Utah animus

"Its sheer breadth is so discontinuous with the reasons offered for it that the amendment seems inexplicable by anything but animus toward the class that it affects; it lacks a rational relationship to legitimate state interests." -- Romer v. Evans, 517 U.S. 620 (1996)

While Justice Kennedy was talking about an amendment before Colorado voters, he might have well been talking about the rationale behind the shooting down of each piece of the Common Ground initiative that has come to a vote this year at the legislature.

Common Ground foes argue that extending rights to same-sex couples or recognizing sexual orientation as a protected class undermines Utah's constitutionally enshrined edict that marriage is only between a man and a woman. They warn that even seemingly benign gay-rights measures put Utah on a "slippery slope" toward a court ruling that would legalize same-sex marriage, like in California last year.

"I don't use this word lightly: That's false," says Clifford Rosky, a family law professor at the University of Utah's law school. "Utah courts can't ignore the Utah Constitution."

Even though they know there is no way that these bills effect the same-sex marriage ban in the constituation, they want to claim otherwise because these "traditional marriage supporters" really just think gays and lesbians are icky to some degree. Enough that they believe homosexuals shouldn't be able to visit their partner in the hospital when the partner is sick, or sue when their partern gets hit by drunk driver, or collect on insurance from their partner.

And the Sumpremes have said not liking a group of people is not good enough reason for denying them rights that other people have.

like 1993 all over again

Obama hasn't even been in the Oval Office a month, and I am beginning to see Bill Clinton's disasterous beginning repeated.

I read George Sephanopolis' book "All too human" this summer and was struck by how many early mistakes the Clinton Administration made and how that limited their ability to get their agenda through. Some was self-made stupidity like making an off-hand comment about gays in the military and letting it spin out of control during the transition, then handing the keys over to Colin Powell on the issue. But many were Republican made, like "nanny-gate" that did in many designates for cabinet posts.

16 years later, it was bad tax filings. Not that Republicans made these nominees file erroneous taxes or hire illegal aliens for nannies, but that in the overall picture, these issues are not that important to these candidates qualifications. And the true goal in both situations was not to get a better qualified nominee, but to make the new Democratic President look bad and weaken him.

Republicans remember 1994 and 2002, the lesson they learned was not to compromise with Democrats and the American voter will reward them.

Obama needs to learn the lesson of 2005, if you stand up and ask what the American people think, you can stop silliness like social security privitization. He has high approval ratings and a large majorit of people want this stimulous bill done NOW not in general, so press your case Mr. President.

sympathy for the lobbyists

The Salt Lake Tribune is doing a series of exposes critical stories puff-pieces on lobbyists.

Sure, lobbyists are people too and they should be able to talk to legislators and try to convince them by the power of her ideas. But they shouldn't have more access than citizens and they shouldn't be able to get access because they are related to a famous person, like Sen. Hatch.

the legislators are in the details

The public just got a sneak preview of the ethics bills that the leadership of the Utah House approve. And I have to say there are some genuinely good things in there, like a 1 year prohabition of lobbying by ex-members, ban on personal use of left over campaign cash, and gift ban on anything over $10 (excluding meals, but +$15 meals would have to be disclosed).

But as usual, there was no consultation with House Democrats, and it appears very little with rank-and-file Republicans either. But the best part was at the end of the article:

Representatives asked how the bill would affect legislators who are also registered lobbyists and Dee punted. "Perhaps the different body needs to address that," he said. Sen. Howard Stephenson, R-Draper, is also a registered lobbyist for the Utah Taxpayers Association.

Classic.

Utah Representatives against (increased) representation

In all of my blabbing about how stupid it was for Rep. Chaffetz to go against the DC/Utah seat bill, I forgot there was an inaugual member of the Utah Representatives against (increased) Representation: Rep. Bishop

New Rep. Jason Chaffetz says the bill is unconstitutional, and Rep. Rob Bishop, who voted present on the legislation last time, questions whether it would even help Utah since the state likely will get a fourth member anyway.

