Dave Mathews Band Summer Tour Dates, 2007

Series 3-2007
May 01
Vodafone Arena
Melbourne, VIC

May 02
Festival Theatre
Adelaide, SA

May 04
Brisbane Convention and Exhibition Centre
South Brisbane, QLD

May 05
Hordern Pavilion
Sydney, NSW

Series 5-2007
May 23
The Point
Dublin, Ireland

May 25
Pavilion Atlantico
Lisbon, Portugal

May 27
Forest National
Brussels (Vorst), Belgium

May 30
Wembley Arena London,
England

Series 6-2007
Apr 21
University of Massachusetts - Mullins Center
Amherst, MA

Apr 22
Radio City Music Hall
New York, NY

Series 7-2007
Jul 08
Toyota Park
Bridgeview, IL

Jul 08
Toyota Park
Chicago VIP Package Bridgeview, IL

Series 8-2007
Aug 01
Tweeter Center for the Performing Arts
Mansfield, MA

Aug 02
Tweeter Center for the Performing Arts
Mansfield, MA

Aug 04
New England Dodge Music Center
Hartford, CT

Aug 05
New England Dodge Music Center
Hartford, CT

Aug 07
Tweeter Center at the Waterfront
Camden, NJ

Aug 08
Tweeter Center at the Waterfront
Camden, NJ

Aug 10
Post-Gazette Pavilion
Burgettstown, PA

Aug 11
Nissan Pavilion at Stone Ridge
Bristow, VA

Aug 14
Saratoga Performing Arts Center
Saratoga Springs, NY

Aug 15
Verizon Wireless Virginia Beach Amphitheater
Virginia Beach, VA

Aug 17
Verizon Wireless Music Center
Noblesville, IN

Aug 18
Verizon Wireless Music Center Noblesville, IN

Aug 20
Blossom Music Center
Cuyahoga Falls, OH

Aug 22
Riverbend Music Center
Cincinnati, OH

Aug 23
DTE Energy Music Theatre
Clarkston, MI

Aug 25
Alpine Valley Music Theatre
East Troy, WI

Aug 26
Alpine Valley Music Theatre
East Troy, WI

Aug 28
Verizon Wireless Amphitheatre
Bonner Springs, KS

Series 9, 2007
Aug 31
Gorge Amphitheatre
George, WA

Sep 01
Gorge Amphitheatre
George, WA

Sep 02
Gorge Amphitheatre
George, WA

Series 10, 2007
Sep 11
University of Florida - Stephen C. O'Connell Center Gainesville, FL

Sep 12
Ford Amphitheatre
Tampa, FL

Sep 14
Sound Advice Amphitheatre
West Palm Beach, FL

Sep 15
Sound Advice Amphitheatre
West Palm Beach, FL

Sep 18
Alltel Pavilion at Walnut Creek
Raleigh, NC

Sep 19
Verizon Wireless Amphitheatre
Charlotte, NC

Sep 21
Cynthia Woods Mitchell Pavilion
The Woodlands, TX

Sep 22
Smirnoff Music Centre
Dallas, TX

Series 11, 2007
Sep 25
Cricket Pavilion
Phoenix, AZ

Sep 26
Verizon Wireless Amphitheatre
Irvine, CA

Sep 28
Coors Amphitheatre
Chula Vista, CA

Sep 29
Shoreline Amphitheatre
Mountain View, CA

Oct 01
Hollywood Bowl
Los Angeles, CA

Oct 02
Hollywood Bowl
Los Angeles, CA

Church rebuffs ' intemperate and disrespectful' Rebecca Walsh over Cheney Visit--Announces Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D) Visit to BYU for Fall

BYU Invitation to Vice President Stirs Debate

SALT LAKE CITY 29 March 2007 An invitation by Brigham Young University to the vice president of the United States to be the commencement speaker next month has triggered discussion and some controversy over the issue of political neutrality.

Whatever the personal views of individual students or other members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, the invitation is seen by the university’s board of trustees as one extended to someone holding the high office of vice president of the United States rather than to a partisan political figure.

The Salt Lake Tribune ran two articles in its edition this morning (29 March) related to the pending visit of the vice president.

One, a prominently displayed personal opinion piece by a political reporter, criticizes the Church, in intemperate and disrespectful language, for inviting Vice President Dick Cheney to be the commencement speaker.

The reporter’s central point seems to be that inviting the vice president — presumably this particular vice president — is inconsistent with the Church’s often-stated political neutrality.

The other article — in the same newspaper — is an editorial that urges that the vice president be allowed to speak because “this is democracy at work” and that an audience of college graduates is capable of assessing what he says. The newspaper further says that the decision was for the BYU board of trustees to make, “just as it is the right of anyone who disagrees with the choice to say so.”

Let’s take a look at what the Church’s political neutrality policy is.
First, the Church prohibits any Church leader from endorsing a candidate in the name of the Church. In the American political process, endorsement means officially putting the weight of an institution or individual behind a political candidate — publicly giving unequivocal support to the candidate’s policies and platform.

Second, the Church bans the use of its chapels for party political purposes and also refuses to allow the distribution of Church membership rolls to anyone, including politicians and candidates.

It also carefully avoids telling its members for whom they should vote. Neither does it tell elected Latter-day Saint officials how they should vote.

Such a policy makes sense in a Church that operates in more than 160 countries and with a global membership that embraces many different political persuasions and views. But the policy is also a reflection of what Church leaders see as the organization’s central mission — to preach the gospel of Jesus Christ. To engage in partisan politics or to take up every social cause would be to divert the Church from that mission.

There is also another side to the neutrality policy, apart from prohibitions. The Church “encourages its members to play a role as responsible citizens in their communities, including becoming informed about issues and voting in elections.”

