N.Y. Times praise unlikely to change Utah immigration debate

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • Beachleydad Orem, UT
    Feb. 14, 2011 4:00 a.m.

    Those who trash the Church because of their stance on immigration are ignorant of what the Church does FOR illegal immigrants in Utah. Open your eyes and minds instead of just reacting emotionally to what you've been told.

  • suzyk#1 Mount Pleasant, UT
    Feb. 12, 2011 3:55 p.m.

    it seems to me that all they are puffed up about is the NYT opinion or which I think is of no importance. The thing that would be important is the opinion of the citizens of Utah not some pumped up newspaper. It just comes down to this: if you are here illegally - you are a law breaker and deserve and should expect nothing more. We do not owe you a living - we know you want the freedom that comes with living in the United States of America but you have to do it: THE RIGHT WAY.And if you choose to stay here illegally do not expect everything to go your way...it doesn't happen that easy. Get your citizenship and then you can live here free of fear of being sent back because that is where you should be until you are a true citizen. You are breaking the law and people who break the law face consequences, you are not an exception to the rule. It's just that simple.

  • SLars Provo, UT
    Dec. 8, 2010 4:48 p.m.

    The LDS church did not sign it, they stated that people should come here legally, and countries have the right to enforce immigration laws.

    The Dream acts cost are $20 billion, that's $4 billion more than the entire illegal population brings in according to the CIS.

    Most people here illegally hire out as sub contractors, temp workers, or never make enough money to pay taxes. So even the CIS might be off.

  • SLars Provo, UT
    Dec. 8, 2010 4:42 p.m.

    Gormax, you are your own worse enemy, from your link.

    The Center for Immigration Studies reported in 2004: "Households headed by illegal aliens imposed more than $26.3 billion in costs on the federal government in 2002 and paid only $16 billion in taxes, creating a net fiscal deficit of almost $10.4 billion, or $2,700 per illegal household."

    Let's not forget it's illegal. Or does making more money approve illegal activity? Should we all start doing things illegally, as long as it makes more money and adds to the economy?

  • Reggie Centerville, UT
    Dec. 8, 2010 4:40 p.m.

    The church preaches compassion, yet conveniently forgets the 12th AofF about obeying, honoring and sustaining the law. The bleeding heart doesn't consider law - only what they see as fairness and equity. We have laws on the road for a reason. We have immigration laws for a reason. Please use logic before compassion. Your argument has no validity without logic.

  • Gormax Cedar Hills, UT
    Dec. 8, 2010 12:44 p.m.

    @RBB, The studies you mention, do they include every aspect of the situation, or are they only focused on trying to make you feel like it's a problem? I gave you a report to look at which covers the much of the issue.

    I agree that you don't create business by importing unemployed people. However, we imported them when we had work for them in droves. We didn't have the lower-level workforce to cover all the home building that was going on five years ago, for instance, and most of them were illegal immigrants.

    If you read my earlier posts, you would see that if one person loses a job, inevitably another will as well. Unemployment is meant to stave off this waterfall effect, but I agree that it can't go on forever.

    It's interesting that you mention agriculture jobs as being one area you are OK with immigrants taking. When you dive deep into the economics you might find that our own government's subsidization of agriculture has a huge effect on why so many people don't have jobs in their own countries and so come here looking for work.

    Dec. 8, 2010 10:58 a.m.

    @Gormax, studies show any gain by illegal immigration is voided by costs to state and local government. 100,000 children in Utah's schools cost us $600 million per year.

    You don't create business by importing millions of unemployed people, you add to the welfare rolls.

    Once again, how do we gain by spending billions each month on unemployment, so America will tolerate having millions of people taking our non agriculture jobs?

    The compact is nothing more than a preamble to amnesty. Like the Dream act, that allows any adult from 16-35 to sign up for college and trade school to get citizenship, it's not being honest. It's about deceit and back door maneuvers that will only inflame America when discovered.

  • Phill Provo, UT
    Dec. 8, 2010 9:06 a.m.

