Why We Must Stop an “Article V Convention of States”

Utah – VOTE NO 1HB 392 NOW!  Also HJR 8…

Contact your Utah House Representative.

Many good people are wrapping themselves around what they believe to be the way to save the U.S. Constitution: Through a constitutional convention, also called a convention of states or an Article V convention.

We all share the same degree of frustration: government is out of control and something must be done.

But what is done must be carefully examined, because in doing, we might just be undoing what we hope to fix.

As we work together to restore the original intent of the founders and framers, and as some of us truly believe a convention of states is the answer, I urge us all to ask some critical questions: Continue reading Why We Must Stop an “Article V Convention of States”

Utah’s “Man on the Street” – An Interview with Low Information CMV Petitioner

Watch a video of an undercover interview with a random “Count My Vote petitioner. It will either make you laugh hysterically or make your blood curdle.

Also: How to Remove Your Name from the CMV “Count My Vote” Petition

While a senior in high school, my daughter interned for Sean Hannity at WABC New York City. She frequently went down on the street in front of the Penn Plaza building and assisted with the Man on the Street segment. Sean gave her the opportunity of a lifetime to actually do the interview – the youngest intern ever.

That segment was usually hysterically funny, but always alarming. It highlighted not just the low information voter, but the completely ignorant voter (meaning the voter that “ignores” information).

Here is a Utah example, one of many petitioners hired by the lobbyists and elitist donors backing the “CMV” Count My Vote petition drive to get rid of the neighborhood grassroots voices and voters. This petition actually does exactly the opposite this uninformed petitioner declares it does. It turns all power over to the rich and famous, the lobbyists and the incumbents and career politicians they love to buy with media sound bites while they get rich off those media buys.

If you know anything about Utah’s neighborhood caucus, you will have a good laugh with this video. Pass it along.

Poor Charity. She should be grateful her last name and that of her friends were bleeped.

But you will also be very alarmed that the “man on the street” survives in Utah. It doesn’t say much for Utah’s education system, which is really not Utah’s system at all but the top-down, dumbed-down system Washington lobbyists and unions have given us and through which they benefit.

Charity is the perfect example of precisely the “low-information” brand of voter that has graduated from that system and is now a brainful of mush in the hands of the politically correct on a local college campus near you. (This preceded “common core” by the way.)

Tragically, Utah will be opening up its election process to this brand of voter if the Count My Vote (“Buy My Vote”) petition campaign gets enough signatures.

If you don’t know much about Utah’s neighborhood caucus, and you’ve been deceived into thinking it’s taking away your voice, think again.

If you signed one of those nasty CMV petitions, and after watching this video of an unbelievably off-the-mark conversation between this unfortunate petitioner and a very savvy interviewer who had the wherewithal to record the conversation, you now realize you have made a BIG mistake (and you HAVE), no worries.

You do have a way to remove your name from that petition, and you have until May 15th to do it.

Please watch this video, understand what this petition is about at the Protect Our Neighborhood Elections website, and get the information TODAY – while you can – for how to remove your name.

If you don’t know much about Utah’s neighborhood caucus system, but are now curious and want to know more and upgrade your status from low-information to medium-information voter, here’s the video that explains it.

For promotion to high-information voter status, please attend your neighborhood caucus on Thursday, March 20, 2014 at 7 PM. You can find your location here.

Also, please pass this information along and tell everyone while there’s still time:


Utah’s Incumbent Protection Twins: SB54 and CMV Initiative

A national campaign to destroy any remaining grassroots neighborhood, caucus-convention election systems. Utah is a #1 target. Immediate action in Utah is needed now.

UPDATED March 19, 2014
Utah’s Governor Gary Herbert signed into law SB 54, which unconstitutionally alters the caucus system. Action now entails the following:

1. Sign the petition to preserve the caucus.

2. Donate to American Leadership Fund. It will now take a legal challenge to protect the First Amendment right to assemble.


This bill that passed the legislature and that the Governor signed is the “Count My Vote-Buy My Vote” equivalent. As members of the Republican State Central Committee, it was a complete over-reach by the legislature to dictate to a private entity what its voting members can or cannot do. Our legislature was guilty of doing what it complains Congress does: trampling on the 10th Amendment.

