More and more often I find myself agreeing with the The Sutherland Institute and their policy positions. This new essay takes me even further down that road.
Kudos to these authentic conservatives for a stance on immigration that actually makes sense. It is so refreshing to see self proclaimed conservatives move beyond the standard “I oppose illegal immigration because it is illegal” argument. Nearly all of the ills presented in this standard anti immigrant argument would be alleviated if the immigrants were made legal and permitted to work within our system as natural citizens do.
I haven’t read the whole essay yet but am curious how far down the immigration road Sutherland is willing to go. Are they also arguing for open borders? It is hard to justify support for making illegal immigrants legal while also arguing in favor of closing the border to others who would come here to make better lives for themselves if they could immigrate legally. I’ll report further after I’ve read the whole essay.
H/T KVNU’s For The People
I’ve been away from blogging for the past week or so because my dad had a stroke last Tuesday. I was on my way to the Sutherland Institute for their environmental forum when I got a call that an ambulance had left my parent’s house.
My dad is doing much better this week and will likely be going home soon. There isn’t anyone I know who is as cool and as stong as my Dad. I’m glad he is going to be able to pull through. It sure stinks to see something like this happen to someone you love.
If anything good can come from this event I’m hopeful that it is a greater education on the part of anyone who sees this post on what the symptoms of a stroke are and a how important it is to get medical help as quickly as possible if you or someone you know gets any of those symptoms.
It isn’t often that I can say Bob Lonsberry is exactly correct about something. This article is one of those few cases.
UPDATE 04/18/2008 11:03AM: Guy Murray at Messenger and Advocate has an even better rundown on the weakness of Texas’ case after the first day of hearings.
H/T Alienated Wannabe
Unless you already know what the Monty Hall Problem is or are just a freaky genius who never falls victim to logical errors you should read this article and then be a little more humble about your assumptions from now on. I know I will.
The Monty Hall Problem is excellently explained in the game linked in the article.
H/T LDS Science Review
Glen Warchol has a description of our heroic immigration system in action.
We need real immigration reform and I’m not talking about a bigger fence at the borders. We need a system that allows non-criminals into our country to work or recreate as they wish. If they want to be citizens make the process strict but streamlined. If they just want to work here we should make sure they meet a limited number of qualifications and then tax their earnings appropriately. Legalize immigration and the vast majority of its ills will disappear.
Or we could adopt the typical conservative immigration plan which is to demand that our government keep doing things the moronic way we do now…only more.
Scott Adams on our current batch of presidential candidates:
According to Time, ethanol is very bad economics and disastrous for the environment.
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1725975,00.html?
The major candidates for President of the United States all support ethanol. If Time has correctly reported the consensus of expert opinions on ethanol, it seems to me that any candidate who supports it would be proved incompetent for leadership.
Is Time’s cover story wrong, or will the next leader of the United States be certifiably incompetent on day one, no matter what time the phone rings?
Any presidential candidate who claims they know right now how to solve America’s energy and environmental woes is likely to screw things up even more and isn’t worthy of our vote. Daniel has a great post about how policy makers should proceed sensibly when it comes to making energy policy.
Lisa and I are complete noobs when it comes to shooting and purchasing handguns. We’ll be taking a class this week that includes some range time and use of several different handguns. Hopefully that should get us off to a good start. If any readers have good advice on purchasing firearms it would be much appreciated.
Here are the handguns I’m most interested in right now. They’re all 9mm. My wife and I will both be practicing with this gun and I want to buy something she’ll be completely comfortable shooting.
H&K P2000 I haven’t fired this yet but respect H&K’s reputation. We want a reliable weapon so this is currently my first choice.
Walther PPS This is a brand new model. That concerns me. My bro-in-law has one we’ll likely be trying out at the range before we make a final decision.
Sig P239 A small gripped gun with a single stack magazine. I’m assuming that will be easier for a woman with small hands to use and easy to conceal if necessary. Am I wrong? I’m tempted to go with the model that shoots .357 sig ammo (also available on the p2000) but that could get expensive.
If anyone has ideas on how I can help make shooting enjoyable for Lisa I’d appreciate hearing them. She’s been very ambivalent about guns as long as I’ve known her. She does want to get one now though so I want to ensure we do things correctly.
I liked this post by Mick Stockinger at Uncorrelated today. His politics are pretty loony (but often articulated well). His social commentary is nearly always right on and very fun to read.
I enjoyed the post but at the same time remembered how very glad I am not to have to play the dating game anymore. It was fun but also terribly stressful.
I had never been to a precinct caucus meeting before tonight. The meetings for Democrats and Republicans in district 16 were held at Northridge High School in Layton. The Democrats had about 20 people in our meeting while the Republicans probably had 8 to 10 times that number and had to use the school’s auditorium.