    THis is a wonderful piece of article, and it is indeed praiseworthy to see that the NYT addressed the Utah Compact Act. It goes to show how Utah should lead the way in EXAMPLE ! and not be a follower of deteriorating, inhumane laws such as the Arizona style law. Utah is showing itself as a compassionate leader, just as the residents of this state portray to be in person and belief, and should reflect those same beliefs in action, and now nationally. CWEB. I couldn't agree more.
    I'm grateful for reasonable people on this world, on this country, and on this state of Utah.

  • JLFuller Boise, ID
    Dec. 8, 2010 8:42 a.m.

    There is room in our country for more people and I think just about anyone will do. But we have to be smart about it. Process is important and allowing just anyone in without regard to who they are or their intentions seems counter productive if not dangerous to me. All of us came form some where else. In the case of Hispanics especially, they represent what we want. By and large they are family oriented, passionate about our country and want to belong. They are good people - our kind of people. The kind America was built by. We are better off with them. We need younger people to help fill in our aging ranks. Someone has to pay our social security recipients checks. I vote for Hispanics. Now we just have to find a way to make the ones here illegally legal. I think we are better off with them. The bad ones we can deal with.

  • DN Subscriber Cottonwood Heights, UT
    Dec. 7, 2010 11:28 p.m.

    Consider the untruths, half truths, and deliberately leaked information which aids our enemies that has appeared in the New York Times.

    Now, why should we grant any credibility to such an organization? They had a great reputation 20+ years ago, but in the last 20 years or so, they have proven that they are little more than stenographers for the radical left, especially the anti-American types.

    Therefore, if the N.Y. Times favors anything, it is probably something to be rejected out of hand by any freedom loving American, and especially Utahns.

    Sorry, Compact supporters, your proposal is still unacceptable, regardless of some no longer credible newspaper's support.

  • van Saratoga Springs, UT
    Dec. 7, 2010 8:26 p.m.

    I would rather get advice on what to do with illegal immigrants from the Mormon Church and Catholic Church and the good people that signed the Utah Compact than..

    Rep Sandstrom and the talk show radio pipe band. Laura Ingraham..Sean Hannity, brother Beck. Brother Romney..and and brother Hatch.

    Oh..sorry Sen Hatch wanted to help illegals kids before he wanted to not help him. Didn't he have a little to do with the dream act?

    Take Hypocrits and the talk radio crowd out of it and we will have sensible reform.

  • Christy Beaverton, OR
    Dec. 7, 2010 8:24 p.m.

    I wonder what the native Americans thought about the influx of the white man on their land way back when.

    I wonder what people thought about the influx of Irish immigrants way back when.

    I wonder what people thought of the influx of Chinese immigrants way back when.

    I wonder what the people thought about setting free the slaves way back when.

    I wonder what people thought of a mixed race couple marrying way back when.

    I wonder what people thought of the idea of a black man being POTUS way back when.

  • Ronald Mortensen Washington, D.C.
    Dec. 7, 2010 7:18 p.m.

    Christine | 1:16 p.m. asks: When will Sandstrom and his band start protecting and defending the rights, freedoms and opportunities of millions of Innocent American children.

    The fact is that Representative Sandstrom and others are indeed working to protect literally millions of innocent American children who are the victims of illegal alien, job-related identity theft.

    According to reports by the New York Times and ACLU, 75% of all Illegal aliens routinely use fraudulently obtained Social Security numbers which is a felony. Many of these numbers belong to innocent American children including an estimated 50,000 Utah kids and over one million Arizona children. This is identity theft, another felony.

    Illegal aliens destroy American childrens good names, saddle them with arrest records, devastate their credit histories and even corrupt their medical records with life threatening consequences.

    Representative Sandstrom and his band are trying to stop illegal aliens from committing serious felonies and destroying the futures of innocent American children while those who oppose his efforts are supporting criminals who are taking the rights, freedoms and opportunities away from millions of innocent American children.

  • Gormax Cedar Hills, UT
    Dec. 7, 2010 6:34 p.m.

