Order Code IB89150
Issue Brief for Congress
Received through the CRS Web
Refugee Assistance in the Foreign Aid Bill:
Problems and Prospects
Updated August 15, 2002
Vita Bite
Foreign Affairs, Defense, and Trade Division
Congressional Research Service ˜ The Library of Congress

---

CONTENTS
SUMMARY
MOST RECENT DEVELOPMENTS
BACKGROUND AND ANALYSIS
Funding for Refugee Assistance
Refugee Admissions
Overseas Refugee Assistance
Refugees to Israel
International Organizations
Administration
Special Funding for Refugee Emergencies
Budget Pressures on the Migration and Refugee Assistance Account
Changing Humanitarian Needs
The Changing Nature of Refugee Situations
The Debate in Congress
Refugee Admissions
Finding Funds for Emergency Assistance
Improving the Efficiency of International Refugee Programs
Addressing the Causes of Refugee Flight
LEGISLATION

---

IB89150
08-15-02
Refugee Assistance in the Foreign Aid Bill: Problems and Prospects
SUMMARY
The United States is the largest national
tic disputes. These new conditions have led to
contributor to international humanitarian
a change in the nature of refugee emergencies
assistance programs for refugees. Tradition-
and changes in the types of programs which
ally, we contribute to refugee appeals both
the United States and the international com-
because of our wish to alleviate the suffering
munity provide for refugees and other people
of innocent victims and out of concern that
forced to flee their homes, as well as a tremen-
refugee flows can lead to instability in coun-
dous increase in the number of people needing
tries or regions important to U.S. foreign
assistance. All these changes have led to
policy interests. The United States is also the
continuing debate between the Administration
largest resettlement country, resettling refu-
and the Congress and within the Congress.
gees who cannot return to their homes and
qualify to be resettled in the United States.
Because the MRA is part of the foreign
The money for humanitarian assistance and
aid appropriation, and because humanitarian
some of the costs of resettlement in the United
emergencies are growing in number, complex-
States is authorized in the Migration and
ity, and size, the MRA faces enormous budget
Refugee Account (MRA) of the Department
pressures, both from traditional foreign assis-
of State Authorization bill and appropriated in
tance programs and from new emerging na-
the Foreign Assistance Appropriations bill.
tional priorities. While refugee assistance
(The overwhelming bulk of assistance for
enjoys considerable support, Congress and the
refugees who resettle in the United States is
Administration face the difficult task of fund-
authorized and appropriated in the Labor,
ing humanitarian needs within a constrained
HHS, legislation.) This issue brief discusses
budget. For the last several years, the appro-
the size of the U.S. international refugee
priation for the MRA account has remained at
assistance budget and its allocation between
about $700 million.
humanitarian assistance and admissions.
P.L. 107-115, signed into law on January
With the end of the Cold War, the U.S.
10, 2002, appropriated $705 million for the
refugee policy began to evolve from its nearly
MRA and $15 million for the Emergency
exclusive anti-communist focus to a new
Refugee and Migration assistance (ERMA) for
focus that is still emerging. At the same time,
FY2002. The President requested $705 mil-
nations no longer constrained by superpower
lion for MRA and $15 million for ERMA for
politics began to implode with internal domes-
FY2003.
Congressional Research Service ˜ The Library of Congress

---

IB89150
08-15-02
MOST RECENT DEVELOPMENTS
On July 24, 2002, The Senate Committee on Appropriations reported (S.Rept. 107-219)
S. 2779, Foreign Operations appropriations legislation for FY2003, including $782 million
for the Migration and Refugee Assistance (MRA) account. $60 million is to be available for
refugees from the former Soviet Union and Eastern Europe resettling in Israel and not more
than $16.565 million is to be for administrative expenses. The Committee recommended $32
million for the Emergency Refugee and Migrations Assistance (ERMA). The President
requested $705 million for MRA and $15 million ERMA.
BACKGROUND AND ANALYSIS
Two major factors influence U.S. decisions to aid refugees: (1) an American bipartisan
tradition of humanitarian concern for suffering people, and (2) a concern that refugee flows
can lead to instability in countries important to U.S. foreign policy. This assistance takes the
form of aid to refugees in their countries of asylum and admission to the United States for
some refugees of special concern.
Funding for Refugee Assistance
The refugee and migration account is authorized in the legislation governing the
Department of State and appropriated in the Foreign Assistance Appropriation legislation.
(In addition, under the provisions of the Refugee Act of 1980, the House and Senate
Judiciary Committees provide oversight of refugee admissions and assistance through a
required annual consultation with the Administration.) The migration and refugee account
includes five major components:
Refugee Admissions. This includes the costs of screening and processing refugees
for admission to the United States, medical examinations, language training, cultural
orientation, care and maintenance until they arrive, and transportation loans for travel to the
United States. It also includes reception and placement grants to cover initial resettlement
in the United States. The bulk of the domestic costs of refugee resettlement in the United
States is appropriated in the Health and Human Services agency authorization and
appropriation legislation. For information on refugee admissions costs and appropriations,
see CRS Report RL31269, Refugee Admissions and Resettlement Policy.
Overseas Refugee Assistance. Aid to refugees consists almost entirely of
contributions to international organizations and to private voluntary organizations working
under the direction of such organizations in caring for refugees outside the United States.
A small amount, approximately 3%, is provided directly to private voluntary organizations
or to governments of first asylum countries. The primary international agencies include the
U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), and the U.N. Relief and Works Agency
for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA). In the FY2003 request, the
Administration separated out (within Overseas Assistance) funding for migration. These
CRS-1

