https://idahocapitalsun.com/feed

Here’s what you need to know this Election Day in Idaho.

This election, statewide offices like the governor, congressional seats in the U.S. House and Senate, and state legislative seats are on ballots. So are local races like for county commissioners, and even for judges.

What is a primary election? Why does it matter?

Today, voters can cast votes to nominate candidates to win their political party’s bid to advance to the November general election, when winners are ultimately decided. In Idaho — where Republicans have long controlled statewide offices and the state Legislature — primary elections often decide the winners of major elections.

But primaries often draw less turnout than elections in November, which are called general elections. In years where the president isn’t being elected, fewer voters tend to turn out. 

So, what primaries can I vote in?

Idaho law allows political parties to restrict voters who aren’t affiliated with their party from voting in primary elections. The Republican Party only allows registered Republicans to vote. 

If you are already registered to vote but are not a registered Republican, you cannot vote in today’s Republican primary election. But if you’re a new voter who is just registering to vote today at the polls for the first time, you can register as a Republican and vote in the GOP primary, Idaho Secretary of State’s Office spokesperson Joe Parris told the Idaho Capital Sun. 

How do I register to vote on Election Day?

To register to vote, you need a current photo ID and a document proving you live in Idaho. Find a list of documents that meet these requirements, and more information, online on VoteIdaho.gov, a website run by the Idaho Secretary of State’s Office. 

More than 1 million Idahoans are registered voters. Need to see if you’re a registered voter? Look it up online on VoteIdaho.gov.

You need to update your voter registration when you move, change your name, or have not voted in the past four years. 

How do I find my polling location?

To find your polling location, type your address into this tool on VoteIdaho.gov.

Who’s on my ballot?

To find out which races and candidates are on your ballot, plug your information into this tool on VoteIdaho.gov. That tool will show you sample ballots. 

The candidates, the ballot measures, and the tools you need to cast your vote.

When are absentee ballots due?

Absentee ballots are due when polls close, at 8 p.m. local time. That means that election officials must have received them by then, not just that the ballots are dropped in the mail by 8 p.m. local time.

If you still need to turn in an absentee ballot, the best way to ensure it gets counted is to drop it off at a ballot drop box or hand deliver it to your county clerk’s office. 

How do I find information about candidates?

The Idaho Capital Sun’s voter guide has information on all statewide candidates who are up for election in the primary, and a handful of contested legislative races.

WASHINGTON — The U.S. Department of Justice announced Monday a new “anti-weaponization” settlement fund as a condition of President Donald Trump voluntarily dropping his multi-billion-dollar lawsuit against the Internal Revenue Service for the leak of his tax returns several years ago.

Trump, his sons Don Jr. and Eric, and the Trump Organization moved to drop the $10 billion suit Monday in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida, with prejudice — meaning he cannot revive it in the future. 

Shortly after Trump’s filing hit the court docket, the DOJ announced the creation of a $1.776 billion settlement, not to be paid to Trump or his family, but to be divvied up among “others who suffered weaponization and lawfare,” according to a department press release.

Democrats swiftly denounced the settlement as a “slush fund.”

The move presumably means those pardoned by Trump for crimes related to the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol could seek money from the government. The DOJ’s announcement did not specifically mention President Joe Biden, former Attorney General Merrick Garland or the Capitol riot, and noted there are “no partisan requirements to file a claim.” 

Trump campaigned on pardoning anyone prosecuted by the Biden administration for crimes related to the 2021 attack, describing them as “patriots” and “hostages.” He pardoned roughly 1,600 defendants on the first night of his second term, and the White House published a dedicated web page to those targeted by “a weaponized Biden DOJ.”

In addition to monetary relief, eligible claimants will also receive a formal apology from the government.

Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche, Trump’s former personal defense attorney, said in a statement, “The machinery of government should never be weaponized against any American, and it is this Department’s intention to make right the wrongs that were previously done while ensuring this never happens again.”

“As part of this settlement, we are setting up a lawful process for victims of lawfare and weaponization to be heard and seek redress,” he added.

Trump, his family and the Trump organization will also receive a formal apology but no monetary damages as part of the arrangement, according to the DOJ.

The president and his family had filed suit in January against the IRS for the leak to news media of their tax information by a contractor in late 2019. The contractor was sentenced for the leak in early 2024.

When questioned by the press Monday afternoon, Trump said he knew “very little about” the creation of the fund. 

“These were people that were weaponized and really treated brutally by a system that was so corrupt, with corrupt people running it, and they’re getting reimbursed for their legal fees and the other things that they had to suffer,” Trump said.

A committee of five “very talented people, very highly respected people” will decide how to distribute the money, he said.

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer denounced the plan Monday afternoon as “one of the most depraved” uses by Trump of the Justice Department.

“This weekend, Trump worked up a plan to shake hands with himself in order to fund his insurrectionist army to the tune of billions,” Schumer, D-N.Y., said in a statement.

“Donald Trump sued his own government. Trump’s DOJ settled with Trump. And now Trump gets a nearly $2 billion slush fund to reward his own allies, loyalists, and insurrectionists. That is not justice. That is corruption happening in broad daylight,” he continued.

In an amicus brief filed Monday afternoon, 93 House Democrats urged U.S. District Judge Kathleen Mary Williams, nominated by President Barack Obama, to immediately dismiss Trump’s “collusive lawsuit” for lack of jurisdiction.

The Democratic lawmakers argued in the filing the fund is “plainly unlawful” for numerous reasons.

“(F)iling a collusive lawsuit only to immediately dismiss it in order to produce a collusive settlement that is illegal multiple times over would not only be legally barred; it would also raise serious questions about whether the parties have manipulated the court system to achieve illicit ends,” according to the brief.

It may have been an unseasonably hot early May day outside the Albertsons Library at Boise State University, but inside its climate-controlled special collections and archive room, a handful of some of Idaho’s most experienced politicos were huddled among stacks of cardboard boxes and reference books.

They were there to jumpstart a book project that aims to help retell the story of Idaho’s longest-serving governor, Cecil D. Andrus – before it’s too late.

The book will feature chapters of narrative essays written by the vanguard of some Idaho’s most notable political insiders, including journalists who covered Andrus, staff who worked side-by-side with him, conservationists who helped shape his environmental policies and beliefs, and Idaho politicians who have followed in his footsteps. 

But they have an unique plan to gather material for the yearlong writing project. And they need your help. 

In early November, the Andrus Center for Public Policy will hold an in-person, two-day “History Harvest” festival – think along the lines of PBS’ beloved “Antiques Roadshow” television program – where Idahoans will be encouraged to bring in anything and everything related to Andrus.

They’re seeking photos, letters, newspaper clippings, artifacts, campaign materials, mementos, and, most of all, personal stories.

“With a team of volunteers, we’ll record oral histories, digitize materials, and have conversations that allow us to construct an inventory of historical resources and use this to reconnect with communities and preserve the memories of what makes our state uniquely Idaho,” according to the Andrus Center.

The festival, which will include the involvement of Boise State students, will take place Nov. 7-6 at the university. A scholarly workshop with the book’s authors, which is open to the public, will also be a part of the event.

Drafts of the chapters for the book are due in January, and they will be formatted by BSU’s graphic design senior capstone students during the spring semester of 2027.

The project’s main mission, said Emily Wakild, is to collect these items and memories and store them in perpetuity for new generations of Idahoans before those that worked so closely alongside Andrus pass on. Wakild is a professor of history and environmental science at Boise State, and serves as the Cecil D. Andrus Endowed Chair for Environment and Public Lands in the School of Public Service.

“Nobody writes about Idaho except Idahoans, right?” Wakild said at a meeting of the authors on May 4. “And we’re getting more and more Idahoans by the day. And so thinking about who they are, how they’re changing Idaho, and what they’re encountering when they move here, is part of the driving force behind (the book.)”

“We want to share the stories of an Idaho that existed when Andrus was governor for the people that will be here in 20 years,” Wakild added.

Who was Cecil D. Andrus?

Andrus, the last Democrat to serve as Idaho’s governor, died at age 85 in 2017. He was the only person to serve four terms – a nonconsecutive 14 years – as Idaho governor. 

But his service to the state and nation extended far beyond that one role.

After serving in the U.S. Navy during the Korean War, he was concerned about the direction of Idaho’s public schools and ran for the state Senate in 1960 at just 28 years old, winning the seat.

That began a longtime tenure in state politics, with his first stint as Idaho governor from 1971-1977. Serving as governor would eventually help prepare him for his role as U.S. secretary of the Interior in the Jimmy Carter administration from 1977-1981. He again was elected Idaho governor from 1987-1995.

Who will be involved in the Andrus book project?

Many of the contributors to the book project are some of the people who knew Andrus best, personally and professionally. 

Wakild said the book will contain short vignettes and longer essays from people in Andrus’ orbit, such as longtime Idaho Statesman environmental journalist Rocky Barker, Andrus chief of staff and author Marc C. Johnson, experienced outdoorsman and writer Steve Stuebner, retired executive director of the Idaho Conservation League Rick Johnson, Andrus administration staffer and chairman of the Andrus Center’s Board of Governors Andy Brunelle, longtime educator and retired Idaho State Board of Education President Linda Clark, veteran Idaho journalist and former president of Idaho Businesses for Education Rod Gramer, and Andrus’ granddaughter and Idaho state Rep. Monica Church, to name a few.

“Most of you will do this inherently, but we’re trying to get as many voices into the story as possible, and as many different experiences that people had,” Wakild told the authors at their May 4 meeting. “It doesn’t all have to be positive. We are not looking for a hagiography or only celebrating the things that worked. The pimples are allowed; the warts are acceptable. We’re thinking about how to treat the struggles for what they really were; that’s an important part of it.”

Gramer said he may be the only living journalist to have covered the four terms of Andrus’ time as governor and hopes his chapter will serve as a “meditation on Cece’s leadership.”

“What I want to do is focus on Andrus in terms of … the key components of leadership: vision, relationships, collaboration, accountability, leverage and drama,” Gramer told the authors.

Many of the chapters of the book will deeply dive into how Andrus worked hard over decades of public service to protect the outdoors and conserve its wildlife and open spaces for generations to come. Andrus was initially a logger by trade, and enjoyed fishing, hunting, hiking and recreating all of his life, up to the very end, Johnson said.

“Cece Andrus was so many things to so many people in this state. He shaped so many things,” Johnson said. “Part of it was a style. Part of it was the way he exhibited leadership. Part of it was the fact that he hadn’t finished college. He was a working dude. He acted like a working dude, and he trusted people, and he ultimately trusted me, and we became very close.”

Johnson said they worked closely together for years to earn protections for the White Cloud Wilderness near Stanley in central Idaho. The White Clouds were designated as a wilderness area in 2015, and in 2018, the area was renamed as the Cecil D. Andrus-White Clouds Wilderness in his honor. The designation and how it came into existence has served as a model for how to protect public spaces across the U.S., Johnson said.

“Different than any other form of public land, Wilderness is established as an antidote to expanding settlement and growing mechanization, a place where ecosystems remain undeveloped and intact, natural processes unfold without intervention, and humans may visit but not stay,” according to the U.S. Forest Service map of the White Clouds.

That’s how Andrus wanted Idaho to remain, at least as much as possible, several of the authors noted.

As more people move into Idaho, Waklid said she hopes the book and History Harvest event will welcome new and old residents alike with warmth and a sense of place and community.

“What we’re trying to do is lay the groundwork for people to … embrace memories and nostalgia and effect from a different time,” Wakild said, “and to think about a future time where people might work civilly together and be able to accomplish things through compromise.”

Water scarcity has always shaped life in Idaho, but now a new threat is emerging.

Large-scale AI data centers consume millions of liters of water per day for cooling, adding industrial pressure to a system already stretched too thin. Idaho has long been an agricultural state. More than $8.5 billion of our annual revenue comes from farming, and agriculture depends on one resource above all others: water. The state faced repeated irrigation cutbacks in 2021, 2022, and 2023, even before experiencing its warmest year since 1934. As AI’s water demand accelerates, Idaho’s communities and agriculture face growing strains because current policies and infrastructure are not prepared for the scale of this new industrial pressure.

Data centers and other new large loads are driving sharp increases in Idaho farmers’ electric bills

This leads to the critical question Idaho must confront: who gets the water, and who doesn’t?

Idaho is entering another year of drought, with below-average snowpack, reduced streamflows, and reservoirs that look full only because the snowpack is melting too fast. We are running out of water while demand is accelerating, and the consequences will fall hardest on Idaho’s farmers, ranchers, and local communities.

According to the Idaho Department of Water Resources’ 2026 Water Supply Outlook Report, the Skitwish Ridge Snow Course is sitting at 47% of normal, ranking this year’s snowpack among the 10 lowest on record. Reservoir storage on the Boise River system is at 119%, but this is scarcity disguised as abundance. Early melt-off means water arrives too soon and disappears too fast. Streamflow forecasts point toward continued drought conditions for 2026.

This is the backdrop against which Idaho is welcoming new AI data centers, including Meta’s massive facility in Kuna, scheduled to open in late 2026. These centers don’t just use water; they compete for the same rivers, aquifers and reservoirs that Idaho’s farms and families depend on.

And if we want to understand what happens when industrial water demand collides with regional drought, we don’t have to look far. We only have to look west.

Oregon is Idaho’s warning

In The Dalles, Oregon, Google’s data centers consumed 355 million gallons of water in 2021, accounting for 29% of the city’s total water use. This happened during a period when Oregon’s drought intensified for five consecutive years. Snowpack in parts of the state fell to 15% of normal in March 2026: a record low.

To understand the real-world consequences, I spoke with Kessina Lee, Oregon state supervisor for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. She has watched these pressures unfold firsthand.

Lee told me that data centers use such high volumes of water that their discharge can overwhelm small municipal treatment plants, leading to untreated wastewater entering rivers with potentially toxic impacts on fish, wildlife and people. When I asked whether she was seeing increased tension over water allocation between industry, agriculture and environmental needs, her answer was immediate: “Absolutely.”

She warned that if current trends continue, the West could face depleted groundwater, reduced snowpack, declining reservoir levels, shrinking streamflows and an increase in high-severity wildfires. All of these impacts, she emphasized, will be “incredibly costly” for communities.

Oregon is not just a warning. It’s a preview.

AI’s water demand is accelerating faster than policy

Researcher Manuel Herrera, who studies sustainable AI infrastructure, warns that AI’s water consumption could increase sevenfold by 2050, reaching 28.11 billion liters per day globally. Environmental analyst Miguel Yañez-Barnuevo notes that a single large data center can use 5 million gallons per day, equivalent to the water demand of a town of 10,000 to 50,000 people.

And most data centers draw from blue water sources, the same rivers and aquifers that Idaho agriculture relies on.

This is not hypothetical. It is happening now.

Idaho’s water system is already under strain

Gov. Brad Little has repeatedly emphasized the importance of protecting Idaho’s water resources, especially after irrigation cutbacks in 2021, 2022, and 2023. In his recent address, Little argued that maintaining water infrastructure investments is essential to supporting farmers and ranchers who rely on groundwater and irrigation systems.

He’s right. But infrastructure alone won’t solve the problem if industrial water demand continues to grow without guardrails.

Idaho cannot afford to wait for federal action. As environmental law scholar Whitni Simpson notes, the Artificial Intelligence Environmental Impacts Act of 2024 is still in its early stages, but it studies the environmental impacts of AI facilities rather than regulating them. Idaho needs state‑level protections now, before new facilities lock in decades of water demand. 

This issue is personal, and it’s urgent

I was born and raised in Boise. I remember when the city was surrounded by farmland, when winters brought feet of snow instead of inches, and when water felt abundant. I take my son to the same fishing spot my grandfather took me to. That place is part of our family’s story, and part of Idaho’s story.

But the landscape is changing. Snowpack is shrinking. Rivers are warming. Farms are struggling. And now, industrial water demand is rising faster than our policies can keep up.

This isn’t a problem for future generations. It’s here.

Idaho needs to act before we hit the breaking point

We have a narrow window to prevent the kind of crisis Oregon is already facing. Idaho must strengthen its water policies to ensure that innovation does not come at the expense of our communities, our agriculture or our natural resources.

Here are four steps Idaho can take right now:

1. Require data centers to use non-potable or recycled water. Greywater cooling systems exist. They work. But without state requirements, companies default to the cheapest option, which is often potable water.
2. Mandate public reporting of industrial water withdrawals. Idahoans deserve transparency. Farmers must report water use. Cities must report water use. Data centers should as well.
3. Require environmental impact assessments before approval. Before a facility is built, Idaho should know how much water it will use, where that water will come from, how wastewater will be handled, and how it will affect agriculture and aquifers.
4. Establish drought-year water priority tiers. During drought, agriculture, drinking water and ecosystems must take precedence over industrial cooling.

These are not anti-technology measures; they are pro-Idaho measures.

The choice is simple

Idaho can embrace innovation while protecting its water, but only if we act now. If we fail to set standards, the burden will fall on farmers, rural communities and future generations.

Water is the foundation of Idaho’s economy, identity and way of life. We cannot allow unchecked industrial demand to drain that foundation beneath us.

The time to act is now.

Two conservation organizations filed suit in federal district court against the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service over a delayed decision about whether the world’s smallest rabbit species qualifies for Endangered Species Act protections. 

Just days before the 21st annual Endangered Species Day — celebrated nationwide on May 15 to recognize commitments to protect and restore imperiled wildlife — Western Watersheds Project and WildEarth Guardians filed their complaint in U.S. District Court in Eugene, Oregon. The suit says that the Fish and Wildlife Service failed to issue a finding on a 2023 petition to list the pygmy rabbit, found in sagebrush habitat across the intermountain West including Montana, as threatened or endangered within the required 12-month period. 

“Our petition presented clear and compelling evidence that the government should take a close look at the threats to the pygmy rabbit and its sagebrush habitats and make the decision about whether to give them the protections of the Endangered Species Act,” said Greta Anderson, deputy director of Western Watersheds Project. “Instead, the agency continues to rush through decisions to destroy pygmy rabbit habitat, authorize extractive uses without oversight, and ignore the plight of this little bunny.”

Pygmy rabbits are found in the Great Basin and intermountain West — comprising parts of Wyoming, Utah, Idaho, Nevada, Montana, Colorado, California and Oregon.

In Montana, pygmy rabbits are considered a “species of concern” by the state, due to risk of habitat loss from clearing sagebrush for agriculture, invasive grass species and disease. The rabbit is found in just a small section of the state, the southwestern corner near Dillon. 

There is also a population of pygmy rabbits in the Columbia Basin in Washington State, which was listed as an endangered species in 2003. 

The petition submitted to the federal government seeks to add protections to the rabbits’ populations in other states, where their habitat — areas of deep soil among tall, dense sagebrush and low tree cover — is at risk of loss due to increased wildfires, development and agricultural uses. 

“These threats are often cumulative and mutually reinforcing,” the lawsuit states. “Grazing, vehicle traffic, and infrastructure increase disturbance and invasion risk, invasive annual grasses promote more frequent and intense fires, and repeated fires can convert sagebrush steppe to annual grassland—resulting in progressive loss of the mature, connected, big sagebrush habitat needed for pygmy rabbit survival and recovery.”

The rabbit is also newly impacted by rabbit hemorrhagic disease, a highly infectious and lethal virus first documented in Nevada in 2022, according to the organizations. 

Giving pygmy rabbits ESA protections across more of their range would mean increased inter-agency consultation on federally-approved projects, increased habitat protections and mandatory recovery planning by the Fish and Wildlife Service. 

“The service has acknowledged that Endangered Species Act protections for the pygmy rabbit may be warranted but has dragged its feet on its legal obligation to finalize a listing decision,” said Thomas Delehanty, senior attorney with EarthJustice’s Rocky Mountain Office. “Listing the pygmy rabbit will help ensure that the highly biodiverse sagebrush steppe receives much-needed protections as well.”

In 2023, the conservation organization submitted a petition to the federal government requesting ESA protections for the rabbit. 

In January 2024, the Service issued a finding that the petition “presented substantial information” that listing the pygmy rabbit might be warranted. That finding triggered a 12-month period to issue another finding, but the Service has not issued one, now more than two years later. 

The lawsuit asks the court to declare the Fish and Wildlife Service violated the Endangered Species Act by failing to issue a 12-month listing determination, and compel the Service to issue their finding.  

USFWS Director Brian Nesvik and Secretary of the Interior Doug Burgum are also named in the lawsuit. 

EarthJustice is representing Western Watersheds Project and WildEarth Guardians in their suit.

This story was originally produced by Daily Montanan, which is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network which includes Idaho Capital Sun, and is supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity.

State officials and hundreds of Idahoans gathered at the Idaho State Capitol in Boise on Friday to honor the late former Idaho Gov. Dirk Kempthorne during a formal lying in state ceremony. 

Kempthorne was a Republican who also served as the mayor of Boise, a U.S. senator and the U.S. secretary of the Interior during a nearly 25-year career in public office.

He died April 24 following a battle with cancer. 

Kempthorne, 74, was remembered as a kind and charismatic public official who made lasting changes to Idaho by serving at the local, state and federal level.

“He was a man who truly loved our state, and he was a man who had an incredibly unique ability to both be larger than life and yet also to make people feel uniquely and genuinely seen – all at the same time,” Idaho Secretary of State Phil McGrane said during Friday’s ceremony. 

Idaho officials, public mourn the loss of ‘man who actually devoted his life to serving others’

Kempthorne’s casket will continue to lie in state in the first floor rotunda inside the Idaho State Capitol until it is moved to Cathedral of the Rockies on Saturday morning for a public funeral service.

Prior to that, the public is invited to visit the Idaho State Capitol to pay respects to Kempthorne until the building closes at 7 p.m. Mountain time Friday.

Idaho Gov. Brad Little and both of Idaho’s living former governors, former Gov. Butch Otter and U.S. Sen. Jim Risch, all attended and spoke at Friday’s ceremonies. 

Kempthorne’s wife, Patricia, the Kempthornes’ children, retired Maj. Gen. Gary Sayler, Lt. Gov. Scott Bedke, current and former state officials, legislators from both political parties, relatives and friends also attended Friday’s ceremonies.

Little said his friendship with Kempthorne and his wife dates back to the time they all spent at the University of Idaho, before they entered public service.

“(First lady) Teresa (Little) and I have joined so many Idahoans in mourning the loss of a man who actually devoted his life to serving others and strengthening both our state and nation,” Little said. 

Otter, who served as lieutenant governor under Kempthorne for two years, said Kempthorne was a living embodiment of two fictional characters famous for their morals – Atticus Finch from the novel “To Kill a Mockingbird” and Jimmy Stewart’s titular character from the film “Mr. Smith Goes to Washington.”

“(Kempthorne) had the same conviction, and he had the same will to do the right thing,” Otter said. 

A 19-gun salute, an A-10 flyover, performances of “The Stars and Stripes Forever” and the state song “Here We Have Idaho,” were included in Friday’s ceremonies. The Idaho Army National Guard’s 25th Army Band, 550 Chordsmen, 8-Top Ensemble and former state Sen. Cherie Buckner-Webb, D-Boise, all performed, sang or led ceremonies during Friday’s events. 

“Each of us has a different personal reason for being here this morning, but our common purpose this morning is to honor and to acknowledge a life very well lived,” former Idaho Senate President Pro Tem Chuck Winder, R-Boise, said Friday. “ We’re here to express our appreciation to one of Idaho’s greatest public servants.”

Kempthorne’s funeral and internment ceremony are scheduled for Saturday in Boise. The funeral service begins at 11 a.m. at the Cathedral of the Rockies, 717 N. 11th St., and will be livestreamed online for those who cannot attend in person. 

The internment ceremony begins at 2:30 p.m. at the Idaho State Veterans Cemetery, which Kempthorne helped authorize and create, located at 10100 N. Horseshoe Bend Road in Boise.

Wyoming wildlife managers plan to reduce how many wolves can be hunted by 50% following a canine distemper outbreak that has cut the state’s wolf numbers to the lowest level in two decades.

A 22-wolf cap is the fewest number of wolves available to licensed Wyoming hunters since the state began allowing wolf hunting after Endangered Species Act protections were lifted in 2012. The limit also marks a significant decrease from last fall’s wolf hunting season.

“As far as the overall mortality limit, it’s exactly half,” Wyoming Game and Fish Department wolf biologist Ken Mills told WyoFile.

Last year, hunters could target a maximum of 44 wolves in the area around the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem, where Wyoming classifies wolves as trophy game during the Sept. 15-Dec. 31 season. Hunters bound to Wyoming’s relatively tight regulations in that zone managed to kill 31 wolves.

It wasn’t hunting, however, that resulted in the lowest population since wolves were still being established after the 1995-96 Yellowstone National Park reintroduction. Biologists say a canine distemper outbreak is the primary culprit in the decline. The measles-like disease is especially deadly for puppies, and it was detected in 64% of the animals that Wyoming biologists handled during routine capture work last year.

As the calendar turned to 2026, Mills and federal biologists tallied 253 wolves and 14 breeding pairs statewide. Those are decreases, respectively, of 23% and 42% from the 330 wolves and 24 breeding pairs estimated at the end of 2024.

Wyoming’s proposed hunt for 2026 is designed to increase the wolf population in the trophy game area, located in the state’s mountainous northwest corner. The population in that zone decreased 19% to 132 wolves in 2025 — a figure that’s well below the state’s 160-animal objective.

“We want to grow the population by 28 wolves,” Mills said.

Driving Wyoming’s desire to increase numbers of the controversial native canine is the 160-wolf objective designed to ensure that the state meets its obligations with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. When the state first gained jurisdiction over wolves 14 years ago, Wyoming’s delisting agreement called for maintaining at least 10 breeding pairs in the trophy game area. In 2025, there were exactly 10 breeding pairs, which shows that the margin for error is thin at the current lower population.

The reductions to Wyoming’s wolf hunting quotas aren’t uniform.

“The wolf numbers in the Cody, Lander and Pinedale regions were relatively stable in 2025,” Mills said. “The largest reduction was in the Jackson region.”

As a result, Game and Fish is proposing to reduce the limit, from 19 to six, for wolves that can be killed in four conjoined hunt areas (units 8, 9, 10 and 11) spanning from Jackson Hole into the Green River basin. The state’s draft regulations also call for relaxing the limit on wolves that can be hunted along the west slope of the Tetons and in the Teton Wilderness (units 6 and 7) from five animals to no more than two.

There are major differences in how the three northern Rocky Mountain states hunt wolves, and it’s unclear if Montana and Idaho will follow suit and decrease hunting pressure near Yellowstone National Park. Wyoming’s distemper outbreak was regionwide and also hit Yellowstone packs, which only managed to produce 17 surviving pups — the lowest count in 30 years of careful monitoring.

River of No Return: How the Nez Perce Tribe stepped in to save wolf reintroduction in Idaho

In Montana, where hunters and trappers can kill 15 wolves apiece, wildlife managers do use a quota system near the Yellowstone boundary to ease impacts on wolves that leave the park. Idaho, meanwhile, allows largely unfettered wolf hunting on the western side of the ecosystem.

Wyoming manages wolves similarly, with few regulations, on the outskirts of the Yellowstone region. Where the species is classified as a “predator” — in 85% of the state — wolves can be killed by almost any means and there are no hunting limits to be altered as a result of the population decline.

Game and Fish will host several northwestern Wyoming public meetings about its wolf hunting proposals. They’ll take place at 6 p.m. May 26 in Jackson; 6 p.m. May 28 in Cody; 6 p.m. June 2 in Pinedale; and 6 p.m. June 3 in Lander.

Public comments can be submitted at WGFD.wyo.gov/get-involved/public-input through June 10.

The state agency’s commission must also OK the draft hunting regulations. Commissioners plan to take up the issue at their July 14-15 meeting in Sheridan.

Mills anticipates hearing from detractors on both sides of the wolf hunting issue.

“There will be people frustrated that the mortality limit is lower,” he said, “and members of the public that probably think we shouldn’t hunt wolves at all.”

Brian Kane has been named the new dean of the University of Idaho’s College of Law.

Kane, a former longtime Idaho chief deputy attorney general and chief executive officer and executive director of the National Association of Attorneys General, will take over the leadership position on July 31, according to a UI press release. He has served as an adjunct faculty member at the College of Law since 2017 and served the state of Idaho as a DAG for 20 years.

Kane is a Vandal alumnus, graduating with a bachelor’s degree in history and political science from UI. He also served as student body president of the university. He went on to attend law school at Northwestern School of Law of Lewis and Clark College in Portland, Oregon. He also served four years in the U.S. Army, primarily with the 1st Cavalry Division at Fort Hood, according to the release.

Kane will replace Interim Dean Aliza Cover, a faculty member in the college, who was appointed to the temporary role after an internal search earlier this year, the press release said.

“We believe Brian’s professional experience will benefit the College of Law and expand the relationships and connections that make studying law at University of Idaho so valuable,” said Torrey Lawrence, UI provost and executive vice president, in the release.

According to the university, Kane comes into the college “as it is experiencing a significant enrollment increase.”

In fall 2025, enrollment grew 9.8%, serving 502 students, including the largest first-year class in the history of the law school, the press release said. UI College of Law students are served in two locations — Boise and Moscow. Kane will oversee both locations.

Kane has also been instrumental in working with Idahoans for Openness in Government, which provides annual training on Idaho’s open meeting and public records laws to journalists, attorneys, elected officials and the public.

The U.S. Supreme Court decided Thursday to preserve telehealth access to the abortion drug mifepristone until after the U.S. 5th Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled on the merits of the high-stakes federal lawsuit Louisiana v. Food and Drug Administration.

Justices Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas issued dissenting opinions.

In his dissent, Thomas said the rule violates the Comstock Act, a long unenforced 1873 law that bans the mailing of “obscene” material. During the 2024 presidential campaign, President Donald Trump said he didn’t support using the Comstock Act to stop mail delivery of abortion pills, saying he thought the federal government should have nothing to do with the issue.

Mifepristone’s manufacturer “makes a passing reference to the possibility of lost sales,” Alito wrote in his dissent. “But lost sales in states where abortifacients are generally illegal are not ‘irreparable injuries’ that can justify granting a stay.”

