Feds sue Utah over illegal immigration enforcement bill

Shurtleff hopes to modify law to end challenge

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • anti-liar Salt Lake City, UT
    Jan. 1, 2012 2:59 p.m.

    "Stopping and questioning someone locally based solely on their skin color is profiling, Burbank said."

    No one is calling for stopping or questioning persons based solely on skin color. Not a single soul.

    So then what is Burbank's point? Is Burbank subtly IMPLYING, with an intent to mislead, that this is what Utah's immigration enforcement bill, HB497, and Arizona's bill, SB 1070, are about, when he knows perfectly well that each of these laws specifically prohibit profiling on the sole basis of race, that these bills therefore are no more "inviting" of such profiling than any other law in the book?

    He's not? Okay, then, so again, what then is his point?

    Burbank talks about bias, and non-bias. But why is he okay with assisting in the enforcement of some federal laws, such as those related to bank robbery, but biased against assisting with the enforcement of other federal laws, such as immigration law?

    By taking a stand against such enforcement at the local level, Burbank is helping to facilitate the illegal-alien invasion that is destroying this country.

  • sportsfan21 OREM, UT
    Nov. 27, 2011 11:42 a.m.

    I have a question I'd honestly like answered. If an owner of a fruit farm needs 100 employees for an upcoming harvest and only 20 citizens apply for a job, what should he do? I do believe there is a small percentage of citizens willing to take these jobs, but not enough to fill the need. I would say that common supply and demand would push the employers to raise wages and entice more citizens, but that would hurt the small business owner and/or affect prices. I think we must find a better solution to control immigration, but at the current moment we rely on illegals. We can't just kick them out, we have to ween ourselves off of them first. Alabama may have dropped unemployment by 1% but they are having a hard time filling every needed position. The small business owners are really struggling without enough labor and if they go under, nobody has a job.

    Tell me what you think. I know most people have a more firm stance on illegal immigration, but this is something to consider. How do we remove illegals without crushing small business owners that rely on them?

  • Freedom-In-Danger WEST VALLEY CITY, UT
    Nov. 24, 2011 12:50 p.m.

    wrz: Thanks for the intelligible comment. I have to say that last line about getting in line had me laughing.

  • Dan Maloy Enid, OK
    Nov. 24, 2011 8:33 a.m.

    The Feds suing a state (again) because the Feds won't do THEIR job?

    I'm not surprised by the ridiculous things this administration does anymore. Obama lacks the wisdom and leadership skills to lead a group of Girl Scouts out of a wet paper sack.

    November 2012: Our last chance to save America!

    Nov. 23, 2011 11:30 p.m.

    Obama going after just the states that want to enforce the laws, shows the dishonest side of the discussion. It's not about the Federal governments exclusive rights, or the sanctuary cities would not exist. Obama would have them in court also. His fixed deportation numbers should infuriate Americans. Turning people away at the border should not be counted as deportations.

    Border, E-verify, etc, enforcing one law will not solve the problem, we must enforce all of them.

    As for people who have been here for 25 years. They are the ones who have no intention of becoming citizens. They have lived off the American taxpayer for 25 years, they should feel guilty instead of entitled.

  • Alfred Salt Lake, UTah
    Nov. 23, 2011 11:17 p.m.


    "I have a great idea...Secure the border."

    Never happen. Many fly in over the border. Others (fully 40 percent) come here on legal documentation, including student, tourist, and work visas, but overstay. They stay on and on. They forget to go home.

    Furthermore, at busy check points on the Texas border vehicle traffic is so heavy that no one is stopped for inspection... going both ways. Totally uncontrolled.

    The only way to stop illegal immigration is to enforce federal laws governing employment of illegals in the US, using all the tools available, including E-Verify.

    And immigration must be stemmed else we become totally overrun and turn ourselves into just another third world nation where the language of foreigners may well become the dominant language.

  • tenx Santa Clara, UT
    Nov. 23, 2011 8:45 p.m.

    @Teka - Neither Bush did or Obama is enforcing the 1986 immigration law, but for different reasons. Meanwhile we pay and the legal immigrants stand in line and wait. Say hello to the Abdullah Fouad Companies for me. I worked there for years.

    @one day - You are confused about illegal labor & immigrants (they are legal). My legal immigrant father-in-law cleans toilets at one of the big box stores and is thrilled to have that job.

    wrz - You are spot on.

    Just Gordon - You are really confused.

  • KM Cedar Hills, UT
    Nov. 23, 2011 8:16 p.m.

    Isn't that the gun runner Erick Holder that is suing Utah over enforcing the immigration laws. No room to talk and no leg to stand on!!!

  • KM Cedar Hills, UT
    Nov. 23, 2011 8:14 p.m.

    Obama to the rescue. Don't enforce the federal law so the states will feel like they have to. I have a great idea...Secure the border. Then we can talk about amnesty. Every once in a while politicians will enforce the immigration law but the funny thing is that without first securing the border it doesn't matter. They just waltz right back into the U.S.

  • Good Guy MURRAY, Utah
    Nov. 23, 2011 7:23 p.m.

    Allow the local county sheriff to uphold his Constitutional Oath and serve the people who elected him. The sheriff is the supreme law enforcement of the land and needs to rid our counties of illegals. We are a nation of law. Holder may find himself in a local jail if the sheriff keeps his oath.

    I like the idea of work camps that help pay for the less fortunate. Thugs would stay clear of a constitutional sheriff and a county that is well armed with educated, American-sovereigns. We make this life way too difficult than what it has to be.

  • Mr. Bean Salt Lake, UTah
    Nov. 23, 2011 6:56 p.m.


    "I have read in some articles that it is not just the low paying jobs that the illegals are taking these days, but some high end type jobs also."

    You go that right. The 'jobs Americans won't take' is a red herring to suck us all in to believing we should be nice and let them flood in to take that work.

    "I mean, we give then a discounted college education why not use that to take away better paying jobs from our citizens also.."

    There's the proof of what I'm saying. They don't need a college education to do jobs Americans won't take... such as picking apples and making motel beds.

    "...all they have to do is steal an SSI and other ID documentation."

    That's the angle Utah law enforcement should be going after. ID theft, which is a violation of state law. But, for some strange reason they won't touch it. Elect me, Mr. Bean, and I'll go after 'em.

  • Miss Piggie Salt Lake, UTah
    Nov. 23, 2011 6:54 p.m.


    "Ronald Reagan offered amnesty. I find it ironic that Republicans now would find Reagan so liberal as to not vote for him!"

    Ronald Reagan would likely be among the first to now admit his amnesty program was wrong-headed. He didn't know it would invite millions of illegals to come for the same treatment. Besides, he had amnesty hooked to completely closing off the border... which didn't happen and ain't never gonna happen.

    Nov. 23, 2011 4:44 p.m.

    I have read in some articles that it is not just the low paying jobs that the illegals are taking these days, but some high end type jobs also. I mean, we give then a discounted college education why not use that to take away better paying jobs from our citizens also.. all they have to do is steal an SSI and other ID documentation. Also, if employers would pay a decent wage I am sure more people would take the jobs. It's not so much that we feel to good to do the low jobs but that we have to support families with all the financial responsibilities that entails and most people cannot do that on lower the medium wage earnings.

  • JustGordon Cottonwood Heights, UT
    Nov. 23, 2011 4:18 p.m.

    Ronald Reagan offered amnesty. I find it ironic that Republicans now would find Reagan so liberal as to not vote for him! If Reagan is to the "far left" now, God save this Republic from those who would move us so far to the right as to make the Founding Father's question what they had wrought for us.

  • one day... South Jordan, UT
    Nov. 23, 2011 3:52 p.m.

    Time to clean the house, to be honest nobody in the congress or the president (and all those before) have worked for the people in this country, they get money from the corporations, to eliminate, create and change was to help them to make more money. Economic crisis made by and for those ones in power...again we paid for it! Sad but those ones that received our vote, doesnt matter rep or dem are working for their own pocket$.
    They make money from US citizens and Illegals, its all about money.
    We lost our country years ago!

  • wrz Salt Lake, UTah
    Nov. 23, 2011 3:48 p.m.


    "Or can we not pass laws that simply say 'we can enforce the law'?"

    That certainty would be a good approach. But apparently we can't since Holder insists it's a federal issue to enforce.

    However, there are provisions in the federal law that allows states to partnership with the fed to enforce federal law. Some states have this type of agreement but Utah does not.

    Speaking of AG Holder... he needs to try to keep up on so-called Fast and Furious gun walking. And he needs to take legal action against the Black Panther group intimidation at voting places... And why doesn't he? His response... 'becasue they're my people.'


    "Hey, they can't even vote..."

