State Legislative Process Episode 3

Welcome to State Legislative Process. I am Rick Griffin, and today’s episode is Legislators and the Electoral Process. Today’s lesson points address: 
>>[graphic]
>>We begin by looking at the recruitment of legislators. As noted by legislative historian Pev Squire, in the early days of our nation candidates didn’t run for office, but would stand for office. This usually involved a respected, prominent member of society standing forward to offer himself as a possible choice for a government office. They stood for office out of a sense of civic duty, and were careful to keep their self-interest subordinate to the public good, or to at least cloak it from the public, the idea being that the most qualified man should be chosen, and if any man sought office for his own gain, he should be the last person to get the job. Today, however, there is a wide variety of candidates who run for the State Legislature, and a wide variety of reasons why they run. Political scientists William Keefe and Morris Ogul explain that four key variables affect today’s recruitment of candidates. 
>>[graphic]
>>For better or worse, candidates are often expected to represent the socio-economic class, religion, ethnicity, and race of their constituencies. This fact is articulated by political scientist Frank Sorauf comments about Pennsylvania’s State Legislators.
>>[graphics]
>>A second variable is government experience.
>>[graphic]
>>Although it is helpful to have a basic understating of government and to network with government officials, it is estimated that about one third to one half of all state legislators get elected without any previous experience in government. One factor which affects how much government experience a candidate will have is the nomination system. In states with restrictive party systems, such as Connecticut’s convention system, or Pennsylvania’s closed primary system, party leaders control the process and tend to recruit and nominate candidates who have had previous government experience. In contrast, in states with non-restrictive systems, such as Minnesota’s non-partisan primary, candidates are less likely to have previously served in government. A third variable in the recruitment process is the way a candidate launches his or her career. 
>>[graphic]
>One common way a candidate launches his or her career is conscription. Conscription occurs as minority parties persuade, and if need be, draft a party loyalist to run in a district where there is little hope of winning the general election. Outnumbered in the district, and often facing a powerful incumbent, the minority candidate may find it difficult to raise adequate campaign support. Under such circumstances, the race is more about having a good showing and planting seeds for later harvests than about immediate victory. Another common way legislators launch their careers is self-recruitment. 
>>[graphic]
>>These candidates are self-starters, and don’t need encouragement from party leaders to run. They enter the game whether the coach wants them on the field or not. Often devoted political activists or successful business persons, these candidates run for the State Legislature with a tremendous zeal and energy. Another common way legislators launch their careers is cooptation. 
>>[graphic]
>>Cooptation occurs when party leaders recruit outside the ranks of their party. This occurs as party leaders seek out popular and well-respected individuals from the state or district whom they believe have a good change of winning in the general election. On the national stage the Republicans have a pretty successful history of cooptation. A good example of this is General Dwight D. Eisenhower being recruited after World War II for the presidential election.
>>[graphics]
>>Or you football fans might remember Hall of Fame wide receiver Steve Largent…
>>[graphics]
>>…being elected in Oklahoma to the U.S. House of Representatives. Or perhaps you recall this famous Republican movie star…
>>[graphics]
>>…who is now the Governor of California. Cooptation does not just happen at the national level with high-profile candidates, however. It also occurs at the state and local levels as party leaders seek out candidates who they believe have a good chance of winning the general election. The last of the common ways legislators launch their careers is agency. 
>>[graphic]
>>These candidates are selected and supported by political interest groups, the goal of the political interest group being to in effect have a lobbyist working for them inside the State Legislature. Candidates that launch their careers by this method are usually concerned with a particular interest: education, baking, labor, agriculture. And they are often expected to sponsor bills and lobby for the agenda of the political interest group that supported them.
>>[graphics]
>>In review, so far we have discussed three of the four key variables in the legislative recruitment process: social characteristics, government experience, and the common ways that legislators launch their careers. The fourth, and according to Keefe and Ogul, the leading variable in the recruitment of legislators, is the structure of party competition in the state or district. 
>>[graphic]
>>In the end, however, political parties typically only want one thing: to back a winner. To learn more about what it takes to be a winning candidate in Utah, we caught up with Congressman Rob Bishop, a former Utah Republican Party Chair.
>>We are here at the Utah State Capitol, and are very pleasantly surprised by a visit by Congressman Rob Bishop, who got to the wrong capitol this morning, but is making a courtesy call at the Utah Capitol Building. Congressman Bishop served in the Utah Legislature for sixteen years, gradually improved his position, and ultimately ended up as Speaker of the House of Representatives, I understand. He was State Party Chairman for four years, a teacher, got convinced to run for Congress, in what, Congressman, 2002? 
>>That is right.
>>In that time period, and has done a phenomenal job representing the northern part of Utah in the United States Congress. But what we want to zero in on today, Congressman, is your involvement as Party Chairman, and the election process. How did you, as Party Chairman, go about recruiting candidates to run for the State Legislature in Utah?
>>It was both easy and difficult at the same time. Being in a majority party here you have lots of people who want to run in those positions. And we could be competitive in every race in the State. 
