♪♪♪ announcer: Funding for "The Hinckley Report" is made possible in part by the Cleone Peterson Eccles Endowment Fund.

Jason Perry: Tonight on "The Hinckley Report."

State lawmakers meet to select their new house leadership team and set priorities for the upcoming legislative session.

After a contentious campaign season, Utah's capital city prepares to select their next mayor.

And the panel looks ahead to next Tuesday's special election and implications for 2024.

♪♪♪ ♪♪♪ Jason Perry: Good evening, and welcome to "The Hinckley Report."

I'm Jason Perry, Director of the Hinckley Institute of Politics.

Covering the week we have State Senator Luz Escamilla, Democrat minority leader representing Salt Lake City; Chris Bleak partner with RRJ Consulting; and Robert Gehrke, columnist for the Salt Lake Tribune.

Thank you for being with us tonight.

Interesting week in politics, and one coming, and we get a preview of that tonight as well.

But I wanna start first with a leadership change in our Utah House of Representatives.

Brad Wilson has resigned to run for the US Senate, and so we have new leadership.

Speaker Mike Schultz has been elected, Majority Leader Jefferson Moss, Majority Whip Karianne Lisonbee, and Majority Assistant Whip Casey Snyder.

What I think is interesting, Senator, let's start with you, because it was a bipartisan vote.

People don't necessarily think that, unlike what happens in D.C., both parties get to vote on the Speaker of the House in Utah.

Luz Escamilla: Correct, and I, you know, first is congratulations to Mike.

You know, Speaker Schultz is-- he's gonna do great.

He's a friend, but he's also a man of his word.

And I think that's something that people value.

it's the only currency you have in the legislature.

And my experience with now Speaker Schultz is that when he commits to something, he'll work with you, and even if there's disagreements, he's able to manage to bring people together.

And I've been-- some of my legislation has been benefited by his efforts to bring common ground and bring all the stakeholders together, and he's been very helpful, and I'm excited.

I mean, he's-- he-- I like his approach.

He's straightforward, you never second guess what he's gonna be on, on issues.

And I appreciate that type of politics, and I'm excited on his policy approach to the state.

Jason Perry: Chris, you've held an interesting position in the past as the chief of staff to a speaker, talk about how this election works out and your thoughts about how this one went down considering how unanimous it was.

Chris Bleak: Yeah, I think it's-- it is interesting.

You mentioned that they voted this week on the House floor to confirm or, you know, him as the house speaker.

He was nominated by Representative Romero for-- got a little confused there for a second.

And, you know, they have a really interesting relationship.

I've likened it to kind of a brother, sister relationship.

But it's interesting to hear even Senator Escamilla's approach with Mike Schultz.

I think you've seen with Mike, he's taken kind of the mantle of leadership on his shoulders the last couple of months as he's known this transition is happening, and he's really taken seriously the role that he has as speaker, of wanting to lead, of wanting to incorporate varied opinions.

Mike is a tough negotiator, and he is going to be someone that has really strong opinions about things, but he's also open to collaboration, he's open to listening to other people, and I think he's really earnest in wanting to incorporate lots of opinions and do the right thing for the state.

Jason Perry: Go ahead, Robert.

Robert Gehrke: Just to kind of echo what Chris says.

I mean, I've seen Mike do some-- do the hard work.

When there are big issues, he got assigned a lot of the big issues and really dug into 'em.

And so, I think that's sort of his MO as a representative.

He's also, in my opinion, a lot more conservative than some-- than Speaker Wilson was.

He was a huge Trump supporter in both 2016 and 2020.

And then you have Karianne Lisonbee, who I think is interesting as well, ascending into leadership.

And these are very conservative legislators compared to what we've seen in the past.

And so, I think that's gonna sort of reflect in the legislation we see coming out of the House.

I think it's a more conservative body writ large, but the leadership is a little bit more partisan, I think, than what we've been used to in the-- Luz Escamilla: The only thing, I will add that I heard that-- I wasn't thinking too much about it is north versus south.

And there's, like, now a heavy representation of legislators from-- in that leadership team from the northern part of the state.

