Frank Pignanelli & LaVarr Webb: Issues of the day: 'Insider baseball,' or should Utahns care?

Often, politicos focus with intensity and passion on issues that are mostly ignored by the saner parts of society. Several such issues are generating much controversy within the media, politicians and operatives. But are Utahns paying attention?

The Legislature conducted a special session last week and overrode Gov. Gary Herbert’svetoes of two bills, one defining the process when there is a conflict between governmental clients of the attorney general and the other providing the Legislature the ability to intervene in court actions as a matter of right. Is this a defeat for Herbert? Does this create an imbalance of power? Should Utahns care?

Pignanelli: "I think most Americans don't really care about politicians bickering.” — Ted Cruz

Parking was plentiful at the state Capitol on Wednesday, even though almost everyone impacted by the vetoed bills was at the special session. Politicos describe such situations as “insider baseball."

Veteran observers were surprised that Herbert's intense efforts to prevent the override did not include his usual and effective strategy of sustaining a veto with a promise to develop a better alternative. Such an approach was needed last week.

As a former lawmaker, I have absolute sympathy with legislators’ frustrations requesting legal opinions and how laws are defended. Many in the legal community (our firm represents the Utah State Bar) understood lawmakers' concerns but were apprehensive with specific details of the solutions (e.g. not mandating the attorney general to the same ethical standards as other lawyers).

Our democracy works best with separation of branches, each receiving appropriate support. So legislative angst is legitimate. Whether one agrees or disagrees with their solutions, lawmakers are commended for attempting a resolution. Hopefully, the special session will spur additional legislation and potential constitutional amendments. Clarifying the obligations of the attorney general, and consideration to make the position appointed, will help.

The first inning of this insider baseball game just ended.

Webb: The capacity of my old and feeble mind is quite limited, so I try not to clutter it with political minutiae that is never going to impact my life. That said, the founders set up tension between the branches of government to protect citizens from any individual or entity that wants to become a despot. So these tussles over power are natural, and Herbert need not feel bad about losing this round. He’s won most of his fights, and there will be others.

The war between President Donald Trump and former FBI Director James Comey is titillating, but does it mean anything? Will it make any difference, and should Utahns care?

Pignanelli: Witnessing the former leader of the venerated FBI engaging in horrific dispersions of the president’s hair, hands and moral fiber is a new dark element in politics — especially since Comey is burdened with his own ethical baggage.

Aside from appropriate disgust, Utahns should care about this controversy. The difficult part is the denigration of our government institutions. But the good — and strange — factor is that the kerfuffle emphasizes that no one is above public criticism in America.

Webb: Trump is Trump, and billions of words have been written (with more to come) about his plentiful failings. But Comey isn’t much better. He’s convinced he’s the only honorable person in Washington (maybe in the universe); he’s sanctimonious, pretentious and condescending. It’s outrageous for him to gossip on TV about all sorts of salacious rumors and innuendo and then say he doesn’t know if it’s true — but, you know, it could be.

Both Republicans and Democrats have ample reason to dislike Comey. He usurped the authority of the Obama administration attorney general. The top levels of the FBI were politicized under his leadership. He took notes about his private conversations with the president and promptly leaked it to the press. Through it all, he maintained his superiority and haughtiness — the only righteous swamp rat in the slough.

Four initiative petition campaigns turned in an impressive number of signatures (each exceeding 100,000), to county clerks. The clerks and the lieutenant governor’s office have a month to verify signatures and determine if the proposals qualify for the ballot. Politicos are chattering about these ballot proposals. Should Utahns care?

Pignanelli: These initiative campaigns were able to raise millions of dollars to collect signatures — a clear signal that Utah politics is changing, impacting future elections and legislative deliberations.

Webb: It is rare (as it should be) that voters get to take lawmaking into their own hands. It’s still possible not all of the proposals will make it on the ballot. Efforts to rescind signatures on some of the proposals are already underway.

These are all substantive and impactful issues — Medicaid expansion, Count My Vote, redistricting commission and marijuana liberalization. Multimillion-dollar campaigns will be run for and against them in advance of the November election. All voters should study each proposal very carefully, understand the pros and cons and ramifications and vote accordingly.