>>What do you mean we could be competitive? What does that mean?
>>We could either have a good chance of winning, or a good chance of coming close in all of these. We didn’t have to write any of them off as unworthy of any type of effort. Then the process—in the United States, it is different than most other countries that have a very strong party process. It is a weak party process, which means people self-nominate. And in that respect, you usually have people that are willing to come to you. Occasionally there were a few times I had to make a few phone calls to ask people if they would consider being a candidate. And sometimes you try to find an ideal candidate in an area, and then you see if you can work to make sure that the others don’t run against him or her. That is very difficult to do for Republicans. Democrats are pretty effective at being able to find their candidate and keep the field clean for them. We had a much more difficult time doing that.
>>Now Rosenthal, who is the author of the book that we are using in this class for discussion talks about different recruitment modes. And one of them is conscription, which you talked about, where you go out and you drag up somebody to run. Being Republican in Utah, probably that didn’t apply very often.
>>Not a whole lot. 
>>Do you have some districts where that is the case?
>>No. Not really. 
>>You mentioned it is all fairly competitive. Another one is self-starters, which would be…what percentage would you say would be the self-starters?
>>The overwhelming majority.
>>Overwhelming majority.
>>Most people are self-starters.
>>Did you run into what Rosenthal calls agency? People that kind of represented special interest groups, or were agents for people?
>>Yes. That will always be there. I think the majority would be truly self-starters. There are some people who are asked by different groups to run and represent them. The problem is, it is very difficult for a group to really have control of a candidate. 
>>Sometimes they are surprised? They think they are going to be…I know we have a vote in the Utah Legislature this afternoon, as a matter of fact, on school vouchers, and some of the votes in the House were kind of surprising.
>>Yes. So it is very difficult to actually—No one ever owns a candidate, even if they have encouraged them to run. So some may do that, and it starts the process, but that candidate will never be successful unless they have the fire within them so they really want to do it on their own, and they want to do it for reasons that are pretty altruistic. If somebody is a candidate who is out there really to promote a special interest group, it usually shows itself in the course of the campaign. They are usually outed by the constituents, or the voters, or the delegates in some way. 
>>The fourth category is where the party kind of recruits somebody who is a notable in the area. How often did that happen where you are Party Chairman had to go out, and somebody was so well-liked, and everybody pointed to that person, and said, “You have got to get that person to run”?
>>As State Chairman, I didn’t really have to do that a whole lot. Those types of people will probably percolate to the top. And usually it is neighbors, it is family, it is local party officials who will talk to somebody, and then they kind of skip over into the self-starter category. If they are not going to skip over into the self-started category, they usually…if you have to really recruit some name that hard, they usually don’t put forth the effort to be an effective candidate. So actually, oddly enough, sometimes those are the worst possible candidates you can have.
>>Because they are just kind of assuming they are going to win by the name.
>>It is not an appointment, necessarily.
>>What are the characteristics of successful political candidates? Psychological profiles, or characteristics?
>>That is a good question, I have never really thought about that, to be honest with you. To me personally, as somebody who was a Party Chairman, as somebody who has worked in the Legislature, having somebody who is philosophically in the same place as I am is key. That is the first thing I like.
>>So you like ideological purity. 
>>However, that doesn’t necessarily equate to being successful as a candidate. You need to have somebody who is dedicated to putting the time in to being successful, especially if you are dealing with local politics and legislative races. The districts are small enough that it really becomes a very personal, one-on-one, door-to-door type of work. If you have somebody who is not going to walk a neighborhood, they are probably not going to be successful.
>>Is just hard work an absolute prerequisite?
>>Yes.
>>And energy level?
>>Yes. I think those are pretty synonymous. They come together.
>>This brings us to lesson point number two: 
>>[graphic]
>>At least as late as 1787, political parties were considered by many Americans to be a threat to a good government and something that should be avoided. However, during George Washington’s first administration, 
>>[graphics]
Secretary of State Thomas Jefferson and Secretary of the Treasury, Alexander Hamilton had many disputes regarding the nation’s economic focus, domestic and foreign policy, the proper scope of government, and how constitutional provisions should be interpreted. These two founding fathers became political rivals
>>[graphics]
>>with two very different visions for America. Their disputes over domestic and foreign policies largely contributed to the rise of America’s two-party system. Over the years, political parties have grown to play a major role in American politics and in the recruitment and nomination of legislators. The two major ways that parties nominate candidates to represent them in general elections are:
>>[graphics] 
>>The caucus method has been used to select government officials in American as far back as the colonial period. A caucus is generally defined as a meeting. 
>>[graphic]
>>Historically, the caucus method involved party leaders meeting, often behind closed doors and smoke-filled rooms, to select the favorite son to run for a given office. Speaking of the caucuses of the past and present, political scientist Alan Gitelson, Robert Dudley, and Melvin Dubnick
>>[graphics
>>To learn about Utah’s variation of the caucus system, we return to President Sederburg’s conversation with Congressman Rob Bishop.
