Corroon Challenge

I know this is so last Thursday but I have to comment on the Corroon to Herbert Challenge.

Corroon challenged Governor Herbert to return any donations over $10,000. It's kind of a funny gimmick really. That would mean Herbert would have to return about $750,000 and Corroon $250,000. So let's face it. It ain't going to happen.

Should campaigns be limited in what money they can raise? Eh. I'm not against requiring some limits. I'm not sure what the numbers should be. Raising money is soooooo difficult. Limiting donation amounts can sometimes force campaigns to reallocate resources from communicating with voters to simply dialing for dollars. A quick example - say you need to raise oh $10,000. Right now, a (state) campaign could get that from one donor. But if the limit were $2,500 then the campaign's got to raise that from four different people. It's a lot more work.

And let me add, I do have serious concerns about limiting one's ability to speak with their wallets - read free speech concerns. Complex issues. I encourage the dialogue.

But the best part in whole back forth between Corroon and Herbert is the zinger delivered by Herbert campaign manager Joe Demma. In his response to "The Challenge" Demma throws it back in Corroon's face and says "If the Mayor has reservations about any of those donations and the influence they have on his ability to govern Salt Lake County, his commitment to returning them should not be contingent upon the governor."

Awesome. I love that. Yes, Mayor; If this is such a concern why are YOU taking donations over $10,000 in the first place? Nice call out by Demma.

Have you taken The Pledge?

Utah's own Congressman Chaffetz was among a dozen-ish Republican Congressmen to appear and speak at the unveiling of the House-GOP's "Pledge to America."

See the official link at Pledge.gop.gov

To me, I'm reminded of the ancient Roman flea standing atop the wheel of a chariot amidst a stir of dust who says "what a great storm we've incited this day!" (I think that's Cicero could be Pliny - can't remember).

I mean it just seems like a poof of dust. Tall on rhetoric short on new ideas. For example from the second page of the intro; An arrogant and out-of-touch government of self-appointed elites makes decisions, issues mandates, and enacts laws without accepting or requesting the input of the many. Classic campaign season blah blah blah.

Can't you just see lead Pledge author Rep Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) sitting at his writing table late into the night, writing by candle light, trying his best to channel his inner Thomas Jefferson...but for what? It's just all so...so...silly.

Try this one - Trust gets it's own section:

A PLAN TO REFORM CONGRESS & RESTORE TRUST

• We will “read the bill” and require legislation be publicly available at least 3 days before voting on it

• We will adhere to the Constitution and require every bill to cite its specific Constitutional Authority

• We will ensure an open and bipartisan debate on all spending bills

• We will advance legislative issues one at a time and end the practice of massive bills that address unrelated issues.

The ironic thing is I DON'T TRUST THE GOP TO DO THIS. It all sounds good, but will they really do it if they take control? Can they really do it? Rhetoric. All stuff that sounds good in an election then never happens. Sigh...

Side note.

Read the sidebar "Why Chaffetz" in the Trib article. I don't think the Tea Party folks would be very happy with the following: Chaffetz said congressional clout is partially based on relationships, and he has become fast friends with some of the leading Republicans in Washington. He said his speaking role “is an expression that they have gained a lot of confidence in me in a very short amount of time.”

I just don't know if Chaffetz can be trusted anymore now that he's so quickly made friends with the Washington elite. ;)

Provo Ethics

The Provo City Council announced it would not be ammending it's ethics rules. At play in this particular debate is the issue of conflicts of interest.

The current rules requre a councilmember to only declare their conflict. They are still free to debate, discuss, lobby, and even vote on the issue. To me, I have no problem with a councilmember declaring their interest - transparency is a good thing. Also, they should be free to lobby and debate their point of view. I'm fine with all of that as long as it's done in the open. My beef is with the final vote. Councilmembers should excuse themselves from voting on those issues in which they have a direct conflict of interest.

Do councilmembers have greater influence on their collegues? Of course they do, but I think it's unfair or unwise even to not allow them to contribute to the debate on issues they have personal interests in. But, they shouldn't vote. Let their ideas and arguments sway the members on the council. Not their own vote.

Good Lesson on Crisis Communications

I thought the Utah National Guard did well for itself by admitting they had made a mistake and taking full responsibility for the Herriman/Machine Gun Fire incident. Maj. Gen. Brian Tarbet said it was the Guard's mistake to shoot under the existing weather conditions.

Its refreshing in a way to see a public/government/military organization take responsibility so quickly. I've found that more damage to credibility, trust, and reputation tends to be done in the cover-up and spin of explanation than just flat out admitting the truth right away.

So for such an awful event it's nice to see the Guard own up to it's mistake.

Where in the UTCO-World is Mayor Corroon?

So I get it that Utah County is exactly a hot bed of support for the Corroon for Gov campaign, but I can't recall hearing about any campaign events in Utah County. I wouldn't spend a ton of time down here either, but you can't completely ignore Utah County. Richard Davis must be pulling his hair out. Just sayin...you know...Richard Davis must be pulling his hair out.

And to tag along on that note, just for fun; Can you tell me what's different between the campaign logo above versus the one below? And I'm not talking "Mayor" v. "Governor." There's something the Corroon Campaign isn't emphasizing in the statewide race.

International House of...Politics?

You've heard of "pancakes and politics" right? You know, when candidates buy delegates/would-be voters breakfast?

