Budget battles begin (or maybe not so much), you must still demand DEFUND of RAP

They are back, or just getting back as  Congress is in full swing at least for a few days starting tomorrow!  See a schedule here for the next few days.
BTW, I see no mention of the legally required hearing that Rep. Trey Gowdy (Chairman of the House Subcommittee on Immigration) is supposed to have had in advance of the fiscal year (before October 1st!) on the US Refugee Admissions Program (RAP) for FY2017.

Rep Brian Babin (R-TX) said in a FAIR interview that he plans to make another run at defunding the UN/US Refugee Admissions Program in the federal budget.

First, listen to Rep. Brian Babin speaking on a FAIR (Federation for American Immigration Reform) podcast. (Hat tip: Richard at Blue Ridge Forum)
It is almost 13 minutes long and well worth listening to, but be sure to listen starting around the 1:50 mark where the Congressman says he plans to work hard and diligently to attach his DEFUND the RAP measure on the Continuing Resolution (or final budget plan) which ever they address in the lame duck session.
Readers will remember that he sought to attach language to the CR that is operative at the moment and had 37 members of Congress, including himself, behind the effort. Letter here.

So what is happening now that Donald Trump has shocked the country with his victory and the House and Senate remain in Republican hands? 

The Hill is reporting that there may be another CR that would continue funding the government at FY2016 levels into February of next year.  This would give the incoming Trump team an opportunity to shape the budget for the remaining months of the year to their liking.
It would also have the benefit of cutting out Obama and the likes of Harry Reid from presiding over a contentious December budget fight.
Unless the Department of State, the Office of Refugee Resettlement, or the VOLAGs have money left over from last year, I am making the assumption that the FY2016 level is not adequate to get Obama’s 110,000 refugees in to the US by September 30th.  They could try to do a rush job and bring them in at high levels now, but they will be gambling on whether they will have money in the second half of the year.
[An aside: I hope this is the last year of this shameful inattention to the federal budget and that Congress gets on the stick and completes the Appropriations bills BEFORE the fiscal year begins on October 1. Not finishing the bills is a sign of shoddy leadership in my opinion! See here.]
See the story in The Hill here (note some Republicans are on Obama’s team and want the budget finished in December):

GOP groups are seizing on Donald Trump’s victory in an attempt to avert the long-dreaded spending deal with President Obama in the upcoming lame-duck session of Congress.

Members of the Republican Study Committee are renewing their calls for leadership to hold off on negotiating this year’s spending bill process until after Obama leaves office.

RSC chairman Rep Bill Flores of Texas says extending the Continuing Budget Resolution in to February will give the Trump team time to put a mark on the federal budget for the remainder of the 2017 fiscal year.

RSC Chairman Bill Flores of Texas said in an interview that his members are backing a short-term spending bill that goes through Feb. 28. That would give the next Congress and the incoming president about five weeks to approve the budget for 2017, which was initially due in September.

It’s an idea that conservatives, led by groups such as Heritage Action and FreedomWorks, had first floated this summer, long before Trump’s surprise victory on Tuesday.

Calls to kick the appropriations process into next year received a lukewarm reception on Capitol Hill earlier this year, with the prospect of a Democratic-controlled White House and Senate looming.

That calculation has now drastically changed.


Much of the outcome will depend on Trump, who must quickly decide whether GOP leaders should clear the decks or let him get involved during the precious first 100 days of his presidency.

Your job remains, no matter when they finish the budget, to demand DEFUNDING of the RAP.

Appropriations are policy!

Tell them to defund it until Congress can seriously look at either reforming it or trashing it altogether!  See my thoughts on what Trump should do on January 21st.
For all of our many posts on Congress and the budget process see our tag ‘Where is Congress.’

Trump transition needs to weigh-in on Obama's Australian 'refugee' deal

What is to be gained by admitting over 1,000 rejected Australian asylum seekers—-mostly Muslims?

Why are they our problem?

We have been writing about this stunning revelation for a couple of days, but it looks like it is going forward as Obama sends officials to the island of Nauru to start processing Australia’s rejected asylum seekers.
Update thanks to a reader: ‘Refugees’ from Nauru wouldn’t arrive until after January 20th. I don’t see this as necessarily a good piece of news because as I read it, the processing will proceed which puts Trump in an even worse position and that is denying entry to ‘refugees’ that the Obama Admin. has screened and given promises to. See the story here, what do you think?
See our previous posts here and here.

Can they do anything to stop the DEAL? Remember the so-called ‘refugees’ failed Australia’s asylum application process.

Another news story from AP gives us more details.
Apparently we asked Australia to take some illegal migrants that were parked in Costa Rica.  WTH! Why are those migrants in Costa Rica our problem?  I will bet a million bucks these aren’t even legitimate refugees but economic migrants:

Turnbull announced at Obama’s Leaders’ Summit on Refugees in September that Australia would participate in the U.S.-led program to resettle Central American refugees from a camp in Costa Rica.

