Republicans: You should listen

By Kelli Lundgren

I will get to redistricting, but before I begin…

Utah Republicans, would you like some advice?  I know, I know, you don’t need any advice from someone that’s in “that other group,” the “everyone-but-Republicans-group,” that "you-must-be-a-Democrat-if-you're-not-a-Republican-group."  But I’m going to give you my advice anyway.

You need to go moderate. 

Republicans, you think good government groups during the redistricting process were “a front” for the Democratic Party.  Some were not.  Our group, Represent Me Utah!, was not a front for the Dems.  Before you start hemming and hawing about this, I will give you a concession.  Represent Me Utah! and the Democrats, along with many other voices, joined forces toward the middle of the process, and definitely in the end. We had exactly the same goals: fairness and transparency.  We weren’t fighting Republicans.  We were fighting for democracy. 

Democrats and media can rifle through 16,000 pages of redistricting correspondence, of tit for tat, of who did what to whom in the fight to grab conservative votes and dilute liberal votes, but you forgot to mention the biggest loser; our U. S. Constitution. 

Without elaborating much, redistricting needs to go independent in all states.  The same computer models used behind the scenes to dilute unwanted votes and suppress voters should be used to the contrary.  Computers should be used to create fairness instead of squash it.  They can be used to create compact boundaries; keeping cities, counties and communities together as much as possible.  Utah’s public overwhelmingly asked Utah’s legislators to keep communities together during the process, both urban and rural residents.  We were ignored.  

Redistricting by power to keep power is a huge slight on democracy.  And it has become a given in our nation; even in the media.   It's like gerrymandering is supposed to be part of democracy and accepted.  It should not be accepted. It's not democracy.  

Utah’s Republican legislators during the redistricting process, but not exclusive of it, muffled the votes of moderates and liberals.  They acknowledge this.  But they turn around and say it is legal.  Utah Republicans say there is no proof that they violated the Voting Rights Act so we can’t sue; that is, Democrats and others can't sue.  Yes, others.  The middle ground is forgotten in this state; including independents such as myself, including the many Republicans who voted for reasonable. 

Why did Utah’s liberals, moderates and conservatives vote for Jim Matheson?  He’s reasonable. 

Why if Jon Huntsman won the Republican ticket for President of the United States, would he have most likely won the presidency over President Obama?   He’s reasonable.

Get reasonable Utah Republican leaders.  Stop stomping on votes you do not like.  Stop minimizing people not like you.   We’re shouting back.  You should listen.

Woman to Woman: Really, You’re Voting for Romney? Please think about this.

By Kelli Lundgren

I get it. We are so busy with life, who has time for politics?  We’re woman and many of us are finalizing our decision right now on who we will vote for for president.  And lately, it looks like many of us are leaning right, toward presidential candidate Mitt Romney, toward change.  I can see the enticement, especially if life just isn’t as good as we had hoped.

Yet, please think about these issues... 

Regarding health care, the Affordable Health Care Act, or rather Obamacare, it's scary, but guess what?  Our college age sons and daughters can now receive health care on our insurance plans versus being vulnerable to a catastrophe without insurance, without a hospital breathing down a family member's neck for payment.  If you are a small business owner, female or male, and have a self-employed insurance policy, you now won’t be dropped from insurance coverage when you get sick because of new rules.  It makes sense.   

And also, women, we have a pre-existing condition according to health insurance companies... we’re women.  This is discriminatory and our President is trying to fix this through his new plan.  And why shouldn’t insurance cover birth control pills?  Do women really exist in a world where decisions are made for us by men as had been touted by the Republican candidates in the primaries?  I think not.  Republican politicians cannot just suddenly shut off all the blather about what a woman can and cannot do and pretend it is an etch-a-sketch moment.

Health care costs are rising.  The root of this problem has not been addressed by either political party.  Yet I do not see Republicans going after the health care industry.  They keep touting “It’s a free market.”   I keep decoding it as, “If you want to live, pay.”  Why vote for this?

