Subject: CND-US CSPA Information Exchange Package (XX), July 1, 1993

From: [email-masked]
Date: Thu, 1 Jul 1993 20:36:37 -0500

+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+   C h i n a   N e w s   D i g e s t  +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

                               (US Regional)

Information Exchange (XX): About Late-Arrival Dependents of CSPA Applicants

                         Thursday, July 1, 1993

Dear Readers:

Starting TODAY, through June 30, 1994, U.S. INS accepts applications for
adjustment to U.S. Permanent Resident from eligible PRC citizens under CSPA.
Meanwhile, INS published the regulation for CSPA implementation (FULL text
was carried in the last issue of CND-US CSPA Info Exchange Package).

This is last issue of the CND-US CSPA Information Exchange Package series.
20 issues in total are published from June 6, 1993 to July 1, 1993.  CND,
as always, will continue to report CSPA-related developments and other
passport/visa/immigration-related news in regular CND-US.

The CND.ORG CSPA InfoBase will remain online in service and related news
will be added to the CND CSPA InfoBase in the future.

As a reader pointed out in June 17's CND-US, "Please Do Not Forget Why and
How We Became Eligible for Immigration Visa." If any of us benefit from the
CSPA and/or April 11, 1990 U.S. Presidential Executive Order, please NEVER
forget the June 4th, 1989!
                               Thank You.

                                         CND Editors

+--------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| CND-US, normally 1 or 2 issues a week, is a supplement to CND-Global and |
| has  basically no overlap with the daily news.  CND-US provides in-depth |
| information concerning Chinese students/scholars in the United States.   |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------+

[Editor's Note: The following is collected and edited from the information
                CND received or saw on the network and elsewhere, we believe
                it is of information nature.  We forward it to concerned
                readers as a timely reference service.  However, some of the
                information may need to be verified (it is beyond our
                capacity to do so).  Please consult your lawyer and use
                your own discretion before you use the information printed
                in this package to make decision(s) on related matter.

                Also, please refer to CND-US CSPA Information Exchange
                Packages (I) thru (XIX) for more info/full picture of CSPA.
                Many questions have been answered and/or discussed in the
                previous issues.

                Errors found in previous packages are usually corrected in
                the discussions in the later issues.

                Back issues of CND-US CSPA Packages and related info are
                available from CND CSPA InfoBase, by anonymous ftp to CND.ORG
                (IP: 132.249.229.100) directory pub/InfoBase/CSPA

                Some of the e-addresses/names/ID's are withheld per sender's
                request, except for those already posted to public network.

                We welcome readers sending their info/experience to us to let
                others to share, request for anonymity will be honored.

                Due to our limited manpower resource of volunteers, we regret
                that we are UNABLE to answer questions from readers.
                     ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
                CSPA = Chinese Student Protection Act of 1992,
                       U.S. Public Law No. 102-404                         ]

Table of Contents                                                 # of Lines
============================================================================
Information Exchange (XX): About Late-Arrival Dependents of CSPA Applicants

1. INS Answered Questions on Late-Arrival Dependents/Public Charge/I-134
    -- CND's Third Report on June 29 AILA/NAFSA CSPA Teleconference .... 115
2. Meeting with Administration on CSPA: Late-Arrival Dependents, 90 Days
   China-Visit and CCP Membership -- News Release No.9 of NCCA ......... 100
3. IFCSS Collects Comments on INS Regulation for the CSPA Implementation  45
                                --- --- ---
          The Divergence of Views on Late-Arrival Dependents
              Before the CSPA Regulation Was Finalized:

4. On Late-Arrival Dependents: IFCSS's Position and Work ............... 170
5. The Position and Activity of ZHAO Hai-Qing (NCCA NR No.5) ........... 260
============================================================================
[Editor's Note: More information about late-arrival dependents vs CSPA can
                be found in CND-US CSPA Info Packages V, XIII, XVII & XVIII,
                information about "Voluntary Departure" can be found in
                CND-US CSPA Info Packages XVII and XIX.]