Abortion-rights advocates around the country called the decision a relief after two weeks of uncertainty.

On May 1, the appellate court sided with Louisiana, where state officials sued the FDA in October, arguing that a rule allowing telehealth access to mifepristone, one of two drugs used to terminate a pregnancy in the first trimester or to treat miscarriage, undermines the state’s abortion ban. Danco Laboratories and GenBioPro, two manufacturers of mifepristone, filed emergency appeals, leading the Supreme Court to issue a 10-day stay on May 4, extended until today.

“Though today’s decision means that mifepristone remains available through telehealth for now, this fight is not over,” said Dr. Camille A. Clare, president of the American College of Obstetricians & Gynecologists, in an emailed statement. “The chaos and confusion wrought by competing decisions and the revocation and restoration of access on an almost daily basis do real harm to patients and to the clinicians who care for them.”

Abortion opponents decried Thursday’s decision.

“Women deserve better than dangerous abortion drugs sent through the mail without physician oversight or in-person support,” said Jor-El Godsey, president of Heartbeat International, a major network of anti-abortion crisis pregnancy centers. “A state like Louisiana that values life in its laws should be able to protect its smallest residents as well as their moms.”

The FDA’s approved two-drug regimen via telemedicine is an increasingly common abortion method, especially for people living in parts of the country where abortion is banned or difficult to access.

Last month, a federal district court paused the lawsuit at the request of the FDA until after the completion of a safety review on mifepristone. That review was prompted by non-peer reviewed, anti-abortion research and in spite of the drug’s record of safety and efficacy since 2000. The state appealed to the 5th Circuit.

Due to multiple ongoing efforts to restrict or block mifepristone, abortion providers have told Stateline they are ready to eventually switch to a misoprostol-only method, which researchers have found to be as safe as the two-drug regimen but typically involves more symptoms and is slightly less effective.

National groups have tried to pressure the Trump administration to drop the Biden-era rule allowing telehealth abortion and called for the head of FDA Commissioner Marty Makary for reportedly slow-walking a safety review of the drug until after the midterm elections. Makary resigned on Tuesday, and anti-abortion groups wasted no time in getting Acting Commissioner Kyle Diamantas on the phone.

Live Action founder and president Lila Rose, in a written statement, said she talked to the acting commissioner on Wednesday and that he said he was morally opposed to abortion. “Diamantas told me that reviewing the abortion pill is a top priority for him and the administration,” Rose posted on X.

Students for Life of America President Kristan Hawkins wrote a similar message to supporters in an email on Thursday, saying Diamantas will be the “most pro-life FDA commissioner in American history.”

But many doctors around the country say curbing access to telehealth abortion is likely to cause harm to people in states with bans who may face more barriers to obtaining an abortion without that option.

“Women will be forced to travel long distances — at times hundreds of miles — to access safe, essential health care at a doctor’s office, no longer having the option to receive mifepristone via telemedicine,” wrote Rob Davidson, an emergency physician in Michigan and executive director of the Committee to Protect Health Care, in a letter asking the Supreme Court to maintain access to telehealth abortion. The letter was cosigned by more than 2,200 physicians.

Stateline reporter Sofia Resnick can be reached at sresnick@stateline.org.  Stateline reporter Kelcie Moseley-Morris can be reached at kmoseley@stateline.org. 

This story was originally produced by Stateline, which is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network which includes Idaho Capital Sun, and is supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity.

For Doug Barrie, a fifth-generation farmer in East Idaho, the options for affordable health insurance have been slim pickings.

The employees at his farm in Ucon include him, his son, and a handful of others, depending on the time of year.

He’s not alone in the struggle to find health insurance. That’s common among members of the Idaho Farm Bureau Federation, an association that serves over 10,000 Idaho farmers, said Barrie, who serves as the organization’s vice president.

“Our big concern is being able to provide that affordable health insurance and trying to relieve that burden for our family farms,” he said in an interview.

But he’s hoping that a new plan, just approved by the Trump administration, will ease that struggle.

The plan lets Idaho farmers who are part of the Idaho Farm Bureau Federation to band together to buy cheaper health insurance by acting as one association of businesses, rather than thousands of separate small businesses. The approval came months after a common health insurance option for farmers — that was deeply subsidized by the federal government — is getting more expensive.

The Idaho Farm Bureau is already offering the plans.

Farmers often get insurance on exchanges, where costs are rising after federal subsidies end

Barrie said he and many farmers he knows get insurance every year on the state’s health insurance exchange, Your Health Idaho. But costs there and through exchanges across the country are rising after Congress declined to extend deeper subsidies for health insurance costs.

Across the country, many farmers used individual markets like Idaho’s exchange to buy health insurance.

More than a quarter of farmers and ranchers get insurance on individual marketplaces, according to an analysis by the nonpartisan health policy group KFF. That’s a much higher rate than the general population, where just 6% of American adults get non-group coverage, KFF Health News reported

In announcing approval of the Idaho Farm Bureau Federation’s new health insurance structure earlier this month, the U.S. Department of Labor said the plan advances President Donald Trump’s goal for health care affordability for small businesses. And it could be a model for other groups in the country to follow, one top federal official said.

“This guidance will expand access to quality, affordable health coverage to farmers, ranchers, and agricultural tenants and landowners, across Idaho and may be used by other groups across America,” Assistant Secretary for Employee Benefits Security Daniel Aronowitz said in a statement. “This is an innovative model that expands access to employer sponsored coverage, especially for small businesses, by reducing regulatory complexity and the cost of health coverage.”

Plan means more affordable health insurance for farms competing in tough insurance markets, attorney says

Holland & Hart Partner Gabe Hamilton represented the Idaho Farm Bureau Federation on the issue. 

Before the Department of Labor approved the new plan structure, many small Idaho farmers had to buy insurance geared toward small employers, he said in an interview. But the new deal, he said, lets them act as one group of businesses, helping them get opportunities to save money on premiums.

“This will allow the members of the Idaho Farm Bureau Federation, the small business owners … to have access to more affordable health insurance for their employees,” Hamilton said. “These are typically small employers with five or fewer employees. … That’s often the hardest market in which to find affordable coverage options.”

He said he believed this is the first deal issued to a farm bureau federation. The Department of Labor couldn’t immediately be reached to confirm that.

“For years, (the Idaho Farm Bureau’s) members have been telling them that affordable health care is one of the greatest needs. So, they’ve been looking for ways to solve that problem,” Hamilton said. “And so I think they saw an opportunity here.”

The deal has been a long time coming. Barrie said there’s been talk about pursuing the health plan structure even before he joined the board of the Idaho Farm Bureau four years ago.

“It seemed just like a dream — nothing that was going to come into fruition,” he said.

Who’s eligible to buy health insurance through this model?

Health insurance plans will only be open to people who are Idaho Farm Bureau members who are “actively engaged in agricultural production in Idaho, employ at least two full-time employees, and sign a participation agreement, according to the U.S. Department of Labor. 

The Idaho Farm Bureau is currently offering the plans. Find more information online at idahofarmbureauinsurance.com/insurance/health-insurance, or contact your local Farm Bureau insurance agent.

Next week Idaho voters will have an opportunity to express what they believe, what they value, and what they want done to improve their quality of life. The overriding questions are: Will they vote for these things, and will they even vote at all?

In Idaho, the primary election is probably the most important election because of the overwhelming control the Republicans have in our state. This year there are many legislative races where voters have a choice between philosophically divergent Republican candidates. Which candidate voters choose will determine the direction our state takes over the next two years.

The problem is that the voter turnout in primary elections is historically low. In 2022, the last non-presidential primary, only 32 percent of registered voters turned out.

What is even more discouraging is that even a smaller percentage of eligible voters turned out to vote in the 2024 primary – about 28 percent.

In other words, only 1 in 4 Idahoans are determining which legislators determine the state laws we all live under and the fate of the institutions and programs that touch our lives every day. No wonder there is a strong disconnect between what Idahoans tell pollsters they value and the candidates who get elected to the Legislature.

It also helps explain why Idaho’s legislators increasingly focus on radical culture issues and often pass unconstitutional laws rather than focusing on the kitchen table issues Idahoans say they care about most. 

Over the past decade one can trace what Idahoans believe by reading the annual Boise State University Public Policy Survey which comes out at the beginning of every legislative session. What is surprising and encouraging is how Idahoans, regardless of political persuasion, agree on the issues facing our state. 

For example, K-12 education always ranks at the top of the list of issues. In 2025, eight out of 10 Republicans and Independent voters put education as an important issue. Nearly 9 out of 10 Democrats rated it as an important issue.

Yet Idaho continues to rank last nationally in education spending per student, and the Legislature has made improved funding even harder by passing a voucher tax credit that diverts millions in state funds to private and religious schools.

Dates to know, how-to instructions and candidate surveys for Idaho’s top contested primaries.

In 2025, teacher pay was one of the top concerns of Idahoans of all parties, yet our state ranks 36th in teacher pay. Only 14 states pay less than Idaho. Most of our surrounding states pay substantially more. And last session the Legislature voted to weaken the Idaho Education Association which works to increase teacher salaries.

In the 2025 survey, Idahoans said that workforce development was a key issue. Yet each session legislators line up to repeal the Idaho Launch program which helps young people get the postsecondary skills they need to productively join the workforce. And because the Legislature has shot a torpedo into our state’s revenue base, this year’s Legislature cut higher education funding by millions, causing at least two universities to abolish and merge colleges and lay off faculty. 

A high-tech entrepreneur told the Boise City Club last week that by 2030, half of the existing jobs may be replaced by artificial intelligence. Yet our lawmakers haven’t even started thinking about the ramifications of AI on our labor force or the economic future of our state.

In BSU’s 2025 survey, housing affordability rose to the top of concerns for 64 percent of Idahoans, including 64 percent of Republicans, 63 percent of Independents, and 84 percent of Democrats. This year 40 percent said housing was the top issue the Legislature should focus on. Yet lawmakers hardly even talked about housing affordability last winter.

In 2025, 69 percent said healthcare was a top issue, including 64 percent of Republicans, 68 percent of Independents, and 85 percent of Democrats. In this year’s survey Idahoans blamed the lack of doctors and cost as barriers to access. Yet in the last few years legislators have passed laws that drove many doctors out of our state and caused some rural hospitals to cancel procedures.

And every year legislators want to repeal or weaken Medicaid healthcare for Idaho’s most vulnerable citizens even though Idaho voters expanded the program in 2018 by more than a 60 percent margin. Medicaid is a program that not only provides affordable healthcare for Idahoans, but it helps support our rural hospitals, thus making healthcare more accessible.

 These are only a few examples of the gap between what Idahoans say they value and the priorities of the lawmakers they send to Boise each winter.

So, what explains this disconnect between what Idahoans say they believe and what they are getting from their legislators? Part of it is that many Idahoans don’t really know what their legislators stand for and most candidates don’t bother to tell them.

The ubiquitous candidate yard signs and billboards you see along Idaho’s highways this time of year hardly tell you what the candidate believes or anything about their character. And efforts to produce a nonpartisan and thorough voting guide to help voters decipher the truth has repeatedly been blocked by legislators. 

I don’t blame the voters for not knowing much about the candidates. Most Idahoans are busy just trying to work and support their families. This year’s BSU survey revealed that 20 percent of Idahoans are having a “hard” time getting by economically and another 43 percent said they are “just getting by.”

Yet at both the federal and state levels, Idaho’s lawmakers have done little to narrow the income gap or ease the strain on middle- and low-income families. Over the past year, food prices have risen, gas prices have soared, and programs that help people have been cut or eliminated.

The good news is that next week Idaho voters have a chance to have their voices heard. It is a chance for them to put into action what they believe, what they value, and what they want from their lawmakers to improve their everyday lives. The only thing standing between them and making a difference is the distance to the closest polling place and the will to get there.

My fellow Idahoans, this is your chance to decide the future of our state, for your children, your grandchildren and yourselves. Please vote. 

If you want to vote without showing up to the polls on Election Day on Tuesday or via an absentee ballot, this week is your final chance. 

The deadline to early vote ahead of Idaho’s 2026 primary election is 5 p.m. Friday. That deadline also extends to in-person absentee voting, which is available in select counties. 

The candidates, the ballot measures, and the tools you need to cast your vote.

Find a list of counties offering early voting or in-person absentee voting online at VoteIdaho.gov, a website run by the Idaho Secretary of State’s Office. Voters can check with their local county elections office to see if early voting is available in their county.

The 2026 primary election is Tuesday, May 19. Polls will be open from 8 a.m. to 8 p.m. local time. Voters can register to vote the day of the election at their polling places with a valid photo ID and proof of residence.

To view your sample ballot, check your voter registration status, or find your polling place for Election Day, view election information at VoteIdaho.gov.

Absentee ballots must be received by election officials by the time polls close on Election Day in order to be counted. 

With at least 663 measles cases confirmed, Utah continues to be a national hotspot — but the state’s outbreak, while still active, appears to be tapering. 

As of the Utah Department of Health and Human Services’ last update to the state’s measles tracker on Tuesday, so far 466 Utahns have been diagnosed with measles so far this year — on top of 197 diagnosed last year. 

Over the last three weeks, the number of Utahns with measles reported to public health officials was 37. That’s compared to 121 during a three-week span leading into April, when Utah’s measles outbreak became the most active in the U.S. after South Carolina’s outbreak tapered. 

Utah’s ongoing measles outbreak is the biggest the state has seen in more than 40 years, Utah epidemiologist Leisha Nolen has said. 

According to Utah’s measles dashboard, the biggest hotspots in the state include:

• The Southwest Utah Public Health Department’s jurisdiction, which includes Washington, Iron, Kane, Beaver and Garfield counties. There, 263 cases have been reported as of Tuesday. 
• Utah County, with 109 cases.
• Salt Lake County, with 62 cases (the same number reported since early April). 
• The TriCounty Health Department’s area, which includes Daggett, Duchesne and Uintah counties, with 73 cases. 
• The Central Utah Public Health Department’s area, which includes Juab, Millard, Piute, Sanpete, Sevier and Wayne counties, with 83 cases. 

Of the state’s 663 confirmed cases, 51 people have been hospitalized. About 430 are under the age of 18, while 233 are adults. 

The state reported 567 Utahns who have been diagnosed with measles were not vaccinated, while 64 were, and 32 have an unknown vaccination status.  

On the state’s website, Utah health officials maintain a running list of “exposure locations” where Utahns may have come into contact with a person infected with measles. 

“Because measles is spreading in Utah, there may be other exposures or exposure locations that we are unaware of and are not listed here,” state health officials say on the state’s exposure locations website. “As soon as a new exposure location is confirmed, we add it to the list below. The list is updated throughout the week. If you have questions about any of the exposure locations, contact your local health department.”

Measles symptoms usually appear seven to 14 days after exposure, according to health experts. Early symptoms include a high fever (of 101 degrees Fahrenheit or higher), cough, runny nose, or red eyes.

A rash will also usually appear after four days of fever.

State health officials encourage anyone who develops symptoms to stay away from other people and call your healthcare provider before going to a clinic or a hospital to prevent others from being exposed.

Health officials also encourage parents to talk to their doctors about giving an early, extra dose of the MMR vaccine to their infants who are older than 6 months and younger than 12 months to protect them amid the outbreak, even if they haven’t been exposed to someone with measles.

Health officials usually recommend that infants who are 6 months to 12 months old get an early, extra dose of the vaccine if they are traveling internationally or to an area where measles is spreading.

But “given the high levels of measles in Utah, it is now appropriate to consider this early, extra dose for all Utah infants of this age,” state health officials say on the health department’s website. “Any infant who gets a dose before 12 months old will need to get 2 later doses in accordance with the standard vaccination schedule at 12–15 months and then a dose at 4–6 years.”

This story was originally produced by Utah News Dispatch, which is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network which includes Idaho Capital Sun, and is supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity.

Housing shortages have eased in most states since 2020, as new construction has made apartments and houses more affordable.

Connecticut, New Jersey and Rhode Island are the only states that have lost housing units per capita since 2020, according to a Stateline analysis of housing data released Thursday by the U.S. Census Bureau. Most other states have built more than enough housing to account for population growth.

The increase in the supply of apartments helped drive down the nation’s median rent in April by 1.7% compared with the same month last year, according to a May report from Apartment List, a company that posts rental listings online.

Single-family homes also are starting to get more affordable, according to a May report from the National Association of Realtors. The group determines “affordability” by calculating whether or not a typical family earns enough income to qualify for a mortgage on a median-priced, existing single-family home.

The improvement in affordability is especially dramatic in the South and Midwest, while affordability is lagging but improving in the West and Northeast.

In analyzing the housing supply, one housing unit for 2.5 residents is considered a healthy balance, though the ratio can be lower in places with large families or higher where there are many young singles or older people living alone.

Nationwide, the ratio ranges from 1.8 people per unit in Maine to 2.7 people per unit in Utah, according to the Stateline analysis. In most places, the ratio of people to housing units is shrinking, as the housing supply grows.

Some states have added far more housing than residents since 2020. Vermont, for example, has added nearly 10 times as many housing units — around 12,000 —  as new residents. The District of Columbia and New Mexico have added five times as many new units as new residents.

The story is different in Connecticut, New Jersey and Rhode Island. In those three states, the housing supply is lagging behind population growth, with about three new residents per new housing unit in Connecticut and Rhode Island, and almost four residents per unit in New Jersey.

New Jersey has added about 260,000 new residents since 2020, but only about 66,500 new housing units. The state is seeking to impose affordable housing quotas on towns, but has run into strong resistance from suburban residents.

In February, a group of New Jersey towns, led by Montvale in Bergen County, a New York City suburb,  asked the U.S. Supreme Court to stop a March deadline for a new phase of affordable housing plans to start, but were rebuffed without explanation later that month by Justice Samuel Alito.

In court papers, town leaders said their residents don’t want the denser housing required by the 2024 state law, and that residents would likely vote them out of office if they implemented it.

At a February public hearing about the plan in Ridgewood, a town in Bergen County, “elected officials continued to receive objections from residents…ranging from accusations against local leaders of conspiracies, accepting campaign donations and personally benefitting from the rezoning,” according to court papers filed by the towns.

Apartment List does not consider Bergen County separately from the New York City area, where home prices have increased 5.6% from last year as of April 30, according to Zillow, to a median $773,069. A one-bedroom apartment in the county can command $2,400 or more according to Rentometer, a rental market analysis site.

In contrast, Travis County, Texas — which includes most of Austin — has added about 99,500 new residents and 120,000 new units since 2020. That disparity helps explain why the Austin area had the largest drop in median rent between 2025 and 2026 in the new Apartment List estimates, declining 5.7% since last year and 22% since 2022.

Along with Austin, apartment-building has driven a decline in rents in Sun Belt metros such as Denver, Orlando, Phoenix and Tampa, according to the Apartment List report.

Stateline reporter Tim Henderson can be reached at thenderson@stateline.org.

This story was originally produced by Stateline, which is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network which includes Idaho Capital Sun, and is supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity.

When Jacqueline Perez started experiencing symptoms of menopause in her early 50s, the brain fog was so severe, she thought she had early-onset dementia.

Perez, who founded a website dedicated to normalizing aging for women, said she gained more than 30 pounds and struggled with depression for months before she found a health provider who tested her hormone levels and recommended hormone replacement therapy for low estrogen.

That was nearly a decade ago, and in the years since, Perez said the culture around menopause treatment has changed dramatically.

“We still have a long way to go, in my opinion, but I think at least we’re on the path,” she said.

Menopause refers to the time when a woman stops having menstrual periods, which typically occurs between the ages of 45 and 55, according to the National Institute on Aging. The associated changes in hormones can cause hot flashes, night sweats, joint problems, bone density loss, insomnia, mood changes and more.

Lawmakers and advocates alike told Stateline the topic of menopause used to be taboo, but there has been a generational shift in recent years that has led to more legislation in statehouses around the country, providing more access to treatments and preventive care as well as more educational opportunities for healthcare providers.

Claire Gill, founder and president of the National Menopause Foundation, started the nonprofit in 2019 and said over the course of the past seven years, public awareness of the issue and interest from clinicians has noticeably increased.

And in November, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration removed its most severe “black box” warning from hormone replacement therapy for menopause and perimenopause after new research that the presumed risks of cancer, stroke and dementia from its use, once thought to be high, came from a flawed study. In the months since, the demand for the therapy has led to a nationwide shortage of certain products such as the estrogen patch.

Gill said more than 60 pieces of legislation related to menopause have been introduced nationwide this year, and 26 states have enacted a menopause-related law since 2019. There tend to be four categories of the legislation: mandating insurance coverage for treatments, workplace accommodations, awareness campaigns and healthcare provider education.

“They said, ‘Oh my god, I had no idea about any of this.’”

– Rhode Island state Sen. Lori Urso, describing her male colleagues' reaction after a hearing on her legislation

The subject is bipartisan: Lawmakers in liberal-leaning Illinois, Oregon and Washington have approved bills requiring insurance coverage, but so has conservative Louisiana.

Gill said the insurance conversation is especially significant, because bone density tests are only covered in existing laws when a person reaches the age of 65 and is eligible for Medicare. But women lose up to 20% of bone density in the first five years after menopause, which happens at an average age of 52. That’s a big gap that puts a woman at increased risk for fractures.

“I’m excited that we’re taking time and focusing more on the role that estrogen plays from head to toe in women, and not just looking at it as, ‘Oh, women get hot flashes,’” Gill said. “It’s so much more than that, and we can do more to protect our hearts and our brains and all of our organs — and prevent hot flashes.”

In June 2025, Democratic state Sen. Lori Urso sponsored a bill that made Rhode Island the first state to require workplace accommodations, such as a modified work schedule, for menopause and its related conditions. It was added to the same part of employment law about women who are pregnant or nursing.

Urso said she had a challenging time personally with menopause, and she wasn’t sure she was going to be able to continue functioning at the necessary level to keep doing her job. When she introduced her bill in committee last year and detailed why symptoms could make it difficult to work, several of the men who were present at the hearing followed her out of the room, stunned by what they’d heard.

Menopause coverage bills meet mixed fates in state legislatures

“They said, ‘Oh my god, I had no idea about any of this,’” Urso said.

In the year since, Urso has watched a flurry of bills spread to other states. Many of them, including another bill from Urso that’s under consideration this year, would mandate insurance coverage for treatments related to menopause and perimenopause, the years leading up to menopause when some symptoms can start.

Others are proposing bills similar to Urso’s workplace accommodations law, with the aim of instituting more education requirements for doctors, directing health departments to conduct a public awareness campaign, or telling agencies to study the issue and make recommendations.

“I don’t think I invented something, I think I just made it okay, and helped open up a necessary dialogue out there,” Urso said.

Urso’s bill to mandate insurance coverage is still pending in the Rhode Island Legislature, but others have already made it law, including in New Jersey.

Democratic Assemblywoman Heather Simmons said she was looking at legislation in other statehouses around the country and found the insurance mandates to be inconsistent. She decided to draft a version for New Jersey that she wanted to be the most comprehensive bill in the country, covering hormonal, non-hormonal and preventive treatments for perimenopause and menopause on state-regulated insurance plans.

It was signed into law in January, passing alongside another bill that allows healthcare providers to earn continuing education credits for menopause-related topics.

Although Simmons said her healthcare providers are generally very good and her insurance is excellent, she faced an uphill battle when going through menopause. She said she would ask about symptoms and whether they could be related to menopause, and her providers would shrug their shoulders. Not for a lack of caring, she said, but lack of knowledge.

“I’m just so grateful that my generation and the generations that follow me are saying no, we deserve better than that, we can do better than that,” Simmons said. “We’re not afraid to talk about it anymore.”

Simmons’ bill also includes behavioral health services for those diagnosed with depression or other conditions, and counseling for those who don’t have a formal diagnosis. It also covers pelvic floor therapy, and bone health screenings and treatments.

Her next step, she said, is to make sure that insurance carriers can’t deny testosterone prescriptions for women who need it just because it’s an off-label use.

Testosterone was a hormone replacement therapy that Pennsylvania Democratic state Rep. Melissa Shusterman needed to help her feel like herself again.

Shusterman has introduced four bills this session related to perimenopause and menopause, including insurance coverage for preventive  care for hip fractures and a joint government study to review workplace policies for state employees. Four other related bills are pending from other representatives, including one that would mandate Medicaid coverage for menopause treatments.

“All of this is going to help women in the long run, which means mothers are happier, women are happier and partners are happier, and that makes us healthier as a society,” Shusterman said.

Advocates like Gill, who is also CEO of the Bone Health & Osteoporosis Foundation, say their goal is to stay committed to pushing the boulder up the hill when it comes to passing more laws and creating more awareness of this phase of life. Too many women still think they have dementia or cancer before they realize it might be perimenopause, she said.

Gill noted the entire budget for women’s health research under the National Institutes of Health has long been about 10% of its total budget — that includes juvenile and post-menopausal ages. The gap in health research was already wide, she said, and amid cuts to federal agencies and projects under President Donald Trump’s administration, a recent report from the Washington Post showed a 31% decrease in projects funded in 2025 that contained the word “women.”

“There’s always been a need to increase that (budget) … and now we’re cutting the dollars,” Gill said.

“The important thing is that there are both immediate and long-term things that can be done at the local, state and federal level that can bring about not just better quality of life and symptom treatment for women, but also longer-term health benefits for women,” she said.

Stateline reporter Kelcie Moseley-Morris can be reached at kmoseley@stateline.org.

This story was originally produced by Stateline, which is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network which includes Idaho Capital Sun, and is supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity.

Idaho state revenues exceeded projections for the month of April, with the latest numbers suggesting the state will end its fiscal year June 30 with an ending balance of nearly $94 million if revenues come in as predicted over the next two months.

That would leave Idaho with a budget surplus, or difference, of $26.4 million compared to the fiscal year 2026 budget set by the Idaho Legislature, according to the May edition of the monthly General Fund Budget Monitor report published this week by the Idaho Legislative Services Office.

The new budget report shows that total April state revenue collections were $808.2 million. That is $56.9 million more than the Idaho Division of Financial Management’s forecast for April. Drilling down into the details, corporate income tax collections came in $135 million ahead of the state’s forecast, but individual income tax collections came in $81.3 million below the forecast, the report shows. 

The report also shows that Idaho’s revenue collections for April 2026 came in $52.6 million, or 6.1%, below actual revenue collections from the same time period one year ago, in April 2025. 

Idaho’s revenue and budget numbers are always closely scrutinized because the Idaho Constitution requires the state to pass a balanced budget and prohibits Idaho from running a deficit where expenses exceed the available revenue. 

Efforts to reach Sen. Scott Grow, a Republican from Eagle who serves as the co-chair of the Idaho Legislature’s Joint Finance-Appropriations Committee, were not immediately successful Wednesday. 

However, last month Grow told the Idaho Capital Sun that revenue collections from the month of April are always extremely important because they include tax returns. Grow said he would continue to study and monitor the state’s budget situation closely, but he was feeling optimistic.

“…(I)t gives me some comfort because we’ve got a little more cushion there,” Grow said in an April 15 phone interview. 

Although the new state budget report brings positive news of a projected state budget surplus, there were two notes state budget analysts included. 

First, the state has tweaked how it records sales tax collections and Tax Relief Fund distributions, said Keith Bybee, the budget and policy analysis manager for the Idaho Legislative Services Office. The new budget report notes that the Division of Financial Management “reported higher sales tax collections because Tax Relief Fund distributions to the (state’s) general fund were recognized as sales tax and reported earlier in the fiscal year.” 

Second, the state has not finished processing tax returns, and state officials do not know how much more money will be sent out to taxpayers via tax refunds in May and June, the final two months of the current fiscal year, the report said.  

Idaho legislators just cut state budgets to pay for federal tax cuts and guard against revenue uncertainty

The new report projecting a year-end state budget surplus arrives after Idaho legislators spent the 2026 legislative session approving across-the-board budget cuts for most state agencies and programs to pay for federal tax cuts signed into law in the One Big Beautiful Bill Act by President Donald Trump, and to guard against state revenue uncertainty and prevent the state from running a budget deficit. 

For months heading into the beginning of the 2026 legislative sessions, Idaho was projecting to end the current fiscal year with a state budget deficit, not a surplus, the Sun previously reported. State legislators responded to the budget crunch – and to their desire to conform to federal tax cuts signed into law by Trump – by cutting budgets for most state agencies by 4% during the current fiscal year and 5% starting next fiscal year.

A recent Idaho law could slow the process for some child custody disputes and even adoption cases, the Idaho Supreme Court found in a ruling this week.

The law, created in 2025 through Senate Bill 1181, means some Idaho parents who can’t afford legal representation won’t have state-provided defense attorneys in cases that could risk them permanently losing their kids, the court found.

In the opinion, the court alluded to an essentially unenforceable right to public defense in some parental rights termination cases brought by private parties, rather than the state Department of Health and Welfare. That’s because courts can’t require the state’s public defenders to represent parents in those privately brought cases, the Idaho Supreme Court found. 

“This gap created by Senate Bill 1181 is vitally important matter that needs to be addressed by the Idaho Legislature. If constitutionally required representation cannot be provided in private termination cases, it will likely result in serious delays or even dismissals of cases affecting Idaho’s children and parents,” Chief Justice G. Richard Bevan wrote in the opinion published Tuesday. “It may mean that children awaiting adoption cannot be adopted.”

The decision comes more than a year after the Legislature passed the bill over the objections of child welfare attorneys, who warned about the bill’s impact on parents’ right to legal counsel. The bill was pitched as a way to control the workload of public defenders as the state overhauled its public defense system.

Attorney says this is the ‘conundrum’ she warned Idaho Legislature about

There are two ways parental rights termination cases can be brought: By the state — often initiated by a state Department of Health and Welfare, or by a private party, such as one parent wanting to end the rights of another parent.

For over 60 years, Idaho law gave parents deemed legally indigent — essentially those who can’t pay legal bills — and who were facing parental rights’ termination cases “with a categorical right to an attorney at public expense,” Bevan explained in the opinion.

But in 2025, he wrote all of that changed when the Legislature passed Senate Bill 1181.

The bill was meant to control the workloads of public defenders as the state consolidated public defense from counties into one statewide office. But at the time, two child welfare attorneys warned the law might inadvertently end the right to legal counsel in privately brought parental right termination cases, the Idaho Capital Sun reported.

One of the attorneys who testified on the bill, Mary Shea from Pocatello, said in an interview that the court described “exactly the conundrum” that she was trying to warn the Legislature about.

“It’s an invitation to the Legislature to fix this, and to provide some kind of a funding mechanism so that those private terminations and adoptions can continue to proceed,” she said. “Because we do have a shortage of attorneys in this state. It is very difficult for us to provide the low-income and pro bono needs for the entire state.”

Sen. Todd Lakey, a Nampa Republican who was the bill’s original sponsor, said in an interview that the Legislature could take up clarifications next year.

“I personally am reluctant to have the taxpayers fund legal costs in a private party termination,” Lakey said on Wednesday. “That said, I recognize that there is a certain situation where it’s constitutionally required, and I want to make sure we’re limiting the burden on the taxpayers to only those situations, where it’s fundamentally required constitutionally. I think as the court noted, that’s kind of a case by case basis, depending on the circumstances.”

Rep. Dustin Manwaring, a Pocatello Republican who also cosponsored the bill, said in an interview that he already has ideas for legislation to address that issue flagged in the ruling.

“When representation is appointed and is constitutionally required, then we need to clarify who’s picking up the tab for that. So, we will do that. And I will personally commit to taking that on and making sure we get that done,” he said. 

How the Idaho Supreme Court ruled 

The bill, Bevan wrote, requires the State Public Defender’s Office only to represent parents deemed legally indigent in parental rights’ termination cases brought by the state — not by private parties. 

“That begs the question: if representation is constitutionally required in a private termination case, who would provide it?” Bevan asked.

Parents in private parental termination cases sometimes still have due process rights to public defense counsel, Bevan wrote, pointing to precedent in the U.S. Supreme Court. But since Idaho courts can no longer order the State Public Defender’s Office or counties to pay for that defense, he wrote that the courts effectively can’t appoint public legal representation in those cases.

“If neither the (State Public Defender’s Office) nor the counties can be required to provide representation, a private termination proceeding may fail to comply with the requirements of due process,” Bevan wrote. “The legislature has eliminated the options available to courts for appointment of counsel at public expense.”

Some parents who are entitled to representation won’t get it, he wrote. 

“We have little doubt that, so long as the representation gap created by Senate Bill 1181 exists, at least some indigent parents who constitutionally require representation will not get it,” Bevan wrote.

Idaho State Public Defender Office spokesperson Patrick Orr said in a statement that the agency hasn’t been assigned any private termination cases since the court took up the case in October.

“Our view is the same now as it was last year. Our office provides indigent defense representation – and representation for parents in Child Protective Act cases where the state seeks to interfere with a parent-child relationship,” he said. But, he added, “we can’t provide legal representation in a private termination case.”

As any store manager can attest, retail is a tough business, and good help is hard to find.

Not so much with Bizarre Bazaar, Sandpoint’s “upscale resale store,” which is celebrating 20 years of operation. Bizarre Bazaar, the flagship fund-raiser for the Community Assistance League (CAL), is staffed by volunteers and the store items are donated goods. Unused items are offered to other thrift stores.

“The store is like walking into a boutique,” says Sherry Fulton, who has been involved with the store since it opened. “We sell gently-used linens, household items, men’s and women’s clothing. We also have crafts … there are no other craft stores, and extensive used books. There are some incredible donated items.”

“And a pair of jeans costs $5,” she says.

Money from the sales go back into the community in the form of educational scholarships and grants to local nonprofit organizations. CAL has been around for 46 years, according to Joyce Price, the board president, and the list of beneficiaries is long.

“This year, CAL expects to distribute more than $225,000 to local students and community programs,” Price said. “Over the past 20 years, Bizarre Bazaar has helped generate more than $2.5 million in funding for the community. Bizarre Bazaar plans to continue serving the community for many years to come. Ten years ago, CAL established an endowment fund through the Idaho Community Foundation, ensuring that its support for students and nonprofits will continue for generations.”

The kind of generosity and spirit I see from those associated with CAL is part of what makes North Idaho such a special place.

Lindsey Hughes, board president for Sandpoint Area Seniors, Inc. (SASi), says that CAL has given her nonprofit organization more than $60,000 over five years.

“CAL supports not only our nutrition program through grants for fresh food and produce, but it has been instrumental allowing SASi to provide an inviting center where seniors gather (including installation of a cooling and heating system). At Christmas-time, CAL brings generous gift bags for seniors who are home-bound. The community impact is immeasurable.”

Tone Stolz, executive director of Pend Oreille Arts Council, says her nonprofit has been a partner with CAL since 1992, and CAL has been instrumental in the success of the Kaleideoscope Visual Arts Program.

“Without this program, there would be no art classes in any of the elementary schools in Bonner County. Their support means the world to us,” she says.

Debbie Love, executive director of the Bonner Community Food Bank, expresses similar sentiments. Support from CAL helped with the purchase of a walk-in cooler and a scale for weighing donated items.

“They’ve truly strengthened our ability to serve our neighbors with dignity and care,” Love says. “They are the kind of organization you can call upon in times of need and trust that they will be there. I’ve experienced that firsthand.”

Mariah Decker, head coach and executive director of Unique Center for Athletes of Needs (UCAN), says CAL over the years has provided “thousands of dollars in funding that directly impacts our daily operations. Their support allows us to invest in essential equipment and compensate instructors who create meaningful, consistent programming to our athletes.”

As Decker well points out, CAL’s impact goes well beyond her nonprofit organization.

“I’m reminded of a quote that reflects who they are,” Decker says. “Never doubt that a small group of committed citizens can change the world; indeed, it’s the only thing that we ever had (Margaret Mead). That is exactly what CAL represents, a group of dedicated, caring individuals working to make Sandpoint and the surrounding communities stronger.”

Organizers of America250 celebration in Idaho announced a new fundraising campaign Wednesday that is designed to bring Idaho’s replica of the Liberty Bell on a tour of all 44 counties after the bell is restored.

Idaho State Treasurer Julie Ellsworth announced the new “quarter drive” on Wednesday, encouraging children and families to donate quarters at participating banks and credit unions to help fund the initiative.

“The quarter drive is a fun and meaningful way for children, families and community members to celebrate America’s 250th birthday,” Ellsworth said in a written statement. “Seeing Idaho’s Liberty Bell travel across all 44 counties will create lasting memories and help connect communities through this historic celebration.” 

In 1950, Idaho received a replica of the original Liberty Bell that rang outside of Independence Hall in Philadelphia. The replica Liberty Bell had been on display on the front steps of the Idaho State Capitol in Boise. 

Earlier this year, members of the America 250 in Idaho Advisory Council sent Idaho’s replica of the Liberty Bell out to be cleaned and repaired prior to America250 celebrations that are scheduled to take place July 4 – the 250th anniversary of the signing of the Declaration of Independence. 

Ellsworth said the quarter drive will help pay to send the bell to each county this summer and fall. The America 250 in Idaho Advisory Council already voted to spend up to  $28,500 to have the bell cleaned and restored. 

Children and families can donate quarters and coins at Liberty Bell donation bins available at participating banks and credit unions in Idaho. A list of places to donate to the effort will be posted online at IdahoA250.com, Ellsworth said. 

Some initial drop off locations include all Idaho branch locations of BankCDA, Ireland Bank, Cache Valley Bank and Idaho First Bank, according to a list posted on the website. 

“The Liberty Bell reminds us that freedom is something every generation must value and protect,” Idaho Senate President Pro Tem Kelly Anthon, R-Rupert, said in a written statement. “Bringing the bell to all 44 counties gives Idaho communities a chance to reconnect with the spirit that shaped our nation.”

WASHINGTON — U.S. House Speaker Mike Johnson on Wednesday pressed for increased funding for the Secret Service, arguing most of the money Senate Republicans included for the agency in their immigration enforcement bill is for security needs, not building a new ballroom at the White House. 

But the Louisiana Republican added during a morning press conference he didn’t want to “prejudge” the $72 billion package before the Senate approves a final version this month and sends it to the House. 

“I don’t have the pen in the Senate. They’re writing the bill,” he said. “We’ll see what we get.”

Johnson noted there are several more steps the legislation must go through in the Senate, including a review by the parliamentarian to make sure all of the provisions fit within the strict rules of the reconciliation process, committee debate and a marathon amendment voting session on the floor. 

Johnson said that President Donald Trump “is excited about building a ballroom with private funding,” though that project comes with some additional needs that will likely require taxpayer dollars.  

“The Secret Service says that as we enhance the White House grounds and the modernization there that obviously we have to think differently about security,” he said. “We live in a very dangerous time and there are new and increasing threats that we have never faced before. And so Congress has a role in funding that and we’ll have to see how it all works out.”

Johnson asserted the bill Senate Republicans released last week “very specifically defined” how the Secret Service could use the additional funding.  

The legislation would provide $1 billion that would be available until Sept. 30, 2029 for “security adjustments and upgrades … to support enhancements by the United States Secret Service relating to the East Wing Modernization Project.”

The bill would limit the Secret Service from using any of the funding “for non-security elements.” 

Johnson said GOP lawmakers added the funding to the immigration enforcement spending bill after the Secret Service “put in an urgent request for additional security measures.”

“We’ve needed some of these security measures for a long time,” he said. “And that’s what this is all about.”

Congress provided the Secret Service with $3.25 billion in the annual funding bill for the Department of Homeland Security that lawmakers passed in late April.  

Republicans approved an additional $1.17 billion for the Secret Service in their “big, beautiful” law that the agency can use through September 2029 for personnel, training, technology as well as performance, retention and signing bonuses. 

Normally, the White House budget office would publicly send Congress a supplemental spending request, asking lawmakers to approve the additional money. That would then be vetted by the Appropriations Committees, though that didn’t happen in this case. 

The Trump administration also could have included a boost in funding to the budget request officials sent Congress in early April that asked members to approve $3.5 billion for the Secret Service in the annual funding bill for the agency that’s due by the end of September.  

Secret Service Director Sean Curran gave Republican senators more details about how the agency plans to use the additional funding during a closed-door lunch this week, though the bill wouldn’t actually require the agency to spend the money as outlined. 

A breakdown obtained by States Newsroom showed: 

• $220 million would go to “hardening” the East Wing Modernization Project with additional bulletproof glass, drone detection technologies and filtration systems designed to detect chemical or other contaminants. 
• $180 million would go toward construction of a “long overdue” White House visitor screening facility. 
• $175 million would bolster Secret Service training as well as its training facilities. 
• $175 million would help the agency “secure frequently visited venues facing heightened risk due to their public visibility and static nature.”
• $150 million would go to the branch of the Secret Service that focuses on drones, aircraft incursions, biological threats and “other emerging threats through investments in state-of-the-art technologies.”
• $100 million for “high-profile national events that require significant planning.”

Republican senators said after that meeting they wanted more information from the Secret Service on exactly how the agency would spend the additional funding before they vote on the package. 

Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., said Wednesday morning most GOP senators will ultimately support the additional funding for the Secret Service “that’s needed to enable them to do their jobs.” 

“Obviously there are security implications related to the modernization of the East Wing. And that represents, I think, of the total request that Secret Service made, about 20%,” he said. “The balance of it, I think, are things that they’ve been putting off for a long time, but need to be done, especially in a modern threat environment where you’ve had, you know, now, three assassination attempts in the last two years.”

Thune said his “aspirational timeline” is to have committees debate their bills early next week, followed by floor action on the full package later in the week.  

“It can always be affected by other factors,” he said. “But I think at least right now, that’s the goal.”

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., said during a floor speech that Trump’s focus on building a “gilded ballroom” shows the president “is living in the theater of the absurd.”

Schumer said Americans don’t want to see government leaders focused on the ballroom project when inflation, food costs and gasoline prices have all increased. 

“I would say Trump has completely lost touch with the American people, but that would assume that Trump was ever in touch with the American people to begin with,” he said. “And on this issue he sure as heck isn’t.”

WASHINGTON — Long-time federal immigration official David Venturella will lead U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, the agency spearheading President Donald Trump’s mass deportation campaign, according to a Department of Homeland Security spokesperson.

Venturella will replace outgoing ICE acting Director Todd Lyons, who last month announced he would leave his position by May 31, the DHS official told States Newsroom on Wednesday. Venturella will also take on the role on an acting basis. ICE has been without a permanent, Senate-confirmed director since Trump first took office in 2017.

Venturella will oversee an agency that has come under intense congressional and public scrutiny after federal immigration agents shot and killed two U.S. citizens in Minneapolis in January. 

The deaths of Renee Good and Alex Pretti led to a months-long shutdown of DHS, after Democrats pushed for constraints on federal immigration officers. The shutdown ended last month, and Republicans are moving forward with funding ICE and Customs and Border Protection for the next three years, through a complex legislative process that does not require Democratic votes. 

Venturella worked at DHS during the Obama administration, when he led the Secure Communities program in which local law enforcement shared fingerprints and booking information with federal immigration officials to identify immigrants in the country without legal authorization. The Obama administration eventually ended the program, but Trump revived it in 2017.

Venturella has also worked for the private prison company GEO, which earns billions in government contracts to detain immigrants across the country. He retired from GEO in 2023 after serving as the vice president of client relations.

Idaho’s rural hospital leaders, who are facing mounting financial pressures, are hoping a $930 million, five-year federal grant will ease some of their pains. 

As they recognized National Hospital Week, which runs May 10 to 16, two North Idaho hospital CEOs told the Idaho Capital Sun that their challenges are similar to those felt by rural hospitals across the U.S. 

Those challenges include difficulty housing employees, upgrading equipment, serving an aging patient population and stretching low cash reserves amid increasing insurance denials, delays and Medicaid reimbursement decreases. 

Among Idaho’s small, rural hospitals, 67% in the last quarter of 2025 had a negative operating margin, according to data provided by the Idaho Hospital Association. Two years ago, just 15% were in the negative. 

“It’s getting tougher and tougher to get payments on time and due to those denials, so we’re seeing our accounts receivable days going up and our days cash on hand going down,” Bonner General Health CEO John Hennessy said. 

Not all of these challenges can be addressed with the federal Rural Health Transformation grant approved by Congress in July as part of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act. Idaho received around $186 million for the first year of the five-year program, and the state Department of Health and Welfare is expected to solicit for awarding subgrants this summer. 

“I think there needs to be a big emphasis on how is this actually benefiting rural communities,” said Coeur d’Alene Republican Rep. Jordan Redman, co-chair of a committee overseeing the state’s grant. “And then also, how is this sustainable long-term? Not just some cash up front that they need ongoing.” 

How can the rural health grant help? What are its limitations?

In Sandpoint, Bonner General Health was built in the early 1970s, and that comes with some limitations, Hennessy said. He is hoping that if the hospital’s awarded a rural health grant, the hospital could invest in a new air handler for the operating room to control humidity. 

As of now, he said, certain operations, such as total knee replacements, have to be canceled if the humidity is too high. 

“Every summer, we’ve had at least a couple weeks where we’ve had to cancel doing any kind of inpatient or those larger cases due to humidity issues,” Hennessy said. 

The project would cost around $4.5 million, he said. 

He said the hospital’s medical record system needs to be consolidated — there are five currently in use — and upgraded. But a large electronic medical record system can cost more than $1 million a year to run, Hennessy said. 

In Benewah County, incidents of heart attacks and strokes are high, according to Benewah Community Hospital CEO Burt Keltner, and he’s hoping to use a grant to purchase equipment to support a new cardiac and dialysis care program. 

He said he also wants to look at purchasing an upgraded MRI machine to speed up efficiency of imaging, and using the funds to start up a new nurse recruitment program to “wean off” traveling nurses — who fill vacant positions through temporary contracts at a much higher cost to the hospital. 

The Benewah and Bonner hospitals are designated as “critical access,” which means the federal government reimburses costs for Medicare-eligible services. The payments come in a once-a-year lumpsum, Keltner said, which can create challenges around stretching low cash flows through the next year or starting new programs. 

He said a grant to start up a nurse recruitment program could go a long way to being sustained through other means. 

“If it’s done appropriately, it’s a way for it to feed itself,” he said. 

Housing pressures hamper health care worker recruitment 

Idahoans have seen increasing housing costs all around the state and because of this, it’s become increasingly difficult for small hospitals to recruit and retain professionals. 

“We’re very fortunate to live in a beautiful area with a ski resort and a lake right in our backyard, but the problem is that the cost of living is quite high. And that housing becomes a problem for quite a bit of our staff,” said Hennessy from Bonner General. “So they want to move here, but due to the housing prices, sometimes it’s just not feasible.”

He said the hospital, like many across the nation, is seeing a shortage in workers such as surgical nurses, surgery scrub technicians, physical therapists, and nurses.  

“So, the same positions that we’re hearing from other hospitals in our area that are also struggling to recruit those,” he said, “which also makes it tough, because you have one candidate, and you might have four hospitals within the service area that are all competing for that one applicant.” 

St. Maries has seen a steep increase in retirees moving in, Keltner said, which has caused an increased population of patients using Medicare and a housing squeeze. 

“We need nurses. We need lab workers. We need radiology techs,” Keltner said, “and it’s kind of a double edged sword, where we have a lot of young people that might want to live here, but a lot of times, especially in northern Idaho, they can’t afford to buy something, or there just isn’t anything available for them to even get started into. Rentals are few and far between.” 

Zillow data released last summer found Idaho’s housing price growth between 2015 and 2025 topped the nation with a 156% increase, KTVB reported. 

Insurance delays, denials and lower reimbursements stretch cash reserves thin

The aging population served by rural areas also means a number of patients are covered by Medicare, which tends to reimburse at a lower rate than private health insurance plans, Keltner said. 

Some patients purchase Medicare Advantage plans, an option for Medicare recipients to purchase private insurance that offers the same coverage. 

Increasingly, claims filed for Medicare Advantage plans are denied, Keltner and Hennessy said. The practice of requiring prior authorization for coverage of a service or treatment used to be rare and only required for limited services, Keltner said. 

“Now it’s getting to where these pre-authorizations are put on everything, every time you turn around, for every procedure you can imagine,” Keltner said. “And so those are slowly building in number, creating difficulty, trying to jump all these hurdles so that we can get paid appropriately.”

A KFF Health analysis of federal data found that Medicare Advantage insurers in 2024 denied 4.1 million prior authorization requests out of about 52.8 million requests, an about 8% denial rate. 

Keltner and Hennessy said the number of services that require prior authorization and the rate of denials has continued to increase, even just since the beginning of this year. 

Keltner said the process feels automatic, with denials coming in almost the instant a claim is filed. 

“I’m completely convinced that, for the last two or three years, large, commercial insurance companies have installed algorithms to auto-deny a lot of things right when they first come in,” he said, “just to create more workflow for the people that are submitting. I have no doubt, because it’s not possible for a person on the other end to actually make a decision.” 

In 2023, ProPublica reported on a tool the insurer Cigna used to instantly reject claims without doctors reviewing the file. Over a period of two months the prior year, Cigna doctors denied over 300,000 requests for payments using this method, spending an average of 1.2 seconds on each case, ProPublica reported. 

Hennessy said when insurers do come back with lower reimbursements or denials, small hospitals have no leverage to negotiate. 

“So usually it’s just insurance is coming each year with a lower number, kind of just expecting us to take it,” Hennessy said. 

Medicaid cuts already affecting reimbursement, hospitals bracing for more 

Idaho Gov. Brad Little last summer approved 4% Medicaid provider rate cuts, reducing the amount doctors are paid to provide services for Medicaid patients, in response to a projected budget shortfall. 

Idaho cuts doctor pay rates for Medicaid. More cuts could come, Health and Welfare says.

Congress in July in the “Big Beautiful” law approved significant reductions in Medicaid spending and changes such as work requirements that are estimated to drop people from coverage. The Idaho Legislature also approved its own work requirements for some Medicaid recipients. 

“Bottom line, any percentage cut is going to have a huge effect,” Hennessy said. “Especially to rural hospitals where they don’t have large margins to begin with. So just for example, 4% cuts happen here, that’s several $100,000 directly to our bottom line that we’re no longer being reimbursed.” 

He said the hospital will also still have to continue serving those who might get dropped from the program and become uninsured. He said emergency care for those patients will have to be covered by the hospital through its charity care program. 

He said about 10% of the patients at Bonner General are covered by Medicaid. Keltner said about 12% of patients at Benewah Community Health are enrolled in Medicaid. Kelner noted that many critical access hospitals operate at about a 1% profit margin, meaning a potential 10% cut to about 10% of the patients would eliminate that entire margin. 

“We weren’t built to be a profit center,” Keltner said. “We weren’t built in order to gouge and make just tons and tons of money, but we do need to be financially viable. So we have to balance that viability with as many services as we can offer for the size of community that we serve.” 

“That’s the difficulty,” he said. “But we just have to keep in the forefront of our mind, and what keeps us optimistic is that we’re here to serve.” 

It is unclear whether an attorney running to become a judge in Ada County meets the legal requirements to be an Idaho judge, a spokesperson for the agency that manages state elections said Tuesday.

David J. Morse, who works in the federal prosecutor’s office at the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Idaho, is one of three candidates running to be a district judge in Idaho’s 4th judicial district in the May 19 election.

Morse was first licensed to practice law in Idaho in October 2016, his licensing record with the Idaho State Bar shows. That start date puts him months shy of meeting the requirement in state law to have been licensed to practice law for at least a decade, for the May election, which is when district judges are elected. But by the November general election, he would meet the statutory requirement. District judges elected this May are sworn in next January.

So what’s the issue? It isn’t clear when the cutoff ends.

“The applicable statutes do not clearly resolve which election date controls for purposes of determining eligibility in these circumstances,” Idaho Secretary of State Office spokesperson Joe Parris told the Idaho Capital Sun in a statement.

Since people can already cast their votes, state election officials said they are planning to wait and see before potentially stepping in. 

“Given that voting is already underway, we have determined that no action will be taken prior to Election Day. Depending on the outcome of the May 19 election, further legal review may be required,” Parris said.

Morse could not be immediately reached for comment. 

A spokesperson for the State of Idaho Judicial Branch declined to comment.

“It would be highly inappropriate for us to give any comment on an election situation,” Courts spokesperson Nate Poppino said.

What are the requirements to be an Idaho judge?

Idaho law spells out the requirements for someone to be a district judge. The statute says they must meet all of the following requirements “at the time of such election,” including: “Have held a license to practice law or held a judicial office in one (1) or more jurisdictions for at least ten (10) continuous years immediately preceding such election.”

Want to know more about the judges on your ballot? The Idaho State Bar last month released ratings on district judge candidates from hundreds of attorneys.

Over the next month, Idaho Power customers can attend online meetings to learn more about the company’s wildfire prevention plans, including power shutoffs. 

Six events are planned over the next month, targeted at different audiences, including:

• 6-7 p.m. May 13: For customers in southern and eastern Idaho, such as in the following counties: Twin Falls, Jerome, Cassia, Minidoka, Power, Bannock and Bingham
• 6-7 p.m. May 20: For customers in the Western Treasure Valley, such as in Ada and Canyon counties
• 6-7 p.m. May 27: For customers in Eastern Oregon
• Noon to 1 p.m. June 3: For Oregon customers with special medical needs, mobility limitations, or disabilities
• 6-7 p.m. June 3: For Spanish-speaking customers
• Noon to 1 p.m. June 10: For Idaho customers with special medical needs, mobility limitations, or disabilities

Find links to join the meetings online, or to find in-person events, on Idaho Power’s website at idahopower.com/communitymeetings. Find more information on wildfire planning online at idahopower.com/wildfire.

A flare up of a disease that’s especially lethal to wolf pups took a toll on Wyoming and Yellowstone National Park wolf numbers in 2025, reducing biologists’ counts to a level last seen when wolves were still reestablishing following the species’ historic 1995-96 reintroduction.

“It was the lowest number of wolves in 20 years,” Wyoming Game and Fish Department wolf biologist Ken Mills told WyoFile. “That was definitely during the population creep stage, so they were still establishing in the state.”

Carter’s Hope: After U.S. government killed off Western wolves, a bold experiment brought them back

All signs point toward canine distemper being the primary reason Wyoming’s statewide wolf population plunged to a minimum count of 253 wolves and 14 breeding pairs at the end of 2025, Mills said.

Distemper was detected in 64% of animals in the northwestern Wyoming zone where wolves are classified as “trophy game.” While adults can survive the contagious virus, which is a measles-like affliction in canines, it’s “quite lethal” for pups and only an estimated “31 to 34” of the 87 documented born pups lived to the end of the year, a survival rate of just 37%, according to Game and Fish’s 2025 wolf monitoring report.

In the past, distemper was a density-dependent disease that surged when populations were high, Mills said. It last flared up in 2018, which wasn’t long after a two-year period where wolves were protected from hunting by the Endangered Species Act and populations — and conflict — were higher.

The 2025 flare up was the first time Mills documented lots of distemper when wolf numbers were not particularly high. The occurrence has him searching for alternative explanations.

“Could it be cyclical? Yeah,” the Pinedale-based biologist said. “However, these are potentially eight-year cycles, and it takes a lot of time to collect data and understand what’s going on.”

There’s cause to believe that distemper will abate in Wyoming wolves this year. When Yellowstone wolves have experienced outbreaks, the event lasts a year and then there’s recovery, Mills said. And the Wyoming population now has more antibodies and resistance built up and so is in good shape to recover itself, he said.

But in 2025, distemper hurt Wyoming wolf numbers, which was a first.

Before that, “we really haven’t had a canine distemper outbreak that has caused a population-level effect,” Mills said.

In 2024, Mills and his biologist counterparts detected 330 wolves and 24 breeding pairs statewide. The estimated 253 wolves and 14 breeding pairs in 2025 means the raw wolf count tumbled by 23% and the reproductive segment fell by 42%.

Of those, 132 wolves in 22 packs that included 10 breeding pairs dwelled in the mountainous portion of northwest Wyoming in the “trophy game” area. There were nine wolves in three packs and no breeding detected on the Wind River Indian Reservation. And in the zone where Wyoming manages wolves as predators — where they can be killed by any means without limit — there were 28 wolves in five packs, including one breeding pair.

The remainder of Wyoming’s wolves — 84 wolves running in seven packs that included three breeding pairs — dwelled in Yellowstone National Park, according to the state’s monitoring report.

The park’s public affairs officers, whose office has been inundated with inquiries about a recent grizzly bear attack, did not respond to WyoFile’s request for an interview before this story published.

The overall number of Yellowstone wolves has dipped into the 80s twice before, in 2012 and 2018. But by other measures, 2025 was a tough year that the park population had not experienced since the reintroduction era. The distemper outbreak appeared to be “synchronous” in Wyoming and Yellowstone, and pup production and survival was also dismal in the national park, Mills said.

“Seventeen pups survived in Yellowstone,” he said, “which was the lowest they ever recorded.”

Outside of Yellowstone, Game and Fish will consider the lower wolf population when its biologists and wardens are setting fall 2026 hunting seasons (hunting isn’t allowed in the park, though park wolves frequently leave). That proposal isn’t public yet, but Mills anticipates that there will be a “surplus” of animals and a wolf hunting season, even if mortality limits are reduced.

Wyoming’s relatively few wolves have enabled the state to manage with precision and a degree of predictability, although the surge of distemper interrupted a long run of population stability. Still, the unexpected disease outbreak left Mills feeling good about Wyoming’s plan for managing its wolves.

“We set up the population objective of 160 wolves to be able to accommodate an event similar to what we experienced, and still meet our minimum recovery criteria,” Mills said.

That recovery criteria includes 10 breeding pairs outside of Yellowstone in Wyoming’s trophy game area. Mills’ 2025 surveys detected exactly 10 packs with pups in that zone.

“We met the minimum,” Mills said. “It actually worked exactly as we intended.”

About 7% of Idaho high school students graduate with an industry-recognized job credential.

That means a certificate, license or qualification that tells an employer, in plain terms, what a new hire can contribute on day one. In a state where employers in agriculture, healthcare and skilled trades say they can’t find enough qualified workers, that percentage is a problem. The challenge is how to close the gap.

Career and technical education, or CTE, is one of the clearest solutions.

A CTE pathway is a focused sequence of coursework tied to a specific field. It includes hands-on learning and leads to an industry-recognized certification upon completion. That certification matters because it isn’t graded by the school.

It’s an industry-developed credential that verifies a student has mastered the skills employers actually need, such as a CNA certificate, an OSHA-10 card, a welding qualification or a NAVTA-approved veterinary assistant certification. Each tells an employer that the person in front of them is ready to work.

Idaho’s low industry-recognized certification rate has been a persistent gap in the state’s workforce-readiness picture.

In 2023, the Legislature responded by creating the Idaho Career Ready Students program through House Bill 267, which expanded career and technical education capacity in middle and high schools and provided funds to districts to build programs aligned with local industry needs.

The 2024–25 Idaho Report Card shows the gap is still real — about 7% of students leave high school with an industry-recognized credential.

That effort acknowledges that workforce readiness and academic accountability aren’t the same thing. In fact, each serves a different purpose.

A standardized test score shows whether a student has met grade-level academic standards. A certification shows whether a student is ready to apply a skill in a specific job. Idaho families need both — and increasingly, employers are asking for the second.

The most significant issue is access. Idaho is geographically large, mostly rural and unevenly resourced.

A small high school can’t realistically staff a welding program, a CNA pipeline, an ag technology lab and a digital media studio at once.

That means a student’s CTE options too often depend on which district they happen to live in. The students who would thrive as surgical technicians, ag mechanics or data technicians shouldn’t have their pathways determined by their ZIP codes.

This is where virtual learning can expand access to career training and provide students with qualifications recognized by employers. Idaho Technical Career Academy, a public virtual charter school in Meridian, exemplifies this mode. The Idaho Public Charter School Commission’s 2025 performance report highlights career-technical pathways as a key design element at the career academy. Students complete a three-year sequence within a career cluster and remain enrolled in CTE courses toward a certificate.

