Press "Enter" to skip to content

Posts published in April 2021

What do the people think?

stapiluslogo1

To the rumble of Idahoans angry about the course of this year’s legislative session, the question of how the state’s legislature might be changed in the 2022 elections - in a positive direction - merits discussion.

I’ll get to that, maybe next week. Here, let’s consider the question prerequisite to plotting an upending of the Idaho Legislature: How many Idahoans like the legislature they have, as opposed to dislike it?

Answers to that question are more difficult to come by than many Idahoans, on either side of the fence, might like to believe, and that’s because significant evidence cuts in both directions.

Critics of the legislature might look at this session (and to an extent, the last few) and ask: The people of Idaho couldn’t possibly find this acceptable, could they? Conspiracy theories and outrages of the day dominate a lot of legislative attention - even the Republican governor now has said so publicly. Basic, core work such as state budgeting, which nearly all sessions until those relatively recent ones have managed adequately, gets mishandled repeatedly. Culture war rules; practicality is dismissed. Concerns about public health and the importance of education, matters Idaho’s legislature took for granted since and even before statehood, are trashed routinely by the current group. And these legislators who apparently can’t handle their own work seem to want to do everyone else’s, trashing the governor’s ability to deal with emergencies, the attorney general’s to give legal counsel, on down to local community control of artwork and historical sites and local school boards to, well, do much of anything. Not to mention all but wiping out the ability of the people to directly pass laws for itself. This 100-plus-day session threatens to become not only the state’s longest, but its least useful.

Do Idahoans really support a legislature like this? It seems hard to believe. Idaho’s voters surely would not have, a generation or two or three ago.

Of course some Idahoans - a significant number - do. (You find them on Facebook and Twitter and sometimes protests in front of the houses of legislators they don’t like.) But how many of them are there?

When you look at public opinion surveys, like those regularly conducted by Boise State University, you get a different sense of how Idahoans see the world, and the issues facing the state - drastically different - than you see and hear at the Idaho Legislature. Follow the polls and you see an Idaho public that doesn’t want what the legislative majority does, not even close. And the roar of discontent with the legislature really is a roar: A lot of people are outraged at it.

And yet.

Defenders of the legislature, in claiming public support for the direction the legislature has taken in recent years - and especially in this current session - might start (though they need not finish) with three clear points.

One is the election results for legislative seats. While it is true that of 105 spots, 39 were won by the Republican candidate unopposed at all, it’s also true that Republicans won the overwhelming number of seats where they were opposed. And it’s true that not many Republican legislators were ousted in their primary elections in recent cycles, and many that were, were relatively centrist.

Two is the state’s vote for Donald Trump: 63.8 percent in 2020 an improvement over the 59.2 percent he received in 2016. This is a different office, of course, but if you voted for Trump the odds are you’re happier with the Idaho Legislature than if you didn’t. It’s a reasonable assumption by proxy.

Three: This group of legislators has not misrepresented themselves: If you were paying attention at all to last year’s campaigns, or to activity in the last few legislative sessions, you knew what you were getting. There was no bait and switch; the nature of this year’s session could not have come as a surprise.

But some of that presupposed another idea: That Idahoans have been paying attention, that they really did follow state politics well enough to know what they were getting. There is a real side question here: What did Idaho’s voters know, and when did they know it?

So if you don’t like this legislature and you want to do something to make the next one different - in a more productive way - the first thing to do is to find out how many Idahoans think the way you do. Enough to significantly change the legislature’s membership in 2022? Or not close to that?

When you know the answer to that question - by no means clear right now - you can start the campaign. About which, more later.

I’m sorry

schmidt

It’s been a while since I haven’t written a weekly column. I have tried quite a few times. I’ve saved five drafts. But they were all pretty bitter. That’s not a good sentiment, so I have decided to forgo the weekly column. I apologize.

We don’t hear many apologies these days. I was taught as a child that when you make a mistake, or injure someone, their person or feelings, you should apologize. I’m apologizing here for not fulfilling my obligation for a weekly column. I doubt anyone reads these columns, so I don’t know if I’m hurting anyone’s feelings. Maybe I’m apologizing to make myself feel better about not fulfilling my obligation. You can see why I shouldn’t be writing a column this week. I’m not in the right mindset to persuade anybody. I’m sorry.

