Sens. Michelle Stennett, Grant Burgoyne, and Janie Ward-Engelking raised concerns about the possible legal ramifications that could stem from the Senate, specifically, coming back into session after adjourning in May, not recessing like the House. No mechanism exists for the body to reconvene once its members officially sine die unless the governor calls a special session.

The three said the majority isn’t adhering to proper protocol, and seem more focused on political grandstanding than passing legally-sound legislation aimed at mitigating the state’s ongoing health crisis. Since Sept. 16, Idaho has been in crisis standards of care.

Senate Republicans are expected to propose a bill to set up another defense fund to join other state legal actions against the Biden administration over its COVID-19 rules for employers. Like the Constitutional Defense Fund, this legal defense fund would authorize the legislature to give sole power to the speaker of the House and the Senate pro-tem to use state funds to pay for litigation expenses, such as hiring outside counsel.

“Other states have been leading this charge and already filed lawsuits against the Biden administration; there’s no need for Idaho to be spending its own money,” Burgoyne said. “We should wait for the federal courts to make a decision rather than writing another blank check to lawyers.”

The group told reporters Senate Democrats have drafted legislation to direct COVID-19 relief funds to help Idaho workers and their families. Some of the bill’s provisions include:

• Reimbursing employers for wages paid to staff in need of time off to get the vaccine and recover from any side effects, or assist a family member in getting it or their recovery
• Rapid testing for businesses and schools
• Compensation for anyone missing work after contracting COVID-19 or being exposed
• A sick-leave bank for all public employees and school personnel
• One-time bonus payments to essential workers

“If we’re going to be here, we should be doing some actual good for Idahoans, not misusing their hard-earned tax dollars on likely unconstitutional bills,” Stennett said. 

“People across our state are struggling, especially our teachers. We are sitting on more than two billion in state and federal funds right now. Why not direct some of that money toward helping Idaho’s working families?” Ward-Engelking said. “Let’s not continue to sit on it; let’s invest it in our people when they need it most.

Sen. David Nelson

Instead, we met several times in recent weeks to determine how to circumvent the federal government and its proposed vaccine requirements. Remember: U.S. taxpayers are spending about $3.7B monthly to treat unvaccinated Americans, a number of which are the cause of Idaho’s current health care crisis.

The committee ultimately decided to recommend a bill forbidding state and local governments from enforcing a federal requirement, penalizing those who do with a personal fine of up to $5,000, six months maximum in jail, or both. We were the only two who opposed it.

The bill might be altered slightly, but it now goes to the full legislature, potentially causing us to reconvene for a special session in the next two weeks for a vote. This only opens the door for even stricter legislation and the continued spread of misinformation, doing nothing to stop Idahoans’ from needlessly dying each day.

At multiple points in this process, we had to correct false information to ensure the legislative record was accurate. Here’s a sampling of the public testimony we heard:

Rep. Chris Mathias

“Reported COVID deaths in the United States because of taking the vaccine is 13,751, and this was reported as an underestimate.” A careful review of health and autopsy records makes clear no deaths have been linked to any of the vaccines, of which more than 390 million doses have been administered. They are incredibly safe and effective in keeping you out of the hospital.

“Don’t get the unproven vaccine, you can treat COVID with Ivermectin, hydroxychloroquine, and monoclonal antibodies. This stuff works.” A sitting legislator said this. Ivermectin is an antiparasitic. A dewormer! It has dangerous side effects, with no proven effectiveness against COVID-19 — as does hydroxychloroquine. Monoclonal antibodies provide some help in keeping you from being hospitalized, but are more experimental and not FDA approved, like the fully-approved Pfizer vaccine. The vaccines are also less expensive, costing about $20 versus several thousand for monoclonal antibodies. While the government covers most of that, we are worried about the residual cost for taxpayers.

In Idaho, almost every COVID-19 patient hospitalized right now is unvaccinated, and they are 11 times more likely to die from it. Bodily autonomy is a right we can assert, but that right comes with responsibilities. Unless you have a legitimate medical reason, you should get vaccinated. The pandemic persists because many unvaccinated people are ignoring public health guidelines.

And misinformation is to blame for a lot of that — we saw that firsthand during committee meetings. People are dying and suffering because they trusted the word of a Facebook post, a chiropractor, or a far-right politician over an epidemiologist and ER doctor.

We recognize some people are strongly opposed to anything the federal government asks us to do, but continuing down this path isn’t how we end the pandemic. We have to make policy decisions based on fact, a careful review of current law, and in Idahoans’ best interests. What we shouldn’t do is give into the fearmongers, who demonize the vaccine and our health care providers, often resorting to threats of violence against those with whom they disagree.

