Provision to reinstate immigrant fees tucked into omnibus
The massive spending bill approved by the Senate last week contains a little-noticed provision that could have major implications for how immigration applications are processed and how expensive they will be.
At issue is a provision in the Senate omnibus spending bill to re-establish old requirements that immigrants applying for visas, citizenship or adjustment of family status pay a surcharge to subsidize the processing of applications by asylum seekers and refugees.
Immigration advocates say this policy unfairly pits certain immigrants against others, and they are pushing for federal appropriations to cover the cost of processing asylum seekers and refugees.
The Homeland Security Department bill passed in November removed the surcharge on applicants-which immigration groups say adds about $80 to a citizenship application. However, it did not authorize any appropriations for asylum seekers and refugees, leaving them without funds.
Then the omnibus bill the Senate passed last week put the surcharge back in, re-establishing the previous system that requires some immigrants in effect to pay for others.
The moving-target nature of the policy has put immigration advocates in a difficult position.
"We are stuck between feeling very supportive and not," said Rosalind Gold, senior director of policy research and advocacy for the National Association of Latino Elected and Appointed Officials.
"If we aren't going to charge a fee for asylum seekers and refugees, then we as a humane nation shouldn't be charging other immigrants," she added, but vowed to continue pressing for appropriations to replace the surcharge.
It remains to be seen what will happen when the bill goes to conference with the House, but congressional aides said the House is unlikely to alter the Senate's surcharge provision.
Meanwhile, the Immigration and Naturalization Service, which processes these applications, lost money during the time the surcharge was not in place and now will have to scramble to find funds and rewrite regulations.
"It's just creating chaos in the immigration community. Nobody knows what to pay," said a spokeswoman for Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions ranking member Edward Kennedy, D-Mass., who is working on the fee issue.
The INS also will struggle in the coming months with being split and folded into the new Homeland Security Department.
"This is one of a multitude of things," said Theresa Brown, director of immigration policy for the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. She says slow processing at the INS is a chronic issue that could become even more complex as it moves into homeland security.
"For us, it's simply a matter of backlog. If appropriated money would keep them from falling into a backlog, then we're all for it," Brown said.