Two weeks ago we asked readers for their suggestions for reforming the Refugee Resettlement Program of the US State Department. Today we heard from reader Paul Nachman of Bozeman, Montana who suggests doing away with it altogether.
Ryan Mauro wrote a brief article, appearing today in FrontPage Magazine, about the wonderfulness of having Somalis in Tennessee. Near its conclusion he wrote:
These issues, of course, do not mean that all Somali immigrants are problems, but it is clear that the government needs to find better ways to assimilate those who travel to the U.S. in large numbers as refugees.
I think the logical solution is to end immigration of Somalis and deport those who aren’t yet citizens.
Maybe my suggestion will surprise people, but why shouldn’t we be thinking along the line I suggest? Our basic question should be: Does their (or any immigrants’) presence do the U.S. any good? If not (and generally one’s answer, after thinking about it, will be “No”), then why permit their immigration in the first place?
There’s an even more basic question out there: What is the purpose of the United States? The answer is “To benefit the citizens of the United States.” Authority for this conclusion is found in the Preamble to the Constitution, where it says “.. to ensure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity …” So the benefit to our citizens should be the starting point for all U.S. laws, including immigration laws. (This doesn’t mean we should run roughshod over the rest of the world. But **benefits** to the rest of the world should be decidedly secondary or tertiary motives.)
Some folks will probably come back with pleadings about “refugees.” Please don’t. I put the word in quotation marks for a reason: Back in 2003, I had an in-person conversation with Prof. Jan Ting of Temple University Law School. Upon learning that he’d been Assistant Commissioner of the INS during the senior Bush’s presidency, I asked him, “Is it true that 90% of all refugee and asylum cases are fraudulent?” Without missing a beat he replied, “95%.”
Let’s think outside the box of cliches and slogans: It’s time to shut down the refugee program in its entirety. The few people who really need refuge or asylum can be handled on a case-by-case basis. As it stands now, “refugees” and “asylees” are almost entirely gamers of our immigration system, using a back-door route to get legal U.S. presence.
There’s plenty more to be said on that subject … writings at VDARE.com by Thomas Allen, Roy Beck’s book The Case Against Immigration, various articles at the Center for Immigration Studies web site by Don Barnett, Mark Krikorian’s recent book The New Case Against Immigration: Both Legal and Illegal …
The federal contractors responsible for resettling refugees want reform too—but their idea of reform is more taxpayer money and a speedier arrival of refugees. Please send us your ideas. Write to Ann@vigilantfreedom.com.