Every week during Utah’s legislative session, The Salt Lake Tribune’s political reporters and columnists will chat about the hottest topics of the week. The following is a lightly edited transcript of their conversation.
Benjamin Wood (education reporter): Welcome to this week’s Trib Caucus Slack chat, which will be convening weekly during the 2018 legislative session.
As of tomorrow, we have a fortnight left. I’m starting to see a little light at the end of the tunnel, but the final days are also the busiest. To the team, what should we expect to see in the final two weeks, and how might it be different than the last five? Or, in the immortal words of the 4 Non Blondes: What’s going on?
Michelle Quist (editorial writer): The crowd cheers!!!
Robert Gehrke (political columnist): 4 Non-Blondes. That’s a deep pull @bwood
Wood: It may or may not be my go-to karaoke song (as it is for everyone who does karaoke)
Quist: Is it a GenX thing or something?
Wood: GenX? I’m a *millennial* thank you very much (apologies to all the industries I’ve killed).
Lee Davidson (government reporter): Most bills pass the final three days, and the final day is the busiest. So legislators will be hitting the accelerator. It will also be easier to miss important things that happen.
Quist: I think the point is to miss important things that happen, @leedavidson
Gehrke: I think the big thing will be that we start seeing the budget taking shape. Revenue numbers are coming and we’ll also start seeing the tax bills.
Taylor Anderson (government reporter): Obviously there will be a lot of talk about money (budgeting) but also what the state is going to do with the $80-$100 million it will get from the Trump/Hatch tax bill.
Gehrke: The House yesterday held up a proposed tax cut from Rep. Dan McCay, it would have lowered the rate so taxpayers don’t end up paying that $80-$100 million that Taylor mentioned. House Majority Leader Brad Wilson says House leaders are working on a larger tax bill that we should see by the end of the week.
Wood: How do the current revenue numbers look and do we have any forecast for what the final totals will be?
Davidson: Final numbers come out at noon today, we hear. But lawmakers say they have twice as many serious requests for money as the funds they expect to be available.
Wood: Mo’ money, mo’ requests
Quist: What are the non-serious requests for money?
Davidson: Whatever the other guy asks for, especially if he is a Democrat.
Quist: Right.
Gehrke: Sen. Jerry Stevenson continually points out that there are about $300 million in requests and nowhere near that much money. The numbers will come in in the black, but it’s not clear how healthy they’ll be.
There is some sense that the economy is cooling off a little bit and we may not see the big surpluses we’ve seen in the past.
Wood: And a big chunk of that, likely the biggest chunk, will be for education, yes?
Gehrke: That’s right @bwood. The state has a real problem in that income taxes have been pretty healthy, about 80 percent of the new tax revenues, while sales taxes have lagged. Constitutionally, income taxes all go to education (public and higher ed) and sales taxes are left over to pay for everything else.
Anderson: The House is fractured on what to do with the *state tax hike* that will happen as a result of the federal tax changes. Rep. McCay wants to lower the income tax rate for everyone - businesses and people. Rep. Tim Quinn wants to target lower-income families that will get a bigger state tax hike than richer families. Some want to put that money in the bank or pay existing bills.
Wood: Quinn sponsored yesterday’s bill lowering the sales tax on food. Does that have any traction in the Senate?
Anderson: No. It won’t pass the Senate.
The governor’s chief economist just poo-pooed on it. Am I using that phrase right?
Quist: I don’t think the “on” was necessary, @tanderson
Anderson: Of course, many predicted the food tax bill would never pass the House either, but it did.
Wood: Let’s move away from the numbers for a bit. Speaker Hughes came out strong yesterday for a bill to repeal the death penalty. He’s also been vocal about banning noncompete clauses for members of the media.
Davidson: Make that the broadcast media. Newspapers apparently don’t have them.
Wood: @mquist you’re the Elephant-whisperer in the group. What do you make of this recent push among conservatives to end the death penalty?
Quist: I’m interested that it keeps coming up every year. I think that means Rs aren’t comfortable with it, but it’s so entrenched.
Davidson: Killing the death penalty sounds doubly violent.
Gehrke: The speaker is working hard to finish his term by pushing a few issues that are important to him across the line.
Wood: On the noncompete bill, it doesn’t specify broadcast @LeeDavidson. So in theory if newspapers *wanted* to use them they wouldn't be able to, under the bill
Davidson: Sponsor says he may amend it to specify broadcast.
Gehrke: Are you threatening us with noncompete clauses, Ben?
Wood: Yes. Should any of you choose to leave this chat you will not be able to participate in a Utah politics-related discussions for at least 1 year.
Davidson: I’m out
Quist: I’m pretty sure the DNews isn’t interested in hiring me.
