Several political observations this week:
- First, setting aside the valid arguments for and against NAFTA, Rep. Bill Orton's vote against the North American Free Trade Agreement on Wednesday made political sense for him.Orton is seriously considering whether to run against Sen. Orrin Hatch next year. Now, if Orton were the only Democrat in the race, he could well afford to vote for NAFTA and anger Utah's and the nation's large trade unions - which vigorously oppose NAFTA.
After all, compared with Hatch's union record, Orton would still look like a shining knight. With no where else to go, unions would begrudgingly swallow the NAFTA vote and support Orton if he challenged Hatch.
But the political equation changed last week with the announcement by Grethe Peterson that if she can find enough money to run a good primary, she'd be in the Democratic hunt in the Senate race next year.
Now there could be two Democrats in the mix. And that changes things considerably for Orton. Union PACs could well show their anger over a pro-NAFTA vote by Orton by supporting Peterson, both with cash and state delegate votes. And it is probably the state delegate union votes for Peterson that would harm Orton more than cash.
For the union caucus in the State Delegate Convention is by far the largest and most influential group of delegates. They don't run the convention - that was seen four years ago when their candidate for party chairman lost. But they can't be ignored, either, especially by a candidate like Orton that doesn't have strong party ties.
Orton's time in Congress shows he doesn't vote the Democratic Party line. He didn't support President Clinton earlier this year in a critical budget vote that barely passed. At the State Democratic Organizing Convention this past June, Orton received polite applause from party delegates during his speech, where Rep. Karen Shepherd, D-Utah, who did support Clinton's budget, was loudly cheered.
Thus, Orton has some party problems - problems he could ignore if he was the only viable Democratic candidate running against Hatch next year; problems he can't ignore if Peterson challenges him in the state convention. Orton needs all the party help he can get, and labor's support in the state convention and primary could be critical.
- Democrats in the Utah House are once again talking about changing the state income tax to make it more progressive. They want to raise the tax rate of upper-income Utahns making more than $65,000 a year from 7.2 percent to 9.5 percent and shift the $90 million that would generate to lowering taxes on middle-income Utahns.
The current tax brackets haven't been changed for 15 years, and inflation has pushed three-fourths of Utahns into the top bracket - 7.2 percent. The "bracket creep" results in a greater tax burden on the middle-class, with wealthy Utahns getting off easier, Democrats say.
Democrats in the House have had tax "fairness" bills introduced in each Legislature since 1988. All have failed. Most often the majority Republicans don't even let the bills out for public hearing. Democrats don't expect to fair much better in the 1994 Legislature but will use their "tax fairness" platform in next year's legislative elections.
While Democrats have complained about the lack of progressivity in state income taxes for years, it was actually GOP Gov. Norm Bangerter who had a real shot at a change.
As part of his 1987 tax increases, Bangerter suggested reindexing the state income taxes. But his idea, swamped by other tax-hike concerns, fell dead in the GOP-controlled House and Senate. Battered by a newly emerging tax protest movement, Bangerter didn't revisit the reindexing question in later years. Instead, Democrats took over the issue and it has died quietly in the Legislature ever since.