Is Newt Gingrich acting like a human being on immigration reform?

In a Republican field dominated by ideologues who, in playing to their far right supporters, will say nearly anything to get elected, Newt Gingrich stands out.  He does not, apparently, believe undocumented immigrants are should be fodder for crocodiles in border moats or that all 12 million should be rounded up, Gestapo style, and deported en masse.  We (sort of) commend him for his "humanitarian vision", for a Republican presidential candidate that is.

Lest we forget, Governor Rick Perry of Texas also espoused hints of common sense too, with his unpopular stance on educating the children of undocumented immigrants via in-state tuition.

Let’s look more closely at Gingrich’s proposal. Here is what he said in last week’s national security debate on CNN:

“I’m prepared to take the heat for saying, let’s be humane in enforcing the law without giving them citizenship but by finding a way to create legality so that they are not separated from their families. If you’ve been here 25 years and you got three kids and two grand kids, you’ve been paying taxes and obeying the law, you belong to a local church, I don’t think we’re going to separate you from your family, uproot you forcefully and kick you out.”

As if we needed any more reasons to discount Michelle Bachmann as a serious contender, she predictably labeled the Gingrich immigration plan “amnesty” for all illegal immigrants…

Unfortunately, Gingrich’s key bullet points are: 1) “without giving them citizenship” and 2) his 25-year minimum residence restriction. 
The only possible reason Gingrich would deny undocumented immigrants a path to citizenship, as the majority of comprehensive immigration reform proposals do, is because he fears these new citizens will vote Democratic.

But even in Arizona, 78 percent support a path to citizenship under certain conditions.

However, his 25-year minimum residency requirement may be the deal killer. Think about this for a minute.  How could we determine if someone has been in the U.S. for Gingrich’s minimum 25 years? And why not 20, 15, or even 10 years? And what about the process and resources required to examine millions of applications for legal status? By one estimate it would take 5,769 person-years to vet the population of undocumented immigrants.

Just as important, what do we do about those who have not been here for his required minimum period of time?  Do we do as flip flopper Mitt Romney has suggested—make their (illegal immigrants) lives so miserable they “will self-retreat to their native countries”? Do you really think the entire country should follow Alabama’s boondoggle?

Don’t be fooled by Gingrich’s unworkable, so-called humane “plan” for the undocumented. We need true comprehensive immigration reform that includes a path to citizenship for those who want it, a guest worker program for migrant workers, continued birthright citizenship, and passage of the DREAM Act.

Instructions and rules for the calendar year 2011 green card lottery (DV-2013) were just posted by the U.S. Department of State (DOS). To the disappointment of millions of citizens of Bangladesh, this impoverished nation was declared ineligible for the upcoming green card lottery program for the first time.

To be eligible the total number of immigrants from any given country cannot exceed 50,000 for the previous five years.  If they do, that country automatically becomes ineligible until their numbers once again dip below the 50K threshold.

With registration set to run for 30 days starting October 4th, the program will award 50,000 diversity visas out 100,000 randomly selected “winners” from the total pool of applicants. In 2010, there were nearly 15 Million registrants worldwide.  Of these, 7.67 Million or 52% were from Bangladesh alone.

In the past few days we have witnessed several key events that, taken together, imply that common sense may yet prevail in immigration policy.

First, there was the widely applauded but unexpected administrative action by President Obama halting automatic deportations of undocumented aliens for non-criminal activity, allowing the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to focus their limited resources on those who represent an actual threat to the public.

This has not stopped the xenophobes on the far-right from screaming “amnesty” and otherwise overreacting to this sensible new mandate at DHS.

Then we recently learned that California may be on the verge of passing their own version of the DREAM Act.  Under Democratic Governor Jerry Brown, new legislation will give in-state tuition and financial aid to the children of illegal immigrants who completed at least three years of school in California.  And, as a sensible compromise to American citizen students, the California law will put Americans first in line for those that qualify for scholarships. Although it will affect an estimated 40,000 undocumented students, it will not solve the vexing problem of getting a job if they graduate.

Simultaneously, New Mexico Governor Susana Martinez’s ongoing crusade to revoke drivers licenses to undocumented immigrants via a process of recertification was halted. U.S. District Court Judge Sarah Singleton in Santa Fe issued a temporary restraining order, ruling that a requirement to validate NM state residency amounted to discrimination against a single class of persons.

