Archive for the ‘Congress’ Category
Posted by Christopher Coen on February 1, 2012
"An investigation..."
***UPDATE*** February 3, 2012 — Washington Post announces that Komen Foundation ambiguously reverses its decision, here.
Due to a new Susan B. Komen for the Cure (the pink ribbon group) policy to halt funding for any group “under investigation by federal, state or local authorities”, 400 refugee women in Boise will now no longer receive critical annual breast cancer screenings, unless new funding is found. Planned Parenthood was receiving funds, now cut, from the Susan B. Komen for the Cure Foundation for 170,000 clinical breast exams nationwide over the past five years) US House of Representatives right-wing Republicans recently began a politically motivated “investigation” of Planned Parenthood’s so-called use of public funds for abortion. This policy now needlessly pits two leading women’s health groups against each other by rewarding a congressman for merely starting an investigation – no matter the facts in the case, or if there is even any basis for the investigation (that’s like rewarding malicious gossiping and rumor mongering or being found guilty simply for being accused of something). No doubt this unwise Komen policy will affect many more refugee women than the 400 in Boise. An article at Crosscut explains:
Because a Florida congressman demands an investigation of abortion spending, some 400 women in rural areas of Clallam County in Washington face the loss of breast cancer screening. So do another 400 in the Boise, Idaho, area, but they face a worse dilemma: They’re refugee women from Africa and Asia, relocated to Idaho through the International Rescue Committee, and most lack the language skills to look for mammogram providers and other breast cancer support on their own.
For years, Planned Parenthood of the Great Northwest has used funds from the huge Susan B. Komen for the Cure Foundation to provide cancer screening treatments to women in Clallam County and in the Boise/Twin Falls area, administered by Planned Parenthood’s Puget Sound affiliate in Seattle. But as of this week, under congressional pressure over Planned Parenthood’s abortion assistance, the Komen Foundation has ended its contributions to Planned Parenthood’s breast cancer screening programs. Nineteen of Planned Parenthood’s 83 affiliates will be affected by the cut, including the two in Idaho and Clallam County. The organization says Komen funds have provided 170,000 clinical breast exams nationwide.
“Komen got bullied by anti-choice politicians,” says Kristin Tlundberg of Planned Parenthood of the Great Northwest, which supports clinics in Washington, Idaho and Alaska, from its office in Seattle. “It’s a shame these two incredibly strong women’s organizations, both working to prevent cancer, have been forced into opposing positions by anti-choice forces determined to harm Planned Parenthood.”… Read more here
Posted in Boise, Congress, funding, health, right-wing, women | Tagged: Boise, Komen, Planned Parenthood, refugees, resettlement, Susan B. Komen for the Cure | Leave a Comment »
Posted by Christopher Coen on December 21, 2011
Both houses of Congress approved the renewal of The Morrison-Lautenberg Amendment last week. An article in the New Jersey Jewish News made the announcement:
Jewish organizations praised Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ) for reauthorization of legislation that grants refugee status to religious minorities in Iran and to Jews in the former Soviet Union.
The “Lautenberg Amendment” — a small portion of the Omnibus Spending Bill — was approved by both houses of Congress last week.
President Barack Obama is expected to sign it into law before the holiday weekend… Read more here
Posted in Morrison-Lautenberg Amendment, religion | Tagged: Congress, Morrison-Lautenberg Amendment, refugees, religious minorities, religious persecution, resettlement | Leave a Comment »
Posted by Christopher Coen on December 1, 2011
The Morrison-Lautenberg Amendment of 1989 and the issue of whether Congress should renew it is up before us again (the last temporary extension of the measure expired on May 31, 2011). San Antonio’s Express-News reports that US Rep. Lamar Smith, R-San Antonio, chairman of the House Judiciary Committee with oversight over immigration policy, is holding up the renewal of the Morrison-Lautenberg Amendment:
In 1989, Congress passed legislation authored by Sen. Frank Lautenberg, D-N.J., codifying the U.S. interest in assisting [people to] escape persecution...
…Congress has routinely renewed the refugee measure for 22 years. This year, as in the past, Lautenberg attached the legislation as an amendment to the foreign operations budget. But Rep. Lamar Smith, R-San Antonio, chairman of the House Judiciary Committee with oversight over immigration policy, has stopped the Lautenberg Amendment dead in its tracks.
Smith raises two categories of objections. The first have to do with fairness. Smith contends that the 2,000 or so refugees who enter the United States annually under the Lautenberg Amendment receive preferential treatment in comparison with the other 73,000 refugees the United States takes in.