Idahoans need real leadership, not another unproductive special session, unconstitutional bill, or eventual lawsuit costing hundreds of thousands of taxpayer dollars.

“At this historic moment, our state needs to come together to navigate the crisis. We are at a breaking point, as unvaccinated COVID-19 patients flood hospitals statewide, forcing Crisis Standards of Care, where medical providers will have to decide who does or doesn’t get treated.

Those of us who trust science have been encouraging and even begging Idahoans to get vaccinated for months. It has not been enough and our health care system is buckling. We all want our schools to stay open for our students, our hospitals to have a bed when we need one, and parents to stay alive to care for their children. Low vaccination rates threaten all of this. We have to do more to ensure our children, teachers, health care workers, and others can stay safe and healthy.   

We need strong leaders who will do the right thing to preserve human life even if they face criticism. What we don’t need is political posturing. This frivolous lawsuit demonstrates a callousness to thousands of Idahoans who have died and will continue to die if nothing changes.

The vaccine is our best way of ending this pandemic, and our state is near the bottom in the nation for vaccination rates. We have to change that, or else the crisis will only worsen and more Idahoans will needlessly lose their lives. The time for bold action is now, and we need real leadership, not another wasteful lawsuit.”

Rep. Lauren Necochea

The current policies have off-ramps and exemptions already in place. Hospitals have a responsibility to all who enter their businesses, whether someone has a heart attack, a serious COVID infection, or a vaccination reaction. Democratic leaders said the crusade led by the GOP and special interest groups isn’t a serious attempt to propose policy, but to generate campaign publicity.

“Republicans are once again trying to exploit COVID to score political points against each other. Meanwhile, Democrats have been doing their homework and we found that prohibiting employers from requiring vaccines is likely to be challenged in court and will likely fail,” Asst. House Democratic Leader Lauren Necochea said. 

Health care officials are trying to combat a recent spike in Idaho’s coronavirus rates, particularly among health care workers, which threatens the ability of the hospitals to deliver care to everyone who needs it. It also comes during the emergence of more contagious variants throughout the country. A majority of employees are already immunized, and individuals are also able to request a medical exemption or a disability/religious accommodation if necessary.

Sen. Grant Burgoyne

“COVID cases among health care system staff are rising in recent weeks, just as patient beds are scarce due to a range of illnesses and rapid population growth. Health care systems across the nation are opting to require a vaccine rather than risk rationing health care to patients,” Necochea said. “When Idahoans take a loved one to a chemotherapy appointment or a medically vulnerable child in for a check-up, they shouldn’t have to run the risk of contracting a dangerous virus in the very place where they seek medical care. Vaccination is the best and only way we are going to truly end this pandemic. It is not only safe but incredibly necessary.”

GOP lawmakers attempted to pass legislation, House Bill 140, during the session to prevent private and state businesses contracting with the state from requiring any type of vaccination, but were unsuccessful. If the legislature reconvenes, a version of the bill could be brought back, but a special session might also open the door to any other topic — wasting taxpayer dollars.

Necochea requested an Attorney General’s opinion on HB 140, which showed the proposed legislation would violate legal requirements protecting medically fragile people.

“The job of political leaders is to strike the right balance. No one is calling for the government to require people to vaccinate, and no one is proposing jail time for those unvaccinated people who spread COVID to others. What we are saying is that a natural consequence of choosing not to vaccinate is not being qualified to do certain types of work,” Asst. Senate Democratic Leader Grant Burgoyne said. “I hate to see anyone lose their job, but shifting the burden of a decision not to vaccinate on to patients and coworkers is unsafe and contrary to the basic expectation that health care workers do no harm.”

Sen. Grant Burgoyne

Idaho’s child care professionals keep our economy running, helping parents and caregivers enter and stay in the workforce, which is more crucial than ever. If we do not provide meaningful support now, the child care industry will not survive. Providers have already struggled to bounce back from the pandemic and that will only continue without the federal funds, potentially leading many to close their doors if adequate resources aren’t provided. We cannot allow that to happen.

On April 6, Gov. Brad Little recommended $96 million in American Rescue Plan Act funds to go toward child care. Despite this, it appears the JFAC co-chairs do not intend to take action on these funds and others before the Idaho Legislature recesses or adjourns. This is unacceptable.

“Child care is the backbone of our economy. Without it, parents cannot work and businesses cannot hire the employees they need. We have released COVID relief funding for a variety of industries. It is unconscionable to hold back funds for child care providers,” Asst. Senate Democratic Leader Grant Burgoyne said. “Release of the funds will help keep child care costs down and help accessibility directly benefiting Idaho families, as well as the businesses that parents work for.”

Rep. Lauren Necochea

There is also pending legislation, Senate Bill 1212, to cut off federal aid to child care providers in December 2021, despite federal guidelines allowing this money to be spent through 2024. 

