Also on Tuesday, the Senate also approved legislation expanding the state’s special gang enforcement law that can tack on extra years to an offenders’ sentence if they are a gang member. Under the plan, 11 more crimes could be considered gang activity, which could add up to five years in prison for a convicted gang member.

The Idaho Senate approved the budget on a 33-2 vote Tuesday and the legislation now heads to Gov. Butch Otter’s desk. Besides sponsor Sen. Bert Brackett, R-Rogerson, only Sen. Nicole LeFavour, D-Boise, spoke about the budget plan.

LeFavour offered some praise for the department’s priorities. “Our state has done an impressive job of increasing its focus of education and treatment of inmates.” However, she was critical of the increases in funding for private prisons and privately-run medical services for offenders, which are required by contract. LeFavour said those private sector programs put prisoners’ lives at risk.

“There have been problems and lawsuits in both areas as a result of low-bidder inadequacies,” LeFavour said.

The added state funding for IDOC would replace some funding from the federal stimulus program. The increase won’t be enough to end furloughs for IDOC workers, including guards at state prisons.

The gang activity legislation was only opposed by one senator, Curt McKenzie, R-Nampa. He said he opposes increasing criminal sentences due to an offender’s association or thoughts. “We should base our punishment on the conduct itself,” McKenzie said.

Sen. Patti Anne Lodge, R-Huston, mentioned the recent arrest of 30 members of the “Brown Magic Clica” gang. She also said the provisions to punish gang activity in schools helps keep schools safer. Lodge, a former teacher, said she saw kindergartners engaged in gang activities, such as wearing certain colored clothes.

Sen. John McGee, R-Caldwell, said the stiffer penalties, which have been used four times, are an exceptional law enforcement tool. “Since the original gang legislation has been in place, gang crime in [Canyon] County has gone down,” McGee said.

Both the gang enforcement legislation and the budget for IDOC now head to Gov. Butch Otter for his consideration.

The legislation passed the Senate 27-8.  Sen. Joe Stegner, R-Lewiston, was the only Republican to join with all seven Senate Democrats in voting against the bill.

The measure, formally House Bill 260, is one piece of legislation that is critical to finalizing budgets and closing shop in Boise. The measure, already passed by the Idaho House, now heads to Gov. Butch Otter for consideration.

The proposal, sponsored by Sen. Patti Anne Lodge, R-Huston, is the trimmed-down result of an earlier measure considered in the House.  An older version of the bill would have cut about $39 million in spending.

Due to the federal matching funds for Medicaid, overall spending for the health program will be reduced by about $100 million.

Lodge told senators that the changes in the bill will help move Idaho from a fee-for-service structure to more of a managed-care plan.  Her bill would mandate that the Idaho Department of Welfare study managed care options and see what Idaho could do to move even further in that direction.

Some of the savings will come by freezing automatic payment rate increases to some health service providers.  Other funds will be saved by cutting some non-emergency Medicaid dental funds, reducing allowable chiropractic visits each year from 24 to six, altering payment rates for prescription drugs, and eliminating audiology benefits altogether.

Lodge told colleagues that instead of slashing a few programs, bill crafters decided to tweak benefit levels of many programs to blunt the impact of cuts.  “No individual receiving Medicaid benefits will lose eligibility under House Bill 260,” she explained. “Most will experience small adjustments in the amount of benefits received.”

There are no changes to services for children because the state is limited in that area by federal regulations. “Children’s programs will not be impacted by this legislation,” said Lodge.

One of the most controversial pieces of the old plan was the so-called “retirement” of those with disabilities from psychosocial rehabilitative services at the age of 45, when they would have been moved to a less-costly care program. Those testifying on the plan said that the loss of services for disabled citizens would land them in more costly intensive-care facilities, ultimately costing Idaho more money.

By removing that provision from the legislation, lawmakers reduced cuts by about $2.6 million.