    @RRB, read wiki's economic impact of illegal immigrants on the US. Overall, illegal immigration actually adds to wealth of American citizens. Just because a politician wants you to believe it's an issue in order to garner your vote, doesn't mean it's true.

    If you remove the illegal immigrant who is working on a low wage then several things happen: Cost of wage will increase to find a citizen to do the job and this will be passed on to the consumer which means we can buy less with our dollar. This means that someone else will lose their job because you can't afford to buy their product any more. Impact: less jobs.

    Otherwise, the business cannot afford to continue employing workers in the US and so closes or moves and eliminates many other citizen's jobs (Hersey's recent move to Mexico costs 1500 jobs). Impact: more lost jobs.

    So, which way would you like to lose your job? In order to boost our economy we need to employ people, any people. This will create people with income (even small) which will create more jobs.

    There are alternatives, let's think of them.

    Dec. 7, 2010 5:58 p.m.

    @ Gormax, we have one person in this country working here illegally that makes to little money to pay taxes. We also have a person that is a citizen, that is drawing unemployment, because a person here illegally is working in his job?

    Do you see anything wrong here?

    @ CWEB, your talking about a family indecent, not all Hispanics. I have Hispanics in my family that do not act that way.

    Dec. 7, 2010 5:21 p.m.

    Bringing the LDS church into the fray is not going to help. Their policies are clear, people need to immigrate legally, and countries have the right to enforce immigration laws.

    I have legal immigrant relatives, I also have acquaintances that are here illegally. People who come here legally want a better life and citizenship. Coming here illegally makes citizenship much more difficult. Those who come illegally do so for the jobs. It's much easier, with no wait, and once here, chances of deportation is slim.

    We use to enforce our laws, and it worked. The amnesty of 1986 changed that. People found that if they came here illegally they could stay and work, have children that gave them a bargaining tool, and brought welfare to the family. Those who came here legally cannot receive help for 5 years.

    They come illegally, because we allow it. With no punishment, there is no deterrent. The only way to solve it is with enforcement. The fear of being caught has stopped many people from doing wrong.

  • Gormax Cedar Hills, UT
    Dec. 7, 2010 5:12 p.m.


    Statistics can lead us to different conclusions depending on how we interpret them. It may be true that $12K is the average illegals wage, which does put them in our poverty category. But lets ask questions before jumping to conclusions:

    What wage did that person have before coming to the US? Its probable that it was much less or he wouldnt be here. This means we have raised his standard/quality of living.

    What impact would removing this worker have on our economy? Costs money to remove him which adds to our debt. Business cant afford to pay higher wage and close or relocate (Herseys) so the legal manager loses his job too. These scenarios leave us with a worse situation all around.


    These people risk life and limb to get here, imprisonment and possible separation from their families.
    The question to ask is why. These people are leaving a situation that is worse and are willing to risk all of this in order to survive. We find causes to help people out of similar situations (Pakistan floods), spending hundreds of millions. Why is this cause less noble?

  • Aaron Smith West Jordan, UT
    Dec. 7, 2010 4:41 p.m.

    The Utah Compact is an important piece of legislation. No, we can't let have completely open borders, but no, building a fence isn't going to fix things, either. Trying to prevent people from moving away from Mexico isn't going to stop them from coming - not until we get to the actual root causes of this mass immigration are things going to change.

    People on every side of the issue are so focused on immigration - why isn't anyone talking about WHY they're coming in such immense numbers, and what we can do to help them be happy where they are? All the immigration reform in the world isn't going to stop them from coming if they really can't stand it back home.

  • Jazz Bass Man Wellsville, Utah
    Dec. 7, 2010 4:26 p.m.

    Wolfgang, so are the "native" Americans who moved in here uninvited from the Asian continent going to "pay rent" to those that THEY kicked out ten thousand years ago?

    And by the way, "Go native pride" sounds just like "viva la raza" or "white power", but to libs like you it's all ok since your hatred is directed toward "white people".

    And speaking of "buying", the United States DID purchase the American southwest from Mexico legally. But that doesn't stop liberals and LA RAZA/brown pride supremacists from thinking that it still belongs to mexico. You can't have it both ways.

