Frank Pignanelli & LaVarr Webb: Lee is an unlikely court pick, but we speculate anyway

Across the country, Americans are experiencing an awful heat wave. And on the political weather front, passions will boil over as the Supreme Court nomination battle commences this week. We try to make sense of all the atmospherics.

Utah Sen. Mike Lee was interviewed as a potential Supreme Court nominee by President Donald Trump, who said he will announce his choice on Monday. Will Lee be nominated? And what does this mean for his career?

Pignanelli: “Markets excel at predicting horse races, election outcomes, and box-office results. But they're bad at predicting who will be the next Supreme Court nominee — which depends on the whim of the president.” — James Surowiecki

The Miss America Pageant recently announced the event will no longer include a swimsuit competition. Contestants are to be judged on talent, poise and accomplishment. Potential and actual nominees for the Supreme Court are not that lucky. They will endure scrutiny of every wart, excess and imperfection that exists on their body of work.

Because Lee can excel in the congressional equivalent of such scrutiny, his name is, and will continue to be, on a shortlist for the court. For decades, most nominees enjoyed an appellate court experience, an advantage that bumps elected officials from consideration. But Lee has overcome this deficit through authoring several books and articles that were well received in the legal community. Although his political rhetoric can sometimes be biting, these treatises are well crafted, balanced and easily read by anyone. Further, Lee is beloved inside the Federalist Society, which is guiding Trump on court matters. Yet, because of political dynamics, insiders are predicting that Trump will select an appellate court judge.

Gratefully, the junior senator does not need to sport a Speedo to prevail in a close examination. Thus, he will be at least runner-up in future contests.

Webb: A good case can be made for Lee, but it’s unlikely he’ll be nominated. Lee is the sort of committed, ideological conservative that Trump seeks for the high court, although some people say his brother, Thomas, has the better legal mind. Mike Lee’s temperament and personality are compatible with a judicial role.

As a member of the Senate club, he would have a good chance of being confirmed by his colleagues. He would certainly be savaged by liberal interest groups (as will any Trump nominee) and his Senate voting record, speeches and writings would be painstakingly scrutinized. His Mormon religion could be a factor, although Sen. Orrin Hatch and Mitt Romney have been playing at the highest levels of U.S. politics and have helped allay “Mormon” concerns.

All in all, being one of 10 or so finalists will be good for Lee’s career, and he’ll be in the mix for future appointments.

Sen. Orrin Hatch has been in the middle of every Supreme Court nomination battle for many decades. With Hatch retiring at year’s end, will Lee, also a member of the Judiciary Committee, pick up the mantle in driving the future of the court?

Pignanelli: This column regularly pokes fun at the senator’s obsession with all things constitutional. But we respect his prowess on even the most minute nuances. (He gets real excited about the commerce clause.) There are many lawyer politicians in D.C., but few with a recognized expertise that guarantees he shall be pivotal in shepherding nominees for all federal courts. Lee is expected to step into the role Hatch executed so well for decades.

Webb: It is a little poignant to see an old warrior like Hatch near the end of his career. He has been the point person on federal judgeships for many decades, pushing through the most critical judicial appointments. He will be greatly missed, especially as Senate Democrats continue to stonewall key appointments. Lee can certainly pick up the banner and carry on.

What does the appointment of a new justice mean for Utah and the elections this autumn?

Pignanelli: Americans and Utahns will soon be inundated with images of a dystopian future if Trump’s pick is approved or not approved (depending upon the special interest group paying for the message). This emotional controversy will seep deep into our local elections. Candidates need to be prepared.

Webb: If Lee is nominated and confirmed, it would obviously be great fun for Utah. Not only would a Utahn serve on the nation’s highest and most important court, but it would give Gov. Gary Herbert an appointment to the U.S. Senate.

That would set off a ripple of machinations by those hoping to be appointed and others affected. Herbert could appoint any number of people, including a community leader, a member of the House delegation, a member of the Legislature, someone on his staff — or himself. It could also spark a fight with the Republican State Central Committee, which could recommend candidates that Herbert might not like.

