Christopher Coen
Melissa Sogard
nancylee1
In an Op-ed in The Buffalo News the local refugee resettlement agencies in Buffalo, NY get the numbers wrong on the US House’ proposed public funding cuts.
…The proposed cuts would impact humanitarian assistance programs in three funding areas. Up to 45 percent of funding to the Office of Refugee Resettlement, Migration and Refugee Assistance and International Disaster Assistance would be gone… Read more here
Yet, of the 4-5 refugee-related US government accounts that US House Republicans have voted to reduce:
- Migration and Refugee Assistance Account (MRA) 45% cut (global food relief – 41% cut)
- Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR) 10% cut
- International Disaster Assistance (IDA) 67% cut
- Citizen and Integation Assistance Program, within the US Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCRI) ( _ )% cut
…the 45% proposed cut only applies to the MRA account, while the ORR account would only get a 10% cut (see our analysis), and the IDA account would get a 67% cut. The domestic refugee resettlement program derives only from the MRA and ORR accounts. Even if the MRA was cut by 45% that does not necessarily mean that the domestic resettlement program would also be cut by 45%, as resettlement countries such as the US take less than 1% of the world’s refugees each year (close to half of 1%). Our domestic resettlement program is considered the cherry on the cake of our efforts to help the world’s refugees. If the cake were cut by 45% the cherry could also be cut by 45% or it could be left intact. That would be US government agencies’ decision to make.
Strangely however, all of this is fairly much a moot point as the US Senate has just voted not to make any cuts in these four accounts, according to the USCRI. In other words, the cuts aren’t going anywhere without the Senate’s approval, contrary to Catholic Charities in Chicago’s statements.
If there were a US government shutdown, and when it came to an end (during which, refugees would suffer from lack of assistance) any decision by the House and Senate on how they will compromise or not compromise on these funding matters would still have to be made in a conference committee. Therefore, we’re right back to the horse-trading again. But no, it’s not some simple 45% cut. That is a proposal by US House Republicans, and it only applies to the MRA account. The devil is always in the details.