>>How about the process in Utah? I have been struck moving to Utah with the power of the caucus system as opposed to primaries, either closed or open. Give us a little textbook 101. You used to be a Social Science teacher. Give us a little textbook 101 on the Utah election process.
>>I actually like the process in Utah. And it has been, historically, all over the place.
>>It has been used.
>>But it combines states that are primary states and states that are caucus states. We have always had a hybrid of that system. So it means that the first level a candidate goes to is to convention delegates. The earliest participation is at the voting district level, which are now called precincts. They weren’t when I was growing up. 
>>Is that right? At one time the precinct was called a voting district?
>>I always learned that they were precincts. Voting districts were when you went to your mass meeting. Now it is a precinct, and you go to your caucus. It is the same thing. The goal is to try and get grass roots involvement so that people come out and meet with neighbors, and they elect people to represent them at either the state or county conventions. Then as a candidate, you have to present yourself to those people who are elected by the grass roots. It is good for a candidate, because it allows somebody to be successful without having to spend a lot of money. The universe of the electorate is very defined. You know who they are. You either work with them or you don’t
>>And that would be a lot cheaper than if you had to run in a primary with flyers, and yard signs.
>>If you have to run a primary system, and you take those delegates out, it is expensive. And then candidates who are supported by special interest groups have a major advantage, because they have the money up front. It is very difficult to get money up front.
>>So Utah has kind of a modified system? Is that about the caucuses?
>>If you can get through a convention with seventy percent of the vote…
>>Seventy or sixty?
>>Sixty. I am sorry. And once again, it was at eighty, it has been to seventy.
>>Oh, really? It used to be higher than sixty percent?
>>Yes. If you can get through at sixty percent, then you are the nominee. You go directly to the November election. If not, you take the top two candidates, and it has always been that way, to go to a primary in which you expand the process. And then you go to a regular primary. That obviously is much more expensive, and involves anyone who wants to register to vote. 
>>Now moderates complain about this, because they say the caucus system really leads to ultra-conservative or ultra-liberal candidates being selected by the political parties. Did you find that to be the case? Or are you comfortable with that?
>>It clearly has a tendency to do it. And I am comfortable with it. I remember this one person who said, his axiom was, “The world is run by those who show up.” It is run by those who show up. And I have also seen where people who do not like either a tilt to the left or the right, they will organize, which is exactly what ought to be. And to be honest, if I find a candidate—I did this one in a city election. Somebody was running for city council. I had no intention of voting for this candidate. But I saw how well she organized to bring people in to pack the caucus. And I thought, “You know, somebody who can organize that well, that is exactly what I want running local government.” 
>>If somebody were brave enough to challenge you in the caucus system…
>>They can’t. Don’t…
>>Oh, because the Congressional level is quite different.
>>No, they can. I just don’t want anyone to have that idea. Shhh…
>>Oh, you just don’t want that idea. Ok. I thought maybe you could, but I guess that would be a very foolish thing to try and do.
>>I like that better. That is a nice way of saying it.
>>But theoretically, let’s say Congressman Matheson, or somebody. How tough is it to get your colleagues and your friends to attend one of these caucuses?
>>Obviously, the bigger the area, the more difficult it is. But there are a lot of people who put forth that kind of effort. And you have what I found is a core of people that will be at every single caucus. But I have also found that usually about half of the people who attend are doing it for the first time. So there is an amazing amount of turnover. For example, when I was running in 2002, I thought, “You know, I have been speaker. I have been the Party Chairman. Everyone would know me.” My guess is about half the delegates had never been involved in politics before 2002, and they had no idea who I was.
>>That was true of the caucus I attended. It seemed like half of the caucus were old-timers that all knew each other and kind of ran things, and then there were fifty percent of us who were kind of new to the caucus and were observers, in a way, trying to figure out what was going on.
>>And the hope is that those who are new stay and they become part of the old timer networking system.
>>Thank you, Congressman, for spending some time with us.
>>My pleasure.
>>And I hope you have a successful visit here in the Utah Legislature.
>>Thank you.

>>The second and, in modern times, more common method of nominating candidate for office is the primary method. 
>>[graphic]
>>A primary is a system of nomination where party membership elects candidates to represent them in the general election. Primaries are considered by many to be a more democratic method of nominating candidates than the caucus method. Although there are several variations of the primary system, the two most common types of primaries are:
>>[graphic]
>>A closed primary is where only party members vote for nominees to represent their party in a general election. An open primary is where both party members and other non-party registered voters can vote to nominate candidates for the general election. Earlier in our program, we learned from Congressman Bishop what kind of candidates Utah Republicans try to recruit and nominate. Now it is time to learn more about Utah Democrats. A few years ago, as I was lecturing on the two-party system, a student remarked that there wasn’t a two-party system in Utah, because Utah doesn’t have any Democrats. Without missing a beat, I quickly replied, “You have forgotten about I-15. There are several Democrats in Utah. They just happen to be on their way to some other state.” Well, if you have been following State politics lately, you know that many of those Democrats are apparently getting off of I-15, and are staying in Utah. Today we have a considerable Democratic population in Salt Lake County, and a slow-growing population in other parts of the State. To learn more about Utah Democrats and the kind of candidates they try to nominate, Val Peterson, Vice-president of Administration and Academic Affairs for Utah Valley State met with Meghan Holbrook, a former Utah Democratic Party Chair.
>>We are here at the State Capitol, and we are talking to Meghan Holbrook who has a variety of different roles in our state. Government Affairs for Zions Bank, Board of Regents, she has been very active in community and civic affairs, and we have the opportunity to talk to her today. And one of the things we want to talk about is where do people come from that run for office? So Meghan, tell us a little bit about where candidates come from. How do people decide to run for office?
>>Well, the reason Dr. Peterson has asked me this question, in my other life I am the former Chair of the Democratic Party for the State of Utah. 
>>[graphic]
>>And you know what? We used to run what I call top tier, main stream Democrats for office. I used to try to recruit people that go to the same churches, 
>>[graphics]
>>same schools, shop at the same grocery stores, may care a little bit differently on social and educational issues than the others, but it is just regular, everyday people. 
>>In your experience as Chair of the Democratic Party, do you have different groups that go out and recruit different candidates? I mean, do special interests go out and try to find a candidate that they think is electable? And what is electable mean in this state?
>>Well, I think that is an interesting question, especially for a Democrat. Because we run top tier, mainstream candidates, and unfortunately, quite a few people see a label and think that is exactly what their candidate is, ok? And so in Utah, it is very much Republican. That is changing slowly, incrementally, but yes, there are special interests, and they go out and do it. 
>>[graphic]
>>When I was a party leader I had a committee with a lot of people, and we tried to run, as I said top tier, mainstream candidates. I don’t think it is good to have people in office who have just one special interest. I don’t think that does the public good, I don’t think it does private good. I don’t think it goes the State any good.
>>Do you think one-issue candidates get elected very often? I mean, the legislature deals with so many issues. 
>>Periodically, yes.
>>Periodically.
>>I am not going to name any names. 
>>We are not looking for you to name any names, but don’t you think that once they get here, they realize that the Legislature is much more broad than maybe their one issue, and that they have got to really look at the general good of what they are here to represent? 
>>I think that is absolutely true. The other thing I think is true that people need to know more is that regardless of how you feel philosophically, people up here work very, very hard. They put in a lot of time. The amount of paperwork is enormous. And they try to do the right thing.
>>We were talking earlier about special interests recruiting candidates, Democratic Party recruiting candidates, Republicans that are out recruiting candidates. Do you sit down and weigh the options between different people, saying, “Well maybe this person has bit more electability than another person?”
>>Yes. Absolutely. I think a lot of suburban, moderate Democratic women can win in Utah. 
>>So those are the characteristics you are looking for?”
>>No. But I think that happens, and if you look at some of the Democratic women legislators, that is exactly who they are. And they tend to be educators, and they tend to be community activists. They can win.
>>The other day I was reading something that talked about how you are seeing more conservative Democrats, for example, in the vein of Hubert Humphrey, or people like that. Do you think that is something we will see in Utah as well? We will see more conservative Democrats, maybe, like a Matheson more in the statehouse?
>>You mean Jim Matheson. 
>>Yes, Jim Matheson.
>>You know, that is an interesting question. I think the overall Democratic Party in Utah is indicative of the State of Utah. So we are more conservative. We are more moderate. The people that you usually read about in the paper, because they are much more interesting to the press at the time, are extremes from both sides, from the Republican Party, and from the Democratic Party. But I first ran for a Democratic Party Chair because I got tired of reading in the paper that the Democrats were this, the Democrats were that, and I thought, “Most of the Democrats that I know are like me. We are pretty much mainstream Utahns.” 
>>This now brings us to lesson point number three:
>>[graphic]
>>Once a candidate is nominated by his or her party, the next hurdle is to prepare for the general election. And if the candidates weren’t really running before, they are running now shaking every hand, meeting in every house, and kissing every baby they can. Elections are very demanding physically, mentally, and financially. And no district is a sure thing during the election process. Political scientism Alan Gitelson, Robert Dudley, and Melvin Dubnick remind us that many factors can influence voter decision. Some voters care about particular issues, such as unemployment, education, crime, transportation, and the candidate’s positions on those issues. Other voters are less informed, and go more by the candidate’s image, and his or her personality, their background, and personal traits. Party identification, a candidate’s past experience, and record in office, and the particular age, race, gender, and education of a candidate also come into play. To learn more about state legislative elections, we return to President Sederburg and state legislative expert Pev. Squire.
>>We are delighted today to speak with Dr. Pev Squire. Dr. Squire is Professor of Political Science at the University of Iowa. He is one of the nation’s leading scholars in the review and study of state legislatures. He is also one of the co-editors of Legislative Studies Quarterly, which is the nation’s leading scholarly journal related to state legislatures. So Dr. Squire, thanks for spending some time with us.
>>My pleasure.
