I believe I will be the last speaker on our side. and I think that my colleagues before me have adequately addressed the issue. Let me Just summarize these arguments as to why I am opposed. and I would urge the House to oppose the Sensenbrenner amendment. First of all. the. targeted program provides muchneeded assistance relief to State and local taxpayers who are faced with the influx of refugees needing assistance and adjustment. As has been stated before. the refugees co.a e here through Federal policies. Once again. at a time when we are attacking the localities in every diferent direction. cutting programs. revenue sharing will be eliminated after next year according to the budget resolution passed by both the House and the Senate. So many other programs are also being cut. it does not make sense at all. it is unfair to tell these localities that they must bear the responsibility on their own. The second issue is that this is not a cash program. It is the kind of program the gentlemen from the other side have often urged us to embark upon. programs that are not bottomless pits. programs that will help people become selffulfilling and independent. In New York City. for instance. we received $2 million for this program. 80 percent of the 1.000 refugees that were trained were working the next year in nonsubsidized ways. So this program is costefficient. Third. it is not directed at only two or three States.
Keywords matched
refugees