“If the day of Vice President Haley ever arrives, Trump’s base should have no illusions about the flatlining vital signs of the America First moment.”
(Pedro Gonzalez)
I am a one issue person—how we handle immigration is all that matters for the future of the US as we know it.
Nikki Haley may have impressed many of you, but she was soft on refugees when the issue became a hot one in South Carolinaa few years ago, and I won’t forgive her for it.
You’ve probably seen the circulating stories about how the President might dump VP Mike Pence in favor of Haley in the coming months.
Frankly, no matter how exciting Haley might appear for some so-called conservatives, I doubt this is even in anyone’s dreams (maybe Bill Kristol’s!) right now.
Why?
I don’t know about you, but I think Pence has been a good and steady voice and apparently a competent manager of the Trump coronavirus team and it wouldn’t look good to give him the heave-ho now.
Here is a post at American Greatness by writer Pedro Gonzalez from a couple of days ago about the Haley for Veep thinking (just in case you are one of those hearing a siren song!).
Rumor has it President Trump is considering swapping Vice President Mike Pence with former American ambassador to the United Nations Nikki Haley. “This is not a prediction,” said CNN political analyst Paul Begala, “it’s a certainty.” Haley would be a great choice—if Trump intends to utterly abandon the agenda that got him elected.
[….]
Pitting Haley against Trump would mean certain political suicide for her, but seeding her in the White House would, in a Machiavellian twist, boost her profile and afford her countless opportunities to subvert the America First agenda. From immigration to foreign policy, Haley has been no friend to MAGA.
[….]
Trump would do well to remember his own rebuke of Haley in response to her shot across the bow: “She’s very weak on illegal immigration and she certainly has no trouble asking me for campaign contributions because over the years she’s asked me for a hell of a lot of money in campaign contributions.”
Indeed, Haley is at odds with Stephen Miller on immigration, the last man in the White House who is true to the America First immigration mandate.
Sympathy in the Congo is one thing, but bringing the Congo to America is another.
When Miller brought together senior officials in 2018 to discuss a plan to reduce the number of refugees admitted to the United States, Haley was deliberately excluded, presumably for her previous opposition to drastic reductions of refugee resettlement numbers. A spokesperson said Miller’s discussion was conducted “in consultation with all appropriate government agencies.” Likely as a result of her views on immigration, then, Haley was kept out of the discussion.
[….]
Haley has all the hallmarks of someone who operates with political expediency as a rule. Appeals to emotion, comic displays of faux strength, radically different stances on the same issue depending on the times. But there remains a remarkable consistency and cunning through it all.
She has maneuvered herself into a good light with the president and his supporters, despite remaining ideologically opposed to the America First agenda. Haley has gone from being the GOP’s Obama—the quintessential anti-Trump Republican—to a favorite of Trump supporters and now a potential replacement for Mike Pence. If the day of Vice President Haley ever arrives, Trump’s base should have no illusions about the flatlining vital signs of the America First moment.
Go hereto read all of the many reasons, Haley as Vice President would signal the end of this administration’s even nominal efforts to reduce immigration numbers.
Many of us are already worried that once re-elected the President might succumb to those voices within the Republican party clamoring to open our gates wide to a steady supply of third world workers.
And, as I said at the outset, nothing else matters for the future of our great country than how we manage immigration.
Editor’s note: As RRW approaches its 13th birthday, there are over 10,000 posts archived here at Refugee Resettlement Watch. Unfortunately, it is just me here with no staff and so it has become virtually impossible to answer all of the basic questions that come into my e-mail inbox or to RRW’s facebook page every day. I don’t want to appear rude—I simply haven’t enough hours in the day.
Please take time to visit RRW (don’t just read posts in your e-mail) and use the search window in the right hand sidebar and see if you can find the information you need. Also see my series that I wrote in recent months entitled Knowledge is Powerwhich explains some basic principles of how Refugee Resettlement is carried out in the US.
And, lastly, I don’t write that much every day, so if you made a habit of reading my posts here on a daily basis, you would eventually catch on to what is happening because I do link back to previous posts as much as possible. LOL! Thank you for helping me not go crazy!
Do you see that big red spot in the center of Africa? That is the DR Congo where the largest group of US-bound refugees have been coming from in recent years.
Since we are now blocking Europeans from entering the US, the logical next question is are refugees being blocked from entry, or are they at least being tested?
(By the way I recommend a great post today at Gatestone on the extent of the virus crisis in Europe.)