Hands-on learning can still happen off-screen. For example, Idaho Technical Career Academy students can earn livestock artificial insemination certifications from the University of Idaho and in-person CPR and EKG certifications. Students can also manage a greenhouse and an incubator, hold district Future Farmers of America officer roles, and serve as state vice president in Business Professionals of America.

The outcomes are measurable. Idaho Technical Career Academy’s Class of 2025 had 27 graduates who earned 147 industry certifications — an average of more than five per student. In 2026, 94% of career pathway completers passed Idaho’s Workplace Readiness Assessment, and 87% passed the Technical Skills Assessment. Both assessments, taken by every student, gauge career and technical education students’ workforce readiness.

A CTE-focused school should be measured by certifications earned, pathways completed and students ready to work on day one — not by whether it’s brick-and-mortar or browser-based.

Idaho’s 7% credential rate won’t fix itself. To close the gap, we must create more programs, build pathways and offer diverse delivery models — all held to one standard: Did the student leave with something an employer needs and recognizes?

WASHINGTON — The cost of the Iran war has increased to $29 billion to date, Pentagon officials told lawmakers in both chambers Tuesday.

Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Dan Caine and Department of Defense acting comptroller Jules Hurst faced questions from House and Senate appropriators over several hours of testimony on the administration’s Pentagon budget request and the direction of the U.S. operation in Iran and the Strait of Hormuz.

The hearings began just as the Bureau of Labor Statistics released the latest inflation figures that showed skyrocketing fuel costs drove overall inflation to the highest level since 2023.

Rep. Betty McCollum, the top Democrat on the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Defense, said she remains skeptical of Pentagon spending, as it has lacked “sufficient transparency with gas prices and inflation numbers increasing.”

“The American people just want to afford the basic necessities for everyday life, but this administration is not doing anything to help them with the cost of living crisis,” the Minnesota lawmaker said.

Similarly, Sen. Jack Reed, D-R.I., who sits on the Senate Appropriations Committee and serves as the top Democrat on the Senate Committee on Armed Services, said “vague generalities are not helping this committee make critical judgments.”

“And the tradeoffs are significant. The deficit is increasing dramatically. We have to be conscious of that. We also have to be conscious (of) helping American families just get by, and inflation just hit 3.8% today,” Reed said.

The latest Consumer Price Index reached 3.8% over one year ago, according to the Department of Labor, up from 3.3% last month.

Fuel and energy costs largely drove the inflation increase, with gasoline up 28.4% compared to last year.

Oil and gas prices have soared since the U.S. joined Israel in launching strikes against Iran on Feb. 28. The protracted conflict has led to a near standstill in the Strait of Hormuz, a key maritime passageway off the coast of Iran where one-fifth of the world’s petroleum crossed prior to the war.

Senate Appropriations Committee Vice Chair Sen. Patty Murray, D-Wash., questioned the Pentagon’s estimate that the war has cost $29 billion, calling it “suspiciously low.”

When pressed, Hurst said the figure does not include the cost of damage to U.S. military bases in the Middle East. Iran launched retaliatory strikes in March on multiple American installations in the region, including a strike on a base in Kuwait that killed six U.S. troops.

“Your acting comptroller suggested that damage to U.S. facilities was not factored into that figure,” Murray said to Hegseth. “It is clear that there has been extensive damage to American military assets.”

The secretary said he could not divulge details on damage to U.S. assets.

“I think an important point is, considering what the president is undertaking, what is the cost of Iran obtaining a nuclear weapon? And the fact that this president’s been willing to make a historic and courageous choice to confront that, it comes with cost. And we recognize that,” Hegseth said.

Despite continued tit-for-tat attacks in the Strait of Hormuz, Hegseth told lawmakers that a ceasefire between the U.S. and Iran is still in effect.

Sen. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, asked Hegseth whether he believes President Donald Trump will need congressional authorization to continue military activity against the Islamic Republic.

“It doesn’t appear that hostilities have ended, and so the question to you is whether or not the administration has considered or had intended to seek an authorization of the use of military force from the Congress?” she asked.

Hegseth replied: “Senator, our view is that should the president make the decision to recommence that we would have all the authorities to do so.”

Efforts to pass a War Powers Resolution to rein in Trump’s military operations in Iran have failed multiple times in the the Republican-led Senate and House.

A vote is possible this week in the House on a bipartisan War Powers Resolution.

WASHINGTON — President Donald Trump on Monday nominated Cameron Hamilton to run the Federal Emergency Management Agency, a former acting chief who was fired in 2025 shortly after he told a congressional panel FEMA should continue to exist.

The Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee will likely schedule a hearing in the coming weeks for Hamilton to testify about his goals for the agency as part of the confirmation process. 

The panel will then schedule a vote on whether to send his nomination to the floor, where Hamilton will need to secure approval from a majority of senators before he would become FEMA administrator. 

Taking on that role will be no easy task, especially since Trump has spoken repeatedly during his second administration about reducing the size and scope of the agency. 

“We want to wean off of FEMA and we want to bring it down to the state level,” Trump said in June. “We’re moving it back to the states so the governors can handle it. That’s why they’re governors. Now, if they can’t handle it, they shouldn’t be governor.”

The FEMA review council that Trump created to review the agency submitted its report last week recommending states shoulder more of the cost and responsibility of disaster relief.

The previous disconnect between Trump and Hamilton about whether FEMA should continue led to Hamilton being removed from his role leading the agency last year. 

Hamilton testified before a House panel in May 2025 that he personally did “not believe it is in the best interest of the American people to eliminate the Federal Emergency Management Agency.”

“Having said that, I’m not in a position to make decisions and impact outcomes on whether or not a determination, such as consequential as that, should be made,” he said at the time. “That is a conversation that should be had between the president of the United States and this governing body on identifying the exact ways and methodologies, in which, what is prudent for federal investment, and what is not.”

One day later he was ousted as the senior official performing the duties of the administrator at FEMA.

David Richardson has been the senior official performing the duties of FEMA administrator ever since. He was previously the assistant secretary of Countering Weapons of Mass Destruction Office at the Department of Homeland Security.

Hamilton detailed his time leading FEMA on an episode of the “Disaster Tough” podcast that aired in September, saying he had developed a plan to address that the agency had “become too bureaucratic.”

“I was very clear and poignant that the cause of most of the problems in FEMA is because we keep putting too much crap in FEMA’s rucksack that never should have been there,” he said. 

Hamilton then spoke about the Shelter and Services Program, which provides grant funding to organizations that help to house, feed and assist migrants released by the Department of Homeland Security. 

He argued that isn’t an “emergency management requirement” and that “FEMA has become a functional multi-tool.”

Housing was a “prime example” of where another federal department, like Housing and Urban Development, could take over some of the tasks that FEMA currently handles, he said. 

“I said, we need to aggressively talk to HUD about them having a larger stakehold in that particular missions field because they are more uniquely suited,” he said. 

But Hamilton insisted he was not supportive of plans to completely eliminate the agency. 

“I was not hired to abolish FEMA. That was never a part of the conversation and that’s never something that I would have agreed with,” he said on the podcast. “And I was very clear, I wanted some reform. I wanted to cut wasteful spending. I wanted to downsize the agency. There’s no denying that. And I think most of those things could be done wisely and properly.”

Any offloading of responsibilities from the federal government to states, he said, would include “a gradual phasing out.”

“We needed to give the states some time to see what that entails and to respond accordingly,” he said. “Not just, ‘Hey, the water is now shut off. You’re on your own.’ That’s not wise. That’s not being a good partner.”

Hamilton also discussed what happened before and after he testified in front of a House subcommittee a year ago, including that he was polygraphed in March.

“One of the more difficult things for me to deal with was when my character was being attacked, and when I was being accused of being a liar and a leaker, and I was polygraphed for it,” he said. “DHS requested that I be polygraphed. And they said in their statement, you know, my character, judgment, my stability, my ethics were all in question.” 

Asked by the podcast host if he wanted to put on his “Navy SEAL hat” when that was happening, Hamilton responded, “I wanted to choke some people, that’s for sure.”

Hamilton said he knew that he was about to be fired and that on the day he testified before Congress, officials “notified my security that my access was eliminated. So before the testimony, I knew it was coming, and I knew it was coming weeks in advance.” 

Later in the episode, Hamilton said he knew he would be asked during the hearing about Trump’s comments regarding FEMA and spoke with former FEMA Administrator Pete Gaynor to work through how best to answer the question. 

The two then “came to the agreement” that Hamilton would say, “it’s not in the best interest of the American people.” 

“I cannot get behind this position that abolishing FEMA is the answer,” he said. “There are so many things that we can do before we go that extreme and put the American people at what I believe to be extreme risk unnecessarily.”

Incumbent Idaho Gov. Brad Little has raised more campaign money so far in 2026 than any other statewide candidate for office, campaign finance reports indicate. 

With just over a week remaining until the May 19 primary elections, Little reported raising $1.8 million for his re-election campaign in 2026, according to Idaho Sunshine, the online campaign finance database maintained by the Idaho Secretary of State’s Office. 

Among candidates running for governor in 2026, Little has raised more campaign money than all of the other challengers combined. 

Retired Idaho Supreme Court Justice John Stegner, who is running for governor as an independent candidate, reported raising $264,252 in 2026 – the most of any of the candidates challenging Little, regardless of party affiliation.

Bar owner and businessman Mark Fitzpatrick, who is running for governor as a Republican, reported raising $184,752 so far this year – about one-tenth of what Little has raised. 

Attorney Terri Pickens, who is running for governor as a Democrat, reported raising $112,759 so far in 2026.

Overall, there are seven Republicans challenging Little in the May 19 GOP primary election. There are also four Democrats, two Libertarians, two independents and one Constitution Party candidate running for governor. For more on where the gubernatorial candidates stand on the issues, check out the Idaho Capital Sun’s 2026 primary election voter guide. 

What other Idaho statewide candidates raised a lot of campaign money in 2026?

Five other incumbent Republican officials joined Little on the list of top 10 statewide candidates for office who have raised the most money in 2026.

Attorney General Raúl Labrador, who is running for re-election as attorney general, reported raising $552,742 so far in 2026. That’s the second-most money raised by any statewide candidate for office in 2026, trailing only Little.

Secretary of State Phil McGrane reported raising $356,371 so far this year. Lt. Gov. Scott Bedke reported raising $274,596. State Controller Brandon Woolf reported raising $181,003 and Superintendent of Public Instruction Debbie Critchfield reported raising $136,521.

Labrador, McGrane, Bedke, Woolf and Bedke are all running for re-election, but none of them have primary election opponents. 

Democratic candidate for attorney general Lori Hickman also cracked the top 10 list of state candidates, bringing in $62,153, campaign finance records show. 

This year, all statewide Idaho constitutional offices, such as governor, lieutenant governor, secretary of state, attorney general and superintendent of public instruction, are up for election this year – as are all 105 seats in the Idaho Legislature. 

However, not all candidates and offices feature a contested primary election. 

Winners of the May 19 party primary elections – and independent candidates – will advance to the Nov. 3 general election. 

Top 10 Idaho statewide candidates who have raised the most campaign money in 2026

1. Gov. Brad Little, Republican, $1,842,516
2. Attorney General Raúl Labrador, Republican, $552,742
3. Secretary of State Phil McGrane, Republican, $356,371
4. Lt. Gov. Scott Bedke, Republican, $274,596
5. Independent candidate for governor John Stegner, $264,252
6. Republican candidate for governor Mark Fitzpatrick, $184,752
7. State Controller Brandon Woolf, Republican, $181,003
8. Superintendent of Public Instruction Debbie Critchfield, $136,521
9. Democratic candidate for governor Terri Pickens, $112,759
10. Democratic candidate for attorney general Lori Hickman, $62,153

Two years ago, Rep. Ben Fuhriman won the closest Republican legislative primary in Idaho.

After a recount, he had won by just four votes over Julianne Young, who was then in her third two-year term in the state House of Representatives.

Now those two candidates are both vying for the seat in eastern Idaho’s Legislative District 30, House Seat B in the Republican primary election on May 19.

Fuhriman, 42, is a certified financial planner from Shelley who said he was born and raised in Idaho. This year, he helped push for the Legislature to restore funding to a cut Medicaid mental health program patient deaths.

“I approach public service the same way I approach my work and my family life: be accessible, be honest, and focus on solving real problems,” he told the Idaho Capital Sun for its 2026 primary election voter guide. 

Young, a mother of 10 from Blackfoot, moved to Idaho when she was 7 years old. When she served in the Legislature, she often pushed for culture war legislation, like her successful 2024 bill to ban Idaho Medicaid from covering gender-affirming care for adults. 

“I am not a career politician — I am a mother, a teacher, a friend, and a neighbor who chooses to serve. I lead with respect, and I consistently deliver results that reflect the values I campaign on,” Young told the Sun for its voter guide. 

Young declined to share her age, saying instead she was aged “Just right.” 

What would they do in the Legislature? 

If re-elected, Fuhriman said he would “continue advancing practical, results-driven legislation that directly impacts families in my district.”

That would include focusing on water issues, funding special education students, and working to protect mental health programs from potential future budget cuts. And, he said, he’s working on legislation “to reduce property tax pressure by improving how we fund schools, infrastructure, and our emergency services at the state level so local taxpayers are not forced to carry the burden.”

Young said she couldn’t name her exact bills just yet — but she rattled off a list of policy areas she wants to focus on.

“I will pursue protections for children and families — online safety, age-appropriate content standards, parental rights, and education reform that prioritizes the academic growth of students over bureaucracy,” she said. “I will prioritize property rights, including water rights–working for greater equity and justice in the way water rights are administered and decisions made.”

The candidates, the ballot measures, and the tools you need to cast your vote.

Asked about the Legislature’s handling of the state’s budget this year, during a session marked by spending cuts, Fuhriman said he didn’t back the use of generalized, across-the-board cuts.

“Treating every agency and program the same fails to prioritize core responsibilities and can create unintended consequences,” he said. He said lawmakers should have “considered using budget stabilization funds to help manage short-term revenue challenges.”

Young acknowledged that the Legislature “made tough choices this year,” and she said she supports balancing the budget.

But, she criticized the focus.

“Ideally, reductions should have come from programs serving those most able to absorb them,” Young said, pointing to Medicaid expansion, a voter-approved policy that expanded the health care assistance program’s coverage to more low-income people.

“Going forward, I am committed to pursuing savings where they are most available and making disciplined decisions that prioritize the most vulnerable,” Young said.

Young said she’d support expanding private school tax credit. Fuhriman wouldn’t, for now. 

Asked about public taxpayer dollars for private or religious schools — which the Legislature approved in 2025 by creating a $50 million private education tax credit program — Young said she believes the tax credit “should be expanded over time.”

“I believe that choice in a marketplace of ideas benefits families, strengthens educators, and raises the quality of education overall — just as competition has improved outcomes in virtually every other sector of the economy,” Young said. “Families know their children best, and empowering them to make educational decisions that fit their children’s needs is good policy.”

Fuhriman said he wouldn’t support “expanding the tax credit until we have a clear understanding of its outcomes and have addressed funding gaps in our public education system.”

“I did not support the parental choice tax credit bill when it was first passed because it lacked sufficient accountability, and at the time we were not adequately funding our public schools—especially high-needs special education. That remains true today,” he added. “I believe we should prioritize meeting those core and constitutional obligations first.”

Asked about legislative proposals this year to require local law enforcement to partner with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, or ICE, Furhiman said local law enforcement, including his local sheriffs, “already work with ICE.”

“I do not believe in one-size-fits-all mandates from the state,” he said. “Requiring every law enforcement agency to enter into a 287(g) agreement may not be practical or appropriate for every community.”

Young’s position was not immediately clear. She stressed the importance of enforcing the border, and that state and local government should support the federal government.

But, she added that, “I also understand the importance of local autonomy and am supportive of an accountable opt-out. I’m also strongly supportive of good immigration policy that provides opportunities for those supportive of American values and interested in making our country a better place to come legally.”

The United States Bureau of Land Management on Monday formally cancelled the so-called “Public Land Rule,” which required the agency to consider conservation and development equally in land-use decisions for millions of acres across the West. 

The BLM, which manages 13.5 million acres of land in New Mexico, published a notice Monday in the Federal Register finalizing its elimination of the 2024 rule, officially known as the Conservation and Landscape Health Rule. The agency first announced it was considering eliminating the rule in September.

The Biden-era rule provided guidance for ensuring conservation received due consideration along with mining, timber, grazing, recreation or other uses on public lands. It also allowed the BLM to issue leases specifically for conservation, though the agency never issued any.

The BLM’s notice Monday said officials had received and responded to nearly 140,000 public comments in response to the proposal. Ultimately, officials said eliminating the 2024 rule was necessary because it “threatened to restrict productive use of the public lands and introduced uncertainty and unnecessary burdens in planning and permitting.” The rule’s elimination comes alongside executive orders and other actions by the Trump administration to expand drilling, mineral production and other commercial uses of public lands.

Michael Carroll, a campaign director for environmentalist group The Wilderness Society, told Source NM on Monday that the rule’s rescission, which officially goes into effect in 30 days, will leave millions of acres across the West newly vulnerable to oil and gas extraction and mining. 

“They’re effectively saying, ‘We’re just going to prioritize extraction across BLM lands,’ Carroll said. “They’re going to be prioritizing industrial-scale development on those public lands. I think we’ll see that right away.”

He also noted that the BLM determined it did not need to consult with Indigenous tribes in its decision to rescind the rule, which he called “shocking in terms of its disrespect to tribal nations,” many of which sit adjacent to federal lands. 

The Wilderness Society was among many environmental groups that denounced the end of the “Public Lands Rule” on Wednesday. Several public statements from the groups mentioned the pending U.S. Senate confirmation of Steve Pearce, a former New Mexico Republican congressman, as BLM director. 

If the Senate confirms him, Pearce, who has deep ties to the oil and gas industry, will oversee an agency that is no longer required to consider conservation as an acceptable use of public land, Carroll said. 

“Today is a bad day for those people who care about public lands and care about the Bureau of Land Management,” he said. “But we’ll keep fighting and keep pushing back.”

This story was originally produced by Source New Mexico, which is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network which includes Idaho Capital Sun, and is supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity.

As President Donald Trump tries to assert power over U.S. elections, he has raged on social media, cajoled Republican lawmakers and unleashed the Department of Justice on his political enemies.

What has he accomplished with all that effort? Not a lot.

Six months before the November midterm elections, the Trump administration’s quest to exercise authority over the contests and impose sweeping restrictions on voters has proved largely unsuccessful. The aggressive campaign — separate from Trump’s more effective foray into redistricting fights — has been stymied by the courts, rebuffed by many state election officials and opposed by key Republican senators.

“I think there’s many out there who are worried about the constant drumbeat of what the administration is trying to do and what they might do in the future. I hear this from voters, I hear this from election officials,” said David Becker, executive director of the nonpartisan Center for Election Innovation & Research.

“And what I see is that there is a vast chasm between wanting to do something and trying to do something and actually successfully doing it.”

Much could change between now and November, of course. 

Facing likely Republican losses in the midterms, election experts warn that Trump could lash out with increasingly brazen attempts to control elections. Or that the Justice Department will conduct more raids targeting election officials, like the FBI seizure of ballots from the 2020 presidential election from Fulton County, Georgia.

Democrats remain braced for federal election interference, especially the prospect of Trump deploying immigration enforcement agents or the military at polling locations — an action prohibited under federal law that some administration aides have nevertheless refused to flatly rule out.

But Trump’s record of achievement up to this point is poor.

The SAVE America Act, which would require voters to prove their citizenship, is stalled in the U.S. Senate despite Trump’s repeated demands for its passage. Federal courts blocked an executive order Trump signed last year that sought to impose a proof-of-citizenship rule unilaterally.

The Justice Department hasn’t secured a single court victory in the 30 lawsuits it’s filed to force states and the District of Columbia to turn over sensitive personal data on voters. A bipartisan group of state secretaries of state is fighting the Trump administration in court — only 13 Republican states have provided the information.

And an executive order signed in March that would limit voting by mail faces five federal lawsuits, with an initial courtroom showdown set for Thursday in Washington, D.C. Federal agencies have yet to finalize plans to implement the directive, which election law experts call illegal and unconstitutional.

“America’s Elections are Rigged, Stolen, and a Laughingstock all over the World. We are either going to fix them, or we won’t have a Country any longer,” Trump posted on Truth Social in late April.

White House spokesperson Abigail Jackson told States Newsroom that Trump is committed “to ensuring that Americans have full confidence in the administration of elections, and that includes totally accurate and up-to-date voter rolls free of errors and unlawfully registered non-citizen voters.” 

Jackson named several federal laws that she said provide the Justice Department oversight over states’ election administration. She also noted Trump’s support for the SAVE America Act.

“Anyone breaking the law will be held accountable,” Jackson said in an email.

Trump has placed the nation’s electoral system under immense stress before. 

After the 2020 election, the president and his allies worked to overturn the results, with Trump leaning on then-Vice President Mike Pence to reject Electoral College votes. The effort failed but it led to a mob storming the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, and disrupting Congress’ certification of Joe Biden’s victory.

Today, the system is holding but under strain. An analysis released Thursday by Issue One, a pro-democracy group, likened American elections to a resilient patient with a strong immune system. Yet the Trump administration, rather than boosting the body’s immunity, acts like a virus, it said.

“America’s election system’s immune system is not breaking, but it is actively fighting against the virus of democratic backsliding,” the analysis reads.

The group identified three safeguards it says are in critical condition: Congress, internal checks within the executive branch and the information ecosystem. 

Election officials have watched with particular concern as the Justice Department probes the 2020 election. Trump has long falsely asserted that the election was stolen and in January 2021 pressured the Georgia secretary of state to find him enough votes to overturn his loss in that state.

After the FBI obtained a warrant to seize 2020 election ballots from Fulton County, which encompasses Atlanta, in January 2026, the DOJ last month sent a subpoena for information on the county’s election workers. The subpoena demands the names, positions, addresses, phone numbers and email addresses of election workers and poll volunteers who worked the 2020 general election.

Fulton County is fighting the subpoena in court. On Wednesday, a federal judge ruled that the FBI doesn’t have to give the ballots back to the county, though he noted the seizure “was certainly not perfect.”

The Justice Department has also obtained a grand jury subpoena for election records in Arizona and demanded 2024 ballots from Wayne County, Michigan, which includes Detroit. And the FBI recently interviewed a Wisconsin election official about the 2020 election, the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel reported.

Local leaders have promised that they won’t bend to pressure from the Trump administration.

“This whole thing is designed to harass, intimidate and chill participation in our election process,” Fulton County Board of Commissioners Chair Robb Pitts, a Democrat, said in a video statement. “It’s not going to work, it’s not going to happen.”

Some states are pursuing additional safeguards against federal election interference. 

For example, New Mexico lawmakers passed a bill that makes intentionally obstructing polling places a felony and prohibits the military or any armed federal personnel from polling locations.

The legislative push, concentrated in Democratic states, comes as Trump administration officials have sidestepped direct questions about whether troops or federal agents could be deployed to the polls.

“It’s yet another gotcha hypothetical,” Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said at a recent U.S. Senate hearing.

The Connecticut General Assembly passed legislation May 6 that imposes a 250-foot buffer zone around election sites where warrantless arrests and searches, use of force and ID checks by state or federal officers, including immigration agents, are banned. The measure also bans masked or concealed identities near polling places, among other provisions.

Connecticut state Rep. Matt Blumenthal, a Democrat who chairs the state House Government Administration & Elections Committee, said that if nothing happens during this fall’s elections, “I’ll say, ‘Good, it worked.’” 

The goal of the bill isn’t to create confrontations between Connecticut law enforcement and federal forces, but to deter intimidation in the first place, he said.

“We have a responsibility to protect all of our residents, but especially our voters, related to our elections — to prevent these sorts of tools of threat and intimidation and terror from being used to shape our political life,” Blumenthal said in an interview.

Connecticut state Sen. Rob Sampson, a Republican, said that he wouldn’t support abuse from the federal government. But Democrats, he said, were spinning a false narrative of voter intimidation for political purposes and attempting to distract from weaknesses in election security.

“In the last few years, I don’t always trust the results,” Sampson said on the Senate floor. “Now, some people will go out there and say, ‘Oh, you’re an election denier.’ I’m not saying that there’s tens of thousands of faulty or erroneous or fraudulent votes. I’m just saying that there’s definitely some.”

Trump and Republicans in Congress say major action is needed to boost election confidence. 

At Trump’s urging, the U.S. House passed the SAVE America Act in February. In addition to requiring voters to show documents such as a passport or birth certificate that prove citizenship, the legislation also imposes ID requirements at the polls and would require states to bolster efforts to clean voter registration lists.

Polling suggests Americans support at least some of the bill’s provisions. A Politico poll conducted in April found 52% of Americans support requiring documentary proof of citizenship to register to vote, while 18% oppose. 

Democrats, election administration experts and some Republicans say the proposal would lead to chaos. Its provisions would take effect immediately, upending voting requirements potentially months or weeks before elections. Married women and others who have last names that don’t match their birth certificates could face additional obstacles registering to vote.

The SAVE America Act hasn’t advanced in the U.S. Senate. Sen. John Kennedy, a Louisiana Republican and major proponent of the bill, attempted to add the measure onto a budget bill in April, but the Senate rejected it, 48-50.

“This doesn’t mean Trump and his allies in Congress will stop,” Héctor Sánchez Barba, president and CEO of Mi Familia Vota, a Latino voting rights group, said in a statement.

The Senate has since moved off the SAVE America Act and would need to hold a procedural vote to return to it. Whether that happens is in doubt, but Kennedy indicated to Punchbowl News that he intends to force another amendment vote later this month. His office didn’t respond to an email from States Newsroom seeking confirmation.

Without the SAVE America Act, Trump’s options to legally restrict voting are limited. 

Trump signed an executive order in March attempting to limit the U.S. Postal Service’s delivery of ballots through the mail. The order also directs the Department of Homeland Security to create “state citizenship lists” that include the names of voting-age citizens in each state — effectively creating a national voter list.

But the order has come under legal attack from Democratic groups, a coalition of Democratic states and multiple voting rights organizations. Its opponents are hopeful that federal judges will soon block the directive like they did a March 2025 order that included a proof-of-citizenship requirement.

“I don’t have confidence that the Trump administration or Donald Trump will refrain from trying to interfere with our elections,” Blumenthal said. “But I have great confidence that the American people will stand up against it.”

An incumbent Democratic state legislator running for re-election in a swing district in Boise has raised the most money of any legislative candidate in 2026, Idaho campaign finance reports show.

As of Thursday afternoon, Rep. Steve Berch, D-Boise, has raised $168,287 during the 2026 election year, according to Sunshine, the online campaign finance database run by the Idaho Secretary of State’s Office.

Berch has raised more than $68,000 more than the legislative candidate who has raised the next-highest amount of money in campaign finance contributions in 2026, Rep. John Shirts, R-Weiser.

In an interview Thursday, Berch attributed his success to engaging directly with constituents and campaigning face-to-face.

“When you’ve knocked on 42,000 doors, when you send out very detailed newsletters that explain the reasons why you vote on bills, when you hold three in-person town hall meetings every year, people appreciate that,” Berch said. “And I’m very honored and I’m very humbled by it, and it just kind of motivates me to continue doing that and really being the role of a public servant.”

Idaho Democrats hope to hold seat, and perhaps gain a seat in swing District 15

Berch, who is in his fourth term in the Idaho Legislature, is the only Democrat on the top 10 list of Idaho legislative candidates who have raised the most campaign money in 2026. The other nine are all Republicans.

Berch is running unopposed in this month’s Democratic primary election, so the money will be directed toward the general election fight in west Boise’s ultra competitive swing district, Legislative District 15 in November.

The candidates, the ballot measures, and the tools you need to cast your vote.

For the past two years, Berch has been the only Democrat representing District 15 – the other two legislators are Republicans. Two years ago, Republicans added to their supermajority in the Idaho Legislature by defeating a Democratic incumbent and gaining a seat in District 15.

Berch and the Democrats will look to hold the line in District 15 this year and potentially look to gain a seat there after incumbent Sen. Codi Galloway, R-Boise, withdrew her re-election bid. Meanwhile, Republicans will look to defeat Berch, completely take the district over and increase their supermajority in the Idaho Legislature again.

However, all of that will have to wait for November.  

Berch and Republican challenger Steve Keyser of Boise will oppose each other in November’s general election. 

State campaign finance reports show that Keyser has raised $6,558 in campaign contributions this year. 

What other Idaho legislative candidates have raised a lot of campaign money?

All nine of the remaining top 10 legislative candidates who have raised the most campaign money in 2026 are Republicans – including seven incumbents and two challengers. 

Two of those candidates, incumbent Sen. Jim Woodward, R-Sagle, and former Sen. Scott Herndon, also R-Sagle, are squaring off against each other in this month’s Republican primary election for the Idaho Senate in Legislative District 1. 

Woodward reported raising $96,100 so far in 2026, while Herndon has reported raising $85,135 as of Thursday. 

This is the fourth time that Woodward and Herndon have run against each other for a seat in the Idaho Legislature. Woodward defeated Herndon in the 2018 and 2024 GOP primaries, while Herndon was victorious in the 2022 primary election. 

Sen. Jim Guthrie, R-McCammon, appears at the No. 4 spot on the list of top 10 legislative candidates, having reported raising $85,245 in 2026.

The two highest ranking Republican legislators – Senate President Pro Tem Kelly Anthon, R-Rupert, $75,022; and House Speaker Mike Moyle, R-Star, $68,999 – also appear on the top 10 list, although neither has a primary election opponent. 

Republican Idaho Senate challenger Brent D. Reinke of Twin Falls appears on the list at No. 8, having raised $72,745. Reinke is challenging incumbent Sen. Glenneda Zuiderveld, R-Twin Falls, in this month’s Republican primary election for the Idaho Senate in District 24. 

Zuiderveld reported raising $56,732 in 2026 – just outside the top 10 at No. 17.

