Reader comments
Voucher client's ad agency calls probe unneeded

The law states that IF a group has received contributions totaling at least $750, they have to file as a Political Issues Committee (PIC) and report to the Lt Governor's Office OR IF they disbursed funds received and spent from more than one person totaling at least $50 during a calendar year on current or proposed statewide ballot propositions, they have to file and report to the Lt Governor's Office. (See Utah Code 20A-11-802). This individual accepted no contributions and spent only his funds. Therefore he doesn�t have to file. The fact that an individual (under the individual's own name or the name of some fictitious group) on a web page asks for contributions, is not a violation of Utah law. The Lt Gov�s office needs to read a couple of U.S. Supreme Court Cases, McIntyre v Ohio Elections Commission and Talley v California.

OK, maybe he didn't technically break the law but he wasn't honest. Kind of like how the whole pro-voucher movement isn't honest. Kind of like saying all public schools failing isn't honest. Kind of like saying a collection of teachers who happen to belong to a "rich and powerful" union (are teachers rich?) isn't honest. Kind of like saying vouchers will help the poor more then the rich isn't honest? Or, saying that vouchers will help public schools isn't honest. What is honest is to say the vouchers will take state resources (tax dollars) away from public schools and give them to private schools that will unaccountable for their use of those tax dollars. So I'm going to be honest and tell you that I'm voting NO on referendum 1. Vouchers are not honest.

Funny how you voucher opponents use the same canned rhetoric the ACLU uses to fight vouchers in every other state. Hmmmm...

Maybe the truth sounds like canned rhetoric to you, but truth is truth. At least it's open and honest and doesn't try to hide in the shadows.