As of three days ago the UN High Commissioner for Refugeesreported that so far there had been no cases of refugees being infected with Covid-19, but all that has changed as at least one refugee In Iraq and another on the Greek island of Lesbos are reported infected. (And, I suspect we are not hearing the full story).
And, here is a story from The Guardian that was published only a day after the UNHCR spoke. Lesbos is a Greek island overrun by Middle East refugees.
Lesbos coronavirus case sparks fears for refugee camp
I’m sure there will be more reports like these in the coming days and weeks.
In the US, the first question I’ve seen about whether refugees are being tested comes from Tennessee where the criticism against Republican Governor Bill Lee has been intense for his eagerness to welcome more impoverished (costly for taxpayers) refugees to the state.
Are Bill Lee’s Refugees Being Screened for Coronavirus?
Good question!
So dear Mr. President, are we testing refugees coming into the US since much of the world is now infected?
Editor’s note: As RRW approaches its 13th birthday, there are over 10,000 posts archived here at Refugee Resettlement Watch. Unfortunately, it is just me here with no staff and so it has become virtually impossible to answer all of the basic questions that come into my e-mail inbox or to RRW’s facebook page every day. I don’t want to appear rude—I simply haven’t enough hours in the day.
Please take time to visit RRW (don’t just read posts in your e-mail) and use the search window in the right hand sidebar and see if you can find the information you need. Also see my series that I wrote in recent months entitled Knowledge is Powerwhich explains some basic principles of how Refugee Resettlement is carried out in the US.
And, lastly, I don’t write that much every day, so if you made a habit of reading my posts here on a daily basis, you would eventually catch on to what is happening because I do link back to previous posts as much as possible. LOL! Thank you for helping me not go crazy!
I’ve reported this news previously, but still get questions about it.
It is wonderful that the President is making it harder for people who would be a burden on our social services (aka welfare system) to stay in the US, but the new rule does not apply to perhaps the heaviest users of our social safety net—refugees.
Factors Government Will Consider under New Public Charge Rule
On the same day the Public Charge Rule went into effect (February 24, 2020), immigrant advocates held a teach-in at Boston City Hall to try to lessen the uncertainty and fear that has been spreading through immigrant communities.
The Administration has stated that the Public Charge “[R]ule will protect hardworking American taxpayers, safeguard welfare programs for truly needy Americans, reduce the federal deficit, and re-establish the fundamental legal principle that newcomers to our society should be financially self-sufficient and not dependent on the largess of United States taxpayers.” However, immigration advocates view the rule as “penalizing poverty”and taking the chance to become self-sufficient away from immigrants, a group of individuals who historically has been an important part of our country and our economy.
Previously, this rule primarily affected those who accepted cash welfare benefits. However, the new rule makes admission to the U.S. more difficult for low-income immigrants and non-immigrants who use other, non-cash welfare benefits. The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has said that the public charge rule is meant to determine whether a person is likely to use of certain government benefits in the future.To make that determination, officers will review the totality of the circumstances, including an applicant’s income, age, health, family status, assets, credit scores, liabilities, education, and skills (including English language), visa classification sought, and receipt of public benefits. Some factors serve as “negative” factors, others as “positive” factors.
[….]
These groups of individuals will not be subject to the public charge test:
[….]
~Applicants for Temporary Protected Status (TPS), asylee or refugee status, special immigrant juvenile status, or U or T visas.
Editor’s note: As RRW approaches its 13th birthday, there are over 10,000 posts archived here at Refugee Resettlement Watch. Unfortunately, it is just me here with no staff and so it has become virtually impossible to answer all of the basic questions that come into my e-mail inbox or to RRW’s facebook page every day. I don’t want to appear rude—I simply haven’t enough hours in the day.
Please take time to visit RRW (don’t just read posts in your e-mail) and use the search window in the right hand sidebar and see if you can find the information you need. Also see my series that I wrote in recent months entitled Knowledge is Powerwhich explains some basic principles of how Refugee Resettlement is carried out in the US.
And, lastly, I don’t write that much every day, so if you made a habit of reading my posts here on a daily basis, you would eventually catch on to what is happening because I do link back to previous posts as much as possible. LOL! Thank you for helping me not go crazy!
The bill seeks to change the Refugee Act by putting a floor of 110,000 refugees as the minimum number to be admitted annually (among a Christmas tree of other provisions).
If you are saying, well, ho-hum, won’t go anywhere with Trump in the White House and the Senate controlled by Republicans, you need to take a broader view.
