My father had a favorite poem that he wanted to commit to memory. He enlisted the help of us children to help him learn it and, as one might expect, the kids learned it faster than my dad. The poem was Kipling’s “If”, and a small part of the poem that I have remembered, after some forty years, goes like this:
If you can dream - and not make dreams your master;
If you can think - and not make thoughts your aim;
If you can meet with triumph and disaster
And treat those two imposters just the same;
This being good advice has made waking up on this day a little easier. Meeting triumph and disaster, I have decided to treat those two imposters the same.
On the wall of my campaign headquarters (aka the guest bedroom) there is a poster that my son gave to my daughter for Christmas. It is an inspirational poster and has a quote and a lovely photo of a ski jumper. The large title is "Ineptitude". The quote says: "If you can’t learn to do something well, you should at least learn to enjoy doing it poorly." Perhaps you can imagine what the ski jumper looks like.
I think I have been well served by the sentiments of this poster. Like many of my fellow candidates in Utah County this year, my campaign for the legislature has been a new adventure. If someone had told me 12 months ago that my name would be on the ballot this year, I’d have told him he was crazy. There have been times during this year that I have decided that I was the one who was crazy. But somehow, as I have campaigned poorly in many ways, I have learned to enjoy it too.
I hope I can adequately express thanks to all the volunteers and financial supporters who believed in me. We knew we had a big challenge to overcome. I received this quote from a friend, attributed to Abraham Lincoln:
"The probability that we may fail in the struggle ought not to deter us from the support of a cause we believe to be just."
Many people knew our probability and pitched in with hope. I have so appreciated that encouragement.
Thank you, to all my friends!
Wednesday, November 5, 2008
Friday, October 10, 2008
Comparing Apples to Apples
I was encouraged early on in the campaign to make a clear distinction between my political opponent and myself. Now, this wouldn't be so hard if I could say that my opponent was a dirty, rotten scoundrel -- but he isn't. He is a friendly family man with good relationships with his friends and family, as far as I know. I assume that he wants to give public service and that is why he got involved in politics. My reason for running for office wasn't because I had personal animosity for him; I just think I have different priorities than he does.
When difficult choices are put before public officials, they need to remember that more is not always better. More laws, more micromanaging, more intervention. Sometimes the best public policy is less legislation. In other areas, intervention is necessary. For example, we need health care reform, so that health insurance is more accessible. That is why these priorities are so important.
Since my decision to run for office, I have had the opportunity to meet and visit with many people of the district by going door to door to introduce myself. It has given me added perspective about the impact of government. The economic hard times in Utah will be felt in many ways. We are better off than those in most other states because of tight spending. I do not, however, agree with many of the priorities that the legislature has acted on. Legislation should reflect how it can strengthen families and communities. It should be based on a vision for the future that includes a strong education system, a safe and healthy environment, and efficient and effect transportation.
While funding for public education was the issue that got me to pay attention to the state legislature, I would say that the thing that really moved me to action was the concern over ethics. The legislature lacks clear, specific, and reasonable ethical guidelines. These have become problematic --- especially lately when some votes have been particularly divisive. There have been proposals and sponsored legislation for stricter ethical rules but they have rarely made it out of committee and never passed. It is as if the legislators, look around at each other, smile and say, “We are all nice people; we don’t need these rules.” The rules are needed not only to stop corruption but to protect those who are acting forthrightly. It gives assurance that public officials are trustworthy. And public trust of government is extremely important. While there is no mention of ethics from my opponent, ethics reform is an item of high priority for me.
Another of the places where my political opponent and I differ is on environmental issues. He rejected a bill at first that gave consumers incentives to drive fuel efficient cars. He also voted against the bill that would prohibit school busses from idling on duty. Both of these bills, which passed, help to conserve gasoline and lessen air pollution.
It is difficult to know what he thought of school vouchers because I have found people who told me that he promised them support of vouchers and others who were promised opposition, depending on whether they supported or opposed vouchers themselves. Eventually he voted in favor of vouchers. I opposed the voucher legislation of 2006. I oppose sending tax dollars to private schools, and this particular plan had the potential to send public schools into a downward spiral. A strong public education system that unifies neighborhoods is a priority to me.
This year all of my opponent’s campaign funds have come from special interests, corporations, or other republican party coffers. Mine have come from family, friends, and neighbors in the legislative district. I have received a $1000 line of credit from the UEA, public school’s “union” because they believe me to be a better support of public education than the incumbent. It is a priority to me that campaign funding for representatives be supplied by the people they will represent.
I notice in the blogosphere that there is talk about his poor attendance record at legislative interim committee meetings. I can understand this. He is a young dad with many family responsibilities. While I don’t judge him for how he prioritizes his time, I will commit the time and energy needed to represent the people of this legislative district, both during the legislative session and throughout the year. I think that the people of the district deserve this commitment.
Finally, independence is a priority to me. My opponent is a reliable follower of Republican Party leadership. I find that the Republican Party leadership has so tied up the political process to protect incumbents, that new-comers cannot get past the county convention. This denies candidates a chance for a popular vote, which is at the heart of a democracy. Although I have been a republican all my life, I discovered that the Utah County Platform for the Democratic Party is very moderate—and conservative in the aspects that are important to me. I felt that the Republican Party was not likely to heal itself from the inside and decided to run for the legislature as a democrat. I will not be bullied or threatened by members of my own party or any other. It is essential to have a better-balanced legislature to ensure ethics reform and dialog on important issues.
