voucher dishonesty goes national

George Will, a conservative columnist for the Washington Post and talking head on ABC's "This Week," wrote yet another disingenuous column today about Utah's voucher referendum. I am sure it will show up in Utah papers today or tomorrow. Let's take it down one lie and smear at a time.

There [Utah], teachers unions, whose idea of progress is preservation of the status quo, are waging an expensive and meretricious campaign to overturn the right of parents to choose among competing schools, public and private, for the best education for their children.

My idea of progress is when things improve. So if vouchers will not improve our children's education--and a study by a conservative once pro-voucher think tank in Milwaukee shows they don't--then change for the sake of reform is not "progressive."

Will also conveniently forgets that this bill was pushed first by outside groups and is opposed by a solid 60 percent of Utahns--the only state that still gives Bush a positive job rating.

And every Utah voucher increases funds available for public education. Here is how:

Utah spends more than $7,500 per public school pupil ($3,000 more than the average private school tuition). The average voucher will be for less than $2,000. So every voucher that is used -- by parents willing to receive $2,000 rather than $7,500 of government support for the education of their child -- will save Utah taxpayers an average of $5,500. And because the vouchers are paid from general revenue, the departed pupil's $7,500 stays in the public school system.

So many lies in such a short space, that merits an award in rightwing shilling. First, he uses the highest public school spending number from Park City School District ($7,500) while simultaneously using the artificially low and cherry picked "average" private school tuition ($3,000). The real average private school tuition is nearly $8,000 according to the Deseret News. And the real public school spending is lower as well--the US Census places Utah again as the lowest in the nation this year with $5,257.

Again, Will "just so happens" to omit the fact that over time, the bill would raid public school money for vouchers, and the problem would get progressively worse. As others has better explained than I, schools have fixed costs that can't easily be reduced when a handful of students leave a private school for a public school.

But wait, there is still more inches to fill in his collumn, so Will manages to squeeze in a few more lies.

Utah's Office of Education reports that the state's private schools -- which are operating one-third below full enrollment -- have a higher percentage of nonwhites than do public schools.

Private schools in Utah are not at a third capacity, rather they are nearly full. From the Deseret News:

Of note, many private schools could not accommodate many more students if they wanted to take advantage of vouchers to enroll.

For example, the Catholic Schools of the Diocese of Salt Lake, the largest private school system in the state with 5,407 students in 14 schools, estimates it has capacity to add only 317 more elementary/middle school students and 373 high school students.

Current capacity at its schools ranges from a high of 101 percent (at both the St. John the Baptist elementary and middle schools in Draper) to a low of 68 percent (at St. Olaf school in Bountiful,) according to data provided by the diocese.

I won't even bother with the diatribe against Teachers' Unions, only to say that he doesn't mention the out of state money coming in defense of vouchers from Amway founders etc. Oh and when you are calling someone else's arguments "threadbare," Mr. Will, you might want to make sure yours aren't full of crap themselves.

the oath

Today I did not blog until now because I have been busy with work, a job interview, and joining the legal profession.



Amid the pomp and circumstance of joining the Utah Bar, there is an important task that some 260-odd men and women did today. We raised our right hands and pledged to defend the United States Constitution and the Utah Constitution, to treat each other civilly, to obey the rules of ethics, etc. I take those oaths very seriously, and this is why speak out so aggressively against things and people like Torture, NSA wiretapping, Rudy Giulliani, George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, vouchers, the suspension of Habeas Corpus, etc.

America-- and the state of Utah-- was founded as a nation and state of laws, not men. I do not pledge allegiance to a flag or to a government, but to a set of rules which the people have agreed to be governed by-- our constitutions.

The republic is under attack, and not just occasionally from Al Qaeda, but from within by those that think that might trumps right and that we must throw away centuries of laws to sleep at night. Their recklessness is what keeps me up at night. I think of all of people around the world who grow to hate America and Americans, of all the people who use the policies and rhetoric of this Administration to repress democracy and peace in their own countries and regions.

While not all of us can or should become lawyers, all of us should personally pledge to defend this state and country against all enemies, foreign and domestic, who seek to subvert our constitution for their own personal or ideological benefit and to the determinant of the people for whom the government was created.

Huntsman backs away slowly

The other day I posted how Huntsman is trying to do a half hearted support of vouchers so that if it fails, which it will, he won't face blowback from the voters next fall. But since PCE people are dumb enough to think they can change public opinion which is overwhelmingly and firmly against vouchers, they are confused at Huntsman's coyness.

If you own a television, you've probably seen the commercial of Gov. Jon Huntsman Jr. at a Capitol news conference endorsing Utah's school voucher program facing a Nov. 6 referendum.
[...]
What you don't see is the part of the news conference in which Huntsman tells Utahns it is OK to vote against vouchers.
"Whatever you think is right, whatever you can justify, is the right answer for you," Huntsman says in the portion voucher supporters edited out.
The governor's "lukewarm" support for vouchers - he refuses to take time to tape a real commercial, saying he will not be used as a "poster boy" for the issue - puzzles political observers and has allowed him to be claimed as a champion by both sides.

Silly "political observers," Huntsman is like any other politican who got stuck on the wrong side of popular opinion. He doesn't want to go down with the ship. Romney was happy to trumpet his support from Sen. Larry Craig, until Craig's arrest report leaked.

Of course, rather than admitting that Utahns don't want their terrible bill, voucher supports are going to blame the lukewarm messenger.

Voucher spin doctors edited his comments as best they could and now are using them in their latest TV ads. But if it turns out to be too little too late, they may blame Huntsman for not stepping up sooner.
Hark back to the Republican convention fight of 2004 when Lampropoulos emerged as the delegates' preferred leader for several months leading to the convention. Lampropoulos was the top voucher drumbeater among the candidates. He not only talked the talk, he opened his wallet and contributed tens of thousands of dollars to the cause. He also gave Parents for Choice in Education free office space at his campaign headquarters.
Huntsman, meanwhile, told delegates at many a chili-and-fruit-punch backyard meeting that he supported vouchers. But his comments were carefully crafted, coming with conditions and certainly not with the born-again zeal Lampropoulos offered.
As the convention neared, Huntsman grabbed the momentum and appeared likely to come out of the convention as the front-runner. The mystery was who would be the runner-up and also qualify for the primary.
[...]
There still could be consequences for Huntsman. Pro-voucher business leaders continue griping about the governor's tepid support - which might have been one reason he finally agreed to show up at the press conference - and have approached some former Republican gubernatorial candidates about a possible run in 2008.

Really, please do primary him. I would love to see the Utah Republican party pick a crazy over Jon Huntsman, Jr. If they pick $100,000 to PCE Lampropoulos, maybe the Dems can convince Jim Matheson to run for Governor.

major voucher supporter is a bigot himself

Remember how Patrick Bynre, CEO of Overstock.com, called people who opposed vouchers bigots?

The NAACP demanded an apology Friday from the founder of Overstock.com, who said Utah minorities who don't graduate from high school might as well be burned or thrown away.

Patrick Byrne's comments were posted on YouTube. The video clip was from a debate Tuesday at the University of Utah law school, where he was speaking in favor of vouchers, public aid for families sending kids to private schools.
[...]
On YouTube, he says: "Right now, 40 percent of Utah minorities are not graduating from high school. You may as well burn those kids. ... If they do not get a high school education, you might as just throw the kids away."

So what would you do when caught on tape saying something racist? First, you pull the video off YouTube, then blame the internets.

Byrne said he had no intention of apologizing and claimed his comments were taken out of context.

"These folks have been selective in their editing," he told The Associated Press. "I very clearly said the system is throwing away 40 percent of the minority kids because they're not graduating. I'm saying that I'm against throwing kids away.

This is the face of the voucher movement. His hundreds of thousands he gave to PCE is the biggest local donor to the cause. He was one of two people who came to debate at the law school on the subject. If he didn't speak for voucher supporters, they have a funny way of letting him speak for them.

Williams noted that Byrne didn't mention white children who don't graduate. Utah is 83.5 percent white, 11 percent Hispanic and 1 percent black.

"It says he's not sympathetic to the minority community and he means exactly what he said," Williams said of Byrne's lack of an apology.

Maybe he got so upset and called people bigots because of his own bigotry he is trying to hide.

SLC mayor money follows the winner-- Becker

People give money to candidates for three main reasons, which some times overlap. 1) You support them on a personal level (Jim Matheson hit up his East High classmates in his 2000 race) 2) You support them on an ideological level (I gave $100 to Wes Clark in 2003 because I agreed with his views on foreign policy) 3) You think they are going to win (re-)election, and you want to have audience with the person who will shortly be in power (Why Hatch raises millions with no effort).