Further, the Church “expects its members to engage in the political process in an informed and civil manner, respecting the fact that members of the Church come from a variety of backgrounds and experiences and may have differences of opinion in partisan political matters.”
The invitation to the vice president of the United States is not a violation of that policy, any more than inviting the majority leader of the Senate would be. In fact, Senator Harry Reid — a Democrat from the opposite political pole to the vice president — has already accepted such an invitation for this fall. That invitation has been in process for many months — long before the announcement of the vice president’s visit.

Is it appropriate for a university — even one that espouses a policy of political neutrality — to have as featured speakers the holders of some of the highest offices in the land? Of course it is. And whoever the visitor — the vice president, the majority leader of the Senate or the chief justice of the Supreme Court (another scheduled fall speaker) — the university and the student body will listen, evaluate and react to them as intelligent citizens capable of making up their own minds about their messages.

Just Playing Around

NEW PARADIGM FOR IMMIGRATION REFORM

By Steve Olsen

For some reason, after all the noise during the 2006 election year, the immigration debate has taken a vacation. This could be a good thing; without the political posturing, the nation’s leaders might be able to accomplish something. But we need some sort of new vision; a major paradigm shift to break the logjam.

I was presented such a vision from an unlikely source. I learned about it from a friend who also happens to be my church file leader. His father, Alton Griffin of Farr West, a World War II veteran and a respected businessman and church leader, received this epiphany last year, and with the help of his sons, had refined it into a position document. I received a copy of this document recently and was able to study it.

Before we go into that, we need to confront some honest facts and dispel some myths about immigration in America:

Myth #1: We can’t solve America’s immigration problems until we first secure our borders.

Fact: Here’s the little secret everyone in Washington understands but won’t admit: We will never be able to completely secure America’s borders. The “lower 48” has over 5000 miles of land borders and over 5000 miles of ocean coastline. It is a physical impossibility to fence or patrol that much border. Whether we’re talking about keeping immigrants or terrorists out, it simply can’t be done. Even the fence that Congress finally came up with after a year of wrangling only spans 1/3 of the Mexican land border; Canada’s border is left open. Another fact: almost half of the illegal immigrants in America didn’t sneak in over the Mexican border; they came here legally and overstayed their visas – which is how the 9/11 terrorists got in.

Myth #2: Illegal immigrants are stealing American jobs.

Fact: The national unemployment rate is 4.5%. In Utah, it’s 2.6%. Just who, exactly, had their job stolen by an illegal immigrant? There is currently a shortage of workers in Utah. Economists and business leaders will tell you that Utah’s economy would have tanked unless the illegal immigrant workforce had been there to take up the slack. If it were possible to immediately remove the entire illegal workforce in Utah, within a week most of the fresh produce, meat and dairy products would be gone from the grocer’s shelves. Construction would come to a halt. Most hotels and restaurants would shut down. I could go on.

Myth #3: Illegal immigrants and those that employ them are lawbreakers and must be punished.

Fact: Technically, yes. The same way that you and I break the law when we drive eight miles an hour over the speed limit. Why do we do that? Because everyone knows the government does not enforce the law unless you’re 10 mph over the limit. When the law is so messed up it is unenforceable, the lawgivers must be blamed rather than the lawbreakers.

I spoke with a dairy farmer last year who tried to do things the legal way. He applied to the government to get legal immigrants to work on his farm. After a year of red tape and getting absolutely nowhere with the government, he faced a decision: Do I continue to obey the law, or do I allow my farm to fail? Shame on Congress for forcing a good man to make that decision. There are a few bad apples among employers, like every other group, but most are good citizens providing jobs and services to our community and want to follow the law. Why do they deserve to be punished for a system that is broken?

Here are a few cold, hard facts: The only way to solve the illegal immigrant problem is to find a workable method to regulate how they are employed. There are anywhere from 10-20 million undocumented workers in America today, and despite the bluster from certain factions, the nation does not have the ability to find and round up all those people onto cattle cars and ship them home. (Only about 55% of illegal immigrants are from Mexico, so we can’t exactly dump them all off in Tijuana.) Thankfully, nor do we possess the Nazi-like cruelty it would require to commit such an act. It would cause untold disruption to our economy, not to mention the lives of millions of innocent children. Despite the bluster, the vast majority of these people will have to be turned into registered temporary guest workers to get a handle on the current situation. Any solution that doesn’t deal with the problem without ripping apart millions of families – which Americans will never tolerate – and damaging our economy is based on fantasy.

Now, back to the epiphany from my good friend Alton. During World War II, the federal government delegated the task of manning our armed forces to state and local draft boards, which had a great deal of latitude in performing their tasks. Using World War II draft boards as a pattern, Alton's idea is to create State and County Immigration Boards to find and register temporary guest workers and those that employ them, as directed by the governor and the legislature. This would bring the administration of worker registration to the “grass roots” level – where the employers are and where the immigrants live and work. These county boards would issue high-tech ID cards, administer local databases of workers and employers, and verify compliance with state mandates. Compliance and cooperation would be much greater compared with working through a federal bureaucracy taking orders from Washington.

With a high compliance rate created by the trust and local knowledge of these county boards, immigrants could be identified and proper taxes could be collected to support the social services required by these temporary guest workers. Those with no jobs would not be issued ID cards, and with high employer compliance stemming from local administration, those who have not been registered could not find work and would leave. Bringing honest families out in the open would also make it easier to identify criminal elements among the immigrants, allowing them to be arrested and deported.

The above is just a broad brush summary of the concept; there are obviously details to work out. These locally registered temporary guest workers would have no guarantees of permanent citizenship or residence; that would have to be earned, and it would be unfair to move them ahead of foreign citizens who have remained in their native countries while working for permanent visas. Given this, an honest appraisal of our current situation leads one to admit that it would be better for all concerned to bring these families out from the shadows.

