Allred was defeated by Republican Gov. Butch Otter by a 59-32 percent margin.  Though he didn’t garner as many votes as he would have liked, Allred says that he is pleased with his campaign and that he could run again.  ”Despite the outcome, I have been truly happy with our campaign and honored by the support we received,” wrote Allred.  ”I will consider the running again if the circumstances are right.”

He did not indicate what office he might seek if the conditions were to his liking.

Prior to his run for the state’s top job, Allred ran The Common Interest, a group that professed to be about finding center-of-the-road solutions to problems faced by state government.  The Democrat acknowledges that he will likely not be able to lead the group in the near-term because of his affiliation with the Idaho Democratic Party, but he still has high hopes for the project.

“In the near term, it’s not realistic for me to play the roles at The Common Interest that I did previously,” he said.  ”In the long term, it remains my goal that by the 250th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence, 16 years from now, The Common Interest will be as effective in all 50 states and at the federal level as it has been in Idaho.”

Allred’s campaign spokesman, Shea Andersen, speaking unofficially for the group, told IdahoReporter.com that Allred would have difficulty working in a bipartisan manner for The Common Interest.  “He has a partisan target squarely on his back at the point,” Andersen said.  ”That would make it difficult to get things done the way he did before the campaign.”

The Eagle Democrat signed on to work with HB Ventures, an organizational management firm, last week.  His company, Allred Solutions, will merge with HB Ventures.  Allred, who taught mediation at several universities, will work as a mediator and consultant in the new firm.

Today HB Ventures and Allred Solutions announced their merger.   The new entity will operate under the HB Ventures name.  Keith Allred, the founder and Principal of Allred Solutions, will be a Partner in the new firm and will lead its strategy and organizational development activities.  Allred brings 15 years of consulting and executive education experience to the new role.   His previous clients include large companies like Chevron, Dow Chemical, Hughes Aerospace, Micron Technology, Santa Fe Railway, and the JR Simplot Company as well as federal agencies like the IRS, EPA, and the Department of the Interior.

Just prior to his recent campaign for governor of Idaho, Allred partnered with Dan Burton and HB Ventures in working with clients to integrate business strategy and organizational development.  Finding that the approach provided unique value to clients, HB Ventures and Allred Solutions merged to pursue this approach with other clients.

An internationally recognized scholar in leadership, group decision making, and negotiation, Allred was a professor at Harvard from 1998 to 2003.  Since founding Allred Solutions in 2003 to focus on his applied consulting interests, he has continued to teach in executive programs for Harvard as well as Oxford’s Said School of Business.  He also teaches in Boise State University’s Executive MBA program.  Prior to joining the faculty at Harvard, Allred was a professor at Columbia University.

Allred holds a Ph.D. in Organizational Behavior from the Anderson School of Management at UCLA and a BA from Stanford University.

Dan Burton, HB Ventures Managing Partner, said, “Keith combines an international reputation as a thought leader with years of successful real world engagement at very senior levels.”  “Having seen him in action putting this rare combination to work for the benefit of consulting clients in the past, I know that he will provide enormous value to our portfolio businesses and consulting clients,” Burton said.  “We’re thrilled to have him.”

HB Ventures specializes in turnaround and growth. Whether helping the clients they advise or its portfolio companies, HB Ventures follows a systematic methodology driving dramatic, sustainable improvements in business performance within 12-18 months.

Allred was defeated by Republican Gov. Butch Otter at the polls Nov. 2 by a 59-32 margin.  Allred has not ruled out running for the post again in the future.

“Idahoans were understandably outraged by fiscal irresponsibility in Washington, which made it especially difficult to convey that this Democratic nominee was more serious about a low tax burden for Idaho families than the Republican incumbent,” Allred said in an e-mail. He added he knew the outcome had little to do with his campaign message.

Allred’s top campaign issues included getting rid of some sales tax exemptions and lowering the gas tax.

Allred lost to Gov. Butch Otter 59 percent to 33 percent. Democrats lost all statewide races, with most local race candidates faring worse than Allred. Superintendent of Public Instruction candidate Stan Olson garnered almost 40 percent of the vote in his race, while Democratic Rep. Walt Minnick got 41 percent of the vote in Idaho’s 1st Congressional District.

“The unusual and powerful nature of the external circumstances means that the outcome was not much of a reflection on us and may not be a reliable indicator of what could happen in future years,” Allred said.

Allred wouldn’t say what his future plan are, besides spending time with his family. Allred led The Common Interest, a non-partisan advocacy group focused on state policy, before entering the governor’s race as a Democrat.

Read Allred’s full letter below.

Dear Friends,

Christine and I want you to know that we have never confronted such a setback and still been in such a good mood.

