February 26, 2010

"...the vision I have is that every student...has an opportunity to become the best that they can be, to be able to develop skills and intellect where they can compete in a global market." -Governor Herbert

KEN VERDOIA, KUED-7: Governor, thanks for joining us today. Several so called message bills have been considered by the state legislature, and some of them passed during the current session, clearly aimed at sending a message to Washington, D.C. to redefine the relationship of states to the federal government on certain critical issues guns, land, health care, et cetera. How do you view these message bills? Are you generally in support of sending the message to Washington? And if so, what should that message be?

GOVERNOR HERBERT: Well, I think there is a need to send messages on occasion, and clearly I think, with the idea that the federal government overreach is kind of a concern for, not just Utah, but many other states. I just came back from the National Governor's Association in Washington, D.C., and the recurring theme with Democrat and Republican Governors was this overreach. We call it Federalism. It's the appropriate balance between Washington, D.C. and the states. So I think some of this is born out of frustration. The legislature wants to vent, and send a message to Washington, D.C., and so that probably is appropriate.

KEN VERDOIA, KUED: Could it be expensive, though?

GOVERNOR HERBERT: Excuse me?

KEN VERDOIA, KUED: Could it be expensive?

GOVERNOR HERBERT: It could be. Again, as we look at these bills and these messages, I guess we want to make sure, one, they're Constitutional, and two, what is the expense that maybe the taxpayer's going to be obligated to pay for? So as I review them from the standpoint of legislation and bills that I'm going to sign, that's going to be the prism which I'm going to look at them through. But again, I understand that sometimes it's important to get a message out. Washington needs to hear from the states. They need to hear from the people. And I think that the people are, in fact, a little bit concerned about this encroachment into the states by the federal government.

JEFF ROBINSON, KCPW: Governor, one of these bills sponsored by Republican Representative Carl Wimmer, the founder of the Patrick Henry Caucus, is a lot more than a message bill. It would require Utah, that the legislature and the Governor to sign off on any federal health care reform before it's implemented in the state. If this could possibly put Utah's Medicaid funding in jeopardy, would you be willing to sign such a bill?

GOVERNOR HERBERT: I'm not sure that I would. I think we need to be careful about what we end up doing in legislation of the unintended consequence. That's always the watch word up on the hill, is what is the unintended consequence. We know what we're intending to do, and sometimes we end up doing something that's different than that. So I think that's a concern of jeopardizing our other programs. That being the case, again, this health care issue has become such an emotional thing for people, it's almost, it's become so emotional, almost rational thoughts going out the window. And this mandate that seems to be coming out of Washington, D.C. to the states of, you will, in fact, participate in our health care program, is causing a lot of concern. Again, we just mentioned about this Federalism aspect, and the overreach of the federal government. I'm here to tell you, Governors, Democrat and Republican, have concerned about the overreach.

DAN BAMMES, KUER: Governor, at the same time these colleagues of yours are concerned about the federal government overreaching, many of them are hoping very much that they can talk the federal government out of some additional funds for Medicaid. You did not sign on to that yourself, but if the money comes, will it be helpful to Utah?

GOVERNOR HERBERT: Well, I didn't sign on it because we didn't need it. Again, there's got to be a time when the states say, you know, we want to get off the federal largesse. We've had 18 states that actually have built in this actually have built in this FMAP program into balancing their budget and they're saying we can't balance it if we don't get it. And this is not just Medicaid, this is designed to be put into the general fund money. And so if we think this is going to be going into Medicaid, we're mistaken. That being the case, I mean when you think about the overall debt that we're incurring, we've got to somehow say no, no more. Right now we've got a $14 trillion debt in this country, $40,000 plus for every man, woman, and child. We're concerned in Utah because the debt ratio is about $800 per person. We didn't need it. And clearly, if they mandate it to us, if they pass this law and say you're going to pay the money back whether you get it or not, we'd be foolish not to take it. But it's a wrong policy, it's a wrong way to go, and states ought not to be building in federal subsidies to balance their budget.

ROD DECKER, KUTV: Kids are walking out of Jordan School District, I think right now. The three high schools there, last night the legislative committee refused them $15 million. Jordan's left an orphan, they're going to fire teachers, they're going to fire other people, they've got real trouble. Can you offer any hope, solace, or words of encouragement?

GOVERNOR HERBERT: Well, I would hope that reasonable people can be reasonable. Clearly we've got a significant challenge in the Jordan School District. The split has not worked very well. I think everybody would acknowledge that this split, where one side was not able to participate in the vote, and to their disadvantage economically has really caused a lot of grief. To have to lay off that many teachers has got to be a significant concern. And a group there saying, you know, we don't want to raise taxes, so they're put in kind of a double box there. I would hope that we could get together and find a solution. I don't know exactly what that solution is to keep all parties happy. Maybe that's impossible. I've worked with a number of the business leaders on the west side of town, in the Jordan School District, they're just frustrated that they can't seem to find a way out. And this appeared to be at least a way to equalize in some form or fashion the funding from the east side to help with the west side. You know, I thought that was going to have some traction. I'm surprised it went down so overwhelmingly in defeat.

Reporter: Governor, when you say the split hasn't worked, would you take the next step and say they shouldn't have split?

GOVERNOR HERBERT: Yeah, I don't think they should have split. I think that what's happened, the outcome, again, the unintended consequence, I think, has been unfortunate. It seems to me that the process of not letting both sides weigh in on the vote, just having one side vote and kind of secede, and leaving some kind of an acute economic challenge for those who are left over, just didn't work very well. And it passed on just the narrowest of margins. If the west side, the Jordan School District, had been allowed to weigh in, it wouldn't have passed at all. So I think that's indicative that the overwhelming majority of the people didn't want to have the split.

MAX ROTH, FOX 13: So you don't believe that people who live in one entity, if they're in a city they shouldn't be able to vote to secede from a county and incorporate?

GOVERNOR HERBERT: I think it makes it difficult, particularly in a state that values equalization in funding. You know, a state has to be kind of the referee. I think the people need to speak and we need to have the ability, in fact, to divide our school districts into more reasonably managed districts, but as look at the funding, the state collects the money and we equalize it out. And I think that's a good approach. I'm concerned about the ramifications of people that think, you know, we've paid our share, and now it's sometimes needful to have the other people pay it. And we pull out the economic advantages and disadvantage, unintentionally those who are left over.

MAX ROTH, FOX 13: But would you like the state to do a state wide equalization of property tax revenue?

GOVERNOR HERBERT: You know, I'd be willing to look into it. I don't know that I've got any solutions right now for this, but that's why I've, in fact, incorporated here, starting this year, the Governor's Commission on Education Excellence. And we're bringing stake holders from all sides of the spectrum, there'll be about 25 of us, we'll be starting in March. And I think it's going to have a significant opportunity for us debate and discuss educational issues, in all of its facets, and see if we can't come up with some recommendations going forward. I expect, along with, you know, teacher salary and pay and curriculum, you know, how do we handle equalization, and making sure that every student has an opportunity for a quality education, no matter where they live in the state, is going to be on the table for discussion too.

JOHN FLOREZ, FREELANCE JOURNALIST: How is this commission going to be different than the commission that Governor Huntsman had on the 21st Century Workforce?

GOVERNOR HERBERT: Well, number one, this Governor's going to sit at the table. So when we meet on a monthly basis, and we start at 9:00 o'clock and go until noon, I'm going to be there for every minute of it, rolling up my sleeves, listening and learning and contributing just like everybody else around the table.

JOHN FLOREZ, FREELANCE JOURNALIST: Every Governor's had commissions and they just go the way of all commissions go, and it's usually the usual suspects that sit there and talk about what they're going to be doing. How's this going to be different?

GOVERNOR HERBERT: Well, the difference is, in this approach that we're taking, there's going to be some buy in. The Governor will have bought into it. I can tell that with other education commissions, the Governor has not bought in, and hence they have either trash canned the report or put it on a back shelf. In this format, we're going to agree, and build some consensus. It may not be unanimous, but we're going to build consensus. And if we don't implement, you know, recommendations that come out of this commission, it will be a failure.

JOHN FLOREZ, FREELANCE JOURNALIST: When you get elected, usually you have a vision, leaders have a vision of what ought to be. What is your vision of education? Say you get re elected, five years from now, what do you say "This is how education should look, and this is what I did"?

GOVERNOR HERBERT: Well, I think the vision I have is that every student, and whatever the student population makeup is, has an opportunity to become the best that they can be, to be able to develop skills and intellect where they can compete in a global market. We are falling behind, not only other parts of our country, but other parts of this world. I had Russian students just in my office just this past week who said, "I'm here in Utah, but my schooling here for this year does not count in my graduation in Russia." And I was surprised about that. I asked, "What are you doing?" And this junior in high school, this young female said, "Well, I'm tutoring math to freshmen and sophomores in college while I'm here on this exchange." We can learn that our curriculum needs to be more robust, that we need to make sure that every student has an opportunity to be the best they can be, and compete in the marketplace. That's not too much to ask, that's something we can do. We have our unique challenges here in Utah, a larger population, a lot of public land that hurts us as far as developing property tax and economic viability to put into education. But we can find solutions, we will find solutions, and I think this education excellence commission will give us six or eight recommendations we can implement by the first of next year.

RICHARD PIATT, KSL-TV: At what point do we start talking about a tax increase? The house majority leader told me the other day that they're looking at education cuts, just as every other state program has been cut. The only other option seems to be some kind of tax increase at some point. Do we be proactive and raise taxes in advance of the crisis, or do we wait, like the Jordan District apparently has, for a crisis to occur, before the pressure is really on?

GOVERNOR HERBERT: Well, I think tax increases certainly are not needed today. We're not in a need to have a tax increase with our budget concerns. Tax increases certainly are something that ought to be considered at the appropriate time. This is not one of them. We are trying to get the economy to come out of the doldrums and start to grow, tax increases will stifle that opportunity to grow the economy, which is the best thing that we can have happen. Growing the economy is the best thing that can happen for all of our community here. Those who are impoverished, the best thing we can do is provide them jobs, opportunity to help themselves. We have provided a number of options to the legislature as far as how to balance the budget, use the resources that we have available on hand now, whether it be rainy day funds, whether it's additional bonding for roads, and putting the saved money into other areas of one time interest, delaying road projects. We have already tightened our belt, we can probably do some additional cutting. There is a way to do this in a reasonable and rational and responsible way without a tax increase, and get us through at least another year. Then we will see the future in a much more clear perspective. How is the economy doing? What are the deficiencies in the budget? What do we need to do going forward? The tax increase ought to be the absolute last thing that we do, and impose that on people out there who are already hurting in a down economy.

ROD DECKER, KUTV: How much rainy day fund do you need to have left after this session? Do you need any, or can they put it all in, if that's what's needed?

GOVERNOR HERBERT: We don't need to spend it all. My original budget allowed for $253 million to be left in the rainy day fund. Our projections, our consensus numbers have been $50 million short. So you could take an extra $50 million out of the rainy day fund, leave $203 million, which is still a healthy amount, which gives us some fall back in case we have some uncertainty in the future, and some bumps in the road. I think somewhere around $200 million is a healthy am to leave in the rainy day fund.

ROD DECKER, KUTV: Some legislative leaders are saying you are a bit optimistic in your budget. That besides the 50, that there's other problems. They're talking about kicking felons out of prison. Would you Can you say that we ought to be kicking felons out of prison, or is that something we ought not to do? We ought to either cut further into the rainy day fund, or raise taxes before we do that?

GOVERNOR HERBERT: Well, let me tell you, Rod. I am optimistic. I'm optimistic about Utah's future. I see a lot of reason for that optimism based on the facts and the data of economic recovery. We can balance the budget in responsible ways, we don't have to release felons out of prison in order to do this. We have a way to get through this and still have some rainy day fund left on hand. We can do more with less, we can maintain our services at our government levels, we can in fact keep education, public education and higher education at the current funding levels, and we can get through this year and do that without having to raise taxes.

DAN BAMMES, KUER: Why not a cigarette tax? That's something that polls show a majority of people in Utah might be willing to go along with if the legislature chooses to do that.

GOVERNOR HERBERT: Well, again, I'm trying to be consistent. I know that's unusual sometimes in politics, but I've said no tax increases, I mean no tax increases. And so a tobacco tax is a tax increase. It's certainly a lot less money than people originally were bandying about, it's gone from $50 million to $24 million. I don't think that's really going to be a significant amount of help to the budget, so I'm not proposing a tax increase, and I don't support a tobacco tax increase.

JOHN FLOREZ, FREELANCE JOURNALIST: Why is there such a resistance to the rainy day fund, using it? A lot of people at the legislature are opposed to drawing from it.

GOVERNOR HERBERT: I think the rainy day fund is designed to plug holes, that's why you have one. A rainy day fund is not something you set aside and never use. And yet we have some that out there say you know we want a rainy day fund and never touch it. And maybe it gives us like a safety net, maybe it's like a security blanket. I don't know.

JOHN FLOREZ, FREELANCE JOURNALIST: A rain dance. You need a rain dance.

GOVERNOR HERBERT: Maybe that's it. But we need to have a rainy day fund that we can utilize, and again, it helps to manage our resources. It helps us get through difficult times. It's a band aid approach, I grant you. But it helps us to get to better times. It bridges the gap. So rainy day fund needs to be utilized in an appropriate fashion, and we can do it and still keep $200 million on board, maintain our AAA bond rating. We can actually do this and working together - I expect at the end of the day, by the way, and I have all kind of faith in our legislators, that at the end of the day we're going to come pretty close to what we proposed.

LISA RILEY ROCHE, DESERET NEWS: Governor, if we could go back to message bills for a moment. I wanted to ask you about SB 11. A lot of people are calling it a gun bill. You say it deals with interstate commerce. You have until tomorrow to decide what you're going to do with it. One of the options I know you're considering is a veto. You met yesterday with the attorney general, have you made a decision yet on how you're going to handle that bill?

GOVERNOR HERBERT: I haven't. I'm weighing and considering that bill, as I would do any bill, I would add, based on its Constitutional aspects of it, does it meet the standards of the law? Is it something that I feel good about moving forward? As well as the fiscal note that would come with it. What is going to be the cost to the implementation of that bill and other bills? And is it something that the taxpayer should be shackled with? So I'm actually looking at the cost factor probably as much as anything right now. I will make a decision by tomorrow. It is not a gun bill, it's unfortunate it's been characterized as that. I've had people say you don't support second amendment right to bear arms. That's not true. This is clearly an interstate commerce issue, and as you look at Article 1, Section 8 of our Constitution, you'll find that that area's been litigated more than any other issue in our Constitution. It is a confusing thing. This is an effort by the legislature to say, you know what, we're going to push back. Most all of us agree that the federal government should not, in fact, regulate commerce intra state, I mean things that are developed, produced, manufactured and sold within our boundaries. The Constitution talks about interstate commerce amongst the several states, that the federal government can regulate. Which really is kind of a facilitation. It's not just regulation, it also, in the definition, has to do with facilitation. But it's going to be one that I'm looking at very methodically, and will make a decision on it tomorrow. And the concern I've got is really the cost element of it right now.

ROBERT GERKHE, SALT LAKE TRIBUNE: You talked about delaying implementation until the Montana litigation runs its course. How would you do that? Would that be done through a signing statement?

GOVERNOR HERBERT: Just a trigger. You'd end up saying this will not take effect until and unless the Montana issue has been determined.

ROBERT GERKHE, SALT LAKE TRIBUNE: Through an executive signing statement, then?

GOVERNOR HERBERT: Well actually, I wanted the legislature to pull it back and put it, and incorporate it into the legislation. I thought that was a wise approach to take. Let's see what happens in Montana. Maybe it will give us a little more clarity as far as how our legislation should proceed, and it did not, in fact, in doing that, disallow our ability to go forward. We just would have more information, and probably a better insight as far as what

GLEN WARCHOL: Have you been rebuffed on pulling it back and adding the Montana item to it?

GOVERNOR HERBERT: The legislature indicated they do not want to pull it back and adding that trigger, that's correct.

ROD DECKER, KUTV: Have you You believe in Shurtleff's approach, he says, "Look, just pass it, sign it, we go to court, they get an injunction." I say, "Okay," and then we sit and wait until we know what's happening.

GOVERNOR HERBERT: He's proposed that to me, and I'm certainly putting that into the mix as far as consideration. I want to make sure that there is not going to be some significant liability. I think the legislation as proposed are the well intended, and again, I think messaging is important. We need to make sure that we speak up and say to the federal government, "Look, we're going to challenge you, here. Your overreach is too much, and we are going to fight you on that." So I don't mind the message, I just don't want to end up having a million dollar cost attached to it, where we have slim chance of winning. I think we have a slim chance of even getting to the Supreme Court, which is the intent of that particular piece of legislation.

JEFF ROBINSON, KCPW: Governor, speaking about a different message bill, Representative Chris Herrod has proposed one to take back land from the federal government, and Representative Sumsion proposed taking $3 million from the school and institutional trust lands administration in order to fund that court battle. You were talking about slim chances and not wanting to throw money at slim chances. Do you feel the same way about this issue?

GOVERNOR HERBERT: I feel that same way about all issues. Again, I think we need to have a realization of what the costs will be for implementing any kind of legislation, particularly some that may be controversial. And I don't want to be just tilting at windmills and braying at braying at the moon. And we don't have a lot of extra cash to be wheedling away in areas that we don't have much chance of success.

JEFF ROBINSON, KCPW: What do you think specifically about taking it from the school trust fund?

GOVERNOR HERBERT: I don't have much problem of taking it from the school funds. They are kind of self sustaining, they develop their lands, they keep the money themselves, a portion then dribbles into the education effort, and that's what it's supposed to do. But if, in fact, we utilize and get back more, the idea is to exchange public lands for private lands, and there's some enhanced benefit for education, it's probably as good a place to take it from as anywhere.

MAX ROTH, FOX 13: Governor, there's a significant movement within the Republican party on the 10th Amendment of the Constitution, and exactly what we're talking about, Federalism. They go so far as to say that Social Security, Medicare, are unconstitutional, because everything not in the Constitution is delegated to the states. Do you agree with them, or do you think that they're tilting at windmills and it's- -

GOVERNOR HERBERT: Well, I think there's some reason for discussion. I think there are legal theories, again, the reason we have a world of attorneys is because they don't always agree with each other, and we challenge each other to discuss those issues.

MAX ROTH, FOX 13: What do you think?

GOVERNOR HERBERT: You know, I think that we have case law that shows that Medicaid is certainly, and Medicare, is Constitutional. It's people who voluntarily join. It's not something that's been mandated to the states. We have our own way of developing our standards, and so I think that probably passes muster. Social Security was clearly over reach back in the New Deal days that's coming back to haunt us because of this entitlement aspect, which is growing exponentially, and we wonder if it's sustainable. That being said, again, I think as the Supreme Court decides what is Constitution and what is not, that's clearly been decided it is Constitutional now, and I have no reason to doubt that. That being the case, though, it doesn't mean we want to exacerbate problems by continuing to have the federal government take the role of the states. And that's why I think you're finding frustration in the public, I think you're finding frustration in legislators, and clearly my experience in this past weekend with the Governors, Democrat and Republican, was frustration with the Governors about this continued overreach by the federal government. We believe in Federalism. We believe in the separation of the powers, the executive, legislative, judicial branch. We also believe that the states, which created the federal government, are there to be a check on the federal government. We're forgetting that check and balance the states have a role to play, and Governors are now, I think, awakening to that fact that we've got to, in fact, push back. The health care debate on the national level, in fact, caused this to happen, has been the catalyst to have Governors re-evaluate, what should we be doing in conjunction with the federal government?

KEN VERDOIA, KUED: Excuse me, the heyday of states' rights is really recognized as the 1950s and '60s. Where the federal government forcefully intervened because state rights created a patchwork of inequitable relationships in the United States' American experience. And so if that was an interventionist period of the '50s and '60s, are you saying we need a counter pendulum swing away from those interventionist actions, civil rights, voting rights, a broad range of civil rights that were guaranteed, because states' rights did not work?

GOVERNOR HERBERT: Well, I think the pendulum does swing back and forth. And that's the way it's intended to be, our founding fathers, in fact, said it is a check and a balance. And as we have too much of the Washington, D.C. mentality, the states rebel and pull them back. Again, I don't think we overturn civil rights legislation and some of these other things that have taken place that have shown that our civil rights need to be respected. But at the same time the states have got a role to play, and they ought not to be forgotten. Don't you find it puzzling that in the debate of our time, the water cooler topic of our time, which is health care, that the Washington, D.C. establishment, the present administration and the congress, did not see fit to invite the Governors to the table? Nobody said "What do the Governors feel? What is their opinion? What is the states' view on health care?" Only at the very end have we been invited in and said, "You know, what are you doing?" And yeah, at the same time we find example after example after example of states actually not just talking about it, but actually doing something about it. Utah's a perfect example. We are, in fact, doing something about health care reform. I'm just saying we've got something to say, something to share. We have to be at the very minimal a partner on this issue, and probably at the very best we ought to be taking the lead on health care.

MAX ROTH, FOX 13: One point that you made earlier in the press conference on Medicaid, and not signing that letter, was you didn't sign it because we don't need it. I wonder I'm just wondering how that would fall on the ears of a woman who's watching you at home right now who's likely to be kicked off the rolls if the current legislative plan goes through? She would think we need it.

GOVERNOR HERBERT: Yeah, and you'll always have a need. Somebody will articulate there's a need, one more, it never ends. We need to take care of ourselves inside our state, we need to work as we can with the private sector. The private sector needs to be tasked with stepping up and helping your neighbor. We cannot make that first phone call always to the welfare office or to the government, "We've got somebody down the street that needs help, and can you come and help them?" We need to look to ourselves, the private sector, and help our neighbors. This FMAP revision, again, for all the discussion, is really not designed to help Medicaid, it's designed to plug holes in budgets, to put more cops on the streets, to build more roads. We've got 18 states that are using this in anticipation, hope that we're going to get some kind of help from the federal government to balance our budget. That's a wrong approach to take.

KEN VERDOIA, KUED: Governor, in this highly charged environment we could do another hour, but we're out of our allotted time. Thank you for joining us today on the Governor's Monthly News conference.

GOVERNOR HERBERT: Thank you.

KEN VERDOIA, KUED: Good Evening.

Return to home page