In medical school and residency training we were taught not to apologize to patients if you made a mistake. “They could use your apology as evidence against you in a lawsuit” was the teaching. I didn’t follow it. And in my thirty years of practice, I’ve only been sued once, and they decided to dismiss it after a year of preliminary hearings. Fear of lawsuits is an excuse for doctors to do bad things. I could tell you other stories, some of them quite touching, but I’m not going to write a column this week. I apologize.

I have wondered if Officer Chauvin ever felt he owed anybody an apology. Nine minutes of kneeling on a handcuffed man’s neck that led to his death seems like harming a person. But cops probably get the same lawyer’s advice I got in medical school. We have given the authority for justice to our legal system. That’s a mistake. It resides with us; each of us. The legal system should not be an excuse for bad behavior, just like medical training doesn’t make you infallible. We all make mistakes. And we all should be able to apologize.

But it seems some folks don’t think about an apology. They just don’t care if they hurt other people. What are we going to do about that? I think that’s why we developed our legal system; to help right unaddressed wrongs. But we all should still behave responsibly. Some of us just don’t. No law, no justice system will eliminate evil.

I am not saying that an apology for killing someone is justice. It’s not. Lady Justice, blindfolded, holds scales. Balance is healthy. But I write about health and balance all the time, not this week.

I have read some social media posts that turned me sour too, so I’m not going to rant about them. Some folks were pushing the idea that Officer Chauvin was mistreated by our justice system, that he didn’t get a fair trial; that got me riled up. But I’m not going to respond to those folks. Their perspective is not mine, so I’ll let it go.

And I’ve been paying close attention to the Idaho legislature. That was three of the five drafts. I haven’t heard any apologies from that direction. No apologies to the universities or colleges for the lack of faith displayed by our representatives when they killed their budget. No apologies for failing to fund the teachers who have worked pretty darn hard through this pandemic. But those drafts were dismal and bitter. Nobody wants to read that.

So, I’m sorry; no column this week.

The spring here on the Palouse has been beautiful, some wind and cool, but over all very fair. We have done a lot of yard work and I’m getting the siding up on the barn I’m building. That takes my time so I can’t get the column done this week. I’m sorry.

Apologies should be directed toward a person if they are to be sincere. So, Martha, my dear and loving wife who reads this column every week, I’m sorry.

Brainwashing

malloy

A lieutenant governor in Idaho has two basic constitutional functions – to preside over the Senate when the Legislature is in session and to serve as acting governor when the boss is out of state.

The job description does not include putting together a rogue task force, which Lt. Gov. Janice McGeachin is doing to look into the social indoctrination and the teaching of social justice in Idaho schools. With McGeachin leading the way, there’s fear from the right that our education system is being destroyed with the teachings of critical race theory (CRT), socialism, Communism and Marxism.

If you talk with your local superintendent about the teaching of CRT, chances are you’d get a blank stare, along with a question about what in the heck is CRT. One longtime superintendent I know had to google-search CRT to find out what the Statehouse politicians are talking about.

This uproar is not coming from the governor’s office, although Gov. Brad Little has not done anything to derail the rhetoric from the Idaho Freedom Foundation and others. McGeachin, meanwhile, has captured the narrative on this issue.

“We must find where these insidious theories and philosophies are lurking and excise them from our education system,” McGeachin said in a news release. “Idahoans are increasingly frustrated by the apparent lack of awareness and leadership coming from the state on these issues.”

McGeachin has a generous amount of support for her cause.

“I appreciate the lieutenant governor taking the initiative to push back against the flawed concept that white people are inherently racist and that our young people should be made to feel guilty for actions they have never committed and biases they have never displayed,” said Rep. Priscilla Giddings of White Bird.

According to Rep. Judy Boyle of Midvale, the CRT “is being used to divide our nation and create great distrust and even hate among the races of people who make up our melting pot of Americans. Students are being taught to feel guilty and ashamed of their identity, gender, religion, or economic status.”

