Not true. The idea of birthright citizenship is a big enough deal that there’s a highfalutin’ Latin term for it: jus soli (“right of the soil”), and many countries have it.
It’s easy to dismiss Trump’s statement, made a week before the mid-term elections, as a stunt — but it’s more than that. It’s an attempt to prime people to take an idea that was formerly out-of-bounds and move the Overton Window so that it’s now possible to discuss, and eventually make palatable. It’s all in the service of making overt bigotry acceptable again, and it’s more than just a stunt:
Hey, Democratic friends: YES, the attack on birthright citizenship is a political stunt. Yes, it’s unconstitutional and his reasoning is based in lies. But it’s also a terrifying attack on many people. PLEASE do not call it a distraction or argue we should ignore it.
Now what we need is for more media organization to stop simply and uncritically reporting Trump’s statements, but make factual corrections when needed:
We have deleted a tweet about President Trump’s claim that the U.S. is the only country that grants birthright citizenship because it failed to note that his statement was incorrect.
The reason why Tax Day falls on April 17th this year
Tomorrow is Tax Day in the United States: the deadline for U.S. taxpayers to file their tax returns for the previous tax year, or failing that, file for an extension. Normally, Tax Day falls on April 15th. However, since:
Last Week Tonight’s take on taxes — corporate taxes, that is
I can’t post a piece about tax day and taxes without pointing you to last night’s feature story on Last Week Tonight, which was on corporate taxes, and how corporations dodge them.
How much tax you’ve already paid through payroll withholding and estimated tax payments, and
How much tax you’re including as payment with the form.
What you don’t have to provide is any reason why you’re asking for an extension. Most requests for an extension requests are granted — I get the feeling that unless you’re Wesley Snipes, your request will probably go through.
Does the tax filing process have to be so painful?
The two gentlemen pictured below say “no”. In any other situation where you are invoiced, the person or organization doing the invoicing does all the work in calculating it, and all you have to do is say whether the invoice is correct or incorrect. But with taxes, you’re getting invoiced and you have to do all the calculating. The IRS already knows your income and finances, and could easily crunch the numbers and send you a bill. This practice is called return-free filing, and both Presidents Reagan and Obama have spoken in support of it.
Return-free filing is already done in some European countries, and it’s as simple as this:
You get a pre-filled filing from the government — basically, a tax invoice.
You review it.
If it’s accurate, you sign it, and pay any taxes you owe, or collect any refunds you’re owed.
If it’s not accurate, you fix it, or prepare your own return.
For many people, this could turn the process of filing taxes into a simple one that doesn’t require specialists or special software, and would take minutes.
But return-free filing would take away a lot of profits from Intuit (as in Turbotax) and H&R Block (the tax accountant shop), and their lobbyists have worked hard to ensure to block any motions to make it possible in the U.S.. Propublica have covered this over the years…
Bill Russell called me one time… He says, “Charles Barkley.” I said, “Yes, sir, Mr. Russell.”
“You grew up in Alabama. Right?” I said, “Yes, sir.”
He says, “Did you go to public school?” I said, “Yes, sir.”
He says, “Did the cops ever come to your neighborhood?” I said, “Yes sir.”
He said, “Any of the houses ever on fire and the firemen come?” I said, “Yes, sir.”
He said, “I don’t want to see your black ass on TV complaining about your taxes anymore.” I says, “What do you mean?”
He says, “So now that you got money you don’t want to help other people out, but when you were poor, other people took care of you.” And I says, “You know what, Mr. Russell, you will never hear me complain about my taxes again.”
And it was a very interesting lesson for me, because I do think rich people should pay more taxes. I’m blessed to be one of them, and we should pay more in taxes. I learned my lesson. I never complain about taxes.
Part 8 of the I-485 is called General Eligibility and Inadmissibility Grounds, and is made up of 67 questions, one of which asks you if you somehow were involved with the Nazis:
Here’s the text of the question:
During the period from March 23, 1933 to May 8, 1945, did you ever order, incite, assist, or otherwise participate in the persecution of any person because of race, religion, national origin, or political opinion, in association with either the Nazi government of Germany or any organization or government associated or allied with the Nazi government of Germany?
That’s right: In the process that determined whether I was allowed to call this place home, I had to disavow any connection with the Nazis. And I did so easily, gladly and proudly.
So why can’t the President?