While he did not make the list of legislators who raised the most money for their campaigns, Rep. Jordan Redman, R- Post Falls, made one of the largest individual contributions in 2026. On April 28, Redman gave $250,000 to the 36-18-1 Inc. Political Action Committee, which Idaho Education News reported first. 

Redman’s $250,000 contribution is the largest contribution any state legislator or candidate has made to a PAC in 2026, state campaign finance records show. 

Campaign finance reports indicate that Redman’s father, former state Rep. Eric Redman, signed the timed contribution report on behalf of the 36-18-1 Inc. PAC. 

Idaho legislative candidates who have raised the most campaign money in 2026

1. Rep. Steve Berch, D-Boise: $168,287
2. Rep. John Shirts, R-Weiser: $100,255
3. Sen. Jim Woodward, R-Sagle: $96,100
4. Sen. Jim Guthrie, R-McCammon: $85,245
5. Former Sen. Scott Herndon, R-Sagle: $85,135
6. Senate President Pro Tem Kelly Anthon, R-Rupert: $75,022
7. Rep. Lori McCann, R-Lewiston, who is running for a seat in the Idaho Senate in District 6: $74,557
8. Idaho Senate candidate Brent D. Reinke, R-Twin Falls: $72,745
9. Sen. Scott Grow, R-Eagle: $69,100
10. House Speaker Mike Moyle, R-Star: $68,999

YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE.

Three Democrats are running in the May primary election for a chance to win the seat currently held by Republican U.S. Sen. Jim Risch. 

Nickolas “007” Bonds, Brad Moore, and David Roth are competing to represent Idaho in the U.S. Senate for a six-year term. The winner will face the winner of the Republican primary contest, as well as Libertarian Matt Loesby, and independent candidates Todd Achilles and Natalie Fleming in the November general election. 

The candidates, the ballot measures, and the tools you need to cast your vote.

Roth, 44, is an Idaho Falls resident and a consultant on search engine optimization, according to his LinkedIn account. He previously ran for the state Legislature in 2020, and for federal elected positions in 2022 and 2024, according to the Idaho Secretary of State election database. 

Moore, 69, is “semi-retired” and an Army veteran from Boise, according to his Bluesky account. 

Bonds, 33, lives in Post Falls and told the Idaho Capital Sun for the 2026 Primary Election Voter Guide that he worked in “analysts administration.” He wrote on his LinkedIn account that he’s an estate executive and a seasonal “education professional” at the Coeur d’Alene School District. 

Neither Moore nor Bonds have run for office before. 

Bonds said his top priorities if elected would be healthcare, accountability and civil rights. Moore said he’d focus on “Stopping (President Donald) Trump’s War in Iran, Removing Trump’s tariffs, and lowering the cost of groceries.” 

Roth said he’d prioritized implementing universal healthcare, addressing affordability issues with an emphasis on housing and healthcare, and restoring “the checks and balances of government while working to end congressional corruption.” 

Candidates say they would work toward bipartisan agreements 

To work toward solutions to avoid federal government shutdowns and make progress on stalled issues such as the farm bill — an agriculture and food assistance package that hasn’t been updated since 2018 — all the candidates said they would be willing to work across the aisle. 

However, Roth expressed some skepticism. 

“The reality is that it is very difficult to foster a bipartisan agreement when there is no guarantee that the other party will continue to move forward in good faith,” Roth said. “I believe that any legislation should first look at how it is going to affect Americans. We should start with agreement for what the goal is and then we can negotiate about how to get there.” 

Moore said, in relation to the farm bill, he’d negotiate with Rust Belt senators to pass a new bill by restoring trade agreements with China, Canada and Mexico.

Bonds said he’d focus on keeping negotiations transparent, “centered on economic impact, and tied to real deadlines that prevent last-minute brinkmanship. 

“Bipartisanship isn’t about compromising values—it’s about delivering results,” he said. 

Candidates offer different healthcare affordability solutions 

Roth listed Medicare for All, or a proposal for universal health care administered by the federal government, as one of his top priorities. 

“As a country we have been kicking the can down the road to solve our healthcare funding problem since President Truman first suggested a national insurance for health care,” Roth said.

He argued that doctors currently lack independence because decisions are driven by “what is allowed by the insurance company,” and that Americans are currently putting off healthcare because they can’t afford it. 

“Every year Americans are spending a larger portion of their income on healthcare,” he said. “We must follow suit of every other wealthy country in the world and move to Medicare for All.” 

Moore said that Democrats would need to win enough seats to control both chambers in the general election in order to reverse Medicaid reductions approved in July in the “Big Beautiful” law. 

“It is a ‘life or death’ situation for many of them,” he said of Idahoans who may face reductions of Medicaid coverage.

He also said he’d want to restore the healthcare premium tax credits, which were used to lower premiums on health insurance purchased through the state marketplace and expired at the end of the year when Congress chose not to extend them. 

Bonds said he supported lowering premium costs and regulations to prevent sudden cost spikes, keeping insurance companies and providers accountable for outcomes, and prioritizing rural healthcare. 

He also said that a “complete overhaul is not out of the picture and single payer systems must be considered.” 

Candidates want legal immigration reform, some don’t see ICE as effective

Moore criticized reports of deaths of migrants in custody of Immigration and Customs Enforcement, or ICE, which in April hit a record high, NPR reported. 

“So, the best way to reform our immigration system at this point is to abolish ICE,” he said. “No one wants it, we don’t need it. Any ICE agents that could pass the standards to become a Border Patrol officer could go to work for Border Patrol instead.” 

Roth also said the current immigration enforcement actions were not “actually solving any problems.” 

“Prior to 9/11 ICE was not a thing,” he said. “It has drifted from its original mandate and is honestly not effective. We should end ICE and move back to the way that we enforced immigration before.”

Roth said he would support creating a pathway to citizenship for the people who came to the U.S. as children, included in the Obama-era Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, and for other workers. He said visa programs for year-round work should be created. Currently, industries like the dairy producing have a large migrant workforce, but cannot use the temporary visa program for seasonal labor used by others in the agriculture industry. 

Bonds said he supported improved border security as well as enforcing the law “while maintaining a system that is orderly, humane and predictable.”  

He also said legal immigration needed changes to reduce backlogs and a “create a reliable workforce pipeline for industries Idaho depends on, including agriculture and small business.” 

Roth leads candidates in fundraising 

Roth’s campaign has collected around $7,500 since the beginning of 2025, according to Federal Election Commission data. 

During Roth’s 2022 campaign for U.S. Senate against incumbent Sen. Mike Crapo, he garnered nearly $100,000 — this total included money raised for both the primary and general election that year. 

This election cycle, he leads his opponents. Bonds has not met the FEC threshold of $5,000 to require itemized reporting. On May 8, he reported to the commission his donations totaled $593.73. 

Moore could not be found in the FEC database. 

This story was first published on May 6, 2026 in WyoFile. 

With low-elevation trails free of snow and temperatures in the mid-50s, tourists prepared to take advantage of Grand Teton National Park when the Teton Park Road gate lifted Friday.

By the afternoon, motorists were erratically pulling off the road to park on the shoulder with parking lots already full. Out-of-state plates dominated the Jenny Lake parking area, where families descended to the lakeshore to pose for photos. The Jackson Hole News&Guide spoke with a dozen groups about their experience at park entrance stations. Four had purchased passes online, four bought passes at another park and four paid at Grand Teton’s gate.

“It was a two-minute ordeal,” said Benjamin Smith, who bought his pass at Badlands National Park while moving to Victor, Idaho. “It wasn’t a big deal.”

But that hasn’t been the case for all visitors, particularly foreign travelers and tour groups, after the Trump administration instituted new fees this year for international visitors. The change was part of a “modernization” effort that created new digital park passes that can be purchased at Recreation.gov.

The National Park Service first unveiled in November a new $100 per-person surcharge for foreign visitors, aged 16 and up, at the nation’s 11 most-visited parks, including Grand Teton and Yellowstone. Entrance to both parks for a week costs $35. For a car with four foreign visitors, the same package could now cost $435.

However, that group could also buy an annual “America the Beautiful” pass, which is good for visiting all national parks and other federal recreational areas for one year. Previously, that pass cost $80 for everyone, including visitors who are not U.S. citizens. Now, it costs $250 for foreign visitors, more than a three-fold increase, but less than the per-person surcharge, in some cases.

“That was really sticker shock,” said Lisa Simon, CEO and executive director of the International Inbound Travel Association. “It was a huge jump in price.”

The international surcharge also applies to Acadia, Bryce Canyon, Everglades, Glacier, Grand Canyon, Rocky Mountain, Sequoia and Kings Canyon, Yosemite and Zion.

Grand Teton sold 253  “America the Beautiful” passes to foreign visitors from January 1 through May 4, generating over $60,000 in revenue, according to park figures provided to the News&Guide. The park also sold 102  per-person passes to foreign visitors, bringing in over $10,000.

Michael Galkien and Maria Pavlova, a Russian couple visiting Grand Teton, purchased their pass online. They were worried when they heard the news about the $100 surcharge, but were sanguine about the $250 annual pass.

“The national parks are our goals,” Pavlova said. “We don’t like cities, we enjoy parks. They’re amazing, wonderful places, so it’s unavoidable.”

National park vacations still make financial sense to the couple and their friends as long as they visit multiple parks in one trip, said Galkien, who was more focused on the park’s four-legged residents than the surcharge.

“Where are the bears?” he asked.

Yellowstone and Grand Teton superintendents support the foreign visitor fee increases, they said Monday while attending the Cody Country Chamber of Commerce’s 74th Annual National Parks Day Luncheon.

Yellowstone’s Cam Sholly and Grand Teton’s Chip Jenkins met with Cody-area community members and business leaders at the lunch, recapping 2025 and providing park updates.

“This is something that should have happened a long time ago, so I really support the decision,” Sholly told the Cody Enterprise, adding that he expects the impact of the revenue collected from higher fees to be “substantial” for Yellowstone’s infrastructure. Twenty percent of the park’s visitors are foreign, Sholly said, and the park retains 80% of entrance fees, which it uses for infrastructure projects, staffing and other expenses.

“We’re going to need this year, maybe another couple of years to see where that levels off, but I do think it’s going to be a significant help to us,” Sholly said.

Jenkins said Grand Teton uses visitor fees similarly, although that park only receives 10% foreign visitation on average. Of the $9 million historically generated by park fees, the park retains “about $6 million,” Jenkins said.

“I think you should actually view it in the context of all entrance fees, not just foreign visitor fees,” he added. “[Fees] play a really important role for us in terms of being able to address the maintenance backlog as well as help with operational expenses.”

The majority of park funding, Jenkins noted, comes “from Congress in terms of appropriated dollars,” but is augmented by entrance fees.

Both Sholly and Jenkins confirmed the 11 national parks affected by the policy change operate under a standardized system.

“We work under direction from Washington,” Sholly said. “All of the parks that are collecting the international fee will follow the same rules.”

Those parks, Jenkins added, have been in communication during the rollout and  share information with each other.

“Because there are parks like Grand Canyon that get much heavier visitation in the winter, much heavier visitation from foreign nationals, the range of questions, the range of situations, they’re experiencing it first,” he said. “We get to use that in our training for our entrance gate rangers.”

Rangers, Jenkins said, have been instructed to ask one of two questions: “Is everybody in the car a U.S. citizen?” or “Is there anybody in the vehicle that is a foreign national?”

Both superintendents reported that the fee rollout in their parks was going well with Sholly saying, “So far, so good,” and Jenkins adding the caveat that, “It’s the time of year where our visitation is pretty low.”

However, those low visitor numbers, Jenkins said, have enabled Grand Teton to actively “work out the bugs” reported by southern parks that have seen greater traffic through the winter months.

The first indication of change came in President Donald Trump’s executive order “Making America Beautiful Again by Improving Our National Parks.”

The July order directed Interior Secretary Doug Burgum to develop “a strategy to increase revenue and improve the recreational experience at national parks by appropriately increasing entrance fees and recreation pass fees for nonresidents in areas of the National Park System that charge entrance fees.”

Simon, the International Inbound Travel Association director, represents tour operators who work with international tours, travel agents and other types of travel buyers to bring customers to the United States. Her association didn’t quibble with Trump’s July order because they didn’t know whether the fee hike would be substantial.

“We could have been fighting from the day we got the executive order,” Simon said. “But if it had been $5, that would have been silly.”

The sticker shock came in November when the National Park Service announced detailed pricing. Parks had five weeks to implement the changes with the policy going into effect on Jan. 1.

“The industry, including our organization specifically, has had a great relationship with the National Park Service for decades,” Simon said. “They have typically given us 18 months notice, so that tour operators can actually build fee increases into their prices.”

Park staff have also been confused, she said. Tour operators were told that rangers likely wouldn’t board buses at entrances to check IDs.

“But that has happened,” Simon told WyoFile. “They’ve also pulled buses over and made all of the customers get off. People go buy their passes and then get back on the bus.”

In February, the National Parks Conservation Association called for pausing the increased fees, citing what the group saw as problems implementing the new rules.

The Bozeman-based Property and Environment Research Center has long championed a foreign visitor’s fee. A 2023 white paper authored by Tate Watkins, director of publications and a research fellow for the center, argued: “If each international visitor to a U.S. national park paid a $25 surcharge, it could raise an estimated $330 million, nearly doubling total recreation fee revenue for the park system.”

Since the mid-2010s, Watkins noted, park visitation numbers have swelled above 300 million visitors annually — nearly the size of the entire U.S. population.

In a separate 2025 paper, “The Economics of Awe,” co-authored by three of the center’s research fellows — Watkins, Sara Sutherland, and University of Wyoming economist Stephen Newbold — found visitation to Yellowstone was “highly inelastic” in relation to entrance fees. That means consumer behavior and, consequently, visitation are unlikely to change because of a price hike for international travelers.

Of the 15% of Yellowstone visitors traveling from overseas, just 0.03% would reconsider or change travel plans, according to the researchers.

“A surcharge of $100 on international visitors would be estimated to generate $55.2 million in new revenue, enough to cover the entire park’s annual routine maintenance costs ($43 million), demolish the abandoned wastewater system at Old Faithful ($6 million), and make site improvements at Midway Geyser Basin ($5 million),” the authors wrote.

Many tour group passengers had already paid admission for parks before the new fees rolled out. Responsibility for the fees fell on tour operators.

In European countries and Brazil, stiff consumer protection laws prohibit tacking on additional fees after purchase without allowing for cancellations, Simon said. Tour operators don’t want to risk their reputations or trigger cancellations, she said.

“They’re going to eat the charges,” Simon said.

Tour operators in national parks already pay a commercial entrance fee for vehicles based on their size. The average cost is $300 for a full-size motor coach, she said, noting she wasn’t sure of the exact rates for Yellowstone and Grand Teton. The new surcharge comes on top of the commercial vehicle fee.

Tour operators can’t purchase the annual America the Beautiful passes for their customers as the current system does not allow bulk, advance purchases. That’s causing problems for operators, though Simon said the Park Service is working on a solution ahead of Memorial Day. For locations that charge per-person rates, the service has said up to four people in a traveling party can be covered by the annual pass. But what defines a “traveling party” keeps changing, Simon said.

“First of all, they keep changing the rules in a very short period of implementation and secondly, a group tour, by nature and definition, is the traveling party,” she said.

Of four parties interviewed by the News&Guide that purchased passes in Grand Teton, two reported having to show ID to enter the park.

Jack Cody, a Vermonter visiting with his two sons, was a member of one of those parties. An employee manning the gate asked the family if they were all residents of the United States.

Cody was more upset by the updated artwork on the pass. Along with the non-resident fees and digital passes, the “modernization effort” also added President Donald Trump’s visage to park passes.

“It’s a travesty that Trump’s face is on it,” Cody said.

In North Idaho’s Legislative District 1, two Republicans are set to face each other for the fourth time in the primary election for a state Senate seat.

Sen. Jim Woodward is seeking reelection and is facing Scott Herndon. Both are Republicans from Sagle, a small town near Sandpoint in Idaho’s northernmost legislative district, which borders Canada. 

In 2018 and 2024, Woodward won primaries against Herndon, who secured the seat after winning in 2022.

Their 2024 rematch was the most expensive primary in Idaho, with more than $272,000 in spending by the candidates, Idaho Education News reported. 

This year, their campaign fundraising is still high. Woodward has raised the third most of all legislative candidates this year, with about $96,000, followed closely by Herndon, who came in fifth with around $85,000 raised. That’s according to Idaho’s campaign finance database, called Sunshine.

Who are the candidates?

Herndon, 58, is a custom homebuilder who has lived in Idaho for 22 years. He describes himself as a “constitutional conservative.” He said he has a “proven record of standing up for North Idaho families.”

If elected to the Legislature, he said reducing property taxes would be his top priority.

“Homeowners in District 1 are being taxed out of their homes and I will keep pushing until we deliver real relief,” he told the Idaho Capital Sun for its 2026 primary election voter guide.

He said he’d also bring bills to protect concealed carry rights on all public lands, to establish a teacher spending account for classroom spending, and push for a constitutional amendment for “education freedom,” similar to a proposal from 2025. 

“These aren’t campaign promises. These are bills I’ve already introduced and fought for. I’m running to finish the job,” Herndon said. 

Woodward, 56, is a contractor who has lived in Idaho for 48 years. He describes himself as a “a lifelong Idahoan trying to provide predictable and stable state government that focuses on providing services such as public safety, education, and transportation.”

Asked what bills he would bring next legislative session, he said he’s not sure the state needs more laws.

“I will continue to focus on the budget process and matching state expenditures to state economic activity and population,” Woodward told the Sun for its voter guide.

The candidates, the ballot measures, and the tools you need to cast your vote.

On the budget, both took issues with the Legislature’s approach

Woodward serves as vice chair for the Legislature’s powerful budget committee. In a year defined by spending cuts, Woodward said he disagreed with many of the Legislature’s budget decisions, including the process of combining several different agency budgets into “omnibus style ‘maintenance’” budget bills. 

“We should run our budget process as we did for many previous decades, delving into each budget individually to consider both recurring expenses and additional expenses, if any,” Woodward said. 

Herndon also served on the Legislature’s budget committee during his term that ended in 2024. He took issue with the Legislature’s approach of across-the-board budget cuts this year, calling instead for targeted cuts to “big drivers of spending growth,” like Medicaid.

“When you cut everything equally, you protect bloated programs and punish lean ones. That’s avoiding hard decisions, not making them,” Herndon said.

On immigration and school choice, the candidates differ

Asked about legislative proposals this year to require local law enforcement to partner with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, or ICE, Herndon leaned on a model to encourage cooperation — but not mandate it.

“That’s a reasonable approach,” Herndon said. “The state should make cooperation the default while respecting the resource constraints of smaller agencies.”

But he stressed that state and local law enforcement should “work with ICE, not against them.”

Woodward’s stance was not immediately clear. 

“Talk to our locally elected Sheriffs,” he said. “We have a system in place that works fine. When a Sheriff has a person who needs to be handed over to ICE, that happens.”

The Idaho Senate didn’t hold a formal vote this year on the proposals to require that local law enforcement partner with ICE. Law enforcement groups, including the Idaho Sheriffs’ Association, opposed the proposal. 

Asked about public taxpayer dollars for private or religious schools — which the Legislature approved in 2025 by creating a $50 million private education tax credit program — Woodward said obligations toward public K-12 schools must be met first. 

“I support educational opportunities for all Idaho students, but our first priority has to be our public K-12 education system,” he said. “We say it often, the Legislature has a duty to establish and maintain the public education system that is spelled out in the Idaho Constitution, but we haven’t necessarily acted in that manner.”

Herndon said he supports “expanding educational choice for Idaho families.”

“The math and reading proficiency scores in Idaho’s public schools prove that the one size fits all formula is not working for every student,” he said. “Parents deserve options, and the tax credit gives them one.”

Idaho Capital Sun reporter Clark Corbin contributed reporting.

Day use access fees at all Idaho state parks will be waived for Idaho residents on July 4 as part of a celebration of America’s 250th anniversary, Gov. Brad Little announced Friday. 

“As we prepare to mark 250 years of American independence, there is no better way to celebrate than by getting outside with our loved ones and enjoying the freedoms and natural treasures that define our great nation,” Little said Friday. “Idaho’s state parks showcase the very best of our state, and we are proud to welcome families, friends and visitors to explore them free of charge during this special occasion.”

While day use fees for Idaho residents will be waived, normal camping and reservation fees will apply, officials said. 

Idaho has 28 state parks, which offer a variety of recreational and outdoor activities including hiking, horseback riding, skiing, bird watching, rock climbing, fishing, boating, swimming, bicycling and more. 

State officials with the Idaho Department of Parks and Recreation are in the process of unveiling improvements and enhancements at several state parks, including Lucky Peak State Park outside of Boise, which recently opened a new dog beach and accessible kayak launch on the Boise River. 

Other state parks include Bruneau Dunes State Park and Observatory, Harriman State Park, Bear Lake State Park and City of Rocks National Reserve, which is a national reserve and state park that attracts climbers from all over the world to its dramatic granite rock spires. 

Little said the July 4 fee waiver is a part of a larger effort to celebrate the 250th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence being signed in 1776.

WASHINGTON — The federal student loan system is set to see a dramatic overhaul beginning this summer, and critics warn it likely will make loans more expensive and difficult to obtain for borrowers — driving them to private lenders or altering their plans for higher education.

Among the major changes are new loan limits for graduate and professional students, a restructured repayment system where new borrowers will have only two plans to choose from and the elimination of a key loan program for graduate and professional students that allowed for unlimited borrowing.

The provisions — most of which will take effect July 1 — stem from congressional Republicans’ mega tax and spending cut bill that President Donald Trump signed into law last year. 

The U.S. Department of Education finalized regulations, published May 1, that implement sweeping changes outlined in the GOP’s “big, beautiful” law. The department received more than 80,000 public comments before the rule was finalized. 

Under Secretary of Education Nicholas Kent said that “at a high level,” the reforms center on “lowering the cost of college, simplifying student loan repayment and restoring accountability to the federal student lending system,” during an April 30 call with reporters regarding the new regulations. 

The average federal student loan debt balance stands at $39,547, according to the Education Data Initiative.

As July 1 approaches, here’s a closer look at some of the biggest changes coming to the federal student loan system: 

The Grad PLUS program, which allowed for graduate and professional students to borrow up to the full cost of attendance, will soon be eliminated under the package and unavailable for new borrowers.

“If you are currently borrowing Grad PLUS loans, so you borrowed Grad PLUS loans before July 1, you will be allowed to continue using Grad PLUS until you finish your program, or until three years have expired, basically whichever is sooner,” said Preston Cooper, senior fellow in higher education policy at the American Enterprise Institute, a right-leaning think tank.

“Current students are grandfathered in — it will only be new graduate students, as of this fall, after July 1, who will be subject to the new loan limits,” Cooper said. 

The package also sets forth new annual and aggregate loan limits for graduate and professional students, along with parents who take out federal student loans for dependent undergraduate students. 

Graduate student loans will be capped at $20,500 annually, with a $100,000 aggregate limit. 

Parent PLUS borrowers will have an annual cap of $20,000 and an aggregate cap of $65,000 per dependent. 

Professional student loans will have a $50,000 annual limit and an aggregate cap of $200,000. 

The programs that fall within the department’s “professional” category and are subject to that larger loan cap include: pharmacy, dentistry, veterinary medicine, chiropractic, law, medicine, optometry, osteopathic medicine, podiatry, theology and clinical psychology. 

The department clarified in a fact sheet on the finalized regulations that the “professional” student classifications “do not express a value judgment about the importance of any occupation or field” but instead serve a “loan-administration function.” 

The agency has received immense pushback from groups representing people in fields that do not fall under the department’s definition and will thus be subject to lower annual and lifetime borrowing caps. 

In another major shift, the regulations replace prior repayment options with two new plans — the Repayment Assistance Plan, or RAP, and the Tiered Standard plan — both of which will launch July 1.

RAP is an income-based repayment plan that “waives unpaid interest for borrowers who make on-time payments that do not fully cover accruing interest,” per the department’s fact sheet. 

Balances under the plan will also “decline with each on-time payment, as unpaid interest is fully waived and the Department then reduces principal by an amount equal to the borrower’s payment, up to $50,” per the agency. 

The Tiered Standard plan offers fixed monthly payments, ranging from a 10-year to 25-year period, depending on the outstanding principal balance of the borrower. 

“The upshot is that loan repayment is going to get a lot more expensive for almost everyone, and for some people, it’s going to get significantly more expensive, and the transition is also going to be difficult for a lot of people to manage,” Michele Zampini, associate vice president for federal policy and advocacy at the Institute for College Access & Success, told States Newsroom.

Zampini, whose organization aims to advance affordability, accountability and equity in higher education, said she thinks “there will be a lot of students who will have to turn to the private loan market, who otherwise would have been able to cover their costs through the (Grad PLUS) program.”

Victoria Jackson, assistant director of higher education policy at the nonprofit policy and advocacy group EdTrust, said that with the new loan limits and “drastic cuts to aid availability” in the regulations, “you would really hope that it would come with other, more affordable and better forms of financial aid.” 

“And what they’ve done is just created this vacuum that right now can really only be filled with private loans, which are costlier and riskier for students, or students are just not going to go,” Jackson said.

Meanwhile, the Trump administration continues its efforts to eliminate the Department of Education, including through a series of interagency agreements that transfer several of its responsibilities to other departments. 

Under the most recent agreement, the Treasury Department will take over Education’s responsibility for collecting on defaulted federal student loan debt — the first step in a multiphase process toward Treasury taking on Education’s entire, roughly $1.7 trillion federal student loan portfolio.

Zampini noted that, when it comes to the incoming student loan regulations, she does not have confidence in the Education Department’s “ability at this moment to successfully manage the transition without a lot of issues, as far as servicing and as far as account tracking and plan enrollment and things like that.” 

Jackson, of EdTrust, said that “by weakening the federal financial aid system, I think there’s a weakening of our higher education system and making it more difficult for low-income students, students of color and other marginalized students to access graduate education.”

She added that “people who complete those degrees tend to have more financial security in the future — they earn more over their lifetimes and, on markers of financial success and opportunity, do better.” 

“I think this is one prong of a plan of undermining our overall higher education system.” 

This story was originally posted on IdahoEdNews.org on May 5, 2026.

Editor’s note: This story is part of a series of candidate profiles Idaho Education News will publish ahead of the May 19 primary election. EdNews is highlighting competitive races impacting education policy. Click here to see the EdNews Elections webpage featuring a list of all candidates and much more. Click here to see your voter information. Follow the Idaho EdNews elections blog for breaking news and insights.

A former legislator who lost her 2024 re-election bid by 83 votes wants her seat back, despite the deluge of attack ads she faced two years ago from out-of-state school choice political action committees.

Rep. Chris Bruce, R-Kuna, faces a rematch with Melissa Durrant in the May 19 Republican primary for District 23, House Seat A covering rural Owyhee, Ada and Canyon counties.

Idaho Legislative District 4: Longtime Republican activist challenges North Idaho incumbent

Bruce, a first-term legislator who sits on the state’s budget-writing committee, said education has changed over the years and kids learn in a variety of ways. While he sends his kids to public schools, he said that’s not the best fit for some families who choose private, charter, virtual or home school environments.

“If the state’s going to put money towards public education, then it should follow the kid,” he said

After a 2024 vote against a private school tax credit bill, the school choice group American Federation for Children decided to heavily target Durrant. Its Idaho Federation for Children PAC, which is funded by out-of-state money, two years ago poured $80,655 into Idaho to oppose her. So far this year, the AFC Victory Fund has spent $38,318 to oppose her.

Durrant said she could not believe the amount of mailers the group sent out in 2024 to oppose a freshman legislator.

“I had kids and they would see it,” Durrant said. “Their high school friends would sometimes get mailers before we did, and they would be like, ‘Hey, this one’s bad.'”

Bruce said he wants to rein in the out-of-state money, regardless of whether he benefits from it or not.

“Money comes from everywhere, right?” he said. “We see it in all elections and all cycles. We see it even in spending with ballot initiatives. Good, bad or ugly, it’s there.”

Bruce ran an efficient campaign in 2024, getting strong results with relatively modest spending. His primary campaign spent just $2,731, with no support or opposition from political action committees.

“I don’t do a lot with campaigns,” he said. “So I’ve just tried to be involved in the community.”

Meanwhile, Durrant’s 2024 campaign spent $38,331. PACs spent $23,978 to support her and $97,797 to oppose her, bringing total spending to $160,106.

When asked if it was a difficult choice to get back into the fray, Durrant said folks in her district told her they need someone to represent them.

“When it came down to it, my kids, my husband were like, ‘Let’s do this, Mom. We want to do this again,'” she said.

• Occupation: Mortgage loan officer
• History of elected service: One term in the House, elected 2024. Kuna City Council member, elected 2021 and 2025.
• Campaign website: cbruce4idaho.com

Bruce almost died from leukemia a few years back and was in the ICU for 33 days. He said that experience shaped how he and his wife approach life.

“After that time, we kind of looked at what we want to do and what we want to provide,” Bruce said. “We try to serve in our community and just, you know, pay it forward.”

Bruce is now a Kuna City Council member and state legislator, while his wife is a trustee for Kuna School District.

“I always represent the people,” Bruce said. “No matter what chair I sit in, I try to look out for them.”

He said he is able to fulfill his duties to both of his roles. Two days a month during the session, he said he leaves the Statehouse and goes straight to the city council meeting.

As a member of the Legislature’s Joint Finance-Appropriations Committee, Bruce said budgeting is a balancing act. He focused on the Legislature’s constitutional duties and the burden placed upon the taxpayer.

In East Idaho, a challenger is trying to unseat a powerful legislative committee chairman

“I talked about this a lot within health and welfare,” Bruce said. “Yes, folks need these services, but what about the taxpayer that may be working two or three jobs and not using any of these programs?”

Bruce said educating kids these days is much different than what he experienced. Now, kids learn in many different ways. That’s why he thinks school choice is so important.

“I think wherever the kid learns best, that should be the parent and the kid’s choice. So whatever that looks like,” he said. “Now, when I say I’m pro school choice, that’s what I mean.”

