Reader comments
Huntsman veto fight looms

Garn stated "It's just that the legislative branch of government has to protect its constitutional functions," while Allen states that she "fears that money may be wasted in having to call the Legislature into a special session to authorize various relatively minor interstate agreements."

That would be the best thing Huntsman does and call them into session every week just to get back at them for upsurping Executive functions and for violating the Utah Constitution in the process. It seems that Garn and other legislators want to play Department Heads and Governor so let them have a go at it.

When their bosses fire them for having to take time away from their jobs every week they might change their minds about the unconstitutional decision to infringe on an Executive function. The legislature should stay with "making laws" and allow the Governor to implement those laws as he sees fit and not infringe on his rights to do so. Governors from other states should call up Garn at home everytime they want to talk about an inter-state agreement and make sure to do it at dinner time so that he, his wife and his children get the message.

State Legislative micro-management of a multi-billion dollar state budget. The governor needs more flexibility to enter into intrastate compacts. Republican President Bush has been given authority to negotiate fast-track regional compacts with other countries. President Bush has been given a strong Presidential executive authority so why can't a Republican state legislature be consistent with their own party values, a belief in strong state government. It's the Democrats who believe in democratic, representative government. Republican perhaps may need to switch parties. A $50,000 threshold in today's economy is paltry. At a minimum, a $50,000,000 threshold would be more workable if one is going to have a legislative oversight over interstate compacts.

The Governor is a good person. Future ones may not have the same respect for the way they conduct side deals. If it is truelly an emergency the legislature can be called into special session or it can wait till the next session.

To Jr. Jonny,
This isn't your daddy's money Jonny. It is the people's. Grow up. Why should you be given a blank check? You haven't earned the people's trust. In fact, you've lost it. If you get into Juan's cabinet, then you can spend the taxpayer's money freely without anyone looking over your shoulder demanding accountability. Geez, now that would be a novel idea.

Some of these comments show an ignorance of government that is somewhat surprising. Yes, the Governor executes laws, but if he isn't empowered to do something, he's not empowered to enter into an agreement to do it and thereby bind the state. That would be nuts. And the President's fast-track authority to negotiate trade agreements (which has expired) still required congressional assent, it merely prevented Congress from amending the agreement.

The legislative branch is the branch empowered to make law and spend money. "The Legislature needs a clue" doesn't seem to understand this. If the governor entered into an interstate agreement on climate change that required the state to expend millions more on certain programs and created additional legal obligations to the state, he is the one usurping a legislative function, not the other way around.

This is the legislature's attempt to restrict the power of the Governor and to send a message to him that they are going to go after him, especially since he didn't push as hard for school voucher reform as they wanted him to. They are in for a fight!

What is the purpose of this legislation? If my understaning is correct, it has always been required that any agreement entered into by the executive branch has to be ratified by the legislative branch. If the governer enters into an agreement that the legislature fails to approve, then it is dead. Is this not correct?

The sad thing about ignorance is the harm it can do.

So many people jump into this discussion, defending Huntsman with a passion and zeal of some cult following. We know how those end up.

The comments from (Someone 7:19am) are right on the money. Add to this, no Governor has abused this process like John Huntsman. Leavitt gets beat up periodically and he was never this boneheaded. In the 100 plus years of statehood Huntsman is the first to bind the state and the legislature to such an enormous degree. He needs to have a check and a balance, just as Congress is such on the President. Just as a City Council is on a Mayor, the legislature needs to be for the Governor.

The bottom line is John Huntsman is planning on running for US Senate. He has zip real foreign experience, except the Ambassadorship his Dad bought him, so he wants to put some impressive items on his resume. And it doesn't even matter to him if they do more harm than good.

His signing Utah up for the Kyoto Protocol will cost Utah up to 65,000 jobs! Lost wages totally up to $5 billion! Check-n-balance please!

Huntsman is bad news for Utah

Not only is he weak on his stance toward illegal migration, but he supported McCain. I think Super Tuesday shows how many Utahns support McCain- about 10, maybe 20 people =) lol. No seriously how about if Romeny runs for Governor lets vote for him. Surely he'd be a much better governor than this somewhat liberal in republican clothing.

no Ed, this is the legislature reigning in the liberalism of this current governor. utah is paying the price for not electing Gov. Olene Walker after she fulfilled Gov. Leavitt's term. Gov. Huntsman has NEVER had to worry about money or whose money he was spending a day in his life. it's the silver spoon phenomenon. so our legislature is simply reigning him in. this is good for you and for me as taxpayers. the Gov will not call special sessions out of the clear blue for fear of public reprisal. it's time for our Gov. to grow up.

