Comments about ‘Utahns for Ethical Government to continue collecting petition signatures in quest to get initiative on 2012 ballot’

At least there is a silver lining with losing this uphill battle to make ethics really count in the Utah legislature.

EVERY voter who believes in higher ethical standards for government ought to be signing this initiative as well as voting to remove those who are unethically attempting to thwart it.

GOOD for them! (The UEG)

Good for them! (UEG)

A Deseret News poll showed 2 out of 3 Utah citizens supporting the ethics initiative petition.

Why was it hard to reach the number of signatures needed to put the petition on the ballot?
1. volunteers unless retired could not work full time.
2. most signatures had to be collected outdoors in publicly owned places: libraries and parks
3. Utah weather makes outdoor signature collecting nearly impossible during the winter months.

With only four good months in which to collect signatures we've come very close and may still make it. We never lacked for people wanting to sign. The more the legislature tried to block us the angrier citizens became.

THERE IS STILL HOPE. If we don't have enough signatures to get the initiative on the Nov. ballot this year, we can legally continue collecting signatures to reach the needed 95,000 until Aug. of this year. That will insure the initiative makes it onto the 2012 ballot. WE WON'T LET THEM WEAR US DOWN!! WE WILL PERSEVERE IN OUR EFFORTS TO REFORM ETHICS IN UTAH'S LEGISLATURE!!!

Perhaps it is failing because people read the 21 page initiative? People realized that it violates Constitutional rights?

The best ethics reform is to vote those who are unethical out. This initiative actually removes the power from the people.

This is a poorly conceived initiative and extremely bad policy. Most people are unaware that the first 5 signatures on the petition would be the governing body of the ethics commission - accountable to nobody. They are not elected or appointed.

In the legislature, there are checks and balances. The governor can veto legislation. The courts can strike down legislation. The PEOPLE can vote out legislatures. There is no oversite or checks and balances for this governing board.

Everyone wants ethics reform in the state of Utah. This initiative is not the way towards good ethics reform.

Most people signing the initiative are not even aware of what it says. They are asked if they are for ethics reform and then asked to sign. Where are the ethics regarding how this group are gathering signatures. In my mind they are trying to form a fourth branch of government - accountable to no one.

I urge everyone - please, please - to read this initiative before signing it. If you have signed the initiative and want your signature removed, go to your county clerk at your courthouse and they will tell you how to remove your signature from the initiative.

Perhaps the Deseret News can find out something for me? I signed the "e" petition on line, but our Attorney General said it was not legal. I want to sign the offline petition but was told by doing so, I would void my signature by signing both petitions?

Can I sign the offline petition, since I signed the online one? Since the online one was declared void, does that mean I give up my right to sign the petition?

Use your fingers to vote them out until they get it right. That is funny that a state official can use the very means which he tells his subordinates not to recognize. Oh, the Irony of politicians. Then they wonder why we do not trust them.

The simple reason the citizen's ethics initiative is 21 pages is to prevent lawmakers from creating their own loopholes to bypass what's written. Seriously, read the citizen's ethics initiative. It makes sense to me.

If you don't like it, what is the alternative? Allow the legislature to continue to make up their own rules which allow for loopholes and provides just lip service?

or,

We can work to pass the citizen's ethics initative and if down the road it is agreed that somehow its effectiveness is no better than what it is today with no "real" ethics accountability in place, then we as citizens can change it through a new ethics initiative.

A win, win situation! In the end we get a more ethically responsible legislature.

Thanks (UEG)!

No where in this citizen's initiative does it remove power from the people. What this initiative can facilitiate is bringing to light unethical behavior so we as voters will have knowledge as to whom we ought to vote out because of unethical behavior. It also makes unethical behavior more clearly defined...something lobbyists and legislators are want to obscure.

Never let a legislator convince you this initiative is poorly written and does not do what it is intended to do. They deceitfully declare that this is what voters believe. In reality, polls show two out of three Utah citizens are supporting this initiative.

One polititian recently remarked, if this initiative is passed, it will prevent both sides of the isle [Republicans and Democrats] from doing their job. I say to them, "With this initiative in place, now you can start doing your job!"

