 |
| Wilson cast crucial vote for immigrants |
March 22, 2002 |
| |
245(I) extension keeps families together
Albuquerque, NM - Congresswoman Heather Wilson cast a critical vote recently in the House of Representatives that will help keep hundreds of New Mexico families together and will increase border security. Wilson supports extending the 245(I) provisions of the Immigration and Nationality Act for four months while reforming border security and visa entry processes, including adding 400 border security personnel and $150 million to the INS budget for port of entry efficiency.
Wilson continues to support extending the 245(I) provision, so called because of the section of INS law in which the provisions are found. Legislation doing just that passed the House last week by a 1-vote margin. Wilson spoke today at a naturalization ceremony where 150 of our country’s newest citizens were sworn in and she underscored her support of the 245(I) extension.
“I know we can balance border security while keeping families together,” said Wilson. “Immigrant rights advocates strongly support extending the 245(I) provision and I agree with them. People who otherwise qualify for legal permanent residence, but may have overstayed their visas or otherwise violated U.S. immigration law, should be penalized, but we don’t have to penalize entire families by keeping them separated for months or years at a time. I think this legislation is a good and reasonable balance.”
“Catholic Charities of Central New Mexico appreciates Congresswoman Wilson’s support of the extension of 245(I),” said Greg Kepferle, Executive Director of Catholic Charities of Central New Mexico, a group that works closely with immigrants. “This is urgently needed by our immigrant community to help families stay together. We appreciate her support in making this possible.”
Some individuals who qualify for 245(i) waivers have overstayed their temporary visas. The 245(i) extension legislation requires these individuals to pay a $1000 penalty and then they may receive the permanent resident status they are otherwise eligible for. Under current law, these people would be required to return to their home countries and wait for 3 or 10 years before they could return to the U.S. and receive permanent residency under the 245(i) waiver. Wilson feels that a $1000 penalty is a serious punishment, and it fits the “crime” of overstaying a visa far better than breaking up a family for 3 or 10 years.
Wilson dispelled the notions that 245(i) extensions represent blanket amnesty that discriminates against those who follow the law, and that the extensions help terrorists or criminals.
“This provision does not discriminate against law-abiding applicants, nor does it help criminals. Those who have not violated immigration law do not have to pay the hefty $1000 penalty to obtain legal permanent residence. And if you break the law in other ways, you don’t deserve a green card and you won’t get one. So this 245(i) adjustment, unlike an amnesty, sends the right message: it discriminates in favor of law-abiders and against lawbreakers,” said Wilson.
Wilson noted that 245(i) extensions do not benefit terrorists or criminals, despite opponent claims to the contrary. Current law provides clearly and specifically that the 245(i) waiver is unavailable to people who are excludable on these grounds, and the screening (including fingerprints, etc.) for adjustment of status under 245(i) is just as thorough as the screening overseas applicants get.
Key Provisions Regarding Section 245(i) Extension
Extends the filing deadline for section 245(i) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) through the earlier of November 30, 2002, or four months after the Attorney General promulgates regulations.
Benefits persons originally qualifying for section 245(i), i.e., aliens who are not lawfully present in the U.S. or have somehow violated the terms of their visa. INS reports that 600,000 aliens filed under the original extension; however, INS failed to publish regulations for the extension until one month before the deadline on April 30, 2001. Estimates are that 200,000 people missed the filing deadline because INS did not act quickly enough.
Allows immigrants to apply for their green card within the U.S. for a fee of $1,000 but imposes on them the same requirements imposed on applicants in their home country. However, if the alien is forced to leave the U.S. to apply, he is barred from reentering the U.S. for 3 or 10 years.
Requires a close family member or employer to sponsor the applicant. The familial or employer relationship must have existed before August 15, 2001, and the applicant must have been present in the U.S. as of December 21, 2000. Due to family preference rules and employer disclosure risks, the bill essentially assists spouses, parents, and young children of current U.S. citizens.
Key Provisions Regarding Border Security and Visa Entry Reform
Increases Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) border security personnel by 400 employees; authorizes $150 million for INS to improve efficiency at ports of entry.
Integrates all INS database systems. Connects INS and State Department database systems with law enforcement and intelligence communities.
Requires visas to be machine-readable and tamper-resistant with biometric identifiers; also imposes these same requirements on passports issued by visa waiver countries.
Restricts the number of visas granted to applicants from countries sponsoring terrorism.
Requires commercial aircraft and vessels entering and exiting the U.S. to electronically submit information on all persons onboard; prohibits carriers from entering the U.S. until they provide the information.
Monitors foreign student activity; collects additional background data from student visa applicants; demands cooperation from institutions and allows the INS and State Department to limit an institution`s participation in foreign student programs if they do not comply with regulations.
--END-- |
|
|
|