It has been very apparent, especially over the past year, that Huntsman's first drive has not been for a better Utah but to advance his career. He has been globe-trotting with McCain, cozied up to Arnold, folded to and fawned over New England lobbyists, gives homage to the Mexican government -- and these are just the things we know about. Huntsman is not about Utah first, he is about Huntsman first. Is his heart on Hatch's job? Or maybe a cabinet position in Washington? It is sad that the Utah Legislature has had to come to this but, I for one, am very glad they are taking action. Who knows what else Huntsman will do to promote himself to the beltway.

Let's be clear that entering into an Executive Agreement can be either legislative or executive. If the Agreement is designed to implement something that has already been passed by the Legislature, then the Agreement is Executive, and the Governor should not need approval from the Legislature. However, if the Agreement does anything else, then it would be the creation of new obligations on the state, which would qualify as Legislative. In that case, the Governor would be usurping power not rightfully his under the Utah Constitution. The law, as passed, appears just to require that the Governor either get authorization from the Legislature before or after entering into an Executive Agreement. In other words, the law simply requires what the Utah Constitution requires, that the Executive refrain from making law. That sounds like a good idea to me.

In terms of money spent, it would have been a better bill if the threshhold were a lot more than $50,000. It will be way too time consuming and big deterrent to progress to have every little interstate agreement lined up to be poured over by the legislature before approval.

However, the idea is good for larger expenditures.

Would Romney even consider running for governor? I would vote for him in a second. Between the avid support for McCain and the upcoming Vetoes of immigration bills, Huntsman will just sink lower in public opinion. I would love to see a governor who will lead out on some of these illegal immigration issues instead of claiming to need to "study" them, or issuing vague comments about needing to keep the status quo.

Amen to those who have been tricked by Gov. Huntsman. His positions on climate change, his early support and campaigning for John McCain, have all proven to me that he is not a conservative Republican as he campaigned. I will not be supporting him if he runs for reelection and would love to see a conservative, limited government, limited spending Republican challenge him in the primaries.

Is not qualified
He needs not re run again, Not interested in the people of Utah

Interesting, Utah doing this might just set a bellweather event that could go to the national level. If we had had a law like this at the national level, Bush wouldn't be getting away with what he has and trying to commit us to a bad policy agreement with Iraq for permanent bases and presence, etc.

A head of state is supposed to make treaties and the like, but they do have to be approved by the legislative body, even though the funding stuff is still in the air both at the federal and state level.

Something stuck about some of the responses. Some have applauded Huntsman's action as "courageous" or showing "backbone."

In one sense that is correct, but not where it counts. Those writers apparently missed many of the posts from today, and weeks/months prior.

John Huntsman has upset people primarily because he lied to them. During the Republican convention he told everyone what they wanted to hear. I have counted 17 posts from people who worked in his campaign four years ago and they have all said that he lied to them, and they won't support him again.

The issue for some is the extreme environmental positions he is taking. For a majority it is the simple complete lack of integrity. How much courage does it take to lie?

One person mentioned Olean Walker. I remember personally hearing John Huntsman privately bash Olean as 'nice, not enough energy, and very liberal.' Having been around Olean more than a few times, she never would have signed that treaty John did. And between the two she is likely more conservative than John with about three decades more experience than he has, even now!

John is not courageous. He is a liar. No courage there.

Dear DCF, etal.

John Hunstman is a silver spoon fed child who has never really been a part of a small business start up (from scratch) or has lived in the real gritty world. Why should anything different be expected of Huntsman?

As for Olean Walkr... now there's a person who has been in the trenches of small business, education and financially struggled, in middle class fashion, with day-to-day real life issues... I'd say she really represents the values and experiences of real Utahns.

There needs to be a concerted grass roots effort to get Olean on the ticket.. that said from an independent Democrat who really appreciates the kind of person and politics Olean represents.

Huntsman is a pretty boy who isn't too far behind Romney as to being Mr. Plastic, and hard to pin down where he stands on some important issues that affect all Utahns.