Politics never takes a break. Here’s what to look for as Utah’s ’22 election season begins

The momentum behind the Republicans this year, and Utahns’ reluctance to elect independent candidates, remain tremendous advantages for the incumbent

By Frank Pignanelli & LaVarr Webb

The Utah Legislature is over, but politics isn’t taking a break. For the first time in memory, the candidate filing deadline occurred during the legislative session, followed soon after by precinct caucuses. We explore the intrigue as the election season launches and candidates scramble for support.

With media attention mostly focused on the legislative session, the war in Ukraine and the pandemic, many people were barely aware that Republican Party precinct caucuses were held last Tuesday. How will the caucuses impact convention, primary and general election contests?

Pignanelli: “Just because you do not take an interest in politics doesn’t mean politics won’t take an interest in you.” — Pericles (430 B.C.)

If history is an indicator, the elements exist to foster delegates intent on disrupting the status quo. A good comparison is the 2010 election season, which bred a host of bellicose delegates. Now, as back then, we have a Democratic president suffering in the polls, an unpopular Congress with internal struggles between moderates and left-wing extremists, nervousness about the economy and aggressive right-wing media. This is a nonpresidential election year without major pushes by community organizations toward citizens to attend party caucuses. Compounding this factor is the early date.

These elements guarantee that the most actively engaged citizens with a specific agenda — of either party — were in attendance. Individuals who care about politics but were diverted by other activities may not learn about the caucuses until they are completed.

More than two-thirds of the candidates filed a declaration to collect signatures. Such statements annoy strong supporters of the convention system. Thus, the conventions could produce numerous primary contests. More importantly, intense battles inside conventions may push some candidates to adopt more extreme positions that could cause problems in the primary and general elections.

Regardless of any historical precedents, 2022 delegate machinations promise to be interesting and possibly disruptive to current policy configurations.

Webb: Party caucuses used to be the major political event kicking off each election year. But now they are relatively low-key because candidates can gather signatures to get on the primary election ballot. That means hundreds of thousands of voters get to choose their party nominees instead of the relatively few caucus attendees and the delegates they elect. This is a good thing for Utah politics.

However, caucuses are still important, and delegates selected by attendees tend to be motivated and serious political activists. Because of their political passion and zeal, they have significant influence and politicians still wisely seek their support. I salute their commitment and enthusiasm. However, I don’t want them, alone, deciding for everyone else who gets on the ballot. All primary election voters ought to have a say in that, including those who are not able to attend caucus meetings.

Utah’s current hybrid candidate nomination system works very well. Citizens must remain wary of extremist efforts to return exclusively to the old caucus/convention system. That would exclude hundreds of thousands of voters from having a say in who represents their party as candidates in the final election.

Over 300 Utahns filed for office by the end of last week. Many powerful incumbents are facing intraparty challenges. Why?

Pignanelli: Utah Sen. Mike Lee and our members in the House of Representatives are encountering challenges from fellow Republicans for the party nomination. The personality or individual policy preferences of the incumbents is driving these candidacies.

An unusual number of high-profile members of legislative leadership will be fending off fights inside their party convention or in a primary. Despite a successful session, general frustration with overall legislative deliberations, and not personalities, seem to be the factor behind these confrontations.

Webb: Citizens’ lives have been disrupted over the COVID-19 pandemic and the resulting dictates of political leaders. Great concern and dissatisfaction also exists about the direction of the country and political dysfunction in Washington, D.C. All of this uncertainty and unrest has motivated citizens to seek political office.

While no politician is ever completely safe and should never take his or her position for granted, I expect most incumbents will be returned to office.

Some prominent Democrats are endorsing independent U.S. Senate candidate Evan McMullin. Does that give him a chance of winning against the GOP nominee (most likely incumbent Sen. Mike Lee)?

Pignanelli: It is increasingly difficult to dismiss McMullin. He is raising money. Volunteers gathered enough signatures for ballot placement. His bipartisan support suggests an unusual competitive feature. But the momentum behind the Republicans this year, and Utahns’ reluctance to elect independent candidates, remain tremendous advantages for Lee.

Webb: McMullin has little chance of winning, even if he gets some Democratic support. In general elections, Utahns come home to their political parties. McMullin is more of an opportunist and gadfly than a serious candidate. He couldn’t win as a Republican, so he abandoned the party for an independent run. He’s embracing policy positions that make liberal Democrats happy.

Still, Lee shows some vulnerability. He faces some solid Republican challenges for the nomination. He needs to run the best campaign of his life.

Are Utahns ready for a voucher-like school program?

In 2007, the Legislature passed a voucher bill that led to an overwhelming referendum to overturn it. Has 15 years really changed anything?

By Frank Pignanelli & LaVarr Webb

The 2022 general legislative session is almost over, and the activities of our lawmakers are giving politicos much to argue about. We review some of the hottest items on the hill.

The Legislature has engaged in earnest debate overHB331, the Hope Scholarship Program. Because this legislation would fund education of children outside the public school system, it is viewed as taxpayer-subsidized vouchers. The bill barely passed committee and is awaiting debate in the full House. Gov. Spencer Cox said he supports vouchers philosophically but not while public education is underfunded. What does the governor’s veto threat mean and what is the fate of this proposal?

Pignanelli: “Don’t hide from the past. It will not catch you if you don’t repeat it.” — Pearl Bailey

Apparently, 15 years is the radioactive half-life of controversial issues. In 2007, the Legislature barely passed, and Gov. Jon Huntsman Jr. approved, legislation establishing a voucher system. In response, teacher and parent associations organized volunteers to gather enough signatures for a statewide referendum to repeal the law. After a summer of contentious debate (LaVarr and I had spirited discussions) 62% of Utahns voted to reject vouchers.

Many wonder why the issue is returning. The gubernatorial elections in Virginia and New Jersey, combined with the expulsions of three San Francisco school district board members, indicate serious trends. Parents dealing with pandemic-caused school closures are frustrated with the public system.

But Cox’s perspective is perhaps beyond teacher salaries. Our state is enduring arguments over vaccination/mask mandates, water shortages and population growth. Questions exist as to the timeliness of this fight.

Supporters can pass the bill and try their luck with a veto override session. Another option is to spend a year persuading citizens to the cause (a well-crafted website already exists).

How voucher supporters learn from the past may determine future success in Utah.

Webb: I’m a big fan and supporter of public schools, and I believe the vast majority of Utah children will attend public schools long into the future. All of my children attended public schools, as do my grandchildren.

I come from an education family with sisters, brothers-in-law and daughters who taught or teach in public schools. I believe we should increase spending per pupil, and pay teachers at a valued and respected professional level, like law or medicine. If we were at only the national average spending per pupil, we could have the best system in the country and the best outcomes for students.

But I still believe there’s a place for vouchers, for money to follow the children — if done right. Vouchers should be means-tested on a tiered basis so low-income families benefit the most. Voucher amounts should be less than current per-pupil funding, so when a child leaves the public system, some money remains. That way, no one can claim that vouchers are hurting funding for public education because the public system doesn’t have to educate a child, but gets to keep some of that child’s per-pupil funding. The public system comes out ahead.

Parents who send their children to private schools actually subsidize the public school system. They pay income taxes (which fund public education) like everyone else, but also pay private school tuition, and the state system doesn’t have to educate their children. Wealthy people can pay for both, but lower-income people ought to be able to keep some of the money they pay for education to send their child to a private school if they wish.

Utahns really like their neighborhood public schools. There won’t be a mass exodus. Most public schools can compete just fine, and those that can’t will improve because of the competition. Many other states are way ahead of Utah on vouchers.

We ought to fund public education appropriately and then allow parents some choice in where their children are educated.

Much media attention has been focused on legislation to eliminate Utah’s death penalty. Some conservative organizations and prosecutors have announced support for such a prohibition. Many insiders believed it had a real chance to pass. But the bill died in committee. Why and what does this signify?

Pignanelli: The legislation was sponsored by well-respected attorneys with bona fide conservative credentials, Rep. Lowry Snow and Sen. Dan McCay. Proponents were armed with impressive facts including the costs of litigation, execution of innocent individuals and harm to victims’ families. Polls indicated some support.

But opponents countered if a judicial system wrongfully condemns individuals, it should be reformed first. Others felt the ultimate penalty provides options to prosecutors for negotiation. Combined with the increased fear of crime, the constituent base for removing the death penalty remains limited.

Webb: Sorry, but I can’t get comfortable repealing the death penalty. When it comes to premeditated, heinous, aggravated murder involving rape, torture and mutilation of totally innocent victims, especially small children, I guess I’m an Old Testament kind of guy.

Last week, lawmakers announced big revenue surpluses — again. But there is also real fear of a coming economic downturn. How do these conflicts-of-expectations impact legislative deliberations?

Pignanelli: A real concern of economic problems in the near future will likely compel lawmakers to restrict ongoing commitments while placing additional funds in reserve.

Webb: We live in a very uncertain world. Invest one-time surplus income wisely in reserves and basic infrastructure.

