Week 12: March 26 -  End of the Session

Week 11: First steps in finishing the session

Week 10: Work on Appropriation Bills

Week 9: HB246 Local Option Transit Bill, HB245 Business Personal Property Tax, and Garvee Funds

Week 8: More on H112 (language of insurance advertisements) and H245 Business Personal Property Taxes

Week 7: More on Vote by Mail, Business Personal Property Tax, Insurance Companies Advertisements

Week 6: Vote by Mail,Local Option Transit Tax

Week 5: Minimum Wage, Community College, Grocery Tax

Week 4: Local Option Tax

Week 3: Urban Renewal Districts, Sales Tax

Week 2: Committee Rules, Capitol Renovation

Week 1: Assignments

    TEAM 17 CITIZEN SURVEY:

Team 17, Senator Elliot Werk, Representative Sue Chew and myself have put together an end of session Legislative Report coupled with a Citzen Survey - this gives you a chance to let us know what you think, and how you would rate our performance this session.  Your input is important - please click the link that follows and make your voice heard.  Thank you.

http://fs3.formsite.com/senatorwerk/form833029452/index.html

March 26 -  End of the Session

The session is definitely winding down with the Garvee (Connecting Idaho) highway bill being debated, once again, in JFAC (Joint Finance and Appropriations Committee) as I am writing this piece on Wednesday morning the 28th. I have the audio feed on (courtesy of KAID) via my notebook computer. The primary focus of the debate is whether the legislature should specify project by project where the funds should prioritized, or whether ITD’s managers and engineers should determine those priorities based on their studies and expertise. I would agree with those who worry that “politicizing” highway construction priorities will lead to “pork barrel” projects rather than rationale and reasoned priorities controlling the outcome. The vote was just taken and the “list” version passed 12-8.

     Yesterday the House voted on the Education funding bills S1124,1125, 1126, 1127, and 1128. All passed, though by varying margins. A number of legislators, including myself, opposed the first three bills; I believed that the 3% wage increase element, particularly given the current 3.8% inflation rate, was insufficient and inequitable, particularly in light of the 5% wage increase provided to public employees generally. Apart from that, the Education funding is improved over prior years – probably due to Mr. Luna’s presence in the Superintendent’s seat.

     We are expecting that the House will be reconsidering H81 (grocery tax credit), H121 (smoking in bowling alleys), and H105 (sick leave credits upon retirement) and, if overridden in the Senate, S1125 (Underinsured automobile liability step-down provision). H8 (mailing of property tax default notices) should have been reconsidered earlier in the session, but the new House leadership overlooked the timing requirement. The reconsideration will probably come up today; rumors indicate House leadership and rank and file strongly wish to override to avoid going home with none of their election promises fulfilled. I believe our caucus proposal, providing relief at the cash register, was a much better approach, but it never got an up or down vote in the Revenue and Tax Committee, being further down the agenda than the two credit relief proposals; I intend to vote to sustain the Governor’s veto in this instance. I will vote to override on H121, however; the no smoking ban is a “no brainer” to me; having once been a smoker myself, I know how incredibly difficult it was to quit, and have no desire to inflict the consequences of this habit on anyone.

     The House voted 48-22 to override the governor’s veto of the grocery tax credit – two votes to spare; opposition principally focused on need for more comprehensive relief at the cash register, coupled with the belief that if H81 made it through the Senate, no future relief would be likely. As to H121, smoking in bowling alleys, the vote was also to override, though more decisive, 57-13; the opposition was principally from those who believe property rights trump any and all other rights, including, apparently, “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness..”.

    March 19 - March 23, Finishing up the Session

Side note: This last weekend I joined with five other legislators in a road trip through Central Idaho. We had an opportunity to meet and listen to the concerns of citizens and local officials in Boise, Valley, Idaho, Washington, and Canyon counties. As I have learned from the visitors to our session long “office hours” and forums, nothing beats personal contact for getting a real understanding of the issues that people are truly concerned about.

