“The Idaho Republican Party congratulates Congressman Ron Paul on his straw poll victory tonight,” stated party chairman Norm Semanko. Semanko continued, “It was a packed house tonight, the energy was contagious, and the Idaho Republican Party is looking forward to making Barack Obama a one-term president! We now turn our focus to the March 6 presidential caucus, and we welcome all Republican candidates to visit our great state to discuss issues important to Idahoans, and to campaign for Idaho’s 32 delegates to the Republican National Convention.”

Paul brought in more than 40 percent of the votes cast. Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney took second and Newt Gingrich placed third.

The effect of the straw poll, however, could be minimal. Minnesota Congresswoman Michelle Bachmann took the Iowa straw poll in August but dropped out of the presidential race this week after she placed fifth in the same state’s caucus.

The Idaho GOP will hold its first-ever caucus at a number of locations through the state on March 6, otherwise known as Super Tuesday.

The proposal would allow local party committees to consider all candidates interested in appearing on the primary ballot, evaluate their political credentials, and eventually narrow the field down to two contenders.

Beck thinks the move would force all candidates to be cognizant of and dedicated to party ideals. “I think it would make the party better and politicians more accountable to the principles,” Beck explained.

The former state senator points to last year’s GOP race for governor in which five candidates were on the ballot.  Beck feels that the extra names clouded the contest.  “There will be a real clear delineation of the issues if you only have two candidates,” Beck told IdahoReporter.com Wednesday.

One party heavyweight, Superintendent of Public Instruction Tom Luna, has come out against the plan because it could prove exclusionary to some.  “I’m a strong supporter of closed primaries. I’m not a supporter of closing the ballot access to any candidate,” Luna told the Idaho Statesman. “If someone wants to run as a Republican, they can put their name on the ballot with 15 other people, and I have no problem with that.”

Beck doesn’t seem to care about the roadblock Luna’s opposition could represent.  “The primary ballot is not about having a whole plethora of candidates, it’s about the party itself finding the best candidate,” Beck said when asked what he thinks of Luna’s opposition.

Implementing this proposal will take time and may even require some law changes by the Idaho Legislature, but Beck is determined to see it through if the GOP central committee approves the idea.  “We’ll probably have to sue,” Beck explained.

It’s not something he hasn’t pursued before.  He was a key figure in a legal fight to close Idaho’s primary elections.  A law to do just that was passed by the Idaho Legislature earlier this year after a court ruling in the legal battle found that the previous system denied parties their right to freely assemble.

The plan has drawn ire on some blogs sites, but Beck is fervent in his support of the idea.  “It’s none of their business,” Beck said of plan critics.  “If the party makes a stupid decision, it will pay for it in subsequent elections.”

There is no official timeframe for implementation of the proposal if GOP leaders decide to move forward.  Beck estimated that the process could take as many as five years.   “It will not affect the 2012 election,” he concluded.

Beck made national news last year at the GOP convention when he successfully pushed through a provision that would require all Republican candidates to review the party’s platform and disclose the policy statements with which they disagree. Several GOP officials, including Gov. Butch Otter, have said they will not participate in the disclosure process.

“You can’t draw the lines sooner or later without some Republicans running against Republicans,” said Idaho Democratic Party Chairman Larry Grant. He and his Republican counterpart, Norm Semanko, spoke Monday at the City Club of Boise about redistricting and other political topics. Grant said the redistricting commission could end up throwing some sitting GOP lawmakers under the bus, but said Democratic-friendly districts are compact and likely to stay intact.

“Redistricting doesn’t win elections, but it does set what the boundaries will look like for your legislators,” Semanko said. He disagreed with Grant, saying Latah and Nez Perce counties in north Idaho, both of which elected Democrats to the Legislature, have grown at a slower rate than the rest of the state. “They can’t just do their one county as a legislative district anymore,” Semanko said.

Grant and Semanko each get to pick a member of the six-person redistricting commission. The Republican and Democratic leaders of the Idaho House and Senate also get to name a commissioner. Democrats have already named their three appointees to the redistricting commission, and Semanko said Republicans will do so before the first commission meeting on June 7.

“Good things come to those who wait,” said Semanko.

