Posts published in “Malloy”

Drawing a laugh from Alex LeBeau is easy – if you refer to the Idaho Association of Commerce as a “liberal” organization. LeBeau, the longtime IACI president takes exception to that reference.

That is, when he stops laughing.

“That is one of the dumbest things I’ve ever heard,” LeBeau told me. “We have elected more Republicans in the state than just about any other organization, except for maybe the Republican Party.”

Business operators in Idaho don’t tend to be “liberal” by any measure, and LeBeau – who has been the group’s president for almost 20 years – wouldn’t be sitting in the president’s chair if he were promoting some form of a “woke” agenda. Over the decades that I’ve been following Idaho politics, IACI has been called a lot of things. “Liberal” is not among the more prominent references.

“Our organization’s membership employs about half of the state’s population, and I’m very proud of our membership,” LeBeau says. “They work very hard to do the different things they do and make the economy great. You are going to have to tell me why that’s a liberal thing.”

Well … the organization generally backs Gov. Brad Little, who is widely panned by the GOP’s right-wing faction. And IACI supports the governor’s Launch program, which some Republicans have dubbed as a socialist scheme. As LeBeau sees it, the biggest objection for some is the fact that Little backs it.

“It’s another level of school choice,” LeBeau says.

He has a point there. Launch gives Idaho students an opportunity to further their education by training for high-demand jobs, giving students the opportunity to pursue career opportunities in the Gem State. One immediate benefit, he says, is that community-college enrollment in Idaho is going up, while other states are experiencing a downward trend.

House Speaker Mike Moyle, among others, have talked about “tweaking” the Launch program, and LeBeau is receptive to that idea.

“We’re perfectly fine with tweaking it. There will always be room for improvement when you have something new, but getting rid of it is not an option,” LeBeau says

In IACI’s world, the same can be said for keeping Little for a third term as governor. He has not announced his intention for seeking a third term in 2026, although signs seem to be pointing in that direction.

“We definitely will get behind the governor if he chooses to go for another term,” LeBeau says. “He’s a former chairman of our organization and he has been a tremendous leader for our state.”

LeBeau gives props to the governor for his recent state-of-the-state message, which outlined his agenda for this session. The governor talked about most of the things that IACI likes, including the Launch program, tax relief and money for highways.

“I think he touched on all the right notes in terms of doing what it takes to make this economy going,” LeBeau says. “I look at the state of the economy and the direction that Idaho is going … what are you upset about? We have the most freedoms, the best economy and the most opportunities. And people are saying they don’t want more of the same? I don’t understand what they are upset about, other than the fact that it’s Brad Little and they don’t like Brad.”

To the Idaho Freedom Foundation, the governor is “out of touch.” Ron Nate, president of the IFF, described Little’s state-of-the-state message as “90 percent platitudes, 5 percent rambling and awkward jokes, and 5 percent something – anything – resembling a conservative thought. In other words, disappointing.”

So, brace yourself for a spirited primary election campaign next year. LeBeau and IACI are ready for the fight.

“Leadership in government matters,” LeBeau says. “It matters to employers, employees and the quality of life. What we see in Idaho, and from the standpoint of a lifelong Idahoan, we’re in a great spot and I’d like to see it keep going.”

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

 

Idaho’s congressional delegation has spent years battling with the Biden administration and the Bureau of Land Management over the Lava Ridge Wind Energy Project, which would have turned a stretch of southern Idaho into a sea of ugly wind turbines.

It took one day of a new administration to put the kibosh on the project and it was Idaho Sen. Jim Risch who wrote the executive order that was signed by President Trump. The senator may never have a more joyful assignment from the president.

Of course, Risch was not writing the order in a vacuum. He had conversations about the project with Trump and the senator emphasized the importance of stopping Lava Ridge during Gov. Doug Burgum’s nomination hearing for Interior secretary.