  • Wolfgang57 Salt Lake City, UT
    Dec. 7, 2010 4:00 p.m.

    If you are a Native American, I will listen to what you say about who may live here and who may not. This is, after all, your land, stolen from you by murder, mayhem, rape, etc. If the U.S. government wants to pay Native Americans rent or lease payments, or just outright buy the land from the Native Americans , THEN and only then, can non-Native Americans say anything about who is on the land. Payments have not been made, treaties have been broken right and left. So, if you are not a Native American, no one should give two whoops in hell what you think. Go Native Pride! Demand rent for your land. (Or let the U.S. buy it from you, which ever you prefer.)

  • Deluged Salt Lake city, ut
    Dec. 7, 2010 3:53 p.m.

    A question never asked, or answered, is why this country needs immigration (legal or illegal) of any amount.

    The simplest answer as to why this is so is because immigration enthusiasts do not have an adequate answer, or maybe it is because they've never asked themselves this question.

    Mass immigration is unnecessary, at best.

    We have 280 million people in the U.S. Ten percent of the country's adults are unemployed, while even more are underemployed.

    It's not like we're running out of people, or "willing workers."

    Immigration proponents chant their mantras -- "we're a nation of immigrants," etc. -- in order to pre-empt the asking of inconvenient questions.

  • Teafortwo salt lake city, utah
    Dec. 7, 2010 3:53 p.m.

    This editorial from the NYT can be dismissed out of hand. Any argument that refers to enforcement of immigration laws as "xenophobic" is not worth the paper it is written on. It is just another play of the race card by people who have no other cards to play. The USA allows people of all races and ethnicities and virtually all foreign countries to enter the US after they have gone through the legal process. The prevention of illegal immigration is not xenophobic. It is the world-wide status quo....

  • facts_r_stubborn Kaysville, UT
    Dec. 7, 2010 3:34 p.m.

    The more citizens and policy makers can steer clear of the hot political rhetoric around this issue and stick to realistic solutions to a very real problem the better.

    Yes, the immigration laws should be enforced, just like other laws. ICE has had their budget doubled in the last five years. Senator Hatch brought the first federal immigration court to Utah about four years ago. There are new Utah field offices in this same time frame and new programs like "secure communities". The federal 287(G) program allows local law enforcement to do everything the Sandstrom bill does and more, but only two Utah counties have adopted it.

    Having said that, enforcement alone will not be as effective as comprehensive reform, anymore than enforcement has won the war on drugs, or any other crime.

    No, the U.S. can no longer invite every immigrant to come here but we can remember the huddled masses who literally made this nation great. We can look at ways to encourage more immigrants who fill jobs not filled by existing citizens to come here. We can also craft intelligent legislation that does not punish the innocent who have lived here their entire lives.

  • Jazz Bass Man Wellsville, Utah
    Dec. 7, 2010 3:15 p.m.

    To all of you who scream about "compassion" and call every one who believes in the rule of law a "racist", I would like you to explain how it is compassionate or fair in any way to allow millions to stay here, who essentially butted in line. Why should they get amnesty just because they managed to sneak across our border? There are MILLIONS of people in Africa and South American countries who would love to come here legally and work hard to be a part of the American dream. So many wish they could be citizens of this country, as opposed to those who abuse our social systems by popping out anchor babies to get freebies or wave mexican flags in our streets. I donate thousands of dollars to sponsor very needy children in latin America and Africa (much worse off than mexicans), and yet you libs call me a racist because I believe in upholding immigration laws? Tell me, what have YOU done for the needy, or do you just think that everybody ELSE'S tax dollars should pay for the illegals? Becoming a legal citizen is not exactly easy, but anything that is worthwhile is never easy.

  • joe5 South Jordan, UT
    Dec. 7, 2010 2:52 p.m.

    @BP: Of course, your argument sounds kind of silly when you realize there was no national immigration policy prior to the latter part of the 19th century. So please specify what laws your ancestors were breaking when they entered the country 200 years ago.