They have indeed trampled on the First Amendment – our right to freely assemble.

The CMV campaign was behind SB 54, and they completely ignored the elected body of the party. That is equivalent to the state legislature telling your company and its board what its voting rules must be.

The bill was backed and promoted by elitists and DC lobbyists who are unscrupulous and who have promoted the Democratic National Convention and even who created Stephen Colbert’s SuperPAC specifically to mock Republican candidates – including Mitt Romney.

It adopts a “dual” election system similar to Connecticut’s. I used to live in Connecticut. Anyone can petition to get on the primary ballot in this system, yielding strange – and often disturbing – results.

When so many are running on the ballot, typically a plurality prevails, in which the winner does not get the majority and leaves the party – those who are working hard and are most involved – in disarray.

It also allows people of the opposing party to intervene and manipulate the election of good, conservative candidates.

It also allows anyone to vote – regardless of political affiliation – in a political party’s primary. This is unconstitutional and violated First Amendment rights of freedom of association.

The Utah bill, 2SB54, passed both the State House and Senate and then headed to the Governor’s office. He reported to the Republican State Central Committee that he supports the caucus-convention. Then why did he sign this bill into law? It will destroy the caucus-convention.

It is unconstitutional and sets a dangerous precedent for a legislative body to dictate to a private for-profit or non-profit corporation what its internal voting members can do and who they can be. (Translated: Do you want a legislature to have this authority over a religious institution?)

Here is the report on what has happened in Utah in hearings, and what has been happening all across the nation.

On Monday, March 3, 2014 testimonies from several Utah Republican State Central Committee members who have been working to preserve the neighborhood caucus election system were heard in the state legislative hearing on Senator Curt Bramble’s bill 2SB54.

First, Iron County Republican Chairman Blake Cozzens delivered an effective message about about how he, as a 23 year old, was able to run and be elected a county vice chair, and then shortly after as county chairman in a rural county. He also expressed his concern about the damage this proposal would do to the rural areas of the state, concerns also expressed by several committee members including Mike Noel and John Mathis, both representatives from rural counties.

Next, former State Representative Chris Herrod spoke passionately about the unconstitutionality of a legislative body intervening into private corporate affairs to dictate who the voting members can be and how its brand is used – a clear violation of the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. Committee member Ken Ivory concurred and also spoke strongly about this concern.

Following these testimonies, I spoke to my experience with the proposed “dual” election system in Connecticut. The chairman interrupted me and asked me to speak to the issue at hand, claiming my comments were not germane to the topic.

This was an indication of lack of information that some of our state legislators have about what they are reviewing and on which they are voting. I explained that last year the state central committee had been given a 26-page legal brief prepared by DC lobbyists Caplin and Drysdale and that the bill on the table was similar to that proposal.

I called it an incumbent-career politician-lobbyist protection bill. I showed how this so-called “compromise” is tied to and is nearly identical to that original DC lobbyist legal brief advocating for how and why Utah should be more like Connecticut by adopting its dual election system.

SB54S2 and CMV Initiative

Having lived in Connecticut, I know of the corruption and fraud that petitioning encourages. The current Count My Vote petition process should be an example and foreshadowing of things to come. It unconstitutionally meddles in the privacy of a corporation by allowing a legislature to dictate to that private corporation who its voting members are and how its brand may be used and by whom.

It creates a plurality election system where only rich and famous can petition and win – typically garnering less than a majority, and leaving candidate workers who supported the winner at odds with the majority of the other workers in the party.

After speaking with a Republican leader and friends in Connecticut, they are asking an important question: Why would Utah want to be like Connecticut when Connecticut would like to be more like Utah?

That’s a good question. And here’s the answer:

It’s really not about voters. It’s about incumbent and lobbyist protection. Lobbyists love career politicians. They and their consultants make huge sums of money with media buys in sound-bite, drive-by elections that remove the voting rights of the rural counties as well as those that are most committed to helping candidates get elected.

These lobbyists want uninformed voters because they’re easier to deceive.

It makes sense that elected officials who may support such measures have figured it out. They all have one thing in common regardless of party affiliation: They are all incumbents. This is their re-election protection policy!

