Referenda – What Are They Good For?
Lee Benson’s article Friday touched on my thoughts regarding Utah’s referendum process. In short, I like the process.
Excluding golf, you can’t say an activity is dumb just because you lose a contest. Likewise, my thoughts on referenda are unchanged by the recent pounding my voucher bill took.
The referendum concept is sound. People give legislative bodies and government as a whole the power to act. Sure, people have the ability to affect those actions through the election process. But, that opportunity is somewhat removed from directly reacting to any specific piece of legislation. Referenda act as a rip cord. If the populace thinks that government got something terribly wrong, the referendum process allows the public to step in and take immediate action. Just like the checks and balances between the branches of government, this is a way to prevent excesses and – as is needed to preserve healthy democratic republics – a way to vent steam. Our system of government is designed to encourage battles within the system, not out on the streets.
Utah’s referendum process is sound. It is tough to get a referendum on the ballot in Utah. The high hurdle virtually guarantees that the attention given to a referendum item will be significant and serious (unlike in other states where the bar is low and referenda see less substantive dialogue). Even though I dislike the outcome on Referendum 1, I can’t deny and don’t deny that the will of the people was done. They spoke up, officially reviewed the bill, and rejected it.
I fully realize that some combatants want to deride the quality of dialogue that surrounded Referendum 1. Again, I think much of the dialogue was wonderful – easily on par with much of the dialogue we are privileged to witness in the Legislature.
As I hope my 7 years in the Legislature and my more visible (or at least my more readily-researchable) 3 years of blogging show, I’m a process guy. Give me good process, and I can easily live with the outcome.
Speaking of which, for those arguing that vouchers should never again be brought up, that’s not how the process works. The 3/8th of the people who embrace the idea of vouchers (at least as it was captured in my bill) can continue to work to put it in a form that achieves broader support. And, of course, others have the right to oppose those effort and/or find better solutions.
As a process guy, I believe that we’ll find the right place on education and all other issues, if (and only if) people dedicate themselves to the process and stay at the table.
Excluding golf, you can’t say an activity is dumb just because you lose a contest. Likewise, my thoughts on referenda are unchanged by the recent pounding my voucher bill took.
The referendum concept is sound. People give legislative bodies and government as a whole the power to act. Sure, people have the ability to affect those actions through the election process. But, that opportunity is somewhat removed from directly reacting to any specific piece of legislation. Referenda act as a rip cord. If the populace thinks that government got something terribly wrong, the referendum process allows the public to step in and take immediate action. Just like the checks and balances between the branches of government, this is a way to prevent excesses and – as is needed to preserve healthy democratic republics – a way to vent steam. Our system of government is designed to encourage battles within the system, not out on the streets.
Utah’s referendum process is sound. It is tough to get a referendum on the ballot in Utah. The high hurdle virtually guarantees that the attention given to a referendum item will be significant and serious (unlike in other states where the bar is low and referenda see less substantive dialogue). Even though I dislike the outcome on Referendum 1, I can’t deny and don’t deny that the will of the people was done. They spoke up, officially reviewed the bill, and rejected it.
I fully realize that some combatants want to deride the quality of dialogue that surrounded Referendum 1. Again, I think much of the dialogue was wonderful – easily on par with much of the dialogue we are privileged to witness in the Legislature.
As I hope my 7 years in the Legislature and my more visible (or at least my more readily-researchable) 3 years of blogging show, I’m a process guy. Give me good process, and I can easily live with the outcome.
Speaking of which, for those arguing that vouchers should never again be brought up, that’s not how the process works. The 3/8th of the people who embrace the idea of vouchers (at least as it was captured in my bill) can continue to work to put it in a form that achieves broader support. And, of course, others have the right to oppose those effort and/or find better solutions.
As a process guy, I believe that we’ll find the right place on education and all other issues, if (and only if) people dedicate themselves to the process and stay at the table.
posted by steve u. at 11/11/2007
Subscribe
15 Comments:
A key weakness I noted through the referendum process was that the proposed legislation (HB148/HB174) was missing from the Voter Information Pamphlet. Future referendums and initiatives should include the proposed legislation that voters are voting on. I've asked the Lt Gov to recommend how best to resolve this.
Many have suggested that a nice set of earplugs to tune out all those inane radio commercials would have been beneficial. Perhaps they can be included with future additions of the Voter Information Pamphlet as well.