>>Let’s talk elections a little bit. What have we found out from political science about the nature of the electoral process for state legislators? Do first timers usually get elected, or does it take running for office two or three times? What do we know?
>>Well you know, it really varies. And it depends on the kind of election that you are running. And if you are running for an open seat, that is one where is not incumbent running, then you have a better chance of winning than if you are challenging an incumbent who has already been elected to the office before. So I think you will find challengers being somewhat strategic in picking their races. It is harder to run against an incumbent in most circumstances. And more strategic politicians will wait until the seat becomes vacant before they choose to run.
>>At the Congressional level, it is something like ninety-five percent of incumbents get reelected, re-nominated and reelected. Is the percentage then same for state legislators? It is lower, but only slightly. On average, it is about ninety percent of state legislators who seek reelection who are successful. And so you are facing fairly daunting odds if you choose to run against an incumbent. And that is for a variety of reasons. One, obviously incumbents have an easier time raising money. But it is also the case that incumbents tend to be pretty good at what they do. They have gotten elected before, and they generally understand the district and represent their constituents reasonably well. So it is hard to toss them out unless the incumbent has done something scandalous or has the bad luck to run in a district that is really, truly competitive between the two parties.
>>What is the correlation between campaign contributions and your chance of winning elections? Is it like .76 or something? It has got to be fairly high.
>>Well, it is pretty high. And the candidate who has more money generally does well, except you have to keep in mind that the candidate who has more money is almost the incumbent, since the incumbent has greater access to campaign contributors than challengers typically do. What really is important in predicting how close an election will be is how much money the challenger can raise, since the challenger usually isn’t know by the voters in the district, and will need that money to become better known. So the more money the challenger can raise, the better he or she generally does in the election.
>>It seems like a huge advantage for incumbents to have political action committee money. What have we found out from our research about the impact of money kind of funneled through the political action committees to incumbent legislators?
>>Well certainly that is a big advantage that incumbents enjoy. Organized groups, political action committees want to have access to people who are in office, so they are going to give campaign contributions to incumbents, knowing that incumbents are likely to get returned to office in the next election. And that gives incumbents a source of money that most challengers have a hard time matching. Most challengers can’t get PAC money. And so it does give the incumbent a much easier time raising the money that he or she needs to run for office.
>>Is the cost of running for office increasing dramatically?
>>It has increased dramatically in some states. There are still a few places where you can find sort of the old campaign of just yard signs and going around introducing yourself to people in the coffee shop. You can still run that sort of campaign in New Hampshire, for example. But in a place like California, where you are looking at districts in the State Senate which are larger than U.S. House districts, you know, you need to raise hundreds of thousands of dollars, if not into the millions of dollars to get elected to the State Legislature. And so the range is enormous across the states, from a thousand dollars or so in New Hampshire to hundreds of thousands, or millions of dollars in California.
>>At one point in time, people have talked about the state legislature as kind of being owned by the railroad companies, or by big oil. How would you describe currently the ownership of the state legislatures in the country?
>>Well, we don’t suffer from the problems that you just mentioned. If you go back in the late nineteenth century, certainly Southern Pacific Railroad dominated the California Legislature. We have had various resource industries in Montana which dominated its Legislature. Today you are less likely to see that. Most states have more diversified economies than they used to have. So even here in Iowa where the Farm Bureau used to be sort of the big organization in terms of its political impact, it is less today than it used to be. And I think it really tends to revolve around how money gets raised for office. The rules governing campaign finance vary significantly across the states. And the amount of money that can be raised and funneled buy particular organizations really dictates in a large measure how much access they have to legislators. 
>>Any particular campaign techniques? You read a lot about negative ads. I noticed don’t sense the same degree of negative ads in state legislative races that we have in Congress. What are the current kinds of campaign strategies that are prevalent in state legislative races?
>>Well again it is going to vary. In a lot of places, television isn’t a very effective way to campaign for the state legislature, because you can’t target your potential voters very well. And so campaigns have to resort to other kinds of tactics. You have the traditional campaign yard signs, going to community meetings and introducing yourself to the voters. But in places where you can’t contact enough voters through those kinds of mechanisms, you have to use a lot of things like direct mail. Recent robo-calls, or automated phone systems that call up voters and relay information that way. And now some people, even at the state legislative level, have moved on to the internet as a way of contacting voters who may be more internet savvy than some of their other voters. 
>>We talked to the Governor’s representatives who commented about the blog world, and blogosphere, or whatever the name is, changing the nature of politics. Like something happens, and instantaneously there is commentary out on the web about whatever happened. Is that changing legislative behavior, as well?
>>It is, although we are just at he beginning of that process, and it will be interesting to see how it unfolds. I think what I have been able to see to this point is that there is this initial burst of enthusiasm about writing a blog, then people come to understand that it takes a certain commitment over time that they may not be willing to give it. So I think you see with a lot of legislators, they start doing it, and then they tend to tail off a little bit as their time gets absorbed doing other things. But it is an interesting way to reach the voters, and probably even more important than the legislators blogging, you have observers of the legislative process in each state who blog and are able to communicate in more depth information about the legislature than you may be able to find even in the state’s best newspapers.
