Opinion articles provide independent perspectives on key community issues, separate from our newsroom reporting.

Editorials

Far-right legislators circle the wagons in defense of Idaho Rep. Giddings

Rep. Priscilla Giddings, R-White Bird, glances up briefly as Idaho House Speaker Scott Bedke prepares to start a reconvening of the Idaho House of Representatives on Monday at the Statehouse in Boise. One of the first orders of business was to vote on accepting a report from the Idaho Ethics and House Policy Committee reccommending censure of Giddings. After nearly two hours of debate, the motion was passed 49-19.
Rep. Priscilla Giddings, R-White Bird, glances up briefly as Idaho House Speaker Scott Bedke prepares to start a reconvening of the Idaho House of Representatives on Monday at the Statehouse in Boise. One of the first orders of business was to vote on accepting a report from the Idaho Ethics and House Policy Committee reccommending censure of Giddings. After nearly two hours of debate, the motion was passed 49-19. Idaho Statesman

Idaho’s right-wing legislators closed ranks Monday in defense of Rep. Priscilla Giddings in the ethics complaint against her, donning blinders and ignoring facts of the case.

The usual suspects tried to focus on funding for the ethics committee, minute details of wording in the committee’s findings and Giddings’ credentials and accomplishments, even noting that Giddings is a scuba diver, as if that somehow excuses her behavior.

They did just about everything besides look at the plain truth of what Giddings did: She shared a right-wing blog post that exposed the identity of “Jane Doe,” a 19-year-old intern who bravely came forward to accuse then-Rep. Aaron von Ehlinger, R-Lewiston, of a sexual assault. And then Giddings was evasive about it when questioned by the ethics committee during von Ehlinger’s own committee hearing.

At various times, Giddings and her defenders asserted contradictory defenses of her actions: Former attorney general and lieutenant governor David Leroy released the accuser’s name, so it must be all right to do so; Giddings didn’t read the post, so she didn’t know the accuser’s name and photo were in the post; or Giddings was simply trying to get “both sides” of the story out.

What was clear to most observers, then and now, was that the far-right faction of Idaho’s House of Representatives was seeking to protect von Ehlinger.

If Giddings’ actions were indeed committed in the spirit of circling the wagons around von Ehlinger, then it’s clear these were actions intended to intimidate, malign and degrade the accuser. When she was questioned about her actions, she was evasive and dishonest with the committee.

If Giddings truly had made an honest mistake, she was given ample opportunity to share those explanations with the ethics committee when it came time for her own hearing.

Instead, she obstructed, demonstrating the very behavior she was accused of previously.

Even on Monday, during House floor debate, she remained defiant, without the slightest hint of contrition or remorse.

Remarkably, she even appeared to concede her intentional dishonesty.

Giddings, a U.S. Air Force Academy graduate and lieutenant colonel in the Air Force, said Monday on the House floor that she learned evasion techniques when being interrogated by the enemy as part of her military training, suggesting that she was putting that taxpayer-funded training to use with the ethics committee.

That statement was full confirmation of the complaint which was brought against Giddings, that of being dishonest and evasive with the ethics committee.

The show of hypocrisy and blinders put on by Giddings’ defenders was astonishing.

Rep. Julianne Young, R-Blackfoot, tried to justify her decision by saying that she always stands up for the underdog and characterizing Giddings as the underdog here. What about Jane Doe? Only in Young’s warped view of the world is Giddings, who holds a position of power and used it against a 19-year-old intern who came forward to accuse another legislator of sexual assault, considered the “underdog.”

Rep. Barbara Ehardt, R-Idaho Falls, tried to make the argument that the punishment of this process was enough for Giddings. What about the punishment of the process that Jane Doe went through — because of Giddings? Isn’t she owed a day of accountability for what Giddings did to her?

And that, really, is a point that should not be overlooked: the damage, the harm Giddings did by disseminating the identity of Jane Doe.

“We were sent an intern to care for in this body,” Rep. Caroline Nilsson Troy, R-Genesee, said on the House floor. “And when we are sent young men and women of this state to care for in this body, I feel that we have the responsibility to care for them at a higher standard, that standard that we expect of ourselves as representatives, that we expect of ourselves representing our districts, that we expect of ourselves on what we say in public media, in our emails and on our text messages.”

Statesman editorials are the unsigned opinion expressing the consensus of the Idaho Statesman’s editorial board. Board members are opinion editor Scott McIntosh, opinion writer Bryan Clark, editor Chadd Cripe, newsroom editors Dana Oland and Jim Keyser and community members J.J. Saldaña and Christy Perry.

This story was originally published November 15, 2021 at 2:51 PM.

Get unlimited digital access
#ReadLocal

Try 1 month for $1

CLAIM OFFER