[Congressional Record Volume 163, Number 17 (Wednesday, February 1, 2017)]
[House]
[Pages H824-H825]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




     TRUMP'S REFUGEE EXECUTIVE ORDER: SEPARATING FACT FROM FICTION

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from 
Texas (Mr. Babin) for 5 minutes.
  Mr. BABIN. Mr. Speaker, I rise to express my fervent support for 
President Trump's executive order: Protecting the Nation from Foreign 
Terrorist Entry.
  I, along with many other Members of Congress, have been speaking out 
for more than a 1\1/2\ years about the dangers posed by our U.N.-run 
refugee resettlement program. I applaud President Trump for following 
through on his promise by imposing strict vetting for seven countries 
that President Obama labeled in 2016 as countries of particular concern 
for terrorism.
  Liberal activists and politicians are leveling baseless assertions 
about the Trump policy only to see a lazy and complicit media parrot 
their claims without exercising due diligence to validate it. To me, 
this is fake news. And in this incident, it is the mainstream media 
that is pushing this misinformation. Let's separate myth from fact and 
inject a little coolheaded commonsense into this national dialogue.
  Friday's executive order does a few things: It pauses the entry of 
all refugees for the next 120 days; it caps refugee admissions for 
fiscal year 2017 at 50,000; it stalls, for 90 days, the admission of 
foreign nationals from seven countries that are well established as 
terrorist hotspot countries; and it puts priority on highly persecuted 
religious minorities when the refugee program resumes.

  The media has echoed the protesters' assertion that this is somehow a 
Muslim ban. They are flat-out wrong. Remember, it was President Obama 
who created this seven-country list, not President Trump.
  If it were a Muslim ban, then why doesn't it include restrictions on 
the other 40 majority Muslim nations? That makes no sense. That is 
because this is a targeted approach to deal with the threat posed by 
terrorists who operate freely in these failed states and pose a direct 
threat to the American people. There is absolutely nothing in this 
executive order that says anything

[[Page H825]]

about banning any particular group of people.
  Another shortsighted fallacy being propagated is that President Trump 
is the only President to ever implement restrictions on refugee 
admissions. Conveniently forgotten is the fact that in 2011, President 
Obama stopped processing refugees from Iraq for 6 months after a 
terrorist plot was uncovered involving two Iraqi refugees who had come 
into the United States.

                              {time}  1015

  Previous Presidents of both parties have responded to global threats 
with refugee admission limitations, so characterizing Trump's actions 
is unprecedented, is simply fiction and a gross demonstration of 
partisanship.
  As ISIS has infiltrated the ranks of refugees in Europe, the 
President is similarly responding to global threats with the 
appropriate safeguards as he sees fit.
  This is something that he should be praised for--not condemned.
  The notion that the executive order is inherently un-American must be 
addressed as well. After all, America is the land made up of immigrants 
that has been a safe harbor to millions fleeing persecution around the 
world since her inception.
  But in order for this to continue, we must be vigilant to protect our 
homeland.
  America is the greatest Nation in the world, and if we let up on our 
pursuit of the highest national security standards, we will see this 
greatness slip away--to the detriment not only of all American 
citizens, but to the entire world.
  Finally, I must address the false notion that having a Christian 
ethic demands that we accept all refugees with open arms. Well, if that 
is the case, why aren't we opening the doors wide to the 60 million 
refugees worldwide rather than only a fraction of 1 percent?
  As a follower of Jesus Christ, I do believe that we should help those 
in need around us, and that America should be involved in helping the 
displaced and persecuted whenever we can.
  Perhaps a more compassionate approach might be to take the money that 
we spend settling one refugee in the United States and, instead, for 
the same price, provide for 12, for a dozen, refugees in a safe haven 
near their own home countries.
  Just as a father's primary responsibility is to care for his own 
children, the chief role of the President and other national leaders is 
to ensure the best interest of the citizens under their charge.
  If President Trump were to overlook the safety of the American 
people, it would simply be an abdication of his own responsibility that 
the American people elected him to do.
  It seems the President's opponents have cherry-picked particular 
Bible verses to suit their own political agenda, while ignoring other 
basic Biblical concepts of stewardship and responsibility out of sheer 
political convenience.
  To conclude, the hysteria surrounding this national security 
executive order must come to an end.
  After all, the main provisions of this executive order are temporary 
in nature and are in line with what many Presidents in the past have 
done.
  ISIS presents one of the most extensive and complex threats to our 
Nation, and we do want our President to take every precaution to make 
sure that Americans are safe.
  This--not the false narratives of Trump's opponents--must be the 
focus of the national dialogue, and we must share in what he is doing.

                          ____________________