Category: survey says

Posted on

Response: NRA-PVF

I’m not interested in this endorsement because the NRA does not represent responsible and accountable gun ownership. Their PAC actively works against the better interests of our citizenry.

The NRA sells fear.

What’s interesting is that their survey fails to address owner accountability. In Utah during the month of August-September 2024, 3 children were shot and 2 subsequently died as a result of finding unsecured, loaded firearms. Question #13 of the survey (owners of lost/stolen weapons to be held blameless) is the closest the NRA will get to negligent storage of a firearm.

For transparency, I completed answers (but did not submit) the National Rifle Association – Political Victory Fund 2024 NRA-PVF Utah Candidate Questionnaire so that my positions on these questions can be shared with constituents.

Message from NRA-PVF (ilastateaffairs@nrahq.org)
Dear Utah Candidate,

The 2024 Utah Primary Election is right around the corner, and our members want to hear about you regarding your stance on the Second Amendment.

As America’s foremost defender of our Second Amendment rights, the NRA, since its inception, has been the premier firearms education organization in the world. Our continued leadership is due to the tireless service of our millions of members that have championed Second Amendment rights and NRA programs throughout the nation.

NRA members are deeply involved in the democratic process at all levels of government. It is important for them to learn about your commitment to preserving and protecting their Second Amendment rights. The 2024 Utah NRA-PVF Candidate Questionnaire can be found above by clicking on the Review & Sign button. Candidate questionnaires are not released to the public, but the information derived from them is used to determine candidate ratings, which are communicated to our members. Please take the time to fill out and return this survey as soon as possible, so we can let our members know your positions on these important issues.

If you choose not to return a questionnaire, you may be assigned a “?” rating, which can be interpreted by our members as indifference, if not outright hostility, toward Second Amendment-related issues.

Should you have questions concerning the questionnaire or the rating process, please contact me at (564) 236-9746 or KHopkins@nrahq.org.

Thank you for your prompt attention, and best of luck in the upcoming election!
Sincerely,

Keely Hopkins
Utah State Director

Please mark the best and most appropriate response that aligns with your views.

1. Do you agree that the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution guarantees the fundamental, individual right to keep and bear arms for all law-abiding Americans? (Yes/No)

x No, it is not a guarantee. Like all rights, the 2nd amendment is not limitless. It says that “a well regulated militia” (i.e. a military force that is raised from the civil population) is necessary.

  • What about the “well regulated” part?
  • What “Arms” should be defined as belonging to the citizenry?
  • What fundamental right does this grant to an individual?
  • Does one person’s fundamental right to bear Arms supercede another person’s fundamental right to a safe community?
  • The “right of the people” does not presume individual ownership.
  • The question states that the right should be for law-abiding citizens, but the 2a doesn’t say that, it says “the right of the people”. Do you disagree that the right of the people is all people who are US citizens?

I want responsible, accountable gun ownership with regulation, and a common acceptance that defense is for the mutual benefit of a free state, not gun hoarding, not fanaticism, not Battle Royale.

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. – U.S. Constitution – Second Amendment

2. Firearm registration is a system in which a government agency maintains immediately accessible records of specific firearms owned by individual citizens. Current federal law prohibits the creation of a federal firearm registration system (other than the existing registration requirement for machineguns and short-barreled rifles and shotguns). Firearm registration has led to gun bans and confiscation in the United States (California and New York City) and abroad (Australia and Great Britain). Do you support requiring firearm owners to register their firearms with a government agency? (Yes/No)

x No. Utah does not require firearm owners to register their firearms.

3. Statewide preemption laws ensure that the state controls firearm regulations, and prevents counties, cities, and other municipalities from passing a “patchwork” of more restrictive and conflicting local laws throughout the state. Do you support Utah’s firearms preemption law? (Yes/No)

x No.

4. In 1994, President Bill Clinton signed a 10-year ban on the importation and manufacture for sale to private persons of nearly 200 models of semi-automatic firearms and ammunition magazines that could hold more than 10 rounds. This became known as the 1994 Assault Weapons Ban. Federal studies determined the ban had no measurable effect on crime, and it was allowed to expire in 2004. Do you support a similar ban on semi-automatic firearms in Utah? (Yes/No)

x It’s complicated. Certain firearms are not for hunting, sport, or personal defense. Those weapons should qualify for restrictions that are reasonable. Additional modifications, regardless of the actuating mechanism, that can turn a firearm into an automatic weapon also need to be restricted.

5. While there is no evidence that limiting the capacity of an ammunition magazine has any impact on reducing crime or increasing public safety, some states are introducing legislation to restrict the possession, ownership, purchase, sale, and/or transfer of ammunition magazines by limiting the number of rounds of ammunition a magazine can hold. Many of these magazines are sold standard with firearms and are commonly-owned. Do you support banning the possession, ownership, purchase, sale, and/or transfer of magazines based on their size? (Yes/No)

x No.

6. Efforts at the state level are increasingly targeting access to ammunition, with proposals to ban mail order sales, require background checks and point-of-sale record-keeping, eliminate traditional lead shot, ration purchases, and even restrict the amount of ammunition that may be possessed at one time. Most of these proposals at the state level aim to punish law-abiding people who practice, train, and participate in recreational shooting activities. Do you support new restrictions on the purchase and possession of ammunition beyond current law? (Yes/No, if Yes, list restrictions)

x Yes, however I disagree that these suggestions are punishment. Ideally we need to phase out lead ammunition used for hunting with a cost effective, more environmentally safe bullet that doesn’t poison scavenger species. This is something that should be introduced within the market and not legislated. Regarding sales tracking, how on earth are you planning to get around that? Internet history, cookies, site accounts, sales records, forums, etc already provide a wealth of information to anyone who wants to look for it.

7. Currently, it is legal for adults over the age of 18 to purchase and possess long guns. Some argue the age to buy rifles and shotguns should be increased to 21. This would effectively deny law-abiding adults, ages 18 to 20, their Second Amendment rights. Do you support raising the age for the purchase of rifles and shotguns to 21 years of age? (Yes/No)

x I support restrictions of firearm sales based on the type of weapon sold that would apply to all buyers.

8. A foundational principle of the American judicial system is the guarantee that an individual is entitled to due process – including notice of the relevant accusations, the opportunity to appear at a hearing before a neutral judge, the opportunity to present evidence in his or her favor, and access to legal representation before they can be stripped of a Constitutional right. Do you agree that an individual’s Second Amendment Right cannot be denied without stringent due process? (Yes/No)

x I support red-flag laws to identify patterns of physical violence and suicidal behavior, or for people who are mentally ill (psychotic, delusional, or otherwise incapable of making a rational decision). The challenge here is what balance there is on when and why to strip a right from a person, and also protect timely restoration of their rights. This is not a simple question to answer, but there are cases where an individual should not have access to a firearm.

9. Gun-free zones create arbitrary boundaries where law-abiding citizens arc disarmed, while zero measures are taken to prevent criminals from entering. Many argue that law-abiding gun owners should be allowed to carry a firearm for self-defense outside their home, especially on public property that is not considered a “secured” facility. Secured facilities are those where all points of ingress and egress are protected by metal detectors and armed security. Do you support state legislation reducing or eliminating gun-free zones that are not secured? (Yes/No)

x No. Churches, Schools, Counseling Centers, Restaurants, Malls, Fairgrounds, Arenas, and any other establishment public or private can have rules on whether firearms are permitted on a property.

10. The “instant” background check system only prohibits the purchase of firearms based on objective disqualifiers. Due process requires the government to substantiate firearm purchase denials with reliable documentation. A “safety valve” provision in current law enforces this requirement by allowing (not mandating) an FFL to proceed with a sale after 3 business days if the FBI still has not denied the sale (illegal possession, of course, remains actionable). Gun control advocates want to repeal this safety-valve and have proposed increasing the “acceptable” time period of delays to a week, ten days, or even indefinitely. Do you support current law allowing the purchase of a firearm to proceed after 3 business days if the FBI still has not denied the sale? (Yes/No)

x No. Point of correction, in Utah background checks are performed by the Utah Bureau of Criminal Identification (BCI).

11. Efforts at the state level are increasingly targeting the expansion of Utah’s background check system. Currently, all sales in Utah, through a federally licensed dealer, have to go through the state’s Bureau of Criminal Identification (BCI) for the criminal background check, which uses the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS), along with other Utah databases. Note: Transfer includes loans, leases, and gifts. Do you support expanding the background check system in Utah to include private sales or transfers of firearms (so-called “universal” background checks)? (Yes/No)

x Yes. I 100% support this.

12. Several states and the District of Columbia require mandatory waiting periods before the purchaser of a firearm may take possession of the firearm. For example, California and the District of Columbia require a 10-day waiting period from the date of purchase to the date of delivery. Do you support mandating waiting periods between the purchase and delivery of firearms? (Yes/No, if Yes, number of days for waiting period)

x No. As long as the application and background checks have been completed successfully, there should be no waiting period for the purchase of a firearm.

13. Lawmakers at the state and local level have been introducing legislation to criminalize the failure to report the loss or theft of a firearm within a certain period of time from when the owner “knew or should have known” of the loss or theft. Proponents claim, although they have never demonstrated, that this will deter illegal firearms trafficking. While the NRA certainly does not oppose the reporting of lost and stolen firearms, it does oppose stigmatizing and punishing the victims of crime or those who suffer loss from events, such as natural catastrophes, that are not their fault. The message these laws send is that persons whose firearms are lost or stolen are somehow to blame or are complicit in the criminal acts of another person. Do you support making it a crime to fail to report the loss or theft of a firearm within a specified time period? (Yes/No)

x No. Comment: Crimes should be reported, and a loss of theft of a firearm should be recorded to protect the owner from possible legal repercussions if the firearm is later involved in a crime.

14. California recently enacted an excise tax of 11% on the sale of firearms and ammunition in addition to existing fees and taxes. The new tax was referred to by the Governor as a “sin tax”. Do you support imposing an additional tax specifically targeted at the retail sale of firearms or ammunition?
Note: All firearm and ammunition sales are currently subject to an 11% federal excise tax known as the Pittman-Robertson Act and applicable state and local taxes. (Yes/No, if yes what additional tax)

x Everything is taxable. California bill AB28 “Gun Violence Prevention and School Safety Act” was passed on Sept. 26, 2023 and went into effect on July 1. For the California bill, money raised is earmarked to pay for things like violence intervention programs, firearm relinquishment, gun safety education and school-based mental health and behavioral services.

15. Increased development, due to a growing and shifting population, has put many established gun clubs and shooting ranges at risk of being squeezed out. This encroachment has led to lawsuits and local ordinances that aim to put established ranges out of business. To combat this, some states have enacted range protection laws or have strengthened existing range protection laws. Do you support Utah’s shooting range protection laws? (Yes/No)

x No. This isn’t a state legislative issue. Work with cities and counties for permits and zoning issues.

16. The Utah Division of Wildlife Resources (DWR) issues over 250,000 hunting licenses annually and the fees from these licenses pay for wildlife conservation across the state. If hunting is an essential tool for wildlife management and conservation, as well as an American tradition that teaches self-reliance, responsibility, and respect for nature. Further, hunting is already heavily regulated by DWR. Do you support further restrictions or bans on hunting? (Yes/No, if Yes, list restrictions)

x No. Comment: My point here is that the Division of Wildlife Resources can continue to be responsible for regulation. I’m not sure what further restrictions the NRA is suggesting, and their language is leading.

17. Traditional lead ammunition is the most common, cost-effective form of ammunition across the United States, but it has been under attack on both the federal and state levels recently by various anti-gun/anti- hunting groups. Non-traditional ammunition, such as ammunition containing tungsten or copper, is expensive and sometimes difficult to find, especially in rural areas. Consideration of any regulation or limitation on traditional ammunition should be based on sound science and population-level impacts. The Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies adopted a resolution in 2010 which stated that “state agencies should focus regulation efforts where population-level impacts to wildlife are substantiated.” Do you support banning or limiting traditional lead ammunition? (Yes/No, if Yes, explain)

x As stated previously, we need to phase out lead ammunition used for hunting with a cost effective, more environmentally safe bullet that doesn’t poison scavenger species.

18. Firearm registration facilitates firearm confiscation. Understanding that the federal government and most states are prohibited from or do not keep a registry of firearms or firearm owners, gun control activists have attempted to deputize banks and credit card payment processors to maintain private firearm transaction data that will be used to track the purchasing habits of law-abiding gun owners. These gun control activists have encouraged banks and payment processors to utilize a gun dealer specific Merchant Category Code to monitor lawful credit card purchases at firearm retailers. Do you support Utah’s recently enacted law that prohibits banks and payment processors from collecting private firearm owner data? (Yes/No)

x As stated previously, Utah does not require firearm owners to register their firearms. Regarding sales tracking, how on earth are you planning to get around that? Internet history, cookies, site accounts, sales records, forums, etc already provide a wealth of information to anyone who wants to look for it.

19. Are you a member of the National Rifle Association or any other firearm/shooting sports/sportsmen’s organization? (Yes, NRA {Membership Number}, Yes, Member of other Org {List}, No)

x No

20. Have you ever run for or held an elected office? (Yes {List Office}, No)

x No

Please feel free to use the space below to provide additional comments or policy positions you’d like to add, including your history and involvement with the NRA. If your campaign has released a position paper on firearm or Second Amendment related issues, please attach those as well.

Thank you for your time and consideration.

Comments:

The NRA sells fear.

What’s interesting is that this survey fails to address owner accountability. In Utah during the month of August-September 2024, 3 children were shot and 2 subsequently died as a result of finding unsecured, loaded firearms. Question #13 of the survey (owners of lost/stolen weapons to be held blameless) is the closest the NRA will get to negligent storage of a firearm.

Posted on

Response: Moms Demand Action

Sept 17 update: I’m pleased to announce that I was awarded the 2024 Moms Demand Action Gun Sense Candidate distinction for my advocacy of common-sense gun safety.

For transparency, I am providing my answers from my application to Moms Demand Action 2024 Moms Demand Action Gun Sense Candidate questionnaire so that my positions on these questions can be shared with constituents.

Everytown for Gun Safety and Moms Demand Action are committed to creating a movement and culture that is diverse, inclusive, and equitable, and being intentional about the intersectional nature of our work. To that end, candidates who apply for the Gun Sense Candidate distinction should not only be ready to commit to governing with gun safety in mind, but must also commit to ensuring that their words and actions promote equity across all communities.

x I commit to governing with gun safety in mind and promoting equity across all communities.

Addressing Gun Violence in America

1. Every day, 120 people in the United States are killed with guns and more than 200 are shot and wounded. The gun homicide rate in the U.S. is 26 times higher than that of other high-income countries. Data and research shows that common-sense public safety measures can reduce gun violence and save lives.

Do you believe that state elected officials have a role to play in addressing gun violence in the United States?
x Yes

Background Checks

2. Federal law requires that a person pass a background check before buying a gun from a licensed firearm dealer. Since 1994, more than 4 million illegal gun sales have been blocked, including to people convicted of a felony, domestic abusers, and people barred due to mental illness. But the federal law does not apply if a person buys a gun from an unlicensed seller. This means that criminals can easily buy guns from strangers they meet online or at gun shows, with no questions asked. States can close this loophole by passing a law extending background checks to unlicensed sellers.

Do you support expanding the background checks requirement, to prevent prohibited people from buying guns with no questions asked?
x Yes

Extreme Risk Protection Order

3. When a person is in crisis, loved ones and law enforcement are often the first to see warning signs. Extreme Risk laws, often called Red Flag laws, allow them to ask a judge to temporarily remove guns when a person poses a danger to themselves or others. If a court finds that a person poses a significant threat, that person is temporarily barred from purchasing and possessing guns. Twenty-one states and DC have passed these laws, including sixteen since 2018.

Do you support Extreme Risk Protection Orders (a.ka. Red Flag laws), which can help prevent firearm suicide and mass shootings?
x Yes

Secure Storage

4. Secure firearm storage can reduce the risks of suicide, unintentional shootings, and school shootings. An estimated 4.6 million American children live in households with at least one firearm that is loaded and unsecured. Three-quarters of school shooters got their firearm from the home of a parent or close relative. One study found that households that locked both firearms and ammunition were associated with a 78 percent lower risk of self-inflicted firearm injuries and an 85 percent lower risk of unintentional injuries among children and teens.

Do you support policies requiring gun owners to store their firearms securely — locked and inaccessible to unauthorized users, including children and prohibited people?
x Yes

Suicide by Gun

5. Nearly six out of ten of all gun deaths in the U.S. are suicides. Gun suicides claim the lives of nearly 25,000 people in America every year–that’s an average of 68 deaths a day. But many of these deaths could be prevented if guns were taken out of the equation: access to a gun triples the risk of death by suicide. In addition to legislative solutions like the Extreme Risk Protection Order and secure firearm storage requirements, building public awareness about the suicide risks posed by firearm access is crucial to saving lives.

Do you support educating the public about the unique role firearms play in America’s suicide epidemic?
x Yes

Ghost Guns

6. New products designed to evade gun laws–including widely available kits that convert unfinished parts into fully functional firearms and new capability in 3D printing technology–make it easy for prohibited people to make their own guns at home. These untraceable “ghost guns” can be assembled in less than an hour and let criminals skip the background check system. Ghost gun recoveries across the U.S. are on the rise, and have been connected with criminal enterprises, gun trafficking rings, and far-right extremists.

Do you support prohibitions on building “ghost guns” at home outside of the background check system?
x. No (see comment below)

Protecting Victims of Domestic Abuse

7. Women in the U.S. are 28 times more likely to be killed by gun homicide than women in other high-income countries. And when a gun is present in a domestic violence situation, the woman is five times more likely to be killed. Federal law prohibits many domestic abusers from possessing firearms, but states play a primary role in enforcement — and can pass their own domestic violence laws. Evidence shows these state laws are especially effective at preventing gun violence if they require abusers to turn in their guns once they become prohibited.

Do you support state legislation that prohibits gun possession by abusers convicted of domestic violence or under final restraining orders, and ensures abusers turn in their guns promptly after becoming prohibited?
x Yes

Funding Community Violence Intervention

8. Community-based violence intervention programs apply a localized approach to address gun violence in neighborhoods with particularly high rates of gun violence. Numerous studies demonstrate that evidence-based intervention and prevention — for example, through street- or hospital-based outreach — can reduce gunshot woundings and deaths in the communities most impacted by gun violence.

Do you support robust public funding in your state for localized violence intervention programs that support people at the highest risk of being shot and killed?
x Yes

Public Carry of Firearms

9. Over the last several years, the gun lobby has gone from statehouse to statehouse seeking to enact “permitless carry,” which would pose a public safety risk by removing the requirement that a person get a permit before carrying a hidden, loaded handgun in public. These laws often remove important safety standards, such as denials for people who pose a danger and requirements for safety training and no recent violent acts. Strong permit laws are critically important after the Supreme Court decision in Bruen struck down gold-standard provisions in some states.

Do you support state permitting requirements, including firearm safety training, in order to carry concealed handguns in public?
x Yes

10. Increasingly in recent years, political extremists have taken advantage of gaps in state law to carry guns openly in public as a means of intimidation. In 2020, anti-government extremists, including the ascendant boogaloo movement and white supremacists, used guns, in particular assault weapons, as tools of intimidation and violence in increasingly open ways. Taking advantage of weak state gun laws, they have brandished weapons at anti-government protests, intimidated peaceful protests for racial justice, and even killed people.

Do you support a law prohibiting the open carry of firearms in public?
x. Yes

Police Use of Force and Accountability

11. Police violence is gun violence – 95 percent of civilian deaths caused by police are with a firearm, and Black people are victims at a disproportionate rate. Police shootings have a corrosive impact on our communities as they foster distrust which makes it harder for law enforcement to keep communities safe. Local leaders must commit to supporting targeted reforms that will help prevent shootings and build trust. These reforms should include: a strong legal standard barring the unnecessary use of force and a standard requiring officers to intervene to stop abuse, a commitment to de-escalation, deploying formal tools to identify misconduct, a thorough and independent review system for use of force incidents, and transparency about use of force and other policies and procedures.

Do you support police accountability measures that promote deescalation, promote transparency, and that aim to eliminate unnecessary use of force?
x Yes

Shoot First Laws

12. Shoot First laws, called “Stand Your Ground” by the gun lobby, allow people when outside of their home to shoot and kill others even if they could safely and easily avoid using deadly force. These laws go well beyond traditional self-defense principles – emboldening vigilante violence and encouraging people to seek out confrontation. They are also associated with increases in firearm homicides.

Do you oppose Shoot First laws?
x Yes (see comment below)

Guns in Schools and Colleges

13. The gun lobby has campaigned in statehouses to allow guns in K-12 schools, to arm teachers, and even to force colleges and universities to allow guns onto their campuses. There is no evidence that arming teachers can help stop school shootings—and on the contrary, armed civilians are more likely to cause confusion when law enforcement respond to a shooting, and guns in schools may be accessed by children when not under the teacher’s control. College life is also full of risk factors that make the presence of guns dangerous, with research showing that college students face significant mental health challenges. Arming teachers and forcing guns onto college campuses is broadly opposed by law enforcement, students, and educators.

Do you oppose allowing guns in K-12 schools and colleges, outside of law enforcement and security staff?
x Yes

Preemption of Local Gun Safety Laws

14. After a decades-long effort by the gun lobby, most states now have some form of firearms preemption law, blocking towns and cities from adopting their own gun laws suited to local needs. These preemption laws often bar mayors and police chiefs from taking steps to address gun violence, and in some cases even have punitive provisions that leave taxpayers on the hook for court costs and fees.