In Alabama, our nation’s most draconian anti-illegal immigrant law was, at least temporarily, put on hold. Alabama’s HB56 would require schools to verify citizenship, jail suspected illegals for any reason, and make it a crime for citizens to give rides, provide shelter, or rent to illegal immigrants -- essentially turning landlords into immigration agents. In this case, District Judge Sharon Blackburn said she needed until September 28 to deliberate on the facts of law. 

Whether this chain of positive events represents the beginning of a new era of common sense in immigration reform or an insignificant statistical blip of good news remains to be seen. But this much should be clear even to the most hard-headed of the far-right. We cannot possibly deport 11-12 million illegal immigrants and we cannot ever make their lives so miserable that they will voluntarily leave. 

What we can do is continue to secure our borders, provide a path to citizenship for those that deserve it (college graduates and military enlistees) and, yes continue to deport those who actually violate our criminal laws -- without resorting to mean-spirited and unconstitutional attacks on the children of illegals and motel maids. 

Please let me know your thoughts.

In what started out as an apology to existing myUSAi members who may have lost one or more photos in a recent technical glitch, we decided to give all new members an equal opportunity to get a free copy of our flagship booklet, “Win the Green Card Lottery”.

Here is all you need to do:

1. Register as a member of the United States Association of Immigrants,
2. Complete your member profile, and
3. Upload one or more NEW photos (or videos).
4. Notify us by midnight, Wednesday, September 7 GMT using our CONTACT US form.  Use this subject line: "FREE BOOKLET".

We will email your booklet (PDF) to your email address of record starting September 8, once we have had a chance to review all requests to make sure all the requirements are met (yes, we will check your profile). Your email box should be large enough to hold 2.6MB File.

Remember you MUST use our"Contact Us" form with the subject line: "FREE BOOKLET." Include your email address in the message box.

We hope this will help compensate you for your lost time while encouraging you to explore and use our new features.

J. Stephen Wilson
President
The United States Association of Immigrants

With the green card lottery opening registration date fast approaching, it seems like a good time to review the current state of affairs of the annual diversity visa program.  But first a quick primer:  

The "green card lottery” is well-paved path for immigrating to the United States. Originally sponsored by Senator Edward Kennedy to benefit Irish immigrants, it now provides approximately 50,000 visas per year randomly to applicants from countries that have not sent large numbers of people to the United States in the past. The program excludes those born in countries like Mexico, Canada, India, the United Kingdom, the Philippines, Pakistan, mainland China, and a few other countries that are already well represented in terms of immigration in the U.S. The only requirement for entry is a high school education and no criminal record.

Aside from the computer fiasco this year that mistakenly notified over 20,000 registrants that they won, the program has been extremely popular and successful with nearly 15 million applicants worldwide from last year’s DV-2012.

Each year the conservative elements of Congress try to kill the diversity visa program. Representative Darrell Issa (R-CA) introduced the “Advanced Degree Bill” in 2008 to eliminate the lottery and reallocate those visas to international students who receive an advanced degree from a U.S. university. The most recent attempt is Congressman Bob Goodlatte’s (R-VA) so-called Security and Fairness (SAFE) for America Act, H.R. 704, introduced February 15, 2011. The text of the bill is available at: www.myusai.org/immigration-reports.html (it is currently #72 on the list). The Senate version is Senate Bill 332 introduced on February 14 by Orrin Hatch (R-UT).

The question is will any of these proposals be successful this year? 

The Goodlatte bill has the highest probability of passing since the House Judiciary Committee recently approved the bill for a future vote before the full House of Representatives by a vote of 19 to 11.

Critics of the green card lottery program say it is prone to misrepresentation and fraud. However, they fail to point out the steps taken by the Department of State’s Bureau of Consular Affairs to combat fraud. They also claim is a national security threat because it admits those from countries like Syria who are “State Sponsors of Terrorism.” However, the actual risk to national security is miniscule. Those against the program typically use the isolated example of Hesham Mohamed Ali Hedayet, who killed two and wounded three at Los Angeles International Airport in July of 2002. Hedayet was an Egyptain national who came to USA through the green card lottery.

Here is a good review of the SAFE for America Act from AILA which dispells many of the mistaken notions of the program.