A Lee appointment would create political drama on many fronts.

Frank Pignanelli & LaVarr Webb: On America’s birthday, how’s the good old U.S.A. doing?

On Wednesday, we celebrate our nation’s founding. So how will Lady Liberty be feeling as she watches the fireworks over New York Harbor on America’s 242nd birthday?

We’ve recently witnessed the best and the worst. Utah citizens went peacefully to the polls last Tuesday to end a spirited, but civil, primary election. But at the national level, political discourse has sunk into the gutter, with harsh rhetoric, political harassment and threats, and rampant incivility. These are weighty matters for political hacks like us to explore.

What is the state of America — and her psyche — as we celebrate the July 4 holiday? Are these the best of times, or the worst of times? Are we making progress or regressing?

Pignanelli: “I do not look upon these United States as a finished product. We are still in the making.” — Franklin D. Roosevelt

The newest fitness trend is high intensity interval training (I'm an ardent disciple), which delivers better results in less time by using high technology and arduous routines to push limits. Much grunting and pain for gain.

America is in the middle of a high intensity workout. Longtime societal mores are frequently challenged as traditional institutions are working at maximum levels to adapt to changing demographics, an evolving economy and flood of information through the web. Americans demand elected officials and business leaders fulfill promises and extract vengeance if denied.

This is exhausting, but results are positive. The #MeToo movement is transformative. Our entrepreneurial spirit is strong. Slurs against minority citizens are not tolerated by an overwhelming majority of Americans. Fundamental constitutional principles are beloved and intensely protected.

Recent controversies are perplexing, but our great nation has experienced worse and still prospered. The current national high intensity exercise is generating sweat and groans but will make us leaner, stronger and more competitive.

Webb: Here’s a tip to avoid going nuts and blowing a gasket: Don’t watch the national news, and stay away from the social media bullies and weirdos. There’s no question that leftist rage, pitted against presidential bombast, is an incendiary combination that produces outrageous behavior by extremists on both sides.

In the meantime, the real America is enjoying a booming economy, low unemployment and times are good for most citizens. Yes, we are deeply divided politically. And our federal government, particularly Congress, is rather a mess.

But the real America outside of Washington, D.C., is running pretty well. Cities, counties and states (with a few exceptions) are solving problems and meeting needs. Innovation in many fields is remarkable, and life, in many ways, has never been easier. I would argue that there exists less bigotry, discrimination, sexism and intolerance than at any time in history. In fact, the only class of humanity that can be safely ridiculed these days is someone like me — old, white, male, Mormon, Republican with a paunch. That’s real progress.

In summary, things aren’t nearly as bad as the cable news sensationalism portrays. It is a tribute to the real America’s resilience that we can thrive despite a dysfunctional Congress and escalating political vitriol.

Nasty rhetoric and even direct harassment seem to be the new norm in Washington politics. What does this say about America, and can cooler heads prevail?

Pignanelli: Gay and lesbian couples deserve a respectful response when exercising their constitutional rights in the public market place (e.g. purchasing wedding cakes or flowers), as does White House Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders when at a restaurant (who was asked to leave). Roseanne Barr appropriately lost her show for the racist tweet, as should have Samantha Bee for using a taboo description in attacking Ivanka Trump. Some TV talking heads were atrocious to those expressing sympathy for children separated from migrating parents. Both sides of the spectrum decry the lack of civility but refuse to criticize bloviators in their ranks for violating basic decency. But this is a historical problem plaguing national dialogue since independence.

Fortunately, most Americans understand that no one is truly courteous and civil unless they are decent to those with whom they disagree.

Webb: The rhetoric is ugly, but we’ll be OK. Trump is a wild man, but he’s not the end of the world as we know it. He trashes political etiquette and blows things up, but sometimes that’s the only way to break logjams.

Utah’s primary election last Tuesday went smoothly. What do the results forecast for the future politics?

Pignanelli: The Beehive State set the national standard for common sense last week, guaranteeing a campaign season filled with intelligent thoughtful candidates from both parties. What a relief!

Webb: As a former GOP presidential nominee with a national focus, Mitt Romney will be a very interesting U.S. senator. But he’ll need to pay attention to Utah. Six-year terms make it easy for a senator to become a creature of Washington and lose touch with the folks back home.

Meanwhile, John Curtis cemented his position in the U.S. House. He’ll be very difficult to unseat in the future.

Frank Pignanelli & LaVarr Webb: Time for far-right Utah GOP members to face reality?

For us political commentators (a nice word for hacks), the controversy over Utah's caucus and convention system is the gift that keeps on giving. Whether the legislative SB54 compromise, the Count My Vote reform movement or the antics of anti-reform activists, the fun never ends. So here’s another installment on this never-ending saga.

In Tuesday’s primary elections, the top races are the Republican contests for the U.S. Senate between Gov. Mitt Romney and state Rep. Michael Kennedy, and the 3rd Congressional District race between incumbent John Curtis and former legislator Chris Herrod. Could these campaigns be another indicator of the demise of the convention system?

Pignanelli: "A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject.” — Winston Churchill

History is filled with legends of fanatical warriors who believe magical powers, derived from some cultish phenomenon, will prevent their death and overpower opponents with superior weapons. These crazies are always slaughtered because the cause is irrational or ancient, and thereby powerless.

GOP activists cling to the archaic delegate/convention system with the unrealistic belief they can triumph against the overpowering will of the electorate. As with most ultra-devotees to lost causes, they will eventually be defeated. Kennedy and Herrod were rewarded for fealty to the delegate diehards by placement on the ballot. But they are failing to raise significant contributions or broad-based support, heading to rout on Tuesday. They prove the general rule “convention only” primary candidates cannot attract money, recruit volunteers or capture serious attention from the media. They fall to opponents who enjoy wide affection, as evidenced by the signatures they gathered. “Convention only” contenders will increasingly reflect the fringe, whose weakness is directly correlated to their extremist fervor.

The last stands of zealots make for great stories, but never for practical results and victory.

Webb: Utah is a center-right state. As a mainstream conservative, I’d like to invite my far-right friends to accept the fact that signature-gathering is here to stay. I’d like them to think about being part of the mainstream Republican Party instead of being relegated to the fringe. Gov. Gary Herbert and others are encouraging GOP factions to work out differences and better unify as a party.

There is plenty of room in the Republican Party for robust debate over policy. Let’s have those debates and let the best argument win. But let’s not try to win using an unfair process that disadvantages one wing of the party. Win by persuasion, not by process.

Otherwise, mainstream Republicans, the majority, will simply ignore the party structure and raise money, run campaigns and establish policy independent of the formal party organization. It’s better to be in the room debating and influencing rather than conspiring futilely in the dark corners.

Some county Republican parties forced candidates into primaries even though these candidates received enough delegate votes to proceed directly to the general election. These candidates are the victims of extraordinary rules designed to punish candidates who gathered signatures, even though they also went through the caucus/convention system. Can this craziness continue?

Pignanelli: These bizarre antics in other regions demonstrate that Utah County does not possess a monopoly on nuttiness. Grumbling about reform is an annoying constitutional right. But party officials denigrate democracy with the silly rule that “convention only” candidates with an arbitrary vote percentage are automatically provided ballot placement. This finagling unfairly punishes qualified candidates with requisite signatures and a majority of delegate support. Utahns will not tolerate such corruption of the election process. Lawmakers can expect pressure from various sources (i.e. media, special interest groups, good government organizations, social media, etc.) to enact reforms.

Webb: These rules used by some county parties are unfair and deceitful, illustrating how far some party insiders are willing to go to desperately cling to power, even contradicting the will of their own delegates. It is truly destructive to the image and reality of the Republican Party. They are shouting to mainstream Utahns: “We don’t want you.”

Some convention system supporters are planning a legislative push to repeal SB54. Is this even a possibility?

Pignanelli: The existence of these rumors is incredible, but true. There are rumblings among officials to repeal SB54 because they believe a deal was broken. Such actions won’t go anywhere, but dust will be stirred in deliberations.

Webb: To paraphrase a favorite pledge: “They won’t take my power away until they pry it from my cold, dead fingers.” Some arch-conservatives are desperately trying to hang on to control of the political process. But I believe enough state legislators like the option of gathering signatures to get on the primary ballot that they won’t repeal SB54. I’m also still hopeful the Utah Supreme Court will place the Count My Vote proposal on the ballot so voters can decide once and for all how they prefer the nomination process to work.

Frank Pignanelli & LaVarr Webb: Sizzling issues — religious freedom, sports betting, athletes and the anthem

It’s hot — meteorologically and politically. Several simmering issues may hit the boiling point, especially decisions by the U.S. Supreme Court and the Court of Public Opinion.

The now-famous baker, Jack Phillips, argued that his First Amendment rights of free speech and religious expression allowed him to decline to bake a wedding cake for a same-sex couple. Human rights advocates argued harm to the LGBT community and other minorities if Phillips prevailed. The Supreme Court artfully dodged a final constitutional determination on the matter by issuing a narrow ruling supporting Phillips because he was unfairly treated by the Colorado Civil Rights Commission. Can this controversy be resolved?

Pignanelli: "The civil rights movement was based on faith.” — John Lewis

This case evolved into a classic melodrama with Phillips as the hapless victim engendering sympathy because of persecution by the villainous commission, which mocked his religious beliefs during the initial hearing. The court was compelled to play the hero and prevent further government-sponsored criticism of First Amendment rights.

Many Americans express concern with the heavy hand of government forcing the baker to provide products for use in same-sex marriages, which his faith opposes. But ask those same Americans if the baker can refuse service because the customer is African-American, Jewish or Mormon, and the sentiment immediately disappears as such conduct is outrageous discrimination.

Thus, the dilemma.

Americans have a fundamental constitutional right to express their religious beliefs in an open manner. But merchants in the public arena are prohibited — by equally important principles — from using faith to deny goods and services to customers solely for their race, creed, religion or sexual orientation. The Supreme Court will eventually structure a coexistence of both absolutes, because to rule otherwise will encourage supremacists to use a religious ploy in commerce to denigrate and harm minorities and not suffer legal ramifications — a frightening scenario.

No need for the boos and hisses of a melodrama. Americans can respect each other's religious beliefs while allowing all to participate in the public marketplace without fear of discrimination.

Webb: The court showed that reason, compromise and goodwill can sooth conflicts between freedom of religion and unfair discrimination. But both sides must be willing to concede a little and acknowledge some merit in the other side’s viewpoint. The problem is militants on both sides would prefer to fight and call names rather than solve problems.

It’s not easy, but usually doable, to find middle ground in these cases. For example, a store that sells everyday commodities to the public ought not to be able to pick and choose its customers. But an artisan using his or her creative talent should not to be forced to create something for a neo-Nazi celebration, or a same-sex marriage, if doing so violates one’s heartfelt religious convictions.

If I tried to buy an oil filter at an auto parts store and was refused service because I’m a Mormon, that would be improper discrimination. But if I asked a professional photographer to capture the joy of my daughter’s wedding on the steps of an LDS temple, a photographer who thinks Mormons are a cult should not be forced to participate.

NFL owners are requiring players to stand for the national anthem or stay in the locker room during that ceremony. The White House canceled the traditional appearance with Super Bowl victors Philadelphia Eagles. Is the NFL action a breach of First Amendment rights, or do owners have the right to demand compliance?

Pignanelli: Players have a right to peaceful protest. Fans will tolerate — to varying degrees — players’ expression of beliefs until such actions infringe upon performance or inhibit enjoyment. Then ticket sales will resolve the matter.