The other measure axed from the original plan also dealt with cutting off services for some of the more capable – yet still disabled – citizens in Idaho.  The services are for those who are independent and can live on their own, but might still need some skill-building help from service providers.

The original plan would have completely cut the services to the more-capable citizens.  The new plan will leave the funding as is, which means about $1.8 million less in savings.

Some of the debate against the bill by Senate Democrats centered on the impact the cuts will have on Idaho’s economy.  Sen. Les Bock, D-Boise, said that the measure could cost as at least 1,000 private sector jobs. Sen. Michelle Stennett, D-Ketchum, said that Medicaid spending and the federal money involved helps sustain Idaho’s economy.

Sen. John McGee, R-Caldwell, said that Medicaid’s mission is not to ward off unemployment.  “Providing jobs is not the role of Medicaid in Idaho,” said McGee.

Bock also said that cutting some maintenance health services will mean more visits to costly emergency rooms for some.  “Why do we choose to shoot ourselves in the foot when we don’t have to?” said Bock.

Sen. Steve Vick, R-Dalton Gardens, said that slumping tax revenues from the poor economy forced legislators’ hands.  “Changes must be made,” said Vick.  “We are on an unsustainable path with the direction Medicaid is going. I wish that we could do more, but this is a step in the right direction.”

Sen. Dan Schmidt, D-Moscow, disputed Vick’s assertion, saying that the plan is nothing new.  “It is truly just more of the same,” said Schmidt, who added that the bill will lead to less care for the most vulnerable of Idaho’s citizens.  “We have choices. I cannot support this choice.”

The Senate Health and Welfare Committee approved a bill Tuesday that would cut state Medicaid spending by $34.6 million in fiscal year 2012.  Senate leadership has indicated that clearing of the bill is needed to help lawmakers end their work by April 1.

The measured passed on a 7-2 vote, with Republicans supporting the bill and Democrats opposing it.

The  proposal, sponsored by Rep. Janice McGeachin, R-Idaho Falls, is the second attempt to pass such a bill. An earlier measure that aimed to save $39 million was scrapped after House members decided to remove some cost reduction methods from the bill.

The legislation, formally House Bill 260, would reduce total Medicaid spending by $107 million because of the cost-sharing agreement between the federal government and the state.

McGeachin told senators that the changes in the bill will help move Idaho from a fee-for-service structure to more of a managed-care plan.  Her bill would mandate that the Idaho Department of Welfare study managed care options and see what Idaho could do to move even further in that direction.

Some of the savings will come by freezing automatic payment rate increases to some health service providers.  Other funds will be saved by cutting some non-emergency Medicaid dental funds, reducing allowable chiropractic visits each year from 24 to six, altering payment rates for prescription drugs, and eliminating audiology benefits altogether.

There are few – if any – changes to services for children because the state is limited in that area by federal regulations.

One of the most controversial pieces of the old plan was the so-called “retirement” of those with disabilities from psychosocial rehabilitative services at the age of 45, when they would have been moved to a less-costly care program. Those testifying on the plan said that the loss of services for disabled citizens would land them in more costly intensive-care facilities, ultimately costing Idaho more money.

By removing that provision from the legislation, lawmakers reduced cuts by about $2.6 million.

The other measure axed from the original plan also dealt with cutting off services for some of the more capable – yet still disabled – citizens in Idaho.  The services are for those who are independent and can live on their own, but might still need some skill-building help from service providers.

The original plan would have completely cut the services to the more-capable citizens.  The new plan will leave the funding as is, which means about $1.8 million less in savings.

Before the final vote, there were kind words for stakeholders and legislators who worked on the issue.  Sen. Joyce Broadsword, R-Sagle, said that she appreciated how narrowly cuts were made.  “A meat cleaver could have been used, but it wasn’t in this case,” Broadsword said.

Sen. Lee Heider, R-Twin Falls, said that he was impressed with how legislators listened to the public and removed provisions too toxic and detrimental to public good.  “It’s an example of how government should work and I am proud to be a part of it,” said Heider.

