Everyone has their issue, so there is nothing wrong with protesting another
outrageous action by the Republican controlled legislature. There are
differences between the bills in the way they were handled, discussed and
considered, and the writer of the letter seems to have missed this. The bottom
line is the Republicans again gave us an awful session, the consequence of one
party rule slowing taking away the freedoms we enjoy.
I think you're missing the point. The "ruckus" was from the
electorate -- the media merely reported it. You sound like you'd prefer a world
without media. That would let the legislators do what they want in total
We all pick and choose our battles. The media reported this shady deal passed by
our legislature, and a majority of the public expressed our outrage. Apparently,
the public didn't feel quite as strongly about the immigration issues as they
did about legislator transparency.
Unfortunately for the people of Utah, their legislature has become the laughing
stock of the entire nation. Fortunately, Utahns were willing to put down their
video games and ipods just long enough to do something about it.Clearly, the Utah Legislature forgot that its state was founded upon Christian
principles. Indeed, faith, love, temperance, and charity for all were the values
upon which the state was founded. If the legislature had remembered this, it
never would have attempted to foster corruption by enacting HB477.Hopefully, the outrage of the people will put the legislature back in its
place and convince it to return to the aforementioned Christian values. This
corruption must be nipped in the bud before it spreads eastward.
Just a thought about the HB477...It was brought forth because there is a very
real dialog that needs to take place concerning the management and openness of
communications by our elected officials. The course of public business needs to
be open to all as it is our business. On the other hand the personal
communications of our public servants needs to be respected as well. Where is
the line? As I have contemplated the issue and where the line
should be drawn. It is apparent that there is no easy answer. The real key is
to make sure that the legislator representing you is ethical, honest, and
transparent. How can we be sure that who we elect meets these criteria? Make
smaller districts so the elected individual is unable to hide within his
district. I live in Senate district 10 and I know three of the 10 individuals
running for the open seat. If I don't approve of the three then I am shooting
in the dark on the seven. My district is one of the largest in the state in
terms of area and population.Quite the dilemma.
Immigration only affects a portion of Utah. And, supposidly by
definition, 'only' the illegal portion of immigrants. While I still
feel that the immigration debate unfairly targets hispanic immigrants vs. say,
danish ones.... HB477 affects us all. Regardless of
racial background, legal status, oreintation, etc. We ALL who live
in Utah answer to the Utah legislator. And yet, they feel they do
not need to disclose anything to their electorate. That is why there
is more outrage. I agree with Really??? | 7:36 a.m. As
1) HB477 affects us all in Utah. and 2) Most of us are decended from
immigrants at SOME point in our family history. Or are some claiming
to be 100% Native American now at the next 'Pioneer day?'
Loren makes a good point.Whatever one's views on immigration,
illegal aliens, or GRAMA, we need to remember something very important. While
we often think of the media as an unbiased observer, dutifully reporting what is
happening, when it comes to GRAMA the media has a vested interest of its own.
It cannot even begin to claim to be an unbiased observer. It has what is
classically known as a "conflict of interest."Certainly
the media has and will continue to cloak this conflict in the high sounding
rhetoric of "the public good" or a "right to know." But
don't we all think that our positions represent how to achieve the greater good?
The media in particular often paraphrases Charles Erwin Wilson in proclaiming
that "What is good for the media is good for the nation".But, as the media often tells us about the right to own guns, with rights come
responsibilities. If the media will not respect what are obviously private
communications between individual constituents and legislators, then legal
protections are needed. If the media abuses its power to engage on partisan
fishing expeditions at taxpayer expense, then legal limits are needed.
Well said John CS. As you may know from previous posts, I'm quite conservative,
but I must tell you, this legislature is amazingly--no, I would say
stunningly--arrogant. I've had the chance to deal with many of them on an up
close and personal basis, and as much as I'd like to disagree with Pagan and
others--whom I regularly do disagree with--they are correct on this issue.It's a real life example that power corrupts and absolute power corrupts
absolutely. They did what they always do, but this time they got caught. They'll
be right back to their old tricks next year, and hoping that the general
populous isn't paying that much attention.I don't know what the
solution is, because I don't feel like electing more democrats is the answer as
I fundamentally disagree with most of their tenets. However, we've got to find a
way to get some honor, accountability and true statesmanship back into our state
government. Otherwise, it's shenanigans like this we can expect in the future.
