What is the long-term fallout of the Legislature’s recent session?

They changed the name of Dixie State University and redrew political maps — two things steeped in controversy and passionate feelings

By Frank Pignanelli & LaVarr Webb

The Legislature’s recent special session produced substantive results — and emotions — on critical issues for Utah. We review how those two days of legislating will impact Utah politics over the long term.

The special session was originally convened to finalize new boundaries for congressional, legislative and state school board districts. But a number of other items consumed lawmakers’ attention, including changing the name of Dixie State University, bail reform, modifying the status of the Intermountain Power Agency and providing exemptions to employees from the federal vaccination mandate. Overall, was the Legislature successful in balancing competing interests or will there be negative fallout?

Pignanelli: “What the Legislature giveth the Legislature can taketh”—Rep. Joel Ferry, R-Brigham City.

As an engaged observer of the legislative process (aka lobbyist), I have the advantage of a holistic view. This is in comparison to good citizens focused on a particular matter. For example, many concerned with redistricting or vaccination exemptions felt the Legislature succeeded or failed because of specific actions. But a comprehensive examination reveals this special session was one of “equilibrium.”

The new boundaries for congressional districts were subject to controversy and partisan attacks. Yet, the new legislative and school board districts received bipartisan support with little commentary. Many southern Utah residents were frustrated with the university name change, while most rural citizens applauded the revamp of Intermountain Power Agency.

Numerous local employers demanded vaccination exemptions to retain employees, but others were nervous with the concept. Lawmakers excluded any employer with a federal contract — a substantial number. Other employees were understandably frustrated having to choose between state or federal law compliance, but the courts may make that moot. The bail reform legislation was the picture of political equanimity as all stakeholders made concessions to achieve a consensus bill. Citizens frustrated with congressional redistricting supported the university name change.

Equilibrium occurs when opposing forces are balanced. A semblance of harmony pervaded the recent special session because there were results for most citizens to contemporarily like and dislike.

Webb: Democrats and liberal activist groups hate the congressional redistricting. But I think moderate, commonsense Democrats (like Ben McAdams) still have a shot at winning. It will depend on the quality of candidates.

And the districts will change. With the rapid growth of high-tech businesses in northern Utah County and southern Salt Lake County, that region is changing politically and growing a bluish tint. Young, hip tech workers tend to be more liberal, more focused on environmental issues and civil rights, offering Democrats a chance.

As I’ve written previously, I fully support the Dixie State name change. It will be good for the university. I understand the opposition and the nostalgia for the old name. I loved my time at Dixie College in the early 1970s. Perhaps I was naïve, but I honestly didn’t even think about the racial connotations of the name. I also don’t recall any racist occurrences, like students wearing blackface or groups holding “slave auctions.” But those things certainly did occur and, whether it was intentionally racist or not, it was wrong.

The name change is needed. Society has dramatically changed since the 1970s. And we have vastly improved with regard to racial sensitivity. The old name wasn’t meant to be racist, but it doesn’t work for students graduating and seeking employment nearly 50 years after I did. We evolve, we get better, we need to acknowledge past mistakes. Lawmakers did the right thing.

What long-term political consequences will result from the special session?

Pignanelli: Since the adoption of our beloved Constitution, allegations of “gerrymandering” have rarely, if ever, mattered in a subsequent election. So, threats of retaliation are hollow. Many businesses are grateful the Legislature provided them a safe harbor in dealing with unvaccinated employees. However, if the U.S. Supreme Court upholds the Biden administration, there will be employers frustrated they were forced into a difficult position. Coupled with other contingencies (i.e. the pandemic, inflation), this could affect support of candidates.

Webb: Let’s not forget that Utah is a Republican state, led mostly by mainstream, sensible leaders. We enjoy a terrific economy and excellent quality of life. Utah had four GOP members of Congress before the session and after the next election it is likely to be status quo. Utah’s Legislature balances budgets while taking care of state needs. Problems are addressed and solved. Citizens are pleased with the direction of the state, while disgusted with federal dysfunction. Politics isn’t going to change much.

Any benefits or setbacks for Gov. Spencer Cox?

Pignanelli: Legislators absorbed most of the attention and heat leading to and during the special session. No bill violated principles articulated by Cox during the campaign or his inauguration. He shrewdly, and quietly, signed them into law. The advantage is that he will receive some credit from others and only a smattering of blame.

Webb: The governor did just fine in the session. It made no sense for him to veto the redistricting legislation or other measures passed. The governor actually gets along pretty well with the Legislature, despite the normal tension and different perspectives. He’s smart enough to know when to be visibly out in front, in the driver’s seat, and when to negotiate behind the scenes and let other leaders be the focus of attention.

