From Peg McEntee’s article on April 18th:

Denice Graham is back at work in the Utah Department of Transportation after being summarily sacked by administrators who accused her of leaking confidential information about a bid for a $1.1 billion contract to rebuild a stretch of Interstate 15…

When the truth came out about a botched bidding process, $13 million in compensation to a construction company and big bucks from the winning bidder to Gov. Gary Herbert’s re-election campaign, only one person — Graham — was blamed.

But in February, the state’s Career Service Review Office issued a scathing ruling that UDOT Executive Director John Njord’s firing of Graham “exceeded the bounds of reasonableness and rationality and amounts to an abuse of discretion…”

…Graham was accused of leaking “confidential” information that wasn’t actually confidential. A bidder on the I-15 project had called to find out whether a competitor had won the bid, and Graham went to a UDOT website and gave the caller the names of the top three contenders.

Flash forward to Robert Geherke’s article today: UDOT wanted to silence politics around fired worker’s case.

The Utah Department of Transportation made an unusual request of a reinstated employee wrongly terminated in the wake of an Interstate 15 contracting scandal: Tell the Democrats to shut up about it…

Graham returned to work at UDOT on April 2 but has been negotiating with UDOT over more than $67,000 in back pay. As part of the negotiation, UDOT asked Graham to tell Democrats to stop using her case for political purposes and state that the judge erred in reinstating her.

The letter (used to make the request) asking the Democrats to stop using (Graham’s) case was drafted by Assistant Attorney General David Pena…”I hope you will respect my wishes and discontinue using my likeness and story in any political mailings, e-mails, etc.,” read the letter that Pena asked Graham to sign.

Still don’t get it? Let Pat Bagley sum it up:

When this story originally broke, I asked the question: Is Governor Herbert Inept or Corrupt? Around the same time, I predicted a scapegoat was not far behind (though I was foolish enough to think that the head of UDOT would take the fall and not some lackey – ah the folly of youth).

It is clear now that UDOT and Herbert’s office showed, at best, extremely poor management skills. In reality, I always say that if it looks, sounds, and acts like a duck, it probably is. The act of demanding that Graham shut up about the situation just adds to the reasons as to why the “just following orders” line doesn’t pass the smell test.

Every true citizen should honestly ask themselves if this is how they want state government to be run – with companies winning bids after giving contributions, loosing bidders being paid off to not complain about the corrupt process, and hard working civil servants taking the fall for it all.

It may not seem obvious, but the ship that is Utah is leaking; and it is happening because of complacent and disenfranchised voters mechanically electing people simply because that is how it has always been done.

We, as voters, need to realize that incumbency does not equate to inherent ability; simply that, at some point, an individual (through dumb luck or determination) found a way to get more votes than the other guy.

It is time we send a message back, and the first step is to get mad as hell at our elected leaders for trying to silence Denice Graham  for telling her story.

If you agree, start by signing Alliance for a Better Utah’s petition demanding that Governor Herbert stop punishing Ms. Graham for doing the right thing by serving the public – The petition can be found here.

And for those of you who may complain that this is simply being blown up because it is good political fodder, I retort by saying that you are damn right it is – our governor…OUR GOVERNOR, who represents us, didn’t know about (or tried to cover up) a $13 million (let me say that again – THIRTEEN MILLION DOLLAR) contract. Pointing that out is not dirty campaigning, it is allowing the voters to know how their government is spending their money. Democrats should point this fact out because, in this case, the truth hurts and pretending it will go away should not be an option if you are in favor of good governance.

I am shocked and saddened by the recent statements made by two members of the Republican Caucus of the Utah Senate.

By now, you may have seen the Senate Majority Leader, Scot Jenkins, outburst on the outlandish thought of exempting military personnel from having to pay property taxes while serving on active duty (click here for post and video).

Well, on Thursday, the trend continued. Senator Casey Anderson (R-Cedar City, District 28), while discussing HB 263, stood up before the chamber and claimed, in short, that military families should do one of two things: have a spouse quit their job and suffer financial hardship due do a forced relocation,  or break up a family because a spouse needs to stay behind to earn money at their present job while their military family member moves due to deployment.  The worst possible solution, in Anderson’s eyes, apparently, is that the state will have to cough up roughly $85,000 a year to cover unemployment benefits while the relocated spouse looks for work near their partners new base (for those of you doing the math, that is a show stopping three cents per year per Utah resident).