---

IB89150
08-15-02
funds are expected to support efforts to promote orderly migration and provide protection to
vulnerable migrants, including victims of trafficking. Funds are expected to go mainly to the
International Organizations for Migration (IOM). The United States also contributes to the
International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), a private international humanitarian
agency that acts as an intermediary in situations of armed conflict.
Refugees to Israel. The United States provides funding through a grant to the
United Israel Appeal to help finance the resettlement of Jewish refugees in Israel.
International Organizations. The United States also contributes to the regular
non-emergency budgets of the IOM and the ICRC. Unlike other international organizations,
the regular budgets of these refugee agencies are paid out of the Migration and Refugee
Assistance account rather than out of the International Organization and Programs account.
Administration. This category includes the costs of personnel and operating expenses
for the State Department Bureau of Refugee Programs.
Table 1 shows amounts appropriated and how it was allocated for the last few years.
Table 1. Migration and Refugee Assistance
(thousands of $)
FY2002
FY2003
FY1999 FY2000
FY2001
Estimate
Request
Refugee Admissions
$142,360a
$92,900
$92,854
$92,000
$105,000
Overseas Refugee Assistance
East Asia
18,456
15,485
21,223
15,800
15,500
Africa
144,235
154,847
190,900
195,600
195,600
Near East
97,963
108,250
106,959
103,400
103,400
South Asiae
27,475
29,879
35,840
45,500
45,500
W. Hemisphere
14,713
16,486
13,626
15,000
14,700
Europe
310,083a
57,692
104,153
88,000
77,000
Multiregional
67,215
73,286
58,569
57,700
56,600
Activities
Migrationc
–-
–-
–-
16,000
15,700
Subtotal
680,140
455,925
531,270
537,000
524,000
Other Activities
Refugees to Israel
70,000
60,000
59,868
60,000
60,000
Administration
13,470 13,800

15,010
16,565
16,565
Total
$905,970
$622,625b
$699,002d
$705,565
705,565
CRS-2

---

IB89150
08-15-02
a P.L. 106-31, the FY1999 Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act, appropriated $266 million for this
account to be available until September 30, 2000. Of this amount, $225.5 million was allocated to
assistance in the regions, $40 million to resettlement in the United States, and $0.5 million to
administrative expenses. In FY1999, $97.9 million was obligated and $166.6 million was carried
forward to FY2000. The Supplemental Appropriation is discussed in CRS Report RL30083 by Larry
Nowels.
b Of the $622.6 million appropriated in FY2000, $21.0 million was not made available until September 30,
2000. This amount is included in the FY2000 column of the chart above.
c In FY2001, funds for Migration activities ($14.5 million ) were included within the individual Overseas
Assistance regions. Beginning in FY2002, they were combined into a new Overseas Assistance category.
d Of the $698.46 million appropriated in FY2001, $6.9 million was carried forward into FY2002 as follows:
Overseas Assistance East Asia ($771,000), Overseas Assistance Europe ($256,000), Overseas Assistance
South Asia ($2.7 million), Multiregional Activities ($390,000), and Refugee Admissions ($2.8 million).
These funds are included in the FY2001 column of the chart above.
e In addition to the $45.4 million appropriated for south Asia in FY2002, $100 million was available from the
Emergency Response Fund (P.L. 107-38).
In addition to the amounts in the table, P.L. 107-38 (FY2001 Emergency Supplemental
Appropriations) included $100 million for Afghan refugees and P.L. 107-206 (FY2002
Emergency Supplemental Appropriations) included $40 million for migration and refugee
assistance.
The amounts above also do not constitute all the U.S. funds dedicated to responding to
humanitarian emergencies. In addition, the USAID Food For Peace Program (Title II) and
Bureau for Humanitarian Response/Office of Foreign Disaster Assistance provide funds for
humanitarian emergencies. In FY2002, Congress appropriated $850 million and $235.5
million, respectively, for these programs. The Department of Defense also provides
emergency humanitarian assistance. In FY2002, the DOD humanitarian assistance account
received a $49.7 million appropriation.
The President requested $705 million for the Migration and Refugee Assistance account
for FY2003. The Senate Committee on Appropriations recommended (S.Rept. 107-219, on
S. 2779) $782 million for MRA and $32 million for ERMA
Special Funding for Refugee Emergencies
Because refugee emergencies occur at frequent but unpredictable intervals, the United
States established the Emergency Refugee and Migration Assistance account (ERMA) in
1962. This account is a no year account which may be drawn upon at the President’s
discretion without fiscal year limitations. It is replenished through additional appropriations
as necessary. The President must report the drawdown of this fund to Congress. Table 2
shows appropriations for, and drawdowns in, ERMA in response to refugee emergencies in
recent years. The appropriation for FY2002 was $15 million and the FY2003 request is also
$15 million.
CRS-3

