On asylum
Asylum has a specific purpose and rules that govern its granting, and the vast majority of the caravaners’ claims wouldn’t fit asylum’s definition.
But that may be somewhat moot, because (at least in the past) many asylum seekers haven’t shown up for their hearings (see this for the war of statistics on this matter).
Who suffers from this state of affairs? Why, the bona fide asylum seekers,, that’s who:
…[U]nless those looking for a better life have either suffered or have legitimate reason to believe they will suffer persecution based on their race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinions, they do not meet the legal baseline for refuge or asylum. Period.
Second, there is reason to believe that a majority of those claiming asylum from Central America do so with no intention of following through. According to a statement from the Department of Homeland Security regarding the migrant caravan:
“The low statutory requirements and legal loopholes in our laws encourage aliens to claim credible fear at our Southern border knowing they will be promptly released into the interior with work permits pending the determination of their full claim.”…
It’s a simple fact…that resources are finite, and when government agents spend time sorting out frivolous asylum claims from economic migrants at the border, it takes up time and resources that could be otherwise applied to other applicants who don’t have the geographic advantage of being able to form a caravan and travel over land.
I doubt very much that those championing the “migrants” in the caravan care very much if at all about bona fide asylum seekers or about the distinction between those who simply want to come here for economic reasons and those who are actually fleeing “persecution based on their race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinions.”
Asylum is a sort of fast-track system to accommodate those in special situations. For those who simply want to better their lives—a laudable and understandable goal—and who think America would be just the place to do it, then get in line and come in via the legal immigration route.
[ADDENDUM: Some “migrants” are impatient with the process.]
“It is difficult to argue” with your conclusion, Neo.
.
[ “It is difficult to argue with…” — Always struck me as going the long way ’round Robin Hood’s barn. Less wordy and more straight-forward: “Can’t argue with that!” Probably closer to the intended meaning besides. Or one could also say, “Yeah, I agree.”
[Although I suppose whoever invented the phrase might have meant it to be a humorous way of agreeing, which is why I use it myself once in awhile. Anyway, it’s now fallen into the status of a faux-tony cliché. IMO, of course. *g* ]
Until the Christian woman from Pakistan is offered asylum, it is all theater, Christians in the Middle East are being exterminated and they usually have good connections that allow vetting if they apply but they are being left to their fate.
I know a few Palestinians, who I assume are Christian. I never asked them. One, whose son was admitted to medical school after my letter of recommendation, invited us to a party celebrating the admission. Quite a few young people, the son’s friends I assumed, were at the party and the girls were showing off their belly dancing lessons. No burkhas in 100 miles.
I doubt my letter helped much but the party was good.
By the convention NONE of them qualify. By the convention they are to stop and apply for asylum from Mexico.
THAT’S the ‘rule’ such as it is — in Europe and elsewhere.
Mexico does not play by that rule. She expects to shunt the missery to the USA.
“I doubt very much that those championing the “migrants” in the caravan care very much if at all about bona fide asylum seekers or about the distinction between those who simply want to come here for economic reasons and those who are actually fleeing ‘persecution based on their race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinions’.”
Neo: I’d go a step further: many of those championing these ‘migrants’ do not care a whit about them. They really are just interested in more voters.
I’d add that many of those championing these ‘migrants’ know that the migrants will not live inside their gated communities.
The only valid asylum candidates from the Western Hemisphere (outside of migrants from Venezuela and Cuba) are people intently engaged in the public life of their country who’ve run afoul of a local padrone, or a corrupt prosecutor, or a corrupt police superintendant. Such people will be coming in the front door on an aeroplane, wife and children in tow. And the first question you ask them if they’re not from Mexico or Haiti or the Dominican Republic is why they came here rather than going to a more convenient location.
As for Venezuelans, set up refugee camps just outside the border.
The public interest bar are the enemies of this country.
The public interest bar are the enemies of this country.
I had some experience with the “public interest bar” when I served on a planning commission. Developers, the state legislature and “public interest law firms” have an iron triangle of mutual interest in “affordable housing.” Our small city in Orange County was “built out” almost 100% when I served on the commission. The state legislature kept ruling that we did not have enough “affordable housing” after they were “sued” by the law firms, which in turn were funded by developers.
There deal was that the developers funded the law firms, which sued the city, creating a “crisis,” which then was corrected by the developers and the state paid the law firms’ fees. Next, the legislature would decide the criteria for affordable housing had to go up. And the cycle would repeat.
> Mexico does not play by that rule. She expects to shunt the missery to the USA.
From what I’ve read Mexico _did_ offer to take care of the caravaners, but they would have none of it. They are not travelling to get away from Honduras, they are travelling to get to the United States, specifically.
This whole episode has been nothing but transparent manipulation of the U.S. for political reasons, where the migrants themselves are being used by whoever is financing the caravan (someone has to be behind it… it would take millions to organize and run this thing), presumably to forward an agenda of provoking trouble, even violence, on the border in order to make the U.S., and President Trump in particular, look bad.
I have coronary artery disease, which means I have higher health care costs and a greater risk than others my age for future medical problems. Since the USA doesn’t (currently) have socialized medicine, I declare myself a medical refugee, and hereby request asylum in Canada. Think that will work?
There is an argument, which I think has some merit, that there GOP should not have focused so much on the “Caravan” and spent more time talking about the economy, which is booming.
The state legislature kept ruling that we did not have enough “affordable housing”
Or, as Mr. Sailer calls it ‘awardable housing’. Dwellings with concessionary rents create patronage opportunities for insiders. Accept a Section 8 voucher, the transactions costs of evicting a problem tenant are jacked up.
Mike K,
As Milton Friedman said, the record of history is crystal clear, (paraphrasing now) leftist governments stink economically. What’s a bit amazing, is that the U.S. economy’s response to Trump’s policies was almost immediate. This is the forward looking nature of trading markets, especially the futures markets. Of course, those very early responses are guesses and projections, but even those have very real consequences, especially if the projections are correct.
More to your point, can a greatly improved economy be leveraged politically? I think the GOP should have tried harder too; and they still should try harder now.
Friedman says in “Money Mischief” I believe, that the psychology of a strong economy (and the expectation of inflation) sets in when many of those salaried workers get bonuses or pay increases. This is also partly why the Fed is fixated on a higher baseline inflation rate; people get pay raises even in a flat economy.
I suppose that the GOP country club set thinks, “Gee, we don’t have to do anything, the pay increases make the selling point for us.” They perhaps miss the fact that we all now live in a world awash in advertising and propaganda, and they need to get in the game or die.
Here’s one for ya.
According to today’s Washington Times, the GAO reports that over the last 4 years USAID has paid some $27 million in taxpayer dollars to “ease re-integration” for illegal aliens the U.S. deports back to their home countries in Central America, who get what is, in effect, a “nice try” CARE package from the U.S., which includes things like toilet paper, school supplies, and even toys for their kids.
See https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2018/dec/7/american-taxpayers-27m-ease-deportees-lives/