Congressional Caucus on India and Indian Americans

Community Must Ask More of Caucus

by Neil Parekh
News India-Times
February 25, 2000

The Congressional Caucus on India and Indian Americans is an important institution for the Indian American community. The community takes pride in its very existence and membership in the Caucus confers a certain amount of credibility and legitimacy for Members of Congress. The phrase "I have recently joined the India Caucus" repeatedly gets a hearty round of applause at community events.

What, however, does it mean to be a member of the Caucus? What role should the community play in the functioning of the Caucus? Over the past several weeks, News India-Times has conducted a series of interviews with current and former congressional staffers and observers of congressional politics to learn more about the Congressional Caucus on India and Indian Americans, its potential and the role of the Indian American community.

The Congressional Caucus on India and Indian Americans was formed in 1993 by several members of Congress, including Rep. Frank Pallone, Jr. (D-N.J.), Rep. Gary Ackerman (D-N.Y.), Rep. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio), Rep. Jim McDermott (D-Wa), and Rep. Bill McCollum (R-Fla). Rep. Pallone and Rep. McCollum served as the co-chairs of the Caucus from 1993-1998. In January of 1999, Caucus leadership passed to Rep. Gary Ackerman and Rep. Jim Greenwood (R-Pa).

According to a list of Caucus membership obtained by News India-Times, there are 105 members of the India Caucus. This list is fairly up to date and includes Rep. Sam Gejdenson (D-Conn) who joined the Caucus last fall. There are twenty-five Republican members of the Caucus.

According to documents obtained by this reporter, the caucus was formed in 1993 with a "dual mission of being an advocate for the concerns and needs of the Indian-American community and to promote better Indo-US ties."

Two documents, including a "Statement of Purpose" and a "Statement of Issues" are explicit in their description of the intended role of the caucus and the range of issues that caucus members had initially planned to work on.

According to the 'Statement of Purpose', the caucus will make its presence known by regular and frequent letters to members of Congress, "sponsoring occasional lectures and events featuring experts on issues of interest to Indian-Americans," and "disseminating news articles and scholarly articles to Congressional offices."

The 'Statement of Purpose' also envisions members of Congress presenting testimony at hearings, offering statements in the House of Representatives, and monitoring public statements made by prominent officials concerning Indian issues.

The second document, a 'Statement of Issues', is a far-reaching document that envisions the caucus playing a "prominent role in identifying priorities and shaping debate on domestic issues of concern to the Indian-American community and furthering better ties between US and India."

The first set of issues referred to in this document (in order) are domestic issues such as racial violence and hate crimes, education, small and minority businesses, immigration and family reunion, political empowerment (of the Indian American community), the glass ceiling, health and human services.

The second set of issues includes foreign aid and development issues, trade and investment in India, intellectual property rights, human rights and nuclear proliferation.

The role of the Indian-American community is very important in the functioning of the caucus. Many staffers agreed that the community needs to be more proactive and encourage their representatives to address domestic issues. One staffer said, "the community needs to identify an issue or role for the caucus and then ask their Member of Congress, 'What are you doing on this issue?'"

One source, familiar with the history of the caucus, said "The community finally took interest in Congress when the Caucus was formed." Another staffer lamented that there are only three times that the average community member writes a letter to their member of Congress: asking them to join the caucus, asking them to defeat the Burton bill and asking them attend a reception in Washington or other community event.

One congressional staffer, familiar with the caucus, lamented the fact that the Caucus is not addressing domestic issues. "The caucus is not addressing housing discrimination, English as a Second Language, Health care needs." This staffer continued, "What did they do about the INS Raid [in San Antonio], about domestic violence, immigration reform, health disparities, the Kirpan issue in Ohio."

(The only member of Congress who spoke on the floor of the House of Representatives about a Sikh arrested for carrying a 'deadly weapon', the Kirpan, was Rep. Edolphus Towns (D-N.Y.), a frequent supporter of Sikh separatism.) There is some debate, however, as to whether or not the caucus can effectively address domestic issues of interest to the Indian-American community. The original 'Statement of Issues' hedges by saying, "it should not be inferred that all members are, by virtue of their association with the caucus, compelled to support every item on the agenda."