    You can't do it. Your argument has no validity. And you have proven yourself to be willfully untruthful in the debate.

  • Teafortwo salt lake city, utah
    Dec. 7, 2010 2:35 p.m.

    Ironmania - Are you really going to try to compare a few thousand American polygamists who mostly just want to be left alone to 12,000,000 illegals who are creating enormous social, economic and criminal problems? Are you really that ignorant?

  • RichardB Murray, UT
    Dec. 7, 2010 2:25 p.m.

    Christine, once again, the child has no rights to stay here alone until they are 18, nor do they have the right to keep their illegal parents here.

    The child can be left with family members that are here illegally, if there parents wish.

    Birthright citizenship has been badly abused. The children are being used as a tool to pry residency for those here illegally.

  • RichardB Murray, UT
    Dec. 7, 2010 2:22 p.m.

    If man is out of work, should he have the right to go into a rich mans yard, say someone who uses illegal labor in his business, and steal his belongings? What if he's otherwise honest and hard working, (except when he commits ID theft)? He is only trying to help his family have a better life, and he is stimulating the economy, since the rich man will have to replace the items stolen.

    Sandstroms purposed law is very moderate. Treating people here illegally like other countries do, with rape, murder and robbery would be considered extreme. It seems all laws that help to enforce immigration are extreme to some.

    Unemployment for another couple of years is going to bankrupt this country, unless we start clearing out those in jobs that they should not be working.

  • BP Salt Lake City, UT
    Dec. 7, 2010 2:18 p.m.

    I wonder how many of Sandstrom's ancestors filled out the proper paperwork and waited the proper amount of time to come to this country legally...I know some of mine that came over from Britain and Scandinavia two hundred years ago didn't.

  • Teafortwo salt lake city, utah
    Dec. 7, 2010 2:15 p.m.

    Most illegals are uneducated, unskilled and desperately poor. We already have enough people of our own like that. We do not need more. They will always consume more in the way of services then they will ever contribute. On top of that, they are criminals. The fact that they want to have better lives does not give them the right to break the law. After all, isn't that what most criminals do? Break the law so they can have a better life? Illegals are no different. They are just more politically correct.......

  • joe5 South Jordan, UT
    Dec. 7, 2010 2:01 p.m.

    @BobP: And I wonder if people like you have ever grasped the concepts of pride taught in the BofM. What is it that makes you believe you are so superior to others, most of whom you have never even met, that you can question their faith?

  • KVC Sahuarita, az
    Dec. 7, 2010 1:56 p.m.

    CWEB: Are you willing to open America's doors to all the poor and destitute of the World? What about all of the billions being oppressed? Should we let them all in? If not, why do we give preference to those from Latin America? It seems racist to say we only want hispanic illegals and not those from Africa or Asia. The fact is that life is a lot more difficult in Africa and Southeast Asia than it is in Mexico, so shouldn't they by your standards have preference instead?

    Why is no other nation taking these illegals out of compassion? Canada is just North of us and we could facilitate the transport to the border. Come to think of it, why doesn't Canada let Americans without health insurance come there for free care? We do it for Mexico.

    "We believe in being subject to kings, presidents, rulers, and magistrates, in obeying, honoring, and sustaining the law." That is what is in my scriptures. Has this been changed recently to include, "except immigration laws." Let me know if it has so I can add it to my scriptures.

  • BobP Port Alice, B.C.
    Dec. 7, 2010 1:46 p.m.

    I sometimes wonder if the LDS who post here in immigration belong to the same church as I have spent me life in.

  • cynic Appleton, WI
    Dec. 7, 2010 1:28 p.m.

    It's pretty clear Sandstrom and his followers still don't get it. They probably never will. It's sad, really.

  • joe5 South Jordan, UT
    Dec. 7, 2010 1:21 p.m.


    To your point #1: Yes, civil rights laws (and others) have been changed as a result of civil disobedience. But there is one aspect of those actions that you neglect either willfully or through ignorance.

    Those who were disobedient did not expect to escape punishment. They expected to pay the price for their law-breaking and were willing to do so regardless the sacrifice.