     S1172 ( English only) came before the House on Tuesday and generated substantial debate from both sides of the aisle; supporters characterized it as opening doors, opponents (including myself) saw it as closing doors. As is often the case, beauty – even for legislation – is in the eye of the beholder. I saw the bill as divisive from a policy standpoint, unnecessary from a practical standpoint, and rife with unintended consequences. As an attorney, I was particularly concerned with the omission of judicial proceedings from the list of exceptions to the English only mandate. In both civil and criminal proceedings, testimony of parties and witnesses, as well as documentary evidence, is frequently in other than English. One proponent stated that was a non-issue since court proceedings were covered by the law enforcement exception, an assertion that surely will come as a great surprise to the judges and attorneys, as well as the authors of Article V of the Idaho constitution, which creates the Judicial branch of government, independent from the Executive and Legislative branches. Unfortunately the bill passed by a vote of 46-20.

     During the course of the debate, word spread that the Governor had vetoed H81, the food tax credit bill which had previously passed both the House and Senate. During the course of the day, both parties caucused, the veto and how to respond to it being a major topic of discussion. As of Wednesday morning it is my sense that no consensus has emerged from either side, at least in the House. Even though the bill passed by large margins in both houses, the response to a veto is anything but predictable. The latest word is that leadership will be meeting with the governor over the noon hour, presumably to explore a possible resolution.

     S1157 is scheduled for debate today (Wednesday) but it is more likely that it will be tomorrow or Friday. It is a bill crafted by Senator McGee from Caldwell that would limit public benefits to those who cannot verify they are U.S. citizens or are otherwise entitled to participate in a particular “benefit” program. I believe this is another “feel good” piece of legislation that will have significant unintended consequences, both socially and economically. In particular, the growing body of experience nationally, in adapting to similar provisions in the Federal benefits programs, reflects two untoward consequences. Colorado, for example, has had to add about 80 new staffers to handle the increased workload required by the more rigorous certification requirements. Scaled by population, this could translate into 28 new staffers in Idaho. It was noted at the Boise City Club Forum on March 8th that, nationally, undocumented workers contribute about $20 billion annually to Social Security and state and federal income withholding coffers. None of these funds are likely to flow back to them, essentially providing a windfall to the rest of us. The economic consequences of this bill could well be exactly the opposite of what the sponsor projects in his Statement of Purpose which predicts an economic benefit at the local level.

     Today (Friday) rumors are rife as to what, if anything, will happen with the Governor’s veto or the grocery tax credit; it is appearing more and more likely the issue is stuck because House leadership, and the Governor, are unable to reach a compromise on this one; it also appears that as time passes more and more of the rank and file legislators are becoming disillusioned with their leadership and the resulting “do-nothing” label that is starting to dog this session. Perhaps by Monday the log jam will ease.

     I served as House Chaplin this morning and selected a favorite prayer of mine, a going home Gaelic blessing, particularly appropriate at this time of the session:

     May the road rise up to meet you; may the wind be always at your back; May the sun shine warm upon your face, the rains fall soft upon your fields, and until we meet again, may God hold you in the palm of His hand.

     See you at week 12. .
You can contact me directly at bkillen@house.idaho.gov

back to top

    March 12 - March 16, Work on Appropriation Bills

The dominant activity this week is considering and voting on various appropriations bills. These bills are the work product of JFAC (Joint Finance and Appropriations Committee) made up of ten representatives from the House and ten senators from the Senate. All budget/appropriations bills originate in this very influential committee; rarely are their proposals seriously questioned on the floor. An exception occurred on the floor of the House today. The vote on S1197, the appropriations bill for the Idaho State Lottery, was 34-34, thus failing on this tie vote; I voted for passage. Immediately thereafter a notice was given as to a possible motion to reconsider; which means that it may come back before the House for another vote later this session. It is my understanding that an effort will be made to change, not the appropriated funds proposed, but the intent language only. Many of those objecting strongly believe that the promotional activities and literature utilized by the Lottery Commission inappropriately exploit school children in urging people to participate in the lottery. The strong no vote reflects the widespread concern with this practice.

