ruby red or going sapphire?

consequences in Utah?

In the late 1960s, I lived in Dallas for a couple of years. I was an inveterate radio listener, as I could get Houston Astros (the nearest team) baseball by wireless, making radio fare central to my days. I also picked up my political habit, so political broadcasts fed my habit.

Memorably, I recall a woman with a deep East Texas drawl who was asked about something Republican Richard Nixon had announced: “My daddy was a Democrat, my granddaddy was a Democrat, and I will forever be a Democrat,” as if that truth were immutable—and Richard Nixon was an enemy Republican. She didn’t answer the question, but she identified by what her family partisanship had been back to the beginning of the past century.

She was correct until she wasn’t. I have no idea who the woman was fifty-six years ago, and I don’t remember the policy question. I doubt she is still alive, and I am pretty sure if she is alive, she is not a Democrat today. While millions of people are still Democrats in Texas, they generally are not in the smaller towns of East Texas.

Realignment of our political scene occurs at times, albeit gradually. That reorientation can escape our attention unless we pay attention to the changes in action.

One rarely considers Utah’s population anything other than dyed-in-the-wool traditional conservatives, partially because 60% of the voters in that state are members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints. The LDS was slow to integrate African Americans, traditional in its views of both the roles of women and the family, while embedded firmly in the Republican Party for most of the twentieth century.

Yet those of the faith have charted their path since Joseph Smith drew believers to his 1830 publication centering on the discovery of the Angel Moroni and gold plates with a different interpretation of Christianity from the “mainstream.” LDS members tend to be devout and spread their news enthusiastically. Over almost two hundred years, Mormons at all levels outlasted federal opposition, physical challenges, and violence to promote their truth. Senator Mitt Romney, heir to one of the storied Mormon families, chose to retire last month rather than face likely reelection defeat following his principled decision to impeach President Trump in January 2021. GOP dominance of Utah’s political scene is legendary.

Yet the 2024 election registered a hint of Mormon displeasure in Utah and elsewhere with current Republican behavior, as diverging priorities appear between Mormons and their traditional conservative political kin. A careful look reveals that 2024’s results are part of several data points, which could indicate a trend.

I confess I had not identified changes underway. According to author Kellen Browning, the increased Mormon population rejecting the far-right conservative views was a contributing factor to Arizona supporting Joe Biden in 2020. Nearly one-third of the Mormon voters in the United States then chose Kamala Harris over Donald Trump, up fully 8% points over the prior presidential election, according to a Fox News assessment of VoteCast data. The percentage of Mormons who supported Democrats was 19% in the 2016 vote.

More interesting is what members of the LDS are actually doing in Utah in conjunction with the ballot box. Since entering the Union in January 1896, the state has voted for Democrats only rarely at the presidential level. Franklin Roosevelt won the state four times, followed by Harry Truman in 1948 and Lyndon Johnson sixteen years later. Those results paralleled national trends, regardless of party affiliation.

Make no mistake, Donald Trump won Utah in 2016, 2020, and 2024, but down-ballot races show some eroding support for the Party’s hyperbole. Mormons are pushing Utah’s Republican party apparatus to abandon the stridency and harsh rhetoric currently espoused by many party leaders, including the senior Utah Senator Mike Lee. By all indications, the Mormons supporting a distinct rebuke of current Republican behavior appear in supporting the Governing Group. This organization is a Political Action Committee born two years ago under the leadership of Becky Edwards, a Republican who unsuccessfully challenged Lee in the 2022 election. A former state legislator, Edwards won thirty percent of the vote in a primary against the incumbent after running on a platform promoting greater civility and answering the challenges of governing rather than pushing divisions. Her position aims to tone down hostility in favor of attitudes that allow collaboration where possible.

The Governing Board is not on the cusp of ousting established Republican figures like Lee or Romney’s successor, John Curtis. However, the Board did show surprising success at the local level in its efforts to elect more candidates with less deliberately polarizing rhetoric or willingness to work across the aisle. Twenty-five of twenty-eight Governing Board-supported candidates for either state legislative or school board seats won their races.

Perhaps more surprising was the success of those who sued to prevent a 2021 gerrymandered redistricting plan from exacerbating partisanship. Utah’s Supreme Court overturned the Legislature’s decision to ignore the voters’ preference for an independent redistricting commission instead of the Republican Legislature trying to eradicate any Democratic districts. This decision is a minor victory but unexpected in an era of hyperpartisanship, regardless of ballot initiatives.

Efforts to promote greater inclusion in Utah’s future also appear under the Dignity Index. Candidates agree to a grading system to evaluate their speeches along an eight-point scale ranging from championing dignity to espousing contempt. Sponsors argue that this process shows that inflammatory campaign language does not equate to governing. These are voluntary actions, but they mark a recognition that something other than hyperbole is required to govern. Utah is also mentoring its young political aspirants to consider the role of moral behavior in running for office.