As far as the deficit goes, it’s a problem, and it could be another ledge like 2007 if we don’t address it.  However, women, did you know that when our country was led by Ronald Reagan, George Bush Sr., and G.W. Bush we had significant red ink, and with Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton, black ink?  It's true.  See link.   Romney and Ryan's Republican supply-side economics philosophy (lower federal taxes to boost the economy) has proven to be an insufficient way of balancing the budget. 

President Obama inherited an economic disaster in 2008. President G.W. Bush had been spending in the red for years without a recession to stimulate.  Bush spent five trillion dollars off-the-books.  It honestly went on the books when President Obama came into office.  Now, instead of using deficit spending to bolster our country at the start of a recession, the red ink spending was already occurring years previously.   

Romney and Ryan, while running for president and vice president, are not telling us what they intend to do, except to lower taxes even further (lower than current record low rates), increase military spending, and decrease mysterious other expenditures.  Arithmetic says Republicans will not solve our deficit’s pending disaster.

I will tell you this, when Romney and Ryan elude questions on what expenditures they will cut, one that keeps cropping up is the mortgage tax deduction.  If Romney is really planning on eliminating the mortgage tax deduction, it is a slap to the face of the middle class and another potential downturn of our home values.  The very wealthy will be affected little by this, but almost every one of our working class homeowners will.  

I argue right now we are heading out of this recession.  The residential home value and construction world looks promising.  We pivoted into a healthy market finally last June with a shrinkage of homes available on the market, and with some markets turning into sellers' markets.  Demand has finally caught back up to what was excessive inventory, thanks in some part to the federal government offering low interest rates and mortgage bond purchases to free up credit.  Growth in home ownership equities is suddenly healthier.  The future is promising. 

And our jobs.  Well, any change looks great, including a change to Romney, simply because he’s a change.  But change isn’t always better.  We haven’t heard details of Romney’s plan. The plan he’s given to economists, in evaluation, does not calculate, does not balance the deficit.

Our country simply cannot balance a deficit by increased military spending and further reduced taxes; Romney’s plan.  It was the G.W. Bush plan in the 2000’s and it simply did not work, as we all painfully know.  The Republican way of "cut, cut, cut," "deregulate, deregulate, deregulate" and "stir up wars" finally ran amuck and out of control.  Our economy was artificially over-stimulated in 2007 by this Republican method and it will be again if Romney has his way.

America is growing out of the Great Recession, slowly but surely. My industry--residential construction--sees a lot of light at the end of the tunnel right now.  And when my industry grows, jobs grow, and the economy grows through free market, the better choice rather than “cut taxes and increase military spending.”  Increased private construction means many people on food stamps will go back to work.  States will enjoy an even greater tax revenue because of increased consumer spending and increased property taxes on homes and buildings, which are appreciating in value versus depreciating.  We’re in an upward cycle of a win/win under President Obama’s care.  Please don’t risk this.

A balanced approach to a balanced budget makes sense; stir the economy then start cutting back on expenses, including military.  Raise revenues once our economy can sustain itself in its housing recovery; maybe back to the tax rates in our economic glory years of President Clinton.  

Don’t place the fox back in charge of the hen house.  Romney and company, including Karl Rove, are the fox.  We will risk any strides we have made pulling out of the 2007 tragedy by putting supply-siders in charge once again.    

Women, you’re now looking at these candidates and deciding.  Great.  But choose the promising future, and ride a decent wave with President Obama. We’re heading in the right direction; a balanced direction, a sensible approach.

(This is an opinion of Kelli Lundgren and does not necessarily represent the views of all members of Represent Me Utah!)

A 120-Day Sign of Recovery? By Kelli Lundgren

Would you like to hear something positive rather than slanderous this election year?  How about this: I predict a notable increase in residential construction jobs in the next twelve months to help pull the U.S. further out of this recession.   I’m not an economist yet I follow real estate closely and am a real estate developer.

