News Categories
UEG News
Listed in Feature Articles
Join UEG on final road trips to gather signatures.
UEG Hits the Road for Final Push to Meet Petition Deadline
April 2, 2010SALT LAKE CITY - Utahns for Ethical Government (UEG) takes its campaign for honest, open and responsible government to the St. George Art Festival today and tomorrow.
With just under two weeks left to reach its deadline of 95,000 signatures on a petition allowing Utahns to vote on its ethics initiative in November, UEG is accelerating its regional Utah petition drive.
“Should Utahns be able to vote on creating a more ethical Legislature? Should citizens be in charge of their government instead of well-funded, narrow interests looking out only for themselves?” asks Kim Burningham, chair of UEG. “We believe thousands living in Utah’s Dixie would without hesitation say ‘Yes’.”
En route to St. George, Burningham said that was the reason UEG expects to collect hundreds of signatures at the region’s largest arts and crafts festival, which will be held in St. George’s new Town Square.
The effort is part of a two-week tour of Utah to ensure success of its petition drive. In addition to St. George, UEG volunteers will be collecting signatures at prominent locations in the following Utah towns:
- April 4th and 5th - Price, Moab and Spanish Fork
- April 6th and 7th - Vernal, Roosevelt, Heber City and Park City
- April 8th and 9th - Kamas, Huntsville, Eden and North Ogden
- April 10th - Pleasant Grove and Orem
- April 11th - Clearfield
- April 12th - Roy
- April 13th and 14th - Logan
Persons interested in helping UEG at any of these locations are urged to contact .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address).
There will never be a better time for Utahns to require their elected representatives to perform their duties according to values all Utahns can be proud of.
For more information contact:
Dixie Huefner, (801) 359-6705
Kim Burningham, (801) 292-9261
Alan Smith, (801) 521-3321 (on background)
David Irvine, (801) 949-6693 (on background)
Utahns for Ethical Government is a nonpartisan coalition of Republicans, Democrats, Independents and unaffiliated voters who are committed to meaningful legislative ethics reform. UEG is working to obtain 95,000 signatures of registered voters to qualify its initiative on the November 2010 ballot. The initiative would establish a strict code of ethical conduct for the Utah Legislature and an independent ethics commission to advise the Legislature.
Time to take the state back from legislative ‘desperadoes’
John Florez, Monday, March 15, 2010And in the category for “best show” of the year, the winner is — “The 2010 Utah Legislative Desperadoes.”
The Wild West extravaganza broke all records with its portrayal of a band of tough guys who rode into town and with their bluster intimidated the locals, while the sheriff was nowhere to be found. They immediately began to take what they wanted and ignored the pleas of the people, who for years had been crying for real ethics reform, a return to civility and integrity to their state government. The people were hoping they could live in harmony with their neighbors and do what their pioneer predecessors did — look after each other.
The desperadoes exacted ransom in the form of campaign financing money. They promised transparency and instead mocked it by unabashedly passing legislation that would let them accept campaign money contributions without any limits, justifying it by saying they were making it transparent. That’s like the Sundance Kid saying, “I told you I was going to rob the bank, so it’s OK.” They didn’t want caps on campaign finance contributions because it limited free speech, when in reality the average citizen cannot afford to pay the asking price for so-called free speech. Free speech has become too expensive.
And the longer they stayed, the more brazen and frantic they became at imposing their will on the people and disrupting any civility folks had come to know. They told the people they wanted to protect them from the federal government. They wanted to have a town that’s free from government regulations, then went about imposing their own rules; claimed they believed in local control, then debated whether they wanted to prevent locally elected officials from passing ordinances to protect their gay constituents from discrimination in their communities. And while the town was undergoing tough economic times with longer food and unemployment lines, and empty food pantry shelves, desperadoes were receiving greater gifts for themselves and passing cosmetic ethics laws to stay in office, more concerned about getting gifts than for the more than 200,000 Utahns who depend on the Utah Food Bank for their food.
In previous years, the riders who came to town wanted longer school days; this band came in saying it wanted shorter school days/years and to spend less money, while the school-age population continued to explode. The desperadoes came in demanding that people live by the rule of law, yet they went around it and even railed against established laws such as civil rights.
