Latest news with #IdahoHouse
Yahoo
15-04-2025
- Health
- Yahoo
Idaho governor approves candy, soda SNAP ban bill
Idaho Gov. Brad Little gives a press conference after delivering his annual State of the State address on Jan. 6, 2025, in the Lincoln Auditorium in the Idaho Capitol. (Pat Sutphin for the Idaho Capital Sun) Idaho will try to ban a food assistance program from covering candy and soda. Idaho Gov. Brad Little signed into law House Bill 109, which requires the Idaho Department of Health and Welfare to seek federal approval to exclude candy and soda from foods eligible for coverage by the federal Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP. Idaho's bill is part of the national movement known as 'Make America Healthy Again,' or MAHA, promoted by U.S. health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., the bill's cosponsor Rep. Jordan Redman, R-Coeur d'Alene has told lawmakers. 'Idaho welcomes the MAHA movement. It is all about looking for creative ways to improve nutrition and increase exercise, the two main factors that influence overall health,' Little wrote in a prepared statement Tuesday. 'Secretary Kennedy said it so well: we need to take better care of ourselves and each other. He said it is an act of patriotism, and the future of our nation depends on it. Idaho couldn't agree more.' Business industry representatives oppose the bill. Arguing the bill wouldn't be workable, Idaho House Minority Leader Ilana Rubel, D-Boise, has said it would cause grocery stores to stop accepting SNAP. But bill cosponsor Senate Majority Caucus Chair Ben Toews, R-Coeur d'Alene, says he's skeptical the bill would be hard on retailers. He said the bill's candy definition is used in 24 other states' sales tax laws. Idaho's new law takes effect July 1. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX In a prepared statement, Washington, DC.-based nonprofit Food Research & Action Center SNAP Deputy Director Gina Plata-Nino critiqued SNAP restrictions, saying they 'only deepen food insecurity and strip people of their autonomy.' 'This push to restrict what Idaho households can buy is an ill-conceived, recycled attempt to shame people who need food assistance and strip them of their dignity and autonomy when data shows that their diet isn't much different from anyone else's,' Plata-Nino told the Idaho Capital Sun. Little signed the bill into law on Tuesday, the governor's office announced in a news release. The bill passed the Idaho House on a 48-20 vote, after passing the Senate on a 25-10 vote with amendments. In the Idaho governor's office news release announcing Little signed the bill, Kennedy wrote in a prepared statement, 'I urge all governors to follow Idaho's lead and submit innovative SNAP waivers to the USDA to reverse the childhood chronic disease epidemic and Make America Healthy Again.' Pushback has largely focused on the bill's broad candy definition, which critics say would also ban granola bars and power bars. The bill defines candy as 'a preparation of sugar, honey, or other natural or artificial sweeteners combined with chocolate, fruit, nuts or other ingredients or flavorings' in several forms. Under the bill, candy would not include items that contain flour or need refrigeration. The Senate amended the bill to tweak the candy definition, removing an exemption for items with more than 10% flour by weight. The bill's soda definition also appears to be broad. Under the bill, soda includes nonalcoholic beverages with sweeteners, artificial or natural. But the bill doesn't consider soda to be drinks with more than 50% juice, containing milk or milk substitutes, or that need preparation, such as powders or concentrates. About 132,000 Idahoans are enrolled in SNAP, according to Idaho Department of Health and Welfare figures, receiving an average of $177 in monthly program benefits. If the federal U.S. Department of Agriculture, or USDA, doesn't grant Idaho's candy/soda SNAP ban waiver, the bill says Health and Welfare 'shall request such a waiver annually until such a waiver is granted.' The bill's fiscal note estimates it would not have a fiscal impact on the state budget. USDA Secretary Brooke Rollins said in a statement she was excited more states 'are heeding the call to Make America Healthy Again.' 'Governor Little is a true partner to USDA, and we look forward to working together on ways to use SNAP to improve health outcomes for Americans and encourage better use of taxpayer dollars,' she added. SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
Yahoo
15-04-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
At Sanders rally, Idaho officials urge that ‘it's time to self-rescue'
U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vermont, took the stage Monday night to the roar of applause, cheers and feet stomping in the bleachers at the jam-packed Ford Idaho Center. The Nampa event was the 12th stop on Sanders' 'Fighting Oligarchy' tour, which he kicked off in Omaha, Nebraska, in late February. The series of rallies, which also prominently feature U.S. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-New York, are billed as a discussion with Americans to regain power from billionaires and corporate influence in government. The rallies have drawn record crowds in some cities, and event organizers said they closed doors at the Idaho Center with 12,500 attendees. Its listed capacity is 12,200. Sanders has had strong support in Idaho in the past. In 2016, he won the Democratic primary against eventual nominee Hillary Clinton with 78% of caucus votes. Sanders' 30-minute speech raised alarm over billionaires' involvement in President Donald Trump's White House, primarily the controversial Department of Government Efficiency's Elon Musk. Sanders focused broadly on the need for livable wages, access to health care and affordable housing, and similar issues that have long been part of the Independent politician's platform. 'What we have to have is an agenda that speaks to the needs of all Americans, whether you're in Idaho or Vermont or anyplace else,' Sanders said. Ocasio-Cortez urged Idaho voters to 'give Russ Fulcher and Mike Simpson the boot' during her speech, referring to the Republican U.S. House members from Idaho who move almost in lockstep with Trump. Both are up for reelection in 2026. She also called out Sens. Jim Risch and Mike Crapo over their votes to cut Medicaid. 'They know that it hurts the working families of Idaho, but they are not here to serve working families,' she said. 'They are here to serve themselves.' Idaho politicians, organizers and doctors brought those same issues back to the Gem State in opening speeches that addressed the state's abortion ban and Medicaid cuts, and the impacts of Trump policies. Nate Roberts, a former Democratic member of the Idaho House who is running to regain the seat he lost in 2024, opened the event with a call to attendees to 'make democracy your side hustle.' Roberts, of Pocatello, said he was drawn to politics after attending a Sanders event in Idaho Falls in 2016, and became more involved in his electricians union. Roberts served a single term. He told attendees that he was proud to protect teachers unions, labor rights and Medicaid. 'Don't let them tell you one vote doesn't matter,' Roberts said. 'One vote protected Idaho's Medicaid system for two years running.' Lawmakers passed a law to cut Medicaid expansion funds in the most recent session. Rep. Todd Achilles, D-Boise, spoke about the impacts of the Trump administration's cuts to federal jobs, particularly in the Veterans Administration and organizations that oversee public lands. 'It's only taken about four months for us to shoot down the theory that billionaires should run America like a business,' Achilles said. He likened the current political state to signs that sometimes warn hunters and backpackers to proceed with caution in the backcountry. 'Idaho, no one is coming to save us,' Achilles said. 'It's time to self-rescue.' Chandler Bursey, president of the American Federation of Government Employees Local 1273, the union representing federal workers at the Boise VA, spoke after Achilles. Bursey said the Trump administration 'killed' the union's collective bargaining agreement last week. He said if Trump officials' plans to cut VA jobs are approved, the local hospital will lose at least 300 workers. 'If you're a veteran, you should be mad,' Bursey said. 'If you know a veteran, you should be mad.'
Yahoo
14-04-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
A long trend: How the Idaho Legislature has removed local governments' powers
A protester's sign encouraging no COVID-19-related mandates rests against an end table in the Idaho House's lobby at the Statehouse in Boise, Idaho, on Nov. 15, 2021. (Otto Kitsinger for Idaho Capital Sun) Early on in the COVID pandemic, Idaho Gov. Brad Little issued a temporary stay home order — temporarily closing some businesses and limiting public gatherings. Months later, he ended the statewide measure. And he refused calls for a statewide mask mandate. Instead, Idaho's governor handed off most pandemic control measures to local governments. Some required masks and limited public gatherings at times. This year — two years after the federal health emergency for COVID ended — the Republican supermajority-controlled Legislature stripped public health powers local governments did and didn't use. Two new laws ban government mask mandates, along with medical mandates for vaccines, medical diseases diagnosis or treatment. Those are among a handful of laws passed by the Idaho Legislature this year that will limit local governments' policymaking powers. The new laws deal with a range of issues — from banning more strict local child care regulations, limiting flags flown at government offices, and requiring big cities to regulate 'public camping.' It's part of a longer trend of Idaho state lawmakers limiting local governments' powers — like limiting raises to property taxes, and stopping localities from banning plastic bags or raising minimum wages. 'There is this ever present tug of war between 'What is the proper role of local government?' and 'What is the proper role of the state government in telling the local government where their boundaries are?'' Senate President Pro Tempore Kelly Anthon told the Idaho Capital Sun in an interview. 'And I think that that is going to continue forever.' SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX In the public policy world, moves by a higher level of government to limit the power of lower government are known as preemption. In other words, it's when a state blocks, or preempts, a local government from taking a certain action or pursuing a certain kind of policy. Idaho Republican elected officials have long said they value local control and limited government. But they often carve out exceptions when they preempt local power. 'When you have Republicans saying that 'It's the government closest to the people that governs best,' but yet they insert themselves as often as they do every year in the business of locals, I would say that they say one thing and then often do another,' Association of Idaho Cities Executive Director Kelley Packer told the Sun in an interview. The Association of Idaho Cities says at least 14 Idaho bills this year sought to preempt local decisionmaking. Sometimes, preemption is appropriate, said Packer, who used to be a Republican state lawmaker. She pointed to a bill this year that will block cities from requiring electric vehicle chargers in new developments. 'We as a city or any city should not be telling other elected officials or private developers that they have to put something in their development plans that doesn't impact the health and safety of the city's residents,' Packer said. To Anthon, the top Idaho Senate Republican who has served in the Legislature for 10 years, deciding whether preemption is appropriate depends on the issue. 'A Republican would say 'We absolutely support local control, so long as it doesn't step on constitutional rights, the rule of law and … the constitutionally mandated powers of the state Legislature,'' said Anthon, a Republican from Rupert. But to Idaho House Minority Leader Ilana Rubel, Idaho's pattern of preemption laws 'exposes' the Republican value of local governance as 'complete fraud.' 'They have no interest in local government. They want government that aligns with their ideologies,' said Rubel, a Boise Democrat who has served in the Legislature for 11 years. She rattled off examples: blocking local governments from flying LGBTQ+ pride flags, preventing local governments from responding to climate change, and blocking federal grants meant to help child care. Idaho's Republican control makes the state an interesting case study for preemption, Boise State University political science professor Alexandra Artiles told the Sun. 'On the one hand, preemption can contradict 'small government' values or the idea that city councils, for instance, can better tailor policies to localized needs,' she wrote in an email. 'On the other hand, Idaho is one of the few states without constitutional Home Rule, a legal framework that helps to protect local governments from state preemption.' Idaho's new laws were among over a dozen bills state lawmakers considered this year to limit local decision-making. Here's a rundown of the new Idaho local preemption laws, signed by Gov. Brad Little: Child care regulations House Bill 243's big policy shift is that it loosens Idaho's state-set minimum child care staff-to-child ratios, effectively letting a staff member care for more children at a given time. That shift will make Idaho's child-to-staff ratios the 45th loosest in the nation, up from 41st loosest in the nation, Idaho Voices for Children Executive Director Christine Tiddens previously told the Idaho Capital Sun. But on a local policy front, the bill also blocks local governments from having child care regulations that are more strict than what the state sets. The bill does that by repealing language in Idaho law that allowed for stricter local policy. The new law takes effect July 1. Only nine cities license day cares, Packer said. That is largely in bigger cities — in response to emergency calls from parents whose kids got hurt, she said. Mask mandates House Bill 32 bans mask requirements for infectious disease by schools and Idaho government entities. The law took effect immediately after Little signed it into law in early March. Electrical vehicles House Bill 86 preempts cities from requiring electrical vehicle charging stations or parking spots. The law took effect immediately after Little signed it into law on March 11. Public camping Senate Bill 1141 will ban public camping or sleeping in Idaho's largest cities, essentially targeting people experiencing homelessness sleeping in public. The law allows the Idaho attorney general to civilly enforce the law against cities or county highway districts that knowingly violate the law. The bill takes effect July 1. Flag restrictions House Bill 96 restricts state and local government entities to only display official domestic government and military flags. Schools, colleges and universities are exempted from the flag bill's restrictions. While House lawmakers didn't specifically mention it in the House's floor debate, Boise City Hall has displayed the LGBTQ+ pride flag. The city continues to fly the flag, the Idaho Statesman reported Friday, despite the law already taking effect. Cars first, sidewalks and bike paths second Two bills, Senate Bill 1140 and Senate Bill 1144, require highway districts to tailor new projects to cars — limiting new pedestrian or bicycle infrastructure, BoiseDev reported. Medical mandates Senate Bill 1210 will create a broad medical mandate ban. It bars Idaho businesses, government entities, schools and colleges from restricting entry, employment or services based on requirements for medical interventions — like vaccines, medical diagnosis or treatment. The law takes effect July 1. Preemption is common in public health, Artiles, the Boise State professor, explains. In a previous research paper, she found governors issued over 1,200 preemptions related to COVID in less than the first two years of the pandemic. CONTACT US But some officials worry Idaho's public health preemptions this year leave the state less prepared to respond to future pandemics. Most cities didn't even require masks, and none of them required vaccines for entry to city halls, Packer said. (Public health districts in Idaho — essentially regional health authorities — did at times mandate masks and limit gatherings.) But the Association of Idaho Cities has pushed back on the mask mandate ban because, Packer said, 'locals are the ones that have to answer immediately to any disaster that happens within the city or the county.' 'We don't know what might come down the pike next — what we might be faced with,' Packer said. COVID was unexpected, and left public officials to face tough choices. Some people wanted public health restrictions, and others wanted to be left alone, Packer said. Rubel thinks the new laws leave Idaho less prepared to deal with a future pandemic. She remembers the days that thousands of Americans died each day from COVID. A future pandemic might be even worse, she said. 'I hope we never see another pandemic in our lifetimes. But chances are, we probably will — with population growth and all the factors being what they are,' Rubel said. 'I don't know what we can fall back on at this point. Everything has been dismantled.' A health freedom philosophy influenced bills in the Legislature this year, Anthon said. That's along with a sentiment that the government had too heavy a hand in responding to the COVID pandemic, he added. 'That was the sentiment of a majority of the members of the Legislature this year. … And a belief that when you have to make these medical or health care decisions, it's better done on an individual basis. And that if you give people the proper information, they will make those decisions on an individual basis better,' Anthon said. 'And that there still can be a government reaction to stop the crisis, if you'll better inform people.' SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
Yahoo
03-04-2025
- Health
- Yahoo
Idaho House passes revised ‘medical freedom' bill, after tense debate
A person stands in front of the Liberty Bell replica at the Idaho State Capitol building in Boise on Jan. 11, 2023. (Otto Kitsinger for Idaho Capital Sun) After a long debate Wednesday, the Idaho House passed — on a nearly veto-proof majority — a bill that would ban business, governments and schools from requiring medical interventions. House Bill 472 is the House's revised version of a so-called medical freedom bill that Gov. Brad Little recently vetoed. The House's 40-minute debate Wednesday turned contentious and oftentimes definitional. Bill cosponsor Rep. Robert Beiswenger, R-Horseshoe Bend, once refused to answer a question from another lawmaker. Opening the House's debate, Beiswenger said the bill 'prevents medical force, medical mandates. People can choose them if they want to, but they don't have to if they don't want to. You can ask people to leave your place of business. But you can't force them into medical treatments like vaccines or other kinds of treatments.' A quarter of the Idaho House's 70 lawmakers rose to debate the bill, which was evenly split in support and opposition. But the House ultimately passed the bill on a 46-21 vote, with one fewer vote in support than the House's vote on the original bill, Senate Bill 1023, two weeks ago. (Three House members were absent for Wednesday's vote. None were absent for the original bill vote.) Critics' central concern on the bill was that it would prevent workplaces from refusing service — or entrance of their facilities — to sick people. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX Asked three times if the bill would prevent that by Rep. Dan Garner, R-Clifton, Beiswenger replied by suggesting he believed it would not. 'Can the business ask someone to leave — force someone to leave, if they feel like they are sick?' Garner asked. 'Again, the bill doesn't address it directly. But I believe a business would be within their rights to ask someone to leave if they are sick,' Beiswenger replied. Garner didn't seem convinced. 'This bill, to me, goes a step too far (in) that it imposes someone's freedom or rights on their private property or private business,' he said. Debating in favor of the bill, Rep. Kyle Harris, R-Lewiston, argued that debate was straying from the bill's intent. CONTACT US Debating against the bill, Rep. Ben Fuhriman, R-Shelley, and Rep. Todd Achilles, D-Boise, referenced the bill's specific language. 'I don't care what your intentions are. A law is a law,' Fuhriman said. 'And it's written right here on page two, line 29: A business entity doing business in the state of Idaho shall not refuse to provide any service, product, admission to a venue, or transportation to a person — because that person has or has not received or used a medical intervention.' After Gov. Little vetoes Idaho 'medical freedom' bill, Legislature pursues tweaks Like the original bill that Little vetoed, two new bills introduced this week in the House and Senate would pursue similarly broad medical mandate bans. The bills would ban businesses and any Idaho governments — local, county or state — from requiring medical interventions for employment, admission to venues, transportation, or providing products or services. The bill would've also extended to schools in Idaho — private or public — and colleges, universities and trade schools, blocking them from requiring medical interventions for school attendance, employment, or entrance into campus or school buildings. Under the bills, medical interventions include 'a procedure, treatment, device, drug injection, medication, or action taken to diagnose, prevent, or cure a disease or alter the health or biological function of a person.' (The House tweaked the bill Wednesday to add a comma between 'drug' and 'injection.') The House's revised bill, House Bill 472, adds language specifying that the bill wouldn't overrule existing powers of school districts, or school board trustees — as already granted in Idaho law. After passing the House on Wednesday, the bill is headed to the Senate for consideration The Senate's revised bill, Senate Bill 1210, exempts day cares and adds language specifying the school medical mandate ban provision is subject to various other Idaho laws that let school boards block sick students from attending, spell out parental rights, and more. The Senate amended its version on Wednesday by tweaking the new language related to schools. It's not immediately clear when the Senate will vote on the amended bill, or consider the House's version. To become law, Idaho bills must pass the House and Senate, and avoid the governor's veto. SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
Yahoo
31-03-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Idaho Legislature approves ban on SNAP coverage for candy, soda
A "SNAP welcomed here" sign is seen at the entrance to a Big Lots store in Portland, Oregon. The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) is a federal program. (Getty Images) A bill to ban a food assistance program from covering candy and soda is headed to Gov. Brad Little for consideration. Idaho also needs federal approval for the proposed ban. House Bill 109 would require the Idaho Department of Health and Welfare to seek federal approval to exclude candy and soda from foods eligible for coverage by the federal Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP. Idaho's bill is part of the national movement coined 'Make America Healthy Again,' or MAHA, promoted by U.S. health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., the bill's cosponsor Rep. Jordan Redman, R-Coeur d'Alene has told lawmakers. And, he said, soda is the 'number one commodity spent on SNAP.' Business industry representatives oppose the bill. Arguing the bill wouldn't be workable, Idaho House Minority Leader Ilana Rubel, D-Boise, has said it would cause grocery stores to stop accepting SNAP. But bill cosponsor Senate Majority Caucus Chair Ben Toews, R-Coeur d'Alene, says he's skeptical the bill would be hard on retailers. He said the bill's candy definition is used in 24 other states' sales tax laws. The Idaho House passed the bill on a 48-20 vote on Monday, after the chamber had already narrowly approved the bill. It came back to the House after the Senate amended the bill to tweak the candy definition. The Idaho Senate passed an amended version of the bill on a 25-10 vote last week. Idaho Senate Minority Leader Melissa Wintrow, D-Boise, critiqued the bill as another way to control poor people. Sen. Camille Blaylock, R-Caldwell, suggested it isn't likely Idaho would make the change alone. Idaho's waiver, she argued, would join other states' requests, applying pressure for a nationwide change. When the bill is transmitted to the governor, he has five days, excluding Sundays, to decide on it. He has three options: sign it into law, allow it to become law without his signature, or veto it. If passed into law, the bill would take effect July 1. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX Pushback has largely focused on the bill's broad candy definition, which critics say would also ban granola bars and power bars. The bill defines candy as 'a preparation of sugar, honey, or other natural or artificial sweeteners combined with chocolate, fruit, nuts or other ingredients or flavorings' in several forms. Under the bill, candy would not include items that contain flour or need refrigeration. The Senate amended the bill to tweak the candy definition, removing an exemption for items with more than 10% flour by weight. The bill's soda definition also appears to be broad. Under the bill, soda includes nonalcoholic beverages with sweeteners, artificial or natural. But the bill doesn't consider soda to be drinks with more than 50% juice, contain milk or milk substitutes, or that need preparation, such as powders or concentrates. About 132,000 Idahoans are enrolled in SNAP, according to Idaho Department of Health and Welfare figures, receiving an average of $177 in monthly program benefits. If the federal U.S. Department of Agriculture, or USDA, doesn't grant Idaho's candy/soda SNAP ban waiver, the bill says Health and Welfare 'shall request such a waiver annually until such a waiver is granted.' The bill's fiscal note estimates it would not have a fiscal impact. Republican legislators in Arizona, Kansas, Utah and Wyoming introduced similar bills, Stateline reported. SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