     S1107 also failed in the House on a vote of 26-44; it was intended to clarify which forms of insurance could or could not utilized genetic testing data in assessing risk for insurance purposes. The bill affirmed that health and medical insurers could not access such data, but sellers of long term care or income protection (disability) policies could. The former are subject to annual renewal and the latter are not. The pro argument was that the clarification of somewhat ambiguous language in last year’s bill was needed to preclude the inevitable higher risk assessment for all purchasers of long term care or income protection policies; the con argument was that it would discourage individuals from seeking genetic testing useful in better determining their individual or family health situation; such information would likely allow them to pursue appropriate care regimens or lifestyle changes designed to reduce any indicated health risk. I voted in favor of the bill believing that to reflect a better long term policy.

     S1197 (Lottery appropriations) came back in the afternoon session and the formal motion to reconsider was made and debated; the vote was 34 – 34 again, though votes shifted on both sides. The net effect is that there are no funds appropriated for the lottery program for the coming fiscal year. In order to fund it, JFAC, the Senate, and the House will have to start over from scratch on this one. My best guess is that the identical bill with some form of intent language addressing the concerns set forth in debate will surface shortly. Ironically this runs counter to another deeply held sentiment in the House chambers that JFAC should stick to budgets and avoid articulating policy. Time will tell.

    We thank all of you who came to forum at West Jr. High. It was good to see some new faces. There were some excellent questions. The session is winding down and our end of the session forum will be back at Borah High School on April 11th at 7:00 p.m. in the library..
You can contact me directly at bkillen@house.idaho.gov

back to top

    March 5 - March 9, Local Option Transit Bill, The continuing saga of the Business Personal Property Tax and Garvee Funds

The naysayers were out in force on Wednesday in Revenue and Taxation. H246, the local option transit tax, went down 11-7. Three votes could have made the difference; ironically, three of the no votes came from Treasure Valley legislators: Mike Moyle of Star, Bob Schaeffer of Nampa, and Gary Collins of Nampa. The members of House leadership on the committee weighed in against this bill and only Leon Smith of Twin Falls and Dennis Lake of Blackfoot stood their ground – “attaboys” to them. If I were a Nampa legislator, I would not look forward to explaining to my constituents gridlocked on I84 why a program designed to address regional transit needs was undeserving of my support.

     I believe the bill had a much better chance of passage on the House floor itself, but we’ll never know, at least for this session. Given the enormous community support for this issue, I fully expect it to be back next session, and thereafter, if necessary. The underlying problem is only going to grow as time passes; unfortunately the costs of construction, corridor acquisition, and the like will only become more expensive with the passage of time as well. The legislature should be considering the long term when examining issues such as this, and affording local government and citizens the tools necessary to plan and execute before things reach a crisis stage, rather than merely reacting after a crisis is upon them.

     On Thursday H 245 (the business personal property tax reduction/exemption bill) was placed on General Orders in the House. This is our mechanism for amending a bill once it comes from committee. This confirms, in part, the speculation that the bill in its present form was in trouble. The exact nature of the amendments is unknown at present, and will likely remain that way until the bill itself is taken up at General Orders. It is still uncertain when that will be, the motion being silent on that point. I do have an amendment of y own waiting in the wings for just such an opportunity. It is identical to that offered in the Revenue & Tax committee a few weeks back; it limited the relief to the first $50,000.00 of assets for all businesses, large or small. The Tax Commission’s best estimate is that figure would pick up over 80% of the present business accounts. Everything over that figure would continue to be taxed as is. Also local government, including urban renewal districts, would be reimbursed for the foregone tax revenues. Maybe the third time for this amendment will be charmed.

