Sunday, July 13, 2025
87.0°F

Idaho House panel introduces new ballot initiative legislation

Coeur d'Alene Press | UPDATED 6 years, 3 months AGO
| March 29, 2019 1:00 AM

photo

Erpelding

BOISE (AP) — A House committee on Thursday proposed changing a ballot initiative bill that critics say makes the process so difficult that it violates Idaho’s Constitution.

The House Ways and Means Committee sent to the full House legislation that increases the length of time to gather signatures and cuts the number of legislative districts where signatures must be collected.

If approved, people would have 270 days to collect signatures from two-thirds, or about 24, of the legislative districts. The existing bill, SB 1159, allows only six months and requires signatures from 32 of 35 districts. It still requires signatures from 10 percent of voters.

“Many people thought the six-month timeline was a little bit too short,” said Republican Rep. Sage Dixon.

The law currently requires 6 percent of voters in 18 districts and 18 months to collect signatures.

The Senate narrowly approved the original bill 18-17 last week, and it appeared poised to pass the House as well.

In previous public hearings in House and Senate committee meetings, public testimony was overwhelmingly against the legislation.

Backers of making the initiative process tougher say it’s needed to give rural voters an equal voice because of information technology and social media that will increasingly allow initiative backers to target growing population centers where groups supporting particular issues live.

Supporters also say that signatures in just four highly populated areas can get an initiative on the ballot.

Opponents contend that the tougher requirements would give four legislative districts with just 9 percent of Idaho voters veto power over the entire initiative process.

House Democrats, who call the proposed legislation the “Revenge on Voters Act,” said the circumstances under which the new version of SB 1159 was introduced Thursday are suspect.

Rep. Mat Erpelding, D-Boise, said the chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee called a meeting just a few hours before it started.

Erpelding said the process paved the way for a small group of Republicans to debate the bill “in secret,” and called it a “classic abuse of power.”

“Committee members were sent a new initiative bill a few minutes before the meeting, leaving virtually no time for us to review it,” he said. “Additionally, it was recommended that the bill be sent to the second reading calendar, thereby ending any public debate. They plan to force this troubling bill onto Idaho against their will, and this is the final step.”

Erpelding argued in committee to either keep the bill in committee or to hold a public hearing so citizens could weigh in. The sponsor and the chairman did not believe they needed to hold a public hearing, he said.

“This kind of behavior is unlawful and unprecedented,” Erpelding said. “Every bill deserves to have a public hearing, especially when it’s on a controversial issue. Our job is to get feedback from the voters and take action accordingly. The Majority has completely cut Idahoans out of the process with no shame. They are not even attempting to hide the fact that they are not listening to the voters.”

Betsy Russell, who covers the Capitol for Idaho Press, reported that committee chairman Rep. Robert Anderst, R-Nampa, said, “We noticed it — the secretary posted it” on the Legislature’s website. However, according to Russell, that was during a lunch break and House Majority Leader Mike Moyle had earlier advised all members of the House, and the public, that no further business would occur until the House reconvened at 2:30 p.m.

Rep. John Gannon, D-Boise, an attorney, said, “We didn’t recess, the floor’s still in session, so how can you have a committee meeting?” He said that in itself is a violation of the rules, reported Russell.

Earlier this week, four former state attorneys general released a letter urging lawmakers to kill the original legislation, saying it could be unconstitutional.

Under House rules, the new legislation can’t be taken up until today.

•••

City Editor Maureen Dolan contributed to this story.