Posts published in “Malloy”

Idaho Congressman Mike Simpson is accustomed to attacks from the right – for his work on the Appropriations Committee, his votes for big-budget bills and his support for dam breaching. Now, there’s something else for those on the far right to complain about: 

His votes against installing Rep. Jim Jordan of Ohio as speaker of the House, which drew a strong rebuke from former state Rep. Dorothy Moon, the chair of the Idaho Republican Party. That’s akin to the Idaho State football team being booed by the cheering squad.  

Traditionally, the state GOP stays away from policy debates, focusing instead on keeping Republicans such as Simpson in office. But Moon, a vocal conservative during her days in the Legislature, has established a different standard. 

She wasted no time expressing “our disappointment” in voting against Jordan, the pride of Freedom Caucus fans everywhere. “Our party has always championed fair and open deliberation, and it is disheartening to see one of our own Idaho congressmen deviate from a fair process to emphasize the same message as the radical Democrat members of the House.” Idaho’s other congressman, Russ Fulcher, backed Jordan. 

Part of her comments had the flavor of a campaign press release. Moon said in her statement that the party’s office “has been inundated with emails and phone calls” from registered voters who were upset by Simpson’s actions. 

“Congressman Simpson’s inclination to engage in inside-the-Beltway political games rather than focusing on the pressing business that truly matters to our constituents is disappointing,” she wrote. “Representative Simpson has served in Congress for decades. Perhaps all this time away from Idaho has caused him to lose sight of the real work that Americans need on the important issues that impact them and their families. … The people of Idaho expect Mike Simpson to represent their concerns and prioritize their needs above political games and partisan divisions.” 

Simpson’s votes also crossed the line with the Idaho Freedom Foundation, which normally avoids involvement with congressional business. “Simpson, who is siding with other leftist members of Congress to keep the chamber in complete disarray, preventing it from carrying out the people’s business, and most importantly, blocking conservative leadership from being seated,” says the IFF, nothing that Jordan is “a respected member of the U.S. House Freedom Caucus.” 

Of course, with Simpson, “respected” and “House Freedom Caucus” don’t belong in the same sentence. Simpson has been at odds with that group for almost a decade. That caucus, which included Jordan and former Idaho Congressman Raul Labrador, was instrumental in forcing the resignation of Rep. John Boehner of Ohio (a friend of Simpson’s) as speaker in 2015. So, Jordan was about the last person in the world that Simpson would want as speaker. 

Simpson wasn’t the only Republican opposing Jordan. The House conducted three votes for Jordan’s speakership, and he lost support each time before giving up his bid. Simpson, in his response to Moon, blamed the whole mess on the “so-called Republicans” who initiated the ouster of Rep. Kevin McCarthy from the speaker’s chair. 

“Their actions paralyzed the House’s legislative business and left Republicans looking like we are incapable of governing,” Simpson wrote. 

Well … Republicans can’t govern, plain and simple. The divide, generally, is between those who want to kiss up to Donald Trump and re-live the 2020 election, and those (such as Simpson) who want to move on. There will be peace in the Middle East before that political situation gets resolved. 

Simpson said his objection to Jordan was based on Jordan’s consistent opposition to continued research at the Idaho National Laboratory, and other priorities that are near and dear to his constituents in the Second District – such as support for Gowen Field and Mountain Home Air Force Base. Simpson also noted that Jordan has never voted for a Farm Bill, which is crucial to the agriculture industry. 

“I cannot vote for a speaker who does not support our state. And I will not take Chairwoman Moon’s ill-advised imput when I have been fighting for Idaho longer than she has lived in the state,” Simpson wrote. 

We’ll see where Moon goes from here. If she thinks constituents in the Second District are so outraged over Simpson, and so overwhelmingly on her side, then maybe she ought to run against him next year. It would be a heck of a race, for sure. 