How will Eastern election results affect Utah?

By Frank Pignanelli & LaVarr Webb

Much analysis has focused on how Virginia/New Jersey gubernatorial elections sent a signal that Democrats are in trouble. But what about the impact on Utah’s elections?

National pundits have waxed eloquently on the earthshaking political events of early November: The Virginia/New Jersey elections, vaccination mandate, infrastructure legislation, climate summit, etc. We have been suffering a serious case of FOMO (Fear of Missing Out), so to relieve our symptoms we opine on how these issues will impact Utah politics. In other words, we get in on the fun.

Much analysis has focused on how Virginia/New Jersey gubernatorial elections sent a signal that Democrats are in trouble. Their control of the House and Senate may be at risk in the 2022 elections. But what about the impact on Utah’s elections?

Pignanelli: “Democrats are coming across in ways that are annoying, offensive and seem out of touch.” — Van Jones, liberal commentator, CNN

Frequently, American elections reflect the famous Greek tragedies written millennia ago — filled with flawed characters, hubris and catastrophic events. Thus, this November’s outcome will be a long-remembered classic.

The ripple effect in Utah will be subtle but real. National Democratic organizations will conserve resources to protect incumbents, limiting funds for local challengers. This extends to coordinated efforts between congressional and legislative campaigns. In addition, unless the trajectory changes, a predicted GOP wave will influence down-ballot races in numerous positions.

Republican candidates that were moderate in tone and established distance from the former president performed well, especially in demographics won by Joe Biden in 2020. This experience could flavor inter-party battles in Utah at the convention and primary levels.

Innocent Utah politicos will be positively or negatively impacted by faraway events fostered by arrogance and cluelessness. Ancient lessons in Greek plays still resonate in modern Americana.

Webb: It wasn’t just Virginia and a much-better-than-expected GOP showing in New Jersey that should worry Democrats. They lost numerous local races all across the country. Democrats have been trying to push America far left, but we are simply not a left-wing nation.

The razor-thin Democratic win in the 2020 election was a rebellion in the suburbs against Donald Trump. It wasn’t an endorsement of big government, high taxes, left-leaning ideology and racial and identity politics. Americans are fed up with victimhood and over-the-top political correctness.

Even more discouraging for Democrats, Republicans learned how to win races, and put together coalitions, despite former President Trump hovering over the political landscape. Glenn Youngkin was brilliant in Virginia in supporting Trump and his policies, while also keeping him at arms length.

Walking this tightrope required Trump himself to exercise some restraint and not help Democrats turn the race into a referendum on him. When President Joe Biden campaigned for Terry McAuliffe, he mentioned Trump 24 times. Democrats desperately tried to make the campaign about Trump but failed, because Youngkin was able to maintain some distance. But Youngkin didn’t have to disavow Trump and managed to turn out the Trump base.

That’s a lesson for Sen. Mitt Romney, although it’s probably too late. Rather than ignore Trump, Romney has trashed him at every opportunity. As a result, Romney probably faces a tough battle for the GOP nomination.

Lawsuits have been filed by states and businesses to prevent implementation of mandatory vaccinations as ordered by Biden. Legislatures, including Utah, are attempting to prevent mandate enforcement in Utah. Could this be an election issue for 2022?

Pignanelli: State officials are reflecting constituents’ frustrations with overreaching government by creating obstacles to federal implementation. Many employers believe compliance with OSHA will create employment vacuums. However, other businesses are frustrated with being forced to choose to violate state or federal law. Emotions on either side will drive voting patterns, campaign contributions and internal party contests. A sour economy and a lingering pandemic guarantee mandatory vaccinations will creep into the 2022 elections.

Webb: My wife and I are both vaccinated and have even received our booster shots. We encourage everyone eligible to become fully vaccinated. But I don’t believe the president has the authority to order businesses with 100 or more employees to fire everyone who refuses to get vaccinated. It’s a typical big-government coercive approach to force compliance and it’s going to hurt Biden and Democrats in the long run. It gives a rabble-rouser like Trump an issue to run on.

The $1.2 trillion infrastructure package was finally passed by Congress. How will this bill impact political deliberations, especially since Sen. Romney was the only member of Utah’s delegation to vote for it?

Pignanelli: Utah will garner $3 billion or more from this legislation. The contemplated projects promise to touch every Utahn whether through transportation, broadband expansion, water resources, etc. Should Romney run for reelection in 2024, he can take credit for the assistance to the state. In the meantime, the acrimony over the multitrillion “social infrastructure” (“Build Back Better)” bill could blemish any federal stimulus and capital improvements. The lousy messaging and funding concerns deliver superior talking points to GOP candidates. Democrats will spend time explaining … which is never helpful.