"The value for Utah is well past," Bishop said Tuesday. He said he wasn't sure whether he was against the bill, but ticked off reasons why he wasn't backing it.

Yeah I am sure he will either vote against it or do the brave thing a vote present. I would rather have a sure seat now than wait 4 years for a likely seat. Bishop is even lamer than Chaffetz, who at least is hiding behind a pluasable constitutional law argument.

So why do 20% of the Utah delegation not support a bill that would increase the power of their state? Is it because they don't want competition for running for Governor or Senate when Hatch or Bennett retire/die? Do they hate D.C. that much? Are they afraid that Jim Matheson will run in the redder district and another Democrat will win the bluer seat after redistricting? Someone please explain this to me.

the end is the beginning

s it bright where you are
And Have the people changed
Does it make you happy you're so strange
And in your darkest hour
Now all secrets fade
We can watch the world devoured in its pain

--The Beginning is the End is the Beginning, Smashing Pumpkins.

Remember this time of year eight years ago? Bill Clinton was doing his midnight regulations and pardons, his 11th-hour Middle East Peace attempt had failed, and Yasser Arafat had declared the Second Infidata, and what almost was a lasting peace broke out into all out war right when the U.S. was transitioning from Clinton to Bush.

That following summer, I was an intern for Rep. Jim Matheson, and us lowly House interns got ask Colin Powell some questions. Someone stood up and said, "what about Israel/Palistine?" The Secretary of State gave us the standard B.S. line about how it is a "top priority" of the Bush Administration. Sure was, that's why they never did anything but photo ops for years while the people living in the land of Caanan suffered and died at the hands of Hamas, random terrorist groups, or the IDF.

Hamas is using the people of the Gaza Strip as props in the political moves to gain more power. They approved of more rocket strikes into Israel. And Israel is equally political in this incursion which they admit will not remove Hamas or the rockets or anything else. But hey, an election is comming up for PM, and all of the potential candidates are trying to out Hawk each other, reality be damned.

Obama should dispatch Bill Clinton to get a temporary end to the fighting. I always find it embarressing when the French trump us diplomatically because the U.S. is too preoccupied to get seriously involved.

what a year

Can you believe it is the end of 2008 already? The year has gone by slowly and quickly at times, but I guess since I am getting older, time moves more quickly in relative terms. In the last few years, I have been countercyclical in the sense that I started to law school when George W. Bush got his second term, I got two great jobs as everyone else seemingly began to lose theirs. Part of me feels guilty for this fact, that I am somehow causing it. Like those sports fans who insist that if they don't watch a game just so, their team will lose.

There are so many good stories nationally and locally to follow but of late, I have dropped the ball given my new employment. Currently, I am in the eye of the storm and so I can peek out and say hello to whomever still reads my ramblings.

I am still bubbling with things to say about all of these topics de jour and maybe some day I will have time to spill them out on to this blog. Until then, enjoy celebrating an arbitrary ending to an arbitrary year where so much changed for better and for worse. Stay safe and let's hope and pray and work to make 2009 much better for those suffering from the effects of years past.

Happy Christmas Eve

I saw this snowman and his snowdog (complete with twine leash) while walking my own dog last night.

Drive carefully and best of luck on your travels.

backup quarterback

I know, I know tired old sports analogy, coming right up.

So have you noticed that Senate Republicans appear to be gearing up to get a scalp in January, namely Eric Holder, Obama's nominee for Attorney General? As much as I am sure the nation would love to watch a political "scandal" version of "I love the 90s," I think Obama has other plans.

Namely, his old Harvard Law School buddy Rep. Arthur Davis (D-AL) is waiting the wings to be his disignee instead of Holder. Why else would Obama have asked for the FBI to do a background check on Davis, and why else would Davis agree to do it? There isn't another appointment left open that Davis would be willing to trade a safe House seat for other than to be A.G.?

