Race relations, riots, compassion — and Utah politics

The protests, both peaceful and violent, along with demonstrations of compassion and government reactions, will influence elections and politics. With appropriate sensitivity, hopefully, we explore.

By Frank Pignanelli & LaVarr Webb

After the record-setting heat and boiling emotions of last week, cooler temperatures are a welcome relief on all fronts. But the protests, both peaceful and violent, along with demonstrations of compassion and government reactions, will influence elections and politics. With appropriate sensitivity, hopefully, we explore.

Hundreds of American cities experienced violent protests after the death of George Floyd at the hands of Minneapolis police officers. How will the responses by President Donald Trump, Congress, governors and city officials impact national politics?

Pignanelli: “We are one American family … united in common values, belief in equality under the law, basic respect for public order, and the right of peaceful protest.” — Former President Barack Obama

A shiny silver lining does glow in these dark clouds dominating our horizon. The disgust and condemnation of the circumstances surrounding Mr. Floyd’s torture and death was absolute and universal. Police officers were clearly outraged. This is a hallmark of our national character of which we should be proud.

Americans grasp this comprehensive condemnation by all demographic elements and sympathize with public statements demanding change and action. But they do not understand if everyone agrees, why is violence and vandalism occurring? These senseless actions, and the perceived confused response by some officials, is creating a sense of insecurity. In such chaos Trump thrives. Further, he understands the power of symbols and will use them repeatedly to communicate strength and willingness to provide protection, especially to solidify his base.

Our political history is replete with examples of leaders using tough talk, and sometimes action, to bolster their campaign messaging (i.e. Richard Nixon in 1968) This is especially powerful when the episodes of violence are frequent, ubiquitous and close to home (as are the current protests). So, a range of candidates will reuse the traditional stands against the dangerous elements plaguing the streets.

But there is a new symbol developing — that all politicos must understand. The recurring image of a well-armed policeman or guardsman “taking a knee” with protesters instantaneously demonstrates both strength and compassion. This is another wonderful silver lining.

Webb: The death of George Floyd is a tragedy and should prompt introspection and a commitment in all of us to improve and treat all people with love and equality.

From a purely political perspective, this whole matter hardens attitudes and positions and cuts both ways. As usual in this crazy political environment it also becomes all about Trump. His hard positions on rioting and violence infuriates liberals in Congress and the big cities.

But in the heartland, in the smaller communities across America, ordinary people watching the cities in flames and police officers being attacked with bricks and bottles are horrified by what appears to be anarchy. Trump is their hero.

While all reasonable Americans want justice for George Floyd and want to improve race relations, the riots and violence haven’t united America, but have furthered the divide. Politicians will follow their constituents.

Personally, I am repulsed by the treatment and death of George Floyd, as I am by all such horrific incidents. The resulting protests have helped me understand the pain and depth of feeling among black Americans and other minority groups. I know I am not as empathetic and understanding as I should be. I can listen more and be more committed to civility, inclusion and racial harmony.

I reject the notion, however, that we are a racist country. I do not agree that systemic racism proliferates in our law enforcement communities. Looking back at my nearly 70 years of life, I am certain we have made dramatic progress in our communities our state and our country on race relations. In fact, I believe less racism exists today than ever before. There is more opportunity and more tolerance. But we can certainly do better, and I personally commit to do so.

Salt Lake City also suffered violence, flames, vandalism and injuries. But there were also acts of understanding and compassion. How will these incidents affect elections and the relationships between state and local officials?

Pignanelli: A week ago, thousands of Utah witnessed on live television violence and vandalism. Immediately after watching a police car set on fire, many assumed a response by authorities. Instead, clearly restrained law-enforcement was on display. Because Salt Lake is the political, religious, cultural and economic “capital” of Utah, state officials will focus on how the city responds to similar demonstrations.

Webb: Cooperation and collaboration among leaders and different levels of government was excellent. Police conduct, overall, was outstanding. Second-guessers will find things to complain about but, given the circumstances, we ought to say thanks to all involved.

Will the interaction of police with people of color, and any resulting public reactions, become a permanent issue for politicians?

Pignanelli: Yes. Intense media exposure, combined with the emotions underlying protests, creates a political dynamic at every level of our democracy.

Webb: The blemishes of societal race relations are not going away soon and are incredibly complex and difficult to solve. I’ve been touched by the outpouring of positive and sensitive statements from church leaders, businesses, nonprofits and all sorts of other institutions. Many of us are committed to do better. That’s a start.