There are solid reasons for our resilience. One of those is that our commitment to the message we carried wasn’t ever contingent on outcome. We know that the rancorous partisan and special interest politics of our times are inadequate to solving the problems before us. We also know that our best recourse is – as the Founding Fathers suggested – to work towards solutions so clearly wise that they attract support across the lines that usually divide us. This campaign strengthened rather than diminished that passion. Even in defeat, it’s a privilege to pursue it.

We also know that the outcome had little to do with us and our message. We knew from the beginning that it would be as difficult as ever here, in Idaho, to get people to look beyond the partisan label to see our genuine commitment to solutions
that rise above the partisan divide. What we didn’t know was that there would be an anti-Democratic wave that would reach such historic heights on Election Day. Idahoans were understandably outraged by fiscal irresponsibility in Washington, which made it especially difficult to convey that this Democratic nominee was more serious about a low tax burden for Idaho families than the Republican incumbent. The unusual and powerful nature of the external circumstances means that the outcome was not much of a reflection on us and may not be a reliable indicator of what could happen in future years.

Everywhere we had the opportunity to give voters an accurate understanding of what I really stand for, the response was overwhelmingly positive. This was true among Republicans, Democrats, and independents.

Finally, one of the most significant reasons that Christine and I have been so buoyed is the outpouring of support from all of you. This began early in the campaign and has continued even through Election Day. Thank you for your hard work and your kind words. We’ve relied on both all year and, especially, in the final weeks. The outpouring of support has been so steady-and so steadying-that we can’t hope to acknowledge each individual message, but we do want you to know that we’ve felt each deeply. We feel grateful to have been partnered with you in such a worthy cause.

Many of you have expressed interest in our plans for the future. In the very near term, we’re spending significant family time with Anna, Dan, and Cate. Longer-term plans will follow and we’ll keep you posted.

For now, we want to share with you a quote that was included in one of the many messages of encouragement we’ve received. The words are from Teddy Roosevelt and had been running through my mind even before they appeared in a kind note. I think the sentiment speaks to each of us who dared to work together in this 2010 governor’s race. Christine and I certainly know that we could never have done such a bold thing alone:

It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood; who strives valiantly; who errs, who comes short again and again, because there is no effort without error and shortcoming; but who does actually strive to do the deeds; who knows great enthusiasms, the great devotions; who spends himself in a worthy cause; who at the best knows in the end the triumph of high achievement, and who at the worst, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who neither know victory nor defeat.

Christine and I want you to know that our great enthusiasm for the message we carried this year is undiminished. The thanks we convey to all of you, for carrying that message with us, is heartfelt.

Sincerely,

Keith and Christine Allred

Shea Andersen, spokesman for Allred’s now-defunct campaign, said, not officially speaking on behalf of the group, that because his boss ran on the Democratic ticket, it would be difficult to get things done in the Idaho Capitol while claiming to be independent.  ”He has a partisan target squarely on his back at the point,” Andersen said.  ”That would make it difficult to get things done the way he did before the campaign.”

Might Allred bring the group back to life sometime in the next few years?  ”I think it’s safe to say that it will stay dormant in the near future,” concluded Andersen.

Throughout the campaign, Allred tried to boast of his independence to attract moderate Republicans to his side.  He often spoke of his work with legislators on both sides of the ideological aisle in 2009 in defeating a gas tax hike proposed by Otter.  Allred even formed his own “Republicans for Allred” group late in the campaign, showing off support from several former state legislators.

Allred was handily defeated Tuesday in the general election, with Otter taking 59.1 percent of the vote compared with the Democrat’s 32.8 percent.

“In 2010, the Democratic brand isn’t doing so good,” said Keith Allred, an Independent who sought the governorship under the Democratic banner, at the party’s gathering at the Owyhee Plaza Hotel in downtown Boise Tuesday evening. “It’s just been a challenge to get through the general assumptions.”

The Republican money machine, including the National Republican Governor’s Association — which spent $500,000 on anti-Allred television ads and mailers — did well tagging him a boilerplate tax-and-spend liberal, Allred indicated.

Asked in an interview if he erred in aligning with Democrats, Allred said he would have had no chance on his own.

“For better or worse, in our system it’s just impossible to make a go of it as an Independent.”

Party Director Jim Hansen also talked of Republicans’ effectively painting Dems in broad strokes, perhaps referring to efforts to stick Walt Minnick, whose record reflects an independent streak, with the poisonous liberal label and linking him to the polarizing speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi.

“The Republicans spent a huge amount of resources defining what a Democrat is in the public mind,” he said.

Republicans handily won seven major offices: governor, superintendent of schools, controller, secretary of state, a U.S. Senate seat and two posts in the U.S. House of Representatives. The statehouse moved further right with GOP pickups.

