Dan Liljenquist Town Hall meeting notes - 6/2/12

Dan Liljenquist held a Town Hall meeting in Provo tonight.  Here's some paraphrased highlights from it I tried writing down. Someone recorded it so hopefully that'll be out there later.  (UPDATE: Here's the link to the recording of the whole thing.) It started at 7:00 and I got there around 7:20. (Hopefully I didn't get anything inaccurate in typing.)

DAN SPEAKING:

There's nothing the Senate should be more aggressive about than the Justices and regulatory czars.

We have for too long blamed the Democrats. It's been Republicans and Democrats that got us here. If we're intent on just blaming the other party, we'll never get anything done.

I went to 16 states helping with pension reform issues. I'm most proud these were not partisan issues, these were reality issues. The debates were civil and objective. We've got to work together to get things done.

I have great reseect for Sen Hatch; he'll go down in history as one of our finest. But this is about the future.

Hatsh said he'll be chair of senate finance committee. Well, he made the same argument in 2006. He keeps saying we're almost there. I almost have enough power. If Hatch is not reelected, we'd have Mike Crapo as chair, he's BYU grad, solid conservative, voted against TARP, he'd make good long-term decisions. He's huge Mitt Romney supporter, as am I.

No one senator is a king no matter what seat they sit in. It takes 60 votes to get anything done.

Have you heard this: If we lose, we lose Hill Air Force Base? We found some campaign literature from 1976. Frank Moss #1 argument then was "If you lose me, you lose HAFB." Hatch was elected; we didn't lose HAFB. It is offensive to the men & women of HAFB to say one person stands between them and oblivion. It is politics of fear and it is not right. No one senator is too big to fail.

This race will come down to seniority, if the voters feel they're forced to vote for seniority and keep the same system in place, or if they can vote for someone new. In the last 7 years, there've been 49 new senators. About 10 more will be retiring soon. It's important to know that 60% of the senate is turning over; we haven't this kind of turnover since the 1970s. Hatch was committee chairman in first 4 years. That same turnover is happening now. What will get us to move forward is not relationship with Olympia Snowe, John Ensign, Ted Kennedy, etc. The future is Marco Rubio, Pat Toomey, Rand Paul, Ted Cruz, etc. I know these guys, these are the ones who lead the future of the senate, the future of this country, those relationships are being built now. We have just enough change to break through the logjam.

Time for questions.

QUESTION #1 - I emailed Hatch about an issue ten days before a crucial vote. I got response two months later and it wasn't even about what I'd asked. Actual question: Harry Reid has messed up badly. How will we structure the Senate Majority leadership rather than have stuff stuck in DC?

I want to focus on Utah as much as possible, be here most of the time. I hope you have chance to ask me directly. Hatch is hiding himself from most voters. Our debate is on radio on Friday June 15 at 9:00am on 1160. Say what you will about Obama, but he's done one thing with honesty. He has said "I do not need Congress." He goes executive order route. Congress has outsourced its job. Nancy Pelosi was never more honest than when she said "We have to pass a bill to find out what's in it." 81,000 pages of new laws and regulations not voted on, just decreed. He said he'll dare Congress to stop him. We've gone 3 years without budget. Becuz when we had GOP prez, we didn't try to rebalance things. We said its our turn to rewrite things. We're closer to having an Emperor becuz President can just decree and Congresss wont do its job.

1. Don't rubber stamp appointees. 2. No new fed regulation goes into effect until Congress approves it. Congress is built for playing defense. There is no bill so urgent you have to ram it through.

QUESTION #2 - Have you been in touch with Club for Growth?

Our preference is let us run our own race. There've been outside groups from both sides get in this race. We'll see what CFG decides, but we're running a grassroots campaign.

QUESTION #3 - Prez can affect most change. I'm for Mitt Romney, but he's endorsed Orrin Hatch. I assume Romney wants Orrin in for seniority. How would voting for you help Mitt over voting for Orrin?

