[Congressional Record Volume 140, Number 143 (Wednesday, October 5, 1994)]
[Senate]
[Page S]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]


[Congressional Record: October 5, 1994]
From the Congressional Record Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]

 
                       WORLDWIDE REFUGEE PROBLEMS

  Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, as required by the Refugee Act of 1980, 
on September 29, 1994, Acting Secretary of State Strobe Talbott held a 
consultation with members of the Judiciary Committee on the number of 
refugees to be admitted to the United States next year, and to review 
worldwide refugee programs.
  On September 30, the committee completed the consultation process by 
sending the following letter to the President, which I ask be printed 
at this point in the Record.
  There being no objection, the letter was ordered to be printed in the 
Record as follows:
                                                      U.S. Senate,


                                   Committee on the Judiciary,

                               Washington, DC, September 29, 1994.
     The President,
     The White House,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Mr. President: Under the provisions of the Refugee Act 
     of 1980 (P.L. 96-212), members of the Committee on the 
     Judiciary have now consulted with your representative, Acting 
     Secretary of State Strobe Talbott, on the proposed admissions 
     of refugees for Fiscal Year 1995.
       We are gratified that the Administration is putting into 
     practice its commitment to reorient the refugee resettlement 
     program toward serving refugees who face imminent threats to 
     life and safety, and away from the defacto ``pipeline'' of 
     in-country processing that developed in certain countries 
     over recent years. We would encourage the Administration to 
     expedite the entry of ``pipeline'' refugees, to permit an 
     even more rapid completion of those programs.
       Over the next few months we will monitor with particular 
     interest the Administration's resettlement efforts in Africa, 
     the former Yugoslavia, and other volatile parts of the world. 
     The Administration is to be commended on its efforts in many 
     unstable and difficult areas, such as the Sudan. We would 
     urge you, however, to keep in close communication with us on 
     your plans for resettlement of refugees from countries such 
     as Bosnia, Liberia, and Rwanda, where it appears that major 
     challenges remain.
       We appreciate your work in ensuring a continuation of eight 
     months of federal reimbursement for refugee resettlement for 
     Fiscal Year 1995. We continue to believe, however, that this 
     level still falls short of meeting actual assistance needs at 
     the state and local level. As in the last year's refugee 
     consultation, we again urge the Administration to request a 
     level of funding for the domestic refugee program that more 
     closely matches the number of refugees to be admitted.
       The Committee continues to support the objectives of our 
     Nation's program to assist refugees of ``special humanitarian 
     concern'' to the United States. We accept your proposals to 
     do so during Fiscal Year 1995, and look forward to working 
     with you on this important program in the coming months.
       With best wishes,
           Sincerely,
     Orrin G. Hatch,
       Ranking Member, Committee on the Judiciary.
     Alan K. Simpson,
       Ranking Member, Subcommittee on Immigration and Refugee 
     Affairs.
     Joseph R. Biden, Jr.,
       Chairman, Committee on the Judiciary.
     Edward M. Kennedy,
       Chairman, Subcommittee on Immigration and Refugee Affairs.

  Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, I would also like to share with my 
colleagues two tables that review fiscal year 1994 refugee admissions 
ceilings and actual refugee admissions, and proposed refugee admissions 
ceilings for fiscal year 1995. I would ask Senators to note 
particularly that the proposed overall ceiling is 112,000 refugee 
admissions. This is 9,000 fewer numbers than the fiscal year 1994 
ceiling.
  I ask that these tables be included in the Record.
  There being no objection, the tables were ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

                      TABLE I.--REFUGEE ADMISSIONS IN FISCAL YEAR 1993 AND FISCAL YEAR 1994                     
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                   Fiscal year 1993    Fiscal year 1994    Fiscal year 1994    Projected fiscal 
             Region                     actual              ceiling       arrivals thru 7/94  year 1994 arrivals
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Africa..........................               6,969               7,000               4,566               6,000
East Asia.......................              49,858              45,000              33,558              42,000
Eastern Europe\1\...............               2,651  ..................  ..................  ..................
Latin America/Caribbean.........               4,126            \2\9,000               4,688               8,000
Near East.......................               7,000               6,000               3,903               6,000
Former Soviet Union\1\..........              48,627  ..................  ..................  ..................
Former Soviet Union/Eastern                                                                                     
 Europe\1\......................  ..................           \2\53,000              40,073              48,000
Unallocated reserve.............  ..................               (\2\)  ..................  ..................
PSI.............................                 251               1,000                   0                   0
                                 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total.....................             119,482             121,000              86,788             110,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\Former Soviet Union and Eastern Europe ceilings were combined in fiscal year 1994.                           
\2\Reallocations: 3,000 admissions numbers initially assigned to the Unallocated Reserve were reallocated during
  the year to the Latin America/Caribbean ceiling. An initial allocation of 55,000 numbers to the Former Soviet 
  Union/Eastern Europe ceiling was reduced by 2,000 to 53,000, with the 2,000 numbers reallocated to the Latin  
  America/Caribbean ceiling. The initial 4,000 numbers allocated to the Latin America/Caribbean ceiling were    
  thus augmented by an additional 5,000 to accommodate a surge in Haitian admissions during the year.           

