ACTION ALERTS

LEAGUE 2009 5TH WEEK ACTION AT THE LEGSLATURE

(Mar 8) HB 122 Amendments to GRAMA
 
Please act NOW!

The bill has passed the House and is circled in the Senate.  It passed the House with mainly Democrats voting “no”.  Then it passed the Senate 2nd Reading with only one no vote.  The Salt Lake Tribune reported Sunday morning that the bill has been recently amended so it is not the version that passed the House and they now don't like it.

 It looks like it has been circled on the Third Reading Calendar for three days.  That usually means a bill is in trouble and/or heavy negotiations are going on.  This all means we have a last chance to stop it.  Since the press is not pleased with the changes we may have allies.
 
Email, call, or fax your senator NOW! 
http://www.utahsenate.org/perl/roster2009.pl
 
See the League arguments in Co-president Alice Steiner’s letter to the senators below.
 

The Government Records Access and Management Act (GRAMA) was carefully crafted to balance the right of the public to know what its government is doing and the right of government to conduct public business effectively and efficiently, with disclosure only if "the interests favoring access outweigh the interests favoring restriction of access."
 
HB 122 changes this balance in seven categories of criminal, civil, and administrative investigations and proceedings (including audit, disciplinary, licensing, certification and registration matters) to require citizens to show by a "preponderance of the evidence" that the public interest favoring access outweighs the interest in favoring restriction of access, a much more difficult standard for citizens to meet.
 
This wording, admittedly, is an improvement over the original version of the bill, which would have required "clear and convincing evidence" on the part of citizens, but it still restricts access unnecessarily.  "Clear and convincing" is still required in one category if disclosure would endanger life and safety.
 
HB 122 also potentially protects access to records involving "anticipated or pending litigation," opening a wider window for denial of access.  GRAMA already contains exceptions for attorney-client privilege and attorney work product records.  It also protects records the disclosure of which would interfere with investigatory or enforcement proceedings, impair a fair process, or put lives in danger.
 
HB 122 is a solution in search of a problem.  Its proponents have failed to demonstrate why such a measure is necessary.  Over 18 years, GRAMA's balancing test has worked well.  Please vote to leave it intact with a "no" on HB 122.
 

Alice L. Steiner

Co-President
League of Women Voters of Utah

(Mar 4)League Members,

The following was sent to the members of the Senate today.  You should contact your own Senator and urge them to vote no.  This bill is on the 3rd reading calendar and will probably be acted upon early in the day tomorrow.  Floor time begins at 8 AM.     SO PLEASE ACT ASAP.  Message was written by Sherilyn who has been tracking this bill with anguish. 

Dear Senator . . ..

The League of Women Voters has long supported open government, with citizen access to government generated documents used by government employees and deliberative bodies to make decisions.  This access allows citizens to raise issues prior to decisions being made and to better understand the reasoning of their elected officials.  HB 122, Government Records Access and Management Act Amendments, diminishes such access, and we urge that you vote no on this bill.
 
The Government Records Access and Management Act (GRAMA) was carefully crafted to balance the right of the public to know what its government is doing and the right of government to conduct public business effectively and efficiently, with disclosure only if "the interests favoring access outweigh the interests favoring restriction of access."
 
HB 122 changes this balance in seven categories of criminal, civil, and administrative investigations and proceedings (including audit, disciplinary, licensing, certification and registration matters) to require citizens to show by a "preponderance of the evidence" that the public interest favoring access outweighs the interest in favoring restriction of access, a much more difficult standard for citizens to meet.
 
This wording, admittedly, is an improvement over the original version of the bill, which would have required "clear and convincing evidence" on the part of citizens, but it still restricts access unnecessarily.  "Clear and convincing" is still required in one category if disclosure would endanger life and safety.
 
HB 122 also potentially protects access to records involving "anticipated or pending litigation," opening a wider window for denial of access.  GRAMA already contains exceptions for attorney-client privilege and attorney work product records.  It also protects records the disclosure of which would interfere with investigatory or enforcement proceedings, impair a fair process, or put lives in danger.
 
HB 122 is a solution in search of a problem.  Its proponents have failed to demonstrate why such a measure is necessary.  Over 18 years, GRAMA's balancing test has worked well.  Please vote to leave it intact with a "no" on HB 122.
 

Alice L. Steiner

Co-President

League of Women Voters of Utah

(Mar 3) Please contact your Congressman to let him know you support correcting this longtime injustice to DC residents. 