    That's not the problem... The problem is, their citizen friends and relatives vote for their cause. Plus, many states do not validate citizenship for those who turn out to vote. ACORN signed up illegals to vote on many cases.


    "Hopefully this lawsuit will be an opportunity for Herbert's administration to work with the Obama administration to work out a comprehensive, acceptable path for immigration reform."

    We already have such a path... It's simple. Go home. Get in line.

  • Fitness Freak Salt Lake City, UT
    Nov. 23, 2011 3:46 p.m.

    @ "one day" Funny you should ask!

    From the time I was 13-17 I worked at Granite schools district doing those things you describe during the school year. Then, during the summer I worked in the orchards of Orem/Provo alongside illegal immigrants.

    SOME kids won't do that kind of work anymore. But, some might!

    Problem is, we'll never know if they will or not because THOSE jobs are already taken.

    Don't we owe it to ALL the entry level workers to FORCE employers to at least pay the minimum wage along with state/federal taxes, etc.
    Many don't. Thats why they hire illegal immigrants.

    How can a LEGITIMATE employer compete with that?

  • Jonathan Eddy Payson, UT
    Nov. 23, 2011 3:27 p.m.

    If the Federal government was not so busy suppressing US production of energy, produce, manufacturing, etc, we would have so much industry here we would be begging foreigners to come here and help us produce. Jobs would be plentiful, we would have more money to spend and immigration issues would be non existent.

    No, illegal immigration is not the problem. The Federal government is. Obama has to go first. Then his henchmen. Then most Senators and Congressmen that love money and power more than their constituents.

    Time to clean house!

  • one day... South Jordan, UT
    Nov. 23, 2011 3:03 p.m.

    Americans need those jobs, and Alabama proves that getting rid of illegal labor puts Americans back to work.
    REALLY??? Would you clean my bathroom, my house, paint houses, @ construction sites, warehouses etc at low pay, no benefits and more than 40 hrs a week, I don't think so! that's why you need immigrants, to do the job that NOBODY wants to do! sad, honest and true! dont blame the immigrants, blame your system!

  • Fitness Freak Salt Lake City, UT
    Nov. 23, 2011 2:13 p.m.

    @ "Tekakaromatagi"

    There haven't REALLY been higher deportation numbers. Napolitano, Holder, Obama, et.al. have just changed the way they "count" deportations.

    Among other things; now, if a border agent catches an illegal 5 feet inside the border and tells him to "go home" THATS considered an "apprehension and deportation"! They didn't use to count those. There are some other "fudging the numbers", "cooking the books" issues, but you probably get the idea!

    This "cooking of the books" is purely a deceptive move on the part of an administration that DOESN'T WANT to do their job! They think we're stupid!

    Obviously they DON'T WANT immigration enforcement to occur at all since they won't even let the states do it for them!

  • Munk Cottonwood Heights, UT
    Nov. 23, 2011 1:23 p.m.

    I really am impressed with the way the Feds handle illegal immigration... impressed at how well they do nothing. Does Eric Holder fail to understand what "illegal" means?

    If you have the proper documentation with you, then you won't be detained... but wait you say.. that is like fascist! Well, considering well have to carry "papers" called our drivers license or other ID.... pretty much the same thing.

    You also have to wonder where a lot of illegals are getting their false SSNs.... Hmmm

    But wait! Not only do you get an fake SSN, but you get free food and living off the backs of legal citizens.

    Oh sorry... I, a legal citizen, who is a disabled veteran, who was not even born here.... am being insensitive.... somehow, I don't care. You want to be here legally? You do it like my family did or you get out. I bled for America, not illegals.

  • ouisc Farmington, UT
    Nov. 23, 2011 1:03 p.m.

    THIS is why the government wants to raise my taxes? And the taxes of the rich? So they can sue their own states?

  • Tekakaromatagi Dammam, Saudi Arabia
    Nov. 23, 2011 12:39 p.m.

    I am hearing people say here that the federal government is not enforcing the law, but then I hear in other news reports that a lot of illegals are being deported by the Obama administration, even more so than the Bush administration.

    Of course, if the federal government is so big into the separation of powers, then they should stay out of education.

    That is good news that Alabama has declining unemployment.

  • cjb Bountiful, UT
    Nov. 23, 2011 11:14 a.m.

    The Utah law as written may invite profiling and low grade harassment of people who happen to look the part but aren't. Given our history, of Utah AND the nation this isn't acceptable. President Obama recognizes this.

