Do these proposed tax cuts favor the rich or poor?

The legislature is proposing a state income tax rate reduction, a constitutional amendment to require income tax be used for education and removal of the food sales tax

By Frank Pignanelli & LaVarr Webb

No legislative session would be complete without deliberations on taxes. Lawmakers are now considering tax cuts and tax realignment. We’ve paid taxes for so long we’re professionals at it, so we offer our two cents (wish it were only that much ...).

A state income tax rate reduction from 4.85% to 4.65% is likely to pass. Is this necessary? Also, key lawmakers want to amend the Utah Constitution to remove the earmark requiring income taxes to be spent on education and some social services — with a sweetener. If voters approve the amendment, the state portion of the sales tax on food will be removed. Why is the Legislature touching this controversial topic again?

Pignanelli: “In levying taxes and in shearing sheep it is well to stop when you get down to the skin.” — Austin O’Malley

For decades, I fielded inquiries questioning legislative rationale of reducing some tax or fee. In response I remind these otherwise intelligent people that local lawmakers reflect a predominant conservative attitude that subscribe to lowest possible revenue intake. Officials also worry a series of surpluses left unchecked will increase state government beyond a normal rate which will be problematic in lean years. Of course, the historical observation that no person lost an election by voting for a tax decrease is relevant.

LaVarr and I remember the late 1980s when Utah was the only state suffering a deep recession with a devastated environment for jobs. Thus, efforts to keep the tax rate competitive with surrounding jurisdictions to maintain and recruit businesses will keep employment strong.

The income tax dedication to public education appropriately haunts the Legislature. If the Legislature attempts another remedy through a constitutional amendment, lessons from prior activities will be helpful. Strong messaging reflecting the popular perceptions, through an aggressive outreach campaign to voters is needed to explain the rationale.

Fortunately, many hot button issues were resolved early in the session to allow intense debate on tax issues that will assure the electorate any results are not last-minute exercises.

Webb: There’s a lot to unpack here. First, Utah already has relatively low taxes that have helped produce arguably the nation’s best economy. I hate to see the tax base further eroded by permanent tax cuts in such uncertain economic times.

We are enjoying great times in Utah, but the national and international economies are far from secure. The world is a scary place right now. Inflation and interest rates remain very high, reducing economic activity and ballooning the federal debt. Tensions are elevated with China and Russia. China could cripple our economy by strategically cutting off exports and banning U.S. imports. The war in Ukraine could expand. China could invade Taiwan.

Now is the time to save and bolster Utah’s future by investing in education and putting surplus dollars into “working rainy day funds” by spending on infrastructure and other one-time projects.

I believe Utah citizens would rather have top-in-the-nation education and an outstanding transportation system than have their taxes cut by an amount barely noticeable.

I support a constitutional amendment providing more flexibility in the use of income tax revenue. But instead of eliminating the state tax on food and eroding the tax base, we should send low-income people a check amounting to more than they would pay in food sales tax. That provides the help where it’s needed. Wealthy people don’t need a tax cut on food purchases.

Democrats and some Republicans are making accusations that the various proposed tax policies benefit the wealthy and harm the poor? What is the reality?

Pignanelli: There was an easy formula when I served in the Legislature: income taxes are progressive and fair; sales taxes are regressive and bad. Unfortunately, such simplicity does not exist today as questions regarding who is benefiting are not easily answered. For example, a recent study by the Utah Taxpayers Association alleges that decreasing the sales tax on food favors the wealthy. Added into the mix are proposals to help those with fixed or lower income by increasing threshold exemptions on taxing Social Security and increasing the earned income tax credit. A potpourri of reductions may be the safest route.

Webb: According to the Legislature, the income tax reduction would cut taxes for low-income households by 22%; middle-income households by 6%, and high-income households by 4%. That seems fair. It’s true that higher income people might see more relief in actual dollars. But that’s because they pay a whole lot more in taxes overall.

In his budget address, Gov. Spencer Cox proposed a one-time rebate to be distributed from the surplus to all Utahns. Is that still on the table?

Pignanelli: The proposal is on the menu but unlikely to be selected. These resources will be directed towards other targets.

Webb: I like the governor’s proposal. In such uncertain times, a one-time rebate is a better way to provide tax relief than permanent cuts. Taxpayers get some benefit this year, but the money is available in future years if needed to maintain education and other critical services. A rebate buys time to see how the economy performs.

Does Utah need these election reforms?

Over the last several election cycles, many of our current mainstream political leaders would have been defeated in convention had they been at the mercy of a relative handful of county and state convention delegates

Frank Pignanelli & LaVarr Webb

More than two dozen bills have been filed or requested in the current legislative session making changes to Utah’s election laws. We review this perennial obsession by politicos.

This is the 10th legislative session in which lawmakers have proposed laws regarding the delegate/convention system and primary elections. Why does this issue continue to haunt the lawmaking process? Will there ever be a resolution as to how a primary ballot is formulated?

Pignanelli: “Organizing free and fair elections is more important than the result itself.” — Fatos Nano

Through close observation and personal experience, I can attest many families endure repeated disputes with continuing hard feelings and grudges. Similar dynamics abound among Utah’s political class, especially regarding the delegate/convention system. Therefore, the Legislature frequently reiterates this ongoing debate.

I was once a solid proponent of the delegate/convention system. This holdover from the progressive era allowed candidates with limited resources (like me) the opportunity to compete. For decades, delegates were selected in homey neighborhood meetings whose participants echoed local priorities. But lifestyles have changed and the process no longer garners large participation, prompting influence by well organized special interest groups. Regardless, delegates control the fate of both parties and of many candidates — a power not easily surrendered. Legislative deliberations result.

Over time, most family quarrels dissipate. This is the likely outcome for determining Utah primary elections, but not in the immediate future.

Webb: Utah’s dual-track system for getting on the primary election ballot could use a few tweaks (see below). But it would be disastrous to force all candidates to exclusively use the old caucus/convention process. There will always be extreme elements within the Republican Party that want to do exactly that. SB54 and the Count My Vote effort produced an excellent compromise that should be maintained and strengthened.

Over the last several election cycles, many of our current mainstream political leaders would have been defeated in convention had they been at the mercy of a relative handful of county and state convention delegates. But because they had the option to gather signatures to get on the primary election ballot, they soundly defeated far-right opponents when all Republican voters had the opportunity to vote and choose their party nominees.

Next year, Sen. Mitt Romney is up for reelection. He will likely be defeated at the state convention, but has a solid chance of being renominated in a primary election. He at least deserves a chance to make his case before all Republican voters.

Our mainstream conservative governance has served the state very well. Let’s not allow more extreme elements of either party to take over the nomination process.

Several interesting concepts sponsored by Rep. Jordan Teuscher have captured the support of lawmakers. HB202 (Signature Threshold Amendments) would modify the threshold for signature petitions to the greater of existing numerical requirements or 3% of the registered voters of the qualified party in the district. HB205 (Primary Election Amendments) attempts to resolve the primary plurality issue to ensure that the nominee is supported by a majority of the voters in a primary. This is accomplished through a “contingency voting” process that utilizes the multiple choices of voters. What is driving these proposals?

Pignanelli: Teuscher is well known on Capitol Hill for intense and persuasive preparation. He did not disappoint when presenting these bills. A weird disparity does exist between legislative and school board signature thresholds, which his bill tries to remedy. As the state grows, the percentage metric becomes important.

Teuscher also documents that since 2014, 42 primary elections had more than two candidates. Among these, almost 80% of the time the winner received less than 50% of the vote (many with less than 40%). Utahns became aware of this unusual feature in 2020 when the gubernatorial and two congressional races sported four candidates. The legislation would allow voters to provide their first and second choice in a primary election. If a candidate does not receive 50%, there is an immediate reallocation of these preferences to determine the winner.

The signature gathering process is enduring growing pains, which these bills are helping to alleviate.

Webb: Yes, the signature-gathering process and multicandidate primary elections need some improvements, which Teuscher seeks to address. Any changes need to strengthen the system and make it fairer and more efficient, not sneakily undermine it.

