Sen. Maria Cantwell and IMBRA !!

[Admin]

For those living in Washington state, Senator Maria Cantwell was one of the chief architects of the IMBRA legislation. She comes up for re-election in November.

Anyone wishing to see IMBRA repealed, please become activist about campaigning on behalf of other candidates in the upcoming election.

Also - if you wish to see some interesting legislation - including the entire IMBRA package, you can check it out on the new (soon to be released to the public) Planet-Love website. Here is the link to the Legislation page, and you can follow each of the 2 links to read the entire legislation -- http://www.planet-love.com/index.php?pid=4

There is some irony, I suppose, that the previous report to Congress, and subsequent Congressional Findings (all documented in the Section 652 link) were obviously ignored in passage of IMBRA. I wonder why that is??

- Dan

[Bruce]

Dan, I do not see the link  .  Ah, now its in.  Thanks Dan.  Can you go the next step and list the Congressmen and Senators who voted for it - so we can at the very least question their judgement and more importantly use it to support their opponents.  Unfortunately, its usually a choice of bad and worse in my State. 

[Admin]

Check again. It was missing for those 30 seconds when you read my post.   

- Dan

[Bruno]

Anyone wishing to see IMBRA repealed, please become activist about campaigning on behalf of other candidates in the upcoming election.

Dan, from my external point of view, the IMBRA is not the real problem... The IMBRA mean do protect foreign women from people who are guilty of DV...

The real problem is the DV law... something who exist before the IMBRA... It is so easy in USA to clain DV without any real evidence... The IMBRA is good but the DV law need to be changed.

!!! : post from a outsider who is not a specialist over USA politic

[Turboguy]

Personally Bruno there is nothing good about IMBRA.  It adds additional burdens to American agencies and gives foreign competion a leg up.  It deprives American men of their basic rights to marry a wife of their choosing and it they have made mistakes which can happen to anyone, it may only give them options that can make big mistakes and big problems more likely.   It promotes false DV charges.  It is insulting to the dignity of American men, It will subject foreign women to more real abuse and murder because it makes marriage to an American man for difficult and will force some to stay in a society where crimes against women are rampant

[Admin]

Dan, from my external point of view, the IMBRA is not the real problem... The IMBRA mean do protect foreign women from people who are guilty of DV...

The real problem is the DV law... something who exist before the IMBRA... It is so easy in USA to clain DV without any real evidence... The IMBRA is good but the DV law need to be changed.

!!! : post from a outsider who is not a specialist over USA politic

Actually, IMBRA is a direct and bald-faced assault on US constitutional freedoms - the Freedom of Association (reference Wikipedia)

Moreover, the latest implementation of IMBRA creates a category of US Citizen who is K-visa ineligible. This is a disturbing expansion of a dubious law - and one which threatens many more American men than is currently recognized.

The law needs to be repealed. It is a knee-jerk reaction to the horrendous behavior of a few - and it penalizes a huge number of good people. This flies in the face of our constitutional tenets. The law should be repealed, and those who created it should be voted out of office.

One of the obligations of living in a free society is constant vigilance of government intrusion - and the consequent activism necessary to defend our personal and corporate freedoms.

This law needs to be repealed - and the message sent to Congress that we will not allow such incursions into personal freedoms.

- Dan

[Turboguy]

I agree Dan, but how do we get it repealed?

[Admin]

I agree Dan, but how do we get it repealed?

Have to become politically active. Contact your Senator's and Congressmen's offices. Establish a letter-writing campaign. Collect signatures on a petition. Seriously, all this and more is necessary.

Contact anyone and everyone you have ever known who lives in WA State. Tell them about the concern. Cantwell has other political issues. Find those and find alternate candidates.

BTW - it is not only Cantwell. While she was the chief architect, we can blame all the gutless politicians from every state who allowed passage of this albatross. Get the voting record. Publicize their failures. Hold them accountable.

jb is one who is far more knowledgeable about political activism that me. Maybe he will jump in with suggestions.

- Dan

[Sohkay]

Re:IMBRA, remember that right wing radical Sam Brownback of Kansas was a co-sponsor of the bill. Interesting, radical left and radical right working together and the B.S. they perpetrate is exponentially greater!

[RacerX]

Actually Dan, I would tend to disagree with you and your approach somewhat.

Statistically, the IMBRA does not affect anyone in the USA (at least to a 99.9%  certainty) which would predict that much future interest in reversing it via the legislative process might be unlikely.  The fact it can be easily circumvented by simply marrying your fiancee prior to bringing her here will also lessen its eventual impact.  Our Canuck friends have been required to do precisely this for a number of years since their version of a fiancee visa no longer exists.

No, I think the best hope for those guys who are actually impacted by it, however, recalling that one needs to have a DV-history or had a previous K-1 visa approved, and so the number will be even more minuscule than it already was -- for those guys the legal approach is undoubtedly their best option.