Words such as “equity,” “inclusion” and “diversity” have “a different meaning under CRT than what most Americans understand,” says Boyle. “Using schools or government to force and pay for the destruction of our society should not be tolerated by anyone. Much of the unrest and violence we have seen across America this past year has CRT roots.”

Wayne Hoffman of the Idaho Freedom Foundation has weighed in on the issue, saying “Our free society is under attack and the education system is the conduit for that attack. We cannot sit by and watch the demise of our country via the calculated effort to brainwash Idaho’s young people.”

As McGeachin points out in her release, Idaho is not alone in the fight against CRT. Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis pledged that his state’s curriculum will “expressly exclude” the teachings. Arkansas is considering a bill that would prohibit public schools from offering “a course, class, event, or activity within its program of instruction that … promotes division between, resentment of, or social justice for race; gender; political affiliation; social classes; or particular class of people.”

Also, McGeachin isn’t the only lieutenant governor appointing an education task force to examine the issue. Mark Robinson, North Carolina’s first black lieutenant governor, says parents and teachers in his state “are literally afraid to speak up against school boards, against principals, against administrators, and folks – that has got to stop.”

As an example of bias, or indoctrination, Robinson said a student wanted to do a report on him for Black History Month, but the teacher rejected the idea, suggesting instead that the student write about rapper Tupac Shakur, who was murdered in a drive-by shooting five years ago.

I’m not sure that the student would have much better luck in Idaho, given the recent brand of political correctness. If folks to the right had their way, there would be no celebration of things like Black History Month, unless it’s balanced with something else – such honoring the accomplishments of white politicians.

Chuck Malloy is a long-time Idaho journalist and columnist. He may be reached at ctmalloy@outlook.com

Is speech really free

rainey

Congress and the rest of us are about to run head-long into the 1st amendment to the U.S. Constitution regarding “free speech.”

Ever read all those words? Well, here they are:

“Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion, or prohibiting the exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of free speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.”

That’s all of it. Right there. Forty-five words. But, just four words - “...freedom of free speech” are the ones pounced on by everyone who believes that right, as it may - or may not - apply to them, has been tampered with. And, while many people may make that claim, constitutional scholars by the hundreds have hundreds of “legal” interpretations but no clear answer. It can be awfully fuzzy.

Please note right here. I’ve spent a lifetime defending the right of free speech. As someone who’s been a reporter/writer for most of 60 years, I’ve held my nose and defended some really terrible “free speech.” And, for the most part, still do. But, there are limitations.

Here’s a list of generally recognized legal limitations to “free speech” I came across the other day: obscenity (depends on context but not regular old porn), fighting words, defamation, child pornography, perjury, blackmail, incitement to lawless action, true threats, solicitations to commit crimes and plagiarism of copyrighted material. Legal decisions have been rendered - and, for the most part, accepted - on all counts. But, as I said, “fuzzy”still applies

Private companies - like the one’s who’ve deleted all of Donald Trump’s accounts - have a lot of leeway in how they handle users - DJT and others - including their own employees.

But, let’s say you’re a government employee. Any government employee. Your employer has the right to make sure your speech doesn’t conflict with your job. But, (un)social media has made it more difficult to regulate employee speech in a constitutional way. (Un)social media has blurred a lot lines. Legal and otherwise.

So, let’s consider what DJT said awhile back which resulted in an attack on our Capitol. Were his words to a crowd of many hundreds, spoiling for a fight with Congress, really protected “free speech” as Republicans claimed?

Well, go back to the limitations list above and see. I find “incitement to imminent lawless action” and “solicitations to commit crimes” pretty well nails it. True threats, too. You might throw in “fighting words” for a topper. I don’t think he’s off the hook there.

When people talk of “free speech” relating to government, the issue is often turned on its head. “Free speech” in the Constitution is really used to protect you from government punishing you for your speech - not the other way around. But - and this is a big jump - the article citing “free speech” means government - and its representatives - are most often held to a higher responsibility to make sure what they do and say doesn’t lead to unlawful actions.

So, again, “free speech.” Did Trump cross the line? Did he abuse the right of “free speech?” Did he use his speech to instigate or condone illegal actions? My take is yes. One House of Congress, too, it seems.
Trump has proven to be the false prophet so many of us believed to be the case years ago. A lot of Republicans in Congress - and I believe elsewhere - have recently thrown in the towel and decided that is a fact, too. The defections in the House are interesting, especially some from the “hard” right.