I'm glad the bill is getting another review. I'm pretty sure when people
actually look at what's in it... they will realize it didn't end Democracy or
put a dark blanket of secrecy over the legislative process.I'm
pretty sure they will find a way to get the REAL story on this bill out there
and make the changes that are needed.The clarifications to GRAMA
were needed. Maybe they went too far, but I think that's mainly an assumption
made by people who haven't read the actual bill and just responded to the
howling and misrepresentations in the media (Note DMN editor Jay Evenson wrote
an official retraction of his comments mis-representing what was in the bill on
Sunday). Read it.I hope this will give us a chance to get over the
mis-representations and over-reactions and make sure the public knows what is
ACTUALLY in the bill and make changes to the parts that actually are upsetting
to the public.I think giving more time for public comment and
compromising on the problem_areas in this bill... is a GOOD thing.
Selznik | 7:10 a.m.The ruckus was not only REPORTED by the media...
it was LEAD by the media.I haven't heard one word about this bill
from my friends I talk with regularly on the street. or in the office, or around
the neighborhood. Just in the papers.Remember... the DMN editors
(who are VERY ticked off about this) pick what letters get published. That may
be why there have been literally DOZENS of letters published on this topic and
almost NONE on Libya.So don't just assume that if more letters
against HB477 get published... that that reflects the exact ratio of approval vs
disaproval. Only the letters the DMN likes (and they HATE this bill)... get
published.When the Media controls the message... they can make it
SEEM like the public is saying ANYTHING THEY WANT.===That_said... I'm glad they are taking a second look at this bill, and even
seem open to scrapping_it all_together. But I really think SOMETHING needs to
be done. Unlimited and free GRAMA requests for ANYONE who wants them are
getting so expensive... the requester (hint..media) needs to help absorb some of
If legislators don't want us to have access to the phones and computers that we
paid for, then maybe they should seek other occupations. I'm sure Energy
Solutions or UDOT would have openings for them.Grow thick skins. If
you don't want the public to know what you're doing, then for one, you're
probably doing something what. If not, why would you be all up in arms and angry
over people wanting to know what you're doing... And two, find another job. Teachers, restaurant workers, and those in health care all have to
answer to someone. If legislators don't want to answer to their bosses (the
people) then please step out of public office.
Free Press = Government Watch-Dogs for the People.Knowledge is
Power.That's exactly how and why Totalitarian Regimes censor the
media, so they can control the people.Q: Why can't Conservatives
who "love" the Constitution support this?A: Because they are the
ones caught in the media spot light.Gotcha'
The Real Maverick 10:52HB477 didn't restrict ANY access to data on
government owned phones or computers. Read the bill AND the
retraction of the misrepresentations of the bill in DMN Editorial Articles
(Sunday DMN... see archives).===I think most Legislators
can afford their own cell phone and their own computer... and they can use these
when they don't want to use the issued phone or computer.===Who OWNS the phone, or the computer, isn't the issue. It's whether or
not the COMMUNICATION was personal or not. Just like ANY job...
they shouldn't be using equipment their employer gave them to do their job for
personal business. Keep in mind... These people only work for the
State 45 days/year. They have other jobs, and businesses they need to take care
of (yes, even when the Legislature is in session). We should not pretend that
we OWN them. Or that they can't have lives and take care of their family and
businesses just because we elected them.We DON'T "own"
them! They have private lives and businesses to take care of the
other 320_days of the year.
'I don't know what the solution is, because I don't feel like electing more
democrats...' - Zed | 10:04 a.m. And THAT'S why the
Republican leadership voted HB477 into law. Because they are SO sure
and SO arrogant, that they are willing to bet Republicans in Utah will continue
to vote straight party line... instead of what's the right thing to
@2 bits; Let them do their "private" business on their
own equipment. ALL, underline and bold that, ALL of the state's
business needs to be open and available to the public.
Pagan,You're right. As I said, folks like me are stuck in a
predicament...and I think there are a LOT of us out there. I'm more libertarian
than conservative, but there is simply not a political platform with any real
presence that is available as a legitimate alternative. The Democrat platform
has its share malignancies that are as unacceptable to me as is this arrogance
issue we're talking about. Believe me, I've given it a good deal of
thought...I wish it were not the case.
