Refugee Resettlement was big news in 2016

Just now as I read through news on my various alerts I saw several year-end wrap-up local news stories including from Poughkeepsie, NY and Rutland, VT which ranked refugee resettlement controversies among their top stories of the year.
The one from Idaho places refugee resettlement right up there with the 2016 Presidential election as a leading story for 2016!

refugee-resettlement
MagicValley.com gleefully notes that a petition drive failed to put the issue before county voters, but this type of activity is not a wasted effort. It generated media, sneering media, but nevertheless the process created political controversy. This is an important stage in bringing about political change. As I say to everyone, stop looking for the silver bullet. There is no silver bullet, or no right thing to do, just keep up the political pressure in whatever way you can using whatever talents and time you have.

I’ve been writing RRW since 2007 and I must say, this has not happened in those nearly ten years—that the refugee issue would be a leading story of the year anywhere, so keep up the good work.
When you are feeling frustrated that your concerns about the UN/US Refugee Admissions Program are not being addressed, know that getting those concerns reported in your local media (within an overarching theme of agitating your elected officials) is a first important step toward reaching a political tipping point.
Here is some of what MagicValley.com had to say:

Refugee resettlement, which was a controversial issue in Twin Falls in 2015 and continued to be on in 2016, was also a major issue in the presidential race, and the debate over Medicaid expansion in Idaho will be shifted drastically because of the outcome. [By the way, the Office of Refugee Resettlement itself says that if your state has expanded Medicaid it makes it a more ‘welcoming’ target for the placement of refugees.—ed]

[….]

A movement to shut down the College of Southern Idaho Refugee Center started last year, after news came out that some Syrians could be among the refugees to be resettled in Twin Falls. (None have been to date.) As the Syrian civil war dragged on, displacing millions of people, refugee resettlement became a topic of worldwide debate and a major issue in the presidential race, with Trump’s hard-line views on refugee admissions and anti-Muslim rhetoric energizing some and horrifying others. As for Twin Falls, it started to attract national media attention as an example of a town divided over what was becoming a focus of national political arguments.

A drive for a countywide referendum on whether to shut down the refugee center fizzled this spring when organizers got about a quarter of the number of signatures they would need to get on the ballot. In June, however, the debate flared back up after news came out about a 5-year-old girl at the Fawnbrook Apartments being sexually assaulted by three boys from Middle Eastern refugee families.

Continue reading here.
LOL! That is all I am snipping.  I am really careful about not taking too much of published news accounts, however, this publication is the only one in the nation to ever send me a legal letter telling me I have snipped too much of their report.
Does anyone know where the case is regarding the sexual assault from last June?
Our archive on Twin Falls may be found by clicking here.

AP says Montana is an example of anti-refugee sentiment spilling forth in wake of Trump victory

Update December 29, 2016: Michael Leahy at Breitbart has a good piece on Montana here also.
This is an Associated Press story that ran on Christmas day so not sure how many of you saw it.
For background, Montana had a small refugee program many years ago, but up until this year it was alone with Wyoming in not having one at all.  That changed in 2016 as Missoula ‘welcomed’ its first African and Middle Eastern refugees. I traveled to the state this summer and can attest to the sentiment outlined in this story.

sk_rossi
S.K. Rossi, advocacy and policy director for the ACLU of Montana: “It’s pretty widely known that this is going to be a hard year…” Photo: https://www.aclumontana.org/en/about/staff

For new readers you might like to see our Montana archive, here.
From AP at The Seattle Times:

HELENA, Mont. (AP) — The push to restrict refugee resettlements and immigration in the U.S. that figured so prominently in Donald Trump’s election is now headed to states that are preparing to convene their legislative sessions early next year, immigration advocates said.

In Montana, which took in just nine refugee families from January to early December, about a dozen bill requests related to refugees, immigration and terrorism have been filed ahead of next month’s session. The measures include requiring resettlement agencies to carry insurance that would defray the cost of prosecuting refugees who commit violent crimes and allowing towns and cities to request a moratorium on resettlements in their communities.

