October 24, 2014
Amendment C: Appointment of Legal Council for Executive Officers
http://ballotpedia.org/Utah_Appointment_of_Legal_Counsel_for_Executive_Officers,_Amendment_C_%282014%29
The final amendment that is being put up for election is an amendment that would allow executive officers specifically the leuitenant governor, state auditor, and state treasurer to appoint their own legal council. How it currently stands is that the attorney general handles legal affairs and advises these officers as well as the governor. This amendment passed through the House of Reps and Senate unaminous besides one vote in the senate.
Arugments for this amendment are that with the events that have happened in recent years has proven the fact that the attorney general is not enough legal council that is needed for all the executive officers. This would allow to have these executive officers to choose their own legal council instead on relying on the attorney general who they didn't choose.
The opposistion to this amendment make some points about how that it is a good enough system to have the attorney general be the legal advisor for all of these of these officers. The attorney general ensures that what ever is being done is all in line with the law and that there won't be contradicting opinions.
I actually have to side with the one Senator on this. I think that the attorney general is placed with his athourity in such a way that there is a check and balance between high powers in our state government. The amendment is an reaction to the whole John Swallow affair. If this amendment passed and the lieutenant governor, state auditor, and state treasurer could appoint their own legal council don't you think they would surround themselves with 'yes men' to contradict their opponents. The attorney general provides stability and there isn't an issue with how things are.
Friday, October 24, 2014
Monday, October 20, 2014
October 20, 2014
Amendment B 2014: Election of Appointed Lieutenant Governor
http://ballotpedia.org/Utah_Election_of_Appointed_Lieutenant_Governor,_Amendment_B_(2014)
Amendment B that is going for election this year is a change in the election of Governor and Lieutenant Governor. It the current system if a governor steps down or of the such the lieutenant governor will become the governor than will appoint someone to be the lieutenant governor that will be ratified by the legislature. The new governor and lieutenant governor will be subject to election at the next election whether it be the regular four year cycle or midterms. In the case the next elections are midterms the newly appointed governor is subject to that election as well as the next election in the four year cycle. With this system it is possible for the governor and lieutenant governor to serve different terms and be from different parties. A governor could serve four years while the lieutenant governor is subject to election.
The new amendment makes it so they are elected together every four years. If there is a vacancy in governor the lieutenant governor will fill that spot then appoint the new lieutenant governor that is ratified by the legislature and then will be subject to election at the four year cycle. The new format is like the current format with the president and vice president.
Opposition for the amendment comes from only one legislature member who says "Our current rules for replacing the Lt. Governor preserve a principle that is fundamental to our elected Republic: we use elections to choose our political leaders... the constitutional tinkering of Amendment B could double the chances of the Governor’s office becoming vacant and an unelected Lt. Governor filling the vacancy. Why on earth would we want to increase the chances of having a Governor we never elected?"
I understand argument being made by the opposition and it's exactly what happened with President Ford becoming the only President in our history not to be elected. In the grand scheme of things we by representative democracy are still voting for the new lieutenant governor. I like the new amendment because we get to have the governor and lieutenant governor be elected together and rids the chances of forcing two people who don't want each other as our governor and lieutenant governor.
Amendment B 2014: Election of Appointed Lieutenant Governor
http://ballotpedia.org/Utah_Election_of_Appointed_Lieutenant_Governor,_Amendment_B_(2014)
Amendment B that is going for election this year is a change in the election of Governor and Lieutenant Governor. It the current system if a governor steps down or of the such the lieutenant governor will become the governor than will appoint someone to be the lieutenant governor that will be ratified by the legislature. The new governor and lieutenant governor will be subject to election at the next election whether it be the regular four year cycle or midterms. In the case the next elections are midterms the newly appointed governor is subject to that election as well as the next election in the four year cycle. With this system it is possible for the governor and lieutenant governor to serve different terms and be from different parties. A governor could serve four years while the lieutenant governor is subject to election.
The new amendment makes it so they are elected together every four years. If there is a vacancy in governor the lieutenant governor will fill that spot then appoint the new lieutenant governor that is ratified by the legislature and then will be subject to election at the four year cycle. The new format is like the current format with the president and vice president.
Opposition for the amendment comes from only one legislature member who says "Our current rules for replacing the Lt. Governor preserve a principle that is fundamental to our elected Republic: we use elections to choose our political leaders... the constitutional tinkering of Amendment B could double the chances of the Governor’s office becoming vacant and an unelected Lt. Governor filling the vacancy. Why on earth would we want to increase the chances of having a Governor we never elected?"
I understand argument being made by the opposition and it's exactly what happened with President Ford becoming the only President in our history not to be elected. In the grand scheme of things we by representative democracy are still voting for the new lieutenant governor. I like the new amendment because we get to have the governor and lieutenant governor be elected together and rids the chances of forcing two people who don't want each other as our governor and lieutenant governor.
Monday, October 13, 2014
October 13, 2014
Amendment A 2014: Qualifications of Tax Commission Members
http://ballotpedia.org/Utah_Qualifications_of_Tax_Commission_Members,_Amendment_A_(2014)
Even though the majority of us in class can vote, I thought I would post about the three amendments being proposed to the Utah Constitution this coming election. While I and others get a chance to vote it would be awesome to hear opinions from everyone.
Amendment A is a change to the qualification of the members on the state tax commission. How it currently stands is that there are 4 members in total and there is a rule that no more than two members from a single party are allowed to be on the commission. The proposed rule would eliminate that current rule and make it alright to have more than two people from a single party on the commission.
Arguments for the amendment include that while it's nice to maintain bipartisan its hard sometimes to find the most qualified members in all the political parties. Eliminating it would allow for the most qualified people to be on the tax commission.
Arguments against say that it is a complete partisan amendment that if a single party had complete control of the tax commission it wouldn't allow compromise and equality in say to be prevalent.
My opinion is against this bill. We have discussed this tons of time in class about screw the other party over politics and gaining more power and authority over the party politics. Big surprise Utah is heavily heavily republican and do you think that this republican proposed amendment isn't a play to gain more political power? I'm not trying to sound anti-republican but I for difference of opinions and compromise shaping our government and tax commission which has a great effect on us the people.
Amendment A 2014: Qualifications of Tax Commission Members
http://ballotpedia.org/Utah_Qualifications_of_Tax_Commission_Members,_Amendment_A_(2014)
Even though the majority of us in class can vote, I thought I would post about the three amendments being proposed to the Utah Constitution this coming election. While I and others get a chance to vote it would be awesome to hear opinions from everyone.
Amendment A is a change to the qualification of the members on the state tax commission. How it currently stands is that there are 4 members in total and there is a rule that no more than two members from a single party are allowed to be on the commission. The proposed rule would eliminate that current rule and make it alright to have more than two people from a single party on the commission.
Arguments for the amendment include that while it's nice to maintain bipartisan its hard sometimes to find the most qualified members in all the political parties. Eliminating it would allow for the most qualified people to be on the tax commission.
Arguments against say that it is a complete partisan amendment that if a single party had complete control of the tax commission it wouldn't allow compromise and equality in say to be prevalent.
My opinion is against this bill. We have discussed this tons of time in class about screw the other party over politics and gaining more power and authority over the party politics. Big surprise Utah is heavily heavily republican and do you think that this republican proposed amendment isn't a play to gain more political power? I'm not trying to sound anti-republican but I for difference of opinions and compromise shaping our government and tax commission which has a great effect on us the people.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)