The lesson to learn from R1 is that Utahns are not free-market conservatives. Even a better voucher bill (no voucher for high income households) would have been rejected by a similar margin.
We ARE conservative in the sense that we like God, guns and military spending and dislike gays, porn, tiddy bars and abortion, but we are not small-government, low-tax types.
Utahns want government to provide (not just finance) education, provide telecommunications infrastructure, golf courses, recreation centers, electricity, reception centers, etc. While the rest of the world is moving towards privatization, Utah is not and probably never will.
The other western states were founded by "rugged individualists". However, Utah was founded by a religious people fleeing persecution and trying to set up a (semi-)theocratic cooperative.
State and local governments in Utah, which in most cases are run by devout Mormons, have replaced the would-be theocratic cooperative.
If you want create a free market state with a (classically) liberalized economy, Utah is not your best bet. Try Arizona.
Rep. Urquhart,
I watched parts of your debate with Carmen Snow and still think your numbers ($7500-$2000 = $5500 in "savings") are not justifiable. I would also think that the text of the bills, especially lines 309-315 of HB 148, would lead more voters to vote against the referendum as they reveal the general fund money was just for show. The voucher check is written from the general fund, but the districts ALSO return money equal to the voucher to the Uniform School Fund where it just sits until the next year. The state breaks even overall, but the school and district lose money.
That said, this blog is why I hold you in much higher esteem than many other voucher proponents. Thank you for not forgetting that we are not "subjects." Referendums are crucial to allowing the people to have a voice. I may lean a little towards making the hurdle for a referendum a little lower, but agree the standard should be high.
Utah Teacher,
Your posts are consistently thought provoking. By the way, I am not ignoring your comments from 2 posts below. I'm just processing. In fact, I discussed many of your suggestions at length w/ Rep. Last. I do sense that Utahns actually would like to see some results-oriented reform, but I sense that it will be very tough to come together on what that means.
Your post today does highlight a weakness of the referendum process (and a reason why I'd want to keep the hurdle high). You are as informed as any citizen out there -- but you misunderstood some of the financial aspects. Don't get me wrong: many legislators did too, but they had the opportunity to directly ask me or legislative staff how it works.
The provision you site refers to the mitigation money. Districts would have received the WPU for the students who left, but they would have given back the average amount of the voucher (that is the minus $2,000 amount).
In reviewing my math, you rightly would have reached the conclusion that the WPU minus the voucher amount would not have left $5,500. That amount comes from total expenditures per student that would remain (e.g., WPU, block grants, local contributions such as property tax).
Does anyone really believe that, had Proposition 1 been approved, the NEA, UEA and PTA would have gracefully accepted the will of the people? Well, neither will the parents or tax payers. With the defeat of Proposition 1, we are now back to square one and precisous time is lost. The issue of parential control and choice in the education of their own children has not been addressed. The crushing tax increases looming as a result of the staggring growth of our public school student population now remains unaddressed. All of the problems with the current system that triggered Proposition 1 in the first place remain and fester. The legislative battles over public education content and funding haves only begun. The education of our children is far too important to leave soley to government and its limited intelectual and financial resources. The legislature and the teachers unions may be able to bob and weave over public education for another year or two. This is deadly serious business. The fact remains that the crushing consequences to the tax payers, for our failure to pull together and address the public education crisis, is now at our door and is coming home to roost. Every tax payer and every public school and every studet will feel its wrath. Voin Campbell.
"I fully realize that some combatants want to deride the quality of dialogue that surrounded Referendum 1. Again, I think much of the dialogue was wonderful"
I wholeheartedly agree. I think the discussions that occurred at the water cooler and on various blogs were awesome. Some of the early tv spots were lame, and that seemed to mar the whole process for a lot of people. But the fact that education, and improving it, was at the forefront of the political scene for so long was a great thing.
Rep. Urquhart,
Thank you for your comments. My comment on the other post is more general and just trying to provide all points of view--no need to reply specifically. I'm glad you're discussing the ideas.
It looks like I was unclear in mixing my objections to the $5500 dollar savings figure and the shell game involving MSP and mitigation funds in the same paragraph. I would also submit that any misunderstanding of the funding by legislator or public member was caused by the over-simplified presentation of $1 billion in savings through $7500-$2000 = $5000 left to be "redistributed" or not spent at all. I feel I understand the true funding mechanic of the voucher because of research I did as part of the referendum process and not just reading legislative quotes in the paper.
