To "Impartial7 " but it isn't the job of any politician to just do
what the majority wants. They are supposed to act in our best interest. You see,
quite often they have more information than the majority of people do, and as
such they should vote using the all of the information that they have at hand.
If they vote in a way that goes against what their constituents want, then they
should explain why they voted the way they did.
@no namesUsing the same logic you presented means the majority of
people did not vote for the representatives that are changing the Medicaid
I also voted for Proposition 3 with full knowledge of the tax increase. I also
had premonition that an additional reasonable further increase might be required
to fully implement the proposition. I would like to think that I cast my vote
in favor of Proposition 3 with a willingness to make the requisite sacrifice to
extend the coverage of health care to fellow Utahns in need. To me, it seems
like the legislature, in passing a bill that that costs more and covers fewer
people, is more fiscally naive than the people of Utah.
It won't matter much if the Utah legislature is able to pass a new law
overriding the proposition. The state constitution empowers the state
legislature to make law - a judge will not be able to rule that a new law passed
by the legislature is then unconstitutional because it may override a
preexisting law passed by ballot initiative. That is the constitutional power of
the legislature, and it is empowered to do exactly that - pass law that
overrides preexisting law.
The conservative story just keeps getting loopier and loopier. First we had
Obama is Bad because he lied. Now we have a convicted liar testifying before
congress on behalf of the liar in Chief and conservatives defending him. Locally we have:1. Utah passed the Weed initiative because they new
conservatives and the Church would fix it.2. Utah didn't approvethe
education initiative because they weren't smart enough to understand it.3. Utah passed the expansion initiative because they didn't know there
was a tax increase.Lesson, voters are window dressing for
conservatives to do what they want.
This article is offensive in assuming we who voted yes on Prop 3 didn't
know it was a increase. Shame on the author for assuming Utah voters are
ignorant. Question 1 failed because it was bad policy. Gas taxes should not be
used to fund education. People voted for Prop 3 did so because of compassion
for the poor. The legislature is currently working on cutting the sales tax.
Why not just increase the part funding the medicaid expansion the cut what you
can beyond that? Why are legislators eager to hand out corporate welfare, but
so against helping the least fortunate among us?
I'd like to think that Utah voters passed prop 3 because they are
compassionate and worry for those who lack access to health care. Our
legislators just demonstrated that they are devoid of such compassion.
I voted yes and I was completely aware of the tax hike.The DN, like
the Utah Legislature seems to think that Utah voters are stupid.
If lawmakers want this due to a lack of voter knowledge, they should also be for
removing the Straight Party option and the Party information from ballots. This is because they are saying that the voters weren't informed
before making their choice. The same should apply to any option that removes
the need to research.Each person in the party is different from the
other. Just because they are a part of the Party doesn't mean that they
will follow it 100% of the time. So making people actually research what each
person stands for would be better.It is all the same right? If you
want to make it so people need to be informed about propositions, shouldn't
they also be informed about the candidates?Maybe the ballots could
provide a little background for each candidate (without including party and
party words (conservative, liberal, libertarian, etc.) to summarize what they
stand for. Ballots may be a little longer due to increased text but the voters
would be more informed of not just the issues but also the candidates.Of course, this would reduce the safety of seats for both parties and
politicians would actually have to work for re-election.
I doubt that most were aware of the tax hike or just assumed that someone else
would be paying for the medicaid ( which was established in the mid 1960's
to provided health care to the poor) expansion. Socialism is Not FREE!
"Did Prop. 3 pass because Utah voters never saw the tax hike?"Definitely not.
"Oh Yes, Californian is an example of a well finical managed state."It is, last years surplus was almost larger then the entire state of
Utah budget. May not agree with the priorities, but as so today, California is
on solid financial ground."If memory serves, the high speed
train project in California has now been discontinued "Which is
a shame. To those who don't travel around the world, they don't see
how far behind we have become to other western nations. This project was no
less challenging than was connecting London to Paris and Brussels via the
Chunnel and the Eurostar. If you visit asia, you can quickly see that we have
fallen hugely behind in being able to move people from point a to point b.
