Comments about ‘Hatch says yes, Lee no on immigration reform bill’

Return to article »

Published: Thursday, June 27 2013 6:30 p.m. MDT

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
MoJules
Florissant, MO

If these two were running against each other, my vote would go for Lee, Hatch has been in way to long.

wigglwagon
Mariion, Va

Why does the Senate want to keep American workers unemployed?

SLars
Provo, UT

A company has 100 employees, and decide they need 5 more. . If they choose to hire five U.S. citizens or if they choose to hire five legal permanent residents--five legal immigrants--they face a penalty of $25,000 for doing so--$5,000 apiece right off his bottom line to the IRS. In contrast, if they decide instead to hire five amnestied individuals, who came here illegally among those 11 million who are here illegally but granted RPI legalization under the Gang of 8 bill, the company pays a penalty of zero dollars.

In this instance, who is the company going to hire? This bill creates an enormous incentive to hire those here illegally, and at the same time it does it by creating a statutory penalty for hiring U.S. citizens or legal immigrants.

Rick2009
MESA, AZ

Hatch is just showing his true colors and you, the people of Utah, keep re-electing him just like people in AZ keep re-electing McCain. These are two of the worst senators in there. they aren't really republicans at all. Maybe it's time to get someone else in that loves their country and the constitution.

DN Subscriber 2
SLC, UT

@Rick2009

Utah nearly threw Hatch out lest election, but he spent millions claiming to be a real conservative, and fooled enough people to win again. We did get Mike Lee in the Senate, who has proven to be someone who can be trusted to keep his word.

On this vote, Lee saw through the liberal taking points, and understood what is actually in this 1,200 page pork laden sham security scheme and instant amnesty. Hatch, however, has not learned from the prior mistakes when Democrats have promised to secure the border (1986 and 2006) or cut spending several times, in order to sucker Republicans into voting for a bad bill. The Democrats never keep their word. Fool me once.... but, Orrin, there have been at least 3 or 4 past precedents and you still fell for it again?

Hope fully the House will refuse to do anything on this. No bill is better than a bad bill!

mohokat
Ogden, UT

Hatch has heard so many lies told in the Senate that he believes the really big ones. The existing laws have not been enforced what makes Hatch think that future laws will be any different. This so called Border enforcement will come to start with from Janet Napolitano and Brack Obama. Thats going to work. Hah Hah

Say No to BO
Mapleton, UT

The premise is absurd. Why does the Senate think that rewarding illegal activity will somehow fix anything? We don't need or want high immigration levels, and certainly not another round of amnesty.
Call me a nativist. Go ahead. The Supreme Court already called me a bigot this week.

Bloodhound
Provo, UT

As a Republican, I'm adamantly opposed to this amnesty. Once these illegals are amnestied and sign up to vote, they will vote at least 3 to 1 for the Democrats. The Republicans who vote for this are voting for the extinction of their party.

VickieB
SLC, UT

Write a report on securing the border, and interior enforcement, but don't impliment it. That's what the Senate voted for. It cuts enforcement.

When my children are doing their American history, I will tell them about Senator Hatch and how he voted against Americans. His vote to take money from social security and medicare to fund this fiasco is a travesty. The bill also rewards business $5,000 to hire someone who came here illegally, over a legal American.

If they used a persons id, they should be required to pay them back for their expenses to straighten things out. If they were citizens the law would force them.

BroJoseph
Ogden, UT

I suggest anyone who would deny another person who is seeking a better life or a better opportunity would be the same ones who would have stripped and beaten the man the Good Samaritan sought to heal and assist. Joseph Smith sought redress from fellow Americans who persecuted his followers to the point they had to flee to Indian Teritory-beyond the borders of Missouri-Many of those followers came from distant countries and nations seeking religious and financial opportunity with the nedd or requirement of passport or papers. Mr Lee is advocating brotherly disharmony and separation of which the Lord warned against..Love your neighbour. maybe he needs to ask "who is my neighbor?"