Utahns clearly like their election system

The Beehive State deserves accolades for building something that is a crown jewel while defending untoward critiques with strength and dignity.

By Frank Pignanelli & LaVarr Webb

While the rest of the world is beleaguered with potential wars, COVID-19 controversies, inflation and haggling politicians, Utah’s Legislature chugs along in relative tranquility. We highlight some of the happenings of the last two weeks — mostly positive — that are significant to all citizens.

The Secure Vote Utah initiative petition effort (that would eliminate the current system of mail-in ballots) has apparently failed. Although most election reform bills this session are technical adjustments, some would address concerns about election integrity and voter fraud. Is there a silver lining in this focus on elections?

Pignanelli: “There are documented voting fraud cases of recent decades involving mail or absentee ballots. They’re stories, they’re dramatic, they are rare.”— Charles Stewart III of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

Utah has so many unique advantages — especially our people. I love watching my fellow citizens, with their deep competence and substance, quietly but effectively deal with attacks on our state. The complete but subtle devastation of the initiative petition is a classic example.

After years of hard work, Utah state and local officials created the premier voting system in the country and possibly the planet. We consistently receive accolades for elections that are free from fraud while providing ultimate accessibility. The distribution and collection of ballots in Utah reflects the best of our state. Therefore, unfair and undeserved criticisms are an assault on us.

In typical Utah fashion, critics of our election system received a polite hearing and then were quickly dispatched. The lack of support for the petition and legislation was astounding. The Beehive State deserves accolades for building something that is a crown jewel while defending untoward critiques with strength and dignity.

Webb: Utah has a great election system that is working fine. The silver lining in these reform bills is that close scrutiny only shows how good our system is. Citizens especially like mail-in voting. Alleging voting fraud and demanding major election changes is not a good issue for Republicans. It alienates as many people as it attracts. It makes no sense to follow Donald Trump down this silly rabbit hole with claims of stolen elections.

The Legislature passed, and the governor signed, legislation to reduce the income tax rate to 4.85%. Also included is a provision for Utahns who earn less than $57,414 a year to be eligible for a 15% state match of the federal earned income tax credit. All Social Security income will be tax-free for those making up to $37,000 for individuals, and $62,000 for those filing jointly. Is there more than monetary benefit in this legislation?

Pignanelli: This legislation passed with bipartisan support (unanimous in the Senate) indicating cooperation and collaboration. Lawmakers and the governor deserve credit for this achievement. Recognition of those in need by enhancing the earned income credit and Social Security payments is especially noteworthy.

Also interesting is no reduction in the sales tax. This reflects concern by lawmakers the economy will likely encounter troubles in the years ahead and reducing revenues for the general fund would be a mistake. Furthermore, it may be some years before another tax cut is contemplated as the state navigates troublesome waters. Although contentious at times, the exercise developing these tax reductions demonstrated judgment.

Webb: I’m old enough to recall severe economic downturns during which state and school budgets had to be slashed with subsequent immense pressure to raise taxes. Therefore, as I’ve written previously, I hate to see Utah’s tax base eroded. I prefer low tax rates with a broad tax base. I strongly supported legislative efforts a few years ago to lower the sales tax rate while broadening the base.

That’s why instead of eliminating the food sales tax, I’ve supported giving low-income people a payment amounting to the equivalent, or more, of the food tax (as proposed by Gov. Spencer Cox. Cutting the income tax narrows the tax base the education system depends on.

I understand that Utah competes with some states that don’t have any income tax. But those states assess very high sales or property taxes (or both), or they depend on specialty taxes like, in the case of Nevada, gaming taxes.

Utah’s overall tax system and tax rates are fairly balanced. Let’s remember that in real, proportionate dollars, Utahns today are enjoying the lowest taxes in decades — despite our large families and proportionately more children to educate.

The legislative session is past the halfway point. Are there certain themes that will define the session?

Pignanelli: The 2022 session will be tagged “The Water Session” because a record number of bills dealing with this precious natural resource are being considered. Many will pass and be funded.

Webb: One bill with long-lasting impact on Utah’s transportation system is HB322, putting the Utah Department of Transportation (UDOT) in charge of large public transit construction projects that use state funds. That takes responsibility away from Utah Transit Authority (UTA), but on the positive side it likely means more funding for big transit projects needed to cope with Utah’s rapid population growth. UTA has done a good job of building and expanding the TRAX and FrontRunner systems, but it has done it so far with little state funding. If lawmakers are going to put hundreds of millions of dollars into public transit, you can’t blame them for wanting control over the projects they fund. UDOT and UTA will work collaboratively to ensure success.