ACTION ALERT: House Vote Scheduled for DC Voting Rights
 
The 111th Congress is poised for critical action on DC Voting Rights.  Last week, the District of Columbia House Voting Rights Act of 2009 cleared the Senate, and this week  the House is set to vote on the legislation!  Congressional leaders have scheduled the crucial votes for Thursday, March 5. 
 
Now is the time to urge your Representative to support DC voting rights and OPPOSE ALL AMENDMENTS!
 
Voters in our nation's capital are not afforded the same rights as voters in the rest of the country. Citizens of the District of Columbia pay U.S. taxes, fight and die for the U.S. during wartime, and are governed by the laws that Congress passes. And yet they have no voting representation in Congress.
 
This bill will right this wrong. The legislation provides voting representation in the House for DC citizens by increasing the size of the House by two seats -- one for DC and the other for the state of Utah, which is entitled to the next seat by size of population. This balanced approach provides voting rights for District citizens without upsetting the partisan balance of the House. The legislation does not affect the composition of the Senate.
 
We are poised to make history.  Take action today!
 
TAKE ACTION
 
1. Contact your Representative now, by phone or by email, and urge him or her to support the DC House Voting Rights Act and oppose all amendments. Tell your Representative that the democracy Americans have fought for around the globe must be brought to our nation's capital.
 
Click here to enter your zip code and send an instant message to your Representative now!  Phone calls are helpful as well, and can be made through the Capitol Hill switchboard at 202-224-3121 or 202-225-3121.
 
2. Send this alert to other concerned citizens - your grassroots network, your friends and coworkers. Encourage them to contact their Representative today!

(Feb 28) OPPOSE VOTER ID in the SENATE!

League Members, 

We need to ask our Senators to vote AGAINST SB69 and HB126S01 which are likely to be debated on Monday.

SB 69 is #15 on the Senate Second Reading Calendar.   

HB126S01 is in the Senate Government Operations and Political Subdivisions Committee which meets at 8 a.m.

To call or email your Senator
http://www.utahsenate.org/perl/roster2009.pl

To find your Senator
http://le.utah.gov/maps/amap.html


A sample message below emphasizes the two main points about these unnecessary bills: 

No voter fraud has been found in Utah (including non-citizens voting) and disadvantaged voters often lack the ID they would need to vote.

Support HB 120 re Snake Valley Water!

(Feb 24) The League supports Second Substitute HB 120 Snake Valley Aquifer Research Team and Advisory Council, Sponsor:  Rep. Bradley Winn.
http://le.utah.gov/~2009/bills/hbillamd/hb0120s02.htm

Please ask your Utah House member to vote for HB 120.  The matter is urgent; it is now # 11 on the house calendar.

The aquifer contains the the water that the Southern Nevada Water District wants TO pump and transport to Las Vegas to support its urban growth  - The Las Vegas Water Grab.

The bill creates a Snake Valley Aquifer research team to compile available scientific data and an advisory council to advocate for Utah’s interests .

Here are some points you can make:

The research team and advisory council will give Utahns more leverage in this fight.  Our executive branch is strangely eager to come to a settlement with the Southern Nevada Water District.

The ranchers of Snake Valley tell us the aquifer is already under stress from their rather meager pumping.  Removing any more water would ensure the end of a unique Utah ranching culture (Remember Cecil Garland.) and create an ecological disaster.

We will have a dust bowl if the water table drops any lower and the native plants that hold the soil in place die.  The dust storms that ensue will be especially harmful to the Wasatch Front which can ill afford more bad air.  Remember the black skies from the Milford Flats fire.

Vote No on HB 208 Nonresident Tuition

(Feb 24) Please contact your House members today.
Ask them to vote AGAINST HB 208, Modification of Exemption from Nonresident Tuition
http://le.utah.gov/~2009/bills/hbillint/hb0208.htm

This bill is likely to be debated on the House floor on Wednesday.

Contact your Representative at
  http://www.le.state.ut.us/house/members/membertable1add.asp
or
Find your Representative at
http://le.utah.gov/maps/amap.html


******************************************************************************
HB 208 requires undocumented children of undocumented immigrants to sign an affidavit saying that they are not employed or earning income in the United States (unless their employment was authorized by a federal agency).

 If they are employed or earning income, they permanently lose the in-state tuition rate at State funded universities and colleges. 
 
HB 208 is clearly an attack on one group of Utah residents.  Although they are not citizens, their lack of citizenship in the United States is not their fault.  They were brought to the US by their parents when they were young. 
 
