Without a guiding script, Idaho Legislature's budget committee strays from voting procedures
Idaho Legislature Budget and Policy Analyst France Lippett gives a presentation to the Joint Finance-Appropriations Committee at the State Capitol building on Jan. 23, 2024. JFAC co-chairs Sen. Scott Grow, R-Eagle, (center) and Rep. Wendy Horman, R-Idaho Falls (right) are leading the meeting. (Otto Kitsinger for Idaho Capital Sun)
The Idaho Legislature's powerful budget committee appeared to deviate again from the new voting procedures that have already created confusion and division in their wake.
The Joint Finance-Appropriations Committee, or JFAC, on Wednesday attempted to send a failed motion to the Idaho House of Representatives – one week after committee leaders said there is no mechanism to send failed motions or bills to the Idaho House.
The committee co-chairs told the Idaho Capital Sun they rely on a written script to guide them when there is confusion, and they both forgot to bring the script Wednesday.
JFAC is a powerful legislative committee that sets every budget for every state agency and department. In that regard, JFAC is arguably the most important committee in the entire Idaho Legislature.
Whether it's funding for public schools, money to maintain state parks, funding to pay Idaho State Police troopers or money to fight wildfires on state lands, JFAC must sign off.
SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
For decades, JFAC voted together as a 20-member committee made up of both representatives and senators, and it was clear that motions and budgets required a simple majority of the full committee to pass and advance.
But over the course of the past several years JFAC's two co-chairs, Sen. Scott Grow, R-Eagle, and Rep. Wendy Horman, R-Idaho Falls, have implemented a series of major changes to JFAC's daily schedule, budget-setting procedures and voting procedures.
Idaho Legislature's budget committee openly feuds over new budget procedures
Grow and Horman said the changes increase transparency and accountability and ensure there is more budget buy-in at the committee level before budgets advance to the full Idaho House of Representatives and Idaho Senate.
But during the 2025 legislative session, JFAC members and House Speaker Mike Moyle, a Star Republican who is not a member of JFAC, have publicly feuded over JFAC's voting and budget procedures.
Some JFAC members and legislators – and former legislators and other community members – have criticized JFAC for passing major tax cuts and budgets before setting a revenue projection to build the fiscal year 2026 budget around.
Now, JFAC has fallen behind, and the unfinished 2026 fiscal year budget is delaying legislators from adjourning this week like Republican legislative leaders hoped.
JFAC is not operating under formal, published rules this year after the Idaho House did not adopt joint rules of the Idaho Legislature during the 2025 organizational session in December. The joint rules provide definitions of things like bills and cover how joint committees, like JFAC, operate and lay out the rules for committee minutes, debate and press credentials.
While the Idaho Senate adopted joint rules during the organizational session, the House did not.
Moyle has said that was deliberate because House members disagree with Joint Rule 11, which states that the Senate chairman shall serve as the chair of committees meeting jointly, like JFAC. Moyle said the Idaho House doesn't want to give up the ability to set agendas and share chairmanship of the committee with the Idaho Senate.
In the absence of written joint legislative rules, Horman said JFAC is operating based on precedent from the past couple of years and operating under the terms of a February 2023 letter that she and Grow signed.
The February 2023 letter states that JFAC will use the joint voting procedure used in the past while also announcing the votes of the 10 JFAC House members separately from the 10 JFAC Senate members.
'If a bill receives majority support from the joint committee and does not receive majority support from the House or Senate committee, the bill will be sent to the house from which the majority of members did not vote in the affirmative,' the letter states.
Horman and Grow have both told the Sun they agree that it takes six votes from the House members and six votes from the Senate members to constitute a majority in JFAC, regardless of how many JFAC members are physically present. That means that if only seven JFAC House members are present, a vote of 5-2 would not be considered a majority because they did not reach the required six votes, even though a majority of House JFAC members voted to support it.
No other committee in the Idaho Legislature operates that way, which creates confusion in itself.
Adding to the confusion, on March 12, Horman and Grow said they have two different interpretations of the February 2023 letter, which leads to two different standards for how votes are handled in the same committee.
On March 12, Horman said that if a motion or budget does not achieve the required six votes among House members on JFAC, the motion or budget is dead and does not advance. Horman said the House clerk told her there is no mechanism to bring a motion or bill forward and assign it a bill number if it does not achieve a majority in committee.
That same day, Horman and Grow said the Idaho Senate has a different interpretation. Under the Senate interpretation, if a budget or motion does not achieve the required six votes among Senate JFAC members that motion or budget would be sent to the Idaho Senate for consideration because that is the chamber where it failed to achieve a majority of support.
'We've agreed to disagree,' Horman told the Sun on March 12.
Fast forward to Wednesday's meeting at the Idaho State Capitol in Boise, and JFAC appeared to deviate from the procedures the committee outlined on March 12.
On Wednesday, Sen. Kevin Cook, R-Idaho Falls, and Rep. Josh Tanner, R-Eagle, made an attempt to pass budget intent language requiring the Idaho Department of Labor to produce a report studying the impact of unauthorized immigration on the state's labor market and requiring a cost-benefit analysis of employers using the E-Verify system.
After some debate, Idaho Senate members voted 8-2 to pass the language requiring the report, but the Idaho House members on JFAC voted 4-5, failing to reach six votes and falling short of a majority among House members present.
Seconds later, Grow noted that among the entire committee, the majority voted 12-7 to approve the budget intent language. But Grow announced he was sending the intent language to the Idaho House because it failed to reach a majority among House JFAC members.
'Well, the majority votes yes, 12 yes – ayes – (and) seven nays, one absent and excused. However, the House, having failed to vote in the affirmative on this motion, it will be sent to the House and you can deal with it,' Sen. Grow said during the meeting Wednesday.
However, under the voting procedures Horman and Grow announced March 12, there is no mechanism to send a failed motion or budget to the House.
When a reporter with the Idaho Capital Sun asked Horman and Grow about the voting procedures after Wednesday's meeting adjourned, Horman and Grow said they forgot to bring their written script that describes how to proceed to Wednesday's meeting to read from.
'We both forgot to put our script up here today,' Horman said.
After the meeting, Grow said he would like to apologize if he misspoke during the meeting. In the absence of a written script, Grow told the Sun he was thinking back to the February 2023 letter.
'I'm just referring to the letter. It was (from) a few years ago, which said, if it fails on one side, it goes to that side; if it fails on the other side it goes to that side for consideration,' Grow said. '(Horman) can consider it. She can do what she wants to do with it. If she wants nothing to do with it, then nothing happens.'
Grow and Horman alternate serving as the chairperson of JFAC each day. Grow was serving as JFAC chairman Wednesday.
After the meeting, Horman told the Sun she would have handled the budget intent language differently if she was serving as JFAC chairwoman Wednesday.
'I wouldn't have said it will be sent to the House,' Horman said. 'I would have said it will be considered at a later date.' At any rate, after the meeting, Horman clarified the budget intent language requiring the report on immigration's impacts on the state labor force is dead for now, but it could be brought up again.
The issue over the intent language does not affect the Idaho Department of Labor's budget, which passed without controversy under a separate motion.
Horman said House members have not changed their interpretation of the February 2023 letter since clarifying voting procedures March 12.
'If it fails (on) my side (among House members) it fails, therefore there is nothing to send,' Horman told the Sun Wednesday. 'They're handling it a little differently (in the Senate).'
In an interview Wednesday with the Idaho Capital Sun, Horman referred to Mason's Manual of Legislative Procedure. Horman flagged a section of the manual that states:
'Rules of legislative procedure are derived from several sources and take precedence in the order listed below:
a) Constitutional provisions and judicial decisions thereon.
b) Adopted rules.
c) Custom, usage and precedents.
d) Adopted parliamentary authority.
e) Parliamentary law.'
