A Tennessee judge this week moved to dismiss a case that would have, we believe, once and for all, settled the issue of whether the federal government can place refugees in a state and expect state taxpayers to pay for many of their needs. So sad. I had such high hopes for AG Sessions. He of all people should have known how significant this case is.
But, as you read the story, remember that the Judge was dismissing the case because the US Justice Department (Jeff Sessions) asked for the case to be dismissed.
We told you back in Maythat DOJ lawyers were pushing for dismissal. I find it stunning that AG Jeff Sessions did not see the significance of this Tenth Amendment case for, not just the refugee resettlement program, but for other programs where the feds dump financial responsibility on states that don’t want it! (And, don’t tell me he might not have known what his lawyers were doing!).
Here is Neil Munro writing atBreitbarton Tuesday:
A March 19 federal court decision requiring taxpayers in Tennessee to fund the federal government’s refugee program ignores a 2012 Supreme Court decision, says Richard Thompson, president of the Thomas More Law Center.
The judge’s 43-page decision on the refugee program “is filled with appealable issues,” Thompson told a Tuesday event hosted by the Center for Immigration Studies. “Our view is that we should appeal it” at no cost to state taxpayers, said Roberts, who is the lead pro-bono lawyer in the case.
“We would relish that … this case could very well end up in the Supreme Court,” he said.
A Supreme Court majority ruled in 2012 that the federal government cannot force states to fund federal programs, so “the judge basically backed off because it was too controversial and ruled on the basis of standing,” Thompson added.
The case is important for many states because the federal refugee program forces state taxpayers and governments to fund most of the welfare, aid, and education costs of federal government’s policy of dropping refugees and their children in the states, he said. If states balk at paying the costs, the federal government can threaten to cut their share of federal funding for the Medicare program, he said.
In Tennessee, the federal Medicare program funds one-fifth of the state budget, or $7 billion per year.
[….]
The judge did not hold a hearing on the case but relied on written statements from the plaintiffs and defendants.
The judge’s decision shows the political power of the federal program, said Mark Krikorian, director of the center. “A state can check out of the refugee program, but it can never leave,” he said.
More here.
As I understand it, it is now up to the state of Tennessee to decide to take theThomas More Law Centers‘ offer to appeal the case, free of charge. (Or, will big industry—meatpackers!—prevail on the pols to drop the whole thing so their steady supply of cheap refugee labor continues to flow into the state.)
Editor: From time to time we post guest opinion pieces and comments worth noting. This is another from Bob Enos of Willmar, Minnesota (home of Jenny-O turkeys!). Here he is reacting to a pronouncement by the state legislature that it simply cannot calculate the cost of refugees to the taxpayer. Of course, since the state’s auditors contend that the numbers simply are not available, then conversely that means that every economic study from the likes of ‘Welcoming America,‘Global Detroit! (and Lutheran Social Services of MN and Arrive Ministries MN) which claim immigrants and refugees bring economic prosperity to small towns and dying cities can’t possibly make that conclusion. Data on the true costs are not available says the Minnesota legislature. Here is Mr. Enos:
On March 10, 2017, the Saint Cloud Times(Minnesota) newspaper – a Gannett Media publication – reported, “Refugee costs are difficult to gather, report says”. The story was published in the aftermath of Saint Cloud city council member Jeff Johnson’s spirited but vain attempt to gather support for a study of refugee resettlement’s economic impact on his city and county.
Of course, whether the costs are difficult to gather or not evades the issue. Furthermore, it is but part of a larger question:
Are refugees a net gain to their communities?
In anticipation of the April 15 tax filing deadline, the following comes from a “pro forma” federal tax return for the fictitious Mr. and Mrs. Ahmed Mohammed.
What we know of the Mohammed family’s likely financial scenario comes from several sources: the US Office of Refugee Resettlement, the MN Department of Employment and Economic Development, the MN State Demographic Center, the MN State Refugee Resettlement plan, the World Health Organizations, and probably a few more sources rattling around in my head.
Here’s the Mohammed family profile.
