Talk:Orrin Hatch/Archive 1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Archive 1 Archive 2

Initial comments

I don't understand why this term needs to be capitalized. Could you explain Quadell? Cool Hand Luke

"Internet" is a proper noun. The word refers to the one and only Internet, so it is capitalized.

hypocrite

to point out that shortly after his "legal hacking" proposition, he was found to be running illegal software on his site... any objections to me adding it? IreverentReverend 7 July 2005 16:26 (UTC)

If you add it just to make Sen. Hatch look like a hypocrite, I object. However, if you document how Sen. Hatch is influential in the arena of file sharing and added that as part of the ongoing discussion, I wouldn't object. You will want to expose Sen. Hatch's work and views on the topic and then add something like: "Opponents of Sen. Hatch's position on file sharing point out that he was running illegal software on his site. When this was discovered, he quickly remedied the situation." If you word it like you put it above, it makes you sound like you have something against Hatch, and so it'll get flagged as POV. Jgardner 7 July 2005 20:19 (UTC)

I was just thinking of adding a sentence or two pointing out the controversy. Of course I would try to stick to NPOV on the main page, but that doesnt mean I can't let my distain of the man show on the talk page ;-) IreverentReverend 7 July 2005 20:36 (UTC)

Quickly remedied the situation? Now that's POV in itself. Mr. Gardner, do you think that there is something influencing your opinion on Senator Hatch?--Folksong 19:40, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

Another example of Hatch's hypocrisy is his position on term limits. In 1976, he ran against Frank Moss, claiming that, after 18 years in the Senate, Moss had "lost touch" with his constituents. Now, over 30 years later, Hatch is still in office! As for "losing touch," he makes proposals that would effectively destroy the Internet, is a software pirate and hacker himself, engages in questionable ethical practices, and supports legislation beneficial to his son's lobbying clients. Also, he virtually accuses the Democrats of treason in the 9/11 matter, failing to point out that George Bush was President for almost eight months before that happened, and the Bush was so scared that he hid for almost the entire day.

But wait, let's not be too hard on him. He is just a "good Republican" and cannot help himself.

John Paul Parks (talk) 12:36, 13 August 2008 (UTC)


I am new to wikipedia, but I found this piece of information intriguing and felt I should share it. It is from the Wikipedia article for "Ephedra": "... makers of the best-selling brand of ephedra supplement, had received over 14,000 complaints of adverse events associated with its product; these reports were not provided to the FDA.[28][29] Senators Orrin Hatch and Tom Harkin, authors of the Dietary Supplements Health and Education Act, questioned the scientific basis for the FDA's proposed labeling changes and suggested that the number of problems reported were insufficient to warrant regulatory action. At the time, Hatch's son was working for a firm hired to lobby Congress and the FDA on behalf of ephedra manufacturers." Righteoussurfergirl (talk) 05:58, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

Repeated vandalism

OK, I don't like mr.Hatch myself, but this is an encyclopaedia and here there are some silly NPOV problems. I just removed from the article the following sentences:

Hatch has always been on the forefront of limiting free speech. He has tried for years to change and alter the Constitution so that it would be rid of those horrible loopholes that the Founding Fathers allowed; these loopholes are known as "The Bill of Rights"

An example of such can be seen in his current incumbency; nearing his third decade as a Senator, he recently called 4,000 of his constituents "Nut cakes," thus proving that his is not only really old but also very out of touch with those he is meant to be serving, not demeaning.

They can be nice political satire, but they're of course vandalism here in WP. It's the second time I come here and I find vandalism on this page. Cyclopia 18:24, 29 August 2005 (UTC)

I think that by "removing" one POV, you've inadvertantly added another POV. If you're going to mention that he ran under the pretense of cutting term limits, it is important to point out that he not only failed to pass such legislation, but he has actually been in office for nearly three decades. Sorry... i don't have a user name yet. 69.151.230.172

You're welcome to add this info, but in a neutral way. --Cyclopia 19:05, 28 September 2005 (UTC)

In case you are ever confused about the meaning of the word "smarmy" just listen to Orrin Hatch's "questioning" of a right-wing witness before the Senate Judiciary Committee. And, to view the basic nastiness of his soul, go back to the Anita Hill hearings to hear Hatch hint around about Anita Hill's "proclivities"--without a shred of evidence. Hatch and Alan Simpson were the Republican hatchet-men chosen to smear Anita Hill. Smearing enemies and "smarming" friends are jobs Hatch seems to relish. 198.107.63.34 17:54, 12 January 2006 (UTC)DLF 1/12/06

More vandalism?

