Posts published in “Jones”

As far back as I can remember, transitions in the Idaho Attorney General’s office have been rather seamless and non-political. The manner in which I took over the office from David Leroy after the 1982 election is typical. I informed the entire staff that anyone who was doing a good job for the state would have a place in my office. And that is how it was with those who preceded me and those who followed.

In 1971, when Tony Park, a Democrat, replaced Bob Robson, a Republican, the transition was handled in that fashion. Tony often told staff members that he was the only politician in the office. Deputies were to concern themselves strictly with the law. Wayne Kidwell, a Republican who took over the office from Tony in 1975, gave the same message to staff. He retained Rudy Barchas as head of the consumer protection unit, even after Rudy volunteered that he’d voted for Tony in the election. Wayne wanted the best person for the job, not a political pal. And that’s how it should be.

Raul Labrador’s transition to the office has thus far been a startling break from the established tradition. Labrador announced early in his campaign against incumbent Lawrence Wasden that he intended to run a political office. His first two hires for top jobs in the office are right-wing zealots. This portends poorly for the rule of law in Idaho. Neither of them is licensed yet to practice law in Idaho. The tradition in Idaho has been to hire Idaho lawyers who are familiar with the legal lay of the land in the Gem State. And I can attest that Idaho lawyers are every bit as good as any from out of state.

During his campaign, Labrador unfairly disparaged the deputies, falsely contending that the office “needs to have better lawyers.” He let it be known that he intended to fire staff members. This unwarranted behavior has had a demoralizing effect on the staff, undoubtedly fueling the unprecedented exodus of talented lawyers from the office.

Idaho’s pre-eminent political reporter, Betsy Russell, recently reported that 24 staff members have announced their departure from the office since Labrador won the GOP primary in May. The important Civil Litigation Division of the office has been hollowed out. Other deputies are waiting to see whether they can continue to give legal advice and representation to their state agencies without political intrusion by the new management. If they can’t give unbiased legal help, they may well join the exodus.

The expertise and institutional knowledge of the departing attorneys has proven invaluable to the state’s legal fortunes. An example is Brett DeLange, who I hired in 1990 to handle consumer protection issues. During the last 32 years, Brett became known nationwide in consumer protection circles, particularly for his expertise in pursuing giant corporations that marketed dangerous products to Idahoans–tobacco, opioids, vaping products and the like. His dogged efforts were instrumental in recovering nearly a billion dollars from those companies and others that victimized Idaho consumers. Idaho will sorely miss his valuable services when he retires in January. There are many similar tales of competent, hard-working deputies who have decided to leave state service because of uncertainty about the future of the office.

Labrador is courting danger for the state’s legal interests with his unfortunate handling of the transition to date. But he could stop the exodus of critical legal talent from the office by pledging to staff that he would observe the rule of law and by allowing the state’s lawyers to do what lawyers are supposed to do–represent their client agencies ethically and responsibly. That is the tradition of the office and it has served the State well to this date.

 

As we enjoy the company of our friends and families during the holidays, fond thoughts turn to special people who have departed during 2022. We all have memories of remarkable people who were important to us during our life journey. There are three memorable people, dear friends all, who played a significant role in my journey.

Donna Jones, who served as Idaho State Controller from January 2007 to October 2012, was a special person and dedicated public servant. She was the first woman to hold that position. A resident of Payette, she previously served in the Idaho House of Representatives from 1987 to 1998 in three different Payette County legislative districts. Donna was twice appointed by Governor Cecil Andrus to fill vacancies in two of those districts. In the interim between her legislative service and election as Controller, she served as Executive Director of the Idaho Real Estate Commission.

I became acquainted with Donna in 1982 when I was running for Attorney General. She and her Payette friend, Mary Hartung, were early supporters, who helped put me in office. I was happy to return the favor by encouraging her to run for Controller in 2002, when she came close to winning, and again in 2006, when Idahoans recognized her as the best candidate. She proved the voters to be correct by a remarkable record of service until serious injuries she received in an auto accident caused her to step out of office. Donna passed away on July 8, leaving a rich legacy of service to the Gem State.

