Whoever is writing the talking points for Utah Attorney General Mark Shurtleff should be fired!
On second thought, they should be given a raise!
He or she or they are turning the AG into his own worst enemy on HB116.
In response to Texas Republican Representative Lamar Smith's letter to U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder, in which he called for the U.S. Attorney General to sue Utah over its usurpation of federal authority as he so quickly did in response to Arizona's SB1070 law last year, our own AG Mark Shurtleff claimed that Rep. Smith's arguments were "a regurgitation of lines from the extreme right."
The extreme right?
What criteria now makes previous supporters of Mr. Shurtleff into the extreme right?
It seems that it is opposition to HB116 that now defines one as "extreme."
Labeling former supporters as extreme because you are selling a bad bill to the feds seems a bit extreme to me.
Mr. Shurtleff also had this to say about Mr. Smith's letter:
"My question for Lamar Smith is what are you doing about reform? This is your purview."
I am sure Mr. Smith is quite capable of responding to Mr. Shurtleff, but the following are some points that crossed my mind.
1. Did you ask the same question of Mr. Obama, Mr. Shurtleff? Did you demand to know what he is doing about immigration reform? Or is this merely an excuse to prod a congressional leader into adopting your position? The refusal to seriously enforce laws about immigration comes from the executive branch, not Congress. We would not need immigration reform if our federal government had not been un-enforcing our immigration laws for years and years now.
2. That little word, "reform" - shortened from its longer phrases: immigration reform or comprehensive immigration reform, means what exactly? It seems that Mr. Shurtleff has the collection of recent Utah illegal-immigrant normalization bills in mind. For Mr. Shurtleff, reform means allowing illegals to remain in the U.S. and to be granted legal status. Reform, then, means amnesty. This is exactly the same meaning that Mr. Obama has when he speaks of a comprehensive immigration reform.
3. Congress fails to act toward "reform" because the American people have stopped them so far. Their lack of action is, therefore, an expression of public will
4. What does the public want? Enforcement of our laws.
5. Mr. Shurtleff, however, is running to the feds to sell amnesty. They like him showing up because they are also for amnesty. They like the Utah-thing about immigration because it has shown them a new angle to sell the same old amnesty to the American people as if it were something new. It isn't.
6. It is sad when our Utah Attorney General slams a congressional leader because our AG is busy selling an amnesty plan and Congress is in the way of what he wants.
7. Mr. Shurtleff's response is quite bizarre on another front. Since waivers do not exist for state run guest worker amnesty plans, congressional approval would have to come in the form of a law authorizing such waivers. If Mr. Shurtleff thinks that insulting and antagonizing congressional leaders is the way to get such waivers put into law, he is probably incorrect.
The citations of Mr. Shurtleff are from the Salt Lake Tribune article, "House leader: Feds should sue Utah over guest-worker law" (4/20/11). Republican Governor Gary Herbert falls into the same game as Mr. Shurtleff, as is clear from the article.