Thursday, May 26, 2011

Military and Overseas Voter Empowerment Act (MOVE Act)

The Military and Overseas Voter Empowerment (MOVE) Act is a federal law that is designed to improve the delivery of absentee ballots to members of the armed forces and Americans temporarily living overseas.


The MOVE Act was first introduced by the United States Senate on July 8, 2009 as Senate Bill 1415. The Act was reported favorably in Senate committee.
Senate Bill 1415 was later merged into National Defense Authorization Act of 2010 (H.R. 2647). House Bill 2647 passed the House by a 389-22 vote on June 25, 2010. The Senate approved the bill on August 28, 2009 by a 68-29 vote. President Barack Obama signed the bill into law on October 28, 2009.
The text of the MOVE Act is located in sections 575 to 589 of the National Defense Authorization Act of 2010.

Key provisions

Electronic delivery

All states are required to use methods of electronic communication for sending election information, voter registration, and absentee ballot applications.
Also, states are required to develop procedures for sending ballots electronically.

45 day requirement

All states would have to send out absentee ballots no later than 45 days before the general election. States with primary elections scheduled in August and September of 2010 have had to apply for a waiver or change their primary election date in order to be in compliance with the law.

Voter registration

Military and overseas voters would be required to re-register with their elections authority every year under the MOVE Act. Previous laws required military and overseas voters to re-register every two years.

Eliminates Notarization requirements
Elimination of notarization requirements for overseas ballots in the states that still require this.


This 45 day requirement is causing headaches for election officials and states with a caucus- convention process.  The problem is that many primaries, those held in August
or September, are quite simply too late for this new timeline.
The Utah June Primary makes the current caucus- convention process impossible.
The proposed plan for 2012 makes the state convention only 5 weeks AFTER the caucus,
leaving 29 counties to hold their conventions prior to the state convention.  (The date change
is necessary to meet the 45 day deadline prior to the current June Primary election date
in Utah)

In the past the state convention was in May approximately 60 days AFTER the caucus, with
the 29 county conventions held in the weeks between the caucus and the state conventions
in May.

In 2010 both the Republican and Democratic Conventions were held on the same Saturday
in May.

Thursday, May 19, 2011

Senate Bill 162 MILITARY AND OVERSEAS VOTING Changes State Convention Dates for all Political Parties in Utah

Senate Bill 162 passed by the 2011 Legislature in the General Session on March 4, in the House and March 9 in the Senate makes significant changes to Utah’s current election system, including moving the date for political parties to certify the names of their party’s candidates in April instead of May 13.  Some counties will have their county convention 7 days after the caucus in March.  SB 162 Votes

This bill decreases the time between the caucus in March and the state conventions 
by almost 30 days, which  also decreases the time between the caucus and the county conventions.  Campaigning for a state wide race in only 4-5 weeks while also
participating in 29 county conventions is going to be interesting.

As near as I can tell, there was absolutely no publicity for this bill. 
You will remember by March 3 there was considerable attention 
on HB 477 changing the GRAMA laws in Utah and by March 7 HB 477 
had been introduced and passed both the House and the Senate. 

Note the times that SB 162 was voted on, March 4 House, 
and March 9 in Senate.  There was such a huge uproar by that 
time on HB 477  I guess no one noticed the impact of this bill on Utah.
The highlighted provisions list he major changes, but the ONE change this blog will
focus on is the change in the date of notification of  each registered political party
             787      that wishes to participate in the primary election shall:
             788          (i) certify the name and office of all of the registered political party's candidates to the
             789      lieutenant governor no later than 5 p.m. [on May 13] on the first Monday after the third
             790      Saturday in April of each even-numbered year; and
             791          (ii) certify the name and office of each of its county candidates to the county clerks by
             792      5 p.m. on [May 13] the first Monday after the third Saturday in April of each even-numbered
             793      year.