As most probably know, the Act was enjoined in the Southern Federal district with court action to follow. If other agencies could file similar lawsuits, or groups of individuals would challenge it in court, there might be some hope of defeating it.  All of this effort will require money, so the members of forums like this one might consider establishing funds to assist those who have decided to challenge it in a arena where there might be a chance for success.

[Admin]

Actually Dan, I would tend to disagree with you and your approach somewhat.

Statistically, the IMBRA does not affect anyone in the USA (at least to a 99.9%  certainty) which would predict that much future interest in reversing it via the legislative process might be unlikely.  The fact it can be easily circumvented by simply marrying your fiancee prior to bringing her here will also lessen its eventual impact.  Our Canuck friends have been required to do precisely this for a number of years since their version of a fiancee visa no longer exists.

No, I think the best hope for those guys who are actually impacted by it, however, recalling that one needs to have a DV-history or had a previous K-1 visa approved, and so the number will be even more minuscule than it already was -- for those guys the legal approach is undoubtedly their best option.

As most probably know, the Act was enjoined in the Southern Federal district with court action to follow. If other agencies could file similar lawsuits, or groups of individuals would challenge it in court, their might be some hope of defeating it.  All of this effort will require money, so the members of forums like this one might consider establishing funds to assist those who have decided to challenge it in a arena where there might be a chance for success.

It affects anyone who wishes to process a K-1 - correct? Your argument would be, if I understand correctly, that it would only *deleteriously* affect anyone who might have information divulged which would otherwise not be divulged.

It further affects anyone who has ever been convicted of a variety of sex-related offenses.

It further affects anyone who is in the business of helping men be introduced to foreign women - even an American-based business who is working with European men.

I really think this law affects many more than might be apparent initially - and the greater concern is the fervor which is being kicked-up by feminazi organizations such as Tahira (sp?) in the DC area. It appears to me that the slide down the slippery slope has begun - and it just needs to pick up a little steam for us to all feel the momentum.

- Dan

[jb]

Dan,

I have to agree with Racer, it would be much easier to attack this law in court than getting Congress to see the error of their ways.  Getting a law on the books is hard enough, getting it off the books is even harder if Congress is involved.

Our lawyer members (I'm not one, BTW) can probably site chapter and verse of all the laws which have been struck down by the judicial branch that would otherwise still be hanging around.  A clever lawyer arguing a well planned case before a sympathetic judge is a lot easier than trying to convince a two thirds majority of elected weasels in both houses of Congress that they've made a mistake.

[Admin]

Dan,

I have to agree with Racer, it would be much easier to attack this law in court than getting Congress to see the error of their ways.  Getting a law on the books is hard enough, getting it off the books is even harder if Congress is involved.

Our lawyer members (I'm not one, BTW) can probably site chapter and verse of all the laws which have been struck down by the judicial branch that would otherwise still be hanging around.  A clever lawyer arguing a well planned case before a sympathetic judge is a lot easier than trying to convince a two thirds majority of elected weasels in both houses of Congress that they've made a mistake.

One of our lawyer members is Gary Bala, an immigration attorney who has extensive information about the IMBRA legislation and its consequences (they are far-reaching, indeed) on his blog. For anyone interested, take a look here -- http://usaimmigrationattorney.com/nucleus/index.php?itemid=2#c

- Dan

[RacerX]

It affects anyone who wishes to process a K-1 - correct?

Yes, but NO one in the USA gets married that way! 

Definition of "no one:" less than 99.9% of the US population.

One thing all of us on this board have to face: we are societal aberrations, freaks, weird-guys, etc., etc., when it comes to Main-Street America and the norms for marrying a woman. It’s a point I have been trying to make in nearly all of my posts.  Since virtually no one does what we do, there will never be precise rules or guidelines for doing it.  For example, you’re not going to find a book entitled: “How to discover America.”

We and our wives are the “explorers” of the marriage world and can only hope for the protection our constitution gives to minorities such as us.  It is a venue best left to a Federal judge because I too, have little hope we will be able to turn the ears of Congress.

[Bruno]

Actually, IMBRA is a direct and bald-faced assault on US constitutional freedoms - the Freedom of Association (reference Wikipedia)

Moreover, the latest implementation of IMBRA creates a category of US Citizen who is K-visa ineligible. This is a disturbing expansion of a dubious law - and one which threatens many more American men than is currently recognized.

The law needs to be repealed. It is a knee-jerk reaction to the horrendous behavior of a few - and it penalizes a huge number of good people. This flies in the face of our constitutional tenets. The law should be repealed, and those who created it should be voted out of office.

One of the obligations of living in a free society is constant vigilance of government intrusion - and the consequent activism necessary to defend our personal and corporate freedoms.

This law needs to be repealed - and the message sent to Congress that we will not allow such incursions into personal freedoms.

- Dan

Dan, i have only one question... and these question is directed to all member of the forum who are already married !!!

