I have been a proponent of the legislative ethics initiative by Utahns for Ethical Government, which is in the petition stage this winter. It is a slow process going door to door because each signature usually involves a lengthy explanation. I do not begrudge the time; it shows that the voters want to be informed.
The voice of opposition to this petition has been coming primarily from the incumbent politicians. They fear the changes it would require. Its provisions for campaign finance reform, for example, prohibit individual donors from contributing more than $2500 and prohibits contributions in any amount from businesses.
Now, however, the ruling of the Supreme Court (January 21, 2010) has driven a hole into the initiative in just this area. Political contributions are seen as "free speech" and cannot be prohibited or limited and business entities are seen as having the same rights of free speech as individuals.
The UEG initiative has strong support among the voters in Utah and while the limits on campaign funding will be stripped by the severability clause, the rest of the bill, if passed in the November election, would still stand.
Although campaign contributions will be unlimited, whether from individuals or from special interest groups—including businesses, voters can learn much about the sort of representation they can expect from a political candidate by examining the sources of their campaign funds.
If he is aware of the Supreme Court ruling, my own representative is understandably relieved by this ruling. Every one of his contributions came from businesses, Political Action Committees, or other candidates’ campaign funds. These are the interests he can be expected to represent.
Thursday, January 21, 2010
Wednesday, January 13, 2010
A Survey or a Push Poll
As the 2010 legislative session gets underway, state senators and representatives are wise to collect information from their constituents. After all, how can they represent people whose opinions they do not know? Town Hall meetings are a great way to do this. Opinion polls and surveys, either by phone or mail, are also good options. Our household recently received the “2010 Legislative Survey” from our elected representative and senator.
Most surveys are meant to collect information. Others are “push polls” meant to look like they are collecting information but, in reality, are meant to disseminate it. A push poll is often used to promote oneself or to “push” negative information about a person or viewpoint.
The first clue that the survey I received might not be a survey to collect real attitudes and opinions was that bad news is introduced with "Due to the economic downturn," and good news with "Due to wise fiscal management".
The second clue was the fact that opinions are interspersed with the questions, such as the following: (Do you support or oppose) steps to opt out of provisions that would raise taxes and harm businesses if a 'Cap and Trade' agreement passes congress?"
The final question put to rest any of my remaining doubts about the nature of this survey. It offers six statements, next to which respondents can place a checkmark to indicate agreement. There is no space for respondents to add explanations or exceptions.
The first statement reads "I prefer having laws made through the legislative process with public hearings rather than by initiative." Of course we all prefer the legislative process over walking petitions around. There is, however, a constitutional right to petition government when the elected representatives ignore the will of the people. Two such cases produced the current initiatives: legislative ethics reform by Utahns for Ethical Government and redistricting reform by Fair Boundaries. In Utah, legislation by initiative is rare but the right to it is essential.
The second statement is "I am aware that the initiative creates and [sic] Ethics Commission that has not [sic] accountability to the Executive, Legislative and Judicial branch [sic] and that its decision cannot be appealed." How do you agree or disagree that you are aware of a falsehood? The proposed commission would be composed of legislative staff chosen by the legislators themselves. The only sense in which this commission would not be “accountable” to elected officials is in the fact that such officials would not completely control commission decisions. These decisions would be whether to forward submitted complaints to the Ethics Committee—formed of legislators themselves—who would then hear and rule on these complaints. Rulings could be appealed. Why would a decision to merely hear a complaint need to be appealed?
The third statement is "I am aware that the Ethics Commission would consist of members who have life time appointments." Again, how can you state you are aware of a falsehood? Commission members would serve five year terms with staggered dates of replacement.
The fourth statement is "I have/would sign [sic] the 21 page Citizens Ethics Initiative without reading it." Is this an attempt to intimidate? It shouldn't be, since the writers of this survey obviously haven't read the initiative.
The fifth statement is "I would prefer laws that create an increased transparency in lobbyist activities." The State of Utah is recognized for promoting transparency and this initiative does nothing to limit that. But the state can dump a pile of data onto a website, calling it transparency, and it would be far more obscure to voters than having the legislators sign a code of conduct.
The last statement is "I think campaign contributions should be capped notwithstanding that such a cap could prevent citizens in lower income brackets from running for office." A cap would prevent a candidate of any economic background from running a campaign financed solely by a few special interest groups. This, unfortunately, is common practice. To finance a campaign through contributions from constituents provides a candidate an opportunity to talk to these constituents and really hear what they think. If the Ethics initiative accomplished just this much, it would be worthwhile.
I have decided not to send in the survey. It will not tell my representatives anything about what I think. But then again, it wasn't meant to.
Most surveys are meant to collect information. Others are “push polls” meant to look like they are collecting information but, in reality, are meant to disseminate it. A push poll is often used to promote oneself or to “push” negative information about a person or viewpoint.
