Mike Lee, Utah Senate Candidate, Earns Nickname 'Rand Paul Of The West' With His Views

By electing Mike Lee as the Republican nominee for Senate in Utah on Tuesday, voters in the state's open primary may also have picked the man who will ultimately fill GOP incumbent Bob Bennett's long-held seat come November.

Lee will face-off against Democratic candidate Sam Granato in the state's general election. Ratings from the Cook Political Report and CQ suggest the Utah seat is very likely to remain in Republican hands.

Given Lee's status as "the overwhelming favorite" to replace Bennett -- who was ousted from his post at the state's GOP convention last month -- it's worth taking a closer look at his views.

Bolstered by support from the Tea Party, Lee has made his "love" and -- as he puts its -- "complete, practical understanding" of the Constitution a cornerstone of his campaign platform. The Republican hopeful touted extremely conservative views on a wide range of issues throughout Utah's Republican primary that mirror many of the policy positions held by Kentucky GOP Senate candidate Rand Paul.

Lee's hard-lined views on health care reform, immigration and tax-related issues as well as solutions he's offered to drastically reduce the size of federal government -- including eliminating the Departments of Education and Energy -- have even earned him the nickname "the Rand Paul of the West."

The Salt Lake Tribune recently took aim at Lee's political perspectives:

Lee's expertise is his encyclopedic knowledge of the Constitution. But his notions of the founding document are reactionary, so extreme, in fact, that we doubt they will ever find traction in mainstream American legal or political thinking. To do so would require reversing much of the jurisprudence of the 20th century.

The blunt criticism from the Tribune came in an editorial endorsing Lee's former Republican rival, Tim Bridgewater, in the state's primary race.

"To be fair, Bridgewater's policies are almost as radical," said the Tribune. "This is, after all, a contest between hard-right ideologues. But we sense from our discussion with Bridgewater at least a modicum of openness to the spectrum of ideas, a glimmer of a pragmatism. We can't say that of Lee."

Lee's primary win on Tuesday may mark the most significant electoral achievement for the Tea Party movement thus far given the conservative candidate's odds at capturing Utah's Senate seat in November.

Here's a slideshow of various policy views maintained by Utah's newly-minted GOP Senate nominee:

1 of 10

Opposes Amnesty, Wants To Close 'Anchor Baby Loophole'

1 of 11

First Slide

Previous Slide

@

Mike Lee maintains a hard-lined stance on immigration and has made clear he opposes "amnesty in any form" for undocumented immigrants. Like Kentucky Republican Senate candidate Rand Paul, Lee has suggested the United States should abandon its policy of guaranteeing citizenship to the children of illegal immigrants. Lee defines his stance on the controversial -- even unconstitutional -- position on his campaign website. In tackling the issue, the Senate hopeful suggests congress must "clarify the original intent of the citizenship clause [of the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution] through legislation specifying that children born to illegal-alien parents in the United States are not entitled to automatic citizenship." Lee also has expressed his support for legislative measures seeking to revoke the right of citizenship to children born to illegal immigrants in the U.S. -- a position that would appear to run counter to the 14th Amendment. "The way I read that amendment is that you're not necessarily subject to the jurisdiction of the U.S. just because you're born here," Lee recently said when speaking at a Utah event. "If you're born to parents of illegal aliens who have come here in open violation of our laws, you're not born in the US and subject to the jurisdiction thereof." The GOP hopeful however admitted, "The 14th amendment provides that any person born in the US and subject to the jurisdiction thereof shall be a citizen of the US and of the state in which he shall reside." Lee's communication of his position on immigration comes despite the fact that he has made his "love" and superior "complete, practical understanding" of the Constitution a cornerstone of his campaign platform. He has articulated his support of the so-called Birthright Citizenship Act by saying, "I support H.R. 1868."

Economic Predictions That Were Blatantly Wrong (Or Have Blatantly Yet To Come True)

Hillary And Bill Through The Years

Aging in Office

Former Air Force One Plane For Sale

United States Governors

Which Women Might Run In 2016?