If these IMBRA have exist during your own marriage time, do you think that these law have lead to problem for your own marriage ?

From what i see, these law try to stop people who have know DV charge and people who repeat K1 like a machine gun. The only real victim of IMBRA are people like Maxx who was accused faulty from DV... I am sure that for people like you, JB, KenC and some other, these law have change nothing...

You wrote "It is a knee-jerk reaction to the horrendous behavior of a few"... Killer are only a very low % of the population... Do you mean that law need to be more easy because killer are only a few... Sorry, but usually law are make for protect innocent people from the act of these few... it is not the law who is bad but these few who are bad.

Of course, the best method will be to reward good men and punish bad one... unfortunately, our modern society is more oriented to punish bad one...

[PeeWee]

For those living in Washington state, Senator Maria Cantwell was one of the chief architects of the IMBRA legislation. She comes up for re-election in November.

Anyone wishing to see IMBRA repealed, please become activist about campaigning on behalf of other candidates in the upcoming election.

Also - if you wish to see some interesting legislation - including the entire IMBRA package, you can check it out on the new (soon to be released to the public) Planet-Love website. Here is the link to the Legislation page, and you can follow each of the 2 links to read the entire legislation -- http://www.planet-love.com/index.php?pid=4

There is some irony, I suppose, that the previous report to Congress, and subsequent Congressional Findings (all documented in the Section 652 link) were obviously ignored in passage of IMBRA. I wonder why that is??

- Dan

If I recall correctly Cuntwell offered jobs to two of her challengers and they both accepted positions in on her campaign staff thus eliminating them as candidates for her seat as Senator.

Peewee

[BillyB]

Yup PeeWee,

Maria Cantwell is trying to buy out her opposition by hiring them. She may lose the election according to early polls and every vote counts to get rid of her. Of course it'll be hard to get liberals to change their vote to Republican but they have to decide what's in their best interest. Overall, Washingtonians haven't connected well with her. I don't know if we can blame the rest of Congess for this law. It's one of those laws that sounds good, voting against it(women's rights) is not cool, and many lawmakers vote on laws like that so they can get votes in return for the laws they're promoting.

Bruno, If a wife beater and abuser can't marry a foreign woman, he'd marry and abusing American women instead. THE OVERALL PICTURE IS THAT IMBRA IS NOT GOING TO CURB CRIMINAL BEHAVIORIMBRA protects one group of women only for another group, American women to get it worse and to think our tax dollars pay for that! IMBRA would not be needed if our government focused on the real problem, the criminals themselves but it's hard to distiguish who is a wife beater and who is innocent of FDV charges because our current laws are tilted since the Feminazi's got their way in Congress. Look at it another way, I'm sure some wacko family with the husband or wife having a criminal record and they will adopt a foreign child and end up molesting the child. Do we now make it harder for sincere people to adopt a child by or should we punish the violators harder detering them form repeating the crime and put a GPS braclet on their leg as I've heard talked about? I say let's target the root of the problem instead of the majority of people seeking happiness. It's logical, less hassle and cheaper.

[Maxx2]

DV or Domestic Violence is an ugly issue. Few in Congress wish to deal with it so it is left up to their congressional staffers and their allies in various feminist organizations to write the laws. Hence we got V.A.W.A. with it's presumption of guilt, quickie trials with no time to prepare a proper defence, no punishment for perjury by the accuser, no punishment for subjorning (sp) of perjury by a shelter, judges and police officers held accountable if they don't convict or arrest, mandatory arrest laws, prosecutors forbidden to drop cases, shelters that can refuse a process server or a Sheriff process serving, a shelter that can sue and often do but are immune from lawsuits. Men who are married to foreign women have even a lesser chance of getting fairness when accused of DV. Under new VAWA rules the USCIS is forbidden from making contact with anyone called a "abuser".


From Rep. John Conyers

Immigration enforcement agents and government officials covered by this section must not initiate contact with abusers, call abusers as witnesses or rely on information furnished by or derived from abusers to apprehend, detain and attempt to remove victims of domestic violence, sexual assault and trafficking, as prohibited by section 384 of IIRIRA. In determining whether a person furnishing information is a prohibited source, primary evidence should include, but not be limited to, court records, government databases, affidavits from law enforcement officials, and previous decisions by DHS or Department of Justice personnel. Other credible evidence must also be considered. Government officials are encouraged to consult with the specially trained VAWA unit in making determinations under the special ``any credible evidence'' standard. I believe that all investigation and enforcement of these provisions should be done by the Office of Professional Responsibility of the Justice Department. For consistency, these cases need to be centralized in one division and I believe that this office is best equipped to address these cases.

Gary, in my story in the Scam section had his story broadcast in Washington DC last March. No one from the USCIS contacted him. No one. Conyers, Cantwell etc have tied the hands of the USCIS from doing their jobs. They have centralized the power and have their staffers pull the strings.

Maxx