Medical Marijuana in the Mormon State: Exploring the Merits of Utah's Proposition 2

In November 2018, Utah voters will be given the chance to vote to legalize medical marijuana in Utah. Proposition 2, the Utah Medical Cannabis Act (“Initiative”), is an important ballot measure with many variables. I do, like most people, see value in medical marijuana but I want to make sure it is effected in a manner which really carries out the medical intent of the law.  I am providing insight on the bill from the lense of an Arizona citizen who has seen the impact of Arizona’s law from both personal and professional viewpoints (I worked for a year assisting marijuana dispensaries with attaining use permit and variance applications in Arizona jurisdictions). My interest in the initiative stems from my Utah roots, my Church, and my sincere belief that Utah stands poised to be the state who gets medical marijuana done right. 

Importantly, there is a difference between the merits of legalizing recreational marijuana versus legalizing medical marijuana. I am not going to divulge into the liberty arguments for marijuana. I prefer instead to emphasize that, as citizens, we are allowed to speak through our vote and elected representatives (even if our vote ends up binding fellow citizens to live by the rules society decides it values). I believe that I would be more likely to vote for a recreational marijuana bill versus a medical marijuana bill because recreational marijuana leads to higher tax revenues and actually more flexibility in restricting use. Of course, I am not saying I would vote for recreational marijuana just the same as, generally speaking, I don’t vote for laws which increase the availability of alcohol or pornography or other issues which I deem as social ills.

This article discusses the perceived abuse with existing medical marijuana laws, a brief debate on the actual medical qualities of marijuana, exploration of negative consequences of the medical marijuana initiative, and additional challenges created under the current wording of the initiative.

Abuse Statistics

There are important statistics which point to abuse of medical marijuana. The Qualifying Illness list includes “Chronic Pain” which is a hard to prove but easy to diagnose condition. In the Arizona Department of Health Services (ADHS) July 2018 report it was stated that 87% of Arizona Qualifying Patients got their card under the chronic pain condition. I believe chronic pain should be thrown out completely, or at the least, chronic pain users should be limited to non-THC heavy products. This statistic is alarming to me and makes it clear that the medical marijuana system is being abused.

Another alarming Arizona statistic is that cards are disproportionately issued to males between age 18-30 (25% of total users are age 18 to 30). It is a sad reflection on society that young men appear to be the primary abusers of the drug. Of note, the percentage of male cardholders has decreased from 73% in 2013 to 60% in July 2018. A concern with regard to lessening of the male-female gap is that ultimately the dispensary is a business and it is seeking higher profits and expansion of its customer base. The marketeers of dispensaries and dispensary manager’s business plans likely are targeting women (including making dispensaries cleaner and better designed…many new dispensaries have a design which is akin to an Apple computer store). Once again, these developments would sit fine if it was within a recreational context but when it comes to providing a medicine it just seems profit driven and not medicine driven. Side note, “free samples” are allowed under the Utah initiative. Free samples is placed under the guise of being provided to low income persons but in reality it’s like any free sample: designed to promote future purchase of the product. It is not being provided for charitable reasons. The dispensary is not advertising charitable giving of marijuana. 

It’s possible that young people are more interested in natural medicines or possibly have a lessened stigma of marijuana but I tend to view these use statistics as highlighting the abuse of medical marijuana. The qualifying illnesses listed do not disproportionately affect young persons and young persons are not disproportionately needing medical care. This usage statistic is disappointing because, though research has not been completely established, there are solid indications that marijuana use can alter positive development of the brain.

Medical Needs

THC isn’t proven to provide significant medical benefits over CBD based versions. I am not convinced that high THC content marijuana has worthwhile medical benefits over high CBD versions. THC is particularly effective in relieving nausea, appetite loss, and insomnia but is the trade-off psychoactive side effects worth it for society? These side-effects are the stereotypical effects of marijuana such as increased heart rate, coordination problems, dry mouth, red eyes, slower reaction times, and memory loss.

If the goal of the initiative is to let patients and physicians pursue medical opportunities together then there should be stronger requirements than just a one time visit with a doctor who does not need to be a primary care physician. Physicians are unattached to medical users of marijuana. The Utah law allows for 6 months of automatic refills after only one visit with a physician (Arizona’s is 1 year) even if the user doesn’t need a refill. I know that doctors issue prescriptions for opioids after one visit but couldn’t there be a way to encourage drug use under continued medical supervision?

The lack of specific prescription may be appropriate for a drug like marijuana which has a wide margin between effective dose and overdose/addiction amounts (unlike opioids which have a shorter distance between the amount needed for pain alleviation and the amount which potentially leads to addiction or overdose) but if the law is for medical marijuana then there should be more primary care doctor involvement. With that said, I am not proclaiming to have a fix for existing opioid issues. The fact that opioid processes are messed up and that the Church hasn’t issued a statement on these issues is not reason enough to not get marijuana processes correct. Abuse is going to happen and it is hard to limit but I see that adding language which requires ongoing consultation before renewal of a card seems to make sense to me.

Negative Externalities

The ironic negative consequence of medical marijuana is that it ends up protecting recreational abusers more than a recreational law would. When marijuana is protected as a medicine and marijuana card carrying becomes akin to a get out of jail free card, then abuse of marijuana becomes protected (not that I think marijuana offenders should be placed in jail…lots of prosecution and sentencing changes needed there). Situations where it becomes protected include divorce and child custody proceedings, traffic laws, employment, and landlord/tenant issues. In Utah, a person who uses marijuana under the guise of “chronic pain” can bind a judge to not allow any mention of marijuana when drafting a parenting plan.

Additionally, a landlord would be unable to evict a tenant based on their smoking of medically sanctioned marijuana even though it could affect neighbors, prospective tenants, and the landlords need to remedy the effects of smoke and odor damage (not to mention the factual debate of whether marijuana use increases or decreases the likelihood that a tenant will pay rent). The marijuana card issued doesn’t distinguish between smoked versus eaten or CBD versus THC. Smoked marijuana is bad for landlords who won’t be able to evict people based on marijuana use and instead will have to go through a more complicated eviction process including proving, assessing, and remedying damages.

