January 27, 2019

 "It might be of interest for you to know that we will introduce probably over 1,000 bills. We'll probably pass, again if history's any example, over 500 bills.   And 85% of those bills will be passed virtually unanimously." Governor Herbert

 KUED presents the Governor's Monthly News Conference. An exchange between Utah reporters and Governor Gary Herbert.

 GOVERNOR HERBERT: Good morning.

 AUDIENCE: Good morning Governor.

GOVERNOR HERBERT: As always it's an honor to be with you and this kind of an auspicious time of the year, because guess what, this coming Monday, the legislature comes back into session. So this is kind of the calm before the storm and we have the whirlwind of activity that takes place on The Hill starting next Monday.

Let me just mention a couple of things. One, I'm excited to have the Legislature back in session. We have 104 wonderful people who take their jobs seriously, elected by the people, trying to develop policy that will put us on the right path to success in our state. And certainly if we have history as an example we've done pretty good.

Certainly in contrast to what we see in Washington, DC where's there's a lot of dis-functionality and hyper partisanship. The good news is for us in the state of Utah that our legislatures do know how to work together and cooperate.

It might be of interest for you to know that we will introduce probably over 1,000 bills. We'll probably pass, again if history's any example, over 500 bills. And 85% of those bills will be passed virtually unanimously. As they set aside partisan politics, bring some common sense and practicality representing the will of the people and developing policy. I think that ability to work together is a hallmark of Utah and why we have great success in our state.

We have new leadership in the speaker of Brad Wilson and a senate president in Stuart Adams. Two men that I've worked with over past years and looking forward to working them in their new leadership capacities and their leadership team. So I think we're all optimistic about opportunities we have to do things together as we go into the future.

Again, Utah's in a very good place in large part as we look towards balancing a budget, $19 billion of what we'll be talking about, how to spend the money, how to prioritize. We're one of only 10 states that have a AAA bond rating. Credit goes to the people of Utah for electing good people who understand fiscal prudence.

One poll script, let me just add this to the issue. One, we don't function well if the public's not engaged and not involved. So let me as the Governor of the state of Utah invite the public to participate, to be involved, talk to you house member, your senate member. If you have issues you want to talk about, concerns you have, that's the place to go to talk to them and see what they can do to introduce legislation or fix a problem or find better policy or improve what we have on the books. It really is a citizen legislature. They need to listen and they are listening to the citizens as they legislate and do their work.

So be involved. The more, again, it's not just paid lobbyist, we have a lot of citizens that come up, some of the issues are controversial, complex. Certainly fraught with emotion. But we would like to invite the public to be a participant for these next 45 days of the legislative session. Really beyond that, too. But this is the most important part of our year, politically, the legislative session. So public is welcome, come and be involved. I'm looking forward to the start next Monday, have a great session. We do it right this year, we'll set the tone for 2019. And maintain our lofty position of Utah being at the top of the list in every positive way in this country today. So with that, happy to take your questions.

LINDSAY WHITEHURST, ASSOCIATED PRESS: Governor, I was hoping to get your take on hate crimes legislation. Wondering if you'd seen the statement from The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and how that might the legislation going forward and if you'd sign something if it got to your desk?

GOVERNOR HERBERT: Well I have heard about it. I've not seen the bill so I don't know what's in it. I think most of us would agree that if we need to have enhanced penalties, if we think there's a benefit there, as far as stopping crime and bad acting by people out there, enhanced penalties for anything that would fall into the definition of a hate crime. I think it's certainly worthy of discussion, debate. The fact that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints evidently has weighed in on this and said they're not opposed to it can't hurt the possibilities, I don't know that it changes everybody's mind. But I think it's certainly a discussion we ought to have and I welcome the debate.

BEN WINSLOW, FOX-13: Do you support, including LGBTQ people in that bill, as far as being subject to protections?

GOVERNOR HERBERT: I don't think, again I think the message we want to put out there is that members of the gay community, LGBTQ, are loved and welcomed and appreciated for who they are. They ought to feel safe, they feel loved. And so anything we can do to enhance that we ought to do.

BOB BERNICK, UTAHPOLICY.COM: What about the bill that Representative Nelson has, that has to do with birth certificates, not allowing transgendered people to go and get a court order to get their sex changed on the birth certificate? That seems to speak against what you just said.

GOVERNOR HERBERT: Well I don't know that it does, I haven't seen the bill, I don't know the motivation behind the bill being presented but I certainly again, agree that if people want to be identified as whatever it is they want to be identified, if that's a gender issue, if it's a sexual orientation, they ought to have the ability to do that. If they want to have that on a public record there ought to be a process for them to in fact, have that to happen. I think most people would welcome it and think there's no reason why we should stop it.

BEN WINSLOW, FOX-13: So would you then veto a bill if it were to pass that would prohibit people from changing their gender marker on a birth certificate or driver license?

GOVERNOR HERBERT: Now without seeing the bill I don't the use the v word very often. I try to work, to shape things as they go through the process. So we work together in a collaborative fashion so we don't have to veto. So I'd expect that's how we would work on this issue if it starts and comes up, nobody's talked to me about it, yet, except for you guys today. But we will work very proactively to get good policy in place on all legislation.

GLEN MILLS, ABC4: There's a bill opposing that by Senator Weiler that would allow for that process to take place. It's coming back after failing. Why has that failed in the past given what you just said?

GOVERNOR HERBERT: Well because they didn't have the votes. Maybe it's lack of awareness, lack of understanding. Who knows why people vote the way they do or why they don't. But many times we have legislation comes up two, three or four years in a row till finally, in fact germinates and has the support, probably the clarity necessary to get the votes and pass. That's the legislative process. It's usually not won and done. It usually is a thought, an idea, maybe germination to some legislation, maybe doesn't get out of committee, then we come back the next year and have broader support and eventually it passes. Basically based on what the public wants to have happen which is what you'd expect in a representative form of government.

BOB BERNICK, UTAHPOLICY.COM: Speaking about something that keeps coming back, coming back this year is SB 54. They'll be a move to veto it by one of the co-sponsors, way back when. Seems like we've talking about this forever. At one time you said you would veto any attempt to repeal, totally, SB 54. Do you still feel the same way, a veto if it comes to your desk and it's a repeal?

GOVERNOR HERBERT: Well what I did say was I wished I'd vetoed the bill when it came up the first time. Not anticipating the significant, the vision it was going to cause over, as you mentioned Bob, so many, many years, that's been disappointing.

The motivation behind Senate Bill 54, by the sponsors at the time, and I would think that motivation should carry over to the sponsors even today is they did it to make sure that the caucus convention system was going to be preserved in some form or another. The worry at the time was that with what the polling showed, and the will of the people, we'd go to just a general kind of primary selection process, there would be no need for caucus nor convention. And so this was designed to preserve and protect that. I think the public seems to have embraced it, the duel pathway that it provides, seems to be having significant support in the state.

That being said, there's been people that have difference of opinion on it and if they want to fight that, then the way to fight that is of course in a court process. That's happening, it's gone to court two or three different times. The laws that we call Senate Bill 54 have been upheld by judicial scholars that we call judges, so far. But the last inning of this game has not been played.

So I would hope that'd we allow that to happen. I think if it does not happen people on either side will be dissatisfied. So that process needs to be completed once The Supreme Court has made the decision, one way or another, then we can react to that and decide what we should do next in terms of legislation, if any is needed.

So again, I'm going to follow what the courts say. We and the Executive Branch have a responsibility to enforce the law. We have people that say to us, don't do that. And as we've said in many instances prior to this. The Executive Branch doesn't create the law but we apply the law. We don't pick and choose what laws to enforce. That's what the Constitution requires of us. And we're going to follow that and so we'll see that the courts decide and react to that decision.

LISA RILEY ROCHE, DESERET NEWS: So is it too soon then, to repeal SB 54 because the Supreme Court has not yet decided whether to take up the case? And would you step in if needed with a veto if lawmakers decide to repeal and as you say is a very popular law with the public?

GOVERNOR HERBERT: Well new law, within of course Trump, old law and there's never, I guess, a time that's not appropriate to bring new law if in fact the will of the people. That doesn't seem to be what the people are asking for right now, I think that is more political opportunism for some out there as opposed to let's see what the courts say and let's see what the will of the people is. But we'll let that play out, that's the process. And so my crystal ball is as foggy as anybody's. I don't know what's going to happen.

But for me, I'm inclined to let's let it play out. In fact we've had the sponsors of the bill, including one that's now saying, I want to repeal it, have said, well I think I'd let the courts play out, let's see what happens there, and then react. I think that's probably the proper order.

LISA RILEY ROCHE, DESERET NEWS: On the idea that the lawmakers don't do that will you step in and stop that bill from taking effect through a veto?

GOVERNOR HERBERT: Well I don't know, it depends on what the law is and what they do. Again I don't want to presuppose what I'm going to do. And not even have any details or anything about what's going to take place. I'll punt on that one for right now and see what happens.

GLEN MILLS, ABC4: Governor, on the idea of letting things play out through the courts, there's a bill that's going to be coming out that would narrow the window of opportunity for an abortion to 15 weeks. And the talk seems to be how much is this going to cost to defend in court? Even legislative attorneys are speaking out saying it's unconstitutional. Is that the right way to go about legislation, to already plan for it to go to court and fight it that way?

GOVERNOR HERBERT: Well some fights are worth having and cost is a secondary issue. But certainly is an issue. And I expect the Legislature, when they look at the pros and the cons of this proposal will say, well is that worth voting for it, or voting against it, based on all these factors including the cost of fighting it in court.

As clearly Roe v. Wade basically said abortion is legal up to a certain period of time and we've drawn a line in the sand, 20 weeks viability outside the womb. Science has advanced since that was passed in the 70s and right now viability is a much shorter period of time then we had in the past. And so, should the line be adjusted? That'll be part of the discussion to debate.

I do note that in New York yesterday they signed a bill that allows for abortion up until the time of birth. Going exactly the other direction. Which you know give us all a little bit pause about this issue. We be sensitive to not only the woman's right to choose and in control of her own body but also the life of the unborn. I'm a pro-life guy. And when you hear a heart- beat after six weeks, it should give us pause, are we doing the right thing? They should be, as we've said, even those who've been pro-choice, have said they ought to be rare, safe and rare, and yet they seem to be more common particularly with this bill passed in New York. So we got extremes going on out there and we'll have to see what plays out. Science has made it certainly a discussion point do we need to adjust where we draw the line on viability?

BEN WINSLOW, FOX-13: So if this will were to pass would you sign it, if this bill were to pass?

GOVERNOR HERBERT: I haven't made up my mind and decision on that but I'm going to look at the pros and the cons of it. Again, we'll see if it even makes it through the Legislature. I think it's got some stiff opposition on that anyway. But again, we ought to look at science and how it works with the viability of an unborn person. We've already drawn the line, it was 20 weeks. Should we go to 15? Maybe science allows that to happen now.

GLEN MILLS, ABC4: Would you see that as a fight worth fighting if it did come to your desk?

GOVERNOR HERBERT: If I signed the bill, and knowing it would still be challenged and I expect that everybody would acknowledge that it would be challenged but you can put it at 19 weeks, it would be challenged.

That's just kind of the opposite points of view and the emotion that's involved with abortion. It's probably the one issue that's divided the nation more than any issue in our history. Second maybe only to Vietnam War. That was pretty contentious time but that passed. This is continuing on. And the fight continue between the sides that say we should be able to do it carte blanche and those who say we shouldn't do it at all. And we've kind of settled on some place kind of in the middle. That middle's adjusting now and it is a fight worth having, certainly a debate, and a discussion worth having.

JULIA RITCHEY, KUER: Governor, on Medicaid, do you support Senator Christensen's idea to go back to the 100% cap and adding work requirements? Does that bring up any broader issues about how the Legislature will go in and modify voter approved initiatives?

GOVERNOR HERBERT: Well as you know I had a proposal called Healthy Utah that was very similar to this and covered everybody though from up to 138%, had a work requirement, a work effort, is what the Obama administration allowed us to have.

Having people come in and say we need help and we say you're here because you don't make enough money, you don't have a job. But if you're physically or mentally capable then we'll give you training and education and give you an opportunity, if you're unemployed, to get a job. If you're underemployed, you get a better job. And we did that all without a tax increase. It didn't work out so now we are now back.

I understand people are concerned and probably upset that we'd be sending six to eight hundred million dollars a year in additional taxation, opposed upon the people of Utah for the Affordable Care Act. So we have all the pain but we've not gotten all the benefit. And that's I think led to this initiative. I understand that frustration, that desire to bring this money back to Utah and expand access to affordable health care. A lot of aspects to this, this is a complex issue. Affordability and who pays for it, all those things intertwined. So there's not really any simple answer.

But what I do know is the people have spoken on Proposition 3 initiative. I do expect it to be implemented at the will of the people, they've opposed a tax on it to help pay the cost but as we've done the analysis now of the cost of Medicaid expansion, in the initiative we find that after about two years we don't have enough money to pay for the additional cost to the state.

So that puts us in a tough situation of saying, well do we raise taxes again to cover that additional growing cost? Do we start shifting monies from one program to this program? Going from education, take it out of there, take it out of public safety, transportation, other health and human services. But some way you've got to pay that cost of expanding Medicaid. And so that debate needs to happen and I expect we're going to need to make some modifications for that.

By the way, just to give you an example, when Medicaid first started in Utah, in the early days, it's been about 9% of our budget. Here before this initiative, was about 19% of our budget. After the initiative now, it's going to be $3.5 billion. It's about 26% of our budget. So it's growing and we need to understand how can we make sure we can pay for it, not just today and not just next year. But the subsequent years after that. So we've got to think in terms of long term and that means the Legislature may need to come in and take a look at this to say how can we in fact cap this expense, how do we control it so we remain fiscally viable and make sure that it's viable not only over the next couple of years but for the next generation. So there needs to be some modification to the initiative at least from the fiscal standpoint. There's other things at play, we're continue to work on waivers, I've talked to the health department, the CMS and Seema Verma. I think waivers that we've requested we can receive.

The only question right now really is one of partiality which is the 90/10 split up to 100% and then you'd kick into the federal exchange from 100 to 138%. That's another viable option that would work and cover everybody. And bring back our money to expand on accessible, affordable health care. So I think we're on the right road and I think we need to listen to the will of the people and implement it. But there needs to be some modifications to keep us fiscally viable into the future.

BOB BERNICK, UTAHPOLICY.COM: Why are we looking at tax cuts, sir, if we have money there now to pay for some of this Medicaid expansion?

GOVERNOR HERBERT: It's not a matter of just a one-time tax cut it's also a matter of future sustainability and having policy that allows the economy to grow and expand. As you know, my focus when I came in, taking over at the depths of the great recession, was to say look, we can do better. And let's put together a plan that we can achieve becoming the best performing economy in America today.

Part of that has been tax policy, part of that's been regulation reform, part of that's been efficiency in state government, part of that's been education, having the best labor force in America. Well as we now see the changing dynamics of the marketplace, we see that our tax policy, our tax code, we have today, although been very good in the past, is going to become less good going into the future. 

So again, particularly on the sales tax, it's inequitable, it's not fair, we've gone from 17% of the economy being taxed to now at 40% and dropping. And so we need to look at the term, broaden the base and lower the rate. If we broaden the base we can lower the rate significantly.

What that allows us to do is to give some money back to the people, as part of a tax fairness, and more equitable position, but allows us to have a healthy economy growing over the next decade and beyond. Is like we've done in the past. So it's not just a matter of money now and money tomorrow, it's a matter of having a healthy, growing economy that's viable for the next generation.

MICHAEL ORTON, CAPITAL PRESS CORPS: To that end, Governor, the national conversation now is tending towards a recession or the very real potential for it, what is, given what you've just said, what is Utah doing to prepare for those kinds of contingencies?

GOVERNOR HERBERT: Well here's what we're doing. And this not anything we're doing differently because of the gossip out there that we may be headed into a recession. Who knows. We don't even allow our administration to use the r word. Why? It is not inevitable that we'll have a recession.

But here, what the state of Utah does is we live within our means. We don't spend more money than we take in. Two, we save for a rainy day. If there's a downturn for whatever reason, the federal government shutdown comes to mind, there's an impact that's happening on the people of Utah and throughout the country, but we save for rainy days so we can adjust and bridge the gap. We don't have unreachable or irrational debt. We keep our debt to the minimum and we've reduced the fact, our dead load, over the last four or five years, in a significant way. I pay off our debts.

We in fact have efficiency in state government. I've bragged about how much more efficient the state government is today than it was back in, say going back to 2002. Which is how far you go back to find a larger number of state employees than we have today. We have in fact improved processes and providing services, which government's labor intensive, with less people. So those things are what we to do be viable and tune with the market today and what the market's going to be tomorrow.

We have $825 million today in a rainy day fund. That allows us to have monies to spend, to bridge gaps as we see them. We have money we're using as one time funds in construction. The proposal I made in the budget is designed to use ongoing money but for one time issues so we can hedge the bet, this $1.2 billion surplus is not the norm. This is probably a little bit of an outlier because of federal tax cuts and people adjusting, what they're doing on their own responsibilities, tax obligations, with the new federal tax code. So we're anticipating that's maybe a peak but that's not going to be the norm.

We're growing at twice the national average, economically. I expect we'll continue to grow faster than the national average but that is subject to fluctuation, the business cycle, the ups and down.

I don't see a recession, I see slower growth, maybe that'll happen. But we're prepared for it. We're doing everything we can do to anticipate that, and make sure the government is solvent and empower the private sector which is really where the adjustments will need to be made. It's when the government gets in the way of those adjustments that we end up going into recession. We're not going to get in the way of the private sector.

GLEN MILLS, ABC4: Governor there's going to be some discussion on potentially modifying the ballot initiative process in general, b process. Would you like to see some modifications to that following the year we just had, or do you think it's sufficient the way it is now?

GOVERNOR HERBERT: One, I support the initiative process. Although I don't think it's a good way to make law. It is a way to get the legislatures attention and when they've ignored issues it's a way for the people to arise together and say hey you know what? We think this is important and we have an initiative here and we're going to vote it up or down and create law. The problem with the initiative petition is that you cannot refine it, you cannot fine tune it. You take it, warts and all. And then hope that the Legislature will peel off those warts and make it better and more viable.

With the legislative process you have the ability to introduce a baseline of the legislation, you can modify it, you have public hearings, you amend it, you change it, you improve it. So with the initiative petition that doesn't happen.

That being said, I think our initiative petition process can use some fine tuning. I think the ability for people to take their names off of the initiative petition, whether you want to keep that or not, it certainly coincide at least with the deadline for those who are getting the signatures, rather than have somebody come and target some areas where we don't have many signatures.

It's hard now to get 26 Senate districts signatures. You get 140,000 signatures in that process and then have a couple of hundred people pull their names off and torpedo the will of the people. Not to pass necessary the legislation or to defeat it either way. But to be able to vote on it. And have a debate and a discussion that's part of the initiative petition process is we want to have a discussion on this, we want to weigh in on it, we want to vote, and to have just a handful of people be targeted and take that away from the people I think is probably not as good policy as we ought to have.

The nuances of fixing this issue, I think are worthy of discussion and debate. I'd like to have it at least coincide, if you want to take your name off but you have a deadline, you can't come back after the fact cause they for whatever reason, I've changed my mind. We don't let people vote and change their mind. So either make it coincide or take the ability to take your name off, once you've decided, once you've voted, your name's stuck. That was the two viable options for me.

LISA RILEY ROCHE, DESERET NEWS: Governor, going back to Medicaid expansion, and the will of the people, through the initiative process. You just told us about the large amount of money and the rainy day fund, the state's efforts to hedge it's bets by paying cash for some one-time expenses. All these things that put us in a very strong economic place right?

Why not carry out the will of the people with Medicaid expansion, even if your analysis shows that there might be some gap in the future, there's not a gap now, let it go, see how many people sign up, and if there's an issue with it, tap into some of this money the state has, the taxpayers said they wanted it, right?

GOVERNOR HERBERT: Well think your view is very logical. And I think that's we ought to be doing, to say okay, let's implement the program and see what happens and react to the happening. That being said though, it's one time money. You need to understand, and this an ongoing, growing expense. So it's not imprudent for us to say, look we need to take a look at this in the long-term. And let's see if we can take corrective action now or make sure as we implement it, it's in the right way that we implement it, so it has viability, long-term. It's easy for politicians to look short-term, it's harder to look long-term. And this one time money you're saying plug a hole for an ongoing, repeating problem. So we need to take a hard look at the fiscal aspects of this and we will do that. There's maybe more than one way to skin the cat but we at to look at it and debate it. 

ERIK NEILSEN, KUED: Governor, we're out of time, thank you very much for joining us this morning.

GOVERNOR HERBERT: Thank you, it's great to be with you as always.

NARRATOR: This has been the Governor's Monthly News Conference. An archive of transcripts, video and audio is available online. Please visit KUED.org. Thanks for joining us.

 

 

Return to home page