Michigan judge’s dismissal of research was unbelievable

See_No_Evil,_Hear_No_Evil,_Speak_No_EvilThis op-ed by William C. Duncan, director of Sutherland’s Center for Family and Society, was published March 29 in The Salt Lake Tribune.

What does “unbelievable” mean? To most of us, it means that something is clearly not true or at least is so implausible as to justify our rejecting it as an explanation.

In his ruling last week that the United States Constitution requires Michigan to change its legal definition of marriage to include same-sex couples, Judge Bernard Friedman vociferously attacked four social scientists. The state had relied on their work to cast doubt on the notion that social science establishes that there are no differences in outcomes for children raised by a married mother and father and those raised by same-sex couples, of whom only one could possibly be the child’s biological parent.

Judge Friedman dismissed all of the witnesses, two for no real reason and the other two because the judge found their research “unbelievable.” Why?

In the case of Mark Regnerus, a sociologist at the University of Texas, the judge points to four factors. One is that his study has limitations, which is true of all studies and which Dr. Regnerus freely admits. Another is that it was funded by a third party who hypothesized that it would demonstrate what anyone with a cursory knowledge of family studies would guess — that children are likely to benefit from being raised by a married mother and father.

Then, the judge said the study has critics(!) who didn’t like the study’s design but who have yet to follow the credible scientific path: produce their own research with different results. This criticism is particularly interesting. The judge and the critics fault the study for not comparing children raised for long periods by same-sex partners (the fact that so few could be found in the random sample is itself telling). But earlier in the opinion, the judge said the social scientific consensus was that “there is no discernible difference in parenting competence between lesbian and gay adults and their heterosexual counterparts.” So, the judge’s favored evidence has nothing to do with children’s outcomes when raised by any kind of family form, but he is bothered that Dr. Regnerus didn’t study that question.

At least Dr. Regnerus’ study was actually relevant to the case since it looked at the effect of family structure on children rather than at the parenting skills of individuals with varying sexual attractions.

So, apparently, “unbelievable” to Judge Friedman means that he has been told something he didn’t want to hear.

Continue reading

Posted in Law, Marriage | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

Sutherland releases 2014 Legislative Scorecard and Lifetime Legislator Scores

Photo Credit: Scott Catron

Photo Credit: Scott Catron

SALT LAKE CITY – Sutherland Institute released today its 2014 Legislative Scorecard. Using 17 pieces of legislation considered during the 2014 legislative session for the Senate and 18 for the House (not all bills overlap between chambers), Sutherland produced an individual score for each legislator and an overall score for each body. In 2014, the Utah Senate scored 79 percent on average (79 percent in 2013 and 81 percent in 2012) while the Utah House came in at 75 percent (58 percent in 2013 and 75 percent in 2012).

Of note during this session was the wide bipartisan agreement on several pieces of transparency legislation. Additionally, the so-called “moratorium” on bills dealing with religious freedom and nondiscrimination laws contributed to a less controversial session.

The 2014 Legislative Scorecard can be found here.

2014 Senate highlights:

  • “High Five”
    • 100%     Margaret Dayton
    • 100%     Mark Madsen
    • 94%       Deidre Henderson
    • 94%       Stuart Reid
    • 93%       Scott Jenkins
  • “Low Five”
    • 50%       Jim Dabakis
    • 56%       Patricia Jones
    • 59%       Gene Davis
    • 59%       Karen Mayne
    • 64%       Luz Robles
  • 20 of 29 senators scored 75 percent or better

Continue reading

Posted in Legislature | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Twice as good, half as well, never enough

half loaf cornbreadIs it more important to stand on principle, or get while the getting is good? Is settling for half a loaf selling out, or a step in the right direction? Does mixing metaphors like concrete weigh prose down, or liberate the literary soul?

OK, no one but the grammar police really cares about that last one. But the first two will decide the limited government movement’s fate. That’s what’s splitting us right now, you see. Libertarian-leaners, classical liberals, and “establishment” conservatives are less divided by issues and objectives than we are about timelines and roadmaps. We all want to see the same movie, but we’re wearing ourselves out haggling over which showing and how to get there. And whatever we decide, the other guys will be there first. Let’s see if I can stick with one metaphor long enough to explain why.