So when news reports came out that Becker had an amazing two months of fundraising and Buhler not so hot, most people with a brain would say duh! Here's how Buhler spins the bad news

Buhler's campaign has taken in about $144,000 since Aug. 31, bringing his total to $465,000. [Becker has raised $590,000 in his campaign for mayor, including $268,000 in the past two months]

"I'm the underdog in this race, so it's always a little more challenging to raise money," he said. "I feel very gratified for the support I've received, and we're still raising money, of course."

Let's look back at the money race at the beginning of August shall we?
As you can see, Buhler had raised slightly more than Becker had at that point, but also spent more on billboards (and both were behind Jenny and Keith).

And here's what I said two weeks after the primary, when the Tribune was trying to portray this as a neck and neck race. (Now of course, they gave up and endorsed Becker):

Make no mistake about it, Ralph is going to barn storm the entire city with volunteers knocking on doors. He is going to raise money from people looking to make a safe bet without much effort. He is going to be organized and disciplined. And he is going to win the race by 15-20 points.

In another mini-edition of "I called it," here's an excerpt from a Becker campaign press release:

Ralph Becker’s campaign received a big financial boost on Friday [October 19th, 2007], thanks to a phone-a-thon that raised $56,365 in just seven hours.

I am not saying that people that gave during this phone-a-thon or any other in the last two months must be only from type 3, but surely the reason Ralph funding has doubled in three months is because he is cruising in the polls.

Utah's undemocratic branch strikes again

Sounds like we need to see which legislator owns a golf course.

Sen. Howard Stephenson, R-Draper, is backing legislation that would vest tremendous power in a 15-member board appointed by the governor which would have broad authority to decide what services towns, cities, counties and the state can provide and what unfairly competes with businesses.
[...]
He believes the state's proper role includes making sure "local governments aren't getting into the business of business and putting private concerns that have invested their capital out of business," said Stephenson.
Stephenson, who chairs the Government Competition and Privatization Subcommittee, said lawmakers keep hearing from business owners who say their survival is being threatened by competition from government-owned entities, and said that is the path the former Soviet Union took and it paid a price. He also noted that government has a built-in advantage because it is exempt from taxes that businesses must pay.
Under the proposed bill, labeled as a "working draft," any business owner that felt he or she was being hurt by unfair competition could go to the Government Competition and Privatization Commission, which would decide if the activity was a "core government function."
If not, it could order the government to stop and, if the municipality refuses, go to court to seek fines and penalties.

Here are a list of these government operations that the Republican controlled legislature wants to do away with:

* Catering and reception halls. Operators have said the low prices to rent public buildings, like Red Butte Arboretum or the Salt Lake Library for receptions undercuts private reception centers.
* Municipal golf courses. They can charge lower rates than private courses.
* Recreation centers. They compete with private gyms.
* Trash collection. Cities disposing of their own trash cut into opportunities for private firms.
* Ambulance services. Some cities are offering municipal ambulance services, competing with private entities.

Because in the bizzaro world of the legislature, the goal of government is to protect business, not citizens that have to pay for things.

Local governments don't do these services to make money but to serve the people of their county/city/town. If the people in these areas don't want, say for Salt Lake County to own horse stables, they would tell their elected officials that or run against them. Unlike the Soviet Union, Utahns currently have the power to prevent their local government from doing things they don't like and have done it in the past. Water in Ogden, for example, isn't fluoridated. But people like to play golf, for example, and not everyone can afford to join the Country Club. The public likes these services and since these places don't have to operate on a profit, they are cheaper to run.

Private businesses that do things that local governments do can earn their business by doing their job better than the local government. And I thought privatization meant that everything would be cheaper because the marketplace is so efficient, so why should these businesses need the legislature to close down these government venues and services.

Beyond my opposition to the substance of what they are proposing to do (privatization for the sake of benefiting lobbyists at the expense of the public), I don't like the way it is being done. Local governments are accountable because officials are elected. This commission, however would be completely anonymous and unaffected by public sentiment since they are appointed.

Huntsman's passive-agressive support of vouchers

Governor Huntsman signed HB 148, thinking it would become law. He resisted a referendum, then supported it for a day he knew Romney would be on the ballot in Utah. As far as I know, he didn't sign the referendum. (Ralph Becker handed me the referendum petition to sign during the blogger open house.) Huntsman said he would vote for vouchers.

But now that the vouchers bill is doomed to failure at the November ballot box, Huntsman is trying to back away from vouchers. He spoke out in support of vouchers, and voucher supporters used his statements in an ad. So now he is attempting to be not as supportive of vouchers while doing nothing to keep the ad off the air.

"I don't think there's much I can do about that," Huntsman told reporters at his monthly press conference on KUED Channel 7 when asked about turning up in pro-voucher advertisements.

"As a public person, you're out there and what you say is reported and filmed," the governor said. "I'm on record supporting vouchers for years."

Actually sir, I am sure if you said please don't use me in your ads, they would honor it, because it would be embarrassing to them for you to make such a statement in public.

Huntsman, you can't claim you aren't trying to convince Utahns to vote for Referendum 1 when you are starring in a pro-voucher ad.

So next year, when Huntsman tries to claim he was a key person in the anti-voucher efforts this year, I will be sure to remind him otherwise.

Becker wins in flawed U student straw poll

The Tribune is pointing out the narrowness of Becker's straw poll victory-- 45 to 42 over Buhler among U students-- which one might assume is Becker's base.

However, a couple of things to keep in mind.

1. An equally unscientific poll--an online poll on the Chony's website-- has Becker winning 57% of voters with Buhler only garnering 12%.


2. The University of Utah is a commuter school (2,300 out of 28,619 students live on campus), meaning a large segment of their student population does not live in Salt Lake City.


3. According to the Utah Daily Chronicle, in 2006, "Only 12 percent of the student body (3,461 students) voted in the [student body] elections, which is down 6 percent from last year's 18 percent (5,111 students)." That is, those students who do live in SLC are also not that likely to vote.


4. According to the article, this was the partisan breakdown of the straw poll:

   Thirty percent of the U. students identified themselves as Republican, 29 percent as Democrat and 33 percent as unaffiliated or independent.

   That's not the makeup of voters in SLC city elections. Dan Jones, who repeatedly has accurately polled this and other races notes that in his last mayoral survey, "Thirty-four percent of city voters said they are Democrats. A third said they are political independents. Only a quarter said they are Republicans." Ergo, this straw poll is skewed against Democrats like Becker.

Yet despite all of this, Becker won the straw poll. To me think this further shows that Dan Jones' numbers--Becker 51-Buhler 33--seem to be holding steady.

shoe leather

How do you win elections? Is it high-priced strategists, focus groups, paid broadcast ads and rallies in airplane hangers? No. It is meeting and greeting voters on their turf and talking to them face to face to convincing them to vote for your candidate.

And what is Becker doing, according to his press release? "Becker and his supporters have walked door-to-door over 90% percent of Salt Lake City’s 157 voting
districts." They have walked "Monday through Saturday, every week, since March – a just under 150 days and nights." There are about 100 volunteers. Most importantly, "[m]ost voting areas have been visited twice by the campaign while just over 50% have been canvassed in three times."

It seems Becker is going to stick with what got him a surprisingly large primary victory: shoe leather.

O ye of little faith: Romney edition

Yesterday, Romney rightly made fun of Giulliani's rooting for the Red Sox in the World Series, despite spending more time in front row seats at Yankees games in 2001 after 9/11 than at ground zero. Romney, who I swear I saw sitting behind home plate during an earlier playoff game this year at Fenway Park, is supposed to be a Red Sox fan.

Yet...

Forget those lame bets between politicians over big sporting events -- you know, those wagers of whatever food item for which a city is famous.

Republican presidential hopeful Tom Tancredo wants to put something important on the line -- his candidacy. His campaign called ABC News to issue this challenge: The Colorado congressman will drop out of the race if the Rockies lose the World Series -- if rival Mitt Romney agrees to pack it in if the Red Sox lose.

Romney has a lot at stake -- he's leading in the Iowa and New Hampshire polls, is competitive nationally, and has invested more than $17 million of his own money in his campaign. So the former Massachusetts governor is not taking the bait, even though the bet looks pretty safe -- the Sox shellacked the Rockies 13-1 in game one Wednesday night.

Asked to respond to the proposed bet, spokesman Kevin Madden issued a terse statement this morning: "The governor is in the race to win the race."