As you will note, previously the date was May 13 and both major political parties held their conventions the Saturday prior to May 13.  SB 162 TEXT

                                                   Chief Sponsor: Lyle W. Hillyard
House Sponsor: Brad L. Dee
Highlighted Provisions:
             12          This bill:
             13          .    changes the period of time in which to file:
             14              .    a declaration of candidacy; or
             15              .    a certificate of nomination;
             16          .    changes the date of the municipal primary;
             17          .    changes the date by which:
             18              .    a political party certifies a candidate for the primary ballot;
             19              .    an ordinance may be adopted for exemption from a primary;
             20              .    a candidate is certified for the ballot; and
             21              .    a certified ballot title is submitted to an election officer;
             22          .    changes dates related to:
             23              .    filling a midterm vacancy; and
             24              .    nominating a State Board of Education member;
             25          .    enacts the Uniform Military and Overseas Voting Act;
             26          .    repeals provisions in Title 20A, Chapter 3, Part 4, Voting by Members of the
             27      Military and by Other Persons Living or Serving Abroad;
             28          .    designates an email address provided by, or a completed ballot transmitted by, a
             29      military or overseas voter as a private record; and

             30          .    makes technical and conforming amendments.

Monday, May 16, 2011

Utah County Republican 2011 Convention Election Results

The Utah County Republican Party elected new leaders at its
Organizing Convention on Saturday April 30, 2011; the newly chosen
Party Officers will lead the Party for the next two years.
Here are the election results:
David Acheson 505  62.89%
Dave Duncan 298  37.11%
First Round of Ballots
David Acheson   325
Dave Duncan     284
Kirby Glad         278 
Vice Chair
Adrielle Herring 470 53.23%  Resigned November 2011 to work on Liljenquist campaign
Lisa Shepherd 413 46.77%
Jeremy Roberts 404  51.20%
Kristen Chevrier 385  48.80%
First Round of Ballots
Kristen Chevrier  299
Jeremy Roberts    296
Jared Jardine      288 
Scott Bell 451 51.08%
Lisa Jensen 246 27.86%
Steven Reid 168 19.03%
Don Larsen 18 2.04%

Following are the election results for State Central Committee; the top 22 listed are the newly elected members (the number in front of their name simply designates their position on the ballot):
Note:  Lowell Nelson was elected State GOP Vice Chair on June 18 and he gets a position
on the State Central Committee in that position, so now the top 23 listed are on the SCC because Lowell is not taking one of Utah County's positions.
State Central Committee
4. Lisa Shepherd 528  60.69%
8. Adrielle Herring 494  56.78%   resigned Vice Chair Position 11/2011
53. Mia Love 488    56.09%
3. Dave Duncan 459  52.76%
9. Kirby Glad 450    51.72%
19. Arturo Morales-Llan 421  48.39%
64. Kristen Chevrier 419     48.16%
63. David Acheson 408   46.90%
54. Craig Frank 406    46.67%
16. Lowell Nelson 387  44.48%  Elected Vice Chair of the State Republican Party
46. Becky Pirente 379   43.56%
11. Jared Jardine 375    43.10%
2. Keri Witte 341      39.20%
12. Heather Williamson 322   37.01%
37. Stan Lockhart 310    35.63%
22. Steve Diamond 303   34.83%
6. Jeremy Roberts 298   34.25%  Removed by CC 12/10/2011
33. Heather Groom 295   33.91%
13. Andrew Holmes 291  33.45%
36. Mike Thompson 287  32.99%  Resigned November 4, 2011
60. Holly Richardson 282  32.41%
42. David Lifferth 276     31.72%  Elected to SCC at April 30 County Convention
31. Thayne Bailey 273     31.38%  Takes Lowell's place as Lowell is Automatic SCC member
55. Kim Frank 270     31.03%      approved by EC 4/17/2012
17. Linda Houskeeper 265   30.46%
61. Joel Wright 261    30.00%
5. Taylor Oldroyd 260    29.89%
51. Val Hale 260    29.89%
48. Cathy Young 224     25.75%
23. Brandon Beckham 223   25.63%
24. Ivan Keller 209      24.02%
45. Jacki Wilson 203    23.33%
56. Christy Kane 203   23.33%
41. Sharon Storrs 192   22.07%
50. Daryl Acumen 191   21.95%
68. Toby Emory 189   21.72%
52. A.Cory Maloy 176   20.23%
70. Carlton Bowen 172   19.77%
27. Gary Taylor 165    18.97%
71. Jordan Gunderson 153    17.59%
9. Matthew Duffin 152    17.47%
35. Brian Jenkins 151    17.36%
1. Chris Shelley 145     16.67%
67. David Kyle 145    16.67%
44. Jennifer Lambert 144   16.55%
28. Doyle Mortimer 126 14.48%
66. Shaun Farr 120 13.79%
15. William “Bill” Lee 113   12.99%