The reason they’ll be there first is because they’re running the theater. Government employees are predominantly big government-type people. That’s not meant as a pejorative. It’s simple common sense. If you think government is the answer and you care about the question, you are more likely to migrate to government employment (it used to be government service, but the days of the dollar-a-year man are gone) than someone who sees government as the problem; or more likely, who sees private work or charity as the answer.

The simple fact is that when conservatives engage in the political and bureaucratic arena, it’s almost always an away game. One reason is noted in this excellent piece by Kevin Williamson: “[C]onservatives are forever in a position of running against handouts, and handouts are popular.”

Continue reading

Posted in Conservative Thought, Government Spending | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

Obama: I don’t know anything, and what I say means nothing

800px-Barack_Obama_in_the_Oval_Office,_April_2010Back in November, I collected a few instances of the left calling out President Obama for his claims of ignorance on a spate of issues — NSA spying, Obamacare, IRS targeting, Fast and Furious gun trafficking, the AP reporter harassment and Benghazi. That post is below for your enjoyment. But now it’s becoming more and more clear that, in addition to apparently not knowing much about what’s going on with his administration, Obama does not expect to be held to what he or his administration says. The message from Obama is clear: What I say means nothing, and I don’t know anything anyway.

On Obamacare, the president’s administration has repeatedly delayed or changed what were once hard deadlines and clear policies, while also insisting that some deadlines could not be altered. The Heritage Foundation has a rundown of what happened to one of those “unchangeable” deadlines:

“We have no plans to extend the open enrollment period. In fact, we don’t actually have the statutory authority to extend the open enrollment period in 2014.” — Health and Human Services (HHS) official Julie Bataille, March 11

“Once that 2014 open enrollment period has been set, they are set permanently.” – HHS official Michael Hash, March 11

“March 31st is the deadline for enrollment. You’ve heard us make that clear.” – Press Secretary Jay Carney, March 21

“There is no delay beyond March 31.” – HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius, March 12

There was no delay … until there was. The Washington Post reported [Tuesday] that March 31 is not, in fact, the final word. To get more time, you tell the government that you haven’t been able to sign up yet:

Under the new rules, people will be able to qualify for an extension by checking a blue box on HealthCare.gov to indicate that they tried to enroll before the deadline. This method will rely on an honor system; the government will not try to determine whether the person is telling the truth.

OK, so everyone knows about the issues with Obamacare. But Obama certainly means what he says when it comes to foreign policy, right?

Continue reading

Posted in Politics | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

Why Herbert should veto preschool bill – Mero Moment, 3/25/14


Most little children are better off at home and tax dollars are better spent on the special needs of truly impoverished children.

Most people know that Barack Obama has been pushing for universal health care since his initial campaign in 2008. But did you know that universal preschool has been on his implementation list for just as long?

The “Preschool for All” concept took center stage in his two most recent State of the Union addresses. President Obama has proposed that $75 billion in mandatory funding be allocated “for a Federal-State partnership that would provide high-quality preschool to all 4-year-olds from low- and moderate-income families, while also creating incentives for States to expand publicly funded preschool services to middle-class families and promoting access to high-quality full-day kindergarten and high-quality early learning programs for children under the age of 4.”[1]

Enter HB 96, Utah School Readiness Initiative – a heavily debated bill passed by the state Legislature but still unsigned by Governor Gary Herbert.

In order for a state to obtain “Preschool for All” money, there are eight qualifications it must have in place legally. Utah has had three of those qualifications in statute. HB 96 puts the other five remaining requirements in place. To be clear, supporters of the bill say that obtaining even more federal funding isn’t the goal of the bill. But the lure of more federal dollars is hard to dismiss.

Continue reading

Posted in Education, Podcast | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

Hobby Lobby at the Supreme Court

Hobby Lobby in Stow, Ohio. (Photo: DangApricot via Wikimedia Commons)

Hobby Lobby in Stow, Ohio. (Photo: DangApricot via Wikimedia Commons)

The Supreme Court decision in the Hobby Lobby religious freedom case is important for many reasons; I’ll just cite a couple. First, the precedent set in the law because of the decision will either strengthen or weaken the ability of business owners to run their business according to their consciences (religious or otherwise).

