated cap for fiscal year 2008 (FY 2008). USCIS will use a random selection process (described below) for all cap-subject filings received on April 2, 2007and April 3, 2007. USCIS will reject and return along with filing fee(s) all petitions received on those days that are not randomly selected.
Cap Procedures: In keeping with USCIS regulations, USCIS will use the following process to handle H-1B petitions subject to the FY 2008 cap:
• USCIS has determined that as of April 2, 2007, it had received enough H-1B petitions to reach the FY 2008 H-1B cap and has set the “final receipt date” as April 2, 2007.
• In keeping with its regulations, USCIS will subject H-1B petitions received on the “final receipt date” and the following day to a computer-generated random selection process.
• USCIS will reject all cap-subject H-1B petitions for FY 2008 received on or after Wednesday, April 4, 2007.
• USCIS will reject and return along with the filing fee(s) all cap-subject H-1B petitions that are not randomly selected.
• Petitioners may re-submit petitions on April 1, 2008 when H-1B visas become available for FY 2009. This is the earliest date for which an employer may file a petition requesting FY 2009 H-1B employment with a start date of October 1, 2008.
As of late Monday afternoon (April 2), USCIS had received approximately 150,000 cap-subject H-1B petitions. USCIS must perform initial data entry for all filings received on April 2 and April 3 prior to conducting the random selection process. In light of the high volume of filings, USCIS will not be able to conduct the random selection for several weeks. In order to fully utilize its data entry and initial processing capacity, USCIS may choose to distribute filings received at one service center to other service centers for data entry. In the event that USCIS exercises this option, petitioners may receive receipt notices or other correspondence from a service center other than theone to which the H-1B submission was sent. USCIS advises employers that there is no need for concern should that occur and that there is no need to contact USCIS.
Cap-Exempt Petitions: As directed by the H-1B Visa Reform Act of 2004, the first 20,000 H-1B petitions filed on behalf of aliens with U.S.-earned masters’ or higher degrees are exempt from any fiscal year cap on available H-1B visas. USCIS does not yet know how many of these petitions it has received as those petitions are mixed with the cap-subject cases received on April 2 and 3. USCIS will make a future announcement regarding the “final receipt date” for these petitions.
Current H-1B Workers: Petitions filed on behalf of current H-1B workers do not count towards the congressionally mandated H-1B cap. Accordingly, USCIS will continue to process petitions filed to:
• Extend the amount of time a current H-1B worker may remain in the United States.
• Change the terms of employment for current H-1B workers.
• Allow current H-1B workers to change employers.
• Allow current H-1B workers to work concurrently in a second H-1B position
USCIS also notes that, in addition to the cap exemption for aliens with U.S. earned master’s degrees discussed above, certain H-1B petitions are exempt from the cap. Those petitions are not affected by this release.
H-1B in General: U.S. businesses utilize the H-1B program to employ foreign workers in specialtyoccupations that require theoretical or technical expertise in specialized fields, such as scientists, engineers, or computer programmers. As part of the H-1B program, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and the Department of Labor (DOL) require U.S. employers to meet specific labor conditions to ensure that American workers are not adversely impacted. The DOL’s Wage and Hour Division safeguards the treatment and compensation of H-1B workers.
– USCIS –
State Department Ramps Up Passport Production To Meet Record Demand
Washington, DC
March 23, 2007
The Department of State remains committed to providing Americans with the passports they need to travel abroad. As passport demand rises to historic levels, the Department is taking necessary steps to meet the challenge:
• Producing More Passports than Ever: The Department has set a new record for passport production. In the week ending March 22, 379,000 passports were issued, on top of the 321,000 passports issued the previous week. The Department of State is on track to issue over 1.5 million passports in March.
• Regional Agencies Working through the Weekend: Employees at the 17 Passport Agencies nationwide continue to work overtime and through the weekend to process applications to meet Americans' spring travel plans.
• Telephone Information Available Daily and Weekends: The National Passport Information Center (1-877-487-2778) is now open for limited weekend hours to make emergency arrangements for travelers departing in seven days or less. NPIC is already staffed Monday through Friday from 7 a.m. until midnight, Eastern Time.
• Volunteers on the Phones: On top of their regular duties, 350 State Department employees are serving on task forces, devoting nearly 2,500 hours to answering questions and helping Americans get their passports. The Department has installed high-capacity telephone lines to increase the volume of telephone calls it can receive.
• Volunteers at the Desks: Qualified State Department employees are also volunteering to help process passport applications. These volunteers, who have approved 5,000 applications so far, supplement the Department's corps of passport specialists, which has increased by 230 new hires since 2005.
Important Points for Travelers
Travelers can check the status of their passport applications on http://travel.state.gov.
Travelers who have applied for passports and are traveling in two weeks or sooner should call the National Passport Information Center at 1-877-487-2778 for information and assistance in arranging to have their passports ready in time for their trips. We ask that other travelers leave these phone lines open for those with immediate travel needs.
Travelers who have not applied for passports to date should plan ten weeks for standard passport processing and two weeks for expedited processing. Information on how to apply for a passport, including how to expedite processing, is available at http://travel.state.gov. Applicants requesting expedited service must write "EXPEDITE" on the outside of the envelope containing their application.
Microsoft Chair speaks before Senate committee: U.S. hurt by immigration, education policies
By William L. Watts
The Market Watch, March 7, 2007
Washington -- A lackluster school system and onerous immigration policies threaten to undermine United States' ability to compete in the world economy, Microsoft Chairman Bill Gates warned a Senate panel Wednesday.
