I support Sandstrom's immigration enforcement bill 100%. If we have to pay more
taxes to get rid of illegals, so be it. It will eventually pay off - more jobs
will be available to US citizens and legal immigrants, and we will no longer
have to pay for the illegals' education, health care, welfare.
Sandstrom is a crybaby who can't stand to admit that his bill will require law
enforcement to divert efforts from other activities to focus on removal of
illegals. I'd rather see the police go after murderers, robbers, gang members,
scam artists, and traffic violators, who really threaten our public safety. Let
the feds enforce federal law.
The Cost WILL BE WORTH IT, even though they are OVERESTIMATING THE COST!!! Why
don't they mark out the savings of health care, welfare, housing, "Free
School Lunches" and every other cost that will be saved simply by the Bill
Passing as Law? I get a kick out of all those who "Pooh-Pooh" the Bill
on the side of "Cost Savings!" This is not to mention all the LEGAL
Immigrants and Citizens who are currently unemployed and looking for work who
are Collecting "Unemployment Benefits" right now! This is a good Bill
that will promote JOB GROWTH and help REDUCE CRIME! Any Good "Legal
Immigrant" who loves this country and Utah should be in favor of this Bill
because it will help REDUCE the Crime Rate, Drug Trafficing, and those who would
take refuge in this state while fleeing Arizona and soon Texas! The Savings
inside of Three Years would PAY FOR THE BILL! While you figure out the
"COST" Don't Forget To Figure In The Estimated "Savings" as
well from getting rid of Illegals! It's pretty simple!
Curmudgeon.So are you basically saying, I want them to go after the
Criminals who are here Legally, and not the ones who are here ILLEGAL AND
Criminals, FAIL LOGIC!
The Legislative Fiscal Analysts Office released figures this week showing it
would cost local governments $5.3 million to $11.3 million annually to detain
and verify the status of people suspected to be in the country illegally.================================That is an astonishing number for the
job performed. I don't believe it is correct, and in fact, very high. If it
proves to be the case in practice, it is time for a very serious audit.
Every immigration enforcement bill gets their cost question. Very few other
enforcement ones do. It's a know path to stop bills on immigration. I saw it
happen time and again in So. Cal. If we can afford 400 million to
subsidize dishonest business owners, we can pay 5 million to get our citizens
jobs back. We have 100,000 citizens looking for jobs. They deserve our
if cost is the only concern, then we should shut down the highway patrol. After
all, it costs money. Same for the schools, fire departments, and every state
The cost is not even an issue. Getting illegals off the streets and back to
their own country is the most important thing.
Typical that Republicans will spend anything it takes if it is their cause.
When it comes to fiscal responsibility, they talk out of both sides of their
mouths. Besides, the bill stands a good chance of being overturned.
A day's drive south from Utah's capital (where good people argue about rights)
are mass drug murders, be-headings, rampant police corruption, armed bands with
military equipment, bullet sprayed homes, burned out cars, and essentially
anarchy.With so much un-rest a day's drive from Utah, do nothing is
not an option.If not Sandsrom's bill, then what? Continuing to do
nothing about illegal immigration is irresponsible and a legislative failure.
I've liked Sandstrom so far even though I don't think his bill is necessary or
necessarily effective. However, I think he and the supporters of his bill are
the ones who are twisting things now.How can he suggest that the
legislative fiscal analyst is trying to defeat his bill? They are not political.
Their job is merely to estimate the cost of all bills and attach a fiscal note.
I think their estimates are conservative if anything. I believe if Sandstrom's
bill were effectively enforced it would cost much much more than the
estimate.That being said, if you support the bill it may be well
worth the cost. But, please Sandstrom and supporters, do not be demagogues and
insult our intelligence. Any thinking person, understands there will be a cost,
or they will divert from enforcing other crimes that may be higher priority. If
you are for the bill, fine, pay for it, but stop insulting our intelligence.I don't support the bill because the ability for local law enforcement
to participate in federal immigration law enforcement already exists in federal
law, or 287-G, secure communities etc.
"The proposed law would require local police agencies to verify the legal
status of people detained for other offenses if the officer has "reasonable
suspicion" they are in the country illegally".-------------Therein lies the problem. This law will negatively
impact minorities where the rest of the population is untouched. What is being
proposed is an igdignity. Since this law only impacts a small portion of the
population, it is likely to endure forever, unless the federal government comes
to the rescue as they did in Arizona.
A cost estimate of 11 million dollars actually sounds a little low. Are they
including the costs of building more jails to house these "illegals",
and how much is it going to cost to deport the offenders? I think
Sandstrom is suffering from a conservative entitlement mentality which thinks
you can get services like education on the cheap. Maybe the police officers
should "punch out" and do the background checks for free, or take pay
cuts and work just for the love of public service.
@ gogogoff,Why do so many of you, not only fail to ground your
assertions, but when the facts are right in front of your nose you twist the
truth to be a lie in order to suit your purpose? The ends do not justify any
means.@ Curmudgeon did not say in his posts anything about a
preference for apprehending citizens who commit violent crimes first over
illegals who do the same crimes. You put words in his mouth and that gives you
about zero credibility.It's quite obvious that's not what he meant.
@ C is totally correct that law enforcement must prioritize their time, just
like any other job, and just like life itself. And it is quite clear to any
thinking person that the first priority should be violent and other serious
crimes first, regardless of whether that person is in this country legally or
not.If the funding is provided to expand resources in order to
apprehend, detain and hand over illegal aliens to ICE under existing federal
law, then more focus can be turned to those here illegally who are not
perpetrating any other crime.
@Cougar Keith,Fair enough, when you say the cost will be worth it.
But, the fact is the funding has not been provided in Sandstrom's bill and it
will be an unfunded mandate to local governments if passed as is.If
you want it to pass, pony up and pay the cost. Where you get the savings or
additional revenue from is another matter, but the appropriation must be made.
Simple as that, like it or not.Even is you say this additional
enforcement emphasis will save far more in savings on services to illegals who
will go home, as many claim, that still does not fund the specific agencies
entrusted with the actual enforcement. The savings would be realized in other
areas.This is really very simple. Fund the local agencies or it is
by definition an unfunded mandate, and makes our state legislators hypocritical
in the extreme even as they rightly call for no federal mandates to the states.
I think it's a fair question as to how local enforcement will be able to do the
job of a federal agency without significant budgetary increase.
*gasp*Utahns might have to... *gasp* actually pay for
services????Crazy stuff!As has been said all along, if
you want to eliminate illegal immigration, it's going to cost ya!Cost you more at the supermarket, cost you more at the hotel, and will cost
you more in taxes. Are you willing to pay for this? Or are Repubs
just going to do what they have mostly done the past 4 years, cry about it?
utah police have to spend there time keeping the people safe.and these poor
illegal mexican people just come here to join the lds church..they dont commit
crimes or sell drugs or do anything that is against the law,they work hard to be
able to take care of there familys they open small mexican grocery stores on red
wood road at twenty seven hunderd south..they pay there tithing you cant go into
a lds ward and find a seat because they people are in church every
sunday..people in utah need to understand that if sandstorms law passes we could
see a change in genral conference.another thing the people in utah will not try
to learn spanish to comunicate with theys wonderful people..you just dont
appriciate what these people do for you people of utah..they are really hard
The estimate is very conservative... and the legal fees projection is low.
Think about the challenges from National and Local Immigration leagues, and our
own Federal govt. Legal fees are not free. and the years to fight it, too long.
In the end, all of this ...for nothing...UT is stepping on Federal grounds.
Aren't law enforcement officers going to be out there doing their job anyway?
Why is the ESTIMATED cost so high? It's a ridiculous at best estimate.
The cost is a red herring. How much does it cost to enforce the seat belt law?
(Some will say that is offset by federal road funds for certain levels of
enforcement, but that is really the cost of encroaching on our personal
liberties.) The cost to society of illegal immigrants is more than the cost of
enforcing this bill.And still it isn't about cost. It is about law.
We don't crab about the cost of enforcing new laws against "spice" -
we do it because it is deemed necessary. Well this bill is necessary, and will
pay for itself in the reduction of costs for those who are here against the
established laws of the country.
It's obvious that Sandstrom is closing his eyes about the clear costs of an
unfunded mandate. But what needs to be more clear is the ultimate cost of
pushing away people who are already refugees from the poverty, corruption and
crime mentioned by Red Smith. While they are here they still pay taxes, spend
money, and create more jobs than they take. Let's at least harbor them until
the US opens the visa quotas to reasonable level and offers those here illegally
a compassionate, fair way to reenter legally.
So we are to believe that for the police who have stopped an individual for a
criminal offense, and then have reasonable suspicion that the perpetrator of the
crime is an illegal alien, so checks and finds out they are. Then books them
for the offense and refers it to the Feds for the enforcement of National Law
along with the other crime they have perpetrated is an additional cost to the
system. If this is so then it is an admission of the police that they do not
have in place an efficient system to detain criminals. Does it really take 3.5
hours to process a person in the system. I think we have identified with Mr.
Sandstrom bill a very inefficient police efficient, which must be fixed whether
or not Sandstrom's bill passes. One must ask, why are the police administrators
so in favor of the exploitation of Non-US citizens that they continue to support
illegal immigration into their communities. Further, every police office in the
state should now be audited as to what is causing this gross inefficiency to
persist cost taxpayers exorbitant amounts of tax money.
NOW is the time to contact your legislators and state senators voicing SUPPORT
for the Sandstrom bill.You might also ask your legislator why MORE
isn't being done to end the freeloading by foreign nationals!Driving
privilage card? Not needed, since they shouldn't be here anyway.Want smaller class sizes? Deport the trespassers!In the next few
days the unethical business groups (read: slave labor lobby)will be doing
EVERYTHING IN THEIR POWER TO DEFEAT this bill.Tell your legislator
how you feel!
Why do people keep griping about the costs of this bill? Didn't you all read the
article just posted yesterday, where Sandstrom says he is considering funding
his bill by charging a fee on every wire transfer that an illegal does, to send
money to their family in the country they came from? I tell you what, with how
much money they drain out of our US economy, that will add up to a lot of money
to fund Sandstrom's bill, and then some!!Also, about the police
griping on having to verify the status of people they suspect are illegal: If we
pass Sandstrom's bill, illegals will leave Utah so fast, police will only have
to do it for about 2 weeks. Look what happened in Arizona when they passed SB
1070 - the illegals packed up and left Arizona in the middle of the night,
faster than the ink had dried on Jan Brewer's signature!
How many dangerous criminals will the jails have to release for Utah to arrest
and detain over 100,000 people? How much will it cost to detain and feed over
100,000 people? There has to be a better way. Also, how will local
municipalities absorb the loss of over 100,000 consumers who buy taxed
merchandise every day in their communities? To claim that the people who are
here illegally do not pay taxes is simplistic and disingenuous. Sandstrom's bill is costly and some parts are most likely unconstitutional. it
amounts to a message bill that will never have teeth due to its cost and its
illegality. But hey, what part of unconstitutional and illegal does Sandstrom
@ facts_r_stubborn said:"How can he suggest that the
legislative fiscal analyst is trying to defeat his bill? They are not political.
Their job is merely to estimate the cost..."======================================The data that the
number-crunchers used at the Legislative Fiscal Analysts Office were supplied
by..... Surprise! ..... the Utah League of Cities and Towns! The
League isn't politically motivated?? They haven't in fact taken a
stand on the bill -- though they CLAIM they haven't??Make me laugh,
please.Kenneth Bullock, Executive Director of the League, is now
asserting: "Sandstrom didn't like the outcome of the fiscal analysis so
he's crying wolf. I think it's just posturing and pandering to a constituency
he's trying to get excited about this."One of the standard
propaganda lies we have heard before. The sheer corruption we are
finding again and again in Utah politics today at almost every turn seems to be
surpassing even that of Chicago politics of the 1920's. What a shame on Utah.
I suggest you support and enact the Sandstrom bill, Utah
politicians. It is what the vast majority of the people want; it is right
thing; and you know it.
