Join 3,372 readers in helping fund MetaFilter (Hide)

Tags:

Who benefits
July 10, 2001 11:32 AM   Subscribe

Who benefits from this one?
It seems to me like Bush is doing crap like this just to see what he can get away with.
Is there something I'm missing about this decision that makes it a good thing? I hope so.
posted by TiggleTaggleTiger (47 comments total)

 
It would appear that it would benefit the person applying for his/her green card with time running out. The application for a green card takes a LONG time. Lots of times peoples time runs out before the processinig takes place, forcing them to leave the country and then come back. I'm not sure why this would upset the liberals in the crowd.
posted by jbelshaw at 11:39 AM on July 10, 2001


Wow... you just have a bounty out on the president's cold dead body don't you?
posted by prototype_octavius at 11:40 AM on July 10, 2001


Who benefits?? Immigrants do. This is a nation of immigrants. Immigrants are a source of strength.

What's wrong with streamlining immigration?
posted by UncleFes at 11:40 AM on July 10, 2001


Who benefits? Uhh-- is this a trick question?

"We should spare families the hardship of separation while one member is awaiting a Green Card."

I'm no Bush apologist, but I am a resident alien, and I still have occasional nightmares about the INS. So tell me, TiggleTaggleTiger, did your family walk here across the Bering land bridge?
posted by rdc at 11:43 AM on July 10, 2001


a bounty out on the president's cold dead body

Anybody care to start a pool? I'd pony up a buck that someone'll take a shot at him. You know, because he's evil and all that.
posted by UncleFes at 11:44 AM on July 10, 2001


That would be an interesting poll indeed... who would contribute to the assassination fund?
posted by prototype_octavius at 11:46 AM on July 10, 2001


Let us know how the Secret Service treats you, UncleFes.
posted by rcade at 11:49 AM on July 10, 2001


Um... Tiggle. What's up with posting so frequently? Nothing better to do than front load the MeFi homepage? This isn't your personal BLOG.

I see that you're a more recent member, so maybe I should back off... but two links in under an hour -- and on the same topic, no less -- is really bad form.
posted by silusGROK at 11:51 AM on July 10, 2001


Great, you're all going to get the Seret Service on our butts. No, thanks. I like Bush. Maybe. Depends who's asking.
posted by msacheson at 11:51 AM on July 10, 2001


I'n not stalking, I'm betting.

I'm sure they'll be just as polite and unassuming as last time :)
posted by UncleFes at 11:51 AM on July 10, 2001


rdc: I too am a Green Card holder and have traversed the nightmares of the INS.

It sucked but if you really want to live in America then it is worth a bit of hassle and misery.
posted by TiggleTaggleTiger at 11:52 AM on July 10, 2001


Uh, for the record, that's pool as in "office pool" that someone would do it, not pool as in "let's pool our money together and see if we can get someone to take a shot at him."

Just to clarify :)
posted by UncleFes at 11:54 AM on July 10, 2001


The visa processing unit of the INS is grossly underfunded, for the work it does. Green card processing has been stretched out to an barely manageable timeframe; as Linus Torvalds testified, to avoid having to leave the US, he'd have to have applied for permanent residency even before receiving temporary residency on his H1-B visa. Which makes a mockery of the INS.

Better for there to be a more general push towards improving processing time, than the recent introduction of the $1000 "fast-track" service. The contribution you can make to the US economy shouldn't be assessed on how much you can advance the INS to jump the queue.
posted by holgate at 11:55 AM on July 10, 2001


gee, TTT. what a nice sentiment. I wonder if its the idea that you're opposed to or who the person who proposed the idea. I wonder....
posted by jbelshaw at 11:55 AM on July 10, 2001


vis10n: i disagree. i think jumping on someone for making all of two posts about separate legitimate news stories in an hour is in poor form.
posted by will at 12:00 PM on July 10, 2001


UncleFes, even Freepers know not to go there...
posted by jennak at 12:01 PM on July 10, 2001


I don't think it was the fact that he posted the two links one right after the other as much as it was the combative attitude with which they were posted.

Especially in the case of the second. Because I would have to agree with UncleFes and rdc. Although I am by no means a Bush fan, I fail to see why this is a bad idea.
posted by dogmatic at 12:05 PM on July 10, 2001


For those against this bill, I suggest you wait in a line outside the Newark, NJ INS for 6 hours just to reach the building, where there is another 2 hour line. Just to get a form! I did it twice, the first day I didn't reach the building and got sent home.
posted by remlapm at 12:07 PM on July 10, 2001


will: I think it is poor form, all the more so because he has failed to describe what he's linking to in both cases, instead moving right into his personal commentary.