When difficult choices are put before public officials, they need to remember that more is not always better. More laws, more micromanaging, more intervention. Sometimes the best public policy is less legislation. In other areas, intervention is necessary. For example, we need health care reform, so that health insurance is more accessible. That is why these priorities are so important.
Since my decision to run for office, I have had the opportunity to meet and visit with many people of the district by going door to door to introduce myself. It has given me added perspective about the impact of government. The economic hard times in Utah will be felt in many ways. We are better off than those in most other states because of tight spending. I do not, however, agree with many of the priorities that the legislature has acted on. Legislation should reflect how it can strengthen families and communities. It should be based on a vision for the future that includes a strong education system, a safe and healthy environment, and efficient and effect transportation.
While funding for public education was the issue that got me to pay attention to the state legislature, I would say that the thing that really moved me to action was the concern over ethics. The legislature lacks clear, specific, and reasonable ethical guidelines. These have become problematic --- especially lately when some votes have been particularly divisive. There have been proposals and sponsored legislation for stricter ethical rules but they have rarely made it out of committee and never passed. It is as if the legislators, look around at each other, smile and say, “We are all nice people; we don’t need these rules.” The rules are needed not only to stop corruption but to protect those who are acting forthrightly. It gives assurance that public officials are trustworthy. And public trust of government is extremely important. While there is no mention of ethics from my opponent, ethics reform is an item of high priority for me.
Another of the places where my political opponent and I differ is on environmental issues. He rejected a bill at first that gave consumers incentives to drive fuel efficient cars. He also voted against the bill that would prohibit school busses from idling on duty. Both of these bills, which passed, help to conserve gasoline and lessen air pollution.
It is difficult to know what he thought of school vouchers because I have found people who told me that he promised them support of vouchers and others who were promised opposition, depending on whether they supported or opposed vouchers themselves. Eventually he voted in favor of vouchers. I opposed the voucher legislation of 2006. I oppose sending tax dollars to private schools, and this particular plan had the potential to send public schools into a downward spiral. A strong public education system that unifies neighborhoods is a priority to me.
This year all of my opponent’s campaign funds have come from special interests, corporations, or other republican party coffers. Mine have come from family, friends, and neighbors in the legislative district. I have received a $1000 line of credit from the UEA, public school’s “union” because they believe me to be a better support of public education than the incumbent. It is a priority to me that campaign funding for representatives be supplied by the people they will represent.
I notice in the blogosphere that there is talk about his poor attendance record at legislative interim committee meetings. I can understand this. He is a young dad with many family responsibilities. While I don’t judge him for how he prioritizes his time, I will commit the time and energy needed to represent the people of this legislative district, both during the legislative session and throughout the year. I think that the people of the district deserve this commitment.
Finally, independence is a priority to me. My opponent is a reliable follower of Republican Party leadership. I find that the Republican Party leadership has so tied up the political process to protect incumbents, that new-comers cannot get past the county convention. This denies candidates a chance for a popular vote, which is at the heart of a democracy. Although I have been a republican all my life, I discovered that the Utah County Platform for the Democratic Party is very moderate—and conservative in the aspects that are important to me. I felt that the Republican Party was not likely to heal itself from the inside and decided to run for the legislature as a democrat. I will not be bullied or threatened by members of my own party or any other. It is essential to have a better-balanced legislature to ensure ethics reform and dialog on important issues.
Monday, September 29, 2008
Gotta be the Economy
When the Utah Foundation surveyed Utahns for a list of prioritized issues last spring, there were a lot of items to choose from--transportation, the environment, education. I'm sure there were some who had financial worries but the worries didn't seem to be wide-spread.
There had been talk of a housing bubble. There were a lot of "no down payment" loans being pushed. There was even news of unprecedented consumer debt. Still there was definitely a feeling of being blind-sided when the financial melt down began a month or two ago.
Now, there are predictions of doomsday and comparisons being made to the stock market crash of 1929. While the Congress and the feds fuss and fume about what is to be done to mitigate the trouble, it is clear that there is no way to avoid it altogether. Both presidential candidates are blaming deregulation, so it seems that "trickle down" economics has turned into a deluge of debt that we will all be swimming in, whether we were wise in our own money management or not.
The State of Utah has a great challenge ahead of it. We will be in better shape than many states but the problems in the stock market and banking industries will have repercussions here as well as everywhere else. The decisions that will be made as budgets are cut and appropriations examined will be extremely important and will require prioritizing needs. Everyone will be wanting a larger slice of an ever-smaller pie.
As I have walked from house to house in my legislative district, I have discussed with many people the needs of individuals and families. The incentives to business must take a backseat in times like these. Lobbyists may holler but the voices of hundreds of my neighbors have my ear.
As I continue to walk door to door, the conversations with the voters are showing their concerns about future economic stability.
"My retirement is disappearing."
"I may get laid off."
"I'm worried about my mortgage."
What issues are you watching in the next year or two?
It's gotta be the economy.
There had been talk of a housing bubble. There were a lot of "no down payment" loans being pushed. There was even news of unprecedented consumer debt. Still there was definitely a feeling of being blind-sided when the financial melt down began a month or two ago.