The Democratic caucus went well. I especially appreciated meeting Carole Peterson, candidate for the legislature. Her background as former chief clerk (30+ years) of the Utah House of Representatives makes her an excellent candidate in this race. She’s seen the political misdeeds of the Republicans who’ve run the capital for the past few decades. She knows for certain what needs to change and how to make those changes. I emptied my wallet and donated what I could to her as soon as the meeting was over. We need representatives who will be responsive to their constituent citizens and who aren’t part of a graft producing machine. Ms. Peterson spoke about her respect for the importance of the office she’s running for and her long career of careful non-partisan service as chief clerk of the House testifies of her sincerity. Anyone who can help her campaign out or donate really should. Beating Kevin Garn won’t be easy…but its not impossible either. If anyone can do it in our area of Davis County I’m betting it is Ms. Peterson.
There wasn’t a lot to vote on in the caucus. Democrats don’t have multiple candidates for any office up for election this year in our precinct so we had a good time meeting each other and called it a night. As our meeting adjourned the Republicans had just ended their large group meeting and had broken up into smaller groups. They were going up the stairs while we were going down. I saw several people from my ward, including my Bishop, following the herd upstairs.
There were times leading up to tonight when I had considered joining that herd only because it sometimes seems so hopeless for Democrats in Davis County. As I watched the dozens of Republican men and women who filed past the handful of Democrats we had I knew for certain that there was no way I’ll be switching to Republican. There is no logical reason for there to be such a political imbalance in our community. A significant portion of the Republicans I saw have exactly the same policy priorities our Democrats have but they’ve accepted the foolish cultural dogma that only Republicans represent their values. Utah’s political environment would be far more dynamic, ethical, and trustworthy if there was real partisan competition in our state. I’m glad I participated tonight if only to do my small part in helping that happen. Utah deserves better than we’ve currently chosen for ourselves. I’m hoping and acting on the belief that our situation is reversible.
My favorite economist blogger is sending some much deserved praise to my favorite overall blogger. I completely agree with her…Radley Balko’s blog really is probably the most valuable one out there right now. His efforts to catalogue injustices perpetrated by those responsible for maintaining our safety and security are invaluable.
It is cool to read about someone else I respect who is reading and enjoying the same blogs I pay attention too. I check every one of the blogs/websites listed over there on the right hand side of my site on a daily basis. Each one has earned my respect and I’m grateful for the effort they all put into providing me with their ideas and information free of charge! If your bored select one at random and give it a look.
UPDATE 3/18/2008 6:55: While I’m handing out blog love I figured I’d pass out a mention to what is becoming the most consistently entertaining read in the whole Utah bloghive. If you haven’t got Glen Warchol’s blog in your RSS reader you really should put it there. The Trib isn’t paying that guy nearly enough.
Because there apparently aren’t enough real criminals to pursue in Utah, Attorney General Shurtleff wants everyone to remember that he’s looking to fine people who bet on March Madness brackets this year.
Utah: The state where it will always be illegal to be an adult.
UPDATE 03/11/2008 11:07: I like VOU’s proposed solution to the silliness that is Utah’s extreme gambling prohibition.
Tom made an interesting comment on this post about SB2 (the education omnibus bill) that I’ve been thinking about for a couple of days. I think he’s probably right.
This omnibus bill may be unconstitutional under the Utah Constitution. (See Article VI, Section 22)
One argument in favor of calling it constitutional would be to consider it an “appropriations” bill, which is partially true. However, the constitution requires it to be a “general appropriations bill”, which I would argue it is not. (See SB1 for an example of a general appropriations bill.) Further, there are stand-alone sections of the bill (e.g. lines 469-491, which come directly from HB 419, a bill that had no appropriation), which give further evidence to the notion that this bill has a) more than one subject, and b) the title (”Minimum School Program Budget Amendments”) does not accurately reflect the body of the bill, both of which are constitutional requirements of bills.
It’s clear in my mind that at the very least, the intent of Art VI Section 22 was violated by the omnibus approach.
I’m no lawyer but it does seem that Tom has a point. I was pretty disappointed that the legislature was able to throw all this stuff into an Omnibus and get it passed as one bill. Commonsense dictates that the people aren’t well served when legislators can avoid voting on substantial changes to Utah law and new programs by sticking them together with essential appropriations in an omnibus bill. It seems that Utah’s constitution is on the side of commonsense in this case.
Thank you Tom!
Here is an interview Brian Schweitzer (Democratic governor of Montana) recently had with NPR. It is very short and sweet and forceful explanation of the foolishness that is “Real Id”. Give the interview a listen then try to imagine Gov. Huntsman being that cool. Pretty hard eh?
It would sure be nice to have a chance to support a candidate like Mr. Schweitzer in Utah. Do you think it is possible that a state like ours, so heavily influenced by cultural Mormonism, could ever elect someone known for his willingness to kick butt in the fight for our freedoms and rights instead of someone well-known because he’s really rich, really pretty, and really Mormon?
Bob is right again (no surprise). This wasn’t a tax shift…it was a tax increase used to give subsidies to Utah’s business interests.
I’ve been self employed and may do it again in the near future. I’d love to get help with health insurance costs but not on the backs of my fellow Utah taxpayers.
Again…where is the vaunted Utah Taxpayer Association? This is very clearly a new tax on everyone meant to benefit Delta Airlines and a few small business owners. Is Barbara right in her comment on this post? Is UTA really just another business lobby willing to throw citizen taxpayers under the bus if it benefits their donors?
