51% of California voters surveyed said they would oppose Proposition 8.
I suppose it’s too much to hope that some seismic activity causes California to break off from the rest of North America and convinces the people of California to declare independence. They could be the 21st century equivalent of Texas.
Often lost in discussions about ethics legislation and lobbyist influence is the fact that there is a legitimate value that lobbyists can bring to the legislative process. I’m in favor of making solid rules of ethics for legislators and lobbyists without removing lobbyists altogether. With that perspective, I really enjoyed this Deseret News story about a lobbyist who carefully limits the money he spends on legislators.
While some lobbyists often take lawmakers to Utah Jazz games — all good seats are over $50 — or to expensive restaurants, {Paul} Rogers is one of a growing number of lobbyists who works in more modest means, even if they have the wherewithal to spend more on legislators.
“My firm, Tetris, has season Jazz tickets. We use those for ourselves and our families. I’m finding that many legislators don’t want those (more expensive gifts),” Rogers said.
One thing I have always believed is that buying a meal for a legislator as a way to sit down with them is generally a perfectly reasonable “gift” for a lobbyist to give a legislator. If our $50 cap on anonymous gift is encouraging lobbyists and legislators to limit their financial back-scratching to such meals then I am pleased with that rule.
I would not consider this to be sufficient evidence that we do not need any more ethics legislation, but I do see it as a good sign that it is possible to have reasonable restrictions to discourage excessive use of gifts for legislators.
I’ve already stated that I believe the goal of using only energy from clean, renewable sources is attainable but I think the Green Prophet might be getting ahead of himself.
{Al Gore} said the goal of producing all of the nation’s electricity from “renewable energy and truly clean, carbon-free sources” within 10 years is not some farfetched vision, although he said it would require fundamental changes in political thinking and personal expectations.
“This goal is achievable, affordable and transformative.”
I would love to be proven wrong on this, but I’m skeptical of the 10 year time-frame. The only real question in my mind is, will Barack Obama endorse this idea before I publish this post?
I guess my personal expectations are among those that he predicted would require fundamental changes.
I’ve mentioned that I have moved to the Davis County area. We are currently in a temporary living situation with friends until the house sells. We have it listed on the MLS, but if anyone knows of someone looking for a place in the northern part of Utah County they could come look at our house. If anyone is looking for a house for sale by owner, I have priced the house with the assumption that I have to pay a buyers agent so if you don’t have a buyers agent I can be more flexible with the price.
I figure there’s no place too obscure to advertise and my readers have always been responsive when I talk about life changes such as new jobs and moving so thanks in advance for your well-wishes and/or referrals.
I really liked this Deseret News profile of a naturalized citizen.
Airman 1st Class Elena Dulger’s face lights up the room when she talks about her first chance to participate in a democratic election.
Dulger, 21, is taking her oath of citizenship today, seven years and one day after meeting her father at JFK International Airport in New York. After becoming an official U.S. citizen, Dulger will get her passport, and she plans on registering to vote.
“A lot of people don’t realize how important (voting) is,” she said. “It is a privilege.”
This is how every American citizen should feel about voting. (I’m not delusional enough to actually believe that we will ever have a time when every citizen actually does feel that way.) I seriously wish we could find a way to limit the right to vote to those people who do recognize the importance of that privilege.
Considering the importance of importance of fiscal policy it seems to evade any serious media coverage in favor of more exciting topics. Ross Perot has launched perotcharts.com to make the information accessible to people. Former Comptroller General, David Walker, has been lecturing around the country about the cliff we are speeding towards and now Peter G. Peterson is pledging to spend $1 Billion in a media campaign to raise public awareness of the issue. (Remember how much a Billion is?)
Ready and waiting as people start to recognize the trainwreck ahead, Downsize D.C. has a campaign which helps people let their congressional leaders know that they are aware of this issue. I think many members of congress are aware of this, but they don’t want to address it because there are no easy answers or short soundbites.
As a perpetual proponent of incresing voter turnout, I enjoyed considering the story on NPR about Rethinking The Tuesday Vote. I’m not sure when voters would be noticable less busy than Tuesday – especially considering that we would not want the vote to be on Friday, Saturday, or Sunday as each of those days is sacred to one major religion or another. If we ever find an easy way to increase voter turnout that would not cost lots of money we should do it. (I thinkthat changing the day of the week would be easy to implement so long as there is advanced warning.)
I was reading Doctrine and Covenants section 134 today. I have read it before on various occasions, but my perspective on government has sharpened considerably since the last time I read it and it struck a chord with me as a wonderful description of the proper interaction between government and religious organizations.
We believe that no government can exist in peace, except such laws are framed and held inviolate as will secure to each individual the free exercise of conscience, the right and control of property, and the protection of life.
We believe that all governments necessarily require civil officers and magistrates to enforce the laws of the same; and that such as will administer the law in equity and justice should be sought for and upheld by the voice of the people if a republic, or the will of the sovereign.
We believe that religion is instituted of God; and that men are amenable to him, and to him only, for the exercise of it, unless their religious opinions prompt them to infringe upon the rights and liberties of others; but we do not believe that human law has a right to interfere in prescribing rules of worship to bind the consciences of men, nor dictate forms for public or private devotion; that the civil magistrate should restrain crime, but never control conscience; should punish guilt, but never suppress the freedom of the soul.
That resonates with my thoughts that government is a divinely sanctioned necessity for maintaining secular order in an otherwise chaotic world and also that the purposes of government are limited to establishing that order while stopping short of interfering with the legitimate agency of its citizens.
I wonder if any government has ever managed to avoid overstepping those very limited bounds consistently.
Considering that our homes use much more energy than our cars – it’s always nice to see improvements in how we can generate or use energy. I was reminded of that when I saw two articles on better/cheaper ways to harness the power of the sun. One would generate power from energy gathered at windows rather than needing full solar panels. The other promises the possibility of printing cheap solar collectors with special ink (no indication of how the enrergy being collected could be stored for use).
The more I think about such technologies the more optimistic I become that human enginuity will eventually allow is to lower our energy usage and raise our energy production from clean and limteless resources such as wind, solar, and gravity (hydro-electric dams which generate power from the force of falling water) to the point that we will no londer need to rely on fossil fuels. Such a transition should also be welcomed by anyone who thinks we have passed peak oil production or who is worried about manmade global warming.
The Legislature approved funds and loose guidelines for merit pay for teachers earlier this year. I really like the first news I have heard about the issue since then:
Each district and charter school that wanted money had to come up with its own plan following broad guidelines lawmakers set earlier this year. . . .
Lawmakers have referred to the law that provided $20 million for performance pay as an experiment they hope will inform future efforts to create a long-term, statewide system. . . .
Some states have taken years to create pay-for-performance plans, but Utah districts and charters had only a few months after lawmakers passed a bill appropriating the $20 million earlier this year.
I think the Legislature was exactly right to avoid the temptation (and it probably was tempting) to try to create a central, defined system for merit pay. Instead they put out the money and let the districts provide dozens of differnt plans for how to use the money – within general guidelines. The result will be that within a couple of years we will have found a dozen approaches that are not very effective and a few approaches that look very promising.
Odds are that if the Legislature had spent money studying the issue for years to come up with The One True Approach™ they would have spent as much money as they end up losing on the plans that will end up failing from this experiement. The real difference is that they will have a higher chance of identifying good ways to implement merit pay.
Anyone who grumbles that $20 Million is not enough can be reminded that this is seed money that can show us the best aproaches and it can be increased in the future as appropriate to foster the most effective merit pay schemes.