Salt Lake Tribune: Legislature Repeals Bill to Limit Feds’ Law Powers

"There are better ways to resolve these issues than to pass a [message] bill that we will have to repeal and litigate in court later on." - Rep. Patrice Arent, D-Millcreek

Gotta admit we were a mite surprised at how this story ended with a whimper.  We were sure that Utah's nutjob "Cowboy State Representative from Kanab" would bravely insist on taking this issue all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court, rather than to weasel out with his tail between his legs:

"Faced with a likely legal defeat over a bill’s constitutionality, the Utah Legislature on Wednesday repealed a measure limiting federal land agencies’ law enforcement powers. HB155 sponsor Rep. Mike Noel, R-Kanab sought the repeal "on advice of counsel" after U.S. District Judge David Nuffer issued" in quick succession (slam-dunk style) a temporary restraining order and a "preliminary injunction blocking the law’s implementation." Coincidentally, this is the same "advice of counsel" which  Noel ignored when he somehow managed to "snooker" our entire Weber County legislative delegation (among others) and rammed this knuckle-headed bill through the legislature at the outset.

• Legislature repeals bill to limit feds’ law powers

"We need to learn from this experience so we won’t make this mistake in the future," said Rep. Patrice Arent, D-Millcreek, one of the few [level-headed] House members who had voted against the bill earlier this year. "There are better ways to resolve these issues than to pass a [message] bill that we will have to repeal and litigate in court later on."

Sadly, that'll never work in our tea-party-owned and controlled Utah State Legislature, where thumbing their legislative noses at the federal government is job #1, and the cost of defending facially unconstitutional legislation in federal court is no object (well almost).

Salt Lake Tribune: Feds Block Utah Law Over Police Power on Public Lands

Something to think about the next time our Weber County legislative "critters" are out campaigning under the "government frugality" banner, no?

For openers this morning, we'd like to direct our readers' attention to an eye-opening story in this morning's Salt Lake Tribune, reporting on the latest blowback from the 2013 Utah legislative session, wherein our Sage Brush Rebellion "cowboy" legislature, in a fit of Utah-style, anti-federal government sentiment,  gleefully passed Rep. Mike Noel's HB155, among other wonderful things.  This bill, which was "narrowly" drafted to limit the law-enforcement authority of employees of federal land-management agencies, has now landed in federal court in what has to be record time, a mere 36 days after the adjournment of the 2013 session. HB 155 was of course just one of a series of 2013 legislative bills designed to "curb" federal government clout, (translation: get in the federal government's face.) Read up folks about what we expect to be the first of several federal injunctions coming up over the next few months:

• Feds block Utah law over police power on public lands

Referring to the U.S. attorney's 2-count complaint, we find allegations which are just what we might have expected, i.e., that federal government attornies seek to "preliminarily and permanently enjoin enforcement of Sections 53-13-106.5 and 76-8-512(4) of the Utah Code, as amended by Utah House Bill (“HB”) 155 (2013), because these provisions are preempted by federal law and therefore violate the Supremacy Clause of the United States Constitution":

Utah Cowboy Caucus

Curious about which of your Weber County-based legislators bought into this lawsuit by voting yea on this bill?  For your future reference we've helpfully assembled these details here.  Yep.  Mostly "The Usual Suspects," folks:

• Weber County Legislators' HB 155 "Yea" Votes

Within the "prayer" of the U.S. attorney's complaint we find this standard "boilerplate" provision:

WHEREFORE, the United States respectfully requests the following relief:.. 3. That this Court award the United States its costs in this action...

Something for Weber County voters to think about after the court grants its inevitable permanent injunction and assesses costs in this matter... you know, the next time these legislative "critters" are out campaigning under the shop-worn "government-spending frugality" banner, no?

Deseret News: Filing Window for Municipal Candidates Cut in Half

We're hoping that a whole fresh wave of Council candidates will throw their hats into the ring for the 2013 Election, to inject a little new blood into an Ogden City Council which has in many respects been the "dullest" Ogden City legislative body in years

More news showcasing the slavish law-making efforts of the 2013 Utah Legislature  this morning, as the Deseret News puts the spotlight on GOP Rep. Curt Webb's HB403, which "passed the state Legislature earlier this month as the 2013 lawmaking session was winding down."

The lead paragraphs provide the gist:

SALT LAKE CITY — Municipal candidates in Utah will have a smaller window in order to get their names on the ballot, thanks to a new piece of legislation that goes into effect this spring.
Residents can now submit their candidacy for mayoral and city council positions between June 1 and June 7, which is eight days fewer than they were afforded in previous years. The compressed timeframe is a result of HB403, which was introduced by Rep. Curt Webb, R-Logan, and passed the state Legislature earlier this month as the 2013 lawmaking session was winding down.

Check out the full Jeffrey D. Allred story here:

• Filing window for municipal candidates cut in half

In view of this latest legislative development, we'll also accordingly take the opportunity to let this story serve as a reminder, O Gentle Ones, of our own upcoming Ogden City Municipal Elections, which are virtually right our the doorstep, with Primaries set for August 13, 2013, and  Municipal Elections scheduled for November 5 of this year. We're already hearing encouraging murmurings via private channels of new "council candidate challenger slates,"  and "council house-cleanings" and such, so we'll encourage all 2013 Ogden Council hopefuls to "circle" the dates June 1 and June 7, and to actively begin the process of getting your ducks lined up. The clock's ticking; the opportunity window is narrow; and "snoozers will be losers," of course.

In that connection, council hopefuls, we'll post this list of all Ogden City Council seats which are "up for grabs" this year:

• Council Member Bart Blair - At Large Seat B
• Council Member Neil K. Garner - Municipal Ward 1
• Council Member Doug Stephens - Municipal Ward 3
• Council Member Susan “Susie” Van Hooser - At Large Seat A

Over the course of the eight years during which we've covered Ogden Municipal Elections, we've rigorously vetted all Council candidates and sliced, diced and Ginsu-knifed all election issues, in addition to providing plenty of plain old-fashioned fun.  So get ready folks, for the same kind of robust, grass-roots WCF citizen journalism this year.

In that same connection we're hoping that a whole fresh wave of Council candidates will throw their hats into the ring for the 2013 Election, to inject a little new blood into an Ogden City Council which has in many respects been the most "dull" and "lumpencitizen unfriendly" Ogden City legislative body in years.

Breaking: Utah Governor Vetoes Bill to Allow Carrying Concealed Gun Without Permit

Herbert’s rejection of the so-called constitutional carry measure sets up clumsy override fight

Informative news from the Salt Lake Tribune, as Lee Davidson reports that Governor Gary Herbert, at his first practical opportunity since adjournment of the 2013 Utah General Legislative session, has predictably applied his gubernatorial power to wield his mighty veto pen, tentatively blotting out at least one highly controversial piece of 2013 legislation in one fell stroke: 

• Utah governor’s veto of bill to ditch gun permits sets up override battle

In that connection, the Governor accompanied yesterday's veto with this brief and helpful explanatory statement, which we've gleaned from Herbert's Facebook page:

Today I vetoed H.B. 76. I cherish the Second Amendment and the right of self defense which it protects. I also support Utah's current set of laws and regulations governing firearms. Utah's permitting system has been in place for decades, and in its current form for more than 15 years. In that time, it has become a national model. 
As a gun owner and concealed firearm permit holder, I understand the value of the permit, both to firearm owners and to the public at large. As a State, we must exercise extreme care that we not impose undue burdens on the right to bear arms, but I have yet to receive any credible evidence that Utah's current permit process constitutes a hardship.

Toast?

So yes; just as we predicted here at Weber County Forum just about this time last week, Rep. John G. Mathis's HB 76 is toast, for the time being at least, as a result of Herbert's executive intervention.  So long as our uppity, gun-loving state legislature doesn't suffer the inconvenient fate of getting dragged back to the now-abandoned Utah House and Senate legislative chambers for a post-session veto override vote, Herbert's veto will stand.

That latter legislative option is by no means inevitable of course, due to a variety of tricky obstacles which Mr. Davidson's story further sets forth:

Senate President Wayne Niederhauser, R-Sandy, said legislative leaders will wait until after April 3 —the deadline for Herbert to sign bills — to see how many other bills could face attempts at a veto override. Then they will poll members about how many want an override session.
"I know HB76 passed both houses with a two-thirds vote," Niederhauser said. "But I really don’t know how hard or how soft that vote is. We won’t know until we do our polling."
House Speaker Becky Lockhart, R-Provo, said House members would be "thoughtful and methodical and evaluate whether or not they want to go into override. It’s a pretty serious thing."
While [Senate sponsor Allen] Christensen said he and others will push for a veto override, he does not know how strong of an appetite lawmakers have for that.
"When it comes to pushing back that strongly, there are a lot of those votes that were not emphatic. They were ‘yes’ votes for the bill — but will they hold up? I would certainly like to see the override happen, and I will be pushing for it. I would hesitate to try to guess at the results of an override session," Christensen said. [Links added].

So at this juncture, the future of this bill can be fairly characterized as stuck in limbo, we suppose, with Utah's legislative leadership evidencing something of a disarray, wondering on the one hand whether they can muster either the legislative political will and/or votes to both call the legislature back into session to again duplicate the intra-session 2/3 House and Senate majorities which would be necessary to shove HB 76 back down Herbert's throat.  Meanwhile, Governor Herbert, on the other hand, remains highly visible on Capitol Hil and keeps repeating the refrain "It ain't broke; so don't fix it" over and over again, every time some Utah news reporter sticks a microphone or notepad in his grill.

Needless to say, we'll be following developments regarding this bill with the an Eye of an Eagle, whilst the internecine bickering concerning the ultimate fate of  HB76 continues to play out.

And please don't neglect to throw in your own savvy 2¢, Gentle Readers, in our WCF comments section below.

Update 3/23/13 11:30 a.m.:

2013 Utah Legislative Update: Key Things That Did Not Happen in the 2013 Legislative Session

Special congratulations and thanks to the many WCF readers who responded to our opposition rants and contacted their "legislative critters" to urge a thumbs-down on the citizen-unfriendly SB66

In our ever-obessive effort to wrap up our coverage of the now adjourned 2013 Utah General Legislative Session, we'll shine the WCF spotlight on this morning's standard-Examiner story, reporting on a hand-full of bills which didn't survive the legislative gauntlet, and "expired" without bein enacted into law, "Not all the big stories from the 2013 legislative session involving the Top of Utah involved legislation that passed. In many ways the session was also highlighted by what didn’t happen," reports the Standard's Antone Clark in his opening lede:

• Key things that did not happen in the 2013 legislative session

Mr. Clark reels off a list of six failed bills, one of which deserves special  note:

No less dramatic was a confrontation involving members of a coalition that blocked potential development of the West Layton Village via two land referendums last November, and the Utah League of Cities of Towns, of which Layton is a member.
In response to the Layton initiative and referendum issues in Orem and Lindon, UCLT sponsored legislation to tighten up the rules for a referendum. The bill sailed through the Senate. However, in the House, some Davis County residents lobbied against it, suggesting it was retaliation from Layton for having taken on City Hall. The bill made it to the floor of the House late Wednesday night, but was circled, or tabled, and then was never brought up for consideration again. It was one of only five bills left on the House calendar when the gavel came down on the session Thursday night.

Mr. Clark's story of course refers to the much criticized "citizen's referendum reform bill" (SB66), sponsored by Ogden's own District 18 State Senator Stuart Reid (R). As regular readers are no doubt aware, we took special interest in this citizen-unfriendly bill, and posted several articles on the topic.

In that connection, we'll offer our congratulations and thanks to the many WCF readers  which responded to our cranky opposition rants (our web stats software tells the happy tale), and contacted their "legislative critters" to urge a thumbs down on this bill.

"Democracy works when people claim it as their own," as media sage Bill Moyers once remarked, and in this circumstance it appears that it was Utah League of Cities and Towns lapdog Senator Reid who ultimately got "owned" by the steely-eyed Lumpencitizens of the State of Utah.

2013 Utah Legislative Session Wrap-up: Herbert Says It’s Likely He’ll Use Veto Pen

Reader-interaction Bonus Question: Governor Herbert is likely to veto one of the 524 bills that were passed in the State Legislature this year; so what about the 523 others?

In the interest of jump-starting another Weber County Forum discussion, now that the 2013 Utah legislative general session has drawn to a close, and as Utah "legislator critters" now find themselves wending their ways back to their own home towns and remote Utah farmsteads, we'll shine the spotlight on this morning's Standard-Examiner front page story,  reporting that Governor Gary Herbert now embarks upon another Utah legislative session tradition, i.e., deciding which "legislatively passed" bills to which he'll affix his signature, and which ones he'll give the ax.  Read up, folks:

• Herbert says it’s likely he’ll use veto pen

"One candidate for a veto this year is HB 76, which would amend the state law on concealed carry weapons. The governor has staunchly maintained he thinks the state’s firearms laws are adequate and has hinted at a veto, but has never definitely said yes or no on the matter," S-E reporter Antone Clark duly reports.

This legislation, would of course render Utah's highly-popular concealed weapons permits superfluous, if not obsolete, and spell the death knell for Utah's booming Concealed Weapons Permit Training industry. Besides, creating a situation where every man jack with an itchy trigger finger could legally carry a weapon without a permit, whether concealed or not concealed, is an statutory outcome that even the most rabid Utah gun nuts would properly tremble to contemplate, wethinks.

Inasmuch as Governor Herbert says he's not changed his "if it ain't broke don't fix it"  position on the state’s existing gun laws, our bet that HB76 will wind up in Herbert's trash-can soon after the bill arriives on his desk, even though he's hedged a mite by saying (reassuringly, we suppose,) that it is [best] to be "thoughtful and methodical in the review process." It's thus to be the gubernatorial "kiss of death" for GOP Rep. John G. Mathis's HB76, wethinks.

OK, folks; now that we've taken our turn "at bat" and dealt with the surely doomed HB76, what about the other bills that are headed for signature on the governor's desk?  "Utah lawmakers passed 524 bills in the 45-day [2013] legislative session," according to the Standard-Examiner; so what about the other 523?

In that connection we've compiled a list, gleaned from the pages of our Northern Utah media over the past few days since the gavel came down ending Utah General Legislative Session 2013. We'll accordingly invite you to plow through these recently prominent 2013 legislative stories, and make your own predictions.

• 2013 Utah Legislature Post-Session News Summary 

So which bills among this admittedly abbreviated list do you predict that Governor Herbert with strike with his trusty veto pen?  Better yet, which of these (or any other 2013 bill that you may come up with) would you "give the ax" if you stood in the shoes of Governor Herbert?

Time for a little reader-interactive weekend fun, we do believe. So don't let the cat get your tongues.

2013 Utah Legislative Update: Two 2013 Bills (One Bad, One Good) "Completely Gutted"

Getting manhandled by oafs like Sen. John Valentine after you've invested so much hard work's gotta REALLY hurt, we'll boldly conjecture

In the interest of kick-starting yet another morning discussion, we'll pursue a novel reportorial angle and put the spotlight on a couple of 2013 Utah legislative bills (one good, one bad) which oppositional state legislative "leaders" didn't have the "guts" to kill outright, but which were so heavily amended during the legislative "process" that they emerged in forms which rendered them virtually unrecognizable to their original sponsors. Curiously, in neither case, did either of these bill's sponsors utter even no much as a murmur of complaint however, when their bills were effectively "gutted" by their "ever-helpful" Utah legislative colleagues.

1) The Bad:  Following up on yesterday's Salt Lake Tribune story, reporting that  Utah House Rep. Jake Anderegg's  bone-headed  HB391 "message bill," was likely to be "killed" in the State Senate, we find that the bill has nevertheless survived, "zombie-like," with a final "lurch" to "passage" yesterday in the that same upper state legislative body where it was prematurely pronounced dead.  Turns out however that contrary to that the bill's original intent, i.e., to "summarily "shut off the possibility of tapping into federal funding for expanding Medicaid to cover an estimated 131,000 uninsured, low-income Utahns," and additionally [to] thwart Governor Herbert's better-reasoned approach of carefully studying the Affordable Care Act's true fiscal impact by means of an already-commissioned cost/benefits study," those objectionable prohibitive operative provisions have now been completely "stripped" from the the final amended bill, and Governor Herbert's reason-based decision making authority has been left mostly intact, as this morning's Kirsten Stewart story's lead paragraphs set forth:

A bill prohibiting Utah’s governor from opting into Obamacare’s Medicaid expansion passed through both the House and Senate late Wednesday — after senators stripped it of the prohibition.
A substitute version of HB391 represents a 180-degree turn from its predecessor, which Sen. Todd Weiler, R-Woods Cross, feared would have prematurely cut off debate on one of the most important policy decisions of the year.
"One of the lessons I hope we’ve learned is bringing out a brand new bill at the end of session and limiting public comment is probably not a good idea," said Weiler, referring to a controversial attempt two years ago to overhaul Utah’s open-records law.
Weiler’s amendments would free the governor to decide whether to stretch Medicaid to cover up to 131,000 poor and uninsured Utahns, but only after public release of a twice-delayed cost study and "thorough analysis" of charity care alternatives by the legislative Health Reform Task Force. Should Gov. Gary Herbert opt into the expansion, he would have to seek funding approval from the Legislature.
The substitute bill passed unanimously, 27-0, and then passed the House with the sponsor’s blessing, 51-23.

Read the full story, folks:

• Lawmakers strike ban against expanding Medicaid

In essence, through Senator Todd Weiler's "fail safe" amendments, which he'd "kept in his pocket" "just in case" this knuckleheaded bill "somehow [might] make its way" to the Senate floor for a vote (which it did), the bill has been "completely gutted" of its original intent, which does represent a victory of sorts for reason and logic, we suppose.

2) The Good: And while we're speaking of 2013 bills that have been "completely gutted," we'll refer to a story appearing yesterday on the Standard-Examiner website, reporting on the "progress" of North Ogden homeboy Rep. Ryan Wilcox's HB 228, which would have mercifully eliminated from Utah liquor-licensed restaurants Utah's "weird" and "comical" Zion Curtains. Seems that this aspect the "Big Gummint Nanny State" will persist in Utah restaurants for at least another year, and that victorian era throwback Senator John Valentine was of course creepily true to his word, when he predicted that "[HB228] has little chance to pass the Senate in its current format. He said he will work with Wilcox and other House leaders to find a potential compromise." The S-E's lead paragraphs provide the gist of reporter Antone Clark's disappointing 3/14/13 story:

SALT LAKE CITY — The Zion Curtains will stay, but fines for serving minors will go down in a compromise bill crafted by House and Senate leaders Tuesday.
Sen. John Valentine, R-Orem, introduced an amended version of HB 228, which includes portions of three separate bills, as proposed changes to the state’s Alcoholic Beverage Control Act.
Valentine said he met with House leaders, including Rep. Ryan Wilcox, R-North Ogden, to find common ground on the compromise, avoiding a rush on the last day of the session.

Here's the full above-referenced S-E writeup:

• Compromise bill: Zion Curtains stay up, but fines for serving minors go down

Although Senator Valentine still refers to his "bill gutting" amendments as finding "common ground and compromise," it doesn't take a rocket scientist to "cut through the crap" and recognize it for what it really is (to the extent that Wilcox may have gone along with Valentine)... good old fashioned Utah legislative capitulation... inasmuch as Wilcox's reason-based HB 228 has now been "stripped" of it's key component, elimination of Utah's ridiculous Zion Curtains. In this case, unlike the "health care" matter referenced above however, we'll chalk this up as a bitter "reason and logic" defeat.

We'll nevertheless offer this morning a Weber County Forum Tip O' The Hat to North Ogden "homeboy" Rep. Ryan Wilcox,  for aggressively pushing this rational (and sane) Utah liquor law reform legislation; and we'll likewise cheer him on when he brings his bill back in 2014, and 2015 and every other legislative session after that, if necessary.

