Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Utah Governor 'Honored' With Blackhole Award

Posted by samzenpus on from the prize-nobody-wants dept.

The national Society of Professional Journalists plans to 'honor' Utah's Gov. Gary Herbert with the first-ever Black Hole award for a restrictive new open records law. From the article: "David Cuillier, SPJ's Freedom of Information Committee chief and a journalism professor at the University of Arizona, said he'll try to present the award to Herbert on Wednesday. The award, Cuillier said, is part of Sunshine Week, an annual initiative begun in 2002 to promote greater transparency in government. Nominations were gathered from around the country, but Cuillier said 'there was no question' the award should go to Herbert as the chief executive of the state."

23 of 161 comments (clear)

  1. Utah: More of the same by fishybell · · Score: 2

    As a resident of Utah I can't help but notice that national news always seems to revolve around polygamists and bass-ackwards politics. Woo Utah!

    --
    ><));>
    1. Re:Utah: More of the same by uberjack · · Score: 2

      I would imagine that most of those who practice polygamy wouldn't readily admit to it. So while I don't think Utah is all polygamist, I wonder about the accuracy of the 2%.

    2. Re:Utah: More of the same by PopeRatzo · · Score: 2

      Florida: just refused an assload of money.

      They believe high-speed trains and a black man in the White House are signs of the fulfillment of Revelations.

      I guess the Antichrist had planned to arrive via a supertrain. Or something.

      But they won't have to worry about that now, because they've made damn sure nobody's going to make them get their teeth fixed and the government's going to keep its hands off their God-given Medicare.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    3. Re:Utah: More of the same by t2t10 · · Score: 2

      So what if it went to "an airport"? The airport is served--and served well--by a ferry.

      No, this wasn't a national "smear campaign", this was corruption in politics; it was an attempt by local developers to enrich themselves at the tax payer's expense. If the airport traffic and development of the island actually had justified building a bridge, then the bridge could have been paid for privately. That's something any red-blooded, free-market Republican should understand.

    4. Re:Utah: More of the same by Sulphur · · Score: 2

      Good grief, there are Muslims who blow themselves up to kill people who don't share their beliefs. And yet I don't see Slashdotters cracking jokes about them.

      Sounds logical to me.

  2. Re:Was he supposed to be the by drinkypoo · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The goal is to promote openness. So you give the 'award' to someone who you can specifically and publicly name and shame in order to generate some buzz.

    Now if only the buzz weren't on a website with more javascript than a tutorial site...

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  3. Bad Bill by dogmatixpsych · · Score: 2

    I have yet to meet someone in Utah (other than politicians) who likes this law that was passed. Utah politics gets a lot of things right (IMO) but this was not one of them. This bill will not last long as passed. It should not have been passed but it will be changed or removed later.

    1. Re:Bad Bill by dogmatixpsych · · Score: 3, Informative

      Yes. It's already in the works as are court challenges and a lot of contact of representatives. Why this even passed baffles me but politicians do inexplicable things all the time.

    2. Re:Bad Bill by Sponge+Bath · · Score: 3, Insightful

      "...the main issue was the cost of storing all the data and accessing it"

      Funny, politicians never consider that when imposing (usually surveillance related) requirements on private business.

    3. Re:Bad Bill by dweller_below · · Score: 3, Informative

      In theory, the citizens of Utah could repeal this bad law via ballot initiative. Here is a good summary of the current law concerning Utah Ballot initiatives: http://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php/Laws_governing_the_initiative_process_in_Utah

      In practice, we haven't seen a ballot initiative in years. In the last decade, we have seen a constant stream of state legislation tightening the restrictions on ballot initiatives.

      I believe that the Utah legislature is attempting to avoid a repeat of the 2000 Civil Forfeiture Initiative. In 2000, Utah voters voted overwhelmingly for a initiative that placed common-sense limits on Civil Forfeiture. The most important reform required that income from seized assets be delivered to the School funds. It took the Legislature 4 years to repeal it and return Utah to the business of Policing for Profit: http://www.instituteforjustice.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=3289&Itemid=165

      In recent years, attempts to achieve ethics reform by Utah ballot initiative have been blocked by the many hurtles imposed by current law. They include:
      1) You have to get more signatures than 10% of the vote cast for Governor IN 26 of the 29 counties. Miss that total in one county, and you are blocked.
      2) You have 1 year to collect signatures. If your 10% in 26 counties is not certified by the end of the year, you have to start over.
      3) You are blocked if the Lieutenant Governor thinks your initiative is patently unconstitutional; nonsensical; or if he determines that the Initiative contains more than one subject.