We'll just close the Utah School for the Deaf and Blind to fund this bill.
"In a meeting Monday with city and county officials, Sandstrom said he sees
it more like a routine traffic stop and other duties police perform daily to
enforce the law."I don't understand how that can be an
additional cost," he said.Let me help you, Stevie.1)If checking the ID reveals the person stopped is not in the country
illegally, then all it costs is time. Of course, costing police time means that
either you need more police to do an equal amount of enforcement (which means
more salaries and expenses) or you do less enforcement - and since checking the
IDs would primarily be connected with traffic stops, less enforcement means
lower revenue to local police for traffic violations. That could be overcome
with higher fines - say, $750 for doing 28 in a 25mph zone.If the
driver or other passengers ARE in the US illegally, then that officer goes off
traffic control while the detainee is processed. Again, you lose money normally
gained through traffic citations, decrease safety during that time, and need to
hire additional personnel - either officers or civilians - to handle the
processing. Either way, it costs money.
$10 million per year in the state police budget is very doable--I'd still like
to see this bill get to the floor. Many current police services could be
redirected to this effort. This is what the citizens of Utah want!I
would take this bill a step further....we should verify the citizenship of
ANYONE pulled over. We offer proof of license, proof of insurance, why not
proof of citizenship? Surely, we could find a way to expedite proof of
It is a sad day for racists and bigots alike. I guess you will have to relieve
your frustrations elsewhere.
Why would he pull it. All along the conservative argument has been that having
illegals is costing out economy money. It seems perfectly logical that fixing
the problem would cost money as well - but at the same time save money by
reducing demand on other state services.His pulling the bill and not
allowing it to be fully vetted makes no sense what so ever. There is no
"low cost" way to enforce the law - he should know that.
If additional taxes are required it will be ONE tax that I will gladly pay!
Actually we will save a bundle on services that we now are providing for the
illegals. Viva Legal Immigration!
Where has Utah been since 1995? We don't need to reinvent the wheel with a Utah
bill. All we need to do is prime the pump with needed local law enforcement
resources.Section 287(g) of the Immigration and Nationality Act of
1995 authorizes the Federal Government to enter into agreements with state and
local law enforcement agencies, permitting officers to perform immigration law
enforcement functions, pursuant to a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA.) Local law
enforcement officers receive appropriate training and function under the
supervision of sworn U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officers.Davidson County, Tennessee claims they saved millions of dollars and
reduced crime by deporting illegal aliens under a 287(g) program in operation
since April 2007. Thus far 8,000 illegal aliens that committed other crimes have
been deported saving approximately $300,000 a week and allowing Davidson County
to lease the extra jail space to other law enforcement agencies.As
of 2009 ICE has trained more than 1,000 officers operating under 66 local
agreements nationwide. Since January 2006, these 287(g)-trained officers are
credited with identifying more than 120,000 individuals who are here
illegally.Utah, get with the program.
As usual the devil is in the details. I haven't heard one person mention the
time needed, or the cost of training the thousands of law enforcement officers
who will have to enforce this law. If something as simple as Baton
Training takes hours every year (because of the potential liability and threats
to police agencies and municipalities from law suits) then imagine how much
training time something this complex and controversial will swallow.
Clearly, the slave-labor lobby is out in force. Completely consumed as they are
by insatiable greed, they are determined to do everything in their power to stop
this bill since they know that it would put an end to their gravy train of cheap
labor. They have the assistance of the power-hungry Democrat's who want the
illegals' votes (and yes, they CAN vote, using their fraudulent ID's!).
The fiscal report is false. it is saying that enforcement will add cost. Most of
the enforcment is while the officers are already on the job. It doesn't create
additional cost unless you do Utah Finance. Then the cost could be 100 million.
I know 5 years olds that can come up with better figures.
"Those found to have a criminal record would be referred to U.S.
