Why did most of Utah delegation vote no on fiscal cliff compromise?

Lawmakers cite lack of spending cuts in voting against fiscal cliff bill

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • RBB Sandy, UT
    Jan. 4, 2013 2:18 a.m.

    @EvolvedRevolutionary the poor common man can't get a break? Nearly half of Americans pay no income tax. Shame on the successful business person who is so greedy as to think that paying nearly 40 percent is excessive when half aren't paying anything. Remember the good old days when even poor people avoided the stigma of being on welfare. Now it is all about how to get me some bennies without having to pay for them

  • one vote Salt Lake City, UT
    Jan. 3, 2013 3:26 p.m.

    Because they dream of conservative gold 1950's utopia and thats all their constituents want to hear.

  • kishkumen American Fork, UT
    Jan. 3, 2013 3:11 p.m.

    Senator Hatch showed his maturity and leadership in this situation. The rest of our state's legislators are the people our nation is disgusted with. These lawmakers are content returning to the economic nightmare we saw unfold a few years back. They should be embarrassed.

  • Pete1215 Lafayette, IN
    Jan. 3, 2013 3:02 p.m.

    We are 16 trillion dollare in debt and headed for 20. Your representatives at least had a clue. They should be thanked for at least trying.

  • Grover Salt Lake City, UT
    Jan. 3, 2013 12:33 p.m.

    CA: Yes we understand...that you don't understand. Since you will never be convinced that in no way does Social Security fit the definition of a Ponzi Scheme, at least have the courage to call it the "longest running Ponzi scheme in history". Most schemes unravel in the first few years, some like Bernie Madoff's version lasted more than 10 years. Social Security is at 78 years and still going strong...now that the full payroll tax is restored thanks to the adults in Congress. The system needs some tweaks like it has twice before in its 78 years, but with those you will be telling your grandchildren that what you thought was a boondoggle is still providing support for seniors and the disabled.

  • Hutterite American Fork, UT
    Jan. 3, 2013 11:43 a.m.

    Politics. Self over country. A knowledge that they simply well not be held accountable for their actions, unless they switch parties. Any number of reasons.

  • pragmatistferlife salt lake city, utah
    Jan. 3, 2013 11:36 a.m.

    The deficit is important and needs to be managed..but..Elcapitan what crisis? Interest is 0 inflation is 0 we have no trouble selling our bonds..what crisis?

  • Thunder Mayf Salt Lake City, UT
    Jan. 3, 2013 11:15 a.m.

    I think I see my last 10 years of paid taxes in the decor of Senator Hatch's office. Whatever Orrin. Your whole campaign was based on 'What If' Your term can't end soon enough.

  • Elcapitan Ivins, UT
    Jan. 3, 2013 10:48 a.m.

    I go back many years...even to the time when Marriner Eccles wss running the fed. He said at that time that deficit spending was OK and that it would always exist. Well, the chickens are now coming home to roost. It has taken years to get into crisis mode. Obama obviously does not intend to try to reverse our course. He is bent on fundamentally changing America into a socialist state. We will probably pay an awful price for not running our house on a sensible budget. I feel sorry for my grandkids, we are handing them a real mess.

  • A_Chinese_American Cedar Hills, UT
    Jan. 3, 2013 10:40 a.m.

    A Ponzi scheme is defined as you cannot give back the return you have promised. Looking at social security and other welfare programs, they definite meet the definition of the Ponzi scheme, because people pay taxi, they will not get the service which is promised to (look beyond year 2017). Therefore, less amount of money put into the Ponzi scheme is better. In this sense, any deal without spending cut would be a bad deal for American People. Do you understand?

  • Grover Salt Lake City, UT
    Jan. 3, 2013 10:20 a.m.

    More significant than the scorecard for the Utah delegation is the one for the early Republican favorites for President in 2016. Both Marco Rubio and Rand Paul (newcomers to the Senate not unlike Senator Obama 6 years ago) were allowed to vote "no" so as not to have to explain to the voters in four years why they "consorted with the enemy" even though the Senate vote was 89 to 6 in favor. They get the best of all worlds: a vote that everyone on both sides knew had to happen and they don't have to pay for it by raising the ire of the fire eaters in their party.

  • Evolvedrevolutionary St. George, UT
    Jan. 3, 2013 10:03 a.m.

    Of course most of the Utah reps are mad about the deal. They make more than $400, 000!!! Gosh forbid the regular man catch a break from the greedy Utah politician/businessman! Sen Hatch had it right to support this bill!

  • perspicacious Salt lake city, Utah
    Jan. 3, 2013 9:51 a.m.

