Saturday, July 31, 2010

This Time, Vote on Principle

West Valley Mayor Mike Winder stepped up with an apology just in time, just as the Salt Lake Tribune was preparing an editorial against him.

Early this week, Winder appeared in an advertisement for EnergySolutions, using his title as mayor, no less, and reaped a public outcry of how it is not proper for him as an elected official to become part of a formal advertisement endorsing a company.

This morning's Tribune says Winder indicated he is big enough to admit he made a mistake. "From many politicians, you will get excuses when they goof up, but that's not my style," Winder is quoted as saying.

Winder's apology is honorable. I tend to think of him as a person we should be proud to have in office.

His having a favorable opinion of EnergySolutions (and I know he draws some income from them) should be allowed, and he should be allowed to express that opinion publicly. Free speech, you know, is the American way of life.

Expressing it in a formal advertisement? I know some suggested that was unethical.

Rather than being concerned whether elected officials express their opinions, we should be concerned with whether their opinions are purchased -- especially if that opinion is expressed in the form of votes.

What, then, of the practice of EnergySolutions and most all groups contributing to political campaigns, knowing full well that once elected, the elected officials will be in position to help them?

I'm sure Winder received contributions from EnergySolutions. Many politicians do, including my opponent, Todd Kiser. EnergySolutions, along with insurance interests, have contributed to Kiser's campaign. Even our most honorable politicians are taking money from EnergySolutions, and many of them have work ties to the company, that list including Winder, current senate candidate Mike Lee, and current U.S. Rep. Rob Bishop (who was a lobbyist for the company). Former Senate President Cap Ferry and former Speaker of the House Craig Moody are current lobbyists for EnergySolutions.

"EnergySolutions and its predecessor, Environcare of Utah, has long relied on political leaders to bolster it credibility," today's Tribune article says.

I do not know that I am opposed to EnergySolutions having a dump in Utah. I listen to the radio advertisements about their nuclear waste not being harmful, and tend to believe them.

But, the network of influence EnergySolutions has in our political system is surprising. The flow of political contributions is wrong, just as it is wrong for other entities to contribute when they stand to reap political favors in return. It is not illegal, but wrong, even if we haven't been wise enough to make a law against it.

I am not accepting any political contributions, so in this election, this time, you have a choice. This is one election in which you actually do have a choice to vote for someone who is not accepting money from influence buyers. You can say you don't like it when your elected officials are bought off, and you can also say you, yourself, will not be bought off. My opponent's campaign is better funded, with money from EnergySolutions, the insurance industry and others, so his campaigning will reach you more readily than mine. I'm hoping you will say it doesn't matter how much money he throws around, you are going to vote for me, anyway.

Oh, I am a Democrat. In a Republican stronghold, and that, too, is working against me. I'm hoping you will vote on principle, not on party.

-- John Jackson, candidate Utah House District 41

1 comment:

  1. John,

    I like your perspective on this.

    Gary Olsen

    ReplyDelete