Thread: Republicans Who Oppose, Support Trump Refugee Order

Republicans who oppose, support Trump refugee order



Jordan Carney January 30, 2017


President Trump's executive order to temporarily halt a federal program admitting refugees and others has sparked criticism from his party and confusion for security officials across the country.
The orders imposed a 90-day ban on the entry of nationals from seven predominantly Muslim countries — Iran, Iraq, Syria, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Yemen. It also indefinitely paused the entry of refugees from Syria.
Green card holders from the seven countries were initially denied entry on Saturday as officials sought to implement the order, though White House chief of staff Reince Priebus said Sunday that those with green cards would be allowed to come into the United States.



Trump defended the policies on Sunday, saying they did not constitute a ban on Muslims and arguing they were necessary to give the U.S. control over its borders and protect the country from terrorist threats. A number of GOP lawmakers have expressed concern or opposition over the administration's policies, which could raise pressure on Trump to make additional changes. Here's a look at the Republicans opposing, critical or supportive of the order.
SENATORS OPPOSING THE ORDER (6)
Sen. Lamar Alexander (Tenn.)
Alexander said in a statement to a local TV station that "this vetting proposal itself needed more vetting. More scrutiny of those traveling from war-torn countries to the United States is wise. But this broad and confusing order seems to ban legal, permanent residents with ‘green cards' ... And while not explicitly a religious test, it comes close to one which is inconsistent with our American character.”
Sen. Susan Collins (Maine)

Collins said Trump's executive order is "overly broad and implementing it will be immediately problematic." She added that "religious tests serve no useful purpose in the immigration process and run contrary to our American values."
Sen. Lindsey Graham (S.C.)
Graham, in a joint statement with Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) on Sunday, sad the order wasn't "property vetted," and the two senators said they "fear this executive order will become a self-inflicted wound in the fight against terrorism."
Sen. John McCain (Ariz.)
McCain said the order has created a "very confusing process," adding, “I think the effect will probably in some areas give ISIS some more propaganda."
In a joint statement with Graham, he added, “We are particularly concerned by reports that this order went into effect with little to no consultation with the Departments of State, Defense, Justice, and Homeland Security.”
Sen. Jerry Moran (Kansas)
Moran said in a statement that "while I support thorough vetting, I do not support restricting the rights of U.S. citizens and lawful permanent residents. Furthermore, far-reaching national security policy should always be devised in consultation with Congress and relevant government agencies."
Sen. Ben Sasse (Neb.)
"The President is right to focus attention on the obvious fact that borders matter. At the same time, while not technically a Muslim ban, this order is too broad," Sasse said.
SENATORS EXPRESSING CONCERN ABOUT THE ORDER (15)
Sen. John Barrasso (Wyo.)
Barrasso said in a statement to The Washington Post that "a religious test or ban is against everything our country stands for. We need to remember that some of our best sources of information that keeps our nation and our troops safe comes from our Muslim friends and allies.”
Sen. Bill Cassidy (La.)

Cassidy said in a Facebook post, "I am pleased to see that this order is being refined to address this and I look forward to it being further refined."


Sen. Bob Corker (Tenn.)
The Senate Foreign Relations Committee chairman said in a statement that "this executive order has been poorly implemented, especially with respect to green card holders. The administration should immediately make appropriate revisions."
Sen. Joni Ernst (Iowa)

Ernst said in a statement that “there must be more clarity surrounding the order’s implementation. In our efforts to protect our nation from ISIS, we also must ensure we are not inadvertently penalizing our allies in the fight against radical Islamic terrorism — especially those who have supported U.S. military efforts in Iraq.”
Sen. Jeff Flake (Ariz.)
Flake said in a Medium post that while the Trump administration is "right to be concerned about national security ... it’s unacceptable when even legal permanent residents are being detained or turned away at airports and ports of entry."
Sen. Orrin Hatch (Utah)
Hatch said the administration should "move to quickly tailor its policy on visa issuance as narrowly as possible, delivering on our security needs while reducing unnecessary burdens on the vast majority of visa seekers."
Sen. Dean Heller (Nev.)
"I share the president's desire to protect our nation from harm," Heller saidon Twitter.