Orrin came out for Romney in 1997. They have a deep relationship. They're friends. That's fine. He endorsed Hatch before I even got in the race. When Romney endorsed Hatch, who was in line to become Sen Finance Chair? Olympia Snowe. We've got to repeal ObamaCare. I don't begrudge Romney that at all, but it's important to know what he's endorsed. He's endorsed term limits. I will be big supporter of Mitt Romney. Crapo's next in line to chair committee; he's huge Romney guy. I can help.



You don't affect more change by reelecting someone whose votes the past 30 years got us into this mess. I'm running becuz he'd be chair, not despite of it. He's been on that committee 18 years; it didn't help. He helped pass Medicare Part-D. National health care w/o a way to pay for it.

QUESTION #4 - Senators should represent the states. Are you in favor of changing 17th Amendment?

I am. That's where we lost our way. One of those frustrating about serving in state senate is seeing what's coming on our way and some of it being sent to us by our own people. No Child Left Behind. If we had US senator working with legislature, we could stop these things. Founders wouldn't have set up six-year term for senators if they knew it'd turn into popular vote. Mike Lee said I know it's my role to work with state legislature. Hatch said "I don't report to you." That's why majority of UT senators support me.

QUESTION #5 - You talk about Romney. What about Ron Paul and his financial issues? How do you feel about Federal Reserve?

Congress has Constituional repsonsibility for finance. They've outsourced that to Fed Reserve. Who's loaning us that money? We have same debt-to-GDP ratio as Greece. They have Euro. They can't print their own money. We can. If Fed Reserve wasnt keeping rates artificially low, our rates would shoot up. It's the one thing keeping fed spending going. And yet, I think if we gave the power back to Congress, they'd probably print money. Congress won't act. They wont balance the budget. There should be full audit of Federal Reserve. Our inflation rate this year, excluding cars and large appliances, is 8%. Everything's going up. Try finding a candy bar for under a $1 at a gas station. Congress won't do its job. I intend to change those programs.

QUESTION #6 - In terms of Fed, where they're talking about worldwide financing with euro, how would you help stop that?

We will review the charter, audit the Fed Reserve. We created autonomous group in 1913. They say its too complex, you dont want to know. I do want to know. I understand finance; it doesnt scare me.

QUESTION #7 - I'm a skeptic. The more I researched you, the more impressed I am. Do you know the amount of debt our Fed owns compared to 20 years ago?

About $8 trillion now. I dont know the percentages compared to 20 years ago, but it's gone up with quantitative easing. I was disturbed when China about 18 months ago, holding billions of dollars in short-term paper. They sold about 100 billion to 4 billion. They said when you print money, you've defaulted. Look at stock market. If you account for inflation, our purchasing power is no better than is was 3-4 years ago. They will set a new world currency. The international monetary system is based off the dollar but that will be not be the case down the road if we dont make changes.

Pimco (?) are smart investors, and they're shorting the dollar. Any dollar you put in treasury is devalued becuz we're printing money. People deserve a return on investment. Its a hidden tax on everyone in this economy.

QUESTION #8 - Where do you stand? In what year would you drive the deficit to zero? How aggressive will you fight to reduce the deficit?

Ten years optimistically. Here's the practical reality. The baby-boom generation who thought we put trillions away; we didn't. I think 50 years is too long, but we need to realize we're the largest economy in history and we're borrowing 10 cents for every dollar we spend. We have a $1.4 trillion deficit. Let me tell you how Bain would handle. First, fire the management team. We'd look at revenues and costs. I don't think we're undertaxed. Do we have a tax distribution problem? Yes. We need to remember, there shouldn't be such thing as too big to fail. TARP ripped us off. I'm not in favor of bailing out banks. I'd resintate Glass-Steagall. We'd put the wall back up between investment bansk (think Goldman Sachs) and deposit banks (think Wells Fargo).

The people who did well are trading on the margins. Pensions are hurt most. Ben Bernake said Fed has no authority to bail out states. Once states saw Congress not Fed would bail them out, they got serious about reform. It is not our job to nationalize risky behavior.

