What's Next for Overseas American Voters? (January 2005)

On September 18, 2005, the German people elected a new government. At the time of writing (the beginning of September) with the campaign running in high gear, the outcome of the election is still unclear. But how did it come to new elections a year earlier than expected according to German law? Many Germans asked themselves the same question in June 2005 when Chancellor Schröder first unveiled his plans, whose results would ultimately lead to new elections a year ahead of schedule.

The key to the problems began (or, rather, one could say ended) with the May 2005 election outcome in the state of Nordrhein-Westfalen, in which the then ruling state government coalition of the SPD (Social Democrats—more liberal) and the Green Party lost to the CDU (Christian Democrats—more conservative). With the ending of the last Red (SPD)/Green (Green Party) coalition state government, the federal Red/Green coalition lost its last support on the state level.

Since the SPD and the Green Party had already lost control in the Bundesrat (Upper House of Parliament), this new situation presented an impossible political situation for Chancellor Schröder. With no control in any state government and no control in the Bundesrat, Schröder faced another 17 months of governmental deadlock until the next scheduled elections in September 2006, which would have only created detrimental effects on the German economy and society.

The German Grundgesetz (Basic Law) prevents the Bundestag (Lower House of Parliament) from dissolving itself to provide political stability; however, it does provide two options per Articles 68 and 63 so that the Bundestag can be dissolved. According to Article 68, the Chancellor can call for a Vote of Confidence in the Bundestag, which if he does not win by an absolute majority, he can then ask the President to dissolve the Bundestag. The President has 21 days to make this decision. This has happened only two previous times in recent German history in 1972 and 1982.

This option can be tricky for the Chancellor because he needs to organize the votes of his party members so that a certain number either abstain or are not present for the voting. Conceivably, members of the opposition might be opposed to the dissolution of the Bundestag and, consequently, vote in favor of the Chancellor.

Per Article 63, the Chancellor could also resign his post. In this case, the President would have to nominate a replacement for the remainder of the legislative period, who could only be elected by an absolute majority of the Bundestag. If an absolute majority is not reached, the Bundestag has 2 weeks to nominate a member from its own ranks who must enjoy the support of ¼ of the Bundestag members. If this candidate receives an absolute majority of votes from the Bundestag, the President has 7 days to appoint him Chancellor. If this candidate fails to get an absolute majority, the President has 7 days to nevertheless appoint him Chancellor or alternatively to dissolve the Bundestag.

On July 1, 2005, Chancellor Schröder opted to go with Article 68 and called for a Vote of Confidence in the Bundestag, which he lost. Out of the 595 Bundestag members present for voting, 151 members from the SPD and Green Parties voted in favor of the Chancellor and 148 members from the SPD and Green Parties abstained. From the CDU/CSU Parties, 296 members voted against the Chancellor. Having not received an absolute majority in his favor, Schröder requested President Köhler to dissolve the Bundestag, which Köhler then did on July 21, paving the way for new elections on September 18, 2005.

If the German voters re-elect the SPD and the Green Party, it will be a renewed support of the governmental policies pursued by this coalition. However, if the voters go for the CDU/CSU/FDP parties, it will give them an unusual power base considering their majority in the Bundesrat. Other power constellations cannot be ruled out, for example, the newly formed Leftist Party (Die Linkspartei), a loose coalition of the PDS (former Communist party) and the WASG, a liberal-oriented party headed up by former SPD member Oskar Lafontaine might drum up enough votes to become powerful coalition partners as well.

They say that hindsight is 20/20 and with the elections over and the new government elected, you know whether Schröder's plan paid off. I still have to wait two weeks.

Information for this article was taken from, Informationen zur politischen Bildung, 2. Quartal 2005, Vol. 287.

  What's Next for Overseas American Voters? (January 2005)

  Biometric Requirement for Foreign Passports Extended (January 2005)

  US-VISIT (U.S. Visitor and Immigrant Status Indicator Technology) Update

By September 30, 2004, foreign visitors traveling under the Visa Waiver Program (VWP) will be enrolled in the US-Visitor and Immigrant Status Indicator Technology (US-VISIT) program upon arrival at all U.S. airports and seaports. Previously only foreign visitors traveling to the U.S. on a visa were enrolled in the US-VISIT program.

The program enhances the security of both entry and exit systems in and out of the U.S. by enabling verification of the identity of incoming and outgoing visitors. Upon arrival the visitor’s identity is validated by digital scanning of the left and right index fingers and by taking a digital photograph. These procedures add only seconds to the overall processing time. Upon departure the visitor checks out by scanning the visa and/or passport and by repeating the finger scanning. Exit identity is verified and compliance with the terms of the visa and/or 90 day stay allowable under the VWP is confirmed. Exit information is added to the visitor’s travel records, and compliance reflects upon future entries into the U.S.