Yes, yes, MetaTalk, I know.
posted by brantstrand at 12:10 PM on July 10, 2001


My thoughts exactly jbelshaw,
As a naturalized American and a resident of Mexico for a few years (which means that we got to meet the Border Patrol whenever we came and went), any improvement in the immigration process is a good thing (no matter who proposes it). Ours is a nation of immigrants and the only way we'll fix the 'illegal immigration problem' is civilize our legal immigration system.
posted by Octaviuz at 12:11 PM on July 10, 2001


immigration to the "November Men". most electronic "crimes" are handled by the Secret Service. Unclefes-pray, and i mean pray the sunglasses dont get wind of this....nothing may come of it but that should worry you the most. These guys(and gals) dont play semantic games. You blew it, shoulda put it in context. Even joking about this will get you...well, good luck. anyone gonna watch the special on Air Force one on PBS tonight? (love how they used the JFK soundtrack for the promo)
posted by clavdivs at 12:12 PM on July 10, 2001


Maybe I'm jaded and bitter and distrusting of the Bush regime, but I think this is pretty clearly another Republican tactic to appeal to Hispanics, who are an obvious key to continued Republican success.

See here for more.
posted by conquistador at 12:14 PM on July 10, 2001


dogmatic: ttt stated his opinions, but i think correctly left it open to debate. i would say that i share the same opinion as you fes and rdc on that matter.

Is there something I'm missing about this decision that makes it a good thing? I hope so.

brantstrand: that's a separate issue than what vis10n brought up. i do agree that more of an explanation of the link would have made it a better post.

anyway, if any of us want to keep these things going, we really should move it to metatalk.
posted by will at 12:16 PM on July 10, 2001


lots of noise making on this ...and so little to do with the post itself.
posted by Postroad at 12:18 PM on July 10, 2001


"civilize our legal immigration system" bravo uncle. (when ca-ca-ca-can i be made Quaestor)
posted by clavdivs at 12:19 PM on July 10, 2001


Uh, for the record, that's pool as in "office pool" that someone would do it, not pool as in "let's pool our money together and see if we can get someone to take a shot at him."

you still can't be sure that a pool of that sort wouldn't attract SS attention. i heard you can get in trouble just by saying "Zippity Bop!" in the same sentence as Bush... i wish i remembered where i got it from so i could link to the article...
posted by lotsofno at 12:26 PM on July 10, 2001


This immigration relaxation rule is a point on which conservatives and Republicans generally behave as two separate groups. Conservatives generally oppose more immigration. Republicans generally approve more immigration. (There is intersection between the two groups, of course). The reason the Republicans generally approve--and here's the answer to you unspoken question, Tiger, which you worded poorly, which is Who is the hidden beneficiary of relaxed immigration?--is because immigrants tend to provide a lower-paid work force. It's a labor issue, pure and simple. That this policy happens to coincide with the new policy of the AFL-CIO--which is generally for increased immigration because it increases the union membership rolls--is one of those freaks of history. That the immigrant candidates themselves will benefit is, in my opinion, one of those freak accidents of government.

It's one of the few issues on which I've ever agreed with Rudy Giulani, who said, and I'm paraphrasing, "Without immigrants and continuing immigration, New York City would be nothing."

For a good perspective on immigrants as labor in the United States, read Strangers from a Different Shore: A History of Asian Americans. Ronald Takaki takes a statistical and anecdotal approach, and though he's a bit too fond of quoting single "words," the book is really rather enthralling in that it not only reveals that immigration policies tended (still tend?) to be driven by plantations and corporations, but it also covers the much unexplored non-European waves of American immigration. A very good read.

For those against this bill, I suggest you wait in a line outside the Newark, NJ INS for 6 hours just to reach the building, where there is another 2 hour line. Just to get a form! I did it twice, the first day I didn't reach the building and got sent home.

Two additional points: perhaps, remplam, your form was not available online with the INS, but I do recommend checking there first.