But that’s precisely the point of the amendment — to recognize special situations of persecution and open a relief valve to help avert a humanitarian catastrophe.
Smith’s second area of concern is that the amendment has never been subjected to oversight. Is the refugee program being run wisely and efficiently? Are people entering the United States under false pretenses?
Oversight hearings are entirely appropriate. We are confident that after hearing the facts about the refugee program, Smith will agree that the Lautenberg Amendment is a judicious and compassionate policy for legal immigration... Read more here
To understand this amendment we must first understand the meaning of the word “refugee” as defined by the Immigration and Nationality Act – the basic body of immigration law:
Refugee – any person who is outside any country of such person’s nationality or, in the case of a person having no nationality, is outside any country in which such person last habitually resided, and who is unable or unwilling to return to, and is unable or unwilling to avail himself or herself of the protection of, that country because of persecution or a well-founded fear of persecution on account of race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion. here
The Morrison-Lautenberg Amendment then added more language in trying to help people experiencing persecution within their country of nationality, and in circumstances that are not easy to prove. A member of a category group:
“…may establish a well-founded fear of persecution on account of race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion…by asserting a credible basis for concern about the possibility of such persecution.”
The category groups were Jews and certain Christians from the former Soviet Union (FSA), as well as certain refugees in Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia. A 2003 update to the law made the category also available to refugees from Iran – mostly Christians, but also Jews, Bahais, Zoroastrians and other persecuted minorities. Presently the US allows in only about two thousand people annually this category.
The problem with the Morrison-Lautenberg Amendment was that powerful US political groups, e.g. Jews and evangelical Christians, abused it to help people they favored emigrate to the US. It allowed people to enter the US as political refugees from the FSA even after glasnost (openness) and perestroĭka (restructuring) often made moot any claim to persecution. Preferential treatment was indeed given to these people, which left some people with a bad feeling about the amendment. The Morrison-Lautenberg Amendment, however, remains the only option for legitimately persecuted groups who stay trapped inside their countries of nationality in circumstances of persecution not easy to prove. I would agree that Congress needs to inspect the oversight of the refugee program to check the many shortcomings that we explore on this blog, but not in the context of the Morrison-Lautenberg Amendment. I also question why the category is only open to persecuted groups from a select handful of countries.
Posted in Bahá'i, Cambodian, evangelical, former Soviet republics, HIAS, Iranian, Jewish, Laos, legislation, Morrison-Lautenberg Amendment, Vietnamese | Tagged: evangelicals, Iran, jews, Lamar Smith, Lautenberg Amendment, Morrison-Lautenberg Amendment, oversight, persecution, refugees, resettlement | Leave a Comment »
Posted by Christopher Coen on October 18, 2011
Freshman Sen. Rand Paul finally ended his two-week hold on extending Supplemental Security Income to elderly and disabled refugees, by demanding that the Senate Judiciary Committee’s immigration panel hold an oversight hearing on the entry of two terrorism suspects to the country via the refugee program. The SSI benefits expired for about 5,600 elderly and disabled refugees on Sept. 30. A POLITICO article has more:
Ending a two-week standoff, freshman Sen. Rand Paul agreed to lift his hold on a bill extending aid to thousands of elderly and disabled refugees living in the United States.
The Kentucky Republican allowed the bipartisan bill to advance after Democratic leaders promised to hold a congressional hearing into how individuals are selected for refugee status and request an investigation into why two terrorism suspects were admitted to the U.S. through a refugee program, an aide said…
…As part of the agreement with Paul, Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), the bill’s author and chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee’s immigration panel, will hold an oversight hearing examining refugee resettlement in the United States. Paul will be among those testifying. And Schumer and Paul will jointly request the inspectors general at the Homeland Security, State and Health and Human Services departments investigate why the Iraqi terrorism suspects were allowed to enter the country... Read more here
Yet, we already know why the terrorism suspects got through the security barriers. Prior to the December 2009 underwear bombing incident the Department of Homeland Security was not checking refugee applications against a broader set of security data, including fingerprints. So, what then does Sen. Paul intend to do with this oversight hearing?