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. INS Answered Questions on Late-Arrival Dependents/Public Charge/I-134
    -- CND's Third Report on June 29 AILA/NAFSA CSPA Teleconference .... 115
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>From: A CND Volunteer, July 1, 1993

[Editor's Note: This is the last part of the report.]

Note: The following is an excerpt of questions answered by INS officials
Michael Aytes and Rita Boie during the teleconference on CSPA on June
29, inaccuracy may occur in the transcription.  Please use your own
discretion.

Q: If somebody want work authorization, they can enclose form I-765 with
the filing fee, is that correct?

Aytes: They can enclose that form. You can file the form I-765 which is
the application for employment authorization, you can file I-824 which
is the application for us to notify the consulate so that the dependent
can follow in the United States, you can file I-131 which is the
application for advanced parole.  Each of those applications can be
filed with the I-485, or can be filed later at the same service center.
If you file in the same time, we recommend you attach separate checks.
Historically we brought in the situations where people start to write a
check for the total amount and miscalculate, and we have to send the
entire package back.

Q: For a relative who is at home and has never been in the United
States, and they're not qualified to be principal applicants, what will be
their ability to come to the United States?

Rita: For family members who don't qualify for CSPA adjustment of
status, whether they are in the United States or outside the U.S., they
may be eligible to obtain permanent residence based on
following-to-join. People who are not eligible under CSPA will not be
able to adjust status or get immigrant visa until visa numbers are
available under the normal course of events.  So they'll be subject to
the world-wide and the per-country visa number limitation to the quotas.
So for most people that means that the 3rd employment based category
under the skilled workers is going to have to be current for persons
born in China.

Q: Under the CSPA, there's no 2nd preference during the pendency of the
CSPA, and certainly not until after it has been approved whatever the
priority date is reached, is that correct?

Boie: That's correct. A person who is filing under the CSPA will not be
eligible to file visa petition for family members until the principal's
permanent residence has been approved.

Q: On family members following-to-join or accompanying, what if the
family member, the non-qualifying dependent is 20 now, and they're
following or accompanying, what happens on their 21 birthday? They're no
longer eligible?

Aytes: As for the family members who are applying under CSPA, we have
put a provision in the draft interim rule that anyone who was under 21
and unmarried on April 11, 1990, we will allow their eligibility to
continue. As for family members who don't qualify under CSPA, the one
who are just applying based on following-to-join, children will lose
their eligibility when they turn 21 or when they marry.

Q: Persons who have received public assistance in the past will have to
show that in the future they'll be able to do not receive public
assistance, is that right?

Boie: We'll be primarily interested in what this person is going to do
in the future.  What's happened in the past, as far as what we talk
about the public charge, the past will not be relevant in so far as
what's likely to happen in the future.

Q: If someone is still a year away from getting a professional job and
their only income is, say, teaching assistant income $15,000 a year,
they have $10,000 in savings, is that likely to be enough?

Aytes: As long as you show us you're above the poverty line, we're not
really going to concern, because they're not going to be eligible for
most benefit programs.

Q: What will happen to those family members who do not qualify for
principal applications under CSPA and who are here?

Aytes: We consider this as equivalent to most of other immigration
processes, which are separated apart from the legalization program in
the family unity statute which was passed by Congress.  We have many
individuals who are in the United States legally or illegally, have
relatives who become permanent residents, and are waiting and trying to
get permanent residence based on their relatives.  There's nothing under
the Immigration and Naturalization Act that found automatic preferential
status with regard to being able to remain in the United States or work
in the United States as a class while they're waiting to get immigration
visa.  However, based on individual discretion in our local offices,
district director can grant voluntary departure and can grant employment
authorization to individual applicant.

Q: If there's a couple, one is in H-1, one is in H-4.  They have a late
arrival child who is H-4. If both parents apply under CSPA, then they
are pending immigrants, and they are permanent residents. And the child
here in H-4 will now be out of status. Is that correct?

Boie: That will be correct. The child will have to change to other
type of status, or the other option will be, the child will be out of
status, and they could request for voluntary departure for the child.
That will be both parents applying at the same time for CSPA adjustment.

Q: If the principal files for adjustment under CSPA, and then immediately
the dependents, who are not qualified, finish off their legal status, what
would you suggest we advise them to do?

Boie: They can contact the local immigration office. There's no
application form for voluntary departure. A person can request it by
letter.  It can be requested early.  We'll recommend in order to
encourage to provide some evidence that the principal really has filed
under CSPA, they wait until they get the receipt from the Service Center
indicating that Form 485 for the principal has been accepted.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Meeting with Administration on CSPA: Late-Arrival Dependents, 90 Days
   China-Visit and CCP Membership -- News Release No.9 of NCCA ......... 100
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>From: "Ying Q. Ji" <[email-masked]> Date: Wed, 30 Jun 1993 23:52:21

             National Council on Chinese Affairs Release 009:
                  Meeting With Administration on CSPA

          FROM:     DR. HAICHING ZHAO
          DATE:     JUNE 30, 1993
          RE:       MEETING WITH ADMINISTRATION OFFICIALS
                    REGARDING THE REGULATIONS

     Today, together with Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi, I met with
representatives of the Administration to discuss outstanding concerns on
CSPA Interim Rule.  Attending from the Administration were Eric Schwartz,
Director of Global and Multilateral Affairs, National Security Council;
Phyllis Coven, Assistant to the Attorney General, Donsia Strong of the
Domestic Policy Council.  Elaine Budd were also present at the meeting.

     A summary of the points raised are as follows:

(1)  Congresswoman Pelosi expressed that she was not happy to see
     that family members were not considered to be direct
     beneficiaries under the Interim Rule.  She strongly feels that
     they should not be subject to the China quota and should be
     allowed to apply together with the principals.

     The Administration officials indicated that it was their legal
     opinion that dependents are not directly covered under the
     Act.

(2)  According to the Interim Rule, since dependents are not
     eligible for immediate adjustment of status, when the
     principal receives his or her green card, the dependents will
     not be able to maintain legal status.  In other words, they
     may be subject to deportation.  As a result, the Interim Rule
     makes provision for dependents to apply for refugee asylum or
     request voluntary departure.  Once voluntary departure is
     granted, the dependent can request employment authorization.

     However, the granting of these application for VD or work
     authorization is subject to the discretion of local INS
     officials.

     We stressed to the Administration officials that this is not
     acceptable and unfair to thousands of family members.  At
     minimum there should be some type of blanket legal status
     given to dependents until they can adjust their own status.
     It should not be left up to local INS officials to decide on
     whether an individual qualifies for voluntary departure.

     The Administration officials promised to work with us on this
     issue.  They noted that the Interim Rule gives dependents the
     same priority date as the principal.

(3)  Since dependents have to wait for the principal to receive a
     green card before they can apply, dependents in China face a
     long wait because they cannot apply for adjustment until they
     receive a Chinese passport and visa.  As a result, we asked
     that some kind of parole accommodation be made so that they
     can visit their family in the U.S.  Presently, they would not
     receive a U.S. non-immigrant visa to visit because they would
     be deemed to have immigrant intent.

     The Administration officials stated this issue is under the
     jurisdiction of the State Department.  They will speak with
     State to see if something can be done but they believe it will
     be difficult.

(4)  There is no provision in the Interim Rule for case-by-case
     review for individuals that were in China more than 90 days
     between April 11, 1990 and October 9, 1992 because of
     involuntary detention.  Involuntary detention means you were
     either too ill to leave or were prevented from leaving by
     Chinese government authorities.

     We were told by Phyllis Coven that this could be handled
     administratively and that they would issue a field directive
     to the processing centers providing for this case-by-case
     review.

