owenkrout Posted January 27, 2003 Report Share Posted January 27, 2003 The situation is not going to improve with the institution of Homeland Security. Probably, it will actually get worse. The reason is that the action being taken is that INS is going to be split in two and the two halves melded into Homeland. DOS will keep their current tasks. DOJ will keep the background (Name) checks. The action taken is insufficently radical to change a process this badly broken. INS is so dysfunctional that only radical action of the scale of terminating INS and all its employees and starting two entirely new departments would have the effect of changing the corporate culture. As it is now being done, the same employees with the same attitudes and work patterns are just going to get a new department title. The result will be a continuation of the same pattern of behavior. DOS will not be changing. It appears that they lack the necessary management skills to achieve their project goals within any reasonable time lines. The GZ consulate is prehaps a worst case scenario for them, but since no changes are in store, we can only expect more of the prevarications that we have come to expect of them. If what we have been told by State is correct, then another problem in the system is that there is no clear line of authority in the Consular system. We are continually told that D.C. cannot order any particular action to be taken at GZ. If that is true, it is an obvious source of poor customer service. DOJ is so obsessed with secrecy that they can't seem to cooperate with anybody. I don't see that changing. Link to comment
Eric&Yuhui Posted January 27, 2003 Report Share Posted January 27, 2003 The situation is not going to improve with the institution of Homeland Security. Probably, it will actually get worse. The reason is that the action being taken is that INS is going to be split in two and the two halves melded into Homeland. DOS will keep their current tasks. DOJ will keep the background (Name) checks. The action taken is insufficently radical to change a process this badly broken. INS is so dysfunctional that only radical action of the scale of terminating INS and all its employees and starting two entirely new departments would have the effect of changing the corporate culture. As it is now being done, the same employees with the same attitudes and work patterns are just going to get a new department title. The result will be a continuation of the same pattern of behavior. DOS will not be changing. It appears that they lack the necessary management skills to achieve their project goals within any reasonable time lines. The GZ consulate is prehaps a worst case scenario for them, but since no changes are in store, we can only expect more of the prevarications that we have come to expect of them. If what we have been told by State is correct, then another problem in the system is that there is no clear line of authority in the Consular system. We are continually told that D.C. cannot order any particular action to be taken at GZ. If that is true, it is an obvious source of poor customer service. DOJ is so obsessed with secrecy that they can't seem to cooperate with anybody. I don't see that changing.I tend to agree Great. Now I'm gonna have to find a lake to drown myself in. Link to comment
Mick Posted January 28, 2003 Report Share Posted January 28, 2003 I agree as well. I don't see as how this reorganization will accomplish much on any level, other than deepening the already out of control budget defecit. This costly plan only serves to give the appearance of creating a more effiecient and streamlined bureacracy. However, we should all know that no bureaucracy is streamlined or effiecient. I don't think Homeland, especially with its leadership, will have any active interest in improving the flow of immigration. I personally think they will, instead, do everything in their power to impede that flow. I agree with Owen in that this is basically a leadership issue. If the person at the top doesn't have a handle on what his or her various levels or underlings are doing on a daily basis, then that organization will operate in a haphazard manner driven by conflicting interests, lethargy, and a general disinterest in quality of service. If we want change, we have to go to the top. We have tried other tactics, and where has it actually taken us? What results has it brought? A trickle of visas, a fund of worthless promises, and interminable delays. It is high time, in my opinion, that we take our case as high as we can. Link to comment
skibum Posted January 28, 2003 Report Share Posted January 28, 2003 Owen, Where did you see that DOS will keep their current tasks? I have looked at the law and it gives me a headache. It seems to me that from what I read that HS will be responsible for approving visas. I also note that clearing up the backlog is written into it! http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?c107...~c107aBfbKm:e0: Not sure if that link will work as they expire after time goes by. Link to comment
Eric&Yuhui Posted January 28, 2003 Report Share Posted January 28, 2003 Owen, Where did you see that DOS will keep their current tasks? I have looked at the law and it gives me a headache. It seems to me that from what I read that HS will be responsible for approving visas. I also note that clearing up the backlog is written into it! http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?c107...~c107aBfbKm:e0: Not sure if that link will work as they expire after time goes by.No. DHS is not in charge of approving visas...State is. Neither was INS , ever..They just process applications for immigration related matters. Link to comment
skibum Posted January 28, 2003 Report Share Posted January 28, 2003 I am talking about the future when it goes into effect. I think I would have to follow up all the INS laws that the new law refers to in order to know for sure. That is why I asked Owen where he saw it. It does say that the Sec of State can veto a visa with reason. That makes me think that Homeland makes the decision. Homeland also may put people in the consulates to train and supervise the DOS personel in visa matters. Link to comment
Eric&Yuhui Posted January 28, 2003 Report Share Posted January 28, 2003 I am talking about the future when it goes into effect. I think I would have to follow up all the INS laws that the new law refers to in order to know for sure. That is why I asked Owen where he saw it. It does say that the Sec of State can veto a visa with reason. That makes me think that Homeland makes the decision. Homeland also may put people in the consulates to train and supervise the DOS personel in visa matters.Possible, yes. But I don't think it will happen by the time our visas are released.....But I'm sure it'll mess up AOS and the rest.... Link to comment
kkimm Posted January 28, 2003 Report Share Posted January 28, 2003 As far as I know, both INS and DOS has been failed in this "blaming game" after the 9/11 event. The Bush administration wouldn't take any responsibilities, nor does the FBI, CIA, etc...so it is these agencies that related to the ultimate decision of visa issuance to take the heat. Even with namecheck, DOS has to wait on other "agencies". With China and Russia being singled out, this has become a blackbox operation that is quickly out of hands (other question is who is advising and overseeing such actions?). If this happens to americans being not able to get visas to some other countries, I would not be surprised to hear about "human rights" motions... I myself is really disappointed... Link to comment
Mick Posted January 28, 2003 Report Share Posted January 28, 2003 I am talking about the future when it goes into effect. I think I would have to follow up all the INS laws that the new law refers to in order to know for sure. That is why I asked Owen where he saw it. It does say that the Sec of State can veto a visa with reason. That makes me think that Homeland makes the decision. Homeland also may put people in the consulates to train and supervise the DOS personel in visa matters.Possible, yes. But I don't think it will happen by the time our visas are released.....But I'm sure it'll mess up AOS and the rest....Good God. AOS! I hadn't thought about that in awhile, what with all the crapola about just getting cleared in the first place. You make a good point Eric. Things like AOS, Advanced Parole, all of these processes will be impacted. Really gives us something to look forward to, huh! Link to comment
chinadave2001 Posted January 28, 2003 Report Share Posted January 28, 2003 Hi all. I can't help but think that these folks know full well what they are doing, why they are doing it, and what the consequences are. Can they truly be this incompetent and uncaring? I don't think so. I think there is some other agenda being served here that we don't know of - and maybe never will. On a different note, since I am relatively early in the process, (5 months and waiting for Packet three...) would there be any advantage in getting married now and then applying for the new V visa???Thoughts??? We decided not to get married in China because we understood that there was no advantage in doing so....Thanks in advance for thoughts about this. Link to comment
chinadave2001 Posted January 28, 2003 Report Share Posted January 28, 2003 OK, thanks. It's difficult to keep all this straight. thanks....dave Link to comment
skibum Posted January 28, 2003 Report Share Posted January 28, 2003 Can they truly be this incompetent and uncaring? Yes they can and yes they are. Please don't anyone think about using the V visa without checking with INS. I beleive that this expired at the begining of last year. For some reason the referrence to the V visa is the standard automated reply to e-mails sent to usvisa@... Imcompetent? Link to comment
owenkrout Posted January 28, 2003 Author Report Share Posted January 28, 2003 It is lengthy, but just shows how bungling and CYA Consular Affairs can be. Back in 1999 there was a House Committee hearing specifically about the allegations of a particular foreign affairs officer in Beijing taking bribes for visas. Basically the testimony shows that DOS, at the best, totally bungled the investigation. At the worst, they covered up the problem and promoted the individual. I have heard these same allegations from Chinese nationals for many years, even before ever coming to China. I also have heard the same about GZ. True of not, I don’t know at this point, but the investigation was a farce. http://www.house.gov/reform/pdf/gpo.docs/1...id=f:77229.wais For a less detailed review see the article from the National Review http://www.nationalreview.com/mowbray/mowb...wbray071102.asp Link to comment
owenkrout Posted January 28, 2003 Author Report Share Posted January 28, 2003 Owen, Where did you see that DOS will keep their current tasks? I have looked at the law and it gives me a headache. It seems to me that from what I read that HS will be responsible for approving visas. I also note that clearing up the backlog is written into it! http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?c107...~c107aBfbKm:e0: Not sure if that link will work as they expire after time goes by.Took me a bit to find it again. From the White House website Section 403. Visa issuance This section transfers to the Secretary of Homeland Security control over the issuance and denial of visas to enter the United States, while preserving the Secretary of State’s traditional authority to deny visas to aliens based upon the foreign policy interests of the United States. The section expressly authorizes the Secretary of Homeland Security to delegate his authority under this section to State Department and other federal government personnel and provides that the Secretary will exercise his authority through the Secretary of State. The section does not alter the employment status of diplomatic or consular officers processing visas abroad, who will remain employees of the Department of State. End Quote/ Emphasis mine Link to comment
skibum Posted January 28, 2003 Report Share Posted January 28, 2003 So it looks like it is as was originally planned with Homeland in charge using DOS people. This is sure to streamline things! I do believe it is good to get ultimate authority under Homeland as State tends to use it as a tool for bribing countries. Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now