Posted in Congress, DHS, disabled refugees, elderly refugees, Iraqi, right-wing, security/terrorism, SSI | Tagged: disabled, elderly, Rand Paul, refugees, resettlement, security, Senate Judiciary Committee, SSI | Leave a Comment »
Posted by Christopher Coen on August 27, 2011
Many elderly and disabled refugees could lose Supplemental Security Income benefits without congressional action. Congress extended the deadline for refugees pursuing citizenship once in 2008, so that refugees could receive assistance for up to nine years before becoming citizens, but that extension expires Sept. 30. Many of the refugees who could lose their benefits next month are apparently unable to successfully take and pass citizenship tests in English because of their age or disabilities. It seems as if U.S. Senator Mitch McConnell is sitting on his hands as the deadline approaches. An article in the Lexington Herald Leader explains the situation:
…up to 605 elderly and disabled refugees in [Kentucky] stand to lose their Supplemental Security Income benefits if Congress doesn’t act by Sept. 30, according to local advocates.
“It’s a pretty profound consequence,” said Rich Seckel, director of the Kentucky Equal Justice Center in Lexington.
SSI is a federal benefit program that provides a $674 base monthly income to people who can’t work because of their advanced age or disability or blindness, and because they don’t have other resources.
Though many people who aren’t citizens are not eligible for SSI, the federal government makes an exception for refugees. But to keep SSI, the refugees must seek citizenship within seven years of their arrival in the United States.
Many of the refugees who could lose their benefits next month are unable to successfully take and pass citizenship tests in English because of their disabilities, according to Rev. Patrick Delahanty, Executive Director of the Frankfort-based Catholic Conference of Kentucky.
According to the Social Security Administration, there are as many as 605 refugees in Kentucky who are at risk of losing benefits, said Ellen Sittenfeld Battistelli, a policy analyst for the National Immigration Law Center.
Advocates have asked for help from U.S. Sen. Mitch McConnell and U.S. Rep. Geoff Davis — Republican members of Kentucky’s federal delegation and key players in any response by Congress to the problem…
…Seckel said people with disabilities can request waivers of the language requirements and civics test from the federal government but the process is complicated.
In Lexington, many people are turning to the Maxwell Street Legal Clinic for help, Seckel said, but Congress should act to fix the problem because “we should not turn every refugee with a disability into a new legal case.”
The advocates are asking Congress for legislation that would ease the citizenship requirement for the severely disabled and elderly or in the short term, allow an extension of the deadline for pursuing citizenship.
Congress extended the deadline once in 2008 so that refugees could receive assistance for up to nine years before becoming citizens. But that extension expires Sept. 30.
U.S. Reps. Jim McDermott, D-Washington, and Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, R-Fla., have introduced legislation that continues the nine-year policy.
Because McConnell is the Minority Leader of the Senate — the highest ranking Republican in the Senate — “his support can ensure that this population continues to be protected,” Battistelli said... Read more here
Posted in Congress, disabled refugees, elderly refugees, health, Kentucky, legislation, Social Security Administration, SSI | Tagged: Catholic Conference of Kentucky, citizenship test, disabled, elderly, Ellen Sittenfeld Battistelli, Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, Jim McDermott, Kentucky Equal Justice Center, Maxwell Street Legal Clinic, Mitch McConnell, National Immigration Law Center, Patrick Delahanty, refugees, resettlement, Rich Seckel, SSI, Supplemental Security Income | Leave a Comment »
Posted by Christopher Coen on August 7, 2011
It seems like each time refugees resettled to the US have contact with the federal government resettlement contractors first select them. Yet, does anyone ever stop to think how this practice fails to promote our democratic ideals? I think that contractors are trying to control the message(s) that reach government and elected officials. The Fairfax Times explains the story of one of the refugee delegates, an Afghan journalist.
A long way from home, Afghan journalist Nazira Karimi remains undeterred in her effort to tell the story of her country.
As part of this effort, Karimi has joined a panel of 50 refugees participating in the first Refugee Congress in Washington, D.C.
The event, held Wednesday and Thursday on Capitol Hill, was hosted by the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees — a two-time Nobel Peace Prize-winning agency.
The goal of the event is to raise public awareness of refugees living in the U.S. as well as to discuss issues facing this population, spokeswoman Charity Tooze said.
“The Refugee Congress stemmed from the idea that people affected most by refugee policies should be involved [in the discussion of policies],” she said. “A lot of times, politicians speak for refugees. We want to put refugees at the table with people who make decisions.”…
…Delegates were nominated by nongovernmental refugee organizations. About 200 people were nominated, Tooze said, and then 50 were chosen based on their experiences and community involvement.