---

IB89150
08-15-02
Table 2. ERMA Appropriations and Drawdown
(millions of $)
Fiscal
Year
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001 2002
Approp.
79.3
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
195.0*
12.5
15.0
15.0
Drawdown
81.0
35.0
22.0
53.0
57.0
85.0
40.0
82.0
25.0
* P.L. 106-31 appropriated an additional $165 million for ERMA for FY1999 in response to the
Kosovo emergency. This is in addition to the $30 million appropriated in the regular
appropriation.
Budget Pressures on the Migration
and Refugee Assistance Account
After the end of the Cold War, refugee expenditures grew substantially. The Refugee
and Migration budget grew from $449.7 million in FY1990 to nearly $671 million in
FY1996, then leveled out at $650 million for several years after that. At the same time,
special appropriations for refugee emergencies and expenditures for humanitarian programs
in other accounts grew. Refugee activities in the Balkans have forced the account to grow
substantially since 1999. Both Congress and the President have attempted to keep refugee
expenditures in the foreign aid budget static because of budget pressures to reduce the entire
International Affairs budget function (function 150), of which refugee assistance is a part,
and other new or growing emphases in the foreign aid program. Refugee needs in general
are difficult to predict and the amount needed for refugee emergencies often cannot be
predicted.
Changing Humanitarian Needs
While budget pressures have squeezed the size of the migration and refugee account,
the worldwide refugee situation has put donor nations under increasing pressure to provide
more funds. The number of refugees in camps around the world increased steadily after the
end of the Cold War, straining the regular budgets of the agencies that assist them. But the
numbers displaced by warfare, or other manmade disasters within their own countries grew
even more. These internally displaced persons (IDPs), such as those in Sierra Leon, Bosnia,
Chechnya, or Afghanistan, currently outnumber traditional refugees. There is no good
estimate of the number of refugees and IDPs worldwide. According to the 2000 Statistical
Overview released in July 2001 by the U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR),
the number of people of concern to the UNHCR declined from a record 27 million in 1995
to 21.8 million by December 2000. This included 12.0 million refugees (persons who have
fled from their country), 0.8 million returnees (people returning to their country), 6.0 million
persons internally displaced within their country and 0.9 million asylum seekers. UNHCR
estimates that an additional 20- 25 million are displaced from their homes, with the majority
receiving little or no international assistance for political or other reasons. The number of
CRS-4

