Voter Fraud In Utah?:

Could this be happening in Salt Lake County and elsewhere in Utah?

Is this one avenue that Obama hopes to capitalize on to try and steal the election?

Are our election officials even concerned?

Is Utah media clueless about this issue?

A Florida TV station has come up with a unique way to find non-citizen registered voters.

The video at the link below tells the story:

http://www.breitbart.tv/mass-voter-fraud-discovered-in-fl/

Mexico loves Salt Lake City Police Chief Chris Burbank!

Mexico loves Salt Lake City Police Chief Chris Burbank!

Or, at least, Mexico's American attorneys do.

In the amicus curiae brief filed in June of 2011 on behalf of the Mexican government as part of the lawsuit against Utah's immigration enforcement law, HB 497, Salt Lake City Police Chief Chris Burbank was listed as a co-author of two articles in the "Other Authorities" section of the brief.

Makes you proud of Chief Burbank, doesn't it?

The brief is part of the effort to keep HB 497 from being implemented. 

The brief is available at:

http://docs.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/utah/utdce/2:2011cv00401/80109/68/

http://docs.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/utah/utdce/2:2011cv00401/80109/68/0.pdf?ts=1307582551

The first citation in the brief is to an opinion article that appeared at huffingtonpost.com:

Chris Burbank, Phillip Atiba Goff & Tracie L. Keesee, Policing Immigration: A Job We Do Not Want, Huffington Post, June 7, 2010, http://www.huffingtonpost.com/chiefchrisburbank/policing-immigration-a-jo_b_602439.html


This article is available at the link cited (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/chief-chris-burbank/policing-immigration-a-jo_b_602439.html)  and is short, but insightful, into the position held by Chief Burbank.

The second article is cited as:

Phillip Atiba Goff, Liana Maris Epstein, Chris Burbank, & Tracie L. Keesee, Deputizing Discrimination?, The Consortium for Police Leadership in Equity, May 3, 2010 (on file with authors)

While the first article is reproduced in full in an attachment to the brief, the second article is not and is listed only as "on file with authors."

Furthermore, the second article appears to be the only article that is missing from the "Other Authorities" that is either not referenced to a website address or to a published source (there are others listed and missing as well - but public sources are listed for them). 

Why is it not readily available?

I will leave that an open question and not address it in this blog entry, although it is an interesting question and one that warrants further attention.

In addition to the two articles listed in Mexico's brief with Chief Burbank as a co-author, there is a third article of interest listed in the attachment with Phillip Goff as a co-author (also missing, but at least referenced to a published source). 

Phillip Goff is also a co-author of the two citations with Chief Burbank. 

The combined list of authors of the three articles: 

Chris Burbank
Phillip Atiba Goff
Tracie L. Keesee
Liana Maris Epstein

What ties these four individuals together? 

The missing article, with no available link or published source, is the only one of the three that mentions the "Consortium for Police Leadership in Equity" in the citation.

The huffingtonpost.com article, however, also has this notation at the bottom:

"Chris Burbank is the Chief of the Salt Lake City Police Department in Salt Lake City, Utah. Phillip Atiba Goff is the co-founder and executive director of research for the Consortium for Police Leadership in Equity, and Assistant Professor of Psychology at UCLA. Tracie L. Keesee is the co-founder and executive director of operation for the Consortium for Police Leadership in Equity, and Division Chief of Research, Training, and Technology of the Denver Police Department" [emphasis in original]

Goff and Keesee are listed with associations to the consortium.  What about the other two of our group of four?  Are Burbank and Epstein also associated with this consortium?

At the consortium's website, on their "People" page (http://cple.psych.ucla.edu/people/), we find that Chief Burbank is closely associated with the consortium and is listed as one of four police chiefs on their "Chiefs Advisory Board."

Liana Maris Epstein is also listed on this page as an emerging scholar.

All four authors, therefore, are closely associated with the consortium.

Chief Burbank, it seems, has been associated with this consortium for quite some time.