For all of you who criticize undocumented workers as lawbreakers, I have a question. If you faced the choice of staying in the shadows or seeing your children starve, which would you choose? We will never find them all unless we create an environment where they will voluntarily come into the open. As long as these families are here, we need to bring them into the sunshine, make sure they are protected by our laws, and ensure they and their employers are paying their fair share in support of the community services they use.

Privatization + Republic = Oxymoron

Republicans for privatization of traditional and common good governmental services are not republicans in the official meaning of the word from its original Latin meaning and Roman use. The word republic means literally "thing public" from the Latin res or "thing" and "publicae" or "public." According to Black's Law Dictionary, there are distinctions from Roman law between what is republican and reprivitan--if you will--in their respective definitions:

res privatae (rays pri-vay-tee) [Latin "private things"] Roman & civil law. Things that can be owned by individuals.

res publicae (rays paeb-li-see) [Latin "public things"] Roman & civil law. Things that cannot be individually owned because they belong to the public, such as the sea, navigable waters and highways.

The whole concept of early republicanism was to eliminate private control of the government and its services by aristocracy or monarchy. Those who fiercely fight for privatization government of services that traditionally promote the common good or a shared public interest are merely fighting the same dispute of the monarchists and aristocrats of old and are working against republican principles in the philosophical sense of the word. Perhaps they should form a new political party called the Reprivitan party--they may even be able to merge with the Constiution Party which is of itself another oxymoron. But we will leave that discussion for another day.

Voucher conclusions after a conversation with a "fed-up" Utah Republican

Today I met with a small business owner who told me he has voted as a Republican most of his life, that is until this last election cycle where he voted a straight Democratic ticket.

His conversation was not emotional, or angry, but he was very clear that he was "fed-up" with the Republican Party both nationally and locally.

When I told him that I was the vice chair of the Democratic Party he asked, "are you going to finally get rid of Greg Curtis?" I assured him that the Utah Democratic Party had ever intention in doing so.

His big issue?

How could the legislature and Governor Huntsman go forward with the Sandy/ReAL stadium deal after Mayor Corroon's wise and educated decision that was based on what was best for the common good?

When I said, "it really didn't matter if the stadium is a success or not, all that really mattered was those who would profit from building the stadium".

He agreed.

When I asked him about his opinion on school vouchers he explained that he had been a member of corporate America for many years and that he and his family had a great experience in the Pittsburgh Public School System.

"It changed my daughter's life", he explained. "When we returned to Utah my daughter asked if she could go back and finish school in Pittsburgh."

He then explained his belief that the citizens of Pittsburgh have built a system that leaves their students with three problems; whether to go to Harvard, Yale, or Columbia.

As we continued our conversation I explained two of my issues with vouchers. I told him how ironic it is that our Republican-dominated legislature has deliberately put a strangle-hold on public education funding over the last 20 years, and how they are unwilling to take any responsibility for their actions.

I also explained my belief that there is no room for vouchers until we build a public school system that allows every child the opportunity to have the very best educational expedience without their parents having to pay for a private education. To me, a private education is a choice, and that choice has a cost. That is why it is called "Private".

Private: 1 a : intended for or restricted to the use of a particular person, group, or class.

As we continued to talk we both agreed that the most important factor in a child's education is the involvement of that child's parent(s). Michelle and I could not be more pleased with Abby's public school teacher and experience. We know her teacher is doing a great job because we are involved with Abby's class, and because school doesn't end for Abby when when the bell rings.

Michelle reads to our children every night and we allow our children the opportunities to explore and discover their talents, as best we can.

Which brings me to this conclusion: Almost every issue that is used in politics to divide us are issues that will never be solved by the government as long as we look at the government as something evil, or incapable, or "failing". We are the government, and we are not only responsible for our own children, but for every child, whether they share our DNA or not.

I believe in the public school system, and I believe that it is privilege when my tax dollars not only help my children receive an education, but that my tax dollars will also help your children receive an education.

If Michelle and I decide for some reason that we do want to place our children in a private school then I still want my tax dollars to fund the public education system that educated my grandparents, my parents and me, even after my children are raised, and when we no longer have children attending school. You see, for me it is very simple; we all profit from the education provided by public schools.

The choice is there; it always has been there. Vouchers have never been about choice, or the lack of it.

If we really want to build our economy, if we truly want to reach for the stars, then let's build a public education system that is second to none anywhere on this planet. When we do so, we can truly say that we are each others keeper, and that we have achieved something truly great.

Does this school look broken to you?

This is Three Peaks Elementary, where my son attends 4th grade.

This morning as I was dropping him off, the principal gave me a hearty wave as he made sure that all of the kids made it safely from the buses and their cars into the school. Principal Tim Taylor has done this every single day since the beginning of classes in August. He is a committed and wonderful principal.

Last week my son participated in his first science fair. He measured the fish in his aquarium for 4 weeks to determine that this particular breed of fish grow really fast. Sam has attended Iron county schools since kindergarten and has been an eager and fast learner from the very beginning.

Three Peaks Elementary and Iron County schools are not broken. Next time I'll tell you about Canyon View High school and their outstanding music program, and how during their spring concert my darling high school son serenaded me with the rest of the Canyon View High School men's choir.

Nick Holland mentioned in The Spectrum

Nick Holland, son of Utah Democratic Chair Wayne Holland Jr., is currently serving as an aide to Congressman Jim Matheson in Washington D.C. Nick was a great inspiration during his father's campaign for state chair and he is young man who is on track towards building a great Democratic future.

Spectrum Editor Todd Seifert went to Washinton D.C. recently and mentions Nick Holland,

"Perhaps even more so than the White House, the U.S. Capitol exudes history. We were lucky enough to have one of Rep. Matheson's aides, Nick Holland, serve as our tour guide. His knowledge of the history of the building certainly added to our tour."