Grant appointed George Moses from Boise, a union political coordinator who worked on Grant’s campaigns for office and served in the Air Force in Vietnam.

“Our goal is a map that meets our legal obligation,” Moses told IdahoReporter.com.

The six commissioners have some guidelines for their redistricting plan. They must make between 30 and 35 districts of roughly equal population — a 10 percent difference has been the maximum legal cut off – and keep counties intact when possible. The commission is also supposed to keep communities of interest within a district. If several counties are combined for a district, they are supposed to be linked by a major road.

Moses said he’s not as concerned about which party or lawmakers benefit from the chosen map, but that cities and communities aren’t sliced up into different districts. “It doesn’t make much sense to me to cut a city into halves or thirds when you don’t have to,” he said. “Why would you do that?”

The Democrats also appointed Julie Kane, an attorney for the Nez Perce tribe in north central Idaho, and Allen Anderson, a former House member and Idaho State University math professor. Moses said Democrats haven’t yet drawn a map that they’ll all support, a move some Republicans say will likely come from their party before the commission starts meeting.

“I’ve heard the rumors that our brethren are going to come in with a plan and that’s their story and their sticking with it,” Moses said. He has used the online Maptitude redistricting software and said he ran into some bugs that required help from state legislative staff.

The Maptitude software is open to the public, with 180 people signing up to start drawing their own legislative boundaries, according to Keith Bybee with the Legislative Services Office. “I’m excited about that,” Bybee said.

So far, five completed maps have been submitted to the commission. Moses promised to look at all the maps sent in by the public. “Every submission’s going to get considered,” he said. “Some will be more useful than others.”

Moses said he expects to see maps with 30 legislative districts, which would shrink the size of the Legislature by 15 members, but said he didn’t have an opinion on that change.

The redistricting commission is scheduled to meet from June 7-9 in Boise before holding meetings in other parts of the state. Once it starts meeting, the commission has 90 days to submit a redistricting plan, which Moses and Secretary of State Ben Ysursa say is likely to be challenged in court because of opposition from someone who disagrees with the plan.

“I look at all the things that we achieved,” Otter said at a news conference. “As I reflect back on the State of the State, which we made in early January, I don’t see very many holes. I see lots of successes.”

Otter said he’d give the Legislature an ‘A’ grade for its work. Other GOP lawmakers have called the session difficult but a success, though Democrats have called it historically bad.

One of the focal points of the session was the “Students Come First” reforms to public schools backed by the governor and Superintendent of Public Instruction Tom Luna. Those reforms increase spending for technology in classrooms, including starting the state down the path of giving laptops or other mobile computers to high schoolers, creating pay for performance bonuses for educators, and reducing teachers unions’ bargaining power. Some for those reforms are paid for by reducing state funding for schools’ salaries, which could lead local districts to lay off staff.

Otter signed several pieces of legislation making changes to the education overhaul he’s already endorsed. Those plans include emergency clauses that make the education reforms laws effective immediately. Critics say that could harm efforts to repeal the laws, though Otter said his intent is to get started on reforms.

Opponents are already gathering signatures to put a referendum of the plan on the 2012 ballot, as well as a recall of Luna that could go to a public vote later this year.

Otter also signed a plan to ban abortions after 20 weeks of pregnancy due to concerns of fetal pain.

That legislation is modeled after a similar plan in Nebraska. Otter said he has a different interpretation of the law than the Idaho attorney general’s office, which said it could violate women’s constitutional rights to have an abortion without an undue burden.

Otter also approved legislation that would require party registration and could close Idaho’s primary elections to independent voters. He said he signed the plan because it was a compromise between House and Senate Republicans and a new primary system was needed thanks to a federal judge’s ruling.

Otter also approved a plan to give the Idaho Republican Party $100,000 for legal fees after the lawsuit. He said he wished the state could have bargained down to give less money, but that the payment for lawyers fees were required by the federal judge.

The governor said he was disappointed that lawmakers didn’t allow the Idaho Department of Insurance to spend $2.5 million in grants from the federal government’s health care reform plan to research setting up health insurance exchanges. Those government-run exchanges could let individuals and small businesses compare and buy health insurance plans.

