“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!
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!
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.
So far, President Trump has no plans to close the border.
As regular readers here know, the federal Office of Refugee Resettlement is responsible for thousands of Unaccompanied Alien Children(mostly teenagers, btw) who cross our borders illegally and without parents.
The shelters in which they are housed are usually operated by contractors including some of the nine refugee contractors mentioned often here at RRW.
I guess you have all been seeing reports that Covid-19 mostly takes its toll on seniors, but that children can be infected and show only mild symptoms and could thus be missed as carriers.
Shelters told to report any coronavirus cases among migrant children
The federal agency tasked with caring for unaccompanied migrant children told staff at shelters Monday that children who may have been exposed to or at risk from coronavirus must be flagged to the health division within four hours, according to an email obtained by CNN.
Children found to be exposed to coronavirus and with symptoms of respiratory disease should also be isolated, the agency told shelters.
Care providers are generally expected to have “an identified space within the shelter facility that may be used for quarantine or isolation” in that a child needs to be separated for a medical reason, according to the agency’s website.
The guidance sent out by the US Department of Health and Human Services’s Office of Refugee Resettlement is indicative of the increased vigilance across the government amid concerns over coronavirus. The dispatch lists symptoms of coronavirus, the agency’s response, and specific guidance to ORR care providers.
[….]
The Office of Refugee Resettlement told CNN in a statement last week that as of February 27, there have not been any suspected or confirmed COVID-19 (the novel coronavirus) disease cases among unaccompanied children in ORR care. There are around 3,600 children in care.
An email went out to staff at those shelters Monday. “This guidance is based on the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) recommendations and is adapted for the [unaccompanied children] Program,” the email says. “This is a rapidly evolving situation, and updated guidance may be released in the future, as necessary.”
[….]
An attached document says ORR’s Division of Health for Unaccompanied Children is working with the Department of Homeland Security and Customs and Border Protection, among others, to monitor when an unaccompanied child “from a high-risk location as designated by CDC … is initially referred to ORR care.”
Shelter administrators have four hours to notify ORR if they have any suspicious illness, or any ‘child’ who might have been exposed to the virus.
The document also provides a breakdown of identification of risk and response, adding that “any child found to be at possible risk for COVID-19 based on travel history or contact with a known case must be flagged to [Division of Health for Unaccompanied Children] via email within 4 hours.”
By the way, I have 320 previous posts in my health issues category.
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.
Rarely do we get any reports on how many citizens take time to contact elected officials about their unhappiness with the refugee admissions program.
Governor Little with Mr. Chobani Yogurt in Twin Falls. Twin Falls is number 10 in the top cities in the nation ‘welcoming’ refugees on a per capita basis.*** Any wonder why the governor jumped on the bandwagon for more refugees for Idaho.
So it was interesting to see that in Idaho citizens took action in a big way to criticize their Republican governor when he encouraged the US State Department to send Idaho more refugees and thus went against the President’s reform effort.
Unfortunately I can give you only a tiny snippet of this story as it is behind a paywall. Surely some Idahoans will subscribe to the Idaho Press for the whole story.
Records show opposition to refugees, Gov. Little’s work to support resettlement program
Gov. Brad Little’s decision to continue to allow refugee resettlement in Idaho wasn’t out of step with his colleagues elsewhere, writes Post Register reporter Nathan Brown. Nineteen Republican governors told the Trump administration in December and January they wanted to keep taking refugees, with just Texas Gov. Greg Abbott asking to opt out.
Not everyone was happy with it. Facebook comments and Twitter replies on Little’s accounts quickly filled with people angry at his decision, and hundreds of people contacted his office to express their displeasure.Documents provided in response to a public records request show both the scale of the blowback and his administration’s work to present facts to justify the governor’s decision.
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.
