Reader comments
Hillyard says he could be forced out
58 comments | Read story
mike | 1:00 p.m. Nov. 3, 2009
Attorneys that won't allow an examination of their business practices tells
me they must have committed alot of crooked deals. Typical of most republicans
in this state.
re: mike | 1:22 p.m. Nov. 3, 2009
Guess again, mike. Attorneys who won't allow their books to be examined
are simply abiding by the Utah Supreme Court's Rules of Professional
Conduct, which require all lawyers to scrupulously maintain their client's
confidentiality. That means no discussing ANYTHING, regarding your
representation of a client with anyone but the client, including billing, work
performed, scope of representation, etc.
Sounds like the Senator is merely wore aware of his pre-existing ethical duties than those who push this "reform."
Sounds like the Senator is merely wore aware of his pre-existing ethical duties than those who push this "reform."
Comments continue below
Don't Like Mike | 1:24 p.m. Nov. 3, 2009
Mike, you are a dope.
Wrex | 1:25 p.m. Nov. 3, 2009
Anyone who has been in the House of Reps since 1980 SHOULD RETIRE!!!!!!!!!!!!!
it's amazing the | 1:35 p.m. Nov. 3, 2009
contortions these folks are willing to go through to avoid the light of day
shining on their work.
oooooo, it burns!! we hates it!!!
oooooo, it burns!! we hates it!!!
Anonymous | 1:43 p.m. Nov. 3, 2009
It is time these extremist republicans retire that have been hogging the
legislature. It is also time for a better representative sample of the
population is in the legislature to represent the will of the people, rather
than their personal bias.
We have suffered from this oppressive legiaslature now for 3 decades and it is time to end the corruptions.
We have suffered from this oppressive legiaslature now for 3 decades and it is time to end the corruptions.
Diana | 1:50 p.m. Nov. 3, 2009
If they are afraid to open their books, what will they do when they die and the
book of life is open. OUCH! Where can we find honest men and women?
Craig | 2:18 p.m. Nov. 3, 2009
The article states that the opponents of the citizen initiative are mostly GOP
legislators. Are there any democrats who oppose the initiative? Is it a
democrat-backed initiative to begin with? I would like to know what the
democrat representatives and senators say about this issue because the DNews is
making this sound like it just a GOP issue.
Anonymous | 2:21 p.m. Nov. 3, 2009
Pethaps you should look at it from a law firms clients' perspective. Maybe
you wouldn't want a lot of YOUR personal data posted publicly just because
another lawyer that works for the firm happens to be in the legislature.
Maybe, just maybe, the proposed reforms are TOO BROAD & could use some focus and oversight as some legislators are suggesting.
Maybe, just maybe, the proposal is not thoroughlu vetted yet.
Ethics reform may be needed, but a wholesale elimination or others' privacy is not.
Maybe, just maybe, the proposed reforms are TOO BROAD & could use some focus and oversight as some legislators are suggesting.
Maybe, just maybe, the proposal is not thoroughlu vetted yet.
Ethics reform may be needed, but a wholesale elimination or others' privacy is not.
Pagan | 2:25 p.m. Nov. 3, 2009
So, this senator will leave if ethics reform passes in Utah? I have just one
word on this passive attempt at blackmail.
Goodbye.
Goodbye.
Greg | 2:25 p.m. Nov. 3, 2009
Mike has displayed his profound ignorance of the business world. When I read
comments like this, it makes me grateful for common sense and for the good, hard
working people who have the fortitude to make their private businesses work.
Anonymous | 2:28 p.m. Nov. 3, 2009
Sounds like a win win for us common folk.
Do we never learn? | 2:29 p.m. Nov. 3, 2009
We've had recent experience with this, "Just sign it into law now and
we'll ammend it to make more sense later"... approach.
Does anybody remember the law on vouchers and private schools? They passed it with the assumption that it would later be ammended. Then the later ammendment was taken to court and used to invalidate and twist the whole law (or something like that).
If it's not right... don't pass it.
Does anybody remember the law on vouchers and private schools? They passed it with the assumption that it would later be ammended. Then the later ammendment was taken to court and used to invalidate and twist the whole law (or something like that).
If it's not right... don't pass it.
To "Diana | 1:50 p.m." | 2:36 p.m. Nov. 3, 2009
Diana | 1:50 p.m.
Don't just assume that is a law firm doesn't want it's books opened and it's client list known, and it's client lawyer privacy rights violated.... means they did something bad or have something sinister to hide.
That's how a lame-brain works. There may be any number of reasons why a business (especially a law firm) would not want their books, client lists, etc, known.
I write software for large companies (including law firms) and protecting this privacy of who has asked for their help, who they are currently working with, etc, is a VERY high priority to them (Even if they haven't done ANYTHING wrong).
Try not being so judgemental.
This issue has NOTHING to do with the Book of Life and you know it. Your just playing religious games to serve your political ends.
Don't just assume that is a law firm doesn't want it's books opened and it's client list known, and it's client lawyer privacy rights violated.... means they did something bad or have something sinister to hide.
That's how a lame-brain works. There may be any number of reasons why a business (especially a law firm) would not want their books, client lists, etc, known.
I write software for large companies (including law firms) and protecting this privacy of who has asked for their help, who they are currently working with, etc, is a VERY high priority to them (Even if they haven't done ANYTHING wrong).
Try not being so judgemental.
This issue has NOTHING to do with the Book of Life and you know it. Your just playing religious games to serve your political ends.
Scott | 2:45 p.m. Nov. 3, 2009
As a state employee all information is made available to the public. How much I
make, where I work, etc. Why should elected officals be held to a lower
scrunity? I think the any Utahn would agree that decision makers or elected
officials need to be held to at least the same standard, argubly higher since
they have the direct power to tax, and legistate that has a direct affect on our
personal freedom.
Privacy | 2:51 p.m. Nov. 3, 2009
Privacy is not illegal. Failure to display every facet of one's personal
life is not a sign of dishonesty. Reform should be realistic and aware of
unintended consequences, i.e. if those with accomplishments are excluded from
politics we will have only those who do not succeed representing us, like Mike.
Nelson | 3:14 p.m. Nov. 3, 2009
Too bad Senator! You and your team have had 20 years to address the problem,
which has now become serious enough for the voters to take act. When asked; sign
the petition.
Put up or shut up | 3:22 p.m. Nov. 3, 2009
I say pass this initiative OR have the legislature come up with a better plan.
Time to put up or shut up.
Time to put up or shut up.
Go Lyle Go | 3:23 p.m. Nov. 3, 2009
Getting Hillyard out would be a great service to Utah.
Wake-up Call to Legislators | 3:24 p.m. Nov. 3, 2009
It is time for the Utah legislators get off the dime and take action in the
upcoming 2010 session to pass meaningful ethic reform — don't just go
through the motions as they have in years past. This is where reform should
occur, be passed, and signed into law by the Governor.
However, if the legislators choose not to do their job and implement meaningful reform this next session, then the voting people of this State will do it for them by initiative, which they obviously don't like. It is called "…control your own destiny…" or the people of Utah will do it for you.
However, if the legislators choose not to do their job and implement meaningful reform this next session, then the voting people of this State will do it for them by initiative, which they obviously don't like. It is called "…control your own destiny…" or the people of Utah will do it for you.
Good | 3:28 p.m. Nov. 3, 2009
Time for more to be forced out. So many of them love their perks and take
advantage of all their freebies.
Get some new blood in Utah government.
Legislators will enter the same time as new ethics laws.
The games will be over and everyone will understand it,
Get some new blood in Utah government.
Legislators will enter the same time as new ethics laws.
The games will be over and everyone will understand it,
Suggestion | 3:30 p.m. Nov. 3, 2009
I suggest that you all read the bill, and you will see that it is too far
reaching and unrealistic. I am all for some type of ethics reform, but this is
not the answer.
Goodbye | 3:32 p.m. Nov. 3, 2009
Goodbye Sen. Lyle Hillyard.
You should have made changes during your 30 years.
Time for someone else to try to fix it.
You should have made changes during your 30 years.
Time for someone else to try to fix it.
Sterling | 3:33 p.m. Nov. 3, 2009
Keep in mind: IF the legislature WOULD HAVE HAD even a semblance of ethics,
this measure would not be necessary!
Bye Bye! | 4:01 p.m. Nov. 3, 2009
As a Senator, you claim to work for the good of this state and its people, but
you are unwilling to let an ethics commission look at your business dealings?
Bye Bye!
Pagan | 4:02 p.m. Nov. 3, 2009
'Keep in mind: IF the legislature WOULD HAVE HAD even a semblance of
ethics, this measure would not be necessary!'
Sterling, Agreed.
Sterling, Agreed.
Gordon H. | 4:20 p.m. Nov. 3, 2009
I think the general feeling in the comments reveal a distrust for all
politicians. Especially career politicians. Vote them out of office before they
do more damage.
From a Democrat | 4:42 p.m. Nov. 3, 2009
Lyle Hillyard has always been a voice of reason on the hill-- from a personal
stand point as a Democrat in Davis County, I feel the lose of Senator Hillyard
with his wealth of background and the moderate path he has taken to represent
the people of this state would be a huge mistake for we as citizens to make.
Farnsworth | 5:03 p.m. Nov. 3, 2009
I strongly support term limits and the end of the "political class" of
permanent politicians. If someone who has played the game for 20 years wants to
stop, I say good riddance.
There are some problems with the initiative as written, however.
Commission composition states that "volunteers" ca be employed, including the Exec Director, a mistake. Instead og grabbing people off the street and employing people with agendas, this is important enough for professionals - pay them for their expertise and work.
Code of Conduct, section 2, pretty well eliminates any responsible corporate officer from the legislature - insanely restrictive, as a start and it doesn't get better. This section is filled with inanely insane language that would prevent legislators from doing their jobs in representing their constituents.
This is a good idea, and I don't trust the legislature to police themselves, but it is stupid to advance garnage that shows, at best a clear lack of understanding of the roles of representative government.
Hmm.... is Utans for Ethical Government a front group for ACORN, daily kos or the Legislature's most corrupt elements?
There are some problems with the initiative as written, however.
Commission composition states that "volunteers" ca be employed, including the Exec Director, a mistake. Instead og grabbing people off the street and employing people with agendas, this is important enough for professionals - pay them for their expertise and work.
Code of Conduct, section 2, pretty well eliminates any responsible corporate officer from the legislature - insanely restrictive, as a start and it doesn't get better. This section is filled with inanely insane language that would prevent legislators from doing their jobs in representing their constituents.
This is a good idea, and I don't trust the legislature to police themselves, but it is stupid to advance garnage that shows, at best a clear lack of understanding of the roles of representative government.
Hmm.... is Utans for Ethical Government a front group for ACORN, daily kos or the Legislature's most corrupt elements?
To "Bye Bye! | 4:01 p.m." | 5:18 p.m. Nov. 3, 2009
Bye Bye! | 4:01 p.m.
If YOU were a lawyer would YOU be OK with sharing your firms client list with the media?
It doesn't have to mean you are representing anyone BAD or anything. What it means is... SOME clients won't come to your firm if they know that fact is going to be announced on the nightly news.
Nothing to do with inpropriety... just the way businesses work. They don't like the competition knowing who they work with, who represents them, etc.
Consulting companies like, oh well I'm not going to name names, but if they know working with you means their client lists, etc will get leaked... They won't do business with you. Period.
And it doesn't mean you did anything wrong. It's just part of the confidentiality they OWE to their clients.
But a few redneck Utahs who think they know ALL about how everybody should do business want to pass legislation that would prevent people who work for a living serving in public office (remember, the legislature's a part time gig... these guys have REAL jobs).
If YOU were a lawyer would YOU be OK with sharing your firms client list with the media?
It doesn't have to mean you are representing anyone BAD or anything. What it means is... SOME clients won't come to your firm if they know that fact is going to be announced on the nightly news.
Nothing to do with inpropriety... just the way businesses work. They don't like the competition knowing who they work with, who represents them, etc.
Consulting companies like, oh well I'm not going to name names, but if they know working with you means their client lists, etc will get leaked... They won't do business with you. Period.
And it doesn't mean you did anything wrong. It's just part of the confidentiality they OWE to their clients.
But a few redneck Utahs who think they know ALL about how everybody should do business want to pass legislation that would prevent people who work for a living serving in public office (remember, the legislature's a part time gig... these guys have REAL jobs).
To all fo you saying good | 6:18 p.m. Nov. 3, 2009
riddance to this guy and other "extremist" politicians- who put thses
peolpe in office for the past 30 years? You the voters. Get off the blog network
and go out and vote. If you want change, then do something about it.
Good riddance | 7:58 p.m. Nov. 3, 2009
"Opponents of the initiative, mostly GOP state legislators, have said
before that if Utahns adopt the far-reaching law, some current legislators may
retire rather than undergo the new code of conduct, which they say violates the
privacy of legislators, especially in business dealings."
Good riddance and don't let the door hit you on the way out since anyone who considers their privacy to be more important than the right of Utahns to know what their legislators are up to doesn't deserve to be in office.
I hope this forces a lot of them to resign so that others who have more ethics will run for and hold the public trust. Shame on these legislators for their comments.
Good riddance and don't let the door hit you on the way out since anyone who considers their privacy to be more important than the right of Utahns to know what their legislators are up to doesn't deserve to be in office.
I hope this forces a lot of them to resign so that others who have more ethics will run for and hold the public trust. Shame on these legislators for their comments.
This cinches it | 8:17 p.m. Nov. 3, 2009
I was on the fence about this initiative until Hillyard said he would have to
resign if it passes. Anyone who has been in the legislature for 30 years should
resign, and if this is what it takes to make it happen, I'm voting for it.
So wait a minute... | 8:36 p.m. Nov. 3, 2009
If an ethics law passes. a politician would be out of a job? Who'da thunk?
Ethics are to politicians what team objectivity is to athletes.
Change lawyer to doctor | 8:39 p.m. Nov. 3, 2009
Those thinking a law firm should open its books, ask yourself if you'd be
cool with your doctor opening his books in the same way you're asking
Hillyard to. If a doctor-legislator had to open her books and tell who paid her
more than X dollars in a given year and you had an expensive surgery, would you
want that public. Read the whole ethics initiative and ask if you'd reveal
your and your family's finances the way it's required. Then ask
yourself whether your extended family, like parents and cousins would give you
their information to share. If not, don't sign the petition.
Forrest | 9:00 p.m. Nov. 3, 2009
Law firms use client lists all the time, to advertise how good they are, and the
kind of law they practice. Its how they hustle more work. That is generally
not the problem. Its just knowing who is representing who, or who is working
with who, that is interesting to one's constituents. And if the firm he is
a partner in is solvent, or not likely to provide much security for someone
seeking extra compensation as a legislator elsewhere.
"Fundamental Change" | 9:39 p.m. Nov. 3, 2009
Have you read the initiative - not just the executive summary, but the entire
initiative? If you do, you will likely have some real questions about its
merits. I know of supporters who after they read it withdrew their support.
I was at one of the public meetings where the fundamental question was asked UEG what other states have a similar initiative and was it effective. The UEG presenters could not answer the question. A follow up question was asked what standards are they measuring ethical behavior against and what other state legislature do they consider ethical and why. Again they were unable to answer the question. I don't want change for change sake. I want effective change where people understand the real consequences of their actions. I have had enough miss managed "change" by the Federal government. This initiative is not the answer.
I was at one of the public meetings where the fundamental question was asked UEG what other states have a similar initiative and was it effective. The UEG presenters could not answer the question. A follow up question was asked what standards are they measuring ethical behavior against and what other state legislature do they consider ethical and why. Again they were unable to answer the question. I don't want change for change sake. I want effective change where people understand the real consequences of their actions. I have had enough miss managed "change" by the Federal government. This initiative is not the answer.
Hmmm. | 10:04 p.m. Nov. 3, 2009
I oppose the Ethics foolishness some are pushing.
However, if it causes Lyle Hillyard to resign, maybe it is not all bad.
However, if it causes Lyle Hillyard to resign, maybe it is not all bad.
If he's out if it passes... | 12:29 a.m. Nov. 4, 2009
then he should already be gone.
Hope his constituents read this article.
Hope his constituents read this article.
Conflicts. | 5:25 a.m. Nov. 4, 2009
I think Hillyard is exaggerating his position and comments just to defeat common
sense ethics and morals from our government.
To answer 'fundamental change' questions to the UEG, it doesn't matter what other states have, we are setting a new standard. And ethics and moral standards are explained in many books on the subject. Accountability, openness, right and wrong, are just a few of the main points of ethical standards.
In the past, ethics and morals were explained in a persons upbringing but now they need it defined. This initiative puts in to law and defines some ethics and morals for the politicians that are confused about their duties and responsibilities to their elected positions.
We don't need lawyers running government, we need the people and general public running government. Lawyers should not be allowed to be elected in to representative positions, it creates a major conflict in the separation of the judicial and administrative government.
Government was never meant to foster lifetime jobs in its leadership. That's why we have elections. As public servants their lives, business, and conflicts are not private.
To answer 'fundamental change' questions to the UEG, it doesn't matter what other states have, we are setting a new standard. And ethics and moral standards are explained in many books on the subject. Accountability, openness, right and wrong, are just a few of the main points of ethical standards.
In the past, ethics and morals were explained in a persons upbringing but now they need it defined. This initiative puts in to law and defines some ethics and morals for the politicians that are confused about their duties and responsibilities to their elected positions.
We don't need lawyers running government, we need the people and general public running government. Lawyers should not be allowed to be elected in to representative positions, it creates a major conflict in the separation of the judicial and administrative government.
Government was never meant to foster lifetime jobs in its leadership. That's why we have elections. As public servants their lives, business, and conflicts are not private.
Last 30 years | 6:47 a.m. Nov. 4, 2009
During the last 30 years term limits were passed, then ammended (abolished)
before they could take effect. If they had not been scrapped this guy would
have been out already.
It is time for the legislature to meet the same ethical standards as other state employees. They do not like limits to their currently uncontrolled power (power corrupts and complete control corrupts completely). Congressmen, presidents and other elected officials step in and out of their career and open their books, so can our legislators.
The biggest problem in Utah is we have no checks or balances. The Republican party runs the governor, the legislature and appoints county party chairs to the bench. They do their works in secret, not in the light of day and the people do not get a representative government.
It is time to shine the light of day on the whole process. We should never have closed door caucuses or other secret combinations. If this initiative shines that light, I am all for it.
It is time for the legislature to meet the same ethical standards as other state employees. They do not like limits to their currently uncontrolled power (power corrupts and complete control corrupts completely). Congressmen, presidents and other elected officials step in and out of their career and open their books, so can our legislators.
The biggest problem in Utah is we have no checks or balances. The Republican party runs the governor, the legislature and appoints county party chairs to the bench. They do their works in secret, not in the light of day and the people do not get a representative government.
It is time to shine the light of day on the whole process. We should never have closed door caucuses or other secret combinations. If this initiative shines that light, I am all for it.
CTC | 7:21 a.m. Nov. 4, 2009
All this talk about "ethics reform" is amusing. People act like the
State Legislature is full of a bunch of reprobates. I have worked closely with
Democrats and Republicans in both houses and they are exceptional people. Lyle
Hillyard has done great things for the state and has nothing to hide.
Change Now | 8:43 a.m. Nov. 4, 2009
Utah is one of the top state for how well it is run. AAA bond rating, low
unemployment, stable economy. Our politicians must be doing something wrong. I
want change now.
Well, | 9:41 a.m. Nov. 4, 2009
The state government is actually run by the executive branch, not by legislative
opponents of the ethics initiative. They are "part time" legislators.
Robert | 9:53 a.m. Nov. 4, 2009
My impression is that those who are behind this initiative simply don't
trust the average citizen. We already have a very good way to enforce ethical
standards on our legislators -- the ballot box.
Why isn't that good enough? Do we really need another government organization to make ethical judgements for us?
Why isn't that good enough? Do we really need another government organization to make ethical judgements for us?
Jack | 11:04 a.m. Nov. 4, 2009
I would somewhat disagree with Robert, who writes that "we already have a
very good way to enforce ethical stards on our legislators - the ballot
box." The incumbant legislator has such an advantage in protecting their
incumbancy (automatic delegates, hugh war chests, etc) that the "average
citizen" and the challenger is really put at a disadvantage.
To "Conflicts. | 5:25 a.m." | 1:49 p.m. Nov. 4, 2009
Conflicts. | 5:25 a.m.
This isn't just about Law Firms. I work for a software company, and I have learned the utmost care must be given to insure that the companies who use our services, and the clients they work with be protected (and NONE of them are law firms).
Before they will do business with you, you have to pass an audit that insures that your servers are sufficiently protected, everything stored in a database is encrypted, all communications that go outside are encrypted and can't be hacked or seen by others. It's VERY important, and any deficiency in security of their information will absolutely mean they don't do business with you.
If during the audit I have to confess that all information including what companies do business with us and who THEIR clients are will be open to the public... We would lose all our customers.
So I have the choice of firing any employee who becomes subject to these laws... Or have the whole company go out of business.
I'm suprised there are so many Utahns who either don't understand this... or don't care.
