Advertisement

AIDS-Immigration Ban Extension Near : Regulations: In reversal of stand, U.S. is expected to act today to continue bar on infected aliens. Health officials, activists oppose move.

Share
TIMES STAFF WRITER

Apparently bending to conservative forces, the Bush Administration is expected to announce today that it plans to maintain current immigration policy barring the entry of AIDS-infected foreigners into the United States, according to government sources.

In deciding to back the existing ban, the Administration apparently has abandoned its proposal to ease the entry rules for AIDS-infected immigrants. Although the regulation that would extend the current policy will be open for public comment for 60 days, “it’s most likely that this is it,” sources said Wednesday.

The Administration has been under extreme pressure from Justice Department officials and political conservatives who argue that foreigners infected with the human immunodeficiency virus could pose a long-term economic burden on the U.S. health care system.

Advertisement

Last January, Health and Human Services Secretary Louis W. Sullivan proposed the removal of AIDS and several other ailments from the list of diseases that prevent foreigners from entering the country. The list includes several sexually transmitted diseases, leprosy and tuberculosis. Sullivan recommended the removal of all but tuberculosis, which--unlike the others--is transmitted through the air.

The new rule, as originally proposed by Sullivan, had been scheduled to go into effect on Saturday and would have reversed a 1987 law sponsored by Sen. Jesse Helms (R-N.C.) that added AIDS to the list.

The Helms law has been attacked as discriminatory and medically unnecessary by members of the world health community, lawmakers and civil rights and AIDS advocacy groups. But conservatives argue that traditional public health measures always have excluded immigrants with communicable diseases and that the policy should be retained.

HHS sources described Sullivan and James O. Mason, assistant secretary for health, both of whom support removing the prohibition, as “very upset” over the Administration’s new position. But it is uncertain whether they will continue to fight to lift the ban during the 60 days before the regulation extending current policy becomes final.

Top federal health officials have been wrangling with the Justice Department over the proposal, sources said. Although both sides essentially had agreed that there should be no restrictions placed on foreigners entering the country for short visits, the Justice Department opposed allowing entry of those seeking permanent residence, sources said.

Existing law requires that applicants for long-term visas or permanent residence status prove that they have sufficient financial resources to avoid becoming “public charges.” But the Justice Department called the law unenforceable, sources said.

Advertisement

Those who favor maintaining the ban applauded the Administration decision.

“It’ll save lives, that’s the bottom line,” said Rep. Robert K. Dornan (R-Garden Grove). “Given any 100 people coming in here with the human immunodeficiency virus who promise they won’t be promiscuous, there will be two or three liars.”

But those who sought to change the rule said that they would continue to fight.

“We’ve been trying for the past two years to maintain pressure on immigration policies worldwide, and we were very happy about the apparently enlightened policy coming down from the White House. Now, we have to go and do battle again,” said Dr. Paul Volberding, an AIDS specialist in San Francisco who is president of the International AIDS Society.

“We and every other health group recognize that the rule is not necessary and that it’s bad health policy.”

The fate of the 1992 International AIDS Conference, scheduled to take place at Harvard University, is still unclear. Harvard last year threatened to drop sponsorship of the conference if the immigration rule were not reversed. Harvard AIDS Institute officials are expected to issue a statement today.

Staff writer Ronald J. Ostrow contributed to this story.

Advertisement