QUESTION #9 - Flat tax? Dept. of Education?

I'm in favor of fair tax, consumption tax. People are nervous about moving that forward. If we move forward with natl consumtion tax, they'll slap fed income tax on top of that. We've used tax code as welfare. People get tax returned when they havent paid taxes at all. Stop playing favorites with tax code. Right now you can go to Congress and get your own special tax break, like GE. I am determined to get rid of loopholes. Get rid of exceptions. Make taxes predictable and stable.

As to Dept. of Education, there's no purpose for it. No reason for Natl D o Educ. I saw that our own Davis HS was fined $15,000 for having a soda machine on during lunch. That's amazing. The Fed govt is creeping into every aspect of schools. NCLB, Common Core, when people start handing out money, we get blackmailed by our own money. The family is the best Dept of Edu., and the state is the backup.

Thank you for coming; let me wrap up and give you some hope. I am so optimistic. I am an economist. Politics is not the art of the possible. It consists of choosing between the disastrous and the inpalatable. We need to do hard things.

I said I had to reform pensions. I literally had a Senator pat me on the head and say "Good luck with that." Even though I had 4500 people protesting me, we did it anyway. I run into people here and there who really dislike me for that. But it was neat to see that you people in this state saw that we had to do something. We've given courage to other states, and they're fixing their problems. When we face reality, face the disastrous, we can fight it and fix it. I need three things from you in this race. I need your vote, a little of your time, go to DanForUtah.com, get people involved. We need a little of your financial support. We're up on TV now; we're going to stay there. With your vote, we can win this race.

Afterwards he answered individual questions. Here's some of what I remember (because I asked some of them)

- Against extending copyright any farther than we are. It's getting ridiculous.

- Against SOPA/PIPA. Six hours after he made a statement about being against it, Hatch came out against it, even though he co-sponsored it. Hatch has a lot of friends in Hollywood and music industry, so we need to keep on top of internet censorship bills.

- Against extending Patriot Act, against the NDAA.

- Would vote to repeal Sarbanes-Oxley.

- As part of getting rid of too big to fail, he'd not only bring back Glass-Steagall but one idea is to say to the big banks, "Comply, or we'll pull FDIC backing." But he needs to think more on that one, how exactly he'd tackle getting the big banks so they're no longer too big to fail.

- Supports the lawsuit to get some of Utah's lands back from the Feds.

- We need to reform and open up legal immigration, make it easier for people to emigrate here.




So there you have it. Hopefully someday I'll be able to find a Hatch event I can attend. I knew about the Dippin' Dots thing he had this morning, but I never got the postcard.

I also had a chance to talk briefly with John Dougall, running for State Auditor. Seems like a good guy. I've read some of his stuff, and right now, he's my vote, but I will make a concerted effort to get to the open house at Spanish Fork High School on June 14.  Dougall and Auston Johnson will be there, as well as attorney general candidates Sean Reyes and John Swallow.

The NDAA of 2012

And now, some positive Mike Lee news.

S. 1867, aka the National Defense Authorization Act of 2012, passed the Senate 93-7.  Buried in there, it further sabotages the 4th Amendment.  Here's the bill.

Sen. Orring Hatch voted for it.
Sen. Mike Lee was one of the seven to vote against it.

Mike Lee forgiven for about $250,000 in short-sale of house

Not long ago, word came out that Senator Mike Lee did a short-sale on his house.  Now I'd heard from others that becoming a senator was a massive paycut for him, or so it was explained to me this way.

But now we know it sold for almost $400,00 less than he'd bought it for.  So much did he actually walk from?  About $250,000.  JP Morgan Chase forgave him about quarter of a million dollars.  The majority of people who are upside-down in their homes wouldn't be able to get forgiven $25,000 in a short-sale, but a sitting senator gets this much? It looks like special-treatment from a big bank to a sitting senator.  Remember when JP Morgan reported they'd lost $2 billion?  We know how some of it was lost.