They boisterously demanded the right to protest against the federal government and for their right to freedom of expression, yet residents who wanted to do the same with a petition aimed at ethics reform were labeled “hucksters,” “bamboozlers,” “deceitful.” And rather than embracing citizen participation, they circled the wagons and made it more difficult for people to voice their opinion, threatening retaliation, even undermining their legal, constitutional and legitimate right to free speech.
The show ended with the desperadoes riding off into the sunset praising themselves for the wonderful job they did.
Missing in this Western is the happy ending where the sheriff finally rounds up a posse and stands up to the desperadoes and tells them to mend their ways or leave town. One is left to wonder if the desperadoes will return with more money in their pockets to continue claiming squatter rights and keep on circling the wagons.
The old Western movies end when a couple of courageous folks stand up together and decent citizens take control of their own town — not a bad idea.
A Utah native, John Florez has founded several Hispanic civil rights organizations; been on the staff of Sen. Orrin Hatch; served on more than 45 state, local and volunteer boards; and filled White House appointments, including deputy assistant secretary of labor and as a member of the commission on Hispanic education. E-mail: .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address).
Rolly: Ethics reform: The ultimate sin
Paul Rolly, Friday, November 27, 2009When most Utahns look at Olene Walker they see Utah’s only woman governor, who governed with a moderate, no-nonsense approach and had an 85 percent approval rating while in office.
When Utah Eagle Forum devotees look at Olene Walker, all they can see is Hester Prynne.
“These constitutional thieves should never hold office again. They should be branded with a scarlet A for seeking to adulterate the constitution and constitutional principles,” says a Utah Eagle Forum e-mail that seems a bit hysterical, even for that group.
The e-mail, sent to rally the troops to defeat an ethics reform initiative that advocates are attempting to get on the 2010 ballot, basically says that if ethics reform passes, it will destroy the state of Utah as we know it.
Walker served for nearly 11 years as Gov. Mike Leavitt’s lieutenant governor, then for 14 months as one of the state’s most popular chief executives before being ousted by her own Republican Party. She was the leading voice at a press conference last week that promoted the petition drive to get ethics reform on next year’s ballot.
So, she must be one of the main targets of the frenzied e-mail with the Eagle Forum logo branding as sinners and adulterers those who are pushing the initiative. The e-mail puts the Eagle Forum morals crusaders in the same camp as the Legislature’s conservative bloc, which has pushed back with such extreme vigor it almost borders on paranoia.
Besides Walker, 35 former legislators have endorsed the ethics reform initiative, while the State Republican Central Committee voted almost unanimously to oppose it.
The Eagle Forum’s missive paints the petition sponsors as monarchists who use their unprecedented power to intimidate and destroy the honest, hard-working folks in the Legislature.
But the e-mail betrays a less-than-honorable agenda with several out-of-context, misleading interpretations of the initiative itself. For example, it warns that if the Republican and Democratic leaders in the Legislature can’t agree on 20 people to be considered for the five-member commission that would be created to hear ethics complaints against legislators, “the sponsors [those unelected people who wrote the bill] unanimously shall select the 20 candidates.”
The problem with that alarum is that it doesn’t explain why the provision is in the initiative. It was put there so that spiteful legislative leaders couldn’t defeat the spirit of the proposed law by agreeing to disagree on 20 names, from which five would be selected randomly to serve on the commission.
That way, they could thwart it by their studied inability to come to a consensus. The commission then, by default, would select 20 names, which would be drawn randomly, in order to achieve the goal of seating a commission.
The e-mail also erroneously states that the ethics commission could investigate not just sitting legislators, but all those who served in the past. In fact, the commission would only have authority to investigate current legislators.
The e-mail creators also took out of context language to insure that a legislator accused of ethics violations couldn’t claim immunity because the alleged violation took place before the initiative took effect.
The e-mail also warns of unlimited power given to members of the commission, with no checks and balances. It fails to mention the fail-safe check and balance that the commission is only advisory. It has no authority to sanction a legislator. It would make recommendations to the Legislature, which would then decide whether to act on them.
But, hey, why let the facts get in the way of a good scare?
