Best way to approach CCP Membership situation

[audelair]

Hello,

I hope this isn't beaten to death, but after reading all of the links on CCP membership, I'd like to ask one more question, regarding how you all would handle approaching former membership with the CCP.

 

Considering that the applicant was a former member but already quit, has an explainable reason for having joined (good for career, or applied during University when it was popular to do so), and is not sympathetic at all to the principles of the party...

 

Upon being asked "Are you a member of the Communist Party", how would you answer?

 

I'm inclined to think that you only need to answer directly to the question being asked, in which case, the answer would be "no".

 

On the other hand, would it be better for the applicant to be as forward and open about it as possible, and perhaps answer something like "no, but I was a former member but quit over a year ago."

 

...and then proceed with any other Q&A related to the topic?

 

I'm just wondering if volunteering more information than needed is a good thing here, or whether it's preferable to just answer what is asked.

 

After reading the links in here, I'm inclined to think that CCP is not a big problem if you quit already. Waivers usually are only needed if you are still a member?

 

Anyone with very recent experience with this? And do you think we would face more or less difficulty with this in Sydney, as opposed to in Guangzhou?

 

Thanks again, and I look forward to any ideas as to the best way to handle it.

 

edit: Also, i know the GNI-2 asks, but as far as i know, it is not used all the time, only for K1 fiancee visas? According to the DS-230 Part 2, which everyone has to fill out, the ineligibility refers to current members only.

Edited September 6, 2005 by audelair (see edit history)

[Steve and Qingqing]

the statement in P4 asks if you ever WERE affiliated with a totalitarian party... in which she will have to answer YES....so even though she has quit she still will have one question that she will to answer yes... I wouldnt worry over it.. just be prepared for any questions that they might ask about it or be prepared to have to file a wavier later.. Hopefully this wont be a problem... have her prepare a written statement just in case and dont volunteer any information about this. just have a statement ready in case they ask for one.

[HanLi]

a yes or no answer should be given directly..... in this particular question, the answer is NO.... not necessary to add anything unless asked.... keep it simple.

[LeeFisher3]

a yes or no answer should be given directly..... in this particular question, the answer is NO.... not necessary to add anything unless asked.... keep it simple.

152022[/snapback]

Hank, you might want to read question 17C on the GNI-2 form that is sent with P4 before advising someone to answer NO when they were a member of the party.

Edited September 7, 2005 by LeeFisher3 (see edit history)

[Steve and Qingqing]

youd better not lie on the GNI form... question 7 reads as follows.... list all organizations or political parties you are now or HAVE BEEN a member of or affliliated with since your sixteenth birthday .inlcude political, social. professional, voctional organizations.... If you were a member and quit, youd have to answer YES to question 7. If your still a member, again youd have to answer YES to this question... Next you will have to answer question 17 C....again it asks if you are or at any time have been associated with any totalitarian party.....How can you advise anyone to answer NO when clearly the answer is YES for both questions.... By answering NO to both you are hoping that they wont catch you in a lie.... Its not a risk my SO and I are NOT willing to take.

we will answer truthfully and feel that this wont ban her from the States...but being caught in a lie .WILL ! Goodluck for those who want to gamble with their futures... Unfortunately it DOESNT ask you ARE you a member on this form that will be signed....That question is asked on a form that is no longer used....Hank is right only if you were asked ARE YOU a member...

Edited September 7, 2005 by Steve and Qingqing (see edit history)

[audelair]

a yes or no answer should be given directly..... in this particular question, the answer is NO.... not necessary to add anything unless asked.... keep it simple.

152022[/snapback]

Hank, you might want to read question 17C on the GNI-2 form that is sent with P4 before advising someone to answer NO when they were a member of the party.

152037[/snapback]

the P4 from Sydney doesn't include the GNI-2 form, so I was inquiring about if it comes up as a verbal question during the interview.

 

So the only time it comes up for us is in DS-230 Part II, which asks about being a present member of the party, to which it is advised on this board frequently to answer "no" if you already quit.

 

So without thinking about the GNI-2 form, i'm just curious what the best way to approach it would be during the interview. It likely won't even be brought up, but we did indeed prepare a statement if it is asked for.

[LeeFisher3]

a yes or no answer should be given directly..... in this particular question, the answer is NO.... not necessary to add anything unless asked.... keep it simple.

152022[/snapback]

Hank, you might want to read question 17C on the GNI-2 form that is sent with P4 before advising someone to answer NO when they were a member of the party.

152037[/snapback]

the P4 from Sydney doesn't include the GNI-2 form, so I was inquiring about if it comes up as a verbal question during the interview.

 

So the only time it comes up for us is in DS-230 Part II, which asks about being a present member of the party, to which it is advised on this board frequently to answer "no" if you already quit.

 

So without thinking about the GNI-2 form, i'm just curious what the best way to approach it would be during the interview. It likely won't even be brought up, but we did indeed prepare a statement if it is asked for.

152113[/snapback]

If the verbal question comes up, which it could, she should answer truthfully. The issue of party membership seems to be in most cases a non-issue, but a misleading or incorrect answer is a HUGE issue.