Here’s what’s happening: Most U.S. recessions historically start their recovery by an increased demand for new home construction.   We have been waiting a long time for this to occur, longer than usual.  

Yet in the last 120 days, just this summer, supplies of existing homes in the U.S. have shrunk dramatically, remarkably.  I witnessed availability shrink significantly in Utah and Hawaii where I track the markets closely. U.S. housing demand has caught up with supply, even when including foreclosed homes.  This means my friends in residential real estate development; general contractors, drywall, framing, foundation, window, paint, and electrical laborers, light fixture retailers, all, will see a pickup in labor and material demand for both new home construction and existing home improvements.

Confidence is back.  Demand for growth is back.  Record low interest rates finally kicked in while pent up demand acted, while supply and demand balanced out, while homeowners now have fewer reasons to sell, keeping their homes off the immediate market.

From my perspective, the 2008 economic crash was an adjustment.  Our economy had been artificially inflated by greed and a government looking the other way; over-built real estate, incredibly easy credit, and inorganic demand… all were ready to burst.  And they did.  I need not have to remind anyone.  

Americans borrowed from far into their futures while Wall Street profited. (First, second and third mortgages, depleted home equities, high credit card debt, exponentially increasing student loan debt, government debt and deficits off and on the books).  We were working in an economy that couldn’t sustain itself, thus it was and still is to a good extent an artificial economy.  

           

Economists remain skeptical, but I do not.  Experts say we’re growing too slowly to make a real estate recovery stick.  It’s possible they are right.  However, growing slowly may be good.  If Americans are cutting back on credit purchases and buying homes only because they need to and not to flip homes over speculation, we have a more realistic-growth economy, not one that is borrowing exponentially from the future. 

America, we can do this if we do it right.  We can grow based on current consumption dollars rather than future dollars.  New construction jobs can pull people off welfare.  More tax revenue comes in. Government can then cut back on expenditures that would have otherwise sideswiped a weaker economy.  And the cycle begins.

No matter who is elected president in November, he needs to oversee this key new trend carefully, and not neglect regulations, inflation, etc. as was done before 2008.  Almost nothing better can help pull our nation out of a recession than a healthy housing market.  

True, outside variables could possibly hinder residential construction expansion: a European recession or depression, world conflict, climate change, more droughts, the budget deficit, oil price gouging, an obstructionist Congress, or an unpredicted event.  But I am too optimistic right now in my own home building industry to buy into the bickering this election year. 

This comes from the entrepreneurial side of this independent voter.  My liberal side says only build highly-energy efficient homes, starting now.  And create a plan to wean our world off of oil.  This seems an ideal new starting point where we can be proactive.

Let’s keep moving forward on this slow-growing path out of this recession.  New construction jobs stimulated by free market rather than federal stimulus are fantastic.  And real-time (not artificial) economic growth based on new jobs and less consumer debt is even better.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-09-18/housing-s-wealth-effect-to-start-nudging-u-s-spending-economy.html

Predictions for America if Romney Wins, if Obama Wins

By Kelli Lundgren

If Presidential Candidate Mitt Romney is elected in November:

• A change of president will foster increased consumer confidence, stimulating the economy. Hope of change for someone "better" no matter his actual effectiveness produces a renewed enthusiasm in those that voted for him.
• The stock market will spike up in value in November, especially for the Fortune 100 companies, although values will eventually adjust back to reality.
• Wall Street may ease credit.  Combined with historically low interest rates, this will further spur an already stabilizing real estate market creating more construction jobs.  Wall Street will have its president of choice in office; one that offers deregulation.  This is good for the short-term, possibly bad for the long, especially if big banks are still too big to fail.
• The extreme right wing will likely relax protests and moral attacks on women, contraceptives, minorities, health care reform and federal government overspending.  But they will strongly pursue prayer in public schools and co-mingling religion with government, hoping that Romney is on board.
• The budget deficit will continue to grow for years, perhaps at an even a greater rate under Romney’s Republican supply-side economic watch. (The deficit historically has grown at a greater rate under Republican presidents rather than Democratic).  Republicans will keep budget deficit growth quieter, less transparent; similar to what was done in the G.W. Bush administration.
• The economy will be business as usual under Romney and will continue to grow slowly with unemployment shrinking gradually in spite of Romney’s claims Obama didn’t do it right.  Our country is having to pull out of one of the most devastating economic crashes in American history; over-stimulated, self-corrected, or more accurately, federal government sustained.
• U.S. oil, gas and mining ventures have been expanding significantly under Obama's watch. They will continue to do so under Romney, possibly expanding at an even greater rate under the guise that the U.S. should be self-sufficient, even though more of our energy production is exported rather than used at home. 
• Utah’s Republican distain for federal government will reduce to a simmer, as it did during the G.W. Bush Presidency.
• I’ve never met Mitt Romney.  He seems nice, yet Americans don’t appear to be getting to know him in his campaign.  He is in “tell people what they want to hear” mode.  It would be refreshing to know the person under the pretense.  We may never get to know who he truly is.  If president, people may quickly start to distrust Romney if the economy does not grow or he pushes us into another war.
• Once the vitriol of the presidential campaign is over, and if Romney wins, Republicans will soften up on Obama and forget they ever had such despise for our first black president.

If President Obama is re-elected in November:

• Americans left and right will feel a psychological let down.  Obama is a moderate.  Liberals will vote for him in November but don’t believe he is doing justice to important causes.  The right has painted him bad no matter what he does right or wrong. The right will feel they were slighted if Obama wins.
• Obama seems fairly transparent.  If you want to know what he thinks about America, about the Constitution, about life, about long-term vision, read the books he wrote before he became president.  Education, self-responsibility, and self-esteem are critical issues to him.  Also, he isn’t hiding his past or his tax returns.   His motives are consistent and open for debate.  This is good for a country’s long-term.  He is a likeable person only if individuals are open to liking him.
• Obama will do more daring things in his lame duck presidency; cut back on military spending, push for more education, and hopefully create a long-term plan to wean us off of oil and coal; the plans he desired before he inherited a falling economy.  Congress will still push back; Republicans in Congress will still throw a temper tantrum even over good ideas.
• Tea Partyers will rise again and rally if Obama gets a second term. 
• The economy will still grow under Obama's watch, slowly.  Maybe this is not so bad.  With Obama, Wall Street will continue to attempt to find ways to lend almost-free money to people, and the Federal Reserve will keep interest rates low.  It will further stir the awakening real estate market, which historically helps an economic recovery.  Perhaps slow growth is better than run-amuck greed that lead us to the edge of a cliff in 2007.

Lastly, seriously, and for our future, this year's elected U.S. President should lead the world in addressing and fixing CO2 levels in our atmosphere.  We should have started 20 years ago.  It's time to get serious.  It's time for politicians to stop denying the data.

As climate change continues, drought ridden states will look to the federal government for subsistence, flood ridden shores will too, and too many people world-wide will be looking to the U.S. to help in famine, extreme heat, and unexpected cold.  There will not be enough federal and state dollars to deal with this, nor familiar environments to produce usual crops, etc., if we do not start now reversing this course.    

Represent Me Utah! presents at Harvard on Redistricting

By Kelli Lundgren

I didn’t realize how much city expansion and growth are academically studied until I had the opportunity to visit The Lincoln Institute of Land Policy at Harvard in Cambridge, Massachusetts. I was invited to speak on April 21 to national journalists about Utah’s 2011 redistricting process.

My presentation was for the afternoon on Day Two, so I had time to listen to other speakers, including former Chicago Mayor Richard M. Daley, and to chat with the Institute’s leaders and several prominent journalists.

The good news for Utah is our state is a topic of land policy conversation for primarily three things. Our progressive UTA light rail system, the EnvisionUtah.org program to plan for growth, and the new City Creek mall. For EnvisionUtah and its importance, Utah will gain an additional one million residents in the next thirty years along the urban Wasatch Front, two-thirds of which will come from internal growth from large families. Utah is trying to plan for this with open source software many other cities are also interested in since projections show a fleeing to urban areas across the world over the next fifty years.

Lincoln Institute of Land Policy Journalists Forum

As to my presentation on Utah’s 2011 redistricting process, I don’t need to rehash this. Basically Utah’s Congressional, Senate and House maps were drawn to favor Republican candidates for office and Republican political agendas, including the latest flare up in the 100-years-long Sagebrush Rebellion.

After presenting Represent Me Utah’s side of the issue, I suggested a solution for our nation’s redistricting; one that takes partisanship, bias, human emotion, and political agendas out of the process. My idea is to define a set of prioritized quantitative parameters, including the consideration of current political boundaries, then use the same sophisticated software programs that are now used behind the scenes to dilute unwanted minority party votes, and instead use these parameters to calculate fairly and nonpolitically new compact boundaries that keep cities and counties together as much as possible.

For journalists, redistricting is last year’s news. Professor Michael McDonald of George Mason University, whom I consider our nation’s academic guru on redistricting, seemed intrigued by my presentation. However, my suggested solution may require a major change in our state and/or country’s government process. It's a good thing we have nine years to work on this.

While touring Boston and Princeton battlefields where George Washington fought the British, visiting gravestones so old names had eroded away, and viewing historic architecture from the eighteenth century, I had a thought:  I don’t believe forefathers and American revolutionaries foresaw American politics today. I think they would shudder in their graves at our two-party system that veers toward political ideology rather than pragmatism, common sense and a vision of fairness and progressiveness for all people.

Why are equal rights even an issue in Utah? How can corporations be people too? Why is it okay for leaders to choose voters in redistricting? Democracy is running amuck. It’s a game where powerful political parties see how much they can stretch the intent of the Constitution for their own self-serving purposes.

Even our U.S. Supreme Court is divided into conservatives and liberals and vote based on their biased interpretation of a tool of good intent, the Constitution.

Politicians sometimes respond with “Well that’s the way our country operates.” As an entrepreneur, I can’t help but ask, “Why? Why do we just take what’s given without analysis and critical thinking? Why do we need to continue archaic and polarizing processes?”

I realize democracy is a slow moving political system, and there is great benefit to that. But why not change the way our country is redistricted? Considering reapportionment, George Washington didn’t foresee sophisticated computer systems being used to dis others politically, or didn’t see that the majority in the middle would find it extremely difficult to obtain millions and millions of dollars in funds to create an option to only two powerful party choices. We need to make this fair again.

Represent Me Utah! wants to expand the horizon and go after the root of the redistricting problem nationally. We’ll keep you posted.

Lack of vision and maturity belittles our nation

By Kelli Lundgren

Gas prices too high? Blame the president. The economy growing too slowly? Blame the president. Health care costs are no problem for you? Criticize Democrats. Finding society morally reprehensible? Make it more difficult for women to obtain contraception while the men creating laws ensure Viagra's blanket health insurance coverage. Offer food to North Korea for government cooperation? Attack our president for politicking.

Some facts: the speculative commodities market affects gas prices even though U.S. oil production is at an all time high and we export much of our oil. Should the federal government take control of this free market? Maybe not, or maybe remove it as a commodity. But that would be federal government intervention, a taboo to Republicans.

Our economy is slowly pulling out of a recession, rather than a decades-long depression because our federal government provided a safety net by going further into debt. This trigger historically happens in every recession, whether under a Democratic or Republican president, but this time it was added on top of two unfunded wars and years of irresponsible debt build up. If we remember correctly the 2008 recession had been induced by an out-of-control free market as our U.S. Congress looked the other way.