Citing Mason's, Horman told the Sun it is unfair and inaccurate to suggest JFAC is not operating under any rules. Horman shared a passage from the manual that says historically members vote individually – not by houses – when voting in joint committees. Under more modern practices, the manual says 'members vote by houses, a quorum being present, and such vote carries only upon favorable vote of the committee members of each house.'
Horman said House members adhere to the more modern practice outlined in the manual.
Horman also disagreed that there is confusion over JFAC's voting procedures. She said the 2023 letter and modern guidance in Mason's Manual of Legislative Procedure provide that certainty.
'We have tried to create certainty; this is what this is. It's certainty, right?' Horman told the Sun. 'So for people who are stuck in how JFAC used to operate, like some members of the committee? Sure, they think it's dysfunction, because we're not doing it how we did in the past. But for three years, this is the new way. And so there's certainty. We have certainty. Now maybe you just didn't have the script and didn't say it this way today. But this is our agreement. So we have certainty and agreements that we're going to handle it differently.'
Grow said he and Horman are trying to build consensus to pass budgets as they navigate a difference of opinion.
'We're just trying to thread a needle here because they (in the House) are interpreting it different than our folks,' Grow told the Sun.
SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Milwaukee County Judge Dugan case, prosecutors urge court not to dismiss
The Brief The Trump administration is opposing the dismissal of charges against Milwaukee County Circuit Court Judge Hannah Dugan. Dugan is accused of helping a man evade immigration agents in her courthouse. DOJ attorneys argue dropping the charges would set a dangerous precedent, implying judges are above the law. MILWAUKEE - A federal motion has been filed in response to Milwaukee County Circuit Court Judge Hannah Dugan's request to dismiss the case against her. And after reading through the 25-page motion, federal prosecutors say Dugan is not above the law. The indictment against Dugan alleges she helped an undocumented man who was wanted on a federal warrant avoid arrest by I.C.E. agents. SIGN UP TODAY: Get daily headlines, breaking news emails from FOX6 News Click to open this PDF in a new window. In Dugan's motion for dismissal, she asked the court to dismiss the indictment based on judicial immunity. But today (June 9), federal prosecutors came back saying her request was unprecedented and quote "would, in essence, say that judges are above the law." Dugan faces a July 21 trial in the case that escalated a clash between Trump's administration and opponents over the Republican president's sweeping immigration crackdown. Trump critics contend that Dugan's arrest went too far and that the administration is trying to make an example out of her to discourage judicial opposition to the crackdown. The backstory Dugan is charged with concealing an individual to prevent arrest, a misdemeanor, and obstruction, which is a felony. Prosecutors say she escorted Eduardo Flores-Ruiz, 31, and his lawyer out of her courtroom through a back door on April 18 after learning that U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents were in the courthouse seeking to arrest him for being in the country illegally. She could face up to six years in prison and a $350,000 fine if convicted on both counts. Her attorneys say she's innocent. They filed a motion last month to dismiss the case, saying she was acting in her official capacity as a judge and therefore is immune to prosecution. They also maintain that the federal government violated Wisconsin's sovereignty by disrupting a state courtroom and prosecuting a state judge. The other side Justice Department attorneys responded in a court filing Monday, saying dismissing the charges against the judge on the grounds that she is immune would be unprecedented and would ignore "well-established law that has long permitted judges to be prosecuted for crimes they commit." "Such a ruling would give state court judges carte blanche to interfere with valid law enforcement actions by federal agents in public hallways of a courthouse, and perhaps even beyond," Justice Department attorneys argued. "Dugan's desired ruling would, in essence, say that judges are 'above the law,' and uniquely entitled to interfere with federal law enforcement." Dugan's attorney, Craig Mastantuono, did not immediately respond to messages seeking comment. In her motion to dismiss, Dugan argued that her conduct amounted to directing people's movement in and around her courtroom, and that she enjoys legal immunity for official acts she performs