  Table II.--Proposal for U.S. Refugee Admissions in Fiscal Year 1995

                                                               Proposed
        Area of origin                                          ceiling
Africa............................................................7,000
East Asia.....................................................\1\40,000
Former Soviet Union/Eastern Europe...............................48,000
Latin America and the Carribbean..................................8,000
Near East.........................................................5,000
Unallocated reserve...............................................2,000
                                                             __________

  Subtotal, funded admissions...................................110,000
Private Sector Initiative.........................................2,000
                                                             __________

  Total.........................................................112,000

\1\This figure includes Amerasians and their family members who enter 
as immigrants under a special statutory provision but receive the same 
benefits as refugees.

  Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, as my colleagues review these two tables, 
would I point out with satisfaction that the two resettlement programs 
requiring the most concerted attention of the United States over the 
past decade--those in East Asia and the former Soviet Union--are moving 
in the direction of completion.
  This is a testament to the generosity of the United States and the 
international community, which have accepted an unprecedented number of 
at-risk persons from these regions. It is also a tribute to the 
hundreds of American men and women--working for the State Department, 
the Immigration and Naturalization Service, the Office of Refugee 
Resettlement, voluntary agencies, and State and local governments, that 
have made possible resettlement of individuals who have a compelling 
connection to the United States.
  In response to the emerging shift in U.S. resettlement policy, we are 
advised that the administration has revised its formulation of the 
worldwide priority system. This revision was communicated to the 
committee in the President's consultation documents. I anticipate that 
the committee will have occasion to discuss the formulation and 
ramifications of this new priority system in some detail with the 
administration at a later date.
  I would ask that the section of the report to the Congress on 
proposed refugee admissions for fiscal year 1995 that describes the 
revised worldwide priority system be included in the Record.
  There being no objection, the priority system was ordered to be 
printed in the Record, as follows:

                     The Worldwide Priority System

       The worldwide processing priority system sets guidelines 
     for the orderly management of refugee applications for 
     admission within the established annual regional ceilings. 
     The priority system has been revised for FY-95 to reflect 
     trends over the past several years in the world-wide refugee 
     resettlement caseload.
       The issues of whether a person meets the definition of a 
     refugee under U.S. law and the priority that person may be 
     assigned for consideration of his case are separate and 
     distinct. Assignment of an individual to a particular 
     processing priority does not reflect any judgement as to 
     whether that individual ultimately will qualify for admission 
     to the U.S. as a refugee. Just as qualifying for refugee 
     status does not confer a right to resettlement in the United 
     States, assignment to a particular priority does not entitle 
     a person to admission to the United States as a refugee.
       The U.S. refugee priorities system sets guidelines for the 
     orderly management of refugee admissions into the United 
     States within the established annual regional ceilings and is 
     subject to change during the fiscal year. Over the years, it 
     has become increasingly apparent that the six processing 
     priorities originally established in the early years of the 
     huge Indochinese refugee outflows are less relevant to the 
     refugee populations in need of resettlement today. For 
     example, former USG employees, who were in Priority Two of 
     the old system, are not inherently at risk in today's non-
     Indochinese refugee situations in which there often is no 
     anti-American sentiment, whereas journalists opposing a 
     repressive regime may be vulnerable even in a country of 
     first asylum.
       Accordingly, the old processing priorities have been 
     revised to reflect the U.S. intent of providing resettlement 
     to those most in need, relying to a greater extent on UNHCR 
     to refer such individuals to our program. We also have 
     included discrete categories of individuals of concern to the 
     U.S. for selected nationalities. Since it makes sense that 
     refugees with relatives in the U.S. be resettled here rather 
     than in other countries, some family-based priority groups 
     are still included in the revised list. The refugee 
     processing procedure will remain unchanged; that is, refugees 
     in Priority One are interviewed before those in Priority Two, 
     etc.


