writing Oprah?

[felixthecat]

hey guys/gals, don't you think now is a good time to pitch our stories to Oprah?

I'm thinking with the primary in Texas coming up, people everywhere are thinking about the "latino vote" and whoever is reading her mail may take notice if we have the right subject lines.

And I think we should point out that, regardless of which Dem is running against McCain, immigration reform WILL be an issue in the election.

However, our issues (as USC spouses/children/parents of illegal immigrants) get drowned out in all the talk about "amnesty" and "security".
We are the USC human element.... and nobody is talking about us.
Oprah can do that better than any politician.

We NEED the average person had some clue what we are going through!

I know some of you have tried writing Oprah before...
but I just have this feeling that now is the time.

(maybe it's after watching Barack last night talking about "the fierce urgency of now")

What do you all think?
Or did everyone write already and am I just way behind :D

[slvjvm922000]

well thats a good idea i havent wrote yet so if everyone else has i am way far behind also lol.

[kitkat1]

Playing devils advocate for a minute and thinking about this from an "outsider" point of view.

These are the facts:

The non-USC spouse broke the law. The INA imposes a ban.
The INA provides a method of overcoming the ban.
The consulate in Ciudad Juarez is the only consulate in the world that has a program for immediate waiver approvable for clearly approvable waivers.
CDJ is also the busiest consulate in the world - even so, the 50% not approved on the spot typically wait for less than one year (as opposed to places like Islamabad, for example)
CDJ is the most lenient consulate in the world when it comes to waivers and denials are few and far between

I totally understand your thoughts that the USC human element isn't being discussed. But I also suspect that ultimately, there isn't all that much to discuss based on the points I listed. From Oprah's point of view, what's the story? Probably how lucky the non-USC spouse is that s/he has an opportunity to legalize and how lucky the USC is that the option exists. And I suspect that's not quite what you were thinking about . . . .

[sinfronteras]

Felixthecat, I did not had a chance to see that speech.. Could you please post it in here to see what it was about??? I am with you , we should do something...

[y14gemini]

Playing devils advocate for a minute and thinking about this from an "outsider" point of view.

These are the facts:

The non-USC spouse broke the law. The INA imposes a ban.
The INA provides a method of overcoming the ban.
The consulate in Ciudad Juarez is the only consulate in the world that has a program for immediate waiver approvable for clearly approvable waivers.
CDJ is also the busiest consulate in the world - even so, the 50% not approved on the spot typically wait for less than one year (as opposed to places like Islamabad, for example)
CDJ is the most lenient consulate in the world when it comes to waivers and denials are few and far between

I totally understand your thoughts that the USC human element isn't being discussed. But I also suspect that ultimately, there isn't all that much to discuss based on the points I listed. From Oprah's point of view, what's the story? Probably how lucky the non-USC spouse is that s/he has an opportunity to legalize and how lucky the USC is that the option exists. And I suspect that's not quite what you were thinking about . . . .



I would have to agree with KitKat on this one. There were many times that I wanted to get my "story" out but in the long run when I put the good vs the bad on paper there really wasn't anything to tell or get out!

[felixthecat]

kitkat - While I see your point, in a way...

when I started this process (years ago) the requirement for the waiver was just plain ol' normal hardship.

It changed to "extreme" hardship, which I think is unreasonable.
I strongly feel that the only reason to deny legal entry of the non-USC spouse is if they are in some way harmful to society.

EVERYBODY that I talk to about this process (other than you all) assumes that if my spouse isn't allowed to return then it is in the interest of national security or something.

EVERYBODY agrees that seperation from your spouse is a hardship.

What is the point of only allowing waivers to the "extreme" cases?

That wasn't the case several years ago when my husband's cousin went through CDJ.

I just think most people would agree that any family that clears the security checks should be allowed to live their life in peace in the US.

Make us pay a fine, but don't make me choose between my country and the father of my child.

[felixthecat]

I know that nothing will happen soon enough to make a difference in my family's case...

but I just feel like this process is wrong because normal families that have normal hardships are not allowed the waiver.

We are lucky that CDJ has such high approvals...but there are still plenty of people that are denied.

I am sick thinking about if I will be denied...
but even more, I am sick thinking that regardless of my outcome, someone WILL be denied.

What is the point?
We are not protecting our country by denying these people the waiver.

And I believe it is the children who suffer the most.

If I didn't have a child, I would feel a little easier about the possibility of a denial.

But I do NOT want to raise my son in Mexico. Don't get me wrong...I like it there...to visit....but I want a better life for my child.

Again...I feel like the general public has NO CLUE about how crazy this system is.

I have to tell people over and over again...
"having a child and paying taxes and being generally an OK person does not matter....they will decide my husband's case based whether I have extreme hardships".

The next question I get is invariably..."what is an extreme hardship, if not having a child who needs a father...a spouse who needs his/her partner?"

And I have no answer.
I could go through all the reasons given in my HSL...but I honestly feel that that the seperation of my family is the MOST IMPORTANT HARDSHIP.

I don't mind having to jump through all these hoops...but let normal families be united at the end, without somehow having to concoct a story about how their hardships are more important than others...
because that is what we are doing here.
We all may get good at making our case...
thank goodness for that...
but someone somehwere has to be denied.

Why?

[kitkat1]

I understand your frustration - but it seems to be mostly about the general public's lack of knowledge about the process. And in my experience that is the case with just about anything. None of us knew anything about the process for fiance or spousal visas before beginning this. Most people don't have a reason to be informed about things that don't personally impact them.

To clarify,the law requiring extreme hardship went into effect 12 years ago. It's true that in the past, CDJ's standards were extremely low and people could get away with one page letter written on a piece of notebook paper. But that changed when the new Officer in Charge came on board. This is not about national security except in the cases of people who have serious criminal backgrounds and are delayed due to background checks. I also don't agree that it's concocting a story about how your hardships are more important than others - it's not a competition - each case is individual and decided independently of others - there are no limits to the number of waivers available. Think about it from the DHS point of view -- why should they give your husband a visa when he broke the law? That's what the waiver is about - proving why they should make an exception in his case.

While extreme hardship is not clearly defined by DHS which makes the whole process harder, "normal families that have normal hardships" ARE allowed the waiver. It's not really all that difficult to prove it. And in my opinion the most important detail to keep in the front of your mind is how incredibly lucky you are to have the opportunity in the first place. After all, people who need waivers due to illegal presence need them because they broke the law. I realize that it's not the same as murder or criminal charges. But can we really expect USCIS or DHS to simply ignore that fact? We are all paying the price for that action when we go through this process. But don't lose sight of the fact that the opportunity to file a waiver and legalize, once and for all, is an enormous gift to all of us. As for the people who get denied, well, again at CDJ there really aren't very many and luckily for them, a second chance is pretty easily available.

I don't mean to sound unsupportive - I've been through it and I know how you feel. But I one thing I was always, always aware of -- how lucky we were that even though my husband broke the law ("clear and outright disregard for the United States' immigration laws" is what the adjudicator said to me personally) the fact that the law provides an option to correct this is truly amazing.

[felixthecat]

I get what your saying.
And thanks for explaining that it isn't competitive (I thought it was..how else do they decide what is extreme vs. normal?)

But you must admit that there are normal people that are denied based upon insufficient hardship.

I2US members have ~80% approval rate, and we are more informed than "normal"...
and doesn't CDJ have an overall approval rate of ~75%?
That is still at least 20% of families that are denied...which to me is unacceptable, if the only reason for denial is insufficient hardship.

Maybe it is easy to appeal after a denial, but meanwhile families suffer longer than needed.

If we are denied, I don't know how I can survive another year without my family together. Yes, people eventually get approved...but at what cost?

I guess I still see no reason for the extreme hardship vs normal hardship, even if it isn't competitive.

And even if it isn't new.

I think it is still wrong to deny people for insufficient hardship.
The waiver should be to keep families together if there is no harm in doing so...
not just to keep some families together.

And I also think that the punishments (10 yr or lifetime ban) outweigh the crime.

DO you really think this is fair punishment?
If so, why?

I understand they broke the law...
but if these bans are meant to deter others from coming, they are not working. So let's get real.

I am not trying to avoid punishment, I just think that the punishments are to harsh. They serve no real purpose and cause significant hardship to real people.

I don't mean to sound like I am griping...
I just think that the system does need reform.

[felixthecat]

and one more thing...

everytime I hear about someone with the lifetime ban, I think,
"there but for the grace of god..."

illegal presence should be punished...

but if my husband had EVER visited his family, and returned to me...
10 more years?

That seems really harsh.

I sympathize with those people and think they should be as lucky as I in being able to apply for the waiver.

One more reason I want reform.

[felixthecat]

Felixthecat, I did not had a chance to see that speech.. Could you please post it in here to see what it was about??? I am with you , we should do something...

In every speach I have seen Obama give, he mentions what Dr. Martin Luther King called "the fierce urgency of now" as being the reason he is running for President.

If you want to hear him talk about it, here is a video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OJyYmEtqDzM

To me, it means that when you feel you can make a difference, you have to stand up and try, rather than procrastinating.
There is a moment for everything.

I think that immigration reform can happen in the 1st term of whoever is president next...but only if the general public can be convinced that it is the right thing.

Obviously, I am struggling just to convince people here that we need to reform this system ;) ...so I don't know if I'm the one to do the convincing!

But I still beleive that the general public would be more sympathetic to CIR if they knew what we go through.
.

[sinfronteras]

Felixthecat... Thanks for the video. I am going to check it out. Well, you know that I am hillbillie :bounce: But anyway whatever happen, whoever is elected, I am 100% with u... We need to get organized & not just send letters to Oprah or the media... We neet to speak about it & let them know what is going on.

[sinfronteras]

Playing devils advocate for a minute and thinking about this from an "outsider" point of view.

These are the facts:

The non-USC spouse broke the law. The INA imposes a ban.
The INA provides a method of overcoming the ban.
The consulate in Ciudad Juarez is the only consulate in the world that has a program for immediate waiver approvable for clearly approvable waivers.
CDJ is also the busiest consulate in the world - even so, the 50% not approved on the spot typically wait for less than one year (as opposed to places like Islamabad, for example)
CDJ is the most lenient consulate in the world when it comes to waivers and denials are few and far between

I totally understand your thoughts that the USC human element isn't being discussed. But I also suspect that ultimately, there isn't all that much to discuss based on the points I listed. From Oprah's point of view, what's the story? Probably how lucky the non-USC spouse is that s/he has an opportunity to legalize and how lucky the USC is that the option exists. And I suspect that's not quite what you were thinking about . . . .

K...
Funny I was telling my husband last night that this whole Elections proccess, gave me the feeling & reminded me that movie " The Devil's Advocate"

[Brisa6]

I feel that people do need to know this. I myself have talked about our situation and everybody symphatizes with us. The people need to know so that when they hear the issue of immigration they can have a connection to it. People don't think it makes a difference in their life until their son/daughter, niece/nephew are faced with such issues. In other words, you never know. It can happen to you. There are stories to be told, specially when it comes to children who are brought into the country by their parents and nobody is defending them. I was one of those kids and our stories are worthy. I have written to Oprah twice. I refer my story to the Dream Act, if you don't know about it, look it up I'm sure most of you would agree with its terms.

[kitkat1]

I really do understand what you are saying and it's not at all that I disagree. My feeling is that people who are denied did not spend enough time on their hardship packet. That's not to say that they couldn't prove extreme hardship - I really do think that anyone can prove it -- but that they didn't put enough time/effort/research into it. Of course I could be wrong, but from my experience here in the past two + years, that is what it seems to boil down to. I guess I view it like a final exam - if you don't study and you don't prepare, you can't be surprised if you failed. (I know that this is much more serious than that, but it's the only comparison I can think of right now!)

I do agree that the lifetime ban and waiting ten years to be able to file a waiver are very harsh. I think if Mexicans were actually aware of the bans, it might have a small impact. (At least maybe it would deter people from leaving the US and re-entering illegally). So in that respect, getting the word out would do a world of good. But I also think that it's up to Mexico to make sufficient changes so that people don't HAVE to enter the US illegally to find work.

I'm not saying I agree with the bans. But it is illegal to enter the US without inspection. And DHS does give a 6 month grace period - meaning illegal presence for less than 180 days does not carry a ban. That's pretty generous for someone who broke the law -- people who go through red lights don't get second chances! So there do have to be repercussions - it's just that as you said, these repercussions don't seem to be detering people at all. Instead, they are making families suffer through the process.

I don't think you're griping at all - it's not a situation with an easy answer. And I see both sides to it. I just hope you feel a little bit better that at least your chances are very, very good.

[Emily]

Felix,

While I understand where your comming from I have to agree with Kitkat. We should feel extremely lucky for what we have been given. Our spouses broke the law, and they disregarded our immigration policy. Furthermore we broke the law by harboring our illegal spouses in our homes, and encouraging them to stay. Do I feel its unfair, yes, I certainly do but at the same time I feel it is just at some degree.

There are millions of immigrants who want to come to America. Many have to enter through the lottery program and pray they get lucky, while others have to wait for a visa to become free which can take decades.

As a spouse of an American they get to step infront of everyone else. Our spouses are not subject to the visa limit that other immigrants have to wait out. Our spouse gets this wonderful chance to be forgiven of the crimes they commited (immigration fraud, and sometimes social security fraud).

Yes it sucks that we have to go through this process, but I just feel we should all feel that we are lucky at least in the fact we have this chance of making things right, and bringing our spouse out of the shadows.

I hate the fact I have to pay all these fee's, and fill tons of immigration forms out. I hate the fact that my husband will be denied a visa, but he will be given the change through the waiver! How many families dont get this chance? How many immigrants are entering that lottery program and hoping they will get lucky, or filling out the paperwork for a visa, and having to wait for one to become available.

I just feel we are extremely lucky even though it is hard. What we have to realize is it is even more hard for those who arn't married to a USC, have a USC fiance, or relative.

[Lidia]

Emily
yes we are very lucky to be able to have a oportunity to be LPR,but remember dear no everything that shines is gold, becouse here we are trying very hard to do the rigth thing, many people don`t have the chance,but the bottom lines is all about the MONEY,you most have a sponsor to be able to became LPR,o you most have pleny money to have a tourits visa,so for the ones than don`t have this oportunity like us ,they waiting for a IMMIGRATION REFORM and this meant lots of money to be paid in fines,i have live many years in this country, i did understad quick that everything has a process,remember in the begining of the pilot program , people was able to make a oppt througt the infopass sistem,and what happed now, we must paid by the minute to make the appot,i always
said is no fair but went somethings are so necessary, no matter the price..

[Emily]

That is true however, the government just wants to make sure that the immigrant isn't going to become a debt to society. At least that is my understanding of why they request a sponsor. It sucks, and I think making the 125% of poverty line is hard. I even dont make that, and now i'm trying to find a co sponsor. The fact that our children can't have state medical is even worse because many families fear having state medical will end their chances of becoming a lpr. How many children are suffering because of that rule? The stuped thing about that is you can make over 125% of the poverty line to get schip, but your kids can't have schip if your sponsoring someone?

The point I was going for though was the fact that a spouse gets ahead of the line, while everyone else has to wait for a visa to be available. We are lucky in that aspect. My great grandparents were trying to come here for years, and only made it after the hitler dynasty killed every one of their family members. If it wern't for my great grandparents chances are I wouldn't be here today. I wouldnt have been born.

[kitkat1]

The reason you must prove that you make above the poverty line (which is pretty darn low for a family of two if you ask me) is because the US doesn't give visas to people who are then going to become a public charge. It's not that the process is about money - it's that the United States is not a charity.

If a US citizen or the family member is receiving public benefits, it doesn't impact the process other than needing a sponsor. It's the IMMIGRANT who cannot get public benefits. If your kids get state funded medical care, that fact is not in any way related to why you cannot be a sponsor. The reason is because you can't afford to be financially responsible for another person -- the intending immigrant.

Again, bottom line is that anyone who has the chance to get a visa, even if a waiver is necessary, is pretty damn lucky. (And I am not aware of any country that allows people to immigrate and then get benefits from the country, having never paid into them).

p.s. the reason you now have to call snf schedule an infopass appointment and pay for the call is because the online scheduling wasn't working and people couldn't get appointments. It's NOT because they were looking for another way to make you pay - really that's an absurd explanation.

[felixthecat]

My feeling is that people who are denied did not spend enough time on their hardship packet. That's not to say that they couldn't prove extreme hardship - I really do think that anyone can prove it -- but that they didn't put enough time/effort/research into it. Of course I could be wrong, but from my experience here in the past two + years, that is what it seems to boil down to. I guess I view it like a final exam - if you don't study and you don't prepare, you can't be surprised if you failed. (I know that this is much more serious than that, but it's the only comparison I can think of right now!)

I agree that we are lucky that the system exists.

But this is what I most take issue with...
people with normal hardhsips will be denied!

You seem to think that the process of getting approved is easy...
as long as you spend the time on the HSL you will get approved.
I disagree.

Some people don't have money to hire lawyers,
and may not be computer literate and understand how to inform themselves on sites like this.
Do you think that the process is so easy that if they just apply themselves they have a good chance of getting approved?

I paid more than I care to remember to lawyers...
and then informed myself here...

I understand you think that being informed raises to chances to pretty good.
But even then, I can't just show normal hardships.
I have to have something more.