Even Sen. Dan Schmidt, D-Moscow, who opposed the plan, said it was “impressive” to watch the plan come together.  Schmidt, however, warned that the bill may not save as much money as projected.

Sen. Les Bock, D-Boise, said that disabled citizens who lose services because of the plan “will resurface in another part of the system.”  Bock explained that counties would likely shoulder much of the burden because there will be more use of the catastrophic health fund.  Though he didn’t expound, Bock said the Legislature wasn’t forced to reduce spending and services.  “I think don’t we have to make these cuts,” he said.

Committee chair Sen. Patti Anne Lodge, R-Huston, countered Bock’s comments, saying that other options included tax increases.  “They wanted to tax somebody else,” said Lodge of those arguing for tax hikes.  “They wanted a luxury tax.  They wanted a cigarette tax.”

Lodge said lawmakers did what they could with what they had.  “I want you know we did the best we possibly could,” she said.

The measure now heads to the Senate floor for a vote.

Sen. Bart Davis, R-Idaho Falls, was the first member of the Senate State Affairs Committee to speak out against the plan, saying that the U.S. Constitution doesn’t let states nullify federal laws. “I can’t find in that important document that our state has the authority to nullify a federal act,” said Davis, an attorney. He said that he opposes the federal reform plan passed by Congress last year, but that the courts are the proper arena to settle the issue.

A federal judge in Florida sided with Idaho, ruling the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA) unconstitutional, but other courts have sided with the federal government that the plan is fine.

Davis and other senators who opposed the plan said they didn’t favor the PPACA. “I find no constitutional justification for the things we are talking here today,” said Sen. Brent Hill, R-Rexburg, about the nullification plan. Six of the members of the Senate committee voted against the plan, with just Republican Sens. Russ Fulcher of Meridian and Chuck Winder of Boise backing the plan.

Sen. Patti Anne Lodge, R-Huston, said she voted against the plan because it could cost $12 million in federal grants for health programs she said go to people who can’t help themselves. “We’re in dire straits and we can’t even meet our budget now,” Lodge said. “There’s a threat that [the federal government] will take those dollars away from us. I can’t handle that right now.” After the meeting, Lodge was surrounded by several people supporting the nullification plan asking about her vote.

The committee listened to almost three hours of testimony on the plan, the vast majority of which supported the plan.

“If we can’t take a stand on this issue, where the court has already decided in the state’s favor, there is nothing to stop the federal government from doing as it pleases,” said Rep. Vito Barbieri, R-Dalton Gardens, who sponsored the plan.

“The number one concern of our members was for the repeal of Obamacare,” said Russ Smerz, the president of Tea Party Boise.

“I think we’ve heard from real Idahoans today,” Sen. Monty Pearce, R-New Plymouth, said at the end of testimony but before the committee killed the legislation. He called the PPACA the worst law in the history of the United States and said nullification is the proper course of action. “Nullification is not a dirty word but it has been made that way,” he said. “This is a peaceful solution to a serious problem.”

Pearce said that Gov. Butch Otter wanted the plan on his desk. He said one potential next step would be for Otter to write an executive order barring state agencies from following the PPACA. Shortly after the plan failed, Otter’s spokesman, Jon Hanian, had no comment on an executive order. Otter will be on a Fox Business cable channel show Monday to discuss health care reform Monday.

Idaho state agencies have received more than $2 million in federal grants for the first steps of the PPACA and spent thousands of dollars studying how to implement to program.

Lawmakers supporting the nullification plan could take further action this year against the PPACA. “I’m sorry we offended these guys’ constitutional senses,” Pearce said. “We weren’t doing this for show. We were doing this to protect the people of Idaho.”

Two people testified against the now-stalled plan. Donna Yule with the Idaho Public Employees Association said the plan showed disrespect to the Founding Fathers of the U.S. and Idaho Attorney General Lawrence Wasden, whose office issued a report saying nullification violated the Idaho and U.S. constitutions.

