Tag: Utah Policy

Term Limits in a Nutshell

Warning: Undefined array key "adf" in /home4/hpvcxhmy/public_html/wp-content/plugins/similarity/similarity.php on line 69

Warning: Undefined array key "sim_pages" in /home4/hpvcxhmy/public_html/wp-content/plugins/similarity/similarity.php on line 70

I read what must be the most succinct summary of the term limit debate over at Utah Policy. LaVarr Webb said:

I am a big fan of congressional term limits if they are applied across the board. It would be foolish, however, for Utah to unilaterally impose term limits.

As long as power in Congress is amassed in its most senior members, Utah needs to play that game or be badly disadvantaged.

But term limits for all makes sense.

The response from trgrant:

I don’t agree in a legislated term limit. There are people you will want to keep in office for longer than a certain term.

I would respond to trgrant by asking a question inspired by someone who had previously opposed term limits. How many hundreds of incumbent get reelected after “a certain term” despite widespread dissatisfaction with their service – now compare that to the number of people who you would really want to keep in after that time. I would bet the benefits of term limits in terms of removing entrenched and undesirable incumbents would outweigh the loss of established and desirable incumbents by at least 100 to 1. Besides that, of those who you wish to keep in, how much of the reason for keeping them is based mainly on seniority rather than irreplaceability?

To LaVarr Webb I would ask – if Congressional term limits are good, why not set the example by imposing term limits at the state legislature so that voters can begin to see the benefit locally and have more inclination to implement it federally.

Tags connections, KVNU FTP, term limits, Utah Policy

National State

Orrin Depends on Sloppy Journalism

Post author By David
Post date January 7, 2009
14 Comments on Orrin Depends on Sloppy Journalism

The news media is supposed to help us make sense of the world around us, but to a large degree most news organizations have relegated themselves to being nothing more than data streams. A perfect example today comes with the news regarding the D.C. Voting rights bill that Orrin Hatch introduced (again) yesterday. In the Washington Watch section of today’s Utah Policy we get news of the event with no analysis and a mention of, but no link to, the press release. They manage to quote Hatch as he contradicts himself (I’ll get to that in a minute) but offer no analysis or context. The Washington Post covers the story in a biased fashion, but at least in their case we could expect that as Washington has everything to gain and nothing to lose by this bill. Simply put, the residents of D.C. have a legitimate complaint and they would rather compromise on the issue than take the time to make the change in the right way. The compromise is that they offer to help Utah to a temporary solution to Utah’s legitimate concern of being denied a seat in conjunction with a permanent solution to their predicament. Looking at the Deseret News coverage we find the story played as a tussle between Hatch and Jason Chaffetz but still little analysis of the merits of the bill.

Let’s see what analysis of the merits of the bill would tell us.

The residents of D.C. have a legitimate grievance about their lack of voting representation in the House. The proper solution would be an amendment that would grant voting representation in the House to the citizens of any territory that pays federal taxes, or returning the residential portions of D.C. to Maryland as suggested by Rep. Chaffetz – this bill does neither of those things. Likewise Utah has a legitimate complaint about being denied another seat after the 2000 census. The proper solution is our pursuit of a redress through the judicial system and a bill to examine and improve the methodology of counting for the census as well as growing our way outside the margin of error in the census system. We have the growth, we pursued the judicial relief, and this bill does not address the census methodologies in any way.

Let’s see what sloppy journalism ignores in Hatch’s statement.

While the 2010 census and reapportionment might provide Utah an additional seat, the failure of the 2000 process showed that this is not a sure thing. This bill maximizes the chances of securing an additional seat for Utah, which has had one of the country’s fastest growth rates since the last census.

I have no doubt that when Hatch spoke he emphasized the word "might" regarding Utah gaining another seat after the 2010 census. Somehow he can get away with saying that, and admitting that Utah has one of the fastest growing populations since the 2000 census, without anyone questioning in their stories how having one of the fastest growth rates in the country would allow us to still be below the margin for error in the next census.

For those who are wondering, the bill makes no mention of Utah. It provides two new seats in the House and assigns one to D.C. The supporters of the bill are trying to work fast before Utah gains their seat in the 2010 census because they aren’t willing to wait until Congress will give them what they deserve, which is representation in the house without resorting to a gimmick such as offering a balancing seat to poor, picked-on Utah. They also fear that after 2010 there will not be a Republican state with a legitimate grievance about their apportionment of representatives. I understand that legislation is dependent on the art of compromise, and rightly so in most cases, but gimmicks are not the same thing as compromise.

Orrin is not representing the interests of his constituents – he’s simply representing the interests of some of his friends in Washington. If that were not the case he would not have to lie to us and say that we might not get our deserved representation from the 2010 census.

Tags amendments, Deseret News, fourth seat, media, Orrin Hatch, Utah Policy, voting

National

Smart Presidential Candidate

Post author By David
Post date November 8, 2007
2 Comments on Smart Presidential Candidate

LaVarr Webb commented today in Utah Policy Daily on a great column by David Brooks at the New York Times called The Happiness Gap. Brooks was talking about the gap between how happy people are with their own lives and how optimistic they are about government. I think Brooks is right that people are beginning to see through the fallacy that government solutions can fix personal problems, or that one level of government can solve the problems in another level of government. The more we trust to the federal government the more apparent it is that the federal government is not equipped to solve problems created by poor state governments. The same logic holds true with each level of government – state government can’t solve county problems, county government can’t solve city problems, etc.

The thing that really got me was Webb’s concluding paragraph:

I’ve written many times that the job description of the federal government has gotten so immense that it’s impossible to accomplish, hence the deep cynicism about the federal government. The nation’s founders intended for the national government to focus on a few things and do them very well. We need a national resorting of the roles of the different levels of government. A smart presidential candidate would do well to pick up on the mood of the people. (emphasis mine)

Webb was right on except that his last sentence left one thing out – there is a presidential candidate who has picked up on this mood. Ron Paul’s campaign is based on the principle of resorting the roles of the different levels of government – primarily reducing the role of the federal government and allowing states to take their proper place in addressing more of the issues they face. Right now the federal government is doing so much that it can’t even adequately address those issues that are properly in the sphere of the federal government, like national security and immigration. So he may not have known it, but Webb just endorsed Ron Paul as a smart presidential candidate.

Tags government, New York Times, Ron Paul, Utah Policy