 

Personally I would suggest that anyone who was or is a party member have a letter prepared and hidden away at the interview just in case an explanation is required.

 

As for the DS-230 Part II, this seems to be a question/answer session with many by the VO and your SO should answer their questions, probably through a translator and at that point it is up to the VO to make sure there is a clear understanding of what they ask.

[audelair]

If the verbal question comes up, which it could, she should answer truthfully. The issue of party membership seems to be in most cases a non-issue, but a misleading or incorrect answer is a HUGE issue.

 

Personally I would suggest that anyone who was or is a party member have a letter prepared and hidden away at the interview just in case an explanation is required.

 

As for the DS-230 Part II, this seems to be a question/answer session with many by the VO and your SO should answer their questions, probably through a translator and at that point it is up to the VO to make sure there is a clear understanding of what they ask. 

152172[/snapback]

 

Oh, she will most definitely be truthful. I was just wondering whether to volunteer more information than was needed. I thought maybe it would be a good gesture to talk to them about the past membership even if they only inquire about current membership.

 

Can I take it to mean that if a former CCP member who has already quit is asked "Are you a member", a "no" would suffice? And if the applicant is asked "Are you or have you ever been a member", a "yes, I am a former member but quit XXX years ago" is the answer to give?

 

From the threads, I gather that CCP membership is a sensitive issue to both the consulate and the applicant, so I just want to make sure we are doing the right thing.

Edited September 8, 2005 by audelair (see edit history)

[LeeFisher3]

If the verbal question comes up, which it could, she should answer truthfully. The issue of party membership seems to be in most cases a non-issue, but a misleading or incorrect answer is a HUGE issue.

 

Personally I would suggest that anyone who was or is a party member have a letter prepared and hidden away at the interview just in case an explanation is required.

 

As for the DS-230 Part II, this seems to be a question/answer session with many by the VO and your SO should answer their questions, probably through a translator and at that point it is up to the VO to make sure there is a clear understanding of what they ask. 

152172[/snapback]

oh absolutely she will answer truthfully, but I was wondering whether it is preferable to be truthful and minimal (if asked if she is a member, she would say "no", since she is no longer a member), or volunteer additional information indicating that she used to be a member but quit over a year ago?

 

Would a "no" answer be misleading? I definitely would not want to mislead the VO, but I also wouldn't want to volunteer information if it is unnecessary. For instance, perhaps the VO chose not to ask it because he sees there is no need for concern about past membership (based on her background and case), and chooses not to face the dillemma of past membership?

152383[/snapback]

We are getting to the "How many VO's can dance on the head of a pen" situation here, and I believe that VO's never learned how to dance or at least not well.

 

You must understand that the rules concerning totalitarian parties, especially the communist party were added to the law back in the 1950's when there was a great fear in this country and it is still there to this day, we love our old laws.

 

I believe the question in most cases is over thought, not to minimize the issue, but we seem to get carried away on some of these things in this process because this affects someone we love.

 

Sure, answer yes/no questions directly and there is no need to offer anything extra. But with the knowledge it could come up have a letter of explanation ready that would give the VO the opportunity to approve the issue without requesting a waiver. Government employees like easy.

 

There is a place in the Links and Resources section that has many links discussing this matter. The basic rule are you "Now or Ever been a member" and there is the "work, family, housing and feed myself exception to that rule." The VO has full discretion to approve the exception and it seems the majority have done just that.

 

As for quitting the party they also offer 2 different bars for past membership, but both of those have a requirement based on quitting the party either 2 or 5 years before the petition was filed and doesn't apply to someone who quit the party after the petition was filed.

 

From what others have posted concerning their SO's this really is a non-issue unless we choose to make it an issue.

[audelair]

We are getting to the "How many VO's can dance on the head of a pen" situation here, and I believe that VO's never learned how to dance or at least not well. 

 

You must understand that the rules concerning totalitarian parties, especially the communist party were added to the law back in the 1950's when there was a great fear in this country and it is still there to this day, we love our old laws.

 

I believe the question in most cases is over thought, not to minimize the issue, but we seem to get carried away on some of these things in this process because this affects someone we love.

 

Sure, answer yes/no questions directly and there is no need to offer anything extra. But with the knowledge it could come up have a letter of explanation ready that would give the VO the opportunity to approve the issue without requesting a waiver. Government employees like easy.

 

There is a place in the Links and Resources section that has many links discussing this matter. The basic rule are you "Now or Ever been a member" and there is the "work, family, housing and feed myself exception to that rule." The VO has full discretion to approve the exception and it seems the majority have done just that.

 

As for quitting the party they also offer 2 different bars for past membership, but both of those have a requirement based on quitting the party either 2 or 5 years before the petition was filed and doesn't apply to someone who quit the party after the petition was filed.

 

From what others have posted concerning their SO's this really is a non-issue unless we choose to make it an issue.

152384[/snapback]

Thank you for the response and your perspective... very much appreciated

 

I think in GZ, they tend to like to not make an issue out of this, but i'll be in Sydney. Actually, it would make sense that Sydney would make even less of an issue out of this, huh? We'll see. I can't wait to post my experience, about going third-country DCF in Australia. I'm very interested to see how different my experience is doing it here as opposed to GZ!