Otter said state agencies have already used some federal grants in an effort to figure out Idaho’s health care needs, irrespective of the federal reforms, which he called Obamacare, would require. Otter favored giving the Department of Insurance the federal money, though the Idaho House balked at that spending.

The governor also said he’d be waiting until there’s further action in Washington, D.C., on wolves until signing a plan that could trigger a wolf disaster emergency in Idaho. Otter has until April 20 to sign the law, and said he’s waiting for an agreement in Congress on delisting wolves, which Idaho Rep. Mike Simpson is backing as part of a government spending plan.

If wolves are delisted, the wolf emergency plan wouldn’t be needed. Otter also said he’d meet with state officials on reinstating a public wolf hunt, saying the state has a good boilerplate, based on the hunt that started in late 2009, which he called a success.

The U.S. House approved the federal spending plan, including the wolf delisting, Thursday afternoon.

Members of the Idaho House  and Senate have approved a measure that would essentially close future primary elections.  Members of the House voted 51-16 to approve the bill.  GOP Reps. Tom Trail of Moscow, Leon Smith of Twin Falls, and Julie Ellsworth of Boise, voted with all 13 Democrats to oppose the plan.

The measure hit the Senate floor a few hours later.  The Senate debate on the plan was very brief, since senators had debated the earlier version of the plan.  Senate President Pro Tem Brent Hill, R-Rexburg, started off his debate by saying the plan was “ditto” the earlier bill.  Sen. Les Bock, D-Boise, said only “ditto” in his opposition of the bill.

“It’s very important that we address this before the end of the session,” Hill said before the Senate approved the plan on a 28-7 vote.

The measure would allow the 750,000 voters of the state register as a member of a party when they register to vote or when they vote in the May 2012 primary.

Six months prior to the election, party officials must notify the secretary of state if they intend to allow unaffiliated voters to participate in primary contests.

If voters choose not to affiliate themselves with parties, they would be allowed to vote only in non-partisan races.  Declaration of party affiliation would become a matter of public record and would become subject to records request laws.

The measure could cost as much as $375,000 to implement.  That figure includes up to $215,000 in taxpayer money to fund an ad campaign to educate voters on the changes.

It was the cost of funding elections for the private parties that drew the ire of Rep. Grant Burgoyne, D-Boise, who argued that taxpayers should not fund primary elections.  “That is not an appropriate use of taxpayer money,” cautioned Burgoyne.

Idaho’s open primary system was declared unconstitutional earlier this year after the GOP sued, contending that parties have the right to decide who participates in election contests.

Burgoyne said that even though he respects the ruling in the case, U.S. District Judge Lynn Winmill did not require that the state continue funding primary elections.  “Nothing in the decision requires that the state of Idaho use taxpayer money to fund private elections,” said Burgoyne.  He unsuccessfully pitched a bill earlier this year that would have made all elected office in the state non-partisan in nature.

House Speaker Lawerence Denney, R-Midvale, said the measure was a “good compromise” among all parties involved in crafting the plan.

Note: Brad Iverson-Long contributed to this post.

Legislators voted 44-24 to approve the transfer of funds.  Several Republicans joined all 13 House Democrats in opposing the move. The bill now heads to the desk of Gov. Butch Otter for his consideration.

The GOP sued the state because it felt that primary elections should be closed and that parties are private entities that should enjoy the right to decide who votes in party-only contests.  The case was decided earlier this year, with the ruling coming in favor of the GOP position.

Rep. Tom Loertscher, R-Iona, defended the payment, saying that the Legislature should have allowed closed-primaries several years ago and that the money is simply the cost of delayed action. “This could’ve been very easily resolved by the parties that be,” said Loertscher.  “Government caused the problem.”

Rep. Brian Cronin, D-Boise, countered Loertscher, noting that Republicans have owned large majorities in both chambers of the Idaho Capitol for several years. “This was a problem that originated in the Idaho Republican Party and could have been settled by the Idaho Republican Party,” said Cronin.  “I am incredulous we are even here debating this bill.”

The money will come out of the secretary of state’s budget.

Sen. Mitch Toryanski, R-Boise, said since the state lost the lawsuit and the Republican Party asked for legal fees, the state’s obligated to pay that money. He also said that the Legislature had a chance to change Idaho’s primary system in 2007 before the lawsuit got started.

“In this case, inaction had consequences, and the consequence is $100,000 four years later,” Toryanski said.

The spending plan was approved on a 25-10 vote, as Senate Democrats were joined by several Republicans in opposition. “We’re paying $100,000 for the Republican Party to sue the Republican Legislature and be defended by the Republican secretary of state,” said Sen. Elliot Werk, D-Boise. “It’s so bad it’s comical.”

Sen. Les Bock, D-Boise, said the state wouldn’t have to pay the lawyers’ fees if the GOP hadn’t asked to be reimbursed. Idaho Republican Party officials say actual legal fees amounted to $143,000, so the state won’t be paying for all the costs.

The legislation now heads to the House. The Senate has already approved a plan that could lead to closed primary elections, giving the state parties the option to limit primaries to just party members. That plan has a House hearing on Tuesday.

“This is not a closed primary bill – it provides options,” said Senate President Pro Tem Brent Hill, R-Rexburg. “It’s a constitutional primary bill.” The new primary system follows a successful lawsuit by the Idaho Republican Party striking down Idaho’s existing open primary election system.

“We’ve tried to put something together here that brings us back into compliance with the Constitution,” Hill said.

Idaho has more than 750,000 voters, none of whom are currently registered by party. The legislation would allow voters to declare their party affiliation at the polls during next May’s primary or when they register to vote. Party affiliation would become public information.

Six months before a primary, state political party chairmen would notify the state if they would allow voters who are unaffiliated or members of other parties to participate in their primary. The chairmen of both the Republican and Democratic parties have indicated they would let independent voters participate in their primaries. If unaffiliated voters pick one party’s ballot in a primary, that also would become public information.

Democrats opposed the plan on a party line vote, with several senators testifying that they prefer the current open primary plan.

“Everyone is used to this primary,” said Senate Minority Leader Edgar Malepeai, D-Pocatello. “What we’re doing with this bill is we’re going to create some barriers.”

Sen. Nicole LeFavour, D-Boise, said party affiliation is a personal matter, and declaring affiliation is troubling to many voters. “I believe I stand with a lot of Idahoans who feel so uncomfortable with this kind of information as public record,” she said.

Sen. Elliot Werk, D-Boise, questioned why the state should continue paying for primaries when they could amount to partisan activities. “The taxpayers shouldn’t have to pay for that private party function,” Werk said.

The change to party registration and closed primaries could cost $375,000 for programs including an ad campaign to educate Idahoans about the changes, new voter registration cards, and county expenses at polling places.

The state is also expected to pay $100,000 to the Idaho Republican Party for lawyers’ fees for the lawsuit striking down open primaries.

According to the Center for Voting and Democracy, 26 states have closed primaries, 15 have open primaries, with the rest of the states have a combination of the two or a different primary election system.

The legislation is one of the “going home” bills Republican leaders at the Statehouse want to pass before finishing the legislative session. It was introduced on Monday and had a full Senate hearing earlier on Wednesday. It now heads to the House for consideration.

Senate President Pro Tem Brent Hill, R-Rexburg, said the new voter registration and primary election system isn’t a true closed primary system, because political party leaders could allow independents to cast a vote in their primaries.

Under the new plan, voters would declare their party affiliation when they vote in the 2012 primary or when they register to vote. People who don’t pick a party could only vote in a partisan primary if the political party chair allows them. Party chairs could also let voters from other political parties vote in their primary, if they wish. Voters could change parties in subsequent primaries, though that would need to happen more than two months before a primary.

The legislation follows a federal court ruling earlier this month that struck down the state’s open primary system, in which voters don’t register by party and can pick any party’s ballot when going to the polls during the May primary.

Secretary of State Ben Ysursa, who supported the old open primary, said Idaho’s primary participation is abysmal and called the closed primaries a major change. He also said he hoped the change wouldn’t lead to a drop in voter participation.

The Idaho Republican Party brought that lawsuit against the state and supports the new legislation. Party chairman Norm Semanko said the party would welcome independents, though current state party rules say only Republicans registered with the party before the primary election date can vote in the party’s primary.

