Reader comments
Hatch helps bring D.C.-Utah House seat bill to Senate floor

Utahn | 4:49 p.m. Jan. 6, 2009

Chaffetz puts his crazy John Birch society ideology ahead of Utah. At least Senator Hatch is a pragmatist about the whole thing. Hatch is a lawyer and has studied constitutional law as judiciary chair and in his vast experience in the Senate. Chaffetz has studied how to kick a field goal and sell multi-level marketing products. Opposing Hatch so soon in Chaffetz not-even-initiated time in Congress is a formula for being ousted in the next GOP convention. Chaffetz has a clear personal bias. There is a chance that if Utah gets a new seat Chaffetz may have to run again before 2010 and expose his pre-pubescent Congressional career to a viable challenger in the interim. If Utah gets new boundaries all 4 seats get re-drawn and all four Congressmen must run mid-cycle. Just be honest Jason, your putting your own self interest ahead of Utah getting a fourth seat. This is not the last time we will be embarrassed by "cot-boy". Next thing we know Chaffetz will be criticizing Atilla-the-Hun for being too liberal and humane. Maybe, if Atilla used more tent cities?

sterlingangle | 5:25 p.m. Jan. 6, 2009

DC does not have a vote! doesn't anyone remember what brought the CONSTITUTION about!!!??? time to get rid of HATCH if he cant understand this simple bit of knowledge written in the CONSTITUTION. sure lets feed the monster our little finger, I'm sure it wont eat the rest!

Spoc | 7:10 p.m. Jan. 6, 2009

Tonight I watched, with some concern, a driver trying to ride the hump of snow in the middle of the road. I could not pass him because he had no firm traction to guide his path but slipped left and right and certainly had no concern for my interest in safe travel.

The only safe surface we have to give traction to our journey as a country is the constitution. It separates powers, it guides the government, and prevents chaos when irresponsible senators put us all at risk. And yet Hatch persists in trying to ride the center and put the constitution at risk.

Just exactly who's interests is he representing in this case. There are good conflict of interest reasons why the constitution does not grant representation to the seat of federal government. It is designed to protect the interests on both sides of the road.

If this bill is such a good idea, why is it the support for it wasnï¿½t there until the Democrats were in control. What advantage do they hope to gain as a party?

I sure hope someone besides a RINO runs for Hatches spot next time.

Comments continue below

Phred | 7:17 p.m. Jan. 6, 2009

Continuing studies between official census counts have shown that without a doubt Utah will get a seat and by the time the bill generates a voting member of the house, we would be gearing up for the election for that seat anyway. In the mean time with Hatchï¿½s bill you not only have that vote canceled out by the DC rep but you also set a legal precedent of granting representation where it is forbidden by the constitution. The next step is for the case to be made that the house is not enough representation. They deserve to be treated like a state in other ways and have the same two senators the states have. After all, they are not being represented in the senate! And that is an advantage for Utah how?

It's very simple. Drop DC back to the original size for Washington City which would include nearly all federal buildings and almost no residential. Give the rest back to Maryland as we did with Virginia.

As Captain Barbossa would say, ï¿½The constitution is not so much a code. Itï¿½s more of a guideline. Arrrrrï¿½ï¿½

Maybe Mr. Levitt will run!

4th Congressional Seat! | 9:59 p.m. Jan. 6, 2009

If a fourth Utah congressional seat is even considered it should strictly be SLC County only.

Hatch is an idiot | 7:46 a.m. Jan. 7, 2009

If the Republicans ever wish to find out why they are now the minority party this is a good place to start.

Ignoring the Constitution in order to do something that is likely to happen through normal processes anyway.

Can someone remind me what, if anything, the Republican Party stands for anymore?

David | 9:17 a.m. Jan. 7, 2009

corn prince harry didn't have to promise Hatch anything. Hatch has been supporting this since before Democrats gained control of the Senate.

Micah | 11:33 a.m. Jan. 7, 2009

I have a hard time believing that Hatch's "study" of the constitutional issues has ended in anything conclusive. The District of Columbia is already larger than the constitutionally-mandated size. If Hatch is really worried about the Constitution, he would be aligned with Chaffetz's position of "returning" portions of the District to the surrounding states.

Evidently, Hatch's "pragmatism" is going to win out over the Constitution. That's something that Utahn wants more of?! Perhaps that's the reason why the "Constitution-be-damned" liberals are in control of Congress - Too many people don't care about the Constitution. They just want what's pragmatic - like socialized health care, social(ist) security, and a constantly expanding federal government.

Give Me A Break | 12:03 p.m. Jan. 7, 2009

To be clear, granting Utah a 4th seat is completely constitutional, but granting DC a seat is clearly unconstitutional (assuming the word state means state).

Orrin should stop trying to justify his pandering to the Democrats and DC on the backs of Utah. Also, since the Democrats control Congress a 4th seat buys nothing for Utah. Might does not make right. Just because Orrin can doesn't mean Orrin should.

I'm glad Chaffetz is willing to stand on principle. Too bad I don't get to vote for him.

Jim Janney | 12:46 p.m. Jan. 7, 2009

A bad idea whose time has passed.

just maybe | 1:35 p.m. Jan. 7, 2009

just maybe Chaffetz can run against RINO Orrin next time Hatch is up for re-election. Chaffetz at least seems to understand and care about the constitution. All Hatch wants to do is not make waves - guess he's getting too old.

Just a Question for Orrin | 1:50 p.m. Jan. 7, 2009

I wonder if it were now 2012 (Utah would already have it's fourth Congressional Seat), would Orrin still be campaigning to get Washington DC a House Seat?

I think he would not. This is political grandstanding on the part of Orrin (who needs to retire), and as Jim Janney (12:46p) accurately stated "A bad idea whose time has passed."

Mike R. | 2:18 p.m. Jan. 7, 2009

You don't have to be a lawyer to understand the Constitution. You also don't have to be a Senator. We will get the seat in two years anyway and quite possible another so why trash the Constitution for short term gain?

Elaine ought to smack Orrin on the head and tell him that it's time to retire.

You all are nuts!! | 5:37 p.m. Jan. 7, 2009

You commenters don't understand the political power of an additional representative. Y'all have no experience in doing things in Washington DC. Politics rules there. The point is you try to get what is best for your state. Orrin Hatch knows what he is doing. This is definitely a good thing for Utah.

It will be granted anyway with the next census. Why not get it a year or two early!

Add your comment

Comments are monitored. Any comments found to be abusive, offensive, off-topic, misrepresentative, more than 200 words or containing URLs will not be posted.

Words Remaining

E-mail address: For internal use only. We may want to contact you to publish your comment (not your e-mail address) in the newspaper or for a separate story idea.