Summer weather is warming up, and so is the Utah GOP governor nomination race

By Frank Pignanelli & LaVarr Webb, Contributors

Finally! Utahns are talking more about politics than about some virus. (At least it seems so in our political bubble-world.) Dominating this banter is the four-person race to become the Republican nominee for governor. This once-quiet contest has now become a heated battle with unusual issues. We have some fun with it all.

One of the hot controversies is the potential for unaffiliated voters and Democrats to register as Republicans so they can vote in the GOP primary. While this possibility has long existed, some candidates are aggressively recruiting independents and even Democrats. Will enough people become temporary Republicans to impact the June 30 primary election?

Pignanelli: “A vote is like a rifle; its usefulness depends upon the character of the user.” —Theodore Roosevelt

For decades, activists warned that hordes of unregistered voters would invade party primaries.

It never happened. But this year could be different — and Republicans should accept the compliment. Because of the pandemic and the recession, unaffiliated voters (most are right of center) have a legitimate interest in the governor’s race for all the right reasons (i.e., the economy, business acumen, leadership experience, etc.) Therefore, there is a greater receptivity — even among some Democrats — to cast a ballot in June when the next chief executive is in reality chosen. All the candidates and their running mates possess strong qualities and attract support across the political spectrum.

Jon Huntsman Jr. is popular with the unaffiliated Utahns. Shrewdly, his supporters are aggressively recruiting this quadrant because in a four-way race, an additional sliver of support will make the difference (and will not be delivered by cannibalizing others).

The over 600,000 unaffiliated Utahns are not reprobates. They are independent-minded individuals suspicious of labels. Especially because of the current crisis, these Utahns (including yours truly) hold a deep civic obligation to participate in this important election, regardless of the extra “paperwork.”

The GOP should be proud it fielded four strong teams that appeal beyond traditional ranks. Just accept the compliment.

(Note: My firm proudly represents the Huntsman Foundation and my wife was a political appointee of Gov. Huntsman)

Webb: Usually, efforts to register non-Republicans have limited success. It’s harder than it seems to get substantial numbers of unaffiliated voters or Democrats to register as Republicans and vote in a primary. But because this race really will determine Utah’s next governor, any Utah voter who wants a voice, who wants their vote to count, might be enticed to crash the GOP primary.

What’s more, with four solid candidates, this could be a very tight race. A few votes from temporary Republicans could make the difference. Both Jon Huntsman and Spencer Cox could attract some independent votes, although polls show Huntsman is likely the biggest beneficiary.

While some are crying foul at the prospect of the Republican Party being “infiltrated” by more moderate voters, there is nothing nefarious about seeking this advantage. Any candidate with a smidgen of sense attempts to register as many supporters as possible and get them to the polls. It’s perfectly legal and proper to recruit supporters and get them registered.

If the race is extremely close, a big registration effort could produce a win.

If unaffiliated voters registering as Republicans are perceived as altering the gubernatorial primary, could this result in election law changes? Would party leaders, lawmakers and the future governor consider abolishing party registration, or creating obstacles to switching registration, or perhaps establishing a “jungle primary” to determine the two highest vote getters for the general election — regardless of party?

Pignanelli: Primary elections are funded by all taxpayers. Fairness dictates those paying the freight deserve a ride. As the national rancor of partisanship increases, more Utahns will recoil at registration. Thus, policymakers will be pressured against further hindrances. But a bipartisan “jungle primary” is unlikely.

Webb: Ronald Reagan’s “big tent” GOP would seek to appeal to good Utahns with ideologies ranging from moderate to conservative. The elitist idea that party members must be “pure” and pass arch-conservative litmus tests, is nonsense. Most Utah independents lean Republican. The Utah GOP ought to open its primary elections and welcome all interested Utahns to help select party nominees. Such action would strengthen the party, not weaken it.

Bryan Schott of UtahPolicy.com reported that Gov. Gary Herbert urged Thomas Wright to withdraw and endorse Cox. Does this change anything?

Pignanelli: Politicos, intrigued by this gossip, flapped gums about the potential impact on the race and the “good guy” image Cox possesses. Most experts believe the matter fades …unless an opponent uses the story in a clever manner.

Webb: All’s fair in love, war and politics. There’s nothing improper about a high-profile supporter of one candidate trying to talk a competing candidate out of running. In any event, Wright is staying in the race.

