Thursday, August 28, 2008

Why isn't Matheson at the DNC Convention?


Many may expect this to be a shot at Matheson for not attending the Democratic Convention . . . well you'd actually be wrong. Matheson is smart and he's making his decision in a smart way. Wouldn't it be nice if more politicians (i.e. Republicans) acted smart!

Before making a decision on any event you are invited to as a candidate you need to do a cost/benefit analysis. What are the drawbacks, what do you gain, what will the public think?

For Matheson this is pretty easy:

Benefits:
  • Loyal Democrats like you more (but they will be voting with you most likely anyway)
  • You may be able to hold off a more Liberal Democrat from challenging you next cycle (would be foolish for the Democrats to get rid of him)
  • You get to hob-nob with Big Money and others who may help your campaign (Yet you can do the same thing in more private situations without as much political risk)
  • You get to go to a fun event
Costs:
  • You don't look very Moderate in an area you need to look moderate in to win
  • You take a week out of other campaign activities
  • You end up in the Clinton/Obama problems
  • Republicans will attack you as just another Liberal Democrat
  • You do miss family obligations (Which s a sacrifice an Elected Official has to make often)
So if it was you running for election what would you do?

Some may say Matheson is unbeatable, but as soon as he starts thinking or acting unbeatable he becomes beatable!

And all of this coming from a guy who doesn't support Matheson in any way.

Thursday, July 31, 2008

Utah Lake Commission

Last night I had the opportunity to attend an Open House for the Utah Lake Commission.

I left disappointed. I looked for detailed information on what the Commission had worked on and what opportunities there were to better the lake. Unfortunately there was really no presentation and the details they provided were very bland and lacked specificity. Yet they asked the 15 or so people there to support or not support the items they were planning (how do you make a decision with no details?).

I had hoped that the meetings would facilitate discussion and talk about specifics. I appreciated what Provo City did when they held meeting to discuss the future of Downtown Provo. Provo took the opportunity to discuss various specifics with those who attended. I believe that's why so many people attended the meetings.

We need to make sure the Utah Lake Commission gets information from the public on specifics. They need to take specifics not just broad generalities from the public. That is how they will be able to create a plan the public will truly want and need.

Wednesday, July 23, 2008

An LDS Perspective on Civic Involvement

“Our obligations to our country never cease except but with our lives” wrote John Adams to Benjamin Rush on April 18, 1808.

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints’ (LDS) First Presidency stated in June 1979 “We encourage all members, as citizens of the nation, to be actively involved in the political process, and to support those measures which will strengthen the community, state, and nation—morally, economically, and culturally.”

The Doctrine and Covenants (LDS Canonized Scripture) states in Section 134 “We believe that all men are bound to sustain and uphold the respective governments in which they reside” (verse 5) Now think about what it means to Sustain in LDS religious perspective. President Hinckley said “The procedure of sustaining is much more than a ritualistic raising of the hand. It is a commitment to uphold, to support, to assist those who have been selected” (Ensign May 1995 pg 51) Now don’t you think that’s the way God intended us to sustain our government according to section 134?

So what have we been instructed to do to Sustain our Country?

First we read in Doctrine & Covenants Section 58 “Wherefore Honest men and wise men should be sought for diligently.” (Verse 10) We are taught to be active, not passive participants. We are to seek people to support in public office and especially vote. Hyrum Smith said “ . . . to Vote for Wicked Men, it would be sin.” (Documentary History of the Church, vol. 6, p. 323.) I also believe it is relevant to listen to the counsel of one of America’s Founding Fathers, Samuel Adams, when he said “Let each citizen remember at the moment he is offering his vote that he is not making a present or a compliment to please an individual – or at least that he ought not so to do; but that he is executing one of the most solemn trusts in human society for which he is accountable to God and his country.” (Samuel Adams, in the Boston Gazette, April 16, 1781)

We also have been taught by our prophets and apostles to be engaged as citizens. To not only be good in church but to be good to our community. We are to strengthen our community. Elder L. Tom Perry taught, “With this great blessing (The Gospel) comes an obligation to be a part of the communities in which we live. Our influence should be felt to safeguard the moral standards in the villages, in the towns, and in the cities where our homes are located in all parts of the world. I challenge you to become involved in lifting the moral standards of the communities where your homes are.” (Ensign, May 1977, p. 61.) We cannot as Latter Day Saints leave it up to others to make sure our community and our Nation are on the right track. We have to be involved. We need to realize that our future generations need us. If the Priesthood men and relief society women do not stand up then who will? Will it be those with motives that are not the same as our own? Will it be those who instead of pushing for more morality in government are fighting to ban God from our Nation’s institutions?

