Paul Kusuda’s column
Naturalization denied (Part 3)
Part 3 of 3 (Conclusion)

    This is the third of a three-part discussion of my views about how the national
government should reconsider naturalization issues and develop policies and procedures
to ease entry into the path  U.S. citizenship.  The bars must be lifted, the pathways
lightened, and applicants welcomed.
    It's been more than a year since optimism was expressed relative to opening positive
discussions about easing immigration and naturalization regulations.  Unfortunately,
political priorities were drastically reoriented because of so many concerns that had to be
dealt with, in many cases simultaneously:  Economy (unemployment, home foreclosues,
small business needs, bank loans, automobile factories, tax cuts), health care (especially
for the under and uninsured), homeland security, environmental worries (incxluding global
warming), immigration (both legal and illegal), H1N1 pandemic or epidemic prevention,
Guantanamo. worldwide issues (Afghanistan, Iraq, Iran, North Korea, Pakistan, Israel,
Palestine).  The list is long, and naturalization remediation is not in the top third.  
     At one time, my hopes were much higher than they are now.  So, those of us who want to see positive action in the
direction of fairness and justice must work harder.
     In the previous two parts, I reviewed thoughts about immigrants, including spouses and children, who came to the
Unitthe ed States through the visa process predicated on relatively short-term stays in the U.S., not permanent residency
or citizenship.  Adults under visa conditional stays are under pressures unknown to most of us.  We are not aware of the
constrictures or anxieties.  We cannot feel the urge visa-entered students, employees, teachers, other professionals might
have about staying after being in he U.S. for a period of time.  Not all want to return to their home countries except to visit
families, relatives, and friends.  Many would choose to become U.S. citizens.
     I reviewed parts of the DREAM (Development, Relief, and Education for Alien Minors) ACT and noted both positives and
potential drawbacks  I think are in the proposal.  The thrust is excellent and deals with part of the dilemma of aliens who
want to become naturalized citizens.  The Act is still being discussed, tinkered with, and "fine-tuned."   I'll be pleasantly
surprised if a Bill were to be made final, passed both the Senate and House of Representatives, and signed by President
Barack Obama in 2010 or 2011.  The need, however, is pressing and will continue to increase.
     A major group seeking access to naturalization is composed of undocumented immigrants, also known as "illegal
aliens."  They number more than 12 million and increase each year.  Not to be overlooked is the fact that their children
attain U.S. citizenship rights and responsibilities by virtue of the fact that they were born here.  Primarily because of racial
prejudice, their presence is not welcome.     Persons directly involved because of social, economic, religious, racial, or
other reasons understand their plight.  They recognize  the positives provided by the undocumented immigrants.  They
decry the injustice they see as being so similar to those faced by many people of color, such as the African Americans.  
Naturalization processes must be opened widely enough to accommodate  the desires of those who want to become
citizens.  Current regulations do not permit undocumented immigrants to become legal permanent residents, the first step
in the naturalization process.
     In an expansion of this article titled "Naturalization Denied--Part 3 of 3," I planned to continue the thoughts and titled it
"Part 3, Conclusion."  By doing so, I avoid taking up too much print space and possibly jeopard my welcome or exhaust
possible readers.