There have been many recent accusations that the democratic candidates in Utah County have eschewed the Democratic Party label. Commentators have complained that candidates are more often touting their religious affiliation over their Democratic affiliation and maintained that the political party should be more relevant than personal religiosity.
I agree that religion should not play a role in political races but I recognize that it often does. The main advantage of activity in the predominant religion, in my opinion, is the network of social connections it gives, rather than dependence on voters' religious preference. For this reason, I have not made much mention of my own religion.
I can, however, be considered one of the candidates guilty of down-playing my political party. My door to door fliers do not mention the Democratic Party. The County Party logo appears inconspicuously on the home page of my website and although one of the questions on my FAQ page is "Why are you running as a democrat?", there is no other mention of party affiliation.
The office I am running for is Representative of District 61 to the State House of Representatives. Voters will choose a person to represent them. With this in mind, I have been knocking on the doors of District 61 voters. I have introduced myself and asked them what they are looking for from the State Legislature. It has helped them to know me as a candidate, a choice on their November ballot, and it has helped me to know them and their concerns.
The Utah County candidates running as republicans are anxious to make the most of their affiliation with the majority party. For many, that is the total of their campaign message: "I am your Republican Party choice."
I do not plan to serve as a representative of my political party. I plan to serve as a representative of people. Real people. People who are struggling with uncertain futures, unemployment or under-employment, higher costs and lower incomes. But people who are resourceful, generous, and in most cases hopeful. I feel extremely confident in my ability to do this. So, to me, the political party is not the most important factor in choosing a representative. It does, however, have a role in the legislature.
There are great benefits of having a legislature that is more balanced in terms of political party. Legislators will turn down the divisive rhetoric to be able to work across the aisle. More opinions are heard and perspectives are examined and people are served. That is one of the reasons I choose to run as a democrat.
In addition, I have confidence in my adopted Democratic Party. I see it as the "big tent" that allows me to formulate solutions to problems from whatever source they come. I see the Utah County Democratic Party as a moderate alternative to an increasingly unbending conservatism in the Republican Party. I am comfortable working with the people in the County Party and I am grateful for the support of the State Democratic Party. Some of them may be skeptical of a moderate in their ranks but are encouraging me just the same.
Wednesday, October 27, 2010
Wednesday, October 20, 2010
Job Stimulus by Any Other Name
Today in the newspaper I saw an article about a proposal to raise the tax rebate incentive the film industry receives from the State of Utah from 20% to as much as 30%. I find this interesting.
What are the reasons for luring film makers to Utah? The jobs they provide are of course temporary and the tax revenue that they generate is a little fuzzy. If we are offering the incentives because we like to see ourselves in the movies, I question the move.
This isn't the only instance of corporate tax relief. The deal that Adobe got for locating in Lehi amounts to $40 million in tax relief over the next 20 years, with $17.5 million for area improvements and infrastructure over the same period. There was general celebration at the State Capitol at the announcement that Adobe was coming.
I hope that the investment of these funds does provide jobs for local workers and that it helps stimulate the economy. I would like to point out, however, that this is equivalent to a "jobs stimulus bill". The difference is the agreement to rebate future tax dollars, instead of appropriating the funds from current taxes and sending it out to existing businesses which are struggling.
I hear that over 80% of the jobs in Utah are in the small business sector. The state budget will be challenged to make ends meet again this year so the individual tax payers and the small businesses will carry the tax burden for the big businesses as they enjoy their rebates.
The Republican Party message often includes bashing the bills coming out of Congress meant to stimulate job growth. They refer to this as "tax and spend" and question the effectiveness of these efforts. However, this is little different from the corporate tax breaks they are applauding.
Will we see campaign contributions from the film industry and new-comer businesses such as Adobe, in gratitude for their financial boost courtesy of the Utah taxpayers? You can bet on it.
What are the reasons for luring film makers to Utah? The jobs they provide are of course temporary and the tax revenue that they generate is a little fuzzy. If we are offering the incentives because we like to see ourselves in the movies, I question the move.
This isn't the only instance of corporate tax relief. The deal that Adobe got for locating in Lehi amounts to $40 million in tax relief over the next 20 years, with $17.5 million for area improvements and infrastructure over the same period. There was general celebration at the State Capitol at the announcement that Adobe was coming.
I hope that the investment of these funds does provide jobs for local workers and that it helps stimulate the economy. I would like to point out, however, that this is equivalent to a "jobs stimulus bill". The difference is the agreement to rebate future tax dollars, instead of appropriating the funds from current taxes and sending it out to existing businesses which are struggling.
I hear that over 80% of the jobs in Utah are in the small business sector. The state budget will be challenged to make ends meet again this year so the individual tax payers and the small businesses will carry the tax burden for the big businesses as they enjoy their rebates.
The Republican Party message often includes bashing the bills coming out of Congress meant to stimulate job growth. They refer to this as "tax and spend" and question the effectiveness of these efforts. However, this is little different from the corporate tax breaks they are applauding.
Will we see campaign contributions from the film industry and new-comer businesses such as Adobe, in gratitude for their financial boost courtesy of the Utah taxpayers? You can bet on it.
A break in the count
A friend asked me yesterday if I knew how many doors I had knocked on or how many voters I had talked to about my campaign. At first I said I had no idea but then I realized that I had been tracking my canvassing on computer.
I went over the numbers last night and came up with this: I have currently knocked on 895 doors but since this doesn't include those whom I contacted for the ethics petition, the number is probably well over 1000 now. The number of individuals I have spoken to in person about my campaign is about 586. This includes telephone contacts but excludes those whom I contacted for the petition. If I include those for whom I left a telephone message, the number goes up to 605.
The downside to this person to person contacting is that I have picked up a cold virus along the way. Last night I went to bed with a scratchy throat and during the night I developed sinus congestion.
I'll stick to telephone contacting today and hope this cold is short-lived. There is much to do in the next 13 days!
I went over the numbers last night and came up with this: I have currently knocked on 895 doors but since this doesn't include those whom I contacted for the ethics petition, the number is probably well over 1000 now. The number of individuals I have spoken to in person about my campaign is about 586. This includes telephone contacts but excludes those whom I contacted for the petition. If I include those for whom I left a telephone message, the number goes up to 605.
The downside to this person to person contacting is that I have picked up a cold virus along the way. Last night I went to bed with a scratchy throat and during the night I developed sinus congestion.
I'll stick to telephone contacting today and hope this cold is short-lived. There is much to do in the next 13 days!
Monday, October 18, 2010
Sabotaging Stimulus
"It is amazing how much you can accomplish when it doesn't matter who gets the credit." -- Harry S. Truman
The Federal Stimulus funds were offered to states to spur jobs in education and the amount Utah accepted was $101 million. The money came with instructions that the states send it directly to the school districts so that they can keep employees working this school year.
The procedure in Utah, however, was more complicated because the State Constitution requires the legislature to allocate federal funds. This would require a session of the legislature, so there were two options:
1) wait for the legislative session to convene in January or
2) call a special session beforehand.
Waiting until January would mean a delay of as much as six months making it impossible to put this money to work during the 2010-2011 academic year.
The next interim meeting of the legislature is this Wednesday, the 20th of October and it seems that if all the legislators will be at the Capitol anyway, it would be a simple matter to convene a special session for the purpose of allocating the $101 million dollars to the school districts.
Of course, politics can turn anything that seems simple into a complex mess. The Governor now has said he will not convene a special session.
There was mixed response about accepting the money in the first place. Many legislators railed against the federal government's attempts to spur job growth by deficit spending on stimulus bills. Republicans are anxious to prove that it doesn't work.
Legislators also have a habit of micromanaging the operations of the state's school districts by mandating the use of funding. For example, the funds that come from the School Trust Lands have all kinds of restrictions. The legislature regularly weighs in on curriculum changes, specific education technology, teaching credentials, etc. I am concerned that they will bicker and fuss over how every penny should be spent. This could delay this allocation to the districts even more. I am a believer in local control and accountability. I would like to see this stimulus money sent to the districts as soon as possible with the instruction to use the funds as intended -- to foster employment.
There is talk of throwing this into the state education deficit or into the troubled pension fund. While I would love to see relief in both of these areas, this money has not come to us to be used in this manner. It is to protect jobs and even as one-time money, it should be used as intended. Otherwise it will become another case of "too little too late".
My fear is that politics will shortchange us in this case. In order to prove that stimulus bills do not work, legislators can make certain that this one doesn't. The ones who will suffer, however, are the teachers in this state and, ultimately, the school children.
The Federal Stimulus funds were offered to states to spur jobs in education and the amount Utah accepted was $101 million. The money came with instructions that the states send it directly to the school districts so that they can keep employees working this school year.
The procedure in Utah, however, was more complicated because the State Constitution requires the legislature to allocate federal funds. This would require a session of the legislature, so there were two options:
1) wait for the legislative session to convene in January or
2) call a special session beforehand.