What a coward! The Sox just destroyed the Rockies 13-1 last night and he won't bet to get rid of Tancredo? It seems Romney places his political career over the Red Sox winning the World Series. I know fans that would have traded major organs to see the Red Sox win the World Series.

Deseret News' Math better than PCE's

Remember how I said that the "average" tuition dollar number put forth by supporters of vouchers was intentionally misleading and bad math? And then voucher supporters got into the weeds saying I didn't know the difference between the mean median and mode? Well, amazingly enough, the Deseret Morning News seems to agree with my analysis:

Even if voters approve giving $3,000 a year per child in state vouchers to help non-wealthy families pay private school tuition, families would still need another $4,800 or so per child to afford typical annual tuition in Utah.
[...]
That is according to calculations and research by the Deseret Morning News. The figures are similar to state tuition averages calculated by the anti-voucher Utahns for Public Schools.
[...]
The News telephoned all private schools listed by the State Office of Education about their tuition and enrollment. Some refused data or did not respond. The newspaper also excluded from calculations many treatment centers for drugs and other problems where overall treatment costs (usually very high) did not break out tuition for schooling there.

The research resulted in a database of 64 private schools, in which more than 13,700 of the 16,000-plus private school students estimated by the state are enrolled.

With it, the newspaper calculated a weighted average (which takes into account how many students pay tuition at different levels). It used "normal" tuition rates, not counting discounts for such things as multiple students from the same family or subsidies by Catholic parishes for members at Catholic schools.

For all private schools providing information, the weighted average for tuition was $7,824 a year per student — more than $4,800 beyond what the $3,000 state voucher for non-wealthy students would cover.

For just those private schools that have identified themselves to the pro-voucher Parents for Choice in Education as willing to take vouchers now, the weighted average is a trifle lower: $7,777.

So turns out, the $4,500 is total BS. Color me unsurprised. PCE complainted that DesNews included K-12, not K-8 like they did. Why do you suppose PCE doesn't want to average in high school tuition? Because that is the most expensive. Most people who support vouchers want them for their kids' primary and secondary schooling, not just K-8. Really, what would the point be to go back to public school for high school after being in private school for all of your childhood?

Oh but there is more about how unfeasible this voucher bill really is.

A $3,000 voucher would fully cover average tuition at nine of the 62 schools that provided data. Another seven schools had average tuition between $3,000 and $4,000. Twenty schools had tuition between $4,001 and $5,000. And 28 schools had tuition over $5,000.

Of note, many private schools could not accommodate many more students if they wanted to take advantage of vouchers to enroll.

For example, the Catholic Schools of the Diocese of Salt Lake, the largest private school system in the state with 5,407 students in 14 schools, estimates it has capacity to add only 317 more elementary/middle school students and 373 high school students.

Not even 10 schools in the whole state of Utah will both a) take vouchers and b) cost less than $3,000 so that the families that make little money could send them to private school without additional out of pocket expenses.

The article doesn't say which 9 schools those are (and where they are located). Suffice it to say that only a minuscule fraction of the hundreds of thousands of children in Utah's public schools could fully utilize vouchers under this terrible piece of legislation. Which is probably why 61 percent of Utahns oppose it.

Matheson makes some moves

So it seems Jim managed to get his name in the press several times today for doing good things. Let's take a took at them.

1. "It's a bad idea to use public money to spend on private academies," said Matheson about Referendum 1. "I'm telling people to vote against it."
   

   Republicans Gov. Jon Huntsman Jr., Congressman Rob Bishop and GOP legislative leadership have endorsed it.
   Matheson says he agrees with encouraging educational innovation and giving parents choices, but vouchers won't accomplish that.
   "That's not what this is about," he said. "This is about taking public taxpayers' funds out and putting them into private schools."
   Guaranteed public education is one of the great traditions America and Utah, he said.
   "It has produced an educated population that has made us a super power. As we now face the challenges of the global economy, this is not the time to be taking resources from the public education system. That would be a mistake."



2. It is good to be in the majority.

   Matheson's bill is aimed to "jump-start" more advanced mine communications, his office says, and would direct the National Institute of Standards and Technology to launch an initiative to come up with a new deep mine communications system.
   "This is a time for an all-out effort, in order to spare mining families from the ordeal that the families of the Crandall Canyon miners and mine rescuers endured," Matheson said.
   "We need next-generation technology that tracks and communicates with miners when accidents occur. Mine safety is our top priority and as we learned in the Crandall Canyon mine tragedy, there's a gap in our ability to locate these miners when tragedy strikes," Matheson said.

   This is a good way to prevent things like Crandall Canyon from happening again. (Banning retreat mining, rather than just studying it, Sens. Bennett and Hatch, is also a good approach)


3. Jim is also helping Moab by lashing out at the DOE for slow walking clean up of the tailings ponds.
   

   "The serious contamination threat to the Colorado River cannot ultimately be resolved without removal of the tailings pile." That's why he is continuing to push the DOE "to end the delays and move forward with the cleanup," Matheson said.

   Now that he is on the committee with jurisdiction over their funding, the Department of Energy will start to listen to Jim.

we all want to know

"Does America get its free taco still?" -- Fox Sports announcer Joe Buck, reminding viewers of his in-game promotion for Taco Bell's stolen base promo.

Our quote of the day. GO SOX!

more voucher fuzzy math and smear tactics

Paul Rolly lays the smack down, again.

For a certified public accountant, Senate Majority Leader Curtis Bramble needs to brush up on his math.
Bramble had an opinion piece in the Provo Daily Herald on Saturday that argued that voters should approve private school vouchers. He noted that from 1995 to 2005, Utah's public school enrollment increased by 34,423 students. He said that between 2005 and 2015, the projected growth will be 154,752 students, "a staggering 450 percent increase."
He goes on to say that "it's not hard to see what a 450 percent increase in student population is going to do to public education."
But according to his own figures, the 154,752 is not a 450 percent increase in the student population, which currently is about 540,000. It's 450 percent of the 34,423 students that represented the previous 10-year increase.
If there were a 450 percent increase in the student population by 2015, we would have 3 million student-age children. That's about a half-million more than Utah's entire population. To reach that figure, every woman in Utah of child-bearing age would have to have six more children.
The Provo Republican then argues that in order to pay for the 450 percent increase, we would have to triple the income tax. But in actuality, the projected 154,752 new students represent a 28.5 percent increase in the student population.

I am sure that Sen. Bramble would love every Utah woman to have six more children, but it another case of lying to hide the fact that vouchers just don't add up. So if giving a disingenuous representation of facts and figures isn't working, it is time to go back to the old standby, slander.

Backers branded those opposing vouchers for private schools "bigots," and accused them of spreading lies.
[...]
[Overstock.com CEO Patrick] Byrne said the vouchers simply shift control from the educational bureaucracy to parents. "It's not about accountability. it's about bigotry," he said.
[Utah Education Association's Vik] Arnold countered: "It is the private schools that choose to accept students or not. That is where there is bigotry - if indeed there is bigotry, Sir."

Meanwhile, voucher opponents pointed out all of the loopholes in this poorly drafted bill.

At the debate, Alan Smith, a lawyer for the anti-voucher Utahns for Public Schools, belittled the program as flawed, describing a hypothetical private school called "Professor Harold Hill's Think Method School of Government and Civics." His school legally would accept vouchers - offering parents a $1,000 kickback - though only offering three class meetings a year in a public park. The students would simultaneously continue their education in public schools. "My school is perfectly kosher under the bill," Smith said.

Sounds like a good debate, too bad I am in D.C. and couldn't make it. Tell me what you thought of it if you went.

Buhler's contradictory arguments

Remember how Buhler said that Becker was an ineffective "dreamer" in the state legislature? Now he says,

"Most of the funding for our schools comes from the state Legislature, so I would like to suggest that we keep Ralph at the state Legislature awhile longer," Buhler said during a debate hosted by the Salt Lake Rotary Club today at the Downtown Marriott.

"If (Becker) keeps working at it, he can convince more of his colleagues to support public education more than they are now," Buhler said. "So the best thing you can do for public education is vote for me and keep Ralph in the Legislature."

I guess he can't complete his "to-do" list without some doing from the "dreamer." Or maybe he has given up on that pathetic rhetoric.

Becker shot back wondering why Buhler didn't do anything positive for education during his one term as State Senator.

"I would invite Dave to go up there to the Legislature, where I've been beating my head against the wall for a number of years on this topic, and carry on the fight," said Becker, Democratic leader in the state House. "As a Republican, you may be able to do better."

If you read the whole thing, they had few substantive disagreements, but argued more about strategy (Becker's blueprint as a good or bad idea, not what exactly Buhler's idea would be).

