Deseret News | Curtis, Seegmiller spar in debate

Reader comments
Curtis, Seegmiller spar in debate

Where do they stand on taxes | 10:58 p.m. Oct. 16, 2008

I heard Jay Seegmiller wants to increase taxes on gasoline and vehicles. Did he talk about that?

Wait a minute | 1:15 a.m. Oct. 17, 2008

Did Curtis say he doesn't vote by how he sees the polls? Isn't that another way of saying that the people's opinions don't matter? Silly me, of course they don't matter.

corrupt legislature | 1:35 a.m. Oct. 17, 2008

Seegmiller seems like a sharp individual who won't be a sheep following orders. After reading about the debate, he has my vote. Good luck!

Something has got to be done to shake up our legislature!

Comments continue below

stevo | 6:05 a.m. Oct. 17, 2008

Seegmiller seems a a man with honor, Curtis not so much.

Take another look | 6:21 a.m. Oct. 17, 2008

Mr. Curtis, an attorney who represents developers, sometimes forgets he is working for the people of Utah. Remember House Bill 466, the controversial incorporation law? When the legislature tried to undo the damage caused by this horrible legislation, Speaker Curtis used his authority to block a provision that would make the new law retroactive. He wanted all developers who had filed incorporation petitions to be allowed to continue their court battles. Daniel Town and Wasatch County continue to fight those court battles today almost a year later. Daniel Town has spent the vast majority of its budget fighting a developer from AZ because this small town accepted an annexation petition from Wasatch County residents which removed the population the developer needed for his new "town". Remember the petition to the Utah Supreme Court? Two other developers have recently incorporated towns in Wasatch County (Hideout and Independence), but "Aspen" is still in court. Wasatch County and Daniel Town has paid a high price for stupid legislation. More taxpayer dollars wasted by Speaker Curtis's actions for special interest groups. I don't think he works for me, the taxpayer.

Laurels | 6:28 a.m. Oct. 17, 2008

I tried to find out how Seegmiller stood on a couple of issues, so I e-mailed him. He didn't respond. I e-mailed him again. No response. Finally, after 3 e-mails, I got a response, but it was obvious from that response he didn't understand the issues I asked him about. His responses were inane, full of generic catch-phrases, and woefully inadequate.

I e-mailed the same questions to Rep. Curtis. Not only were the responses thorough, they represented a level of understanding of the issues and details associated with those issues totally lacking from Mr. Seegmiller, and Rep. Curtis followed it up with a telephone call to make sure he had answered my concerns.

Seegmiller may talk the talk about being responsive, but he sure didn't walk the walk when it came to responding to my inquiries...and when he did, he didn't even answer the questions.

He claims he wants to be my "representative," but he was slow to respond, and when he did, he didn't understand the issues, nor did he answer the questions I asked of him.

He lost my vote.

vote according to the people | 6:47 a.m. Oct. 17, 2008

We live in a Republic. Curtis is chosen (just like everyone else) to represent his district. Representing does not mean following public opinion polls. Chaos would ensure should every politician become a populist. We, the people, are idiots - we change our minds more than we change our underwear, and then get mad when our politicians don't do the same.

Earl Hamiliton | 7:58 a.m. Oct. 17, 2008

Laurels. You had the exact opposite response than I did. I asked Curtis for help last year with a zoning issue. He would not respond at all. I contacted Seegmiller and he showed up at the Planning Commission and helped with the issue. Seegmiller is very knowledgeable. What issues did you ask him about? Curtis is probably better at answering questions about tax laws and city incorporation than Seegmiller. Curtis uses these laws to press his issues like school district splits and giving tax breaks to his special interest buddies. He did not support the West Side voting on the District Split. He changed the law mid-stream to take the West Side out of this vote. He has given several of his developers buddies sweet heart deals for land. Look at what happened with Anderson Development in St. George and the open space purchase in Sandy. Curtis does not represent me or most of the voters in his District. I also want to know why it has taken him 12 years to support ethics reform. Vote Democratic and save South Valley.

Elkman | 8:07 a.m. Oct. 17, 2008

I have followed this race very closely. I want to know why Curtis has not pushed ethics reform before now. It only got his attention after several of his handpicked minions got caught doing supposedly unethical things. Lets see Walker and the bribery issue. It appears that Walker wants to plead on some inane misdemeanor. Greg Hughes and the voucher nazi mess. It appears that Hughes has been strong arming his way around the state. I wonder where he learned these tactics. Curtis is only supporting ethics reform because it is being forced on him. This debate was interesting. I listened to it on NPR. Curtis is very smooth and talks a good talk but is still a Special Interest bought politician. Seegmiller does not have conflicts of interest. He is not getting large amounts of money from developers, alcohol & tobacco interests, nuclear waste, trial lawyers, voucher, and HMO groups. Curtis has received very little money from average citizens. A very scary thought is re-electing Curtis and sending him back to the Legislature to reek havoc on public education and the average citizen. Vote for Seegmiller and save Utah.