“Child care providers are small businesses that face narrow profit margins in good times. The pandemic has stretched them to the breaking point,” Asst. House Democratic Leader Lauren Necochea added. “If we do not support them, these vital businesses could shutter, leaving families, employers, and communities at a major loss.” 

Rep. Ilana Rubel

Both House Bill 135 and Senate Bill 1136 were opposed by the House and Senate Democrats. 

House Democratic Leader Ilana Rubel said Little made the right choice to veto the two bills, and hopes he’ll do the same with Senate Bill 1110, which seeks to trim the power of the people.

“In emergencies, the speed of our response is a matter of life and death for Idahoans. It is critical that our executive branch can act swiftly and effectively, something that our legislative branch has not exactly modeled this session,” Rubel said following the announcement. “We hope that in addition to guarding the powers of the executive, however, that Gov. Little will protect the powers of the people he serves by vetoing SB1110, a bill that virtually eradicates citizens’ ballot initiative rights.”  

Sen. Michelle Stennett

Democratic Leaders Ilana Rubel and Michelle Stennett said they wish the individuals who’ve tested positive a full and speedy recovery, and are thankful for the decision to take a two-week pause. However, it shouldn’t have taken an outbreak for lawmakers to start addressing the seriousness of the coronavirus, since the Statehouse is equipped with fully functional remote capabilities, they added.

“We hope our colleagues are able to heal quickly and return, so we can finish the session. But we can’t help but be disappointed in how bad things have become at the Capitol, when we could’ve prevented this from becoming a hot spot all along,” the pair said in a joint statement.

Rep. Ilana Rubel

“We are just so sorry it took so many people getting sick for us to act. We must do better when we return, or else we’ll keep finding ourselves in this position.”

As of 5 p.m. Thursday, the state had logged more than 177,000 confirmed and probable COVID-19 cases, as well as nearly 2,000 deaths. This week, The New York Times reported Idaho Falls was the nation’s worst hot spot, with Rexburg as number three. 

I think we should use the pandemic to review our policies on handling emergencies, and I welcome reasoned discussions with good data when we are finally out of harm’s way — and only then. We will have plenty of time in future sessions to make these changes.

We should utilize the interim committees over the next year to study, review best practices and take public comment on: special sessions of the Legislature, public health emergencies and authorities along with disaster emergencies.  Once the necessary information is gathered, we then can act accordingly — and responsibly — in the 2022 regular session.

Sen. David Nelson, District 5

We have three sets of laws to deal with health emergencies which are all rarely used, making it confusing to understand and apply.  Relying on local action is not always an effective way to introduce public health orders (mask mandates for example). The virus did not strike the entire state at the same time, but in the end, all counties have been affected, with some of the higher rates in very rural counties. Our county commissioners, who are on most of the public health boards, are usually smart and wise elected official; however, we need to make sure they are provided with and suitably consider the best advice from our health experts.

The Idaho Legislature should be able to call itself back into special session. Idaho is one of 14 states that can only be called into special session by the governor; the other 34 can be called either by the governor or the legislature. But we need these necessary safeguards in place for calling a session:

• Require 2/3 of both the Senate and House to agree. If the governor will not call us in, anything passed would have to probably override his veto. We should have that same standard for a special session, so we don’t waste time and money.
• In fairness to our citizens, the topics to consider should be limited. Special sessions will come up with little notice, and our citizens need time to understand the issues being considered by their legislators.
• Limit to some number of days annually. No one wants a full-time Idaho legislature, and limiting the time we can be in special sessions between our regular session is important. It costs north of $30,000 per day for the legislature to meet.

Once the pandemic is over, the legislature should thoroughly consider how state and local government worked during this crisis.  Let’s provide opportunity for public input and then make those changes.  But this year, let’s not rush it.  Let’s keep our focus on working to help all Idahoans to get through the pandemic safely and our kids back to school learning.

And let’s not make the governor’s job harder.  The legislature is playing politics with the governor now, and I don’t approve.  He’s not of my political party and he hasn’t done many things I would have, but he has done a good job.  His focus is on the people of Idaho, not political power.   I support his actions, and I wish his legislative partners would as well.

But there is one value missing from their list: Community. This omission reveals a growing concern as the legislature shifts toward prioritizing individual liberties over protecting the interests of the larger community. A civilized society strikes a healthy balance between the two. Extremism in either direction serves more to divide us than unite us.

Rep. Steve Berch

COVID is challenging our ability to strike this balance, especially when it comes to masks. Consider this: if our young men and women in the military can don battlefield attire and armament from head-to-toe in hostile climates, then we should all be able to endure the inconvenience of wearing a mask when we’re around other people.  Some don’t wear a mask because they question the severity or even the existence of a pandemic and want the Governor to lift the COVID emergency order. One legislator actually stood on the floor of the House and publicly declared the pandemic was over – while people are scrambling to get vaccinated!