I’ve just returned from a speaking trip on the East Coast. Utah is not alone. This is an all-out national attack on those states that use this grassroots system. The lobbyists behind this campaign to destroy Utah’s constitutional system, closest to the people and to replace it with the system that will further suit their purposes – keeping them in power and YOU and I at a distance, are with Caplin and Drysdale in DC.

These lobbyists represent the Democratic National Committee, they created McCain-Feingold – another election regulation that protects wealthy, self-funding candidates such as John McCain, while forcing the rest of us to raise the money $2,600 check by $2,600 check at a time.

Colbert and Sanderson
Stephen Colbert confers with lobbyists from Caplin & Drysdale, leads on the Utah CMV initiative to eliminate the neighborhood elections (caucus)

And if that isn’t enough, they also created Stephen Colbert’s SuperPAC to mock Republican candidates in 2012, including Mitt Romney.

So if our legislators want this kind of sleazy protection, by all means, vote FOR SB 54S2. But if they want to do the principled thing, vote AGAINST SB 54S2.

Capping the testimonies, former State Representative Fred Cox effectively spoke to his specific concerns about convention deadlines. He pointed out that he had fought the CMV proposals in their time frame and method last spring, but had worked on improvements. He said the Same Day Ballot was being tried out for 2014 for which solves several concerns and would not be ruined by the new Sub SB 54 where the previous version did. He believes SB 54 was over reaching and that they needed for fix the April 1st requirement. (As written, if we don’t follow the April 1st requirement we would be subject to CMV).

At the end of my testimony, Representative Kraig Powell questioned whether I had done anything to support any changes or improvements in 2013. I responded that, yes I had, and that many have spent hours reviewing changes that would streamline the caucus, and yes, I was involved in that process and yes, I did support those improvements.

I supported improvements, Mr. Powell, not those changes that would harm or replace it.

Representative Powell moved to lift the bill out of committee. He was particularly condescending to you and me – the voters, suggesting we needed to take a “Political Science 101 course.”

Then Senator Todd Weiler tweeted that it was ironic that I was “taking credit” for the improvements. I tweeted: #lie. (I took no such credit.)

Actually, Senator Weiler IS the irony.

Why would a Senator – an attorney – who places an “R” behind his name, and who professes to stand for that party’s platform of limited government and more state sovereignty, prop up the very lobbyist system that binds Utah to federal over-reach? Why would he want to grow the corrupting influence of big money over the people’s voices?

And why would ANY Utah elected official that has taken an oath to support and defend the U.S. Constitution vote for a bill that violates our First Amendment right to freely associate?

Because too many fear the loss of their re-election over doing what is right.

I’ve been following the tweets that have continued since the hearing. It is disheartening to read that Senator Weiler and perhaps others of his colleagues believe that the extensive process the state central committee went through with complete transparency and input from a wide range of people to vet the best ideas was inferior to the 12 hours the legislature gave the committee to vet their proposal, which was negotiated entirely behind closed doors to include backroom deals with lobbyists and consultants.

But then this is the way government is run. I’m reminded of the warning of the arrogance of officialdom attributed to Cicero.

I want to personally thank all those who spent so much more time than I was able to give for what they have done to protect our voices and our neighborhood elections.

Although the committee voted unanimously in favor of moving the bill onto the House floor, several did express their dislike for the bill and indicated that they may vote against it on the floor. Those were: Reps. Grover, Noel, Mathis, Ivory.

Once again, Rep. Powell voted with the Democrats Fisher and Chavez-Houck, not to give it a robust debate on the House floor, but because all support allowing lobbyists and consultants to buy your vote.

I agree with our young Republican leader, the 25 year old Iron County Republican County chairman Blake Cozzens that this is no compromise. It’s a surrender.

1. Sign the petition to preserve the caucus.

2. Donate to American Leadership Fund.

A Letter to the Holladay City Mayor and Council

We are asking the Holladay City Mayor and Council to vote NO on the proposaed anti discrimination proposal 6 PM Thursday, February 20, 2014.

Public comment is a 6PM Individuals 3 minutes; organizations 5 minutes.

