 |
| One Smart Dude |
Read up, folks:
At risk being accused of taking "liberties" with Sen. Weiler's three main reasons to "change to appointment" of Utah's Attorney General, here they are they are in a nutshell, boiled down as we see them, at least:
- An appointment process would de-politicize (and professionalize) the role of Utah Attorneys General, and remove the grubby influence of political party partisanship and favoritism from the office.
- Such a process would eliminate the incentives for campaign fund-raising "bad behavior" which are inherent in the current Utah Attorney General "election" system.
- An appointment process would remove the responsibility of choosing our Attorney General from Utah's relatively uninformed (read gullible) Utah electorate, and place it in the hands of a better-informed "commission," a proposed body of legal "experts" who'd have the added advantage of screening candidates and making appointment recommendations from a "greater pool of qualified candidates" (than those who emerge from Utah's current nomination and election process.)
Election, appointment, same-o. We get a crooked Republican who gave the Gov and UDOT a get out of jail free card. As long as the "Party" rules, there is no justice.We believe such an objection lacks merit, however, inasmuch as removing the current party-partisan "taint" is precisely what the good GOP Senator does propose:
In New Jersey, the attorney general serves for a fixed term in an appointment system. This provides independence, without substituting dependency on voters and campaign contributors. In the best judicial appointment systems, like Utah’s, governors select judges from a group of five nominees who are screened and proposed by a commission. This adds an assurance of candidate quality and to limit executive discretion, which includes avoiding purely patronage and unqualified appointments. This process is adaptable to attorney general selection.It's a tantalizingly interesting proposal, wethinks.
So what do our ever-savvy and gentle Weber County Forum readers have to say about all this?
7 comments:
Worth thinking about, since appointed officials NEVER become corrupted like elected officials . . . and the dominant party will always choose the right person for the job . . . . because the Democratic administrations of the past were so boringly normal, efficient and apparently not corrupt, that we just can't trust them in office . . . besides, if the best the Dems could come up with is Dee Smith, then all hope is lost anyway . . . then there is Andy McCullough . . .
I think the key to Weiler's proposal is in the committee "pre-selection," where AG candidates would be screened according to their actual legal/professional qualifications, in the manner that Utah judges are vetted prior to gubernatorial appointment. The fly in the ointment, methinks? We'd need some process to ensure the selection and nomination committee would be composed of folks who are at least reasonably honest and politically-neutral. Looking at the big picture however, in a circumstance where the current nomination process has delivered us "gems" like Shurtleff, Swallow, and Smith over the past 12 years, could an "independent" A.G. nominee selection committee possibly do any worse? Just a thought.
Just another layer of secrecy. A appointed Attorney General vetted and selected in a secret Republican closed caucus. How does this benefit the citizens of Utah? Just another attempt to deprive Utah voters of a choice in selecting governent leaders.
a dart board would have proved better than the last 3 clown selections
The potential benefit is this: having been appointed by the Governor the Governor will be considered responsible for the AG's conduct in office. I think it probable that if John Swallow served at the pleasure if the Governor, he'd have been sacked by now.
That is no assurance that the job will not just become a reward for faithful service to the party holding the Governors position. . Letting the Governor fill the position takes a direct voting choice away from Utah voters. The qualifications held by the various elected job seekers are known to the public. Filling the job by appointment adds a layer of secrecy to the selection process.
A wee bit more "grist" for the "discussion mill":
Letter: Keep voters picking AG
Post a Comment