Thursday, October 30, 2008

Another Strong Brent Wallis Endorsement

A Legislative District 10 reco from an Ogden City council member whom everyone can trust

On the heels of yesterday's Dan Schroeder reco, we find another strong Brent Wallis endorsement in this morning's Standard-Examiner. Here's what Councilwoman Dorrene Jeske has to say about Legislative District 10 House of Representatives candidate Mr. Wallis:
Wallis can work with other legislators

Brent Wallis is an exceptional man with unequaled qualifications for the Utah House of Representatives, District 10.
He has served Ogden and the surrounding communities for more than 30 years as president of the Ogden-Weber Applied Technology Center/College. He has been with the school from its inception when it was housed in back of the old Weber High School on Washington Boulevard.
Through his foresight and vision, Brent enlisted the help of Weber State University's President Rodney H. Brady and the Ogden and Weber County school districts in the early 1980s.
He confided in me his vision for the old reform school at 100 N. Washington Blvd. Through his perseverance, ingenuity and dedication, he is responsible for a highly esteemed, leading vocational training center. He was offered numerous opportunities to move to other vocational schools with considerable increases in pay.
Brent spent every legislative session at the Legislature successfully lobbying for millions of dollars needed for programs and new buildings. One just needs to look at the growth and success of the Applied Technology College, to witness his many talents and abilities to work with people, and achieve results and goals.
He is more knowledgeable about the workings of the Legislature than many legislators. He works well with everyone, a necessary trait for effective negotiations and success in the Legislature. His ethics are above reproach. He understands the issues and has a common-sense conservative approach to their resolution.

Dorrene Jeske
Ogden City Council
We swear it doesn't get any better than this. A Weber County Forum Tip O' the Hat to Dorrene Jeske this morning, for letting Leg. 10 voters know what's up with Brent.


Curmudgeon said...

A nice letter... by a Republican, for a Republican. No surprise there.

Someone commented earlier that unless we elect moderate sane Republicans, to office we cannot expect the party in Utah to change. That is true. But electing moderate Republicans at the expense of seats held now by Democrats makes no sense at all, and for this reason: so long as the distribution of seats is skewed as it now is, so heavily in favor of Republicans, their wing-nut leaders [Curtis, Bramble, Buttars et al] can safely ignore more moderate members of their own caucus. They don't need them. They can railroad through whatever they want, and if every moderate member votes against them, they still win.

However, if we can shift the distribution of votes to 60-40 or under, that in fact empowers the handful of moderate Republicans, like presumably Mr. Willis, who might gain election, for then the wing-nut leaders will need their votes. For if the moderates threaten to bolt, Bramble/Curtis/Butttars will not be able to pass what they want passed. Then, and only then, Republican moderates will be able to move the wing-nut agenda closer to sane moderation in return for their support for the leaders' bills on the floor.

So, electing more Dems, and in this case, not replacing a Dem with a Rep, will in fact empower Republican moderates within their own caucus. That's one reason why it would be a bad idea to have the seat Allen is running for, which is now held by a moderate Dem [Lew], pass into Republican hands, however moderate. That will do nothing to enhance the influence of moderate Republicans in their own caucus. In fact, it may do the opposite.

I understand Dorrene's loyalty to her party, but her advice on this matter is not good for Ogden, and not good for Utah.

ozboy said...

Mr. Curmudgeon

I think who Jeske was endorsing was the man, not just another Republican out of party loyalty. I have never known her to be a party loyalist. She is a champion for all of the people of Ogden.

The election in this leg district 10 is not about Republican -vs- Democrat, it is about integrity -vs- corruption. Party has nothing to do with it inspite of your intelligent and oft stated reasons for voting for the God Father of the Godfreyite movement because he is a Democrat. I highly dispute his true Democrat credentials anyway. Based on his past actions and proclamations he is a Neo-Con Republican, just like his precious Son-In-Law, both in Democrat sheep's clothing. There is no doubt in my mind that he would not gladly join in with the evil Bramble/Valentine/Buttars cabal to further the Godfreyite strangle hold on the tax payers of Ogden.

For a fellow with such great political insight you sure seem blind to this particular situation.

I suggest you just hold your nose and vote for this one Republican just once. Try it, you might like it! You can always go back to your losing party (in Utah) in the future.

Curmudgeon said...


On this general topic, I just found an interesting essay by Eugene Volokh on The Volokh Conspiracy blog [generally Republican of the Libertarian strain]. He discusses exactly that question, voting the party or the candidate. [The bold-faced emphasis is mine.] I'll put a link to the blog [one of the right leaning ones I read daily] below. Volokh's article is the seventh item down, at the moment, headlined "Voting For The Party, Not For The Candidate":

1. Elections of legislators (federal or state). Which particular people are in the legislature definitely matters — but which party has a legislative majority matters far more. Legislative power is generally exercised by organized legislative party blocs, not by individual representatives who make up their own minds.

I generally think the country would be better off if the Republicans (for all their warts) are in control than if the Democrats are. So if I and those like me vote for a Democratic candidate over a Republican because we think that this particular Democrat is better (smarter, more honest, or even more in agreement with us on many issues, despite his party affiliation), and this candidate’s election ends up giving Democrats control of the relevant legislative chamber, then we’ve hurt the causes that we favor: By electing this candidate, whom we like, we’ve essentially elected a party that we dislike. And even if the candidate breaks with the party in some cases (which may be part of why we voted for him), in most situations — both when voting on legislation, and, as importantly, voting on whom to put on various legislative committees and the like — he’ll follow party discipline.

Link here.

Oh, an Oz, you wrote: just like his precious Son-In-Law, both in Democrat sheep's clothing. Sorry, Oz, but Hizzonah, Mayor Godfrey, is a registered Republican, and has been for years, however unhappy that makes Rudi. So you're reduced to arguing that Democrat Allen is really a Republican, and that Republican Godfrey is really a "Democrat in Sheep's Clothing."

And I'm the one you think is too partisan?

Moroni McConkie said...

I saw Ed Allen at the State Democratic Party Convention in ... 1978! He has consistently been a Democrat in name and philosophy all his life.

ozboy said...

No Mr. Curmudgeon, that is not what I am saying. I am saying that regardless of party they are both immoral opportunists. They are Godfreyites. They are the originators and initial members of this evil and greedy sect. They will use either party to further their true goal as Godfreyites to turn Ogden into one big amusement park to fulfill the Little Lords fantasy.

Where he came up with this ridiculous idea the Lord only knows. Perhaps his parents wouldn't let him go to Lagoon when he was a kid? Maybe it is just his short man complex? Where ever it comes from it is not healthy for Ogden tax payers, and once again the God Father of the Godfreyite movement, Ed Allen, will not hesitate to throw in with the evil forces of Bramble/Valentine etal to further promote legislation that will give his precious son in law more power to destroy what is left of Ogden and rebuilt it in his own fantasy.

I don't think either one of these bad actors are representative of either political party. I think they only use party affiliation to further their own greedy causes to the detriment of the citizens who pay the bills.

Curmudgeon said...

OK, sorry if I misread your meaning.
But I do think it is true of you, and others who've posted, that absent Allen's support for the gondola, you'd not be advocates of Wallis.
One last time: Allen is wrong about the gondola. Totally, completely and thoroughly wrong. And if he were running for City Council or mayor, I'd be walking the streets for his opponent.
But to judge a long political career, in and out of office, by a single issue which will be settled... and it seems largely has been settled... within the city, seems to me not only unfair, but unwise. He's running for state legislature, not mayor or city council, and given his long history as a Democrat in the legislature and out, opting instead to swell the Bramble/Curtis/Valentine/Buttars wing-nutjunto majority by sending a Republican to fill a currently Democratic seat seems to me like, politically, throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

dan s. said...

Curm, once again I find your predictions overly speculative. One could just as easily predict that if we elect more moderate Republicans to the legislature, they'll be less likely to elect such wing-nuts as leaders.

I've already explained how my reasons for supporting Wallis go far beyond Allen's devotion to the gondola. So I'll assume that your "unfair" and "unwise" accusation wasn't aimed at me. But if you're worried that your candidate may lose because of the gondola issue, all you have to do is get him to publicly say he supports WSU's decision not to sell its land.

Meanwhile, I'm astonished that in all your posts endorsing Allen on this blog, you've said almost nothing about him other than that he's a Democrat. How much do you even know about the guy?

just wondering said...


Who do you support for State Senate?

Curmudgeon said...


You wrote: Curm, once again I find your predictions overly speculative. One could just as easily predict that if we elect more moderate Republicans to the legislature, they'll be less likely to elect such wing-nuts as leaders.

That would be true, Dan, if there was any evidence that the majority of the Republican members of the House and Senate were moderates by any definition of the term you or I would recognize. There is not.

"Moderate" members of any particular party... like the so-called "Blue Dog Democrats" in Congress... wield significant influence with their colleagues when they, collectively, make a difference --- or might --- in the passage of legislation by their being willing to withhold their votes from the majority. That condition does not exist in the Utah legislature, and will not exist there until the party alignments becomes more evenly distributed than they now are. Which, yet again, is why it's important not to have current D seats go R.

Dorrene Jeske said...

Just Wondering,

I support Bill Hansen for the State Senate in my District. I tried talking to Senator Allen Christensen about the bill concerning the civil service commission a couple of years ago, and he would not give me the time of day let alone listen to me, saying that he liked the bill.

I have never voted a straight ticket and never will. I vote for the best person (in my opinion) running for a particulat seat.


I know both candidates for the State Representative seat, District 10, and there is no comparison! It's like night and day. I could give you a number of examples why I don't think Ed Allen will represent the people of District 10, but I won'nt because I don't believe in negative campaigning, and I can't say anything good about Ed Allen. I've received a couple of lettes from him -- one anonymous which I think is gutless and doesn't deserve serious consideration.
So your comment "I understand Dorrene's loyalty to her party, but her advice on this matter is not good for Ogden, and not good for Utah" is completely wrong. We are talking ethics, character and who the best person is here.

Dorrene Jeske said...


FYI I've written letters to the editor in the past encouraging Republicans to vote for the PERSON not their party because we need a more evenly balanced legislature. I even made that comment to Lt. Governor Herbert last week, but I believe integrity and scruples are required, well at least desired, when possible, in a candidate no matter which party.

dan s. said...

Curm, I said "just as easily"--not just "easily".

There are 75 seats in the Utah House, of which 20 are currently held by Democrats. I don't know how many of the 55 Republicans you would classify as moderates, but you seem to believe it's not enough to be relevant in passing legislation--perhaps only 10.

We can probably agree that the transfer of a single Democrat-held seat to a moderate Republican isn't going to result in any fundamental change. Instead, you've argued that if the Democrats can pick up another 10 seats (bringing their numbers to 40%), then they and the moderate Republicans together will become relevant. That's true only if the moderate Republicans can also hold on to most of their 10 seats, so the Democratic gains come at the cost of non-moderate Republicans. In your scenario, what matters is the total number of Democrats plus moderate Republicans--not the breakdown between these two groups.

Furthermore, your scenario isn't likely to occur in the near future. What's at least equally (un)likely, I think, is that the moderate Republicans might increase their numbers enough to have some influence within the Republican party. This would result in better choices for leadership and committee chairs, so it would make a real difference. And it'll actually happen faster if the more liberal districts elect moderate Republicans instead of Democrats.

In reality, what happens in the legislature is far more complex that this. Legislators don't always vote along party lines, and the Republicans cannot be so cleanly divided into moderates and "wing-nuts". Even a small shift in the makeup of the Republican majority could, potentially, result in a different person becoming a committee chair, or a different vote on a piece of legislation. That's why the bottom line, for me, is not party identification but rather the credentials and positions of the individual candidates.

Ogden Voter said...


Your silence speaks volumes. I appreciate the above comments of Ms. Jeske and Dan S. BTW, Ms. Jeske failed to mention that Bill Hansen is a Democrat which proves OzBoy's assessment is right on.

Curmudgeon said...

Og Voter:

Well, that's a new one. First time every anyone on this blog has accused me of "silence." Usually the complaint is "he does run on and on, doesn't he."

Ogden Voter said...


You're quite an artist at avoiding the issues being discussed when you've been upstaged and don't have a response.

Post a Comment

© 2005 - 2014 Weber County Forum™ -- All Rights Reserved