Who’s right about social media, liberals or conservatives?

Does social media need more or less regulation — and who is it hurting?

By Frank Pignanelli & LaVarr Webb

Social media has emerged as a big societal issue — and getting bigger. This matter has political ramifications, so the Utah Legislature and the U.S. Congress are debating and may take action. We’re dinosaurs, having grown up in the pre-social media era. But we still have opinions.

Liberals say social media companies aren’t aggressive enough in eliminating disinformation from their platforms, including conspiracy theories regarding elections and COVID-19 vaccinations. Conservatives say social media companies have been biased against them, have shut down free speech and are damaging young people. Who is right? Has Elon Musk’s purchase of Twitter improved things?

Pignanelli: “I think a lot of things that get blamed on social media are just human problems, and social media just makes them more visible.” — Elizabeth Nolan Brown, senior editor, Reason Magazine   

When in junior high, I overheard a heated debate on talk radio (the “social media” of the 1970s) about whether the elitist Trilateral Commission was controlling society. Most historians agree the yellow journalistic tactics of William Hearst and Joseph Pulitzer in their newspapers fostered the Spanish-American War. The development of the printing press exponentially spread antisemitism throughout medieval Europe. So whatever medium humans use to collect and distribute news circulates both information and disinformation. (75% of Americans now use social media.)

The internet has done much to expand human knowledge, therefore government regulation of content is a dangerous path. Concerned activists suggest instead transparency of the algorithms used and a focus on consumer protection. The escapades surrounding Elon Musk serve as a valuable prompt to Americans to scrutinize both the organizations and individuals behind statements in social media.

My parents assured me the “Trilateral Commission conspiracy” was a silly rumor — proving that consulting with family and friends is the best check against falsehoods.

Webb: When I was a journalist I was fond of a quote by John Milton, the great English poet and intellectual. I found it inspirational. In 1667, Milton wrote in “Areopagitica”: “Let her (Truth) and Falsehood grapple; who ever knew Truth put to the worse in a free and open encounter?” Milton was right for about 336 years — until social media arrived about 15 years ago.

Today, Milton’s Truth (with a capital T) doesn’t have much of a chance against the falsehoods and pervasiveness of social media — the algorithms that deliver garbage at every click, untruths going viral with no ability to stop them, bots creating millions or billions of deceptive posts sparking outrage and unhealthy bodily comparisons, along with insecurity and depression. When immense success and wealth are produced by clicks, unsavory people and businesses will do anything to generate clicks.

Government interference and censorship are not the answer. Government interference will only give more power to the political party in charge and may stifle more wholesome competition. It would be great if Musk could clean up Twitter, but I’m not hopeful.

An enormous social media issue is the damage these platforms have done to the self-images and mental health of young people. Are reforms needed via legislation and family screen-time rules?

Pignanelli: A conclusion social media harms adolescents drives whether sponsoring companies will be required to limit access by age. To do so effectively will mandate companies to obtain deep personal data on everyone in order to decipher who is a minor. That begs the question of forcing social media companies into such a situation.

Because this is a technology dilemma, solutions teem in technology. A number of apps exist to help parents monitor content and accessibility. Requiring government or corporations to intrude on personal lives is not the answer.

Webb: Used properly and sparingly, social media and other tech platforms can be useful for purposes like communicating with family and real friends and supporting business objectives such as promoting good products.

I’ve spent plenty of time on YouTube learning how to connect a posthole digger to a 3-point hitch on a tractor, or how to build an ATV bridge across a creek. But it takes immense self-discipline to stick to the positive aspects of social media and not get distracted by — and addicted to — the garbage.

The good, unfortunately, is dwarfed by the worship of beautiful bodies, the nasty bickering, the outright political falsehoods and conspiracy theories. Social media addictions too often replace real relationships, people thinking they can find fulfillment following the lives and fashions of the Kardashians. The most popular “influencers” are those who dare show the most skin in TikTok and Instagram posts or promote the craziest conspiracies.

We’re not going to be able to regulate away the damage these platforms do to young people and others. The genie is out of the bottle and government can’t do much more than apply a few bandages. It comes down to families and individuals establishing standards, limiting screen time and filling time with real and more wholesome activities.

Should we allow such incredible communications and political power to be concentrated in the hands of a few social media companies and their owners?

Pignanelli: Constructing regulations just to keep companies from “being big” is destructive and pointless, as our economy is constantly changing the playing field. Indeed, just in the last year the power of Facebook and Twitter has diminished. As American families search for alternate means to garner information, the entities that supply such that will grow, tumble and evolve.