Without the lottery, there will be few options left for those from many countries, particularly in Africa, to enter the USA. Some think that with the elimination of the program the numbers will be transferred to the EB (employment) or FB (family-based) immigration categories. Don’t bet on it. Restrictionist groups like NumbersUSA and FAIR are lobbying hard to restrict immigration across the board, including but not limited to, constitutionally questionable proposals to eliminate birthright citizenship.

The fact is that the lottery is a very small program that admits only 5% of the total number of immigrants into the United States. But it seems to have a bull’s eye painted on it by the far right who like to use the issue to placate their xenophobic constituents into believing they are gutting the program to save jobs for American citizens while simultaneously wrapping themselves around the false cloak of “fighting terrorism.”  Don’t be fooled.

My prediction is that Goodlatte’s bill may actually pass the House of Representatives this year (witness the boneheaded budget deficit limit extension debate) but it will be defeated by the Democratic-controlled Senate. Too bad a real Comprehensive Immigration Reform bill is still stalled by the Party of No.

Here in Albuquerque I’ve spoken with several winners recently who won the lottery, including one who informed me that his wife, an F-2 visa holder, won DV-2012.  Ironically, if Issa’s bill passes, they could still obtain U.S. permanent residency if he completes his advanced degree from the University of New Mexico. (According to the UNM Office of International Programs and Studies, UNM had 917 international students enrolled in 2009. Of these, 574 or 63% were enrolled in graduate programs.) However, if Issa’s bill eventually passes, it would skew the proportions of immigrants from foreign countries to those with the highest educational budgets like China and India. This would ultimately reverse the gains of the green card lottery program.

Last week, the Obama administration announced, in apparent reaction to Wednesday’s National Day of Action by Latino activists protesting deportation of thousands of illegal immigrants, a change to the "Secure Communities" policy to include reviews for criminal conduct.

According Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano, the amendment will mean those who are in the process of deportation, numbering approximately 300,000, will now have the chance to have their cases reviewed on a one-by-one basis.

By focusing on criminal immigrants who pose no threat to national security or public safety, DHS will be able to prioritize their resources on illegal aliens who represent an actual threat to the general public. But the most controversial element is that it will allow those who are allowed to stay to apply for a work permit.

We applaud this long overdue and common-sense reform to the program. 

Progressives point to a sobering assessment from the American Immigration Lawyers Association how the Secure Communities program unfairly targeted those with mere traffic violations or minor misdemeanors (see: “Immigration Enforcement Off Target: Minor Offenses with Major Consequences”). Here is a very typical example from the report detailing how ICE has been targeting undocumented aliens with no criminal background:

In May 2011, a man was burning leaves on his property in New Mexico when a sheriff’s deputy approached him. The man explained that city officials had told him he did not need a permit to burn leaves in his yard. The deputy then asked him twice for his social security number and the man explained that he did not have one. The sheriff wrote a citation for burning leaves. Two hours later, plainclothes ICE agents arrived at his house and took him into custody. He was removed later the same day. He had lived in the U.S. for over 15 years.

In February we warned our readers that DREAM Act-eligible students and others could easily be caught up in deportation proceedings after New Mexico Governor Susana Martinez authorized immigration checks of anyone arrested in the state. Although there is no evidence any local high school or UNM students were actually deported, it was only a matter of time before this occurred.

Under Secure Communities, fingerprints of those arrested by local police are shared with Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) for possible deportation. However, ICE recently mandated that the Secure Communities program is mandatory so states are no longer allowed to opt out of the program, in effect banning sanctuary cities like Santa Fe.

Conservatives, including Republican Representative Lamar Smith and others, are calling this change “back-door amnesty” in an election year to get votes from Latinos.  And Roy H. Beck, president of the restrictionist group NumbersUSA, is against the new policy because it authorizes work permits for those who are released, further eroding job prospects of American citizens already out of work due to the Great Recession.

And the majority of comments from readers of recent articles on the subject favor deporting any illegal alien at any age for any reason whatsoever. Of course this is not a scientific poll, but it does indicate that there seems to be substantial support for the far right's set of values (but not those of the church).

This change is highlighted by the fact that illegal Antonio Diaz Chacon, rescuer of the 6-year old kidnapping victim here in Albuquerque, could be deportable under the previous rules.

What do you think? Do you support deportations of U.S. high school graduates brought illegally into the U.S. as small children and others like Antonio Chacon?

The Hispanic Leadership Network (HLN) just announced they will hold their next conference in Albuquerque, New Mexico September 23-24 at the Hyatt Regency Hotel.

