H.B70 A Bigger Deal Than Most Thought: By Guadalupe Rivera

The air quality in Utah is without a doubt the worst in the winter, which affects our daily lives more than we know. The poor air quality will negatively affect our health in the long term. People with asthma suffer from the effects of polluted air faster than others, since whenever the pollution in the air is high they have a hard time breathing.

Salt Lake City’s particle pollution in a 24 hour period is an average of 22 parts per million. This number is just two less than Los Angeles, California which has a particle pollution of 24 ppm.

The bill H.B.70 would create a task force to look at with Utah’s poor air quality. It is much like the already existing one that deals with water issues. The bill would create a 13 member committee, which would be made up of five Utah senators and eight representatives. The members of the task force will be appointed by the speaker and the majority president, and would review laws so that they can suggest changes that need to be made to improve the air quality in Utah.

The bill will be having its 3^rd reading in the House of Representatives sometime next week, where the representatives are to vote whether to pass it on to the Senate. The task force will suggest changes or improvements that need to be done on existing laws to help clean our air. This does not mean that the laws will be changed by the task force, but that they will be giving suggestions and opinions and then the House will decide whether or not to apply the changes. Representative Patrice Arent, the main sponsor for this bill, is unsure of what laws will be changed or fixed.

“It is premature to determine what the outcome of the study might be,” Arent said.

The bill has many supporters, including Questar, Utah Moms for Clean Air, Breathe Utah, Wasatch Clean Air Coalition, and Utah Physicians for a Healthy Environment, Overstock.com, and the Utah Medical Association.

Besides these, there are also the citizens who wish to be able to breath clean air.

The big question is: what can be done about the poor air quality? Some people think that it is out of our hands, but others think that we can all help a little bit at a time.

Sol Maria Diaz-Vera, a sophomore at West High School, was asked what could be done to help clean our air, and she answered “Maybe if each person told themselves, ‘today I’m going to reduce pollution,' it’d be better.”

I completely agree with her. If we all help a little then there will be a huge difference.

Another major question on this matter is whether or not this is a moral or political issue. For some it may seem like it’s more of a moral issue, since it’s depending on whether or not we care about the planet that all of us live on, but for others it is a political matter. Tony Yapias is a Utah activist and a columnist at the weekly newspaper El Estandar. He sees this issue as being both a political and a moral matter: “I think it’s a moral issue, first because we have to be good stewards of this land so that your kids and the future generations can enjoy the land. Everything is political because that is the only way to protect it.”

Governor Gary R. Herbert recently said that he had a plan to get Utah’s air clean up called U-CAIR. The plan would consist of running campaigns to get the citizens of Utah involved in cleaning the air. This plan will not make it a requirement to help improve the air quality. In my opinion if it's not mandatory then people will not participate. There needs to be a better solution if our air quality is to improve.

Protecting our environment is a big deal, whether it’s our water, land, or air. We all need to start doing something to clean our air and not just leave it to the people with power. It will be best if the task force does strengthen some existing laws since it’s in all of our interest to have clean air, at whatever the cost.

Two Bills Concerning Applied Technology Colleges

By Van Le

“Beginning with the 2011-12 school year, a student served under this section in a regional applied technology college shall continue to be counted in the average daily membership of the sending school district or charter school.” (House bill 258)

In the starting of the current Legislative Session, two bills contest against each other in the effort to affect Utah's funding and enrollment for applied technology colleges. If passed, Curriculum Options for Secondary School Students (HB 206) will increase student enrollment in trade and technical colleges while the Education Funding Amendments (HB 258) works to decrease funding for these vocational programs. The passing of one or both of these bills will no doubt have an impact on not only the funding for applied technology colleges, but also the students enrolling in these programs.

