To the editor:
On Feb. 17, 2022, Susan Collins and Kyrsten Sinema introduced a bill to help asylum seekers obtain jobs more quickly. The proposed legislation was co-sponsored by Angus King. I have some questions about that bill and it all hinges on how one defines asylum.
My concern is the illegal entrants to our country. For those who choose to enter legally, I wish them all the best.
To start, let’s go to some basic definitions.
Refugee: person fleeing armed conflict or persecution.
Asylum seeker: someone who claims to be a refugee but whose claim has not been evaluated.
Migrant: someone just looking for a better place to live.
Vetting: the process of thoroughly investigating something or someone before making a decision.
First question; How many people who enter our southern border illegally are truly asylum seekers and how many lie to gain entry?
Second question: Should we allow illegals entry on their word that they are refugees when their first act on U.S. soil is breaking the law? Wouldn’t it be a more prudent idea to return them to Mexico while they are being vetted?
Question three: When these refugee-asylum seekers enter Mexico and refoulement is no longer a concern, should their status be changed to migrant for any future travels they may desire to take?
Some food for thought: If someone were to knock on the door to your home and claim they now owned your home, what would you do? Would you tell them to come in and stay until you figure out what’s going on or tell them to go somewhere else while you investigate their claim?
Of course you would ask them to leave; who would allow an unknown person or persons access to their home without first investigating them and their motives? But that is exactly what Collins, Sinema and King are suggesting we do with those who enter our country illegally. Let them in, let them work and worry about their legal status later.
Question four: what are the motives of Collins, Sinema and King? Maybe they should be vetted.
Walter Crean
Madawaska