What’s the political impact of the state budget collapse?

By Frank Pignanelli & LaVarr Webb

Ouch! Legislative and executive branch fiscal analysts last week predicted a major hit to the state budget as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic. We knew it would happen — but it still hurts. Obviously, this is an indication of an economy in free-fall. The question is not if, but how, these challenges impact politics.Lawmakers will meet after Memorial Day to review budget cut options of 2%, 5% and 10%. These recommendations will be finalized in a June special session after new revenue collection numbers are reported. All of this is occurring at the height of a campaign season and on the eve of the primary election. This is unprecedented in modern history. How do gubernatorial and legislative candidates respond? Who is advantaged or disadvantaged?

Pignanelli: “Here’s what I know about political campaigns: No matter what you map out at the beginning, it’s always different at the end.” — Chris Christie

All politicians venture through an obstacle course when campaigning. But a pandemic budget creates a new feature resembling a minefield as all Utahns will feel the pain. Weaving between the current emotional issues requires extreme dexterity to avoid a misstep. Thus, candidates cannot just broadcast ideological pablum as voters will demand a substantive response to the dilemma.Candidates need a working knowledge of the budget to craft a message demonstrating their competency. Campaigns will be inundated with inquiries regarding their position on specific funding, plans to reinvigorate the economy and views on social distancing. Because much of the electioneering will be through social media, no one can hide.Politicians who construct a plan with specifics, sensitivities and accountabilities cleverly marketed through traditional and new media will have an advantage.

Remember, the best route through a minefield is a map.

Webb: While it is unfair to blame the impact of a fast-moving international crisis on local politicians, some candidates will certainly try to exploit the situation. Whether they will be successful depends on the good sense of voters.

It’s likely that never in Utah history has state government been clobbered with a budget decline so big and so fast. Local governments face the same revenue collapse. But voters aren’t nearly as worried about government finances as they are about their own finances. Tens of thousands of Utahns are reeling under the economic shutdown.

While Utah political leaders didn’t cause the crisis, it is fair, of course, to judge their response. But it’s hard to be too critical because state leaders have been fast and forthright, making pretty good decisions on the fly with limited information and no precedent — balancing health concerns against economic concerns.

In hindsight, there will be plenty to quibble about. But critics should be asked, “What would you have done at that point in time with the information available and in the context of national and international conditions?”

The state’s actions have been measured and based on available data. The results have been quite good compared to many other states. Utah is opening back up and the virus is generally under control.

What happens politically will depend on the mood of voters come November — will they feel the government-forced economic crisis was worse than the health crisis? If so, fair or not, they might take frustrations out on those who made the decisions.

Will the election alter budget deliberations? Will the pandemic change traditional fiscal procedures?

Pignanelli: Special interest organizations will argue, with some legitimacy, their constituents should not endure the same level of budget reductions as other programs. Advocates for the impoverished, disabled and Medicaid will contend the pandemic especially reaffirms a need for adequate resources. Although the budget will be determined in a special session(s), candidates should expect that the battle over funding for many items will occur on the campaign trail.

Also, the pandemic will likely alter the process and the details in the budget. Normally, deliberations during the legislative session shield against too many external pressures. But a special session (or sessions) during the campaign offers no such protection.

Webb: The crisis affirms the wisdom of many years of conservative budgeting, socking away money in reserves, and restraining the growth of government. Frugality pays off. Unlike the feds, Utah lawmakers can’t print money or run up huge debts.

The fiscal analyst did reveal some silver linings. As has been recognized in the national media, Utah is well prepared to absorb these blows and flourish in a post-pandemic world. Why is that?

Pignanelli: As a lawmaker and lobbyist, I witnessed the careful and usually painful deliberations conducted by legislators of both parties to construct a well-managed state government structure. They received very little credit other than national organizations frequently complimenting Utah for such quality governance. Bottom line, it is a testimony to our incredible culture.

Webb: Utah has wisely spent billions of dollars in cash for needed buildings and highways. It can now bond for those capital projects at very low rates and free up sales tax money for necessary state services. With some $5.4 billion in reserves of some sort, the state has flexibility. But it would be a mistake to quickly deplete reserves. This crisis may last a long time and may get worse.

It’s the summer of the pandemic and an election. What will the political slogans look like?