Glen Black, who left us on March 21, was not a household name in Idaho and that was just fine with him. However, people throughout the State witnessed the fruits of the labors of Glen and his dear wife, Peggy. They built up the largest Idaho-based hotel brand, AmeriTel Inns, starting in the early 1990s. Glen began his business career as owner of a service station in Battle Mountain, Nevada. He built some residential rental units in Battle Mountain, then acquired hotels in California, Nebraska and Nevada and then moved to Boise where he built the AmeriTel chain.

Glen hired me as his attorney after building his first AmeriTel Inn in Elko. His business plan was to build high quality, moderately priced hotels in cities where the competition was rather time worn. It was wildly successful, resulting in AmeriTels in Twin Falls, Idaho Falls, Pocatello, Coeur d’Alene and Boise. He later expanded to Utah and Washington.

Glen was a dream client–he followed my legal advice and was always thankful. But, more than being one of my best clients, he was a great friend. Even though he achieved marvelous success, he remained a humble, thoughtful person. He treated his staff well and made rooms free of charge to people who were in town with a child in the hospital. When he turned the business over to his children, they decided to affiliate the hotels with national chains so the AmeriTel name disappeared from cities across the State.

Nevertheless, Glen Black was a graphic demonstration of the American dream, deserving some of the recognition that he sought to avoid during his successful life.

A lawyer friend from my Jerome days, Eugene Fredericksen, passed away on December 3. When I started my law practice in 1973, Gene was kind enough to help me orient myself to small town law practice. He was the elected county prosecutor, but also maintained a private practice. Law school teaches what the law is but does not tell you how to practice it. He was a tremendous help.

When I decided to run for Congress against George Hansen in 1978, Gene served as my campaign treasurer. When that venture did not succeed, he served in that same role when I made a second unsuccessful attempt in 1980. Gene served as treasurer once again when I ran for Attorney General in 1982 and won the office. His help with other county prosecutors was essential to that victory. I never quite figured out whether he was that patient or whether he just wanted to get me out of town. Regardless, he was a great friend. His son, Eric, now serves as State Appellate Public Defender.

I’ll be remembering Donna, Glen and Gene during this holiday season. I would urge others to embrace their special friends and family, but do it while they are still with us.

 

The serious split in the personality of the present-day GOP in Idaho was demonstrated in two articles that recently appeared in the media.

The Kootenai County Republican Central Committee (KCRCC), savoring its evil Mr. Hyde persona, announced on December 8 that U.S. Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) would keynote its Lincoln Day Dinner in February. The very next day, Rep. Mike Simpson evoked the good Dr. Jekyll when explaining his vote for the Respect for Marriage Act.

The idea that the KCRCC would so horrendously insult the legacy of the father of the Republican Party by inviting his exact opposite to speak at an event bearing his name is hard to fathom. Where Abe Lincoln stood tall for unity, dignity and American values, Rep. Greene stands for insurrection, white nationalism and QAnon conspiracies. She will bring disgrace to the Gem State by her very presence, but she will be among kindred spirits at the Coeur d’Alene event.

The KCRCC, which is commanded by John Birchers and Idaho Freedom Foundation functionaries, speaks for a significant, but extremely vocal, minority of today’s Republican faithful. It carries great weight in the area, whether working to destroy North Idaho College, hamstring primary and secondary education or create havoc with fake culture war issues. It and its counterparts across the State have managed to capture an outsized share of the Party apparatus and they are intent on total control.

Mike Simpson is representative of the other branch of the Party, someone who rose through the ranks of the GOP as a pragmatist with traditional Republican values but the ability to work across the aisle. I met Mike in 1984, when I was Attorney General and he was running for the Idaho Legislature. Governor John Evans and I were working furiously that year to help elect legislators in our respective parties who would support our joint effort to keep Idaho Power from controlling the Snake River. I supported Mike because he was favorable to that cause. He proved to be an exceptional legislator.

Mike was elected to Congress in 1998 and has been the only member of Idaho’s Congressional delegation to actually be a leader–to stick his head out from time to time when he feels strongly about an issue. He worked hard to establish the Cecil D. Andrus-White Clouds Wilderness, despite strong opposition from many in the GOP. He proposed a bold plan to save Idaho’s anadromous fish runs, despite vociferous, but false, claims that it would harm Idaho’s water interests. He voted to certify President Biden’s election, but it should be mentioned that both Idaho Senators did likewise. And, he was the only one in the delegation to support the Respect for Marriage Act.

