Hal Netkin
POB 3465
Van Nuys, CA 91407
Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle
May 17, 2002
Dear Senator Daschle
Although there is no doubt of your good intentions, you are misinformed about some of the facts regarding 245(I).
Several weeks ago, I watched an hour long Video clip of INS Director, James Ziglar's appearance at the National Press Club and I wanted to comment on something that Ziglar said that was not what it appeared to be.
In giving the chronology of the two terrorists whose visa approval arrived six months after 9/11, Ziglar said that their visas were actually approved before 9/11. He said the approval was done before anyone knew that they were terrorists and referred to the document of approval as the "Notice of Action" (NOA) form that the two terrorists received. He made light of the situation by drawing an analogy to buying something at a store and receiving the receipt by mail six months later.
The truth is that other than an INS clerk's skimming of the submitted visa applications, none of the information on those applications was ever verified.
Let me tell you what the NOA form is. THE NOA FORM IS NOTHING MORE THAN AN ACKNOWLEDGMENT AND A RECEIPT THAT THE INS HAS RECEIVED YOUR FILLED OUT FORM AND THE ACCOMPANYING FEE. The NOA is a general form used by the INS to acknowledge ANY form submitted by almost anyone. IT IS NOT PROOF OF ANYTHING. How do I know this? Because my wife, who immigrated from Mexico eleven years ago and is now a U.S. Citizen, petitioned for immigration visas for two of her brothers who are presently in the U.S. illegally but remaining via the last 245(i) (normally, a legal U.S. NON-citizen resident can petition from Mexico or other country, for a son, daughter, and/or parent/s -- but a born or naturalized U.S. citizen can also petition for their sibling/s). In the case of one of her brothers, the INS ignored the fact that my wife in filling out the necessary form, indicated that he had been deported once and reentered a second time illegally (see line 16, of INS form I-130 enclosed).
When the I-130 forms were sent to the INS along with a $110 (Now $130) filing fee check for each of the brothers, both received the NOAs -- no questions asked.
Summarizing: anyone can download any INS form, fill it out with false information, mail it in with a check, and receive a "Notice of Action" receipt. In the case of the 245(i) provision, the "Notice of Action" would be the applicants only "proof" that the INS gives them permission to be in the U.S. They will not receive any further documents until their visa turn comes up in eight to ten years.
HERE ARE THE FACTS ABOUT 245(i)
The 245(i) provision allows illegal aliens in the U.S. who would otherwise be eligible to be sponsored by a legal U.S. resident or U.S. citizen, to immigrate legally as if they were in their own country, to apply for an immigration visa while remaining illegally in the U.S. with the permission of the INS.
There is a $1,000 fine which must be paid for the 245(i) privilege, but that doesn't need to be paid until the INS is ready to issue a visa to the applicant, which could be up to 10 years from the time that the applicant received their NOA. As the law is now, the applicant cannot receive permission to work even though they are allowed to remain in the U.S., so there is a period (the length of time to get a visa) of being in limbo. However, working is not a problem for an illegal alien because the illegal alien can obtain an IRS ITIN (INDIVIDUAL TAX PAYER IDENTIFICATION NUMBER which looks like a social security number, but all IRS ITIN numbers issued to illegal aliens start with the number "9" -- a dead give away to employers that the bearer of the ITIN is probably an illegal alien).
245(i) does not change the fact that the applicant is still an illegal alien. Moreover, a thorough background check [ including submission of fingerprints] and thorough medical check will only be required at the time just before the visa is issued. On the NOA itself, it states "It usually takes 815 to 825 days from the date of the receipt for us to process this type of (any) case." That's over two years before the INS gets around to verifying the information on the form -- IF AT ALL! In other words, a criminal who has a contagious disease who has applied for a visa via the 245(i) provision, can reside in the U.S. for at least two years and possibly up to 10 years before he/she would be deported (if they can be found) because of a criminal background and/or negative medical check.
To apply for legalization via the 245(i) provision, the applicant's U.S. Sponsor (usually a qualified relative residing legally in the U.S., but employers can also sponsor illegal aliens in some cases) fills out an I-130 petition for their alien relative just the same as if the illegal alien relative was in his/her home country, but declares that the illegal alien relative is presently in the U.S. "without inspected" (lines 13 and 14) and simply mails it in to the INS along with a check in the amount of $110. Upon receipt of the form, the INS sends the NOA receipt. What is important to know, is that the NOA is not proof that the information sent to the INS has been verified -- it has not! If the form contains false or erroneous information, that information won't be known for years, if at all. The only consequence to someone who puts false or erroneous information in the form, is deportation, but that won't happen for up to 10 years from the time the form was submitted. In fact, the procedure buys time for illegals who would not otherwise qualify under the ordinary circumstances of being in their own country when petitioned for. Simply put, the INS accepts any application, whether falsely filled out or not, cashes the check, and sends the NOA.
The 245(i) applicant carries the NOA with him/her and can present it to any law enforcement agency as "proof" that they have permission from the INS to be in the U.S.
You give family reunification as your main reason for pushing the 245(I). In my brothers-in-laws' cases, which are typical of most, they are being petitioned by their sister (my wife), but they have left behind in Mexico, their immediate families whom they may not see for many years to come. This is not family reunification -- it is family separation!
By not requiring any proof other than the petitioner's word that the applicant has been in the U.S. for the specified time required to be eligible for the 245(I), the INS creates a magnet for yet more illegal borders crossers. When I consulted with an immigration attorney about the 245(i) procedure for my brothers-in-law, the attorney offered the suggestion that my wife petition for her other six siblings, I told him that they were not in the U.S. He replied, "oh yes they are" (nudge, nudge -- wink, wink).
In California (and other states) there is a link between the 245(i) and State Assemblyman Cedillo's driver's license bill. After Governor Davis vetoed Cedillo's first try, the latest version of Cedillo's bill is "watered down" by requiring that the license applicant show that he/she has applied for his/her papers. A 245(i) applicant only has their NOA receipt to show that they have applied for legal residency and will not receive any further documents until his/her visa turn comes up (could be as long as 10 years). Most likely, if Cedillo's bill passes, the only proof that the DMV will require, will be the NOA receipt number. Moreover, the NOA receipt is easily forged and will no doubt become a hot item on Alvarado Bl. (where in L.A., false documents are sold in the open).
I love my wife's family and know personally that my brothers-in-law pose no security risk for our country, but I cannot guarantee that anyone smart enough to learn to fly an airliner into a high rise building, could not also be smart enough to disguise themselves as an illegal alien and take advantage of the 245(i) privilege [to bring harm to Americans]. It is inconceivable that you and others would push the 245(i) in the shadow of 9/11.
Hal Netkin
CC: Senator Edward Kennedy
