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.
Tag: Utah
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.”
When the news began about accusations against John Swallow his first response was to dismiss the allegations based on the tainted source from which they sprang and then duck his head and send out lots of emails about what “he” was doing for the state. When the volume and variety of allegations increased Mr. Swallow adopted a new standard answer which sounds reasonable on the surface but is likewise meant to distract from the issue arising from the multitude of allegations. His standard andwer is that he has done nothing illegal and therefore he will not resign. Holly Richardson does a great job of explaining the standard which governs the impeachment process and that standard is “high crimes and misdemeanors” not “committing illegal acts.” In doing so she illuminated the way that Mr. Swallow is using his standard answer to deflate the very appropriate calls for impeachment by playing on a general misunderstanding of what constitutes “high crimes and misdemeanors.” Let me start by making this very clear. We tend to think of high crimes being obviously criminal like murder but the fact is that obviously criminal acts such as that are felonies and felons are not even allowed to vote, let alone hold office. Lesser criminal acts are classified as misdemeanors so having ruled those out we can understand that “high crimes” are acts which may not even be actionable in the criminal system. As Holly points out, they are issues such as “breaches of ethical conduct, misuse of power, and neglect of duty.”
It’s time to set the record straight on the difference between the best BCS football programs and the best non-BCS football programs in response to the ill-advised and self-serving comments of Ohio State President E. Gordon Gee. TCU did their part responding on the field by beating 11-1 Big Ten co-champion Wisconsin (from Mr. Gee’s own BCS conference) and people have noticed.
Mr. Gee’s claim was that the schedule in a non-BCS conference could not compare to the schedule in a BCS conference. The fact is that conference schedules account for only 2/3 of the season and that strong BCS programs rarely play a decent opponent outside of their conference. They’re too busy playing the “Little Sisters of the Poor”—either weak teams from weak conferences or teams that do not even play at the FBS level. (Of course there are some rivalry exceptions but they are a minority of non-conference contests among BCS programs.) Non-BCS programs spend most of their non-conference games playing the toughest teams that are willing to agree to play from BCS conferences.
Perhaps it’s just me, but if I were Michael Otterson I would find it irksome that the same position I had represented for the church for more than a year was suddenly newsworthy as if something had changed.
It looked like a stunning reversal: the same church that helped defeat gay marriage in California standing with gay-rights activists on an anti-discrimination law in its own backyard.
. . .
The ordinances passed and history was made: It marked the first time the Salt Lake City-based church had supported gay-rights legislation.
More than a year ago – months before the votes started coming in for California’s Proposition 8 the LDS Church stated its official position that they were supportive of the basic rights of all people, including homosexuals, such as probate rights and housing rights. They stated that they were amenable in theory to the Common Ground Initiative but could not take a public position on bills that had not yet been drafted.
The position of the church never changed. Some people claim this is a PR move to blunt the backlash over their role in defeating Prop. 8, but the only thing that changed is that unlike the theoretical five bills of the common ground initiative, the Salt Lake City council actually drafted two bills. The church publicly supported the bills – in keeping with the position they had already taken.
Sadly some people still don’t get it and are suggesting that the church should take a further step by actually writing bill proposals for the state legislature to consider which would extend these same benefits statewide that were just passed within Salt Lake City. The fact is that the church will do just have they have done up to this point – they will not write legislation and they will take no position on theoretical bills that have not been written. When bills are written that are acceptable the church will support them. Bills they can’t quite support will get no comment. In the Utah Legislature they don’t even have to worry about addressing bills that are worthy of their opposition.
As another group of local government officials stands up in opposition to tolling the Mountain View Corridor (MVC), I was surprised to read this in the Salt Lake Tribune:
While the Utah Department of Transportation has explored user fees as a funding option – one that could cost some west-siders up to $200 a month – state Transportation Commission Chairman Stuart Adams said his panel hasn’t seriously considered it.
“I don’t think anyone wants to take a tool out of the toolbox and throw it away,” Adams said, “but it isn’t a tool that has been talked about.”
I could not believe that the Transportation Commission has not discussed tolling yet. The Utah Department of Transportation (UDOT) has and there are rumors that congestion pricing will be recommended for freeways nationally.
It’s about time that the Transportation Commission started talking about this tool – and they should apply it across the board. Ideally, I-15 and the MVC should each include congestion pricing along-side a free lane or two (meaning always free rather than only free when traffic is low).
It’s been a busy month for me personally since I asked about implementing regional classifications for Utah blogs listed on BlogNetNews. I am finally ready to implement regional categories. The options are going to be:
The classifications will be self-selection – if you want to be identified in a particular region you just email me or leave a comment with the region(s) you want to be listed in. Please only request to be listed in regions where you have an interest (that would generally be living or working in that region). Please do not choose Salt Lake if your only interest is that you follow the legislative session.
If you are going to be listed in a region with two names, please vote on which name you prefer to use. (We’ll use straight democracy – I’ll break any ties.)
