Editorial Roundup: Idaho

Recent editorials of statewide and national interest from Idaho newspapers:

Idaho legislators could have made voting more convenient but chose not to

Idaho Statesman

Sept. 2

daho legislators missed an opportunity during last week’s special session to make it easier to vote during the coronavirus pandemic. Voting in the November election likely will be more difficult for those who want to vote in person on Nov. 3.

Because of the pandemic, county clerks across the state are concerned about finding enough polling places and poll workers to provide a full complement of polling locations. More than likely, county clerks will reduce the number of polling places and consolidate multiple precincts within one polling location.

Clerks already are ruling out places like senior centers and assisted living facilities as polling places. Schools, if in session on Nov. 3, would not be a good idea during a pandemic.

In addition, in Ada County, only 50% of the county’s regular poll workers decided to work the polls for the Aug. 25 election, according to Ada County Clerk Phil McGrane.

So if counties decide to reduce the number of polling places, that means your polling place might be a little farther from your house and there might be more voters from other precincts trying to vote in one place.

Legislators could have helped relieve that scenario and made it much easier for everyone to vote in person through legislation allowing “vote centers.”

Vote centers allow any voter from any precinct to cast their vote in person at any vote center within their county.

For example, if you live in Kuna but work in downtown Boise, you could swing by a vote center set up at the Ada County Courthouse during your lunch hour and cast your ballot.

Instead, you’ll still have to go to your polling place in Kuna when it opens at 8 a.m. before going in to work or hope you get back to Kuna after work before 8 p.m. before the polls close. It’s not just an Ada County issue. Think about people who might work in McCall but live in Cascade or Donnelly. Same for Ketchum, Hailey and Bellevue.

McGrane said that most people who vote in person vote after 5 p.m., and the problems with long lines and shortage of ballots tend to happen during those last three hours.

So you already have a majority of in-person voters trying to squeeze in their vote in the last three hours of polls being open. Now, with likely fewer polling places, it could become even more of a challenge this November.

It’s worth noting that every single sitting county clerk in Idaho signed off on a request for vote centers.

The Idaho Senate passed the “vote center” legislation pretty handily, 31-4, during the special session.

The bill hit a roadblock in the House, though, failing to make it out of the House State Affairs Committee.

Concerns raised during that hearing included where vote centers would be located, how those locations are communicated with voters and concerns that counties would limit vote centers to just one center in a county.

Unfortunately, it was clear that some legislators didn’t really understand the bill, didn’t understand how polling places currently work and had unfounded suspicions about the motives behind the legislation.

Some of the legislators opposing the bill also didn’t seem to fully understand that county clerks already can — and likely will — change polling locations in November. The bill as proposed would have just made it more convenient for voters.

These vote centers ideally would have been in larger venues, such as ExtraMile Arena or the Ford Idaho Center, to promote social distancing and still accommodate large numbers of voters.

Vote centers are a good idea, and the idea should be brought back in the regular session. I know I would like greater flexibility in where I can cast my vote on Election Day. Wouldn’t you like to be able to go into any vote center within your county, no matter where you are, and cast your vote?

Online: Idaho Statesman

___

When Idaho’s legislators came to help

The Lewiston Tribune

Sept. 2

It’s not every day that Idaho’s Republican-led Legislature can demonstrate the wisdom of Ronald Reagan.

Wasn’t it the late president who observed: “The nine most terrifying words in the English language are, ‘I’m from the government, and I’m here to help’ ”?

You have to wonder what Reagan would think of last week’s legislative rush to help. In the course of a three-day-long special session, GOP lawmakers obliterated the ability of ordinary Idahoans to hold businesses, employers and some government entities — but not all — to account if they negligently exposed them to COVID-19.

But it got progressively worse. What started out as a measure that would exempt private and public entities from liability if they acted in good faith emerged as one that would bar any and all claims — except when someone willfully, recklessly and intentionally infected another with coronavirus.

In the process, the Idaho Freedom Foundation’s outlook on the enterprise evolved. Had any lawmaker supported the first version, he would have been dinged with a negative-7 on its Idaho Freedom Index. The ultimate bill carried a neutral rating, however.

Here’s one other striking change: The draft measure extended liability immunity to ... “the state of Idaho and any agency or subdivision thereof.”

The measure that passed specifically excluded from this legal umbrella the state of Idaho — with the exception of state colleges and universities — and the public health districts. Perhaps that reflects legislative annoyance with the restrictions Gov. Brad Little and the health districts set in place to restrain the epidemic.

In any event, that choice may have unintended consequences for the legislators and for the taxpayers.

For instance, Idaho’s lawmakers engaged in a super spreader event. Anywhere else in Boise, they would have been subject to restrictions set by the city and the Central District Health Department: no groups larger than 50 while everyone is required to wear a face mask and practice social distancing in public.

Within their chambers and meeting rooms, lawmakers answer to their own rules.

They set no limits on crowd size. Start with 105 legislators. Throw in possibly 50 legislative staffers, lobbyists and reporters. Don’t forget the small army Emmett anarchist Ammon Bundy assembled.

With no requirements, few wore masks and few practiced social distancing.

Why not?

As far as many lawmakers are concerned, the pandemic is a farce. They even illegally voted to terminate Little’s emergency order.

“This emergency declaration has created the situation we’re in, not the virus,” said Rep. Vito Barbieri, R-Dalton Gardens. “(In) reaction to the potential damage from the virus, the government — oh, isn’t that normal for the government to create a problem and then figure out a solution that’s always more draconian, always more expensive?”

But where does that leave someone whose job required him to attend the special session?

If the state remains liable for simple negligence, would that expose to potential litigation a group of lawmakers who denied the pandemic and took almost no steps to contain it?

What about the other gorilla in the room — the thousands of people in state custody at the penitentiaries?

Just about anywhere you turn these days, there’s a COVID-19 outbreak among those held in confinement. So far in Idaho, there have been case surges at the Ada, Bonneville and Twin Falls county jails. The state of Idaho reported a second state inmate died of the coronavirus.

What did the Legislature tell families of inmates whose underlying health conditions — older, obese, diabetic or suffering from heart disease or an immunocompromised state — puts them at greater risk?

What did the Legislature say to families of inmates who are being held on non-violent drug offenses and whose release on medical grounds would pose no risk to the rest of us?

This is the work product of a legislative session on a tight schedule held in late August. There wasn’t time enough for lawmakers to review all the issues or even hear all the people who had a stake in its outcome.

Do you think something got by them?

Online: The Lewiston Tribune