Webb: It’s a very difficult dilemma. The algorithms control the flow of information and those who create the algorithms wield immense power. But government censorship and interference would make things worse.

Can fewer Democrats still be effective? What forces influence lawmakers? Your legislative questions, answered

A healthy legislature mirrors its constituents — which means we won’t all agree with everything, but we can all agree on something

By Frank Pignanelli & LaVarr Webb

The Utah 2023 General Legislative Session commences Tuesday. Your columnists have a combined 85 years of experience monitoring, analyzing, lobbying (and with Frank, a decade of public service to) this annual convocation. In other words, we’re old as dirt. We’re compelled, as usual, to offer our geriatric insights and prognostications.

Utah legislators will be facing a broad array of issues, including saving the Great Salt Lake, distributing a massive budget surplus, tax cuts, education and contemporary social issues. What will be the major themes and why?

Pignanelli: “Legislators represent people, not trees or acres. Legislators are elected by voters, not farms or cities or economic interests.” ― Chief Justice Earl Warren  

A significant number and diverse quality of citizens frequently engage in harsh critiques of legislators. These strong emotions erupt because the Utah Legislature is a pure form of representative democracy. Lawmakers’ actions are influenced from special interest groups, lobbyists, social media and — overwhelmingly — their constituents. Thus, legislative proceedings can be a rollercoaster ride. Yet, these dynamics are fundamental and necessary to a robust republic. Authoritarian regimes are devoid of such inconveniences.

State officials are reaping the benefits of educating residents on the Great Salt Lake’s potential extinction. Voters support mitigation to this disaster through massive funding of various programs. Utahns always prioritize public education and substantive additional infusions are expected. Strong organizations are pushing for scholarship or voucher programs for alternative schools and heated deliberations on this topic are predicted. Although controversial, there are pressures to clarify new abortion restrictions and prohibit transgender operations for minors that will garner attention.

A major theme for legislative leaders is an efficient Legislature addressing tax cuts, water shortages, growth, public education and cultural concerns with conservative principles. Readers can expect the usual push against the federal government and progressive policies, but especially in legislation targeting Environmental Social Governance (ESG) investment policies.

The Legislature is a mirror of who elected them. Therefore, by adjournment every Utah voter will both appreciate and dislike the results — another sign of a healthy democracy.

Webb: Lawmakers have an ambitious agenda. Here’s my advice: Go forward with school choice, but do it wisely so the program provides a net financial benefit to public schools, where the vast majority of Utah children will always be educated. House Majority Leader Mike Schultz told me that’s the plan. Students who move to private schools will leave a large chunk of their per pupil funding in the public system. That, combined with a possible $6,000 raise for teachers, will leave public schools in better shape than previously.

Be smart with tax cuts. Don’t erode the tax base or you’ll regret it in the next economic downturn. Keep tax rates low, but the base broad. Look for ways to eliminate tax incentives, as proposed by Rep. Kay Christofferson. Continue the wise practice of spending surplus money on one-time, generational investments like infrastructure that will benefit our children and grandchildren. It makes sense to set aside surplus money to retire state debt.  

The focus on water makes great sense. Water conservation and development will benefit future generations. The era of taking water for granted is over forever.

What are the internal and external forces that will be exerted on lawmakers during the decision-making process?

Pignanelli: Despite the contentions of contrarians, legislators value communications from their constituents. But judgements are also shaped by the current political, economic and social forces. Nagging concerns are percolating that the economy may flatline, which could limit new ongoing expenditures. National organizations on either side of controversial social issues will be engaged. Especially effective will be those local activists in both parties that capture the attention of their representatives.

Webb: Lawmakers must be responsive to their constituents and to ideological activists, while keeping an eye on the next election. Happily, the Legislature enjoys a fairly high approval rating, providing some political capital to be spent, and is led by sensible people. There will always be crazy bills and speeches, but in the end common sense will prevail (mostly).

Democrats have reduced numbers this year, so how will they articulate their positions with effectiveness?

Pignanelli: Shrewd Democrats understand the balance they must maintain of an aggressive, loyal opposition without antagonizing independents and moderate Republicans. Articulating positions attractive to the mainstream will require the same discipline for Republicans — ignoring the extreme forces within their party.

Webb: Republicans rule the Legislature, but they play nice with Democrats — except when they don’t. Democrats will have opportunities to sponsor important bipartisan legislation, but won’t make progress with liberal causes. 

What’s in the forecast for 2023 politics?