I ran into your posts on the UTOPIA blog and felt an ironic sense of empathy. You seem to be politely questioning the asserted costs of a taxpayer-financed program using facts. I feel the same way here. =) (But unlike you, I've not been bashed here which I appreciate.)
Common sense (If one student leaves my class, does the district save 1/5 of my salary?) and the official state document on WPU reject the claims that $7500 is spent uniquely on each student rather than spread among benefits to all students:
http://le.utah.gov/interim/2007/pdf/00000364.pdf
"The WPU is NOT a plan of expenditure, or budget...but a mechanism to derive total program cost and distribute revenues." (Caps mine)
The local and federal money is almost exclusively fixed costs, and even the state MSP is allocated to teachers of hundreds of students rather than individual students. The marginal savings for removing one kid from a given school is a couple bucks in paper until you remove enough from that one school to remove a teacher, and the total voucher removal then costs more than the savings for one teacher. I think the effective redefining of those true savings was the greatest PR success of the voucher campaign.
As for the cost to public education of each voucher, during the 5 years of mitigation and after, the best explanation--too long to cut and paste to my already long comment here--is from my Nov. 2 blog post on Nuts and Bolts and the BYU professor's voucher editorial. See the example of Average Timmy. But for now--lines 203-204 of HB 148 assign the voucher check out of the general fund. Lines 309-315 in the mitigation money section show that the same amount is also subtracted from the district and put back into the Uniform School Fund. It's double subtracted and NOT redistributed! Here's my summarization from another post:
To sum up the voucher hustle -- For a first grade student next year who switches because of the voucher law HB 148, the state gives the districts an average of $1800 for five years in exchange for taking $3800 for twelve years. That money taken or withheld each year sits in the Uniform School Fund until the next year, NOT being redistributed or spent on classrooms, schools, or teachers, but still counted as education funds to fuel the deception of 1 BILLION DOLLAR SAVINGS!
And that is where I think the disconnect between perceptions of value comes from. The state saves $2000 in the Uniform School Fund for five years and $3800 for every year of school after that, minus the cost of the voucher from the general fund. But the local school and district, where I submit the loyalties of the average taxpayer lie, both lose money for each voucher. Many proponents are philosophically OK with that loss on the grounds of free-market competition. I disagree, but we can honestly debate the difference in opinion. I get frustrated when that philosophy is masked by misrepresentations of how redistributed "savings" will actually increase money for schools.
Thanks for allowing everyone to be heard!
leading to the replica handbagsodd spectacle of replica watchesthe defendants being wholesale clothingquestioned both by state Men's Clothesprosecutor Hakan Designer clothingRoswall and industry lawyersDesigner replica handbags from the music and movie replica handbagindustries. Fredrik Wholesale jewelryNeij was questionedbody jewelry by lawyers who tried Replica rolex watchesto paint him as replica watchesthe point man wholesale shoesfor The Pirate Baynike shoes operations.Replica Handbags Peter Danowsky, Replica Handbagwho represents the Coach Handbagsmusic business, Gucci Handbagspointed out that Niej owned fashion sandalsThe Pirate Bay's domainladies sandals and then showed him leather walleta contract he had signed coach walletssaying that he would oversee wholesale jewelryoperations for the site. Neij'slouis vuitton bag response?women stores "But replica handbagsI didn'trolex watches read clothes storeit."
The apparentdata processing service disconnect betweendata processing the defendants data processand a prosecution convinceddata processing service that The data processingPirate Bay isdata process an organized data processing servicecriminal data processingenterprise swimming indata process cash prompted everquest 2 goldSwedish Pirate eq2 platParty leaderEver Quest 2 Rick Falkvinge eve iskto reflect on eve online iskthe "generation clash"eve online between thehellgate london palladium two sides. But Hellgate Londonprosecutors gaia online goldand industry gaia goldlawyers remainwow gold prices convinced that the make wow goldappearance wow gold makingof disorganizationvery cheap wow gold is an illusionselling wow gold. Many of wow gold pricetoday's questionscheapest wow gold turned on Thewow gold guides Pirate Bay's wow europe goldrelationship with wow hacksan Israeli businessman who buy gold for wowserved as an ad some other business ideas.