The Hispanic Leadership Network is funded by the American Action Network a conservative think tank founded in 2010 that focuses on promoting “center-right policies.” Co-founded by Douglas Holtz-Eakin, a former economic policy adviser to Republican Senator John McCain’s presidential campaign, and Norm Coleman, former Republican Senator from Minnesota.

Douglas Holtz-Eakin wrote an op-ed in the New York Times and appeared on Fox News to argue against the Affordable Health Care Act. Co-founder Norm Coleman has a rather mixed background, starting his career as a liberal Democrat, then switched parties to run against the late Paul Wellstone.

The HLN inaugural conference was held in Miami, a traditional stronghold of Republican Hispanics. They are meeting here in Albuquerque to identify with New Mexico Governor Susana Martinez and encourage more Hispanics to vote with the GOP.

Besides Susana Martinez and Nevada GOP Governor Brian Sandoval, we have yet to see who the other speakers will be, but the preliminary agenda is here.

But the fact is that the new far right Republican plus Tea Party (“FARuplicans”) have done more to marginalize Hispanics than any party in the last 50 years.

Here is a link to a recent report entitled, “Wealth Gaps Rise to Record Highs Between Whites, Blacks, and Hispanics” (it is currently #7 in the list) by the Pew Research Center showing that during the last Bush administration:

… from 2005 to 2009, inflation-adjusted median wealth fell by 66% among Hispanic households and 53% among black households, compared with just 16% among white households.

This now includes a GOP platform that seeks to deny birthright citizenship to undocumented aliens; deny health care to Hispanic and poor women; block increasing taxes on the wealthy and closing corporate tax loopholes (thus increasing the budget deficit); gut union bargaining rights; block much needed financial regulations that caused the recession; kill the DREAM Act and opportunities for innocent children of illegals; destroy Medicare; and, generally speaking, selectively harm the middle and lower class at the expense of the top 1% of wage earners and large corporations.

So why would any informed, responsible Hispanic leader have anything to do with the GOP’s Hispanic Leadership Network? That’s what we’d like to know.

Leaders of several key Hispanic groups including LULAC, the League of United Latin American Citizens, and the Southwest Voter Project seem to agree.

We urge local Hispanics to boycott the conference, or better yet, demonstrate in front of the Hyatt against a Republican ideology that hurts Mexican-Americans while simultaneously pandering for their votes.

On June 28 the United States Senate Committee on the Judiciary held hearings on the latest version of the  DREAM Act. As you recall, last year the DREAM Act was defeated. The latest proposal is Senate Bill 952 sponsored by Democratic Senator Dick Durbin of Illinois.  (The 2010 Senate version of the DREAM Act was S. 3992 and the corresponding 2010 House bill was H.R. 6497.)

The text of S. 952 and statements from those who participated in the recent hearings are available on our Downloads page at myUSAi.org. This includes testimony of sponsor Senator Dick Durban (D-IL); Stephen Camarota of the Center for Immigration Studies (CIS); Janet Napolitano, Secretary of U.S. Department of Homeland Security;  Arne Duncan, Secretary United States Department of Education;  Clifford Stanley, Under-Secretary of Defense; Margaret Stock Lieutenant Colonel (ret) USMC; and “Dreamer,” Ola Kaso. 

Every participant was in favor of the act except Stephen Camarota. Let’s look at each of his major objections.  

IT WILL COST TOO MUCH. According to Camarota, it will be too expensive for state governments to cope with the expected influx of in-state tuition alien students into a public school system where they are only required to complete two years of college; these new illegal immigrant students will take the place of U.S. citizen students; and they will take away affirmative action programs that should be targeted for U.S. citizens only.

RESPONSE.  If an illegal alien child has exceptional scores on standardized tests, it would be a travesty to deny assistance to that person based solely on his or her parent’s immigration status. Illegal immigrant children are, from a humanitarian perspective, just like natives. This measure is designed to assimilate those for whom it is unwise, unfair, and impossible to deport anyway. And the Congressional Budget Office recently estimated the bill would actually cut 1.4 billion dollars from federal deficit over the next 10 years. For more on the perspective of educators, read Arne Duncan’s prepared statement.

IMPACT ON NEW MEXICO. Forward-thinking states like New Mexico already give in-state tuition to alien children. And California and New York just passed or are introducing similar legislation.

