The Senate Site

Senator Hillyard on Ethics

2009-11-06T13:16:00.002-07:00

Senator Lyle Hillyard, along with Representative Brad Dee, spoke with KCPW about their concerns with the Utahns for Ethical Government voter initiative.

Click here for the story.

Senator Adams

2009-11-05T10:28:00.003-07:00

The Salt Lake Tribune on our newest senator, Stuart Adams:

"As the new face in the state Senate, Stuart Adams enters with a distinct advantage -- colleagues already view him as an effective policymaker who can bring people together."

Click here to read the whole article.

More thoughts on today's Ethics Discussion

2009-11-03T21:16:00.000-07:00

By Lyle Hillyard
Utah State Senator

As I read Bob Bernick’s report of the debate Tuesday morning at the Hinckley Institute, I realized that some reading it may mistakenly think that the reason I would be concerned about opening the records of the law firm that I helped found 42 years ago (and where I still work every day) is that by subpoenaing the company records they might discover some ethics violation. I hope that's not the case.

Let me take a moment to share more detail than the short debate format allowed. Because my legal work involves very sensitive matters for which a strict privilege is granted, I and my firm could not risk any thing that may compromise that protection.

Under Section 5 of the initiative, any three persons can complain to the commissions that I have committed an ethics violation. The executive director then must investigate and report his preliminary findings back to the commission. The section clearly provides that the three complainants can be involved in this initial investigation and at their direction, the executive director *shall* issue these subpoenas. They cannot go back more than 6 years so as worded, I (and others) read that they would be able to subpoena all the business records of the firm for 6 years. My attorney fees would be paid for by the State, there is no allowance for accountant or employees costs to respond to such a request. The section provides that these records are confidential but there is no penalty given if that provision is violated.

As the Section is now written, a competitor or disgruntled opponent in an emotional court case could file a complaint against me alleging, say, that that I am taking money under the table from business in the form of fees that are not related to actual legal work but to influence my vote. The complainants could then demand that the executive director subpoena all of the income records of the law firm for the past 6 years. They could also go to the press 31 days before the election (with early voting it could be just before people began to vote) and tell them that an ethics complaint has been filed against me for taking money under the table. After I had gone through this ordeal, when nothing is found, the commission would give an opinion that the allegations were without merit but, under the wording of the initiative, there is no way for that to be released.

In my opinion (and I am only one of 104), the complainant should file any allegation under oath based on first hand knowledge with all the supporting information attached. The Executive Director should then be able to contact the legislator and share the information with him or her and let them also respond under oath with any documentation to support the legislator’s position. Then the matter should be referred to the commission for their vote as to whether to continue. If they do, then both the complainant and the legislator should be able to use the power of subpoena subject to the unanimous approval of the commission. If there is no merit found to the allegation, the commission should have the power to order that the complainant pay for the costs incurred by the commission and the legislator. If the complainant violates the confidentiality provision, there should be a serious sanction such as the complaint is dismissed or even a criminal charge.

The issues raised by this 20+ page initiative are complex. Even though I was reassured by two initiative supporters that we could correct these problems, I maintain that we are already in process of correcting most of the problems that have been raised and will continue to do so. We have always had crimes for bribery or extortion which catches most of the acts complained of, if they really exist. The work of the legislature will be very difficult for the next few years trying to balance the budget and save the state sponsored programs that our citizens want. I hope we don’t have to use valuable time trying to correct the many flaws in the actual wording of this initiative.

The Chief is Back

2009-11-03T10:58:00.005-07:00

NEWS ADVISORY
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
November 2, 2009

Chief Massasoit returns to the Utah State Capitol

Salt Lake City, Utah - At 11 a.m. on Thursday, November 5, 2009, the monumental bronze sculpture of Massasoit, created by nationally recognized sculptor Cyrus E. Dallin, will return to the Utah State Capitol Grounds. The sculpture will greet visitors as they enter the Capitol Hill Complex from the east side of the Capitol. A brief press conference related to the re-installation will take place at the foot of the statue at the time of installation.

Massasoit is famously known as the Wampanoags Nation Chief who first welcomed the Pilgrims at Plymouth Rock after they disembarked from the Mayflower. Dallin created the sculpture in the 1920s. He was born and raised in Springville, Utah, and is known internationally for his realistic rendering of Chief Massasoit as well as the Angel Moroni statue that sits on top of the Salt Lake City Temple.

Dallins sculpture was first unveiled at the Utah State Capitol on July 31, 1922, at a time when Utah struggled economically. The State graciously accepted the generous gift from one of its most famous sons, adding to the Capitol beautiful artwork they could not have otherwise afforded.

During the first unveiling, Dallin expressed his desire that the state accept the gift as a token of his love for his native state of Utah. These mountains are linked with the story of the Indian, he said. In setting up this man of peace, who saved the Plymouth Colony, I have a hope…that I might model the old Chief Washakie of the Shoshones, who, too, was a man of peace; and he wielded as potent and saving an influence over the first Pioneers…as ever did Massasoit over the Pilgrims.

Classically trained in Paris, Dallin practiced sculpting during a period in art history which was a flowering of classical architecture and sculpture.

Capitol Curator Judith McConkie, PhD, noting that Massasoit is often compared to famous European sculptures, states that The pose and the idealized body are a direct homage to Michelangelos David.

Massasoit originally stood in the center of the Capitols Rotunda from 1923 until 1957, when it was moved outside to the South entrance of the Capitol Hill Complex. Now, complete with a new platform, Dallins beloved sculpture will be able to once again call Utahs Capitol home.

###

Voter Information

2009-11-03T07:58:00.000-07:00

Click here to find out where you are supposed to vote today. Then get out and vote!

Municipal Election Day

2009-11-02T10:44:00.002-07:00

By Lyle Hillyard
Senator, District 25

On Tuesday, our residents will go to the polls to elect local officials and vote on various bonds. I always appreciate our rights to vote and make our wishes known by the people we elect. Time and again we see that just a few votes can mean the difference between being elected and not. It is so disappointing when we saw the very low turnout in these Primary elections earlier this year. When I see the drop in State revenues and know that most local governments rely on the same sources, I wonder why we have so many good candidates running. Maybe they don’t realize the challenges they will face with growing demands from the public for more governmental services, dropping revenues, and a reluctance of the public to accept tax increases. Some must think there is no connection between what can be provided and what that service will cost.

Here in Cache Valley, there are many good candidates running for city and town offices. I was surprised to read in the newspaper this morning that there had been so few early voters here in Logan. That was not true last year with the huge national election. I wonder if the voters are still making up their minds with such good candidates. Maybe last year, the voters made up their minds earlier or just felt that by voting they could bring the entire hubbub to an end early.

I will be voting and I hope that we have a large turnout. I like to tell people who don’t have time to vote that they lose their right to complain. I can only wish that was true.

New Health Care Rate

2009-10-30T10:49:00.004-06:00

At the new federal government rate of $2.2 Million per word this blog post is worth over $62 million.

Don't worry about it. We'll bill your great grandchildren.

Congressman Bishop on Health Care

2009-10-30T09:51:00.001-06:00

Two minute video that cuts to the core of the issue:

Senator Urquhart's discussion

2009-10-29T11:28:00.002-06:00

Senator Steve Urquhart has been blogging about Sex Ed. Quite the discussion happening on his blog.

Check it out.

First Snow at the Capitol

2009-10-27T13:37:00.001-06:00

Tuesday

2009-10-27T12:16:00.011-06:00

A few things in which you may be interested.

1. We're not dead. It's just interim.

2. From a man who has seen both sides -- Former Governor Michael Leavitt writes about the balance of power between the states and D.C. (also in today's UPD)

3. Speaking of the 10th Amendment (and, to a lesser extent, dead people) Rep. Morley posted a blog about the Patrick Henry Caucus in today's UPD.

4. Good comments on the last post.

5. Brrrr.

Today's question: raise taxes or cut more deeply?

2009-10-23T10:13:00.005-06:00

The Governor is committed to building a balanced budget with no tax increase. Gotta respect that. Others, according to Art Raymond's article, believe we'll need to raise about $100 M.

Today's question: raise taxes or cut more deeply?

Parents Empowered Press Conference

2009-10-22T16:39:00.000-06:00

President Michael Waddoups and Senator Peter Knudson spoke at a press conference highlighting the success of the Parents Empowered program in curbing underage drinking.

Listen to the podcast of the entire press conference here.

