How To Succeed In The Wind Energy Fight

I was asked to speak as a NY town board meeting this week. They were quite interested in how to best protect their community from the threat of a proposed wind project. This is a condensed version of what I said…

Since an industrial wind project is something you may have to live with for 20± years, it seems wise to carefully, objectively, and thoroughly investigate this matter, ahead of time

After working with 100± communities throughout the US, my conclusion is that your absolute best and first line of defense, is a well-written, protective set of wind energy regulations.

The focus of these regulations should be to protect the health, safety and welfare of the community.

These regulations can be in a stand-alone law, or part of a more comprehensive zoning document. (Where they appear is significantly less important than their content.)

Note that writing these regulations is not about excluding wind energy development — but rather it’s about protecting the citizens, small businesses, the economy, the military, and the ecosystems of your community.

So, how do you go about creating proper wind energy regulations? Well, you have two very different choices…

1 – Option One is to figure out what needs to be done, on your own. 

Since this is an extremely complex technical matter (with wide-spread ramifications), you’ll need to find the following local people: physicist, electrical engineer, civil engineer, acoustical engineer, physician, financial PhD, hydro-geologist, ecologist, bat expert, ornithologist, EMF expert, real estate appraiser, and last but not least, a technically competent lawyer. That would be your team.

In addition, each of those local people need: 

a) to have an interest in this matter, 

b) to be supportive of citizen rights, and 

c) to have the time available to assist the community. 

After you’ve collected these experts (that meet those three qualifications), make sure to also allow for at least a year to do research, to have multiple meetings, etc., etc.

The fundamental question is: do you have all those resources in your community, and the time? 

If you are missing any of those experts (or don’t have the time), the wind regulations that result will likely leave you not properly protected, and very vulnerable to a wind project getting built…

2 – Option Two is to stand on the shoulders of those who have gone before you.

Many are not be aware of it, but some 250 communities in the US have had to deal with industrial wind energy. Every case is different, but a few were fortunate enough to have the necessary cross-section of experts living nearby. Some were proactive, so they had the luxury and time to do more research. Etc.

In any case, in every one of the 250± other communities, there are lessons to be learned — both what to do, and what not to do. One of my beliefs is that it rarely makes sense to reinvent the wheel — and particularly not in a complex technical matter like industrial wind energy.

That’s the point of my free citizen advocacy service, and my website (WiseEnergy.org), and my monthly Newsletter (which now has some 10,000 readers). All of these are intended to sort out, and then pass on to you, the best ideas out there. 

As we announced several months ago, to help those who want to go the Option Two route, we are advocating a model local wind law. (The explanation and supporting data behind it is found on the Key Documents page of our website.)

When all is said and done, it’s your community — so it’s your call how to deal with any proposed wind project. 

We’ve simply tried to make it easier to be successful in dealing with this extraordinary challenge — by giving you the Science perspective, and by sharing with you some of the wind energy experiences of numerous other communities.

Let me know any questions you have, or suggestions to improve our services by leaving a comment below.

Tax Friendly Counties in Florida: Only 7 out of 67 or 10.5%

There are 67 counties in this Sunshine State and only seven (7) are “sales tax friendly” holding at 6%. These counties can operate their budgets and manage their money with as little pressure as possible placed upon their citizens ensuring the harder you work the more you keep. Excluding, of course, the corrupt IRS at the federal level and the illegal confiscation of your wealth in local property taxes.

Here is the list of counties with a 6% sales tax in the great state of Florida.

  1. Martin County
  2. Okaloosa County
  3. Palm Beach County
  4. Collier County
  5. Marion County
  6. Lee County
  7. Broward County

Martin County – 6% also borders Palm Beach County (6%) St Lucie County 6 1/2% – Okeechobee County at 7%.

I would suggest the TEA Party conservatives and all citizens in the higher taxed counties cross the county border and shop in Martin County and Palm Beach County.

Gas – clothes – car repairs – new furniture purchases – new appliance’s etc. Then write letters to companies in the high taxed counties and let them know you are no longer shopping with them due to the high tax base surcharge above the 6%

Okaloosa County borders Santa Rosa County soon to be 7% and Walton County at 7%. I recommend all patriots living in Santa Rosa and Walton County shop in Okaloosa County. This would also include Escambia County that operates at a 7 1/2% fleecing of its citizens.

Santa Rosa County is being ran by a Fascist group of Obama interns. They doubled the gas taxes on us in January 2016 – they emotionally destabilized folks into voting for a sales tax increase to 7% and now these slimy RINO golems are going to try and raise the property taxes on us on September 20th. These boys need a lesson in constitutional governance.

Anyway – Palm Beach County is at 6% which borders Martin County at 6% – Broward 6% – Hendry 7% – Glades 7% and Okeechobee 7%. Same story. Cross county lines for all purchases from high tax to lower taxed counties.

Collier County at 6% borders Monroe County at 7 1/2% – Lee County 6% – Hendry 7% – Broward at 6%.

Looks good here. The folks in the higher taxed counties have more choices to cross the county line to shop and purchase gasoline etc.

Marion County 6% – borders Alachua at 6% – Putnam County 7% -Volusia County 6 1/2 % Lake County 7% – Sumter County 7% – Citrus 6% and Levy 7%.

Lee County should do pretty well at 6%. It borders Desoto County that fleece their citizens at a 7 1/2 % tax rate – Collier is good at 6% – Hendry County fleeces its citizens 7% – Sarasota County 7% and Glades County at 7%.

Lee and Collier County should be reaping all the financial benefits from its low tax base surrounded by tax and spend liberal counties.

Broward County at 6% borders Dade County 7% – Palm Beach County 6% – Collier County 6% and Hendry County at 7%.

There you have it ladies and gentlemen. Only 7 counties in Florida that can manage a budget – the rest are fleecing you dry.

They are sucking money out of your wallets faster than a Planned Parenthood vacuum pump to fund their $100,000 plus salaries – to purchase their antiquities and gold embossed bides.

Start inquiring into the salaries of all your county and city employees. Find out what they make. This will help explain the high sales tax bases. Lots of folks move to Florida from New York to escape high taxes and they bring their Marxist ideology with them and start burying us in taxes.

You will find some of these leaches are sucking over $130,000 a year from your taxpayer coffers in salaries while only working 5 hours a day with expense accounts and travel accounts. Its a racket.

Lets start fighting these miscreant bottom feeding cockroaches. Start with public emails and finally at the ballot box. All emails are public record under Florida Sunshine laws – So the party is about to begin.

Demand Congressmen and Senators Defund Refugee Resettlement

URGENT ACTION ALERT

Take action now to voice your strong opposition to any additional refugee funding

Is there anyone in Washington, aside from a handful, who actually care about American lives? When confronted with obvious threats to our national security and personal safety, wouldn’t a normal response of an elected leader, especially one from the Grand Old Party, be one of concern? As it stands now the GOP playbook will end up killing Americans.

On my recent, self-inflicted trip to our nation’s capital to actually meet with my Congressman and other congressional aides to express concerns over the dangerous Refugee Resettlement program, I found nothing but excuses and anything but a fighting spirit.

No wonder so many people balk when you try to encourage them to call their congressman or senator with a concern about a policy or government program that is affecting you and your community financially or in regards to safety security. And Refugee Resettlement is and will affect all those areas, but many in Congress seem to be playing a dangerous game by not listening to the experts who have said over and over that this program is not safe.

Senator Jeff Sessions just released Obama’s request of 110,000 Refugees for fiscal year 2017. No telling if the extra 15,000 will be Syrian or not. In a release by the good Senator, he stated,

“Despite opposition by the American people, a documented link between terrorism and individuals admitted to the United States as refugees, and over $19 trillion in debt, the Obama Administration has committed the United States to admitting 110,000 refugees during Fiscal Year 2017—a roughly 57 percent increase in the number of refugees the United States admitted as recently as FY 2015, and a roughly 29 percent increase from the Administration’s target for FY 2016.”

Senator Sessions understands the gravity of this issue and has been fighting for fair and lawful immigration for years. He states,

“Despite a clear nexus between immigration and terrorism, and warnings from top officials in his own Administration about their inability to properly vet refugees, President Obama remains in denial ‎about the dangers that his policies pose to the United States. Instead of taking a sober assessment of the ‎dangers that we face, and analyzing the immigration histories of recent terrorists so that we can more effectively safeguard our immigration system from being infiltrated, the Obama Administration leads the United States down a dangerous path – admitting as many refugees as possible from areas of the world where terrorists roam freely, and granting a temporary amnesty to Syrians living in the United States illegally. And contrary to the assertions made by many, the potential for future terror activity is real.”

So again, the American people must make their voices heard and alert their congressmen and senators about defunding this program. Gone are the days when you could expect your elected officials to be apprised of the issues at hand and vote in accordance to what benefits the American people. Now, more than ever, keeping the status quo and getting reelected is the goal of most of those who have been placed in elected positions by the people of their districts.

The trend must be to put persons of integrity into elected positions who understand the Constitution and then following up, the most important step, by constituents keeping that elected official accountable for every move they make.

There are several ways to get your elected official’s attention. Please call not only your elected officials but also those in the leadership positions who could bring about a defunding of the Refugee Resettlement Program this month. Also use their Twitter accounts to bring attention to this critical matter.

Suggestions and contacts to follow:

#CCOT Target House #FreedomCaucus before September 15th, tell them to halt all funding for expanded Refugees

#CCOT .@Jim_Jordan Halt all funding for expanded refugee program – Americans demand it #MAGA #FreedomCaucus #AmericaFirst #OHpol

#CCOT .@RepJBridenstine Halt all funding for expanded refugee program – Americans First! #MAGA #FreedomCaucus #AmericaFirst #OKpol#CCOT

.@RepKenBuck Halt all funding for expanded refugee program – Americans demand it #MAGA #FreedomCaucus #AmericaFirst #COpol

#CCOT.@RepDeSantis Halt all funding for expanded refugee program – Americans demand it #MAGA #FreedomCaucus #AmericaFirst #FLpol

#CCOT.@RepJeffDuncan Halt all funding for expanded refugee program – Americans First! #MAGA #FreedomCaucus #AmericaFirst #SCpol

#CCOT.@RepTrentFranks Halt all funding for expanded refugee program – Americans First! #MAGA #FreedomCaucus #AmericaFirst #AZpol

#CCOT.@replouiegohmert Halt all funding for expanded refugee program – Americans demand it! #MAGA #FreedomCaucus #AmericaFirst #TXpol

#CCOT.@RepMGriffith Halt all funding for expanded refugee program – Americans demand it! #MAGA #FreedomCaucus #AmericaFirst #VApol

#CCOT.@CongressmanHice Halt all funding for expanded refugee program – Americans demand it! #MAGA #FreedomCaucus #AmericaFirst #GApol

#CCOT.@SteveKingIA Halt all funding for expanded refugee program – Americans demand it! #MAGA #FreedomCaucus #AmericaFirst #IApol

#CCOT .@CynthiaLummis Halt all funding for expanded refugee program – Americans demand it! #MAGA #FreedomCaucus #AmericaFirst #WYpol

#CCOT.@RepMickMulvaney Halt all funding for expanded refugee program – Americans demand it! #MAGA #FreedomCaucus #AmericaFirst #WVpol

#CCOT.@RepScottPerry Halt all funding for expanded refugee program – Americans demand it! #MAGA #FreedomCaucus #AmericaFirst #PApol

#CCOT.@congbillposey Halt all funding for expanded refugee program – Americans demand it! #MAGA #FreedomCaucus #AmericaFirst #FLpol

#CCOT.@RepSanfordSC Halt all funding for expanded refugee program – Americans demand it! #MAGA #FreedomCaucus #AmericaFirst #SCpol

#CCOT.@TXRandy14 Halt all funding for expanded refugee program – Americans demand it! #MAGA #FreedomCaucus #AmericaFirst #TXpol

Here is the info via Jim Simpson for the leadership:

Please call GOP House leaders to include a moratorium on the resettlement of refugees from countries where terrorists groups are prevalent in the upcoming continuing resolution (short-term spending bill). The numbers listed below will connect you directly to their leadership offices. There are additional talking points below the phone numbers.

Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy– (202) 225-4000(202) 225-4000GOP Conference Chair Cathy McMorris Rodgers — (202) 225-5107(202) 225-5107Appropriations Committee Chair Hal Rogers — (202) 225-4601(202) 225-4601Judiciary Chair Bob Goodlatte — (202) 225-5431(202) 225-5431*

*Last year, FBI Director James Comey told a Congressional panel that the United States can run background checks “until the cows come home”, but our government simply doesn’t have access to all the databases necessary to fully vet incoming refugees.

* Nearly 500,000 refugees have been resettled in the U.S. since 2009 — roughly 70 percent of all the refugees resettled by the United Nations each year. There has been little to assure us that these programs are capable of screening out present and future criminals and terrorists who often exploit the chaos of emergency migrations. And the programs show little regard for the multiple long-term fiscal costs imposed on the local receiving communities that already are suffering from the same depressed wages and low labor force participation rates as the rest of the United States.

* The United States should not be resettling what would be only a tiny fraction of the current flow of refugees and migrants from the other side of the world. Instead, we should join other nations in providing for the greatest comfort to the greatest number of people fleeing their destabilized countries. The Center for Immigration Studies has determined that we can help 12 refugees in safe zones in their home regions for every 1 refugee resettled in the United States.

More Leadership:

TALKING POINTS-See above

Homeland Security Chair Mike McCaul — (202) 225-2401(202) 225-2401

GOP Policy Chair Luke Messer — (202) 225-3021(202) 225-3021

Majority Whip Steve Scalise — (202) 225-0197(202) 225-0197

Speaker Paul Ryan — (202) 225-0600(202) 225-0600

Keep up the fight!

Donald Trump’s Child Care Tax Plan Empowers Parents

WASHINGTON, D.C. /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ — Family Research Council Action today announced its support for a plan proposed by GOP presidential nominee Donald Trump that would allow parents — whether in the workplace or at home — the ability to deduct the average cost of child care from their taxes.

Family Research Council Action President Tony Perkins made the following comments in support of the proposal:

I commend Donald Trump for offering a new proposal that give parents the additional flexibility to decide what’s best for their own family. Trump’s child care plan compliments the child tax credit that Family Research Council designed and helped enact in the 1990s, and increases the ability of moms and dads, whether they are working or at home parents, to deduct child care expenses from their taxes.

“The Obama economy and the Clinton agenda have made it very difficult for parents, both for their finances and their ability to start and raise a family. Trump’s plan recognizes the importance of the family in society and the importance of children to future economic growth. His plan encourages family formation which will, over time, help boost the economy.

“The data makes clear that strong families are the true engine of the economy, and allowing parents to keep more of what they earn to provide for their children’s well-being makes both immediate and long-term sense,” concluded Perkins.

frca-flash-logo426ABOUT FAMILY RESEARCH COUNCIL ACTION

RC Action, the non-profit and tax-exempt legislative affiliate of Family Research Council, was founded in 1992 to educate the general public and cultural leaders about traditional American values and to promote the philosophy of the Founding Fathers concerning the nature of ordered liberty.

FRC Action is a 501(c)(4), non-profit education and lobbying organization based in Washington, D.C. FRC Action is dedicated to preserving and advancing the interests of family, faith, and freedom in the political arena.

FRC Action seeks to fortify the traditional foundations of civil society through efforts to educate, inform and influence elected officials in support of the country’s historic ideals of equality under the law, and the unalienable rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness on which the nation was founded.

FRC Action Supports:

  1. Constitutional and legal protections for life in all stages from conception to natural death.
  2. Preference in public policies for heterosexual marriage and the traditional family.
  3. A strong national defense and foreign policy rooted in national interests and ideals.
  4. Tax and fiscal policies that strengthen rather than weaken America’s families.
  5. Restoration of the constitutional balance in relations between church and state.
  6. Judicial and Executive restraint that respects the original intent of the framers of the Constitution.

RELATED ARTICLE:  The Numbers That Show Planned Parenthood About Abortion, Not Women’s Health

Since 2009 U.S. Has Spent $73 Million to Register Immigrant Voters

Months after the Obama administration spent $19 million to register new immigrant voters that will likely support Democrats in November, it’s dedicating an additional $10 million in a final push as the presidential election approaches. The money is distributed by U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), the Homeland Security agency that oversees lawful immigration, to organizations that help enhance pathways to naturalization by offering immigrants free citizenship instruction, English, U.S. history and civics courses. Officially, they’re known as “citizenship integration grants.”

Since 2009 USCIS has doled out $63 million in these grants to prepare more than 156,000 resident immigrants in dozens of states for U.S. citizenship, according to the agency’s figures. Besides the free classes, Uncle Sam also offers immigrants free “naturalization legal services,” the latest USCIS grant announcement states. “Recipient organizations serve both traditional immigrant destinations and new immigrant getaway cities in 21 states,” the USCIS document reads. The latest $10 million investment will prepare approximately 25,000 residents from more than 50 countries, according to the agency. More than a dozen states—including California, New York, Florida, Washington and Ohio—with large resident immigrant populations are being targeted as well as cities with huge immigrant populations such as Miami, Los Angeles, Chicago, San Francisco and Washington D.C.

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has been aggressive in promoting its citizen integration grant program this year, offering large sums to recruit new groups that can offer immigrants the services they need to become citizens. Clearly, the ultimate goal is qualifying as many immigrants as possible to vote since they tend to cast ballots for Democrats. “We intend to award about $1 million to first-time recipients in the Citizenship and Integration Grant Program for fiscal year 2016,” the agency’s grant announcement states. “If you represent one of these organizations, or know of an interested organization, we strongly encourage that organization to consider applying. Additionally, another $9 million will fund programs that provide both citizenship instruction and instruction and naturalization application services.” Some might consider this a cash giveaway.

This is part of a broader, government-wide initiative launched by the president to “strengthen federal immigrant and refugee integration infrastructure.” The mission is to facilitate life in the U.S. for immigrants and refugees by enhancing pathways to naturalization, building welcoming communities and providing “mobile immigration services in underserved communities.” To carry out this important mission Obama created a special Task Force on New Americans chaired by his Domestic Policy Director, Cecilia Muñoz, the former vice president of the powerful open borders group National Council of La Raza (NCLR). Millions of taxpayer dollars have funded the task force’s various enterprises, including multilingual media campaigns promoting immigrant rights. The goal is to “strengthen civic, economic and linguistic integration and to build strong and welcoming communities,” according to a report issued by the task force. In the end communities will be strengthened by welcoming all residents, the administration assures.

Practically every federal agency is participating in the effort by contributing resources and creating programs to help immigrants. For example the Department of Labor (DOL) is implementing “new workforce programs” for the “new Americans” and the Department of Education is promoting “funding opportunities” to assure that the immigrants “are provided the tools they need to succeed.” The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) is collaborating with other agencies to release a career and credentialing toolkit on “immigrant-focused career-pathways programs.” The Department of Justice (DOJ) and USCIS are making sure the new Americans have worker rights and protections and the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) is launching a two-year pilot to assure that non English speakers have “meaningful access to housing programs” subsidized by American taxpayers.

RELATED ARTICLES:

“Segregation” Is Now Progressive? Cal State LA Offers Black-Only ‘Safe-Space’ Housing

Obama Nominates Muslim Lawyer to Federal Court

Trump’s 10 Point Immigration Policy: It is our right as a sovereign nation to choose

On Wednesday, August 31, 2016, Donald J. Trump  at a rally in Phoenix, Arizona just hours after meeting with President Enrique Peña Nieto of Mexico gave a major policy speech on immigration.

The Trump Ten Point immigration policy:

  • Number One: We will build a wall along the Southern Border.
  • Number Two: End Catch-And-Release
  • Number Three: Zero tolerance for criminal aliens.
  • Number Four: Block Funding For Sanctuary Cities
  • Number Five: Cancel Unconstitutional Executive Orders & Enforce All Immigration Laws
  • Number Six: We Are Going To Suspend The Issuance Of Visas To Any Place Where Adequate Screening Cannot Occur
  • Number Seven: We will ensure that other countries take their people back when we order them deported
  • Number Eight: We will finally complete the biometric entry-exit visa tracking system.
  • Number Nine: We will turn off the jobs and benefits magnet.
  • Number Ten: We will reform legal immigration to serve the best interests of America and its workers

Here is the full video of the event and his immigration policy speech:

RELATED ARTICLES:

Trump shuts down talk of softening on immigration

Trump Paints New Target on Legal Immigration

FULL TRANSCRIPT

Thank you, Phoenix. I am so glad to be back in Arizona, a state that has a very special place in my heart.

I love the people of Arizona and, together, we are going to win the White House in November.

Tonight is not going to be a normal rally speech.

Instead, I am going to deliver a detailed policy address on one of the greatest challenges facing our country today: immigration.

I have just landed having returned from a very important and special meeting with the President of Mexico – a man I like and respect very much, and a man who truly loves his country. Just like I am a man who loves the United States.

We agreed on the importance of ending the illegal flow of drugs, cash, guns and people across our border, and to put the cartels out of business.

We also discussed the great contributions of Mexican-American citizens to our two countries, my love for the people of Mexico, and the close friendship between our two nations.

It was a thoughtful and substantive conversation. This is the first of what I expect will be many conversations in a Trump Administration about creating a new relationship between our two countries.

But to fix our immigration system, we must change our leadership in Washington. There is no other way.

The truth is, our immigration system is worse than anyone realizes. But the facts aren’t known because the media won’t report on them, the politicians won’t talk about them, and the special interests spend a lot of money trying to cover them up.

Today you will get the truth.

The fundamental problem with the immigration system in our country is that it serves the needs of wealthy donors, political activists and powerful politicians. Let me tell you who it doesn’t serve: it doesn’t serve you, the American people.

When politicians talk about immigration reform, they usually mean the following: amnesty, open borders, and lower wages.

Immigration reform should mean something else entirely: it should mean improvements to our laws and policies to make life better for American citizens.

But if we are going to make our immigration system work, then we have to be prepared to talk honestly and without fear about these important and sensitive issues.

For instance, we have to listen to the concerns that working people have over the record pace of immigration and its impact on their jobs, wages, housing, schools, tax bills, and living conditions. These are valid concerns, expressed by decent and patriotic citizens from all backgrounds.

We also have to be honest about the fact that not everyone who seeks to join our country will be able to successfully assimilate. It is our right as a sovereign nation to choose immigrants that we think are the likeliest to thrive and flourish here.

Then there is the issue of security. Countless innocent American lives have been stolen because our politicians have failed in their duty to secure our borders and enforce our laws.

I have met with many of the parents who lost their children to Sanctuary Cities and open borders. They will be joining me on the stage later today.

Countless Americans who have died in recent years would be alive today if not for the open border policies of this Administration. This includes incredible Americans like 21-year-old Sarah Root. The man who killed her arrived at the border, entered federal custody, and then was released into a U.S. community under the policies of this White House. He was released again after the crime, and is now at large.

Sarah had graduated from college with a 4.0, top of her class, the day before.

Also among the victims of the Obama-Clinton open borders policies was Grant Ronnebeck, a 21 year-old convenience store clerk in Mesa, Arizona. He was murdered by an illegal immigrant gang member previously convicted of burglary who had also been released from Federal Custody.

Another victim is Kate Steinle, gunned down in the Sanctuary City of San Francisco by an illegal immigrant deported five previous times.

Then there is the case of 90 year-old Earl Olander, who was brutally beaten and left to bleed to death in his home. The perpetrators were illegal immigrants with criminal records who did not meet the Obama Administration’s priorities for removal.

In California, a 64 year-old Air Force Veteran, Marilyn Pharis, was sexually assaulted and beaten to death with a hammer. Her killer had been arrested on multiple occasions, but was never deported.

A 2011 report from the Government Accountability Office found that illegal immigrants and other non-citizens in our prisons and jails together had around 25,000 homicide arrests to their names.

On top of that, illegal immigration costs our country more than $113 billion dollars a year. For the money we are going to spend on illegal immigration over the next ten years, we could provide one million at-risk students with a school voucher.

While there are many illegal immigrants in our country who are good people, this doesn’t change the fact that most illegal immigrants are lower-skilled workers with less education who compete directly against vulnerable American workers, and that these illegal workers draw much more out from the system than they will ever pay in.

But these facts are never reported.

Instead, the media and my opponent discuss one thing, and only this one thing: the needs of people living here illegally.

The truth is, the central issue is not the needs of the 11 million illegal immigrants – or however many there may be.

That has never been the central issue. It will never be the central issue.

Anyone who tells you that the core issue is the needs of those living here illegally has simply spent too much time in Washington.

Only out of touch media elites think the biggest problem facing American society today is that there are 11 million illegal immigrants who don’t have legal status.

To all the politicians, donors and special interests, hear these words from me today: there is only one core issue in the immigration debate and it is this: the well-being of the American people. Nothing even comes a close second.

Hillary Clinton, for instance, talks constantly about her fears that families will be separated. But she’s not talking about the American families who have been permanently separated from their loved ones because of a preventable death. No, she’s only talking about families who came here in violation of the law.

We will treat everyone living or residing in our country with dignity. We will be fair, just and compassionate to all. But our greatest compassion must be for American citizens.

President Obama and Hillary Clinton have engaged in gross dereliction of duty by surrendering the safety of the American people to open borders. President Obama and Hillary Clinton support Sanctuary Cities, they support catch-and-release on the border, they support visa overstays, they support the release of dangerous criminals from detention – and they support unconstitutional executive amnesty.

Hillary Clinton has pledged amnesty in her first 100 days, and her plan will provide Obamacare, Social Security and Medicare for illegal immigrants – breaking the federal budget. On top of that, she promises uncontrolled low-skilled immigration that continues to reduce jobs and wages for American workers, especially African-American and Hispanic workers. This includes her plan to bring in 620,000 new refugees in a four-year term.

Now that you’ve heard about Hillary Clinton’s plan – about which she has not answered a single substantive question – let me tell you about my plan.

While Hillary Clinton meets only with donors and lobbyists, my plan was crafted with the input from federal immigration officers, along with top immigration experts who represent workers, not corporations. I also worked with lawmakers who’ve led on this issue on behalf of American citizens for many years, and most importantly, I’ve met with the people directly impacted by these policies.

Number One: We will build a wall along the Southern Border.

On day one, we will begin working on an impenetrable physical wall on the southern border. We will use the best technology, including above-and below-ground sensors, towers, aerial surveillance and manpower to supplement the wall, find and dislocate tunnels, and keep out the criminal cartels, and Mexico will pay for the wall.

Number Two: End Catch-And-Release

Under my Administration, anyone who illegally crosses the border will be detained until they are removed out of our country.

Number Three: Zero tolerance for criminal aliens.

According to federal data, there are at least 2 million criminal aliens now inside the country. We will begin moving them out day one, in joint operations with local, state and federal law enforcement.

Beyond the 2 million, there are a vast number of additional criminal illegal immigrants who have fled or evaded justice. But their days on the run will soon be over. They go out, and they go out fast.

Moving forward, we will issue detainers for all illegal immigrants who are arrested for any crime whatsoever, and they will be placed into immediate removal proceedings. We will terminate the Obama Administration’s deadly non-enforcement policies that allow thousands of criminal aliens to freely roam our streets.

Since 2013 alone, the Obama Administration has allowed 300,000 criminal aliens to return back into U.S. communities – these are individuals encountered or identified by ICE but who not detained or processed for deportation.

My plan also includes cooperating closely with local jurisdictions to remove criminal aliens.

We will restore the highly successful Secure Communities program. We will expand and revitalize the popular 287(g) partnerships, which will help to identify hundreds of thousands of deportable aliens in local jails. Both of these programs have been recklessly gutted by this Administration. This is yet one more area where we are headed in a totally opposite direction.

On my first day in office, I am also going to ask Congress to pass “Kate’s Law” – named for Kate Steinle – to ensure that criminal aliens convicted of illegal reentry face receive strong mandatory minimum sentences.

Another reform I am proposing is the passage of legislation named for Detective Michael Davis and Deputy Sheriff Danny Oliver, two law enforcement officers recently killed by a previously-deported illegal immigrant. The Davis-Oliver bill will enhance cooperation with state and local authorities to ensure that criminal immigrants and terrorists are swiftly identified and removed.

We are going to triple the number of ICE deportation officers. Within ICE, I am going to create a new special Deportation Task Force, focused on identifying and removing quickly the most dangerous criminal illegal immigrants in America who have evaded justice.

The local police know who every one of these criminals are. There’s no great mystery to it, they’ve put up with it for years. And now, finally, we will turn the tables and law enforcement will be allowed to clear up this dangerous and threatening mess.

We’re also going to hire 5,000 more Border Patrol agents, and put more of them on the border, instead of behind desks. We will expand the number of Border Patrol Stations.

I’ve had a chance to spend time with these incredible law enforcement officers, and I want to take a moment to thank them. The endorsement I’ve received from the Border Patrol officers means more to me than I can say.

Number Four: Block Funding For Sanctuary Cities

We will end the Sanctuary Cities that have resulted in so many needless deaths. Cities that refuse to cooperate with federal authorities will not receive taxpayer dollars, and we will work with Congress to pass legislation to protect those jurisdictions that do assist federal authorities.

Number Five: Cancel Unconstitutional Executive Orders & Enforce All Immigration Laws

We will immediately terminate President Obama’s two illegal executive amnesties, in which he defied federal law and the constitution to give amnesty to approximately 5 million illegal immigrants.

Hillary Clinton has pledged to keep both of these illegal amnesty programs – including the 2014 amnesty which has been blocked by the Supreme Court. Clinton has also pledged to add a third executive amnesty.

Clinton’s plan would trigger a Constitutional Crisis unlike almost anything we have ever seen before. In effect, she would be abolishing the lawmaking powers of Congress in order to write her own laws from the Oval Office.

In a Trump Administration, all immigration laws will be enforced. As with any law enforcement activity, we will set priorities. But, unlike this Administration, no one will be immune or exempt from enforcement – and ICE and Border Patrol officers will be allowed to do their jobs. Anyone who has entered the United States illegally is subject to deportation – that is what it means to have laws and to have a country.

Our enforcement priorities will include removing criminals, gang members, security threats, visa overstays, public charges – that is, those relying on public welfare or straining the safety net, along with millions of recent illegal arrivals and overstays who’ve come here under the current Administration.

Number Six: We Are Going To Suspend The Issuance Of Visas To Any Place Where Adequate Screening Cannot Occur

According to data provided to the Senate Subcommittee on Immigration and the National Interest, between 9/11 and the end of 2014, at least 380 foreign-born individuals were convicted in terror cases inside the United States. The number is likely higher, but the Administration refuses to provide this information to Congress.

As soon as I enter office, I am going to ask the Department of State, Homeland Security and the Department of Justice to begin a comprehensive review of these cases in order to develop a list of regions and countries from which immigration must be suspended until proven and effective vetting mechanisms can be put into place.

Countries from which immigration will be suspended would include places like Syria and Libya.

For the price of resettling 1 refugee in the United States, 12 could be resettled in a safe zone in their home region.

Another reform involves new screening tests for all applicants that include an ideological certification to make sure that those we are admitting to our country share our values and love our people.

For instance, in the last five years, we’ve admitted nearly 100,000 immigrants from Iraq and Afghanistan – in these two countries, according to Pew research, a majority of residents say that the barbaric practice of honor killings against women are often or sometimes justified.

Applicants will be asked for their views about honor killings, about respect for women and gays and minorities, attitudes on Radical Islam, and many other topics as part of the vetting procedure.

Number Seven: We will ensure that other countries take their people back when we order them deported

There are at least 23 countries that refuse to take their people back after they have been ordered to leave the United States, including large numbers of violent criminals. Due to a Supreme Court decision, if these violent offenders cannot be sent home, our law enforcement officers have to release them into U.S. communities. There are often terrible consequences, such as Casey Chadwick’s tragic death in Connecticut just last year. Yet, despite the existence of a law that commands the Secretary of State to stop issuing visas to these countries, Secretary Hillary Clinton ignored this law and refused to use this powerful tool to bring nations into compliance.

The result of her misconduct was the release of thousands of dangerous criminal aliens who should have been sent home.

According to a report from the Boston Globe, from the year 2008 through 2014, nearly 13,000 criminal aliens were released back into U.S. communities because their home countries would not take them back. Many of these 13,000 releases occurred on Hillary Clinton’s watch – she had the power and the duty to stop it cold and she didn’t do it.

Those released include individuals convicted of killings, sexual assault and some of the most heinous crimes imaginable, who went on to reoffend at a very high rate.

Number Eight: We will finally complete the biometric entry-exit visa tracking system.

For years, Congress has required a biometric entry-exit visa tracking system, but it has never been completed.

In my Administration, we will ensure that this system is in place at all land, air, and sea ports. Approximately half of new illegal immigrants came on temporary visas and then never left. Beyond violating our laws, visa overstays pose a substantial threat to national security. The 9/11 Commission said that this tracking system should be a high priority and “would have assisted law enforcement and intelligence officials in August and September 2001 in conducting a search for two of the 9/11 hijackers that were in the U.S. on expired visas.”

Last year alone, nearly a half a million individuals overstayed their temporary visas. Removing visa overstays will be a top priority of my Administration. If people around the world believe they can just come on a temporary visa and never leave – the Obama-Clinton policy – then we have a completely open border. We must send the message that visa expiration dates will be strongly enforced.

Number Nine: We will turn off the jobs and benefits magnet.

We will ensure that E-Verify is used to the fullest extent possible under existing law, and will work with Congress to strengthen and expand its use across the country.

Immigration law doesn’t exist just for the purpose of keeping out criminals. It exists to protect all aspects of American life – the worksite, the welfare office, the education system and much else. That is why immigration limits are established in the first place. If we only enforce the laws against crime, then we have an open border to the entire world.

I will enforce all of our immigration laws.

The same goes for government benefits. The Center for Immigration Studies estimates that 62 percent of households headed by illegal immigrants used some form of cash or non-cash welfare programs, like food stamps or housing assistance. This directly violates the federal public charge law designed to protect the U.S. treasury.

Those who abuse our welfare system will be priorities for removal.

Number 10: We will reform legal immigration to serve the best interests of America and its workers

We’ve admitted 59 million immigrants to the United States between 1965 and 2015.

Many of these arrivals have greatly enriched our country. But we now have an obligation to them, and to their children, to control future immigration – as we have following previous immigration waves – to ensure assimilation, integration and upward mobility.

Within just a few years immigration as a share of national population is set to break all historical records.

The time has come for a new immigration commission to develop a new set of reforms to our legal immigration system in order to achieve the following goals:

To keep immigration levels, measured by population share, within historical norms

To select immigrants based on their likelihood of success in U.S. society, and their ability to be financially self-sufficient. We need a system that serves our needs – remember, it’s America First.

To choose immigrants based on merit, skill and proficiency

And to establish new immigration controls to boost wages and to ensure that open jobs are offered to American workers first.

We want people to come into our country, but they have to come in legally and properly-vetted, and in a manner that serves the national interest.

We’ve been living under outdated immigration rules from decades ago. To avoid this happening in the future, I believe we should sunset our visa laws so that Congress is forced to periodically revise and revisit them. We wouldn’t put our entire federal budget on autopilot for decades, so why should we do the same for immigration?

Let’s talk about the big picture

These ten steps, if rigorously followed and enforced, will accomplish more in a matter of months than our politicians have accomplished on this issue in the last fifty years.

Because I am not a politician, because I am not beholden to any special interest, I will get this done for you and your family.

We will accomplish all of the steps outlined above, and when we do, peace and law and justice and prosperity will prevail. Crime will go down, border crossings will plummet, gangs will disappear, and welfare use will decrease. We will have a peace dividend to spend on rebuilding America, beginning with our inner cities.

For those here today illegally who are seeking legal status, they will have one route and only one route: to return home and apply for re-entry under the rules of the new legal immigration system that I have outlined above. Those who have left to seek entry under this new system will not be awarded surplus visas, but will have to enter under the immigration caps or limits that will be established.

We will break the cycle of amnesty and illegal immigration. There will be no amnesty.

Our message to the world will be this: you cannot obtain legal status, or become a citizen of the United States, by illegally entering our country.

This declaration alone will help stop the crisis of illegal crossings and illegal overstays.

People will know that you can’t just smuggle in, hunker down, and wait to be legalized. Those days are over.

In several years, when we have accomplished all of our enforcement goals – and truly ended illegal immigration for good, including the construction of a great wall, and the establishment of our new lawful immigration system – then and only then will we be in a position to consider the appropriate disposition of those who remain. That discussion can only take place in an atmosphere in which illegal immigration is a memory of the past, allowing us to weigh the different options available based on the new circumstances at the time.

Right now, however, we are in the middle of a jobs crisis, a border crisis, and a terrorism crisis. All energies of the federal government and the legislative process must now be focused on immigration security. That is the only conversation we should be having at this time.

Whether it’s dangerous materials being smuggled across the border, terrorists entering on visas, or Americans losing their jobs to foreign workers, these are the problems we must now focus on fixing – and the media needs to begin demanding to hear Hillary Clinton’s answer on how her policies will affect Americans and their security.

These are matters of life-and-death for our country and its people, and we deserve answers from Hillary Clinton.

What we do know, despite the total lack of media curiosity, is that Hillary Clinton promises a radical amnesty combined with a radical reduction in immigration enforcement. The result will be millions more illegal immigrants, thousands more violent crimes, and total chaos and lawlessness.

This election is our last chance to secure the border, stop illegal immigration, and reform our laws to make your life better.

This is it. We won’t get another opportunity – it will be too late.

So I want to remind everyone what we are fighting for – and who we are fighting for.

So I am going to ask all the Angel Moms to come join me on the stage right now.

[[PAUSE FOR ANGEL MOMS – EACH SAYS THE NAME OF THEIR CHILD INTO THE MICROPHONE]]

Now is the time for these voices to be heard.

Now is the time for the media to begin asking questions on their behalf.

Now is the time for all of us, as one country, Democrat and Republican, liberal and conservative, to band together to deliver justice and safety and security for all Americans.

Let’s fix this problem.

Let’s secure our border.

Let’s stop the drugs and the crime.

Let’s protect our Social Security and Medicare.

And let’s get unemployed Americans off of welfare and back to work in their own country.

Together, we can save American lives, American jobs, and American futures.

Together, we can save America itself.

Join me in this mission to Make America Great Again.

Thank you, and God Bless you all!

A review of Florida Constitutional Amendment 4 — Solar Devices by James Lampe

As you consider your vote remember this is a Constitutional Amendment, and once passed the chances of changing it are slim and none.  Before we change the Constitution, shouldn’t the Amendment be clearly beneficial to most Floridians?  Unfortunately, the vast majority of Floridians will be hurt if Amendment 4 is passed.  The Amendment will raise electric rates and ad valorem taxes.  Vote NO on this Amendment.

amendment 4 ballot language

Summary:  This Amendment will exempt solar devices installed on homes or businesses from ad valorem taxes, until 12-31-2037.

First of all, homeowners who install Solar-Electric systems already get a 30% federal tax break!

This financial assistance from the federal government, has been around for years.  Secondly, Florida state government has helped by exempting “solar energy systems or any component thereof” from sales tax.  And now we have this amendment, a third gilded gift to prop-up the failing solar industry.

Nonetheless, let’s see how many people this Amendment will help.  A review of the US Census Fact Finder data on the table below, shows that 30% (2,166,215) of all Floridians live in “Rental Occupied” units, and therefore, no-one in that group would invest in solar-electric systems.  As shown in the “Owner-occupied” category, that leaves 4,986,629 potential customers.

amendment 4 survey

In addition, even if you own a house you may not be able to afford to invest in a solar-electric system.  People who own lower valued housing units valued at $50,000-$150,000, are not likely to invest $30,000 (cost estimate to buy, install, and connect a solar-electric system to the electric grid) for solar system.  So of the 4,986,629 total housing units, we can subtract 1,593,957 for the lower valued houses.  That gives 3,392,697 as the remaining moderate to higher priced housing units that would be the target market for solar-electric systems.

However, there are about 1,000,000 condominiums in Florida, whose owners would also be prevented/impeded from modifying or otherwise changing their common roofs, so the total possible number of housing units for solar falls to 2,392,697, or ~34% of all housing units.

With only ~34% of housing units available for solar-electric systems, how can this Amendment be considered fair?  Worse yet, many snow-birds and residents have mobile homes that are included the housing units, but there is no itemized number for them.  So the 34%, would be even lower if mobile home units were subtracted from the total number of units.

florida solar amendment

In 2015, the Nevada PUC changed the rules for “net metering,” which allows homeowners to sell their excess solar generated electricity to their utility at retail rather than wholesale rates.  But because that arrangement was too costly, the PUC changed the rule.

The Nevada scenario seems like a no brainer, but apparently there was enough grant money to make up for the losses, until one day when the math didn’t work, and the people in Nevada realized that the more electric generated by solar, the less profits the utilities collect.  The utilities need profit to pay staff to restore power after storms, sustain street lighting, and maintain the electric grid, etc.  In addition, utilities work on economies of scale, and their efficiency is reduced when customers convert to solar, because it costs more to generate a KW of electricity.

This Amendment is an obvious attempt by state bureaucrats to boost the heavily subsidized, yet nearly bankrupt solar industry.  It’s not fair or prudent, to let the state pick winners and losers in a free market economy, and we should not let this cronyism go unnoticed.

Vote NO on Amendment 4.

Sunday Rally in D.C.: Goal is to increase Muslim refugee numbers for FY 2017

And, here Mark Krikorian of the Center for Immigration Studies reminds us of the huge cost of resettling each refugee to your town or city.  It is far less expensive to find safe places in the Middle East for the Syrians, says Krikorian.

Safe zones!

In fact, Donald  Trump has remarked in the past that he would like to see “safe zones” established where refugees could be protected until the conflict is over in Syria.  I’m thinking one such safe zone could be in Saudi Arabia!

Maybe Trump could make a deal with the Saudis who at present do not take care of their fellow Muslim refugees (a fact that we have chronicled over the years) to establish a safe zone in the kingdom.

From the Daily Signal about Sunday’s Rally 4 Refugees (see our earlier post here).  Emphasis below is mine:

Mark-Krikorian

Krikorian points out that there are much more fiscally responsible ways to care for Syrian refugees than to scatter them through hundreds of American towns.

Are you concerned about the plight of international refugees? Would you like to see the U.S. government take decisive, constructive action on behalf of displaced persons across the globe who have been forced to flee their homes?

If so, you’re invited to “stand up against the voices of intolerance” this Sunday in Washington, D.C., where you can join forces with other concerned Americans.  [If you are concerned about the costs and social upheaval for both refugees and for Americans when refugees are secretly placed in your towns, you are intolerant! Get used to it!—ed]

But if you do participate, policy analysts who have examined the refugee crisis want you to know they have good reason to believe the rally is a highly politicized event organized for the purpose of lobbying the Obama administration and Congress to allow more refugees into the U.S.—including those from war-torn Syria and Iraq who may have ties to terrorism.

A major contributor to causes on the left, the Tides Foundation, is collecting contributions for the rally.

[….]

High Costs of Resettling Refugees

A report by the Washington-based Center for Immigration Studies found that it costs 12 times as much to resettle a refugee in America than it does to provide for services and relief to the same refugee in the Middle East.

The nonprofit, nonpartisan research outfit included State Department expenditures, welfare use rates, and other figures and benefits from the departments of Health and Human Services, Housing and Urban Development, and other U.S. agencies. Its report says:

Based on that information, this analysis finds that the costs of resettling refugees in the United States are quite high, even without considering all of the costs refugees create. We conservatively estimate that the costs total $64,370 in the first five years for each Middle Eastern refugee. This is 61 times what it costs to care for one Syrian refugee in a neighboring country for a single year or about 12 times the cost of providing for a refugee for five years.

“The organizers, funders, and the supporting groups are putting this rally together to exert pressure to ensure that the Obama administration increases the admission of Syrians into the U.S.,” Mark Krikorian, executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies, told The Daily Signal.

[….]

Krikorian, of the Center for Immigration Studies, said he sees more than mere happenstance at work in the timing of the rally: Obama is set to play host to a refugee summit at the U.N. on Sept. 20. The president also is expected to release his fiscal year 2017 plan for refugees by the end of September.

The rally is not only “to exert pressure to ensure that the Obama administration increases the admission of Syrians,” Krikorian said, but “timed to influence the number of refugees the State Department is trying to settle.”

And, it is my view that it is also to exert pressure on Congress to loosen the purse strings on funding for the program as Congress addresses the budget this fall. The nine federal contractors*** who resettle refugees in your towns and cities want to expand their operations to even more towns and they need your money to do that!

We have talked about this before, but I’m going to be a broken record on it!  Your focus for the next couple of months should be on pressuring your Member of Congress to grow a spine and oppose the expenditure of your money on resettling ever larger numbers of refugees.

Don’t focus your anger at Obama and the Progressives, they are doing what they always do—focus on someone you can change—your member of Congress and U.S. Senators up for re-election in a little over two months.

***The nine federal resettlement contractors (participating in the rally Sunday) which are almost completely funded with your tax dollars:

RELATED ARTICLES:

The Man Who is Destroying America, Europe and Israel

Refugees boosting the TB rate in Nebraska

Syrian refugee numbers expanding, but hard to pin down why

Georgia mosque plan: Commissioner asks will it bring refugees here?

NC Rep confirms it: The buck stops with him and others in Congress

Trending? Connecticut resettlement contractor farming out refugee families

Concord Coalition: It’s the Federal Budget, Stupid!

WASHINGTON, D.C. /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ — Projections released today by the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) provide further evidence that candidates for federal office should address the nation’s worsening budget problems, according to The Concord Coalition.

“Voters are hearing a lot of expensive new proposals from candidates but not so much about how to keep the nation’s debt from growing on an unsustainable path,” said Robert L. Bixby, Concord’s executive director. “Today’s CBO report, which projects a rising debt burden over the next 10 years and beyond, shows why voters should expect candidates to offer credible policies to put us on a better course.”

The new report updates the budget and economic projections that CBO made earlier this year for the coming decade. Its baseline budget projections are based on current law and do not take into account deficit-increasing policies that tend to get passed on a yearly basis, such as the extension of various tax breaks.

CBO projects that Fiscal Year 2016 will close in September with the first increase in the deficit as a share of the economy since 2009, when the country was struggling with the fiscal consequences of the Great Recession. At$590 billion, the annual deficit will be $152 billion larger than in 2015 and $56 billion higher than the agency estimated in March. However, the 10-year cumulative deficit estimate of $8.6 trillion is $700 billion lower than the March projection — primarily due to lower projections of interest rates.

The report shows growing pressure on the federal budget as the result of an aging population and rising health care costs. These factors increase the costs of Social Security and Medicare — just to provide the same services to more recipients.

“As in the past,” Bixby says, “CBO is pointing toward a structural mismatch between the federal government’s spending and tax policies. With a strengthening economy, elected officials should address this mismatch as soon as possible to put the budget on a more responsible course and avoid saddling future generations with massive government debt.”

Two reports earlier this summer also underscored the nation’s fiscal challenges. The CBO’s Long-Term Budget Outlook, released last month, makes clear that unless fundamental changes are made, federal finances will deteriorate even further after 2026. In June the Medicare and Social Security trustees issued their annual reports, calling for prompt reforms to put those critical programs on more sustainable paths.

concord_logo (1)ABOUT THE CONCORD COALITION

The Concord Coalition is a nonpartisan, grassroots organization dedicated to fiscal responsibility.

Since 1992, Concord has worked to educate the public about the causes and consequences of the federal deficit and debt, and to develop realistic solutions for sustainable budgets. For more fiscal news and analysis, visit ConcordCoalition.org and follow us on Twitter: @ConcordC

RELATED ARTICLE:  CBO Projects Return of Massive Federal Deficits

Why Luxury TVs Are Affordable when Health Care Is Not by Richard N. Lorenc

Imagine this. You are feeling under the weather. You pull out your smartphone and click the Rx app. A nurse arrives in 20 minutes at your home. He gives you a blood test and recommends to the doctor that she prescribe a treatment. It is sent to the CVS down the street, which delivers it to your door in 20 minutes. The entire event costs $20.

Sounds nuts? Not so much. Not if health care were a competitive industry. As it is, medical care prices are up 105% in the last 20 years. This contrasts with the television industry, which is selling products that have fallen 96% in the same period.

Take a look at this chart assembled by AEI. It reveals two important points. First, there is no such thing as an aggregate price level, or, rather what we call the price level is a statistical fiction. Second, it shows that competitive industries offer goods and services that are falling in price due to market pressure. In contrast monopolized industries can extract ever higher rents from people based on restriction.

Consider each product or service shown. College is heavily subsidized, regulated, and exclusionary, and the costs are soaring. The textbook industry is hobbled by extreme copyright regulation, and can depend on captive buyers. Childcare is one of the most regulated industries in the country. Not just anyone can enter. Every aspect of childcare provision is controlled by the state.

On the other hand, software, wireless service, toys and and TVs (see: free trade) exist in relatively freer market settings. The price pressure is down.

It’s not that complicated, folks. If you want good services, good products, innovative ideas, and low prices, you need competitive markets. The more you control, the higher the prices and the worse the results.

Richard N. Lorenc

Richard N. Lorenc

Richard N. Lorenc is the Chief Operating Officer of FEE and Publisher of the Freeman.

Iran takes Obama’s ransom and then takes more hostages

Surrounded by his yes-men at the Pentagon on August 4, President Obama, with trademark smugness, hammered the media and his political opponents for claiming that his $400 million cash payment to Iran in January was tied to the simultaneous release of four American hostages.

“We do not pay ransom for hostages,” the President declaimed.

Just two weeks later, State Department spokesman John Kirby acknowledged in response to a reporter’s question that Iran’s release of the hostages was “contingent” upon the $400 million cash payment.

Much of the elite media continues to see Emperor Obama clothed in all his finery. But increasingly, the American people now see him for what he is: a bald-face liar.

This president is a master at projecting his own failings on his opponents. Dripping with contempt, he accurately explained why ransom payments were bad, and why his administration — and no administration past or future — would engage in such behavior. Except that he did.

The problem, of course, is that paying ransom to hostage-takers only encourages them to take more hostages. It was true when Jimmy Carter released billions of dollars of Iranian assets as he was heading out the door of the White House in January 1981, and it is true today.

The money-for-exchange in January wasn’t the first time that President Obama has caved in to the demands of terrorists. One week before the ransom payment, Iran captured a U.S. naval patrol boat and 10 American sailors, claiming they had strayed into Iran’s territorial waters, and brazenly paraded them blindfolded on Iranian TV — just as Khomeini’s “students” did with U.S. diplomats in 1979.

By design or good fortune, the incident occurred early in the morning of Obama’s last State of the Union speech. Obama pretended it hadn’t happened and dispatched Secretary of State John Kerry to apologize to the Iranians.

The message sent to Iran’s Islamic thugs was simple: you hit us and the United States will reward you, not punish you.

Iran is responding predictably — by taking more hostages.

Gholamreza “Robin” Shahini, 46, traveled to Iran this May to visit his family in the northern city of Gorgan just days after graduating from San Diego State University.

He had come to the United States 16 years earlier, became an American citizen, and worked his way up. He eventually bought a pizza shop that he sold to go back to school.

In mid-July, goons from the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps burst into his mother’s home, presented a search warrant, and took him into custody. He was only allowed to meet with a lawyer when he had a medical emergency last week.

On Monday, he was brought into court and charged with “acting against national security,” “participating in seditionist protests in 2009” and “collaborating with the Voice of America,” family members tell me. A hard-line publication called him an American spy and absurdly claimed he had been sent to Iran “on a mission from the U.S. government … to create chaos in the country.”

Those are serious charges that could lead to a lengthy jail sentence, and perhaps – given the Islamic regime’s current execution rampage — much worse.

In his August 4 comments, President Obama claimed that his administration “stood up an entire section of interagency experts who devote all of their time to working with these families to get these Americans out, but those families know that we have a policy that we don’t pay ransom.”

Another lie.

No one from the administration has met or even spoken with any member of Robin Shahini’s family. Worse, State Department spokesman John Kirby and Secretary of State John Kerry have refused to answer questions from reporters about the case.

I attempted to reach various offices at the State Department last week when I initially wrote about Shahini’s plight but received no reply. Today, after contacting Kirby, an official said that the State Department has “seen reports of the detention in Iran of a person reported to be a U.S. Citizen,” and was “looking into it.”

One additional lie that has gotten little attention: Kirby today repeated Obama’s claim that the $400 million “was Iran’s money,” and was the resolution of a dispute over Iranian payments to the United States for military equipment before the 1979 Revolution.

The problem is, the $400 million in the Iran’s frozen Foreign Military Sales account at the Pentagon was paid out to victims of Iranian state terrorism in December 2000 by then President Bill Clinton. At least, that’s what the Clinton administration told the families.

“We all believed that Iran would pay our damages, not U.S. taxpayers,” said Stephen Flatow, a New Jersey real estate lawyer whose 19-year-old daughter was murdered by Iranian-backed terrorists in a 1995 bus bombing. “And now, 15 years later, we find out that they never deducted the money from the account. It makes me nauseous. The Iranians aren’t paying a cent.”

This obscene $400 million cash payoff to Iran’s Revolutionary Guards Corps has provided much-needed cash for Iran’s terrorist operations overseas and is an insult to the American victims of Iranian state terrorism and their families.

Worse: it has put a price tag on any American citizen who travels to Iran, starting with the roughly 30,000 Iranian-Americans who visit family in Iran every year.

Once you start rewarding terrorists, their demands just never seem to end.

Kenneth Timmerman is author of Deception: The Making of the YouTube Video Hillary and Obama Blamed for Benghazi, and was nominated for the Nobel Peace prize in 2006. He is a Donald Trump supporter.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Obama’s Cash Deal Encourages Iran to Take More Hostages

Tim Kaine Boycotted Netanyahu Speech, Backed Iran Deal

Clinton’s VP pick Kaine: Promoting jihadis in America in exchange for cash

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared in The Hill.

Muslim Migrant who died fighting for the Islamic State got Federal Welfare and Food Stamps

That is the headline, but what has the Leftwing media done in Maine?  They are attacking the governor because he released the information thus not respecting the Islamic terrorist’s privacy in death!  Ahhhh!

Robyn Merrill

Robyn Merrill (left) speaking at the State House in support of continued state welfare for the many refugees and asylum seekers arriving in Maine.

By the way Governor LePage is one of only a few governors who have had the guts to criticize the UN/US State Department Refugee Admissions Program over the years.

Here is the news at Maine Public Radio:

Gov. Paul LePage has pounced on the recent unsealing of court documents showing an Iranian refugee who resettled in Maine and later joined the terror group ISIS.

But the governor’s eagerness to use Adnan Fazeli’s radicalization here to rail against welfare benefits for refugees may have led him to run afoul of a federal law designed to protect the identities of welfare recipients and their families.

State officials have not confirmed that Fazeli, or his family, received welfare benefits when he lived in Maine between 2009 and 2013. According to federal laws governing food stamps and cash assistance, they’re not supposed to.

“It’s concerning if that was indeed reported by Maine officials because federal law is clear that people’s confidentiality should be protected,” says Robyn Merrill, director for Maine Equal Justice Partners, an advocacy group for the poor.

Merrill’s concerns were raised by a report in the Boston Herald in which Maine state officials are quoted as saying that Fazeli, and his family, received cash and food stamp benefits. [Here is one of several stories about the terrorist on welfare in Maine—ed]

Those benefits, known also as SNAP and TANF, are federal programs, funded mostly with federal tax dollars.

According to federal rules, the identities of benefit recipients are confidential — only law enforcement, immigration officials and state administrators are allowed to know who receives the benefits.***

Those same officials, according to the law, “must adequately protect the information against unauthorized disclosure.”

The Herald story also contained an interview with LePage, who told the newspaper that the Fazeli case prompted him to order a review of all benefit programs for refugees.

More here.

***Now how does the claim by Maine Equal Justice Partners square with a law we told you about in the previous postwhere the federal ‘Work Opportunity Tax Credit’ is available to businesses that hire people (refugees!) who are on welfare, including food stamps.  If there is supposed to be secrecy surrounding one’s status as a welfare recipient, how is a company which wants to take advantage of the Work Opportunity Tax Credit know which welfare programs the refugee (the prospective employee) is receiving?
It seems everyone is allowed to know who is on welfare, but you! the taxpayer paying for it all!

For new readers, our Maine archive is here.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Iranian refugee who lived in Freeport fought, died for ISIS

Report: Illegal Migrants From Terror-Linked Countries Surging at Southern Border

“Anti-refugee rhetoric” fueling controversy in southern elections

German asylum seekers refuse to work: ‘We are Merkel’s guests’

Decisions on Muslim migration made by leftist politicians have become a scourge on the German people and other European citizens, who have witnessed the slow metamorphosis of their peaceful communities while they pay with their tax dollars for the recklessness of their leaders such as Angela Merkel. Tens of thousands of crimes and assaults have been committed by Muslim migrants in Germany, but these are less of a concern to the politicians who walk with their security detail and their bank accounts intact.

Even in the midst of the Muslim migrant crisis in Germany, Mayor Bernd Pohlers of the eastern town of Saxony Waldenburg, where the asylum seekers refused to accept work, stated his concern about this latest piece of news playing “into the hands of those opposing the mass migration,” evincing yet again the all too familiar stench of political posturing and a cruel disregard for those who cast their votes in trust.

“German asylum seekers refuse to work insisting ‘We are Merkel’s GUESTS’”, by Siobhan McFadyen and Monika Pallenberg, UK Express, August 18, 2016:

ASYLUM seekers in Germany are refusing to undertake work to counteract boredom – using Chancellor Angela Merkel’s generous hospitality as an excuse.

According to mayor Bernd Pohlers of the eastern town of Saxony Waldenburg, the asylum seekers refused to accept the work that was offered to them after they arrived in the country.

The local council spent £600 arranging for the men to have uniforms but were stunned when they were told they would not complete it because they were “guests of Angela Merkel”.

While asylum seekers are not allowed to work under immigration rules within the EU, they are allowed to do voluntary work.

However officials in the district of Zwickau came up with a plan to help encourage those without employment to get back to work and to help them become more accepted within the local community.

In order to do this they created voluntary jobs which included a nominal payment of £18 for 20 hours work.

But all of the male residents of the local refugee accommodation who initially agreed to get involved in the charitable activities quit after discovering there was a minimum wage £7.30 (€8.50) in Germany.

The men had been picked up and offered transportation from their paid-for housing where they are also given food and then dropped home.

Mayor Pohlers said: “It was subsequently argued by these people that they are guests of Mrs. Merkel and guests do not have to work.

“Furthermore, they were of the opinion that there is a minimum wage (€8.50) in Germany, and that this had to be paid by the City Waldenburg.”

Despite attempts at mediation the asylum seekers refused to return to work.

Mayor Pohlers added: “In a specially convened meeting with an interpreter the authorities explained the rules again.

“Unfortunately, no agreement could be reached on the continuation of the measure.”

Now all seven of the jobs have been scrapped.

The mayor spoke out in a bid to highlight the issue of the asylum crisis in Germany.

He said he is aware his statements could play into the hands of those opposing the mass migration.

However after having raised money from the local community to help aid the asylum seeker’s transition into the community, he felt compelled to speak out…..

RELATED ARTICLE: Italians reject plans for mosque next to the Leaning Tower of Pisa

Obama looking to ‘welcome’ 213,000 humanitarian arrivals in FY17 with $2.2 billion budget

…..and that $2.2  billion is only for the Office of Refugee Resettlement (HHS) portion of the costs!  It does not include the US State Department funding or the cost of security screening. Nor does it cover the cost of most welfare, subsidized housing, medical care and most of the cost of educating the children.  They aren’t saying yet how many Syrians Obama will be requesting.

While I was on my 30 day ‘listening tour’ that took me to 13 mid-western and western states, the Obama Administration held a press conference call about the stepped-up Syrian Muslim refugee flow in to the US.  Thanks to Christine for sending the transcript which I decided to post below in full.

Just so you know, all of the officials on the call are Obama appointees.  Remember them! These are the people who are changing the demographics and the character of your home towns.

Anne Richard and Robert Carey both revolved in to their government perches from a refugee resettlement contracting agency (the International Rescue Committee). Shin Inouye is a former Washington, D.C. spokesman for the ACLU.  And, for my friends in Montgomery County, MD, León Rodríguez was once your county attorney.

These Obama appointees are all hard core open (NO!) borders advocates, and if Hillary is elected they will likely be able to stay on and continue their work of changing America by changing the people!

And, if you are wondering, Obama has one more shot in September to make a determination about how many refugees will be admitted to the US in the next fiscal year.

We know what Obama is going to do, but what will Paul Ryan do?

It will be up to Speaker Paul Ryan and the REPUBLICANS to decide if the numbers Obama is requesting will be acceptable because it is Congress that will fund (or not fund!) the President’s final request!

This (below) is from a press conference call on August 5th. Those of you doing research around the country on what is happening where you live will find this useful.

BTW, I am struck by how little the reporters know about the program and so they largely wasted their questions.

See phone numbers at the end for the public affairs office of each government agency responsible for the refugee program.  If you are reporting via alternative media about what is happening where you live, try calling those numbers!  Call and ask questions even if you already know the answers!

Coordinator: 

Welcome and thank you for standing by. At this time all participants are in a listen-only mode until the Question and Answer session of today’s conference. At that time you may press Star 1 on your phone to ask a question.

I would like to inform all parties that today’s conference is being recorded. If you have any objections you may disconnect at this time. I would now like to turn the conference over to Shin Inouye, USCIS. Thank you, you may begin.

inouyeshin

Shin Inouye

Shin Inouye:   

Thank you (Sheila) and thank you all for joining us today to discuss the current state of Syrian refugees security screening and admissions. As a reminder this call is on the record and without embargo. On the call we have Assistant Secretary of State, The Bureau of Population Refugees and Migration, Anne C. Richard, US Citizenship and Immigration Services or USCIS Director Leon Rodriguez, and Health and Human Services Director of Refugee Resettlement, Robert “(Bob)” Carey.

We’ll have our speakers offer remarks about their agency’s respective roles in the refugee process and then open up the call to your questions. Let me first turn it over to Assistant Secretary Richard.

Anne Richard:  

anne-richard

Anne Richard

Thanks, this is Anne speaking. The United States has been a global leader in the resettlement of refugees. That’s why last year the President made a renewed commitment to help in some of the most vulnerable refugees in the world, pledging to increase the number of refugees we will accept from around the world to 85,000 from 70,000 per year over the last three years. As part of this commitment we also pledged to welcome at least 10,000 refugees fleeing the terrible conflict in Syria.

To that end early in the fiscal year we began working to adjust the capacity of our refugee admissions program, to bring many more refugees to the United States. To welcome more refugees from Syria we worked with the Department of Homeland Security, with our intelligence community and with other relevant agencies to upgrade our capacities to conduct security screening. DHS increased the number of the DHS offices available to interview applicants so that more security screening interviews could take place for more applicants, resulting in more refugees approved for travel.

In Jordan, for example, between February and April of this year we worked with DHS to surge additional staff to Jordan where DHS offices conducted interviews for about 12,000 UNHCR referred refugee applicants. In Beirut, Lebanon we restarted interviews of refugees in February. These had stopped for a year because of space limitations in the embassy compound. In Turkey we added staff to the resettlement support center in Istanbul that covers refugee processing in Turkey and Lebanon and DHS sent additional officers to conduct interviews.

In Iraq we began processing refugee resettlement cases in Erbil in December 2015. Thanks to these efforts and through the coordinated efforts of the Department of State, Department of Homeland Security, Department of Health and Human Services, we can now say that we have 8,000 Syrian refugees so far this year and that we are very confident that we will welcome at least 10,000 refugees from Syria by the end of this fiscal year. Monthly totals have climbed from low numbers of refugees admitted in the first half of the year to higher numbers recently.

In May, June and July the impact of our investments in and the enhancements to the process began to be realized. Our expectation from the beginning was that the rate of Syrian refugee admissions would increase over time as referrals from UNHCR — the Human Refugee Agency — UNHCR increased as we added to the capacity to process more cases referred to us and as DHS sent more DHS officers to the field to conduct the necessary rigorous and exhaustive security screening.

Briefly and in closing we want to reiterate that this is just one line of multiple lines of effort that the US government is undertaking to help the victims of terrible conflicts and crisis around the world. I want to remind you all that President Obama will convene the leader’s summit on refugees on the margins of the 71st session of the UN General Assembly in September. This summit is about encouraging all countries to take action and do more now.

Wealthy governments are asked to make new and significant contributions relating to humanitarian financing and refugee resettlement or admissions – other forms of admission to their country. Countries that host refugees are asked to make new commitments related to refugee self-reliance and inclusion, with a specific focus on letting refugees work and allowing refugee children to go to school. The purpose of the summit is to recruit other countries to join with us and make a real difference in the world’s contributions towards helping refugees.

At this point I’d like to turn to my colleague, the head of USCIS, Leon Rodriguez.

Leon Rodriguez:  

Thank you Anne and thank you for your presentation. I too am gratified with the success that we’ve had in refugee admissions, particularly with respect to Syrian admissions. The process that we have applied to reach those admission levels is the same process that we have applied for many years – actually with a few enhancements that have further strengthened that process.

LeonRodriguez

Leon Rodriguez

There are basically two critical components to the process and adjudicating, whether an individual is admitted to the United States as a refugee after that individual has been referred to us by the United Nations high commissioner and refugees and by the State Department. The first is to determine – this is what our officers do to determine whether that individual actually qualifies as a refugee – whether they meet the legal definition.

The legal definition that we use is derived from the United Nation’s convention on refugees, and that definition is used by all of the signatory countries to the convention, although in many cases each country interprets the conventions slightly differently. The second aspect and probably particularly critical for this discussion is we determined if — notwithstanding the fact that the individual meets the legal definition of refugee — if there is still some basis to deny that individual admission to the United States.

That can occur in one of two ways. In some cases we have – we exercise our discretion. For example if we have concerns about that individual’s credibility. In other cases we may have evidence that that individual falls under a specific category of inadmissibility. For example, if there is evidence that they are a known or suspected terrorist. To do that we used a number of tools. From my perspective the most critical of those tools is the refugee officer – is our highly trained, highly experienced staff that we deployed throughout the world to screen refugees.

Before they get there they have been extensively trained both in the legal tenants surrounding refugee law — the grounds inadmissibility that I discussed before — but also very critically in fraud detection and prevention, security protocols, interviewing techniques, credibility analysis.

They’ve also been briefed in country conditions and in regional conditions and again that briefing is often extensive, and the depth of that briefing grows as we spend more time in a particular refugee environment, be that the Syrian environment, the Iraqi environment, the Somalian environment, or as the case may be, the central American environment. The interviews that are conducted by those officers are frequently extensive – pro-credibility issues and pro-particular basis of inadmissibility.

In the specific cases of Syrians there are additional steps that are also taken. All of those cases or the majority of those cases, rather, are subject to something we call Syrian enhanced review, which provides us specific in-depth support both from our Refugee Affairs division and our Fraud Detection and National Security directorate to provide enhanced view of those cases before the interviews even occur overseas. This is intelligence-driven support – for example it yields specific lines of questioning that our officers are prepared to ask.

It also includes social media review of certain Syrian refugee applicants. Additionally and during the course of the interview an officer identifies areas of national security concern about a candidate, and that case moves into what we call the controlled application review and resolution process – essentially a hold process where further investigation and inquiry into that case occurs.

At the same time we have a number of law enforcement and intelligence resources that our officers utilize in order to determine whether there is any derogatory — and that’s a critical term — derogatory information about that individual. Those sources can come from State Department databases, databases of customs and border protection, the Department of Defense, but most critically from both the United States law enforcement and intelligence communities, including the FBI as well as a number of intelligence community partners as well.

One particularly important aspect there is a process that we call the intra-agency check which involves queries of a series of intelligence community holdings. That occurs not only prior to the interview of the individual but actually occurs on the recurrent basis during the entire process of that individual’s adjudication, and in many cases actually beyond the period of that individual’s admissions. So that if new derogatory information arises about that individual we are able to act on that derogatory individual – derogatory information at any time that that information may arise.

We have on an ongoing basis the implementing improvements to these processes – much of that is law enforcement sensitive or intelligence community protected. But those improvements have been occurring on an ongoing basis. I believe that this information is very critical because it really rebuts what is a widely held view that in fact we do not have resources against which to vet these individuals.

In fact literally hundreds of individuals from different countries, including hundreds of individuals from Syria, have had their admissions to the United States denied because of information that was found in these databases. Additionally, a number of other individuals have been denied admissions or have been placed on hold because we have determined – we have accessed that there are credibility concerns that have arisen during the interview process.

And that process is the same one that we conducted a year ago, two years ago and last week, and we will continue as we move through the process of screening refugees to apply those methodologies. Thank you.

Shin Inouye:     

Thank you Director Rodriguez. Next we’ll hear from Director Carey.

Robert Carey: 

bob carey

Robert Carey

Okay thank you. (Bob) Carey here. We could go to the work of your Office of Refugee Resettlement, under the Refugee Act of 1980 Congress created within the Department of Health and Human Service and the Office of Refugee Resettlement, and we are charged with providing refugees with resettlement assistance. This assistance includes employment training and placement, English language instruction, cash assistance and additional social services, all of which are designed to assist refugees in integrating into their new communities and to promote early self-sufficiency.

ORR carries out this work through an extensive public-private partnership network and funding to state governments and non-profit organizations across the US. In fiscal year 2016 ORR expects to serve upwards of 200,000 humanitarian migrants. So these humanitarian migrants include refugees, but also asylees, keeping Asian entrance on unaccompanied refugee minors, victims of torture and unaccompanied children.

Our work includes collaborations at the federal and state level with resettlement agencies, resettled refugees themselves and members of the communities that welcomed them. A central goal of the program is to ensure that states and municipalities have the best information available to help them prepare for incoming refugees. To this end each state has a state refugee coordinator, and often a state refugee health coordinator who oversees services and refugee benefits provisioned to eligible individuals in the given state.

The President’s fiscal year 2017 budget requests include $2.2 billion for ORR programs and that represents the cost of maintaining services for additional refugees and other entrance and unaccompanied children primarily from Central America. The President’s budget request would support a total of 213,000 humanitarian arrivals including 100,000 refugees in 2017. Once a refugee arrives in the US they are eligible to access the same benefits as American citizens who are here legally including temporary aide to newly families, Medicaid, SSI, and SNAP.

When refugees do not meet eligibility requirements for these programs ORR provides time-limited refugee cash assistance and refugee medical assistance. Social services and targeted assistance funds are allocated to states based on a formula tied to the prior two years of refugee arrivals, and that accounts for refugees and other entrance movements to other states after their initial resettlement on their path to legal permanent residence and citizenship.

ORR also supports additional programs to refugees and integrating which include migrant enterprise development assistance for ethnic community organizations, agricultural partnerships and services for survivors of torture. Another critical service we provide is school impact program funding which provides approximately $15 million for activities that assists children in adjusting to school after the trauma of war flight and all too often interrupted education.

As an alternative to access and cash assistance refugees may also enroll in what is known as the Matching Grant program – that’s Intensive Case Management program conducted by private non-profit organizations which assists refugees in finding employment and in economic self-sufficiency – self-sufficiency within four to six months after their arrival in the US and which is funded with a combination of private and government funds. And at the end of the program last year 82% were self-sufficient at the end of 180 days. [This is a joke, refugees can still be receiving most forms of welfare, such as food stamps and housing help and still be labeled “self-sufficient.”—-ed]

In summary, the Office of Refugee Resettlement stands committed to welcoming integrating newcomers into the fabric of our society. We believe this goal benefits not only refugees and their families, but strengthens communities and our nation as a whole and refugee resettlement is a reflection of our core value of who we are as a country, providing protection to individuals fleeing persecution on the basis of their race, religion, political opinions or membership in a social group. So thank you.

Shin Inouye:   

Thank you Director Carey and thank you to all of our speakers. Operator if we can go ahead and open it up or if you could provide the instructions for how folks can ask questions.

Coordinator:

Thank you. We will now begin the Question and Answer session. If you would like to ask a question please press Star 1 to unmute your phone and record your name clearly. If you need to withdraw your question press Star 2. Again to ask a question please press Star 1.

Our first question comes from Julia Edwards with Reuters – your line is open.

Julia Edwards:      

Hi, thank you. I was wondering if you could quantify how many refugees or how refugees were not considered after the additional screening procedures that were put in place by Congress at the end of last year? Or was there anyone who was ruled out as a result of this additional screening measures being put in place?

Leon Rodriguez: 

I think that the screening measures were never actually voted into effect that you’re discussing, so when I talk about screening measures they’re basically the ones that we apply as our part of our ordinary process – that is joined between USCIS, State Department, the law enforcement intelligence community partners. And again what I would say is based on that screening – just speaking to the Syrian case, you know, hundreds – I wouldn’t be able to put a specific number on it now but hundreds have been denied.

There are even larger numbers of individuals who go on hold because concerns have been raised or – and also individuals who are denied on a credibility basis because our officers determined that there are concerns about the accounts that they’re given when we interview them.

Coordinator:       

Our next question comes from Julie Davis with the New York Times. Your line is open.

Julie Davis:  

Hi there. Well I was hoping you could be more specific about how many of the Syrian applicants had been denied because of the information that was found on the databases or put on hold because of credibility concerns. It sounds like you don’t have those numbers now. Would that be something you could get to us after the call potentially?

Leon Rodriguez:   

Yes we can see if we can get you those numbers. Again what I will share are those numbers are large. When we’re talking still about, you know, we’re talking about 8,000 who have been cleared for admission this year we’re still talking about a substantial number who have either been denied or held because of these types of concerns.

Julie Davis:      

Okay and also I’m wondering whether you can say, based on the up-ticks that you described, just in May, June, July – I assume August, you’re expecting will be the same if not larger in terms of refuge – Syrian refugees resettled. Do you expect that to continue rising into fiscal 2017, and do you have any estimate at all of how many Syrian refugees you may be looking at welcoming as a result of this surge in the next, you know, after the fiscal year ends?

Leon Rodriguez:

Actually I’m going to share a little bit more of an answer to your first question and I think I’m going to defer to my State Department colleagues. So our approval rates are 80%, denial rate is 7%, and the balance is hold – that kind of reflects the overall universe. So, you know, I can’t give you specific numbers that reflects about our clip of approvals denials and holds.

Julie Davis:     

Got it.

Leon Rodriguez:  

And Anne I’m wondering if you want to – I don’t know if you’re in a position to talk about next year or not…

Anne Richard:   

Well just to say the current pace of arrivals will continue through the end of this fiscal year so we may exceed 10,000 and for next year we will continue to welcome large numbers of Syrians, but it’s too soon to have a target figure established.

Coordinator:     

Thank you. And our next question comes from Jared Goyette with PRI. Your line is open.

Jared Goyette:  

Hi I was just wondering if you could provide any detail to the I-130 program and if that’s had any impact in terms of the numbers of, you know, the number of Syrian refugees coming in – that’s of course the family petition? Thank you.

Anne Richard:  

No we don’t have numbers for you for this call but we can follow-up on that after the call.

Jared Goyette:

Okay thanks.

Coordinator:   

The next question comes from Nick Ballasy with PJ Media News your line is open.

Nicholas Ballasy: 

Thanks for taking the question. My first – the first part of my question is among the applications for refugee status that have been denied, you said some of them were denied – was it because of national security or terrorism issues? And then the second part of my question is as you know, if you’re applying for legal status by marrying a US citizen or in a different category, you have to prove you have the financial support and you’re not a public charge and you also have to pay thousands of dollars in fees for those applications.

Why are refugees treated differently than people seeking legal status in the United States through the legal immigration process?

Leon Rodriguez:   

Sure, this is Leon Rodriguez and I’ll invite my colleagues to chime in as well. You know, the fact is that refugees are refugees because they’re often coming out of war-torn countries or countries devastated in some other way. Frequently individuals have been living away from their countries without any means of securing a livelihood, or in many cases when we’re talking about Syrians, of having their children educated. So more typically individuals do not have the economic wherewithal. It’s also – frankly it’s a statutory decision that was made. We do not have authority to charge any kind of fee for refugees – it’s not a legal authority that we have.

Nicholas Ballasy:  

And then the issue of the denied applications, was the reason for any of those denials national security or…

Leon Rodriguez: 

Yes.

Nicholas Ballasy:

…(test) and concerns?

Leon Rodriguez: 

Yes.

Shin Inouye:      

All right (Sheila) if you could move to the next question please?

Coordinator:   

Absolutely and as a reminder if you would like to ask a question you can press Star 1 on your phone and record your name when prompted. Our next question comes from Lauren Ashburn with EWTN. Your line is open.

Lauren Ashburn:   

Thank you very much and thank you for taking my call. The percentage of those Syrian refugees who have been let into the country – what percent are Muslims? Do you have that breakdown?

Anne Richard:     

Yes, most are Muslims over 99% are Muslims. [At least she is being honest! But, the reporter wasted her question because that information is readily available elsewhere.—ed]

Lauren Ashburn:  

And then what percent are of religious (execution) are fleeing (because they) say religious persecution?

Anne Richard:   

I don’t have that breakdown for you.

Lauren Ashburn:  

Okay and then you mentioned, Secretary Carey – you mentioned that 82% are self-sufficient at the end of 180 days and I was wondering how long do the rest of them stay on benefits? How long do you extend the benefits?

Robert Carey:    

The benefits access depends on the category. There are some individuals for whom, you know, refugee cash assistance can be extended for up to eight months for certain individuals, and then others may be eligible for mainstream benefits if they fit the qualifications.

Lauren Ashburn:   

Okay, thanks.

Coordinator:  

Our next question comes from (Esa Gomez) with ABC News. Your line is open.

(Esa Gomez):    

I was wondering out of the 8,000 of the admitted refugees how many of them were children?

Anne Richard:      

I should – we should have that number for you. Seventy eight percent were women and children and the number of children we’ll have to get you but let’s see  – nearly – let’s see, 4,576 were under 18 – just a little under half female and roughly half male of the children. [Does this really give us any comfort when we know it is the Somali “children” who grew up in America that have been the most radicalized of the Muslim migrants?—ed]

(Esa Gomez):   

Is that of the children or women and children?

Anne Richard:     

So the first number I gave you the 78% were women and children. And then the second that’s 78% out of 8,000. And then the number of children is – or under 18 year olds is 4,576 and they’re roughly half and half men and – girls and boys rather.

(Esa Gomez):       

Oh okay, thank you.

Coordinator: 

And again as a reminder you can press Star 1 on your phone and record your name if you have a question. One moment please for any additional questions. We are showing no further questions at this time. (Unintelligible)…

Shin Inouye: 

(Unintelligible) (a couple). All right, well thank you (Sheila). Thank you all for joining us. As a reminder this call is on the record and without embargo. If you have any additional questions here are the phone numbers for the respective public affairs offices for the participants on the call. The State Department is at 202-647-2492. Once again The State Department is 202-647-2492. USCIS is at 202-272-1200. Once again USCIS is at 202-272-1200. And HHS is at 202-401-9215. Once again HHS is at 202-401-9215. Thank you very much.

Coordinator:     

That does conclude today’s conference. Thank you for participating. You may disconnect at this time.

This post is filed in our ‘where to find information’ category, here.

Infrastructure Unites Voters in Divisive Election Year — Advantage Trump

MILWAUKEE, Wis. /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ — With 90 days left before Election Day, a national poll released Tuesday by the Association of Equipment Manufacturers (AEM) found that half of registered voters say the nation’s infrastructure has gotten worse over the last five years, and a majority of voters said roads and bridges are in “extreme” need of repair.

Donald Trump at the Detroit Economic Club stated:

We will build the next generation of roads, bridges, railways, tunnels, sea ports and airports that our country deserves. American cars will travel the roads, American planes will connect our cities, and American ships will patrol the seas.

AEM notes that the findings were part of a new national poll to gauge voter perceptions and attitudes about the current and future state of U.S. infrastructure amid a high-profile election. The poll found that registered voters, regardless of political affiliation, recognize the declining state of the nation’s infrastructure as an issue that should be addressed and believe that the federal government should do more to improve infrastructure across the board.

“Americans across the political spectrum understand the dire state of U.S. infrastructure and believe that the federal government should do more to improve our infrastructure,” said Dennis Slater, president of AEM. “Voters recognized that increased federal funding for assets such as roads, bridges, and inland waterways will have a positive impact on the economy, and they are looking to the federal government to repair and modernize.”

The national poll identified a number of key findings, including:

  • Nearly half (46 percent) of registered voters believe that the state of the nation’s infrastructure has gotten worse in the last five years.
  • A significant majority (80 – 90 percent) of registered voters say that roads, bridges and energy grids are in some or extreme need of repairs.
  • Half (49 percent) of the surveyed population feel that the federal government is primarily responsible for funding repairs to the nation’s infrastructure.
  • Seven out of every 10 registered voters say increasing federal funding for infrastructure will have a positive impact on the economy.
  • More than eight out of every ten Americans consider water infrastructure (86 percent), solar powered homes (83 percent) and smart infrastructure (82 percent) as the top three important innovations for the future of infrastructure.
  • Voters across the political spectrum think that the federal government should do more to improve the nation’s overall infrastructure, with 68 percent of Republicans, 70 percent of Independents and 76 percent of Democrats sharing this sentiment.

Registered voters also feel that government across the board should be doing more to improve the nation’s overall infrastructure, with 76 percent of individuals surveyed wanting more from state governments, 72 percent looking to the federal government to do more and 70 percent expecting more from local governments.

“Both presidential nominees have voiced their strong support for infrastructure investment,” said Ron De Feo, CEO of Kennametal and chairman of AEM’s Infrastructure Vision 2050 initiative. “The specific ideas and proposals they offer over the next 90 days will be critically important, and voters should consider them carefully on Election Day.”

The national poll was conducted as part of AEM’s ongoing efforts to develop a long-term national vision for U.S. infrastructure. An analysis of the national poll results is available here.

aem logoAbout the Association of Equipment Manufacturers (AEM) – www.aem.org

AEM is the North American-based international trade group providing innovative business development resources to advance the off-road equipment manufacturing industry in the global marketplace. AEM membership comprises more than 850 companies and more than 200 product lines in the agriculture, construction, forestry, mining and utility sectors worldwide. AEM is headquartered in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, with offices in the world capitals of Washington, D.C.; Ottawa, Canada; and Beijing, China.