When it comes to education, Bruce said he wants more accountability.

He said higher education leaders spoke to JFAC this year about how they are spending more money on remedial classes. Bruce said kids should know that they might get held back if they don’t complete assignments or learn at the level they should be at.

“Honestly, if we’re passing kids up who aren’t prepared, that doesn’t help them any, and it doesn’t help the state any,” he said.

Fundraising – 2026 election cycle to date

Chris Bruce

• Beginning cash balance: $7,083
• Total contributions: $12,697
• Total expenditures: $723
• Ending cash balance: $15,788

Melissa Durrant

• Beginning cash balance: $2,491
• Total contributions: $12,095
• Total expenditures: $2,500
• Ending cash balance: $13,491

Source: Idaho Sunshine, May 1

He was happy to see a bill pass this year that created “earned autonomy” for school district funding. House Bill 883 gives public schools more flexibility in spending state funding if they show high proficiency in state assessments.

“Limiting some public schools and rewarding other ones — I’d like to see us look at that as a whole and maybe allow schools, just like agencies do, to be able to use the funding as they see fit,” he said.

While Bruce’s campaign has benefitted from out-of-state lobbying and PAC spending from the American Federation for Children, he told EdNews that he wants to rein it in. “I think getting back to where it’s just you and the community out spending time, that’s what I try to do.”

Bruce said he has spoken to American Federation for Children lobbyists at the Statehouse but has not communicated with the group’s PAC, which cannot coordinate with candidates on independent expenditures.

“That’s been the craziest thing is getting calls from people who had questions about it, and you’re like, ‘Look, I don’t know who’s sending it,'” Bruce said. “There’s nothing that I can stop or start.”

• Occupation: Speech language pathologist in the Kuna School District.
• History of elected service: One term in the House, elected 2022.
• Campaign website: durrantforidaho.com

Durrant has been busy since being voted out of office two years ago.

She earned a master’s degree last spring and is wrapping up her first school year as a speech language pathologist for the Kuna School District.

Her daughter, who was born with a bilateral cleft lip, inspired her to enter the profession.

Working in special education has given her perspective of how legislation impacts schools, and she said the work is rewarding. She loves being with the kids and seeing their excitement when they learn to say new words.

“They’ll come and stop me in the hall and be like, ‘Look, I can say this one now,'” she said.

But Durrant has a target on her back.

Idaho Legislative District 24: County commissioner takes on steadfast budget-cutting senator

In 2024, she served on the House Revenue and Taxation Committee and was one of seven Republicans to reject a bill that would have created a $50 million private school tax credit.

Durrant said she stands by her vote. She opposed HB 447 in part because there was no priority for low-income families.

“I tried working with the sponsors of the tax credit when I was there, and we just couldn’t come to terms on something that would work,” she said.

The next year, legislators passed a similar $50 million tax credit in HB 93. The new program gives priority to families who make under 300% of the poverty level.

“Whether people are for that tax credit or not, when you look at it, a better bill came the next year because we voted no on that first one,” Durrant said.

Due to her vote against the 2024 tax credit bill, the Idaho Federation for Children PAC spent $80,655 and the national super PAC Make Liberty Win spent $17,142 to oppose her in the primary. Both groups are funded by out-of-state money.

Candidate scorecards

Idaho Freedom Foundation, Freedom Index Lifetime Scores

• Bruce: 88.8% Freedom, 87.7% Spending
• Durrant: 51.2% Freedom, 12.6% Spending

Idaho Children are Primary, Kids Matter Index

• Bruce: 33% (2026)
• Durrant: 69% (2024)

Durrant said she wonders why those groups spent so much money to send out campaign ads against her.

“I was just a freshman legislator,” she said. “I don’t have a seniority weight to me. I don’t have a leadership weight.”

While the PACs say she opposes school choice, Durrant told EdNews that she supports school choice.

“My thing that I think people don’t like is that school choice is a catchphrase,” she said. “We need to focus on making sure it’s good policy.”

Durrant said she decided to run for office again because she thinks she could represent constituents better than Bruce. She said her opponent wears two conflicting hats with seats on the city council and in the Legislature.

“He couldn’t give either one his full attention,” she said.

Durrant said she values freedom, family, personal property rights, Second Amendment, local control and limited government.

“When you look up Republican in the dictionary, the values, you know, what Republicans stand for, I can honestly say I’m looking in the mirror,” Durrant said.

From the Rockies to the Cascades to the Sierra Nevada, mountainsides across the West are sparsely covered by the snow that usually blankets the high country well into the summer.

That snowpack is like a savings account that the West draws on when the hot, dry months arrive. It moistens the landscape as it melts, lessening the risk of severe wildfire. The runoff feeds into river basins, and the swelling waterways provide power to hydroelectric dams, irrigation to farmers and drinking water to cities.

This year, Western states are heading into the summer with a desperately low balance — threatening wildfires, drinking water, crops, electricity and more.

“This has been an extremely poor year,” said Sharon Megdal, director of the Water Resources Research Center, a research unit at the University of Arizona. “This has gotten a lot of people concerned and alarmed.”

While a late-season storm brought heavy snow to parts of the Rockies this month, the region remains in a deep snowpack deficit.

As warmer weather arrives, states are preparing for a dangerous wildfire season across the drought-stricken West. Farmers and cities are bracing for potential cutbacks in their water allocations from rivers that have less to give. Fisheries managers are watching for low river flows that could threaten vital salmon runs. And worsening conditions could threaten the supply of hydropower that provides cheap, clean electricity to many Western states.

Across nearly the entire West, states spent the winter waiting for snow that rarely arrived. Ski resorts lost millions of visitors as they struggled to stay open. Then in March, a record-breaking heat wave settled across the region, shrinking the already paltry snowpack.

“It’s unheard of,” Megdal said. “Things were already looking bad in January, but if you follow the projections, they had to keep revising the numbers downward because the snow just never came and we had this hugely hot period in March.”

The federal National Water and Climate Center produces a real-time map showing the snow water equivalent in river basins across the country — a measurement of how much moisture is being held in those mountaintop savings accounts.

The majority of the West is bright red, indicating that snowpack is at less than 50% of the median level for this time of year. Yellow and orange cover most of the remaining areas, showing regions that are still well below the median.

The most recent U.S. Drought Monitor map shows most of the country in abnormally dry or drought conditions, aside from the Great Lakes region and some other parts of the Midwest.

For many Western states, the most imminent threat from the dry winter is the prospect of a dangerous wildfire season.

Already, wildfires in Nebraska have burned hundreds of thousands of acres, shattering records and setting the stage for a record wildfire year.

The wildland fire outlook maps produced by the National Interagency Fire Center show above-normal fire risk spreading across much of the West by June and July.

“There’s a lot of red on the map,” said Matthew Dehr, wildland fire meteorologist with the Washington state Department of Natural Resources.

What we’re likely to see are wildfires moving more quickly through forests. When we do have a large fire event, it’s likely to move faster, be more significant.

– Washington public lands commissioner Dave Upthegrove

Dave Upthegrove, Washington’s public lands commissioner, said his agency is preparing for fire season as normal but with a heightened awareness that this summer could be demanding. He’s focused on educating residents about the risks, noting that 90% of wildfires in Washington are caused by humans.

“What we’re likely to see are wildfires moving more quickly through forests,” he said. “When we do have a large fire event, it’s likely to move faster, be more significant.”

He also noted that this year is Washington’s fourth consecutive year of drought conditions, making trees more susceptible to diseases and pests and compounding wildfire risk.

Dehr said spring rains could provide a bit of a buffer before the heat of July and August, but a recent stretch of sunny weeks has yet to provide relief.

Upthegrove noted that the challenging conditions across much of the West could make it more difficult for states to send wildfire crews to each other’s aid, if many states are battling big blazes simultaneously.

“As the climate crisis pushes a forest health crisis pushes a wildfire crisis, it’s going to stress the whole system, not just in our state,” he said.

Many Western states also rely on snowpack to feed rivers that provide irrigation for farming and the water supply for cities. In particular, the Colorado River provides water for tens of millions of people across seven states, a region that has grown even as the river’s supply has dwindled in recent decades. Reservoirs that were full at the turn of the century are now nearing critically low levels.

“There hasn’t been enough flow in the river to meet all these expected demands, even in the good years,” said Megdal, the water researcher. “We’ve used up our savings and storage, so now what do we do?”

Water allocations for states, tribes and farmers in the region are governed by a complicated and fiercely contested system known as the Colorado River Compact. In recent years, cutbacks due to the low supply reduced the water allocation for central Arizona, including all of the water for agricultural users.

Now, states are fighting over even less water and struggling to negotiate who should bear the cost. Last week, Arizona, California and Nevada submitted a proposal to federal officials that would impose further cutbacks over the next two years in order to buy time for a longer-term deal.

“It’s turning out to be very hard to get the states to agree on how to slice up a much smaller pie,” Megdal said. “There are scenarios that are not zero probability that are catastrophic to the region.”

If the states are unable to reach an agreement, allocation for the river’s diminished water will be determined by federal regulators under the “law of the river.” Cutbacks imposed by the feds could fall heavily on central Arizona, Megdal said, cutting the supply for Phoenix, Tucson and some tribal nations.

Such uncertainty in the Colorado River basin and elsewhere “leaves farmers making planting decisions now without knowing whether sufficient water will be available to carry crops through harvest,” the American Farm Bureau Federation wrote in an April report.

The lack of water could force farmers to remove trees or vineyards, the Farm Bureau noted, or reduce cattle herds if the parched landscape does not supply enough forage.

Meanwhile, rivers running at a slow trickle could reduce the hydroelectric power produced by dams across the West. Across 13 Western states, hydropower accounts for nearly a quarter of electrical generation.

The Glen Canyon Dam in Arizona, which forms Lake Powell, produces about 5 billion kilowatt-hours of electricity each year, enough to power nearly half a million homes. But the lake level may soon fall below a threshold from which the dam can no longer generate power.

“Hydropower is so incredibly important because it has been the lowest-cost power for many in the West,” Megdal said. “There are big implications for the energy grid and the cost of electricity.”

Stateline reporter Alex Brown can be reached at abrown@stateline.org.

This story was originally produced by Stateline, which is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network which includes Idaho Capital Sun, and is supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity.

Thousands of protests were filed in a water permit application meant to feed the operations of a massive data center proposed in Box Elder County. But, they won’t be considered by the Utah state engineer, as the company withdrew its application to start a new one. 

A request to change the water use from irrigation to industrial use to, mostly, power a 40,000-acre data center with natural gas was taken back on Thursday. However, developers behind the Stratos project are still planning on moving forward with their plans, according to correspondence to the state’s Water Rights Division.

“In light of the County’s action on Monday, we are withdrawing the current change application at this time,” Logan Riley, a water consultant wrote to the division on Wednesday afternoon. “Bar H. Ranch intends to resubmit in a timely manner with additional supporting information and to further demonstrate the feasibility of the application.”

Box Elder County commissioners unanimously approved two resolutions in support of the data center campus sponsored by Kevin O’Leary, a celebrity investor featured in the reality TV hit “Shark Tank,” and developed with the Military Installation Development Authority (MIDA), a state entity overseeing infrastructure projects with military missions. That was one of the initial steps before state environmental reviews could begin, commissioners said. 

The water permit application started in March and collected about 3,900 protests in about a month, a sign of the stunning interest the data center project has drawn in the state. Every filing cost $15, accruing about $58,500 for the division.

According to the application, 1,900 acre-feet of water from the Salt Wells Spring Stream would be dedicated for the “Wonder Valley Utah” natural gas power plant, which, according to the filing, has a 7.5 gigawatt capacity — though MIDA representatives have recently said the plant would be able to produce 9 gigawatts of power at full buildout.

“Water diverted under this application will be used primarily for power generation. A portion of the water will also be used in connection with a data center that will operate as a closed-loop system,” the application reads. Any water discharged during flushing of the closed-loop system would eventually return to the Great Salt Lake, the company said.

However, without an environmental study of the equipment the data center is planning to use, communities across the state remain skeptical about the developers’ promises.

Deeda Seed, a senior Utah campaigner at the Center for Biological Diversity, said she has never seen such a high number of protests in a water permit before.

“You can surmise that this was likely a cynical act by the developers to nullify all of the protests that were filed, because they’re all wiped away now,” she said.

Water is her primary concern because resources in the area are already scarce and this kind of project could affect wetland habitat immediately adjacent to the Hansel Valley area.

There is no legal basis for the state engineer to approve the application, the Center for Biological Diversity said in its own protest filing, because of the lack of details on the project and the developers’ failure to demonstrate that their proposed change won’t increase the quantity of water historically diverted on the site. 

According to the organization, it’s possible the water rights’ holder hasn’t used the full amount of water, meaning the developers’ request “would represent a significant increase in the actual consumption rate, and a correspondingly significant loss of inflow to the Great Salt Lake.”

“The implications are so much greater now given the crisis that we’re in, right?” Seed said. “We’ve got the worst drought that we’ve had in recorded history.”

After hundreds crowded a Box Elder County Fairgrounds event space in an unruly commission special meeting, a group of residents are also organizing to file a referendum against one of the resolutions commissioners approved on Monday.

Appalled by the commission’s decision, Brigette Cottam, who lives in Brigham City, has organized a small group of county voters to sponsor a referendum. 

“I am concerned about our water because we’re already in a water crisis. The Great Salt Lake is already dry enough that we have arsenic air already,” Cottam said. “And my concern is that with these data centers going in right on top of the edge of basically what is the edge of the Great Salt Lake up north, that our water will be gone, will dry up, and then it’ll be uninhabitable here.”

They initially got turned away by the county’s clerk, who argued that since MIDA has an independent authority over its project areas, the commissioners’ consent “is considered an intergovernmental or administrative action,” not a legislative act, and was not eligible for a referendum, according to a response letter. 

Residents did, however, get a call back from the office, saying they could still contest one of the resolutions regarding land use, Cottam said. They intend to file a new referendum application on Friday.  

Cottam wasn’t planning on getting this involved, she said. However, she wants people to know it is possible to fight back.

“The government overreach is ridiculous these days. I think they have too much power. And to my understanding, the commissioners that approved this, they didn’t really have much of a choice at all,” she said. 

This story was originally produced by Utah News Dispatch, which is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network which includes Idaho Capital Sun, and is supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity.

Three Republican challengers are seeking to unseat incumbent Idaho U.S. Sen. Jim Risch. 

Joe Evans, Denny LaVé, Josh Roy and Risch will all appear on the May 19 Republican primary election ballot. The winner of this primary contest will face the winner of the Democratic primary election, as well as Libertarian candidate Matt Loesby, and independents Todd Achilles and Natalie Fleming in the November general election. 

The candidates, the ballot measures, and the tools you need to cast your vote.

Risch, 82, lives in Boise and is in his 18th year as a U.S. senator, after previously serving as an Idaho state senator, lieutenant governor, and Idaho governor. 

Roy, 44, is a Lewiston resident and engineer in the pulp and paper industry. LaVé, 49, lives in Worley and is an ironworker and owner of an ironworking construction company. Evans, 57, is an Army combat veteran who works in data analytics and lives in Boise. 

LaVé told the Idaho Capital Sun in the 2026 Primary Election Voter Guide that his top priorities would be border security and immigration, restoring affordability by “Ending Reckless Spending,” and ending “Forever Wars” and foreign influence over the U.S.

Evans said he’d focus on reining in lawmaking authority from federal agencies and improving affordability through “lower taxes on working people, domestic production, supply-chain security, and ending regulations that drive up the cost of living.” Evans also said he would focus on securing the border “while protecting civil liberties.” 

Roy said he would prioritize pursuing “policies to protect the nuclear family by fighting social media and other anti-family policies, institutions and trade groups,” term limits for members of Congress, and reducing federal regulations that affect Idahoans. 

Risch did not respond to the survey for the voter guide. On his campaign website, the incumbent includes as his top issues “fighting for Idaho farmers,” cutting taxes and wasteful spending, and supporting law enforcement. 

Risch’s challengers open to bipartisan agreements on issues like the farm bill 

Amid narrow party majorities, Congress has shut down the government multiple years in a row because of a failure to pass a budget, and failed to reach an agreement on issues such as the agricultural and food assistance bill called the farm bill. 

The candidates who responded to the survey each expressed interest in finding common ground across the aisle to solve such issues. 

Two candidates vie for seat in Idaho 1st Congressional District Democratic primary 

“Bipartisanship does not mean surrendering principles,” Evans said. “It means finding concrete agreements that help the people we represent. Shutdown politics hurt families, contractors, producers, and local communities. I will work with anyone serious about passing budgets on time, updating the Farm Bill, and ending the cycle of governing by last-minute panic.”

LaVé said that, as a conservative Catholic, it would be difficult to find common ground on social issues but “when it comes to all the other issues, I think there is room for collaborative solutions and even agreement.” 

“America should be able to provide a strong social safety net and high wages for American workers, and it can,” he said. “But the key word there is American, we don’t have the resources to also provide that for tens of millions of illegal immigrants.” 

Roy said his advantage would be that he’d come to the position with “no past baggage” and a private-industry approach to getting things done. 

“I will be able to approach relationships and legislation differently than my predecessor,” he said. “After 20 years of heavy industrial manufacturing experience, I have learned not to underestimate the value of a fresh perspective.” 

Candidates vary on public lands approach 

All of the candidates said they supported protection of Idaho’s vast public lands. 

LaVé said he would oppose the sale of public lands to “mega corporations,” especially any that would want to use them for data centers. 

“Idaho is the most beautiful state in the country,” he said, “nowhere else does the landscape compare, and I will not allow us to lose that.” 

Evans said he also wouldn’t support a broad selloff and he would be “skeptical of simply dumping federal lands onto the state without a serious funding and management plan. That can become a backdoor path to liquidation.” 

Two GOP challengers will face longtime incumbent U.S. Rep. Mike Simpson in May election

He said he would support more input and more active management of the land, including more forest management, wildfire mitigation, improved access for grazing, timber, recreation, hunting and “less red tape” from “distant bureaucracies who do not live with the consequences.”

“Idahoans should have a bigger voice in how these lands are managed, but they should remain public, productive, and accessible for future generations,” he said. 

Roy said the federally owned land in Idaho, which is managed by the Bureau of Land Management and U.S. Forest Service, should be under state control. He also supported some development on the land. 

“Developing a few acres of snake infested sagebrush outside Boise or Idaho Falls into starter priced homes and lots of young families would be a great idea,” Roy said. “I think there should be a 5 year residency requirement to be eligible. Any land sales must be done for the benefit of the citizens of Idaho and not out of state developers. Our pristine river frontage and mountain valleys are not for sale at any price.” 

Risch has long expressed support for keeping Idaho’s federal lands open to the public. Amid an attempt this summer to add to the “Big Beautiful” law an amendment to sell off swaths of public land, Risch publicly opposed the proposal. 

During a hearing in February for President Donald Trump’s nominee to head the Bureau of Land Management, former Republican New Mexico Congressman Steve Pearce, Risch directly questioned Pearce on the issue of selling off land. 

 “… There is no authority for you, for that matter, for the president, to sell off public land,” Risch said. “Do you agree with that?”“

Risch went on to say it was a “98% issue in Idaho.” 

“In all my decades of serving the state, I have never received such passionate, unified messages as I have on this particular topic,” he said. “Idahoans do not want their public lands sold. Period. Full stop.”

All candidates support voter ID requirements in SAVE Act

The U.S. House recently passed the “Safeguard American Voter Eligibility Act” or “SAVE Act,” which would require proof of citizenship to register to vote and photo ID at polls. The bill, a top legislative priority for President Donald Trump, is still under consideration in the Senate.

It is illegal for non-citizens to vote in federal elections, and most other elections across the U.S. States vary in requirements for showing photo identification or proof of citizenship. 

Fulcher to face two GOP opponents in 2026 Republican primary election on May 19

The bill has drawn criticism from some saying it would make it harder for people to vote who don’t have access to documents proving citizenship. 

Risch recently said on the local conservative podcast The Ranch about the bill, “We Republicans are saying, look, if you’re going to vote, it’s fair that everybody knows that you are who you say you are and you are qualified to vote. Is that asking too much?”

Roy said voter identification and showing proof of citizenship are “common sense” and an issue that has support among members of both political parties. 

LaVé said that voter identification is already a requirement in many states and “we just need to make it national law and ensure that it is enforced.” 

Evans said he supported the premise that only American citizens should vote, but noted that some “Critics argue the SAVE Act could burden some eligible voters, especially if documentation requirements are rigid or if states are forced into unfunded mandates.” 

“My position is this: I support proof of citizenship for federal voting, but it must be implemented in a way that is workable, uniform, and fair.” he said. “That means clear standards, a cure process for errors, no games with lawful married-name voters, and no federal overreach that turns election administration into chaos.” 

Candidates support changes to make private healthcare affordable 

Evans and LaVé both said there should be price transparency requirements for healthcare costs and that access in rural areas needed to be improved. 

LaVé said he also supported capped markups on costs and expanding acute trauma centers in Idaho, as well as clinics and hospitals. 

Roy said lawmakers needed to address issues such as monopolization of hospitals and “arcane” Food and Drug Administration regulations “that make the start-up of new production facilities for generic drugs nearly impossible financially.” 

Risch and his fellow Republican U.S. Mike Crapo late last year voted against a Democratic-led plan in the Senate to extend the federal healthcare premium tax credits, which were reduced premiums for those who purchase health coverage through the state marketplace. The credits expired at the end of 2025, and 24,400 Idahoans dropped marketplace coverage this year, the Idaho Capital Sun reported. 

Risch campaign raises more than $2 million 

Risch’s campaign, including his political action committee, or PAC, has collected more than $2.7 million since the beginning of 2025, according to data from the Federal Election Commission. About $1.7 million of that came from individual donors, and over $736,000 from other PACs. He has spent over $1.3 million as of May 7. 

LaVé’s campaign has a total of nearly $161,000 in total, $148,000 of which came from a loan from himself, according to FEC reports. He has reported spending around $1,600. 

Roy has collected more than $27,300 in total, $9,117 of which came from individual contributions and $17,862 came from the candidate himself. He’s spent nearly $15,000 so far in the campaign. 

Evans has garnered $7,741 in total, $850 of which came from individuals, and $6,800 came from a loan from himself. Individual donors contributed $6,200 of that total. He’s spent around $7,650. 

Idaho Attorney General Raúl Labrador’s Office announced this week that the state is set to receive more than $24 million in the latest settlement with opioid manufacturers.

The settlement with Purdue Pharma and its owners, the Sackler family, is set to dole out most of the funds within the first three years, but the distribution process will take more than a decade, the Idaho Attorney General’s Office announced in a news release Wednesday.

“The Sackler family and Purdue Pharma made billions marketing opioids they knew were dangerously addictive, and Idaho families paid the price,” Labrador said in a written statement. “They knew the damage they were causing, and they did it anyway. Through this settlement, my office is recovering $24 million for Idaho, and we will keep pursuing pharmaceutical companies that profited from this crisis.”

Since Labrador became Idaho’s attorney general in 2023, Labrador’s office said he secured over $127 million in opioid settlement funds. The Republican is running unopposed in the primary election but is set to face Lori Hickman, an attorney who’s running as a Democrat, in the November election. 

Idaho’s opioid settlement money is funneled three ways: 40% goes to the state, 40% goes to counties and cities, and 20% goes to public health districts. So far, entities in Idaho have received $73 million, with nearly $30 million going to the state, according to the Attorney General’s Office’s website.

The Idaho Behavioral Health Council recommends to the governor how the state should spend its share. The council is accepting recommendations until June 5, the Idaho Capital Sun reported.

PORTLAND — Oregon’s congressional Democrats on Wednesday warned that federal agencies tasked with helping prevent and fight fires in the Northwest could be understaffed and underprepared going into the 2026 fire season.

Oregon’s U.S. Sens. Ron Wyden, Jeff Merkley, and Portland and Willamette Valley-area U.S. Reps. Suzanne Bonamici and Andrea Salinas left a Wednesday wildfire season briefing at the Northwest Interagency Coordination Center in Portland with “deep concerns” about federal agencies’ capacity to respond to what’s expected to be a long and severe fire season in the region. The center is the headquarters for a wildfire prevention and response network that includes nine state and federal agencies across the West.

At a news conference following the meeting, the lawmakers said budget cuts and the loss of staff at federal science and land management agencies during the last year — especially at the U.S. Forest Service, tasked with the largest share of federal wildland fire prevention and response — have created needless uncertainty and chaos.

“The rhetoric today is very different than it’s been in the past,” Wyden said of the annual briefing the lawmakers receive from the interagency officials. “The White House better wake up and look at the reality and the serious threat that Oregon is looking at.”

Oregon’s winter was among the warmest on record and snow-pack across the Northwest was one-third of normal levels, according to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. A potentially early El Niño weather pattern hitting in the summer rather than later in the year could further stir up temperatures and lightning storms into the fall.

The lawmakers’ concerns were a stark departure from the assurances Oregon’s new fire chief gave journalists and Gov. Tina Kotek just the day before at a briefing on the state’s preparedness for the 2026 season. Chief Forester Kacey KC said she had been in regular communication with fire leaders at the U.S. Forest Service, Department of the Interior and at the new U.S. Wildland Fire Service, and had been assured that their Oregon-based firefighting force hadn’t been cut.

Spokespersons for the U.S. Forest Service did not immediately respond to questions from the Capital Chronicle on Wednesday but spokespersons for the Department of the Interior said “there will be no gap in response capacity” during the fire season.

Wyden said he was glad Oregon’s fire officials are ready to handle the season on the 16 million acres of state land they oversee, but there’s a disconnect in what he and Congress see occurring among federal agencies, their leaders and their budgets, and what those officials are sharing with state leaders.

The federal government owns more than half of Oregon’s land — 32 million acres — including the responsibility to respond to wildfires on those acres. Because fire does not abide boundaries, preventing and fighting them requires coordination across local, state and federal agencies.

“We have a very serious threat, and this administration consistently serves up misrepresentation, and a failure to give the people of Oregon the details. And I’ll tell you, I left that room today saying that we are lucky to have all these people at the state level,” Wyden said. “We are unlucky to have an administration that can spend billions of dollars on war and not on the details to keep Oregonians safe.”

The lawmakers confirmed that Forest Service officials told them it was a good hiring year for seasonal firefighters, due in large part to wage increases passed by Congress last year. A spokesperson for the Department of the Interior, where the new Wildland Fire Service is housed, said in an email they expect to have about 5,700 wildland fire personnel this year, roughly equal to last year, as well as partnership agreements with more than 900 tribal wildland firefighters.

But the U.S. Forest Service has lost more than 1,400 employees who are also certified to respond to fires, Wyden said. President Donald Trump’s proposed budget for the next year includes $0 for forest and rangeland research at the Forest Service, and a 20% reduction in staff during 2026 — about 7,000 employees.

The consolidation of all firefighting under the Interior, and the shuttering and consolidation of 57 of 77 Forest Service research and development facilities has been a major concern for Merkley, who partnered with Alaska’s senior Republican Sen. Lisa Murkowski to get U.S. Forest Chief Tom Schultz to agree to undertake a study of potential impacts.

“We’re hoping that gives us enough time to really carefully bring in experts and analyze this and not devastate the architecture of firefighting and fire prevention that has been built up over decades and destroyed in a single year,” Merkley said.

Salinas and Bonamici, both on the House Committee on Science, Space and Technology, said they are most concerned by cuts to federal science agencies that help with weather forecasting, air quality monitoring, atmospheric monitoring via satellites and employees that clear debris to prevent fires that will impair firefighters’ efforts.

Officials at the interagency center said federal crews are dealing with a severe backlog of debris clearing and prescribed burning, and during the last year cleared about 35,000 fewer acres of debris from forest floors than they did in 2024, according to Salinas. She said they suggested relying on volunteers to clear up heavy fuels around popular wilderness trails in the absence of time and employees to take on the work.

“I know recreationalists are good stewards of the land, and they’d love to get out there, but we’re not going to solve this with volunteers. We need real personnel,” she said.

She added that cuts at federal agencies mean lawmakers lack details on good-neighbor authority agreements typically made in advance of a fire season between the federal government and states, private landowners and firefighting partners in Canada and Mexico.

“Is Canada really going to send down firefighters right now? They hate us. They hate Trump,” she said. “It’s all of those pieces.”

This story was originally produced by Oregon Capital Chronicle, which is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network which includes Idaho Capital Sun, and is supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity.

WASHINGTON — President Donald Trump’s trade agenda faced another major setback Thursday when the U.S. Court of International Trade handed a win to two small businesses and the state of Washington after they challenged the president’s 10% global tariffs, imposed after the U.S. Supreme Court struck down his previous emergency tariff regime.

In a 2-1 decision, the court granted a permanent injunction to a Florida-based toy manufacturer and a New York-based spice importer that sued the Trump administration in March, alleging the new tariffs would harm their businesses.

The court also granted relief to Washington state, which was among nearly two dozen states that sued over the tariffs. 

Jay Foreman, CEO of toy company Basic Fun!, said he was “extremely excited” upon learning the decision.

“It takes a lot of guts and chutzpah for small companies like us and Burlap and Barrel to put ourselves out on the line to fight what we feel is injustice and unfair,” he said during a virtual press conference, referring to the other company named in the lawsuit, an online spice retailer.

“Certainly, there’s a place for tariffs on strategic products that make sense to protect in this country …  but in cases across the board, to approach this situation with a bazooka instead of a fine-tooth comb makes no sense, and it hurts companies like ours, hurts companies like Burlap and Barrel, hurts the consumer,” Foreman said Thursday evening. 

Basic Fun! is behind popular toys, including Tonka Trucks and Care Bears.

Foreman said he expects imports that were subject to the tariffs to arrive as soon as tomorrow.

“I’m already emailing my customs broker to make sure they’re on it,” he said.

The ruling only applies to the plaintiffs Basic Fun! and the online spice retailer Burlap and Barrel, and does not give universal relief to all businesses that must pay the blanket 10% tax on imports. 

Jeffrey Schwab, who argued the case on behalf of the clients for the Liberty Justice Center, said the nonprofit advocacy law firm has been “wrestling” with what the decision means for other businesses that are paying the import tax.