    We are debating H245 as I write; The amended H245 was voted on today, Friday the 9th, passing 47-20. As amended it continues with the exemption of the first $50,000.00 of assets, but with no reimbursement to Local government, even though they are still required to gather, and businesses to report, those items making up the $50,000.00 or less exemption. The $92 million balance remains in the bill, but requires annual review and approval of a portion each year conditioned on the economic situation at that time. Those dollars, which are scheduled to be reimbursed to local government from general fund/sales tax revenues, will ultimately adversely impact the dollars otherwise available to fund education, corrections, and other general fund activities. Essentially another tax shift from the business to the non-business sector, on top of that visited upon the citizens last August. I made another attempt Thursday to pare it back to the first $50,000.00 with reimbursement to Local government; several legislators from across the aisle supported it, but not enough. There’s always next year.

    Garvee Highway Funding: JFAC (Joint Finance and Appropriations Committee) will continue with the Garvee funding issue on Monday, March 12th. My best guess is that it will make it out at that time, obviously with some tweaking to reflect the concerns expressed earlier in JFAC, predominantly those dealing with perceived delays in planning and contracting. The lack of shovels on the ground since last year's appropriations made for some very unhappy legislators and constituents. My best guess is the additional appropriations will be forthcoming and the pace of construction commitment will accelerate in 2007.

    On March 13th the District 17 Legislators will have a Public Forum at West Jr. High at 7:00 p.m. We had a great turnout last month at South and hope to have a repeat. If you can't make it we always have our Tuesday office hours at the Borah High School Career Center from 7:00 p.m. to 8:30 p.m.

    If you would like to receive this newsletter regularly via email Subscribe to the Team17 Newsletter.
You can contact me directly at bkillen@house.idaho.gov

back to top

     February 26 - March 2, More on H112 (Language in Insurance Ads) and H245 (Business Personal Property Taxes)

In an unusual move today the House voted down 40-30 House Bill 112. This was the bill that provided insurers a “safe haven” in the event they provided advertising materials to prospective purchasers in other than English; simply put, it provided that whatever was said or implied in the brochure as to the policy coverage, could not be used to construe or interpret the provisions of the insurance contract itself. In effect, a Spanish language brochure, no matter how misleading or erroneous, could not be used to determine what was actually sold to the purchaser; contrariwise, if the brochure was in English, Idaho law provides it could be used in this fashion in the event of a dispute. Forty members of the House, from both sides of the aisle, voted to defeat this proposal. I am proud to be one of those who debated against this bill and joined in its defeat.

    The personal property tax bill issue muddles on. H206 was held in committee to be replaced by H233 last Friday; this new bill was rewritten to include urban renewal districts among the local governmental entities receiving general fund reimbursements to offset the loss of personal property tax revenues. At Friday’s session “trigger” language in the bill (designed to deal with what would happen in the event an economic downturn impaired general fund revenues) was targeted by committee members as being imprecise and ambiguous – by Monday morning the bill was reborn as H245 with new, and presumably improved, “trigger” language.

     I made an attempt to amend the latest bill while it was still in RS form, sort of a bill’s fetal stage, but was rebuffed on procedural grounds that an RS was not subject to amendment in committee; foolish me – I had read the committee rules the night before and believed otherwise. By the end of the day I was approached by majority members of the committee acknowledging that I had read the rules correctly. However as the Chair, Rep. Lake, opined the next morning, it just wasn’t good form to do what I had attempted –in fairness he did have some legitimate reasons for his position. I guess the lesson to be drawn is that the rules are the rules, unless the chair opines differently.