I do not support lifting the Governor’s emergency order at this time (A resolution ordering this, SCR101, is stuck in a Senate committee). Here are the factors I take into consideration when making a determination – which can change with new information:

• Mortality rates.  The loss of any life due to COVID is tragic, even if the rate may be less than what was originally projected.  This is an important – but not the only – criteria for reaching a determination.
• Morbidity rates (people who survive but suffer long-term or permanent damage to their health).  This number is unknown, and it will take time to quantify. We do know COVID can result in long-term convalescence periods and possibly life-long problems that can be severely debilitating (e.g. “COVID lung”).
• Hospital beds.  As hospital beds fill up with COVID patients, and/or hospital staff is reduced due to self-quarantine, an increasing number of non-COVID patients can’t get the life-saving medical care they need because healthcare systems are pushed beyond capacity. This results in people potentially dying from anything requiring ICU care, not just COVID.  This factor will ebb and flow with spikes and decreases in infection rates.
• Mutations.  The more wide-spread COVID infects humans, the greater opportunity for the virus to mutate into strains that are more contagious and more lethal.  One identified strain may be 30-70% more contagious, and another may be more lethal and more resistant to the vaccines currently being administered.
• Vaccinations. This may be the most important factor, now that vaccines have started to be administered. The quicker we can vaccinate the population, the quicker we can get back to a more normal existence, but we must remain vigilant as the virus spreads and mutates.

I try to balance both the immediate and long-term perspective when making decisions.  I value the input and advice of credible sources whose knowledge exceeds mine (including our state epidemiologist), as well as people with years of experience in containing pandemics and other highly infectious diseases (such as SARS and Ebola).

The definition of a patriot is: “a person who vigorously supports their country.” I don’t like wearing a mask – but I do.  It’s just one small patriotic action I can take to protect and support others in my community, my country.

It is ridiculous for GOP leadership to suggest the motion was brought for publicity or fundraising purposes. Every effort was made to resolve this issue in a non-public way, but those efforts were systematically shot down. Friday’s motion was brought out of a genuine desire to solve the problem, and with the expectation that it could pass given its modest nature and that it had been identified by Speaker Scott Bedke as the appropriate way to proceed. After the shocking party-line vote, it was entirely appropriate to send out a public email seeking accountability for the callous disregard shown on the House floor. If the majority does not like the bad press generated by their collective ‘No’ vote, they should heed the pleas of disabled legislators for reasonable accommodations in the workplace, not feign outrage that their actions triggered subsequent public notification.

There is office space on the 4th floor, which Speaker Bedke proposed be used by Reps. Sue Chew and Muffy Davis. Currently, the House Minority Interns occupy it. However, it is still a very high traffic area as it is the main corridor to the public gallery, continuing to cause safety/health concerns for both. The primary issue isn’t office space, since they still wouldn’t be able to vote/debate remotely from there. The real issue is these legislators with serious health conditions need to be able to fully carry out their job duties, including asking questions and speaking on the floor and in committee in a safe manner. Millions were spent upgrading the Capitol building to allow for full virtual participation, so the capabilities are now in place and would not cost any additional money. We just need legislators to allow those virtual capabilities to be used. Office location isn’t what is at issue here, and wherever these legislators are housed, it won’t solve the problem of their being able to debate, ask questions and vote safely.

Thus, the lawsuit isn’t impacted or resolved by Bedke’s statements regarding offices, but it would have been resolved if the House had passed Rep. Davis’s motion. That motion was precisely what Speaker Bedke directed the plaintiffs to do. In his declaration, he wrote, “I would entertain any motion properly brought to the Floor to allow virtual debate and voting. Similarly, I would entertain any motion properly brought to the Floor to allow Plaintiffs to debate from the gallery on the Fourth Floor. Until the session begins, however, these only remain as hypothetical options.” Friday’s motion, which was prompted by Bedke’s statement and the judge’s order, was supplied to House Republicans 24 hours in advance, so they were not surprised and would have time to discuss. The motion brought the narrowest possible request for relief, applying only to a handful of legislators, on a temporary basis during this session only. It would have cost nothing, did not require action on the part of any other legislator, and was consistent with what most other legislatures are already doing. The House suspends rules all the time for less pressing reasons, and this, frankly, seemed like a very modest and noncontroversial request. The Democrats were stunned when the Republicans locked arms and blocked this on a straight party-line vote.

We are pleased to hear options are still being considered to provide a safe work environment, and are hopeful that we can find a mutually agreeable solution and put this painful episode behind us.