Yes, most people can come up with something...
but if I just tell the honest truth that about my hardships they are not any different from anyone elses.
And as far as I understand, even if this isn't competitive, if a hardship is one that most people have, it is not considered extreme.

Knowing what you know, I am surprised how easy you think it is to get approved!
I think I have a decent chance, but it's not a sure bet.
My lawyers aren't sure that my husband will be approved.
I am planning for the worst case scenario.
And you think that if I don't, then I didn't try hard enough?

I used to think it would be easy to get the waiver because I thought having a home, a child, a life, was enough hardship.

And I still think it should be.
But it is not.

I understand all the reasons to make us wait (because the lines are long) and all the reasons to check for security and financial risks (we can't just let anyone come here)
but the fact that the waiver is only available to families with extreme hardship is not neccesary.
It should be open to approval for anyone who is not a security or financial risk to this country.

Can you explian to me why it shouldn't be?

To me your argument that we should be lucky with what we get is kind of like saying that beggars can't be choosers.
I disagree strongly.
These are our immigration laws and we should speak up when we think they are unjust. And if we don't, who will?

I say keep the process and reform the waiver guidelines for people with normal hardships.

[felixthecat]

and again...
who is allowed to file the waiver should be reformed.

Losguerros, for example, should have been allowed to file the waiver long ago.

Why did she and her hubby have to wait for some officials to clarify the law?
It should have been clear!

And anybody else facing the 10 yr or lifetime ban...there should be a process for them.
Because to me, those are extreme punishments.

This is not about getting myself approved.
This is about changing the system so that other families don't suffer.

Our laws should 1st and foremost allow families to stay together unless there is a good reason not to.

Not make us prove why we should be able to stay together.

[kitkat1]

I'm doing my best to explain my point of view.

The first thing to clarify is that yes, the waiver IS available to families with "normal hardship". Waiver eligibility is based on the law -- if the person is eligible, a waiver can be submitted for review.

It is NOT AT ALL a given that people with "normal" hardships will be denied. The law may call for "extreme hardship" but that only means that you must prove the situations will be "extreme" to YOU.

While certain serious and grave situations can certainly help a person to prove this, it all comes down to how the applicant paints the picture of exactly how a permanent move to another country will result in extreme hardship to them. It doesn't mean you must have a seriously ill parent or be a primary caregiver or have children who cannot be taken outside of the country due to a custody battle. The law doesn't say we will only give a waiver to people whose lives ALREADY suck. It's about proving why a permanent move to another county would be devastating to the USC's live now and forever.

The guidelines simply say that you cannot count on emotional or financial issues ALONE to prove this - because that's not enough. Why isn't it enough? Because your husband broke the law and DHS isn't too happy about that. So while they are giving a chance to those who qualify, you have to work for it.

The law doesn't define "extreme hardship" or provide a checklist for adjudicators. That's a good thing -- that means it's not about having 5 out of 6 specific things in your letter -- there is a ton of leeway in adjudication. That's why it comes down to how well written the letter is and how well it proves each point. So in most cases a denial is not because the person didn't have "extreme" hardship -- it's because they didn't prove their case well enough. So yes, it seriously comes down to how much work went into the hardship packet. No one knows if they will be approved - no lawyer can say for sure because they are not mind readers. But obviously people who prove their points well and paint a picture of an "extreme" result will have a better chance than someone who didn't do that well. And I really don't think it's about how much money you spend on a lawyer - anyone can learn how to do the research on their own and write a killer letter on their own. That's why sites like this exist - and over the past few years here we have seen many, many people who came to this site knowing absolutely nothing. They read, they researched, they asked questions, they learned, they posted their letters and they got approved. Without spending a fortune on lawyers. That's my case. I knew nothing. I read everything I could here. I asked questions. I did a lawyer consult. I weighed the pros and cons and decided to go it alone without a lawyer. And it was approved. So I speak from personal experience - I've been through it, I don't have any extreme hardships, I don't have children and I was approved.

This may not be the best example but let's try an argument that just about everyone will use -- the inability to work in Mexico. If you just say "I won't be able to work" it's NOT good enough. If you explain the nature of your work, any specialized certifications or education that you have now that would not apply in Mexico, information about the unemployment in Mexico and the lack of jobs in your area, information about laws regarding hiring non-Mexicans, information about visas, proving that you would not be legally able to work, information on how not being able to work would impact your life in every way, etc. etc, you have a MUCH better chance than the person who provided one sentence about employment. And yet not being able to get a job in Mexico is a "normal" hardship.

Again, I'm not saying that changes are not necessary. But you cannot sneak into the country and expect to not face any consequences. Lifetime bans are harsh -- it would probably much better to impose a large fine along with a waiver.

But I think it's extremely important to realize this -- your husband BROKE THE LAW. The US doesn't like to reward people who break the law, even if we think the reason for breaking the law was valid. Don't you think it's unbelievably lucky that the government gives us a second chance to correct this? And this second chance is given to most people -- ANYONE who is eligible can apply for a waiver.

I don't know if I've made my point a bit clearer for you - yes the laws are harsh and there should be other options - I think a waiver for fine is a reasonable idea instead of a ten year wait or lifetime ban. But again, bottom line, people do have to face the consequences of their actions. So for someone to break US immigration law and still have a chance to legalize - yes it's absolutely a gift and an amazing opportunity.

[Brisa6]

I understand people are breaking the law and the government is making sure they pay for it, but let me put it to you this way. I married my husband in 1996 and I was illegal and he was a citizen. My parents brought me into the country illegally. Before 2001, people were adjusting in the country, like myself, paying the $1,000 fine and application costs and what have you. I often think about the fact that I didn't have to leave the U.S. to fix my papers and I can't imagine what I would've done if they would've made me leave. Now, many of the people here have families so why seperate them? To me that's wrong because the key word is "United". Now I also understand that some people get married to fix their papers and some people were probably taking advantage and making a business out of it so now people like the ones in this forum are paying for the STUPID things others do. I completely understand why some people don't see the justice in the immigration laws.