Most Americans don't realize how far behind we currently are... we have
our collective heads in the sand. As stated, transparency is a huge
issue. We keep wanting to create narratives based on false views of our place
on the global stage. Trump promised real infrastructure improvements, but
nothing has been done yet. It's time for him to make this a priority.
Jay is spot on here... voters deserve real information or they will
rebel like that have here.
My sense was that the decision by the sponsors of Prop 3 to be fiscally
responsible and include a funding source is actually the reason for the
considerable gap between the 53% final outcome and the much higher support
measured in polls before the election.
One point. yes CA requires Independent assessments on all props. This was put
into place as a result of the disaster that is Prop 13, which to this date still
greatly hampers the state's ability to collect property taxes based on
current property values.They learned after the fact and imposed this
requirement to try to avoid it. Yes the Initiative did clearly state it would
increase the tax rate. But what it was missing was the assessment of whether
or not that would actually pay for the program or if the state would be on the
hook for much, much more (it would have been had the Legislature not acted.)
That is what was missing. It passed by a narrow margin. Add just a brief
explanation of the forcasted costs and I'm willing to bet it would have
crashed as well.Oh, and NoNames, Trump won 30 states to 21(including
DC), Hillary garnered 224 Electoral votes Trump had over 300. Not a one or two
state win. Not quite landslide but still a significant margin.
If memory serves, the high speed train project in California has now been
discontinued by the governor of California because it would have been too
In California, every voter proposition requires an independent assessment of the
full fiscal cost. Oh Yes, Californian is an example of a well
finical managed state.
@NeifyT"You didn't vote for Prop 3 because of the 138% poverty
level it is supposed to cover? That really is not even high enough; it should be
250% poverty level."The reason 138% is selected is because
that's the level at which those making less were expected to get the
Medicaid expansion (since the ACA basically forces it on states but the court
struck that part down) and those making above 138% (up to I think 400%) are
eligible for subsidies on the exchanges. So the problem was that states that
didn't expand once the court gave them the choice to say no had a hole
where if you didn't make 138% you weren't eligible for subsidies but
also wouldn't get Medicaid. This is to fix that issue.
@Rick for Truth"I do not want to hear the crying of liberals and
educators when they realize that there Are no longer any additional $ for
education, or transportation, or any infrastructure because of this black hole
of cash medical program."If we're in such dire fiscal
straights as a state then why is the state government pushing a large tax cut?
Proposition 3 had, in bold text on the ballot... so it's the part that
stands out the most aside from the heading "Initial Fiscal Impact
Estimate"... the words "This initiative seeks to increase
the current state sales tax rate by 0.15%, resulting in a 3.191% increase in the
current tax rate."so I think people knew they were voting for a
@Impartial7: "that the majority wants"What majority? Fewer
than 30% of registered voters voted for Prop 3. 54% voted yes, but only 55% of
registered voters voted: 29.7% of registered voters. Not a majority.Further, Prop 3 won only in Salt Lake and Summit Counties. In the other 27
counties of the State, Prop 3 was defeated at the polls.Yes, Prop 3
won and became law, a regular law like any other law that the legislature can
amend or repeal the next time they meet. But to claim Prop 3 somehow represents
the will of the people or what a majority of Utahns want is as laughable as a
Trump supporter claiming that President Trump has some massive, widespread
mandate simply because he won the electoral college vote by one or two
States.The reason the legislature feels safe making changes is that
the vast majority of our legislators' constituents actually voted against
Prop 3. A minority of legislators from inner-city SLC and ski-resort-elitist
Park City have a huge majority of their constituents who voted for it.We are a republic, not a democracy. If a 60% vote can't define marriage,
a 54% vote can't force the entire State to accept an unsustainable
In California, every voter proposition requires an independent assessment of the
full fiscal cost. And normally it details the funding proposal. That is
obviously needed in Utah so that voters are clear that they are voting for high
costs/taxes or not.