And a lot of the people, you know, legislators or house members in the southern part of the state are feeling a little bit alone maybe, or not a lot of representation.

That was a concern that was raised on that group of four.

But all of them have been involved.

I mean, Snyder was, you know, the chair for rules committee.

So, I mean, he was heavily already involved in some of the direction of the policy.

You know, as a member of the Senate, I love our Senate leadership, majority leadership, and we love the structure there that, you know, I'm sure the dynamic in the House certainly is very different compared to the Senate.

Jason Perry: We might have got a little preview of where he's going and what he wants to do as speaker, Speaker Schultz.

And let me show a graph, because this is an indication from his speech when-- after he was elected to the body, I want to read this.

And then Chris, you may give a comment about where you think he's gonna go given what he talked about here.

This is what Speaker Mike Schultz said.

"It only took one round today to elect a new speaker.

I believe with all my heart that Utah has something special.

We cannot and will not allow the D.C. model of divisiveness and dysfunction to enter into the chamber as it has in so many other states."

Chris Bleak: Yeah, and I applaud him for that.

I think it's the right approach.

It's easier with the partisan split in the House to say something like that, but I think he means it.

The other thing that he has noted is that he cares deeply about energy policy.

That's something that he's really going to be focused on.

My interactions a lot with Speaker Schultz over the years has been in transportation.

He cares deeply about having a multimodal system, and I think he's really been responsible for putting more of the money into transit and into trails.

And so, I think that's a area that we should continue to see real growth and improvement in.

But I asked him the other day what he also is focused on, and he mentioned tax policy to me as wanting to see that income tax rate come lower.

That might be a little bit to Robert's point about some of that conservative nature.

But Mike will burrow in on issues, and he will understand them as well as anyone, and that's something to-- that he will be a real challenge as speaker, because he's gonna be spread a lot further than he has been in the past.

Jason Perry: Robert, one of the interesting things-- oh, go ahead, and then-- Robert Gehrke: Yeah, I've seen Mike do as Chris said, kind of bring people together and stakeholders together.

I've also seen him be kind of an attack dog at times.

You know, there was an issue where they were trying to put a moratorium on the death penalty two sessions ago, and he really came out hard against that and really made a show of force in the committee hearing.

So, I think what's his-- what's his approach going to be as speaker?

Is he going to let Democrats get some bills out in committee or is he going to stifle those?

I mean, that's-- it is, you know, bipartisanship.

It's not really bipartisanship, it's still 80% running the show.

But, you know, are they allowed to contribute, are they allowed to have input on bills?

That's the sort of the test of the speaker.

And I think we saw, you know, with Becky Lockhart when she was doing it, the Democrats were more included than I think they had been in the past.

Are we going to see that sort of go back or is it gonna be-- are they gonna have a seat at the table?

Jason Perry: What do you think, Senator?

Luz Escamilla: You know, I think with the Representative Romero as a minority leader, Mike is gonna have a harder time pushing back in the sense of their relationship, as it was explained by Chris, allows them to have those very tough conversations.

I don't know if you've ever been in a conversation on energy between Minority Leader Romero, now Speaker Schultz, but those are heated conversations, and there's huge disagreement, by the way.

I mean, I-- that I can say even though the Minority Leader Romero is not here.

But I like that they actually have that conversation, and I think that's something that I appreciate of Representative Schultz.

He's not shy of having uncomfortable conversations.

And in many of these are very uncomfortable, and that's something I think is gonna help to allow the minority to have a voice through that process.

Jason Perry: Just the last comment on this too, Robert.

Speaker Schultz stated one of his top priorities, to your point, is going to be energy.

These speakers have priorities, but that was an interesting one right out of the gate.

Robert Gehrke: Well, and there's a lot of-- we're in sort of a transitional time in Utah in-- when it comes to energy, right?

We're seen Rocky Mountain Power say they want to phase out coal.

We've seen the Intermountain Power Agency, you know, starting to shutter their plant.

We've been moving away from coal.

There's this push to kind of hang onto it a little bit.

I'm curious to see how that plays out.

But energy is always-- is a traditional top of the, you know, top tier issue for state legislators.