Sponsored by Representative John Dougall, Curriculum Options for Secondary School Students (HB 206) proposes to allow secondary school students to fulfill their high school CTE (Career and Technical Education) requirement at a regional applied technology college. As of right now, Utah law states that only school districts can decide where a student may fulfill his CTE requirements. In an interview, Representative Dougall stated that the motivation for sponsoring HB 206 comes from his belief that the parents, not the school districts, are in charge of their children's education, “I come from the perspective of where do you expand the choice for students, . . . and I don't like the concept that a school district can hold that kid hostage.” In its introduced form, HB206 gave the authority to decide to the students or their parents. Later, the bill was amended by the House Education Committee to state that the parents must always be involved in the decision-making process.

Each year, the state appropriates fundings for a school based on the number of students currently enrolled at the school. Education Funding Amendments (HB 258), sponsored by Representative Kraig Powell, modifies the provisions for education state funding.

Representative Powell's bill lets secondary schools that currently send its students to applied technology colleges retain those students in the schools' head counts, which means they will also get to keep the funding allocated based on that head count. When asked of his opinion on HB 258, Representative Dougall (the sponsor of HB 206) responded that, although he was not originally aware of the bill, “From my perspective, we should be counting the students that are actually attending the school. We should not be counting kids that are not attending the school.”

It is clear that these two bills are in conflict with each other. The proposals of both bills center around one key commonality: the Utah statute that gives school districts the sole authority to regulate where a student might go to fulfill his CTE requirements. This state law is a key component central to the future enactment of HB 258 if the bill were to pass. If HB 206 were to be successful in transferring the authority from the school districts to the parents, HB 258 will become obsolete, and its language need to be re-drafted because school districts no longer have the power to send its students to applied technology college. Currently, either bills meets little opposition in the House. If one or both bill passes, however, the state will need to think beyond the legal language and seriously consider future funding for vocational programs. Last year alone, funding for programs that let high school students enroll in applied technology colleges experienced a five million dollar decrease. With the passage of HB 206, applied technology colleges will surely encounter a surge in enrollment. Without more funding to accommodate the influx of new students, it is hard to say that these institution will be able to maintain the same quality of education. HB 206's purpose toward providing better CTE options for students is then defeated. While HB 258 will have less of a direct effect on trade school enrollment, its retaining state funding from applied technology colleges will no doubt leave the same negative impact on the quality of education that these career and technical institutions offer.

A Shift in Utah Adoption Laws

by Emmylou Manwill & Tillie McInnis

Is it safe to assume that only a married couple can properly raise a child? If so, Utah’s current adoption laws are flawless. Yet Senator Ross Romero sees a big issue with this outdated perception; he frames his new Adoption by a Co-Parent Bill as a means of expanding all parental rights, but it's apparent that it would benefit the LGBTQ community. Romero’s proposed alterations would allow any couples that are co-habitating but either choose not to marry, or are unable to marry (i.e. a lesbian couple living together or even two brothers living together), the right to designate a partner as a “co-parent"--giving this person the right to legally adopt and help raise the child.

So far, Fox 13 stated that this bill will “allow gay couples, or any unmarried couple living together, to adopt.” Statements like this are misleading to the public because the bill clearly has stringent requirements. First off, the un-married, co-habitant spouse of a parent may not adopt a child unless the child has only one legal parent, who must also willingly join the petition for the person to adopt the child. In addition, the adopter must prove they have previously developed a parental relationship with the child and contributed to the “emotional or financial well-being” of the child, and of course, the decision must be in the best interest of the child.

This causes one to wonder why the media is framing the story in such a way? It could be due to a simple misunderstanding of the bill or a belief that this bill is of little importance due to a similar bill’s failure to pass in previous legislative sessions. Or it could be an attempt at stirring up opposition to any possibility of advancement in gay rights.

Ultimately, S.B. 126 will not allow any co-habitating couple to adopt any child; the child would have to already belong to one member of the couple without another active parent engaged in the child’s life. This would be one small, bittersweet step for the LGBTQ community, though the bill lacks the means to allow a gay couple to apply for adoption through an adoption agency.