Im not very experienced in editing wikipedia, and although I disagree with several of Senator Hatch's views, it certainly appears that this article has been vandalised and is not in a neutral point of view, as seen in this paragraph

" Senator Hatch is all-about-money, having already collected $2 million from the rich and powerful. The alternative to politics-as-usual is Pete Ashdown who is running his campaign for a small fraction of that sum and is relying on "people-power" and personal freedom of speech rather than money-power that Senator Hatch relies on. "

Anyway, someone more knowledgable about editing wikipedia should probably fix this or at least make it neutral.

Upon reading the revisions it looks like it has been changed by this IP address 207.135.154.96 to be non-neutral, bashing Senator Hatch and favoring his political opponent, Pete Ashdown. This should probably be reverted to the previous version by TommyBoy.

Greater detail

I have added significant details from his earlier Senate career. I might be regarded as a partisan, since I handled his press in his first run for the Senate in 1976 and worked for him for most of the decade after, but I would note that I remained a registered Democrat and have had no direct contact with Hatch for nearly 20 years. All details I've added are readily verifiable, and significant omissions for a complete biography, especially for a guy who has been in the Senate for 30 years. For one example, there was no mention at all of his chairing the Senate Labor and Human Resources Committee, which has the greatest authorization responsibility of any Senate Committee (for labor, education and health issues).

As a Democrat, I agree that the 'Hatch is all-about-money' stuff is beyond the pale. Adding details instead of opinion will get around some of those issues.

Ed Darrell

Term Limits

There is a slight possibility I err, but I do not believe that term limits were proposed by Hatch in the 1976 campaign against Frank Moss, especially in the ad copy that I wrote. Hatch ran advertisement that said '18-years is too long,' but he stopped short of calling for term limits, hoping himself to be able to served quite a while. Edarrell 06:25, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

During the 1976 campaign Orrin Hatch said "What do you call a senator that has been in the senate 18 years? You call him home." Ironic, as Hatch will have been in the senate for 30 years now. He did make this statement, but I think a verified source with exact wording should to be found before it is put in this article. Nodekeeper 23:18, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

My point was that Hatch did not directly advocate term limits. He argued that Sen. Moss was out of touch with Utah's political views. It may be a subtle distinction, but an important one. When the ad was made, we on the campaign staff joked that it might come back to haunt Hatch. Sure enough, in his second re-election campaign I was contacted by several people trying to find copies of that ad. My understanding is that is missing from the archives of the campaigns kept at the University of Utah Marriott Library (Western Americana, I assume), and also from Hatch's papers collection at Brigham Young University. Newspaper stories would indicate his advocacy, but term limits was not a serious issue of the campaign. Hatch's victory would be an effective limit on Moss's terms, we assumed -- and so it was. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Edarrell (talkcontribs) 10:34, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

Radiation Compensation

How did I miss this? There is no mention of Hatch's work to get compensation for citizens who were injured by nuclear fallout from our nation's atmospheric nuclear tests at the Nevada Test Site. This work took a lot of Hatch's time and attention, and he focused some of his best people on the effort. The movement really got going after Hatch became chairman of the Senate Labor Committee in 1981, but he had worked diligently for the previous four years to get a bill through. The compensation bill didn't actually pass until 1987 or 1988. Between 1977 and 1988 Hatch held several hearings, pushed appropriations for researchers to find real answers, and generally acted like a liberal anti-nuclear activist on the issue.

Surely that deserves some mention.

See the reporting of Gordon Eliot White in the Deseret News of the times; and see, with warnings that he got little information from the Congress, Howard Ball's Justice Downwind.69.152.115.152 23:48, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

Judge?

