Big Tobacco Wants You To Thank Governor Herbert

You'd think that with a legislature that is predominantly LDS, a religion whose scriptures say "And again, tobacco is not for the body, neither for the belly, and is not good for man," that big tobacco would have a horrible time in the legislature.

But, big tobacco has big money. And some of that money flows into the coffers of our legislators. And the pockets of lobbyists. Lobbyists like former house speaker Greg Curtis.

Amazingly, the legislature managed to pass HB 196, which increases taxes on cigarettes. However, Governor Herbert has said he plans on vetoing a tobacco tax increase. Well, that was before he said that he'd sign it, which was before he said he wasn't sure what he'd do. Leadership -- not his strong suit.

And, at least one group wants him to veto it:


(click to enlarge. Page found here.)

Look in the top right-hand corner. "Provided by Altria Client Services." Who is Altria you ask? Well, they are the parent company of Phillip Morris, whose cigarette brands include Marlboro, Alpine, Basic, Benson & Hedges, Bristol, Cambridge, Chesterfield, Commander, Dave's, English Ovals, Lark, L&M, Merit, Parliament, Players, Saratoga and Virginia Slims. In other words, Pillip Morris put the big in big tobacco.

And you thought the Legislature only did the bidding of the Church.....

-Bob

Stop The Presses! Gayle Ruzicka and I Agree on SB 248

Someone once said that politics makes strange bedfellows. You know it's true when I agree with Utah Eagle Forum's Gayle Ruzicka on a bill.

But, sometimes, a bill is so wrong (wrong isn't even the right word. Strange? Stupid? I don't know) that it requires people of all stripes to weigh in in opposition.

To the Trib:

Utah kids could begin getting hit up to play blackjack or try their luck on Las Vegas' loosest slot machines under legislation being sponsored by a conservative Utah County lawmaker.

Sen. Mark Madsen, R-Eagle Mountain, is sponsoring SB248 to exempt casino gambling from the state's do-not-contact registry, designed to protect children from solicitations for pornography, alcohol, smoking and other adult-oriented business.

He told a committee this week the casino carve-out was brought to him by the Attorney General's Office, which won a lawsuit in October brought by the pornography industry challenging the registry but feared it couldn't withstand a suit by the gambling industry.

That is not Attorney General Mark Shurtleff's recollection.

"We didn't come up with this," Shurtleff said. "The casino folks came to [Madsen] initially and asked him to run the bill and then came to us next."

Because suddenly caring about being able to afford lawsuits is important.

Because Senator Madsen cares for kids so much, he wants them to get SPAM from the Peppermill.

If I had the oomph, I'd check to see how much money Senator Madsen has gotten from the gambling industry lately. I'd be willing to be it's not a small amount. But, that would require dealing with Gary Herbert's cluster-**** of a website, which requires more patience than I have right now.

[UPDATE 3/4/10 5:54 PM] Someone looked into Senator Madsen's donations back to 2008 and couldn't find any gambling interests. [end update]

Oh, and Gayle Ruzica's take on the bill?

But Madsen's proposal has conservative groups, who traditionally back the like-minded legislator, concerned about the impacts.

"I didn't like that bill from the beginning," said Gayle Ruzicka, president of the Utah Eagle Forum. "Senator Madsen is a really, really good man who believes in that registry. He would never do anything to destroy it. ... That registry has to be protected at all costs."

If the state has to exempt gambling to preserve the rest of the registry, she said, it is a pill they will have to swallow, but she would rather leave it the way it is.
"I don't believe anything [the casinos] are saying. They're evil people," she said. "They'd love to addict all of us, including children."

Hey, Carl! Don't shoot Gayle!

Craig Frank's $12.600 Pay dishonesty

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.

-Bob

Buttars Defends K-11 Plan on CNN

If a student has the credits to leave high school early, they are allowed to already.

HB 288 -- Daylight Savings Time Elimination

Deseret News:

"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.

No Legislative Pay Raise in 2011

Deseret News:

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.