Webb: Utah can use the money and will spend it wisely. But there’s a lot of waste in the legislation, and a lot more debt. It’s not paid for, as proponents claim. Utah should use the windfall for one-time projects and not build it into long-term budgets because when it’s gone it’s gone.

Utah politics awash in resignations, intrigue

The last several days have produced a zesty potpourri of political news. Here’s what it all means

By Frank Pignanelli & LaVarr Webb

Pignanelli & Webb: The last several days have produced a zesty potpourri of political news, especially changes in political leadership. Here are people, issues and events spicing up Utah’s political world.

Francis Gibson. “A resignation is a grave act; never performed by a right-minded man without forethought or with reserve.” — Salmon P. Chase

The House majority leader announced he would not only retire from the Legislature but resign, effective Nov. 8. That produced a big shock reverberating through insider circles. Gibson was often viewed as the likely next speaker, although rumors circulated that Gibson’s often-brusque style could jeopardize such advancement.

Gibson’s resignation shakes up House GOP leadership. Popular Whip Mike Schultz is likely to replace him. Assistant Whip Val Peterson announced he will continue in his current position. So, the whip race is wide open. Gibson was a very able, talented lawmaker who didn’t tolerate much rebellion against leadership positions. His vacancy will have ripple effects in House culture and leadership style.

Steve Christiansen. This West Jordan lawmaker made national news organizing a rally and conducting a hearing demanding an audit of Utah’s 2020 elections. Legislators allowed his supporters ample time to state their case, but no commitments towards legislation were made. Backlash from across the political spectrum was strong and clear. Christiansen not only resigned his seat at the Legislature, citing threats against his family, but also his employment at The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

This action by Christiansen sends a clear message that Utah’s political and business establishment is not interested in re-litigating the 2020 elections in Utah, especially with no proof of any fraud.

Redistricting Commission. Established by a 2018 ballot initiative, this independent entity developed maps for federal and state districts after months of deliberation and public input. They formally presented the maps to the Legislature last Monday. Within a few seconds, GOP officials noted the proposed congressional maps would provide an advantage for Democrats in one of the four districts.

The reality is that the Republican Legislature was never going to allow the Redistricting Commission to dictate district boundaries. This is further amplified by the fact that the GOP is just a few seats short of majority in the U.S. House, and they are not going to give a free one to a Democrat. The media and some left-of-center activist groups will complain about the Nov. 9 special session vote that ignores the commission recommendations, but it will be forgotten by the end of the year.

Rob Bishop. The former congressman was an interesting selection for the Redistricting Commission. His very public resignation from the group in October did not change the commission’s recommendations. But Bishop’s arguments and his resignation did provide cover for lawmakers who will likely stipulate that the proportions of rural and urban/suburban population in each of the four congressional districts should be as close to the same as possible.

John Curtis. This moderately conservative congressman from Utah’s 4th District attended the COP26 Climate Summit to discuss solutions to global warming. Curtis organized the Conservative Climate Caucus and has acknowledged that on climate and environmental issues, Republicans have a “branding problem.” He asserts that Republicans care about the environment and climate change, and the GOP should be at the table when environmental and economic commitments are made.

This reflects a growing dynamic in Utah. Residents of all political stripes are concerned about clean air and the changing local climate. Curtis, however, will have difficulty changing public perception of GOP views on environmental issues. But if gas prices continue to rise and the emerging global energy crisis worsens, public opinion on energy and climate may align more with Republican views than with the climate activists.

Public education curriculum. The Virginia gubernatorial election highlighted the potency of education as a political issue and the sensitivity of race and cultural issues in school curriculum. It also confirmed the importance of parents having a role to play in their children’s education.

This dustup is noteworthy as Utah also is engaged in serious discussions over public education curriculum. We think most Utah school boards and teachers strike the right balance and teach these topics respectfully and properly. School leaders also welcome parental involvement. Still, Utah lawmakers are likely to weigh in on these matters in the upcoming legislative session.

President Joseph Biden. The president’s approval ratings continue to drop amid worsening crises. These include perceptions of his handling of the economy, Afghanistan withdrawal, COVID-19, inflation, the border/immigration crisis, and his priority legislation.

Most Utahns did not vote for the president and do not support his agenda. His continued decline in popularity places Utah Democratic candidates in swing districts in political jeopardy, and especially hurts any chance of Democrats winning a congressional race. It’s fair to say Utahns appreciate the president’s demeanor and politeness, compared to Donald Trump, but that alone won’t help Democrats.

