Help! Hearing in MD Senate to determine future of International dating

[remiel6]

 to clarify the bill after I read it.
1. The fingerprints do not go to the foreign lady.
2. The foreign lady receives a criminal background check.
3.  marital history of the man she is writing
4. Information on the number of people he has sponsored to bring over as his wife.
5. Information is only released with consent of both parties.
6. woman receives basic human rights information
7. The bill does not apply to free dating services

the largest difference is the attempt by this bill to force disclosure of the information at an earlier time than the IMBRA does. The problem is to me a source of power issue. The federal government can require such information because it is related to Immigration which is a power reserved for the federal government. Where is the compelling state interest here. Are there a large number of foreign spouses in Maryland who have been abused by their husbands and are now on public support, if so why do they not get the money from the spouse. I see this bill as neither narrowly tailored or with a compelling state interest, both of which are required to limit a fundamental right, and if the right to talk to who you want to talk to is not a fundamental right, marriage is.

Of course none of this is legal advice, but just my humble opinion. Even if the bill is passed I predict a short future for it. 

[hemingway]

I would be in favor of screening out trolls and fakes and stupid frat boys playing games with some sort of background check and permit to access dating sites for foreign women, but only if done in a secure manner like a passport. I have not found a way to screen for those affected with Narcissistic Personality Disorder, which many westerners seem infected with. No system is perfect.

If a man and woman need a passport, what is the big deal with submitting the same information to a goverment entity at the start of a partner search, and needing to register for access to certain web sites? The same for the woman. Her passport information could be verified by the US government and she would be allowed to register on the site, similar to approval process for a visa. Unregulated contact can still occur via forums. My problem with the Maryland law is the release of personal information to non-government entities, and there seems to be no accountability if personal information is released improperly or misused. Use what is already in place and proven to work, keep personal information secure, and everyone should be happy.

The passport system is already in place. It is secure are already set up. If the man is serious, he will need a passport. It should not be too hard to set up a secure PIN system for access. Banks and trading accounts do it all of the time with sensitive information. Of course, the web sites would also need to pass a background check and be licensed before being allowed to operate. If the dating sites are licensed and audited, the men and woman screened the same way as for a visa, the quality of communication would greatly increase for both the men and women looking for partners overseas.

[remiel6]

quality of communication is a purely subjective thing. There is no rational basis for objectively determining what "quality" conversation means.

second, a lot of people find it very offensive to be told who they can and cannot be chatting with and where and when.

I don't have a problem with a woman having access to this information as she is applying for her visa, but to hold a conversation? This seems premature and a little to big brother like for me.

More importantly there is a freedom to associate and a freedom to marry. The federal government has right to control who comes into the country. So I have less problems, the issue here is that this is a state passing a law that requires information not after two people have decided to marry, or heck even meet face to face. This is a law cutting off communication before it ever happens in the first place. "no you can't talk to this person." "No you can't talk to this person either" "No you haven't been screened properly so you can't open your mouth either."

to me kind of creepy. A noble attempt at something that IMHO goes too far, too soon, too fast, and over an issue that is none of a states concern.

[GQBlues]

Shadow-

Here's the excerpt from the bill. Information gets sent to a 'local repository' in charge in handling the background check. No identity theft artist or Osama Bin Laden's disciples hanging out waiting for the information...LOL.

                                                          HOUSE BILL 65/SENATE BILL 129

IN ACCORDANCE WITH FEDERAL LAW, A CLIENT SHALL:

(1) PROVIDE TWO COMPLETE SETS OF THE CLIENT’S LEGIBLE FINGERPRINTS THAT MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF § 19–604(C) OF THIS SUBTITLE TO THE INTERNATIONAL MARRIAGE BROKER;
(2) PROVIDE THE CLIENT’S OWN MARITAL HISTORY INFORMATION TO THE INTERNATIONAL MARRIAGE BROKER;
(3) PROVIDE THE CLIENT’S OWN STATE AND FEDERAL CRIMINAL HISTORY TO THE INTERNATIONAL MARRIAGE BROKER; AND..
(4) NOTIFY THE INTERNATIONAL MARRIAGE BROKER IF THE CLIENT HAS PREVIOUSLY SPONSORED AN INTERNATIONAL SPOUSE.