On the other hand, he has made some infuriating votes and uttered some indefensible words, particularly during the Trump era. Still, if Idaho can look to anyone in the delegation to help lead the Republican Party back to a position of responsibility in the State–to play the good Dr. Jekyll role– he is the best bet in the delegation. Here at home, Governor Brad Little is the one we must look to in resisting the destructive Mr. Hyde role being played in Idaho politics by the likes of KCRCC and its counterparts across the Gem State. He has good instincts but needs to speak and act more firmly.

There is a civil war currently going on for the soul of the Republican Party in the State of Idaho and it will take strong leadership from both state and federal officeholders for the Dr. Jekyll side to prevail over the Mr. Hyde troublemakers. Idahoans should encourage Little and Simpson to speak out more forcefully for what is right and take the necessary action to accomplish it in order to make Idaho a true Gem of the United States.

 

Attorney General Lawrence Wasden will be stepping down at the end of the year, after providing 33 years of dedicated service in the AG’s office. I hired Lawrence in 1989 to perform legal work for the State Tax Commission. He worked his way up in the AG’s office until he was elected as Attorney General in 2002. His 20 years in that office makes him the longest-serving AG in Idaho history. Much more important than that, he was one of the very best–a man deeply committed to the rule of law.

An Attorney General must shun personal considerations and provide sound, even-handed legal advice and representation to state officials and agencies. The law requires no less. There is no leeway for favoring your friends or party when the law stands in the way. Lawrence characterized his work as honestly “calling the balls and strikes” and he routinely put the interests of the people above his own.

Lawrence stood strong in demanding that the US Department of Energy honor its contractual commitments to clean up nuclear waste at the Idaho National Laboratory, even as he supported the mission of the INL. After all, the contract was the DOE’s word and bond. Lawrence understood that he would take a great deal of heat for doing the right thing and he most certainly did, but he prevailed.

When the Legislature tried to give favorable treatment to users of state endowment lands, Lawrence stood by the constitutional requirement to obtain the “maximum long term financial return” from those lands. He successfully sued to overturn a statute that violated the Constitution, infuriating many legislators and land users. He knew that his political fortunes would suffer, but he valued the rule of law over political expediency.

When the Texas Attorney General sought to overturn the outcome of the 2020 presidential election with an action filed in the US Supreme Court on December 7, 2020, Lawrence declined to join the other Idaho officials who swarmed like lemmings to support that unconstitutional action. He understood the action was unsupported by any facts or law and was dangerous to our democracy. He also understood that by doing the right thing, he was subjecting himself to serious jeopardy in the next Republican primary election. As a measure of the man, Lawrence chose the constitutional course.

These are just a few examples of the dedicated service Lawrence Wasden performed for the people of Idaho. I did not always agree with the positions that Lawrence took on legal issues, but he always presented a sound legal argument for his position. You can respect a person who comes to a different conclusion on a debatable legal issue if they demonstrate their position has sound legal footing. We see too little of that in today’s poisonous political atmosphere, where politics too often trumps the law.

Perhaps no tribute to Attorney General Wasden could surpass the accolades heaped on him by Idaho’s six previous Attorneys General in a resolution I presented to the Conference of Western Attorneys General at its Sun Valley meeting on June 13, 2022:

“With our collective 32 years of service in the position, we can recognize an Attorney General who excels. Lawrence Wasden has courageously represented the State of Idaho and its people and will be remembered as one of our very best Attorneys General. Our sincere thanks and congratulations to Lawrence and his wife and partner Tracey for their dedicated service to the Gem State and best wishes for the future.”

Hear, hear, Lawrence!

 

Hate and bigotry often lurk just beneath the surface of civil societies. So long as a society is united in disapproving of hateful words and actions, those evil twins remain suppressed. When they receive official approval, they rise to the surface and infect society like a virus. A society must maintain continued vigilance to keep them in check.

When the Aryan Nations hate group started flexing its muscles north of Hayden, Idaho, in the early 1980s, drawing in white supremacists from across the country, a number of local folks organized to counter it, including Father Bill Wassmuth, attorney Norman Gissel, educator Tony Stewart and leadership of the Coeur d’Alene Tribe. They formed the Kootenai County Task Force on Human Relations to educate the public and counter the malign activities of the hate mongers.

A significant part of the local community took part in that effort, but it was not until the bombing of Father Wassmuth’s home in 1986 that area Republican legislators and the business community across the State woke up to the necessity of lending a laboring hand. The strength of that united front was successful in eradicating the evil or, at the least, driving it underground during the next decade.

Recent years have witnessed the growth of white nationalist sentiment in northern Idaho, due in significant part to the promotion of this beautiful area as part of the American Redoubt, a refuge for the so-called “white race.” Realtors marketed the area as a place where extreme conservatives could live among like-minded souls. That has brought a large influx of people fleeing liberal states on the west coast and elsewhere to live in a right-wing Christian haven. Donald Trump has provided a wink and a nod of approval to the worst elements in white nationalist groups, supercharging the movement, including the northern part of the Gem State.

In a welcome piece of history-repeats-itself news, a new anti-hate effort was launched in Coeur d’Alene on November 17 to counter the white nationalists. United Against Hate is an initiative of the U.S. Attorney General, presided over in Idaho by our U.S. Attorney, Josh Hurwit. Although the revered Father Bill died in 2002, the KCTFHR and its usual suspects– Stewart, Gissel, the Coeur d’Alene Tribe and many locals– joined in the campaign to place a check on the new crop of hate mongers.

As history has shown, this is the kind of action that can open the way to better understanding and at least a semblance of harmony amongst those who must co-exist in this great State. Hurwit said the goal of the meeting was to “connect communities” and create “partnerships to counter hate.” Kootenai County Prosecutor Stanley Mortensen added that he would address hate crime “if and when it does happen.”

This is certainly a promising start for an undertaking to counter the serious problem of hatred and bigotry in Kootenai County and the surrounding area. It will need to be a sustained effort and appears to have the right participants to make that happen. But, as history tells us, it will need more than that to be successful. It will need the buy-in and vocal help from local elected leaders, speaking out against hateful words and actions.

Business leaders from across the State will also have to weigh in, big time, to get the message across that Idaho is too great for hate. Businesses will have to stop merely paying lip service to the problem and speak forcefully with their voices and, more particularly, with significant financial resources to support those who run as human rights advocates and to oppose those who won’t–no more pussyfooting around with those sympathetic to the nationalists and extremists just to get tax cuts and other favorable business legislation. This is an all-hands-on-deck endeavor.

 

The president and CEO of Mountain States Policy Center (MSPC), which styles itself as an “independent, free market think tank,” recently floated a thought piece on how to improve Idaho’s public school system. First, MSPC contends we can restore faith in public schools by using taxpayer money to fund private education. Second, it contends we should increase transparency in public school budgeting.

MSPC’s first proposal calls for the Legislature to establish and fund universal education savings accounts, which parents could use to pay for private schooling for their children. In other words, a form of voucher system, much like the Idaho Freedom Foundation (IFF) has repeatedly called for over the years. Unlike the IFF, the think tank does not call for the outright destruction of the public school system, but its proposal would cause serious damage to public schools.

Public education in Idaho has been chronically underfunded for decades, both for instructional funding and for construction and maintenance of “facilities” (buildings and equipment). It has gotten worse since the Idaho Supreme Court ruled in 2005 that the Legislature was violating its constitutional mandate to “maintain a general, uniform and thorough system of public, free common schools.”

Idaho’s expenditure per pupil is the lowest of the 50 states. A recent legislative report disclosed that the State would have to spend over a billion dollars to bring school facilities up to “good” condition. In its 2005 ruling, the Court said this was the responsibility of the State, not of local school districts.

Idaho’s Constitution never contemplated that taxpayer money would be used to pay for private schooling. That has been left up to parents who may prefer to send their kids to private or parochial schools. The Constitution clearly commands that no public money ever be used for religious schooling. Thanks to a couple of recent U.S. Supreme Court rulings, states must provide public money for religious schooling, if and only if, they pay for other private schooling. The only way Idaho can keep from forcing taxpayers to support religious schools is to reject MSPC’s education savings account proposal.

Idaho’s public schools desperately need substantial additional funding, both to hire, support and pay for qualified teachers in the classroom and to maintain facilities and build new ones. The funding authorized in the special session will help, if it actually materializes, but much more is needed. To start diverting taxpayer dollars to private and parochial schools, when the State is violating its constitutional responsibilities to public schools, will undoubtedly give rise to a citizen lawsuit against the State.