Do you oppose broad firearms preemption laws, which block local officials from passing and enforcing laws that keep communities safe from gun violence?
x Yes

Holding the Gun Industry Accountable

15. In 2005, at the strong urging of the gun lobby, Congress passed the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, one of the biggest giveaways to private industry in American history, giving the gun industry more protection from litigation than makers and sellers of cars or tobacco products. In recent years, several states have fought back against this unique type of immunity, passing laws that push back on industry by empowering gun violence survivors (and/or state authorities) to file suit against gunmakers and dealers whose bad conduct results in harm.

Do you support giving gun violence survivors access to justice by allowing them to take bad industry actors to court?
x Yes

Assault Weapons

16. Assault weapons have been shown to increase the number of people killed and wounded in mass shootings—as they enable shooters to fire more quickly and with more destructive force. Researchers have found that the federal prohibition on assault weapons and high-capacity magazines was associated with a significant decrease in public mass shootings and related casualties.

Do you support an assault weapons ban that would bar new civilian purchases of these weapons of war?
x Yes (see comment below)

ABOUT

Moms Demand Action
Moms Demand Action is part of Everytown for Gun Safety, an organization with nearly ten million supporters. Moms Demand Action is the nation’s largest grassroots volunteer network working to end gun violence and campaigns for new and stronger solutions to lax gun laws and loopholes that jeopardize the safety of our families, educates policymakers and parents about the importance of secure firearm storage and works to create a culture of gun safety through partnerships with businesses, community organizations and influencers. There is a Moms Demand Action chapter in every state of the country and more than 700 local groups across the country.

Students Demand Action
Students Demand Action is the largest grassroots, youth-led gun violence prevention group in the country with more than 550 groups and active volunteers in every state and the District of Columbia. The movement, created by and for teens and young adults, aims to channel the energy and passion of high school and college-aged students into the fight against gun violence. Students Demand Action volunteers organize within their schools and communities to educate their peers, register voters, and demand common-sense solutions to this national public health crisis at the local, state, and federal level. Students Demand Action is part of Everytown for Gun Safety, the largest gun violence prevention organization in the country with nearly ten million supporters and more than 700,000 donors. For more information or to get involved visit www.studentsdemandaction.org.
Have you been an active participant with a Moms Demand Action Chapter, Students Demand Action Group, or the Everytown Survivor Network?

x No

Survivors of Gun Violence
The Everytown Survivor Network is inclusive of anyone who has personally experienced gun violence—whether you have witnessed an act of gun violence, been threatened or wounded with a gun, or had someone you know wounded or killed with a gun. This includes but is not limited to gun suicides, domestic violence involving a gun, and unintentional shootings. Have you or a loved one experienced gun violence – such as homicide, suicide, wounding, witnessing gun violence?

x Yes

COMMENTS

Would you like to provide any background?
I grew up in rural Alaska in a hunting and trapping family; lived in the East Bay, California for 10 years, and have spent the last 24 years here in Utah. I had a childhood friend killed by his brother because they were playing with unlocked guns in their house. At my first job I was one of two assault victims where a person used a gun. I have extended family who have been stalked, attacked and shot, or killed. In the East Bay I had co-workers who were killed, or seriously disabled in drive-by shootings. I had a much-revered teacher who committed suicide with a gun. Since living here in Utah I have had a co-worker who committed suicide with a gun, and there have been multiple child fatalities in my own neighborhood from access to unlocked guns. I haven’t even mentioned school shootings, mass shootings, road rage incidents, or brandishing.

Would you like to provide any additional background for any of your responses to this questionnaire?

Thank you for this questionnaire.

Beside working on common sense gun control measures, I want to start building a coalition of voices for 2a regulation that can advocate at the state level. I really would be interested in strategies for engagement, and making conversations that build trust and respect.

My commitment in the campaign (Utah House District 44) is that I will listen to constituents, and I will represent local issues for Utahns. Gun control here is hotly contested, even when most agree that sensible measures need to be put in place to improve safety and reduce harm. There is a lot of the mentality of “a good guy with a gun” that results in bills being passed for non-permitted concealed carry, to arm teachers, and to place lockboxes in classrooms for their guns. We were the first state to declare an official state firearm (the Browning 1911). Along with Browning there are a large number of gun and ammunition manufacturers in the state. Much of rural Utah sees the gun control issue as an urban problem that doesn’t understand or appreciate their lifestyle. There are additional issues for us with militias and white nationalist movements.

Re: Ghost Guns
There is no system in place for comprehensive firearm registration, and there are no laws in place to track changes of ownership past the initial purchase. Private gun sales and the proliferation of gun shows in the Midwest are the likely sources of private sales of firearms. Cost and accessibility lean towards private sales. Ghost guns and kits are geared more towards firearm enthusiasts than criminals seeking to manufacture and distribute weapons. Weapons used in crimes are still traceable based on the ammunition type, bullets used, rifling of expended bullets, etc. If legislation were proposed for private gun manufacture, it would have to be comprehensive and/or pragmatic, i.e. focused on holding component manufacturers, distributors, assemblers accountable for firearms used in a crime, or in the case of organized crime, that the component manufacture was part of an organized crime operation. There are other issues apparent for this topic; I believe that our priorities lie elsewhere.

Re: Shoot First Laws
I agree, but need to comment here. The best defenses in order of priority is de-escalation, running away, getting help, non-lethal defense, then lethal defense. Acts of provocation (following a person, confronting a person, brandishing) should exempt anyone from claiming self-defense. Bottom line here is that a gun owner MUST be responsible and held accountable for actions.

Re: Assault Weapons
I agree, but we need to update definitions on what an assault weapon is. Example: Bump stocks turn a gun into a machine gun, but aren’t legally defined as such based on recent supreme court ruling (Garland v. Cargill). Regardless of the actuator, any firearm that produces a rate of fire above XX threshold should be defined as a machine gun, and parts used to convert a firearm into a weapon like this should also be illegal. I would like to see clear definitions of firearm types to distinguish differences between hunting, competition, self defense, security/police, and military grade weapons.

I appreciate these questions, and encourage that we continue conversation.

Posted on

Response: Asian/Pacific Islander Caucus Survey

March 29 Update: I did not receive an endorsement from the AAPI Caucus.

For transparency, I am providing my answers from my application to Asian/Pacific Islander Caucus 2024 Candidate Endorsement survey so that my positions on these questions can be shared with constituents.

Q1: What office are you running for?
State Representative, House District 44

Q2: Have you held an elected position previously?
No

Please answer each question so that our caucus best understands your work in the Asian Pacific Islander Communities. As you answer each question, please be sure to specify the difference in your work with Asian communities & Native Hawaiian & Pacific Islander communities- as AANHPI is a massive umbrella that includes hundreds of cultures, languages and experience different needs. It is crucial that as the AAPI Caucus that you display a proven track record of working with all communities in this umbrella and not just one. All question responses are private and will only be shared with members of the AAPI Caucus to help us best decide who will receive an endorsement.

Q3: Do you have AANHPI staffers on your campaign? (Yes/No)
No

Q4: If no, why?
It’s currently just me running for office. I have a couple of people who I look for advice from, but no staffers. I expect that endorsements and donations will start after convention when groups are more familiar with candidates in the field and can prioritize their support. I am reliant on garnering support to advance my campaign.

Q5: What is your understanding and knowledge of AANHPI communities in Salt Lake County?
The AANHPI community represents a large and diverse number of groups. Utah has a large Pacific Islander population that is growing, particularly for Tongan and Samoan communities. Utah also has a diverse Indian community.

Q6: What is your understanding of current needs of AANHPI voters in Utah?
I would ask for a conversation on this. If I am successful in my campaign one of my commitments is to listen and engage. Right now my focus includes defending diversity and inclusion in public and private spaces, protecting voting rights and restoring representation, supporting workers’ rights to organize, expanding public transit options, prioritizing clean air and water, and addressing homelessness through housing, drug programs, and mental health.

Q7: Understanding the current needs of AANHPI communities, what policies are you passionate about that will directly impact our communities? What policies and initiatives do you intend to implement in order to address the socio-economic disparities in Utah or Salt Lake County?
It may be best to see my stance on issues at https://utah44.com/issues/. I have also published key legislation that I would like to see worked on at https://utah44.com/proposed-2025-legislation/. I want to be as open as possible on what I call priorities, which I publish on my site.

Q8: Often times candidates seek the endorsement of minority caucuses without any true contribution to AANHPI communities, to help us better understand the impact & work you have done for these communities please answer the following: Please list AANHPI Led Community Based Organizations, Collectives & Service Providers that you have collaborated with to better understand issues being faced by our community. Please include outcomes & specific projects you have worked on with AANHPI Led Community Based Organizations, Collectives & Service Providers.

I work at an enterprise software company, and am a Project Lead for the Volunteer program, and a Pride Employee Network (OPEN) Employee Resource Group (ERG) representative. In that capacity I work with other ERG leads, specifically with the Professional Asian Leadership (OPAL), Women’s Leadership (OWL), and Generations of Leaders (GLO). We emphasize “unity in community”. Together with the other ERG leads we have hosted annual PIK2AR school supply drives, and internally host events like the OPAL Leadership Symposium, celebrating Asian Pacific Heritage Month, Mid-Autumn Festivals, Diwali celebrations, Lunar New Year, and Women in Tech. We also host trainings in unconscious bias, career development, mentoring programs, and confronting anti-asian racism. This is all not done by me, but the efforts are planned and hosted jointly.

Q9: What is your stance on Land Back & Indigenous Sovereignty?
I support Indigenous Sovereignty in respect to land, water, medical practices, childcare and religous observances. I think we need better support for infrastructure (energy, roads), physical addressing, voting, and representation. In regards to land back, I believe that California’s Reparations Task Force support specific state bills based on their findings (formal apologies, addressing health and wealth gaps, returning land). This may serve as a model at the federal level. Currently, a meaningful cash reparation at the federal level is challenging and not likely – political support, details of eligibility, meaningful payments, a system to identify recipients and manage distributed payments are lacking.

Q10: What policy issue is most important to you, and why?
I am first and foremost a disability advocate. I have two adult children with disabilities who I take care of. I’m a member of the Legislative Coalition for People with Disabilities (LCPD), and participate in the Utah Developmental Disabilities Council (UDDC) Advocacy and Leadership Program. My family participates in Special Olympics, and we are strong advocates for mental health issues. There are some excellent advocates on both sides of the aisle for disability and mental health legislation, but we have serious work to do for Medicaid expansion, improving availability of services for people with disabilities, expanding mental health care, addressing the homeless issue, and de-escalating engagements by law enforcement.

Q11: Why are you running for office?
My step into politics is based on where we as a community stand today. Divisive legislation and social campaigns are without empathy, that are breaking the networks in place for us to be informed, that are tearing at the fabric of our communities. There is an infiltration of local school boards, and the introduction of legislation in states that comes from national platforms that do not have our common interests in mind. There is disinformation in social media that is meant to be divisive, that tears on the intent and good will of society. I’m stepping into politics because the “our” in our voice needs to be represented. I have enough shared experience and humility to know that I should listen and understand before I speak, and that my actions affect a community that I love and have much respect for.

Q12: Would you like to speak at our AAPI Caucus Meeting on March 28th 7:00-8:00PM? (Y/N)
Yes

Posted on

Response: Women’s Democratic Club of Utah 2024 Candidate Endorsement Survey

This is not an endorsement.

For transparency, I am providing my answers from my application to Women’s Democratic Club of Utah 2024 Candidate Endorsement survey so that my positions on these questions can be shared with constituents.

Q1: Are you a member of the Women’s Democratic Club? (Yes/No)

Yes.

Q2: Are you a registered Democrat? (Yes/No)

Yes.

Q3: If you are in a partisan race, are you running as a Democrat? (Yes/No)

Yes. Running in House District 44 against incumbent Jordan Teuscher (R)

Q4: The Equal Rights Amendment is a proposed amendment to the United State Constitution designed to guarantee equal legal rights for all American citizens regardless of sex. It seeks to end the legal distinctions between men and women in terms of divorce, property, employment, and other matters. For more information, please see: https://www.equalrightsamendment.org/.

Do you support the ratification of the Equal Rights Amendment (ERA)? (Yes/No)

Yes.

Q5: What office are you running for?

Utah House, District 44

Q6: Is this your first time running for THIS office? (If no, please explain in the comments.)

Yes.

Q7: Is 2024 a re-election campaign for you? (Relevant if you are a currently elected official.)

No.

Q8: If you have previously run for ANY office, please tell us briefly about your other races.

I have not run for an office previously.

Q9: Please tell the Candidate Support Committee a bit about why you are running for office.

I’m running against Jordan Teuscher to unseat him, and become the Utah State House Representative in District 44. It was a tough year, with moves towards rhetoric. A large number of bills that felt like an onslaught of nationally-promoted bills (many originating from Florida, Texas) that were intended to overwhelm. This was a really rough, exhausting, demoralizing session.

  1. DEI attacks in public education and employee sectors
  2. LGBTQ Rights, trans bills, bathroom bill
  3. Women’s Rights/Reproductive Rights
  4. Civil Rights
  5. Voting Rights
  6. Workers Rights (2 bills against recertification, get rid of career service protections)
  7. 1st Amendment, Pride Flags, “Neutral” classrooms, book bans
  8. Intrusion of Religion on Public Education, school chaplains, 10 commandments in schools
  9. trickle-down economics tax cuts, and attacks on Public Education funding through voucher expansion, tax cuts that fund education
  10. “Lean Budget” non-funding for transportation, public transit, education
  11. Sovereignty Bill (SB57) – essentially pushing the US federal courts to sue Utah

If we are going to make change, we need people in the Legislature who will listen to constituents and work on local issues. My part is standing up and saying that I can do a better job than Jordan Teuscher, who received an “F” in the 2023 Progress Report from Alliance for a Better Utah. My part is actively working to unseat someone who has forgotten how to represent the southwest corner of Salt Lake valley and Utahns generally.

Q10: Please tell the Candidate Support Committee about your political race/campaign.

I’m running in House District 44, which is a primarily residential district that encompasses the north and west of South Jordan city (28 voting districts SJD002-5, 7-11, 15-21, 27-31, 33-37, 45 and 62), and the southwestern edge of West Jordan city (4 voting districts WJD058-61).

HD44 registered voters profile:
49.4% Republican
31.5% Unaffiliated
13.4% Democratic
5.7% Other

In order to win in this election cycle, I need to appeal to enough moderate republicans, and motivate unaffiliated and democratic voters to show up and vote for me. My hope is that the extreme partisanship of the 2024 legislative session and the anticipated divisiveness of the 2024 election cycle will push interest in my campaign. I need to build name recognition and visibility on local issues facing Utahns.

See https://utah44.com/a-democrat-running-in-a-red-district/
See https://utah44.com/hd44-demographics/

Q11: Please provide your campaign website.

https://utah44.com/

Q12: Please tell the Candidate Support Committee about your funding needs.

This is a new campaign, and I’m literally starting from nothing. I will need funding or in-kind services for printing of literature and signage, photography, video, targeted social media campaigns, and access to local media. In addition to static references like the campaign site and social media accounts I need to push information to district voters as well (email, video, debates, radio & television).

I anticipate that groups typically begin to invest in viable candidates around the March 30 caucuses, and am reaching out to organizations who would be interested in supporting my campaign through endorsements, donations, feet on the ground and for door-knocking campaigns.

Q13: The WDC will be endorsing Democratic candidates and this means that we will formally announce that you are an endorsed candidate and provide a graphic that you may use for your campaign. We will promote the endorsement on social media and in our official communications. In the past, some candidates prefer to receive financial support but NOT a formal endorsement. This is often the case if someone is running in a nonpartisan race (like school board or city council). Please note that you may receive financial contributions without seeking the formal endorsement.

Would you like to be endorsed by the WDC? (Yes/No)

Yes.

Q14: All financial contributions must be reported in campaign disclosures with the name of the organization that made the donation.

Would you like to receive financial support (donation) from the WDC? (Yes/No)

Yes.

Q15: All endorsed candidates are asked to submit a short biographic sketch. Please provide in this section. (Limit 500 words).

My step into politics is based on where we as a community stand today. Divisive legislation and social campaigns are without empathy, that are breaking the networks in place for us to be informed, that are tearing at the fabric of our nation. There is an infiltration of local school boards, and the introduction of legislation in states that comes from national platforms that do not have our common interests in mind. There is disinformation in social media that is meant to be divisive, that tears on the intent and good will of society. I’m stepping into politics because the “our” in our voice needs to be represented. I have enough shared experience and humility to know that I should listen and understand before I speak, and that my actions affect a community that I love and have much respect for.

Posted on

Response: Freethought Equality Fund PAC Survey

March 12 Update: I am pleased to announce that the Center for Freethought Equality Fund PAC has endorsed my campaign! You can find their endorsement here.

For transparency, I am providing my answers to their survey from Center for Freethought Equality Fund PAC so that my positions on these questions can be shared with constituents.

Q1: Do you acknowledge that we are in a climate crisis, which is primarily influenced by human activities?

Yes. The vast majority of scientists agree that humans are causing global warming and climate change, based on our use of fossil fuels.

Q2: Should concepts such as “intelligent design” and/or creationism be taught in public school science classes alongside evolution?

No. These concepts are anti-science and have no basis to be taught in public schools.

Q3: Do you support a person’s right to obtain a medically safe and legal abortion?

Yes. We need to stop legislating a person’s body. Medical decisions should be made in a safe and private setting between a woman and her doctor.

Q4: Do you support public funding of school voucher programs that may be used at religious schools?

No. Public money should go to public schools. Education funds are for education, not indoctrination.

Q5: Should terminally-ill patients have the right to obtain and self-administer palliative, life-ending medication?

Yes, but guardrails are necessary. We would need to address how mental health is treated, prevent institutions from adopting eugenics as a program of treatment, and ensure that incentives for guardians and caregivers don’t exist to influence end-of-life decisions. If a patient is deemed unresponsive, incompetent or intellectually disabled, who decides? In terms of disability law and disability justice, this issue also raises concerns for disabled individuals about disability rights and personal choice/representation.

Q6: Do you support legislation to provide equal rights for members of the LGBTQ+ community in employment, housing, education, and public services?

Absolutely, yes.

Q7: Do you support efforts to establish a federal Commission that would study the effects of slavery and discrimination on African Americans, and would recommend remedies that could include reparations?

Yes. I believe that California’s Reparations Task Force have findings with support of specific state bills based on those findings (formal apologies, addressing health and wealth gaps, returning land). However, a meaningful cash reparation at the federal level is challenging and not likely – political support, details of eligibility, meaningful payments, a system to identify recipients and manage distributed payments are lacking.

Q8: Do you think that belief in a god is a requirement to live an ethical life?

No. To be more specific, a belief in god is often used to justify hateful acts, or to use a confession or conversion as a shield from past wrong-doing. Humility, grace, morality, accountability and servant-leadership are all accessible ethical values that humans can embrace and ascribe to.

Q9: What is your religious background, and how do you identify when asked to do so?

I am an atheist. As a child, my family was originally Methodist and I was baptized in a Methodist church. We moved frequently as I grew up, and my formative years were set in an Assembly of God (AoG) church. When I was 12 my mother was diagnosed with an aggressive form of Multiple Sclerosis, and we experienced the abandonment and judgement of members (if she only renounced sin and truly accepted Jesus in her heart, she would be healed). I intermittently stopped going to church then, but didn’t completely reject a concept of god until my housemate committed suicide when I was 22. At her grave service the priest disparaged her memory by saying he doubted she was in hell but had to make a journey through purgatory. I have no second thoughts following my decision to leave religion behind me.

Q10: What role does religion play in your personal life, and what influence will your beliefs have on your public policy decisions as an elected official?

As an atheist, I respect other’s religion and welcome conversations to learn what motivates and inspires faith for them. I believe that there is a common desire for community, for acceptance, and for hope in all of us.

My beliefs: Act with empathy. Take time to understand where your point of view comes from, and think about where others are coming from. There isn’t a good excuse for ignorance, prejudice or ambivalence – and it’s not respectful to dismiss any of that. Diversity is accepting that we all come from very different backgrounds and understanding that it’s actually a benefit to work with our collectively diverse perspectives. Inclusion is about engagement – having conversations, contributing ideas and sometimes challenging things. Inclusion is about building respect and trust, and taking away barriers that limit us from fully engaging and seeing others. It is about truly understanding the worth and value we each have, and what we can do if we bring it together.

Q11: Will you speak out and be a leader for the equality of all people, including humanists, atheists, agnostics, and other nonreligious Americans?

Absolutely, yes. I will defend our first amendment freedoms.

Q12: If elected, would you take your oath of office on the Constitution rather than on a religious text?

I would not use any religious text. For reference, there is no reference in our Utah Constitution about taking the oath on a document. See Article IV, Section 10. [Oath of office.] All officers made elective or appointive by this Constitution or by the laws made in pursuance thereof, before entering upon the duties of their respective offices, shall take and subscribe the following oath or affirmation: “I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support, obey, and defend the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the State of Utah, and that I will discharge the duties of my office with fidelity.”

Posted on

Response: BLM Utah Chapter – Police Transparency & Accountability Survey

This is not an endorsement.

For transparency, I am providing my answers to a survey from Black Lives Matter Utah Chapter – Police Transparency & Accountability Survey so that my positions on these questions can be shared with constituents. I want to make note that some of the survey questions are either too broad or specific, but are also required to complete the survey. Please see my comments following these blocks of questions for better explainers of my stances. . My response to BLM Utah appears on their site here.

Q1: Email

ggreen.hd44@gmail.com

Q2: Do Black Lives Matter? (respond Yes/No)

Yes

Q3: If elected, or re-elected, what programs will you implement to help the black and brown community?

The House Representative role is a 2-year term, and I will be a freshman in Utah’s congress. Having said that, my approach (if I move forward at Caucus and participate as a candidate in the general election) will be to organize groups to work together on shaping 2025 legislative bills that can be submitted in the new year. You can see the list of topics that I want to submit bills for at https://utah44.com/proposed-2025-legislation/

Q4: First and Last name

Greg Green

Q5: What City/State are you running in?

South Jordan, Utah

Q6: Which district?

44

Q7: Which office are you running for?

Utah House of Representatives, District 44

Q8: Who is/are your opponent(s)? (Please disregard if your race has concluded)

Currently: Jordan Teuscher (R) – incumbent. I expect there will be more candidate filings, as No Labels Party candidates have a filing deadline of April 29, 2024. See https://vote.utah.gov/2024-candidate-filings/ for a current list of candidates.

Q9: Which of your opponents should NOT be elected, and why? (Please disregard if your race has concluded)

I am running against Jordan Teuscher, who is consistently anti-union, and actively legislates against workers rights that negatively affect teachers, public workers, and the unions that represent them. He has supported bills that degrade state career-service employees to at-will status. I support the right to organize, and to establish collective bargaining for both public and private employees. I also support a national bill to pass the Protecting the Rights to Organize (PRO) Act that will expand labor protections for employees’ rights to organize and for collective bargaining in the workplace.
– Jordan actively votes against diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) supports, and environmental, social, and governance (ESG) investing. Jordan is party to the overall “chilling” effect in Utah over racial equity, LGBTQ+ supports, trans rights, and promoting bias. I support diversity initiatives and strongly defend marginalized communities and environmental programs.
– Jordan is a proponent of vouchers that bleed our public school funding. I support our public school system, and believe that teachers and school administrators need to be allowed to do their good work without interference from the legislature. I support pay increases and retention programs that incentives to keep teachers in our schools.
– Jordan actively votes against pro-choice. I support women’s rights for safe abortion access. I also support school curriculums that provide age-appropriate instruction on sex education that is not based on “abstinence only”.
– According to the Alliance for a Better Utah, Jordan Teuscher receives an “F” rating for the 2023 legislative session.

Q10: If you are not elected, which of your opponents should win, and why? (Please disregard if your race has concluded)

There is no a preferred alternative.

Q11: What is your political party? (Democratic, Republican, Green, Other)

Democratic

Q12: In September 2021, the Salt Lake Tribune, in partnership with PBS Frontline, released an in-depth investigative report on the racial and ethnic make-up of people shot by Utah police. The report revealed that Utah police shoot people who are Black, Hispanic, Native American, and Pacific Islander disproportionately to white people. Moreover, the majority of white people shot were in possession of a gun or fake gun, while the majority of racial and ethnic minorities were not. What is your reaction to these findings and what will you do to address these disparities? https://www.sltrib.com/news/2021/09/20/new-data-utah-police/

We need a close relationship with our police force that respects community engagement but is not patronizing. Diversity initiatives and accountability measures have significant impact in transparency and trust. Education is important, particularly for de-escalation and for interactions with the disability community, and mental illness. I also think we need more community resource engagement rather than police intervention. Justice is an important concept that must be found in cases where threats, intimidation, discrimination, detaining, violence and death. Our goal should be “everyone is protected, and everyone is respected”. (this answer is repeated later in this survey)

Q13: Several major cities across the United States have created Community Controlled Civilian Review Boards which have the power to discipline police. Community-based organizations in Salt Lake City have developed a model ordinance, the Salt Lake Civilian Police Accountability Council (SLCPAC), which would establish a community-controlled civilian review board in Salt Lake City. Would you support the creation of the SLCPAC or other similar boards in your city and in Utah? (We are aware that HB415, which was passed during the 2019 General Session [https://le.utah.gov/~2019/bills/static/HB0415.html], places some restrictions on creating review boards, yet does not make it impossible.)

I support the creation of the SLCPAC and similar boards in cities and counties of Utah. Following a summer of protests over the killing of George Floyd and widespread examples of police brutality, common-sense reforms like increasing oversight and accountability over local police agencies should continue to receive attention. I have concerns about appointment to a CRB, and what actions can be taken if a member of the CRB acts unethically. Decisions by the CRB should be handed to a prosecuting authority rather than grant the CRB full punitive capabilities. CRBs should have authority to make recommendations for individuals, departments, cities and counties with referral to hiring organizations, or for escalation to broader authorities to intervene.

Q14: Would you support efforts to repeal HB415? (respond Yes/No)

Yes

Q15: What is your reaction to the limitations that HB415 places on local authority to create independent civilian review boards?

HB74 was submitted in 2021 but did not pass through the legislature that year. We need to create a replacement for HB415 that will survive both houses.

Q16: Would you advocate for, or oppose a stronger use of force policy for police?

I oppose a stronger use of force policy. See https://utah44.com/issues-police/

Q17: How strongly will you advocate for the following policies regarding public information about actions taken by police officers in your district? (Select only one: Very Strongly. I will work proactively to make this happen; Strongly. I will advocate when it comes up; Somewhat strongly. I will be mildly positive about it; Not strongly. I do not really agree with this policy; Not at all. I do not agree with this policy)

  • Require officers to report all uses of force to a public database (Very Strongly)
  • Use a database to inform an early intervention system that retrains and disciplines officers with repeated uses of force or civilian complaints (Very Strongly)
  • Make a Use-of-Force database available to the public. (Not at all)
  • Make footage from body cams in situations involving use of force available to the public (Very Strongly)
  • Publicly release unedited body cam footage of officer-involved shootings (Not at all)
  • Require public release of unedited body cam footage of uses of force and officer-involved footage within 10 days of the incident. (Very Strongly)
  • Require public release of demographic information on people stopped by police in your district (Strongly)
  • Require public release of demographic information on people arrested by police officers in your district (Strongly)

Q18: Please add any comments about your views on providing the public with information about actions taken by police officers in your district.

These radio selections are generally too broad or too specific. Aggregated data on people stopped or arrested should be anonymized to protect individuals, and the frequency of reporting needs to be specified. I have concerns about who would be authorized to maintain the proposed public database, and what compliance measures would be in place to ensure that records are submitted promptly and maintained for a specified period. FOI requests for information, including body footage, should always be expedited.

Q19: How strongly will you advocate for the following policies regarding video recording devices/ bodycams? (Select only one: Very Strongly. I will work proactively to make this happen; Strongly. I will advocate when it comes up; Somewhat strongly. I will be mildly positive about it; Not strongly. I do not really agree with this policy; Not at all. I do not agree with this policy)

  • Require police officers use technology that collects audio and visual data of police interactions (including body cameras)(Very Strongly)
  • Develop clear policies governing bodycam use, storage and accessibility of footage in consultation with activists and community organizations (Strongly)
  • Record all police interactions with civilians (except where a civilian opts not to be recorded, notification of the option not to be recorded should be required upon first contact) (Not Strongly)
  • Make footage from body cams in situations involving use of force available to the public (Strongly)
  • Allow civilians to review footage involving them or a relative and require this information be released to the public (Strongly)
  • Prevent officers from reviewing footage of an incident before completing initial reports or statements (Strongly)
  • Secure the privacy of civilians during all processes (Very Strongly)
  • Assure the right of the public to record the police by video and audio, without fear of having their devices confiscated or damaged (Very Strongly)

Q20: Please use this area to add comments about your views on policies for bodycam usage.

Again, these radio selections are generally too broad or too specific. If police are required to interact with civilians and be recorded, then it should always be recorded. There are too many legal loopholes for who would be authorized to request no recording (in a domestic dispute, does the abuser have the right to say no camera?). If a violent crime is committed in a business, does the business manager have the right to request no cameras so their business isnt negatively impacted?). Privacy needs to be assured unless the case is exceptional (a threshold would need to be determined). This also raises concerns about the public database access referenced in the previous question. Requests for footage should not be limited to individuals involved and their families. Anyone should be able to make a FOI request for information.

Q21: How strongly will you advocate for the following policies regarding de-escalation techniques and non-force actions by police officers in your district? (Select only one: Very Strongly. I will work proactively to make this happen; Strongly. I will advocate when it comes up; Somewhat strongly. I will be mildly positive about it; Not strongly. I do not really agree with this policy; Not at all. I do not agree with this policy)

  • Prohibits officers from using force on a person for talking back or as a punishment for running away (Very Strongly)
  • Implement a performance evaluation system that rewards, and values effective interpersonal skills (de-escalation, effective work with people who have mental health and substance abuse challenges, and countering bias, etc.) (Very Strongly)
  • Modify police department use of force policies to require officers use minimal force and de-escalation tactics, carry a less-lethal weapon, and intervene when another officer uses excessive force (Very Strongly)
  • Require training for and use of non-force techniques for people with mental health and/or substance abuse issues (Very Strongly)
  • Require training for and use of non-force techniques for people who are homeless and/or are victims of domestic violence (Very Strongly)
  • Re-allocate funding for non-sworn personnel who can assist in cases of mental illness, substance abuse, homelessness, and domestic violence (Very Strongly)
  • Require training that uses the latest science on implicit bias based on social identities, including people of color, LGBTQ individuals, and non-English speakers (Very Strongly)
  • Require evaluation of police officers’ ability to recognize bias and knowledge of techniques to counter it (Very Strongly)
  • Reward police officers who successfully use anti-bias techniques (Very Strongly)
  • Conduct an assessment of what kind of training is most effective in terms of helping law enforcement personnel to achieve goals of effective, non-violent policing (Very Strongly)
  • Implement training identified as the most successful toward achieving effective, non-violent policing (Very Strongly)

Q22: Please share your comments on de-escalation techniques and non-force actions by police officers in your district.

This is all very strongly supported by me. All of these options are excellent. Might want to update annual trainings on what it means to uphold the law to include mandatory reporting for ethics violations, including acts of excessive force.

Q23: How strongly will you advocate for the following policies regarding community involvement with police officers and the police department(s) in your district? (Select only one: Very Strongly. I will work proactively to make this happen; Strongly. I will advocate when it comes up; Somewhat strongly. I will be mildly positive about it; Not strongly. I do not really agree with this policy; Not at all. I do not agree with this policy)

  • Hire a local research institution to field a regular survey of community perceptions of the police (Not strongly)
  • Use results of a community survey to guide officer evaluations as well as department policies and practices (Very Strongly Support)
  • Institute a model system where people stopped by the police are immediately given a card by the officer, with their name and badge number, what the stop was for, and how to file a complaint, should they chose to (Very Strongly Support)
  • Increase representation from the community by hiring more women and Black, Indigenous, and People of Color as police officers (Very Strongly Support)
  • Hold regularly-scheduled community forums about police activities (Very Strongly Support)
  • Implement special outreach to minority communities to participate in community meetings (Very Strongly Support)
  • Support Civilian Review Boards (CRBs) in your district to hold police accountable for misconduct
  • Give CRBs the power to investigate police misconduct independently (Somewhat strongly)
  • Give CRBs the power to subpoena individuals and collect documentation on police misconduct (Somewhat strongly)
  • Give CRBs the power to discipline police officers found guilty of misconduct (Somewhat strongly)
  • Give CRBs the power to investigate and discipline police misconduct, specifically in the case of a police shooting (Somewhat strongly)
  • Promote, expand, improve, innovate the membership of CRBs (Very Strongly Support)
  • Disallow current or former law enforcement personnel to serve on CRBs (Not at all)
  • Disallow family members of law enforcement personnel on CRBs (Not at all)
  • Make serving on a CRB a paid position (Not at all)
  • Require an independent and external prosecutor, separate from the City or County prosecutor’s office, or any other government agency, to manage the proceedings following independent investigation (Strongly Support)

Q24: Please share your comments on community involvement with police officers and the police department(s) in your district

  • We need a close relationship with our police force that respects community engagement but is not patronizing. Diversity initiatives and accountability measures have significant impact in transparency and trust. Education is important, particularly for de-escalation and for interactions with the disability community, and mental illness. I also think we need more community resource engagement rather than police intervention. Justice is an important concept that must be found in cases where threats, intimidation, discrimination, detaining, violence and death. Our goal should be “everyone is protected, and everyone is respected”.
  • I have some concerns about “local research institution” versus a qualified organization. I understand that local issues, history, demographics affect research but should also include sound information gathering, analysis and reporting that can be aggregated to broader studies to perform meta-analysis of regions within the state, statewide, and regionally.
  • Regarding former law enforcement or families being restricted from serving on the board… what if it was a former wife of a law enforcement officer who was protected from domestic abuse charges? What if the law enforcement officer was a whistle blower? Rather than make blanket exclusions, the criteria to serve on the board should be based on their ability to contribute to the stated purpose of the board.

Q25: Alternatives to Incarceration – Background: The United States incarcerates a larger share of its population than any other country in the world (Pew Research Center 2021). There are active nationwide campaigns seeking to reduce the prison population by half using strategies such as alternative to incarceration programs; the reform of money bail systems and extreme sentencing laws, and the provision of support to people who are reintegrating into society after incarceration. Questions: 1) What are your views on reducing the number of people who are incarcerated in Utah and the U.S.? 2) What changes do you believe need to be made to the Utah and U.S. prison systems? 3) Will you support the implementation of alternative to incarceration programs?

Stop privatizing prisons. Personal drug use and possession of drug paraphernalia should not be jailable offenses. At the Federal level marijuana should be removed from schedule 1 list of the Drug Schedule. We need to fund medical and mental health for incarcerated individuals, with tracked referrals for continuing treatment following incarceration. Career training and transition programs are critical to reduce rates of recidivism.

Section: Health and Human Rights – The next set of questions asks for your views on topics related to health and human rights.

Q26: Do you support the overturning of Roe v. Wade? (Respond Yes/No)

No

Q27: Please explain your support for, or opposition to, the overturning of Roe v. Wade.

I support women’s rights for safe abortion access. I also support school curriculums that provide age-appropriate instruction on sex education that is not based on “abstinence only”.

Q28: Do you support Utah’s trigger law (SB174) that would ban abortion with limited exceptions for rape, incest, and the health of the pregnant person? https://le.utah.gov/~2020/bills/static/SB0174.html (Respond Yes/No)

No

Q29: Please explain your support for, or opposition to, Utah’s trigger law (SB174). https://le.utah.gov/~2020/bills/static/SB0174.html

We need to stop legislating women’s bodies. Abortion is medical care.

Q30: Do you support Utah’s ban (HB136) on elective abortions after 18 weeks of pregnancy that went into effect after the overturning of Roe v. Wade? https://le.utah.gov/~2019/bills/static/HB0136.html (Respond Yes/No)

No

Q31: Do you believe the decision about whether to have an abortion should belong solely to the person who is pregnant? (Respond Yes/No)

Yes

Q32: In situations where abortion is illegal, which of the following people, if any, do you think should face penalties? (Select all that apply)

  • The person who had the abortion
  • The doctor/provider who performed the abortion
  • The person who helped pay for the abortion
  • The person who helped find or schedule the abortion
  • None of the above (x)
  • Other (explain): (x) Abortion is women’s health. It is a medical procedure carried out between a woman and her doctor. Travel (including interstate travel) should not be prosecuted. Laws in other states that penalize women, systems of support or health care providers should not be legally recognized in Utah.

Q33: Which of the following sexual and reproductive health measures do you support? (Select all that apply)

  • Comprehensive sex education (x)
  • Access to low or no cost contraception (i.e., birth control) (x)
  • Access to low or no cost emergency contraception (i.e., “morning-after pills”, emergency IUDs) (x)
  • Extending Medicaid coverage to postpartum people beyond 60 days (x)
  • Expanding the Child Tax Credit (x) – see https://utahchildren.org/newsroom/speaking-of-kids-blog/item/1219-utah-child-tax-credit
  • Expanding access to paid family leave (x)
  • Other (explain): (x) Remove funding restrictions for charitable organizations, specifically Planned Parenthood.

Q34: On the final day of the 2022 Legislative Session, lawmakers passed a last-minute amendment to HB11 banning transgender girls from participating in school sports that match their gender identity. Although Governor Cox vetoed the bill, the legislature voted to override the veto. HB11 now faces almost certain legal challenges to its constitutionality. Would you support efforts to repeal HB11 in its entirety? (Respond Yes/No)

Yes

Q35: Please explain your answer to the previous question regarding efforts to repeal of HB11.

A similar question was asked in the “Black Lives Matter Utah Chapter – Education in Utah Survey”. Legislators should not be legislating gender identity, and the bill should be struck down as unconstitutional. For reference, policy was updated in the Utah High School Athletics Association handbook in 2020-2021 and going forward (https://uhsaa.org/Publications/Handbook/Handbook.pdf). Equality Utah supports this policy as equal treatment. See https://www.equalityutah.org/youth-laws.

Q36: Do you think that fossil fuels cause climate change? (Respond Yes/No)

Yes

Q37: If elected, what action will you take to divest from fossil fuels?

  • Utah recently announced its selection by the IOC for the 2034 Winter Olympics, but the announcement comes with a mandate to improve air quality before we host this international event. Inversions mean that Utah has some of the worst air quality in the nation, and this affects everyone who lives here. Staged, multi-year legislation to reduce traffic, promote remote work, improve public transportation, implement stricter emission regulations on vehicles and commercial production are all necessary.
  • We need to embrace clean energy, and that means investing in the development of clean energy technologies as well as producing jobs to replace economies built on fossil fuel industry.

Q38: Is there anything else you would like us to know? We appreciate your attention to these serious matters which so deeply affect the lives of so many.

Posted on

Response: BLM Utah Chapter – Education in Utah Survey

This is not an endorsement.

For transparency, I am providing my answers to a survey from Black Lives Matter Utah Chapter – Education in Utah Survey so that my positions on these questions can be shared with constituents. I want to make note that some of the survey questions are hypothetical/situational, would not be fully covered under legislative action, and would need to include state board, local board, district, administrative and educator supports.

Q1: Email

ggreen.hd44@gmail.com

Q2: First and last name

Greg Green

Q3: Which office are you running for?

Utah House District 44 (South Jordan)

Q4: If elected, would you support efforts to repeal HB11, which bans transgender girls from participating in school sports that match their gender identity? (respond Yes/No)

Yes

Q5: Please explain your answer to the above question regarding HB11.

Legislators should not be legislating gender identity. For reference, policy was updated in the Utah High School Athletics Association handbook in 2020-2021 and going forward (https://uhsaa.org/Publications/Handbook/Handbook.pdf). Equality Utah supports this policy as equal treatment. See https://www.equalityutah.org/youth-laws.

Q6: What do you believe is the best way to keep students safe in school? Rank the following options with 1 being best and 6 being worst. You can only use each rank once. (Rank 1-6)

  • Implement early-intervention systems to identify at-risk students and connect them with resources (1)
  • School Resource Officers (SROs)/School Police Officers (SPOs) (2)
  • Parent/community volunteers (3)
  • Ensure schools have proper physical security measures (e.g., sturdy locks on interior doors) (4)
  • Hold regular lockdown drills in schools (5)
  • Arm teachers (NO)

Comment (not possible in the survey): This is not a good list. The first thing we need is to support broad implementation of SEL programs at schools. We need to support annual DEI training for all teachers. SROs and SPOs need to be trained in CIT, practice de-escalation techniques, and pass background checks that include past disciplinary notes and actions. We need availability of counsellors, we need responsive, supporting administration who will pursue discrimination, hate acts, threats or violence. We need demands for accountability from the community. Volunteers need to be registered with the district, and must have completed background checks.

Q7: An ACLU report found that 54% of Utah students attend schools with a school police officer but no psychologist, nurse, social worker, and/or counselor. If you are elected, what will you do to address this disparity?

The short answer here is that we need to pay teachers and get out of their way. We need to fund nurses, counselors in every school and lower support ratios. We need better access to psychologists and social workers. Pay is poor, school funding is poor, and the politicization of educational roles makes work environs unattractive. Demographically Utah has some of the youngest counties in the nation (https://www.axios.com/local/salt-lake-city/2023/06/26/utah-young-us-median-age-county-cache), so it’s not appropriate by any means that our state spends so little, with Utah spending the LAST per pupil in the nation. Education funding is constantly under attack. We need to tackle the rhetoric in the legislature and work with the Governor’s office to grow funding, remove politics from Education Boards, and return curriculums and text books back to educators.

Q8: Which of the following school personnel should be responsible for responding to the following situations? You can select more than one. (multi-select from: SRO/SPO, Nurse, Guidance Counselor, Social Worker, Principal or Other Administrator, Teacher)

  • Physical/verbal altercations between students (any present)
  • Bullying by a student against another student (any present)
  • Bullying by a staff member against a student (any present)
  • Students experiencing mental health issues (Teacher, Administrator, Counselor, Social Worker)
  • Students’ physical well-being (Teacher, Administrator, Counselor, Social Worker)
  • Students struggling with schoolwork (Teacher, Counselor, Social Worker)
  • Students lacking basic necessities or struggling with issues from outside school (Teacher, Counselor, Social Worker)
  • Reports of alleged criminal activity by students or staff (Administrator, Counselor, Social Worker, SRO/SPO)
  • Students breaking school rules (e.g., using a cell phone during class; dress code violations) (Teacher, Parents)

Comment (not possible in the survey): This isn’t necessarily a point of state legislation. The current “who responds” will be based on who is available and present, and in most cases the appropriate staff is not there. It should also be noted that students should be able to raise concerns or to call out discriminatory behaviors. Parents or Guardians should be involved. Regarding dress code violations, we really should be removing policies that set cultural standards on hair and clothing. Criminal activity may be minor (stealing a lunch) or major (physical violence or damaging property) and the commensurate action should be based on context.

Q9: What is the appropriate consequence for a teacher or administrator who: (select only one from the following: Receive a verbal or written warning, Pay a fine, Suspension without pay, Employment terminated, Banned from employment in other schools)

  • Uses a racial or identity-based slur (Employment terminated)
  • Targets a student because of the color of their skin or another aspect of their identity (Banned from employment in other schools)
  • Fails to escalate a report of bullying or discrimination (Employment terminated)
  • Physically disciplines a student (Banned from employment in other schools)

Comment (not possible in the survey): I don’t believe in nickel jars, so “pay a fine” is not on the table. There should be evidence of slurs or targeting to terminate employment. Banning from employment would need a system of tracking because this may not come up in a background check or from employment history (typically you will see “not recommended for rehire” or something to that effect). Failure to escalate a report may be addressed through training. Corporal punishment in schools is assault. See https://le.utah.gov/xcode/Title53G/Chapter8/53G-8-S302.html

Q10: If one student calls another student a racial or identity-based slur, and a verbal or physical altercation results, which student(s) should be disciplined? (select one)

  • The student who used the slur (x)
  • The student who was called the slur
  • Both students

Q11: Please explain your answer regarding which student(s) should be disciplined. If you selected “both students”, do you believe the consequences should be the same for both students?

In the hypothetical, the student who used the slur should be disciplined. However it may be both students, depending on context and drivers leading up to the altercation. Provocations, taunting, bullying, discriminatory behavior, violence need to be considered beyond acts of defense. Assault should always be reported to law enforcement. Destruction of property may include legal recourse. Repeated outbursts or violence require additional actions.

Q12: Define Critical Race Theory. Please be as detailed as possible.

CRT is Critical Race Theory, which argues that historical patterns of racism are ingrained in law and other modern institutions. It is generally understood that CRT is not taught in K-12 settings, rather is part of higher education programs. “CRT” has been used recently for a word-soup of acronyms, with the intent to get the public thinking that all are the same, and that all are bad. This is broadly an attack against diversity and equity in our public schools.

Q13: Do you think the role of racism in American history and present-day society should be taught in our classrooms? Please explain your answer.

Yes. History matters. We need to stop the re-writing of history for our students. I would also recommend that we offer civics and history classes on African-American studies, Latinx, Disability legislation, and the Pride movement

Q14: Here (https://www.utah.gov/pmn/files/831761.pdf) is an example of the Utah State Board of Education’s Library Materials Model Policy. If elected, what elements of this policy would you keep in place? What elements would you change?

This is a quick review. I have concern about Section III, “local school board’s adopted selection criteria and procedures” being too restrictive. I would base the procedure and selection on recommendations of Professional Library Associations (i.e. American Association of School Librarians (AASL)). Under Section V, a review process should exist but should not qualify removal simply based on objectional material. Review processes should not be burdensome to staff (perhaps included the regular examination of a library collection), possibly annually?. The “Library Media Review Committee” should have accountability to defend first amendment access to materials, and be barred from decisions based solely on objectionable material. Appendix B, Section 5a definitions from Utah Criminal Code 76-10-1201 (Offenses Against Public Health, Safety, Welfare, and Morals) for its inclusion here, particularly of 5(a) “Harmful to Minors”, 5(a)(i) on “prurient interest”, and 5(a)(ii) “patently offensive to prevailing standards in the adult community”. I would support the definition from “Court Cases: Island Trees v. Pico 102 S.Ct. 2799 (1982)”.

Q15: On June 29, the Utah Education Association wrote a letter (BROKEN LINK – https://n2d4q8s9.rocketcdn.me/wp-content/uploads/UEA-Letter-Library-Model-Policy-6.29.22.pdf) to the USBE with recommendations for the Library Materials Model Policy. Which of the UEA’s recommendations do you agree with? Which do you disagree with?

Note that the letter in reference is not accessible.

Q16: Do you agree with Alpine School District’s since-reversed decision to remove 52 books from its library shelves before completing the review process? (respond Yes/No)

No

Q17: Which of the following do you think are appropriate reasons for removing a book from a school’s library or curricula? You can select more than one.

  • “Harmful to Minors” as defined in Utah Code 76-10-1201
  • Offensive language and/or content
  • Content related to suicide, including suicide awareness
  • Violent content
  • Parent complained
  • Student complained
  • None of the above (x)
  • Other: (specify) (x) The librarian removes the book from circulation based on condition, the overall catalog of books, and for out-of-date references. A good article on procuring and retention of school library books is at https://www.edweek.org/teaching-learning/how-school-libraries-buy-books-struggle-for-funds-and-confront-book-bans-an-explainer/2023/02 and in particular this quote: “I believe that decisions are most effectively made closest to the point of consequence,” said Jordan Ely, chief financial officer for the Gresham-Barlow district in Oregon. “The media specialist and the principals in those schools, they know what students are struggling with, what life looks like for them. And frankly, what the kids want to read.”

Q18: Who should have the authority to remove a book from a school’s library or curricula? You can select more than one.

  • Principal
  • Local Education Agency (LEA)
  • District Superintendent
  • Parent-Teacher Association (PTA)
  • District School Board
  • Other: (specify) (x) The school Librarian (who is typically a teacher, with a degree in library science or school library media), and the Principal. A review process should exist but should not qualify removal simply based on objectional material. Review processes should not be burdensome to staff (perhaps included the regular examination of a library collection).

Q19: Do you believe students should be able to exercise their right to peacefully assemble during school hours? (respond Yes/No)

Yes.

Q20: Do Black lives matter? (radio select)

  • Yes (x)
  • Absolutely!
  • Of course!
  • Black lives matter every single day

Note: all of the answers above are correct.

Posted on

Response: 2024 Utah Education Association PAC Survey

This is not an endorsement.

For transparency, I am providing my answers to a survey from Utah Education Association (UEA) Political Action Committee so that my positions on these questions can be shared with constituents.

Q1: What is your name?

Greg Green

Q2: What is your Political Party?

Democrat

Q3: What are you running for?

House

Q4: What district are you running for?

44

Q5: Why are you running for the legislature?

My step into politics is based on where we as a community stand today. There are divisive legislation and social campaigns that are without empathy, that are breaking the networks in place for us to be informed, that are tearing at the fabric of our nation. There is an infiltration of local school boards, and the introduction of legislation in states that comes from national platforms that do not have our common interests in mind. There is disinformation in social media that is meant to be divisive, that tears on the intent and good will of society, with efforts to promote “strong-leader” fascists who would undermine our democratic systems. I’m stepping into politics because the “our” in our voice needs to be represented. I have enough shared experience and humility to know that I should listen and understand before I speak, and that my actions affect a community that I love and have much respect for.

Q6: What personal experiences have you had with neighborhood public schools and/or with charter schools? (Be as specific as possible.)

All three of our kids went through the public school system in Jordan District. We initially started at Challenger School for pre-school and kindergarten programs for our two eldest children, but moved to Jordan District schools for the remainder of their K-12 education. Natalie attended pre-school in Bluffdale Elementary early intervention program, before attending kindergarten in a mainstream class at Welby. She began special education classes at Terra Linda when the district began revising cluster programs, then moved to South Jordan Elementary when the district did more shuffling for its special education classes. All of our kids attended Elk Ridge Middle School. All of our kids attended Bingham High School with two graduating from that school. Our daughter Natalie moved to RSL Academy High School for grades 11-12 because their teacher/student ratio and special needs classroom support was better for her.

Some of the personal involvement I have had at or on behalf of public schools:

  • Letters written, and attendance at school board, district, or state USBE meetings setting policy or addressing critical issues
  • Participation in groups like “We All Belong Utah – All Abilities, All Schools”
  • In-school volunteering, past mentor/counselor for the South Jordan Youth Council
  • Sponsored and participated in school supply drives at work, participated in school supply drives in the community
  • Participation during Junior Achievement Career Days by speaking to, or bringing my daughter (Special Olympics Global Ambassador) to speak to Special Education classes on personal story and transition for students with disabilities. Special Education is typically not engaged in Junior Achievement Career Day programs
  • Supporting my daughter Natalie as a Special Olympics Utah Global Ambassador and Special Olympics US Youth Ambassador for Unified Champion Schools.
  • Recognition for teachers during teacher’s week in the school year
  • We funded two special education scholarships through Jordan Education Foundation in memory of Cindy Chavez, a para-educator for our daughter who passed away.
  • Invitations and outreach to teachers/classes/teams to attend Best Buddies Friendship Walks, Special Olympics events
  • Sponsoring “Spread the Word: Inclusion” campaigns at Jordan District Schools

Q7: What is your view on the rights of public employees regarding collective bargaining, payroll deduction of dues and other association issues?

I support the right to organize, and to establish collective bargaining.

Q8: What is your position on private school vouchers and voucher-like programs (tuition tax credits, backpack funding, education savings accounts and/or scholarships)?

I am against school vouchers, or any other form of redirecting funds away from public schools. As an example, Senator Lincoln Fillmore and Candice Pierucci have submitted SB44 “ALTERNATIVE EDUCATION SCHOLARSHIP COMBINATION” that diverts funds from public schools to home-school or private schools.

Q9: What ideas do you have related to creating a sustainable increase in revenue to invest in public education funding?

In 2024 I think the first issue is to look at proposals to do away with income tax, which would disproportionally shift the burden of taxes to property and sales taxes. Utah’s Constitution requires income tax revenues to only be used for public and higher education and some social services for disabled residents, so the question is how and where funding would continue to be sourced for education. I would support higher earmarking for education funding. Regarding classroom resources and teacher retention, I think this needs to be addressed in legislation AND in campaigns to defend our public education system and challenge the rhetoric of conservatives that disrupt and dismantle education standards, funding, and outcomes of our public school system. On a side note, it would be interesting if the proposed 2024 bill from Rep. Kera Birkeland on a constitutional amendment to legalize lotteries in Utah could become a source of funding for education in Utah. I am really interested in seeing this legislation introduced (it has not yet been submitted effective Jan 14, 2024).

Q10: What can be done to encourage our best and brightest to enter the teaching profession? How can we assure that every student has a qualified teacher in their classroom? What should be the role of the legislature?

The short answer here is that we need to pay teachers and get out of their way. Pay is poor, school funding is poor, and the politicization of educational roles makes work environs unattractive. Demographically Utah has some of the youngest counties in the nation (https://www.axios.com/local/salt-lake-city/2023/06/26/utah-young-us-median-age-county-cache), so it’s not appropriate by any means that our state spends so little, with Utah spending the LAST per pupil in the nation. Education funding is constantly under attack. We need to tackle the rhetoric in the legislature and work with the Governor’s office to grow funding, but we also need to remove politics from Education Boards, and return curriculums and text books back to educators.

Q11: The UEA believes that teachers and their professional association should be a partner with policymakers in making decisions affecting children and public education. What role do you envision for the UEA in advancing public education?

  • Organize. I have been approached by Utah Parents for Teachers, Utah Education Association PAC and Black Lives Matter Utah Chapter with surveys about education in Utah. All of the surveys had similar questions.
  • Push for accountability. We need to change the USBE Board of Director positions to non-partisan/apolitical positions, and legislate explicit direction for recall of USBE board positions when persons are materially working against interests of a free public education.
  • Be a part of defending freedoms. Assist in writing responses (bills, social media, legal challenges) for attacks on diversity and inclusion, or book-banning, or discrimination, or against re-writing history.
  • Support broad implementation of SEL programs at schools.

Q12: Some legislators have worked to increase legislative oversight of academic course standards, curriculum, classroom materials, books and other instructional resources. Is this an appropriate role for the legislature or should these decisions be made by the State Board of education and local school boards?

I said this previously, but we need to remove politics from Education Boards, and return curriculums and text books back to educators. Legislators are (generally) not academics. In the current year, I am also concerned that we have a highly political and dysfunctional State Board of Education.

Q13: What do the terms diversity, equity, and inclusion mean in the classroom setting?

To borrow words from Nikki Walker, “DEI is an idea and a space to make people who have been traditionally under-represented.

  • Diversity exists everywhere, but when it is not recognized or nurtured it can become a place of division.
  • Equity is a choice. We need to understand what equity looks like to people and our community.
  • Inclusion is the space where people feel their ideas and selves are worthy, and respected, and included.”

DEI programs are more than IDEA and 504 accommodations. It is the conscious awareness and practice to make sure our institutions work for everyone. It’s about who you are, not how well you try to fit within a dominant culture.

There is broadly an attack against diversity and equity in our public schools. I’m fighting against the USBE attempt to repeal of Educational Equity Rule – R277-328 (we won by only 1 vote this week, see my letter at https://utah44.com/letter-vote-against-repeal-of-educational-equity-rule-r277-328/), and also against the UT GOP RESOLUTION IN SUPPORT OF REPEALING R277-328 AND ALL CRT PRAXIS IN UTAH SCHOOLS (https://utgop.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/Oct-28-2023-Resolution-in-Support-of-Repealing-R277-328-and-All-CRT-PRAXIS-in-Utah-Schools.docx.pdf).

Posted on

Response: 2024 Utah Parents for Teachers Survey

I’m proud to share that Utah Parents For Teachers has endorsed my campaign! Investing in public education, and actively supporting our educators and students are in the best interest of our community.

For transparency, I am providing my answers to a survey from Utah Parents for Teachers so that my positions on these questions can be shared with constituents.

Q1: Your name and the office you are running for:

Greg Green, HD44 House Representative

Q2: If you are currently serving in office, how are CURRENT teachers a consistent part of conversations regarding education policy? If you are not currently in office, how do you plan on making sure teachers are part of your learning when it comes to educational policy in the future?

I’m not currently in office. The first step is for democratic candidates to successfully campaign up and down the ticket to replace USBE board members to restore reasonable oversite for Utah schools.

Q3: If you are currently serving in office, how did you vote on HB215 (vouchers) and why did you vote that way? For everyone, what is your position on increasing the number or amount of vouchers?

I’m not currently in office. I would have voted no for vouchers, and I will categorically state that vouchers work against a free public education system. The particular issue I had with HB215 was the “compromise” of offering salary for educators as a gimmick to gain support. We need to fund our educators, and I will work to promote that, but I don’t believe the compromise in this bill was beneficial. See HB215 https://le.utah.gov/~2023/bills/static/HB0215.html

Q4: What is your position on the current book banning that is happening in all school districts in Utah? What is your position on the bill by Rep. Ivory is proposing that will lower the threshold to ban books statewide to 2 school districts or 5 charter schools causing a small minority to control what is banned statewide?

I am 100% against book banning. Period. You can see my comments about this on my campaign site at https://utah44.com/issues/. You can also see my post at https://utah44.com/a-utah-reading-list/ about response to Utah Parents United. It’s worth mentioning that I have my own Little Free Library charter specifically to make banned books available in the community. Regarding Ken Ivory’s bill HB29 https://le.utah.gov/~2024/bills/static/HB0029.html, he attempts to define “sensitive material” as constituting “objective sensitive material or subjective sensitive material”, he expands the definition beyond library materials, and unnecessarily apportions review to school boards. Contrast that with the quote “A truly great library contains something in it to offend everyone.” from librarian Jo Godwin. We don’t need to be banning books, we need to create more classes in critical thinking and encouraging debate. We need to be funding educators and librarians. We need to offer safe spaces for students to grow into adults with the capacity to think for themselves and make educated, reason-based decisions.

Q5: How do you define CRT and do you believe it is currently being taught in Utah public schools? Do you also support AP African American Studies courses being developed in high schools? If so, why? If not, why not?

CRT is Critical Race Theory, which argues that historical patterns of racism are ingrained in law and other modern institutions. It is generally understood that CRT is not taught in K-12 settings, rather is part of higher education programs. “CRT” has been used recently for a word-soup of acronyms, with the intent to get the public thinking that all are the same, and that all are bad. This is broadly an attack against diversity and equity in our public schools. I’m fighting against the USBE attempt to repeal of Educational Equity Rule – R277-328 (we won by only 1 vote this week, see my letter at https://utah44.com/letter-vote-against-repeal-of-educational-equity-rule-r277-328/), and also against the UT GOP RESOLUTION IN SUPPORT OF REPEALING R277-328 AND ALL CRT PRAXIS IN UTAH SCHOOLS (https://utgop.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/Oct-28-2023-Resolution-in-Support-of-Repealing-R277-328-and-All-CRT-PRAXIS-in-Utah-Schools.docx.pdf).

Q6: How often do you meet with local school board members? How often do you meet with teachers/administrators/classified personnel? How many town halls/public meetings have you had since last legislative session? (If not currently in office, what are your plans for this?)

I have 3 adult kids who graduated from the Utah public education system (last in 2019). I have not recently attended local school board meetings but was an active participant in the response to Jordan District’s 2021 attempt to force consolidation of local special education classrooms (see https://utah44.com/letter-all-students-belong-in-all-utah-schools/). Regarding plans to engage constituents if elected, my thoughts have been to host moderated “listening parties” to hear from the public on matters important to them, and supplement that with quarterly local town halls within the House District for accessibility. I’m still figuring out what this will look like, but this is the general idea.

Q7: What ideas have you formulated that will increase public school funding to keep up with growth, fully compensate teachers for their expertise and commitment to teaching, ensure they have the classroom resources they need to be effective educators, and making teacher retention a priority?

In 2024 I think the first issue is to look at proposals to do away with income tax, which would disproportionally shift the burden of taxes to property and sales taxes. Utah’s Constitution requires income tax revenues to only be used for public and higher education and some social services for disabled residents, so the question is how and where funding would continue to be sourced for education. I would support higher earmarking for education funding. Regarding classroom resources and teacher retention, I think this needs to be addressed in legislation AND in campaigns to defend our public education system and challenge the rhetoric of conservatives that disrupt and dismantle education standards, funding, and outcomes of our public school system.

Q8: What are your short and long term plans to address school age population declines, shifts and increases (due to limited housing options for young families, less children being born per family, etc.)? With Utah spending the LAST per pupil in the nation, how can funds be allocated to increase spending per pupil and make it more equitable for rural school districts as well?

I already spoke about the serious funding issue for schools in the question above. Demographically Utah has some of the youngest counties in the nation (https://www.axios.com/local/salt-lake-city/2023/06/26/utah-young-us-median-age-county-cache), so it’s not appropriate by any means that we spend so little. I need to learn more in this topic, but initially some things that I believe would help include Medicaid expansion in the state to provide better health and support services, tackling the rhetoric in the legislature and working with the Governer’s office to grow funding, working with education councils and associations, and more. On a side note, it would be interesting if the proposed 2024 bill from Rep. Kera Birkeland on a constitutional amendment to legalize lotteries in Utah could become a source of funding for education in Utah. I am really interested in seeing this legislation introduced (it has not yet been submitted effective Jan 13, 2024).

Q9: If budget was not a concern, what 3 things would you tackle in education? What steps are you taking now to address those issues?

More than 3, sorry.

  1. Change the USBE Board of Director positions to non-partisan/apolitical positions
  2. Provide explicit direction for recall of USBE board positions when persons are materially working against interests of a free public education
  3. Fund our educators, provide funding for professional development, provide funding for paras, provide funding for libraries, offer qualified reimbursement to teachers for supply purchases for classroom materials.
  4. Provide visible support and expansion of Unified Schools programs that include mainstreaming, clubs, leadership development, and athletics
  5. Broadly implement Social Emotional Learning (SEL) policies in K-12 public education
  6. Restore a science-based nonjudgemental sex education program that is not based on abstinence-only
  7. Expand post-secondary University certificate programs for students with IDD (i.e. Aggies Elevated, Wolverines Elevated, etc)

Q10: What ways can we support diversity in our curriculum so that all students see themselves as culturally relevant?

  1. Stop banning books
  2. Remove policies that set cultural standards on hair and clothing
  3. Report discrimination and abuse, and ensure escalations to investigative or prosecutorial agencies takes place. Hold administration accountable.
  4. Encourage roles for diversity for Student Body Officers (i.e. chief diversity officer)
  5. Stop the re-writing of history for our students.
  6. Offer civics and history classes on african-american studies, Latinx, Disability legislation, and the Pride movement

Q11: What have you personally done to support teachers/public education?

  • Letters written, and attendance at school board, district, or state USBE meetings setting policy or addressing critical issues
  • Participation in groups like “We All Belong Utah – All Abilities, All Schools”
  • In-school volunteering, past mentor/counselor for the South Jordan Youth Council
  • Sponsored and participated in school supply drives at work, participated in school supply drives in the community
  • Participation during Junior Achievement Career Days by speaking to, or bringing my daughter (Special Olympics Global Ambassador) to speak to Special Education classes on personal story and transition for students with disabilities. Special Education is typically not engaged in Junior Achievement Career Day programs
  • Supporting my daughter Natalie as a Special Olympics Utah Global Ambassador and Special Olympics US Youth Ambassador for Unified Champion Schools.
  • Recognition for teachers during teacher’s week in the school year
  • We funded two special education scholarships through Jordan Education Foundation in memory of Cindy Chavez, a para-educator for our daughter who passed away.
  • Invitations and outreach to teachers/classes/teams to attend Best Buddies Friendship Walks, Special Olympics events
  • Sponsoring “Spread the Word: Inclusion” campaigns at Jordan District Schools

Q12: How will you show your commitment to public education outside of your role as an elected official?

By continuing to do what I do. I will maintain engagement with school programs, and if elected will actively sponsor and/or support legislation that defends free public education in Utah.