The U.S. Constitution has been amended only 27 times in the past two centuries - 10 of those amendments coming with the Bill of Rights in 1789 when the document became the supreme law of the land.
The reluctance to amend the U.S. Constitution is a testimony to its enduring qualities. But the Utah Constitution?It seems Utahns have no reluctance whatsoever about amending it. In fact, state elections director Kelleen Lieschman says there have been 169 changes to Utah's Constitution in the state's 98-year history.
"It seems like there's something on the ballot every year," added Shelley Day, information specialist with Office of Legislative Research.
This year, Utahns will have the chance to vote on three more amendments to the state constitution. Proposition 1 would guarantee victims of crime certain rights during court and parole proceedings. Proposition 2 changes the way interest from state school trust lands is handled. And Proposition 3 clarifies language permitting the non-sectarian study of religion in Utah schools and colleges.
All are expected to pass with little difficulty.
Rights of crime victims
Proposition 1 - an amendment guaranteeing crime victims certain rights in criminal proceedings - is riding a tidal wave of public support. Support for the proposition is so vast that the number of outspoken objectors can be counted on one hand.
The move to guarantee victims certain rights is a national trend that has prompted similar laws or constitutional amendments in 14 other states. In Utah, the amendment has the support of government agencies and both Re-pub-lican and Democratic politicians.
An aggressive campaign to educate the public appears to have greased the proposition's passage.
Perhaps the most controversial portion of the amendment is a clause that frees victims from testifying at preliminary hearings. Proponents say this will spare traumatized victims the anguish of reliving the crimes twice, once during a preliminary hearing and again at the trial.
Opponents - a handful of defense attorneys - say this robs defendants of their constitutional right to confront their accusers.
But University of Utah professor Paul Cassell said some Utah defense attorneys use the preliminary hearing to intimidate victims into dropping a case. These attorneys conduct brutal cross-examinations designed solely to traumatize the victims, he said.
Barbara Noriega, a local woman whose sister and mother were murdered during a Christmas robbery in Oakley, Summit County, supports the proposition. A preliminary hearing for her relatives' murderers traumatized her niece, she said.
The girl was forced to recount details of the murders only days after they had happened. She was then forced to view photos of her murdered mother and aunt - photos that were later deemed to gruesome for the jury to see, Noriega said.
The proposed amendment requires courts and parole boards to notify victims of all proceedings in their case. It also guarantees victims the right to speak to a judge or a parole board before a defendant is released on bail, sentenced or released from prison.
A recent sentencing in Texas revealed a potential problem with that right. Two gang members were being sentenced for raping and murdering two girls. Statements by the girls' families consisted of name calling and a description of how the two men should suffer for their crimes.
The statements inflamed the crowd in the courtroom, according to an Associated Press report.
The proposed amendment also guarantees all victims the right to be treated with dignity, fairness and respect, and to be free from harassment during legal proceedings.
Changes to public school funding
Proposition 2 would allow part of the earnings from Utah's school trust lands to be returned to the permanent account - an accounting process that would, over time, generate more interest to support Utah's education system, proponents say.
Currently, the Utah Constitution mandates that all earnings from the permanent account go to fund education. If that interest were instead funneled back into the trust fund, schools would receive less money over the first few years, but in the long run, the account would earn more interest as it got progressively larger.
The proposed amendment appears to have generated little opposition. When the lieutenant governor's office advertised for opposing viewpoints to include in a voter brochure, no one offered any.
The change would hedge against inflation by putting an amount equal to the consumer price index for the previous year back into the account.
"We should have done this 50 years ago," said Rep. Melvin R. Brown, R-Midvale, who sponsored the legislation calling for a vote on the issue.
The proposal caps a three-year effort to improve management of the trust lands, which were given to Utah at statehood to help support education. Currently, about 3.6 million acres remain of the original grant of 7 million acres. A new management scheme has evolved that separates decisions about the trust lands from those concerning other state land issues. A new land board has been seated to set policy and provide division oversight.
Another component of Proposition 2 would clarify the management of sovereign lands - those lands beneath navigable waters, such as Great Salt Lake. These lands also were granted to Utah by the federal government at statehood, but for the general benefit of all Utahns. Trust lands are solely for the benefit of schools and a handful of other beneficiaries.
Nonsectarian study of religion
If passed, Proposition 3 would clarify existing language in the Utah Constitution - language that some believe now prohibits school and university teachers from even mentioning the role of religion in history, culture and societal values.
Proposition 3 would specifically permit the non-sectarian study of religion in state-funded schools and institutions of higher education - as part of historical events, cultural heritage, political theory, moral theory or societal values.
According to chief proponents, Reps. Kelly Atkinson, D-West Jordan, and Byron Harward, R-Provo, "We just want to make it clear that our schools can, for example, teach history the way it really happened without having to sanitize it to remove any mention of the effect of religious or non-religious beliefs on historical figures."
Opponents of the proposition, led by the Utah Society of Separationists, say the U.S. Constitution already protects the non-sectarian study of religion in schools, as does a state law passed by the Legislature. Passage of a constitutional amendment, they say, would only encourage Utah educators to use public schools for religious indoctrination - something specifically prohibited by the U.S. Constitution.
The proposed amendment, says separationist Chris Allen, "is a fraud. What I really think is going on here is pandering to the religious right. If teaching religion is what they're concerned about, it's already protected."
Harward counters that the amendment corrects a technical defect in the Utah Constitution.
The Utah Constitution specifically states that "no public money or property shall be appropriated for or applied to any religious worship, exercise or instruction, or for the support of any ecclesiastical establishment.
The proposed amendment would add the clause: "The study of the influence of religion, the comparative study of religions, or the theistic, agnostic and atheistic assumptions relevant to the educational curriculum, including cultural, heritage, political theory, moral theory, scientific thought or societal values, does not constitute either religious instruction or a sectarian practice forbidden by the Utah Constitution."