What do we need in this country right now? If you’re a Senate Democrat, you might think the answer is more Muslims. On Thursday, a group of Senators made the case for increased refugee resettlement, posing it as a moral obligation. “While the United States is the largest donor of humanitarian assistance to Syrian refugees, we must also dramatically increase the number of Syrian refugees that we accept for resettlement,” said 14 lawmakers headed by Dick Durbin of Illinois and Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota.
The UN has been trying to get the United States to take in more refugees from the wartorn country, hoping to resettle 130,000 Syrians over the next two years. So far, they have submitted around 12,000 refugees to the U.S., though only 700 have actually been accepted into the country. That’s “an unacceptably low number” according to the Democrats.
“Following the international community’s tragic failure to shelter Jewish refugees fleeing the Nazi genocide, the United States played a leadership role in establishing the international legal regime for the protection of refugees,” they wrote. They are calling on the U.S. to accept “at least 50 percent” of the UN’s registered refugees, a number that would be in excess of 65,000.
Not everyone is on board with that plan. House Homeland Security Committee Chairman Michael McCaul said that such an effort would be a “serious mistake” when you consider the security risks. McCaul stands on solid ground with that argument; earlier this year, U.S. officials admitted that they did not have the resources to do thorough background checks on these refugees. When McCaul says that the program could provide ISIS with a “jihadi pipeline,” he’s not just pandering to the base.
Democrats are not blind to this risk, but they say that by devoting “sufficient resources and staff,” the U.S. can rise to meet this “moral, legal, and national security imperative.”
Yes, but is there room in the budget for such an increase? And if there is, are there not better ways in which that money can be spent? We don’t seem interested in providing safe haven for the Iraqi translators who put themselves at risk by helping our troops. Seems odd that we suddenly have all of this space and room to invite thousands of potentially-dangerous Muslims into the country.
Even if you put aside terrorism concerns (which you can’t), the truth is that we have enough of our own citizens sucking off the government teat. And we have more and more coming across the southern border every day. We need to be working on solutions to reverse these trends before we start letting in Syrians who will be largely dependent on the government.
It’s also worth noting that several wealthy Arabian countries have already refused to take these refugees in. Saudi Arabia and Kuwait, for instance, have declined to house them. Why should America jump in to save the day every time? If there is a moral imperative here, it must come second to protecting our own nation. That seems like common sense, but you can’t expect that from Washington and you certainly can’t expect it from the Democrats.