How will Sen. Mike Lee do in his reelection bid?

Politics behaves as a bright light because something is always reflecting its energy. Such is the case as the situations of Utah’s senators mirror the turmoil of the national GOP

By Frank Pignanelli & LaVarr Webb

Legislative activities tend to dominate discussions among Utah’s politicos this time of year. However, a recent poll regarding our two U.S. senators caught our attention. We take a break from the Legislature to ruminate on Senate politics.

A Deseret News/Hinckley Institute of Politics poll indicates Sen. Mike Lee has a 42% approval rating among Utahns. While this is three points lower than in the past, Lee remains popular with conservative voters. In addition, Lee faces a number of Republican, Democrat and independent candidates who have filed to run against him this year. What does all this mean?

Pignanelli: “Public opinion polls are like children in a garden, digging things up all the time to see how they’re growing.” — J.B. Priestley

Politics behaves as a bright light because something is always reflecting its energy. Such is the case as the situations of Utah’s senators mirror the turmoil of the national GOP.

Lee was an outspoken supporter of President Donald Trump in the 2020 elections, but refused to participate in the Jan. 6 objections to the Electoral College delegate activity. Regardless, he is still receiving heat from “Never Trump” Republicans.

The Evan McMullin factor is interesting because he is attracting support from various corners of the political arena. However, as revealed in the recent PBS “Hinckley Report,” he carries almost $700,000 debt from his 2016 presidential campaign. This could be a factor in the campaign.

Lee will be on the Senate primary ballot. His renomination will be eased by more than just one intra-party contender because the core support will not be diminished.

As usual, history is helpful. We are in a scenario similar to 2010. Then the nation was led by a Democratic president with approval ratings under 50% and plagued with controversies regarding federal government expansion. Projections for the midterm elections favored Republicans. In Utah that year, the most conservative candidate won the Senate primary and general election. His name was Mike Lee.

The national political scene will continue reflection on Utah, especially when greater turbulence is caused by domestic and foreign affairs.

Webb: Lee has served nearly two terms in the Senate, but he’s never been much of a self-promoter. He’s not constantly featured on talk shows and he doesn’t inundate the news media with press releases. He’s no publicity hog. Political and reelection concerns seem to figure less in his Senate activities as compared to other politicians. He doesn’t seem to always see, or take advantage of, political opportunities.

Also, Lee is not naturally a charismatic, back-slapping politician. He’s an ideological conservative who is a bit low-key and doesn’t warmly relate to voters. To many people, he’s still an enigma. The senator is a true policy wonk and is happiest in policy discussions and debate, even on some obscure, though important, topics.

For all of those reasons, Lee has never enjoyed high approval ratings. He faces some solid, moderate challengers for the nomination. And independent candidate McMullin may be a factor in the general election.

But if Lee raises a lot of money and runs a strong, highly-visible campaign with great messaging, he should handily win reelection.

The poll also indicates that 51% of Republicans and 51% of Democrats approve of Sen. Mitt Romney’s performance. Although he enjoys support across the political spectrum, almost 45% of conservative Republicans have concerns about Romney. What is this telling us?

Pignanelli: The reflection mentioned above is especially relevant with these results. Romney is not shy in criticism of President Joe Biden. So, the across-the-board support for Romney suggests that frustration with the administration includes Democrats and independents. This is a harbinger of what may come in November.

Lee and Romney have two different styles that garner different areas of support. Normally, this is unusual in politics. But we are amidst an historical era with parties and demography realigning.

Webb: Romney has emerged as a real leader in the Senate, especially with regard to China, Russia and foreign affairs in general. He’s very visible and has a great communications operation. He’s a moderate, but has harshly criticized the Biden administration on a number of topics. He obviously hates Trump and has gone out of his way to be Trump’s main antagonist among Republicans in the Senate. A lot of conservatives dislike him for that.

Romney can easily win a general election in 2024. His challenge will be in the Republican primary where he could be vulnerable, depending on who emerges to challenge him.

These senators will be faced with voting for or against the Supreme Court nominee put forward by President Joe Biden. Could this impact their support in Utah?

Pignanelli: How these senators message their support or opposition to the African American female nominee will affect their respective campaigns … and legacies.

Webb: It depends, of course, on who the nominee is and how far left her legal and political ideology veers. We can certainly count on a very progressive nominee, but if she is in the tradition of her predecessor, Justice Stephen Breyer, who is a practical liberal, then most Republican senators won’t fight the nomination. If the nominee is a left-wing radical ideologue, then Lee can probably bolster his reelection chances by opposing the nomination. I have no idea how Romney would vote.

Is democracy in trouble in the U.S.? How about in Utah?

Extremists on the right and left are claiming the governor and Legislature are dictatorial and authoritarian. But these antagonists perform without retribution and demonstrate that democracy is vibrant in the Beehive State

By Frank Pignanelli & LaVarr Webb

Media outlets, think tanks and special interest groups are bombarding Americans with polling questions regarding their political preferences and feelings about the country. These surveys show a high level of concern about the nation’s direction. Since your columnists have a lot of experience with these things (we’re almost as old as the republic), we offer our insights.

A recent NBC news poll revealed that 76% of Democrats, Republicans and independents believe “there is a threat to democracy and majority rule in this country.” Are these fears justified?

Pignanelli: “The thing about democracy is that it is not neat, orderly, or quiet. It requires a certain relish for confusion.” — Molly Ivins

Our nation is amid a constitutional, economic and societal turmoil. But we have endured some tumult … every year … for centuries. Considering religious Puritans escaping persecution, indigenous people overwhelmed, immigrants fleeing poverty or victims of the slave trade, our nation was built on turbulence. Thankfully, the Constitution bequeathed to us continues to harness this energy into an entrepreneurial, innovative drive for freedom.

When political, business and community leaders continually express concern over the demagogic attacks on the government, it is no wonder citizens tell pollsters they are nervous about our constitutional structure. Yet, voters turned out in record numbers in 2020 and 2021.

This signifies a deep solid faith in the system. When one objectively views the panorama of current events, the resulting scene is 330 million Americans engaged in a massive debate on multiple issues. We are adapting to technological, environmental and demographic change. Such observations of passionate discourse reveal an actual beauty to what is happening — democracy in action.

We struggled through tough times before and prevailed. An understanding of history, combined with gratitude toward the founders, emphasizes democracy is messy and frustrating but well worth the effort.

Webb: I don’t believe our democratic republic is in imminent danger. However, I do believe rabble-rousers exist on both sides of the political spectrum who would do serious damage to our civic institutions if they got their way. But they’re not going to prevail.

Donald Trump’s refusal to accept the presidential election outcome and his continued demands that the election be overturned are a threat to the country. Especially disturbing is his recruitment of his millions of ardent supporters to follow him down this destructive path. His disparagement of anyone who disagrees with him — even his former Vice President Mike Pence, who loyally served him — is disgusting.

But Trump is not going to overturn the election. We have plenty of sensible and courageous leaders in this country of all political persuasions who will prevent anything crazy from happening. By going so far into the looney bin regarding the 2020 election, Trump has alienated sensible conservatives and destroyed his chance to run and win in 2024. He can still be a spoiler, however.

It’s important to note that left-wing politicians and elitist interest groups are just as dangerous as Trump. They would remake our political institutions by federalizing elections and turning America into a welfare state that is soft on crime and has no borders. They would trample over reasonable, rational heartland citizens who make America the great country it is. They won’t prevail either.

Our democratic republic remains a center-right nation with prudent, common-sense citizens who won’t allow rabble-rousers on either extreme to control the country.

What has led to this dismal state of national angst — the Jan. 6 riots at the U.S. Capitol, the congressional committee investigating it, Trump asserting the 2020 election was stolen, left-wing disparagement of unwoke behavior?

Pignanelli: History documents that new versions of media always propel significant changes in society (i.e. printing press, street cafés, telegraph, newspapers, radio, television, internet). Social media provides unparalleled opportunities for people to engage, learn, grow and improve themselves. But is also expands the cesspool of strange and dangerous thoughts.

I refuse to concede a bunch of weirdos endangered our republic by invading the Capitol on Jan. 6. The potential threat was from those attempting to commit fraud on the country through manipulating the Electoral College system. But our Constitution, and many good people from all political perspectives, firmly prevented them, proving once again America works.

Webb: The fringe people are certainly a problem. But a majority of citizens simply don’t like the way the liberal Democrats who control Washington, D.C., are running the country. Unfortunately for Republicans, things are so broken at the federal level that they won’t be able to do much better when they retake power.

Is democracy in Utah threatened?

Pignanelli: Extremists on the right and left are claiming the governor and Legislature are dictatorial and authoritarian. They scream and shout while watching and participating in the proceedings of those they dislike so much. These antagonists perform without retribution and demonstrate that democracy is vibrant in the Beehive State.

Webb: Utah is the most sensible of states. Yes, we have our extremists, but most Utahns are mainstream citizens who vote for good leaders and good policies.