The thinking behind this bill is that the students “must be” committing identity theft to be able to work, although the sponsor did not cite any examples of students being charged with identity theft.  The president of Associated Student at the University of Utah (ASUU) indicates that he believes that these students are working without a Social Security number, off campus.  Although employers must request verification of ability to work in the U.S. since 1986, the form used does NOT require that a Social Security number be provided.  Also, small employers, such as households and one or two person small businesses, may not be doing the paperwork or may be accepting only one type of documentation from the student rather than the two required.  In other words, working does not mean that the student is committing identity theft. 
 
While the charge of identity theft is serious, students of all types can be charged with crimes from possession of drugs to fleeing the scene of an accident, etc.  Yet, the sponsor of this bill wants to punish one group of students with no evidence that they are committing the crime of identity theft while allowing students who are US citizens to  commit crimes and still retain the benefit of in-state tuition.  The bill is mean-spirited and because it is targeted to one group is indicative of an attitude of prejudice.  The bill does not require that the students be convicted of a crime before losing in-state tuition, only that they be members of a class of people who might commit a crime.  This approach fails the test of fairness. 
 
The LWV position on Immigration states that “The League of Women Voters believes that immigration policies should promote reunification of immediate families . . .(and) . . All persons should receive fair treatment under the law.” 
 
Please ask your representative to vote NO on HB 208. 
 
Thank you.
 
Alice L. Steiner
Co-President
League of Women Voters of Utah

Urgent Tuesday a.m. Ask your Representative to vote NO on HR 3 Resolution on Energy Policy -- Support Utah's membership in the Western Climate Initiative

(Feb 23) Please Take Action Tonight or early Tuesday!  Likely to be voted at 10:00 tomorrow morning!

HR  3 ­ Resolution on Energy Policy -- Noel
http://le.utah.gov/~2009/bills/hbillint/hr0003.htm),
Rep Noel urges the Governor of Utah to abandon their seat at the Western Climate Initiative table as the West develops a Climate Change strategy.

-It's important for Utah to be engaged in the policy debate to develop solutions that will work well for Utah;

-Participation will spur early adoption of energy efficiency measures that will reduce greenhouse gas emission, while saving Utahns money and making our state more competitive;

-Participation in the WCI sends a clear message to businesses that Utah is an active player
in one the fastest growing sectors of the national economy—Clean Energy;

-Through participation in the WCI, Utah will get credit for early greenhouse gas reductions.

Although HR 3 claims that the Gov's BRAC process was unbalanced, see the list of fossil fuel advocates that were on the BRAC. Complete list of BRAC members  at
http://www.deq.utah.gov/BRAC_Climate/docs/BRAC_Members.pdf

Rich Walje, president of Rocky Mountain Power;
David Litvin , Utah Mining Association;
Randy Parker, Utah Farmer Bureau;
Greg Schaefer, vice-president of Arch Coal;
Duane Zavadil, Bill Barrett Corporation;
Scott Gutting , Utah Association of Energy Users;
Aaron Tilton,  Utah House of Representatives

Please contact your Representative tonight!

HB 126 1st Sub Proof of Residency Required at the Polls and SB 69 Proof of Citizenship Required to Register to Vote

(Feb 22) There are two bills related to voters needing identification in order to
vote that have cleared their respective committees and will begin their
journey through the Senate and the House this week.

       UPDATE!
       Substitute HB 126 could be voted on by the House as early as tomorrow,
Monday afternoon.
       So please contact your Representative   ASAP on this one.

SB 69 requires government issued ID in order to register to vote.  It will
probably be voted on next week in the Senate.  This is the easier bill to
argue against since it has the potential of disenfranchising many types of
voters.  However, it should be noted that anyone who is registered to vote
in Utah at this point in time will not be impacted.  In an odd twist for a
voter ID law, it will only apply to people registering for the first time
in Utah.  The County Clerks are opposed to this bill.  We should contact
our senators and let them know that SB69 will make it very difficult for
many people to register to vote and it is very unfriendly to newcomers to
our State.  Your e-mail or phone call should go out on Monday or Tuesday of
next week.  Information to use in your e-mail or phone contact follows.
Please go to http://www.utahsenate.org/perl/roster2009.pl to find your
Senator and be sure to tell him/her that you are a constituent.