---

IB89150
08-15-02
refugees and displaced persons in Africa numbered 20,000 in 1989. Today there are more
than 6.0 million refugees, IDPs and returnees in Africa. Much of the increase in numbers of
refugees and displaced is blamed on the rise in ethnic conflict unleashed after years of
suppression during the Cold War.
In addition to those fleeing their homes, UNHCR helps many refugee populations to
return to their homes. As of the end of 2000, 0.8 million refugees and 0.4 million IDPs have
returned home and are being assisted by UNHCR. These repatriations have often required
follow-on rehabilitation of agricultural land and infrastructure to ensure that the refugees can
survive in homelands devastated by war. Although in the long run repatriation is the best and
least expensive solution, in the short run it is often more expensive than maintaining refugees
in camps. Additional complications make the expense even higher. For example, between
November 1996 and January 1997, warfare around and in the camps where Rwandan
refugees were sheltered in Zaire, attempts to drive them from the camps by various factions,
periods of prohibited contact with the aid agencies, and the need to return many of them
quickly to Rwanda all contributed to a required UNHCR need for $114 million for
repatriation and reintegration of refugees to Rwanda alone for 1997. This amount did not
include the many millions more that are spent by other agencies such as U.N. Development
Program, UNICEF, and the World Health Organization for activities needed to rehabilitate
both the nations and the people who have been victims of war. In many recent cases,
UNHCR has been urged to repatriate refugees in a short period of time so that they can
participate in elections in their homeland. At the same time, refugees remaining in exile
must be offered care and support to ensure that they are not coerced into returning to a
situation where their lives will be endangered.
Changing circumstances in refugee producing countries have also changed the
international response. Increasingly, refugee problems are part of longstanding political
disagreements within countries rather than between nations. Resolving them may require
the unified action of many governments, if not the entire U.N. Security Council, touching on
the limits of a sovereign government to repress or harm its own citizens. Such unanimity is
difficult and often takes years to achieve. In the interim, humanitarian suffering and
destruction continues in the affected countries. While the issues fester, humanitarian
assistance is often the only course which can be agreed upon. But it cannot prevent civilian
casualties, and often must be delivered with the assistance of military forces. These and
other factors have driven up the cost and reduced the effectiveness of humanitarian
assistance.
The total budget of the U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) tripled in the
early 1990s as a result of increased humanitarian situations of increased complexity. The
2002 budget is $828.8 million. Raising money in a timely fashion has become increasingly
difficult for the international agencies, both for humanitarian assistance programs and for
repatriation programs. On May 10, 2000, UNHCR announced a cash availability crisis,
noting that the cash on hand to help refugees was the lowest it has been in ten years. At that
time, only $346 million of the $956 million needed for Calendar 2000 obligations had been
donated. As of September 1, 2000, only $629 million had been contributed. By December
1, UNHCR had been forced to borrow $40 million of the $50 million in the working capital
fund (emergency fund) due to late contributions. Since many countries earmark their funds
for specific programs, the shortages are not spread evenly to all the humanitarian
emergencies or even to all programs in a country. Other disaster agencies have similar
CRS-5

---

IB89150
08-15-02
patterns of inequality. The U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees has expressed concern that
the continuing failure of donors to meet the funding needs of the humanitarian aid programs
means that UNHCR has not been able to meet the very real needs of refugees, returnees, and
IDPs. The high level of contributions of rich nations to the Kosovo crisis and lack of
contributions to African crises gives the impression of a double standard by U.N. members.
Nearly 95% of the total contributions to the UNHCR budget come from 14 industrialized
countries and the European Commission. The U.S. contribution to UNHCR during calendar
2000 was $239 million as of December 22, according to UNHCR, or about 30% of all
contributions.
The Changing Nature of Refugee Situations
In the last few years, and particularly since the end of the Cold War and the dissolution
of the Soviet Union, refugee situations have become more complicated and more dangerous
for international aid workers. When the refugee organizations were established in the 1950s
and 1960s, their mandates were fairly specific and defined refugees as persons who fled their
country in response to persecution on the basis of race, religion, ethnic or social group, or
political opinion. While refugee situations did not always conform to these definitions, they
usually could be accommodated within the mandates of the humanitarian relief agencies.
Refugee emergencies were also hidden from public view. There was little news coverage
of the hardships faced by refugees in their exile. Refugee assistance was also provided in a
relatively safe setting because humanitarian assistance was provided with the agreement of
the government involved. Within the last decade and a half, and particularly with the end
of the Cold War, new kinds of humanitarian situations have become increasingly common
and in fact make up the bulk of international disaster situations. In addition, the long,
universally agreed doctrine that nations should not meddle in the internal affairs of other
countries, unless invited to do so, began to be questioned. This placed humanitarian
assistance workers into increasingly dangerous situations and has led to an increased military
role for the United Nations. All of this has increased the cost of providing humanitarian
assistance, only part of which is provided by the refugee agencies discussed in this issue
brief. These new situations include:
1. Refugees fleeing to areas that are also at war. Rwanda/Burundi/Democratic
Republic of Congo are examples of this. Refugee and humanitarian aid workers attempting
to help these victims of war have themselves become victims of conflict.
2. People driven from their homes by warfare but not crossing an international border
and thus not becoming “convention” refugees. For decades these IDPs have suffered from
lack of international attention even though their compatriots who fled to another country
received humanitarian aid as refugees. Examples of this situation today include Afghanistan,
the Balkans, Chechnya, Sudan, and Sierra Leone. One response to the growing numbers of
people in this type of situation has been a broadening of the UNHCR mandate or area of
responsibility. In October 1992, UNHCR donor nations approved an expansion of the
UNHCR role to include assistance to the millions of people displaced within their own
countries by war and/or famine resulting from war. This change made UNHCR responsible
for nearly twice as many needy people almost overnight, although in fact the agency had been
assisting many of them previously with informal donor support. In other cases, such as the
current situation in Colombia and Afghanistan, people are prevented from fleeing warfare
CRS-6