As an example, I could be listed in the Davis (live) and Salt Lake (work) regions – in the past I could have been listed in Utah Valley (before I moved).
Update 8/28/08: The names of the geographic categories have been settled. Only Utah Valley has more than the basic name attached to it (valley) because “Utah” might appear to be general for the whole state (even though that would have been redundant).
I rarely listen to the Doug Wright show. When I do, I generally wonder afterwards how I am any better off than if I had simply listened to the fuzz between stations. Today I happened to hear Doug when I turned on the radio and he was speaking on a subject I care about – tolling in Utah. It did not take long to conclude that Doug must have been stuck on the freeway when the discussions of tolling were starting – because he’s behind the times on the debate. Doug talks as if the tolling were going to happen only on the Mountain View Corridor and that planners were suggesting that it would only last until the bonds were paid off. I think it’s time that Doug caught up to what’s really being discussed more recently.
First, nobody is pretending that tolling is a temporary measure, so Doug is right that once that door is opened it won’t be closed again. Doug also fails to recognize that we already have a toll lane on I-15 with the possibility of other lanes starting to be tolled in the future so the door has already been opened to tolling in Utah.
Second, as cars get better fuel efficiency the government (State and Federal) receives fewer tax dollars per vehicle mile traveled to maintain roads. Regardless of how innovative our ancestors were, we have to find more revenue to maintain that transportation infrastructure. Perhaps Doug would like us to raise the gas tax – as if that would not disproportionally hit the poorest people (the same complaint he makes against tolling). That option fails to address the possibility of a future with other fuel alternatives and the fact that we must find a way to generate revenue in a way that is fair according to use regardless of other factors such as what fuel one person’s vehicle uses or how efficient the vehicle is. Fair revenue would be based on usage (miles traveled being the best measure of usage in my mind).
Third, Doug is referencing revenue projections on toll roads that were built for the purpose of generating revenue. The Mountain View Corridor needs to be built regardless of what revenue it might generate. Any revenue it generates is better than not generating any revenue. Also, lower revenue is an indication of lower usage which results in lower maintenance costs. For a road that is already necessary the risk of low revenue is minimal and tolling a necessary road is a totally different situation than adding new road capacity in order to generate revenue.
Let’s review what’s really being discussed.
-
- Simple tolling is being less talked about than congestion pricing – which is even more fair because the cost is adjusted based on the usage levels when the driving is happening and it means that people can plan most of their trips at low-toll or no-toll times.
- Calls to include similar tolling options on I-15 and the Mountain View Corridor are increasing. There is no reason that tolling should favor one area over another.
- Electronic tolling would prevent the sitting in line using up gas that Doug complains about. Anyone who was using a toll road regularly would be getting an electronic monitor. Only those who are passing through or who use the roads infrequently would ever have to be stopped at a toll booth.
There are arguments against tolling that deserve consideration, but Doug missed any of those. My conclusion is – if we get congestion pricing as I envision it and I had to listen to Doug Wright I can promise that I would pay the highest toll rates to get off the road as fast as possible in order to minimize my listening time.
I generally do not favor government action that places a mandate on citizens. I don’t believe that it is the place of government to decide whether citizens should recycle or not, but if the options are between mandatory recycling and no recycling option after the citizens have overwhelmingly favored optional recycling it makes sense for the city to choose mandatory recycling. This appears to be the case in Bountiful.
The motion to proceed from Council member Beth Holbrook rescinded the “opt-in” proposal passed May 27.
Reasons cited were a change by Allied Systems, the previously chosen provider. It wanted a guaranteed minimum participation level and a four-year contract, and would start charging the city to maintain the 200 West recycling bins, at an estimated cost of $30,000-$35,000 each year.
With a price-tag of $3 per month I don’t think we’ll see too much protest over this. Of course my position might be affected by the fact that I have lived with mandatory recycling in Lehi for a few years and I liked it. We generally had more recyclable trash than we did regular garbage so I thought the service was very worthwhile.
I have been given the opportunity to function at the editor for BlogNetNews/Utah. That is not likely to produce visible changes to the site because the purpose of BNN is to remain neutral while providing an image of what’s happening in the various corners of the blogosphere. Functionally, it means that when people want to have their blog added to BNN/Utah I will be the one who receives and processes the request. On the other hand, I have been invited (if I choose) to categorize the Utah blogs geographically.
There is currently some categorization between liberal and conservative leaning blogs and a category to identify blogs connected to MSM organizations but there has been no geography-based categorization thus far. You can see how the categorization works by clicking on the arrow next to “Sort By” in the header. If you visit BNN/Virginia you can see an example of geographic categories in use.
Having been given that invitation, my first action as editor is to ask my fellow Utah bloggers whether they would be interested in geographic categorization – which would allow people to sort blogs based on those categories – and if so, do you have any recommendations on what categories would make sense for Utah?