Government Man. | 8:15 a.m. Oct. 17, 2008

Seegmiller is a good honest man. He may not be a polished as Greg Curtis but he will represent the little people on District 49. Curtis stated in the Debate that he would not raise taxes. This is not true. He raised the taxes of every homeowner in Salt Lake County by passing the Salt Lake County School equalization law. This law is having all of the home owners in Granite, Salt Lake, and Murray Districts have to pay for the building of new schools on the West Side of Jordan District. All three of these District have had to raise their mill levies to pay for this new law. Curtis also raised taxes by forcing school Districts to pay for Charter Schools. Several districts have had to raise their mill levy to pay for this inane law. Curtis has been involved with shady deals all his career. We had guzzle gate, and the mess with Mayor Workman. Curtis also stopped the building of a new state office in Logan that had been approved already when he found out one of his developer buddies was leasing his building to the state!!!

Seegmiller's Gaffe | 8:21 a.m. Oct. 17, 2008

In the debate Seegmiller said he didn't believe in marriage between a man and a woman.

Curtis kindly corrected Seegmiller when it was Curtis' turn to speak.

But I can understand the confusion in Seegmiller's response. He's flipped-flopped so much on gay marriage that I'm sure it is hard for him to remember where he stands one day to the next.

Regardless, if Curtis had made that gaffe you can bet the news would've reported it.

Elkman. | 9:09 a.m. Oct. 17, 2008

I listened to the Debate on NPR. It sounded like Seemiller was very tired. He had probably just finished a 48 hour run on Amtrak. This happens to actual working people who don't have the opportunity to work in soft special interest bought lawyer jobs!! Seegmiller has never flipped on Gay Marriage. I have followed his career and know him. He is an active Mormon who has had a son on a mission. So, please do not try to paint him as an ultra left wing tree hugging, gay marriage loving, Eastern Democrat. Curtis also has an excellent family and he does not support gay marriage. This incident was a slip of the tongue. Curtis did handle this well and should be congratulated for that fact. This was not one of Seegmiller's best debates. Find the recent debate on KBYU. Both candidates did an excellent job during this debate. There are sharp differences between these candidates. A vote for Seegmiller will be a vote for Open Government and ethics reform. A vote for Curtis will be a vote for more of the same. Vote Democratic and save Utah!!!

Vote Libertarian for real change | 9:28 a.m. Oct. 17, 2008

Also on the House District 49 ballot, former FAA manager and all-around decent guy, Libertarian Charles Bonsall.

Mark | 10:03 a.m. Oct. 17, 2008

The most striking answer in the Debate was when Curtis said the he would keep special interests out of the legislature but then went on to lump in education, tax reform, and corporate interests all as "Special Interests".

Greg can't remove the undo influence of special interests if he can't even tell who they are.

It is time to elect a rep. that can. Vote for Jay!

Not The Reason | 10:35 a.m. Oct. 17, 2008

The reason to vote for Mr. Seegmiller is not that he would be a better legislator that Curtis, it's that he is NOT Mr. Curtis!

Mr. Curtis is among a handful of Republicans who have done serious harm to the party and to conservative principles. Electing Mr. Seegmiller would be a great help in purging the legislature and Republican party of some heavy-handedness. Being in the minority party, Mr. Seegmiller will be unable to do much serious harm.

County resident | 10:35 a.m. Oct. 17, 2008

Best wishes to the hopeful new Rep. Seegmiller. He has my support.

Concerned | 11:09 a.m. Oct. 17, 2008

Just what we need is a voice for the west side and the continuation of the neglect of our schools by the Jordan School District. We are continuing to pay for the west side schools, even with the split. Bond payments will continue and equalization payments. Yet the schools on the east side lack seismic and fire protection. You may not like his manner, but Curtis voted to protect east side students, took the sales tax off food, salvaged the animal cruelty legislation and public education has received record increases in funding over the past two years.

jake | 11:19 a.m. Oct. 17, 2008

Curtis pushing ethice reform? Am I the only one that finds irony in that?

Constitution Party | 11:30 a.m. Oct. 17, 2008

The whole issue would be solved by voting for Wayne Crawford! Check out his responses to the Deseret News candidate survey-House District 49. A true representative with common sense!

Loosing Curti means Sandy Looses | 1:16 p.m. Oct. 17, 2008

It might be helpful for some of the voters to think about the consequence of not having Greg Curtis representing them. Most other years, it might not be a serious issue to loose his leadership in the House.

