Well Over Half Of U.S. States Now Refusing To Take Syrian “Refugees”

Here Is The Map Of All States Defying Obama And Refusing To Take ‘Syrian Refugees’ – Top Right News


More than half of U.S. states are now refusing to cooperate with Barack Obama’s insane importation of 200,000 so-called ‘Syrian Refugees’ in the wake of the Paris terror attacks.

As public outrage has exploded since revelations that at least two of the Paris terrorists came into Europe as “Syrian refugees,” the number of governors opposing Obama’s plan has increased almost hourly on Monday, from just one – Michigan – overnight, to at least 27 at this hour… including one Democrat in a tight race (Maggie Hassan, NH).

As Top Right News has reported, at least two of the Paris terrorists entered Greece posing as so-called “Syrian refugees” in September – and were able to make their way to France to prepare, arm and execute a massive terrorist attack just 90 days later. This, after a Syrian informant revealed over 4,000 ISIS fighters have already been smuggled into Western nations – “hidden among innocent refugees.”

Obama’s own DHS Secretary Jeh Johnson actually said “we don’t know a whole lot” about Syrian refugees coming into America, and that DHS has “no active protocol” for properly screening them.

Yesterday, Michigan Gov. Rick Snyder (R) announced that, to protect the safety of his citizens, he would BLOCK any future importation of Muslim “refugees” to his state. A virtual avalanche of U.S. governors quickly followed suit. And although Federal law gives Obama the ability to import refugees as he sees fit, through the Jimmy Carter-era Refugee Act (1980), the states are essential parts of the settlement process. Without their cooperation, few if any refugees are likely to be moved to those states.

In a press conference this morning in Turkey, Obama said that ‘the United States has to step up and do its part,’ while chiding those in the opposition party for suggesting there be a ‘religious test’ for entry into the United States.

Clearly, the American people do not agree, and the brutal Paris attacks were the critical mass that has spurred massive political action.

The White House is furious at the growing revolt of the states:
Liberal News

White House blasts Republican states for rejecting needy Syrian refugees, says “Xenophobia is not the answer to terror” #paris

11:47 AM – 16 Nov 2015

Here is a map of the states currently defying Obama on his Muslim importation program (updated hourly):


As of 11/17/2015 3:00EST


Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, Georgia, Florida, Idaho, Indiana, Illinois, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Massachusetts, Michigan, Mississippi, Nebraska, New Hampshire (D), New Jersey, New Mexico, North Carolina, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Wisconsin

UPDATE: Gov. Susana Martinez (R-NM) is opposed to the resettlement of Muslim migrants. This remains missing from all other internet maps/lists hours later, for some reason.

UPDATE: We have Alaska in green because its Republican Gov. Bill Walker (I, former R) said he “can’t be bothered” to address this issue due to other concerns, angering many Alaskans who want him to oppose it.

UPDATE: Gov. Jay Nixon (D-MO) has refused to bar Obama’s refugees from Missouri, despite 105 of 114 counties being opposed to it.

Is your state welcoming any of the 200,000 so-called “refugees” Obama is demanding be imported into the heart of America, despite there being no “effective protocol” to properly vet them for ISIS ties?

If so you may wish to contact your governor at THIS link.


Related articles:

Third Of Syrian Refugees ISIS Sympathizers, 13 Percent Support – Gateway Pundit

A poll released in November but ignored by the mainstream media shows a third of Syrian refugees do not want the Muslim terrorist group ISIS defeated. The survey results buttress concerns by the dozens of U.S. governors who have announced opposition to President Barack Obama’s plan to import 10,000 Syrian refugees over the next year.

The poll shows thirteen percent of Syrian refugees have a completely positive opinion of ISIS with another ten percent having mixed feelings on the terror group, suggesting that nearly one quarter are open to recruitment by ISIS.

Factoring the survey results with the 10,000 Syrian refugees Obama plans to bring to the United States means Obama will bring in 1,300 ISIS supporters and a total of 3,100 who do not want the US to defeat ISIS.

The Obama administration imported about 1,600 Syrian refugees in the past fiscal year. That means around 200 Syrian refugee ISIS supporters and a total of nearly 500 Syrian refugee ISIS sympathizers are already in the country.