(5)  There is no mention in the Interim Rule about Communist Party
     membership not being grounds for exclusion.  We had been
     earlier told that this was not a problem but we raised the
     issue again to make it clear.

     The Justice Department said that this could be taken care of
     administratively and did not need to be in the Interim Rule.
     They will either send a directive or cable instructing
     processing centers on this issue.

                          ************

     We ended the meeting by thanking Congresswoman Pelosi, Eric Schwartz,
Donsia Strong and Phyllis Coven for all their efforts.  We also thanked
the Administration officials for giving us the opportunity to present our
initial concerns on the Interim Rule.  We will follow-up our meeting and
continue to work on this issue.

     We will continue to keep you informed of how these issues are resolved.
If you have any problems as a result of the way the Interim Rule is written,
please contact us.  We will try to do all we can to make sure the problems
are minimized.  We will also continue to push on the family issue.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. IFCSS Collects Comments on INS Regulation for the CSPA Implementation  45
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>From: IFCSS HQ <[email-masked]> Date: Thu, 1 Jul 1993 15:23:12

[Editor's Note: Full text of the INS CSPA Regulation has been carried in
                CND-US CSPA Info Exchange Package XIX, July 1, 1993, please
                concerned reader send comments to the IFCSS DIRECTLY per the
                addresses listed below.]

**************************************************************
IFCSS Headquarters News Release No. 4153          July 1, 1993
            CSPA RULES AND REGULATIONS PUBLISHED
**************************************************************
Independent Federation of Chinese Students and Scholars (IFCSS)
   733 15th Street, N.W., Suite 440, Washington, D.C.20005
         Tel. (202)347-0017  Fax: (202)347-0018
                Email: [email-masked]

            CSPA Rules and Regulations Published
            ====================================

Dear fellow Chinese students and scholars:

     In today's Federal Register, (v.58, July 1, 1993), the Interim
Rules for the implementation of CSPA, were published. It is a long
document (eight pages). Since all IFCSS HQ officers are in Lexington
Kentucky for the 5th Congress, we are not able to release the content
of the Regulations in the computer network, nor can we provide a
complete analysis of the Regulations at this time.

     Since the there will be a one month public comment period, the
IFCSS HQ urge the CSS nationwide to send comments to the HQ. We are
planning to have a conference with Congressional offices, the White
House and the INS after we come back from Kentucky.

     (The rules can be found on page 35832).

     Thanks.

                 IFCSS Headquarters Office

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
4. On Late-Arrival Dependents: IFCSS's Position and Work ............... 170
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>From: IFCSS HQ <[email-masked]>   Mon, 28 Jun 1993 19:16:36

       **************************************************************
       IFCSS Headquarters News Release No. 4149         June 28, 1993
           IFCSS'S WORK ON THE ISSUE OF LATE-ARRIVING DEPENDENTS
       **************************************************************
      Independent Federation of Chinese Students and Scholars (IFCSS)
          733 15th Street, N.W., Suite 440, Washington, D.C.20005
                   Tel. (202)347-0017  Fax: (202)347-0018
                          Email: [email-masked]

           IFCSS's Work on the Issue of Late Arriving Dependents
           =====================================================

     From day one of the CSPA implementation, the IFCSS has given top
priority to the issue of late-arriving dependents. On Feb. 18, during our
first meeting with INS, we made it clear that we wanted the late arriving
dependents to be allowed to apply together with the principal applicants.
This appeal, however, was originally not given enough attention. Towards the
end of April, the first draft was circulated among related government
agencies, but no arrangement was made for late-arriving dependents. Upon
hearing the news, we acted swiftly. Xiao Geng and Baoping He, as IFCSS
President and Vice-president, send letters to Secretary of State
Christopher, Attorney General Reno, and Mr. Anthony Lake, Assistant to the
President for National Security Affairs, calling for their immediate
attention to the issue. Meanwhile, Heping Shi, IFCSS Director of Government
Affairs, maintained contact with Senator Gorton and Senator Kennedy's
offices on a daily basis to coordinate the effort. Later on, Geng Xiao also
sent a letter to Congresswoman Pelosi regarding the issue. Considering that
the law was written in such a strict way that only those who were themselves
under the protection of the Executive Order would be eligible for PR under
CSPA, we set it as our bottom line that these dependents should be allowed
to stay and given work permits. By the middle of May, we have learned
through informed sources that the late-arriving dependents would be allowed
to continue with a legal status in the U.S..