Don’t believe me? Lets take a look at the tape:

Boy, that doesn’t look good…eeee. Almost looks like you care more about your rabid anti-tax stance that you wouldn’t know a good bill if it punched you in the face. I mean, the idea of paying three cents more is so gawdawful that you are willing to either split up families or force them to suffer because, whelp, they knew what they were getting into when they signed up to serve.

This kind of fanaticism makes me sick. Far too often dogmatic lawmakers such as Anderson can’t see the forest for the trees. This same type of thinking creates lawmakers who will shoot down a revolutionary school education funding program because they perceive it as a tax hike, but make them more than eager to pass laws that will cost the state millions in lawsuits that will undoubtedly be overturned – all because we want to prove a point to the nasty federal guv’ment.

I hope that voters see these people for what they really are, dangerous to our state. At the very least, I hope Republicans are able to reign this kind of crap in because, frankly, they have gone way too far.

P.S. To contact Sen. Anderson, Click Here or call 435-263-5854

We as a society love to say how much we support our troops, but it is rare that policy makers actually step up to the plate and say “thank you, we are going to make your life a little bit easier because you have decided to protect our nation.”

That is why I applaud Senator Luz Robles’ (D – Salt Lake, District 1) SB 116, Armed Forces Property Tax Exemption.  As you might have guessed by the bills title, the law, if passed, would exempt active duty military personnel from having to pay property taxes while they are actually out fighting for our freedoms.

Robles is also running a Joint Resolution (SJR 8) is also advancing through the legislature to add the property tax exemption to our state constitution, directly allowing the people to vote on the matter.

As a nation, we ask much of our service personnel, and give so little back.  Take, for example, the lack of a ticker-tape parade for our nations vets in New York when they returned home from Iraq…but that city was more than eager to roll out the red carpet for the winners of a football game.

We as a society don’t want to think about our troops because it forces us to think about why we are fighting wars, or why people fly planes into buildings, or why foreign policy is so hit or miss, or why gay people can hold a gun, or why women are just as capable as a man at something – so it is much easier to pretend that they don’t exist, or if they do; they only exist on the margins.

But they do exist, and oftentimes military service presents both opportunity and struggle – sometimes it also presents the ultimate sacrifice.

Robles is trying to make it just a little bit easier for service men and women to make it while they are serving our nation and her interests (however flawed they may be in peoples eyes). Many people may have many different opinions on the various wars we have been waging, but not very many people are out there blaming the troops for the situation they are fighting around.

By exempting our service men and women from property taxes, we as citizens (by way of state law) are saying “thank you – we’ll pick up the tab while you are out, don’t worry about it.”  This bill is a small way we can help those who make a huge sacrifice.

To contact Sen. Robles, Click Here or call 801-550-6434

Impact: 1

Need: 1

Overall: 4

Questions about the rating system? Click Here

To view other bills in the 2012 Bills to Watch series, Click Here

P.S. I would be remiss if I didn’t include the rant Majority Leader Scott Jenkins (R-Plain City, District 20) had against this bill; he felt that troops have received enough and that we shouldn’t give them any more benefits. I am sure his constituents (many of whom undoubtedly work at Hill Air Force Base) feel about this information.  If you would like to contact Sen. Jenkins, you can email him at sjenkins@le.utah.gov or call 801-731-5120

P.P.S. Senator Jenkins should know that the fiscal impact for the average Utah Resident would be $1.03 per home owner and $7.68 per million dollar business.

P.P.P.S. Did you hear the part at the end where Senator Jenkins says that he doesn’t even want to pay his own taxes? Starting to connect the dots now?

It always astounds me how much hot air comes out of the legislature every year about how grand the Constitution is and how we must uphold the document as a sacred text…unless there is something in there that happens to disagree with the legislature, that is.

Take, for example SB 249, Firearm Possession Amendments as proposed by Sen. Mark Madsen (R-Lehi, District 13). The bill adds three lines of text that basically spit in the face of our Constitution.

Why? Well the bill says that if you can legally posses a firearm in Utah, you are exempt from any federal laws regarding legal possession of a gun.