“There is an appropriate process to address the constitutionality of law and this is not it,” Yule said. She also said the plan could affect people on Medicaid, which uses federal and state funds to provide medical services.

The other person to testify against the plan, retired submarine officer and blogger Joel Kennedy of Meridian, quoted Presidents Andrew Jackson and James Madison in opposing nullification. “In no case has nullification been found to be constitutional,” Kennedy said.

Supporters of the nullification plan both supported the idea of nullification and criticized the federal health care plan. People who testified said the federal plan would be an economic nightmare and worse than Dracula.

Rep. Janice McGeachin, R-Idaho Falls, and Sen. Patti Anne Lodge, R-Huston, said legislation to weed out waste, duplication, fraud, and excess spending should be introduced sometime next week. McGeachin and Lodge chair the House and Senate Health and Welfare Committees, respectively, and are part of a small group of lawmakers who have been meeting for a month to review spending on services and locate areas to cut.

“We will have that safety net for those who, through no fault of their own, cannot help themselves,” Lodge said. She and McGeachin spoke Thursdayto the Joint Finance-Appropriations Committee (JFAC), which writes the state budget. JFAC has told Lodge and McGeachin to find $35 million to $50 million in cuts, though both lawmakers say they don’t have a bottom line set for how much they plan on cutting.

One likely target for reductions is Medicaid, which provides medical services to low-income children and adults in Idaho. Any reductions to Medicaid spending would come with larger spending reductions from the federal government, which pays for the majority of Medicaid.

Lodge said that while the federal government does offset the costs of government-funded medical services, it isn’t free money. “If you take the money, there’s going to be strings attached,” she said.

McGeachin identified several areas where lawmakers could change policy to lower Medicaid costs, though she didn’t identify a dollar amount of those savings. She said almost one-third of all pregnant women on Medicaid have caesarian sections, which can be more costly and lead to birth defects. She said the state could encourage the use of midwives, which could lower the bill to the state. Other areas of savings include buying more generic prescription drugs and encouraging elderly Idahoans to rely on community care, rather than living in higher cost nursing facilities.

McGeachin also said some families on Medicaid are receiving more than $100,000 a year from the state, which could be unnecessary state spending. “We have to question whether those are the types of things our limited resources should be paying for,” McGeachin said.

Cuts to Medicaid are being opposed by House Minority Leader John Rusche, D-Lewiston, a retired doctor. He wrote a letter to JFAC on Feb. 7 saying that cutting $50 million in state spending could lead to a loss of $185 million in federal dollars, and that any short-term savings could be wiped out by an increase in institutionalization of people currently able to live on their own.

“Shorting the budget for needed services will likely cost us much more, and diminish the health and safety of our Medicaid recipients,” Rusche said. “That may have a significant effect on the public health and public safety in our communities.”

Rusche has worked with Lodge, McGeachin, and other lawmakers in reviewing health and welfare spending, though McGeachin said he hasn’t been supportive of the reductions being proposed by the group.

A group opposed to Medicaid reductions, Medicaid Matters in Idaho, is planning 17 rallies around the state on Saturday, saying the plan to cut Medicaid is unrealistic and costly.

Lawmakers writing the budget won’t include any proposed cuts to Medicaid until they are approved by either the House or Senate. “We’ll have to make sure it rolls out in a timely matter so that we can make sure we solve the budget,” said Sen. Dean Cameron, R-Rupert, one of the chairs of JFAC.

The Joint Millennium Fund Committee is considering requests on how to spend this year’s portion of the 1998 settlement with several tobacco companies. Among those asking for money for programs are the Department of Health and Welfare, the Idaho Supreme Court, the Boys and Girls Club, and the Idaho Meth Project.

Idaho’s share of the tobacco settlement is split into several different funds, including a permanent endowment that would be difficult for the state to touch. However, lawmakers could tap approximately $82 million in one of the funds to pay for health programs or other state services. Using money from the fund would prevent spending reductions or seeking additional revenue sources, including taxes.