Gates, appearing before the Senate Health, Energy, Labor and Pensions Committee, said he felt 'deep anxiety' about the nation's ability to keep up with foreign competitors unless it takes steps to boost high-school graduation rates and entice more students to study for advanced degrees in math and science-related fields, while also doing way with immigration policies that drive away the world's 'best and brightest' workers.
'When I reflect on the state of American competitiveness today, my immediate feeling is not only one of pride, but also of deep anxiety. Too often we as a society are sacrificing the long-term good of our country in the interest of short-term gain,' Gates said.
Gates urged lawmakers to pursue programs designed to double high-school graduation rates and to re-tool curriculums toward math and science-related careers. Gates argued that the U.S. education system remains stuck in the past, geared toward an economy based on manufacturing and agriculture rather than digital technology.
Gates called on lawmakers to re-authorize the No Child Left Behind education program, boost incentives for top teachers, and set a goal of doubling the number of math and science graduates by 2015 while recruiting an additional 10,000 science and math teachers a year.
Gates also praised the 'early college high school' program, which has received funding from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. The program aims to recruit struggling students to attend high schools that require enrollment in college courses. Students graduate with a high-school diploma and two years of college credits.
On immigration, Gates repeated tech industry complaints that H-1B visa restrictions and other measures are choking off the supply of highly-skilled workers.
Gates said the H-1B visa program, which deals with skilled workers, is outmoded. For fiscal 2008, H-1Bs are expected to run out next month, the same month in which they first become available.
'For the first time in the history of the program, the supply will run out before the year's graduating students get their degrees,' Gates said. 'This means that U.S. employers will not be able to get H-1B visas for an entire crop of U.S. graduates. We are essentially asking top talent to leave the U.S.'
Gates also said it makes 'no sense' to require foreigners who apply for student visas to prove that they don't intend to remain in the country once they receive their degrees.
'Why drive them away just when this investment starts to pay off for the American economy?' Gates asked.
EDITOR'S NOTE: The Senate Health, Energy, Labor and Pensions Committee site is accessible online at http://help.senate.gov/
Bush's Last Chance on Immigration
By Massimo Calabresi
The Time Magazine, March 2, 2007
People say a lot of things on the campaign trail, but when Texas Governor George W. Bush stood before conservative Iowa crowds in 1999 and talked about the urgency of immigration reform, it was hard not to believe he was speaking from the heart. 'Family values do not stop at the Rio Grande,' he said back then, and the felicitous phrase became a touchstone of compassionate conservatism for his campaign and his presidency. For Bush, making immigration fair and safe 'is a matter of very strong personal commitment,' says his spokesman, Tony Snow.
Bush is about to get his last chance to prove that that commitment is real. Immigration reform stands out as the unfulfilled promise of the Bush presidency, and as Congress prepares to debate a compromise bill in the coming weeks, Democratic leaders in the House and Senate say Bush's help is crucial. 'We're going to need Republican votes,' says Jim Manley, spokesman for Senate majority leader Harry Reid. 'And we're going to need the President.' But power is sluicing out of the White House, Iraq is draining the Administration's remaining energies, and the President is entering a difficult period with a Congress he has never treated with much respect.
November's Democratic victory in Congress should have improved Bush's odds of getting what he calls 'comprehensive immigration reform': tightened border controls and work-site enforcement, a new guest-worker program and a solution to the problem of the U.S.'s 12 million illegal immigrants. Although some Democrats side with unions in opposition to the President's proposed guest-worker program, a majority favor his broad immigration reforms. At the same time, some of Bush's most outspoken Republican opponents lost in races to Democrats who back his position. Post-election polls showed Hispanic voters punishing Republicans, abandoning the
G.O.P. in larger numbers than the rest of the electorate in what some analysts saw as a backlash against tough G.O.P. rhetoric on immigration. That impression may drive fence-sitting Republicans who represent Latinos to support Bush's moderate plans.
The election effect alone is not enough to deliver Bush the votes he needs, though, especially in the House. Privately, lawmakers and key aides in both parties are skeptical that he can make up those votes. Republicans say Bush's political weakness is too great to coerce enough wavering G.O.P. lawmakers to risk their seats out of loyalty to the President. 'What leverage does he have? Not a lot,' says a senior Senate Republican aide. Bush's influence has ebbed since the last Congress, when he failed to rally Republicans behind an immigration deal. Democrats say Bush's biggest problem is his style of dealing with Congress. 'He likes to be the closer, bringing in the last five fence-sitters,' says a senior House Democratic aide. 'But this time he needs to engage early in the process to prove this is a real priority for him.'
Bush's hardest challenge will be selling a fix for the 12 million illegal immigrants already living in the U.S. The new immigration bill, to be introduced in the Senate as early as next week by Democrat Ted Kennedy and Republican John McCain, will set most of them on a 'path to citizenship.' Opponents call that amnesty. Bush has been vague in his support for legalization. But Kennedy says that at a private meeting on Jan. 8, Bush gave him a commitment to back 'comprehensive' legislation, which Kennedy believes is a commitment to granting them eventual citizenship.
One last opportunity for Bush may have come thanks to G.O.P. hard-liners. The only immigration bill that Congress managed to push through last session cracked down on illegal border crossing. At the same time, the Department of Homeland Security has stepped up work-site enforcement of laws banning the employment of illegal immigrants. The effect has been a marked labor shortage, especially in agriculture. Growers nationwide blame the shortage for losses in the hundreds of thousands of dollars. With business leaning on lawmakers to do something, the crackdown has 'increased the chances of comprehensive immigration reform,' says a senior Senate Republican aide.
Bush doesn't have much time. Democratic aides say Reid plans to get the new bipartisan bill to the floor this spring in the hope of forcing it through Congress before the presidential campaign paralyzes Washington. If it's not done by August, says one, 'it's dead.'