. At least twice this week, the Governor’s plans were scuttled in favor of a direction favored by the House leadership. And the House leadership—especially Representatives Bedke, Moyle and Roberts--is feeling its oats. They punished the Democrats for voting to kill a bill that the Speaker wanted introduced by not introducing a bill important to Democrats. As someone said, “Real mature.” We knew going into this session that the leadership would be conservative; it is now beginning to show its personality. What is not clear yet is how the Governor is going to play it. Will he remain laissez faire or will he start to play tough?
. On Tuesday, the House Revenue and Taxation Committee, which is stacked with leadership and its cronies, voted down HB80, Governor Otter’s plan to target tax relief to Idaho families with incomes under $50,000. Instead they voted out a tax credit plan that will increase the current $20 credit to $50 for all non-seniors and double the senior credit to $70. HB81 also makes the credit refundable to people who ordinarily would not file a tax return. One of the main concerns about this bill is its price tag of $48 million. Even after it was passed 62-7 through the full House on Thursday few believed that it would remain unchanged through the Senate process. Speculation is that it will be changed to more closely resemble the Governor’s bill or that the credit amount will simply be reduced.
In her excellent blog, Betsy Russell of the Spokesman Review (http://spokesmanreview.com/blogs/boise), does a funny account of the House Revenue and Taxation Committee’s use of the metaphor of the “camel’s nose under the tent. Rev and Tax rejected Otter’s proposal to lower the super majority for votes on creation of community college districts to 60% in the belief that it is the “camel's nose.” Suffice it to say that 10 of the 18 members see lowering the currently required 2/3 majority for any tax vote as an invitation for higher taxes. Business groups, including IACI and the newly formed Chamber Alliance, supported the change, believing it is an important investment in a quality workforce. The Legislature has consistently rejected any attempt to lower the bar for local patrons to vote to raise their own taxes believing instead that a third of the people should decide for the rest of us.
of raising the minimum wage but the Republicans on the House State Affairs Committee had apparently agreed not to print the bill presented by House Democrats to punish them for voting against printing a bill to close election primaries. House Democrats, led by Anne Pasley-Stuart and Shirley Ringo, and Republican Tom Trail tried to introduce a bill on Tuesday to index the minimum wage to the Consumer Price Index as they do in Oregon and Washington. Instead the committee printed a bill that would simply conform Idaho’s minimum wage to whatever the Feds do. Opponents, including Eric Anderson who voted for the bill last year, used the argument that we didn’t know what Congress was going to do, as an excuse for not printing the bill. And then there was Russ Mathews, “If it’s so cool and neat to raise the minimum wage to $7.25, why not $17?” Next did he say “Nanna Nanna Billy Goat”?
http://www.nwfco.org/job_gap.htm released this week to get a fuller picture of the employment scene for low wage workers in Idaho.
. Despite the presence of several Sudanese refugees sitting in the back of the room, some from the Darfur region, Senators and PERSI fund managers were able to talk about “slippery slopes” and getting the same level of return as they are getting from companies invested in Sudan. Members of the Senate Commerce and Human Resources Committee voted 4 –3 on Thursday not to introduce a bill to require the state’s retirement fund to divest itself of the $50 million or so it has in companies with egregious records in Sudan. Alan Winkle, PERSI’s Director, seemed almost proud of the fact, as he blandly explained that the fund had never “interposed other kinds of criteria into their investment decisions” even through the South African apartheid divestment campaigns. Well bully for you! In Colorado, where their Legislature passed a similar bill this week, it was pointed out in debate that more people had been killed in Darfur than are on their pension plan. That’s something to ponder.
The House State Affairs Committee turned down a bill to close primaries so that voters would have to register their party affiliation in order to vote in the May primary elections. It is a feature of Progressive era states like Idaho to place less emphasis on parties and the kind of machine politics that were prevalent at the time. Seems the current crop of politicians, including the Speaker Lawerence Denney who sponsored the bill, are concerned about cross over voting by Democrats. Some speculate that Bill Sali’s nomination was as a result of crossovers. (I doubt it.) Interestingly I was talking to a colleague in Oregon who told me that there some legislators are pushing for open primaries! The grass is always greener.
. On Friday, JFAC heard a presentation from Keith Johnson, the Director of the Department of Administration, about the Governor’s plan to dismantle that agency and contract out more services. Some pieces will be brought into the Governor’s office and other pieces will be spread out to the individual agencies. The committee had a lot of questions. How will procurement be handled? What about Information Technology? What about the state employees? How will they be accommodated? Will it save any money? Stay tuned.
The House Health and Welfare Committee introduced a bill on Thursday sponsored by Representative Bob Nonini of Coeur d’Alene, which would make it a criminal act to use coercion or force to make a woman have an abortion. In the legislation it also prohibits threatening to do “anything that the person does not have the legal right to do against the pregnant woman.” Acording to Nonini this provision could include acts like “a school counselor maybe describing to a young person that by having this baby you have no future.” This is some spooky territory. It is already a crime to use violence and abusive speech to compel a person to do anything. This seems to be criminalizing the more benign act of giving advice.
but I have to agree that banning their use is a little over the top. The State Affairs Committee killed HB75, sponsored by John Rusche of Lewiston, which would have banned their use for political, charitable or business purposes unless a live operator got consent from the person answering the phone to deliver the message. Robocalls are used because they are cheap; adding an operator into the mix would raise the price substantially. Rusche commented that this legislation is popular with the public. I’m sure it is. But sometimes free speech and getting the word out needs to trump popularity.
And how the “victors” write history shapes the way people think. At the end of this week’s Independent Living Conference about 100 people with disabilities descended on the Statehouse to lobby legislators to create Disability History Week in October. Many people with disabilities helped to shape our history but that is rarely mentioned. Even today, showing FDR’s wheelchair at his DC memorial is controversial. Change can happen when people understand history and probably not before.