In practicality, this bill would be more beneficial to female couples in that one could give birth and the spouse could adopt said child. For male couples, it would prove slightly more difficult by bringing in the legality of surrogates, if they were to choose such a route. Nonetheless, this bill is perfect for all single parents in co-habitating relationships.

Although Romero is not convinced S.B. 126 will pass this year, he says it is important to keep the dialogue going in hopes that one day it will pass. With a continual effort from the Utah Legislature, there’s a chance that within the next few years gay couples will be able to adopt without such strict limitations. This is a step in the right direction for LGBTQ rights, but this bill is nowhere near as extensive as it needs to be.

A Little Help for Utah High Schools - by Nick Ramos

With an estimated ration of one high school counselor for every 300-plus students, it is needless to state that high schools all over Utah need help. With the presentation of HB 65 by Rep. Patrice Arent (D-Salt Lake), these high school counselors might get the help they need.

The “College and Career Counseling for High School Students” bill will create a pilot program for the next 3 years which will give high school seniors much needed encouragement and help getting ready for the transition to high school education.

In the House Education Committee meeting, held on January 27, 2012, Rep. Arent admitted that she saw the necessity to create this bill when she was assigned to a task force to track women’s college completion. There, she realized that Utah students have the talent, but lack the information they need to go on to higher education. She said that many of them are overwhelmed by the admissions process and financial aid paperwork, particularly those in rural high schools.

As explained in the bill text, the pilot program will deal with this issue by hiring 18 school counselor interns (Approximately 1 intern on average per 2.25 school districts, with charter schools considered as a school district) who will have specialized training to help students fill out the necessary paperwork and encourage them to pursue the best education possible.

These professionals can be hired by the school, or be interns from universities who “are getting their masters in high school counseling,” she said.

From my experience, the road to higher education can be a very difficult one. It’s not just about having good grades, but about giving students the confidence they need to seek a brighter future. Working with them from the moment they enter high school, instead of only in their last year, is critical. Also, HB 65 does not suggest that students have the work done for them, but merely gives counselors the time to adequately explain what needs to happen.

Overall, HB 65 has met a very positive response, but concerns still remain. The main one is that it requires money. Education has suffered some major cuts in the last few years, and it’s estimated that $800,000 more will have to be set aside to implement this program.

Responding to this question, Rep. Arent suggested that new money could come from outside grants, but the funding should not be reduced.

Another issue will be accountability. Since it is only a pilot program, it will be crucial to know how well the program performed by measuring the progress of the students affected against those who did not take part in the program.

No one seems to disagree that the problems highlighted by this bill are real. School counselors are currently trying their best to help students obtain all the help they need, but they are simply overworked.

The proposed bill, HB 65, will ease the stress on high school counselors and provide kids with more opportunities. With this bill leading the way, education is getting the attention it needs.

Congrats to the new MAA 2012 Legislative Interns

We are pleased to announce the new interns for the 2012 Mestizo Arts & Activism Legislative Internship Program.


2011 High School Interns

Maricela Hernandez, West High School
Sujey Rodriguez, West High School
Viri Nareja, West High School
Guadalupe Rivera, West high School
Enrique Jimenez, West High School
Jonathan Soto, West High School
Jennica Trujillo, West High School
Hugo Lopez, West High School
Sergio Brito, West High School
Daniela Chaires, West High School

University of Utah Honors College Social Justice Scholar Interns:
Pamela Portacarrero
Nick Ramos
Logan Froerer
Rebekah Jung
Van Le
Emmylou Manwill
José Hernandez
Alonso Reyna
Liliana Martinez
Tillie McInnis
Geneva Thompson

The MAA legislative Internship provides high school students with a hands-on working and learning opportunity in a legislative environment. Students learn leadership responsibilities and develop an in-depth understanding of both formal and informal aspects of the legislative process. Students work with faculty and student advisors from the University of Utah who will mentor them as they identify and track bills, work with community groups, and participate in committee meetings and other aspects of the legislative process. Student interns participate in bill analysis and tracking, spot and in-depth research, drafting of position statements, liaison work, lobbying, and liaison work.

