The Foreign Service Journal, September 2013

THE FOREIGN SERVICE JOURNAL | SEPTEMBER 2013 41 In the meantime, while the lawyers had been “agreeing to disagree,” thousands of foreign-born children over the years were receiving citizenship by taking advantage of this loop- hole. In Caracas, where we both served, this loophole was so popular that we were processing several such cases every day. In fact, when we arrived, the post was actively promoting this loophole to applicants who did not have enough physical pres- ence to transmit citizenship to their children. Apart from the fact that the situation often confused our applicants, the way the department required us to implement the provision created more work and extra costs for everyone involved, by requiring the involvement of the immigrant visa section for “non-immigration” cases. We began by spending 10 to 15 minutes ascertaining whether each applicant had enough documentation to satisfy the physical presence requirement. When they didn’t, we would then spend at least another five minutes explaining to each of them how to exploit the loophole. First, the applicants had to make an appointment with the immigrant visa unit, then file the necessary paperwork and pay the fees for an immigrant visa for their child (even though they weren’t planning to immigrate). Once they received that, they had to travel to the United States with the child to demonstrate the intent to “immigrate” (even though they were only planning on staying for a few days). The applicant would typically have to find someone with an address in the United States as their putative residence, where USCIS could then send them an expensive green card with high-security features. Upon receiving that documentation, the parents would then make another appointment at the American Citizens Ser- vices section, where they would apply for a passport and turn in their green card for destruction. Given the fact that this process went against the process of USCIS, created more work for consular sections at post, and made our laws seem arbitrary and confusing, why was the State Department supporting this? Cue the Lobbyists Another reason the department lawyers gave for their interpretation of the CCA was the influence of lobbying groups of American citizens living abroad, such as the Association of Americans Resident Overseas, American Citizens Abroad and the Federation of American Women’s Clubs Overseas. One of the main goals of these organizations, in addition to exempt- ing Americans living abroad from paying U.S. taxes, is to