I dont wish to use this forum to voice personal gripes, but my recent experience with the American consulate goes beyond the personal and ought to be reviewed by any American citizen with a conscience. Below here I reproduce an editorial I have sent to various media outlets, which is a slightly briefer version of a letter i have sent to my representatives back home (Clinton, Rangel, Perkins Scheiderman), as well as other influential leaders.
"I wish to take this opportunity to discuss what I consider to be a serious breach of the contract that we as Americans have with our consulates abroad. As a journalist I have lived and worked in many countries, and it has always been my understanding that our embassies exist to promote American interests and exemplify American values. That they should not only advocate such values, but embody them in their own practice. I have recently been confronted with a sorry example of failure in these matters that leaves me, quite frankly, somewhat stunned over the egregious hypocrisy that lies behind that failure.
I currently work in the Dominican Republic, and I am raising a family there. I choose to do so because in part my work requires it, and because I am genuinely dedicated to contributing something to that society as well as reporting on it. We are happy despite the inevitable struggles that accompany living in a developing nation, and my wife and I believe that our daughter benefits enormously from the kind of childhood she enjoys there. Thus it is with great consternation that I describe the following almost incomprehensible bad faith in regard to the treatment of foreign spouses legally married to American citizens. Since we are a binational family, we have two branches, and to ensure that they not become estranged, my wife and I planned to visit the American branch this summer while my daughter was free from school. My daughter enjoys dual citizenship, so travelling with her is not a problem, but my wife is Dominican and as such does not automatically qualify for a visa to the States that would allow her to visit with my family. She therefore dutifully applied for a non-immigrant tourist visa and carefully attended to every detail, providing legal paperwork that defined her solvency, properties and business holdings, her marriage to me, her motherhood ? in short, everything the consulate requires.
Despite some improvements, the process is still a bit confusing, poorly handled, and cloaked in some mystery. The day of the interview at the consulate arrived, and my wife showed up punctually with all her paperwork well organized. I accompanied her because I thought that the consulate might benefit from any information I could provide them (in addition to the letter of support I wrote for the file), and to assure them of what seemed to me at the time the glaringly obvious fact that my wife had no intention of immigrating, that my job and her businesses required that we reside in the Dominican Republic. I was told at the entrance of the consulate that I would not be allowed to enter. This struck me not only as odd but as a potential denial of my rights as a citizen: how can the consulate deny me my right to enter American soil in pursuit of what must be considered a legitimate claim on the government to honor my commitment to my wife and family? In this matter I am simply a family man who is trying to keep the family together.
My wife emerged downhearted from the interview process five hours later. They had rejected her application without even bothering to analyze all the paperwork. She reported that the consular official merely read the letter I wrote and consulted the bank?s letter ? he did not look at any of the legal papers relating to the property and businesses my wife owns, nor did he ask her about these matters. He asked if I were present and whether he could talk to me, but as I was not allowed to enter the consulate this was not possible, which he ought to have known, since that is the prevailing policy. It turns out that the consular official could have issued a pass at that point so that I be conducted to the interview at his behest, but he neglected to do so, I presume out of sheer laziness, because his entire conduct bespoke a kind of pretense of action that from the get go was never going to be accomplished. He had made up his mind long before he even saw my wife?s file, because in fact the consulate has a policy of automatically rejecting these applications. When we left the premises, several consular employees told us that ?they never give visas to the spouses of Americans.?
I realize that the consulate feels it must act decisively in the face of fraudulent applications and that there are Dominicans who have abused the good will of the American government (I have reported on these issues myself); but it strikes me as the height of hypocrisy to claim, as does the consular letter of rejection, that the Law of Immigration and Nationality ?presumes that every solicitant of a non-immigrant visa in reality intends to immigrate.? This astonishing statement just bowled me over. If this is so, why even bother with non-immigrant visas at all? It is all just for show, a pretense of fair minded arbitration that masks a malevolent intent. Moreover, what sense does it make to presume that every applicant is automatically trying to defraud the government? Our government and our businesses are there profiting to the tune of billions of dollars in trade, and yet when it comes to opening our doors to the Dominican people, we tell them that we cannot trust them, that we cannot have them visiting us, and that they are just out to con us. And they are charged a considerable sum to receive this slap in the face. The consulate is generating thousands of dollars a day while denying all these applications.
I ask you, what kind of justice can we expect in these matters when our consular officials behave in accordance with a policy that presumes guilt and offers only the semblance of a fair trial? And what does this say about the representation of our values overseas and our reputation as a nation that advocates social justice, due process, and the rule of law? The consulate has effectively placed itself above the law, since it states in the form letter given to rejected applicants that ?the decision taken today cannot be appealed.? And they do not bother to explain their reasons for rejecting any particular application. The whole process is discriminatory and conducted in a supercilious and high handed manner.
The bad faith at the core of these proceedings is just so execrable, so unworthy of us as a nation, that I still cannot quite wrap my mind around it. It is also unnecessary, and there?s the rub: if the consulate would work to make the process more efficient and also pay due attention to the criteria it sets out, I am sure that its officials could separate the wheat from the chaff and allow deserving applicants a chance to interact fruitfully with our society, which in the end, if you think about it, only serves to enhance our interests abroad. Every person who returns from the US is a kind of ambassador who brings new ideas to their society and with them the potential for beneficial change. Much of the progressive change taking place in the Dominican Republic today is coming from just such people. I thought that was the ultimate purpose of our legates abroad, but it would appear that I have too naively trusted in the stated ideals of our way of life. It is with great sadness that I write these words, but I am dumbfounded and sorely disappointed by what I discovered while blindly believing in the good will of my government."