Webb: The owners certainly have the right to order players to respect the flag and anthem, especially because the players have an out by entering the field after the anthem is played. I have no sympathy for players who hijack a football game to make a political statement that most Americans oppose.

As for President Donald Trump disinviting the Eagles, he should simply end the tradition of sports teams going to the White House. It’s obvious that many sports superstars don’t like Trump and will try to embarrass him by saying they need to stay home and mow the lawn.

The Supreme Court recently authorized states to engage in sports betting. It also is expected to rule on state political district gerrymandering and allowing states to collect sales taxes on internet purchases. Do these cases give cause for Utahns to rejoice or grumble?

Pignanelli: Utah will continue to prohibit gambling (thank goodness, since I am easily tempted). Online sales taxation has received little attention, but it will impact every Utahn. This issue needs to be solved so Utah and other states can adapt their revenue policies accordingly.

Webb: The Supreme Court, thankfully, seems to favor turning a little power back to the states. Utah may be the last state standing against any form of gambling, and that’s OK. Every state needs its niche, its competitive advantage. Clean, safe and respectable isn’t a bad one.

The four hard-fought ballot initiatives — what’s next?

Three far-reaching proposals are now officially on the ballot for voters to approve or reject in November. A fourth, the Count My Vote proposal, was disqualified after opponents rescinded just barely enough signatures to keep it off the ballot. Myriad questions remain, such as potential lawsuits, the merits of the proposals and whether each will win or lose.

The lieutenant governor has ruled Count My Vote won’t be on the ballot. What’s next?

Pignanelli: "If you are sure you understand everything that is going on, you are hopelessly confused." — Walter F. Mondale

This ongoing drama has much in common with the "Star Wars" saga — sequels, endless spinoffs and activists who resemble scary aliens. Utahns will continue to endure this struggle between hostile forces for years.

Count My Vote is supported and well-funded by some of Utah's most prominent families. Further, they are just as tenacious as the Republican delegate militants, but nicer and less obnoxious.

So initiative supporters are not going away and will continue to push party nomination reforms through litigation, legislation and other means. In addition to requesting changes to Utah's primary system, they are now focused on the rescission process.

Readers are advised to approach this issue as they do "Star Wars": Enjoy the current offering knowing another installment is in the future.

Webb: Much has yet to play out on the Count My Vote disqualification, and it’s difficult to predict the outcome. The vast majority of Utah voters support Count My Vote and would like to affirm that support at the ballot box. The Utah Supreme Court will likely decide if they get that privilege.

The good news is that whether or not Count My Vote is on the ballot, the dual track to the primary election remains in force. The Count My Vote initiative would have improved the SB54 law, but it’s pretty good the way it is. The hundreds of candidates who have gathered signatures to get on the ballot will continue to do so, and Utah is not going back exclusively to the outdated, elitist, exclusionary caucus and convention system. We’ve crossed a tipping point in opening Utah’s election system to all voters — and we’re not going back.

The proposal to make marijuana readily available at the recommendation of almost any medical professional will go before voters. Are voters likely to approve?

Pignanelli: Politicos were shocked that the well-respected opponents (i.e. Utah Medical Association, law enforcement, prominent Mormons) could not obtain more rescission signatures — a clear indication of organizational problems. Also, this initiative was filed June 2017, but few bothered to read and explain concerns until a few months ago, far too late. Currently, the apprehensions with the initiative are far outweighed by the fear of the existing alternatives — opioid addiction and ineffectiveness of current FDA approved medications.

Webb: Despite polls showing widespread support for the marijuana proposal, the tide can easily turn. Prominent medical, law enforcement and community leaders are pointing out serious problems in this flawed proposal bankrolled by the multibillion-dollar marijuana industry.

It’s entirely possible that elements found in the marijuana plant have medicinal qualities. If so, let’s do it right and go through the approved process to create safe medications. This proposal allows widespread marijuana use without the normal safeguards used to regulate prescribed medications. Marijuana states like Colorado and California are seeing serious negative consequences. This is too big a gamble.