Thursday Morning Workout

2009-10-22T09:55:00.003-06:00

SL Trib: 80 mph stretches safe -- so far
DesNews: Lawmakers consider sex-ed changes
O'Donoghue & Roche: Lawmakers riled over bonuses for trust land officials
DesNews: State legislators "disappointed" by actions of college's trustees
SL Trib: Independent ethics panel gaining support in Legislature
Fox13: No Bill, but Sex Ed Debate Rages On in Utah
SL Trib: Lawmakers debate sex education
ABC 4: Legislators hear differing views about climate change
KUTV 2: Utah's 4-day workweek brings some dividends
SL Trib: Ephraim lawmaker will resign to take new job

October 21, 2009

2009-10-21T18:06:00.001-06:00

Wednesday Afternoon Workout

2009-10-21T15:41:00.004-06:00

By our distinguished intern, Mike Cannon:

SL Trib: Cost savings from Utah's 4-day workweek fall short of projections
ABC4: Utah's 4-day work week brings some dividends
DesNews: Lawmakers riled over trust land bonuses
SL Trib: Legislative leaders outraged by land agency bonuses
DesNews: State agencies prepare for more cuts
SL Trib: Legislators consider emergency flu options

(More to come tomorrow...)

October 20, 2009

2009-10-20T17:51:00.000-06:00

Senate Radio: Senator Hillyard Budget Update

2009-10-20T17:23:00.002-06:00

Our distinguished intern, Mike Cannon, caught Senator Lyle Hillyard after the Executive Appropriations meeting today to discuss the current budget situation. Listen here.

Confirmation Committee TODAY

2009-10-20T13:08:00.003-06:00

The Senate Business and Labor Confirmation Committee will meet today to consider the Governor's appointment to the Alcohol Beverage Control Commission. Catch the meeting LIVE online here.

Glance at the Week

2009-10-20T09:23:00.002-06:00

Click here to see the Legislative Calendar for this week, with links to listen live online.

Executive Appropriations Meeting Tuesday

2009-10-19T14:18:00.004-06:00

KCPW: Lawmakers Consider Impact of Last Year’s Cuts, More Cuts Loom

"Last year, the Legislature approved more than $1 billion in budget cuts, but softened the blow with one-time appropriations from reserve funds and federal stimulus money. However, the programs saved last year by this roughly $450 million appropriation are vulnerable to cuts this year. Meanwhile, revenues have continued to decrease, and enrollment in Utah’s public schools and Medicaid have increased."

Budget Train Wreck?

2009-10-16T16:35:00.005-06:00

By Lyle Hillyard
Senate Chair of Executive Appropriations

This past week, I attended 3 presentations. I was told that there are essential State programs that, if they were not funded either with a continuing back fill or new money, serious problems would occur. The trouble is that I agreed with them. We have identified societal issues where state intervention is making a difference and loss of that State help will have quite an impact. The other problem is that we don’t print money so we are restricted to spending only the money we have. That money comes from the people either with the current tax revenues, which are appearing to continue to decrease, or some type of revenue enhancements. The decreases are so great that such “enhancements” must be large to fill in the gap. Gov. Herbert has initially stated that he does not plan to seek such enhancements so none will come unless he actively pushes for them.

How do we solve the dilemma? The only solution I can offer is that people who know how to deliver these necessary services must find a way to focus these services to those who truly need them and can be delivered within the available revenues. I am pleased when I see agencies realize the dilemma and step up with proposals that will work. Lisa-Michele Church put it fairly when she asked the legislature to amend the law and thus decide where her priorities as an agency should be. She accepted our challenge to make recommendations, but I agree that the ultimate decision should be made by the legislature, if her department cannot adequately provide the services allowed under the mandates of the law. I feel sorry for groups who think that these threatened dire consequences will motivate the legislature to find money to continue business as usual. They are probably in for a rude awakening.

We will try our best but things will be different. I still remember Gov. Matheson did not want to be the first Governor to have a $1.0 B budget in 1984. Now our budget is $12.0 B. That was only 25 years ago. Somehow we survived, but I have not seen that by spending more money, the problems have gone away.

I strongly request that we all look very carefully at the services we really want from Government and measure that against what we (not the rich guy behind the tree) are willing to pay. If agencies and the people who rely on governmental services are not preparing for what may happen with the reduction of state revenues next January, there will be a rude awakening, but hopefully not a train wreck.