As to the issue of transparency, MSPC has it backwards. It admits that the school budgeting information is currently available to the public, but just hard to find in existing reports. Perhaps school patrons could simply ask that the information be provided in summary form or take the time to peruse the reports. If we start dishing out taxpayer money to parents who wants their kids to have the luxury of private or religious schooling, how could the State possibly ensure that each family is properly using the taxpayer money? The savings account proposal would have virtually no accountability.

Numbers of informed individuals say that the voucher proposal would favor folks in the urban centers, leaving rural parents high and dry. Geoff Thomas, the former superintendent of Madison School District in Rexburg, points out that ”85% of all Idaho’s private and parochial schools are in urban centers.” This highly respected educator says voucher programs are “welfare for the rich.”

For legislators on the fence, a recent poll commissioned by the Idaho Statesman may be instructive. The poll disclosed that 58% of the respondents believed the State spends too little on education and that 63% said taxpayer money should not be used to help residents pay for private schools.

If we really want to improve our public schools, we should make a point of valuing our teachers, hushing those who falsely claim teachers are indoctrination or grooming children and increasing teacher compensation roughly equivalent to what teachers in surrounding states are paid. We could fix our old schools and build new ones with state monies, as the State’s founders contemplated, which would give property tax relief to local property owners. Perhaps MSPC could join in those efforts, which would go a long way toward restoring the effectiveness of our public school system.

 

The Supreme Court doomed the Republican Party’s chances in the November 8 election when it issued its abortion decision last June. On September 5, The Hill news outlet published my column predicting that the Democrats would take 52 Senate seats and about half of the House seats as a result. When the election dust settles, my prediction will be off by one Senate seat. The abortion decision did not have an appreciable impact on the Idaho election this year, but it will have a significant influence in Idaho and across the country in 2024. The Hill column, which follows, explains:

Just as the bases were getting loaded for a grand slam homer for the Republican team in the 2022 general election, the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) managed to strike out its own team. Instead of taking control of both Houses of Congress, the GOP will likely end the election cycle with about 48 Senators and a razor thin margin, either way, in the House.

A variety of factors will have played a part in this GOP election debacle, but the major factor will be the SCOTUS majority’s decision overturning Roe v. Wade. The Dobbs decision, which took away a 50-year federal right to reproductive care, has energized women voters across the country.

The Dobbs decision caught both parties by surprise. Republicans have long used abortion as a powerful vote-getter, particularly in red states, thinking they would never have to explain how they would protect the health of women who experience life-threatening complications during pregnancy.

With the issue of abortion going back to the states, many extreme anti-abortion legislators were caught in a bind. They are no longer able to gain political points by enacting ever-tougher abortion restrictions into state law, knowing that Roe will be there to prevent those laws from going into effect. Republican candidates in purple states, sensing that draconic restrictions are not favored by a majority of voters, have been furiously scrubbing extreme abortion positions from their campaign websites. Women voters will not be fooled by such chicanery.

It will get worse for those GOP candidates. Most women have either experienced a serious pregnancy complication or know someone who has. They know that any number of dangerous conditions can arise during a pregnancy to threaten the life of the woman and/or viability of the fetus. Between now and election day there will be any number of heart-wrenching stories about the consequences of the Dobbs decision.

Most pundits were predicting a Republican wave election this year until the Dobbs opinion was released. Some are now cautiously suggesting that Democrats could salvage the Senate and even win the House, pointing to recent polls that seem to be moving in that direction. Naysayers claim that the polls are too tight and midterm election history is against the Democrats.

Informed soothsayers can safely predict the election of at least 52 Democratic Senators and an almost equal number of each party in the House. While other components will figure into those results–a wretched crop of Senate candidates endorsed by the former president and an electorate sick of the culture wars being continually stoked by the GOP--the Dobbs decision will be the primary reason for Republican losses.

It was not just the Court’s radical departure from what the Trump appointees had claimed was settled precedent during their respective confirmation proceedings. The in-your-face language of the Dobbs opinion and its tortured recitation of the history of abortion in America were unsettling. When taken in context with other precedent-breaking decisions by the Court’s ultra-conservative majority on a variety of issues–voting rights, gun rights, religion in school, and administrative rules on climate and work-place safety–one could justifiably conclude that the Court majority is on a mission to remake America to conform with its political and religious outlook.

