Mitt Romney, unsurprisingly, is wrong. He’s not the only one spouting this hollow rhetoric, however. Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-UT) said just last week during his CPAC speech that we should “never, ever, ever” apologize for America. Former Governor Sarah Palin said last fall that we “should never apologize for our country”. George H.W. Bush said, as President, that “I’ll never apologize for the United States. Ever. I don’t care what the facts are.”
These shallow and ignorant statements are an affront to any sense of justice, morality, and civic virtue. If, as Romney suggests, America has “made some mistakes”, it might just follow that, depending on their severity and damage, we should apologize and/or make reparations. To see where this might apply, and in stark contrast to the superficiality of Romney and his like-minded cohorts, let’s dig a bit deeper and consider a few examples
Sen. Curt Bramble, R-Provo, said he is sponsoring a bill that would allow Sandy to annex Snowbird Ski resort away from the jurisdiction of Salt Lake County because of the mean and nasty taxes and fees imposed by that mean and nasty Democrat, Mayor Peter Corroon.
If Bramble lived in a community so poorly treated, he would look to the heroic Utah Legislature for help, too, the senator told The Salt Lake Tribune recently.
And Snowbird general manager Bob Bonar told The Tribune that its temptation to be rescued by Sandy has nothing to do with future development, or zoning issues, but the desire to be under "an efficient, cost-effective government for our area."
However, even though I dislike the public safety fees from the County, using them as a basis for leaving doesn't exactly hold melted snow:
Cities are permitted by the Legislature to impose a utility franchise tax on its residents. The unincorporated county is not permitted to do that. So by moving to Sandy, Snowbird would be saddled with a new tax that would be more than the new $120,000 law enforcement protection fee being imposed by Salt Lake County, which both Bonar and Bramble cited as a reason for the move.
So, why does Snowbird really want to leave the county?
Bramble's bill was filed three days after Bonar met with Salt Lake County Council members Randy Horiuchi and Joe Hatch in which he asked for their support for Snowbird's plans to build a chairlift linking Hidden Peak to American Fork Twin Peaks. Hatch told me the meeting was "truly bizarre."
The problem is that the planned lift would drop skiers off right next to White Fork Canyon, an environmentally sensitive piece of Forest Service land that is being considered for wilderness study area designation.
Hatch said when he and Horiuchi didn't commit to Bonar's request, Bonar was miffed. A few days before the Horiuchi/Hatch meeting, Bonar met with Corroon, who also failed to do back-flips over the proposal.
And if you are a developer and get turned down by Randy Horiuchi, your plan must really suck. Either that or that's one developer that failed to donate to Randy's campaign.
And, of course, because Bramble is involved, a certain lobbyist isn't far behind:
Lobbyist Paul Rogers lists both Snowbird and Sandy as his clients. Rogers and Bramble are known by Capitol Hill observers to be extremely tight, with their families having vacationed in Europe together.
So, I want to start a revolution. Protest against the wrongs my government is imposing on me. Since this is 2010, the most important thing to have is a name. Hmm....
Let's name it after someone from the revolution! I found the perfect person!
He's a failed businessman turned lawyer (conservatives hate lawyers!). In his most famous case as a lawyer, he defended a law that restricted how much clergymen got paid (this is so perfect. We liberals love government declaring how much people get paid). Not only that, but the judge in the case was this lawyer's father! (Old-school Chicago politics at it's finest!)
This person used the momentum from this win to get elected into his colony's legislative body. (we liberals love electing celebrities!)
Nine days after being sworn into office, he proposed an act "in language so extreme that some Virginians said it smacked of treason." (Ann Coulter is going to write her next book about us. I know it!) In fact, he allegedly said "If this be treason, make the most of it!" The freshman representative waited for an opportunity where the mostly conservative members of the House were away (only 24% was considered sufficient for a quorum). In this atmosphere, he succeeded, through much debate and persuasion, in getting his proposal passed.
Later, in a speech to the legislative body against their federal government, he used graphic name calling, according to the only first-person record of the speech. (Typical Liberal can't say anything without cussing.)
Then, when he was Governor (for the second time), he voted against the ratification of the Constitution. (You can't hate America more than that!) George Washington tried to appoint him to be Secretary of State, but he declined because he didn't like Washington's policies. (Man, when you hate America, you really hate America!) But, he later changed his mind (flip-flopper!) and liked Washington better than Jefferson and Madison. (Hey, those are two more Founding Fathers! I really must be an unpatriotic Commie/Liberal America-Hater to name my caucus after this guy!)
Well, after all of that reading, I have come to find out that someone has already named their caucus after this person. What crazy liberal did that?
Oh.