Star Chamber II

2009-10-15T11:57:00.009-06:00

An editorial board that seems to have read the actual text of the "ethics" initiative:

Daily Herald: IN OUR VIEW

A group pushing a ballot initiative it says would raise ethical standards in the state Legislature wants to create a special commission that would examine allegations of misbehavior.

Just about everybody, including many a lawmaker, feels that some sort of independent eye on the Legislature is a good idea. But Utahns should not be swayed to support this ballot measure just because it sounds good. Sound bites do not make sound public policy. It's the nitty-gritty plain language of the law that counts, and that's where the proposed initiative fails.

Voters need to understand the plain language of this initiative, because it is laden with problems.

For example, those pushing the ethics initiative frequently claim that the oversight commission it would create is strictly advisory, so Utahns need not fret overmuch about its powers. Looking at the plain language, however, which describes what would be on the ballot in November 2010, gives a more alarming picture.

The referendum, if passed, would make this state law:

"The commission is vested with power and jurisdiction ... to do all things, whether herein specifically designated or in addition thereto, which are necessary or convenient in order to accomplish" the broad purpose of ethics enforcement.

That's a blank check for the commission, with no check or balance. Who decides what's necessary or convenient? The proposed law makes the commission immune from any court ruling. So the conclusion must be that the panel itself would decide what was "necessary and convenient."

That's not merely wide latitude; it's a virtually unlimited mandate.

The genius of the American system is that it puts limits on government. Here, unfortunately, is a loophole that would seemingly let the ethics panel avoid limits. But this is just one instance of plain language at variance with sound bite.

Is the commission's job merely advisory, to lecture Capitol Hill on right or wrong? Not at all. Here's a key passage from the petition:

"Although the commission serves the legislature and is not an agency within the executive branch of state government, the commission nevertheless shall have the powers and shall adopt the procedures of the Utah Administrative Rulemaking Act."

Mmm. That doesn't sound so bad. It has to make rules, right? But now turn to the code, which says:

"An agency's written statement that is made as a rule in accordance with the requirements of this chapter is enforceable and has the effect of law."

That means the ethics commission will make laws -- or at least rules that have the effect of law, something like the Internal Revenue Code of the United States. The laws the commission would make are not necessarily trivial ones, either. The petition goes on to say that

"Any conduct which violates the code of conduct shall be deemed in every instance to be one or more of the following: (i) a felony; (ii) a breach of the peace; (iii) an action outside the ordinary course of legislative business; (iv) an action beyond the scope of a legislator's official duties."

Looking at all this, we see that the initiative would give the ethics panel real heft in the legal world. Advisory? Hardly. Of course, its advocates certainly hope the new setup would have an impact. But our judicial system, by contrast, has plenty of built-in protections for an accused person. Not so with the ethics initiative. It seems to envision a different process.

To its credit, the proposed law would explicitly apply the state open meetings and open records acts to the panel, so that proceeding would be conducted in the full light of day. Yet, except for openness,

"there shall be no judicial review or agency review of any commission action."

Is this the sort of Star Chamber that Utahns want? Be careful what you wish for. No judicial review of a governmental action? How could that happen? How could Americans think that courts should not step in to protect rights? Who is to prevent potential abuses by the ethics panel itself if not the courts?

In short, a reading of the plain language of the ethics petition strongly suggests that the commission would not be merely a nag and a scold, with no real powers. On the contrary, it will have significant legal powers, including a startling authority to intervene in court cases.

Certainly, there is merit in the idea of an independent body examining ethics questions. But like every other governmental entity, it must act within clear and definite limits. Sadly, the ethics commission as outlined in the current ballot initiative falls far short of that vital American ideal.

Star Chamber I

2009-10-15T11:52:00.001-06:00

Star Chamber (from Wikipedia):

" . . . The court was set up to ensure the fair enforcement of laws against prominent people, those so powerful that ordinary courts could never convict them of their crimes. Court sessions were held in secret, with no indictments, no right of appeal, no juries, and no witnesses. Evidence was presented in writing. Over time it evolved into a political weapon and became a symbol of the misuse and abuse of power by the English monarchy and courts."

Panguitch!

2009-10-14T14:22:00.003-06:00

We hardly knew ye. Article in the New York Times, via Utah Policy Daily.