|
By JONATHAN BLAZER and BRETT MURPHY[1]
As the United States experiences an
elevation in both the incidence and perceived threat of disaster,
emergency preparedness has been assigned high priority by all levels of
government, as well as by nongovernmental organizations. Potential
hazards range from frequent and severe natural disasters to terrorism
and public health epidemics. One of the most basic ingredients of
effective planning is the development of strategies for maximizing the
participation of the entire populace in preparing for disaster,
complying with emergency orders, and engaging in other response efforts
when disaster strikes. In the event of a major public health crisis
such as a pandemic flu, the country’s success in containing harm and
saving lives requires that all members of the community understand how
to protect themselves, seek timely help, and avoid spreading disease.
Although there is growing recognition
that the effectiveness of disaster planning and relief depends on
engaging and addressing the concerns of all segments of the population,
the particular concerns of immigrants and other individuals with limited
English proficiency are too often overlooked, disregarded, or even at
times exploited.
Hurricane Katrina provided a
particularly graphic occasion for examining the multiple levels of
failure to account for the concerns of vulnerable groups. Geographical
areas affected by Hurricanes Katrina (late August, 2005) and Rita (late
September, 2005) were home to vibrant communities of immigrants.
According to a special American Community Survey report, when the
storms hit, approximately 1.8 million Hispanics, many of whom were
immigrants, were living in the 117 counties most affected by Hurricanes
Katrina and Rita.[2]
In the years immediately preceding the storm, over 30,000 Asians were
living in the five Louisiana parishes most impacted by Hurricane
Katrina.[3]
Many immigrants were left behind in
the worst-hit areas because the government failed to issue warnings,
evacuation instructions, or hazard and safety precautions in a language
they could understand. Some lost the documentary proof of immigration
status needed to obtain government assistance and employment. Some were
evicted from shelters or otherwise made to feel unwelcome. The threat
of deportation loomed large. Even many lawfully residing immigrants who
had proof of their status were ineligible for most of the cash
assistance, housing, employment, and health care services on which other
survivors relied. All levels of government failed the survivors, and
voluntary organizations and community groups were only partially
successful in filling the gaps.
Drawing from nearly two dozen
interviews with individuals involved in assisting immigrants struggling
to survive in the aftermath of Katrina and other recent disasters,[4]
this report attempts to identify lessons—positive and negative—that can
inform the disaster management work of state and local governments,
disaster relief agencies, and community-based organizations seeking to
address the needs of immigrant and limited-English proficient (LEP)
communities more effectively.[5]
The recommendations in this report
are directed principally to the following sectors:
-
The federal government, particularly
the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), whose agencies include
the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), U.S. Immigration and
Customs Enforcement (ICE), and U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP).
-
State and local governments, which
play a critical role in disaster planning.
-
Disaster relief
agencies—nongovernmental organizations at the national and state
levels that provide assistance when disaster strikes, many of which
are members of National Voluntary Organizations Active in Disaster (NVOAD).[6]
-
Community groups, whose role has been
prominent in meeting the needs of immigrants in time of disaster.
The Struggle of Community Groups to Meet the Needs of Immigrants
Affected by Katrina
Community-based organizations are a
critical ingredient in effective disaster planning and response,
particularly as a link to marginalized and vulnerable populations. Some
noncitizens, for a variety of reasons, may have more reason than
citizens to distrust the government; and people who distrust the
government are less likely to comply with public health and emergency
directives. Community groups are more likely than other disaster relief
providers to employ culturally and linguistically competent staff and
are more likely to have earned the confidence of the populations they
serve. However, a recent study of member organizations of the National
Alliance for Hispanic Health indicates that while willingness to provide
disaster assistance is high among community groups, capacity is low.[7]
Community groups that responded to
the needs created by Hurricane Katrina reported that they encountered a
variety of obstacles in their efforts to provide assistance. These
included difficulties connecting victims and evacuees with major
disaster relief providers due to the providers’ lack of linguistically
and culturally competent staff; difficulties securing adequate funding
for disaster relief operations;[8]
an inability to participate in shelter trainings and certification
processes because they were too overwhelmed to navigate bureaucracies
and training programs; poor communication with FEMA, Red Cross, and
other major disaster relief providers; and lack of technical expertise
in disaster relief. These obstacles negatively affected both service
providers and recipients, heightening confusion and stress, placing
financial and logistical limitations on service providers, complicating
referral processes, and ultimately preventing many hurricane survivors
from obtaining in a timely manner the full range of services for which
they were eligible.
