Deseret Morning News graphic    Legislative conflicts

One of the Utah Legislature's perceived strengths is that its 104 members serve part time and bring their private-job, real-world experience into lawmaking.

Yet, another result of that experience, a Deseret Morning News review of all bills introduced in the 2007 Legislature shows, is that a fourth of the session's legislation came with clear or possible conflicts of interest involving the measures' sponsors.

Insurance agents sponsored bills on insurance regulation. Police officers carried bills on criminal penalties. Contractors sponsored bills on construction. Teachers carried bills on education.

The percentage of lawmakers' conflicts of interest may actually be even higher than 25 percent because some lawmakers reveal little of their real conflicts in their personal disclosure forms, using only broad or vague wording.

And Utah lawmakers can't escape their conflicts of interest when it comes to voting on bills. Unlike members of Congress or other state legislatures, Utah's legislators, due to internal rules, must vote on a bill even though they may have a clear conflict of interest. However, they are supposed to declare their conflicts, either on a written form available online or through verbal declarations at the time of the vote.

Twenty other state legislatures allow a member to vote "present but abstaining," reports the National Conference of State Legislatures. Of those, 15 allow the "present" vote only after the body hears the member's reason for not wanting to vote and only after a vote of the body allows the member not to vote. In some states, the vote of the members to allow a fellow member to vote "present" must be unanimous.