Plan for Halting the Refugee Resettlement Program

Every once in a while pure common sense will rise to the top of all the crap that is excreted in Washington. And it is not surprising it comes by way of Texas.

Representative Brian Babin, R-Tx., introduced legislation to halt the United Nations/State Department Refugee Admissions Program back in July. Since the virtual flood of refugees pouring into Europe is on the world stage it is now  gaining support in the House.

The bill has been referred to the Subcommittee on Immigration and Border Security, of which Trey Gowdy, R-S.C., now sits. The following, have given their backing for  H.R. 3314, named the Resettlement Accountability National Security Act of 2015, and need to hear of your support.

Rep. Michael Burgess, Tx., Rep. Paul Gosar, Az., Rep. Jody Hice, Ga., Rep. Walter Jones, N.C., Rep. Steve King, Ia., Rep. Pete sessions, Tx., Rep. Randy Weber, Tx., Rep. Lynn Westmoreland, Ga., and Rep. Ryan Zinke, Mt.

If you live in Virginia, someone may want to call Rep. Bob Goodlatte, 6th district, and ask where he stands on the issue since he is the Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, under which falls the Subcommittee on Immigration and Border Security.

Seventy-two House democrats just asked President Obama for 100,000 more Syrian refugees to be sent to America. When executing a comparison of pros verses cons for this request, finding the pros is like looking for needles in a haystack. Listing the cons would be akin to counting dishonest people in Washington… too easy.

Not only are there blatant national security risks involved in bringing refugees from warring Islamic countries, in which over 70% are military-age men, but also the fact that our own House Homeland Security chairman, Michael McCaul, R-Tx., stated there isn’t a way to properly vet these people, and introduced the bill to give Congress oversight of the Syrian Refugee resettlement Program.

Of late, there have been numerous reports of ISIS infiltrating refugee groups in order to embed themselves in Western countries for future jihad attacks in the respective countries.

Maybe this is Obama’s next strategy, since the 41.8 million dollars thrown at 54 Syrian opposition fighters didn’t work. The possible tactic now may be to bring the fight to us, an all-expense paid travel for ISIS to the United States on the backs of hard working Americans. This makes about as much sense as giving 150 billion dollars to Iran while they chant, “Death to America!”

National security aside, we are left with the enormous financial crisis that bringing thousands more refugees to this country would produce.

Federal money goes directly to the nine agencies or Voluntary Resettlement Agencies (VOLAGS), who arrange for these refugees to be settled all across our country. Food, shelter, healthcare, and schooling are just the major facets of care provided to the immigrants through the generous gift of our tax dollars.

Obama has brought 500,000 refugees to America since being in office, and the overwhelming majority use welfare to get along. Seventy-five percent are on food stamps alone, and that isn’t counting all the other forms of government assistance.

Once the refugee has spent six months in a town, if they have no job and aren’t able to care for themselves, the local tax-payer, picks up the tab. How long before this type of system affects the average family financially.

Take a look at Sweden who has had an open borders policy in regards to immigration. They are quite the different country than they were even twenty years ago since they started seeing an influx of immigrants from places like Iraq, Bosnia, Somalia, and Syria.

Sweden has been taking in at least 500 Syrian refugees a week for several years now. The rate of unemployed foreign-born individuals is twice that of the Swedish born. Taking in immigrants when an economy is booming is one thing, what happens in the equation where more are added to the welfare rolls and there is less available tax money.

An article in Foreign Affairs asks a poignant question,

“Sweden is becoming the clearest case study of a question being asked across Western Europe: Can a modern welfare state be reconciled with rapidly increasing diversity at a time of rapidly dwindling job prospects?”

Folks, this is generally speaking, the state of our country as well. I don’t know who in the world of brilliant economists is touting America’s great wealth and booming job sector right now. With 18 trillion dollars of debt, how could we be in solid financial shape? All the more reason to put a halt on this program that seems to have been given a shot of testosterone since more facts have come out about it.

Those with pensions should be specifically concerned about the possible ramifications of such an influx of welfare-dependent people. If our country is spending less, which produces less tax money in which to support these dependent refugees, where will the money come from?

Some say the government would be dipping into accounts of those who have spent a lifetime working and saving for their retirements. If that is the case, a smart move would  be putting support behind those few congressmen in Washington who are trying to actually protect not only the physical security of Americans, but also financial security as well.

It is almost like Obama is against transparency or something, since he seems to be expediting the incursion of these immigrants before we know all the facts. Thankfully we have a few representatives left in our government who are willing to expose dangerous programs as well as display some logic.

 

 

 

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *