Posts tagged “Department of State”

Attached is our letter to the Office of Inspector General at the Department of State calling for an investigation into the DOS decision to invalidate the results. OIG is the “watchdog” in the Department. It ensures that action by DOS officials is not wasteful; does not result from mismanagement; and is not detrimental to American policy goals. As detailed in the letter, the Department’s decision to invalidate the results will come at great expense to the American taxpayer; is a result of DOS mismanagement of the situation; and will irreparably harm US image abroad. Therefore, an investigation is warranted, with a view towards rectifying this malfeasance by permitting the 22,000 selectees to remain winners and holding a drawing for the remaining slots. oig letter final signed

If you were selected in the DV–2012 Lottery, are currently studying or working in the US, and have not contacted me yet, please send me an e-mail at white@bridgewest.com Thank you.

As you all have noted, American public image overseas has been severely damaged because of this fiasco. It is absolutely critical to share your experience with the public and shape the court of public opinion in your home countries. Thank you to those who have created and posted videos. Here are a few links: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JK_23uMN0d0&feature=related http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gihogZrd8sw&feature=related http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xp-pAVUu5D4&feature=related

Thank you to all of you, including a Mathematics Ph. D., who have educated me on the randomness issue. My initial reaction that the results were not random was based on the unusual skewing of the results and the possibility that the results were manipulated, warranting further investigation. I now see that while the results were not uniform, they are random. Here is my own simplistic 2 step analysis: 1. Mathematically speaking, these results certainly could have occurred naturally. As such, the results are random. 2. Even if the results did not occur naturally because of a “computer glitch”, the results are still random because no one in advance knew how to increase one’s chances. Thus there was a level playing field. Example: Lotto — 6 numbers drawn 1–40. Computer glitch causes a drawing in which the 6 numbers drawn are 1–6. But no one knew about it in advance. It would seem…

We will be posting our latest correspondence to the Department of State on this blog later today. Stay tuned.

Thank you to those who completed the questionnaires. I am truly overwhelmed by the response. Your backgrounds are very, very impressive and your stories are heartwrenching. America truly needs people like you! To those who have completed the questionnaire and authorized distribution to the Department of State — I will be sure to pass on to officials the relevant details. Besides the devastation experienced by many of you, it is obvious that hundreds of thousands in dollars in expense were incurred. Life changing plans were made — one person got married upon learning of selection; one person quit his job in India to move back to Africa in preparation; one person sold his car; another gave up his apartment. Hopefully, the Department of State will recognize these very real human tragedies and act prudently in rectifying this travesty. I urge you to tell your compelling stories to the…

For those unable to open the questionnaire, please find two other versions below: .doc and pdf. If completed by hand, please make sure that the handwriting is legible. Thank you! questionnairedv2012doc questionnairedv2012pdf0001

In response to my earlier post, completed questionnaires are starting to flow in. Thank you. I would like to allay any concerns out there about the use of information contained in questionnaires: 1. Completion of the questionnaire is entirely voluntary. Any possible resolution to the issue at hand will most likely relate to the entire class of 22,000, not just those who fill in this questionnaire. Obviously, I am not making any representations that completing the questionnaire will somehow help you. Nevertheless, I do believe that collecting and synthesizing information will be important going forward. 2. One of the questions in the questionnaire relates to privacy. If you do not wish your name disclosed to the Department of State, you would indicate “No” in response. 3. We are a team of professionals. We have been battling erroneous and misguided decisions of consular officers and DOS officials for nearly 20 years….

Thank you all for your words of encouragement and support! We greatly appreciate it. To pursue the compromise solution proposed in my May 17, 2011 letter to Mr. Donahue at the Department of State, I believe it appropriate to gather more detailed information about the individuals who were winners. This additional data about the winners — who already filed with the Kentucky Consular Center? countries affected? etc… — will be critical going forward as all possible remedies are discussed and explored. If you are a winner, please complete the questionnaire at this link questionnairedv2012 and return it to me by e-mail at white@bridgewest.com with the word Lottery 2012 in the subject line. Thank you in advance for your cooperation. May common sense and justice prevail.

A national media outlet is seeking comment from DV–2012 winners. If anyone is willing to speak to the media about this situation, please contact me directly at white@bridgewest.com Please indicate Media in the subject line. In your e-mail please indicate your name, telephone number, and location (city/country) . Thank you.

The Department of State’s invalidation of the DV–2012 results has left 22,000 winners distraught. And they have a right to be — they did nothing wrong, started to act on their winning notifications, and now have had the carpet pulled out from underneath them. Why can’t the Department allow those winners to remain and conduct a new drawing on July 15 for 78,000–100,000 additional selectee slots? This is the topic of my letter to the Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Visa Services, David Donahue: donahuefinal1

In an unprecedented decision, the Department of State has invalidated the DV–2012 Lottery results. Here is the official announcement: http://dvlottery.state.gov/ The Assistant Secretary of State for Visa Services confirmed what was pointed out in earlier blogs and our letter to the Visa Office — that the Lottery was not random because the overwhelming majority (90%) selected were those who submitted entries on October 5th and 6th, thereby violating one of the requirements of the Lottery. As a result, a new Lottery will be conducted, with all entries submitted during the October 5-November 3 timeframe being eligible. Unfortunately, for those who “won” — they are no longer winners. However, they will have another chance to be selected. The winners will be announced on or about July 15, 2011. Stay tuned…

Armande has passed on a link to her interview on Univision: http://noticias.univision.com/inmigracion/videos/video/2011-05-22/loteria-de-visas-afectada-por Also, notable in the video is the appearance of a DOS official, defending the invalidation. Thank you, Armande, for getting the word out!

One of the first things that I learned in Catholic School is the Ten Commandments. We didn’t so much learn the Commandments as to have them seared into our memory, at our ready recall when the situation called for them. Violating a commandment was cause for soul-searching and a trip to the confessional on the following Saturday. Similarly, the visa applicant should know that consular officers have their own set of “commandments” that they must abide by, those set out in the Customer Service Statement to Visa Applicants (reproduced below verbatim). This Statement specifies some rights to which visa applicants are entitled when applying for a visa (visa applicants are entitled to many more rights than those listed, a topic for a future blog). Notable for their frequency of violation are “Commandments” #1, 2, 4, and 8 (I have added numbers for ease of reference). For example, a consular…

This subject has been gnawing at me for a while. Why is it that other government agencies, including USCIS and Customs and Border Patrol, have complaint procedures and will follow-up on legitimate complaints, but the agency responsible for our image overseas and interacts with thousands of foreigners a day, the Department of State, does not? While admittedly raw, the linked article represents our attempt to structure such a procedure within the context of the visa process. Your feedback is welcomed. http://www.ilw.com/articles/2011,0408-white.shtm

As a follow up to yesterday’s post, refusal rates usually are inversely related to the economic development of a country: the lower the level of economic development, the higher the refusal rate. Most African countries have higher refusal rates than more developed countries, such as China, Russia, and Kazakhstan. But this does not always hold true. An example of this is the refusal rate of the US Embassy in Armenia. While recently lowering its refusal rate, the refusal rate of the Embassy in Yerevan is still at 51%, a level higher than such countries as Bangladesh, Cambodia, Central African Republic, and Burkina Faso. According to the Embassy, this is due to the results of a “validation study," an analysis of how many Armenians overstay their visas or do not return to their home country. The high level of overstays, according to the Embassy, justifies the high refusal rate. As a…