Jeff Youtz, director of the Legislative Services Office, says that Christy Perry, who ran against and defeated Rep. Steve Kren in the state’s 13th District, comprised of parts of Nampa, served as a tour guide on three different occasions during the 2010 session.  Youtz explained that during her time as a guide, Perry only gave three total tours – two to Idaho interest groups and one to students from Melba High School.  When asked if his office ever received complaints about Perry being overly political during tours, Youtz said that it hadn’t.  ”She did a great job,” said Youtz.  ”We never got any complaints.”

It is unknown exactly when Perry officially announced her intent to run for Kren’s seat, but the Idaho secretary of state’s office reports that she filed her paperwork to become official in the contest on March 8, 2010.  A search for data on her campaign website shows that it was registered in September of 2009 and it appears one of her first campaign-style events came only a month later.

How did it come to be that an announced candidate for the Idaho House worked as a guide while her electoral opponent was busy voting on bills?  Youtz said that one of his staffers contacted five students in Boise State’s masters of public administration program to find volunteers to serve as guides.  Perry was one of the five.  ”We were just looking for people who were excited about the Idaho Capitol and Idaho history,” explained Youtz.  Perry’s status as a candidate for the Idaho House never came into consideration during the process.   “That wasn’t even on the radar,” said Youtz.

Perry, a self-described “Idaho history buff,” said she only discussed her political campaign one time during tours when someone asked if she is the same person he had seen on a billboard earlier.  Other than that, she says, she kept tour discussions professional and on the topic of Idaho government.  “It’s not about me, it’s not about the campaign, it’s not about all of that,” said Perry.  “It’s about the Capitol.”

Legislative Services has no policies against candidates serving as tour guides during sessions.  That may change, however, in November when the Legislative Council, one of the oversight boards of the Capitol, meets to discuss policies and procedures for the 2011 session, slated to begin in January.  Youtz said his office could set a new policy in motion, but that he would prefer to let lawmakers on the council hash out the details at the November meeting.

At that meeting, lawmakers on the council could opt to ban announced candidates from guiding tours, but that could be messy.  Most of the lawmakers themselves declare their intentions to run for re-election in late February or early March, which means that they are announced candidates for portions of sessions, which typically end in late-March to mid-April.  Standard procedure in the tour program allows state lawmakers from Capitol tourists’ districts to be contacted and give tours to patrons, if legislators have time.

Sen. Nicole Lefavour, D-Boise, up for re-election this fall, said at a council meeting in June that candidates for legislative office shouldn’t be automatically disqualified from serving as tour guides.

Another member of the council, Rep. Gary Collins, R-Nampa, says that Perry incident wasn’t that serious, but that lawmakers will examine the facts of the case anyway in November.  “It was not a conflict of interest, at least I don’t think it was,” said Collins.  “If it (tours program) were to be used in a way it shouldn’t be, then I can see how that would be a problem.  It will likely be a topic at the next meeting.”

Should lawmakers change the policy to prevent announced candidates from serving as guides?  Collins thinks not.  “I think we have enough rules, regulations, and statutes to govern it and we don’t need to get into detail on everything,” Collins concluded.

Perry said a decision to ban certain individuals from giving tours would hurt her and the program.  “I enjoyed it, I loved it, and I would be saddened if I am told I can’t do it anymore,” said Perry.  “It’s hard enough for organizations to get volunteers.”

The post authored by LeFavour came in the closing days of the 2010 legislative session and said that she believed that due to the nasty nature of Republican leadership in the Senate, some Republicans would join Democrats on the other side of the aisle.  Graham took LeFavour’s post and ran with it, suggesting that Stegner would be the one to flip and fill the minority leader position being vacated by retiring-Sen. Kate Kelly, D-Boise.  Stegner currently serves as the assistant majority leader in the upper body of the Legislature.

When asked about Graham’s prediction, LeFavour denied that Stegner had considered becoming a Democrat.  “Joe would not do that,” said LeFavour.  “I’ve never, ever had that kind of conversation with him.”  She did say that one Senate Republican had come to her with the idea of making a party swap, but that unidentified person has since backed away from the idea.  “And with further discussions I think the person who said that to me will not consider it either,” she said.  “Think of the retaliation.”

The senator from Boise also clarified her position on the issue, saying that the door is still open to Republicans who are willing to work with Democrats to find solutions to the issues of the day.  “We offer that we’d be kind and respectful to moderates all the time but most won’t even consider it — no matter how mean it gets,” said LeFavour.

Graham’s post, dated June 7, 2010, addresses possible changes to Republican Party leadership in the Idaho Senate.  Graham suggests a few scenarios for a leadership shakeup, including one that has Sen. Russ Fulcher, R-Meridian, a man who Graham believes to be more conservative than Stegner, moving up from the caucus chair position to take Stegner’s spot as the assistant majority leader. He also speculates that Sen. John Goedde, R-Coeur D’Alene, or Sen. Chuck Winder, R-Boise, could challenge Stegner outright and best him when Republicans in the Senate choose their leadership in December.  If Stegner is ousted from his post, Graham predicts, he would switch parties and join the Democrats on the other side of the aisle and become their minority leader, a post being vacated by the retiring Sen. Kate Kelly, D-Boise.

Stegner said that Graham’s assertions are “Based on nothing but conjecture,” and that “It’s a ridiculous speculation” by the blogger.  He said that Graham had no evidence when he posted his speculation and that no evidence actually exists to suggest a party-swap on his part.  ”I have no intention of changing parties and leaving the Republican Party,” concluded Stegner.

The post by Graham ties in the writings of Sen. Nichole LeFavour, D-Boise, who also says that some Republicans could switch parties in the near future.  Here’s what LeFavour says about the future of the Idaho Senate:

Some (moderate Republicans) have suggested that if it gets much meaner they will be joining us on the “D” side. If enough came over, and the House or Senate were then fairly evenly split, they’d have a good chance at more power and at not being marginalized as they are by more conservative leadership.

LeFavour offered no specifics on which Republican senators she thought might try and jump the aisle.  She was not available for comment.

One member of Stegner’s hometown state legislative delegation thinks a switch by the senator is highly unlikely.  Rep. Liz Chavez, D-Lewiston, told IdahoReporter.com that Stegner is a Republican who knows how to work in a bipartisan manner.  ”I have the highest respect for Sen. Stegner,” Chavez said.  ”He takes more -moderate and more-mainstream stands than other members of his party.”  When asked if she believed Stegner was planning a party switch, Chavez said she would be “incredibly surprised” if it actually happened.

The law gives police officers in Arizona the power to attempt to determine the citizenship status of anyone they stop through lawful means.  If officers have a reasonable suspicion that a person they stop might be an illegal immigrant, police have the power to detain the person under the new provision.

The protest was headlined with speeches by Monica Hopkins, executive director of ACLU Idaho, Sen. Nicole LeFavour, D-Boise, and Leo Morales, a community organizer with Idaho Community Action Network (ICAN).

Hopkins told those gathered that the ACLU is preparing to challenge the law, which she called unconstitutional, in courts.  “It betrays American values,” said Hopkins.  “This law flies in the face of the Constitution by turning the presumption of innocence on its head.”  Hopkins, who spoke against three anti-illegal immigration bills at the Idaho Capitol during the 2010 legislative session, said the duty of developing and enforcing immigration policy rests with the federal government and not the states themselves.

By turning police officers into immigration enforcers, Hopkins said, the government of Arizona is creating an environment of fear in areas of the state that are already distrusting of law enforcement officials.  She said that law enforcement efforts in the state will be hampered by the law because police officers will be diverted from their primary responsibility of public safety to a task which is not their duty.

“The fact is that what Arizona has done is taking the country backwards,” said Morales, who himself is an immigrant. He told the crowd that he worked in the fields for 12 years after coming to the U.S. to find a better life.  Following his work there, Morales went on to college to better himself.  “But my story is not unusual; that is the American story.  Community members from all over the world coming to this nation for the opportunity to succeed,” he said.  He said encouraged the crowd to call Idaho Sen. Mike Crapo, the state’s senior member of the U.S. Senate, to encourage him to push for comprehensive immigration reform on the federal level.  He also urged those present to express their voice through at the polls during upcoming elections.

LeFavour told that crowd government officials in Arizona need to remember that the U.S. consists entirely of immigrants from other countries.  She said that the immigrants today are not criminals, but rather hard working, family-oriented people who came to the U.S. looking to better themselves and their families.  The law passed in Arizona, LeFavour said, will spread fear among racial minorities, regardless of their immigration status.  She, like Hopkins and Morales, called for immigration reform to take place on the federal level.  “Other nations have managed to craft sensible immigration policies that allow people to live and work across borders.” said LeFavour. “Why can’t we?”

The protest also featured traditional Mexican dancers, as well as a solo song performance.

(Note: Several protestors came to the rally carrying signs expressing outrage over the law; see what those signs had to say here.)

Sen. Dean Cameron, R-Rupert, said the new federal health care laws will affect Idahoans.  “The provisions in that act are so onerous and the consequences are so devastating,” he said.  Cameron, who is an insurance broker, said the unintended consequences could lead health care rates to rise by 20 percent a year.  He also said people can’t buy auto insurance after a crash or home insurance while their house is on fire, but the federal government would create a similar system for buying health insurance.

Sen. Nicole LeFavour, D-Boise, debated against the proposed constitutional amendment.  She said that while she doesn’t support all parts of the federal mandate, it could lower the state’s $33 million payment for catastrophic health care for people unable to pay for services.  “When people’s health suffers, we pay one way or another,” she said.

