District 21 Republican Sues Republican Chair

Last year's District 21 Senate challenger and Republican district chairman, Steven Ricks, has filed a libel suit against Idaho State Republican Chairman Norm Semanko, in response to a letter Semanko sent out regarding a letter Ricks sent out as part of his campaign.

As described here last December, Ricks sent out a letter before May's primary that some people believe affected the results of the primary and caused the loss of one of the incumbent House representatives in our district. Ricks, as well as being the chair of the district, was also one of the primary challengers supported in the letter, which was sent out over the names of Republican precinct committeemen in the district. The letter -- which was identical regardless of the person who signed it -- noted that it was “gladly paid for” by the Ricks campaign. Ricks unsuccessfully ran against incumbent state Senator Russ Fulcher in the primary, losing by 149 votes.

"[T]he Idaho Republican Party has a long-standing policy of abstaining from endorsing candidates in the primary,” Semanko said in his September 17 letter. “Your actions caused some voters to believe the state party had taken the extraordinary step of rescinding this policy, which was not the case.”

According to an article on the lawsuit in the Idaho Statesman, Ricks seeks a jury trial and damages of more than $10,000, saying that Semanko exposed him to public contempt or ridicule by impugning his honesty, integrity or reputation. He also names the Idaho GOP State Central Committee as a defendant.

The lawsuit appears to center around a statement in Semanko's September letter to Ricks that the May letter from the Ricks campaign used the state GOP logo without authorization, saying it was trademarked. Ricks' lawsuit includes a certification by Idaho Secretary of State Ben Ysursa that the GOP logo is not trademarked in Idaho.

This also means, incidentally, that anyone else can apparently use the state GOP logo in any way they like.

Jarvis Votes to Raise Gas Tax

According to the Idaho Statesman, Representative Rich Jarvis was one of 27 legislators (and one of only 9 of the Southwest Idaho legislators) voting to raise the fuel tax by 7 cents per gallon.

The measure lost, 43-27.

Most legislators said they voted against the tax increase because they thought it was a bad time to raise taxes and that they were following their constituents' wishes.

Jarvis did not say why he voted for the bill.

Fulcher Favors Religious Discrimination?

In last week's Senate committee hearing to decide whether to print a bill making it illegal to discriminate against homosexuals in employment, education, and housing, Senator Russ Fulcher was quoted in the Idaho Statesman as indicating he was not in favor of such protections for religious beliefs, either.

"Senator LeFavour looks at this as a genetic difference and others, including myself, look at this as a behavioral difference," Fulcher said. "Given that, the debate becomes, 'Do you look at making provisions based on behavior?' "

However, since religion is also a behavioral difference, this indicates that Fulcher is also not in favor of the existing laws protecting people from being fired based on their religion.

For example, from Idaho's formation as a state in 1890, a law was on the books forbidding LDS members from holding office, or even from voting. That discriminatory law was not removed from Idaho code until 1982.

If discrimination based on behavior is allowed, as Senator Fulcher suggests, that raises the spectre that such religious discrimination will again be permitted in Idaho. 

District 21 Town Hall Meeting with Legislators

It hasn't been well publicized, but there's another District 21 Town Hall Meeting with legislators tonight at Reed School at Linder and Deer Flat, 5:30-7 pm.

Education Committee Shoots Down Jarvis Dropout Bill

After a two-hour debate, members of the Idaho House Education Committee voted to kill Representative Rich Jarvis' bill that would have raised the legal dropout age from 16 to 18. The final vote was 9-8, with committee chair Representative Bob Nonini, R-Coeur d'Alene, breaking the tie and casting the dissenting vote.

According to articles by Brian Murphy in the Idaho Statesman and Sarah Wire in the Associated Press, dissenters were concerned about the bill's $11 million cost and whether it would actually be effective. State Superintendent of Public Instruction Tom Luna, who did not testify, told the Statesman that he supported the arguments that making schools “rigorous and relevant” will be more successful at retaining students than compelling them to remain in school.  

Rep. Pete Nielsen, R- Mountain Home, told the committee it is better to provide students with educational choices such as alternative schools than to force them to attend traditional classes, the AP said.

Hearings Set for Dropout Age Bill

Hearings on Representative Rich Jarvis' bill to force students to go to school until they're 18 by raising the legal dropout age from 16 will be held on Wednesday,  02/11/09 at 9:00 A.M. in room 148 in the Capitol Annex-East Side.

House Bill 58, which does nothing to provide more services or resources to students, including at the early age where intervention would actually be helpful, is expected to cost a minimum of $11 million just in daily payments to the school districts for the approximately 2,000 youth who would be affected, at the same time that schools are being forced to cut $62 million due to the economic situation.  It also does not expand the truancy court system that would actually enforce the bill.

The bill also limits parental choice by not allowing parents to give their youth permission to drop out at 16, and in fact could result in them being fined $1000 and thrown in jail for six months if their teenagers are declared "habitually truant."

Moreover, there is no indication that it will actually be successful in its goal to gain more high-school graduates. Of the 12 states with better high-school graduation rates than Idaho, 7 of them allow students to drop out at 16, and of all the states Jarvis cites as having a dropout age of 18, only one, Utah, has a better graduation rate than Idaho. Last year, the Minnesota legislature defeated a similar bill when even its supporters admitted that simply raising the graduation age wouldn't solve the dropout problem.

'Protecting' Idaho's Schoolchildren?

Senator Russ Fulcher sponsored, then postponed for a day, a bill that would eliminate one loophole in public education while enshrining another in state code.

Attendees at the recent "Keeping the Promise" Dropout Summit, held in Nampa earlier this month, learned that the Health and Welfare Department could not intervene with parents who were keeping their children out of school, because "educational neglect" was not recognized as a category. Fulcher's bill, S1017, remedies that, creating the category "without proper education" and allowing H&W to intervene.

However, Fulcher's bill also adds that a chid who is being "privately instructed at home by his parent or guardian" is considered to be properly educated -- which completely removes any teeth from the bill; a parent charged with not sending their child to school can simply say they're being homeschooled and get let off.

While the majority of parents who homeschool are doing so legitimately, some tell the district their children are being homeschooled without actually doing any instruction. Due to the way Idaho’s homeschooling law is written, any parent can say their child is homeschooled and there is no oversight, said Nick Smith, deputy superintendent as the State Department of Education at the "Keeping the Promise" summit. “Our hands are really tied,” he said. “I receive calls all the time from parents who’ve just moved to Idaho from other states,” where people are asking how to register and get a curriculum. “I have to explain, we don’t have registration, we don’t provide a curriculum, we do not regulate, we don’t oversee the process at all,” he said. “I don’t see any legislation discussed to change that.” Senator Dean Mortimer (R-Idaho Falls), who has served on the Senate Education Committee for two years, agreed, saying there was “no political will in the legislature” on that issue.

During debate on the Senate floor, Fulcher decided to postpone his motion for one legislative day to further discuss the issue with "stakeholders," whom he did not identify.

'No, You Can't Have Your Medicine'

Imagine going to the grocery store to buy bacon, and having the checker tell you, "Oh, pork products are against my religion, so I can't sell you that."

Or imagine going to the drug store for your blood pressure or diabetes medicine, and being told, "According to my religion, you should be curing that yourself with the power of your mind, so I'm not going to sell that to you."

Now, Senator Russ Fulcher is working on a bill with a faith-based organization to allow pharmacists to make just that sort of religious-based determination on emergency contraception.

Emergency contraception uses the same chemical that's in birth-control pills, but at a higher dose. Used within five days of a sexual act -- including rape or a condom failure -- it can help keep a woman from getting pregnant. It was approved by the Food and Drug Administration for over-the-counter sales in 2006.

According to the Idaho Statesman, Fulcher is working with Idaho Chooses Life, an anti-abortion religious organization that, deliberately or because it doesn't know any better, considers emergency contraception to be the same thing as an RU-486 chemical abortion (which is administered up to seven weeks into a pregnancy).

Fulcher said in the Statesman the idea would need to be run by the state attorney general's office to make sure it wouldn't violate state or federal laws before it can be brought before the Legislature. He did not say whether he would include a provision requiring the pharmacy to have someone else who could provide the person's medicine.

Such a bill would bring a particular religious belief into the lives of everyday Idahoans, interfere with a person's medical decisions about themselves and their families, and create a slippery slope. Should a pharmacist be able to refuse to sell someone insulin because they should pray to be healed? Should a grocery store clerk refuse to sell Nicoderm because according to their religion, you shouldn't be smoking or chewing anyway?

In short, such a bill would let a pharmacy allow its staff members to decide for themselves which medicine you deserve to get.