[kitkat1]

I agree that people who were able to adjust in the country and pay a fine were extremely lucky. But that was a one time deal that was even extended to allow people more time. That was the biggest gift of all to people who were illegal. And of course the situation involving a child who was brought to the US against their will at an age where they had no chance to make a decision or have a say is totally 100% different. I strongly feel that in those situations the children should be able to adjust in the US by paying a fine. I do NOT agree that holding children responsible for their illegal action of their parents is in any way fair. So that's another part that definitely needs fixing - without a doubt.

But again, if the price a married couple pays is separation for a time in order to get legal, I'll take it. It's better than having no chance at all.

[Chapital]

But again, if the price a married couple pays is separation for a time in order to get legal, I'll take it. It's better than having no chance at all.

Ditto...even as someone who will have an usually long seperation, post pilot program, mostly due to a name match issue, I am extremely grateful that this process even exists. I do wish I could make sense of many of the inconsistencies and inefficiencies of the process and I wish that USCIS was held accountable in the same way corporations are, but that doesn't change the fact that the opportunity of a waiver means that I do not have to move to another country to raise my children. This seperation is terrible, but my husband broke the law and if this is the current consequences of that, then I will survive the seperation to have the rest of our lives together.

[LilB]

I saw a couple of articles online:

USCIS regarding being considered a public charge (http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrelease/Public.pdf)

And

More about being a public charge (http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrelease/public_cfs.pdf)

If a US citizen or the family member is receiving public benefits, it doesn't impact the process other than needing a sponsor.

According to the USCIS articles above, this is correct. It says:
"Aliens applying to become LPR's will not be considered a public charge for using: healthcare benefits, food programs, and other programs that do not give cash."

Just to give you an idea, it's benefits such as:

Health center programs
Medicaid, except long-term care. Short periods of rehabilitation are not to be considered.
Children's Health Insurance Program
Immunizations
Testing and treatment of symptoms of communicable diseases
Prenatal care
Nutrition programs, including Food Stamps, the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants and Children (WIC), the National School Lunch and Breakfast programs, and other supplementary and emergency food assistance programs
Housing assistance
Child care services
Emergency assistance, such as the Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program
Emergency disaster relief
Foster care and adoption assistance
Educational assistance, including benefits under the Head Start Act and aid for elementary, secondary, or higher education
Job training programs
In-kind, community-based programs, services, or assistance (such as soup kitchens, crisis counseling and intervention, and short-term shelter)


No worries for those applying that had this topic in the back of their head and may be receiving these benefits for themselves or their children.

It's the IMMIGRANT who cannot get public benefits.

This statement very un-true (excluding minor exceptions). An immigrant CAN receive benefits and not be considered a public charge after they immigrate.

"LPR's cannot lose their status (have their "green card" revoked) if they, their children, or other family members use:

Healthcare, Food Programs, and other Non-Cash Programs
Cash Welfare (minor exceptions are in the above document)
Long Term Care"


So, in summary, they seem to be mainly concerned with those who are on Welfare as THE SOLE BASIS of their income and those being institutionalized.

[kitkat1]

This statement very un-true (excluding minor exceptions). An immigrant CAN receive benefits and not be considered a public charge after they immigrate.

"LPR's cannot lose their status (have their "green card" revoked) if they, their children, or other family members use:

Healthcare, Food Programs, and other Non-Cash Programs
Cash Welfare (minor exceptions are in the above document)
Long Term Care"So, in summary, they seem to be mainly concerned with those who are on Welfare as THE SOLE BASIS of their income and those being institutionalized.

All good info. My point was, in the context of the conversation posted, the immigrant cannot rely on public benefits to meet the pubic charge.

[LilB]

All good info. My point was, in the context of the conversation posted, the immigrant cannot rely on public benefits to meet the pubic charge.

I was just looking it up because THAT topic interested me. What IF I got laid off or fired or quit my job? Or my hubby? Would we NOT be able to apply for assistance? It was curiosity after I read your post. After I found my answer, I decided to share it with everyone. :rolleyes:

[felixthecat]

So....
does anyone here (other than sinfronteras) actually think that it is a good idea to get media attention to our immigration issues?

Does anyone here think we need Comprehensive Immigration Reform?

I understand this issue is complex...
we all have opinions...
and should be free to agree or disagree....
but the general public still has no clue about ANY of this.

The national discussion of CIR would be better educated if people understood how immigration affects USCs.

My point is that OUR ISSUES SHOULD BE PART OF A NATIONAL DIALOGUE, rather than just us talking to each other.

And if you want Oprah to talk about this (because she can get the discussion into the general public) then follow this link and tell her your story!
https://www.oprah.com/plugger/templates/BeOnTheShow.jhtml?action=respond&plugId=B2100004

[felixthecat]

I can just imagine us all being on Oprah's show and her asking,
"but you guys are married...doesn't he just get to stay?"

And us all saying in one voice,
"NO!"

It would be worth it if the only thing that came of it is that I would never have to hear that question again.

[Chapital]

I agree that for CIR to occur more of the general population needs to understand how the system works now...like you mentioned, almost everyone believes that valid marriage to a USC is the golden ticket. But because of the complexities of our immigration laws and the short attention span of USC's not personally affected by immigration, I think it is a tough battle. It has taken me years to understand even just the part of the process that relates to our situation and I have a vested interest in understanding. Many competent lawyers do not even understand the whole process and they are used to complex laws and policies. I am all for educating the public and helping others to understand more, but I am not sure how. I know that my personal situation has done alot of educating as I have to constantly share our situation. I have thought about going to our local media to share our story or writing a letter to the editor, but I don't think I have the emotional energy for that right now...I am focusing on keeping my family together despite the seperation. But, I hope to one day have the ability to be more of an advocate....