"I wish to take this opportunity to discuss what I consider to be a serious breach of the contract that we as Americans have with our consulates abroad. As a journalist I have lived and worked in many countries, and it has always been my understanding that our embassies exist to promote American interests and exemplify American values. That they should not only advocate such values, but embody them in their own practice. I have recently been confronted with a sorry example of failure in these matters that leaves me, quite frankly, somewhat stunned over the egregious hypocrisy that lies behind that failure.
I currently work in the Dominican Republic, and I am raising a family there. I choose to do so because in part my work requires it, and because I am genuinely dedicated to contributing something to that society as well as reporting on it. We are happy despite the inevitable struggles that accompany living in a developing nation, and my wife and I believe that our daughter benefits enormously from the kind of childhood she enjoys there. Thus it is with great consternation that I describe the following almost incomprehensible bad faith in regard to the treatment of foreign spouses legally married to American citizens. Since we are a binational family, we have two branches, and to ensure that they not become estranged, my wife and I planned to visit the American branch this summer while my daughter was free from school. My daughter enjoys dual citizenship, so travelling with her is not a problem, but my wife is Dominican and as such does not automatically qualify for a visa to the States that would allow her to visit with my family. She therefore dutifully applied for a non-immigrant tourist visa and carefully attended to every detail, providing legal paperwork that defined her solvency, properties and business holdings, her marriage to me, her motherhood ? in short, everything the consulate requires.
Despite some improvements, the process is still a bit confusing, poorly handled, and cloaked in some mystery. The day of the interview at the consulate arrived, and my wife showed up punctually with all her paperwork well organized. I accompanied her because I thought that the consulate might benefit from any information I could provide them (in addition to the letter of support I wrote for the file), and to assure them of what seemed to me at the time the glaringly obvious fact that my wife had no intention of immigrating, that my job and her businesses required that we reside in the Dominican Republic. I was told at the entrance of the consulate that I would not be allowed to enter. This struck me not only as odd but as a potential denial of my rights as a citizen: how can the consulate deny me my right to enter American soil in pursuit of what must be considered a legitimate claim on the government to honor my commitment to my wife and family? In this matter I am simply a family man who is trying to keep the family together.
My wife emerged downhearted from the interview process five hours later. They had rejected her application without even bothering to analyze all the paperwork. She reported that the consular official merely read the letter I wrote and consulted the bank?s letter ? he did not look at any of the legal papers relating to the property and businesses my wife owns, nor did he ask her about these matters. He asked if I were present and whether he could talk to me, but as I was not allowed to enter the consulate this was not possible, which he ought to have known, since that is the prevailing policy. It turns out that the consular official could have issued a pass at that point so that I be conducted to the interview at his behest, but he neglected to do so, I presume out of sheer laziness, because his entire conduct bespoke a kind of pretense of action that from the get go was never going to be accomplished. He had made up his mind long before he even saw my wife?s file, because in fact the consulate has a policy of automatically rejecting these applications. When we left the premises, several consular employees told us that ?they never give visas to the spouses of Americans.?
I realize that the consulate feels it must act decisively in the face of fraudulent applications and that there are Dominicans who have abused the good will of the American government (I have reported on these issues myself); but it strikes me as the height of hypocrisy to claim, as does the consular letter of rejection, that the Law of Immigration and Nationality ?presumes that every solicitant of a non-immigrant visa in reality intends to immigrate.? This astonishing statement just bowled me over. If this is so, why even bother with non-immigrant visas at all? It is all just for show, a pretense of fair minded arbitration that masks a malevolent intent. Moreover, what sense does it make to presume that every applicant is automatically trying to defraud the government? Our government and our businesses are there profiting to the tune of billions of dollars in trade, and yet when it comes to opening our doors to the Dominican people, we tell them that we cannot trust them, that we cannot have them visiting us, and that they are just out to con us. And they are charged a considerable sum to receive this slap in the face. The consulate is generating thousands of dollars a day while denying all these applications.
I ask you, what kind of justice can we expect in these matters when our consular officials behave in accordance with a policy that presumes guilt and offers only the semblance of a fair trial? And what does this say about the representation of our values overseas and our reputation as a nation that advocates social justice, due process, and the rule of law? The consulate has effectively placed itself above the law, since it states in the form letter given to rejected applicants that ?the decision taken today cannot be appealed.? And they do not bother to explain their reasons for rejecting any particular application. The whole process is discriminatory and conducted in a supercilious and high handed manner.
The bad faith at the core of these proceedings is just so execrable, so unworthy of us as a nation, that I still cannot quite wrap my mind around it. It is also unnecessary, and there?s the rub: if the consulate would work to make the process more efficient and also pay due attention to the criteria it sets out, I am sure that its officials could separate the wheat from the chaff and allow deserving applicants a chance to interact fruitfully with our society, which in the end, if you think about it, only serves to enhance our interests abroad. Every person who returns from the US is a kind of ambassador who brings new ideas to their society and with them the potential for beneficial change. Much of the progressive change taking place in the Dominican Republic today is coming from just such people. I thought that was the ultimate purpose of our legates abroad, but it would appear that I have too naively trusted in the stated ideals of our way of life. It is with great sadness that I write these words, but I am dumbfounded and sorely disappointed by what I discovered while blindly believing in the good will of my government."