Your Help Needed: Travel/Immigration Letter Writing Campaign Update

Our last issue (AIDS TREATMENT NEWS #128) included an action kit on how to write letters supporting the lifting of the ban on persons with HIV entering the United States, and a list of organizations you can contact; it also included an in-depth background article on the controversy. [If you need a copy, send a self-addressed, stamped envelope to: AIDS TREATMENT NEWS, P. O. Box 411256, San Francisco, CA 94141; ask for issue #128.] We will continue publishing updates urging people to write their own letters and to organize friends and associates to do so, and to institutionalize such grassroots lobbying as a permanent part of the AIDS community, even beyond this immediate issue.

Some major points:

* Not only does the current travel ban threaten to cancel next year's International Conference on AIDS in Boston, but if it is not changed, retaliation by other countries against U. S. travelers with HIV is likely -- further restricting scientific and public-health conferences and coordination, and treatment options for individuals, as well as the ordinary conduct of business. Also, such border restrictions give everyone in the world an incentive not to be tested for HIV, if they might ever have a need for international travel. (No one has proposed testing everyone at the border, which would be grossly impractical; rather, those already known to be HIV-positive are not allowed to pass.)

* All we are asking for is the straightforward implementation of the Immigration Reform Act of 1990, which became law on June 1, 1991. This law clearly requires that the U. S. Public Health Department -- not the Department of Justice -- decide which diseases warrant exclusion because of the danger of contagion; the Public Health Service has determined that only active tuberculosis should be on that list. The law also allows exclusion of foreigners who are likely for any reason to cause a financial burden to the U. S.

* Some people have asked why not separate short-term travel from permanent immigration -- especially since there is much concern about cost to the government of caring for foreigners with HIV. Unfortunately this issue has been widely misunderstood. The real HIV "immigration" issue concerns persons already here -- most of them here continuously for at least nine years (as required to qualify for the immigration "amnesty" program) and therefore almost certainly infected in the United States. They now face deportation to countries throughout the world, regardless of prevention or treatment programs available there. Even those who want to keep foreigners with HIV from coming to the United States often agree that deporting persons who were infected here is a reprehensible attempt to unload our own problem on others -- and an action likely to damage this country's reputation worldwide.

What about intermediate cases, such as persons in the U. S. for a year or two who are found to be HIV-positive when they try to change their visa status due to marriage or a job? Decisions could be made on a case-by-case basis, using the "public charge" provision in the current law. There is no need to automatically exclude HIV-positive visitors at the border, or to deport persons who have lived in the United States for years.

The Immigration Reform Act of 1990 only provides for one list of diseases for exclusion on public-health grounds. It does not allow two lists, one for visitors and the other for permanent immigrants -- a fact well known to the right-wing politicians and officials who are trying to use the image of the U. S. being overrun with HIV-positive immigrants to stop all international travel by persons with HIV.

At the Seventh International Conference on AIDS last week in Florence, there was much pessimism about whether the Eighth International Conference would take place in Boston next May -- or take place at all. The general view was that the White House does not want an AIDS conference in the U. S. during an election year, since AIDS (and health care in general) is an embarrassment to the government, and a conference will generate unfavorable or disturbing publicity. If the White House is willing to sabotage next year's AIDS conference in pursuit of Republican political gains in the November election -- we do not know whether or not this is true -- then it may be impossible to remove the travel ban at this time, no matter how many letters are sent to Atlanta or Washington.

This uncertainty illustrates the need for letter writing as a permanent institution in the AIDS community, whatever happens on this issue. The AIDS "corporate culture" so far has included Washington lobbying, has included high-profile demonstrations, and has included treatment information and activism. But now it must also include grassroots lobbying, such as mass letter writing to elected representatives and other public officials, in order to insure that AIDS policy reflects public-health expertise, not right-wing sabotage. Let us respond to the immediate travel/immigration issue in a way that builds the long-term strength we need.


Statement of Purpose

AIDS TREATMENT NEWS reports on experimental and complementary treatments, especially those available now. It collects information from medical journals, and from interviews with scientists, physicians, and other health practitioners, and persons with AIDS or HIV.

Long-term survivors have usually tried many different treatments, and found combinations which work for them. AIDS TREATMENT NEWS does not recommend particular therapies, but seeks to increase the options available.

We also examine the ethical and public-policy issues around AIDS treatment research and treatment access.