---

IB89150
08-15-02
because surrounding countries close their borders and UNHCR and other humanitarian
agencies must assist them in extremely difficult and dangerous situations. Former U.S.
Ambassador to the United Nations Holbrook made the plight of IDPs a special concern of
his. Both the U.N. Secretary General and the U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees have
also called for increased attention to IDPs.
3. Persons in need due to a combination of a refugee emergency and a natural disaster,
which may be exacerbated by warfare. The drought in Ethiopia/Eritrea while warfare
continued and the current drought in conflict areas of Afghanistan are examples of this.
Another example are farmers who cannot farm because of warfare or minefields, leading to
food shortages. The needs of these people have been served by the international agencies
that respond to natural disasters and by the refugee relief agencies, as well as by the
humanitarian agencies, such as the International Committee of the Red Cross, which respond
to civil conflict situations. In response to the desperate needs of these people, problems of
program overlap among the international agencies and the lack of clear mandate by any one
agency to help, the United Nations Secretary General created the U.N. Department of
Humanitarian Affairs in December 1991. Although it was somewhat successful in
coordinating the international response to all disasters, either manmade or natural, U.N.
Secretary-General Annan abolished it under his 1997 reorganization plan and established
instead a U.N. Emergency Relief Coordinator (Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian
Affairs or OCHA) within his own office, thereby raising the level of attention paid to
humanitarian assistance.
4. Humanitarian emergencies occurring in countries without a government. In Somalia
and Liberia, for example, it was difficult for the relief agencies to get assistance to victims
of civil war because there was no government. Issues such as visas, shipping clearance, use
of roads and airport facilities, water, and power could not be addressed centrally. Nor could
the issues of protection of aid workers or aid supplies. In addition, the political factions at
war insisted on separate negotiations in all facets of providing assistance. In both countries,
the international community attempted to restore order through the introduction of foreign
military forces, a U.N. force in Somalia, and a regional African force in Liberia.
5. Civil wars in which civilians and the humanitarian agencies who try to help them are
specifically attacked in order to change the outcome of the war. Humanitarian aid personnel
have been the targets of various factions in many other countries and have become an area
of increasing concern to the United Nations. Between January 1, 1992, and September 18,
2000, 198 civilian U.N. employees were killed. In the last ten years, 51 World Food Program
employees alone have been killed. Since the beginning of the 90’s, 18 UNHCR staff have
been killed in deliberate, premeditated and armed attacks and dozens more have been
wounded. If UNHCR contractors from non governmental agencies are included, the numbers
are much higher. The recent U.N. response has been to provide U.N. peacekeeping forces to
assist in providing humanitarian aid and protecting aid workers. Deputy U.N. Secretary-
General Louise Frechette called on governments to address these deaths in the following
ways: conduct vigorous investigations and punish the guilty, ratify the two international
conventions which address protection of international personnel, provide additional funding
to international agencies specifically for improved security, and use whatever government
influence is available to bring irregular forces under better control and discipline. In a recent
report, U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan calls for the expenditure of $30 million per year
to protect civilian staff in conflict situations. In his report, he states that there are only 9
CRS-7