Way to go Nick, keep up the great work!

Observing history
Children provide different perspective on nation's capital

Petition opposing Cheney address at BYU's commencement

The petition states:

It has been widely reported that BYU and its board of trustees have accepted the request of Vice President Richard Cheney to address BYU’s graduating class on April 26th. Sign this petition encouraging BYU to identify a more appropriate commencement speaker, and refuse Mr. Cheney’s offer to speak.

Over the past six years, Vice President Cheney and his office have been the center of great national controversy. During this time, Cheney has made misleading statements about the tragic war which continues in Iraq, levied outrageous partisan accusations against his Democratic opponents, and used vulgarity on the Senate floor. He has been linked to serious scandals involving botched intelligence reports, no-bid contracts awarded to friends and political donors, and perjury convictions handed down to his own staff. Mr. Cheney is simply not the type of role model to whom we wish to bestow the responsibility of addressing our best and brightest as they “go forth to serve”.

Today more than ever, the LDS church and its educational institutions have come under unwarranted criticism for close links to Republican political interests. Recently, faculty members in BYU’s own Marriott School of Business attracted national attention for using their professional positions to endorse and fundraise for Republican Mitt Romney’s bid for the White House. While the individuals involved in the situation were appropriately reprimanded, some spectators have erroneously concluded that the LDS Church privately endorses Republican political candidates, while maintaining an official, public position of political neutrality. Mr. Cheney's visit will do nothing to dispel that misconception. In fact, it will serve only as a troubling and untimely reminder of the dominant political influence that his party has on politics in Utah, and will be viewed by many as a tacit endorsement of the Vice President’s party, and its policies.

We are concerned that this action by BYU represents an unvoiced endorsement of one of our nation’s most controversial partisan figures, and serves to undermine the stated position of political neutrality held by BYU’s sponsoring institution, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

If you agree you can sign here: Petition

Voucher Balancing Act

In eager anticipation of the onslaught of outstanding new private schools that will inevitably arise as a result of vouchers, the Sutherland Institute has revamped their web site, UtahSchools.org.

"Since the voucher bill passed, we decided it would be a good time to give utahschools.org a facelift," said Katie Christensen, the Web site's spokeswoman. "We hope it will help parents choose the education that best fits their child." (source - Daily Herald)

That's great! I applaud them for taking these steps. As Paul Mero proclaims - "There is no greater measure of success in a child's educational experience than the degree to which a parent is involved." (blogger's note - should we all be homeschooling our kids???)

So, let's say these same parents want to compare the ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT of private schools with their public school counterparts? Last time I checked, academics are an important component of a school.

In a quote that might cost Katie her job (or at least a fatherly lecture from Mr. Mero on the dangers of speaking to the liberal press), Katie had no choice but to admit:

Since we can't do academic rankings for private schools, it's hard to actually compare private and public schools side by side.

(source - Daily Herald)

Hence the dilemma for voucher agitators & apologists - if we regulate, we discourage business interests from entering the new private-school-entitlement market (e.g., Challenger Schools). If we deregulate, we end up with fraud, waste, abuse, court cases, and constitutional challenges.

I invite comments on how this could actually work, because so far the voucher experiments elsewhere have been a royal mess.

P.S. I was recently admonished by a fellow blogger to stop quoting the conservative elite who are seeking to end public education and, instead, to just study the bills. To this suggestion I invite my fellow friend in the blogosphere to read my previous post "100 Unintended Consequences of HB148 - School Vouchers." There is some good news to report, though - HB174 fixes 3% of the 100 problems identified in the original bill (not that it will matter after Utah citizens repeal HB148.)

Tax dollars taken from public education deserves vote

All Utahns benefit from an excellent public education system. Our youth enter the work force among the most literate and skilled in the world. But to hear Writers Group columnist Joe Baker and other voucher supporters, you would think our education system was a complete failure.

Utah's schools are not a complete failure. Utah - and specifically Southern Utah - has some of the very best public schools around. Furthermore, there is no proof that a private school produces "better results" than a public school.

According to a National Center for Education Statistics study, public school students show little to no difference in performance, and in some areas tend to do better. It is only in head-to-head comparisons where private schools' ability to reject students that don't meet their standards that private schools outperform public schools.

Vouchers are promoted as the solution to overcrowded schools. To relieve this pressure, there would need to be enough affordable private schools in Utah to absorb the demand for private schools that voucher supporters claim exists. But Utah doesn't enjoy a large number of private schools - let alone affordable ones.

A Google search of private schools in Utah shows Cedar City has exactly one private school listed on www.allprivate schools.org. With 16 students (all from out of state) it is a school for "at risk youth." Under the voucher law a school must have at least 40 students to qualify and at least one of the student's parents must live in Utah.

In Washington County, five schools are listed. The majority of these schools are for "at risk teenagers" whose parents live out of the state. There is neither significant demand for private schools in our region nor much capacity to relieve pressure on the public school system.

Baker claims that with vouchers, private schools will be "affordable to all Utah parents." It is not clear whether vouchers will lower the price of a private education enough to entice parents away from public schools, especially when the majority of Utah parents are happy with them.

According to the National Association of Independent Schools, the median tuition for its member private schools is $14,000. The maximum a low-income family could expect to receive under Utah's voucher legislation is $3,000. Assuming Utah's few private schools could approach the national median tuition, it is hard to accept Baker's claim that all parents in Utah could afford to send their children to a private school even if they wanted to.

Polls show an overwhelming majority of Utahns favor placing vouchers on the ballot. They are happy with their local neighborhood schools, and have consistently advocated for improving public education rather than funding private schools with public funds. Many Southern Utah parents have nothing but praise for their public schools, using words like "wonderful" and "excellent" when they describe their children's teachers.

Voucher proponents recently sent out letters telling voters that they "must not sign" the referendum. What do they fear? Why not let the people decide? It's our tax dollars in question, we should be given the opportunity to vote on how we want our tax dollars spent.

Utah spending (per capita) on public school students ranks 51st (below the District of Columbia.) We have a lot of kids to educate with limited resources. Why divert one penny of those precious resources to subsidize an industry that doesn't need and doesn't want the influx of students? Why not do everything we can to support the neighborhood schools that open their doors every day to all of our children?

Those of us who are opposed to using public money for private education have no problem with private schools. But when something affects how our tax dollars are spent and the future of our neighborhood schools, we just want to cast our ballot.

Emily Bingham Hollingshead is a Cedar City resident, a small business owner and a mom to two sons who attend Cedar City public schools.

PCE PAC Fueled with Amway and Walmart Money

Quotes From kutv.com: Utah PAC Fueled With Out Of State Funds

An infusion of out-of-state money is raising the profile and influence of the Utah political action committee Parents for Choice.

The money comes largely from large big-business political donors from out of Utah, including the Wal-Mart heirs and the founders of Amway, a multilevel marketing company.

In 2002, the grass roots group had just $10,000 for donations to candidates. But in 2004 the group got $255,000 in seed money from the Michigan-based All Children Matter, a group with ties to Betsy and Dick Devos, who is an Amway heir.

That was followed by a $75,000 contribution for Gov. Jon Huntsman from Patrick Byrne, of Overstock.com.

Now the PAC has several spinoffs and growing influence over education policy with lawmakers and the governor's office.

Parents for Choice refuses to comment on the source of the organization's financing until after a September federal tax filing deadline for PAC disclosure forms.

"Nobody's going to comment,'' communications director Nancy Pomeroy said. When pressed about the sources of Parents for Choice's money, specifically All Children Matter, Pomeroy said: ``I don't know what you're talking about.''

Read kutv's: Utah PAC Fueled With Out Of State Funds

Voucher Truths V

The Intimidation:

“Republicans must not sign these petitions!”

Doug Holmes
President, Parents for Choice

It's time for Utah Democrats to make this a two-Party state

By Wayne Holland Jr.

During the 2006 election, one local Republican candidate ran against his Democratic opponent arguing his district deserved "a representative in the Utah State Legislature who is seen as more than an interloper in a one-party system."

There was a time when a "one-party system" was something to be ashamed of, but apparently not anymore.

Being perceived as a "one-party" state has not exactly resulted in better treatment for Utah citizens from previous Republican-controlled Congresses or the White House. Having our votes taken for granted by the Republican Party has proven bad for both the democratic process we hold dear and for our state in general.

Perhaps the most glaring recent example was the proposed Divine Strake test. Though eventually canceled, it took considerable outcry from the citizens of Utah. Having Republican congressmen like Chris Cannon speak favorably of the test didn't help matters.

The Republican Party demonstrated again this month why enjoying solid support in Utah won'ttranslate easily into benefits for our state. Utah has been seeking a fourth congressional district since the 2000 census. The Legislature was even called back into special session in 2006 to redraw district boundaries in anticipation of the lame duck Republican Congress finally taking some action on the proposal. They never did.

Within 48 hours of Democrats passing a bill out of committee earlier this month giving Utah the fourth congressional district it has been seeking for seven years, President Bush announced his opposition to it. No more than a couple of more days passed before Sen. Bennett declared the bill's chances in the Senate practically zero as a result.

Republicans serving on Utah's Capitol Hill are not immune to the arrogance that comes with almost absolute power over the legislative process. Public opinion polls have consistently shown strong support among Utahns for their neighborhood public schools. In spite of this fact, vouchers passed the House by one vote and the Senate by nine votes without a single Democrat
voting in favor in either chamber.

Popular reforms that consistently enjoy two-thirds support or greater -- including the creation of a bipartisan redistricting committee, banning or further limiting gifts from lobbyists to legislators and prohibiting legislators from using campaign funds for personal purposes -- rarely
received a hearing in committee, let alone a vote on the floor of the House or Senate.

Perhaps the most significant of the reform measures introduced by Democrats during the 2007 session, but denied even the benefit of a debate in committee, was Rep. Roz McGee's legislation creating a bipartisan redistricting commission. Utah is not nearly as monolithic as it appears. Upward of 43 percent of Utahns vote entirely or partially Democratic in just about every election. Unfortunately for Utah's voters, our Legislature has acquired national renown for using the redistricting process to select their voters instead of enabling voters to hold their legislators accountable.

After the 2000 census, Utah's redistricting fiasco garnered attention in papers like the Wall Street Journal, which pointed in disgust at the moving of nearly 700,000 voters from one congressional district to another in a blatant attempt to get rid of Congressman Jim Matheson. The Standard-Examiner, The Salt Lake Tribune and Deseret News were openly critical of this blatant gerrymandering, as well.

It has become apparent the voices of Utah voters are not being heard on key issues. The Utah Democratic Party commends those willing to exercise their constitutional rights to be the ultimate "deciders" in Utah by pursuing referenda to ensure they are finally heard, and commits itself to continuing to fight for their interests into the future.

Holland is chairman of Utah's Democratic Party.

The Tribune get's it!

Here are some relevant quotes from today's Salt Lake Tribune opinion piece:

In Utah, where the Legislature prefers government "for the people" instead of "by the people," they can do it when pigs fly.

Our Legislature has made it nearly impossible to undo what they've done. Placing a repeal referendum on the ballot requires that organizers gather an enormous number of signatures, a figure equal to 10 percent of all the votes cast for governor in the previous general election. This year that means 92,000 signatures.

And, as if that's not enough, they add a double dose of discouragement: Those 92,000 signatures must represent 10 percent of the registered voters from at least 15 of Utah's 29 counties, and they must be gathered in just 40 days. Oh, and make sure the signers dot every "i" and cross every "t."