At this point, I have to ask if Madsen is dense or unpatriotic? Perhaps he simply does not know that the federal government always (and I do mean always) trumps state law – that was just one of those pesky little conditions we agreed too all those years ago when we decided to join the United States. But, perhaps he doesn’t know that…perhaps he thinks it is okay if, for example, an employee says “ya know what? I am going to ignore company policy because I know I have a better way to do things.”

But this conclusion seems odd, as his legislative webpage proudly lists himself as a member of the Federalist Society – After all, one would assume that a Federalist Society member knows how federalism works…

So, this leads me to my second conclusion – he is unpatriotic.  Why else would he openly defy the Federal Government except to prove that he knows better than the founders on this one? I don’t know, that seems awfully anti-American to me.

There is, I suppose, a third option: Madsen is a blowhard who is more concerned about proving a point than he is actually taking time to properly legislate on the hill.  He has no problem wasting your taxpayer dollars on a bill that will be challenged and will fail in court. No doubt about it.

I am sick and tired of rabid lawmakers out to prove just how much they hate the government by posting ridiculous bills such as these. They are unnecessary, they bog down the process, and worst of all, they waste time. Shame on you Sen. Madsen for not respecting the peoples house and proposing real legislation.

To contact Sen. Madsen, Click Here or call 801-361-4787

Impact: 0

Need: 0

Overall: -5

Questions about the rating system? Click Here

To view other bills in the 2012 Bills to Watch series, Click Here

One issue that has always mildly bugged me has been that lawmakers receive retirement benefits similar to long term state employees if they simply put in enough years at the state legislature. Currently, if a lawmaker manages to stick it out for ten years, they receive the same benefits as a full-time state employee may receive after years of service. Now, I know I take many jabs at the legislature as part of this blog – but I do respect the work that they do for the state…but I would not say that they are on the same level as a state employee who puts in 40 hours a week, every week, for 30+ years.

It appears that Senator John Valentine (R – Orem, District 14) is of a similar opinion. With SB 156, Elected Official Retirement Benefits Amendments, Sen. Valentine is basically cutting off retirement benefits to any legislator or governor who takes office from here on out.

Now, these legislators do work hard; but remember that we have a part-time legislature. Every single person up there either has a job outside of the statehouse or has retired…meaning that, in theory, they should already have some sort of safety net in place. Also remember that these legislators receive fantastic compensation for part time work (when stretched out over a year, of course). Yes, they are having to take time away from work and family to serve, but in many ways I feel that that is part of the sacrifice of public service.  Should it be a burden? No…But at the same time, I would not want people running for office simply because they want a benefits package. When lawmakers view their duty as a job rather than a responsibility, they are far more likely to be corrupt – if only because they want to make sure they can provide for their family.

Let us also remember that this will ultimately save the state money without harming the public.  As of the time of publication, no fiscal note has been published – most likely because any savings won’t be seen for decades. But consider this: so often the state asks the citizens to accept cut-backs in government services as part of mutual sacrifice, yet lawmakers never seem willing to make the cuts to themselves; this bill would at least start the process. Yes, I know that anyone voting on this bill will not be affected by it, but the principal still holds.

In the end this is a small but symbolic step to say that lawmakers have to tighten their belts too.  If they are going to ask us to scrimp and save, they should be willing to do the same.

To contact Sen. Valentine, Click Here or call 435-263-5854

Impact: 0

Need: 0

Overall: 3

Questions about the rating system? Click Here

To view other bills in the 2012 Bills to Watch series, Click Here

Over the past year, there have been numerous anti-government protests across the nation, and though I have been highly critical of some of the movements, I none the less support the right for them to petition their government.

Well, it appears that Senator Margaret Dayton (R – Orem – District 15) doesn’t feel the same way.  Her bill, SB 33, Trespassing on State Lands is a knee jerk reaction to the protests we have seen because these groups had the gall to peaceably assemble to protest the government.

The bill says, in no uncertain terms, that it is a misdemeanor for a person to camp on state land for more than 15 days. Now, at first, I knew this bill didn’t pass the smell test, but I couldn’t quite figure out why; then it hit me – the capitol building also counts as state land.

Ha ha! Remember how those pesky protesters would not go away in at the Wisconsin State House? How they demanded to be heard after they disagreed with the decisions of policy makers? Remember how those pesky protesters couldn’t just be thrown into jail because they weren’t, you know, breaking the law? Furthermore, remember how they have something called a “1st Amendment Right” to be there? Well, thankfully, Dayton is trying to at least make sure that they are breaking the law in the short term so that lawmakers won’t have to deal with upset people when they are trying to pass laws behind closed doors.