The telephone poll of 900 Syrian refugees was conducted by the Arab Center for Research and Policy Studies as part of a larger survey of six hundred people in each of six Arab nations and the Palestinian territories about ISIS. The group surveyed Syrian refugees in “equal proportion” located in Turkey, Jordan and Lebanon. The survey also covered residents of Iraq, Egypt, Lebanon, Tunisia, Saudi Arabia, Jordan and the Palestinian territories.

The poll has a margin of error rate of plus or minus four percent.

The survey result for the other Arab countries show similar levels of support for ISIS which ought to prompt a reevaluation of the U.S. policy for immigrants and refugees from the Middle East. The sole exception is Lebanon where less than one percent have a positive view of ISIS.

At the other end of the spectrum, even more supportive of ISIS than the Syrian refugees, are Palestinians.

The survey shows twenty-four percent of Palestinians have a positive view of ISIS with another thirty-six percent only having a somewhat negative opinion of ISIS. The survey also shows Palestinians as the only group where less than fifty percent (48) support the defeat of ISIS .

A Google News search shows only Investors Business Daily and The Blaze have reported on the survey. In Canada, which has pledged to take in 25,000 Syrian refugees, it appears only The Rebel has reported on the survey.


Obama Admin ‘Lied’ About Vetting Syrian Refugees – WorldNetDaily

The former chairman of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence says President Obama has no coherent strategy to defeat ISIS, and he alleges one of Obama’s top advisers “lied to the American people” to perpetuate a misguided program allowing tens of thousands of refugees into the U.S.

Deputy National Security Adviser Ben Rhodes appeared on multiples Sunday morning news shows. When asked whether the news that one and possibly two of the Paris terrorists came to Europe as refugees would alter the Obama administration’s plan to accept tens of thousands of refugees, Rhodes said there would be no re-evaluation.

“No, Chuck,” Rhodes told “Meet the Press” moderator Chuck Todd. “We have very extensive screening procedures for all Syrian refugees who would come to the United States. There’s a very careful vetting process that includes our intelligence community, our National Counterterrorism Center, the Department of Homeland Security. So we can make sure we’re carefully screening anybody who comes to the United States.”

Peter Hoekstra spent 18 years in Congress and spent much of his time focused on intelligence matters. He is now with the Investigative Project on Terrorism and is the author of “Architects of Disaster,” which outlines the failure of the Obama administration’s policy in Libya.

“I think (Rhodes) basically lied to the American people,” Hoekstra told WND and Radio America. “He said we’ve got a good vetting process in place where we can vet those that are coming from Syria into the United States.”

He continued, “No we do not. The records don’t exist in Syria, especially after you’ve had five years of civil war. We don’t have a relationship with the regime. It’s an ungoverned area. We don’t know who these people are. Ben, shame on you for even implying that we’ve got a good vetting system. We’re lucky if can get the names right.”

In fact, even before the terrorist attacks in Paris, Hoekstra said the idea of bringing in tens of thousands of refugees was a fool’s errand. As such, he said the announcements from a growing number of governors that they won’t accept refugees is a good sign.

“I think it’s a good decision,” he said. “I wasn’t quite sure why we were ever welcoming these folks in. We are a welcoming nation to refugees and to these kinds of individuals, but only after they’ve been vetted.”

Hoekstra said spreading all these refugees around the Western world does nothing to solve the real problem.

“This problem is not solved by accepting refugees into Europe and the United States,” he said. “This problem is solved by eliminating ISIS and bringing some stability back into the Middle East. You’ve got to wipe ISIS out.”

The issue is taking on additional scrutiny after the European Union revealed only one-fifth of the refugees it has accepted (or about 44,000 of some 213,000 total) are actually from Syria.

But the refugee issue is just one element of the Obama administration’s approach to ISIS that baffles Hoekstra. On Monday, Obama told reporters at the G-20 Summit in Turkey that the Paris attacks would not alter the U.S. strategy toward ISIS. Hoekstra said the existing strategy is a proven disaster, as evidenced by Yemen and Libya turning into lawless wastelands and both Syria and Iraq getting increasingly unstable and deadly to Christians, Yazidis and others.