And so, I'm kind of interested to see what-- where he ends up on it.

I also think he's got to be the first speaker from Hooper, which is, you know, it's fun to say Hooper.

Jason Perry: Yeah, it is.

Everyone should go look at that map, make sure they know where Hooper is.

I wanna talk about what's happening in D.C. for just a moment.

Chris, it looks like another government shutdown has been avoided with some actions taken this week.

Talk about what's happening in Washington D.C. as it relates to the state of Utah, because we did not have unanimous support in that vote.

Chris Bleak: Yeah, I guess avoided in the short term.

I still don't know how Speaker Johnson is going to manage the end of this continuing resolution.

You know, he's got this two tiered approach, and I think he's gotten a little bit of rope from, you know, the hard right in terms of being able to punt the-- push the can down the road, so to speak.

But I don't know how he's going to find a resolution without doing something similar to what Speaker McCarthy, Speaker Boehner, Speaker Ryan, you know, all the rest have had to do, and that's find votes on the other side of the aisle in order to continue the government.

It's clear that the House and Senate even on the majorities, or excuse me, on the Republican side don't see eye to eye on some big issues, including Ukraine and some other things.

And so, I think at the end of the day, we're going to see-- we're going to see all sorts of drama.

It is not going to end easily, because there's just significant disagreements in the far right in the House.

I don't even know if they really want to govern.

I'm not sure what they want.

I guess they theoretically want spending cuts, which is fine, but they haven't really proposed how to do that and deal with some of the other issues that are out there.

Jason Perry: Senator, so Speaker Johnson needed Democrat votes to get this through, to get the CR move forward.

Can we talk about that for a minute?

Because everyone in his party was not completely thrilled that that's how he-- Luz Escamilla: Well, I mean, it's deja vu all over again, right?

So, I'm like, if they're not learning the pattern that we need this-- and again, by bipartisan, I mean, coming together on certain issues, and it's okay to agree to disagree, but at the end, if you wanna move forward, nine weeks is not enough.

I mean, I'm already getting anxious about only having nine weeks of our government being able to operate and bring the services to the people that I-- when I hear the same Republicans that were complaining about the previous speaker upset about this, and I'm like, are you guys not learning?

And like, it's a deja vu all over again, and it's-- they're just gonna have to live, and at one point it's their own caucuses.

I mean, I'm-- it's disturbing.

I mean, they're almost calling fights in the middle of congress now.

Where is that decorum?

Has been lost.

People punching each other apparently, or touching each other.

I'm like-- I'm-- it's seriously a circus over there, and it's pathetic.

It's very sad.

Jason Perry: Well, it's been observed by our students at the University of Utah as well, what's happened recently?

In fact, we had a student send in a question about this very topic and what you mentioned, Senator, and maybe, Robert, if you'll watch this and give a comment to this question.

Anna Locke: Hi, my name is Anna Locke, and I'm a sophomore at the University of Utah majoring in economics.

The House just recently passed a bipartisan spending bill to avoid a government shutdown.

However, this extension is only temporary.

With all the recent issues going through Congress like the speakership and the government shutdown, it appears that it's so divided that practically nothing can be accomplished.

What steps does Congress need to take moving forward in order to reach compromise?

Robert Gehrke: Yeah, it's one of those things where it's almost built into the system, right?

Especially when you have a House controlled by one party.

Barely controlled, I think controlled may be too strong of a word.

But functionally run by one party, and then you've got the Senate run by the other party, and you've got a White House.

So, it's-- there's this natural tension.

I don't know that there's a way to break through that without seeing some shift in the electoral makeup of it.

And I think especially in the House, when you talk about the way that districts are divided, the gerrymandering of it makes it so you get these more strident Republican and Democratic, both liberal and conservative, they're a lot more strident, they're a lot more embedded.

They don't have to worry about getting elected in November, they have to worry about getting their party's nomination, and then that's it.

And we've seen it happen here, and it happens all across the country.

So, that's-- I think that's the big breaking point right now.

And so, you know, we talk about not being able to pass budget bills.