    We can keep our law, we just need to take out those parts that invite discrimination.

    Nov. 23, 2011 11:03 a.m.

    I understand your point and concern.
    But, what about the family of US citizens that cannot get a job and pay their bills and are losing their homes etc.. do they not also deserve your concern and charity. If we open our doors to all the weak and downtrodden then soon we will become a nation of weak and downtrodden ourselves. There are poor and weak people ALL OVER this world that would love to be here. WHY are we allowing the Latinos the right to come here at their will breaking our laws and not allowing others the same opportunity? How fair is that to the people who are doing it the right way and waiting and working to do all they can to come here correctly and not under the wire? OH and by the way... just because we want people to OBEY our laws, does NOT mean that we hate them!!! In my opinion they show more hate towards us when they come here illegally. I personally don't care what their nationally is - if they are here illegally then they are putting our lives and country at risk.. and that is not love!!!

  • Fitness Freak Salt Lake City, UT
    Nov. 23, 2011 10:25 a.m.

    Whichever way you lean politically, consider the bigger picture here related to politicizing law enforcement.

    Thats a very common trait of 3rd world countries.

    Up until now the U.S. hasn't had that problem. Sure, law enforcement can't be everywhere at once, but when they REFUSE to even take into custody law breakers, think what COULD come next.

    Today its' failure to enforce illegal immigration violations (or let the states do it), whats next?

  • DaleC Magna, UT
    Nov. 23, 2011 9:41 a.m.

    I understand some of the frustration over this issue, but I have a Latino neighbor who is a young mother of two small children and is going through a divorce. The husband refuses to pay support. She can't get a job because of the law and can't pay her rent and no one can help her pay her rent because of the law. There is no help! Maybe some people do need to go back, but we need to have some compassion and make sure our laws do not hurt the week and downtrodden. Also, I would like to remind us of what John said, "If anyone says, I love God, and hates his brother, he is a liar; for he who does not love his brother whom he has seen cannot love God whom he has not seen.

  • DeltaFoxtrot West Valley, UT
    Nov. 23, 2011 9:19 a.m.

    This is *exactly* what I'm talking about when I say we need a Constitutional Convention.

    Power needs to be stripped from the greedy and corrupt federal government and given back to the states, where it belongs.

  • Kami Bountiful, Utah
    Nov. 23, 2011 9:08 a.m.

    I am very surprised at some of the comments. Do you not have to take a course in high school in Utah to understand the basics of the US Constitution, particularly the separation of powers between the States and the US Government?

  • TOO Sanpete, UT
    Nov. 23, 2011 8:47 a.m.

    This is sort of like a bad boss who doesn't do his job and is risking the company to go down hard. So you jump in, try to save the company, then your boss sues you for not doing his job the way he wanted.

  • all hands on deck Sandy, UT
    Nov. 23, 2011 8:34 a.m.

    Sue Utah for enforcing Federal Law. Wow.

    The constitution says, the federal government is responsible to establish "an uniform rule on naturalization," not immigration rules. Go figure. So we should now stop catching bank robbers, because that is a "federal" crime?

    There is a bigger end game afoot.

  • DN Subscriber Cottonwood Heights, UT
    Nov. 23, 2011 8:24 a.m.

    The feds may sue, and they may twist the facts and the law enough to win.

    But they are still wrong.

    The root cause of so many of our problems is that the feds have totally failed, no, they have totally abandoned, their very real responsibility to control our borders and enforce immigration laws.

    It they won't, then who will? If they won't allow the states to do so, then the essential question is "Why not?"

    It appears that some in this administration do not love this country, or want to do their Constitutional job to defend our country and constitution against all enemies foreign and domestic.

  • tabuno Clearfield, UT
    Nov. 23, 2011 7:22 a.m.

    Hopefully this lawsuit will be an opportunity for Herbert's administration to work with the Obama administration to work out a comprehensive, acceptable path for immigration reform. Will all the work that this State put into it, it has the best chance to become a national model for the rest of the Country, something that Congress and Obama could move towards in passing next year. If Utah can support this reform model, then the rest of the Country might be able to accept it too.

  • Doug10 Roosevelt, UT
    Nov. 23, 2011 7:22 a.m.

    Neither party will address the real issue of the porous border. When Bush was approached by states concerened over illegal immigration he totally ducked the issue. Had he not he would have lost all popularity at home as Texas runs on the hired help.