Esquire
Springville, UT

Mike Lee can't get along with anyone. He had a chance to have some influence on this and he walked away. It was going to happen, and he took his ball home like a petulant, spoiled child. He has not learned that the legislative process is not about having all or nothing. That's the way it has worked since the beginning of time, except in totalitarian regimes. Lee is ill-suited to serve in any legislative body. If one thing has been revealed in the past couple of years, the far right wing does not believe in democracy, the will of the people, nor in the Constitution.

TRUTH
Salt Lake City, UT

Bro Joseph.....I don't remember the part where the Mormons who arrived here were commuting fraud and stealing identities and trying to move ahead of others who followed the law and came here legally......to those who have followed the law and enjoy their earned citizenship, Mr. Lee is a Good Samaritan!

Moabmom
Moab, UT

Senator Hatch said "the bill is far from perfect" but he voted for it anyway. In a nutshell, that's the problem with DC and that's why the country is in such a mess. "A little leaven leaveneth the whole lump." Thank you, Senator Lee for once again having the common sense to understand that a bad bill is just that.... A Bad Bill.

Informed Voter
South Jordan, UT

Bro Joseph: if someone broke into your house and stole your property, would you say he was just trying to improve his life, so it was OK? And do you to believe in obeying, honoring, and sustaining the law?

Three cheers for Senator Lee, and zero cheers for those who voted for Senator Hatch.

Truthseeker
SLO, CA

A look at the immigration overhaul bill now before the Senate, as amended to include new provisions on border security the Senate agreed to Wednesday.

BORDER SECURITY

—The bill sets out a series of requirements that must be achieved over 10 years before anyone here illegally can obtain a permanent resident green card. These include:

Roughly doubling the number of Border Patrol agents.

Completing 700 miles of pedestrian fencing along the border,

Installing a host of new security measures and technologies along the border.

Implementing a system for all employers to verify electronically their workers' legal status.

Setting up a new electronic system to track people leaving the nation's airports and seaports.

ute alumni
paradise, UT

hatch is the teddy kennedy of the Republican Party. never was a conservative and doesn't care because he'll be 100 when he leaves office and won't live through the mess he has created. recall..........

John Pack Lambert of Michigan
Ypsilanti, MI

I am hoping the house takes up the bill. However interpretations of the voting rights act that militate for minority majority districts may make that unlikely. While the people directly affects by this bill are non-citizens and cannot vote, their family members are heavily concentrated in certain districts, which makes it easy for some congress people to ignore the bill.

I hope the house passes the bill. I am not sure if that is really likely though. I am not sure what sort of more stringent language they could put in a bill. I hope they do something, but have my doubts, with fire eaters like Chaffetz having replaced compromise supporters like Cannon.

I hope the house can find a way to compromise, but I have my doubts.

John Pack Lambert of Michigan
Ypsilanti, MI

The claims that this is "instant amnesty" are ludicrous. Most undocumented immigrants will not get fully regular immigrant status for 10-years at the earliest. People will have to pay fines, back taxes and lots of other things. The fines "fit the crime" so it is not amnesty at all.

John Pack Lambert of Michigan
Ypsilanti, MI

I wish the DN would give us a better rundown of the bills provisions. I checked them out elsewhere. The changes in the family immigration rules seem fairly innocuous. The end of sibling sponsorship, and no sponsoring of married children over age 31 make sense I guess. I wish they had ended different treatment of married and unmarried children.

I am glad they got rid of the diversity visas, which were instituted to increase immigration from Ireland. Apparently they have no ended entirely the by-country caps, which they really should do. We should stop paying any attention to what countries immigrants are coming from and create a system where in theory 100% of admitted immigrants all came from Mexico. Reality would make it so that would not be the case.

There are provisions designed to discorage use of high tech visas to train and then export workers. So I think some of the complaints against those are not founded on the reality of the bill.

Eliot
Santaquin, UT

I hope the Senate can find a way to compromise. If one side gives in completely to the demands of the other side without demanding something in return, it's not really a compromise is it?

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments