Show Arguments Against The Constitution was written to eliminate government tyrany not to have the government chain people down by limiting their powers This constitutional revision will take away YOUR right to have a candidate run against ajudge in an election It limits individual rights to remove judges from office by permitting UNOPPOSED RETENTION ELECTIONS every ten years for Supreme Court J udges and every six years for other judges Ask yourself these questions: (1) What form of elections? (2) What kind of government has uncontested government does not allow competition in candidates? (3) What kind of government has moved justice away from the people by making government unaccountable to the people through the voting process? (4) What kind of government allows only one candidate per office on the ballot? (unopposed retention elections) (5) What form of government eliminates scrutiny by the people? (6) What form of government muzzles the people in the ballotiny system? (7) Under the American check & balance system of government should the judiciary police itself without scrutiny from thepeople?(8) Why put the elitistJudicial Council A Judicial Conduct Commission twofunctioning in the Constitution committees thus making them difficult to eliminate or change should the need arise? This constitutional revision goes beyond the point of CLUB" forming a “EXCLUSIVE It allows the Judicial Branch to rise above the level of of the people instead serving the citizenry This atrocity is perpetuated by the judiciary for the convenience of the judiciary and it should be offensive to LOVING PEOPLE FREEDOM Vote “AGAINST" Proposition 3 Representative Francis Hatch Merrill 4280 South 838 East Salt Lake City Utah 84107 The people need to know that Proposition 3 proposes drastic undesirable changes in our constitution There are two or three good suggestions within the proposal however several very bad provisions are included within the package The good provisions should be submitted to the people rather than “take it or leave it” in a single package 3 will give unprecedented power and Proposition For to the judicial branch of government authority instance the present constitution reads that “judges may be removed from office by twathirds vote of both houses of the legislature" This gives the people through their representa lives some control Proposition S would remove this safety valve and the judicial branch would account only to themselves for their action This would also take from the people the Inherent right to elect Judges This would also give the Supreme Court unprecedented power and authority to govern the practice of law in Utah including who would be admitted to the bar and under what circumstances The proposed article was rushed through a special session of the legislature without time to go through the It may be we need some regular legislative process changes this proposal certainly is not the answer There are many legislators who voted to have the proposed amendment on the ballot yet themselves will vote against Proposition 3 Vote "AGAINST" Proposition Senators Barlow Bangerter concur! No 3 Matheson Overson Sandberg Senator E Verl Asay Senate Chairman Judiciary Study Committee South 1950 West Taylorsville Utah 84118 4857 Rebuttal to against Proposition Arguments No 3 Utahns respect the US Constitution and the principles it outlines A most important principle is the need for an independent judiciary The constitution provides for the President to appoint federal judges subject to review by the US Senate If approved federal judges are appointed for life Proposition 3 proposes a similar method for selecting state judges However Proposition 3 contains additional safeguards: nominating commissions to screen applicants and periodic review of judges by the people Proposition 3 for selecting and actually includes more protections reviewing state judges than the US Constitution does for federal judges Selection methods similar to Proposition 3 are used in many other states These procedures have been very effective at attracting good judges and removing poor ones It has been shown that poor judges are often more likely to be removed with retention elections than with contested elections judicial elections raise the possiblity of For example election campaigns require For judicial elections raised by contributions usually money money comes primarily from lawyers and other persons who regularly appear before judges This situation can easily result in conflicts of interest and compromise the independence and integrity of the judiciary Contested serious abuse Proposition 3 is one of the most thoroughly studied proposals ever presented to Utah voters It has been carefully reviewed by state and national authorities for nearly five years Most of the changes have not been suggested by the courts but by citizens concerned that Utah maintain an effective court system VOTE “FOR" PROPOSITION 3! Senator Karl N Snow Jr Chairman Constitutional Revision Committee 1847 North Oak Lane Provo Utah 84604 Representative G LaMont Richards House Chairman Higher Education Study Committee PO Box 25717 Salt Lake City Utah 84125 |