"This is hypocritical. If (the Justice Department) chooses not to take
legal action against Utah's unconstitutional law, it will be clear the
Administration bases their decisions on their own political views rather than
constitutional principle," Rep. Lamar Smith, R-TexasI could not
agree more!There is ALREADY an existing federal guest worker
program. The problem is Utah employers and agriculture just don't want to use
it. Utah's SB 116 should have made it mandatory to use the existing plan. For those that say the program is flawed, broken or doesn't work -
recent enforcement efforts in other states show that the program DOES work.
Search nytimes(dot)com for "Illegal Workers Swept from Jobs in Silent
Raids" - published 10 July 2010
Senator Smith is correct.
One can only hope that HB116 and other such bills that were passed this term can
be overturned, either in the special session or by the Feds. Utah just hasn't
got the right to mess with immigration. It does have the right to handle
employment, though, so they should get busy on requiring eVerify and such for
Shurtleff's and Herbert's objections are pure bunk. The state legislature's own
attorneys told them the bill was unconstitutional, so they are complaining that
a congressman from Texas agrees with their own attorneys??The whole
idea of "requesting a waiver" from the feds is also bunk. Neither the
administration or the congress can waive the requirements of the constitution.
The guest worker bill needs to be repealed, pronto. The way to avoid the
federal lawsuit is to revoke the bill that should have never been passed by the
legislature and signed into law by Gov Herbert. We need to get rid of that law
and then get rid of Gov Herbert and any legislator who continues to defend the
passing of that law.
There would be no hypocrasy if the Federal government acting as the executive
administrator over its lawfully given Constitutional authority approved a waiver
especially as parts of the Utah law have been developed with the cooperation of
the Mexican government in the absence of any existing federal law on the matter.
In the void, the Federal government has the authority to regulate immigration
and decide whether or not to approve Utah's law having considered the
comprehensive implications across the entire nation.
Hey Herbert: if the law doesn't go into effect for 2 years, then why pass it
this year? Why not try to get your unconstitutional waiver and then pass the law
when you want it to take effect?Seems kind of stupid to pass
something that isn't any good for 2 years.Smith is correct. Holder
is incompetent. Obama has never read the COTUS let alone taught it anywhere.Looks like we know who needs to go at the next convention: Shurtleff and
Smith is correct. This was a bad law and the legislators should have realized
that and voted against it, and the Governor should have vetoed it.Repeal it! That will be less expensive than paying hordes of lawyers to
defend it, only to loose anyway.
Lamar Smith, R-Texas, is a hypocrite himself. The Republicans have been
fighting against any reform legislation in Washington, so how can we do anything
but end up with state level laws? And I thought the Republicans loved states
rights. They are just big game players intent on gaining power (because it is
profitable to them and their lobbyist friends), and not about resolving issues.
Mark my word on that.
The problem with the Arizona law is it let to unequal treatment of people who
are citizens. Citizens who look like they could be non citizens would have been
profiled by police carrying out Arizona's law.The same is not the
case with the Utah law. Therefore the motivation to move against the Utah law is
lower. Obama was absolutely right to move against the Arizona law. He has the
right to move against the Utah law if he wishes, however if he chooses not to
thats okay too.The federal government can't do everything, there
are priorities. Moving against the Utah law, because it is a better less
obtrusive law is not as high of a priority.
I had some quality face to face time with the Gov. regarding this bill last
Saturday at SLCGOP Convention and told him 'You have lost my vote'! Herbert
listened only to the LDS church officials and business leaders. The LDS church
has since back peddled stating they do NOT approve of people breaking laws
'hello identity theft'? I will personally support anyone in a primary against
Gov. Herbert! Being fearful of a supposed economic backlash as AZ has allegedly
experienced is NOT a reason to not veto HR116. As soon as Herbert passed this
bill UT AG Mark Shurtleff was on plane to Wash D.C. trying to convince White
House that UT had solution to immigration issue. LOL every heard of chain
migration? There are one way U-hauls leaving AZ for UT and our crime rate will
go up as well as our financials go down. No longer are UT STATE Municipal bonds
a good buy rather good bye! Interesting that crime in AZ has gone down and
their budgetary issue have improved since they took a tuff stance. Time to take
one of those UHauls and leave UT?
Those amongst us who favor HB116 might appeal our federal legislators to create
a waiver for the Utah guest worker program. I emailed my congressmen last night
and encourage others to do the same.
Shurtleff is over his head.Herbert is now guilty on two accounts
this bill which is illegal no matter which way you look at it and the bill
allowing government people to keep their information secret. Not a good time at
the legislature this past season governor.It bothers me that the
governor was willing to spend my money to keep the illegals here yet he was
unwilling to extend more help to those on unemplyment insurance who had to have
legal jobs in order to collect in the first place. I wonder when he
got so out of touch with reality?
I agree with Rep. Smith that the Feds need to step in and take the bull by the
horns. I also agree that this bill should be over turned. Giving any break to
the illegals for breaking the laws of this country is crazy. I further believe
that we shouldn't give them any of the benfits at taxpayer's pockets is foolish
and needs to stop, and send them back were they came from.
There has been a tendency in politics to often put the cart before the horse,
meaning priorities often get mixed up. Before any meanful immigration reform
should even be considered, we need to secure our borders. Period! Without
control at the borders, everything else involving new immigration laws is (or
should be) secondary.I know of no other industrialized country in the
world which has such lax border controls as the southern border of the USA.
There are literally many hundreds of illegal aliens crossing every day into our
country, with very little control of who they are, what their intents are, and
what they might be bringing into our country (drugs, contraband, etc.). Until
that border issue is completely under control, talk of any other parts of
illegal immigration reform is premature and should come afterward.Strictly
enforcing existing immigration laws (border control, not hiring undocumented
people, etc.) would then make it unnecessary to pass many of these new laws
being presented. It's not as complicated as many people try to make the issue.
It just takes some personal resolve and some political backbone to do what the
majority of citizens have already expressed they want.