Categories
National politics State

Choosing a Third Party Candidate

With news that Donald Trump has fallen into a tie with Hillary Clinton in Utah, and considering how historically unpopular both major party candidates are, it is suddenly a very real possibility that a third candidate could win our state. There have been discussions about which third party candidate(s) deserve any support at the ballot box. Let me explore the only two who have any traction here and how I make my choice. Those two candidates are Gary Johnson with the Libertarian Party and Evan McMullin who is running as an independent.

First off, neither of them has any chance of capturing 270 electoral votes (although both are on enough ballots to make getting 270 technically possible) so they both have the same path to the presidency (have no candidate reach that number). Therefore, functionally there isn’t an inherent advantage for one of the two over the other.

When choosing which candidate to give your protest vote to I would argue that you should pick the candidate who most represents what kind of person should lead or nation. On that score, I look at Gary Johnson and he has shown over the last few months that, while he isn’t completely morally bankrupt like Trump, he is like Trump in that he is clearly unprepared to be taken seriously as a president and comport himself in a presidential way.

When Evan McMullin announced his candidacy I wondered how prepared this unknown latecomer could possibly be. As I have reviewed his history and his positions I have been impressed with his solid background and his considered policy ideas.
I find it easy to choose Evan because he seems capable of handling the challenges of the office without looking like a juvenile pretender.

Categories
Local politics State

Ballot Issues

After seeing the ballot for this election cycle I quickly spotted a number of problems with the ballot. These weren’t issues with the ballot being faulty. They were (generally) manifestations on the ballot of problems within our political system and climate. Here is the ballot I received:

Ballot Issues

Issues

Empty Ballot

This really isn’t a problem unless the ballot stays empty (which this one won’t). The problem is that there are always thousands of ballots (millions nationwide) that remain empty. This is, functionally, the simplest of the problems to fix – people just need to take the time to vote. (If only it were really that simple.)

Long Ballot

This ballot is 8½ X 17 and it fills out the first side and most of the second. That is too many races and issues for most people to pay attention to and cast informed votes on in a single cycle. It practically guarantees uninformed voting.

Categories
culture Education State

It’s not sexuality OR self-expression

Bingham High School
Photo by Photo Dean

Despite how the media and students are portraying the situation, the Bingham High dress code fiasco isn’t about sexuality nor is it about self-expression despite what this article in the Standard Examiner suggests.

They got their spin from the girl who led the protest walkout on Monday. She said this:

I understand having a dress code but when it comes down to a dance that’s our time to be rewarded for being good students and we should be able to express ourselves.

She’s trying to claim self expression but notice that there is no complaint about the dress code itself. “She understands having a dress code” and she makes no claim that its too restrictive or unreasonable. She simply wishes that it would be ignored for the dance despite the fact that the school did everything to make sure that students understood the dress code for the dance.

Categories
Local politics State

An Open Letter to James Evans

The chairman of the Utah Republican Party sent a letter to precinct chairs last week. Unfortunately in that letter, Mr. Evans crossed a line that any elected person whether public official or party officer should never cross.

Mr. Chairman,

You’ve crossed an important line and I am disappointed by you and anyone among the leadership of the Utah Republican Party who felt that the letter you sent to precinct chairs last week was acceptable.

Obviously it is reasonable that you should communicate with precinct chairs. Certainly it is wise that you should inform them of items that you feel are adversely affecting the party that both you and they have been elected to support. Naturally we should expect and even want you to offer suggestions and encouragement for them to make a positive difference on issues of concern. Despite these truths, the paragraph that you requested the precinct chairs to read at the caucus meetings was out of line.

I see nothing wrong with you pointing out the disproportionate ratio of male to female delegates in past conventions. I also have no problem with your efforts to encourage women to run for delegate positions, to invite precinct chairs to do the same, and to share your concerns and the corresponding statistics with caucus attendees. The problem comes in your overt request that caucus attendees elect more female delegates.

I don’t mind if we do elect a higher proportion of women as delegates than we have in the past – my problem with your request isn’t the desire for more female delegates. My problem is that you would publicly express favoritism on intra-party elections. That is completely unacceptable for a party officer.

Our job as caucus attendees is to select the best people we can to represent us as delegates at the state and county conventions. Having more women running for those positions gives us more options to evaluate which is a good thing. Giving us the information regarding the 4 to 1 ratio of men to women in past conventions is useful information so that we can make an informed choice regarding who we send as delegates. Requesting that we elect more women is inappropriate as it is our job, not yours, to determine who in our individual precincts will best represent us – regardless of gender or gender ratio.

I appreciate your desire to make the party and the party conventions the best they can be but there is no excuse for crossing the line into telling party members how they should be shaping the party with their caucus votes.

Categories
Local politics State

I’m In

Well, I’ve been struggling with the question of whether I should run to replace Jim Nielson in House District 19 since he announced that he won’t run for another term. Apparently Mike Leavitt told Mitt Romney about it and Mitt took the time to share his thoughts:

Email From Mitt

 

With that encouragement how could I not take the leap. I’m glad that Mitt is using his iPad to dispense so much wisdom. The people of House District 19 will be the beneficiaries of it.