GOP National Convention. October also witnessed a real attempt by local operatives to land the 2024 Presidential Nominating Convention in Salt Lake City. The new convention hotel at the Salt Palace will help that cause, but it’s probably a long shot.

Opinion: How should Utah’s political leaders dress for Halloween?

From Ted Lasso to Scooby Doo, political leaders echo the characteristics of several fictional characters in real life.

By Frank Pignanelli & LaVarr Webb

For the past several weeks, Utahns have been frightened by apparitions and haunting illusions — mostly emanating from Washington, D.C. But it’s also Halloween this weekend. Our politicians love free goodies even more than the rest of us. We utilized various artificial intelligence algorithms to determine what costumes they will be wearing as they seek treats and threaten tricks.

Gov. Spencer Cox will be dressed as Ted Lasso the football coach turned soccer manager. (For those of you who don’t have Apple TV, this award-winning fictional character is beloved by viewers for his incredible ability to be always positive and upbeat and for transforming enemies into friends.)

Lt. Gov. Diedre Henderson will be Wonder Woman as she uses her magic lasso to corral those pesky individuals claiming voting irregularities.

The Independent Redistricting Commission members (those left of center) will be dressed as the Bad News Bears dysfunctional baseball team trying to capture attention while irritating incumbent lawmakers.

The other redistricting commission members (those right of center) will be dressed as farmers and cowboys, emphasizing that each congressional district must include a large rural component.

Rep. Steve Christiansen and his fellow claimants of election fraud will be dressed as Scooby Doo and the Mystery Inc. gang, having fun looking for any evidence, any whatsoever, of voting scams in Utah.

Legislative redistricting chairs Sen. Scott Sandall and Rep. Paul Ray will wear railroad engineer caps, signifying that the redistricting locomotive is barreling down the track and you’d better get on board or get run over.

Congressmen Chris Stewart and Blake Moore will be each wearing military uniforms to help convince the redistricting committee that both should have a portion of Hill Air Force Base in their new districts.

President Joe Biden will be Casper the friendly ghost because he’s nice. Utahns don’t like his policies, but he has a nice smile.

Former President Donald Trump will be wearing the hockey mask of Michael Myers, the villain in many “Halloween” movies, hoping to terrorize liberals in an upcoming sequel.

Sen. Mike Lee will be costumed as the Norse god Thor, so he can use the big hammer to squash liberals, big technology companies and those not respectful of the Constitution.

Independent U.S. Senate candidate Evan McMullin will be dressed as Don Quixote (no further explanation necessary).

The announced major party candidates opposing Sen. Lee (Becky Edwards, Ally Isom, Nick Mitchell, Austin Searle, Allen Glines) will be dressed as the 1969 Miracle Mets with the hope that wondrous phenomena do actually occur.

Attorney General Sean Reyes will be dressing as Teddy Roosevelt the “trust buster,” reflecting his attempts to bust up Big Tech.

Salt Lake City Mayor Erin Mendenhall will don the mask of diplomat Henry Kissinger, representing her ability to keep left-wing City Council members and constituents happy, while balancing the scrutiny of conservative legislators.

Congressman Burgess Owens will be wearing a suit made of Teflon. Apparently, attacks upon him — or even comments made by him — bounce off without causing harm.

Sen. Mitt Romney will return as the Dark Knight — mysterious in his ways but trying to instill common sense into the dark corridors of the nation’s Capitol.

Salt Lake County Mayor Jenny Wilson will again assume the nun habit of Mother Teresa, demonstrating her concern for those afflicted in the pandemic while hoping to shame state leaders.

Congressman John Curtis is superhero Plastic Man, able to stretch himself across the state and the political aisles in preventing global warming and protecting states’ rights in public lands.

House Speaker Brad Wilson will sport the attire of Atlas, the demigod, shouldering the multitude of appropriation requests from those seeking a piece of the federal generosity.

Senate President Stuart Adams will seek treats as Gandalf the Grey, effortlessly and effectively leading his fellowship of senators through the scary forest filled with protestors, lobbyists and House members.

Senate Minority Leader Karen Mayne is Flo, the Progressive Insurance spokeswoman, reminding everyone that a unique style of relentless determination and earnestness does succeed.

Minority Leader Brian King is the cartoon character Underdog, fighting for right of the opposition to oppose anything, at any time, no matter what.

State Auditor John Dougall returns again as Baby Yoda, rooting out mediocre performance in state government.

Former Sen. Orrin Hatch is the Great Pumpkin. We know he is out there and we have fond memories but there haven’t been any sightings and we wish him well.

Pignanelli & Webb will be dressing again as a couple of gone-to-seed potted plants, reflecting both their intelligence and personalities.

Enjoy watching legislative sausage-making? Pull up a chair

By Frank Pignanelli & LaVarr Webb

The American ritual of redrawing congressional and legislature boundaries is well underway across the country and in Utah. News reports about the process are filled with acrimony and intrigue. We explore the considerations important to Utah politics.

What are some of the primary issues that lawmakers, interested observers and the independent redistricting commission will encounter as they prepare for a final plan to be adopted in a November special session?

Pignanelli: “The Illinois (redistricting plan) demonstrates that no party has a lock on political virtue.”— Henry Olsen, Washington Post

Thirty-one years ago my wife and I were looking for a home with the hope to someday raise children. She cared about a garage and yard. As a legislator, other concerns burdened me. Having just completed another bruising reelection effort, I demanded this new residence be located in the middle of my legislative district to prevent imaginative political operatives from eliminating my seat during the upcoming redistricting. I was obligated to protect the investment of friends and supporters, along with constituents, who elected me.

These legitimate and reasonable concerns were shared by my legislative colleagues. Often labeled “incumbency protection,” similar convictions have existed for centuries and will into the future. Admittedly, these emotions frequently collide with other elements, including population balancing, communities of interest, municipal boundaries, expanding representation in high growth areas, minority interests, etc.

Targeting incumbents with extreme boundary adjustments (aka “getting cute”) often backfires in Utah. For example, attempts to eliminate state Sen. Scott Howell and Congressman Jim Matheson through creative redistricting bolstered their reelection campaigns and political careers.

My wife and I are now empty nesters in that well-placed Capitol Hill historic home where we raised three incredible children. Another benefit to incumbency protection.

Webb: Redistricting is legislative sausage-making at its finest. If you like pure politics, pull up a chair. In congressional redistricting, Democrats will want to create a safe Democratic district, reasoning that the usual Democratic vote is higher than 25% statewide, so Democrats deserve at least 25% representation in Congress. Of course, carving out a safe Democratic district would be the definition of partisan gerrymandering — something everyone is supposed to be against. Given the reality that control of Congress may hang in the balance, Republicans aren’t likely to fulfill the Democrats’ deepest desires.

Beyond that, debate will occur over whether each congressional district should be comprised of urban, suburban and rural components. Doing so gives each member of Congress a stake in Utah’s sparsely populated wide open spaces and a concern for public lands.

In creating both congressional and legislative districts, a major driver will be the large population shifts that have occurred over the past decade. The fastest growth has occurred in Republican-dominated areas, which naturally means those regions will get more representation.

For the first time, Utah has a formal independent redistricting commission that will provide recommendations to the Legislature. Will it have an impact on the process?

Pignanelli: The redistricting commission was formally created by initiative in 2018. Therefore, it will capture media attention when presenting final proposals.

However, Senate President Stuart Adams and House Speaker Brad Wilson are brilliantly promoting alternative means of public participation other than the commission. Lawmakers conducted a series of town halls and aggressively encouraged citizens to access the “Utah Redistricting Legislative Committee” website to develop their own maps. They inspired constituents to be engaged personally in the process. Thus, an alternate source of public opinion other than the commission is developing.

Redistricting results always garner critics and opponents. But the legislative tactics will deflect attacks on the process.

Webb: In many states, independent commissions are bogged down in partisan bickering and anger. By contrast, Utah’s commission members seem to be getting along just fine — at least so far. Liberal interest groups are already demanding that the Legislature simply adopt the recommendations of the redistricting commission, despite not yet knowing what the commission will recommend. They assume the commission boundaries will be better for Democrats than the lines drawn by the Legislative Redistricting Committee. When interest groups say they want “fair and impartial” boundaries it really means they want boundaries drawn that fit their political interests.

Both the legislative committee and the independent commission will do their best to keep cities, counties and “communities of interest” together. While that is important, I guarantee it won’t be possible in every case. To achieve districts of equal population (which is required), some cities and counties will be divided and it won’t be possible to keep all communities of interest intact. Some communities will suffer a bit. To be fair, the pain should be equally split among Republican and Democratic areas.

In some states, the governor has vetoed redistricting legislation or demanded changes. What role will Gov. Spencer Cox play?

Pignanelli: A former lawmaker, Cox understands the constitutional role lawmakers play in drawing boundaries. While offering guidance behind the scenes, he is unlikely to publicly counter final results from the special session.

Webb: The state constitution gives the Legislature the duty to redistrict the state. Short of some egregious offense or power play, I doubt the governor will second-guess legislative action.