Additional Challenges in the Law

It is fair to note that the Utah initiative does do some things better than other states. The initiative prohibits smoking and using cannabis in public view. It has a higher distance requirement for allowing home grown use (25 miles from dispensary in Arizona versus 100 in Utah). It also gives decent law enforcement oversight, tracking every aspect of the plant in a database and allowing inspections of cannabis establishments.

Also, it restricts physicians and medical cannabis establishments from advertising, and limits how many patients a doctor can recommend for treatment. If physicians don’t want to give a marijuana recommendation then they cannot be compelled to do so and physicians can provide a referral which works for less than 6 months. However, a physician can sign cards for up to 20% of its patients. The statute (26-60b-107) does not clarify whether its 20% of prescriptions issued or just 20% of patients. There could be a wide difference in this number, particularly if the percentage is based off of patients seen and not prescriptions given. There is not enough elaboration on this 20% calculation. The law is good to restrict physical advertising. This was not done under the Arizona law and has led to the creation of clinics which only issue medical marijuana cards and are obnoxious in their physical advertising.

While these virtues do exist, there are still important changes to be made in addition to refinement of the qualifying illnesses, age restrictions, and doctor involvement.

Medical marijuana should be dispensed from pharmacies. I see that recreational marijuana dispensing has validity in its own venue (like a liquor store) but I see no cognizable reason that this controlled substance shouldn’t be regulated similar to other recognized drugs. Under the Controlled Substance Act, pharmacists cannot dispense marijuana. The drug cannot be used in pharmacies because pharmacists are federally registered and would lose their license if they distributed a Schedule I drug. The legislature needs to remove the drug from Schedule I and then pharmacies should be able to utilize the drug. Removal will also allow the drug to have better access to grants and research (Research which the Utah legislature is already encouraging via HB 197 passed this year. Also, good to mention the Utah legislature also passed HB 195 which makes medical marijuana legal for terminally ill patients. So Utah is actually pretty with it already and shows it is capable of making good marijuana laws). It may take years to make these changes at the federal level but unwinding the creation of dispensaries is nearly impossible.

There are many legal complications related to granting dispensary licenses and then taking away those rights and requiring pharmacy distribution in the future. Unlike the 15 dispensaries which the Libertas Institute predicts, there is valid potential for 39 dispensaries. There are 29 counties (according to my 4^th grade Utah counties knowledge). A license for one dispensary in each county will be allowed and additional licenses in other counties based on population (7 in Salt Lake, 4 in Utah, 2 in Davis). A total of 39 dispensary locations will be allowed immediately in Utah. Side note: In Arizona, there was a legal change 4 years after the initiative passed which allowed transfer of those licenses into other jurisdictions. This transfer and eventual crowding in populated cities is not explicitly prevented by the Utah law.

The millions of dollars which are being used by national marijuana lobbying firms are completely intended to create recreational marijuana and are only pretending under the guise of medical needs for now. I wish these lobbyists spent resources lobbying for changes to the CSA as opposed to creating a billion-dollar industry under the guise of medical needs.

Next, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints inquiry into the law revealed that enforcement of existing federal and state laws have inherent difficulties including police officers not being able to dispute illegal marijuana use so long as the user retains evidence that the user bought at least some marijuana from a licensed dispensary. Additionally, the affirmative defense provision in 58-37-3.7(1) is unnecessary and has a potentially disastrous effect of allowing a large amount of abusers to circumnavigate the existing law. If the existing law is harming teens and ruining peoples work opportunities, then let’s show that is what is happening. I don’t see the need to have this provision. If a child with epilepsy or an elderly person with cancer has been illegally using marijuana then I find no evidence that Utah prosecutors have been locking them up, even if the current law technically allows them to (to quote the Libertas article: “Numerous states have plowed this ground already, and no federal crackdown on cancer patients (for example) is occurring.”).

Also, research on medical use of marijuana is still fresh and is largely being performed by active proponents of marijuana use. The ability to amend this initiative in the future is difficult. The Utah initiative proposed creation of a Cannaboid Product Board but it limits the board’s ability to modify qualifying illnesses even if those illnesses are determined to be dangerous or ineffective.

Lastly, the law does not provide clear direction on what should be done with the fees. In Arizona, this has been a major issue because there currently is a nearly $40 million budget surplus for card fees that cannot be utilized. The Utah law needs to make clear that funds from fees can be redirected to marijuana research, programs that assist drug dependents including opioid abusers, etc. Arizona’s Attorney General issued a worthwhile opinion on this matter.

In conclusion, I do believe in principles of deregulation and individual agency. Importantly, I also value the ability to vote and help form the society which we live in including optimizing the health of our society. Therefore, I am likely to vote against pro-marijuana initiatives because I believe it overall is harmful to society and I encourage Utah citizens to do the same.

My Autonomous Car Stock Portfolio and Legal Implications for the Future of Transportation

Quick and dirty ideas about self-driving cars and attempt to tie into my finals studying. 

Introduction

What’s going to make grandma’s bad hip change from debilitating to hip? When she is the first person on the block to purchase a completely self-driving car.

Technological advances typically take root in younger generations, Snap Inc. has a market value near $24 billion largely because its users are young (and dumb). I-Pad’s and smart phones are second nature to elementary students. Business owners spend millions for the latest software to manage internal operations or expand their market reach. Yet, my 70 year old father needs instructions on sending a picture from his phone. As my father ages our families comfort level with him driving will lessen but we will struggle with trying to give him the autonomy which he deserves and which his mental capacity is capable.

I propose that within the next few years autonomous driving technology will substantially increase in its demand and available supply. Therefore I am proposing a potential investment portfolio which could take advantage of this transportation revolution. My analysis is solely focused on the self-driving portion of these companies public corporations like Google or Apple and close corporations such as Uber. A very basic portfolio is contained at end of post.

The typical joke in my circles is about how bad Utah drivers are…but a strong case can be made that Arizonan’s also would be better off with computers at the helm. The 2015 Arizona crash facts claim that $3.8 billion in economic loss was caused by vehicle crashes. This number gives a generous economic impact to the 895 person who were killed on Arizona roads in 2015 but property damage accounted for nearly $1 billion. The US Department of Transportation 2015 crash stats attribute 94% of vehicle crashes to correctible human error. A lucrative market exists for the entrance of self-driving cars.

Benefits of wide-spread self-driving car use is apparent: Insurance premiums and deductible payments will lower and save citizens substantial money. Self-driving cars themselves contain technology which makes them better, safer drivers than humans. Owners of cars will benefit from a greater ability to multi-task (now you won’t get the stink eye for putting your makeup on while driving). And the efficiency of roads will increase which curbs pollution and fuel costs (hopefully starting with 101 north in mornings, 60 east in afternoons, and downtown 10 whenever).  

Potential Legal Implications

The rise of autonomous vehicles will have an effect on land use in Arizona jurisdictions. States enable counties, cities, and towns to exercise its police power to regulate transportation (US Constitution 10^th amendment: authority not contained in the federal government is left to state governments). Local jurisdictions will likely need to be proactive in developing ordinances which do not inhibit the orderly growth of self-driving vehicles. It is likely that legislatures will be able to create ordinance’s which will not be challenged by referenda or preempted by initiative.

Primarily, road use will be affected because flow of cars on roadways will be more efficient. State budgets could significantly be increased by a change in transportation funding. Narrowing of roads or less demand to expand roads will lessen both federal and state funding of roads. Allocation of tax monies will lead to debates on how to use potential revenue surplus. Synonymous with an increase in the popularity of autonomous vehicles is the improvement of technology related to group travel and task-oriented travel. Local mass-transit systems possibly will be affected by more nimble transportation methods (think carpool systems which have algorithms to pick multiple individuals up from home instead of a bus-stop and can take directly to needed location).

Regulation of autonomous vehicles could largely fall under the jurisdiction of the federal government based on the commerce clause. The Department of Transportation would create certain standard requirements and states would adjust those requirements according to their state specific needs. Even though most driving occurs in-state as people go to work and local activities, transportation still has a significant influence on interstate commerce and principles of federalism wouldn’t be affected by general national guidelines.

It is conceivable that potential litigation could arise if seniors owned self-driving cars and their ability to use the vehicles was being curbed by government regulation. The freedom of movement is largely a judicial construct under the privileges and immunities clause of the US Constitution. This privilege has taken on “right” status. Given how it’s been variously used in other cases, freedom of movement possibly could be construed to protect self-driving cars.

The Portfolio

Potential self-driving car focused portfolio. Assuming you get free trades and wont get overly burnt on commission fees. $1,000 investment unless if you are able to get into non-public companies which likely would increase minimum investment amount substantially.

-Apple (Aapl): 1 share at $143

-Vanguard Industrials Index Fund (VIS): 5 shares at $124

-General Motors (GM): 1 share at $33

-Ford (F): 1 share at $11

-Google (Goog): 1 call option at $107

-American Airlines (AAL): Short 1 share at $46

-United Airlines (UAL): Short 1 share at $71

-Medallion (TAXI): Short 10 shares at $3

-Find a way to privately place in companies like AutoNet 2030 (sensors/computers) or Local Drive (engine and body design)

-Hope that Turo does another round of investments and that you’re an sophisticated angel investor who can get a slice (not likely)

Many industries would be affected by growth of the self-driving car. Delivery of materials and crew would be more effective and lead to less subcontractor caused delays. It is likely that self-driving cars would inhibit short-term airline models because persons would be given the opportunity to drive at night and sleep while driving or purely choose to drive 4 hours from door to door instead of driving to airport early and enduring security and hassle of boarding a plane. Taxi, shuttle, and disabled transport companies would likely lose clients.

Another industry which could be impacted is the construction industry. Construction lawyers will have added work as contracts for manufacturing self-driving cars increases and construction of plants devoted to self-driving spring up. There likely will not be changes to basic principles of offer and acceptance or prompt payment, warranty, differing site conditions, etc.

Thanks for reading. Would be glad to hear your thoughts on self-driving car development in general or anything specifically related to this stream-of-thought post.

Note: This does blog does not constitute financial or legal advice. Investment is subject to risk and all investment should be considered in light of appropriate risk management and diversification principles. 

Standing with Standing Rock; Public Finance of Sports Stadiums; Mormon Faith Crisis and Marriage (Fall 2016)

I intentionally chose some “funner” classes this semester to help ease my transition from Nebraska to ASU. For sake of time I combined a couple classes into one topic: Administrative Law-Private Property Rights and Sports Law-Sports Venue Financing. In an effort to combat “fake news” the first section will be my attempt at non-biased informative journalism. The second section will attempt to show overlap between the topic and my class. The third section will be my personal analysis of the topic. I wont judge you for skimming over things to get to the Jon’s View section. Please comment on these topics and any other thoughts you have about my semester of classes.

Admin Law/Private Property Rights: Standing with Standing Rock

Informative News

            The Dakota Access Pipeline is being built to transfer oil between various drilling sites and oil hubs from North Dakota to Illinois. In order to run the pipeline, Dakota Access (subsidiary of Energy Transfer Partners) must obtain easements for the 30 inch pipe which will run over 1,172 miles. Voluntary Easements are obtained primarily by paying money to landowners but often accompanied with the threat of eminent domain action. Dakota Access obtained the majority of these easements from private landowners and has subsequently installed the majority of its pipe. An easement to run the pipeline under the Missouri River at a section which is owned by the federal government (US Army Corp of Engineers (CoE)) has not been granted. As early as January 2016 it had been decided by the CoE that an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) would not be required before the easement could be granted. Since that time however there have been requests from the Department of Interior (DOI) and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to have an EIS conducted. The EIS can take around 2 months to complete and requires the development company to provide planning alternatives, pay for environmental scientists to conduct research, and gather public input. Resistance to the project, largely led by the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe, has become highly politicized. The Standing Rock Reservation is less than a mile from the proposed pipeline easement and Tribal members are concerned over the impacts which would occur to the water system if a pipeline leak were to occur.

Class Application

            Administrative agencies involved in the debate include the Department of Defense (CoE being an agency within DOD), DOI, and EPA. Principal Officer leadership of each of these agencies is chosen by the President with the advice and consent of the Senate. The President has free removal power over Executive Agencies such as DOI and CoE so theoretically he exercises some political control over these agencies. The EPA technically is an independent agency which is more insulated from political influence. The CoE also has some insulation because it is largely left to oversight by a civilian board. The CoE is following regulation previously made regarding EIS but it is not clear why they have diverted from their earlier decision not to require EIS on the Missouri River easement. After the EIS is completed the CoE still has freedom in how it interprets and applies principles of the EIS.

Jon’s View

            I admire Standing Rock for fighting for its belief in the sacredness of water. I believe Standing Rock rightfully should be concerned about the potential for oil spills. I admire the protesters for sacrificing quality of life to fight for their beliefs. I believe there are rebel rousers among the protesters (not limited to Jill Stein vandalizing equipment) but as a whole it is a peaceful demonstration. I believe in the validity of the Indian Nations being sovereign and demanding respect from entrepreneurs and governments alike. Additionally, I believe that Dakota Access has followed the rules in obtaining its voluntary easements. I believe that pipelines are safer to use than truck or train transport, I believe it is cheaper to move oil via pipeline which is good for businesses and the economy as a whole, I believe the free market and innovation will lead to environmental change, and I believe oil use is necessary and that alternatives to oil energy will not be viable for years to come. I’d say I have a foot in both camps.

Sports Law/Sports Venue Financing: Public Taxes Being Used for Stadium Construction

Informative News

            The Oakland Raiders are likely moving from Oakland to Las Vegas after the Nevada legislature approved increasing taxes placed on hotels in the Las Vegas area (Clark County) and diverting $750 million of these public monies to fund a $2 billion football stadium. The funding difference will be met by private investment primarily from Raiders ownership. The development will include an entertainment district and also will be used by UNLV.

Class Application

            In accordance with league rules, NFL Owners will vote on whether to approve the move. Ironically, former Raiders owner Al Davis (current owner Mark Davis’ father) had sued the NFL under anti-trust laws when the NFL sought to prevent his team from moving from Oakland to LA. The NFL had prevented that move because of a league rule restricting teams from playing within 75 miles of each other. The provision as applied in this case was determined to be an unreasonable restraint on trade and the Raiders were allowed to move to LA. Likely no anti-trust issues will stem from the Las Vegas move. Stadiums almost always are determined to serve a public purpose and thus be valid beneficiaries of public funds. 

Jon’s View

Professional sports are expanding in popularity and influence in our society. However, the importance of water cooler sports talk is not enough to justify public funding of private enterprise. Professional sports team owners make millions of dollars when the public funds new stadiums because it jumps their team valuation exponentially. The jobs created when a new stadium is built are primarily short term construction jobs or low paying venue operation jobs. The tax impact as a result of new stadiums is negligible because substitution is high (people go to a football game instead of shopping or to the movies).  

Family Law: Mormon Faith Crisis and Marriage

Informative News

            In October 2016, nearly 8 hours of footage showing presentations of subject matter experts to the Latter-Day Saint Quorum of the Twelve of Apostles between 2007-2012 were leaked onto YouTube. The videos revealed the broad interests which LDS leadership considers ranging from naval piracy in Africa to the real estate markets of the USA. One of the videos focused on data revealing an increasing amount of young single adults not going to church and the threat this poses to the growth of a multi-generational church. The study showed declining church activity, marriage rates and fertility rates among members in their 20s. Wilkins said the study shows young single members don’t feel welcome or needed in their congregations. The average age for marriage inside and outside the LDS temple is increasing. Young single adults delaying marriage in an era of high immorality and pornography puts them at risk, the subject matter experts said. Elder Dale G. Renlund (then an area Seventy) gave specific recommendations from the Priesthood Department of the LDS Church on how to engage young single adults more directly in mainstream church work including adjusting some organizations, allowing stakes to be flexible in ministering to young single adults in their areas and merging young single adult and single wards.

Class Application

            Here are some possible considerations for individuals who leave mainstream Mormonism because they want to have sex and not feel guilty about it: Unmarried cohabitation leads to several legal issues. Cohabitation agreements are not common and when separation occurs this leads to housing and property issues. A marital agreement has advantages in enforcing legal and equitable obligations but other instruments exist to protect yourself in the event of separation. Common and separate property is harder to gauge when written documents are not involved. Delayed marriage often means that partners both attain education and vocational skills but when kids come along often pursuit of these skills is restricted by one party more than the other. Child support and alimony are tools which courts use to satisfy this dilemma should divorce occur.

Jon’s View

People should be Mormon, people should get and stay married, people should have as many kids as their mental, emotional, and physical resources can provide. As far as the Mormon faith crisis which I do see occurring: Mormons need to trust their leadership, additionally Mormons need to develop their own opinions even if it conflicts with Mormon culture, Mormons need to care less about not drinking alcohol and more about being guided by the Holy Ghost when interacting with others (If you promise to care less about Brigham’s wives then I promise to care less about you drinking Polygamy Porter). And people just need to chill a little. Have some patience, life is long and it has ups and downs. Be the change you want in your world. Don’t throw the baby out with the bathwater. Be sincere about covenants and if you make them, exercise some grit in keeping them.

Love to all. Thanks for reading. 