Idaho Democratic Party Chairman Larry Grant, who also supports open primaries, told lawmakers the closed primary issue is a Republican intramural fight. He also called the new primary system too complicated and said it could lead to more lawsuits.

“I simply urge you to make it as simple as possible, and make it as easy as possible for people to vote,” Grant told lawmakers.

Senate Majority Leader Bart Davis, R-Idaho Falls, said he thinks the new primary system is simple. He also said the early deadline for switching parties allows parties to prevent “known political operatives” from crossing over to vote.

Davis also asked Grant whether the new primary system could allow Democrats to stop holding a closed caucus for its presidential primary. Grant said Democratic National Committee rules require Idaho to hold a caucus as long as the party has an open primary that allows independents to potentially get a Democratic ballot.

The legislation passed the Senate State Affairs Committee on a party-line vote, with Democrats in opposition. Senate Minority Leader Edgar Malepeai, D-Pocatello, said he’s concerned because voters’ party preference could become public knowledge, which could be problematic for voters who side with a minority party.

“This is a very very private thing amongst a lot of people,” Malepeai said. He also said the new primary system is too doggone complex. “Making this more complex and having to declare party affiliation is going to be a deterrent to voter participation.”

Davis said the full Senate is scheduled to vote on the legislation Thursday afternoon. He said the legislation isn’t being rushed, because plans for a closed primary have been discussed at the Statehouse for years.

The legislation for closed primaries follows a successful lawsuit by the Idaho Republican Party, which convinced a federal judge that Idaho’s open primaries, which let voters pick any party’s ballot, violated its constitutional right to assemble. On Monday, budget writers also agreed to repay some of the GOP’s attorney fees.

The Joint Finance-Appropriations Committee (JFAC) agreed to pay the Idaho Republican Party $100,000 to cover lawyers’ fees for the lawsuit striking down open primaries. The state owed the GOP those costs as a result of the GOP’s victory. State GOP Executive Director Jonathan Parker said the actual attorney costs were closer to $143,000, but the party and the state government agreed to the smaller payment.  The money for the GOP comes from the state general fund.

The closed primary “will also allow independent voters to join the Republican Party at anytime, providing a great opportunity for us to continue to attract and recruit like-minded folks to the cause,” party chairman Norm Semanko said on the party’s website.  He said he supports implementing the legislation before next year’s primary.

The legislation would require Semanko or other state party chairmen to notify the secretary of state six months before a primary if the party would allow unaffiliated voters or voters who identify with a different party to cast a vote in their party’s primary.

Idaho Democratic Party State Chair Larry Grant said his party supports open primaries. “The more people who vote, the better candidates you get,” Grant said. He also said that while Semanko and other Republican officials say they welcome independents, that may not hold true next year.

“This is just slight of hand and a nod to the independents,” Grant told IdahoReporter.com. “This is probably just a head fake.” Grant also said he expects Democratic lawmakers to stand up for voters and oppose the closed primaries and party registration system.

State GOP Executive Director Jonathan Parker said the party’s central committee would likely vote on how to handle independent voters. “we want those like-minded folks to join the Republican Party,” Parker said. “We just don’t want Democrats crossing over and negatively impacting our elections.”

The new plan was introduced Monday in the Senate State Affairs Committee. For next year’s primaries, it would instruct county clerks to add check off boxes to their poll book to ask all current registered voters to declare a party affiliation, which would include being unaffiliated. Party registration would also become part of new voter registration cards.

If a party allows unaffiliated Idahoans to vote in its primary, a poll worker would need to check off a box in the poll book saying which party’s ballot a voter receives. Voters’ party registration or party choice in a primary election would become public record. Idaho currently doesn’t ask or keep track of such information.

Down the road, voters could switch parties or declare themselves unaffiliated, but they’d need to inform county clerks of those changes more than two months before the primary election, on the deadline for candidates to declare for a primary race.

Party registration and the closed primary system carry a $215,000 price tag to the state for new voter registration cards and a voter information ad campaign and $160,000 cost to the counties for more poll workers and processing new voter data.

The new primary and party registration system next faces a full Senate committee. It’s part of the “going home list” that lawmakers put a high priority on during the last few days of the legislative session. The $100,000 payment to the Idaho Republican Party must be approved by the Idaho House and Senate.