While “Donnie” still has a corps of several million “believers,” it appears he’ll be too busy defending himself in one courtroom or another to “lead.” And, it seems, he’ll be too busy scrounging for dollars to keep his heavily mortgaged companies alive. Trump just has to be thinking that running for president was the worst decision he’s made on his own.

“Free speech” finally got him. Got him good.

But, look at the bright side. He’s got his own special place in our country’s history. And an asterisk beside his name, too. Something no other former president can say. Talk about speech. And free, too.

Veto the initiative-killer

jones

(Editor's Note: After this column was written and posted, Governor Brad Little signed this bill. The points made in the column, however, remain in force.)

The Legislature has sent a bill to the Governor’s desk that will make it virtually impossible to put an initiative or referendum on the general election ballot. It requires valid signatures of at least 6% of registered voters in each and every one of Idaho’s 35 legislative districts to put an initiative or referendum up for a vote --a herculean task.

Legislators claim Senate Bill 1110 is essential to protect the interests of rural Idaho, which is pure baloney. The Bill is designed to keep the voters of Idaho, both urban and rural, from using their constitutional power to propose needed legislation or to kill wretched legislation like the Luna Laws.

Idaho voters wrote the initiative and referendum into the Idaho Constitution in 1912 precisely to get around an unresponsive state legislature. The move was prompted by experience in other states where legislatures were bought and paid for by railroads, oil companies, and other powerful monopolies that were victimizing farmers. The farmers were not able to overcome the legions of lobbyists that the big money interests deployed in those legislatures, but the initiative and referendum gave them an avenue of relief--a legislative lifeline around legislatures controlled by special interests.

The supporters of the initiative-killing bill cannot point to any initiative or referendum that has ever discriminated against rural Idaho. After the Legislature stubbornly refused for years to accept millions of federal dollars to expand the state Medicaid program, people from Bonner County stepped forward with an initiative to get the job done.

Voters in many rural counties gave strong support to the Medicaid expansion initiative because it provided medical care to thousands of modest-income country folk and saved rural hospitals from going belly up. The initiative received a 60.4% vote in Adams County, 54.8% in Clark County, 56.7% in Lemhi County, 58.3% in Shoshone County, 57% in Jerome County, and 51.4% in Owyhee County.

The popularity of a public policy, like Medicaid expansion, can’t be accurately judged by the number of people across the state who will sign a petition. Having grown up in a tight-knit rural community, I can say that a lot of folks don’t like to publicize where they stand on a contested issue and won’t sign a public petition. But they are happy to support their position in the secrecy of the ballot box and that’s where we find out where the majority stands.

The initiative and referendum have benefited rural voters as much as urban ones over the years. Rural voters used the referendum in 1986 to resurrect the Right-To-Work law, after it was vetoed by Governor Evans. It is not likely that most of the signatures necessary to get the referendum on the ballot came from urban-dwelling liberal hippies who had it in for rural Idaho. Country folk got it on the ballot and over the top.

While legislators claim the strict signature requirements will protect the rural population from citified people, the bill will give city dwellers a veto over any ballot measure that rural residents want. For example, the Legislature has refused for years to make the school funding formula fair for rural school districts. Senate Bill 1110 would make it impossible for country voters to cure the inequity with an initiative. In fact, any measure that would benefit rural Idaho could be kept off of the ballot by any one of a number of urban legislative districts under Senate Bill 1110.

The initiative and referendum were born to protect the rights of country dwellers against legislatures controlled by the lobbyists of monied interests. Now, the lobbyists and their legislators are trying to make these populist measures inoperable so as to maintain their iron grip on the law-making process. Senate Bill 1110 would slash the legislative lifeline of both rural and urban Idaho, making it impossible to get around a power-grabbing legislature. It is essential that Governor Little wield his veto stamp to protect the people.

Agriculture in the lead

hartgen

Economic trends aren’t always easy to track because the raw data doesn’t make the news much, but if you look at the big picture, it’s apparent how agriculture is the dominant driver of Southern Idaho’s regional growth.