I think Obama's people are considering weather to cut Holder loose and go with Davis, and whether the risks of having a nasty confirmation fight outweigh the risk of changing nominees.

ever to true to Brown

Since my boss is stuck in Twin Falls or some place and the office shut down at 4, I decided to head home early and read the backlog of magazines.

I started to read about Thomas Tamm, one of the whistle blowers on the NSA's illegal wiretapping that eventually hit the New York Times and three things jumped out at me:

1. I have walked by the payphone Tamm used to call the Times many times, and I hope in the future it will become as famous as the Watergate landmarks of Washington, or the Hilton where Reagan was shot.


2. While the FBI may be terrible at stopping terrorist attacks, or finding the anthrax mailer, they are terrific at making your life miserable in hopes that you will confess and they can be done with it.



3. Tamm himself, after graduating from Brown University in 1974 and Georgetown Law three years later, chose a different path in law enforcement.

   I am proud to say I am a fellow alumnus.

Spiting his face

Can you believe that we are half way through December? It seems there is not enough time in the day to do all of the things I need to do, at work and at home. And the things I used to do, like post to this blog, have unfortunately fallen by the wayside. So while I haven't as much time as I would like to digest the day's news and commentary, one thing I read recently struck me:

Jason Chaffetz is determined to continue the legacy of Chris Cannon by being as overly partisan and embarrassing to his state and constituents as Cannon was. Case in point: Utah's mythical 4th seat.

[Caffetz] is breaking with the rest of the state's delegation by saying he opposes a plan that would give Utah a fourth seat in the House and add a seat for the District of Columbia.

Republican Jason Chaffetz says he's opposed to the bill because he believes giving Washington, D.C. full voting rights in the House is unconstitutional.

Jason cares more about continuing to disenfranchise overwhelmingly Democratic and not coincidentally overwhelmingly African-American D.C. than he cares about increasing his state's power in the House. Is he worried that Jim Matheson would take one seat and a Becker/Corroon-type would take the lean-Dem seat?

We all know the constitutionality argument is a smokescreen for something else. Jason's ideological peers are the same congress-critters that voted to intervene in a lawsuit between the husband and parents of a brain-dead woman, the same ones that voted for the Military Commissions Act (which stripped detainees of the writ of Habeas Corpus without a state of civil war or invasion), the same ones that looked the other way or promoted bills that would condone or allow the U.S. government to torture people (in clear violation of signed treaties, which have equal force as the constitution itself).

So why cut off another seat to spite your state? To me, no other explanation makes sense besides the partisan one: if D.C. gets a seat, that is one more liberal Democrat in the House. He probably figures that Utah will get that seat in 4 years anyway, so why give up a seat to D.C.? How about because now the Democrats can give D.C. its seat without giving Utah one? Or making D.C. a state, and therefore also creating 2 more Democratic senators?

The news out of Minnesota sounds like Al Franken has a pretty good chance of pulling out a narrow victory, making 59 members of the Democratic Caucus in the Senate (including Lieberman and Sanders). All you need therefore is one scared GOP senator to vote with you to overcome cloture and the Dems could pass it even with a filibuster threat.

And there are plenty of those. Specter looks like he will get serious challenges from the left and right, if he decides to stick around (he has stage 4 Hodgkins's Disease)...and Pennslyvannia has gone Democratic since 1992. There are numerous other senators in bluing states that could be picked off on an issue by issue basis.

Jason, in short, is a freshman GOP House member during worst time to be a conservative partisan-hack back bencher. But he seems determined to stay as clueless as Cannon.

all over but the constitutional amendments

Over half the states in the union (29) have articles in their state constitutions banning gay marriage, including, most recently, California. Arizona was the only state in which such an amendment actually failed any time it proposed, but then it passed this year. Only two states allow actual marriages (Connecticut and Massachusetts) and a handful more allow civil unions for same-sex couples. So why are gay rights advocates feeling positive? Time, in short, is on their side.

