Every few years, conservative lawmakers introduce legislation to limit gay rights, restrict abortion, block access to violent video games and cover pictures of buxom models on grocery store magazine racks. At the same time, they brush off the threat and cost of defending legislation that skirts the borders of the Constitution.
Most of the grandstanding coincides with election years. But this year, lawmakers are a bit off schedule. The next election is nearly two years from now.
Still, halfway through the legislative session - the official midpoint is marked on Tuesday at noon - representatives and senators are plowing their way through a pile of message and morals bills.
Legislators insist this year is no different from years past.
"They generally come around every session," says House Speaker Greg Curtis. "Legislating is all about morality. We represent the people. Some of the representatives are more aggressive than others in doing that. Some legislators want to push the envelope on court rulings."
But some legislative observers wonder if a $1.6 billion surplus is emboldening lawmakers to take on causes they might otherwise pass up in leaner years.
The bill most likely headed to court is a ban on elective abortions intended to overturn Roe v. Wade. The legislation awaits debate on the House floor. Conservative lawmakers insist it is their duty to assert a state's right to set health policy and challenge the U.S. Supreme Court to reconsider the 1973 landmark case. The estimated price tag for defending that bill hovers at $2 million.
"We set the policy for the state," says West Jordan Republican Rep. Wayne Harper. "Will this bill go to court? Definitely. But it is incumbent upon us to do this. We tell people what to do all the time."
And Logan Republican Sen. Lyle Hillyard doesn't want to send the wrong message by letting money determine legislators' principles.
"I don't want the word to be out that the Legislature would cave on these issues because of the cost," Hillyard says.
Nevertheless, lawmakers thought better of another bill their attorneys warned might run afoul of the Constitution. Logan GOP Rep. Scott Wyatt's legislation prohibiting the sale of violent video games could violate the First Amendment's protection of free speech. Rather than pursue that bill, lawmakers plan to turn it into a non-binding resolution - essentially a meaningless statement.
But a bill to protect religious practices - such as wearing a Mormon CTR (Choose the Right) T-shirt or praying in school - passed the Senate and a House committee last week and is headed to the House floor, despite a civil rights attorney's warning that the bill will be challenged in court.
Legislation targeting so-called "Gay-Straight Alliances" in Utah high schools by requiring parental consent forms and forcing the state to defend school districts that ban the groups is back again - a retread of last year's legislation. A resolution urging the United States to withdraw from the Security and Prosperity Partnership of America - a version of the often-debated "get out of the U.N." resolution - will be debated by the full House. And senators will debate another resolution urging Congress to "stop Internet pornography to children."
With several bills labeled as constitutionally challenged, the legal bill to defend them is likely to mount. Lawmakers are flush with cash right now. But as budget talks become more intense - and the surplus is divvied up between tax cuts, education funding and health care for low-income Utahns - those bills may lose favor.
"Are they willing to give up one of those things to pay to defend the abortion bill?" asks Melissa Larsen, director of the Planned Parenthood Action Council.
However constitutionally suspect the initiative, legislative leaders are generally willing to let lawmakers' pet peeves get a hearing.
"All of us have different issues that are sort of our 'hot-buttons.' We have to respect that by letting them get debate," says Senate President John Valentine.
And so the heated debate about morality continues on Capitol Hill.
It all strikes House Minority Leader Ralph Becker as very familiar - even his conservative colleagues' willingness to funnel cash into possibly doomed legal battles.
"It's consistent to see a willingness to take on well-established law," Becker said. "That's not new."
University of Utah professor of political science Matthew Burbank agrees: "This is the Utah Legislature we're talking about."
walsh@sltrib.com