Children and teenagers who face the greatest risk of nutritional deficiencies tend to use vitamin and mineral supplements the least, researchers reported Monday.Among 10,828 US children ages 2 to 17 years old who participated in the 1999 to 2004 United States National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, roughly 34 percent had used vitamin and mineral supplements in the past month."We hypothesized," Dr. Ulfat Shaikh told Reuters Health, "that children who had poor diets (low vegetable intake, low milk intake, high fat intake, low fiber intake), world of warcraft goldwow power levelcheap wow goldwow power levelingwow powerlevelingbuy wow goldEverQuest 2 goldeq2 platfaced food insecurity, had less physical activity and poor access to health care, would use such supplements more.""What we found was for the most part the opposite of what we expected,"cheap ffxi gilffxi gilfinal fantasy gilMaple Story Mesosmaple story accountmaplestory MesosLOTRO Goldlord of the rings goldLOTR Golddofus kamaskamas dofus said Shaikh from University of California Davis School of Medicine, Sacramento."Other than children who were underweight (we did expect these children to use more vitamin and mineral supplements and found this to be true from the data), runescape goldrunescape powerlevelingrunescape moneyArchLord goldarchlord powerlevelingbuy ArchLord goldflyff penyabuy flyff goldflyff moneyWarhammer goldbuy warhammer goldchildren who used vitamin and mineral supplements were for the most part healthier, had more nutritious diets, greater physical activity, lower sedentary activity, lower obesity, lower food insecurity and better health care access,"
Yim's group looked for a link between placental corticotropin-releasing hormone (pCRH) and postpartum depression. The researchers took blood samples from 100 pregnant women at various stages during their pregnancy and tested for levels of pCRH.They also assessed the women for signs of depression during pregnancy and about eight weeks, on average, after delivery.In all, 16 women developed postpartum depression. world of warcraft goldbuy wow goldcheap wow goldwow power levelingwow powerlevelingeverquest 2 goldeq2 platIn each case, the women had had high levels of pCRH at 25 weeks into their pregnancies, the study found.final fantasy 11 cheap gilbuy ffxi gilffxi gilfinal fantasy xi gilmaple story mesosmaplestory mesosmaplestory mesoThe blood test, which was found to have a high degree of both specificity and sensitivity, could identify about 75 percent of women who would develop postpartum depression, Yim's team found. lotro goldlotr goldlord of the ring goldrunescape goldrunescape moneyrunescape itemsThe test misclassified about 25 percent of the women.When the blood test was combined with assessing symptoms of depression during pregnancy, Yim noted, it was even more predictive of postpartum depression.dofus kamaskamas dofuswarhammer goldbuy warhammer goldCheap warhammer goldflyff penyabuy flyff goldflyff moneyIf the findings can be replicated, then testing the level of this hormone might become standard care, Yim said."eve iskeve online iskarchlord goldbuy archlord goldPostpartum depression affects so many women that it would be great to have something that would help to identify being at risk early on, and perhaps develop strategies to prevent it," she said.
When thefake designer handbagslearned that lesson I am so happy to get somereplica louis vuitton handbagswith the spare money and I gain somefake bagsinfants in incubators and others customer service cheap handbagscustomers who really appreciate our service. replica handbagsand Robert Wade.
nike shoes
jordan shoes
nike dunks
nike air force 1
nike shox
nike shoes
nike shox
nike dunks
nike air force 1
nike shox
nike shoes
nike shox oz
nike shox nz
nike shox r3
nike shox r4
nike shox r5
nike shox tl
nike Air Force 1
nike shoes
Jordan shoes
nike sb dunks
cheap nike Air Force 1
cheap nike shoes
cheap Jordan shoes
cheap nike sb dunks
discount nike Air Force 1
discount nike shoes
discount Jordan shoes
discount nike sb dunks
nike shoes
nike shox
nike dunks
nike air force 1
jordan shoes
nike shoes
nike shox
nike dunks
nike air force 1
jordan shoes
nike shoes
nike shox
jordan shoes
puma shoes
nike dunks
nike air max
nike air force one
timberland boots
ugg boots
nike shoes
nike shox
nike air force 1
nike sb dunks
puma shoes
nike air max
jordan shoes
ugg boot
jordan sneakers
timberland shoes
bape shoes
nike shoes
nike shox
nike dunks
nike air force 1
jordan shoes
Post a Comment
<< Home