A number of years ago I heard of a Blessings Game that was recommended to families. It starts off with each family member identifying blessings, writing them down on little slips of paper and arranging them on the table. Such things as good health, friendly neighbors, grandparents, and opportunities for school come out immediately. Imagination is helpful as time goes on and indoor plumbing, my new running shoes, a roof that doesn't leak, and chocolate pudding are added. Soon the table is covered with happy little scraps. It seems to be a lesson about gratitude.
Part 2 of the game brings about a change in the atmosphere. Everyone is asked to choose what they would be willing to do without. "Okay, I guess I don't really need the collection of DVD's." Dad is surprised when one of the kids is willing to do without a lawn mower and the kids are perplexed that Dad is willing to toss out the TV. Round after round of sacrifices are made and soon one of the family says, "I don't want to play anymore," but the game must go on and the "Blessings Game" turns into the "Horrible Game". Eventually we are choosing between health and shelter. Clearly the lesson has turned into one about priorities.
The legislature is playing this horrible game now. We know that these times call for sacrifices and no one will be spared some sacrifice. It is critical, however, that the long-range effects of the choices are part of the consideration. I may be willing to do without tools if it came down to tools or skills needed to use them. But if as a community we lose both the tools and the skills to work once again when times are better, we have turned a crisis into a chronic condition.
As a people we are resilient and can give until it hurts. We can deal with "downs", knowing that "ups" will soon come along. We do not, however, want to see ourselves in a nosedive and headed into the ground. We must be assured that when the crisis is past we will have the skills, if not the same tools, to rebuild neglected infrastructure and to put lives back together.
Monday, March 8, 2010
Saturday, March 6, 2010
It's Official!
At 5 PM on March fourth, I stood before a group of smiling faces and announced that I had decided to March forth! I announced my campaign for the Utah State House of Representatives.
Over the next few days I will post excerpts from my announcement speech. Today I want to post the opening acknowledgments (including the people that I only thought to acknowledge after I sat down).
In attendance and at my side was my good husband who supports me in many of my wild adventures. He not only offers his technical expertise with all things digital, he also gives careful consideration to the issues of the day and shares his viewpoints with me. Often we agree, sometimes we do not, but his love and respect for me is constant.
My father drove 100 miles through blizzard conditions to attend this event and that was symbolic of his tremendous support for me. His example and explicit teaching throughout my life of personal integrity and responsibility are part of my living inheritance.
My mother, at home giving hospice care to my aunt, has of course been a great influence in my life. She has provided an example of community service throughout her life, including being elected to the district school board and organizing community activism. She spear-headed the first Tea Party march in Ogden so you know I have had conservative values instilled in me from the beginning.
I also feel the love and support of my parents-in-law, whom I love as my own parents and consider them as such.
My brothers and sisters, including all the in-laws, represent a wide political spectrum and some of us can be very out-spoken. My Staffanson and Turley parents raised us to be courageous independent thinkers. They are amazing role models.
The home where we have raised our seven children seems to be emptying out. My children are landing all across the country and some are starting families of their own. In spite of the distance, they are ever supportive of my political forays. I can count on them for campaign advice and their perspectives on public policy. This is valuable since they represent professions in economics, law, transportation, education, military service, and, in one case, navigating the middle school social scene. Each is a blessing to me.
Lastly, I am indebted to the many volunteers who have cheered my entrance into this campaign. Many have joined me as Republicans or independents because of their faith in me. This is humbling and gratifying. Many are what I call "the keepers of the Democratic Party flame." They have been marginalized for years and haven't succumbed to cynicism and despair. They continue to put heart, soul, shoe leather, and financial backing into hope that their voices will be heard. I am proud to be counted among those who are anxious to see balance return to state government. I am willing to work, and happy to represent my neighbors of District 61 in the Utah House of Representatives!
Over the next few days I will post excerpts from my announcement speech. Today I want to post the opening acknowledgments (including the people that I only thought to acknowledge after I sat down).
In attendance and at my side was my good husband who supports me in many of my wild adventures. He not only offers his technical expertise with all things digital, he also gives careful consideration to the issues of the day and shares his viewpoints with me. Often we agree, sometimes we do not, but his love and respect for me is constant.
My father drove 100 miles through blizzard conditions to attend this event and that was symbolic of his tremendous support for me. His example and explicit teaching throughout my life of personal integrity and responsibility are part of my living inheritance.
My mother, at home giving hospice care to my aunt, has of course been a great influence in my life. She has provided an example of community service throughout her life, including being elected to the district school board and organizing community activism. She spear-headed the first Tea Party march in Ogden so you know I have had conservative values instilled in me from the beginning.
I also feel the love and support of my parents-in-law, whom I love as my own parents and consider them as such.
My brothers and sisters, including all the in-laws, represent a wide political spectrum and some of us can be very out-spoken. My Staffanson and Turley parents raised us to be courageous independent thinkers. They are amazing role models.
The home where we have raised our seven children seems to be emptying out. My children are landing all across the country and some are starting families of their own. In spite of the distance, they are ever supportive of my political forays. I can count on them for campaign advice and their perspectives on public policy. This is valuable since they represent professions in economics, law, transportation, education, military service, and, in one case, navigating the middle school social scene. Each is a blessing to me.
Lastly, I am indebted to the many volunteers who have cheered my entrance into this campaign. Many have joined me as Republicans or independents because of their faith in me. This is humbling and gratifying. Many are what I call "the keepers of the Democratic Party flame." They have been marginalized for years and haven't succumbed to cynicism and despair. They continue to put heart, soul, shoe leather, and financial backing into hope that their voices will be heard. I am proud to be counted among those who are anxious to see balance return to state government. I am willing to work, and happy to represent my neighbors of District 61 in the Utah House of Representatives!