As you know, we're against public funding for private schools and the private soccer stadium, and polls have indicated the public shares our opinion. But that's not the issue here. We think the voters should have the right to make things right when they believe the Legislature has done wrong.

The referendum requirements are much too stringent. Petition organizers should have more time to gather fewer signatures, and they should be able to collect them anywhere in the state.

We prefer government "by the people." We want to see pigs fly.

Read The Salt Lake Tribune's: Referendum reform,Why not give the voters a chance?

Primary

Michelle and I have just been called as teachers in the Bountiful Hill's Ward Primary.

The best experience I have ever had in any calling was teaching in the Primary, although I truly believe that it was the children who taught me.

The last time I was involved in the Primary I worked with a boy who was extremely disabled . I had to carry him to class, and we had to be careful that he didn't fall off his chair. His name was Andrew and his gift in this life is that he carries the light of love.

On Sunday, October 20, 2002 our Primary Children presented their annual program of song and scripture to the Winder Fifth Ward. My wife Michelle had just given birth to our second daughter Anna, so it became my great privilege to sit with Andrew during the program. I don't think I can explain how beautiful it was to be there with Andrew during the program, but it was one of those moments where I actually understood how the spirit of love can transcend any disability. After the program was over I gave the closing prayer.

For some reason Michelle had to stay at the ward house after the meeting so Abby and I decided to walk home in the warm sun. The neighborhood was painted in gold by the falling leaves of Fall, and I distinctly remember thinking, "this is a perfect day".

When I arrived home I noticed that there were 21 calls on our caller id. I looked at the phone numbers that belonged to my Uncle Bruce Miller, and to my 96 year old grandmother Dolores Graves. I dialed Bruce's number but he wasn't home, so I dialed grandmother's number. When she answered she said, Oh Robby its terrible". She then handed the phone to my Uncle Bruce who explained to me that my father Michael had passed away.

A day later I arrived home late, in the dark, during a rain storm to find my front yard filled with paper hearts that were taped to knives and placed into our lawn. Andrew's mother Athena, with the help of some Primary Children, had given me what I now know as, "a heart attack".

I don't know how I would have gotten through that difficult moment in time if I had not had such a overwhelming affirmation from the "spirit of love" that came from my Primary experience.

I am very grateful to know that I will once again have the opportunity to be a student, this time with the seven year old children of the Bountiful Hills Ward.

Sound like anybody you know?

The 14 Defining Characteristics Of Fascism
by Dr. Lawrence Britt

Dr. Lawrence Britt has examined the fascist regimes of Hitler (Germany), Mussolini (Italy), Franco (Spain), Suharto (Indonesia) and several Latin American regimes. Britt found 14-defining characteristics common to each:

1. Powerful and Continuing Nationalism -
Fascist regimes tend to make constant use of patriotic mottos, slogans, symbols, songs, and other paraphernalia. Flags are seen everywhere, as are flag symbols on clothing and in public displays.

2. Disdain for the Recognition of Human Rights -
Because of fear of enemies and the need for security, the people in fascist regimes are persuaded that human rights can be ignored in certain cases because of "need." The people tend to look the other way or even approve of torture, summary executions, assassinations, long incarcerations of prisoners, etc.

3. Identification of Enemies/Scapegoats as a Unifying Cause -
The people are rallied into a unifying patriotic frenzy over the need to eliminate a perceived common threat or foe: racial , ethnic or religious minorities; liberals; communists; socialists, terrorists, etc.

4. Supremacy of the Military -
Even when there are widespread domestic problems, the military is given a disproportionate amount of government funding, and the domestic agenda is neglected. Soldiers and military service are glamorized.

5. Rampant Sexism -
The governments of fascist nations tend to be almost exclusively male-dominated. Under fascist regimes, traditional gender roles are made more rigid. Divorce, abortion and homosexuality are suppressed and the state is represented as the ultimate guardian of the family institution.

6. Controlled Mass Media -
Sometimes to media is directly controlled by the government, but in other cases, the media is indirectly controlled by government regulation, or sympathetic media spokespeople and executives. Censorship, especially in war time, is very common.

7. Obsession with National Security -
Fear is used as a motivational tool by the government over the masses.

8. Religion and Government are Intertwined -
Governments in fascist nations tend to use the most common religion in the nation as a tool to manipulate public opinion. Religious rhetoric and terminology is common from government leaders, even when the major tenets of the religion are diametrically opposed to the government's policies or actions.

9. Corporate Power is Protected -
The industrial and business aristocracy of a fascist nation often are the ones who put the government leaders into power, creating a mutually beneficial business/government relationship and power elite.

10. Labor Power is Suppressed -
Because the organizing power of labor is the only real threat to a fascist government, labor unions are either eliminated entirely, or are severely suppressed.

11. Disdain for Intellectuals and the Arts -
Fascist nations tend to promote and tolerate open hostility to higher education, and academia. It is not uncommon for professors and other academics to be censored or even arrested. Free expression in the arts and letters is openly attacked.

12. Obsession with Crime and Punishment -
Under fascist regimes, the police are given almost limitless power to enforce laws. The people are often willing to overlook police abuses and even forego civil liberties in the name of patriotism. There is often a national police force with virtually unlimited power in fascist nations.

13. Rampant Cronyism and Corruption -
Fascist regimes almost always are governed by groups of friends and associates who appoint each other to government positions and use governmental power and authority to protect their friends from accountability. It is not uncommon in fascist regimes for national resources and even treasures to be appropriated or even outright stolen by government leaders.

14. Fraudulent Elections -
Sometimes elections in fascist nations are a complete sham. Other times elections are manipulated by smear campaigns against or even assassination of opposition candidates, use of legislation to control voting numbers or political district boundaries, and manipulation of the media. Fascist nations also typically use their judiciaries to manipulate or control elections.

