This is the last in a series of questions posed to the candidates in the State Senate District 23 race. To see the previous questions in this series, please go to http://www.woodscrosscitizen.com/search/label/Answers.
Before getting to the answers to this last question, I would like to sincerely thank both Dan Liljenquist and Richard Watson for taking the time to answer my questions. I have personally met with both candidates and have been impressed with both of them. I know that if you have questions of your own that you'd like answered by either of these candidates, they will be responsive. Give them a call or send them an e-mail.
13) What makes you the best candidate? In other words, why should someone vote for you over one of the other candidates for this seat?
Republican - Dan Liljenquist:
I believe I am the best candidate for Senate District 23 for a few reasons:
First, I am a committed Republican and I believe in the principles of limited government, individual responsibility, and free markets – I share these beliefs with a majority of the citizens of Senate District 23.
Second, as a Republican Senator, I will be able to better deliver results for the people of South Davis County as a member of the majority party.
Third, I have the necessary experience and training to be effective. I am the President & COO of Focus Services, LLC, a contact center company based in Roy, Utah. Focus has over 1,200 employees and handles inbound and outbound telephone calls for several Fortune 500 companies. Prior to Focus, I worked as a Director of operational strategy for Affiliated Computer Services and as a Strategy Consultant for Bain & Company in Dallas, Texas. I received a BA in Economics magna cum laude from Brigham Young University and a Juris Doctorate from the University of Chicago Law School. While I do not practice law, I am a member of the Utah State Bar Association. I believe in furthering Republican ideals through public service. I worked as a volunteer for two years with the Institute for Justice helping low income entrepreneurs in south Chicago pursue their dreams of business ownership. I also served as a Legislative Intern with US Senator Robert Bennett in Washington, DC.
Finally, and most importantly, I have a very supportive and loving wife, Brooke. We have been married for nearly 10 years and have five beautiful children – Jacob, Grace, Nathan, Joshua and Benjamin. My wife and children keep me grounded, balanced and happy.
Democrat - Richard Watson:
As stated [in a previous answer], I will not be obligated in serving the legislative leadership. Instead I will serve the people of South Davis. After writing columns in the Clipper for the past three years, I have come to appreciate the different view points within our community. I am amazed at how so many of us have similar concerns and worries about our quality of life in South Davis. And so many of us not only care about our families, but there is a genuine concern for helping our neighbors. The people in South Davis truly are great people and it will be a pleasure to represent the people of Senate District 23. Now is the time to change the "business-as-usual" type of government and give it back to the people. Change means that we are Moving Forward.
Thursday, September 25, 2008
Tuesday, September 23, 2008
Answers - Question 12
This is the 12th in a series of questions posed to the candidates in the State Senate District 23 race. To see the previous questions in this series, please go to http://www.woodscrosscitizen.com/search/label/Answers.
12) What do you see as the biggest issue facing our state? What would you, as a state senator, do about it?
Democrat - Richard Watson:
Long-term planning. What does long-term planning mean? It means too many projects have come about because of a reaction to a problem. It is good to see the business community taking economic development seriously as they look to bring more businesses into Utah. But we need our lawmakers to plan better in areas of transportation, public education and affordable health care if we want Utah to be economically stable. Transportation is a good example of how Utah government has reacted to a problem instead of planning for future growth.
Long-term planning for public education is also essential for the future of our state. As stated [in a previous answer], more funding for public schools is crucial for Utah to have the best schools in the nation.
Republican - Dan Liljenquist:
There are several issues that we are facing as a State that I am concerned about. Perhaps the biggest issue we are facing is how to address issues, from education to transportation to economic development, holistically and objectively, without the political rancor that so often burdens the political process. I believe in the concept of “rational government” – if elected I will do my best to be objective and rational in making decisions.