There are several bills mandating an audit of Utah’s election process. Are these needed and why?

Pignanelli: Utah possesses the gold standard for elections. Any mandates for audits should be to maintain this treasured attribute.

Webb: Periodic audits are fine if they are fair and not too burdensome on the entity being audited. For the most part, Utah’s elections are administered efficiently and professionally. When problems occur, such as happened in Utah County a few years ago, they are promptly resolved. 

The biggest election problems occur when vote counting drags on for days and weeks after election day. Long delays produce suspicion and doubt. Any election reform ought to focus on voting efficiency and quick and accurate tabulation of results. 

Why Utah’s controversial bills are up first, not last

The legislature is prioritizing its to-do list from hardest to easiest this year

By Frank Pignanelli & LaVarr Webb

The legislature is an institution of representative democracy wherein lawmakers usually reflect the views of constituents. But this branch of government also reflects deeper political trends. We examine a few noteworthy examples.

The Legislature recently passed, by overwhelming majority, HB215 Third Substitute — Funding for Teacher Salaries and Optional Education Opportunities. In addition to providing pay raises to teachers, the legislation also establishes education savings accounts to be used for private education, online programs, home schooling, etc. This is a remarkable change from when lawmakers approved a voucher program in 2007, which was then rejected by almost two-thirds of voters in a referendum. What caused the shift? 

Pignanelli: “Nearly 90% of America’s school-aged children attend local, district-run public schools. Suddenly it’s no longer unthinkable this paradigm might be challenged.” — Robert Pondiscio  American Enterprise Institute   

History documents serious episodes of disease alter the structure and mores of society. The 1918-1919 pandemic brought us the “Roaring ’20s,” a culture very different from 10 years before. Another effect of the coronavirus pandemic is now revealed.

Closure of public schools in 2020 and 2021 fostered frustration with once revered educational institutions among many parents. Further, the enhanced use of technology and changing work patterns created reassessments of traditional structures. These emotions opened the doors for unprecedented acceptance of concepts behind HB215. (Some polls indicated over 60% of Utahns approved.)

In 2007, proponents rammed the voucher legislation through the Legislature. Conversely, proponents of the 2023 legislation were sensitive to concerns and shrewdly attached significant pay raises for teachers. Also, an educational account controlled by parents is less objectionable than vouchers that directly fund other organizations.

Bill sponsor Rep. Candice Pierucci deserves recognition as a formidable advocate with a strong command of the facts and amenable style. (Of course, she documented good judgment by marrying an Italian).

We are all happy the pandemic is behind us, yet the effects of this traumatic time will continue to offer surprises.

Webb: School choice legislation has been gaining momentum across the country for several years. Utah was actually behind many other states in allowing state funding to follow students as they and their parents choose their schools or education practices. Before this year, lawmakers had been leery of taking on the education establishment, given the big setback in 2007.  

But education choice is now more popular with the public than in the past. And this year, with a lot of money available to provide a large (and deserved) pay raise for teachers, lawmakers pulled the trigger and set aside $42 million for the program, coupled with the pay raise. The governor did not object.

So, it’s a done deal. The only way it will be overturned is if opponents undertake a very expensive and difficult initiative campaign to enact a law repealing the program.

As a big supporter of neighborhood public schools, where all my children were educated, I’m not worried that public schools will be harmed. And the pay raise will really help teachers. Don’t believe the rhetoric that it’s going to destroy public education. The vast, vast majority of Utah students will still be educated in their good neighborhood schools.

Yes, a public school will lose a little money if a student leaves for a private school, but the school also doesn’t have to educate that student. The funding issue is actually a wash and even favors public schools if they retain local funding for students who leave.

Let’s try school choice for a while. Giving parents flexibility is a good thing. 

What Utah’s top leaders revealed in their opening speeches to the legislature

Gov. Cox spoke to the youth. Speaker Wilson kept it personable. Senate President Adams focused on policy

By Frank Pignanelli & LaVarr Webb

The 2023 session of the Utah Legislature is off to a busy start. The state’s three top leaders — Gov. Spencer Cox, Senate President Stuart Adams, and House Speaker Brad Wilson — set the themes for the 45-day sprint with speeches. We take a look at their substance and effectiveness. 