From the consortium's "About the CPLE" (http://cple.psych.ucla.edu/about-the-cple/), the following:

"In November, 2008, following in the steps of Dr. Eberhardt’s Policing Racial Bias initiative, Dr. Goff and Division Chief Keesee traveled to the Major Cities Chiefs conference in San Diego, California to invite interested departments to participate in the initiative– promoting researcher and law enforcement collaborations with the goal of tackling issues at the heart of both groups’ interests. Their enthusiasm for this new paradigm was contagious. Chiefs of police and sheriffs in departments in: Denver, Chicago, Edmonton, Houston, Las Vegas, Los Angeles County, Milwaukee, Nashville, Newark, Portland, Salt Lake City, San Jose, Seattle, Toronto, Virginia Beach were eager to become part of this new wave of research and policing."

The consortium itself appears to have been formally organized in early 2009 - although elsewhere on the site, it says it was organized in July of 2008 (see http://cple.psych.ucla.edu/category/events/ at the bottom of the page for the item posted February 17, 2009: "Welcome").

If you search for "Burbank" in the website search engine, you come to a page that lists more information about Burbank's relationship to the consortium (http://cple.psych.ucla.edu/?s=Burbank).  Scroll down and you will come to an entry dated February 14, 2009 and which lists him as being on the Chiefs Advisory Board as of that date. 

Other interesting dates for Chief Burbank from the page:

June 8, 2009:  The consortium thanks Chief Burbank for his support for equity issues in law enforcement.

July 27, 2009:   The consortium states: 

"The CPLE has just completed Wave 1 of data collection of residents of Salt Lake City, UT and officers with the SLCPD. We were aided by a great team of CPLE-trained researchers in Salt Lake City and the integral support of Chief Burbank."

September 26, 2009:  The consortium tells us:

"On September 23, the CPLE briefed congressional staff in Washington D.C. on the subject of biased policing.  Dr. Goff, co-founder and executive director of research for the CPLE, Dr. Keesee, co-founder and executive director of operations for the CPLE, Chief Burbank of the Salt Lake City Police..."

May 18, 2010:  According to the consortium:

"Dr. Phillip Atiba Goff, Executive Director of Research, was invited to testify as a witness at the House Judiciary Committee Hearing on Racial Profiling and the Use of Suspect Classifications in Law Enforcement Policy.  Chief Christopher Burbank, a CPLE Chief and the Chief of Police of the Salt Lake City Police Department, was also invited to testify."

June 3, 2010:  The consortium reports about hate mail received by Chief Burbank: 

"Pat Reavy recently wrote an article for the Deseret News about the backlash that Chief Burbank, the chief of a CPLE partner police department, is experiencing because of his recent trip to Washington along with other chiefs to meet with Attorney General Eric Holder and express their concerns about the new Airzona [sic] immigration policy..."

June 7, 2010:  The consortium describes the brief article that appears at huffingtonpost.com and tells us that it covers research that was recently completed about policing in Salt Lake City:

"The op-ed outlines the recent research conducted by the Consortium for Police Leadership in Equity in Salt Lake City assessing whether or not cross deputization creates harmful effects on policing.  The research showed that cross deputization will decrease trust in law enforcement and decrease the reporting of crime - consequences that negatively affect policing making it difficult to effectively keep people safe."

The research talked about in the article, that appeared at huffingtonpost.com (with Burbank as a co-author), is most likely the same research that is described in the missing article referenced in the amicus curiae brief for Mexico (the article not reproduced in the attachments for "Other Authorities" of the brief with Chief Burbank as a co-author).

So far, we have the following points:

1.  Salt Lake City Police Chief Chris Burbank is one of the co-authors of this study:

Phillip Atiba Goff, Liana Maris Epstein, Chris Burbank, & Tracie L. Keesee, Deputizing
Discrimination?, The Consortium for Police Leadership in Equity, May 3, 2010


2.  Chief Burbank has had a close relationship with the Consortium for Police Leadership in Equity from sometime in 2008 and probably a more formal relationship as a member of the Chiefs Advisory Board since early 2009.

A third element is now needed to see the relevance of the missing study in the amicus curiae brief. 

In a story at ksl.com (5/27/10 - "Study shows Latino crime rate proportional to population," at:  http://www.ksl.com/?nid=148&sid=10937794), the mysterious study is talked about.  Here's how ksl.com begins the story:

"Salt Lake City Police Chief Chris Burbank is armed with a new study to support his stance in the immigration debate. But critics think the study is flawed."

The article also includes this:

"Burbank commissioned the Consortium for Police Leadership in Equity to see if data and public perception supported his opinion and to analyze the effects of SB81."

Burbank commissioned the study?  To see if it supported his opinion? 

The three points now are connected like dots to form a relationship:

Salt Lake City Police Chief Burbank commissioned a study that just happens to end up supporting his viewpoint on certain immigration issues.

Chef Burbank's study just happens to be of his own department and the community his department serves.

He commissioned it from an organization that he has strong ties with, including perhaps serving on their Chiefs Advisory Board at the time he commissioned the study.

He is also a co-author of the report.

This is a major problem for the study. 

The problem is this:  whether or not the study was designed to produce a certain point of view, it has the appearance of being compromised through bias, whether intentional or unintentional, because of the strong relationship between Chief Burbank and the consortium that produced the study.   

The conclusions of the study, that Chief Burbank and the consortium seem to want people to accept uncritically, are what are generally talked about in the public domain. 

The nuts-and-bolts of the study itself, however, seem to be far less known or talked about than the conclusions.  The key for judging the validity of the conclusions lies in a careful reading of the study and analyzing whether or not the mechanics of the study justify the conclusions made or their use in the public domain to support Chief Burbank's immigration positions. 

For an example of how the study's conclusions are used, we may turn to Chief Burbank's own "Declaration" in support of the lawsuit against HB 497, submitted with the original filing against the law:

"A recent study conducted by the Consortium for Police Leadership in Equity (CPLE) in Salt Lake City showed that people across the board, regardless of immigration status, race, ethnicity or national background, are significantly less likely to report crimes if they feel officers are engaged in immigration enforcement, interjecting bias into our policing actions.  I have received numerous anecdotal reports of individuals who have fallen victim to a crime and have failed to report these incidents because of the rhetoric surrounding proposed immigration laws."

Chief Burbank's "Declaration" to the initial suit against HB 497 is available at:

http://docs.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/utah/utdce/2:2011cv00401/80109/37/14.html

http://docs.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/utah/utdce/2:2011cv00401/80109/37/14.pdf?ts=1305167594

The political uses to which Burbank and the consortium's research have been put seem to demand a careful examination of the study itself. 

Bias in the research process, at any level or in any form, is one area that should be considered.

Chief Burbank's strong ties to the consortium that produced the study (of his own department and city) make this area of concern a significant one - especially given that the research just happens to confirm his own positions and finds its place within political and legal battles surrounding this issue.

The Real Utah Compact:

Given the fact that the Utah Compact is being sold as a model for other states to mimic, a closer look at the document itself is warranted.  One goal of this "create a compact" operation seems to be to stir up support for an "America's Compact."  Absent such a nation-wide document, a secondary approach seems to be in play that consists of getting enough state compacts going to create a critical mass of pressure on Congress to pass "comprehensive immigration reform." 

Below, I have rewritten the Utah Compact in a different format to focus more clearly on its propositions.  The five "principles" it talks about seem more clearly understood as "areas to consider" and not as actual principles.  Certain principles are, however, outlined under each heading. 

The Utah Compact is a document which has been criticized for confusing the distinction between legal and illegal immigrants.  This blurring of distinction seems intentional.  For clarity, therefore, I have inserted "illegal immigrants" in those places in the text where warranted in order to make the distinction clear for the reader.  A few other alterations have been made for clarity as well, such as separating out some of the propositions into separate statements.

