Saintless

I’ve known Curtis Haring for a couple of years, now. Not only is a really good guy, he’s really impressed me with his dedication to the Democratic Party, and making it better. He’s been knowledgeable on every subject I’ve discussed with him, and he’s put a lot of effort into understanding the how’s and why’s of Utah politics. During the recent Legislative Session, anytime a bill came up that I needed to know more about, I almost always found a wonderful overview of it on his blog. He covered hundreds of bills, with very details analysis. I can’t begin tell you how impressed I was with that, because I know how much effort had to have gone into it. He’s also been on the Board of the Young Democrats of Utah for 5 years. This position of responsibility isn’t new to him, and he’s going to rock once he’s elected!

That being said, Curtis is running for the 2nd Vice Chair of the Salt Lake County Democrats. I will be voting for him this Saturday at the Salt Lake County Democratic Convention, and I hope you will, as well. Take a look around his blog, Blue in Red Zion, and I know you’ll be impressed. I believe his past experience is perfect, and that he has the perfect organizational skills that the SL County Democratic Party needs!

If you need a little more reason to vote for Curtis Haring, check out Bob Aagard’s endorsement, or JM Bell’s.

Tags: Curtis Haring, endorsement, Salt Lake County Democrats

This is priceless. You may remember Jack Thompson as the disbarred lawyer and figure behind the recent video game bill that Gov. Huntsman vetoed. Thompson himself showed up here in the comments, apparently hoping to debate me and/or spread some more of his lies.

Anyway, even though Utah Senate President Waddoups supported the video game bill, Thompson is apparently harassing him:

In an e-mail sent out earlier today, Thompson claimed that Utah State Senate President Michael Waddoups (R, at left) has threatened to have him prosecuted if the disbarred attorney doesn’t stop sending him e-mails.

Waddoups, who presided over the Utah Senate as it overwhelmingly passed Thompson’s video game bill earlier this month, apparently became upset by an Easter Sunday e-mail in which Thompson attacked Utah Attorney General Mark Shurtleff.

[...]

To back up his point, Thompson included a large screenshot of a pair of strippers giving GTA IV protagonist Nico Bellic a lap dance. Why Waddoups reacted so strongly is not entirely clear, although it is possible that he was offended by the picture. Or perhaps he has grown weary of Thompson’s persistent attacks on Gov. Huntsman and A.G. Shurtleff, both fellow Republicans. GamePolitics contacted Waddoups for comment, but the Senate President did not return our call.

GamePolitics has plenty more, including excerpts from emails flying back and forth between Waddoups and Thompson. I’m looking forward to the article in the Salt Lake Tribune tomorrow morning, as alluded to by Thompson.

My guess is, whatever the outcome, that video game bill won’t see resurrection next session.

Update: The Salt Lake Tribune already has their article out.

Waddoups, on Tuesday, confirmed he would attempt to pursue legal action under the federal CAN-SPAM Act of 2003.

While that law carries a punishment of up to $11,000 in fines, it covers “e-mail whose primary purpose is advertising or promoting a commercial product or service,” according to the Federal Trade Commission.

The Attorney General’s Office has not looked into the validity of using that or any other law to prosecute Thompson because Waddoups has not yet filed a complaint.

Tags: Jack Thompson, President Michael Waddoups, video game bill

I’m all for open debate, and making Representatives answer for their votes. But, this video shows that Rep. Jason Chaffetz is participating in pre-planned attacks, designed only to badger the Democrats, with no clear purpose or ability to make progress. It’s simple kindergarten bullying. From Politico:

Cantor’s floor staff has created a photo album to help identify the 42 most vulnerable Democrats. The aides send daily e-mails to the members of the attack team and alert lawmakers when these targeted members are speaking on the floor. They even draft quick scripts to help focus the questioning.

This is beyond childish. And it’s embarrassing, since apparently, Chaffetz made an idiot out of himself when it was his turn up, and it didn’t quite turn out the way he wanted. Go, Utah!

