Utah Legislature: Demos to fight amendment that targets affirmative action

SALT LAKE CITY — After watching an array of conservative message bills fly through this session, House Democrats say they will fight a proposed constitutional amendment targeting affirmative action in Utah.

House Minority Leader David Litvack said although the minority Democrats have to "choose their battles," the proposed amendment has crossed a line.

"It's about time to say enough is enough," said Litvack, a Democrat from Salt Lake City. "This is not a message bill; it will have specific ramifications. Some lawmakers may not understand how divisive this will be in our communities."

While he opposes the proposal "on many levels," Litvack said he wants to have a constructive debate about the resolution.

After initially moving quickly through the legislative process, HJR24 was put on hold in the House at the request of the sponsor, Rep. Curtis Oda, R-Clearfield.

The resolution calls for a constitutional amendment that would prohibit state entities from granting "preferential treatment" based on race, sex, ethnicity or national origin. A potential amendment would add religion to that list.

Critics have accused Oda of trying to "jam" the proposal through the process without allowing debate.

"It is an abuse of the legislative system," said Rep. Brian King, D-Salt Lake. "This has come up so quickly that people haven't had a chance to get all the information."

Although they individually support the proposal, House Republican leaders agreed to delay the resolution and allow for more discussion, said House Majority Leader Kevin Garn, R-Layton.

"This body needs more time to weigh in," he said.

On Wednesday, Oda said he did not know when he would move the resolution forward but dismissed concerns that he had moved too quickly.

"I haven't heard anything from anyone," he said. "If people want to talk about it, then let's start talking."

Beyond the procedural issues, Democrats have sharpened their criticism of the proposal's content as well.

King said the lack of debate has led to misunderstandings about the types of programs potentially affected by the amendment.

Quotas are already illegal and courts have ruled that race and sex may only be used as factors as long as they do not trump other considerations, he said.