Immigration and Customs Enforcement. Those with a clean background would be
fingerprinted, photographed and released."So explain to me how
this bill is getting rid of illegals? Yeah it gets the criminals but the rest
just get photographed, fingerprinted and released. And what about the criminal
ones that are using stolen IDs or whose paperwork has falledn through the
cracks? they just get released as wellInstead of spending milions on
a catch and release bill, how about passing bills that will actually work. For example bills that make life in Utah so uncomfortable that they choose not
to live here. We could have bills that would prevent illegals from owning a car
or hooking up utilitis or owning a home. After all, the argument that is
brought up with Sandstroms bill is that is unconstitutional because of racial
profiling. Nowhere in the constitution does it say you have the right to a car
or to cable TV or..... I think you get the idea.
There is a lot of talk here about the cost or legality of this proposed law. But
I think the question we should ask is, Why in the world do we want such a
mean-spirited law representing our state? Those who are 100% behind this law
come across as mean and prejudiced. Why should we begrudge a better life and
education to people just because their skin is brown? Before people
start to scream that they should immigrate legally, refer to the earlier comment
that enumerated the horrible things going on in the Mexican drug wars. Would any
of you put an administrative rule over the safety and well-being of your family?
Not me! I would crawl across that border in a heartbeat to save my family from
that sort of hardship and danger. To those who say any cost is worth
enforcing the law (immigration is not a criminal offense) how much should we pay
for more police to chase down those that license their cars in Idaho to avoid
fees, or to crack down on diesel pickups idling while pumping fuel? Second
greatest commandment--love your neighbor. Don't judge by appearance and accent.
I fully support enforcing our immigration laws. But I do not agree with this
type of enforcement law. The reasoning of asking because of
"reasonable suspicion" is flawed. Why don't we then ask people in
suits if they are committing fraud because we have a reasonable suspicion
because people who look like them commit those crimes? Or what about angry
people who we might have a reasonable suspicion that they beat the wife and
kids? I assume that most people would disagree with being targeted just because
people like them might commit certain types of crime.People need to
get it through their heads that disagreeing with Arizona type laws does not mean
that one thinks that we should never enforce our laws or that he or she doesn't
care if people are here illegally. If people for the bill are tired of people
called racist or bigoted because it's not true, they should not do the same
types of things to those on the other side.
The HYPNOTIC factor. When Arizona closes the door, the illegals will flood in
Utah, and then Mr. Sandstrom will scare off the bad guys with the same power and
their relatives can pay us fees if they are legal enough to still work her and
send money home. Money can hypnotize also. The For Profit Prison industry stands
to do well, that is, it will have beds ready for people who really should be
shown the door back to home, but money talks and the private prison industry can
pen the bull for a much larger fee than just a little old money transfer fee.
It's sad when law enforcement officials try and torpedo a proposed law by using
inflated data, rather than seeing where the law could be used to better ensure
the public safety and eventually lower the cost of law enforcement. Criminal
illegal aliens are encarcerated at twice the percentage of their general
population. And recidivism is substantially higher as they return to the US
after they have been deported.
Get it done.
Law-fromariz, yes I see the need to protect especially because of
recidivism.So create a federal law, and a federal database with eye and
finger print identification. The law allows a citizen from another country to be
prosecuted in the United States. The data base can be accessed, permissable by
law, when any person, even you or I are interrogated by police. There would be
no profiling since everyone is treated equally, and a felon with anew name would
have the same eye and finger I.D.
"A police chief in one city said it would take an officer about 3 ½
hours to process someone in that scenario, taking them away from other public
safety tasks."Processing a DUI case takes the officer away from
other public safety tasks.Processing a wife-beater takes the officer away
from other public safety tasks.Processing a robbery suspect takes the
officer away from other public safety tasks.Pocessing a traffic fatality
takes the officer away from other public safety tasks.Being interviewed by
the media takes the officer (Chief) away from other public safety tasks. On and on with the lame excuses of police chiefs who fail to uphold
their oath of office.
We have drunk driving because it costs too much to enforce the law. It is
obvious that Sandstrom's measure is an extremely expensive one. The language
Sandstrom uses is that of an intolerant individual who has no desire to look at
the facts. There are so many who believe themselves to be conservatives who
cannot see the facts. This bill would be an economic disaster for not only
state government but also city and county government. Perhaps we need some of
you who are so much in favor of this to shell out more for the higher tax burden
this will impose.