As Politico says, about this video:

Of course, these attacks don’t always work out. Virginia Rep. Gerry Connolly, a veteran of party politics, quickly turned a Chaffetz challenge against his attacker. The Utah freshman also appeared flustered when Kilroy left the floor recently as he launched another line of questioning about her AIG vote.

Perhaps this is an alternative explanation for Jason Chaffetz blocking me on Twitter. Hearing from me was sometimes a little taste of his own medicine. Oh, and what was that advice Chaffetz had for the President again?

(h/t Glen Warchol)

Tags: Representative Jason Chaffetz

Newcomer to the United States House of Representatives, Jason Chaffetz, has some balls, all right (emphasis mine):

Rep. Jason Chaffetz, R-Utah, lent tentative support to President Barack Obama’s war policy in Iraq after spending two days in the war-ravaged nation as part of a congressional delegation.

“Thus far he has been pretty good at listening to the generals. I just hope that continues,” Chaffetz said. “My advice to the president is don’t let politics drive the timeline.”

Seriously? Chaffetz (in all of his worldly experience) thinks he’s finally got a chance to advice President Obama about something (yeah, right) and he tells him not to let politics drive him? I mean, because we all know Chaffetz gave a moment’s consideration to anything dealing with the budget that wasn’t politically driven. Uh, huh. Ri-i-i-ight.

Though, maybe this explains why Chaffetz blocked me on Twitter. He was afraid I might be a terr’ist, like all them other lib’rels, and since he was traveling to see the rest of them terr’ists over in Iraq, it was dangerous to keep me on Twitter!

I wonder if Obama laughed him out of the room when he gave that advice, or treated him more like a pesky fly?

Tags: Representative Jason Chaffetz

Surfing through my RSS feeds, I come upon a post from Senator Greg Bell that starts with this:

A college student wrote to ask me for her class assignment what the most pressing issue facing our society. I decided not to speak to moral issues but said the following:

My first thought was “Wow! He’s not going to go with some religious pronouncement that gays are ruining marriage, or that letting children see alcholic drinks poured in restaurants is going to make them grab the nearest bottle and drive over grandma.” Then, I wondered what the subject would be. Being a Utah Republican, it wasn’t likely that he was too worried that bad environmental policies are going to leave our children without a planet upon which to reside. Nor was it likely that he’s too worried that Utah’s one-party rule is bad for our state. Highly doubtful that it had anything to do with Human Rights, or the lack thereof, of any sort. So, what could Sen. Bell think was the most pressing issue for our society?

Although he never mentions Democrats or Obama directly, he infers that the whole economic mess we’re in is their fault. Yep, those Obama Democrats are the “most pressing issue facing society”. Here’s how he starts out:

The most pressing governmental policy issue is the expansion of the federal government into areas I believe are unconstitutional. And whether or not these actions are unconstitutional, the funding for the federal government’s programs and bail-out packages is unsustainable. The government has shouldered staggering debt to finance programs and the bail-outs. The massive expenditure of funds in the bail-out/stimulus packages will, by almost everyone’s admission, cause serious inflation. Moreover, taxes will have to be increased, jobs and company expansions will be curtailed with higher taxes, and more and more people will become dependent on the federal government for income, health care and food.

Apparently, it’s ok for the State of Utah to tread on unconstitutional ground, though. I mean, they just passed a bill with the purpose of funding the legal battles that come from attempting to ban abortions. Um, which is unconstitutional. That’s about the point I started feeling pressure in my head. Then I got to the point where he used the word “unsustainable”. Because I can think of a ton of ways that government practices are unsustainable, and most of them are related to the environment, of Bush’s (and the GOP’s) last 8 years, which got us into this mess to begin with. So, he’s seriously telling this college  kid that GW’s trash heap that Obama’s attempting to clean up is somehow all Obama’s fault. That’s about where my head exploded.

He then takes the opportunity to give himself and the rest of the Utah Senate a nice pat on the back by saying how neighboring states are failing, but Utah is doing the right thing, and businesses like us.