HB 126 1st Substitute requires proof of residency at the polls in order to
vote.  The two bills appear to be bookends but are being run separately.
HB 126 1st Substitute is harder to argue against, but we should
nonetheless.  The sponsor indicated that he had been contacted by poll
workers who were concerned about the inability of poll workers to recognize
voters when they are assigned to precincts other than their home precinct.
He claimed that he was putting this bill forth at the request of poll
workers.  The County Clerks have requested an amendment, but are not overly
concerned by the bill since the list of “identification” accepted is long
and varied and ranges from one form of a picture ID or two forms showing
your name and address.  Nonetheless, requiring proof of who you are at the
polls will make voting more difficult for the same groups of citizens.
Please find your representative and let them know that this bill will make
voting difficult for many groups of citizens.  You can find your
representative at: http://le.utah.gov/house/members/membertable1add.asp

Ask your Senator to oppose HB 27 Protection for Agricultural Practices,
Sponsors:  Rep. Michael Morley, Sen. Margaret Dayton

We have already asked you to contact your senator to express your
opposition to HB 27.  If you have not done so, you have a second chance.
The bill is circled in the Senate.  That means its opponents have raised
some doubts; the sponsor is worried.  We need to keep up the pressure.

Two points:  (1) You speak for yourself and not the LWV.  (2)  It is that
time in the session for being brief – legislators are under unbelievable
pressure.  Your well-crafted paragraphs and lucid reasoning may simply be
put in the “against” pile unread so think short and pithy.  Also, keep in
mind that legislators will be hearing from clean air and medical activists.

Read only as much of this as you need.  Better to send off a short email
saying you are against the bill.  The verbiage below is only to help you
feel comfortable about doing so.

The League’s Position

The LWV of Utah believes this bill removes language from the current law
that more reasonably defined what sound agricultural practices are, deletes
wording that gave the public some right to protect health and safety, and
goes further than current statutes to include large industrial processes in
traditional agriculture in order to give them the special protections we
might want for the family farm.

We fear that the proposed wording would make it impossible for Utahans’ to
sue large agricultural operations for air and water pollution and leave us
to clean up after the wastes of such establishments as the large, enclosed
pig farms near Milford.

Below are some bullet points that describe what is wrong with the bill,
give some background, and suggest some approaches you might take.

1.  HB 27 is touted as a response to a recent case in which a farmer was
forced to spend $60,000 to defend against suburban neighbors who complained
of alfalfa seeds in their swimming pool.  Urban sprawl and summer cabins
encroaching on agricultural land and then complaining about farms is a real
problem but can be addressed by other means like local planning and zoning
ordinances.

2.  HB 27 gives large, industrial agricultural operations the same special
protection it gives traditional agriculture.  In order to protect public
health and safety a large, industrial operation even an agricultural one
should be subject to the same rules as any other large industrial operation.

3.  The LWV has seen a long succession of bills touted to protect the "the
family farm" be used to protect large, industrial pig farms, etc.  HB 27 is
more of the same.  If you have opinions/feelings about contained animal
feeding operations (CAFOs) in general and the Milford area pig farms in
particular, now is the time to tell your senator.

4.  A good argument for you senator if an urban/suburban one:  As a good
hearted urban legislator you may believe you are helping farmers and
ranchers when they vote for bills like this when they are in fact aiding
and abetting agribusiness - not something favored by your constituents.

5.  If you live in a bad air county speak of the need to curb all sources
of pollution, even agriculture.  This bill will make it very difficult to
curb the truly dangerous pollution that emanates from egregiously large
agricultural operations.  Much of the opposition to this bill comes from
clean air advocates and physicians.

HB 126 - VOTER IDENTIFICATION FOR ELECTIONS    (Brad Daw) is in House
Workforce Services and Community and Economic Development tomorrow,
Thursday at 9:00 AM, IN 25 House (West Building), State Capitol Complex

The League agrees with the purpose of Representative Daw's  bill, which is
to be sure that only qualified voters vote-- to prevent voter impersonation
fraud.

However, we oppose the bill because we are concerned that the result will
reduce turnout by qualified voters without reducing fraud.

PLEASE CONTACT COMMITTEE MEMBERS AND REPRESENTATIVE DAW before 9
a.m. to let them know your thoughts.
The League analysis is below.

Contact information is at

http://le.utah.gov/house/members/membertable1add.asp


Rep. Steven R. Mascaro, Chair
Rep. Christopher N. Herrod, Vice Chair
Rep. David Litvack
Rep. Rebecca D. Lockhart
Rep. Kay L. McIff
Rep. F. Jay Seegmiller
Rep. Kenneth W. Sumsion
Rep. Christine F. Watkins

Thank you!
Sandy Peck
Legislative Action Coordinator

******************************************************************************