Opinion: How on earth did masks become so political?

Although the recent mandate was issued in just two counties, it started a firestorm across the entire state. Part-time legislators are in frequent contact with their constituents, and they heard from them

By Frank Pignanelli & LaVarr Webb

At the beginning of the legislative session, lawmakers from both parties and houses outlined ambitious agendas regarding traditional issues of education, natural resources, transportation, etc. However, pandemic politics dominated attention and interaction with constituents in the early days. This dynamic illuminates features of modern politics. Thus, we provide our insights.

On the first day of the session, and without the usually required committee hearings, the Senate passed a resolution terminating the mask mandate implemented by Salt Lake County. The House followed suit a few days later. Why did the Legislature weigh in so quickly on this controversial matter?

Pignanelli: “Putting a piece of cloth on your face has become a culture war.”— Stephen Colbert.

I possess a good barometer of the intensity of a political storm — the number of friends and acquaintances yelling at me. By my standards, the mask controversy breaks boundaries. I encountered individuals howling at me in restaurants, during jogging and while I was in a “state of nature” in a post-workout shower at the gym.

Every person, regardless of demographics, is impacted by this matter. Thus, a mask has evolved from a medical accessory into a symbol of something much larger, (i.e. loss of freedom, trusting science, etc.). Neither side is persuading the other.

Although the recent mandate was issued in just two counties, it started a firestorm across the entire state. Part-time legislators are in frequent contact with their constituents, and they heard from them. Utahns upset with mask demands, or just tired of pandemic restrictions, outnumbered those supporting the government edict. The pressure was intense, compelling lawmakers to circumvent the usual committee process. Election year dynamics further complicated actions.

The pandemic will end soon. But the mask dispute highlighted the raw feelings on both sides, providing critical insight to future generations. Hopefully, no more showers are interrupted.

Webb: As I’ve written previously, I don’t support mask mandates. In many situations, masks should be worn, but it should be voluntary. But, as a conservative, I believe the best government is government closest to the people. I believe it was a mistake for the Legislature to override the mask decisions of locally elected officials. Let those local leaders answer to their own constituents.

This is a highly charged, divisive, emotional issue. By taking this action, lawmakers have elevated the issue up to the state level, subjecting themselves to the anger and vitriol.

There may, at times, be compelling reasons for the federal government to usurp state prerogatives. There may, at times, be compelling reasons for state government to usurp local prerogatives. But I don’t think requiring masks in public places rose to the level of something that demanded termination.

The “test to stay” program developed by the Legislature last year may be substituted with a statutory requirement that a school could only revert to remote learning if state leaders concurred. Why the dramatic change to this program?

Pignanelli: “Test to stay” was a good attempt to balance all concerns but based on older versions of the coronavirus. But, omicron overwhelmed the system, irritating parents and school officials. There is, as of yet, no substitute for the testing regime and remote learning is deeply problematic, so state leaders will drive the decision.

Webb: The capricious COVID-19, and its variants, have simply created a mess for schools and parents. Schools are struggling mightily and no easy solutions exist. Certainly, children need to be in school, but high omicron infection rates are wreaking havoc on the best-laid plans and policies. Teachers and substitutes are in short supply, and questions abound: Who should be in school? Who should be tested and when? How soon can infected students and teachers return? When should schools flip to on-line learning, and so forth.

I believe these decisions, to the extent possible, are best left to local school leaders and local school boards. Adding another level of bureaucracy at the state level will add to confusion and slow down what sometimes needs to be quick action.

The pandemic has produced massive amounts of federal funds and, combined with a hot Utah economy, has generated large budget surpluses. This is escalating talks regarding a tax cut. What is the likely result?

Pignanelli: As illustrated in speeches by Gov. Spencer Cox and lawmakers, there is a tug-of-war between them for an income tax cut or grocery sales tax credit. But these deliberations include important considerations by lawmakers as to the reality of the ongoing surpluses beyond 2022. So the amount of reductions will reflect the confidence by officials as to the short-term future of the economy. Many weeks to go before all the details are decided.

Webb: Republican lawmakers seem intent on cutting income taxes, which fund education. Democratic lawmakers want the sales tax on food eliminated. A better plan is Gov. Cox’s proposal for a food tax credit for low-income people. It makes no sense to narrow the tax base by cutting the food tax for wealthy people and tourists.

Right now we, as Utahns, enjoy historically low taxes. The economy may be booming, but great fears exist that it’s a “sugar high.” We’re seeing that the world is very a perilous place and factors (like inflation) are looming that could dampen the economy. Now is no time for a big income tax cut.