Refugee rights advocates say those measures are a sign of what is to come as the anti-refugee rhetoric that featured prominently in the presidential election spills over to statehouses and local governments.

“It’s pretty widely known that this is going to be a hard year for those of us who are seeking to protect the rights of refugees and immigrants,” said S.K. Rossi, advocacy and policy director for the ACLU of Montana.

The president-elect campaigned on building a border wall with Mexico to stop illegal immigration, deporting immigrants who are in the nation illegally and halting the resettlement of refugees to strengthen the federal program that vets them.

[….]

“It absolutely does not end with the presidential election,” McKenzie [Michele McKenzie, deputy director of the Minneapolis organization The Advocates for Human Rights] said. “It’s a national strategy by a small but organized group of anti-immigration advocates and anti-refugee advocates.”

[….]

“We need to get serious,” said Nancy Ballance, a Republican state representative from Ravalli County.

Ballance said refugees are a “gigantic issue” in her southwestern Montana county, just south of the liberal college city of Missoula. “People expect to see some legislation brought,” she said.

It is pretty clear that legally state legislators can’t do much to change the US Refugee Admissions Program (USRAP), but here we have the ACLU lobbyist making the crucial point about efforts in the Montana (yours too!) legislature.

“Filing this and making it a public conversation automatically undermines the refugee process,” Rossi said.

“They can’t legally undermine the process, but they can socially undermine the process.”

Continue reading here.

Trickle up!

You have a right to ask questions and demand that your elected officials at all levels of government be transparent, and consider your economic worries and your safety concerns when the federal government targets your communities.
Efforts like these in the Montana legislature are important to help create controversy because the ultimate goal is for the controversy to ‘trickle up’ to Congress and to the new Trump Administration. There is no doubt that the USRAP must be trashed or reformed, but that pressure must come from the states (and local governments) to Washington.  Politicians hate noise and so it is your job as grassroots activists to make political noise!
To that end, since Montana’s lone House member is likely going to the Trump Interior Department, it is critical that you, in Montana, make the selection of his replacement a referendum on the refugee program. See The Hill (scroll down to Rep. Zinke).
Endnote: I am off to jury duty, be back later!

Texas AG makes stupid, uninformed comments about refugee program!

Approximately 6,000 refugees came to Texas in 2015 and 2016, but Texas never knew the extent of the program. (Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton)

Who is he trying to fool!

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton said on Fox & Friends yesterday that the state never knew the extent of the refugee program in the state. OMG! The State had been paying a refugee coordinator for years and years and no one apparently at the governor’s level ever asked? What incompetence! Or was it?

texas-ag-paxton
Texas AG Ken Paxton. The real test for Texas comes after January.  Will they then sue the feds with a Wilson-Fish states’ rights suit? Or, are they all talk and no action!

If we knew that Texas was the number one state in the nation for refugee resettlement (it gained that distinction in 2011), why didn’t Texas leaders know?
By the way, the Texas governor pulled the state out of the program (officially in January the state will be out), but what did they expect was going to happen, that the refugee flow would be cut off?
Did no one investigate the Wilson-Fish program and how the feds will step in and simply appoint a non-profit contractor to run the program in the state?  This strikes me as sheer incompetence!
They still have a way out, or a possible way out! Once they are designated a Wilson-Fish state we will see if the governor and this Attorney General have the guts to sue the feds as Tennessee is doing!
From Newsmax:

Texans are “stuck with no control” over the refugees coming into their state, and Attorney General Ken Paxton said Thursday state leaders are concerned the same situation going on in Europe will happen in the United States.

[….]

Texas has sued the federal government to try to stop refugees from being placed in the state, but federal law controls the issue, Paxton said.  [Yes, but it was a dumb lawsuit!—ed]

[….]

Earlier this fall, Paxton warned Texas will pull out of the federal refugee-resettlement program in January unless major changes were made. Approximately 6,000 refugees*** came to Texas in 2015 and 2016, but Texas never knew the extent of the program.