Yesiree, we do believe that Rep Wilcox is a smart, intellectually honest, clear-thinking and persistent Utah legislative up-and-comer, and that sooner or later he'll outlast retrogressive and senescent legislative antiques like Valentine.

Additional kudos to Wilcox for his gentlemanly "tactfulness,"  by the way, in pretending that this so-called "compromise" was a "good thing," on balance. Getting manhandled by oafs like Valentine after you've invested so much hard work's gotta REALLY hurt, we'll boldly conjecture; so Wilcox should be congratulated, wethinks, for ever-so-politely "biting his lip."

Utah Senate: No Interest in Banning Medicaid Expansion

Governor Herbert may not be required to break out his "veto pen" after all; and at least one lame-brained Utah legislative "message bill" stands to get "killed" before it becomes a national embarrassment.

Good news from the Salt Lake Tribune this morning for opponents of  Utah House Rep. Jake Anderegg's   ill-considered HB391, which would in the final days before the close of the 2013 legislation session summarily "shut off the possibility of tapping into federal funding for expanding Medicaid to cover an estimated 131,000 uninsured, low-income Utahns," and additionally thwart Governor Herbert's better-reasoned approach of carefully studying the Affordable Care Act's true fiscal impact by means of an already-commissioned cost/benefits study to be conducted over the course of the next few months.

Although this bill successfully sailed through the State House yesterday by a lop-sided 46-27 margin, amidst much "weeping, quoting of scripture and other asinine tea-party-style fanfare," a similar fate does not await the bill in the Senate, about which Trib columnist Robert Gehrke remarks that the bill has "landed" with a resounding "thud":

• Utah Senate: No interest in banning Medicaid expansion

"I’m not advocating for Medicaid expansion. I’m advocating for: Let’s follow a timeline. Let’s follow a process. We have three more years to make a decision. Why do we want to make it in the last three days of the session?" said Senator Todd Weiler (R-Woods Cross) in a statement following yesterday's Senate Republican closed caucus, in which there was "no support for the bill," according to Senate Majority Leader Ralph Okerlund, (R-Monroe)

Weiler added that he doesn’t expect Andregg's bill to get heard on the Senate floor, but he's drafted amendments "just in case it does," which "would allow the state to expand Medicaid after the completion of a state Department of Health-commissioned study of the issue and a report from the Health Systems Reform Task Force on Utah’s charity care system," in direct contradiction to the provisions of Anderegg's HB391.

It thus appears at this juncture, if all goes well, that the Governor Herbert may not be required to break out his "veto pen" after all, and wonder of wonders; at least one lame-brained Utah legislative "message bill" stands to get "killed" before it becomes a national embarrassment.

Salt Lake Tribune: Utah Lawmakers Back Charity Care Instead of Medicaid Expansion

All seven Weber County based State Representatives vote to summarily deny Affordable Care Act expansion to 131,000 poor and uninsured Utah residents

Following up on yesterday's Weber County Forum writeup, the Salt Lake Tribune reports this morning that "[the] bill [HB391] that would prevent Medicaid’s expansion in Utah passed the House Monday by a wide [46-27] margin with urging from a family doctor who argued the health care solution for 131,000 poor and uninsured isn’t bigger government," (and we are NOT making this up) "but more charity":

• Utah lawmakers back charity care instead of Medicaid expansion

"As a dedicated member of the predominant faith, I donate four hours a week to Boy Scouts....So what if I was assigned by my faith as a doctor to contribute four hours a week to charity care? What if the 3,000 doctors in the state were willing to do that?" said Rep. Michael Kennedy (R- Alpine), a family practitioner who sees patients at a University of Utah-owned clinic in Orem. "I would do it in a heartbeat. Would others do the same?...I believe they would."

Notably, wethinks, we find NO pending bill in the Utah legislature which would require Utah medical providers to "to contribute four hours a week to charity care," so we'll just chalk up Rep. Kennedy's above remark as a mere political non-sequitur.

Olde-timey religious love fest

Adding to the above alternate reality vignette we find this Utah House of Representatives gem, focusing on the House floor antics of  HB391 sponsor  Jake Anderegg (R-Lehi) for whom yesterday's House pre-vote "debate" devolved into something weirdly resembling a "visionary religious revival meeting":

Crying and quoting scripture, Anderegg called upon providers to do more and upon corporations to divert money they spend on international charities to building and staffing clinics at home.

"So-called charity care is a viable option if you get the right people at the table," he said. "My vision is a vision of people, county by county, throughout the state hearing the call to action and stepping up to serve the least of these, our brethren."

For a complete list of House representatives who joined in on yesterday's seeming olde-timey politico-religious love fest, bowed to currently faddish and twisted GOP ideological dogma and voted yea on this decidedly mean-spitited bill, we helpfully link, straight from the Utah Legislature's website, yesterday's final House vote tally:

• 2HB 391 - Prohibition of Medicaid Expansion - Anderegg

Drilling down within the above list, Weber County residents, here are the names (for 2014 election day reference) of your local legislators who voted to summarily deny Affordable Care Act expansion to 131,000 poor and uninsured Utah residents:

• Brad L. Dee (R - Ogden)
• Gage Froerer (R - Huntville)
• Richard A. Greenwood (R - Roy)
• Lee B. Perry (R - Perry)
• Jeremy A. Peterson (R - Ogden)
• Dixon M. Pitcher (R - Ogden)
• Ryan D. Wilcox (R - Ogden)

"HB391, however, faces a doubtful future in the Senate," the Trib also reports. In that connection, of course, we'll continue to closely monitor this crackpot bill, as the 2013 Utah legislative session inexorably edges within three days of final adjournment.

2013 Utah Legislative Update: Herbert, Lawmakers Head for Showdown Over Medicaid Decision - UPDATED

Health care train wreck looms in the state legislature

[Rep.] Anderegg said he incurred "tens of thousands of dollars" of medical debt during a five-year stint without health insurance and said he told creditors, "I will pay what I can." He still owes $232. "People who think they cannot get coverage without [the Affordable Care Act], that's just not true," Anderegg said. "But it takes integrity, and it takes people who are willing to work and make sure they can get things paid off."

Deseret News
Utah lawmakers push for alternatives to Medicaid expansion
March 8, 2013

While we’re glad that Representative Anderegg, who lists his occupation on the legislature’s website as “sales manager,” was able to pay off his medical bill, it is absolutely inconceivable, and irrational, to expect those [with low incomes] to take on additional bills just so they can stay alive.