as a judge. She also accused the federal government of violating Wisconsin's sovereignty by disrupting a state courtroom and prosecuting a state judge. Dugan's case is similar to one brought during the first Trump administration against a Massachusetts judge, who was accused of helping a man sneak out a courthouse back door to evade a waiting immigration enforcement agent. That case was eventually dismissed. The backstory According to prosecutors, Eduardo Flores-Ruiz illegally reentered the U.S. after being deported in 2013. He was charged in March with misdemeanor domestic violence in Milwaukee County and was in Dugan's courtroom for a hearing in that case on April 18. Dugan's clerk alerted her that immigration agents were in the courthouse looking to arrest Flores-Ruiz, prosecutors allege in court documents. According to an affidavit, Dugan became visibly angry at the agents' arrival and called the situation "absurd." After discussing the warrant for Flores-Ruiz's arrest with the agents, Dugan demanded that they speak with the chief judge and led them away from the courtroom. She then returned to the courtroom, was heard saying something to the effect of "wait, come with me," and then showed Flores-Ruiz and his attorney out a back door, the affidavit says. The immigration agents eventually detained Flores-Ruiz outside the building following a foot chase. Dugan, 66, was arrested by the FBI on April 25 at the courthouse. A grand jury indicted Dugan on May 13 and she pleaded not guilty on May 15. FREE DOWNLOAD: Get breaking news alerts in the FOX LOCAL Mobile app for iOS or Android What we know A legal defense fund created by Dugan supporters to help pay for her high-profile defense attorneys has raised more than $137,000 in three weeks from more than 2,800 donors. Her legal team includes former U.S. Attorney Steve Biskupic and former U.S. Solicitor General Paul Clement. Both were appointed by Republican presidents. She has also hired prominent attorneys in Milwaukee and Madison. "This is an impressive show of support for the defense fund, highlighting that the public believes in protecting a fair and independent judiciary," former Supreme Court Justice Janine Geske, the fund's trustee, said Monday. "The fund will continue to raise grassroots donations and uphold strict guidelines to ensure transparency and accountability." Dugan is not required to list the donor names until she submits her annual financial disclosure form, which is due in April. Numerous people are prohibited from donating, including Milwaukee County residents; attorneys who practice in the county; lobbyists; judges; parties with pending matters before any Milwaukee County judge; and county employees. The Source FOX6 has done significant reporting on the arrest and charges filed against Milwaukee County Judge Hannah Dugan. FOX6 produced this story with information from the federal motion, with contributions from the Associated Press.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
List: Democratic candidates for NJ governor
The Brief Nearly a dozen candidates are competing for the chance to succeed Gov. Murphy. The race for the Democratic nomination features a crowded field of prominent current and former officeholders. Primary election day is Tuesday, June 10. Polls close at 8 p.m. NEW JERSEY - Nearly a dozen candidates are competing in New Jersey for the chance to succeed term-limited Democratic Gov. Phil Murphy. MORE: Who is ahead in the NJ governor race? Polls, candidates, updates MORE: How to vote in New Jersey The race for the Democratic nomination for governor features a crowded field of prominent current and former officeholders. ***Click on each name to jump to their section. Mikie Sherrill Josh Gottheimer Ras Baraka Steve Fulop Sean Spiller Steve Sweeney Sherrill is a former federal prosecutor and U.S. Navy helicopter pilot. She has represented the 11th District, which includes parts of Essex, Morris and Passaic counties, since her 2018 election. She has since won reelection three times. Gottheimer, a former speechwriter for Bill Clinton and adviser to the head of the Federal Communications Commission, toppled conservative Republican Rep. Scott Garrett in 2016. Gottheimer represents the state's 5th Congressional District, which spans parts of Bergen, Passaic and Sussex counties. Baraka is the current mayor of Newark. First elected mayor in 2014, Baraka has spent over a decade leading Newark through economic and social changes, including reductions in crime and homelessness, and improvements in infrastructure. Most recently, he was arrested outside the Delaney Hall federal immigration detention center while protesting its opening. Fulop, the third-term Democratic mayor of the state's second-biggest city, is a former Marine who served in Iraq after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks. Back in January, Fulop floated the idea of a 'reverse congestion pricing' toll in an appearance on Good Day New York. Fulop suggested New Jersey could implement similar fees, capitalizing on the state's opportunities for cross-border tolling. Spiller is the president of the New Jersey Education Association and former mayor of Montclair. Spiller began as a science teacher before rising through the ranks of the New Jersey Education Association, becoming its president in 2021 after eight years on the executive board. Sweeney has centered his gubernatorial campaign on reforming New Jersey's budget process and addressing the state's housing challenges. With 20 years of public office experience, including more than a decade as Senate president, Sweeney is banking on his experience and commitment to tackling systemic issues. Primary election day is Tuesday, June 10. Polls close at 8 p.m. Click HEREfor more information. Emerson College Polling/PIX11/The Hill survey: According to a May survey, 28% of registered New Jersey Democratic voters said they would vote for U.S. Rep, Mikie Sherrill, as Jersey City Mayor Steven Fulop, Newark Mayor Ras Baraka, and U.S. Rep. Josh Gottheimer each had 11% of Democratic responders' support. A month ahead of the primary, 24% of Dem voters said they were undecided. SurveyUSA: According to a poll conducted in May, voters showed slightly more favorable options for Sherrill compared to the rest of the field. Gottheimer was a close second. Fundraising numbers: Gottheimer has had a slight edge in fundraising, with about $9.1 million in contributions, followed by Sherrill and Fulop, each with about $8.9 million raised for their campaigns, according to the Associated Press.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Democrats pick first woman of color to be next state Senate president
California's state Democrats are shaking up leadership, with the Senate Democratic Caucus pledging unanimous support to Sen. Monique Limón (D-Goleta), who will take over as Senate president pro tem in early 2026. Limón, who was elected to the state Senate in 2020, is chair of the Senate Democratic Caucus and the Senate banking committee. The 45-year-old Central Coast native served in the Assembly for four years before her Senate campaign and worked in higher education at UC Santa Barbara and the Santa Barbara County School Board before entering politics. She highlighted the importance of the moment, noting that the caucus, amid ICE raids led by the Trump administration targeting minorities in Los Angeles and across the state, elected her — the first woman of color to hold the position. The uncertain times, she said, were "a reminder of why leadership today, tomorrow and in the future matters, because leadership thinks about and influences the direction in all moments, but, in particular, in these very challenging moments. And for me, it is unbelievably humbling to be here." Recently, Limón has been vocal on the Sable Offshore Pipeline project, which aims to repair and reopen a pipeline off the coast of Santa Barbara County that spilled 21,000 gallons of crude oil in 2015. This year she wrote a measure, Senate Bill 542, in response to the project that would require more community input on reopening pipelines and better safety guidelines to find weak points that could lead to another spill. "No one has fought harder to make college more affordable than Monique Limón," said current Senate President Pro Tem Mike McGuire (D-Healdsburg), who also applauded her work on wildfire recovery. "She is a tireless voice for the Central Coast in rural parts of this great state." McGuire took leadership of the Senate in a unanimous vote by Democrats with former speaker and gubernatorial candidate Toni Atkins' blessing in February. He pledged to protect the state's progressive ideals ahead of a problematic state budget that continued to bubble over, with the Trump administration and Republican-controlled Congress supporting cuts in federal aid to the state for heathcare for low-income Californians, education and research and other essential programs. The Sonoma County Democrat's takeover was part of a wider change — both legislative houses were led by lawmakers from Northern California this year, leaving Southern California legislators with limited control. Limón's district covers Santa Barbara County and parts of Ventura and San Luis Obispo counties. McGuire terms out of office next year and may be planning a run for insurance commissioner in 2026 but wouldn't confirm his plans despite collecting more than $220,000 in contributions so far this year. Sign up for Essential California for news, features and recommendations from the L.A. Times and beyond in your inbox six days a week. This story originally appeared in Los Angeles Times.