Curtis has actively supported the school district split and rightly so. The east side needs to the opportunity to allow parents to take responsibility for their children's educations instead of the Teacher Unions. Eastside parents have the opportunity now to really know and understand their school board members.

If Curtis does not return to the legislature, there is a crowd of people who will gladly lead a vote in the house to reverse the decision and stop the completion of the eastside school district. Some think there is no way that can happen. But I think they better wake up and see the money that UEA is putting into the defeat of anyone who supported the division. It will be interesting in a few years when the UEA tries to have some influence on the leadership of that district.

continued in the next note:

Special Needs | 1:49 p.m. Oct. 17, 2008

Seegmiller sounds so 'righteous'! Too bad that he will so ineffectively represent the people of Sandy. If maybe he had spent some time meeting and greeting some of the people who spend their jobs educating the legislature, like Lisa Johnson and Margaret Bird, the leaders of lobbyists against vouchers and care takers of trust lands, he might know a little more about how ethics guidelines work.

He can cry ethics reform all day until he realizes that his special needs are represented up there at the legislature as actively as mine. And then he will start to understand how the Democratic party is using him to cry a war cry that the voters of Utah will chant day in and day out without realizing that the Democrats enjoy the attention of the special interests even more so than the Republicans.

Elkman. | 3:50 p.m. Oct. 17, 2008

You guys who argue that loosing Curtis will hurt Sandy are up in the night. I'm a Sandy resident and I feel like I have been hit over the head with a sledge hammer. My taxes are going up thanks to Curtis and his misguided school district split. This school district split is one of the biggest disasters in Utah History. The law did not address the adequate needs of splitting the assets of the District and how the split was going to impact students and teachers. This Split was hatched in diet coke filled back rooms with Cullimore, Dolan, and Walker. It was undemocratic not letting the West Side Vote. I'll tell you what is a lot scarier than a few PTA Ladies and little UEA Members is Curtis getting elected again and reeking havoc on Public Education and little people. The Special interest groups that have Curtis in their pocket are a lot more dangerous than some little poorly paid school teachers. Look at Curtis's record and be very afraid. He has crammed vouchers, district splits, and soccer stadiums down or throats. Shame on him and all the GOP Big Boys!!!

I WAS THERE | 10:34 p.m. Oct. 17, 2008

I was actually at the debate, and Seegmiller seemed a lot more than "tired." He seemed lost. He seemed overwhelmed. He seemed out of touch. Bob Bernick is just as out of touch. The Seegy quote used in the story about Seegy being "shocked" Curtis would compare schools and zoos shows it. Anyone who heard the debate realized that Seegy completely missed the point of Curtis' comment. The guy is just not all there.

I feel very proud to have Curtis represent me. Has has supported ethics reform by voting for such reform in 2007, 2005, 2004, 2002, 2000, 1998, 1997, and 1996.

He has constantly voted to cut taxes, although at times taxes have been raised by the legislature as a whole -- often against the vote of Curtis.

And the UEA is the biggest special interest out there. Anyone who is getting funds/support from the UEA is not going to be an independent voice. The UEA is the puppeteer behind the curtain.

Vote Curtis and let him continue to fund education, keep Utah in the black, and build the roads/infrastructure that set Utah apart.

1 man is not responsible | 10:37 p.m. Oct. 17, 2008

No matter what his position, one man is rarely responsible for anything done in government, good or bad. And if that's how you think, then you have to give Curtis ALL the credit for all the great things accomplished by our legislature, as well as for all the bonehead moves. Anyone who follows government closely know the goods FAR outweigh the bads.

Elkman. | 11:32 a.m. Oct. 18, 2008

I WAS THERE. You are wrong in your assumptions of the UEA. Curtis hates public education and cannot stand the fact that a bunch of under paid teachers and PTA moms stopped his voucher crusade in it's tracks. The people of Utah did not want vouchers and voted them down. This was after the fact that Curtis had to arm twist every moderate Republican Legislator to get it passed. Curtis does not believe in ethics reform. Why are we having the problems now if he supported ethics reform? We have the worst ethics laws in the country in regards to our state government. Curtis has even supported the law that allows for candidates to keep the money donated by special interest groups after an election. The Special interest groups that support Curtis and the GOP Leadership are certainly more powerful than the UEA and PTA. We need to hold our on ethics committee on November 4th and send Curtis packing. A vote for Seegmiller is a vote for Democracy and good open government.

Special Needs | 4:12 p.m. Oct. 18, 2008

Too bad we can't see the good done by the Utah Government.

Add your comment

Comments are monitored. Any comments found to be abusive, offensive, off-topic, misrepresentative, more than 200 words or containing URLs will not be posted.

Words Remaining

E-mail address: For internal use only. We may want to contact you to publish your comment (not your e-mail address) in the newspaper or for a separate story idea.