Move along, Part Two
The lobbyist/columists at the Deseret News are at it again -- at least one of them -- assuring readers that there's nothing amiss on Utah's Captiol Hill. Any little hint or whiff of scandal is largely a creation of the yapping media "Chihuahuas" and actually proves how squeaky clean Utah politics are.
So, move along, there's nothing to look at here.
"But the reality is that the GOP's so-called scandals and ethical issues are very small potatoes by national standards. Much of the controversy consists of closed caucuses, smalltime gifts, legislators attending Jazz games with lobbyists, and lawmakers throwing their weight around.
"If the worst Republican scandal in decades is two potential campaign competitors talking about a job and a pay raise to avoid a primary battle, then I'd say we have pretty tame, pretty squeaky-clean politics. Certainly, if a law was violated in that instance, then punishment is in order. But in the big picture, Utah is a veritable model of probity."
Yes, a vertitable model.
In a column last May, Webb downplayed all the "hand-wringing" over ethics, lobbyist gifts, etc., by saying Utah politics were "pretty clean compared to a lot of states."
Apparently we've elevated our game, despite a whole bunch of recent controversies, from the disclosure of lobbyist-drafted legislation intended to shrink voter rights to alleged bribery attempts (with taxpayer money) to sexual harrasment accusations.
Now we're a veritable model.
In that case, we should soon see a lot of others rushing to follow our lead. Here's some of what we can expect to see other states do:
-- jettison limits on the amounts of campaign donations corporations and individuals can give to politicians
-- throw out restrictions that bar politicians from using their campaign accounts for personal expenses
-- scrap conflict of interest laws that prevent legislators from voting on bills in which they have an obvious financial stake
-- replace independent ethics panels with all-legislator committees
-- and put oversight of campaign and lobbyist regulation into the hands of a partisan officeholder whose staff is made up of all political appointees not covered by civil service laws.
Surely, it can only improve things on the ethics front.
-- Dan Harrie
Surely, it can only improve things on the ethics front.
-- Dan Harrie
10:45 AM
| 
5 Comments:
Typical left wing response from Dan Harrie.
He wants to limit contributions from corporations but not unions. Unions, as we all know, are 100% pure and corruption-free.
He wants legislators not to vote when they have "obvious conflicts of interest". Of course that means CORPORATE conflicts of interest. The Tribune would have us believe that government employees in the legislature by definition don't have conflicts of interest. Not surprisingly, these government employee legislators are always "moderate" (Tribune-speak for "liberal").
Legislators like Allen, Winn, Menlove, Greiner and others work for state and local government. They get to vote on tax cuts/increases that directly impact their paychecks and departments. Yet you'll rarely see the Tribune bring this issue up.
Why do you Right Wing chuckleheads always post as anonymous? I figure it's because you're Republican legislators who lack the testicular fortitude to say silly things like this with your real names.
Bell,
Instead of attacking the messenger, why don't you just attack the message?
Because, you idiot, the message is ridiculous, typical of your nobles oblige attitude.
Message is ridiculous? Yet you cannot give any specifics?
Pathetic.
Post a Comment
<< Home