It is clear, therefore, that
partnerships between government agencies, disaster relief organizations,
and immigrant-serving organizations at both the national and community
levels are paramount to an effective preparedness and response
strategy. In addition, to effectively engage these community groups and
other community leaders, it should be recognized that despite a high
social will to assist in disaster planning and response, structural
barriers such as a lack of resources and understanding of how to become
connected with emergency networks and systems make such efforts more
difficult than they need to or should be.[9]
Overcoming Barriers Preventing Immigrants from Effective
Participation in Disaster Preparedness and Relief
In order to include immigrant
communities in disaster planning and emergency assistance more
effectively, government agencies, disaster relief organizations and
community groups must address a wide range of obstacles. Some of these
barriers resemble those experienced by other vulnerable groups. For
example, some studies have indicated that distrust of governmental
authorities, a common obstacle in bringing aid to immigrant communities,
is also prevalent among racial and ethnic minorities more generally.
Immigrant and low-income communities alike suffer from vulnerabilities
associated with a lack of financial resources and poor access to health
care.[10]
However, these obstacles have unique dimensions when experienced by
immigrants. Language barriers and low education attainment create
further challenges for many immigrants, as well as for citizens with
limited English proficiency. Finally, for undocumented immigrants or
mixed status households that include undocumented members,
vulnerabilities relating to immigration status can vastly exacerbate
other challenges.
On a positive note, the
resourcefulness and resilience of immigrants also present an opportunity
for emergency managers and planners. Immigrants must often overcome
traumatic situations in their home countries and effectively adjust to
obstacles they face in their new home. While there is little
information on how to tap into this potential, there are hints that the
resilience and self-reliance immigrants have been forced to develop can
be a valuable asset to a community’s recovery. Examples can be seen in
post-Katrina New Orleans, where the Latino and Asian communities were
among the first to recover and thrive economically.
Fear of Immigration
Enforcement
Overview. Undocumented
immigrants live in a continuous state of anxiety due to the ever-present
possibility that their lives will be thrown into chaos if immigration
authorities discover their unlawful presence. This anxiety extends also
to their families, which often include U.S. citizens. The degree of
trepidation varies according to a number of factors, and it may ebb and
flow over time. There is strong indication that undocumented immigrants
and their family members are currently experiencing extraordinarily high
levels of fear.[11]
When disaster strikes, fear of
immigration enforcement clearly inhibits immigrants from securing even
the most basic emergency services, such as shelter, food, and water.
For reasons that remain unclear, in Katrina’s aftermath the federal
government did not issue the same kinds of assurances it had made when,
for example, Hurricane Charley hit Florida in 2004. Then, FEMA issued a
press release in English and Spanish titled “Storm Victims Urged to Come
Forward for Emergency Aid Regardless of Immigration Status,” in which it
encouraged all immigrant storm victims to seek emergency aid for which
all survivors are eligible. A lack of reassurance in combination with
instances of actual enforcement conducted by ICE in disaster areas
following Hurricanes Katrina and Rita exacerbated immigrants’ fear of
the authorities, which discouraged them from seeking assistance from
government agencies. In the interviews conducted for this report, fear
of exposing immigration status was the most commonly cited reason why
many undocumented immigrants avoided FEMA and even the American Red
Cross, preferring instead to seek assistance from community
organizations. Publicity surrounding immigrants who were detained by
the authorities in the course of applying for benefits fueled these
sentiments.[12]
PERSPECTIVE
José Velázquez, Ph.D.,
Executive Director, Latino Memphis
Recommendations. In an
emergency, the government should do everything in its power to encourage
all victims to participate in rescue and recovery efforts. Fear of
immigration enforcement corrodes these efforts and exacerbates threats
to public health and safety. We therefore recommend that state and
local governments make it clear that their sole interest in times of
disaster is to assist persons in need. Policies should ensure that
officials and agencies providing disaster-related services avoid making
unnecessary inquiries regarding the immigration status of evacuees or
any other information that is not strictly necessary to deliver or
determine eligibility for critical services. Furthermore, state and
local public officials should institute policies to ensure to the
maximum degree permissible by law that information gathered during a
disaster remains confidential and will not be shared with other agencies
for purposes not directly connected to administering disaster
assistance.
DHS likewise should develop a
standing policy, reiterated in times of disaster, not to conduct
immigration enforcement in association with any phase of disaster
preparedness or recovery.[13]
Federal agencies should not make inquiries regarding immigration status
or any other information that is not strictly necessary for effectuating
evacuation or determining eligibility for critical services, and should
not use information obtained in the course of humanitarian disaster
relief efforts for immigration enforcement. Neither ICE nor CBP should
be visibly present in disaster relief settings.
In addition, the American Red Cross
and other VOADs should establish and train staff in policies preventing
employees from making unnecessary inquiries into immigration status,
prohibiting the sharing of information regarding immigration status
without consent, and forbidding employees from calling upon immigration
or law enforcement authorities or other agencies that are not involved
in determining eligibility for disaster assistance. Neither the
American Red Cross nor any other VOAD should invite, welcome, or permit
immigration enforcement authorities to operate in the vicinity of their
shelters or assistance sites.
