Despite recession, State Department Refugee admissions have not slowed

There are few jobs and Iraqi refugees especially are not staying quiet about the conditions in which they are living, yet we are on target to reach the ceiling permitted for refugee resettlement this year.   President Bush set the admissions ceiling for 2009 at 80,000 and seven months in we are already at 36,702.   Normally the refugee admission numbers increase dramatically in the last half of the year.   For contrast note that at this time (end of April) in 2008 we had admitted 23,072.

We have a major recession, jobs are not available, refugee agencies are closing their doors and we keep the spigot wide open.  You would almost think someone wanted the system to implode.

To answer some readers questions here are the top six sending countries:

Iraq:  9581

Burma:  8149

Bhutan (Nepalese):  6651

Iran:   3093

Cuba:  2672   (I thought the Obama Administration regards Cuba as a lovely place to live)

Somalia:  2232 (see my post earlier this morning on this, here)

After that the numbers drop off into the hundreds or less for myriad countries.   I thought some other interesting numbers were:  Russia (305), Ukraine (330), Vietnam (693), Afghanistan (228), and Palestine (10).  I put this last in here to point out that NO we are not bringing large numbers of Palestinians right now.

UN revises its guidelines for Iraqi refugees

The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) reports that Iraq is safer, so it is no longer recommending that Iraqis who leave get automatic refugee status. A press release from UNHCR says:

The improved security situation in Iraq, particularly the southern governorates and Al-Anbar governorate, has allowed UNHCR to revise its guidelines on eligibility for Iraqi asylum seekers for the first time since the end of 2007. UNHCR previously advised that all Iraqis from the central and southern governorates should be considered refugees – unless they are in categories, such as those who have committed war crimes, who are specifically excluded. Now UNHCR believes the international protection needs of those originating from Al-Anbar and the southern governorates should be individually assessed.

UNHCR will continue to recommend special consideration for certain groups, such as

members of religious and ethnic minorities; public officials; Iraqis perceived as opposing armed groups or political factions; Iraqis affiliated with the multinational forces or foreign companies; certain professionals; media workers; UN and NGO workers; human rights activists; and homosexuals.

It also names particular areas in Iraq where there are still problems, and recommends refugee status for Iraqis leaving there. And UNHCR does not recommend mass returns to Iraq at this point.

The Washington Post reports on the UNHCR’s change of policy here.  And here’s an odd little thing that goes by without explanation:

Some of the 1.5 million Iraqis living outside their country, which descended into sectarianism after U.S.-led forces invaded in 2003, should now be able to return safely, UNHCR spokesman Ron Redmond said.

One and a half million Iraqi refugees, hmm? Since I began reading about Iraqi refugees, the number has always been stated as two million. Just a couple of weeks ago I reported that the Iraqi government is compiling statistics on how many displaced Iraqis there actually are. And I wrote:

The longstanding estimate is that 2 million Iraqis have left the country. They are not counting internally displaced people, but that number has been estimated at 2.5 million. I generally hold to the rule that reality is never as bad as estimates and media reports in any area (such as environmental problems), but occasionally wartime figures turn out worse than estimated. If I had to bet, I’d place my money on the not-as-bad scenario. There are always reasons to inflate numbers and few incentives to deflate them.

And now, mysteriously, the two million number has been reduced by 25 percent. I hope somebody explains what happened. Perhaps 500,000 refugees have returned, but I don’t think so.

IRC closes office in Boston, leaves refugees in the lurch

Update May 4th:   More details about this closure revealed here.

My fury is without bounds this morning as I read this article from the Boston Globe.   The granddaddy of Corporate Humanitarianism, the International Rescue Committee, is abruptly closing its doors in Boston (along with the Globe ?) and other nearby Massachusetts cities because it doesn’t have enough federal money to keep them going.   Arrghhh!   Before you read this, return to my post of only two days ago where I told you about the huge salaries we taxpayers are paying for the CEO and Vice Presidents of this supposedly charitable organization.   This Boston Globe story makes it sound like they are a struggling shoe-string operation!

And, since Massachusetts Senator Ted Kennedy is the brains behind the refugee program we are now operating under (since 1980), I hope to God we don’t find out that the IRC is dropping the lifeline for refugees they resettled in Kennedy-land in hopes of putting political pressure on Congress to give more of your money for refugee resettlement—-a bailout for the Top Ten Corporate Humanitarian organizations.  Maybe Senator Ted, the hypocrit, Kennedy should take some soon-to-be-homeless Iraqis to that big house in Hyannisport, even persuade his neighbors to do the same!

To set the stage, here is how the Boston Globe story begins:

In their cramped apartment at the base of the Tobin Bridge, Jamal Al Samara, Iqbal Abid, and their three children don’t mind the rumbling of the traffic above or the occasional bang of a car crash. The Iraqi refugees learned to live with booms and other din at the home they abandoned in Baghdad.

