disasters in the making

There once was an idea out there to "professionalize" our state legislature by making it year round. If they passed bills like the ones I am going to describe below year round, no thanks. If it would attract saner politicians, I am all for it.

1. the zombie RSL stadium is back:
   

   A bill emerged Thursday on Utah's Capitol Hill that could bring a Real Salt Lake stadium to Sandy and salvage Utah's two-year-old soccer franchise, which is being aggressively courted by investors in St. Louis.
   If the measure passes - it was crafted behind closed doors this week with the blessing of Gov. Jon Huntsman Jr., Salt Lake City Mayor Rocky Anderson and legislative leadership - it would snatch at least $20 million for the project out of Salt Lake County coffers, which critics allege could result in a countywide property-tax hike.
   The move to revive a stadium in Sandy spells the end of talk to relocate RSL to the Utah State Fairpark in Salt Lake City or the former Geneva Steel site in central Utah County.
   [...]
   A separate bill - sponsored by Sen. Michael Waddoups, R-Taylorsville, and backed by Sandy Mayor Tom Dolan - threatens to redirect $15 million in annual restaurant taxes from the county to the suburbs.
   Corroon calls the new soccer bill "troublesome" and insists it could gut the county's ability to fund conventions and tourism.
   "It's regretful," he said. "It will end up hurting all the citizens of the county and the state."
   

   Good thing they didn't consult the public who would be paying for it.


2. Rather than an abortion trigger bill, the Utah Legislature wants to be the test case to overturn Roe:
   

   "On its face, it is unconstitutional. But there are a lot of issues that are ripe for the Supreme Court to consider," said Senate President John Valentine, an attorney. "It's the kind of thing the citizens of this state would support."
   And citizens will have to support it - literally. Defending the bill could cost at least $2 million.
   [...]
   The bill provides exceptions in cases of rape, incest or to prevent a woman's death or "substantial and irreversible impairment of a major bodily function." Without allowing public comment on the new bill, committee members sent it to the House floor for debate.
   [...]
   The Attorney General's Office estimates the legal battle will cost taxpayers at least $2 million - double that if an outside law firm is hired. In the early 1990s, the state's abortion ban cost more than $1 million to defend - not including plaintiffs' fees. That law was found unconstitutional.

   Once again, the legislature is going to be wasting the public's money without any input from them.


3. Another dumb bill is the school voucher bill, one that will not help a single poor person go to private school but will give the rich a break on their bill:
   

   After weeks of back-room arm-twisting and spirited lobbying on both sides of the issues, supporters managed 38 yes votes to the 37 opposed -- there were no representatives absent. Surprise supporters included Rep. Brad Last, R-St. George, and Rep. Keith Grover, R-Orem - two former public school officials. Both said they had wrestled with a decision.
   [...]
   HB148 will let parents spend public money on private school tuition. Every Utah family, with the exception of current private school students, would be eligible for a voucher ranging from $500 to $3,000 depending on family income.

   
   "The Parent Choice in Education Act, sponsored by Rep. Steve Urquhart, R-St. George, would give families a private school tuition voucher that would range from $500 to $3,000, based on income.
   The bill, which calls for $9.2 million in general, not school funds, would leave per-student spending over and above the amount of the voucher in the school system. So, an estimated average $2,000 voucher still would leave $1,500 in state spending in the school district where the voucher recipient lives for the next five years, unless the student graduates.
   The bill seeks $9.2 million, but the Office of the Legislative Fiscal Analyst also says it would put nearly $4 million back into the schools' budget in the first year. The program would require more funding in the coming years."
   Man oh man...I won't get into this any more, because Utah Amicus and others have written much more and better things about it. Count me in as agreeing with them

Ed Bagley Rocks

Oh and the legislature hates brown people too:

Sen. Mark Madsen, R-Lehi, is again seeking to require voters to prove their citizenship and residency in order to register to vote.
[...]
"I don't want to disenfranchise people who are citizens," Madsen said. "In order to have confidence in the system ... it's worth a little bit of effort on everyone's part."
[...]
"I'm not sure what they're trying to solve," said Salt Lake County Clerk Sherrie Swenson. "It just creates a bit of a hardship for everyone. ... If someone poses as someone else, we should punish that person."

And even though Speaker handout doesn't think it is a big deal, the public wants ethics and campaign finance reform in their state government.

Oh and standing up to RSL and Sandy politicians was a popular move.


For those of you keeping score at home, that 70.5% approval for the RSL move and 67.5% approval of Carroon in general. Unless something goes horribly wrong, like San Fransisco Mayor Gavin Newsom's affair with a substance abusing wife of an aide, he will win reelection in a landslide.