Second, and related to the first, is the signal the Supreme Court’s decision will send to lower courts about its view of religious freedom. A ruling in favor of Hobby Lobby and religious freedom could stem the recent tide of state-level decisions against religious freedom, in which small business owners face fines or even jail time for declining to participate in same-sex marriage ceremonies based on the First Amendment rights to the free exercise of religious freedom and freedom of speech.

Opponents of Hobby Lobby’s position argue that, as a corporation, Hobby Lobby is not entitled to the same protections that individuals receive. However, the Supreme Court ruled in the Citizens United case that corporations have substantially the same rights as individuals in the eyes of the law. This makes sense. Simply because a business owner takes the necessary legal steps to form a corporation shouldn’t suddenly strip the business owner of the ability to run the business as they see fit.

Yes, all freedoms have limits, and in the early ’90s Congress passed the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) with lots of bipartisan support to define those limits and freedoms. RFRA strengthened religious freedom by prohibiting government from unduly burdening the practice of religion without demonstrating a compelling state interest, and even then, it must do so using the least restrictive means possible.

Some would find fining Hobby Lobby an estimated $475 million per year for failing to comply with the Obamacare mandate a bit excessive.

Additionally, National Review points out:

While claiming the mandate is necessary for women’s health, the Obama administration has exempted the health-care plans of tens of millions of women from the HHS mandate — often for merely political or commercial reasons. But the government is unrelenting in enforcing this mandate against a relatively small number of family businesses that simply want to provide health care without being forced to violate their conscience under threat of heavy fines.

Hobby Lobby offers 16 of the 20 mandated contraceptives under the Affordable Care Act. The company objects to the other four. The question is who should pay for one of those four if it is what the Hobby Lobby employee wants to use as a contraceptive. It seems reasonable that the employee should find an alternative method to pay for that particular contraceptive after rejecting the other 16.

Surely, no one is forcing an individual to work at Hobby Lobby and, if that person does work at Hobby Lobby, he or she understands the Christian values in play (one of which, incidentally, compels Hobby Lobby to pay wages 80 percent higher than the federal minimum wage). In other words, the employee knows what to expect, which should help inform his or her employment decisions.

It is ironic that a corporation like CVS Pharmacy is widely applauded for making a business decision based on health to no longer sell cigarettes, but when the Hobby Lobby corporation makes a decision based on religious beliefs not to offer four of 20 mandated contraceptives, it is roundly criticized by the left. Both are corporations (run, of course, by people); both make business and moral decisions that affect employees and customers; and both should be free to do so.

Posted in Law | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Legislature supports public-lands transfer with ‘what next’ bills

Sutherland-Self-Govt-LogoThe Utah Legislature adjourned this month with a nice package of bills to support the state’s Transfer of Public Lands (TPLA) initiative. Since they’ve already passed a bill demanding transfer, the next step is to address what happens to the lands when that transfer occurs.

Other states contemplating a TPLA-like effort can front-load some of the debate and address the concerns of many potential detractors by including some or all of these “next step” bills in their initial package. The idea is to demonstrate that this isn’t an industry grab or an effort to develop every federal acre out there, but rather to responsibly manage these lands in a way that balances responsible conservation with betterment of the human condition. This means that some lands will remain (or become) preservation areas, some will be economically developed, and most will probably see some of each of those things since they’re rarely mutually exclusive.

Here are the Utah bills (with links) that I think most directly address the “what next” issue and show good faith in future management plans. …

Click here to read the rest of this post at at Sutherland’s Center for Self-Government in the West.

Posted in Limited Government | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

Utah through a taxpayer’s eyes

MoneypileAccording to a recent Salt Lake Tribune article:

  • Utah residents pay the 14th lowest taxes in the nation, or the 10th lowest if adjusted for cost of living
  • The average Utah taxpayer pays $6,069 in taxes (state and local)
  • The average tax bill in Utah is 13 percent less than the national average
  • Unlike some states, Utah has no local income taxes
  • Utah’s property taxes are 11th lowest in the nation
  • Republican states like Utah have lower taxes, on average, than Democrat states

To see the report from which these facts were taken, click here.

