Refugee Admissions Still Slumping Under Biden

Lawmakers and advocates lament historically low numbers, despite the president’s promises to the contrary.

By
8
A group of migrant families from Central America walk alongside the border wall between the U.S. and Mexico in January 2023. (Photo by Salwan Georges/The Washington Post via Getty Images)

Dauda Sesay watched in horror 30 years ago as armed rebels in Sierra Leone’s brutal civil war overran his hometown, rounded up five of his friends, and amputated their hands. His hand was under the blade next when his father ran in to plead for the boys’ lives, but the rebels killed him instead. Sesay escaped with a gunshot wound in his left leg and an injured right hand.

He spent 10 years in a Gambian refugee camp before coming to the United States as a refugee, becoming a citizen, founding the Louisiana Organization for Refugees and Immigrants, and serving on the board of the advocacy group Refugee Congress.

“I would have preferred to stay or remain in my homeland,” Sesay told a panel of senators meeting Wednesday to examine the current state of the U.S. refugee program. “I had no other choice but to leave. The refugee program was my only hope.”

Refugee advocates like Sesay are asking the Biden administration to do more to rebuild the United States’ languishing refugee program. Despite Biden’s promises to the contrary, admissions have remained low and infrastructure necessary to boost refugee admissions has eroded.

Start a Free Trial
Get every newsletter and all of The Dispatch. Support quality, fact-based journalism. Get Started ALREADY HAVE AN ACCOUNT? SIGN IN
8
By
Comments (8)
Join The Dispatch to participate in the comments.
 
  1. Avatar photo
    DougAz

    It takes government people to make government work. It takes encouragement and not constant Reaganesque "government is the problem" slogansnto make government a good place to work and and value auch as these refugees deserve. It takes a wonky Hillary Clinton and not moronic faux leader who actually hated refugees.

    You get what you pay for.
    You are what your score says you are.

    Trump with his Republican sycophants in Congress severely wounded an improving refugee onboarding operation begun under Obama.

    The very smart and insightful Noah Smith of Noahpinion, said TMSC should just abandon Arizona here and setup in Canada. Canada welcomes immigrants and refugees. And have workers who want to actually work hard.

    Here in Arizona TSMC is finding workers withnlow energy, low skills.

    I'm sure Biden's administration is trying to grow the Trump depleted and demoralized staff. Such a hole Trump made.

    Collapse
  2. Clintmerkel

    Thanks for this report, Harvest. I am on the (rear?) frontline of refugee resettlement in Bloomington, IN. My church has supported refugees from Afghanistan, the DRC, Rawanda, and other East African countries. To a person, they are beautiful people who want to make good with a new opportunity in the richest country in the world. The bureaucracy is truly heartbreaking.

    I appreciate the news and the reporting, just not the lack of progress.

    Collapse
    1. Avatar photocircle-angle-nib
      Harvest Prude vertical-nib Author

      Really interesting. Thank you for sharing!

      Collapse
  3. James Morphew

    The Refugee program certainly needs a lot of staff to be effective, including verification of the circumstances generating the request, then the difficult task of placing, supporting and integrating any refugee. True refugees are especially in need, and are part of our mission. Many others who simply desire to join the good life in America will be ready to claim refugee status, and must be weeded out. Setting a number limit seems false.

    Collapse
  4. Avatar photo
    Brianj

    Along with a group of faith leaders advocating for immigration reform and refugee care, I met with key staffers from both Oklahoma Senators. They agreed with the merit of our pleas, but when we asked if they'd be willing to provide leadership, it became clear that they had not even considered it. They came across as shocked by the suggestion that they lead, even though we guaranteed they'd have immense support from us - which would be good PR for them. But they were too scared of their far-right bases. Since the current wasn't with them, they weren't jumping in. So instead of talking about the incredibly positive relationships being formed by Afghans who are full of gratitude and working long hours, they'd rather gripe about how we don't have enough workers and how the border is broken - a real problem that they are perpetuating.
    I was sadly reminded of how pathetic most of our politicians are. They aren't congressional leaders - you'd have to be willing to lead to be called such.

    Collapse
    1. Avatar photocircle-angle-nib
      Harvest Prude vertical-nib Author

      Thank you for sharing!

      Collapse
  5. Philebus

    Each administration can set the allowed numbers of refugees at whatever works politically toward their own best interests. So, it doesn't really matter where the numbers are set; the bureaucracy involved is probably where the bottleneck occurs. My own heuristic thinking would put the numbers for each refugee at a minimum of 20 individuals and agencies involved to process and settle even a single refugee. Sadly, this a congressional issue, not an executive issue. It may be possible to streamline the process through allowing private sector agencies to take the lead and to administer programs as they see fit - remove the bureaucracy; retain some oversight...what could go wrong (ha!). Thanks for the article...

    Collapse
  6. Avatar photo
    Kelvinktsang

    Thanks for this!

    Collapse