Indochina Migration and Refugee Assistance Act - Opposition

Opposition

Although many politicians thought it appropriate and necessary for the United States to provide a safe haven for those denied their human rights, some questioned the fairness of the Indochina Migration and Refugee Act for several reasons. Some, mostly conservative republicans, argued that the refugees would never be able to assimilate to American culture and would detract from the value system already in place. Other legislators, like Representative Frank Sensenbrenner, were concerned with the price tag of committing so many immigrants, (roughly $1 billion per year) especially in a time of rising unemployment. While many refugees were receiving financial assistance, economic success did not come easily and this usurpation of federal funding became an issue that not only lawmakers were paying attention too, but also the American public. Another group of opponents focused on the growing need of poor Americans. Representative John Conyers asked, "Should we be spending (federal dollars) on Vietnamese refugees or should we spend them on Detroit 'refugees?'" A last group of opponents believed that presidents Ford and Carter were taking advantage of the parole system to allow mass amounts of people into the nation. In their eyes, the parole system should have been only used for people with specific cases, and certainly not for the processing of huge groups.