I realize it may not be a smart political move to direct people to my opponent's website, but I must say, Mark has one of the saddest posts on his site that I have ever seen.
He has put together a 23 SECOND video on education funding. Anyone who has ever paid even the slightest attention to education funding can tell you there is no possible way to say anything meaningful on the topic in 23 seconds, and Shurtleff's video proves them right.
Shurtleff claims "we're (no explanation who "we" is) protecting the funding for our children's education by securing and generating money from our school trust lands." How HE is securing and generating money from the trust lands is not explained (for the record, the School Institutional Trust Lands Administration is responsible for securing and generating money from the trust lands). Nor does he offer any explanation how his pro-voucher position fits with this claim that he --or the unidentified "we" --is protecting education funding.
He also states he will stop the "federal government or anyone else" from using the school trust lands unless the use benefits school children. Again, no explanation what the Attorney General of Utah is actually doing or has done to protect the trustlands from misuse.
Of course, there's also no information about any specific attempts by the feds "or anyone else" to use the trust lands to the detriment of the schools. From what I have seen as a member of the Trustlands Advisory Committee, the State Institutional Trust Lands Administration is doing a great job of protecting the value of the lands. And Shurtleff was nowhere to be found when the Division of Natural Resources was pushing to buy some trust lands for far less than fair value--but SITLA and the leaders of the Advisory Committee were.
So, if you want to see a classic example of political pandering and a dismal attempt by one politician to gloss over his ill-conceived support for vouchers, check out the video (and note the date on his PTA award).
He has put together a 23 SECOND video on education funding. Anyone who has ever paid even the slightest attention to education funding can tell you there is no possible way to say anything meaningful on the topic in 23 seconds, and Shurtleff's video proves them right.
Shurtleff claims "we're (no explanation who "we" is) protecting the funding for our children's education by securing and generating money from our school trust lands." How HE is securing and generating money from the trust lands is not explained (for the record, the School Institutional Trust Lands Administration is responsible for securing and generating money from the trust lands). Nor does he offer any explanation how his pro-voucher position fits with this claim that he --or the unidentified "we" --is protecting education funding.
He also states he will stop the "federal government or anyone else" from using the school trust lands unless the use benefits school children. Again, no explanation what the Attorney General of Utah is actually doing or has done to protect the trustlands from misuse.
Of course, there's also no information about any specific attempts by the feds "or anyone else" to use the trust lands to the detriment of the schools. From what I have seen as a member of the Trustlands Advisory Committee, the State Institutional Trust Lands Administration is doing a great job of protecting the value of the lands. And Shurtleff was nowhere to be found when the Division of Natural Resources was pushing to buy some trust lands for far less than fair value--but SITLA and the leaders of the Advisory Committee were.
So, if you want to see a classic example of political pandering and a dismal attempt by one politician to gloss over his ill-conceived support for vouchers, check out the video (and note the date on his PTA award).
1 comments:
You're saying Mark's post was pandering?! Pot, meet kettle.
As I would hope an AG candidate would know, the Trust Lands generate money primarily through natural resources activities -- which Democrats and environmental special interest groups tend to oppose. Mark has fought a good fight to retain access to and production on our Trust Lands, which leads to more money for the children. That point is valid and should be obvious to you. And, regarding the issue of pandering, that activity has nothing to do with vouchers.
If you want to zing Mark on his support of vouchers, do it. But don't try to confuse the two issue that have nothing to do with each other.
Post a Comment