“I’m not sure what strategy this president is looking at that he believes it working,” Hoekstra said. “When you’ve got at least four countries that are no longer governed and are failed nation-states and are home for the planning and training and preparation for attacks against the West, that is not my view of success.”

Another statement from Obama in Turkey is getting even more attention. After announcing he was sticking with his existing strategy toward ISIS, Obama slammed those who want to America taking a more decisive role.

“What I’m not interested in doing is posing, or pursuing some notion of American leadership or America winning or whatever other slogans they come up with that has no relationship to what is actually going to work,” Obama said.

Hoekstra was stunned.

“This message is clear: When the president says, ‘I have no intention of following or implementing a strategy about America leading’ or whatever slogan they may come up with, it is clear that this president does not have a strategy in place for America leading in Northern Africa, the Middle East or, for that matter, any other place in the world,” Hoekstra said.

And he said America’s credibility is taking a beating as a result.

“I hate to be that critical of this president, but America is at risk,” Hoekstra said. “We are in danger, and we’re in danger of losing our influence in the world. We’ve been a voice of stability, security, democracy and human rights. We are just losing all credibility throughout significant portions of the world.”

In addition to his frustrations with the Obama administration, Hoekstra is alarmed at how unprepared the intelligence communities were for the Paris attacks.

“What I’m hearing is that there was some general awareness that there were some attacks or an attack was imminent in Europe,” Hoekstra said. “That was out there, but again no tactical insight into exactly where the attack would take place or when it would take place.”

He said the truth is, it’s really hard to find these small plots before they happen.

“It just tells you that ISIS and these radical jihadist groups in a country of 80 million people or in a country of 300-plus million people like the United States, it’s not that hard to hide and organize and prepare to carry out an attack like this,” Hoekstra said.

So what can be done to improve America’s odds of stopping future attacks?

“We need closer intelligence sharing between our agencies,” Hoekstra said. “We need to push the technology envelope as quickly as we can, and we need to improve our human intelligence.”

Intelligence experts say efforts to infiltrate ISIS have essentially “gone dark,” partly due to former National Security Agency contractor Edward Snowden exposing tactics for tracking terrorist suspects.

Hoekstra said this confirms what everyone should have known about Snowden from the outset.

“As I said at the time, this was not an American hero protecting American liberties,” he said. “This was an American traitor that was giving away some of America’s secrets that would make us more vulnerable to these kinds of groups and these kinds of individuals and these kinds of attacks.”



Governors Of Michigan And Alabama Refuse To Accept Syrian “Refugees” Into Their States

Snyder Suspends Syrian Refugee Effort In Michigan – Detroit Free Press


Gov. Rick Snyder’s decision to suspend efforts to bring Syrian refugees to Michigan in light of the deadly terrorist attacks in Paris on Friday has sparked controversy and launched the state into the national debate of how to protect U.S. citizens while providing a haven for those who desperately need help.

Snyder’s office released a statement Sunday saying the state would not be accepting any Syrian refugees until the U.S. Department of Homeland Security fully reviewed its procedures.

“Michigan is a welcoming state and we are proud of our rich history of immigration,” Snyder said in the statement. “But our first priority is protecting the safety of our residents.”

More than 120 people were killed in Paris on Friday night, and hundreds more injured, in a series of suicide bombings and attacks that officials say were orchestrated by the Islamic State, a terrorist group with a stronghold in Syria. News agencies have reported that a Syrian passport found at the scene of one of the attacks matches a refugee who traveled through Greece. Now in its fifth year, the war in Syria has devastated the country, sending millions of people abroad in search of a new life.

Snyder’s announcement Sunday is a step backward from recent efforts and comments from his administration offering to aid refugees. In September, Snyder said he was working with the federal government to determine the process for accepting refugees from the ongoing crisis in Syria and the Middle East.

“Isn’t that part of being a good Michigander?” he asked at the time, while stressing that the refugees would have to be carefully screened to assure they were not security threats.

His reversal drew immediate and divisive reactions across the nation on Sunday, but especially in metro Detroit, home to one of the largest Middle Eastern populations in the nation.

“Good decision,” state Rep. Tim Kelly, R-Saginaw Township, posted on his Facebook page.

“We expect more from you,” and “this sends the wrong message,” Rashida Tlaib, a former state representative from southwest Detroit, countered on her Twitter account.