Whenever Lee lectures on fiscal responsibility, the subject of real estate had better not ever come up again.

Reyes & Swallow on KSL's Sunday Edition

Richard Piatt will moderate. (He's one of my favorite reporters.)

JOHN SWALLOW - This is a critical time in our state. I'm a conservative, and that's the real difference between the two of us. I led on repealing ObamaCare; Sean thought we should wait. I led on regaining our lands; Sean thought we should wait and try a different approach. Utah needs an AG with conservative values. That's why I should be elected.

(Swallow came out swinging this time.)

SEAN REYES - The office of AG is critical to the state to defend freedom and families. The AG is the lawyer for the state. My vision is turn the office of AG back into a law office for the people. I'm not a fan of the unduly influences by politics, by lobbyists, and what I want to see is a law office accountable to the people. I'm not a career lobbyist, I'm not a career fundraiser, I'm a career lawyer.

(I do think the more people realize that Swallow was a lobbyist for the payday loan companies, and that Swallow's appointment to the AG office was after all the fundraising he did for Shurtleff, the more they'll look to see what Reyes has to offer.)

Piatt asks what specific leadership qualities would you bring to the AG office.

SWALLOW - I have experience in the AG office. Leadership is about having a vision, it's not just about being a lawyer and logging billable hours.

REYES - Being a seasoned, experienced lawyer is an important part of being a leader. I've been a leader in civic and community teams, some bigger than the AG office.

Piatt - What would you change?

REYES - The office needs to be less political, less beholden to special interests, to lobbyists. I'm not a career lobbyist, not a career fundraiser. I'm a career leader, and that's what the office needs right now.

SWALLOW - I'd like to change the political nature of the job. I have experience in the AG office, in the legislature, I've worked with the governor, but I'd like to deal with policy issues behind the scenes, not as much in the public light. We've led the fight on getting back our public lands.

Piatt - Will this be a non-partisan office?

REYES - It is a partisan race, it's set up that way, but a lot of the functions are non-partisan. I liken it to a firefighter. If someone's house is on fire, they care most about the experience and ability of the firefighter, not his party. The AG should have the best record of winning cases, fighting cases in court.

SWALLOW - I've been leading the largest case in the history of the state, the ObamaCare case. I cannot divorce myself from my conservative principles and values. My conservative bias will come through as AG.

(he's smarmier when he's more comfortable)

Piatt - So you're saying you will keep it a partisan office?

SWALLOW - No, but I will always be a Republican and conservative at heart and my decisions will be based on my core beliefs.

REYES - The AG needs to be independent; he is the voice for the people and in many cases is the last line of defense for the people.

Piatt - Mark Shurtleff stepped out a bit; he defended Eric Holder in the fast and furious case for instance. Does that mean you disagree with Shurtleff about taking positions against the GOP line?

SWALLOW - Not at all. My record will show I'm able to be independent from anyone I disagree with. I have the courage to stand on my own. If and when I disagree with the legislature, i will let them know. I'll do so behind the scenes.

REYES - The approach is better when done behind the scenes. The governor and legislature appreciate that. That said, but if there's an issue I care about, or something the AG office can shine a light on, like domestic abuse, I would use the office in a more public way.

Piatt - What about the selection of attorneys to represent outside of Utah?

REYES - As long as it's an open process. Could apply to 10th Amendment cases, could be large liability cases.

SWALLOW - Generally speaking, I'd like all to stay in-house to save taxpayer dollars. We have specific rules as to how to do it.

Piatt - How far should Utah go in prosecuting polygamy?

SWALLOW - The AG office doesn't pursue what happens between consenting adults, but when there's abuse or fraud or teen victims, that's when we'll step in.

REYES - I would prosecute polygamy. It's not my highest priority, but I would go after those committing teen rape, predators like Warren Jeffs. My focus would be on protecting women and children and going after tax fraud.