     H245 came before the committee for hearing on Tuesday and substantial testimony and debate ensued. This time I successfully put forward my amending motion (to send it to the floor for amendment); the gist of the motion was to limit the exemption to the first $50,000.00 of taxable assets and reimburse local government for the last revenues. This would benefit a little over 80% of the affected businesses, essentially those with the least assets. It would cost the general fund 1/10 what the bill itself would cost, in my view a much more prudent approach. At the present time we still don’t know the real implications of last August’s special session tax shift, as well as that of the earlier increase and indexing of the homeowner’s exemption. It is my belief that a more prudent course is to let enough time pass to develop a more precise understanding of the impact of those changes prior to adding another variable to the tax policy mix. My concern is that this bill will simply shift additional burdens on an already strained general fund – an unanticipated economic slowdown could quickly destabilize our somewhat lopsided three legged stool. Rumor has it the Governor is not overly entranced by this bill either – there may be light at the end of the tunnel.

     Please contact me with any other questions or concerns you may have about this or any other issue.bkillen@house.idaho.gov

back to top

     February 19 - February 23, More on Vote by Mail, Business personal Property Tax and Insurance Company Advertising

House Bill 94 (vote by mail) would allow counties to voluntarily adopt vote by mail procedures. This week, and to the surprise of the bill’s sponsor, Clete Edmunson, by motion on the House floor, the bill was returned to the House State Affairs committee. During floor debate, some legislators expressed concern about access to voting day polling places, and perceived voter fraud potential; these had not been issues for all 44 of Idaho’s elected county clerks, the very individuals who are charged with administering our elections, or the state’s chief election officer, Secretary of State Ben Ysursa who had signed on as sponsors of this legislation.

     When one realizes we have been conducting absentee voting by mail for years, it is easy to see how the elected county clerks were not concerned. One can only conclude there are other issues at stake rather than those voiced on the House floor. I spoke briefly with the State Affairs committee chair this morning, wondering when it might re-surface in committee. His response did not give me much hope that it would be anytime soon, if ever. If any of you have influence with Mr. Loertscher or any of the house leadership, let them know your feelings about the importance of this measure. There is still time to turn it around.

     House Bill 206 is an IACI supported bill that would phase out the local personal property tax presently imposed on businesses that utilize personal property not otherwise exempt from taxation; this amounts to about $100,000,000 annually.

     It would eliminate or exempt all such taxes over an eight-year period. The bill provides that most, though not all, of the lost revenue would be reimbursed to local governments from the state general fund. The reimbursement amount is capped at the current (2006) amount otherwise raised locally by the counties, cities, and other local taxing districts. Thus as time passes inflation will gradually erode the purchasing power of the capped amounts being reimbursed.

     It's going to be a close one -fortunately the bill as drafted has some flaws, which may derail it for a while - hopefully beyond the end of the session. Alternatively, the Senate may simply treat it as one more giant exemption and sit on it for that reason. The hearing, which began Tuesday, was continued until Friday morning to complete witness testimony and then take up deliberations. I oppose it as drafted since the lost revenue will inevitably be made up from the sales tax and income tax sectors, the bulk of both coming from individual taxpayers rather than business entities, essentially tax shift part II.

    House Bill 112 - I have had some questions about a little known bill, House Bill 112, that has to do with advertising for insurance companies. I hope this clarifies the bill. Basically it provides that if insurance companies advertise in languages other than English, the content of the advertisement cannot be used to interpret the policy language. In other words a Spanish language brochure need not accurately reflect the actual coverage set out in the policy. Great huh?

     I started questioning it last Wednesday and the sponsor was supposed to come back Friday with clarification, legal opinion, whatever; he showed up late, after we had adjourned, so the matter was put over until Tuesday. There are Democrats and Republicans on the committee questioning this bill.

     Thank you for voicing your opinion. It is only with the involvement of people like yourself that democracy works. Please contact me with any other questions or concerns you may have about this or any other issue.bkillen@house.idaho.gov

back to top

    If you would like to receive this newsletter regularly via email Subscribe to the Team17 Newsletter.
You can contact me directly at bkillen@house.idaho.gov

back to top