Prior to the rewrite, however, I have isolated those statements I have rewritten regarding illegal immigration from the text and listed them.  In this way, the meaning that the text seems to want us to understand, without explicitly saying so, is highlighted.   

The goal of the rewrite is to parody the Utah Compact for political discussion.  The motives of most of the signers of the Utah Compact are noble and reflect goodwill on their part.  I am not impugning their character or motives.  However, the motives of some involved in the process may not have been so noble.  It is hard to not conclude that creating a propaganda document to use in a new national amnesty campaign was one of the goals. 

Even though significant and convincing arguments could be made rebutting much of the Utah Compact (and many other principles and areas of consideration that should be included are not), the goal of the current article is merely to re-work the document for clarity.  I leave it to the reader to form his or her own conclusions about the motives and impacts on public policy that would flow from its limited set of concepts about illegal immigration.    

For comparison, the original text of the Utah Compact is available at:  http://utahcompact.com/

For a devastating critique of the Utah Compact, the series of articles by former Arizona State Senator Karen Johnson are recommended and available at:  http://newswithviews.com/Johnson/karenA.htm

The rewritten statements from the Utah Compact about illegal immigration:


THE UTAH COMPACT

A DECLARATION OF FIVE AREAS OF CONSIDERATION TO GUIDE UTAH'S ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION DISCUSSION

We urge state leaders to adopt reasonable policies addressing illegal immigrants in Utah.

Local law enforcement resources should focus on criminal activities by illegal immigrants.

Local law enforcement resources should not focus on civil violations of federal code by illegal immigrants.

We oppose policies that unnecessarily separate illegal immigrant families.

We champion policies that support illegal immigrant families and improve the health, education and well-being of all Utah children, including the children of illegal immigrants.

We acknowledge the economic role illegal immigrants play as workers and taxpayers.

Utah’s illegal immigration policies must reaffirm our global reputation as a welcoming and business-friendly state.

Illegal immigrants are integrated into communities across Utah.

We must adopt a humane approach to this reality about illegal immigration, reflecting our unique culture, history and spirit of inclusion.

The way we treat illegal immigrants will say more about us as a free society and less about our illegal immigrant neighbors.

Utah should always be a place that welcomes illegal immigrants of goodwill.

__________________________________________________________

The rewritten and reformatted Utah Compact:


THE UTAH COMPACT

A DECLARATION OF FIVE AREAS OF CONSIDERATION TO GUIDE UTAH'S ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION DISCUSSION

FEDERAL SOLUTIONS:

Immigration is a federal policy issue between the U.S. government and other countries. 

Immigration is not a policy issue between Utah and other countries.

We urge Utah’s congressional delegation, and others, to lead efforts to strengthen federal immigration laws.

We urge Utah’s congressional delegation, and others, to lead efforts to protect our national borders.

We urge state leaders to adopt reasonable policies addressing illegal immigrants in Utah.


LAW ENFORCEMENT:

We respect the rule of law.

We support law enforcement’s professional judgment and discretion.

Local law enforcement resources should focus on criminal activities by illegal immigrants.

Local law enforcement resources should not focus on civil violations of federal code by illegal immigrants.


FAMILIES:

Strong families are the foundation of successful communities.

We oppose policies that unnecessarily separate illegal immigrant families.

We champion policies that support illegal immigrant families and improve the health, education and well-being of all Utah children, including the children of illegal immigrants.


ECONOMY:

Utah is best served by a free-market philosophy that maximizes individual freedom and opportunity.

We acknowledge the economic role illegal immigrants play as workers and taxpayers.

Utah’s illegal immigration policies must reaffirm our global reputation as a welcoming and business-friendly state.


A FREE SOCIETY:

Illegal immigrants are integrated into communities across Utah.

We must adopt a humane approach to this reality about illegal immigration, reflecting our unique culture, history and spirit of inclusion.

