Lawmakers, Count My Vote talking deal that would end initiative petition

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • JenicaJessen Riverton, UT
    March 1, 2014 2:15 p.m.

    I'd much prefer a direct primary, but I recognize that some change is better than none. And extremist positions are one of the things the petition was designed to avoid in the first place.

    I'm willing to settle for less, but what I'm not willing to settle for is nothing at all. And given the track record of Curt Bramble and the Utah Legislature (like the term limits ray vaughn mentioned above), I fear that may be exactly what CMV is going to get. There will be no initiative next year-- and I don't think that any 'compromise' they reach is going to survive the 2015 session. If CMV caves, there will be NOTHING preventing the Legislature from going back and quietly undoing anything the initiative may have accomplished.

    No deal.

  • My2Cents Taylorsville, UT
    March 1, 2014 2:54 a.m.

    I hope the CMV leaders dump this deal faster than a hot potato, there is no alternative and we do not support any modifications to the petition we signed, it nullifies our vote and signature and these DMV deal is a petition breaker that will have to start over and renew signatures.

    This is the intent of this deal so do not accept any changes, we must put the fear of god into our legislators, they cannot speak for us nor our vote and for them to presume to think they have the right to block or stop an authorized and recognized legal petition of the people to challenge and call for a redress of the government is an unconstitutional and unforgivable act of treason and terrorism by our legislators. Keep the petition in tact, we have them running scared and any deal is not binding since we did not sign this.

    This is our choice and right, the legislators are the defendants and out of court negotiations are not authorized or legal and will disqualify the petition. So close its too sad intimidation and threats were allowed to be used to defeat our constitutional rights.

  • NedGrimley Brigham City, UT
    Feb. 28, 2014 5:30 p.m.

    Holy cow! Two sides talking and considering a compromise?? Jeepers , Wally. That's swell! Obviously someone was getting a little concerned that maybe the people really did want a change.

    ray vaughn: What better way than to "compromise" and then wiggle around it later?

  • Top of UT Patriot Cache, UT
    Feb. 28, 2014 11:04 a.m.

    Former Gov. Leavitt signed legislation repealing all of Utah's laws governing internal affairs (nominating procedures) of Political Parties in 1994.

    Stated reason for repealing the statutes was because of US Supreme Court rulings declaring Political Parties have a Constitutional right to freedom of association. If the political parties challenge this legislation in federal court, the State of Utah will lose and the court will order the State to pay the legal fees of the political parties.

    Prior to 2011, Idaho law required open direct primary. Idaho GOP moved to limit it's primary to registered party members. Legislature refused to change the law. GOP filed complaint in Federal District Court. Federal District Court declared the Idaho statute unconstitutional on freedom of association grounds.

    Here is the memorandum decision. Here is a link to Idaho legislature allocating funds to pay the GOP legal fees.

    If Bramble and Jowers succeed at moving the State Central Committee's of all political parties to the Utah Senate Chambers with this legislation, a federal judge may very well be deciding this issue.

  • mcclark Salt Lake City, UT
    Feb. 28, 2014 10:38 a.m.

    How about you let us vote on it instead of another backroom deal between the rich and powerful?

  • ray vaughn Ogden, UT
    Feb. 28, 2014 10:33 a.m.

    Every time i read or hear of a eal to gut the CMV petition i am reminded of the previous effort to have term limits. At that time elected leaders passed a bill mandating term limits and the petition effort went away. A few years later when term limits were about to begin another bill was passed repealing the term limits bill.

  • Web Geek Lehi, UT
    Feb. 28, 2014 10:19 a.m.

    Those that have read CMV know that it is full of holes and oversights. A deal between lawmakers and the CMV people would be an excellent way to end this debate on a positive note.

  • lost in DC West Jordan, UT
    Feb. 28, 2014 9:13 a.m.

    perhaps if they reach a deal, someone among the 100,000+ that have signed the petition can draw up another one for 2016

  • stevo123 slc, ut
    Feb. 28, 2014 7:10 a.m.

    Those that despise CMV, fear the voice of the people.

  • perspicacious Salt lake city, Utah
    Feb. 28, 2014 5:40 a.m.

    Not sure we want to see or smell this sausage being made. The good ole boys want to be kingmakers and keep the voters out of the decisions. And what about campaign contribution limitations? And ethics codes? Haven't they learned some lessons from the Swallow mess?