The important legislative document you probably haven’t heard about

Usually, lawmakers announce proposals and plans as the session progresses. This document upends this tradition by courageously establishing accountabilities at the beginning.

By Frank Pignanelli & LaVarr Webb

The Utah Legislature is one week into the 2022 session. Usual deliberations regarding the budget and taxation commenced immediately, along with laws regarding the pandemic. However, prior to lawmakers convening, an unprecedented and important document was released — the House Majority Caucus revealed its “Policy Pillars.” We review potential long-term impact of these stated legislative priorities.

The Policy Pillars contained in a House leadership press release outlined some expected priorities, such as water conservation, education innovation, sustainable growth, etc. But the accompanying document, “The Utah Way Forward,” is an impressive, glossy, explanation of how these leaders intend to achieve their vision. (Available at: https://house.utah.gov/2022majoritypolicypillars/) Will this fairly detailed, substantive approach to solving the state’s challenges improve legislators’ focus and produce better results?

Pignanelli: “To give a direction and a specific sanction to the general sense of the community is the true end of legislature.” — Edmund Burke

“Geezers” and “fogeys” are less kind descriptions of the many decades of experience LaVarr and I claim with legislative activities. Since this is not our “first rodeo” we can verify the House Pillars instrument is beyond novelty — it is noteworthy.

The document is important for what it articulates … and for what it ignores. A nonpartisan theme runs throughout the text describing issues and painting broad solutions. The first section focuses on water conservation and the Great Salt Lake. There are omissions (i.e. reform in higher education), yet the breadth and scope is impressive. Hot social issues are not mentioned.

Usually, lawmakers announce proposals and plans as the session progresses. Pillars upends this tradition by courageously establishing accountabilities at the beginning. The authors invite citizens to comment, thereby further enhancing Utah’s strong participatory legislative process.

Thankfully, the Pillars proposal is valuable in demonstrating old dogs (like LaVarr and me) can learn new tricks.

Webb: It is difficult for part-time state legislators to provide a forward-looking policy vision on the top issues facing the state. It is usually the governor, with his senior staff, cabinet and thousands of state employees, who takes the lead in setting the state’s policy agenda. And Gov. Spencer Cox has done a good job outlining a vision for the state.

State legislatures usually focus on current crises and day-to-day issues, rather than demonstrate farsightedness and long-term planning for future generations. They are by nature more reactionary than visionary due to the part-time nature of their jobs and the many immediate problems facing the state. They collectively enjoy the spotlight for 45 days, but the governor dominates the rest of the year.

But the House Majority Caucus Policy Pillars document shows that House leaders are attempting to be more influential in setting the state’s agenda, rather than allowing the governor to take primacy in the “vision stuff.”

The Policy Pillars and supportive material clearly, succinctly and pragmatically outline top issues facing the state and the House GOP commitment to focus on and resolve them. In this agenda, the House Majority mostly avoids cultural wars and hot-button, divisive, partisan “message” issues. That’s actually quite remarkable.

If this strategy is pursued and maintained, will House and Senate lawmakers change the dynamics of political interaction with the governor, state agencies, the business community and citizens?

Pignanelli: Although generated by the House, Pillars covers issues that have been the center of activity for many senators, as well. Their united action will reaffirm the Legislature remains more than a responsive entity, but a group that can solidify behind common vision.

In December, Cox pronounced a well-crafted and equally ambitious set of objectives. But Pillars sends a signal to the executive branch and agencies that lawmakers expect a greater role in developing state government solutions to challenges. Business and community activists will respond accordingly.

Webb: Certainly, lawmakers are taking a more proactive role. But the governor, with his “bully pulpit” and legion of experts and leaders, has a larger say, especially because the executive branch carries out legislative policy and writes the detailed rules and regulations accompanying new statutes.

What would be even more powerful than the House Majority manifesto would be a joint House/Senate/Governor vision document outlining mutual policy priorities, and a path forward for the long term. However, there is too much natural tension and distrust among the branches of government and bodies of the Legislature for that to occur. And it’s good to have some competition among these groups.

Why do so few Utahns know of these policy statements, and will that change?

Pignanelli: For decades, Utah has been honored by multiple awards for excellent management and efficiency. Governors and department heads have eagerly, and appropriately, collected these trophies. Yet, none of these recognitions would have occurred without all the pesky demands by lawmakers for efficiency and accountability.

Utah is an incredible place to live and work directly because of the unheralded, tireless work by hundreds of lawmakers for many years. Hopefully Pillars will correct this unfairness.