Nationally, approximately one million may qualify for citizenship under this version of the act. If this total were divided equally between the 50 states it would equate to about 20,000 Dreamers per state.  If one-half went into the military and the other 10K went into higher education, it would require each of New Mexico’s roughly 12 institutions of higher learning to absorb about 80 students per year over the next 10 years. Although this not an imposing burden, states with a higher percentage of the undocumented will obviously have more students. And many of these will attend college anyway.

IT IS “AMNESTY”.  According to Camarota it will encourage more illegal immigration since it is actually an amnesty, and will reward their illegal immigrant parents.

RESPONSE. This is the classic restrictionist myth. The short answer is: “No it will not encourage more illegal immigration.”  Why? Two reasons. First, illegal immigration has already dropped, mainly for economic reasons.  Second, our borders are far more secure than before. So any alleged new influx of illegal immigrants will be met with tighter security, just as Conservatives have demanded. Deportations are way up too, so arguably, the right has already gotten just what they wanted in the enforcement arena.

IT IS SUBJECT TO FRAUD. According to Camarota the system is too easily subject to fraud since it does not adequately discourage false applications. Furthermore, this entire process will overwhelm USCIS with more work and let off those currently in criminal deportation proceedings.

RESPONSE. There should indeed be a clearly acceptable list of documents used to determine eligibility and the act should and will be self-funding via fees.

THE EDUCATIONAL REQUIREMENT IS INADEQUATE. According to Camarota two years of college do not provide sufficient skills to get a job.

RESPONSE.  Camarota has a point here too. Two years of post-secondary school education may not enough to make a significant dent in earnings potential over that of high school graduates. So why not raise the bar and require at least a two-year (Associates) Degree as the minimum? Even conservative pundit George Will supports the idea that a non-citizen with an advanced science or technology degree from a U.S. college should have “a green card stapled to it”.

IT ENCOURAGES LAWLESSNESS. According to Camarota it legalizes serious law offenders.

RESPONSE.  This is nonsense. The fact is that the criminal provisions in the DREAM act are more stringent than for regular citizenship.  An applicant cannot have more than two misdemeanors, like a DUI or a disorderly conduct. Camarota’s complaint that many criminals plead out a felony to a misdemeanor isn’t relevant considering the low numbers involved.

IT IS UNFAIR. According to Camarota it is unfair to those that can’t do college level work and those who followed the rules to come here legally.

RESPONSE.  Wrong and wrong again. If a Dreamer successfully completes two years or more of college (or whatever educational level is finally enacted), he or she will deserve a path to citizenship, that’s the whole point of the proposed legislation. And if they don’t have the interest or the chops for schoolwork, they can join the military and become a U.S. citizen via that path. And make no mistake, America definitely need these recruits. Just read the testimony of Clifford Stanley and Margaret Stock.

But what about the alleged unfairness of letting Dreamers get ahead of the line of those who “play by the rules” (another common conservative sound bite).  Well, the point is that these kids didn’t break any rules. They were just children and young adults brought here illegally by their parents. They are student leaders, class valedictorians, star athletes, and yes, our gardeners. Let’s give them a chance and help the economy too.

And what about the “chain migration” claim? (another conservative talking point)  If a Dreamer  eventually sponsors a relative from another country for citizenship, these new immigrants will be subject to current legal immigration limits.  For example, natives of some countries have a 20-year immigration backlog.

Just like the budget deficit extension, some version of the DREAM Act will eventually pass because the key positions of both sides are so close.  Once the myths are exposed it should leave issues that Centrist Republicans and Democrats can likely compromise on, or that technology can solve. But don’t bet on logic, negotiation, and common sense to prevail as long as FARuplican ideology dominates the conservative debate.

July 15, the State Department Bureau of Consular Affairs rolled out a new version of their electronic status check (ESC) website for those who registered for last year’s annual diversity visa (green card) lottery. 

The newly updated ESC website now features a Secure Login, Glossary, Search, and a modern Help System, complete with screenshots that (almost) puts their new system on par with commercial applications. Presumably too, the software error that incorrectly notified 22,316 people that they won in early May, has been patched and thoroughly tested.

We welcome these changes and congratulate the State Department for making their July 15 deadline.

According to the State Department website:

If you submitted a qualified entry from October 5, 2010 to November 3, 2010, your entry remains with us.  It will be included in the new selection lottery.  Your confirmation number to check results on this website is still valid.

