Speech #880142731

Today we have introduced a resolution intended to supplant and supersede Senate Joint Resolution 127 with respect to an identical list of beneficiaries. The two superseding resolutions. Senate Joint Resolution 127 and the one introduced today. provide that upon enactment all of the named beneficiaries shall be considered to have been paroled into the United States pursuant to section 1 of Public Law 86648. the socalled refugeefairshare law. The refugee fairshare law. enacted as a temporary measure in 1960 for the World Refugee Year. and since made a permanent part of our refugee laws. authorizes the Attorney General to parole into the United States aliens who. because of persecution or fear of persecution on account of race. religion. or political opinion. have fled from a Communist country and who cannot return there for the very same reason. The number of refugees who may thus be paroled is determined at regular intervals by the Secretary of State in accordance with a formula geared to the pace of resettlement of similar refugees by other free world nations. The two measures to which I have referred as the superseding resolutions. rather than threatening to reduce the regular Yugoslavian immigration quotas. would if enacted simply charge off the admission status of all the beneficiaries to the parole allotment for the United States under the refugee fairshare law. Mr. President. with hearings this week on various proposed revisions of the Immigration and Nationality Act. this is an appropriate occasion. in my judgment. to comment briefly on the state of the law as applicable to refugees and others seeking asylum in the United States. One of the most salient points that could be made in reference to the administration of the refugee fairshare law Is that the United States. which sees itself as a historical haven for the oppressed and downtrodden of all nations. has during the past few years carried somewhat less than its fair share of refugee resettlement. As of June 30. 1963. the total number of parolees authorized by law to enter the United States was 20.898. However. only 14.565 refugees have been found qualified under these provisions. It is ironic to note that many of those found qualified were Yugoslavs very similar to the beneficiaries listed in the two resolutions as to their background and their reasons for fleeing Yugoslavia. But the difference in treatment is due to the fact that those who have already been found qualified had not directly entered the United States but instead entered Austria. Italy. or some other nonCommunist country illegally. In contrast. those named in the resolutions came to the United States via the only common border between Yugoslavia and the United States. and that is. the sea. They came as seamen. and therefore when they overstayed their period of authorized entry as nonimmigrant seamen. they were deemed shipjumpers instead of refugees. The irony is. therefore. that whereas similar refugees have been paroled into the country under the refugee fairshare law. the beneficiaries of the resolutions stand in a different legal status while the full number of allotted fairshare parolees has not come close to being used up. The beneficiaries had their sole administrative remedy under section 243 (h) of the Immigration and Nationality Act. This provision authorizes the Attorney General to withhold deportation of any alien within the United States to any country in which. in the opinion of the Attorney General. the alien would be subject to physical persecution. Applications under this provision. with rare exceptions. have been denied on the ground that while the applicants may have established by their own testimony that if returned to Yugoslavia they may suffer from antiCatholic discrimination and oppression. or may be jailed for maritime desertion from a Yugoslav vessel. this is nevertheless not the physical persecution intended by section 243(h) of the Immigration and Nationality Act. It has become virtually impossible. then. for the usual Yugoslav refugee to furnish legally accepted proof of anticipated physical persecution within the meaning of the law. The beneficiaries here were no exception. Their applications were denied. court review proceedings were unavailing. and deportation would have followed in due course. were it not for the staying effect of the resolutions introduced in the Senate. In contrast to the line of decisions under section 243(h). which is the only asylum provision of the immigration laws proper. under the refugee fairshare law merely a bona fide fear of persecution on account of race. religion. or political belief is sufficient to qualify. No strict proof of actual anticipated physical persecution is required. This can lead to anomalous results at times. For example. the first named beneficiary in Senate Joint Resolution 132. Josep Baresic. is teetering on the brink of deportation to Yugoslavia. but meanwhile the Attorney General has admitted his brother Ante into the United States under a special nonquota refugeeescapee visa provided for in a predecessor of the refugee fairshare law. Ante Speleta is another beneficiary of Senate Joint Resolution 132 who was denied asylum under section 243(h). However. his 17yearold son Hugo was paroled into the country under the refugee fairshare law with the sponsorship of the Catholic Relief Services of the National Catholic Welfare Conference. At least two other beneficiaries of Senate Joint Resolution 132 have been classified as "political refugees" by the U5nited States High Commissioner for Refugees. and as such would not be forcibly repatriated to Yugoslavia by any of the nations of the world which have signed or adhered to the World Refugee Treaty. Nevertheless. unless this resolution receives favorable action. the United States. historical port of refuge for the oppressed. will be returning these men to Yugoslavia from whence they fled. In my judgment. this country ought never to be in the position of giving different treatment to aliens similarly situated. especially where that would result in turn in the separation of members of the same family or in the return of anyone to a regime not known for its solicitude for those who exercise freedom of political and religious expression. A number of active and vitally important relief agencies have urged assistance for these refugees and others similarly situated. in particular. the American Council for Nationalities Service. the Catholic Relief Services of the National Catholic Welfare Conference. and the International Rescue Committee. I ask unanimous consent that two letters and a memorandum from these agencies be inserted at this point in the RECORD.