The SCOTUS majority may have the raw power to advance its agenda, but it certainly does not have the political power to make it stick. The Dobbs decision is a prime example of a law that has stood the test of time–the law of unintended consequences. The American public has no way of calling the Court majority to account for this and its other recent decisions, but the voters can and will take out their disapproval on those in federal and state offices who have supported and campaigned in favor of the outcomes arrived at by the Court. The SCOTUS majority has overplayed its hand and set the stage for the Republican team to switch from a grand-slam winner to a strike-out loser in the November elections.

Jim Jones is a Vietnam combat veteran who served 8 years as Idaho Attorney General (1983-1991) and 12 years as a Justice on the Idaho Supreme Court (2005-2017). He is a regular contributor to The Hill.

 

Every year on November 11, Americans gather at Veterans Day observations to honor and thank America’s veterans for their service to the country. It is certainly right and proper that they do so, but is that the extent of what our countrymen must do to show appreciation for those who put their lives at risk to serve the nation?

As one of those veterans, I submit it is the very least of what they are obliged to do.

Men and women who serve in the U.S. military forces are required to carry out their orders to the best of their ability. That is their role in this remarkable democracy and they have performed it well over the long haul, even when the going was dire and deadly. As a teenager in the mid-50s, I remember my heart swelling with pride when I read about our troops assaulting Omaha Beach at Normandy and engaging in bitter combat in the Pacific islands. It was heart-stopping to read about Americans facing human wave assaults in the bitter cold of the forgotten war in Korea.

I personally witnessed U.S. military personnel working together in harmony, draftees and volunteers alike, in fighting Communist forces in Vietnam. Network television showed us the dangers that U.S. troops faced from insurgents and IEDs in Iraq and Afghanistan. Through it all, our military personnel did what was asked of them, performing in an exemplary fashion. They did not put themselves at risk to get thanks and praise at some future Veterans Day. They were told their service was essential to protect American democracy, even at the cost of their very lives. Many paid that ultimate price, thinking that preservation of our self-governed union was well worth it.

The fact is that paying lip service to veterans once a year is the very least we owe these intrepid souls. If they could risk their lives for our democracy, everyone at home is under a heavy obligation to exert his or her best efforts to preserve it. Quite frankly, we have done a wretched job of meeting that responsibility. These last few years have seen too many of us put the country at serious risk by ignoring the rule of law that is the bedrock of our enlightened system of self-government.

We just have to look at the recent election to see the grievous harm done to the foundations of our country.

Despite the fact that American elections have been the gold standard around the world for years, false claims of election fraud have run rampant across Idaho and the nation without an iota of supporting evidence. Nothing could be so hurtful to the country because those false claims attack the most important pillar of our democracy–the selection of our leaders by popular vote. Some have joined the fraud chorus–think Dorothy Moon and her extremist branch of the Republican Party–primarily for political gain. Others have gone along by failing to do their democracy homework, believing without question the untrue claims spewing from biased propaganda outlets.

For instance, numerous false claims have been made by anti-democratic groups, like the Idaho Freedom Foundation (IFF) and its affiliates, that our public schools, another important foundation of our system, are indoctrinating our children. Allegations of critical race theory, grooming, smut peddling and whatever else are just pure baloney. IFF is engaged in a cynical effort to subvert public education so it can be replaced by taxpayers-supported private schools that would truly indoctrinate kids in the fashion desired by IFF’s dark money contributors.

If we take seriously our obligation to honor those who have risked their lives to protect and preserve the American system, each and every one of us must stay better informed on the issues of critical importance to the state and nation. That means breaking free of spoon-fed “news” by propaganda outlets like Fox News, OAN and the like. It means keeping tabs on our federal and state officials and calling them out when they involve themselves in false claims or conspiracy theories. It means urging the public schools to double down on civics education so that we can have a better-informed public.

So, while we must continue to hold our veterans in high esteem and thank them for protecting our democracy, not just on Veterans Day but throughout the year, we are honor-bound to them to reciprocate on the home front–to devote ourselves to supporting and improving the system for which they put their lives at risk.