It looks a lot like West Valley City Mayor Mike Winder. His take on UTOPIA:

So if you were mayor, what would you do? Walk away from the system, let it go dark and make your $147 million in payments over the next 30 years with nothing to show for it? Do you try to sell the network and take pennies on the dollar? Do you dribble in a little money so the network can limp along indefinitely, hemorrhaging cash along the way? Or do you take out a new bond that can grow your subscriber base to break-even point and beyond? A relatively small bond — 20 percent the size of the original UTOPIA bond — could do that.

Leadership is not complaining about decisions made in the past that can’t be undone. It’s not questioning whether or not the decision should have been made in the first place. It’s not endlessly blaming your predecessor for inherited problems. It means accepting the reality of your situation and choosing to make choices that lead towards the best possible outcome, no matter how painful or unpopular they may be.

If only other elected officials had the same strength. (I’m looking at you, Congress.)

This last legislative session ended in Utah trying to pick some big fights with the federal government. From seizing federal land to bucking federal gun regulations to suing to stop the health care bill that just passed, our legislature and AG are digging in for a knock-down brawl. A lot of criticism has been leveled at them for the expense of these fights, but I’m starting to wonder if the potential payout isn’t worth it.

(more…)

The press and most bloggers have been fixated on the current Republican nomination race for US Senate because, hey, the odds are in their favor of winning handily in the general election. Little attention is being paid to what’s going on on the other side, though. Sam Granato and Christopher Stout are currently vying for position on the ballot and what’s going on there has been rather telling.

(more…)

I’ve already covered my requirements of someone running for federal office. In a lot of ways, managing a state can be even more complex than handling federal issues. Many problems tackled by the legislature are often based around narrowly-defined groups of people that cross political and sometimes geographic boundaries. It also requires more discipline since going into massive debt isn’t on the table as an option. Here’s what I expect out of anyone running for state office.

(more…)

I very much enjoyed David Rodeback’s series of If You Want My Vote posts outlining his basic requirements of those running for local office. There’s a lot of sage advice in there for candidate and voter alike. In that spirit, I’d like to list a few things I want to see from candidates at the federal, state, and local level. There’s been way too many politicos insisting that “government” is some nebulous blob that’s the same all over. It’s not. Here’s what I want from anyone running for a federal office.

(more…)

My jaw just about dropped when I saw that Qwest’s top lobbyist, Eric Isom, was running for a seat in the state legislature. (House District 15, to be exact.) He’s currently up against 3 other Republicans at the upcoming convention. What’s shocking about this is that if delegates in his district truly knew who he is, he’d be turned out on his head. In this post, I intend to full lay out why Eric Isom is completely unfit for public office in our state.

For starters, there’s the whole lobbyist thing. It’s bad enough that Sen. Howard Stephenson is both lobbyist and legislator, but to add one more to the heap? Mr. Isom comically claims that, if elected, he would resign his position as a lobbyist at Qwest and take another position with the company. How exactly does that resolve the conflict of interest? Even if he resigned from the company entirely, I doubt that would magically balance his votes as a lawmaker. I don’t know what other employment Mr. Isom would find given that his position prior to that was as a lobbyist for the GOP. Do you really want another professional lobbyist in the legislature?

As part of Eric Isom’s work with Qwest, he has sought out the elimination of price controls on basic phone service which sharply increased costs for customers across the state. Qwest is also reportedly seeking a $50M rate increase from you, the taxpayer, to finance their network construction plans. This is despite receiving over $2.7B in benefits from the Telecommunications Act of 1996 to build advanced fiber optic connections to every customer in the state and promote better competition for phone service. Do these sound like the actions of someone who’s looking out for the taxpayer… or looking for a handout for a multi-billion dollar corporation? Do you think he’ll stop doing it once elected?

It’s also worth noting that residents of Layton could see a nice, hefty tax increase thanks to the actions of Mr. Isom’s employer, Qwest. In 2004, Qwest successfully lobbied for SB66, a bill that placed strict financing restrictions on any municipality seeking to build a municipal telecommunications system. Layton was a part of UTOPIA at the time and was stuck with a commitment to build the network while not being allowed to bond for more than half of the total system cost. Imagine trying to build a skyscraper when you could only borrow half of the money! This restriction combined with Qwest’s frivolous lawsuit against UTOPIA, which was dismissed, has seriously degraded the financial health of the network and will likely cause increased taxes, decreased services, or both in Layton for at least several years. Do you want someone in office who would represent and push those aims?

Delegates and voters in Utah State House District 15, do not vote for Eric Isom. To do so is to encourage more malfeasance and corporate welfare at the hands of his current employer, Qwest.

As someone who spent 14 years in Henderson, NV and still has a number of connections there, I’ve been watching what’s been said and reported about the canceled firesides for Harry Reid with some amusement. A lot of folks don’t seem to have the slightest clue as to what goes on in Nevada politics, nor have they bothered to find out. Many just charge on down the lane with their opinions despite having a very incomplete view of the picture. If they did, they would walk away with a very different take.