Local Arab-American leaders and refugee advocates said Sunday they understand the governor’s concern about security, but argued the Department of Homeland Security already does extensive security checks before allowing any refugees into the U.S.

“The United States should be a safe haven,” said Dr. Yahya Basha, a Syrian-American advocate from West Bloomfield who has family members who are refugees. He was at the White House recently to discuss the Syrian refugee crisis with U.S. officials: “We should welcome them.”

Basha said he doesn’t mind the scrutiny before allowing refugees in but doesn’t think their arrival should be prevented.

Maged Moughni, a Dearborn attorney and Arab-American advocate, agreed, saying “it’s uncalled for… I think it’s really unfair.”

“It’s doing what ISIS wants… He’s just basically buying into what ISIS wants: Muslims against the West… Gov. Snyder is buying into the rhetoric.”

“I can understand being cautious, but to suspend it is wrong,” Moughni said.

A spokesman for the Michigan and Ohio branch of the Department of Homeland Security referred questions about Snyder’s move to the national office, which did not return an e-mail seeking comment late Sunday.

Sean de Four, vice president of child and family services with Lutheran Social Services of Michigan, said the U.S. has a moral obligation to help with what he called “a humanitarian crisis the world has not seen since World War II.”

The agency has helped resettle about 1,800 to 2,000 refugees in Michigan over the past year; about 200 of them are from Syria and many others are from Iraq, another war-torn country.

“I certainly understand and appreciate Gov. Snyder’s desire to be cautious and put the safety of Michiganders first,” de Four said. But “the State Department already uses an overabundance of caution in its screening of refugees before they gained entry into the United States. In fact, refugees spend an average of five to seven years in refugee camps being screened and background checks before access to any country.”

More Syrian refugees were expected in coming months, but Snyder’s decision could bring an end to that.

“He could make it very difficult, next to impossible for refugees to come here,” de Four said, pointing out that two-thirds of Syrian refugees are women and children. “It’s really unfortunate.”

Snyder has been known for his pro-immigrant views, in contrast to strong anti-immigrant sentiment heard on the national level in the Republican Party during the presidential race.

Two weeks ago, Snyder visited Hamtramck, which has the highest percentage of immigrants among all cities in the state, telling a crowd of Bangladeshi Americans: “I believe I’m the most pro-immigration governor in the country.”

Amid criticism from some conservatives over city voters electing a Muslim-majority city council, Snyder praised the city.

Then came Friday’s attack, prompting state Rep. Gary Glenn, R-Midland, to issue a statement Saturday night calling on Snyder to “reverse his call to relocate Syrian refugees in the state.”

“We should not rush to offer an open door to the high-risk importation of individuals from a known hotbed of Islamic extremism,” Glenn said, disputing assertions that the refugees can be safely vetted.

Snyder decided to halt the refugee program on Saturday, after consultation with legislative leaders, prior to Glenn’s statement, spokesman Dave Murray said.

It’s true that earlier efforts to bring Syrian refugees to Michigan “were contingent on proper security vetting, which is an extensive process that takes up to a year or more,” Murray said.

However, “in light of the terrible situation in Paris, Gov. Snyder has asked that the U.S. Department of Homeland Security complete a full review of those security procedures and clearances.”

Asked whether Syrian refugees who have been through the current vetting process and want to settle in Michigan should be prevented from doing so, Murray said he’s not aware of any refugees who fit those criteria, but would check.

On Sunday, U.S. Rep. Candice Miller, R-Harrison Township, issued a statement applauding Snyder: “I support Governor Snyder’s decision to suspend efforts to relocate Syrian refugees to Michigan, and have cautioned against the Administration’s decision to increase the number being admitted into the U.S…. The fact is, as evidenced by Friday’s horrific attack in Paris, terrorist organizations like ISIS are looking for any and every opportunity to exploit a nation’s hospitality to carry out their barbaric attacks against the innocent. Anyone who says we can adequately and safely vet these refugees is wrong because there is no database in Syria and no way to identify who’s who.”

“America has a long, proud history of helping refugees from across the globe, and we will continue to help. However, in doing so, we must make certain that we are not jeopardizing the safety of our citizens.”