We must also teach patriotism and love for our Country? Dr. Kenneth McFarland a noted speaker describes a young man coming home from Vietnam and asking his parents if they loved America. They responded with how dearly they loved this land and the benefits it has brought their family of freedom and happiness. The son then asked “Why didn’t you tell me that when I was growing up?” he said. “I never heard you once say that you loved America. You never taught me to love it. I can’t tell you what an ungrateful pup I have been. I had to go to Vietnam to find out what the United States of America is all about. I would gladly lay down my life for it. I would have given anything to know how you felt about it when I was growing up.” Elder Vaughan J. Featherstone while serving in the Presiding Bishopric wrote in the Ensign “I think it is time we should all awaken. Our concern isn’t about the flames of freedom which burn so brightly in our generation; the concern is that in the upcoming generation the fire has never been kindled. Our youth have never known anything but criticism of the United States of America. We need some faithful, free-loving patriots who will issue forth a clear, loud trumpet call. Remember Paul’s counsel: “For if the trumpet give an uncertain sound, who shall prepare … to the battle?” (1 Cor. 14:8.) Freedom ought to ring in the heart of every Latter-day Saint regardless of his country.” (But Watchmen, What of the Night, Ensign Nov 1975)

The first Presidency has even put out an official Letter stating the need to teach the Constitution to our children in America.(First Presidency letter of 15 Jan. 1987) For true citizenship, true patriotism isn’t just about only saying how you love your freedom or your country, though we need to say it. It’s about getting out there and showing it. Flying the flag on National/State Holidays. Talking about as a family what these days off mean, we can take some time before running off to the BBQs or the lake to actually remember why the day is a holiday. We can use these days as teaching tools for our children and ourselves about the sacrifices our predecessors had to give. “Of the 56 who signed the Declaration of Independence, nine died of wounds or hardships during the war. Five were captured and imprisoned, in each case with brutal treatment. Several lost wives, sons or entire families. One lost his 13 children. Two wives were brutally treated. All were at one time or another the victims of manhunts and driven from their homes. Twelve signers had their homes completely burned. Seventeen lost everything they owned. Yet not one defected or went back on his pledged word. Their honor, and the nation they sacrificed so much to create is still intact.” (Rush Limbaugh, Our Lives Our Fortunes, Our Sacred Honor) If they can put up with so much, can we not put up with such small inconveniences? Adlai Stevenson said “Patriotism puts Country ahead of self, (it’s a) steady dedication of a lifetime.” (Adlai Stevenson, speech given in New York City, 27 August 1952, quoted in John Bartlett, Familiar Quotations, Boston: Little, Brown and Co., 1955, p. 986.)

Let us remember to be good citizens through involvement in our community. We may think the world is doomed as prophecies have stated, but that does not absolve us of our duties to fight for what’s right. The Church has encouraged and invited its members to get involved in many civic causes. From opposing pornography, liquor sales and gambling to the fight against the Equal Rights Amendment or the MX Missiles. Our Church has stood strong on involvement in Civic Life. Even as recently as June 20th the First Presidency asked the Saints in California to get involved through support for the California Constitutional Amendment to protect the sanctity of Marriage. They used these words “We ask that you do all you can to support the proposed constitutional amendment by donating of your means and time . . . Our best efforts are required. . . “ (First Presidency Letter, June 20, 2008, as found in the Deseret News) Let us take those words to heart for our local community and national community as well.

I know how important these duties are. I challenge you to pay attention a little more. Read the news papers, follow candidates, don’t just complain get out there and do something about your concerns. Remember to vote November 4th. Make it a habit, not just a rarity. Our nation was founded in such a way as to allow Freedom here. Let us keep our freedoms by going out and getting involved.