>>I know as a college president I thought about having my own blog from time to time, but I thought that would just be fraught with potential controversy, because people interpret different comments so differently. Thank you so much, Dr, Squire, who is co-editor of Legislative Studies Quarterly and Professor at the University of Iowa. We appreciate your time and commitment to this project.
>>My pleasure. 
>>Thank you, Dr. Squire. It is time now for you legislative spotlight. Our first legislator is Democratic Representative Christine Johnson of Utah House District 25. Representative Johnson is a realtor by profession, and a community activist by choice. As one of only a few gay Utahns to ever serve in the State Legislature, she hopes to bring awareness to gay and lesbian issues. As a woman, she hopes to bring attention to gender issues, and to establish a women’s caucus in the State Legislature. Representative Johnson is proud to be both liberal and progressive, and looks forward to building better understanding and cooperation in the State Legislature. We recently caught up with Representative Johnson at the State Capitol to learn more about her and her recent election to the State Legislature. 
Today we have the pleasure of chatting with Christine Johnson. State Representative Johnson is a newly elected legislator from Salt Lake County. Your district, as I understand it, includes the University of Utah area, and then goes up Parley’s Canyon towards Park City, but doesn’t go into Part City, which is kind of an interesting shaped House district, to start with. Representative Johnson has been a realtor in the Salt Lake City area. She has been a community activist, very active in the Democratic Party. Thank you for joining us.
>>My pleasure.
>>And Christine, I guess I would like to have you just talk a little bit about what motivated you to run for the Legislature. Did you wake up one morning and say, “By golly, I can do this”?
>>Well, actually I have been an activist for several years now, and I am fortunate to be the third openly gay candidate elected to office in the Utah Legislature. 
>>How do your colleagues respond to that?
>>Very well.
>>Do they?
>>Yes.
>>It seems like there is a lot of concern about gay candidates.
>>Well, not in my party. I am fortunate to align myself with Democratic Party values, and I have found a great deal of acceptance. And among Republicans, I have actually found that most of the freshmen are very friendly. And I have made a point of reaching across party lines to express appreciation for those that have been tolerant of my alternative lifestyle.
>>So you were an activist in the community.
>>Yes.
>>And a seat opened up. And who held the seat before you?
>>I currently hold Ross Romero’s seat. Ross has moved up to the Senate.
>>And so that seat was open. And share with us just your thinking process a little bit about what led you to take the plunge to get involved in the legislative process.
>>Well, there was a period of time where Senator Karen Hale was determining whether or not she would run again, and if she had anyone in mind for her seat that she would recommend. Ross Romero was waiting for her to make that recommendation. I was sort of waiting for Representative Jackie Biskupski to determine whether of not she would run for Ross’s seat.
>>It was kind of a ping pong effect, or something.
>>Exactly. So everything just sort of fell into place.
>>Did you face a tough primary?
>>I had a very, very difficult primary, and a very expensive primary.
>>How much money did you have to spend on the primary?
>>Probably about thirty-eight thousand for the primary and about fifty thousand for the entire race.
>>And how did you raise thirty-eight thousand? That would be a very challenging thing in a House district. How did you raise thirty-eight thousand?
>>It is very challenging, because my opponent in the primary was well-liked by a lot of Democrats. He worked for, and continues to work for, an advertising agency that supported a lot of previous Democratic campaigns. And so he had a certain degree of notoriety. Because I have been a Chair of the East Central Community Council and I have been a board member of Equality Utah, I am currently the Vice-Chair of the Salt Lake City Human Rights Commission, and I am on Accessibility Services Advisory Committee...
>>So you are a community activist.
>>I have networked very well with a lot of people who feel passionate about some of the same issues that I do.
>>So was your funding largely from individuals, or did you go for Political Action Committee funding?
>You know, I did have some great support from the Victory Fund, which is a national gay and lesbian advocacy pack, and Equality Utah was generous. I was also well-supported by local gay-rights activist Bruce Bastian. But I was fortunate enough to be the only candidate in the entire state of Utah to be endorsed by EMILY’s List, which is a national pro-choice organization.
>>Let’s talk a little bit about EMILY’s List, because I know in Michigan it is a very significant factor for any woman running for the Legislature.
>>It is. It really is. It is a tremendous honor. They really screen their candidates very well to make sure they are progressive on women’s reproductive issues. So I contacted EMILY’s List and let them know that I would like to seek their endorsement. EMILY’s List is a progressive, pro-choice organization that supports female candidates.
>>Explain a little bit about how they operate. It is fascinating the national network that exists.
>>Right. Well, there are a lot of organizations like Act Blue, and other political action committees which can accept money from single donation providers, and then take that money and make lump sum donations to a candidate that is pre-approved by that political action organization. 
>>So can I ask how much money you would get from EMILY’s List?
>>I only received five hundred dollars from EMILY’s List, which is really unusual, because they don’t support a lot of state level candidates.
>>Usually it is at the U.S. Senate level.
>>Correct.
>>Or Congressional level that EMILY’s List is so significant. But you got five hundred dollars.
>>I got five hundred dollars, but I got to put on my documents that I was supported by EMILY’s List. And in my district, that means a great deal. It carries a lot of weight. So the name and the endorsement outweighed the monetary donation, by far.
>>Now the discussion that we have had so far is so different than a discussion you would have in Utah County, or more conservative areas of the state. 
>>Right.
>>As you look at the Legislature, do you expect there to be a lot of cultural differences, or a lot of geographic fighting that goes on between Salt Lake and other portions of the state?
>>I think that history has shown that to be the case. Most of the seats held by Salt Lake County legislators are seats held by Democrats. 
>>You are a realtor.
>>Yes.
>>The state has a very active political action committee.
>>They do. 
>>I think they are one of the largest donators to campaigns.
>>Yes.
>>Were you a recipient of that?
>>No, and I didn’t want to accept it. 
>>And what was your thinking as far as, I presume in those real estate issues, your thinking would align with the realtors. What led you to say that you didn’t want anything to do with the real estate pack?
>>Well, I think that the pack represents a different value system than I have regarding my community. I feel like there are bills which favor developers, there are bills which favor a lack of community input on community development. And I don’t really alight myself with that. I don’t contribute to the realtor’s pack. They give most of their money to Republicans. And being part of a community council for years, part of the process has been controlling growth, or having some input of growth, making conscious decisions about the growth in our communities.
>>In political science, they tend to define legislators as delegates, being representative of their district, or trustees, saying we are here to represent the whole state and do what is best for the state, or kind of the political leaders. Pat Jones earlier told us that she was a populist. You sound more like a populist than one of these other three categories. But how would you define yourself in some of those traditional definitions?
>>I am very progressive. I think that in all likelihood once I have a voice I will be the most progressive voice on the hill. And I don’t consider myself really a centrist, but I consider myself a cooperative individual.
>>Now a conservative would say, “Well, you are just saying progressive because you don’t want to use the ‘liberal’ word in Utah.” 
>>I don’t mind using it.
>>How do you define progressive?
>>I am unapologetic liberal and a progressive. 
>>An unapologetic liberal. 
>>Yes.
>>I was just going to ask you how you define progressive, vis-à-vis liberal.
>>Progressive is forward thinking, not stuck in the mind set of thinking about how things have been done in the past. That won’t work for us, particularly in an environmental level. We have got to be thinking about how we are going to take care of our planet so that our children and grandchildren have a healthy place to live. The carbon that we put in the air today will be there fifty years from now. And so I hope that I can be a voice that will help educate I think this largely uneducated body on issues of environmentalism and human rights.
>>And global warming is going to be a major thing.
>>It is a major thing.
>>On a scale of zero to ten, how enthusiastic are you about having an opportunity to make change?
>>Fifty.
>>Fifty. There is a diplomatic answer. Fifty of ten. Not fifty percent, but above and beyond that.
>>I think it is over…it is so humbling to have this responsibility, as you know. So there are tens of thousands of people out there relying on me to help make some change. That is what they voted for in my district. During my primary they had an opportunity to vote for a moderate, and they chose not to. They chose to vote for me. And in my platform I was very clear and very clean about where I felt we needed to go. And so I feel a responsibility to be consistent with that message. 
>>Thank you, Christine Johnson.
>>Oh, it has been my pleasure.
>>Thank you very much.
>>Good luck. And we are going to be back with you throughout this session and see how it goes, because it will be fun.
>>I hope so.
>>Thank you, Representative Johnson. 
>>[graphic]
>>Our next legislative spotlight is on Republican Representative Kenneth Sumsion of Utah House District 56. Representative Sumsion is a BYU Financial Solutions Consultant by profession, and a proud member of the Utah Legislature Conservative Caucus by choice. Before being elected to office, he was a Republican Party Precinct Chair. As a state legislator, he plans to advocate for tax cuts, school choice, and a toll road for his district. Recently we caught up with Representative Sumsion at the State Capitol to learn more his impressive victory over an incumbent this last election.
>> We are talking with Ken Sumsion. Ken is a newly elected state legislator from the Lehi Saratoga Springs area, a very rapidly growing part of Utah. Ken Sumsion is a fiscal administrator at Brigham Young University. On the official title, it is the Financial Solution Consultant. So Ken, we have got to jump right in and ask, ”What is a Financial Solution Consultant at BYU?”
>>It is a fancy term for an internal consultant. Basically what I am involved in, I implement BYU’s financial systems. I work with the other accountants and programmers, and we upgrade their financial systems. And part of my job is to try to re-engineer and improve our processes.
>>That is not a typical background for somebody interested in the Legislature. What led you to suddenly say, “I think I can take this financial world and apply it to the Legislature”?
>>Through my background…my father had been involved in politics thought Utah Farm Bureau, growing up in that environment. So I have always been very interested in it, very interested in history. Growing up, probably an interesting tidbit, as a young man, I mean young, I dreamed of being President of the United States.
