“Count My Vote” warns lawmakers about undoing deal

This is an archived article and the information in the article may be outdated. Please look at the time stamp on the story to see when it was last updated.

File photo: Count My Vote volunteers work to collect signatures in October of 2013.

SALT LAKE CITY — Organizers of “Count My Vote,” the signature initiative that allowed candidates to skip the caucus and convention system, are warning lawmakers not to go back on a deal.

In a letter sent to lawmakers on Friday and obtained by FOX 13, former Utah Governor Mike Leavitt, Utah Jazz owner Gail Miller and others who backed “Count My Vote” urged them not to pass new bills, which could undo a compromise between them, the governor and lawmakers.

Read the letter here:

Count My Vote letter to lawmaker

Last year, Governor Gary Herbert signed a compromise law that gave candidates the option to get on the ballot with a signature drive, skipping the caucus/convention system.

The Utah Republican Party is suing the state over that law. A hearing on the lawsuit is slated for April in federal court.

Count My Vote co-founder Kirk Jowers told FOX 13 on Friday that he believes the bills seeking to undo the compromise will not pass. However, he warned that if they did — Count My Vote could return as a signature drive forcing a ballot initiative.

2 comments

  • utah_1

    Two election law bills do not change the requirements of the deal. They do delay one general election. The Utah GOP is suing re: 2014 SB 54over major constitutional issues.

    The new bills provides time to see what happens there. Also SB 54 requires all 29 county conventions and the state convention happen in two weeks which is near impossible. It also requires a change in the way delegates vote or requires twice as many there just in case one doesn’t vote for back up. Salt Lake County would need 5000 seats vs 2500 and the state convention would need 8000 seats vs 4000. That doesn’t include the rest of the counties.
    Is more time needed, yes.

    One of the “bills” sends the whole discussion to the voters as a constitutional amendment.

    One fixes the majority/plurality issue that was raised last year and was supposed to be fixed this year.

  • Mark D. Butler

    The CMV people are being unusually disingenuous if not dishonest here. There is no deal. Period. The legislature never voted on any deal. The legislature doesn’t have the authority to enter a deal like that even if it wanted to, because so doing would purport to bind future legislatures in the same manner that passing a law that stated “this law may not be amended” would.

    This is not a matter of speculation, but of absolute historical fact. There was no deal with the legislature, there is no legal documentation, record, or evidence of a deal with the legislature, and any pretense to the contrary is wishful thinking at best.

Comments are closed.