The first clue that the survey I received might not be a survey to collect real attitudes and opinions was that bad news is introduced with "Due to the economic downturn," and good news with "Due to wise fiscal management".
The second clue was the fact that opinions are interspersed with the questions, such as the following: (Do you support or oppose) steps to opt out of provisions that would raise taxes and harm businesses if a 'Cap and Trade' agreement passes congress?"
The final question put to rest any of my remaining doubts about the nature of this survey. It offers six statements, next to which respondents can place a checkmark to indicate agreement. There is no space for respondents to add explanations or exceptions.
The first statement reads "I prefer having laws made through the legislative process with public hearings rather than by initiative." Of course we all prefer the legislative process over walking petitions around. There is, however, a constitutional right to petition government when the elected representatives ignore the will of the people. Two such cases produced the current initiatives: legislative ethics reform by Utahns for Ethical Government and redistricting reform by Fair Boundaries. In Utah, legislation by initiative is rare but the right to it is essential.
The second statement is "I am aware that the initiative creates and [sic] Ethics Commission that has not [sic] accountability to the Executive, Legislative and Judicial branch [sic] and that its decision cannot be appealed." How do you agree or disagree that you are aware of a falsehood? The proposed commission would be composed of legislative staff chosen by the legislators themselves. The only sense in which this commission would not be “accountable” to elected officials is in the fact that such officials would not completely control commission decisions. These decisions would be whether to forward submitted complaints to the Ethics Committee—formed of legislators themselves—who would then hear and rule on these complaints. Rulings could be appealed. Why would a decision to merely hear a complaint need to be appealed?
The third statement is "I am aware that the Ethics Commission would consist of members who have life time appointments." Again, how can you state you are aware of a falsehood? Commission members would serve five year terms with staggered dates of replacement.
The fourth statement is "I have/would sign [sic] the 21 page Citizens Ethics Initiative without reading it." Is this an attempt to intimidate? It shouldn't be, since the writers of this survey obviously haven't read the initiative.
The fifth statement is "I would prefer laws that create an increased transparency in lobbyist activities." The State of Utah is recognized for promoting transparency and this initiative does nothing to limit that. But the state can dump a pile of data onto a website, calling it transparency, and it would be far more obscure to voters than having the legislators sign a code of conduct.
The last statement is "I think campaign contributions should be capped notwithstanding that such a cap could prevent citizens in lower income brackets from running for office." A cap would prevent a candidate of any economic background from running a campaign financed solely by a few special interest groups. This, unfortunately, is common practice. To finance a campaign through contributions from constituents provides a candidate an opportunity to talk to these constituents and really hear what they think. If the Ethics initiative accomplished just this much, it would be worthwhile.
I have decided not to send in the survey. It will not tell my representatives anything about what I think. But then again, it wasn't meant to.
Tuesday, January 12, 2010
Happy New Year!
Holidays are wonderful ways to end a year. It is like having dessert at the end of a meal. It leaves a good taste in your mouth. At least, that is the way it has been for me.
My almost-empty nest was filled (and then some) with children who brought their children. Coming from the East Coast, the Midwest, and the Pacific Northwest, they converged. The grandchildren played with each other, with only occasional klonks with their toys; the grown children laughed and teased each other; and even the in-laws chatted comfortably. Conversation topics ranged from potty training to college selection to hospice care -- and, of course, memories of Christmases past.
We are blessed with comfortable shelter, sufficient food, caring friends, loving family, and faith that God is watching over all.
What could be better than this?
My almost-empty nest was filled (and then some) with children who brought their children. Coming from the East Coast, the Midwest, and the Pacific Northwest, they converged. The grandchildren played with each other, with only occasional klonks with their toys; the grown children laughed and teased each other; and even the in-laws chatted comfortably. Conversation topics ranged from potty training to college selection to hospice care -- and, of course, memories of Christmases past.
We are blessed with comfortable shelter, sufficient food, caring friends, loving family, and faith that God is watching over all.
What could be better than this?
Tuesday, November 17, 2009
Has it been a year?
This past year has been different from the previous year.
I have written more birthday cards. I have painted my living room. I planted and harvested a vegetable garden. I have read books just for fun. I have hiked a mountain and rafted a river. I have experimented with new recipes in the kitchen, new software on the computer, new hardware used with power tools, and new projects with the sewing machine. In short, I have taken on more varied projects during this year than campaigning allowed in 2008.
The similarities lie in the fact that I still enjoy relationships with old friends and new. I still have kept a paddle in the stream of politics. And I continue to find avenues of service to my community.