Interestingly, I noticed that Idaho is attempting to pass a similar law in their state.  Near as I can tell, their most conservative lawmakers too feel that this is all-of-a-sudden an issue for them as well.  I am sure, however, that this is all just a coincidence, and not that there is a national conservative organization of lawmakers that get together to discuss what bills they feel must be passed right away.

These random lawmakers all have similar talking points – namely that cities have these types of laws, why not states? I say the main difference is that trespassing laws are inherently city and township issues, because cities and towns are primarily the government entities who have do deal with the issues of trespassing. Furthermore, cities have mechanisms in place specifically designed to avoid infringing on First Amendment rights – this is why, for example, Occupy Salt Lake was able to camp at Pioneer Park overnight…for many nights. This bill conveniently forgets to add such mechanisms; but I am sure that this was just an oversight.

This is a terrible bill born out of conservative lawmakers fears that they might actually be called out on the work they do. I am sure, at some point, someone will get arrested on this very issue, and that the state will be drawn into a long and messy court battle.  Dayton will of course gleefully take us down this road because she just hates those filthy hippies sooooooo much.

To contact Sen. Dayton, Click Here or call 801-221-0623

Impact: 2

Need: 0

Overall: -5

Questions about the rating system? Click Here

To view other bills in the 2012 Bills to Watch series, Click Here

So, I am just going to say it now and get it out of the way, watching Senator Casey Anderson (R-Cedar City, District 28) propose legislation is a bit like watching clowns continually come out of a car labeled “mind numbingly bad.” Just for kicks, you could even add the word “Express.”

I have  already told you Anderson’s brilliant idea to arrest cops for enforcing federal law, and his awe inspiring ideas on making it more difficult to pay our bills as a state.  In that tradition, I would like to inform you of his latest work of legislative craftsmanship by informing you of SJR 11, Joint Resolution – Informal Poll on United States Senate Candidates.

To put it bluntly, this piece of crap is a grand bit of legislative masturbation if I have ever seen any.

Get this – if this resolution were to pass, the state would have to create a way for state lawmakers to voluntarily participate in a poll to determine who (as a body) they feel would be the best senator for Utah.

Yes, we would spend state tax payer time and money to allow lawmakers to participate in what amounts to a popularity contest.

I just have to ask how this possibly serves the needs of the citizens of the State of Utah? Like, at all?

Anderson is proposing this bill for one of two reasons (or possibly both – lord only knows what is going on in his head at this point):

1) Anderson really wants to go back to the good ol’ days when state legislatures picked senators, as opposed to when the 17th Amendment was added to the Constitution, placing that power in the hands of the people – because he can’t change the US Constitution, he would like to do the next best thing and just pretend – if only for a day.

2) Anderson wants a way to influence the general public to vote for senators by giving whatever candidate one the added “endorsement” of the Utah State Legislature. However, I dream that this tactic would backfire terribly given most peoples attitudes towards the legislature at any given moment.

Regardless of the motive, this bill is beyond stupid. Every “small government” Republican should vote against this bill because it expands government and truly does nothing for the people.  Not one citizen will benefit from this resolution (except the person running for office that gets the endorsement I suppose).

Seriously senator? Is this really what you came to Capitol Hill for? Was this how you dreamed you would serve the people? If so, you really need to ask yourself how you think you are going to achieve those goals…cuz’ buddy, right now you ain’t cutting it.

To contact Sen. Anderson, Click Here or call 435-263-5854

Impact: 0

Need: 0

Overall: -5

Questions about the rating system? Click Here

To view other bills in the 2012 Bills to Watch series, Click Here

It is rare when I agree with Representative Curtis (R – Clearfield, District 14); so on those rare occasions that I do, I feel it is worth noting.

With HB 124, In-State Tuition for Veterans, Oda is saying in no uncertain terms, thank you, to the men and women who serve (or have honorably served) our country by offering them in-state tuition to our state colleges and universities even if they do not meet normal residency requirements. The best part is that this bill would even extend residency status to active personnel family members as well.