     At the same time, the revised draft of the Regulations were sent to INS
General Counsel for review. As soon as the General Counsel received the
draft, IFCSS got in touch with the office.  Heping Shi had several telephone
conversations with Ms. Beate Ort, Assistant General Counsel in charge of the
review, and stressed that no late-arriving dependents should be allowed to
fall out of status. Ms. Ort replied that the General Counsel had already
learned IFCSS's position from other sources and would consider it very
carefully.

     Although we had learned the good news through informed sources, we did
not relax. On May 28th, the IFCSS HQ staff went to the White House to meet
with Mr. Kent Wiedemann, Special Assistant to the President and the Senior
Director of Asian Affairs of the National Security Council, and once again
raised the issue. Before we left, Mr. Wiedemann assured us that he would
help us to seek a solution.

     On June 2, Qingsong Zhang and Heping Shi went to INS HQ to meet with
Mr. Duarte, Director of Examination Operations, who indicated that the
dependents would be allowed to stay and that something like a "family
fairness" program would be probably developed after the implementation
started. He was very understanding.

     On June 25, during her telephone conversation with Heping Shi, Ms.
Philis Coven, Assistant Attorney General, formally confirmed that the
late-arriving dependents would be allowed to stay and work. Ms. Coven also
mentioned that the Regulations might be published in one to two days. After
getting this information, the IFCSS HQ contacted Senator Gorton and Senator
Kennedy's offices.  While expressing the appreciation on behalf of the
Chinese students nationwide, the IFCSS HQ asked for their advice as to how
to pursue the issue further. Both offices felt that from a legal point of
view, it is very hard to include the late-arriving dependents.

     On June 25, we learned through e-mail that Dr. Haiqing Zhao had talked
with some White House official and demanded that changes be made in the
Regulations so that late-arriving dependents would be allowed to apply with
the principal applicants. The IFCSS HQ held a meeting over the weekend and
decided that the best thing to do was to urge the White House to go ahead
with the implementation.

     On June 28 Heping Shi contacted INS HQ, Senator Gorton and Senator
Kennedy's offices and asked them to push for the early approval of the
regulations. Later on, Heping Shi talked with Mr. Eric Schwartz, who is in
charge of issues related to the CSPA implementation at the National Security
Council where the regulations are currently being held up, and informed him
that the official position of IFCSS is that the White House give green light
to the Regulations. Heping Shi added that since what would be published were
Interim Regulations which would allow a public comment period, the related
parties could very well continue to discuss the issue after the students
started to apply.

     Right now, we are following the issue closely and trying our best to
have the Regulations published before July 1.

     The following list contains some of the reasons why the IFCSS has taken
the current approach.

     1. July 1st is drawing near. Currently, opposition to the CSPA is being
built up. In fact, our friends in Congress told us that many senators and
congressmen now believed that they made a mistake in letting the legislation
pass. The actual number of potential applicants is certainly much greater
than they assumed. Under such a situation, further delay may complicate the
whole implementation process.

     2. What will be published are Interim Regulations, which means that a
public comment period will be allowed and changes can still be made after
the implementation starts. In fact, the use of interim regulations was
designed to allow early processing of applications, considering that time is
limited. Had the Interim Regulations not been used, the processing would
have to follow the public comment period, which of course would result in a
very late start.