I end in the words of Elder Featherstone, “The priesthood of God should be an example of patriotism and loyalty to our country.” (But Watchmen, What of the Night, Ensign Nov 1975)

An Analysis of the Utah Primary Election 2008

One month ago Utah experienced several monumental upsets in Primary Elections. In this election a 6 term Congressman, 3 County Commissioners, 2 Legislators, and a State Treasurer candidate supported by pretty much every heavy weight in the Republican Party lost. The question has to be why? Many are trying to claim reasons for each individual race. This is true to a certain extent, but they miss the greater overarching facts in the results. There are too many similarities between the loses for us to not see at least some reasons that are universal.

Some of similarities are:
  • The Republican voters were not interested in getting out and voting.
  • Those who did come out had a clear anti-establishment even anti-party bent (only slightly larger numerically then 2 years ago).
  • In most races the public went against the votes of the Delegates (3rd Congressional District being the exception).
Why is this happening? My research has pointed me to the following points:
  • Republicans are not excited about John McCain, and this frustration with the nominee is pushing Republicans away.
  • Voters overall are tired of the way our country is being led.
  • Voters want something done to fix the Economy/Gas Prices and they feel nothing is being done.
  • Because of this feeling of nothing being done they are starting to lash out at the Establishment (i.e. Republican Incumbents).
What other factors are at play?
  • We see in-fighting within the Party that damages the Party.
  • Democrats are extremely excited (especially in Utah) that Barrack Obama is their National Nominee.
  • Democrats are raising enough money to be at play in the elections.
  • Democrats have also recruited several well known and well respected candidates (Including in Utah County).
What does this mean in Utah?
  • First the Republican Party is in trouble, their supporters are mad.
  • Those who are getting out and voting want to change the system.
  • They don’t want to support those who have been in charge because they feel like those in charge haven’t done enough.
  • This means several races are now open to the Democratic Party that weren’t previously.
  • We could see low Republican turnout meet high excited Democratic turnout equaling incumbent loses.
Caveats:
  • If John McCain picks Mitt Romney as his running mate Republicans in Utah will get out and be excited.
  • Several local issues can create problems. (I use for example the democratic candidate whose FiancĂ© was indicted for running a Prostitution ring)
What should we do?
  • We need to (as a Party if possible) advocate our goals, not just define our principles.
  • We need to understand the dynamics and not take for granted the opportunities for losses.
  • We must figure out how to bring our Party back together.
  • The Party needs to right itself.

Sunday, May 4, 2008

Salt Lake County Republican Convention 2008


I had the opportunity to attend the Salt Lake County Convention and here are some thoughts and information:
  • Not as many signs outside this year for Salt Lake, Utah County had many more.
  • Once you got inside there were quite a few as usual.
  • Once again Incumbents are what delegates prefer, the only incumbent to lose lost to the person who vacated the position 2 years ago to run for Congress. (LaVar Christiansen vs Sylvia Anderson)
  • The Senate Leadership Race is going to be very interesting, Sen. Waddoups has already announced he will challenge Valentine for President.
  • Vouchers support does not get you kicked out of office.
  • Delegates want experience, pure and simple. What's more they want leadership!
  • Republicans are CONSERVATIVES!
House District 48:
La Var Christensen - 42
Sylvia Andersen (i) - 18

  • La Var held the seat until 2006 when he vacated it to run for Congress.
  • I heard many delegates say they wanted someone with more leadership, not just the right votes.
  • Most legislators supported Anderson's re-election (Reps. Steve Urquhart, R-St. George; Becky Lockhart, R-Provo; Lorie Fowlke, R-Orem; Keith Grover, R-Provo; Chris Herrod, R-Provo; Sens. Wayne Niederhauser, R-Sandy; and Curt Bramble, R-Provo and others)
  • Sen. Margaret Dayton supported Christiansen openly
  • Lt. Governor Gary Herbert and House Majority Leader David Clark were on both candidates literature as a supporter, who wasn't truthful?
Senate District 10:
D. Chris Buttars (i) - 112
Gary Armstrong - 74
House District 24:
Joe Jarvis - 28
Michael Ridgway - 1
  • That's gotta hurt Mike Ridgeway's pride!
  • It shows his district doesn't even want that type of divisive politics.
House District 51:

Greg Hughes (i) 60
Margaret Bird 26
  • The UEA had strength just not enough
  • Don't run as a single issue candidate, it seems that Bird was only about Education
House District 32:
Ron Bigelow (i) - 30

Walt Sorensen - 1
Johnny T. Ruiz - 0

House District 33:
Warren Webb - 17
Joseph Pete Moesser - 6
Andrew Parker - 0

House District 35:

Rob Alexander - 10
Rick Taylor - 6

House District 42:
Jim Bird (i) - 41
Steven Larsen Rinehart - 18
Peggy Wallace - 3

House District 45:
Brian Monsen - 33
Mary Bangerter - 18


House District 46:
Jaren Davis - 46
LeAnne Walker - 8

Senate District 6:
Michael Waddoups (i) - 83
Ronda Rose - 43


County Mayor:
Michael Renckert - 1,079
Joseph Irish - 40

County Council District 6:
Max Burdick - 137
Robert Warnick - 44

*Results courtesy of the Salt Lake Tribune.


AWARD for weirdest sign placement once again goes to Leavitt for Congress.
Signs in the restrooms? Really is that what you want your name associated with?

Tuesday, April 29, 2008

Mine Your Own Business


I had the opportunity to watch "Mine Your Own Business" courtesy of a screening by the Sutherland Institute.

About 125-150 people were there, apparently less then the 300 or so they expected.

Ethan Millard of KSL's NightSide Project opened up the event, "When we clamor for results from politicians, we will get political results."

The documentary was quite interesting. The movie was a documentary about several towns especially one in Romania that mining companies wanted to open mines in. It discussed the idea from Environmentalists side who wanted to shut down the mine and also from locales who wanted the jobs/Economic benefits from having a mine. It was obviously more preaching to allowing mines. Whatever side of the political spectrum you belong to I encourage you to view this film as it will enlighten you about a part of the issue you probably haven't looked at.

The film brought up several interesting ideas and thoughts.
  • Why do outsiders have such a say in local issues of mining? (all the Environmentalists fighting the project were from outside of the area, many outside the country)
  • Mining Company officials and the directors of the film kept saying now days all of the environmental concerns have been addressed, which basically says the Environmentalists have been good or at least not as bad as the movie portrays.
  • What is the ultimate motivation of the Environmental Groups fighting mines? Do they want no mining?
  • Several mines said they would mine for 20 years then be done. What happens to the local economy and land after they leave?
  • Why does the head of the World Wildlife Fund who was interviewed in the movie think poor locales don't want schooling for their kids? He also said they can't handle money as well as Westerners (for lack of a better word).
  • Why do large companies pay Environmental groups huge sums of money when they have different goals?
Several comments from the directors (from my notes):
  • George Soros is funding the anti-mining initiatives in Romania
  • Think Globally and Act Locally
  • If you own shares of a company donating to Greenpeace etc. demand they stop
  • When you read an obituary and see a 96 year old death you can thank Mining and Big Business they didn't die much earlier
  • Our Sweatshops are their Factories and help them (local poor) out of poverty
  • No one wishes to be a basket weaver
  • Everyone in the Rice Paddies wants to be working at the Nike Factory
  • It's about helping people out of poverty
And last but most important in their comments: "Environmentalists forget that humans are part of the environment not just the problem."

Their next movie is "Not Evil Just Wrong"

Brian Chapman

Sunday, April 27, 2008

Utah County Convention 2008

This is what greets you as you enter a convention.















Saturday thousands of Republicans gathered at Orem High School to have their annual Convention. Here are some thoughts:

  • Utah County Likes Incumbents/Experience, the only incumbent who lost was beaten by someone who'd been on a City Council.
  • Delegates had concerns over several incumbents but didn't feel the challengers would be better replacements. (better challengers would equal more incumbent losses)
  • Voucher support does not get you kicked out of office (let's see if Salt Lake County has similar results)
  • Strong candidates can beat powerful incumbents weak ones can't, but it takes issues not just personalities
  • Legislators need to work on their base of support
  • The media isn't everything, so don't complain to the media about Party Issues