Related article:

Alabama Governor: Syrian Refugees Can’t Come To Alabama – Weekly Standard


Alabama governor Robert Bentley is refusing to allow Syrian refugees to relocate to Alabama.

“After full consideration of this weekend’s attacks of terror on innocent citizens in Paris, I will oppose any attempt to relocate Syrian refugees to Alabama through the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program. As your Governor, I will not stand complicit to a policy that places the citizens of Alabama in harm’s way,” Governor Bentley says in a statement released by his office.

“The acts of terror committed over the weekend are a tragic reminder to the world that evil exists and takes the form of terrorists who seek to destroy the basic freedoms we will always fight to preserve. I will not place Alabamians at even the slightest, possible risk of an attack on our people. Please continue to join me in praying for those who have suffered loss and for those who will never allow freedom to fade at the hands of terrorists.”

The office of the governor of Alabama says that no Syrian refugees have come through Alabama and that there are no current threats to the state.

“The Alabama Law Enforcement Agency is working diligently with the FBI, DHS and federal intelligence partners to monitor any possible threats. Law enforcement presence has been increased at major gathering events in Alabama to further insure the safety of citizens. To date, there has been no credible intelligence of any terrorist threats in Alabama,” reads a statement from the governor’s office.

“Alabama currently has one U.S. State Department approved refugee processing center in Mobile. There have been no Syrian refugees relocated in Alabama to date, though neighboring states have processed a number of refugees.”



Hundreds Of Thousands Of Fed-Up Taxpayers Flee Democrat-Run States For Republican Ones

Taxpayers Fleeing Democrat-Run States For Republican Ones – Americans For Tax Reform


In 2013, more than 200,000 people on net fled states with Democrat governors for ones run by Republicans, according to an analysis of newly released IRS data by Americans for Tax Reform.

“People move away from high tax states to low tax states. Every tax refugee is sending a powerful message to politicians,” said ATR President Grover Norquist. “They are voting with their feet. Leaders in Texas and Florida are listening. New York and California are not.”

That year, Democrat-run states lost a net 226,763 taxpayers, bringing with them nearly $15.7 billion in adjusted gross income (AGI). That same year, states with Republican governors gained nearly 220,000 new taxpayers, who brought more than $14.1 billion in AGI with them.

Only one-third of states with Democrat governors gained taxpayers, compared to three-fifths of states with Republican governors.

Top 5 loser states for Democrat governors in 2013:

· New York (114,929 people with $5.7 billion in AGI)

· Illinois (68,943 people with $3.8 billion in AGI)

· California (47,458 people with 3.8 billion in AGI)

· Connecticut (14,453 people with $1.8 billion in AGI)

· Massachusetts (11,915 people with $1 billion in AGI)

Top 5 winner states for Republican governors in 2013:

· Texas (152,912 people with $6 billion in AGI)

· Florida (74,094 people with 8.3 billion in AGI)

· South Carolina (29,176 people with 1.6 billion in AGI)

· North Carolina (26,207 people with $1.5 billion in AGI)

· Arizona (16,549 people with $1.5 billion in AGI)

The single largest net migration from one state to another took place between New York and Florida (17,355 people).



Woman With Rare And Dangerous Form Of TB May Have Exposed Hundreds In Three U.S. States

Report: Patient With Rare & Dangerous Form Of TB Sent To NIH, May Have Exposed Hundreds In 3 States – Big Government


An unidentified female patient with an extremely rare and drug-resistant form of tuberculosis is being treated at the National Institutes of Health (NIH), and authorities are reportedly attempting to track down hundreds of people who may have been in contact with her and exposed to the dangerous form tuberculosis.

According to an NBC report, the unidentified woman flew from India to the United States and “traveled to at least three states before she sought treatment from a U.S. doctor.” The patient was reportedly “isolated in a suburban Chicago hospital before she was sent to the NIH.”

“The patient traveled in April from India to the United States through Chicago O’Hare airport,” the CDC said in a statement to NBC. “The patient also spent time in Missouri and Tennessee. Seven weeks after arriving in the United States, the patient sought treatment for and was diagnosed with active TB.”