Risch probably didn’t need to do much to sway the president to his side. Trump made it clear during his inaugural address, with Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris watching, that green new deals would be replaced with “Drill, Baby Drill.” So, it’s unlikely that the president gave much hesitation to putting his name to an executive order to scuttle one of the Biden administration’s pet energy projects.

For good measure, Risch had plenty of political support from Congressman Mike Simpson, Sen. Mike Crapo and Gov. Brad Little, among others.

The BLM had its reasons for wanting the turbines. The project northeast of Twin Falls, according to a BLM news release in December, “could power as many as 500,000 homes with clean energy, while creating hundreds of jobs and supporting local and regional economies.”

Folks were not buying the line. The political response from the delegation and beyond: “Not in our back yard.” They wanted nothing to do with hundreds of wind turbines sitting on nearly 100,000 acres, visually compromising the Minidoka National Historic Site – which served as a relocation for more than 13,000 Japanese Americans who were incarcerated during World War II.

Risch documents numerous battles on the Lava Ridge issue, going back to 2021. During that time, he opposed two nominees for Interior secretary, based on support for Lava Ridge. Risch and his colleagues wrote letters that were ignored. Simpson has a similar history of banging his head against a bureaucratic wall, including putting together legislation to stop Lava Ridge.

Then, in just one day of Trump 2.0, it all went away with the stroke of the president’s pen.

“President Trump demonstrated on his first day of office his commitment to listening to the valid concerns of Idahoans, Minidoka survivors and descendents, families, ranchers and sportsmen,” said Crapo.

Simpson chides the Biden administration for “blatantly” disregarding the voices of Idahoans. “The Lava Ridge wind project is unwanted and has zero place in our state. I stand fully behind President Trump’s decision to end it once and for all.”

Gov. Brad Little followed the president’s executive order with one of his own – called “Gone with the Lava Ridge Wind Project Act.”

The star of this show was Risch, the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations who used his influence and personal working relationship with Trump to make this executive order happen. The two will have plenty of time to talk about Russia, China and Iran.

“I made a promise to Idahoans that I would not rest until the Lava Ridge Wind Project was terminated. On day one, President Donald Trump took action to keep that promise,” Risch said.

“Lava Ridge has been the embodiment of liberals’ disregard for the voices of Idahoans and rural America,” he said. “Despite intense and widespread opposition from Idaho and the Japanese American community, the previous administration remained dead set on pushing this unwanted project across the finish line. Finally, our nation has a leader who recognizes that people on the ground should have a say in how our natural resources are managed.”

Not all of Trump’s executive orders on day one had such a warm reaction, but this one put smiles on the faces of Idahoans – and the political leaders who found a way to kill it.

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

 

Sen. Lori Den Hartog of Meridian, the new Senate Republican leader, has identified the best reason why political leaders – from the governor on down – are backing expanded school choice (a.k.a. vouchers).

The public demands it – it’s as simple as that. Or, more cynically, the demand comes from out-of-state interests that are pushing the concept of state money going to private schools. However you want to look at it, voucher advocates are winning elections and the incumbents who say “no” are being bounced out.

Gov. Brad Little, who takes pride of his record on education, is now friendly toward tax credits for those seeking alternatives to public schools. He’s asking the Legislature to set aside $50 million for that purpose. House Speaker Mike Moyle of Star said bluntly in a pre-session news conference that the money should follow the student – to the chagrin of a couple of leading Democrats appearing at that same gathering.

So, that’s where the conversation in the Legislature begins and it will take at least a few months to sort out the details.

Den Hartog is no late-comer to the fight. She spent her school days at Nampa Christian School, and that’s been the home for her three kids. She has nothing against public schools, but the private school has been the best fit for the family.

“My parents believed strongly in the value of Christian education – what is taught in our home and at church on Sunday,” she told me. “And that’s the choice we made for our three children, and we made choices in our budgeting to make that happen.”

Now, she wants other Idaho parents to have similar options.

“It’s all about making sure people can find the right education setting for their children, and that can change – even with the same kid,” she said. “And the reasons are different.”

Over the years, Idaho has done much to provide school choice – from establishing open enrollment to creating charter schools and providing a better environment for home schooling.

“What we’re talking about during this session is just one more piece of the puzzle – providing resources to families, particularly to families that may not have the means to some of those choices,” she says. “We’re not trying to take anything from anyone. We’re trying to provide additional options for families.”

She rejects the notion that choice advocates want to raid public-school budgets or the general fund. Den Hartog doesn’t see a future of high budget deficits and massive program cuts as a result of modest efforts to expand school choice.

“We’re talking about a fraction of the state budget that competes with other priorities,” she says. “Part of the reason that it’s in the conversation now is this is what Idaho voters are asking for. These are Idaho taxpayer dollars, and these are Idaho kids whose parents pay taxes.”

Den Hartog does not join the chorus of public-school bashing. She doesn’t buy the Idaho Freedom Foundation’s analysis that public schools are glorified indoctrination labs for the political left, and she earns her “F” rating with the IFF by voting for education budgets.

“Our public schools do a tremendous job with the resources that they have, and it’s not all about test scores,” Den Hartog said. “Introducing a little competition in the mix is good. We saw that with open enrollment, where districts highlighted what they were doing well. If you have a monopoly and parents are not happy, for whatever the reason, what is the motivation for schools to respond?”

Over the next few months, we’ll see how many “choice” proposals will come to the table. An early frontrunner is a bill by Den Hartog and Rep. Wendy Horman of Idaho Falls (co-chair of the Joint Finance-Appropriations Committee). That would provide $5,000 tax credits to students who don’t attend public schools (up to $50 million) – with the priority going to those with lower incomes.

There will be plenty of pushback to the Den Hartog-Horman plan, of course. But if early political momentum means anything, we’ll be seeing some kind of subsidy for families seeking alternatives to public schools.

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

 

The fight over school vouchers might be the leading issue going into this legislative session, but the term “vouchers” will have selective use.

We’re more likely to hear terms such as “school choice,” “tax credits,” “rebates” or even “savings accounts” come up in the committee rooms and press briefings. Regardless of the name, it’s all part of the effort to steer public money to private or religious schools.

Rod Gramer, an advocate and former president of Idaho Business for Education, uses another term. “It’s the biggest government handout in history,” he says, and one that is aimed for helping rich folks get money for sending their kids to private schools.

“There is nothing conservative about vouchers,” he says.

Politically, there appears to be strong sentiment is some form of vouchers. Gov. Brad Little has endorsed a tax credit that will provide $50 million to those seeking education alternatives. Gramer, a longtime journalist and native Idahoan, blasted the governor for pandering to the right – at the expense of Idaho’s constitutional obligation for public education.

Tax credits, or other measures, may not raid the public-school budget, but they can chip away at the general fund that underwrites everything else. Gramer says that Arizona, a voucher-friendly state, is cutting programs and facing close to a billion-dollar deficit as a result of its financial boost to the private schools.

Reviews in Arizona are mixed. Former Republican Gov. Doug Ducey, in a recent visit to the Gem State, had high praise for Arizona’s voucher program. Arizona’s current governor, Democrat Katie Hobbs, has called the program “unsustainable.”

Gramer sides with Hobbs in this dispute.

“The state general fund has only so much money, and we always have been frugal in Idaho. It’s not like we are throwing money at our public schools,” Gramer says. “So, if you have vouchers, it puts the squeeze on the state general-fund budget – and not just for K-12 education. It puts the squeeze on community colleges, higher education, roads and all the things we do on a limited budget.”

Legislators are getting plenty of pressure to provide relief for those fleeing public schools. Ron Nate, a former Eastern Idaho legislator and president of the Idaho Freedom Foundation – which has a generous following among legislators – sees public schools in a negative light.

“For some time, public schools have been indoctrination zones for leftist ideology,” Nate says. “If it’s not sex ed at an inappropriately early age, it’s a course how we should be ashamed of our country’s history. While the teachers are forcing their woke LGBT, anti-white agenda down our children’s throats, their test scores continue to drop.”

Meanwhile, he says, “spending on education continues to go through the roof.”

Education professionals may sneer at Nate’s assessment, but the perception is real. And political leaders are paying attention after seeing a few anti-voucher legislators bounced out of office. Gov. Little, who next year could be looking at running for a third term, doesn’t want to be on the wrong side of this issue.

Gramer agrees that political momentum in Idaho is on the side of tax credits, savings accounts – or whatever the variation is to vouchers. But he’s not convinced that the public stands by the effort. He sees little benefit to rural areas that traditionally have strong identification with the public schools.

“In November, on the night that Donald Trump was elected president, three states (two red states and one purple) rebuffed efforts to use taxpayer money for private schools,” Gramer says.

In political campaigns, there’s plenty of money flowing to candidates who support vouchers in some form. But Gramer, who has followed politics for more than 50 years, has seen some unusual dynamics in national campaigns. Advertisements avoid focusing on using taxpayer money to support private schools over public education.

“Vouchers are never mentioned,” he says. “The ads focus is on candidates who are accused of being soft on border security, or gun control.”

Of course, as Gramer knows, legislative sessions are all about political momentum and the messy process of finding consensus with conflicting bills. With luck, he says, the volume of school-choice plans will collapse under their weight.

But the issue certainly is not going away.

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

 

Idaho Congressman Mike Simpson had the perfect reaction when he was told that the embattled Florida congressman, Matt Gaetz, had been picked as the nominee for attorney general.

“Are you s***tin’ me?”

Simpson’s loose comment was an “instant classic” for sure, but he was not the only one expressing concern over President-elect Trump’s selection. Gaetz ended up withdrawing his name after it became apparent that Senate confirmation wasn’t going to happen.

While Simpson’s comment was aimed at Gaetz, the same reaction could have been given for other nominations that were somewhere between “laughable” and “totally bonkers” – Kash Patel (FBI), Pete Hegseth (defense), Robert F. Kennedy Jr. (health and human services), Linda McMahon (education) and Tulse Gabbard (national intelligence). And this is just a short list of his controversial picks.

But don’t look for more “instant classics” from Idaho’s senior House member. Trump has been known to keep track of these things and doesn’t hesitate to retaliate. Simpson has spent almost a decade backing away from his 2016 comment about Trump being unfit for the presidency.

There may be at least a few creative ways that a president can “get back” at a sitting member of Congress. The immediate weapon is that mega-billionaire Elon Musk will invest part of his fortune for getting wayward Republicans defeated in a primary. Fortunately for Simpson, his political career is safe regardless of what Trump thinks or how much money any rich guy wants to spend. As a senior member of the House Appropriations Committee, Simpson has managed to cover about every square inch of the Second District with federal money – making him practically unbeatable in any election.

Simpson is the one member of Idaho’s congressional delegation who could afford to speak up if, or when, Trump goes off the rails in his second term. But Simpson hasn’t gotten to his lofty position by being a loose cannon. He’s always been a “team player” for the House Republican leadership, and right now the “team” is all for Donald Trump. And with Trump carrying Idaho by staggering numbers, there’s no way that Simpson will go against his constituents.

On the Senate side, there’s no danger of Sens. Mike Crapo and Jim Risch bucking the party line – and for good reason. Much of Trump’s economic agenda will be going through the Senate Finance Committee (chaired by Crapo) and sensitive foreign policy issues will be debated in the Senate Foreign Relations Committee (chaired by Risch).

So, the two Idaho senators have no interest in grandstanding over Trump’s Cabinet nominations or scoring cheap political victories in the early stages of the president’s second term. Risch, especially, has Trump’s ear on foreign policy and Crapo could become a key figure for the new administration on tax and economic policies. The senators would vote for Trump’s selections if they included Kermit the Frog and Miss Piggy.

