That is basically the gist of the post at a blog called Immigration Impact.

Who are these political activists pretending to be non-partisan policy analysts?  Frankly, I don’t know exactly because I see they reference the Immigration Policy Center which is an arm of the American Immigration Council which is itself a spin-off of the American Immigration Law Foundation.  By the way, Guidestar says of AILF (whose file doesn’t open there):

AILF promotes public understanding of immigration law and policy through education, policy analysis, and support to litigators. We seek to counter anti-immigrant groups that would close America’s doors to future newcomers, making the case that America is a Nation of Immigrants.

My point in stating this, about the tangle of groups, is that this is typical of organizations most likely connected to George Soros and/or the Tides Foundation—one cannot follow the money trail partially because they are always changing names and spinning off new groups and casual readers believe them to be independent analysts when in fact they are activists.

Family reunification fraud

But, back to my story today.  Regular readers are well aware of the the fraud that was discovered in the P-3 (family reunification program) of the US State Department.  It was learned in 2008 that as many as 80% of the refugees entering the US as family members (primarily from East Africa) arrived here falsely claiming a family relationship to others already here.  The State Department puts the estimate of the number of illegal Africans (largely Somali) at 36,000 admitted from 2003-2008.

Now the State Department is getting ready to re-open the P-3 program that has been suspended since 2008.   It is imperative that anyone concerned about re-opening the program with some evident loop holes, should send comments in response to the Federal Register posting.   (Reader Tony Lee, gives us instructions on some problems we can raise, here).

Now to that Immigration Impact post entitled, ‘Underrepresented African refugees and potential problems with DNA Testing ‘(emphasis mine):

Earlier this month, President Obama announcedthe annual refugee allocations—80,000 total for Fiscal Year 2011, the same total as in 2010. However, while the total yearly allocation is the same, African refugees are being underrepresented. The 2011 ceiling for African refugees is 15,000, which is slightly lower than in 2010 and nearly 25 percent lower than the average for the previous decade (2000-2010). In reality, the number of African refugees actually admitted has fallen considerably below the ceilings due to processing problems. Why? New data documenting the underrepresentation of refugees from Africa in the U.S. looks at allegations of fraudulent African family reunification applications, DNA testing programs, and its implications for U.S. refugee and immigration policy.  [Readers, I recommend reading the source to follow links which did not transfer easily here.–ed]

Implications are then made that the US State Department wasn’t being fair in its DNA testing program:

However, the P3 program was suspended in 2008 due to allegations of fraud. The program relied on attestations of relationship from family members, and there were concerns that many applicants purporting to be blood relatives were not, in fact, related. A DNA testing pilot project to test DNA samples of P3 applicants was initiated in several African countries. Refugees were asked at their interviews (with no forewarning) to provide a DNA sample. Large levels of fraud were reported. However, counted in the fraudulent cases were people who refused to submit DNA. In cases where one family member’s family relationship was not as claimed, the entire family would be coded as fraudulent.

Next we are presented with that old excuse about the definition of a family in Africa implying that we must be sensitive to their cultural norms (and forget about ours!).

While some of the reported fraud was actual fraud, in some cases cultural differences played a role.  [You can read what follows yourself—ed]

Now comes the crux of the concern by Open Borders activists—they are afraid DNA testing will be required in other areas of immigration!

In September of 2010, the State Department published proposed rules that would change its procedures for processing P3 applicants, including mandatory DNA testing to prove claimed family relationships. The prospect of mandatory DNA testing is of concern to refugees themselves, refugee resettlement agencies, the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), and other human rights advocates. Moreover, the implementation of DNA testing in the refugee context may portend required DNA testing in other areas of immigration admissions.

When the United States once again begins to allow relatives of refugees to enter the country through the P3 program, DNA testing will be required. All the details are not entirely clear at this point. DNA testing brings up questions of cost, privacy, discrimination and delays, in addition to the definition of family relationship and cultural differences. Strict rules regarding the use of DNA testing are necessary.

LOL! They’ve got to get Africans in here, by hook or by crook, to vote for Democrats as we heard yesterday from Portland, Maine, here.

Send in comments, you can bet the Open Borders activists are doing the same!

As I said earlier, it’s not too late for concerned readers to comment on the new regulations published in the Federal Register on the new DNA testing requirements which we believe need to be more stringent.  Check out this post  at RRW about a Center for Immigration Studies analysis to learn more about the weaknesses in the proposed regulations.  Don’t delay because the deadline for comment is next week sometime.  The Federal Register notice was published for a 60-day comment period on September 9th.