“This is not a one-time thing,” Tooze said of the Refugee Congress. “We’re hoping this is an annual event. We see this as the beginning of a movement to give refugees more of a voice … and power.”
Remembering how difficult her resettlement to the U.S. was, Karimi said she hopes that she and other delegates can help make future resettlements easier.
…During this week’s gathering, refugee delegates drafted a proclamation with some recommended changes to U.S. policy regarding refugee resettlement efforts. The proclamation will go to the U.S. Congress first, then on to the annual meeting of the United Nations Secretariat in Geneva, Tooze said.
“Delegates meet in the day to discuss refugee policy and their experiences in resettlement,” she said. “There’s a lot of energy, a lot of dynamics. … We have people who are 80 years old and people in their 20s. … What they have in common is their shared [refugee] experiences.”… Karimi would like to see resettlement programs offer more emotional help to refugees… Read more here
I have a proposal – that refugees who want to meet with government and elected officials be free to do so, and that they be allowed to rise from their own grass-roots.
Posted in Afghan, Congress, democracy, UN, UNHCR | Tagged: Capitol Hill, Congress, NGO, Refugee Congress, refugees, resettlement, UN, UNHCR, United Nations, United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees | 1 Comment »
Posted by Christopher Coen on July 29, 2011
In this week of federal debt trauma in walks an employee of U.S. Customs and Border Protection to tell us how federal employees at his agency get overtime pay in exchange for not working. But of course all of us who care about refugees and immigrants, for the human beings they are, already know this about government agency workers, as well as their friends in private industry at the resettlement agencies. Many of them do whatever they want to do, and they suffer no consequences whatsoever. That is why we so desperately need passage of the Whistleblower Protection Enhancement Act. Read more in Joe Davidson’s Washington Post column.
During a period when some in Congress and their related policy wonks think federal employees are overpaid, here comes Christian Sanchez, a Border Patrol agent who says he was punished for refusing overtime pay.
His bosses suggested that he get psychological help.
Instead, Sanchez has become a whistleblower, and on Friday he plans to tell gathering on Capitol Hill that he was retaliated against because he would not take overtime for doing no work.
Sanchez is an example of what the Government Accountability Project, a whistleblower advocacy organization, calls “pocketbook whistleblowers.” They allegedly have suffered retaliation for actions that could save the government money.
This emphasis on guarding Uncle Sam’s pocketbook allows whistleblower advocates to broaden the appeal of legislation designed to expand legal protections for employees who disclose government waste, fraud and abuse. Supporting whistleblowers becomes more than helping individual employees who have been mistreated by the system — it becomes into an act of fiscal responsibility.
That approach could increase chances for the Whistleblower Protection Enhancement Act. It’s come close to passage during the many years it has lingered in Congress, but proponents have not been able to push it across the finish line.
In a letter last month to President Obama and Congress, a group of federal whistleblowers urged them to approve the legislation, telling them that “you have allowed potentially billions of tax dollars to be wasted because all federal workers know they cannot speak up without engaging in professional suicide.”
Sanchez is speaking up, and he has paid a price.
There is little work to do at the Port Angeles, Wash., station, where he is assigned, he said. He calls it a “black hole” where agents have “no purpose, no mission.”
“The worst fraud on taxpayers is that we are getting paid overtime not to work,” Sanchez said in a prepared statement. When he first started working at the station, “I noticed it was common practice for everyone to get paid overtime not to work… Read more here
Our own experience with Customs and Border Protection also demonstrated how completely corrupt and debased that federal agency is. Before either the Left or the Right try to spin this case for their own interests, I’d like to remind everyone that for decades both the Democrats and the Republicans have repeatedly contributed to corruption by installing their own cronies in the federal agencies and courts, while turning a blind eye to the damage these people have done to the people and the nation.
I nominate Christian Sanchez as hero of the month. It helps to restore my faith in humanity when I see that our country still has people like this among our ranks.