The 2024 presidential posturing has already begun, and several Utah politicians are preparing for reelection campaigns

By Frank Pignanelli & LaVarr Webb

2023 is an off-election year featuring municipal races and plenty of posturing for the big 2024 presidential year. We note what to watch for and make a few predictions. Next week we take a look at the upcoming legislative session.

Prospective candidates for major 2024 races will likely announce their intentions this year. Will Gov. Spencer Cox, U.S. Sen. Mitt Romney and President Joe Biden seek reelection? How will the national and local parties adjust to the post-midterm environment?

Pignanelli: “Trump is certainly not who he used to be.” — Mike Dennehy, GOP consultant 

Most Americans are struggling through their New Year’s resolutions. We will soon discover if political leaders are adhering to theirs. Of course, this would mean that Republicans move away from election deniers, allegiance to former President Donald Trump, crazy conspiracy theories and towards economic, immigration and foreign policy solutions. Democrats should be veering away from ultra-progressive policies and extreme cultural positions that anger mainstream voters.

In this new environment and possessing strong approval ratings, Cox will file for reelection. Romney is a flag bearer for his expanding wing of the party and seeks re-election. Had Democrats suffered a beating last November, Biden would be pushed aside. But after the surprising results, party kingpins are now behind him and he runs.

2023 will be critical because voters expressed desires for more substance and less extremist rhetoric from either side. As usual, whoever follows their New Year’s resolutions will benefit from the discipline.

Webb: 2023 is a big political year. Major campaign events happen early in 2024, so 2023 will be critical for candidates to position themselves. Cox will certainly run in 2024 and I predict that Romney will as well. Biden is giving every indication he will run, but that could easily change. I personally hope Biden will not run. He is too old, too frail. It’s time to turn the presidential election over to a younger generation of candidates.

Unfortunately, Trump is too arrogant and selfish to be willing to walk away. He will hurt Republican prospects in 2024 and it won’t end well for him. He will either be defeated in the GOP primary, or will be defeated later by the eventual Democratic candidate.

In general, going into 2023 I believe more Americans are aligned with traditional conservative/Republican values than liberal/Democratic values. However, nationally, the Republicans are so divided, so much in disarray, that 2023 and 2024 are going to be difficult years for them. The uncompromising, unreasonable Trump wing of the party will stymie progress and hurt other Republicans. Nationally, Republicans are perfecting the art of the circular firing squad, as demonstrated by the battle for the House speakership.

Thankfully, Utah Republicans are a lot more sensible.

Some major Utah mayoral races will be featured this year. What are the prospects for Utah’s big city mayors? What are the likely issues?

Pignanelli: Utah will continue to expand in population and economic vitality for many years. This brings benefits and concerns that underly the election issues for mayoral and city council candidates. Obviously, the race to receive the most attention is the reelection campaign of Salt Lake City Mayor Erin Mendenhall. Currently, former Mayor Rocky Anderson is the announced challenger and there may be others. Anderson hit the ground with a press conference, billboards and fundraisers. Mendenhall is quietly securing her support with personal contact outreach, combined with multiple announcements of credible achievements in her toil to solve homelessness.

Utah is blessed with other effective mayors and politicos will be watching their reelection efforts. These include Millcreek (Jeff Silvestrini), Ogden (Mike Caldwell), West Jordan (Dirk Burton), Layton (Joy Petro). 

Webb: Utah’s municipal election this year will feature hundreds of city council races in most cities, and a handful of mayoral races, Salt Lake City being the biggest prize. Salt Lake City is a liberal island in a conservative ocean resulting in some SLC mayors fighting with the Legislature and governor. But Mendenhall seems to have figured out how to get along, even while championing liberal causes. That bodes well for her reelection. Rocky Anderson has significant support, but I doubt city residents want to return to the days of contentious political battles. 

Will a divided Congress accomplish anything, or will it mostly be bogged down in partisan politics?

Pignanelli: After the confusion surrounding the speaker’s election is resolved, the Republican Conference will need to focus on a strategy that appeals to voters in anticipation of 2024 beyond investigations (i.e. Hunter Biden) and impeachment hearings on cabinet members. This will compel efforts regarding the economy, energy and immigration. Last year, the Senate achieved some important bipartisan achievements, which could happen in 2023 while pressuring the House for accommodations.

Webb: When Democrats controlled the House, they were reasonably disciplined under the iron fist of Speaker Nancy Pelosi. Republicans are a disorderly mess as they take over. Congress is not only divided, it’s dysfunctional. 

What political lessons did we learn in 2022?

Review some of the lessons our politicians learned this year — to their benefit or downfall: Don’t put it in writing. Get your dang signatures. If you believe it, then stick to it

By Frank Pignanelli & LaVarr Webb

Pignanelli & Webb: “The 2022 lesson: Voters who trust elections are more likely to vote.” — The New York Times  

As is traditional every year’s end, the news media are feeding Americans a stream of 2022 highlights and predictions for 2023. But your columnists possess greater experience and more common sense than most of those younger, beautiful talking heads. (In other words, we are a lot older and uglier.)

So we hereby offer our 2022 political lesson nuggets, providing insight for politicos in the future.

Don’t put it in writing. Text messages are the newest form of written correspondence. So even if the very powerful chief of staff of the president of the United States asks you to offer hypotheticals regarding constitutional provisions related to presidential election procedures, kindly but firmly refuse. Some of Sen. Mike Lee’s text messages to White House officials were likely academic musings. But he should have shared them through the antiquated technology of a telephone call, or the much-tested failsafe method of in-person conversation.

Nothing beats basic retail politics. In the 2020 legislative session, GOP Sen. Dan Thatcher voted against legislation limiting transgender boys’ participation in high school sports. Everyone (and we mean everyone) assumed he was dead politically, especially running in a new and even more conservative Senate district. Thatcher was not daunted, and he visited every Republican delegate to explain his rationale in a personal conversation. He not only survived the convention, but emerged as the sole nominee, besting several challengers. Regardless of one’s opinion on the bill, it is refreshing to know that courage and shoe leather mean something in the 21st century.

Get your dang signatures. We’ve said this before … and will say it again. The delegate/convention process is flawed and hard to predict, even for the best of politicians. Rep. John Curtis barely survived the convention. Popular GOP legislator Stephen Handy did not. They, along with others, are textbook examples of why it is political misfeasance to avoid this exercise.

Get your dang signatures — Part 2. The unpredictable nature of delegates does not just reside with Republicans. Attendees at the State Democratic Convention refused to nominate a fine candidate — Kael Weston — in order to back independent Evan McMullin. Weston could have avoided this dismissal with signatures. Equally important, Democrats would have avoided the foolishness of signaling to Utah voters that they lacked confidence in their message and party by rejecting a Democratic candidate to lead the ticket.

Candidate quality really matters. Being endorsed by Donald Trump got a lot of bad Republican candidates nominated, who then lost in the general election. And a number of quality candidates opposed by Trump still won. In 2024, Trump himself will be the bad candidate. He may win the GOP nomination, but he can’t win the general election.

Nothing beats retail politics — Part 2. Salt Lake County Council member Richard Snelgrove is a popular, successful businessman and political moderate who was well-liked on both sides the political spectrum. But lawmaker Suzanne Harrison developed a strong message and worked all corners of the county to defeat Snelgrove. She documented that in politics nothing can be taken for granted by anyone whether you are an incumbent or a longshot contender.

If you believe it then stick to it. Gov. Spencer Cox and U.S. Sen. Mitt Romney have endured much criticism from their own party. Activists are frustrated with their moderate stances on some issues. Yet, both never wavered from articulating personal beliefs rooted in faith and conviction. Cox is now enjoying high approval ratings. Romney polls are less positive but he still commands respect and remains a viable contender in 2024. 

Negative advertising does work, unfortunately. Every year, the news media notes that Utahns despise attack commercials, but concede they do move the electoral needle. We suggest much of this dilemma exists because of a vacuum of quality positive ads or humorous comparison advertisements. In other words, the nasty ads persuade because there is a void of anything else.

Independent campaigns rarely succeed. The electoral math showed that independents McMullin and Handy had reasonable chances of winning. But voters, at the end, almost always come home to their political parties and their nominees. 

Learn from history. History documents that stridently partisan political actions produce limited results. The Senate Watergate hearings were viewed as fair and therefore were credible and impactful. The impeachment proceedings against Clinton were deemed biased and Republicans suffered in the next midterm elections. Despite all the interesting results, the Trump impeachments and the January 6 Commission are correctly painted as partisan attacks and therefore little may result.

Trust voters and our system. In past elections, Trump, many of his acolytes and even some Democrats have spread fear that democracy and fair elections were in peril. These nonsensical allegations were dismissed by most Americans, especially younger citizens, who turned out in strong numbers to vote. In Utah, the elections demonstrated once again that our state conducts a quality balloting process. Apparently, Americans and Utahns have greater respect for the strength of the republic than do many of their leaders. All should treasure this collective virtue.

Santa is coming ... so what did politicians wish for?

If you’ve ever wondered what your politicians are asking from Santa for Christmas, look no further for the answers

By Frank Pignanelli & LaVarr Webb

We understand Santa and his reindeer are excited they can deliver gifts this year without having to wear masks or practice social distancing. They remain worried, however, about criticism from the Dark Sky movement over light pollution from Rudolph’s nose. And with Title 42 remaining in place thanks to Chief Justice John Roberts, they’re deploying evasive sleigh-flying techniques while crossing the border.

Still, our sources confirm that Santa will arrive as usual. So, as a service to readers, we unleashed AI spy technology to hack into North Pole social media accounts revealing the Christmas wish lists of politicians and others.

Gov. Spencer Cox: “Thanks for all the early snow. But please bring a lot more. We need to fill up the Great Salt Lake and meet our basic needs. And more moisture will shut up all those comedians making fun of my ‘Pray for water’ strategy.”

Former President Donald Trump: “Please deliver more lawyers who will work without pay to defend me. I can’t make enough selling digital superhero tokens.”

President Joseph Biden: “Please make sure Trump stays in the presidential race. He’s my best chance to win reelection in 2024.”

Lt. Gov. Deidre Henderson: “Santa, thank you for a wonderful legislative audit documenting the fair and fraud-free election system in Utah. Please deliver copies of that audit to all the election deniers who see nefarious activity behind every tree and rock.”

Left wing “woke” progressives: “Santa is still around? That example of self-entitled white privilege should be canceled immediately. He exploits smaller humans and misogynistically ignores his spouse. Forcing reindeer to fly on cold nights is abominable and he glorifies the consumption of sugary foods contributing to world obesity.”

Right wing guardians of liberty: “We are outraged Santa is still around. Various movie and television outlets owned by corporate fake media promote his socialist gift-giving. His invasion of privacy is disgraceful in making lists of who is naughty or nice, and jumping into everyone’s fireplace.

U.S. House Republican congressional leadership: “Please deliver some common sense to our caucus members in choosing a new speaker and avoiding senseless investigations next session.”

U.S. House Democratic congressional leadership: “Thank you for delivering utter confusion into the narrow GOP majority as they fight over who should be speaker. Please keep our own chaos out of sight.”

Utah House Speaker Brad Wilson: “I am grateful for our recent election victories. But I am asking Santa to ensure members of my caucus don’t get any wild ideas watching the silliness among Republicans in the speaker’s election in the U.S. House.

Utah Senate President Stuart Adams: “In the Utah Senate, we rise above all rabble-rousing and in-fighting. So, we just modestly ask for wisdom in spending the incredible amount of money we have available.”

Attorney General Sean Reyes: “I’m hoping that Santa delivers more opportunities for me to sue the Biden Administration and lots of visibility before the U.S. Senate race in 2024.”

State Treasurer Marlo Oaks: “I’ve been a good boy doing my part fighting the left wing agenda by pulling state money out of environmental, social and governance (ESG) investments. Please deliver the state from any more of these do-gooder funds.”

Sen. Mike Lee: “Santa, for the holidays please find someone else to lead any effort to shut down the government. Maybe Ted or Rand. I made my point and got plenty of grief.”

Sen. Mitt Romney: “Please have Trump issue another series of superhero NFT digital trading cards. The fallout from this nonsense helps me with those who think I’ve been too hard on the guy.”

Congressman Chris Stewart: “Chairmanship of the House Intelligence Committee would be a nice gift. Asking again. In return, I will always clear and protect the airways from nefarious foreign interventions on Dec. 24-25 to protect your late-night global excursions.”

National Democrats: “Let Kyrsten Sinema have her fun. But please no more defections.”

National Republicans: “Santa, we always ask for a strong economy. But not too strong; we need to blame Biden for something.”

Salt Lake City Mayor Erin Mendenhall: “I have been very nice this year — especially to Republicans. So I appreciate their efforts to help me with the homeless population. Please keep delivering that generosity.”

Mayoral candidate Rocky Anderson: “Please deliver me just one more chance to tax those Davis County Republicans for driving into Salt Lake City.”

Salt Lake County Mayor Jenny Wilson: “Christmas came early with elimination of that veto-proof Republican council majority. Now can you work your magic with the Legislature?”

Congressman John Curtis: “Santa, nothing too difficult — just more visibility for my Conservative Climate Caucus.”

