Comments on: U.S. raising fees for both inbound and outbound travelers

By: State Dept. brushes off critics, raises passport fees

State Dept. brushes off critics, raises passport fees — Thu, 01 Jul 2010 10:06:25 +0000

[...] week the Department of State published an interim final rule putting its previously proposed increases in passport and visa fees into effect as of July 13, [...]

By: Airlines, travel agencies, Congress join public outcry against passport fee increase

Mon, 15 Mar 2010 15:32:08 +0000

[...] from the response to the government’s latest proposal to increase passport fees (in order to cover the increased costs of including a uniquely-numbered remotely-readable RFID chip [...]

By: Consumer Travel Alliance » Airlines, travel agencies, Congress join public outcry against passport fee increase

Mon, 15 Mar 2010 11:11:32 +0000

[...] from the response to the government’s latest proposal to increase passport fees (in order to cover the increased costs of including a uniquely-numbered remotely-readable RFID chip [...]

By: Scott

Scott — Thu, 04 Mar 2010 09:59:58 +0000

Forget about the visitors. What about our own government essentially extorting its own citizens who travel? THAT is the main issue of importance here. As Joel noted, Americans have to pay ridiculously more than any other country to travel abroad because of the ridiculous amounts the Bush Administration started charging foreign visa applicants. Oh, and those applicants have to pay the $131 whether they are approved or not. Raising passport costs, not allowing frequent travelers to get extra visa pages, and now charging exorbitantly for that? There is just no reason for it other than extortion.

By: Vacationagent

Vacationagent — Wed, 03 Mar 2010 17:44:05 +0000

@Joel and em – The USA issues more than 25 different types of visas based on the traveler’s purpose of entry. Any one of those types of visas has different criteria the visitor must meet in order for the visa to be granted – i.e. their suitability to visit or eligibility for a visa. I doubt that the criteria is racial in nature. Here’s an example of our visa requirements: For a basic visitor’s visa, we would require the visitor to have demonstrable evidence of enough money to support himself while here and strong ties like property ownership in his home country so that he will return.

This article is about encouraging people to visit the USA. I’m totally in favor of that. The writer goes on to talk about our supposed dracion process for visas and seems to propose loosening those requirements. I do not favor that. Furthermore, I think there is a giant disconnect between what the writer lead his article with and what he ended his article with.

By: Joel Wechsler

Joel Wechsler — Tue, 02 Mar 2010 20:15:22 +0000

I think @em Hoop has it right. Unless you’re talking racial profiling I don’t see how a determination of “suitability” can be made on a reliable, consistent basis. This sounds very much like another example of security theater.

By: em Hoop

em Hoop — Tue, 02 Mar 2010 19:52:42 +0000

Poor people don’t spend any more than absolutely necessary. I know, i was once “poor” myself.
Now that i can afford to travel internationally, I understand that the goal is to bring in the people who will drop the most money in the tin cup of whichever country one visits.
In the US, we can’t even keep track of prison parolees. Whatever makes you think our systems are more efficient at tracking/ weeding out the “suitable visitors” from the not-so-suitable??? Especially 2 point whatever million of overstaying visitors.
This is a new world to me, where people are sorted out only by the criterion of what they MIGHT do. Sounds rather dictatorial to me.(Being sorted out by what one can afford is not a surprise anymore). Just exactly who has the crystal ball that determines what the “unsuitable” traveler MIGHT do? More likely, this is just another way to create more jobs in government. Or,as in UK, it’s a way to make each agency collect fees equivalent to the cost of each service the agency provides. In a country where babies’ nappies and bottles of formula excite the hunting instinct, I guess anything is possible, but I’ll be surprised to read an article in the NYT bragging on how many people were kept out of this country because they MIGHT overstay their welcome.

By: Vacationagent

Vacationagent — Tue, 02 Mar 2010 17:47:48 +0000

@Joel Wechsler – the GAO estimates the resident overstay population at 2.3 million people as of 2000. That figure will be the starting point for the 2010 census. That figure does not include shortterm overstays who have not established residency, nor does it include unknown numbers from Canada and Mexico. I think it is pretty safe to say that overstaying visas is a significant problem.

The purpose of the visa fee is to cover the cost of determining whether or not a visa applicant is a suitable visitor. The purpose of the fee is not to make it so high that only a rich person (without regard to that person’s suitability as a visitor) can afford to apply.

By: Joel Wechsler

Joel Wechsler — Tue, 02 Mar 2010 16:04:01 +0000

@Vacationagent What is your source for the statement that “thousands and thousands of ‘visitors’ enter the USA and disappear…”? And do you think that a high fee for a visa is going to prevent that, if it is indeed a problem of major proportions?
@Nathan I am inclined to agree that the injection of a presumed racial bias in the discussion of the VWP in unnecessary. However, I think you are kidding yourself if you believe that high visa fees and other onerous procedures are doing much to identify threats or people who are likely to overstay. Mostly what these fees do is provoke retaliation. For example, I visited Chile 4 years ago and was surprised to find that I had to pay a newly instituted $131 entry fee. My friends there told me that this was imposed because the U.S. charged Chileans that amount for a visa.

By: Nathan

Nathan — Tue, 02 Mar 2010 09:21:07 +0000

Mr. Hasbrouck,

Yes, this specific fee is for advertising. However, I believe Vacationagent was referring to you remark about “the xenophobic rules and procedures that make it so difficult and expensive to get permission to travel to the USA” – most of the rules and procedures are in place to determine whether the applicants will overstay visas, or be threats. Flawed as they may be, I for one am glad such “rules and procedures” are in place, regardless of the (regrettable) expense and inconvenience for travelers, or the erroneous perception of xenophobia some may complain about.

Also, nice of you to inject some perception of racism – noting that the visa waiver program is “limited to a short list of mostly-wealthy most-favored nations, most of them populated mostly by white-skinned people”. Statistically, this is true but… the largest VWP nation is Japan, not famous for being overly white. Neither is the nearly fifty million strong population of South Korea. Or Singapore. Or Brunei. But, I digress. If we’re racists about our visa waiver policy, we’re incompetent racists. You should have stopped at “mostly-wealthy most-favored nations”, which is not terribly misleading by itself. Note that pretty much every first-world nation has similar visa waiver criteria, in terms of which countries get favored treatment, and which don’t.

It seems as though you, Mr. Hasbrouck, are complaining about all of the costs associated with security for traveling internationally, and implying that the government is “presumably” and “ostensibly” doing what they say, despite absence of evidence to the contrary. Also, alleging “de facto” exit visa requirements (actually, these are entrance visa requirements, we have no control over anyone leaving another country unless they are entering the USA’s jurisdiction). And, alleging minimum $200 visa costs (try zero in some cases, $131 in many common tourist/business cases).

Seems like a reactionary agenda against improving security of travel and immigration at work here. On the bright side, I would like to thank you for the contact info, I will use it to express support for improved security and immigration controls.