Frank Pignanelli & LaVarr Webb: Plenty of intrigue ahead at the GOP state convention

Next Saturday, the state will witness an entertaining, enlightening — and possibly chaotic and frustrating — political event. There will be plenty to cheer and groan about by the end of this important political pageant. We are, of course, talking about the State Republican Convention.

One high-profile convention participant will be U.S. Senate candidate Mitt Romney. He faces very aggressive opposition — especially from state Rep. Michael Kennedy and attorney Larry Myers. Can Romney win 60 percent of the delegate vote and avoid a primary election?

Pignanelli: “A political convention is not a place where you can come away with any trace of faith in human nature.” — Murray Kempton

Although most possess reserved dignified personalities, Utah Republicans can exhibit unhinged behavior during convocation. (e.g. state conventions in 2000, 2008, 2010, 2012.) Such gatherings are subject to the bizarre whims of delegates, external national issues, internal fights, etc., and often provide unexpected results.

Similar dynamics threaten the upcoming GOP assemblage. A lighter turnout in the March precinct caucuses likely causes extremist elements dominating the delegate pool. Factions are vying to change or maintain party structure. Attendees will be charged $10 for parking (the horror!), further highlighting GOP financial problems.

U.S. Senate candidates will face grumpy delegates who will have been at the Maverik Center for hours. Romney is popular with mainstream Republicans, but his opponents are well known with activists. So he will endure several ballot votes before securing the nomination. Some GOP insiders predict if the elections go too late in the afternoon, Kennedy or Meyers may capture 40 percent and force a primary.

Utahns are excited for the Jazz playoffs, but our local Republicans are equally entertaining.

Webb: The conventional wisdom is that Romney will not fare well at the unpredictable convention. Arch-conservative activists and delegates have been plotting against him for months. His delegate support will be a test of his organizational prowess. If he wins 60 percent, he’s a political genius. If he wins at least 40 percent, he’s OK. Less than 40 percent is a loss, even in the multi-candidate field.

To Romney’s credit, he handily exceeded expectations in gathering signatures to get on the ballot, using an all-volunteer army to get double the needed signatures. So, he will be on the primary ballot no matter what happens at the convention.

A number of more mainstream Republican activists are pushing for changes to the party’s governing documents to reduce power of a minority of delegates and members of the State Central Committee and to create more sensible management of the party. Will they prevail in this civil war?

Pignanelli: After hours of speeches and balloting, exhausted delegates will then wrestle with over 17 proposed amendments and resolutions to amend party governing documents.

But the rest of us can enjoy the action. For example, just reading these contentious measures is great fun. With titles like “Return to Reason” and “Give Others a Chance to Serve”, there is a guaranteed nasty fight between the old guard and rebels wanting change. By late afternoon Saturday, the number of sane people in attendance diminishes — and so do the chances for reform.

Webb: It’s going to be a bloody fracas and the reform outcome depends on how many delegates turn out (and how long they stay), whether Romney succeeded in recruiting moderate delegates, and how well delegates are educated about the intrigue and nuances of this battle for party control. With a high delegate turnout a year ago, Rob Anderson, a sensible conservative, won election as chair. Since then, he has been demonized and undercut by a minority of State Central Committee members.

Anderson allies plan to make a brave effort to bring order and sense to the party. But the convention is the home court of the far-right militants. They love to spend hours arguing over arcane rules and party procedures, making motion after motion, delaying decisions and wearing out normal people who have better things to do. They don’t represent the views of the vast majority of Utah Republicans, but their zeal and intensity gives them undue influence in this closed caucus/convention system. It will be very difficult for the majority to take back the party from the minority.

Will Utah Republicans heal their wounds and move forward, or is the antipathy so great that Democrats and other parties can capture an advantage?

Pignanelli: Because the fights are over purist ideology and party control — and not over personalities (other than Romney) — a major movement is unlikely. However, if Saturday’s contests are especially bitter (i.e. Romney is unreasonably mistreated, reform attempts become acrimonious), enough Republicans may stay home in November, potentially impacting tight elections.

Webb: It’s true that many far-right conservatives prefer purging fellow Republicans who aren’t pure enough, instead of working to elect Republican candidates. And it’s true that while the party used to attract a who’s who of Utah leaders, now most normal people run the other direction.

So, all of that should provide an opportunity for Democrats. But, really, it doesn’t. Most Republican candidates ignore the party shenanigans and run campaigns independent of the party. Most don’t need party money or organization (because not much of either is available). So Republicans will continue to dominate.

Frank Pignanelli & LaVarr Webb: Here are forecasts for an unpredictable political spring

Politics in Utah can be as variable as spring weather. Here are some forecasts as the tulips sprout and the political season kicks off. Utah is losing its top two legislative leaders this year. What will be the legacy and future of retiring House Speaker Greg Hughes and Senate President Wayne Niederhauser?

Pignanelli: "Politics, like theater, is one of those things where you've got to be wise enough to know when to leave." — Gov. Richard Lamm

These two public servants, with very different backgrounds and personalities, achieved incredible political success. Furthermore, their diverse approach sustains my long-held belief regarding the different characteristics between Utah-born Mormons and those raised elsewhere.

Niederhauser, in a deliberative manner, fostered changes that will dramatically impact state government for decades. Compelling efficiencies in regulation, taxation and economic development are hallmarks of his influence. Hopefully, a governor will tap his skills to lead an effort to recommend needed changes to the higher education system. Regardless, Niederhauser will be remembered as a great president.

Hughes arrived in Utah a young whirlwind and never stopped spinning. With flashes of temper, passion and charm, he instilled classic conservative principles into legislative arguments. Yet Hughes laid the legislative groundwork to help parents of autistic children. This compassionate and practical side to his nature was revealed to the entire state last year through efforts to eliminate criminal activity and homelessness in Salt Lake City. Hughes’ political career is not over, and he is a likely governor candidate in 2020. But grateful Utahns will recall Hughes as the speaker who — through force of personality — pacified and rehabilitated downtown.

Niederhauser and Hughes set a new standard for future presidents and speakers. I appreciate their leadership, and conclusively proving my amateur sociological theory regarding personality differences between native and transplanted Utahns. (I'm expecting a call from the Nobel Prize committee)

Webb: Neiderhauser and Hughes are very different in temperament and style — but both are very effective and have served the state well. Neiderhauser is understated, common-sense and dignified, but was always looking to the future, determined to position Utah for long-term success. He focused on infrastructure needed to cope with rapid growth, and sponsored legislation to ensure future mobility. He was also resolute in seeing that the Senate won its share of fights with the House.

Hughes is a vocal and emotional street fighter, but he doesn’t (usually) go over the edge into bullying. With his forceful focus on homelessness, his leadership at the Utah Transit Authority and his passion battling the opioid crisis, he revealed nuances and complexities that defy the usual stereotype of a right-wing ideological conservative.

I’m hopeful Niederhauser will at some point want to return to the public arena. Hughes clearly wants to run for governor and will likely be a strong competitor in a crowded field. Many other lawmakers have announced retirements. How will this affect the elections and the future of the Legislature?

Pignanelli: Most freshman legislators in 2019 will have garnered signatures to be on the nomination primary ballot, with some participation in the delegate/convention system. Furthermore, these newcomers utilize social media at greater levels.

Candidates who secured their nomination through signatures are less strident in tone, yet demanding of efficiencies in the government process. Thus, vacancies open opportunities for moderate Democrats and Republicans — changing how the Legislature deliberates and communicates.

Webb: The turnover is about average, but some colorful characters are leaving. But, never fear, no shortage exists of interesting personalities who are attracted to politics. Senior lawmakers are already maneuvering to secure enough caucus votes for top leadership positions. Watch Sen. Stuart Adams and Rep. Brad Wilson as they seek to ascend to the top. As expected, a federal appeals court upheld SB54, which means candidates can collect signatures or use the caucus/convention system, or do both, to qualify for the primary election ballot. Will Republican hardliners continue appeals, possibly to the U.S. Supreme Court?

Pignanelli: The activists will request a hearing to the entire Court of Appeals and then the Supreme Court — all will be denied. They would consider taking their cause to the United Nations — but hate that organization.

Webb: If the far right’s wealthy benefactor grants them more money (so much for their criticism of big money in politics), they might appeal. In the meantime, all candidates should ignore the machinations and dictates of the Central Committee and feel secure in gathering signatures to get on the ballot.

As I’ve written previously, should the hardliners ever win in court (very unlikely), the Republican Party as we know it will be wrecked. Mainstream Republicans will never return exclusively to the outdated caucus/convention system. They would leave en masse, and Utah’s Grand Old Party would be a shriveled skeleton of its former self.

2018 Legislative Session in Review

Utah’s 2018 Legislative Session adjourned sine die on March 8th, officially ending the 45-day process. This year’s session was primarily dominated by critical issues facing Utah including education funding, reactions to initiative petitions, tax reform, inland port authority, and the opioid crisis.

Utah constantly ranks at the bottom of nation for per-pupil funding yet our graduation rates, test scores, and other performance metrics are at or near the top in the nation. The threat of the “Our Schools Now” ballot initiative forced the legislature to compromise in the final hours of the legislative session on a bill that freezes property taxes rates but when property values increase, so do homeowners’ tax bills. The bill also lowers income taxes slightly (from 5% to 4.95%). This will generate $122 million in additional tax revenues that will go directly to education funding. “Our Schools Now” has agreed not to pursue their ballot initiative at this time.

The legislature also passed a joint resolution placing a non-binding question on the November ballot asking voters if they would support a 10 cent gas tax increase to further help fund education. If this is enacted along with the tax bill, the state will collect an estimated additional $375 million in tax revenue.

The northwest quadrant of Salt Lake City will see some dramatic changes in the next five years from a newly renovated airport, construction of the relocated state prison, and the development of an inland port. Utah’s elected officials have been working on the governance structure of what a possible inland port authority should look like. After a year-long discussion with stakeholders, developers, transportation entities, local and state officials, a bill was passed that usurps Salt Lake City’s authority and creates an 11-member board cobbled together from a coalition of stakeholders. Salt Lake City is only granted one member from the city council and one member designated by the Salt Lake Airport Director. This caused the Salt Lake City mayor and Council, the Salt Lake County Council and Salt Lake City legislators to request a veto from Governor Herbert which they were unsuccessful in obtaining. The Governor signed the bill but  stated he wanted  issues addressed in the near future. So there is discussion at the State Capitol of a possibility of a Special Session this summer to address the controversial issues in the legislation.

As in past years, a flurry of bills were introduced attempting to address the opioid epidemic plaguing Utahns. The primary outcomes were bills that increase awareness campaigns, provide more training for high opioid prescribers, requiring consultation of the controlled substance database before prescribing opioid, and most notably, a bill encouraging the Attorney General to sue drug manufacturers.  

The final days of the legislative session were consumed with heated budget negotiations between the House and Senate. The complete budget came down to the wire on the final night.  

There are three important dates to keep in mind. The Governor has until March 29th to sign or veto any bills. Bills not signed or vetoed by this date will automatically become law on the regular effective date. The legislature has until May 7th to call a veto override session. All bills will become effective as of May 8th unless otherwise specified.  

Interim & Elections

The Legislature will likely convene their first interim meeting in May. Interim hearing will be held on the third Wednesday of every month except for possibly July and December. They can also hold hearings at their discretion that same week, or as otherwise specified.  

Every seat in the State House of Representatives is up this year and due to a high number of notable retirements, a majority of State Senate seats will also be up. Utah’s senior US Senator Orrin Hatch is retiring leaving Mitt Romney as his air apparent for that seat. Congressional races in Utah seem fairly uneventful with the exception of Mia Love who is being challenged by Salt Lake County Mayor Ben McAdams. 

Frank R. Pignanelli and LaVarr Webb: Exploring the legislative session hangover headaches

After a legislative session, politicos experience a few “hangover” weeks as they decompress and review the session’s impacts. Although only Frank has experience with real hangovers, your columnists explore the aftershocks of the frenzied session.

Much has been made of supposed legislative attempts to seize power at the expense of other branches and levels of government. Lawmakers proposed a constitutional amendment allowing the legislature to call itself into special session, gave themselves the ability to intervene in lawsuits without relying on the attorney general and debated other similar issues. Are lawmakers being reasonable, or is this an unwarranted power grab?

Pignanelli: “Real politics are the possession and distribution of power.” — Benjamin Disraeli

The critiques of the Legislature are akin to criticisms of the loud partygoer who shouts outrageous insults, but sometimes even the obnoxious say things that need to be said. As a former lawmaker, I sympathize with legislators’ frustrations.

