It is scary when KSL's Ethan Millard and I are on the same side of an issue. Either I am wrong or we are both right. In this case, I am standing firm. HB477 is a bad idea and there needs to be some serious consequences for those who have passed it, even those who have changed their mind. They do not belong in government. Let me again quote from the Utah GOP platform:
ETHICS AND STANDARDS
We demand honesty, integrity, morality, and accountability of our public officials. We will work to
expose and stop corruption.
HB477 is against the Utah GOP platform...the same platform that those who are elected to public office agree to uphold. It is for secrecy. Period. Those who voted for this bill, including Governor Herbert who signed it, need to resign from office and let those who agree to uphold the platform serve in those offices. The only answer is a complete repeal of the bill.
Now the Governor and the House have agreed to special session to consider the repeal of the bill. Both houses of the State Legislature need to vote for this repeal, and if the open records law needs a tweak, then take your time over the next year to work out all of the problems. Perhaps the best policy is an acceptable use policy for all state officials including elected officials. As an Information Systems professional, this is my best advice. In fact, I am willing to volunteer my services, if necessary. Please contact me and I will help. I can provide my resume and references. I will do this free of charge as a public service. But first, let me say that there needs to be an understanding that any communication on a public system is meant for the public, while understanding that legislators need to have private communication with their families.
For your enrichment, here is a list of sponsors for this legislation. Let the letter writing begin. Please contact your state senator or state representative and let them hear you.
Monday, March 21, 2011
Saturday, March 19, 2011
One Big Problem With Utah's Immigration Law
Let's say that the "Utah" plan passes constitutional muster in the courts...and is adopted by several other states the problem is how to deal with discovered identity theft issues. The Utah bill does not address this, and many feel that identity thieves may get a pass and avoid jail time as a result of this new guest worker program.
But let's examine the following scenario. Joe came into the US undocumented. Works a minimum wage job. Decided that he does not wish to fear deportation any long. Applies for the guest work program and comes up with the 2500 to pay the fine for crossing our borders illegally. During the criminal background check, it is discovered that Joe is actually using the Social Security Number of a deceased individual. He never used this number to apply for credit. Never purchased a home or a car with it. Just used the number to work around the system. How will a situation like this be handled.
How will it look when Joe is arrested and put in jail for identity theft when he was just trying to beat the system and never ruined anyone's good name? The easy answer is to put Joe in jail anyway...he did the crime and he should do the time as well. Does Joe then get deported when his jail sentence is over?
One can not simply give Joe a pass either. That will not go over well should the public find out.
Dealing with the identity theft that goes along with illegal immigration is the pit fall of the Utah plan, and something that probably can not be overlooked. It would be better to do all that we can to stem the problem before the guest worker program goes into effect. It will be something that Congress will need to address at the Federal Level and something that the individual states will need to address as well. This is something that State and Federal officials will need to work together on to resolve.
But one thing is possible. Credit will reports will confirm whether or not Joe is telling the truth...that the card was only used for identification purposes and was never used to obtain credit. It is also likely that Joe did not get his fraudulent social security number by himself. If he can prove that he did not use his stolen identification to gain credit--that he did no harm to the stolen good name and he can help bring down the ring that gave him is identification, maybe a slap on the wrist is appropriate. Otherwise, it would be best to take care of all of the identity theft issues before the guest worker program goes into effect.
But let's examine the following scenario. Joe came into the US undocumented. Works a minimum wage job. Decided that he does not wish to fear deportation any long. Applies for the guest work program and comes up with the 2500 to pay the fine for crossing our borders illegally. During the criminal background check, it is discovered that Joe is actually using the Social Security Number of a deceased individual. He never used this number to apply for credit. Never purchased a home or a car with it. Just used the number to work around the system. How will a situation like this be handled.
How will it look when Joe is arrested and put in jail for identity theft when he was just trying to beat the system and never ruined anyone's good name? The easy answer is to put Joe in jail anyway...he did the crime and he should do the time as well. Does Joe then get deported when his jail sentence is over?
One can not simply give Joe a pass either. That will not go over well should the public find out.
Dealing with the identity theft that goes along with illegal immigration is the pit fall of the Utah plan, and something that probably can not be overlooked. It would be better to do all that we can to stem the problem before the guest worker program goes into effect. It will be something that Congress will need to address at the Federal Level and something that the individual states will need to address as well. This is something that State and Federal officials will need to work together on to resolve.
But one thing is possible. Credit will reports will confirm whether or not Joe is telling the truth...that the card was only used for identification purposes and was never used to obtain credit. It is also likely that Joe did not get his fraudulent social security number by himself. If he can prove that he did not use his stolen identification to gain credit--that he did no harm to the stolen good name and he can help bring down the ring that gave him is identification, maybe a slap on the wrist is appropriate. Otherwise, it would be best to take care of all of the identity theft issues before the guest worker program goes into effect.
Thursday, March 17, 2011
Congressional Redistricting...What the Legislature Will Choose From
Four plans came out of committee on redistricting Utah. None of them are similar to my plan from back in December where my bright idea was to put Davis and Weber Counties into separate districts to help protect Hill Air Force Base.
None of the plans keep Salt Lake County whole. All of the plans build the new districts around the current delegation. Congressman Bishop lives in Brigham City, so every plan has the Box Elder County in the First District. Congressman Matheson lives in Salt Lake City. Northeast Salt Lake County is always in the Second district. Congressman Chaffetz lives in Alpine. The Third District always includes northeast Utah County. All of them seem to put Carl Wimmer, the Tea Party favorite, in the 4th district.
Source: Provo Daily Herald and the Utah Legislature.
My comments on each plan...
Plan A
Out of the four plans, this is my favorite because it appears to balance the population between the four districts...even though that is not a constitutional requirement. It splits the national parks between the 2nd and 3rd districts. The new district is Southern Salt Lake County. The First District will continue to be a strong Republican district. The Third District has the strong Democratic base in Summit, Grand and Carbon counties against Utah County...meaning that if the GOP messes up there, it would be possible for a Democrat to win. Jim Matheson will likely be able to keep his job representing the second district, but could be replaced by a Republican when he leaves office. The new 4th district would also be a strong GOP district. All four districts would have growth areas. What I like about it is that there is districts, mostly, are culturally matched.
Plan G
This is my least favorite because it not only splits Salt Lake County into three, but splits the populated part of Utah County from the new growth part of the county. It guarantees a Democrat in the Second District and a Republican in the other three districts. It is population balanced, but not growth balanced. There are very little new growth areas in the established part of Salt Lake County, the part that would be the second district. It emphasizes the differences between the parties in Utah. This is what is called the donut plan. The second and third district are the donut hole.
Plan I
It is workable, but I really don't like the idea of separating Rich County from Cache County nor do I like the idea of separating Morgan County from Weber County. This separates the rural from suburban in Northern Utah in a bad way. This plan also separates Park City...mostly Democratic from the rest of Summit County. Although the Democratic Stronghold of Northern Salt Lake County remains in tact. But on the other hand, there are enough Democrats in Park City, Carbon and Grand Counties to keep the Republicans in Utah County in check.
Plan J
This plan is the second best plan, in my opinion. It is better than plan I because it keeps Rich County with Cache County and does not divide any county other than Salt Lake County. It almost guarantees a Democrat will represent the Second District, but a hard working moderate Republican could win. Like some of the other plans, it help keep a Utah County congressman honest by putting some Democratic-leaning counties in the district. I would rather see Morgan and Weber Counties together. But otherwise, this plan looks almost natural. You could probably fix this by taking Morgan County out of the Second District and giving them northern Summit County, giving the 4th District Garfield and Kane Counties and giving the 2nd District West Davis County (Clearfield, Syracuse, Clinton and West Point). But giving the 2nd District Morgan County makes for a nicer map.
The plan the Tea Party did not get.
If the GOP in Utah really wanted to screw the Democrats out of seat, the districts would have been divided like this:
This is the plan that would have ensured that all four Utah Congressional districts would be solid Republican.
This plan would have protected the one Democratic Seat in Utah...
The main difference between this plan and the plan I had in mind is that Salt Lake County is split north and south. My plan was to split Salt Lake County East and West. Salt Lake County becomes more Democratic as you move to the north.
Which plan do you like best? Please leave a comment.
None of the plans keep Salt Lake County whole. All of the plans build the new districts around the current delegation. Congressman Bishop lives in Brigham City, so every plan has the Box Elder County in the First District. Congressman Matheson lives in Salt Lake City. Northeast Salt Lake County is always in the Second district. Congressman Chaffetz lives in Alpine. The Third District always includes northeast Utah County. All of them seem to put Carl Wimmer, the Tea Party favorite, in the 4th district.
Source: Provo Daily Herald and the Utah Legislature.
My comments on each plan...
Plan A
Plan G
Plan I
It is workable, but I really don't like the idea of separating Rich County from Cache County nor do I like the idea of separating Morgan County from Weber County. This separates the rural from suburban in Northern Utah in a bad way. This plan also separates Park City...mostly Democratic from the rest of Summit County. Although the Democratic Stronghold of Northern Salt Lake County remains in tact. But on the other hand, there are enough Democrats in Park City, Carbon and Grand Counties to keep the Republicans in Utah County in check.
Plan J
The plan the Tea Party did not get.
If the GOP in Utah really wanted to screw the Democrats out of seat, the districts would have been divided like this:
This is the plan that would have ensured that all four Utah Congressional districts would be solid Republican.
This plan would have protected the one Democratic Seat in Utah...
Which plan do you like best? Please leave a comment.
Wednesday, March 16, 2011
Utah's New Immigration Law
I've heard that a lot of people are upset about the Utah Immigration Law and what they believe is in it. Also, a lot of people are upset that the Chambers of Commerce in the state and the LDS Church have supported it. Even the ultra-conservative Sutherland Group is for this series of laws. Hopefully, I can help clear up some misconceptions.
What is is:
1. A Guest Worker Program that allows those who are already here a chance to apply for permits if they pay a 2500 fine and 1000 if they overstay their visa. It also will include a criminal background check for those wishing to apply.
2. Worker Exchange Program with the Mexican State of Nuevo Leon.
3. Requirement that employers verify the legal status of employees.
4. Allows employers and citizens to sponsor an immigrant laborers.
What is is not:
1. Amnesty. It simply states law enforcement agencies in the State of Utah will not enforce Federal immigration law. It is no worse that the status quo. It keeps the state out of it. This is something that Police Chief Burbank of Salt Lake City and other law enforcement agencies asked for. However, Governor Hebert will file a grievance with the Feds asking for stronger enforcement of the law. Amnesty is a complete pardon for a crime. Paying 2500 is not amnesty. At minimum wage, that is about 8 and 1/2 weeks of labor. You would not consider working for 8 and 1/2 weeks for any misdemeanor fine amnesty. If you are the kind of person that believes anything short of deportation is amnesty, there will never be an executable law that you will like.
2. A pass for identity theft. No where does the new law excuse identity theft nor does it excuse any other crime. Those who fake their identities or steal the identity of another will still be punished according to the law. This is perhaps the biggest misconception that I heard on KNRS radio this afternoon. Shame on Rod Arquette for not clarifying this with his listeners and callers.
3. An attempt at an Arizona-style immigration law.
4. A path to US Citizenship. That has already been defined by the Constitution and by Federal Law. The State of Utah itself has no authority to grant citizenship.
Will it work? It is doubtful that anything other than the employment verification bill will pass constitutional muster, but I am no constitutional expert. It seems, however, that the Utah Department of Public Safety does not have the authority to issue a visa, but I could be wrong about that.
Rather than condemned, the state leaders should be commended for passing this series of laws.
Further Commentary...
As a state GOP delegate (former delegate, I had to surrender my position when I moved), I voted against the immigration provision for three reasons.
1. The language is unclear. According to the language of the platform plank, the party is opposed to a guest worker program IF that program provides a pathway to citizenship. This is clearly not the intent of that plank. The sponsors were completely opposed to a guest worker program...period.
2. Amnesty is one of those words that sparks an emotional response, but is not clear in it's meaning. To some people, some punishment, even when light, is not amnesty. And yes, those people are Republicans. To others, anything short of deportation is amnesty. Those people are also Republicans. People in the Utah GOP need to realize that this is a wedge issue that could cost our state dearly.
3. A punitive approach seems racist. We are not racist in the GOP. Therefore, the plank needs to be reworded.
The current plank:
America is a stronger and better nation because of the hard work and entrepreneurial spirit of legal immigrants, and the Republican Party honors them. We believe that control of our borders is an urgent national security interest and our national sovereignty depends on those secure borders.
We oppose illegal immigration and all forms of amnesty, or legal status, for illegal immigrants. We support suspending automatic U.S. citizenship to children born to illegal immigrant parents. We oppose granting government benefits to those illegally present in the US. We oppose any temporary or "guest" worker program that would offer an automatic path to citizenship. We believe that current laws against employing illegal immigrants should be vigorously enforced, particularly to stem the now too common crime of identity theft in obtaining employment.
How it should read:
America is a stronger and better nation because of the hard work and entrepreneurial spirit of legal immigrants, and the Republican Party honors them. We believe that control of our borders is an urgent national security interest and our national sovereignty depends on those secure borders.
We believe that those who cross international borders illegally into our country or those who over-stay a visa, no matter their nation of origin, are not entitled the same rights and privileges granted to natural-born or naturalized citizens nor the same privileges and rights granted to legal immigrants and those with a current visa. We strongly encourage vigorous enforcement current immigration and identity law. We do not support laws that provide a pathway to citizenship for any undocumented immigrant without a just remedy. We encourage businesses to conduct background checks on prospective employees and refer any suspected violations to the proper authorities.
(This is no amnesty without saying the word amnesty.)
We do not support birthright citizenship for the children of those who are not in the United States legally and call for Federal Government to fix this oversight in law, even if the Constitution of the United States needs to be amended. We do not support enforcement of immigration law of the type that would break families apart and allow children to remain in our country while their parents are deported.
We support programs that will allow foreigners to work or gain an education in our nation legally, provided they have obtained gainful employment or admittance to an accredited school; but do not support the idea that such programs should provide an automatic path to citizenship. We strongly encourage authorities to ensure that no guest worker or student overstays a work or education visa.
(The following could be a new plank.)
We do not support the selective enforcement of immigration law or any law when the sole basis for suspicion is race, religion, nation of origin, gender, age or sexual orientation. We believe that justice should be blind in such matters.
What is is:
1. A Guest Worker Program that allows those who are already here a chance to apply for permits if they pay a 2500 fine and 1000 if they overstay their visa. It also will include a criminal background check for those wishing to apply.
2. Worker Exchange Program with the Mexican State of Nuevo Leon.
3. Requirement that employers verify the legal status of employees.
4. Allows employers and citizens to sponsor an immigrant laborers.
What is is not:
1. Amnesty. It simply states law enforcement agencies in the State of Utah will not enforce Federal immigration law. It is no worse that the status quo. It keeps the state out of it. This is something that Police Chief Burbank of Salt Lake City and other law enforcement agencies asked for. However, Governor Hebert will file a grievance with the Feds asking for stronger enforcement of the law. Amnesty is a complete pardon for a crime. Paying 2500 is not amnesty. At minimum wage, that is about 8 and 1/2 weeks of labor. You would not consider working for 8 and 1/2 weeks for any misdemeanor fine amnesty. If you are the kind of person that believes anything short of deportation is amnesty, there will never be an executable law that you will like.
2. A pass for identity theft. No where does the new law excuse identity theft nor does it excuse any other crime. Those who fake their identities or steal the identity of another will still be punished according to the law. This is perhaps the biggest misconception that I heard on KNRS radio this afternoon. Shame on Rod Arquette for not clarifying this with his listeners and callers.
3. An attempt at an Arizona-style immigration law.
4. A path to US Citizenship. That has already been defined by the Constitution and by Federal Law. The State of Utah itself has no authority to grant citizenship.
Will it work? It is doubtful that anything other than the employment verification bill will pass constitutional muster, but I am no constitutional expert. It seems, however, that the Utah Department of Public Safety does not have the authority to issue a visa, but I could be wrong about that.