In Senate 16 (Bramble's seat) we got to listen to the nominators' and candidates' speeches. It went like this:

  • Jackie de Gaston's nominator Michelle Bray said we should put this in a Primary so the public could decide. (So what is the point of the caucuses and convention in her mind?)
  • Jackie de Gaston spoke of her qualifications then attacked Bramble

  • Bramble was nominated and spoken of highly by: Kimmie Bramble (daughter), Jeff Alexander (former State House District 62), Steve White (Utah County Commission), Dean Sanpei (Leg Chair District 63), Becky Lockhart (State House District 64)
  • President Valentine went and stood with the group but didn't say anything (I think he did this on his own accord because it seemed a bit awkward)
  • Curt Bramble spoke on his experience and qualifications

I was in a House seat with no challenger so instead of voting we heard from our Representative. Representative Lockhart did an excellent job answering the questions.

Senate District 16

  • Curt Bramble (i) 119 67.61%
  • Jaqueline de Gaston 51 28.98%
  • James O'Neal 5 2.84%
  • Blank 1

House District 56

  • Kenneth Sumsion (i) 125 96.15%
  • Jared Sepulveda 4 3.07%
  • Blank 1 0.77%

House District 57

  • Craig Frank (i) 68 68%
  • Kim Robinson 3 2 32%
  • Jennifer Baptista 0

House District 58

  • Stephen Sandstrom (i) 64 63%
  • Paul D. Newton 37 37%

House District 60

  • Brad Daw (i) 52 60.47%
  • Linda Housekeeper 34 39.54%

House District 61

  • Keith Grover (i) 57 60.64%
  • Lisa Shepherd 37 39.36%

House District 62

  • Chris Herrod (i) 60 66.66%
  • David Starling 30 30 33.33%

House District 65

  • Francis Gibson 70 60.87%
  • Aaron Tilton (i) 45 39.13%

House District 66

  • Mike Morley (i) 71 82.56%
  • Chance Williams 15 17.44%

Numbers courtesy of Deseret Morning News




Wednesday, April 23, 2008

Utah Senate 16 Debate

Last Night I had the opportunity to attend a Meet the Candidates Night for Republican Candidates at the home of John and Sue Curtis (He C.O.O. at Action Target and her Provo School Board Member). The night was for 2 races Utah Senate District 16 (Incumbent Curt Bramble, Jackie de Gaston, James O’Neal) and Utah House District 62 (Incumbent Chris Herrod, David Starling). The Curtis’s had the House race upstairs and the Senate race downstairs so I was not able to attend both. So as I am a delegate in the Senate District I chose to attend the downstairs portion.

Approximately 60 people attended the downstairs portion and I would estimate another 40 or more were staying upstairs.

I took a rough transcript of the questions and responses of the candidates, which is below. As this comes from my notes, I welcome any of the candidates to clarify or expound on my notes so the readers can better understand their positions.

Overall the debate/meeting went well and I think most attendees learned more about the candidates. If my informal discussions have any bearing on reality while several have concerns over Bramble’s record they didn’t seem to be willing to support the others. My prediction Bramble avoids a Primary.


OPENING STATEMENTS approximately 7:15pm

De Gaston: Focus on Divorce Laws, child welfare. She is half-Hispanic but against illegal immigration and for legal immigration.


Bramble: Today is 30th Anniversary with wife (she is at Republican Executive Committee meeting so showed up later). Discussed the fact that Utah has been rated the best managed state in several magazines and polls, took partial credit as he has been Senator and Senate Majority Leader


O’Neal: (Arrived later because of prior commitment, see below)


QUESTION: Attorney General Mark Shurtleff has admonished the Legislature on open Meeting laws, please comment on what you think about that.


Bramble: Caucus by definition is closed meeting, supports that concept. Wants the Senate Caucus to be closed so they can discuss sense of Caucus without media present
De Gaston: It’s the appearance of evil, related the concept to School Boards are not allowed to do that. It looks bad & looks like we decide legislation behind closed doors. “It’s exploiting numerical advantage.” She said it would be fine if rule states less than a Senate Majority can be in the caucus (Republicans are 2/3s of Senate)



QUESTION: The good economy has helped our state and area with improvements in transportation and airport funds, what should we cut if economy goes bad?