Wednesday, March 3, 2010
Balance of power in government
The three branches of government that should balance each other are well-known to students of government. The power of the Executive Branch is held in check by the Judiciary and the Legislative branch. Similarly, the courts are balanced by the governor's office and lawmakers; and the legislature is balanced by the courts and the governor.
There are also provisions to balance citizens' interest with the power of the legislature.
One is the ballot box. Voters unhappy with their representative certainly can wait for their term of office to expire and vote them out of office.
The other is the initiative process, which gives citizens the ability to create and pass legislation independent of their elected officials. It is created as an initiative and if enough voters sign a petition to place the initiative on the ballot, voters can vote the initiative up or down at the next election. This procedure may signal to their elected officials that they are generally pleased with their representation but that the legislature is reluctant to pass a particular piece of legislation.
The constitutionally guaranteed right to petition government is a pain in the neck for legislators who want to be the sole body able to initiate and pass legislation. The usual method of legislation is very good. It allowed careful consideration, debating, and often amending bills to approve them. This is sufficient -- most of the time.
Issues that relate to their conduct and the extent of their power are especially suited to voter oversight. The initiatives for legislative ethics and for fair boundaries in redistricting are precisely suited to citizen involvement.
There are also provisions to balance citizens' interest with the power of the legislature.
One is the ballot box. Voters unhappy with their representative certainly can wait for their term of office to expire and vote them out of office.
The other is the initiative process, which gives citizens the ability to create and pass legislation independent of their elected officials. It is created as an initiative and if enough voters sign a petition to place the initiative on the ballot, voters can vote the initiative up or down at the next election. This procedure may signal to their elected officials that they are generally pleased with their representation but that the legislature is reluctant to pass a particular piece of legislation.
The constitutionally guaranteed right to petition government is a pain in the neck for legislators who want to be the sole body able to initiate and pass legislation. The usual method of legislation is very good. It allowed careful consideration, debating, and often amending bills to approve them. This is sufficient -- most of the time.
Issues that relate to their conduct and the extent of their power are especially suited to voter oversight. The initiatives for legislative ethics and for fair boundaries in redistricting are precisely suited to citizen involvement.
Thursday, February 4, 2010
All politics
I have heard many times the statement: "All politics is local." The meaning of that, I suppose, is that the local effect of politics overrides the movements on state or national level. The messages of national politicians are tailored to the moods and opinions of their audiences as they tour the country.
I have found a reverse effect in my own community and I have been trying to understand how a politician responds to this.
Utah County has been identified as one of the most, if not the most, Republican counties in the country. Candidates for office, even non-partisan office, must prove their Republican credentials. When the Women's Legislative Council of Utah County holds events, they are listed as non-partisan but the woman conducting the meetings extols "the great Republican values" of its members and only Republican candidates for office are recognized and introduced. In this city only elected officials are allowed to ride in parades, closing that opportunity to other candidates for office, effectively shutting out all but one political party.
During my experience in running a campaign, the most frequently asked question is: "what party are you?" They are convinced that the party affiliation will tell them all they need to know about the candidate standing before them. And what they "know" about the party platforms is what they hear on national television. They will vote with the majority party even when the politics of the majority party are not in their best interest as families and individuals.
In a homogeneous community such as this, the majority party will tend to the extreme -- in this case, extreme conservatism. The only way to have a viable two party system, is to have an opposition party that maintains a moderate platform.
At this point, the Republican party leadership has fairly successfully convinced their voters that a vote for a local Democrat is a vote for the national platform of the Democratic Party. I was told a number of times that I could say that I was independent of party ideology but once elected, I would be pressured my members of my party. A printed copy of the more moderate platform of the Utah County Democratic Party failed to dissuade many.
The interesting thing is that the most popular Republican candidates are those who call themselves "Mavericks" -- a person who acts independent of any partisan pressures.
Maybe in other places, all politics is local. Around here, all politics is national.
I have found a reverse effect in my own community and I have been trying to understand how a politician responds to this.
Utah County has been identified as one of the most, if not the most, Republican counties in the country. Candidates for office, even non-partisan office, must prove their Republican credentials. When the Women's Legislative Council of Utah County holds events, they are listed as non-partisan but the woman conducting the meetings extols "the great Republican values" of its members and only Republican candidates for office are recognized and introduced. In this city only elected officials are allowed to ride in parades, closing that opportunity to other candidates for office, effectively shutting out all but one political party.
During my experience in running a campaign, the most frequently asked question is: "what party are you?" They are convinced that the party affiliation will tell them all they need to know about the candidate standing before them. And what they "know" about the party platforms is what they hear on national television. They will vote with the majority party even when the politics of the majority party are not in their best interest as families and individuals.
In a homogeneous community such as this, the majority party will tend to the extreme -- in this case, extreme conservatism. The only way to have a viable two party system, is to have an opposition party that maintains a moderate platform.
At this point, the Republican party leadership has fairly successfully convinced their voters that a vote for a local Democrat is a vote for the national platform of the Democratic Party. I was told a number of times that I could say that I was independent of party ideology but once elected, I would be pressured my members of my party. A printed copy of the more moderate platform of the Utah County Democratic Party failed to dissuade many.
The interesting thing is that the most popular Republican candidates are those who call themselves "Mavericks" -- a person who acts independent of any partisan pressures.
Maybe in other places, all politics is local. Around here, all politics is national.
Thursday, January 21, 2010
A Supreme Court Speed Bump for Ethics Reform
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.
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.
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?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