By Frank Pignanelli & LaVarr Webb

Memorial Day is the unofficial start of summer. Each summer is unique. LaVarr is so old he actually remembers the “Summer of Love” (1967) when he was in high school — although Provo was quite the opposite of Haight-Ashbury in San Francisco.

Frank has enjoyed many memorable summers. Many of them are a little fuzzy — although nothing as hardcore as what they did in Haight-Ashbury.

The summer of 2020 will go down in history as the “Summer of Pandemic” — a summer unlike any of us have ever experienced. Nevertheless, life — and politics — must go on. The warm weather brings the sprint to the June 30 primary election, and voters will be inundated over the next few weeks with TV, radio, print and social media ads.

We thought candidates might need a little help developing catchy messages that really attract attention after Memorial Day. So, we’re offering a few slogans. No cost to use.

Jon Huntsman Jr. for governor: “I lived in Beijing. I lived in Moscow. I lived in Washington, D.C. So, I am never leaving Utah again. Never. I repeat, never.”

Spencer Cox for governor: “I am proud to lead the COVID-19 Task Force and the state into the recovery phase of yellow/green — which happen to be my campaign colors. Can’t argue with fate.”

Greg Hughes for governor: “Utah needs Hughes. He throws strongest punch. Early Trump supporter. Best Hair.”

Thomas Wright for governor: “Former chair of Utah Republican Party. There is no better crisis management training. And I have the funniest TV ads.”

Chris Peterson for governor: “Bank regulator. Law professor. Finally, a boring Utah Democrat.”

John Dougall for auditor: “The auditor Utah needs. I terrify government agencies and bureaucrats. I frighten recipients of taxpayer dollars. I scare Democrats from challenging me.”

Brian Fabbi for auditor: “Church accountant. It takes a lot of faith to lead the Utah United ticket.”

David Damschen for treasurer: “Just enjoying a smooth, unopposed ride. See ya at the victory party in November.”

Rep. Rob Bishop for lieutenant governor: “Good News. The commercials are correct. Wright has bright ideas, but I have the judgement (and hair).”

Victor Iverson for lieutenant governor: “It is great to be part of the Trump-flavored Hughes campaign. I can say or do anything and no one is shocked.“

Lieutenant governor candidate Deidre Henderson: “I am ready to be lieutenant governor. Eight years in the state Senate taught me how to quietly succeed without offending.”

Lieutenant governor candidate Michele Kaufusi: “History repeats. Remember the last time Huntsman picked a local official from Utah County as a running mate.”

Sean Reyes for attorney general: “Hey, Trump endorsed me. ’Nuff said.”

David Leavitt for attorney general: “The only candidate with the courage to keep his beard during the campaign.

Greg Skordas for attorney general: “Led the real-life Utah version of ‘Law & Order: Special Victims Unit.’ Try to beat that.”

Utahns for Trump: “We need a president with great courage ... and a stomach of steel who can consume hydroxychloroquine.”

Utahns for Joe Biden: “Biden and Trump may confuse facts, stumble over phrases, reconfigure history, suffer issues with harassment and speak too long. But Biden is nicer at it.”

Ben McAdams for Congress: “I survived COVID-19. Working to represent all Utahns. COVID-19 Survivor. Member of bipartisan Coalition of Problem Solvers. Did I mention I survived COVID-19.”

John Curtis for Congress: “I respect Utah voters. I gave you the best campaign commercial of 2020.”

Chris Stewart for Congress: “Squashing socialists and Chinese communists wherever I can find ’em!”

Kael Weston, Democratic candidate for 2nd Congressional District, and Devin Thorpe, Democratic candidate for 3rd Congressional District: “Supported by over 80% of convention delegates. What a victory! ... From there on it has been all downhill.”

Four Republican candidates in the 1st Congressional District: “We need a (man/woman) who can maintain the (legacy/tradition) that Rob Bishop brought to our district, but I promise to wear (socks/no sweaters).”

Four Republican candidates in the 4th Congressional District: “We need a (man/woman) who can (defeat/ obliterate) McAdams and go to Washington to (punish Pelosi/ blow up the deep state) and (seek bipartisan solutions/ preserve conservative values)

Democratic candidates in the 1st Congressional District: “Counting on another blue wave. It could happen. It really could.”

Republican incumbent legislative candidates: “This is the time for all of us to come together and solve problems. So let’s forget all those tax reform votes.”

Democratic legislative candidates: “We are doing what needs to be done: Nitpicking, second-guessing and Monday morning quarterbacking.”