The way we treat illegal immigrants will say more about us as a free society and less about our illegal immigrant neighbors.

Utah should always be a place that welcomes illegal immigrants of goodwill.

The Salt Lake Chamber and Civility:

The Chamber of Commerce called for civility in a recent ksl.com article.  Here's how the article put it:

"Besides honing Utah's approach to immigration, chamber leaders urged civility in public discourse."

(http://www.ksl.com/index.php?nid=148&sid=18955834&title=sl-chamber-says-immigration-law-works-calls-for-civility)

The Chamber is making a call to civility in a general way - to apply to all public discourse.

However, the article is heavily focused on immigration and it is hard to not conclude that immigration is a special area of concern to the Chamber. 

Who can argue with the call to civility either in general or as applied to a specific area of concern?

Clearly there are strong emotions on all sides of this issue.  Without civility, it seems unlikely that much productive discussion or work will be accomplished.   

But, in calling for civility, we may wish to consider how civil some have been with whom the Chamber of Commerce finds kinship.

Is their call to civility a call to a principle that all sides should adhere to or is it a principle being put forth to control the debate so that only one side is heard?

The Chamber tells us it was part of the efforts to create the Utah Compact, for instance.  From the Chamber report mentioned in the ksl.com article:

"The Utah Compact – Working with community leaders, law enforcement officers, Utah’s religious communities and other business associations, the Chamber helped to develop The Utah Compact. The Compact has been lauded nationally and adopted by other states and municipalities across the country, while bringing a more reasoned approach to the immigration discussion."

(http://www.slchamber.com/uploads/files/PDF/PPG2012-FINAL.pdf)

Indeed, the Chamber even reproduces the Compact's principles on page 12 of its report.

While I do not know who actually runs "The Utah Compact" page on Facebook, it seems reasonable to assume it is someone who is attached to the official Utah Compact group in some fashion. 

If you go to this facebook page and click on the "Notes" button, you will find that the page has reproduced a New York Times editorial from December 4, 2010 (http://www.facebook.com/note.php?note_id=182488208428131).

At utahcompact.com itself, the editorial is linked as well:

http://utahcompact.com/media-contact

The original at the New York Times is at:

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/05/opinion/05sun1.html?_r=1&src=twrhp

Notice also on the media page for the Utah Compact that Marty Carpenter of the Salt Lake Chamber is listed as a media contact for the Utah Compact.

Let's examine briefly a quote or two from this editorial to see how "civil" it is to those holding a divergent view. 

The first quote:

 
"Not all the political news this year involves the rise of partisan extremism and government by rage. There has been lots of that. But maybe there is a limit, a point when people of good sense and good will band together to say no. As they have just done in Utah"

Are you for the Utah Compact?  Then you have good sense and are standing up to extremists!  At least, according to the world being portrayed by the New York Times.  Those who are not on board with the Utah Compact program are being demonized.  Is that civil?  Cannot opponents of illegal immigration who want different solutions be people of good will?


Here's how the Times contrasted Utah's approach with Arizona's SB1070 approach:

 
"South of Utah in Arizona, the political establishment, top law-enforcement officers and voters have lined up behind a radical go-it-alone strategy to uproot and terrorize unwanted immigrants. That hard-line fever is spreading, with lawmakers in other states scrambling to pass their versions of the infamous Arizona law that empowers the police to demand people’s papers."

Sounds pretty horrific, doesn't it? 

It is clearly meant to.  Again, is characterizing enforcement of immigration laws in this fashion, and by implication those who wish such laws enforced, civil?  No.  It is meant to position the reader on the side of the position of the New York Times and to demonize opponents of that view as extremists who essentially want and are willing to terrorize people. 

If this is how the matter is portrayed in the media, i.e., with little or no real civil discussion of varying viewpoints on illegal immigration and options for enforcement, then we do not have civil discourse.  The call to civility will be merely one of allowing those holding the media cards to stand on a pedestal and point the finger at their political opponents.

