Late last week, Senator Jon Kyl Of Arizona, the Minority Whip, offered several amendments to the Omnibus Appropriations Act (H.R. 1105). One of these amendments, S.A. 629, stated "None of the funds appropriated or otherwise made available by this Act may be made available to resettle Palestinians from Gaza into the United States." Besides the fact that it was based on a false internet rumor, this amendment was an blatant example of bigotry and xenophobia.
On Monday, March 9th, Senators John Kerry of Massachusetts and Patrick Leahy of Vermont, arose in the Senate chamber to speak out against this ill-conceived amendment. Senator Kerry, Chair of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, and Senator Leahy, Chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee, spoke eloquently in defense of Palestinians in Gaza, as well as our basic democratic principles.
Senator Kerry was first to speak against S.A. 629:
Now, let me first point out, in 2008 the United States did not resettle anyone from Gaza. So this is an amendment, this is a solution in search of a problem. The fact is, there is no problem currently. But let's assume--let's assume for the purposes of argument--in the future a Palestinian escaped from Gaza to get away from Hamas oppression and applied to be resettled in the United States. This amendment would prevent that resettlement.
Now, obviously, any Palestinian refugee ought to be subjected to a complete and thorough battery of security checks, screens, background checks, as we do already for any refugee from anywhere. And, of course, we want to be assured that an asylum seeker does not have ties with Hamas, with Islamic Jihaddists or any other terrorist organization.
But the point is, we already have exactly those kinds of security screens and background checks. We have them in the regular Department of Homeland Security resettlement procedures. So I see no reason to make an exception to the normal procedures that suddenly singles out a resident of Gaza. It also sends a message, not just of indifference, but, frankly, of hostility to tens of thousands of Palestinians in Gaza who are victims of Hamas.
Now, I just was in Gaza. I became--unbeknownst to me; I did not realize it at the time--the highest ranking American to go into Gaza in something like 8 or 9 years, and I saw thousands of kids roaming around the rubble of Gaza. I met with Fatah businessmen and others, with people who are struggling to make ends meet and pull their lives together. If one of them were to escape because of the oppression of Hamas and wanted to come to the United States, it would seem, given the daily deprivations and brutality of Hamas militants, the United States, commensurate with our highest values and the traditions of this country, would not want to refuse the possibility of asylum to those folks.
In fact, this amendment assumes that every resident of Gaza, regardless of age, background, political opinion or any other distinguishing characteristic, is pro-Hamas and ineligible for consideration for resettlement in the United States, even if they are lucky enough to escape from Gaza. It ignores the fact that a whole bunch of folks in Fatah were killed by Hamas and some of them knee-capped and otherwise assaulted in the course of the recent war because they weren't part of Hamas.
It is unnecessary. There are ample laws on the books which prohibit entry into the United States of any person who has been involved in terrorism or other crimes. During the Cold War, we did not bar Russians from coming to the United States, just as we don't bar Cubans or North Koreans from entering the United States, even though they live in oppressive regimes that we object to--or did live, in the case of the Soviet Union, in that situation. This amendment, therefore, is not only unnecessary but it would establish for the first time since the passage of the 1980 Refugee Act a law that discriminates against a particular nationality in a particular geographic region.
After a rather simple explanation of his rationale for offering the amendment, Senator Kyl began to backtrack on his submission. Then, Senator Leahy spoke against S.A. 629:
Frankly, it is unnecessary and for the United States, a Nation of immigrants, it goes against everything we stand for.
We don't resettle anybody from Gaza, nor do we resettle anybody from Gaza who is living in the U.N. refugee camps in the West Bank, Lebanon, Syria, or Jordan. The amendment is a solution looking for a problem. If a Palestinian from Gaza gets to a place like Italy, or somewhere in Europe, the amendment would prevent the State Department from even considering that person for resettlement to the United States. We would have to tell them sorry, you can't come in, because you are from a place that has terrorists.
I think back to my family who came to Vermont about 150 years ago. On my father's side, they were Irish. If we had a law like this in place then, it is questionable whether they could have entered this country. If the Irish were fighting to keep their land, if they were fighting to keep their rights, if they were fighting for the ability to vote, and they lived in what is now the Republic of Ireland, they were considered terrorists. We have gone back through the record and found when they left Ireland, even though they had been offered free room and board for the rest of their lives. They were very small rooms, with bars on the windows, and they didn't know that the rest of their lives would come very soon. But they left for Canada, the United States, or Australia.
I was thinking about the birthday party for Senator Kennedy the other night at the Kennedy Center. There were a number of Irish-Americans there who could speak about their roots, when their families came here, and why they had to leave Ireland to come here. They were hunted because they fought to practice their own religion. They were hunted because they spoke Irish. They were hunted because they wanted to keep their land. They were hunted because they would not renounce their religion. Thank goodness the United States had open arms for them.
We have very strict rules about who can come into this country. This, again, is an unnecessary amendment, saying that we in the Congress are going to pick and choose which groups of people can resettle here.
When my maternal grandparents came from Italy, a country that had numerous wars at that time, thank goodness they weren't blocked from coming here. My grandmother lived long enough to see her grandson run for the U.S. Senate. They came to this country not speaking English, not reading or writing it, learning English and raising six children. We could all tell stories like that.
I hope we don't start doing things that label whole groups of people as terrorists, no matter who they are as individuals.
Following this statement, Senator Judd Gregg of New Hampshire spoke to support the Senior Senator from Vermont. Before Sentaor Kyl's withdrawl of the amendment, Senator Leahy concluded his remarks:
The last point about saying nobody should be allowed into the U.S. from Gaza, there are tens of thousands of Palestinians in Gaza who are victims of Hamas every day. Are we going to say that a Palestinian child cannot be considered for resettlement, because of his or her place or origin? Are we going to say to a child's parents, if they were being persecuted by Hamas, they are ineligible for resettlement? Are we going to say, as the distinguished Senator from New Hampshire suggested, to a scientist who has great skills, we cannot accept you because there are terrorists in Gaza? That is not what made this Nation great. We have that wonderful Statue of Liberty with the upraised torch in the New York Harbor--or the New Jersey Harbor, depending on where you live--saying we are a welcoming country. I trust our State Department and our intelligence agencies and others, that if somebody with an interest that is hostile toward the United States tries to come here, they will be barred. But let's not make a blanket rule against a whole group of people based solely on their ethnicity or place of origin.
Over the last several months, both Senators have spoken out in support of the people of Israel and Palestine. Senator Leahy offered an eloquent and complex assessment of Senate Resolution 10, and an impassioned statement on the killing of (Middlebury College Graduate) Amer Shurrab's brothers during the recent War In/On Gaza. Senator Kerry recently visited Israel, The West Bank, and Gaza, in addition to several other Middle East nations, to assess the conditions after the War. Last week, he offered a policy speech concering his vision of the Middle East peace process.
Both of these Senators need to be commended for their recent actions. Please consider:
- Calling their offices to offer support for their recent statements and actions. (The Capitol Switchboard number, (800)828-0498.
- Contact JStreet and ask that these Senators be included on their list of endorsed candidates. (202)895-1502 or info@jstreet.org.
- Contribute to their campaigns through A Dream Of Peace:Justice and Equality For The People of Israel and Palestine ActBlue Fundraising Page.
Hat Tip: Adam Horowitz of Mondoweiss, and The Arab American Institute