Mike Lee maintains a hard-lined stance on immigration and has made clear he opposes "amnesty in any form" for undocumented immigrants.

Like Kentucky Republican Senate candidate Rand Paul, Lee has suggested the United States should abandon its policy of guaranteeing citizenship to the children of illegal immigrants.

Lee defines his stance on the controversial -- even unconstitutional -- position on his campaign website. In tackling the issue, the Senate hopeful suggests congress must "clarify the original intent of the citizenship clause [of the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution] through legislation specifying that children born to illegal-alien parents in the United States are not entitled to automatic citizenship."

Lee also has expressed his support for legislative measures seeking to revoke the right of citizenship to children born to illegal immigrants in the U.S. -- a position that would appear to run counter to the 14th Amendment.

"The way I read that amendment is that you're not necessarily subject to the jurisdiction of the U.S. just because you're born here," Lee recently said when speaking at a Utah event. "If you're born to parents of illegal aliens who have come here in open violation of our laws, you're not born in the US and subject to the jurisdiction thereof."

The GOP hopeful however admitted, "The 14th amendment provides that any person born in the US and subject to the jurisdiction thereof shall be a citizen of the US and of the state in which he shall reside."

Lee's communication of his position on immigration comes despite the fact that he has made his "love" and superior "complete, practical understanding" of the Constitution a cornerstone of his campaign platform. He has articulated his support of the so-called Birthright Citizenship Act by saying, "I support H.R. 1868."

comments(2019)

Total comments: 2019 | Post a Comment

1 of 11

Rate This Slide

Rank #2  |  Average: 4

Who Cares? Shocking

• 
  1
• 
  2
• 
  3
• 
  4
• 
  5
• 
  6
• 
  7
• 
  8
• 
  9
• 
  10

Most Noteworthy Mike Lee Views

loading...

Most Noteworthy Mike Lee Views

UserName

 | Become a fan

Picked These as the Top 5 Slides in the Slideshow

loading...

Top User Slides

← Prev|Next →

 | Become a fan

Picked These as the Top 5 Slides in the Slideshow

loading...

Users who voted on this slide

← Prev|Next →

loading...

Comments

[James Brown]

11:02 AM on 07/14/2010

Holly crap.
He is making the argument that it is possible to be born in the US but not subject to its jurisdiction. The only case for this would be if at the moment of birth you were proclaimed to be a diplomat and have diplomatic immunity from US laws.
Please don't tell me that the people of my state cannot see through this self serving nonsense.

[highflag]

05:34 AM on 06/26/2010

Utah needs to be separated from the rest of the states. It's politics are so far right of rational thinking that they're just a carnival attraction.

So they'll elect this guy, and he'll go off to D.C. where his insane ideas will be fodder for cocktail-party anecdotes, but nothing more. He'll mostly vote with the GOP caucus, like every representative/Senator from Utah always has, but mostly he'll be anonymous.

Unless he becomes a Bachmann-like media wh ore. Going on all of the cable shows to entertain us with his particular brand of idiocy.

So go ahead Utah, send this fool. You're just wasting your vote...

[Rickter]

03:15 PM on 06/25/2010

What's scary, is that this hasn't even been a blip in the Salt Lake Tribune, or on any of Salt Lake's news stations.

Even the Utah Democratic Party, and Granatto (the Dem nominee) hasn't mentioned this - facebook, emails - nothing. Why???

[LiberalMormon]

06:02 PM on 06/25/2010

Um, did you read the quote in teh article from the SL Tribune article?

[RockyMissouri]

01:38 PM on 06/25/2010

I'm wondering......if this Lee is from the same family that was involved with the Mountain Meadows massacre?? Utah has some draconian views...

[Hoodoo X]

06:19 PM on 06/25/2010

Isn't a Senator from West Virginia a former K lan member?
I believe this Lee is a direct descendant from the Mountain Massacre man. So his great-grandfather did wrong. I'm not LDS, and not real familiar with all the history, but I live in Utah and I'm aware of the massacre. I'm not religious, so the "mark of Cain" seems a little silly.