-Bob

Cycling Bill Dies

I posted about my opposition to this bill a couple of weeks ago. Well, it looks like the bill died in committee yesterday:

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.

Ethics Reform -- They're Doing it Wrong

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:



(Thanks to Ashley Anderson for the poster....)

HB 223 -- Applying Free Market Principles to Liquor Licensing

Blue in Red Zion:

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.

-Bob

GOP Legislature Doesn't Want Your Grandma to Vote

Well, not without waiting in line for 4-5 hours to get a state ID card.

KSL:

Elderly voters in Utah won't be allowed to use their Medicare cards as a valid form of identification at the ballot box.

The Utah House voted down a measure Thursday 47-27 that would have carved out an exception in state law that requires a picture ID to vote.

Current forms of acceptable identification include a valid Utah driver's license, U.S. passport, tribal identification card and concealed weapons permit.

Two forms showing the voter's name and proof of address can also be used.

Rep. Marie Poulson, a Cottonwood Heights Democrat who sponsored the bill, says many older voters don't have driver's licenses or other necessary documents.

But opponents defeated the bill out of fear illegal immigrants would obtain fraudulent Medicare cards.

Maybe Grandma can get a concealed weapons permit.....

Hunsaker: You Can't Handle The Truth About Canal Safety

Tribune:

Last summer's deadly Logan canal collapse is spurring efforts to identify potential hazards along Utah's waterways, but a House bill would keep those findings secret from the public and even the courts.

That is, if there ever were any findings from HB60, the Water Conveyance Facilities Safety Act. Compliance, if the measure passes, would be voluntary.

The bill, sponsored by Rep. Fred Hunsaker, R-Logan, says water companies should create management plans identifying potential hazards along their canals or ditches. Voluntary compliance would give them continued access to state revolving funds. Noncompliance would cut them off from state money for repairs or hazard prevention.

But Hunsaker's bill would make the plans exempt from the Government Records Access and Management Act, Utah's open-records law. And if a lawsuit were filed in the event of canal failure, the management plans -- or the lack of them -- would not be allowed as evidence in civil negligence, injury or damages litigation.

But because the canal companies wouldn't have to actually file the plans with the state, only certify that they exist, would they be records at all? And what would be their point?

HB 60 -- The "We know whether or not you live under a canal that could destroy everything you own and possibly kill you, but we're not going to tell you or the state." bill.

Cause that will work really well.

-Bob

Democratic Response to State of the State

Hey, that's my Senator!



I can't find video of the Governor's speech, but here's a link to the transcript.

HB 76, Scalpers, and SmithsTix

Deseret News:

The 2010 Legislature, which convened Monday, will consider a proposed bill that targets overpriced tickets by limiting the amount scalpers and ticket brokers can charge.

If passed, the law may not eliminate the independent ticket business in Utah, but resellers say the restrictions would have a "very negative effect."

Under HB76, a person may not sell a ticket for more than the ticket's face value plus tax and a "service charge" not to exceed $10, or 15 percent of the price.

The bill's sponsor, Rep. Lynn Hemingway, D-Salt Lake City, said the proposal is a result of constituent complaints.

"I just want to keep prices down," he said. "It's important that families can afford to go to these events and not get ripped off."

In December, I attended a concert at a local venue. The advertised price of the tickets was $10, including taxes. However, buying four $10-face-value tickets at the venue box office cost me $48, due to a $2 "facility fee." Had I gone to the authorized ticket agent (SmithsTix), it would have cost me nearly $60 plus additional fees to either print my tickets at home or have them mailed to me.

I have a problem with this. However, this is not what seems to be what this bill targets. This bill appears to target the scalpers standing on the street before most sporting events and concerts.

However, Scalping, like many other things, runs on a system of supply and demand. When demand is high (say a Miley Cyrus concert or a Jazz/Lakers game), the scalpers make a profit (however, usually the base price of the tickets is so high, the scalpers on the street have a tough time making a profit). Yet, when the demand is low (say, a Salt Lake Bees or a Jazz/Kings game), The scalpers are selling tickets well below face value (I get a great deal as an employee at Bees games, but the price from a scalper is still better).