---

IB89150
08-15-02
professionals responsible for managing a security system for 70,000 staff and dependents at
150 duty stations. He recommends the appointment of a full time security coordinator and
changes in the current method of funding security officers.
6. Repatriation of refugees to a homeland that has been devastated by war and dotted
with land mines. International donors have recognized the need to provide rehabilitation to
these countries as well as the usual short-term repatriation assistance, but the rehabilitation
funding has not always been made available. This assistance may include help in the election
of a new government, mine-clearing, establishment of banking and commercial facilities, and
other non-traditional humanitarian assistance programs. Kosovo and East Timor are the
most recent examples. Cambodia, Mozambique, Angola, Afghanistan, and El Salvador can
be included as well. This rehabilitation often includes the involvement of foreign military
personnel and civil servants, as well as humanitarian assistance personnel and often
continues for years. UNHCR has also been required to return refugees involuntarily to
countries where they may still face danger because the asylum country forces them back
across the border.
7. Growing attempts to replace humanitarian agencies with military humanitarian
assistance as in Kosovo. Former UNHCR Ogata expressed concern over attempts to bypass
humanitarian agencies in high visibility crises with military or other newly created
governmental entities. She noted that military involvement has sometimes undermined
coordination among civilian humanitarian agencies and may make refugees parties to the
conflict in the eyes of combatants. U.N. Secretary General Annan has also cautioned against
mixing military and humanitarian actions. He stress that no government should fear that
accepting humanitarian aid will lead to military intervention. Military forces in humanitarian
assistance emergencies raise other thorny issues, such as how much force they should use,
and whom or what they should protect: refugees, humanitarian aid workers, or pallets of aid
supplies?
The Debate in Congress
The debate over the refugee budget in the 106th Congress included both the funding
issues facing all the programs in the foreign aid account and the policy differences that are
arising both between the Administration and the Congress and within the Republican
majority over U.S. refugee policy. What direction the Bush Administration will take is still
unclear, but differences within the Republican majority in Congress continue.
Refugee Admissions
The number of refugee admitted to the United States for resettlement is set every year
in consultation between the Administration and Congress. This is a requirement of the
Refugee Act of 1979. The initial costs of resettling refugees in the United States will
comprise about 20% of the proposed FY2001 Migration and Refugee Account. The number
of refugees admitted dropped during the Clinton Administration from 113,000 admitted in
FY1994 to 70,000 in FY1997. The Clinton Administration expected to continue these
reductions based on reduced admissions from the former Soviet Union and Southeast Asia
(which once accounted for about 80% of U.S. admissions, but were reduced to about 50%
CRS-8

---

IB89150
08-15-02
in FY1997 and less than 15% in FY2000). Refugees located in camps throughout Southeast
Asia that the United States pledged to accept under the Comprehensive Plan of Action (CPA,
a 1989 international agreement to address the refugee crisis in Southeast Asia), have mostly
been admitted. Most of the Amerasians and former political prisoners have been admitted
to the United States. The number of Soviet Jews and Evangelicals admitted also continues
to fall. Some members of Congress do not support this reduction in refugee admissions. The
number was raised to 83,000 for FY1998 largely at the urging of Congress. Because of the
Kosovo emergency, the actual number admitted in FY1998 was 85,000. (The FY1999
ceiling was raised in mid year to 91,000 to include Kosovars who were added on an
emergency basis and the FY2000 admission level of 90,000 continues to reflect that
resettlement need.) For 2001, the Administration requested the admission of 80,000 refugees
and is proposing 70,000 for FY2002. In addition, the number of African refugees admitted
has grown from 7,000 in FY1998 to a proposed 22,000 in FY2002.
During the 104th Congress, Members of Congress who did not agree with U.S. policy
on Southeast Asians negotiated an agreement with the Administration to rescreen some of
the Vietnamese who have been determined not to be refugees and returned to Vietnam. This
rescreening program, the Resettlement Opportunity for Vietnamese Returnees (ROVR),
began on April 1, 1996. In the 105th Congress, the conference report on the Foreign
Relations Authorization Bill (H.R. 1757) contained language which prohibited the use of
U.S. funds to assist the involuntary return of persons to a country where they fear
persecution. Committee report language stated that the House International Relations
Committee expected the Department of State to continue to rescreen those Vietnamese
eligible for resettlement in the United States. The language became part of the Omnibus
Appropriations law (P.L. 105-277). P.L. 106-113 continued this restriction and establishes
guidelines and procedures for the continuing admission of Vietnamese to the United States.
The Administration calls for the admission of a total of 6,000 from East Asia in FY2001.
P.L. 106-554 continued the so-called Lautenberg amendment until October 1, 2000.
This provision gives special consideration for admission to the United States as refugees to
Jews and some Christian groups from the former Soviet Union and some religious groups
from Vietnam. The current extension of this 10-year-old provision is in the Senate Health
and Human Services appropriation bill. The FY2001 admission number for refugees from
the former Soviet Union is 17,000.
P.L. 104-208, the Omnibus Appropriation Act of 1997, broadened the definition of a
refugee under U.S. law to include persons who have been forced to abort a pregnancy,
undergo involuntary sterilization, or who have been persecuted for refusal to undergo such
a procedure. This provision was directed toward the birth control policy of the Chinese
government. The numbers to be admitted under this provision are limited to 1,000 in any
fiscal year. P.L. 106-113 requires that the Secretary of State and the Attorney General
establish a task force to set eligibility criteria for women seeking refugee status based on
gender related persecution.
P.L. 106-386, a law addressing problems of trafficking women into the United States,
amends the Immigration and Nationality Act to allow the Attorney General to grant up to
5,000 non-immigrant visas per year to certain victims of severe forms of trafficking who are
in the United States and who would face retribution or other harm if removed from the
United States. It also provides up to 10,000 visas for victims of domestic violence, material
CRS-9