Clark is in?!

Good news for me. It seems that Wes Clark is IN!

So he will probably announce this weekend at the DNC winter conference/on Hardball. With him in, the field goes to 10 (just like 2004). So, let's take a look at the field and see who's up, and who is down (and who should be out):

1. Obama: his timetable legislation is specific and tough, with a date far enough away to be realistic and not 'too liberal' it forces other candidates to either make their time tables sooner (and seem to be followers or 'too liberal') or reject timetables altogether (and be labeled as Joe Lieberman clones).

2. Clinton: she went to Iowa and demonstrated how much press and people she can attract. But some seemed non-plussed with her who weren't already firmly behind her beforehand. And then her big splash in NH got canceled due to a family illness. I hope they get better.

3. Edwards: with Hillary and Barack in, he is a front runner who is running against the media this time who is hell bent on making this a two-way race. Obama timetable outflanks Edwards who cannot do anything other than make a speech. (that's the downside of not being in office). But he can hang out with primary voters and raise money all day long (that's the plus side).

4. Richardson: His Darfur peace treaty seems to be holding up, and his resume is pretty impressive. But the fact that he was part of the When Ho Lee scandal (as Clinton's Energy Secretary), and the rumors of philandering may kill his candidacy before it starts. Plus, he lost NM for Kerry.

5. Clark: he starts off much better off than last time. Like Edwards, he learned a lot by running last time. He now has a real organization behind him (WesPAC/VoteVets/etc.), he has campaigned for candidates all over the country in 2006 by request, just like Obama. His wife, who was against it in 2003, learned to love campaigning in 2004. A general who make a lasting peace in ethnically divided land and ran a competent war (save the embassy bombing) seems like a pretty good selling point in 2007. Now who is he going to hire? Where is his money coming from?

6. Vilsack: he keeps going lower and lower in Iowa, where he was governor for 8 years. If he can't win Iowa, how can he win nationally? Plus, that name is terrible.

7. Also rans (Dodd, Biden, Gravel, Kucinich): none of these guys have a prayer. Dodd said he is competing with the margin of error in polls. A paper replied, you wish, the MoE is 5.4%, you are at 1%. Ouch. Biden made news today by making a racist-sounding "compliment" to Obama. This from a guy whose whole strategy is to convince South Carolinians that he is just as racist as the worst of them (saying that Delaware was once a slave state and wished it could have joined the Confederacy, mean old Maryland and DC where in the way). Gravel will never be heard from. Kucinich is trying to capture the Nader vote, so I guess that is useful, but he is a joke.

To me, the biggest threat to Democrats wanting the White House is no longer John McCain, but ex-AR Gov. Mike Huckabee. He really sounded great on the Daily Show. My wife remarked that she had no idea that he was a GOPer until the label appeared. His anti-fat campaign is something that many Americans can get behind. After all, there are lots of overweight people in America. His story of losing hundreds of pounds is about as inspiring as Obama's to some.

why RSL must die

I don't know about you, but I am sick and tired of the political drama of Real Salt Lake and its stupid soccer stadium. Clearly, Sandy's Mayor and representatives in the Legislature (especially the Speaker) miscalculated SLCo. Mayor Peter Corroon. Same with Dave Checketts. They all assumed that Corroon was a normal politican and would bow to their whim because they were "powerful" and "influential."

But Corroon decided that he needed to do what was in the best interest for the taxpayers of the County, and in his judgment, that was not selling the farm to rent a cow to milk. He wanted real hard numbers, and so did the County Council after Corroon led the way. And when those numbers finally came in, it was clear that they were about as forthright and reasonable in their assumptions as Enron's financial statements (or President Bush's Budgets). So Carroon and the Council said no dice.

And guess what? The voters love them for it. And the Speaker almost lost his seat last fall because of this chest-beating exercise.

It is good that someone finally stood up to professional sports teams when they ask cities to pay for their stadiums or threaten to leave. The economics behind such sweet-heart deals just isn't there. That's why Portland's voters said see-ya to the Trail-Blazers. Now the Speaker is going to punish the County while trying to punish Corroon by taking away the hotel tax money.

I would love to see how that turns out. But really, I don't want to hear another story about that soccer team. I am tired of it by now, aren't you?