The CDC said it “will obtain the passenger manifest for that flight from the airline and will begin a contact investigation.” The agency said that though “the risk of getting a contagious disease on an airplane is low, public health officers sometimes need to find and alert travelers who may have been exposed to an ill passenger.”

But the unidentified woman does not have a normal case of tuberculosis.

She has what is known as XDR-TB (extensively drug-resistant tuberculosis), which is so rare and dangerous that the CDC reportedly “got reports of 63 cases between 1993 and 2011″ and “only about a third to half of cases can even be cured.”

Though ordinary TB is “hard to treat and requires, at a minimum, weeks of antibiotics,” XDR-TB “resists the effects of almost all the known TB drugs” and patients sometimes “have to have pockets of infection surgically removed.” In fact, XDR-TB is reportedly “so dangerous that health officials will have to make a concerted effort to warn anyone who may be at risk.”

According to the CDC, “TB bacteria are put into the air when a person with TB disease of the lungs or throat coughs, sneezes, shouts, or sings,” and “these bacteria can float in the air for several hours, depending on the environment. Persons who breathe in the air containing these TB bacteria can become infected.”

The NIH said that “the patient was transferred to the NIA via special air and ground ambulances” and is staying in an isolation room that is “specifically designed for handling patients with respiratory infections, including XDR-TB.” The special isolation rooms reportedly “control air flow to prevent germs from escaping into the rest of the hospital or outside.”

The woman reportedly “may face months or even years of treatment,” and, according to NBC, “the average cost of treating multidrug-resistant TB is $134,000, compared to $17,000 for a normal case.” The cost can even “shoot up to $430,000 for an extensively resistant case.” NBC noted that it is not yet clear at the moment who will pay for the patient’s extensive treatment.



Nevada And Tennessee Join 24 Other States Suing To Stop Obama’s Executive Amnesty

Nevada And Tennessee Make It 26 States Suing To Stop Obama’s Amnesty – Townhall


Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton announced Monday that both Nevada and Tennessee have joined the Lone Star state’s challenge of President Obama’s executive amnesty, bringing the total number of states fighting Obama’s unilateral immigration policies to 26.

“Texas is proud to lead a coalition that now includes a majority of the United States standing up against the President’s rogue actions,” Attorney General Ken Paxton said in a statement. “The momentum against the President’s lawlessness continues to build with Tennessee and Nevada joining the effort to protect our states from the economic and public safety implications of illegal amnesty. As President Obama himself has said numerous times, he lacks the authority to impose amnesty. His actions represent a blatant case of overreach and clear abuse of power.”

U.S. District Judge Andrew Hanen already heard oral arguments in the case January 15th, where Texas argued that Obama’s amnesty would create a new wave of illegal immigration that would burden state governments. “This is the second time they’ve done it in two years,” Texas attorney Andrew Oldham told Hanen. “People think: They’ve done it twice in two years. Maybe they’ll do it again in 2016.”

Obama lawyer Kathleen Hartnett disputed that claim, insisting that new arrivals will not come “on the expectation of receiving deferred action because they will be turned away.” “His policy only applies to people who have been here since 2012,” she said.

Judge Hanen is not likely to buy that administration argument. In a 2013 case, Hanen predicted that Obama’s lax border enforcement policies would lead to a wave of illegal immigration. And that is exactly what happened in 2014.

Texas and the other 25 states are asking Judge Hanen to issue an injunction that would stop Obama from giving out any work permits before the program gets up and running in May.

If Obama’s amnesty does stand it will cost taxpayers billions in tax credits every year.

With Tennessee and Nevada, the full list of 26 states suing Obama over his executive amnesty are: Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Kansas, Louisiana, Maine, Michigan, Mississippi, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Utah, West Virginia, Wisconsin.



Coalition Of States Suing Over Obama’s Executive Amnesty Scheme Swells To 24

Coalition Of States Suing Over Immigration Swells To 24 – Conservative Intelligence Briefing

Last week we reported that the tip of the Republican spear aimed at President Obama’s Executive-Order-turned-proclamation on immigration was the coalition of states that have joined the suit filed and led by TX Attorney General Greg Abbott.


At the time of reporting, the coalition of states in the suit stood at a healthy 17, but that number has now swelled to 24. With the potential for more states to sign on in the coming weeks, more than half of the states in the union could be taking on the federal government for its overreach.