Two parents are raising seven minor children in a nuclear family. One parent likely works in meatpacking, earning a maximum of $12 per hour for a 30-hour work week – just two hours shy of full-time employment, absolving the meatpacker of a health insurance obligation. The other parent is home (with seven children, someone has to stay home!), consistent with the 40-50% unemployment rate reported by several public and private sources.
Consequently, the family’s total wage income is $18,720. With exemptions and deductions totaling $49,150, there is ZERO tax liability. Stated another way, the family’s income would have to increase 145% – to $49,500 – for the family to begin having any federal tax liability at all.
What’s more, the Mohammed’s are income-eligible for the “earned income tax credit”, entitling the Mohammed’s to receive an IRS “rebate” of $6,318.
Sorry Welcoming America. Since none of you know what the true costs are to local, state and federal taxpayers, you can’t sell us on more refugees as a vehicle to re-building local economies.
So much for the refugee family which earns its keep.
Now that we have confirmed the Mohammed’s tax status, let’s turn to the additional burdens placed upon taxpayers; the burdens that the MN Office of the Legislative Auditor finds inordinately complex.
The income threshold for poverty guidelines in Minnesota for a family of nine is about $45,900 annually; consistent with the income required for the Mohammed family to reach tax liability. The Mohammed’s income is only 41% of that which our federal government calls a family in similar circumstances 100% impoverished.
There is virtually NO poverty entitlement program for which the Mohammed’s are not eligible.
So, let’s add ‘em up.
Health Care
Since Mr. Mohammed is considered a part-time employee, publicly-funded Medicaid provides the family health insurance. We know what our private insurance premiums are costing us, so let’s be lenient and estimate the value of the Mohammed’s insurance premium at a $1,000 per month, or $12,000 annually.
Housing
Subsidized housing for a four-bedroom apartment is close to a $1,000 per month, or $12,000 annually. The Mohammed’s will have no co-pay.
Education
Estimates for the costs of teaching a non-English learner are about 50% over a mainstream education, according to most sources. In Minnesota, educating a mainstream student costs about $6,000 annually; for the refugee student, about $9,000, or $63,000 annually for the Mohammed family.
Federal supports and sundries
The federal Refugee Reception and Placement Program contracts with the nine “faith-based” VOLAG’s, to relocate and place the family over a 30-day period, for $2,225 per person. Total RRP tab for the Mohammed family: $20,025.
Minnesota’s “Diversionary Work Program” is intended to help parents prepare for the world of work. The family can qualify for a benefits package of up to $70 per person to cover expenses including shelter, utilities, phone allowances, and other “personal needs”. Total expense for the Mohammed family: $630 a month, or their eligibility for the cash portion of the Minnesota Family Investment Program (read: welfare), whichever is less. For a family of just two, the cash portion of the MFIP is $408 per month. MFIP assistance lasts for five years. Oh, and by the way; up to 43% of the Mohammed family’s earned income is disregarded when determining the net income for computing their monthly benefits. Essentially, the Mohammed family will be eligible for the maximum full ride on this program for five years.
If, by some freak occurrence, the Mohammed family is ineligible for the benefits described above (and how could they be?), the state Refugee Cash Assistance program will pick up the slack. RCA provides a monthly standard of $437 for a childless couple, so it’s a safe assumption that a family of nine will receive at least twice that amount.
The federal Supplemental Security Income (SSI) and Minnesota Supplemental Aid (MSA) provides cash assistance for aged, blind, or disabled refugees.
Then there are: Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), a/k/a food stamps; refugee health screening for communicable and infectious diseases; employment services; English-language learner classes; federally-mandated translation services for schools, hospitals, health clinics, law enforcement, judiciary, and corrections. [And, I will add a cost never calculated and that is the cost of the criminal justice system if just one of the ‘children’ has a run-in with the law.—ed]
Finally, there have been suggestions that employers of refugees, such as in the meatpacking industry, receive cash subsidies from the US Department of Labor, intended to offset the cost of training the refugees. In the past, federally-funded “on-the-job” training at the worksite has enabled employers to recover cash equal to 50% of the employees’ wages for up to twelve months.
Have I said enough, fellow activists?