      So, years since we have seen a ballot initiative. Don't expect to see another one in my lifetime.

      Miles

    4. Re:Bad Bill by dogmatixpsych · · Score: 2

      That's not how politics works in Utah. The LDS Church voices its opinion in very, very few matters. On a recent one, the LDS Church hinted at not being in favor of harsh anti-illegal immigrant policies that would break up families, at least policies done at the state level yet Utah is moving towards an immigration policy similar to Arizona's. The LDS Church does not dictate politics in Utah. A number of the legislators are LDS but they certainly don't report to church leaders about political matters.

  4. Blackmail on the highest level by deweyhewson · · Score: 4, Informative

    It is worth noting here that one Republican legislator in Utah has come out so far and talked about being blackmailed by the leadership in the Legislature to vote for the bill without even considering or debating it.

    http://www.ksl.com/?nid=960&sid=14729423&s_cid=rss-960

    The Utah Legislature is representative in name only, and have barely attempted to make any secret of their disdain and disregard for the Utahn people for years. Why do they keep getting elected then? That's the power of the (R) in this state.

    The more national shame they receive, the better.

    1. Re:Blackmail on the highest level by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Is the law a church-led/influenced thing, then? Not to harp on the LDS, but if anything is perceived by the Quorum to affect the church, then odds are perfect that they can and will strong-arm the legislature into doing/voting whatever's best for the church. Since only like 1-2 legislators are not practicing LDS members, it's a pretty easy task.

      Contrary to what most people think, the "Freedom of Religion" clause was inserted in the Constitution to protect churches from government, not government from churches. That latter notion is a modern interpretation, originating almost entirely from the political left. What freaks people out is that Utah happens to be the only place in the US where any single religion is dominant enough to create a state-level electoral majority. But having lived in Utah for 10 years at one point in my life, I can say that the LDS Church actually stays out of politics for the most part. In fact, it explicitly bans political discussion from the pulpit and the use of church property and membership records for fundraising and other political uses. It really only speaks out when it perceives a proposed law as affecting public morality (ex gay marriage), which isn't really uncommon--plenty of churches do the same, including the Catholic Church.

      And while Republicans certainly dominate in Utah, there are plenty of Mormon Democrats. Of the 15 Mormons in Congress, 4 of them are Democrats--27%. Salt Lake City even has a Democrat mayor. So it's not like Mormons vote as a total right-wing political bloc--that notion is a total myth.

  5. Re:Should go to Obama by skids · · Score: 2

    Awwww. The guy trying to change the subject to Obama didn't get first post this time. Such a pity.

    --
    Someone had to do it.
  6. give it to the legislature, not the Governor... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    ummm....if you knew the whole story, you would realize the Governor did what he did so that in the end the bill would be defeated....it's the LEGISLATURE leadership that needs the award!

    1. Re:give it to the legislature, not the Governor... by unjedai · · Score: 3, Insightful

      That makes no sense. If he vetoed it and his veto was overridden it would still become law so that, as you say, "it COULD be hashed out in public". But you'd have sent the message that this bill sucked and was vetoed. I don't see a reason why you would sign a bill you are against. Just makes him look stupid if you ask me.

  7. I'm surprised and disappointed by overshoot · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Why not President Obama? Unlike his Nobel Prize, he's actually done something to deserve this one.

    After promising us the most transparent Administration ever, he's actually (hard as it is to believe) racked up a worse record on FOIA requests than the Bush43 administration, set new records in cracking down on whistleblowers, and (to top it off) actually taken to torturing a political prisoner to fudge up a case against WikiLeaks for doing the exact same thing that the New York Times did [1].