-Bob
P.S. No, I don't think Carl Wimmer hates America. nor do I think he's unpatriotic. However, if a Democrat had done something like Patrick Henry, or even in 2008 had spoken out against the Federal Government in the way the PHC do, they would have been called Unpatriotic Commie/Liberal America Haters by Glenn Beck.
A businessman says he's only months away from starting construction on a toll bridge across Utah Lake.
Leon Harward said the bridge will cost $300 million, but didn't say where he will get the money.
Harward, a partner for a private outfit called Utah Crossing Inc., is rejecting calls from skeptics to take out an insurance bond for the bridge's removal in case the project sours.
Harward insists the venture will be well-funded and won't fail, and that a bond isn't necessary. The bridge is meant to connect booming bedroom communities on the west side of Utah Lake with the Provo-Orem metropolitan area on the east.
Promoters have said it will serve a booming population that could reach a half-billion in 20 years.
Harward said that even in the worst-case scenario -- he builds a bridge and for some reason has to walk away -- the state will be left owning the bridge at no cost to taxpayers.
The group Utah Valley Earth Forum says Harward won't find a demand for bridge travel. The history of toll roads and bridges in the U.S. is bleak, says Jim Westwater, chairman of the skeptics' group.
"Many of the toll roads and bridges that have been built around the country have failed financially," Westwater wrote Feb. 15 to Dick Buehler, director of the Utah Division of Forestry, Fire & State Lands.
That agency controls Utah Lake.
"Given the current lack of need for such a bridge, it seems likely that this toll bridge could suffer the same fate," Westwater said.
He added, "Consequently, we ask that the state ... require the developers to provide full proof of funding for both construction and initial operating costs before finalizing any permits (and) require a full bond from the developer and any successors to provide for the complete removal of the bridge should it prove financially infeasible, or other causes render it dead in the water."
Harward said he was familiar with "the same diatribe" from skeptics he discounted as "tree huggers and squirrel squeezers." He asserted his most vocal critics want to return to the days of the horse and buggy.
I'm sure they meant to say a half million people, not a half billion.
But, those people who have built homes West of Utah Lake knew that there was only one road in and out of town. And, Utahns are notoriously thrifty. I can't see that many people paying to drive on a bridge.
Oh, and I realize that Utah Lake isn't the most beautiful structure in the world, but imagine how ugly a bridge over it will be.
Some months ago, I got introduced to an online app that allows you to practice your skills with redistricting. I gave it a try, and was impressed. I made my own 4-district map, which took a couple of hours. Using current population estimates, and only being able to draw lines along current voting precincts (something the actual line drawers don't have to do), here is my vision for the four districts:
District 1 (blue): 684,557 residents. Box Elder, Cache, Rich, Weber, and Morgan Counties, plus all of Davis County except North Salt Lake.
District 2 (green): 684,358 residents. All of Southern and Eastern Utah (including Wasatch County), Summit County except Park City/Kimball Junction, and Utah County from Provo South
District 3 (purple): 683,873 residents. Tooele County; Utah County from Orem North (including cities west of Utah Lake); and Salt Lake County cities Draper, Bluffdale, Herriman, Riverton, South Jordan, West Jordan, Sandy, Midvale, Cottonwood Heights, Alta, and surrounding unincorporated ares.
District 4 (red): Salt Lake County cities of Holladay, Murray, Taylorsville, West Valley, and Salt Lake City, with surrounding unincorporated ares; North Salt Lake in Davis County; Park City in Summit County.
The following discussion came between Representative Craig Frank and myself was on Facebook. I edited out other people's comments in between. The whole thread can be found here.
Don't you find it just a little dishonest that Representative Frank claims that legislators bring down $6000 when he took home more than three times as much? Not too many part time jobs pay mileage reimbursement to commute to your office (heck, most full time jobs don't reimburse you to get to the office) nor a per diem.
Also, using the same site I got Representative Frank's pay information (utahsright.com), I pulled the pay for a friend of mine. This friend works full time (not part time like a legislator) for the state, in a job that requires a Master's Degree. Their total pay?
$34,410.
Yep, someone working full time with a Master's Degree makes less than double what our "$6000/year" legislators make.
Plus, lobbyists aren't giving them gifts, nor do they get to use campaign contributions for their own uses if they want.
Much has been made by the Climate change unbelievers about the snow storms in Washington DC last week.
Yet, they fail to mention that it rained in Salt Lake City (and at the site of the 2010 Olympics in Vancouver) at the same time it snowed in Dallas, Atlanta, and in Florida.
In fact, for the first time ever, there was snow on the ground Saturday in 49 states. That's every state except Hawaii.
Yet, it's weather as usual because it snowed in Washington DC. Twice. Th fact that they were two of the largest snowstorms in centuries makes no difference -- everything is normal in Republicanland.
