Now HB 12 was the act of a zealot who could not think beyond sending a message to the arch-conservatives out there that Carl Wimmer is numero uno when it comes to anti-abortion bills, so you should probably send him money so that he can get reelected.

Now, HB 12 was not just pulled out from nowhere. A Vernal woman paid a man to beat her until her child was aborted – truly a horrific act. But, instead of thinking about why this woman went  to such extremes to abort her child, Wimmer simply did the knee jerk thing and tried to pass a law.

Well, Wimmer got away with it, with the bill flying through the House and the Senate with little resistance from fellow Republicans; after all, it was an abortion bill from a good fellow Republican, so there should be no harm in voting for the bill. Indeed, as we speak HB 12 is waiting for the signature of the Governor.

Well damn liberals like me, the New York Times, the Huffington Post, and ABC (just to name a few) rightfully called this a barbaric abortion bill as it  had the consequence of charging women with homicide in the event of a miscarriage.

So Wimmer, in order to save face and pretend to be the victim has proposed HB 462, a relatively good bill that makes it very clear that a miscarriage does not an abortion make. Basically this bill does what Wimmer intend to do in the first place, make sure that women are not intentionally harming themselves to prevent a birth.

But we should ask ourselves why Wimmer was not so careful in the first place when proposing HB 12.  Is it possible that he is a bad lawmaker and does not think about the consequences of his bills? Is it possible that he does think about it, but simply does not care about those who disagree with them – even if they raise very real an very valid points? Is it possible that Wimmer cares more about being the golden child of the Republican Party than doing the will of the people in his district and of the state? Is it possible that Wimmer is a bad legislator?

Well, I know how I feel.

I hope this bill passes, it really is a reasonable abortion bill when you get right down to it – it is just a shame that this bill had to be proposed because we already passed a radical bill before hand. Finally, I would like to point out that if this bill does not make it though in time, HB 12 will (probably) be signed into law and miscarriages could be illegal in Utah until at least next year – when we will have to clean up Wimmer’s mess by proposing a bill similar to this one.

For those of you who don’t know, the enacting clause is the portion of any bill that basically says that it is a law if passed, specifically it says “be it enacted by the Legislature of the state of Utah.” If it is removed, it means that it is not enacted and is not, therefore, a law. To have an enacting clause struck is, quite possibly, one of the most dishonorable ways to kill a bill, as it is worse than just not voting on it – having the clause struck it is sort of like the legislature saying to the bill sponsor “we don’t like this idea so much, we are going to spend extra time just to kill it.”

Thankfully, Senator Robles is back with SB 117 – Pete Suazo Memorial Highway. The bill, again, would make Redwood road (from 2100 South to 1700 North officially the Pete Suazo Memorial Highway (see below).

I went to school with the Suazo children, and I remember how vivid the events of his tragic death were to the west side – a strong and passionate leader was removed from us so quickly.  Senator Suazo was the first Hispanic legislator and was a great inspiration to those who often felt disenfranchised – he truly represented what government could and should be about.

I hope this bill passes, it has already made it out of the Senate at the time of writing, and I hope it makes it to the Governors desk.

Click here to contact Senator Robles.

Having grown up on the West-side of Salt Lake my entire life, I know first hand the effect gang activity can have on a school.  Furthermore, as a volunteer with the Salt Lake Peer Court program, I have seen how many students can easily get sucked into the gang lifestyle and how difficult it can be to get out – let alone receive an education that is of any value.  One of the most common things we hear from parents is that the gang activities their children engaged in started small, but nothing was done to stop it from growing.

That is where SB 59 comes in. The bill would require the State Board of Education to make rules that require local school boards to come up with policies related to gang activity and outlines various provisions that should be included in these rules.

The rules themselves are very straight forward: School personnel will report suspected gang activity,  students who participate in gang activity will not be allowed to participate in athletics, parents will be notified of gang related damage and possibly have to pay, parents will be made aware of serious gang-related incidents, and faculty and staff will be trained to spot gang activity.

My only suggestion to Senator Robles is to remove the suggested mandate to prevent gang members from extracurricular activities. Oftentimes kids join gangs to feel as though they fit in, to remove a possible healthy outlet is not advisable.  These students need something to keep them busy, and after school programs could be the key to a student teetering on the edge to veer away from a gang. Of course, if the student is too far gone, some activities should be removed as a punishment.

Overall, though, this is a good bill and it deserves to pass.

Click here to contact Senator Robles.

The bill itself would mandate that convicted defendants in criminal cases have to pay for any sort of transportation expenses incurred by the government  if the defendant was charged and convicted of a misdemeanor. Currently the court only has the option to impose a transportation fee if it so chooses, with the passage of this bill, it would have to choose not to charge.

This is a good bill.  We are not talking about high profile felonies where a defendant may not be able to get a fair trial in his community, no we are talking about people trying to move their case from court to court in an attempt to avoid paying speeding tickets.