The GLAAD poll -- conducted the week after voters outlawed gay marriage in California, Arizona and Florida -- shows that majorities of U.S. adults support expanding hate-crime laws to include gay people (63 percent), offering some type of legal recognition to same-sex couples (75 percent) and extending rights to fair housing and employment to gay and transgender people (51 percent). Nearly 70 percent oppose laws -- Utah has one -- that prevent gay and lesbian couples from adopting children.
...
GLAAD's [poll also found] that 47 percent of U.S. adults back gay marriage -- with 49 percent opposed (within the poll's 2 percent margin of error).

So that means that people alive today are becoming more and more tolerant of gay rights in general, but gay marriage itself is still off on the horizon.

Results, drawn from the Big Ten Battleground Poll, indicate that support for gay marriage will get a notable boost if the state's high court rules in favor of it. And, a majority of Iowa voters under age 30 are already in favor of gay marriage, suggesting that support for it could grow as time goes on.

Battleground polls were conducted Oct. 19-22[, 2008] in Ohio, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Indiana, Wisconsin, Iowa, Illinois and Minnesota, home to the 11 universities in the Big Ten Conference. The margin of error is plus or minus 4 percent.

I remember seeing similar polling in Massachusetts in 2003 after Goodridge came down. The majority of younger voters supported gay marriage, their parents' generation was split, and their grandparents' generation was overwhelmingly opposed.

In sum, the culture wars are for all practical purposes over and those dirty hippies have won. While supporters of the mythical 1950s style Ozzie and Harriet family values might score victories now, their supporters are shrinking--both the number of evangelicals are shrinking as well as those left of the Greatest Generation. This is why supporters of such bans seek constitutional amendments and not legislation, not because they fear the courts (which they could pack via political victories in legislative and gubernatorial races), but because constitutional amendments are, in theory, more permanent and more difficult to undo.

But I fully expect that in coming years all this will rapidly change in favor of gay rights, including the right to marry. When this tipping point will occur, I cannot say, but anywhere from 5-20 years from now, I predict that gay people will be marrying everywhere...yes, even in Utah.

No shame

There's a joke I heard recently: two LDS missioniaries go in for a visit with a family. After a while, the hostess remarks that the
rumors aren't true, Mormons don't have horns. "No, we just saw them down," says Elder Smith. "Go ahead, feel," he says, leaning his head towards her. "I don't feel nothin'," she remarks. "Not even a little embarressed?" Asks Elder Smith.

OK that was a long windup to the point of this post: the shameless hipocrisy of ex-Rep. Enid Greene Waldholtz Mickelson. Enid came out of hiding to denounce Obama's AG designate Eric Holder as a "lawbreaking opportunist". This from a woman who violated FEC regulations by dumping over a million dollars of illegal funds to get elected, only to blame her husband and cry on national TV when she got caught (and prosecuted by Holder). "Ms. Kettle, may I introduce you to Mr. Pott? ... Oh I see you've met already."

"I think [Holder] has absolutely no moral or ethical integrity and shouldn't be attorney general," Enid told the Tribune's Ed board. She has to oblivious, right? No, she is anything but dumb, which is why the whole Joe-did-this-behind-my-back-he-tricked-me defense is remains laughable today. I mean, even Republican hack Hatch supports Holders nomination.

I had to share this

So I am taking a break from work (that's right, I have worked several hours EVERY DAY this week and I know that will also include tomorrow) to eat dinner and watch some TV. One of my favorite shows is Ace of Cakes and during the commercials I saw this gem:

(H/T Informerical-Hell.com)


Yes, you too can look like a Druid for just $19.95 plus shipping and handling. Do people really get deathly cold when they want to use the phone AND be under a blanket? Call me crazy, but to me, a "blanket with sleeves" is really just a robe that opens in the back like a nightgown. And seriously, what is up with commercials and the use of black and white as parade of horribles?

