Your tone is flippant, and your assertions are insulting. Human rights are defended by sovereign states. The “American military” may seem like some remote concept to many, but the United States Armed Forces has to think about the defense of each and every person on American soil—and the protection of his rights. It is not a light matter to assume additional responsibility. Real lives, indeed.
1
We have a assimilation problem in California. Every year more foreign language tv/radio stations,billboards... in your face foreign flags at protests, garbage strewn parks recreation areas overwhelmed, sky rocketing cost for educating,providing health care. The left wants open borders for political advantage,.. it would be wise to halt or limit all immigration until current assimilation issues are dealt with,then carefully vet future immigrants to not repeat the Somalian problem in Minnesota or Jewish students harassed by middle eastern immigrants in schools.
8
I personally know many refugees who fled religious persecution in Iran after the Shah was deposed by Ayatollah Khomeini. The were and are members of the Baha'i Faith, a gentle world wide religion that is hated by fanatical Muslims. Since the Baha'i Faith was founded in Iran in the middle of the 19th century, many Baha'is have been killed and imprisoned for practicing their faith. This continues down to the present day. These refugees that I know left their whole lives behind to come to this country. Every single one of them has become an American citizen, works hard, holds property, and pays taxes. I know doctors, college professors, taxi drivers, computer software designers, administrators, and blue collar workers, men and women alike. They believe strongly in giving back to their communities and are often involved in inter-faith councils. This is the face of the refugee for me. I know our country would be poorer without these fine individuals. It's not the time to close our borders to refugees seeking a better life. Nor should we deny this to our own citizens, ancestors of immigrants. Everyone should be given opportunities. If a tiny country like Uganda can take in 600,000 refugees, certainly we, who use so much more of the world's resources can take in a sixth of that number.
2
Just keep out our enemies and those who will NOT become Americans, and insist on waving their flag and observing their old hatreds and idiocies. Can't assimilate? Then STAY OUT!
7
Is Miliband that keen for America to repeat what Europe is actively regretting? I was in the Coast Guard during the Haitian migration wave and have no wish to see hundreds more boats full of desperate people drown trying to get here, a la Europe and their oh-so-effective migration policies. How many people tried to jump onto trucks at the barricaded Chunnel today Ed? Or is it just impossible for him to admit a cherished policy is a failure? Thanks for the advice, but we'll work it out for ourselves. Maybe you could concentrate on that whole Brexit kerfuffle imstead? Immigration is just one part of what makes America function as well as it does (full disclosure- my family is about 1/3 immigrants), and we have a huge obligation to our citizens who are already here. Immigration has definite positives and negatives. The unwillingness to speak candidily about the cons as well as the pros of immigration makes advocates of unrestricted immigration look like they're trying to pull a fast one. Try telling the victims, or the victims families, of crimes commited by undocumented immigrants that they commit less crimes overall. The only thing Trump has done that I agree with is to scrap Obamas blatantly unconstitutionally imposed immigration policy and thereby force Congress to do their darn jobs and deal with it.
11
I find the tone of this piece to be rather condescending. I'm originally from MN and have witnessed the strain that large amounts of refugees from vastly different cultures have done to communities. Schools and local social services have to spend massive amounts on translators and other services. Plus refugees get full Medicaid benefits and cash assistance. Try explaining to a blue collar family with no insurance why a refugee family should get better healthcare than they do. Also do you ever see refugees placed in Manhattan, Beverly Hills, the Hamptons, or Greenwich? Of course not! Working class towns and cities are the only places that have affordable housing so yet again the rich and liberal elite don't have any problems in their own back yard. So like usual the poor and working class have to deal with this forced diversity while the rich can wall themselves off in their enclaves.
I also take issues with with this argument that vetting is tougher and there are almost no risks with refugee resettlement. MN is dealing with radicalized youth being recruited to ISIS and just a year ago had a terror attack at Crossroads Mall in St. Cloud. So how did this happen? By refugee resettlement.
20
None lost to immigrants? Does that include the bloody killing of the woman in Minneapolis. ?
David Miliband's column should be required reading, first for Mr. Trump, second, for his advisers and third, for the entire US Congress. Has no one observed that, except for the native American Indian, we ALL are "immigrants" or descendants of immigrants? Let Emma Lazarus' poem on the base of the Statue of Liberty inspire us to reclaim our heritage, strength and moral fiber as a nation:"Give me your tired, your poor, Your huddled masses yearning to be free, The wretched refuse of your teeming soil, Send them, the homeless and the poor to me, I lift my lamp beside the Golden Door."
3
Immigrants add to our lives. Restricting immigration and making it harder for refugees to settle here will hurt America. I've worked with plenty of immigrants and almost every one of them was educated, hard working, and more than willing to contribute their share to America. This was in the past. Given the attitudes displayed now by our current administration and Congress I wouldn't be surprised if quite a few decide that America is not a place worth settling in. That's truly sad because immigrants, even those who are refugees, have something to offer us.
5
That does NOT include Islamist radicals. Look at the CAIR agenda.
1
'Decided in haste, regretted at leisure' is the motto of immigration in Europe over the past few decades. 'Misery loves company' seems to be Mr Miliband's.
12
If I were a refugee and had a choice, I'd rather go to any of the many modern nations with established health care for all, instead of the USA where almost 30 million are still lacking health care access and where costs are the highest in the world.
9
That America seems to be turning its back on the world's refugees is not because Americans don't have a heart. But it is because the killings that are happening in the Middle East, and which are mostly being carried out in the name of Islam (which I believe is a religion of peace) has put Islam in a false light, making many people in the West unable to comprehend the cruelty that is going on in that part of the world.
But "that part of the world" is still a part of our world and the refugees that are escaping persecution there deserve our compation and helping them is imperative and is the right thing to do.
1
Calling Islam a "religion of peace" is a demonstration of a completely willfull ignorance of the history and tenets of Islam. Muslims may be by and large "peaceful" but the religion itself is anything but. The same can and should be said of all forcefully proselytizing religions though.
8
Because we need it to be, as we need the Christian religion to be one of peace and hews to the better natured text in each of their scriptures and not the violent and cruel ones.
1. Thousands, uh huh, thousands are not refugees. Thousands come here well dressed, smart phones with contracts, and thousands of dollars. Canadian entries have the finest luggage.
In Germany they are now armed.
2
Yesterday many of us celebrated Joe Biden's words about reclaiming American values and I was one of many (URL at the end).
But I wrote those words knowing all too well that there is a different truth revealed every single week in Readers' Picks in the comment columns. Read the top 10 Readers' Picks here in Welcoming Refugees and you will see. The new normal here, especially if the refugees are people born Muslim, is that they are not welcome.
I quote only one: Catherine Milligan - Canada "Britain and other European countries have been destroyed by immigration."
No Catherine, Sweden, the country that took in the most refugees per 100,000 population in 2015, has not been destroyed by immigration. It appears to me to be far better off in these ways than the New England I enjoyed for 30 days last summer: Public health, infrastrucure, renewable energy, family support...and more.
Only-NeverInSweden.blogspot.com
Dual citizen US SE
http://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/14/opinion/joe-biden-more-perfect-union.h...
2
Larry...check out Sweden's rape statistics.
1
If American immigration policy is to become more conservative, as so many comments here favor, the least we can do is to be engaged in working against international human rights violations and offer more to the victims of famine and disease, abroad, as a high national priority. We are a very wealthy nation and our reputation is as a fair and just people, who always support democracy, intellectual freedom, human rights, and work against world hunger and poverty. This reputation is being damaged and diluted even among ourselves. America is in the position to make the world outside our borders more livable, and perhaps if we did so with more vigor and as a much higher priority, less people would so desperately and urgently need to immigrate. This is an oversimplification, but our policy has become oversimplified as well. Somewhere in the anti immigrant sentiment that has swept many in the country, there seems to be an implicit hardening and even hatred towards foreigners, even those in very unfortunate circumstances. It's possible to be against broad immigration without losing a moral compass. We are the world leader still, and our example should be one of compassion and generosity. It is possible to protect our interests at the same time that we acknowledge in word and deed that the suffering of every human is our own.
6
Why doesn't Saudi Arabia take in refugees? Refugees would rather live in their own countries so how does taking them in FIX the underlying problem?
8
Saudi doesn't take in refugees because it might destabilize their society. They are more than happy to bulid and fund mosques for new immihrants to other countries however.
8
100 countries do not take in immigrants Eastern Asia wants no part of them nor does Russia. They have more than their share.
Whatever determines a share. Islamists do not want to work except to work the system as do many Americans. Perhaps we cold swing a deal with D.C.. Sent the healthy Americans who refuse to work to the Middle East in a switch.
1
The late Henning Mankell, a Swedish author with life-long experience in Africa, came up with a brilliant idea in writing Kvicksand his final book written as he was approaching death from cancer.
He being Swedish knew that what we now call Norden has been repeatedly buried under ice sheets, making life impossible there. So he, fully aware of the climate change that now concerns us, wrote in several chapters about a Norden once again covered with mile thick ice - I write from such a place.
Were that to happen all the Nordic people, now a people with ever increasing number of lines of descent would have to seek refuge further south. Guess where?
Africa.
He did not try to be didactic, he just provided the scenario.
I thought that was brilliant. As a New Englander, I imagine future New Englanders desparately trying to get over Donald Trump's wall to enter Mexico.
Luckily I won't be around then.
Only-NeverInSweden.blogspot.com
Dual citizen US SE
Just stop, or at least slow it down, for a few years. We do NOT need more people of low education that don't assimilate.
We cannot feed and supply jobs to those Americans that are already here!
I live in Miami and we have homeless, out of work vets, families etc that our help. Give our resources to them! How dare we even think of giving it to those who have no stake in this country. Those who come to take advantage and complain about to.
No!
Have some backbone and say no!
12
Sorry, everyone is welcome, of any race or religion, if they intend to become Americans and a part of modern western civilization. In the past, that was the case. But those coming from Muslim countries are far too often intent on living in a parallel culture while enjoying our freedoms and safety. Not OK.
11
We lost Inja, you know.
Britain also has lost any semblance of unity on just about any major issue imaginable, except that all its resources need to be dedicated ad infinitum, ad nauseam, amen to keeping its public health service afloat, despite serious indications that every castle, every ancient artifact, Big Ben and the Queen's knickers may need to be sold to moneyed Arabs to do it. All of that can be put down to a loss of culture. But, then, Mr. Miliband, like many Americans, apparently doesn't believe that culture has any intrinsic worth. But it does.
Welcoming a few refugees is one thing, and if it appeared that this was all there was to the matter, it indeed could be a "settled" question across the West. It's not because there's no evidence that it's a "few" but millions. Many millions. Endless millions. Perhaps the resettlement of large parts of indigenous populations from shattered societies whose fundamental values resulted in the shattering.
We're centuries away from the time when people are interchangeable, hot-swappable culture to culture. We may never see it. You can't resettle such numbers in other societies without having cultural impacts. It's not 22.5 million -- the U.N. Refugee Committee estimates that 65.6 million people were displaced globally by the end of 2016. That's about the population of France.
19
No, the solution, until people ARE hot-swappable culture to culture, is for the West to arrange safe zones within those shattered countries where the resulting refugees can re-boot shattered lives, and for the West to invest in those regions to make them viable. This matter of a few thousand refugees more that Mr. Miliband wants President Trump to authorize probably will be resolved by compromise; but the larger issue of saving these people manageably won't be resolved by mass resettlement.
13
Most refugees are housed in camps in non-Western countries.. that delivers them from war, but not from privation. The US and other Western countries resettle a small percentage. The largest refugee population in the U.S. comes from the Democratic Republic of Congo. Of the millions of refugees from the Congolese wars, we take 19,000. Our present refugee program is window dressing and nothing more. By contrast, we admitted 800,000 Southeast Asians after the Vietnam War. 50,00 or 100,0000, both numbers are low.
4
Close the doors.
1
Am I the only one who finds this column condescending? This issue is more complicated & it's far from a settled question. Why is the finger being pointed at us? Why are Middle East countries such as Saudia Arabia, Iran, & Egypt not taking more refugees? I think it is also fair to ask does it make sense to bring refugees 10,000 miles to the US when there're closer alternatives? Is bringing them here the best choice...for them & us? This column answers none of these questions.
Just before Xmas the number of refugees that arrived in Europe passed the million mark. It has been mass chaos. Thirteen thousand refugees arrived at Munich train station in one day in September, & the population of some villages in Germany has doubled as refugees have been accommodated in gyms and church halls.
US politicians are reluctant to accept more refugees here because it's become a political taboo. After what happened in Europe, asylum is the third rail in US immigration policy. That's understandable. No government, especially one that vaunts its toughness on immigration as much as this one, wants to see asylum figures explode on its watch. Politicians also don't want to provoke a backlash that could inflame far-right sentiment. I'm not saying we should do nothing...we should help in anyway we can...food, clothing, housing, money. But what we do, how we do it, & when we do it doesn't necessarily mean taking in more refugees. I don't think anyone here wants to repeat the European disaster.
32
Asylum figures have not 'exploded' on anyone's watch. This is a nation of about 330 million people. The impact of 100,000 refugees per year or a million refugees in a decade is scarcely 'explosive' or at all likely to overwhelm our public and private institutions -- particularly in a country with a low birth rate, shrinking workforce and aging population like the United States that desperately needs an influx of immigrants. We're talking about 2,000 people per year in each of the 50 states - granted, they likely would not be dispersed quite so evenly. But give us all a break... we're not stupid. We can count. We're not talking about a flood of newcomers like the one Europe has experienced over the past few years.
No, there is something far darker at work here: meanness of spirit, xenophobia and out and out racism. If we were talking about 100,000 blond haired, blue-eyed, fair skinned devout Christian Western Europeans and Scandinavians, then trust me, we would not be having this conversation at all.
It is no mere coincidence that our current President's oft repeated catch phrase is 'America First' - the same one that was used in opposition to the admission of Jewish refugees from Nazism in the 1930s and 1940s. Racism and religious prejudice was at the root of the America First movement then; and it is at the root of the America First movement today.
3
Fulfill non monetary needs. They do not know how to spend $$ any more than the congress.
Considering our policies with the war on terror caused some of the refugee crisis we're seeing the least we can do is help those who have been displaced through no fault of their own start new lives. The fact that 60,000 Iraqis who helped keep our soldiers alive are still waiting is disgraceful. We can't turn back from our values. People have been coming here since the pilgrims seeking sanctuary and a new beginning.
10
We owe the 60,000 Iraqi translators a safe harbor; they risked their lives. And, now with the country fractured, we do not know if they are in real danger. At least, bring in the translators. The Saudis should bring in some refugees; perhaps they would only bring in Sunnis, but that is what they should do; they can afford it. Iran could take in some Shia refugees. Syria is not safe and is undergoing a drought which is driving people into the urban areas. We must do something for the translators, at a minimum.
3
If the tens of thousands of Syrians returned and went to work rebuilding their country it would simplify matters greatly.
I'm shocked by these comments. We are country of immigrants Many were refugees. That has made America great.
10
Understand that most of these anti-immigrant toadies are descendants of immigrants themselves. And it's a good bet that a majority of them claim to be "Christians", not that they would ever be able to explain their positions to Christ. Hypocrisy defines these reptiles better than DNA.
4
People always leave out the second half of that statement. We are a nation of immigrant... who came together to create one American culture. It doesn't apply to immigrants who want to be here for safety but have no intention of assimilating.
6
Excellent. This is also a problem in Western Europe. Hungary, Poland, the Czech Republic and Slovakia not allowing immigrants in. Why?
'Meanwhile, some 60,000 Iraqis who have supported the American military and diplomatic effort in Iraq — as, for example, interpreters — are waiting to know if the promise of safe passage to the United States is to be honored." Keeping these people on hold is the ultimate cruelty as well as puts their lives in jeopardy.
10
These refugees should be priority. So we promise those who help us overseas safe passage here, and then don't honor that. What could possibly go wrong in our overseas ventures in the future.
4
I suggest folks go to the IRC website to get some information, rather than making wild and inaccurate statements about refugees in the USA. Put your prejudices aside and get some facts. It's Very Refreshing.
5
How about the Gulf states embracing their Muslim brothers and sisters, why do they need to emigrate here?
20
Why do you think the Saudis and other gulf states care about their "Muslim brothers and sisters"?
Like any spoiled (oil) brats, they are egoistic and in no small measure xenophobic.
Thus it is no big wonder that Saudi Arabia is the new best friend of the current US administration.
If the US wants to have no higher aspirations than values of the level of Saudi Arabia, that is of course a choice the US, like any country, is free to make.
Just as the rest of the world is then free to readjust their estimation of the US.
It would be nice if the US were more welcoming to refugees. But there's a simple reason why it's not. We have had so much immigration that the country has a bad case of immigration indigestion. And Americans are fed up. A Pulse Opinion Research poll about a month ago found that 62 percent favor reducing immigration to half a million or less per year. Nearly one quarter would prefer no immigration. And immigration is the issue that catapulted Trump into the White House. His campaign languished until some aides suggested that he should talk about immigration.
So, those who want America to accept more refugees--call your senators and tell them to support the RAISE Act, which would cut legal immigration in half, and tell them to support a national, mandatory E-Verify, which would stanch illegal immigration far more effectively than the wall.
Less immigration would make Americans much more accepting of refugees.
36
Yes sir.
That was not really very convincing. Remind me, why should welcoming refugees be a "settled question"? Settled by whom? Welcoming migrants only invites more of them to come, as we have seen on multiple occasions. Most of them will have to journey across deserts, seas and other dangerous terrain risking their lives and dying in their thousands. Those needlessly lost lives should weigh on conscience of the "welcomers" like Mr. Miliband. Most of those "refugees" are in fact nothing but economic migrants who a leaving their failing native countries for better quality of life in the West. Such population drain brings only more economic devastation to the lands from whence they come. Instead of migrating to take low-paying jobs and to depress the wages in the West even more, they should stay and improve their own nations. If cheap labour is so important to the international capitalists, let them stop bombing the third world countries and take advantage of that newly found stability by investing in their economies. That might just work to decrease the flow of migrants too.
24
"Settled by whom?"
How about the Universal Declaration of Human Rights? There seemed to be at least some sort of consensus about that, at some point.
Like an estimated 90% of the posters here, you seem to be unable to grasp the difference between a refugee and an economic migrant
I am saddened by the crabbed and defensive tone of so many of these comments. This isn't the country I have been so proud of all myeline. As Mr. Miliband points out, we take in far fewer refugees, especially per capita, than many other countries, not merely the ones unfortunate enough to border disaster zones, like Jordan or Uganda, but also countries like Germany and England.
The art of governing is the acknowledgement that there is never enough money for all the meritorious causes. But to begrudge even the meagre amount to spend to welcome the stranger is heartbreaking. The article points out that 60,000 Afghans and Iraqis are in danger today because they helped American troops. Are we really going to turn our backs on them?
8
"Not one of the three million refugees to the United States since 1980 has committed a lethal act of terror on American soil.”
This statement may be technically correct, but does not fully describe the story. Here are 3 examples:
1. Abdul Razak Ali Artan was a Somali refugee who tried to commit a lethal act of terror. A 11/30/16 NYT article titled "Ohio State Attacker May Have Been ‘Inspired’ by Al Qaeda, F.B.I. Says" tells how Ali Artan drove his car into pedestrians and then jumped out to slash some of them with a butcher knife. That he only managed to wound 11, but not kill anyone was not for lack of trying.
2. Somali refugees, in Minneapolis, were convicted of trying to go to Syria to sign up with ISIS? Would ISIS have trained them to return to the U.S. to commit terror here?
3. The Boston Marathon bombers were Chechens who had been granted asylum. They killed 3 and injured 250. Technically, the Tsarnaev brothers were not refugees because they were already here when they asked for asylum.
36
This is an example of how elites, such as David Milliband, try to convince to the population, us, to accept their ideas by using technicalities to disguise the truth.
I wonder how much David Milliband gets paid as an executive of the International Rescue Committee.
4
Very interesting. And can you provide us with a similar rundown of the number of 'Americans' who have been recruited by neo-Nazis, the Klan, various and sundry heavily armed 'militias,' and other domestic terror organizations in the same time frame? The hate crimes and murders that have been committed by members and 'fellow travelers' of these loose knit domestic terrorist organizations? The armed occupation of public lands by heavily armed extremists... this also does not trouble you in the face of this 'obslaught' of refugees, all of 0.3% of the population in a full decade at the rate of 100,000 per year.
There are thirty thousand deaths in this country each and every year from gunshot wounds, tens of thousands more are maimed, human sacrifices to a perverse reading of the Second Amendment. That apparently troubles you not in the least either.
1
As other have sagely noted, let us help those in our own country. It is disheartening to read about abysmal living conditions for many of our First Americans, Native people who struggle with high unemployment, alcoholism and abuse, feeling trapped and unable to escape the trap after much of their original lands were seized by those possessed with the idea of Manifest Destiny, their children forbidden to speak their own native languages and practice their own traditions, not so very long ago.
What of our own bridges, an alarming percentage receiving a D grade, our aging electrical infrastructure, notes of crumbling roads around the nation.
We have a relatively stable democracy with took generations of hard struggle.
Africa and the Middle East are set to have the fastest growing populations in the world over the decades to come. Just as we have struggled here, those who live in those nations have an obligation to remain where they are, to build stable and secure societies.
25
@ Tim B - the infrastructure argument is particularly weak. I have been commenting these past two weeks on the extraordinary ability of Swedish agencies to keep infrastructure in good shape to an extent unthinkable in my New England USA. Yet Sweden is the "western" country that has taken in the greatest number of refugees (asylum seekers is the term used in Sweden) per 100,000 population 2015 data. There are plenty of strains arising from this practice and the political parties are struggling to find a path each can follow as the 2018 election approaches.
I would agree with you had you said, no one sees satisfactory solutions to the ever evolving problems - think Myanmar - unless population growth can be limited. But on one can even imagine satisfactory solutions to what I will call the age-pyramid problem if population growth is limited.
Only-NeverInSweden.blogspot.com
Dual citizen US SE
3
Enough with the refugees.
Just how many Somali refugees have tried to enlist in isis?
Enough!
30
There is NO way we can take in all the refugees which our interference in foreign countries has caused. To create millions of refugees and take in a few thousand, to feel good about ourselves, is nothing short of hypocrisy. Germany took in more than a million and even that number was not enough.
We need to stop interfering in the affairs of other nations - e.g. do NOT destabilize the governments in Libya or Syria or Ukraine. And help to resettle the refugees in their own lands. At the very least Arabic speaking refugees should go to countries where Arabic is the spoken language. Why bring them here where things are more costly and the spoken language is English (or Spanish)?
9
The more talent and power, the more responsibility to act on it to benefit our neighbors in need. Refugees need our help today, we may need their's tomorrow; things in life are never stationary, your dependent one today may become your boss tomorrow. This is not only a matter of justice, let alone compassion, it has to do with your cruel pettiness giving you a guilt complex you won't be able to shake, and survive unscathed a guilty conscience, the one that tells us, day in and day out, what's right from what's wrong, and the miserable feeling that may come when, in a position of power, you could have made the difference. This is especially true when the U.S. may have contributed to the mayhem (Irak's invasion under false pretext, for instance) that caused the pain and suffering of folks escaping the horrors of war. The fact that the decision to curtail help from refugees is in the hands of a cruel and vengeful and discriminatory beast in the presidency is very regrettable indeed.
2
I agree with some others who have previously commented. In Anaheim California a "Homelessness Emergency" has just been declared. Yet we continue to be told we are a wealthy country and we must take people in. Wealth and compassion are immediately calculated by how we treat our own citizens.Why can't we leverage some of that wealth to help people that are here already?Why is it the left believes that those that are born here and are poor or in dire circumstances do not deserve help? The non native that just got here 10 seconds ago deserves support those that were born here deserve to be thrown under the bus. This sort of thinking is exactly why the last election went the way it did.
33
"Why can't we leverage some of that wealth to help people that are here already?"
The obvious answer is, " Because we throw away all our national treasure on the military". And that is EXACTLY what history will record about us.
Do you really want to change all of this? Then vote against the military-industrial complex. Vote to defeat its champions, its shills, its apologists. The support of defense contractors to the detriment of EVERYTHING else is un-American. Inhuman. Apocalyptic.
Stop being part of the problem. Choose to be part of the solution.
6
A few points. The refugee stories are heartbreaking. I'm devastated by the likes of Trump and his ilk now in power. I'm anxious every day by my family's lack of access to healthcare. We have a horrible, overpriced HMO. I'm hoping our nation comes to its senses and enacts some form of single payer soon.
All this said, I feel anger when I see refugees taken in by our country and given unlimited healthcare (many can access Medicaid) while my children forego doctor visits unless it's really serious (and it's often hard to know). I feel anger at undocumented immigrants delivering babies for free at a hospital where my last child's birth cost over $50,000 (we paid around $15,000 of that). Our income is high enough that we don't get any breaks, but we have a whopping tax bill and struggle to save. Doctor bills are outrageous. I'm a Democrat. I'm not blindly against taxation. But paying taxes through the nose, then worrying constantly about the cost of healthcare while watching people take advantage of our social benefits bothers me. I'm bothered by billionaires and their low tax rate, too, by the way.
The middle class are struggling right now. It doesn't mean the poor aren't suffering, too. The constant focus on helping immigrants and refugees is well meaning. But when I feel terror that one broken arm will bankrupt us it's hard to muster endless sympathy for the unending numbers of people who want to come here and instantly access Medicaid.
37
Medicare for all - universal health care - would provide you and others in the situation that you describe much more relief than would turning away refugees. A most logical source of funding for universal health care is to be had by terminating the Deep State programs that produce refugees and illegal workers through rendering their countries unfit and unsafe places in which to live.
4
It's even worse than that because the working poor, working class and middle class are forced to watch programs cut in our public schools because of mandates to pay for education of illegal alien children and legal immigrant refugee children alike. While the Washington, DC politicians send their own kids to elite private schools like Sidwell Friends and Episcopal Academy which are completely exempt from these requirements! They may have some token immigrant children or elite child from Ambassador's trilingual family but it is not the huge percentages now swamping so many public schools.
Which is not to say any of these immigrant children are not intelligent and hard-working because so many are. But there are only so many dollars to go around and public schools are being mandated to spend huge amounts on English as Second Language and special education interventions for immigrants. Necessitating cuts elsewhere. The per student spending for first-generation immigrant children in our public schools dwarfs the per student spending for US citizen children. It is unequal education and ripe for a lawsuit based on a violation of our civil rights laws which prohibit discrimination. How crazy that the 1% elite have imposed this on our public schools while opting out for themselves.
21
"Many Americans, and the American government itself, have expressed shock at the treatment of Rohingya Muslims in Myanmar."
That does not mean America is obliged to take all these refugees. Islamic terrorism by ISIS, al Qaida and other militant groups is creating this refugee crisis worldwide. It is not right for a former British secretary of state to advise America to take more and more refugees, why not UK? Rich Muslim countries in the Middle East should take these refugees to show their Islamic values. As long as these terror groups exist, there will be refugees. Western countries can offer only humanitarian help.
22
Are you forgetting who waged an illegal war in Iraq; creating two million refugees?
3
The United States cannot absorb all the refugees in the world.
Our infrastructure is crumbling.
Our resources are limited.
Are taxes are too high.
Why is the left so eager to take in so many people?
40
No one is asking the US to take in all the refugees in the world. 22.5 million refugees in the world and we take an average of 95,000 per year. Turkey has taken 2.9 million refugees; Pakistan 1.4 million; Lebanon 1 million; Iran, Uganda, and Ethiopia each have taken over 800,000 refugees. America's role is limited but vital. We lead by setting an example for other countries to do their part. We lead by taking in the difficult cases that other countries pass by. We lead by standing for freedom.
I didn't know that President Reagan was part of the left. His administration averaged far more than 95,000 refugees a year. In his Farewell Address he spoke with great and justified pride about America's role in helping refugees. Other republican presidents have had similar records.
7
All the refugees in the world? This article suggests 75,000, and there are 16.1 million refugees in the world. That's less than 1%.
3
"The left" also realizes: "“It could have been us. These are our fellow human beings. We cannot turn them away.” Nazis and narcissists are not known for such thinking that requires that kind of capacity for such empathy, but I am thankful that most Americans are known for exactly that.
Americans are also known for a "Can Do" response to such challenges. Save their lives, bring them in here, and we'll figure out how to make it work.
2
Let Japan take some refugees. Japan is never in these conversations on immigration.
17
Japan took no part in destabilizing the government of Libya or in attempting to destabilize the government of Syria. WE did that.
Why should Japan pay for OUR sins?
1
That's because Japan doesn't believe in diversity, unlike the liberals in the US. Japan is homogenous and yet they have democracy, clean streets, and nice people. Who said you need diversity to make a country work well? Look at all of the US' ills and diversity is the underlying cause.
11
Aruna, I did not do anything to Libya or Syria, or any other country. Why do I need to pay?
6
I will try to bring up this aspect of the issue delicately... Back in the day, my wife and I had only two children as we were concerned with sustainability of the planet. Many couples today cannot afford children but pay taxes to support refugees and their families. Refugees can come into this country and have as many children as they want, many with large families, and our taxes support them. I get the part of rescuing someone facing death somewhere. But this is as if I was in crisis and a friend invited me to stay out of the goodness of his heart- and I then proceeded to invite several friends to stay as well.
35
I'm not sure that's accurate. From our experience (several years working with and living among refugees), they rarely have children here. Most of the children were already born before they arrive to the US. And the government benefits that they receive are fairly limited. They can only utilize food stamps and Medicare programs for a short time before they must become self-sufficient.
9
Birth control, family planning and sustainable development must also be settled questions throughout the globe. The west embraced sensible fertility rates decades ago. The developing world still hasn't gotten the message.
48
Neither has the Deep South.
4
Tell that to the current administration, which has an executive order "gag rule" on clinics in developing countries counseling women on birth control and family planning.
2
But we don't help with that when we tell developing countries that the funds we give them cannot be used for any sort of birth control, discussions about abortion or abortions. America has a very peculiar attitude towards life: it's sacred before it's born but not worth anything after the birth.
3
Citing the statistic offered by the paper that posits that refugees bring in 21K more in taxes than they burden the system is blatantly irresponsible. The refugees spoken of in that research had been here for 20+ years in 2015, meaning a huge proportion of them must have been soviet era refugees- we are talking about Jewish physicists here as well as refugees from the balkan crisis. This is vastly different from the current composition of refugees who often don't have any relevant skills for living in the modern world, let alone an education. The biggest source of refugees this year has been the Congo. If refugees living here for 20 years bring in only 21K in tax dollars in total, that is a pretty clear indicator that today's refugees are likely to be a permanent money sink. Studies of refugees such as somalians have shown that they are a tremendous drain on our welfare systems.
Refugees should be held to the same standard of merit as other immigrants if they want to come here. Otherwise we should set up safe havens for these people in areas of the world where it is cheaper to feed and house them. Every dollar we spend on a refugee in the US helps 10 times as many people if spent in the developing world.
29
In Canada, we can help one asylum seeker for the same amount we could care for 135 refugees in or near their country of origin. Those with money and opportunity make their way west. The most desperate and impoverished remain behind. Is it right to help 1000 people have a better life in the west when we we can help 135,000 people near their home for the same amount?
10
So let's stop throwing money away on the military and spend it where it should be spent--on people.
8
Aunti Hose, good point. You know we are in deep when even Bernie Sanders insists on putting Lockheed's budget-busting F-35 fighter jet before the health and home values of his own constituents. I am not going to hold my breath for sanity any time soon when even the most liberal member of the Senate still insists on throwing money away on the military and refuses to even meet with the thousands of constituents he is harming by insisting on basing the F-35 fighter jet in Vermont's most densely populated area.
5
Why is it always assumed the United States, one of the most diverse countries on earth, needs more diversity? Shouldn't less diverse nations (Japan, Congo) be encouraged to take in these refugees and thereby enjoy the benefits of diversity?
27
It's too late, once we felt worthy enough to put up that statue proclaiming to the world of our unique righteousness, we bought the farm. Now less righteous dictators anywhere are free to purge their countries of whomever they don't want and rest assured there will be a comfortable place for them to go. Only problem with the farm now is that the mortgage is due and we have to decide if we're really have the strength for farming. My bet is we let the bank foreclose and we take a condo in the city with an elevator.
7
There are presently tens of thousands of homeless people in America. There are even more who can barely afford the housing they are currently living in. We just had two major natural disasters that have left thousands homeless as well. Let us take care of our own first. America already admits about a million immigrants each year. Perhaps it is time the UN and all these NGOs to start concentrating on increasing the use and availability contraceptives.
31
Or maybe it's time for this country to stop throwing away half a trillion dollars EVERY year on the military. Or are we just too stupid?
8
According to the UN, there will be hundreds of millions, if not billions of people looking for refugee status. We cannot accept them all, without destroying this country.
21
Do you have a citation for that?
2
Of course you didn't know that if you stood them shoulder-to shoulder, front-to-back, EVERY SINGLE PERSON on Earth would fit on the Juneau Ice Field. It's a pretty big place, but it fits in Juneau--Alaska. Clues are free. Fox News charges.
2
Britain and other European countries have been destroyed by immigration. The temerity of this fool expecting the U.S. to follow suit. Tony Blair destroyed Britain with immigration.
42
"over a 20-year period, those who were admitted to the United States as refugees between the ages of 18 and 45 (and more than half of refugees are under 18) will pay $21,000 more in taxes than they will receive in benefits."
REFUGEES are not economic migrants. Their lives have been uprooted by war and persecution. As a nation we have agreed not to resend any refugees back to their country when their lives are threatened. We need an infrastructure in place to assist in resettling the refugees and having them assimilate into our communities. We also have a moral obligation if our infrastructure is stretched too thin to resettle them in another country and not send them back into harms way.
4
But Canada has thrived on immigration hasn't it?
3
Funny, I thought Britain still exists. Thanks for clearing that up.
2
i loved this piece, its sentiments, its morals, as much as i hated the close-minded, hard hearted imbecility of the comments in this section. uganda actually now has one million refugees, and germany has taken in close to that number in the past few years. the semi-fascist xenophobia of east europeans, like hungary, and its neighbors, all of whose rationalizations are echoed in this comment section, is to be contrasted with scandanavian or north european generosity. it is clear that all but native americans are descended from immigrants; half of all americans are descended from those who arrived between 1880 and 1920. those descendants who are now saying poverty or warfare elsewhere is not our problem have lost the humanity and generosity of spirit that made ellis island stand for an ideal of openness that welcomed their ancestors.
6
I am shocked and saddened by the sour and close-hearted response of many of these letter-writers, many of whom, no doubt, have ancestors that came from elsewhere. Refugees and immigrants enrich our country and yes, I suspect the "real" story here is the desire to keep America "pure and white."
6
Refugees and immigrants enrich our country "
Some do, most don't. You are kidding youself. Those who do, probably start as students at a university, or H1B visa holders.That is an unqualified statement that gets a lot of support but the proof simply is not there. It is the worst kind of emotional argument.
14
Europe is looking good right now isn't it. However, I would prefer to avoid giant refugee slums, soldiers patrolling the streets, being blown up at random in the name of Allah, and a society who views woman as property. This really has nothing to do with race, at least for me. I have no doubt it does for many, especially in the south. I simply have no interest in living with terror, violence or religious radicals.
18
@2-6
Frequent visitor to Europe, are you? Funny, I've got friends in UK, German, and France. They don't see the same boogeyman you do. Oh, sure, Jihadists are real, but if I only know the US from the news it would be a hellhole where kids can't go to school without a mass shooter killing them and white supremacists run people over with cars.
7
Are we selfish? After some help, refugees become a benefit.
Are we afraid? Fear of refugees who have lost so much/everything and still have a stellar record of being good citizens is without any understanding of the situation. With the exceedingly stringent vetting, they will become good citizens and good neighbors.
Do you know any refugees? I do, and they have become friends - friends I can count on. My experience is that they will give more than they get.
12
I keep reading, as I have here, that the U.S. has a very rigorous vetting program for immigrants and refugees. (Not the same thing, by the way. Crucially different.) Would the Times please have an expert guest writer explain in some detail what the vetting process looks like for both immigrants and refugees?
12
A 5 second Google search will take care of that for you. Direct from the state dept, here's the refugee admissions process. https://www.state.gov/j/prm/releases/factsheets/2017/266447.htm
1
Don't be throwing facts at them. That freaks them out more than science.
3
Thanks for the tip.
The usual bunch of Trump supporters will no doubt talk about how much refugees cost, how much they drain resources that can be used to help Americans, etc. (although the same people are notably silent on issues of public healthcare and other social safety nets.) If Trump supporters really care about fiscal accountability, they should focus on Trump putting taxpayer dollars in his own pocket when he takes those $3.6 million weekly trips to Mar-a-Lago. We are too cheap to feed families escaping a warzone, but will pay for Glorious Leader to go golfing and stuff his face with ketchup steak and "beautiful chocolate cake" at his own resort? What are we, North Korea? How many refugees can we feed if Trump stopped going to Mar-a-Lago on the taxpayer's dime, and stopped forcing the Secret Service to rent golf carts from his own resort?
Or perhaps the problem Trump supporters have with a country of 323 million taking in 100,000 refugees is not about money at all. It's about keeping America religiously, ethnically, and racially pure.
17
Sorry - refugees are not our problem. They can settle in the nearest safe country and call it a day.
50
Well, aren't you the fortunate one to be born in the USA? Refugees do run to other countries but it is our humane responsibility to take some in too.
There by the grace of God go you.
1
Oh, and how many of your friends and coworkers are descended from refugees who came here because America was a safe country when no other country was? And what about your ancestors? Some of them might have been refugees in or from other countries. We all owe our lives to people who we will never meet, might have despised, or might have loved.
Yes, Sue, I was fortunate to be born in the USA. That has zero bearing on my point. The world is an unfair place where some people are just going to get ground up. Again, not our problem. I certainly do not want to see tax dollars based trying to right wrongs that are unresolvable, especially for non-Americans with do many Americans in need here at home. The US is not the first safe country for any refugees given our geography, so our obligation is nil.
2
World wide refugee crisis is due to wars and civil wars. Very few are due to natural disasters. Stop proxy wars and sale of arms.
17
Agreed. Last I checked weapons was America's #1 export.
3
I was intrigued by the statistics of a refugee of age 18-45 paying 21K more in taxes than benefits over 20 years. Thats about 1k per year in prime working age.
Now suppose this refugee family has one child. To put this child through school in New York state for 12 years, it will cost roughly $240k (it costs 20K per child in NY)
The parents pay $21k net taxes. The rest $219,000 is picked by US taxpayers.
Now, if the US taxpayer instead wrote that $219K check to the refugee's parent country, they could probably educate 100 children there. Wouldn't that be better?
42
My compliments on a very polite and reasoned response to an eye rolling statistic offered by the author.
6
"Now, if the US taxpayer instead wrote that $219K check to the refugee's parent country, they could probably educate 100 children there. Wouldn't that be better?"
Except for the part involving civil wars and other armed conflicts where said children are likely to be killed. You know, those armed conflicts that "refugees" are seeking "refuge" from in the first place?
3
You don't get it, do you? They don't want your money and they don't want your charity. People don't uproot themselves for a lonely, tired existence in a country that smears the poor like the US unless they are truly and utterly desperate. It's your own self-interest that's at stake. You won't be able to get anything done or get into any markets to sell anything anywhere, because you'll be seen as a vile country rich enough in the pocket but too poor in the heart, and there are better options for trade partners out there. No one will vote with you in the UN. Next time you're attacked, intelligence services will hold back information and you won't know where to hit back. You won't be able to subcontract torture and will have to do it yourselves, here in the mainland. It's your benefit not the refugees' that is at stake. Iran pacified its Afghanistan border by welcoming over a million refugees and neutralized your attempts at cornering it from the East; had you received more good will in Afghanistan you wouldn't have lost the entire Levant to Iran, which is on its way to checkmate you in the Middle East like North Korea has done in Asia. Anyways, have it your way. Ugliness has consequences and one of them is that you will hide your identity as an American wherever you go in the world so you don't get yelled at or be at the receiving end of nasty remarks, or worse. But who cares? Paris in Las Vegas is better than the original! And Italy too! That's the American way.
4
The overwhelming majority of people in this world live in countries and regimes that are beset by poverty, violence, hunger and oppression and that will only worsen in the future. In the 21st century the United states can no longer be the dumping ground of last resort for all of them, or even a substantial percentage of them. The days of the New Colossus, the "Give me your tired, your poor" days, are long gone. The tired and poor now comprise a disturbing percentage of our own citizens and they need to be tended to first.
47
In reality immigrants have never been particularly welcomed here. Each successive wave of Europeans who passed through New York Harbor, often as refugees of poverty, were a hated underclass who eventually and with great difficulty, found a toe hold here. Most groups were largely illiterate, unskilled, unhealthy, and very poor. Nobody was happy having them tumbling in with all their needs and problems. So there is nothing new to anti immigrant sentiment. But still we let them in.
What is different now? Is the changing national ethos, that the "give me your tired and poor" is suddenly a depleted sentiment? And if that is because that unlike Europeans, these refugees have dark skin?
1
This is not about the odds of getting extinguished by a terrorist alone.
What many Americans are concerned about is overpopulation and lack of resources. Where are all of the incoming migrants/refugees going to live?
What types of employment will be available to them? Where do they go to school? Or get medical care? As it is, our country is full up. We can't keep adding millions more without any foresight into the environmental, political, infrastructure and social impacts. It's time to slow down or curtail the express immigration train. We can't be the only station or destination for the world's refugees.
So nice to see other Muslim countries helping their brethren, not.
34
the Muslim countries don't help because everything in the MID EAst is TRIBAL. Wrong tribe, and you are out of luck. Those countries need to get with it in the 21st century or ABANDON religion for the sake of their nation.
9
People have been hiding their racism and xenophobia behind poorly constructed "arguments" since Ronald Reagan's presidency. So there are no "resources" to house 50,000 on an entire continent with 300 million people?
@dve commenter
Is there really more tribalism in the Middle East? I'm seeing plenty of tribalism in these comments. You got families faced with violence and death, and all these supposed "Christian Americans" say it's none of their business because the people suffering are the wrong race or practice the wrong religion. Seems like you don't need to go to the Middle East for tribalism.
I use "Christian American" in quotation marks because I don't see much of Christ's teaching or American spirit in their words.
3
I wish that, just once in this piece, you had acknowledged the difference between "immigrant" and "refugee". The term "refugee" has a legal definition and the large majority of people who want to come to the USA do not meet it.
Germany, the most welcoming nation in Europe, with regard to refugees, has determined that roughly half of the immigrants who have arrived in the last 2 years do not qualify as refugees and must now be deported at great expense to the country and with great disruption to all the lives involved.
39
The author's organization, the International Rescue Committee, has been focused on rescuing Refugees for over 8 decades. It was founded at the suggestion of the refugee Albert Einstein
https://www.rescue.org/article/albert-einstein-and-birth-international-r...
Here FYI is a bit of its history.
https://www.rescue.org/page/history-international-rescue-committee
Those deportations are not working out very well. Nobody ever leaves on their own will. Why would they? Many countries don't want them back either.
4
The difference between us and Germany is the Atlantic Ocean. You can't walk here like you can to those ciuntries in Europe. A person can only be here as a refugee after they have gone through our process. Even if someone from a country like Syria showed up in the US, they couldn't just walk in and get the benefits of a refugee. At that point, they would more than likely be considered an illegal immigrant.
1
Ultimately these countries have to resolve their own problems.
45
Refugees are not countries. And for too many, the only way of resolving "their problems", (besides leaving their homes), is to be raped, tortured and killed.
1
Admitting one or two hundred thousand refugees a year into the United States is insignificant. Honestly, the country has never had existential legal or illegal immigration crises.
I am suggesting however that the United States needs to have a rational and unemotional immigration policy in place which directly addresses overwhelming disruptive mass migration into the United States due to climate change.
There are about 7.5 billion people living in the world today and that number is going up. Most of this population lives in poverty in third world countries. Most people in the world know that life is better in rich countries such as the United States. If you believe that climate change is real, you must also believe that many parts of the third world will soon be uninhabitable. This means that there will inevitably be mass uncontrolled migrations to this country.
Gaining more control over our borders and other points of entry would be a good first step with many possible benefits and little downside risk.
20
Patent nonsense. The United States has no moral or legal obligation to accept one-to-infinity number of refugees based on the practices of last week or last century. Second, if every American taxpayer paid $21,000 more in taxes than they received in benefits over a 20 year period, the nation would be out of business in ten days.
Thank you, former British former secretary, for your advice on how my country should handle its immigration policy.
44
There are many countries doing so much more for refugees, it would be informative to see more statistics.
75,000 being allowed into a geographically large nation with a low population density, the most accumulated wealth, that lifts its lamp by the golden door, seems a pitifully small number.
There is a viral strain of homogenous identity running across many parts of the world today that is creating an environment of paranoia. It is happening in Russia, India, US and in many part of Europe including the UK. It prevents a good section, if not all, of the people in these countries from recognizing that the ultimate goal of humanity is preservation at the level above the mere self. That shortsightedness is driving complacency and denial about climate change, indifference about species extinction and paranoia about people who don't share the same physical and cultural characteristics.
The strain has always existed but much of it has been set alight by democratically elected leaders across the world or those that aspired for higher office : Putin, Narendra Modi, Teresa May, Nigel Farage, Geert Wilders, and Donald Trump to name a few.
Thankfully, there also some beacons of light. The latest one is the premier of Bangladesh, Sheikh Hasina. She is welcoming the battered Rohingya refugees into her own impoverished country with the following message "If we can feed 160 million, we can surely feed another 700 thousand more". That is what we need more of. Not the Trumps, Modis, Putins and the like.
4
There is an error in your argument: Geert Wilders is not unwelcoming or conservative in his politics. He is far, far left. He is against Muslim migrants immigrating to the Netherlands because Islamic ideals are anthithetical to Dutch, liberal progressive values. It's the liberal values (around same sex marriage, gender equity, etc.) that he seeks to defend through limits on immigration.
16
"At stake are not just the lives of tens of thousands of victims of war and persecution who dream of starting a new life in America; at risk also are American values, the United States’ reputation and American interests around the world."
Sir, try explaining your noble sentiments to the president's supporters who are already up in arms about what they perceive as a presidential betrayal of his campaign promises and their values about keeping immigrants and foreigners out of the United States. Republicans and the president's base are enraged because of the president's desire to work with Democrats to allow DACA children to stay in the country and make a commitment to the resettlement of refugees in the United States.
The president's supporters would much rather see a Statue of Liberty holding a stop sign and a billy club surrounded by a razor wire-topped wall in New York harbor instead of a torch and a broken chain signifying freedom and welcome.
4
What should be obvious in the image accompanying this op-ed are two things: every person has his/her hand over their heart and the look on every face bespeaks of a rapt and deep reverence for the act of recognizing the flag of the United States. Natural-born American citizens (perhaps) take Old Glory for granted but the refugees here do not.
The flag, for those fleeing persecution of whatever stripe (political, religious, ethnic, etc.), upon arrival on our shores do more than pay lip service to the only gateway to a better tomorrow that will be a blessing to counteract the cursed situations that drove them to this desperate pass.
Donald Trump's supporters--all 63-millions of them (and counting?)-- are anything but the "patriots" that they so gratuitously flaunt. The Trumpistas should be embarrassed by the folks in this photo whose faces are alight with the hope of a lifetime. They are obviously in love with a country that has yet to formally accept them. They are clearly shining object lessons to the "homegrown" types who can, maybe, rattle off some memorized milquetoast platitudes without understanding a word. They are Americans by birth only.
The "real Americans" (sorry, Sarah Palin) yearn to be free because they've lived without a lot of what we daily take for granted and scarcely treasure. They would add to the "greatness" that should be inherent in America. They've got to know that we're all show--and no go.
6
"The "real Americans" (sorry, Sarah Palin) yearn to be free …”
I’m sure the young Muslim woman in the photo wants the freedom to practice her religion, but what does she think of our freedom of speech? Would she be willing to let others criticize her religion? Could they draw caricatures of Islam’s prophet Mohammed to illustrate their criticisms?
The writers and cartoonists at the French satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo criticized and drew cartoons of figures from all of France’s religions. Only the Muslims could not tolerate the criticism. They shot 11 of the writers and cartoonists to death.
The BBC took a poll of the attitude of British Muslims toward the Charlie Hebdo murders. In a 2/25/5 article in Britain's Telegraph newspaper titled "Over a quarter of British Muslims have sympathy for the Charlie Hebdo terrorists. That is far too many” Dan Hodges wrote:
"Presented with the statement “I have some sympathy for the motives behind the Charlie Hebdo attacks in Paris”, 27 seven percent agreed with the statement. A further 2 per cent refused to answer the question. And an additional eight percent said they were unsure whether they had some sympathy or not.”
We, Americans, need to ask Muslims who want to move here if they could tolerate our freedom of speech.
27
Send them, the tempest tossed, to me.
Those of us who continue to believe in America
(unlike those who cower and snarl in a dark corner of hatred),
lift a lamp beside the Golden Door,
in honor of the greatness of the dreams
of our huddled ancestors,
who came before.
3
We have plenty of huddled already here and a chronic unemployment/underemployment problem. The number of prime working age adults fully employed in the workforce has been declining every year for decades. Better to revamp our immigration process, including standards for refugees, to prioritize young, healthy, skilled/educated employable immigrants.
18
"young, healthy, skilled/educated employable immigrants."
This is exactly who the dreamers are.
3
Thank you for the facts about refugees and for exposing the fiction generated that America hosts more refugees globally than any other country. This information is vital in today's political climate. Most people are under the impression that providing sanctuary is equivalent to providing charity that sees no end to funding.
Uganda has it right when they said upon acceptance of 600,000 refugees from the war in South Sudan. "It could have been us. These are our fellow human beings. We cannot turn them away." I also add that America should not.
However, this administration is less than charitable to its own American citizens so other than everyone speaking up and telling Congress that the new quota not drop below 75,000, Trump will get away with even more sins of omission made against humanity.
I wish I knew what Bible Trump and his particular group of evangelists subscribe to as the first commandment seems to be "Do unto others what you do not want done to yourself."
40