I watched with interest the birth of two different citizen initiatives during this past summer. Both addressed needs of our state government and I am pleased to be carrying both petitions to my neighbors these days. If you have not investigated the initiatives, called "Fair Boundaries" and "Utahns for Ethical Government", I encourage you to do so. The names above are linked to their respective websites. If you are registered to vote in Utah, I would be pleased to bring a petition to you to sign or arrange for someone else to do this.
The process of bringing a citizens' initiative to the voters' ballot next November is arduous but these issues are worth the trouble. I hope you will join me in supporting these initiatives.
I have written more birthday cards. I have painted my living room. I planted and harvested a vegetable garden. I have read books just for fun. I have hiked a mountain and rafted a river. I have experimented with new recipes in the kitchen, new software on the computer, new hardware used with power tools, and new projects with the sewing machine. In short, I have taken on more varied projects during this year than campaigning allowed in 2008.
The similarities lie in the fact that I still enjoy relationships with old friends and new. I still have kept a paddle in the stream of politics. And I continue to find avenues of service to my community.
I watched with interest the birth of two different citizen initiatives during this past summer. Both addressed needs of our state government and I am pleased to be carrying both petitions to my neighbors these days. If you have not investigated the initiatives, called "Fair Boundaries" and "Utahns for Ethical Government", I encourage you to do so. The names above are linked to their respective websites. If you are registered to vote in Utah, I would be pleased to bring a petition to you to sign or arrange for someone else to do this.
The process of bringing a citizens' initiative to the voters' ballot next November is arduous but these issues are worth the trouble. I hope you will join me in supporting these initiatives.
Thursday, February 19, 2009
Legislator v. the PTA
Senate Bill 199 is an example of vendetta legislation that has long range implications. It would make it illegal for schools to work with volunteer parent groups that require members to pay dues.
Many parent organizations charge membership dues but recognize that most of the activities at their individual schools are paid for by other fundraising efforts. PTA would literally be pushed out of the state since its state and national bylaws require membership dues. The dues that come from PTA members are what makes it possible for PTA to be a lobbying organization, advocating for children, families, and schools.
PTA was in the forefront of the push to get School Trustlands to produce an sizable and growing income in the state of Utah and legislators have been anxious to get their hands on funds being generated by the Trustlands ever since. PTA has been vigilant in protecting public schools' interests with Trustlands funds. This has been possible with their lobbying efforts.
Senator Curt Bramble is the bill sponsor and his political opponent in the past election is active in the PTA. He and PTA have been at loggerheads on a number of occasions, most recently in the voucher fight.
Senator Bramble would certainly be pleased to see the lobbying ability of PTA wiped out. This bill has the potential to do it.
Many parent organizations charge membership dues but recognize that most of the activities at their individual schools are paid for by other fundraising efforts. PTA would literally be pushed out of the state since its state and national bylaws require membership dues. The dues that come from PTA members are what makes it possible for PTA to be a lobbying organization, advocating for children, families, and schools.
PTA was in the forefront of the push to get School Trustlands to produce an sizable and growing income in the state of Utah and legislators have been anxious to get their hands on funds being generated by the Trustlands ever since. PTA has been vigilant in protecting public schools' interests with Trustlands funds. This has been possible with their lobbying efforts.
Senator Curt Bramble is the bill sponsor and his political opponent in the past election is active in the PTA. He and PTA have been at loggerheads on a number of occasions, most recently in the voucher fight.
Senator Bramble would certainly be pleased to see the lobbying ability of PTA wiped out. This bill has the potential to do it.
Need a job? Be a teacher!
Senate Bill 48 is said to address a teacher shortage, and would allow people to get jobs as teachers in public schools without the education background currently required.
The “shortage of teachers” may be affected by predictions of high unemployment.
But the real question to ask is whether “real world” experience can take the place of training in pedagogy for teachers. For example: would a banker or bookkeeper who has been laid off be prepared to teach math at the local middle school. Should a retired secretary with no other training be hired to teach English, or second grade? Pedagogy includes what motivates a child to learn, how to discipline individually and in a classroom setting, how to create effective lesson plans, how to write tests and measure learning.
The argument that “substitutes have no other requirement than a high school diploma” is no reason to lower the standards for full time teachers with responsibilities for a class. I will concede that there are many “natural teachers” that could by their personality and dedication effectively teach young people. But brillance in a subject area isn't the same as understanding how to impart the knowledge. A concert pianist may not be a good piano teacher. The skills that motivate love for learning may be natural but I can't see how will it show up on a written application.
Before this door to employment in public schools is opened, I’d like to see provisions of a trial period, mentoring and supervisory structure, and equal requirements for on-going training.
The “shortage of teachers” may be affected by predictions of high unemployment.
But the real question to ask is whether “real world” experience can take the place of training in pedagogy for teachers. For example: would a banker or bookkeeper who has been laid off be prepared to teach math at the local middle school. Should a retired secretary with no other training be hired to teach English, or second grade? Pedagogy includes what motivates a child to learn, how to discipline individually and in a classroom setting, how to create effective lesson plans, how to write tests and measure learning.