It has become so cliche now and I wonder why people think it is so effective. Aren't black and white TV shows and movies supposed to make you feel all warm and fuzzy? Then why are people always wrenching their backs, shaking their heads, and having trouble opening jars in black and white? Just asking.

The Word

"In the beginning there was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God." --John 1:1

This is arguably the most famous opening lines ever, and for ranks above the lines for "A tale of two cities." Why?

For since its inception, humans have revered their most brilliant invention: writing. The written word is so powerful that Jesus used it to thwart the devil himself in his battle against Satan. The phrase "for it is written" is one of the most oft occurring phrase in the bible for a reason. The word is the basis of differentiation between us and other animals.

The U.S. was founded on the power of the written word. The Founders placed their new government in the hands of a piece of parchment they wrote on, not a royal family, or army as every person had before then. If you haven't yet, go visit the National Archives the next time you visit D.C. The Constitution, Declaration of Independence, and Bill of Rights are placed on a secular alter for all to worship and view behind protective "glass."

The rule of law is not just a concept but a possibility due to the written word. It is reason I have been able to learn from those who came a millennium before me and become an attorney. It is the reason I work so hard and conversely why I am able to provide for my family despite my inability to repair or build almost anything physical. I owe my life, livelihood, and this blog to the written word.

So while you might not see many new words on this blog in the foreseeable future, the Word remains with God and the Word is God. Have a blessed Thanksgiving everyone!

politcal capital at the capitol

I am not surprised that Chris Buttars and the NRA can sink anything in the legislature out of ignorant vindictiveness. But here's what surprises me: Gov. Jon Huntsman is very weak.

In case you forgot, two weeks ago Huntsman won by the biggest margin of any governor up for election this year. He should have clout with the legislature like President-elect Obama supposedly has with Congress. Then again, Obama is not spending any of it on things like punishing Joe Lieberman for disparaging him for two years (and campaigning against him and a number of other Senate Democrats). So did Huntsman let Hilder let his Court of Appeals nominee twist in the wind? Did he see the writing on the wall?

Attorneys of all ideological stripes supported Hilder because he is a good, ethical judge and not anti-gun or whatever crap his detractors claimed he was. I have had occasion to go before him, hear him at CLE events, and talk to him on a personal level and you could have added me to the list of supporters.

Hilder was a pawn in a political show of force by the intransigent legislature heck-bent (this is Utah after all) in stymieing the will of the people. This time it was the NRA, next time it could be the culture warriors or any other member of the parade of horribles that make up their the lobbyist and wingnut base of supporters.

Missing in action

So where have I been? I started my new job on Monday. And while
people are super nice, helpfull and patient with me, I feel totally
overwelmed and lost.

As for my thoughts on the day's news, the LDS Church is turning into
the fall guy for the blowback on the passage of prop 8. Yet this
won't earn them any respect with Evangelicals or conservative
Catholics.

And Obama's choices thus far as underwhelming as his pick of Biden.
Change will be gradual, it seems.

--
Sent from my mobile device

why lawyers should dominate the legislature

...and why they don't.

The Odgen Standard-Examiner published a letter to the editor that uses his irrational fear to write a letter that is out of touch with reality:

Most of us know that a one-party system is not in the best interests of the claimed democracy. But, we also know that one profession, Utah's legal profession, has played the dominate rule in two branches of our government. Article 5 of the Utah Constitution pays heed to the domination of two branches at the same time.

All judges are lawyers, all prosecutors are lawyers, all public defenders are lawyers.

If we start counting the lawyers in the Legislature, we will see another domination. Not a one-political party, but certainly a one-profession legislative and judicial system.

While the majority of the founders of the U.S. Constitution were lawyers, less than ten percent of legislators are attorneys. That's less than Democrats.