Utah's legislature: corrupt, male chauvinist pigs

Tribune opinion columnist Rolly notes that "The Utah Legislature has consistently rejected legislation mandating that insurance companies cover birth control for women. At the same time, the Beehive State is the easiest place in the country to get Viagra." Could it possibly have something to with the fact that the average state legislator is male, middle-aged, alumni of the U or BYU, and LDS (90% of them are) with dozens of grandchildren.

Meanwhile, those same legislators who are sexists can't bother be ethical either.

The tickets were so good that [a legislator] took an elbow from Jazz forward Matt Harpring, who was chasing after a loose ball.
[He] accepted the bruise and the gift, as did Senate Minority Leader Mike Dmitrich and Senate Majority Leader Curt Bramble.
Bountiful GOP Sen. Dan Eastman rounded out the quartet. But he paid Stokes for the ticket.
The cost: $500.
"Because of the price of this seat, I just thought it was appropriate that I pay for it," Eastman said. "I was always taught to avoid the appearance of evil, and if there is some there we ought to avoid it."
Bramble shrugs off concerns about perception. He says he routinely disagrees with Stokes and that the Jazz game will not buy his vote.

The gift limit is technically $50, but no one will enforce it against Bramble, who wants to eliminate the restriction altogether. Because you know, it won't buy his vote, at least that is what he says. And how dare we citizen's question his morality?

September 2003=February 2007?

Hotline says Wes Clark will probably form an exploratory committee in two weeks and then take his sweet time to decide whether he should really run. But beyond this revelation, they have a interesting point:

Clark recognizes that he got in too late in 2003. And he's arguably the most qualified to confront issues of war and peace in these turbulent times. Is February of 2008 equivalent to September of 2003? What an absurd question -- of course not.

But then again, when you think about it, it's hard to divine a compelling justification for Clark to take his time in a field that includes foreign policy heavyweights (Biden), a Clinton (remember how Clark was encouraged to run by Pres. Bill Clinton's friends and donors?) a Southerner (Edwards) and a breath of fresh air (Obama?)

First off, at this rate of announcements drop outs etc, it might be like September 2003. Secondly, Biden is not a foreign policy heavyweight. He is a blowhard Senator that likes to hear himself think. If he was such a brilliant foreign policy guy, why did he support the war? Why is he pushing all these non-binding resolutions and going on Sunday talks shows moving the goal posts for Iraq dozens of times? Clinton's presence really does hurt Clark in terms of his old staff and his old donors. But maybe he needs to get beyond Bill and Hill. He needs better staff than last time, he needs his own fundraising base.

I am starting to worry that Clark, being the smart guy that he is, realizes it will be tough slog to raise the necessary money with this current three-headed monster of Clinton-Obama-Edwards gobbling up all the primary cash. He may be running for VP against Richardson & Warner & Bayh. I sure hope he runs. If he does, he will have my support. If he doesn't, I will support Obama and urge him to pick Clark for his VP (visionary with no foreign policy experience but with lots of domestic policy experience coupled with a visionary with lots of foreign policy experience and no real domestic policy experience).

Cannon will be primaried

Just look at the reception he got with the Utah State Legislature, filled with state Reps. and Sens. who live in Cannon's district:

[The exchange] turned heated when Cannon was questioned about immigration and the "out-of-control" spending of Congress.
Sen. Howard Stephenson, R-Draper, told Cannon that the recent shift of control in the House and Senate on the federal level is because people are "fed up" with the inability of Congress to "run the affairs on this nation." He then asked Cannon how he planned to deal with the issues of earmarks and illegal immigration, which he called an "unfunded mandate."
Cannon responded by saying that Republican leadership made a "huge mistake" with immigration by listening to people who were "xenophobic and tried to create a wedge issue." He then said that Congress is "going in the right direction and have been savaged by people, I think unfairly."
Other notes from Cannon include a reference to Utah Valley State College and his hope that the school would be turned into a full university.
"I like the name Utah International University," he said. "It has to be a regional college, calling it more than a university will not make it a regional college."
Cannon also said that he was hopeful lawmakers would look carefully at a bill that would forbid children of illegal immigrants from receiving in-state tuition. "What does it cost us to have an incremental student, then what is the cost to society to have an incentive?" he said.

Sounds pretty hostile...now if it was just a cranky legislature, they would be even meaner to Utah's lone Democrat in Congress:

Stephenson asked Matheson the same question about immigration and spending. Matheson said he was confident the issues would be addressed.
"I think that the message you have voiced about the concerns that Congress is not functioning and is not doing its job is something that resonated in the past election and I hope that Congress gets it," Matheson said. "I sure heard it."