Now, there are predictions of doomsday and comparisons being made to the stock market crash of 1929. While the Congress and the feds fuss and fume about what is to be done to mitigate the trouble, it is clear that there is no way to avoid it altogether. Both presidential candidates are blaming deregulation, so it seems that "trickle down" economics has turned into a deluge of debt that we will all be swimming in, whether we were wise in our own money management or not.
The State of Utah has a great challenge ahead of it. We will be in better shape than many states but the problems in the stock market and banking industries will have repercussions here as well as everywhere else. The decisions that will be made as budgets are cut and appropriations examined will be extremely important and will require prioritizing needs. Everyone will be wanting a larger slice of an ever-smaller pie.
As I have walked from house to house in my legislative district, I have discussed with many people the needs of individuals and families. The incentives to business must take a backseat in times like these. Lobbyists may holler but the voices of hundreds of my neighbors have my ear.
As I continue to walk door to door, the conversations with the voters are showing their concerns about future economic stability.
"My retirement is disappearing."
"I may get laid off."
"I'm worried about my mortgage."
What issues are you watching in the next year or two?
It's gotta be the economy.
Wednesday, September 17, 2008
Happy Constitution Day!
I want to take a break from campaigning to acknowledge a document that has changed the world. The Constitution of the United States was signed by a majority of the participants at the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia on this day in 1787.
I love this country. I love that it was founded on the concepts that "small people" can govern themselves. I love that this document was made to live, breathe, and grow with a country that would change rapidly in the subsequent 221 years. I love that the rights outlined in the First Amendment have challenged Americans to examine themselves and better their own instincts.
Despite its bumpy history I remain an optimist about the future of the United States. The Statue of Liberty has welcomed tired, poor, huddled masses and continues to do so. Of still greater impact is the attitude of the American people that, whatever his or her beginnings, the individual is worthy of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Americans are generous people; charitable giving and volunteerism are strong impulses. Americans have a sense of justice but love to see signs of mercy mixed in.
I agree with the observation that Alexis de Tocqueville made over a hundred years ago: "America is great because she is good." I also acknowledge the corollary that-- "If America ceases to be good, America will cease to be great."
The greatest service we can give to our country is to make a commitment to goodness. The Constitution has a physical structure; it is our goodness that enlivens this document and gives it longevity.
Happy Birthday and long live the Constitution of the United States!
I love this country. I love that it was founded on the concepts that "small people" can govern themselves. I love that this document was made to live, breathe, and grow with a country that would change rapidly in the subsequent 221 years. I love that the rights outlined in the First Amendment have challenged Americans to examine themselves and better their own instincts.
Despite its bumpy history I remain an optimist about the future of the United States. The Statue of Liberty has welcomed tired, poor, huddled masses and continues to do so. Of still greater impact is the attitude of the American people that, whatever his or her beginnings, the individual is worthy of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Americans are generous people; charitable giving and volunteerism are strong impulses. Americans have a sense of justice but love to see signs of mercy mixed in.
I agree with the observation that Alexis de Tocqueville made over a hundred years ago: "America is great because she is good." I also acknowledge the corollary that-- "If America ceases to be good, America will cease to be great."
The greatest service we can give to our country is to make a commitment to goodness. The Constitution has a physical structure; it is our goodness that enlivens this document and gives it longevity.
Happy Birthday and long live the Constitution of the United States!
Thursday, September 11, 2008
Lipstick Quick-draw
When Geraldine Ferraro and Shirley Chisolm were national political candidates, the country was not at all ready to welcome a woman into the White House. Now in 2008, it has been interesting to see the excitement generated on diverse ends of the political spectrum, by the entrance of Hillary Clinton and Sarah Palin into the national spotlight.
Sarah Palin is rousing support by her socially conservative convictions that fit so well the culture of Utah and much of the western United States. At the same time, she is praised for the courageous handling of entrenched political power brokers in her own party and the special interests who were accommodated in Alaska state government.
Whether or not she is a candidate prepared for presidential responsibilities, her history should be looked at with interest in the state of Utah. She came to her office as governor describing herself as a "Hockey Mom", doggedly dedicated to ethics reform in state government. She saw closed door deals, politicians enjoying campaign gifts and financing from Big Oil or other special interests, and various ethical problems in the state. Her success in handling these problems is making national news. This should send chills through the Utah Republican Party.
Moderate republicans, as well as democrats, have been calling for ethics reform in the Utah legislature for years. Well-managed leadership in the State Republican Party has, however, held them at bay. As long as incumbents could recruit enough friends to become delegates to the county conventions, voters would have no say about their party nominees. The Democratic Party, hobbled by progressive national politics, could not elect a legislator in Utah County as well as much of the state, and the republicans ceased to worry about campaigning against them. As a result, the ethical questions have gone unanswered.
Unable to heal the Party from within, many traditional republicans and unaffiliated voters are looking to the Democratic Party for a "bulldog" to stir up the questions.
Thank you, Sarah Palin, for making this cause a popular one in Utah! Women's ability to take on this problem is certainly now proven. Now I just need to get a little more consistent with wearing lipstick.
Sarah Palin is rousing support by her socially conservative convictions that fit so well the culture of Utah and much of the western United States. At the same time, she is praised for the courageous handling of entrenched political power brokers in her own party and the special interests who were accommodated in Alaska state government.
