Page images
PDF
EPUB

the same type of phasedown as we are recommending to begin now with respect to the refugees who are already in the United States.

Altogether, the President's proposal recommends an additional 42-year period of continuing, but decreasing, special Federal assistance to the States on behalf of the Indochinese refugees. We estimate that the funding required will total approximately $146 million for the whole period, of which $139 million would be for grants to the States and $7 million for special services and for administration.

The $139 million would of course be supplemented by the regular Federal funding, for those refugees who are eligible under the AFDC and Medicaid programs. We estimate this amount to be about $59 million.

Mr. Chairman, we recognize that a number of States have expressed their view that special Federal aid should be continued to the States on behalf of the Indochinese refugees.

The proposal which we are supporting today represents the Administration's conclusion on this question. We believe that there should be an extension in order to avoid an immediate undue impact on the States. We also believe that a distinction should be made in terms of the level of Federal funding-between the refugees who have previously reached the United States, the vast majority of whom were resettled some 2 years ago, and those who will be arriving in the next several months. That is, we feel that it is appropriate to provide a full Federal funding to the States on behalf of the new refugees for a reasonable period to offset the initial impact which would otherwise be felt in the area of cash assistance, medical assistance, social services. and related administrative costs, until these refugees begin to participate in the national economy.

The phasedown in funding, we believe, will encourage a more rapid and complete integration of the refugees into the regular activities of life in this country and not continue to leave them as a separate group indefinitely.

Mr. Chairman, we commend this proposal for the consideration of the Committee and the Congress, with the hope that action may be completed by September 30 so that there will not be a gap in the assistance to needy refugees or aid to the States.

I indicated at the beginning that we recognize that this is a very short timespan, and I want again to express my appreciation to the Committee for your consideration of this proposal.

Mr. EILBERG. Thank you very much, Mr. Wortman.

Because we do have three members present, I think we ought to stick to the 5-minute rule so we try to utilize the time available to us. I will ask questions for about 5 minutes and then ask the others for as long as we can go.

The 1975 act has been in effect for over 2 years with an expiration date of September 30, 1977; why didn't we receive the administration's proposed extension until September 7?

You talk about our enacting the law in a week. Now, you had 2 years to think about this, your Department; and you do not give us the legislation to work on until-scarcely 2 weeks ago much of which was taken up with holidays, congressional holidays.

Mr. WORTMAN. The proposal this summer as it was being developed in HEW and then proceeded towards the White House got delayed primarily because of the desire on our part to have our position on the 15,000 new refugees thought out at the same time as we presented the extension. I can only apologize for this lateness; but that is one factor that did come in during our deliberations, and delayed us somewhat in our presentation of the bill to Congress.

Mr. EILBERG. It was very clear from the inception of this program that it was to be limited in duration-with the Cuban experience in mind.

To your knowledge, have the States made any preparations for the termination of the program, or have they merely proceeded on the assumption that Congress would extend the program?

Mr. WORTMAN. I think so far as I know many of the States have already issued instructions about phasing down the staff associated with this program, and transferring some of the people from one type of eligibility roll to another. Mr. Holman may have additional information on that.

Mr. HOLMAN. Yes.

Mr. EILBERG. Mr. Holman?

Mr. HOLMAN. Mr. Chairman, our impression is that the actions by the States have varied. As Mr. Wortman has indicated, some have followed that precisely in moving toward the transfer of eligible cases to other programs; whereas other States, having known that there was to be, or was expected to be, a favorable administration position on extension, have not taken such action as yet.

Mr. EILBERG. Did HEW request the States to provide transition plans, or did you attempt in any way to prepare the States for the expiration of Federal funding?

Mr. WORTMAN. I think if we could submit this for the record you would find that all of our policy statements since the important oneI think it was June

Mr. HOLMAN. 1975.

Mr. WORTMAN [continuing.] June of 1975, which set forth policies to the States for these kinds of public assistance, were very explicit that this program expires in September 1977. Of course, it was our hope, and I think everybody's at State government levels and private voluntary agncies-all worked hard so we would not have as many on cash assistance as it now appears that we do have.

[The following was submitted for the record :]

POLICY INSTRUCTION TO STATES

HEW has provided for the record the basic Policy Instruction to the States on the refugee assistance program, issued June 9, 1975. References to the expiration date of the Indochina Migration and Refugee Assistance Act (Public Law 94-23) appear on the first and last pages. (Certain of the aspects of this Instruction were superseded by later Instructions to the States.)

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, EDUCATION, AND WELFARE
SOCIAL AND REHABILITATION SERVICE
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20201

TO:

SUBJECT:

BACKGROUND:

NEW LEGISLATION:

CONTENT:

POLICY INSTRUCTION

ACTION TRANSMITTAL
SRS-AT-75-27.

