Readers: This article is old news now to most of you. I started to write about it yesterday when I got sidetracked writing about the Tampa terrorist—the guy from Kosovo (likely a refugee brought to the US with the help of the International Rescue Committee that coincidentally is mentioned in this article as one of the federal contractors helping boost the immigrant population in Baltimore)—who wanted to kill some infidels. I don’t know if Baltimore got Kosovars, but the city did get Muslims from many ethnic backgrounds.
If you have time and the interest, read my post here about how in 1999 we brought in 15,000 “refugees” from Clinton’s Bosnian war to help justify the war to the public and within a year shipped 10,000 back (they wanted to go back) all at taxpayer expense. When I see this, it makes me think Ron Paul does have a point!
Now to the post I started yesterday:
I’m seeing this wrong-headed idea all over the country—it is the latest excuse to build immigrant enclaves in failing cities (Buffalo, NY and Detroit, MI come to mind immediately). The theory is that immigrants grow cities.
Please someone tell me how large numbers of really poor people, who don’t speak English, who have little education, and few prospects for getting a job will help a city grow. How and where will they work is my first question? Who will pay for all the services they require and what about the truth about crime? (Baltimore is in the top ten high crime cities already!)
What if they all voted Republican?
And, let me pose another question, if the immigrants (legal and illegal) arriving in places like Baltimore said, ‘you know my values are more in line with conservative values—strong families, no abortions and no gay marriage, hard work, little or no government handouts—so I think I’ll be voting Republican,‘ how long do you think Mayor Stephanie Rawlings-Blake would be pushing for a large immigrant population for Baltimore? Not for a second!
Here is the Baltimore Sun yesterday—‘Immigrants key to reaching Mayor’s population goal‘—a piece which simply defies logic:
The rate of foreign immigration to Baltimore more than doubled in the past decade, bucking the national trend of slowing immigration. In the 1990s, the city added about 6,000 immigrants; during the 2000s, more than 14,000 foreign-born people arrived.
Those are compelling numbers, experts say, because Baltimore during the ’90s was bypassed by most immigrants even as the national immigration rate boomed.
The city had 44,000 foreign-born residents in 2010, about 7 percent of the total population, according to the U.S. Census Bureau, which counts foreign-born residents regardless of the legality of their presence. About 40 percent of the immigrants came from Latin America and the Caribbean; 25 percent from Asia, including the Middle East; and 15 percent from Africa.
It is not just illegal aliens, but refugees are arriving in the “welcoming” city too. For readers unfamiliar with the refugee program of the US State Department, the International Rescue Committee is one of ten (sometimes 11) federal contractors which include the US Conference of Catholic Bishops and the Lutheran Immigration and Refugee Services (also headquartered in Baltimore, here) which are paid by the head to bring refugees to American towns and cities.
Meanwhile, hundreds of African immigrants, including many refugees, have put down roots in the northeast corner of the city. The International Rescue Committee, which has a resettlement center in Baltimore, estimates that over the past 10 years more than 3,000 refugees and roughly 1,000 asylum-seekers have moved to the city. The group has helped nearly 1,000 people from Bhutan and resettled hundreds from Burma, among other countries.
Private foundations, like the Abell Foundation, can come up with all the planning they want, but the financial burden will fall on the taxpayer.
The importance of courting immigrants has been noted in Baltimore since at least 2002, when the Abell Foundation released a report that concluded: “Growth comes from immigrants or not at all.”
Stosur, Baltimore’s planning director, said city officials are still developing strategies to reach Rawlings-Blake’s goal of attracting 10,000 families — or 22,000 people. He hopes that with “targeted research” city administrators can work with organizations like the Abell Foundation to develop a plan that will increase the immigrant population, retain young people and draw older people looking to retire in a city setting.
Not everyone thinks this plan is great. Over-crowded apartments, not enough money for schools and increased crime are cited by longtime residents as problems they see. Oops! Not crime, “rowdy conduct” says our reporter.
Longtime residents have raised concerns about large numbers of immigrants living in rental units intended for a few, as well as a lack of street parking and a rise in rowdy conduct, Johnson said. The community’s public school resources, she said, have been strained by accommodating students who speak Spanish.
“When they use the term immigrants, it’s a euphemism for illegal aliens,” said Del. Patrick L. McDonough, a Republican who represents Baltimore and Harford counties. He is concerned that increased immigration to the city would displace native residents from low-skill jobs, stretch health care and education systems, and increase crime.
“When you put out the welcome mat, you are opening yourself up to more violence, more crime and more drugs,” he said.
Oh, and one more thing, the article points out that one more advantage of enticing immigrants to Baltimore is that they have lots and lots of babies! These same Leftists (or their Leftist parents) who told yuppies several decades ago that they dare not have more than two children per family or the planet would over-populate and be destroyed, now see no illogic in urging the multi-culty crowd to produce like crazy (yikes, I almost said rabbits). And, if you said they were trying to out-breed white America you would be called a racist!