Several staffers and Congressional observers agreed that it is difficult to reach a consensus on domestic issues, particularly since the Caucus is bipartisan. One staffer familiar with partisan politics suggested that the caucus work harder to find issues that "Republicans and Democrats agree on." This staffer suggested that there might be bipartisan support for expanding the number of H-1B visas, expanding internet access in the classroom. Several agreed that the ability of the community to influence the Caucus' agenda is limited due to the fact that the Indian American community is not a significant voting constituency. Others, however, felt that the relationships built up by the community over the past ten-fifteen years are not being used to their full potential. Respected Congressional observers feel that the caucus is being used as a 'fundraising vehicle' for its members and that the Indian-American community is being used.

One person familiar with the Indian-American community, said "I think the flaw sits on the community. Too many people think getting on the caucus is enough. It only means you've entered the game, now you have start playing." The consensus is that there are individuals who have 'access', but that they aren't using their leverage effectively. These are the individuals who will have to raise the issue of domestic violence, of limited English proficiency and the lack of health insurance. Some community groups were praised, however, for establishing an agenda and effectively communicating it to members of Congress. The same staffer who lamented the lack of communication by the average community member acknowledged the role of the Asian-American Hotel Owners Association, The Indus Entrepreneurs and the American Association of Physicians of Indian Origin for identifying legislative agendas at the national level. Several other groups have been active at the local level, but for the most part the community has been ineffective in the legislative arena, particularly around domestic issues.

Several observers agreed that if the caucus is not addressing domestic policy issues of interest to the Indian-American community, than the burden lies on the community to hold their representatives accountable.

Although the focus has been on foreign policy, there is general frustration about the lack of activity in the caucus last year. Several observers openly questioned whether or not the Caucus had a proactive agenda in 1999 when world events propelled US - India relations to new heights. The Kargil conflict, the lifting of sanctions, the coup in Pakistan and the hijacking of an Indian Airlines flight from Katmandu clearly strengthened US-India relations. Many asked, "What role did the Caucus play in this process? What role did individual members play?"

When new bylaws were introduced in January, 1999, it was seen as a fresh start for the caucus. The "Statement of Purpose and Caucus By-laws" identifies the goals of the caucus as 1) advocating the interests of the more than one million Americans in the United States who were born in India or are of Indian ancestry, and 2) promote and strengthen relations between the United States, the world's oldest democracy and India, the world's largest democracy."

According to these by-laws, Section II reads, "The CO-chairs shall have the authority to call meetings, schedule speakers and provide general organizational support for the Caucus. However, the CO-chairs are expected to consult regularly with the caucus and keep the members of the caucus informed of their activities."

News India-Times has learned that over the course of the last year, there have been very few Caucus-organized meetings. There were at most 3-4 briefings, mostly by the State Department, and various intelligence agencies on matters of National Security. Most of these were only for Members of Congress. The only working meeting for Members of Congress took place in January 1999 when new bylaws where introduced and several could not recall any working meetings for staff.

There were a few congressional letter-writing campaigns and joint letters by the leadership of the Caucus. Several staffers were surprised that the Caucus had not circulated news articles, reports or other information about events such as the Kargil conflict, the coup in Pakistan or the hijacking. Most were frustrated by what they saw as a lack of organization, focus and coordination.

Section III of the bylaws also state that The Caucus "shall have an Executive Committee of eight members, four Republicans and four Democrats."

Few staffers who are familiar with the inner-workings of the caucus could identify Members of the Executive Committee. There are several Democrats who have taken an active role in the Caucus, and one could guess that Rep. Ackerman, Rep. Pallone, Rep. McDermott and Rep. Brown are Democratic members of the Executive Committee. Republican Members of the Executive Committee are harder to ascertain. Educated guesses include Rep. Bill McCollum, Rep. Joe Knollenberg (R-Mich), Rep. Connie Morella (R-MD) and Rep. Dave Weldon (R-Florida).

The last section, Section IV, deals with the appointment of members to head task forces. "The caucus CO-chairs shall appoint members of the caucus to serve as head (sic) of various task forces. These task forces will allow more caucus members to assume visible leadership roles in the caucus."

Several task forces were in fact established, including ones dealing with Kashmir (chaired by Rep. Frank Pallone), terrorism (co-chaired by Rep. Bill McCollum and Rep. Robert Wexler (D-Fla)), Sanctions (chaired by Rep. Jim McDermott) and health care (chaired by Rep. Sherrod Brown).

These task forces have held briefings and/or have lead letter writing campaigns, but many staffers remain unaware of the 'existence' of these task forces.

Several of the staffers spoken to for this article expressed the hope that the caucus can and will play a larger role this year with the president's trip to India and the November elections. When approached by this writer, Ackerman's office did not respond to several emails and voice mails asking for information about the caucus.