NumbersUSA prognostication on Trump Administration immigration/refugee policies
Posted by Ann Corcoran on November 10, 2016
This morning I figured I would just go back to business reporting the news from across America and across the world on what was happening with refugees and specifically refugee resettlement here and abroad. But, all the news everywhere (typical of most of the media) was about immigrants/refugees (and groups like CAIR) freaking out. In the case of one particular story from Baltimore, The Sun article caused my computer to freeze up for about a half an hour. (Don’t you just hate those sites, even Breitbart does it, where they run videos that simply pop up and stall your computer!).
So instead of sorting through all the scare stories, I read what Roy Beck (NumbersUSA) said about Trump on immigration, but will have to beg to differ if this is really what Trump plans on refugees.
Geez, is the honeymoon over already?
And, so begins a new phase for Refugee Resettlement Watch! Will we have to be the conscience—the nag—for an administration that purports to be on our side?
And what is my side? It is my job to advocate for what I believe needs to be done, not to find the compromise!
First, let me tell you what Roy Beck says in an otherwise good piece on immigration control and the American worker.
See here on Refugees:
Trump would continue refugee resettlement at more traditional lower numbers*** than the Obama Administration has sought and would emphasize a higher priority on helping more refugees in their home regions.
During Trump’s Phoneix, AZ speech in August 2016 he advocated for creating safe zones for refugees instead of permanently resettling them in the U.S.: “For the price of resettling one refugee in the United States, 12 could be resettled in a safe zone in their home region. Which I agree with 100 percent. We have to build safe zones.”
Trump has also said he will end the practice of forcing refugee resettlement on local communities against their wishes. [Easier said then done! What? take a vote in town? See who comes out with more activists in dueling rallies in the town?—ed]
Just lower the numbers? No way!
The entire structure of the Refugee Act of 1980 is flawed and my wish is for it to be scrapped altogether. The system of sending millions (billions!) of taxpayer dollars to non-profit ‘religious’ groups to, in cahoots with the US State Department, secretly place them (chosen by the UN!) in hundreds of towns and cities in 49 states is wrong!
Now, if Congress with the President deem it in our national interest to admit some permanent refugees, then they must repeal the original act (build a new program) or completely overhaul it. I have ideas on what could be done, if that is what the soon-to-be-powers in Washington decide to do.
But, simply reducing the numbers and restricting a few countries won’t cut it! This entire flawed system must be blown up first and I will continue to advocate for that outcome.
***If you want to talk “traditional” numbers, the refugee industry will be quick to say that the RAP (Refugee Admissions Program) admitted much higher numbers in the past, in some years twice what we bring now under Obama. So you can’t stick to the strict ‘reduce numbers’ meme with this program. And, indeed, if Trump is turned out of the White House in 4 years, then the next administration will simply up the numbers again.