The Pioneer Day floats we’d like to see

These would make for a more animated parade

By Frank Pignanelli & LaVarr Webb

This week is the 174th anniversary of the pioneers entering the Salt Lake Valley. After a year’s hiatus due to the pandemic, the Days of ’47 Parade is returning. Politicians and interest groups love to participate in this highly visible event for obvious reasons. Most of them smile and wave from shiny vehicles.

In a fit of civic engagement, your columnists volunteered modest ideas for more substantive “theme” floats to these politicians and interest groups. But our suggestions were inexplicably rejected by all of them. (Apparently, our officials have good taste.) Here’s a sampling of floats for a more fun and animated parade:

Gov. Spencer Cox: A large flatbed farm trailer holding many Utahns, representing a variety of religious denominations. Cox is leading the crowds in prayer for more rain, less heat and better attitudes toward vaccinations. The overhead banner reads, “Prayer — It’s easy, free, and do you have a better idea?”

Sen. Mike Lee: An oversized baby crib mobile rotating various figures and images that Lee uses in describing friends, foes and legislation. Like a Captain Moroni/Donald Trump, a gun-toting Ronald Reagan riding a velociraptor, and Satan burning in hell while writing the Democrats’ voting reform legislation.

Anti-vaccination protesters: A giant grim reaper under the banner “Science, Schmience, who wants a sore arm anyway?”

The new redistricting commission: This hardworking group of appointed volunteers will be walking behind a banner saying, “What we suggest for district boundaries does matter. It really does. We promise it does.”

Sen. Mitt Romney: He will be standing on a Red Sea float, dressed as Moses, arms raised, leading members of Congress from the plagues of political bickering and bombastic rhetoric, through the parted waters of bipartisanship and on into the promised land.

Congressman Blake Moore: Dressed as superhero Captain Consistency with the poster, “I’m moderate and I voted how I promised.”

Congressman John Curtis: He would be atop a float pulling a giant ostrich head out of the sand under the banner, “Climate Change, is there any question after the last 60 days?”

Congressman Burgess Owens: Standing alongside a Britney Spears impersonator under the banner, “Release Britney — because I’m sure we all care.”

Congressman Chris Stewart: He would be dressed as a pioneer leading seagulls to eat the rampaging crickets — labeled as Marxists and socialists.

Salt Lake County Mayor Jenny Wilson: Riding in a car, but throwing masks instead of candy to the crowds, with the side banner, “You know they’re coming back!”

Salt Lake City Mayor Erin Mendenhall: Atop a huge float decorated as a bar, featuring protesters, bicyclists, vegans and tree-huggers under the banner, “Salt Lake City — you hate our politics but you love to party here”.

Utah Jazz players: They would be waving from a Conestoga prairie schooner wagon with a side banner: “Just reminding everyone of the heartbreak and disappointment endured by pioneers. We just wanted to provide a taste. You’re welcome.”

National Republican Party: A large, spartan float would hold a ghostly apparition and a large sign saying, “Inflation … It’s back … Thank you, Democrats.”

National Democratic Party: A large float would hold an impersonation of President Joe Biden with the banner, “Courtesy, compassion and adulthood in the White House.”

Bears Ears National Monument supporters and opponents: They walk together carrying a banner, “Thanks, Utah, for the issue that increases membership dues and contributions to our activist groups.”

Lt. Gov. Deidre Henderson: Surrounded by staff carrying a banner, “Maintaining the legacy — defending Utahns against nonexistent voter fraud.”

Senate President Stuart Adams and House Speaker Brad Wilson leading a pack of legislators: Atop the float is a huge dollar sign with a banner: “We have billions to spend in one-time money, and don’t know what to do with it all. Any ideas?”

Attorney General Sean Reyes: Just carrying a large sign proclaiming, “Bringing the left and right together — to sue big tech.”

Utah Democrats: Marching behind a banner, “Relevant Once Again … at Least in D.C.”

Utah Republicans: Marching behind a banner, “Fighting for You. Fighting With Each Other.”

Downtown panhandlers: Holding signs saying: “We appreciate the new resource centers, but please don’t trample on our tent cities as you watch the parade.”

Is it time to use ranked choice voting in Utah?

By Frank Pignanelli & LaVarr Webb

The recent New York City mayoral primary election received national attention not just because a moderate Democrat won, but because Ranked Choice Voting (RCV) was used. Many Utah cities will be utilizing RCV later this year.

In RCV, voters rank candidates on their ballots (i.e. first choice, second choice, etc.). If a candidate wins a majority of first-place votes, he or she wins the race. If not, the last-place candidate is eliminated and that person’s second-choice votes are allocated to those still in the race. The process continues until a candidate has a majority. Will RCV help Utah elections?

Pignanelli: ”Ranked-choice may be cost-efficient. But without a course in advanced calculus, let’s drop this rank nonsense.” — Dave Newhouse, Oakland Mercury News The current hostile environment requires the following admonition: elected and appointed officials willing to assume risk and attempt innovation, notwithstanding success or failures, deserve commendation and respect. The always astute Rep. Jeff Stenquist, sponsor of the legislation authorizing ranked choice voting, wisely stated, “I didn’t run the (RCV) bill because I’m convinced it’s a better way. I just want the ability for cities to give it a try,”

Ranked choice voting is intriguing, complicated, and very controversial. Despite perceptions of a recent novelty, the process was utilized — then abandoned — in various Western states a century ago. Supporters claim it saves taxpayers’ dollars by eliminating primary elections, increases opportunities for moderate candidates, decreases negative campaign tactics and guarantees the winner has a majority. Opponents claim its complexity leads to errors while disenfranchising minority voters. This complaint includes every vote is not equal, which lowers general confidence.

Plenty of opinions and several studies exist for supporters and opponents to use, but nothing from Utah. Thus, another admonition is our brave leaders research RCV extensively to determine advantages and problems for our state.

Webb: I’m not opposed to ranked choice voting, also called “instant-runoff voting.” In theory, at least, it’s a superior way to conduct elections. But I’m not ready to endorse the new system for major races. Utah is smart to experiment with ranked choice voting in smaller non-partisan municipal races. We’ll see how it works, allow voters to get used to it, and decide if it makes sense for other races.

Clearly, ranked choice voting could save a little money. In non-partisan races, it could eliminate the need for primary elections. In theory (again), it could lead to more mainstream representation with less negative campaigning and fewer attack ads. That’s because (in theory) candidates will try to avoid alienating supporters of other candidates, hoping to win their 2nd or 3rd-place votes.

All that is good, but be wary of the downsides. First, ranked choice voting can be confusing until voters get used to it. Expect initial elections to be somewhat chaotic. Also, results take longer to tabulate. Winners might not be known for several days.

Finally, expect a lot of complaints if the first-round winner ends up losing. For example, current Gov. Spencer Cox won only a little over 36 percent of the vote in the 2020 gubernatorial primary, with former Gov. Jon Huntsman close behind at 34.95 percent. Had RCV been employed in 2020, it’s entirely possible Huntsman could have overtaken Cox in the second or third rounds if enough supporters of Greg Hughes and Thomas Wright supported Huntsman as their second or third choice.

At the presidential level, imagine the high drama and extreme controversy if the first round winner ended up losing. Ranked choice voting opponents make a simple argument: First choice votes should determine elections, not second or third choices.

As we celebrate our nation’s founding, how’s America doing?

Frank Pignanelli & LaVarr Webb

Happy Independence Day weekend. Sunday is the 245th anniversary of the founding of our beloved republic. But these are not easy times for the good ol’ USA. Your curmudgeonly columnists, who are almost as old as the nation, offer a perspective based on experience, practical insight and our usual blather.

Political leaders, special interest groups, and the media on both sides of the political spectrum are claiming, in high pitched tones, that our democratic republic is in jeopardy. Is this true? Why so much gloom?

Pignanelli: “America was a massive improvement over what came before it. The Founders eliminated inherited nobility and enshrined freedoms of religion, speech, and assembly. The Founding was the most radical political—and epistemological—leap forward in history.”— Jonah Goldberg .

Teenagers excel in emotional tirades predicting impending doom when denied their outrageous demands. Usually disconnected from reality, they refuse to acknowledge parents’ prior experience. Like entitled adolescents, left- and right-wing extremists claiming a dystopian future for our country disregard reason or precedence.

Millions are engaged in feverish debates on TV, the internet, periodicals and in their homes. Most discourses are hostile to officials wielding power. The typical response from Americans is either a yawn or an even louder rejoinder. Yet, in many countries such vigor of argument is rewarded with jail time, or worse.

Since 1776, Americans have been at each other’s throats (sometimes literally) disputing the direction of the country. Granted, cable television and internet activities ramped up the current rhetoric, but a quarter-millennium of continuous contention is undeniable. Argument is our sinew. The unpleasantness, and beauty, of democracy is having to listen to someone else’s opinion.

Americans are enduring great changes to their lifestyles, employment, health, and security. We are redefining how we communicate about race, sexuality, faith, environment, priorities of life. No wonder many are a little cranky.

The best advice to raising teenagers is acceptance and appreciation for their enthusiasm. Similarly, sound minds value the passions raging as evidence our country is not in jeopardy — but rather strong and dynamic.

Webb: I know it’s not chic, among many elitists, to be patriotic these days. But I’m an old, white, male, religious Republican – about as un-chic and old-fashioned as anyone can be. So just write me off as an eccentric and obsolete relic of the past.

That status gives me plenty of cover to be patriotic, to love America, to believe that the United States is exceptional — the greatest country in the world — with a destiny and purpose in the sweep of history.

I believe that in many ways we’ve made remarkable progress as a country, especially with regard to civil rights, opportunity for all, and the environment. The fact that these words — diversity, equity, inclusion and sustainability — are now part of nearly every corporate annual report and every discussion among leaders in government, education and business, shows how far we’ve come. We are wealthy and mature enough to focus on higher level goals like justice and equality, not just where our next meal is coming from.

But I don’t believe America is a systemically racist country or that some people (like me) are inherently racist because of the color of their skin.

And I believe that the greatest threats to America’s future come from an abiding belief among many in academia, government and even big corporations that regulation and government programs requiring mind-boggling deficit spending are the best ways to achieve a better life for all citizens.

This faith in big government, while ignoring the “root causes” (to use VP Kamala Harris’ phrase about reducing illegal immigration) of societal and family dysfunction, is our country’s gravest danger.

But, overall, considering that we just came through a devastating pandemic, things are pretty good in America this July 4 weekend.

Most Americans are moderate in tone and centrist in thought. Yet, they are feeling the brunt of all the acrimony and bitterness. Will it ever end?

Pignanelli: Left- and right-wing fringes are fabricating outrageous nonsensical claims. Yet, few in the respective parties are attempting to apply adult supervision.

History is replete with instances of extremes swinging back and forth when civilization is immersed in great upheavals. (i.e. The Enlightenment, French revolution, McCarthyism, the 1960s, etc.) In 2021, societal and political norms are undergoing radical readjustment, with similar oscillations. A simple reading of history reveals a more tranquil atmosphere is the eventual result.

Webb: It’s discouraging for average citizens to be overwhelmed by wall-to-wall news and social media coverage featuring accusations from the left that Americans are systemically racist and are destroying the planet via climate change, while far-right voices decry America as a decadent society moving rapidly toward destructive socialism.

The reality is in between. Enjoy this patriotic weekend by turning off social media, cable news and radio talk shows.

Is the State of Utah spared from the consternation happening on a national level or is it just under the radar?

Pignanelli: Percolating emotions do exist. They are usually mediated pursuant to the “Utah Way” — subdued, respectful and with a practical solution efficiently applied.

Webb: Go to a small-town parade and patriotic celebration in Utah and enjoy a family picnic. That’s the real Utah and real America.

As we celebrate our nation’s founding, how’s America doing?

By Frank Pignanelli & LaVarr Webb

Happy Independence Day weekend. Sunday is the 245th anniversary of the founding of our beloved republic. But these are not easy times for the good ol’ USA. Your curmudgeonly columnists, who are almost as old as the nation, offer a perspective based on experience, practical insight and our usual blather.

Political leaders, special interest groups, and the media on both sides of the political spectrum are claiming, in high pitched tones, that our democratic republic is in jeopardy. Is this true? Why so much gloom?

Pignanelli: “America was a massive improvement over what came before it. The Founders eliminated inherited nobility and enshrined freedoms of religion, speech, and assembly. The Founding was the most radical political—and epistemological—leap forward in history.”— Jonah Goldberg .

Teenagers excel in emotional tirades predicting impending doom when denied their outrageous demands. Usually disconnected from reality, they refuse to acknowledge parents’ prior experience. Like entitled adolescents, left- and right-wing extremists claiming a dystopian future for our country disregard reason or precedence.

Millions are engaged in feverish debates on TV, the internet, periodicals and in their homes. Most discourses are hostile to officials wielding power. The typical response from Americans is either a yawn or an even louder rejoinder. Yet, in many countries such vigor of argument is rewarded with jail time, or worse.

Since 1776, Americans have been at each other’s throats (sometimes literally) disputing the direction of the country. Granted, cable television and internet activities ramped up the current rhetoric, but a quarter-millennium of continuous contention is undeniable. Argument is our sinew. The unpleasantness, and beauty, of democracy is having to listen to someone else’s opinion.

Americans are enduring great changes to their lifestyles, employment, health, and security. We are redefining how we communicate about race, sexuality, faith, environment, priorities of life. No wonder many are a little cranky.

The best advice to raising teenagers is acceptance and appreciation for their enthusiasm. Similarly, sound minds value the passions raging as evidence our country is not in jeopardy — but rather strong and dynamic.

Webb: I know it’s not chic, among many elitists, to be patriotic these days. But I’m an old, white, male, religious Republican – about as un-chic and old-fashioned as anyone can be. So just write me off as an eccentric and obsolete relic of the past.

That status gives me plenty of cover to be patriotic, to love America, to believe that the United States is exceptional — the greatest country in the world — with a destiny and purpose in the sweep of history.

I believe that in many ways we’ve made remarkable progress as a country, especially with regard to civil rights, opportunity for all, and the environment. The fact that these words — diversity, equity, inclusion and sustainability — are now part of nearly every corporate annual report and every discussion among leaders in government, education and business, shows how far we’ve come. We are wealthy and mature enough to focus on higher level goals like justice and equality, not just where our next meal is coming from.

But I don’t believe America is a systemically racist country or that some people (like me) are inherently racist because of the color of their skin.

And I believe that the greatest threats to America’s future come from an abiding belief among many in academia, government and even big corporations that regulation and government programs requiring mind-boggling deficit spending are the best ways to achieve a better life for all citizens.

This faith in big government, while ignoring the “root causes” (to use VP Kamala Harris’ phrase about reducing illegal immigration) of societal and family dysfunction, is our country’s gravest danger.

But, overall, considering that we just came through a devastating pandemic, things are pretty good in America this July 4 weekend.

Most Americans are moderate in tone and centrist in thought. Yet, they are feeling the brunt of all the acrimony and bitterness. Will it ever end?

Pignanelli: Left- and right-wing fringes are fabricating outrageous nonsensical claims. Yet, few in the respective parties are attempting to apply adult supervision.

History is replete with instances of extremes swinging back and forth when civilization is immersed in great upheavals. (i.e. The Enlightenment, French revolution, McCarthyism, the 1960s, etc.) In 2021, societal and political norms are undergoing radical readjustment, with similar oscillations. A simple reading of history reveals a more tranquil atmosphere is the eventual result.

Webb: It’s discouraging for average citizens to be overwhelmed by wall-to-wall news and social media coverage featuring accusations from the left that Americans are systemically racist and are destroying the planet via climate change, while far-right voices decry America as a decadent society moving rapidly toward destructive socialism.

The reality is in between. Enjoy this patriotic weekend by turning off social media, cable news and radio talk shows.

Is the State of Utah spared from the consternation happening on a national level or is it just under the radar?

Pignanelli: Percolating emotions do exist. They are usually mediated pursuant to the “Utah Way” — subdued, respectful and with a practical solution efficiently applied.

Webb: Go to a small-town parade and patriotic celebration in Utah and enjoy a family picnic. That’s the real Utah and real America.

Drought politics: Can Utah leaders inspire us to conserve water?

Mother Nature has been wreaking havoc with record heat and drought. How will Utah’s leaders respond?

By Frank Pignanelli & LaVarr Webb

For several years, Utah has been performing well as a state. Our economy has been strong with low unemployment and rapid growth. However, Mother Nature has been wreaking havoc with record heat and drought. The mixture of all these dynamics can only mean one thing — more political wrangling.

State and local officials are very concerned about water shortages both short term and long term. Do our leaders possess the will to make necessary hard decisions and also persuade the population to follow them?

Pignanelli: “It’s a new normal and I really do think that global weirding is the best way to describe what we’re seeing.” — Katharine Hayhoe

I unequivocally love hot Utah summers, even the current season. Despite this heated joy, a nasty cold fact exists. A native Utahn, I can testify the weather patterns are changing. Whether caused by manmade pollution, sunspots, natural cycles, cow flatulence or those dang aliens flying the UFOs, our local meteorology is evolving. The models are correctly predicting Utah will endure higher temperatures and more precipitation — but through rainfall and less snowpack. This dynamic, combined with a burgeoning population and economy, offers an unprecedented challenge.

Last week, House Speaker Brad Wilson submitted a well-crafted guest opinion to this paper explaining the drought dilemma. This is significant because the author is a true political warrior who consistently demonstrates a courageous tenacity to undertake tough issues (e.g. tax reform, water management).

Senate President Stuart Adams has quietly revealed creativity in developing financing of much-needed state projects in transportation, economic development, health and water resources. Gov. Spencer Cox has an amazing ability to make tough decisions while expressing bold statements to citizens that would normally irritate, but are thoughtfully accepted. This explains his high approval ratings across the political spectrum.

Therefore, Utah may have the best generals to commence overcoming the deepest threat since the Great Depression. There is no room for error as we must innovate and alter habits. Vision is not enough as leadership moves the population to do what they normally don’t want to do.

This is the essence of politics. I get to watch from my much-treasured patio while enjoying the weather.

Webb: My pastures are already dry. We had no run-off and the creek is already low. One of the worst droughts in Utah’s history is a cold-water-to-the-face wake-up call we need to change our lifestyles and make necessary investments to ensure Utah doesn’t run out of water for essential needs.

That means using drastically less water for lawns and flowers, while conserving water for trees, vegetable gardens, drinking and bathing. It means metering secondary water systems and using market forces (higher costs) to change consumer behavior and the notion that everyone must have a green lawn.

It also means a lot more efficiency and conservation in agriculture, where most of our water is consumed. And, yes, despite opposition from some environmentalists, it means additional water development to capture runoff in wet years. This crisis requires sacrifice and compromise from everyone.

All of this demands strong leadership, innovation and effective communication from our policymakers. It won’t be easy to change many decades of culture and attitudes about water. We essentially must value it a lot more, treat it as the precious and costly resource it really is.

Beyond just curtailing water usage, what political mindset adaptations must Utahns make in order for us to survive this ordeal?

Pignanelli: One hundred and twenty years ago, most metropolitan areas were overwhelmed by horse waste, carcasses and disease. Residents responded by choosing the “environmental option” of newfangled petroleum powered vehicles. This illustrates perspectives change and judgment for past behavior is pointless.

If prompted by intelligent explanations, Utahns will support tough decisions and endure sacrifices. But we will not tolerate silly critiques. Success depends on no guilt trips and judgment-free planning.

Webb: If the experts are to be believed, we may never go back to the wet years, due to climate change. I don’t know if that’s true, and I’m not ready to concede that every big weather event, whether it’s extra hot or extra cold, or extra wet or extra dry, is the result of a warming climate and greenhouse gas emissions.

However, the same measures that combat climate change also help clean up our air, conserve our water and keep it pure, and otherwise protect nature. Those are things we all can support whether we agree or disagree that climate change is the greatest threat to our planet’s future.

I believe we’re rapidly moving to ubiquitous clean energy and a healthier environment. But we should allow innovation and free market forces to prevail, not force the issue with onerous government regulation and market-disrupting subsidies that destroy the wealth that makes progress possible.

Is there any hope that proposed solutions to the drought and growth avoid partisan wrangling?

Pignanelli: The stakes are too high to allow party hacks from demonizing tough decisions and collaboration between politicians in solving problems.

Webb: If we can center the solutions on conserving the water we all need and improving air quality, not about global warming, then we can reach agreement.

Opinion: Utah’s Senate race, a crime wave and Biden in Europe — oh my

By Frank Pignanelli & LaVarr Webb

Stifling summer heat is here — weeks early. Heat stroke prevents us from focusing our feeble minds on one topic, so here’s a potpourri of issues in the news.

Former Utah House member Becky Edwards has kicked off a campaign for the Republican U.S. Senate nomination next year against Sen. Mike Lee. Club for Growth Action, a national conservative SuperPAC that has endorsed Lee, has already mailed attack ads against Edwards and Ally Isom, another potential opponent. Is this a smart strategy and is Lee vulnerable?