Cannon saw his primary win as a condemnation of xenophobia, but it looks like immigration reform is still an urgent need of the states. And states like Utah wish (at least their legislatures do) that the Sensenbrenner bill passed.

global warming is bad for the economy

There are some delusional folks who want to believe climate change is not occurring, or that if it is, it isn't caused by humans. Then there are those who agree that it is happening but then believe that any policy changes would set America's economy back to those of Sub-Saharan Africa. But then there is this troubling fact:

The most recent glimpse of snowpack totals in Utah's six major river basins paints a fairly grim picture. After ending 2006 - and the first three months of the water year - with near-normal precipitation, Utah has seen a long dry spell shrivel snowpacks to as low as 64 percent of normal in the north and 69 percent in the south.

Now the article blames it on El Nino, which is a weather event that happens when sea temperatures are higher...gee I wonder what causes that. Just remember ZERO peer-reviewed scientific articles on the climate have disputed that humans are causing a dramatic climate change. And remember that less snow in Utah's northern mountains means less skiing. And less skiing means that less people stay at hotels, rent skis, buy meals, gas, etc. In short, our tourism portion of the local economy suffers.

Utah ski resorts, not surprisingly, are hurting.
In the Cottonwood canyons, Alta, Snowbird, Solitude and Brighton all had base totals of less than 60 inches on Wednesday.
The Park City resorts - Park City, Deer Valley and The Canyons - were all under 50 inches.
"I think we're at the point in the season where people are beginning to realize that they need to ski the mountain as it is, because we've now had a couple of long, extended periods without new snow and we're not seeing anything on the horizon," said Snowbird spokeswoman Laura Schaffer.

Then think about all the jobs that can come from developing better wind turbines, solar panels, water turbines, hydrogen fuel cells, electric motors and batteries. And more efficient gas-motors, and hopefully some day hover boards! These are jobs that will not end up in India and China for decades, these are jobs that can only be accomplished in a research heavy US with its Universities and private businesses.

Hatch: no I'm the partisan hack

Yesterday I told you about a silly speech that Sen. Bennett gave to his fellow crazy Utah Republicans in power and the silly coverage by LDS Church-owned and GOP-controlled Deseret News. Well today, Sen. Hatch one-upped his colleague:

Even most Utahns - always Bush's strongest fans in the reddest state in the nation - are not backing the president on the war in Iraq.
Tough crowd.
Not the same crowd that welcomed him in 2002 with 76 rounds of applause during his 48-minute speech, or an America that, at the time, gave his job performance an 83 percent approval rating.
This time, Bush clocked in at 49 minutes, but only got applause 57 times - a dozen times from the Republican side only.
...
Hatch, who watched from home still nursing an injured shoulder, said Bush “enjoyed” giving the speech, even with a not-so-receptive audience. “I think he stuck it to them,” Hatch said. “How can you disagree with anything he said?”

I will tell you how one can disagree with nearly everything Bush said. It is called fact-checking. Much of what Bush said was based off of distorted information at best, all intentional misrepresentations.

Secondly, even the MSM nearly universally agreed that Bush's speech was a dull retreat of last years and other speeches, whereas Sen. Webb's response knocked their socks off.

Disagreeing with your party's president on principle? That is impossible to fathom for water-boy Orin. Sen. Chuck Hagel is one of these principled Republicans. He is conservative, but he is mad about Iraq and willing to call BullSh!t on Bush where most Republicans cower in the corner, or blame Cheney (ala McCain) an easy out since Cheney is not running for president and couldn't care less what anyone else thinks.

If only Republicans had Sen. Hagel to choose from, along with the usual bootlickers in Congress and in state houses, GOP primary voters would have a choice of conservative who is against the war or moderate who is for the war, or conservative who waffles on the war, or conservative who is for the war. If those were the choices, then we could truly see where the party is at.

Oh and thank you John Kerry for not running for president again. I appreciate what you did in 2006, and while you were my third choice in 2004, you got pretty dang close for a liberal senator from Massachusetts. Now if we could only get Joe Biden, Dennis Kucinich, Tom Vilsack, and a few others to drop out, we would be somewhere.

I still don't get the point of protest presidential candidates.

Bennett: I want to be the political hack

As a poly sci professor in college argued persuasively to me, Senators compete against the other home state senator for niches*. One tends to be the "bacon" senator, the other the "statesman" or "lawmaker." Some divvy up issues: Barbara Boxer get the environment while Feinstein gets abortion. For the longest time, Orin Hatch was the lawmaker, drafting bills with the likes of Ted Kennedy on cigarette taxes (towards children's health care), while Bennett was Utah's own "Senator Pothole" touting every nickel he got for the beehive state.