"Mr. Positive" proceeded to try out more attacks that fell flat.

Buhler told the Rotarians he has "lots of respect" for Becker, but insisted he is more effective. He tweaked his opponent for passing too few bills at the Legislature, including none on public safety or liquor reform.
"I'm very practical," he said. "I'm very results oriented."
For his part, Becker refused to take the bait. Instead, he said he wants to strengthen public education, keep the capital green and help foster the city's chances for becoming a model across the region "and across the entire country."
"Rather than criticize Dave," he said, "I'd invite you to look at my record . . . and make your own conclusions."

More debate coverage was also here.

Oh and if you are a U student, please vote in the online straw poll on the SLC mayors race. No Freeping please.

not the best word choice

"I took a city that was full of pornography and licked it to a large extent."

-- Rudy Giuliani.

I really didn't need to know what Rudy likes to do with dirty shows, movies, and magazines, but that's just me.

join in on the voucher debate tonight

So many of you in the bloghive have written great posts delving into the voucher issue by the numbers and by investigating suspicious supporters. I urge supporters and opponents (and especially undecideds) to attend tonight's debate on vouchers at my alma matter.

Voucher bill sponsor Rep. Greg Hughes and Overstock.com founder Patrick Byrne and will face voucher opponents Vik Arnold of the Utah Education Association and Allen Smith, a lawyer for Utahns for Public Schools. Each side will be given 10 minutes to state its position, after which questions from the public will be taken. Refreshments will be available afterward.


* When: 7 p.m. tonight
* Where: Sutherland Moot Courtroom at the S.J. Quinney Law School, U.ofU. campus, 332 S. 1400 East, Salt Lake City
* Parking: West Rice-Eccles Stadium lot

It is not often that you can get a real debate on the issues in Salt Lake near a TRAX stop. Come and join in the revelry.

Romney's in denial

People keep clamoring for Willard Mitt Romney to give the speech about Mormonism in 2007 like JFK gave about Catholicism in 1960. And yet the much desired speech won't happen, instead, he gives sound bites like these:

"I think the reason that some 28, 29 percent are not comfortable voting for a Mormon is they think they're voting for Harry Reid."

-- Mitt Romney, on polls showing people aren't comfortable voting for a Mormon, "Face the Nation," CBS, 10/21

While it is true that the Majority Leader has low national and local approval ratings neither polls give us cross tabs (Democrats versus Republicans, percentage of each in their sample). For example, every time the media talk about how low Congress' approval rating are, you have to remember that Democrats are mad at Congress because on their inability to end the war, as well as the constant folding on important issues like FISA and Habeas Corpus. Republicans meanwhile, actually have started liking Congress more since they were able to scuttle immigration reform and have thus far kept the war from ending etc. My point is, Reid's approval among liberal activists is very low because of FISA (he is reportedly not honoring Sens. Dodd and Feingold's hold of retroactive immunity for telecoms who illegally let the NSA spy on Americans) and other issues. Not because he is Mormon.

Also, these polls don't tell us Reid's name recognition nationally. I would bet you that most people in the U.S. don't know who Harry Reid or Nancy Pelosi are, let alone that Sen. Reid is LDS.

Whereas the reason a little over a quarter of those polled say they won't vote for a Mormon is because these are the same religious conservatives who believe Romney's religion to be a cult and has about as much vehemence for Mormons as they do for Muslims.

And he knows this, that's why Romney is trying to be BFFs with haters like Bob Jones III, whose college did not allow interracial dating until 2000. Bob Jones University also fought allowing blacks into their school all the way to the US Supreme Court in 1983. More hypocritically for Willard, this same man, Bob Jones III called Mormons and Catholics "cults which call themselves Christian" on the schools website in 2000.

Then again, Romney had opposite views on just about everything only 5 years ago, so I guess Bob Jones III must be a model of consistency in Republican circles.

Millioniare vs. Millioniare vs. BYU place kicker

The race for Utah's 3rd Congressional district heats up. Mike Leavitt's brother, David, is worth "between $31 million and $81 million." Poor little Chris Cannon is worth a paltry sum of somewhere between "$2.1 million and $7.5 million." Both of them are richer than 99.999% of their fellow Utahns because of their family. And David Leavitt's family corporation is pitching in:

Leavitt raised $27,000 from his immediate family — most of whom work for The Leavitt Group of insurance agencies and related family businesses, which are the basic foundation of David Leavitt's wealth, as well. Each of the six Leavitt sons and their father, Dixie, own a similar share in the family businesses, which spring from a small independent insurance agency started years ago by Dixie Leavitt in Cedar City.
[...]
"I raised more money than Cannon did, even if you don't count the Leavitts," said David Leavitt. "But there are a lot of Leavitts. And if you can't count on your immediate family to support you, you've got problems."

Most of the 14 Leavitts on his report gave him the maximum amount allowed at this point in the race under FEC rules — $2,300 apiece. They can give more if Leavitt comes out of next spring's Utah State Republican convention, either as the sole party nominee for the 3rd District or gets into a late-June primary election with another GOP candidate.

Oh and don't forget Jon Huntsman's ex-campaign manager and chief of staff, the place kicker for BYU.

Read about this football "heroics" at the 1988 Freedom Bowl. Full disclosure: I am a Utah man.

another poll, another lopsided loss for vouchers

Give up already, the people don't want your crazy experiment. From the Deseret News:

The Center for the Study of Elections and Democracy at Brigham Young University released the results of its Utah Voter Poll, a survey of 417 voters earlier this month.

Sixty-one percent of those polled indicated they would vote against vouchers, while 39 percent said they would vote in favor of the program.

Moreover, 90 percent said they were very certain of their vote.

Voucher pusher Speaker Greg Curtis said that "polls are just polls," let's see you say that to when you lose your job next November.

voucher debate next Tuesday

Mark your calendars! Tuesday, October 23, at 7:00 PM, the SJ Quinney College of Law will be hosting a debate on vouchers. KUED's Ken Verdoia, who moderated the Rocky Anderson v. Sean Hanity debate, will repeat his role for the voucher debate.

On the Yes side will be Rep. Greg Hughes (R-Draper) and Patrick Byrne (Overstock.com CEO and major PCE donor). On the No side will be Allan Smith (Utahns for Public Schools' attorney) and Vik Arnold (UEA Dir. of Gov. Relations and Political Action). The debate is sponsored by the Federalist Society and my old group, the Public Interest Law Organization.

I wish I could be there. It should be filled with actual arguments and not just Oreo cookie-style rhetoric. Park at the Rice-Eccles stadium lot or take TRAX.

the conservative case against vouchers

(Photo Credit: Tom Smart, Deseret Morning News)
(Republicans Representatives Sheryl Allen (displaying the charts), Kay McIff (left), and Steve Mascaro)

With PCE claiming that somehow the ACLU, Nancy Pelosi, Hillary Clinton, and the gays are behind opposition to vouchers, it is helpful to remember that the only reason Referendum 1 is possible is thanks to a few courageous Republicans who disobeyed their leadership's wishes. Utahns appreciate it.

"I respectfully disagree with my Republican colleagues who support the flawed voucher law," said Rep. Sheryl Allen, R-Bountiful. "Utah voters, especially Republican voters, need to hear from Republican lawmakers that this law has too many flaws and will cost too much money — money that could be spent in our public schools."
[...]
"...as the program is phased in, the costs far exceed any savings associated with the program," Allen said. "Over a 13-year period, Referendum 1 would cost the state $429 million, which is hundreds of millions of dollars more than even the most optimistic estimate of savings."
[...]
"We have funded education in the state through our entire history, through the Depression and thick and thin," said Rep. Kay McIff, R-Richfield. "Now we find ourselves with the fewest numbers of kids per family and the strongest economy in our state's history and they are saying, 'We can't afford to fund our kids' education'... Citizens should know that we will continue to educate our kids in the state (in a system) that gives us the biggest bang for our buck."

Rep. Steve Mascaro, R-West Jordan, also said he wanted to dispel the myth that vouchers will lower Utah's large class sizes.

"If you reduce the number of students in a school, then you reduce the number of teachers as well. ... Vouchers will not change that," Mascaro said.

The Legislative Fiscal Analyst estimates a reduction of three students, at most, per school per year, he said.

Three students? For those of you who never took or forgot basic economics, fixed costs-- school buses, salaries (teachers, bus drivers, crossing guards, school support staff, district administration), maintenance, etc.--will all not be reduced by vouchers, especially if the 3 students number bares out. So where are the savings supposed to come from? [crickets]

I don't want government programs for the sake of government programs, so if the private sector can do something better, then let them do it instead. But when there is a market failure, the government should step in for moral reasons. For example, private charity has failed to keep the elderly and the poor from getting health care...thus, we have Medicare and Medicaid.