Sunday, May 15, 2011

Utah County Republican 2011 candidates Contact Information

Utah County GOP 2011 candidates

Candidates for Party Chair
Name Email Address Website Phone Filing Date
Kirby Glad 801-376-2050 2/11/2011
David Acheson 801-319-7103 2/23/2011
Dave Duncan 801-360-1683 3/1/2011
Candidates for Party Vice-Chair
Name Email Address Website Phone Filing Date
Lisa Shepherd 801-787-8211 2/23/2011
Adrielle Herring 801-221-1451 3/12/2011
Candidates for Party Secretary
Name Email Address Website Phone Filing Date
Jeremy Roberts 801-742-1513 3/8/2011
Jared Jardine 801-836-2561 3/18/2011
Kristen Chevrier 801-369-0468 4/1/2011
Candidates for Party Treasurer
Name Email Address Website Phone Filing Date
Scott Bell 801-717-1514 3/19/2011
Steven Reid 801-822-3233 3/31/2011
Don Larsen 801-489-4186 4/1/2011
Lisa Jensen 801-361-2792 4/1/2011
Candidates for State Central Committee
# Name Email Address Website Phone Filing Date
1 Chris Shelley 801-734-0122 2/17/2011
2 Keri WItte 801-377-8448 3/1/2011
3 Dave Duncan 801-360-1683 3/1/2011
4 Lisa Shepherd 801-787-8211 3/7/2011
5 Taylor Oldroyd 801-404-8635 3/7/2011
6 Jeremy Roberts 801-867-0156 3/8/2011
7 Roger "Chip" Browne 801-802-6069 3/11/2011
8 Adrielle Herring 801-221-1451 3/13/2011
9 Kirby Glad 801-376-2050 3/14/2011
10 Kraig Thorne 801-368-9874 3/14/2011
11 Jared Jardine 801-224-0743 3/14/2011
12 Heather Williamson 801-995-5365 3/18/2011
13 Andrew Holmes 801-358-1406 3/18/2011
14 Karen Lee 801-796-3998 3/18/2011
15 William "Bill" Lee 801-796-3998 3/18/2011
16 Lowell Nelson 801-722-6627 3/19/2011
17 Linda Houskeeper 801-225-3332 3/25/2011
18 Jackie de Gaston 801-623-1964 3/27/2011
19 Arturo Morales-Llan 801-368-3660 3/29/2011
20 Don Larsen 801-489-4186 3/29/2011
21 Leo Lines 801-636-0268 3/29/2011
22 Steve Diamond 801-830-2400 3/29/2011
23 Brandon Beckham 801-358-6776 3/29/2011
24 Ivan Keller 801-358-4826 3/29/2011
25 Merrill Hansen 408 368-6686 3/30/2011
26 Mark Steele 801-756-5138 3/30/2011
27 Gary Taylor 801-400-9387 3/30/2011
28 Doyle Mortimer 801-318-3400 3/30/2011
29 Derek Seal 3/30/2011
30 Chris Nichols 801-368-5337 3/30/2011
31 Thayne Bailey 801-319-2975 3/30/2011
32 Sterling Beck 801-472-3160 3/30/2011
33 Heather Groom 801-768-2270 3/30/2011
34 Kay Thoreson 801-226-1940 3/30/2011
35 Brian Jenkins 801-636-0969 3/30/2011
36 Mike Thompson 801-615-3810 3/30/2011
37 Stan Lockhart 801-368-2166 3/30/2011
38 Martha Winsor 801-358-1735 3/30/2011
40 Richard Harrison 801-592-5280 3/30/2011
41 Sharon Storrs 8018361843 3/30/2011
42 David Lifferth 801-358-9124 3/31/2011
43 Victor Jackson 801-319-8998 3/31/2011
44 Jennifer Lambert 801-232-1893 3/31/2011
45 Jacki Wilson 801-404-4067 3/31/2011
46 Becky Pirente 801-362-7392 3/31/2011
47 Eric Aroca 801-368-5266 3/31/2011
48 Cathy Young 801-226-2698 3/31/2011
49 Matthew B. Lindner 801-789-6209 3/31/2011
50 Daryl Acumen 801-400-2200 3/31/2011
51 Val Hale 801-226-7487 4/1/2011
52 A. Cory Maloy 801-319-7900 4/1/2011
53 Mia Love 801-319-6415 4/1/2011
54 Craig Frank 801-362-3171 4/1/2011
55 Kim Frank 801-722-8911 4/1/2011
56 Christy Kane 801-735-5971 4/1/2011
57 Joey Smith 801-556-2389 4/1/2011
58 Paul Baltes 801-636-2442 4/1/2011
59 Jeff Rogers 801-830-0714 4/1/2011
60 Holly Richardson 801-369-2836 4/1/2011
61 Joel Wright 801-368-5385 4/1/2011
62 Wayne Woodfield 801-362-0799 4/1/2011
63 David Acheson 801-319-7103 4/4/2011
64 Kristen Chevrier 801-369-0468 4/1/2011
65 Erin Clawson 801 885-7796 4/8/2011
66 Shaun Farr 801- 228-7642 4/8/2011
67 David Kyle 801-615-1532 4/10/2011
68 Toby Emory 805-451-0072 4/11/2011
69 Matthew Duffin 801-210-1540 4/15/2011
70 Carlton Bowen 801.550.4972 4/15/2011
71 Jordan Gunderson 801-623-3013 4/15/2011