Piatt - How far should the state's roll be in illegal immigration?

REYES - I didn't support HB116 because it went too far, but I would support going after more identity theft cases, background checks for those arrested for serious crimes, that's an appropriate use of our state police power. We need to do something. I'd support E-Verify. I'd push the feds to come up with national solution.

SWALLOW - It is a federal issue, but we have to deal with the consequences. As AG I'll be ever stronger on that issue.

Piatt - Closing remarks.

SWALLOW - I'm running for this office because I believe in this office. I have support of conservatives because I'm conservative. No one needs to wonder how I will run. I stand on my conservative record. I'm a conservative. I'll lead with conservative integrity. I conservatively thank you for your conservative vote.

REYES - I appreciate the opportunity. I'm the most qualified candidate for the AG office. I've done more representing in court and that's why so many legal leaders support me. I'm proud of my conservative credentials. I'm not running for Lobbyist General, I'm running for Attorney General. Please go to my website http://www.SeanReyes.com

Very brief debate.

If this was the only one I'd seen and I didn't know anything about these candidates, I would have said it was close and my mind would not be made up by this. But because I have seen their other debate and know a little something about each, edge to Reyes.

Kudos for the two men to meet on TV and debate and help educate voters. A fine example to all Utah politicians.  (Looking at you, Orrin!)

You can watch it here.

Calling Orrin Hatch's Office

I did my part, called up Orrin Hatch's office and asked for a debate. I was told it had never really been part of his plan and that they had more constituents calling them asking him not to debate than to debate, said Hatch constituents say Liljenquist supporters are bullies ("not us saying that, it's constituents") but he shouldn't give in if it's something he doesn't want to do.

I said that was like Goliath calling David a bully.

"Does he think he would lose a TV debate? Does he think he would win?"

"That's just not part of his campaign or what he had planned." "Why change it just because someone else says 'I want you to'?"

"So him saying he doesn't have time, that was never really the plan..."

"That's one of many, many reasons that has been said..." and then she said something about twisting any soundbite to make it the truth. "It's part of the game."

He'd rather meet the people one on one, he's gone to several Q&A events and he'll do more. I asked about his calendar, since his website doesn't mention any events. She said they hope to get that up Tuesday. Whoever I spoke to was very nice, though it sounded like the end of a long day for her.

For those who don't want them to debate, I would say this, "Then don't watch."

Sean Reyes-John Swallow Utah Attorney General GOP Debate

This is all paraphrased as I watch.

Opening Statements:

SEAN REYES - Thanks Stan Lockhart and Greg Peterson, excited about this debate and the Lincoln-Douglas format, and I apologize that Swallow changed his mind last night and refused to do an L/D style debate. "I want to return the attorney general's office as a voice for the people." Needs to make sure law enforcement does not deprive citizens of rightsd and liberties. I have the leadership background and experience. Please visit our website at http://www.seanreyes.com

JOHN SWALLOW - It's my privilege to be here this afternoon. Let's talk about our country and where we are. It's been my privilege over the years to stand on the wall and fight for you. It's been my privilege to work as a lawyer at a private-equity firm for almost 22 years, fighting my own cases, winning battles in court. I fought for property rights, I've been endorsed by the NRA, in the legislature I fought against illegal immigration. I'm part of the fight to defeat ObamaCare. I'm the lead attorney in regaining access to our lands. I'm pleased to earn the endorsement of Mike Lee, who knows my integrity and values.

Moderator: What was the largest case you've ever been involved in?

REYES - Hard to quantify, are you talking dollars, number of lawyers, etc. It was the Yellowstone case, billions of dollars at stake in that bankruptcy case where several small businesses stood to lose tens to hundreds of thousands on that. We faced the largest law firm in the nation, they sent 150 lawyers. I was one of the leads and we won, we protected those citizens.

SWALLOW - I'll waive rebuttal.

(Swallow's countenance is sunny.)