Posted in Congress, funding, Government Accountability Project, immigration services, Obama administration, openess and transparency in government, police, revolving door, U.S. Customs & Border Protection, Washington | Tagged: Border Patrol, Christian Sanchez, Congress, Customs and Border Protection, Democrats, federal government, Government Accountability Project, immigrants, Port Angeles, refugees, Republicans, Washington, whistleblower, Whistleblower Protection Enhancement Act | 1 Comment »
Posted by Christopher Coen on July 26, 2011
Larry Gilbert, the Mayor of Lewiston, Maine spoke about refugee resettlement at a Senate hearing on immigration reform today. He claimed, incorrectly, that federal refugee assistance cannot be redirected when refugees migrate to new locations (secondary migration). In fact it is transferable. Further, he claimed that the assistance is inadequate, apparently unaware that the State Department just last year doubled initial resettlement assistance to $1800 per refugee. An article in the Morning Sentinel has more:
WASHINGTON – Lewiston’s experience with an influx of Somali immigrants shows the economic energy they can bring, but also the need for the federal government to do more to help the new residents settle into their new life, says Lewiston Mayor Larry Gilbert.
Gilbert testified Tuesday at a Senate hearing on immigration reform, a session that mostly focused on the system for attracting and retaining high-skill foreign workers in fields such as computer sciences and engineering.
But Gilbert was one of three mayors from around the country invited to address the broader topic of the economic impact of legal immigrants on local communities…
…more support, some of it from the federal government, is needed to help the immigrants living in Lewiston in areas such as workforce training and learning English, Gilbert said.
Aid from the federal Office of Refugee Resettlement is often available to help immigrants adjust to their new lives. However, the assistance is good for just eight months and does not follow an immigrant to a new city. If an immigrant starts receiving the assistance in, say, Atlanta, and then leaves that city after several months to live in Lewiston, the aid is cut off, Gilbert said.
This makes it harder for immigrants to find jobs and creates more of a hardship on the secondary migration city, Gilbert said.
The “inadequate federal funding associated with a refugee resettlement program simply does not meet the many needs of our refugee residents,” Gilbert said.
The federal Office of Refugee Resettlement, part of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, did not respond to a request for comment Tuesday. Read more here
Posted in Congress, funding, Lewiston, secondary migration, refugee, Somali, State Department | Tagged: federal assistance, immigration reform, Larry Gilbert, Lewiston, Maine, Office of Refugee Resettlement, ORR, refugee, resettlement, Senate hearing, State Department | Leave a Comment »
Posted by Christopher Coen on April 16, 2011
-
$928.5 billion in defense spending
-
$898 billion in health care expenditures
-
$787.6 billion in pensions
-
$464.6 billion in welfare spending
-
$250.7 billion on interest payments
-
$151.4 billion in other spending including basic research
-
$140.9 billion for education
-
$104.2 billion for transportation
-
$57.3 billion in protective services such as police, fire, law courts
-
$29 billion in general government expenses
The final horse trading between the US House and US Senate for the FY 2011 continuing resolution (CR) is done and results in a 10% reduction to refugee assistance programs. The pie chart above (at Motorgasm) shows the FY 2011 US budget final continuing resolution (CR) — HR 1473. The refugee assistance program represents just a tiny piece out of a tiny slice of the budget pie dominated by discretionary security spending (Pentagon and others) and non-discretionary entitlement programs (Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, etc), yet cuts to foreign assistance programs is now politically popular, even though foreign assistance represents less than 1% of the budget. An article in the UK’s Guardian media source has a succinct blurb:
…Joseph Nye Jr, Harvard professor and former assistant secretary of defence, said cuts to the state department and the US foreign aid budget would fail to make any real contribution to deficit reduction, but would do serious damage to America’s global influence.
“Polls consistently show a popular misconception that aid is a significant part of the US federal budget, when in fact it amounts to less than 1%,” he said. “Thus, congressional cuts to aid in the name of deficit reduction are an easy vote, but a cheap shot.”… Read more here
International affairs spending will be $48.3, a half billion reduction from FY 2010 spending levels, although $8.4 billion less than what President Obama proposed 13 months ago, and $3.3 billion more than the version that the Republican-led US House of Representatives passed in February, HR 1.
An Inter Press Service article breaks these figures down:
WASHINGTON, Apr 14, 2011 (IPS) – While the State Department’s overall 2011 international affairs budget was cut sharply from President Barack Obama’s initial request, humanitarian and development groups are expressing some relief at the final result given the current political climate.
The 2011 continuing resolution (CR) that emerged last Friday after weeks of difficult negotiations, and which is expected to be formally approved by both houses Thursday, provides a total of 48.3 billion dollars for international affairs funding this fiscal year, which ends Sep. 30.
While that was 8.4 billion dollars less than the 56-billion-dollar request Obama submitted 13 months ago, it marked a cut of only about half a billion dollars from baseline 2010 spending levels. And it was 3.3 billion dollars more than the version that was approved in February by the Republican-led House of
Representatives, HR 1.