This is what the savvy Leftists do—they stake out their dream territory for the day when Trump is gone. He will be gone sooner or later. But, in the meantime they use initiatives like this one to keep their base engaged and it ticks me off because conservatives are always playing defense to their offense.
Where are the bills that could stake out a position on the immigration restriction side—-heck how about a bill calling for a moratorium on all immigration to America!
It won’t happen of course, but it would be a way to energize the base and lay down a marker.
The New Deal for New Americansis a marker the Open Borders Left is throwing down! It is to attract media attention and to move the needle in that direction—in the direction of their ultimate goal, a borderless world!
Mass. immigrant advocates join Sen. Ed Markey to celebrate introduction of visionary New Deal for New Americans Act
Markey and Millona at press event announcing bill. Media opportunity? How many media outlets were even in attendance? Doesn’t matter because they make it look like there is press in the room. It is all for show.
Dozens of advocates and leaders of immigrant- and refugee-serving organizations joined U.S. Senator Edward J. Markey at Agencia ALPHA today to celebrate the introduction of the New Deal for New Americans in the U.S. Senate.
The bill, which is strongly supported by the National Partnership for New Americans (NPNA), co-chaired by MIRA Executive Director Eva A. Millona, was introduced in the House last October and has 39 cosponsors so far, including U.S. Reps. Ayanna Pressley, James McGovern and Joseph P. Kennedy III.
It would provide federal leadership to increase access to citizenship; support local organizations that welcome newcomers; expand high-quality workforce development and English-language programs; increase access to legal counsel; and embrace America’s global role as a refuge.
To give these issues greater prominence and institutional support, it would also create a National Office on New Americans to lead a federal inclusion and integration strategy coordinated with state and local governments and community stakeholders.
[….]
A key provision of the bill would be to eliminate the annual ceiling for refugee admissions,which has dropped precipitously under the Trump administration, to just 18,000 for fiscal 2020, and replace it with a floor. The minimum annual admissions would be 110,000 – the same as the ceiling set by former President Obama for fiscal 2017 – to recognize America’s role as a refuge for people from around the world.
For new readers: the Refugee Act of 1980, which will be 40 years old on March 17th, gives the power to the President to set a ceiling for refugee admissions.
They don’t want to take the chance that another President like Trump would have that power. You need to know that Obama never came anywhere near 110,000 either. According to the Refugee Processing Center, his average annual admissions number was 69,946 over his 8 years in office.
Just so you know! The Refugee Act of 1980 gives the President the responsibility to set the annual refugee cap. President Donald Trump has set the cap for this year at 18,000.
If elected Prez, Joe Biden would dramatically raise the cap higher than anything the Obama Administration ever did—to 125,000.
Increase the number of refugees we welcome into the country.
With more than 70 million displaced people in the world today, this is a moment that demands American leadership. Offering hope and safe haven to refugees is part of who we are as a country. As a senator, Joe Biden co-sponsored the legislation creating our refugee program, which Trump has steadily decimated. His Administration has reduced the refugee resettlement ceiling to its lowest levels in decades and slammed the door on thousands of individuals suffering persecution, many of whom face threats of violence or even death in their home countries. We cannot mobilize other countries to meet their humanitarian obligations if we are not ourselves upholding our cherished democratic values and firmly rejecting Trump’s nativist rhetoric and actions. Biden embraces the core values that have made us who we are and will prioritize restoring refugee admissions in line with our historic practice under both Democratic and Republican Administrations. He will set the annual global refugee admissions cap to 125,000, and seek to raise it over time commensurate with our responsibility, our values, and the unprecedented global need.
Bernie is cagier and doesn’t stipulate a cap! However, he says he will welcome 50,000 (or more!) climate refugees in addition to other refugees.
Lift President Trump’s refugee caps and live up to our nation’s ideals and international law by welcoming those displaced from their homes.
Create a new program to welcome migrants displaced by climate change, and set a floor of accepting at least 50,000 climate migrants in his first year in office.
Note to PayPal donors! I want to thank all of you who send me donations for my work via PayPal. I very much appreciate your thoughtfulness. However, PayPal is making changes to their terms of service and I’ve decided to opt-out beginning on March 10, 2020.
Note to PayPal donors! I want to thank all of you who send me donations for my work via PayPal. I very much appreciate your thoughtfulness. However, PayPal is making changes to their terms of service and I’ve decided to opt-out beginning on March 10, 2020.