Entry procedures are currently in place at 115 airports and 14 seaports. As of the fall of 2004 exit procedures are being piloted at 13 airports and 3 seaports. Entry procedures will be implemented at the 50 busiest land ports by December 31, 2004, and to all 165 land ports by December 31, 2005.

For more information, see the following websites: www.dhs.gov/us-visit, www.dhs.gov/dhspublic, or http://travel.state.gov.

  Hamburg Goes to the Polls (February 2004)

Some said it was only a matter of time before Hamburg’s coalition government of the CDU (Christliche Demokratische Union), the FDP (Freie Demokratische Partei) and the Schill-Partei (Partei Rechtstaatlicher Offensive) came to as dramatic an end as it began. It began in September 2001 when the CDU joined with the above-mentioned parties in a coalition government, the first CDU-led government in Hamburg in 44 years.

The Schill-Partei was new on the political scene in Hamburg in 2001. It was founded just prior to the election by Ronald Barnabas Schill, otherwise known as Hamburg’s “Merciless Judge” (Richter Gnadenlos). His party ran on a platform that verged on being right-extremist, standing behind foreigner bashing and a strong police state. He was able to rally enough disgruntled and desperate voters behind him to win 19.4% of the vote. This, coupled with poor voter turnout, mostly on the side of SPD voters, led to the victory enjoyed by the CDU and its soon-to-be partners. Ironically, Schill’s party won more seats in the Hamburg parliament than it had party members.

Although the CDU did not win the majority of the votes, it was able to gather a majority with the help of its coalition partners. The SPD (Sozialdemokratische Partei Deutschlands), which won the highest percentage of the votes, however, was unable to form an acceptable coalition with any of the other parties to retain its control of the government.

The coalition collapsed because of the antics of Schill-Partei founder Schill. After numerous scandals involving Schill, he brought the page to a close himself when he tried to blackmail Hamburg mayor and governor, Ole von Beust. Now that the coalition has collapsed, many are saying that the CDU was too power-hungry and entered into a coalition with an unstable partner to win the election at any cost. Others believe that such a coalition was a necessary step to improve Hamburg politics. Whoever might have been right, the coalition collapsed and new elections are facing Hamburg voters.

What are the issues? Well, among the reasons for the collapse of the former government are issues surrounding Family Politics (KiTa Gutschein) and School Politics (Arbeitszeitmodel). Scandals involving these areas caused the resignation of former Minster of Education Rudolf Lange (FDP) in October 2003. Security issues will also play an important role. Speakers for the CDU claim that the junkie and drug dealer scene, which formerly plagued Hamburg’s main train station (Hauptbahnhof), has been decimated. Critics point out that the problem has just moved elsewhere (Wilhelmsburg, Harburg and Langenhorn to name a few places).

Campaigning for the new elections slated for February 29 began in December 2003 when the former coalition broke apart. The CDU hopes to win enough votes to retain control of the government and will stick with Ole von Beust as its candidate. The SPD, on the other hand, has nominated Thomas Mirow, former senator of economics, as its candidate. To make it confusing, Ronald Schill has been expelled from his original party and in retaliation has united with Bolko Hoffmann to form the new PRO DM/ Schill party, and the parties disagree over the right to use Schill’s name.

If elections were held at the time of writing (January 11, 2004), here is how the votes would fall: CDU 47%, SPD 30%, GAL (Green Party) 11%, FDP 2% and Schill-Partei 2% (a minimum of 5% of the vote is required to gain seats in Parliament and form part of a coalition government). In such a configuration, the CDU would be forced to join in a coalition with the Greens or the SPD in order to retain control. These two parties, however, have renounced governing in such a coalition. Ideally, the SPD and the Greens would like join together to form a red-green coalition and regain control of the government; but with numbers such as these, it will be a hard campaign.

If you cannot wait for the election results, just tune in at 18:00 on February 29 to any of the public TV or radio stations (ARD, NDR, ZDF, etc.) for the first voting results. And if you are an eligible Hamburg voter, please be sure to exercise your civic duty and help contribute to the new government in the city in which we all live.

Citizenship

Under the current law, children with U.S. citizenship born in Germany (or anywhere abroad) are only able to pass U.S. citizenship on to their children if they spend five years residing in the United States, two years of which must be after age 12. The following changes will allow U.S. citizen grandparents to apply for naturalization of grandchildren whose U.S. citizen parents have not met this five-year residency requirement.

