Wednesday, April 28, 2010

Meet the Candidate Event April 23, 2010 House Seat District 20

Candidate Responses from The United Women’s Forum

1. SB77 Prohibits Education Union Representatives Taxpayer paid “release time” to lobby the State
Legislature or be in the State Legislature. How did you vote or how would you have voted for this
DJ Schanz YES B. Edwards NO C. Loftis (needed more education)

2. A bill to amend the State Constitution and exempt Utah from the Federal Affirmative Action
program was debated this last Legislative Session. How would you have voted/or how did you
vote on this bill?
DJ Schanz YES B. Edwards NO C. Loftis YES

3. How would you have voted/or did vote on SB251 E-Verify Bill?
DJ Schanz YES B. Edwards YES C. Loftis YES

4. How important is Republican Party loyalty to you? Have you ever voted for anyone other than a
Republican Candidate and if so whom?
It was determined in that:
DJ Schanz voted for Ron Paul in Primary; didn’t vote in General Election due to an emergence
Business Trip to New York. B. Edwards voted in the Primaries for Barack Obama C. Loftis voted
for Barack Obama in the General Election

5. Ethics Initiative Petition; were you for or against this petition?
DJ Schanz AGAINST B. Edwards FOR C. Loftu AGAINST

6. There was a bill to allow citizens an easier process to remove their name off of any petition that
they sign. A process that no longer involves a Notary Public. How did/or would you have voted
for this bill?
DJ Schanz FOR B. Edwards AGAINST C. Loftis FOR

7. Do you feel Government at any level should designate special rights to specific groups of people?
Examples were the Salt Lake City Discrimination Ordinance in regards to employment and
housing for homosexuals and the Common Ground Initiatives from the previous legislative
DJ. Schanz NO B. Edwards YES C. Loftis NO

There were other questions asked about the education budget and what their 3 highest priorities were
facing the state of Utah. However their answers were longer and therefore will not be reported for the
sake of not leaving out something important from their answer

No comments: