There’s always a story behind the story and there’s never any shortage of gossip on Utah’s Capitol Hill. In Anonymous Hacks, we provide the cloak of anonymity to some of the most connected politicos and let them spill the tea.
Question 1: Will Governor Spencer Cox follow through on his state of the State speech promise and “veto some of [the Legislature’s] bills…probably more than [his] predecessors”? Why or why not? Which bills is Governor Cox most likely to veto?
– We’ll be pleased to learn he has a spine.
– He is going to let some bad gun bills go through, but he will veto any bills that attack LGBTQ youth, based on his Road Map. A balancing act he’s been trying to walk for a couple years now, between “protecting youth” and appeasing his rural base.
– I think for the first few years, Governor Cox will likely veto more bills than Governor Herbert did – but more out of keeping a promise than focusing on good policy.
– He will not veto any bills because that would hurt the legislature’s feelings, and Gov. Cox’s highest priority is to make sure everybody’s feelings are intact, regardless of the public policy impacts.
– My guess is this is more of a way of Cox showing he’s “different” than Herbert on his biggest stage but, in the end, he won’t actually do it. Maybe he’s hoping to come off as a good guy in the effort. Maybe he will offer to sign a bill if a legislator promises to do a service project.
– Cox is great at saying the right things. He struggles to follow through if there’s any risk of losing political capital.
– Vetoing more bills than Gary Herbert is like being the tallest building in Eureka. Hopefully, Gov. Cox follow through on his promise because there are far more than 1-3 bad bills (Gov. Herbert’s usual veto count) out of the 500+ the Legislature passes in a given session. I’m sure we’ll hear lots from the governor’s staff about how he is going to carefully weigh the merits of each individual bill before issuing any vetoes. A reasonable shortcut: Find any legislator with a 95% or above ranking from the Libertas Institute and veto all their bills en masse.
– He is a chicken shit.
Question 2: Do Lieutenant Governor Deidre Henderson and her immediate family merit all necessary security and protection from the Office of Executive Protection? Why or why not? Does a rumored $3 million/year appropriation influence your answer?
– Every LG to this point has been perfectly capable of driving himself or herself around the state without dinging the taxpayers for $3 million a year for security. Most people couldn’t identify our governor, let alone the LG so this seems like a bit much. I would roll my eyes at this request if we had a male LG, too.
– Yes, that’s way too much money to protect a glorified bureaucrat.
– Absolutely not. Olene Walker was 62 years old when she became Lt. Governor and she never had a security detail until she became governor, 10 days shy of her 73rd birthday. This is a massive overreaction to this strange time in politics, and is of a piece with the recent “unprecedented” show of force at the Capitol when 550 law enforcement officers and National Guard troops were on hand to keep the dangerous mob of…15 Boogaloo Bois and George Zinn in line. Keep in mind that this isn’t just a onetime $3 million appropriation. This is a $3 million/year ongoing, inflation-adjusted, escalating appropriation into perpetuity. Once you give the Lt. Governor a detail, you’ll never be able to take it away. This is a discussion that is going to be nothing but pain and bad politics for all involved. Deidre Henderson would be smart to ask for a detail for six months, have the Commissioner of Public Safety do an assessment to ensure there are no credible, ongoing threats, and then go back to driving herself around like Olene Walker did.
– Sadly, I think her being a woman increases her exposure as a target. She also has children still in the home.
– Because a guy wearing a fur cape and horns broke into the nation’s Capitol less than a month ago while his pals built a hangman’s noose on the front lawn, threatening to hang even the most conservative nuts in the building because they didn’t get what they wanted. Also, if you don’t like the 3-million-dollar price tag, why don’t we get the tech bros involved and let them disrupt the security and protection industry. Maybe they can bring that price tag down the way they did for our state response to COVID.
– In the current climate of extreme rhetoric and radical violence, our leaders should be making decisions about our state’s future without having to worry about the safety of their families. Additionally, because the Lieutenant Governor would assume the Governor’s office if the Governor dies or is incapacitated, the LG must receive the same level of protection we would grant to the Governor and his family.
– That’s a lot of money for an office that no one cares all that much about.
– Precedent of security protocols and no clear and present dangers to the Utah LG (at least that we know of – if there is, they should articulate ‘threats’ to the LG) offer another staffer to drive and help her with day-to-day operations
– Hasn’t been an issue in the past but we’ve also never had a recent national insurrection before.
– Yes – it’s nuts out there and the administration is pretty outspoken. The $3M is fine, take it from the expense budget from someone no longer driving back and forth to Fairview.
– It is a really contentious time. People feel at liberty to just show up at elected officials’ homes and protest (Angela Dunn’s home for example). If you are going to take on the burden of leadership, the least the citizenry can do is provide you with some level of protection.