Likewise, private education in the early republic failed to adequately educate a sufficient number of our citizens. And for over 200 years, we have provided free public education for our children until secondary school. Now other countries are doing a better job of educating their children, and none of them have vouchers. Rather, they have nationalized education. If you want to talk about savings, how about nationalizing education? Why not use the bargaining tactics and power that Walmart uses for toilet paper to buy supplies for schools, including textbooks, buses, building materials, playgrounds etc.?

Instead, the Republican leadership in the legislature prefer gimmicks like vouchers that by design cannot and will not give enough parents "school choice" to see if the idea would really work.

Cannon and Bishop don't want children to have health insurance

Not a single Republican switched their vote, including Chris Cannon and Bob Bishop, who chose President Bush and HMOs over children.

Sad really.

something to remember

Next year, when Governor Huntsman asks for 4 more years. Remember that he signed the voucher bill, and is voting for the bill to become law. You, the people, have the power to make sure it doesn't become a law. Vote NO on Referendum 1.

While we are having to debate whether it is a good idea to try to waste millions of dollars on a voucher program that no one can afford, no schools will participate in, with no oversight, and no positive outcomes, our city's police and fire department need help.

For about two hours early Wednesday, all of the department's computers and radios went out, including all 911 services. The culprit: rain and a leaky roof.

About 1:30 a.m., the power source to the electronic equipment at the police department, on the corner of 200 South and 300 East, went out "because water leaked through the ceiling and fried the mother board," said Salt Lake City police detective Jeff Bedard. The power source is in a building next to the police station's parking structure, which already is partially closed because of deterioration.

Vote to issue to the bond if you live in Salt Lake City.

legislature's own auditors say schools lack oversight

In the wake of Federal and State embezzlement charges against officials in Davis and Weber Counties' School Districts, Utah's legislature wisely (lap that up because I won't use those words again in a while) asked the Office of the Utah Legislative Auditor General to audit and report on all school districts' controls to prevent such crimes in the future. For Davis County, the Auditor General's report found

• Inadequate separation of duties


• Centralized order and delivery for Title I purchases


• Inadequate approval and review of vendors

[...]
We are also concerned that important monitoring controls at Davis were ineffective or not implemented.

These problems are similar to that of D.C.'s voucher school program and to what is a lack of oversight built into Utah's voucher bill.

Now, to be fair, the Auditor General's report also says that Davis and Weber's problems are getting fixed (at least partially) and that they have problems worse than other Utah school districts. But when school district officials are siphoning off millions of dollars for personal use, that is hard to top.

vouchers supporters are ignoring rural Utah

The graphic of the day (graphics love to The Salt Lake Tribune, H/T Accountability First):
To me, this looks like a map of the Wasatch Front, not the state of Utah. Since state taxpayer dollars are going to this ideological pet project, shouldn't everyone in the state be able to use the vouchers? And if it is such a great and wondrous thing that will magically fix our public schools and lower costs (since the invisible hand of the market gave us Enron, WorldCom, Tyco,...), why can't the kids in Kanab or Hurricane enjoy their vouchers?

Its the same reason $24 Million of your tax dollars are going to a useless soccer stadium in Sandy, Speaker Curtis' home town: because Republicans in the legislature can and don't care about actual public policy outcomes. They just want pork for their district or a nice pork tenderloin paid for by a lobbyist.

Chris Cannon: corrupt and in trouble

Maybe Marshall is right and Rep. Chris Cannon is a lost cause on S-CHIP. If that is the case, I might has well point out other horrible things Cannon is doing.

First, Cannon is going to bat for telecommunications companies. His brother edits the piece that tells us...

Cannon, along with House Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers, D-Mich., proposed a bill that would reduce taxes paid by satellite television subscribers to be the same as those who use cable.

"Quality of service, variety and cost to consumers should be the deciding factor in choosing a television service," Cannon said. "When the government favors one service over another, using the tax code, consumers and taxpayers always lose. Instead of playing favorites, we should level the playing field and let businesses compete for subscribers."

Six states have sales taxes on satellite television service, so DISH Network or DIRECTV customers pay higher taxes than cable customers, according to DIRECTV Inc. and EchoStar Communications Corp., which support the bill.

When you say the same as, it really is a government subsidy to support satelite TV companies. I am sure it has nothing to do with the $417,772 he has raised over his career by Telecommunications and Electronics companies and their employees.

And then there's his fundraising numbers. Let's compare the Deseret Morning News who's managing editor is Chris' brother, and Salt Lake Tribune, shall we?

Campaign coffers swell for Cannon, his election rivals
By Suzanne Struglinski
Deseret Morning News
Published: Oct. 16, 2007 12:37 a.m. MDT

Cannon trails challenger Leavitt in race for campaign funds
By Matt Canham
The Salt Lake Tribune
Article Last Updated: 10/16/2007 06:56:08 AM MDT

Which one is telling the more accurate story and which one has an inherent conflict of interest which they never mention in any Chris Cannon story? (Oh by the way, here are the actual Q3 numbers: David Leavitt raised $110,005, $95,000 cash-on-hand; Chris Cannon raised $53,087, $40,026 cash on hand; Jason Chaffetz raised $45,100, $35,000 cash on hand).

Chris Cannon picks mercenaries over children

This Thursday, the US House will vote to override President Bush's veto of the State-run Children's Health Insurance Program or S-CHIP. To refresh your memory, Reps. Chris Cannon and Rob Bishop voted against health care for poor-to-middle-class children. This shouldn't be a partisan issue, this program and its compromised expansion has been championed and authored by Sens. Kennedy and Hatch. Governors love the program because it gives them flexibility to implement the coverage and eases state coffers. It is funded by the only politically tenable form of taxation out there (thanks to Conservative Activist Grover Norquist): cigarettes.

Guess what else Cannon is against? Making sure Private companies that kill Iraqi civilians while attempting to protect U.S. governmental officials are accountable under U.S. law. "What's next? Supplying Moqtada al-Sadr with a taxpayer-funded trial lawyer?" Cannon, a Republican from Utah, wrote in piece published last week in the conservative newsletter Human Events. This just shows how stupid Chris Cannon really is. al-Sadr is a Iraqi cleric, and last time I checked, wasn't being paid to protect the U.S. embassy and State Department officials like Blackwater USA is. Furthermore, making a company who merely fires an employee who gets drunk and kills people accountable under U.S. criminal laws is a no-brainer...as long as you have some sort of brain apparently. Since his first line of "reasoning" amounts to an apples-to-bowling-balls comparison, he tried this nugget out next:

Under current U.S. and Iraqi laws, contractors have what amounts to immunity.
And Cannon thinks they should. He says success in Iraq hinges on diplomatic efforts. No diplomat has died under Blackwater protection, but if those contractors had to worry about being prosecuted for their actions, they may hesitate.
"If diplomats start being killed because of it, then we are set back," he said.

The diplomatic effort that needs to occur is among Iraqis (especially between Sunnis and Shi'a leaders and militias), and while hopefully the State Department can facilitate that, I don't see the two as linked like Cannon does. A dead American diplomat is the same as a dead American soldier, or a dead Iraqi civilian, or a dead Iraqi moderate...they are all bad for peace and all equally valuable human lives.

Cannon thinks they need to act with impunity because they get results like these:

During the ensuing week, as Crocker and Petraeus told Congress that the surge of more U.S. troops to Iraq was beginning to work and President Bush gave a televised address in which he said "ordinary life was beginning to return" to Baghdad , Blackwater security guards shot at least 43 people on crowded Baghdad streets. At least 16 of those people died.

Two Blackwater guards died in one of the incidents, which was triggered when a roadside bomb struck a Blackwater vehicle.

Still, it was an astounding amount of violence attributed to Blackwater. In the same eight-day period, according to statistics compiled by McClatchy Newspapers , other acts of violence across the embattled capital claimed the lives of 32 people and left 87 injured, not including unidentified bodies found dumped on Baghdad's streets.

The best known of that week's incidents took place the following Sunday, Sept. 16 , when Blackwater guards killed 11 and wounded 12 at the busy al Nisour traffic circle in central Baghdad .

Iraqi officials said the guards were unprovoked when they opened fire on a white car carrying three people, including a baby. All died. The security guards then fired at other nearby vehicles, including a minibus loaded with passengers, killing a mother of eight. An Iraqi soldier also died.