    When approached about healthcare reform Bush chose not to address the issue. Had he actually lead as presidents should, the GOP may have been able to set aside all the confusion this country has experienced over the past 3 years.

    Now we have lived through this I am not in a rush to reinstae the other party just because they are the other party. This time I want somebody responsible to be elected. Someone who will change the way our country does business.

    We cannot afford to pay the military a billion a day. We cannot afford to run bases overseas like it was 1967, nor do we need to.

    We can't afford 20 million illegals in the country. We cannot afford to have state people like Shurtleff who wants to run his own country. We are all grateful for the work he has done but are more grateful he is leaving.

  • atl134 Salt Lake City, UT
    Nov. 23, 2011 7:21 a.m.

    @Andrew Marksen
    "Gotta solidify that illegal immigrant voter base right Mr. President? I notice the Democrats in Utah, the ones who have our best interests at heart support this nonsense. No such thing as right and wrong for a Democrat, for them breaking the law is condoned as long as the votes turn up for them in November. "

    Heh, they can't even vote (and if you want to argue that they do then have fun coming up with documented cases that they do). Besides the LDS church (hardly a liberal entity) is against splitting up families and amusingly Gingrich took a fairly similar position in the debate last night. On the plus side, considering Romney's attacks on Gingrich for that stance we can see that Romney's definitely not going to just follow church political positions.

  • Keith43 Springville, UT
    Nov. 23, 2011 7:13 a.m.

    The fact that more than 50% of the voting public leans to the far left, how will it be possible, as suggested earlir, to vote out the incumbents? Secondly, what makes us think these people will vote themselves out of power by setting term limits?

    With as much debate, outrage and protest as there has been (Arizona in particular) over the years due to our failed immigration policy, what of real substance has changed? There's too much power to be lost if our elected officals do what's right. And, as long as the Federal Government continues to do nothing, the states have every right to enforce the laws and protect it's citizens.

    Finally, I have a question. What constitutional rights does a person have who is not a citizen of the U.S., and who enters our country illegally? It would appear that the government bends over backwards to insure they have every advantage; whereas, our constitutional rights are trampled on daily.

  • Freedom-In-Danger WEST VALLEY CITY, UT
    Nov. 23, 2011 7:13 a.m.

    "The federal lawsuit suit claims that HB497 is unconstitutional because it attempts to establish a state immigration policy."

    While I think that immigration is best handled on the federal level (and few things are as I see it) ...the attempt for Utah to pass laws is by all means not unconstitutional. If the constitution says 'undocumented immigration is okay' then we'd be wrong for enforcing legitimate citizenship, etc. If the constitution said 'you have to be legit' then our laws would only enforce and sustain the supreme law of the land. If the constitution doesn't say anything at all about it, then the laws are left to the states respectively.

    So by all means, laws aren't unconstitutional that merely enforce the very same constitution and the laws below it. This attempt only further places doubt on our judicial branch's ability to understand law.

    Or can we not pass laws that simply say 'we can enforce the law'?

    I'm all for peaceful and a welcoming but safe immigration policy. However, this case has no merit and only wastes even more tax dollars than the federal government is currently. States have sadly lost too much power as it is.

  • mohokat Ogden, UT
    Nov. 23, 2011 7:04 a.m.

    Notice that the Regime sues on this law but leaves the amnesty (116) alone. Shows their true colors. Amnesty is their keyword.

  • md Cache, UT
    Nov. 23, 2011 6:56 a.m.

    Illegal is illegal. They broke the laws of our country, send them home and secure the borders. Bring our troops home to protect our country that is under siege. More people are dying in the war in our own country due to these illegals bringing their gangs and drugs across the border with them. Get tough America. Vote for people who want to have immigration that is legal.

  • dave4197 Redding, CA
    Nov. 23, 2011 6:51 a.m.

    The real disgrace here is Sandstrom's attempt to put the boot of the law on the neck of a bunch of poor people based on the color of their skin.
    We need to debate comprehensive change to the immigration laws, we don't need anything like Sandstrom's attempt at elimintation of immigration, we do need to open the door to our friends, we do need to help others in our hemisphere who only walked across a line in the sand to our relatively opulent economy, we do need to think about sharing our wealth with our friends in need.
    The real disgrace here includes attitudes of hate and exclusion towards our neighbors and friends from south of the border.
    Go, Holder! Stop Sandstrom's bad law.
    Then let's continue a discussion about how we as a state and a region and a country can help raise up the standard of living for a few of our poor neighbors. The Utah Compact has good points.

