StandardNET/Standard-Examiner:Civil debates
I might have called this, "Let's take this fight outside in the parking lot!", since that is what the candidates were instructed to do after each debate. At the end of the debate we were also urged to evacuate the building as soon as possible. It's good that the DCRW are concerned with keeping to time constraints since the event took the full two hours. Ironically, I probably took better notes on the debates that weren't covered in the Examiner article, below, and vice-versa.
Let's get to it!
Deamer vs. Downs
In the Deamer-Downs debate the candidates were asked about raising taxes.
Downs believes that a tax increase for the jail expansion was already put to a vote, so no tax increase should be required. (Tyler says, only one tax increase has been implemented. We were promised another vote on an increase when it comes time to staff the jail.) Downs said that we had saved $250,0000 in combining Aging Services with the Health Department but we would still need to consider how to manage the Baby Boomers that are entering retirement. She said she is not predisposed to increase or decrease taxes. She said that planning is a big key to keeping taxes low. She would not accept at face value every written document that is shown her. "Look 'em in the eye and say I want another report!" She said there was a six-week study out on the Conference center to see if there is a cost-effective way to go about expansion.
Deamer said he will not raise taxes without a citizens vote.
When asked about Transportation Downs and Deamer did not clash. However, Deamer went on to say that we need to get something like Utopia here. He felt that building a UTOPIA was like building an airport that would not compete with the Private sector. It is a place for the private sector to exist. Preserve and protect HAFB. He denies that the Recreation Center competes with the Private sector. He said it is needed because Churches do not open their basketball courts to the public, and the private sector won't cover it. Deamer said that if you look at it that everything that government does competes with private industry. He said that when you have a 'commissary at a Jail that it competes with local restaurants'. (Tyler says: I'm not joking! That is what he said!)
Downs disagreed that UTOPIA was worth building since we can use wireless technology that is provided by Private industry. Government needs to step out unless health and safety is involved. We are looked on as a bedroom community but we are much more. We are running out of space to build so we need to create a better tax base. Downs said that she was involved in writing the Economic Development plan ten years ago and wasn't sure why not much happened with COG after that. (Tyler says: Correct me if I'm wrong but I think she means Council of Governments).
Deamer's closing statement said that the overall goal of government is to "maintain and improve the quality of life". He then went on to discuss child abuse and Meth addiction. (Tyler says: Correct me here. Meth addiction is beyond the scope of what can be called 'quality of life'. I see quality of life to be something that individuals can strive for themselves. It is the governments role to not stand in the way of the individuals pursuit of a 'quality of life'. I clearly have a problem with this statement by Deamer.)
Mortensen vs. Neuenschwander
This is an easy debate to cover, because neither candidate successfully clashed with the other except on one question. In fairness to the candidates, they had fewer questions given since they were last and we had to evacuate. Both candidates represent the party platform well. Both are strong Republicans to the core.
Taxes were the point of pain for these two. Neuenschwander agreed with Mortensen that more could have been refunded in taxes, that State Sales tax could be taken off of food, but Cities could decide on their own sales tax formula. Neuenschwander would not pledge to not raise taxes which Mortensen was not only willing, but eager to do. Neuenschwander invoked the common comparison to the first President Bush's pledge to "Read my lips". (Tyler says: Most citizens only have a problem with the famous pledge not to raise taxes in that it was not a kept promise. I can't think of a soul that would not accept a moratorium on tax increases by a public official.) Mortensen said there was never a case that would require a tax increase. He gave an example of a Katrina like disaster. If we had such a disaster in Utah then raising taxes would be the last thing we would do to bring relief to a impoverished people. We would want to invite economic growth. (Tyler says: Mortensen could have taken this logic a step further to conclude that the only time officials are tempted to raise taxes are when they conclude that the public can easily bear the cost. They tell us that the money will not be missed. They also confuse needs with wants in their discourse.) Neuenschwander said, " I agree that we will probably never see a situation to raise taxes. It does tie your hands to a certain extent. Like, taking care of certain primary services that are necessary. I believe that I have the right as a legislature to look and see what is best for the people.”
Even on taxes the candidates were similar. Neuenschwander said that "The best person to spend is the person who makes the money".
On Education Neuenschwander said, "All children have the right to choose between private and public schools. Parents need to have that opportunity to choose. Having said that, If we were wildly successful in supporting vouchers and other incentives we can't do anything to jeopardize the public school system."
Mortensen agreed . "In education our focus is children. It is not about teacher rights, not parents, but children. All children aren't the same. I'd like to make it possible to have parents determine the best method to educate their children."
On the government funding of private enterprise Neuenschwander said, "The primary role of government is to secure the rights of citizens. I’m very concerned with causes that don’t take into account the needs of citizens. Whenever you want economic development, you want to create wealth. I’m not sure a hotdog vendor at a soccer stadium is what I would consider good economic development."
Mortensen would have opposed the bill that would have led to the soccer stadium.
On Driver priviledge cards being issued, Neuenschwander said, "[that] the card is a very dangerous step. That is convuluted thinking." 'Since a person is here illegally, it doesn't mean we should help them out.'
Mortensen said that the idea for the card came from Tenessee which, ultimately, had to suspend their card. They found that 50-60 licenses were being issued for the same address.
Wrapping up
There you have it. See the Examiner article for more on the other debates. I will mention that I saw both Rob Miller and Bret Millburn in attendance. (Rob, I was the guy with the laptop that you passed on your way out the door- sitting next to Millburn. I'm sure we'll meet someday.) I enjoyed talking with all the candidates I could after the debate. We have some great candidates from which to choose.
