Were You Informed? Did You Read The Bill?

If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be.
    -- Thomas Jefferson

There were many valid reason to support and oppose Referendum 1.  My question is:  Did you read the bill (HB148/HB174)?  If the answer is no, then note the quote above.  When the decision is placed on your hands, your duty is to be informed.  Listening to outrageous commercials (from either side) is insufficient and likely counterproductive. Attending debates and reading the voter pamphlet can be helpful.  But if you didn't read the bill (and voted), you shirked your duty.

I am grateful for the constituents (voucher supporters and opponents alike) who I saw with copies of the legislation, whether printed off of the Internet or published in the newspaper.  They were truly trying to make a difficult, but informed decision.  I was also shocked at how few citizens actually read the legislation (I would guess fewer than 10% actually read the bill).  Legislators are castigate (justifiably so) for voting for a bill that they hadn't read.

What was the cause of the impairment?  Any insights would be appreciated.  Some have told me it was lack of time, lack of interest, being unfamiliar with where to find the information, distracted by the media wars, etc.

Comments

[Tom Grover]

I read the bills during the session. And truthfully, the bills themselves are what turned me against the voucher program. I immediately had two big concerns. #1 The bill is unconstitutional under the Utah Constitution. #2 It had ridiculously nearly no accountability.

From that point on, I spoke out against the program.

And no offense, but to chastise those who didn't read the bill is a little silly. I know darn well that Legislators don't read all the bills in a session and refer to each other for Cliffs Notes versions.

Informed votes were cast by those who didn't read the bill, regardless of how the votes.

[John Dougall]

There are legislators who do read every bill that they vote on. It takes a lot of work, but it is possible. Unfortunately, there are also legislators who do not read every bill on which they cast a vote.

I stand by my point. If a voter didn't read the bill (or have someone read it to them), then the voter wasn't informed. Who knew that reading 13 pages could be so difficult. Of course, reading the bill is only the most basic step in becoming informed.

[Davis Didjeridu]

I agree with Tom. John, when you get every legislator to start reading the bills they pass, even the ones they sponsor, you can start complaining about an uninformed electorate.
I did read the bill, and posted a point-by-point analysis of it on my blog during the legislative debate.
Also, I would strongly suggest that Utahns are not as gullible as you imply and that most either read the bill itself, the voter information pamphlet, or took the time to study out the issue themselves. Some could also have made decisions about the concept of vouchers long before now, and polls before HB 148 was introduce seem to support that.
BTW, since you are so disgusted by the outrageous commercials, I hope we will see you return the $500 you got 10/13/06 from overstock.com, unless you really do believe Utahns don't care about their kids.

[rmwarnick]

If legislators had read HB 148, they might have realized it violated the constitutional separation of church and state.

[Reggie Gardner]

I think the point is well taken. Private citizens don't have to read every bill before the legislature, but certainly should read every one on the general ballot.

In the voucher case there appears to have been a good number of misinformed voters. A quick perusal of the comments on the DeseretNews article shows many who liked the general idea of vouchers but voted against this bill because of 3 or 4 reasons which were not true.

[Voice of Utah]

Yep, read it, didn't like it. More important, a majority of your constituents have rejected it. That's all that matters.

[John Dougall]

I am glad to hear you all read the bill, but rationalizing that it was acceptable for supporters and opponents to vote without reading the legislation is reckless. You are saying that governing in ignorance is acceptable. Nothing could be more destructive. I would have preferred 100% of voters reading the bill and then voted against the referendum than 100% not reading the bill and voting in favor.

[UtahTeacher]

I personally believe that voucher supporters were more guilty of light reading than voucher opponents. The claims of $1.4 billion in savings were accepted and promulgated without question by PCE and repeated in the last letter to the public from Sen. Valentine and Rep. Curtis. I'm doubting they read even the executive summary of the USU study they cite, let alone the in-depth statistical twisting necessary to save $2675 more on the marginal cost of each student leaving school than total cost put in per student including capital costs.

Lines 309-315 of HB 148 reveal the shell game. When the general fund disperses a $2250 voucher to a school, the district ALSO has to give $2250 back to the Uniform School Fund...where it just sits until rolling back into the funds for the next year. That money is counted in the total student funding which makes the funding statistic look better, even though the local school and district both lost money. And after the five years of mitigation, the district loses the entire MSP.

[John Dougall]

Many of you probably think I actually know Patrick Byrne (as if voucher supporters are some sort of tight knit cabal). I wouldn't recognize him if I ran into him on the street. I met him once in May 2006 when the legislature debated the issue of naked short selling (a big concern for Overstock.com and some other Utah companies). He expressed appreciation for my support on the legislation. I met him again at a voucher debate last month at UVSC. He asked whether or not I supported Referendum 1. For a combined total of about 4 sentences of pleasantries.

For those that are curious how I spent election night, I was at home watching the kids since my wife had a meeting.