Hey, Mr. Paxton, do you need a phone number for the Thomas Moore Law Center, or can you handle finding that yourself?
Paxton also told Fox that they were counting on Donald Trump to save their bacon.
See our complete Texas archive here, and don’t miss Austin mayor working against the state here two days ago.
***He doesn’t even have the numbers correct. Checking Wrapsnet.org we learned that for calendar years 2015 and 2016 (until December 20th), the state of Texas admitted 15,681 refugees.

Asheville, NC still under consideration for new refugee site

At least that is what the International Rescue Committee told a local newspaper this week.

Image #: 30348799 Rep. Mark Meadows (R-NC) questions IRS Commissioner John Koskinen as he testifies before the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee in Washington Monday June 23, 2014. REUTERS/James Lawler Duggan (UNITED STATES - Tags: POLITICS) Reuters /JAMES LAWLER DUGGAN /LANDOV
Rep. Mark Meadows opposes the plan for Asheville to be a new resettlement site, but it is important you follow up with him now and tell him what you think (even if you live elsewhere in NC).

By the way, as an update, Hudson, Wisconsin has dodged a bullet for now and will not be getting the Syrian families; plans for which caused a huge public outcry and the Congressman representing the district got involved.
See my post yesterday with update.  Did the Republican Congressman help push the decision in that direction?  (Be sure to read the update and open links, see the medical problems with that group of Syrians.)
The news from Asheville tells us that the member of Congress for the district where the city is located (Rep. Mark Meadows) opposes the resettlement site. Could that be the holdup?
Note that another Republican, West Virginia Rep. Alex Mooney apparently is welcoming the plan for his district and it has been approved.  It is too early to draw conclusions, but it sure looks like some consideration is  given to whether the member of Congress representing the district is willing to stand against it. [Hint! Montana!]

From the Citizen-Times:

A visit from the International Rescue Committee in June sparked a debate in Western North Carolina as the global aid and humanitarian organization announced it was exploring the possibility of making Buncombe County a resettlement site for refugees.

Representatives from the International Rescue Committee met with residents at the Unitarian Universalist Congregation to discuss the feasibility of relocating about 150 people fleeing persecution in their home countries to the Asheville region.

At the time, J.D. McCrary, executive director of the IRC office in Atlanta, said that if plans move forward, the first household could come as early as next spring. Others would arrive over the ensuing 12 months, he said.
The organization has remained tight-lipped since their first visit to town.

“There are still no new updates,” IRC spokesman Sean Piazza said in December. “We are still considering Asheville as a potential site that would welcome refugees and give them a chance to rebuild their lives.”

The majority of refugees now being resettled domestically are Congolese, Bhutanese, Burmese, Afghan and Iraqi, although there are likely to be more Syrians in the near future, McCrary said in June.***

[….]

That month a spokesman for Meadows said the congressman opposed the IRC’s plans and is working with the group and the State Department on the issue.

If you live in Asheville, you need  to stay on top of this and on top of Rep. Meadows!

So which ethnic groups have been placed in North Carolina?

***I was interested in the list McCrary gave and especially because he didn’t mention the Somalis!  Does NC not get Somalis?
So, I checked Wraps.org and had a look at FY2016 and FY2017.  Fiscal years run from Oct. 1 of the previous year to Sept. 30th of the following year.  So, for new readers, FY 2017 began on Oct. 1, 2016 (we are over 2 and 1/2 months in to it).
I did see that Asheville got 21 refugees from Moldova recently.  I don’t know what that is about.
In that timeframe, one year and 2 and 1/2 months, NC took in 4,101 refugees.  NC has often been in the top ten states for refugee resettlement in the years I have been writing RRW.
Here are the top nationalities that have been placed in NC since October 1, 2015 (FY 2016).

DR Congo (1,201)

Syria (705)

Burma (594)

Somalia (301)

Bhutan (231)

Afghanistan (157)

Iraq (145)

Below are new sites we have identified so far of the supposed 47 the Obama Administration is (or has been) trying to get established.