Student interns write weekly analysis and reviews of bills they are tracking, which they post here on the MAA blog. Check back frequently to read our stories and analysis of bills and policies.

Anti-federal sentiment really dying down? -- by Pamela Portocarrero

Utah's anti-federal sentiment seems to be dying down. Or is it?

During the past two years, Utah has overwhelmingly introduced "statements," officially in the form of resolutions, explicitly telling the U.S. federal government to leave states alone. Such examples included a bill exempting Utah from implementing any type of federal health care reform, and prohibiting the national government from assigning federally protected land within our state.

So what's in store for this year's session? Surprisingly, just the opposite, at least for now.

Senate Bill 25, sponsored by Senator Van Tassell (R-Vernal), aims at making some changes to the state issued drivers license and identification card by implementing the Federal REAL ID Act of 2005. This act was signed into law by President George W. Bush back in 2005 and mandated that all states implement new drivers licenses with features that will be identical throughout all states.

The purpose behind this act was to increase security at airports and federal buildings. However, even though this may sound like a step in the right direction regarding national security, Utah did not think so two years ago in the 2010 session. Then, Representative Stephen Sandstrom (R-Orem) sponsored House Bill 234, which prohibited the state from enacting the REAL ID Act, citing arguments that it would create unnecessary expenses for the citizens of Utah, and that the federal government was in violation of the federalism principles stated in the 10th amendment by mandating all states to implement this act.

It was a perfect example of the very common anti-federal sentiment that has been reigning over Capitol Hill for the past couple of years.

Fast forward two years and we have Senator Van Tassell wanting to implement this federal mandate. Is the state of Utah finally agreeing to follow federal law, or is there an additional motive for such change?

Maybe Senator Van Tassel is trying to turn around Utah's anti-federal thinking by complying with its laws, but that still does not clearly explain the remaining provisions attached to Senate Bill 25. For example, the bill would not allow a person to have in his or her possession both a drivers license and identification card.

While we await some more clarifications on this bill one thing is certain: the introduction of Senate Bill 25 reminded us that Utah's legislators can curse the federal government's involvement in our state one year, and welcome its presence in our laws the next.

Applications available for 2012 Legislative Intern program

Interested in politics and/or journalism? Want to learn about the legislative process through a hands-on experience while tracking bills and interacting with lobbyists, legislators, community activists, and others? Join the Mestizo Arts & Activism legislative internship where you can do all this, and possibly even earn high school credit (depending on your school).

The Mestizo Arts & Activism Legislative Internship Program provides high school students with a hands-on working and learning opportunity in a legislative environment. Students learn leadership responsibilities and develop an in-depth understanding of both formal and informal aspects of the legislative process. Students work with faculty and students from the University of Utah Honors College who will mentor them as they identify and track bills, work with community groups, write policy analysis briefs and journalism stories, and participate in committee meetings and other aspects of the legislative process. Student interns participate in bill analysis and tracking, spot and in-depth research, drafting of position statements, liaison work, and lobbying.

Student interns will meet at the capital on a regular basis during the legislative session from 9:00-10:30 am weekdays (this falls in the 2nd period slot for most schools in the Salt Lake Valley, so students will need to make arrangements for work release or an intern credit with their schools. We can assist with this if we do not already have something arranged with your school). Students may also need to attend specific committee meetings at 8:00 am or 2:00 pm as scheduled (as permitted by their regular school schedule). In addition they may also be required to attend community meetings or other community events as they relate to the bills that the student interns are tracking.

For more information, please contact Matt Bradley (mattbradley@honors.utah.edu, 792-5917)

Maa Legislative Intern App