Issues large, small filled legislative session

The 2016 legislative year is finished and it is a pleasure to be home. As I recall from last year, it will take a while to unwind from the intense focus we experience for three months in Boise, but the return to a “normal” life is welcome. The 2016 session was a busy one for me, working on issues both large and small that will benefit our state and district.

I was happy to work closely with Sen. Shawn Keough, Rep. Heather Scott, and the Idaho Department of Water Resources in advancing a plan for the Outlet Bay Dam and other important projects at Priest Lake.

With input from our local school districts, I was able to promote legislation that will directly impact District 1, such as a rural education center, and the Innovation Schools Act.

After hearing from our local veteran organizations, I had legislation drawn up that would promote awareness of their service and sacrifice.

I successfully carried four bills (three Senate, one House) on the House floor and debated various others.

I was asked to be chairman of a sub-committee in each of my three House committees. One of the most important pieces of legislation, in my opinion, was HJR5. HJR5 is a

call for an amendment to the Idaho Constitution that would affirm the legislative branch's ability to have oversight of rules made by the executive branch. This idea was a proposed constitutional amendment last election cycle and failed to gain the required 2/3 majority need for ratification. There was a great deal of confusion surrounding the composition of the amendment that caused many on both sides to not be certain of what they were voting for. Competing analyses were circulated, email campaigns went into effect, and no clear direction was arrived at, even for those who were paying close attention. The new proposed amendment, which passed through both bodies by a count of 96-4-5, clarifies the language so that there is no doubt as to what is being proposed. It reads as follows:

“Section 29. The Legislature may review any administrative rule to ensure it is consistent with the legislative intent of the statute that the rule was written to interpret, prescribe, implement or enforce. After that review, the Legislature may approve or reject, in whole or in part, any rule as provided by law. Legislative approval, or rejection of a rule is not subject to gubernatorial veto under section 10, article IV, of the constitution of the state of Idaho.”

The necessity of this amendment cannot be understated. As I have written before, we are experiencing an abridgement of our proscribed separation of powers. It is often observed within the Capitol, and by those who watch closely, that there are only two branches of government, the executive and the judicial. The legislative branch does vote on the bills, but the final outcome is frequently left to the agencies of the executive branch, who promulgate the rules, and have the authority of implementation. This outcome does not always concur with what the Legislature intended and legislative recourse is limited. We do experience the ability to review rules each year, but it takes both bodies to reject a rule. While a rejection does occur occasionally, it is rare.

Far from being a power grab by the Legislature, this is an effort to protect the citizen by keeping the law making authority in the hands of their elected officials, as opposed to hired personnel, or appointed bureaucrats, over who they have no control. I will continue to promote this proposed amendment in future editorials.

Thank you for allowing me to represent District 1 this past legislative term. I am humbled by the opportunity, and appreciate the diversity of opinion that we share here in the most beautiful part of Idaho. I look forward to speaking with more of you in the upcoming election cycle, and hope to be found worthy or your trust once more.

Lord bless.

Rep. Sage G. Dixon represents Bonner and Boundary counties in District 1B.