    In fact, punishment was essential to their purpose. They wanted to be seen as "social martyrs." They wanted to be made an example or their commitment to their cause. They wanted their punishment to sway public opinion in their favor through publicity.

    This was the inspiration of Ghandi. His adherents, including Martin Luther King, adopted those concepts and lived them.

    Where are the illegals willing to risk all to change what they perceive to be unfair legislation? They don't exist. They want to violate without consequence. That is not admirable; it's simply criminal.

  • Christine Orem, UT
    Dec. 7, 2010 1:16 p.m.

    When will Sandstrom and his band start protecting and defending the rights, freedoms and opportunities of millions of Inocent American children. When will they uphold the Constitution to protect those rights.

  • ironmania San Diego, CA
    Dec. 7, 2010 1:10 p.m.

    Those who chant "what part of illegal don't you understand..." may wish to consider how the State deals with polygamy. Yes, it is on the books as an illegal activity, but the State is very selective in how it prosecutes the crime, in order to be sensitive to disruptions to innocent spouses and children.

    Can't the Feds take a similar approach to immigration enforcement?

  • SLars Provo, UT
    Dec. 7, 2010 12:29 p.m.

    @Gormax. The PEW institute has put the average wage of someone here illegally at $11,900. That's below the poverty level and would not require paying taxes. Also business can hire someone here illegally as a sub contractor. Then no taxes or social security is taken out. There are more loopholes than you can imagine.

    And we are paying 15 million people unemployment, so people here illegally have work? Those jobs belong to Americans.

    Will honesty and integrity ever return to the immigration debate?

  • lost in DC West Jordan, UT
    Dec. 7, 2010 12:05 p.m.

    I agree with what you said except your first statement is based on an erroneous assumption. Illegals do not change their allegience, only their residence

  • Gormax Cedar Hills, UT
    Dec. 7, 2010 12:03 p.m.

    @Cats, ouisc, all:

    #1. Explain to me the legal process that the people of this country undertook in order to change several discrimination laws. Isn't it true that in many cases laws were changed after many people risked breaking the law in order to initiate that change?

    #2. Not all things we want are good for us. Right now we want jobs so badly that we are willing to kick illegal immigrants out in order to "free up" jobs. This move can prove to be devastating because companies don't care who works for them, only how much they cost. Case in point: Hershey moves to Mexico. Also, people who work here (illegal or otherwise) spend money to live here which generates other sources of income. Stopping one person from working inevitably stops another.

    #3. To CWEB's point, shouldn't our decision of how to treat a person (illegal or otherwise) be based on higher reasoning than our laws may dictate? If our character is dictated by our laws, then we have no chance of progressing. Rather, I think our character should dictate our laws, which means our laws may need to change.

  • Say No to BO Mapleton, UT
    Dec. 7, 2010 11:58 a.m.

    The Gray Lady sold out to the left thirty years ago. Why would anyone care what they think?

  • Teafortwo salt lake city, utah
    Dec. 7, 2010 11:48 a.m.

    Illegal immigrants are criminals. Period. Why is that so hard for some people to understand? If the average American citizen were caught doing the things that illegals do on a regular basis, they would find themselves in deep trouble, and quite possibly in jail. We allow people of every imaginable racial and ethnic background to go through a process to come to America legally. There is absolutely no reason we should tolerate illegal immigration to ANY degree.

  • SLars Provo, UT
    Dec. 7, 2010 11:47 a.m.

    Over a million people come here legally each year. It's not that difficult if one has patience and a desire to become an American citizen, instead of looking for a job.

    Intolerance and compassion are both two way streets. Intolerance towards our laws, and lack of compassion towards those in line cannot be stressed enough.

    As others have said, The New York Times supports open borders. They care more about political ideology than this countries future.

  • UteMiguel Go Utes, CA
    Dec. 7, 2010 11:19 a.m.

    I agree that the importance of the NY Times editorial "cannot be underestimated."

  • Cats Somewhere in Time, UT
    Dec. 7, 2010 11:10 a.m.