He was uncharacteristically silent for the first part of Saturday, when stories about the torch gathering the night before and neo-Nazis on the street that morning were already circulating:
The slow, faint response wasn’t lost on former Ku Klux Klan Imperial Wizard and high-profile white nationalist David Duke, who took it as implicit support…
Here’s the text from that screenshot (because there’s no way in Hell that I’m linking to the Daily Stormer):
3:46 p.m.: Trump comments were good. He didn’t attack us. He just said the nation should come together. Nothing specific against us.
He said that we need to study why people are so angry, and implied that there was hate…on both sides!
So he implied the antifa were haters.
There was virtually no counter-signaling of us at all.
He said he loves us all.
Also refused to answer a question about White Nationalists supporting him.
No condemnation at all.
When asked to condemn, he just walked out of the room.
Really, really good.
God bless him.
I’ll say it again:
I easily, gladly, and proudly disavowed the Nazis in front of witnesses, including my wife, my lawyer, and a U.S. government official.
Why can’t the President do the same in front of the American people?
Also…
It’s a shame that the I-485’s “Nazi question” is limited to the time period from March 1933 through May 1945. Even a kid who turned the minimum qualifying age — 10 — for the junior division of the Hitler Youth on V-E day would be 82 years old at the time of this writing. I think that it should be phrased more like question 56, the “Communist question”, which asks if you’ve ever, during any point in time, in any country, been part of or tied to the Communist Party or any other totalitarian party:
Not all of us (myself included) were schooled in the United States, so you may have heard Donald Trump’s reference to Andrew Jackson’s opinion on the U.S. Civil War and not considered it unusual (and hey, same goes for many people who were schooled in the U.S. and studied U.S. history). However, it is unusual for this simple reason:
Here’s a CNN report featuring the recording of Trump’s statements, which were made during an interview with the Washington Examiner:
It’s one thing to make stuff up, and it’s another thing to make stuff up about things in an age where facts can easily be looked up. But it’s a completely bizarro thing to try and spin this mistake, as Republican communications strategist Paris Dennard did:
Celebrating my green card status the American way at Burger 21.
Last Thursday — January 26, 2017 — I acquired permanent resident status in the United States, colloquially known as “getting my green card”. The process took about nine months and a little over US$4,000 in processing and lawyer fees, but it’s done, and from a cursory reading of recent news headlines and from what I heard at the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services offices, not a moment too soon.
In case you’ve forgotten or don’t know me that well, there’s a reason why I moved from Toronto to Tampa…
A great day: March 7, 2015, St. Pete Beach.
…and she’s why I started the green card process last April.
With the help of our lawyer, Gerry Seipp, we started the process with me filling out an I-485 form (Application to Register Permanent Residence or Adjust Status) and Anitra filling out an I-130 (the interestingly named “Petition for Alien Relative” document). Using a lawyer wasn’t strictly necessary, but I found that it was well worth the $2,500 to have some professional assistance in navigating through the myriad forms, byzantine processes, and potential pitfalls.
Nine months of paperwork, payments, processes (including a medical exam), and a lot of waiting in between culminated in last Thursday’s appointment at the Tampa U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services office. The appointment is an in-person interview, and its purpose is to confirm that ours was a genuine marriage and not just one of convenience for the purpose of securing a green card.
Gerry told us that in some of these sessions, they separate the spouses and interview them separately, asking questions intended to reveal whether or not they are truly a couple. “Don’t worry about that part,” our lawyer said, “you’re a real couple, and it’ll be just like being on that old game show, The Newlywed Game.”
The problem with that reassurance is that when I think of The Newlywed Game, I always think of the infamous moment on the show, often referred to (somewhat incorrectly) as the “That would be the butt, Bob” moment:
Great, I thought. Now that’s all I’ll be able to think of during the interview.
I was planning on wearing a blazer, dress shirt, and dress pants, but asked if I should wear a tie. Since this is Florida, and since not all of Gerry’s clients are professionals, he told us that he’s seen people show up for the interview in shorts and flip-flops.
“You know what?” I said. “I’m going to wear a tie.”
The sign outside the USCIS field office in Tampa.
Our appointment at the Tampa U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services office was scheduled for 12:15 p.m.. We met up with Gerry a half hour prior in order to have some time to talk and go through the airport-style security line, complete with metal detector and baggage x-ray machine.
The local immigration lawyers seem to know each other. While we waited for our interview, a number of other lawyers came up to Gerry to say hi. He introduced us to all of them, and we had some brief — and very interesting — conversations with them:
One lawyer whose clients had just completed the interview said that the questioning had become more extensive. “My couple got nearly a hundred questions,” he said.
The next lawyer shared his observation that the interviewers were becoming increasingly hard on less articulate candidates. “That shouldn’t be a problem for me,” I said, to which he replied “Radio voice. That’ll help.”
Another lawyer, who was waiting with his clients for their interview, said “Things are different with you-know-who in charge,” saying “you-know-who” using the same tone of voice that Harry Potter characters use to say “Voldemort”.
The most interesting comment came from a lawyer who remarked “If your last name begins with ‘Al’ and ends with ‘i’, let’s just say that you’re not gonna have a good time in that room.”
Kateryna and Arshameh Taidi’s green card interview in Tampa, 2010. Click the photo to read about their interview.
Our turn came, and interviewer was a friendly guy with an easygoing demeanor. In another life, he could’ve easily been in sales or marketing. After the usual introductions and handshakes, he walked us to his office, where Anitra and I took seats in front of his desk, and Gerry took a seat behind us. The seating arrangement wasn’t all that different from the one pictured above.
After a brief swearing-in where we affirmed that everything we would say in the interview was the truth, it began. First came a review of the forms we’d filled out months ago to ensure that all the information they contained was accurate. Then came our turn to provide supporting documentation:
The actual folders I used in the interview. I got to keep the folders, but their contents are now in a file somewhere in the USCIS office.
The guidance on how much supporting documentation to bring to a green card interview is pretty vague — the general rule seems to be “more is better”. I tried to strike a balance between having enough material to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that our relationship was genuine and not spending an inordinate amount of time and printer ink on preparing it. In the end, I believe I printed out about 60 pages’ worth of material, including:
Proof that Anitra and I were both professionals with good prospects and jobs that paid well,
statements that showed that we had joint bank accounts, insurance policies, and other jointly-owned assets,
photos, photos, photos: from our wedding, as well as from life before and after we got married, including our trips to places both near (Disney World, Charleston, Savannah, Bahamas, Toronto, Montreal, Quebec City, Grand Canyon, Las Vegas, San Francisco, and most recently, New York) and (Manila and London, both of which we visited in 2016), and
flight itineraries showing that we saw each other monthly before I moved to Tampa in March 2014.
We also provided a sealed envelope containing the results of a medical exam performed specifically for my green card application. The exam took place in August, and a couple of weeks later, I was given in the results in a brown envelope marked “USCIS only — DO NOT OPEN”. Our interviewer opened it, saw that I’d been given a clean bill of health, and then noticed that whoever filled out the paperwork within forgot to specify the clinic where I’d been examined.
“The doctor signed it, which is the important part,” the interviewer said, “but I need to enter a name for the clinic into the system.”
“Mind if I check my phone?” I asked, and a moment later, I had the name and address of the clinic.
The current sample green card.
We must’ve presented well, because the interview wrapped up shortly after that. Aside from being asked if we lived in the same house and if I’ve ever been convicted of a crime or been denied entry into the United States, I don’t recall being asked any of the questionstypicallyasked in a green card interview. We spent most of the interview reviewing the contents of the folders that I brought.
A half-hour after the interview began, it concluded with our interviewer saying “Congratulations. You are now a legal permanent resident of the United States.” He said I should expect the actual green card in the mail in a couple of weeks.
Since my status was gained through marriage and since Anitra and I have been married less than two years, my permanent residence status is conditional and temporary. Two years from now, we’ll have to file an I-751 (Petition to Remove Conditions on Residence) form to seal the deal.
In case you were wondering how I’ve been working in the U.S. since 2014 without a green card: From March 2014 until last summer, I’ve been here under TN-1 (NAFTA Professional) status, and in the process for applying for a green card, acquired I-512 “Advance Parole”.
My plan for these soon-to-be interesting times is simple: carry on, watch my back (this year, two people in red caps have yelled at me to “go back to China” — wrong country, guys), speak truth to power and fight the good fight when needed (and oh wow, will it be needed), play the accordion, and follow the wisdom of Canadian poet Dennis Leigh:
“Work as if you live in the early days of a better nation”.
That’s me on the right, on Thursday, January 26, 2017, celebrating 
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