What’s more distressing for the family – who moved to Chelsea eight months ago without a penny, with little English, and deep anxiety about living in such a different culture – is that in a month they will lose the one lifeline they’ve had since arriving in the United States.

The International Rescue Committee’s office in Boston, which over the last 30 years has helped settle more than 25,000 refugees, has told state officials it will close on June 1 – creating a vacuum in services for some of the region’s most vulnerable residents, and leaving hundreds of refugees like the Al Samara family to figure out where to turn for help with housing, medical care, food, jobs, and much more.

“This is terrible for us,” said Abid, who works 25 hours a week on the salad line at a Panera Bread in Boston, a job arranged by the International Rescue Committee. “Now, there will be no one to help us. We are afraid. We are here just a few months. We need more help.”

IRC says its not getting enough federal money!  I told you two days ago that in 2007 they received almost half of their funds from the federal government (you!) and in that year it was $108 million.

Officials at the New York-based organization said they had to close the Boston office, as well as satellite offices in Worcester and Lowell, because of insufficient aid from the federal government, rising local expenses, and a dwindling donor base. They’re in the process of firing what’s left of their 32-member staff statewide, cutting links to scores of volunteers, and transitioning their clients to other organizations.

No where have I seen any of these federal contractors say that maybe with the economic downturn we should slow the flow of refugees to the US.

“This is sad, and it was a very difficult decision,” said Jenny Mincin, regional director of the International Rescue Committee, which has 23 other offices in the United States and operates in 42 countries. “But the cost of housing in Boston, the difficulty of finding the refugees employment rapidly, and the economic downturn made this necessary.”

Read this next section of the article, it’s the tipping point for my anger this morning.

When the Rescue Committee opened its Boston office in 1979 in response to a flood of Southeast Asians fleeing Cambodia and Vietnam, the State Department provided $565 per refugee to resettlement organizations. The federal government now provides $900 per refugee, but with rent and other expenses significantly higher, that amount buys significantly less today in Boston. In exchange for the payment, the resettlement groups are expected to do everything from meet the refugees at the airport to rent and furnish their apartments, buy them food, set them up with public assistance, show them how to navigate the city, find them medical care, and enroll them in job training and English programs, among many other tasks.

In short, the groups say, the government aid no longer covers their costs; they now rely on private donations and volunteers to make up the difference.

As for that $900 payment, this is misleading.   It doesn’t all go to the refugee, the IRC gets to keep half of that State Department payment for their overhead.  The refugee is lucky to get $450.  But, what they don’t tell you here is that the IRC gets most of its federal funds from grants through the Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR) in the Dept. of Health and Human Services, and through various programs it, like its sister groups, doles out (after taking its cut) in some mysterious fashion that is not consistent from organization to organization in the Top Ten.

And then, this CRAP about now having to rely on private donations and volunteers—THEY WERE ALWAYS SUPPOSED TO DEPEND ON PRIVATE DONATIONS AND VOLUNTEERS, IT IS A HIGHLY TOUTED PUBLIC-PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP.  It was never meant to be a completely government-funded program and if it was (or is) then let’s put the whole thing back into government control so we citizens can have at least some accountablility about where our tax dollars are spent.

In fact we have argued from day one of  writing this blog that there is not enough private donor and volunteer development being done in these groups.  It’s just easier to set up little bureaucracies funded by taxpayers rather than to get local citizens, churches and other groups to sponsor families.   In Waterbury, CT we even saw one resettlement office actively discourage church volunteers from helping the Burmese that the resettlement office had neglected.

We have advocated from day one that every refugee family must have a local sponsor (not some other poor struggling refugee family member) for a minimum of a year.  Not enough sponsors, then the number of refugees brought to the US is limited accordingly.

Closing offices sets a bad example.

That’s what another representative of a Top Ten Corporate Humanitarian organization says.  However, we have reported that even Catholic Charities has been dropping the ball in its care of refugees.

Marjean Perhot, director of refugee and immigration services at Catholic Charities, worried that the Rescue Committee’s closure will set a bad example for other organizations that might decide that “when it gets too expensive to settle refugees, it’s time to stop.”

Back to the apparently Muslim Iraqi family we opened with.  Did anyone line them up with support from a local mosque or church?  It doesn’t sound like it.

But they’re running low on cash and are worried about covering the $850 monthly rent for their three-bedroom apartment, and repaying the $5,500 they owe the federal government for their plane tickets to Boston, among other concerns.

“We’re very lucky for all the help we have received,” Abid said. “But I don’t know what we’re going to do when we need more help.”

What are they and thousands going to do as the federal funding runs out?   I don’t see any move by the IRC to shutter its New York City corporate headquarters, or cut its big CEO salary (over $400,000 salary and benefits), or lay off some of its vice presidents.  It strikes me as no differant than the big so-called greedy corporations paying out big salaries at the top and laying off the little guy.   The differance is that groups like the IRC can hide behind their do-gooder cover—-what is that expression—-doing well by doing good.