Outside left-wing special interest groups: “Defend the Constitution and American values. Dump Trump. Vote Democrat.”

Outside right-wing special interest groups: “Defend the Constitution and American values. Fight Pelosi. Vote Republican.”

All Utah politicians: “Unite in providing self-esteem to those suffering incurable cluelessness. Be kind and read Pignanelli/Webb each Sunday.

What’s the political impact of the state budget collapse?

Ouch! Legislative and executive branch fiscal analysts last week predicted a major hit to the state budget as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic. We knew it would happen — but it still hurts. Obviously, this is an indication of an economy in free-fall. The question is not if, but how, these challenges impact politics.

Lawmakers will meet after Memorial Day to review budget cut options of 2%, 5% and 10%. These recommendations will be finalized in a June special session after new revenue collection numbers are reported. All of this is occurring at the height of a campaign season and on the eve of the primary election. This is unprecedented in modern history. How do gubernatorial and legislative candidates respond? Who is advantaged or disadvantaged?

Pignanelli: “Here’s what I know about political campaigns: No matter what you map out at the beginning, it’s always different at the end.” — Chris Christie

All politicians venture through an obstacle course when campaigning. But a pandemic budget creates a new feature resembling a minefield as all Utahns will feel the pain. Weaving between the current emotional issues requires extreme dexterity to avoid a misstep. Thus, candidates cannot just broadcast ideological pablum as voters will demand a substantive response to the dilemma.

Candidates need a working knowledge of the budget to craft a message demonstrating their competency. Campaigns will be inundated with inquiries regarding their position on specific funding, plans to reinvigorate the economy and views on social distancing. Because much of the electioneering will be through social media, no one can hide.

Politicians who construct a plan with specifics, sensitivities and accountabilities cleverly marketed through traditional and new media will have an advantage.

Remember, the best route through a minefield is a map.

Webb: While it is unfair to blame the impact of a fast-moving international crisis on local politicians, some candidates will certainly try to exploit the situation. Whether they will be successful depends on the good sense of voters.

It’s likely that never in Utah history has state government been clobbered with a budget decline so big and so fast. Local governments face the same revenue collapse. But voters aren’t nearly as worried about government finances as they are about their own finances. Tens of thousands of Utahns are reeling under the economic shutdown.

While Utah political leaders didn’t cause the crisis, it is fair, of course, to judge their response. But it’s hard to be too critical because state leaders have been fast and forthright, making pretty good decisions on the fly with limited information and no precedent — balancing health concerns against economic concerns.

In hindsight, there will be plenty to quibble about. But critics should be asked, “What would you have done at that point in time with the information available and in the context of national and international conditions?”

The state’s actions have been measured and based on available data. The results have been quite good compared to many other states. Utah is opening back up and the virus is generally under control.

What happens politically will depend on the mood of voters come November — will they feel the government-forced economic crisis was worse than the health crisis? If so, fair or not, they might take frustrations out on those who made the decisions.

Will the election alter budget deliberations? Will the pandemic change traditional fiscal procedures?

Pignanelli: Special interest organizations will argue, with some legitimacy, their constituents should not endure the same level of budget reductions as other programs. Advocates for the impoverished, disabled and Medicaid will contend the pandemic especially reaffirms a need for adequate resources. Although the budget will be determined in a special session(s), candidates should expect that the battle over funding for many items will occur on the campaign trail.

Also, the pandemic will likely alter the process and the details in the budget. Normally, deliberations during the legislative session shield against too many external pressures. But a special session (or sessions) during the campaign offers no such protection.

Webb: The crisis affirms the wisdom of many years of conservative budgeting, socking away money in reserves, and restraining the growth of government. Frugality pays off. Unlike the feds, Utah lawmakers can’t print money or run up huge debts.

The fiscal analyst did reveal some silver linings. As has been recognized in the national media, Utah is well prepared to absorb these blows and flourish in a post-pandemic world. Why is that?

Pignanelli: As a lawmaker and lobbyist, I witnessed the careful and usually painful deliberations conducted by legislators of both parties to construct a well-managed state government structure. They received very little credit other than national organizations frequently complimenting Utah for such quality governance. Bottom line, it is a testimony to our incredible culture.