Saturday, May 14, 2011

Peace Officer Memorial Day?

Two Arizona Border Patrol Agents Died May 12, 2011
My daughter-in-law who works at an airport in Arizona called this morning
to ask who died, because the flags are flying half mast at the Arizona
Airport.  She also noted the flags at Arizona State University ASU are
not half mast.

My research discovered the fact that flags are being flown half mast at all Federal
locations until sunset Sunday May 15, 2011 in honor of Peace Officer Memorial

I did find the following unrelated notable fact as well.

May 12, 2011 - Arizona Governor Brewer has ordered flags at all offices and
facilities in Arizona lowered to half-staff immediately May 12, 2011 until 
sunset in honor of two Border Patrol agents who died early this morning 
as a result of an accident \when their SUV was struck by a train near 
Interstate 8 in the Gila Bend area.
Edward Rojas an agent since 2000 and Hector Clark an agent since 2001 were 
assisting other officials in pursuing a group of suspected drug smugglers 
when the accident occurred. All individuals are encouraged to join in this tribute.

Wednesday, May 11, 2011

Utah Tea Party leader WANTS political caucuses Not Primary Elections

"If we get rid of our caucus system, what will happen is any legislator...
who votes to get rid of the caucus system will literally be 
throwing rural Utah under the bus."    abc4.
Founder of Utah's Tea Party, David Kirkham,

As posted in an earlier blog ALL special interest groups fiercely defend
their rights to control the election process in the political caucuses.

A poll conducted for The Salt Lake Tribune in January found that 61 percent of Utahns support a direct primary system.

The  primary elections are run by state and local governments, while caucuses
are private events run by the political parties.  None of the Utah election laws
apply to the caucus convention system, only to the primary elections.  The
number of complaints in the party nominating process has grown extensively in the
last 10 years, especially in the Republican Party in Utah.

As the number of special interest groups driving the grassroots, caucus system increases,
so does the support for a direct primary system.

I can only find three states still  using a caucus system, Iowa, Wyoming and Maine.
Wyoming and Maine, only the Republican parties use a caucus system,
while Iowa has a statewide caucus.  Each of these states use the caucus
for the Presidential selection process.  So Utah may be the ONLY state left
still using the caucus system for all elected officials.  Utah is also famous for more
corruption in the electoral process and Utah's campaign financial disclosure laws
have been ranked the worst in the nation.

(Those with more information about
states using a similar caucus convention system to the one Utah uses, please
leave comments with specific references.)

The question is, has the time come for the voters to take control of the election
process in Utah, where state election laws will apply to the process used to
elect Utah's Senators, Congressman, Governor, and all other elected officials,
or should the candidates be selected by a process determined by each party
where they set their own rules, and nominate anyone they want in any method
or process they want, whether the candidate represents the majority of the
registered members of their party or not.