The speeches outlined policy objectives for the session, but differed in tone and style. Did the three leaders boost public support for their priorities?

Pignanelli: “The task of the leader is to get people from where they are to where they have not been.” — Henry Kissinger 

Right and left wing activists, some media commentators, and other observers are criticizing the presentations of the state leaders in the first week of the session. But these critiques, usually lazy or rhetorical, miss an important dynamic. All our leading state officials, including Lt. Gov. Deidre Henderson, were engaged in confronting the most challenging issues in the last decade. The list comprises such controversies as tax reform (twice), a pandemic, severe drought, dwindling Great Salt Lake and unprecedented growth. Therefore, regardless of the details in the oratories, state leaders possess the benefit of experience in numerous political battles. This expertise is demonstrated daily in this legislative session through terms of pace and early priorities.

The three speeches were dramatically different in terms of style and presentation. The governor spoke to Utah’s youth, the House speaker provided heartwarming stories to compel his flock towards greater heights and the Senate president reminded the entire state of our greatness, with the vision for future growth. They all established markers for tax reform, restructuring water usage and providing economic and housing opportunities.

Legislative leaders were clear that education is to be restructured. While expressing support for teachers, the governor was less detailed on this topic but left room for maneuverability

Our state officials implied a common theme — they will utilize battle tested experience, personal background and vision to implement substantiative changes. They are not sitting on their laurels.

Webb: As one who has written hundreds of speeches, I honestly thought all three speeches were very good. Cox’s speech was short (only 22 minutes), very personable and full of relatable anecdotes and metaphors. He asked legislators to withhold applause until he finished, rather than seek as many applause lines as possible. Cox was very effective speaking to young people, recognizing legislators’ children and grandchildren, by name, as beneficiaries of his legislative recommendations and highlighting their legislator parents and grandparents for carrying important legislation.

Wilson used personal stories to make his points and described dilemmas and successes of real people to illustrate policy challenges. He capably outlined the big issues facing the state and steps the Legislature will take to resolve them.

Adams’ speech was a little more policy focused, but he was also personable, praising former Sen. Karen Mayne, a Democrat; thanking the Senate staff for their hard work; and acknowledging spouses of senators for their support. He also provided a short history lesson, relating part of the inspirational life of James Madison and his contributions as a “citizen legislator,” encouraging senators to serve “with that same vision.”

Will Cox play a major role in the budget and key legislation approved in the session, or be more of a bystander?

Pignanelli: Although the governor’s budget presentation articulated major differences from legislative priorities, there is an obvious interaction between the two branches on the final budget product. This is a critical time for the state especially for water resources, housing, maintaining economic viability and planning for growth. Therefore, usual differences are likely to be deferred to achieve the important objectives. Harmony is predicted.

Webb: The governor enjoys the spotlight most of the year, but the 45-day session is the Legislature’s show. The governor is wise to stay somewhat behind-the-scenes and let session dynamics play out. As a former legislator himself and veteran executive branch leader, Cox knows where the pressure points are and how he can have the most influence. He knows how and when to wield the veto threat. It would be a bad mistake to attempt to upstage the Legislature on every issue at every opportunity.

The tension and interplay between the two branches of government are healthy — just what the Founders intended. The result is better government and better policy. Remember, the Legislature’s and the governor’s priorities aren’t all that different to begin with. 

Pignanelli: Cox, in a recent presentation to the Salt Lake Chamber of Commerce, urged citizens to reach out to legislators, participate in meetings and otherwise be engaged in the process. Otherwise, as he noted, a small sliver will significantly impact policy deliberations. His analysis is irrefutable.

Webb: The Utah Legislature, by any fair measure, is very conservative, but responsibly so. Still, some right-wing legislators and citizens say legislative leadership is too liberal. That sort of criticism of a very conservative Legislature puts the radical right on the extreme fringes of society where they are best ignored.

2023 Utah Legislative Session Week 1

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.