Whether or not she is a candidate prepared for presidential responsibilities, her history should be looked at with interest in the state of Utah. She came to her office as governor describing herself as a "Hockey Mom", doggedly dedicated to ethics reform in state government. She saw closed door deals, politicians enjoying campaign gifts and financing from Big Oil or other special interests, and various ethical problems in the state. Her success in handling these problems is making national news. This should send chills through the Utah Republican Party.
Moderate republicans, as well as democrats, have been calling for ethics reform in the Utah legislature for years. Well-managed leadership in the State Republican Party has, however, held them at bay. As long as incumbents could recruit enough friends to become delegates to the county conventions, voters would have no say about their party nominees. The Democratic Party, hobbled by progressive national politics, could not elect a legislator in Utah County as well as much of the state, and the republicans ceased to worry about campaigning against them. As a result, the ethical questions have gone unanswered.
Unable to heal the Party from within, many traditional republicans and unaffiliated voters are looking to the Democratic Party for a "bulldog" to stir up the questions.
Thank you, Sarah Palin, for making this cause a popular one in Utah! Women's ability to take on this problem is certainly now proven. Now I just need to get a little more consistent with wearing lipstick.
Tuesday, August 19, 2008
The pain in Campaign
The challenge of running for office as a democrat in Utah County is in discovering who the "swing" voters are. I happen to know that among the registered republicans, there are quite a few "closet democrats" who just wanted to have a chance to vote for something (as in, vote in the Republican Primary). There are also a number of disenchanted republicans who are looking for a way to change the State Legislature and just need to know there is an alternative to the incumbent.
So how does one find these potential supporters?
Walking the district -- going door to door to introduce myself to the neighbors. And that's what I have been doing this summer.
My door to door campaign is one of the reasons my blog entries have been so sparce this summer.
I enjoy the experience of meeting people and visiting with them at their doors. It does, however, have its dangers.
One Saturday, I stood at a door, campaign flyer in hand, and admired the floral wreath hanging there as I waited for the owners to open the door. As it opened, the jarring startled three or four bees who had been nestled in among the flowers of the wreath. They flew out and into my face and one stung me on the cheek when it hit. The lady of the house accepted my flyer as I grimaced and stuttered my greeting, "Hello, my name is Deon Turley and I -- I've just been stung by a bee!"
So how does one find these potential supporters?
Walking the district -- going door to door to introduce myself to the neighbors. And that's what I have been doing this summer.
My door to door campaign is one of the reasons my blog entries have been so sparce this summer.
I enjoy the experience of meeting people and visiting with them at their doors. It does, however, have its dangers.
One Saturday, I stood at a door, campaign flyer in hand, and admired the floral wreath hanging there as I waited for the owners to open the door. As it opened, the jarring startled three or four bees who had been nestled in among the flowers of the wreath. They flew out and into my face and one stung me on the cheek when it hit. The lady of the house accepted my flyer as I grimaced and stuttered my greeting, "Hello, my name is Deon Turley and I -- I've just been stung by a bee!"
Friday, June 13, 2008
The Educrat
A newspaper recently carried letter to the editor that commented on the large numbers of opposition candidates vying for a seat in the state legislature. Noting that many were from the teaching profession, it warned against the election of “educrats” who wanted to take over the legislature.
Certainly there is a strong showing of the education community in the field of candidates this year. I see it as a natural response to the legislature’s arrogant disregard of constituents' support of public education.
I was, however, fascinated by the term “educrat”. It isn’t found in the dictionary and the word itself sounds like something spat on the ground. Who would want a title like that?
If having a commitment to public education makes me an educrat, it is a label I'll gladly accept. If recognizing the need for excellence in institutions of higher education in the state, and wanting to fund them sufficiently makes me an educrat, I admit to it. If efforts to provide everyone literacy training and educational opportunity would make me an educrat, sign me up.
Statistically, Utah is the youngest state in the nation. Families are large and school-age children make up a large percentage of our population. Young people left to popular media, television and advertising, won't find training for informed citizenship. Preparation for their emergence into responsible adulthood requires a large investment.
It is well-established that education is power – not only measured in earning capacity but in ability to control one’s own life. We want our children to understand how to function in an increasingly complex world. The educated citizen is more likely to tell a good idea from a bad one, a trustworthy steward from a swindler. Parents play the greatest role in raising their children. Most families rely on public schools to help them teach their children to become independent, thoughtful individuals.
Our society also invests in the future through education. Public schools should prepare children to become productive, informed citizens. We all benefit when doctors know how to operate, architects can design a building well, and engineers create planes, trains, and cars that get us where we need to go in a safe manner.
The training of teachers has never been better. They are being prepared to teach a wide range of children with various individual challenges, family circumstances, and cultural backgrounds.
The administrators of public schools and state institutions of higher education shoulder responsibilities that are comparable to CEO's of large businesses in terms of employee management, legal navigation, contract negotiations, capital investments, and the logistical maze of governmental requests, requirements, and restrictions.
The biggest difference between schools and business enterprises is that business generates its own income; public education must rely on public revenue controlled by elected officials.
Our state legislators show their commitments by what they are willing to nurture, support, and entrust.
Nurturing the education community means giving them manageable class sizes. The current student to teacher ratios in Utah are among the highest in the nation. This means our students get the lowest levels of individual attention of any group of public school students in the country.
Supporting the education community means providing the funds necessary to do the job. That hasn’t happened in our state. Public school employees in Utah are among the lowest paid in the nation. Per-pupil funding of education continues to place Utah at the bottom of the stack, relative to every other state in the nation.
Trusting the education community means allowing parents, teachers, and administrators at the local level to control their budgets and curriculum. In this year's legislative session a big part of the increased education funding went to specific state-defined programs. School officials who see, at close range, the needs of the students and employees, are constantly shuffling budget categories to meet the requirements of earmarked funding.
The effects of this neglect take years to emerge but they are showing up now. Scores that show preparation for post-high school training are dropping and measurements of technical understanding among Utah's population are showing a decline. This trend must stop. To scrimp on education is to leave the next generation unprepared for the challenges of a complex world.
We must be willing to nurture, support, and trust the education community. Our legislature could use a few more educrats who will do that.
Certainly there is a strong showing of the education community in the field of candidates this year. I see it as a natural response to the legislature’s arrogant disregard of constituents' support of public education.
I was, however, fascinated by the term “educrat”. It isn’t found in the dictionary and the word itself sounds like something spat on the ground. Who would want a title like that?
If having a commitment to public education makes me an educrat, it is a label I'll gladly accept. If recognizing the need for excellence in institutions of higher education in the state, and wanting to fund them sufficiently makes me an educrat, I admit to it. If efforts to provide everyone literacy training and educational opportunity would make me an educrat, sign me up.
Statistically, Utah is the youngest state in the nation. Families are large and school-age children make up a large percentage of our population. Young people left to popular media, television and advertising, won't find training for informed citizenship. Preparation for their emergence into responsible adulthood requires a large investment.
It is well-established that education is power – not only measured in earning capacity but in ability to control one’s own life. We want our children to understand how to function in an increasingly complex world. The educated citizen is more likely to tell a good idea from a bad one, a trustworthy steward from a swindler. Parents play the greatest role in raising their children. Most families rely on public schools to help them teach their children to become independent, thoughtful individuals.
Our society also invests in the future through education. Public schools should prepare children to become productive, informed citizens. We all benefit when doctors know how to operate, architects can design a building well, and engineers create planes, trains, and cars that get us where we need to go in a safe manner.
The training of teachers has never been better. They are being prepared to teach a wide range of children with various individual challenges, family circumstances, and cultural backgrounds.
The administrators of public schools and state institutions of higher education shoulder responsibilities that are comparable to CEO's of large businesses in terms of employee management, legal navigation, contract negotiations, capital investments, and the logistical maze of governmental requests, requirements, and restrictions.
The biggest difference between schools and business enterprises is that business generates its own income; public education must rely on public revenue controlled by elected officials.
Our state legislators show their commitments by what they are willing to nurture, support, and entrust.
Nurturing the education community means giving them manageable class sizes. The current student to teacher ratios in Utah are among the highest in the nation. This means our students get the lowest levels of individual attention of any group of public school students in the country.
Supporting the education community means providing the funds necessary to do the job. That hasn’t happened in our state. Public school employees in Utah are among the lowest paid in the nation. Per-pupil funding of education continues to place Utah at the bottom of the stack, relative to every other state in the nation.
Trusting the education community means allowing parents, teachers, and administrators at the local level to control their budgets and curriculum. In this year's legislative session a big part of the increased education funding went to specific state-defined programs. School officials who see, at close range, the needs of the students and employees, are constantly shuffling budget categories to meet the requirements of earmarked funding.
The effects of this neglect take years to emerge but they are showing up now. Scores that show preparation for post-high school training are dropping and measurements of technical understanding among Utah's population are showing a decline. This trend must stop. To scrimp on education is to leave the next generation unprepared for the challenges of a complex world.
We must be willing to nurture, support, and trust the education community. Our legislature could use a few more educrats who will do that.
Wednesday, April 9, 2008
The Balancing Act of Privatization
There is a move afoot to privatize operations that are currently performed by government agencies. After all, the competitive market and capitalist ideals have built the American economy and powered business initiative and productivity. Government workers have a reputation for inefficiency and lethargy, knowing that they will draw a paycheck no matter how they perform on the job.
While I can see the need for many functions of government to be provided by private industry, there is a balance to be achieved.
Services that are seasonal or intermittently needed are good candidates for out-sourcing. Imagine if the local public school district had to use government employee architects and carpenters to build a school. In addition, options would be limited, if elections were held using only the sort of balloting machine that some government agency had produced that year.
Some things should not be left to the private sector. The livability of a community relies on free access to certain amenities. Property owners would not be motivated to provide libraries, parks and playgrounds that are open to the public. Similarly, maintenance of public spaces, for example, parks or the grounds of public buildings or custodial care of buildings, might be privatized but work of this sort tends to be full-time employment, and it makes sense to employ maintenance workers that provide continuity of the care.
There is a danger in privatizing too much. When elected officials must award contracts to private companies, conflict of interest questions mushroom and campaign contributions from businesses vying for contracts would surely be seen as “kickbacks”. Before I would entertain proposals of widespread privatization of government services, I would demand ethics reform of the state legislature, especially in regards to conflict of interest and campaign finance.