Rather than condemned, the state leaders should be commended for passing this series of laws.
Further Commentary...
As a state GOP delegate (former delegate, I had to surrender my position when I moved), I voted against the immigration provision for three reasons.
1. The language is unclear. According to the language of the platform plank, the party is opposed to a guest worker program IF that program provides a pathway to citizenship. This is clearly not the intent of that plank. The sponsors were completely opposed to a guest worker program...period.
2. Amnesty is one of those words that sparks an emotional response, but is not clear in it's meaning. To some people, some punishment, even when light, is not amnesty. And yes, those people are Republicans. To others, anything short of deportation is amnesty. Those people are also Republicans. People in the Utah GOP need to realize that this is a wedge issue that could cost our state dearly.
3. A punitive approach seems racist. We are not racist in the GOP. Therefore, the plank needs to be reworded.
The current plank:
America is a stronger and better nation because of the hard work and entrepreneurial spirit of legal immigrants, and the Republican Party honors them. We believe that control of our borders is an urgent national security interest and our national sovereignty depends on those secure borders.
We oppose illegal immigration and all forms of amnesty, or legal status, for illegal immigrants. We support suspending automatic U.S. citizenship to children born to illegal immigrant parents. We oppose granting government benefits to those illegally present in the US. We oppose any temporary or "guest" worker program that would offer an automatic path to citizenship. We believe that current laws against employing illegal immigrants should be vigorously enforced, particularly to stem the now too common crime of identity theft in obtaining employment.
How it should read:
America is a stronger and better nation because of the hard work and entrepreneurial spirit of legal immigrants, and the Republican Party honors them. We believe that control of our borders is an urgent national security interest and our national sovereignty depends on those secure borders.
We believe that those who cross international borders illegally into our country or those who over-stay a visa, no matter their nation of origin, are not entitled the same rights and privileges granted to natural-born or naturalized citizens nor the same privileges and rights granted to legal immigrants and those with a current visa. We strongly encourage vigorous enforcement current immigration and identity law. We do not support laws that provide a pathway to citizenship for any undocumented immigrant without a just remedy. We encourage businesses to conduct background checks on prospective employees and refer any suspected violations to the proper authorities.
(This is no amnesty without saying the word amnesty.)
We do not support birthright citizenship for the children of those who are not in the United States legally and call for Federal Government to fix this oversight in law, even if the Constitution of the United States needs to be amended. We do not support enforcement of immigration law of the type that would break families apart and allow children to remain in our country while their parents are deported.
We support programs that will allow foreigners to work or gain an education in our nation legally, provided they have obtained gainful employment or admittance to an accredited school; but do not support the idea that such programs should provide an automatic path to citizenship. We strongly encourage authorities to ensure that no guest worker or student overstays a work or education visa.
(The following could be a new plank.)
We do not support the selective enforcement of immigration law or any law when the sole basis for suspicion is race, religion, nation of origin, gender, age or sexual orientation. We believe that justice should be blind in such matters.
Monday, February 28, 2011
Utah State Senate approves bill to restore a full sales tax on food.
The six readers that follow this blog know that we are fairly consistent in our opposition to this. The State Senate has passed the bill. The action is still pending in the House. For those in our Utah State Legislature who do not get it...let me spell this out in plain and simple language.
-A restored tax IS a tax increase!
Those of you in the legislature who voted in favor of this bill have violated your "No Tax Increase" pledge.
Please sign this petition asking Governor Herbert to veto this bill. Please tell all of your friends to sign the petition as well.
http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/utahfoodtaxrestoration/Publish Post
Here is the list of members of the Utah State Senate who violated their "No Tax Increase" pledge and voted for this bill:
Howard Stevenson
Stuart Adams
Kudos to those who stood pat:
Michael Waddops
Lists will be updated.
Because the action is still pending in the house, we urge you to contact your state representative asking him or her not to support this bill. Please follow this link to do so.
Please sign this petition asking Governor Herbert to veto this bill. Please tell all of your friends to sign the petition as well.
http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/utahfoodtaxrestoration/Publish Post
Here is the list of members of the Utah State Senate who violated their "No Tax Increase" pledge and voted for this bill:
Howard Stevenson
Stuart Adams
Kudos to those who stood pat:
Michael Waddops
Lists will be updated.
Because the action is still pending in the house, we urge you to contact your state representative asking him or her not to support this bill. Please follow this link to do so.
Saturday, February 26, 2011
Pulse on Obama's Reelection, how is it going?
I found six point that would cost Obama's chances at reelection in 2012. Here is how he is doing as of February 2011.
How is Obama doing?
1. He must avoid a serious primary challenge. So far, no one serious from the Democratic party has risen to challenge Obama. This would need to be a state governor, senator or cabinet secretary. So far, Hillary Clinton seems to be serious about her current job. Obama grade so far A-
2. He must unite his party. The aggressive republicans in the House and in the various state houses are giving the Democrats something to unite about. The Dems do a better job at uniting when the opposition is strong than the Republicans do. Obama grade so far A.
3. He must not let the campaign get too personal. Stuff like this will not help the President. Obama grade so far D+
4. The economy needs to improve and Americans need to return to work. U3, the traditional employment number is at 9.7 percent in March. The U6 rate, which includes those who are marginally looking for work and those who have taken part-time jobs to help pay the bills is at 16.9 percent for the same period. It does not count those who have completely given up. This is still above where it used to be. Obama grade so far D+.
5. Perceived popularity of his policies. You can be the judge of that right now. Obama grade so far C. I improved his grade slightly with the capture of bin Laden, but that will be a memory next November. If this had been the October surprise of 2012, it would be much better. B-
6. Try to keep a strong left-leaning third-party challenger out of the race. Bloomberg is leaning toward getting into the race as an independent. This will not be good for the President. Obama grade so far D+
Obama so far: C+
How are the Republicans doing?
1. Picking a strong candidate. Michelle Bachmann and Ron Paul, who won the straw poll at CPAC, have popular policies but there is no historical precedent for their candidacy. History is against them. Trump was also strong until his tirade of F bombs and until Seth Meyers put him into place. Right now, Romney holds a slight lead over Huckabee. Both would be strong nominees for the GOP. Neither is the clear front-runner. GOP grade B.
2. Non-economy strategies? How about a bill requiring insurance companies cover physicals, smoking cessation, physician supervised exercise plans, early cancer screenings and other methods to lower heath care costs? Right now, the GOP alternatives to Obama policies really do lack creativity. GOP grade C-.
3. Avoiding wedge issues like immigration and gay rights? You be the judge on that one. Right now, the GOP is stepping into it with both feet. GOP grade D-.
4. Pushing the President on unpopular items? GOP grade B+.
5. Tone? Some one needs to silence Governor Palin or at least she needs to learn that she does not need to voice her opinion on every issue. Trump silenced Palin, Newt and Bachmann for a while...but not for long. B-.
GOP so far: C+
As of May, 2011, there is a slight edge to Obama. Once the GOP decides on a candidate and a message, things get a lot tougher for the President.
How is Obama doing?
1. He must avoid a serious primary challenge. So far, no one serious from the Democratic party has risen to challenge Obama. This would need to be a state governor, senator or cabinet secretary. So far, Hillary Clinton seems to be serious about her current job. Obama grade so far A-
2. He must unite his party. The aggressive republicans in the House and in the various state houses are giving the Democrats something to unite about. The Dems do a better job at uniting when the opposition is strong than the Republicans do. Obama grade so far A.
3. He must not let the campaign get too personal. Stuff like this will not help the President. Obama grade so far D+
4. The economy needs to improve and Americans need to return to work. U3, the traditional employment number is at 9.7 percent in March. The U6 rate, which includes those who are marginally looking for work and those who have taken part-time jobs to help pay the bills is at 16.9 percent for the same period. It does not count those who have completely given up. This is still above where it used to be. Obama grade so far D+.
5. Perceived popularity of his policies. You can be the judge of that right now. Obama grade so far C. I improved his grade slightly with the capture of bin Laden, but that will be a memory next November. If this had been the October surprise of 2012, it would be much better. B-
6. Try to keep a strong left-leaning third-party challenger out of the race. Bloomberg is leaning toward getting into the race as an independent. This will not be good for the President. Obama grade so far D+
Obama so far: C+
How are the Republicans doing?
1. Picking a strong candidate. Michelle Bachmann and Ron Paul, who won the straw poll at CPAC, have popular policies but there is no historical precedent for their candidacy. History is against them. Trump was also strong until his tirade of F bombs and until Seth Meyers put him into place. Right now, Romney holds a slight lead over Huckabee. Both would be strong nominees for the GOP. Neither is the clear front-runner. GOP grade B.
2. Non-economy strategies? How about a bill requiring insurance companies cover physicals, smoking cessation, physician supervised exercise plans, early cancer screenings and other methods to lower heath care costs? Right now, the GOP alternatives to Obama policies really do lack creativity. GOP grade C-.
3. Avoiding wedge issues like immigration and gay rights? You be the judge on that one. Right now, the GOP is stepping into it with both feet. GOP grade D-.
4. Pushing the President on unpopular items? GOP grade B+.
5. Tone? Some one needs to silence Governor Palin or at least she needs to learn that she does not need to voice her opinion on every issue. Trump silenced Palin, Newt and Bachmann for a while...but not for long. B-.
GOP so far: C+
As of May, 2011, there is a slight edge to Obama. Once the GOP decides on a candidate and a message, things get a lot tougher for the President.
Sunday, February 20, 2011
Utah Should Stop Sending Taxpayer Funded Work Overseas
I am sure that some of you have missed this report, after all it was only reported on ABC4, the news report that almost no one in Utah watches except for the mothers of the anchors and reporters. It is about the University of Utah contracting medical transcription jobs to overseas firms. This will idle about 200 of my fellow Utahans. My knee-jerk reaction is, no fair. They can not do this. But after sleeping on this, I have calmed down about.
There is really no economic sense to move jobs overseas. The dollar is weak right now and only becoming weaker due to rapid government borrowing at the Federal level. Because of the weak dollar, you have to pay more money for overseas work than you did three or four years ago. It takes more dollars to purchase what ever currency is used in whatever country these jobs are being sent to. There has got to be other reasons and costs for shipping these jobs overseas than just wages. There are other factors making this economically feasible for so many firms. This could include factors like lower overhead due to lower property values and energy costs and lower taxes. Our government is not doing a good job at identifying and dealing with these factors. As such, our jobs are being exported and more people are becoming unemployed. The more that this happens, the weak the economy in the US becomes. There will be fewer and fewer people who will be able to afford the niceties of life. The US economy will spiral into oblivion.
One such factor that is making jobs more expensive is how unemployment insurance is charged. In most states, including Utah, we do not charge money to companies when they lay people off. There is not a deductible when an unemployment insurance claim is filed. This is a big mistake. We should charge companies when they involuntarily separate people without cause. We need to provide an incentive for companies to keep people on board. Since unemployment insurance is just that, insurance, it is perfectly justifiable to charge a deductible for separating an employee without cause. Doing so would allow the state to charge a smaller premium in unemployment insurance. Companies that find ways to keep employees would be rewarded with a smaller premium. Perhaps the state can even provide an unemployment insurance discount to firms that have a history of not laying people off.
Specifically about this issue. This company is the University of Utah Hospital. It is an extension of the University of Utah which is an extension of Utah State Government. It is as if the State of Utah themselves were off-shoring work. It is as if the Governor himself authorized it. This should be a personal embarrassment to Governor Herbert. And it should be a personal embarrassment to every state senator and every member of the Utah House of Representatives whether Republican, Democrat or otherwise. These men and women have the opportunity to fix this problem right now, while the legislature is in session. They can stop the current action by the University Hospital and prevent other state entities from making similar personnel moves. They can make this type of outsourcing against State Policy.
I also find it interesting that this story broke on the Saturday of a Holiday Weekend and is only reported on the #4 news channel in the market. It is as if someone wants to keep this news on the down-low.
As a Republican, I believe in staying out of the way of private business. The state can not and should not stop a private corporation like IHC, Mountain Star or any other private medical company from sending work off-shore, but the State of Utah and the Hospital of the Flagship University of our state should be different. They must lead by example. The fact that the University Hospital off-shores work will make it easier for other firms to justify their similar actions. We can not expect private companies to keep work on our shores if entities of the government send their work off-shore.
The majority of funding received by the University Hospital comes from the state in one form or another. Not only does the hospital receive money from the state for regular operations. It also receives funds from the state in the form of Medicare and Medicaid payments. This money all comes from the tax payers.
This move hurts the state fiscally. They money that the University Hospital saves with this contract will be lost in other areas of state government. The 200 people that are losing their jobs will file unemployment insurance claims. They may become eligible for food stamps, WIC and perhaps other forms of state welfare. They will put off purchases of new clothes and other items that are eligible for sales taxes. They may not be able to pay their bills and could lose their homes to foreclosure. This reduces property values and puts a dent in property tax revenues. If enough firms in the state follow-suit, it could lead to another economic avalanche. This will not only cost the state money in the long run it will also cost the city and county governments in lost revenue.
I ask of my readers the following. First, tell all of your friends about this travesty and second contact both your state senator and your state representative and ask them to put a stop to this. The State of Utah must lead by example and learn to show all enterprises, both public and private, how to keep jobs in the United States. Also, ask your congressman, either congressman Bishop, Matheson or Chaffetz to fund a study to identify the reasons so many firms off-shore labor and to identify and implement counter measures at the Federal and State levels. We must keep Americans working. We must remove the obstacles that keep Americans from working. We must find ways to keep jobs on our shores. Our economic future depends on it.
There is really no economic sense to move jobs overseas. The dollar is weak right now and only becoming weaker due to rapid government borrowing at the Federal level. Because of the weak dollar, you have to pay more money for overseas work than you did three or four years ago. It takes more dollars to purchase what ever currency is used in whatever country these jobs are being sent to. There has got to be other reasons and costs for shipping these jobs overseas than just wages. There are other factors making this economically feasible for so many firms. This could include factors like lower overhead due to lower property values and energy costs and lower taxes. Our government is not doing a good job at identifying and dealing with these factors. As such, our jobs are being exported and more people are becoming unemployed. The more that this happens, the weak the economy in the US becomes. There will be fewer and fewer people who will be able to afford the niceties of life. The US economy will spiral into oblivion.
One such factor that is making jobs more expensive is how unemployment insurance is charged. In most states, including Utah, we do not charge money to companies when they lay people off. There is not a deductible when an unemployment insurance claim is filed. This is a big mistake. We should charge companies when they involuntarily separate people without cause. We need to provide an incentive for companies to keep people on board. Since unemployment insurance is just that, insurance, it is perfectly justifiable to charge a deductible for separating an employee without cause. Doing so would allow the state to charge a smaller premium in unemployment insurance. Companies that find ways to keep employees would be rewarded with a smaller premium. Perhaps the state can even provide an unemployment insurance discount to firms that have a history of not laying people off.
Specifically about this issue. This company is the University of Utah Hospital. It is an extension of the University of Utah which is an extension of Utah State Government. It is as if the State of Utah themselves were off-shoring work. It is as if the Governor himself authorized it. This should be a personal embarrassment to Governor Herbert. And it should be a personal embarrassment to every state senator and every member of the Utah House of Representatives whether Republican, Democrat or otherwise. These men and women have the opportunity to fix this problem right now, while the legislature is in session. They can stop the current action by the University Hospital and prevent other state entities from making similar personnel moves. They can make this type of outsourcing against State Policy.
I also find it interesting that this story broke on the Saturday of a Holiday Weekend and is only reported on the #4 news channel in the market. It is as if someone wants to keep this news on the down-low.
As a Republican, I believe in staying out of the way of private business. The state can not and should not stop a private corporation like IHC, Mountain Star or any other private medical company from sending work off-shore, but the State of Utah and the Hospital of the Flagship University of our state should be different. They must lead by example. The fact that the University Hospital off-shores work will make it easier for other firms to justify their similar actions. We can not expect private companies to keep work on our shores if entities of the government send their work off-shore.
The majority of funding received by the University Hospital comes from the state in one form or another. Not only does the hospital receive money from the state for regular operations. It also receives funds from the state in the form of Medicare and Medicaid payments. This money all comes from the tax payers.
This move hurts the state fiscally. They money that the University Hospital saves with this contract will be lost in other areas of state government. The 200 people that are losing their jobs will file unemployment insurance claims. They may become eligible for food stamps, WIC and perhaps other forms of state welfare. They will put off purchases of new clothes and other items that are eligible for sales taxes. They may not be able to pay their bills and could lose their homes to foreclosure. This reduces property values and puts a dent in property tax revenues. If enough firms in the state follow-suit, it could lead to another economic avalanche. This will not only cost the state money in the long run it will also cost the city and county governments in lost revenue.
I ask of my readers the following. First, tell all of your friends about this travesty and second contact both your state senator and your state representative and ask them to put a stop to this. The State of Utah must lead by example and learn to show all enterprises, both public and private, how to keep jobs in the United States. Also, ask your congressman, either congressman Bishop, Matheson or Chaffetz to fund a study to identify the reasons so many firms off-shore labor and to identify and implement counter measures at the Federal and State levels. We must keep Americans working. We must remove the obstacles that keep Americans from working. We must find ways to keep jobs on our shores. Our economic future depends on it.
Thursday, February 3, 2011
Sales Tax on Food?
I thought that we had gone a day in our legislative session without a Republican legislator saying something stupid...but I spoke too soon.
State Rep Mike Noel has proposed a return of the sales tax on food...again. Here are the arguments for it to return.
1. It is a stable source of revenue. Even in tough economic times, people have to purchase food.
2. It is a tax that even poor people pay...it is fair. Everyone contributes.
3. Rural areas in Utah do not have many other sources of revenue.
Here are my counter arguments.
3. Rural areas need a better source of revenue, but every one gets shut down by the Federal Government. Today, I will not go into a history of it, but it is well documented. The Feds control too much of rural Utah, and it is here that the State's Rights arguments carry the most weight. Whether you are speaking about recreation, energy production or land use, the Federal Government has too much power. Mike Lee has promised to do something about this. Let's make sure he does.
2. All taxes are unfair. There is no way to create a tax that will hit an even number of people proportionally. For some, any tax is more of a burden than others. It is not the most poor, those who qualify for food stamp assistance, that will suffer the most from the sales tax on food. There is no sales tax when paying for your purchases with the Horizon Card. It is those who make just enough not to qualify for Food Stamps that are hurt the most by a tax on food. Think about this when asking about the motivation people have to get off of these programs.
3. Certainly, people will not completely cut back on food, but they will limit their purchases in tough economic times. In times like this, people purchase less steak and more hot dogs. Parties are less extravagant and there will fewer fancy desserts. There is a certain degree of steady revenue in taxing food, but it is not a complete panacea.
How is it that we can not live without what 31 states in our country do...a sales tax on food? Here are some answers to our problems...but it will take some help from Mr Hatch and Mr Lee to get it done.
1. Utah needs more tax revenue from energy production. Let's stop talking about it and get it done. Our country needs this energy and we need that tax revenue more than OPEC does.
2. Utah needs less Federal ownership of our land. We need to release some of our land to developers including land that is in a certain controversial national monument. We need to have the courage not to let the Feds continue walk all over us. This was one of my main problems with Bob Bennett when he was in the Senate. It is certainly a problem that I have with Hatch. Mike Lee personally promised me that he would do something about this issue if he were elected. But he has only been in office for a month...so I will give him the benefit of the doubt for now.
3. Utah needs more general and diverse economic development statewide. We can not be a state, like we are now in some counties, completely dependent on tourist dollars. We have good communities all over this state with talented and hard working people whose talents are going to waste.
It is certainly easy to tax food. But we can not go after easy solutions to our problems. We have to find better, more permanent solutions to our problems.
State Rep Mike Noel has proposed a return of the sales tax on food...again. Here are the arguments for it to return.
1. It is a stable source of revenue. Even in tough economic times, people have to purchase food.
2. It is a tax that even poor people pay...it is fair. Everyone contributes.
3. Rural areas in Utah do not have many other sources of revenue.
Here are my counter arguments.
3. Rural areas need a better source of revenue, but every one gets shut down by the Federal Government. Today, I will not go into a history of it, but it is well documented. The Feds control too much of rural Utah, and it is here that the State's Rights arguments carry the most weight. Whether you are speaking about recreation, energy production or land use, the Federal Government has too much power. Mike Lee has promised to do something about this. Let's make sure he does.
2. All taxes are unfair. There is no way to create a tax that will hit an even number of people proportionally. For some, any tax is more of a burden than others. It is not the most poor, those who qualify for food stamp assistance, that will suffer the most from the sales tax on food. There is no sales tax when paying for your purchases with the Horizon Card. It is those who make just enough not to qualify for Food Stamps that are hurt the most by a tax on food. Think about this when asking about the motivation people have to get off of these programs.
3. Certainly, people will not completely cut back on food, but they will limit their purchases in tough economic times. In times like this, people purchase less steak and more hot dogs. Parties are less extravagant and there will fewer fancy desserts. There is a certain degree of steady revenue in taxing food, but it is not a complete panacea.
How is it that we can not live without what 31 states in our country do...a sales tax on food? Here are some answers to our problems...but it will take some help from Mr Hatch and Mr Lee to get it done.
1. Utah needs more tax revenue from energy production. Let's stop talking about it and get it done. Our country needs this energy and we need that tax revenue more than OPEC does.