Just when I was about to launch my own IHOP version; a world-wide political think tank/non-profit/save-the-world/its-all-about-the-kids foundation... the lawyers go and get in the way!

IHOP (the pancake maker) sues IHOP (the prayer center) over trademark

...back to the drawing board err...test kitchen...whatever...

Next Stop. Havana?

Cuba is reforming their economic system. As one of the last few communist holdouts its amazing really it's lasted this long.

One gem from the Cuban statement: "Our state cannot and should not continue supporting businesses, production entities and services with inflated payrolls," the union said, "and losses that hurt our economy are ultimately counterproductive, creating bad habits and distorting worker conduct."

Well duh.

I've always thought the travel and trade restrictions to Cuba are silly. They are a remnant of the Cold War and should be abolished. The White House as recently as last month has indicated they may move to lift the restrictions. With any luck we could all be relaxing on a Cuban beach a year from now.

Who's in?

To Report or Not Report. That is the...

I was a bit surprised to see this piece from Paul Rolly of the Trib.

It's an article regarding the Florida pastor who wanted to burn the Koran. Interestingly, Paul in this case argues that there are some stories the press should not report. It's insightful and spot on.

If a tree falls in the forest...

Civility, Politics, Media, and the Truth

I wanted to jot down a couple thoughts regarding the new media policy from KSL, which is "taking a stand for civility in political advertising."

"What we'd like to do is try to help candidates focus on what they stand for rather than tear down their opponent," Willes said (Deseret Media Companies CEO).

Okay. Who can argue with that?

Essentially, what they are trying to do is come up with some kind of "truth test" according to the statement. I think they will have a hard time really blocking any ads because most ads (if not all) are based in some form of the truth. I would challenge anyone to produce an example of an out and out lying political ad. Show me one without some element of truth to it.

When I worked on the Cannon campaign we were often frustrated by what we felt were "lies" about the Congressman's record for example. The reality is what our opponent(s) were saying were not necessarily lies but elements of the truth somewhat twisted or taken out of context to further advance their arguments. Were our opponents out and out lying? No. They weren't. My experience is that most candidates are able to justify what they are saying to some degree or another.

When candidates challenge their opponents directly some think that is negative. I believe it is important to allow candidates to directly and frankly point out their differences. But let them be fair and honest in outlining their differences. Let them not conveniently ignore certain unflattering facts. Let them confront them honestly and directly. We deserve it.

What we really need is not civility in politics but intellectual honesty. What most people would call "negative" ads are generally not personal attacks, but distorted elements of the truth. The line between that and a lie is admittedly thin. What our political speech needs is less rehtoric and more honest examination of the facts in full context. The challenge becomes the ability to fully flesh out an issue in a 20 second radio spot or direct mail post card.

My advice if the media is really trying to clean up campaigns (should that even be their role?) is to challenge candidates more openly, loudly, in your face, on the out and out exaggerations, twisting facts, out of context comments, and yes, be intellectually honest themselves void of agenda. You know, honest journalism. If KSL is going to block an ad let them do it publically not by preventing it's airing in the first place but challenging it so loudly the candidate will be forced to defend and here's that word again - justify it.

So what do I really think about KLS's new policy? Its misguided and naive. In the end it will have little if any effect on campaigns in Utah.

Update 9/15/2010: For a current real life example take a look at the sausage grinder's blog regarding Morgan Philpot's claim that Matheson has only passed two bills. How quickly each camp gets into the minutia. Also take a look at the comments - they just prove my point and are what inspired this update.

Congressman Ryan...I like it.

Congressman Ryan. No. It's not what you think. I came across this great Washington Post article profiling Congressman Paul Ryan (R-WI). When I was in DC I secretly admired Congressman Ryan from afar. Probably because we have so much in common. He's smart. He's young. He's good looking. ;) And in an institution of poll fearing policy making and cheap sound bites he's the real deal.

When I run for Congress (wink) I want to run on the Ryan platform. Seems like a natural thing to do right? But really, what's not to like about this guy? His views particularly on budget items just ring common sense to me.

One of the biggest problems with our nation's debt problem is funding the entitlement programs such as social security, medicare and medicaid. Congressman Ryan (I just like saying that) wants to implement private insurance options in the place of government run programs. On Social Security he says why not allow those under 55 to put their social security tax payments into personal accounts? Really? Yeah really! This is one that absolutely drives me crazy! I know my money would grow more in a private account than sitting in the government treasury...but that's all for another day.

What's endearing about Congressman Ryan (don't you like the sound of that too?) is this line: "Political people always tell their candidates to stay away from controversy," said Ryan, 40. "They say, 'Don't propose anything new or bold because the other side will use it against you.' (Think Congressman Rob Bishop here - don't propose anything new or bold - you won't get anything done, but you won't get voted out either).

We need more people who lead with real vision, passion, and common sense. And given the silliness of the recent Senate Primary the following quote from the article is also timely:

"It's really important, I think, not to run campaigns on some vague platitudes and rip down the other party, to hopefully win an election by default," he said. "You have to win an election by acclamation, by aspiration, by telling people who you are and what you are going to do, and then go do it once you get there."

So yeah, Congressman Ryan. I like the sound of it.

If you are feeling policy-wonkish check out the Ryan platform here.