I agree with Evensen that the voters have boxed themselves into a contradiction
by electing and re-electing legislators who reliably legislate against the will
of the majority. I will do my part in 2020 to change that, even though I am as
conservative as most legislators. No more votes for Republicans until I see them
being responsive to the voters. It's true that we live in a
Republic. As I read the constitution, it's conceptually more a democratic
republic, the noun and adjective as shown. Ballot initiatives are part of the
Utah constitution designed to be used exactly the way they are being used.
Senate terms = more republic. House terms = more democracy. Citizen initiatives
= more democracy. The legislators have worked against their own
constituents on Medicaid expansion, air pollution, education, prison move,
school district divisions, etc. Then some suggest that we are not capable of
reading or understanding.
I voted for it, and I was fully aware of the tax increase. I'm happy to pay
a few dollars extra in taxes each year if it means less fortunate families in
Utah will have access to healthcare.
I am voting against all future propositions because you never know what is
hiding in the shadows with these sorts of things. Thank goodness for a
legislature that reviews propositions and does what is best for Utah.
"In casual conversations, he said, the people he has spoken to were
surprised to learn about the tax increase."This may be
technically true, but it is also irrelevant. I believe that 99% of supporters
who didn't know about the 0.15 percent tax increase would still have voted
for it because the increase is so small and the need is so great.
It's interesting that the final version of SB96 is very close to the intent
of Prop. 3, but it's still being discussed as mostly a re-write and repeal
of Prop. 3. The lesson for the legislature is that they should have
just done a clean repeal of Prop. 3 because that's what you're getting
blamed for. Would've been better policy.
Here's a declaration for all voters who think we are a democracy and that
the majority vote should rule...We are a REPUBLIC not a Democracy. We have a
representative form of government. Just because a majority wants to vote for
something, doesn't mean it will become law. Do you really want to live in
that society? You won't like it if you have to live by majority votes when
you're the minority. That's why we elect representatives who are part
of the Legislature. I see so many comments about how the Legislature
didn't listen to the "will of the majority". Prop 2 and 3 both
needed to go to the Legislature to be fixed. There were problems with both
propositions. That's why we elect representatives. We are a Republic, do
@Flashback,You didn't vote for Prop 3 because of the 138%
poverty level it is supposed to cover? That really is not even high enough; it
should be 250% poverty level.Do you realize that the "Federal
Poverty" level is based on an average across the country. It doesn't
take into account the "Cost of Living" for each area.When
was the last time you tried to live on $17,236/year dollars (138%) anywhere in
the Salt Lake Valley (I see you identified as living in Kearns); let alone have
enough money left over to pay for healthcare?The median home price
in Kearns is $253,400 -- even at an extremely low 3% interest rate over 30 years
the monthly mort. payment would be $1,068 plus more for tax and insurance (that
is over 74% income). There is no possible way for someone even at 138% poverty
to live anywhere in this valley and even have enough for housing let alone food
or healthcare. If anything; Medicaid should be expanded in Utah to cover up to
250% the federal poverty level based on Utah's Cost of Living.I
make more than twice the "poverty level" yet I cannot afford healthcare
for myself and have had to go into major debt for my wife's healthcare even
Let's check primary sources.This is what the fourth paragraph of the
Proposition #3 section of the Utah November 2018 ballot said.Note: This
section was also bolded."This initiative seeks to raise the current
sales tax rate by 0.15%, resulting in a 3.191% increase in the current tax
rate."Plus, there was this seventh paragraph (not bolded):"Increase sate sales taxes by about $90,000,000 by increasing the state
sales tax rate by 0.15% from 4.70% to 4.85% (a 3.2% increase from the current
tax rate)."Hiding in plain sight?
