Utah’s Contentious Legislative Challenges

Utah’s Contentious Legislative Challenges

– By Howard Sierer –

[Note: After six satisfying years with The Independent, I will be leaving after next week’s column to publish on my own. Readers can subscribe at no cost to Sierer Says | Howard Sierer | Substack. Subscribers will receive an email notifying them when new posts are available.]

Utah’s legislature will be dealing with several of the same contentious issues that will be playing out on the national stage this year. The new Trump administration plans to make changes in immigration policy, to government-mandated diversity, equity, inclusion (DEI) training, and to reduce or eliminate unneeded programs and activities. Our legislature plans to address these issues at the state level.

Illegal Immigration. Former Pres. Biden threw open the doors on our southern border immediately after taking office, allowing 10 million illegal immigrants to flood into the country. As a result, “Americans now rank immigration as the most important problem facing the country today,” according to a Gallup poll taken in early 2024. “Fifty-five percent of our citizens call it an acute threat to the country’s interests.”

Utah has historically been receptive to immigrants and I have long been an advocate for substantially increased legal immigration. But Biden’s unprecedented surge has highlighted the strain on that goodwill and focused attention on problems introduced by some of those immigrants.

The legislature will be considering proposals to increase temporary detention capacity in the state, identifying migrants convicted of class A misdemeanors for automatic deportation, and increasing criminal penalties for gang activity, fentanyl distribution, human trafficking and driving without a license.

Rep. Trevor Lee says, “If we get all the legislation passed that we are proposing and have planned, it will make Utah one of the most safe and protected states from illegal immigration problems in the country. It definitely is going to be one of the biggest issues of this entire session.”

To those who object, this writer asks, “What part of the word ‘illegal’ don’t you understand.”

Flags in the classroom. Equality Utah, one of the largest LGBTQ activist groups in the state, explains that “LGBTQ students didn’t feel a sense of belonging. So [some] very well meaning teachers in Utah public schools sometimes posted a rainbow flag or a pride flag as a way to help students who were feeling isolated.”

Republicans have revived a bill from last session that would limit the kinds of flags public school teachers can display in their classrooms to the U.S. flag, state flags, municipal flags, tribal flags, military flags and the flag of the school where the classroom is located.

Rep. Lee said, “I know a lot of people are upset about the LGBTQ flag being banned but this bill really is about bringing political neutrality back to classrooms as it pertains to just flags in general. I don’t want MAGA flags being flown just as much as I don’t want a pride flag flown.

Lee continues, “Removing the ability for teachers to display flags with political connotations in classrooms will remove a potential source of discomfort for students and parents and will “help teachers get back to what they do best.”

This writer would ask Equality Utah if it believes Jewish students would “feel isolated” if teachers posted the Hamas flag or if Muslim students would “feel isolated” if teachers posted the Israeli flag.

Higher education. Members of the legislature believe there are reasons to expect cuts in state support for public colleges and universities. Forecasts of lower overall enrollment levels coupled with inadequate capacity in high-demand majors like nursing and engineering indicate to legislators imbalances in the use of state funds. Legislators are wondering why some low-performing majors that don’t lead to job opportunities continue to receive substantial state funding.

Add to these concerns significant increases in administrative cost-per-student over the last nine years at, for example, the University of Utah (112%) and Salt Lake Community College (143%) when compared to Southern Utah University (20%).

Factors like these lead House Speaker Mike Schultz to reflect on the large amount of public funds appropriated annually to higher education. He says, “And I’m good with that as long as we’re getting the right outcomes. But if we’re not getting the right outcomes, the question has to be asked: ‘Do we still subsidize at the same level that we’ve been subsidizing at?’”

Schultz said that any legislative cuts to Utah’s higher-education institutions should not be the same “across the board. So we would maybe look at a higher (subsidy cut) percentage for some schools and a lower percentage number for others.”

The legislators have Gov. Cox’s support, calling the budget changes to higher education a “reallocation,” instead of an across-the-board cut, where money will be redirected from canceled programs to new or expanded ones after a review process by the Utah Board of Higher Education.

This writer fully supports Cox when he said, “I am one who does believe that higher ed has lost their way across the country in very important ways. They’ve forgotten their core mission and become much more in the advocacy business than the seekers of truth.”

Expect a lot wailing and gnashing of teeth in these three areas from those whose oxen are getting gored.