But lately, Bennett is encroaching on Hatch's other domain: political hack. Orin likes to ask compliments or softballs during his "questioning" of Republican officials--be they Appointees for the judiciary (see Anita Hill hearings through ScAlito) or executive appointees (see this month's Gonzales hearings). He also likes to go on talk shows or other media outlets and make the most disingenuous arguments in favor of whatever conservatives want to be true be it that Hillary and Bill killed Vince Foster or that Obama is a radical Muslim (not that he made either arguments, but ones like them). Now, Bennett is trying to be his own mini-hack:

The Democratic takeover in Congress, Bennett said, has put in jeopardy some funding for the state, including for agriculture-related programs at Utah State University and for scholarships at the University of Utah.
The decision by the new Congress to continue spending at current levels, the state's junior senator said, "means that new initiatives will disappear ... quite frankly there will be some problems in the state of Utah as a result of that."

I am sure this bogus stuff has nothing to do with the fact that the former Utah Republican Party Chairman is their editor in chief, nothing.

But to the meat of his contentions. Democrats (and many Republicans) in the House voted to lower college student loans (Utah's House Republicans voted no, claiming it hurt loans paid off during college, which no one does). If the USU programs are valid ones and not Iowa rain forest studies or $300 million bridges from one hamlet to another in Alaska, then I am sure it will be included in appropriations. Democrats will be cutting GOP pork, not projects in GOP districts just because they are presented by republicans. Oh and who's fault is it that funding is frozen at its current levels? Why the Republican controlled 109th congress who failed to pass 11 of the 13 appropriations bills last year and then passed a CR (continuing resolution) during the lame duck session. It is like the guy who ditched you when the bill came at the nice restaurant and then complaining to others that you didn't order appetizers.

* Wendy Schiller, "Sharing the Same Home Turf: How Senators from the Same State Compete for Geographic Electoral Support." 2002. In U.S. Senate Exceptionalism, ed. Bruce Oppenheimer, Ohio State University Press.

YouTube-ization of announcement speeches

I don't know about you, but I am already tired of the the internet videos of candidates announcing their candidacy for the presidency online. Edwards did it, Obama did it, Hillary Clinton did it, Richardson did it, and who cares about the other Democratic announcers thus far? It is a bit condescending to me as a blogger that this is their nod to the netroots. "Look, I put it on the internet, now help me raise some money!"

It makes one wistful for Kerry's announcement tour to stand behind various objects (boats, people, etc.)...OK well not really.

Fact is, the announcement process is really ridiculous and farcical. Everyone knew that these folks were going to run (even if I tried to con myself into thinking Hillary would hold the trigger at the last moment). The real news is when these people decide NOT to run. It doesn't matter if they pose in their living rooms, their hip lofts, their office, behind the USS Constitution, or in the lower 9th ward.

I know all this pomp and circumstance is to generate buzz and free press. I will tell you who has no need for free press: Hillary Clinton. I listen to a podcast of the leading nightly newscast in Germany and Hillary made that news, no mention of Obama or McCain or anyone else save Bill.

The 4th seat mutates

So the Utah-DC exchange bill is introduced in the 110th, but with a new twist:

[this year's bill contains] a provision that would bar [Utah's Republican-controlled legislature] from redrawing congressional districts until 2012. Some Democrats in Congress fear [they would] gerrymander the state's only Democratic congressman, Jim Matheson, out of office.
State lawmakers already met in a special session last year to finalize a four-seat map.
[Utah Republican Congressman Chris]Cannon says the redistricting moratorium is "a slam down on our Legislature." He said state lawmakers wouldn't want to redraw the map, but Congress shouldn't be telling them they can't.

I think this is a reasonable restriction, since it forces Utah Republicans to go with the December 2006 map (see HR 328 IH sec. 6(a)(1)).

The DC vote folks want this bill to happen on or before April 15th, when their whole taxation without representation will have the most symbolic power.

quote of the day (Buttars edition)

As usual, St. Sen. Chris Buttars tops the list in terms of stupid statements: “The state has become hostile to religion.” Really? If anything the culture in this state is hostel to those who are atheists. Just look at Bountiful, Utah. While it probably still is the one of if not the most LDS city in Utah, there are lots of churches of other religions in that city. I suspect that those who are not LDS and live in Bountiful feel compelled to prove that they are just as religious as their LDS neighbors. There are churches every other block there from my experience. Even in "secular" Salt Lake City and Park City, there are are no shortage of people attending church without any "hostility." If you ever try to get any chores done on a Sunday in Utah, you can forget it. Almost everything is closed on Sundays, save grocery stores, Chinese restaurants, some coffee shops, convenience stores, some smoke shops, and some 'private clubs.' Utah has some of the strictest anti-smoking and drinking laws in the country, and have had them 20 years before the smoke-free restaurants movement of the late 1990s.