Posted in Taxes | Tagged | Leave a comment

Learning the delicate dance of candor and civility – Mero Moment, 3/18/14

This post is a transcript of a 4-minute weekly radio commentary aired on several Utah radio stations.

dancersTen years ago this month Sutherland Institute finalized plans for a very unique project in Utah politics. It was 10 years ago that we created our Transcend Series. Hundreds of elected officials and community leaders have spent the better part of a full day, once a month, for nine months to gain context, perspective and introspection about their role as decision-makers.

The highlight of the Transcend Series has been sessions with author Jim Ferrell and educator Quinn McKay. Jim Ferrell permissioned these elected officials and community leaders to see people as people and not as objects in a political arena, and Quinn McKay pushed them uncomfortably to face the realities of honesty and integrity in public service.

At the heart of the Transcend Series has been a desire to highlight the delicate balance between civility and candor. Too much candor at the expense of civility and too much civility at the expense of candor can hurt open dialogue and, ultimately, democratic processes.

Most of us are either very good at one or the other. We’re very good at candor or we’re very good at civility. But few of us have mastered that delicate balance between the two. Undisciplined, candor can often seem offensive and civility passive-aggressive. And it’s no coincidence that community voices often remind us to be civil in our public dialogue – as if to say we rarely lack the ability to express candor. The truth is that achieving candor is just as difficult as achieving civility mostly, I think, because many people don’t believe you can be both candid and civil.

Continue reading

Posted in Podcast | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

What time is it? Caucus time!

caucus_system-portionParty caucuses are tonight and Thursday, so here’s your chance to have a voice in Utah’s political process! Click here for a giant infographic explaining how Utah’s caucus system works. Click here to learn what delegates are and how they’re important. And click here to find out how to become a delegate!

Posted in Limited Government, Politics | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

On Point at the Capitol: advice from women in politics, 3/14/14

In this episode of On Point, “Holly on the Hill” blogger Holly Richardson interviews several Democratic and Republican state legislators about the highs and lows of the 2014 session and finds out how they got started in politics. The legislators, many of them retiring, also share advice for women considering entering politics.


Holly interviews:

Sen. Patricia Jones, D-District 4
Sen. Karen Mayne, D-District 5
Rep. Ronda Menlove, R-District 1
Rep. Dana Layton, R-District 60
Rep. Becky Edwards, R-District 20
Rep. Rebecca Chavez-Houck, D-District 24
Rep. Jennifer Seelig, D-District 23

Watch here on YouTube!

Posted in Legislature | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Election solution may be a Pyrrhic victory – Mero Moment, 3/11/14

This post is a transcript of a 4-minute weekly radio commentary aired on several Utah radio stations. (Scroll down for podcast.)

CapitolnightAs the legislative version of the Count My Vote initiative is signed into law, we should reflect on its meaning. State Senator Curt Bramble did a remarkable job in countering the initiative by consuming its vital parts and making it a legislative solution rather than a special interest victory. Even though the end result is that Utah voters are now strapped with a dual electoral system that will only add more divisiveness to Utah politics, Bramble’s expert move temporarily frustrated political liberals and cut off their momentum at the knees.  The Legislature became the solution, not political elites.

But this legislative solution looks to be a Pyrrhic victory. In this new dual electoral system, people of principle will run inside the ongoing caucus/convention system and people of pragmatism will use the signature/primary system – and, depending on the most pressing issues of the time, people of principle in elected office might find the need to join the ranks of the pragmatists just to stay there.

The bottom line is that principle will lose ground to pragmatism – meaning limited government will lose ground to Big Government. It’s tough enough now for principled leaders of limited government in the Utah Legislature to stand against the tide of special interest demands and cultural shifts. It will soon be impossible.

Count My Vote makes Utah a worse place to live, work and raise a family. Providing an alternative path for liberals and moderates to get elected in the Republican Party means Utah changes forever. Perhaps it’s a sign of the times – freedom will lose permanent ground.