Gehrke: We did see last week that the bigshots at Deseret Media (KSL and DNews) called lawmakers down for a lunch. The head of the DNews said noncompete clauses are vital to a free press — and that they’ve never used them. This is a broadcaster fight.
Wood: I thought it was very interesting that the DNews editor said he doesn’t use them *now* but that he might need to in the future.
Full disclosure: I worked for the DNews from 2012 to 2014 and was able to take my current job because I was not under a noncompete.
Gehrke: Lee had a story today about how the news reporters have been muzzled when it comes to reporting on this and speaking in support of the bill.
Anderson: It’s interesting to see Hughes pick this as one of his big fights for this session. He’s been very vocal in favor of the bill and he’s accused TV stations of gagging their reporters, who hate noncompetes
Quist: The focus on media kind of came from left field, though. Last year it was all noncompetes. Is media really the most important field to pass this for?
Gehrke: The problem Rep. Schultz ran into when he tried to cast a broader net was there was HUGE pushback from the business community and he got pulverized. So he’s trying to target one industry, one that he says abuses noncompetes more egregiously than others.
Anderson: Do you think this push is to get the law in place and then add industries in future sessions?
Gehrke: Schultz said yesterday that he would be open to that, but he doesn’t have plans to do it right now.
Wood: The way both Schultz and Hughes have talked about noncompetes, I don’t see their intent as stopping with media if the bill is successful.
But hey, death penalty. Is that gonna happen this year?
Quist: If the Speaker is on board it could. It’s a long-shot, but you never know.
Wood: Remind me, didn’t the last attempt pass the Senate but stall in the House?
Anderson: Yes it did. That’s why this started in the House.
Gehrke: We’ve had this debate before and it never got there. Sen. Steve Urquhart tried to get it through, but there was pushback in the House.
You have people in the House, like Rep. Paul Ray, who support the death penalty and have passed legislation to expand its application. So I think they’re working in different directions.
Quist: Which was why the speaker’s support yesterday surprised me.
Gehrke: But again, this is one where the speaker is throwing his weight behind it. It got a hearing this morning -- actually it’s still going. But point is they’re trying to move it quickly.
The speaker supported it before, as well. But as Ben noted, it was coming out of the Senate then and it moved pretty late in the session.
Wood: OK, before we get into the lightning round on votes and bills, let’s talk about two big campaign announcements. First I’m shocked, SHOCKED!, that Mitt Romney is running for U.S. Senate. Second, I’m sincerely a little surprised that Jim Dabakis is leaving the state Senate.
Quist: Oh, Romney is?
Gehrke: Wait, Mitt is running for the Senate IN UTAH?!?
Anderson: Does Mitt Romney even shop here?
Wood: WILD right? #Gamechanger
Quist: He’ll be the next senator.
Wood: Michelle beat me to my next question. Real talk: this race is over already, right?
And in fairness to Mitt Romney, LOTS of Utah races are over before they begin
Gehrke: It’s been striking to see how much grumbling there is from the Republicans. They don’t like the coronation and State Auditor John Dougall floated the possibility of running.
Quist: Dougall won’t win, but it would be a good strategy to “get in line.”
Davidson: I’m back. Did a quick phone interview. So did I miss anything?
Wood: Lee did you hear? Mitt Romney is running?!?!?!?
Quist: For Senate. He’s running for Senate. In Utah.
Davidson: WHAAAT? That’s the last time I do a quick interview.
Wood: loooool
Anderson: [image]
Gehrke: The poll The Trib did in January showed him with a 45-point lead over Democrat Jenny Wilson. Hard to know how the Republican field shakes out without knowing who might run, but he’s a huge favorite.
Wood: When is Dougall’s term up. Would he have to quit being auditor?
Quist: I don’t think his term is up this year.
Wood: So if you’re John Dougall, you have little to lose and potentially name-recognition to gain?
Davidson: I actually received at home a survey asking me if I would vote for Dougall over Romney. Dougall asked me what I said. I smiled.
Quist: Dougall is very popular among Republicans and has done a great job in the Auditor’s office.
Gehrke: Let’s be clear: Dougall has zero interest in being in Congress. He just thinks there needs to be a contest.
Quist: That was my impression too. But that’s quite the sacrifice.
Wood: Let’s briefly discuss Dabakis. If you’re a Utah Democrat, that’s one of maybe 3 seats in state government you can expect to win.
Quist: It’s my district. I’m going to run and flip it Republican.
Wood: YOU HEARD IT HERE FIRST FOLKS!
Anderson: 😮
Quist: Just kidding.
Gehrke: Sen. Dabakis served the role of vocal opposition. He is a charismatic guy and probably the best spokesman the Senate Democrats had on a bunch of issues.
That doesn’t translate into getting things done -- passing bills and such.
Quist I heard there are a few Dems interested in the seat.
Anderson: Who wouldn’t be? One of few they can win.
