After a quick search of this blog’s contents, I did not find any evidence that my colleagues had written previously on this subject. If one or more of them have written on it, and I missed their contributions, I apologize. Then again, an issue like this one — and the fast-approaching opportunity to fix it — deserve repeating.

In the May 14 WaPo, Andrew Sullivan provided a very accessible, 900-word summary of the issue — a must read if you really want to understand what’s at stake. This issue has a little bit of everything tossed in the mix, from HIV/AIDs to Iraq and Libya; from the recently deceased Jesse Helms to bipartisan agreement and the dogged persistence of dis-proven fears.

Returning to Sullivan for a moment, it’s no secret to regular readers that I’m all-but-addicted to his writing. Yes, I’ve had my disagreements with some of his positions and posts — and I think at times he goes overboard (e.g., in supporting Obama and dissing Hillary) — but on balance, I agree with his approach to a wide range of issues and I respect his intellect.

It was this respect that led me to eventually heed Sullivan’s numerous blogged requests and write my Senators (McCaskill and Bond), asking for their support in repealing the outdated, baseless ban on immigrants with HIV.

Unfortunately, I jumped on the bandwagon before clarifying certain details. Case in point: My one-line lobby asked for support of the “bi-partisan PEPFAR legislation which removes the HIV travel and immigration ban.” That’s not quite right. The noted legislation is primarily designed to reauthorize PEPFAR (the President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief), which was first authorized in 2003. Repeal of the HIV travel and immigration ban is not core to the PEPFAR bill; rather, it’s addressed in a proposed amendment to that bill, as Sullivan’s WaPo op-ed (linked above) makes clear. Ahh, if I’d only read that op-ed before writing my senators.

Net: My original lack of clarity contributed, I believe, to a gracious but not entirely on-point reply from Sen. McCaskill’s office, which I received yesterday. Accordingly, I responded to her office today, clarifying my request — a copy of which follows, below the fold. (I still have not heard from Sen. Bond’s office. Maybe the unclear language of my original note so confused his staff that they tabled and ignored it. I’ll write to them again.)

In turn, if you’d like to encourage your Senators to support the noted amendment to PEPFAR, please don’t hesitate or push it off like I did. As mentioned above, this bill and amendment are apparently fast-approaching a vote in the Senate, so time is of the essence. Please, go here to locate your Senators and express your opinions. (Writing to them via their “Web forms” is always better, in my opinion, than a phone call. On the phone, nine times out of 10, you’ll be saddled with a well-meaning but uniformed intern.) And for more information, in addition to the links above, you can check these sources: here (for Facebookers) and here (for a Sullivan-shared reader’s story).

AUTHOR’S RECENT CORRESPONDENCE WITH SEN. McCASKILL’S OFFICE

Dear Senator,

Thank you so much for your reply (pasted below) to my recent inquiry. I now realize that I was not as educated, nor as clear, as I should have been, when I first wrote to you regarding the legislative vehicle that I hope you’ll support.

Drawing from a Washington Post op-ed, I understand repeal of the HIV travel/immigration ban has been proposed by a bipartisan group of senators in an amendment to the reauthorization of the President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR).

It is this bill and this particular amendment that I understand are nearing a senate vote and for which I hope we can count on your support.

Thank you again for taking time to send a response to my query. I hope this additional information clarifies my original correspondence.

———- Forwarded message ———-
From: Senator McCaskill
Date: Jul 9, 2008 2:19 PM
Subject: From the Desk of Senator Claire McCaskill

Dear Mr. Abel:

Thank you for contacting me regarding the ability of individuals with HIV/AIDS to travel to the United States. I appreciate hearing from you, and I apologize for the delay in responding.

Currently, the United States is one of only 13 countries which restrict travel for HIV-positive individuals. Individuals with HIV/AIDS must apply for a special waiver in order to visit our country. On World AIDS Day 2007, President Bush announced his intent to streamline the process of obtaining this waiver and eliminate discrimination against those living with HIV/AIDS, but the new rules proposed by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) could actually create more barriers to travel. These rules would allow short-term visas to be granted to HIV-positive people by U.S. Consulates in their home countries, cutting out the involvement of DHS headquarters and speeding up the process. However, applicants would have to agree to certain conditions, including giving up the right to apply for a longer stay or permanent residency in the U.S.

You may be interested to know that on December 7, 2007, several House Democrats sent a letter to Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff objecting to the new regulations. Furthermore, Representative Barbara Lee (D-CA) introduced the HIV Nondiscrimination in Travel and Immigration Act of 2007 (H.R.337), which would amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to eliminate HIV as a bar to U.S. admission. As your United States Senator, I will be sure to keep your thoughts in mind should this legislation reach the Senate, and I will continue working with my colleagues on the Committee on Homeland Security and Government Affairs to create an effective and nondiscriminatory admissions process.

Again, thank you for taking the time to share your thoughts with me. Please do not hesitate to reach out in the future regarding other matters of interest or concern to you.

All best,
Senator Claire McCaskill