Small wonder Minnesota’s Legislative Auditor can’t get its head wrapped around refugee resettlement finances. And it won’t. And neither will any other agency of local, county, or state government. Because it’s the equivalent of pulling a loose thread on your clothing. And because the motivation, the incentive, simply is not there.
Run the numbers for health care, housing, education, cash assistance, and sundries, and this one Mohammed family appears to produce liabilities to federal, state, county, local, and school district taxpayers of about a HALF MILLION DOLLARS over a five-year period.
So, the hair-splitting and hand-wringing that reports like the Minnesota Legislature’s Auditor produced this month are simply a diversion. The question is not whether or not refugee resettlement burdens the taxpayers. The existence of the burden is beyond question. The central questions is: how much, if any, burden is our society willing to incur?How much of a burden is TOO much? Those are political questions. Meanwhile, we as a nation are now faced with the management of a chronic financial burden.
And with regard to the future political question, the following proposal is a reasonable starting point for a conservative’s solution:
1) Any refugee resettled in the US must have pre-arranged employment, pre-arranged unsubsidized housing, and a private sponsor that secures an insurance policy – a bond – to relieve government of any financial liability, should the resettlement threaten to become a public charge;
2) Refugees must be INELIGIBLE for any public assistance, excluding the public education of minor children, for the first five years following resettlement;
3) The taxpaying public is long past the point for trusting its government agencies associated with refugee resettlement to audit themselves. It’s time for the establishment of Citizen Review Boards, bestowed with the legal authority and the funding to retain private, independent auditors; to identify which public programs are to be measured, the metrics used to measure them; to share what is learned with the citizenry, through neighborhood-based discussion and debate; and to recommend reforms or repeal. Lastly, it is time for citizens to DEMAND that state legislatures take up this issue for discussion, debate, and resolution.
We do not need the permission of the federal government to protect our communities. What we need is the political will, along with very thick skin.
Mr. Enos’ guest column is archived in my category entitled: ‘Comments worth noting/guest posts,’ here. You will find other columns by Mr. Enos there as well. Endnote: In 2015, the Center for Immigration Studies took a stab at calculating the cost of Middle Eastern refugees to your wallets, here. And more recently the Federation for Immigration Reformdid a calculation, here.
This post falls in my ‘Special deals for special (non-citizen) people’ archive!
Where is Congress?
I see that although Congress is debating the budget for the remainder of the year, there are still millions of taxpayer funds sloshing around HHS’s Office of Refugee Resettlementand those have been offered up for grabs starting this week.
We’ve been reporting on the fact that the nine federal refugee contractors,*** which monopolize all resettlement in the US, are paid by the head to place refugees in your towns and that they are hurting financially as the Trump Administration slows the flow of new paying clients.
However, know that those per head payments are not the only federal funding available to them. The Office of Refugee Resettlement has myriad other grants, like these two announced a few days ago.
The first is one of the most outrageous ones we have ever discussed. It is the ‘Refugee Individual Development Accounts (IDA) Program.’ In a nutshell, to be eligible, refugees must save some money toward a house, a car, a business or education and their savings are MATCHED by you up to a limited amount. For example, if a family saves $4,000, you, dear taxpayer, will match them another $4,000.
The match-money is managed (and doled out) by middlemen NGOs awarded the grant—the contractors or their subcontractors usually. Don’t believe me,see here.
Incidentally, one of the side benefits of the Leftwing government contractors/community organizers as middlemen is that it endears the refugees to that local non-profit. I’m sure the refugees think the non-profit group is giving them money!
The Trump Administration is not starving the beast!
This is the grant availability for the coming year for refugee savings accounts….
And, here I went back to look at previous grants for the IDA and it sure looks like Idaho’s Mountain States/Janus Inc. (they are one and the same) have figured out the racket as the organization got a couple of big dips into the federal trough.
Feds help refugees set up licensed childcare facilities for their kids!
The second grant announcement from ORR is the ‘Refugee Family Child Care Microenterprise Development Program.’ See here.
Besides the fact that here we have the middlemen contractors and subcontractors getting paid to help refugees set up businesses that of course will compete with American businesses where the American citizen worked hard to establish her daycare service, we reported here in 2013that the ORR program touted the fact that the children cared for by refugee day care workers would get “culturally appropriate” care.
So much for assimilating the kids!
And, this will surely steam you—-the money is only available to those not yet US citizens. ORR, here.
All low income refugees who are not citizens are eligible for services under this program.
Here is the grant announcement:
This post is filed in my ‘where to find information’category.
***You can bet the nine contractors (below) and their subcontractors will be scrambling for these millions of dollars made available a few days ago.
The number in parenthesis is the percentage of their income paid by you (the taxpayer) to place the refugees, line them up with jobs, and get them signed up for their services! From most recent accounting, here.
Ten years ago they hid the fact that those poor third worlders coming in to the US as refugees were providing a steady supply of cheap labor for big business, now they are admitting it right up front and trashing Trump because he has cut their supply. Do you humanitarians out there really understand that the US Refugee Admissions Program is first and foremost for the pleasure of the Chamber of Commerce and businesses large and small which want to keep wages low? Why do you think the Republicans in Congress have made no serious move to reform the program?
And, secondly it is about giant ‘non-profits’ like Samaritas(formerly Lutheran Social Services Michigan) keeping their government funding flowing.
By the way Samaritas is a made-up word and why they dropped “Lutheran” is a mystery. (It is like HIAS dropping the “Hebrew” from its name!)
As I said here recently, if we have a labor shortage, let’s debate that, but then shut up about this being all about saving the downtrodden of the worldand trying to silence those of us questioning the business model (cheap immigrant labor brought to the US and supported with welfare by THE TAXPAYERS!).
One of the things I’ve wondered for years is: do the refugees coming in understand that low wage, often very dirty and difficult, jobs await them?
The wailing has become deafening as the refugee flow to America has slowed in the last year.
Here is Crain’s Detroit Businesswith this headline:
Refugee clampdown hits local nonprofits
The subheadline should be: Businesses aren’t getting their steady supply of taxpayer-supported laborers!
Here is a bit of the story:
Nonprofit services to help refugees fleeing war or persecution resettle in Southeast Michigan are a shell of what they were a year ago.
Local resettlement agencies have laid off much of their staffs and closed offices, following revenue decreases tied to a federal clampdown that has significantly reduced the number of refugees coming to the U.S., especially those from Middle Eastern and African countries that have been the mainstay of local resettlement efforts in recent years. [Revenue decreases because they are paid on a per refugee head basis!—ed]
We need immigrant laborers in Michigan (to heck if we change America by changing the people)! Picture kind of reminds one of picking cotton (just saying!). Steve Tobocman, executive director of Global Detroit, a proponent of immigration as an economic development strategy. http://www.modeldmedia.com/features/tobocman060610.aspx
Crain’s goes on….
The slowdown in acceptance of refugees and increased vetting was ordered by the Trump administration over concerns about security. It has had an impact on not just nonprofits but also employers who were relying on resettled refugees as a source of labor, local nonprofits say.
Similar cuts have played out at similar agencies in other parts of the country, said Steve Tobocman, executive director of Global Detroit, a proponent of immigration as an economic development strategy.
“Ultimately, the current state of affairs impacts the services agencies can offer to integrate new refugees,” given the loss of economies of scale that come with larger resettlement numbers, Tobocman said.
[….]
To continue providing services to refugees already here, resettlement agencies are seeking alternative funding such as grants from private funders.
And some are looking to local churches and community groups for help.
It is about time, why haven’t they been doing this (above)? Why? Because taxpayer funding was readily available, so why bother trying to raise private charity—that is hard work! Crain’scontinues…. Vickie Thompson-Sandy, president of Samaritas makes over a quarter of a $million annually, according to a recent Form 990. Will she give up some of her salary to care for refugees who are down and out now?
“When we’re closing offices in Ann Arbor, where does a refugee go? They can no longer stop by our office to get basic support,” said Vickie Thompson-Sandy, president of Samaritas, a Detroit-based social services agency that counts refugee resettlement among its services.
[….]
Some local companies are feeling the squeeze in their workforces.
