Budget Deal

House and Senate Republican leadership teams (7 from each body), and a lot of staff, typically meet 2 or 3 times a week during the session. We meet in the "Star Wars Room" -- a high-tech room with two long tables triangling away from two large video screens on which we project budget line items and dollar amounts. With rare (but highly-memorable) exceptions, the meetings are cordial -- everyone realizing that, however important each decision is, there will be hundreds of other decisions that must be made just a few moments or days later; we cannot afford to significantly damage personal relationships between the two leadership teams. (In a joint leadership meeting, there will rarely be significant disagreement within each team (just tongue biting), since each team meets separately to form its positions).

Thursday morning, we asked staff to let us meet by ourselves, and we moved to the House majority conference room -- a windowless room with one table and a whiteboard. It was the House's turn to conduct, and Majority Leader Jeff Alexander led the discussion. Euphemistically, you might say each team was quite willing to provide the other with some constructive criticism, but Rep. Alexander skillfully worked to keep the discussion productive.

It became clear that each side was every bit as entrenched as it had been saying -- the House was not forming a budget without significant tax relief for individuals and without reducing the food tax. The Senate, meanwhile, was not forming a budget with $166 million taken out of the general fund by removing the food tax. Through the course of several meetings that day between members of leadership, our caucuses and with the Governor, we came to the deal which is being reported -- tax cuts of $70 million from individual income tax, $70 million from food tax (reducing the rate on food about 2%), and $20 million from business inputs.

Much work remains. How will we provide the individual income tax relief -- flat tax or simple rate reduction? Which specific business taxes will we cut? And, how will we resolve all of the "hot spots" that remain in the House and Senate's spending priorities? But, we can figure out those kinds of details.

The House majority caucus was the first to grudgingly accept the proposal. In their ever-gracious way, once it was obvious that the proposal had the support of most caucus members (after a few hours of rolling debate and a few modifications), most other caucus members expressed gratitude for the efforts and shared a willingness to support the position. Later, President Valentine stopped by my office to inform me that the Senate had accepted the proposal. Together, we went to inform Speaker Curtis. I will cherish the memory of their embrace and expressions of gratitude for a hard-fought battle and successful resolution.

Live Blog Day 36

I will live blog day 36 (out of 45) of the session.

The budget weighs heavily on us. Having reached an impasse with the Senate, House Republican leadership worked with the Governor's people on Friday to put together a budget. News articles suggest that the Senate spent the weekend crafting its own budget. These likely will be exchanged today, and we'll see where that puts us. I'LL FILL IN BUDGET DETAILS HERE.

(2:40) We're still at loggerheads. All the House (and the Governor, I believe) wants the Senate to do at this point is take a firm position on how much money we're going to spend this year. Before we jump with both feet into negotiations regarding food tax, flat tax, etc., we need to know how much money we plan on taking out of the budget for transportation and tax cuts. We keep hearing that they agree with the $300 million number, but, then, we hear they don't. If they don't, we'd like them to simply let us know and then give us a number they do like. Until we agree on that number, we can't start spending. Otherwiwse, it all will get spent and we'll have set nothing aside.

CAUCUS. My day starts at 7:00 a.m., with a meeting of House conservatives. We had a bit of an inconclusive meeting, other than ratifying the position that $300 million should be set aside for tax cuts ($230 million of that figure), transportation, and water development.

COMMITTEE. At 8:00 a.m., my House Law Enforcement and Criminal Justice Committee meets to consider the following bills (audio link here).

1. SB 98 Safety Belt Enforcement Amendments (K. Hale).

This bill would allow law enforcement to pull over and ticket drivers for not buckling up. Currently, a driver cannot be pulled over for a seat belt infraction. A seat belt infraction is a secondary offense to some other primary infraction for which the driver is pulled over.

Sen. Hale presented. AAA spoke in favor, arguing this would save lives and fit well with out strong DUI laws. UDOT spoke in favor, pointing out that 75% of those dieing on our highways are improperly restrained. PTA spoke in favor, arguing that children largely do buckle up, but many parents don't; children need parents. Primary Childrens spoke in favor, arguing that properly buckled parents have properly buckled children. Highway Patrol spoke in favor, arguing that buckled drivers are safer because they don't slide around in dicey situations. Chairman Bowman is describing the death of his son-in-law in a rollover. Rep. Pat Jones moves to pass the bill. It fails 6-4.

