Fax to Powell for Friday Jan 23rd

[owenkrout]

Dear Secretary Powell,

 

I am one of the many thousands of people who have made an application for a visa for our wives, husbands or fiancees through the Guangzhou, China or Moscow, Russia Consulates and who had a successful interview during the period of July through September, 2002. I am writing this letter to you in my continued belief that you personally are a man of principle and a fair man.

 

Despite continued promises, the great majority of people within this group are still told that their visas are being held up for “namechecks”. Sir, just how long is a reasonable time to perform namechecks on women from countries with no history of terrorist activity in the U.S.? In my wife’s particular case, it has now been over 23 weeks.

 

The continued inaction and ineptitude of those involved has reached such epic proportions that many of those who were originally eager to come to America and eager to become part of a government truly of the people, by the people and for the people, have now begun to despair. To quote one Chinese fiancee, “I was told citizen in US had more freedom, more respect, more equality and US cares about human rights. but now.....I am really confused what US is.”

 

Sir, this is not the America that we want to project to the rest of the world.

 

We have been lied to too much.

Just a list of some of the ways:

1. At interview, "We will mail you a letter to pick up your visa in about two weeks!"

2. After two weeks, the GUZ Consulate web site advises that there is a delay and those who have interviewed for a visa can expect to wait for 6-8 weeks"

3. After 8 weeks, we were told, "delay will be about 2 to 3 months"

4. After 3 months, A good sign. They start issuing visas. "5100 visa have been sent to Guangzhou. Why no visa yet? Maybe they have not entered your fiancée’s name into computer yet, call back next week". When we call back the next week, "Not yet, still pending" is all we got.

5. After another month, something like, "We are working very hard to clear up the backlog", and "we will try to clear the backlog by Jan 4".

6. Then we found out there were few visas issued for August interviewees. We were told that July through September is on back hold. There was some error that caused special delays for the July - September group.

7. Then some people were told or asked to have Guangzhou resubmit their cases for the namecheck.

8. We were told that all cases still pending approval from the July through September group were resubmitted in the period of Jan 4-13.

9. Then we were told, "It will about 2-3 more weeks after resubmission".

10. Two weeks after the resubmission, only a small number of backlogged cases from July through September have actually received visas.

 

Please, Sir, we are appealing to you to demand some effective action from these bureaucratic sloths. Perhaps your people are telling you that they have taken effective action, but those of us out here, where action counts for more than words, can assure you that it is not so. Some of the very few that have received visas are reporting to us that there are only 10-20 people a day actually picking up visas. Given the thousands already in the backlog and the fact that they are still interviewing people and telling them to wait, the backlog will never be resolved.

 

I hesitate to suggest solutions, since we are supposedly paying experts very good money for that, but given the lack of effective action I will.

 

The problem here is that there are certain "constraints" in the system. That is there are choke-points at which the delays are generated. Every system has these. One very effective trick to making any system work better is to identify the constraints and take action to eliminate them. This is not a new or radical theory.

 

In this case I can see several choke-points.

 

One of the major ones is the need for multiple entries into the computer system. In this day and age, there is no reason that one entry should not suffice. There is a magical thing called networking nowdays. Information sharing. If networking is too advanced for them, then the data could be sent between units in the diplomatic pouches, on something as simple as a RW-CD or a Zip Drive. By keying all info to the case number and with appropriate programing, multiple re-entries by hand would be unnecessary. This would also decrease the number or errors. Wouldn't this be slower than cabling the cases? Yes and no. Yes in that the actual transfer between departments would be slowed, but overall no in that the cases would not sit on someones desk awaiting hand entry.

 

There are other solutions also. Barcoding could be used to speed entries and to eliminate mistakes in entering that long case number.

 

Training is lacking on personnel involved. The GAO report pointed this out.

 

A web-site similar to the INS site, would enable peope to find out the status of their case using their case number, without tying up personnel.

 

Do not schedule interviews until the name check has cleared. That would free up man-hours by eliminating the need to call people back for a second time.

 

I am sure there are more things that any competent troubleshooter could find if they were intimate with how things are now being done.

 

Please, Sir, do not let these people continue to blunder and sweep the problem under the carpet. Demand effective action.

 

 

Respectfully yours,

 

Roger Owen Krout

(address e-mail etc)

[Mick]

Well-penned and to the point Owen. I hope and pray it gets to Powell himself. Thanks for your efforts my friend!

[bobmal99]

Do you really think Powell will see that letter? I certainly hope so. Call me crazy but unless some politician send him something similar, unfortunately I do not see much if anything changing!!!

 

Owen you were told two weeks, how many times??

[owenkrout]

I personally have a high opinion of Powell. I think that he is more likely to kick some *** than anyone else that is involved in this. He may not see it, but somebody will be eager to take care of the level of incompetence that is being displayed rather than have him find out about it.

 

I no longer believe anything from them until I see a visa in the passport on the street outside the Consulate.

[Guest woaipw]

Nice pen Owen..but I am afraid Powell has more concerns with Iraq these days....but hopefully one of his underlings will address the issue.

 

As it goes to show you, the US steams about human rights, but doesn't take care of business at home...

[skibum]

I used to have a high opinion of Powell but it turns out he cannot even see to having the visas taken care of. And he fought to keep the visa process in State instead of Homeland. IMO they should be in Homeland where there is less chance to use them as a political tool.

 

should be "lied to too much" "sloths"

[owenkrout]

I used to have a high opinion of Powell but it turns out he cannot even see to having the visas taken care of.  And he fought to keep the visa process in State instead of Homeland.  IMO they should be in Homeland where there is less chance to use them as a political tool.

 

should be "lied to too much"    "sloths"

Actually, I was intending to write: "this bureaucratic sloth", but I like "these bureaucratic sloths" even better.

 

I corrected both points with an edit.

[Robert S.]

Good letter, Owen.

 

Should be "man of principle" (though he is the principal man in the DoS).

 

As far as whether he will actually see it, this is actually possible. Our first group letter was sent to Powell. When we sent the letter back in the first week of December the lady who gathered the names and actually faxed the letter called Powell's secretary a few minutes later to confirm that the fax had been received. The secretary said that it had been received and she had carried it in to show to Powell. The reply came from Maura Harty so this is why we addressed our second group letter with 77 co-signers to Harty. But I would like to really believe that the first letter was actually seen by Powell. I don't know if the secretary will take the trouble to show a letter from a single person to the boss but your letter is such a strong one with a comprehensive statement of the problem it deserves to be noticed.

 

- Robert

[Guest jennifer_lam]

Owen, it is a great letter. I remember a group letter was sent to Powell before. Did he reply???

[Nicole]

Owen, it is a great letter. thank you.

[Ying&Vin]

Owen, Great letter! Thanks!

Do you need our email or name for co-sign?

[owenkrout]

I am not making this a group letter because I am encouraging everyone to submit complaints. That is more effective for emphasizing the number of people that are upset. Anyone that wants to copy my letter and put their name on it and personalize it for their situation is welcome to do so. The point is to keep it in the front of the bosses minds that things are not really working as smoothly as I am sure the bureaucrats are telling them.

 

Thanks for the detail Ron. I missed that one.

[Robert S.]

Who is Ron?

 

I know you would have caught that on the final proofreading but I just like to be pedantic sometimes.

[owenkrout]

Rob, Rob. I told you once that I tend to get left and right hand strokes mixed up (n instead of