“It’s not entirely clear, and probably will depend on what happens now if the government appeals. If the government seeks a stay that could have an effect. Certainly, I think companies will probably want to file (legal challenges), being concerned about making sure that the tariffs stop for them, and possibly ensuring that they get a refund too,” Schwab said.

The ruling also applies to Washington state as an importer subject to the tariffs, according to the ruling. 

Washington Attorney General Nick Brown called the ruling “a win for both affordability and the rule of law.”

“It’s American consumers and businesses that have ultimately paid for the president’s illegal tariff campaign,” he said in a statement. “The court’s order will encourage more parties to challenge this illegal executive overreach.”

The judges ruled other states that sued did not have standing because they were “non-importers.” Among them were Arizona, Colorado, Kentucky, Maine, Michigan, New Jersey, Minnesota, Nevada, New Mexico, North Carolina, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Virginia and Wisconsin.

Trump ordered the fresh round of tariffs on Feb. 20, the same day the U.S. Supreme Court ruled, in a 6-3 opinion, that his initial global tariffs under the 1977 International Economic Emergency Powers Act, or IEEPA, exceeded his presidential authority.

Following the Supreme Court loss, Trump’s alternative tariffs, imposed under Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974, went into effect on Feb. 24.

U.S. Customs and Border Protection is now in the legally mandated process of refunding businesses and importers who paid a collective $166 billion in IEEPA tariffs. 

The White House did not immediately respond to a message seeking comment.

WASHINGTON — State governments should shoulder more of the cost and responsibility for natural disaster recovery, according to a report released Thursday by the Federal Emergency Management Agency review council.

The board, created by President Donald Trump last year, called on Congress and the administration to make several major changes, including offloading the National Flood Insurance Program to the private insurance market. 

Robert Fenton, regional administrator for FEMA Region 9 and a member of the review council, said the flood insurance program is “financially unstable” and in considerable debt. 

“We came away with a number of recommendations that we want to put forward — primarily that focuses on a shift from a federally managed flood insurance program back to the private sector and allowing the private sector to take on a bigger role within the market,” he said. “And I think that’s going to help because it puts the states, who are statutorily responsible for regulating insurance, back into a critical role.”

Fenton said the review council recommended lawmakers create a program to transfer NFIP policies, which he noted are a requirement for many homeowners, to the private sector.

But there will be some extra work to do on the 5% of NFIP policies he said are categorized as “repetitive loss” and are “responsible for 30% to 40% of the payouts that we do through our flood insurance program.” 

“So leveraging our other programs, like our mitigation program,” Fenton said. “How do we buy out those homes and move them out of those risk areas? Or how do we build the infrastructure around them to better protect them and have those not be areas that have repetitive damage?”

White House spokeswoman Abigail Jackson wrote in a statement that Trump “looks forward to reviewing the recommendations put forth by the FEMA Review Council.”

“The President remains committed to getting resources to communities in need while also working with states to ensure they invest in their own resilience before disaster strikes, making response less urgent and recovery less prolonged,” Jackson added. 

Trump has said throughout his second term that he wants to change how the federal government approaches natural disaster management and recovery.

“We want to wean off of FEMA and we want to bring it down to the state level,” Trump said in June. “We’re moving it back to the states so the governors can handle it. That’s why they’re governors. Now, if they can’t handle it, they shouldn’t be governor.”

Kevin Guthrie, executive director of the Florida Division of Emergency Management, said one of the review council’s main recommendations is “to equip state, local, tribal, territories to lead disaster response with the federal government in a supporting role, not a supplanting role.”

“We want FEMA to set the standard and then encourage creation of standards and then adoption of standards at the state, local, tribal, territorial level,” he said. 

Guthrie said during the public meeting where review council members outlined the recommendations in their 75-page report that “federal assistance should only be reserved for truly significant events that exceed state, local, tribal, territorial capacity and capability.”

The federal government, he said, needs to update the methodology it uses to determine when a natural disaster or other major event has overwhelmed a community’s ability to recover. 

“Many, many states are going to say, ‘I hit a million dollars, I can request the threshold,’ regardless if it’s actually broken the back of that local or state government,” Guthrie said. “They’re going to do it because they can. And again, that’s what we’re talking about. We need to realign that.”

Former Mississippi Gov. Phil Bryant said “nothing can be more important than empowering the states to take on this responsibility,” though he added that individuals need to prepare for natural disasters as well. 

“I remember as a child when people had their own fallout shelters in their backyards,” he said. “If they didn’t, they knew where the closest fallout shelter was. We took responsibility for food and water and to be able to respond to those disasters.”

Fenton said the review council believes FEMA’s post-disaster mitigation program should be turned over to state governments. 

“Let the state manage this program by providing them the resources and an architecture that will ensure that priorities are naturally aligned and that some of the complexities of environmental review and some of the other reviews are done locally,” he said.  

Guthrie said FEMA should also look for ways to speed up federal assistance by making it less complex for people whose homes are deemed uninhabitable following a disaster. The federal government should also allow state, local, territorial, or tribal governments to have more of a say on emergency housing. 

“Let’s get back to some common-sense, state-managed solutions,” he said. 

Another suggestion from the board calls on the administration and lawmakers to better integrate private sector, faith-based and nonprofit organizations that regularly play a role in natural disaster response and recovery. 

“(The) private sector is responsible for so much in disasters, and they own so much of the infrastructure or key capabilities that we depend on,” Fenton said. “And so we need to be able to leverage those retailers, those small businesses and we need to give them a way to integrate with these events.” 

Many of the recommendations from the review council will need to run through Congress, where work overhauling FEMA began last year. 

The House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee voted 57-3 in September to approve a bill that would make several changes to the FEMA, including removing it from the Department of Homeland Security and making the agency its own Cabinet-level department. 

The legislation would create one application for federal natural disaster assistance from FEMA, the Department of Agriculture, Department of Health and Human Services, Department of Housing and Urban Development and the Small Business Administration. 

It would also give local and state governments more flexibility in deciding which types of emergency housing best meet the needs of their residents following different natural disasters.

House Republican leaders have yet to bring the bipartisan bill to the floor for a vote. 

On a call organized by disaster relief advocacy group Organizing Resilience, disaster survivors said the council did well at identifying problems with the current infrastructure, but that the recommendations appeared to come up short.

“Our concern for disaster survivors is that some of the recommended changes may not reflect what the council heard from survivors about what they need,” Maddie Sloan, the director of disaster recovery at the social justice nonprofit Texas Appleseed, said on the call shortly after the report was published.

FEMA would be unable to act on many of the recommendations on its own without congressional approval, Sloan said, while many of the “transformative actions” the agency has taken over the past 18 months have significantly weakened disaster response.

The changes shifted responsibility from the federal agency to states, tribes, local government and individuals, she said. Thursday’s recommendations would only worsen that problem.

“Survivors absolutely want a more streamlined system, and they need help to get to them faster,” Sloan said. “But these recommendations, particularly around individual assistance, in fact slash the help that’s available to individual survivors.”

One such change, allowing only relief for survivors whose homes are uninhabitable, means that costs related to auto repair or replacement, medical care or funerals cannot be covered, Sloan said.

Shifting responsibility to state and local governments, without any federal guarantee of repayment, would leave more survivors without access to critical funds, Sloan and other panelists said.

Michael McLemore, an organizer in St. Louis and a survivor of the tornado there last year, said the federal response was marked by “abdicating responsibility, playing political games and shifting the burdens of states and … cities.”

It took the agency nearly eight months to even start obligating funds, leaving the city to shoulder the cost in the meantime, McLemore said.

The panel called for passage of the bipartisan FEMA bill, sponsored by Missouri Republican Sam Graves and Washington Democrat Rick Larsen, along with 68 other cosponsors, that would take FEMA out of DHS management and reestablish it as an independent agency.

WASHINGTON — Attorneys for the Trump administration argued before a federal appeals court Thursday the Pentagon should be able to reprimand Arizona Democratic Sen. Mark Kelly for reminding members of the military they can refuse illegal orders, and for criticizing the Defense Department. 

Lawyers from the Justice Department told the three-judge panel that even though Kelly, a retired Navy captain, is no longer on active duty and has no commanding officer, they believe he is still subject to disciplinary action and limited First Amendment rights. 

John Bailey, an attorney in the DOJ’s civil rights division, said a “pattern of statements and conduct” showed Kelly intended to “counsel disobedience” within the armed forces. That led to a censure letter and attempts by the Defense Department to downgrade his retirement rank and pay. 

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth’s attempts to punish Kelly, he said, weren’t solely based on the senator’s appearance alongside other Democrats in the “Don’t Give up the Ship” video.

Bailey said comments Kelly made during a press conference and in television news interviews about the deployment of National Guard troops to various cities and strikes on alleged drug smuggling boats in the Caribbean also played a role. 

Bailey told the judges that if Kelly or another of the roughly 2 million retired service members wanted to make similar statements, they were “free” to separate from the military and resign their commissions. He said the Trump administration was not seeking to apply the same restrictions on free speech to the 17 million veterans who have been discharged and no longer have any connection to the military. 

But, Bailey also told the judges that “context matters” and an instructor at the Naval Academy or West Point wouldn’t be in the wrong to tell service members they aren’t required to follow illegal orders.  

The question before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, which will rule in the coming weeks, is on whether a preliminary injunction granted to Kelly can stay in place while the case proceeds, or whether it should be overturned.

The attorney representing Kelly said during oral arguments a district court judge ruled correctly earlier this year when he granted the preliminary injunction that allows Kelly to keep his retirement rank and pay while the case moves through the court system. 

Benjamin C. Mizer, a partner at the Arnold & Palmer law firm, said that Kelly “did not counsel disobedience to lawful orders.” 

He also said subjecting a retired service member who is also a lawmaker to the jurisdiction of the president as commander-in-chief would create an issue with the separation of powers. 

Kelly said outside the courthouse after 90 minutes of oral arguments the Trump administration’s attempts to limit the free speech rights of retired service members was “absurd” and “an outrageous violation of our constitutional rights.”

“One of our most fundamental rights is the right to speak out about the government,” Kelly said. “It’s the right that guarantees all others and it’s how we hold our government accountable.”

Kelly said the voices and experiences of retired service members are especially important after President Donald Trump started a war with Iran. 

“Who better to speak out and share their perspective than the people who served — retired military members who understand the risks and sacrifice of sending brave Americans into combat, who understand how to use combat power, but also understand its limitations,” he said. “And also who have seen the mistakes of past administrations that thought wars could be fast and simple, only to get bogged down for years or for decades.”

Karen LeCraft Henderson, nominated by President George H.W. Bush in 1990; Cornelia T.L. Pillard, nominated by President Barack Obama in 2013; and Florence Y. Pan, nominated by President Joe Biden in 2022, make up the three-judge panel that will rule on the appeal.  

The case began earlier this year after Hegseth started the process to downgrade Kelly’s retirement rank and pay for appearing in a 90-second video alongside other Democratic lawmakers. 

“No one has to carry out orders that violate the law or our Constitution. We know this is hard and that it’s a difficult time to be a public servant,” they said in the video published in November. “But whether you’re serving in the CIA, in the Army, or Navy, or the Air Force, your vigilance is critical.”

The video also featured Michigan Sen. Elissa Slotkin, Colorado Rep. Jason Crow, Pennsylvania Reps. Chris Deluzio and Chrissy Houlahan and New Hampshire Rep. Maggie Goodlander. 

A censure letter from Hegseth released in January alleged Kelly’s comments in the video undermined the military chain of command, counseled disobedience, created confusion about duty, brought discredit upon the Armed Forces and included conduct unbecoming of an officer. 

Senior Judge Richard J. Leon of the District of Columbia District Court heard arguments in early February over whether to grant Kelly a preliminary injunction, which he did later that month. 

“Rather than trying to shrink the First Amendment liberties of retired servicemembers, Secretary Hegseth and his fellow Defendants might reflect and be grateful for the wisdom and expertise that retired servicemembers have brought to public discussions and debate on military matters in our Nation over the past 250 years,” Leon wrote. “If so, they will more fully appreciate why the Founding Fathers made free speech the first Amendment in the Bill of Rights!”

The Trump administration then appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia.

Two Democrats will face each other in the May primary election race for Idaho’s 1st Congressional District. 

Kenneth Brungardt and Kaylee Peterson are running for the U.S. House of Representatives position that covers all of North Idaho and the western part of the state. Republican U.S. Rep. Russ Fulcher currently serves in this seat, which has a two-year term. 

The candidates, the ballot measures, and the tools you need to cast your vote.

The Democratic winner will face the winner of the Republican primary contest as well as Constitution Party candidate Brendan Gomez and independent Sarah Zabel in the November general election. 

Brungardt, 71, is a retired painter for Ada County from Meridian and a first-time candidate, according to the Idaho Secretary of State elections database. Peterson, 36, is a political strategist from Eagle who previously ran for the same congressional seat in 2022 and 2024. 

Peterson told the Idaho Capital Sun for the 2026 Primary Election Voter Guide her top priority is restoring government accountability and trust through policies such as banning congressional stock trades, term limits, and campaign finance reforms. She said she’d also focus on “building a labor-first economy,” and protecting public lands. 

Brungardt said his top priorities were affordability, including in health care, as well as farmers and public lands. 

Candidates say they’d try to legislate protection of public lands 

As nearly two-thirds of Idaho’s landmass is federally owned public land, policies regarding those lands are a top issue for many Idaho voters. 

“Idahoans love outdoor recreation,” Brungardt said. “Hunting, Fishing, Hiking, Biking and just enjoying Nature. Selling our Public Lands is just wrong. I will present Bills to save open spaces for future Idahoans.”

Fulcher to face two GOP opponents in 2026 Republican primary election on May 19

Peterson also said she opposes the sale of public lands, and that she thinks they could be used to generate more revenue. 

“Idaho sits on an extraordinary asset and we should be far more creative and strategic about how we use it,” Peterson said. “That means strengthening the federal agencies and local stakeholders who manage our lands and oversee private leases, ensuring they generate real revenue for Idaho communities. It means thoughtfully building out the infrastructure around logging, mining, and energy leases in ways that create lasting economic value without sacrificing conservation.” 

Peterson and Brungardt oppose Medicaid cuts, present differing healthcare solutions 

Congress approved major reductions in Medicaid spending in the “Big Beautiful” law in July, and Idaho officials last summer cut Medicaid provider pay rates by 4% to address a projected budget shortfall. 

As Idaho permanently extends governor’s budget cuts, Medicaid will keep provider pay cuts

Peterson said she opposed the cuts, but thinks there are changes needed to the system, especially investigating fraud in Medicaid and Medicare “to ensure taxpayer dollars actually reach the patients they are intended for.” 

Regarding healthcare overall, she said she supported changes to prevent insurance companies from determining levels of care patients receive and eliminating monopolies in the insurance industry. 

“We must continue to negotiate prescription drug prices,” she said. “We must protect Medicare funding. We must fully fund our VA; it is an abomination to have the highest defense budget in the world and yet fail to take care of our service men and women.”

Brungardt criticized congressional Republicans, who narrowly control both the U.S. House and Senate, regarding healthcare actions. 

“Republicans have no answers for healthcare,” he said. “They have gutted Medicaid … Healthcare is valued by all people. Universal Healthcare (at this time) has no real chance but a tiered system can work, based on income and other circumstances (marital status, children, ect).”

Candidates say they want immigration reform to improve legal pathways 

Brungardt and Peterson both condemned the highly visible mass detention and deportation efforts being pursued by Immigration and Customs Enforce, ICE, under the Trump administration. 

Brungardt said he “was glad they got the border under control but the policy Trump has endorsed is not Law & Order.” 

Two GOP challengers will face longtime incumbent U.S. Rep. Mike Simpson in May election

“I believe in the rule of law and if there’s a reason those who don’t belong here, there’s a legal system and courts to decide these issues quickly,” he said. “Congress should find a path through the legal system for immigration to be fair for all who want citizenship. We are all better off with diversity.” 

Peterson said the actions by ICE are “unacceptable.” She said she supported changes proposed in a 2024 bill negotiated by a bipartisan trio of lawmakers, which later lost support and failed on a procedural vote, the States Newsroom reported. Peterson said she supported accelerated screening times for migrants, more funding to immigration agencies and expanding legal pathways. 

“Idaho agriculture depends on foreign-born workers, and I will seek ways to grant work visas to those hard-working individuals,” she said. 

She added she supported protections and college access for recipients of the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, or DACA, for undocumented residents who arrived in the U.S as children. 

Campaign finance filings show Peterson ahead in fundraising 

Since the beginning of 2025, Peterson has raised more than $130,800 for her campaign, according to data from the Federal Election Commission. Individual donors contributed around $116,400 of that total, and other political action committees provided another $11,000. The total includes a $3,000 loan from herself. 

Brungardt has garnered nearly $22,000 for his campaign, with around $15,000 coming from individual contributions, according to FEC data. He hasn’t received any reported funds from other political action committees. Brungardt took out a total of $12,500 in loans from himself. 

Hundreds of attorneys rated candidates for Idaho district judgeships in a survey conducted last month by the Idaho State Bar. 

The survey comes as Idaho voters prepare to elect judges in the May 19 primary election. But instead of picking party nominees who advance to the general election in November, the nonpartisan judicial races will be decided later this month.

The survey focused on four contested races in Ada, Caribou, Madison, and Shoshone counties. District courts are state-level courts, split up by region, that hold trials for felony cases and high-value civil cases, such as lawsuits.

The survey asked legal professionals to evaluate judicial candidates based on their legal qualifications, such as experience, integrity, independence and demeanor. But the results, which are available online, aren’t an endorsement of individual candidates, according to the Idaho State Bar, which licenses attorneys to practice law. 

“The Idaho State Bar does not interpret or express any opinion about the results of this survey,” the report on the survey says.

The survey was developed decades ago, and has been used in most contested judicial elections in Idaho since 2006, Idaho State Bar Executive Director Maureen Ryan Braley said in an interview Wednesday.

“Attorneys in Idaho and judges in Idaho have a unique perspective and knowledge of the people running for judicial office …. As an attorney going in a courtroom and interacting with a certain judge, or as an attorney working alongside or opposite a member of the bar, we have experiences with these lawyers and with these judges that the public may not have,” she said.

How are Idaho judges elected? 

It depends what type of judge they are.

District judges are elected once every four years in May. Justices that serve on the Idaho Supreme Court and judges that serve on the Court of Appeals are elected in May to six-year terms.

Magistrate judges are elected in November and serve four-year terms. 

The State of Idaho Judicial Branch has a webpage explaining how Idaho judges are selected.

What the survey found

The survey drew 873 anonymous responses from more than 7,200 Idaho attorneys and judges invited to participate in April, the Idaho State Bar announced in a news release. 

Surveyors ranked judicial candidates on a four-point scale, similar to a grade point average, or GPA. The survey asked for ratings for four areas: Integrity and Independence; Knowledge and Understanding of the Law; Judicial Temperament and Demeanor; and Legal Ability and Experience. Here’s what the scores mean:

• A 1 means the candidate “does not meet expectations for this position” in a given area, such as legal ability.
• A 2 means “Average for position.”
• A 3 means “Above average for position.”
• A 4 means “Exceeds expectations for position; excellent.”

Responses to questions about each candidate ranged from as low as 56 to more than 300. Bar members were asked to not respond to questions about candidates whom they don’t know, the report says. 

Here’s a snapshot of how the candidates fared:

District 1, Shoshone County: 

• Benjamin J. Allen: 3.11 average. His lowest rated area was legal ability and experience, with a 3.01 rating. And his highest rated area was judicial temperament and demeanor, with a 3.19 rating. 
• Lisa M. Chesebro: 2.87 average. Her lowest rated area was judicial temperament and demeanor, with a 2.79 rating. And her highest rated area was integrity and independence, with a 2.93 rating. 

District 4, Ada County:

• David J. Morse: 3.1 average. His lowest rated area was legal ability and experience, with a 3.07 rating. And his highest rated area was integrity and independence, with a 3.14 rating.
• Jeffrey Street Jr.: 3.48 average. His lowest rated area was legal ability and experience, with a 3.44 rating. His highest rated area was integrity and independence, with a 3.51 rating. 
• Greg Woodard: 2.54 average. His lowest rated area was judicial temperament and demeanor, with a 2.5 rating. His highest rated area was legal ability and experience, with a 2.6 rating. 

District 6, Caribou County:

• Cody L. Brower: 2.26 average. His lowest rated area was legal ability and experience, with a 2.07 rating. And his highest rated area was integrity and independence, with a 2.47 rating.
• Aaron N. Thompson: 3.66 average. His lowest rated area was integrity and independence, with a 3.63 rating. His highest rated area was legal ability and experience, with a 3.68 rating.

District 7, Madison County: 

• Steven W. Boyce: 3.66 average. His lowest rated area was knowledge and understanding of the law, with a 3.6 rating. And his highest rated area was judicial temperament and demeanor, with a 3.7 rating. 
• Randy Neal: 1.66 average. His lowest rated area was integrity and independence, with a 1.58 rating. His highest rated area was knowledge and understanding of the law, with a 1.76 rating. 
• Want to read more about this race? See East Idaho News’s coverage.

Frank Church’s conservation legacy deserves respect. But the federal law that Frank Church and his U.S. Senate colleagues passed — the Pacific Northwest Electric Power Planning and Conservation Act of 1980 — does not ask the region to choose salmon over reliable power. It requires an “adequate, efficient, economical, and reliable” power supply, alongside fish and wildlife protection under the Columbia Basin Fish and Wildlife Program.

Forty-five years later, the harder question is whether either half of that mandate can still be met. Salmon returns are struggling across Western North America, including in undammed rivers, due to predators, ocean conditions, habitat loss and warming waters. This is not only a Snake River problem — it is a coastal problem.

Even so, investments in hatcheries and passage have produced gains. Average salmon and steelhead returns over the past 15 years have more than quadrupled at Lower Granite Dam, compared with the dam’s first year of operation in 1975.

The power picture is going in the opposite direction. Jim Robb, president of the North American Electric Reliability Corporation, warned last fall that the U.S. grid is in a “five-alarm fire” condition, with dependable supply retiring faster than replacement resources arrive. The Western Electricity Coordinating Council reached a similar conclusion in its January 2026 assessment, finding blackout risk rising across the decade and flagging the Northwest as among the West’s most exposed regions.

That risk is no abstraction. During the January 2024 cold snap, the Northwest came close to cutting power to homes and businesses. Federal dams were running hard, wind and solar output had dropped sharply, and the region had little margin left.

Idaho may not have a statutory clean energy mandate, but it is not insulated from these pressures. Load is growing, winter peaks are tightening, and the region is increasingly dependent on coordinated operations and imports during extreme conditions. When the margin narrows in the Northwest, Idaho is part of that system.

In an April 23 Idaho Capital Sun commentary, Stephen Pfeiffer made the case for removing the lower Snake River dams, arguing they represent “just 4 percent” of the region’s power and can be replaced with “shovel-ready” clean energy.

That argument was strained five years ago. It does not survive today’s power-system reality.

A recent E3 analysis, commissioned by the Public Generating Pool and 14 utility and power sector sponsors, and conducted by Energy + Environmental Economics, an independent energy consulting firm, projects the Northwest will be short 9 gigawatts of dependable capacity by 2030 and 14 to 18 gigawatts by 2035 — a gap larger than Oregon’s average demand before any dam is removed.

A second phase, released last month, projects retail rates running 36 to 47 percent above inflation from rising demand and insufficient supply alone. Meeting the West Coast’s clean energy mandates — alongside rising demand and tightening supply across the region — would nearly triple today’s retail rates.

E3’s conclusion is direct: the transition is infeasible without at least one clean, firm, long-duration, dispatchable resource at commercial scale. Only one currently exists. It is hydropower.

That brings us back to the “4 percent” claim. It measures average energy in normal water years. It does not measure reserves, voltage support or the ability to respond when demand spikes and other resources underperform. And it does not measure winter peak capacity — the lower Snake River dams can deliver up to 3,000 megawatts of flexible, carbon-free output, precisely the resource type the Northwest is already short on.

Idaho is not a bystander to this arithmetic. The state’s municipal utilities and rural electric cooperatives rely on Bonneville Power Administration hydropower for most of their supply — among the lowest-cost wholesale electricity in the country. Even with the federal system in place, a typical Idaho public power household faces roughly $400 to $550 more per year in today’s dollars at the lower end of E3’s rate trajectory.

Now imagine that math without the lower Snake River dams.

None of this is an argument against salmon recovery. Pacific Northwest identity and tribal heritage are inseparable from the rivers, and Idaho has some of the finest remaining salmon habitat in the lower 48. But a serious basin debate requires the full arithmetic.

That math must include what reducing dispatchable, carbon-free capacity actually costs in reliability, in rates, and in the clean-energy transition regional policymakers have already committed to.

The Northwest Power Act’s mandate was for both salmon and power. Honoring it today means treating the power obligation as seriously as the salmon obligation — and recognizing that neither has been solved.

The 28th edition of the Idaho Blue Book, which has been fully redesigned with the modern reader in mind, is now available to the public for purchase.

The Blue Book, which has been produced by the Idaho Secretary of State’s Office since 1969, is distributed free of charge to all Idaho libraries, schools — including every fourth-grade classroom to help students learn Idaho history — and government agencies. It is essentially the official encyclopedia of Idaho, detailing the state’s history and culture, public officials and commission members, and processes and procedures for how state government works.

Members of the public can purchase a physical copy of the Blue Book online at the Secretary of State’s website for $20 or view the full edition online for free.

This edition of the Blue Book has been reimagined and took an extra seven months to perfect, Secretary of State Phil McGrane said at a press conference unveiling the book on Wednesday at the Idaho State Capitol in Boise.

To be more accessible to modern readers, McGrane said the design and format of the book has changed feel more like that of a coffee table book, rather than a reference guide or encyclopedia. The 217-page book, which is in full color, features numerous photos, maps and graphics that better help tell the story of Idaho, McGrane said.

Members of the Secretary of State’s Office and the Idaho State Historical Society, including State Historian HannaLore Hein, contributed to the writing and fact checking for the Blue Book.

“One of the big things that we’ve seen, though, is everything has become more and more digital,” McGrane said. “The Blue Book readership has slowly declined in terms of people. There are some people who collect these and have for years. …One of the things we wanted to do is bring back the relevance of the Idaho Blue Book.”

McGrane and Idaho Gov. Brad Little held a book signing ceremony at the press conference Wednesday to launch the public access to the book.

The sale of the book to the public helps offset the costs of publishing, McGrane said. The book was designed by Robert Logan and published by Treasure Valley Litho in Boise.

The deadline to request an absentee ballot ahead of the 2026 primary election is 5 p.m. Friday.

Voters can request an absentee ballot, which allows people to vote via mail-in ballot, online at VoteIdaho.gov.

The Idaho Secretary of State Office says voters who miss the deadline can still participate in the May 19 primary election. Voters can take part in early voting, which is underway in many counties, or turn out at the polls on Election Day. 

Dates to know, how-to instructions and candidate surveys for Idaho’s top contested primaries.

Friday is also the deadline to register to vote before the election. But in Idaho, voters can register to vote on Election Day, or when they early vote.

“Primary elections matter,” Secretary of State Phil McGrane said in a statement. “The races on the ballot range from Idaho’s Congressional seats and state legislative races down to the hyperlocal precinct committeemen who represent your neighborhood. In Idaho, we make it easy to register, vote, and preview your own ballot before Election Day. I encourage every eligible voter to make a plan and vote.”

The primary election is where voters can pick nominees for political parties to advance to the November general election. This year, three congressional seats representing Idaho; all Idaho constitutional offices, including the governor’s office; and all 105 state legislative seats are up for election, along with local offices such as county commissioner and clerk.

Visit VoteIdaho.gov to check your voter registration status, see what your ballot will look like, or to find an early voting location near you. 

Here’s other key election deadlines, from VoteIdaho.gov:

• May 15: The end of in-person early voting and in-person absentee voting. Some small counties allow voters to fill in and submit absentee ballots at the county office in-person, without mailing the ballots.
• May 19: Primary Election Day. When polls close at 8 p.m, absentee ballots must be received by county clerks to be counted. 

A large logging project near Cooke City and an entrance to Yellowstone National Park has been scrubbed by the U. S. Forest Service after conservation groups challenged the federal government, saying it was using unproven methods at the risk of several endangered species.

The Cooke City Fuels Project was withdrawn by the  Forest Service and would have encompassed 19,921 acres. The purpose was to reduce the amount of fuels in order to reduce the threat of wildfire using a number of techniques, including “daylight thinning.” The Forest Service would have removed other trees and brush around the endangered Whitebark Pine trees as a means to bolster their chances of survival. However, the conservation groups which challenged the project said that there was no scientific research validating the technique.

Three conservation groups and an individual who brought the legal action in federal court said that the Forest Service’s own plans and documents outlining the project included the admission that the technique could wind up harming the pine tree stands, as well as imperil the habitat of other threatened or endangered species, including Canada lynx and grizzly bears.

Whitebark pine trees are threatened and considered a “keystone species.” They are susceptible to a disease, whitebark pine blister rust, and need the cool to cold climates of high elevations, which has been increasingly limited because of climate change. 

The plan for the Cooke City project also estimated that the net loss to the American taxpayers would be $2.8 million if the project was completed.

On Thursday, Clint Kolarich, the Gardiner District Ranger signed off on the notice of withdrawal, saying that Jacqueline Buchanan, Deputy Chief for Ecosystem Management Coordination, authorized withdrawal of the decision.

The lawsuit had also claimed that the Forest Service disregarded wide swaths of designated Canada lynx habitat. Also, the suit pointed out that increased logging activities and road building in the area would disrupt grizzly bear habitat.

“The Forest Service claimed the project was going to protect Cooke City from wildfire, but the plan called for logging well beyond the wildland urban interface – which is why the vast majority of Cooke City residents who commented opposed the project,” said Mike Garrity of Alliance for the Wild Rockies, one of the groups that challenged the project. “We won on this issue when the federal district court ruled in our favor and stopped the Round Star logging project in the Flathead National Forest. We hope the Forest Service will now work to protect Cooke City from wildfires by helping residents ‘harden’ their homes against wildfires by having non-flammable roofs and decks and trimming trees next to their homes, not logging roadless areas miles away.”

