Second you have ignored what LLW actually is, I detailed what it is, I named Household items that you find in all houses(BY LAW) that are considered LLW. I named what items off of the nuclear facility’s are considering LLW.

I will post the link again just in case you need to reread a bit.

http://underthedome.org/?p=870

My “enlightened opinion” as you call it Ronald is that like the majority of Utah’s citizens, I do not want my state to become the dumping ground for the world’s nuclear waste. Once that door is opened to Italy, then it will be harder to refuse other country’s waste. Energy Solutions has a history of trying to up the ante for hotter and hotter waste once it becomes “established” in an area. In Utah we need to draw a line, regardless of how many millions they dangle in front of our elected officials.

http://underthedome.org/?p=870

I will also note that I am in favor of the green river nuclear plant that has been proposed, I do wish they would choose a design that was better at conserving water however.

On the issue of campaign finance reform however do agree with you that we need a bit.

http://underthedome.org/?p=538

My question to you and your colleagues who oppose the ethics reform initiative is “What are you afraid of?” An independent and impartial citizen’s ethics commission will shine the light of day on ethics charges that are found to have merit, unlike now when they are dealt with in back room closed door meetings of the Republican power brokers. You folks keep bringing up the value of “transparency”. What is more transparent than a citizens commission that is truly independent of any branch of the government having oversight on the practices of the members in the legislature?

I beg to disagree with your last statement Rep. Frank. As an elected public official in the State of Utah you are ACCOUNTABLE to all of us, not just your constituents. You are in public service to the State of Utah, not just to a small group of people in your district who get out and vote. I’m surprised you don’t know this already. You may not “represent” me or my views Craig but you are accountable to every citizen, including me.

I believe most Utah state candidates and legislators have generally this same philosophy. However, the Ethics Initiative assumes the worst in people and works from that point. I prefer to start from a more optimistic stance (and faith in good people) and work from there. Naive?! Perhaps. I’m one of those guys who wakes up in the morning takes a look around and thanks God for all my blessings. People are inherently good. At least the people I represent. They are my neighbors, friends, associates, and family. They are part of me and I am part of them.

The people who elect their representatives are the ones who create the level of accountability they expect from their representatives. It happens every two (or four) years at the ballot box. Here’s an example: There’s a guy I used to serve with in the Legislature, Aaron Tilton (you may know him). His electorate decided a couple years back that they preferred to have someone else represent them, and by a majority margin elected Francis Gibson to represent them, instead. I’d have to check, but I think Aaron had significantly more campaign capital (mingled with “special interest” money) in his account than Francis–yet Francis was the victor. There you have it. Our system of government, our representative republic, works. And, it works every time. The People decide. If the people decide to be apathetic…the People decide.

(John, I’d ask that you be careful with your elicit illustrations on this blog. I’m aware of a number of young people who read this blog on a regular basis, and, we as responsible adults wouldn’t want to be responsible for putting salacious images in their heads. I respect people’s first amandment rights…but I will disapprove further comments with content like your last paragraph…you’ve been warned.)

Have you ever tried to get “fact time” with your representative when the legislature is in session? They most certainly find the time for those lobbyists who showed up at the legislator’s fundraiser paying thousands of dollars at the door. If the legislator doesn’t listen to them, they might not be so willing to step up when next year’s fundraiser comes around. It is the old “quid pro quo” and “you scratch my back and I’ll scratch yours. That is why we need campaign contribution limits so the legislator will have to go to the grass roots level and get lots of small donations from the voters instead of a few large donations from special interests.

There are many examples of why this is a problem that needs to be addressed in Utah. Take Energy Solutions for instance. There are those who think that Utah should not be known as the “outhouse” for the world’s nuclear waste. Obviously the management at Energy Solutions thinks otherwise. That corporation in Utah has perhaps a few hundred employees and just a hand full of well paid people in management at the top of the food chain. Now compare the few hundred voters associated with the company with the tens of thousands of average citizens who do not have the same money and clout. Corporate donations need to be banned outright and limits put on all other political contributions in order to LEVEL THE PLAYING FIELD.

It is not about honesty, dishonesty, or corruption. It is about the legislator being responsible and accountable to the electorate. “Whoever pays the piper calls the tune” is a fact of human nature. You can feel “beholden” to your largest contributor without being dishonest.

If campaign contributions are indeed free speech, then one could use the same logic justify bribery, extortion, and paying a prostitute on the same grounds. “Your honor, I was just exercising my right of free speech by offering the young lady $50. It was my way of saying how nice she looked in that mini skirt with the high top boots”.

Only if you are so naive to believe that money is equal to speech.