That is a quote from Tamar Jacoby, President and CEO of Immigration Works USA, at a meeting we reported, here, in 2009. It was a closed-to-the-public and press conclave held at a MARRIOTT HOTEL in Washington, DC and included such luminaries as Grover Norquist. The assembled, as reported by a NumbersUSA expose‘, were talking about how to get amnesty after grassroots activists (like those who would later become the tea party) had defeated the Kennedy/McCain/Bush “comprehensive immigration reform” in 2007.
So, when you find yourself getting all sentimental about the impoverished immigrant coming to the US for a better life, have some sympathy for the immigrant but remember that the biggest driver for amnesty is BIG Business—whether its the meatpackers I mentioned in my previous post or the major hotel chains looking for maids and dishwashers—make no mistake, there is BIG money behind the amnesty/open borders movement AND the Refugee Resettlement Program.
That 2009 secret gathering (Storming the Hill National Summit) was located at a Marriott Hotel, and….
The welcome was by Deborah Marriott Harrison, who is granddaughter of the Marriott Hotels founder and V.P. Government Relations for the chain.
Burmese refugees working for Marriott in Utah
I’m sure the grateful refugees receiving awards for their good service by a Marriott hotel are wonderful people. But, don’t for one second think that refugee resettlement is driven primarily by warm and fuzzy humanitarian motives—this is about making money with legal laborers who come ready to work and have almost zero chance of going home again. Refugee labor is better than other immigrant labor for that very reason.
Here is just a bit about the awards the Burmese refugees received from grateful hotel management:
Five years ago, the Marriott Summit Watch needed new housekeeping staff members. At the time, hiring a group of Burmese refugees seemed like a good business decision with help from Utah’s Department of Workforce Services and the Refugee Services Office, hiring the refugees was an easy process.
However, hiring refugees did not come without a few hiccups. Company lore tells of mishaps like dishwashers overflowing with suds from Palmolive, or the machines being loaded with toasters. “We had to learn their culture to teach and train them,” Belnap says of the early days working with the refugees.
These days, transitions for refugees working at the Marriott are becoming a little easier. Are Min, unofficially serves as the Marriott’s representative to help new refugees. He also works with Refugee Services to help those new to the area buy groceries, find places to do laundry, and adjust to life in Utah. He also encourages other refugees to apply to the Marriott Summit Watch. “We talk about how much better this Marriott is,” he says.
The Marriott is also very happy with their Burmese employees and Belnap says the company frequently speaks with other employers in Utah about the benefits of hiring refugees. “[It’s] rewarding in every way,” he said, “these are hardworking people, working to benefit themselves and their families.” Another advantage to hiring refugees versus other foreign employees is that they are legal to work as soon as they arrive, [and they have no where else to go!—-ed] said Perkins. Are Min says a few of the other hotels in Park City also hire refugees including the Canyons, Westgate, and Montage, among others.
But, it’s not always so great for the generally docile Christian Burmese as we saw here a few years ago when a Burmese Muslim refugee murdered a little Christian Karen girl after the Muslims were placed in the same apartment complex in Salt Lake City as the Christians.
The point of what I’ve posted above is that “humanitarianism” is not driving the open borders movement, corporate giants are (along with the federal refugee contractors like Catholic Charities), and that the lives of the refugees are not always as sweet as this Marriott propaganda would have you think.
The bottomline for me is that I would have a lot more respect for the Refugee industry (and for the open borders position generally) if they admitted that their goals were largely financial (and political) and not driven by emotion and a sympathy for the poor and downtrodden immigrant. If the general public understood that point then perhaps a serious policy discussion might be possible… but I won’t be holding my breath.