Congressman Burgess Owens: “Santa, I appreciate my new district boundaries. What I really want is an opportunity to tell football stories instead of all this political stuff.”

Congressman Blake Moore: “Santa, I keep hearing whispers about the powerful Ways and Means Committee. It’s not so much to ask.”

All Utahns: “Santa, please deliver extraordinary snow this winter so we can fulfill the basic needs of our lives — water parks, golf courses, perfectly manicured lawns, clean cars, washing down driveways, water skiing, snow skiing, swimming pools, etc.”

Deseret News: Happy Holidays to our readers — especially those masochists who endure Pignanelli & Webb every week.

Utah’s bounteous budget plans — how likely are they to pass?

Gov. Spencer Cox has released his recommendations for the state budget

By Frank Pignanelli & LaVarr Webb

Utah’s economy — and its taxpayers — are generating massive amounts of tax revenue for state government. That’s good for Gov. Spencer Cox and Utah legislators who get to spend it. Cox has now released his recommendations for his $28 billion budget — the largest in Utah history. We take a look.

Cox’s proposed budget includes a $6,000 compensation increase for every public school teacher in the state, and $1 billion for a variety of tax cuts. Are these and his other proposals wise expenditures considering the possibility of slowing economic growth in the coming year?

Pignanelli: “Reviewing a government budget is much like going through the attic in an old home.” — Rick Scott  

Cox provided a technical budget document but broadcast implied signals to legislators, special interest groups and the media. The governor is prioritizing public education, tax cuts, water management, housing and rural development. These are valid concentrations as Utahns care for their schools, and slightly lowering the income tax rate does maintain competitiveness while allowing taxpayers to keep a little extra in paychecks.

In my first session as a legislator (about the late Bronze Age) Utah was amid a disastrous economic crisis without relief from the federal government. This experience made me a firm believer in a rainy-day fund for such contingencies. Concerns of a future emergency raise the necessary question of whether the governor’s proposed one-time rebate of taxes to citizens is better allocated towards the savings account.

The governor has successfully set the tone for the next session with direct and inferred communications.

Webb: For an old guy like me, the amount of money available for spending is mind-boggling. I remember too well the hard days of budget cuts and scraping together every penny. Today’s budget is almost an embarrassment of riches. But it is a reflection of good governance that has helped enable a very strong, diversified economy.

And Gov. Cox has budgeted wisely. Nothing is more important to Utah’s future than excellent public education, so it’s appropriate to invest in teacher salaries. We need the best and brightest teaching, mentoring and motivating our young people. Money targeted for water conservation, domestic violence, mental health, housing and homelessness and rural initiatives are all deserved expenditures.

Cox has also been careful to spend a lot of money for one-time purposes so it will be available in the future if the economy goes bad. Substantial debt reduction is a great way to save money for the future. And a big chunk of the governor’s tax relief is in the form of a rebate, meaning it won’t require ongoing money. Utah’s taxes are already low on a historical basis. We don’t need massive tax cuts. Better to invest in one-time infrastructure projects that will further build Utah’s economy and create jobs.

Because the national economy is tenuous right now, it’s important to be conservative. Despite the large numbers, this is a reasonably conservative budget. 

How are Utah’s 104 state legislators likely to react to the governor’s budget recommendations?

Pignanelli: For almost three decades, the Legislature developed its own budget, with occasional reference to the governor. By detailing exact amounts for teacher salary increases and tax cuts, the governor is drawing a line. As usual, legislators will develop their own budget, but next year has a critical difference.

Many lawmakers want to establish a scholarship or vouchers program as an alternative to public education. Cox has repeatedly stated that he will not support such an effort unless teachers are adequately compensated. Thus, his budget address provides these parameters. Lawmakers will tweak his tax cuts and recommendations for water management. Many ancillary proposals (i.e. funding bus fares for a year) are unlikely to survive. As a former lawmaker and lieutenant governor, Cox has a good handle of which objectives are needed and those that need to be jettisoned.

Webb: Lawmakers and their excellent staff have been scrutinizing the budget numbers for many months and they will improve on the governor’s budget, although most of the governor’s priorities will survive. Lawmakers will also be very careful to use large amounts of money for one-time purposes, preserving revenue for the future to prepare for economic decline.

According to a recent Deseret News/Hinckley Institute of Politics poll, 63% of Utah voters give Cox a positive approval rating. Will that help him achieve his priorities in the Legislature? 

Pignanelli: In the last year Cox’s veto was overridden by the Legislature, the GOP party chair attacked him on national television and his administration was booed at the convention. Yet, he is enjoying very high approval ratings, which screams volumes about his personality and performance. Therefore, he enters the legislative session in a strong position to prevail.

Webb: The governor enjoys substantial political capital, and that’s always a great asset in a political fight. But the Legislature has a way of keeping high-flying governors humble. Lawmakers will legislate as they wish, but they and the governor are all mainstream politicians. The principals on both sides talk frequently and have good relationships. Legislators know they need the governor’s signature on their bills. In other words, it will be a standoff with sensible compromise.

Are perceived ‘threats to democracy’ real or imagined?

Concerns about the Constitution have existed since its birth. Now is not the time to throw it out

By Frank Pignanelli & LaVarr Webb

A growing number of national politicians, academics and journalists are complaining more frequently that the U.S. Constitution is “undemocratic” and even a “threat to democracy” because it includes such provisions as giving each state, no matter its population, two U.S. senators. They lament the fact that presidents are not elected by popular vote, but instead by the Electoral College, which doesn’t always reflect the majority vote. And because the “undemocratic” Senate confirms federal judges, small states even have disproportionate influence in the judicial system. Thus, they say, all three branches of the federal government are undemocratic and constitutional change is needed. We consider these weighty matters.

It is true that our nation’s founders did not create a pure democracy with perfectly equal representation, proportionate to population. Sparsely populated states have outsized clout in the U.S. Senate and in presidential elections through the Electoral College. One New York Times columnist recently wrote that the greatest long-term threat to democracy in our nation “is, in fact, the Constitution.” He quoted a noted legal scholar who said, “... the Constitution may be the enemy of the democracy it supposedly sustains.” Should the Constitution be amended to enable a true mass democracy?

Pignanelli: “Every constitution, then, and every law, naturally expires at the end of 19 years. If it be enforced longer, it is an act of force and not of right.” — Thomas Jefferson    

Serious concerns with the Constitution have existed since inception. Even many of our brave ancestors who jeopardized their lives and fortunes for independence argued against adopting the document. Yet, as the charter lost many of the initial warts (i.e. slavery, women’s suffrage, etc.) it endured tremendous crises including invasion, a Civil War, Depression and politicians’ nefarious actions.

The founders wanted democracy but with protections to prevent too much power in the hands of an overbearing majority or an unrepresentative minority. This explains the checks and balances that often frustrate the hopes for a more efficient, but possibly dangerous, process.

For 235 years, the Constitution has been an embodiment of our natural rights and liberties. Academics and activists may ponder radical changes or wholesale rejecti

on, but do not offer a superior substitute for one of the world’s oldest democracies. Affection for the union outweighs any desire for amendments.

Thankfully, Jefferson was wrong, and our Constitution continues to thrive.

Webb: The greatest threat to our democratic republic isn’t the Constitution. It’s the left-wing politicians, pundits and academics who would throw out foundational constitutional provisions and create a pure democracy — another name for mob rule. It drives some elitists crazy that the population centers on both coasts and in the big cities don’t completely control politics in this country.

Remember, it was the states that created the federal government, not the other way around. The founders very intentionally created a governance structure that recognized the importance of states and gave each state special status. Today we have 50 very different states. Presidential candidates must recognize them as unique entities. They can’t just campaign to masses of people. The Senate makeup ensures that the small states are not marginalized in the congressional process.

Without these constitutional provisions that the elites call “undemocratic,” politicians wouldn’t care about state interests or state boundaries. They would simply appeal to large population centers. Large states would have multiple senators and small states would be crushed.

Another writer recently noted that the power to set government policy is increasingly disconnected from majority public opinion. He referred to the fact that Donald Trump, who lost the popular vote, appointed three Supreme Court justices, who were then confirmed by the “undemocratic” U.S. Senate, producing a conservative-majority court. Why did the nation’s founders create a governance structure where political power and voice is not distributed evenly on a per-capita basis?

Pignanelli: Americans’ complaints towards the Supreme Court never cease. Recent examples include conservative hatred of the Warren Court and left-wing frustration with the current panel. Liberal presidents and senators also deliver left wing justices. The pendulum swings back and forth.

Thus, Americans understand the need for this deliberative body and will not change the structure.

Webb: Most of the time, public policy should align fairly closely with public opinion. Most of the time, the popular vote should determine presidential election winners. But not always. The founders talked extensively about how passions of the moment can overwhelm good long-term public policy. Majority public opinion can sometimes be impetuous, even reckless. It needs to be tempered by underlying laws, constitutional provisions and processes that prevent thoughtless action.   