                 refugee processing priorities--fy 1995

       Priority One: UNHCR-referred or Embassy-identified persons 
     in immediate danger of loss of life.
       UNHCR-referred or Embassy-identified cases of compelling 
     concern such as former political prisoners or dissidents.
       UNHCR-referred vulnerable cases including women at risk, 
     victims of violence, torture survivors, and individuals in 
     urgent need of medical treatment not available in the first-
     asylum country.
       UNHCR-referred cases of individuals for whom the other 
     durable solutions are not feasible and whose status in the 
     place of asylum does not present a satisfactory long-term 
     solution.
       Groups of special concern to the U.S. to be established as 
     needed by nationality (see listing below for FY 1995).
       Priority Two: Spouses, unmarried sons and daughters, and 
     parents of persons lawfully admitted to the U.S. as Permanent 
     Residents Aliens, refugees, or asylees.
       Unmarried sons and daughters, of any age, of U.S. citizens; 
     parents of U.S. citizens under 21 years of age. (Spouses and 
     minor children of U.S. citizens and the parents of U.S. 
     citizens who have attained the age of 21 are required by law 
     to apply for admission on immigrant visas.)
       Priority Three: Married sons and daughters and siblings of 
     U.S. citizens and persons lawfully admitted to the U.S. as 
     Permanent Resident Aliens, refugees, or asylees.
       Priority four: Grandparents, grandchildren, uncles, aunts 
     nieces, nephews and first cousins of U.S. citizens and 
     persons lawfully admitted to the U.S. as Permanent Resident 
     Aliens, refugees, or asylees.


          priority one: groups of special concerns for fy 1995

       Burma: Students/dissidents who are referred by UNHCR, 
     arrived in Thailand between March 15, 1988 and May 1, 1992, 
     and have a well-founded fear of persecution due to pro-
     democracy activities in Burma.
       Laos: Highlands (mostly Hmong).
       Vietnam: Former reeducation camp detainees who spent more 
     than three years in detention camps:
       Certain former USG employees and other specified 
     individuals or groups of concern;
       On a case-by-case basis, other individuals who have 
     experienced persecution because of post-1975 political, 
     religious, or human rights activities.
       Former Soviet Union: Soviet Jews, Evangelical Christians, 
     members of the Ukrainian Catholic or Orthodox churches.
       Bosnia: Bosnian Muslims, and on an exceptional basis non-
     Muslim Bosnians, referred by UNHCR, such as women victims of 
     violence, torture victims, ex-detainees, and other 
     individuals identified by UNHCR as requiring resettlement in 
     the U.S.
       Vulnerable Bosnians in mixed marriages of any ethnic group 
     referred by UNHCR.
       Parents and siblings of minor U.S. citizen children who 
     have been displaced by the conflict in Bosnia-Herzegovina.
       Bosnian Muslims, and on an exceptional basis non-Muslim 
     Bosnians, referred by the International Organization for 
     Migration (IOM) for medical treatment in the U.S.
       Cuba: Former political prisoners, members of persecuted 
     religious minorities, human rights activists, forced-labor 
     conscripts, persons deprived of their professional 
     credentials or subjected to other disproportionately harsh or 
     discriminatory treatment resulting from their perceived or 
     actual political or religious beliefs or activities, 
     dissidents, and other refugees of compelling concern to the 
     U.S.
       In third countries, Priority One Cubans may be processed if 
     they fled Cuba before November 20, 1987.
       Haiti: Senior and mid-level Aristide government officials; 
     close Aristide associates; journalists and educational 
     activists and high profile members of political, development, 
     and social organizations who have experienced significant and 
     persistent harassment by the de facto authorities, or who 
     have a credible fear because of their activities; others of 
     compelling concern to the U.S. and in immediate danger 
     because of their actual or perceived political beliefs or 
     activities; and others who appear to have a credible claim 
     that they will face persecution as defined in the Refugee 
     Convention. (The 1951 Convention on the Status of Refugees 
     defines a refugee as someone who has a well-founded fear of 
     being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality, 
     membership in a particular social group, or political 
     opinion.)
       Iran: Refugees who have served in positions of leadership 
     or played a conspicuous role within a religious denomination 
     whose members are subjected to discrimination, including the 
     clergy, prominent laymen, those who have served in 
     denominational assemblies, governing bodies or councils; 
     refugees who because of their minority religious affiliations 
     have been deprived of employment, have been driven from their 
     homes, have had their business confiscated or looted, have 
     been denied educational opportunities available to others 
     similarly situated in the same area, or have been denied 
     pensions that would otherwise be available.

                          ____________________