It makes me wonder if Australia is trying to save itself from too many Muslims so is willing to take the Central Americans instead.
This deal smells and is emblematic of an issue I haven’t written about since 2015 when I last posted my Ten Reasons for a Moratorium on Refugee Resettlement, see that post by clicking here.
I was making the point that there is ample evidence that the UN/US State Department Refugee Admissions Program is being used for extracurricular activities of the State Department, not (as advertised!) to help poor downtrodden people who are pawns in these deals.
Why did we admit thousands of Meskhetian Turks to America when Russia didn’t want the Sunni Muslims in their midst (those who came to my county had to sell homes in Russia when they resettled here)? They could hardly be ‘refugees.’
Why did we airlift Uzbek Muslim extremists to America in the Bush Administration and call them ‘refugees?’
What national interest was involved in helping the UN close camps in Nepal to move nearly 100,000 Bhutanese (Nepali!) people here over the last 9 years (many did not want to come here)? I suspect we were sucking up to the UN.

Now, what is to be gained by admitting over 1,000 rejected Australian asylum seekers—-mostly Muslims.  Why are they our problem?

Here is what I said in my Ten Reasons for a Moratorium…. 
This is number 7. Only legitimate refugees should even be considered. Moving people around the world for other reasons should be specifically prohibited.

Congress needs to specifically disallow the use of the refugee program for other purposes of the US Government,especially using certain refugee populations to address unrelated foreign policy objectives—Uzbeks, Kosovars, Meshketians and Bhutanese (Nepalese) people come to mind.

I don’t know if Trump and his team have any power to halt this DEAL before the 20th of January, but I sure hope he tries!

Charleston, WV rally Tuesday: We want Syrian Muslims in our city!

You know what strikes me as different about this pro-refugee rally scheduled for tomorrow evening (Nov. 15th) at 5 p.m. is that it is specifically a rally to welcome Syrians (99% of the Syrians the Obama Administration is admitting to the US are Muslims even as we see Christian genocide in the Middle East).
In most locations where an ‘Interfaith’ group advocates for refugee resettlement they don’t pick a specific nationality/religion. Indeed, a new agency like the one proposed for Charleston won’t get to choose its favorite nationalities either—they will take a mix of people from different regions of the world.

Rabbi Victor Urkecki suggests we must atone for mistakes in WWII when the US turned away Jews, by inviting tens of thousands of Syrian Muslims to the US. I do not get this logic!

So here is the latest from Charleston.  Longtime readers know that West Virginia has taken very small numbers of refugees over the years and those that have been resettled were placed by Catholic Charities.  Now, Episcopal Migration Ministries wants in on the action.
From The Charleston Gazette-Mail:

Volunteers are planning a rally for Tuesday in Charleston to send a welcoming message to Syrian refugees fleeing their war-torn country.

The second-annual West Virginia Welcomes Refugees rally will be held at 5 p.m. in the mini-pavillion at Court Street and Kanawha Boulevard East.

Episcopal Migration Ministries, one of nine national refugee resettlement agencies that works with the U.S. government and local groups to place refugees, and the West Virginia Interfaith Refugee Ministry have been working together in hopes of making Charleston a safe haven for refugees.

Last month, the ministries submitted an application to the U.S. Department of State to turn Charleston into one of its “resettlement communities” and place 100 refugees in the first year in Charleston. The State Department has not yet made a decision.

Then below we hear the story about how some Jews were turned away from America in WWII (yes, it was an awful mistake). But, I fail to see how throwing America’s gates open to large numbers of Muslims (Sunnis in the case of Syrians who form the basis of ISIS and Al Qaeda) is equivalent in any way.
Please someone explain to me why an error of 75 years ago somehow requires us to invite to America tens of thousands of participants of a religious civil war in the Middle East! 
Update: And tell me why this isn’t a rally for the Christians facing genocide in the Middle East which would be the real equivalency argument to what happened to the Jews in WWII.
But here we go again with the guilt trip:

“These are people that are escaping the same forces of evil that we are opposed to,” said Rabbi Victor Urecki, one of the organizers.

“There is a sense that America is not welcoming to the other — to the refugee, to the immigrant,” he said. “And this is our response, to say ‘We are together. We stand in solidarity and hospitality to all who come to our state. We are a city of tolerance and love.’”

Urecki noted that at one point in America’s history, America’s border was closed to the Jewish community.

“The best way I can show that I’ve learned the lesson of what it’s like to be an outsider is by embracing the outsider and the other,” he said.

How many Syrian Muslims will Rabbi Urecki take home with him? How many would even want to go home with him?
Is the huge cost of resettling large numbers of refugees of any concern to the Rabbi and the local ‘Interfaith’ activists?
Learn about Charleston’s ‘Interfaith’ group here, and go here for more posts on the Charleston refugee controversy.
For West Virginians who are not happy with what you are learning, you must contact your two US Senators and Congressman Alex Mooney who represents Charleston and let them know what you think!
Endnote! I don’t want to hear from any readers who think this is a Jewish plot. This is about political ideology. Remember that most resettlement in America is being done by Leftist Christian organizations.  There are many people of the Jewish faith who disagree vehemently with our policy of admitting large numbers of Muslim refugees, not to mention those who have serious concerns about the economic impact on local communities and state governments and are working hard to bring attention to the enormous cost to taxpayers.