I am grateful that we as a state are willing  to dig a little bit deeper to show our appreciation for the sacrifice these soldiers have shown.  We may disagree about the merits of the conflicts we are fighting, but bills like this show that we as citizens know there is a huge difference between the politics of war and the on-the-ground realities of war.

Kudos to Representative Oda for proposing this bill. It may cost us more, but I say it is a price worth paying.

To contact Rep. Oda, Click Here or call 801-773-9796

Impact: 2

Need: 3

Overall: 2

Questions about the rating system? Click Here

To view other bills in the 2012 Bills to Watch series, Click Here

There is always a cute dance that takes place at the start of every legislative session, where we get to see just how mean, crazy, out of touch, or (gasp dare I say it?) reasonable newly elected or appointed legislators are.  Well, I am sorry to say that Representative Steve Eliason (R-Sandy, District 45) appears to be falling on the “mean” side.

By proposing HB 285, Repeal of Higher Education Tuition Assistance Program, Eliason is attempting to remove a job creator in our state…and I don’t quite know why. Heck, I even tried to find any news-clipping or blog post that might explain this bizarre move. Nothing.

So I have to presume that Eliason is coming from a budget hawk, starve the beast, mentality where any government spending is bad government spending. Even if such spending is good for the state.

The Higher Education Tuition Assistance program is specifically designed to help low income students pay for the high price of college; where the only barrier to their education is not a lack of ability, but a lack of funds. The program, presumably, helps dozens, if not hundreds, of students receive a college degree – a degree that will allow them to receive higher paying jobs…by extension helping the state economy.

As of the time of posting, no fiscal note was attached to the bill, so I can’t tell you exactly how many dollars go to students.  But I have to believe that every single one of those dollars is an investment in our state and our citizens. By trying to reverse this bill, Eliason is trying to reverse course for our state.

To contact Rep. Eliason, Click Here or call 801-673-4748

Impact: 2

Need: 0

Overall: -3

Questions about the rating system? Click Here

To view other bills in the 2012 Bills to Watch series, Click Here

I have come to a conclusion: Representative John Dougall (R-American Fork, District 27) has no idea how cause and effect, prevention, or general common sense, works.

Why else would he be proposing HB 298, Motor Vehicle Safety Inspection Amendments? A bill that, based on his own arguments in the media, is a bad decision.

HB 298 would eliminate the requirement that automobile owners have to pass a safety inspection in order to drive on Utah’s roads…let that sink in for a moment.  Now, I would at least wrap my head around the concept that a far-right, anti-environment lawmaker may want to do away with emissions inspections…but safety? Really?

Dougall’s justification for this bill is that we have reduced deaths on the road and that people don’t repair their cars anyway until they are forced too come inspection time.

So, your argument is that we have fewer deaths, so getting rid of safety standards would…reduce that…somehow? By that logic Dougall should propose a law increasing the amount of alcohol in “Utah beer” to national levels – after all, we have fewer alcohol related incidents in the state, so adding that back in shouldn’t cause a problem.

The second point is equally perplexing. I know that people tend not to fix mechanical problems such as poor breaks and dangerously cracked windshields until the state forces them to. But I guess Dougall is missing the point that issues such as these DO GET FIXED.

I mean, does Dougall honest want to be on roads where people have bald tires, worn breaks, and broken tail lights?

This logic originates from the Land of Conservatism, where people always have money to fix things and no one struggles to get by.  In this same land people magically just take it upon themselves to do things even when the path of least resistance is far easier and it is much less work to simply ignore problems…until they blow up in your face.

Conservatives like this fundamentally don’t understand the role of regulation.  Regulations such as these force people to do things they are not normally inclined to do.  We don’t impose laws like safety requirements on cars because the DMV gets a kick out of making citizens struggle (despite what people like Dougall might think), we impose regulations because failure to do so puts you, me, and everyone else on the road in danger. Regulations such as these are a requirement for living with other human beings that have as many faults as you do.

This bill, if it were to pass (and I hope it does not), would be putting peoples lives in danger in a very real way. Remember, with this law in place, you may have a perfectly running car, but that does not mean that the person who side-swiped you  because their unsafe car ran a red.

To contact Rep. Dougall, Click Here or call 801-708-5170

Impact: 3

Need: 0

Overall: -5

Questions about the rating system? Click Here

To view other bills in the 2012 Bills to Watch series, Click Here