Speech #970191247

Mr. Chairman. I rise in strong support of the Refugee Assistance Amendments of 1982. As the Representative of San Joaquin County. one of the most heavily impacted refugee areas in the United States. I can attest to the importance of a dependable program of cash and medical assistance reimbursement to the States. An estimated 12.500 refugees live in San Joaquin County. and make up 3.45 percent of the countys population of 365.000. The presence of so many refugees in a county which is experiencing an 18.1percent unemployment rate is particularly sensitive as many lack the skills and language ability to compete for scarce jobs. During these times of economic adversity. I regularly receive complaints from constituents about the refugee presence. Some constituents are resentful about the Federal benefits refugees are receiving which are not available to them. With unemployment as high as it is. and with decreased funding for social programs. it is hard to be charitable. Nevertheless. I believe the majority of my constituents want the refugee population to succeed. They are here now and they will be here in 10 years. and it behooves us to provide the services and training to help speed their assimilation into contributing members of society. No one wants this more than the refugees themselves. We know the refugees need help. and to ignore this would be a grave abdication of Federal responsibility. That is why I believe we cannot establish the cap on Federal reimbursement which the administration would like. The committee bill clarifies the intent of Congress that the States will be reimbursed "100 percent"-not "up to 100 percent" as was previously contained in the lawfor the expenses they incur in relation to the refugees. Already California is expecting a shortfall in its Federal reimbursement. and although the magnitude of this shortfall is being debated. we must assure the States that they will receive 100percent reimbursement. More stringent State Department guidelines are expected to reduce the Southeast Asian refugee flow by about 30 to 40 percent. A 1year reauthorization of the program and the authorization of "such sums as needed" is the most flexible approach to varying refugee numbers and assimilation rates. The San Joaquin County administrators office reports that almost 8.000 of the countys 12.500 refugees are receiving AFDC and cash assistance. I am encouraged by the provisions in the committee bill that provide for closer coordination between the voluntary agencies and the welfare offices. Specifically. welfare offices are required to notify promptly the sponsoring voluntary agency whenever a refugee applies for welfare. voluntary agencies are required to notify welfare offices whenever they learn that a refugee has declined an appropriate job offer. This latter requirement will lead to the termination of cash assistance for that refugee. after an administrative hearing. The bill also provides for line items of $100 million for social services such as English language training. job training and job placement. and $14 million for medical screening and initial treatment. Social services funding will target money toward assimilation efforts. and the medical assistance will relieve the States and localities of the burden of paying for the health needs of the refugees. As the committee report notes. Indochinese refugees have tended to concentrate in certain geographic areas. California has approximately 40 percent of all Indochinese refugees admitted since 1975. and 78 percent have been placed in 10 States. For whatever reasonsclimate. an established Asian community. the relatively higher welfare benefits. or the free community college system in Californiamy State has been a popular site for secondary migration. and San Joaquin County has accepted its share of migrants. The county administrators office estimates that 7.000 or 56 percent of the refugees have come through secondary migration. The committee bill requires the Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR) of the Department of Health and Human Services to develop and implement a refugee placement policy. This would. to the extent possible. preclude placement of other than immediate family reunification cases in areas that have already been highly impacted by the resettlement of large numbers of refugees and Cuban/Haitian entrants. Further. the committee instructs ORR to conduct and to report to Congress the results of its study on the practicality and need to establish an impact aid program for refugeeconcentrated areas. Throughout the debate today. one theme emerges: The decision to admit refugees was a Federal decision. and it is the Federal Governments responsibility to provide for refugee resettlement needs for 36 months. Funding must be authorized on the "such sums as needed" basis contained in this bill. Further. authorizing funds without making an equal commitment to their appropriations is meaningless.