Can Utah do anything to challenge Biden’s vaccine mandate?

The COVID-19 shot requirement would establish a precedent. Expect more federal incursions, such as a national minimum wage

By Frank Pignanelli & LaVarr Webb

With the Biden administration and the Democratic-controlled Congress seeking to remake U.S. society with mandates and vast new programs, we’re seeing many states push back against federal encroachment and presidential executive orders. We explore these lessons in federalism.

Utah’s GOP Legislature is resisting the Biden administration’s COVID-19 vaccine mandate for private businesses with more than 100 employees. Will the legislative effort be successful?

Pignanelli: “The tough guys at OSHA are finally treating the plague with the same seriousness as not being able to stand on the last rung of a stepladder.” — Stephen Colbert

The proposed directive from Biden to OSHA is much like the all-you-can-eat buffet at a large family restaurant — there is something for everyone to either relish or find disgusting.

Many large businesses believe the potential rule could assist them in increasing the vaccination percentage in their operations. But other companies are frightened that valuable employees will leave to avoid the jab. Vaccination advocates, concerned about the rates of acceptance among Utahns, support the decree enthusiastically. Conversely, many vaccinated citizens are aligned with anti-vaxxers in a shared alarm of government overreach. Incredibly, all this emotion is generated over a rule yet to be published.

Utah has a 174-year-old strained relationship with the federal government, and therefore passionate statements by citizens and their officials are expected. The vaccination mandate is a fertile cornucopia for speeches. Legal experts are falling on either side of whether the Occupational Safety and Health Administration requirement is constitutional. But that will not prevent serious consideration of potential actions by Utah to prevent implementation, which will be difficult. However, the practical effect of the mandate is already occurring as some organizations are using this as a leverage to jab their employees.

The potential downside is a hardening of antagonism that will jeopardize future vaccination efforts as the coronavirus becomes just another disease plaguing our society. Unfortunately, not everything in a big buffet tastes great.

Webb: Good for the Legislature for fighting a dramatic federal incursion into an arena where it has no business. Certainly, if business owners want to impose vaccination mandates on their employees, they should be free to do so. Employees can choose to remain employed or not. But the federal government should not be forcing nationwide employee mandates on business owners. Even moderates like Gov. Spencer Cox oppose such broad federal encroachment.

The vaccine mandate would establish a terrible precedent. More federal incursions are sure to follow, such as a national minimum wage that doesn’t account for the diversity of the country. The broad mandate also doesn’t recognize individual circumstances, such as employees who work from home and don’t interact in person with customers or other employees.

Republicans control many state legislatures across the country, and some of these states are going in a much different political direction than the Democratic-controlled federal government. Is this pushback by states against federal initiatives healthy for the country?

Pignanelli: For decades, movies and television painted representatives of the federal government (i.e. the U.S. Marshals, FBI, EPA, CDC, etc.) as saviors remedying the incompetence and corruption of locals. But such tales are fantasies. Our national government has become so bloated and impervious to change that even well-intentioned efforts fail. State officials developing creative solutions to problems, and challenging federal initiatives, is imperative.

Webb: It’s perfectly natural, and proper, for the states to serve as a check on the national government. Such action was foreseen and intended by the nation’s founders. The founders gave states specific constitutional language and tools to fight federal encroachment. We are a very diverse country and laws that may be fine in one state don’t work well in another. Such laws ought to be left to the states to impose — or not.

Democratic-controlled states certainly pushed back against many Trump administration initiatives, especially on immigration and environmental matters. That was their prerogative.

I’m happy to see states use lawful means to challenge federal laws and mandates they don’t agree with. We need more of it, not less. In fact, states need more tools to compete with the federal government, such as the ability for a supermajority of states to repeal a federal law or regulation.

More of society’s problems would be solved, governance would improve, and the nation’s unfathomable debt would decline with a massive devolution of programs and power from the federal level to states and local governments.

Former President Donald Trump is pushing legislatures all across the country to require audits of the 2020 election results — even in states where he won. Is there any interest among Utah legislators to seek an audit — and is there any need?

Pignanelli: Utah is the diamond encrusted platinum standard of balloting activities. Our lieutenant governor and county clerks are efficient and dedicated to fair and efficient elections. An audit is unnecessary, especially as other government functions deserve such.

Webb: This effort by Trump and his supporters is political insanity. Trump’s nonsensical crusade to overturn the 2020 election is hurting himself and his party. Even in deep-red Idaho, where Trump won big, the election deniers have demanded an investigation. No clear-thinking person on the planet thinks this makes sense.