McEntee: Wise advice on ethics reform
Peg McEntee, Wednesday, November 25, 2009By ones and twos, the former Utah lawmakers — some with gray hair, some with white — came to the Utah Capitol to stand together in support of a citizen’s initiative that would establish a nonpartisan ethics commission and code of conduct for the Legislature.
Olene Walker was the first to speak. It’s time, she said, for sitting lawmakers to recognize that absent specific, binding standards and rules, the Legislature will remain all but rudderless when it comes to binding ethics reform.
Walker is a former Republican governor and representative. Most importantly, in this case, she was lieutenant governor charged with overseeing elections and financial disclosure from officer holders, candidates, political action and interest committees and lobbyists, among others.
For nearly three decades, she has watched ethics reform efforts die in the Rules Committees and seen legislators enjoy gifts, though limited, from lobbyists who now far outnumber the lawmakers themselves.
Utah is often said to be the best-managed state in the union, she said, so why does it earn a failing grade from the Center for Public Integrity? (The nonprofit organization bills itself as a producer of investigative journalism on issues of public concern.)
“Utah should have the highest integrity rating in the nation” and the laws to get us there, her voice resonating in the domed ceiling high above.
Walker is one of 35 former legislators who back Utahns for Ethical Government’s petition drive to get an ethics initiative on the ballot in 2010. They are Democrats and Republicans whose service spanned nearly 40 years. About 15 of them were there in the Rotunda to back Walker and former state Sens. Karen Shepherd and Karl Snow, who also spoke. Shepherd also served one term as Utah’s 2nd District congresswoman.
Now the Legislature’s Ethics Study Committee has endorsed a bill that would set up an independent commission to screen complaints against legislators. The five-member commission, made up of retired judges and lawmakers, would investigate complaints. Those found frivolous or politically motivated would be weeded out; those deemed to have merit would go to the Senate or House ethics committee for a public airing.
It’s a step toward progress for the overwhelmingly Republican Legislature, which has strained for years against ethics reform. Today, Utah is one of only 10 states without an independent ethics commission and one of only five with no limits on campaign contributions.
Speaking of which, Gov. Gary Herbert last month hauled in about $1 million in his first annual campaign gala. More than half came from Realtors, developers, construction firms and energy companies.
Both UEG and Rep. Craig Frank, R-Pleasant Grove, have proposals to contain political contributions
Back on the hill, many sitting legislators remain hostile to the initiative, and last weekend, the state Republican Party’s central committee voted 103 to 1 for a resolution opposing the ballot initiative.
There’s no doubt that getting 95,000 signatures on the proposal by April 15 will be a long, hard slog. Even some of the former lawmakers at the Capitol could be heard wondering if they’ll make it.
Kim Burningham, a former GOP lawmaker and one of the leaders of UEG, said Wednesday it’s too early to even begin to count signatures.
The petitions now are all over the state, he said, “but there are weak pockets and strong pockets. Winter’s a hard time.”
But maybe you, like me, were taught to listen to the wisdom of the elders. It’s clear to me that Thursday’s bipartisan show of support for the initiative deserves the careful consideration of every voter in Utah.
As Shepherd said, reform is just a matter of common sense.
People should rid Capitol Hill of political ‘roaches’
John Florez, Monday, November 16, 2009“Roaches check in but they don’t check out.” That old commercial about roach traps evokes the present-day image of our Utah legislators. Once in office, it’s almost impossible to get rid of them. They keep building more barriers and finding more excuses to remain as permanent residents of the people’s house.
While a bit facetious, it’s a sad day when citizens have to fight their elected officials to carry out requests for ethics reform to have a government they can trust. But like roaches, the elected leaders keep building up their immunity in order to resist any suggestions to change. Over the years, they have come up with some creative tacks — ignoring constituent concerns, becoming offended, assuming they “know best,” “killing the messenger” and making token changes while doing the same.
Before leaving office, Gov. Jon Huntsman Jr. created the Governor’s Commission on Strengthening Utah’s Democracy to recommend ways to “have an impact on citizens’ ability and desire to vote,” with a focus on elections, lobbying and campaign financing. Legislators resisted the governor establishing such a commission. The commission completed its work this month after its chairman met privately with several legislative leaders to work out a compromise on its recommendations (http://www.strengthendemocracy.org).