[RockyMissouri]

07:30 PM on 06/25/2010

Thank you for answering. I don't know anything about a 'mark of Cain', or what that would be?? My parents always went to Utah for vacations to see the breathtaking beauty...Yes.. Senator Byrd was a member of that ghastly group of racists..The massacre was an awful thing to happen to innocent people, and there have been caring Mormons who wanted to clarify and bring it all to the cleansing light of day...in order to move forward...a marker was to be built, but I haven't heard about it..

[Bronxdude]

01:07 PM on 06/25/2010

I smell the odor of mendacity. The average American refuses to accept that republicans are at war against the working-class, which is why they vehemently oppose reform (financial and healthcare), unions, public education, government oversight, wage hikes, worker rights, access to higher education, middleclass tax relief, and, in general, any legislation that would jeopardize the continuation of a credit-dependent, employer exploited, unhealthy, downtrodden, marginalized, underpaid, debt-laden, undereducated and permanent class of laborers. Similar to sharecroppers, it’s in republican’s best interest to keep the working-class hopeless, oppressed, and undereducated. Republicans staunchly supported the Wall Street bailout to protect their own assets, but opposed the automobile industry bailout, which employs thousands of middleclass Americans. The republican aristocracy opposes any kind of governmental oversight that will interfere with their pursuit of exploitive capitalism, which is why they want to abolish or privatize the EPA, FAA, FDA, SSA and Departments of Agriculture, Transportation, Interior, Health and Human Services, and Education. Just like feudal lords, Republicans require a formidable army to protect their financial interests, which is why they defend unrestrained military spending. The Iraq War will cost well over $9 trillion, while health insurance for every American would cost $1 trillion. Republicans want to keep America angrily divided by class and race, which is why they vehemently oppose any legislative action that would eliminate the status quo and elevate the standard of living for average Americans.

[BLACKCAT66]

01:26 PM on 06/25/2010

Nice to meet you, I'm fan 956.

[MstrBlstr]

01:49 PM on 06/25/2010

Your comments are HILARIOUS !!! Where do i start? "Reforms"? Obamacare is already $100 billion in debt and hasn't started yet, they hid $250 billion in costs for Doctor re-imbursment in another bill, will cost BILLIONS more than they lied to us about, Financial reform being discussed gives government unconstitutional authority over private industry, unions these days are not only unbelievably corrupt, but want taxpayers to bail out their $1 trillion in unfunded pensions (And Obama will make us pay it) This administration WILL tax the hell out of the middle class since we're the ONLY ones producing these days, The automotive bailout wasn't a bailout at all, but an opportunity to hand the company to the unions, the "Stimulus" bill gave the World Bank $8.5 trillion in direct transfers from the U.S. Treasury that then "Loaned us back the $787 billion Obama gave to the richest men on the planet. The Dept of energy has wasted over a trillion dollars accomplishing NOTHING, Dept of Education has spent trillions when Education is up to the STATES and Obama is pissing away so much money his projected debt by 2012 is $19 TRILLION that means this administration by 2012 will have created MORE debt than BOTH Bush's, BOTH wars and ALL debt by ALL presidents in history COMBINED. I won't even bring up Timothy Geithner (Former Federal Reserve) and Ben Bernanke and the "Missing" trillions Congressional hearings tried to find.

[Grunty1]

02:40 PM on 06/25/2010

[Where do i start?]

Apparently in the well of fantasy.

[James Brown]

11:16 AM on 07/14/2010

MstrBlstr Congratulations - Your post is total unencumbered by the thought process.
Take a look at the change in the national debt since 1900 and you will see that the SECOND worse offender was Reagan, the first being your friend Bush.
Sorry to break it to you buy Obama isn't even on the screen.

[Tim303]

12:59 PM on 06/25/2010

What an absolute pipe.

[trish333]

01:18 PM on 06/25/2010

LOL! As a state delegate from Utah, one of the unexpected benefits of helping to unseat Bob Bennett and replacing him with Mike Lee.....It makes the progressives become completely unhinged.