Webb: Utah has wisely spent billions of dollars in cash for needed buildings and highways. It can now bond for those capital projects at very low rates and free up sales tax money for necessary state services. With some $5.4 billion in reserves of some sort, the state has flexibility. But it would be a mistake to quickly deplete reserves. This crisis may last a long time and may get worse.

Will balanced federalism be the pandemic’s next victim?

By Frank Pignanelli & LaVarr Webb

In the last six weeks, the pandemic has changed everything: how we interact, work, communicate, learn, travel, eat and recreate. It is also causing heated arguments over the roles and responsibilities of the different levels of government.

Some say the federal government should have shut down the entire nation and been more aggressive in assisting states. Some say state governments were unduly prescriptive, or too weak, in giving directives to local jurisdictions. Responding to COVID-19 is a rigorous test of our federalist system. It’s almost too much for our homebound-enfeebled minds, but we do our best to explain.

How will the federal and state responses to the pandemic alter their relationships? Are the venerable principles of balanced federalism being enhanced or diminished?

Pignanelli: “Federalism has been likened to a layer cake in that no one fully understands how layer cakes are constructed and layer cakes can always assert eminent domain.” —Alexandra Petri, Washington Post

Every family endures longtime comfort arguments — choosing the game for get-togethers, determining holiday decorations, planning travel, etc. (My clan vigorously disputes the best meatball recipes.) These endless quarrels are important because they define us. Tugs of wars between Washington, D.C., and the 50 state capitals must never cease, as they buttress our democracy. We need the fight.

Responses to the pandemic are rapidly altering this debate. Every day, Americans learn of state officials overcoming challenges while implementing creative programs to help their citizens. Contemporaneously, Congress continuously bickers while handing out loads of cash, laced with frustrating bureaucratic obstacles. An unusual twist occurred when left-wing New York Governor Andrew Cuomo pushed back against Pres. Donald Trump’s assertion he had ultimate authority over the states. This was followed by the President lecturing a fellow Republican, and governor, when to reopen Georgia for business.

Some observers believe the pandemic will prompt an even more expansive national presence and control. But the states’ demonstrated ability to innovate and problem-solve refutes the conjecture they are just administrative units of a bloated national government.

What a wonderful episode of a crucial centuries-old squabble.

Webb: Vice President Mike Pence has frequently said the pandemic would be “federally supported, state managed and locally executed.” That is precisely the proper approach, respecting our system of federalism. However, the execution has been untidy and wildly inconsistent. Of course, much of the chaos can be attributed to the “fog of war” — of necessity charging ahead in crisis mode with little information or precedent.

Despite a few erratic statements by President Donald Trump (like he alone has “total authority” reopen the country), the administration has gotten the relationships mostly right. The federal government established guidelines, but states have been free to close or open their economies. Despite harsh criticism from many liberals and the national news media, Trump was correct to allow maximum flexibility to state leaders. One size does not fit all states or localities, even in a national emergency.

In general, states are supposed to play co-equal roles with the federal government. But one area where equality is not even close is in the financial realm — paying for the costs of the crisis and providing financial relief for individuals, businesses, nonprofits and state/local governments.

That’s because only the federal government has the ability to print money and borrow without restraint. I’m not complaining, because this is a true national crisis, and when government forces an economic implosion, it should try to pay some of the costs. But the unfathomable debt produced by the several multitrillion dollar bailout packages may be the most lasting impact of the COVID-19 crisis.

How has Utah state government performed in its relationship with both the federal government and local governments?

Pignanelli: Our troubled history with the federal government paid dividends again. The Herbert administration did not wait for instructions and moved fast to implement a plan that balanced safety and economic security. Utah appreciates the federal minting presses, but established state and private mechanisms to ensure qualified businesses and individuals received funds.

A patchwork of restrictions creates confusion for business in an already chaotic environment, and the state appropriately restricted cities and counties from enhancing restrictions unless extenuating circumstances were present. This consistency was especially important as most Utahns live along the I-15 corridor.

Webb: While critics with 20-20 hindsight are beginning the game of second-guessing crisis-mode decisions made by the Herbert administration, I would challenge any of the naysayers to explain precisely what they would have done in the same situation with the same information (or lack thereof). A crisis is inherently chaotic. Quick decisions have to be made. Expert medical advice has to be followed.

Overall, and in context, the Herbert administration has done an admirable job and citizens should be grateful.

Will the ongoing realignment of politics include a readjustment of support or suspicion of federalism?