Wait, what was the original question, again? Oh, yeah. “What is the most pressing issue facing our society?” His answer: ‘Those darn Democrats. But Utah politicians are the good guys’. Way to stay on topic, Senator.

Anyone have a better answer?

Tags: economy, Utah Senator Greg Bell

Thanks to @gwarchol for alerting me via Twitter that Gov. Huntsman vetoed HB 353 (Truth in Advertising Act Amendments aka Video Games Bill) today! At the very end of this News Advisory on the Gov’s site, it’s mentioned.

Thanks to everyone who called, wrote and otherwise let the Governor know their opinions on this one! And thanks to all of the people who commented on my original post about the Bill. It’s been a great conversation! And most of all, thanks to Gov. Huntsman for vetoing this one! I think maybe a thank-you card is in order!

Update: This is what Gov. Huntsman had to say in a letter to Speaker Clark and President Waddoups about why he vetoed the video games bill:

Dear Speaker Clark and President Waddoups:

After careful consideration and study, I have decided to veto HB 353, TRUTH IN ADVERTISING ACT AMENDMENTS, and have transmitted it to the Lieutenant Governor for filing.

While protecting children from inappropriate materials is a laudable goal, the language of this bill is so broad that it likely will be struck down by the courts as an unconstitutional violation of the Dormant Commerce Clause and/or the First Amendment.

The industries most affected by this new requirement indicated that rather than risk being held liable under this bill, they would likely choose to no longer issue age appropriate labels on goods and services. Therefore, the unintended consequence of the bill would be that parents and children would have no labels to guide them in determining the age appropriateness of the goods or service, thereby increasing children’s potential exposure to something they or their parents would have otherwise determined was inappropriate under the voluntary labeling system now being recognized and embraced by a significant majority of vendors.

Sincerely,

Jon M. Huntsman, Jr.
Governor

Tags: children, Governor Jon Huntsman Jr., video games

According to the Trib, Gov. Jon Huntsman signed 97 new bills into law yesterday, after having signed 103 of them last Friday. It makes my head spin just trying to keep up with them.

It looks like he hasn’t touched the Video Games Bill yet, so there’s still time to call. That information is below.

Among the ones he did sign are HB 17 (Expedited Partner Therapy Treatment), HB 21 (Amendments to the Driver License Act), HB 22 (Harboring a Runaway), HB 51 (Exemption for Alcoholic Beverage Manufacturing License), HB 90 (Abortion Law Amendments), HB 114 (Abortion Litigation Trust Account Amendments), HB 313 (Social Host Liability Act), and SB 11 (Incest Amendments).

I’ve only barely touched on the new laws, and I’m sure I’ve skipped at least a few that are important. But, as citizens of this state, it’s rather important to be informed on the new laws, right? Well, besides reading this blog, you can also keep an eye on what the Gov signs by reading the Latest News and Announcements from the Governor’s web site. Feel free to leave your thoughts about these bills, or others that are of concern for you. I always love to hear from my readers!

Call Gov. Huntsman at 801-538-1000 or 800-705-2464

Utah State Capitol Complex
PO Box 142220
Salt Lake City, Utah 84114-2220

Or email him at the Governor’s web site

Tags: Governor Jon Huntsman Jr.

Ok, maybe Sego Lily Spa doesn’t love me yet, but they are going to absolutely adore me, after they choose me to be the Sego Lily Blogger. I can’t quite count this in my Local First series though, since I haven’t yet had the pleasure of visiting their little piece of heaven on earth, yet.

Can’t you just imagine how impressive the quality of my writing would be after partaking in an Ionithermie Algae Detox? Because I can! I would come home, prepared to tell the world, or at least Utah, about something like how to read an egg carton. The stress of the day will have washed away, and my mind would be clear enough that maybe I would take the time to research what options we have in healthy and environmentally sustainable eggs here in Utah, how local the eggs are, and maybe even post a photo of a yummy quiche I whipped up.