I have a real problem seeing the supply-and-demand Republicans get involved. However, this is an election year, so they'll ram this one through.

-Bob

P.S. -- as always, the views expressed here are my own, and do not reflect the views of my employers.

Corroon Setting High Water Mark in Ethics

From the Press Release:

Salt Lake City, Utah - Standing on the Capitol steps, Salt Lake County Mayor Peter Corroon set the high water mark for ethics reform.

“I’m here today as we begin this legislative session, because I want to see Utah set a high water mark. A mark the voters in Utah can look back on through the session and afterwards to see if this legislature has fulfilled their commitment to pass meaningful ethics reform and that the Governor has signed it,” stated Mayor Corroon.

Calling on the Legislator [sic] and Governor to take immediate action, Mayor Corroon outlined five needed reforms that are critical to ensuring the needs and interests of the people of Utah are represented in the government.

1. Immediately limit the amount an individual or entity can give to a state-wide candidate to $10,000 and $5,000 for a legislative race, and prohibit state contractors (people who financially benefit from state contracts) from donating to state wide candidates and legislative candidates.

2. Immediately ban all gifts to statewide elected officials and legislators.

3. Immediately end of the personal use of campaign funds.

4. Stop the revolving door by giving legislators a cooling off period of 2 years before they can lobby their former colleagues.

5. Create an independent ethics commission to address ethical violations by legislators and state wide elected officials.

Mayor Peter Corroon ended his statement by urging immediate action. “Our society is based on values and ethics. Our values as Utahns are deeply rooted in ethics. The ethic of hard work, the ethic of being good stewards, the ethic of doing the right thing. Our Legislature and Governor can and should do the right thing. They can make this easy. They can and should do this now.”

To accept comments and build on his ideas, Mayor Corroon is encouraging the people of Utah to submit their thoughts on ethics reform on his website, www.votecorroon.com. “This is a critical issue for all
Utahns, and I’d love to hear what you think. Please post your comments about ethics reform on our website votecorroon.com. We’ll be reporting back as the session progresses.”

As Mayor of Salt Lake County, Peter Corroon worked with the Republican controlled legislative body and together, the Republicans and Democrats passed real and meaningful ethics reform. They took it head on and passed it.

Under Utah State Law, the Legislature and Governor have the authority to pass legislation and have it go into immediate effect. The process requires take a 2/3 vote in both the House and Senate and the Governor’s signature.

I highlighted the pertinent parts of the release. This is the type of leadership this state needs.

SB 36 -- Maybe We Should Hunt Republicans Next

(I want to be clear -- I do not condone the hunting of Republicans.)

Sometimes, there's a story about a bill that's so good, it just needs commenting....

From the Tribune:

Wolves are out of control, says Utah Sen. Allen Christensen, and the state's policy should be to kill them. Heck, he did. Went to Canada to bag one. It's at the taxidermist.

And besides, Christensen says, passing a bill to declare Utah's policy to destroy or remove all wolves is a simple case of states' rights.

The North Ogden Republican's goal is spelled out in SB36, which has caught the attention of legislative attorneys who attached a rare warning that the bill, if passed, probably would be found unconstitutional.

Screw the Constitution!

"Will it be a fight? Absolutely," Christensen concedes. "We have enough money to take it all the way to the [U.S.] Supreme Court."

Again, in this day of deep budget cuts and such, I think the AG's office has way too much money if they can afford to defend vanity bills all the way to the Supreme Court.

The Utah chapters of the Cattlemen's Association and Sportsmen for Fish & Wildlife support the bill. The Sportsmen will contribute to litigation costs, says Byron Bateman, president of the Utah chapter.

"We've been in the fight from the get-go," Bateman said, "and we'll be in it to the end."

Ah. There's where the money is coming from. And I thought it was illegal for outside groups to fund the State's defense. That seems to be an issue whenever an abortion bill comes up.

SB36 is for people who enjoy wildlife, Christensen says, adding he knows wolves are wildlife, too.

I enjoy wildlife enough to kill it unnecessarily.

But they were exterminated in this region in the 19th century "for good reason," he says. "They were simply not compatible with humans anymore."

They weren't compatible because humans showed up and decided they weren't compatible. Remember,white man settled the region in the 19th century.

And now in Utah, Christensen says, "we supposedly don't have wolves. We would like to control our borders and say wolves are not endangered. We would like them not to immigrate into here."

You see, it's an immigration issue. Dang immigrants!

But federal law trumps state law. In Utah, except for a small area included in the northern Rocky Mountain gray-wolf recovery area, wolves remain on the endangered list and under federal protection. So even if Christensen's bill were to take effect, says Ed Bangs, U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service wolf-recovery chief, it wouldn't matter.

Anyone who kills a wolf without proper cause in most of Utah still could land in big trouble -- to the tune of a $100,000 fine, a year in prison and loss of the gun that killed the beast and the truck the hunter rode in.
Bangs has heard all the arguments against wolves: They've destroyed elk and moose herds in the Yellowstone region, decimated livestock, hurt ranchers financially and they are man killers -- claims that tell some of the truth about wolves but not all of it.

"People who don't like them give them supernatural powers. It's that way all over the world," Bangs says. "In reality, they're no big deal."

Wolves have contributed to a decline of elk in and around Yellowstone, but moose loss is probably more due to climate disruption. "Moose can't handle heat at all," Bangs says. "They just lie around and don't store body fat."

White-tail deer populations are stable. Weather, loss of habitat, fire and other predators, including humans, have contributed to wildlife losses. In the West, Bangs says, wolves mostly cause problems with livestock depredation.

But they don't kill people. The first documented time a wolf killed a person the federal agency knows of occurred three years ago in Canada at a mining camp where wolves had become habituated to humans who fed them and left garbage around. The wolves had become aggressive. They killed a man who was trying to get close enough to photograph them, Bangs says.

This year, Christensen says, he went to Canada to kill a wolf. "I did kill one. It's currently at the taxidermist," he says. "Wolves are wildlife, too. But they proliferate so fast."

Republicans proliferate so fast. Maybe we can hunt them, too.

-Bob

SB38 -- Ruining The Purpose of HOV lanes

HOV Lanes should be for 1) Cars with more than one occupant and 2) for Clean fuel cars. And those restrictions should be in place 24/7/365, not just during rush hours, like SB38 would do. From Jesse:

I was perusing through the list of bills filed so far up at the hill and came across SB38, Restrictions on High Occupancy Vehicle Lane. This adopts a practice used in many other states that turns HOV lanes into normal lanes outside of peak traffic hours defined in the bill as 6AM to 9AM and 4PM to 7PM. This would certainly be a welcome change to help lessen congestion outside of the morning and evening commutes.

Traffic Jam at noon, but you've got a nice, open lane of travel unused because you and everyone around you have only one person in your SUV? Tough luck.

-Bob

Another Brilliant Move From Buttars

Because this sends a great message to businesses looking to relocate here -- Come to Utah, where our kids have one less year of school than yours do!

SALT LAKE CITY -- A Utah senator thinks the way Utah looks at its budget needs to be "rethought." Sen. Chris Buttars, R-West Jordan, began outlining his plan to reform state spending from the ground up Thursday. Among his proposals is one to eliminate the 12th grade, a move he says would cut $250 million out of the budget every year.

"Almost all of the industrial world uses 11 grades," he said. "Why do we use 12? The kids either got their one foot in AP classes in college, or they're just running around, taking PE."

Buttars hosted what he called a government reform summit at the State Capitol. In attendance Thursday afternoon were several Republican senators and representatives, as well as some conservative leaders like Gayle Ruzicka of the Utah Eagle Forum.

Buttars believes his ideas "have legs."

Yep. That will fly.

And, I take offense. I didn't take one AP nor one PE class my Senior Year.