Other facts: Health care costs are soaring, so is health insurance. You want to live, pay.

Lives will be saved with food sent to North Korea. Shouldn’t this matter more than politicking?

For Republicans shouting states rights, they seem to expect just about everything from President Barack Obama. I hear messages: Give us federal money and earmarks, don’t tell us what to do, and accuse the federal government of fiscal irresponsibility. Everything difficult in our county is the president’s fault, everything good can only be brought by Republicans, those that seem to forbid compromise, those glued to Wall Street.

I love free markets. I am an entrepreneur. But some markets have made themselves no longer free.

I am a person, but my corporation is not a person. Big corporations pay big campaign dollars and have many politicians wrapped around their big balance sheets (I can't say "little fingers" because those are reserved for people).

At the same time, human and equal rights, and tolerance, are being threatened by presidential candidates. Even Utah’s local leaders are failing non-discrimination laws and retracting proven-effective sex education in schools.

I'm hearing too many "We know what's best for women" comments by male presidential wannabes lately. Why would any woman, or couple planning their family, vote for one of these guys? I do not understand any willingness to submit to this demeaning behavior, but I also understand this is just my opinion.

Sensibility somehow needs to eventually prevail or we, the people, will not progress as a society, or more broadly, as a civilization.

Where are vision and maturity in our leaders? Where are facts and rationale? These attributes and truths seem to be lacking in too many politicians.

----

(Opinions only of Ms. Lundgren. My dear friends and political activists in Represent Me Utah! may or may not agree.)


www.RepresentMeUtah.org

Eight things I have learned as a first-time Utah Capitol Hill observer

By Kelli Lundgren


1. With 1,000 bills being presented in this Utah State general legislative session, it astonishes me that some of our politicians accuse our federal government of socialism.

2. Numerous times ideology has trumped sensibility in legislative debate and outcome. Reasonable decisions and compromises are being made, but man, the nonsense that sometimes occurs is entertaining and scary at the same time.

3. Bills get sacrificed. “You give us this. We’ll give you that.” Politician versus politician, party member versus party member, party versus party, spy versus spy. Compromise is good, but leveraging the killing of good bills for the passage of bad, I’m not sure its worth.

4. The media throws polls and facts at the legislature, saying 75% of citizens are in favor of this, 63% of citizens oppose that. Silly media, thinking legislators will listen. (But keep trying! We will too.)

5. Political activists are alive and well, some paid, some volunteer like us. I meet with several in the Senate cafeteria at the liberal table. All the Davids up against the Goliath are pigeon-holed as liberal in this state, so we aptly fill a bulging table. But also, you have the Eagle Forum table, the labor union table, the militia table, and the media table. People wander around carrying a lunch tray anxious they may sit down at the wrong table.

6. Political activists admit they are addicts. “How many years have you been doing this?” I say. “Eight,” he says. “Have you ever swayed legislators to fail or pass a bill?” I say. “No,” he says. In silent response, I stare deep into his eyes knowing I have only peeled the outer surface of this onion.

7. In conversation with anyone on the political spectrum, when you offer a solution or a practical idea, you get a response of “that’s too rational” to pass through this legislature.

8. It’s all about control. If a city proposes and implements an idea, say a vehicle idling ban, or the federal government sends our state money with contingencies, bills fly all over the place in Utah, telling cities what they can and cannot do, telling our nation (after we cash the check) it can take a flying leap.

--

Asking a supermajority-led legislature to make it easier for full citizen participation is nearly impossible, we realize. so Represent Me Utah! attends the general session to watch the legislative debate and influence where we can.

Represent Me Utah!’s focus is to lobby citizens, not so much the legislature. We tried to focus on the legislature during redistricting and were unsuccessful. We are only grassroots without much money. Yet the public is where change can happen.