This isn't just about Law Firms. I work for a software company, and I have learned the utmost care must be given to insure that the companies who use our services, and the clients they work with be protected (and NONE of them are law firms).
Before they will do business with you, you have to pass an audit that insures that your servers are sufficiently protected, everything stored in a database is encrypted, all communications that go outside are encrypted and can't be hacked or seen by others. It's VERY important, and any deficiency in security of their information will absolutely mean they don't do business with you.
If during the audit I have to confess that all information including what companies do business with us and who THEIR clients are will be open to the public... We would lose all our customers.
So I have the choice of firing any employee who becomes subject to these laws... Or have the whole company go out of business.
I'm suprised there are so many Utahns who either don't understand this... or don't care.
Well... | 9:38 p.m. Nov. 4, 2009
Goodbye then.
Re: from conflicts.. | 5:41 a.m. Nov. 5, 2009
I'm not saying lawyers should disclose a lawyers client list. I'm
saying if this is in conflict to ethical government then they don't belong
in elected representative positions.
As I said before, we must keep the judicial and legislative government separate and lawyers don't have the ability to think as representatives without inappropriate judicial mindset. They spend most of their life practicing judicial thinking and its very much a conflict of these separations of powers. Lawyers should stay in the judicial side of government as their avocation has been.
As I said before, we must keep the judicial and legislative government separate and lawyers don't have the ability to think as representatives without inappropriate judicial mindset. They spend most of their life practicing judicial thinking and its very much a conflict of these separations of powers. Lawyers should stay in the judicial side of government as their avocation has been.
Add your comment
Comments are monitored. Any comments found to be abusive, offensive, off-topic, misrepresentative, more than 200 words or containing URLs will not be posted.
Words Remaining
E-mail address: For internal use only. We may want to contact you to publish your comment (not your e-mail address) in the newspaper or for a separate story idea.
Jeffrey D. Allred, Deseret News
Kim Burningham, David Irvine, Sen. Lyle Hillyard and Rep. Lorie Fowlke during debate.
- Preps of the week 7:45 p.m.
- Brad Rock: Rock On 7:40 p.m.
- Fall sports academic all-state 7:25 p.m.
- Welcome home RSL photo gallery 7:13 p.m.
- Truck driver dies in rollover 6:34 p.m.
- Girls basketball rankings 6:31 p.m.
- Boys basketball rankings 6:26 p.m.
- Nordqvist wins at LPGA 6:15 p.m.
- S.L. could up fees to rec facilities 5:55 p.m.
- Utah GOP opposes ethics initiative 5:45 p.m.
- Real Champions
- Bronco, Kyle rubber match
- Protests against Phoenix LDS temple
- RSL wins MLS Cup on penalty kicks
- BYU's Lamb, Jorgensen reprimanded
- Plenty on line for rivalry game
- Time for big matchups in WAC, MWC
- BCS at-large bids up for grabs
- Hall, Johnson matchup key
- Is talking about religion taboo?
- Buttars wants to limit gay rights laws
214 - Glenn Beck to enter politics?212
- RSL wins MLS Cup on penalty kicks193
- Palin plans tour stop in Utah178
- BYU records with win132
- Palin's book shows she's unqualified131
- Bronco, Kyle rubber match124
- Officer cleared in Cardall Taser case103
- BYU cuts Women's Research Inst.103
- Jazz finally win in San Antonio99
Are you a small business owner who can't afford a holiday party this year?
Latest comments
Cut Blocks are legal, period. Ever seen a running back try to take on a D...
Hatch deserves to be censured for the HOLY WAR comment. It would be an even...
In 2006 and 2007 when BYU was winning MWC titles yet needed LUCKY to pull out...
@Anonymous 1:34 p.m.: "Go (sic) she ran a business poorly." She ran the...
I guess it's rivalry week, because all the comments I've read today have been...
If I may offer a bit of education to the misinformed... An LDS meeting house...
Springville should be #1 in 4A.
"I about fell out of my chair when I read Anon 9:06's post that "liberals...
"If you live in Utah, you are likely to be surrounded by mormons. " You...
Hey, to Mr. "Important Statistic," do your homework next time -- if you can...
Advertisements
In keeping with a longstanding Deseret News policy of not publishing stories the day before or the day of the election, no comments will be posted on election stories Monday or Tuesday. The rationale for this policy being applied to comments is to prevent the last-minute dissemination of untrue allegations against a candidate that could influence voters.