| 
Hatch Essay on 4th Seat
Today the U.S. Senate begins debate on the 4th seat bill. In an essay published below, Sen. Orrin Hatch, sponsor of the legislation, tells why he’s fighting for a 4th seat for Utah and the constitutional grounds for giving D.C. a voting seat in the U.S. House.
GOP Debate Tonight
Ten Republican presidential candidates square off in a debate tonight in Columbia, South Carolina, 7 p.m., on Fox News cable channel.
Housekeeping Items
Bad Link?
The link in yesterday’s UPD to the full profile on Jim Bradley didn’t seem to work all the time. If you couldn’t make the connection, click here to read the profile.
Support UPD Advertisers
We welcome the Rural Business Conference, hosted by Sen. Bob Bennett and the Utah Rural Development Council, as a new advertiser. Click on the ad, above right, for all the info about the May 30-31 conference. Click on the Axiom Realty Capital ad below to learn about an upcoming free seminar about real estate investing. And we encourage your support of Zions Bank, our longest-running advertiser. Check out Zions’ spring loan sale.
Today in Political History
May 15, 1862: U.S. Department of Agriculture is created
May 15, 1911: Supreme Court orders the dissolution of Standard Oil Company, ruling it was in violation of the Sherman Antitrust Act. (Source: New York Times)
May 15, 1972: George Wallace, Alabama Governor, is shot by Arthur Bremer, in an attempted assassination. (Source: perspicuity)
Wise Words
Curiosity: "I keep six honest serving-men, They taught me all I knew; Their names are What and Why and When, And How and Where and Who."
-- Rudyard Kipling, from 'Just So Stories', 1902. (Source: Business Leadership)
Communications Tip
Use Audience Interaction
Public speaking 101 teaches us to get our audience’s attention early in a speech. That’s why so many candidates embarrass themselves by telling not-so-funny jokes or, worse, telling jokes that offend people in their audience. Rather than telling a joke to get your audience’s attention, try getting them to interact. Start by saying something like, “Raise your hand if you think taxes are too high.” Getting your audience to raise their hands will do more to get their attention than you telling a bad joke. (Source: Campaign Tips)
Rocky Roast
The Salt Lake Acting Company is roasting and toasting SLC Mayor Rocky Anderson at a fund raising event Friday, May 18, Jeanne Wagner Theatre, 138 West 300 South. Food and drinks at 7 p.m.; 8 p.m. showtime. Featuring the wit and wisdom of: Pat Bagley, Tom Barberi, Jim Braden, Babs Delay, Dani Eyer, Chris Vanocur and Mayor Anderson. Interludes provided by The Saliva Sisters, Pom Pom Not Bomb Bombs, Hal Cannon and Phillip Bimstein. Music by Jerry Floor. $78 donation in support of SLAC. Call 363-0526 for more information or visit website.
National Politics
Best Stories From . . .
-- Roll Call: Columnist Stuart Rothenberg says he's puzzled by John Edwards' "seemingly insatiable desire to run to the left -- far to the left -- of everyone in the Democratic race with the possible exception of Rep. Dennis Kucinich (Ohio). Increasingly, political observers are whispering that Edwards seems to be running much as former Rep. Richard Gephardt (D-Mo.) did in 2004, wooing organized labor and recycling a class warfare message. ... While almost everyone has nice things to say about the former Missouri lawmaker personally, and Gephardt has his share of loyalists, he finished a disappointing fourth in Iowa last time, something Edwards presumably hopes to avoid."
-- The Hill: "Nebraska Republican Sen. Chuck Hagel on Sunday hinted at the possibility of running for the White House as an independent, saying a credible third party ticket would be beneficial to the country. 'I am not happy with the Republican Party today,' Hagel said, adding that the party is not what it was when he joined. ... Hagel met recently with New York mayor Michael Bloomberg, who some say is also weighing an independent bid for the presidency."
-- RealClearPolitics: Columnist Peter Brown: "Every four years some presidential candidate, but never the front-runner, tries to find a way around the early, smaller state primaries and caucuses. That decision is almost always a sign of a candidate's efforts to mitigate a potentially fatal flaw. That is what former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani is doing with his reported decision to de-emphasize the Iowa caucuses and New Hampshire and South Carolina primaries in his quest for the GOP nomination. Make no mistake about it, this is a big deal."
-- Wall Street Journal: Editorial: "'Universal' government health care has once again returned as a political cause, with many Democrats believing it's the key to White House victory in 2008. They might want to study last week's news from Illinois, where Democratic Governor Rod Blagojevich's tax increase to finance health care became the political rout of the year. The Democratic House in Springfield killed the proposal, 107-0, after Mr. Blagojevich came out against his own idea when it became clear he was going to be humiliated."
Blog Watch
-- At UtahSenateDemocrats, Sen. Mike Dmitrich posts a letter he and House Minority Leader Ralph Becker sent to Gov. Huntsman last week asking for a special session to "provide a way to clean up conflicting interpretations of whether vouchers should be implemented in the middle of a referendum called by the people" (for more on the voucher issue, see Paul Rolly).
-- At the Senate Site, Sen. Lyle Hillyard solicits reader feedback on some questions related to "how elected officials and the public interface while we try to do our legislative work."
-- At RCP Blog, Justin Miller observes: "Mitt Romney is fighting over his faith and positions on abortion not with the religious right, as had been expected earlier in his campaign, but with Al Sharpton and the press, all to his benefit. Sharpton's remarks about Romney's Mormonism allows Romney to defend himself from one of the most-hated members of the cultural left and make him look less like an outsider and more at home among social conservatives and the religious right. Each attack on Romney's religion from outside social conservatives and the religious right gives him another chance to speak about how he shares the same values as others without having to defend or dismiss the significant theological differences that constitute a large gulf between Mormonism and mainline Christianity, as would certainly happen with an attack by Christian figures on the right" (see also related Jeff Bell post).
