What does Bell's selection mean to people of Utah?

Gary Herbert has selected state Sen. Greg Bell to replace him as lieutenant governor, thus finally ending the most-watched and overanalyzed event in modern political Utah history (at least in this century).

So, naturally, we must pile on a little more analysis and a few more observations, thereby guaranteeing the last word.

What benefits does Greg Bell provide the Herbert administration? Any drawbacks?

Pignanelli: "Some achieve greatness, others are just damn lucky." — Anonymous. Without the assistance of a lieutenant governor, Herbert has already eliminated most of his potential and toughest competition for the 2010 special election. If facing a difficult intraparty contest or a Jim Matheson, the new governor would seek a tough finger-breaking enforcer — which Bell is not. Bell is beloved in the media and by most politicos for his sincerity and complete lack of hypocrisy and guile. Yet he alone is unlikely to change the balance of power in state government — currently favoring the legislative branch. Bell likely agreed to Herbert's request in exchange for maneuverability to push personal projects (i.e. ethics and campaign reform). Politicos are now expecting developments in this arena from the Herbert administration.

It is now confirmed: The best mind in Utah politics is Chris Bleak, chief of staff to House Speaker Dave Clark. Within nanoseconds of the announcement from the White House of the Huntsman nomination for ambassador (and possibly before Herbert even knew of the appointment), this astute veteran predicted Bell would be selected.

Webb: Herbert made a safe, solid choice, selecting a lieutenant governor who is a lot like himself. Bell is not flashy or flamboyant but is experienced and capable, steady and wise. He will perform well as lieutenant governor and will help bridge the gaps among Utah's political factions. The two men obviously are highly compatible, and Bell will understand his role and won't upstage Herbert.

The question for the Herbert/Bell team is the "vision thing." Can two nuts-and-bolts guys inspire, lead and motivate Utahns to come together on big problems, tackle ambitious goals, and take the state to the next level? Or will they simply manage well, but not think big thoughts or attempt any "moon shots."

Does the selection help or hurt Democrats?