Also, those of you who are looking to get a green card, have failed in all the legitimate attempts to do it through sponsorship, via family or spouse, or what have you, and are now going to resort to the Green Card Lottery, also known as the Diversity Lottery, please be advised: You do not need a lawyer to participate in the Green Card Lottery. In fact, there is no benefit to paying someone to handle this for you. In my opinion, if you are paying someone to help you participate in the lottery, you are wasting your funds. Your chances are in no way enhanced by using legal counsel to participate in the Green Card Lottery. Also, and I quote. "There is no fee for entering the diversity visa lottery." However, I Am Not A Lawyer.
posted by Mo Nickels at 12:27 PM on July 10, 2001


Mo Nickels: Thank you for clarifying my phrasing, that is indeed the point I was trying to raise.
posted by TiggleTaggleTiger at 12:30 PM on July 10, 2001


pray, and i mean pray the sunglasses dont get wind of this | you still can't be sure that a pool of that sort wouldn't attract SS attention.

Then they should come and see me, and we can have a nice conversation over various interpretations of the First Amendment over coffee. But I'm certain that I can reassure them that I am not a... you know :)
posted by UncleFes at 12:56 PM on July 10, 2001


1. TiggleTaggleTiger on relaxed immigration laws:
"It seems to me like Bush is doing crap like this just to see what he can get away with."

2. TiggleTaggleTiger on homosexual discrimination: "Bush is at it again.
Is the fact that he is able to get away with things like this ..."


Am I reading you correctly to be a person of pro-homosexual and anti-immigration persuation, who himself is trying to immigrate to America?
posted by tamim at 1:05 PM on July 10, 2001


While I'm cynical enough to always look for the Bush administration's "secret" agenda (ometimes you don't have to look too hard), I'm also willing to give mad props when mad props are deserved. This is a good thing, not at all characterized by the anti-immigrant xenophobia we generally hear from Republicans/ Conservatives- though Mo's analysis is intriguing, I hadn't thought making that distinction before. And even if there is a political or economic ulterior motive, I don't much care because I agree with it completely.

Besides, whatever will speed up the Hol-ster's comin' to America, I'm for that. :)
posted by hincandenza at 1:34 PM on July 10, 2001



I agree this is designed to appeal to Hispanics, a growing group with a high interest in voting. A recent WPost article noted how Republicans believe that just throwing Hispanics against the wall ... er ... as judge nominees, and seeing what sticks, is a viable strategy, because Dems will be loathe to oppose them. (In other words, the GOP believes they can play a race card in the event of opposition.)

In another sense this is Clintonesque triangulation, carefully chosen from a list of moderate issues that will appeal to demographic groups like Hispanics. He'll be able to claim this is bipartisanship and all that down the road.
posted by dhartung at 1:58 PM on July 10, 2001


I wonder if its the idea that you're opposed to or who the person who proposed the idea. I wonder....

I have to agree there. I wouldn't piss on Bush if he were on fire, but I have to admit that this sounds like a good plan. Sure, there's an ulterior motive, but most of this administrations are heinous on their face. At least this one has a silver lining.

And TTT, no offense, but your website needs a warning label, or something. I nearly had a seizure. :-)
posted by jpoulos at 2:14 PM on July 10, 2001


"Bush skips breakfast. What is he trying to get away with? Is there something I'm missing about the decision that makes it a good thing?"
posted by gyc at 2:45 PM on July 10, 2001


I think this may turn out to be an example of Bush trying to be evil, but resulting in good - in spite of himself.
posted by owillis at 2:47 PM on July 10, 2001


[Who benefits from this one? ]

Every american, and everyone trying to become an american.

[I think this may turn out to be an example of Bush trying to be evil, but resulting in good - in spite of himself.]

Um. Could you explain how this is trying to be evil?
posted by revbrian at 3:07 PM on July 10, 2001


I filed an application for a visa for my fiancee in late December, 2000. This is a 90 day visa, during which time she has to get married to me -- not really a high risk situation. I was told it would take 30 days for the application to be approved and sent on to New Zealand for the visa to be issued.

After 45, I was told it would take between 3 and 6 more months. I was in Texas. My fiancee was still in New Zealand. The government was telling us that, unless we could make several transcontinental trips, we couldn't be together for the better part of a year. And the INS was completely unable to tell me what was taking so long.

I called the INS many times, and was met with a stronger and stronger resolve NOT to talk to me. I called my congressman and was informed that even he had very little sway over the INS machine. Finally, I gave up and moved to NZ.

The application finally went through this month. 7 months after it had been filed. Now, we're going to return to the States, get married, and she'll file for her greencard.

I can only hope that this initiative is successful and that the process is simplified and sped up. Because, dedamn, I don't know how much more of this I can handle.