[BLACKCAT66]

01:43 PM on 06/25/2010

Wouldn't it be easier to just move to the libertarian dream land, Somolia instead of trying to F-up this country?

[BPCentrisAmerican]

01:49 PM on 06/25/2010

Actually trish you may lose the seat with this wako.

[Alhitch]

12:55 PM on 06/25/2010

Just out of curiosity....what is the liberal plan for social security when it goes bankrupt around 2021?

[Tim303]

12:59 PM on 06/25/2010

Ah, you spread the myth. What are your facts that it will go bankrupt?

[Alhitch]

01:05 PM on 06/25/2010

Are you really that ill informed? Even Bill Clinton realized its inevitable collapse and he spoke out for reform as early as 1996. It is a very simple matter of mathematics....something that is always left out of the liberal evaluation of things.

[dnalpahs]

01:40 PM on 06/25/2010

Ten years ago, there were almost 4 workers for each SS recipiant. Ten years from now, there will be two workers for each recipient. It will either go bankrupt, or the next generation will have to pay a huge portion of their income to SS.

It is a ponzi scheme that is coming to its end.

[trish333]

01:08 PM on 06/25/2010

Happy to be your Fan #100

[BLACKCAT66]

12:38 PM on 06/25/2010

Just read his 11 points and the only thing that comes to mind is...what a clueless butt monkey. I guess he is impressive to people that want to go back to a fictional Donna Reed 1950's and who quite frankley don't like to think too much. In other words he is a good fit for Utah.

[nypapajoe]

11:48 AM on 06/25/2010

Mike Lee please join the other anti common folk party that consists of Paul, $ara, Crazy Buckmann and seditionist Beck!

[MstrBlstr]

02:06 PM on 06/25/2010

Now that you got your typical "Rules for Radicals" insults and ridicules in, what exactly is your answer to $129 TRILLION in debt for government promises and entitlements they CANT pay???

[indy100]

09:37 AM on 06/28/2010

What are YOURS?

[magnoliabird]

11:25 AM on 06/25/2010

Anyone who thinks that privatizing Social Security is a good thing is nuts. All we would need then is for another Wall Street failure and there goes Social Security, if this were to ever happen.

[GOPfreedSlaves]

11:41 AM on 06/25/2010

no theyre not. social security is my money. not the governments. and privatizing allows me to be in control of my money, not the government. It would allow me to give me money to my family and next of kin if i died before the retirement age. It's not the government's money, it's the people who paid into it.

[Grunty1]

11:48 AM on 06/25/2010

[social security is my money]

Except that your money is paying for the people receiving right NOW.

So no, it's not your money.

[dragonlady620]

11:51 AM on 06/25/2010

If social security had been privatized before the economic collapse you would HAVE no money from it now.
Before you even consider supporting privatized social security you had better push for regulation on the financial markets first.

[guitargeorge1964]

11:42 AM on 06/25/2010

You would think that anyone can see how ridiculous this idea is. I don't understand how anyone not delusional would trust their future and retirement on the Stock Market. That's taking away your safety net and replacing it with a pit full of vipers.

[dnalpahs]

11:46 AM on 06/25/2010

Because the government is so successful and good? Are you crazy?

[BPCentrisAmerican]

12:12 PM on 06/25/2010

I have firm Ideas on that, the more conservative the better than Im really more conservative than some phony libertarian wing-nut.

PJO'Rouck libertarian Republican and humorist said it better than I can, when asked on C-Span "why can't we start a libertarian party"? O'Rourk answered no going to happen, because we of nothing to offer. Remember true libertarians don't apologize to foreign based multi national oil companies, or tell women they can't have a abortion, or try to out law being gay with Amendments. The tea-party isn't libertarian, it's the worst of every wing-nut idea I can think of including Prohibition.

[Liberal2009]

11:12 AM on 06/25/2010

A lot of Hot Air. Typical pyscho Righty/Liberterian drivel. The philosophy of a toddler roaming through life on the edge with no sense of responsibility or consequence for its actions. If left unchecked would run into a brick wall head first with no concept of gravity or instinct of survival.