Finally, community groups should
continue to monitor and document the experiences of immigrants as they
attempt to secure disaster relief, serving as advocates and watchdogs.
It is clear that the presence of community organizations as observers,
fact-finders, and information-providers at disaster relief sites has
discouraged abusive practices and promoted accountability when abuses
occur.
Loss of Documentation
Overview. Even in
normal times, tens of millions of U.S. residents lack readily available
identification documentation. According to a national survey sponsored
by the Brennan Center for Justice, as many as 7 percent of U.S. citizens
do not have ready access to documents proving citizenship, such as U.S.
passports, naturalization papers, or birth certifications. As many as
11 percent of U.S. citizens lack government-issued photo identification.
The problem is particularly prevalent among the poor, seniors, and
minorities.[14]
When Katrina’s floodwaters swamped
cities and towns along the Gulf Coast, many people lost important ID
documents, including driver’s licenses, Social Security cards,
passports, bank statements, pay stubs, and birth certificates. For many
survivors, the loss of these documents proved to be a significant
obstacle in obtaining FEMA assistance and regaining financial solvency.
For noncitizen victims who were lawfully present in the U.S., the loss
of documentation caused more than delays in the processing of their
applications for government assistance; it also meant they had no proof
that their presence was lawful, which in turn complicated their efforts
to seek employment and made them vulnerable to arrest and detention.
Disaster aid personnel operating in
Gulf Coast disaster settings at times demanded that persons seeking
assistance present documents to prove their personal identity or confirm
that they resided in an area affected by disaster and were therefore
“legitimate” disaster victims. Whether or not such demands are pretexts
for discrimination on the basis of race, ethnicity, or immigration
status, their effect on immigrants can be particularly severe. Because
of increasingly stringent rules governing state issuance of photo ID,
immigrants are less likely to possess driver’s licenses or other state
IDs issued in the U.S. Therefore, even in normal times, many immigrants
struggle to provide acceptable documentary proof of their identity and
residency. They must often rely on secondary forms of evidence, such as
utility bills, leases, and rent receipts—the kinds of documents that
are most likely to be destroyed or left behind in haste when disaster
strikes. To make matters worse, noncitizens’ inability to produce
acceptable ID may cause authorities to suspect that they lack ID because
they have no lawful immigration status. Because noncitizens are well
aware that, increasingly, local law enforcement and other authorities
are actively cooperating with federal immigration enforcement efforts,
the specter of ID checks is a severe deterrent to immigrants’ seeking
assistance, particularly if aid applicants are being required to produce
federally or state-issued IDs.
Recommendations. In
light of the above, federal, state and local agencies administering
pubic benefits and other assistance programs should develop plans for
relaxing ordinary documentation requirements in areas where a disaster
has caused widespread destruction of documents.[15]
And in the aftermath of disasters that cause widespread destruction of
documentation, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) should
expedite issuance of temporary documents to replace lost immigration
papers, such as work authorization cards.
State and local
governments should do their part by passing legislation or enacting
policies that prohibit agencies involved in disaster assistance from
soliciting documents or information that are not strictly necessary
under state and federal rules to determine eligibility for assistance.
For example, California recently enacted a bill intended to address
some of the abuses that occurred during response to the 2007 San
Diego–area firestorms. Proponents of the bill noted that persons
fleeing a disaster commonly lose or lack access to critical documents,
and that low-income individuals, seniors, persons with disabilities, and
immigrants face particular barriers in replacing these documents. The
bill states, in relevant part: “Entities providing disaster-related
services and assistance shall strive to ensure that all victims receive
the assistance that they need and for which they are eligible. Public
employees shall assist evacuees and other individuals in securing
disaster-related assistance and services without eliciting any
information or document that is not strictly necessary to determine
eligibility under state and federal laws.”[16]
Finally, disaster
relief agencies and community groups should similarly develop policies
limiting solicitation of information to that which is absolutely
necessary to determine eligibility for assistance.
Loss of Immigration Status
Overview. In many
cases, the lawful immigration status of noncitizens is conditioned on
their relation to a relative in the U.S., their work for a particular
employer, or their attendance as a student at a certain educational
institution. After the Gulf Coast hurricanes in 2005, many immigrants
who had previously been the beneficiaries of family- and
employment-based petitions for immigrant visas were relegated to a limbo
status because their relatives died or their employers’ facilities were
destroyed. Immigrant students who had to suspend their studies because
their schools closed technically did so in violation of their student
visas.[17]
When similar issues arose for
surviving immigrant victims of 9/11, Congress acted swiftly to enact
legislation ensuring that noncitizens residing lawfully in the U.S.
prior to the attacks did not suffer a loss of immigration status or
benefits due to circumstances that changed as a result of the attacks.[18]
After Katrina, the U.S. House of Representatives quickly passed a bill
providing for insufficiently narrow remedies.[19]
Improved provisions were included in a comprehensive immigration reform
bill that passed in the Senate,[20]
but the legislation was never enacted. Congress was not willing or able
to take even the minimal step of authorizing the attorney general and
DHS secretary to waive technical transgressions by noncitizens in lawful
status prior to the hurricanes whose failure to comply with immigration
laws was the direct result of the disaster. As a result, thousands of
previously lawfully residing immigrants were placed in limbo or lost
their lawful status due to circumstances caused by the hurricanes’
devastation.[21]
Recommendations.