StandardNET/Standard-Examiner:Civil debates
Let's get to it!
Deamer vs. Downs
In the Deamer-Downs debate the candidates were asked about raising taxes.
Downs believes that a tax increase for the jail expansion was already put to a vote, so no tax increase should be required. (Tyler says, only one tax increase has been implemented. We were promised another vote on an increase when it comes time to staff the jail.) Downs said that we had saved $250,0000 in combining Aging Services with the Health Department but we would still need to consider how to manage the Baby Boomers that are entering retirement. She said she is not predisposed to increase or decrease taxes. She said that planning is a big key to keeping taxes low. She would not accept at face value every written document that is shown her. "Look 'em in the eye and say I want another report!" She said there was a six-week study out on the Conference center to see if there is a cost-effective way to go about expansion.
Deamer said he will not raise taxes without a citizens vote.
When asked about Transportation Downs and Deamer did not clash. However, Deamer went on to say that we need to get something like Utopia here. He felt that building a UTOPIA was like building an airport that would not compete with the Private sector. It is a place for the private sector to exist. Preserve and protect HAFB. He denies that the Recreation Center competes with the Private sector. He said it is needed because Churches do not open their basketball courts to the public, and the private sector won't cover it. Deamer said that if you look at it that everything that government does competes with private industry. He said that when you have a 'commissary at a Jail that it competes with local restaurants'. (Tyler says: I'm not joking! That is what he said!)
Downs disagreed that UTOPIA was worth building since we can use wireless technology that is provided by Private industry. Government needs to step out unless health and safety is involved. We are looked on as a bedroom community but we are much more. We are running out of space to build so we need to create a better tax base. Downs said that she was involved in writing the Economic Development plan ten years ago and wasn't sure why not much happened with COG after that. (Tyler says: Correct me if I'm wrong but I think she means Council of Governments).
Deamer's closing statement said that the overall goal of government is to "maintain and improve the quality of life". He then went on to discuss child abuse and Meth addiction. (Tyler says: Correct me here. Meth addiction is beyond the scope of what can be called 'quality of life'. I see quality of life to be something that individuals can strive for themselves. It is the governments role to not stand in the way of the individuals pursuit of a 'quality of life'. I clearly have a problem with this statement by Deamer.)
Mortensen vs. Neuenschwander
This is an easy debate to cover, because neither candidate successfully clashed with the other except on one question. In fairness to the candidates, they had fewer questions given since they were last and we had to evacuate. Both candidates represent the party platform well. Both are strong Republicans to the core.
Taxes were the point of pain for these two. Neuenschwander agreed with Mortensen that more could have been refunded in taxes, that State Sales tax could be taken off of food, but Cities could decide on their own sales tax formula. Neuenschwander would not pledge to not raise taxes which Mortensen was not only willing, but eager to do. Neuenschwander invoked the common comparison to the first President Bush's pledge to "Read my lips". (Tyler says: Most citizens only have a problem with the famous pledge not to raise taxes in that it was not a kept promise. I can't think of a soul that would not accept a moratorium on tax increases by a public official.) Mortensen said there was never a case that would require a tax increase. He gave an example of a Katrina like disaster. If we had such a disaster in Utah then raising taxes would be the last thing we would do to bring relief to a impoverished people. We would want to invite economic growth. (Tyler says: Mortensen could have taken this logic a step further to conclude that the only time officials are tempted to raise taxes are when they conclude that the public can easily bear the cost. They tell us that the money will not be missed. They also confuse needs with wants in their discourse.) Neuenschwander said, " I agree that we will probably never see a situation to raise taxes. It does tie your hands to a certain extent. Like, taking care of certain primary services that are necessary. I believe that I have the right as a legislature to look and see what is best for the people.”
Even on taxes the candidates were similar. Neuenschwander said that "The best person to spend is the person who makes the money".
On Education Neuenschwander said, "All children have the right to choose between private and public schools. Parents need to have that opportunity to choose. Having said that, If we were wildly successful in supporting vouchers and other incentives we can't do anything to jeopardize the public school system."
Mortensen agreed . "In education our focus is children. It is not about teacher rights, not parents, but children. All children aren't the same. I'd like to make it possible to have parents determine the best method to educate their children."
On the government funding of private enterprise Neuenschwander said, "The primary role of government is to secure the rights of citizens. I’m very concerned with causes that don’t take into account the needs of citizens. Whenever you want economic development, you want to create wealth. I’m not sure a hotdog vendor at a soccer stadium is what I would consider good economic development."
Mortensen would have opposed the bill that would have led to the soccer stadium.
On Driver priviledge cards being issued, Neuenschwander said, "[that] the card is a very dangerous step. That is convuluted thinking." 'Since a person is here illegally, it doesn't mean we should help them out.'
Mortensen said that the idea for the card came from Tenessee which, ultimately, had to suspend their card. They found that 50-60 licenses were being issued for the same address.
Wrapping up
There you have it. See the Examiner article for more on the other debates. I will mention that I saw both Rob Miller and Bret Millburn in attendance. (Rob, I was the guy with the laptop that you passed on your way out the door- sitting next to Millburn. I'm sure we'll meet someday.) I enjoyed talking with all the candidates I could after the debate. We have some great candidates from which to choose.
StandardNET/Standard-Examiner:Civil debates
posted by Tyler Farrer at 11:23 PM
<< Home