Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Brad Chambers's avatar

One more thing on the subject of Idaho's legislature. Yesterday, the Joint Finance-Appropriations Committee (JFAC) voted to cut $2-million from both Boise State and University of Idaho over "DEI" concerns. One of the represenatives, House Assistant Republican Leader Josh Tanner (R-Eagle, said “They need to start listening to the legislature as a whole on the direction that we want them to actually go and hopefully this sends them a slight message to them to straighten their act up.”

Maybe representative Tanner should take his own advice. Maybe the Legislature should start listening to their constituents. Boise State's annual Public Policy Survey shows yet again, just how out of sync the legislature is compared to the top priorities and concerns of the people who sent them to the Statehouser.

For instance, iIncreased teacher pay is Idahoans’ top education budget priority. A majority of Idahoans say they oppose (53%) the use of tax dollars to pay for a private or religious

school.

Nearly half of Idahoans (49%) say access to health care is difficult in the state. 39% of Idahoans say increasing the number of immigrants helps Idaho’s economy, but that proportion

grows to 46% when discussing legal immigrants specifically.

A majority of Idahoans (55%) believe that abortion should be permitted in Idaho through at least the first trimester. A majority (64%) also believe that exceptions for abortion access should be expanded.

A majority of Idahoans (51%) have concerns about the security of elections in the United States, but less than a quarter (22%) have concerns about the security in Idaho itself.

A majority of Idahoans are concerned about campaign spending by independent groups in Idaho.

Yet our legislature's top concerns seem to be culture issues. Bathrooms, "DEI," using taxpayer money to help fund private/religious schools, libraries, tax cuts versus increased/adequate funding for our PUBLIC schools. And look at the legislature's stance on abortion and higher education. Idaho is having trouble attracting and keeping doctors. Could legislation that once again, is contrary to the wishes of Idahoans, contribute to that issue. And we just lost another University president as Dr. Marlene Tromp is leaving for the University of Vermont. Could Idaho's legislators' insistence on controlling our institutions of higher learning contribute to retention issues at the leadership level, and recruiting issues for teachers and staff?

Not only does the legislature refuse to consider the priorities of we the people of Idaho, they try to make it even more difficult for us to take action on issues important to us when the legislature fails to act, or acts contrary to the wishes of THE MAJORITY OF IDAHOANS. Almost every legislative session, the legislature tries to make it harder if not impossible for citizen initiatives to get on the ballot and when they do, make them hard to pass. Even when they pass, the legislature does everything in their power to overturn the will of the people. Of course we do it to ourselves; we keep electing people who are more beholden to extremist groups like the IFF, the Idaho Family Policy Center, the rogue right wing nuts controlling the once great Idaho Republican Party. All of them espousing minority opinions, but well funded so they outspend and out-shout the majority. Isn't it time to elect a legislature that actually has the same priorities as the people they represent?

Expand full comment
Brad Chambers's avatar

Yesterday during discussion of HB 398, Representative Clint Hostetler made quite an argument against the bill. He maintains an A+ rating from the Idaho Freedom Foundation, and as reported by Idaho Political Potatoes, the IFF was vehemently opposed to HB398, which shines a light not just on traditional lobbying but also on campaigns aimed at alarming voters enough for them to pressure their representatives to vote with the IFF and other extremist groups. During the 2024 campaign, I received text messages asking me if (name the exreme behavior) had happened and it was supported by an opponent of Representative Cody Galloway, would it change my vote? I said no, that even if what they mentioned HAD happened (I don't think it had), I wouldn't change my vote. I got a text message right back, asking if (something even more extreme) had happened, would THAT convince me to vote for Cody Galloway instead of her opponent. Again, I said no. Who conducts this "research?" Who is SO desparate, SO motivated to discredit Idaho's few Democrats, even moderate Republicans, that they will stoop so low as to create false scenarios, each one a little worse, trying to determine what claims they would have to use to get voters to change their minds and vote for their preferred candidate? WE SHOULD KNOW who is making these claims and on behalf of which organizations and candidates. Yet once again, the IFF wants to continue operating in the shadows and Representative Clint Hostetler is happy to carry their water, as is Representative David Leavitt. One (or both) of them said it's a First Amendment issue. Come on! They just want extremist groups to be able to send out salacious mail, email and texts, to put up billboards and run negative radio and TV commercials to encourage voters to pressure their representatives OR they threaten to finance primary opponents more likely to vote as instructed, and hide behind vague identification about who's really slinging the dirt. It's very telling to listen to who objects the most to bills designed to shine a light on all the darkness invading Idaho's elections.

Expand full comment
3 more comments...

No posts