Brian’s Utah Weblog

The Senate has reconvened. The House is likely to approve map L easily but there may or may not be fireworks in the Senate. Senator Bramble is sumarizing the committee results.

Senator Arent (D-Cottonwood) has a history with bad redistricting plans. She is in the Senate because she was drawn out of her house district in 2001. Arent is retiring this year and I like seeing her go out with a comment on redistricting. “Voters should pick legislators; legislators should not pick voters.” We will miss Patrice Arent.

Senator Bell (R-Farmington) points out that this redrawing is done to enable unconstitutional activity in Washington.

Senator McCoy (D-SLC my senator!) talks about the need for a nonpartisan process. McCoy stresses the difference between a bipartisan process where parties protect their mutual interests and a nonpartisan process.

S5001 passes 23-4.

A Brian’s Utah Weblog thank you to Senators Bell and McCoy.

In the House Julie Fisher (R-Fruit Heights) wants to block Congress from “end run[ning] the Constitutional requirement of statehood.” “Since when,” she asks has the state no interest in the Constitution. She wants to attach an amendment requiring retrocession to Maryland or a constitutional amendment or statehood before D.C. can send a congressman.

I think Fisher is Greg Bell’s representative. Maybe they should bottle the water in Fruit Heights and send it up here when the Republicans are writing up their contempt-of-the-Constitution message bills next year.

There’s some trouble with numbers. Fisher thinks Utah has three million people (the truth is about 2.5 million, or 2.2 million in the 200 census). Another rep suggests that the population of D.C. is over one million (the truth is about 550,000). Why don’t all of Utah’s legislators at least know the actual population of Utah? Shouldn’t these folks bother to look things up before announcing them on the floor? Looks like they’ve all got laptops on their desks.

The Fisher amendment vote is close, but she doesn’t ask for a roll call. Speaker Curtis pauses for a while; seems like he’s surprised that she doesn’t want a roll call. So am I.

The bill passes 51-19. The governor is expected to sign it.

The Democratic House caucus is holding an open meeting discussion of redistricting process and the new legislature. Sentiment in favor of a bipartisan redistricting commission is as universal with Litvack (D-SLC) and Biskupski (D-SLC) telling the story today.

Republican caucuses are expected to be more divisive but also closed to the public.

Biskupski is telling us about what is probably happening in the Republican caucus with pieces of West Valley switching from the Map L plan into district 2 while more of Taylorsville moves into district 4. Part of the idea may be to put Senator Mayne (D-West Valley) into district 2 to prevent him from winning in 4, as he and Rep. Matheson (D-UT2) are the only Democrats expected to be able to win in 4. (My map shows that Mayne is already in 2 under Map L, but just barely.)

Much scoffing is done toward the idea shared by Republicans and the Democratic HQ staff that the reason Mark Walker or Greg Curtis were in close races was Matheson coattails. There was much angst over losing Matheson coattails among Democratic leaders last week and now Republicans are trying hard to push Matheson out of their legislative districts.

Rep. Shurtliff (D-Ogden) observes that the current map trimming is about political prospects but that in hearings the Republicans emphasized that political data should not be considered in the map drawing.

Rep Clark (R-Dixie) has come to visit the Dem caucus and offered either to bring to the floor the public map L or a modified map L with various adjustments favored by Republican legislators who don’t want Matheson campaigning in their districts.

It is suggested that with Democrats in the majority maybe we should draw a new map that could send two Democrats to Washington. Biskupski says there is no such map presented. Rep. Becker (D-SLC) suggests maybe I could draw such a map. I’ve drawn it up just for fun, Rep. Becker, but it’s even uglier than any map we’ve seen yet.

Rep. King (D-Price) is reluctant to support the bill since the Carbon County folks really want to keep Jim Matheson. He proposes that if he votes for it he’ll need to claim temporary insanity.

Democrats are now speculating whether voting aye or voting no on any bill here will result in a stronger position before the public to advocate for a bipartisan commission bill before 2011.

The decision is that map L will come to the floor. But no one knows yet what the Senate will do.

The House is discussing fixing the scheme for taxes on boats and watercraft.  And now recessing for two hours for lunch.  Recess until 1:30 pm.

Now I’ve abandoned the languid pace of the Senate for the House, where they are organized enough to have started discussion and the traditional seating respects the history and traditions of Western Civilization.

So far they’re proposing some redistricting principles and then rumor has it the Senate will adjourn so that the Republicans can decide what to do about redistricting in closed caucus. The House Republicans will probably soon do the same.

Whispers indicate that Senator Waddoups (R-Taylorsville) wants the rest of Taylorsville in the new district and possibly some more of his district, too. Waddoups lost a leadership race in the Senate and may be marginalized by his erstwhile opponent, President Valentine. If a fourth congressional seat opens, Waddoups may want as much chance to take a new job as he can.

Just now the news is that the Senate has convened.

I’m here at the Utah Senate temporary gallery waiting for the session to start, watching Senator Arent charming the press.

One thing that strikes me about the temporary chamber (the Capitol is undergoing a seismic retrofit) is that the Democrats are sitting on the right. It’s been like this since the first general session in the temporary chamber in two years ago.

The more progressive caucus in popular assemblies has seated itself on the left and the more reactionary has been on the right for over two centuries. When I interned at the Illinois General Assembly it was so. When I traveled East to lobby Congress it was so. In our Utah Capitol building it was so. When I as a tourist visit the Colorado chambers or the Massachusetts chambers or any other chambers it is always so.

The first time it happened, the world changed. On the 20th of June in 1789 the Spirit of ‘76 spread to Europe and the various representatives of the different social classes of France declared the people’s sovereignty over the king. They had been run out of royal chambers by the king and convened in a tennis court. When they took an oath to stand against the king in the name of the people they organized themselves with the radical revolutionaries on the left and the less radical revolutionaries on the right.

But in 2005 for some reason we did it differently.