Wood: Dabakis really has a sweet gig. He has carte blanche to be as *out-there* on the left as he cares to be
Quist: Yeah but he doesn’t get anything done.
Anderson: It’ll be interesting to see what, if anything, Dabakis does next. He didn’t deny future runs for office.
Gehrke: My hunch is that he will run for Salt Lake City Mayor next year.
Quist: Help us all.
Davidson: I could also see Dabakis attempt to return to chairman of the Democratic Party.
Wood: If you’re a Democratic senator, you can’t expect to get much done. Dabakis at least appears to have fun losing.
Gehrke: I think we all have fun watching him lose. I mean he kept things entertaining, at least.
Quist: I don’t know, I know what Sen. Escamilla stands for. I don’t know what Dabakis stands for, other than applause.
Davidson: What else is there in politics?
Quist: Policy.
Davidson: Money?
Quist: Policy.
Gehrke: You contrast Dabakis with someone like Sen. Karen Mayne, a senator who is loved by the Republicans, plays ball with the GOP and gets some bills passed. Jim didn’t do that. But I don’t think his constituents wanted him to do that.
Wood: OK I’m going to rattle off a bunch of the votes from the last week. Feel free to jump in on them, or others, as you care to. The bill requiring harassment training for lobbyists passed committee, as did the bill calling for $2 million for a lawsuit against California’s green-energy policies. Rep. Noel’s bill weakening SLC’s control of its drinking water was “tabled”, and both chambers approved a shorter waiting period for divorce.
Quist: I’m surprised by the divorce waiting period, but it makes sense.
Wood: Surprised in which way?
Quist: Surprised that they made it easier to divorce.
Davidson: The new 30-day wait was a compromise. Bill attempted to erase the waiting period. Some conservatives argued that it devalued the sacredness of marriage.
Wood: The sacredness of [toxic and unhealthy] marriages?
Davidson: I’m sure your wife will love reading that @bwood
Wood: I’m referring to marriages headed for divorce, of course
Davidson: That would be half of them, statistically
Quist: Harassment training was a no-brainer.
Gehrke: If anyone can kill the harassment training for lobbyists, it’s lobbyists. But it sounds like it has a lot of support in the #metoo movement.
Anderson: Noel’s water bill came back this morning. It’s not dead yet.
Gehrke: Noel’s water bill -- stripping SLC of its ability to protect the watershed in the canyons — is in committee right now and it sounds like it’ll pass the House. Salt Lake City is fighting that one hard in the Senate.
Quist: Mayor Biskupski hasn’t made many friends.
Gehrke: I think Noel will get some money for this lawsuit against California. Maybe not the full $2 million. We need to keep in mind that this is just a downpayment to get the lawsuit started. There will be millions more that will be needed down the road. And as Brian Maffly reported, this thing was dreamed up by coal companies and lawyers who want taxpayers to foot the bill for this.
Wood: Maffly also reported that similar lawsuits have been attempted, and have failed in near-resounding fashion
Quist: It’s a pretty dumb idea.
Gehrke: Is that your professional opinion, counselor?
Quist: Yes. I’ll send you the bill.
Anderson: Remind me, it’s a lawsuit against California’s cap-and-trade program, which Noel and Coal companies say hurts Utah’s mines?
Gehrke: It is a bad idea. They hang their hat on this Minnesota case, but the Minnesota case is really very different. ... not that anyone will bother reading it and recognizing that’s the case.
Wood: @mquist give me the “State’s Rights” pitch for suing California
Quist: There is no state’s rights pitch for suing California! Not with a straight face anyway. Utah is going to sue California to do what Utah wants it to do with its own land?
Gehrke: I’d just add that California is doing the right thing in trying to cut pollution and curb climate change, things Utah’s Legislature are unwilling to do. They should be applauded, not sued.
Wood: One of these days we’ll find something that Gehrke and Michelle disagree on and then this chat will be off to the races 🙂
Quist: Then you’ll want to talk about caucuses .....
Wood: I was a Republican state delegate once. It was ... an experience
Davidson: Probably a fulfilling experience, judging by how candidates like to feed and woo delegates.
Gehrke: BTW, Noel’s water bill just passed out of committee. Off to the full House!
The death penalty repeal bill also passed the House committee 7-4.
Wood: Wow, life comes at the Trib Caucus fast
Gehrke: And now you’re up-to-date.
Davidson: And Mitt is running for the Senate....
Wood: Wait, WHAT!!!!
Gehrke: From Utah?!?
Davidson: I’m always a bit behind....
Wood: Well on that note we better call it a day. Thanks everyone.
Readers, are you as shocked, SHOCKED!, as we are that Mitt Romney is running? Are there any California laws that you would like to challenge with the backing of taxpayer dollars? Let us know in the comments.
