Defending the Idaho Political Consensus
For those who are not flying high on the right wing of Idaho’s politics, there is some good news about public policy outcomes in Idaho. For moderates, liberals, progressives, even conservatives whose political views do not veer that far from the center of the political spectrum, it is reassuring to note there is an Idaho Political Consensus that seems to smack down a good portion of the irresponsible showboating that occurs every year as the state Legislature deliberates.
Although Idaho may be a red state, its color loses its blazing tones when the Idaho Legislature strikes down legislation that damages government’s ability to serve its citizens. In some cases, it’s legislative inaction that gets the job done as happened in the recent session when a proposal to freeze property taxes failed to survive the session.
Where the Legislature fails to act with a modicum of concern for those most in need of government assistance, the governor can step in to apply a more moderate political, cultural and economic calculus when using his veto power. In exercising his first constitutional veto following the recent legislative session, that is exactly what Gov. Brad Little did when he vetoed a misguided attempt by Rep. Joe Palmer to move sales tax revenues that fund education, prison and health and welfare to the transportation budget.
This idea of “robbing Peter to pay Paul” is nothing new for the Idaho Legislature which already shifts 1% of the state sales tax to roads, but Palmer wanted to double the amount diverted from the general fund to the road fund. Little justified his veto by citing the uncertainty of the ongoing COVID-19 crisis and its likely impact on the state budget.
Sometimes the governor and Legislature take orders directly from the people when legislators drag their feet on legislation clearly in the interests of Idahoans in need of basic health care coverage. That was the case in 2018 when the Medicaid for Idaho campaign succeeded in obtaining enough signatures to get Medicaid expansion on the ballot and 60% of the voters called for the state to expand Medicaid in Idaho and accept federal dollars as 31 states had already done.
In a report to the legislature during its recent session, Idaho’s Medicaid administrator, Matt Wimmer, reported that about 62,000 Idahoans have enrolled for health coverage and expansion “has gone remarkably smoothly and we are pleased with how that has rolled out.”
Perhaps nothing shows the distance between the far right of Idaho and the Idaho Political Consensus than Gov. Little’s recent statewide “stay home” order. With right-wing talk show hosts and commentators questioning the expertise of epidemiologists on how the coronavirus spreads and how dangerous and lethal a virus it has proven to be, the governor joined Republican and Democratic governors in what can only be called a national consensus on how to fight COVID-19. At the time the governor imposed the order, President Trump’s approach was to return life to normal on Easter Sunday. From the scientific evidence Gov. Little apparently had at his disposal, that was a very unlikely scenario for Idaho at least and, of course, the president has since backed off his Easter Sunday deadline.
Scientific evidence didn’t stand in the way of that ideological bastion of irrelevance, the Idaho Freedom Foundation. From his perch on the far right of the political spectrum, Freedom Foundation President Wayne Hoffman decreed in a letter to the governor that his “stay at home” order was “too sweeping,” declaring that “it makes no sense to limit the movement of all people, all ages, when some age brackets are at greater risk.”
With no apparent understanding of how the coronavirus spreads from a person of any age to those who can die from the virus, the Freedom Foundation showed its stubborn resistance to expertise while it chose to apply its holier-than-thou free market principles to a pandemic. Gov. Little ignored the Freedom Foundation’s call for a free market approach to a pandemic and, instead, chose to govern within the parameters of the Idaho Political Consensus.
The jurisdictional lines defining the Idaho Political Consensus are not impermeable. There will be bills passed by the state Legislature that come from outside the Consensus and brand Idaho as a place hostile to human rights, social justice and business and job growth — its attack on diversity and affirmative action comes to mind. Those moments will test the mettle of the governor, and he may not always stay within the boundaries. But overall, Idaho is still governed by a Consensus that represents a majority of Idahoans who do not buy into the radical agenda of the right that sometimes rears its ugly head in the Legislature.
If the Idaho Political Consensus is to resist laws branding Idaho as a right-wing funny farm, it will not be a self-correcting process that gets the job done. It requires activism on the part of those who believe in a moderate political consensus in which Republicans and Democrats agree on a positive role for government to play in our state. It requires opinion-makers and movers-and-shakers from the community to speak up and out. It requires a vigilant press to observe, report and comment on the direction of government. It requires candidates willing to challenge incumbents who bring their own narrow, ideological agendas to the capital city and to Washington.
Most importantly, the Idaho Political Consensus must reject the kind of outrageous claims and demands of a so-called Freedom Foundation that refuses to identify its membership or who it speaks for when it claims that during this pandemic crisis, we must stick to free market principles. I doubt Adam Smith would fall for nonsense like that.