June 9, 1975

STATE ADMINISTRATORS AND OTHER INTERESTED ORGANIZATIONS
AND AGENCIES

VIETNAMESE AND CAMBODIAN REFUGEES

This supersedes Action Transmittel SRS-AT-75-8
(April 29, 1975) with regard to Vietnamese refugees.
(A further notice regarding the Repatriate Program
will be transmitted when pending legislation is en-
acted.)

The following legislation has been enacted, providing
for asistance to Cambodian and Vietnamese refugees
in the United States:

The Indochina Migration and Refugee Assistance
Act of 1975 (Public Law 94-23).

Special Appropriations for Assistance to Refugees from Cambodia and Vietnam (Public Law 94-24).

Under the authority of the cited legislation, the
Social and Rehabilitation Service will provide
reimbursement to States on a 100 percent basis for
financial assistance, medical assistance, and social
services to Vietnamese and Cambodian refugees in the
United States. This will also include reimbursement
on a 100 percent basis for administrative costs incurred
in the provision of such assistance and services.

Funds for this purpose have been appropriated for the period ending June 30, 1976. The authorizing legislation for this purpose expires September 30, 1977.

States may claim reimbursement of costs, as defined by this Policy Instruction, incurred on behalf of Cambodian or Vietnamese refugees on or after April 8, 1975 (the date on which the President designated Vietnamese and Cambodians to be refugees under the Migration and Refugee Assistance Act).

[ocr errors]

- 2

The Congressional intent that this be a temporary program has been made clear. The House Appropriations Committee stated in its report (No. 94-204, May 13, 1975): "The Committee is concerned that this program could develop into a permanent Federal undertaking similar to the present Cuban refugee program. The Committee wants to state categorically that this is not its intent nor should the Executive Branch or the various States interpret the appropriation of these funds as starting a permanent Federal program. With this in mind, the Committee directs that the Executive Branch place these refugees in existing federal programs as soon as possible so that this part of the operation [the special funds for welfare, medical assistance, education, and public health] can be promptly phased out."

Waiver of Categorical Relatedness

Requirements of categorical relatedness for financial
assistance, medical assistance, and social services
are waived. This enables assistance and services to
be provided on the basis of need, without regard to
family composition or the presence of children. The
provision of assistance on this basis is designed to
avoid a needy refugee's becoming a burden on State or
local public or voluntary resources if the resettlement
plan has broken down.

Verification with Sponsors of Refugees

Most of the refugees who reach a community will have been resettled by one of the national voluntary agencies or a State or local government working with the Federal Government and will have a local sponsor. The sponsor may be an individual, a church, a civic organization, a State or local government, or other local group or organization. The responsibilities of the sponsor remain the same regardless of which of these categories a sponsor falls into.

In resettling a refugee, the resettlement agency and
the sponsor undertake certain responsibilities as a
moral commitment. These include receiving the refugee
and his family, providing shelter and food until the
refugee becomes self-sufficient; providing clothing
and pocket money; providing assistance in finding
employment and in school enrollment for children; and
covering ordinary medical costs. Once employment is
obtained, the sponsor will assist the refugee to locate
permanent housing, acquire minimal furniture, and
arrange for utilities. Sponsors are also expected to

96-725 O-78-5

- 3

help the refugees with some of the less tangible
aspects of adjustment to a new culture.

If a sponsor no longer provides for a refugee

-

[ocr errors]

as may occur when a substantial period of unemployment
is experienced or when major medical needs arise.
then the refugee may have to turn to the public
welfare agency for assistance.

As part of the regular verification process, the State
agency, prior to accepting a refugee for assistance,
should contact the sponsor, verify that the sponsorship
has broken down, and assure itself that the sponsor
has done the best he can.

The State agency should also confirm that the resettle-
ment agency has been notified of the breakdown in
the sponsorship so that the resettlement agency can
endeavor to develop another sponsorship; meanwhile
assistance may need to be provided. In cases in which
the State acts as the resettlement agency, the State
agency will notify responsible State officials of the
breakdown. States that act as a resettlement agency
have the same responsibilities as the voluntary
resettlement agency.

Isolated instances of breakdowns in resettlement
planning are expected to occur in any refugee resettle-
ment program. However, if the welfare agency should
find that refugees in a community are applying for
assistance within a few days after arrival or that
a substantial portion of the resettlements are breaking
down, this information should be communicated immediately
to the office of the SRS Regional Commissioner, including
the names of the voluntary resettlement agencies res-
ponsible for the resettlements. This will provide a
basis for corrective action and future resettlement
planning.

« PreviousContinue »