Three ways to help the budget

I think that the criticism that being unwilling to vote to cut programs without another solution is right on. After all, as a state legislator, I along with the rest of the legislature have the constitutional requirement to balance the budget. Last year I was more than just a little hesitant about cutting programs, especially in education (at all levels) and Medicaid. This year, those cuts are looking like they may be even more draconian than ever before. In order show that I am serious about finding solutions, I have come up with the following three ideas to help trim the state budget, so that cuts to vital programs can be minimized.

1. Modify the property tax legislation from the 2006 Extraordinary Session to only apply to owner occupied residences,
2. Institute a new program for paroling and otherwise taking non-violent offenders out of our expensive prisons and into other forms of corrections (e.g. house arrest, work release, etc.), and
3. Restructuring of state government by combining some state agencies, where doing so makes sense both fiscally and from an operations standpoint.

While there are many other solutions, and these three ideas aren't the panacea for our budget woes, they certainly would make a significant dent in the budget shortfall. In the upcoming days and weeks, I'll provide more details and data about my ideas and explain why I think that they are superior to simply cutting state programs that serve Idahoans. Stay tuned.

Off Topic Post - BCS Mess, Again.

Well, its that time of year again. The Bowl Championship Series (BCS) is out ranking collegiate football teams and Boise State is at the center of the controversy just as as it was last year. At issue is whether or not an undefeated BSU team deserves to go to a so-called BCS Bowl Game where the riches and exposure are that of some mythical treasure island.

In the first week of the BCS rankings BSU was ranked a regular season best fourth place, but that all changed this week. BSU got moved back to seventh place and now sits behind Texas Christian, the other non-BCS conference school that is looking to be this year's BCS Buster. As you might recall, the same thing happened last year when BSU and Utah were fighting for a similar distinction. However, this year is different.

This year is different because the spotlight has been shined ever brighter upon the BCS and its uppity elitist conferences by not only Congress, but also President Obama. In Congress, claims have been made that the BCS may be in violation of anti-trust laws. Of course, the BCS conspirators have lifted their nose and tried to laugh off such accusations as nonsense. Well, frankly, if BSU and TCU end up in the top eight at the end of the year, but one of the is left out, it won't be nonsense it will be because of cents (and millions of dollars).

That is why, as big of BSU football fan as I might be (I've gone to games since before there was a blue field and have the schedule poster to prove it), I am hoping that both BSU and TCU end the seasons undefeated and ranked in the top 8. I am also hoping that one of them gets left out because if they do, then the claim that the BCS is nothing more than an anti-competitive money passing scheme will be proved accurate. You see, if BSU and TCU are both in the top 8 or higher and if it really is about placing the best teams in college football against one another, then there will not be a logical basis in which to exclude either team. That is, of course, unless its not about placing the best teams each against each other.

Now, you can bet that BCS conference officials are talking and trying to figure out how to weasel their way out of this one. Perhaps they made some calls to the SEC officiating crews and are trying to figure out the going rate is to throw football games. Either way, they'll be ready with some pigheaded press release that tries to pacify the populace, but we can't let it happen. The BCS is bigger than just some stupid college football games. It is about doing the right thing and giving everyone a fair shot. After all, fighting for the little guy and making things is equal, is something that all of us, football fans and non-fans alike, can agree on

What's next?

On Sunday, October 11, The Idaho Statesman ran my op-ed dealing with what I view as a real disconnect between Governor Otter and regular Idahoans. In the print edition, the Statesman placed my piece right next to one by House Assistant Majority Leader Scott Bedke. Representative Bedke asserted that now wasn't the time for rash measures and insinuated that he and his majority team in the House would protect the taxpayer. The phrase, "starve the beast," comes to mind. At the same time, the Statesman's Editorial Board also ran a piece discussing the issue and proclaiming that, "Lawmakers must defend Medicaid, higher education."

The three opinion pieces generated a fair amount of comments, some of which related to a question of how to protect programs, without raising taxes. I'd like to respond.

First, I have no appetite whatsoever to raise taxes on hard working Idahoans, that option is off the table.

Second, I'd like to clear up some of the misinformation Rep. Bedke disseminated. I, and no one in the legislature that I know of, has advocated for depleting ALL of the rainy day funds. I agree that some cuts will be required. Efficiencies, as the Guv suggests, should help, some. For example, it would be wise to combine some agencies together to reduce administrative costs (e.g. Ag and Water Resources, or Lands and Parks and Rec and Fish and Game). Washington State is doing so and I believe we can too.

I also think we could revamp our corrections systems, which would yield some significant savings. For example, I would move certain non-violent offenders out of prison and into work release. We are doing this some right now, but I think more could be done.

We also need to partner more intentionally with faith-based and community organizations (FBCOs). I attempted last year to put this idea into action with HCR 11, which ultimately stalled in Senate State Affairs Committee because Senators were concerned that it wasn't the Guv's idea and didn't want to "go over him." By investing in FBCOs, we reduce the burden to the State and subsequently taxpayers. In many cases FBCOs can do more with less because of partnerships they leverage within their communities. Plus, unlike state government, they know their communities better because they are in their communities. This has the potential to save a lot of money.

Lastly, not spending rainy day funds has the same practical outcome of slowing the economic recovery. State government, whether the Governor or Rep. Bedke like it, is a very important part of Idaho's gross state product. By unnecessarily cutting state government you are cutting jobs. Jobs that families rely upon. Families, that without those jobs, will end up tapping our already strained social services. That will lengthen the recession for regular Idahoans. Economist forecast a mostly full recovery including job creation by December 2010 at the latest. That is good news for Idahoans, regular Idahoans.

Charter Schools and the Bible

An AP report today about the Nampa Classical Academy has shined a blaring light on a major philosophical divide in our society. On one side, the pro-Separation of Church and State crowd is essentially saying that anything that even remotely smells of religion should stay out of public schools. They point to the First Amendment of the United States Constitution and the so-called Establishment Clause as their primary argument. On the other side, the pro-Bible crowd extols the Judeo Christian origins of our society and their immediate relevancy on understanding contemporary western philosophy. Whatsmore, the proliferation of charter schools flows as a secondary undercurrent to this heated debate.

Perhaps predictably, I find myself somewhere in the middle. I certainly disagree that First Amendment was intended to spawn the sort of anti-religious overtures that it has become synonymous with. I also don't believe that the State should be in the primary role of informing our spiritual needs. Instead, I believe that understanding religion in our society is critical, but I believe it should be a cognitive understanding not a spiritual or moralistic one. In my view, the latter should be kept in our houses of worship and out of the public education system.

In terms of the public charter school debate, I tend to believe that charter schools are a double edged sword. They can, and have proven to fill a very real need. The problem comes when, in the competitive process, they over-compete and subsequently hurt the traditional public school to the point where the traditional public school can no longer serve its core mission. In this particular case, a strong argument could be made that in the charter application process the school should been more forthright about its intentions to utilize the Bible. Not doing so has been a disservice to all involved.

Ultimately, I don't believe that there is a problem using the Bible in addition to other texts for the study of literature or history. I for one read the Bible (the Book of Genesis specifically) in my senior year English course at Boise High School. Surely there is a lot to be learned by understanding the belief systems that have had a significant impact on the development of western thought. In fact, I would argue not understanding these belief systems puts any scholar, student, or citizen at a strategic disadvantage. That said, I don't think that the Bible, by itself, should be the subject of an entire class in the public education system, whether it be at a traditional or charter school. The debate will continue and hopefully everyone will be quick to listen and slow to speak.

Reading between the lanes

I could be wrong, but my guess is that the announcement that the Guv's new Transportation Tax Force (mispelling by design) will not report until 2011, it means John McGee won't be running for CD1. Why else would McGee be engaged so heavily in a process that wasn't going to bear fruit until after the election? Just a hunch.

More about the Tax Force later.

I wish I had thought of that...

Today the Statesman is reporting that the a group calling itself Idaho Vote by Mail is planning on pushing a citizen initiative to allow permanent absentee voting. That sounds like a great idea, I wish I had thought of it first. Wait a minute, I did. In both 2008 (HB 413) and 2009 (HB 26) I have pushed permanent absentee voting, but didn't get anywhere.

My impetus behind becoming involved in the issue predates my being elected to the legislator. In fact, it came in the HOT summer of 2006 when I was campaigning door-to-door. During that experience, while walking in Old Lakewood (as natives of SE Boise would refer to it), I came across an elderly couple with a fantastic life story. The gentleman of the house was (as I recall) a WWII vet and former mayor of a small town in Montana. He, with his wife by his side, spent his entire life serving our country and protecting our democracy. Unfortunately, due to his ailing health, he was no longer able to leave his home and neither was his wife because like many of that generation, she never learned to drive. Subsequently we had two people that served our Country that would likely never get to vote again. That, I believed, was a sham and patently unfair. I gave them absentee ballot request forms and picked them up and personally delivered them to Ada County Clerk a couple of weeks later. After some time thinking (and being elected), I concluded that something had to be done. Someone wasn't always going to be there to make sure they had the absentee ballot form to fill out. That's when I decided that permanent absentee was the perfect solution to this problem.

In 2008 when I attempted to push legislation I found an enthusiastic partner in the Idaho Association of Counties and the Clerks Association. After much work, we moved forward with having the legislation introduced. Unfortunately, that's far as it would go. It met a wall known as the chairman of the House State Affairs Committee, Tom Loertscher. While we had counted our votes in committee and they looked like enough to pass, we never had the support of the chair.

In 2009 the Clerks Association decided it wasn't worth the effort and so I was stuck carrying the mantel. After a very brief discussion with the chair it was clear that a hearing was out of the question and so was a print hearing. I decided to just run it as a personal bill and it went to die in House Ways and Mean-spirited.

Finally, I applaud the effort to move forward with a citizens initiative. I believe the group has accurately surmised that with an obstructionist chairman, this issue is DOA. Some of the critics will try scare folks into believing the system is inherently circumspect with voter fraud. They, frankly, don't know what they are talking about. The Secretary of State and the Clerks all feel that absentee voting is as secure (if not more so) than voting in the polling booth. These are the experts, if they are wrong about this, then we have a lot bigger problems on our hands. Some opponents will try to talk voters into thinking that permanent absentee gets rid of polling booths all together, again, they are wrong. In fact, the continued existence of polling booths is why I support permanent absentee over other forms of vote by mail, which do eliminate traditional polling locations. Ultimately, I hope the politics of fear misinformation is unsuccessful and Idahoans, just like at Burger King, can have it their way.

Debate Tonight

Tonight I will be participating in a debate regarding Liberty University's decision to remove a College Democrats Club from the campus. Link to the event will be forthcoming.

UPDATE: Click HERE to play the debate (it should load in Windows Media Player).