Webb: The Legislature is becoming more sophisticated with communications, but still lags. It’s far more difficult for 104 independently elected lawmakers to collaborate on communications than it is for the one-person governor, who commands immense resources, to effectively communicate. If every House Republican amplified the Policy Pillars document through their newsletters and social media channels, they could have a real impact.

What to expect as the Utah Legislature holds yet another pandemic regular session

COVID-19, from government restrictions to spending federal relief dollars, will be front and center, as will be a large surplus

By Frank Pignanelli & LaVarr Webb

Hold onto your wallets and avert the children’s eyes. The 2022 general session of the Utah State Legislature convenes on Tuesday. Once again, it will occur amid a raging pandemic. We explore both of these important events and how they may affect each other.

State and local officials are receiving pressure to impose vaccine mandates, school closures and mask requirements to slow the omicron variant infection rate. How will the Legislature respond, and will the virus impact legislative deliberations?

Pignanelli: “Remote learning has been a disaster for America’s kids. We must acknowledge that, and do everything to minimize any further remote learning.” — Dr. Ashish K. Jha, Dean, Brown University School of Public Health.

The weird repeat of a legislative session during a viral pandemic is best explained by the astute observation of that great Italian philosopher Yogi Berra — “It’s déjà vu all over again”. As with last year, the Legislature will be open for business while providing excellent accommodations for lawmakers and citizens to participate remotely. Also, expenditures of pandemic relief federal dollars will be another continuing element.

But a year makes all the difference — which will be highlighted during the session. Public education will enjoy increased funding, but not without intense discussion, and potential legislation, regarding school closures. The results of this year’s gubernatorial elections in Virginia and New Jersey, along with protests at school board meetings throughout the nation, demonstrate that Americans and Utahns across the political spectrum want children at school, not at home. These emotions will be reflected during the session.

The U.S. Supreme Court is likely to rule on the federal mandates for employee vaccinations. The results will generate potential tweaks to the laws passed in special session last year.

The pandemic and legislative session share another element, a common desire for conclusion. Yet, as again best described by Hall of Famer Berra, “It’s not over until it’s over”.

Webb: We’re fighting a new battle with the onset of the omicron variant. And federal, state and local governments were not prepared for it. It’s clear now that we can’t totally eliminate COVID-19. So we must learn how to live with it and minimize its impacts — while keeping schools and businesses open and avoiding onerous mandates.

Lawmakers ought to be focused on dramatically ramping up testing, therapeutics that fight the symptoms and prevent serious illness, and bolstering the health care system so it can handle more infections and more patients. It’s clear we need more doctors, more nurses, more hospital beds. It’s a matter of supply and demand. We need more supply to meet demand.

I recognize we can’t boost the capacity of our health care system by 20% overnight. But if COVID-19 is here to stay, we need another Operation Warp Speed to get moving. That ought to be a focus of the Legislature and Governor’s Office.

What will be other major issues addressed in this legislative session?

Pignanelli: In addition to the plethora of federal dollars, state revenues are at a major surplus. But legislative leaders are articulating a deep concern the extra receipts may not be available in the near future because the economy could constrict from its current sugar high. This analysis will dominate the appropriations process, as ongoing spending commitments are limited. Such wise scrutiny explains why our state is so well-managed.

The mild winter and hot summer of 2021 undeniably illustrated that future growth and water needs must be confronted. To the credit of the governor and legislative leadership, these matters (including the Great Salt Lake) will be a priority.

Webb: It’s tough to spend a big, fat state surplus and dump truck loads of federal money. But somebody’s gotta step up and do it, and Utah’s 104 lawmakers will enjoy doling out all that cash. They will deal with rapid growth: Water conservation and development, air quality, transportation investment and education funding. They will debate ways to save the Great Salt Lake from drying up. They will consider tax cuts and a host of lesser issues.

They must be wise and frugal, because the federal money is going to dry up and our great economy won’t last forever. Don’t imperil the future by granting too large a tax cut.

Salt Lake City and Salt Lake County are led by Democratic mayors and the population tends to be more left-of-center than the rest of the state. Will the Legislature allow these local governments, and others, to establish their own COVID-19 policies?

Pignanelli: Any such discussions will be focused on further restricting, not expanding, local government power to impose mandates.

Webb: Personally, I don’t support more pandemic government mandates. We’re done with mandates. But because I believe in local control, rather than dictates from above, I don’t believe the Legislature should prevent these local governments from taking whatever action they deem proper. Let them make their policies and face their voters.

I do believe we all should use common sense. That means voluntary vaccinations and face masks as appropriate. No shutting down schools or businesses.