Naturalization of Grandchildren born overseas whose U.S. citizen parent has not met the 5-year physical presence requirement of Section 301(g) of the Immigration & Naturalization Act (INA)

• "Expeditious" Naturalization using the Grandmother/Grandfather Clause under Section 322 of the INA: In this case, the grandparent who has met the physical presence requirement of living five years in the U.S., two years of which are after the age of 14, may transfer U.S. citizenship onto the grandchild living outside of the U.S. The application is made from abroad to the Bureau of Citizenship and Immigration Services (BCIS), which is a part of the newly created Department of Homeland Security (DHS). The new website address effective March 1, 2003, is http://www.immigration.gov/graphics/index.htm. There you can download information and application forms. Applications are sent from overseas to one of the 55 sub-offices in the U.S. of your choosing. Smaller offices in the Northeast have been recommended to be quicker in the processing. When the application has been processed, the child in the custody of the U.S. citizen parent travels to the U.S. for a short interview and ceremony to take an oath of allegiance. At this time a certificate of citizenship is given to the child. With this certificate in hand, the child may immediately apply for a U.S. passport at a local U.S. Passport Office or overseas at a U.S. Embassy. The entire process must be completed before the child's 18th birthday.
  
• "Automatic" Naturalization under the Child Citizenship Act of 2000 Section 320: In this case, the foreign born child under the age of 18 years who did not acquire U.S. citizenship at birth legally enters the U.S. on an Immigrant Visa in the custody of the U.S. citizen parent. The Immigrant Visa is issued by the State Department (http://travel.state.gov/) at an U.S. Embassy. A permanent place of residence in the U.S. must be given on the application form for the Immigrant Visa and the form must be filled out correctly. The child is admitted to the U.S. as a lawful permanent resident (LPR) with intention to reside in the U.S. Upon entry into the U.S., the Immigration authorities stamp the child's foreign passport. At that point in time, the child "automatically" becomes a U.S. citizen. With this red endorsement stamp (I-551) and documentation of a certified copy of the child's foreign birth certificate and the parent's U.S. passport, the child may immediately apply for a U.S. passport. That preferably should be done while in the U.S. at a U.S. Passport Agency since a U.S. citizen must enter and leave the U.S. on a U.S. passport. However, the passport may be obtained abroad at a U.S. Embassy. The U.S. passport is the only proof of U.S. citizenship. No certificate of citizenship is given. Citizenship is acquired on the day that all conditions have been met. It is not retroactive to birth. This entire process provides a loophole in the law since no length of the duration of the stay in the U.S. is stated. However, the intention is that the child born overseas is coming to the U.S. to reside there permanently. Adopted children may also qualify if they have been in the legal custody and residing with the U.S. citizen parent for two years (Section 101(b)(1) of the INA).
  
• Naturalization of the child born overseas when the U.S. citizen parent is deceased: Public Law 107-273 amended Section 322(a) of the INA under Section 11030B November 2, 2002. The naturalization process was made a little more flexible to allow the U.S. citizen grandparent or legal guardian to transfer U.S. citizenship onto the American child born abroad by applying for naturalization.
  

Selective Service Registration

All male U.S. citizens regardless of where they live must register within a time period of 30 days before to 30 days after the 18th birthday. Late registrations are accepted, but not after the 26th birthday. Those who do not register within the 60-day window of time around the 18th birthday are technically in violation of the law.

Registration may be done online at http://www.sss.gov/ or at any U.S. Embassy or Consular Office when living overseas.

Registration at a U.S. Embassy

When living overseas, it is advisable to register at your U.S. Embassy or Consular Office. This registration may be done online by filling in a simple form at http://www.usembassy.de/. Having registered helps if you lose your passport as the replacement process is made easier and speeded up.

Registration is also advantageous for census purposes as a way of knowing how many U.S. citizens are residing in that particular foreign country. We need to be counted! As it stands now we are not counted in any census.

Passports

Parental Consent by both parents: The U.S. citizen parent and child must apply in person for a U.S. passport of a child under 14 years of age. Both parents must sign the passport application form as well as the renewal form. A letter of consent from the other parent is still accepted so that both parents do not have to accompany the child to the U.S. Embassy. The reason for this law is the child abduction problem. If there is a family situation where child abduction is a possibility, notify the U.S. Embassy so that a warning may be put on their computer against issuance of a child's U.S. passport.

Lost Passports: It is strongly recommended to make a copy of your U.S. passport to leave at home when traveling so that if your passport is lost or stolen, it will be easier to replace.

Digitized State of the Art Passports: All passport applications are sent to the National Passport Center in the U.S. now. Remember to allow a little more time for processing of the application.

Security since 9-11

There are stricter procedures for replacing U.S. passports (see passports above).

We encourage you to register for online warnings sent by Embassy security emails. Send a blank email to GermanyACS@State.Gov to get signed up for this E-Warden system.

Although currently visa applications are accepted by mail, with few applicants called in for interviews, new guidelines being implemented this fall will change the situation so that all applicants for visas must be interviewed at the Embassy. Biometrics - either fingerprints or iris scans - may be required for visas. These new procedures may considerably slow down the processing of applications, so apply well in advance of your proposed U.S. trip.

Information provided by Dorothy Stage, FAWCO Citizenship Committee Chair
This article is currently posted on the FAWCO website under Citizenship Committee at http://www.fawco.org/.