Commentary:
An interesting note to end this article: As of January 2004, the United States fulfills all fourteen points of fascism and all seven warning signs are present. But we're not alone. Israel also fulfills all fourteen points and all seven warning signs as well. Welcome to the new republic, redefined, revised and spun. It is not too late to reverse this in either country, but it will be soon. The first step is realizing it. The second step is getting involved. As the propaganda slogan disguising our current war goes, "Freedom isn't free." But our war for freedom isn't abroad; it's here at home.

Voucher Truths IV

The Method:

"Early voucher bills may move us only slowly toward separation. They may include provisions that temporarily prolong the power of unions, school boards, and other remnants of the socialist regime; limit the number of students who can participate; set voucher amounts too low; and place restrictions on qualifying schools. But once established, those programs will be broadened.

Vouchers offer a halfway house to wean the public from their addiction to government provision of education. By removing institutional barriers to privatization and setting in motion a dynamic that ensures further movement toward competition and choice, vouchers are a necessary step toward complete separation."

Joseph Bast
President, Heartland Institute

Republican delegate responds to PCE's "Liberal Bad" letter

Despite attacks by policy makers and Parents for Choice,

Utahns for Public Schools ‘committed to ensuring that the will of the people is heard’

When David Gatti, a teacher and state Republican delegate, received a letter from Parents for Choice in Education (PCE) saying, “Republicans must not sign these [school voucher referendum] petitions,” he was outraged.

Like a majority of Utahns, Gatti believes that citizens should have an opportunity to vote on whether or not private school vouchers are a wise use of taxpayer dollars. (In a March 9 poll released by KSL Television, 80 percent of Utahns said they would sign a petition to put education vouchers on the ballot.)

In a response to Doug Holmes, PCE chairman and author of the letter, Gatti reminded Holmes that the referendum process provides checks and balances on the power of the state’s policymakers “just in case elected officials do not represent the will of their [constituencies].

“The fact that you are against letting the people vote on such an important piece of policy lets me know that you are afraid of the possible results,” Gatti told Holmes. “I do not disagree that there are parts of the public education system that could be revamped. Let’s start by investing our money there – where [96] percent of Utah students are and will continue to be educated. Finally, do not ask me not to exercise my constitutionally guaranteed right to petition the government. Many people have died, and are dying for that document; do not ever insult it like this . . . and especially never do it under the guise of being a responsible Republican.”

Gatti and more than 15,000 volunteers statewide have until April 9 to gather 92,000 signatures and ensure a ballot referendum on a new private school voucher law passed by the 2007 Utah Legislature. The organization behind the referendum effort – Utahns for Public Schools (UTPS) – has support from the following organizations: Utah State Parent Teacher Association (PTA); Utah School Boards Association (USBA); Utah School Superintendents Association (USSA); Utah School Employees Association (USEA); Utah Education Association (UEA); NAACP – Salt Lake Chapter; League of Women Voters; Utah Association of Elementary School Principals (UAESP); and the Utah Association of Secondary School Principals (UASSP). According to UTPS, 9,000 petitions have been delivered to the Utah Education Association and 6,000 have been delivered to PTA volunteers.

“We have PTA moms and dads who are leading this effort to give the people of Utah a chance to vote on whether vouchers are worth the expense,” said Carmen Snow, state PTA president and a UTPS spokesperson. “We have encountered roadblocks at every turn, but our people remain committed to ensuring that the will of the people is heard.”

The “roadblocks” Snow referred to began after the referendum petition was filed in early March. UTPS attorney Janet Jenson received a call from the office of Utah Lt. Governor Gary Herbert, telling her the petition was invalid because the notary’s stamp was green instead of purple. The state employee Jenson talked to later recanted. Jenson received another call informing her that the petition was invalid because it was called a “Petition for Referendum,” rather than an “Application for Petition for Referendum.” Once again, following a challenge by Jenson, the employee recanted.

Lt. Governor Herbert and Utah state Senator Curtis Bramble (R-Provo) then proceeded to argue that the referendum petition to put education vouchers on the ballot was pointless because a second law was passed by the Legislature – and that law superseded House Bill 148, the basis for the petition drive.

Jenson argues that the second bill (House Bill 174) does not supersede HB 148.

And that means repealing HB 148 will kill both bills. In addition, Jenson noted that it wasn’t possible to challenge HB 174 because it hadn’t been signed into law by the time the referendum deadline passed.

“Having spent more than half a million dollars to buy legislators’ votes and get the voucher bill enacted by a single vote after it had been voted down six previous times, did we really believe that the pro-voucher machine would just quietly roll over when we stood up for ourselves, our children and our public schools and demanded to vote?” Jenson said. “Heavens, no. Voucher proponents will use every weapon they’ve got to stop us from putting this on the ballot. We have to expect them to run media ads that distort the truth, file lawsuits, pressure people not to sign petitions or even to take their names back off after they do sign.”

Last week, as Jenson predicted, the Utah Republican Party began running radio advertisements, patting themselves on the back for a legislature and governor who approved the nation’s most sweeping voucher legislation. When the ads first aired, they ended with a notation they had been paid for by the Utah Republican Party. That tag line was taken off after a couple of days.

“Like the civil rights marchers of the 1960’s, we will not stop until Utah taxpayers are given an opportunity to be heard on this most important issue,” said Snow.

Voucher Truths III

The Method:

"Incrementalism is a different strategy. It consists of seeking passage of very limited or modest voucher plans with no provisions for later expansion. Supporters of an incrementalist strategy plan to introduce at a future date new legislation that would expand the program."

Design Guidelines for School Vouchers
The Heartland Institute

Welcome to the World Elliana!