    CWEB: to say that "people came here illegally" is not "ignorant." IT IS A FACT. These people have broken the law and are here illegally. Can we deal with this situation compassionately? Of course.

    But, deliberate violation of the sovereign laws of any nation is an affront to that country and also against what God has taught us--"render unto Caeser the things that are Caeser's." We are required to obey and sustain the laws of the land.

    Am I opposed to immigration? NO! But, we have a legal process and people need to go through it. Our borders are wide open, but WE get to decide who we let in.

    I wish people wouldn't get so emotional.

  • ouisc Farmington, UT
    Dec. 7, 2010 10:53 a.m.

    Changing allegiances to a new country is not an overnight decision and is not a decision that can be made on an overnight trip to the U.S. in the back of a semi-truck.

    Yes, there is "red tape" as CWEB calls it to become a citizen of the U.S. There is much less "red tape" to become a legal worker of the U.S. Thousands and thousands of immigrants are able to handle this. Why not all?

    If we facilitate illegal immigration, we may as well stop persecuting those who commit other crimes, such as armed robbery, DUI, or even murder, as being behind bars does not help these criminals provide for their families.

  • klangton Akiachak, AK
    Dec. 7, 2010 10:06 a.m.

    Cheers for CWEB. Much of the dialogue about immigration does not well reflect our religious beliefs.

  • Machado South Jordan, UT
    Dec. 7, 2010 9:56 a.m.

    Wow!! Talk about intolerance. CWEB provided the best example I've seen in a long time.

  • Fitness Freak Salt Lake City, UT
    Dec. 7, 2010 9:49 a.m.

    I wonder how the NY Times journalists would feel if we brought journalists from Mexico city to take THEIR job?

    The NY Times lost their relevancy ages ago! The only ones who don't know this is them!

  • Built2Last Provo, UT
    Dec. 7, 2010 9:35 a.m.

    Oh goody! An endorsement from the New York Times. In general, I would say if the NYT is praising you for something, you'd better re-examine the direction you are headed.

  • CWEB Orem, UT
    Dec. 7, 2010 8:44 a.m.

    Sandstrom and all the other people who think illegals just "broke the law" are ignorant, and have NO compassion! They don't care "why" a person came, to them it matters NOT!

    They are the very people that the Savior talked about in the parable of the Good Samaritan. They pass by, not wanting to be involved, or don't care, or for some other reason (it's the law--they scream!) They do not stop to ponder the plight that so many were in that caused them to come illegally.

    They do not care, that the immigration laws of this land are so difficult to deal with, that only the wealthy and the very educated can navigate the path through the red tape.

    They do not care of the children of the illegal mother--were continually sexually abused by family or others. (Those people should have STAYED there and taken it!!!)

    These people do not see themselves as those who passed by the beaten man. Nor do they see themselves as Javair in Les Mis... but THIS IS who they are.

    God forgive them for their FEAR, their arrogance, their lack of gratitude for THEIR great blessings.

  • micawber Centerville, UT
    Dec. 7, 2010 8:32 a.m.


    I would have signed it anyway. It's clear to me what the Utah Compact is talking about, even without the phrase "illegal immigration" in it.

  • sodiedog Salt Lake City, UT
    Dec. 7, 2010 7:22 a.m.

    Mr. Jowers says Utah is misunderstood. Really?

  • AggieNation Logan, Utah
    Dec. 7, 2010 6:45 a.m.

    As much as we all would like illegal immigration to be handled effectively, it IS NOT in the purview of the states to enforce FEDERAL immigration law. If you believe in he Constitution, then what Arizona did and what Utah is proposing is illegal. All we can do is send our petitions of grievances to the Congress and President. Illegal immigration is not a simple matter of enforcement. The costs of deportation would be phenomenally damaging to taxpayers.

  • JBrady Murray, Ut
    Dec. 7, 2010 4:22 a.m.

    I wish the Utah compact had addressed illegal immigration. That's the problem. Instead they chose to combine legal and illegal immigrants to cloud the situation.

    How many would of signed it, if the word immigration was changed to illegal immigration?