The traditional notion of separation of powers is strained. Legislators want the executive branch (including the attorney general) to intervene in lawsuits or provide opinions when necessary. Also, lawmakers believe some issues (i.e. the statutory authority given to the governor to institute special elections) require additional legislative activity through a special session that can only be called by the governor. Thus, the part-time Legislature is trying to reassert its authority in litigation activities and by expanding special sessions.

So that loud guy at the party is unsettling, but sometimes the critiques are true. Or as Italians say “In vino veritas” (which means “in wine, truth”).

Webb: The natural tension among branches and levels of government is ever-present and is healthy. If pushing, pulling and vigorous competition occurs, we don’t need to worry about any particular level or branch gaining too much power and becoming despotic. The Founders clearly intended such rivalries.

However, that it is rather arrogant for legislators to routinely stomp on local governments while complaining about federal overreach. The state may have created local governments, and the locals may not enjoy constitutional protections, but the principle of the best governance being closest to home certainly still holds.

The Legislature created an authority to govern a huge part of Salt Lake City’s northwest quadrant as an inland port. Salt Lake City is crying foul and demanding a gubernatorial veto. Why did this happen, and who’s right in this debate?

Pignanelli: Salt Lake City Mayor Jackie Biskupski valiantly pushed back against this encroachment on Salt Lake City, but the legacy she inherited was too heavy. For several decades, state officials have become increasingly worried the capital city is unable to behave itself in important economic development matters. Former agency directors stalled combined efforts to attract jobs. Prior mayors attacked residents of other cities who drive to the city to shop and work. Moves by the Biskupski administration to develop a regulatory scheme that promoted the inland port could not overcome these long-held perceptions.

The port is a big deal with potential to foster many jobs in manufacturing and transportation. Many observers were hopeful the exhaustive public hearing process of the prison relocation would have been repeated for this. So strange items need to be explained (e.g. the mayor has no seat on the governing board, the expanse of the area, etc.)

Webb: There’s no question that lawmakers steamrolled Salt Lake City in creating the governance structure. On the other hand, the inland port vision and momentum came mostly from the state level, and the city was moving too slowly.

I think the state and city can, and should, work out something more acceptable to both. The numerous cities around the Point of the Mountain area ought to be watching this tug-of-war very closely — because a similar governance authority could be in the works for that region. There’s time to resolve this in a special session.

Lawmakers headed off the Our Schools Now ballot proposal by boosting public education funding and making future promises. Marijuana legislation and Medicaid expansion also passed. These efforts were in response to citizen initiative campaigns. Will this action blunt the initiatives?

Pignanelli: Most of the petitions were struggling anyway, but the Legislature solidified its demise through various actions. Only the marijuana initiative may have residual momentum to succeed.

Webb: It’s always better to make public policy in the legislature, rather than by ballot initiatives. But ballot measures can be very effective in forcing legislative action. Our Schools Now made a good deal, assuming that voters embrace a 10-cent fuel tax increase in November. The Medicaid expansion and medical marijuana initiatives will carry on. Legislative work on those issues will give initiative opponents the ability to say that progress is being made, so the ballot proposals are not necessary.

In the case of medical marijuana, I believe that is true. That initiative has a lot of flaws. Given legislative and federal action, there exists a sensible, science-based way forward to create cannabis-based medicines without the excesses allowed under the initiative proposal.

Frank R. Pignanelli and LaVarr Webb: Utah legislators — what they said ... and what they meant

Pignanelli and Webb: The 2018 legislative session concluded last week and, as usual, it consisted of an awful lot of talk. But sometimes all those words require some translation. So we reprise our annual service to readers, noting what they said ... and revealing what they really meant.

Gov. Gary Herbert: "Out of deference and respect to lawmakers, my office and I stayed mostly quiet during the session." (Why should I interfere as legislators beat each other up; I look more like a statesman.)

Many lawmakers: “We certainly respect ballot initiatives, but just want to ensure that they are appropriately implemented." (These dang things are a terrible nuisance. We know better than the hundreds of thousands of Utahns who sign petitions and vote for initiatives.)

Senate leadership: "Rumors of friction between us and the House are overblown. We respect the speaker and his passion.” (It’s a total zoo over there, while we govern with dignity, gentility and style.)