Sen. Patti Anne Lodge, R-Huston, who co-chairs the committee, said last year that the money in the Millennium Fund is a last resort to lawmakers looking to balance the budget. She said that’s still the case, but almost all other reserves are spent.

“They took money from everything else but the Millennium Fund,” Lodge said. “There’s no other money – there’s no other place.”

“We understand it’s tough budgetary times,” said Rep. Dennis Lake, R-Blackfoot, who also chairs the committee. He also leads the House Revenue and Taxation Committee. Lake also said that cash-strapped lawmakers looking to balance the budget have drawn from the Millennium Fund before. They transferred a total of $89 million during the last large economic slump in 2002 and 2003.

A potential transfer to balance state spending wouldn’t necessarily lead to a reducing the annual grant disbursements, though Millennium Fund grants have covered ongoing expenses, including salaries, for the Office of Drug Policy (ODP), a state agency created by Gov. Butch Otter and led by former lawmaker and Otter campaign manager Debbie Field. The legislative committee in charge of the Millennium Fund didn’t nd funding ODP earlier this year, but the office ended up receiving funding from the tobacco fund.

Field said the ODP won’t request such money this year, because the governor’s budget will have another source of funding for the office, including potentially from the general fund, made up mostly of tax money.

Field did speak to the committee about a continuing $500,000 in funding for the Idaho Meth Project to pay for anti-meth TV ads and billboards across the state. Field said the ads, which dramatize the effect of meth use, are incredibly necessary. “We think it’s really important to continue this fight,” Field said.

Sen. Elliot Werk D-Boise, questioned Field about the effectiveness of the Idaho Meth Project, pointing to research done on a similar program in Montana saying that the ads had little impact. He said other factors, including laws tightening access to the chemicals needed to produce the drug, could be causing a decline in meth use.

Field said she hadn’t read the research, but offered information from a 2009 survey saying more Idaho youth believe that using meth carries great risks. She also said that Idaho may need to continue the anti-meth message for a generation, to make sure people know its potent affects.

The committee also heard from one of the ad campaign’s intended targets, 16-year-old Kimberly Bible, who lives in the Magic Valley. Bible spoke as part of a presentation by the Boys and Girls Club for a different drug prevention program seeking state funding.

“It scares people more than it makes them not want to do it,” Bible told the committee about the ads. “It’s a scarier impact than I think it should be on young children.” Bible also told the committee about how drugs, including meth, has harmed her and her family. She said that it’s not difficult to find meth, if you know the right people.

Lawmakers will now score the grant requests. During their legislative session, they will make their recommendations to budget writers on which to fund. In the past, the recommendations haven’t perfectly matched the scores and funding hasn’t matched the recommendations.

While there’s sufficient money for all the grants, lawmakers say they won’t greenlight all of them. “There are always better or worse programs,” said Rep. John Rusche, D-Lewiston.

Lodge also said it’s important that the Millennium Fund dollars be used effectively, and said she’s looking into making sure that any unspent grant money could be returned to the state.

Sen. Patti Anne Lodge, R-Huston, heads up the Senate Health and Welfare Committee and is instituting changes for her panel that will save paper and money at the same time.  Lodge, working with the Idaho Department of Health and Welfare (DHW), is set to ban the use of paper, folders, and binders for panel members in reviewing rules and statutes, a change that one official says will save more than $5,000.

Committee members will still be allowed to bring paper notebooks into meetings, but the department will no longer provide documents of rules in paper form and will, instead, distribute files through electronic format.

Lodge says the only drawback to the switch is that use of e-formats might make it more difficult for some lawmakers to take and keep notes on various administrative rules.

To offer the documents electronically, DHW will work with the health and welfare committee’s secretary to sync daily online agendas with documents being considered, which are typically available on administration websites.