---

IB89150
08-15-02
witnesses, and for other humanitarian purposes. The Act allows adjustment to lawful
permanent resident status for those who have remained of good moral character and who
have assisted in trafficking investigations or prosecutions. The Department of Health and
Human Services (HHS) has begun certifications to assist victims of trafficking in persons to
become eligible to apply for federal and certain state benefits to the same extent as refugees.
P.L. 107-115 includes at least $30 million drawn from various accounts to fight
trafficking and assist victims.
(For information on refugee admissions policy, see CRS Report RL31269, Refugee
Admissions and Resettlement Policy. For information on admission issues considered during
the 106th Congress, see CRS Report RS20836, Immigration Legislation in the 106th
Congress. For information on trafficking, see CRS Report RL30545, Trafficking in Women
and Children: The U.S. and International Response.)
Finding Funds for Emergency Assistance
The cost of responding to refugee and humanitarian emergencies has risen. Pressure
on the Foreign Affairs function, the 150 account, caused by rising emergency costs, have led
to concerns about the bilateral development assistance programs. In the last few years, many
of the private voluntary agencies working in the development field, as well as U.N. and U.S.
development specialists have expressed concern that the rising costs of emergency assistance
are reducing the amount of money available for development assistance.
Several attempts have been made to address the growing need for refugee assistance and
the anticipated growth in refugee repatriation needs without further draining the development
aid accounts. In response to the need to help Kurdish refugees displaced after the Persian
Gulf War, Congress transferred interest on money from the Persian Gulf Regional Defense
Fund and Defense Cooperation Account, two funds established to channel contributions from
other countries to Iraqi war expenses. A supplemental appropriations covered the costs of
responding to the Rwanda emergencies by the Department of Defense ($170 million),
Department of State ($30 million), and USAID Office of Foreign Disaster Assistance ($20
million). Supplemental legislation enacted in the Spring of 1999 (P.L. 106-31) reimbursed
the agencies and provided new funding for aid both in Central America and the Caribbean
for natural disaster response and to pay for humanitarian assistance to Kosovo. The
Administration requested a FY2000 supplemental to meet the continuing needs in Kosovo.
For information and discussion of the FY1999 Supplemental, see CRS Report RL30083, by
Larry Nowels.
Although UNHCR receives donations from a large number of governments, inter-
governmental organizations, private voluntary agencies and individuals, nearly 95% of the
funds contributed come from 15 donors – fourteen governments and the European
Commission Humanitarian Office (ECHO). According to UNHCR, between 1994 and 1998,
the United States provided 26% of the contributions, followed by ECHO and Japan. The
1999 U.S. contribution totaled about 30%. During 1999, following widespread publicity
about events in Kosovo and E. Timor, UNHCR estimates that it received nearly $30 million
in private contributions, compared to $11.5 million in 1998. While UNHCR continues to
encourage contributions from additional governments, the small number of donors, in
addition to earmarking contributions for particular refugee situations or programs, has led
CRS-10