Sen. Curt McKenzie, R-Nampa, said the federal plan would end up increasing the national deficit.  “It creates that overwhelming debt that we pass on as our legacy to our children and our children’s children,” he said.  “This is one small way to say ‘enough.’”

The joint memorial now heads to the House.  Read IdahoReporter.com’s first story on the proposed amendment here.  The text of the memorial is available here.

The reductions in the plan would only cover about 9 percent of the cuts needed for Medicaid.  Larry Tisdale, the bureau chief of Medicaid financial operations for the Department of Health and Welfare (DHW), said the reduction fits into its method of reducing costs.  “It is to nibble around the edges and try to come to a solution,” Tisdale said.  “This is a pretty significant bite.”  The legislation would give DHW more authority to cut Medicaid spending midyear.  The Idaho House approved the proposed reductions, which faced opposition from some long-term care providers, who said the reductions wouldn’t be spread fairly among Medicaid providers.  Tisdale met with some providers over the weekend to discuss the reductions, but said there wasn’t a meeting of the minds on how to make Medicaid cuts.

Democrats on the Senate committee voted against the plan, saying it’s coming too late in the legislative session.  “We’re making perhaps some major policy changes and our neck is on the guillotine,” said Sen. Les Bock, D-Boise, who said he wasn’t convinced the plan would reduce costs for DHW and health care providers.  “We really need to make the right decision today.”

Bock and fellow Boise Democrat Sen. Nicole LeFavour, as well as Sen. Melinda Smyser, R-Parma, tried to make changes to the legislation that could have appeased some health care providers.  LeFavour also called for lawmakers to shift some money in a reserve fund to lessen the reductions to Medicaid she said would be difficult for DHW to meet.  “We’re giving the department a fairly impossible task in some ways,” she said.  LeFavour also expressed concern that DHW will make more than $40 million in Medicaid reductions during the next year without public hearings or input from lawmakers.

The majority of Republicans on the Senate Health and Welfare Committee opposed changing the legislation.  “If this was not the last day of the session, I would reject this bill,” said Sen. Joyce Broadsword, R-Sagle.  “I don’t like it, I don’t want to do it, but we don’t have a lot of options.”

“These are tough decisions,” said Sen. John McGee, R-Caldwell.  “There’s no other alternative, other than raising people’s taxes, than to make these types of decisions right now.”  The committee chair, Sen. Patti Anne Lodge, R-Huston, will sponsor the legislation on the floor on Monday.  Read the text of the legislation here.

Sen. Dean Cameron, R-Rupert, said the 90-day waiting period is standard in the private sector.  “Given the circumstances of this next budget year, we thought it ought to be at 90 days,” he said.  Cameron said the state hasn’t shifted to a 90-day period due to concerns that it would discourage people from applying for state jobs.  “That’s certainly not the case now,” he said.

Boise Democratic Sen. Nicole LeFavour was the only member of JFAC to oppose the change.  “I am just afraid that there will be more people that have a gap in their coverage,” she said.

Cameron, an insurance and investment broker, said new state employees could buy short-term insurance called gap policies.  “They’re generally used for people who are in between jobs,” he said.

The added waiting time for new hires is part of the budget for the Department of Administration, which needs to be approved by the Idaho Senate and House of Representatives.

“We can help our fellow Idahoans by buying local,” said Sen. Joyce Broadsword, R-Sagle

“Food is really personal,” said Sen. Nicole LeFavour, D-Boise.  “It’s part of who we are and it’s one of the great things about Idaho.”  She added that buying food grown in Idaho and going to farmers markets can help the state’s economy.  She said the increase in farmers markets is exciting.

Read IdahoReporter.com’s story of a House panel approving the resolution here. The text of the resolution, HCR59, is available here.

“I think this resolution… is a good signal to our citizens out in the state,” said Rep. Tom Trail, R-Moscow. Trail said he’s been involved with Moscow’s farmers market, which brings in $50,000-100,000 to stores in downtown Moscow each week.

Nampa farmer Janie Burns said the resolution would tell Idahoans that buying food from Idaho benefits their health, their community, as well as their economy. “The power of food systems as an economic engine is a real one,” she said. Sen. Nicole LeFavour, D-Boise, said Idaho citizens spend $4 billion a year on food, but that 90 percent of that food comes from outside Idaho’s borders.

Boise farmer Josie Erskine, who sells at Boise’s farmers market and an online farmers market called Idaho’s Bounty, said the resolution affects her personally. “It’s a declaration of who I am, of who my family is in Idaho,” she said. Erskine added that she believes that as Idaho cities become larger, locally-grown food and farmers become more important. “It is very important for urban people to understand how important agriculture is to the state of Idaho,” she said. “As Idaho grows more urban and more urban, there is going to be more disconnect to ag and farmland.”

The resolution says that people who eat lots of fruits and vegetables experience better health, with lower rates of obesity and related chronic conditions. It also encourages Idahoans to get to know their growers and to buy and eat more food that is grown in or near Idaho.  The resolution now heads to the Senate for a full vote. Read IdahoReporter.com’s story of a House panel approving the resolution here. The text of the resolution, HCR59, is available here.

“The goals of this [budget] are to protect public schools and to minimize reductions, to provide as much flexibility as possible to local school districts, to maintain student achievement (and) to maintain teacher hours in the classroom,” said Sen. Dean Cameron, R-Rupert, who chaired the Joint Finance-Appropriations Committee (JFAC) that set the budget for schools and other state agencies. He said he understood why some opposed the budget. “I will fully admit that I think it is inadequate for our public school system. You could vote against this bill, because frankly none of us like the reduction in this bill.” But Cameron said rejecting the budget would lead to lower funding for public schools, based on the will of some House Republicans and low tax revenue numbers. “It is in my opinion, the best budget that could potentially come out of [JFAC] without higher revenue numbers.”

Other Republican lawmakers agreed that this was the best budget for schools possible, given the state’s finances. “It isn’t going to get any better if this one doesn’t go through,” Sen. John Goedde, R-Coeur d’Alene, said about the budget.

“We’re in the greatest financial crisis that we’ve ever experienced in our lifetimes,” said Sen. Brent Hill, R-Rexburg. “We have done everything we could to protect education.” The schools budget did not see reductions for the current school year. “I feel bad that we can’t do more, but I don’t feel bad that we haven’t done enough,” Hill said. “We have worked hard to get this budget where it is.”

Cameron said Idaho isn’t alone in reducing spending to schools and other programs. “We’re not the only state in the mess. This is not an Idaho problem, this is a national problem.” He also said that a reduction in funding doesn’t necessarily lead to a reduction in the quality of education. “I don’t think that’s a correct notion,” he said. “Every teacher that I know is a professional, and they’re going to teach to the best of their ability regardless of this appropriation and regardless of what they’re paid … They sacrifice unbelievably to make sure that our kids and our grandkids are appropriately taught.”

All seven Democrats in the Senate voted against the lower funding for schools, as did Moscow Republican Sen. Gary Schroeder. Sen. Elliot Werk, D-Boise, said the cuts will affect school children. “Our class sizes are going to get larger,” he said. “We should be avoiding packing our students into classrooms like sardines.” He also said teacher contact would be reduced. “Johnny and Janey can’t repeat second grade. It just doesn’t work like that. Kids that fall behind now fall behind forever.” Werk said the cuts in the current budget follow years when they weren’t properly funded. “Our public schools have been on a starvation diet for a decade. They are hurting.”

Sen. Jim Hammond, R-Coeur d’Alene, said districts would need to make difficult decisions, but that the flexibility in the schools budget could prevent drastic cuts. “I don’t think that we’re really talking about an issue of raising class sizes,” he responded to Werk. “I don’t mean to say that what we’re doing isn’t creating challenges for our school district … What I’m saying is that they’re surmountable.”

“This budget will hurt Idaho school children,” said Senate Minority Leader Kate Kelly, D-Boise. “I’m sad that I’m a part of this.” During the debate on the budget, Kelly quoted the Idaho Constitution, which requires the Legislature to maintain public schools. “I think that this bill before us comes perilously close to abdicating our constitutional duty to the children of Idaho,” she said.

Another Boise Democrat, Sen. Nicole LeFavour, tried to add amendments to the school budget that would increase funding for schools and remove some intent language that would allow school districts to declare a financial emergency. “We do have choices before us, and we do have alternatives,” she said. “We have, in our hands, every school in the state of Idaho. And it truly is our duty to do everything we can, and perhaps more.”

Her effort failed. Cameron and Senate Majority Leader Bart Davis, R-Idaho Falls, said lawmakers traditionally don’t change budgets after JFAC sets them. Davis called LeFavour’s actions political theatre. “If this body’s not inclined to the legislation, vote against it,” Davis said.

Cameron said he opposed adding the financial emergency language into the schools budget. However, he said it could be a good thing, because it would only last for one year. “There’s a hidden blessing to it being here,” he said. “It’s short term, and we can get by with it.” The financial emergency language could allow districts to reopen contract talks with teachers. A statewide teacher association opposed including it in the budget. Cameron said he looks forward to better financial days, but the current spending plan is the best available to the Legislature. “This is a tough decision for this body, but it is the best budget that can potentially pass for public schools.”

Read IdahoReporter.com’s story on JFAC’s approval of the schools budget here, and watch an interview with Burley Republican Rep. Fred Wood, who proposed the financial emergency language, here.