I should point out that the fees associated with transportation are relatively low and that this practice of court hopping is probably not all that common of an occurrence. This is just a good common sense law that punishes those who try to draw out the conviction process to avoid penalties they rightly deserve. I am honestly surprised to hear that this policy was not already in place.

Click here to contact Senator Adams.

This bill would allow the transmission of government records to be distributed to individuals through electronic means if the requester wishes to receive the information electronically and if the information exists in an electronic format.

In short, this bill would allow people greater access to how their government works.  Furthermore, the bill would reduce paper usage and make it much easier to search the mounds of information that can come along with making government records request.  Finally, this bill would reduce government costs as fewer resources would need to be used to do the peoples business.

I am glad to see that there are efforts being made to make government more available and bills like this should be encouraged.

Click here to send Representative Herrod a piece of electronic mail.

Want proof? Look at Representative Carol Spackman-Moss’ ( D – Salt Lake – District 37) sound ethics bill,  HB 247 – Lobbyist Restriction Modifications.

Currently, a former legislator could lobby on behalf of a bill if they are engaging in lobbying that is on behalf of themselves or a business they are associated with (unless that business is associated with lobbying or government affairs).  Spackman-Moss’ bill would remove this loophole and demand that legislators wait one year after leaving the legislature before becoming a lobbyist…period.

This bill, and the “cooling off” period it is advocating, is just one of many Democratic ethics bills that are going nowhere because a Republican did not sponsor it. I have to wonder where this bill would if it was proposed by some random legislator in the heart of Utah – alas, I will never know.

This is a great example of a bill that will go nowhere because of the name associated to the bill.

Click here to contact Representative Spackman-Moss.

Well, last year I said it was a good bill, and this year I will say the same.

Teenage drivers are already the most likely to be hurt or killed in car accidents, and the addition of cell phones only adds one more distraction. Even experienced drivers are more distracted when using a phone, let alone those who have been driving for two years or less. Those found guilty would be charged with a class C misdemeanor if an individual is found using a cell phone at the time of an accident and the driver could, potentially, loose their license.

Now this bill should not be confused with the text messaging bill that passed last year.  The ban on text messaging applies to all drivers, this would simply make any use of a cell phone illegal to minors.

I would also like to point out that this bill is an example of how lawmakers constantly modify bills from year to year in order to reach a desired goal.  Earlier today I discussed how Representative Rebecca Chavez-Houck is expanding her bill due to its successful passage last year, well this bill is the opposite. Riesen, hoping to pass a bill that he feels does some good, is scaling his original bill in hopes that he can get some of his ideas on the books. Both of these actions are common in lawmaking as everything is a give or take – this is the process in action.

Hopefully this bill will pass and Riesen will be able to expand the law in the future.

Click here to contact Representative Riesen.

Thankfully, this bill passed, and Representative Chavez-Houck is looking to improve the law further with HB 232 – Medical Language Interpreter Amendments.

The bill itself will allow the Division of Health and Human Services to recommend to the legislature the need for laws relating to the act if HHS discovers that people are abusing the system or unqualified individuals are getting through the system and dispensing inadequate or incomplete medical advice.  Furthermore, the bill would set up a certification system and demand that certifications would expire.

In short, this bill takes a good law and makes it better.

As I have said, health is one of those things we simply can not skimp on because we dislike people who don’t look like us – disease could care less if you know a particular language or come from a particular country.  With the expansion of this law we will ensure that our community will be healthier and that people are making informed decisions about their health.

Click here to contact Representative Chavez-Houck.

Well, it is back, and this time it is an even stronger bill than before. To recap from last year, the bill would allow the collection and storage of rainwater either above or below ground without having to receive a water rights permit. This bill has been modified from last year to allow the storage only up to 2,500 gallons in underground containers or above ground in 55 gallon containers above ground (addressing the concerns of agriculture).

As I said last year, this bill is beneficial to urban areas where rain and snow would normally just flow down the drain and be wasted.  By capturing it and using it on, say, cooling systems, rooftop gardens, and irrigation, the water would not need to come from reservoirs miles away from the source – saving both energy and reserves by not having to pump as much during dry times.

Finally, I hope this bill will pass as it did get the recommendation of the State Water Development Commission – showing that this is a practical solution to Utah’s water needs.

Click here to contact Senator Jenkins.

This bill is one of those bills that is straight forward and, hence, has a uncertain future in the legislature.  The bill basically says that if you are charged with human trafficking, you will be charged for each individual you smuggle or traffic across the border as opposed to just receiving one blanket charge.

This is a sound immigration bill as well as a sound human rights bill. Certainly it acts as an actual deterrent to illegal immigration (as opposed to silly drivers license laws that just inconvenience citizens), but it also recognizes the fact that some people are brought across the border to serve as either sex workers or indentured servants.

I hope this bill passes, but the legislature has a history of screwing this sort of thing up.  I hope it does pass, but we will see what happens.

Click here to contact Representative Fisher.