“If they can do it to a political party, they can do it to a private civic organization or a private religious organization.”
--Chris Herrod, former member Utah House of Representatives
Freedom of Speech is one of the first elements of the 1st Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. It states that “Congress shall make no law…abridging the freedom of speech…; or the right of the people to peaceably assemble…” The 9th Amendment states: “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.” Could the right to associate freely be one such power? Many Utahns think that the right to associate freely with others of your choice and in the manner of your choice is a basic right and necessary for a free society. Many Utahans, including members of several groups, are very concerned that a law (SB 54) passed by the legislature and signed by the Governor in 2014 has potentially opened a Pandora’s Box that could infringe upon our right to freedom of speech and much more. Specifically, many consider the right of association to underpin the Constitution.
Utahans have selected their political candidates in a unique fashion by caucuses and conventions for many years. State activist Lowell Nelson, of Utah County, says many states have looked at Utah’s system as a model for their states. Now, Utah’s system is under attack and will be severely damaged if Senate Bill 54, passed by the Legislature and signed by the Governor this spring, continues in effect. The bill would take away political parties’ abilities to nominate a candidate of their choice for primary or general elections. The bill was touted as a compromise with the Count My Vote campaign. Nelson says that Utah’s reputation as one of the best managed states is likely to be lost if Senate Bill 54 continues.
Supporters of the bill say that it gives Utahans more say through primary elections; but James Humphreys, PR person for Protect our Neighborhood Elections, an umbrella group for many groups dedicated to restoring our Freedom of Speech and the connected Right of Association, says that SB 54 would actually do the opposite. He says that only in Utah did a sitting Senator of 30 years (Orrin Hatch) have to go out and sit in people’s homes and in local cafés to convince them that he was the one to continue to represent them. If Senate Bill 54 is allowed to be the law, the higher level of accountability will no longer exist.
Chris Herrod, a former member of the Utah House of Representatives says that the right of association applies not only to political parties, but to private civic and religious organizations. He asks: If we are told who we can associate with and how we can associate in our private lives, where will it end? Herrod says that the attack on the right of association is related to enthroning political correctness and the “boldness” by which “they have gone after political and religious liberties is astonishing!” As an example, he says that in California there was a proposal (although defeated), “that anyone who had been associated with the Boy Scouts could not become a judge.”
The Republican Party has relied in the past on wealthy donors, and apparently State Republican operatives who are in favor of more popular elections where money has a bigger influence over education and accountability are encouraging the wealthy donors to restrict their donations. Lowell Nelson believes that many of those donors are unwittingly supporting the effort to diminish Utahns’ right of association. In any case, it’s evident that this controversy has yet to be resolved.
Editor’s note: Although James Humphreys is quoted here; Sentinel News wants to make it very clear that we do not agree with everything he stands for.