Pignanelli: “War has rules, mud wrestling has rules — politics has no rules.” — Ross Perot

Mountains of dandruff were created by political operatives scratching their heads watching the tactics of this PAC. The entity is legally forbidden from coordinating with Lee’s campaign, which explains the confusing activities.

Of course, smart candidates define themselves and their opponents before the other side does. But precinct caucuses are scheduled for March. The convention and primary are a year away. Thus, the timeliness is questionable. The challengers were almost unknown, but the mailed literature has elevated their name identification, especially with the resulting buzz in traditional and social media.

Lee is well financed and beloved among most GOP activists. But his Senate accomplishments are often ignored or vilified in the media. The PAC blundered by not highlighting Lee’s achievements to bolster support among the general population. Moreover, there are acres of fertile ground to plant seeds that Lee is the needed obstacle to liberal Democrats and a Biden administration. That helps him secure signatures for the petition and enhances fundraising capabilities.

This is another reminder that national PACs, either on the left or right, are usually clueless about local politics. They cause head scratching every year.

Webb: The truth is, it’s way too early to make any intelligent comments about this race. But I’m always willing to make unintelligent comments. Edwards is one of several Republicans thinking about challenging Lee for the GOP nomination. But Edwards is running a real campaign and the fact that Lee allies are already attacking her shows they take her seriously. But they’re increasing her visibility and generating some sympathy support for her. Lee ought to tell them to knock it off.

Lee does have some vulnerabilities. His overall job approval rating isn’t terribly high and his demeanor is more detached, scholarly and judicial than that of a charismatic rock star politician.

Edwards’ problem is that this race is for the GOP nomination and Lee is popular with the Republican base. Lee is clearly the favorite in the GOP primary.

Much will depend on the national political climate. If the Biden administration and congressional Democrats continue their leftward tilt, Utah Republicans will want someone who will fight for conservative values and policies, not someone who takes moderate positions and pledges to bring everyone together.

There has been a big uptick in crime across the country, especially gun violence. Is this a gun problem, or is it related to a shortage of police officers and poor law enforcement morale? Could this be a campaign issue?

Pignanelli: Defying expectations, enhancing public safety, and supporting law enforcement are winning issues in the 2021 New York City mayoral election. One of the leading contenders is a former police captain.

Most major metropolitan areas, including those in Utah, are experiencing increases in crime. The variety of causes percolating in the post-pandemic environment will continue next year. This will create incredible anxiety for politicians on both sides. Special interest groups successfully pushed policymakers into a relaxation of containing criminal behavior.

Backtracking is already happening. This new dynamic will likely drive a much-needed practical re-examination of how justice is implemented.

Webb: This is a real problem and Democrats who are viewed as anti-police may be punished in 2022. Liberal Democrats tend to focus their wrath on police shootings and ignore the much greater violence occurring all across the country. Their solution is gun control, which is a distraction and scapegoat. They prefer not to deal with the root causes of violence. Officials could try to confiscate all the 350 million to 400 million guns in America and criminals would still be shooting people.

This is a potent campaign issue. Police officers are demoralized, recruitment is difficult, and retirement rates are accelerating. Police work has always been stressful and dangerous. But who would want to be part of the thin blue line in this atmosphere of disrespect, overzealous scrutiny and lack of support from policymakers?

Certainly, if cops violate laws they should be fired and prosecuted. But responsible and caring officers every day face the reality that a split-second decision in a criminal confrontation that they didn’t want or instigate might lead to scrutiny, trauma, community unrest and loss of job. That’s too much pressure on police officers.

President Joe Biden has concluded his first international trip. He declared to America’s European allies that, “America is back at the table,” and his interactions were much cozier than those of his predecessor. How will Utah’s congressional delegation respond to “less drama” in U.S. foreign relations?

Pignanelli: For generations, Utahns were rightfully suspicious of authoritarian regimes. Hopefully the rhetoric will be now matched by legislative actions as our senators and representatives demand a stronger approach to those countries wishing us harm.

Webb: Biden enjoyed a love fest with European allies and the news media covering his trip. He had some “senior moments” when he had a hard time communicating, but I admit it was more comfortable to see a normalization of foreign relations after President Trump’s “America first” policies. But Utah’s delegation should provide oversight to ensure that other nations don’t take advantage of Biden’s kinder, gentler approach.

Redistricting ensures a sizzling political summer in Utah

By Frank Pignanelli & LaVarr Webb

Political redistricting happens only once every decade, but it’s always a traumatic event for many politicians. It also provides a forum for political do-gooder groups that want to do the impossible — take politics out of the process. And, it provides a gold mine of speculation for political hacks like us.

A new element this year is the independent redistricting commission that will hold hearings and draw maps in parallel with the legislative redistricting committee. What dynamics will this create? Will the two entities be complementary or adversarial?

Pignanelli: “She was from the wrong side of the tracks no matter how you gerrymandered the town.” — James Lileks

A signatory to the Declaration of Independence and member of the Continental Congress, Elbridge Gerry utilized mercantile contacts to supply the Revolutionary American Army. As delegate to the Constitutional Convention, he was instrumental in developing our governmental structure. Opposed to slavery, Gerry pushed against the provision counting slaves as three-fifths of a free person in apportionment. He was invaluable in passing the Bill of Rights.

Before serving as James Madison’s vice president, Gerry was governor of Massachusetts. In 1812, despite concerns with some details, he signed the redistricting legislation. Political opponents were outraged, comparing the shape of a Senate district to a salamander — giving birth to term “gerrymander.”

The politics of redistricting are so volatile that even an amazing founding father like Gerry continues to be unfairly blemished after 200 years. The upcoming clash in Utah will be equally emotional. The objectives of the new commission will clash with the realities lawmakers must confront. Personalities, incumbency and the needs of local jurisdictions will be in play — as they have for centuries. These struggles are a tiresome but necessary struggle in a healthy democracy.

As redistricting heats up in Utah, one of the most effective partisan attacks in history — a salamander cartoon — will be recalled incessantly. Poor Gerry.

Webb: This will be redistricting year like no other. News media interest will be intense. Besides the legislative redistricting committee and the independent redistricting committee drawing maps at the same time, progressive groups like Better Boundaries (which got the measure on the ballot creating the independent commission) and the Alliance for a Better Utah will be hovering over the process, analyzing every line the Republican Legislature draws.

In addition, political parties will monitor and try to influence the process, along with legislators, members of Congress, and cities and counties that don’t want to be chopped up.

Passions will be inflamed, feelings will be hurt and national interest will be extreme. Incumbents and challengers will be impatient to know their district configurations so they can begin campaigning. For political junkies, it will be a fun summer and fall.

Utah’s population has boomed over the last decade, especially in new suburban areas. What will be the impact of the growth patterns on legislative and congressional redistricting and will there be winners and losers?

Pignanelli: Demographics is the source of pain in redistricting. Utah County and other regions have boomed in population and will receive new legislative seats at the expense of Salt Lake City and east Salt Lake County. The commission cannot prevent this mathematical dynamic. The result will demonstratively impact partisan makeup, leadership and even focus of issues in future legislative sessions.

Webb: Courts have been adamant that legislatures create political districts equal in population. Population equity trumps everything else. So high-growth areas, most of them Republican majority, will gain representation, while no-growth or slow-growth areas will lose. Northern Utah County and southwestern Salt Lake County will be winners. Older urban neighborhoods will lose a little political clout.

Those drawing maps will try to keep cities, counties and communities of interest together. But because district populations must be equal, that won’t always be possible. It’s easy to look at one area, or even a region, and keep communities together. But when boundaries and equal districts have to be extended statewide, it is impossible to please everyone.

Is it likely a safe Democratic congressional district will be created, or will the Republican legislative majority try to evenly distribute Democratic votes among the four congressional districts?

Pignanelli: In prior redistricting deliberations, there was serious talk of a “lean Democrat” district. Apparently, national GOP bigwigs balked at giving Dems a “gimme.” Because Republicans are a few seats away from recapturing the majority in the U.S. House, the scientific prediction of a Democratic seat formed by the redistricting committee in 2021 is exactly 0%.

Webb: Congressional boundaries will be the biggest battle of the redistricting wars. Republicans will argue, somewhat persuasively, that each congressional district should include some urban, suburban and rural components. This ensures that all members of the delegation are concerned about both urban and rural issues. Democrats will argue, also persuasively, that because Democrats routinely win more than 25% of the vote in Utah, they should certainly get one congressional seat.

It’s gonna be messy, and control of the U.S. House of Representatives could hang in the balance. The political intrigue will be thick.

Opinion: What happens in Utah if inflation monster rears its ugly head?

By Frank Pignanelli & LaVarr Webb

Some economists are forecasting the nation will suffer from high inflation in the near future. This may be caused by massive federal stimulus funding, tariffs on commodities, post-pandemic economic resurgence, etc. Your columnists are old guys who remember the horrors of prices escalating on a frequent basis. We provide our geriatric recollections and the possible impact on politics.

For almost 40 years, high inflation of prices and interest rates has not been a serious problem. If it returns over the next several months, what could be the economic and political impact?

Pignanelli: “Inflation is as violent as a mugger, as frightening as an armed robber and as deadly as a hit man.” — Ronald Reagan

I remember the 1970s fondly for bell-bottoms, discotheques and groundbreaking television. But it was a time of oil embargoes and seemingly never-ending price increases. Inflation diminishes wages for middle- and lower-income families, while devastating their savings and assets. This corrosive effect generates emotions with voters and the impact on politics is illustrated through three presidents.

Most attribute the resignation of Richard Nixon from the Watergate scandal. But his public standing in 1974 was extremely low in the polls because inflation was raging at 11%. He could not survive both. While his pardon of Nixon was controversial, Gerald Ford faced the more daunting challenge of 10% inflation in 1975. This led to his 1976 loss, with Jimmy Carter claiming a “misery index” of high inflation and unemployment. Four years later, Carter was dispatched by Ronald Reagan as the inflation rate in 1980 was almost 14%.

Depending when inflationary pressures decay Americans’ wages and investments, history suggests reverberation in the midterm and possibly the general elections. The early 2020s may be remembered more than just for post-pandemic celebrations.

Webb: It sounds old-fashioned and boring to be worried about inflation. But high inflation in an overheated economy can be devastating. It’s a hidden tax. It reduces the value of savings and retirement nest eggs. The Federal Reserve response to high inflation usually means higher interest rates, which could tank the housing market and drive up federal debt payments to catastrophic levels.

The Biden administration is taking a monumental risk by flooding the country with “free” money while the economy is already booming after the pandemic. The resulting inflation and potentially higher interest rates could severely dampen economic expansion and needed job growth.

Some experts argue there’s nothing to worry about. They say today’s economy is different, that high inflation is temporary, and that price surges will decline once supply and demand are better balanced as manufacturing picks up and supply chains return to normal. Whether that is true or not remains to be seen.

But, clearly, whether inflation becomes a crisis or not, the historic blowout of borrowing, printing and spending money at the federal level is unwise. It not only is fiscally dangerous, it teaches incorrect principles — that there really is a free lunch and debt is no big deal.

Once people don’t fear or care about debt or deficits, and expect cradle-to-grave government services that they don’t pay for, we’re at that tipping point in a democracy where citizens have discovered they can vote themselves unlimited services without consequence.

But there always are consequences. Whether inflation soars right away or not, we simply cannot defy economic gravity forever. We’re headed toward a really dangerous place.

Most Utahns do not have a memory of an inflationary economy. So if one reappears, what are the local ramifications?

Pignanelli: Utah was especially hit hard during by the 1970s inflation because of reliance on a few industries. Today, our state is much more diverse economically, which will help absorb the impact. Utah’s largest economic sector, financial services, is focused on innovation, which may be of real benefit to not only survive, but perhaps flourish during this time.

The frustration with federal macroeconomic policies will trickle to down-ballot races. Because government largess is the likely target of blame, candidates who can distance themselves from overspending practices and offer alternatives will succeed. Many of the battles currently raging inside each party will be forgotten amid this turmoil.

Webb: With worst-case raging inflation, we could see a major stock market setback and the dreaded “stagflation” — a 1970s economic term that means persistent high inflation combined with high unemployment and stagnant consumer demand. That’s what destroyed Jimmy Carter’s presidency.

Those in power get blamed, so the misery also trickles down to state and local politics.

Could inflation provide any opportunities for politicians or new ideologies?

Pignanelli: Because of policies and beliefs, lefty progressives and devoted Trumpistas could be burdened by politicos with blame for inflation. This dynamic creates a ripe opening for visionary think tanks and party leaders to offer various economic and governance solutions that are practical and effective. A new age of rational thought is possible.

Webb: President Joe Biden will get plenty of blame if serious inflation occurs on his watch. But beware: Besides providing opportunity for innovative solutions, economic distress also provides fertile ground for rabble-rousers and extremists.