I noticed that Hatch is in Category:American judges - but I cannot find any mention of him ever being a judge. It isn't in this article or in the bio on his senate web site. Is the listing a mistake? GabrielF 01:00, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

I think it's a mistake; perhaps it's related to his reported desire to be appointed to the U.S. Supreme Court? I'm removing it. John Broughton 15:06, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Zappa

Frank Zappa has a song called "Orrin Hatch on Skies" ...Just an instumental.


Orrin & Mormons

With Orin Hatch endorsing Mitt Romney for President of the USA, can someone add what the Mormon religion has mean to Orin Hatch in his time as US Senator.

Has he attempted to submit bills etc esp for Mormons, etc.

And or does he support US Freedom of Religion ?

What role does he see Mormon's playing during the time some expect may be NOW, the Second Coming of God / Jesus to earth ?

What role at that time would he see for Mitt Romney ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.192.5.137 (talk) 15:10, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Hatch has been very sensitive to religious discrimination and persecution throughout his senate career, a product of his understanding of Mormon history. For example, in health legislation, there is usually a provision that allows Christian Science practitioners to be compensated for their services, by Medicare and Medicaid for example. Hatch had at least one Christian Scientist in a high position on his labor staff, and they made sure each piece of health legislation did not shut out Christian Scientists.

He was embarrassingly tolerant of contacts from the Rev. Sun Myung Moon, and he often spoke out against what he saw as a miscarriage of justice when Moon was convicted and imprisoned (tax evasion? I forget the charge.).

I suspect one might find an early career interview in which Hatch discusses what a lot of LDS Church members believe to be prophecy, that at some point the nation will face a crisis and that the "Constitution will hang by a thread," and that a Mormon would save the nation. Hatch was not opaque about his feeling it was his duty both to prevent such a crisis, but to be ready to act to preserve the country if the crisis could not be prevented. As with most Mormon politicians, I think Hatch regards his serving as a calling; Mormons often get callings to serve without a clear mandate on exactly what it is they are to do, other than do a good job.Edarrell (talk) 15:40, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

Balanced Budget Amendment & anti-trust

From what I remember, Orrin Hatch led the Republican effort to push through the Balanced Budget Amendment. It seems this should be discussed in the article. Also Orrin Hatch led the anti-trust hearings on Microsoft as head of the judiciary committee. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.125.83.67 (talk) 06:17, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Global Warming

It is not controversial to criticize the prevailing fear mongering around global warming these days. Many do it and no one is surprised.

--Kfedup (talk) 02:55, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

Yes, it is controversial to deny global warming and to dismiss it as "fear mongering". That's a fringe position that's blatantly contradicted by the scientific evidence. 75.76.213.106 (talk) 02:25, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
Well, it was until all the global warming scientists were proven liars. 138.162.128.52 (talk) 20:33, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