2. Utah needs less Federal ownership of our land. We need to release some of our land to developers including land that is in a certain controversial national monument. We need to have the courage not to let the Feds continue walk all over us. This was one of my main problems with Bob Bennett when he was in the Senate. It is certainly a problem that I have with Hatch. Mike Lee personally promised me that he would do something about this issue if he were elected. But he has only been in office for a month...so I will give him the benefit of the doubt for now.
3. Utah needs more general and diverse economic development statewide. We can not be a state, like we are now in some counties, completely dependent on tourist dollars. We have good communities all over this state with talented and hard working people whose talents are going to waste.
It is certainly easy to tax food. But we can not go after easy solutions to our problems. We have to find better, more permanent solutions to our problems.
Global Warming?
If global warming is a fact, how come science can't agree on an explanation for such weather phenomena as this winter?
Fox News Article.
Fox News Article.
Tuesday, February 1, 2011
Some of the stuff spewing from our legislators mouths.
The Utah State Legislature is in session and some of the things that are being said are making Utah look like a back-woods fly-over state. Here is an example of some of the short sided things our legislators have said.
The Debt Limit Amendment...
This is a proposed constitutional amendment that will require that the Congress get approval from the majority of states in order to raise the federal debt limit. Sounds like a great deficit fighting tool until you realize what some of the unintended consequneces could be. For Example:
-The Congress could hold programs important to states, like highway funds, in order to get the states to approve a debt limit increase.
-The Congress could pass on unfunded mandates if the states refuse to raise the debt limit.
-The Congress can use the states as a scape-goat from run-away spending.
It looks like a good idea, but really a poor idea that instead of giving more power to the states would actually give more power to the Feds.
State Veto Amendment
This is a proposed consitution amendment that would give states the power to veto any legislation by a super majority of the state legislatures.
Um, guys...that is what we have Senators for. If anyone should have a direct line to a member of Congress it should be our state legislators. If Orrin Hatch will not answer a phone call from Chris Buttars or Howard Stevenson then Hatch is not doing his job and we the poeple should hear about it.
Speaking of Howard Stephenson.
I read what he said about how the ATC's do a better job at placing our kids in jobs. This is true for SOME kids. Some kids are better off earning a degree at the ATC than going to one of our fine Universities. SOME kids simply do not belong there.
SOME kids belong in the military. SOME kids belong at culinary school and SOME kids should go directly to work right after high school.
But the data shows that MOST kids will be better off by earning a college degree. For SOME jobs, any 4-year degree is better than nothing. So many kids, not myself, end up working in a job that had nothing to do with their major. The reason this is even possible is because our colleges and universities do such a good job at giving our young people a well rounded education.
SOME four-year college degrees are worthless and should be curtailed. We know that degrees in Liberal Arts, for example, are not in as great of demand as a degree in Marketing. But even the Liberal Arts grad has a better chance at becoming a senior manager at an accounting firm than someone with an associates degree in electronics. Although that person with the associates degree in electronics may rise up and run his own firm, and hire the guy with the degree in accounting to work for him.
In America, anything can happen.
However, study after study, and here is one, shows that on average a person with a Bachelor's Degree will earn about 1.5 times more than someone with some post-secondary education and no degree and twice as much over a lifetime as someone with only a high school diploma.
It is not hard to dispute Stephenson's comments with the facts.
The Debt Limit Amendment...
This is a proposed constitutional amendment that will require that the Congress get approval from the majority of states in order to raise the federal debt limit. Sounds like a great deficit fighting tool until you realize what some of the unintended consequneces could be. For Example:
-The Congress could hold programs important to states, like highway funds, in order to get the states to approve a debt limit increase.
-The Congress could pass on unfunded mandates if the states refuse to raise the debt limit.
-The Congress can use the states as a scape-goat from run-away spending.
It looks like a good idea, but really a poor idea that instead of giving more power to the states would actually give more power to the Feds.
State Veto Amendment
This is a proposed consitution amendment that would give states the power to veto any legislation by a super majority of the state legislatures.
Um, guys...that is what we have Senators for. If anyone should have a direct line to a member of Congress it should be our state legislators. If Orrin Hatch will not answer a phone call from Chris Buttars or Howard Stevenson then Hatch is not doing his job and we the poeple should hear about it.
Speaking of Howard Stephenson.
I read what he said about how the ATC's do a better job at placing our kids in jobs. This is true for SOME kids. Some kids are better off earning a degree at the ATC than going to one of our fine Universities. SOME kids simply do not belong there.
SOME kids belong in the military. SOME kids belong at culinary school and SOME kids should go directly to work right after high school.
But the data shows that MOST kids will be better off by earning a college degree. For SOME jobs, any 4-year degree is better than nothing. So many kids, not myself, end up working in a job that had nothing to do with their major. The reason this is even possible is because our colleges and universities do such a good job at giving our young people a well rounded education.
SOME four-year college degrees are worthless and should be curtailed. We know that degrees in Liberal Arts, for example, are not in as great of demand as a degree in Marketing. But even the Liberal Arts grad has a better chance at becoming a senior manager at an accounting firm than someone with an associates degree in electronics. Although that person with the associates degree in electronics may rise up and run his own firm, and hire the guy with the degree in accounting to work for him.
In America, anything can happen.
However, study after study, and here is one, shows that on average a person with a Bachelor's Degree will earn about 1.5 times more than someone with some post-secondary education and no degree and twice as much over a lifetime as someone with only a high school diploma.
It is not hard to dispute Stephenson's comments with the facts.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