Sure, other sectors of the economy are important. Tourism, manufacturing, hospitality, health care and financial services all play important roles. Indeed, the Southern Idaho economy is better balanced across sectors than many American communities. (DataUSA, 2019)

New retailing pops up frequently on city commercial lots. So does new housing. So do new hospitality centers, hotels, restaurants and recreation sites. We drive by them every day, so it’s easy to spot them.

But it’s agriculture which brings in the revenue which is then spread throughout the region, supporting thousands of workers and millions in purchasing dollars and taxing districts. A new report by University of Idaho Extension researchers and outlined in this month’s Gem State Producer, highlights the sector’s dominant impact. Some top points:

The agriculture sector represents over 40 percent of the Southern Idaho jobs (43,000) and almost 60 percent of total regional sales. ($12 billion). It accounts for almost half of the region’s gross regional product of all goods and services, ($3.6 billion). The report also shows the links from growers and producers, through processors and agriculture services like implements, seeds and fertilizers. (Idaho Farm Bureau, Gem State Producer, 4/2021.

Almost half of the state’s total farm receipts come from the Southern Idaho region. ($3.6 billion). Of that, over 20 percent comes from milk production alone. Dairy, beef and potatoes are the largest portions of base sales. Virtually all (98.7 percent) of the region’s croplands are irrigated. That makes sense, as this is a dry, arid region with often less than 12 inches of rainfall annually.

Important trends and some break-throughs are leading the way in making the region the “Silicon Valley” of American agriculture.

First is the incredible productive land, water availability, climate and long growing season. These underlying features are often overlooked or not given the credit they deserve, but without them, we’d be a far-less-prosperous farming region.

Second, the innovative spirit of our agricultural community, from production to processing to transportation,. Everywhere you look, there’s innovative thinking at work, squeezing progress from water delivery to crop fertilizer application, milk cow monitoring to intermodal transportation, dairy research to consumer products like frozen potatoes.

A new intermodal rail containerization facility in Pocatello will help expand the region’s international sales. (Idaho State Journal, 3/25). The facility will handle some of Southern Idaho’s compressed hay for shipment to Asia, first to Pocatello and then by container rail to West coast ports.

The development of the region’s agriculture research is often “below the radar,” but can be seen in new products from milk processing to whey components. These innovations are sometimes propriety-driven by processors, but emerge frequently in new product lines and consumables. Research in dairy management and crop varieties for grains have expanded the “base” of tech-driven changes, and are likely to do so well into the future.

People may not think of agriculture as a “high tech” industry, but it is, and Southern Idaho has emerged as one of the nation’s leading agricultural regions. These trends aren’t new; they’ve been evident in the Southern Idaho economy at least since the 1990s.But now, they’re accelerating as new technologies, research and production expand in the region.

Correction: In a column (4/11), I overstated the number of Idahoans who’ve received COVID-19 vaccinations as 800,000. The latest figures from the Idaho Department of Health and Welfare show almost 540,000 people in Idaho have received at least one vaccination shot, with the numbers increasing week by week.

Stephen Hartgen, Twin Falls, is a retired five-term Republican member of the Idaho House of Representatives, where he served as chairman of the Commerce & Human Resources Committee.  Previously, he was editor and publisher of The Times-News (1982-2005). He can be reached at Stephen_Hartgen@hotmail.com.

Village idiots

johnson

Naturally, since I write for an Idaho newspaper, a good deal of my commentary focuses on the state where I lived for more than 40 years and whose politics I’m been observing closely for just as long.

But today’s subject: the reactionary, ideological forces of the modern conservative right fighting new “culture wars” is a national phenomenon, playing out in Republican dominated legislatures from Florida to Iowa, Montana to Kansas.

The Florida Legislature, for example, has passed a bill calling for a survey of the political beliefs of public college and university professors in that state. You can’t call that even thinly disguised McCarthyism. One critic asks, “Could this information potentially be used to punish or reward colleges or universities? Might faculty be promoted or fired because of their political beliefs?” Of course it’s an effort to intimidate.

In Montana Republican lawmakers are headed for the showdown with the state’s judiciary after all members of the Montana Supreme Court were subpoenaed by a legislative committee and told to appear and bring records related to a separation of powers and policy dispute.

Iowa’s Republican legislature wants to outlaw talk of “diversity” and proscribe what subjects can’t be taught in public schools.

And in Idaho the worst, most anti-education legislature in memory is slashing and burning its way through a COVID interrupted session. Frankly, much of what the GOP-controlled legislature has been doing is appalling.

The late, great Texas journalist Molly Ivins was both an astute and acerbic observer of political stupidity and a world class wit. She was fond of saying as Lone Star state legislators annually gathered in Austin to abuse their constituents that suddenly “many a village is without its idiot.”

Once wonders what Molly would have made of the village people who gathered in Idaho’s Statehouse since early January.

In 45-plus years of observing the annual convocation of the 105 most self-confident bumblers in Idaho, I’m left to conclude that the present legislative fiasco tops – or bottoms out – every other reckless, disgusting, ill-informed and damaging legislative session in modern memory. Just when you think they can’t possibly go lower, they go lower.

Idaho voters are clearly not sending the best people to Boise. To paraphrase a famous American: they’re sending their cranks, the science deniers, the destroyers of public schools and higher education, the self-proclaimed experts on absolutely everything. And a few of them are nice people.

The crappiest legislature in modern times is clearly a product of Idaho’s down the rabbit hole one party politics where the most outspoken cranky local conspiracy theorist is able to appeal to the narrowest band of likeminded Republicans, and low and behold they are suddenly lawgivers. As the old joke goes, yesterday many of them couldn’t spell legislator, today they are one.

Consider just a partial list of what the anointed few of Idaho legislative politics have done recently in the name of 1.8 million of their fellow citizens:

After being forced to shut down the legislative session for two weeks because of a COVID outbreak that many lawmakers deny or ignore – during the hiatus they kept paying themselves, of course, with your money – they approved legislation to prohibit mask mandates by local officials. “This is a matter of our personal rights and our liberty,” said Republican Representative Karey Hanks, the bill’s sponsor. The Associated Press’s Keith Ridler noted the obvious, that Hanks, whose public health expertise consists of having been a school bus driver, was contradicting “virtually all public health experts… cited information she has that masks aren’t effective in preventing disease.” It seems worth noting that Hanks has twice been elected to the legislature by simply putting her name on the ballot. She’s never had an opponent.

Not liking Governor Brad Little’s wimpy and often ineffective leadership in battling the deadly virus that has now claimed the lives of 2,000 Idahoans, Little’s fellow Republicans voted to further limit his and future governor’s powers to deal with emergencies.

Unhappy with Republican Attorney General Lawrence Wasden, a truly exemplary public official who has repeatedly attempted to protect the legislature from its own hubris and save your money from being wasted on senseless litigation, the legislature tried to gut the AG’s authority to represent certain state agencies and then settled for merely slashing his budget. Wasden had the audacity to refuse to join a spectacularly undemocratic lawsuit – Texas idiots, again – seeking to overturn the presidential election. That angered certain of the knuckle dragging caucus and because grievance is their guiding principle, they lashed out.

This legislature’s attacks on public schools and higher education have truly been unprecedented. A bill to fund Idaho teacher salaries died this week after a nonsensical debate about “critical race theory,” a Fox News staple that no one in the legislature can define. As Betsy Russell of the Idaho Press wrote, the teacher pay legislation went down “after debate that focused alternately on whether Idaho values and wants to pay its teachers, and whether ‘critical race theory’ is somehow being promoted in Idaho’s public schools because the state funds teacher professional development.” What an absolutely horrible message to send to thousands of teachers who have had the most trying year imaginable.

The legislature’s blindly ideological assault on higher education prompted University of Idaho president C. Scott Green to go public in an effort to address “misinformation and half-truths” that he said profoundly threaten the state’s colleges and universities. Green put a fine point on the problem when he wrote to Vandal alums and business leaders: “There is a troubling void of voices in the legislature standing up for the principles of critical thinking, the pursuit of knowledge, and the ability of students and faculty to explore ideas, examine the facts, and come to their own conclusions.”

Having disposed of education and pandemic concerns, legislators devoted hours of time and untold amounts of your money this week to discussing a clownish idea to create an expanded state of “Greater Idaho” by sweeping in vast acres of eastern and southern Oregon. This idea has precisely nothing to do with public policy, but is grievance driven political performance. “Greater Idaho” will happen when pigs fly, but hey it’s entertaining to blather about stuff that fires up the rubes back home.

In the face of advocacy from business leaders and educators around the state, these flimflammers kicked early childhood education efforts to the curb, again. They demonized transgender children. They disdain women and minority rights, while cozying up to an absurd militia leader who craves attention and gets it by repeatedly breaking the law.

And last buy not least, lawmakers are working to make it virtually impossible for citizens to mount an initiative campaign to create a law at the ballot box. This despite Idaho’s history of having created some of the state’s most important public policy through initiatives, including expanding Medicaid, mandating campaign finance disclosure and limiting residential property taxes.

One guesses it’s mighty difficult to tell anything to people who are happily confident in their own ignorance. What these legislators think they know they’re confident of. What they don’t know they can’t be bothered with.

For the rest of the good people of Idaho – and particularly for those in the business community – who care about a competent government, who don’t believe public school teachers and college professors are engaged in a vast Marxist conspiracy to indoctrinate children with dangerous ideas about diversity and actually want a better education system that fuels a better economy there is only one question: How far down this rabbit hole are you willing to go?

If you think the collection of dunces and nitwits who have taken over state government have gone as low as they can possibly go think again. They haven’t. If you like this legislature your task is easy: keep sending your local nincompoop to Boise. If you’ve got some concerns about what’s happening there is an alternative course.

Legislative comparisons

stapiluslogo1

To form some basis of comparison between this year’s legislative session and those of the past, let’s start with what many Gem State politics watchers maintain was the best ever: The 38th, in 1965.

You could overrate that session because of the collection of personalities in it, people such as James McClure, Cecil Andrus, Vern Ravenscroft, Phil Batt, Perry Swisher, Charles McDevitt, Pete Cenarrusa, Darrell Manning, Bill Roden, and many others who would be important in Idaho politics and government for a generation to come. But the session gets its ace ranking because of what those legislators did.

Maybe foremost, they passed - after hot debate - a state sales tax, which some people liked and others didn’t but which has helped stabilize state finances ever since. But there was much more: setting up a statewide park system, major changes in both public schools and higher education, creation of a state personnel commission, a standard for how state state rules and regulations would be developed (there had been none until then), approval of urban renewal law, upgrading water management and - on top of all that, the first redistricting in Idaho history of legislative districts, one of the toughest tasks a legislature can handle. Were all of these achievements (and many more) clear public benefits? You might get a reasonable argument about that. Were they all aimed specifically at improving life for Idahoans, and making their government work better? Absolutely, and for the most part at least the benefits are clear. That was the focus for these legislators.

One of those legislators, Perry Swisher, who loved to play the contrarian, has argued that the 1947 legislative session (he was not a member but watched it closely) was even better. There’s no question it was both highly productive and well regarded. That session reorganized public schools in Idaho (the state endured the chaos of almost 1,300 local school districts before the legislature consolidated most of them), started state spending for public schools, rewrote worker compensation law, created colleges at Pocatello (which became Idaho State University), Lewiston and Albion, set up the state corrections board and state archives, and much more. Here again, all of this was aimed specifically at providing benefits to people in the state and improvements to how their government worked.

That’s why so many people have regarded sessions like those as examples that later lawmakers might aspire to. It also provides some basis for measurement, some metric of whether a legislature is doing its job.

This year, the widespread talk is over whether the 2021 Idaho legislative session is the worst in the state’s history. Put aside the transitory foolishness - like the normal run of eye-rolling quotes and poor response to a pandemic that is keeping legislators still in session instead of long since adjourned - and the apparent results, as they seem to be materializing now, provide a strong case for the barrel’s bottom.

What will this year’s legacy be?

A few positives seem to be happening. Hemp is being legalized, and wrongly convicted people will receive compensation. And other odds and ends.

