10 Responses to “LaVarr Webb On Campaign Limits”

1. John B Talcott Says:
   September 22nd, 2009 at 9:49 pm

   I don’t understand his article. What are “independent groups”?

2. John B Talcott Says:
   September 24th, 2009 at 9:42 pm

   I would really like to hear Rep. Craig Frank’s view on the ethics reform referendum.

3. JJL9 Says:
   September 25th, 2009 at 12:03 am

   I could be wrong, but I believe “independent groups” basically means that while there may be limits on the amount that I can contribute directly to a political campaign, I can start my own “independent” non-profit group that, by virtue of its independence, is not controlled by the politician I support. I can then accept and spend unlimited funds promoting whoever or whatever i want to.

   Does that sound right?

4. Rep. Craig Frank Says:
   September 25th, 2009 at 7:32 am

   JJL9:

   Your explanation is my preliminary understanding of the “definition” of independent groups. And, I believe this definition has been utilized by the Governor’s Commission on Strengthening Utah’s Democracy, of which I am a member.

   John:

   I’m still performing my due dilligence and discovery as I seek to formulate my own personal opinion about the independent ethics initiative (not referendum, referendum refers to reversing an action of the Legislature) proposed. I am but a single vote…one man, one vote. I have read the Initiative, I attended the public meeting the other evening at the Provo Library, I have extensively searched many sides of this issue, and have come to the conclusion that…I will continue to look into this issue some more before releasing a formal public opinion. But, an opinion you shall get…believe me.

5. Rep. Craig Frank Says:
   September 25th, 2009 at 7:43 am

   Also, as a side note, you might be interested to know as the Chairman of the House Government Operations Standing Committee (and Interim Committee), I’ve taken it upon myself to open two bill files, legislatively addressing some of the proposals and concerns of my colleagues on the Governor’s Commission on Strengthening Utah’s Democracy. And, although these bill files are “In Process,” they will directly address many of the key elements of Commission discussion and resolution, should the Commission’s recommendations not be forwarded to the legislature from the governor’s office prior to the 2010 General Session (beginning the 4th Monday in January 2010).

   Here’s the link: http://le.utah.gov/asp/billsintro/RepResults.asp?Listbox3=FRANKCA

6. Rep. Craig Frank Says:
   September 25th, 2009 at 7:50 am

   Sorry, the link above seems to take you to 2009.

   Use the following link: http://le.utah.gov/asp/billsintro/index.asp?year=2010GS

   After you get to the above linked page, click on the down arrow at the “representative” box and click on my name “c. frank” that should take you to the bill files. (Unfortunately, they’re in drafting…stay tuned)

7. John B Talcott Says:
   September 25th, 2009 at 8:10 am

   Thank your answer. l stand corrected on the definition of referendum versus initiative. I await your detailed opinion on which of the proposed ETHICS RULES in the citizen’s INITIATIVE that you feel you and your colleagues should not be required to follow.

   I fully expect that your opinion will address these core issues in the proposed bill rather than nit pick around the peripheral issues as was done by practically everyone who spoke against the INITIATIVE in Wednesday night’s meeting.

8. John B Talcott Says:
   September 27th, 2009 at 8:12 pm

   I assume Rep. Frank that by posting LaVarr Webb’s piece on campaign limits that you agree with his premise that they should be no limits only full disclosure. Is that true? Do you oppose that portion of the citizen’s initiative that would set limits on campaign contributions?

   You are aware I’m sure that Utah is only one of 6 states that does not have a limit on campaign contributions. One would think that there might be a good reason that 44 other states have chosen to do so.

   It is also true that half of the states also sharply curtail or completely ban donations from corporations to state campaign coffers as does the federal government. Do you disagree with this as well?

   It is a well known fact that money buys “face time” with busy politicians so that lobbyists and representatives of businesses can present their case one on one for the legislative outcome that is most beneficial to them. It is also well known that individual constituents have neither the money, time, or opportunity to make their views known to the legislator in so strong a fashion.

   I ask you then, who does the legislator truly represent—hypothetically speaking, of course? Is it the corporations such as Energy Solutions with their deep pockets, or the constituents in one’s voting district?

9. Rep. Craig Frank Says:
   September 27th, 2009 at 10:54 pm

   You can assume, John, that I think Mr. Webb’s proposal may have merit and should be studied and debated…in public.

10. John B Talcott Says:
    September 28th, 2009 at 9:17 am

    Good politically evasive response there Craig. It shows that you have had a lot of practice using that technique. If you don’t agree with any limits on campaign contributions, why don’t you have the courage to come out and say so, instead of beating around the bush. You know, kind of like giving your political views and values some of your much touted “transparency”.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.