On the Democratic Party’s future prospects in the most Republican of states, Hansen said, “We have a lot of really, really good people. They don’t believe in the way that they’re defined … the more people know their community leaders as individuals, not as some sort of artificial label, the more people Democrats, or Independents supported by Democrats, or moderate Republicans supported by Democrats, will be elected.”

Were the across-the-board trouncings worse than he expected?

“I think it’s a reflection of what was in play,” Hansen said.

In closing words to the crowd late Tuesday, Allred again spoke of combating the GOP-imposed “Democratic label.”

“We all knew at the beginning of this that it would be a tough challenge to get beyond that.”

He spoke of his commitment to overcoming political divides by following the Founding Fathers’ direction to support policy that attracts broad and diverse support; but the widespread Republican stereotype campaign largely drowned out his voice.

“Wherever we had a chance to really get that message out, and talked face to face with voters, that message resonated and it didn’t matter if they were Republican or Democrat or Independent, but we live in a highly partisan age.”

Idaho voters go to the polls Tuesday to elect a full slate of state officeholders featuring three contested races, a U.S. senator, two congressmen, as well as state House and Senate members. In addition, there are four constitutional amendments on the ballot.

Following is a summary of the contested national and state races, as well as an overview of the state Senate and House contests, plus a look at the constitutional amendments on the ballot.

Governor

Five candidates are running to be Idaho’s next governor, though only three – at the most – have a real chance at claiming victory Tuesday night.  Independent Pro-Life, formerly known as Marvin Richardson, and Libertarian Ted Dunlap added some issue-oriented talk at a debate held last week in the Statehouse in Boise, but neither has polled anywhere near close enough to have a legitimate shot at winning.

Slightly above Pro-Life and Dunlap is Independent Jana Kemp, a former Republican state legislator who wants to examine the health and welfare and corrections budgets to find money for education.  Kemp has also been critical of the two front-runners in the race, Republican Butch Otter and Democrat Keith Allred, for being members of the “good ‘ol boys club” and for taking money from special interests.

In the latest polling by Mason-Dixon, Otter holds a 22-point lead over Allred, though the Democrat says he has information showing a tighter race.  Allred has used this race to focus on the $128 million cut in the public schools budget, blasting Otter for approving it along the way.  To shore up funding for schools, Allred says he would close sales tax exemptions that “don’t make sense.” Otter has defended the cut, saying that Idaho can’t go into debt and the budget had to be balanced. He also said public schools were the least cut of all state-funded operations.

Otter has accused Allred of “Obama-speak” because he believes the Democrat is promising to be all things to everyone in the state with pledges of increased education spending coupled with no tax hikes. The two men also disagree on handling of wolves, with Otter recently handing management of the creature back to the federal government while Allred says the state must monitor wolves to show federal agencies the state can effectively do so.

Read IdahoReporter.com’s profile of Kemp here, Otter here, and Allred here.

Lieutenant governor

Republican Brad Little and Democrat Eldon Wallace are on the ballot to fill the lieutenant governor position.  Little is the incumbent in the contest, though he was never elected to the post.  Appointed by Gov. Butch Otter after Jim Risch left the seat in 2008 to take a U.S. Senate seat, Little has taken on key issues in his limited role as the second in command.  Little heads a task force on finding transportation funding for the future and has worked on economic development initiatives at the request of the governor.  At a debate between the two men in October, Wallace hammered Little – and Idaho Republicans in general – on a $128 million cut made to the education budget.  Wallace says that education is key to the Gem State’s future prosperity.  Little defended cuts, saying that tough decisions had to be made to balance the state’s budget.

Read about the debate between Little and Wallace here.

Superintendent of public instruction

The race for state superintendent of public instruction fits at least one electoral stereotype: it features a Republican businessman opposing a professional educator in the race for the state’s top education position.  Since his entry into the race, Democrat Stan Olson, a former superintendent of the Boise School District, has criticized his opponent, incumbent Republican Tom Luna, for not having enough experience in education to qualify for the job.  Olson has also blasted Luna for failing to plan for slumping tax revenues, which led to a $128 million cut in education during the 2010 legislative session.  Luna had plenty of criticisms for Olson, however.  The Republican blasted Olson for taking a $25,000 severance payment upon retirement from Boise schools and has repeatedly criticized him for not reducing his $175,000-a-year salary during the economic slump.

The men have found at least one area in which they agree: Luna and Olson both believe in charter schools and both have worked to enhance school choice while serving in public office.  They disagree, however, on instituting a new performance pay system for teachers.  Luna wants to implement a career ladder plan that would give teachers more control over how much they make, but needs $30 million to do so.  Olson wants to look at pay plans from other region of the country, but is skeptical of any system that includes salaries based on student achievement.

Read IdahoReporter.com’s video profile of Luna here and Olson here.