Protecting victims of disaster from losing their preexisting immigration
status solely because of the disaster should be a federal priority. The
federal government alone is responsible for enacting and administering
immigration laws.
In the weeks following Katrina, the
National Immigration Law Center published a set of recommendations
outlining features that should be included in federal hurricane relief
legislation, including numerous provisions aimed at safeguarding
lawfully residing immigrants from loss of immigration status. Most of
these recommendations are broadly applicable to other major disasters.[22]
Language Barriers
Overview. Unless
agencies engaged in disaster planning develop measures to overcome
language barriers, individuals with limited English proficiency will
miss important information needed to prepare for emergencies. When
disaster strikes, effective communication with limited-English
proficient (LEP) individuals is necessary to ensure that they understand
evacuation orders and other emergency directives. Failures in
communication not only endanger LEP individuals and their families but
also threaten to put into harm’s way first responders tasked with
rescuing people. Furthermore, communication failures pose a more severe
threat to the broader public in the event of a pandemic. Indeed, the
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recognizes communities with
limited language competence as a population group warranting
particularly careful attention in emergency planning and response.[23]
It is an understatement to say that
many LEP Gulf Coast residents did not get the information they needed
about the pending disaster of Hurricane Katrina or the relief available
to survivors. Prior to Katrina, only one Spanish-language radio station
based in New Orleans served coastal Mississippi, and the hurricane
interrupted that station’s services. Immigrants whose primary languages
were neither English nor Spanish had even less access to information.
For example, Gulf Coast callers seeking to communicate with FEMA via
telephone were given a choice between English and Spanish. No offer was
made for Vietnamese, despite the large numbers of Vietnamese affected by
the storms, or for any other foreign language.[24]
Due to the lack of accessible warning
information, many immigrants failed to evacuate, putting themselves at
great personal risk. Ineffective outreach to immigrant communities
created a lack of awareness of the services available to persons
affected by the storms, resulting in thousands of Vietnamese and Latino
survivors and evacuees bypassing officially sanctioned shelters in favor
of ethnic enclaves (such as the Hong Kong City Mall and El Coquito
Restaurant, both in Houston) where compatriots provided food and
shelter.
Other LEP individuals who sought
assistance from mainstream providers did not have effective access to
relief services because FEMA, the Small Business Administration (SBA),
the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), state
governments administering Community Development Block Grant (CDBG)
funds, and the American Red Cross lacked multilingual staff or
volunteers who could communicate with them and often did not offer
printed materials in their primary language. Feeling unwelcome, many
LEP families walked away from shelters and disaster recovery centers
upset, confused, and without the assistance that they desperately
needed.[25]
The failure to provide effective
language assistance to individuals in need of disaster assistance runs
contrary to the spirit and, in many cases, the law of Title VI of the
Civil Rights Act of 1964,[26]
which obliges the programs receiving federal financial assistance[27]
to take reasonable steps to provide LEP persons with meaningful access
to their programs, activities, and services. In addition, in 2000 the
White House issued Presidential Executive Order 13166,[28]
which requires that federal agencies work to ensure that federally
funded programs provide meaningful access to LEP applicants and
beneficiaries.[29]
It also directs federal agencies to examine the services they conduct,
identify any need for services among those with limited English
proficiency, and develop and implement a plan to provide those services
to ensure that LEP persons have meaningful access to them.
In light of the problems witnessed in
Katrina and other disasters, the Post-Katrina Emergency Management
Reform Act of 2006 included provisions specifically requiring FEMA to
work in coordination with state and local governments to identify LEP
population groups and take such groups into account in the disaster
planning process; ensure that information is made available in formats
that can be understood by people with limited English proficiency,
disabilities, or special needs; and develop and maintain a clearinghouse
of information about model language assistance programs and best
practices for state and local governments to consider in providing
disaster services.[30]
PERSPECTIVE
Encourager Church, Houston
Recommendations. To
protect the health and safety of all communities in times of disaster
and to ensure that emergency preparedness services adhere to legal
obligations, FEMA should comply with the directives of Executive Order
13166 by implementing a language assistance plan for its federally
conducted activities and establishing policy guidance on providing LEP
persons with meaningful access to programs receiving federal financial
assistance from FEMA.