ELLIANA HOPE BURRIDGE

7 POUNDS 10 OUNCES

19 INCHES

7:27 A.M.

New Burridge baby on the way!

Marissa woke up around 4:30 a.m. with pains. She is in labor now. We expect our third child in a few hours. More to come....

Dear Friend,

Elizabeth and I are so grateful for your prayers and wishes. Your support means a great deal to us during this difficult time.

As you may have heard, yesterday we found out that Elizabeth's breast cancer is back, but confined mainly to her bones. Although this isn't the news we wanted to hear, we are very optimistic. Having been through many struggles together in the past, we know that the key is to keep your head up, keep moving and be strong. And that's exactly what we intend to do.

Elizabeth and I have been married for nearly 30 years and we will be in this every step of the way together. We will keep a positive attitude and always look for the silver lining—that's what we do.

Although the cancer is no longer curable, it is treatable, and many patients in similar circumstances have lived full, energetic lives. We expect nothing less for Elizabeth. She expects to do all the things next week that she did last week.

Our campaign goes on and it goes on strongly. We are so proud of the campaign we are running—a campaign based on ideas and reaching out to people. This campaign is not about me or Elizabeth—it's about all the people we have met these past few years and people like them all across America and the world—people worried about feeding and clothing their kids; people without health care; people facing hardships overseas.

Both of us are committed to this campaign. We're committed to this cause and we're committed to changing this country we love so much.

Thank you again for your support and for standing with us.

John Edwards


P.S.-- Many of you have asked how to contact our family and the campaign. You can click here to send us a note. Quite a few supporters and friends have already e-mailed and blogged such kind messages. Thank you so much.

Give Barberi the Job!

Rocky v. Hannity
Who other than Tom Barberi, "The Voice of Reason!", could handle both Sean Hannity and Mayor Rocky Anderson.

Tom is as independent as they get, and he can defiantly handle these two guys.

I say, "Give Barberi the job!

Prayers for Elizabeth

Washington, DC - Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean issued the following statement in response to the announcement that Elizabeth Edwards's cancer has returned:

"On behalf of the Democratic family I want to express our enormous admiration of Elizabeth's courage, strength and grace. Her optimism and positive attitude continue to be an inspiration. Our thoughts and prayers are with the Edwards family."

Watch: Edwards to continue presidential bid

Voucher Truths II

The Method:

"We see vouchers as a major step toward the complete privatization of schooling. In fact, after careful study, we have come to the conclusion that they are the only way to dismantle the current socialist regime."

Joseph Bast
President, Heartland Institute
(From an essay published by the Cato Institute)

VP Cheney is coming to BYU

The Tribune has reported that the Vice President is coming to BYU to speak at commencement.

Hmm.

So much for political neutrality.

Voucher Truths

The Goal:

"I proclaim publicly that I favor ending government involvement in education."

Paul Mero
President, Sutherland Institute

Cannon: NASA Scientists' 'free speech' about Climate Change can be gagged and 'directed by policy.'

With Chris Cannon every issue is 'complicated.' From immigration to the minimum wage--and now its even a scientist's ability to speak freely about....science. According to Rep. Cannon, NASA scientists can't talk about global warming if the Administration doesn't want them to.

Raw Story reported:

....Republicans hammered a NASA director testifying about pressure from the White House, "accusing him of political bias, of politicizing his work and of ignoring uncertainties in climate change science."

Rep. Chris Cannon (R-UT) issued a startling rebuke to the NASA official, disputing his assertion that taxpayer-funded scientists are entitled to speak freely.

"Free speech is not a simple thing and is subject to and directed by policy," Cannon said, according to the Times.

Are Newton's Three Laws now subject to White House approval?

Utah Democratic Party: We do advocate a "power grab" by the People of Utah

Two weeks ago we encouraged Democrats to assist with a petition drive to put the school voucher issue on the ballot. Since then we have been subjected to lectures on: the nature of “representative” gov­ernment; the wishes of our Founding Fathers; accused of a “power grab”; advised not to take a stance on things we care about because of how “popular” we are in rural Utah; told it is a “waste of time, energy, and means”; and, that we should not “put the community through such a divisive and futile battle.”

We would like to point out something: Article VI, Section 1 of the Utah State Constitution clearly puts the voters of Utah on an equal footing with the State Legislature by vesting Utah’s legislative powers with the Senate, House and the People of the State of Utah.

This voucher legislation has significant implications for every public school and family in Utah. As such, we do advocate a “power grab” by the People of Utah to assert their constitutional rights

Regardless of your opinion on vouchers, the use of referenda to put laws passed by the legislature to a vote of the people is written into the Utah Constitution, which explicitly recognizes that power in our state rests with the peo­ple as co-equal to the rest of the legislative branch.

With public opinion polls showing strong opposition to vouchers and support for our neighborhood public schools, it is 58 Republicans serving us in state government who are putting Utahns through an unnecessary and divisive referendum battle. Had any one of 38 Republican State House members voting to support this scheme adequately represented the will of the people, Utahns would not be asked to vote on this issue. It is ironic that the motto over the House chamber is “vox populi” or “voice of the people.” Clearly, Republican State House mem­bers really think they are people’s voice and have taken numerous steps over the years to limit the actual ability of the People to have their say through referenda and initiative as a co-equal legislative voice.

Referenda are a necessary check on legislative power and an important means of fostering debate within our repre­sentative democracy, especially in a state that has seen considerable gerrymandering making it difficult for the people to truly hold their representatives accountable on Election Day.

It is well within the Utah Democratic Party’s mission to adopt and promote statements of policy. We proudly do so. Utahns of every political stripe -- even those from rural Utah -- should assert their constitutional authority and place this issue on the ballot. It is our patriotic duty to jealously protect the power of the People of the State of Utah to have their say on important matters like the school voucher scheme.