Thanks for your support Mitt. On to victory!

Categories
politics State

Guilty by Association

KSL has a John Swallow headline that deserves to be examined. The article provides details but the headline alone is sufficient to draw a final conclusion to the John Swallow saga from a public interest perspective (in other words, this isn’t about drawing a final conclusion from a civil or criminal perspective, but from from the perspective of whether Swallow should have been able to serve out his term in office).

The headline is: New warrants show Swallow campaign hid donations from IRS

Some comments at KSL show some people reading that as saying that Swallow received campaign donations from the IRS that he hid. The truth is that these were donations from the payday lending industry that weren’t disclosed to the IRS.

Does this make Swallow a criminal?

Let’s assume for a minute that Swallow himself was unaware of this deception on the part of his campaign. In that case Swallow wouldn’t be considered a criminal. I don’t make that assumption because I consider it likely (in fact the likelihood of that assumption proving true is remote). I make that assumption because it illustrates the more important point that people who would engage in such activities are the kind of people with which John Swallow surrounded himself.

That fact alone should be sufficient reason for a man of integrity to leave his public office (or at the very least distance himself from such associates) which is why I confidently stated 8 months ago that he should step down.

Update: Holly Richardson just wrote about the House Investigation Committee findings that were reported just before Christmas and not only was the scope of wrongdoing greater than I was previously aware, but (unsurprisingly) their findings explicitly indicate that Swallow was directly involved in all of it.

Categories
culture Education politics State

Funding Education

Senator Pat Jones has an idea about how to bring in more money for our public education system in Utah. I appreciate what she is trying to accomplish and laud her efforts to make a difference but as someone who definitely qualifies as having a large family (this bill will hit me twice as hard as at least half the households in the state) – in other words as someone whom this bill targets for funding – I have to say that there are a few problems with the logic behind this effort.

Categories
politics State

Facts Aren’t Always Impartial

I was listening to Doug Wright this morning talking about the John Swallow situation and I found myself laughing at the linguistic gymnastics he was engaged in trying to discuss the situation without suggesting that impeachment might be the proper course of action to untangle the mess that Mr. Swallow has created.

I can’t decide whether the verbal somersaults were a result of Mr. Wright trying to appear unbiased while secretly agreeing with the Eagle Forum that impeachment should be reserved as a tool we use after we know an official is guilty of serious crimes such as the FBI might investigate or if it was simply a result of Mr. Wright not understanding that being personally impartial does not require the pretense that the facts of the situation be impartial – as if there are facts in favor of Mr. Swallow the way there are so many facts that clearly demonstrate that a legislative investigation is already warranted. Of course there are many unproven allegations out there but there are enough allegations backed up with enough evidence to clearly warrant an investigation by the House.

Here is my unbiased (and unvarnished) opinion. Unless the House is able to investigate and prove that the many emails, recordings, and receipts that we already have in relation to Mr. Swallow’s interactions with Mr. Jensen and Mr. Johnson were fabricated then Mr. Swallow has clearly violated the public trust and should not hold any position of public trust – even if everything he did was technically legal as Mr. Swallow obviously believes (which is why he insists on directing our focus to the existing investigations by the FBI – which necessarily cannot address the issue of public trust).

Categories
politics State

Impeachment isn’t the same as Removal from Office

I don’t know if John Swallow’s attorneys are honest (like many people) in mistakenly conflating the opening of impeachment proceedings with the potential outcome of conviction and removal from office or if they are simply perpetuating that misconception in the hopes of protecting their client. Either way, it is once again time to try to clear up that misconception.

The attitude from Mr. Swallow’s attorneys is quite clear in their letter:

“This discussion about impeachment is based on innuendo and unsupported allegations in the press from indicted and convicted felons and a few political enemies of Mr. Swallow,” attorneys Rod Snow and Jennifer James said.

I would expect exactly that attitude from any attorney regarding their own client. The problem is that it misrepresents the situation. Some of the allegations do come from indicted and convicted felons but beyond those indicted and convicted felons the allegations are also coming from many others – not just “a few political enemies.” They may choose to describe everyone who has made allegations as a political enemy but the number of people making allegations can hardly be quantified as “few.”

Categories
culture Local politics State

Thoughts on Caucus System Reform

Curt Bentley has an excellent post in which he discusses the issue of reforming the caucus system. I really appreciate the methodical approach he has taken to examine the issue. I completely agree with each of his guiding principles and while I suspect I am more comfortable with the caucus system in its current form than he seems to be, I also want to see it strengthened through some reforms that will make it better at promoting voter participation and issue-centric campaigns. I agree with his assessment of what the caucus system does well and with his conclusion that dumping the caucus system entirely is not the way to go. As for his assessment of what the caucus system doesn’t do well, I have some thoughts I’d like to share and I sincerely hope that Curt and others will share their feedback on those thoughts.