De Gaston: Most people want Education at bottom of cuts lists, but if Ed must be cut it should come from Administration not Teachers. If it gets bad enough everybody gets cuts.
Bramble: 1st to be cut will be Capital projects like state buildings, then transportation. State has set aside rainy day funds to protect us in downturns also. Commented that the School Boards decide what Administration money should be not legislature.


QUESTION: What is your 1st priority core belief?


Bramble: Preserving individual freedom/Family rights, sanctity of family first
De Gaston: “We agree” but we should hear from constituents and let people run their lives as much as possible



O’Neal arrived around 7:44pm


O’Neal Opening Statement: talked about family and BYU ties to Provo, was in sporting goods business and named many retailers (never heard of most of them, I’m not originally from Provo), he disagrees with Bramble on Nuclear Power and its big “wedge” issue (he seems very quiet)



QUESTION: What’s your stance on Limited Government?



O’Neal: welfare state is bad, lived back East and saw moms with multiple kids to get more welfare
De Gaston: Government can’t be given too much power as it hurts us, we need to back off funding school breakfasts and all day kindergarten, try harder to keep kids in homes not in foster care, Health care is a major problem, over utilization of government healthcare causes problems, so no MediGap etc
Bramble: Just Say No to government programs, we have an addiction on relying on Government. Should we privatize State Hospital? No but several programs there can be privatized that government doesn’t need to do. Wants to limit political subdivisions (Cities, etc) from getting into too many private programs


CITIZEN QUESTION: Provo High School has 30% Hispanic and many are dropping out Pregnant what will you do about this? (Editor’s note: Can’t we ask questions without referring it to race?)



Bramble: It comes down to family values and helping with self-sufficiency, which are the underlying problems
O’Neal: In black housing projects this was a serious problem back East, we should shut off money to them
De Gaston: Sex Ed makes problems worse, only good ones are abstinence programs. Homes need to be working on the problem



CITIZEN QUESTION: What should legislature do about city programs like iProvo that are failing and compete with Private Enterprise?



O’Neal: I like iProvo, thinks it's a great program for future, relates it to municipal power and utilities
Bramble: Government closest to people expansive, careful about what iProvo and cities do, but try not to interfere too much
De Gaston: Congratulated Steve Turley (Provo City Councilman) on voting against iProvo, Turley is only non-Socialist on Council, but we shouldn’t tell Provo what to do


MARY MOSTERT QUESTION: There is a lot of Socialism in Provo, define what you think Limited Government means?



Bramble: Legislature have privatization task force, government shouldn’t compete where private sector already is
De Gaston: We are doing too much Socialistic stuff in government
O’Neal: Stay away from telling other government entities what to do


QUESTIONS FROM CANDIDATES TO EACH OTHER


O’Neal QUESTION: Bramble told him he was going to France and wants to know if that trip is Energy/Nuclear related?



Bramble: Was invited by Governor Huntsman as part of Economic Development, then Tajikistan(?) to train them on legislative process. He then referred to conversation with O’Neal and that while in France could test truthfulness of assertion France is going away from Nuclear Power


Bramble QUESTION: Would you support the Renewable Energy consensus we came to in Legislature with Environmentalists and Energy Companies? LINK to Bill


De Gaston: Renewable Energy is important but problems with each, wind power great but what if no wind, we need to expand renewable energy
O’Neal: Spoke against it at legislature, it's because it's all about what Rocky Mountain Power wants and they wrote bill. He said most Environmentalists didn’t see through the bill but he did.
Bramble: Sponsored the bill, Rocky Mountain Power drafted original but it was changed a lot over time, RMP didn’t get what they wanted but it was a compromise, worked with all stake holders including Environmentalists



De Gaston QUESTION: What would O’Neal do differently with the above bill?



O’Neal: It just wasn’t good enough environmentally



CITIZEN QUESTION: Are you in favor of Nuclear Power?



Bramble: YES
O’Neal: No its not renewable
De Gaston: Yes but only our waste should be stored not others’


CITIZEN QUESTION: On FLDS situation in Texas



De Gaston: It’s a slippery slope with Religious Rights and Parental Rights
O’Neal: (Couldn’t hear response)
Bramble: Representative Fowlke had a great bill on this and you need to draw the line


BILL FILLMORE QUESTION: Public Health and Safety are important factors, what will they do about sexual abuse of women and children? Why aren’t we at forefront with severe penalties?


