Idaho's elections and the integrity of
them was a focal point and major focal
point of the 2022 campaign season.
A whole lot of hand wringing despite little
to no evidence we needed to be concerned.
Yet heading into the 2023 legislative session
there was expectation we would be seeing a
bevy of ballot related bills and we are.
A pair of them were brought forth today,
one of those having to do with
private money being used to pay
for state and local elections.
So chief political reporter Joe Paris,
is this something Idaho has to worry about?
Well Brian, I want to be. Very clear.
The answer to your question is no,
and I heard some chatter about this today
and wanted to explain the proposed law and
why it's being talked about by lawmakers.
House Bill 11 very simply prohibits
the state of Idaho from using private
monies to administer an election,
and previously lawmakers
did a prohibition on that,
but it only applied to local governments.
Now you may be asking at home,
is this something that's been done
in the past of the state of Idaho,
get offers or get private money to
run elections? The answer is no,
but there is one single instance.
Where private money was used recently
and Secretary of State Phil Mcgrane,
who spoke on behalf of the bill
and committee today.
He explains the controversy that
they're working to avoid,
one you may recall.
All of what House Bill 11 stems from
is during the 2020 election where we
were in the thick of the pandemic.
Absentee balloting was off the charts.
There was some private grant money
that was used to help add pay for PPE,
help, pay for some additional pay
for poll workers and other things
that was used across the country.
That raised a lot of questions about
the funding of elections and whatnot.
It's very simple.
Elections really are at their core,
a government function and simple
a house bill.
And says that it should be
paid for by the government,
whether that's by the local government,
by the state or the federal government,
that our elections should be just solely
contained within government functions.
And so this bill was just a simple cleanup
bill to make sure that that happens.
So to be clear, Mr.
Mcgrane says that he thinks private
money has no business in elections.
So you won't be seeing the
Idaho election season sponsored
by Coca-Cola, Mcgrane says.
This is something that can break
trust in the very system itself.
Absolutely. One of the biggest
challenges we have right now is building
confidence and trust in our elections.
And if there's any notion that somebody
has undue influence somehow in the process,
that is a real concern.
And So what this bill does,
it just closes one spot in the law to say,
you know, we shouldn't have an
election sponsored by Coca-Cola or
some other brand or anything else,
not that we ever would and
not that it has happened.
It's just one of those Peace of Mind to
give people confidence in the process.
So House Bill 11 passed.
To the full house.
And there's a great chance to let up on
the governor's desk in the coming weeks.
So before you get confused on that one,
that's all House Bill 11 is all about.
Now, another piece of election
legislation being talked about
today in the same committee,
a little more controversial and
drawing some great discussion.
House Bill 58 aims to remove March
and August elections for school bond
levies and instead consolidate those
into May and November election cycles.
So two different camps on this one.
Some believe that the March and
August school elections are
obscure and not publicized well,
so if you don't have a kid in school.
You may not know what's going on if
they're having a vote on bonds and
levies that could increase taxes.
They also come with the cost
of running more elections.
Now, others argue that getting
rid of March and August elections
will result in important bonds and
levies getting lost on the ballot
during busy political cycles,
and that those levies and bonds,
they're crucial to just
keeping schools running well.
Both sides spoke out in public testimony,
but first let's hear from Jeff Dillon,
Superintendent of the Wilder School District.
We believe in the Wilder School district,
that number one. We get lost.
In the narrative of the ballot in November.
We believe this situation leads us to
have a very visible and transparent
opportunity to meet and be visible
with our Community so we could
be the only item on the ballot.
So we have the ability to communicate
specifically the needs that we have
for our special education students
and the current technical needs
that we have in our Community.
The point that maybe hasn't been.
Conveyed enough here today is
the money savings that cutting
out those extra elections.
Has in Boundary County last year,
if my numbers are correct,
we spent somewhere in the neighborhood
of $30,000 extra running extra
elections for bonds and levies.
I'm not necessarily opposed to paying
my fair share for a levy or a bond,
but I feel like voters aren't
actually ad or equally represented
in those off elections.
So all this brings me to a point that
was brought up during the race for
Secretary of State this past fall.
You remember it in that race.
We saw comments and messages from
you at home asking if candidates for
Secretary of State would implement
a voter guide system for Idaho.
Voters for years have been asking that
the Secretary of State's office published
a guide about issues and candidates,
like many other states around us,
already do well to debate on
school elections and the cycle.
Secretary Mcgrain has this note for you.
One
of my goals as Secretary of State is actually
to provide more information to voters.
One of the ideas I'll be proposing
later this session is a voter guide
to get information out about both hey
and election is coming up and here's
what you're going to be voting on.
So if you want to do your research,
here's information you can do.
Use to find out about the candidates,
to find out about the issues.
And that was one of the key
things I heard in today's debate,
was a combination of turnout but
also information and education.
There was a few citizens who
testified and said.
We need to make voters informed about
what's coming up and hopefully as
Secretary I can help participate in that.
So we will wait and watch on that idea.
But it seemed to be very popular
when I spoke with voters last fall.
But back to the bill at hand,
House Bill 58, Brian that passed out
a committee on a party lines vote and
now heads to the full House election.
Related items will likely be popping
up a lot in the next few weeks
and the burden was shifted to local
municipalities by the way because of
this few years ago by the legislature.
So now they have to bear the brunt of
that with these local levies and bonds.
Going forward. So that's kind of
the situation, right. Thanks, Joe.