Note to Refugee Industry lobbyists—Refugees International, Human Rights First and Center for American Progress— who are all advocating that we bring tens of thousands, indeed 100,000 Iraqis to the US THIS YEAR, are you aware of what is happening in American towns and cities to the Iraqis already here.

Maybe its time to heed the warning from the ‘wise beyond his years’ Iraqi boy in Tucson who said:

It is better to have 10 Iraqi refugees who are satisfied with their lives than having 100 angry ones with no life at all.

Weird Iraqi refugee story in LA Times

I’m just going to let you go read this at the LA Times.  Frankly, it makes no sense.  This American woman, a reporter, falls for an Iraqi man while on assignment in Iraq.  They ultimately marry.    He then applies for refugee status (I think through the Special Immigrant Visa Program) because he worked for Americans.   But, he also applied for his younger brother to come with him.  Younger brother gets accepted but husband is still waiting to hear.  New wife is hosting sullen younger brother who doesn’t want to eat her cupcakes and cookies.

Either Iraqi refugee processing is very screwed-up or the husband has run into Homeland Security screening problems—not good whichever it is!

Iraqi refugees in Atlanta voice their unhappiness to IRC’s CEO

Your tax dollars:

I must say even I am getting tired of one article after another about Iraqi refugees struggling to find their way in Any City, USA.  Maybe you are too, but I think you will enjoy this aspect of the same old story. 

The basic story we have reported more than 20 times now is:

* Iraqi refugees misled by officials abroad about how great their lives in the US will be, 

* Iraqis can’t find employment and many are highly skilled, evictions possible,

* Refugee agency ‘poor mouths’ and claims they are struggling along with meager funding, trying to do their best they tell reporters,

* Iraqis are savvy enough to know how to voice their complaints to the media, unlike refugees from camps such as the Burmese or Bhutanese,

* No resolution to the problems in sight, refugee program will soon emerge on the national stage as more refugees continue to pour into the country.

This article today from the Atlanta Journal Constitution contains a revealing bit of news.   George Rupp, former President of Columbia University and CEO of the International Rescue Committee, one of the Top Ten government contractors has gone to Atlanta and called a meeting of disgruntled refugees.

Atlanta welcomes more than 2,000 refugees every year, many of whom are fleeing terror or have lived the bulk of their years without a homeland. But amid a severe recession in this country, the struggle to begin anew is greater than ever.

Expectations dashed and pocketbooks quickly emptied, jobless refugees are left to ponder whether the lives they left behind, though mired in fear, might have served them better.

“What do I have to expect? Being homeless? This is the United States. Life should be better than that,” says an angry Zainab Ibrahim, an accountant who fled to Jordan from her native Iraq and was resettled in Atlanta last June.

She came with hope, as did her compatriots Jabber Mohammed, Abdulkadir Ahmed and Imad Yakoub, middle-class professionals who expected to find suitable employment here.

Some aired their frustrations one April afternoon at the Decatur office of the International Rescue Committee, a nonprofit agency that resettles refugees. George Rupp, president and CEO of the global organization, was visiting the Atlanta office to hear from Iraqis like Ibrahim, now dependent on the generosity of friends and family to pay her bills.

Rupp says American resettlement agencies feel a moral responsibility for Iraqi refugees because of the 2003 invasion and subsequent U.S. involvement in Iraq. It took the United States several years to open its doors to Iraqis displaced in the war that began in 2003. It’s unfortunate, Rupp says, that when they finally began arriving in America, it was in the midst of an economic downturn.

Corporate Humanitarianism

Let me tell you a little about Dr. Rupp and his struggling refugee agency.   This is from their 2007 Form 990:

The IRC took in $253,733,301 in that year and $108,201,276 came from you, the taxpayer, in the form of government grants.   Think about it— over $108 million!  That is almost half of all their funding.

Dr. Rupp’s salary and benefits package amounted to $412,540 which is more than the  President of the United States or the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court makes. 

Four Vice Presidents in New York receive salary and benefits ranging from the high $100,000’s to nearly $250,000.    They spent around a half a million dollars on fundraising consultants and $444,000 on their financial audit alone.   

All this and they leave refugees living in fear of being evicted from their apartments and being homeless in the mean streets of America.    Where is the IRC’s moral responsibility?

We’re seeking emergency funding [Edit: this means from you the taxpayer] to prevent homelessness,” says Beattie of the International Rescue Committee.

She doesn’t know of a family who is on the streets yet, but is concerned about the high number of eviction notices. Refugees in Georgia are not immediately eligible for subsidized public housing, prompting some to migrate to states such as Maine where such housing is available.

Yes, just ship them off to Maine where the taxpayers can pick up the tab.  Maybe the IRC ought to cut a few salaries and help the people they feel a moral responsibility to!

Do you know how the Obama Administration is attempting to cap salaries of bank executives and other business executives that get taxpayer funding, same principle applies here, or does ‘spreading the wealth’ not apply to the work of do-gooders? 

I hope  you are reading this Mr. Parker.