The 2020 election is long over and the country moved on months ago. Trump and a few fanatics are showcasing the depths to which human stupidity can descend.

Washington is on the verge of defaulting; should Utahns worry?

Four major legislative initiatives are in play, each of them potentially having dramatic consequences for the economy and even society. This is one time when it’s difficult to be overly dramatic

By Frank Pignanelli & LaVarr Webb

Washington was in major turmoil this week — even more than usual. Four major legislative initiatives were being promoted or opposed, each of them potentially having dramatic consequences for the economy and even society. This is one time when it’s difficult to be overly dramatic. We explore the impact on our local lives and politics.

Congress was focused this week on authorizing spending beyond October at the risk of the federal government shutting down. Also, the debt ceiling must soon be raised to accommodate out-of-control deficit spending. What does passage or failure mean for Utah’s congressional delegation and the political scene?

Pignanelli: “These negotiations are extremely complicated. It’s a Rubik’s cube. It’s a Venn diagram. And it’s every sort of, like, crazy mathematical thing that they’re trying to fit together.” — Leigh Ann Caldwell, NBC News

Small children often erupt in temper tantrums that are soon resolved by adult supervision. When adults have similar eruptions without guardians, the results can be disastrous.

Closure of the federal government always impacts Utah’s economy, especially through tourism, federal employees, entitlement programs, etc. Failure to raise the debt ceiling would have reverberations on credit, trade and other economic activities. Because Democrats control both houses, they will immediately be pasted with blame. However, should the stoppage last beyond a few days then all members of Congress, including Republicans, will be blemished.

Paying bills and obligations is a fundamental activity for all families. Thus, any pain suffered because of congressional stubbornness will be a topic in primary and general election battles. Frustrations with the 2013 government shutdown raised issues for federal candidates in 2014 and 2016.

Everyone watching just wants the screaming child to behave and be quiet. Similarly, Utahns don’t care about partisan bickering, they just want their officials to perform basic duties.

Webb: Republicans, including Utah’s delegation, are mostly united in opposition to raising the debt ceiling and authorizing additional spending. Since Democrats control Congress, Republicans are saying they must pass these bills on their own. Republicans don’t want to enable historic spending blowouts that dramatically expand the welfare state. And Democrats have not been willing to compromise or make concessions to Republicans.

However, Republicans open themselves to charges of hypocrisy by refusing to help on this must-do legislation. During the Trump years, Republicans routinely voted to raise the debt ceiling and pass continuing resolutions to fund the government.

One way or another, this legislation will pass. And if the government shuts down for a short period, it won’t really shut down. Essential services and payments will continue, some federal employees will get paid vacations, and the shutdown will not impact very many people.

But both sides will blame the other and attempt to exploit it for political purposes. Utah’s Republican delegation won’t suffer any real damage. However, Republican obstruction on this and other legislation could push Democrats to eliminate the filibuster process, allowing a simple majority to do anything they wish.

The $1.2 trillion bipartisan Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act and the $3.5 trillion “Build Back Better” appropriations bill are the focus of intense wrangling — and that’s just inside Democratic caucuses. What does passage or defeat mean for Utah?

Pignanelli: Obtaining a loan to fund a home, car or other major asset is a logical and beneficial action by families. Therefore, the infrastructure legislation has broad bipartisan support. Government investment in transportation, water, broadband and other capital projects will benefit Utah. Because our state is so well managed, these federal funds will be efficiently spent.

While several of the separate parts of the larger package do have support, the overall price tag is creating serious consternation, even among the center-left. Labeled Joe Biden’s bill, the president is facing difficulty building necessary momentum across the country. Because the American and Utah economies are rebounding, his sales pitches are not resounding. Utah’s congressional delegation will not support, and will face few recriminations.

Webb: The $3.5 trillion reconciliation bill would create a historic surge in social welfare spending. It fulfills every social spending fantasy for left-wing Democrats. The real cost will be much more than $3.5 trillion, and it’s certainly not paid for, as President Biden and Democrats claim. It will create vast new entitlement programs, just when existing entitlement programs like Medicare and Social Security are running out of money and need to be shored up.

I’m not as opposed to the bipartisan infrastructure bill because the funds will be used (mostly) for real infrastructure, which the country needs. Utah Sen. Mitt Romney has been a major champion of the legislation and he claims it is paid for, although that is questionable. Sen. Mike Lee is opposed.

Does Utah need another massive infusion of federal dollars?

Pignanelli: Although Legislators are still laboring to spend the billions from COVID-19 relief, federal dollars can assist in water collection and distribution, broadband and transportation to maintain our current excellent trajectory.