“The worst of the harsh and damaging cuts to international affairs accounts proposed in HR 1 were avoided,” said Samuel Worthington, president of InterAction, a coalition of some 180 humanitarian and development non-governmental organization (NGOs).
“At the same time, we are mindful of the fact that American interests and values call on us to do better,” he added. “Political turmoil and U.S. economic and strategic interests underscore that America needs to be more engaged in international affairs, not less.”
It appeared that lawmakers who forged the final deal split the difference between HR 1 and the Senate version of the CR, which was considerably more generous, albeit less so than Obama’s original request…
…bilateral migration and refugee assistance was cut by nearly 10 percent, to 1.7 billion dollars, compared to 2010, although that total was some 600 million dollars more than the total approved by the Republican-led House.
Similarly, the 1.7 billion dollars for international food aid programs represents an 11 percent cut from Obama’s request and a 17 percent reduction from 2010…
…The United Nations and other international organizations will also face significant cuts – a total of 377 million dollars, or 23 percent, less than last year’s contributions of 1.7 billion dollars and 304 billion dollars less than what Obama had requested. How these cuts will be allocated agency by agency has yet to be determined, according to Congressional staffers…
…The International Development Association, the World Bank affiliate that provides low-interest loans and grants to the world’s poorest nations, and the Rome-based International Fund for Agricultural Development, on the one hand, suffered only nominal cuts…
…Aid specialists here also objected to the CR’s cuts in operating expenses of the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) of three percent compared to 2010 and reduction of nine percent from Obama’s request, noting the agency is implementing reforms to promote transparency and accountability under its new administrator, Rajiv Shah, that have long been sought by Congress, Republicans and Democrats alike.
“The NGO community has been calling for these reforms for years, and now they’re really moving forward on them,” said Interaction’s Todd Shelton. “It’s really important that the agency be given the capacity it needs to make them sustainable and lasting.”… Read more here
Do I need to point out the irony of NGO’s, including refugee resettlement agencies, spearheading demands for more government transparency? These groups run in secrecy, with closed books, managing even less transparency (accountability to the public) than our government agencies. They are private entities conducting public activities, to a great extent using public funds.
Posted in Congress, funding, Migration & Refugee Assistance Account (MRA), NGO's (Non-governmental organizations), Obama administration, openess and transparency in government, State Department, UN (United Nations) | Tagged: bilateral migration, continuing resolution, CR, Democrats, FISCAL YEAR 2011, food aid programs, FY 2011, House of Representatives, HR 1, human rights, International Development Association, NGO's, Obama, refugee, refugee assistance, refugee resettlement agencies, refugee resettlement program, Republicans, senate, U.S. Agency for International Development, UN, United Nations, USAID, World Bank | Leave a Comment »
Posted by Christopher Coen on October 26, 2010
The Obama administration determined that refugee admission numbers for fiscal year 2011 will be 80,000 refugees. A detailed report to Congress can be found at the State Department’s Refugee Processing Center (RPC) website – Proposed Refugee Admissions for Fiscal Year 2011 Report To the Congress.
According to the requirements of the Immigration and Nationality Act the report must contain detailed information on various aspects of the refugee admissions program including “An analysis of the anticipated social, economic, and demographic impact of their admission to the United States”. The Act requires that this information be submitted before the start of the fiscal year. Curiously they footnoted this requirement with the following statement.
Detailed discussion of the anticipated social and economic impact, including secondary migration, of the admission of refugees to the United States is being provided in the Report to the Congress of the Refugee Resettlement Program, Office of Refugee Resettlement, Department of Health and Human Services.
Sort of sounds like the ORR is simultaneously issuing a report to Congress for FY2011, doesn’t it? Yet, the ORR has not furnished Congress with a refugee report since fiscal year 2007! This seems to be some pretty serious flouting of the requirements. Of course this is hardly surprising in light of all the other violations of requirements that refugees discover once they arrive in the U.S. during their initial resettlement process.
Posted in Annual Report to Congress, Congress, ORR, RPC (Refugee Processing Center) | Tagged: Office of Refugee Resettlement, ORR, Proposed Refugee Admissions for Fiscal Year 2011 Report To The Congress, Refugee Processing Center, refugee resettlement, refugee resettlement agencies, refugee resettlement program, refugees, resettlement, RPC (Refugee Processing Center), State Department | Leave a Comment »
Christopher Coen
Melissa Sogard
nancylee1