AG Mark Shurtleff, a conservative, LDS Republican that actually knows the law (unlike lawmaker Butters) knows that the West Valley Republican's bill will cost the state lots of money in pointless lawsuits:

"What it will guarantee is it opens up the need for more litigation in state courts," he said, just as there have been in federal court. ...The Republican attorney general said the bill would protect "every strange permutation" of religious expression, including a child who defends wearing a Satanic T-shirt to school by claiming to worship Satan.

Did I call that one about that Satan Tees or what? The Tribune chimes in with more doubters:

“Can we solve this problem by working with the school boards instead of passing legislation and opening up a can of worms?” asked Sen. Scott McCoy, D-Salt Lake City.
“This is a sledgehammer,” said McCoy, an attorney. “I don't know that we need a sledgehammer.”
The bill also drew opposition from Utah Attorney General Mark Shurtleff and Utah Higher Education officials.
“There will certainly be a number of state court challenges because of this law,” Shurtleff said.

I guess every work place has to have it's Chris Buttars.

"I have a feeling it is going to be very interesting."

That is the closing line on Sen. Hillary Clinton's announcement video on her website. And this is one thing everyone should be able to agree on. Right now, there are about 7 Democrats in the race for the party's nomination, but only 4 real shots (HRC, Obama, Edwards, and Richardson) and the last one, Richardson, is on the outside looking in on the 3-way race. By contrast, the Republican side is McCain versus the anti-McCain, whoever wins that prize.

Both primaries look to be wide open. McCain probably will win the nomination, since there is no good consensus "true conservative" to challenge him...but he is looking pretty weak right now. But who knows, maybe the religious right will rally around Romney (unlikely because of the SBC's hatred of Mormons) or Gingrich (he seems to be Giullini's man) or Brownback (too dumb to be president after GWB). I predict a McCain/Gingrich ticket at this point, but its is way too early.

Democrats will squabble and might not know who their nominee is until after Super Tuesday, especially if it narrows to a Clinton v. Obama race. Hillary has sworn off taking any public money either in the primaries (like Kerry and Dean and Bush) or in the general, a first. Edwards and Obama are holding simultaneous fundraisers in NYC early February not just because it is Hillary's "home turf" but because there is a lot of money in that city. Richardson may be running for VP and even that race is tough, with Warner and Clark and Bayh as possible contenders.

AFSCME is holding a cattle call in a few WEEKS, so if Clark wants to even have a chance, he better announce before then. He is my first choice, but if he doesn't run, then I would say Obama, then Richardson, then Edwards, and then Hillary (in that order). I think Hillary has done a great job as Senator and should stay there, where her talents and shortcomings are best matched.

Utah Republican legislators: too righteous to be ethical

In the U.S. Senate, after a failed attempt (45-55) to fillabuster the Finegold-Obama ethics bill by the GOP leadership, the bill passed albeit without key provisions thanks to Utah's senators. Sen. Bennett introduced an amendment that would allow astroturf non-profits like those used by Jack Abramboff to continue to lobby Senators sans reporting. And horribly enough, it passed. Worse yet, the bill was weakened substantially by ethically lacking senators who didn't want an independent Office of Public Integrity like other countries have and preferred the current self-regulating system that worked so well that the 109th Congress lost 3 members to felony charges (2 convicted and sentenced) and another resigned because of what would be felony charges. Others lost who should have been investigated, indicted, and convicted. Even this watered down version was too much for Sen. Hatch, who was one of two senators to vote against the ethics bill.

And if you think that's terrible, at least they are letting it come up for consideration (although I bet Hatch and Bennett filibustered like good GOPers), unlike their state level colleagues.

But Legislative leaders have issues with outright banning meals, because food is often paired with lunchtime meetings during the session. In addition, lawmakers say they're not about to be pressured into passing new laws based solely on what the Governor does.

Rep. Greg Curtis, House Speaker: "He chose to do this in the state of the state, in a very public forum. To my knowledge, I haven't been able to obtain a copy of the executive order. And it seems to have been done for a very public purpose."