Secretary of state

It’s hard to call this contest a race because though there are two candidates on the ballot, voters might only take one seriously.  Republican Ben Ysursa, the incumbent in the fight, has served in the office in various positions for multiple decades.  His opponent, Mack Sermon, is a debate coach at the College of Idaho in Caldwell.  Sermon spent much of his time in the debate between the men defending his campaign website, which features pictures of him dressed up as a pro-wrestler, a vampire, and a rock star.  That doesn’t mean that Sermon didn’t attack his Republican counterpart on a few issues, however.  Sermon said that if elected, he would work to move Idaho to a vote-by-mail system , which he says would save millions for taxpayers.

The secretary of state sits on an oversight panel that manages Idaho’s reserve accounts.  Earlier this year, the board approved a transfer of $22 million the funds to the public education budget.  Ysura said the transfer was a one-time thing, while Sermon said he would use the office to ensure education funding is shored up as must as possible.

Here’s a link to coverage of the debate between Sermon and Ysursa.

U.S. Senate

Republican Sen. Mike Crapo is running a well-funded campaign for his third term in the U.S. Senate. On the campaign trail, he’s been critical of Democratic leadership in Congress, including the stimulus package, bailouts and reforms for the financial sector, and the uncertain fate of the Bush-era tax cuts.

Crapo’s Democratic opponent, Tom Sullivan, has criticized Crapo for taking campaign contributions from financial companies. He’s also been supportive of the administration of President Barack Obama, saying many of his policies, including health care and the stimulus package, have benefited the country.

The Senate race has a third party candidate. Constitution Party candidate Randy Bergquist is calling for a gradual repeal of all federal social welfare programs and a reduction in other government spending, including on the military.

1^st District, U.S. House

The race for 1^st Congressional District is expected to be one of the closest and most-watched across the state. Incumbent Democratic Rep. Walt Minnick, a businessman who led a wood products company, is being challenged by Republican state Rep. Raul Labrador, an immigration attorney. Labrador’s profession and the issue of illegal immigration has been one of the dominant topics in the race. The candidates also disagree on how to fix recent the health care overhaul approved by Congress.

Independent Dave Olson and Libertarian Mike Washburn are also running in the 1^st District race.

2^nd District, U.S. House

Republican Rep. Mike Simpson’s most vocal challenger has been Independent candidate Brian Schad, a former Navy SEAL. Schad has said Simpson has “joined the big government crowd” based on some of his votes, including the $700 billion Troubled Asset Relief Program in 2008 aimed at helping banks and other finance companies.

All the challengers running in the congressional races have said that the incumbents, be they Republican or Democrat, are part of the problems plaguing Washington, D.C.

Idaho Senate

The Idaho Senate is very likely to remain controlled by the Republican Party, since 16 Republicans in the 35-member chamber are running unopposed. GOP candidates are challenging all seven Democrats in the Senate, with the majority party hoping to pick up several seats. Democrats are running for 12 seats currently held by Republicans, largely in more urban legislative districts.

Interesting races to watch include the 6^th district, serving Moscow, where Republican Gresham Bouma defeated a longtime incumbent but faces Democratic challenger Dan Schmidt, and the 25^th District, where Sen. Michelle Stennett has two opponents in her bid to take the seat held by her husband, the late Sen. Clint Stennett.

Idaho House

This much is known about the Idaho House of Representatives Tuesday night: Republicans will maintain control of the state’s lower chamber.  The question to be answered is if the GOP will keep its commanding majority enjoyed by Republicans in the last two years.

Of the 70 House seats up for grabs, 28 are uncontested, 26 of which are held by Republicans.  Only two Democrats, House Minority Leader John Rusche, Lewiston, and Rep. Wendy Jaquet, Ketchum, are not facing electoral foes on the ballot.

District 18 in south Boise has been pegged as one area to watch Tuesday night. Democratic Rep. Phylis King is facing a competitive challenger from Republican Trevor Grigg for one House seat and Democrat Janie Ward-Engelking is battling with Republican Julie Ellsworth for the other.  Ellsworth and Engelking are battling for the spot vacated by Rep. Branden Durst in his quest to move up to the Idaho Senate.  Engelking is a veteran education, but Ellsworth may have the edge in name recognition because she served in the Idaho Legislature for 10 years.

Also of note on election night is the race for Democratic Rep. George Sayler’s seat in Coeur D’Alene.  Republican Kathleen Sims, a business owner in the area, served one term in the Idaho Senate, but was defeated in a GOP primary.  Democrat Paula Marano has Sayler’s backing and has outraised Sims in the contest.  Marana pledges to increase education spending, while Sims says her priority will be to cut government.

Constitutional amendments

Four constitutional amendments are on the ballot, three dealing with public debt and one about how the University of Idaho (UI) charges its students.

SJR101

Senate Joint Resolution 101 (SJR101) was passed by the Legislature in 2009, but had to wait for a general election for a vote.  The Idaho Constitution prohibits UI from charging students tuition because of the school’s status as a land grant college.  The framers of the Gem State’s founding document set forth a plan that forbids college kids from paying tuition, though they don’t attend school for free.  UI is still able to charge fees, and it does it on a level comparable to the tuition rates of other public Idaho universities.

The problem, says the school, is that the constitutional provision prevents the school from exercising complete control over its own finances. The issue has come to a head at this time because state support for higher education has shrunk more than 20 percent.  Fees are allowed to pay for campus buildings and other projects, but cannot be used to pay professor salaries.  Therein lies the problem, says the school.

Of the four amendments, this measure has the least opposition.  One state lawmaker opposed it as a matter of principle, explaining that if the state properly supported higher education, the school wouldn’t need the amendment.

Read a comprehensive profile of SJR101 here.

The other three

In 2006, the Idaho Supreme Court issued a ruling on a case involving the Boise Airport that, in impact, declared that certain political subdivisions of the state – airports, public hospitals, and city-owned power systems – cannot enter into long-term agreements or incur debt without voter approval.

Each of the three other amendments on the ballot seeks to alter that ruling and allow hospitals, airports, and city-owner power companies to incur debt without voter approval, but only if the debt is to be paid without using taxpayer dollars.

House Joint Resolution 4 (HJR4) zeroes in on hospitals.  The Idaho Hospital Association believes that passage of the measure is necessary for hospitals to purchase needed equipment, which can be very costly and require financing.  Those advocating for passage note that no public hospital in the history of state has ever missed a payment on debt.

House Joint Resolution 5 (HJR5) has received the most attention of the four measures on the ballot.  This amendment has the backing of the majority of mayors of cities in the Treasure Valley, who say that airports need to catch up in infrastructure investment to the tune of about $738 million through the next 20 years.   The man behind HJR5, Rep. Fred Wood, R-Burley, said that Idaho Constitution was written at a time – 1890 – when airplanes weren’t around.  Wood said that the founders of the state never planned for this scenario and that the document was never meant to function in this manner.

House Joint Resolution 7 (HJR7) would allow city-owned power companies in Idaho – of which there are 20 – to enter into long-term agreements without voter approval.  Those in favor argue that if passage of the measure is not secured, Idahoans in those power cities would be faced with higher prices on power bills.  They say that larger power providers, like the Bonneville Power Administration, offer better deals when long-term agreements are reached.  The shorter the contract, advocates say, the more volatile the pricing.

David Frazier, an activist and blogger, is the man behind the 2006 lawsuit that spurred these three amendments and he is still opposed to public debt without a vote of the people.

Frazier opposes HJR5 specifically because he believes airports could use the provision to publicly-finance building construction and lease the structures to private companies, thereby denying other taxing districts, like schools and highway districts, from collecting revenues to which they would otherwise be entitled.  “Schools, cities, counties, highway districts, and any other taxing agencies would suffer loss of revenue on any buildings constructed under this plan,” said Frazier.

Rep. Stephen Hartgen, R-Twin Falls, asked voters in the Magic Valley to oppose all the measures.  “Still, all three proposals essentially are end-runs around the Constitution,” wrote Hartgen.  Rep. Joe Palmer, R-Meridian, is also on record for his opposition to the three debt amendments.  “I think it takes away the voters’ rights,” Palmer told IdahoReporter.com.  “I think they are just trying to find a way to go around the voters so it makes it easier for them.”

A simple majority is required on each amendment for passage.

Read IdahoReporter.com’s profile of HJR4 here, HJR5 here, and HJR7 here.

Note: Brad Iverson-Long contributed to this post.

The bill was signed by Gov. Butch Otter, who received national attention for doing so.  Otter, facing a re-election challenge from Democrat Keith Allred, believes that the federal government cannot force anyone to purchase any product or service.

Allred, in a press conference several days after the signing, said that Otter’s behavior wouldn’t help Idahoans at all.  He said that he would work within federal health care reforms to develop a state health system that would perform better than any federal program that could be devised.

Instead of bucking the federal system, Allred said he would work to create a state exchange, based on free-market principles, which would help lower the cost of overall care.  He said that it is critical that costs are addressed in statewide reforms, but added that the markets must be involved.  ”I don’t think all the answers are government-run, by a long shot,” said Allred, who does not favor government price controls on health products or services.

The Democrat’s system would focus on preventative and primary care as a means to avert higher costs in catastrophic care.  To do that, Allred explained, Idaho needs to put a large emphasis on training nurse practitioners, who provide basic health services at lower costs than doctors.

Here are Allred’s full remarks to IdahoReporter.com on his ideas for a state health system:

Otter has consistently rejected the majority of Allred’s ideas, saying that health care reforms need to be overturned.  Otter explained in an interview with IdahoRepoter.com that he also believes in a “homegrown” health system and that the state has been working to increase nursing schools to allow more health providers to receive training in Idaho.

