Our state leaders recently spoke to Utahns about their concerns, objectives and hopes. We offer our perspectives.
Gov. Spencer Cox delivered citizens his fifth State of the State address last week. Cox’s comments focused on “we must build” in addressing the issues Utah confronts. Did he succeed?
Cowley: Gov. Cox referenced the Greatest Generation building a trove of economically attainable homes and announced, “We can do it again.” World War II houses had quality craftsmanship that is still observable today. Just take a tour through Sugar House to see all the whitewashed bricks and black-paned windows, courtesy of DIYers.
It is undeniable that Utah has a starter home shortage, but solving this problem will take more than “build, baby, build.” Housing requires investments in roads, utilities, schools and more.
Where will these 35,000 homes be built? Near urban centers where the jobs are, or in rural communities with cheaper property? Will the state usurp local land authority? There are numerous roadblocks to this ambitious goal — the only thing that gets Utahns’ pulses racing more than running out of Diet Coke is building a subdivision in their backyard.
Pignanelli: “I am sorry to have made such a long speech, but I did not have time to write a shorter one.” —Winston Churchill
All the speeches we analyzed this week were delivered well by the officials. Still, they suffered one common flaw — limited use of their arms (although Cox deserves an honorable mention for some gestures). The people of my ethnic heritage appreciate such physical animation when making a point.
Cox’s theme of “we must build” initially sounded simplistic. But within minutes, an earnest listener realized that while building homes is essential, so is building productions of energy, modes of transportation, health care services and other essential elements of a quality lifestyle for a state that will soon double its population.
Thus, in one short statement, Cox both inspired and simultaneously explained how we can accomplish important goals with his warm, energetic style. Of course, more waving of the arms would have been a tremendous addition.
On the opening day of the session, Senate President Stuart Adams and House Speaker Mike Schultz offered their visions for the state. Often these remarks reflect the priorities of lawmakers. Will they accomplish these goals within 45 days?
Cowley: President Adams fired a warning shot against out-of-state funded special interest groups wanting to run initiatives that would turn Utah into California. He also described the global arms race for artificial intelligence, stating that whoever controls AI will control the world. AI needs data centers and data centers need power. His bold pursuit to make Utah a nuclear energy hub would start with the deployment of micro nuclear reactors.
Speaker Schultz reaffirmed his desire to retool higher ed, making it more affordable for students while focusing on skills needed for modern jobs. Schultz’s moonshot effort will be petitioning the feds to allow Utah to serve as a national experiment and keep a portion of our federal taxes to manage Utah’s public lands ourselves.
Both mentioned Utah’s unique and untapped cache of rare earth minerals essential for technology, health care and defense. The biggest barrier to unlocking Utah’s unearthed potential is that these minerals are mostly located on federal lands.
The federal government has historically stood in the way of many Utah legislative priorities, making these refrains repetitious, with little hope of advancement. With Trump in the White House, there is a renewed hope that maybe, just maybe, they can succeed.
Pignanelli: I have come to learn the opening addresses of legislative leaders are critical to understanding what’s in store for the Legislature. Lawmakers spent weeks deliberating their priorities, which the president and the speaker then articulate on the first day.
Speaker Schultz focused on solving the housing crisis and higher education reform. His concern for practical uses of taxpayer dollars is very apparent.
President Adams detailed priorities for energy expansion, mining of critical minerals, water and, of course, tax cuts.
Any seasoned veteran of the legislative process understands that while the sessions are short, much gets accomplished. While all the details require further refinement, citizens can expect significant advances in these areas.
Utah Democrats posted a well-crafted response delivered by Senate Minority Leader Luz Escamilla and House Minority Leader Angela Romero. Was it effective?
Cowley: It was a powerful message to have Utah’s two female minority leaders, in both party and ethnicity, advocating for inclusion of all Utahns in the legislative process. Their statements were straight from the Democratic platform. However, their admonition to preserve checks and balances by not eroding the power of the judiciary may appeal to some voters on the right.
Pignanelli: At the beginning and end of the Democrats' presentation, they encouraged citizens to participate in the legislative process. This is a good faith request, as the Legislature provides incredible opportunities for public engagement online and in person.
Democrats suggest support for many ideals offered by the governor and legislative leaders, but suggested different approaches. Their focus on the environment, day care and education will be crucial components in the deliberative process.