In years past, Eagle Forum, the National rifle Association, Utah Education
Association, National Education Association, and Parent Teachers Associations,
were fighting for control of the caucus/ convention candidates nominated in
each party.

Since 2008, the number of special interest groups fighting for control of
the caucus delegates has dramatically increased.  Patrick Henry Caucus,
Libertarians, UFIRE, Tea Party and many others all fight for control of
the delegates.

They send representatives to the caucuses and those
representatives register at the caucus in the party affiliation of the
caucus they attend, consequently delegates are elected in BOTH
parties that really aren't concerned about the party platforms, but have
more concern about the group they belong to and getting the candidates
of their choice elected, whether the process is legal, transparent or honest
or not.

The question now is how much longer will the special interest groups
continue to hi-jack the election process for all candidates in Utah?

"Some state Republican lawmakers are privately asking whether 
the time is right for Utah to drop its system of picking candidates 
through neighborhood caucuses and political conventions in 
favor of a direct primary.. . . . . . .
Sen. John Valentine, R-Orem, said he has been “casually” approached 
by some colleagues about doing away with the caucus system.
“I’ve said, ‘You really don’t want to do that, especially in this environment, 
because there’s a level of distrust anyway,’ ” Valentine said, referring 
to the aftermath of the immigration debate, the public records debate and
 veto override. “Allow things to settle down some and have a rational discussion.”

by Robert Gehrke.  Lawmakers play with idea of direct primaries, Salt Lake Tribune.
Salt Lake Tribune

Tuesday, May 10, 2011

Utah Legislators Respond to Direct Primary Media Speculation


May 10, 2011


SALT LAKE CITY * Today the House and Senate chairs of the Utah
Redistricting Committee stated that they do not intend to divert the
committee's time to consideration of Utah's caucus/convention system.
Senator Ralph Okerlund (R-Monroe) and Representative Ken Sumsion
(R-American Fork) made the following statement:

"A recent news report has suggested that the Legislature's
Redistricting Committee will discuss changing Utah's election processes,
including the possibility of moving from a caucus/convention system to a
direct primary election system.

"As chairs of the Redistricting Committee, we have had no discussions
of this issue, we have not placed this item on the Committee's agenda,
nor do we intend to consider this issue at future meetings.

"The purpose of the Redistricting Committee is to help the Legislature
meet its constitutional duty to divide the state into congressional,
legislative, and state school board districts that are equal in
population to ensure equal representation for all citizens.  The focus
of the Redistricting Committee is completely and exclusively on
redistricting, and to conduct the redistricting process in a manner that
is fair and open.  We will resist any efforts to divert the time and
attention of the Committee to other issues."

# # #


Ric Cantrell
Chief Deputy
Utah State Senate
Office: 801-538-1035
Mobile: 801-647-8944

Legislature's Redistricting Committee will discuss doing away with these mass meetings

EXCLUSIVE: Will Utah legislators get rid of Utah's political mass meetings?

"Reported by: Chris Vanocur
SALT LAKE CITY (ABC 4 News) - Utah's long-standing political caucus system may be on its way out.  ABC 4 News has learned some state legislators (and others) now want to get rid of mass meetings where delegates are selected and replace them with a direct primary election."   ABC4 Exclusive

“Caucus convention systems almost always have less involvement in them than a direct primary election."  This move comes in the wake of three term Senator Bob Bennett being defeated by conservative and Tea Party delegates at the G.O.P. State Convention.
Sources tell ABC 4 there's now growing concern that caucus meetings can be too easily "hijacked" by special interest groups."