House leadership: "Rumors of intense shouting matches between us and the Senate leadership are fake news. We respect the president and his deliberative style.” (Getting action out of that arrogant House of Lords is intensely frustrating. The Senate should be called the House of Turtles.)

Politically correct lawmakers: "Capitol Hill must be a safe place for everyone, so we are requiring lobbyists and journalists to take sexual harassment training.” (They can’t refuse or they appear insensitive. It’s great watching them squirm.)

Bitter people who post on social media: “The Legislature is a self-serving cadre of crooks.” (I have no clue how it works or anything about legislators, but I hate anyone more important than me.)

Most all legislators: “The best government is closest to home, so we appreciate the insights and hard work of our partners at the county and city levels.” (The state created those entities and we’ll bully them any time we wish.)

Veteran lobbyists: "We are proud to be a critical part of the important legislative process." (We’re like gut bacteria; no one wants to acknowledge us, but they know they need us.)

Ambitious legislators: "I admire the strong, steady guidance and experience of our leaders.” (Finally, some of those dinosaurs are retiring, providing a long overdue opportunity for me.)

Nervous Republican lawmakers: “We need to ensure that the nomination process is fair and reasonable.” (We need to figure out a way to quell those crazies on the Central Committee or chaos is ahead.)

Nervous Democrat lawmakers: "I am committed to bipartisanship in solving the state problems and I value my relationships with Republicans." (My bills are stuck, but I don’t want to further irritate them.)

Real nervous Democrat lawmakers: “Every day I promote Utah values in the Legislature." (I need to start crafting a moderate image to withstand the upcoming Romney tsunami.)

House Speaker Greg Hughes: “I am retiring from the Legislature to use my skills in other endeavors that benefit our state.” (I correctly predicted Trump. I’m solving homelessness and the opioid crisis. We’re funding education at unprecedented levels. The big office on the second floor beckons.)

Senate President Wayne Niederhauser: “Leading the Senate has been a joy and an opportunity of a lifetime.” (I am so looking forward to a long bike trip. I’d rather dodge potholes and life-threatening drivers than endure another day dealing with the House mob and smug news reporters.)

Senate Minority Leader Gene Davis: "We are a real moderating influence in the Senate." (Once in a while they let us select a luncheon menu.)

House Minority Leader Brian King: “We enjoyed an excellent working relationship with Republican House leaders.” (Goodness, they despise the Senate even more than they do the loyal opposition.)

GOP legislative leadership: "We appreciate the efforts of Gov. Herbert and his staff for their input into the legislative process." (We’ve been running the show for years and it ain't changing now.)

Visionary lawmakers: “We believe changing the name and governance structure of the UTA will provide a fresh start.” (If this doesn’t work, we stick it under UDOT.)

Swing district legislators: "I’m working hard with my fellow lawmakers to dedicate tremendous amounts of resources to public education." (I hope we did enough to avoid irritating half my voters, but not so much that I irritate the other half.)

Key lawmakers: “We look forward to a productive partnership with Salt Lake City as we develop the Inland Port in the northwest quadrant.” (There is no way we entrust the largest economic development project of the century to those radical left wingers. They’re lucky to have a seat at the table.)

Capitol Hill reporters: "We demand unimpeded access to scrutinize perks and gifts to lawmakers from lobbyists." (We have the divine right to enjoy those ultra-convenient and coveted reserved parking places.)

Frank R. Pignanelli and LaVarr Webb: Attacks on Romney and sugar — which is worse?

The legislative session has passed the halfway mark. During this intense time, Frank lives at the Capitol, while LaVarr observes from a safe distance. We discuss the hot issues, along with bizarre comments made by the Republican state chair about Mitt Romney. What are the prospects of the Legislature restoring the DUI blood alcohol content level from the current .05 back to .08, where it was previously?

Pignanelli: "Controversial proposals, once accepted, soon become hallowed." — Dean Acheson

Advocates of the lower threshold flaunt studies demonstrating that lives will be saved with the change — a real possibility. Also, studies from national transportation safety organizations document many road fatalities occur between 40 mph and 50 mph. Therefore, similar consideration must be given to a statewide speed limit of 40 mph — which would save many Utahns. But such consistency of analysis in this issue will suffer the same fate as my social life after the new law becomes effective. There just are not enough fellow imbibers on Capitol Hill to move any change.

