Both the Salt Lake Tribune and the Standard-Examiner provide brief writeups this morning on the topic of last night's Weber County GOP "debate," wherein Legislative District 7 candidates Glen Donnelson and Ryan Wilcox were invited to field questions from GOP voters from their legislative district. From this morning's Kristen Moulton article:
OGDEN - What was supposed to be a debate turned into a town hall meeting Friday night, giving candidate Ryan Wilcox, challenger to the absent Rep. Glenn Donnelson, a chance to tell 75 District 7 residents his views on everything from property tax reform to energy policy.The article suggests Donnelson's decision to decline debating his challenger may have exacted at least some political price:
The nondebate attracted a much bigger crowd than Weber County Republican Chairman Matthew Bell expected. The high turnout was due in part to media reports that the state Republican Party told Bell it was a bad idea to host a debate between an incumbent and challenger.
"We're going to do it more often," Bell said after the forum. "There is nothing wrong with Republicans debating Republicans."
Donnelson said Wednesday that he would not debate Wilcox because he and Bell could not agree on the format and because Friday is his date night with his wife.
Christy and Kevin Bailey, noting that it was their date night, too, said Donnelson only hurt himself.According to the Tribune report, candidate Wilcox comported himself well, deftly responding to at least the one key question which precipitated a political firestorm within the Utah GOP during the past week:
"I was shocked when I heard him say [on a radio show] it was of no interest to him," said Kevin Bailey, a former Pleasant View council member. "Anytime you have an exchange of ideas, it's a good thing. Maybe he's just too confident that he knows what his constituents think."
"What's the motivation for running against a proven conservative incumbent in one of the most conservative districts in the state?" he asked.As we said, the Standard-Examiner's Scott Schwebke also contributes additional information about last night's event in his own report.
"First, I believe in competition. That's part of being a conservative. That's good in business and it's good in politics," said Wilcox, who works for a cell-phone company. "The issue is, it's time for new representation."
All-in-all, it appears from these two print media reports that Chairman Bell capably moderated the event; and aside from the fact that the incumbent candidate declined to participate, the event otherwise went off without a hitch This of course is something Weber County Republicans have come to expect, under the leadership of Weber County Republican Party Chairman Matt Bell.
We'll also make parenthetical note of another intra party GOP debate which was held last night. Unlike last night's Weber County Leg. 7 event, the Salt Lake Tribune reports that last night's 3rd Congression District Cannon/Chaffetz debate was a genuine old-fashioned knock-down brawl. We have to admit we're sorry we missed that one.
So what about it, gentle readers? Should the Utah GOP (indeed all parties) adopt a firm policy requiring all party candidates to debate prior to party primaries? Should this be a condition for a political party's endorsement? Does the public interest in "openness" and "transparency" trump an incumbent's "right" to conduct his own campaign in the manner in which he sees fit?
It will be interesting, we believe, to examine the post-primary results in the Legislative 7 and Congressional District 3 races, to compare the results for an incumbent who did debate, with the outcome for one who didn't.
And we again invite any readers who attended either of these Friday night GOP debates to chime in with their own observations and comments.
11 comments:
I have known Glenn Donnelson for more than 40 years and worked with him in varying capacities. He is an honorable, honest, sincere man. As my Representative, he has ALWAYS listened to my concerns and answered any questions I've asked including, "Where do you stand on this issue?" "How will you vote on the issue?" His first response is to tell me what his concept of the issue is, then he adds, "I am always open to more information about it though. And I will always listen to my constituents and consider their views and concerns." I have found that he does what he says.
Rep. Donnelson received quite a prestigious award from a grass root organiztion who represents the taxpayers point of view and is for good, no-frills government. He received the award because of his voting record.
I have met and talked with Ryan Wilcox. What a shallow young man! I asked him the same questions that I had asked Rep. Donnelson, but his answers were not to my liking. I told him of my experiences with the issue and that I felt that I was somewhat of an authority on it, but it made no difference to him. He had made his mind up, which was how some other Legislators felt who had not worked directly with the issue, but had accepted the proponents propaganda. When I explained how the situation really is, he remarked quite arrogantly that he knew that. He reminds me of Brandon Stephenson. Another thing that bothered me about him is that he wouldn't look me in the eye. You can't trust someone who won't look you in the eye. So for whatever it's worth, my vote goes to Rep. Donnelson.
Thanks, Mrs. Donnelson. We think he's great, too!
Nobody has questioned Donnelsons honorability nor his service. The time he has put in is appreciated.
The problem is when he feels like his personal time is more valuable than that of his constituents. The least he could do is show up to a political debate. he is after all running for "public" office.
I just did a search on the internet. In the past 8 years Glenn has personally submitted less than 45 bills thats little more than 6 a year. Of those he has presented non have been substantial.
He touts illegal Immigration as his top issue but hasnt successfull passed a single piece of legislation to help with the problem. presenting bills that go nowhere are a waste of our part-time legiaslature valuable time.
His status as a top notch human being has never been in question. The world is full of good guys, but We need a legislator who is effect. Unless you live at the legislature the only two ways to determine how effective he is are 1. the bills he has passed (sorry glenn doesnt cut it). 2. Watching him in action in a public forum like a debate (oops didnt show up).
His refusal to do one and his inability to do the other is what makes him less desirable to voters.
Now before everyone gets carried away with bitter posts look a what glenn has done. Since Glenn has not passed most of his own bills the bills he says he passed only means he voted on someone elses bill correctly and after hearing Wilcox I beleive he will vote no different on most of these core issues.
Bottomline, Glenn is ineffective not accessable as is made evident by not showing up to a high profile debate.
Wilcox will do fine. He supports the fight against illegal imigration, He recognizes a need for public education reforms which start in the public sector and may have to include a public private partnership. He is prolife and eager to protect it. Why not give someone else a chance to be a voice on the hill that will showup and be heard.
Sorry, I am NOT Mrs. Donnelson.
Annonymous, there is another way that determines whether you are a good legislator and that is how many sub-committees you chair, and how significant they are. Glenn chairs a couple of significant sub-committees because of his tenure. I am on the Chambers' Ad Hoc committee and it really doesn't matter much what legislation cities and states pass, if challenged in court, they won't hold up. Immigration is the responsibiiity of Congress.
After talking with Ryan, I disagree with you that he is for education. He says that he is, but like so many, even you, don't know what you're talking about. Tell us what your experience is besides a student and parent, maybe a PTA leader. Ryan hasn't been in the trenches of the education system. I have, and he wouldn't even listen to me! He thought that he knew more than I do. Talk about arrogance! I don't need another Brandon Stephenson down at the Legislature -- having him on the City Council is more than enough!
I believe the test of how effective a legislator is that you mention, Anonymous, is the worst test in the world! THERE ARE TOO MANY BILLS PASSED EVERY YEAR!! Most of them are nonsensical, insignificant and only clutter the law books. A majority of the citizens don't know an eighth of the bills that become law! Talk about a waste of time! They aren't important enough to make it in the paper so the public goes merrily and ignorantly on their way. And you think that is a test for an effective legislator?! You are probably a Godfreyite, too.
That's okay, Mrs. Donnelson, my name's not Ivan DuHussein, either.
No, baath party, it's idiot!
Argh! I am wounded! Your rapier-like barb has punctured my thin skin.
Also, next time, put quotes around "idiot".
Brett:
You wrote: Annonymous, there is another way that determines whether you are a good legislator and that is how many sub-committees you chair, and how significant they are. Glenn chairs a couple of significant sub-committees because of his tenure.
Seems to me you contracted yourself. First you say the number of subcommittees someone chairs is a reflection of his quality as a legislator. Then you concede the sub committee chairmanships are awarded by tenure... i.e. seniority. Unless you want to argue that those from the safest districts who never have a serious challenge and so who stay in the legislature longest are necessarily the "best" legislators, it's hard to make both parts of your claim work together.
I believe Mr. Buttars chaired some important committees, didn't he? Until of course he became such an embarrassment even the Republican leadership had to remove him... and we all know what it takes to embarrass a Utah Republican.
Curmudgeon,
Touche'! But I don't believe I "contracted" myself, however, I concede that on the surface, it does seem like a contradiction. In most cases, a legislator usually serves a while before he is asked to chair a "sub-committee" and then he must have the confidence of his/her fellow legislators to be nominated.
In Buttars case and from what I've seen of him lately, he is one of those politicians who let the power go to his head. There are a lot of them. Very few stay true to themselves, their constituents and to their promises. Donnelson is one of the few that the power hasn't seemed to change. I'm guessing, but I would dare say that when Buttars was elected, he was a pretty good legislator.
Baath party, I hope I didn't wound you too deeply. I like your sense of humor. But I have been posting on this blog for quite some time, long before this issue with Donnelson, so believe me I am not Mrs. Donnelson. BTW, why would I want to put quotes around Stupid if I'm saying that "Stupid" is your name? I didn't put quotes around Baath party. What's the rule on that?
Oops, I mean "idiot." Same difference.
Post a Comment