"I agree that better vetting and border protection measures are necessary. That's why I support the thorough vetting of individuals entering our country. However, I am deeply troubled by the appearance of religious ban. The use of an overly broad executive order is not the way strengthen national security. I encourage the administration to partner with Congress to find a solution."
Sen. James Lankford (Okla.)
Lankford said on Twitter, “We should value freedom & not surrender security. We can protect the homeland while upholding #religiousfreedom & refuge for the persecuted."
Sen. Mike Lee (Utah)
Lee told the Salt Lake Tribune he does "have some technical questions about President Trump's Executive Order” and said he and his staff “will continue to reach out to the White House for clarification on these issues.”
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (Ky.)
McConnell said "it's a good idea to tighten the vetting process, but I also think it's important to remember that some of our best sources in the war against radical Islamic terrorism are Muslims."
He did not specifically say he opposed the executive order, noting it would be up to the courts to decide if it's "gone too far."
Sen. Rob Portman (Ohio)
Portman told CNN that the executive order wasn't "properly vetted" and that the administration should "slow down."
“We ought to all take a deep breath and come up with something that makes sense for our national security and again for this notion that America has always been a welcoming home for refugees and immigrants."
Sen. Pat Roberts (Kansas):
Roberts said he agreed that there needs to be a "better vetting process" but "we need to strike a balance that protects the rights of Americans and those permitted to enter the country legally. The president needs to work with Congress to ensure every aspect of a major policy change such as this is taken into consideration."
Sen. Marco Rubio (Fla.)
In a statement with Sen. Tim Scott (R-S.C.), Rubio said that while it’s clear “some of what is being said and reported about the scope and implications of these measures is misleading,” it’s “also clear that the manner in which these measures were crafted and implemented have greatly contributed to the confusion, anxiety and uncertainty.”


Sen. Tim Scott (S.C.)
In a statement, Scott and Rubio said they are “seeking clarity on the changes to the Visa Waiver program, which is critical to the economies of our respective states."
“And we are uneasy about the potential impact of these measures on our military and our diplomatic personnel abroad, as well as those who put their lives on the line to work with us.”
They said they are both “committed to doing what we must to keep America safe” while also remaining “equally committed to the defense of religious liberty and our tradition of providing refuge to those fleeing persecution.”

Sen. Thom Tillis (N.C.)
Tillis posted a statement on Twitter that said “there is a lot of confusion surrounding the order” and said that implementation should be “refined to provide more clarity and mitigate unintended consequences that do not make our country any safer.”
My statement on the immigration executive order. #ncpol pic.twitter.com/qbjAvu9qme
— Senator Thom Tillis (@SenThomTillis) January 29, 2017
HOUSE MEMBERS OPPOSING THE ORDER (
Rep. Justin Amash (Mich.)
Amash outlined his concerns in a string of tweets, arguing that while more refugee vetting is needed, "a blanket ban represents an extreme approach not consistent with our nation's values."
Rep. Mike Coffman (Colo.)
"While I've supported heightened vetting procedures, I have never, nor will I ever support a blanket travel ban for people solely based on ethnic or religious grounds," Coffman said.
Rep. Charlie Dent (Pa.)
"I guess I understand what his intention is, but unfortunately the order appears to have been rushed through without full consideration," Dent told the Washington Post.
Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick (Pa.)
Fitzpatrick said in a statement to the Philadelphia Inquirer that the order "entirely misses the mark." He added that, "while serious actions are needed to protect our country, these must not be done in a way that singles out any specific nations or ethnicities."
Rep. Will Hurd (Texas)
"This visa ban is the ultimate display of mistrust and will erode our allies' willingness to fight with us,” Hurd told CNN. “The ban also provides terrorists with another tool to gain sympathy and recruit new fighters."
Rep. Leonard Lance (N.J.):
Lance said in a Facebook post that the "executive order appears rushed and poorly implemented. Reports of green card holders and those who assisted us in the War on Terror being denied or delayed entry into the U.S. is deeply concerning and must be remedied immediately. It is Congress’ role to amend our immigration laws and I strongly urge President Trump to work with legislators to enact a clear, effective and enhanced vetting and monitoring process."
Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-Fla.)
Ros-Lehtinen said in a statement that she opposes "the suspension of visas from the seven named countries because we could have accomplished our objective of keeping our homeland safe by immediate implementation of more thorough screening procedures."
Rep. Elise Stefanik (N.Y.)
Sefanik wrote in a Facebook post that "our first role as the federal government is to protect our national security and I believe we need to work in Congress to reform and strengthen our visa vetting process. However, I oppose President Trump's rushed and overly broad Executive Order."
HOUSE MEMBERS EXPRESSING CONCERN ABOUT THE ORDER (
Rep. Carlos Curbelo (Fla.)
In a Sunday tweet, Curbelo said, “US permanent residents shouldn't be detained, deported, or discriminated against. They've already been thoroughly vetted #executiveorders.”
He later added that he was "grateful" to see Homeland Security Secretary John Kelly say “the entry of lawful permanent residents to be in the national interest."
"Seems the @POTUS #executiveorders were hastily issued & need a lot of work," Curbelo said.
Rep. Barbara Comstock (Va.)
Comstock said Trump's executive order "went beyond the increased vetting actions that Congress has supported on a bipartisan basis and inexplicably applied to green card holders. ... This should be addressed and corrected expeditiously."
Rep. Jaime Herrera Beutler (Wash.):
Beutler said in a statement "surely there is a way to enhance the security at our borders without unnecessarily detaining innocent individuals who have followed the rules, stood in line, and pose no threat to our country, and I hope this Administration takes quick action to ensure that we’re focused only on those who pose a threat to our safety."
Rep. Adam Kinzinger (Ill.)
Kinzinger wrote in a Medium post, "I support a comprehensive look at our vetting process. ... However, reports of green card holders and those who assisted us in the war on terror being denied or delayed entry is deeply concerning."
Rep. Raúl Labrador (Idaho)
Labrador called Trump's order a "sound policy" and criticized the media for calling it a Muslim ban. But he said permanent U.S. residents should not be denied entry and criticized the administration's rollout.