Here is my letter to them: Continue reading A Letter to the Holladay City Mayor and Council

Holladay Anti-Discrimination Ordinance Proposal, Talking Points & Resources

Here’s a copy of the anti-discrimination ordinance Holladay is reviewing and will vote on Thursday, February 20, 2014

Mayor Rob Dahle, Council Members Pat Pignanelli and Jim Palmer all favor this proposal and are misleading citizens on a few points, clarified below, especially the point about the LDS Church endorsing Holladay’s anti-discrimination ordinance.

Talking Points – Use these only as a guide, re-write in your own words.

Unnecessary. Holladay has never had any anti-discrimination ordinance at all;  Federal and State laws cover standard anti-discrimination.  No discrimination complaints of any kind have ever been filed in the City of Holladay.  Under recent anti-discrimination ordinances that have added sexual orientation/gender identity, only three complaints have been filed statewide, and all have been dismissed.  Holladay has demonstrated it is a city of civility, a peaceful and safe community without such an ordinance.  If it ain’t broke – don’t fix it!

Intended LGBT consequences. Communities around the nation that have adopted anti-discrimination ordinances covering sexual orientation and gender identity have experienced the consequences of men believing they are women demanding to use the women’s bathroom or locker room. While this may not be anticipated, the LGBT community does intend to radically transform society into an unsafe place full of havoc. This is happening in public schools and is harming minor girls when the school, under these laws, are required to allow a boy who thinks he’s a girl into the bathroom/locker room.

Trans-gender bathrooms have been costly to businesses, and still the LGBT community has not been satisfied and does not want to be “singled out” and has sued in other communities to be treated “equally,” invading privacy and creating an unsafe environment for women. Under this ordinance, those who sincerely believe they are a female when they were born male, can and do force their way into women’s locker rooms and public bathrooms – protected by law. How will the Cottonwood Country Club respond in this situation, a Holladay business where the Mayor has served as President?

Harm to business, community and religious liberty. What will religious and privately-owned Holladay catering businesses or wedding and photography services do when they are asked to cater, host or photograph a gay wedding and it’s against their religious beliefs? Suppose they have minor employees and they do not want to expose those minors to a lifestyle they believe is immoral. How does this ordinance protect the first freedoms of assembly, speech, religion, and the right to earn a living and own property in a free market? Are there options such as gay-owned catering companies that the client could select? Should these businesses be forced by law to serve clients that require them to violate their religious beliefs? Experience in other states with anti-discrimination laws show these protections are lost. This is really a reverse discrimination law. Anti-discrimination laws have created huge lawsuits in the schools and businesses.*

This proposed ordinance goes against its very preamble which states that Holladay promotes prosperity, comfort and convenience and safety.

The LDS Church Endorsement Myth.  At least two members of the Holladay City Council and the Mayor are mistaken that the LDS Church is endorsing this anti-discrimination proposal – or any of the others that have been passed outside of the Salt Lake ordinance.

While it is true that the LDS Church did support the Salt Lake City ordinance, it first exempted itself.  This proposed ordinance provides similar exemptions, but neither ordinance protects the adherents of that faith – or any faith whether Jewish, Muslim or Mormon.

After this flaw was brought to its attention, the LDS Church has been silent on anti-discrimination ordinances since the Salt Lake City ordinance. It also opposes the proposed anti-discrimination legislation in the state legislature.

In fact, the LDS Church stands boldly against “gender identity” as defined in these ordinances. That definition is found in the Proclamation on the Family at www.LDS.org.  To pass this ordinance will be a violation of religious liberty against the very religion that founded this state in search of religious liberty.

Bad timing. Wait until the 10th Circuit/US Supreme Court has ruled on Amendment 3.  The Utah State legislature has decided not to entertain any anti-discrimination related bills until the court challenge to Utah’s Amendment 3 is decided so as not to negatively or positively influence that outcome.

Utah’s Amendment 3 is clearly written: “Marriage consists only of the legal union between a man and a woman.” The state legislature or City Councils cannot introduce the idea that sexual orientation or gender identity is simply an emotional state or, an ” internal sense of gender, without regard to the individual’s designated sex at birth,” [state proposal, line 83] without destroying our state law Amendment 3. Passing this ordinance would be unconstitutional.

*Resources and Examples
Mass Resistance Video and Summary
In Depth Background of Holladay’s Proposed Ordinance
What Is “Gender Identity?”
Paul Mero and Senator Stuart Reid on Anti-Discrimination and Religious Liberty