Medicaid expansion qualified for the ballot. Will it become law?

Pignanelli: Supporters were unchallenged while gathering signatures. That free pass now ends. Opponents will soon advise Utahns that buried in this initiative is a sales tax increase to fund the state obligation of 10 percent of medical services for the additional Medicaid recipients. So, messaging will determine the outcome of this. Is the opportunity to obtain millions of federal dollars to assist Utah's poorest greater than the fear entitlement programs are exploding the national debt? Does a tax increase make sense when the state budget is in surplus? The winner will have conveyed the simplest, most emotional missive.

Webb: Our health care system — except the emergency room — remains inaccessible for many low-income families. The system needs significant reform, especially at the federal level. In the meantime, we have the opportunity to bring home hundreds of millions of dollars we’re currently paying to the federal government. This money could help provide insurance and health care services for low-income families. Makes sense to me.

Voters will decide whether to set up an independent redistricting commission. Is gerrymandering a thing of the past?

Pignanelli: Gerrymandering coexists with the Constitution and is difficult to completely remove from our system. A Supreme Court decision in the very near future could impact how proponents and opponents message this initiative. Stay tuned because we will have opinions.

Webb: The authors of this initiative have struggled mightily to take the politics out of politics. It won’t work, but it will be fun to watch.

The Year of the Golden Spike

Those affiliated with Foxley & Pignanelli are aware that 2019 is the year of the Golden Spike. Our founding partner, Douglas Foxley, was selected by Governor Gary Herbert to serve as the Chairman for the committee to plan the commemorative ceremony of the Golden Spike 150th anniversary to be held on May 10, 2019.


To say this has escalated to something more than a passion project for Doug would be an understatement as the anniversary represents many of Doug’s interests. He is a Utah history enthusiast and has proudly represented Union Pacific Railroad for over 20 years. He is leaving no detail overlooked. Doug is working with local and national businesses and government officials to ensure the celebration is consummate with the grandeur of the impact the Transcontinental Railroad has has on our country. It is his mission to share this important historical event with everyone, to inspire youth to imagine the next big thing, and preserve this historical site for generations to come. Some of his plans include: partnering with the Beverly Taylor Sorenson Art Works for Kids program to implement a statewide history course for 8th graders to learn about the transcontinental railroad; he is designing a commemorative Winchester rifle to replicate the model manufactured for the 100th anniversary; and working to have the Golden Spike National Historic Site recognized as a national historic park. 


Last week Doug testified before Congress to ask them to support Congressman Bishop’s HR 5751 which recognizes the upcoming celebration and re-designates the site as a national park. We at Foxley & Pignanelli are proud of Doug’s hard work and look forward to the entire state catching the Spike 150 fever with us.

To watch Doug's presentation to congress, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ugKjT87Hhjk

Frank Pignanelli & LaVarr Webb: What’s the future of Utah’s newspapers?

Recent newspaper layoffs in Utah raise questions about the rapidly changing communications world and what it means for our local news media. We explore the ramifications.

What do the layoffs and low media approval ratings say about our news media locally and nationally?

Pignanelli: "Fifty percent of people won't vote, and fifty percent don't read newspapers. I hope it's the same fifty percent." — Gore Vidal

Our constitutional rights of freedom of speech and press are sacred fundamentals. Therefore, as a good Italian I must use a food analogy to highlight their importance. These protections are the vegetables of the American body politic providing nutrients, fiber and healthy regeneration. Although not always tasty, without them everything else withers.

The endless Twitter disparagement by President Donald Trump is often blamed for the challenges confronting news media. Yet, Trump is an amateur compared to his predecessors. Richard Nixon worked the IRS and the Justice Department to harass the media. A prominent constitutional law scholar (aka Barack Obama) subpoenaed reporters, targeted leakers and unreasonably limited access to information. Founding Father John Adams pushed the Alien and Sedition Acts to criminalize newspaper conduct. The businesses of newspapers are struggling not because of Trump, but because of what underlies Trump’s success — the internet.