All of the issues we are facing are interrelated and extremely complex. Here are the issues I am most concerned about:
The Economy
Utah’s record setting economy is coming down to earth. We must be diligent in our economic development efforts to ensure our ongoing prosperity as a State. We need to attract more, higher-paying jobs by leveraging our well-educated workforce, continuing to develop our transportation infrastructure, and fostering a business friendly environment through the use of appropriate economic incentives. Real economic growth results in more, higher-paying jobs and less pressure on local counties to raise revenue by increasing our property taxes.
Healthcare Reform
Health insurance costs are spiraling out of control as our population ages, treatment options increase, and more people drop from insurance pools, counting on the government to take care of their medical needs. All of these issues threaten to collapse our medical care system. We must be committed to a market driven solution to healthcare, allowing insurance companies more flexibility to offer a wider range of health insurance options to meet the needs and budgets of each Utah family. The alternative is government administered healthcare which will drive up taxes, reduce funds available for education and other necessities, and limit treatment options for everyone.
Education
Education is the key driver of our prosperity in Utah. We must continue our commitment to reduce class sizes and providing competitive wages for our teachers. We must ensure that the public education funding mechanisms are sufficient to handle the anticipated enrollment growth in our schools. Our educational system must become more competitive, with greater parental involvement in our schools. Parents must have a stronger voice in the educational decisions involving their children, strengthening the relationship between parents and educators. We must all work together to prepare our children to excel in hyper-competitive, global labor markets where knowledge and intelligence are vital for success.
Transportation
Population growth in North Davis County will continue to put pressure on our transportation infrastructure in South Davis County, threatening our quality of life by driving up traffic congestion and impacting air quality. We must be committed to the expansion of I-15, the build-out of Legacy Highway, and the extension of Front Runner. We also need to explore other avenues to alleviate traffic congestion as needed, including light rail and expanded bus service options. We must work to ensure that South Davis County residents have transportation options that will allow us to fully participate in the economic, educational and cultural opportunities along the Wasatch front, now and in the future.
Ethics Reform
Our Legislature must hold itself to the highest standards of integrity as it fulfills the trust and exercises the authority placed in it by the people. We must ensure that all potential conflicts of interest are disclosed publicly and that all legislative business is conducted openly and at arms length. All campaign donations should only be used for legitimate campaign purposes. We must make sure that the people of Utah have confidence in the integrity of our Citizen Legislature.
Immigration
The Federal Government must act to secure our borders and stop the flow of illegal immigration – this is the foundational action required for all meaningful immigration enforcement and reform. The Federal Government should also expand the flow of legal immigration to ensure that America continues to be a beacon for hard-working, intelligent, and law-abiding individuals is search of a better life. We should enforce our existing State laws, especially our identity theft laws, while treating everyone with respect and compassion.
12) What do you see as the biggest issue facing our state? What would you, as a state senator, do about it?
Democrat - Richard Watson:
Long-term planning. What does long-term planning mean? It means too many projects have come about because of a reaction to a problem. It is good to see the business community taking economic development seriously as they look to bring more businesses into Utah. But we need our lawmakers to plan better in areas of transportation, public education and affordable health care if we want Utah to be economically stable. Transportation is a good example of how Utah government has reacted to a problem instead of planning for future growth.
Long-term planning for public education is also essential for the future of our state. As stated [in a previous answer], more funding for public schools is crucial for Utah to have the best schools in the nation.
Republican - Dan Liljenquist:
There are several issues that we are facing as a State that I am concerned about. Perhaps the biggest issue we are facing is how to address issues, from education to transportation to economic development, holistically and objectively, without the political rancor that so often burdens the political process. I believe in the concept of “rational government” – if elected I will do my best to be objective and rational in making decisions.
All of the issues we are facing are interrelated and extremely complex. Here are the issues I am most concerned about:
The Economy
Utah’s record setting economy is coming down to earth. We must be diligent in our economic development efforts to ensure our ongoing prosperity as a State. We need to attract more, higher-paying jobs by leveraging our well-educated workforce, continuing to develop our transportation infrastructure, and fostering a business friendly environment through the use of appropriate economic incentives. Real economic growth results in more, higher-paying jobs and less pressure on local counties to raise revenue by increasing our property taxes.