THE INTERNATIONAL MARRIAGE BROKER SHALL REQUIRE THE CLIENT TO AFFIRM THAT THE MARITAL HISTORY INFORMATION IS COMPLETE AND ACCURATE AND INCLUDES INFORMATION REGARDING MARRIAGES, ANNULMENTS, DISSOLUTIONS, AND THE NUMBER OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE, PROTECTIVE ORDERS ISSUED AGAINST THE CLIENT THAT OCCURRED IN THIS STATE, IN ANOTHER STATE, OR IN A FOREIGN COUNTRY.

(C) THE INTERNATIONAL MARRIAGE BROKER MAY NOT PROVIDE ANY SERVICES TO THE CLIENT OR THE RECRUIT UNTIL THE INTERNATIONAL MARRIAGE BROKER HAS:

(1) RECEIVED THE REQUESTED CRIMINAL HISTORY RECORD INFORMATION IN ACCORDANCE WITH § 19–604 OF THIS SUBTITLE;
(2) RECEIVED THE REQUESTED MARITAL HISTORY INFORMATION; AND
(3) PROVIDED THE INFORMATION TO THE RECRUIT.

INFORMATION OBTAINED BY THE INTERNATIONAL MARRIAGE BROKER UNDER THIS SECTION (for Shadow) *SHALL BE CONFIDENTIAL AND MAY NOT BE USED FOR ANY PURPOSE OTHER THAN THAT FOR WHICH IT WAS DISSEMINATED*.

THE INTERNATIONAL MARRIAGE BROKER SHALL REQUEST WITH: REFERENCE TO A CLIENT STATE AND NATIONAL CRIMINAL HISTORY RECORDS, CHECKS FROM THE CENTRAL REPOSITORY ON A FORM APPROVED BY THE DIRECTOR OF THE CENTRAL REPOSITORY. FOR EACH REQUEST FOR STATE AND NATIONAL CRIMINAL HISTORY RECORDS; CHECKS UNDER SUBSECTION (A) OF THIS SECTION, THE CENTRAL REPOSITORY SHALL PROCESS THE STATE AND NATIONAL CRIMINAL HISTORY RECORDS CHECKS AND FORWARD TO THE INTERNATIONAL MARRIAGE BROKER AND THE CLIENT A PRINTED STATEMENT LISTING ANY CONVICTIONS AND PLEAS OF GUILTY OR NOLO CONTENDERE TO ANY CRIMINAL CHARGE.

AN INTERNATIONAL MARRIAGE BROKER SHALL SUBMIT TO THE CENTRAL REPOSITORY:

(1) CLIENT’S TWO COMPLETE SETS OF THE LEGIBLE FINGERPRINTS TAKEN AT ANY DESIGNATED STATE OR LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICE IN THE STATE OR OTHER LOCATION APPROVED BY THE SECRETARY ON FORMS APPROVED BY THE DIRECTOR OF THE CENTRAL REPOSITORY AND THE DIRECTOR OF THE FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION;
(2) THE MANDATORY PROCESSING FEE REQUIRED BY THE FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION FOR A NATIONAL CRIMINAL HISTORY RECORDS CHECK; AND  (3) THE FEE AUTHORIZED UNDER § 10–221(B) OF THE CRIMINAL PROCEDURE ARTICLE FOR ACCESS TO MARYLAND CRIMINAL HISTORY RECORDS.

AN INTERNATIONAL MARRIAGE BROKER MAY DISCLOSE INFORMATION ON A RECRUIT ONLY AFTER OBTAINING CONSENT FROM THE RECRUIT, WRITTEN IN THE RECRUIT’S NATIVE LANGUAGE.

AN INTERNATIONAL MARRIAGE BROKER SHALL BE DEEMED TO BE DOING BUSINESS IN THE STATE IF IT CONTRACTS FOR SERVICES WITH A MARYLAND RESIDENT OR IS CONSIDERED TO BE DOING BUSINESS UNDER OTHER LAWS OF THE STATE.

