Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

Logical

(22,457 posts)
Fri Nov 20, 2015, 08:08 AM Nov 2015

Do you support or oppose the H.R. 4038 American SAFE Act against refugees?

H.R. 4038 is known as the ‘‘American Security Against Foreign Enemies Act of 2015’’ or as the ‘‘American SAFE Act of 2015’’ . The mandate is “To require that s supplemental certifications and background investigation be completed prior to the admission of certain aliens as refugees, and for other purposes. ”


17 votes, 0 passes | Time left: Unlimited
I support the bill as we need more "supplemental certifications and background investigation" of these refugees
4 (24%)
I oppose the bill as these refugees are already screened enough
13 (76%)
Show usernames
Disclaimer: This is an Internet poll
20 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Do you support or oppose the H.R. 4038 American SAFE Act against refugees? (Original Post) Logical Nov 2015 OP
Support. Like gun control bigwillq Nov 2015 #1
And that is why the patroit act passed! FEAR! Logical Nov 2015 #2
No such thing sarisataka Nov 2015 #10
There is no excuse for this poll not being 100% opposed!!! nt LostOne4Ever Nov 2015 #3
I know that I going to get blasted for this melm00se Nov 2015 #4
It is my understanding that both of those are currently on the books... NCTraveler Nov 2015 #12
you didn't read the actual text geek tragedy Nov 2015 #16
I oppose any 'extra' screening because its racist 951-Riverside Nov 2015 #5
Are you even SERIOUS?? B2G Nov 2015 #7
Yes, why do you ask? 951-Riverside Nov 2015 #9
You just won the internet. nt. NCTraveler Nov 2015 #13
It is racist! Nt Logical Nov 2015 #19
Can you even screen folks from these areas? ileus Nov 2015 #6
Wow, you are sounding like bush in 2001. Nice concern. just say you are scared and.... Logical Nov 2015 #18
Oppose Bradical79 Nov 2015 #8
+1000 nt Logical Nov 2015 #11
the bill doesn't call for screening, it calls for a de facto moratorium geek tragedy Nov 2015 #14
Wow, and some voted yes! disgusting! Logical Nov 2015 #15
yes, it's about making life difficult for the Obama administration, but some people wallow in fear geek tragedy Nov 2015 #17
Glad to see 90% of the DU are not scared of make believe. nt Logical Nov 2015 #20
 

bigwillq

(72,790 posts)
1. Support. Like gun control
Fri Nov 20, 2015, 08:53 AM
Nov 2015

It can't hurt to have strict (er) policies. I'd rather be safe than sorry.

melm00se

(4,990 posts)
4. I know that I going to get blasted for this
Fri Nov 20, 2015, 10:58 AM
Nov 2015

but the text of the House Bill sounds (to me at least) that the FBI would be tasked with oversight to ensure that background checks are performed:

Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) shall take all actions necessary to ensure that each covered alien receives a background investigation before U.S. refugee admission.


Additionally, Congress is acting in its oversight capacity by tasking that

(the) DHS shall report monthly to Congress on the total number of admission applications for which a certification was made and the number of covered aliens for whom such a certification was not made for the preceding month. The report shall include for each covered alien for whom a certification was not made the concurrence or nonconcurrence of each person whose concurrence was required by the certification.


I have no issue with the law, in and of itself, but I will have an issue if the law is abused in its implementation.
 

NCTraveler

(30,481 posts)
12. It is my understanding that both of those are currently on the books...
Fri Nov 20, 2015, 12:29 PM
Nov 2015

and have nothing to do with the odorous parts of this bill. Once we determine how many we will accept, under current law, those individuals wouldn't step foot on US soil for well over a year while check after check are done. This has nothing to do with additional checks. The legislation has to do with stopping them from coming here. FBI checks are done on every single refugee before they come here. As does a CIA check, a written report from their country of origin with additional checks, along with checks from other US and non-us agencies. That is already being done. The republicans are spinning it so people think this isn't the current reality. It is.

 

geek tragedy

(68,868 posts)
16. you didn't read the actual text
Fri Nov 20, 2015, 12:41 PM
Nov 2015
A covered alien may not be admitted as a refugee until the Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation certifies to the Secretary of Homeland Security and the Director of National Intelligence that each covered alien has received a background investigation that is sufficient to determine whether the covered alien is a threat to the security of the United States.

(b) Certification by unanimous concurrence.—A covered alien may only be admitted to the United States after the Secretary of Homeland Security, with the unanimous concurrence of the Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the Director of National Intelligence, certifies to the appropriate Congressional Committees that the covered alien is not a threat to the security of the United States.

(c) Inspector general review of certifications.—The Inspector General of the Department of Homeland Security shall conduct a risk-based review of all certifications made under subsection (b) each year and shall provide an annual report detailing the findings to the appropriate Congressional Committees.

 

951-Riverside

(7,234 posts)
5. I oppose any 'extra' screening because its racist
Fri Nov 20, 2015, 11:05 AM
Nov 2015

Would we subject African-American police officers to 'extra' screening because of Chris Dorner?

Absolutely not.

So, why are some so-called progressives okay with subjecting thousands of people to screenings just because of their ethnicity and religion?

I say let them all in, we already have terrorists within our country killing people everyday and they're called Gang members most of whom are of the Christian or Catholic faiths.

I honestly don't get why people get so freaked out when Muslims commits violent crimes, its as if 11,700 people haven't died this year so far due to gun violence in our own country (That's 36 people a day BTW).

 

B2G

(9,766 posts)
7. Are you even SERIOUS??
Fri Nov 20, 2015, 11:11 AM
Nov 2015

"we already have terrorists within our country killing people everyday and they're called Gang members most of whom are of the Christian or Catholic faiths."

ileus

(15,396 posts)
6. Can you even screen folks from these areas?
Fri Nov 20, 2015, 11:05 AM
Nov 2015

After the local government offices have been destroyed and everyone scattered who/what info can actually be gathered besides a persons word for who they are?

Did they even have records in the first place?

 

Logical

(22,457 posts)
18. Wow, you are sounding like bush in 2001. Nice concern. just say you are scared and....
Fri Nov 20, 2015, 12:45 PM
Nov 2015

Move on.

 

Bradical79

(4,490 posts)
8. Oppose
Fri Nov 20, 2015, 11:24 AM
Nov 2015

It's my understanding that we already have strong screening and it's already a multiyear process. It doesn't make much sense for a terrorist to enter the U.S. through this method. The bill is made to play on racist fears.

 

geek tragedy

(68,868 posts)
14. the bill doesn't call for screening, it calls for a de facto moratorium
Fri Nov 20, 2015, 12:38 PM
Nov 2015

it asks three cabinet-level officials to personally certify that there is zero risk from EVERY SINGLE REFUGEE.

 

geek tragedy

(68,868 posts)
17. yes, it's about making life difficult for the Obama administration, but some people wallow in fear
Fri Nov 20, 2015, 12:42 PM
Nov 2015

and will follow the loud and dumb party down the xenophobic path.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Do you support or oppose ...