Just like before, you need three pieces of identification to check your entry:

1. Confirmation Number, (for example: 20121O0DZWY3DOV9);
2. Last (Family) Name; and
3. Birth Year.

Winners will receive special instructions and forms directly on the U.S. State Department Entrant Status Check website. If you win, the ESC site will display a winning notice. NOTE: The text of the notice is blocked out to help prevent fraud. However don’t expect this to slow down the fraudsters from sending fake winning emails to as many email addresses as they can find. The latest victims of these ongoing email scams were customers of a well known green card lottery service.

In related news, U.S. District Court Judge Amy Berman Jackson threw out, as expected, Los Angeles attorney Kenneth White’s class action lawsuit. This case was filed only a month ago on behalf of a 28-year-old Dublin resident from Russia living in California on a temporary work visa and 35 other entrants from DV-2012 that were mistakenly notified they won.

Here in Albuquerque, a 22-year old senior University of New Mexico student from Scandinavia (I’ll call her “Olga”) lost her DV-2012 Confirmation Number. As I mentioned in my prior commentary, applicants like Olga are still out of luck for last year’s lottery. We hope the State Department comes up with a method in the future for applicant’s to retrieve their numbers if they are lost.

In our previous column we reported that the U.S. State Department Bureau of Consular Affairs announced that Electronic Status Checking for DV-2012 applicants was delayed until July 15 due to a progamming error. This error mistakenly notified 20,000 green card lottery applicants that they were winners, when in fact they were not.

Although some of these 20,000 may still win the lottery, they (and all other applicants) must recheck their status on or after July 15, 2011 when the software update is complete and fully tested.

All they need to check their winning status are three pieces of information from their 2010 green card lottery registration: 1) CONFIRMATION NUMBER, 2) FAMILY NAME (Last Name), and 3) BIRTH YEAR.

A confirmation number was provided if you successfully entered last fall. It is a16-character number, similar to this: 2012lO0DZWY1DOV9.

But what if you lost your confirmation number?

We previously reported (incorrectly) that you can email or call the Kentucky Consular Center (KCC) and ask them to look up your number given the Principal (Primary) Applicant's full name and birth date. However, this is no longer true (or perhaps it was never possible). Regardless, if you lost your number you cannot determine if you won. In this case, you will be unable to check your winning status at the ESC site above.

Therefore you will have to wait until this year's upcoming DV-2013 lottery and reenter if you have any hope of winning. But as the graph shows, more applicants are registering each year which reduces the chances of winning one of the 50,000 available visas.

In the last few days I received dozens of emails from DV-2012 "winners" (including one from a temporary visa holder here in Albuquerque, New Mexico) who discarded their confirmation numbers after they were mistakenly notified that they won. Although they were issued a "case number", these case numbers are now invalid, and cannot be used to check status beginning July 15. Here is an excerpt from one letter:

To find out the results, each applicant needs a "confirmation number." But when notified, you need a "case number" which they provide. Therefore, most of us thought that we won't need our confirmation number and threw it away, so if we are lucky [and win] the second time then we won't be able to see the results.

Bottom line: do not lose your confirmation numbers. (Actually, this may be one reason to use a paid lottery service since they would not misplace your number.)

In response to these and other concerns from "the 22,000" I sent a letter to the Department of State summarizing this and other issues. They are:

1) From a probability perspective, the initial selection was still random. That is, the software could just as well have chosen those who applied on the last three days, or on odd/even numbered days, or on Saturday/Sundays. Or the system could have even selected the very last 100,000 applicants. Hence there is no need to cancel the results.

2) Those who were declared "winners" and successfully submitted their paperwork prior to the announcement should be in a "special category" and kept in the review process for a green card. Then a second batch of winners could be selected beginning July 15.

3) After the results were announced, the Kentucky Consular Center (KCC), responding to e-mails and phone calls, urged the "winners" to send their forms for processing as soon as possible, even though they must have suspected something is wrong with the results.

4) Arguing for financial loss, some "winners" paid attorney fees, turned down job proposals, and paid money to mail application forms to the KCC.

5) Many are arguing for an independent investigation to determine how this occurred.

Besides the lost money, lost confirmation numbers, lost opportunities, and a mathematical argument that the 22,000 "winners" were chosen randomly anyway, there is the basic notion of fairness (espoused by the U.S.) which seems to have been overlooked by voiding the initial lottery results.

What do you think?