    [1] No, not the whole bit about knowingly publishing Administration lies -- that's totally cool and the fact that Wiki doesn't play that kind of ball may be part of the reason that they're in the Administration black book.

    --
    Lacking <sarcasm> tags, /. substitutes moderation as "Troll."
    1. Re:I'm surprised and disappointed by mr1911 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The only thing different about Obama is that his worshipers bought his load of BS hook, line, and sinker. He is a career politician who will say or do whatever it takes to further himself. Those that believed his "hope and change" story probably send money to Nigerian princes too.

      --
      This post comes with a double-your-money-back guarantee!
      Any offense taken to this post is at your sole discretion.
    2. Re:I'm surprised and disappointed by vux984 · · Score: 2

      After promising us the most transparent Administration ever, he's actually (hard as it is to believe) racked up a worse record on FOIA requests than the Bush43 administration,

      Yes and No.

      "Obamaâ(TM)s directive, memorialized in written instructions from the Justice Department, appears to have been widely ignored."

      Yes, the foia situation is getting worse. But the real question is why?

      Clearly he's not reviewing all the FOIA requests personally... so who is reviewing them and why are the seemingly clear instructions to be more transparent being ignored?

      Is Obama secretly telling them to be less transparent, while very publicly signing instructions to be more transparent?

      Is there an entrenched bureaucracy that is essentially acting with impunity?

      I give his administration a failing grade on this too, but I'd like to give Obama himself the benefit of the doubt on this one. I don't think he's the problem. Whereas in the Bush years, both Cheney and Bush were part of the problem.

    3. Re:I'm surprised and disappointed by vux984 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      If he gave specific instructions then why weren't they followed? He's the President of the United States.

      The President is not God-Emperor.

      A CEO typically has far more direct power over their organization.

      The buck stops with him.

      Its great rhetoric, but not much else.

      You can blame one man for all that is wrong in the United States all you like but its absurd on its face.

      The President is a figurehead. He has power, but it pretty limited.

      It's his job to take responsibility for the departments under his control.

      Fair enough. Just exactly how under his control is it exactly? And what exactly would you have him do?

      Giving him a pass and saying it's someone else's fault that his personal and specific instructions were completely ignored is disingenuous at best.

      Its "insincere"? Its "lacking in candor"? Are you sure you know what "disingenous" means?

      That said, I'm not giving him a pass, but I do recognize there is a substantial difference between being ineffective at fixing a problem, and enthusiastically perpetrating a problem.

  8. Not really the full picture. by slycrel · · Score: 5, Informative

    As a resident of Utah, I've been casually following this Bill. I was very perturbed to find out that it had passed, but I think I understand after hearing the governor's explanation. He gave an interview the day after and said basically that even had he vetoed it it would have passed. So he instead amended it, calling a special session so that there would be time for public debate and changes. I don't know all of the nuts and bolts of the process, but as a casual interested party that was good enough for me. In fact I respect the fact that he told the public why he voted for it and why he amended it -- it was in everyone's best interest (except Utah's congress maybe) for him to do what he did. He was handed a crap sandwitch and he sent it back to the kitchen, even if he's still sitting in the restauraunt that served it. In the end basically it's a law that will be re-voted on before it goes into effect, with public participation and transparency. The fact that the governor is being given this award over those who pushed the bill through in the first place is fairly disgraceful, assuming that it would have gotten through regardless of what he did.

    I'm cautiously optimistic, and I know enough people involved in the political process here in Utah that I expect this won't stand for long even if it goes through in a bad state.

    1. Re:Not really the full picture. by slycrel · · Score: 2

      Interview l heard on the radio to come to these conclusions:
      http://www.ksl.com/?nid=148&sid=14661633
      (click the "Interview with Gov Herbert" link on the right side of the video pane)

  9. Well said. by Benfea · · Score: 2

    The right spends so much time going on about how Obama is some kind of super liberal that is totally indistinguishable from a socialist, when in fact he is largely indistinguishable from Bush. Hell, his much-maligned health care bill was almost a note-for-note copy of a Republican health care proposal from the 1990s. He has proved to be exactly the kind of conservative appeaser/collaborator that I expected him to be.