While I can see the need for many functions of government to be provided by private industry, there is a balance to be achieved.
Services that are seasonal or intermittently needed are good candidates for out-sourcing. Imagine if the local public school district had to use government employee architects and carpenters to build a school. In addition, options would be limited, if elections were held using only the sort of balloting machine that some government agency had produced that year.
Some things should not be left to the private sector. The livability of a community relies on free access to certain amenities. Property owners would not be motivated to provide libraries, parks and playgrounds that are open to the public. Similarly, maintenance of public spaces, for example, parks or the grounds of public buildings or custodial care of buildings, might be privatized but work of this sort tends to be full-time employment, and it makes sense to employ maintenance workers that provide continuity of the care.
There is a danger in privatizing too much. When elected officials must award contracts to private companies, conflict of interest questions mushroom and campaign contributions from businesses vying for contracts would surely be seen as “kickbacks”. Before I would entertain proposals of widespread privatization of government services, I would demand ethics reform of the state legislature, especially in regards to conflict of interest and campaign finance.
Financing the Work
Was I surprised, when I first began to consider this project of running for office, how much the campaign itself would cost? Yes, indeed!
So the first thing you do is say, "How does everyone else raise that sort of cash?"
I knew that Mitt Romney had the resources to pay for his campaign -- or a lot of it. That isn't my situation.
Calling upon businesses or political action committees to contribute seemed the last thing I wanted to do, since that would send the message that I would be able to return the favor when their interests came up in legislation.
The ones whom I want to represent are the people of my legislative district, my neighbors. It takes confidence to approach a neighbor, especially one who you know is struggling to makes ends meet, and say, "It is so important to you that I be elected that you should help to pay for signs and pamphlets." As hard as this is, it is equally amazing when people respond and pull out a checkbook.
Many people don't get it. They haven't been asked to support a political candidate. It has hasn't been necessary in Republican dominated Utah County. There are enough willing businesses and PAC's to get the job done for republican candidates.
But others recognize the relationship of money and representation.
When it is difficult to get out of my comfort zone, memory of the $25 check that came as a surprise gets me on my feet.
This campaign may be a long shot but these $50, $20, and $5 contributions are feeding my resolve.
So the first thing you do is say, "How does everyone else raise that sort of cash?"
I knew that Mitt Romney had the resources to pay for his campaign -- or a lot of it. That isn't my situation.
Calling upon businesses or political action committees to contribute seemed the last thing I wanted to do, since that would send the message that I would be able to return the favor when their interests came up in legislation.
The ones whom I want to represent are the people of my legislative district, my neighbors. It takes confidence to approach a neighbor, especially one who you know is struggling to makes ends meet, and say, "It is so important to you that I be elected that you should help to pay for signs and pamphlets." As hard as this is, it is equally amazing when people respond and pull out a checkbook.
Many people don't get it. They haven't been asked to support a political candidate. It has hasn't been necessary in Republican dominated Utah County. There are enough willing businesses and PAC's to get the job done for republican candidates.
But others recognize the relationship of money and representation.
When it is difficult to get out of my comfort zone, memory of the $25 check that came as a surprise gets me on my feet.
This campaign may be a long shot but these $50, $20, and $5 contributions are feeding my resolve.
Thursday, April 3, 2008
Looking behind the legislation
Now that the dust from this year's legislative session is settling, we are left to inspect the results.
1. The tax on the most expensive snuff tobacco is lowered and tax rates are now set by legislation per ounce. So no matter how the price changes on the stuff, the taxes will be static. It will take an act of the legislature to up-date it. This doesn't make sense to me.
2. The amount of time that citizens have to collect signatures for a referendum on legislation has been shortened by about six weeks, by act of this year's legislature. We witnessed the herculean task to place the voucher issue before the voters last year. Regardless of my opinion on education vouchers, I really like the rights of citizens to petition government. I am still trying to figure out why this bill was a good idea.
3. I am also a big fan of citizen's access to the courts. This year, the legislature passed a law that took away the right of most home owners to sue the builders of their homes for slipshod workmanship. I spoke with a frustrated subcontractor who lamented that this would affect the reputation of all the trades in the building industry. The ones who suffer the most from this legislation are the homeowners stuck in a ramshackle house. The ones who benefit are the developers who sweep in, sweep out, and sweep up.
Tied to each of these pieces of legislation, are lobbyists who are making generous donations to the campaigns of many of our legislators. It is not difficult to see who is being represented.
1. The tax on the most expensive snuff tobacco is lowered and tax rates are now set by legislation per ounce. So no matter how the price changes on the stuff, the taxes will be static. It will take an act of the legislature to up-date it. This doesn't make sense to me.
2. The amount of time that citizens have to collect signatures for a referendum on legislation has been shortened by about six weeks, by act of this year's legislature. We witnessed the herculean task to place the voucher issue before the voters last year. Regardless of my opinion on education vouchers, I really like the rights of citizens to petition government. I am still trying to figure out why this bill was a good idea.
3. I am also a big fan of citizen's access to the courts. This year, the legislature passed a law that took away the right of most home owners to sue the builders of their homes for slipshod workmanship. I spoke with a frustrated subcontractor who lamented that this would affect the reputation of all the trades in the building industry. The ones who suffer the most from this legislation are the homeowners stuck in a ramshackle house. The ones who benefit are the developers who sweep in, sweep out, and sweep up.