HB 91-- A bad Bicycling Bill

Blue in Red Zion has pointed out a bill being run by Representative Carol Spackman-Moss that "allows bicycle riders the right to blow through intersections when no other cars are there. No having to legally wait for the light to change in a downtown commute, no need to stop in a residential area with a stop sign, no riders can simply keep on riding, provided it is safe for them to do so."

I used to ride my bike a lot. Anyone who has seen my calves can attest to that. However, anyone who has seen the rest of me can probably guess that I haven't been on a bike much since getting home from my mission a decade ago. My parents and I have been involved in the local cycling community in varying degrees since the late 80's.

I think this is a bad bill for many reasons. I feel that one of the problems cyclists face today is that they don't get any respect from drivers, compounded by the fact that they many in their ranks don't respect the laws that are out there. How many times have I seen a cyclist just about get themselves killed blowing through a stop sign or a red light. Now, having times that they are allowed to is just foolhardy. Even fewer cycling laws will be enforced.

You see, in Utah, a bicycle is a vehicle, and has the right to be on the road (at least in the right half of the right-most lane of traffic) with a few exceptions (freeways when there is an alternate road, some local restrictions). With that right, bicyclists have to obey the same laws as everyone who drives a car. Yes, I have heard of cyclists getting cited for speeding and running stop signs.

So, creating a special set of rules for cyclists is a dangerous path to go down.

-Bob

AG, BCS, and Budget Cuts

So, this year's legislative session is starting to gear up, and it's going to be ugly. Most departments are looking to cut budgets, and a tax increase is looming. I have several friends employed by the state that are nervous that they may be drawing unemployment come Summertime.

So, you'd think that leaders of some departments would be showing how fiscally sound they've been.

Which is why it flabbergasts me as to why Mark Shurtleff would think this would be a good time to prove his limited-government street cred by getting the government involved in college sports:

Antitrust laws require free and fare competition and that applies to businesses. Shurtleff said,” The Supreme Court of the United States has already ruled that those laws apply to NCAA College sports. Isn't that what college sports is supposed to be about, fairness.”

But, some say college football is about money and power. Shurtleff knows he'll face a strong opponent in court. The BCS recently added a former White House Press Secretary to their team. Shurtleff said,” I mean they just hired Ari Fleischer for crying out loud. I'm sure they paid him a ton of money. The lobbying money to congress is huge.”

BCS Administrator Bill Hancock is ready for the fight he says. " The real fact is that those conferences who complain are receiving more money from postseason football than ever before, far more than they've received before , because of the BCS."

Nevertheless, Shurtleff says no matter how tough the competition is there will be a lawsuit. How confident is he that he’ll come out a winner? Shurtleff said,” Very Confident.”

Shurtleff says if Utah has to go it alone, they will. However, he says he's trying to get help from the Antitrust Division of the US Department of Justice. No word on when the lawsuit will actually be filed.

What's next? Getting the Government involved in religious rites such as marriage? Oh, wait, I forgot. Crap.....

Anyway, looks like I know one department that could use some budget trimming, if the AG's office has this kind of money to kick around.....

Margaret Dayton's Gun Deregulation Bill

So, Senator Margaret Dayton (nRa - Orem) has a bill to change how guns manufactured in Utah (presumably to be used only in Utah) are regulated.

A personal firearm, a firearm action or receiver, a firearm accessory, or ammunition that is manufactured commercially or privately in the state to be used or sold within the state is not subject to federal law or federal regulation, including registration, under the authority of Congress to regulate interstate commerce.

However, there is a big problem with this, as pointed out by the Tribune:

The Legislature's own lawyers, in an analysis of the bill, conclude that it is highly likely the bill would be found unconstitutional by the courts. The reason is the Constitution's Supremacy Clause, which places the federal government above the states in the constitutional pecking order, and because of existing judicial interpretations of federal firearms laws as they apply to conduct within a single state.

And, as we all know, the state has a large budget surplus right now, so there's plenty of money to spend on a lawsuit.......

Oh, wait. Nevermind.