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

(image/Gage Skimore)

Idaho Congressman Mike Simpson often talks about his love for the House of Representatives – a place that he has called home for 24 years. The 73-year-old Simpson has made it clear that he will run for re-election next year, which means that he likely will be around for at least a couple more years.

Lately, though, there hasn’t been much to “love” about serving in the House, with the “firing” of the House speaker. Simpson’s good feelings could be put to the test if Rep. Jim Jordan of Ohio, a conservative firebrand who has a long history with the House Freedom Caucus, becomes speaker.

“I am deeply disappointed that eight House ‘Republicans’ joined the entire Democratic caucus to oust Kevin McCarthy as speaker of the House,” Simpson said in a release from his office. “Instead of using our limited time to work on critical appropriations bills, we watched a political personal stunt unfold. A House divided cannot stand.”

As you might imagine, nothing is being done on those appropriations bills, which could mean a government shutdown on Nov. 17. Don’t blame fellow Idaho Congressman Russ Fulcher for this one. He voted to keep McCarthy and is frustrated that Congress is not spending a minute on the pressing budgetary issues.

“That’s a problem,” Fulcher told me. “People are looking at this as a Republican revolt against McCarthy, and that’s not the case. You have every single Democrat voting against him and eight Republicans. Some 96 percent of Republicans didn’t want to do anything, and the vast majority of members of the Freedom Caucus (of which Fulcher is a member) wanted to stay the course.”

One notable exception was Rep. Matt Gaetz of Florida, who led the charge against McCarthy and convinced seven other Republicans to go along.

“This was personal – Matt and Kevin,” Fulcher said. “It has been personal since the get-go. My personal opinion is Matt wanted to pull this trigger all along.”

Gaetz may be basking in glory at the moment, but not so much in Fulcher’s eyes. “Don’t look for a lot of Matt Gaetz legislation to pass. We have come to a grinding halt. We can conduct business in committee, but we cannot legally conduct any more business without a speaker of the House.”

Finding a new speaker will not be an easy task.

“We have a broad conference,” Fulcher said. “We have Republicans in New York who would be Democrats in Idaho. Then we have conservatives who are farther right than what there is in Idaho. There are members who are trying to negotiate a coalition government with Democrats, which may sound like a good thing to the outside world. But that’s not a good thing. The only thing that’s standing in the way of a socialistic system is the House. It’s important to have a speaker with 218 votes from the Republican side.”

Fulcher is backing Jordan, who was endorsed by former President Trump. But Fulcher’s support has nothing to do with the former president. “Jim is the real deal. For someone like me, he’s a conservative and a liberty-focused guy. He’s a friend and a good man.”

Fulcher says he also could support the party’s No. 2 man in the House, Rep. Steve Scalise of Louisiana. Fulcher’s main reservation is that Scalise has been going though cancer treatments – and Fulcher, a cancer survivor, has some personal expertise in that area.

“I went through a very robust level of cancer therapy. What Steve is going through is not as aggressive. I’m telling Steve that he will come out of it fine, but in about three to five weeks, one of the biggest challenges is getting out of bed. Nothing happens with your mind, you can think clearly, but your physical strength is zapped,” Fulcher said.

“That job is a punching bag – the worst job in politics,” the Idaho congressman said. “I’ve told others that if we coalesce around Steve, they are going to have to a lot of the footwork for the next six months, because Steve may not have the endurance to do it. He could be right guy over time, but the timing is not right for him.”

Whether the timing is right remains to be seen. Simpson and Fulcher can brace themselves for at least a few long days and nights in Washington.

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

Round and round we go, and we all know where this stops. It’s Nov. 17, when Congress will face another chapter of tired talks about a government-shutdown.

There’s no telling who will be speaker of the House by then since House Speaker Kevin McCarthy (who was booted from his job) dared to rely on Democrats to push through a 45-day stop-gap measure to keep the government operating. The drama with the speakership, along with Hunter Biden and the possible impeachment of President Biden will provide enough distractions from the job that Congress should be doing with appropriations.

In theory, the stop-gap bill gives Congress time to work out differences with the budget. In practice with a divided government, there’s a greater chance that nothing will be done. If we’re lucky, we’ll get another stop-gap measure on Nov. 17 that will keep the government running for another month or two.

It’s a shame that it comes down to this. What’s amazing is there are those in Congress who think that shutting down the government is sound policy, as if all problems will be solved by refusing to sign off on a dozen appropriations bills. A lot of people get hurt by government shutdowns, but not members of Congress. They get paid regardless.

Idaho Congressman Mike Simpson, a senior member of the House Appropriations Committee, favors a more sensible approach. As he wrote in a recent commentary, “letting the government shut down is neither good policy or good politics.”

He’s entirely correct – although that attitude will never land him an invite to join the House Freedom Caucus (he’s not interested anyway). Fellow Idaho Congressman Russ Fulcher, who is part of the Freedom Caucus, predictably voted against the stop-gap bill. Given the nature of his district, there’s no question that his job would be on the line if he voted otherwise.

“Through this entire process, I have supported efforts to keep the government funded, control spending and end chaos at the Southern border,” Fulcher said. “Unfortunately, the most recent continuing resolution does not address these pressing matters my constituents want addressed.”

House conservatives do have a point. Spending is out of control and has been for a long time. The national debt is more than $33 trillion with no signs of slowing down, and it continues to grow no matter what party controls the White House.

But in these shutdown debates, detractors are nibbling at the edges. The focus is on discretionary spending, the 25-30 percent of the budget that Congress can control. If all discretionary spending were eliminated, including national defense, we’d still be drowning with the deficit. The problem is the 70-75 percent of the budget that Congress cannot touch – the so-called “entitlement” spending, which includes Social Security and Medicare. The fiscal crisis will never be resolved until Congress approves relevant reforms for the next generations. It’s as simple as that.

Ah, but there’s so much juicy political theater that goes with these shutdown talks. Members of Congress can draw lines in the sand, point fingers, puff out their chests and show all their constituents back home how they are trying to bring spending under control. Who cares about the millions of people who get hurt in the process, such as military men and women, border agents and air-traffic controllers.

“These political games have very real consequences for your friends and neighbors,” Simpson wrote. “To Idaho, a government shutdown means thousands of furloughs for government workers and contractors, no new vouchers to homeless veterans through the Department of Housing and Urban Development, a halt to U.S. Small Business Administration loans, and the closure of our national parks, just to name a few impacts.”

Simpson isn’t the only one in Idaho’s delegation who holds a dim view of government shutdowns. Sens. Mike Crapo and Jim Risch voted for the temporary resolution and issued a joint statement.

“Government shutdowns hurt taxpayers. This legislation will keep the government’s lights on while ensuring our troops and border agents receive the pay they have earned. During this time, we will continue to advocate for a long-term funding solution that saves taxpayer dollars and serves the needs of Idahoans.”

Good luck with that. Government operations are safe until Nov. 17, and there are no guarantees after that. Keep your expectations low as far as the ability of Congress to find a long-lasting solution to this fiscal mess.

After all, these are the “honorable” men who helped give us this $33 trillion debt in the first place.

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

Idaho Congressman Russ Fulcher is a self-described optimist, but he has trouble putting a smiley face to what he’s seeing on the national level.

“I think this is the most reflective time in America since the Civil War, and surely in my lifetime,” he told me. “We have a serious leadership void.”

Fulcher says the void is more on the Democratic end, with a president who looks ready for an assisted-living facility. But he just as well could be talking about Republicans, who have their own (near) 80-year-old vying for the White House. Former President Trump, the far-away frontrunner for the GOP nomination, is facing multiple federal and state indictments. His campaign – and presidency, if he wins – could be marred with endless court hearings, perhaps more indictments and lord knows how many more impeachments.

“That’s a valid concern,” Fulcher acknowledges.