     3. Before the Regulations were drafted, we anticipated a hard battle
over the benefits for late-arriving dependents. Had we insisted on
simultaneous application, controversies would have been generated about the
legislation itself, as the law clearly indicates that only those who are
under the protection of the Exe.  Order are eligible for immediate
consideration for PR. Therefore, from the very beginning, we chose to pursue
the issue from a humanitarian stand. Given the American emphasis on family
values, we believed that this point would be well taken. And so it was.

     4. The last thing we want to do is to drag out the legislation for
reinterpretation. What we can do is to point out to the U.S.  Government
that although the late-arriving dependents are allowed to stay, the issue is
still there. Therefore, the earlier it is resolved, the better. It is
impossible that they will have to wait for 16 years. There has never been
such a precedent in the American immigration history.

     5. The inclusion of late-arriving dependents does not increase
available visa numbers. While there is a possibility to obtain visa numbers
for them through some other channels, we are not in a hurry to let them
share the 46,000 visa numbers available this year.

     6. We have to be aware how much has been gained on the late-arriving
dependents issue. In February, INS was telling us that the dependents
themselves have to maintain their non-immigrant status, that these
dependents had to go back to China before they could be considered for PR
and that they could not be allowed to work when they were in the U.S.. We
must also be aware that the tremendous task of processing tens of thousands
of applications is still ahead for INS. We want to ensure its maximum
cooperation throughout the implementation process. So far, the INS HQ has
been reasonably accommodating to our requests, but pushing the issue to the
extreme within a short period of time may very well give rise to resentment.
After all, it is highly likely that we will have to rely on INS to develop
some special program for the late-arriving dependents.

                                   * * *

     The IFCSS understands the feelings of those who are worried about their
dependents. The HQ staff has its own share of the concern over this issue.
We will continue to work for more satisfactory solution for the dependents
inside China as well as those who have arrived here. However, we have to be
rational. More often than not, problems have to be solved one by one.

                         IFCSS Headquarters Office

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
5. The Position and Activity of ZHAO Hai-Qing (NCCA NR No.5) ........... 260
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>From: Ying Q. Ji <[email-masked]>  Sun, 27 Jun 1993 22:29:35

                  THE NATIONAL COUNCIL ON CHINESE AFFAIRS

                             News Release No. 5

     FROM:     DR. HAICHING ZHAO
     RE:       THE ISSUE OF FAMILY DEPENDENTS

     In an earlier E-mail I released the issue of late-arrival family
dependents of CSPA principals as well as those in China.  According to
current INS draft of the CSPA regulations these family members will NOT be
allowed to file the adjustment application at the same time with their
principals and their application will be subject to China quota from the
employment based third preference.  This quota will come down to roughly
2500 per year (7% of world quota, less 300 the CSPA borrows).  If the
preliminary estimate that there are 40,000 dependents involved, this would
mean, according to experts' calculation, family members would have to wait
for 16 years at the worst to be able to apply and be granted the permanent
residency, not to mention that many inside China will also apply for
permanent residency from the same category.  Even though INS will provide a
limbo status for dependents while they are waiting in the U.S., there remain
serious problems.  Some of the main problems of the current INS approach are
analyzed here:

     (1) Under the current draft, the dependents would not be able to file
their applications immediately.  They will be subject to China quota.
Currently, there are at least two or more years of backlog in both China
employment-based third preference and family-based second preference where
these dependents will file their applications.

     What does this mean? It means that this group of people, primarily
women and children, will have to wait for at least 2 years, many as long as
more than 10 or even 15 years before they can have their status adjusted.

     Meanwhile, there are extreme difficulties and hardship exerted to this
group of people.

     Example 1: Under current immigration law, minor children have to be
under age of 21 at the time of adjustment (not at the time of application)
in order to qualify as dependent.  A child at 15 year old will qualify as
dependent now, but if he/she has to wait under China quota for more than 6
years to have his/her visa number available, he/she will have disqualified
as a dependent then since he/she would be older than 21 year old.

