Rumor: Reader says some refugees let off the hook on repaying their airfare loans

Reader TonyLee says that he has heard that fairly well-off refugees who came to the US in the 1980’s and 1990’s did not suffer any consequences for not repaying taxpayer funded airfare “loans,” while today’s really poor refugees are hounded by the volags (supposedly non-profit federal contractors)  for the money.   Here is what he says:

Here’s another rumor. We know the Volags chase down the refugees to recover the interest-free loans made for airfare to the U.S. (must inculcate responsibility, you see).

We know the Volags pocket a whopping 25% of the funds they collect.

I have seen almost comical threatening legal letters sent to people who are illiterate. In these letters they are told their credit will be wrecked, they will be unable to buy a house, etc, etc.

Here is the rumor: those who arrived in the 80’s and 90’s did not pay back their loans and did not suffer any consequences.

Ironically, the Volags today are hounding truly poor and oppressed refugees for their last crumbs while the refugees who arrived in the 80’s and early 90’s who were not really refugees at all – many were basically middle class, educated Soviet Jews, never paid back the air loans. They were told they didn’t have to.

As we mentioned the other day in launching this new category (Rumors!), we do want to get at the truth about many many aspects of the Refugee Resettlement Program that are being kept hidden from the general public.

Can anyone tell us if Mr. Lee’s rumor is true or false?

Rumor: Refugees are getting larger SSI payments than American citizens

We’re launching a new category this morning, obviously titled “Rumors.”   One of the most important reforms the Refugee Resettlement industry must make is to promote transparency (where have I heard that word before?) in how the program operates.    The result of the present obvious strategy of keeping the public in the dark about the program is that “rumors” get a life of their own.   We want to find the facts!

The “rumor” of the day is that the Obama Stimulus plan gives refugees larger Supplemental Security Income (SSI) increases than American citizens are receiving.

True or false?    Would a reader who knows the answer please give us the facts.

Hamas members are NOT flooding into the U.S. from Gaza

Update Feb. 21st:  More on this issue here.

In the last few days Ann and I have seen numerous references to a presidential directive that supposedly opens the floodgates to hundreds of thousands of people from Gaza “migrating” to the United States.  Two of these articles, by usually credible sources, are here and here, and we saw several others. They all refer to a Presidential Directive that reads as follows (from the White House web site):

Monday, February 2nd, 2009 at 4:11 pm

Relief for Gaza

President Obama signed a memorandum today directing more than $20 million for “urgent refugee and migration needs” in Gaza.

You can read the full text of the memorandum below.


THE WHITE HOUSE
Office of the Press Secretary
­
For Immediate Release February 2, 2009
January 27, 2009
Presidential Determination

No. 2009-15

MEMORANDUM FOR THE SECRETARY OF STATE
SUBJECT: Unexpected Urgent Refugee and Migration
Needs Related to Gaza

By the authority vested in me by the Constitution and the laws of the United States, including section 2(c)(1) of the Migration and Refugee Assistance Act of 1962 (the “Act”), as amended (22 U.S.C. 2601), I hereby determine, pursuant to section 2(c)(1) of the Act, that it is important to the national interest to furnish assistance under the Act in an amount not to exceed $20.3 million from the United States Emergency Refugee and Migration Assistance Fund for the purpose of meeting unexpected and urgent refugee and migration needs, including by contributions to international, governmental, and nongovernmental organizations and payment of administrative expenses of the Bureau of Population, Refugees, and Migration of the Department of State, related to humanitarian needs of Palestinian refugees and conflict victims in Gaza.

You are authorized and directed to publish this memorandum in the Federal Register.

BARACK OBAMA

It must be the word “migration” in the headline and body of the directive that has set so many people to reporting President Obama’s treachery in planning to flood us with Gazans. That’s not what the directive says, folks. We are sending emergency funds to Gaza, by way of international organizations, and that’s all.

Just to be sure, I talked to an official at the State Department. He said the fund in question, known as ERMA (the U.S. Emergency Refugee and Migration Assistance fund), is run out of the White House. That is, the president has discretion to use it for what he determines are emergencies. It is for providing funds for people in place — that is, where they are in need in other countries, not here.  He pointed out that “migration” is not the same as “immigration.” It means people moving around, that’s all.

Ann posted on this directive on January 30, when it was issued. We both understood at the time that it referred to aid to Gaza civilians in Gaza. In her post Ann was critical of the emergency aid because we are well aware that much of such aid ends up in the hands of Hamas.

George W. Bush also used the ERMA fund. In September 2007 I posted on a $24 million expenditure, quoting from Reuters:

President George W. Bush authorized up to $24 million to meet “unexpected and urgent” needs of refugees from conflicts in Iraq, Lebanon, and Sri Lanka, according to a memorandum released on Monday.

The amount from the United States Emergency Refugee and Migration Assistance Fund was not to exceed $24 million “for the purpose of meeting unexpected and urgent refugee and migration needs,” Bush said in a memorandum to the Secretary of State.The funds were for international, governmental, and nongovernmental organizations, and administrative expenses of the State Department’s Bureau of Population, Refugees, and Migration, the memo said.

It is understandable that the directive would be interpreted as it was. We have learned that we cannot trust anything President Obama says or does. And he has been positively obsequious toward the Muslim world since he took office — no, since well before he took office.

But in this case the interpretation is wrong. And it needs to be corrected. Remember that our side was hurt when we allowed false rumors about Bill Clinton to circulate unimpeded. There are enough true bad actions to pin on Obama; we don’t need this false one.

Here’s a good, factual article on the matter, mostly quoting the State Department press release. Ironically, it comes from TASS, the Russian news agency.

Update Feb. 13th: More on ERMA here.

Update Feb. 18thSnopes is now on the case.  I suspect Snopes used this post or an email circulating about it for leads to the facts, since its discussion references the George W. Bush authorization of funds.