Utah Political Capitol
EDITORIAL: Lawmakers Claim Utahns Don’t Need Health Insurance
March 10, 2013

Fascinating 2013 showdown looming between Utah's executive and legislative branches, as Utah House Rep. Jake Anderegg (R-Lehi) advances his HB391 out of committee and onto the State House floor for a vote scheduled for this very afternoon.  Anderegg's bill is founded upon what we'll label the "Twin Towers of GOP Health Care 'Reason,'" i.e., 1) the purely ideological notion that all federal money is per se bad, and 2) 130,000 uninsured Utahns don't need the health insurance anyway, because people with "integrity" and a "willingness to work" (people like Anderegg, that is) can "make sure they can get things paid off," even without health insurance.

Legislative passage of this bill would of course deprive Governor Herbert of the opportunity of carefully study the pros and cons of "taking a slow, studied approach" as to the issue of whether to expand Utah's medicaid insurance program to include federal "Obamacare" subsidization of up to 100 percent, and would even more importantly, kill the Medicaid implementation of the Affordable Care Act in the State of Utah entirely.

Check out the full Standard-Examiner story here, which frames this showdown as something of a potential political train wreck:

•  Herbert, lawmakers head for showdown over Medicaid decision 

Added Double Bonus:  HB391 not only "comes with a warning from legislative lawyers that it is likely unconstitutional," but also Anderegg and his Utah legislative colleagues won't be personally effected by the bill's outcome anyhow, inasmuch as these fine, highly GOP-principled legislators (and their families) "receive health insurance through the state, which is heavily subsidized and primarily paid for by the taxpayers. The coverage lasts as long as they remain in office, until they reach the 10 year mark, after which they get to keep their taxpayer-subsidized coverage for life," as yesterday's most excellent Utah Political Capitol editorial carefully notes:

• EDITORIAL: Lawmakers Claim Utahns Don’t Need Health Insurance

The floor's open, O Gentle Ones.  So what about it? Will our Utah legislature stick with its continuing anti-federalism posturings and reject what amounts to a federal health care economic windfall? Or will our our state legislature adopt the sensible practical approach of House Rep. Dixon Pitcher (R-Ogden),  who says, regarding a Obamacare, "At some point we’ve got to … say, ‘Yeah, we really did lose?’" 

And if this bill actually does somehow successfully clear the legislature, will Governor Herbert have the political courage to wield the "veto pen and Just Say No?

Lotsa good questions to consider this morning, eh, folks?

Update 3/11/13 12:05 p.m.:  Uh-oh.  We just learned from our friends at Alliance for a Better Utah (ABU) that "46 members of the Utah House of Representatives just voted to refuse expansion of Medicaid and eliminate the Governor and public from the decision. This needs greater study and thorough public discussion."

We join ABU in recommending that you "contact Senate President Wayne Niederhauser, and ask him to oppose this unwise and mean-spirited bill," now that it's on its way to the State Senate:

• wniederhauser@le.utah.gov
• (801) 538-1035

2013 Legislative Update: Utahns For Ethical Government Needs Your Help Now - Updated

An Urgent Utahns For Ethical Government (UEG) Call to Citizen Action

For the benefit of those Weber County Forum readers who'd like to participate in a little last minute political action as the 2013 Utah legislative regular session draws to a close, we're delighted to incorporate some useful material received yesterday evening from our friends at Utahns For Ethical Government, who've identified some still-pending bills which we'll urge you to either actively support or oppose. In this connection we've taken the liberty of adding  a couple of links to our own WCF article concerning one of these below-mentioned bills, i.e., Senator Stuart Reid's SB 66, which we briefly discussed yesterday.

Roll up your sleeves and gear up for action, O Gentle Ones, inasmuch as the "critters" up on Utah's Capital Hill are sitting on the edges of their seats even now, eagerly awaiting our readers' ever-savvy two cents' worth.

Here's the full  text of the UEG's March 7, 2013 Call to Action, folks, which we now furnish (in slightly edited form) without any further ado:

----o0O0o----

LEGISLATIVE UPDATE: 
The Welcome and Unwelcome Bills

The Legislature is in its final 6 days, and a few ethics-related bills deserve your immediate support. Another bill, SB 66, deserves your opposition. Please contact your legislator now; otherwise it will be too late. Each is described below.

Urge Support of House Bill 78 (Republican Kraig Powell's bill) to improve disclosure 

Please ask your House legislator to support HB 78, which reduces the secrecy of legislative bills that are in process of development. HB 78 would require that when a request for legislation is made to the Office of Legislative Research, the legislator's name, the date, and a short title for the bill would be public information even if the content remains protected because it is in process and may change significantly. Such disclosure would provide more openness/transparency to the bill-making process and decrease the odds that citizens will be caught completely off guard by a bill that is introduced without warning in the final days of a legislative session.

Encourage Passage of Senate Bill 86 (Republican John Valentine's Bill for Review of Ethics Complaints) 

 Tell your state senator that you support SB 86, creating an Executive Branch Independent Ethics Commission. It is patterned on the Legislative Branch Independent Ethics Commission, so it is weak and will need amendments in the future, but it's a step in the right direction. It is a reaction to the potential ethical problems that have arisen with both Attorney General Swallow and Lieutenant Governor Bell.

  

Urge Release of House Bills on Campaign Contribution Limits

HB 311, introduced by Brian King (Democrat) and limiting the size of financial contributions to candidates, has been waiting in the House Rules Committee for HB 174, a similar measure by Rep. Kraig Powell (Republican), so that the bills can be merged into a bipartisan bill. Ask the House Rules Committee Chair and members to release these bills now--in time for action before the end of the session.

Ask Your House Member to Oppose SB 66 Tightening Referendum Requirements

SB 66, which tightens county and municipal referendum requirements, deserves your opposition. SB 66 has been passed by the Senate and has been maneuvered to bypass a House Committee hearing altogether, so it will move to the House floor for a vote without the benefit of the Committee debate and public input. We expect the bill to have a 2nd substitute introduced on the House floor that will try to reinstitute some of the worst provisions that were eliminated in the Senate. For instance, the 2nd substitute mandates that the required percentage of signatures be obtained in every geographic precinct (smallest unit of local government).

All versions of the bill make it more difficult for citizens to successfully place a referendum on the ballot to try to overturn a county or local ordinance. The bill requires a fiscal and legal analysis of the anticipated consequences of any referendum, which then can be placed in the voter information pamphlet without any corresponding right of rebuttal from the referendum sponsors. Such a requirement is missing from statewide referendum provisions. Although sponsors can appeal the accuracy of the analysis to the Utah Supreme Court, they must rebut the presumption of accuracy by "clear and convincing evidence"-an extraordinarily high standard for such a lawsuit.

The bill is being supported by the League of Cities and Towns and backed by pro-development groups who do not want to see their favorable land use and zoning changes subjected to challenge by voters.

PLEASE contact your House legislator immediately to convey your opposition to this bill in any of its various forms. All of them undermine the chance that citizens can successfully place a referendum on the ballot in county and municipal elections.