Donald Trump recently called for the “termination of all rules, regulations, and articles, even those found in the Constitution” related to elections. Is he also a threat to democracy?

Pignanelli: Americans understand Trump won and lost in accordance with constitutional provisions. Thus, citizens will reject his irresponsible demands to “terminate” our republic.

Webb: It was an exceptionally dumb thing to say even by Trump’s standards. He quickly tried to walk it back. He was rightly lashed by both Republicans and Democrats. But there is a fair amount of hypocrisy among those who blast Trump but want to change the Constitution themselves to benefit politically.

What are your politicians grateful for this season?

If local and national politicians were around your Thanksgiving table, this is what they would be grateful for

By Frank Pignanelli & LaVarr Webb

Pignanelli & Webb: Well, it is Thanksgiving weekend, and the only political controversy is who gets the last piece of pumpkin pie. Although it is a time for relaxation with our families, your columnists have been busy using drone technology to eavesdrop on conversations about what people appreciate during this holiday of gratitude. Here’s what we learned:

Every man, woman and child: We are extremely grateful that we can now watch TV and enjoy all those pharmaceutical and automobile advertisements, instead of the constant barrage of negative advertising from the Lee and McMullin campaigns and PACs that supported them.

All Utahns: We are truly blessed to be regularly reminded that a small group of hard-working individuals — who were dismissed by elitists — have demonstrated teamwork, humility and perseverance to overcome difficult obstacles. We are referring of course to our local heroes, the new Utah Jazz (first place in Western Conference!).

Utah parents: We are grateful that Taylor Swift is ignoring Utah on her concert tour, so we don’t feel any pressure to buy tickets for our teens and endure all that hassle.

National pollsters, campaign experts, political wise men, media pundits: We are grateful Americans have a short attention span and will likely forget that we once again missed on our predictions and expectations this political season.

National news media: We are grateful for former President Donald Trump and his return to the national spotlight. He is a ratings machine, giving us daily stories and more advertising revenue. His new presidential bid will keep viewership and readership high among those who both love him and hate him.

National Democratic leaders: We are grateful to Trump and his army of election deniers. Without them this would have been an awful election year.

National Republican leaders: We are grateful to Trump and his army of election deniers. Because of the losses they caused, we can now purge them from our ranks and move on to new leaders.

Advertising agencies, newspapers, TV and radio stations, graphic artists: We are deeply grateful for the cornucopia of blessings our democracy delivers, especially a Supreme Court that reaffirms First Amendment rights of unlimited spending by super PACs and eager billionaires. May they prosper and raise ever more dollars to spend with us on their right-wing and left-wing causes.

Salt Lake County Mayor Jenny Wilson: I am grateful for Suzanne Harrison’s election to the County Council. Thank goodness the Council is no longer veto proof.

State Auditor John Dougall: I congratulate all my fellow politicians in their electoral successes. But I’m thankful none of them broke my record for the highest number of votes collected in a statewide race.

Gov. Spencer Cox: I share the gratitude of many that elections are over along with the unrelenting pressure for fundraising. Now it is easier for me to solicit support for my gala next week.

Lt. Gov. Deidre Henderson: I am grateful that once again Utah elections are near perfect. Even hard-core election deniers are muted.

Congressman John Curtis: I’m grateful the election is over because now I can get back to wearing my crazy socks.

Congressman Chris Stewart: I am thankful that American democracy triumphed and a Republican majority controls Congress. I now hear that wonderful word, “chairman.”

Congressman Burgess Owens: I appreciate the expressions of confidence made by the voters, and that they didn’t care I blew off the debate.

Congressman Blake Moore: I am grateful for my diplomatic experience because it is going to be needed inside the new, rowdy, Republican Caucus.

Salt Lake City Mayor Erin Mendenhall: I am grateful for the generally peaceful relations between my office and the City Council, the Legislature, the governor and pretty much everyone else in the state. Just what I need for my upcoming election in 2023.

Senate President Stuart Adams and House Speaker Brad Wilson: We are grateful for the Utah economy … and for the munificent surplus we will have next session.

Salt Lake Chamber President Derek Miller: I am grateful for hard-working Utahns, visionary politicians, fair regulators, and creative business leaders that make this state so attractive for companies to move their operations. I just hope they bring water with them.

Jason Perry, moderator, Hinckley Report: Always grateful that Utah leaders make local politics — and my show — interesting.

Pignanelli & Webb: We’re grateful that the elections are over, the holidays are here, and that the politicians we annoy have a sense of humor — at least most of them!