  • JWB Kaysville, UT
    Nov. 23, 2011 6:45 a.m.

    This is a stretch to sue 4-5 states for trying to maintain state integrity.

    The Federal Government hasnt done anything in this administration to stop the border flow.

    The U.S. attorney-general doesnt want the case to go to court, even though he says he is suing the State as it will bring up a lot of infighting within the Federal Government, not just the issue of immigration.

  • JWB Kaysville, UT
    Nov. 23, 2011 6:43 a.m.

    Over the years, immigrant votes have been a very serious tactic for people such as the Clintons and the President today. There has never been a serious study on the impact of illegal alien voting when they are not citizens. Why protect their votes when they are not legal to vote. The politicians want the whole support of that block on their election day. Not closing the border is not just one party, as it impacts on all parties, even Independents. The U.S. has always had border requirements on highways but it wasnt until the U.S. started having a drug problem that there was more government agents on the border, DEA, etc. That brought in the ATF due to the weapons and drugs interconnect. With the advent of Homeland Security, there should have been more of a concerted effort but there wasnt as it is a very political agency linked with more sub-agencies under their control.

  • Dixie Dan Saint George, UT
    Nov. 23, 2011 5:32 a.m.

    Why doesn't Utah enforce the 1986 Immigration Reform Act signed into law by President Reagan. It was one of President Reagan's crowning achievement of his administration instead of blaming President Obama? How can our local Constitutional expert Carl Wimmer, allow all of this to happen and not enforce Reagan's law? What a joke Wimmer has become in Utah.

    Nov. 23, 2011 5:22 a.m.

    The Church said they supported the 4 bills as a package. When the guest worker bill came under fire, they fought for it. Will they also fight for the enforcement part of the package?

    Obama has proved that the executive branch can't be trusted to run immigration alone. It needs to have a partnership with congress.

    Our government has a responsibility to it's people, it either lives up to it's commitment, or the people need to change it. I have lost trust and faith over the illegal immigration issue.

    Americans need those jobs, and Alabama proves that getting rid of illegal labor puts Americans back to work.

  • Spoc Ogden, UT
    Nov. 23, 2011 4:58 a.m.

    Federal law 287(g) encourages local participation in interdiction of illegal aliens. Recent POLICY changes made by Obama in that program require local agencies to "follow Federal priorities". Those priorities were expressed when Janet Napolitano announced that they would no longer be deporting anyone not convicted of a felony because of a lack of manpower. Talk about laying out the welcome mat for illegal aliens!

    They bring suit because "it is a federal issue" and therefore unconstitutional for local agencies to assist with enforcement of federal law. That of course makes the federal law 287(g) unconstitutional. I haven't seen them declare that states cannot assist with enforcement of other federal laws such as controlled substance violations. Nor have they brought suit against certain left-coast states whose pot laws are directly contradictory to federal drug laws.

    There is nothing about the Utah law that is contradictory to Federal law. They want to be perceived as tough on crime but refuse to assign enough people, enable catch and release policies, and refuse assistance.

    There is no logic in this argument, only deception and ulterior motives.

  • RichardB Murray, UT
    Nov. 22, 2011 11:07 p.m.

    Alabama's new laws are proof that self deportation laws are working and put Americans back to work. Look at their unemployment numbers.

    "September was the first full month that the reform was in force, and
    the unemployment rate fell from 9.8 percent in September to 9.3 percent
    in October, according to a Nov. 18 report from the state government.

    The rates fell from 9.9 percent to 9 percent in Etowah County, from
    8.8 percent to 8.1 percent in Marshall county, and from 11.6 percent to
    10.6 percent in DeKalb county."

    We have a solution to immigration and to a jobs bill.

  • David Centerville, UT
    Nov. 22, 2011 10:24 p.m.

    Re: Makid continued

    And I do not believe that Democrats are sincere in wanting to increase taxes to reduce the deficit. They want to increase taxes to appease their voting base, to hurt business, to consolidate power with the federal government, and to avoid cutting favored programs.

    The federal government has more money rolling into the treasury than ever before in American history. They don't have a money problem. They have a huge spending problem.

    Social programs of Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security are exploding the budget. Another source are retirement funds of federal workers.