Monday, May 9, 2011

Governor Herbert’s statement regarding Saturday’s vote

May 7, 2011

Utah State Senate
Utah State Capitol, Suite 320
Salt Lake City, UT 84114-5115

Dear Senators,

As you meet this evening to discuss HB 328, I want to share two thoughts with you. First and foremost, let me reaffirm my support for providing enhanced services to the public. Providing the best for the citizens of Utah is a goal we all share and I agree that making critical, public-facing services available on Friday is part of that goal. My veto of HB 328 is based on the simple fact that opening state office buildings an additional day per week has real costs, such as electricity and maintenance. Although a fiscal note of approximately $820,000 annually was submitted to HB 328, this fiscal note was not included with the bill as it passed through the legislative process. Since no funding was appropriated when the bill was passed, I did not feel I could sign a bill putting an unfunded mandate on the state (which we all certainly do NOT like to receive from the federal government). Because I agree with the concept of enhanced service, I worked with the bill sponsor to create an Executive Order directing critical, public-facing services to be available on Fridays by person, online, or by phone. The purpose of the Executive Order is to continue to provide excellent customer service within budgetary constraints.

Since yesterday morning when the potential for a veto override of HB 328 was unexpectedly raised, I asked the analysts in GOPB to begin working with analysts in LFA to identify their collective best estimate of the associated cost of HB 328. After working yesterday and today, I understand the identified fiscal impact is approximately $790,000. I have also been informed that because funding for these particular costs come from the Internal Service Fund, that the funding would not necessarily be appropriated with passage of the bill (or in this case a veto override). Rather, the money will be appropriated to the Fund as needed, as the actual costs are realized. As long as the Legislature recognizes there is a cost associated with opening buildings an additional day, and that cost will be funded one way or another, then the Executive Branch will continue to provide the best service we can for the funding we receive.

Second, let me address some constitutional comments raised during the House debate on HB 328. Before I do so, however, please know that I do not believe that the
discussion around HB 328 should be about the constitutionality about the original “Working 4 Utah” Executive Order. As I stated above the discussion and the reason for my veto is and should be about funding. Nevertheless, since the question of constitutionality was raised (specifically that the Order violates Article XVI, Section 6 of the Utah Constitution) let me share with you that my General Counsel has informed me that the courts have not interpreted this provision outside of the context of factories, smelters and mines. Common understanding of this provision is that it does not forbid the state from establishing flexible work schedules or from asking employees to work more than eight hour days. It is difficult to believe that a court would construe this language to mean that the state and its subdivisions are constitutionally forbidden from asking employees, be they a public safety officer, a firefighter, a doctor at the University Hospital or an agency head, to work more than eight hours in any given day.

This interpretation comports with the apparent Legislative understanding of this provision. Until 1969, Utah Code Sections 34-3-1 and 34-3-2 provided for an eight hour work day. In that year, the Legislature repealed that section and added Utah Code Section 34-30-8 which provides “forty hours shall constitute a working week on all works and undertakings carried on by the state, county, or municipal governments, or by any officer of the state or of any county or municipal government.” In light of this history, there is no reason to conclude that a court would find the four day, ten hour schedule to be constitutionally infirm.

Some comments suggested that the Governor lacked the authority to implement a four day work week. Article VII, Section 5 of the Utah Constitution invests the Governor with the power to “see that the laws are faithfully executed.” Utah Code recognizes that authority and echoes that the Governor “shall supervise the official conduct of all executive and ministerial offices.” See Utah Code Section 67-1-1(1). In light of the Constitutional power to execute the laws, and statutory authority to supervise all executive offices, there can be no doubt that the Governor possesses the authority to issue an Executive Order regarding the hours of operation for state offices.

Thank you again for your consideration as you deliberate on this important matter. I look forward to working with you to keep Utah the “Best Managed State”.

Very Truly Yours,
Gary R. Herbert
Governor, State of Utah

Utah Legislators Override Gov. Gary Herbert's veto of HB 328- returning 5 day work week

In a special session Utah Legislators override Gov. Gary Herbert's veto of two bills including 
HB328, requiring state offices to reopen on Fridays, meaning state workers will no
longer enjoy four day work weeks.  The other override was on SB229, earmarking 30 percent of future sales tax revenues for roads.   KSL

"Huntsman predicted it would save the state $3 million a year because of reduced energy consumption and janitorial service, although the actual savings were much smaller — just under $1 million, according to a legislative audit."   Robert Gehrke,Salt Lake Tribune May 7, 2011      Salt Lake Tribune

                         “The only issue here was that the Legislature failed to pay for it,” 
                          Herbert said. “There was no funding for this bill. But there is a 
                        $790,000 price tag for turning on the lights and opening the doors 
                         an additional day.”  
                       The governor’s office had called it the move back to a five-day workweek an
                       “unfunded mandate” and compared it to the decision by the 
                        Legislature to slash budgets at the state liquor stores and then act 
                        surprised when stores had to close.  Robert Gehrke,Salt Lake Tribune May 7, 2011 

The main message of this legislative session is that the Legislature and the Governor
were NOT on the same page.  Governor Herbert vetoing not only ONE bill but FOUR
bills passed by the legislature shows his concern with the 2011 legislature.  The legislature
coming back to override the vetoes of two of the vetoed bills further deepens the divide 
between the 2011 legislature and the Governor.