Utah’s relatively small population supports two major statewide and many regional newspapers. This indicates Utahns still consider periodicals critical to understanding local and national current events.

So, Utahns love and want their vegetables, but no longer in the traditional recipes.

Webb: It is actually quite remarkable that Salt Lake City has two competing newspapers. Few, if any, similar markets anywhere in the country have two papers. The only reason both papers survive is they operate under an agreement allowing them to share a lot of operations and expenses. In other industries, such an arrangement would violate antitrust laws, but newspapers were given an exemption.

Many years ago, I was in a meeting with the top leadership of the Deseret News and the Salt Lake Tribune. Tribune Publisher Dominic Welch, who was also president of the Newspaper Agency Corporation, made this statement: “One day there will only be one newspaper in this city — and it won’t be the Deseret News.” How wrong he was.

I believe the LDS Church really does want the Tribune to survive. The church is subject to criticism for dominating Utah’s culture and society, so having a dissenting voice in the state is actually good for the church.

As long as the Tribune is there, the church can say, “See, there’s a lot of diversity and alternative voices in Utah. We don’t really dominate.”

How important are newspapers and other media in supplying reliable information to the public about politics and elections?

Pignanelli: The biggest stories of the last two years (Weinstein and other sexual harassment revelations, Russian meddling, payments to porn stars, etc.) were revealed by newspapers and magazines. Utah’s daily publications continue to shed an important light on legislative, executive and local governmental activities. The press, in traditional and new formats, continues to provide the valuable check on the powerful.

Dystopian futures are frequent scenarios for the movies and television. But the real nightmare is the void of free speech. Journalists are the greatest soldiers and defenders of this right, and we need to keep them engaged whether through newspapers, magazines, blogs, television, YouTube, paid subscriptions or whatever. The health of our democracy depends on them.

Those who want their news for free all the time are sacrificing freedom to save pennies.

Webb: Despite their challenges, the traditional media still set the agenda. Most social media posts and online media stories link back to traditional media. And despite their obvious biases, the traditional media still produce the most reliable and factual stories.

Are newspapers, in particular, dinosaurs awaiting extinction, or will they make a comeback?

Pignanelli: The Facebook controversy taught Americans an invaluable lesson — nothing is free. So paying a minimal fee to participate in privacy secured social networking platforms will eventually prompt customers to subscribe to media outlets for their news consumption. Entrepreneurs will discover multiple methods to publish newspapers at a profit.

Webb: The Deseret News has a chance to survive because it is part of a family of communications-related businesses, including KSL TV, KSL Radio, KSL.com, LDS Church News, Deseret Digital Media, DeseretNews.com and Deseret Book.

Those relationships provide synergies and collaboration that a stand-alone newspaper doesn’t enjoy. Reporters, editors, photographers, etc., can provide and share content across a number of print, online and broadcast platforms, which provides a lot of economies.

Unlike the Tribune, the Deseret News and its sister companies also have a worldwide audience, providing news and information to millions of members of the church. That’s a big market.

How fair is the citizen initiative signature rescission process?

It’s nail-biting time for supporters and opponents of the four initiative proposals that citizens are trying to place on the 2018 November ballot. Tuesday, May 15, is the deadline for initiative opponents to turn in documents rescinding signatures. After Tuesday, the lieutenant governor’s office will total the number of signatures verified, the number of signatures rescinded, and will determine which initiatives qualify for the ballot. That likely won’t end the controversies, however.

If passed, the initiatives would institutionalize Count My Vote, fully expand Medicaid, create a commission to propose political district boundaries and allow marijuana to be used for medical purposes. The rescind efforts have sparked accusations of deception and even bullying. What is going on here?