Thanks UEG !!!

This is an effort by Democrats to get around the State Legislature and the Utah State Constitution.

Having had some personal interaction with Dave Irvine, I wouldn't be involved with anything he has a hand in.

I advise everyone to take a close look at this before getting on board. It's not what it seems.

We have a house majority leader resign in disgrace for hot-tubbing with a nude teenager (and get a standing ovation for it), a senate majority leader resign for a DUI, and five other GOP legislators resign for various bad behaviors in the last few years, state legislators not just working FOR lobbyists but working AS lobbyists, and the GOP wants us to believe that the fox will behave while guarding the hen house?

This is commonsense legislation that the majority of Utahns support, and the GOP is scared to death of it!

Can no one see the irony of this? The group calling for ethics reform is found a loophole in the law, which is questionably unethical, to try to bring about ethics reform.

Bazinga,

How is this unethical? The law says they have a year after filing, and they're going to use it in order to get on the ballot in 2012.

The only problem that I see with it is that it will just delay the implementation of meaningful reform and give our legislature another two years to become even more corrupt than they already are.

While some Republicans in office are trying to deem this initiative a political ploy by the democrats to get around the State Legislature and Constitution, pretending to achieve real ethics reform, they are only fooling themselves. If that is what the Republican party believes, well then, this Republican may just as well be a democrat!

Truth before trust!
Principles before Party!
Ethics before Office!

The board that this initiative forms is not elected or appointed. They are accountable to no one. What does this mean? They can overrule the voice of the people or the peoples vote. This is unconstitutional and poorly written.

We need ethics reform, but this hastily written initiative is wrong to ethics reform as a solution just as the national health bill was wrong to solving our problem with health care.

With the above mentioned legislatures who have resigned. Neither are still in the legislature. Both are gone as they should be. The incidences leading to their resignation would not have been prevented by this initiative and this initiative would have provided no better an outcome in the end.

I do not hold any office. But I can see that this initiative - -perhaps with good intentions, will have terrible consequences. The ultimate ethics reform is for us citizens to become more informed, take a more active part in communication with the legislature, and vote them out if they do not live up. That's democracy! This initiative diminishes democracy!

A hastily written ethics reform bill was written by the legislature in response to the Citizen's Ethics Initiative. This hastily written bill is the wrong source of ethics reform.

To clarify the selection and oversight of the "board" as has been mentioned, or commission, as named in the initiative, here is your answer:

"The Commission is selected by lot from a pool of 20 candidates. The twenty candidates are nominated by the unanimous agreement of the Legislative leadership (Democrat and Republican)."

While it is true that "they do have terms of office which terms expire...this procedure is consistent with constitutional provisions and provides a greater degree of independence and objectivity."

"In summary, the oversight comes from a bipartisan group of the legislature. As our constitution currently stands, if the Commission was totally independent of the Legislature, we believe that it could be declared unconstitutional."

The Citizen's Ethics Initiative makes sense to me. Perhaps NOT lobbyists and lawmakers who like things as they are: ethics laden with loopholes without any real accountability.

As Honest Abe stated, that a UNANIMOUS aggreement must be in place for the legislative leadership to select the pool of 20 candidates. If they cannot receive UNANIMOUS consent (which is unlikely) the initiatives sponcors will select the 20 representatives. This would be the most likely method for selection. These 5 initiative sponsors are not elected nor appointed. They are simply the first 5 signatures on the initiative. This is not a representative body of the people.

Who is going to police this committee for ethics? What checks and balances are there in place to ensure this board does not simply create a witch hunt against the legislature? There are no checks on this board.

We truely need ethics reform - but change for the sake of change will only lead to a worse situation.

In light of recent activity in the legislature, I am less concerned about witch hunts destroying political reputations rather than than protecting our citizen's interests.

In recent days the legislature has proved that something more has to be done...and what is the problem with having the legislature unanimously select a pool for the commission?

Again, what is the worst thing that can happen? Can you have too much ethics???

Please sign the petition.