But these modest efforts are swamped by the tide of culture-war issues without benefit to the people of the state. Attempts to kill (in effect) the ballot initiative. Attempts to keep the governor from effectively responding to statewide emergencies. Attempts to defang a (highly capable) attorney general’s office. Killing out participation in Powerball over concern about what stands the government in Australia might take. Attacks on “social justice” (of which there are only slippery definitions) in schools - apparently as an excuse to defund schools; which they seem not to like, as witness the concurrent attacks on teacher pay. Even an attempt (passed by the legislature, awaiting voter action) to amend the Idaho Constitution to take some policy-making power away from the voters and give it, in effect, exclusively to the legislature. And even an attempt to put the legislature in charge of local artwork and memorials.

Tommy Ahlquist, a Republican candidate for governor three years ago, was quoted in the Idaho Statesman as saying, “They’re not for anything. They’re really against anything that they don’t like. So we don’t like any government — unless it’s the government we want. We don’t like any control from government — unless it’s our control. They’ll talk local control and freedom for people, yet look at the legislation that they’re bringing up that is exactly the opposite.”

I’m hard pressed to imagine how a legislative session could get much further away from the high achievements like those of 1965 or 1947, than this one.

On the other hand, there’s always next year.

Prescription

schmidt

The legislature was still in session, so the Capitol doctor still had to show up for office hours, though it didn’t seem like he was doing much good. Still, these part time retirement gigs kept his mind in the game, though he felt his heart fading from it a bit.

Doc Hasty shuffled up the steps of the domed building early. He hoped the morning hours would be brief and he’d make his 11AM tee reservation at the club. He unlocked his basement office door and flicked on the computer.

It had been a weird session with all the pandemic brouhaha. He’d done his share of nose swabs. Prior sessions he mostly dealt with the worried well, the bad cold that hung on, the sore shoulder that wasn’t a heart attack. But there was real medicine to do sometimes. He once drained a painful purple fingernail with a red-hot paper clip. And there were nose bleeds and hemorrhoids, but this year had tested him.

First, he couldn’t get anybody to wear a mask except the Democrats, and that made the issue political, not common sense. He winced whenever he thought of it.

Then nobody would agree to get a vaccination, even though some of these guys were prime candidates for a ventilator, should they get the virus. That is, of course, except the Democrats, the dozen of so walking the halls with their “I Got the Shot” buttons. It was like they thought that might convince their counterparts across the aisle. Doc Hasty shook his head at the thought. Common sense ain’t common even here in the “Peoples House”.

But he was most bothered by the secret requests for hydroxychloroquine. Senators would lean in and whisper if he had any “Hydroxy”. The first time this happened last year, when the pandemic was still on the rise, he’d mistaken the request. He’d done enough ER shifts to know folks who wanted “hydros”, the short for hydrocodone, and “oxy” the short for oxycodone, both prescription narcotics with street value and narcotic effect. So, the whispered “hydroxy” request made his eyes bug out at the conservative Senator. With no answer, the Senator had filled in the “hydroxychloroquine”, but still whispering.

Now it was Doc Hasty’s turn to whisper, and he didn’t know quite where to go. He had read the studies, heard the news and knew the politics of the drug.

And he also knew the risks. But he didn’t want to offend anyone for their beliefs either. He whispered back, “Hard to come by.” And shook his head. He hoped that would spread the word. The couple more times he got the ask he handled it the same. It faded and last session ended. Nobody had whispered such requests to him this session.

But there had been a few tough calls this session. Some folks had come in with bad colds, maybe a fever or a cough, so he’d swabbed their nose and told them to go home to await the results. It was awkward when he still saw them in the halls later that day sniffling or coughing. He’d glare at them, but he didn’t have any authority besides his professional advice. And he didn’t want to scare off folks from getting checked.

He shared this with his golf buddy one afternoon on the back nine. “Acting like a bunch of high school kids not wanting to miss the big game, huh?” had been Jack’s response.

Hasty chuckled. “Yeah, kinda, I guess.”

“How do you handle caring for all those prima donnas? It sure would drive me crazy.”

“Oh, they’re just normal people, like you and me.” Hasty offered.

Jack lined up his putt. “Well, if they’re normal, like you and me, I wish they’d act like it. I think getting elected has gone to their heads.”

“Oh?”

“You know Doc, what those guys need is a prescription for hydroxycommonsense. You got any of those pills?”