Tamara Prisock with DHW is helping to implement the change.  Prisock said that moving to electronic format will save more than $5,000 in materials and more in labor.  In anticipation of committee review of department rules and procedures, the agency prepares binders for reference by lawmakers.  Lodge says that in some busy years, she has had the department give her five large binders full of paper.

If the experiment works, Lodge says she will pass the idea onto Senate leadership.  “I’ll use it for everything,” said Lodge Thursday.  “This is just a test run.”  The Huston Republican says the plan is fulfillment of a campaign promise.  “I pledged to do away with waste, fraud, and abuse,” explained Lodge.  “And I added overutilization of taxpayer dollars.  This [use of several binders of paper] is an example of overutilization of taxpayer funds.”

The ban won’t go into effect until Gov. Butch Otter signs off on the measure.  From there, it will only be temporary, and the board must take the ban to the Idaho Legislature, which will decide if it should be made permanent.

The agency couldn’t outright ban the substance, which is sold as not for human consumption.  Instead, it classified the chemicals used to produce Spice as illegal in the state’s Schedule I of Controlled Substances.  Other substances on the schedule are those used to make marijuana and other drugs.  The ban, if signed by Otter, would make possession, transport, or production of Spice a felony-level crime.

Spice is essentially incense sprayed with a synthetic cannabinoid and it produces a marijuana-like high.   It has become increasingly popular because normal drug screens cannot detect its presence in the human body.  Officials have complained that some people on parole or probation in the state have used it to get high while staying on the right side of the law.

There haven’t been any reported deaths in Idaho linked to overdose of Spice, but a survey recently released by the Idaho Hospital Association revealed more than 80 cases of physical ailments caused by the drug between February and August of 2010.  Use of the substance can lead to nausea, vomiting, increased agitation, elevated blood pressure, seizures, and loss of consciousness.

But it gets tricky there.  Caitlyn Zak, aide in the Idaho Office of Drug Policy, in an August presentation to the oversight board of the Idaho Department of Health and Welfare, said that makers of Spice have a myriad of combinations that can be used to make the drug.  Zak said she found evidence that some folks even submerged otherwise harmless incense in nail polish remover to get the desired chemical effect.

Jan Atkinson, senior compliance officer for the board, told IdahoReporter.com that the ban will affect seven chemicals panel members believed to be the key ingredients needed to producing Spice.  “They felt comfortable banning those seven chemicals,” Atkinson said.

If the ban makes it before the Idaho Legislature, it could run into some resistance.  Sen. Patti Anne Lodge, R-Huston, isn’t so sure the state should be outlawing the substance.    ”We’re telling people what they can eat and when they can eat it,” said Lodge.  ”I know this may not be the popular thing, but I’m concerned with the lack of personal responsibility.”  Lodge is the chair of the Senate Health and Welfare Committee, one of the panels to which the board will have pitch the Spice ban.

Otter has not indicated if he will approve the ban.

Mark Johnston, executive director for the BOP, tells IdahoReporter.com that because the problem has only come up recently, no one has concluded what should be done.  ”No decisions have been made at this early stage,” says Johnston.  He also says that the board doesn’t have the authority to necessarily ban substances, but that it can only develop rules in dealing with the drug, which must ultimately be accepted or rejected by the Legislature during its next session.

The incense, sprayed with synthetic cannabinoinds, is sold as a product not for human consumption.  That label prevents the substance from being subject to regulations of the Food and Drug Administration, as well as some rules in Idaho.  When smoked, the substance produces a marijuana-like high, but it can also come with hazardous side effects, including nausea, vomiting, increased agitation, elevated blood pressure, seizures, and loss of consciousness.  There have been no reported deaths in Idaho as a result of use of Spice.  A mother in Indiana died after reportedly smoking the product.

Johnston explains that the board may decide what action to take on Spice at its next meeting in October.  He also said that board members are still in fact-finding mode about the makeup of the incense.  ”We are still gathering information, such as what substances are in Spice,” said Johnston.