When Trump takes the oath of office on Jan. 20, he will have a firm grip (if not total control) over all three branches of government – executive, legislative and judicial. He’ll have his loyalists on the executive end, the Republican Congress in his pocket and a judicial system that will abide by his every wish. It will be as close to a dictatorship as anything I’ve seen since the Lyndon Johnson and the “Great Society” years – which in 1965 was a dictatorship in the making, but collapsed in the end because of the Vietnam war.

Time will tell where Trump’s power carries him, or what he thinks his election mandate means. His early nominations suggest that he’s out for revenge against those who oppose him – which serves notice to Democrats who impeached him, disobedient Republicans and even the media. During the next four years, I imagine that Trump’s world will portray Jan. 6 as a moment of patriotic honor, instead of the ugly historical scar that it was.

But our congressional delegation says everything will be fine. The borders will be under control, the nation’s economy will be booming, the United States will have respect globally and America will be great again – just as Trump has promised.

I sure hope our congressional representatives are correct. God help us if they’re not.

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

 

Those in my line of work who are covering the transition zoo in Washington would do well not to stick a microphone under Sen. Jim Risch’s chin.

He’s not going to give great sound bites on President-elect Trump’s Cabinet selections – even the ones he might like. Here’s what he says about Rep. Elisa Stefanik of New York, Trump’s pick for United Nations ambassador: “She’ll be fine.”

Risch is more vocal about his support for Sen. Marco Rubio, a longtime friend and colleague on foreign relations, for secretary of state. Risch says he’s working with the leading Democrat of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee to get Rubio confirmed on Day 1 of Trump’s second term.

“Next to (Sen.) Mike Crapo, Marco is the best friend I have here,” Risch says. “We know each other well and I know his thought process. He influences me in that regard, and I influence him.”

So, it’s a nice path forward for Risch, who soon will chair the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. Risch, who was the committee chair during Trump’s first term, has a long-standing working relationship with the president and one of his best friends on Capitol Hill will be the secretary of state.

But don’t expect him to comment about more controversial Cabinet selections – such as Pete Hegseth (defense), Robert F. Kennedy Jr. (health and human services), or Linda McMahon (education). Risch has indicated that he will vote for all of the above, and more, if those nominations come to the floor. Until then, he’ll leave the vetting, fighting and mike drops to others.

“I have my hands full on my committee,” Risch says. Rubio and Stefanik are two high-profile confirmations before his committee, but there also are numerous confirmations through the state department and ambassadorships to almost 200 countries. Risch wants to see appointments in place early and immediately focus on the business at hand.

“It’s hard to put into words how much better I feel about (the new administration),” Risch says. “I watched what the (Biden) administration has done, and they fell so short in so many areas. The most obvious one was the disastrous way they handled the end of the Afghanistan war – clearly, clearly encouraging others to take advantage of that.”

Trump’s second presidency, Risch says, will be much like the first – with some twists. “It’s a foregone conclusion that Trump will seal off the border immediately and I think the burst of spending that Democrats did that caused the inflation – that’s going to stop, obviously. And you are going to see a more stable world because Trump is a strong leader and others are not willing to challenge us, or him.”

Risch, who has made some comprehensive recommendations for dealing with China, should have a friendly audience with President Trump.

“I don’t think so, I know so,” Risch says. “Biden was not interested in my views on that. The first thing we need to do (toward China) is to show strength. We also need to convince, not only the American people, but China, that we understand the challenges – whether it’s militarily, economically or culturally – and that we are up to meeting those challenges.”

Risch, an advocate for supporting Ukraine’s efforts against Russia, says that Trump may have the ultimate solution for ending that conflict.

“I saw him in the debate when he said he would end it on Day 1,” Risch says. “This is a man who has a habit of doing what he says and he’s probably one of the few people on the planet who has a relationship with the leaders of those countries. I’ve seen him use the most powerful weapon, the telephone, and he’s very effective. He feels that he can end this war, and I say give him the space to do it.”

There will be many other hot global issues coming before Risch’s committee, including continued support to Israel, which the senator enthusiastically supports. Iran, NATO and ongoing issues with Russia also will be part of more than a few high-level discussions.

This time, Risch – as the committee chair – will be working with a president that he supports, opposed to sending out releases and commentaries blasting the administration. So, let’s party like it’s … 2017.

“It’s déjà vu all over again,” says Risch.

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

 

In the 40 years that I have known Sen. Mike Crapo, he has never bragged about his having great power or influence – even when he was in high-level political positions.

Crapo has the reputation of a workhorse. He’s more comfortable diving into the minutia of complicated tax legislation, opposed to being a star attraction at a MAGA rally. He gladly leaves it to others to be the “talking heads” on Sunday network news shows.

Basically, he’s the same guy I interviewed some 40 years ago – the young Idaho Falls lawyer and state senator who talked about how he might like to serve in Congress one day. That day came when he won the Senate District House seat in 1992, then moved to the Senate in 1999 – facing little more than token opposition along the way.

The senator is 73 years old, an age when politicians, and other folks, start thinking about winding down their careers, if they haven’t done so. But there will be no “slowing down” with President-elect Donald Trump moving into the White House and Republicans winning both chambers of Congress. Crapo, the fourth longest-serving Republican in the Senate, is entering the peak of his political career – and the height of power and influence.

In January, he takes over as chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, the first Republican chair in 24 years not named Orin Hatch or Chuck Grassley. Crapo chaired the Senate’s banking committee during Trump’s first term as president, but there’s more meat that goes with finance. Crapo, the committee’s ranking member for the last four years, welcomes the challenge.

“I think the finance committee has the broadest jurisdiction of any committee in Congress,” he told me.

The committee presides over federal tax policy, Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, and the implementation and enforcement of trade agreements. It’s all mind-numbing detailed stuff on which Crapo thrives.

One of the committee battles will be the extension of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, which Republicans passed through in 2017 and part of it is scheduled to expire at the end of next year. The task may be easier with Republicans controlling both chambers of Congress. That means Republicans can pass some select bills through the Senate by simple majority, opposed to the normal two-thirds vote. The tax-cut bill is a prime candidate for “reconciliation.”

Democratic critics say that the tax cuts caused the deficit to skyrocket while benefiting billionaires. Crapo rejects those arguments.

“That’s what was said in 2017, and those arguments are false,” Crapo said. “If it’s allowed to expire, it would be a $4 trillion tax increase on Americans. The Biden administration says that it benefits mostly big business. But $2 trillion is for those who make under $400,000 and multiple hundreds of billions are for small businesses and other entities.”

And, he says, if taxes go up, then so do consumer costs.

“It’s not going to increase the deficit, even though the joint tax committee scores it that way. The committee does not take into account the growth in the economy that will occur with a pro-growth tax policy,” Crapo said.

There will be other high-profile issues before the committee, including Trump’s plan to raise tariffs. Republicans who don’t like Obamacare will have a chance to put their stamp on health insurance and prescription drugs.

“If we get those right, it will be a repeat of Trump’s first presidency when we had the strongest economy of our lifetimes,” Crapo says. “Jobs, benefits, wages, unemployment and almost everything were at positive record levels.”

On the flip side, getting those issues “wrong” could produce much different election results two years from now in the mid-term elections. So, there is pressure and responsibility that goes with Crapo’s new job. The finance committee could serve as a springboard for Trump’s policies as well as a measure of the Republican Party’s ability to effectively govern.

Along the way, there will be plenty of drama – as seen with some of his early cabinet picks (Crapo has given a friendly nod to Robert F. Kennedy Jr. to head Health and Human Services). Democrats who are reeling from their crushing election losses will be vocal with their opposition. It will be a rocky four years, to say the least.

Up to now, Crapo has managed to maintain a relatively low profile. We’ll see how long that continues, considering the burning issues that will come before his committee.