Pignanelli: Lefty progressives love D.C. control. Many Trump supporters embrace strong national industrial policy. Conversely, Gen Zers and millennials seem to favor local perspectives. The ground underlying federalism is shifting.

Webb: A real danger of a national crisis is that the resulting “new normal” is bigger, more expensive government, and loss of freedom. But I believe balanced federalism will survive. Certainly, the pandemic has demonstrated the important roles of each level of government and how they need to work collaboratively.

The pandemic has caused political processes to change. Will it be permanent?

How we conduct elections and lawmaking could be changed forever.

By Frank Pignanelli & LaVarr Webb

Yes, your columnists can often be hyperbolic (especially Frank). But the last several weeks have been truly remarkable at the intersection of politics, technology and the pandemic. How we conduct elections and lawmaking could be changed forever. We do our best to tamp down emotions and explain why.

The Utah Republican and Democratic parties conducted their nominating conventions by remote speechmaking and voting. Were there surprises and did the new process impact the outcome? Is this a harbinger of political gatherings in the 21st century?

Pignanelli: “All great discoveries and paradigm shifts are always stimulated by an external event.” — Roberto Esposito

Being overdramatic is a fundamental element of my Italian Irish heritage — which is handy in analyzing these new developments. The state and county conventions held in April were a HUGE shift in electioneering. Over 93% of Republican and 85% of Democrat delegates participated in the online voting process. More amazing is most attendees were holdovers from the 2018 precinct caucuses. Participants agree the events were successful. Party leaders must consider this alternative for future gatherings.

The convention outcomes destroyed any conventional wisdom. Lt. Gov. Spencer Cox outperformed polls and projections. This reflects his high-profile leadership of the COVID-19 pandemic task force.

The delegate/convention system was on a long path to extinction. However, online conventions, with delegates chosen by electronic means, may preserve this legacy for decades.

So let me wave my arms and exclaim this was really a big deal.

Webb: Convention reviews were mostly positive. The good news was no one had to spend a full day at a convention center. The bad news was that the rush and vibe and magic of being at an exciting, dynamic political convention was lost.

The serendipity and undercurrents of several thousand noisy political activists gathering in one spot was missing. A political convention can take on a life of its own. With great planning, a stemwinding speech, and a penchant to create floor buzz, a candidate can swing a lot of votes in convention. I’ve seen it happen many times. Like in an exciting basketball or football game, you can feel the momentum shift.

It’s fun to watch the floor management, the stunts and events. There’s not much intrigue in watching recorded speeches or voting remotely. The patriotic fervor of a political convention can’t be matched sitting in your pajamas with a laptop or iPad.

So I expect live, in-person conventions will return at some point. However, this year’s experience and technology can absolutely be used to involve more citizens in the political process, especially at party caucuses.

The Utah Legislature conducted two special sessions remotely. Were they successful and will this change legislating forever?

Pignanelli: I watched every second of both special sessions. The proceedings were effective — despite the intriguing and distracting overabundance of facial hair displayed by our elected officials.

Lawmakers passed needed legislation in response to the pandemic while allowing the public to observe the proceedings. Hopefully, future sessions will have a less emergency dynamic, to provide online committee hearings that permit remote public input in some form.

While the use of this system may not be a regular feature for full sessions, I believe commonsense dictates this could be how task forces, some interim committees and other special projects be conducted. This allows both lawmakers and observers from around the state to be engaged without unnecessary cost and effort.

Webb: The sessions worked in an emergency. But remote sausage-making isn’t nearly as good as being there in person, getting your hands greasy. The side discussions, the emotion, the body language, the on-the-spot coalition building are sorely missed. It’s hard to have a passionate debate from a distance.

The GOP has four-way primaries for governor and also in the 1st and 4th congressional districts. How does this impact results?

Pignanelli: All four of the candidates (and the lieutenant governor contenders) in these contests are substantive and charismatic. Also, they all enjoy a political base and will capture a slice of the electorate. Thus, mathematics compel that a person could be the GOP nominee for governor or Congress with 30-35% of the vote. This will alter how campaigns focus resources to excite the base and attract others along the ideological spectrum. Plus, any outreach will occur during a pandemic.

Webb: As I’ve written previously, Utah is assured of having a very good governor beginning next year. All four GOP candidates are solid, capable people. A four-way primary means voter targeting is more important than ever. Candidates must use every means (especially social media and direct mail) to identify likely supporters, communicate frequently and get them to vote. TV and radio ads are important, but not enough.

Leading the state’s COVID-19 response gives Lt. Gov. Spencer Cox an edge. We’ll see how innovative other candidates can be in their pandemic campaigning.

The tactics of targeting likely voters are even more critical in the two congressional districts where most candidates are not well-known.

Are protesters right about getting back to work?

By Frank Pignanelli & LaVarr Webb

The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on politics has expanded beyond campaigning, dueling press conferences and who gets blame or credit. Actions by federal and state governments are generating protests among the general public. We do our best to explain.

As the pandemic shutdown drags on, we’re seeing rallies against “stay-at-home” orders. Are these protests an emotional flash response that will soon fade, or an indicator of much deeper citizen convictions with long-term consequences for society?

Pignanelli: “Most protesters are simply struggling Americans who have concluded that — at least for them — the cure is turning out to be worse than the disease.” — William McGurn, Wall Street Journal.

From the moment the Puritan separatists disembarked from the Mayflower, our country has been a series of arguments and protests. The demonstrations against lockdowns in a dozen states last week reflect this tradition.

Most observers conclude the demonstrations are organic actions organized through social media. Especially compelling is participants are not seeking handouts or anything free. They just want to return to work.

Lower- and middle-income families are suffering through no fault of their own. Yet, their questioning of extreme pandemic restrictions is often labeled as either insensitive or stupid. (My similar inquiries usually generate unkind or patronizing responses.) This only increases the frustration and anger. As these emotions percolate, they will impact the primary and possibly the general elections.

Shrewd politicians will acknowledge that protesters’ demands for employment are a positive — and very American — ritual.

Webb: A natural wariness of the coercive power of government — and its expense — is a healthy thing. So when government suddenly becomes a lot bigger and more intrusive, shutting down the economy and causing massive job loss, the backlash is not a surprise. That’s why it’s important for most governmental directives to be persuasive and voluntary, rather than police-enforced.

Government actions to this point have not been unreasonable, given the health risks, the emergency nature of the pandemic, and lack of accurate information and data. But now it’s time for the next phase.

One big consequence of the pandemic is a dramatic expansion of government power, and the accompanying meteoric increase in government spending. There have also been fascinating debates about the proper roles of different levels of government. It has become clear to me that the concept of balanced federalism is more important than ever. All levels of government have important and complementary roles to play. This emergency should not be an excuse to permanently expand the size and power of the federal government at the expense of states and local governments.

In responding to the coronavirus crisis, has Gov. Gary Herbert been too prescriptive in partially shutting down the state? Overall, how has his administration, and the Legislature, performed?

Pignanelli: Herbert enjoys a well-deserved reputation for appointing competent officials and judges. The incredible health and economic responses developed by his chosen teams magnifies this skill (i.e. TestUtah is an amazing assessment and testing tool — the product of a partnership between Silicon Slopes and the Department of Health, administered by the skillful Nathan Checketts). Herbert has great instincts and supports his people, despite national and local pressure to do otherwise.

The Legislature deserves accolades for responding quickly, in an online special session, to manage the budget and state programs. Furthermore, lawmakers are sensitive to the economic impact and are appropriately pushing hard for Utah to fully reopen for work.

Once again, the “Utah Way” is a practical philosophy adeptly administered by our state leaders.

Webb: Herbert has hit the right balance, mostly issuing directives that don’t carry the force of law, and opening things up as rapidly as possible. The overall state response has been excellent.

Is it now time to start opening up Utah and the country so people can get back to work?

Pignanelli: YES! Facts and the science support opening the state. We can be smart, through testing, tracing, strategic isolating and other activities to promote safety while allowing Utahns do what they do best — working hard and contributing to the community. Reopening the economy will be the best defense when the virus returns later in the year.

Webb: When all is said and done, it’s entirely possible that portions of the country will have overreacted to the coronavirus threat. But our leaders acted on the intelligence available at the time.

Once the initial confusion — the fog of war — has passed, and we have data and knowledge to understand the virus, we’re smart enough to manage the health threat and reopen the economy. We can practice proper hygiene while still engaging in activities critical to economic survival. I have no doubt we can do two things at once.

The entire scientific, intellectual and commercial might of the United States, both public and private sectors, is now arrayed against COVID-19. We have enough creativity and innovation to find solutions to effectively manage the virus and get back to work. This is a problem-solving exercise and most of the solutions will come from the private sector.