To "LDS Liberal | 11:15 a.m. " did you even read the bill? It really
isn't as bad as the media has made it sound.It protects the email
addresses of private individuals. Protecting them from being attacked by people
with opposing views.It also increases fees to get the records to
help pay for the additional manpower needed to make those records public.Tell us, are you against protecting the privacy of individuals? Are you
also against people paying for the additional government resources that they
RanchHand,What makes you think they DON'T do their private_business
on their own phone and computer?I think they do. Do you have any
evidence they DON'T?===I agree with the part you
underlined... the STATE'S business needs to be open and available. I totally
agree with that.But we also need to realize that this is a part time
job (45_days/year). They have a life outside the legislature. We don't
actually OWN_THEM (as many rabid posters have posted). We own their work....
not their private_lives. They have lives the other 320 days of the year and
businesses, farms, families, etc, don't go away during the 45_day_session. They
STILL need to communicate and take care of things.===I
have no issue with access to 100% of the stuff on their WORK computer/phone.
HB477 wasn't about that.It was about access to their private emails,
private facebook_accounts, tweets and texts.They don't legislate in
Facebook. The Media wants access to that to see who their friends are... to
VILIFY the friends/family and get info about contacts they can use to make
interesting innuendo_based stories insinuating questionable contacts.
Isn't it funny how some posters wrap themselves in American flags and rant about
freedom yet will defend this bill that was even called an
"abomination" by fellow repubs?If legislators don't want
to be watched by us, then they should find other jobs. I for one, will do my
best to help them in this process at the next election. :)Can't wait
to vote these bums out! Sandstrom, Bramble, Herbert, and Wimmer, you boys are
"the consequence of one party rule" Darn that thing called democracy,
every time it sticks its head up one party ends up ruling. Esquire would like
to try something called what, two party, three party rule. Oh no just liberal
Americans everywhere are having buyers remorse for the past election.Americans are finally wising up to the GOP.WE, THE AMERICAN PEOPLE
are saying NO to corporate welfare, subsidies, and tax cuts for the rich.We are saying NO to wars and runaway military spending.We
are saying NO to immoral health insurance companies.We are saying NO
to greedy wall street and corrupt banks "too big to fail."We are saying NO to flip flopping politicians like Mike Lee. Yes, he can read
off his teleprompter fine and look wonderful. But substance is severely lacking.
Americans are seeing this.We are saying NO to Tea.We are
saying NO to deregulation.We are saying NO to drill baby drill.We are saying NO to foreign aid and to the UN run by republican
corporate interests.We are saying NO to Glenn Beck (he's lost
millions of viewers), AM radio, and radicalism.We are saying NO to
mudslinging. We are saying NO to HB477 and republicans who
"know better than we do." I predict massive losses for
repubs in the next election. We are taking our country back from the GOP and
their rich allies.
'...there is simply not a political platform with any real presence that is
available as a legitimate alternative.' - Zed | 12:05 p.m. I get
that. And I want to say, I'm sorry if my 11:24 a.m. seemed to target
you. It is the MINDSET that a person can 'only' vote one party that upsets me.
Not you. As a Democrat, I cannot say everything they do
I support. I mean, Bill Clinton signed 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' and that lead to
my discharge from the US Army based soely on my orientation. Can't
say I agreed with that. And, of course, MANY things Republicans do
in Utah I do not agree with. Example? Amendment 3, 2004, which changed marriage
from 'two people' too 'one man/one woman'. What I hope we DO agree
on is that HB477 is a bad bill. When EYE vote against that bill, no
one will care. I am part of a political minority in Utah. The ONLY way to get the message that HB477 is a bad bill... is if
it comes from Republican voters in Utah. Otherwise, the Utah
legislature is NOT accountable.
Redshirt1701 | 12:07 p.m. March 22, 2011 Deep Space 9, Ut To
"LDS Liberal | 11:15 a.m. " did you even read the bill? It really
isn't as bad as the media has made it sound.================ Better yet RedShirt...Why do you so adimitly defend it?The Govenor who signed it said it was bad.The Legislators who
approved it said it was bad.85% of the entire State of Utah said it was
bad.The rest of America thinks it is bad.Yet - you and a very
FEW others somehow think it's OK, fine, and nothing wrong with it.That's called "denialism", "being out of touch" or
"extremeism"....The cheese stands alone.
The Real Maverick There is a law that prohibits the recording a phone
conversation unless both parties agree to it being recorded. It does not matter
who owns the phone. You do not have the right to listen in on any individual or
legislator's casual phone conversation. HB477 tried to clarify what is a
personal casual conversation. It appears the most rabid anti HB477 posters seem
to think that once the legislative session begins there is no privacy. But what about the rest of the year. Do you really think the only
lobbying going on happens in 45 days. How naive can people be. They don't have
year round lobbyist jobs because it happens in one month. So under yours and a
thousand others, shouldn't we just out law such and all lobbyists like SUWA,
Unions, UEA, and others. Or just bug everyones phones. Because even you might
call your legislator.