Lighter Side
Headline Favorites
(Source: James Taranto’s Best of the Web at OpinionJournal.com)
He'd Better Get to an Orthopedic Surgeon
"Obama's Hip Status Slips During Visit"--Richmond Times-Dispatch, May 11
We'd Have Guessed Vermont
"State No. 1 in Nuts"--Las Cruces (N.M.) Sun-News, May 10
What Do the Sweet Potatoes Say?
"Rice Says Turkey Leaning Toward Europe"--Associated Press, May 10
Secretary of Sewing
"Rice Goes to Moscow to Mend Ties"--Reuters, May 13
Klinger Dons New Dress to Mark Occasion
"Former Hawkeye Pierce Moves to Illinois"--Associated Press, May 11
Advocacy Essay
Righting Two Wrongs: The Case for D.C., Utah House Seats
By Sen. Orrin G. Hatch
 As the saying goes, two wrongs don’t make a right. But with new legislation, I and others in Congress are hoping to right two wrongs: an act of commission against my home state of Utah in 2000 and an act of omission against Washington, D.C., two centuries earlier.
Today, the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee will begin considering S. 1257, the District of Columbia House Voting Rights Act of 2007. It would give Utah an additional seat in the House of Representatives and grant District of Columbia residents full House representation. I believe that the Constitution allows Congress to accomplish these important objectives and that it should do so without delay.
One of the fastest growing states in the Union, Utah narrowly missed adding a House member after the 2000 census. The Census Bureau conducts the “actual enumeration” required by the Constitution through a complex system of mailed forms, personal visits, and statistical techniques. Any number of variables in that process could have put Utah over the top, and it appears we missed it by fewer than 900 people – an uncomfortably thin margin for error. Our subsequent population growth makes even more clear that Utah deserves what we were denied before, an additional House seat.
I cosponsored S. 1257 because it achieves that end by respecting Utah’s choice of means. The Utah legislature has made clear its preference for the traditional re-districting process, which would produce a new congressional map with four insular districts. In contrast, the House version of this legislation would have left our current three districts intact and required that the fourth member be elected at-large. Utahns would each be represented by two House members while other Americans would have just one. Congress should not step in where states have traditionally acted. There is no reason to impose upon Utah such an unusual plan when it has clearly chosen to incorporate an additional member into its House delegation the traditional way.
America’s founders wisely chose not to make the nation’s capitol one of the nation’s constituent states. They also provided for population to be represented in the House and for only states to be represented equally in the Senate. While the District’s significant population justifies representation in the House, it must actually be a state for such equal representation in the Senate. While I believe that the arguments against making the District a state remain compelling, giving the half a million Americans living in the District a full voice in the House is justified.
The Supreme Court has said that “no right is more precious in a free country than that of having a voice in the election of those who make the laws under which, as good citizens, we must live.” The good citizens of the District cannot today fully exercise that most precious right. Their elected delegate, while subject to the same restrictions and regulations as other House members, cannot vote in all matters relating to House business and her participation can change as House rules and majorities change. This legislation would end such inconsistency. There is no evidence that America’s founders deliberately denied House representation to those living in the area ceded by Virginia and Maryland to become the seat of national government. They simply did not provide for it. Their act of omission should be remedied.
Even among those who say Congress should give District residents full House representation, there is a real debate over whether Congress may do so. On the one hand, the Constitution says that Congress may “exercise exclusive legislation in all cases whatsoever, over such district…as may…become the seat of the government of the United States.” That is extremely broad authority. On the other hand, the same provision says that the House of Representatives “shall be composed of members chosen…by the people of the several states.” The question is whether the fact that the District is not a state trumps Congress’ legislative authority. Congressional action and judicial precedent throughout American history suggest that the answer is no.
Article I, Section 2, of the Constitution, for example, once said that “direct taxes shall be apportioned among the several states.” In 1820, the Supreme Court unanimously held that Congress, exercising its legislative authority over the District, could impose direct federal taxes on District residents. Chief Justice John Marshall wrote that “certainly the Constitution does not consider [the District’s] want of a representative in Congress as exempting it from equal taxation.” If the word “states” did not prevent Congress from imposing taxes on District residents then, how can it prevent Congress from granting representation to District residents now?
Article III grants the federal courts jurisdiction over controversies “between citizens of different states.” Noting that it would be “extraordinary” for courts to be open to citizens of states but not citizens of the District, the Supreme Court unanimously held that Congress may correct this anomaly, and later upheld Congress’ decision to do so. If the word “states” did not prevent Congress from granting access to the judicial branch then, how can it prevent Congress from granting access to the legislative branch today?
The Fourteenth Amendment’s guarantees of due process and equal protection apply explicitly to states. The Supreme Court held in 1973 that while the Fourteenth Amendment itself does not apply to the District, Congress could use its legislative authority to extend the same protections. Congress did just that. If the word “state” did not prevent Congress from allowing District residents to sue for violation of constitutional rights, how can it prevent Congress from granting District residents a full voice in that same Congress?
And even more to the current point, the Supreme Court in 2000 affirmed a lower court decision that while the Constitution does not itself grant District residents the right to House representation, they may pursue that goal in “other venues” including the “political process.” In each of these and other instances, the Congress and the Supreme Court have treated the District like a state, and its residents as residents of a state, for specific purposes. The Constitution allows us to do so today regarding House representation.
The denial of Utah’s fourth House seat is recent, and the failure to provide for full District representation is longstanding. Let’s right both of these wrongs. Congress should seize the day and get this done.
Orrin G. Hatch is Utah’s senior Senator and former chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee. |