  

If you do not know the name of your own senator and representative, go to the bottom of the Legislature's home page and enter your street address and zip code, and hit Find. Next, you can find the phone numbers, email, and home addresses of your senator and representative by clicking, respectively, on Senate and then Roster and House and then Roster, both on the same home page. 

  

Thank you for being interested in your state government and for considering making your voices heard at this important time.

Kim Burningham, UEG Chair, and Dixie Huefner, UEG Communications Chair

Update 3/8/13 7:49 a.m.:  We've just now received by email, in the form of a 3/7/13 press release, more dire warnings from former Utah Republican National Committeewoman Nancy Lord's Utah lumpencitizen-friendly group, Save GRAMA.org, urging opposition to Senator Reid's Utah referendum-gutting SB 66 (as amended), which document we've now lodged in our WCF Archives:

• SB0066SO1 Is An Affront to the Citizens of Utah

Please read up, folks, and contact your legislators before Utah League of Cities and Towns lapdog Stuart Reid manages to sneak this bill to final passage in the Utah House of Representatives... without even so much as one single word of public comment.

We can' overemphasize the importance of your taking immediate action to Kill this Bill!

2013 Utah Legislative Update: A Few More Selected Items of Pending Legislation

Time is short, so it’s a perfect chance to ram stuff through

As the Utah legislature approaches the final days of the regular 2013 Utah legislative session, we'll follow up our most recent Weber County Forum 2013 legislative-topical postings with a focus on a few more selected items of pending 2013 legislation. As Standard-Examiner columnist Charlie Trentleman wryly remarks in Wasatch Rambler column this morning , "The final days of the session are the best time to see those guys [Utah legislators] in full flower. Time is short, [so] it’s a perfect chance to ram stuff through."

Just to get the ball rolling, we'll note that the Standard carries a short item this morning, reporting that Ogden's City's very own beloved Senator Stuart Reid (R), in a spirit fully consistent with "ramming stuff through at the last minute," summarily canceled yesterday's regularly-calendered committee hearing on his much criticized "citizen's referendum reform bill" (SB66), so particularly irate citizens  there to testify against it would get no chance to do so. Since all committee action ends in a day, the bill will next be discussed on the floor of the house when it comes up for passage. There will therefor be "no public input," one sharp-eyed WCF reader points out in a heads-up email this morning, "thanks to Reid's cancelling the committee hearing on it." Have at it, O Gentle Ones:

• Organizers of Layton referendum shut out in bid to argue against bill

In other Reid-related news of course, this morning's Standard also reports that Senator Reid was not quite so dextrous with his (SB39), a bill which one web commentator labeled "Sex Ed for Parents (For All the Wrong Reasons)"' and was also roundly denounced by the Standard-Examiner.  This bill, which got mercilously clobbered yesterday in the House by a lopsided 16-50 floor vote, also featured a curious floor transaction, the Standard informs its readers, wherein House sponsor, and Utah legislative "class clown"  Rep. Jeremy Peterson, R-Ogden, in an unmatched exhibition of Utah State House dignity, "put an interesting spin on the vote after the tally was announced. Given the microphone for personal privilege, Peterson simply echoed “waa, waa, waa” to amused House members."

Notable too is Rep. Rebecca Chavez-Houck's HB 91, a bill which would drag Utah's elections (kicking and screaming?) into the 21st century, and into alignment with at least eight other (shall we say more "progressive") states, by "making it possible [for Utah lumpencitizens] to register and vote in Utah on the day of an election," according to this morning's Standard-Examiner:

• Bill would make same-day registration and vote possible

So what about it folks?  Does Rep. Chavez-Houck's HB91 have a snowball's chance in hell of making its way through the legislature and into the Utah lawbooks?

Nope.  We don't think so either. Sadly, in view of  recent disturbing politicl developments, the overall U.S. Republican legislative strategy, (and thus the Utah GOP legislative majority approach, wethinks) appears to revolve around reducing, and not increasing voter registration eligibility pools:

• Legislature briefs: Bill would drop nonvoters from registration rolls

Moreover Ms. Chavez-Houck's legislative resume sports a dreaded "D," which obvious debility, as every Utah political wonk knows, is usually the kiss of death for any creative, intelligent, innovative and even highly "democratic" legislation originating from the "wrong" side of the political aisle. 

Nope, whatever she does, we don't think Rep. Chavez-Houck has even so much as a "snowball's chance" of "ramming" this one through.

That's it for now, O Gentle Readers.  Time again to throw in your own 2¢.

2013 Utah Legislative Update: Utah House Says Tear Down the Zion Curtain

Added "fair and Balanced" bonus: The nitty-gritty core philosophy from the Sutherland Institute, one of Utah's more prominent and wacky Eagle Forum-style "think tanks"

I think it's weird and I'm not a drinker. But I grew up away, not here in Utah. I always thought that was a little strange.

Utah House Speaker Becky Lockhart, Deseret News
Bill would remove 'Zion curtain' in Utah restaurants that serve alcohol
February 27, 2013

It’s inappropriate for a personal religious belief to be the tool that violates the rights of others to conduct business in a fair, responsible manner. The Zion Curtains are a hindrance to common-sense business practices. They insult restaurant employees by making their jobs more difficult, and they insult customers by making a simple request for a drink with dinner look like something forbidden and shameful.

Standard-Examiner Editorial
Our View: Zion curtains are weird
March 5, 2013

Removing the “Zion curtain” might make good sense for a variety of practical, even commercial, reasons. But whiny and immature reasons like “it’s unfair,” “it makes us look backwards and silly,” or “Mormons can’t tell us what to do” aren’t in the arsenals of truly thinking people. Liquor laws, regulations and proscriptions exist for one very good reason: Liquor hasn’t made one human being a better person. Ever.

Sutherland Institute
Confused Mormons whine about ‘Zion curtain’
September 2, 2011

As a followup to Thursday's semi-encouraging Weber County Forum writeup, both the Standard and the Tribune report this morning that "the Utah House has advanced" (by a lop-sided 63-11 vote) Ogden Republican Rep. Ryan Wilcox's HB 228, which would "repeal a mandate for restaurants to mix and pour alcoholic drinks behind a barrier," otherwise affectionately derisively known in Utah the dreaded "Zion Curtain":

• Utah House advances bill to remove 'Zion Curtain'
• Utah House says tear down the Zion Curtain

The Standard chimes in this morning in with its own strong editorial too:

• Our View: Zion curtains are weird

Forbidden Zion Curtain Rituals

Although the Standard editorial headline pretty much says it all, and the full editorial neatly sums up most the common-sense arguments rationally supporting what ought to be the bill's slam-dunk passage, Rep. Wilcox's battle against the forces of backwards idiocy in the Utah legislature ain't over yet, as former Utah Senate President and Utah County's State Senator John Valentine (R) (and a surprising variety of his Senate cohorts) wait in the wings, poised to deliver a kill shot to Wilcox's bill once it arrives in halls of the Utah State Senate, Holy Senator-for Life Valentine's oft-unchallenged domain.