Rep. Michael McCaul (Texas)
“In light of the confusion and uncertainty created in the wake of the President’s Executive Order, it is clear adjustments are needed,” the House Homeland Security Committee chairman said in a statement.
“We should not simply turn away individuals who already have lawful U.S. visas or green cards—like those who have risked their lives serving alongside our forces overseas or who call America their home.”
He added that, “In the future, such policy changes should be better coordinated with the agencies implementing them and with Congress to ensure we get it right—and don’t undermine our nation’s credibility while trying to restore it.”
Rep. Dan Newhouse (Wash.)
Newhouse said in a statement that "the manner in which this Order is being implemented at airports and other points of entry appears that some innocent people... are having their lives needlessly disrupted. I encourage the administration to review its order in consultation with its national security team to ensure our enforcement resources are being targeted where they can be most effective."
Rep. Steve Stivers (Ohio)

Stivers said he believes the vetting process must be improved, but, "I believe the executive order risks violating our nation's values and fails to differentiate mainstream Islamic partners from radical Islamic terrorists. ... I urge the administration to quickly replace this temporary order with permanent improvements."

REPUBLICANS VOICING SUPPORT FOR THE ORDER

Senate (5)

Sen. Roy Blunt (Mo.)

Blunt told USA Today that Trump "is doing what he told the American people he would do. I do support increased vetting on people applying to travel from countries with extensive terrorist ties or activity. These seven countries meet that standard."

Sen. Tom Cotton (Ark.)

Cotton said "it's simply wrong to call the president’s executive order concerning immigration and refugees ‘a religious test’ of any kind. I doubt many Arkansans or Americans more broadly object to taking a harder look at foreigners coming into our country from war-torn nations with known terror networks."

Sen. Steve Daines (Mont.)

Daines said in a statement that "we need to take the time to examine our existing programs to ensure terrorists aren't entering our country. The safety of U.S. citizens must be our number one priority.”


Sen. Pat Toomey (Pa.)

Toomey said in a statement that he supports the administration's decision. He added while the "initial executive order was flawed... the administration has clarified that this order does not apply to Green Card holders and that the Secretaries of State and Homeland Security have the ability to grant exceptions."

Sen. Todd Young (Ind.)

"I look forward to carefully analyzing this temporary executive order and its effects, and working with this new administration and my colleagues in Congress to keep America safe while finally ending the unspeakable suffering of the Syrian people," Young said in a statement.

House (39)

Rep. Ralph Abraham (La.)

Abraham tweeted, "On immigration, I stand w/ President @realDonaldTrump 100%. We must focus on protecting Americans first!"


Rep. Robert Aderholt (Ala.)

