No Thumbs Up or Down To Legislature

---

Bruce L. Olsen, Managing Director
Public Affairs Department
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints

A recent political cartoon in The Salt Lake Tribune shows a bald official of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints leaning back in his chair with a thumbs-up signal toward the State capitol that can be seen through the window in the background.

Cute, but how accurate is this depiction that the Church influences outcomes at the Utah State Legislature, and if so, to what extent?

The Church makes no apology for making its views known on issues that it considers essential to the well-being of Utah society.  It does so as part of our democratic process, through formal lobbying of members of the legislature in the same way that other interest groups seek to explain their views.

But, despite some journalists and cartoonists’ assertions, such involvement in public policy matters is minimal in terms of the entire legislative agenda.

Let’s look as some numbers.  During the 2003 session of the legislature, 707 bills and resolutions were considered.  The Church took a position on just seven.  Here they are:

• Alcohol. Before 2002, the Church objected to wholesale changes in the alcohol laws to cater for the Olympics, arguing that such far-reaching decisions should not be made to accommodate a 17-day event.  With the Games over, the Church worked with a coalition representing the hospitality industry, the Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control, and others to find language that would not lead to over-consumption, would not contribute to underage drinking, and yet would meet the legitimate needs of those who wish to drink.  With agreement of those major coalition partners, the Church took a “not oppose” position on the comprehensive alcohol bill (SB 153), the increase in the beer tax (SB 66), and the minors’ driver license bill (SB 127), and then worked to encourage their passage as agreed.
• Weapons in houses of worship.  The Church was unhappy about being unable to restrict guns in churches without having to post signs outside its buildings asking people to check their weapons.  At the suggestion of legislative leadership, Church representatives met with pro-concealed-weapons advocates, and as a result, language was added to SB 108 that allows, among other options, for notice prohibiting concealed weapons to be published annually in newspapers of general distribution.
• Hate crime amendments. The Church publicly announced that it would “not oppose” HB 85.  Incidentally, that bill died in the House.
• Volunteer exemption for vehicle registration.  Currently students and military personnel are exempt from registering their vehicles after being in the state six months. HB 254, which incorporates language suggested by the Church, expands the exemption for up to two years for individuals who are engaged without pay “in public, charitable, educational or religious services for a government agency or for an organization that qualifies for tax-exempt status.”  This obviously includes older couple missionary service and is an administrative convenience that speaks for itself.
• Court-ordered counseling.  The Church expressed concern to the sponsor of HB 325, “Court-ordered Counseling,” because of potential State entanglements with clergy.  In the interim, Church representatives will work with the sponsor to see if a satisfactory solution can be found.

In addition, legislators asked the Church about two other matters.  The first, which has been considered in the past, deals with the possible complete privatization of  This is the Place State Park, which is currently overseen by a foundation that is subsidized by the State.  The State would save about $750,000 per year if the park were completely privatized.  After being asked by a legislator about this issue, the Church referred consideration of privatization to the foundation.

The other matter the Church was asked about by a legislator was a proposed resolution calling for a constitution amendment defining marriage.  The Church, although it is a vigorous advocate of traditional marriage, took no position on this proposed resolution.

That’s it. There were no winks or nods on other bills.  No secret meetings.  No private deals.  The Church’s position was made public on all major issues.

The numbers for 2003 are very typical of any given legislative session.  Ask any legislator, and the chances are that he or she has never heard from the Church about anything in any year.

So the next time someone makes a comment about the Church controlling the legislature, understand that the thumb seldom goes up, down, or sideways.