[Emily]

The reason you must prove that you make above the poverty line (which is pretty darn low for a family of two if you ask me) is because the US doesn't give visas to people who are then going to become a public charge. It's not that the process is about money - it's that the United States is not a charity.

If a US citizen or the family member is receiving public benefits, it doesn't impact the process other than needing a sponsor. It's the IMMIGRANT who cannot get public benefits. If your kids get state funded medical care, that fact is not in any way related to why you cannot be a sponsor. The reason is because you can't afford to be financially responsible for another person -- the intending immigrant.

Again, bottom line is that anyone who has the chance to get a visa, even if a waiver is necessary, is pretty damn lucky. (And I am not aware of any country that allows people to immigrate and then get benefits from the country, having never paid into them).

p.s. the reason you now have to call snf schedule an infopass appointment and pay for the call is because the online scheduling wasn't working and people couldn't get appointments. It's NOT because they were looking for another way to make you pay - really that's an absurd explanation.

Thanks for clearing this up. I misunderstood the "state means benefits" then. So if you do make over the 125% and your kids still get state medical your ok then? Our state I can make over 30K for a family of 4 and still qualify for it, but I canceled it because I thought it would effect us. So now i'm paying $450.00 a month to insure the kiddos, but its a really good Kaiser plan (i'm sure I could get one for less)

[FloresFamilia]

[QUOTE]I also don't agree that it's concocting a story about how your hardships are more important than others - it's not a competition - each case is individual and decided independently of others - there are no limits to the number of waivers available. Think about it from the DHS point of view -- why should they give your husband a visa when he broke the law? That's what the waiver is about - proving why they should make an exception in his case.

I really do understand what you are saying and it's not at all that I disagree. My feeling is that people who are denied did not spend enough time on their hardship packet. That's not to say that they couldn't prove extreme hardship - I really do think that anyone can prove it -- but that they didn't put enough time/effort/research into it. Of course I could be wrong, but from my experience here in the past two + years, that is what it seems to boil down to. I guess I view it like a final exam - if you don't study and you don't prepare, you can't be surprised if you failed. (I know that this is much more serious than that, but it's the only comparison I can think of right now!)

While certain serious and grave situations can certainly help a person to prove this, it all comes down to how the applicant paints the picture of exactly how a permanent move to another country will result in extreme hardship to them. It doesn't mean you must have a seriously ill parent or be a primary caregiver or have children who cannot be taken outside of the country due to a custody battle. The law doesn't say we will only give a waiver to people whose lives ALREADY suck. It's about proving why a permanent move to another county would be devastating to the USC's live now and forever. [/QUOTE

Felix-
I have been thinking about this alot lately also. Not necesarily about Oprah, but more about Famiy Unity and particularly lifetime bars and how the public does not realize what the laws are. I do think the failure to pass CIR is based largely upon misconceptions by the public. Myths such as:anchor babies, "green-card"marriages and automatic citizenship for marriage, family migration, and the idea that people do not become legal because they do not want to wait, pay fine, etc etc. Much of the public does not even know that someone who has EWI'd cannot become legal. Or that there is a major difference in consequences of someone who is here illegally after entering on a tourist visa or somneone who snuck across.

I think Felix and Kit-kat have a fundamental difference in your view of when immediate family should be eligible to legalize after EWI. Kit-kat thinks that you should have to prove yourself to recieve a visa after having EWI's and Felix is saying that it should be possible to recieve a visa to unite the family unless they are potentially harmful to the US or society.


I do realize my spouse broke the law. However, I do feel the punishment does not fit the crime. In our case we face the possibility of a life-time bar and therefore sit and wait in limbo. I also place blame on the U.S. on it's inabilty to fix the broken system and make a reasonable, functioning policy that accounts for the labor needed. This has created the massive presence of so many illegal immigrants. Many of whom entered as minors and/or have been here for years and made themselves part of our communities with lives and roots here. Inevitably they have become part of USC's families as well. This is not just a few select who happen to have mixed document families and I would think it is only going to become more common.

I do think the current bar with waiver system is unreasonable. It is not accessible to many who do not have lawyers or the education/literacy/accessibility to produce the perfect painting of extreme hardship. This does not mean they are any less worthy of being united as a family. The idea that you have to "sell" you hardships in the right way in order to recieve a visa is asinign and a waste of time and money. While it is not competing with others it is competeing with an imaginary bar of how bad can I spin my harships. It serves no purpose. Why not have a more reasonable ban(6 months to a year) Why not go back to the fine under the 245I or life act. I coudl be wrong, but I don't think that the sunset date meant that it was only intended to be a one time gift. I think a sunset date is usually meant to revisit the law, see how it is working and adjust accordingly if needed. If I am wrong I do not see why this isn't a feasible solution untill we get some real CIR and stop the influx of illegal immigrants. It would be in everyone's best interest.

I am all for getting the reality of the system out to the public through the media. It seems to me that if we cannot get some real CIR in the near future we can at least fix the sytem to allow for adjustment to make it possible to unite more families more quickly and eliminate of some of the "catches" that make immigrants ineligible for a waiver or be deinied. This in and of itself I would think would be easier for the public to swallow. I didn't hear a huge outcry over 245I, but then I could have not been as atuned.

Has anyone written to Oprah?? And if so, what did you say?

[kitkat1]

So....does anyone here (other than sinfronteras) actually think that it is a good idea to get media attention to our immigration issues?

I imagine every agrees that it would be easier for all of us if the general public understood the details. But as I posted before, I don't think all that many people would be interested - because it doesn't impact them directly.

And perhaps more importantly, since an option exists for people who entered illegally to get legal through their relationship with a USC, I fear the focus would end up on the people who don't have any option. After all, from the point of the media, there isn't much of a story ultimately in regard to people going through the waiver process. Meaning, there is sympathy, on some sides, for people who have no options. But I don't know if there's much for peope like us. I'd be afraid there would be a backlash i.e. what are we complaining about? Know what I mean?