Time and time again, the legislature passes a bill that is so poorly written that the result is contrary to the intent. Folks like Sen. Chris Buttars, who expresses a clear disdain for judges that do anything against his personal interests (and not just his ideology). While there are staff attorneys and some attorneys in the legislature, it appears they are often ignored. I can't tell you how many times I would listen to a legislative history where someone like Sen. Scott McCoy is trying to warn his colleagues of the possible unintended consequences of what they are about to pass. Or where the legislature completely fails to discuss some ambgibous passage that might help those trying to interpret it.

Lawyers are not all ambulance chasers like Siegfried & Jensen. They are trained not to be hacks (contrary to popular belief) but to be capable of both seeing both sides of an issue and being able to persuade others that their suggestion is the better course of action. Shouldn't that be the description of a legislator?

still up to their old ways

I was hopeful that the loss of Speaker Curtis would be a wake up call to Utah Legislators, not only to pursue serious ethics reform in a state that is rated at the bottom of by watchdog groups, but also to change the overall bully mentality that the legislative branch has towards potential political rivals, not just the Rocky Andersons but also the Jon Huntsmans.

On the plus side,ethics reform seems like it will actually happen next February, but of course, the devil can sneak into the details. However I was disheartened to read this:

Some local government officials are alarmed over newly proposed legislation that would block or severely restrict agencies with appointed boards from raising property taxes.
Sam Dickson, manager with the Salt Lake City Mosquito Abatement District, said one version of the bill would essentially wipe out the district's ability to exist. That version would halt a non-elected board's ability to levy taxes for any new projects after 2010.
He also worried about an alternate version that would require a public vote for any tax increase.
"We're a forgotten entity in November," Dickson said. "If you have an election in July, it might help. But we don't have a lot of cheerleaders - we don't have the cute little animals the zoo can put out there."
The bill, unveiled Wednesday during a meeting of the Revenue and Taxation Interim Committee, is aimed at increasing transparency in property-tax issues and holding officials accountable, said panel chairman Sen. Wayne Niederhauser.
"I would like to see us craft something in legislation that would bring the accountability but yet not hurt the long-term issues that come with special districts," Niederhauser said.
Richard Bay, the general manager of the Jordan Valley Water Conservancy District, said that taxpayers could end up paying more for services such as water if special districts lose their ability to increase taxes.

While the buzzwords are there (transparency, accountability), the overall aim is to take power away from local governmental entities and concentrate power in the hands of the legislature so that they get to decide who wins and loses. Or in this case, who gets West Nile Virus or clean water. Frankly, I just don't trust anyone from the Utah County or Sandy machines to do the right thing in terms of looking at the bigger picture and looking out for more than just their friends.

Nor should all Utahns have to dole out their hard earned tax dollars for things better left to the decisionmaking process of local governments (cough RSL stadium cough cough). And sure, these taxing decisions should be made by elected officials who will have to face the music from voters if they go too far, but those officials should be those closest to the issue at hand, and not those insulated from the will of the voters ala the legislature.

this week's sign

One of my favorite bits by Sports Illustrated was the "This week's sign that the apocalypse is upon us" ... while generally it was an athlete doing/saying something mindbogglingly stupid, it was consistently a good read.

Anyway, that is what popped into my head (into my head and out into my blog dear readers) when I read this:

Billy Ray Cyrus and his daughter Miley, have made it clear that there is an open invitation to the girls [Sasha and Malia Obama] to appear as guests [on "Hannah Montana"] whenever they would like. The two Obama girls have expressed interest in entering showbiz one day, and Cyrus has said that they are "kind of like me before I started my own career. You are kind of put in it because [of] their dad and because of my dad."

Yes, because the Obama girls make hundreds of millions selling jammies at Target with their likenesses on them made by children in China. Thier dad becoming the first black president is just like your dad being a one hit wonder. And of course, Miley Cyrus has Secret Service protection because people want to kidnap her and hold her ransom, and other violent acts including kill her. ... OK well that last one might be true.


Michelle and Barack, please put your feet down on this one. I can't think of a single pre-teen girl that wouldn't want to do this, but if you want them to "keep it real" and for it all to "not go to their heads," I think shooting this one down tops the list.