Is there any thing that Bush could do that Cannon wouldn't support?

quote of the day

"I'm sure I am neither as virile nor as handsome as Chris Cannon," said Rep. Chris Cannon. "I don't know if I have ever seen the guy, but I suspect that for whatever parts are attractive in those kind of movies, I probably don't compete." --on the Chris Cannon who has stared in such films as "Booty Bangers" and "Reform School Girls."

On his campaign website:

Pornography is a national problem that needs to be curtailed. The solicitation and distribution of pornography in its many forms is an issue that Congress needs to address. Determining the long-term effects that pornography has on individuals is the first step in fighting the pervasive filth that has unfortunately become a staple of American culture. It is my hope that during the 109th Congress, major steps will be taken to address this important issue.

cutting the crap

Buhler is claiming he is an environmentalist and that Becker is not. I will pause for the laughter to die down.

"He has been with us 100 percent of the time," Scott Daniels, chairman of the Utah chapter of the Sierra Club said about Becker, whom the group has endorsed. "The environmental community feels very comfortable with him."

Any politican can use a locale as a prop and make promises. Remember that prison that Governor Huntsman was going to build? I am sure the people of Daggett County remember that too.

So next time Buhler attacks Becker and holds a press conference in some place to make his point (the capitol, a water treatment plant) remember to ask the people who really care about a given issue, who they support. That way, you can cut through the crap--by looking at records, not plans--and know who you should vote for if the given issue is important to you.

Utahns want out of Iraq

Despite their apparent fealty to George W. Bush, Utahns want their soldiers home...the only question is how soon. Of course, you wouldn't know that from reading the Deseret News headline "Iraq exit splits Utahns: Support for war slipping — even in reddest state." The Utah Republican Party Morning News' Editor-in-Chief is not only the brother of one of the most loyal Bush supporters, but also got to attend the super secret conservative cabal meeting, wrote the distorting headline. Doesn't that sound like half want to stay indefinitely, but the other half want out soon? But in reality.

A Deseret Morning News/KSL-TV poll by Dan Jones & Associates found that 49 percent of Utahns do not want U.S. troops out of Iraq within one year, while 43 percent said troops should be out of Iraq by the end of the next 12 months.
[...]
The survey found that 41 percent of those polled want troops out within one year, 30 percent said two or three years, and 5 percent said within five years. A hard-core 7 percent opposed troop removal even within five years. Sixteen percent didn't know.

That means 71 percent of Utahns in the poll said they want U.S. troops out of Iraq within three years, and few Utahns would support troops staying longer.

After hearing that Bush was still over 50 percent in Utah, I was a little depressed about how Utahns seemed to be impervious to all of the horrible things Bush has done, but this poll gives me hope. In the only state in the union where Bush's approval rating is higher than his disapproval rating, they still want out soon. A plurality within a year, a super majority with three years.

Rocky, the Washington Square protesters, and the Thursday afternoon federal building protesters don't seem so radical anymore, do they?

and now for something completely different

My YouTube video of the week, a must watch:

corruption, vouchers, and results

(screen shots courtesy of KSL.com)
Remember this investigative reporting by KSL's John Daley?

We followed a money trail that led to the likes of Wal-mart, Amway, Overstock.com and others. We followed the money, looked at contribution filings and found there was plenty of campaign cash on both sides of the voucher debate. Money on the pro-voucher side was in much bigger sums, half of it coming from out of state.
[...]
In the House there was a similar show of loyalty to the side that gave the money -- 96 percent who got money from the pro-voucher group voted for and 78 percent who got money from the other side voted against.
[...]
The biggest financial force in the voucher fight is a national pro-voucher organization called All Children Matter, based in Michigan. Its funders include the son of a former Amway billionaire and an heir to the Wal-mart fortune.

The political action committee for Parents for Choice in Education took in half a million dollars last year; half came from out-of-state, $240,000 from All Children Matter.

Now we hear more stories of [the appearance of] corruption from the same people that voted for vouchers against their constituents' desires.

At separate events, lawmakers dined at Locke-Ober and Clio, a pair of the finest restaurants in the city. The bill for the two meals ran over $10,000 combined, divided up among at 15 lobbyists who attended the National Conference of State Legislators' gathering.
On Aug. 6, a group of lawmakers, including Senate President John Valentine, ate at the posh Clio Restaurant, a contemporary French-inspired locale, where the soup will run you $14.
[...]
At last year's conference in Nashville, the legislators were treated to a dinner cruise on The General Jackson.
On Aug. 8, Comcast lobbyist Steven Proper threw his own bash, spending $3,445 feeding lawmakers at an event in the Boston suburb of Essex, his report shows.

The Utah Senate majority leader says his two-week Italian trip with two longtime friends, who also happen to be lobbyists, last month was above board and "not one dime" of his trip was paid for by the lobbyists.
[...]
About a year ago, [Sen. Curt] Bramble said, Stan Lockhart, who he regularly goes boating with on Lake Powell, called him, asking if he would be interested in sharing the cost of a trip to central Italy. Utah County Commission Chairman Steve White was actually at an auction/fund-raising event for the local Boys and Girls Club and was bidding on the trip as they spoke.
[...]
White ultimately paid $4,100 for a villa in a town about 80 miles north of Rome. It ended up that that cost was split four ways by the four couples, and each couple paid their own travel costs.

Lockhart is the lobbyist for Micron, a large computer-chip maker that has a plant in northern Utah County. Rogers carries a long list of clients and as a partner in the Tetris Group lobbying and government consultant firm is one of the most successful lobbyists on Utah's Capitol Hill.

Gee, I wonder why he is so successful. Now maybe these two men became lobbyists because they were good friends with Bramble, rather than became friends because they were lobbyists, but it hardly matters, the results are the same.

Oh and remember that Milwaukee study that showed vouchers had no positive impact on student outcomes nor did they improve public schools? Or the other study that found private schooling alone does not make a difference for at risk youth? Now there is a study from DC's vouchers system, started in 2004 by the Republican Congress and now studied by the independent, nonpartisan Government Accountability Office and it found that the lack of DC's controls lead to kids being in terrible private schools. And since Utah can't even figure out how many schools have failing grades (turns out 52% not the mid-70s as previously announced), the lack of controls in the voucher bill itself is a real concern.

But don't worry, voucher supporters will hold fake townhall meetings to convince you otherwise, in between posh dinners in Boston, Nashville, and two week vacations in Italy with lobbyists. And don't forget Hillary Clinton is some how all behind this, I mean it isn't like she is busy running for president or anything.

some free advice for Becker

Buhler likes to point out Becker's lack of bills that became law during his two decades in the state legislature.

Buhler scolded Becker for passing only a handful of bills during 11 years as Utah's House minority leader, while other Democrats seemed far more busy. "In some years, Ralph didn't even try," Buhler said.
Becker countered that his role Utah's GOP-dominated Capitol Hill was to speak up for the voiceless in the community. And he slammed Buhler, a Republican, for being "turned out of office" after a single Senate term, while Becker was elected six times.

How about, instead of talking about Buhler getting canned by the voters, talk about why he got canned: his record.

As a state senator, he repeatedly tried to limit the power of cities to govern themselves. In the Senate, Buhler tacked a rider onto a bill governing city incorporation. It allowed businesses that owned land in newly formed cities Kearns and Magna to opt out, escaping from new taxes. One company benefiting from Buhler’s changes was Kennecott Copper. Also, as state senator, he limited the power of cities in Utah to regulate rental units.

I am sure Becker's oppo-research team can find more votes on things like social issues that SLC voters would not like, but this is just what I found on the internets in about 30 seconds.

Next time that "nice, reasonable guy" attacks your record Mr. Minority Leader, hit back with Buhler's terrible record in the state legislature.

Mitt Romney as George Costanza

This will get my rating to PG at least.

George: Jerry, just remember, it's not a lie if you believe it.

Boy, does that ever remind me of someone...

Some think he was feigning his moderation then and is revealing his true self now. But it's a safe bet that Romney would have passed a lie detector test in both incarnations. And that speaks to his consummate skills as a salesman, the best of whom believe so deeply in their product that they internalize its merits -- which is why they never sound like they're selling.

(Photo Credit: Associated Press/Deseret News) "If the world ended tomorrow, would you give $1,000?...Great, I'll put you down for a thousand."

