KUED Vote Utah: Corroon v. Herbert Gubernatorial Debate - Why wait till Monday?

Corroon - The Realist

Take a minute and watch Mayor Peter Corroon's post debate comments on ksl.com.

Video Courtesy of KSL.com

Mike Lee - Gut it!

Post 2001* From the last issue of the Thursday Davis County Clipper: Party Lines - Should changes be made to the 14th Amendment? If so, how?

Despite my strong objections to those who break our law and come here illegally, punishing babies for the transgressions of their parents seems wrong to me. I happen to believe that people will be punished for their own sins, and not for the sins of their fathers.

The American consensus for 142 years has been that it is wrong to deny citizenship to people born in the United States because you don’t like their parents. The argument that the 14th Amendment is a magnet for illegal immigration is a gross exaggeration at best and cynical political pandering at worst. The Pew Hispanic Center estimates 51,000 of 4.3 million babies born in the U.S. in 2008 were born to people who had been in the country for less than a year. Most were born to tourists and people who came here to buy better health care services. This fight is not about deporting, jailing, or considering as property 51,000 babies.

There is a strong and bipartisan consensus on what needs to be done. The first and most important job of government is to protect its people, and you can’t protect your people if you can’t protect your borders. It is unbelievable that nine years after 9/11, we still haven’t secured our borders.

There is nearly unanimous agreement that securing the border is not simply a matter of building a wall between us and Mexico. There are more than 7,200 miles of water between Hong Kong and Los Angeles and still we have illegal crossings. The wall is a symbol.

What we agree on is that every person who is in America should be here legally — no exceptions. To do this, we need to hire more border guards, create natural entry points, and crack down on employers who violate the law and undercut American jobs with cheap labor.

But true leadership also calls on us to acknowledge a hard truth: Politicians who tell you that we can find and deport 12 million illegal immigrants aren’t being honest.

We are going to have to restore the rule of law by requiring those who came here without our permission to gain some legal status, register and get in line, obey our laws, work hard, pay taxes, and, at the very least, pay a fine for breaking the law.

As religious leaders remind us, human decency also requires us to prevent splitting families apart and to stop sending away people who have known no other home but ours. It is cruelty in the extreme to do otherwise.

True leadership calls on us to tell another hard truth to immigrants who want to stay here. They must adopt our core community standards: be a good neighbor, get involved in the local community, and learn our language because those who don’t speak English will likely never achieve the American Dream.

True leadership isn’t about scoring political points — it is about solving problems. We should direct our anger where it belongs: at the special interests that exploit cheap labor and drive down American wages, and on the politicians who would rather stoke the flames of division than solve our problems. But solving problems is difficult if we get caught up in a wave of anti-Hispanic hysteria.


Read more: Davis County Clipper - PARTY LINES Should changes be made to the 14th Amendment If so how

Post 2000* From the last issue of the Thursday Davis County Clipper: Party Lines - Should changes be made to the 14th Amendment? If so, how?

Ben Horsley, Davis County Republican

The 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution was adopted on July 9, 1868, as part of the Civil War reconstruction amendments. The intent of the amendment was to allow slaves born in the United States full citizenship and constitutional rights. What is so controversial about this amendment? Read it for yourself.

Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.

Does automatic citizenship of the children born in the U.S. to illegal immigrants create an “incentive” for illegal immigration? Is the problem so significant that amending the Constitution is the answer?

I am of the strong opinion that our Constitution is a divinely inspired document and the less we change it the better. While I abhor the ongoing problem with illegal immigration, changing our Constitution to impact less than 1 percent of our nation’s births is not the answer.

I spent six years handling immigration issues and policy for Congressman Rob Bishop. In that experience, I reviewed in detail the amnesty type legislative proposals that were proposed under the Bush administration. None of these proposals ever addressed the core issue of the problem and neither does eliminating this provision in the Constitution. The bulk of illegal immigrants are coming here to work, not for citizenship. The rest are typical criminals participating in drug and human trafficking activities.

They are not interested in citizenship either. The almighty dollar is the motivation for these individuals while the rights and privileges of our great nation are a secondhand thought.

It is easy to assess blame in blanket terms and easier to assess solutions in the same manner. However, this proposal does nothing to solve the real problem of illegal immigration. Amending the constitution in this manner is akin to killing a mosquito on your arm with a crop duster full of pesticide. The solution to the problem continues to be enforcing our borders to prevent the issue from occurring in the first place. Republicans have been pushing for strong border protection and immigration reform in a piecemeal fashion. While there is a comprehensive problem with our immigration system, there is no comprehensive solution.

Congress must allocate the appropriate amount of resources and manpower to lock down the border. Once this is accomplished, changing our current system to ease the process of legal immigration is something both parties can agree on and accomplish with ease.

While I appreciate the motivation and intent for making this change, I fear any proposal to amend the Constitution in this culturally and politically unstable environment.

A constitutional convention at this point in history could incite additional short sighted solutions that will have long-term implications for our nation. Creating an opening for such changes is dangerous and irresponsible in this period of time when partisanship and extremist political agendas are rampant.

Changing the Constitution will not stop illegal immigration from occurring. Only strong border protection and hiring enforcement can do that.

Read more: Davis County Clipper - PARTY LINES Should changes be made to the 14th Amendment If so how

*Best estimate

Utah Senate pokes Summit County - again

The Utah Senate has asked for an investigation of development rulings in Summit County, claiming "political influence" may have effected decisions. That is rich coming from a body that specializes in taking corporate donations and doling out goodies to their friends. The planning commissions in Summit County are volunteer, unpaid positions, Senate leaders receive 10's of thousands of dollars in contributions. Who do you think is playing the political influence game?
What are the most dangerous 5 words to Summit County residents? - "The Legislature is in session"