“Quite frankly, I think it is commonsense for additional vetting to occur for the countries that are home to ISIS and AL Qaeda," Aderholt said in a statement.

Rep. Jodey Arrington (Texas)

Arrington told The Washington Post that “given concerns about the inadequate vetting of refugees and problems with our immigration system, this temporary pause is intended to ensure the safety of our citizens.”

Rep. Brian Babin (Texas)

Babin reacted to the executive order on Facebook, saying, "Great news — now let's get it into law!"

Rep. Jim Banks (Ind.)

A spokeswoman for Banks told USA Today, "Congressman Banks supports tightening the vetting process to ensure radical extremists who wish to harm American citizens cannot enter the United States. He is studying the president's executive order and hopes to learn more next week about how it is being implemented."

Rep. Lou Barletta (Pa.)

"I commend President Trump for suspending the refugee program, and in particular for Syria and the six other countries, because they are unquestionably terrorist havens and hotspots," Barletta said.
Rep. Joe Barton (Texas)
Barton told McClatchy that he supported the ban, but, "We have heard of brief delays among constituents and are empathetic to any inconveniences while traveling."

Rep. Marsha Blackburn (Tenn.)

Blackburn sent out an email backing Trump's decision, writing, "I agree with President Trump! This is the most responsible approach to the refugee program if we're going to keep America safe."


Rep. Rod Blum (Iowa.)

Blum told the Cedar Rapids Gazette that "the bottom line is they can’t properly vet people coming from war-torn areas like Syria and Iraq. If we can’t vet people properly, then we shouldn’t be allowing them into our country. I’m supportive of that.”

Rep. Vern Buchanan (Fla.)

Buchanan called the executive order "long overdue," adding, "a freeze on Syrian refugees and a crackdown on sanctuary cities! Time to protect Americans.

Rep. Larry Bucshon (Ind.)

"I support temporarily restricting the admittance of refugees and other travelers from these select areas until a verifiable system is in place to fully and completely vet whether or not the individuals admitted pose a threat to the safety of the American people," Bucshon told a local newspaper.

Rep. Chris Collins (N.Y.)

Collins told a local NPR station that he supported the order, adding "I get a little frustrated with the folks who don't like Trump trying to make something into something it's not. So I'm just disappointed that we can't have a true and honest debate without someone inflaming the situation and claiming there's religious overtones."

Rep. Kevin Cramer (N.D.)

Cramer, a potential 2018 challenger to Sen. Heidi Heitkamp (D), told the Forum News Service that “what Donald Trump is doing, is he’s pulling America’s head out of the sand and facing the reality that we have not been kept very safe by current immigration and refugee policies.”

Rep. Dan Donovan (N.Y.)

"President Trump's decision is in America's best interest, and I support exploring safe zones in the region to protect innocent life," Donovan said in a statement.

Rep. Jeff Duncan (S.C.)

Duncan posted on Twitter: "I'm grateful that @realDonaldTrump is making the safety & security of the American people his top priority. His actions are very appropriate."

Rep. Bob Goodlatte (Va.)

The House Judiciary chairman said in a statement that "Trump has begun to fulfill this responsibility by taking a number of critical steps within his authority to strengthen national security and the integrity of our nation’s immigration system."

Rep. Clay Higgins (La.):
Higgins told a local TV station that "radical Islamic Terror should not be a partisan concern. The President's executive order for a short-term restriction on visa entry from 7 countries... that are known to foster terrorists... combined with a systematic review of our immigration and vetting procedure, is reasonable."
Rep. Richard Hudson (N.C.)

Hudson told a local newspaper that "Trump is right to pause the flow of refugees from countries where terrorism is rampant until we can properly vet them and implement additional screening for individuals."

Rep. Bill Johnson (Ohio)

Johnson posted on Facebook that he backs the "temporary, three month, precautionary action directed towards a handful of countries with a history of producing and exporting terrorists. These countries are either torn apart by violence, or under the control of hostile, jihadist governments."

Rep. Peter King (N.Y.)
King told Newsday that he backs the executive order, saying "I don’t think the Constitution applies to people coming in from outside the country, especially if there is a logical basis for it."

Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers (Wash.)

"It is the federal government's responsibility to protect the American people, and the Trump administration is following through on that responsibility," McMorris Rogers said in a statement.

Rep. Luke Messer (Ind.)

