Lawmakers shouldn’t rush into something rash like a texting-while-driving law. It’s not like 87 percent of their constituents want one or anything.

Oh, wait a minute.

According to the AAA Idaho survey that was released this week, 87 percent of respondents support a texting ban — a fairly simple and innocuous legislative fix that has somehow eluded lawmakers for the past two sessions.

They didn’t get it done two years ago, when students, the population’s leading texting cohort, testified in favor of a texting bill. And last year, they again got mired down in the wording.

I’ve heard the main arguments against a texting bill.

1. Idaho already has an inattentive driving law that can (and should) cover rogue texters.

2. If the state bans texting while driving, what unsafe behavior comes next? Eating a hamburger while driving? Drinking a coffee?

Both arguments are intertwined, and both arguments are cop-outs, really.

There is nothing wrong with having clarity in the law and expressly forbidding texting while driving. It makes the law clear to motorists, especially young drivers, and gives law enforcement one more tool. Research has demonstrated the dangers of texting while driving — that differentiates this behavior from the cheeseburger or the cappuccino, and justifies a specific mention in state code.

When an overwhelming majority wants elected officials to get something done, this sends a message — one state legislators dismiss at their peril.

SPEAKING TOO SOON?

On Wednesday, the White House issued a report trumpeting state health insurance exchanges — and held up Idaho as an illustration. Let’s just say the Obama administration overplayed its hand. Here’s the title: “2012 Progress Report: States Are Implementing Health Reform.”

In Idaho, praise from the Obama administration is likely to do a proposed state-run health exchange more harm than good.

Some GOP lawmakers already are mobilizing against the exchange because it would be funded with a $20.4 million grant from the federal health care law.

Gov. Butch Otter has sided with business groups seeking the exchange — which would provide a marketplace where small businesses and individuals can shop for insurance — but in the face of opposition from fellow Republicans, his support can best be described as wobbly.

The report also cherry picks some facts. Yes, Otter in 2011 vetoed a variation of the “nullification” bill, which would have banned the state from accepting federal dollars to implement the health care law.

But Otter signed an executive order accomplishing the same purpose — although he allowed himself the latitude to issue waivers and accept some federal funding.

That is the crux of the debate over establishing a state health exchange, with the outcome very much in doubt.

For the White House to suggest that Idaho is a health exchange success story is premature and out of touch with the on-the-ground reality.

BUTCH BREAKS BREAD

In 2010, as Gov. Butch Otter and legislators wrestled with a second round of deep budget cuts, the governor had breakfast with the Statehouse media corps and famously appealed for a little slack.

“I would like to see some compassion (in news reports) that says, ‘This is a tough, tough position to be in.’ It’s not fun. ... Do I lose sleep at night? Yeah.”

In 2011 — freshly re-elected, but facing a third year of budget-cutting — Otter sought no compassion. He passed on the annual session with reporters, sending Lt. Gov. Brad Little in his place.

This year, Otter will resume the tradition. He has agreed to a breakfast meeting and question-and-answer session with reporters, sponsored by the Idaho Press Club. The session is scheduled for Jan. 25.

The easy pundit fallback here would be to question motives. Is Otter trying to refute critics (including some in the fourth estate) who have suggested he is disengaged from his job? Is he trying to show he is serious about running again in 2014 — an announcement that has been greeted with skepticism?

But that’s really not relevant. I’m glad to see Otter doing this again. When elected officials agree to a free-flowing, on-the-record Q&A with the reporters who write about them, the public is better informed for it.

I don’t know if this qualifies as “compassion,” but I give Otter unqualified credit on this one.

MCGEE’S MEDIA GO-ROUND

After his Father’s Day arrest, and seven months of silence, Sen. John McGee is back making the rounds with the media. The Caldwell Republican sat down Jan. 10 for interviews with our Dan Popkey, the Press-Tribune and, on Jan. 11, with KIVI, Channel 6. Then, KTVB checked in with an interview it hails as “Sen. John McGee: Uncut and on the record for the first time,” suggesting an exclusivity not supported by the facts. Excerpts appeared Thursday, and a half-hour interview ran Sunday.

Whenever the KTVB interview went down, I’m betting the weekend was in view.

© 2012 Idaho Statesman

Kevin Richert: 377-6437