(A) A PERSON WHO VIOLATES ANY PROVISION OF THIS SUBTITLE IS GUILTY OF A MISDEMEANOR AND ON CONVICTION IS SUBJECT TO A FINE NOT EXCEEDING $12,000 OR IMPRISONMENT NOT EXCEEDING 1 YEAR OR BOTH, IN ADDITION TO ANY PENALTY IMPOSED UNDER FEDERAL LAW.

(B) IN DETERMINING THE PENALTY, THE COURT SHALL CONSIDER:

(1) ANY PREVIOUS VIOLATIONS OF THIS SUBTITLE BY THE INTERNATIONAL MARRIAGE BROKER;
(2) THE SERIOUSNESS OF THE VIOLATION, INCLUDING THE NATURE, CIRCUMSTANCES, AND EXTENT OF THE VIOLATION;
(3) THE DEMONSTRATED GOOD FAITH OF THE INTERNATIONAL MARRIAGE BROKER; AND THE NECESSITY OF DETERRING FUTURE VIOLATIONS.  

SECTION 2. AND BE IT FURTHER ENACTED, That this Act shall take effect October 1, 2010.

--------------------------------------------------------
*note: the Law is NOT gender specific.

Beautiful phocking law if you ask me. My only problem with it are:

a) it didn't take place sooner than it has/will,
b) penalty is not severe enough,
c) it isn't nationwide (not only in Maryland), fully applicable for both domestic and international,
d) Fully applicable to every single singles/dating/internet-based social sites..
e) Still have not considered the forehead branding or tattoing of convicted and/or released felons.

I've said from the very beginning, Bubba, if you have nothing to worry about, YOU HAVE NOTHING TO WORRY ABOUT. If you're credit is shot, you can't buy a car/get credit....if you're a complete flake applying for a job, you ain't getting it....if you are a convicted sex felon/abuser - or have a known history of abuse - are currently married - have outstanding civil dispute unresolved...looks like phsyth is about to hit the proverbial fan.

[Gylden]

All of this is really some nobel attempt, with good intentions, but really it is just a bunch of unnecessary nonsense IMO. My heart goes out to all who have ever been a victim to any sort of crime or scam, but this type of reaction is truly weak. The types of individuals, who are committing these atrocities are not just targeting foreign women. Are we trying to protect foreign women above our own daughters? All of the energy and debate is a wasted effort, as any results from this type of legislation will only defer the crimes to another target group.

[GQBlues]

...and that's why Gylden the more this gets exposed and debated, the more it gets public attention. When it does, hopefully, it'll educate our active domestic social population, at least in the absence of such a law domestically. Many AWs I know, which I hope is a good indicator of a trend, have now started to use background checks on their men. I do hope this becomes a norm than just a passing fancy...

There needs to be a stop of the perpetuality cases of child abuse, molestation, violent sexual predation, even trafficking...but that's just me.

[Gylden]

Exactly GQ, this is the education approach, if everyone is educated on how to protect themselves. It goes for the men as well.

[GregfromGa]

A foreign lady absolutely deserves the right to know who she is immigrating here to marry. She needs to know who she is exposing her children to. She needs to know if he is in bankruptcy. She needs to know if he's been married 3 times and has 5 kids but has failed to pay child support. I have no doubt that there are people on this very forum that has no business pursuing a foreign woman for obvious reasons. I never would've had a problem submitting any of this. My credit is insured and protected. The USA is full of freaks that are trying to get these women here for the wrong reasons. The biggest reason is probably because they are such freaks and women here will have nothing to do with them. I've met some real clowns in person in my day that are undertaking this endeavor. I've also met my fair share here as well.

[Gylden]

You are absolutely right Greg, those women have the right to know, but so do my daughters and everyone elses for that matter. There must be a better way to get this information to everyone who deserves it.