Tied to each of these pieces of legislation, are lobbyists who are making generous donations to the campaigns of many of our legislators. It is not difficult to see who is being represented.
Friday, March 7, 2008
Answering Education Questions
I recently received email from a neighbor who said that he felt that since he didn't have children, he shouldn't be taxed for public education. He also favored the voucher program, which the legislature passed and subsequently was overturned by referendum.
The two statements were related but not necessarily complementary. If we only taxed families with children, we would certainly not be able to afford the current level of funding for public education, let alone the additional costs of vouchers. My response to him was long but perhaps this forum is a good place to record my perspective.
I believe that quality public schools are a priority because they ensure an educated citizenry for the future of democracy. The taxes we pay are not tuition for our children any more than the taxes are user fees for the library or the parks or the freeways. Not everyone will use them but everyone benefits from the fact that the services are provided in our communities.
I don’t know what your occupation is but say you manage a fast food restaurant, or run a print shop, or an insurance company. You might discover that you “use” the public education system because it is supposed to prepare your employees to be able to do basic mathematics, to communicate, or to think logically. Whether or not I am an employer, I want my police officers, my cable guy, or my store clerk to be trained – and trainable. So I benefit if the public school system is working. No, I don’t like to pay taxes any more than you do but I think that the alternative would be worse.
There are many areas of government that support other segments of the population. We hope we don't ever need the service of a school for the blind but we support it because we are charitable. Loyalty to the community often trumps freedom to support only those areas of government that serve us individually. And we take on the projects that protect or care for our neighbors.
The voucher issues seem to linger and unfortunately are very divisive.
The problems I had with the education voucher legislation of last year were these:
1. The appropriation for vouchers would be another budget category-- one that goes to support private schools, when public schools are already underfunded relative to education funding in every other state. This appropriation would be called additional education funding though, and legally could be pulled from the education Trustlands revenue.
2. Voucher proponents claimed that the parents would have greater choice. However, the tuition voucher would lower the expense of private school tuition only if the school chose to accept the child. The children who would be accepted would not be the “at risk” students, the learning disabled, the ESL, or behavior problems. And it is unlikely that the low-income parents could provide the transportation or the parent involvement that private schools require, let alone the remainder of the tuition. I visited with a college student who described the urban public schools in Baltimore. She said she wished they had vouchers available so she could have escaped them. Our schools are not currently as bad as that. I believe that vouchers would have hastened the descent of our public schools to that situation and widened the gap of social classes.
2-B. I call it 2-B because it might be an alternative scenario to #2 above. The private schools set the price of their tuition based on a free market system. They will charge what the market will bear. If they are not particularly interested in growth in the number of students they serve, they may find that they can raise their tuition by the amount of the voucher, and the families who were willing to pay at that level before will still be able to pay. This gives them more revenue with the same affluent population. But the increased revenue is tax dollars.
3. In areas of the state where there are no private schools within hundreds of miles, the families would have the tax burden of benefits to the urban and suburban private schools.
4. Lastly, not all private schools would be willing to accept tuition vouchers because they don’t want to bow to government requirements. And the legislature would be anxious to show that the schools accepting tuition vouchers were held accountable. Their way of doing this is to subject the schools to the same testing requirements or teacher certification. Many private schools don’t want the expense of this intervention.
I know that there are private schools that fill a need. I wouldn’t stand in the way of those who want to provide them or patronize them. I also don’t object to appropriations such as the Carson-Smith scholarships for autistic children who are not served in public schools. But I have this attitude that tax-funded public education is the basic education that is provided to prepare the next generation for responsible citizenship. Public schools must take everyone that comes to the door. Private schools don’t have that responsibility. Private schools should not be given the public funding.
On a more personal level, I choose to have my children experience public education because it puts them in an environment where they learn to work with those people who make up their community. Their education is enriched at home and we as a family try to contribute time and talent to enrich the education experience for others at the school as well.
Well, now you have the long version of my voucher opinion. Admittedly, some of it consists of speculation, but then, so did the opinions of those who favored vouchers. A system as widely applied as the Utah proposal that was over-turned, has never been tried. No other developed country in the world has a system of education vouchers for private schools. It would be an experiment. For the reasons I gave at the beginning of this message, I am not anxious to be the state to see whether I am wrong.
The two statements were related but not necessarily complementary. If we only taxed families with children, we would certainly not be able to afford the current level of funding for public education, let alone the additional costs of vouchers. My response to him was long but perhaps this forum is a good place to record my perspective.
I believe that quality public schools are a priority because they ensure an educated citizenry for the future of democracy. The taxes we pay are not tuition for our children any more than the taxes are user fees for the library or the parks or the freeways. Not everyone will use them but everyone benefits from the fact that the services are provided in our communities.
I don’t know what your occupation is but say you manage a fast food restaurant, or run a print shop, or an insurance company. You might discover that you “use” the public education system because it is supposed to prepare your employees to be able to do basic mathematics, to communicate, or to think logically. Whether or not I am an employer, I want my police officers, my cable guy, or my store clerk to be trained – and trainable. So I benefit if the public school system is working. No, I don’t like to pay taxes any more than you do but I think that the alternative would be worse.