Moderator: In any state or federal court, have you first-chaired a trial, argued, or drawn a brief (not counting small-claims court)?

SWALLOW - That's tough for someone to answer for someone who's been a lawyer for almost 22 years. I'm almost always lead-chair in cases I work on. Example is touch-phone case. I handled XM International vs. I won a summary judgement.

(I'm not going to be too great at paraphrasing these court and case details examples).

REYES - You never first-chaired any trials at state or federal level, you never argued an appeal, you never drafted an appeal, the experience you're touting is what any second- or third-year litigator would do. It's what I've done my entire career. What I'm talking about is leadership. You take credit for ObamaCare, but--

(45 seconds are up.)

(Reyes is ready to fight.)

(Swallow kinda looks like Sen. Bill Henricksen when he gets upset.)

((Bill Paxton))

(((A slightly younger Bill Paxton)))

Moderator - What's your stance on public lands?

REYES - I fight. I support HB148. I understand the needs for a state to have sovereignty. Our Founders would turn in their graves if they could see what federalism has become. There are serious issues facing us. Sweeping federal powers have been granted to take lands. We're looking at different solutions. We want our lands back.

SWALLOW - Because my opponent doesn't have a record on that, I can't rebut that. I take him at his word. (See what he did there?) I'm running for attorney general, not running against Sean Reyes. I have led almost every case I've been in since I was a junior associate. I'm the lead counsel on the 3310 against the Secretary of the Interior when he tried to take away our lands.

Moderator - Are you AV rated, which is one of the highest integrity ratings? If not, what is your Martin-Dale-Hubbell rating?

(I get the feeling that lawyers went "WooOOoo!" when this was asked, while the rest of us went "Huh?")

SWALLOW - One of the funniest things is to listen to two lawyers talk about things that no one else understands. let me explain how Martin-Dale-Hubbell works. If you want a rating from them, you pay a fee. I have not been a part of a litigation firm, outside of the atty general's office, since I was 7 years out of law school. I know what kind of attorney I am, I honestly, Sean, don't know what my MDH rating would be. When I worked as a partner, I was entitled to it but I haven't thought about it until you brought it up.

(I remember a candidate once saying the same thing about the Better Business Bureau.)

REYES - I'll give you a pass for not understanding the process since you haven't practiced law for most of your 22 years. You don't pay for an AV rating, it's done anonymously. You can't get a skill rating until the majority of judges and lawyers feel you've earned it. Mark Shurtleff has a rating and he hasn't been in a law firm for a while. The lawyers and partners you talk about have AV ratings, I've had one for almost half of my career. It's significant. People are proud of it because we're real lawyers.

Moderator - The case against ObamaCare was filed the day it was signed. What was the rush? In trying to rush it, was anything sacrificed?

REYES - The whole idea of politicians putting forth 4000-page bills with unconstitutional items in there was horrible, but as atty general I would be for more openness and transparency, but since John brought something else up in his rebuttal, I want to address it. He staked his credibility as a lawyer on ObamaCare. His own people and his own office said he had little to do with it. Our former soliticor general Anita Mitchell was lead lawyer on it and called him on it. She said she felt disappointed you were misleading voters on that. The other folks in your office tell me you're hardly there, you're absentee; I understand you have political ambitions and other things you want to work on.

SWALLOW - Wow. That's all I can is "Wow." You are so misinformed. I have respect for Mitchell, but she was not part of the main team. I was on the ground floor. Sean, you don't know what you're talking about. Get your facts straight and be honest. Wow. Wow!

Moderator - Name the following: the companies you have lobbied for, the last time you received compensation for lobbying, and any supplemental income you receive outside of atty general's office since you started working there.

SWALLOW - The answer is no to the first two. (What?!) I have friends in the legislature, and I decided to go beyond what the law required and disclose anytime I met with anyone. Disclosure and transparency is missing in this state. You should know better. You know what you've accused me of is not true.

(I just heard the head of a former Provo City Council employee explode.)