Vital written materials, such as
all-hazards emergency preparedness guides and disaster preparedness
brochures, should be translated in advance into any languages frequently
encountered within affected communities. The availability of
information in languages other than English should be communicated
effectively to LEP communities.
To be most effective, foreign
language materials should not be mere literal translations of materials
intended for English-speaking U.S. citizens. They should take into
account the particular concerns of immigrant and LEP communities.
Translated materials should be made available on the Internet. However,
they should also be distributed in non-Web formats, such as brochures,
picture books, and pocket guides. As a recent study notes,
“Unfortunately, many racial/ethnic groups might not benefit from [Web]
resources because of limited access to the Internet and limited skills
to navigate complex Web-based systems predominately in English.”[31]
To effectively protect LEP
households, state and local governments must include explicit procedures
within their emergency operating plans to distribute emergency-related
communications in languages other than English.
Furthermore, providers of disaster
assistance services must be trained in the policies and procedures
established to ensure meaningful access to LEP persons.[32]
Interpreters should participate in training exercises, disaster
simulations, and assessment modules to ensure that they will function as
expected.
In order to help programs receiving
federal funding to meet their obligations under Title VI, the Department
of Justice maintains a website that functions as an informational
clearinghouse.[33]
Governmental and nongovernmental entities engaged in disaster planning
should review and utilize these online resources, beginning with the
“Language Assistance Self-Assessment and Planning Tool for Recipients of
Federal Financial Assistance.”[34]
Barriers that Impede Access
to Government Benefits and Services
Overview. When a
disaster uproots families from their homes, employment, and personal
support systems, a predictable surge in demand for public benefits
ensues. These critical services range from emergency provisions to more
sustained assistance in securing food, housing, health care, and other
necessities. Like other survivors of the Gulf Coast hurricanes,
low-income immigrants and refugees lost family members, jobs, homes,
possessions, and the documents they needed to secure critical
assistance. In addition, many immigrants faced barriers to securing the
services needed due to immigration-related restrictions in benefits
programs, impairing their ability to resume healthy and productive
lives.
Short-term, noncash emergency
assistance is, by law, available to disaster survivors without regard to
citizenship or immigration status. When a major disaster strikes an
area, FEMA provides such assistance in the form of warnings, evacuation,
transportation, emergency medical care, crisis counseling, and emergency
shelter. However, the Red Cross, VOADs, and other nonprofits are free
to provide disaster victims with unrestricted assistance,[35]
including cash grants to help with immediate expenses, regardless of
one’s immigration status.[36]
Unfortunately, many immigrant victims of Katrina avoided FEMA and other
government agencies because they incorrectly assumed that they were not
eligible for government assistance and received no information to the
contrary. Even when individuals were fully eligible for disaster
assistance, a lack of awareness and community misperceptions regarding
the rules served to exclude immigrants from seeking services.
The byzantine complexity of the
eligibility rules governing programs that extend beyond noncash
emergency services contributes to confusion and misunderstanding among
disaster victims and the agencies that assist them. A wide range of
federal public benefits—including those that target disaster recovery
(cash grants, disaster unemployment insurance, rental assistance, loans)
and safety-net programs available more generally to low-income
individuals (food stamps, Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF),
Medicaid, subsidized housing)—are foreclosed not only to undocumented
immigrants but also to many categories of lawfully present immigrants.
These longer-term programs are available only to a subset of immigrants
classified in the federal welfare law as “qualified” immigrants.[37]
In some programs, such as food stamps, even “qualified” immigrants may
be barred from participation during their first five years in qualified
status.[38]
Although various bills introduced in
Congress would have loosened some of the restrictions barring immigrant
survivors of Hurricane Katrina from obtaining needed benefits beyond the
initial emergency period, the most significant legislation—including the
Hurricane Katrina Food Assistance Relief Act and the Emergency Health
Care Relief Act of 2005—failed to pass. The consequences of the
governments’ failure to respond more robustly to the health needs of
hurricane victims extend far beyond immigrants. In the months following
Hurricane Katrina, an alarmingly high incidence of health problems was
experienced by storm victims lacking health insurance. The problem was
not an inability to connect survivors with government programs but
rather a failure to ensure universal health coverage to low-income
survivors; even among families living in FEMA-subsidized community
settings, 44 percent of caregivers surveyed reported that they did not
have health insurance, although nearly half had at least one chronic
medical condition.[39]
Eighty-five percent of families
headed by an immigrant include at least one U.S. citizen child.[40]
In theory, the federal government is committed to ensuring that all
eligible individuals, including U.S. citizen children of ineligible
immigrants, have access to short- and long-term disaster assistance.