>>So at an early age you had some inspirations for political office?
>>I had interest because of my love for the country. And life kind of went on. I moved around the country from California to North Carolina. I had my family of six kids, and so those things kind of have moved along, and I thought that would never happen. Four years ago I moved to where I am at currently. I built my own house and got myself elected as Precinct Chair. I kind of looked at my interest, and had some issues that I was concerned with.
>>And decided to jump in.
>>And I thought I could beat the incumbent.
>>This is a very rare occurrence to beat an incumbent. I think the incumbent had been here eight years. And you took on the incumbent in the caucus system. Help us understand especially for somebody like me, that is from outside of Utah who is not familiar with the caucus system, how does that work here in Utah? Where it is really not up to the voters, generally, it is up to the political activists.
>>How the caucus system works in Utah is, in my district I have thirty-three precincts. And the registered voters can be Republicans and there are some rules that I am not fully sure I understand, that even non-Republicans can kind of show up and either register at the last minute and participate in those caucus meetings. And they basically elect delegates to go to a convention. And in my case I had approximately 135 delegates. And if a candidate gets sixty percent of those delegate votes they receive the party’s nomination and avoid a primary. 
>>So you started taking on the incumbent. And did you go house to house to these precinct delegates? Or did you recruit friends to become precinct delegates?
>> I actually started before that. I started in January. I actually started before that, a year ago July as I started to really get serious about running. And I actually approached Parents for Choice, because that was one of the issues, education, that was…
>>Parents for Choice is charter school?
>>Charted schools, vouchers, some education reforms. And basically they told me no, that they wouldn’t support me. And over a course of three or four months, talking to them, I was trying to find out who they were supporting. They finally gave me the person’s name. I talked to the person, and after talking to the person over the phone, I made a decision that I was going to run against…
>>Regardless.
>>Regardless. 
>>How much money did you spend in this whole process?
>>I spent…you know, I am an accountant, I should have it right at my…
>>You can round it off to the nearest thousand.
>>I spent about…because you can go look it up. That is the sad part.
>We are not going to hold you accountable. You spent quite a bit of money.
>>I spent about eleven thousand, twelve thousand dollars.
>>Was that out of your own pocket?
>>I spent five hundred officially out of my own pocket, but I probably spent hundreds. And then serving in the Legislature, it will cost me financially, probably hundreds more.
>>Are you able to get a leave from BYU during this time period, or are you carrying on your regular responsibilities during the session?
>>They are giving me unpaid leave of absence for six weeks.
>>So it is quite a financial hit for you personally.
>>It is. And I will not make it up.
>>This may not be a fair question, but I have to ask it. A Conservative Caucus member, your district is growing rapidly, they need highways, they need more schools. All sorts of different services are needed. Can a good member of the Conservative Caucus really operate and get those services out of the state budget? Or are you going to be pulled to go with tax cuts? What is in your thinking far as this balancing act between the need for services and cutting taxes?
>>On the cutting taxes side, I am a believer in kind of the supply side economics, although it works on a much smaller scale at the state level than certainly I think it does federally. But one is that there are lots of government programs, and to just leave that door continually open, because the buckets all go to different programs. They don’t all just funnel to education. And so I think you have to continually bring in, keep a restraint on that, because you are looking long term. We are not always going to have these surpluses every year. It is not going to happen. Just as with our family budgets, sometimes they cycle up and down as we loose jobs, move, do those kinds of things.
>>At the end of this legislative session, what would you consider to be a success? When we do kind of a wrap up of the legislative session, and come back, and Ken Sumsion says, “By golly, I achieved…” What?
>>I would like to see some tax cuts, which I think will happen. It is a matter of how large they will be, because all three branches are agreeing that there will be some. Additional funding for roads, and I think that will happen.
>>Especially in Lehi, Saratoga Springs, and Eagle Mountain?
>>There is funding on the table there. Part of our big issue currently is our E.I.S. studies aren’t done.
>>Environmental Impact studies.
>>Yes. And I am a little bit frustrated with UDOT in how that has probably been managed over the last few years that I don’t think has helped those issues along. We actually had funding in place for several auxiliary roads, and we have no study done, and so we are stuck for another three years.
>>How long do you see yourself being in the Legislature?
>>I would like to serve a few terms. 
>>A few terms.
>>And we will see. I don’t think of myself as a professional politician. It certainly is going to be a sacrifice. 
>>The Utah Legislature is not filled with professional politicians, because of the nature of it. Ken Sumsion, thank you for spending some time. We are going to be back with you later on in this legislative session to see how it unfolds for you as a newly elected legislator. But we appreciate your time and energies. And good luck this session. 
>>Thank you.
>>Thank you.
>>Thank you, Representative Sumsion. That completes our program on legislators and the election process. On behalf of President Bill Sederburg, I am Dr. Rick Griffin. Thanks for tuning in, and we hope to see you next time on State Legislative Process.


Closed Captioning provided by Distance Education Accessibility Services