Most of us adore the indulgence of a perfectly gooey brownie, its irresistible aroma greeting us as we step into the kitchen. Its appearance promises deliciousness, beckoning us to indulge. However, imagine the disappointment when just before taking that anticipated bite, you discover that a cup of unsavory elements, akin to feces, and a tablespoon of poison have been added. Instantly, the desire to partake dissipates, and the brownie is set aside, untouched. This analogy mirrors the complexity we, as lawmakers, face when voting on certain bills.
Before delving into the toxic components of a particular bill, let's first indulge in the delightful ritual of sharing a brownie recipe. Click HERE for recipe.
Now, let's delve into the details of H521. This bill primarily concerns the allocation of 1 billion dollars for school infrastructure, a pivotal point highlighted in the Governor's State of the State address. In my humble opinion, it would be prudent to focus solely on this aspect within the bill. However, it seems we couldn't resist adding some seemingly positive elements, such as a tax return provision, which would amount to approximately fifty dollars per household. Yet, amidst these seemingly favorable additions, the bill also introduces some concerning elements. Namely, the inclusion of the 4 to 5 day school week, which can be likened to a poisonous ingredient tainting an otherwise promising recipe. Additionally, the funding formula proposed within the bill disproportionately favors larger school districts, leaving rural areas with mere crumbs in comparison. Click HERE to read H521.
Next up is the recipe for H596, which addresses the issue of Pharmacy Benefit Managers (PBMs). This bill aims to dismantle the monopolistic grip of large PBMs, offering a lifeline to smaller pharmacies. While the core ingredients appear promising, there was a need for some adjustments to enhance its flavor.
During our early day session, amendments were introduced to incorporate these additional ingredients. However, the surprise came when these new elements were swiftly placed on our Senate floor desks by the afternoon, fast-tracked ahead of all other bills for immediate voting. This rushed process deprived us of the opportunity for thorough review and consideration.
In my assessment, it seems the baker of this recipe didn't allow it to fully cook through. The haste with which it was served led some tasters to reject it, feeling it hadn't been given the proper time to develop its full potential from oven to plate. To read 8 page recipe click HERE.
Finally, let's delve into H613, which, on the surface, boasts to be a promising recipe: "This legislation will prohibit advertising of products and services in Idaho which are federally illegal." However, upon closer inspection of the ingredients listed in the recipe, doubts begin to surface.
Initially, it appears that the Chef wanted to restrict advertising related to marijuana, which is illegal in our state but legal in neighboring states and federally prohibited. Which look appealing to all the tasters. However, the text of the bill surprisingly omits any explicit mention of marijuana. Instead, it broadly states that "Any person who willfully publishes any notice or advertisement, in any medium, within the state of Idaho for a product or service that is illegal under the laws of the jurisdiction where the product or service is offered, including federal, state, or local laws, is guilty of a misdemeanor."
This expansive language raises concerns among brownie critics, as it implies that the bill could apply to a wide range of products or services governed by various legal jurisdictions, including federal, state, or local laws. Given the unpredictable and sometimes inconsistent nature of federal legislation, the potential implications of this bill could be numerous and, frankly, concerning.
When the brownie critics raised their concerns with the baker and requested a reconsideration of the recipe, he sought guidance from the head chef, only to return with the disappointing news that she was unwilling to alter the recipe. Left with no other option, they decided to discard this flawed recipe and start anew, with hopes for a more palatable alternative to be presented in the upcoming Cafe State of Affairs session this Monday. To read recipe H613 click HERE.
I'm glad you enjoyed the insights shared in my brownie blog from the second to last week of the 2024 session. As they say, a “Spoonful of Sugar” indeed helps the medicine go down. It's always refreshing to find creative and engaging ways to discuss the complexities of legislative matters, much like savoring a delicious treat alongside a necessary remedy. Thank you for joining me on this flavorful journey through the legislative landscape.
It is unfortunate when some don’t or will not care to comprehend correct legal wording. Nor will they listen to solid reasoning for specific language which adheres to the Constitution.
Repeatedly, when their special interest organization rates a bill negative, nothing matters but opposing the bill.
Their “fix” is the real poison in an effort to fool the public.
Thank you for this interesting approach to analyzing a bill's recipe.
Another good commentary about H613 is here: Misfire: When Good Ideas get Lost in a Badly Written Law. We prefer to keep good bills alive and improve them with friendly amendments, but it depends on sponsor cooperation. IDAHO FREEDOM CAUCUS (03/21/24): https://open.substack.com/pub/idahofreedomcaucus/p/misfire-when-good-ideas-get-lost?r=14nzxn&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web
This article brings to mind several questions. I'm hoping someone can answer:
1. How many votes are taken in haste without time to properly analyze a bill? A few? Many?
2. How many legislators vote for bills that are "mostly good" but contain enough "poison" (or perhaps salt instead of sugar in the recipe) to make Idaho and Idahoans sick down the road?
3. How often are legislation and votes influenced by pressure from lobbyists and donors?
4. How do we reduce the number of competing bills and get legislators working together to craft the best bills? The "my bill" mentality should be replaced by "our bill" with the best hearts and minds contributing.
5. How do we create bills that truly follow the Party platform of the sponsor? So, in the case of "Republicans," bills that promote small government, benefit taxpayers now and for generations to come, and adhere to the US and Idaho constitutions. (Republican Platform: https://idgop.org/party-resources/)
6. How much influence to constituent letters have on legislator votes? I've written many and encouraged others to do so, but the effects appear to be minimal. Is it worth the considerable time I pour into these efforts?
For anyone interested, I created and regularly update a voting guide with resources and tools to help voters make informed decisions and to understand the importance of voting in the PRIMARIES (by the General, the choices are made already). I set up this guide after moving to Idaho in late 2021 to assist my own learning process. I hope it can help others:
https://eolson47.substack.com/p/idaho-voting-guide-updated-91423