Gov. Cox signs fluoridation ban into law
SALT LAKE CITY (ABC4) — It's official, Governor Spencer Cox has signed a bill banning water fluoridation in public water systems – a nationwide first.
H.B. 81 — or Fluoride Amendments — is a law that will to public water systems. It would also allow pharmacists to prescribed fluoride tablets to those needing fluoride as an alternative delivery method for those wishing to take fluoride.
Currently, there are two counties and several municipalities across the state that fluoride their water systems, those systems serve around 1.6 million people. With the bill being signed by the governor, public water managers will have until May 7 to cease fluoridation operations.
The process of fluoridation is the addition or removal of fluoride in order to meet the recommended levels beneficial to oral health, which is 0.7 milligrams per liter, or about three drops within a 55-gallon barrel of water. As fluoride is removed from Utah's public water, the new law allows pharmacists to prescribe fluoride tablets to those who which to continue receiving fluoride.
Cox allows flag ban to go into effect without signature, acts on remaining bills
Unlike other bills this session, the debate around fluoridation saw support and resistance from bi-partisan lawmakers as Utah's Republicans and Democrats either voiced support or opposition to the bill in the final vote in the legislature. The bill also garnered nationwide attention, as the Beehive State is the first in the nation to mandate a statewide ban on public water fluoridation.
Although water providers will be removing their fluoridation systems, don't expect your water bill to be affected much. In previous statements to ABC4.com, water providers don't expect prices to change at all for customers. Water Pro INC said residents might see 'less than 90 cents per month' in savings as a result of the ban. Other providers said that bills might go up as they get rid of standing supplies and equipment.
Dentists have issued warnings about what the ban could mean for Utahns, saying that without fluoride cavities will go up, especially among the less fortunate.
'It really only hurts the children whose families are not aware of the benefits of the program, or cannot afford to go to their dentist or physician to get fluoride supplements,' Mark Fullner, local dentist in Utah County, told ABC4.com. 'It also puts the burden of compliance on adults in those families who care enough to follow the guidelines to administer proper doses. Chances of a mistake in those circumstances seems to be much higher than the associated risks with well monitored addition of fluoride to the water source.'
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Newsweek
31 minutes ago
- Newsweek
Stop Posting, and Start Legislating—A Message to the GOP from Gen Z
We remember. We remember the Paul Ryan years. We remember the lofty promises, the press conferences with tax cut charts, the selfies with Trump in the Roosevelt Room. And we remember the disappointment—because when Republicans controlled the House, Senate, and White House, barely anything bold got done. The border wasn't secured. Obamacare wasn't repealed. The swamp wasn't drained. The only thing that moved quickly was the clock—and opportunity slipped away. The bills stalled. The hearings dragged. The excuses piled up. And in the end, the status quo won. Again. A Make America Great Again (MAGA) baseball hat supporting President Donald Trump is pictured. A Make America Great Again (MAGA) baseball hat supporting President Donald Trump is here we are again. President Donald Trump is back in the Oval Office. Conservatives have momentum. The political stars are aligned like they haven't been in years. And yet? The same old D.C. inertia is setting in. Congress is snoozing through a once-in-a-generation opportunity to deliver real change. There's no sense of urgency. No fire. No strategy. Just more performative politics as usual. The difference is: this time, we're paying attention. Gen Z conservatives didn't get off the couch and show up to the ballot box to watch history repeat itself. We're tired of politicians who post more than they produce. House and Senate Republicans—stop acting like influencers and start acting like lawmakers. You don't get to post selfies with Elon Musk or tweet your appreciation to DOGE if you won't even codify basic spending cuts like the DOGE Act. You can't coast on vibes while the country's on fire. You were sent to legislate, not livestream. You weren't elected to trend on X—you were elected to fix what's broken. Brilyn Hollyhand and President Donald Trump are pictured at the University of Alabama on May 1, 2025. Brilyn Hollyhand and President Donald Trump are pictured at the University of Alabama on May 1, 2025. Photo Courtesy of the White House Despite facing one of the most pivotal moments in modern political history, Congress still isn't working full weeks. Many lawmakers fly in Tuesday afternoon and are wheels-up by Thursday. Three-day workweeks in the middle of a national crisis? That's not leadership—that's laziness. Meanwhile, families across America are grinding five, six, even seven days a week just to stay afloat. Blue-collar workers don't get to call it a week by Wednesday night. Neither should the people writing our laws. If our representatives can't even put in a full week's work during a make-or-break presidency, maybe they don't deserve the job. I will never forget my first ever dinner with a U.S. senator. It was my 12th birthday, and we were in D.C., eating downtown after I had recorded some episodes of my podcast on Capitol Hill. He leaned across the table to me and said, "Brilyn, the first thing you're going to learn in this business is that in politics there are work horses and show horses. The work horses bring home the pork for the state that sent them there. The show horses run to the TV cameras. Be a work horse, and only join a cable show when you have an accomplishment to tout." That stuck with me—and I'm reminded of it right now more than ever. Because D.C. is overflowing with show horses. They gallop into every hearing, prance onto every panel, and leave before the hard work begins. This isn't just about optics. This is about outcomes. Republicans were given a second chance to do what they promised the first time. It's