Bigger Swamp Playground? Rob Anderson, Count My Vote, And The Utah Republican Party

Earlier this month, I ran across a scathing report on Rob Anderson’s time with the Davis County Republican Party. He’s now Chair of the Utah Republican Party (GOP). I concluded the post with:

Will the state party (or media) address this at all or did Chairman Anderson find a bigger swamp to play in?

I may already have my answer. Two reports are out. A short KUTV blurb (Activist says “Civil War” in Utah GOP, special meeting Saturday). In this, a familiar tone is sounded:

“This disagreement with the governing body, and it’s rogue chair will end up in the courts,” said Bill Olson, retired CEO and Utah transplant, who immersed himself in state Republican politics. “He’s a rogue chair.”

For a more in depth report on what is going on, see the op-ed at Utah Standard News (NewsOp: Anderson Flips Again). The report gives much more background and was helpful for me. It notes that Anderson is attempting to usurp authority and may well be a plant by the Count My Vote folks:

Rather, his actions lend immense credibility to those who suspect he’s colluding with Count My Vote to bankrupt the Party, undermine the Caucus System, and silence the SCC.

As noted in the article, Count My Vote was pushed by high power political-media elites, many of whom stand to benefit from it:

If CMV passes, Utah’s media outlets will make a killing on primary campaign advertising. One political consultant stated “So much of this [CMV] has always been about lining the pockets of the consultant class. As a former (and sometimes current) member of the political consulting class, I can tell you that primaries are money makers for “campaign professionals”, and that mostly means media/ad buys.

Per KUTV, attendees include Teena Horlacher who is very familiar with Anderson’s (and his attorney’s) ‘ethical’ behavior while at the Davis County GOP. Let’s face it, the behavior was very swampy.

Better yet, it seems Anderson will be appointing an attorney for the SCC:

Anderson is also complaining about the special SCC meeting called for this Saturday. He says that the GOP attorney, who hasn’t been confirmed yet, has the opinion that the meeting is outside of GOP Bylaws.

If I were on the Utah GOP’s State Central Committee, I would be extremely careful about the attorney he appoints based on what went down at the Davis GOP. If it turns out to be his Davis County GOP days attorney, David Irvine, it only lends even more credibility to his association with Count My Vote since Irvine was (surprise!) a big proponent of it (just run a web search).

I haven’t heard what came of the Saturday meeting but I’ll try to update this if I find a summary somewhere. In the meantime, the SCC may want to keep an extraordinarily close watch on their indemnification protection…

UPDATE: Here’s a write up on the meeting which includes a link to a video of the entire meeting: UTGOP Chair Fails to Sabotage Successful Special SCC Meeting


Senator Bramble and Stan Lockhart In News Over Suspicious Political Behavior (Update)

Every once in a while, I check out Utah Standard News. This week I caught a report about some possible unethical, if not criminal intrigue at the Utah County and State GOP conventions.

Some of the actors are the “usual suspects” for me. I’ve written before on the cozy relationship between State Senator Curt Bramble and Stan Lockhart. I’ve also noted Bramble’s Chicago-style political ‘tactics’ (click here for all posts on Bramble). This may well be another example of such.

I’m only going to put a very small excerpt of the article here as it would be best to read the entire article (read to the end for the big stuff). Ultimately, the charges should be investigated and verified as what may have occurred strikes to the heart of the caucus system (which I’m a big proponent of) and integrity of the Utah County and State GOP as a whole.

Caucus Obstruction, Delegate Tampering & Voter Fraud in Utah County

In what could be the biggest scandal in the Utah GOP of the past decade, this tale of corruption involves two sitting Utah State Senators (Curt Bramble & Deidre Henderson), the new Utah County GOP Chair Robert Craig, legislative district officers, precinct chairs, and state delegates. Their activities include clear and blatant infractions of the GOP Constitution and Bylaws and could result in a multiple criminal investigations and charges of voter fraud.

EDIT: I just finished typing up the above and checked back on the USN website and there’s a follow-up article: UPDATE Part 2 : Caucus, Delegate & Voter Tampering. New info. Evidence. YAK info. Be sure to read it in full too – it includes some additional information along with some more personal reports of ‘anomalies’ along the lines of the first article and some possible better perspective on Sen. Henderson. Again, this stuff should be investigated and verified.

Obviously, some are having conniptions about it and State Senator Todd Weiler (Davis County) is on threatening the publisher with libel:

I know you’re the messenger, Ed Wallace. At least one of the people you lied about called me tonight for legal advice on a libel lawsuit. Hope you’ve got good insurance!

While I’ve found Weiler to be nice and polite in person (the couple of times I’ve met him), I’ve noticed he’s disrespectful, derisive and condescending online. Par for the course.

UPDATE: USN has posted another follow-up: FINAL UPDATE Caucus, Delegate & Voter Tampering. INCLUDING EVIDENCE.

UPDATE II: This is exactly why the caucus is so important and any potential corruption thereof must be investigated. Chris Herrod probably wouldn’t have had a prayer as he isn’t an establishment/donor class favorite. Thanks to the caucus and neighbors representing their areas and vetting candidates, he now has a chance:
Utah GOP delegates pick candidate to replace Congressman Jason Chaffetz

He still has to make it through a primary and I doubt he’ll be favored by the establishment GOP. Check him out and consider helping him out.

ICYMI: Count My Vote Exposed For Violations, Investigation Requested

This came out on Friday, when many start tuning out of the news in anticipation of the weekend.  The Count My Vote group that wants to take away neighborhood elections and place political power squarely in the hands of political elites and big donors  (see here and here too) may have an legal ‘oopsie’ on its hands.  As Channel 2 reports (‘Illegal’ Actions Alleged Against Count My Vote – video at link):

Specifically, the complaint alleged corporate CMV donors have not filed necessary disclosures, that out of state residents have collected signatures, and that some of the petitions were left unattended—so no one actually witnessed petitions being inked.

Protect Our Neighborhood Elections also said a Washington School District Foundation director used a school “email system” to send out a notice about the initiative during school hours.  The email was allegedly addressed to “all WCSD Employees,” and was said to include the words, “Information about the Count My Vote Initiative is available at your school office to include signature booklets.  The petition deadline for signatures is January 31, 2013.”

More dramatic was an audio recording purported to be of a Count My Vote signature taker, who seemed to link the petition effort to kids’ lunches that were tossed at a local elementary school several weeks ago.

Here’s the full audio of the non-resident, “signature taker”:

Buy My Vote: Elites Pour Money In To Crush Citizen Candidate Selection

About two years ago, a bunch of political power-broker elites met with the intent to kill the Utah caucus system. I obtained one of their emails with their agenda for the meeting (held in an exclusive club – go figure). Essentially, they all have sour grapes that they couldn’t get elected and find a way to push the system back in their favor rather than having to more directly deal with the great unwashed. What better way to do so than make campaigns so expensive and cost prohibitive that only their big money-selected candidates will be able to enter?

Thus, they decided to try to pull the wool over everyone’s eyes and push for a virtual or actual primary only system under the guise of “Count My Vote” (including an initial $500,000 in cash). As such, let me repost my explanation on how this ruse works and why they hate the caucus system so much:

Equalizer: The Neighborhood Caucus System

We are aware of a push to kill Utah’s neighborhood caucus system and are confident of who the actors behind the push are.  But why should anyone care?  Why not do as they wish and move to a primary election only?

Simply put: a primary-only system rips power from you and your neighbors and places it squarely in the hands of elite interest groups with oodles of cash.

Right now, by attending a caucus meeting, you virtually shut out the big money interest groups.  You know your neighbors, their principles, and their character.  A big money group isn’t going to gain traction endorsing someone in such a meeting; nor can they when you realize that hundreds of these meetings are occurring at the same time.  These meeting are the greatest means of empowering the unconnected ‘little guy’ and true grass-roots action.

Next, after the meeting, you and/or your neighbor has been elected to represent the neighborhood at the party’s convention to whittle down candidates who will either go on to a primary election or straight to the general election (depending on the percent of votes they garnered).  The convention is also very effective at interdicting big money and outside influences.  At the convention candidates court a manageable number of typically highly motivated, issues-oriented voters and they have a list of who they are and how to contact them.  The result is that candidates can comfortably run shoe string campaigns and literally individually meet with each voter.  Another benefit is that, in this phase, campaigns tend to focus on issues and specifics rather than fluff like expensive baby kissing ads.  That means candidates who aren’t politically or fiscally well-connected have a fighting chance to be considered and nominated for the office they seek.  It opens candidacy up to John Doe rather being so cost prohibitive that you need connections to big donors or independently wealthy.

The caucus and convention system grates elites as well as in-state and out-of-state political money pushers because it simply sucks so much power out of their hands.  Once we hit primary and general elections, the elites can begin to peddle their influence as campaign costs skyrocket in an effort to contact potential voters with the fluffy mailers and ads lacking any substance (sadly, yes that wins elections and it’s the voters fault).  However, these special interest groups only gained any significant power after you and your neighbors had their say and chose the candidates they could fund.  The political elites and big donors want this constraint knocked off and want to become the king-makers without distractions.

I urge you to attend your neighborhood caucus and contact your neighborhood’s delegates.  The neighborhood caucus is the great equalizer – use it!  If you are not sure who they are, someone in your neighborhood does or you can contact your party offices and they should be able to tell you.  I also ask that you contact the Governor and your state Representative and Senator and ask them to oppose any and all efforts to kill the caucus system…unless you are particularly fond of big money influence in politics and a deluge of vacuous political ads lasting for months…

They’re now on Plan D: Pump money into an initiative effort (with paid, not volunteer, signature gatherers, of course) to trick citizens to give greater political power to the political elites and big donors. Don’t fall for the gimmick.

For more posts documenting the caucus-killers antics click here. For some more information and satire on the County My Vote group, see

Addendum: Adding a video that sums most of the points made above:

Additionally, the proposed initiative ironically makes getting on a primary ballot harder by increasing the signature threshold (again favoring the well-funded and politically-connected): “The Count My Vote Proposal Hurts Ballot Access

Finally, an important problem I had not thought of is that the primaries will turn rural Utah into “flyover country” for state-wide election races ( Congressional, Governor, Attorney General etc).  In a primary, the candidates will need the biggest bang for the buck by targeting (and catering to) the largest voting pools.  Those pools primarily reside along the Wasatch Front.  With the caucus system, rural delegates must be contacted, with a primary, population centers become the focus.  Rural Utah will be largely ignored and lose influence and representation by state-wide office holders.

Introspection: Legislator Ethics Versus Delegates and Voters – The Double Standard

I recently had a discussion with a friend about the Senate 23 election and how nice it was that my father isn’t the only one in the race running a shoestring campaign focusing on the issues and principles rather than wining/dining and expensive, colorfully vague pamphlets.  They replied that there’s an ethical double standard in politics and were right on the money (pun intended):

Everyone from the delegates to general election voters get all worked up over elected officials’ ethics in taking lobbyist money, dinners, and gifts. Public opinion poll after poll always notes how annoyed everyone is with gifts.  That’s great – we absolutely should care about who’s buying influence, how much they are getting, any impropriety therein, and how that may affect votes on critical/controversial issues.  However, has anyone ever polled the same respondents and asked: “Have you ever been swayed by a gift or expensive item from a campaign?” or “Do you feel you have ever pressured a campaign to provide gifts for you?”

Most won’t admit or realise it, but they likely have.

At the delegate and occasional primary level, free “meet the candidate” breakfasts or lunches etc. tend to attract more people.  Typically, expensive glitzy ads (TV, radio, or mail), chapsticks, pencils, cheesy t-shirts with negligible information tend to grab attention more than a set of black and white pages with fairly detailed positions on issues.  Yes, part of it has to do with our busy lives (I reject that as a reason to be an uninformed voter) but a chunk of it has to do with the fact that we like getting free junk.

Yet many of us finding time for a lunch or line for the goodies jump up and down about legislators doing the same.  Is it good for me and not for thee?  I know criticism stings and this isn’t the first time I’ve brought this up, but it is worth asking:

If you detest money in politics, do you engage in the same behavior you dislike in a legislator?

It would be nice if we got to the point of asking: “Why do they feel the need to give me this stuff for my consideration and why don’t their positions/principles suffice?”

SL Chamber, Political Insider Backed “Education First PAC” Officially Funding Shumway

Disclaimer: My father is on the Senate 23 race ballot but be aware that this blog is maintained separate from my father’s campaign and is not affiliated with his campaign.  His campaign items can be found at the site.

In my post on December 21, 2011 “Utah Business PAC On Education: Taxes For Thee But Not For Me” I noted how monetarily and politically powerful groups/individuals had aligned themselves under the name “Education First PAC’.  In that post,  I also highlighted the fact that they were lobbying to significantly increase taxes on everyone else fortunately drawing some push back from Senator Waddoups.  I further noted that rather than use their money to directly further fund educational initiatives they have chose to use that money to lobby for a tax increase.  Prior to above post, I noted in another post that the PAC was after the Senate 23 seat and speculated that Shumway was their preferred candidate based on his associations and the quote from a Trib article:

Education First has no intention of unseating lawmakers it sees as hostile to education, but it will groom candidates to run for vacant legislative seats, such as that of Sen. Daniel Liljenquist, the Bountiful Republican who is resigning to mount a shot at Orrin Hatch’s seat in the U.S. Senate.

In an email, sent from the big lobbying firm, the Exoro Group, I think it is safe to say that the group is firmly behind Mr. Shumway and appears to be placing significant sums of money towards his campaign:

From: Kameron Lopez [Redacted]
To: [Redacted]
Sent: [Redacted]
Subject: Randy Shumway for State Senate

Randy Shumway
Candidate for State Senate

The Alta Club
100 East South Temple

Friday, January 6th
8:30 am to 9:15 am

Hosted by Mark Bouchard, Natalie Gochnour, and Bob Marquardt
Continental Breakfast and Beverages

Recommended donations: $250-$2,500.
Checks payable to Friends for Randy Shumway.

If you are unable to attend, but would like to donate,
please send checks payable to:

Friends for Randy Shumway
[Remainder redacted to protect personal information]

This confirmation should come as no surprise.  Just clicking the “About” page on the groups website reveals that Mr. Shumway is on the Steering Committee.  Take a look at the page as well for a who’s who of well established power players, several of whom attended Jowers’ meeting (ironically, also at the Alta Club) that served as a jump off point to neutralise the caucus system and who were also behind the rushed and flawed HB116.  The Salt Lake Chamber of Commerce is represented in the group and was a huge pusher of HB116 and has consistently opposed effective E-Verify measures (identity verification by employers to protect victim identites and prevent illegal workers – fugitives/illegal immigrants/deadbeat parent etc – from obtaining the job.  The Exoro Group (which sent this email) coordinated the Jowers’ meeting.

Another thought: This fund raiser will also help build a war chest should he lose this delegate election thus preparing him for the next delegate selection (caucus) meetings and subsequent election.

Republican Delegates Beware II: Consolidated Post On Davis County Candidates (Liljenquist Senate Seat)

Full Disclosure: Friend(s) may also officially enter the race and my father (Ron) is now on the ballot.  I will also put up my gripes (to include my father) if/when they enter the race.  Also be aware that this blog is maintained separate from my father’s campaign and is not affiliated with his campaign.  His campaign items can be found at the referenced site.

UPDATE(1/2/12): Added several updates and made this a sticky post.  Also, I recommend delegates read “Introspection: Legislator Ethics Versus Delegates and Voters – The Double Standard” and consider if they are falling into the trap (particularly with Mr. Shumway).

I decided to write a consolidated post on the various candidates which I will keep a running update on as more, if any, candidates definitively run for Senator Dan Liljenquist’s vacated Utah Senate seat.  Right now there are three who are definitely running.  I, personally, liked Dan Liljenquist.  While not always in agreement with his positions, he was a fairly dependable conservative on the issues I followed.  It would be nice to have someone like him fill the seat and not wind down to a liberal republican.

Before anyone freaks out about being negative on candidates, understand that the candidates will cover all the positive spin stuff on their sites and I don’t need to regurgitate it here.  My decision is also based on a Michelle Malkin’s “nose clips” post on the presidential candidates – I found it to be an excellent means of disclosure and clarity in knowing what you are getting with your vote (the political ‘truth in advertising’ equivalent).  Caveat emptor, in alphabetical order:

Greg Ericksen

I trust him on defending the neighborhood caucus/delegate system (his thoughts and mine are similar).  But…on illegal immigration, I see a red flag (from his site):

I support Utah legislation passed in 2011 as a stopgap measure rather than an ultimate solution…I support work permits that require accountability for undocumented immigrants…

He’s referring to HB116 which is undeniably unconstitutional (the bill even had a constitutional note attached), passed in the same late session as HB477 with negligible debate (I called it Utah’s Obamacare Legislature).  Unsurprisingly, the rammed ‘down your throat’ legislation ended up having a litany of expected and unexpected flaws (including for the illegal immigrant beneficiaries).  Mr. Ericksen is also involved in Orbit Irrigation products which had a lot of workers walk out to the 2006 May illegal immigrant amnesty rally (indicating Orbit hired plenty of illegal workers).  At the time they pledged action would be taken but who knows if any was.  Hopefully, Mr. Ericksen will reconsider the effects and process employed for this legislation – right now he seems prime for pressure from the illegal worker use protection lobby (which includes the Salt Lake Chamber of Commerce).

Update (12/28): I’ve been hearing that he does seem fairly conservative but doesn’t yet have a grasp of the issues (he’s still on the learning curve but progressing).  I messed up and failed to ask about impressions on his stance regarding illegal immigration.

Timothy Hawkes

Here’s what I know for now: He’s pledged to support the caucus system and wants greater participation but doesn’t include any specifics on how he would do so (that can be very important).

His site is ethics heavy but doesn’t have many specifics other than promising only to run for two terms.  I hope by ethics he doesn’t mean the Utahns for Ethical Government scheme which is much more about power than ethics.  Note: Mr. Hawkes has elaborated on this in the comments section.

Other than that, his site lacks specifics (see update below) but may be in development.  I’ll add more as time permits.

Update (12/28): I’ve been heard him speak recently and he does seem fairly conservative but also is still gaining a grasp of the issues (also on the learning curve).  It was nice to hear that Mr. Hawkes has joined in running a shoe string campaign and not trying to influence votes by buying delegates lunches and dinners etc.  Note that also brings some challenges (see Ron Mortensen section).

Ken Holman

UPDATE (1/2/12): I have been told that Ken Holman has exited the race and is no longer a candidate.

***Under Construction***

So far, I know he’s a former Centerville Councilman and is heavily involved in real estate and appears to partner with the Salt Lake Chamber of Commerce.  The Realtors are a major lobbying/special interest force as is the Salt Lake Chamber of Commerce.  The Chamber and Realtors lobbied for HB116 (illegal immigrant amnesty – see Ericksen section) and both have a track history for corporate welfare (like the Utah new home purchase credit).

I have no idea on his personal stance regarding preserving the neighborhood caucus but the SL Chamber had plenty in attendance at the exclusive meeting where Jowers et al launched their effort to kill Utah’s caucus system (see Shumway section) and consolidating influence for political elites and big donors.

Update (12/28): The only feedback I’ve heard was that some delegates felt lukewarm about him as a conservative.  Sorry – it’s not much to go on.  Hopefully more will arise – as a former councilman he must have a record.  I’m not sure if he was on the council when the tax-raising recreation center, RAP tax, theater, and recycling votes took place.

Glen Jenkins

***Under Construction ***

On his site he is reasonably specific on education but appears to be still developing positions on some other issues.  He didn’t list anything on the caucus system, illegal immigration, or ethics.  As I previously stated, he’s a semi-late entry and is either still getting his issues up or on the learning curve.  He does, otherwise, appear reasonably conservative.  One caution, similar to Holman is his service on the Woods Cross City Council – what was his record there regarding the recreation center, RAP tax, theater, and recycling along with any private property restricting ordinances (if any).

Ben Lusty

***Under Construction***

12/28 – I found out he is a ‘late entry’ into the race.  I understand several delegates did like him and believe he’s also conservative but they also noted that he was a bit shaky on issues and is on a learning curve right now.  No surprise, since he just started.

I’ll try to update if/when I have time.

Ron Mortensen

Disclosure: Ron is my father.

Well I guess you can say this is now a festivus post and we’re at the family “airing of grievances”.

First, he is fully committed to defending the neighborhood caucus and has played significant role in identity theft, illegal immigration, and legal immigration legislation*.

In keeping with his belief in governmental fiscal responsibility, citizen representation, and avoiding special interest influence, he runs low budget campaigns eschewing lobbyist/big donor money.  That means he relies on an engaged electorate willing to accept detailed pamphlets etc over expensive colorful, puff piece cards with bullet two ‘policy’ bullet points.  That works for the caucus/convention system but is tougher during primary/general elections when many (disengaged) voters ultimately prefer the expensive puff card (face it, voters say they hate $$ in politics but they like the product).  It also means he is targeted by big donors and lobbying groups who see a potential loss of influence.

Along with the above, in the past he’s pledged not to attend closed legislative caucus sessions sponsored by an interest group (they usually provide lunch) as it provides an exclusive perk to the sponsors unavailable to regular citizens (shuts out Joe Blow).  He’s said he’ll be happy to sit out in the hall eating his peanut butter sandwich and meeting with constituents.  That can also mean that he will miss out on some tactical strategy talk by colleagues (they could fill him in later, but that assumes time is available to do so).

He is quite analytical.  He doesn’t go into paralysis by analysis but just dumping something on him and expecting an immediate answer (unless it’s something he’s already knowledgeable about), you’ll have to wait.  He will take some time to study the issue and it can be longer than impatient folks like me want.  Snap decisions are not something he likes to do.

*Regarding the recent legal immigration legislation (HB469) he, to my knowledge, still supports, I supported it too but have since retracted my support and called for its repeal due to Constitutional issues I did not realize (I doubt many do) exist with the legislation.  Please read the linked post for details on why the 10th Amendment does not apply.  Note: he may be re-evaluating his position on HB469 but I can’t confirm that until he returns, sorry.

He’s also out of the country filling in on a humanitarian mission with limited contact capability on this.  Delegate contact will be negligible until his return.  His timing totally sucks but no one knew when Liljenquist would resign and the schedule thereafter.  Murphy’s Law.

Now, on to the feats of strength…

Randy Shumway

He gets a staunch “no way” from me.  He’s aligned with those who seek to kill the neighborhood caucus system, thereby shifting power to the political elites and big donors.  Delegates and neighborhoods would be effectively locked out of the process.  Shumway not only attended Jower’s Alta Club meeting which initiated the effort to neutralize caucuses, but is also part of the Dan Jones and Cicero Group and serves on the Salt Lake Chamber of Commerce’s Board of Governors.  These groups had multiple attendees at Jowers’ meeting. He is also part of the Chamber’s Capitol Club which recently hosted a meeting on neutralizing the neighborhood caucus with Kirk Jowers and LaVarr Webb presenting.

He’s also received what I called a reverse endorsement from Republican turned Democrat, Sheryl Allen.

Update (12/28): Mr. Shumway contacted me and stated that he is supportive of the caucus system and would like to see “greater consistency in the system” but it is not a campaign priority at this time and should be handled within the party (Note: my above concerns about his actions toward the caucus system remain – especially given his financial backers – see 1/2/12 update).  He didn’t remember much from the aforementioned meeting and believed it had more to do with education than the caucus system.  I maintain that the meeting was the launchpad for the Jowers’ push on the caucuses.  He stated that he’s not part of the Capitol Club but part of the SL Chamber’s Board of Governors.  I didn’t follow up but just took another look at the linked Capitol Club roster and he’s on it (is it a typo?).  We very briefly discussed the SL Chamber on illegal immigration/identity theft and he did not take  a position.  The SL Chamber has consistently opposed enforcement measures, identity theft prevention via E-verify and was a driving force behind HB116.

UPDATE (1/2/12): Phill Wright on his blog, related to a meet the candidates event, noted that Mr. Shumway came out against HB116 but ultimately gave him a “D-” grade.  I’m also left scratching my head given those who will soon financially support a potential war chest for him are folks behind the effort to neutralise the caucus system and a major force behind HB116.  I hope delegates do not fall for the smooth talk and focus on the issues and who is supporting him and why [edits made on 1/5/12].

Richard Siddoway

***Under Construction***

I just heard a rumor that he is running and would, likely, be a last-minute entry.  I would guage him as the UEA-backed candidate given his past associations.  As I recall, he was a Utah House Representative and I think would be reminicent of Sheryl Allen (not something I’m keen on).  I don’t have any other specific information on his positions at this time.

Todd Weiler

He has stated that he’s supportive of the caucus system and will fight to preserve it.  I wasn’t able to turn up any links to formal articles or statements on caucuses. He’s been in the party leadership structure since 2003.  Mr. Weiler is not supportive and derisive of the Tea Party movement going as far as implying supporters are not “normal people” (also taking a jab a Mike Lee).  I believe he was a Senator Bennett supporter and received $2000 from Bennett in 2009-2010.

Mr. Weiler, however, has had some ethical bumps in the road as recent as this year.  The most recent (this year at the Davis County Republican Convention) was breaking Convention rules and speaking on a resolution despite not being a delegate.  I knew a complaint was lodged at the time.  Then he brushed it aside when asked. Recently, however, I found out that action appears to have been taken in the matter as both he and then Chair Bouwhuis issued apology letters to the current chair.  While trying to turn up references on the caucus system, I stumbled onto a post on cronysim exhibited by party leadership (2008) in which Weiler was also mentioned.  The issue raised in the post was also corroborated by a Deseret News article.

He was a staunch supporter of HB116 (see Ericksen’s section) at the recent County Convention and spoke (the above mentioned violation) to oppose a resolution calling for the flawed legislation to be repealed and replaced.  Hopefully he will reconsider his support of the bill and the process enacted for passage.

That’s all for now.  As noted, if others officially join the race, I will try to keep up.