Ineligible parents therefore are authorized to apply for assistance on
behalf of an eligible child.[41]
However, the final page of the FEMA application form includes a chilling
waiver for parents who have included their identification information on
the application:
I understand that, the information
provided regarding my application for FEMA disaster assistance may be
subject to sharing within the Department of Homeland Security (DHS)
including, but not limited to, the Bureau of Immigration and Custom
Enforcement.[42]
Like requests for green cards or Social
Security numbers, even small-print statements such as this can deter
parents from seeking the assistance that is promised to their eligible
family members.
CASE STUDY
New York After 9/11
Recommendations.
Public programs that assist low-income disaster survivors in meeting
basic necessities, such as nutrition assistance, housing, and medical
care, should be made available to all victims for at least a temporary
period, regardless of immigration status. At a minimum, essential
public benefits should be made available to victims of disaster who are
lawfully present in the U.S.[43]
If the federal government is unwilling to take this step, state
governments should exercise their prerogative to utilize state funds to
deliver this assistance to all persons who critically need it.
Agencies at all levels should become
familiar with the rules governing immigrant eligibility for
disaster-related benefits and services. Agencies assisting disaster
victims should familiarize themselves with the rules regarding public
charge so they can provide appropriate reassurance to victims.[44]
During recovery periods, the federal government should reiterate that
use of disaster-related assistance will not carry public charge
implications. Government agencies providing disaster benefits should
examine their applications to ensure that they do not intimidate parents
into not applying for benefits on behalf of their eligible children.
Notices, brochures, and applications
should communicate clearly in plain language which family members need
to provide immigration status information and Social Security numbers
and for what purpose. Federal agencies coordinating in the development
of the new Disaster Assistance Improvement Program (DAIP) must be
especially vigilant in ensuring that the new online disaster benefits
portal does not exclude immigrants from securing benefits for which they
are eligible. New materials developed to promote DAIP should be written
with the needs of immigrant families in mind.[45]
Conclusion
A nation whose goal is to protect
overall public health and safety during and after a disaster will
institute policies designed to ensure that disaster relief agencies,
community organizations, and the government will work in concert to
assure that all members of the affected community heed warnings, comply
with instructions, and seek needed assistance. The recommendations
offered above are aimed at overcoming particular obstacles that have
undermined participation by immigrants and other communities with
limited English proficiency in disaster preparedness and response. In
essence, they are suggestions for cultivating understanding, trust, and
cooperation, factors by which any disaster preparedness– or
response-related practice instituted by any public or private agency
should be measured.
Given the intense anxiety currently
prevalent within many immigrant communities in the U.S. and the
country’s poor performance in addressing immigrants’ concerns during
recent disasters, disaster relief agencies, community organizations and
all levels of government are faced with a difficult task. As the
emergency management coordinator for one county in south Texas
recognized, “We’ve already lost a lot of the public’s trust.”[46]
Unless bold steps are taken to restore trust, future disasters could
result in grave human tragedy, public health catastrophes, and national
embarrassment, particularly if the disaster is a pandemic or
bioterrorism attack. Fortunately, concrete steps can be taken to foster
understanding, trust, and cooperation among immigrant and LEP
communities. These steps can better ensure that everyone in an impacted
area can participate in response efforts, allowing communities to
rebuild and regain their collective strength together.
NOTES
[1]
Jonathan Blazer is a NILC public benefits policy attorney, and
Brett Murphy formerly worked at NILC as a Bill Emerson
Congressional Hunger Fellow. This article, which stems from
interviews conducted by Mr. Murphy, is excerpted and adapted,
with permission, from a more detailed paper that will be
published as an appendix to Emergency Managers Tool Kit:
Meeting the Needs of Latino Communities (National Council of
La Raza, publication expected in late 2008 or early 2009).
Editorial assistance was provided by Tanya Broder, Eduardo
Cusicanqui, Richard Irwin, Elizabeth Light, Grisella Martinez,
Gregory Wersching, and Dinah Wiley. The authors wish
particularly to acknowledge the feedback and assistance provided
by Melissa Crow and the generosity of the Open Society
Institute, which supported NILC’s engagement in Gulf Coast
recovery work.
[2]
See the special American Community Survey Report on the 117
“disaster counties” designated by the Federal Emergency
Management Agency (FEMA) as eligible to receive “individual and
public assistance,”
www.census.gov/acs/www/Products/Profiles/gulf_coast/index.htm.
[3]
The 2000 U.S. Census, which is commonly recognized to have
undercounted immigrant and limited-English proficient (LEP)
communities, recorded 32,523 Asians living in New Orleans and
surrounding parishes. For additional demographic data regarding
Asian immigrants affected by Hurricane Katrina, see Tuyet G.
Duong and Juliet K Choi, Hurricane Katrina: Models for
Effective Emergency Response in the Asian American Community
(Washington, DC: Asian American Justice Center, 2007),
www.advancingequality.org/attachments/files/34/KatrinawriteupFINAL.pdf.
[4]
Unless otherwise specified, these interviews are the sources of
any other quotations or profiles that follow. Organizational
affiliations are identified according to the positions held at
the time of the incidents reported.
[5]
This paper focuses principally on lessons learned from how
immigrant and LEP survivors fared during the 2005 Gulf Coast
hurricanes. It does not address other important issues, such as
the treatment of workers involved in the reconstruction effort.
For a comprehensive report based on over 700 interviews of
black, Latino, Asian, Native American, and white workers, see
Judith Brown-Dianis, Jennifer Lai, Marielena Hincapié, and Saket
Soni, And Injustice for All: Workers’ Lives in the
Reconstruction (Washington, DC: Advancement Project, July
2006),
www.nilc.org/disaster_assistance/workersreport_2006-7-17.pdf.
[6]
NVOAD is a coordinating body that supports a network of 34
national member organizations by providing a framework for
information sharing and cooperation. It also supports more than
50 state and territorial Voluntary Organizations Active in
Disaster (VOADs) and an increasing number of local VOADs.
Information about its membership, as well as contact
information, can be found at
www.nvoad.org/AboutUs/tabid/70/Default.aspx.
[7]
See Lourdes Baezconde-Garbanati, et al., “Maximizing
Participation of Hispanic Community- Based/NonGovernmental
Organizations (NGOs) in Emergency Preparedness,”
International Quarterly of Community Health Education 24,
No. 4 (2005–06): 289, 291, citing R. D. Lasker, Redefining
Readiness (Albany, NY: Center for Public Health
Preparedness, 2004). See also Olivia Carter-Pokras, et al.,
“Emergency Preparedness: Knowledge and Perceptions of Latin
American Immigrants,” Journal of Health Care for the Poor and
Underserved 18, No. 2 (May 2007): 465–81.
[9]
Baezconde-Garbanati et al., “Maximizing Participation.”
[10]
Carter-Pokras, et al., “Emergency Preparedness,” 466, citing
Stanford L. Bolin on the 1994 Northridge, California
earthquake: “Studies of earthquakes in California suggest that
poor Latinos, undocumented immigrants, and monolingual ethnic
groups are among the groups that encounter the most problems in
acquiring resources and recovering.”
[11]
See Julia Preston, “Facing Deportation but Clinging to Life in
the U.S.,” New York Times, Jan. 18, 2008.
[13]
On Sept. 10, 2008, with Hurricane Ike threatening, DHS released
talking points stating, in part: “There will be no DHS
immigration enforcement operations associated with evacuations
and sheltering.” This marked an improvement over a statement
DHS released a week earlier in response to Hurricane Gustav’s
threat. Advocates and organizations in directly affected
communities have urged DHS to establish a standing policy
ensuring all evacuees and their families will have safe and
equal access to humanitarian care during every phase of
disaster. See letter from the New Orleans Workers’ Center for
Racial Justice and supporting organizations to DHS Secretary
Michael Chertoff, Sept. 9, 2008,
www.nilc.org/disaster_assistance/national_letter_on_dhs_disaster_policy_sept08.pdf.
[15]
A Government Accountability Office (GAO) report notes that,
after Katrina and Rita, “In addition to providing disaster food
stamps to hurricane victims in the disaster-affected states,
[the U.S. Department of Agriculture]—for the first time
ever—adopted a policy of providing disaster food stamps to
evacuees nationwide. Usually disaster food stamps are available
only in areas where the disaster occurred. This new policy
authorized states across the country to provide the maximum
monthly food stamp benefits to Katrina victims for up to three
months. Seventeen states, including the four hurricane-affected
states—Alabama, Louisiana, Mississippi, and Texas—issued
disaster food stamps to evacuees.” Hurricanes Katrina and
Rita: Federal Action Could Enhance Preparedness of Certain State
Administered Federal Support Program (Washington, DC: GAO,
Feb. 2007),
www.gao.gov/new.items/d07219.pdf, 13.
[16]
The bill, AB 2327, which the legislature passed with bipartisan
support, was enacted on September 28, 2008.
[18]
See USA Patriot Act of 2001, PL 107-56, §§ 421-428.
[19]
The Immigration Relief for Hurricane Katrina Victims Act of 2005
(H.R. 3827).
[20]
The provisions, entitled “Preservation of Immigration Benefits
for Hurricane Katrina Victims,” were included in the
Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act of 2006 (S. 2611).
[21]
Three months after the storm, USCIS offered discretionary relief
to certain foreign students, providing “interim relief” to F-1
visa–holders and, on a case-by-case basis, “deferred action”
status to F-2 visa–holders. See USCIS press release, “USCIS
Announces Interim Relief for Foreign Students Adversely Impacted
by Hurricane Katrina,” Nov. 5, 2005,
www.uscis.gov/files/pressrelease/F1Student_11_25_05_PR.pdf.
