Opinion: Legislative dust finally settles

Yahoo

04-04-2025

March is a stormy time for politics as the Legislature ends and the governor reviews hundreds of bills. We review the implications and fallout from the preceding month.
Gov. Spencer Cox vetoed six bills and allowed two others to become effective without his signature. While some of his objections were technical, others reflected policy positions. He is requesting a special session to reform some bills he signed. Meanwhile, lawmakers will determine the appetite for veto overrides. What are the ramifications of Cox's exercise of gubernatorial powers?
Cowley: Cox's vetoes signal his willingness to challenge the Republican-dominated Legislature, yet his special session request reflects collaboration with legislative counterparts.
The governor is keenly aware of opportunities to fulfill his pre-session promises to provide (or in this case, protect) tax relief for seniors.
One of the most debated decisions of where to expend ink was the pride flag bill. Cox allowed it to go into law without his signature, citing that even if he used his red pen, the Legislature would assuredly override it. This nuanced approach will likely result in Cox facing pressure to better define where he stands on the issue.
In a move rarely undertaken by any executive branch, Cox declined to expand his power and vetoed SB296, which would have allowed him to choose the chief justice, preserving judicial autonomy.
Pignanelli: 'They called me Veto Corleone. Because I vetoed 2,500 separate line-items in the budget.' — Jeb Bush
Years ago, I conversed with a veteran lawmaker about the governor vetoing bills. He opined that lawmakers, including him, would erupt with anger at such insolence. However, the astute politician also observed that the governor's office is a muscle that needs exercise, and rejecting legislation maintains strength. He believed the executive pushback built parameters for future lawmaking, even if overridden.
Cox's vetoes (and bills passed without signature) reaffirm his place in formulating tax and election policies.
SB296 would have given Cox the ability to select the chief justice. There was a compromise by the courts and Utah bar (which this firm is honored to represent) to be neutral on this bill in exchange for dismissal of HB512, an aggressive restructuring of the judicial retention process. Thus, Cox's veto of the bill raised eyebrows.
As Cox expressed to lawmakers, the courts (including the bar) did not request this action. However, this wrinkle in the agreement may propel an override or a potential future reexamination of judicial retention. Perhaps Cox's strategy is to assert a more decisive role in actions regarding the judicial branch.
Political observers and the governor have increasingly warned about the number of bills introduced and passed every legislative session. In 2025, 962 bills and resolutions were introduced (surpassing the 2024 record of 942), and an almost record-breaking number passed. Is this an issue, and will it ever be resolved?
Cowley: The public sees the astronomical volume of legislation coupled with headlines of perceived insignificant or even humorously unnecessary bills, and wonder if elected officials are squandering time and resources. As an insider, I can attest that weighty issues are addressed — tax reductions, educational freedom, etc. — but superfluous bills are a distraction. It's hard to argue that Utah would come to a screeching halt if all 582 bills didn't pass.
There isn't a good solution other than encouraging legislators to focus on quality rather than quantity. Limiting the number of bills will only make each longer and more complex, akin to federal spending bills. Only those plagued with political obsession disease or severe insomnia read every word, thus minimizing public scrutiny.
One way to curtail voluminous legislation is for the governor to more liberally use veto authority.
Pignanelli: Decades ago, an arrogant legislator sponsored 20 bills and was chastised by fellow lawmakers and the media for burdening the system. Of course, I was that obnoxious politician who angrily claimed a constitutional prerogative to represent my constituents. So, I cannot join others in the complaint chorus.
Despite the increasing bill flow, I am amazed that the system functions well. Still, modifications are needed to utilize interim sessions better for analyzing complex issues. Lawmakers with bills in similar subject areas should be encouraged to combine efforts. But again, I'm not pointing fingers.
Sundance Film Festival announces that after 40 years in Utah, they will move to Boulder, Colorado, in 2027. Was this a political or economic decision?
Cowley: Utah has more to offer than just free money. Outdoor Retailers threatened to leave over political differences. They even tried leveraging lawmakers for more incentive money and threw a tantrum when they didn't get their ransom, but eventually came back. I'll miss stargazing, but will sleep fine knowing our tax dollars aren't treated like Halloween candy.
As with many rocky relationships, time apart might help Sundance see what a good thing they had with Park City. It may also open new opportunities utilizing the 'greatest snow on Earth,' like the X Games.
Pignanelli: Our firm represented Sundance for several years, and they were aware of local political dynamics. Their decision was a financial consideration, as Colorado offered an incentive larger than Utah's proposal. The impact will be less than predicted. The festival is a lively event, but unique visitor attendance is dropping. A future return is likely, as Salt Lake City is more user-friendly.