    Same old political games! Why didn't our wonderful delegation at least push the Boehner-Kantor incompetents to push the Sandy aid bill? Time to replace the whole bunch with a statesman who wants to serve the country and not just their lobbyist-benefactors.

  • bricha lehi, ut
    Jan. 3, 2013 9:45 a.m.

    MightyHunter: The problem I have with this deal is it didn't change a dang thing! Congress the House, and even the president said there just wasn't enough time to come up with a better deal, bull! They have had months and months, ever since they imposed this dumb fiscal cliff. I am sick and tired of all the politicians kicking the can farther down the road instead of figuring out how to fix the problems! If I did my job half as ineffectively as them, I would be fired in no time flat. That is why I am angry, nothing is getting done, and the can gets kicked farther down!

  • Wonder Provo, UT
    Jan. 3, 2013 9:13 a.m.

    @lost in DC -- It is absolutely nutty that a Republican is saying that voting for a tax cut is evil. I know, I know, if it's ANYTHING that Obama even looks like he supports, it is evil, even if it's exactly what you were trying to get all along. It's a crazy world in tea party land.

  • xert Santa Monica, CA
    Jan. 3, 2013 9:11 a.m.

    Can we finally face the fact that Mr. Hatch is no longer right to represent the values and concerns of most Utahn's? When will we come to our Tea sippin' senses and elect the kind of candidates who will really, honestly represent hard line conservative values and show the rest of the nation how a truly anti-liberal state can lead the way? From all appearances, it would seem like the country is choosing to go in another direction. It's time to double down on all of those things that the nation voted against and present them in a new and delightsome way. Mr. Hatch simply does not want to play hardball and actually wants to "bipartisanship." With who?! President Obama and the left leaning media. Right. Like that's ever gonna happen.

  • lost in DC West Jordan, UT
    Jan. 3, 2013 8:50 a.m.

    Hatch proved long ago he feels he no longer has to answer to his constituents. Especially since he said he will not run again (though I would not be surprised to see him reverse himself on that, too)

    so you’re saying, go ahead and go along with evil if you cannot overcome it. Like a good German industrialist in 1936: we can’t stop Hitler, so let’s make money building his war machines.

    What cuts are you talking about? The deal includes INCREASED, not decreased spending.

  • Mike in Cedar City Cedar City, Utah
    Jan. 3, 2013 8:40 a.m.

    The simple fact is is that those who voted no, regardless of whay they say, voted for a tax increase on everyone. The fact that in this stop gap legislation that there were no spending cuts is no excuse.. They gave us all an convenient Cool-Aid excuse, and some of you have bought it. But the real reason for the vote was fear of being Tea Party primaried in the next election. That wouuld not be a problem for Hatch, he has six years before he has to worry about that. Fear is a great motivator.

    The worst part of it is that a so called democrat was so fearful that he voted against what the majority of his party wanted. That is real fear. I expect that of the Utah Republican establisment, they have seen what the radical tea party can do. But Mattheson, needs to change parties and join the Tea Party caucus, because that is what he really is.

  • Say No to BO Mapleton, UT
    Jan. 3, 2013 8:27 a.m.

    I've heard two Republican Reps (in Illinois and Indiana) justify their yes votes. The one from Illinois voted for it because it preserved the inheritance cap of $5 million which is good for farmers.
    The one from Indiana claims it will box Obama into a corner a couple of months down the road because they can throw this deal back in his face telling him he got what he asked for and it didn't work.
    Those are both interesting takes on the matter but they don't sell to the informed voter.
    Obama's approval rating is at 57% with Rasumussen. That's amazing. What it tells me is that voters want the perks today. They don't care about the national debt, deficit spending, making our kids pay for the government benefits we recieve...
    Most importantly, voters and congressmen do not understand that we are playing with fire. If we lose our reputation as the world's currency the cost of money will bury us. The Fed will no longer be able to manage interest rates and inflation.
    This dabbling with our fiscal situation will cost us far more than a cheap gain in January of 2013.

  • JoeBlow Far East USA, SC
    Jan. 3, 2013 8:15 a.m.

    Lets look at the really sad part of this whole mess.

    We have had this staring us in the face for almost 2 years.

    How sad is it that the "children" who run our government cant get this done, with reasonable debate and compromise. Why did they not do this a year ago? Do you let your kids start on that project on Sunday night when it is due on Monday?

    Instead, they do a 2 month measure because it is easier than fixing the DANG issue like they were sent there to do.

    What a bunch of pathetic non-leaders we have. ON BOTH SIDES of the political isle.

  • FT salt lake city, UT
    Jan. 3, 2013 7:55 a.m.