You really should read rest of the lengthy article about Mitt Romney's recent "change of heart" on cultural issues great and small in today's Washington Post...that quote was just the closer. But here's some more choice bits. On abortion:

Including NARAL Pro-Choice Massachusetts. In September 2002, at a face-to-face meeting at Romney's headquarters in Cambridge, Romney assured a delegation from the group that, no, he would not impinge on abortion rights. And yes, he would like to see easier access to emergency contraceptives, such as Plan B. He closed the meeting by taking on a just-between-us tone and saying, essentially, You need Republicans like me. And the party needs candidates like me, because this issue is killing the party, according to Melissa Kogut, who was then executive director of the organization. He didn't expect an endorsement, he told her, but he hoped the organization would refrain from attacking him during the campaign.

Which the group did, stressing instead its support for Democrat Shannon O'Brien. Kogut said at a news conference before the election that it would be "dangerous" not to elect a leader on this issue, but that's a long way from the war she and her colleagues would have declared against an antiabortion candidate.
[...]
But two years into his term, Moderate Romney started to vanish. NARAL's detente lasted until July 2005, when the governor vetoed a bill that would have allowed pharmacists to provide emergency contraceptives to women without a prescription -- a total 180 from his avowal during the NARAL meeting. Kogut, the group's former executive director, phoned the governor's office but, she says, he never called back.

"We felt completely played," she recalls. "We just couldn't believe it, given what he'd said to our faces."

On gay rights:

Romney also awed the state's Log Cabin chapter, meeting with the gay Republican group in October 2002 and wowing attendees with opinions on domestic-partnership benefits in the workplace (he was for them) and discrimination based on sexual orientation (strongly against).

He spoke against gay marriage, one attendee recalls, but it sounded as if he could countenance civil unions when he said, "Just don't use the M-word." He emphasized themes of tolerance and respect, and by the end of the meeting Log Cabin members were pretty dazzled. After Romney left, the group unanimously voted to endorse him.
[...]
By then, some Log Cabin Republicans were saying they'd been snookered.

"He shakes your hand, looks you in the eye," says Richard Babson, a Log Cabin member who attended the Romney meeting. "It's hard for me to know what Mitt Romney's first principles are on a given day."

The environmentalists:

Environmentalists, meantime, were amazed to discover that this uber-capitalist seemed pretty much a Greenpeace fantasy. Once elected, he brought environmental activists into the fold, among them Douglas Foy, the formidable president of the Conservation Law Foundation, who was given a newly created Cabinet-level job. And not long after he was sworn in, Romney went to the oil- and coal-fired Salem Harbor Station power plant and threatened to shut it down if its owners didn't meet a deadline to slash nitrogen oxide and sulfur dioxide emissions.

"If the choice is between dirty power plants or protecting the health of the people of Massachusetts, there is no choice in my mind," he said at an impromptu news conference, in February 2003, while hard-hat-wearing workers at the plant jeered.
[...]
If the gay-rights crowd sounds bitterly disappointed, the state's environmentalists sound like they'd gotten punk'd. By the end of his term, Romney had announced his support for oil drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. He'd supported an easing of regulations on power-plant cleanup, including Salem Harbor, the site of that confrontation. And he'd pulled out of a historic seven-state agreement designed to reduce greenhouse gases, an effort he'd initially championed.

"Hearts were broken," says Seth Kaplan of the Conservation Law Foundation. "That's the best way I can put it. And when someone is an unexpected advocate, like Romney was, it builds up your hopes and breaks your heart even more."

The Republican party:

[Mitt's change occurred during] the elections of 2004, when Romney backed a slate of Republican candidates, hoping to loosen the Democratic hold on the state legislature. When the GOP gained not a single seat, he seemed to abandon interest in a second term and set his sights on a run for the presidency.

That's not to say he gave up on the governor's job; in 2006, for example, he signed into law an ambitious health insurance bill that mandated coverage for all Massachusetts residents by July of this year. But he began traveling regularly outside the state for campaign-like, get-to-know-me appearances, more than 100 trips in 2005 and 2006, the Boston Globe reported. He stopped selling Massachusetts and started to make it the butt of jokes, telling out-of-state audiences that his job made him feel like "a cattle rancher at a vegetarian convention."

The business community:

"Everyone knew that rebuilding the economy here would be 40 miles of hard road, and Mitt bailed out after five miles," says Howard Anderson, a professor of business at MIT and a longtime investor in Bain Capital who has known Romney for years. "At some point, we in the venture capital community became skeptics, and that eventually turned into rampant cynicism."
[...]
"It's as though he's let the market dictate his ideology, which is something no one who knew him in the private sector ever saw coming. Not a hint."

So let's look at the political ideological market and Mitt, by election:

In 1994, it was a banner year for Republicans, with large sweeps in the US House, US Senate, state legislatures, and governor's offices. President Bill Clinton was at his lowest popularity. Mitt was voicing liberal positions against Ted Kennedy running for the US Senate.

In 2002, Democrats listened to Joe Lieberman and Dick Gephardt, offering up the disastrous Department of Homeland Security, losing the fight over unionizing its employees, and trying to bribe Seniors with prescription drug coverage...and they got trounced. Only one new Democrat was elected to the US Senate, and that was because the sitting senator had an affair with his wife. Mitt Romney espoused the liberal-to-moderate beliefs quoted above and won his Governor's race.

In 2004, with Kerry on the ticket in Massachusetts and gay marriage on the ballot in most states, Romney ran against gay marriage and pushed GOP local candidates and lost every single race.

After that, he moved to New Hampshire and Iowa, even though he still had a job as a Governor of Massachusetts. But to those of you who think Willard Mitt Romney lied to Bay Staters to win an election, it's not a lie if you believe it.

fake townhall meetings anyone?

Your Utah state legislature at work. In less than a month, Speaker Curtis and his fellow voucher voting Republicans will have egg all over their face when their bill to create vouchers is repealed by Utahns. Rather than work on finding out what their constituents actually want and making laws around those ideas, these Republicans are trying to sell something Utahns don't want by threatening a recession.

Still, Giles and Ann Florence, Salt Lake school teachers who attended the meeting, weren't comforted by the lawmakers' assurances about vouchers or even how the so-called town meeting was put together. The gatherings are being organized around the state by the Informed Voters Project, a political issue committee of lawmakers who support vouchers. Democrats are not invited, nor is anyone from the organized voucher opposition.
The Florences complained they spent all day trying to find one of the meetings, calling newspaper and lawmakers' offices, before they found a listing in The Tribune.
They found the town meeting at Daybreak development's community center a disappointment.
"There was no open discussion - it was definitely loaded in favor of vouchers," Giles Florence said. "It was not a town meeting." The voucher discussion began with a slick promotional film, paid for by the Milton Friedman Foundation, that presented the voucher program as necessary to prepare Utah for an expected onslaught of 155,000 new students over the next five years.
The short video that included cameos by Hughes, Rep. Aaron Tilton, R-Springville, and Senate President John Valentine made a case that Utah's recent prosperity is not assured and an economic downturn similar to one in the mid-1980s is possible. "Then, Utah is really in trouble," says Sen. Margaret Dayton, R-Orem, in the film. "Everyone agrees something has to be changed," says Tilton.
Utah's stalled voucher program, which must survive a referendum next month to be implemented, is the change needed, the film maintains, because it would reduce the number of students in classrooms while leaving additional money for public schools.

The meeting ended with these legislators handing out copies of the poorly drafted bill and a plea that this bill is not saying bad things about public schools. If you are having to sell your bill or program by saying what it doesn't do, or what other people say about it isn't true, you are already in trouble.

2008 round up

• Sens. Sam Brownback (R-KS) and Joe Biden (D-DE), both of whom have no shot at winning their party's nomination (or a general election were they to succeed), are campaigning together in Iowa for Biden's dumb soft-partition plan. It is dumb because it is A) too late to partition the country now; B) the one thing the Iraqi Parliament has done is vote this proposal down; C) it smacks of colonialism. [More on Biden's idiocy later]


• The only reason Rudy has been successful thus far in the GOP primary is because Republican primary voters like bullies on their behalf. All he does is make negative statements about Democrats, especially Hillary, and they lap it up. A-holes for Giulliani.


• I get "breaking news" from the New York Times sent to me via my Google Reader. And the most laughable breaking news of the day was this one: "A Senate Star Sparkles Less on the Stump"...and that "senate star" is Joe Biden. Anyone who has heard him speak at committee hearings or on Sunday talk shows knows he is a pompous windbag that is an exemplar of what is wrong with Washington. Here's a taste from a resent trip to Iowa:
  

  The senator explained that he had just barely caught the direct flight from Washington to Des Moines that evening, “since neither Hillary nor Barack will lend me their G5 jets,” and that there had been no time to change. “I got in the plane — I was meeting with President Talabani, you know, he’s the Kurdish leader in Iraq, and I literally ran from that meeting in the Capitol.”
  [...]
  Mr. Biden may sometimes seem a caricature for long-windedness in Washington, but he goes over well with Iowans, who sit nodding through his stories-within-stories about the Senate and his meetings with presidents and world leaders.
  [...]
  “I think I have the ingredients,” Mr. Biden told a crowd of around 50 people who gathered to hear him speak in Burlington. “I could be wrong, to state the obvious, and if I’m wrong, then you’ll have to watch me on the Sunday shows and in the Senate. But if I’m right, then you may have the chance to really, really change the world.”

  Iowans are just polite and Joe has all the ingredients of a electoral disaster. Go name drop at a cocktail party in the Beltway and leave these poor people alone.


• Go Log Cabin Republicans!


• Is Obama '08 Daschle '04? Just look at these facts...
  

  the major former Daschle staffers now in Obama's orbit:
  
  *Pete Rouse: Rouse served as Daschle's chief of staff for 20 years before the South Dakota Senator's defeat in 2004. Shortly afterward, he was selected to serve in that same post for Obama.
  
  *Robert Gibbs: Obama's communications director, Gibbs served in that same role at the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee in the 2002 cycle. He was handpicked by the Daschle operation for that job.
  
  *Steve Hildebrand: Daschle's campaign manager in 2004 (and South Dakota Sen. Tim Johnson's in 2002), Hildebrand accompanied Obama on a recent trip to Iowa and has been reaching out to potential staff behind the scenes. Hildebrand also ran the Iowa caucuses for then Vice President Al Gore in 2000.
  
  *Anita Dunn: Dunn, a longtime Daschle aide, has been tasked with straightening out Obama's Hopefund PAC through the end of this year. She will not be a part of any Obama bid as she is committed as a senior strategist for Indiana Sen. Evan Bayh (D).
  
  *Todd Webster: Webster is a former spokesman for Daschle and the brains behind www.runobama.com, a draft site for the Illinois Senator that has collected some 11,000 signatures urging him to run.

  Don't forget his finance team [larger image here]
I bought Wes Clark's new "presidential candidate book" and have just finished the introduction, but I am reminded again how terrible it was for him to have entered in so late that he missed Iowa, got crappy Gore '00 staffers and based his strategy on beating Dean in the February 3rd states. He would have been a terrific president. It also reminds me about how saddening it was to see him endorse Hillary this early. It would have been career suicide for Clark to support Edwards and maybe Obama should she win it all, but some how I was hoping for more.

Clark's loss in 2004 broke my political heart and I am still not ready to fall for any of these candidates yet. Although Obama is appealing, he is listening too much to those Daschle people who feed into his inner cautious streak.

Utahns say no to vouchers

When Utahns finally get a say, and not a few rich guys with crazy ideas that fund Speaker Curtis' 23-vote reelection campaign, the answer is an overwhelming no to vouchers.

Sixty percent of Utah voters say they would likely vote against a voucher program, according to a Dan Jones & Associates poll conducted for the Deseret Morning News and KSL-TV. In comparison, 34 percent said they would vote for vouchers, while 7 percent were undecided.

The poll of 409 Utahns was conducted last week and has a margin of error of 5 percent.
[...]
In July, the Deseret Morning News reported on a similar poll that found that 57 percent of those surveyed would most likely vote against the voucher program and 36 percent said they would vote in favor of it.

So people have made up their minds already. But the best quote of the day goes to PCE, in all of its delicious irony.

"We're convinced that as parents begin to understand who is behind this and who supports it and the merit of the program itself, they are going to vote for this," said Leah Barker, spokeswoman for Parents for Choice in Education, a pro-voucher group.

Who is behind vouchers? Overstock.com's CEO that pushed an unconstitutional intellectual property law for his company, out of state partisans and anti-public school nutters. And don't forget astroturf bloggers. Who is behind the anti-voucher movement? Utah teachers and their union, who asked for money from the national union. Contrary to the ads you see and hear, that has nothing to do with Nancy Pelosi, Moveon.org, or gays getting married. Now maybe gay people (who might want to be married) gave money or are teacher's union members, or maybe one of Moveon.org's 3 million members gave money, but really it is Utah's teachers that are opposed to it.

And as to the merits of the program, we have a study in Milwaukee, which has had vouchers for a few years now, that shows vouchers have made no improvement in student achievement, which is of course, the whole point of vouchers right? Or is it just to make schooling like health insurance, privatized.

I went to a private school (Rowland Hall-St. Mark's) from 5-PreK to grade 12, and it was great for me and my ADD with the small class sizes. But RHSM's current tuition is $14,710 for grades 6-11 ($15,040 for 12th because of graduation expenses) and $12,450 for full day kindergarten to 5th grade. That to me seems unaffordable for those who would get the $3,000 voucher. Now maybe Rowland Hall is at high end, but it is also one of if not the best school in the state. And don't our children deserve the best.

Truth is, the real problem is that kids in Park City get a much better education that those on the west side of the Valley. If we actually want to improve education for all of Utah's kids, we need to base funding on a state-wide funding mechanism, build more schools and hire more quality teachers.

Instead, our Republican-controlled legislature is content to resort to ideological gimmicks that won't solve the problem and will probably only make it worse. And this same Republican-controlled legislature is threatening to take your child's ball and go home: when Referendum 1 fails, they will decrease funding for Utah's schools. I am glad Utahns are at least standing up to these bullies.

Becker lays out his agenda, again

Rather than attack his opponent, Ralph Becker opted to summaries the highlights of the many blueprints he has perviously offered on different policy areas.

Under the 180-day outline, Becker pledges to appoint a first-of-its-kind education-partnership coordinator. If elected, he also would create the mayor's monthly school summit and develop a scholarship program.
Becker wants to build green, complete a capital bikeway system, require a review of so-called carbon footprints and finish work on the Jordan River Parkway.
He also hopes to bolster community engagement and better relations with the Utah Legislature, where he has served as a lawmaker for the past 11 years.
Becker also vows to pass a broader nondiscrimination ordinance and change city policy to allow an employee to name a domestic partner as a beneficiary.
To benefit downtown, the Utah House minority leader hopes for form a cultural district for the arts, create a year-round public market, add bike rentals and lockers at the transit hub and initiate a downtown circulator system for public transit.

Naturally, Buhler supporters have rated down the story and have filled the comments section with attacks on Becker that mirror Buhler's, even though these aren't new plans but a summary of pre-runoff plans.

If Buhler truly wants this to be an election about ideas, let's compare Ralph's blueprints to Dave's policy proposals and see which one is more appealing to more SLC voters. But I get the distinct impression Buhler wants it to be able how "ineffectual" Becker has been and not about what each proposes to do while in office.

Rocky finally wises up

(Photo Credit: Reason Magazine)

Although it might have been a tar baby strategy all along to endorse Keith Christensen and slam Jenny Wilson to help Wilson and Ralph Becker, this time Rocky for sure is staying away from something he supports on purpose.

No bully pulpit speeches. No public campaign. In fact, Anderson's input can be summed up by his three-sentence sound bite in the Prop. 1 brochure.
"Our resources and facilities are stretched to the breaking point," the mayor writes. "Our need for improved facilities is dramatic and urgent."
So where is the urgency?
City Hall insiders can't explain the mayor's quietude. Meantime, police and fire officials, who avoid public criticism, privately wonder about Anderson's support.

Who ever these unnamed sources are must be dense.

Rocky is a polarizing figure.

In a Salt Lake Tribune poll conducted earlier this month, 54 percent of Salt Lakers rate Anderson's performance as "good" or "excellent." That's virtually the same tally as the 53 percent approval he received in January 2006, the last time The Tribune asked residents to score Anderson.
But the numbers at the extremes have grown. More than a quarter (26 percent) rate the mayor's performance as "poor," up from 17 percent in the earlier survey. And 25 percent now say mayor is doing an "excellent" job, compared with 17 percent last year.
In addition, nearly half (45 percent) rate the mayor as only "fair" or "poor," up from 36 percent in 2006.
Fewer residents - a mere 1 percent - are undecided in the latest poll...

As such, the minute he goes out on the rustings supporting something, whatever that is sees its negatives go up. And it is a lot easier to vote down something like a bond initiative than it is to approve it. Ergo, Rocky's finally shutting his trap. You are welcome police and fire officials and "City Hall insiders."

Mr. Anderson has also thankfully stayed away from Becker, only to heap scorn on Buhler, which thankfully won't have as much of a chance to back fire as his dissing of Wilson. In any event, Rocky has thankfully discovered that he can be useful only in the negative or by working quietly behind the scenes.