Refugee Resettlement Watch

White House could announce refugee ceiling for FY18 this week

Posted by Ann Corcoran on September 13, 2017

“We don’t really know who is driving this train”

(whines Melanie Nezer of the Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society)

Update: My friends at VDARE cross-posted this story and added an excellent chart that illustrates the ceilings and admissions over the years. See here.

The decision could come this week and the contractors*** are scared to death that the number could be 50,000 or lower. At least that is what VICE News is reporting and they clearly have an inside line to Leftist/Open Borders leakers in the administration if this report is to be believed, and I have no reason not to believe it.

It also confirms the vibes I got listening to the HIAS conference call last week—the contractors are out of the loop!

Before you read the VICE story, be sure to see my post yesterday entitled:

Consider the optics Mr. President! Thousands of impoverished people arriving in the US when Americans are homeless

Now, here is VICE News (emphasis is mine):

The Trump administration is expected to drastically reduce the number of refugees that will be allowed into the United States in the coming year, VICE News has learned.

Stephen Miller 2

VICE reports that Stephen Miller is butting heads with Mattis and McMaster over refugee numbers for FY18 (which begins in a little over 2 weeks)

Multiple sources, including an official in the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program (USRAP) with direct knowledge of the situation, say Trump plans to cap refugee admissions for the 2018 fiscal year at no more than 50,000. That limit would be the fewest in modern history, and less than half as many as President Obama authorized last year.

[….]

Trump hasn’t yet made a final decision on refugee admissions, the sources said, but according to the USRAP official, “it won’t exceed 50,000” and could even be fewer. White House officials and members of the National Security Council were scheduled to discuss the refugee cap Tuesday, and an official announcement could come as soon as this week.

[….]

A White House spokesman declined to comment on “internal discussions” about refugees. The State Department, which oversees U.S. refugee resettlement programs, told VICE News the cap would be set “after appropriate consultation with Congress” and before the start of the 2018 fiscal year on October 1, but declined to answer additional questions.

According to a source familiar with the discussions, Stephen Miller, Trump’s senior advisor for policy, has been the leading advocate for fewer refugee admissions, and has attempted to sideline other key players in the discussions, including Defense Secretary James Mattis and National Security Advisor H.R. McMaster.

[….]

In his proposed budget for 2018, which is under consideration by Congress, Trump calls for slashing the budget for refugee resettlement from $544.7 million to $410 million. Overall spending on U.S. refugee programs, including ones that provide aid to refugees and displaced people overseas during humanitarian crises, would be cut by 13 percent, falling from $3.1 billion to $2.7 billion.

[….]

Under the Refugee Act of 1980, which established the current standards for screening refugees and admitting them into the country, the president has broad authority to dictate how many refugees the U.S accepts. In certain years the U.S. has admitted fewer refugees than allotted, but Trump’s proposed cap would be the lowest ever.

melanie-nezer

Transparency my a**!

This next bit should make your blood boil if you have been (for years) a citizen activist in your community and have been excluded from refugee planning meetings and denied documents about your towns/cities!

Humanitarian groups, which have typically been consulted ahead of a final decision by the president, complain they’ve been completely shut out of the process this year.

Melanie Nezer, senior vice president of public affairs at the refugee resettlement agency HIAS, said in past years there was transparency and an open dialogue between the White House, the State Department, and Congress, but uncertainty is now the status quo. [THERE WAS NEVER TRANSPARENCY FOR TAXPAYERS AND CITIZENS QUESTIONING HOW THEIR MONEY WAS BEING SPENT AND WHO WAS COMING TO THEIR NEIGHBORHOODS!–ED]

“We don’t really know who is driving this train,” Nezer said. “We’re guessing like everyone else. That’s very unusual. In prior administrations, both Democrat and Republican, we’ve been a real partner on this.”

Continue reading VICE here.  However, have a look at accurate numbers for the ceilings and actual admissions here.  Obama never set a ceiling anywhere near 110,000 until he was walking out the door in 2016.  Also there were many years when admissions dropped below 50,000.

For new readers, the point to remember is that each refugee (client) comes with a pile of money (taxpayer dollars) attached that goes to the contractors, like HIAS, to keep their phony-baloney ‘non-profit’ groups afloat.  See (here) how much they are being paid to do their ‘charitable good works.’

(BTW, HIAS is one of the plaintiffs in the ‘Travel ban’ lawsuit against the President while pocketing millions of federal dollars.)

We have been arguing for weeks that the President should suspend the program altogether for FY18 and tell Congress to investigate the program with an eye to reform it.  Irma and Harvey have made that the most sensible course of action.

America First!

We have refugees of our own!

Tell the President what you think by clicking here to get instructions…Tell your members of Congress and US Senators too!

***The federal contractors paid by the head for refugee “clients” they place (secretively!) in your towns and cities:

6 Responses to “White House could announce refugee ceiling for FY18 this week”

  1. Al Sheeber said

    They had many excuses why they could not let the European Jews enter during WW2, 1100 in total entered, FDR locked them up in a concentration camp for the duration of the war. One of them invented the MRI/CatScan. It is however a presidential decision, if he feels that it will become a problem to integrate Muslims, or that they pose a threat, he should be able to explain it and follow on his decisions. Plenty of reasons why not to increase immigration, it is his job to explain.

    Like

  2. Rose said

    ZERO is all the Traffic will Bear with Voters. WE are the Authority over ALL the Public Servants, regardless of their Donors fat opinions.
    The USA is below the rate of Surviveability.
    DO NOT LET THE USA be BLED TO DEATH as our First President, George Washington was, when he was too weak to fend off the HACKS who decided on archaic THEN techniques of BLOOD LETTING for his case of Pneumonia.
    The CDC verified in a back page story that the USA fell below SURVIVEABILITY rates a number of YEARS ago, well before President Trump was elected.
    TO A POINT BELOW which any nation has EVER recovered – in all of History.
    But the Passengers are dancing on deck while the hole blown in the hull is swamping the ship.
    WE CANNOT AFFORD TO BE RAMPING UP the BLEEDING OUT at this stage of the game.
    We don’t even know if our efforts to save the USA are going to work.
    Minutes from BLEED-OUT is no time to go on some heroic crusade when you need to be getting the bleeding stitched up.
    You won’t get out the Door.

    Liked by 1 person

  3. Lynn Walker said

    This entire refugee program needs to be scrapped. It only took 19 on 9/11! Why the hell do We need anymore people that we have to support and cannot trust? Sent from my iPad

    >

    Liked by 1 person

  4. Steve Lavalle said

    still for to many

    On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 6:12 AM, Refugee Resettlement Watch wrote:

    > Ann Corcoran posted: ““We don’t really know who is driving this train” > (whines Melanie Nezer of the Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society) The decision > could come this week and the contractors*** are scared to death that the > number could be 50,000 or lower. At least that is what VICE ” >

    Like

  5. ljarvik said

    Zero was the number that forced cuts in NEA & PBS in 1990s–though we never really got zero it forced Congress to make cuts…President Trump would get as much grief for 50k or 10k as for zero, so might as well go all the way to zero as an emergency temporary measure for one year until we find out what is going on with so-called “refugees.” There would be no political downside IMHO, as opposition already activated.

    Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply to Lynn Walker Cancel reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

 
%d bloggers like this: