Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Election Law Sb54 topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
SB 54 leaves party without control over 'R' ballot designation, speakers say on podcast
Summary
Guests on the God and Country Podcast said Utah law under SB 54 dictates party labels next to candidates' names and that parties cannot presently block signatures from producing an "R" designation; changing that would require litigation or a change in state law.
Guests on the God and Country Podcast discussed how Utah law determines the party label that appears next to a candidate's name on the ballot, and said the Republican Party does not currently have the authority to prevent a candidate nominated by signature from receiving an “R” designation.
“Not right now, because that is completely dictated to us by state law,” Speaker 2, a podcast participant, said. “And so that gets to the place that you either litigate or you legislate to change the law.”
The discussion centered on SB 54 and the signature-based nomination system it established, which one participant described as requiring a law change for the party to regain control over ballot designations. “Right now, under Utah state law that we don't have any control over, the the r or d or l next to your name is completely dictated to a process that is outside of our control,” Speaker 2 said.
The exchange began with a question about SB 54 and whether the Republican Party could prevent signatures from producing an “R” behind a candidate’s name. “With SB 54 in place, you got the signature system. Is there anything that the Republican party do that can that can prevent signatures from getting the R behind their name?” Speaker 1, a podcast participant, asked.
Other participants noted visible frustration among party activists online. “I'm glad you said that because on the, you know, there's delegate pages, you know, on social media where we share information,” Speaker 3, a podcast participant, said. Speaker 3 added that some people had “blamed you,” and asked rhetorically, “Why did he let them have an arbitrator? Yeah.”
Speakers emphasized that the state statute — cited as SB 54 in the exchange — sets the mechanics for signature nominations and ballot labeling, and that alternative mechanisms exist in “some states” though those are not the law in Utah. No formal actions, motions, or votes were recorded in the conversation.
The podcast participants framed the options for changing the system as legal or legislative: pursue litigation to challenge the existing statute or pass a new law that restructures how ballot designations are assigned. Beyond that statement of options, the speakers did not record any formal direction to an agency or party body, and no timeline or specific legislative language was offered on the recording.
The discussion is a reminder that under current Utah law, according to the participants, parties cannot unilaterally override the label that appears next to a candidate nominated by signatures; changing that would require state-level legal change or court action.