Waiting until January would mean a delay of as much as six months making it impossible to put this money to work during the 2010-2011 academic year.
The next interim meeting of the legislature is this Wednesday, the 20th of October and it seems that if all the legislators will be at the Capitol anyway, it would be a simple matter to convene a special session for the purpose of allocating the $101 million dollars to the school districts.
Of course, politics can turn anything that seems simple into a complex mess. The Governor now has said he will not convene a special session.
There was mixed response about accepting the money in the first place. Many legislators railed against the federal government's attempts to spur job growth by deficit spending on stimulus bills. Republicans are anxious to prove that it doesn't work.
Legislators also have a habit of micromanaging the operations of the state's school districts by mandating the use of funding. For example, the funds that come from the School Trust Lands have all kinds of restrictions. The legislature regularly weighs in on curriculum changes, specific education technology, teaching credentials, etc. I am concerned that they will bicker and fuss over how every penny should be spent. This could delay this allocation to the districts even more. I am a believer in local control and accountability. I would like to see this stimulus money sent to the districts as soon as possible with the instruction to use the funds as intended -- to foster employment.
There is talk of throwing this into the state education deficit or into the troubled pension fund. While I would love to see relief in both of these areas, this money has not come to us to be used in this manner. It is to protect jobs and even as one-time money, it should be used as intended. Otherwise it will become another case of "too little too late".
My fear is that politics will shortchange us in this case. In order to prove that stimulus bills do not work, legislators can make certain that this one doesn't. The ones who will suffer, however, are the teachers in this state and, ultimately, the school children.
Saturday, October 9, 2010
Un-derdog
At a "Meet the Candidates" event this week, there was a gathering of state and legislative candidates that almost outnumbered the folks who came to hear them. Each candidate was given two and a half minutes to introduce themselves and was asked to carry a name placard with them to the front. Printed after each name on the card was an initial to indicate their party affiliation.
I told the audience that mine was "D" for Deon.
One of the other candidates who spoke was running without party affiliation and his name on the card was followed by "Un". He began his talk saying that he was an "Un", and quipped that perhaps some assumed it meant "unpopular" or "unelectable" and then acknowledged that it certainly meant "unfunded".
The interesting thing, however, was that if "Un" really were a party, and the unaffiliated really got behind their candidates, they would win by quite a margin. The majority of voters in this district are unaffiliated.
Based on my own personal experiences, I have accounted the growing ranks of unaffiliated voters to growing discontent with the Republican Party. I made the move from the Republican Party to the Democratic Party about three years ago and have met many others who have as well.
Based on my conversations with voters, as I walk this district, I have discovered another reason, probably a greater reason, for the expanding unaffiliated populace. Very often the unaffiliated are democrats, who have gone underground. I used to think the tales of persecution were exaggerated, that claims of discrimination were handy excuses, and threats of retribution were more perceived than real. I have now decided that, while some may be unwarranted, many claims are exactly as they say.
I have never heard anyone argue against Lord Acton's assertion that "Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely." At the same time, it is clear that the Republican Party in Utah, particularly in Utah County, is "in power". Yet the threat of corruption escapes so many people.
I had doubts as to the legitimacy of the recent charges of "pay to play" and corruption in the bidding process for government contracts until I spoke to a small business owner in this district who regularly bids for government contracts. There was no doubt in her mind that politics had come into play and that it does more often than not.
I have been told by business owners that they could not risk offending customers by putting up campaign signs for me. Interestingly, signs for republicans pop up a little while later.
In the last election, I pointed out in my fund raising letters that I was required to disclose the names of donors of $50 or more. I was astounded by the number of $49 donations I received.
When I heard the story of a woman whose husband's professional prospects were impacted by her campaign for public office as a democrat, I asked my husband if he thought his pay or promotions were hindered by my political activities. He responded immediately, "No." And then, with a moment to think about it, he added, "and if they were, it would be so wrong that I would still support you in this."
Other people are not so bold.
I keep hearing from unaffiliated voters, "You are so brave! Yes, I am a democrat and you have my vote." Some will take a sign but with the warning that their neighbors may remove it. Others don't want to cause a confrontation with their neighbors. More than once I found people who claimed to be "the only democrat on the block" living right next door to each other. Staying underground. Staying unaffiliated.
To me, this is the greatest indicator for the need for balanced opposition in government. The image that comes to my mind is that of the teeter-totter -- at one end, one scrawny kid with feet dangling, and at the other end, a gang of burly bullies who find perverse pleasure in their power as they hold their side down.