You know, we haven't been able to pass budget bills in years, and now we've got-- instead of kicking one can down the road, we're gonna kick two cans down the road.

It seems like it's really dysfunctional.

I think this was the most-- the least productive congress since the Great Depression.

And so, we're-- we've been on this trajectory for a while, and I think the entire system is in danger of breaking down.

Jason Perry: Before we leave Washington D.C., Chris, I wanna talk about a recent position change for Congressman Moore.

He is now the Vice Chair of the House GOP conference.

It's an interesting position for a sort of a junior leadership position, but it's number seven on the House GOP list of leadership.

Chris Bleak: Well, it's also the stepping stone to House Speaker, so I expect Blake Moore to be the next speaker.

You know, that's where Mike Johnson came from.

No, it speaks to Blake Moore's capability and his talent, and I just think it's awesome to see.

I'm a big fan of Blake Moore's.

I've known him and his family for a long time, but he really-- he's somebody that's serious, but enjoyable to be around, is not dogmatic in the way that he approaches issues.

And so, I hope to see him continue to rise.

He early on was a supporter of Liz Cheney, so it's interesting to see him sort of thread the needle through that conference and find himself in a really respectable space.

And I think it speaks to him, but also the way that Utah generally punches above its weight.

And so, kudos to him, and I can't wait to see him as the next House Speaker.

Chris Bleak: It's pretty striking, though, to see for a guy who's only been there for a little while to earn the respect of his colleagues so quickly.

And because, you know, there were some pretty heavy hitters in that race against him.

So, for him to emerge victorious I think is an honor for him, but also speaks to the way he's ascended in the House leadership.

Luz Escamilla: It's great for Utah, and he's also super nice.

I think he has this ability, I mean, we've known him now as congressman in that capacity, and he's very neutral, which I think it gives people the ability to say I can talk to this guy.

And, you know, and, but I think for Utah, even though, of course, it's not-- we would love to get more Democrats obviously elected, that's our priority, but to see one of our own getting into those positions of leadership for a small state like Utah, it's per-- it's, like, really good.

Jason Perry: Let's go more local for just a moment.

And Chris, let's start with you, because the mayor's race for Salt Lake City, this is a very interesting race, not just because of how it's playing out with names that people know pretty well throughout the state, but for our capital city, something unique is happening here.

And it's a ranked choice voting election here for the mayor's race.

Talk about maybe our viewers what that means, and let's talk about the implications as it may-- in this race and going forward.

Chris Bleak: Yeah, absolutely.

And rank choice voting as-- I first became aware of it when I was at the state party, we used it in the election for governor in 2004, and it's where you're able to rank all of the candidates, one through whatever number you have.

So, if there are eight candidates, you know, you pick a first choice and a second choice and a third choice, and once your first choice vote falls off, it defaults to your second choice vote.

Theoretically, what the proponents have argued is that it allows you to, you know, maybe vote for a candidate that's not gonna get that support, but you wanna show that you like them, you like some of their ideas, maybe almost like a coalition style voting system.

But ultimately, it's gonna winnow it down.

The challenge is when you get the ballot, it's not terribly intuitive, and it's a little bit frustrating when you see it.

And I-- so I think as more people have become exposed to it, they have not particularly liked it because it is not intuitive, it's not a binary choice.

There may be-- maybe there's some positives to that, but it leads to some confusion and some frustration.

And I think a lot of people feel like, oh, if I vote this way, should I be gaming it this way?

And so, I'll be interested to see-- there was some angst last year that we should get rid of this.

I wonder if more will be as more people become exposed to it.

Jason Perry: Robert, you were so good at reading the chess board and what may happen with the particular moves, but on this one in this mayor's race, there are three candidates, Michael Valentine, Rocky Anderson, Erin Mendenhall, So, to Chris's point, the Mendenhall campaign even put out a flyer and said you don't have to vote for all three.

Talk about what happens, and maybe this third place candidate, whoever is in the third place, what-- how this may shift the dynamics.

Robert Gehrke: And I think that's mo-- directed most directly at Michael Valentine, right?

So, he's most likely to finish third.

He would be the one dropped off.

But if he gets, you know, if he's polling 10% of the vote, that could roll over to Rocky, most likely Rocky.

I mean, you know, and that would be a big boost for Mayor Anderson, and-- if Mayor Mendenhall's under 50%.

If she's over 50%, it doesn't matter.

And I think the likeliest outcome is that she's gonna finish first on the first round, Rocky is gonna be second, and there's not gonna be enough there to-- for Michael Valentine to make a difference.

But, you know, it-- there-- it strategically, it makes sense for her to say, well, you know, you can leave it blank after one.

And then those votes won't roll to Rocky Anderson.

So, strategically, it makes sense.

I'm not sure that in this particular race it's going to matter.

It's not like the Sandy race we had a few years ago where there were, like, eight candidates and, you know, they had different rounds of balloting.

And, you know, so it's potentially gonna make a difference.

I think more likely maybe in some of the city council races it might make a difference.

I don't see it being a big factor in the mayor's race, though.

Jason Perry: Is ranked choice voting gonna gonna catch on?

Luz Escamilla: So, you know, because this is kind of, like, therapeutic for me after losing that race four years ago.

So, PTSD here, but because we didn't use, obviously, that one on the last election, and then there was an election in between where they did it for council members.

This is the first time you have the-- such a large election.

I think it defeats the purpose when you're shifting, right?

It is the idea of empowering people.

We, meaning the Democrats, were very supportive.

Actually, Representative-- former Representative Chavez-Hauck was one of the leaders on passing this legislation and making it available for-- to be part of our election system.

I think it's-- it is, you know, people are confused, it's confusing.

And it's the first time that it's being utilized, I think it's-- when there's a lot of more candidates, which four years ago we had nine initial candidates, maybe it would have been an interesting dynamic there.

With three candidates, I'm not sure how that really will be impacted, right?

So, that's what I think is interesting.

Robert Gehrke: If I could before we move on, if we go back to the question the student asked, though, about how we address the with divisiveness, I do think there is something to be said about, you know, if you're trying to be somebody's number two or number three choice, you don't go a scorched earth campaign.

And so, I think, you know, from that standpoint, there are some benefits potentially there.

I don't know that it's gonna catch on because we actually saw more cities using it two years ago than we saw this year.

And so, you know, and the people, as Chris mentioned, people who've tried it are kind of like, eh, you know.

Sandy tried it, they decided not to use it this time.

So, I mean, we have to see, but I think there are some real upsides to it.

Jason Perry: One more interesting dynamic in this race, Chris is who is endorsing these candidates.

Gary Herbert has come out saying that he would support Erin Mendenhall, and Phil Lyman, who's going to run for governor, is endorsing Rocky Anderson.

Chris Bleak: And if you'll remember when Rocky Anderson was mayor the first time, one of the people that he battled hard with was then a young representative in the House named Stuart Adams, who's the senate president.

I think there's a number of folks at the State Capitol that have no interest in a Rocky Anderson 2.0, and they just-- they enjoy working with Erin Mendenhall, they think she's collaborative.

I know they've had their battles, but-- and maybe at some level it is that balance that Democrats have to strike here between how do I work to get some of my priorities done versus being more confrontational and appealing to a base that likes that and likes that approach?

And so, it's a tough challenge, as Senator Escamilla knows, and one-- but it's clear they're not interested in Rocky 2.0.

And that's why you see Governor Cox and Gary Herbert and others saying, no, let's support Erin Mendenhall.

She brings a good approach and a good air to the-- to city hall.

Robert Gehrke: Yeah, I mean, Senator Escamilla can probably speak to this too, and I agree with Chris, like, there's this constant tension.

Do I-- as a Democrat, do I stand up and shake my fist and make my-- take my stand and then die on that hill?

Or do I try to, you know, as Mayor Mendenhall said she's tried to do, is bring people to the table and try to get as much as we can from the legislature.

And the legislature still has a huge amount of control over Salt Lake City.

It limits what they can do and tells them what they can't.

So, you know, I think it's important to be collaborative in that way, especially when you're a mayor.

