Open revolt? Governors refuse to take in Syrian Refugees. LA Times.

Refugees in Slovenia. Slovenian Ministry of Defense. 

State governors have largely rejected President Barack Obama's plan to bring Syrian refugees into America. LA Times. At least 23 governors have criticized the plans, citing security concerns after the terror attack in Paris. Members of Congress also condemned the plan and may even introduce legislation pulling funding for the refugee program. Muslim activists blasted the moves and some other states have committed to take in Syrian refugees. The plan is for America to take in 10,000 refugees from Syria next year. The process of vetting refugees can take years, and even then it may not catch everyone with links to terror organization. Even though there is great resistance to the Syrian refugee program, there is very little the states can do to prevent the Federal Government from settling the refugees in states where they are not wanted. 

My Comment:

As of this writing, 28 states have said no to Syrian refugees. 12 states have said yes with the rest undecided. So far the rejections come from mostly red states, though a few states that are traditional Democrat strongholds, such as Massachusetts and New Jersey, have said no as well. I am guessing that before all this is said and done, more states will come out as being opposed to this program. 

So what's my take on this? I'm generally not a fan of letting refugees into the country, no matter where they are from or what the circumstances are. Even if the refugees were not possibly infiltrated by ISIS or other terror groups, we have an obligation to take care of our own people before we take care of anyone else's. That isn't to say that stopping the Syrian refugees would magically make the problems we have disappear. Indeed, I doubt much would be done in either case. But at least we wouldn't make our problems worse. 

And what problems would these refugees cause? Just ignore the possibility of terrorism for now. Let's just assume that all these refugees are properly vetted and aren't going to blow themselves up. That's no sure thing but for the sake of argument, just grant it. They will still cause problems. Why? Well for one, they will be taking jobs that could be filled by American citizens. Due to language issues, the Syrians would most likely be forced into the underclass and will only be able to get low paying jobs. The last thing people in the lower classes need is more competition for jobs. There is also the fact that these refugees would put a burden on our social safety net. People are always saying that our social programs are overburdened and over used, but adding thousands of Syrians into the mix would make things even worse. 

There is also the problem of integration. As it stands right now, most US Muslims are fairly well integrated. Due to how strict our immigration laws are, very few Muslims that are here are people that don't want to be there. We also have very little in terms of Muslim enclaves, which cause so many problems in Europe. Our Muslims are spread out. All of that is changing though. Bringing in thousands of Syrian refugees will create these enclaves and once that happens any chance of integrating them into American society will fail. And keep in mind that the left considers cultural integration to be unfettered racism. The idea that people should adjust their culture when they come to a new country is a concept that is widely rejected by the left, and there would be resistance to integrating these refugees. 

Obviously, there are security concerns as well. In the short term we have to worry about ISIS or other terrorist groups infiltrating the country. At least one of the attackers in Paris was reportedly a refugee, and it is possible that many other ISIS fighters have infiltrated Europe in this way. If it has happened there, it could happen here, and I think getting fighters into the United States is a major priority for ISIS.  

In the long term though, things could be even worse. Even if the first generation of Syrian refugees integrates well, the second generation could be ripe for recruitment by terrorist organization. I seriously doubt the problem of Islamic terrorism is going away in the next 20 years, so I think it is a real possibility that a large community of Syrian refugees could be a long term threat. After all, we are talking about a group of people that won't integrate well and won't have much in the way of economic opportunity. They may very well be pissed off when they realize that the United States isn't quite what they were promised. Remember, in the Paris attacks, many of the attackers were European citizens. Having a large population of angry young men, ripe for radicalization, hasn't worked out very well for Europe. 

All that being said, I don't see how these resistance will actually accomplish anything. Like the article said, the governors can make it harder to resettle Syrians, but they can't stop it completely. Congress can vote to de-fund the program, which would probably work much better, but they would need a veto-proof majority to pull it off. I don't see that happening. Indeed, as long as Obama is president I see these refugees ending up in America, even if a majority of states don't want it. This is going to be a huge election issue and I think it might be one that puts a Republican into the White House. But at that point it would probably be to late as the refugees will already be here. 

As for actual support from the common people, I haven't seen any polling yet. All I have are what I have seen on social media or heard from friends and family. About the only people I have seen that are really in favor of it are people far to the left of center. As expected most of the conservatives I have seen are opposed but it's surprising to me that so many people in the center are upset as well. Still, this is just my opinion and I have no data to back it up. Hopefully polling will clarify things soon.