Overstayed Visas

[StLucieBengal]

http://freebeacon.com/national-security/dhs-more-than-half-a-million-aliens-overstayed-visas-in-2015/

More than half a million .... What is the point of even applying for the visa if they have no plan to enforce them.

Quote:More than half a million aliens overstayed their temporary visas in the United States in 2015, with more than 482,000 of those individuals believed to be still residing illegally in the United States, according to a new report by the Department of Homeland Security.

Around 527,127 aliens temporally granted U.S. business and tourist visas were found to have stayed in the United States longer than legally permitted, according to DHS’s 2015 entry and exit overstay report.

Of those who did not leave the United States on time, around 482,781 are believed to still be illegally residing in the United States, according to the report, which was issued by DHS amid debate in Congress over an Obama administration initiative to permit around 170,000 new immigrants from Muslim-majority nations in 2016.

Senior Obama administration officials had trouble in the past year informing Congress about the number of individuals who had overstayed their visas. The administration also could not provide Congress with statistics about the number of Syrian refugees who had been granted residency in the United States in 2015.

Concerns about visa overstays come as Congress is investigating a sharp uptick in the number of terror plots hatched by foreign-born individuals legally granted entrance to the United States. Lawmakers estimate that at least 113 foreign-born individuals have been implicated in domestic terror plots since 2014.

Last year there were 219 illegal overstays from Afghanistan, 681 from Iraq, 564 from Iran, 56 from Libya, 1,435 from Pakistan, 440 from Syria, and 219 from Yemen, according to the report. Many are still in the United States illegally.

The statistics also do not encompass land ports, meaning those numbers compiled from Latin American could be higher as result of these types of border crossings.

The 527,127 individuals found by DHS to have overstayed their visas account for 1.17 percent of the “44,928,381 nonimmigrant admissions to the United States for business or pleasure” in 2015, according to the report.

“There were 482,781 Suspected In-Country Overstays,” according to DHS. “The overall Suspected In-Country Overstay rate for this scope of travelers is 1.07 percent of the expected departures.”

Additionally, 0.65 percent of the 20,974,390 individuals granted access to the United States under the visa waver program, which facilitates travel to America from 35 partner countries, are suspected of overstaying their authorization, according to the report.

When it comes to overstays from countries that do not participate in the visa waiver program, around 1.6 percent of the 13,182,807 individuals required to leave did not do so, the report states.

DHS has designated these visa overstay issues as “important for national security, public safety, immigration enforcement, and immigration benefit application processing,” according to the report.

The foreign-born population in the United States stands at an all-time high of nearly 43 million people.

The Senate Immigration Subcommittee is schedule to hold hearing Wednesday to investigate this issue. Testimony will be provided from officials from U.S. Customs and Border Protection, as well as U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

Lawmakers on the committee remain concerned that the Obama administration has implemented a de facto policy of exempting visa overstays from its enforcement regime.

“By not enforcing visa overstays, the administration has flung the border open—millions get temp visas and then freely violate their entry contracts and shred their eviction notices,” the subcommittee said in a statement. “Further, DHS has refused to complete the legally required biometric tracking system.”

[BmorePat87]

So 1% or so? Yes, let's act like there is no point in even applying for a visa...

[*michaelsean*]

And to think they deported Babu because Jerry forgot to give him his mail that was accidentally delivered to Jerry.

[StLucieBengal]

 BmorePa Wrote:So 1% or so? Yes, let's act like there is no point in even applying for a visa...

Round up the violators and send them home.  

[BmorePat87]

(01-20-2016, 02:26 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: Round up the violators and send them home.  

Ok. But still keep issuing visas, right?

[StLucieBengal]

BmorePat Wrote:Ok. But still keep issuing visas, right?

Can't issue them if you aren't willing to follow up and keep track of people.

[BmorePat87]

(01-20-2016, 04:51 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: Can't issue them if you aren't willing to follow up and keep track of people.

I would say a 99% success rate in people returning is good.

[StLucieBengal]

 BmorePa Wrote:I would say a 99% success rate in people returning is good.

Not knowing where they are is the problem.   We should be tracking them.

Yes 99% is good but no way should be running around unchecked.

[GMDino]

(01-21-2016, 01:22 AM)StLucieBengal Wrote: Not knowing where they are is the problem.   We should be tracking them.

Yes 99% is good but no way should be running around unchecked.

Registry?  Implanted chips? Or are tattoos enough?

[Benton]

(01-21-2016, 10:19 AM)GMDino Wrote: Registry?  Implanted chips? Or are tattoos enough?

Put them in camps.