LDS Liberal | 11:15 a.m. " did you even read the bill?
jsf | 2:19 p.m. March 22, 2011 Centerville, UT LDS Liberal | 11:15
a.m. " did you even read the bill?============= Yes, I did.Personally, I feel that "Thou shalt not lie, cheat
or steal or bare false witness" or "Are you HONEST in your
dealings with your fellow men",should have been MORE than enough to
cover anything specifically written in the HB477....but I'm a just law abiding
Citizen Engineer that uses my own moral compass to define what is right and what
is wrong, I'm not some (is it legal?, or is it illegal?) moral bending
Lawyer or Politician...one someone trying to defend them.
To "LDS Liberal | 1:50 p.m." The governor is only saying it is bad
because the public has pressured him.Since you read the bill, which
section was so bad, was it section 63G-2-203 where the law requires people to
pay for the time it takes to prepare a record for release?How about
section 63G-2-204 which sets the time table for a response.How about
section 63G-2-206 which describes how records may be shared within the
government.What about section 63G-2-301 which defines records that
must be disclosed. This section was changed to make draft documents protected
against being disclosed.What about section 63G-2-302, which protects
personal information?How about section 63G-2-303 which protects
government employees?How about section 63G-2-305 which designate
protected communications, such as email between legislators that do not have
anything to do with legislature business, are personal in nature, would put a
person at risk, contain information on bids and proposals, or contain trade
secrets?Since you read it, please tell us what it is that is so bad
about the law, other than it bothers the media?
HB477 is a decoy, and a patsy. Language similar to HB477 was tacked on to HB116
(the guest worker bill) at the last minute, providing redundancy should anything
happen to 477. 477 will be repealed, Herbert and Lockhart will be hailed as
folk heroes, and the law will go through anyway, by way of 116 instead of 477/
[line 197] Section 2. Section 63G-2-305 is amended to read:[line 198] 63G-2-305. Protected records.[line 199] The following
records are protected if properly classified by a governmental entity:[line 296] (19) (a) (i) personal files of a state legislator, including
personal correspondence to or from a member of the Legislature; and [...]and much, much more. The language is far more comprehensive
than just the id's of those given the guest worker cards, and extends well
beyond matters pertaining to guest worker program. Thus the REAL
secrecy bill gets past security, while everyone focuses on 477. You've almost
got to admire the Machiavellianism of it for its ingenuity. Go
ahead, look it up for yourself: HB0116S03 (HB116 - Third Substitution)
Section 1 and Section 2.
Personally, I feel that "Thou shalt not lie, cheat or steal or bare false
witness" or "Are you HONEST in your dealings with your fellow
men", should have been MORE than enough to cover anything specifically
written in the HB477. Then why the stink on HB477. Because if the above
arguments have merit, how can you think they would do anything dishonest that
needed to be covered up. Are you saying you have more moral integrity and no
one else could have as much as you?
Herbert is using recall of HB477 to get his signed illegal immigration bills off
the front page. Very clever politician. Very poor statesman.
I think BlueShirt has raised a very valid point. Those who object to this bill
should cite chapter and verse of what it does that is bad. I haven't read the
bill in detail, but I haven't found anything yet.But if someone
would point me to a specific section or item that they think is problematic, I
could read it and maybe decide it is a problem.I also have to agree
with wrz. I fear that 477 is diverting a lot of attention from the amnesty bill
that just hung a huge "Illegals are welcome in Utah" sign at every
port of entrance to this State.The media LOVES 116 despite how it
was passed, but are using the same procedures against 477. The media may be
correct on 477. But they are not an unbiased source here. They have a conflict
Hey Mav...your list of what you are saying NO to was hysterical to read. btw,
Beck hasn't lost millions of viewers. so much for your factual statements.Wait, facts and Liberals are like oil and water.
Considering... that very question... "site your proof or part of the law
that does what you claim"... has been raised here many times over. But
when you rely on the media, and don't fact check your sources, you end up with
many claims based on someone else's opinion - often an uneducated one.For example, Death Panels. I challenge anyone to find the line in the
Healthcare bill that calls for "death panels". It doesn't exist
outside of one parties talking points. So if you are going to take
a stand on making sure someone can recite page and line, that standard needs to
be held for both sides of the isle or political spectrum. And yet, somehow the
same requirment is not applied.In this case, what one does while
employed by someone else while on the clock, everything they do is the
employer's business. There is no expressed right to privacy while on the clock
or using employer assets, same in the private sector as it is in governance.
Part time of full time makes no difference. What one does on their own time
with their own resources is another story.