If the Chamber is serious about civility, they might begin by calling for those running "The Utah Compact" facebook page and the utahcompact.com website to not reproduce uncivil discourse from the media and to remove links to offensive editorials, such as that by the New York Times.

Utah Compact Sources Page:

Utah Compact Sources Page:

Below are a variety of sources regarding the Utah Compact.  All items are posted for your information and consideration.  Views therein do not necessarily reflect the viewpoint of this blog. 


Johnson, Karen:

Karen Johnson, a former Arizona State Senator, has written a number of very significant articles critical of the Utah Compact and pointing to those behind the compact.  What she has uncovered will be quite surprising to those who support the Utah Compact.  These articles are well-worth reading.  The series is available at newswithviews.com at:

http://newswithviews.com/Johnson/karenA.htm


Karen Johnson's articles are linked individually below:


Johnson, Karen  (Aug. 19, 2011)
"The One-Sided Utah Compact"
newswithviews.com
http://newswithviews.com/Johnson/karen100.htm

"Suffering near apoplexy over the passage of SB1070 in Arizona and the growing national movement to pass similar bills in other states, the Salt Lake Chamber of Commerce rallied business groups, churches, and other like-minded organizations to devise a plan to head off any SB1070-type bills that might arise in state legislatures and buy time for Congress to pass amnesty. Pretending that the 'Utah Solution" was something new, unique, and more compassionate than previous attempts at immigration reform, they put it in a pretty new package, slapped a brand-new label on it, and took it on tour, trying to foist it off on other states and Congress. But despite the new packaging, it's still all about amnesty. And the vaunted diversity of the Utah Compact is a sham."


Johnson, Karen (Aug. 29, 2011)
"Propaganda and the Utah Compact"
newswithviews.com
http://newswithviews.com/Johnson/karen101.htm

"Most readers will be totally unaware of the subtle psychological traps in the Utah Compact. They will read the Compact and reach a conclusion — most likely in favor of amnesty — but will be unaware that the conclusion they have reached will not be freely made. It will not be based on a truthful, straightforward presentation of facts and arguments. Their conclusion will be the result of coercive psychological tricks and subtle mental manipulation. The Utah Compact is a seductive piece of political propaganda."


Johnson, Karen (Sep. 6, 2011)
"Who Wrote the Utah Compact?"
newswithviews.com
http://www.newswithviews.com/Johnson/karen102.htm

"We may never know for sure who actually wrote the Utah Compact. What is clear, however, is that the Compact is not some sparkling new approach to the complex problems of immigration that sprang forth with pristine virtue from the God-fearing Mormons of Utah, as its creators would have everyone believe. The Utah Compact is the cornerstone of a major campaign of the Left, conceived by Washington radicals, implemented with manipulation and deception, and funded by the likes of George Soros, with the goal of ramming amnesty down the throats of the American people, whether we like it or not."



Johnson, Karen  (Sept. 14, 2011)
"The Utah Compact and the Rule of Law"
newswithviews.com
http://www.newswithviews.com/Johnson/karen103.htm

"Like a lovely temptress, the Compact whispers beguiling phrases that seduce listeners into ignoring the Rule of Law in favor of a well-meaning but misguided compassion. We succumb to the temptress at our peril." 


Johnson, Karen  (Oct. 25, 2011)
"All Roads Lead to 'Radical' (Part 1 of 2)"
newswithviews.com
http://www.newswithviews.com/Johnson/karen104.htm

"The campaign to pass "comprehensive immigration reform," or amnesty, is charging like a speeding train at Congress. After the last major attempt went down to defeat in 2007, the open-borders advocates licked their wounds and regrouped, realizing they would have to reframe amnesty to make it look conservative and reduce the pressure on conservative Congressmen. The end result was the Utah Compact, a happy sounding statement of principles regarding immigration."