Healthcare Reform
Health insurance costs are spiraling out of control as our population ages, treatment options increase, and more people drop from insurance pools, counting on the government to take care of their medical needs. All of these issues threaten to collapse our medical care system. We must be committed to a market driven solution to healthcare, allowing insurance companies more flexibility to offer a wider range of health insurance options to meet the needs and budgets of each Utah family. The alternative is government administered healthcare which will drive up taxes, reduce funds available for education and other necessities, and limit treatment options for everyone.
Education
Education is the key driver of our prosperity in Utah. We must continue our commitment to reduce class sizes and providing competitive wages for our teachers. We must ensure that the public education funding mechanisms are sufficient to handle the anticipated enrollment growth in our schools. Our educational system must become more competitive, with greater parental involvement in our schools. Parents must have a stronger voice in the educational decisions involving their children, strengthening the relationship between parents and educators. We must all work together to prepare our children to excel in hyper-competitive, global labor markets where knowledge and intelligence are vital for success.
Transportation
Population growth in North Davis County will continue to put pressure on our transportation infrastructure in South Davis County, threatening our quality of life by driving up traffic congestion and impacting air quality. We must be committed to the expansion of I-15, the build-out of Legacy Highway, and the extension of Front Runner. We also need to explore other avenues to alleviate traffic congestion as needed, including light rail and expanded bus service options. We must work to ensure that South Davis County residents have transportation options that will allow us to fully participate in the economic, educational and cultural opportunities along the Wasatch front, now and in the future.
Ethics Reform
Our Legislature must hold itself to the highest standards of integrity as it fulfills the trust and exercises the authority placed in it by the people. We must ensure that all potential conflicts of interest are disclosed publicly and that all legislative business is conducted openly and at arms length. All campaign donations should only be used for legitimate campaign purposes. We must make sure that the people of Utah have confidence in the integrity of our Citizen Legislature.
Immigration
The Federal Government must act to secure our borders and stop the flow of illegal immigration – this is the foundational action required for all meaningful immigration enforcement and reform. The Federal Government should also expand the flow of legal immigration to ensure that America continues to be a beacon for hard-working, intelligent, and law-abiding individuals is search of a better life. We should enforce our existing State laws, especially our identity theft laws, while treating everyone with respect and compassion.
Thursday, September 18, 2008
Answers - Question 11
This is the 11th in a series of questions posed to the candidates in the State Senate District 23 race. To see the previous questions in this series, please go to http://www.woodscrosscitizen.com/search/label/Answers.
11) What are your reasons for running for State Senate?
Republican - Dan Liljenquist:
I am running for the Utah State Senate because I believe I can effectively represent the citizens of South Davis County.
First, I believe in the principles of limited government, individual responsibility, and free markets – I share these beliefs with a majority of the citizens of Senate District 23.
Second, I have the necessary career flexibility to devote the time required.
Finally, I try to follow the advice of Theodore Roosevelt to “do what you can, with what you have, where you are”. I am determined to do my part and participate in the political process.
Democrat - Richard Watson:
Public education has to be funded better than it has been. We always hear that our schools are doing well with the money they receive. Yes, it is true that Utah has good schools and great teachers. But why should we settle for good when we could have the best schools?
Also, we have to address the issue of taxes in Utah and the effect it has on hard, working families. We always hear politicians promising tax cuts, but once elected, they cut some taxes and shift the burden to others.
These two concerns as well as other problems facing Utahns, would be easier to tackle if we had a more open government with tougher ethics rules. Imagine if we knew everything that our legislators were doing on Capitol Hill, then we would have a government for the people and by the people. Furthermore, as a state senator, I will not be part of the legislative leadership and I will stand up to the bullying tactics that they commonly impose on other legislators.
The voters of South Davis want their government back. They want to change the existing attitude among lawmakers that legislators know more than they do. I want voters to know that the residents of South Davis will be my employers and I will work for them.
11) What are your reasons for running for State Senate?