I mean, aren't we supposed to be living in a new, global culture? Why does it need to be so bloody hard to move from country to country?
posted by benbrown at 3:08 PM on July 10, 2001


Yeah, it's a real pain. I know two women (one from New Zealand, one from Canada) who recently moved to the States to marry American men. The Canadian woman doesn't even believe in marriage, and vowed never to do it, but after several months of trying to find a legal way to move to the US, she decided to bite the bullet and tie the knot (in more or less that order). I was amazed at the hoops both these people had to jump through in order to be with the men they love.
posted by kindall at 3:39 PM on July 10, 2001


For what it's worth, the American "hoop jumping" system is still the best. Just marrying a Japanese or a Swiss will not grant you any citizenship of those countries; just residential rights. And considering the volume, the US Immigration is still the best at processing applications. Why would any sane person want to leave the universal health care of Canada and move to USA? Is USA that much better than New Zealand?

[I can understand someone struggling to come here from a disadvanged country where they don't have running waters or human rights; but immigrating to USA from New Zealand, England and Canada? Is "First World" now limited to only good ol' USA?]
posted by tamim at 4:37 PM on July 10, 2001


Every american, and everyone trying to become an american.

Kind of. This still won't address the biggest lag of all in the INS bureacracy: the processing of naturalisation applications for permanent residents. The stats kept by the wonderfully helpful people on the alt.visa.us.marriage-based newsgroup suggest that that takes between 365-1000 days after filing, depending on the the INS office at which you file. But you can't cure everything at once...

[tanim: my personal situation is quite simple. I'm at the end of my doctoral degree; my girlfriend is only a year into hers. And because she's taking her doctorate in psychology, there are issues of accreditation which make it comparatively easier for me to spend a few years in the US, than for her to attempt to transfer to a British university. And if I get sick, I can always take the cheap option and pop on a plane back home.]
posted by holgate at 4:46 PM on July 10, 2001


"For what it's worth, the American "hoop jumping" system is still the best. Just marrying a Japanese or a Swiss will not grant you any citizenship of those countries; just residential rights."

Guess again, tamim. It is the same here. Just marrying an American does not grant you citizenship, only residency, temporary at that. You must refile after 10 years.
posted by keithl at 4:58 PM on July 10, 2001


Why would any sane person want to leave the universal health care of Canada and move to USA?

Well, in this case, it was because the guy she was in love with can't move because he has kids (and his ex has visitation rights, so he can't just up and move them to the frozen north).

Which reminds me... why would any sane person want to leave the pleasant climes of coastal Virginia and move to the frozen wasteland of Canada? ;)

Is USA that much better than New Zealand?

It is a heck of a lot more convenient if you're a writer who hopes to break into the vastly larger US market, that's for sure. And if (again) the guy you love happens to live there...
posted by kindall at 5:03 PM on July 10, 2001


He's English. I'm a Canuck. I figured I should be able to walk up to the nice English Immigration people and say, "Look... Canada's in the Commonwealth. We're in love. Here's my money for the fees."
But noooo.
Then there's what the forms and guides say, and what they're really saying.
posted by spandex at 5:19 PM on July 10, 2001


Who benefits?

Immigrants have always been invited to the country for one primary reason: to do labor so menial that most Americans won't do it, and to keep wages down. Oh, and the other modern reason: to cherry pick the brains of the world.
posted by Twang at 5:29 PM on July 10, 2001


Um. Could you explain how this is trying to be evil?

Well, he's opening the border in hopes of people going "he opened the border, never mind his policies hurt us, lets vote for him anyway" as opposed to actual intuitive intelligent reasoning. Ok, not so much evil as a bit underhanded....
posted by owillis at 5:44 PM on July 10, 2001


This was simply early campaigning.

Bush said he supported slightly relaxed rules (for family reasons, mind you) and then kicked it over to Congress. Local interests will prevent it from getting anywhere, and Bush will get to blame Congress and take the credit for trying.

If you want real free trade -- and nobody really does -- you have to open your borders completely to all qualified migrant workers, from grape pickers to software engineers.

Let's see him back that.
posted by pracowity at 2:01 AM on July 11, 2001


Well, he's opening the border in hopes of people going "he opened the border, never mind his policies hurt us, lets vote for him anyway" as opposed to actual intuitive intelligent reasoning. Ok, not so much evil as a bit underhanded....

It's not even underhanded, by Washington standards. Clinton was doing all kinds of things in his eight years to persuade new immigrants vote Democratic. That's one of the reasons Florida is no longer a Republican lock, because the non-Cuban Hispanic population is soaring and they strongly support Democrats.
posted by rcade at 6:23 AM on July 11, 2001


« Older Bush...  |  JAVE... Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments