New report from CIS: Obama's illegal aliens disguised as refugees

05/02/2016 ~ Ann Corcoran ~ Leave a comment

Here (below) is the press release from the Center for Immigration Studies this morning. In fact this effort to expand the definition of who is a refugee is going on world wide as so-called ‘Unaccompanied Alien Children’ (largely teenage boys) are also flooding into Europe. It is not a coincidence!

Teenage boys Texas — Unaccompanied Alien Children arrive at US border in 2014 (many more have come since then). http://www.alipac.us/f12/90-000-illegal-alien-children-could-caught-trying-cross-us-border-2014-a-303995/

For nearly 9 years I’ve watched the definition of the word ‘refugee’ be stretched like a rubber band until now most in the media think that anyone on the move for any reason is a refugee!
But, that is exactly what the No-Borders gang is pushing for. When you read this remember that a legitimate refugee must prove that he/she has been persecuted for one of several reasons (such as race, religion, political persuasion).
Someone running from crime and wanting a better life does NOT a refugee make!
(emphasis below is mine)

WASHINGTON, DC (May 2, 2016) — The Center for Immigration Studies has released a new report, “Welcoming Unaccompanied Alien Children to the United States”, analyzing the Obama administration’s persistent efforts to relocate the children of Central American illegal aliens to the United States. The report is online at http://cis.org/Welcoming-Unaccompanied-Alien-Children-to-the-United-States.

When the illegal flow of mostly teen-age boys from Guatemala, Honduras, and El Salvador across the border reached record levels in 2014, the administration at first tried to arrange for them to stay by presenting them as victims of trafficking. But for the immigration benefits of being trafficked to apply, there must be coercion and exploitation; this was not the case.

Next, the administration established the Central American Minors Refugee/Parole Program, to fly the young people directly to the United States. But this program requires that the family members to whom the children are delivered have some form of legal status in the U.S. Because the majority of the minors’ family members in the U.S. are illegal immigrants, the program has not been widely used.

Thus the latest initiative: a new “family reunification program” specifically designed for illegal aliens and their children. In collaboration with the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, the administration is planning to enable illegal aliens to have their children brought to them in the U.S., with the minors labelled as “refugees.” However, by the UN’s own admission most of these children do not qualify as refugees.

The cost to American taxpayers of reuniting illegal aliens with the children they left behind is substantial. The FY 2017 budget request for the Unaccompanied Children (UC) program totals $1.321 billion, making the cost for one UAC likely to be more than $17,000. This is more than double the cost per UAC in 2010.

Nayla Rush, a senior researcher at the Center and author of the report, writes: “We can empathize with children wishing to reunite with family members who make it to the United States before them. … We can also, however, question this administration’s policies and motives and wonder if it is in the best interest of the American people to welcome these children here. … We might even call this program what it really is: a family reunification program specially crafted for illegal aliens and their children under the cover of refugee resettlement.”

Go here for our very extensive archive on the problem (originally archived as Unaccompanied minors).

What is the cost to admit (and care for!) refugees in the US?

10/23/2015 ~ Ann Corcoran ~ Leave a comment

Nobody really knows, nor does the refugee industry want you to know!
We just now reported on a leaked report in the UK that puts the figure at around $36,000 per refugee per year in the UK, but as far as we have ever seen, no official government estimate has been made of the cost of resettlement in the US. That is why the bill introduced by Rep. Brian Babin of Texas is so important. Update: See more on the Babin bill, here.

Syrians arrive KY — Starving Syrian refugees arrive in Kentucky earlier this year. Do Mitch and Rand know that KY is so far this fiscal year the leading Syrian resettlement state? https://refugeeresettlementwatch.org/2015/02/15/first-syrian-refugees-arriving-in-louisville-ky-helped-with-grant-from-islamic-charity/

Here Jessica Vaughn (Center for Immigration Studies) writing at National Review (‘Help Refugees, but Stop Feeding the Refugee-Resettlement Industry’) references a Heritage Foundation report:

The Heritage Foundation has calculated that the 10,000 Syrians who would be admitted under the president’s plan would eventually collect about $6.5 billion in services over the next 50 years. Much of that would be borne by local communities.

Read it all.
And see here at The Atlantic someone did a quick and dirty calculation, but this number only represents the cost of bringing 70,000 refugees in to the country and does not include the welfare benefits refugees receive, the healthcare or the cost of educating the children.

The process of bringing refugees to the U.S. is handled by three agencies: the State Department, which leads the program, USCIS at the Department of Homeland Security, and the Office of Refugee Resettlement at the Department of Health and Human Services.

Together, the three agencies spent about $1.1 billion last year. That’s $1.1 billion for 70,000 refugees, which comes to about $15,714 per person.

Getting at the real costs to federal, state and local taxpayers is an important goal going forward, but be prepared for all involved in the industry to stonewall such an effort.
Photo caption: Go here to see how KY is Numero uno so far in October for receiving Syrian refugees (97% of those who have arrived so far are Muslims).

CIS: Welfare Use High for Both Legal and Illegal Immigrants

09/10/2015 ~ Ann Corcoran ~ Leave a comment

49% for Legal Households, 62% for Illegals
Here is the complete Center for Immigration Studies press release:

WASHINGTON, DC (September 10, 2015) — Low levels of education — not legal status — are the main reason immigrant welfare use is high, according to a new report by the Center for Immigration Studies. The report estimates welfare use separately for legal and illegal immigrant households based on Census Bureau data, and is a companion to the Center’s study released last week examining all immigrant households. The new analysis shows that legal immigrant households make extensive use of most welfare programs, while illegal immigrant households primarily benefit from food programs and Medicaid through U.S.-born children.

“Welfare use by illegal immigrant households is certainly a concern, but the bigger issue is welfare use by legal immigrants,” said Steven Camarota, the Center’s Director of Research and author of the report. “Three-fourths of immigrant households using welfare are headed by legal immigrants. Legal immigration is supposed to benefit the country, yet so many legal immigrants are not able to support themselves or their children. This raises important questions about the selection criteria used for legal immigration.”

View the entire report at: http://cis.org/Welfare-Use-Legal-Illegal-Immigrant-Households

Among the findings:

~An estimated 49 percent of households headed by legal immigrants used one or more welfare programs in 2012, compared to 30 percent of households headed by natives.

~Households headed by legal immigrants have higher use rates than native households overall and for cash programs (14 percent vs. 10 percent), food programs (36 percent vs. 22 percent), and Medicaid (39 percent vs. 23 percent). Use of housing programs is similar.

~Legal immigrant households account for three-quarters of all immigrant households accessing one or more welfare programs.

~Of legal immigrant households with children, 72 percent access one or more welfare programs, compared to 52 percent of native households.

~Of households headed by immigrants in the country illegally, we estimate that 62 percent used one or more welfare programs in 2012, compared to 30 percent of native households.

~Households headed by immigrants illegally in the country have higher use rates than native households overall and for food programs (57 percent vs. 22 percent) and Medicaid (51 percent vs. 23 percent). Use of cash programs by illegal immigrants is lower than use by natives (5 percent vs. 10 percent), as is use of housing programs (4 percent vs. 6 percent).

~Of illegal immigrant households with children, 87 percent access one or more welfare programs, compared to 52 percent of native households.

~There is a worker present in 85 percent of legal immigrant-headed households and 95 percent of illegal immigrant-headed households. But while most immigrant households have a worker, many are less-educated, earn low wages, and are thus eligible for welfare.

~Education level plays a larger role in explaining welfare use than legal status. The most extensive use of welfare is by less-educated immigrants who are in the country legally. Of households headed by legal immigrants without a high school diploma, 75 percent use one or more welfare programs, as do 64 percent of households headed by legal immigrants with only a high school education.

~The overwhelming majority of illegal immigrants have modest levels of education; therefore, the high use of welfare associated with less-educated legal immigrants indicates that legalization would likely increase welfare costs, particularly for cash and housing programs.

~Restrictions on new legal immigrants’ access to welfare have not prevented them from accessing programs at high rates because restrictions often apply to only a modest share of immigrants at any one time. Some programs are not restricted, there are numerous exceptions and exemptions, and some provisions are entirely unenforced. Equally important, immigrants, including those illegally in the country, can receive welfare on behalf of their U.S.-born children.

# # #

Be sure to see CIS’s previous announcement about how immigrants of all kinds use welfare at a higher rate than native born Americans.

Refugees!

For readers who are researching the Refugee Resettlement Program, go here for annual reports to Congress which contain information about welfare use by refugees.
In the most recent year (2013) available, note that on page 101, refugees are using public assistance at a much higher rate than other LEGAL immigrants shown in the table above. Remember it is the contractor’s job to get their ‘clients’ (refugees) signed up for “services.” Refugees thus benefit to a greater degree than other legal immigrants partly because you pay a supposed non-profit to guide them through the process of signing them up for their welfare benefits.

21% of refugees are using SSI

56% are using Medicaid

74% are getting food stamps (SNAP)

23% are in public housing or subsidized housing

This post is filed in our categories ‘where to find information‘ and ‘refugee statistics.’
Oops! Forgot to mention that the whole premise of the Refugee Act of 1980 (Ted Kennedy and Joe Biden) was that refugees were to be self-sufficient very quickly, they were not meant to be a burden on the taxpayer—so much for that promise!

Mark Krikorian of CIS: Why isn’t Saudi Arabia resettling the Syrians? Why are we resettling any Middle Easterners?

04/14/2015 ~ Ann Corcoran ~ Leave a comment

Mark Krikorian of the Center for Immigration Studies asks the questions any rational American is asking!

Writing at The Corner at National Review, here is how Krikorian begins (but I want you to visit The Corner for the links and his prescription!):

Mark Krikorian Executive Director of the Center for Immigration Studies http://cis.org/Krikorian

The International Rescue Committee, a refugee advocacy group headed by former U.K. foreign secretary David Miliband, has urged the United States to resettle 65,000 refugees from Syria by the end of next year. The head of the State Department bureau in charge of carrying out the U.N.’s instructions on refugees (the U.N. decides who gets to move to the U.S.) said last week, in the AP’s words, “that between 1,000 and 2,000 Syrian refugees will be brought to the U.S. by the end of September and several thousand more in 2016.” Miliband welcomed this but said “it certainly needs to improve.”

The more important question is, why are we resettling any Middle Eastern refugees at all? Since January 2013, State Department numbers show that we’ve resettled here in the U.S. only 697 Syrian refugees, more than 90 percent of them Muslims. The FBI admitted at a congressional hearing in February that it lacked the capacity to do meaningful background checks on such refugees. That’s why we have headlines like “US May Have Let ‘Dozens’ of Terrorists Into Country As Refugees.”

But putting the security threat aside, why would we take any Arab refugees from any war-torn country in the Middle East? Resettlement in a faraway country should be the absolute last resort; it’s preferable that displaced people be accommodated in countries near their homeland, facilitating eventual return, and in countries that are culturally similar to ease the strains for both the refugees and the host country.

In that vein, why aren’t we demanding that Saudi Arabia resettle the Syrians?

Read it all. Be sure to see the many good comments!

I can think of several reasons, first, the Saudis don’t want any diversity in S.A. and have been deporting all their Muslim brethren riffraff who sneak in there from Somalia, Yemen, even Rohingya (from Burma), etc.

The UNHCR is pushing impoverished refugees on the US (to help us get diversity!) and more democrat voters.

Then the US resettlement contractors are paid by the head to bring them here, so big bucks are involved.

And, finally, this is about the Hijra—Mohammed told his followers to migrate to dominate all the lands of the world—and so the UN and Obama are helping bring that about, and, of course, S.A. doesn’t need more Muslim migrants to bring about shariah law. They have it!

See our archive on Saudi Arabia and note its history of ethnic cleansing!

CIS: Illegal alien “children” continue to flood border, never really stopped coming

04/01/2015 ~ Ann Corcoran ~ Leave a comment

We reported here that the Office of Refugee Resettlement (and its contractors) took charge of 58,000 so-called ‘unaccompanied minors’ in FY2014.

Now comes news from the Center for Immigration Studies (CIS) that the flow is presently at a 2,000/month level.

Jessica Vaughan, Center for Immigration Studies: American communities need to brace themselves for the onslaught!

It occurred to me recently that the contractors, eager to set up offices in places like Spartanburg, SC, aren’t just doing it to take care of refugees who we admit to the US through the US State Department, but will be in place to help the ‘minors’ and ‘dreamers’ get connected with their services, do the paperwork to bring in their family members and help them through their citizenship process ASAP.

Here is CIS today:

WASHINGTON, DC (April 1, 2015) — The Center for Immigration Studies reports that illegal alien juveniles and families continue to flood across the U.S. border. More than 2,000 illegal alien juveniles have been apprehended and taken into federal custody every month this year – the second highest level ever for arrests of illegal alien minors. Family units also continue to see an incentive to enter the U.S.; the Border Patrol apprehended 1,622 illegal aliens who arrived as part of a family unit in January and another 2,043 family members in February, and expect that March’s total could be as high as 2,700.

The overwhelming majority of juveniles apprehended are male teenagers, about one-third of whom claimed to be 17.

ICE has taken custody of illegal alien juveniles from 27 different countries so far this year. Nearly 90 percent were from four Central American countries (Guatemala, El Salvador, Honduras, and Nicaragua, in that order); half were from Guatemala. However, 41 percent of the few sent home by ICE were from Mexico.

“These statistics show that the surge of illegal arrivals from Central America was never really over,” stated Jessica Vaughan, the Center’s Director of Policy Studies. “The incentives for people to have their children smuggled into the United States illegally have not changed – they know that under Obama administration policies they will be allowed to stay without consequences. American communities should brace themselves to accommodate more new arrivals.”

View the entire report at: http://cis.org/vaughan/influx-central-american-teen-and-family-arrivals-continues.

The numbers also show that few of those apprehended are being sent home. While taking custody of roughly 2,000 illegal alien juveniles per month since the start of the 2015 fiscal year last October, ICE reports removing well under 200 juveniles per month. Only 2,900 total detention beds are available for families and children, so most of the new arrivals are released and then melt into the larger illegal population. About 90 percent of the recent Central American arrivals who had hearings scheduled last summer and fall failed to appear at their immigration hearings and likely remain in the country.

Go here for our complete archive on ‘unaccompanied minors’ extending back several years. Obama is now working to magically transform these illegal aliens into refugees so that they can get all the welfare goodies refugees receive and get on the fast track to citizenship!