2. HB 402 Sentencing Amendments (S. Urquhart)

Though this bill has a fiscal note that could choke a horse, I want to start a discussion on how we sentence prisoners. If a prisoner is sentenced to Corrections, and if Corrections, then, sends that prisoner to a local jail, the local jail gets a pretty-good contracted rate. If, however, that same prisoner (the State's prisoner, mind you) is sentenced by the judge directly to a local jail, the jail gets a lower reimbursement rate. The State sets the reimbursement rate, and it is an open question whether that rate is fair to the counties that run the local jails. My starting proposal is to sentence all jail-time prisoners to Corrections (from where they can be farmed out at contracted rates).

This passed unanimously, with no discussion.

3. HB 350 Concealed Firearms Instructors (C. Oda)

This bill imposes more stringent criteria on concealed-firearms instructors. Rep. Oda arranged for me to get my concealed-carry permit this past year. I occassionally show the permit to Sara, to remind her how macho I am. She says it would be more impressive, if I owned a gun.

Clark Aposhian (an instructor) is speaking in favor, pointing out that some instructors should be much better; unless we tighten things a bit, safety and recognition by other states could be brought into question.

Rep. Kiser is concerned that this is too much a gate-keeper statute. Rep. Jones wants clarification whether we're in danger, if things stay as they are. Ed McConkie, Bureau of Criminal Investigation, is clarifying concerns regarding the screening we do on instructors, saying he needs the help this bill would provide. Rep. Kiser wants to know the cost and time involved in the NRA-level class instructors would need to take ($20 and up; a day, to a couple of days). One of the most important skills up here is counting votes; I'm sensing Rep. Kiser is feeling better about the bill with that answer (not that it matters much for present purposes; I suspect this bill will pass committee with margin).

I was wrong about Rep. Kiser being put at ease. It passed unanimously, except for him.

4. HB 164 Compensation for Wrongful Conviction and Incarceration (D. Litvack)

This bill would provide a way to compensate people who have been wrongfully convicted.

Heather Harris is helping Rep. Litvack present. She took a class on wrongful conviction and was inspired to get some legislation going. Her presentation, like the e-mails I have received from her, is very impressive. On Rep. Bourdeaux's motion, the bill was sent back to the Rules Committee, with a recommendation that it be studied over the interim.

5. HB 362 Enforcement of Controlled Substance Laws (D. Hogue)

This bill would make it tougher to acquire precursor ingredients for crystal meth. I've read a fair amount about this topic and talked with a few local pharmacists. I'm anxious to see where the discussion goes and hopeful that the sponsor has worked with vendors to strike the right balance.

Unfortunately, Rep. Hogue is detained in another committee and will not be able to present his bill today.

6. 2 SB 175 Correctional Facility Bidding Process (H. Stephenson)

Over the next 10-years, the State is projected to spend about $500,000,000 on increased prison capacity and operations. I can quickly think of hundreds of other areas where I'd rather spend the money. Private providers should be part of the solution.

We skipped this for now, because Sen. Stephenson hadn't arrived. We're back to this one. Sen. Stephenson handed out information, showing that all of our surrounding states have private prison facilities (from 1.7% in California and 4% in Nevada up to about 30% in Wyoming and Montana and 42% in New Mexico).

We adjourned without taking action on this bill. The sponsor's understanding was that private contracting would take place after the next 300 beds are in place at Gunnison. That turned out to not be Corrections' understanding; they want private contracting to only kick in only after Gunnison is fully built out (about 2,000 more beds).

7. SB 185 Drug Offender Reform Act Amendments (S. Killpack)

Though this bill merely broadens the data base of information in our drug offender reform act pilot program, I'll see if I can't squeeze a Whitman's Sampler quote out of Sen. Killpack.

This blew through and was sent to the consent calendar.