[FloresFamilia]

And perhaps more importantly, since an option exists for people who entered illegally to get legal through their relationship with a USC, I fear the focus would end up on the people who don't have any option. After all, from the point of the media, there isn't much of a story ultimately in regard to people going through the waiver process. Meaning, there is sympathy, on some sides, for people who have no options. But I don't know if there's much for peope like us. I'd be afraid there would be a backlash i.e. what are we complaining about? Know what I mean?

I do not think the waiver is a "good" option. Sure, the the approval rate is great for CDJ(if you aren't one of the 25% it seems that way) But, I do not think that is the way the law intended it. Meaning, I think those getting approved at that rate are very lucky, but at any point they could truly enforce extreme hardship. (Which they do if you don't spin your tale the right way) I think your focus to the public would be not so much on the waiver as an option. But, that it IS a hardship to face a 10 year seperation from yoru spouse and family. The waiver is a possiblity, but not a sure thing and it is asking for proof of EXTREME hardship. I think there should be a true option. Meaning if you do A,B,C, and D you are eligible for your spousal visa.

[felixthecat]

I'd be afraid there would be a backlash i.e. what are we complaining about? Know what I mean?

no I don't.
I don't think that there will be backlash.
I honestly believe that the system IS unfair and that many people would agree...
if they had a clue.

Again, I am not just talking about CDJ and those who EWI once....
I am talking about everyone who lives in a mixed-legality family and tries to become legal.

As FloresFamilia says,
"It is not accessible to many who do not have lawyers or the education/literacy/accessibility to produce the perfect painting of extreme hardship. This does not mean they are any less worthy of being united as a family."

As I said before, everytime I see someone who EWI 2 or 3 times,
and gets the 10 yr or lifetime bar,
I say "there but for the grace of god go I"
and thank my lucky stars that my husband didn't see his family for the 10 years before we started this process.

I think that it is because we are lucky that we should care about those who aren't.

[FloresFamilia]

My husband has not seen his family in 11 years. Nor do we see a a reunion coming anytime soon. We often debate starting the process, but do not due to the possibility of a lifetime bar outcome. We have prepared and gathered docs and evidence, but when it comes down to taking the steps we are not risking it and always hanging on to the possibility of reform dnalging in front of us. I do not know how much longer he will be patient. I only hope that we figure something out before his mother passes away because I am afraid he would be bitter forever. We have been living together for 8 years, married for 4 with 2 kiddos 4 and 5. I am so tired of waiting and wondering what to do. We try to carry on and not put things on hold because of his status but it is hard not to. For example, he does a lot of work for himself on the side and we dream of him having his own business, (my business he wouldn't exist essentially) but what if CIR passes and there is relief for workers and not families and he doesn't have documented work history. I am jealous of those seperated at times, because at least we would be progressing towards something. Instead we live with it day in and out with no end in sight.

[kitkat1]

Given the strong anti-illegal immigration climate in this country right now, it's hard to say how the general public might respond. That's not to say it isn't worth your while. That's not to say that the laws are fair and equitable. That's not to say that there couldn't be a better system (I like the idea of a specific set of requirements to be met, or a fine as part of it).

All I can say is that for me, personally, I believed that going through the waiver process was a fair price to pay for my husband's actions. I worked long and hard to learn about it and to understand what I needed to do to make it happen. And while I'm not one to go out and fight for change, I sure do my part here, educating people who have no other resources for how to go about this. I'll bow out now.

[felixthecat]

All I can say is that for me, personally, I believed that going through the waiver process was a fair price to pay for my husband's actions. I worked long and hard to learn about it and to understand what I needed to do to make it happen. And while I'm not one to go out and fight for change, I sure do my part here, educating people who have no other resources for how to go about this. I'll bow out now.

I think it is admirable that you spend your time and energy helping people through the process. I thank you for it, and apologize if I came across as judgmental about your stance.

I do appreciate your input and am sorry if it seemed otherwise.
But I also do strongly disagree with the idea that this system works for most families if they just put the time and energy into it.

I am not attacking you...just trying to explain me....if that makes sense.
We obviously have different opinions and approaches.
And that is just fine with me.

[felixthecat]

My husband has not seen his family in 11 years. Nor do we see a a reunion coming anytime soon. We often debate starting the process, but do not due to the possibility of a lifetime bar outcome. We have prepared and gathered docs and evidence, but when it comes down to taking the steps we are not risking it and always hanging on to the possibility of reform dnalging in front of us. I do not know how much longer he will be patient. I only hope that we figure something out before his mother passes away because I am afraid he would be bitter forever. We have been living together for 8 years, married for 4 with 2 kiddos 4 and 5. I am so tired of waiting and wondering what to do. We try to carry on and not put things on hold because of his status but it is hard not to. For example, he does a lot of work for himself on the side and we dream of him having his own business, (my business he wouldn't exist essentially) but what if CIR passes and there is relief for workers and not families and he doesn't have documented work history. I am jealous of those seperated at times, because at least we would be progressing towards something. Instead we live with it day in and out with no end in sight.

the other question I got sick of hearing is,
"why doesn't your husband just become legal?"

grrrrrr....

people need to be educated.

[Emily]

I worry about what it would cause if we were to tell our stories. The climate is very anti illegals right now, and I don't see that changing anytime soon. I worry about my family, and every USC that has an illegal husband,wife, child, or relative and what "coming out" could potentialy mean. Would it cause more harm then good?

Americans are not sure what they want right now. More then half state they want to secure the borders, and the others state doing a mass deportation is not in our best interest. But how many actually know the process we go through? How many know what the cost is? If they are informed/educated about the immigration policies do you really think they would care anymore or less about our situation? Honestly, I do not.

[alkhalil]

Hi

I am not latina but I think this is a great idea we all have our families dispersed. We all want our husbands or our wives with us. People of all kinds have this problem and we need to talk about it. Who knows the HDS can make some changes.