But in Fulcher’s mind, it’s worse on the Democratic side. “Our current president, I strongly believe, is not at his full capacity, and our vice president is lacking for acumen for the job.”

So, there you have it, folks. The “real” choice in the next election is what form of rat poison you’d prefer to ingest. One side offers the liquid form, and the other gives the powder version. Both taste awful – and equally deadly.

During the August recess, Fulcher offered some sage advice to his political friends in Idaho. “Keep a strong ship at home, because the federal ship is being rocked for all the wrong reasons.”

The mess is not going to be cleared up anytime soon.

As indictments roll in like a mountain top avalanche, the question that Fulcher and his fellow Republicans is: How hard would prosecutors be pushing if Trump were not the leading candidate for the nomination.

“If Trump was not the leading candidate for the Republican nomination,” Fulcher says, “would anybody give a rat’s behind about what’s at his home in Mar-aLago?”

And would Georgia officials be gung-ho to prosecute Trump if he had quietly ridden to the sunset after the 2020 election?

Fulcher does not defend Trump for carting home boxes of classified materials, or his call to the Georgia secretary of state asking that election results there be overturned. “I think my message has been clear – Trump is not a choir boy,” Fulcher says. “And I am not making excuses for anyone.”

But to Fulcher and his friends, corruption doesn’t end with Trump … there are issues with Biden and his son, Hunter, that should be explored. It could come to the point where House Speaker Kevin McCarthy calls for an “impeachment inquiry” to get to the bottom of the Hunter Biden matter.

“This would be an inquiry, and not an impeachment,” Fulcher says. “That would give some investigative tools we don’t have. McCarthy’s position is the DOJ has been so aggressive with its investigation of Trump, but they won’t share information about Hunter Biden. I believe we have corruption on multiple levels in our intelligence community, and it needs to be cleaned up. There essentially was an autopsy on the CIA during the ‘70s and I think that needs to happen again – with an autopsy of the DOJ and FBI. This corruption is not just with Democratic administrations, it goes way back.”

In the meantime, good luck to those agencies in getting full appropriations from the House. “The power of the purse is the only tool we have,” the congressman says. “The FBI is not going to get its full appropriation, and there will be a motion to zero out (director) Christopher Ray’s salary. I’m not saying it will pass, but there will be a motion. There will be things in the administration’s budget that will be held hostage unless there is a certain amount of cooperation.”

So, don’t look for anything substantive on high gas prices, oppressive inflation, national security, border control or the budget deficit.

Of course, we will have an election next year and Fulcher (for now) is staying neutral. At this point, there’s not much suspense. Voters will be stuck with the same cast of characters who are pushing the country over a cliff.

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

When Republican Sen. Tammy Nichols of Middleton reads the words, “far-right extremists,” in a political commentary, she knows that the side she generally represents won the debate.

“They have already lost the argument, so it’s not worth my time to try to bring any kind of logical conversation into the discussion,” she told me. “(The writers) are going from trying to have a conversation to getting personal about it.”

She has a point. Influence peddlers who employ labels essentially are speaking to the choir – those who agree that those far-right extremists are a menace to society. But name-calling mostly does nothing to sway people on the right.

“I call it label lynching. It’s when they disagree with you, but don’t have a solid argument, so they label you. It was a tactic used during the times of Karl Marx, or Nazi Germany when they attacked the Jews. When I hear that (far-right extremist), and it’s directed at me, it reinforces to me that I’m on the right track,” Nichols said.

“What we’ve learned is that the name-calling and bullying we heard on the school playground has not ended. People grow up, but they bring some of the names with them.”

I remember those rough days on the playgrounds in Osburn. Here was one of the stoppers: “Oh, yeah. Well, your mother wears Army boots.” Fast forward some 60 years and it’s “right-wing extremists,” or “fake news” media.

There’s nothing new about name-calling in politics. From the conservative side of the fence, any Republican that doesn’t score high on the Idaho Freedom Foundation index is labeled a “RINO.” Former President Donald Trump, the pride of the GOP, has turned name-calling into an art form.

During my early days of political reporting in Idaho, writers often used the term “ultra-conservative” to arbitrarily describe those who were perceived to be to the right (or far right) of center. Of course, that term applied only to Republicans; Democrats were never branded as “ultra-liberals” or “liberals” in general.

“When somebody calls me a far-right extremist, I throw back the question. ‘What does that mean?’ And they can’t define it,” Nichols says. “Is a far-right extremist someone who upholds the constitution, believes in limited government, or stands up for people’s rights? Those are the things I stand for. So, I don’t accept the label.”

In the Idaho Statesman recently, an editorial suggested that far-right extremists ran off a Post Falls educator, Karen Lauritzen, who was selected as Idaho’s teacher of the year. The teacher apparently had friendly views toward the LGBTQ community, Black Lives Matter, transgender rights and the United Nations agenda.

Not surprisingly, Nichols had a different view than the Statesman’s editorial board. “They used the term far-right extremists, but they didn’t label the teacher as anything for pushing a radical agenda. She wasn’t labeled as a far-left extremist. But they tell you about these right-wing extremists without telling you who they are or why they are extremists. If the teacher doesn’t fit in with Idaho, then I say good riddance. But those concerns are not just in Idaho. There are plenty of parents everywhere who are riled up with the LGBTQ and transgender agenda pushes that are happening in education.”

The Statesman apparently has its own idea about what’s “radical” in the political world. But it’s probably closer to “mainstream” within the Idaho Republican Party, which largely has been taken over by conservatives. That transformation has been by design. In Nichols’ view, conservatives worked hard on the grassroots levels of the GOP, while the so-called establishment was “asleep at the wheel.” The efforts resulted in former Rep. Dorothy Moon taking over as the party chair and former congressional candidate Bryan Smith of Idaho Falls moving in as national committeeman.

“The establishment wants to maintain the status quo, but that’s what has been causing the demise in some states,” Nichols says. “Colorado is an example of what can happen in a few short years. People were not engaged and not on the ground educating voters, getting people to run for office, taking stances and being vocal. Those that are doing this are being labeled as right-wing extremists.”

Those “extremists” might be an election or two from being the undisputed “mainstream” in Idaho. Editorial and column writers might think about visiting some school playgrounds for fresh name-calling material.

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

An unemployment rate of anything under 3 percent is like music to a politician’s ear, especially to those lucky enough to sit in the Oval Office or a governor’s chair.

So, strike up the band with Happy Days are Here Again, and there will be no shortage of politicians lining up to take credit for a rate that’s in the range of 2.7 percent. Let’s celebrate with a statewide hoedown, and bring along some Tennessee cloggers to add to the flavor.

Now for the buzzkill … you knew that was coming. There’s always someone in the crowd who will put a reality check on any kind of good news. This comes from a longtime friend, Suzanne Budge, the state director of the National Federation of Independent Business. For certain, an unemployment rate that’s under 3 percent is the definition of full employment in any economics book. But Budge tells me that’s no comfort to Main Street business owners who are struggling to find workers at all skill levels.

In other words, people don’t want to work anymore. And this is not through lack of effort by employers who have raised wages significantly and have practically begged people to work.

“It’s very gloomy,” she said. “The struggle is that the workforce has not come back since the pandemic. We have the lowest workforce participation rate in decades.”

And get this … a staggering 42 percent of business owners have reported job openings they could not fill – and it’s not because wages are low. According to the NFIB, 36 percent of employers have raised wages and another 22 percent intend to do so.

“In fact, it’s been reported that the average wage for all occupations in Idaho reached just under $25 an hour last year,” she says.

Budge can only speculate why employers can’t find workers. “This is not an NFIB position, but I think you have a generational shift. There has been so much money put into the economy through the federal stimulus that has far outstripped the demand. Owners can’t get people to work, or apply for jobs, and that will have an impact on small business and the ability to carry on. Second and third generation businesses are selling out, because either you grow or you die. It’s hard to be a small business person right now.”

The problem is not confined to Idaho. “It’s the same situation everywhere,” says Budge, who travels extensively with her job.

So, how are people paying the skyrocketing housing costs, or keeping up with inflation?

“That’s a good question,” she says. “Developers seem to be banking on Idaho being an open state with recreational opportunities – and people are coming to Idaho. Look at McCall. And the demographics of downtown Boise are much different than, say, 28 years ago. Outsiders are moving to Idaho.”

But they are not filling the plethora of job openings, and you know where that leads.

“How often do you hear about lack of service? Lack of help? Owners apologizing for lack of service and inability to deliver? Changing hours, and automating because they have to? It’s a confounding problem. I don’t think we know why, but it doesn’t look like it’s really changing,” she says.

Call it the “new normal” in today’s society.

The NFIB issues a jobs report monthly, which includes a wide range of facts and figures – and a news release for media outlets and interested parties. The lead to July’s news release summed up the sorry situation well.

“Another monthly small-business jobs report, another dismal reading for the Main Street enterprises of America.”

There’s not much optimism between those lines, but it’s something you should keep in mind when politicians talk glowingly about our low unemployment rate.

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

Idaho Republican Party Chairwoman Dorothy Moon is fired up, and for good reason. At least, that seems to be the consensus of the party’s faithful.

She and her fellow Republicans, who strongly back former President Trump, are peeved about what appears to be a two-tiered justice system. “Joe Biden’s Department of Justice,” as Moon describes it, has issued a string of indictments against Trump – President Biden’s most likely opponent in next year’s presidential race.

Nothing fishy about that, right?

“Of course, the fake news media have trained their spotlights on Donald Trump, focusing all of their energy on the allegations against him,” Moon says.

And then there’s Hunter Biden, the president’s son who apparently has never taken the silver spoon from his mouth.

“Testimony by Hunter Biden’s former business associate suggests Hunter used his father, during his tenure as vice president, as political influence in his business dealings. And we’ve all seen the video of Joe Biden admitting, in his own words, that he strong-armed a foreign government to fire the prosecutor that was investigating Hunter Biden and his company,” Moon wrote. “We sit and watch the DOJ give preferential treatment to the sitting president’s family, and our press shields Joe Biden from criticism.”

With Republicans so hopping mad over the DOJ developments, it’s no wonder why Trump’s poll numbers keep rising. Moon is not alone with her views. Polls show that more than 80 percent of Republicans think indictments against Trump are politically motivated. That’s a good number of people who dislike everything about Biden, the justice department and liberal policies in general. The GOP’s solution is to put Trump back in the White House to straighten out everything.

Let’s think more about that one. The former president’s defenders keep saying that Trump has done nothing wrong – at least not enough to put him in jail, or disqualify him for the presidency. But what I haven’t heard from Moon, or any other Trump supporter, is what he has done “right.”

• Was it right (or presidential) for Trump to sit silently at a kitchen table in the White House and watch as rioters were storming the Capitol?
• Was it right (or presidential) for Trump to pressure his vice president into not certifying the results of the 2020 election, which was Mike Pence’s constitutional duty that day?
• Was it right (or presidential) for Trump to ask (more like demand) the Georgia secretary of state to “find” nearly 12,000 votes (by any means) to reverse the outcome of the race?
• Was it right (or presidential) for Trump to stash boxes of classified documents at his Florida home?

The list can be longer, for sure. My take is that anything positive that came from his administration – such as a robust economy and building some respect internationally – were overshadowed by his deplorable conduct since his election defeat. And, yes, he did lose that election. It’s hard to imagine that the party of Ronald Reagan – known for his wit, wisdom and dignity -- wants a guy like Trump back in the White House.

This campaign for the nomination is about one person, and not about the future … and not about pressing issues such as national security, border control and the $32 trillion national debt. It’s about re-living the 2020 election and all those indictments from Joe Bidens justice department – which in the eyes of the GOP faithful apparently is a far bigger threat than Russia or China.

If Trump wins the presidency, we can look forward to an endless string of court proceedings over those indictments, perhaps in addition to an impeachment or two if Democrats regain control of the House.

Republicans have an impressive list of candidates who are ready to take on Biden and talk about their vision for the future. I don’t see how the country can take four more years of Donald Trump.

By the way things are looking, that’s what we’re going to get.

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

When I came to the Idaho Statesman as opinion page editor in 1999, it was suggested that I read a special section that the editorial department did on dam breaching. It was a gold-standard argument for saving salmon – the kind of effort that gets a Pulitzer Prize.

As the Statesman saw it, breaching the four dams on the lower Snake River was the only practical way that salmon could survive and the writers outlined a compelling case. The environmental, economic and scientific reasons clearly were on the side of breaching the dams.

Keep in mind, that was 24 years ago. The debate was raging long before that, and it continues today – without much movement in either direction. The groups that were for it decades ago are still for it, and those who have been opposed are still opposed. Idaho’s congressional delegation and state officials were – and still are – adamantly opposed to breaching. Predictably, conservationists and tribes favor it.

A big breakthrough on the breaching side came a couple of years ago when Idaho Republican Congressman Mike Simpson came out in favor of breaching and issued a $33 billion plan to get it done. He said at the time that he didn’t know that breaching would save salmon, but he was certain that removal of the dams was the only chance.

Simpson doesn’t have a lot of support from fellow politicians; even Democrats from Washington and Oregon are, at best, lukewarm to the idea. But Simpson is not one to give up easily, and he may have the biggest ally of them all on his side. President Biden has said he supports salmon and dam removal, drawing recent attention from national outlets such as Politico and the Wall Street Journal.

If salmon recovery becomes a “legacy” issue for Simpson (he has no shortage of those in his long career), he might consider establishing a “Republicans for Biden” committee, mixing with those within the GOP who don’t like the idea of four more years of Donald Trump. Simpson often is reminded of his statement in 2016, declaring that Trump was unfit for the presidency – a statement that may be more applicable today than seven years ago.

Of course, Simpson won’t break from Trump if he wins the GOP nomination … his caucus in the House wouldn’t stand for it. But it’s a sure bet that breaching will not happen if Trump, or any other Republican, gets in the White House.

Idaho Sen. Jim Risch, for one, is taking the potential of Biden’s intervention seriously. Risch is looking more toward the human benefits that the dams bring, such as hydropower and clean energy. The dams, he said, are a lifeline for the Port of Lewiston.

“As a U.S. senator and the leader of an independent free-market research organization, we are unified in our effort to protect the Snake River dams and maintain their economic and environmental benefits for our region,” Risch wrote recently. “Beyond us, there is strong, widespread support for the dams, including from Idaho officials and trade groups.”

Risch points out that dam removal will not be an easy process, even if the president pushes forward. He has introduced the Northwest Energy Security Act, along with Republicans from Washington and Monana.

“Congress authorized these dams, and only Congress has the power to remove them,” he wrote. “Thankfully, many of the congressional members elected to the area surrounding the Snake River dams are working to protect the economic and environmental benefits they provide.”

Responding to Risch’s efforts, Simpson said, “While I respect Jim’s opinion, following his path forward would mean the annual loss of half a million-acre feet of water and extinction of Idaho’s salmon runs. This all to save four dams in Washington. That’s a path I cannot follow.”

So, we’re back to where the breaching debate was when I returned to my home state 24 years ago. The way it looks, the rhetoric will be the same 24 years after I’m gone from this earth.

By that time, salmon probably will be wiped out and the environmental argument will be about saving goldfish.

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