[Congressional Record Volume 142, Number 17 (Wednesday, February 7, 1996)]
[Senate]
[Pages S1074-S1075]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




               PROGRESS AGAINST FRAUD IN POLITICAL ASYLUM

  Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, this is the first anniversary of a major 
initiative by the Immigration and Naturalization Service to reduce 
illegal immigration by cracking down on fraudulent asylum claims. One 
year ago, INS Commissioner Doris Meissner put new regulations into 
effect which have more than doubled the number of asylum officers, 
increased the number of immigration judges and streamlined the asylum 
application process.
  The results have been dramatic. In 1 year, there has been a 57 
percent reduction in new asylum applications. Clearly, there has been a 
reduction in the filing of fraudulent claims. In addition, 84 percent 
of new asylum claims are now heard by INS within 60 days. This 
initiative is a major success story in the Clinton administration's 
ongoing effort to combat illegal immigration.
  In coming weeks, the Senate Judiciary Committee will recommend 
comprehensive immigration reforms. A large part of these reforms focus 
on the need to reduce illegal immigration, including steps to deal with 
abuse of the right of asylum.
  As the INS has shown, asylum abuse can be remedied--without denying 
true refugees the right to apply for asylum. They deserve adequate time 
to learn how to apply for asylum, overcome their fear of authority, and 
obtain help with their applications. We must avoid unfair restrictions 
that result in real harm to true refugees.
  I ask unanimous consent that recent articles on the major progress 
against asylum abuse be printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the articles were ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

               [From the Washington Post, Jan. 15, 1996]

                          Some Progress at INS

       A year ago, the Immigration and Naturalization Service put 
     into effect new regulations to control abuse of the political 
     asylum program. Commissioner Doris Meissner recently released 
     figures that indicate progress. The problem has been this: 
     Although immigration law authorizes sanctuary to be given to 
     people in fear of political persecution at home, too many 
     undocumented immigrants had figured out that they could 
     indefinitely postpone deportation merely by requesting 
     asylum. They would be automatically given work permits, and, 
     because of the backlog of cases awaiting adjudication, they 
     could often disappear into the general population without 
     much chance of being found. In 1994, 123,000 new applications 
     were filed (up from 56,000 three years earlier), and the 
     backlog exceeded 425,000.
       In response, the INS decided to issue work permits only to 
     those granted asylum or waiting more than 180 days for an 
     adjudication. Within a year, applications dropped by 57 
     percent to 53,000. Then Congress approved a request for more 
     asylum officers and judges, and the new positions--which are 
     still being filled--have enabled INS to complete more than 
     twice as many cases as it did last year. Finally, most 
     individual claims for asylum are heard within 60 days instead 
     of waiting months, or even years, as was the case before. 
     While the backlog remains almost unchanged, the figure is 
     deceptive, inflated by a sizable number of petitions filed 
     pursuant to court order by certain Salvadorans and 
     Nicaraguans.
       Although some challenge has been made to the claims of 
     progress made by the INS, it is 

[[Page S1075]]
     certain that considerable distance has been covered in improving 
     procedures. And this kind of effective enforcement is, 
     paradoxically, the best way to deal with the anti-immigration 
     political climate. Legal immigrants and those who have valid 
     claims for asylum will be the beneficiaries of policies that 
     make the law work as it is meant to--and should--work.
                                                                    ____

         U.S. Department of Justice, Immigration and 
           Naturalization Service,
                                  Washington, DC, January 4, 1996.


              ins successfully reforms u.s. asylum system

       Washington. DC.--A Clinton Administration initiative to 
     reform the U.S. asylum system has achieved dramatic success 
     in its first year, INS Commissioner Doris Meissner announced 
     today.
       On the first anniversary of the initiative, Commissioner 
     Meissner said that the unprecedented reforms have 
     substantially lowered the incidence of fraudulent claims by 
     eliminating the virtually automatic issuance of work 
     authorization documents to all asylum applicants. ``INS has 
     removed the primary incentive for baseless asylum claims,'' 
     she said, ``resulting in the fair and prompt adjudication of 
     newly filed cases for the very first time. With this attack 
     on fraud, we have closed a back door to illegal 
     immigration.''
       Over the past year, the Administration's landmark reforms 
     have reduced the number of new asylum claims filed with the 
     INS by 57 percent. In addition, these initiatives enabled INS 
     asylum officers to double their productivity, completing 
     126,000 cases during 1995 compared with 61,000 in 1994. INS' 
     new regulations to improve productivity and prevent misuse 
     became effective on January 4, 1995.
       Commissioner Meissner said, ``The U.S. asylum system was 
     broken for many years, but today our asylum system is fair 
     and efficient. The 57 percent reduction in new asylum cases 
     is evidence that the INS has eliminated incentives for asylum 
     abuse. At the same time, we have greatly improved the 
     system's ability to quickly provide protection to those who 
     deserve it.''
       In response to a mandate from President Clinton in July 
     1993 to overhaul the inefficient and long-neglected U.S. 
     asylum system, INS established asylum reform as a top 
     priority. New regulations which took effect one year ago 
     today eliminated easy access to work authorization and 
     streamlined the process.
       Applicants for the first time are required to personally 
     appear at an asylum office to receive notification of the 
     asylum decision. At that time, the applicant is granted 
     asylum or is served with charging documents which formally 
     begin deportation proceedings.
       The Administration also sought the resources necessary to 
     improve and update the system and secured them through the 
     1994 Crime Bill. In addition to more than doubling the 
     authorized number of INS asylum officers from 150 to 325, the 
     Crime Bill significantly increased the number of Immigration 
     Judges from 112 to 179.
       Additional indications of the success of asylum reform 
     include:
       Currently 84 percent of individual claims for asylum are 
     heard by the INS within 60 days.
       In 1995, the issuance of charging documents doubled (from 
     29,000 in 1994 to 65,000 in 1995), placing twice as many 
     applicants directly in deportation proceedings.
       ``By limiting the availability of work authorization to 
     only those applicants who are granted asylum or are not 
     promptly adjudicated, the Administration has significantly 
     reduced the potential for baseless claims. At the same time, 
     INS has streamlined the entire asylum system. And we will 
     continue to make dramatic progress in resolving this long-
     standing problem,'' Commissioner Meissner added.
                                                                    ____