See, this would not only benefit Sego Lily Spa, but it would benefit my blog. Which is why I would be willing to “take one for the team” and commit to monthly visits to both the Midvale and the Layton locations.

While expounding on the reasons why Sego Lily should choose this blog, I want to point out that I firmly believe in tipping, even when a service is otherwise free. So, even their employees will love and appreciate me during our yearlong mutual commitment. Provided the rules of the contract would let me, that is.

I’m wondering, though, if the Couple’s Massage Class is included in the package? I may have to go ahead and purchase that package, without waiting to find out. Being able to give my boyfriend a shoulder massage without my hands aching in the first 5 minutes would be so useful!

I wonder if they’ll want me to put photos up of my face covered in green goo and cucumbers, though?

If you, dear reader, would like to help me in this endeavor, please leave a comment on the Sego Lily blog about me. Or enter the contest yourself. A little healthy competition never hurt, right?

Tags: Sego Lily Spa

So, awhile back, you’ll probably remember that the Utah Senate invited all of us blogger types over for a “blogger presser”. Or if you don’t, you can look back through some of the #utpol tweets to see several people’s twitters about it (look for the ones on March 11), or TheSideTrack has a roundup.

Senator Dayton, along with Representative Morley, came in to talk about HB 353, aka the Video Games Bill. As Jason wrote on KVNU:

Genesis of bill is to thank video game retailers who’ve taken a pledge to keep mature games out of the hands of minors and increased compliance. Offer them “safe haven.” Gone from 15% compliance to 80%. Not an attempt to create or enforce ratings, create lawsuits. Subjects retailers to fines for non-compliance. Civil statute only. Question: Would this be incentive for manufacturers to no longer label, or to decide to not sign pledge to avoid fines? Answer: I don’t think it will. A lot of misinformation. It’s not a punitive bill.

I didn’t feel like Dayton and Morley came out to share details of the bill, but to introduce it with the idea that this isn’t a punitive bill, so that maybe we would all have warm fuzzies about how good this was for our children. Because really, think of the children, will you?

I think the oddest thing about this was when one of them mentioned something to the effect of ‘retailers won’t get in trouble if kids present fake IDs’. I did a double take at that. Seriously, I can see kids trying for a fake ID to get into a bar. But I’ve never heard of a fake ID being made so a kid could go buy Grand Theft Auto. I know stranger things have happened, but that really made me think that the sponsors of this bill were looking at it from entirely the wrong viewpoint.

As a parent, I feel very strongly that it’s my responsibility to my children to educate them about what they can play, and why. They’ve asked me for video games that are rated T. They know they can’t have M games. My boys are 9 and (almost) 11 years old. They don’t just say “Can I have this game, Mom?” They look at the games they want, and try to decide if I’m going to let them play it, and if I’ll have any objections. I’ve overheard them explaining to each other why they can’t play certain games, such as too much violence, too gory, etc. And frequently, those games never come up when they start making birthday lists. When they do, the boys generally come prepared for my objections.

Drake: Mom, can I have this game for my birthday?

Me: What’s it rated?

Drake: Well, it’s “T”, but it’s not because it’s gory. It’s just because it’s a shooter. But I saw it at my cousin’s house and there’s no blood, and it’s just machines.

Me: Hmmm, I don’t know.

Drake: Let’s go watch the preview and then you can ask at Play N Trade and they’ll tell you.

And my 9 and 11 year old boys probably aren’t going to make their way into Play N Trade without my assistance. If they do, I get a Parenting Fail card. Which is a much bigger problem than them picking up Halo 2 on their own.

Parenting isn’t the government’s job. It just isn’t.

Now, the rating system for video games isn’t quite the same as the rating system for movies. The rating system for video games is known as ESRB. The ESRB is not overseen by the US Government. It’s a non-profit organization that is self-regulated. It’s been a great success in helping parents choose age-appropriate games for their children. The ESRB is accomplishing what it should.