My take: First I voted against the gas tax hike; mainly because legally (under
state statute) the gas tax CANNOT be used for education; it rather must be used
for transportation (like road maintenance).So, it was falsely billed
for education. As if the legislature is saying "do it for the children"
when they know full well it will never and cannot ever be used for the children.
Just a way of social engineering the voters to vote for it. I believe most
voters saw through the deception.As for the Prop 3, Medicaid
expansion, I voted for it knowing that it was supposed to raise taxes (yes that
was posted in plenty of news articles). It wasn't that I wanted taxes
raised; but that I do care about people. Every single time I also mention we
need to pass meaningful healthcare reform to actually bring the costs of
healthcare down (so that we don't need tax increases). Not to mention that
Prop 3 was only to do what the supreme law of the land (yes federal laws trump
state laws) requires through the ACA -- that our state government has been
dragging its feet on for over a decade now.Just one of many
thousands of examples of Utah government considering themselves above the law.
These are all valid points, but it is also important to respect the
people's wishes and if the State Legislature like a stern parent continues
to protect the public from their own bad decisions, voters will never learn to
be more informed or careful on how they vote. By the State Legislature taking
this paternal approach to law-making only perpetuates the dumbing down of the
average voter who doesn't get to accept some of the responsibility of what
might be poor decisions as well as good decisions on their part. The problem is
not that the initiative process overall is poor, it is that legislators treat
voters like young children instead of perhaps adolescents or young adults when
it comes to politics. It's time to give the average voter more
responsibility and discretion in terms of their ability to vote in some informed
way. There needs to be more public involvement, more public dissemination of
pertinent information in deliberating over public initiatives and referendums,
more mass media coverage on television, radio, and newsprint, not after the fact
impulsive, fast-tracked, almost hidden attempts to pass legislation by the State
Legislature overriding the public's voices.
I actually read the Prop 3 text, and I knew about the tax hike. Only one of the
reasons I voted no on that and all other props. There are a myriad
of other reasons such as the 138% of poverty level not to vote for it either.
Never saw the tax hike?Costs?Tax break for
corporations?No problem.Help for people who need medical
This change is absolutely needed. People must know the true costs. Prop 3 was
doubly dishonest in that it hid a tax increase and suggested that tax was enough
to pay for Medicaid expansion. I doubt 53% would have voted for Prop 3 had
they known it would both raise taxes and run an $83 million deficit by 2025.
That also greatly helps in the last point of this op-ed:>how to get lawmakers to at least honor the intent of what they pass at
the ballot boxProp 3 was a contradiction. Lawmakers can't
honor the intent, because blocs of voters wanted incompatible things. There
was no one "will of the people." There were several in that
contradictory mess. Lawmakers had to pick one or two of those several options
to make the expansion work. That made most people angry that their intent
Prop 3 passes barely because the MSM made sure that little to no press was
published about runaway costs, and continuous tax increases that it will
generate. You can multiply by 3 to 4 projected costs, with no end in sight. Even the decreased new state legislator boondoggle is beyond and
unaffordable, depending on federal funds that can disappear at any time without
notice, leaving Utah taxpayers holding the uncontrollable bill.I do
not want to hear the crying of liberals and educators when they realize that
there Are no longer any additional $ for education, or transportation, or any
infrastructure because of this black hole of cash medical program.
Why would the legislature take such a condescending attitude that the voter
didn't know or understand what they voted for? The voter isn't as
stupid as the Utah legislators seem to assume.
"Many lawmakers (not all) have a storied history of disliking the little
piece of direct democracy known as the citizen initiative process. They view it
as the philosophical fast-lane to California, the poster child for endless
government-choking ballot initiatives."If lawmakers would
actually do their jobs and pass legislation that the majority wants, expanded
Medicaid, Medical Marijuana, Clean air, Government Honesty, etc., then there
wouldn't be a need for ballot initiatives. This is a result of their own
creation. THEY are responsible for the citizen backlash that leads to ballot