The argument that “substitutes have no other requirement than a high school diploma” is no reason to lower the standards for full time teachers with responsibilities for a class. I will concede that there are many “natural teachers” that could by their personality and dedication effectively teach young people. But brillance in a subject area isn't the same as understanding how to impart the knowledge. A concert pianist may not be a good piano teacher. The skills that motivate love for learning may be natural but I can't see how will it show up on a written application.
Before this door to employment in public schools is opened, I’d like to see provisions of a trial period, mentoring and supervisory structure, and equal requirements for on-going training.
Thursday, February 12, 2009
The Long Road to Becoming Law
While the budgetary woes and sensational debates about gay marriage garner all the attention, there are still issues that pop up occasionally that merit a look.
In order for a bill to become law, it must pass through the Rules Committee of the legislative body of its sponsor. So a bill sponsored by a state representative would go through the House Rules committee. That committee decides if it is reasonable to consider this bill. If they decide it is a great bill that should definitely be debated by the House, they can send it "by consent" directly to be scheduled for debate and a vote by the House. If they definitely don't like it, they can table it and it doesn't come up at all. If they want it studied, as most bills are, they assign it to a committee by topic.
For example, the Senate bill that asked for a rate increase in the tax on tobacco was sent to the Committee on Revenue and Taxation. They studied it and decided that it should not be considered and that ended it.
A similar bill was sponsored by a member of the House of Representatives and is being considered by the House Rules committee. If it is sent to the same committee, it will probably suffer the same fate. Proponents of the bill hope that it will be considered by the Committee of Health and Human Services. This is not an unreasonable assignment since the revenue from tobacco tax goes to fund program to discourage tobacco use and for health services required by smokers.
Another bill that is currently being evaluated by the House Rules Committee is HB189 that would make changes in the instruction of sex education in schools. This bill has a long list of specific instruction on what health teachers are to say. It also removes the directive that health teachers not advocate use of contraceptives. Proponents of the bill point out that STD's are up in the State and that something more should be done. Opponents of the bill hold that while health teacherss can present facts, parents should be the ones to teach their children moral principles. For me a major factor is that the State School Board is qualified and elected to determine curriculum standards and requirements. The legislature should not be micro-managing school curriculum.
If a bill is found worthy of "floor debate" it is sent to the legislative body of the sponsor, House or Senate, and is debated and voted upon. If it passes, it is sent to the rules committee of the other legislative body to begin the process again with a new sponsor. If it passes the rules committee and the committee to which it is assigned, and if it receives a majority vote by the second legislative body, it is on its way to the Governor's desk. The Governor can sign it, veto it, or let it go into law without his direct approval.
Stay tuned for more reports on what may soon become your new laws!
In order for a bill to become law, it must pass through the Rules Committee of the legislative body of its sponsor. So a bill sponsored by a state representative would go through the House Rules committee. That committee decides if it is reasonable to consider this bill. If they decide it is a great bill that should definitely be debated by the House, they can send it "by consent" directly to be scheduled for debate and a vote by the House. If they definitely don't like it, they can table it and it doesn't come up at all. If they want it studied, as most bills are, they assign it to a committee by topic.
For example, the Senate bill that asked for a rate increase in the tax on tobacco was sent to the Committee on Revenue and Taxation. They studied it and decided that it should not be considered and that ended it.
A similar bill was sponsored by a member of the House of Representatives and is being considered by the House Rules committee. If it is sent to the same committee, it will probably suffer the same fate. Proponents of the bill hope that it will be considered by the Committee of Health and Human Services. This is not an unreasonable assignment since the revenue from tobacco tax goes to fund program to discourage tobacco use and for health services required by smokers.
Another bill that is currently being evaluated by the House Rules Committee is HB189 that would make changes in the instruction of sex education in schools. This bill has a long list of specific instruction on what health teachers are to say. It also removes the directive that health teachers not advocate use of contraceptives. Proponents of the bill point out that STD's are up in the State and that something more should be done. Opponents of the bill hold that while health teacherss can present facts, parents should be the ones to teach their children moral principles. For me a major factor is that the State School Board is qualified and elected to determine curriculum standards and requirements. The legislature should not be micro-managing school curriculum.
If a bill is found worthy of "floor debate" it is sent to the legislative body of the sponsor, House or Senate, and is debated and voted upon. If it passes, it is sent to the rules committee of the other legislative body to begin the process again with a new sponsor. If it passes the rules committee and the committee to which it is assigned, and if it receives a majority vote by the second legislative body, it is on its way to the Governor's desk. The Governor can sign it, veto it, or let it go into law without his direct approval.
Stay tuned for more reports on what may soon become your new laws!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
