An explanation of votes taken this session

Below is a brief explanation of the votes questioned by the BCRCC. I consider my votes to represent traditional Republican values of fiscal responsibility, support of business, less regulation, and personal freedom and liberty.

HB 314, AKA the library Bill, would have added a private cause of action against every library in the State. It would have empowered civil actions for a broadly written policy. I don’t want kids exposed to harmful materials or things, nor does anyone else. We have elected library boards and school boards to develop local policy and operations. The GOP platform states government is best when its closest to the people. We also have current obscenity statutes and penalties in Idaho Code.

The bill writer publicly boasted of the costs ($25,000-$200,000) for the lawsuits, then said it would be the insurance companies who ultimately decide on what’s in the libraries. I didn’t see where Idahoans in this District would like to have an insurance company make policy or spend their tax dollars. We are much too self-reliant to go along with this. The constitutional aspects of this bill were unknown as well.

SB 1130, was presented as freedom from vaccination mandates or orders. This a good example of the importance of reading a Bill, maybe twice. The problem is, the bill requires businesses to provide service despite the health concerns of a private business owner or employee. The GOP platform strongly supports the Idaho way of doing business. Our limited regulation State has become a magnet for new business and efficiency. Republican values do not include excessively regulating businesses.

HB 24 is the Launch program for career technical education (CTE). When I knocked on doors, I heard it often, we need to fill skill-based jobs and get our kids prepared for these opportunities. The GOP platform supports CTE in more than one place. The number one reason students say they don’t ‘go on’ to specialized training in financial difficulties. This program helps them with a start. This grant program for in-demand jobs is supported by businesses. Businesses pay state taxes, too. This program is an investment in our future and keeps the spending in Idaho.

HB 180 is a Bill directing the State to invest in Gold and Silver with the state's short-term funds. The problem is the funds the Bill directs for this use are liquid, the equivalent of a checking account. The GOP platform stresses good fiscal management. Current State statute directs Idaho short-term funds into a number of secure accounts, ideal for withdrawal when needed and not subject to rises and falls in the market. The GOP platform does provide direction for the purchase of gold/silver, but this is for private citizens.

HB 293 would have politicized the State Board of Education, and established seven districts for state commissioners. changed their operations and created a new group of salaried, elected officials. The intent of the Bill had merit. I support the concept of regional representation. Our own former Senator (Shawn Keough) serves as a ‘Board of Ed’ Commissioner. Therefore, we have local representation. However, the Bill also increased spending. It expanded the duties of the Superintendent of schools by adding oversight of the colleges and of the State Board of Education itself, as well. The GOP platform notes government must be fiscally responsible.

Educational Savings Accounts were a hot topic this session. I have written about them previously. The GOP platform supports school choice. We expanded the statute for all students this session. Idaho has more school choice than almost any other state. The research I did and the presentations I listened to all led to an increase in government and in spending after the adoption of ESA bills. Establishing another school system didn’t seem conservative to me. Not following our constitutional mandate doesn’t seem like a good strategy either. The best option for our education system is to continue to make improvements.

Medicaid spending … approximately 25% of our residents receive aid from this program. The Bills for Medicaid spending were for budgets, not policy. Enforcement policy (and staffing) and a study of how the Medicaid system works for providers was introduced this past session. However, it didn’t pass.

It is the constitutional responsibility of the Legislature to develop and pass a balanced State budget each year. The budget must follow the States laws. For now, Idaho law includes the Medicaid program. This funding serves as revenue for our healthcare providers, too. Over 70% of the program funding is from the Federal government.

Others have spoken out, saying the Legislature should have cut another $150-300 million from the Medicaid budget, but the truth is the spending is in the statute. If the services are used and the appropriate claims are filed, the spending happens. The Medicaid budget is an estimate of the cost of the services, if the amount is less than the actual spending, a supplemental request for funding will have to be made during the next session.

We likely have friends and neighbors who rely on Medicaid. We owe it to all Idahoans to continually improve this program. That is the conservative, Republican way to address this issue.

In summary, this is a very brief explanation of how I determined how I would vote on these Bills. Determining how to vote is a complicated procedure that requires critical thought and consideration. On each of these bills I believe I used both and stayed in the lane of a responsible Cconservative Republican. Thanks for reading.

Mark Sauter represents Bonner and Boundary counties in the Idaho Legislature in District 1A. He can be reached at msauter@house.idaho.gov.