Webb: Utah will use infrastructure money carefully and wisely. Still, it’s sort of an embarrassment of riches. Utah has done a good job paying for infrastructure with state dollars, so the federal largesse is a big bonus. If turning down the federal dollars would reduce the spending and debt, I’d say refuse it. But the money would just be diverted to some other state or local government where it probably wouldn’t be used as smartly. So it makes no sense to unilaterally return the money.

Will Republicans win control of the House in ‘22?

A lot depends on Donald Trump and whether he continues to claim the election was stolen in 2020.

By Frank Pignanelli & LaVarr Webb

If history is a guide, Republican congressional candidates should do very well in the 2022 midterm elections and probably win control of Congress. However, one colossal wild card will play out in this election — Donald Trump and his continued claims of massive voter fraud. The Trump factor will influence — for better or worse — both primary and general election outcomes in many races. We look at the Trump impact in Utah and nationally.

Sen. Mike Lee and four Utah House members — all Republicans — are all up for reelection next year. Will they cozy up to Trump, or try to keep him at arms length? Also, Trump is making election fraud a litmus test for his favored candidates. How will Utah GOP candidates respond?

Pignanelli: “A Republican candidate can maintain some distance but certainly can’t frontily challenge Donald Trump.” — Rich Lowry, National Review

Many neighborhoods are beset with an ever-present gossip. Despite objections to the tactics used by these gadflies, few openly challenge them out of fear of being the next target. Utah’s GOP has made a similar pragmatic cost-benefit analysis — aggravating the political yenta Trump and his supporters is not worth the resulting pain.

Trump is not overwhelmingly popular in Utah; President Joe Biden, less so. Thus, smart candidates will shout love of Trump’s policies — especially against the overreach of the current administration — while softening any support of the man.

The new book “Peril” by Bob Woodward and Robert Costa adds a new element into election discussions. They write that Lee intensely investigated Trump’s allegations of voter fraud, and eventually voted to certify the election results. Lee’s undisputed reputation as a constitutional expert now offers a shield to those who also agreed to certification.

The 2022 elections will be a true test of political acumen, keeping the busybody satisfied to avoid an attack, but also dodging perceptions of over chumminess.

Webb: Trump is making life difficult for Republican candidates across the country. Even people (like me) who voted for him and liked a lot of his policies think his brazen assertions that the 2020 election was stolen from him are absurd. By refusing to get over his loss, and demanding that GOP candidates agree with him, he’s damaging GOP chances in many races.

Trump’s fixations aren’t about policy, or what’s best for the country. Trump is, unfortunately, all about Trump. As I’ve written many times, the tragedy of Trump is that while he was smart and governed well in many respects, his deep personal flaws and toxic ego were his undoing.

Still, Trump has a magnetic hold on a diminishing, but still significant, base of the party. Republicans need him to energize the base, but they can’t win with him out front because he is so poisonous to moderates and independents.

The danger for moderates like congressmen Blake Moore or John Curtis is if a reporter asks if they believe the election was stolen from Trump, and they answer, honestly, that it wasn’t, then Trump may turn the GOP base against them.

They can probably still win in heavily Republican Utah, even if they alienate a share of hardcore Trump loyalists. But Trump makes things more difficult, especially if we end up with a true swing district as a result of redistricting.

Nationally, Trump is becoming more aggressive in endorsing and opposing Republican candidates, and he is speaking out on many issues. Overall, will the Trump factor help or hurt Republican chances to win back control of Congress?

Pignanelli: A handful in the House and one in the Senate is the minimum for the GOP to capture control. Yet in many of these swing areas Trump’s influence is mixed. While voters still retain some fatigue from his presidential antics, Trump is the absolute face of opposition to the Biden administration. Republican tacticians must be extraordinarily disciplined and strategic in using this weapon wisely to protect their advantage as the election season ramps up in a few months. Too much or too little will cost them.

Webb: Trump could be a big help to all GOP candidates if he would encourage the base to vote, criticize Democrats all he wants, but stay out of primary battles and not demand personal fealty. But he is incapable of such altruism and thus will be a net drag on the party.

Is Trump gearing up to run for president in 2024?

Pignanelli: Trump is an extremely shrewd player. By consistently vocalizing the objections to the Biden administration, he is dominating the presidential contender field. Trump wants to make his position as strong as possible as he decides to pull the trigger in late 2023. But there are number of external factors, including economy, his legal issues and others which are just too remote to predict at this time.

Webb: I think Trump is running, but I hope I’m dead wrong. Even as disastrous as the Biden administration has been (and will continue to be), Trump can’t win. But he can win the GOP nomination and doom the party to another presidential loss.