Republican - Dan Liljenquist:
I am running for the Utah State Senate because I believe I can effectively represent the citizens of South Davis County.
First, I believe in the principles of limited government, individual responsibility, and free markets – I share these beliefs with a majority of the citizens of Senate District 23.
Second, I have the necessary career flexibility to devote the time required.
Finally, I try to follow the advice of Theodore Roosevelt to “do what you can, with what you have, where you are”. I am determined to do my part and participate in the political process.
Democrat - Richard Watson:
Public education has to be funded better than it has been. We always hear that our schools are doing well with the money they receive. Yes, it is true that Utah has good schools and great teachers. But why should we settle for good when we could have the best schools?
Also, we have to address the issue of taxes in Utah and the effect it has on hard, working families. We always hear politicians promising tax cuts, but once elected, they cut some taxes and shift the burden to others.
These two concerns as well as other problems facing Utahns, would be easier to tackle if we had a more open government with tougher ethics rules. Imagine if we knew everything that our legislators were doing on Capitol Hill, then we would have a government for the people and by the people. Furthermore, as a state senator, I will not be part of the legislative leadership and I will stand up to the bullying tactics that they commonly impose on other legislators.
The voters of South Davis want their government back. They want to change the existing attitude among lawmakers that legislators know more than they do. I want voters to know that the residents of South Davis will be my employers and I will work for them.
Tuesday, September 16, 2008
Answers - Question 10
This is the 10th in a series of questions posed to the candidates in the State Senate District 23 race. To see the previous questions in this series, please go to http://www.woodscrosscitizen.com/search/label/Answers.
10) Do you support school vouchers?
Democrat - Richard Watson:
Absolutely not.
Republican - Dan Liljenquist:
I voted against the voucher bill. Here is the text of the editorial I had published in the Ogden Standard Examiner last fall:
Guest commentary: Tone of the voucher debate disappoints
Saturday, October 6, 2007
By Dan Liljenquist
The voucher debate has digressed in recent weeks from the logical to the emotional, with both sides seeking the moral high ground in a state where voters are committed to "do what is right." It is critically important to re-set the debate and attempt to look at vouchers objectively.
The initial case for private school vouchers was articulated by neoclassical economist Milton Friedman in his 1955 article "The Role of Government in Education."
The article was published in an era of broad based regulation and general public distrust of market economies.
In the article, Friedman argues that it is appropriate for government to subsidize education. He wrote that "a stable and democratic society is impossible without widespread acceptance of some common set of values and without a minimum degree of literacy and knowledge on the part of most citizens."
Friedman then argues that it is not necessary for government to administer public education, as long as its educational goals are met. Friedman presents educational vouchers as a market-driven alternative to publicly administered schools.
In the context of the voucher referendum vote this fall, it is important to consider the following:
* Friedman expected governmental oversight of educational curriculum to ensure common, appropriate content.
* Friedman expected extensive financial oversight by government agencies to ensure proper use of funds, citing the possibility of a greater abuse.
* Friedman does not address what forms of education have the greatest social advantage and how much educational funding is appropriate, except to say that these are questions to be decided "by the judgment of the community through its accepted political channels."
House Bill 148 represents a clear departure from the voucher program envisioned by Milton Friedman. First, the bill does not establish curriculum oversight to ensure appropriate use of government funds; this is contrary to Friedman's approach.
Second, the financial oversight provisions of the bill are simplistic and are not adequate enough to prevent fraud; Friedman clearly advocated substantial financial oversight.
Third, the bill explicitly excludes the judgment of the community from educational decisions, preferring to rely exclusively on parental judgment in educational decisions; this is contrary to Friedman's foundational assumption that all society has a vested interest in how our neighbor's children are being educated and what they are being taught.
While I am disappointed with the recent tone of the voucher debate, I am very pleased to see a grassroots movement to challenge our educational paradigms. Our educational system must become more competitive, with greater parental and community involvement, and more educational choices. We must provide increased funding to reduce class sizes and create greater financial freedom to compete for top talent, particularly in the key secondary education fields of math and science.
We must be focused on preparing our children to excel in hyper-competitive, global labor markets where knowledge and intelligence are the coins of the realm.
I am optimistic that this voucher debate will be the spring-board for broad based, positive educational reform.
10) Do you support school vouchers?
Democrat - Richard Watson:
Absolutely not.
Republican - Dan Liljenquist:
I voted against the voucher bill. Here is the text of the editorial I had published in the Ogden Standard Examiner last fall:
Guest commentary: Tone of the voucher debate disappoints
Saturday, October 6, 2007
By Dan Liljenquist
The voucher debate has digressed in recent weeks from the logical to the emotional, with both sides seeking the moral high ground in a state where voters are committed to "do what is right." It is critically important to re-set the debate and attempt to look at vouchers objectively.
The initial case for private school vouchers was articulated by neoclassical economist Milton Friedman in his 1955 article "The Role of Government in Education."
The article was published in an era of broad based regulation and general public distrust of market economies.
In the article, Friedman argues that it is appropriate for government to subsidize education. He wrote that "a stable and democratic society is impossible without widespread acceptance of some common set of values and without a minimum degree of literacy and knowledge on the part of most citizens."
Friedman then argues that it is not necessary for government to administer public education, as long as its educational goals are met. Friedman presents educational vouchers as a market-driven alternative to publicly administered schools.
In the context of the voucher referendum vote this fall, it is important to consider the following:
* Friedman expected governmental oversight of educational curriculum to ensure common, appropriate content.
* Friedman expected extensive financial oversight by government agencies to ensure proper use of funds, citing the possibility of a greater abuse.
* Friedman does not address what forms of education have the greatest social advantage and how much educational funding is appropriate, except to say that these are questions to be decided "by the judgment of the community through its accepted political channels."
House Bill 148 represents a clear departure from the voucher program envisioned by Milton Friedman. First, the bill does not establish curriculum oversight to ensure appropriate use of government funds; this is contrary to Friedman's approach.
Second, the financial oversight provisions of the bill are simplistic and are not adequate enough to prevent fraud; Friedman clearly advocated substantial financial oversight.
Third, the bill explicitly excludes the judgment of the community from educational decisions, preferring to rely exclusively on parental judgment in educational decisions; this is contrary to Friedman's foundational assumption that all society has a vested interest in how our neighbor's children are being educated and what they are being taught.
While I am disappointed with the recent tone of the voucher debate, I am very pleased to see a grassroots movement to challenge our educational paradigms. Our educational system must become more competitive, with greater parental and community involvement, and more educational choices. We must provide increased funding to reduce class sizes and create greater financial freedom to compete for top talent, particularly in the key secondary education fields of math and science.
We must be focused on preparing our children to excel in hyper-competitive, global labor markets where knowledge and intelligence are the coins of the realm.
I am optimistic that this voucher debate will be the spring-board for broad based, positive educational reform.
Thursday, September 11, 2008
Answers - Question 9
This is the ninth in a series of questions posed to the candidates in the State Senate District 23 race. To see the previous questions in this series, please go to http://www.woodscrosscitizen.com/search/label/Answers.
9) Are there any changes that you would like to see made in relation to charter schools?
Republican - Dan Liljenquist:
With 30,000+ students on charter school waiting lists, I am in favor of expanding the reach of charter schools as fast as possible. I would like to see permanent funding mechanisms put in place for charter schools to ensure their ongoing success.
Democrat - Richard Watson:
When a new charter school is proposed, we would be better served if we take away the conflict-of-interests any legislator has when building a new school.
9) Are there any changes that you would like to see made in relation to charter schools?
Republican - Dan Liljenquist:
With 30,000+ students on charter school waiting lists, I am in favor of expanding the reach of charter schools as fast as possible. I would like to see permanent funding mechanisms put in place for charter schools to ensure their ongoing success.
Democrat - Richard Watson:
When a new charter school is proposed, we would be better served if we take away the conflict-of-interests any legislator has when building a new school.