Pioneer Day 2016: Charles and Caroline Hall

Pioneer heritage is one of the elements of Mormonism which differentiates Mormon identity from most other Christian faiths. Around July 24^th, 1947 Brigham Young entered the Salt Lake Valley, recognized the valley from previous vision, and declared “This is the right place.” The 24^th of July holiday is now commemorated in Mormon communities with parades, rodeos, music, food, recreational competition, and religious meetings. Whether an individual is religious or not the holiday is a meaningful day to reflect on how far our society has progressed and the great labors which our progenitors endured to ensure our current standard of living. My holiday celebration yesterday in Snowflake, AZ was especially enjoyable because I remembered the noble pioneer heritage which my family comes from. Here is a brief exposition about my great great great grandfather Charles Hall. I will note that while it might appear that I am only giving Charles’ history . . . his work is very much entwined with his wife Caroline’s accomplishments. In pioneer days particularly, any success which a man had was a direct result of the steady hand of his helpmeet.

Charles Hall was a skilled boatmaker in Belmont, Maine. Charle and his two brothers were converted to the Latter-day Saint faith in New England and were baptized in 1844 in Nauvoo, IL where the majority of saints were gathering at the time. Records indicated they were baptized in Nauvoo but I surmise this could have been a re-baptism. Charles was ordained a seventy in Nauvoo and later was an electioneer in New England for Joseph Smith’s presidential bid. An excerpt from a patriarchal blessing given to Charles promised that “As a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, thou are entitled to the priesthood because of the integrity of thy heart. The Lord has given an angel to look over thee in times of danger to defend thee from thine enemies, to go before thy way that thou mayest prosper in every land wherever thou art called to labor.”

Charles and Elizabeth Caroline Freeman were married in Salt Lake City in 1849. It is probable that they fell in love in present day Omaha, NE while quartering for the winter prior to making the trek west with the early companies (finding love in Nebraska is possible!). Charles had been endowed with temple blessings in the Nauvoo temple. Caroline was endowed in 1856 and they were sealed on that same day in the Salt Lake Endowment House.  In 1850 Charles answered George A. Smith’s calling for settlers of Iron County. They spent a season in present day Provo, UT before continuing the trek to Parowan, UT.

In Parowan Charles was elected as one of four constables and continued in barrel making and other wood related trade. Charles had five children in Parowan, losing one in infancy. Charles was called to practice polygamy in Parowan and was sealed by Brigham Young to a 15 year old Danish girl named Dolta Jensen. No further history is known about Dolta so it is likely she either died or divorced Charles fairly soon after their marriage.

While in Parowan, Charles sat on a commission called to determine responsibility for the 1857 Mountain Meadows Massacre. Beginning in Nauvoo, Charles had been good friends with John D. Lee, the stake president who orchestrated the massacre. Charles and his commission found Lee to be liable for the massacre. Interestingly, Lee and Charles remained good friends after the commission determination. Lee established Lee’s Ferry over the Colorado river near present day Page, AZ. Additional details will be given about Charles Hall’s Ferry which was operated further upstream years later. Lee was executed in 1877 at the site of the massacre.

The family settled Kanosh, UT around 1863 and another son George was born to them while living there. George never married and lived with his parents until their deaths. In 1874 Charles was called to serve a mission in Maine, 30 years after leaving.

Records indicate that among the settlers of Escalante, UT in 1876 was the “boatbuilder and explorer” Charley Hall. In 1879 John Taylor shared now deceased Brigham Young’s concern about the settlement of present day south eastern Utah. Most Mormon settlements were located in a corridor from Salt Lake City through Las Vegas to San Bernardino, CA and south eastern Utah was being settled by outlaws (who were apparently stealing millions of dollars worth of livestock), miners (you know, drinking types), Indians, and other non-Mormons.

Rivers and canyons prevented easy access to San Juan County (south eastern Utah) from the corridor of Mormon settlements (present day national parks Capitol Reef and Canyonlands notably in the way). Charles was a leader of the group tasked to trailblaze a shortcut from Parowan to San Juan. It is during this expedition that the famous “Hole in the Rock” trail was established. Charles is credited with discovering Hole in the Rock after following a deer and losing it when it bound into the cleft of a rock. The cleft in the rock was too narrow and jagged to fit a wagon through and stood over two subsequent 50 foot drops. However, with some ingenuity (and a bunch of black powder) it was decided that the cut could be expanded, the steep drops leveled, and a system of pulleys created to lower wagons through the narrow cut. I plan to visit this site ASAP, it appears to be about a 300 foot stretch down into present day Lake Powell. The stretch was longer before the 1970’s when the waters of Lake Powell rose some 300 feet over the 1880 river bottom.

At the bottom of the Hole in the Rock decent was the Colorado River. Charles and his two sons prefabricated planks of wood and carried them down to the river for assembly of a ferry. I wont go into detail about ferry construction but needless to say it was a very specialized task and was quite the accomplishment. And Charles’ ferry was ready on schedule promptly once the expedition made it to the river floor. He transported 26 wagons on the first day across the 350 foot wide river and had the entire expedition across in two days. Charles operated the ferry at Hole in the Rock for one year. Charles discovered an easier route from Escalante to San Juan and established a crossing 35 miles upstream from Hole in the Rock. Researchers have debated how Charles transported his boat 35 miles upstream, I simply think he was a beast and rowed upstream. Halls Creek Narrows in Capitol Reef National Park also likely was used in the journey.

From 1881-1884 Charles and his family lived at the river or at a nearby ranch and operated the ferry. Cost to cross was $5 a wagon and $0.75 a horse. Two wagons could cross on the ferry at a time and 3 men were needed to navigate. The ferry became obsolete when the Rio Grande Railroad connected to south-eastern Utah in 1883. Today a boating marina providing entrance to Lake Powell carries the name Halls Crossing Marina. A modern day ferry called Charles Hall Ferry, operated by the Utah Department of Transportation, ferry’s travelers on Highway 276 across the lake.

