Speech #1040191416

I know that the proponents of the amendment are well intentioned. Second. I know that we share the same goals. and that is a generous level of admission for refugees. But still. in my judgment. Congress should set the level of refugee admissions. The bill ensures that Congress. not the White House. sets refugee admission levels that are responsive to humanitarian needs and that serve the national interest. To me this amendment in many ways is the equivalent of Congress saying that we do not trust ourselves with the responsibility of setting those refugee admission levels and that only an administration. regardless of whether it is a Republican or Democratic administration. could handle the responsibility. The bill also give the President acting in consultation with Congress. though. sufficient flexibility to meet emergency humanitarian situations by admitting additional refugees. The bill sets refugee admissions at a target level of 75.000 in fiscal year 1997 and 50.000 per year thereafter. Under current law. refugee admissions are set by the President with minimal impact from Congress. Under the bill. the target level may be exceeded either if Congress approves a higher level or if the President declares a refugee emergency. Based on administration projections of future refugee resettlement needs. the bill will not result in a reduction of refugee admissions. The administration projects that refugee admissions will be 90.000 this year. 70.000 in fiscal year 1997. and 50.000 in fiscal year 1998. which is almost exactly in line with what the bill has as its targets. In fact. in one of those years the bill actually has 5.000 refugees more than the administration recommends. The refugee provisions in H.R. 2202 also follow recommendations of the bipartisan commission on immigration reform chaired by the late Barbara Jordan. Given the positions of the State Department and the Jordan commission. the bill reflects a consensus on the need for permanent resettlement of refugees into the United States. Mr. Chairman. current refugee admissions consist primarily of refugees admitted through special programs operating in the former Soviet Union and in Indochina. Of the 90.000 refugees who will be admitted this year. 70.000 will come from Just those two resettlement programs. Since these programs are due to phase out soon in the next couple of years. the targets contained in the bill will ensure that refugee admissions do not drop below historically generous levels. H.R. 2202 creates a new category in immigration law that allows 10.000 visas to be granted every year to those who do not qualify for refugee status but whose admission is of a humanitarian interest to the United States. Congress should get back into the business of setting refugee admission levels. We simply cannot afford to continue to give any President unfettered discretion in determining refugee policy. Let me conclude. Mr. Chairman. by emphasizing two points. The first is that we are not really talking about any difference in numbers. Both the bill. the commission on immigration reform. and the administration through its State Department. have all recommended the exact same levels concluding 2 years from now in a level of about 50.000. So numbers are not the issue. We all know what the numbers are going to be. The second point is that the real question is who gets to decide. Should it be the President alone? Or should Congress have a role in determining our refugee policy? Historically. Congress has always had a role in setting immigration policy. Quite frankly. under the Refugee Act of 1980. Congress is supposed to have an equal role with the President. with the administration. in establishing refugee policy. We know that is not the case. that consultation procedures that we now go through have in effect become a situation where the administration dictates to Congress what the refugee levels will be. So the whole point of this amendment again is to guarantee that we have generous levels of refugee admissions. In fact the commission on immigration reform said In testimony before the Subcommittee on Immigration and Claims that the reason they recommended the target of 50.000 is because they were afraid that if we did not have a target of 50.000. the levels would drop below that 50.000. For example. as I have already explained. 70 of the 80.000 refugees expected this year are in two categories that are soon to expire. So the motive behind the bill again was to continue a generous level of refugees in accordance with the projects by the State Department and the recommendations of the Commission on Immigration Reform. Again. the second point is that I think that Congress does have a role to play when it comes to setting refugee policy. and that is why I have to say that I reluctantly oppose this amendment. Mr. Chairman.