How Refugees Became a Campaign Issue in Montana, featured in Mother Jones, is an article by Max J. Rosenthal centered on the Montana gubernatorial race of 2016. As well as discussing how refugees became a prominent issue in the Montana campaign, Rosenthal analyzes what causes people’s rejection to refugees.
Starting with a reference to the Paris terrorist attacks in November, 2015 Rosenthal lays out the political and local sentiments on bringing refugees to Montana, and more specifically Missoula. Since the attacks “30 mostly republican governors” (1, Rosenthal) have had a fear driven reaction towards the acceptance of refugees in the U.S. In order to address what they believe to be a threat to security, these Governors publicly requested that Syrian refugee placement be stopped. Absent among these Governors was Governor Steve Bullock of Montana.
In the article Rosenthal pointedly refers to Bullock’s opponent in the 2016 election, Greg Gianforte, in discussing the refugee backlash from Montana residents. Gianforte, in a recent mailer, attacking Bullock’s stance on refugees said, “Governor Bullock supports bringing Syrian refugees into Montana.” (1). Feeding on security …show more content…
In Gianforte’s mailer he takes a stance, saying that as Governor he would “’stand up to dangerous refugee programs’ and refuse entry to ‘unvetted refugees.’” (1). Contradictory to this statement is the fact that the vetting process for refugees is the most rigorous of all vetting processes for immigrants, averaging three years in length. When it comes to vetting refugees and being Governor there is a lack of connection. States, and specifically Governors, do not have jurisdiction over the immigration of refugees, this lies in the hands of the Department of State and Department of Homeland Security, both of which are federal agencies.
Starting with a reference to the Paris terrorist attacks in November, 2015 Rosenthal lays out the political and local sentiments on bringing refugees to Montana, and more specifically Missoula. Since the attacks “30 mostly republican governors” (1, Rosenthal) have had a fear driven reaction towards the acceptance of refugees in the U.S. In order to address what they believe to be a threat to security, these Governors publicly requested that Syrian refugee placement be stopped. Absent among these Governors was Governor Steve Bullock of Montana.
In the article Rosenthal pointedly refers to Bullock’s opponent in the 2016 election, Greg Gianforte, in discussing the refugee backlash from Montana residents. Gianforte, in a recent mailer, attacking Bullock’s stance on refugees said, “Governor Bullock supports bringing Syrian refugees into Montana.” (1). Feeding on security …show more content…
In Gianforte’s mailer he takes a stance, saying that as Governor he would “’stand up to dangerous refugee programs’ and refuse entry to ‘unvetted refugees.’” (1). Contradictory to this statement is the fact that the vetting process for refugees is the most rigorous of all vetting processes for immigrants, averaging three years in length. When it comes to vetting refugees and being Governor there is a lack of connection. States, and specifically Governors, do not have jurisdiction over the immigration of refugees, this lies in the hands of the Department of State and Department of Homeland Security, both of which are federal agencies.