As far as the OP, same answer every time the topic is brought up: fund current laws, give the Department enough manpower to enforce those laws, and be stricter on employers hiring anyone who is ineligible to work. It's a lot more efficient and a lot safer than using raids to round up illegals, hold them for weeks, then take them wherever they're going (which costs thousands per illegal)... only to have them come right back which costs them nothing.

[fredtoast]

It will cost a lot of money to track millions of people just becaue 1% do not comply.

So this requires a cost/benefit analysis. Does that 1% cause enough problems to justify the massive expenditures required to track them all?

[GMDino]

(01-21-2016, 12:36 PM)Benton Wrote: Put them in camps.



As far as the OP, same answer every time the topic is brought up: fund current laws, give the Department enough manpower to enforce those laws, and be stricter on employers hiring anyone who is ineligible to work. It's a lot more efficient and a lot safer than using raids to round up illegals, hold them for weeks, then take them wherever they're going (which costs thousands per illegal)... only to have them come right back which costs them nothing.

Dang!  Missed that option.

And I'm one quarter German.  

[Benton]

(01-21-2016, 05:50 PM)GMDino Wrote: Dang!  Missed that option.

And I'm one quarter German.  

That's not enough German. Report to camp.

[Rotobeast]

(01-21-2016, 06:15 PM)Benton Wrote: That's not enough German. Report to camp.

Does 75-80% cut it ?


Anyways.....to the OP......
Put bounties on them.

[SunsetBengal]

(01-20-2016, 05:06 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: I would say a 99% success rate in people returning is good.

That is a good rate.  Shows that most people that come to visit the US are earnest in their intent, and respectful of our laws.  However, half a million remaining here illegally is just too many.  I realize that when you look at the total number of people that visit the US, that number seems very small, but it doesn't take very many dangerous people to cause harm to a large number of American citizens. 
 
This a dangerous time that we live in.  We look to our government to protect us from harm, that is job 1 of government, to protect the safety of it's citizens.  I fear that if the people that are in government, and it's agencies (all employees of us, the taxpayers) aren't able to contain possible homeland terrorist attacks (similar to San Bernadino) then they will have to act in drastic forms, forcing us citizens into giving up our liberties and freedoms that we are all accustomed to.


Accountability, that is where it all leads back to.  We currently have a President that does not hold the employees of America accountable, and that slack is impacting our safety.

[fredtoast]

(01-21-2016, 10:56 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: Accountability, that is where it all leads back to.  We currently have a President that does not hold the employees of America accountable, and that slack is impacting our safety.

What does this even mean?  What employees?  Accountable for what?

[fredtoast]

(01-21-2016, 10:56 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote:  it doesn't take very many dangerous people to cause harm to a large number of American citizens. 

The biggest mistake we could make is to only look at immigrants as a threat.  Of all the terrorists attacks and foiled attacks over the last few years many of them were by American citizens.

We need the government to take steps to protect us from all possible threats, not just immigrants.  

[SunsetBengal]

(01-21-2016, 11:47 PM)fredtoast Wrote: What does this even mean?  What employees?  Accountable for what?

You know exactly what it means.  Otherwise, you wouldn't have isolated one particular sentence, from the entire quote, for the purpose of attempting to get me to explain things that we both already know.

(01-21-2016, 11:51 PM)fredtoast Wrote: The biggest mistake we could make is to only look at immigrants as a threat.  Of all the terrorists attacks and foiled attacks over the last few years many of them were by American citizens.

We need the government to take steps to protect us from all possible threats, not just immigrants.  

People who visit the US on visas are visitors, not immigrants.  As far as I understand, they must file certain paperwork declaring their desire to officially immigrate.  When these visitors violate the terms of their visa, they become illegal foreign nationals.  With the state of affairs in the world right now, we cannot afford to have half a million illegal nationals roaming around, with their whereabouts untracked.  It puts the US citizens in danger.

[fredtoast]

(01-22-2016, 12:13 AM)SunsetBengal Wrote: You know exactly what it means.  Otherwise, you wouldn't have isolated one particular sentence, from the entire quote, for the purpose of attempting to get me to explain things that we both already know.

I have no clue what it means?  Why would I ask the question if I did?

You are not afraid to answer are you?

[SunsetBengal]

(01-22-2016, 12:16 AM)fredtoast Wrote: I have no clue what it means?  Why would I ask the question if I did?

You are not afraid to answer are you?

Ok Fred, everyone knows how you go about, with your "Matlock" like lawyer rhetoric..  But, just for fun, I will indulge you.


By "employee", I mean anyone who holds office, or works for the government.  As technically they are all paid with citizen tax dollars, and therefore are employees of the citizens.  By "accountability", I mean whomever is in charge of them holding them to task of doing their duty to protect the citizens of the US.

Clear enough?