It appears that legislators were quick to compromise on the issue of campaign contributions ?— $10,000 over four years for the Senate, and $5,000 over two years for the House. According to Senate President Michael Waddoups, those limits were so high it “really is not a big thing” (quoted in Wednesday’s Deseret News). The commission compromised one of the key things Huntsman wanted to review in order to give voters a “desire to vote.” It appears the commission’s work may go the way all commissions go.
Some legislators still seem set on establishing a commission to handle complaints of ethics violations as a way of diffusing public criticism. Why wait for members to fail? They would do well to let their ethics study committee upgrade its code of ethical conduct to provide clear guidelines for members to follow. It would go far in preventing violations and reduce public criticism. How will they police themselves?
Lawmakers seem consumed with keeping their seat by fighting the majority of citizens who want ethics reform. If they responded to citizens’ interests, legislators may find that they would not have to depend on lobbyists for their survival. They should keep an open mind instead of playing the bully or victim role. Legislators who resist having retired judges sitting on an ethics panel because they have different standards than legislators might think twice. Judges follow the law. Those who say they may have to resign their office if the rules change may find their sense of importance misplaced.
Rather than finding fault with the people’s initiative referendum, legislators should try to understand the intent behind the citizens’ concerns and take the best ideas for improving their conduct. After all, it’s their conduct that has led to the complaints voters have in trusting their government. Citizens keep calling for ethics reform including limiting campaign spending and accepting gifts — which have gotten out of control and are the reason for the public’s mistrust in their government.
We should not have to fight with political leaders to have our voices heard. Legislators should welcome the spirit of the intent of the recommendations of the commission and those of the people’s petition initiative. It’s time lawmakers worked for the public good, rather than focused on keeping their seats. They may be surprised at the breath of fresh air they would bring to the people’s house.
It just may take citizens to remind lawmakers that the state Capitol is not a roach motel.
Ethics-reform initiative would bring needed change
Lois M. Collins, Thursday, November 5, 2009It doesn’t matter whether the debate is taking place online in the comments accompanying a news story or in a debate at the University of Utah’s Hinckley Institute of Politics.
When the topic under discussion is an initiative that would reform ethics rules for the Utah Legislature, both sides throw off heat and passion.
The initiative, a 21-page handbook of behavior being put forth by a group called Utahns for Ethical Government — which includes some former lawmakers among its ranks — has opponents saying that it goes too far and pries too deeply into lawmakers’ business.
The group, which hopes to gather enough signatures to put the measure to voters in the 2010 election cycle, counters most of the criticisms at Utahethics.org, where you can also read the proposal for yourself. I hope people will do precisely that.
The crux of the initiative is establishing an independent commission that would look at allegations of ethical impropriety by lawmakers and make recommendations to the Legislature as to what action should be taken against a lawmaker who seems to have committed an ethical breach. Its membership would be five people chosen at random from a pool of 20 candidates who are acceptable to both political parties, in order to make the commission a nonpartisan entity. It’s an advisory body, so it won’t mete out actual punishment.
The initiative also establishes rules regarding political contributions and from whom and how much a lawmaker can accept, as well as how that money can be spent. Corporations would not be allowed to donate to campaigns. Disclosure would be a must. And campaign cash would have to be used for actual campaigns or given to charity after a certain amount of time, rather than letting the candidate treat it like a personal piggy bank.
The proposal says lawmakers must wait for two years to become lobbyists once they leave office, and it beefs up disclosure of anything that might turn into a conflict of interest. Further, legislators could not serve on corporate boards if the only qualification they had for it was the fact that they are lawmakers and have clout the corporation might desire.
Some of the measure’s critics have had harsh things to say about citizen initiatives in general. Critics say that once a citizen initiative is passed, it’s hard to change or improve, even when doing so is important, because it can be portrayed as going against the public’s will.
There may be some truth to it, but I find that argument ironic as all get out, given that the public has clamored for some time for meaningful ethics reform, and the Utah Legislature, with years and years to deliver up something meaningful, has pretty much said, “Nope.” The Legislature has passed up many opportunities to forge its own real reform. Even as the demands have increased, efforts have been mostly token.