Assuming you've read and absorbed the Standard's above editorial, it's our great pleasure to deliver, in the interest of balanced coverage, the other side of the story.  In that connection, here's the nitty-gritty core argument and philosophy from the Sutherland Institute, another of the more prominent and wacky Eagle Forum-style "think tanks," i.e,, those ivory-tower entities which evidently encourage and propel the "religio-fascist 'thinking'" of some Utah legislators, such as Valentine:

• Confused Mormons whine about ‘Zion curtain’

 That's it for now, folks.  So who wants to throw in their own 2¢?  Better yet, having digested all the above arguments, pro and con, who wants to go out on a limb a predict the outcome for Rep. Wilcox's HB 228?

2013 Utah Legislation Session News Roundup

Wholesome red meat nutrition for our ever-politically ravenous Weber County Forum readers

Over the course of the current 45-day 2013 Utah legislative session, our State legislature's apparently been on its best behavior, possibly because it's occupied by fewer political "kooks" than in years past.  Nevertheless, there's still evidence of certain legislative quirks and mis-steps, some of which we've gleaned this morning straight from this morning's Salt Lake Tribune .  Here goes, folks: the latest in our never-ending effort to provide wholesome red meat nutrition for our ever-politically ravenous Weber County Forum readers, as our 2013 Utah legislature begins to wrap things up:

Surprise of surprises, the oft-neglected process of upgrading legislative ethics rules has been the subject of at least some proposed legislation during this 2013 Utah legislative session, as the Trib reports this morning on the fates of two 2013 bills addressing that general topic.  In that connection "Utah legislators may soon bar themselves from accepting donations while on Capitol Hill — but have decided to continue voting on bills even if they have conflicts of interest," the Trib's Lee Davidson reports:

• One Utah ethics bill advances, one flounders 

Specifically,  GOP House Rep Greg Hughes's HJR16, "which would prohibit accepting [campaign] donations on Capitol Hill,"easily sailed through the House Rules Committee and has been thus sent on  to the full House for a vote. Happily, Hughes recognises that it's exceedingly bad form for lobbyist bag-men to deliver wads of cash to their favorite Utah legislators on the same sacred site where legislators consider the very same bills that they're being paid to promote. As to the other referenced legislation, GOP House Rep. Jim Nelson's HR1, "which would allow members to abstain on votes when they may have a conflict of interest," that piece of much-needed legislation has been summarily nixed in committee and sent on for "further study," — "during interim meetings later this year." We've discussed this issue before on Weber County Forum, of course; and frankly we're perplexed that Utah legislators won't just pass a bill (without all the rigmarole) allowing for legislators to conform to the highest ethical standards and to simply "declare and abstain from voting on any bill or appropriation in which lawmakers believe they have a conflict of interest." Seems like a "no-brainer" to us.

During past years we've devoted considerable WCF electronic ink to stories involving Utah's Government Records and Management Act, and the substantial effort and expense to which which Utah Citizens are often subjected, even when their public document discovery efforts are clearly expended mainly in the public interest. In that connection we'll refer to this morning's Salt Lake Tribune story, which reports that "Democratic"Rep. Brian King’s efforts (HB122) to require agenc[ies] to provide public documents at no cost is going on the back burner":

• Bill requiring free public records sent back to drawing board

This is bad news for Utah political activists, folks. So long as Utah's public agencies retain discretion in the waiver of  GRAMA request "costs," the same public agencies will continue to thwart the process through trumped up and exorbitant document production fees.

And as an added bonus, here's a real doozy of a story involving Weber County's own State Senator Allen Christensen (you know, that odd-ball legislator from North Ogden who's afraid of the Big Bad Wolf). Seems "[a] bill seeking to turn cock fighting into a felony took a detour during floor comments in the Utah Senate Monday when a Republican expressed dismay that the Legislature was looking to elevate the penalty (SB52) for rooster fighting while abortion remained legal":

• Senator raises abortion issue in cockfighting debate

"Do we really want to make it a felony and go to prison [because] two chickens were bred — which naturally want to do this thing in their lives — and we’re going to send their owners to prison for this? Yet we allow people to go ahead and murder their unborn babies? I vote no." Yep.  That's what Senator Christensen reportedly said.

Senator Allen Christensen, anti-abortion constituent panderer, and champion of  "cock fighting sports enthusiasts and industry lobbyists everywhere," yes?

Salt Lake City Weekly: Senate Pres Could Profit From Prison Relocation

Sodden Question: "Is there anyone out there in WCF Readerland who's the least bit surprised about this suspiciously odoriferous political scenario?"

Property even four miles away from the prison will see a huge upswing in value if the prison is relocated and replaced with a major commercial development. That does raise concerns that Niederhauser would be too closely tied to the prison relocation plan.

Buzz Welch, Director, U. of U. Ivory Boyer Real Estate Center
Senate Pres Could Profit From Prison Relocation
February 28, 2013

I haven’t even thought about how the prison might affect us, because prison relocation is so far down the road. We’ll be done and won’t own any property in that area by the time that happens

Wayne Niederhauser, Utah Senate President
Senate Pres Could Profit From Prison Relocation
February 28, 2013

We'll dirct our readers' attention to potential blockbuster Utah legislative conflict of interest story simmering on the Utah news front-burner this morning, as City Weekly carries a 2/28/13 story reporting that Utah State Senate President Wayne Niederhauser (R-Sandy) possibly stands to reap a substantial financial windfall if the state legislature ultimately decides to move the Utah State Prison, a prospect that's been floating around in the public forefront for the entirety of the 2013 legislative session. CW Reporter Eric Peterson's lead paragraphs provide the gist:

A bill passed favorably out of committee Wednesday to create a special board to consider the economic worth of relocating the Utah State Prison in Draper and developing the land underneath it. The bill would allow Senate President Wayne Niederhauser, R-Sandy, to assign three senate members to that group, which raises ethical concerns, considering that Niederhauser operates a holding company that owns more than 30 acres of undeveloped property near the prison that could increase considerably in value if the board decides to move the prison. [Emphasis added.]

Get the full lowdown here, O Weber County Forum Legislative wonks:

•  Senate Pres Could Profit From Prison Relocation

"Under Senator Scott Jenkins’ SB72, Niederhauser won’t be able to stay away from his duty in appointing senators to the Prison Land Management Authority. Niederhauser says that, unfortunately, he can’t get around his own conflict of interest but says such things are unavoidable in a citizen-run Legislature," yesterday's SL Weekly story further reports.