Webb: It’s pretty simple. If you drink alcohol, don’t drive. Don’t become a highway hazard. A recent comprehensive report from the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine strongly recommended lowering the legal limit for DUI from .08 to .05 nationwide, as Utah did last year, although the law hasn’t taken effect yet.

This wasn’t a bunch of goody-goody teetotaling Mormon legislators harassing drinkers. It was a 520-page report by the nation’s top scientists and experts on the dangers of driving while impaired.

The report noted that drunk driving killed 10,500 people in 2016, 28 percent of total roadway deaths that year. The National Transportation Safety Board has also conducted a number of prominent studies making the same recommendation. The research concluded that essentially all drivers experience some level of impairment at the .05 level. Rep. Tim Quinn is moving legislation that would entirely eliminate the sales tax on food, while slightly raising the general sales tax to offset impact to the budget. Also, his bill restores the full sales tax on candy and other sugary products. Where is it going?

Pignanelli: Rep. Quinn has a serious problem — his bill makes too much sense. Taxes on food are horribly regressive on lower and middle income families. Generations from now our descendants will label sugar as the poison that killed millions of poor addicted Americans (I too suffer a sweet tooth). Quinn deserves kudos for fighting unfairness and unhealthiness.

Webb: As I’ve written previously, this is ill-advised legislation that should be composted with the rest of the garbage. The sales tax base is already shrinking and lawmakers are desperately trying to shore it up by taxing online sales and possibly services. The tax on food is already mostly gone, and low-income people won’t even notice a difference. Other ways exist to help them. Don’t destroy the tax base. The House has been struggling with marijuana bills, but eventually passed two bills related to medical marijuana. Will the use of pot in some fashion be legalized in Utah?

Pignanelli: Lawmakers have a legitimate fear that the initiative petition to legalize the use of marijuana could get on the ballot and pass in a general election. Some details of the petition are concerning to policymakers. Thus, there is a strong likelihood legislators will enact something to allow limited access to the forbidden plant. This will provide relief for hundreds of families, but deflect a perceived overbroad initiative.

Webb: It’s ridiculous that necessary studies haven’t been completed settling questions of marijuana medical benefits. We ought to be going on more than anecdotes. Regardless, medical marijuana will eventually be authorized in Utah — heavily regulated and monitored. There is talk of legislators giving teachers a very big raise. Will they?

Pignanelli: Lawmakers remain concerned about the Our Schools Now initiative to raise taxes for public education. Legislators have been increasing the Weighted Pupil Unit at admirable percentages, but such jargon means nothing to most voters. But placing more cash into their children’s teachers' wallet immediately resonates and gives pause to raise taxes through the initiative. Pretty shrewd.

Webb: Anything would be nice, but Utah won’t achieve education excellence with a token salary boost. Legislative funding for education in real dollars has been flat for many years. A substantial increase is needed for salaries and other proven enhancements. In a newspaper interview, GOP Chair Rob Anderson harshly criticized presumptive U.S. Senate candidate Mitt Romney. Is he crazy, or just a clown?

Pignanelli: Romney is the dream candidate who likely stops the “Blue Wave” in Utah, and could help non-incumbent GOP candidates down ballot. Yet, the Republican chairman launched personal attacks — more vicious than from any Democrat — against Utah’s favorite son. He should forget apologies and claim he is channeling Donald Trump. Or just plead insanity.

Webb: I have defended Rob Anderson, but his Romney comments parroting right-wing fringe people are indefensible. So much for Anderson’s efforts to woo mainstream Republicans. Here’s some advice to normal Republicans: Don’t give any money to a Republican Party with such irrational leadership.

Frank R. Pignanelli and LaVarr Webb: Legislative highs and lows, Romney’s run and city/state intrigue

With lawmakers busily adding pages to the Utah Code, Mitt Romney making an anticlimactic announcement this week and city leaders warily eyeing legislative ambition, there’s never a dull moment in Utah politics. Here are questions pondered by enquiring minds. Three weeks into the legislative session, how is the session going?

Pignanelli: “The legislator learns that when you talk a lot, you get in trouble. You have to listen a lot to make deals.” — Bob Woodward

Some lawmakers are commenting how constituents seem less interested in legislative activities this year, despite prodding through social media. The Washington circus is grabbing all the attention, so this perceived silence should be construed in a positive manner.