FLOOR TIME. We'll be on the floor at 9:30 a.m., to quickly work through the consent calendar (without debate) and, then, the House 3rd-reading calendar. (Click HERE to get the calendar menu; then, click on the relevant calendars and, if you want, the audio and video links). This is the same calendar we use on the floor. Though I'll comment on only a few of the bills, feel free to go to town in the comments section.

10:30 On the concurrence calendar, we are debating 3 HB 46 (Energy Policy Amendments). The concern is that the Senate included language that would allow study of a nuclear reactor. Everyone realizes that study hurts nothing, but because it invokes nuclear passions, it took up a lot of time but, then, passed 69-2.

10:40 When we are on the floor, people who want to speak to us send in messages (we call them "green notes," because they are on green paper). I've already received several notes, a few on Sen. Stephenson's private prison bill (from Corrections and private prison proponents). It gets difficult following debate, working on bills, and going in the hallway for all the green notes, but I do like that we have the green notes; I hope the public doesn't buy the rhetoric that we aren't accessible to the public. If they do, they're leaving the hallways and green notes to others. Typically, I collect the green notes and go out about every half hour.

11:05 Rep. Morgan moved to uncircle her reading requirements bill. Because circled bills have a higher priority, it bumped Rep. Frank's uniform bill. We already voted against the reading requirements bill once, but nothing up here really dies. I like the concept of the bill (grade-level reading by 3rd grade is a good thing), but the medicine is a bit much (automatic failure). My youngest was born 13-weeks too early. She'll be behind at the end of 3rd-grade. She doesn't need to be held back; she simply needs some time to catch up. By her senior year, she'll do great. She, and others, don't need this bill.

This bill failed (again). We'll see if it's really dead this time.

11:30 We are addressing Rep. Frank's bill on school uniforms. The main change here is that parents in a school can vote to impose uniform requirements. I'm not a public school uniform fan at all. I don't care if my neighbors do vote on how to dress my kids; it shouldn't be their choice. But, this bill will blow through. Proponents tease me that I must be defending a KISS concert T-shirt I wore in high school or something. How dare they impugn me! It was a Neil Young concert T-shirt.

It passed 46-25.

11:50 We have been going for over 2 hours (in the last full-week of the session), and we're on our fourth bill. Grrr. The last week of the session, my job as whip includes prioritizing the House bills we want the Senate to address. Because we've gone so slow this session, we are going to have many House bills die for lack of time. People will be freaking out the last week to get their bills on the prioritization lists, but . . .

I went off the floor to work out language on SB 113 (Governmental Immunity Limits). Currently, the caps are $500,000 (actually, $553,000 because it is adjusted for inflation) per individual and $1,000,000 per occurrence. The bill would raise it to $1,000,000 and $10,000,000. Local governments think that is too high, and want to raise the per occurrence cap to $2,000,000 and allow a Board of Examiners to go higher in extraordinary cases.

2:35 Mike Morley just passed his bill that addresses how and when schools can recommend psychotropic drugs to children. After the Governor's veto last year, Rep. Morley worked very hard with various interested groups, to put together a bill that should pass into law.

3:25 Rep. Holdaway is running his bill to provide for optional all-day kindergarten in Title I schools. The bill would cost $7 million/year. Rep. Oda made a motion to decrease the age to four. Rep. Dayton is now making a motion to decrease the age to three. It looks like the troops are getting a little testy.

3:55 lots of debate on this bill (which, by the way, was prioritized 24th out of 26 by the education subappropriations committee -- meaning that, in any event, it is unlikely to be prioritized, unless someone (i.e., the Gov) works it big time). It passed with margin (but it still has the funding hurdle to clear).

We're off the floor. I have a House leadership meeting and, then, a rural caucus meeting tonight.

Bringing It Home

Closing the budget will take concentration and a steady hand. To see if you have what it takes, you might want to test your concentration and steadiness on these 3 mazes (courtesy of the Urquhart kids). Crank up the sound, to enjoy the celebration at the end. And, good luck!

Legislative Process

One-and-a-half weeks to go, and we have many things to pull together. As is being reported, the House and Senate are having a difficult time coming together on the budget. Budget leaders for the House and the Governor's office spent the day putting together a budget proposal that hopefully will be helpful in breaking the log jam.

