This is not a comprehensive list – just a few select candidates issues. Here’s my opinion in a very rushed post, for what it’s worth.
RAP Tax – See my post entitled “Heed Bastiat: Bountiful RAP Tax (2014)” for details. A partial summation from the post:
I guess all I can say is that I have a lot of hobbies and interests I enjoy participating in. I take the time and money to pay for those and don’t demand that my wealthy neighbor, the widow on a fixed income, or a struggling young family pay for or subsidize my fun. I am fortunate and grateful that I get to voluntarily donate and assist others. I would just ask that the same courtesy be granted to me and to those least able to pay.
Board of Education
I’m going with Laura Belnap. While I don’t see eye-to-eye with her on everything, she’s much more open to parental input and involvement than her opponent. She is responsive and willing to engage, something I hope (and expect) that she’ll carry on into office. Belnap also has previous education experience and served on other boards. Finally, she appears to be independent (which give citizens a better voice) rather than being propped up by entrenched political interests.
Commission Seat B
I’m going to go with Ryan Macfarlane. Jim Smith is way too tied in with the Chamber of Commerce and I simply have trouble believing he’ll keep citizen interests as the top priority. Various Chambers of Commerce (particularly the National and Salt Lake Chamber of Commerce) have been bastions of promoting and lobbying for corporate welfare and cronyism. Their reps tend to just toe the line and I’m not interested in this. Udy, on the other hand, will tend to far the other way with well-intentioned projects that have the tendency to raise taxes and burdens on residents (although her focus on transparency is worth giving her a second look). I believe, Macfarlane will hold spending down and keep a sharp eye out for how appropriate current and future programs will be.
Constitutional Amendment A
I’m going to oppose this. After the IRS was used to target tea party and conservative groups, I think it is best to keep the split on the commission and prevent a single political affiliation from dominating the commission seats. I don’t really care for arbitrary qualifications (like party affiliation) but make an exception in this instance. Yeah, the vast majority who are placed in the position will be well-qualified and serve honorably but it just takes once to really muck things up (especially if you can get away with it with media complicity ala Obama IRS…imagine if this were Bush or Nixon!). An recent experience, I say we keep the current check/balance.
Constitutional Amendment C
Opposed but primarily because I don’t see the need. It seems that the AG’s office can fulfill the requests. The voter’s guide opponents also make a good point that having each agency head with a personal counsel could allow undue influence on them rather than having a more disinterested assigned attorney from the AG’s office. I’m open to feedback on this one – feel free to comment with reasons why this should be supported.