Continue reading

Posted in Legislature, Podcast | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

What’s the deal with Utah’s air quality?

A 2013 survey found that 78 percent of Utahns think our air is worse today than it was 20 years ago. While we certainly do seem to have a lot more bad air days lately, the number of official red air days isn’t because we have worse air, it’s because the government changed its definition of bad air. In 2009 the EPA became much stricter on how much pollution it says is too much. Consequently, we have more red air days even as actual pollution levels are falling. That’s right, Utah’s air quality has drastically improved over the last couple decades. It just doesn’t seem like it because of changing regulations and aggressive public awareness campaigns.

So why do we care what the EPA’s changing regulations say? First, because pollution is harmful and public awareness of its levels and its sources is a good thing. Second, and this may explain the recent rush of government and business proclamations about air quality, if Utah continues to run afoul of federal regulations then we face the prospect of losing all federal transportation funding. There will be no federal money for new freeways or light rail trains, or any other new transportation project we currently rely upon the federal government to fund.

But regardless of funding or artificially inflated red air days, there are real health risks associated with poor air quality. There are numerous studies linking certain particulates in the air to a multitude of breathing and other health problems. So as responsible citizens it behooves us to identify these pollutants and reduce them where possible. However as in most things, identifying problems is fairly simple, while the policy prescriptions are much less so.

First, what’s causing the pollution? Again, surveys show that what many of us believe to be the culprit has less of an impact than we think. When we see pollution we often envision big industry with their huge smokestacks. While the Wasatch Front does have some industry (Kennecott Utah Copper mine, refineries, etc.), these sources only make up about 10 percent of the air pollution.

Continue reading

Posted in Environment | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

Weakening the ‘old habits of decency’

The Cook County Juvenile Detention Facility and Court, Chicago.

A juvenile detention facility in Chicago.

A wonderfully stated warning regarding the effect of government largesse:

A sentimental utilitarianism argued that prosperity would abolish sin. It was a shallow argument, ignorant of history; for had it been true, all rich men’s sons, these many centuries past, would have been perfectly virtuous.

To the student of history, as contrasted with the doctrinaire positivistic reformer, it seems that people are decent, when they are decent, chiefly out of habit. They fall into habits of decent conduct by religious instruction, by settled family life, by assuming private responsibilities, by the old incentives of private gain and advancement in rewards for decent conduct. When the individual seems to run no risks; when food, shelter, and even comforts are guaranteed by the state, no matter what one’s conduct may be; when the state arrogates to itself a complex of responsibilities that formerly were undertaken by church, family, voluntary association, and the private person – why, then the old habits of decency are weakened, and the police constable and the Borstal* are required to maintain precariously by compulsion what once was taken for granted in Britain and elsewhere.”

- Russell Kirk, ‘The Sword of Imagination’

*youth detention center

Posted in Conservative Thought | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

Arkansas’ new Medicaid expansion is already seeing cost overruns

MystethoscopeAccording to a recent analysis from the Foundation for Government Accountability (FGA), the “private option” Medicaid expansion plan in Arkansas (giving premium subsidies to mostly able-bodied, childless adults to help them purchase private health insurance) has begun seeing cost overruns in its second month of operation. Based on previous cost estimates done by consultants and state departments, the cost overruns are expected to continue. And despite Obamacare’s “promise” to cover 100 percent of Medicaid expansion costs in the first three years of expansion, these unexpected costs mean Arkansas taxpayers will pay millions more than they would have otherwise.

All of this is relevant to Utah because the Legislature is also considering a “private option” Medicaid expansion plan, albeit in a more limited fashion (only for those below 100 percent of the federal poverty line, rather than 138 percent like Arkansas’ plan). But Arkansas’ cost problems are still a warning for Utah because the underlying problems driving the costs are similar to those in what Utah is proposing: no incentive for Utahns to choose low-cost health plans and significant variations in insurance rates in the Obamacare exchange across the state.

What we see playing out in Arkansas is another reason that Utah would be logical and prudent not to expand Medicaid. At the very least, Utah should take a “wait and see” approach while other states unwisely rush to grab every federal dollar they can, without understanding what they (and their taxpayers) are getting into.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , | Leave a comment