Now back to the bill in question. What is HB 353? It’s a bill titled “Truth in Advertising Act Amendments”. The brief description of it from the bill’s text says:

This bill prohibits a person from advertising that a good or service will not be sold to a certain age group and then selling the good or service to that age group; and makes technical corrections.

According to Dayton and Morley, the basics of the bill are that IF a business advertises that it’s a family friendly store that won’t sell “M” games to kids, they will be held to that. So, if a business doesn’t have that sort of advertising, this doesn’t even apply to them. So, kids who are without supervision (again, parenting fail) will still be able to go to stores without such advertising, and if the store decides to sell them the games, no penalty at all.

So, what happens to these “family friendly” stores, if they are caught selling inappropriate games to minors? Well, they’re stuck with a $2,000 fine. There’s some incentive for you, right?

The whole point of the ESRB is that it’s a voluntary ratings system, so that the industry can police itself. And if the industry is succeeding in that endeavor, why should any government attempt to mettle? If it’s not, then shouldn’t something entirely different be done? The Utah Legislature seems to be approving of ESRB by trying to enforce it. So, obviously that’s not where the problem is? Which leads me to wonder if businesses in Utah are ignoring this ratings system?

No one seems to be saying that’s the case. In fact, Mac World says this:

According to a recent audit, Utah video game retailers enforce their store policies regarding the sale of M-rated games an impressive 94 percent of the time — without any laws or requirements that they do so. That level of compliance took many years to achieve, and speaks to the strong commitment of video game retailers to do the right thing.

Wow! 94% of the time, huh? Where’s the problem?

I’m thinking that if this law goes into effect, Utah businesses, especially small ones, are not going to be trying for the idea of being “family friendly” anymore. Here’s what the National Coalition Against Censorship has to say on that topic:

The bill may result in consumers getting less information.  Stores not willing to risk lawsuit or fines for violating age restrictions may simply decide not to display ratings information.  The industry as a whole could even consider dispensing with its voluntary rating system if the result is to make retailers vulnerable to lawsuits and judgments.

Hmmm, so instead of giving parents more tools in being good parents, this might end up giving us fewer? Not to mention straining businesses that might actually be trying in good faith to comply with the (voluntary!) ratings system?

My favorite game store is a little one in Sugar House called Play N Trade. They are an independant franchise. I’ve met the owner several times, and spoke with him about everything from his Dad to how they decide which games to stock, and whether or not I should let Drake play in the Guitar Hero tournaments. He’s a really good guy, and I won’t shop anywhere else if I have the choice. When I’m trying to decide whether my boys get a certain game, or not, I often ask his advice, or that of one of his employees. Frequently, they’ll tell me that there’s no way I should let my sons play a game that I might otherwise have been considering. Last year, when I was considering letting Drake buy a PSP, they told me it was a bad idea, because most of the games were aimed at adults. Exactly the sort of thing you want from your local video game shop, huh?

So, if they display the ESRB logo, and attempt to make sure that they are a “family friendly store”, they’ll be subject to this new law. I’m pretty sure that if I let my 11 year old go in and try to buy an “M” game, they’d tell him to come back with me if he wants to buy it. Just a guess. But, let’s say that the state’s undercover sting operation sends in a very mature looking 17 year old to buy that game. If they don’t card him, and sell him the game, they’re slapped with a $2,000 fine? I’m wondering how long it would be until they make up for that loss? I’d venture to guess it might put them out of business. I’d also guess that the law itself would probably make them a bit paranoid, and less focused on the great customer service that brings us back to their store.

I don’t want this law passed. Not because I don’t want to protect children. But, because I think it’s a bogus attempt to regulate the ESRB, and won’t do anything for our children. It will cost local businesses money, and is likely to remove some great tools I have in making decisions about video games as a parent.

Ask Governor Huntsman to veto it.

Call Gov. Huntsman at 801-538-1000 or 800-705-2464

Utah State Capitol Complex
PO Box 142220
Salt Lake City, Utah 84114-2220

Or send an email through the Video Game Voters website.