On Allred’s plan for a state-managed health system, Otter says that the Democrat’s plan would likely be worse, in his opinion, then federal reforms. ”It’s been my experience that you’ve got to have a system that’s as bad as – or worse than – the federal government’s answer,” concluded Otter.

Here are Otter’s full remarks on health care in Idaho:

Otter and Allred, along with three other candidates, square off in the polls Tuesday.

Amid fist-bumps between the incumbent governor and a man who changed his name to reflect his political feelings and talk of wolves eating children, candidates for the state’s top job squeezed in talk of education cuts, tax hikes, reserve funds, tax policy and immigration at the final debate before voters head to the polls Nov. 2.

The debate was sponsored by Idaho Public Television and was carried statewide.

Thursday’s forum was the first featuring all candidates in the race.  Republican Gov. Butch Otter had tangled with Democratic challenger Keith Allred three times, and Independent Jana Kemp once, but it was his first meeting with Libertarian Ted Dunlap and perennial candidate Pro-Life, formerly known as Marvin Richardson.

Education dominated much of the 90-minute forum.  Otter was on the defense much of the time, taking heat from foes because he approved a public schools budget earlier this year that feature a funding reduction of $128 million.  Asked if he would cut education again or raise taxes if budget numbers don’t turn around in the future, Otter said that it might be premature to forecast revenues so early in the fiscal year, but also explained that he would favor cutting more government spending over raising taxes.

Allred, a consistent voice blasting Otter on the education cuts throughout the campaign, said he would not make more cuts to public schools.  ”I will draw a line in the sand,” Allred said, adding that closing some tax exemptions would help shore up funding.  The Democrat also warned that if voters select Otter Tuesday, education budgets would see more cuts next year.

The state approved a $22 million transfer of reserve fund money into the public schools budget earlier this year to blunt the impact of revenue decline.  Would candidates approve another transfer to stave off more cuts to education funding?  Kemp gave a hard “no,” explaining that she would look to trim money in the corrections budget while examining other budgets to find incremental savings.

Allred took the opposite route, stating that education must be the top priority of state government and that reserve dollars may be necessary next year.  ”I supported that, I thought it was a good idea,” Allred said.  “It is one of a number of options that we’ll need to keep education whole in the coming year.”  Otter left the door open.  ”It depends on the shortfall,” he said, warning that the state is quickly running out of backup dollars.

Otter’s move to end an agreement with the federal government that put the state in charge of wolf management again put the Republican incumbent on the defensive.  ”We need to be taking destiny into our own hands and using effective tools for beating back federal control,” criticized Allred.  Pro-Life, in one of the more lighthearted moments of the night, used comedy to knock Otter.  ”When you’re pro-life, you don’t like wolves,” he said, drawing laughs from the crowd. “I think the animals that are in Idaho belong to Idaho.”  After Otter fired back at Pro-Life for not wanting to use executive power to deal with the wolves, Pro-Life said, “Well if wolves were eating children, I would do something.”

It is likely that an Arizona-style immigration law will appear in the Idaho Legislature in 2011. The majority of candidates for governor aren’t necessarily opposed to such a plan.  Otter said that he would like to see Arizona’s lawsuit with the federal government over the law wind its way through the courts before approving a similar plan in Idaho.  Allred said that the federal government isn’t living up to its responsibility on immigration enforcement and that he would likely give the proposal an OK.

Kemp opposed the idea, saying the state has enough laws on the books.  ”Illegal is illegal,” Kemp stated.  Dunlap advocated for immigration reform for the entire nation that would include a guest worker program to allow talented minds to come to the United States easily.

On tax policy, Allred accused Otter of using sales tax exemptions to manipulate the markets.  ”Yes, we are picking winners and losers in state government,” Allred pled.  ”Let the market pick the winners and losers.”  Otter fired back, saying that Allred is trying to promise all things to all people.  ”This is Obama-speak,” Otter cried, saying that Allred pledged not to raise taxes while promising to keep department budgets whole.

The forum, hosted by Idaho Public Television, begins at 8 p.m. and runs for 90 minutes.

7:58 p.m.: All candidates are in place.  Instructions are being given to candidates and the audience.

8:oo p.m.: Debate begins.  Salary for governor position is $115,000.  Moderator is giving introductions to each of the five candidates.

Note: Official Twitter hashtag for the debate is #iddebates.

8:04 p.m.: Crosstalk is is allowed and candidates will be able to duke it out, verbally speaking.

Question 1: Why are you running?

Pro-Life: I am running to teach you the truth.  God’s judgement is pretty serious and so is government.

Dunlap: I am running to get people out.

Kemp: I want my 7-year-old to grow up in Idaho.  I am not owned by anyone.