In 1885 Charles followed one of his married daughters Nancy Flake to Snowflake, AZ. Nancy was married to James Flake, brother of the founder of Snowflake. Charles was an accomplished brick maker in Snowflake and provided the brick for the James Flake home which still stands on the corner of 2^nd Street North and 1^st East in Snowflake.

Charles and Caroline raised their granddaughter Luella in Snowflake. Luella was married to Ed Roethlisberger, lived in Vernon, AZ, and was the mother of my grandmother Nellie Gillespie.

A certain sense of unrighteous entitlement might stem from realizing my pioneer heritage but ultimately I think a healthy empowerment comes from knowing what my family is capable of. I am grateful to be a part of this proud fabric which extends from New England to Nauvoo to Utah and to the White Mountains. A fabric which is comprised of industry, faith, and determination. A fabric which, while changing and growing, still cannot be unthreaded from its roots. Happy Pioneer Day!

The following sources were used generally:

http://www.udot.utah.gov/main/f?p=100:pg:0:::1:T,V:2257,

https://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=336&dat=19730606&id=wNFSAAAAIBAJ&sjid=Kn8DAAAAIBAJ&pg=5611,1189182&hl=en

https://www.nps.gov/care/planyourvisit/hallscreek.htm

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:HoleInTheRock.jpg

http://www.traildamage.com/trails/index.php?id=100

https://www.nps.gov/glca/learn/historyculture/holeintherock.htm

https://forestry.usu.edu/files/uploads/UFN/Winter02.pdf

https://www.amazon.com/HOLE-ROCK-Colonization-Great-American/dp/0963992414

https://umarket.utah.edu/um2/press/product.php?product=42&storecookie=1

https://archive.org/stream/toluellaedwithlo00andr/toluellaedwithlo00andr_djvu.txt

https://www.nps.gov/parkhistory/online_books/glca/baker.pdf     

Joseph Smith for President?

I will be experimenting with being outspoken on social media this week. I hope to find some juicy threads about banning Muslim immigrants or combating Mormon homophobia; anything BYU v Utah would be appreciated. Not to say that I don’t fully trust everyone else already commenting on these topics but I thought it’d be fun to mix it up and let my voice be heard a bit. Let’s call it my Facebook rumspringa. Also let’s call it a week between internships so I have time on my hands. I plan to mostly just comment on others stuff but figured I’d start with a post on some political and religious related topics just to start with a bang:

Joseph Smith Jr. ran for President in 1844. As leader of the LDS faith his presidential bid was largely influenced by his dissatisfaction with how federal leadership was addressing issues facing his people (aka if Martin Van Buren sucks, then just run for office yourself). However, his views on the powers and policy of government were pretty fascinating to read and I feel they have some relevance in current presidential discussions. Here are some bullet points and related commentary:

-“I am astounded at the silly moves of persons and parties, to foment discord in order to ride into power on the current of popular excitement.” I like politicians who keep the main thing the main thing and aren’t tossed to and fro with social media waves.

-Joseph didn’t consider himself a Democrat or a Whig… he was a third party candidate. Because none of the leading candidates had adequately responded to his pleas, Joseph was running on principle and didn’t appear to be concerned with stealing votes from a particular party.

-Joseph didn’t like that a big business could default on million dollar notes with no criminal action being brought against defaulters and yet petty crimes led to incarceration.  

-Joseph believed the legislature should “study the convenience of the people more than the comfort of the cabinet.”

-Though Joseph was assassinated while imprisoned for ordering the destruction of a printing press, he praised the colonists for abhorring the Stamp Act and Tea Act because the limted freedom of speech, liberty of press, and liberty of conscience.

-Joseph believed in protecting domestic prosperity with a degree of government oversight including a “judicious tariff” which protects the whole “circumference of the realm” and “accommodates all tastes, trades, and calculations”.

-With the exception of dirty-rotten-pig stealing Martin Van Buren, Joseph referenced every preceding president with respect and highlighted the accomplishments of their terms in office.

-Joseph believed foreign diplomacy should be accomplished by compact as opposed to conquest.

-Joseph revered Andrew Jackson for eliminating the public debt. Harriet Tubman is a big deal but I’d say Andrew Jackson earned his spot on our currency…I forget how much public debt exists today, maybe everyone else has too.

-Joseph didn’t like that the wealthy could achieve legal results over humble parties largely based on their money and well-trained lawyers.  

-Joseph believed reducing the numbers of federal representatives and their pay, “Pay them two dollars and their board per diem (except Sundays); that is more than the farmer gets, and he lives honestly.” I don’t think any inflation needs to be figured into his suggested figure there.

-Joseph encouraged the people to petition their state legislatures to pardon every convict in prison saying to them “go thy way and sin no more”.

-Joseph called for massive reform in criminal law with penalties for crimes to be “work upon roads, public works, or any place where the culprit can be taught more wisdom and more virtue; and become more enlightened. Rigor and seclusion will never do as much to reform the propensities of man, as reason and friendship. Let the penitentiaries be turned into seminaries of learning.” He did still believe murder deserved confinement and potentially death.

-Joseph abhorred slavery. He proposed a compromise in order to get rid of slavery. He proposed that sale of public lands and surplus from reduced congressional salaries be used to give slave holders a reasonable price for their slaves. Joseph treated slave-holders with respect, emphasized their humanity, and believed they would agree to discontinue slavery if fairly negotiated with.

-Joseph believed in getting rid of court martial’s for desertion from the Army (I’m thinking of you Bergdahl). Obviously a different issue then versus today but I do like the emphasis he placed to “Make HONOR the standard with all men.” He send to send them a letter which says, “his country will never trust him again; he has forfeited his honor.”

-Joseph called for Congress to establish a national bank, with branches in each state. He thought leaders of this bank should be elected yearly by the people. He wanted the bank to be prevented from issuing more debt than the amount of capital stock in the vaults.

-Joseph believed in expanding the power of the president in order to allow POTUS to send federal troops to suppress mobs without state approval. This was likely an issue close to home given the lack of support which the Mormon’s received from Missouri leadership against unruly mobs.

-Joseph wanted Texas and Oregon to join the union. Heck he even wanted Canada and Mexico if they were down. Sounds like he was open to globalization so long as it didn’t compromise American values.

-Joseph was a God fearing man who trusted that the Lord would lead the nation right. He was not ashamed to share his testimony that Jesus Christ was the way to salvation.

https://archive.org/stream/generalsmithsvie00smit#page/n0/mode/2up

https://www.lds.org/ensign/2009/02/joseph-smith-campaign-for-president-of-the-united-states?lang=eng

Spring 2016 Substitute for Actually Studying

Sorry for the clickbait. Finals are coming up so it’s time for a quick and dirty exposition of a few things I learned this semester. Overall I have conceded that law school is extremely challenging.

Property: Why do Churches Get Special Land Use Privilege?

The Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (Sep. 22, 2000, RLUIPA introduced by Utah Senator Orrin Hatch) provides protection to religious groups in regards to governmental zoning and governmental enforcement of private land covenants. The federal statute bars the government from imposing a substantial burden on religious land use unless if the government can show that it has a compelling interest to impose the burden and that the imposition is the least restrictive means to accomplish the compelling governmental interest.

James Madison taught that religious freedom is an unalienable right, superior to the civil authority. First it is necessary to understand that religion can only be exercised by reason and agency and cannot be enforced with the sword (or tax garnishments). In contrast, civil authority relies on social and militant power. The relationship between God and man exists outside of the purview of the state. The founders were not “creating” rights in the Constitution…they were “protecting” rights. Man is subject both to God and Caesar, but subjugation to God is earlier in time and higher in eminence (See Is RLUIPA Unfair to Secular Land Users? by my profess.).

Backing up a little it is important to realize that government does have certain powers (albeit powers given by the people) in regards to land use (land rights which are endowed on man from a power greater than government).

Most notably is the eminent domain power (US Const. 5^th Amendment isn’t just about protecting against self-incrimination) which equips the government with the ability to take private land for public use, provided that it pays just compensation. This power is typically used to build roads, run utility easements, or provide public parks, hospitals, public buildings etc. The grey area in regards to both physical takings and regulatory takings is the line on what constitutes public use. The SCOTUS (US Supreme Court) case Kelo v City of New London found that the government could take land and give it to a private company because the economic development would serve a public purpose (I know, scary right?). Overall I would say the taking power of the government has pretty well been kept in check by state legislation and sound judicial decisions.

Also of note, local governments have the power to create zoning ordinances which are designed to protect the public safety, health, and welfare. Sidenote: One issue we discussed related to this regulating power is “exclusionary zoning” where a city often tiptoes segregating society along economic lines. These economic lines often indirectly separate society according to income, race, and background, think: designating portions of a city to single family residential, others to high density apartments, etc. It is in local ordinances that certain areas are designated as appropriate for religious use.

One of the major subsets of local regulation which we discussed was disputes which have arisen when individuals conduct worship services in their home. The issues arise when heathen neighbors complain about the parking or traffic nuisance associated with 25 or so people coming to study the Quran or sing hymns. Heathen neighbors (joking with that term FYI) unfortunately do not emphasize the essential nexus of the issue which the congestion caused. They instead emphasize the religious practice creating a quasi-church which needs to operate with a permit.

RLUIPA codifies the protection which individuals have against the power of government. The burden of proof is on the government to show that society has a compelling interest in the land being used differently.

North Carolina’s recent religious protection act, let’s just get my initial thoughts out there: I wish that additional rules didn’t need to be made but in order to carry out the purpose of the constitution it is better to legislate through elected officials as opposed to leaving it to unelected judges. The constitutional rights of gay and transgender persons are certainly important as well. I however do not believe that in a capitalistic society persons have a “right” to buy goods from certain vendors. The constitution protects the people from the government, it doesn’t necessarily protect the people from the people.

Contracts: Athletes who want to Breach

The USWNT (Mia Hamm and co I think) team and Tom Brady have been disputing their collective bargaining agreements as of late. Collective bargaining agreement in this instance is a fancy way to say “contract between the players and owners”.

The USWNT actually seems to be taking advantage of procrastinating leadership which didn’t finalize a new official CBA. However there seems to be ample evidence that enforcing the old CBA shouldn’t be an issue because the elements of offer, acceptance, consideration, statute of frauds, and conditions seem to be present with the agreement to continue recognizing the old CBA. I would advise USWNT not to breach. While their cause (equal pay) might be just, the current approach seems to be a losing battle, but they are smart to advance their pay concerns in an Olympic year when they are in the public spotlight.

Mr. Brady essentially believes the CBA he signed didn’t actually give Mr. BadDell the right to suspend Brady for cheating or in the alternative that it gave too much power to Mr. BadDell. I don’t believe the NFL’s action was unconscionable but it is too bad that one player gets to be made an example.        

Civil Procedure: Does Information Access Kill the Legal Profession?

The availability of information via the internet has threatened many job sectors. Notably, I believe the legal profession has lost some of its value as a result of information dis-asymmetry. Legal education likely could afford to move away from the standard brick and mortar model (and I by “afford” I don’t mean to include the professors who would lose their six figure incomes). We spent this semester applying the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Like any code, a layman could look this information up and attempt to apply it. The “lawyer difference” comes with being able to issue spot among a complex set of facts and then to be able to know how different rules are connected to each other. As such, I believe lawyers do have job security and society shouldn’t necessarily want them to become techies, doctors, or engineers.  

International Perspectives: Business Idea: Nonprofit Which Teaches Comparative Law Course to Muslim Arabs

I keep a long list of business ideas in my notes. Some are higher on the spectrum (i.e. Uber stole my Carpool.com idea) than others (i.e. gas station to gas station sell the “Employees must wash hands” signs). My International School for Kids who Don’t Understand Differences Between American and Islamic Law Good is the combining of the millennial need to travel the world and the education need for lower income individuals. Individuals will travel to Jerusalem, Cairo, Amman, and Istanbul where they will spend two weeks working half-days in local high schools teaching about American and Islamic legal systems.

