Reader comments
Huntsman will veto any limits to power

I think the Governer makes a good point. Who would want to give up power? Not me. This country was made great by the power-famished. I salute him.

One might suggest that the one thing he WON'T be vetoing is his own tanning salon pass.

I have to agree with the legislators on this issue. The governor should not have any powers that take away from legislators responsibility. The governor should not be able to negotiate or indenture the state with financial contracts with any party, in this state or any other state. The governors job is one of policy matters and not asurping the powers of the legislators overview of all matters concerning spending of the states funds. No governor should be able to negotiate and approve the funding of contracts drawing on state funds without the approval of the legislators. We can't have two offices making decisions about where the tax dollars are spent, it's corruption in the works. The governor must remember he is not the one puling the purse strings anymore. Power is part of the governors office but power of writing checks to special interst groups is not part of his official duties. All legislators should deem this a no brainer to override any veto on this matter. This could limit the powers of the governor in a state emergency as well but that is what seperation of powers is all about.

I am not sure if I am the only one who finds the Governor too liberal for my tastes. It has become increasingly evident that he is into the power thing and has lost any conservative leaning he may have ever had.

king to save us from ourselves. John McCain likes King John. We should all like King John.

At this point in Utah's history, the legislature is dominated by complete idiots.

The governor's mansion not so much so.

At least for now: Hang in there Jon-boy!!

Didn't our friend Hugo Chavez also decry attempts to reign in his power? John is sounding rather like Chavez.

The legislative power is the power to make law, and the executive power is the power to enforce the law. At the national level, there is some overlap, such as in the area of treaties, but a treaty is supposed to be worthless unless ratified by the legislature. If the legislature is just trying to make sure that the same thing goes for interstate agreements, then I think the legislature is probably correct. If the governor can obligate the state without the consent of the legislature, and it sure does seem like Huntsman enjoys doing that, then the executive has usurped the power of the legislative branch, and they have the right to demand that the governor cease and desist.

I rarely read through the ramblings and rantings of those who passed American National Government their freshman year and now deem themselves fully enlightened--but I did. I am shocked at the ignorance of those writing comments today. One cannot take an obscure snippet of information and reach a definitive conclusion, as it appears you all have done. You cannot rely on one source of information. Utah's law gives little power to its governor, so to take away what few powers legitimately exist must be carefully weighed. I am no fan of the Governor (or his plastic wife, for that matter) but believe that eroding what little power he has is unwise. We have a remarkably effective legislative body that does what the public expects: pass an annual budget in only 45 days. That the Legislature does not grab more power when it could speaks well of the leadership (minority and majority) in the House and Senate. The Legislature will always pass some laws that make no sense and will be chided in the press for it. But they pass a sensible budget each year, even when no one gets everything they demand. Competition for money should be keen.

It's about time he does something. I don't know why he doesn't use his power more often.

Each branch of government has an inherent duty to protect it's circle of influence; otherwise, the other branches would usurp their power. That is why there are checks and balances.

If the legislature can muster the 2/3, then so be it. That's the process, and it's right and fair.

I agree with our legislators in trying to bring our guv back down to earth. He seems to enjoy making big waves to make himself look good in the national spotlight. A Matheson or Leavitt he is not, more like a liberal democrat than a conservative republican. He should remember the power of the vote, me may be out of a job soon. I for one, will not be voting for him next election.

Turning our sovereignty over to California's elected leaders to decide if we can build power plants in Utah or not may not be the reason for this bill, but it is a good example of why it needs to be addressed.

If the Governor didn't even propose entering into this agreement to the Legislature and let them voice their opinions and concerns before signing the agreement, then there is a problem.

Huntsman is nothing more than a McCain liberal. How did this state elect such an unqualified individual?

If our governor is so concerned about climate change, and hanging with Arnold in order to make us all feel guilty, let him show some leadership by using his family's personal fortune to at least repair some of the environmental damage done by Hunstman Chemical Co.

What a hypocrite !

Light's out in the head, Utah?!

Huntsman has dreams of being President. His heroes are Richard Nixon and George W. Bush, the two presidents who most sought for and fought to retain powers (Executive privilege and the like). However, I don't feel too bad for Utahns, because they deserve what they get when they elect someone who bought his name recognition with his father's integrity and money. Too bad that character isn't hereditary!

I am not one to speak about Huntsman without 100% disdain. But I would not want any governor to have more power than to hire and fire state employees.

This is clearly a constitutional (Utah's) question. It's what the separation of powers is all about. Fight it out dudes. The Utah Supreme Court has not had a good case in a long time. This is a "who cares" thing, but it will be fun to watch. I'm on both sides.

I find myself in the middle on this one. I agree with the Governor in that he needs the authority to enter into agreements with other states when it comes to more important matters arise like he mentioned (fire fighting, etc.) But I think the Legislature ought to be involved if the agreement is going to affect budgets and such in the future. I'm not sure what the best solution here is, but I think this needs to be looked at closer before becoming a law.

Governer Huntsman has done great things for Utah. He's smart and articulate. I saw we give 'em more power until he does something bad. Until then, why, let the chips fall where they may. As for climate change, the climate in his tanning bed never changes; it's always set to stun. A stunningly handsome man, is our governer.

I've never been a big fan of authoritarianism.
I'm also grateful for not being raised with,
"... being subject to Kings, Rulers, Presidents and Magistrates," in that when push comes to shove, all who disagree with authority will be banished from society.