One of the first things the Trump Administration must do is to make all of this information public information.  Here are some of the sites we have identified so far:

Asheville, NC (not decided yet)

Rutland, VT (approved, waiting)

Reno, NV (open)

Ithaca, NY

Missoula, MT (open)

Aberdeen, SD (not now)

Charleston, WV (approved)

Fayetteville, AR

Blacksburg, VA

Pittsfield, MA

Northhampton, MA

Flint, MI

Bloomington, IN (dead for now)

Traverse City, MI

Poughkeepsie, NY

Wilmington, DE

Hudson, WI (dead for now?)

Watertown, NY (maybe)

Youngstown, OH (maybe)

Storm Lake, Iowa

I would like to get more updates from you, let me know if you have anything more on these sites.

Obama State Department approves 100 Syrian Muslims for West Virginia state capitol

Where were you WV Republican Senator Shelley Moore Capito and Republican Rep. Alex Mooney?  Only two choices!—either asleep-at-the-switch or in support of this move by a local ‘interfaith’ group to be named a federal subcontracting agency for the purpose of beginning a new refugee resettlement site in the state.  (Charleston previously received a few refugees through Catholic Charities, but no where near this scale).
If Capito and Mooney had put up significant opposition, we would have heard about it and this decision might have turned out differently.
Does Obama think he can stick it to West Virginia (Trump territory) voters in his final weeks in office? And, where is Joe [Manchin]?  He must be all for it too!

mooney
Did Mooney tell this nice lady that he is supporting Syrian Muslim resettlement in the state capitol? Charleston is in Mooney’s district. Photo: https://www.nationaljournal.com/s/57741

Just this morning we reported that in Wisconsin, Republican Rep. Sean Duffy sent a strongly worded letter about plans to begin placing Syrians in his district and here a few days ago we learned that the plan for Bloomington, Indiana was shelved because opposition had grown there and because it is expected that Trump will make some move after January 20th to slow (or stop) the flow of refugees to America (money for resettlement is drying up as well).
So why go ahead with this new site at the West Virginia state capitol?
For new readers we have followed the growing controversy in Charleston extensively for months, see here.
From the West Virginia Gazette-Mail (emphasis is mine):

The U.S. Department of State has approved an application to establish a refugee resettlement program in Charleston, officials announced Wednesday. But that decision could be reversed by the incoming administration, according to an expert on refugee resettlement law.

The West Virginia Interfaith Refugee Ministry, which also is the name local organizers have been informally using to describe their humanitarian effort, will begin as a program of the Episcopal Diocese of West Virginia.

In a statement issued Wednesday, the Rev. Canon E. Mark Stevenson, director at Episcopal Migration Ministries, announced that the West Virginia Interfaith Refugee Ministry had been approved to join its network of 30 refugee resettlement sites throughout the country.

[….]

In October, they submitted an application for a resettlement agency to place 100 refugees in Charleston in the first year.

David Ramkey, chief financial officer for the Episcopal Diocese of West Virginia, said the refugees should be a “welcome addition” and “very productive part” of the community.

[….]

Neil Grungras, executive director of the nonprofit Organization for Refuge, Asylum and Migration, said the Donald Trump administration could reverse the decision.

“The State Department is never obligated to allow even an approved refugee into the U.S.,” Grungras said. “The answer, with regard to the 100 approved, is that it probably depends where they are in their processing. [I will bet a buck that the Obama Administration is packing as many as they can into that pipeline right now!—ed]

[….]

Lynn Clarke, a local organizer, said the group had been told that, if they were approved, the refugees would likely begin arriving this summer. She said the group anticipates refugees fleeing from Syria, Afghanistan and Iraq, but she said they also could be from other countries. –

As I said in a previous post, I don’t know why this ‘interfaith’ group was so hot for Syrian Muslims (apparently Iraqis and Afghans too), they usually don’t get to pick their favorite ethnic groups, but actually get a little bit of everything.