REYES - You didn't even answer the question, and that's the problem, and your indignation belies the fact that someone's calling you out and asking you to be honest. You give yourself too little credit for your lobbying career. I remember being introduced to you by Richard Rahle (sp?), your former boss, he's the CEO of Check City (Swallow just got that "oh-crap" look on his face) and he was bragging about his super-lobbyist, and that seems inconsistant with how you portray it. You can sound good, but the facts contradict what you say, and people need to hear that. That's the only reason we're bringing these up. We're running for Attorney General, not Lobbyist General, not Legislator General; that's all I've done, and I'm a better lawyer than you.

(Drops the mike and walks away.)

(Not really.)

Moderator - Freedom and liberty are the reason these people are here today. Tell me how the Attorney General factors into that.

SWALLOW - Before I was in the Atty General's office, I didn't really know about federal encroachment, but now I understand. The Atty General is about being a leader, and he does more than log hours and fill briefs. He has to stand up and have a vision, and that's what we did against ObamaCare. The states are the guardians against federalism. The Attorney General fights for our liberties. I will lead the fight for liberty.

REYES - The role of the Atty General is one of those pre-eminent roles. I'm tired of the Fed Govt of telling us what to do with our land and our guns and our gold, they have too much interference in our daily lives. I will fight to return power back to the individuals, to families, not just the state against the federal government. Here's the irony, sometimes the state will turn around and encroach on the rights of the cities and municipalities. We need someone not to just stand on a wall, but who will get in the trenches and fight. We have to be vigilant or freedoms will erode away, and we need someone who will stand and fight.

Moderator - Summation from each candidate.

SWALLOW - Thank you, it's been a privilege. I can use my personal history as experience, as Deputy Attorney General, as six years in the legislature. The NRA, Mike Lee and Mark Shurtleff endorsed me. I will fight for the rights of the parents. I will lead the fight against illegal immigration, when I voted to make English the official language of the state. I can't believe you ripped my metaphor about standing on a wall, we need to stand on anything to fight back against the federal government.

REYES - We need a lawyer. When you vote for the Attorney General, you're voting for the state's top lawyer, and John helped me make my case, you're also voting for a leader. I have far more leadership experience, I've led large teams of lawyers and business organizations, I've been a leader my entire career. I want to take that experience to the Attorney General's office. I will roll up my sleeves and not worry about a political career, but turn the AG office back into one for the people. We don't need a career politician who happens to have a law degree; we need a career lawyer who happens to understand politics, and that's what I will bring. With your vote on June 26, I will stand up to protect our families, our freedoms, our lands, our business communities, these are my commitments to you, based on sound Constititutional principles. My experience in law and leadership speaks for itself, my opponent's lack of law and leadership speaks for itself, and the disparity between us speaks for itself. Sean Reyes, Utah's next Attorney General.

And it's over.

After this debate they took a straw poll and Reyes won with 62%. It was electric, and now it's a matter of looking up the stuff they said and seeing who's portrayed a more accurate picture. Personally, I thought Reyes did a nice job of contrasting their experience and he came ready to fight. He made Swallow look like a politician first. (And I've heard from others about his lobbying for payday loan companies). I was for Reyes before I saw this, but now I really am.

Which lawyer would I want representing me? For me it's now obvious.

You can watch the whole debate yourself here.

The Liljenquist-Herrod-Hatch debate

Well, since Sen. Orrin Hatch is still actively refusing to a TV debate despite everything, here's the YouTube video of his pre-primary debate with Dan Liljenquist and Chris Herrod. I can see why he doesn't want to do it again.

Orrin Hatch scared to debate

How else do you explain his agreeing to only one debate, on radio, in the middle of a workday, just a few days before the primary vote?

Supporters of Hatch say he's already debated twice.  Big giant difference between a caucus debate and primary debate, and hardly anyone that wasn't a delegate watched either. This argument says to me they know the less informed the public, the better for Hatch. (And the one I did see, Hatch lost.)

Utah deserves better.