Of all the distorted ideological bills on Utah’s Capitol floor this year, and there are plenty, the one I find most fascinating is the bill that allows Utah to distribute hunting permits to kill wolves. Anywhere from zero to six wolves possibly reside in Utah, reintroduced into Wyoming through a wildlife restoration project. But come on.

Other ideological bills, such as elimination of sex education in public schools, and discrimination against the LGBT community are among several. I can’t believe there is actually a for-and-against debate on discrimination... of anyone, or that it's even a discussion. How embarrassing for our state. These bills do not go into my “fascinating” category. They go into my “ignorance” category.

www.RepresentMeUtah.org

A False Enemy

Why, if Mitt Romney becomes President, Utah’s frenzy over states’ rights will dissipate.


By Kelli Lundgren

I firmly believe that whether Senator John McCain or President Barack Obama became President in 2008, our national debt still would be a huge spiraling problem. Tarp money still would have been distributed to prevent a depression. Our President still would have consulted the same conservative economists. Stimulus money still would have been spent to keep people working on roadways and projects. Welfare and unemployment rolls still would have bulged. Iraq and Afghanistan war costs eventually would have been placed on the books. And our nation would hurt no matter what.

Could President Obama have done better? Yes. I think he’s the first to admit this. I believe every new U.S. President needs two to three years to become fully functional in their leadership position.

Steve Jobs of Apple told President Obama that because of the market crash no matter what Obama did he would be a one-term president. Jobs could have been right.

During the President George W. Bush years, conservatives praised the President as he could do no wrong, voting him back into office for a second term. Life was good for most Americans, yet behind the scenes the nation’s balance sheet was going bad, and a meshed banking system with Wall Street was getting greedy.

Why do I rehash this? Because conservatives have picked an enemy during this recession. They picked anything “liberal.” They picked the wrong enemy.

If (the actually moderate) President Obama says the red couch is red, many conservatives say it’s blue. Some conservatives in Utah prevent their children from listening to this Democratic President in public schools. Utah, along with a few other conservative states, are shouting states’ rights, throwing anti-federal government bills at our nation, essentially saying, “You’re doing this to us.”

Conservative U.S. Senators and Representatives say their main directive is to remove Obama from office no matter what it takes. They threaten National Public Radio, the Consumer Protection Agency, those on welfare, saying they are sources of our nation’s deterioration. Really?

Here’s the scoop, liberals did not start and continue the run-up on our deficit. Both Republican and Democratic leaders horded and continue to horde earmarks and stimulus dollars. States are raising taxes. Our federal government is not.

Liberals do not use legislation to prevent conservatives from practicing their beliefs. But the same does not apply to conservatives. I have seen several bills scoot through Utah’s legislature that do just that, trying to make others conform to the conservative view on life.

Liberals alone did not cause this recession (see above). But it seems liberals are now the greatest threat, the biggest fear, the people that have allowed this nation to run amuck. An enemy for some reason must be found, and that enemy is President Obama, and anyone that believes in him.

In Utah, leaders are planning for and spending two to three million taxpayer dollars this year to focus on suing the federal government, demanding our nation hand over its lands in our state.

Conservatives seem to be trying to get others to conform to their views, their definitions, while even conservative views vary greatly. How could there possibly be one standard for all? Why do we polarize our country into only two ideologies, when really, we all need each other as a community? We need to continue to pull out of this recession together.

I see an emotional wall being erected on the perimeters of Utah's state. Yet we should not isolate ourselves from those we disagree with, or find fault with. The moment we look for fault, we need to look in the mirror and take responsibility. Finding enemies does no one any good.

Utah citizens were the holdouts in their loyalty to President George W. Bush. Up until the last few years of his presidency, several conservatives seemed to think Bush could do no wrong.