Why Jarvis' Dropout Plan Won't Work -- and What Will

The Idaho Statesman is reporting that Rich Jarvis is proposing to spend $11 million by forcing students to stay in high school until they're 18 (unless they graduate, presumably). The new law would help promote higher graduation rates, lower crime rates, and boost the economy because high school graduates earn more money, pay more taxes, and are less likely to spend time in jail, he said in an earlier version of the Statesman story.

The move is not a surprise; in fact, Jarvis had said during the campaign that he wanted to make high school graduation mandatory. Apparently he realized that while he can force the horse to come to water, he can't make it drink, and instead is sticking to just making the students stay enrolled until they're 18 rather than trying to force them to pass.

Of course,  having more kids graduate from high school is a laudable goal. But this is a feel-good proposal that substitutes a law for actually solving a problem -- if indeed it's a problem at all -- that goes against current thinking, and which may actually make Idaho schools worse.

Let's start with the fact that it takes away parental choice. Some legislators have voted against kindergarten and pre-kindergarten education, saying giving parents that option takes away their parental choice.  If legislators really support parental choice, they would continue to allow parents and students to make the choice to leave school at 16, if they decided it was best for the student.

Indeed, should the law pass, parents could be charged with a misdemeanor if their teenagers are declared to be "habitually truant" and don't attend school. 

A copy of Jarvis' proposed legislation is not yet available, so it isn't clear what the $11 million it will cost includes other than the per-student amount the department pays schools. Does it include enforcement? How, exactly, will this be enforced? How many staff people will it take to make sure the kids come to school, and to charge the parents with crimes if they don't?

(Jarvis, in fact, doesn't understand why the new legislation would cost anything. “We’re putting another student in the classroom. We already have a teacher. We already have desks. We have the textbooks, heat, lights. Where is the expense?” he's quoted as saying in the Statesman.)

 It also isn't clear how a group of disgruntled students will end up graduating, unless the schools begin passing students regardless of their performance, which will end up cheapening the value of a high school diploma for all Idaho students.  Or will the students get a wink and a nod that they are being "homeschooled," giving the impression that homeschooling is a way to get out of the requirements and making it harder for those families who actually do homeschool to be treated legitimately?

Moreover, having a group of potentially disruptive 16- and 17-year-olds in a high school could be distracting, and perhaps even dangerous, for other students, making it more difficult for the students to get an education who want to be there. What would having a group of poorly performing, unmotivated students do to Idaho's compliance rate with federal standards such as No Child Left Behind?

In this budget year, when schools are already facing having their budgets cut by more than 5 percent, do we want to spend $11 million to force students to attend school who don't want to be there? What more will be cut from the education budget to provide this $11 million?

Did Jarvis even talk to the Department of Education about his proposal? According to the December 2008 newsletter from the Idaho Business Coalition for Education Excellence, State Superintendent of Public Instruction Tom Luna told the group in September that one of his top three priorities was "a K-10 system in which students pass a comprehensive exam and, if proficient, go on to community college or a professional technical school. A student could stay in high school for grades 11 and 12 to take remedial courses or advanced placement/college prep courses." How does this fit with Jarvis' proposal to force students to stay in school until they're 18?

The problem is that Jarvis thinks that slapping a rule, forcing students to stay in school until 18, guarantees that they will learn, and will get a high school diploma. It doesn't work that way. 

If Jarvis' real goal is to increase the number of high school graduates in Idaho, as he claims, there's better ways to do it. Instead of making a new law and adding to the amount of government, how about finding out what actually makes students drop out, and solve those problems?

First, Idaho's rate of high school graduates is pretty good. As of 2006, the most recent year for which numbers are available, Idaho ranks 13th in terms of students graduating high school. 78.7 percent of students graduate from high school. And the preliminary figures for 2007-2008, as given by the Statesman, are even lower than those for 2006-2007.

Jarvis said that 18 states have already required students to stay in school until 18, but if you look at the statistics, states that have implemented those laws don't necessarily have better rates of graduating from high school. New Jersey, for example, has the highest rate of graduation, with 86.3 percent, but it lets students drop out at 16. 

In fact, of the 12 states with higher graduation rates than Idaho, only Wisconsin and Utah require students to stay in school until 18, while Nebraska, Arkansas, and Pennsylvania require students to stay in school until 17. But New Jersey, Iowa, Minnesota, South Dakota, Vermont, Montana, and North Dakota all have better graduation rates than Idaho, and all allow students to drop out at 16. 

If the goal is really to increase the number of high school graduates, then the solution is to keep students motivated to stay in school. If they can't -- perhaps for financial reasons, perhaps because they don't do well in a class situation -- then how about increasing the number of alternative high schools, perhaps at night or online?

Studies such as Robert Putnam's Bowling Alone have also shown that states with a great deal of "social capital" -- that is, trust, networks, and reciprocity within a child's family, peer group, school, and community -- have schools with higher rates of graduation. If Idaho wants to improve its rate of graduation, it could encourage citizens to take part in actions that improve social capital, such as increasing the turnout in presidential elections, attending more community and neighborhood clubs, increasing the number of nonprofit organizations, or going to church more often. 

There's a community forum in Nampa on January 30th called Keeping the Promise that talks about just that. "If we are to be successful on behalf of at-risk children, we must find a way to provide them with lifelong connections with caring and supportive adults, who can help them transition to the workforce, achieve their higher education goals, and deal with the issues of life when they happen," according to the description of the keynote. While there is one workshop on whether the age should be raised, all the others are about actually looking at the problem.

But this all requires work, and thought -- much more thought than simply slapping people with a new rule and more government -- which isn't even as likely to work.

District Loses Power in Two Key Committees

Senator Russ Fulcher has won a vote in a secret Republican ballot to become the caucus chair, replacing Senator Brad Little of Emmett, who has been appointed lieutenant governor. 

However, in gaining that position, Fulcher gave up his seat on the Joint Finance-Appropriations Committee -- where, with Representative Cliff Bayer, he had helped to craft a compromise bill to reduce the tax on food in Idaho -- as well as his vice-chairmanship on the Education committee. 

Now, Fulcher -- a commercial real estate developer -- is just a member of the Education committee, and was also named a member of the State Affairs committee. Issues the State Affairs committee worked on in the 2008 legislative session included closing the Republican primary to independents, the business of the Idaho Lottery and Idaho Racing Commission, and liquor licenses. Bayer is now one of only three Treasure Valley representatives on JFAC.

In addition, because Little was known as a moderate voice in the Senate, there is some concern that Fulcher will take the Senate in a more conservative direction, both financially and socially. Conservative gadfly Bryan Fischer called Fulcher, compared to Little, "a significant trade-up for the conservative movement in Idaho, and gives conservatives another reliable, principled vote." 

Fischer is promoting legislation this year that would make it more difficult for a couple with children to get divorced, even in a situation with physical or substance abuse. He did not say whether he expected Fulcher to support this legislation.

District 21 Legislators Hold Citizen Forum

District 21 legislators held a neighborhood meeting in Kuna earlier this month where they told more than 50 people that they saw the current economic crisis as an “opportunity,” because it would help them to cut waste. 

Some members of the audience, such as one woman describing how disabled children were having their training cut from 30 to 22 hours, and who were facing their providers going out of business because the cut in hours wouldn’t pay for the overhead, did not seem to see it as an “opportunity.” 

“I hope you take back to the Legislature how unhappy people are here, or there’s going to be anarchy in this country,” said one man. “There are some unhappy campers in this state.”

Faced with that concern, some of the legislators’ responses struck an off note. In response to the woman concerned about cuts in training for disabled children, Senator Russ Fulcher, who hosted the event, said, “Should the state or family have control? What is the responsibility of the state? When I’m confronted with state vs. family, I’m going to go with the family most of the time. That’s where control should be,” as though by asking for help in making their disabled children productive citizens parents were somehow giving up their responsibility as parents.

It was reminiscent of former legislator Bill Sali, who as a member of the House Health & Welfare committee refused to increase funding for nursing homes, saying it would deprive people of the opportunity to take care of their aging, sick parents themselves at home.

One small business owner encouraged the legislators to look beyond saving money to helping businesses make money, noting that a number of Idaho companies actually had their best year last year, and that legislators should be asking those companies what they would need to help them increase their revenue. While big companies such as Micron are given tax breaks, small business is not getting anything, he said.

Fulcher encouraged constituents to trust him to do the right thing because, due to Idaho’s part-time citizen legislature, he isn’t a career politician. “None of us make our living [as legislators],” said Fulcher, who since joining the Legislature has quit his job as a technology executive to become a commercial real-estate developer. Legislators’ pay – which was increased by 5 percent in the last legislative session, from $16,116 to $16,921 – is “nothing more than a stipend,” he said.

“We don’t have an incentive to help special interests,” Fulcher said, adding later, “I don’t have any motivation for doing something wrong or stupid.”

Representative Cliff Bayer, who was also present, said the state would be looking for “novel” funding approaches, such as the Sales Tax Anticipated Revenue (STAR) program – which lets developers decide which roads to expand based on their needs and their willingness to front the money, but which the region then has to pay back by giving them a 60% break on their sales taxes.

A number of constituents brought up annexation reform, a sore point in the district. “Idaho ranks third from the bottom in ethics in holding public office,” said one man. “Every time we’ve submitted a bill to kill forced annexation, it gets shot down by the Contractors Association.”

In response to some citizens saying they had been treated disrespectfully by legislative committees for not knowing the right way to testify, the legislators said they would “help you through the ropes” if people called them up a week or so before a hearing.

The legislators deserve credit for holding the forum in the first place. A number of issues raised by the audience really fell into the purview of the counties, and newly elected County Commissioner Sharon Ullman, who was in the audience, promised to have similar forums for the county, even if she was the only commissioner who showed up.

Deciding How Much Money We Have

Today the Joint Economic Outlook and Revenue Assessment Committee meets to help determine how much money it thinks the state of Idaho will make for the 2010 fiscal year -- that is, between July 2009 and June 2010.  

Typically the committee hears testimony from a number of economists and representatives from various industries. For example, it was hearing about the slowdown in construction last year that led the committee to be conservative about how much revenue to expect in 2008. 

This committee then makes a recommendation to the full Legislature about what to use as a target figure for revenue. It may or may not agree with what the Governor chooses.

Cliff Bayer, who is also on the budgeting committee (which spends the money) is co-chair of this committee. 

All the material for the committee is here: <http://legislature.idaho.gov/budget/EORAC/index.htm>

The material for last year's committee is here: <http://www.legislature.idaho.gov/budget/EORAC/2008/index.htm>

To watch the hearings streaming on the Internet, go to http://www.idahoptv.org/leglive/> 

You can also click on the link to the right in the blog roll.

Something amusing is that each legislator on the committee makes a prediction about the year's revenues (on a percentage basis) and the following year, those predictions are looked at to see who was the most accurate.  

District 21 Meeting

In preparation for the 2009 Legislative Session, which starts on Monday with the "State of the State" message by Governor C.L. "Butch" Otter, District 21 state Senator Russ Fulcher will be hosting a town meeting from 5:30 to 7 p.m. on Thursday, Jan. 8, at Reed Elementary School, 1670 N. Linder Road in Kuna. Special guests will include Legislative District 21 House Representatives Cliff Bayer and Rich Jarvis. Bring your ideas and comments.

Why it's hosted by Fulcher, with the representatives (including the newly elected Jarvis) only as "special guests," is unclear. Perhaps it's because Fulcher was the only one who was unchallenged in the November election?

Typically, these legislative meetings have been held at a school on the eastern end of Amity; Fulcher is holding this meeting in Kuna in response to constituent request.

Southwest Ada Neighborhood Association Meeting

After you go to the legislative meeting, then you can race on down to Victory Road and attend the quarterly Southwest Ada Neighborhood Association meeting.

The primary purpose of SANA is to inform. SANA helps inform people within Southwest Ada County area about issues and events that may affect the life style and property value of people within Southwest Ada County. In particular, the organization is focused on issues around forced annexation.

The meeting will be held at 8201 W. Victory Road, the South Building, at the South Entrance, at 6:45 PM .

As of November 7, 2007, all residents of southwest Ada County are eligible to be full members of SANA.  More specifically, South of I-84 to Snake River; West of Pleasant Valley Road to Ada-Canyon County Line.

Agenda for Thursday, Jan. 8th, 2009 
6:45 PM Open meeting with Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag with introduction of guests. 
7:00 PM Boise City Airport Director, Mr. Richard McConnell. 

• "The Boise Airport- Planning for the Future" 
  
• Accompanied by Mr. Matt Petaja, Airport Facilities Manager. 
  

7:45 PM Chad Dryden, Idaho Statesman Community Reporter. 

• May or may not address the audience. Mr. Dryden is visiting to get acquainted with SANA and its membership.