The Heartland Needs the Refugees
I know the people in your states appre- ciate that their humanitarian undertak- ing has been by no means a one-way street. I believe most of them feel that the heartland benefits from the enrich- ment the refugee's presence brings to their lives. The personal contributions which the refugees have brought to your states are now important and prized assets of each community. The benefits your children derive from grow- ing up with youngsters from such diverse backgrounds overshadow, I hope, the challenge school districts have sometimes faced in providing the special services needed by the refugee children.
Regarding more tangible contribu- tions, I am told that refuges resettled in your states have quickly taken note of the value Americans place on hard work. Despite severe economic difficul- ties in the farm belt and unemployment in your cities, overall refugee welfare dependency rates in this area are about half the national average, and the majority of your states actually showed considerable improvement in 1985. This is a significant achievement in which refugees, as well as those of you who assist them, can take justifiable pride. One particularly good example of this success can be found right here in St. Louis, where I understand over 60% of new arrivals are placed in stable em- ployment situations within their first 6 months in the United States-and many of these within the first 30 days.
Primarily, however, the credit for this success story must be given to the refugees themselves-for it is their courage, hard work, and perseverance which enables them to overcome serious obstacles and a tragic history. Indeed, it is perhaps here-in the understanding and sharing of fundamental human values between refugees and their new American neighbors-that we find the key to the success of refugee resettle- ment in the heartland. This is why I believe that, while the refugees need the heartland, the heartland also needs the refugees.
Challenge for the Future
While we can be proud of all that has been accomplished, it is important to recognize that we all face a new set of serious challenges for the future. We face the harsh reality of a political world in which refugees are still the victims of repressive and brutal regimes. We see no early end of the domination of the states of Indochina by Hanoi, where repressive policies continue to cause thousands to endanger their lives in clandestine flight-more than 20,000 Vietnamese last year risked the danger- ous escape by boat. Similarly, for Pales- tinian refugees in the Middle East, for
Afghans in Pakistan, for refugees in Africa, Central America, the Soviet Union, and Eastern Europe-on all continents-individual human beings continue to suffer and have well- deserved fears of persecution should they remain in or attempt to return to their homelands.
There are today 10 million refugees around the world in desperate need of material and moral assistance from the international community-often the most basic food and medicine just to stay alive.
Resource Limitations
As we confront the starkness of this continuing human need, we must con- front also the reality of a world where public and private resources are becom- ing increasingly limited.
In 1986, the budgetary situation of the U.S. Government is certainly a criti- cal concern for any discussion of the American refugee program. In fiscal year (FY) 1985, the expenditures of the State Department for the U.S. refugee program totaled more than $390 million-of which more than two-thirds was committed to international refugee assistance and less than one-third for all aspects of the U.S. refugee admissions program. Despite the fact that the United States was able to sustain its contributions to international refugee assistance organizations at our tradi- tional level of between 25% and 30% of total projected needs, these organiza- tions experienced a serious shortage of funds from other sources which will con- tinue into the foreseeable future.
The UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), in particular, sus- tained a $30-million shortfall in its general program funding in 1985 and has advised all donor governments that it may lack sufficient funding in 1986 to continue even the most basic forms of refugee assistance beyond meeting the life-sustaining essentials of food, shelter, and medical care.
And in the United States, the resources available to the bureau have been reduced by congressional mandate to a level of $324 million for FY 1986 (compared to the total expenditure level of $390 million in FY 1985). And the Congress may mandate greater cuts for FY 1987.
I emphasize this point for two
reasons:
First, because I know you share the State Department's wider concern for the well-being of refugees wherever they may find themselves; and
Second, because in a future period of budgetary uncertainty-when the refugee program may be directed to
bear a portion of the effort to reduce the Federal deficit-we face extremely difficult policy choices between applying very scarce dollars to fund the costs of a level of refugee admissions to the United States or applying those same dollars to meet severe international refugee relief requirements.
The dilemma is this: do we spend $100,000 to bring 60 more refugees to America or do we spend this same $100,000 to help feed and shelter many more than 60 refugees in camps in Asia, Africa, Central America, or the Middle East?
Refugee Resettlement
If 1986 marks an uncertainty about the availability of sufficient cash contribu- tions from principal donor countries to the international refugee effort, 1986 may also mark an important and historic crossroad for the Indochinese refugee situation.
The year 1986 has already brought the report to the Secretary of State of the special Indochinese Refugee Panel- chaired by former Governor Robert Ray of Iowa-with recommendations for new refugee policy and program directions. In presenting the report to Secretary Shultz in April, Governor Ray's panel said it reached several general conclu- sions concerning the Indochinese refu gee situation, including that:
--[It] has changed significantly since...1975.
-The Indochinese fleeing today are no longer predominantly persons who were asso- ciated with the United States, nor does it appear that the majority have been singled out for harsher treatment than that generally suffered by the rest of the population. Far more appear to be taking this perilous jour- ney in search of economic and political free- dom or to be reunited with family members. Once having left, few can now return.
-The presence already of so many Indo- chinese in the United States means that many now in their home countries and in first asylum are able to communicate with relatives in this country, and can be helped by friends and relatives when they are even- tually resettled. This new situation has created a potential for greater reliance on normal immigration procedures...
U.S. Admissions Policy- The New Situation
It is essential that we now develop refu gee admissions policies and programs to reflect the new situation described by the Ray panel. In order to make maxi- mum use of limited refugee admissions numbers, and as part of the effort to regularize the admissions of persons from Indochina, it is our intentior to emphasize the use of immigrant visas for the admissions of individuals who seek to come to the United States
2
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.