Abbott remarked in a statement Wednesday on the coalition’s suit, “The president’s proposed executive decree violates the U.S. Constitution and federal law, circumvents the will of the American people and is an affront to the families and individuals who follow our laws to legally immigrate to the United States.”

The suit now includes the following states, reports CNN: Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Kansas, Louisiana, Maine, Michigan, Mississippi, Montana, Nebraska, North Carolina, South Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Dakota, Texas, Utah, West Virginia, and Wisconsin.



Study Finds Right To Work States Booming While Leftist, Forced Unionization States Busting

Study: Right To Work States Booming, Forced Unionization States Busting – Washington Free Beacon

Right to work laws have led to skyrocketing manufacturing growth in the auto industry, according to a new study.


The National Institute of Labors Relations Research, an employment policy think tank, found that the auto industry’s flight from coercive unionization has produced a boom in right to work states, such as Tennessee. The institute traced federal labor statistics from 2002 to 2010 and discovered a dramatic shift in where the nation’s cars are being built.

“Considering just the 22 states that had Right to Work laws from 2002 to 2012, the Right to Work share of nationwide automotive manufacturing output grew from 36% to 52% over the decade,” NILRR researcher Stan Greer wrote on the institute’s website. “Real manufacturing GDP in these 22 Right to Work states grew by 87% from 2002 to 2012, but fell by 2% in forced-unionism states.”

Foreign carmakers, such as Toyota, Honda, and Volkswagen have established factories in right to work states, as well as non-union shops in Kentucky. Additionally, Ford, GM, and Chrysler have shifted jobs and supplier contracts from forced unionization states to right to work states.

“As recently as 2002, just 21% of the total U.S. output in automotive manufacturing took place in Right to Work states,” Greer found.

That gap will likely widen when the U.S. Commerce Department’s Bureau of Economic Analysis release manufacturing data for 2013 later this year.

Michigan and Indiana, two of the largest automobile manufacturing hubs in the United States, became right to work states in 2012 and 2013, respectively. Those laws will allow autoworkers to opt out of the United Auto Workers when their current contracts expire, which could signal a steeper decline of the number of cars built by unionized workers.

Auto expert Ted Niedermeyer said that Big Labor’s dominance of the auto industry “is on its last legs.”

“The fact that the UAW has not responded well to competition explains why auto production in this country is only expanding in non-union states,” he said.

The UAW has been trying for many years to insinuate itself into a manufacturing facility in a right-to-work state in order to boost its sagging membership. The union had its best chance when it secured Volkswagen’s support to unionize a Chattanooga, Tenn., facility, Niedermeyer said. While management embraced unionization, workers soundly rejected the UAW in a February vote.

Patrick Semmens, a spokesman at the National Right to Work Committee, said that workers have witnessed the negative effects that come with union representation, as companies shift jobs out of traditional manufacturing sites. The fact that business is booming in union-free shops reminds workers of the potential downsides of unionization.

“The moral case for Right to Work as a means of protecting the individual rights and free choice of workers is strong enough all on its own. But time and time again we see that freedom for workers also benefits the economy of states that choose to protect worker choice and the booming auto industry in Right to Work states is just another example,” Semmens said.

Niedermeyer added that the rejection of the UAW in Tennessee is only the first sign of lagging support for unions among autoworkers.

“Beyond even the UAW’s rejection at the Chattanooga, Tenn., Volkswagen plant we are now seeing pro-union workers at the Mercedes plant in Vance, AL telling the UAW that their presence has been counterproductive,” he said. “The UAW-affiliated automakers have been shedding production capacity over the long term due to eroding market share, and are unlikely to add any significant amount of new production jobs in the US any time soon.”

These trends could play a central role as right to work laws are debated in Missouri and other states, according to NILRR’s Greer writes. Lawmakers should have to reconcile the impact that forced unionization could have on local economies.

“The overwhelming advantage Right to Work states have enjoyed over forced-unionism states in attracting automotive manufacturing investment ought to put the burden of proof on Big Labor legislators in forced-unionism states like Kentucky, Missouri and Ohio who claim it makes no difference to companies considering new plant construction or expansions whether unionism is voluntary or not,” he said.