Local manufacturing and retail employers that relied on new refugees as employees are calling the U.S. Committee for Refugees and Immigrants Detroit on a weekly basis, said Tawfik Alazem, director of its Dearborn office. [USCRI is another of the nine federal contractors*** the US State Department hires to place refugees in your towns and cities.—ed]
Among them is Reino Linen Service, a company that launders and returns about 50 million pounds of linens to area hospitals, health clinics and doctors’ offices each year.
The company’s location in Brownstown Township, where public transportation is an issue, leads to high employee turnover, said Mary Onifer, a corporate human resources specialist for the company. [Truly a sweat shop says one commenter, here.—ed]
Reino has turned to organizations like USCRI Detroit for the past nine years to engage refugees as employees.
Once again we see federal refugee agencies are contractors (head hunters!) for businesses while they collect federal dollars for their supposed good works!
There is much more here, I’ve only snipped a tiny bit.
Don’t cry for Samaritas!
Now just to show you how Samaritas (a subcontractor of Lutheran Immigration and Refugee Service) is rolling in taxpayer bucks, and the head honchos are pulling down huge salaries, here are a couple of screenshots from a recent Form 990. Here is there income page—$30 million from taxpayers!
And here check out these huge salaries! Yikes! Ms. Thompson-Sandy’s salary isn’t even the largest! Doing well by doing good!
See more on Michigan by clicking here.
***The nine federal contractors you fund are here:
The number in parenthesis is the percentage of their income paid by you (the taxpayer) to place the refugees, line them up with jobs, and get them signed up for their services! From most recent accounting, here.
Update March 24th: You can see a video of the panel discussion hereat CIS.
And, the St. Cloud Timesonce again shows how biased it is against anyone who challenges the power in that city and state that is hauling in third world workers for the slaughterhouse industry ( while faking humanitarian concern!) by falling for the Southern Poverty Law Centers‘ shoddy research. St. Cloud Times reporter shows her bias (again). Stephanie Dickrell @SctimesSteph
(RRW is listed as a “hate group” as well, and as you know I’m a single blogger/journalist with NO group—so much for their research.)
And, by the way, Breitbarthas a big story on Friday entitled:
Disgraced Media Already Hit with Massive Layoffs in 2018
Newspapers are going down and sloppy work and biased reporting by the likes of the St. Cloud Timeswill eventually bring it down too! This is what I mean….
In large type, reporter Stephanie Dickrell and her editor post this subheadline so as to bias readers right up front.
Group hosting panel was labeled an anti-immigrant hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Center in 2016
Here is some of Dickrell’s story: Councilman Jeff Johnson
A St. Cloud City Council member will travel to the nation’s capital this week to discuss the local impact of refugee resettlement.
Jeff Johnson will be part of a panel Tuesday at the National Press Club in Washington, D.C., discussing whether states should be able to opt out of the federal Refugee Resettlement Program.
The host of the panel, the Center for Immigration Studies, says its agenda is pro-immigrant but for low immigration. The Southern Poverty Law Center listed it as an anti-immigrant hate group in 2016.
Last fall Johnson proposed a moratorium on refugee resettlement in St. Cloud. The motion failed and an ensuing council vote declared St. Cloud a welcoming city.
Don Barnett
The National Press Club panel discussion — “Should States Be Able to Opt Out of the Refugee Resettlement Program?” — will use a January reportby center fellow Don Barnettas a starting point. He outlined what say states have in refugee resettlement, highlighting “federal overreach.”
He includes a history of the states’ interactions with the refugee program and recommendations for better defining the state role. It also includes a case study of a recent federal lawsuit filed by the state of Tennessee which claims the refugee resettlement program was an imposition by Washington over which the state had no control.
In addition to Johnson and Barnett, the panel will include Richard Thompson, president and chief counsel of the Thomas More Law Center, which represented Tennessee in the lawsuit. Center for Immigration Studies Executive Director Mark Krikorian will serve as moderator.
More here.
Minnesotans, this is the time to develop more alternative media in the state.
Papers like the St. Cloud Times (which swallows the lies of Leftwing money-grubbing groups like SPLC) will die and you need to be ready with other sources of news that support your interests and concerns. And, the more the merrier!
See my ever-expanding archive on St. Cloud by clicking here.