Pignanelli: “Democracy is not just an election, it is our daily life.” — Tsai Ing-wen

Supporters and opponents of the initiative efforts are accusing the other of unfair tactics, misleading messaging, false representations, intimidating behavior and other outrageous activities. So the initiative campaigns have devolved into … resembling every political contest for the last 10,000 years of human history.

Direct democracy is just as nasty, brutish, competitive, energetic and important as representative democracy. Until this year, Utahns only infrequently experienced such trauma. Two initiatives passed in 2000 and a referendum (to repeal the legislative sponsored school voucher law) in 2004. In response to both, the Legislature established such high hurdles any similar attempts for ballot measures since then faltered or were voluntarily extinguished.

But our local political environment has dramatically changed. The CMV compromise legislation created a permanent signature gathering industry. Data analytics provides better targeting of, and messaging to, voters. Social media inexpensively and efficiently enthuses supporters and detractors. Large well-funded special-interest groups commit massive resources. These dynamics breed emotional controversy.

A nightmare for well-adjusted Utahns, the new battle lines and weapons used by contestants supporting and opposing initiatives are intriguing for those of us in the demented political hack species.

Webb: I have mixed feelings about the rescind efforts because I strongly support Count My Vote and want the rescind effort to fail. But I strongly oppose the marijuana initiative and would like the rescind effort to succeed.

This issue is fascinating, because we really are in uncharted territory. This is the first time under current law that statewide citizen initiatives have successfully gathered enough signatures to qualify for the ballot and have faced rescission efforts. No one really knows how difficult or easy it is to defeat a proposal by asking petition signers to remove their signatures. But we’ll know in the next few days. Lawsuits are likely, along with complaints to the lieutenant governor’s office.

s the process allowing opponents to defeat an initiative campaign by potentially removing just a few signatures a fair process?

Pignanelli: Fairness is a much desired, but missing, element in politics. I have participated on both sides of state and municipal initiative efforts — fighting to keep the number of signatures above a threshold or scrounging for rescissions to prevent ballot placement. Such activities are tactics, not policy indicators, in public affairs campaigns.

As with any other political campaign advertisement, messages to solicit signatures — whether through media or in person — are imbalanced and minimally factual. So a rescission effort is the very imperfect but necessary means to provide the opposing viewpoint and ability for voters to retract their decision.

Webb: The question is whether some equivalency should exist in the difficulty of gathering signatures and the difficulty of rescinding signatures. It is incredibly difficult to obtain at least 113,000 signatures of registered voters with the required distribution in at least 26 of Utah’s 29 state Senate districts. Success requires an immense effort engaging hundreds of volunteers and paid staff over several months, costing a million dollars or more.

Hypothetically, all that effort could be negated if opponents of the ballot proposal rescind just a very few signatures in just one Senate district. The practical reality is that initiative supporters must gather far more verified signatures than the 113,000 to protect against rescind campaigns. Even then, a dedicated group of activists, or someone with enough money to hire paid signature removers, will have a shot at removing a proposal from the ballot by focusing on just one or two districts and rescinding a relatively few signatures.

Under Utah’s Constitution, citizens clearly have the right to make laws. And the courts have clearly held that the process must not be so difficult as to make citizen lawmaking nearly impossible. Given the rescind campaigns we’re seeing, some smart lawyers could make a pretty strong case that the hurdles to citizen lawmaking under the current rescission provisions are too high. I think the courts might agree.

When all is said and done, will any of the rescind efforts be successful? Will the Legislature make any adjustments to the process?

Pignanelli: An overwhelming number of signatures creates impossible obstacles for rescission efforts. Thus, the marijuana initiative is safe. But the others could be in jeopardy. Legislators may tinker with some procedural details, but not eliminate the current process.

Webb: I can’t predict. Certainly, enough signatures can be rescinded to kill an initiative if the opponents are well-organized, well-funded, have a detailed campaign plan and ready to execute immediately when the rescind period begins. The opponents probably weren’t quite that well organized this year.

The Legislature doesn’t particularly like citizen lawmaking, so I don’t expect any action there.