(more…)

It’s always very exciting to find an obscure historical document that backs up one of your political positions, especially when it makes an opposing group look bad. I can imagine that Salon blogger Paul J. O’Rourke experienced that same kind of schadenfreude when he stumbled across “An Act for the Relief of Sick and Disabled Seamen”, legislation from 1798 that would appear to back up his position that a individual mandate to carry health insurance is in line with the Constitution. After all, if James Adams approved, how can you argue against original intent?

On the surface, he appears to be correct. Until, that is, you actually take on the chore of reading the entire thing. Or, heck, even just the first paragraph. Take a look for yourself:

That from and after the first day of September next, the master or owner of every ship or vessel of the United States, arriving from a foreign port into any port of the United States, shall, before such ship or vessel shall be admitted to an entry, render to the collector a true account of the number of seamen, that shall have been employed on board such vessel since she was last entered at any port in the United States,-and shall pay to the said collector, at the rate of twenty cents per month for every seaman so employed; which sum he is hereby authorized to retain out of the wages of such seamen. (emphasis mine)

Huh. So, basically, this applied to foreign trade only. And the ability to regulate foreign trade is rather expressly found in Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution.

Better luck next time, dude.

Dear Congressional Democrats,

After spending years talking about how evil insurance companies are, your “solution” to ever-increasing health care costs  is to mandate that we do business with this “enemy” and give them a large chunk of taxpayer dollars. Every time you spread the meme that the Republican Party is nothing but a bunch of corporate shills, I hope they pull this one up to show that you’re just as bad as they are.

Sincerely,

A pissed-off taxpayer

P.S. Bob and I disagree on how to fix health care, but we agree that your bill sucks.

I had to take some time to really take in what was going on with Kevin Garn, and there’s a lot of anger that’s worth spreading around.

Kevin Garn: Really? What part of your mind thought that, as a 30-year-old married man, it would be okay with carry on a relationship with a 15-year-old girl that culminated in a round of naked hot-tubbing? (Strike one.) This was your Sunday school student and your employee to boot. That goes so far beyond “poor judgment” that I’m not even entirely sure there’s a word to describe it. At the very least, you’re a total manipulative skeeze. Then you decide it’s a good idea, 17 years later (and long after the statute of limitations, I would add) to try and buy off her silence. (Strike two.) Apparently, the $150K and a non-disclosure agreement wasn’t quite enough to keep her from blabbing the story to the entire free world in the meantime, and you ended up forced to ‘fess up a good 25 years later. That’s all fine and well, but why on earth did you choose the last night of the legislative session with a captive audience to do it? (Strike three.) Good heavens, man. Hold a press conference with your wife and kids at your side like every other guy embroiled in a sex scandal. Forcing everyone into that kind of uncomfortable situation is unseemly and unprofessional.

David Clark: Look, I can understand wanting to sit on this kind of thing. I get that. You party guys are supposed to protect your own and all, and just like a good team player you wanted to close ranks. But c’mon, enabling the circus on the floor without giving anyone else warning that it was coming? It reads like a bad joke. You’re leadership. You’re supposed to lead. What you did is not leadership. I think Holly is right about you.

Deseret News: I can understand sitting on the story back in 2002. Garn lost his bid for public office, it looked like he was going back to private life, and the accuser clammed up suddenly and stopped talking, casting the veracity of the entire thing into doubt. It was an editorial judgment call and you made it, though it sounds like you had plenty to at least put something in the paper at a later date, say like maybe when Garn wanted to hold elected office once again? And maybe when the accuser starts talking again, you should maybe run the story? But no, instead of running with that kind of scoop, you were caught with your pants down just like everyone else. You lost a lot of credibility as journalists on this one.

Every single chucklehead who clapped: I don’t even think I need to explain this one. Thank goodness for the few that were stunned enough or incensed enough not to participate.

The entire majority caucus: Did it really take you two hours in a private session to come up with that completely and totally lame statement? It should have taken all of five minutes to agree that Garn is a skeeze, clapping was idiotic, and Clark totally bungled handling it from his side. Good job at throwing plenty of gasoline on the UEG fire so that they can get their terrible bill pushed through not on merit, but on the fact that they’re doing something while you appear to do nothing.

Cheryl Maher: Yeah, what happened to her is bad and it’s probably contributed to some of her issues, but I have serious doubts that it didn’t just exacerbate some mental problems that were already there. I know people who went through much worse that still ended up becoming decent human beings. If it’s about justice, why on earth didn’t you file a frakkin’ police report and press charges? Why did you continue to stay in contact with him? Why did you take the hush money and violate the non-disclosure agreement? And most importantly of all, why were you e-mail his son thinly-veiled blackmail threats? At some point, stop blaming everyone else for your poor choices in life.

Maher’s soon-to-be-ex-husband: How tasteless and classless can you get to start airing your marriage’s dirty laundry in the daily papers during your divorce proceedings? Apparently you saw your opportunity to get in another dig and just couldn’t help yourself. She may be looney tunes, but you’re not exactly giving us an image of a guy she’d want to stick with, you know?

And just because I’m sure that Ric Cantrell thought there was no way I could possibly tie this song to the session:

Yeah, it’s probably a bit harsh and maybe a little tasteless, but when the thought popped into my head, I had a hearty belly laugh. (For the record, Ric and I had that exchange weeks ago when none of us knew about Garn and he asked me not to find a way to do it. Sorry, Ric, but comedy demanded satisfaction.)