[23]
Carol Simon, Public Health Workbook to Define, Locate and
Reach Special, Vulnerable and At-Risk Populations in an
Emergency (draft, Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention, 2007)
www.bt.cdc.gov/workbook.
[24]
Uyen Le, The Invisible Tide: Vietnamese Americans in Biloxi,
MS: An Update One Year After Hurricane Katrina (Silver
Spring, MD: National Alliance of Vietnamese American Service
Agencies, 2006).
[25]
Elena Shore, “Katrina Victims Denied Aid and Face Deportation.”
[26]
42 U.S.C. § 2000d et seq. Title VI prohibits discrimination on
the basis of race, color, religion, national origin, and sex in
the delivery of services. Title VI’s prohibition against
national origin discrimination has been interpreted to cover
conduct disproportionately affecting LEP individuals. The
failure to take reasonable steps to provide LEP individuals with
language services needed to ensure their participation in
federally funded services has been interpreted to be a violation
of Title VI. See Lau v. Nichols, 414 U.S. 563 (1974),
and U.S. Department of Justice, “Guidance to Federal Financial
Assistance Recipients Regarding Title VI Prohibition Against
National Origin Discrimination Affecting Limited English
Proficient Persons,” 67 Federal Register 41455–72 (June 18,
2002).
[27]
Federal financial assistance is defined broadly and includes
grants, training, use of equipment, donations of surplus
property, and other assistance. Ibid.
[28]
Executive Order 13166, 65 Federal Register 50121–22 (Aug. 16,
2000). This executive order, issued by President Bill Clinton,
was reaffirmed by the Bush administration. See Ralph F. Boyd
Jr., Assistant Attorney General, “Tools to Ensure Implementation
and Understanding of Executive Order 13166 (Improving Access to
Services for Persons with Limited English Proficiency)”
(memorandum, Nov. 12, 2002),
www.usdoj.gov/crt/cor/lep/BoydNov122002memo.htm.
[29]
These steps include utilization of translation to facilitate the
understanding of written materials and bilingual personnel or
interpreters to facilitate oral communication.
[31]
Dennis Andrulis, Nadia Siddiqui, and Jenna Gantner, “Preparing
Racially and Ethnically Diverse Communities for Public Health
Emergencies,” Health Affairs 26, No. 5 (2007): 1272.
[33]
The website,
www.lep.gov, is called “Limited English Proficiency: A
Federal Interagency Website.”
[35]
Nonprofit charitable organizations are not required to
determine, verify, or otherwise require proof of eligibility of
any applicant for benefits that are otherwise restricted for
many immigrants under the 1996 welfare law. See 8 U.S.C.
§ 1642(d).
[37]
“Qualified” immigrants include: (1) lawful permanent residents
(“green card”–holders); (2) refugees, asylees, and persons
granted withholding of deportation or removal; (3) persons
paroled into the U.S. for at least one year; (4) Cuban/Haitian
entrants; and (5) certain victims of domestic violence who have
a pending or approved visa petition filed by a spouse or parent,
a self-petition under the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA), or
an application for suspension of deportation/removal under
VAWA. Victims of trafficking, although technically not
classified as “qualified” immigrants, are eligible for benefits
to the same extent as refugees.
[38]
For an overview of these and other rules governing immigrant
eligibility for public benefits, see Tanya Broder, “Immigrant
Eligibility for Public Benefits,” Immigration and Nationality
Law Handbook, 2005–06 edition (Washington, DC: American
Immigration Lawyers Association, 2005–06), available at
www.nilc.org/immspbs/special/imm_elig_for_pub_bens_aila_0305.pdf.
[39]
See David Abramson and Richard Garfield, On the Edge:
Children and Families Displaced by Hurricanes Katrina and Rita
Face a Looming Medical and Mental Health Crisis (New York,
NY: Columbia University Mailman School of Public Health, Apr.
17, 2006, rev. Dec. 23, 2006).
[43]
The Hurricane Katrina Food Assistance Relief Act of 2005 (S.
1643) proposed to extend the availability of food stamps to
lawfully present immigrants by treating them in the same manner
as refugees and other humanitarian immigrants, who are afforded
immediate access to benefits on the same terms as U.S. citizens.
[44]
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services specifically
designates “emergency disaster relief” as an example of benefits
that will not be considered for public charge purposes.
Furthermore, even in benefits programs providing ongoing
assistance beyond disaster relief, only cash assistance and
institutionalized, long-term medical care count as part of the
determination. On these points, and for more general
information on public charge, see Questions and Answers:
Public Charge (U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services,
May 25, 1999),
www.uscis.gov/files/article/public_cqa.pdf.
|