And I think Chris is right, I think that that's the real risk with another Rocky term is it took a long time to rebuild a lot of those relationships for the, you know, between the city and the legislature, and it would be a step back to, you know, go back to that sort of combative, you know, punitive approach that was taken during his term.

Jason Perry: Let's talk about a couple of other races.

Let's talk about the senate race, Senator, because what's interesting is we are-- the slate was sort of set for a little while here with, you know, Brad Wilson once he announced.

But we had an announcement that John Curtis was not going to run, but rumor on the street is maybe he's thinking about it.

Luz Escamilla: Yeah, I was surprised, because we heard so much before, and everybody's like, he's coming in, and of course, then Brad Wilson announcing, and Brad, you know, he's been so good, and we've sponsored bills together, he's a good friend.

And we were in his last speaking engagement together.

We were talk, you know, doing a-- to students together, so we had a chance to, you know, talk about some of our experiences working this bipartisan approach.

But now hearing again Congressman Curtis, and he's also great.

I mean, both of them are great.

I think, you know, we-- a lot of Democrats like Mitt Romney, so there's been this-- because I always say he's almost like a Kardashian for Utah, right?

Like, everybody loves Mitt Romney.

I mean, I'll say this is not-- it's real, like, when the interns-- when Mitt Romney comes, all interns come and ask for a picture with him.

He's the only member of the congressional delegation that has, like, a line of people.

I-- and I've seen it year after year, and it's-- there's something about Mitt Romney.

So, I think we collectively understanding that Democrats have very few opportunities to win a US Senate, right, wanna see another Mitt Romney coming to the US Senate.

So, in those two, I think both are great guys.

I mean, Curtis and Wilson are great, but it's interesting to see now his shift to maybe I'm interested.

And I'm like, what's going on?

Let's make a choice, you know.

Robert Gehrke: I'd also be interested to know what you think of this, but from where I sit, I don't think Speaker Wilson's really caught fire the way he expected to.

He has cleared the field for the most part.

He's raised a lot of money, but I think there's still an opening for, if John Curtis wants to get in, he can get in.

And going to the sort of the North-South split that Luz was talking about earlier, Curtis has represented a huge chunk of Southern, you know, the Southeastern part of the state.

So, I think there's a potential there for him to have a base that Brad hasn't been able to tap into yet.

I think if John Curtis decides to get into this, it completely flips the race on its head.

Chris Bleak: John Curtis is a super talented politician, and I was excited to see him stay in the House or suggest he was going to stay in the House for another reason.

Speaker Wilson and John Curtis, Congressman Curtis, are very similar in terms of the way they approach things.

I think they're both very likable, they're both very pragmatic.

I think they would represent Utah well.

And so, I hate to see them go against each other and potentially split some of that vote and end up with somebody that will come in with a much more confrontational tone.

Now, maybe they can ultimately resolve that and, you know, the final-- they'll be the final two in the primary, but I think there is some risk that the two of them together end up splitting some of that vote that's, if you will, more mainstream, because they do have similar approaches.

But the the thing that Speaker Wilson has done well up to this point, and it's-- he's been laser focused, he's been out there, but he has raised money.

So, he is going to be competitive from that perspective.

Now, John Curtis can bring some of that to the race as well.

But Speaker Wilson is well situated to be a strong, you know, competitor in this race.

Jason Perry: The last 20 seconds, go ahead, Senator.

Luz Escamilla: Oh, no, just I-- like I said, I think both of them are great, I-- and we want-- we need another one like that to replace Mitt Romney.

We need someone that can be accessible, and I think both of them are.

And-- but you're right, it will be interesting to see if they split the vote, and then you have this third person coming of more of a scary perspective.

So, I'll take any of those two guys.

Jason Perry: We're watching this one closely.

Of course, we're watching voter turnout as well.

Ballots are in people's homes.

Should be sending those in, does have an impact.

So, thank you for being with us tonight, and thank you for watching "The Hinckley Report."

This show is also available as a podcast on PBSUtah.org/HinckleyReport or wherever you get your podcasts.

Thank you for being with us.

We'll see you next week.

♪♪♪ ♪♪♪ ...