The same will hold true with Mitt Romney if he becomes President this year. He will be able to do no wrong in Utah’s eyes. And Utah’s states’ rights under Romney? What states’ rights? Oh yeah, that thing. Utah will have forgotten. The notion of states' rights will go away. The nation will be welcome in Utah once again. And Utah parents will freely allow their children to watch a President Romney speak in public classrooms.

Oh, the irony and sadness of defining an enemy. How distractive and unproductive it has become.

Don Quixote and Utah Voter Turnout

By Kelli Lundgren

We admit it, Represent Me Utah! is a newbie at this legislative thing, even at political activism in general. Last year when we began our plight, we learned a lot about Utah’s political process during the redrawing of voter boundaries. We had the pleasure to meet and get to know several of our state’s leaders and other political activists, both those we agreed with and disagreed with. We gained respect for several of these individuals.

We also gained heartburn from the redistricting process and its unjustness in Utah and throughout the country. So with this burning in our hearts, we’re continuing our pursuit of democracy in Utah in 2012; Q, Jenny, Sue, Sarge, Kim and Kelli.

Our goal this year is to increase Utah’s voting percentage to 50% of all adult Utah citizens (not just registered voters) in November’s general election. This figure dipped down to around 34 to 36% in 2010. Utah comes close to the bottom of the pile in voter participation. I can speculate many reasons for this. Yet if more voters voted, we would have a better balance in Utah’s government, a.k.a. “Why Utah’s Republican supermajority government doesn’t want to see more voters voting.”

Yet Represent Me Utah! is driven and members are attempting our goal of increased citizen participation. That’s why we are opposing Rep. Kraig Powell’s HB 253 Voter Registration Amendment, which will remove registered voters off of voter rolls if they are inactive. Counties already separate “active” from “inactive,” and from “removable.” As of this writing, HB 253 unfortunately passed through House committee with partisan votes of 6 to 4; Republicans for, Democrats against. It’s on its way to the House floor.

Ironically, time and money are already being spent to qualify a voter inactive, so it takes no effort or money to simply keep them inactive until they choose to participate. 230,000 registered voters are listed as inactive, and according to HB 253, they will be removed from the list if the bill passes and passes legal muster. “A voter is responsible to vote,” I paraphrase Rep. James Dunnigan, “If they don’t vote, they should be removed from voter lists.”

A cycle perpetuates itself. Utah used to have extremely high voter participation. In the mid-1970’s, our state headed conservative in its leadership, and voters stopped voting. So for years, when Republicans redistricted to dilute “the other side’s” votes, when caucuses tightened their rules so only a fraction of “active” members of each political party chose candidates to run for office, the 50% of Utah’s independent voters and many of Utah’s moderate Republican voters began to get shut out of the process. Now we really think we are shut out. So now Republican legislators think it’s a good idea to remove 230,000 inactive voters. And the cycle continues.

Represent Me Utah! wants to break this cycle. Did you know that Utah’s registered independents/unaffiliated account for more Utah voters than Democrats and Republicans combined? We have the largest unaffiliated percentage in the country.

If the unaffiliated block of voters gets out to vote, along with ALL Republican voters, and ALL Democratic voters, our government would look much different. But we all have to vote. Republicans and Democrats, please participate in caucuses to bring good candidates into the primary and general elections. Independents and other political parties, try to bring candidates to the general election too. (To find out how to get involved in a caucus or affiliate with a party, go to www.RepresentMeUtah.org)

Represent Me Utah! is feeling a little Don Quixote-esque. But one thing for certain is we haven’t given up on our state. And we don’t want other citizens to give up either. We’re in this for democracy. We’re in it to get voters out to vote. I can’t think of a better cause because a strong democracy affects every other concern we may have; environment, education, economy, fiscal responsibility, and equal rights for all. Let's work on an equal say for all, then we can have a better say in these other issues.

www.RepresentMeUtah.org

Near-future topic for our blog: Utah’s States Rights Focus, and why, if Mitt Romney becomes president, states rights will become a moot point.