[TedEjr]

10:52 AM on 06/25/2010

Freedom of speech is a lovely thing. And, what we really need is for da baggers to exercise it profusely.

The more they talk, the more they expose themselves for what they really are. The DNC might be well served to pay for the baggers advertising. Allow them the opportunity to demonstrate how difficult it is to extricate one's foot from one's mouth.

[dragonlady620]

10:48 AM on 06/25/2010

It might be of interest to read what Thomas Jefferson said about education:
http://etest.virgina.edu/jefferson/quotes/jeff1350.htm
Most of the founders shared these sentiments.
For someone who claims to be a Constitutional expert, Lee seems derelict in his knowledge of early American history.

[Hoodoo X]

10:53 AM on 06/25/2010

The link didn't work. BTW Thomas Jefferson was for a small federal government. He and Hamilton used to argue about the size and scope of the federal government.

[dragonlady620]

11:04 AM on 06/25/2010

sorry, my bad:
http://etext.virgina.edu/jefferson/quotes.jeff1350.htm
Jefferson absoutely believed that education was a function of government.
Anyone who says it isn't cannot claim they are pushing government as the founders envisoned.

[dragonlady620]

11:15 AM on 06/25/2010

Jefferson and Hamilton argued about the role of business in the government. Hamilton believed that extensive commerce and nurturing business interests was the best hope for the future of the country. Jefferson was violently opposed to the specter of of the control of government by the monied interests. He believed that it would lead to corruption. They fought like hammer and tongs over this issue.

[dragonlady620]

11:17 AM on 06/25/2010

repost, typo:
http://etext.virgina.edu/jefferson/quotes/jeff`350.htm

[dragonlady620]

11:25 AM on 06/25/2010

Sorry again:
http://etext.virginia.edu/jefferson/quotes/jeff1350.htm

[MissingAmerica]

10:47 AM on 06/25/2010

If it were not so pathetic, I would laugh at these right wingnuts. They accuse the president of wanting to socialize this country when he simply wants to provide healthcare to our citizens. At the same time, so many of the GOP are like this guy who is, basically, spouting anarchy and crying for a dictatorship! Let's see, member of the religious, God-like right. Stop taking care of the elderly and infirmed who took care of us, eliminate education, eliminate a system which controls (or at least should) control the oil companies and move us forward into self-sustaining energy, and hate those who are not one of us. Nothing he suggests even resembles democracy or the U.S. While we need to crack down on illegal immigration, we must not proceed with hate. That seems to be all these guys know. I hope those people listening to this ridiculous guy will not be swayed. He is a Judas goat, and the only ones who will follow are the mindless sheep who go where they are led, and to Hell with everyone else. We need to make our voices heard and obviously we are not being loud enough.

[dragonlady620]

11:06 AM on 06/25/2010

I really have a problem with the way he claims to be a constitutional expert. The founders would probably have considered him a traitor.

[swengnikaerb]

11:40 AM on 06/25/2010

The founding fathers are dead. They did not live in an age of twitter and Google. The only traitors are the GOP and their duplicitous sell outs to corporations over the good of the Nation.

[MstrBlstr]

02:34 PM on 06/25/2010

Which ammendment to the Constitution gives central government the authority to provide healthcare again ?? I can't find it anywhere ??

[Janus]

10:22 AM on 06/25/2010

This potential stooge is a rightwingers' dream come true. If this bozo and others like him get into office thanks to the Dupes and the imbecilic teabaggers cheering and voting against their own interests, political multi-orgasms will explode among the plutocrats who own and control the institutions of the Country.

[drebleloaw]

10:28 AM on 06/25/2010

Sadly, that explosion will have shrapnel that will be hitting the rest of the country.

[dragonlady620]

11:37 AM on 06/25/2010

And we haven't recovered from the shrapnel from the Bush years.

[MstrBlstr]

02:35 PM on 06/25/2010

Again "Teabaggers" are homosexuals that squat on eachothers faces. You're somewhat confused.