Messer said the "details will of course matter, but it's way past time for us to develop this capability, and President Trump is right to prioritize American safety until we get this done."

Rep. Kristi Noem (S.D.): Noem said in a statement, "I support putting a temporary pause on accepting refugees from terrorist-held areas — at least until the administration can certify that asylum seekers do not present a safety threat."

Rep. Devin Nunes (Calif.)
Nunes called the order “a common-sense security measure to prevent terror attacks on the homeland. While accommodations should be made for green card holders and those who’ve assisted the U.S. armed forces, this is a useful temporary measure on seven nations of concern until we can verify who is entering the United States.”

Rep. John Ratcliffe (Texas)

"I applaud President Trump's actions to vamp up the vetting of refugees attempting to enter our country. ... I've been very vocal about the threats posed by the woeful inadequacy of our current screening process," Ratcliffe posted on Facebook.

Rep. Dave Reichert (Wash.)

Reichert told a local radio station that "we must be absolutely certain we have systems in place capable of thoroughly vetting anyone applying for refugee status on American soil.”

Rep. Jim Renacci (Ohio):

Renacci said in a statement that "while I strongly encourage the administration to examine more closely whether it is effectual and necessary to subject green card holders from these nations to this temporary order, I fully support our government's renewed commitment to keeping Americans of all faiths safe and free across our homeland."


Rep. Todd Rokita (Ind.)

Rokita told an Indiana newspaper that "this is not a ban on Muslim refugees, as the order specifically targets a select few nations with known terrorist networks and is similar to an executive order signed by President Obama without controversy in 2011."

Rep. Dennis Ross (Fla.)

Ross said "this is long overdue. We must ensure our country is safe from radical Islamic jihadists who want to kill Americans."
Rep. Ed Royce (Calif.)
Royce, the chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, told The Washington Post that a pause of “refugees from terror hot spots is the right call to keep America safe,” but added, “I hope cases of individuals with visas traveling as this executive action went into effect — including some who served alongside U.S. troops — will be resolved quickly.”

Speaker Paul Ryan (Wis.)

Ryan was among the first to support the ban, with his office telling The Washington Post that "this is not a religious test and it is not a ban on people of any religion."

Rep. Steve Scalise (La.)

Scalise told Fox News that "it's very prudent to say, 'Let's be careful about who comes into our country to make sure that they're not terrorists.'"

Rep. Pete Sessions (Texas)

Sessions said in a statement that "just as President Obama suspended the refugee program in 2011 for six months, the Trump Administration is working to protect national security by making adjustments in the refugee vetting process."

Rep. John Shimkus (Ill.)
Shimkus said in a statement that "this temporary halt will give Congress and the new Administration time to evaluate and improve the vetting process, and in the meantime gives Secretary Kelly authority to grant exceptions to the restrictions as needed."
Rep. Scott Taylor (Va.)

Taylor said in a statement that "while I do not agree with some of the rhetoric, taking a pause, figuring out if we are properly vetting people, and making changes if necessary to continue our American principles is prudent and needed."

Rep. Dave Trott (Mich.)

Trott told the Detroit Free Press that "until we can adequately vet these refugees and ensure the safety of all Americans, I support President Trump's executive order to stay refugees from these terror-prone countries."

Rep. Jackie Walorski (Ind.)

Walorski told USA Today that she wanted "greater clarity" but added, "The temporary suspension of the refugee program and admission of individuals from countries where terrorism poses an elevated threat will allow our national security officials to examine the vetting process and strengthen safeguards to prevent terrorists from entering our homeland."

Rep. Roger Williams (Texas)

Williams told CNN that "President Trump is responsible for defending this country, and I think what we've seen in the last couple days with executive orders that he's passed, that's what he's doing."
Rep. Lee Zeldin (N.Y.)
“I support the temporary entry restriction from certain nations until the administration, Congress and the American people know with confidence that any individual being granted admission does not pose a threat to our security," Zeldin said in a statement.
"With all that being said, I will be closely monitoring the execution of this EO to make sure that any misapplication is corrected immediately.”
Katie Bo Williams contributed.


http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/3...-refugee-order

that is make a lot

Many thanks to all those who are supportive of the travel ban. To the rest, if you had any clue how to solve our deep and serious troubles, you would have alread done so. So sit down, be quiet and wait for orders. When you fully understand why this was needed and why it was done, then many of you opposing and criticizing the ban will look as foolish as you've proven yourselves to be.