not enough to give speeches about the border. Close it. It's not enough to post videos in front of the IRS. Defund it. It's not enough to warn about weaponized government. Dismantle it. This is the moment to act, not admire the problem. Stop playacting reform—deliver it. The base isn't looking for another firebrand quote; we're looking for a signed bill. We're not asking for the moon—we're demanding that you work. Get off the couch. Get off cable news. And get legislation on the president's desk. Defund the weaponized bureaucracy. Close the border. Cut the waste. Stop acting like your job is to coast to retirement and start acting like your job is to represent us. If you need inspiration, look outside the Beltway—real Americans are hustling every day without fanfare. Why can't Congress? Gen Z is watching. And we have receipts. We're the most online, most informed, and most fed-up generation to ever engage in politics. We can see through the talking points. We recognize when someone's all flash and no follow-through. And we're not afraid to call it out—publicly, loudly, and often. You can't gaslight us with headlines. You can't distract us with Instagram posts. We see the floor schedule. We track the votes. We know the difference between working and pretending. If the GOP wastes another Trump term, it won't just be a policy failure—it'll be a generational betrayal. My generation won't forget. We didn't come this far just to watch you do nothing, again. We showed up because we believe in a different future—one that isn't dictated by lobbyists, legacy institutions, and leadership that loves the camera more than the country. Clock in, Congress. Or clock out—and make room for someone who will. Brilyn Hollyhand is an 18-year-old political commentator, chairman of the Republican National Committee's Youth Advisory Council, and bestselling author of One Generation Away: Why Now is the Time to Restore American Freedom. For more of his hot takes you can follow him on socials @BrilynHollyhand or visit The views expressed in this article are the writer's own.
The Hill
37 minutes ago
- The Hill
Hegseth could be ‘on the hook' for hundreds of millions on Qatari jet, says Raskin
The top Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee has warned Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth that he could be 'on the hook' for hundreds of millions of dollars for having accepted a luxury jet from the Qatari government. In a letter sent Wednesday, Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) argued that Hegseth's formal acceptance of the Boeing 747 jetliner last month – a move made so that the Air Force can upgrade its security measures so it may eventually be used as Air Force One – violates the Constitution emoluments clause. The rule bars federal officials from accepting financial benefits from foreign governments without congressional approval. 'I write now to urge and advise you to promptly mitigate these violations—and your own personal legal exposure—by either returning the plane to the Qatari government or promptly seeking Congress's consent to accept it,' Raskin wrote. The Pentagon announced on May 21 that it had officially accepted the 13-year-old luxury jet previously used by the Qatari royal family, a supposed 'free,' gift that could be used to supplement the aging Air Force One fleet, according to President Trump. The transfer has been criticized by U.S. lawmakers on both sides of the aisle, who say it raises ethical and corruption questions in addition to costing taxpayers hundreds of millions of dollars to retrofit the plane into a secure and working Air Force One. Others have focused on the national security risks of such a gift, saying the aircraft would have to be swept for listening devices. Some have worried that in Trump's push to use the plane before he leaves office, the Air Force will rush security upgrades and cut corners on protection systems. A former professor of constitutional law and former ranking member of the House Oversight Committee, Raskin has focused his criticisms on the ethical issues around accepting the Qatari plane, repeatedly arguing that it requires congressional approval. 'The Constitution is perfectly clear: no present 'of any kind whatever' from a foreign state without Congressional permission,' Raskin wrote on X last month after news of the gift broke. Congress has the authority to block federal officials from receiving gifts from foreign governments, as granted in the Constitution, but the government arm has not held any formal vote to accept the plane or not. Democrats largely have been unsuccessful in stopping Trump from accepting the Qatari jet. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) last month attempted to pass a bill that would bar the use of a foreign jet as Air Force One, but that effort failed. Raskin, along with other Democrat lawmakers, have introduced resolutions to condemn the gift but Republicans have blocked them from being considered on the floor. Making matters more complicated, Democrats, given their status as the minority party, can't convene any oversight hearings that would force government officials to testify on the issue, and their colleagues across the aisle have not called any such hearings themselves. In his letter, Raskin says Hegseth is in violation of the Foreign Gifts and Decorations Act, which could prompt the Attorney General to bring civil action and penalties against him. Under that law, government officials can accept certain gifts up to $480 in value, and they cannot 'request or otherwise encourage the tender of a gift or decoration' from another country. In violating the act, Hegseth can face a penalty 'not to exceed the retail value of the gift improperly solicited or received plus $5,000.' 'In other words, you may be on the hook for $400 million (plus $5,000) even for a jumbo jet that you accepted on behalf of the President but do not get to personally enjoy,' Raskin writes, referring to the cost of a new Boeing 747-8 jet. 'If you truly believe that there is nothing untoward about the President asking for and receiving a $400 million 'flying palace' from a foreign power, then you should let Congress and the President's Republican colleagues vote to approve the transaction,' he adds. 'If you're unwilling to do that, you must return the plane to Qatar.'
Business Insider
an hour ago
- Business Insider
The Trump-Musk feud is painfully awkward for the GOP
Rep. Tom Tiffany seemed to be at a loss for words. "I don't have anything to say," the Wisconsin Republican told me as we descended the steps outside the House chamber. "Let's wait for the next tweet." I was hoping for a bit more, so I pressed on. "It is what it is," he said with a slight laugh. It was the last vote of the day, and House Republicans were eager to get out of there. Their counterparts in the Senate had managed to leave town for the week just as the nasty — and for some, long-anticipated — feud between Elon Musk and President Donald Trump was getting underway. What began as a disagreement over the "Big Beautiful Bill" had taken a strange turn. By this point, Musk had replied " yes" to a post that included a reference to impeaching Trump, claimed responsibility for the president's 2024 victory, declared that tariffs would cause a recession, and said that Trump is in the "Epstein files." Trump had floated taking away Musk's government contracts, said that the billionaire "went CRAZY," and insinuated that the tech titan suffered from "Trump Derangement Syndrome." As Tiffany faltered, a Democratic colleague pounced. "So Tom," Rep. Mark Pocan of Wisconsin interjected as he walked by, "Elon or Trump? Who's gonna win?" The Republican congressman's tepid laughter grew into a guffaw. We all waited for the response. It never arrived. "I've got the press here," an exasperated Tiffany said. "What do you want me to say, Mark?" Many Republican lawmakers on Capitol Hill found themselves in some version of Tiffany's position, unsure what to say about the vicious war of words unfolding online. "Is Mercury in retrograde?" asked Republican Rep. Lauren Boebert of Colorado. For months, Trump and Musk have appeared largely in lockstep. Republicans had become accustomed to brushing off and explaining away questions about the former DOGE leader's machinations in the executive branch, as they had with Trump for nearly a decade. Now, with the two men very publicly at odds, it was a time for choosing. But Republicans weren't all that eager to choose. And at least one who did quickly reconsidered. "Enough Elon. Put the phone down and go outside and play," Republican Rep. Greg Murphy of North Carolina wrote in a post on X that was deleted minutes later. Rep. Ryan Zinke, a Montana Republican who served as Secretary of the Interior during Trump's first term, initially offered praise for Musk when asked about the feud. "I respect, obviously, the President. I respect Elon Musk," Zinke said. "Very, very bright." When informed about Musk's response to the post referencing Trump's impeachment, Zinke let out a sharp sigh. "Yeah, that's a bridge too far," he said. "You know, I'm sorry that his tour of duty ended that way." "This is a sign of the times that you see some of this stuff being done in public," Republican Rep. Scotty Perry of Pennsylvania said. "People over the course of history who wanted to save the republic had different viewpoints about how to do it." Several Republicans on Thursday used social media to subtly make their allegiance to Trump known, even without explicitly criticizing the world's richest man. One of them was Republican Rep. Abe Hamadeh of Arizona, who posted a photo of himself with Trump on X as the drama with Musk unfolded. America First — now and forever. 🇺🇸 — Abe Hamadeh (@AbrahamHamadeh) June 5, 2025 Was it a veiled message? Hamadeh laughed and looked down when asked about it. "President Trump's my president," he told me. "People voted for him. I supported him. President Trump is the reason why we're all here." He later added that he "appreciated" Musk's contributions. For Democrats, it was a told-you-so moment. "None of it surprises me, to be honest," Rep. Melanie Stansbury of New Mexico, the top Democrat on the DOGE subcommittee, told me. "You sell your soul to the devil, or you pay your way into it, and this is what you get." The only Republican who seemed to be genuinely enjoying himself was Rep. Thomas Massie of Kentucky, who's had his fair share of feuds with Trump and voted against the "Big Beautiful Bill" for largely the same reason that Musk decided to critique it. "I tell my colleagues," Massie said, "if I get hit on Independence Avenue, and they have to deliver my eulogy, just say he was having his best day ever."