Question 3: In light of Representative Stoddard’s bill file, “Articles of Impeachment or Resolution to Censure Utah Attorney General,” does Utah need a mechanism to impeach constitutional state elected officials? Why or why not? Should Attorney General Reyes be investigated for his alleged ties to organizations involved in the January 6, 2021, breach of the U.S. Capitol?
– These impeachments have become a circus. We have the ability to get rid of an elected official every 2, 4, or 6 years. If an elected official is doing something that egregious, they’ll likely resign anyway.
– While he likely has an alibi, you know, a picture of him parachuting in and rescuing some kids from the trafficking trade or something with other elected officials who paid to be there, Utahns still deserve to know that their tax dollars are not going to support QAnon nonsense. Public trust in our institutions needs to be earned back and a public investigation is a good way to do it.
– Utah’s constitution already has a provision in Article VI, from Sections 17 thru 21. As a result, no change is necessary in order to allow for the impeachment and removal from office. Attorney General Reyes should absolutely be investigated over his involvement with the January 6 breach.
– Sure. Let’s have a mechanism to impeach constitutional officers. But let’s not have the effort led by an attention-seeking blowhard from the minority caucus. If there is a really serious threat here, then let serious people propose a serious solution.
– I don’t think so. I don’t see any conduct that results in his removal from office. It is sad to see him hang on to Trumpism for so long.
– The state should have an impeachment process for criminal or actions that violate executive rules or ethical obligations but not for AG Reyes’ work on the Trump campaign which was done on his personal time and paid for privately.
– Good for the goose is good for the gander. Reyes deserves some of the blame and had no business to interfere in another state’s election process.
– There are several things he should be investigated for not the least of which is this.
– The AG didn’t do anything illegal unless I missed that we have a law against stupidity. Rushing into the fracas led by now-former-President Trump was ill-advised and a clear signal Reyes was slow to see the political winds shifting. More than a mechanism to impeach a statewide official, we need to eliminate the caucus-convention system. If he knew he was going to be subject to the full spectrum of Republican voters in this state, the AG may think twice before following along like a lemming.
Question 4: Will any Republican challenge Senator Mike Lee in 2022? Why or why not? Which Republican would give Senator Lee the biggest challenge to his re-election hopes? Why? Who should run, but won’t?
– Huntsman, should but likely won’t. Maybe Evan McMullin or Steve Schmidt challenge him.
– By the 2022 election, we’ll be in the height of Biden misery. No rational GOP voters in Utah are going to want some squishy Zions Bank stooge or rabid Lincoln Project lunatic to challenge Mike Lee. The Biden Administration has provided a unique opportunity for Utah’s two very different senators to actually work as a team and fight back on the leftist assault that is already battering Utah on national monuments, oil and gas moratoriums, culture war escalation, etc., etc. Let Sen. Lee pull out his pocket Constitution, rail against the injustices of the Antiquities Act, and use his standing to keep the right flank focused on rational strategies to oppose federal overreach. Let Sen. Romney use his standing to corral the moderates, keep them from buckling to pressure from “polite” opinion in the Avenues, Bay Area political wannabeeism from the Silicon Slopes tech bros, and a battering from the Trib’s editorial page…all the while trying to cut deals with Biden and Chuck Schumer behind the scenes. Utah has the Odd Couple we need in the U.S. Senate right now. Let’s hope there aren’t a bunch of bored rich guys who crave affirmation from highly-paid campaign staffers waiting in the wings to challenge Sen. Lee.
– Lee’s polling and approvals among republicans in Utah makes him hard to defeat. If he wants to keep that seat, he probably can.
– Draper City Councilman Mike Green.
– I believe Mike Lee will be challenged in the convention process or via signature gathering, but he will prevail. Possible Senate contenders may be Thomas Wright, Greg Hughes, Derek Miller, or someone from the far right or business community (Jeff Burningham).
– Steve Starks could be a strong challenger.
– Because they would lose. Have you BEEN to the GOP state convention? It’s a whose who of the most extreme, ideological, group thinkers you have met in your life. I mean…they practically booed Curtis off the stage because he gathered signatures, and gave Chris Stewart a standing ovation because he drove a coal rolling truck to the convention.
– He will be challenged by a primary opponent. I think the biggest challenge to Mike Lee would be former Governor Gary Herbert, but he will not run.
– Sadly, ambition sometimes overpowers logic. Some individuals will challenge Senator Lee – unsuccessfully. During the campaign more people will realize that Senator Lee provides national clout for Utah, especially in conservative circles (which will also lead to big fundraising), but also see that he is more bi-partisan than he is given credit for (see his work on Criminal Justice Reform with Cory Booker as an example).
– I would imagine someone from the mainstream Chamber crowd will run…likely Thomas Wright or someone similar.