I have been asked by several Democratic candidates for my endorsement. I'm holding off endorsing for now, until I learn a little more about the candidates. Mostly because at this point, I don't know much more about most of them other than their names and what office they are seeking. Therefore, I'm preparing a questionnaire for Democratic candidates that I hope to send out by the end of this week. If any of you have questions that you think I should ask, leave them as a comment or email them to me.
"Over time, I've had so many constituents say they hate switching," said [Rep. Kenneth] Sumsion, [(R-American Fork)], who Wednesday introduced HB288.
So his bill, with an accompanying amendment, will open a dialogue that simply says: Pick Daylight Savings Time or pick Mountain Standard Time and stay on that all 12 months.
No more spring forward and fall back.
No more resetting the clocks in your house and trying to remember how the heck you change the time on your car's digital or face-number clocks.
Arizona is now the only state in the continental U.S. that doesn't go on Daylight Savings Time. So it is out of sync with surrounding states for part of the year.
One way or the other, depending on whether Utah legislators pick Daylight Savings Time or Mountain Standard Time, the Beehive State would join that minority.
I rather like this idea. However, I think that Rep Sumsion misspoke later in the article:
Yes, a change could mean that the sun would set in the winter around 4 p.m. "But it would be daylight" when Utahns got going in the morning, he said.
"How many of us really are enjoying the outdoors in the winter? Not many," Sumsion said.
Ski resort operators likely would have to shoo skiers and snowboarders off the slopes before the sun goes down, but they would just open an hour earlier in the morning.
Actually, if we stayed Standard Time year-round it would still get dark around 5 PM in the dead of winter. It would get dark just after 8 in the summer. If we went with Daylight Savings year-round, it would get dark at six in the winter, and just after 9 (as it does now) in the summer.
Like I said before, I like this idea, but only if we make it daylight savings year-round.
Gov. Gary Herbert has been challenged by his presumptive Democratic opponent to return a $10,000 campaign donation to a coal company that got a fast-track decision from state regulators on a strip mine.
"The right thing for the governor to do here is to return the money," Salt Lake County Mayor Peter Corroon said Thursday. "The public needs to have confidence that their elected officials and government are not in a pay-to-play position."
Corroon, who's running for Herbert's job in the next election, is calling for an independent investigation to establish the facts.
Thursday evening, the governor's office spoke back sharply to the Democratic challenger. Herbert's chief of staff accused Corroon of spreading inaccuracies for political purposes, adding that Herbert will not return the campaign contribution.
The money came from the Alton Coal Development company, which wants to start a coal mine near the town of Alton. On the day the $10,000 contribution was deposited by the governor's campaign, he met with company officials. A month later, the state approved the mining application.
Officials of the Division of Oil, Gas and Mining have given conflicting statements on whether the approval process was sped up after the meeting with the governor.
The team leader on the approval told KSL News Wednesday that her supervisors did speed up the timetable and told her that's what the governor wanted.
"That's why we need strong ethics reform up at the Capitol, and we want citizens to have faith that the government is doing the right thing and not being overly influenced by large corporations or money," Corroon said.
But the governor's staff insists he never even knew about the campaign contribution; it went to his campaign committee, not the governor's office. They say he did nothing to pressure the Division of Oil, Gas and Mining on behalf of the coal company.
"No money exchanged hands. No one came to the governor and gave him money, looking to do something on their behalf. It's just inaccurate and really not appropriate to even insinuate that there was in this case," says Jason Perry, the governor's chief of staff.
Perry says the governor will not support an independent investigation.
While I believe that there was no quid pro quo, I do not believe that the Governor did not know that he was dealing with a campaign contributor. $10,000 donations don't often appear out of thin air.
The 104 part-time Utah legislators should not get a pay raise next year.
So says House Minority Leader David Litvack, D-Salt Lake, who introduced a bill Wednesday that would keep lawmakers' daily pay at $117, like it is this 45-day session.
If legislators don't act, they would automatically get a pay raise July 1 to $130 a day — their old pay level. That is the recommendation of the Legislative Compensation Commission.
A law passed in 2001 says that pending other action, legislators' pay automatically goes to the level recommended every two years by the commission. Late last year, commission members said it is proper that lawmakers' pay go back to where it was two years ago.
At that time, lawmakers cut their own pay by the same percent that state budgets were trimmed. Most state employees got no pay raise this year, and some had to take unpaid furlough days, as well.
Most state employees won't get a pay raise next budget year, either, and some may have to take furlough days again.
No to mention the fact that many state employees have been laid off, and therefore some of their former coworkers have faced increased workloads because of it. Furthermore, most state employees are nervously following the legislative session to see how much their department is going to get cut, resulting in new rounds of labor cuts.
The Tribune ran a feature yesterday talking about the similarities and few differences between the two candidates running for Governor. It is well worth the time and effort to read the piece. I agree with BYU political scientist Quinn Monson when he says that while Corroon and Herbert agree on many social issues,
Corroon ... needs to make the governor's race about fiscal responsibility and good government. "If it turns on social issues," he adds, "you activate the vote-Republican gene" in GOP-dominated Utah.
So, how does Peter Corroon feel on some of the Utah's hot-button social issues?
Gay Marriage/Civil Unions:
Corroon » "I believe traditional marriage is between a man and a woman. I also do support making sure all our citizens can work, live and support their loved ones without discrimination in our society.
"Our citizens have spoken on [civil unions] through a constitutional amendment so it wouldn't be something I would pursue."
Abortion:
"Based on my [Catholic] faith and upbringing, I am opposed to abortion except in limited circumstances: rape, incest and the life and health of the mother. ...
"I certainly understand that other people may have a different opinion. I respect that difference. As governor, my goal would be to unite everybody to see how we could reduce the number of abortions. ...
Utah bicyclists will have to keep stopping at stop signs or risk a ticket, regardless of whether there's any traffic.
The House Transportation Committee on Tuesday deadlocked 6-6 over a bill that would legalize a rolling stop when a bicyclist finds it safe to cross and also allow for stopping and then riding through red lights when there is no traffic. The tie vote means the bill fails to advance to the House floor.
Rep. Steve Mascaro, R-West Jordan, said the change would confuse drivers and send the wrong message to children taught to wait out red lights and walk their bikes across the street. Like others on the committee, he added that he believes drivers would be sued and found at fault for hitting cyclists who make poor choices.
So, the lobbyists rented a room at the State Capitol Building so they could have an office to work out of. And, because they wanted to prove that you can indeed purchase anything in this world with money, including a Legislature, made it the nicest room in the building:
Rep. Carl Wimmer, R-Herriman, is one who has opposed a cell phone ban on the principle of individual liberty. "Government does not need to mandate every good idea," said Wimmer, who acknowledged that driving while phoning may be dangerous. "We are a free people."
So, let's use this reasoning on some of Wimmer's pet issues:
Abortion:
Sure, you're taking the life of another person into your hands, but we are a free people. Government does not need to mandate every good idea..... Oh, that's not his position? Never mind.
Marriage:
We are a free people. We should be able to choose whom we marry. Government does not need to mandate every god idea..... Oh, that's not his position? Never mind.
One article, two posts. Part two to come. but first, from the Tribune:
Many Utahns are wary of drivers who are talking on cell phones behind the wheel, and most say they would support legislation to ban the practice.
A Salt Lake Tribune poll found 69 percent of respondents favor a ban, and on Thursday a state senator introduced a bill to keep drivers younger than 18 from using cell phones while driving.
That's a start, but doesn't go far enough, said West Jordan resident Thomas Black, one of the poll respondents.
"I have two daughters that drive while using a cell phone, and I refuse to ride with them," Black said. "It's dangerous. It takes away from concentration." He prefers an all-out ban.
Honeyville resident Shelly Thorsted agrees it's especially important for new drivers to avoid distraction. Even adults can zone out, though, she said. She has become frightened enough that she won't answer calls while in the car.
"I've been talking on my phone and hung up and realized I didn't even remember driving that last five or 10 minutes," she said.
Sen. Ross Romero, D-Salt Lake City, on Thursday introduced a ban on phone use by under-18 drivers. Rep. Phil Riesen, D-Holladay, is sponsoring a bill with the same ban in the House.
Limiting the ban to teens was necessary because the Legislature has been hostile to a flat cell phone ban, Romero said. Lawmakers last year prohibited texting while driving, but all talk of a phoning ban has gone nowhere.
No phone call is so important that you have to answer it or make it while behind the wheel.
This bill, if it were to pass, would eliminate the population requirement for liquor licenses issued to restaurants and open the liquor license process to the free market – allowing any restaurant to receive a license if they are willing to pay the fee.
For those of you who may not know, there is a limited number of restaurant liquor licenses (and bar licenses for that matter) that the liquor commission can give out to restaurants across the state, and this number is tied to the state population. In fact, only one license can be distributed per 5,200 people if the restaurant wishes to sell liquor (these laws apply to, say, the Olive Garden). The bill goes further, if a restaurant wishes to sell wine, heavy beer, or beer (but not spirits), it too lifts the population requirement of one license per 9,300 people (these laws apply to that local wing joint you may love).
There's a reality that just because a place sells alcohol doesn't mean that you have to partake. And, if this means that more restaurants can open and be profitable (because there is a large profit margin in alcohol, as well as soft drinks), then I'mm all for it.
