Hatch wants to create grants to preserve records for genealogists

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • rutucker
    April 21, 2010 10:21 a.m.

    This is important to preserve these records of our ancestors and not a waste of money. We need to ensure that the records are not destroyed after being digitized. Paper has endured for thousands of years. Who knows how long the film, CD, DVD, etc will endure?? A nation that does not revere its people's history and preserve it will not endure.

    An example is the Soviet Union who destroyed many of the vital records of that county and the communist government in China who did the same with thousands of years of family lineages. This was the backbone of the nations.

  • DN Subscriber
    April 20, 2010 4:51 p.m.

    Great project if we had loads of spare cash around looking for a good use.

    How subsidizing genealogical records is authorized in the Constitution is still a bit of a mystery that would need to be cleared up.

    But, when we are 12 Trillion in debt, blowing $50 million a year for 5 years is absolutely irresponsible.

    "A million here, a million there, and pretty soon you are talking real money."

    Yeah, the money our kids will have to pay back to the Chinese from whom we are borrowing it.

  • don
    April 20, 2010 4:24 p.m.

    RE: Pagan, Money for Geneology also serves a purpose for the LDS Church. I suprised that a Liberal Mormon doesn't get that, afterall the name Pagan means many gods(polytheism)like the Greeks who had gods,or Mormons.

  • bobosmom
    April 20, 2010 1:05 p.m.

    I wish every state would have good access to digitalize records. As an amatuer, some states are better at it than others. Nebraska is horrible and in order to get a death certificate I almost have to sign my life away to get one. The only ones they allow you are yours, spouses, and parents. When I called washington to get a copy of my husbands grandmothers death certificate, they didnt care what I wanted the ifo for. (It was for fh of course). Nebraska has really hardened down on getting cetificates for family history puposes.

  • Pagan
    April 20, 2010 10:28 a.m.

    'Pagan has clearly let his hate limit his reading ability.' - 4:22 p.m.
    'Not to worry Pagan. Nothing you have to say will be preserved.' - 7:54 a.m.

    Wow. People must really be upset when their hypocrisy is made apparent.
    When cries of 'lower the national debt' ring false with a $50 million dollar project per year.
    By the way, if people are SO upset with what I say, why do the reply?
    You realize you are just giving me reason to continue, right?
    I do realize one democrate signed on this.
    Could that also be the reason our national taxes have been the lowest in years?
    Majority of people who signed on this are republicans.
    How sad they want your federal money to support project after project, while at the same time claiming states should do without.
    Try this, next time you want the federal goverment out of your lives give back the money you ask them for.

  • Cats
    April 20, 2010 9:36 a.m.

    Dear Rock: RIGHT ON!!!!

  • John Stewart Pill
    April 20, 2010 9:13 a.m.

    Sounds like more big government from those who profess to espouse small government.

  • pianojazz
    April 20, 2010 8:52 a.m.

    This seems like one the better bills that the senator has sponsored. Maybe the senator can write a song to promote it.

  • Esquire
    April 20, 2010 8:18 a.m.

    I have said for a long time, Republicans and conservatives love federal spending when it is on one of their projects, and hate it if it is not one of theirs. That's why Hatch and the rest of the Utah delegation have no credibility.

  • The Rock
    April 20, 2010 7:54 a.m.

    Not to worry Pagan. Nothing you have to say will be preserved.

  • Lagomorph
    April 20, 2010 7:48 a.m.

    Sen. Hatch outs himself as a closet socialist.

  • Cats
    April 20, 2010 7:37 a.m.

    I think this is a great idea and, I believe, it is a legitimate function of government to keep and preserve important records. However, we are a little broke right now. It may not be the best timing for the project.

  • OneAmerican
    April 20, 2010 7:09 a.m.

    If Hatch is so concerned about preserving historical records, he may want to start with the Constitution. He has Potomac Fever and needs to come home and rest. I am a conservative and am appalled at how far left he has veered in recent years. Are you aware that he has cut an unconstitutional deal to treat Washington DC as a state, let them have a member of congress in return for votes to give Utah another congressman? This is in spite of the fact the Constitution clearly spells out DC is not a state and therefore not eligible for a seat in Congress. But, hey, these days it's not what's constitutional, but rather what does it take to buy votes.

  • My2Cents
    April 20, 2010 5:21 a.m.

    Duplication of existing laws. We already have a library of congress who's only job is to preserve history and historical documents. Cities and states are already required to preserve personal and historical information. Geneology is a personal record of individuals and families already being preserved so why is there any need for this new federal historical society? The private sector is already in control of preservation and restoration of records and doing a very good job.

    This plan seems a little excessive and too costly with only one direction of higher and permanent costs to burden tax payers with. If this task comes under the control of government they will decide what records and historical data can be obtained and maintained in order to get the funds.

    I don't think Obama is yet ready to disclose his illegal and unconstitutional presidency to the record keepers. His past is under lock and key so he can't be disputed or questioned.

  • Gracie
    April 20, 2010 12:26 a.m.

    What's the Constitutional rationale for this? If it seems like a good idea, do it? And, how will the grant money be raised? The country is flat broke. Lawful and fiscal accountability... By definition, this idea doesn't fit either scenario. But when does that stop a politician?

  • L
    April 19, 2010 8:57 p.m.

    @Fredd | 7:44 p.m. April 19, 2010

    Yes, maybe the Catholics could do it too, they have lots of records.

    Maybe the Irish should do it and you could go on and on.

  • Fredd
    April 19, 2010 7:44 p.m.

    Why can't the LDS church fund this?

  • JoeBlow
    April 19, 2010 5:57 p.m.

    I guess its only pork if you dont like it.

    Hey Folks PORK IS PORK. R or D its still pork

    If state libraries want to protect their records, then states can pay for it.

  • markusjbear
    April 19, 2010 5:45 p.m.

    My hat is off to Orrin Hatch and Carl Levin. Good Job

  • John Pack Lambert of Michigan
    April 19, 2010 4:22 p.m.

    Pagan has clearly let his hate limit his reading ability. The main co-sponsor of this bill is Carl Levin, a Democrat senator from Michigan. In fact, I am over-represented by Levins, since Carl's brother Sander is my Rep in the house.

    This is a good and needed thing. Preserving history and records is very important. This also is no pork-barrell project, but a plan to do so all across the nation. I am all for it, but I guess I also hope to get a job from it, so I am a little biased.

  • William Gronberg
    April 19, 2010 3:52 p.m.

    That which is trash to one man is another mans treasure. That which is pork barrel reckless spending to one man is another mans dream come true. $50 million is about $1 per person that actually pays Federal Income Tax.

  • Fiscal Hawk
    April 19, 2010 3:31 p.m.

    Orrin, is this really what you think you should be working on right now?

    Start worrying about genealogy when federal spending has been slashed by 75%, please.

  • Pagan
    April 19, 2010 3:29 p.m.

    'It would authorize spending $50 million a year for five years for grants to governments around the country to help preserve records, whether in paper, electronic or other form.' - Article

    This, from Hatch and the party that wants to reduce national debt?
    Spending $50 million per year is reducing national debt?