    Most of Utah's delegation voted "No" because "Maybe" wasn't an option.

  • pragmatistferlife salt lake city, utah
    Jan. 3, 2013 7:42 a.m.

    Boehner has a grand bargin with over a trillion in spending cuts, but it rasises taxes on those making over 400K..can't even get it to the floor because of the tax increase. Realizes there will be a tax increase so he decides to be pro-active and unilateraly set the bar at a million..can't get that to the floor. Gives up and passes the ball to the senate at the two yard line. Senate passes a smaller bill saving tax cuts for all those under 400K..hmm, that looks familiar..and it restores the payroll tax to shore up SS, and give all workers more skin in the game..hmmm I thought that's what the republicans were crying about during the election..and it says ok folks you've got two months to figure out the sequestar with taxes off the table..and our congressmen vote against this..talk about do nothings. They have a chance blow it are given another chance and blow that.

  • raybies Layton, UT
    Jan. 3, 2013 7:28 a.m.

    1. Government makes giant Fiscal Cliff Problem.
    2. Government makes everyone aware of giant Fiscal Cliff Problem.
    3. Government solves problem it made...
    4. Government wonders why no one likes government...

    Hrm. Now there's a toughy.

  • mightyhunterhaha Kaysville, UT
    Jan. 3, 2013 7:27 a.m.

    Everyone who was against this deal is out to lunch. Had this deal not passed and taxes increased they would have screamed louder than anyone. Had this deal not passed they are fooling themselves in thinking they would have got a better deal. Congress is broken but so is America. Too many stand on the far right or left and we have few hero's like Hatch who have the courage of our founding fathers to compromise. Those against this bill would never have allowed the Constitution or the 13th Amendment to ever survive a vote. They don't understand what the word compromise means or entails.

  • Esquire Springville, UT
    Jan. 3, 2013 7:01 a.m.

    Each of these members of the Utah delegation want spending cuts, as long as they don't affect Utah. What is Utah ready to give up? The answer is clear: Nothing.

    Jan. 3, 2013 6:26 a.m.

    So, if they vote no and the bill fails, everyone's taxes go up and Utah screams. If they vote yes and it passes, then taxes stay relatively low, but the social safety net (ie. Medicare, Social Security) doesn't get completely gutted and Utah screams. Regardless of whether the bill passes or fails, Utah screams. When Obama fought to extend the payroll tax cut, the commenters here complained. Now that it has expired they still complain. There is absolutely nothing anyone can do that would make Utah republicans happy. Nothing.

  • jbob Holladay, UT
    Jan. 3, 2013 1:32 a.m.

    so what's really wrong with the cliff...
    we have to understand that at some point someone has to pay for all this and having people on food stamps and medicaid pay a little into the pot with the rest of us sounds like a great idea.
    True, there would be a lot of people very upset...but that would get the masses involved and interested.
    I wouldn't mind paying extra taxes for a year or two if it meant that we as a society realized we have to stop spending- or come up with the money

  • UtahBlueDevil Durham, NC
    Jan. 3, 2013 1:08 a.m.

    @ETT - the reason given by the head of the Utah Tea Party said it best...

    "We have a big problem were not looking at he said. These guys are never going to fix it. You know what? In Hatch's defense, maybe he realized that and got what he could for taxpayers."

    There are signs of intelligent life out there.

    You can tell that the people who keep playing the role of all-ot-nothing have not had serious jobs where getting the deal was more important than arguing over whose kids are better looking. Any deal where someone gets all they want is a bad deal and will eventually come back to haunt them - the Treaty of Versailles is a great example.

    This is why they call it politics boys and girls. How many of you were willing to have you jobs lost to make a point?

  • Ett Salt Lake City, UT
    Jan. 2, 2013 11:12 p.m.

    The reason one delegate (Hatch)voted yes, is because he's a career politician. He's forgotten how to serve the people of Utah. Like his former colleague Bennett, he ignored his constituency. He voted the way he thought would keep him in office next term. Hatch has become old and jaded. It's time for him to retire.
    Our other delegates voted no because they knew this was political cliff compromise. The Senate Republicans, and now the House Republicans sold us out on a disastrous bill. They traded a cliff for a bottomless pit.

  • toosmartforyou Farmington, UT
    Jan. 2, 2013 10:43 p.m.

    Oh, you've got to be kidding, durwood. The voters have short, short memories. Otherwise how could Obama and Harry Reid ever get re-elected? Yet they did.....

  • durwood kirby South Jordan, UT
    Jan. 2, 2013 9:23 p.m.

    A better question might be, "Why will many voters ignore these people in the next election?"