Allred: We need to keep taxes low and provide education for kids.  We must cuts taxes to grow our economy.

Otter: I have been fiscally responsible and we are growing the economy and bringing jobs to the state. I have also pushed back on feds.

Question 2: Will you propose tax increases to shore up the budget?

Dunlap: No.  We cannot burden people more.

Kemp: No.  We need to focus on revenue we can already collect.  We must clean up the Idaho State Tax Commission.

Otter: We will probably have some shortfall and we may look at cutting government more.

Allred: I will not hike taxes.  Economy will grow in 2012.  We must keep education whole.

Pro-Life: We need to do away with some of our taxes.  I am opposed to public education.

Question 3: Is there room for more education cuts:

Allred: I will draw a line in the sand.  There were good options on the table to keep education whole.  We must fully staff the Idaho State Tax Commission. Otter’s budget was based on doom and gloom.

Kemp: I have already tried to draw the line in the sand.  There are unintended consequences for cuts.

Otter: Other candidates’ math is fuzzy. Others say we aren’t going to raise taxes but we are going to keep all budgets whole.  Three giants in budget: corrections, health care, and education.  That’s the kind of magic they are using in Washingon, D.C.

Kemp: I still cannot get access to the state budgets.

Otter: It doesn’t exist.

Kemp: We are waisting  time.

Allred: Otter is saying that we need more cuts and telling people to prepare for them.  We are ahead of budget projections, despite what Otter said.

Pro-Life: We worship public education.  It’s communist doctrine.  We are socialists because we have all been through public school.  We need to turn to God.

Dunlap: Government is far too important to leave to a government monopoly.  We must have choice in education and tax credits for any learning institutions.   We must define what we teach in schools.

Question 4: How will you make tough decisions?

Kemp: I rely on all sources to gather information.  We must engage all stakeholders in the process.  Tough decisions must be made.

Allred: Get the facts.  Consults with competing perspectives.  Make the decisions.

Otter: I confer with cabinet members.  I have history of making tough decisions in private business life.  We must also work with Legislature in the process.

Pro-Life: You can only rely on your conscience.  The conscience sees farther than intellect.  You have to follow your guiding light.

Dunlap: Central government planning has failed.  People should decide.

Question 5: Would you take more money out of reserve funds to shore up education funding?

Otter: It depends on the shortfall.  We have enough money for 2.5 years of $30 million yearly support.  Land Board money was never meant to be a slush fund.  I think it’s going to be pretty tough to get that through.

Kemp: No. I will look at corrections to find money.  We need to get rid of No Child Left Behind.  It is wasteful of teacher time.

Allred: Yes.  I think we need that money to prevent further damage to public schools.

Dunlap: We need public school choice and $5,000 tax credit for families to allow them to put their kids in whatever schools they want.

Pro-Life: We need to phase out public education.

Question 6: What would you have done different in the economy?

Pro-Life: Cut public education. We need to throw off federal regulations.

Otter: Idaho was picked to lead the nation out of recession because of our fiscal responsibility.  We must bring more businesses in.

Kemp: We need to connect businesses.  I will work through secretary of state’s office to help businesses connect.  I will work to help university research connect with corporations.

Allred: Federal money is propping up Idaho’s economy and Otter is touting that.  We must lower tax rates by closing exemptions.

Dunlap: We must cut government and let small businesses do their work.

Pro-Life: Dealing with our economy is not the proper role of government.

Otter: We are not in the business of picking winners and losers.  We want to bring businesses to the state.  We are working to empower local economies and chambers of commerce.

Kemp: Why is Idaho in the business of owning commercial property?

Allred: Yes, we are picking winners and losers in state government.  Sales tax exemptions manipulate the free market.  Let the market pick the winners and losers.  Let the market go where it wants to.

Question 7: Otter has been right about budget for three years running; where is the evidence that Otter’s latest budget is wrong?

Allred: The last three months.  We are now $14 million ahead of that rate in the last three months.  I saw us turning the corner.  It was wrong to say we would not see any revenue growth.

Pro-Life: This is getting pretty boring.  I bet people are turning on the ball game.

Allred: We are ahead!

Question 8: Does Idaho need Arizona-style immigration law?

Dunlap: We need to stop attracting illegal immigrants.  We need an open border that will allow people to come work here as they please.

Allred: There is a real immigration problem.  The federal government should not be suing states. We need to fingerprint inmates at county jails.

Kemp: Illegal is illegal. If feds cannot do immigration, we may need to.

Otter: Federal government needs to enforce law.  I would like to see immigration lawsuit with Arizona finish before finalizing law.

Pro-Life: Feds do not have jurisdiction if they do not enforce the law.

Question 9: How are past miscues an example of good customer service?

Otter: Budgets have put a damper on things.  We have opened labor offices in communities and staffed them on certain days with health and welfare employees.