Every year St. Rep. Ralph Becker has introduced ethics reforms, and every year the GOP majority have kept his bill from coming to a vote. According to the non-partisan center for public integrity, Utah ranks 47th in "Legislator Personal Financial Disclosure," garnering a grade of "F." This means that legislators rarely, if ever report conflicts of interests (i.e. and vote on a bill/amendment that effect them personally). I remember a friend of my parents was a state senator in the early 1990s, and when a bill came up on taxing small aircraft, he announced that he could not vote on the matter since his family owned one. They all look at him in shock and horror, and not because his family was wealthy enough to afford a private jet, but that he disclosed it.

In prior years, when ethics bills have come before the state legislature, Legislators took the bills as a personal affront to their morality. They assumed that the sponsor was accusing them. One even cried during his speech, babbling something about his wife. I wish I could find the test of that, I can't remember what was said, but I remember it was rich.

feeling like a young parent

My wife and I don't have children yet. We want to start a family soon, and need the financial stability of me being employed full-time before we make that leap. But as avid readers know, we did get a dog "for Christmas."

The miniature/toy poodle, who named himself Poe, [we went through a list of authors and he responded to Edgar Allen's last name] is now a full member of the family. And just like an infant, he has trouble sleeping through the night and wakes us up with his antics. So as a result, I haven't been sleeping through the night either.

Plus, like a child, we have been dressing him in snow coats [because of the cold (10 degrees at 11 PM) and his lack of fur (the rescue society gave him a mighty buss)]. We go home at lunch to take him out on walks and he is sad to see us go every time, trying a sit-down strike on our laps to keep us from returning to work/class.

Unlike my classmates with lots of real children, mine will never grow up and learn how to talk to us and so on. Instead we rely on gestures like pawing the dish for
hunger, weird behavior and pawing the door for urgent bathroom breaks, and tail wagging for happiness.

So I know we are not experiencing nearly the same thing as our friends with infants and young children, but for right now, it is the closest we are going to get.

better late than never

Obama on the McCain Doctrine:

“I cannot in good conscience support this plan. As I first said two months ago, we should not be sending more U.S. troops to Iraq, we should begin redeploying them to let the Iraqis know that we will not be there forever and to pressure the Sunnis, Shiites, and Kurds to finally reach a political settlement.

“Escalation is a failed policy opposed by generals, Democrats and Republicans, and now even the Iraqis themselves, and the fact that the President is already moving ahead with this idea is a terrible consequence of the decision to give him the broad, open-ended authority to wage this war in 2002.

“It now falls on Congress to find a way to support our troops in the field while still preventing the President from multiplying his previous mistakes. That is why I not only favor capping the number U.S. troops in Iraq, but believe it’s imperative that we begin the phased redeployment I called for two months ago, and intend to introduce legislation that does just that.”

So I take it the Senator is in favor of a rhetorical empty gesture, a symbolic non-binding resolution. The Levin resolution.

Obama believes that symbols mean a lot, and they do. But actually doing something is always better than great speeches and gestures.

Romney can only dream of being the next Gore

That is, best case scenerio, he will win the popular vote, but lose his "home" state.

A Nov. 17 poll by Survey USA and WBZ-TV found that 65 percent of residents disapproved of Romney's performance, a figure that dropped to 59 percent a month later in Romney's waning days in office. The Globe and WBZ reported 54 percent of those surveyed in October viewed Romney's performance as unfavorable.

In reality, Romney is a lying opportunist. I would tell my conservative friends who are worried about Romney's fidelity to conservative ideals that he is a conservative...as long as that will get him the nomination.

Romney played liberal Republican in 1994 and 2002 and governed conservative to please the national party people from 2003 until 2007. In truth, he has no principles and just wants to get power. He probably is conservative socially, more so than Giulliani for sure, and maybe more than McCain on things like tax cuts and illegal immigration.

Nevertheless, he will never be president.

so much for Oprah

Folks had speculated that Barrack would announce he was running for president on Oprah because the website had a TBA for one of the days of the week. However, Obama is trying to be all high-tech and announce via a streaming video on his website. Here's the text (HT to Hotline)

"As many of you know, over the last few months I have been thinking hard about my plans for 2008. Running for the presidency is a profound decision - a decision no one should make on the basis of media hype or personal ambition alone - and so before I committed myself and my family to this race, I wanted to be sure that this was right for us and, more importantly, right for the country"

"I certainly didn't expect to find myself in this position a year ago. But as I've spoken to many of you in my travels across the states these past months; as I've read your emails and read your letters; I've been struck by how hungry we all are for a different kind of politics."