Historically, it is rare for a Utah Governor to veto a bill passed by the legislature, especially a bill
that passed with a veto proof margin.  It is even more rare for a legislature to go into special
session to override even one vetoed bill, let alone two vetoed bills.

This is  just the third time in 15 years the Legislature has overridden a governor’s veto, according to Robert Gehrke in a Salt Lake Tribune story.  Legislature Paves over Governor . . .

Stay tuned to see the number of challengers Governor Herbert may face in 2012.

Saturday, May 7, 2011

Brady Campaign gave Utah lowest possible score on gun laws

This Pat Bagley editorial cartoon appears in The Salt Lake Tribune on Sunday, May 8, 2011.

Utah is the first state to have an "official state firearm," but the ranking of  one of its “Craziest Gun Laws” awards, was for allowing guns on college campuses.

The Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence this week gave Utah, Arizona and Alaska all scores of zero, and said they “do not have a single common sense gun law on their books.”

Tuesday, May 3, 2011

ACLU and National Immigration Center File Class Action Lawsuit Against Utah's Immigration Laws

NATIONAL IMMIGRATION LAW CENTER in California and the AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNIONS in New York, San Francisco and Salt Lake City have joined together to file a class action suit against Utah's Governor and Utah's Attorney General acting in their Official Capacities.

               1.    This action challenges Utah’s immigration enforcement law, 

                     House Bill (“HB”) 497. HB 497 was enacted by the State of Utah 
                   along with two other immigration laws—HB 469 and HB 116—to 
                  create a comprehensive system of immigration regulation.". . . . . . . . .

Is it too late to vote on whether to use tax dollars to defend Utah's Immigration Policy against
this legal action?

Did the Legislature discuss the options for covering the costs of litigation as a result of the
immigration bills passed this session?

Did the Legislature set aside funds to pay for the legal fees or will this be discussed in
this week's special session?

Salt Lake Tribune

Sunday, May 1, 2011

Dave Acheson new Utah County GOP Chair

Utah County Organizing convention Results:
Congratulations to the winners!
Thanks to all who ran!

Organizing Convention Results

           David Acheson 505 62.89%       Daily Herald
           Dave Duncan 298  37.11%  
Vice Chair
           Adrielle Herring 470 53.23%
           Lisa Shepherd 413 46.77%  
           Jeremy Roberts 404  51.20% 
           Kristen Chevrier 385  48.80%  
           Scott Bell 451 51.08% 
           Lisa Jensen 246 27.86% 
           Steven Reid 168 19.03% 
           Don Larsen 18 2.04%  

(the number by their name is their place on the ballot)

State Central Committee
4. Lisa Shepherd 528 60.69% 
8. Adrielle Herring 494 56.78% 
53. Mia Love 488 56.09% 
3. Dave Duncan 459 52.76% 
9. Kirby Glad 450 51.72% 
19. Arturo Morales-Llan 421 48.39% 
64. Kristen Chevrier 419 48.16% 
63. David Acheson 408 46.90% 
54. Craig Frank 406 46.67% 
16. Lowell Nelson 387 44.48% 
46. Becky Pirente 379 43.56% 
11. Jared Jardine 375 43.10% 
2. Keri Witte 341 39.20% 
12. Heather Williamson 322 37.01% 
37. Stan Lockhart 310 35.63% 
22. Steve Diamond 303 34.83%
6. Jeremy Roberts 298 34.25%   
33. Heather Groom 295 33.91% 
13. Andrew Holmes 291 33.45% 
36. Mike Thompson 287 32.99% 
60. Holly Richardson 282 32.41% 
42. David Lifferth 276 31.72%