Dehumanizing immigrants contrasts markedly with the personal experiences of many in this population. Hundreds of thousands of LDS missionaries served across the globe, developing empathy with the minority groups targeted for deportation. The Church, of course, also relies on increased membership to sustain its growth and financial security, both risked to a small degree by any attacks on immigrants.

Additionally, some women in Utah are reconsidering abortion following the 2022 Dobbs as they recognize the dangers of health care limitations. The Legislature in Salt Lake City passed a virtually total prohibition on abortion in 2020. Ensuing legal challenges at the state Supreme Court prevented the enforcement of the most extreme restrictions. At present, abortion is legal in the state until the 18th week of pregnancy, though litigation is still underway regarding the 2020 ban.

Utah women see the effects of the total bans in several states as well as the harsh retribution against anyone, including medical personnel, assisting in or promoting abortion as health care. This eye-opening legislation forced some women to reconsider their views as health care alternatives rather than solely consider the unborn.

None of these steps presume Utah will move as East Texas did from one Party to the other, but three lessons jump out at me from what is underway in Utah and perhaps broader Mormon communities in the southwest.

First, we need to remember that few, if any, communities in this country belong exclusively to one Party or the other. While Republicans crow about the current administration’s overwhelming mandate, that is a chimera. The popular vote was 49.8% for Mr. Trump while Ms. Harris received 48.32%; in no way can one see the popular vote as a mandate, nor are there any parts of the country—including Utah—where one Party exists unilaterally.

Second, painting any group, particularly one associated with Christianity, with a single brush overstates the monolithic nature of the American population and its interest groups. Of course, some congregations and individuals toe a strict line to one Party or the other based on conservative versus liberal views; that is obvious in polling data and anecdotal assessments.

Americans, however, have always taken individual freedom as an absolute right, particularly in the contemporary era. Catholics no longer listen exclusively to the Vatican as they pick and choose adherence to doctrine on divorce, birth control, the death penalty, or anything else. Virtually all faiths within the United States have a complexity that belies the common wisdom because of the vast number of people in this country.

Dipping below the highest binary choice between religious or non-religious, details become lost. Jewish or Gentile is one question. Pro-life or pro-choice is another. Many meaningful questions never rise to our attention. We tend to like attribute questions rather than behavior ones, which perhaps tell us at least as much.

The Pew Research Center, one of the top polling outfits in the world, reminds us that religious affiliation may not be as relevant to voting behavior as regular attendance at services. As either Party sees religious affiliation as helping or hurting its support, the dynamics of other questions bear consideration. Is attending services weekly increasing or decreasing affecting people’s partisan views? Are we in a trough or a peak for the historically evident U.S. views on religion in our lives? The variables are almost endless as to individuals making political choices—or the individuals may put personal priorities for civic outcomes above Church-suggested concerns. Is there a way to measure empathy or political awareness in a population beyond what occurs at the altar each week? These come to mind immediately as I consider Utah’s experiences of late.

Third, pervasive antipathy toward the other side has a cost for both parties and us as individuals. The world includes provocateurs of all views, but some citizens of this country appear to have a “do not exceed” fill line for consuming denigrating rhetoric, humiliating attacks, and overall intolerance. As long as we have elections, politicians are foolish to forget that. Should our elections cease, what outlets would allow public reaction? That is not as inconsequential as it sounds.

Do these microcosmic differences mean Utah is abandoning its ruby red status for sapphire blue? Hardly, but the frantic pace of change in Washington may distract us from other noteworthy moments outside the Beltway. We too often assume only Florida or California are the laboratories for societal change, but voters nationwide want their voices heard.

I welcome your thoughts as actions do create consequences, even if they take decades to show themselves. Please weigh in on this as a slight exception or a possible harbinger of change.

I appreciate your time reading Actions Create Consequences. I especially thank the paid subscribers whose support means so much.

Some unexpected lilac watercolor clouds for a February Friday.

Be well and be safe. FIN

Kellen Browning, “A Lonely Holdout Where Republicans Still Resist Trump: Utah”, NewYorkTimes.com, retrieved at https://www.nytimes.com/2025/02/18/us/politics/trump-republicans-utah.html?searchResultPosition=1

Michael Lipka, “U.S. religious groups and their political leanings”, PewCenter.org, 23 February 2016, retrieved at https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2016/02/23/u-s-religious-groups-and-their-political-leanings/

“Official 2024 Presidential General Election Results”, fec.gov, 15 November 2024, retrieved at https://www.fec.gov/resources/cms-content/documents/2024presgeresults.pdf

Emily Anderson Stern, “Abortion care remains available in Utah after State Supreme Court Ruling—for now”, 19thNews.com, 1 August 2024, retrieved at https://19thnews.org/2024/08/abortion-care-remains-available-in-utah-after-state-supreme-court-ruling-for-now/

“Utah: 270 to Win”, 270towin.com, retrieved at https://www.270towin.com/states/utah