"So I've spent some time thinking about how I could best advance the cause of change and progress that we so desperately need. The decisions that have been made in Washington these past six years, and the problems that have been ignored, have put our country in a precarious place. Our economy is changing rapidly, and that means profound changes for working people. Many of you have shared with me your stories about skyrocketing health care bills, the pensions you've lost and your struggles to pay for college for your kids. Our continued dependence on oil has put our security and our very planet at risk. And we're still mired in a tragic and costly war that should have never been waged."

But challenging as they are, it's not the magnitude of our problems that concerns me the most. It's the smallness of our politics. America's faced big problems before. But today, our leaders in Washington seem incapable of working together in a practical, common sense way. Politics has become so bitter and partisan, so gummed up by money and influence, that we can't tackle the big problems that demand solutions.

And that's what we have to change first.

We have to change our politics, and come together around our common interests and concerns as Americans.

This won't happen by itself. A change in our politics can only come from you; from people across our country who believe there's a better way and are willing to work for it.

Years ago, as a community organizer in Chicago, I learned that meaningful change always begins at the grassroots, and that engaged citizens working together can accomplish extraordinary things.

So even in the midst of the enormous challenges we face today, I have great faith and hope about the future - because I believe in you.

And that's why I wanted to tell you first that I'll be filing papers today to create a presidential exploratory committee. For the next several weeks, I am going to talk with people from around the country, listening and learning more about the challenges we face as a nation, the opportunities that lie before us, and the role that a presidential campaign might play in bringing our country together. And on February 10th, at the end of these decisions and in my home state of Illinois, I'll share my plans with my friends, neighbors and fellow Americans.

In the meantime, I want to thank all of you for your time, your suggestions, your encouragement and your prayers. And I look forward to continuing our conversation in the weeks and months to come.

And if that doesn't work out, there's always getting reelected in 2010.

the undemocratic, dogmatic branch

Which branch am I referring to? Why its the Utah State Legislature of course. Its members routinely give the metaphoric finger (because swearing and fingering in reality would be "rude" and "sinful") to Utahns by adopting unneeded legislation and ignoring the people's priorities.

Utahns want lawmakers to spend a projected $1.6 billion surplus first on public education. A tax cut is lower on their list of priorities. Much lower.
But legislators are poised to give Utahns a tax cut ranging from $100 million to $300 million anyway - whether they want it or not.

And that's not all. Utahns don't want school vouchers, but screw 'em we will do it anyway.


But wait, there's more:

If someone directly challenges Roe v. Wade . . .
And if the U.S. Supreme Court reverses more than 30 years of legal precedent . . .
State Rep. Paul Ray wants Utah to be ready.
[...snip...]
Ray's bill is modeled on similar legislation South Dakota voters rejected earlier this year. That law was meant to test the 1973 Supreme Court decision that granted women the right to legally end a pregnancy. But South Dakota's bill did not include exceptions for incest, rape and the health of the mother.
"I would have issues if we didn't consider those exceptions," said Ray.

So now the legislature will most certainly pass a litmus test bill on a theoretical problem. Why not wait until Roe is overturned and then pass the bill? Someone in Utah just might get an abortion in under some freak scenerio I guess. While there are 4 solid anti-abortion votes on the high court, it is fairly uncertain that Justice Anthony Kennedy could be convinced to reverse on Roe. Rather, the anti-abortion plurality will have more success if they keep finding areas to chip away at ones ability to have an abortion...although there aren't too many exceptions left to find. There already are 24-hour waiting periods, parental consent for minors (from both parents with a judicial escape clause if the girl claims Daddy is the father), the prohibition on dilation and extraction procedures (so called "partial birth abortions") unless the health/life of the mother is in jeopardy, forbidding people from traveling state lines to have an abortion in another state were the laws are laxer, unfunding clinics, making it dangerous and unprofitable to become a doctor performing such procedures etc. [the last few are extra-legal ones that occur]

And really is this an urgent problem? Are the number of abortions skyrocketing in Utah despite the 75% anti-Roe gut reaction of LDS-dominated Utah? No

Abortions in Utah

Abortions remained fairly flat even as Utah's population grew by 300,000.
Abortions by year:
* 2000: 3,279
* 2001: 3,372
* 2002: 3,300
* 2003: 3,338
* 2004: 3,379
* 2005: 3,279
Population:
* 2000: 2.25 million
* 2005: 2.55 million

Why won't the legislature work on making our K-12 schools better, our college more affordable, better health coverage for the poor, etc. Why not do things that will actually improve the lives of Utahns rather than posture for lower taxes for the rich and a fake abortion bill?