Johnson, Karen  (Oct. 25, 2011)
"All Roads Lead to 'Radical' (Part 2 of 2)"
newswithviews.com
http://www.newswithviews.com/Johnson/karen105.htm

"It doesn't matter which direction you approach the Utah Compact. Whether through its creators, its signers, its supporters, or its promoters, all roads lead to "radical." The Utah Compact was dreamed up by radicals, facilitated by radicals, fine-tuned by radicals, and funded by radicals. Now it's slithering from state to state, escorted by radicals who would have you believe that it's nothing more than a nice little conservative message." 


Johnson, Karen  (Dec. 7, 2011)
"Will the Utah Compact Derail Mitt Romney?"
newswithviews.com
http://www.newswithviews.com/Johnson/karen106.htm

"You can be sure that others have gotten the message loud and clear. Mitt Romney's 2007 "Faith in America" speech aside, many people are wondering once again what a Mormon candidate for political office will do when faced with a decision that appears contrary to the position of the LDS church leadership. Can Romney be trusted to secure the borders, since it appears that the leaders of the Mormon Church want amnesty?" 


Johnson, Karen  (Feb. 4, 2012)
"Where Did The LDS Church Go Wrong?"
newswithviews.com
http://www.newswithviews.com/Johnson/karen107.htm

"The leaders of the LDS Church may not have recognized the propaganda buried in the Utah Compact or the inflammatory, deceptive language of the statements issued by the Church Public Communications Department. But the creators of the Compact and the authors of the Church statements knew perfectly well what it all meant. They selected their words carefully and subtly embedded the propaganda into both the Compact and the Church statements. To the degree that the authors knew what they were doing, they are guilty of deceiving the Church leadership."


Robbins, Darrell:

Robbins, Darrell  (Jan. 25, 2011)
"The Real Utah Compact" 
immigrationutah.blogspot.com
http://immigrationutah.blogspot.com/2012/01/real-utah-compact.html
"Given the fact that the Utah Compact is being sold as a model for other states to mimic, a closer look at the document itself is warranted.  One goal of this "create a compact" operation seems to be to stir up support for an "America's Compact."  Absent such a nation-wide document, a secondary approach seems to be in play that consists of getting enough state compacts going to create a critical mass of pressure on Congress to pass "comprehensive immigration reform."'



Terran, Mark:  




Terran, Mark  (Jan. 25, 2012)
"When LDS leaders speak"
Salt Lake Tribune
sltrib.com
http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/opinion/53325662-82/church-compact-utah-lds.html.csp


"The Utah Compact has been the subject of much discussion and considerable controversy. Some allege that it contains deliberately misleading language intended to subtly promote tolerance of illegal immigration, opposition to enforcement of immigration and other laws, and amnesty, in various guises, for individuals who flout the law."

The comparison of the Utah Compact to the Mayflower Compact:

The comparison of the Utah Compact to the Mayflower Compact has always seemed a bit "off" to me. 

I now think I know why.

The Mayflower Compact was a document establishing a government for the Mayflower group:

"...in the presence of God, and one another, covenant and combine ourselves together into a civil body politic; for our better ordering, and preservation..."

In other words, the creation of a "civil body politic" and governing laws were seen as essential to the ability of the group to survive.

The Mayflower Compact also adds this:

"...and by virtue hereof to enact, constitute, and frame, such just and equal laws, ordinances, acts, constitutions, and offices, from time to time, as shall be thought most meet and convenient for the general good of the colony; unto which we promise all due submission and obedience."

The signers pledged "all due submission and obedience" to the laws they would create.

The Utah Compact, for all its noble principles, can't escape the perception that it was created to be a cover for those who wish to negate the underlying principles and reasons for our immigration laws and to do an end-run around the representative governmental processes that created them.

In short, the Utah Compact is nothing like the Mayflower Compact.

Utah Rattler Video: Utah Attorney General Shifts Position On Illegal Immigrant ID Theft

The Utah Rattler has this video posted at his youtube site.  His blog can be accessed via the link in the list at the right.