The American legal system is, like, pretty straight forward as I have learned this year (not). Here are some basics of Sharia Law just so you are prepared for the atfaal (children). Sharia Law is based in the Quran which is the written version of Muhammed reciting God’s message. The Quran is supplemented by the sunna and hadiths which are basically examples of how Muhammed applied the principles of the Quran. Ijma(community consensus) and Qiyas (reasoning) are utilized next in providing legal decisions. The Qadi (judge) also is assisted by mufti (scholars) in making rulings. In reality there are few pure Islamic Law countries with most regions having some influence from French civil code and British common law. “Islamic Law” in and of itself is too broad of a term because there are several different schools of jurisprudence. These schools vary because of different historical and cultural influence and have varying degrees of conservative and liberal principles.

One of the interesting principles of Sharia Law is its “Conflict of Law” provisions. These provisions concede rights to Jews and Christians in making their own legal decisions including decisions on inheritance, divorce, health, and Sabbath observance.

So basically the kids are going to learn to appreciate their own legal system and also see the virtues of the American legal system. Western ideals will be planted in their minds and not just western idols. 

Defying Dependence by Defining Investments.

These are definitions of some investment vehicles related to health, retirement, college, and fun:

Roth IRA: An individual can contribute $5,500 a year into a retirement account which will grow tax free and can be accessed at age 59 1/2. Unlike a Traditional IRA, you don’t get a tax deduction when you contribute but if you contribute $20/mo for 30 years your total contributions would be $7,200 and your tax free earnings would be $17,500 (assuming a safe interest rate of 7%). Meaning when you turn 59 ½ you could have $24,700 to buy a few four-wheelers. There also is an exception where you can take both contributions and earnings out tax-free prior to retirement in order to pay for your first home purchase.

Employer 401k Match: In the past employers often used defined benefit (i.e. pension) plans as incentive to attract workers. Modern companies, and even government organizations, are now moving towards defined contribution (i.e. 401k) plans. Often companies will automatically put a particular amount of money into your 401k (retirement plan which can be accessed penalty free at age 59 ½). In addition you can divert more of your own money towards that same account and often employers will match 100% of your contributions up to 3-5% of your income. So say you file the paperwork to get 4% of your $2,000 paycheck put into your 401k ($80)…the company will put $80 more into the account for you (80+80=160). That’s what we call doubling your money, a 100% return, and/or a pay increase. 401k’s usually function like Traditional IRA’s where you get a tax deduction in the year you contribute but have to pay taxes on the money when you withdraw it, but they can also be set up as Roth 401k’s.

Emergency Fund: Usually it is best to save 3-6 months of living expenses in a safe place such as a normal bank account, a bond focused mutual fund, or under the mattress. Three to six months of living expenses could be upwards of $10,000 so that’s a big thing to build up to. Putting just $1,000 into an account which is separate from the accounts you normally access but still available if the car breaks down, you lose your job and need groceries, or someone gets cancer… will provide A LOT of peace of mind (not for Christmas shopping, taking your parents on a trip, or buying a nice new phone).

College Savings 529 Plans: Like a Roth IRA, you don’t get a tax deduction for money contributed to a 529 plan but you do get completely tax free growth (as long as you use the money for tuition, housing while a student, books, etc.). What if your kid decides they don’t want to go to school? You can transfer the money to another kid or grandkid or go get yourself another degree. Most 529 Plans require a $1,000-$3,000 initial contribution but after that you (or your kid) can contribute as little as $20 a month.

Term Life Insurance: Most companies provide a life insurance component for their benefits package. Often they supplement the cost so it is very cheap or even free. Typically the amount they provide leaves you underinsured and also makes you rely on their employment. This is one of those “sleep at night” products which is more critical to have when you have kids, a mortgage, and not very much money in savings/retirement accounts. Having $400,000 in term insurance would cost a 35 year old around $30/mo.

Health Savings Account: HSA’s are a double whammy investment because you don’t pay taxes on the amount you contribute and you also don’t pay taxes on growth or withdrawal amounts. The money does have to be spent on copays, medical emergencies, insurance premiums, and medical expenses like crutches and the like. HAS companies have convenient debit cards which you can use or you can pay yourself back later for medical expenses you incur. The money is usually invested in a mutual fund of your choice: heavier stocks if you don’t mind risk, heavier bonds if you are risk adverse.

Mutual Fund: A passive instrument that leaves the actual investing choices up to either managers or a specific formula (i.e. a formula which just invests in all big American companies or mid-level energy companies etc.). The return on a mutual fund will vary depending on the sector of companies it is invested in (manufacturing, health care, entertainment, etc.), the type of instruments it is invested in (stocks, bonds, etc.), and the management cost of the fund (are you paying a person to manage or is a machine/formula doing it). The amount of risk which you can take when choosing a fund to invest in depends on when you will need the money and how much growth you need to occur. If you are saving to buy a new car in 5 years then you will pay taxes on any dividends paid out while invested and then pay capital gains taxes (typically much lower than regular income tax rates) on earnings when you withdraw. Mutual funds are an investment which can be inside a tax-sheltered retirement account or just a normal investment account. Investing in something like a Vanguard S&P 500 Fund would require $1,000 initial investment and could fluctuate up or down by 10-20% on any given year but over the long run averages about an 8% return.

Credit Card’s: Many credit card companies have good reward incentives for making purchases with their cards. They provide these rewards because whenever you use their card, businesses running your transaction have to pay the credit card company a fee. Using around 5-25% of your credit limit will report positively on your credit score report. It is not wise to spend more than you have readily available in your checking account because missing credit card payments gives the credit card company the right to charge you interest. That interest gives them a nice 6-25% investment return and steals your hard earned money. That 6-25% interest you are paying them could be put into an investment of your own which could make you 6-25% (that’s another example of doubling your money).