Tuesday, September 09, 2008
Answers - Question 8
This is the eighth in a series of questions posed to the candidates in the State Senate District 23 race. To see the previous questions in this series, please go to http://www.woodscrosscitizen.com/search/label/Answers.
8) What are your feelings about charter schools?
Democrat - Richard Watson:
Again, charter schools began as a great idea for Utah families. And charter schools continue to serve the needs of those families who want a specialized education for their children. However, some lawmakers have viewed charter schools as a profit-driven opportunity for building more charter schools rather than focusing on the education needs of our communities.
Republican - Dan Liljenquist:
I fully support the charter school movement in Utah.
8) What are your feelings about charter schools?
Democrat - Richard Watson:
Again, charter schools began as a great idea for Utah families. And charter schools continue to serve the needs of those families who want a specialized education for their children. However, some lawmakers have viewed charter schools as a profit-driven opportunity for building more charter schools rather than focusing on the education needs of our communities.
Republican - Dan Liljenquist:
I fully support the charter school movement in Utah.
Thursday, September 04, 2008
Answers - Question 7
This is the seventh in a series of questions posed to the candidates in the State Senate District 23 race. To see the previous questions in this series, please go to http://www.woodscrosscitizen.com/search/label/Answers.
7) What are your feelings about the federal government mandating states to follow certain criteria, such as they did with NCLB? What about the Utah Legislature mandating cities to follow certain criteria such as has been done with entities like UTOPIA?
Republican - Dan Liljenquist:
I am not familiar with the criteria that the Utah Legislature has passed regarding UTOPIA. My problem with NCLB is that the Federal Government is holding our own money over our heads.
Democrat - Richard Watson:
Again, big government hovering over local municipal government is taking away the power and confidence of the people. Also, Utah lawmakers have a bad habit of mandating and legislating cities to comply with new laws, but fail to properly fund most mandates. The problems we see with UTOPIA only emphasize the problem our Legislature has with funding programs that they mandate.
7) What are your feelings about the federal government mandating states to follow certain criteria, such as they did with NCLB? What about the Utah Legislature mandating cities to follow certain criteria such as has been done with entities like UTOPIA?
Republican - Dan Liljenquist:
I am not familiar with the criteria that the Utah Legislature has passed regarding UTOPIA. My problem with NCLB is that the Federal Government is holding our own money over our heads.
Democrat - Richard Watson:
Again, big government hovering over local municipal government is taking away the power and confidence of the people. Also, Utah lawmakers have a bad habit of mandating and legislating cities to comply with new laws, but fail to properly fund most mandates. The problems we see with UTOPIA only emphasize the problem our Legislature has with funding programs that they mandate.
Tuesday, September 02, 2008
Answers - Question 6
This is the sixth in a series of questions posed to the candidates in the State Senate District 23 race. To see the previous questions in this series, please go to http://www.woodscrosscitizen.com/search/label/Answers.
6) What are your feelings about "No Child Left Behind" (NCLB)?
Democrat - Richard Watson:
What seemed like a great idea when it passed, NCLB has now become a miserable failure. In review, the legislation provided a lot of mandates with little funding to support the plan. However, since Utah receives some federal funding for public schools, we have to live with NCLB until lawmakers increase public school funding.
Republican - Dan Liljenquist:
I think NCLB is ineffective at best, coercive at worst. I don’t like being taxed by the Federal Government and then having to follow top-down, burdensome directives to get our money back.
6) What are your feelings about "No Child Left Behind" (NCLB)?
Democrat - Richard Watson:
What seemed like a great idea when it passed, NCLB has now become a miserable failure. In review, the legislation provided a lot of mandates with little funding to support the plan. However, since Utah receives some federal funding for public schools, we have to live with NCLB until lawmakers increase public school funding.
Republican - Dan Liljenquist:
I think NCLB is ineffective at best, coercive at worst. I don’t like being taxed by the Federal Government and then having to follow top-down, burdensome directives to get our money back.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
