Reasons to Vote for Liljenquist Over Hatch

I favor Dan Liljenquist over Orrin Hatch.

Now, I like Orrin Hatch, I do. He played a key role in one of the most significant pieces of anti-abortion legislation in our country's history, the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003. That law outlawed one form of abortion, and Hatch was recognized as a key proponent bringing the law to fruition.

And, Hatch is a major Congressional player in the fight against pornography. He has been credited with getting about half the Senate to sign a letter calling for greater enforcement of obsenity laws.

A third thing I like about Hatch, is that he has been a leader in the fight against the national debt, introducing legislation to amend the Constitution to prohibit deficit spending.

I like Orrin Hatch, I do.

But, then, this . . .

I'm reading along in Facebook, and see a post of how, in 1976, his campaign ads called him, "Anti-Establishment" and "Anti-Incumbent." The ad said, "We need more debates! 18 years is too long!"

Then, a Facebook post links to a news article from 1976, in which Hatch is saying seniority doesn't matter, and that while his opponent is hoping to move up to number 3, the committee chairmanship he has might not matter, anyway, as the committee might be abolished.

I am not a dead-set proponent of term-limits, but with how hard Hatch campaigned against the 18-year seniority of Frank Moss in 1976, I think his stand back then reason to vote against him in 2012. The Orrin Hatch of 1976, in essence, campaigned against the Orrin Hatch of 2012.

Another reason for supporting Hatch's opponent is that Hatch has introduced and supported legislation coming from some of his biggest financial backers. I do not believe legislation should be bought and sold. To introduce and be a key proponent of legislation coming from those who are financially contributing to you does leave open the question of motive in introducing legislation, and it should. We should question our legislators when this occurs.