[inlimbo]

This is an extremely interesting discussion.

I have to say I generally agree with kitkat's point:
Given the strong anti-illegal immigration climate in this country right now, it's hard to say how the general public might respond. That's not to say it isn't worth your while. That's not to say that the laws are fair and equitable. That's not to say that there couldn't be a better system (I like the idea of a specific set of requirements to be met, or a fine as part of it).

All I can say is that for me, personally, I believed that going through the waiver process was a fair price to pay for my husband's actions. I worked long and hard to learn about it and to understand what I needed to do to make it happen. And while I'm not one to go out and fight for change, I sure do my part here, educating people who have no other resources for how to go about this. I'll bow out now.

Personally I have gone through the cycle of feeling like the world needs to know how absurd it is that I and many, many others face a 10 year exile if our "extreme hardship" is not considered to be extreme enough--not to mention that having to prove extreme hardship just to live the life I want in the US seems a little insane.

But I agree that the general climate towards illegal immigrants isn't really at a high point right now in the US. When I think it through, I realize I don't really have much to complain about that the general public could really be outraged about, unless my waiver is ultimately denied, and any subsequent re-filing or appeal is unsuccessful, and I actually DO have to live outside of the country for 10 years. But until that happens, I don't think many people would really feel too torn apart about the fact that my fiance, or anyone else's fiance/spouse has to wait in Mexico for a year or so.

Also, I think similar discussions have come up here in the past, and people have pointed out that when it comes down to it, all of us USC spouses of illegal immigrants are really a very small number, compared to the much larger problem of normal illegal immigrants. In the eyes of the media, our stories just don't have that much "pizzazz," so to speak, except maybe in the cases of people who aren't even eligible for a waiver or people whose waiver has already been denied.

You know, I wish there were more public sympathy for our situations but I think there are just so many other, bigger things going on that people would probably look at all the facts and echo what I think is one of kitkat's main points: At least we have a chance to get a visa for our spouses after they broke the law, and with the pilot program, around 50% of people going through CDJ will only be out of the US for the time of a short vacation before they return, legally. Not a bad price to pay to become a LPR.

But on an individual level, if you feel driven to share your story, by all means do it. It's just that I've learned that the general public isn't nearly as sympathetic to our situation as we might think they'd be. Unfortunately! :rolleyes:

[mosaic]

I understand that every denial is not right when familys are being forced to live apart.. Like stated above I do feel that if you are filing through cdj you are more furtunate than other countries. In Albania for instance where I am going through the denial rate is soooo much higher. I wrote to oprah a while back for her to cover a story about the impact that it has on familys that can not be together...

[tasksgirl]

I really think Dr. Phil is much more likely to pick up the story because #1 - he does not shy away from controversy #2 - he is more perceptive to viewer requests for show topics #3 - he has been doing more current event type stories lately..

Just last night I was watching and he was telling viewers to make sure and ask for what they want to see on the show. Oprah never asks that she sort of has her own agenda and mostly with celebrities or Dr. Oz. She doesn't have room for something like our story even if the idea ever reached her. I'm sure she receives much more mail and email than Dr. Phil does..

[losguerra]

Well, just so you know, if anyone is looking for actual people, we have no problem sharing our story. We're already outside the US, and it looks like there is only a very very tiny slim chance we'll be allowed to even file a waiver.

So we have very little to lose, and I sincerely believe, regardless of broken laws and wait times, it is extremely unfair that minors are punished for immigration crimes committed when they were too young to speak for themselves. And then that this punishment carries through and causes his US citizen spouse to permanently choose between her husband and her family, roots, and life she built in the US?

So now I must be punished, too, and my only crime was falling in love with this great man? Only the most anti-immigrant, heartless, cold person would believe that is fair.

So you can count us in. I think the world needs to know what a sinister immigration system exists in the US, and we'd be glad to be a part of informing everybody.

[felixthecat]

I really think Dr. Phil is much more likely to pick up the story because #1 - he does not shy away from controversy #2 - he is more perceptive to viewer requests for show topics #3 - he has been doing more current event type stories lately..

Just last night I was watching and he was telling viewers to make sure and ask for what they want to see on the show. Oprah never asks that she sort of has her own agenda and mostly with celebrities or Dr. Oz. She doesn't have room for something like our story even if the idea ever reached her. I'm sure she receives much more mail and email than Dr. Phil does..

well...I already wrote to Oprah, as did several others on the Juarez Forum....but I'll try Dr. Phil too. I agree he might be more willing to tackle the issue, I was just hoping that Oprah would, cause she has the strongest voice.

[Brisa6]

I am so disappointed in Oprah, she rather have a pregnant man than one of our stories. Whatever, I'm not watching her show anymore.

[jeannie]

To me your argument that we should be lucky with what we get is kind of like saying that beggars can't be choosers.
I disagree strongly.
These are our immigration laws and we should speak up when we think they are unjust. And if we don't, who will?

I say keep the process and reform the waiver guidelines for people with normal hardships.

I agree with all that you wrote, but this last statement described it best. Just showing my support because I too am in this situation

[jeannie]

I am so disappointed in Oprah, she rather have a pregnant man than one of our stories. Whatever, I'm not watching her show anymore.

Sometimes her topics do kind of get dumb. Not always though. I wonder if she would ever do a show on this topic. Immigration experiences.

[adri_alv777]

Its amazing how I have thought of this but never shared with anybody. I agree that "public sympathy" would not be as great as we would want it to be b/c we are a smaller percentage of that than the others. What saddens me the most is that recently on Primer Impacto on Univision I saw that some people are promoting Adopt an Immigrant campaign and in my case this could of happened to me with my aunt but my mother always had these views that I should carry on my fathers last name but in the end I was to marry and my name would change but I would of wished that something like that would of been promoted before to change peoples minds like my moms but thats another story lol.