     Example 2: During this long waiting period, there are numerous
unforeseen difficulties to the dependents.  Children would not be qualified
to receive many scholarship benefits in school or reduced tuition in public
schools since they do not have PR status.  Dependents would not be able to
travel back to China easily for many years.  Once you file adjustment
application, you should not leave the country until your application is
approved, because if you do, you automatically give up your application
unless you have written approval from INS which might be increasingly
difficult to obtain.

     (2) The current INS draft will not only put dependents in the U.S. in
limbo, it will also severely hurt the dependents who are currently in China.
Since the draft requires dependents to be subject to China quota, one can
imagine that dependents in the U.S.  can soon take up employment-based third
preference and family-based second preference China quota for many years.
This means the dependents currently in China would not be able to get their
visa number for many years until almost all the dependents here obtain their
visa numbers first.  At the same time, they would not be able to obtain
easily any nonimmigrant visa to come to U.S. to join their family.

     (3) The current INS draft will also have negative impact on many
Chinese nationals both in the U.S. and in China who are planning to apply
adjustment of status in the future under employment-based third preference
or family-based second preference simply because the China quota under these
two categories would not be available for many, many years.

     This group of people who will feel negative impact and will have to
wait for many years for visa number includes (a) people who came here after
April 11, 1990, many of them may qualify for employment-based third
preference China quota in the future; (b) the dependents of this group of
people who are in China may also qualify for family-based second preference
China quota in the future; (c) people in China who may want to apply for
immigrant visa in the future using China quota under employment-based third
preference.  All these people would not be able to adjust simply because the
China quota would have been taken by the dependents in the U.S. for many,
many years.

     (4) The current INS approach will also hurt many principals under the
Act who do not have dependents now.  Why?  Many young students who are
covered by the bill are not married.  There is a disproportional large
number of young male students in our community.  Many of them will get
married in the next few years.  Their future spouses could be here or in
China.  Pretty soon, they will realize that under the current INS approach,
their newly-weds will either be in limbo state for many years if they are
already here in the U.S. or they will not be able to easily come to U.S. to
join their loved ones simply because the China quota under which they
qualify would not be available for many, many years.

     Our position on this issue has been consistent and firm: the family
dependents should be covered in the Act and be allowed to file their
application together with their principals.  They should not be subject to
China quota.  To separate family members from applying with their principals
is against the humanitarian spirit in general and against the humanitarian
nature of the United States immigration spirit of family union in specific
(technically, Section 203(d) of the Immigration and Naturalization Act), and
is also astray from the spirit of the CSPA legislation which provides us the
status.

     We maintain that the family members in China should also be allowed to
follow to join at the same time. For otherwise these family members
immigration intent.

     In the meeting we had in the White House last week, this issue was
seriously raised and was seriously received.  We will continue to push on
this issue to satisfaction.

     Since this issue was surfaced in public a few days ago, there has been
some misunderstanding and controversy surrounding it.  We would like to
briefly address some of the common concerns here:

     (1) Some worry that by pushing for dependents will negatively impact on
principals.

     Not true, since principals are not subject to China quota.

     (2) Some worry that pushing for more will negatively affect our image.

     Quite to the contrary.  In the U.S. political arena, we have already
been criticized as a group of "elitist" that we only care about people with
Ph.D. and advanced degrees.  The democrats who are in power also have the
tradition to care about family unity.  By pushing for family dependent issue
will show that our care is based on a humanitarian level and gain respect
from U.S. public.  However, if we demonstrate that we don't even care about
our own family members and children who are most vulnerable, it can only
hurt our image as a whole and give our opponents more ammunition to show
that we are indeed a group of selfish "elitists".

     (3) Some worry that pushing for dependent issue would further delay the
regulations.

     It may or may not, depending on how fast this issue can be resolved.
The regulation was already delayed when we first requested White House
interference on the first INS draft more than a month ago.  As a
consequence, the annual quota number available to Chinese nationals has been
dramatically increased.

     If the current push would delay the regulation but will bring the
beneficial results for people involved, it certainly would be a good thing.