It is no small project, piecing together policy and budgetary items in a 45-day span. And, I remain confident that we'll have a budget.

A good example of how the process works is my Hospital Lien bill. Concerns were raised (regarding whether the health insurance policy of an accident victim should pick up medical costs or whether that party's potential 3rd-party recovery from the other driver's liability policy should be liened). The relevant parties (hospitals, insurers, lawyers who typically handle accident cases, and collection agencies) huddled together many times, made a little progress here and a little there, sent many drafts back and forth, and finally agreed to resolve the issue by way of a letter that will sit in my file (clarifying that the health insurance policy will be billed and that the insurer will be allowed to collect against the 3rd-party). Among other things, this issue involves millions of dollars and a lot of passion. The process brought parties together, and we worked it out -- without adding more pages to the code book.

Education Reform

In an article on my education reform bill, the president of the teachers' union said that the bill is deja-vu to SB 154 (Sen. Tom Hatch), which I sponsored in the House in 2003. I hope so; she opposed that bill (saying it would do horrible things for education), it passed, and it has done great things for our schools. We could stand to see that sequence repeated.

I handed out the following information to House Education Committee members:

This bill addresses 3 items in the following ways:

1. UBSCT REMEDIATION

Students reaching their senior year without passing the Utah Basic Skills Competency Test (“UBSCT”) will receive a stipend toward a remedial course. The stipend amount is either $500 or $1,000 or $1,500, depending on how badly the student failed each subpart of the test (more money for those further from passing). The stipend can be redeemed by public or private providers, but only after the student passes the test.

2. ORDERLY TERMINATION

Currently, termination of the worst teachers is too slow and difficult. The bill will clarify the procedures that must be followed (lines 218-230).

3. MATH IMPROVEMENT

Significant disagreement existed regarding the best approach toward improving math performance in grades 4-6 (which is important to do, as students move from arithmetic to algebraic skills). Some wanted to fund inputs, such as math endorsements. Others wanted to fund results, through rewards for teachers who do a superlative job. It would be difficult for either side to produce empirical evidence to prove that its approach is best. This substitute provides for pilot projects in Title I schools – one project to fund inputs, the other to fund rewards. (Since then, we've also decided to fund a hybrid of the two).

I will meet with the State School Board on Friday, to get their input.

UPDATE (2/18/06): The State School Board voted to oppose the bill on an 8-6 vote, due to concerns over privitization and merit pay. The bill might or might not lead to some form of merit pay, depending on the results of the pilot programs it would create. Unless the privitization concerns are solely over turf, I don't really see their relevance. The remediation credits work on a gravity-like basis, affecting all the same. Only those programs that help failing students succeed would get the money. Nevertheless, I appreciate the State School Board members giving me the honor of presenting the bill to them (as I had the opportunity to do with the equally-gracious superintendents association the week before). I am very pleased with the direction we are headed in education in Utah, and I give high praise and credit to the good teachers and education leaders who offer so much to the system. Stay tuned; I'm predicting Utah vaults forward in the next decade in educating its children.

Task Forces

House leadership earlier took the position that no new task forces should be created this year (though one or two existing task forces will be reauthorized/modified). We question the value of task forces, figuring it might be best simply to run issues through existing standing committees, instead of spending extra time and money on task forces. Today provided some good evidence that this is a sound decision.

The Tax Reform Task Force spent a lot of the public's time and money this past year discussing tax issues. Except for 2 House members, the task force agreed that the food tax should be repealed. Today, the Senate informed the Speaker and the Governor that it had no interest in further pursuing repeal of the food tax. No Senate committee hearing, no floor discussion, they simply don't want to take up the issue. That, of course, is the process. But, if there never was any support in the Senate for repealing the food tax, it would have been nice to know that months ago, instead of hearing there was support when, obviously, there was not.

After all is said and done with the session, it will be interesting to see if the tax reform task force gives the citizens anything other than an interesting sideshow. With a week and a half to go, it's not looking good. The Senate has sent over bills that would provide tax relief for telecommunications companies, oil and gas companies, and mining companies. And nothing for individuals. My strong guess is that the House is not willing to cut taxes for businesses and do nothing for individuals.