I just called my senators and both of their Washington office telephones were busy. Then I went to distinct offices and mailboxes were full at the ones I called. I finally reached a person to voice my displeasure with their opposition to the Executive Order on refugees. I said that American citizens elected them, not foreign citizens and then I gave the millions of dollars that our state spends on refugees and illegal aliens - 700 million dollars a year.

I was told that people in the state of Tennessee are against the refugee order. I could not believe it. These senators are getting more calls and emails against it. We are failing our President if we do not counter these organized immigrant groups, lobbying for foreign citizens against us, and who are sending emails and calling our representatives. The groups have a planned demonstration at Senator Bob Corker's office and other lawmakers across the nation.

We cannot just read and vote we must email and call, too. Please do.

Find your Congress member for email and telephone.

https://www.senate.gov/general/conta...nators_cfm.cfm

http://www.house.gov/representatives/find/

https://www.senate.gov/general/contacting.htm

Establishment Republicans Bash Trump’s Executive Order on Immigration, Refugee Resettlement

by KATIE MCHUGH
31 Jan 2017
2,080 comments

Some establishment-aligned Republicans criticized President Donald Trump’s refugee and immigration reform, strengthening the left’s emotional narrative about a fictitious “Muslim ban.”

“Never Trump” Nebraska Sen. Ben Sasse called the refugee moratorium a “signal” to jihadists:

"The President is right to focus attention on the obvious fact that borders matter. At the same time, while not technically a Muslim ban, this order is too broad. There are two ways to lose our generational battle against jihadism by losing touch with reality. The first is to keep pretending that jihadi terrorism has no connection to Islam or to certain countries. That’s been a disaster. And here’s the second way to fail: If we send a signal to the Middle East that the U.S. sees all Muslims as jihadis, the terrorist recruiters win by telling kids that America is banning Muslims and that this is America versus one religion. Both approaches are wrong, and both will make us less safe. Our generational fight against jihadism requires wisdom."

Maine Sen. Susan Collins issued a statement to the Maine Sun Journal:

“The worldwide refugee ban set forth in the executive order is overly broad and implementing it will be immediately problematic,” said U.S. Sen. Susan Collins, a Republican.

She said, for example, “it could interfere with the immigration of Iraqis who worked for American forces in Iraq as translators and bodyguards — people who literally saved the lives of our troops and diplomats during the last decade and whose lives are at risk if they remain in Iraq.”

[…]

Collins said that “while it is appropriate to consider religious persecution when reviewing a request for refugee status, a preference should not be given to people who practice a particular religion, nor should a greater burden be imposed on people who practice a particular religion.”

Pennsylvania Rep. Charlie Dent said in a statement to Politico that returning refugees to their country of origin caused unnecessary suffering:

“A Syrian Christian family who, according to family members in my district, held valid visas and were not refugees, yet were detained at the Philadelphia International Airport and then forced to leave the country as a result of the Executive Order. This family now faces the uncertain prospect of being sent back to Syria… [That incident] is unacceptable and I urge the administration to halt enforcement of the order until a more thoughtful and deliberate policy can be instated.”

Arizona Sen. Jeff Flake, part of the Senate Gang of Eight that tried to pass a massive immigration increase in 2013, wrote in a Medium post:

President Trump and his administration are right to be concerned about national security, but it’s unacceptable when even legal permanent residents are being detained or turned away at airports and ports of entry. Enhancing long term national security requires that we have a clear-eyed view of radical Islamic terrorism without ascribing radical Islamic terrorist views to all Muslims.

Ohio Sen. Rob Portman said on CNN’s “State of the Union” that Trump’s executive order was not “properly vetted” itself.

“I want to start with the executive order that President Trump signed into law on Friday. Three of your fellow Republican senators now, Ben Sasse, Susan Collins and Jeff Flake, came out and said that the order goes too far. Let me show you the statement from Senator Sasse, which reads in part, ‘While not technically a Muslim ban, this order is too broad.’ Do you agree?” host Jake Tapper asked.

“I agree with both of those aspects,” Portman replied. “One, it is not a ban. However, I think it was not properly vetted. So, you have an extreme vetting proposal that didn’t get the vetting it should have had. And as the result, in the implementation, we’ve seen some problems.”

http://www.breitbart.com/big-governm...-resettlement/