Future direction for this article, to raise its quality

This article still looks to me as if it were put together by a very young person with little information about Utah or the Senate, and only cursory knowledge about Hatch. Of course, I'm biased, but I think the article can be filled out well in several areas.
Building the Republican Machine in Utah --
Up to about 1976, had one taken all votes cast in partisan elections in Utah, about 50% would have been Democrat, and about 50% Republican -- a holdover from the event early in the territorial history when LDS officials tried to persuade Congress the state was not a haven for pro-slave Democrats by showing split party registration - they went house to house, designating one house "Republican" and the next house "Democratic." This produced some interesting political splits among families and friends.
By 1976 there was a clear Republican undercurrent, but it had not borne fruit in long-time control of any part of the elected machinery. Gov. Calvin Rampton was retiring as a very popular politician, Utah's only three-term governor to that point. The U.S. Senate was split by party, as it had been through much of state history. The Congressional delegation contained two very popular Democrats. Democrats controlled both houses of the state legislature. Hatch was a neophyte, but very smart. Among other things he hired a savvy though very green campaign manager, a kid he had known in Pittsburgh, Mac Haddow (C. McClain Haddow). The campaign did a lot of "not Republican" things, like running ads in Spanish in the state's Spanish language newspapers, and asking Utah's Japanese community for support. The big differences came in organizing the party itself. Republicans in Utah were very independent. They did not do things like phone banks well, or often, at all. Hatch had to put together his own phone banks, which were manned by hundreds of active volunteers and very active. Hatch had to make his own ties with party officials in each of the 29 counties. Once elected, Hatch and Haddow purposely kept that machine oiled, and lent it to Republicans in a well-thought-out campaign to turn the state Republican so they wouldn't have to build the machine for each election. By the time of his second run, in 1982, that machine had already elected enough county commissioners, state legislature members and state-wide office holders that virtually the only Democrat left was Gov. Scott Matheson (who had also won in 1976).
Utah's solid Republican voting history since 1976 can be attributed in large measure to the work of Orrin Hatch and his campaign supporters.
Building influence in Washington and the Nation -- It took a little while for Hatch to get a firm footing, but in Washington he worked to extend the influence of Utah and his campaign machine. The appointments of NLRB members Bob Hunter and Jim Stephens, the appointment of Judiciary Committee aide Stephen Markman to the Supreme Court of Michigan, the appointment of "intern" Toni Novello to U.S. Surgeon General, and many other appointments, were demonstrations of Hatch's work in the tradition of Utah's Sen. Smoot, to make the Senate office an outpost of Utah and influential. The article has a major headline for the release of Dallas Austin; there is no mention of the hundreds of times he went to battle against the INS to get babies and toddlers from Central America admitted to the U.S. for life-saving surgery at the University of Utah. There is little mention of his work to support the fledgling law school at Brigham Young University. Oddly, there is no mention of the MX Missile "racetrack" plan for the Utah desert, nor how it ended up. His epic battles with and for labor barely get a mention. His use of the investigative arm of the Labor Committee for what might be considered parochial battles by some is only noted in passing -- but it played a key role in reining in the nation's atomic bomb development machinery that killed thousands of Utahns with radiation from atmospheric bomb tests. How about at least a mention of his work against industry and military in the Hill AFB Building 100 hearings?
Six terms in the Senate are difficult to boil down to a 5,000 word article, but it really needs to be done here. This article makes it look like the guy fell from the sky in 1976, and only resurfaces near elections. That's an inaccurate portrayal of his Senate career, and it sheds very little light on what happened and is happening in Utah politics, nor in Washington. Anyone living in the Hatch office would wonder how it happens that the Madsens, Cannons, Gardners, Oblads, Korologoses, Parrys, McGuinesses and others just fell out of the narrative, why there is so little discussion of issues where he dwelled for long periods of time (Illinois Brick antitrust case comes to mind, as do his dozens of hearings on the EEOC). What should be in an article covering 36 years of American political revolution and backlash? Where is that stuff?Edarrell (talk) 16:11, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

These sounds like good topics for an article on "History of Utah Politics", but not for an article on a specific candidate/politician. 174.101.136.61 (talk) 00:34, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

Dellusion or lie?

Of course, the Constitution of the United States of America makes no assertions regarding polygamy. Does it make sense to insert a conditional or some sort of supposition as to whether Mr. Hatch was delusional, lying or deflecting questions regarding polygamy and the Mormon Church? Is it not correct that the Mormon religion abandoned its prophet's views on polygamy as a condition of being admitted as a State? - Gwopy —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gwopy (talkcontribs) 07:20, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

Sen. Hatch Says Gays’ “Religion is Politics”

Reference from his quotation should be referenced from this article (if not already referenced):
http://www.hrcbackstory.org/2010/06/sen-hatch-says-gays-religion-is-politics/
Native94080 (talk) 03:46, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

Criticism of Frank Moss

The article contains an un-sourced assertion that Hatch criticized Frank Moss for having lost touch with his constituents after serving so long. I've heard this before (as I recall, Pete Ashdown offered a $1000 reward for anybody who could find a contemporary source for it during the 2006 election), but I've never seen a good source. For the time being, I've put a citation needed tag on it. If no source exists, perhaps we should remove it? Jonathan Christensen (talk) 20:55, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Orrin Hatch/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

Some mention of his advocacy of term limits should exist in the article. He did use it as an issue in 1976, and it has come up every election cycle since 1988 with good reason. Perhaps is should not be over emphasized but it has been ignored in the article. 67.182.219.81 (talk) 01:55, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

Last edited at 01:55, 2 February 2009 (UTC). Substituted at 15:30, 1 May 2016 (UTC)