There are many areas of government that support other segments of the population. We hope we don't ever need the service of a school for the blind but we support it because we are charitable. Loyalty to the community often trumps freedom to support only those areas of government that serve us individually. And we take on the projects that protect or care for our neighbors.
The voucher issues seem to linger and unfortunately are very divisive.
The problems I had with the education voucher legislation of last year were these:
1. The appropriation for vouchers would be another budget category-- one that goes to support private schools, when public schools are already underfunded relative to education funding in every other state. This appropriation would be called additional education funding though, and legally could be pulled from the education Trustlands revenue.
2. Voucher proponents claimed that the parents would have greater choice. However, the tuition voucher would lower the expense of private school tuition only if the school chose to accept the child. The children who would be accepted would not be the “at risk” students, the learning disabled, the ESL, or behavior problems. And it is unlikely that the low-income parents could provide the transportation or the parent involvement that private schools require, let alone the remainder of the tuition. I visited with a college student who described the urban public schools in Baltimore. She said she wished they had vouchers available so she could have escaped them. Our schools are not currently as bad as that. I believe that vouchers would have hastened the descent of our public schools to that situation and widened the gap of social classes.
2-B. I call it 2-B because it might be an alternative scenario to #2 above. The private schools set the price of their tuition based on a free market system. They will charge what the market will bear. If they are not particularly interested in growth in the number of students they serve, they may find that they can raise their tuition by the amount of the voucher, and the families who were willing to pay at that level before will still be able to pay. This gives them more revenue with the same affluent population. But the increased revenue is tax dollars.
3. In areas of the state where there are no private schools within hundreds of miles, the families would have the tax burden of benefits to the urban and suburban private schools.
4. Lastly, not all private schools would be willing to accept tuition vouchers because they don’t want to bow to government requirements. And the legislature would be anxious to show that the schools accepting tuition vouchers were held accountable. Their way of doing this is to subject the schools to the same testing requirements or teacher certification. Many private schools don’t want the expense of this intervention.
I know that there are private schools that fill a need. I wouldn’t stand in the way of those who want to provide them or patronize them. I also don’t object to appropriations such as the Carson-Smith scholarships for autistic children who are not served in public schools. But I have this attitude that tax-funded public education is the basic education that is provided to prepare the next generation for responsible citizenship. Public schools must take everyone that comes to the door. Private schools don’t have that responsibility. Private schools should not be given the public funding.
On a more personal level, I choose to have my children experience public education because it puts them in an environment where they learn to work with those people who make up their community. Their education is enriched at home and we as a family try to contribute time and talent to enrich the education experience for others at the school as well.
Well, now you have the long version of my voucher opinion. Admittedly, some of it consists of speculation, but then, so did the opinions of those who favored vouchers. A system as widely applied as the Utah proposal that was over-turned, has never been tried. No other developed country in the world has a system of education vouchers for private schools. It would be an experiment. For the reasons I gave at the beginning of this message, I am not anxious to be the state to see whether I am wrong.
Thursday, March 6, 2008
Effective Legislators
There is an organization whose purpose it is to judge the effectiveness of legislators. While there might be many aspects that go into defining a “good” legislator, the single criteria for being “effective”, according to this group, is the number of bills an individual sponsors that pass. So, the more laws that make it into the Utah Code, more effective our legislature is. Of course, no elected official wants to be seen as a “slouch”. Is there any wonder that citizens are increasingly dependent upon lawyers to keep them on the right side of the law?
I wonder if there might be an organization out there which would take on the task of identifying the legislators who are most effective at stopping the passage of needless or downright bad legislation.
What's for dinner?
Every once in a while it's time to clean out the refrigerator. There are Ziplock bags of this and Tupperware containers of that – some of the contents of which are beginning to show their age. So we sort out these containers. This one is definitely a “keeper”-- just what we want and need for dinner tonight. That one (Piu!) goes into the trash.
The legislature has the responsibility to do a similar exercise. Bills pile up going into a session in January and the sorting begins. Committees evaluate them first. If they merit approval there, they are sent to the House or Senate for debate. Both chambers must declare them worthy of adoption, after which, the Governor has an opportunity to validate the choices, and (Bingo!) we have the latest set of laws and regulation. In other words, “Dinner is served.”
What happened this year was interesting. Education is a hot topic in the state as well as the legislature. Lawmakers are being hounded by their constituents to adequately fund public education and the institutions of higher education, for which they have responsibility. The number of bills dealing with education was daunting but the committees began their work of sorting back in January. Some bills were debated in one legislative house or the other; some passing, some tossed out.
But the days were passing faster than the bills. By March third, votes on many bills that were essential had been postponed and still more, which were deemed of lower priority, were a long ways from being debated.
So some legislators came up with a brilliant, if unappetizing, idea. Take a big pile of education bills; pour them all into one stew pot, called an omnibus bill; and vote on them all at once. A time saving concept in the kitchen as well as the legislature! So in went the essential funding, along with the questionable programs, along with (What's this?) proposals which had already been rejected in committee or defeated by an earlier vote. What does it matter that some parts of the concoction were fished out of the trash? Would any legislator dare to reject the essential funding of education in an election year?
Law makers went home smiling. Everyone who sponsored an education bill got a gold star on the forehead for being an “effective legislator.”
What the public is served up now is a stew that brings in the increased money that educators need, but it sure smells funny.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