Bramble: Jessica’s Law by Wimmer LINK is great way, our judges typically do stronger sentences than what O’Reilly (Fox News) claims because they don’t do minimums but more through out
O’Neal: Can’t legislate morality. He’s not up on code to know what should be changed in this arena, but sanctity of womanhood very important
De Gaston: Continue stiff penalties of “raping and all.” But we need to teach our girls not to provoke men with the way they dress and act and how they do things. We also need to keep a balance and be skeptical of such claims


(EDITOR’S NOTE: If she really means that girl’s who wear immodest clothing or have immodest actions cause men to rape, that’s deeply troubling to me)


KIP JENSEN QUESTION: What two issues for Precinct 16 are most important in your mind?


Bramble: Transportation and Education, I-15, Geneva Rd, reduce class sizes
De Gaston: Education, make sure we give Parental Choice, do it within Public also
O’Neal: That we don’t become repository for Radioactive Waste for Europe and rest of Nation. More Mass Transit, and TRAX (Light Rail) into Utah County.


LINDSEY WIBLIN QUESTION: What will they do about Illegal Immigration?


O’Neal: There are stumbling blocks to legal immigration but Illegal is still wrong
De Gaston: Raise quotas for legal immigrants, discourage illegals, a 20 ft fence will just bring 21 ft ladders, fence isn’t best idea. Doesn’t support incentives like Driving Privilege Cards
Bramble: Federal issue mainly, must deport those who commit crimes. Should cross deputize police to ICE to help. Elect people at Federal Level


ANGIE CARTER PR27 QUESTION: This is the first time the legislature has done Omnibus bills, what’s the rationale, especially when previously vetoed items were included?


O’Neal: Avoid it as much as possible. Quoted Bismark saying “Public should not see the making of Laws or the making of sausage”
De Gaston: Not in favor of Omnibus bills if bill was already voted down
Bramble: Omnibus bills have been done before as in 2003 also, the legislature learned a lesson though and it won’t be repeated in short term


ROB EASTMAN QUESTION: Proponent of Free Enterprise, why not limit legislative terms and have line item vetoes?



Bramble: State Constitution doesn’t say term limits should happen, average tenure of a state Senator is 5.1 years so not long, public is doing term limits now
O’Neal: Best term limits is voting people out, Line Item Veto he’s not sure
De Gaston: Legislature is volunteer, shouldn’t do it over and over, 8 years is enough, we need fresh faces, they learn how to manipulate which is bad, Line Item Veto is bad because it disrupts legislative process


ISACC PAXMAN QUESTION: Legislature chips away at judicial independence what should we do about it?



De Gaston: If indeed it's happening we shouldn’t
O’Neal: We need a balancing act and must watch and be careful
Bramble: Judicial Activism is the flip side of this discussion and is a problem also, thinks the compromise with the Supreme Court of Utah has resolved the issue for the foreseeable future


SUMMATION



Bramble: appreciate everyone, he’s effective, it’s critical to have experience, and we are best-managed state
De Gaston: Thanks, honesty, integrity, openness and fairness are needed. We need system for that, we have opportunity to be open and forthright. Who’s paying for the legislation?
O’Neal: He’s amateur and enjoying asking for support


The Debate ended about 9:15pm

Tuesday, April 22, 2008

Introduction

Right Talk Blog has been in our minds for quite some time. We have wanted to have a place to discuss policy and political activities that occur near our homes but also around the Nation and the World. Right Talk Blog is what we have come up with. We hope those that read our Blog will come away not only informed of actions but also more interested and hopefully more willing to participate in this great cause of Politics.

While occasionally we may ask you to indulge us in a rant on a particular issue, our goal is more circumspect. This Blog is not fashioned to be us explaining only our opinions but instead to be a discussion of issues and activities that surround Politics.

We will have several writers and we hope that each can give our readers insights and views that they may not be aware of. We also hope that our postings will leave our readers with a better understanding of the policies and events we discuss.