OCR Text |
Show PlNpttEfiii More noticeable than anything about the Twenty-ninth Legislature's Legis-lature's first three and a half weeks has been the lack of color and fireworks. Since the House of Representatives Representa-tives took four days to effect an organization from its 30-30 party split, there has been little of the type of action in either house that would keep a gallery alert as to what was going on. It could be that the entire session ses-sion will run at the same pace as the first one-third of the 60-day 60-day grind. But with issues piling up on the calendars the way they are, considerable well-heated debate de-bate might well develop. For instance, four different reapportionment re-apportionment bills have been Introduced, two in each house,, and a complete highway program of the Utah Legislative Council, including a raise of two cents in gas tax, is in the Senate. Also, the schools have asked for an increase of $500, from $3300 to $3800, In the minimum classroom unit and for a ten per cent increase in-crease in the ceiling on taxes they may levy over and above the minimum program. Also at issue is certain to be the biennially presented proposal to refund taxes on motor fuel put to non-highway use, a measure meas-ure that effects gas used in farm machinery. A good deal of the controversial controver-sial matter will be thrashed out by the appropriations committee. Headed by Sen. Alonzo F. Hop-kin Hop-kin (D-Woodruff) and Rep. W. G. (Bill) Larson (D-Magna), this committee faces a task of fitting department requests to estimated revenues. Certain to influence the thinking think-ing are the figures presented by Gov. J. Bracken Lee in his budget bud-get message. He said general fund requests totaled more than 521,000,000, and that estimated revenues amount to $15,095,000, including the surplus of more than $3,000,000 carried over from the current biennium. Out of this he hewed a budget of a bit over $14,800,000. What the appropriations committee com-mittee may determine as estimated esti-mated revenues may be a quite different figure somewhat higher high-er than the governor'sand the appropriations, consequently may be considerably higher than those recommended by the chief executive. , But knowing of the governor's veto power and his strong stand for a balanced budget, however, the committee undoubtedly will attempt to keep the expenditures expendi-tures very close to estimated revenues. Action on apportionment if it should come has the markings of a red-hot rural -urban scrap in both houses. On the other hand, so wide a range Is covered by the bills introduced, that nothing may come of the question again this year. The constitution requires re-quires reapportionment on the federal census, each ten years, but the matter has been left alone since 1930. There are those who think the present apportionment could hardly be bettered and that the law might best be changed to meet the present numbers. That would mean that the four measures mea-sures on the line would die a natural na-tural death. First to appear was a bill to re apportion on a basis of two senators for each senatorial district dis-trict (cutting five senators out of Salt Lake County), and representatives rep-resentatives on a basis of one for each 10,000 population, as of now. This measure was sponsored spon-sored by 11 rural senators all but one, Sen. Marl D. Gibson (D-Price). (D-Price). Five urban senators were on a bill to re-apportion the Senate on a basis of one for each 29,000 population, instead of the present pres-ent 27,000, and the House on a basis of one for each 12,000, instead in-stead of 10,000 as now. That would give Salt Lake county two more senators. Utah county and Weber county one more each. Salt Lake county would get four more representatives, Weber, Davis Da-vis and Utah would get two more each, and Sanpete would lose one. Latest to appear were two bills in the House, one sponsored by 25 rural representatives and one by 26 Weber, Tooele, Salt Lake and Carbon representatives. The first would set up the Legislature with one senator from each county coun-ty and representatives on the present basis, giving Salt Lake county eight new members, Davis Da-vis two, Carbon one, Weber and Utah three each, and removing one from Sanpete. The other bill calls for strict re-apportionment on the present basis,'" providing three more senators sen-ators for Salt Lake county, Utah and Weber counties one more senator each, and would increase the representatives as in the aforementioned bill. At present outlook, it appears some sort of a compromise may be worked out on both the school fund hike request and the legislative legis-lative council recommendation to jump gas taxes and truck license li-cense fees. Given less chance of getting , attention, however, are proposals of the governor picked pick-ed in similar bills introduced by some House Democrats to lower Income taxes by raising exemptions, and to take the sales tax off food. Many legislators have expressed the opinion eff the record, tax decreases in these times are most difficult to secure se-cure and that it would be quite satisfactory if they just hold the line with no increases. About the only Senate action to show signs of bringing on some controversial debate was a brief flurry over a resolution of Sen. Mark Paxton (R-Fillmore) and Senator Hopkin to memorialize memor-ialize leaders of both political parties in congress to forget their political differences and formulate formu-late a unified, clear-cut foreign policy. The Democrats came out of a caucus and voted solid to table the bill on motion of Senator Hopkin, against a solid front of eight Republicans. The motion to table was not debatable, but in explaining his vote, Senator Pax-ton Pax-ton charged that the Democratic Democra-tic members of the Senate had been "whipped" by "party bosses" boss-es" to a point where they "did not dare to stand up and be counted". It required a majority of the Senate to lift the' bill from the table for consideration. One bill, other than legislative legisla-tive salaries and expenses, was passed by both houses during the second week, and effects the out- lying areas of the state seeking co-operative fire : protection. ' It would permit establishment of fire protection districts in unincorporated unin-corporated areas. |