Update: I didn’t have time to verify the rumor that Jack Thompson wrote this bill, but it looks like Glen Warchol did my homework for me. Uh, last month. Anyway, according to Glen’s research, Thompson may or may not have written the bill, but the idea for it, at least, did originate with him. If you’re not familiar with Jack Thompson, he’s a disbarred lawyer from Florida, who is more than a little nutty. If you don’t believe me read this whole article, but here’s a taste (emphasis mine):

Jack Thompson looks nothing like 9/11 orchestrator Mohamed Atta. He wears a slick business suit and lives in a million-dollar home in Coral Gables. Yet the 56-year-old lawyer hand-delivered a letter to U.S. District Court Chief Judge Federico A. Moreno last week that sounded a lot like terrorism: “Maybe,” he wrote, “my ‘mistake’ was not killing 3,000 people to make my point.”

On Monday, federal marshals showed up at his home to question him about the matter. Next up for the man who for 20 years has worn the mantle of the puritanical police: disbarment.

Miami-Dade Circuit Court Judge Dava Tunis last month found Thompson guilty of 27 violations of the Florida Bar code of conduct. The case against this vexatious litigator is detailed in 4,100 pages of exhibits and testimony. Examples of his sins include sending members of the Florida Supreme Court gay porn and a picture book with images of (1) swastikas, (2) a kangaroo clutching an outsize gavel, (3) a kangaroo in judge’s robes sitting on the bench, and (4) Ray Charles. His point was to illustrate that Florida’s high jurists simply could not comprehend the ineffable complexities of his arguments.

Update 2: The Gov vetoed this bill.

Tags: children, video games

I recently met Utah Senate President Michael Waddoups at a citizen lunch. He’s my Senator, and happens to be President of the Senate. That experience didn’t go so well, and this is part of what I wrote about it:

The entire conversation was so fast that it was a relief when the gentleman who was on the other side of him leaned over to ask him if this was what he’d expected. The next part told me that Waddoups needed a lesson on table manners. Waddoups whispered back that he’d “expected it to be a little more intelligent”.

Now, I’m trying to give him the benefit of the doubt, but for the life of me I can’t help but wonder if he was talking about me. He was obviously trying to hide his reply, and I don’t think he thought I heard it. And I would think that being at a public lunch, whispered musings such as this are highly inappropriate. I would really like to think that this comment was not about me, but his demeanor and attitude towards me actually made me question for a moment why I had inconvenienced the Senator with my presence.

Tonight, the Utah State Senate hosted a blogger press conference. Several of us wrote about the event using Twitter. I’ll be writing more about that tomorrow.

After the blogger conference was over, President Waddoups asked to speak to me. Ok, that’s not entirely correct. He actually asked in the middle of the conference, which led to several of my fellow bloggers to tease me about being called into the President’s Office, and the like (along with a few guesses as to how the conversation would go via private messages). Anyway, after the event, he asked to speak with me, and I followed him to an adjacent room. He said that Ric Cantrell had told him of reading my blog about our previous interaction, and offered what seemed and felt like a very sincere apology. I told him briefly of my side, and that I understood that we were at odds regarding the topic. He didn’t remember the topic, so I reminded him. He said specifically that he did not recall ever thinking that I was unintelligent, or that the topic (Common Ground Initiative) was unintelligent. He said that perhaps it was the event itself, or something completely unrelated, and again offered an apology. He also said something to the effect that he would not want to come across that way to anyone, especially a constituent, and that he probably needed to be more careful about that in the future.

I told him how important I think events like tonight’s blogger conference and the opportunity for us to talk with him was, and we ended on friendly terms.

If nothing else, at least now I will not feel so hesitant to approach him in the future, and I don’t feel any lingering resentment for the previous incident. I’m sure we’ll continue to be at odds with our political ideology, but that’s just fine by me.

Tags: President Michael Waddoups