[GregfromGa]

You are absolutely right Greg, those women have the right to know, but so do my daughters and everyone elses for that matter. There must be a better way to get this information to everyone who deserves it.

True. I just don't think the freaks are going to police themselves. I don't think the agency owners can do the job because it's mostly about the money for the most part with them. Not all of them I'm sure but some. An unsuspecting foreign lady could really be in for a miserable life when these people slip though the cracks and import someone.

[Markus]

The special interests which are pushing this Bill have done an excellent job treating all Maryland citizens as potential / probable sex offenders or batterers.           

POINT #1 - The very title of the bill is derogatory toward matchmaking services and factually incorrect

Page 1 - Title "International Marriage Brokers - Regulation"   In February 1999 The U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services issued a report to Congress on "International Matchmaking Organizations". The INS (now Homeland Security) did not refer to matchmaking companies as "Marriage Brokers" which has been used deliberately in the Bill's title, to be derogatory toward these companies and their clients, and is factually incorrect. In fact, none of these Matchmaking services "broker" marriages anymore than do eHarmony.com, match.com, chemistry.com, Yahoo Personals and so on. 

Similar to calling Online dating companies and Matchmakers "Brokers" foreign citizens seeking possible marriage with Maryland  residents are called "Recruits" to denigrate them into some form of commercial commodity.

POINT #2- The legislation requires that that correspondence itself be regulated not specifically marriages.

This Bill requires that (2) sets of fingerprints, a criminal background check, a check of the state and national sex-offender database, personal history including marital history, children, etc. be sent to  each woman a man wishes to communicate with; and then get her written permission to allow the man to write to her by letter, email, or instant message. (This is all before the man has any personal contact information about the lady, this is just to say "hello" to a stranger halfway around the world.)

There are NO safeguards in the bill for potential privacy and identity theft violations.  The women can do what they like with the information they receive.  Even if the Bill were amended to include a non-disclosure requirement for the ladies; Maryland has no jurisdiction in the ladies' home countries to safe guard this information.  The ladies can do what they like with the data.

All Americans have Constitutional guarantees of freedom of speech and freedom of association.  No State has the Constitutional Authority to require Americans to submit this type of information to strangers, simply to communicate with them.  We have the right to speak and associate with whoever we choose without regulation of any kind.

Protecting women can be done in an appropriate way that does not treat all American men like criminals.

POINT #3- The Bill only provides rights and protection for foreign citizens; not US citizens and residents of the State of Maryland.

There are no protections in this bill to address the myriad of problems that US citizens face when marrying either US or foreign citizens. There are no provisions to protect American women from the alleged dangers of on-line correspondence.

The INS reported that domestic violence in marriages of US citizens to foreigners was approximately seven (7) times lower than comparable domestic rates. The sponsors of this Bill promote the false idea that the rate of domestic violence is higher in international marriages when in fact the opposite is true.

POINT #4- The description of "International Marriage Broker" services is incredibly vague and broad.

a.      Exchanging names (first only?)

b.      Exchanging "statistics"

c.       Exchanging photographs (a mobile phone picture text?)

d.      Providing a Social Environment for introductions (a private party or event?)

The Bill will require Maryland residents to send personal information to a lady before:

-          Seeing a photo of the lady

-          Knowing her Age, Height, Weight, Marital Status, Number of Children or.

-          Any other information at all!

You will be required to submit your info to a woman you know NOTHING about..literally nothing at all!  And then hope that this mystery lady agrees to let you see her photo and say "hello".  Absurd beyond belief.  Makes correspondence essentially impossible.

 

POINT #5- Paragraph 2 (I)-Excluded is a "Traditional Marriage Broker" that operates on a nonprofit basis.

What is a Traditional Marriage Broker? And if Maryland men are so potentially dangerous to foreign women, why not regulate all organizations regardless of business model?

POINT #6- Paragraph 2 (II & III) This is an attempt, in clever wording, to avoid litigation by dating giants like eHarmony, Match, Yahoo, and the huge dating applications on Facebook and MySpace

If the protection of foreign citizens was the primary concern, than there would be no exclusion for these major companies. There are tens of thousands of profiles of foreign citizens on major US online dating sites and MILLIONS on Social networking sites like Facebook and MySpace. Under this legislation all of these organizations are excluded from this regulation.

Although the sponsors of the Bill insist foreign women must be protected from Maryland residents, they have written a Bill which would allow a Maryland resident to easily avoid the entire issue by using the excluded companies to write, call, text, video chat, exchange photographs, meet, date, and marry without complying with ANY of the regulations in this Bill.

This Bill does NOTHING to protect women, it simply chooses which Matchmaking companies live and which die; based on nothing more than their business model, not the risk a woman faces in using the services.

POINT #7- It is unimaginable that the State of Maryland would require a Maryland citizen who has not been convicted of any crime to provide their finger prints to a private company in the dating industry before they can write emails, instant messages or text messages to a total stranger in a foreign country. We don't even require US citizens to be finger printed to enter the country or board an airplane, but Maryland citizens will have to do this before writing letters to a person whom they know nothing about!

[Gylden]

It seems clear to me that the motivation behind the legislation is political and not humanitarian, as the target group for protection is very small segment of the people in need of protection from the undesirable scum. If the argument for protecting women is used, why only protect the minute segment of women who get involved with agencies? Looks to me on the surface that someone with a special interest is involved.

[Markus]

It seems clear to me that the motivation behind the legislation is political and not humanitarian, as the target group for protection is very small segment of the people in need of protection from the undesirable scum. If the argument for protecting women is used, why only protect the minute segment of women who get involved with agencies? Looks to me on the surface that someone with a special interest is involved.

I agree. There's some motivation here that I cant detect, yet.

[ECOCKS]

My biggest problem with IMBRA and laws like this one is that the anti's seem to spend a lot of time complaining about what it doesn't do rather than trying to fix it.

Instead of complaining, contribute constructive criticism to get them to make it better. Instead, most spend their time fighting and end up losing to see the bill go though without improvements to make it better.

Specifically,

* address the application to all women in the state/country to allow access of their future husband's criminal record and previous identities, including deadbeat dad status, if any.

* have the identity info held by the government rather than numerous, foreign, unregulated companies.

* require similar submissions from the woman which will be needed eventually by CIS if it goes through anyway.

* remove the exemption for non-profits, religious organizations and other "dating-only" operations.

[Boethius]

I suggest that at the door of any bar or community gathering every person will have to submit their personal data, background check  and fingerprints.
After all the amount of incidents there is a multitude higher as those happening through the internet.

I have spoken to police who deal with underage prostitutes.  They face a lot of challenges because having a 12, 13, or 14 year old girl delivered to your door, anonymously, is just a click away.  It's a huge problem, and is a driving force behind forced prostitution.  

Not too many people meet at bars/community gatherings, and end up marrying barely knowing each other.

Glyden, I don't think prohibition is comparable.  You have a dynamic of women from poor countries, often looking for a better life.  When they arrive, they are almost completely dependent on their spouse.  A situation couldn't be better made for an abuser.

The problem is that currently, internet sites are catering to only one side in the equation (the men paying them a fee).  Unless they are ethical, like raven, the more men who sign up, the better for them.

[Markus]

Let's find a solution other than this law. I'll have to work on it later as I'm drinking sleeping tea (from my wife) trying to get sleepy.
I'm thinking about something along the terms of volunteering info. Just a thought at this point.

[Boethius]

No decent person should have a problem providing a criminal background check.  Where I live, anyone who works, or even volunteers, to work with children (coaching, scouts, etc.) needs to submit to a criminal background check.

Russia still has, to some extent, a propiska system, so they do de facto do background checks on citizens.  Passports have been denied in the past for citizens who have criminal backgrounds, or owe alimony, etc.

[ECOCKS]

No decent person should have a problem providing a criminal background check.  Where I live, anyone who works, or even volunteers, to work with children (coaching, scouts, etc.) needs to submit to a criminal background check.

Russia still has, to some extent, a propiska system, so they do de facto do background checks on citizens.  Passports have been denied in the past for citizens who have criminal backgrounds, or owe alimony, etc.

Bingo +1

[GregfromGa]

I'm all for taking the passports of child molesters so they cant travel to Thailand or wherever and hurt children but then again I'm all for just taking them out back and putting a cheap bullet behind their ear. Any person who would hurt a child should never ever have a 2nd chance at seeing daylight.

[BillyB]

I think if the government sees fit to release past sexual predators, violent abusers, etc...back out into the free world, the least they should do is tattoo their foreheads with their convictions as follows:

Warning: "S-E-X-U-A-L   P-R-E-D-A-T-O-R", or Warning: "C-H-I-L-D  M-O-L-E-S-T-E-R", or Warning: "P-E-D-O-P-H-I-L-E", etcetera, etcetera, etcetera...

Maybe extreme but the idea to target the people who causes problems in society is where to begin, not every man out there.

Believe me. There are not enough laws.

There will never be enough laws for some. Who's to say who is weird or normal? I couldn't live with most of the people at this forum because they have different habits and beliefs but it doesn't make them freaks and no need for laws to be created in order to restrict their lives.

Seriously guys, don't be voting for laws because they sound good. I like the idea of free health care, lower taxes, reducing the debt, better schools, and two girls for every guy but there is also a downside to everything proposed and there also may be a better solution compared to what is proposed.

If that law in Maryland passes, I'm sure those who lobbied for it will be granted State money to oversee it. I'd do the same thing for my own personal interests but my personal interest may not be in the interest of the majority.

The special interest group who lobbied for the Maryland law know they can't target women equally. Yes, there are some violent women who did time in prison but in this society, making more hassles in a woman's life not politically correct.

GQ's idea is not so bad labeling known freaks since it's a gender neutral idea since it warns all people, men, women and children, not a small group of women at a dating site, of who they are dealing with.

Boethius, ALL people equally have to submit background checks to work with children? It affects all adults regardless of gender? That sounds fair to me and for a good cause.

[Boethius]

Boethius, ALL people equally have to submit background checks to work with children? It affects all adults regardless of gender? That sounds fair to me and for a good cause.

Yes, men and women over 18.  For community associations such as scouts/hockey/soccer, the police run the background checks free of charge.  They have to be resubmitted every two years.

[ECOCKS]

Even the janitors, bus drivers, athletic volunteer coaches, office volunteers and foodworkers at US schools are background-checked before beginning employment. Same with day care workers in most states. When people use unlicensed day care to save money, they are endangering their child in direct circumvention of the law.

[Bruce]

Government should protect its citizens, provide infrastructure and stay out of people's pants.   This law sounds like government run amuck.    Keep the feminazi's out do not support their efforts.   Our immigration laws force American men marrying Russian women to suffer enough.   Let the government clean up the immigration process for American citizens.   All I see is continued erosion of our liberties.

[Markus]

No decent person should have a problem providing a criminal background check.  Where I live, anyone who works, or even volunteers, to work with children (coaching, scouts, etc.) needs to submit to a criminal background check.

Russia still has, to some extent, a propiska system, so they do de facto do background checks on citizens.  Passports have been denied in the past for citizens who have criminal backgrounds, or owe alimony, etc.

The issue isn't about getting checked on criminal history, maritial history, domestic violence check, and sex offender check. If you're clean, its not a problem. The problem is the
having the Government run this operation. Put the government aside. This information could be obtained and given to the agency on a volunteer basis. When the ladies get used to
seeing this information and when 1 guy wont provide this information, that guy should be taken off her list. I'm brainstorming here and trying to find a solution other than the govt
putting their nose in the process.

[ECOCKS]

Believe me if anyone should be complaining about suffering through immigration processes it would be me.

I keep hearing this but see little or no suffering except that of our own making and inevitable processing from a bureaucracy. None of my rights or liberties were aaffected in this process.

Fix the law (maryland's and the IMBRA)  and apply it evenly, foreign and domestic, gender neutral (thanks for the continual reminders on the neatrality issue BB) then enforce it consistently.