Astonishingly, faced with an arguably blatant conflict of interest in this matter, Niederhauser nevertheless seems entirely unwilling to recuse himself from his prospective Prison Land Management Authority board member appointment role; and here's another eye-popping Niederhauser quote: 

“I don’t make a living being a legislator, and I don’t think the people want me to make a living being a legislator and, consequently, all of us have conflicts of interest and we try to deal with them the best way possible, by [merely] declaring all of our conflicts,” Niederhauser says.

Niederhauser evidently thinks it his overriding, unavoidable duty to act, you see, O Gentle Readers, despite his admittedly conflicted position. Thus, in our "blessed" Utah legislature, "duty to stack an legislative expolaratory committee" apparently trumps "scrupulous avoidance of the appearance of impropriety."

Complicating the narrative, City Weekly further reveals that Niederhouser's own "business partner lobbied" SB72's Senator Jenkins "for the relocation," even though Niederhauser claims, with a completely straight face, that he hadn't "even thought about how the prison might affect [he and his real estate development partner]." Jenkins, of course just goes right along with  the Senate President (with an equally straight face, we guess) and says that he didn't know "nuttin' from nuttin'" about Niederhuser's property interest prior to drafting his pending bill.

Adding further grist to the discussion mill, at least one other Utah blogger has also latched onto this story, and suggests that it's not just Niederhauser, but also Jenkins himself, who may sit in the conflict of interest hot-seat with respect to this convoluted legislative transaction:

• Bill sponsor and senate president could both profit from prison relocation

We'll be keeping a close on this story as developments continue to play out; but in the meantime we'll ask the sodden question:

"Is there anyone out there in WCF Readerland who's the least bit surprised about this suspiciously odoriferous political scenario?"

Whatever you do, don't let the cat get your tongues.

Common Sense State House "Zion Curtain" Liquor Law Fix Poised to Suffer "Senate Leadership" Fatal Blow

“We don’t want restaurants looking like bars,” says Utah Senate Leadership (so-called)

In encouraging stories breaking yesterday, Salt Lake City Weekly, The Tribune and Standard-Examiner all gleefully reported on a pending Utah House of Representatives bill, HB 228, aimed in pertinent part (see lines 764-791) to eliminate Utah's quirky "Zion Curtain" statutory provision, which refers to "the permanent structural barriers" required of restaurants to shield underage patrons from the morals-corrupting sight of wine being poured and cocktails being mixed.

The bill's sponsor, Rep. Ryan Wilcox R-Ogden, said during testimony yesterday before the House Revenue and Taxation Committee "that after significant study, there was no evidence of any kind to be found showing the walls were helping to prevent underage drinking."

“An uneven playing field that’s the first strike, we haven’t been able to show it encourages underage drinking and the third one is that we get fun headlines [about the Zion wall] in The New York Times, USA Today and even The Economist,” Wilcox also told committee members.

For our readers' convenience we'll helpfully provide the above-mentioned northern Utah print media stories via the links below:

• Bill to Tear Down "Zion Walls" from Restaurants Clears Panel
• Bill aims to help businesses take down ‘Zion Curtain’
• Bill could tear down Zion curtains at restaurants

Sadly however, it appears that Wilcox's common sense and intelligently researched legislation is poised for failure, and that Utah's downright comical Zions Curtain Law won't be further dragged into the 21st century anytime soon, as this morning's Standard-Examiner reports that GOP Senate leadership (so-called) is already positioning to deal Wilcox's bill an all-too-predictable lethal blow:

In a news briefing, Sen. John Valentine, R-Orem, said the bill has little chance to pass the Senate in its current format. He said he will work with Wilcox and other House leaders to find a potential compromise. He suggested any offset would have to address public safety concerns.
“We don’t want restaurants looking like bars,” Senate President Wayne Niederhauser, R-Sandy, said of the bill.

Check out this morning's discouraging S-E story for the full lowdown:

• State senator: ‘Zion Curtain’ bill unlikely to pass as it is

While it's obvious that Ogden's own House Rep Wilcox has done his homework and that this fact-based proposed legislation would succeed in a more rational state legislature, it's time for Wilcox to adopt a more forceful and precise lobbying approach, wethinks. Perhaps in fact it's time for Wilcox to a appeal to a higher Utah legislative authority with something appealingly Reaganesque, maybe a Gipper-like message like this, que no?

President Monson, tear down those walls!

The floor's open for your ever-savvy comments, O Gentle Ones.

Don't let the cat get your tongues.

Fox 13 News: Mayors Urge Utah Lawmakers to Deal with Dirty Air

Hopefully Mayor Mike will keep the pressure on Governor Herbert and the Utah Legislature to get off their derrieres and do something about Utah's toxic air, which, sadly, is among the worst in the nation

Breathe much?

A hearty Weber County Tip O' the Hat to Ogden Mayor Mike Caldwell for joining with Salt Lake City Mayor Ralph Becker and going public with a plea to the state legislature to do something about our increasing Wasatch Front air pollution. According to Fox 13 News, "[on] Thursday, the mayors of Salt Lake City and Ogden unveiled a list of proposals to deal with Utah’s air quality, including more emphasis on people to drive less and use more mass transit. The mayors also pushed for legislative and regulatory actions to improve the air":

Here's Mayor Mike's comment on this issue, urging a bi-partison legislative and regulatory approach:

Ogden Mayor Mike Caldwell said the air quality is an issue that affects both Republicans and Democrats, and it’s bad for business.
“I’ve certainly heard from a lot of those businesses that have relocated in the outdoor industry and say, ‘Hey this is a real issue. It needs to be given serious attention,’ and that’s the business side,” Caldwell said. “But there’s the regular resident that wants to get around and they may have asthma and breathing problems or they just want to go out and exercise.”

As an added bonus, we embed below yesterday's full Fox News video story:


We'll also delightedly remark in passing that it's great to finally have a mayor in Ogden who's truly worthy of high praise, for the first mayoral term of office during the nearly eight years of Weber County Forum's web publishing existence. Granted, Caldwell's predecessor did set the performance bar at a dismally low level.

Hopefully Mayor Mike will keep the pressure on Governor Herbert and the Utah Legislature to get off their derrieres and do something about Utah's toxic air, which, sadly, is among the worst in the nation. As Mayor Mike sez, bad air is bad for business, especially when we're touting ourselves as an outdoor recreation mecca. Our supposedly business-oriented Utah elected officials should immediately write this down so they don't forget it, no?

Great job, Mayor Caldwell. We're proud of ya's.

Update 2/15/13 4:33 p.m.: More on this story from the Salt Lake Tribune:

• Mayors join chorus seeking cleaner air imperatives from Legislature