---

IB89150
08-15-02
to problems funding refugee emergencies. To address these concerns, UNHCR began
requesting funds for a new Operational Reserve fund equal to 10% of the program budget.
It should be used to cover unanticipated emergencies, planning repatriation programs,
unanticipated cost increases, or modification of current programs. However, due to shortfalls
in contributions during 2000, $40 million of the $50 million was used for regular program
needs during 2000.
Improving the Efficiency of International Refugee Programs
Meeting the growing need for humanitarian assistance to refugees in other countries
within a constrained budget can also be helped by improving the effectiveness and efficiency
of international refugee organizations. The last two administrations emphasized increased
efficiency in the U.N. refugee agencies. Consolidation of humanitarian assistance programs
has been one of the Department of State’s suggestions for U.N. reform. In the United
Nations, Secretary-General Annan included the consolidation and reorganization of U.N.
humanitarian agencies, abolition of the Department of Humanitarian Affairs, and other
budget saving steps in his July 1997 reform proposal and the General Assembly accepted the
change. Under the new organization of U.N. humanitarian assistance, the U.N. Office for
the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) issues consolidated appeals for the major
humanitarian emergencies. These appeals simplify donations and eliminate overlap and
competition among the agencies included such as UNHCR, UNICEF, World Food Program,
and World Health Organization. Nonetheless, UNHCR Ogata noted in the preface to the
agency’s most recent report on the state of the world’s refugees that no matter how well
managed and coordinated humanitarian agencies may become, they cannot end civil wars,
require nations to respect human rights, or bring a halt to deliberate displacement of civilians.
That requires the political will of the international community. UNHCR has also approached
the information technology industry to add its talents and tools to help refugees. During the
Kosovo crisis, UNHCR received assistance from Microsoft, Compaq, Hewlett-Packard,
Canon, Kingston Technology, Security World Ltd, and ScreenCheck B.V. in the
development of a computerized refugee registration and documentation kit. Currently, the
team is adapting this kit to other refugee situations.
Addressing the Causes of Refugee Flight
The overall cause of refugee flight is violation of the human rights of certain people,
persecution based on race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group or
political opinion. In most cases, however, many believe the underlying cause of refugee
flight is more basic: poverty, underdevelopment, overpopulation, and environmental
degradation. There is widespread agreement that refugee flows are best addressed by being
prevented. The President created the new position of Under Secretary for Global Affairs to
allow the Department of State to focus more attention on the underlying causes of refugee
flight. The Administration also reorganized the Bureau of Refugee Programs to include
population and migration, in order to consolidate all departmental responsibility for these
related matters. The Office of Transition Initiative was also created as a part of a reorganized
USAID humanitarian response entity. It provides assistance to countries recovering from
disasters in moving toward self government and sustained development.
CRS-11

---

IB89150
08-15-02
LEGISLATION
P.L. 107-115 (H.R. 2506)
Foreign Operations Appropriations, FY2002. Appropriates $705 million for the
Migration and Refugee Account and $15 million for the Emergency Refugee and Migration
Account. Of the $705 million, $60 million is earmarked for refugees from the Soviet Union
and Eastern Europe resettling in Israel. The conference committee (H.Rept. 107-345)
endorsed Senate report language directing the Secretary of State to submit a report by April
1, 2002, describing efforts to improve the safety of relief workers. Original bill was reported
by the House Appropriations Committee (H.Rept. 107-142) on July 17. Passed House (381-
46) amended on July 24. Reported by the Senate Appropriations Committee (S.Rept. 107-
58) on September 4. Passed Senate (96-2) on October 24. Conference report (H.Rept. 107-
345) agreed to by House on December 19 by vote of 357 to 66 and by the Senate on
December 20 by unanimous consent. Signed into law on January 10, 2002.
H.R. 1646 (Hyde)
Foreign Relations Authorizations Act, FY2002 and FY2003. Authorizes $817 million
in each of FY2002 and FY2003 for Migration and Refugee Assistance account. Of this
amount $60 million in each fiscal year is earmarked for refugees resettling in Israel; $2
million in each fiscal year for Tibetan refugees; and $2 million for displaced Burmese.
Reported (amended) by the House International Relations Committee (H.Rept. 107-57) on
May 4, 2001. Passed House on May 16 by vote of 352 to 73. As passed, the measure
authorized $817 million for each of FY2002 and FY2003 for the Migration and Refugee
Assistance account (MRA). The House Committee on International Relations had
recommended this amount to compensate for the effects of inflation since the account had
not received sufficient annual increases since FY1995. The Committee noted that refugee
protection is especially jeopardized in Africa where UNHCR’s protection capacity is
particularly weak and understaffed. The Committee also expressed concern about East
Timor refugees in militia controlled camps in Indonesian West Timor and about the rapidly
deteriorating humanitarian conditions in Afghanistan.
S. 1401 (Biden)
Foreign Relations Authorizations, FY2002-FY2003. As reported by the Senate Foreign
Relations Committee (S.Rept. 107-60) includes $715 million for FY2002 and $750.75
million for FY2003 for the MRA.
S. 2779 (Leahy)
Foreign Operations Appropriations, FY2003. Reported by Senate Appropriations
Committee (S.Rept. 107-219) on July 24, 2002.
CRS-12

---