by Phyllis Schlafly
Eagle Forum September 16, 2015
The United States is the most generous nation in
the world, and we have taken many refugees from foreign lands. Europe has not
offered to take refugees from Central America, so why are some politicians here
insisting that we take many thousands of refugees from the Middle East?
While refugee crises are tragic, crimes committed
by transplanted peoples against unwarned, unprotected victims in our own
country are even more tragic. Politicians demanding that American neighborhoods
accept thousands of refugees, without proper screening or any indication by the
migrants that they genuinely want to assimilate into our culture, should be
rejected.
Americans are horrified by images of tens of
thousands of people, mostly unattached Muslim young men from the Middle East
and Africa, crossing unguarded borders into Europe. The news media often
describe these people sympathetically as refugees from the civil war in Syria,
but many could be migrants seeking a more comfortable life in a rich society
with a cradle-to-grave welfare state.
The scene is eerily reminiscent of the tens of
thousands of people from Central America who crossed into the United States
last summer. Often described sympathetically as unaccompanied minors fleeing
gang violence, most of those Central American arrivals were able-bodied, tough
young men who left their families in search of better economic opportunities.
Wealthy European nations did not offer to help out
by accepting thousands of migrants from Central America. We did not expect that
of them, and they should not expect it of us now.
The Muslim migrants follow a route through Turkey,
Macedonia, and Serbia into Hungary, the European country closest to the Middle
East, and from Hungary they can travel throughout 26 European nations. That
route may soon close when Hungary completes the razor-wire fence it is building
along its entire 108-mile border with Serbia.
The free movement of people across national
boundaries, without passports, is required by the Schengen agreement, one of
the central principles of the European Union. It makes those 26 member
countries subject to the weakest link, the country with porous borders, in this
case Hungary.
The idea of creating nations without borders,
allowing the free movement of people inside a common perimeter, was pushed by
President George W. Bush when he met with the Mexican president and the
Canadian prime minister at Waco, Texas on March 23, 2005. Soon after that first
summit of “the three amigos,” the Council on Foreign Relations published
“Toward a North American Community” which called for a “seamless market” with
“a more open border for the movement of goods and people.”
Fortunately, Senate Judiciary Chairman Chuck
Grassley (R-Iowa) wants to put some brakes on giving away the security of our
neighborhoods to thousands of people having unknown intentions about the United
States and our way of life. “Before agreeing to accept tens of thousands of
Syrian refugees, the Obama administration must prove to the American people
that it will take the necessary precautions to ensure that national security is
a top priority, especially at a time when ruthless terrorist groups like ISIS
are committed to finding ways to enter the United States and harm Americans.”
Our daily freedoms could be sharply limited if
terrorists were to slip into our country along with migrants from areas hostile
to the United States. Senator Jeff Sessions (R-AL) warns that “we’re really not
able to vet Middle Eastern applicants now, and if we increase that number,
we’ll be even less able to do so.”
Stark financial problems also stand against
welcoming so many strangers into our country. More than 90% of recent refugees
from the Middle East are on welfare, according to official statistics published
by the U.S. Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR).
Our welfare system is already strained by the
Central American migrants who entered our country illegally and never went
home. There are a potential 6 billion people in the world who would like to
partake in the American welfare system if given the opportunity, but we cannot
afford to foot the bill for everyone in the world who does not have a job.
We should learn from the experience of accepting
about 55,000 Somali refugees between 1983 and 2004, which included the Clinton
Administration and three different Republican Administrations, and taking
another 27,000 Somalis between 2008 and 2013 under the Obama Administration.
Many were settled in Minnesota, where Somali participation in a food assistance
program increased to 17,300 adults and children, not even including Somalis
subsequently born here.
An open-door policy towards Syrian refugees would
be dangerous and costly for American communities. As Senator Sessions says,
“Our policy should be to keep the refugees as close to home as possible. For
the cost of one in the United States, we could probably provide maintenance to
10, maybe more, in or near their home country.”
No comments:
Post a Comment