Caitlyn Zak, aide with ODP, explained at a meeting in August that Spice is gaining popularity because it cannot be detected by typical drug tests and that it can be produced easily at home, which, she said, can be very dangerous for the user of the drug.  Some producers went so far as to dunk incense in nail polish remover to obtain similar results.  And though the label says the incense isn’t for human use, Zak says people buy Spice for a specific reason.  “It’s being advertised as the new legal marijuana,” Zak said.  “They know what its purpose is.”

If the BOP finds some way to regulate the drug and then take that rule to the Idaho Legislature, results could be mixed.  Rep. Darrell Bolz, R-Caldwell, believes that lawmakers should take up the issue in order to protect children.  Another Canyon County legislator, Sen. Patti Anne Lodge, R-Huston, says individuals should be responsible for the substance they put in their own bodies and that government doesn’t need to get involved.

The incense, sprayed with synthetic cannabinoinds, is typically referred to as “Spice” or “K2″ and is sold as a product not for human consumption.  That label prevents the substance from being subject to regulations of the Food and Drug Administration, as well as some rules in Idaho.

Rep. Darrell Bolz, R-Caldwell, told IdahoReporter.com Thursday that lawmakers will likely broach the issue during the next legislative session, set to begin in January of 2011.  Bolz says he isn’t sure exactly how legislators will deal with the substance, one that has caught the eye of the Office of Drug Policy, as well as Canyon County prosecutor John Bujak and officials from Twin Falls County.

Bolz says he isn’t sure how he would like the Legislature to deal with Spice, but knows that kids should be protected.  ”My real concern is kids because they’re getting into something that they might not know what it is,” Bolz explained.  He said that a complete ban of Spice could come out of the next session, or lawmakers could opt to simply put age restrictions on it to prevent minors from using the drug.

A legislator on the other side of the issue, however, isn’t so sure the state needs to take up the matter.  The chair of the Senate Health and Welfare Committee, Sen. Patti Anne Lodge, R-Huston, said that government action on the drug isn’t necessarily needed.  ”We’re telling people what they can eat and when they can eat it,” said Lodge.  ”I know this may not be the popular thing, but I’m concerned with the lack of personal responsibility.”  Lodge says that the state might be able to take step toward limiting use of Spice, but that might not do any good overall.  ”This is a new phenomenon,” she explained.  ”They’ll just find something else to use.”

If lawmakers decide to put age restrictions on Spice, would it help?  Lodge says no.  ”That’s the trouble we’ve had with alcohol and the war on drugs,” she said.  ”How do you prevent kids from using it when adults buy it for them?”

Lodge thinks there may be another, simpler solution to the problem.  “What we need to look for is responsible merchants who won’t sell it,” Lodge said.  Bolz has experience in that area.  He recently saw an advertisement for the substance in his local paper.  He called the store owner responsible for the ad and informed him of what people are doing with Spice.   The store owner promptly discontinued the ad and subsequently pulled the product from store shelves.

Though it’s not intended for use by humans, Caitlin Zak, an aide with the Office of Drug Policy, says that those who buy it know exactly what they are getting.  “It’s being advertised as the new legal marijuana,” Zak said.  “They know what its purpose is.”  Zak, in a meeting with the Board of Health and Welfare last week, said the substance produces a high similar to that of marijuana, but it can also come with host of side effects, including nausea, vomiting, increased agitation, elevated blood pressure, seizures, and loss of consciousness.

The drug is causing concern among those in the corrections community because of its inability to be detected in typical drug tests.  Though there are tests available to detect Spice, Zak says they are too expensive to be used on a regular basis.

No one, including the Office of Drug Policy, knows exactly the effect Spice is having in Idaho.  The Idaho Hospital Association is conducting a study to find out how serious the problem might be, but results of the survey aren’t expected until next week.

Canyon County prosecutor John Bujak announced last week that he plans to go after youths using the drug with a section of Idaho Code that prevents a minor from possessing inhalants.  Other areas of the state, including Twin Falls County, are looking at banning the substance altogether.