While the feds are busy congratulating each other for doing their job to avoid shutdowns, the Utah Legislature is performing some heavy lifting. Key lawmakers are intensely re-examining the business taxation system with a focus on 21st-century dynamics. While mind-numbing to follow, the results will be important. Also, Democrats and Republicans are partnering on a host of criminal justice, technology, health care and air quality issues.

Every session, the Capitol is flooded with thousands seeking state appropriations for worthy (and some questionable) projects. Increasingly, lawmakers are demanding quantifiable “return on investment” metrics from requesters. This is dramatically changing the budget process, especially from the top.

Speaker Greg Hughes, a founding father of Operation Rio Grande, speaks eloquently of data analytics and computer dashboards to ensure success of this important project. Senate President Wayne Niederhauser offers compelling efficiency principles while advocating for the toll road in Little Cottonwood Canyon.

Political muscle must now be accompanied by an analytical brain.

Webb: Here are the valentines of the session: Sen. Wayne Harper and a lot of other forward-thinking lawmakers, along with transportation agencies and business groups, are transforming funding and governance of transportation infrastructure in Utah. SB 136 positions Utah for rapid population growth and will help prevent highway gridlock in the future. It is smart, progressive legislation that encourages multimodal transportation planning and will likely result in more much-needed funding for public transit. Niederhauser is also modernizing Utah’s tolling statutes to reduce congestion in Wasatch Front canyons and position Utah for the future. Nice job to all concerned.

Here are the session stinkers: Rep. Dan McCay is pushing the anti-John Curtis bill that would eliminate primaries in U.S. House special elections, throw voters off the party nomination bus and tie the governor’s hand in replacing a U.S. senator.

Here’s a novel idea: How about letting party voters choose party nominees?

Equally smelly is Rep. Mike Schultz’s bill that would reverse the will of voters if they raise taxes for education by supporting the Our Schools Now ballot proposal in November. It takes remarkable chutzpah to attempt to negate a vote of the people before you even know how the people will vote.

A final stinker is HB 148, which would eliminate the very small (1.75 percent) state sales tax on unprepared food at precisely the same time wise leaders are trying to broaden the tax base, not narrow it even more. The bill runs against every principle of good taxation policy. And it won’t make an iota of difference to low-income people.

If any of these bills pass, hopefully a gubernatorial veto will relegate them to the garbage bin of malodorous laws.

Mitt Romney is poised to enter the U.S. Senate race on Thursday. What are the local and national implications?

Pignanelli: Usually Americans ignore congressional elections outside their home state. But every generation offers a candidate who compels national attention as a possible game changer within their party (i.e., Robert F. Kennedy, 1968; Hillary Clinton, 2000). Romney is definitely in this category, as the GOP believes his gravitas will bend a worrisome direction in Washington.

Therefore, Utahns can expect extensive media coverage of the Romney campaign from the announcement to Election Day. A resulting positive is a new group of visitors will learn of Utah’s unique qualities — especially fry sauce.

Webb: If Romney runs a grass-roots, Utah-centric campaign up and down the state where he goes to the convention, really connects with Utahns and seeks to earn their votes, he will help other Republicans on the ballot (especially Rep. Mia Love), and we’ll feel like we’re electing a real Utahn.

If he runs an aloof, rose-garden campaign that relies on his star power and amounts to a coronation, he will still win. But it will be a big missed opportunity. Salt Lake City’s northwest quadrant is a big development opportunity. But the state and city visions for the area might spark a power struggle. Is the Legislature going to pull rank on the city?

Pignanelli: Mayor Jackie Biskupski inherited a troublesome legacy. Many Utahns, including city residents, view City Hall as a bureaucracy slow to move and unresponsive to necessary changes. Realizing the economic potential of this area for industry requires vision and flexibility, which state leaders believe the city does not possess. The mayor is trying to modify this judgment but has years of baggage to jettison.

Webb: With a new international airport, a potential global trade port, new infrastructure associated with the new state prison and enormous trucking and freight rail operations close by, the northwest quadrant has unlimited potential for manufacturing, distribution and intermodal activities.

The fight will be over governance, with the state likely to create some sort of authority that might usurp city zoning and taxation. Watch for a compromise to emerge.