Kemp: We must have effective communication.  The pattern must come to an end.

Allred: Otter wants to blame his poor performance on the economy.  His administration has failed us.  I will end Molina contract with Department of Health and  Welfare.

Pro-Life: A governor cannot do everything.  Government make mistakes.  You must base your choice on political philosophy.

Dunlap: I don’t take handouts from FEMA.

Question 10: Is Idaho failing to monitor water quality?

Pro-Life: Maybe we should look at that.  That is one of the proper roles of government.

Otter: It is an overreach. They act like we don’t care about our resources.  We used stimulus money to pay for unfunded mandates of federal government.

Allred: There are problems with Clean Water Act.  We must look at non-point source pollution management.

Dunlap: We should encourage states’ rights.  Federal government overreaches.

Question 11: How should state handle wolves?

Kemp: Otter is wrong to handle wolf management to feds.  I think he should have stayed the original course.

Allred: Otter is completely wrong on this.  We must manage our wolf populations.  The state must conduct research on the issue to be able to be as smart as we can on this issue.

Otter: We were spending more than $1 million on wolf management.  Sometimes states must say enough is enough.  Federal government hasn’t kept its promise in wolf situation.  We have met benchmarks for de-listing, but federal government wouldn’t do it.

Allred: We need to take destiny in our own hands.  We must monitor our own wolf populations.

Dunlap: Canadian wolves are monsters.  We are not going to get the answer from the federal government.

Pro-Life: Animals in Idaho belong to Idaho.

Otter: We haven’t spent that much on lawsuits against the feds.  About $10,000 in all.

Pro-Life: If the wolves were eating children, I would do something.

Question 12: Is there rationale for providing more services that what are required by Idaho Constitution?

Dunlap: We need to move back to government that we can afford.

Allred: Only education has unique requirement in Constitution.  We must do education with excellence.

Kemp: This affects everyone every day.

Otter: We must live within our means.  All of the sudden, things are starting to look a little bit better.

Pro-Life: We must turn to God to fix things.

Allred: I am the fiscal conservative in the race.  No one but you has tried to raise taxes.

Otter: This is Obama-speak. We can’t promise low taxes and fully-funded departments at this time.

Allred: We need to remove exemptions.

Question 13: Why have you been touting scholarship funds?

Otter: We have helped people get into college.

Kemp: We must work with Legislature to get more money .

Closing statements

Pro-Life: We must turn to God.  Churches are now social organizations.  We need to get churches into government. Turn to your conscience.  We must repent.  We are in big trouble. Government cannot get us out of this mess.  We need to get out of state-run mafia.

Dunlap: We need to stop central planning by government.  We have 58 boards and council of government.  Government is where it doesn’t belong.

Kemp: We must decide if we are better off now than we were four years ago.  We can’t trust Allred because he isn’t a Democrat, though he is running as one.  Don’t vote for cowboys.  Idaho needs a true champion to lead us out of the slump we are in.  We are independent.  Allred’s organization is a lobbying group.

Allred: I am proud to be an independent.  Thanks to Democrats for nominating me.  I am serious about cutting taxes.  We must find was to invest in education.  Butch Otter tried to hike taxes.  I defeated his proposals.

Otter: We are in a recession.  Idaho is not an economic island. We had to make tough choices and we did it without increasing tax burden on citizens.

The thing is that Otter isn’t opposed to reviewing the exemptions.

Allred has taken heat from business groups around the state because they say he has flip-flopped his positions on the issue, saying at one debate that “all exemptions are on the table,” while proclaiming at another that some larger exemptions would remain in place.

Allred explained to IdahoReporter.com that all exemptions will be up for review, but that a consensus must be found among Idahoans about which allowances should be closed and which should remain.  Those that receive higher than 60 percent support among citizens will remain in place, while those that receive less approval would be closed.

It is estimated the state loses out on about $1.7 billion annually due to the exemptions.  Allred has argued in the past the closing some exemptions, thereby raising taxes on certain transactions, will bring fairness to Idaho’s tax policy.  He also says that revenue generated through the plan could be used to bolster education funding and lower overall tax rates for Idaho families.

Otter says that Allred, while working as a lobbyist for The Common Interest the past years, and Democratic lawmakers had the opportunity to bring forth reviews in the 2010 legislative session, but failed to do so.  The Republican supports a thorough review of all exemptions, but says that the provisions serve a purpose.  ”All of those exemptions were put into place for a reason,” explained Otter. “All went into place because people thought they were a good idea at the time.”

Otter and Allred, along with Independent Pro-Life and Jana Kemp, and Libertarian Ted Dunlap, square off in the final televised debate in the race for governor Thursday at the Capitol in Boise.  The forum will be broadcast statewide by Idaho Public Television.  Check back with IdahoReporter.com for a live blog of the debate proceedings.