I’m betting this next legislative session will be different. Just maybe, if they get serious, they can look their constituents in the eyes and say honestly that the initiative isn’t needed. They did it themselves.
I think one thing is clear: The public wants real ethics reform, whether in this form or another. Too often, lawmakers have seemed to hold themselves above us, rather than accountable to us. One positive that I think may have come from the trials of the past year and its economic upheaval has been a willingness on the part of John Q. Public to finally say “enough” with conviction.
Next, I hope someone goes after carve-outs that allow lawmakers, especially Congress, to inflict laws upon us while excusing themselves from living by them.
Behind the Iron Curtain
Paul Rolly, November 6, 2009Republican legislators opposed to the proposed ethics reform initiative have told constituents that the initiative would be disastrous and they should read the entire 21-page bill before signing a petition to get it on the ballot.
It’s too bad the leaders of the Utah County Republican Party don’t heed the advice of their esteemed lawmakers.
The Utah County GOP Central Committee recently passed a resolution opposing the ethics reform initiative. When some committee members complained that they had not had a chance to read the bill before voting to oppose it, they were summarily dismissed and members were told to voice their opposition whether they knew what the bill contained or not.
Before the issue was proposed to the Central Committee, it was vetted in the Utah County Republican executive committee, where Sen. Curt Bramble and Rep. Becky Lockhart appeared on behalf of the resolution, even though they are not members of the executive committee.
When some members of the committee tried to speak against the resolution, they were shouted down, town-hall-meeting style.
McEntee: Legislative ethics — just do it
By Peg McEntee | Posted Sunday, October 4, 2009There’s certainly a lot of legislative handwringing over a ballot initiative to establish a nonpartisan ethics commission and a code of conduct for Utah’s state senators and representatives.
If signed by 95,000 Utahns who cast gubernatorial votes last year, the initiative would go on the 2010 general election ballot. If approved, it would probably send a lot of lawmakers into a nose dive of despair.
Already, leaders are claiming that no good, honest person would run for office if he or she might face a complaint that he’d violated legislative ethics.
It could be worse — it’s possible that good, honest voters would assert their rights and values in opposition to the wishes of the Republican leadership in the Legislature and the Governor’s Office.
The fundamental problem is that ethics on the hill are not as pristine as leadership would have us believe. Remember Greg Hughes, who slipped out of allegations that he tried to bribe a fellow representative to change her vote on vouchers last year?
Hughes ultimately was given a “conduct unbecoming” slap by his colleagues, if getting hit in the face with a feather can be construed as a slap.
Or Chris Buttars, whose Senate brothers refused to sanction him for the racist, homophobic bile he spewed last year.
Here are some basics of the initiative: It would establish a nonpartisan, five-member advisory board to hear complaints; bar departing lawmakers from becoming lobbyists for two years; ban virtually all gifts and cap campaign contributions; and prohibit trading favors or influence for votes. It also would prohibit a lawmaker from giving funds from his or her campaign to another legislator.
Do I hear distant howls?
Thing is, 30 other states have independent ethics commissions, so the need and value has been established. And Utah is one of only five states without contribution caps. And after last year, even Utah legislative leaders acknowledge that their ethics system is broken.
Now, under the best of circumstances lawmakers should conduct the state’s business competently, thoughtfully and fairly, because in reality, they are in the business of governing. They are paid, have great insurance and, most importantly, are responsible to all Utahns, not just their constituents.
Doctors, lawyers, certified public accountants, teachers, law enforcement officials, even journalists: all have codes of conduct and ethics that, if breached, likely will cost them their jobs. Businessmen and tradespeople who don’t deal ethically while providing goods and services won’t get far.
Which is why the claim that good, smart, dedicated people would shy away from running for the Legislature is self-serving bunk. People always have and always will find ways to serve others; being a lawmaker who adheres to clear ethical standards probably is a lot safer than those who lack — and fear — such clarity.
It will be up to the voters to say yay or nay on the ballot initiative. Those voters, by the way, are you and me.
And if the initiative doesn’t make it, then, again, it’s up to us to hold legislative leadership to its announced intention to do the job themselves.