     (4) Some also advocate that principals have the priority and should be
allowed to adjust their status regardless whether dependents are covered or
not.

     No!  This is selfish and immoral!  The dependents, mostly women and
children, are the most vulnerable group in terms of seeking protection.
Many principals are capable enough to seek adjustment even on their own.
However, if the dependents are not covered, most of them would have nowhere
to go but stay in limbo.  During a war, when troops need to move to a safe
place, they will move the women and children first.  It is unthinkable to
seek protection yourself and leave the weak and the unprotected behind.

     As stated above, our position regarding this issue is firm and clear.
We strongly call on YOU, those on whom your family members depend, and those
who feel the life of your family is indispensably connected to the life of
yourself, regardless if you are a CSPA principal or not, and those who have
general sympathy and understanding of family value, to express your support,
to us and to other media, of our efforts to push the Administration to
revise the regulations and include late-arrival family dependents.

     There are those with whom we disagree, content with the current
situation and believe that our efforts might jeopardize the whole
legislation itself.  But on the contrary, it is unbelievable and adverse
indeed that we consider our family members less important than ourselves.
And with that, our image will be damaged with the perception that our family
is not an integral part of our lives.  We are not simply asking more above
what we have been granted; we are pursuing what is reasonable, acceptable
and righteous in the standard of human value.  And we strongly stress the
fact that family value of the Chinese community is no different from that of
any other communities.

     Here, I would like to make my commitment on this issue clear to the
public.  When I push for this, it is because in my heart I truly believe
this is the right and principled thing to do.  In the past, we have tackled
many controversial issues.  When we advocated human rights conditions on MFN
status, there were criticism.  We continued and succeeded with President
Clinton signing executive order and hundreds of political prisoners released
in the last few years.  When we first pushed for J-1 waiver bill, we were
criticized as being selfish.  We disregarded that and succeeded with
protecting Chinese nationals in the U.S.  Today, on the family dependent
issue, we may face misunderstanding and even criticism.  We understand the
anxiety some may have and will try our best to explain what we are doing.
At the same time, due to the urgent nature of this matter, we will continue
to push on this issue since we believe this is the right thing to do.

     Finally, there is a technical information we need the most and urgently
in order to effectively pursue our effort.  WE NEED TO HAVE AN ESTIMATE OF
HOW MANY DEPENDENTS ARE HERE IN THE U.S.!

     We need your help in this regard and we have set up a special E-mail
account to quickly collect the information.  If you have late-arrival
dependents in your family or you are one of yourself, please complete the
following survey form in this E-mail and send it to the following E-mail
address as soon as possible:

           [email-masked]

     You can also reply to this E-mail address:

          [email-masked]

     Name: _________________________

     Mailing address: ____________________

                      ____________________

                      ____________________

     Tel: _____________________

     e-mail address: ____________________

     ______ I am a CSPA principal, I have ___ late-arrival family
dependent(s) in the U.S., and I have ___ dependent(s) in China.

     ______ I am a late-arrival dependent myself.  There are ____ dependents
in my family.

     Note: Late-arrival dependents are those spouses and minor children
under 21 years old who came to the U.S. after April 11, 1990 to join their
family in the U.S.

     You are also encouraged to write a brief description about your
dependents' situation and difficulties and send to us via E- mail.

     For further information regarding this issue, please contact Mr. Song
directly at (202) 835-1885.

+--------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|    Editor of This Issue: Bo Xiong,   Coordinating Editor: Zuofeng Li     |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------+
l
|  China News Digest (CND) offers the following services:                  |
|     (1) Global News (daily)        (2) US Regional News                  |
|     (3) Canada Regional News       (4) Europe & Pacific Regional News    |
|     (5) Hua Xia Wen Zhai (a weekly Chinese magazine)                     |
|     (6) several information packages.                                    |
|  For subscription information, mail to: [email-masked]                 |
|  To get help, mail to:                  [email-masked]                 |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------+