Cross posted at Brian's Utah Weblog

Local wags Frank Pignanelli and LaVarr Webb suggest in their column that House Speaker Curtis should have a full time chief of staff.

Perhaps a chief of staff is what already scandal-plagued Speaker Curtis (R-Sandy) needs.  The Utah House Of Representatives sure needs some kind of improved leadership and organization.

In the 2005 general session, our legislators passed a bill requiring that our new voting equipment produce a voter verifiable paper trail.  The governor signed the bill into law and our right to vote was secure.

But Speaker Curtis (who had to resign his county job for filing fradulent expense vouchers) and Senate President Valentine (R-Orem) prepared an incorrect version of the bill for the governor and his signature was meaningless.

Republican Senate Majority leader Bill Frist is threatening to use the 'nuclear option' to end filibusters of a few appellate court judges.  Action is expected this week.

In parliamentary procedure, the president (or chairman) of a body is always responsible for making final rulings on disputes over applying the rules, whether Robert's Rules or Mason's Manual or standing rules of a body like the United States Senate.  These bodies usually have parliamentarians, but their opinions are advisory and only the president makes rulings.  A ruling of the president can be appealed to the body by any member and if the majority of the body disagrees with the chair, the ruling can be reversed.  Therefore, the ultimate authority to interpret the rules rests in the majority of the body.

The majority of a body could reverse any ruling of the president and insist on having its way without debate at any time.  The obvious question is how any procedural rule or open debate can exist when there is no higher authority to enforce rules.