09-04-2025
An Idaho lawmaker made a joke of deleting records. It's legal, but should it be?
Idaho state Rep. Barbara Ehardt, R-Idaho Falls, walks away from the lectern after presenting a piece of legislation to the House State Affairs Committee on Jan. 7, 2025, at the State Capitol Building in Boise. (Pat Sutphin for the Idaho Capital Sun)
Originally posted on on April 9, 2025
It's not a secret that some Idaho lawmakers delete their emails and text messages — which are public records when they relate to legislation and other official business, according to state law.
But they rarely admit it publicly.
Rep. Barbara Ehardt bucked this trend last week, in an attempt to bring some levity to a tense House debate over a bill that would restrict diversity, equity and inclusion on college and university campuses.
The debate occurred Thursday, the penultimate day of a hectic legislative session. Ehardt, an Idaho Falls Republican who has long opposed DEI, said that she had received text messages from people 'at the universities' who supported Senate Bill 1198. Then she addressed Statehouse reporters who were watching the debate and might want to see the messages.
'I'm gonna delete (them),' Ehardt said with a laugh. 'Don't put in the FOIA request.'
Half an hour after the House approved the anti-DEI bill, Idaho Education News hand-delivered a public records request to Ehardt.
Too late. The messages were gone.
Ehardt later told EdNews that her comment 'was all meant to add a little levity' on the House floor. When asked why she didn't want reporters to see the messages, Ehardt said that the authors may not have expected their texts to be public.
'No one's anticipating that that's going to get shared,' she said. 'Obviously, if I hadn't said anything, nobody would have known.'
State law exempts from disclosure personal communications by a member of the Legislature, but communications related to 'the conduct or administration of the public's business' are considered public. In other words, someone who messages a lawmaker about a bill shouldn't expect that it will remain private.
While Ehardt's stunt was clearly meant to be funny, it raised a more serious question: Why are lawmakers allowed to destroy public records?
Unlike the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), which applies to federal agencies, the Idaho Public Records Act doesn't have a retention provision that bars destroying records before a certain period of time.
State agencies adhere to a schedule — created by the Idaho State Historical Society — that guides how long various types of records should be retained, and local governments set their own guidelines. But similar rules don't apply to the Legislature.
Lawmakers can trash their records at any time, unless someone files an official request to see them. Destroying records after they've been identified in a request would violate the Public Records Act, but Ehardt didn't appear to do that in this case.
Still, her decision to delete the texts is a good example of why the state needs more specific retention requirements, said Scott McIntosh, First Amendment committee chairman for the Idaho Press Club.
'The decisionmaking process of state legislators is the public's business and should be done in public,' said McIntosh, who is also opinion editor for the Idaho Statesman. 'Deleting text messages cited by a lawmaker during a legislative debate is anathema to the Idaho values of open and honest government.'
Journalists and other members of the public often rely on correspondence records to shed light on government work that happens behind closed doors. Here are some recent examples from EdNews:
Emails between West Ada School District administrators and trustees exposed internal turmoil after the district told a teacher to remove a classroom sign promoting inclusivity.
Messages between Idaho State University President Robert Wagner and House Speaker Mike Moyle, R-Star, revealed that ISU is considering the feasibility of buying a private medical school in Meridian.
Public comments on a divisive bill to fund private education using tax dollars showed widespread opposition to the proposal that was ultimately signed into law.
On Tuesday, Ehardt declined to share details on the messages, except that they were from people affiliated with multiple universities and they weren't from students. Ehardt said she will retain EdNews' records request, however.
'I did scan and copy and save that for time and all posterity,' she said.
SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
