Tuesday, October 27, 2020

Utah 2020 Amendments

 I am Yes for A B C and D

No on E F and G

For E, Sen Mayne does a good job. Hunting and fishing are essential and undeniable parts of Utah’s cultural identity and economy and protected in statute.

We love and cherish many things about our great state. Few are so vital they must be enshrined in our state’s most sacred document.

The Second Amendment in the U.S. Constitution and our Utah Constitution guarantee our rights to keep and bear arms and 

individuals’ rights to protect themselves and their families. These sacred constitutional liberties are not about hunting and fishing. We should not dilute them by adding to them or defining them as something they are not.

If we do not carefully scrutinize what goes into it, the entire document will lose value. That is not to say that we should not protect hunting and fishing—we absolutely should. But if we do not draw a line between rights that are fundamental and privileges that extend from those rights, we will no longer be able to tell the difference.

Nobody is threatening our right to hunt and fish. Any threat is hypothetical or imaginary. The Utah Division of Wildlife Re-sources is an agency of outdoor sports professionals and enthusiasts dedicated to preserving and managing Utah’s vibrant hunting and fishing traditions, culture, and industry. The protections and promotion that they provide is woven deep into the laws of our state and are not going anywhere.

Legislative supporters of Amendment E admit that the amendment will not make any meaningful difference in how hunting and fishing is managed in the state. It will have no meaningful impact on people’s access to hunting and fishing. These activities are and will continue to be open to all. Without the amendment, you will still be able to hunt and fish, and the state will continue to promote and protect these activities as they always have.

No one is even considering taking away our hunting and fishing rights, so why are we considering inserting unnecessary language into our constitution?

By adding this amendment, we will dilute our fundamental rights, like our right to protect ourselves and families, our right to free speech, and our right to peaceably assemble.

Vote NO to protect the power of our constitutional rights. Vote no on amendment E.

- Senator Karen Mayne and Representative Marsha Judkins

On Amendment F: "As the Utah Constitution now dictates, the session would still need to begin in January and run for only 45 consecutive days, with the exception of federal and state holidays. The only change included in Constitutional Amendment F is removing the specific January start date from the Constitution and instead specifying the January start date in statute. The Legislature would be enabled to set the start date by passing a bill. This will allow for more adaptability in determining a start date."

Currently citizens, businesses, taxpayers, and legislators can plan in advance for years for the start of the session. Will they also change the candidate filing deadlines at a wim? I don't trust the flexibility as written. The session may be one or two days longer with the holidays but the session date could shift greatly.

Amendment G, according to the official voter guide and the unbiased calculation section, is expecting to help balance the budget by allowing $600 Million to be used from the education fund to pay for something currently funded by the general fund. It basically removes $600 Million from the education fund per year. The UEA and others cut a deal so this would not be worse than it could be. I doubt higher ed got such a deal. Since sales taxes are better than expected and income tax is worse than expected as of July 1st, the deal could be worse than expected. I am a no vote on G. Is it better than the tax reform? At least the voters get to decide.

Utah GOP ad Oct 27

 from my friend Judy

"I have tried to keep politics off of JUDY’S CORNER except to copy something that someone needed from the 2019 Tax Referendum page but I have to repost this because of the unethical flyer sent out by the Utah State Republican Party in retaliation to a flyer sent out to several select areas by the Democratic State Party. This flyer unlike the Democratic one is absolutely a lie and FALSE!

Please read and tell your friends that this is flyer is unprofessional and deceitful.



It has just come to my attention that several Democrats that not only voted against SB2001 but helped to get signatures to repeal have had a mailer sent out by the Republican party saying they didn’t try to stop the tax on food! 

Remember all Democrats voted AGAINST SB2001. 

Please if you are in Representative Suzanne Harrison, Represenative Elizabeth Weight, Carol Spackman Moss, Representative Brian King, Rep Joel K Briscoe or Represenative Karen Kwan’s area tell your neighbors it is rubbish! You can even have them call me and I can tell them the truth! 

I just addressed an issue that said the Democrats were unethical because a news article questioning the integrity of a Republican that was based on fact which caused a stir. That article was based on fact, the flyer sent out against these individuals is not! 

Shame on those who sent out the flyer! Let’s hope that all that participate in these shenanigans down in defeat!!!

Last week it was the Democratic Party that tried to tell voters in special areas that specific Republicans voted for SB2001 when they didn’t. 

This type of campaign strategy does not work in Utah!

I DETEST Dirty Politics!

One week left....stay tuned!"

Rep Spendloves ad

 One Representative voted to raise the tax on food and fuel, take $680 Million from public ed and add taxes on several services and change the way we fund roads. In otherwards  they voted for 2019 SB 2001. Now they send out a flyer bragging they voted to repeal that bill (after we got enough signatures to put the bill on the ballot through the referendum process) and tried to imply someone calling them on their original vote was untruthful? Perhaps this flyer deserves some kind of Pinocchio award? Deceptive at best.

Leadership races

 The Utah House and Senate Leadership races is an important vote. It is a mistake again, to have the vote so close to election day and not later as the votes will not all be counted for the legislature. In 2010 I was not a member when the vote took place. In 2012, I did not know by the time of the leadership vote if I won or not so I was not able to vote. In 2014, when I did win, I again did not know yet and was not allowed to vote. The Democrats have delayed their vote in the past for this reason. Hopefully, enough people will turn their ballots in now so on election night there will be a better view of likely house and senate members. The final vote isn't until the start of the session but by then, traditionally the races are done and everyone votes for the leadership of both parties as was chosen in November. I believe the leadership vote should be delayed 2 weeks. Perhaps if it appears the current speaker has lost or could lose on election night, I will get my wish.

Leadership races for the state House and Senate should be at least 2 or 3 weeks after election day so those that are voting are decided by the voters.

Oct 16 Bad Flyer

For those that don't know, in Utah per the state constitution, any bill passed by less than a 2/3 vote of both houses is subject to referendum. 

If passed by 2/3 It also can have an immediate effective date, instead of waiting 60 days to take effect. 

As you likely know, it takes a lot of signatures to get the bill on the ballot to block it. The legislature didn't get the 2/3 for 2019 SB 2001 last December. 

Why, when the Republican leadership of both houses backed the bill did they not get 2/3 of both houses? 

Initially the bill passed the senate with 2/3 (20 votes) with 2 Republican's voting against it. They listened to the voters in their area and voted No. It then went to the House. They needed 50 votes for 2/3. They got 43. Not 2/3. 

That is when I thought, this bill is subject to Referendum. I started immediately asking if there were others that thought it was a terrible bill. There were on both sides. There were changes in the bill and it went back to the Senate. One Senator had left and so the bill got 19 votes. If the bill had got 50 in the House, they would have had the UHP go get the Senator to bring him back if required. They didn't. 

The bill passed and eventually would be signed by the Governor, even after he knew we were gathering signatures. Referendums can't be done without $4 Million and UEA had already caved at that point. 

Well, we proved them wrong. We got 170,000 signatures in 29 counties. We only needed about 116,000 votes in 15 counties. 

Now, Some [...] in the democratic party is going after some of the 11 Republican Representatives that voted with the people and against the leadership of Speaker Wilson. They are saying their party leadership backed the bill. They forget to mention the legislator voted against the bill and listened to the voters. If the democratic party wants to go after the leadership on this bill, or after these legislators for a different reason, fine, but don't go after the heroes for this bill. Without them there would not have even been the possibility of a referendum.