               [From the Washington Post, Nov. 12, 1995]

                       Don't Gut Political Asylum

                         (By Philip G. Schrag)

       For many years, the United States has granted political 
     asylum to victims of persecution who come to our country and 
     seek our protection. Now, however, Congress is on the verge 
     of abolishing the right of political asylum.
       Congress is not proposing to repeal the asylum provisions 
     of the Refugee Act of 1980. An outright repeal would probably 
     never pass, because many in Congress, recalling America's 
     sorry treatment of refugees during the Holocaust, accept the 
     humanitarian premises underlying asylum. Rather, the 
     abolition is in the form of a new, apparently innocuous 
     ``procedural'' requirement. The House Judiciary Committee 
     recently adopted, as an amendment to this year's immigration 
     reform act, a proviso that denies asylum to any person who 
     applies for it more than 30 days after arriving in the United 
     States. A Senate subcommittee has approved a similar 
     proposal.
       If this bill becomes law, the asylum process will shut down 
     because, as a practical matter, it is impossible for an 
     applicant to file that quickly. Most refugees fleeing 
     persecution must give top priority to searching for their 
     American relatives and acquaintances. In many cases, they do 
     not speak English. They are not permitted to hold jobs in the 
     United States. They must immediately find ways to feed 
     themselves and their children. It takes weeks for them to 
     find minimal housing and to achieve the most basic 
     orientation to American culture. Months may pass before they 
     even learn that if they want asylum, they have to file an 
     application with the Immigration and Naturalization Service 
     (INS) on Form I-589.
       After refugees learn about asylum and obtain the form, they 
     will discover the daunting task ahead of them. The form 
     itself is quite complicated: seven pages, plus eight pages of 
     fine-print instructions. It is only available in English and 
     must be completed in English. It requires applicants to prove 
     that they have a well-founded fear, should they be deported, 
     that they will be ``persecuted'' because of their ``race, 
     religion, nationality, political opinion or membership in a 
     particular social group''--all legal terms of art that have 
     been interpreted by many courts. Because the legal standard 
     has been embellished by judicial decisions and because a 
     lawyer can help * * * case effectively, an applicant is well 
     advised to have an attorney help compile and organize the 
     supporting documentation. Mistakes can literally be fatal, 
     resulting in deportation into the hands of a persecutor.
       At present, most asylum applicants need weeks or months to 
     find a lawyer, especially if they need one who will handle 
     the application free of charge. Even now, only a few 
     neighborhood offices that offer free legal help to the poor 
     handle asylum cases, and Congress is slashing the budget of 
     the Legal Services program.
       Once the applicant finds a willing lawyer, however, more 
     inevitable delays are in store. The instructions for the 
     application form ``strongly urge'' applicants to ``attach 
     additional written statements and documents that support'' 
     their claims, including ``newspaper articles, affidavits of 
     witnesses or experts, periodicals, journals, books, 
     photographs, official documents, other personal statements, 
     or evidence regarding incidents that have occurred to 
     others.''
       The law students who help prepare these applications under 
     my supervision in an asylum law clinic at Georgetown 
     University Law Center spend at lest a month of nearly full-
     time work putting together just one application for a client. 
     Obtaining supporting affidavits or even such elementary 
     documentation as birth and death records typically includes, 
     among other things, making repeated telephone calls to people 
     in the country from which the applicant has fled (sometimes 
     with interpreters on the line) and exchanging numerous faxes 
     with witnesses and officials there. These communications are 
     expensive as well as time-consuming.
       Similarly, obtaining accounts of arbitrary imprisonment, 
     torture, rape and other human rights violations from local * 
     * * many weeks of investigative effort. Finding experts who 
     know about human rights violations against the applicant's 
     tribe or ethnic group is also an arduous and lengthy process.
       The attachments to support an application can include 
     several hundreds of pages of evidence, and the file can be 
     several inches thick. It is not reasonable to expect a 
     refugee to develop such a file within 30 days after arriving 
     in the United States, with or without the help of a lawyer.
       A few years ago, the asylum program was abused by large 
     numbers of applicants who were not genuinely eligible for it, 
     but the federal government closed this loophole by ceasing to 
     issue work permits for people whose applications have not yet 
     been approved. In July, Commissioner of Immigration Doris 
     Meissner reported that ``after years in which fraudulent 
     asylum claims were routinely filed as a backdoor way to enter 
     the U.S., INS finally has * * * stopped the abuse.''
       Congress should preserve the asylum program. At the very 
     least, Congress should not abolish asylum by invisibly and 
     irresponsibly imposing a procedural requirement that is 
     impossible to satisfy. Fewer than one percent of the 900,000 
     people who immigrate into the United States each year are 
     asylees. This small immigration program poses no serious 
     problems and is worth keeping. When we give sanctuary to 
     victims of oppression we demonstrate to everyone the most 
     humanitarian impulses of the American spirit.

                          ____________________