    It is also frustrating to have read that the reduction in military spending that is now required (because an agreement was reached by the super committee) is really a reduction in the growth of military spending. The annual military spending would have been over $700 billion, but will now be only over $600 billion. Spending increases will drop from 23% to only 16%. Republican fear mongering over military spending in this scenario is similar to Democratic fear mongering over social programs to score political points. Spending must be reduced so stop acting this way...both Democrats & Republicans! Get the job done!

  • David Centerville, UT
    Nov. 22, 2011 10:17 p.m.

    Re: Makid

    I never vote straight party. I haven't voted for a Republican governor since Leavitt in the early 90's.

    I don't ascribe, necessarily, to term limits either. But I do hope that every American will study the issues, learn about candidates, and vote for the man that will be best, and honest.

    When I stated that we must continue what was started in 2010, I didn't mean to vote Republican only. Instead, we must vote for what is best for America. Current federal spending levels are not in the best interest of America if we want to avoid what is happening in Europe with Greece, Italy, etc. Our spending levels are not sustainable.

    In 2010 we voted in a group of new congressmen and senators that vowed to change federal spending, decrease the size of government. I say we must continue that effort until the government actually follows through on this.

    The current fiasco with the special committee, who was to come up with a bipartisan plan to reduce the deficit, was another display of partisan selfishness. Vote them out. Vote Republican or Democrat, as long as they will decrease spending.

  • Makid Kearns, UT
    Nov. 22, 2011 9:34 p.m.

    I agree David but, that means we must vote out all incumbents. The only way that they will get the message in Washington is if there is a constant new House of Representatives every 2 years and each Senator is only in office for 6 years.

    Both parties are to blame. I do hope that you are planning to vote for something other than an (R) next to it if you expect any changes coming from Utah as the current group are complicate to just keep the current state of immigration affairs as can be seen by the bills that have been brought forth by the current Utah representatives.

  • David Centerville, UT
    Nov. 22, 2011 9:19 p.m.

    "A patchwork of immigration laws is not the answer and will only create further problems in our immigration system," U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder said in a statement.

    "The federal government is the chief enforcer of immigration laws, and while we appreciate cooperation from states, which remains important, it is clearly unconstitutional for a state to set its own immigration policy."

    OK, Mr President and Congress, if states cannot pass laws to deal with immigration, then why don't you do it?

    The fact is, the federal government has completely ignored this issue because of politics. It is sad that our national leaders do not do what is right for America. They only try to do what is in their own selfish, individual interests to remain in power.

    Sick sick sick. Voters can change Washington by continuing what was started in 2010.

  • trekker Salt Lake, UT
    Nov. 22, 2011 8:40 p.m.

    Tell the Feds to enforce or the States will leave the Union, i am willing to bet they would give in

  • Fitness Freak Salt Lake City, UT
    Nov. 22, 2011 8:09 p.m.

    Wouldn't it be nice if our federal government were as concerned about the rights of ACTUAL legal citizens as they are about the rights of illegal alien trespassers?

    One can dream!

  • Andrew J. Marksen Deseret, UT
    Nov. 22, 2011 8:04 p.m.

    Gotta solidify that illegal immigrant voter base right Mr. President? I notice the Democrats in Utah, the ones who have our best interests at heart support this nonsense. No such thing as right and wrong for a Democrat, for them breaking the law is condoned as long as the votes turn up for them in November.

  • Hemlock Salt Lake City, UT
    Nov. 22, 2011 6:33 p.m.

    The Feds ignore their responsibilities with respect to immigration and then sue Utah because they are trying to handle the problem. Eric Holder's logic is the same as his Fast and Furious debacle - flawed. He should be added to the list of those seeking employment.

  • CJ Murray, UT
    Nov. 22, 2011 6:23 p.m.

    What a disgrace this administration is, they won't do their job and enforce the law and then sue their own states who try to do their job for them. 2012 can't come soon enough, if ever there was a President who needs to go it is this one. It's always about politics with him, he is trying to pander to Hispanics, plain and simple and doesn't care how many Americans suffer as a result of it. Barack Obama has never stopped running for office beginning about eight years ago. Everything is about him and getting more and more power. And to have a disgraceful attorney general like Holder, who has the fast and furious blood of a border agent on his hands, leading the charge to stop the enforcement of our immigration laws makes this all the more shameful. Holder needs to resign or be fired and Obama needs to be impeached for failing to protect the borders of the United States, it's his duty under the constitution. Instead here we are as state defending ourselves in court. Unbelievable.