Perhaps that is why teeter-totters have disappeared from playgrounds. The concept was cooperative but children quickly learned to leverage power and maintain it through fear.
Swing voters have the ability to restore the game to balanced play. I am hoping they will in November.
I told the audience that mine was "D" for Deon.
One of the other candidates who spoke was running without party affiliation and his name on the card was followed by "Un". He began his talk saying that he was an "Un", and quipped that perhaps some assumed it meant "unpopular" or "unelectable" and then acknowledged that it certainly meant "unfunded".
The interesting thing, however, was that if "Un" really were a party, and the unaffiliated really got behind their candidates, they would win by quite a margin. The majority of voters in this district are unaffiliated.
Based on my own personal experiences, I have accounted the growing ranks of unaffiliated voters to growing discontent with the Republican Party. I made the move from the Republican Party to the Democratic Party about three years ago and have met many others who have as well.
Based on my conversations with voters, as I walk this district, I have discovered another reason, probably a greater reason, for the expanding unaffiliated populace. Very often the unaffiliated are democrats, who have gone underground. I used to think the tales of persecution were exaggerated, that claims of discrimination were handy excuses, and threats of retribution were more perceived than real. I have now decided that, while some may be unwarranted, many claims are exactly as they say.
I have never heard anyone argue against Lord Acton's assertion that "Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely." At the same time, it is clear that the Republican Party in Utah, particularly in Utah County, is "in power". Yet the threat of corruption escapes so many people.
I had doubts as to the legitimacy of the recent charges of "pay to play" and corruption in the bidding process for government contracts until I spoke to a small business owner in this district who regularly bids for government contracts. There was no doubt in her mind that politics had come into play and that it does more often than not.
I have been told by business owners that they could not risk offending customers by putting up campaign signs for me. Interestingly, signs for republicans pop up a little while later.
In the last election, I pointed out in my fund raising letters that I was required to disclose the names of donors of $50 or more. I was astounded by the number of $49 donations I received.
When I heard the story of a woman whose husband's professional prospects were impacted by her campaign for public office as a democrat, I asked my husband if he thought his pay or promotions were hindered by my political activities. He responded immediately, "No." And then, with a moment to think about it, he added, "and if they were, it would be so wrong that I would still support you in this."
Other people are not so bold.
I keep hearing from unaffiliated voters, "You are so brave! Yes, I am a democrat and you have my vote." Some will take a sign but with the warning that their neighbors may remove it. Others don't want to cause a confrontation with their neighbors. More than once I found people who claimed to be "the only democrat on the block" living right next door to each other. Staying underground. Staying unaffiliated.
To me, this is the greatest indicator for the need for balanced opposition in government. The image that comes to my mind is that of the teeter-totter -- at one end, one scrawny kid with feet dangling, and at the other end, a gang of burly bullies who find perverse pleasure in their power as they hold their side down.
Perhaps that is why teeter-totters have disappeared from playgrounds. The concept was cooperative but children quickly learned to leverage power and maintain it through fear.
Swing voters have the ability to restore the game to balanced play. I am hoping they will in November.
Thursday, October 7, 2010
Ding dong
This post is dedicated to wonderful people I meet as I walk door to door!
I am out to deliver the messages of my campaign but sometimes I get something in return.
One might expect that finding a supporter would result in the offer to host a sign, and it does. It also, at times, brings in a financial contribution and this is gratefully received!
Then there are the more unexpected gifts.
During the hot, dry summer, when I forgot to pack a water bottle and my mouth got dry and sticky, I was often offered water.
Once I stopped by at the home of a caterer who was busy cooking up a storm. I left with a take-out box for lunch.
Recently, I was given a DVD documentary on health care.
And just yesterday, I was introduced to a cottage business called "Thur-goodies" and left with a delicious cinnamon roll. It served to hold me over for dinner until it got too dark to knock doors.
What a great community this is!
I am out to deliver the messages of my campaign but sometimes I get something in return.
One might expect that finding a supporter would result in the offer to host a sign, and it does. It also, at times, brings in a financial contribution and this is gratefully received!
Then there are the more unexpected gifts.
During the hot, dry summer, when I forgot to pack a water bottle and my mouth got dry and sticky, I was often offered water.
Once I stopped by at the home of a caterer who was busy cooking up a storm. I left with a take-out box for lunch.
Recently, I was given a DVD documentary on health care.
And just yesterday, I was introduced to a cottage business called "Thur-goodies" and left with a delicious cinnamon roll. It served to hold me over for dinner until it got too dark to knock doors.
What a great community this is!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