This story was originally produced by Daily Montanan, which is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network which includes Idaho Capital Sun, and is supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity.

Most kratom products won’t be on Utah shelves starting today as new legislation goes into effect allowing only pure leaf powders and capsules to be sold in specialty stores. 

A lawsuit from Botanic Tonics, the manufacturer of “feel free” tonics, won’t delay the law. A federal judge denied the company’s request for an injunction on Monday.

Quickly after the Utah Legislature approved a partial kratom ban this year prohibiting adulterated kratom from being sold in the state, the company sued state officials in federal court, asking for a judge to declare the new regulations unconstitutional while arguing it contradicts federal law. 

Botanic Tonic’s “feel free” tonic mixes kratom and kava root, which according to the new law, will be illegal to sell in Utah as it combines kratom with a “nonkratom” substance. Utah’s law, the company said, would cause them to remove their products from Utah stores and immediately lose over $10.7 million.

However, according to court documents, a judge found the company “failed to show a likelihood of success on their legal arguments that federal law preempts any relevant part of the Kratom Regulation Act.” 

“Even if feel free falls within the federal definition of a dietary supplement and does not meet statutory criteria for being deemed to be adulterated, these federal statutes do not require that feel free be sold,” the court wrote in its decision. 

That means that even if federal law allows kratom supplements like “feel free,” the company is able to comply with Utah regulations “by simply declining to sell feel free in Utah.” 

Botanic Tonics filed an appeal to the decision on Tuesday. It did not reply to a request for comment.

The kratom leaf, native to Southeast Asia, has been the center of controversy nationally. While many say it’s highly effective in treating conditions like chronic pain, anxiety and opioid use disorders, kratom products can also have opioid-like characteristics and have been responsible for addiction and even death among Utahns.

Lawmakers have discussed at length kratom products’ presence in gas stations and convenience stores, especially studying the impacts of items that increase the herb’s potency by artificially enhancing 7-hydroxymitragynine, or 7-OH, a naturally occurring alkaloid that’s only a minor constituent of the plant.

Senate Minority Assistant Whip Mike McKell, R-Spanish Fork, who sponsored the law and has heavily advocated for a full kratom ban in the state, told Utah News Dispatch he believes the court reached the right conclusion.

While the company may have appealed, McKell predicted the company won’t prevail.

“That’s a really bad sign for them, if the court, looking at it at this initial level, doesn’t feel like they have a substantial likelihood of prevailing,” McKell said. “It’s going to be an uphill battle for them, certainly.”

Now that the partial ban is going into effect, McKell said he intends to keep an eye on the issue, hoping for a full ban. But, as of Tuesday afternoon, he said “midnight can’t come soon enough.”

“Bottom line is the product sold by the company Botanic Tonics is really dangerous, and I’m glad that we’re no longer going to be selling the product ‘feel free’ in the state of Utah,” he said. “It is one of the worst, and it didn’t surprise me that they wanted to litigate it, but I’m also glad the court ruled against them.”

This story was originally produced by Utah News Dispatch, which is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network which includes Idaho Capital Sun, and is supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity.

SALEM—Oregon’s wildfire season started early this year and is expected to last into October, according to state fire experts.

The season is made more difficult by historic heat, drought and a potentially early El Niño weather pattern that could further stir up temperatures and lightning storms into the fall, fire officials said at a Tuesday news conference with Gov. Tina Kotek. Oregonians need to be proactive about protecting themselves and their properties from wildfire and behave far more cautiously when starting campfires or burning debris than in recent years, they advised.

“It’s not one thing that brings the wildfire season, it’s many things,” Kotek said.

Although May is officially Wildfire Awareness Month, the season’s first Level 3 fire — meaning residents were ordered to evacuate immediately — occurred in La Pine in March, burning 20 acres.

“All indications suggest a more challenging fire season ahead of all of us,” Kotek said.

Oregon’s winter was among the warmest on record and snow-pack across the Northwest was one-third of normal levels, according to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

Last year’s wildfire season burned significantly fewer Oregon acres than in previous years, in large part because the Oregon Legislature allocated hundreds of millions of additional dollars to the Oregon Department of Forestry and the Office of the State Fire Marshal. Both in turn beefed up preparation and response systems since the 2020 Labor Day Fires that became the most expensive in state history.

But most fires last year — more than 60% of wildfires — were started by humans, a disappointing reversal from years prior, which had human-caused fires trending downward. People burning yard waste and other debris is the number one cause of human-ignited wildfires, Oregon State Fire Marshal Mariana Ruiz-Temple said.

She encouraged Oregonians who burn debris to download a new Before You Burn app developed with support from state and federal fire agencies, which will provide users information about local burn regulations, burn statuses, required safety measures and fire and weather alerts. About 700 Oregonians have downloaded it since it launched in April, she said.

Oregon’s new state forester, Kacey KC, said it’s likely that wildfire risk will be above normal east of the Cascades in rangeland areas beginning in June and above normal southwest of the Cascades by July, heading up further into forests that have experienced record-low snowpack this year.

Oregon’s fire agencies have roughly 700 wildland fire fighters and 300 fire trucks ready to protect 16 million Oregon acres this season. They’ll rely as well on more than 300 local fire departments and federal and tribal wildland firefighters to respond in an emergency.

“We are ready, we are coordinated and we are all hands on deck as we prepare for the season,” Kotek said.

Oregon’s congressional Democrats have raised concerns that federal support could be lacking in light of budget and personnel cuts to the U.S. Forest Service over the last year. The cuts, according to a letter from Oregon’s senior U.S. Sen. Ron Wyden, included 1,400 employees who hold the necessary certifications to support firefighting operations during a wildfire.

KC said she talks frequently with the Forest Service’s regional director — at least weekly as the state prepares and gets closer to the fire season — and that she’s been assured no wildland firefighters working for the Forest Service or U.S. Department of the Interior in Oregon have lost their jobs.

Although federal officials have been criticized for consolidating wildland firefighting efforts at both agencies to create the new U.S. Wildland Fire Service so close to the start of the fire season, KC said signs so far indicate that moving all firefighting efforts under the Interior as opposed to several agencies could be beneficial in the long run.

“They’re working together to figure out how to do this more effectively. And so I feel confident that this year, on a firefighting front, they’re going to be as active as they’ve always been, and that it may actually even be a little simpler,” she said.

• Space trees and prune them to prevent fire from climbing up them and onto structures.
• Remove leaves, pine needles, mulch and other debris within 100 feet of structures or up to the property line.
• Clean roofs and gutters.
• Move combustible materials like mulch and firewood away from structures.
• Trim dead material from plants and trees, especially near the house.
• Do not plant directly under eaves. Leave at least a five-foot buffer between plants and structures.
• Know your evacuation routes, be two weeks ready and sign up for emergency alerts at OR-Alert.
• Know your local air quality smoke conditions by keeping up with DEQ’s Air now program: About AirNow | AirNow.gov.
  

This story was originally produced by Oregon Capital Chronicle, which is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network which includes Idaho Capital Sun, and is supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity.

WASHINGTON — Voters, including those within the Make America Healthy Again movement, say the rising cost of healthcare is a significant concern that will have an impact on whom they support in November’s midterm elections, according to a poll released Wednesday by KFF. 

Sixty-one percent of respondents to the survey, which asked how important several health-related issues were, said the price of healthcare will have a major impact on which party they support as control of Congress hangs in the balance.

Among MAHA voters, who are predominantly Republicans but also include independents and some Democrats, 42% said cost is their top issue heading into the elections. 

“While the issue of health costs is more salient for Democratic voters than for Republicans, larger shares across partisans say health costs will have a major impact on their voting decisions than say the same about vaccine policy or food safety,” the survey said. 

Seventy-two percent of Democrats, 63% of independents and 47% of Republicans said the cost of healthcare will have a major impact on which party’s candidate they vote for. 

Vaccine policy came in next, with 57% of Democrats, 46% of independents and 32% of Republicans surveyed saying it will have a major impact on their choice. 

Issues related to food safety came in third after 43% of Democrats, 40% of independents and 38% of Republicans responded that it will have a major impact on their choice of candidate.  

For MAHA voters, twice as many listed health costs as their first priority than the next issue: restricting the use of certain chemical additives in food, which was a key concern for 21%.

Ten percent were interested in politicians who will reevaluate vaccine approvals, 8% want lawmakers to limit corporate interest in food and 8% want Congress to limit the use of pesticides in agriculture. Eleven percent said none of those or had no answer. 

The survey showed that a significant majority of Americans across the political spectrum believe the government hasn’t done enough to address chemical additives in food or pesticide use in agriculture, two core demands of MAHA supporters.  

“The public perception that there is not enough regulation may be rooted in broader skepticism toward the industries themselves,” the survey said. “Most U.S. adults do not trust pharmaceutical companies, food and beverage companies, or agricultural companies to act in the public’s best interest.”

Doctors and healthcare providers were the most trusted source of information at 70%, followed by agriculture companies at 40%, food and beverage companies at 25% and pharmaceutical companies at 21%. 

Seventy-five percent of those polled said the government hasn’t done enough to regulate chemicals in food, while 65% said it should do more to regulate pesticides in agriculture. 

The poll of 1,343 U.S. adults took place from April 14 to April 19. It has a margin of error of 3 percentage points for the full sample and 6 percentage points for MAHA supporters.

Correction: This story was corrected at 10:35 a.m. on May 6 to reflect that U.S. Rep. Mike Simpson previously served on the Blackfoot City Council. 

Longtime Idaho U.S. House Rep. Mike Simpson will face two challengers in the Republican primary election on May 19. 

Brian Keene, a 63-year-old from Twin Falls, and Perry Shumway, a 61-year-old from Rexburg, are running against Simpson. The incumbent is in his 14th, two-year term representing Idaho’s 2nd Congressional District, which covers eastern Idaho and Boise. 

The candidates, the ballot measures, and the tools you need to cast your vote.

Keene, now retired, said on his campaign website he formerly was an educator, Navy sailor, member of the National Guard and Army Reserve. Shumway said on his website he is a marketing professional with a varied employment background, and the son of a former Republican U.S. House Rep. from California, Norman Shumway.

Simpson, 75,  served on the Blackfoot City Council in 1980 until he was elected to the Idaho state House of Representatives in 1984. He was in the Statehouse until 1998, when he was first elected to the U.S. House of Representatives. 

Keene and Shumway say they will prioritize congressional processes 

Keen told the Idaho Capital Sun for its 2026 Primary Election Voter Guide that his top priority was “accountability,” followed by a “stable maintenance and responsible taxation” plan, and passing a balanced budget amendment to the U.S. Constitution. 

Shumway said his top priorities were allowing state-driven amendments to the U.S. Constitution without Congress, “thereby forcing a vote on amendments like congressional term limits and a balanced budget.” 

The nation’s Constitution may be amended by Congress through a two-thirds vote in both the House and Senate, or through a constitutional convention called for by two-thirds of the state legislatures, the latter of which has never been used for an amendment. 

Idaho’s Legislature has weighed in on recent efforts to call for a convention, but none of them have passed both chambers. 

Simpson said his top priority is improving affordability through lowering taxes and reducing regulations. He highlighted his vote in support of the “Big Beautiful” law, approved in July by Congress, which cut taxes on workers tips and overtime pay, and his support for the elimination of the estate tax, also known as the “death tax.” 

Simpson’s other top priorities are fighting for American energy independence and “to continue to use my position to fight against the Democrat’s war on fossil fuels,” as well as reforming legal immigration for the farm workforce.  

Candidates support deporting criminals and new immigration policies 

Simpson and Keene said they support immigration reforms for the farm workforce. Idaho’s agriculture industry depends on migrant workers, some documented and some undocumented. The dairy industry in Idaho does not have access to workers under the H-2a visa program, which is for seasonal workers. 

Simpson has been a co-sponsor on the bipartisan Farm Workforce Modernization Act, which was first introduced in 2019 but has not advanced through both chambers. The act would create a legal pathway for some undocumented agricultural workers, expand the program beyond just seasonal or temporary, and require agricultural employers to verify employment and immigration status when hiring. 

Fulcher to face two GOP opponents in 2026 Republican primary election on May 19

Simpson said he also supports “targeting and removing” people who are not legally authorized to be in the U.S. who commit crimes. He also said he supports building a border wall. 

Keene also said there was a need for changes to address farm workforce needs. 

“Idaho farmers depend on migrant workers — I grew up working alongside them. We need an efficient way to speed up the legal immigration process with biometrics and an ‘easy gate’ so we can track workers efficiently,” Keene said. “Deport criminals and illegals immediately. Fix the legal system first so enforcement becomes straightforward and unquestionable.” 

Shumway said in a video on his website that he agrees with President Donald Trump’s prioritization of improving border security. He said that, for undocumented farm workers, he doesn’t support mass deportations. 

“We need these people to be here to do the work that they’re willing to do at the prices they’re willing to do this work at, kind of a win-win. Deporting them all, sending them back to their countries would devastate our economy, so I’m not in favor of that,” Shumway said. “I’m also not in favor of a path to citizenship for people who have violated the law in coming here in the first place.” 

Candidates vary greatly on need for bipartisan agreements 

In recent years, the federal government has stalled, shut down and failed to pass legislation that requires reauthorization, such as an updated farm bill, in large part because a bipartisan coalition couldn’t be formed to get issues through. 

Keene said he would propose a constitutional amendment to require bills to be co-sponsored by at least one lawmaker from each party. He also has proposals to require Congress to approve “stable, multi-year budgets to prevent government shutdowns.” 

Shumway said he has no intention of reaching these kinds of agreements. 

“I will not foster so-called bipartisan agreements,” Shumway said. “Such agreements have brought us to the brink of economic disaster, where we find ourselves now.” 

He said there should be no farm bill, which is a massive piece of legislation that includes agricultural policies, farm subsidies, funding for food assistance, and other programs. 

“The federal government has no constitutional basis for involvement in agriculture or social welfare of any kind, nor is there a compelling rational argument to be made about the effectiveness of government intrusion into these things in the past,” Shumway said.
“As we approach $40 trillion in debt, it seems ridiculous to me that anyone in office would even consider voting yes on this $1.4 trillion debacle.” 

Simpson said in a past release he voted for the farm bill because it “modernizes and improves” funding for the USDA and because it provides “certainty to farmers and stakeholders,” the States Newsroom reported. 

“I regularly hear from farmers, ranchers, and producers in Idaho, and their main concern over the years has been when Congress will reauthorize the Farm Bill,” he said in the release. 

Simpson also underscored his work as chairman of the House Interior and Environment Appropriations Subcommittee, and the months negotiations it requires. 

“My experience and ability working with diverse groups and individuals are strengths that I’ve used, and will continue to use, to help Idaho,” Simpson said. “My experience working at the local, state, and federal level has allowed me to work with nearly every group and many individuals across Idaho.” 

All candidates agree Idaho’s public lands should remain public 

Keene and Shumway said they could support transferring some ownership or decision making of federal public lands to the state if there were conditions that the land wouldn’t be sold or made inaccessible. 

“Much of the current federally owned land in Idaho is undeveloped and should stay undeveloped for as long as possible,” Keene said. “It makes this land easier to use for outdoor recreation and for grazing. Putting it under state control with some federal funds but state decision making simply makes good sense.” 

Shumway said he would oppose the sale of any public lands and maintaining their accessibility. 

“I would only support transferring them to the state if there were an iron-clad guarantee that they would never be sold, and that free access would never be restricted,” he said. 

Simpson had previously co-sponsored the Public Lands in Public Hands Act, which would prevent the sale or transfer of large swaths of federal land except under narrow circumstances. 

“Idaho’s abundance of beautiful parks, forests, and public lands makes our state a wonderful place to live, work, and play,” he said. “Public lands were set aside for public use, and we have a responsibility to ensure that future generations will be able to enjoy the same benefits we sometimes take for granted today.” 

Simpson and Shumway support the SAVE Act voter ID bill. Keene says it’s ‘grandstanding.’ 

The U.S. House previously passed the “Safeguard American Voter Eligibility Act” or “SAVE Act” that would require proof of citizenship to register to vote and photo ID at polls. The bill, which is a top legislative priority for President Donald Trump, is still under consideration in the Senate.

Simpson joined every House Republican in voting in favor of the bill, which has drawn criticism from Democrats and voting advocates who say it will make it harder to vote for married women who have changed their name to vote, and would end voter registration drives. Some have also expressed concern about its requirement that states submit full voter rolls to the U.S. Department of Homeland Security to check for citizenship status. 

Simpson said the bill is a “common-sense approach to strengthening current election laws.” 

Shumway said he supported the bill, but has higher priorities. 

“I do not think it unreasonable to require people to prove their citizenship when registering to vote,” Shumway said. “It is not a super high priority for me, though. It’s not like voter fraud is rampant, or a hugely significant threat, compared to other, more pressing issues.” 

However, Keene called the bill “grandstanding and unnecessary noise.” 

“Idaho and most states already require photo ID with address and proof of citizenship to register and vote,” Keene said. “The real focus should have been strictly enforcing citizenship rules, not creating another fight. The way it was sold turned it into a pointless and unnecessary conflict. I support election integrity, but this feels like theater.” 

Candidates agree healthcare is unaffordable, offer vastly different approaches to fix it

Americans are facing future reductions to Medicaid in the “Big Beautiful” law approved by Congress in July, and the expiration at the end of 2025 of premium tax credits that were created to make coverage through the Affordable Care Act marketplace more affordable. 

After health insurance subsidies end, 30,000 Idahoans will be uninsured, government report says

More than 24,000 Idahoans canceled their health insurance plans through the state marketplace after Congress chose not to extend the premium subsidies, the Idaho Capital Sun previously reported. 

Shumway said American healthcare “is far removed from true free market competition.” His recommendations include changing the federal income tax code so employers could no longer write off health insurance expenses but individuals could, removing all medical licensing and credentialing requirements, eliminate requirements for prescriptions and controlled substances, and end all government health care programs, including Medicaid, Medicare and the Affordable Care Act. 

Simpson said he opposed “throwing more money” at the ACA. He said he supports price transparency, holding pharmacy benefit managers accountable, reducing prescription drug costs and reducing hidden costs. 

“I support strengthening rural health care access and protecting Medicare and Medicaid for those who rely on them while rooting out waste and improving efficiency,” Simpson said. “I also support expanding association health plans and reducing costly regulations that burden providers and small businesses.” 

Keene argued that key provisions of the ACA came from a Republican-led health care plan from the early ‘90s, and that it should be more supported by the GOP. 

“Sadly, President Trump and many congressional and senate republicans, forgot that the Affordable Care Act was largely based upon our own Health Equity and Access Reform Today Act of 1993 (often called the Chafee bill),” he said. 

The 1993 proposal by Republican Sen. John Chafee of Rhode Island included Senate Republican leadership as cosponsors at the time, and shared some similarities with the ACA such as an individual coverage mandate, vouchers for low-income people to purchase insurance, and a ban on denying coverage based on a preexisting condition. The bill never moved forward after it was introduced. 

“We need Republican leadership to do a better job studying history and learn to work with the Democrats when the democrats plagiarize OUR best material,” Keene said. “We need to work with the Democrats and negotiate a bipartisan blend of HEART (1993) and the Affordable Care Act.” 

Simpson nears $1 million in campaign fundraising 

Simpson’s campaign, which includes his political action committee, has garnered more than $900,000 in contributions since the beginning of 2025, according to data from the Federal Election Commission. Individuals donated more than $400,000 of that total, and over $500,000 came from other political action committees. 

His campaign has spent more than $600,000 so far. 

Shumway has raised just over $5,000, and he’s spent around $775, according to FEC reporting. Keene wasn’t in the FEC campaign finance database. 

On Tuesday, about 400 cubic feet per second, or cfs, of water was flowing over the falls, according to an Idaho Power press release, and that volume will increase to about 3,700 cfs by Thursday afternoon.

The additional flow comes from water released each spring by the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation from reservoirs on the Upper Snake River to help young salmon and steelhead migrate downstream through the lower Snake and Columbia rivers to the Pacific Ocean, according to Idaho Power.

The additional water is expected to be released at Milner Dam east of Twin Falls on Wednesday and will increase over the next few days to the target flow rate, the press release said.

At 212 feet, the falls are higher than Niagara Falls, and the site offers a wide variety of outdoor recreation opportunities, including children’s playgrounds, hiking trails, picnic areas, a boat ramp, a swimming area and a scenic overlook.

The cost for admission at Shoshone Falls Park is $5 per car, now through September.

Idaho Power’s Shoshone Falls Power Plant has a capacity of 14,729 kilowatts — enough to power more than 11,000 homes. The original plant was built in 1907 and was the first power plant in the Magic Valley.

Idaho Power does not control the timing or the amount of federal water releases, according to its press release. The company provides a minimum scenic flow of 300 cfs over the falls during the summer as long as flows from upstream reach that level, the press release said.

I’m a family physician who also provides obstetric care in rural Idaho. I have practiced here for five years, delivering babies, managing prenatal complications, and caring for patients across the lifespan.

Since June 2022, when nearly 50 years of access to comprehensive reproductive health services ended after Idaho implemented the trigger ban, physicians like me have struggled to understand how to take care of our patients in an environment mired in legal confusion and where we face prison sentences for delivering evidence-based medicine.

Unfortunately, another legislative session has ended, and Idaho lawmakers didn’t address confusion over Idaho’s laws; in fact, they doubled down on targeting doctors and making Idaho a more difficult state to practice medicine, which is highly concerning for all of us.

Idaho already faces a primary care workforce shortage. We are 50th in the United States for active physicians per 100,000 population.

Laws that prevent physicians from delivering high-quality, evidence-based care drive skilled specialists from our state — 94 obstetricians left Idaho between 2022 and 2024 because Idaho’s reproductive health laws have made it such a tenuous place to practice medicine. Government intrusion in medicine has ripple effects across the entire healthcare system: physician departures and recruitment challenges result in longer wait times, reduced services, and even clinic closures.

Group seeking to end Idaho’s abortion ban says it’s met signature goal in 19 legislative districts

While working on the front lines of primary care in rural Idaho, these Idaho laws have made practicing medicine overwhelming at times. 

The Reproductive Freedom and Privacy Act is a citizen-led initiative that will appear on the ballot for Idaho’s general election this November. The Reproductive Freedom and Privacy Act would restore patients’ ability to make private medical decisions in consultation with their doctor without government interference.

The initiative protects patient autonomy, patient safety, and evidence-based practice. It ensures that when complications arise, physicians can provide the care their patients need.

Passage of the Reproductive Freedom and Privacy Act will allow physicians to deliver pregnancy-related care without fear of legal repercussions, which will help us to protect the health and lives of pregnant patients in emergencies.

Idahoans should have the freedom to make health care decisions based on medical best practices, and through a trusted and confidential relationship with their physician. Restoring patient autonomy will result in healthier families and communities across our state.

Medical decisions during pregnancy are urgent and deeply personal, involving medical facts, family circumstances, faith and fear. Families confronting complicated pregnancies are living through painful, high-stakes situations — not policy hypotheticals. Patients deserve clear information, compassion, and safe access to the medical care they need.

As a physician serving Idaho patients, my job is to meet these families with grace, prioritize health and safety, and work toward policies that support both patients and the providers who care for them. The Reproductive Freedom and Privacy Act will help Idaho restore safe, compassionate, and accessible reproductive healthcare for all Idahoans.

WASHINGTON — The alleged White House Correspondents’ Dinner shooter was indicted by a grand jury Tuesday on four federal charges, including attempting to assassinate President Donald Trump and assaulting an officer or employee of the United States with a deadly weapon.

The three-page indictment alleges 31-year-old Cole Tomas Allen, of California, “knowingly and by means and use of a deadly and dangerous weapon” forcibly assaulted, intimidated or interfered with an unidentified U.S. Secret Service agent who was hit with one bullet in his protective vest while working a security checkpoint outside the annual dinner. The agent was uninjured.

The indictment does not specify whether Allen fired the shot that hit the agent.

Allen was also indicted on transporting a firearm over state lines with intent to commit a felony, and using, brandishing or discharging a firearm during a crime of violence. 

The indictment specifies Allen transported a 12-gauge pump action shotgun with 45 rounds of ammunition, and a .38 caliber semi-automatic pistol with 55 rounds of ammunition.

Government prosecutors in a court filing prior to the indictment alleged Allen also had on him “two knives, four daggers, multiple sheaths, multiple holsters, needle nose pliers, (and) wire cutters.”

The Department of Justice initially charged Allen on three of the grand jury indictment counts, with the exception of assaulting a federal officer or employee.

Allen is scheduled to be arraigned in federal district court Monday in Washington, D.C.

He faces up to life in prison if convicted of attempting to kill the president.

Allen allegedly rushed a security checkpoint one level above the Washington Hilton ballroom on April 25 where Trump, Vice President JD Vance and several Cabinet officials were among thousands of journalists, government officials and celebrities attending the black-tie event that dates back a century.

Shortly before he ran through a magnetometer, with a long gun in hand, at 8:40 p.m., Allen sent an email to friends and family explaining he intended to target “administration officials … prioritized from highest-ranking to lowest.”

Trump, first lady Melania Trump and Cabinet members all safely evacuated the ballroom. 

The Secret Service agent, whose vest protected him from gunfire, is referred to in court filings as V.G. 

Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche told reporters April 27 that a ballistics investigation had not yet been completed, and would not answer whether Allen fired the bullet that hit the agent.

V.G. fired five rounds from his service weapon in Allen’s direction, but did not hit the suspect who fell to the ground and sustained minor injuries, according to a signed affidavit from law enforcement filed in court April 27.

Trump publicly shared photos on his social media platform Truth Social the day following the dinner of a shirtless and handcuffed Allen face down on the hotel carpet Saturday night.

Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks has quantified some of the impacts of poaching in the state from 2025 with an uptick in reported poaching cases and fines leveraged against defendants compared to 2024.

In a report by TIPMONT, the state’s program that encourages the public to report poaching crimes by offering reward payouts to informants who help lead to convictions, the state authorized $28,100 in reward money to members of the public in 2025.

The TIPMONT board at its April meeting also approved $48,553 in fines levied against defendants in poaching cases presented to the board; 66 total years of lost hunting, fishing and trapping privileges for the defendants; 153 total charges and $71,010 in restitution paid by defendants.

Poaching crimes include illegal shed hunting, vandalism, littering, cultural resource theft and other resource crimes. TIPMONT offers potential cash rewards of up to $1,000 for individuals who report poaching crimes.

“By reporting poaching, individuals contribute to the conservation of endangered species and the overall health of natural habitats,” FWP Operation Sgt. and TIPMONT coordinator Brooke Shelley said in a statement.

The 2025 numbers are higher than the previous year, which saw 83 charges and $37,250 in restitution, but the agency notes that the increase is partly due to the timing of the TIPMONT board meeting — which occurred after the 2025 hunting season this time, as opposed to in mid-summer in 2024.

However, Shelley said that breaking down the number by year still shows “more and bigger cases” submitted for the 2025 season.

Across the state’s seven hunting regions, game wardens reported similar hunting seasons compared to previous years, but a few noted an uptick in violations.

In western Montana, Warden Capt. Kyle Miller said he saw more hunters who hadn’t thoroughly read hunting regulations and “because of that mistakes were made,” including some hunters being in areas without the required permits.

“We also saw hunters not reading the ‘Opportunity Specific Details and/or Restrictions’ box in the regulations, which restricts who may harvest an animal or where that animal may be harvested,” Miller added, resulting in some animals being harvested on public land when opportunities were restricted to only private property. “It was mostly resident hunters.”

Increases in mistakes were also noted in southwest Montana, where game wardens said hunters called in their own mistakes including accidentally exceeding limits or recognizing they’d shot an animal in the wrong district.

“The TIPMONT reports were also top-notch in my opinion,” Game Warden Capt. Josh Leonard said. “I can honestly say some of the eyewitness details we received on some cases were exceptional – exceptional enough that all we had to do was arrive and the case was made.”

Over in the eastern portion of the state, a game warden captain said a busier hunting season overall led to increased violations.

“Word began to spread about specific areas of the Region where hunters were seeing better deer numbers,” Justin Feddes said. “Subsequent groups of hunters then focused on these areas, especially later in the season, resulting in an uptick in violations and reports.”

Feddes added that citations and warnings were up significantly from the 2023 and 2024 seasons, with many related to recent changes made by the state legislature and Fish and Wildlife Commission.

“Game wardens primarily focus on educating hunters when these changes occur, but it is the ultimate responsibility of the hunter to know the rules and regulations before they head into the field, he said.

This story was originally produced by Daily Montanan, which is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network which includes Idaho Capital Sun, and is supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity.

Two hikers on the Mystic Falls Trail near Old Faithful in Yellowstone National Park sustained injuries by one or more bears on Monday, according to the National Park Service.

The status of the hikers, and the number and type of bears involved were not included in information released about the incident.

Emergency services personnel with the Park Service responded to the incident and it is under investigation.

This is the first bear-human conflict resulting in an injury in the park for 2026. The last time a visitor was injured by a bear was in September of last year.

The last human fatality in Yellowstone from a bear attack occurred in 2015.

This story was originally produced by Daily Montanan, which is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network which includes Idaho Capital Sun, and is supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity.

WASHINGTON — U.S. Senate Republicans released a roughly $70 billion spending package Monday night that will keep Immigration and Customs Enforcement and Border Patrol operating for the rest of President Donald Trump’s term without any of the new constraints Democrats have demanded.

The legislation also includes $1 billion “to support enhancements by the United States Secret Service relating to the East Wing Modernization Project, including above-ground and below-ground security features.”

Trump, who had the East Wing of the White House bulldozed to make way for his $300 or $400 million ballroom project, had said it would be funded by private donors and not taxpayers. White House officials have said the ballroom is critical for national security when top officials are gathered, following an April 25 incident in which a gunman opened fire at a dinner at the Washington Hilton attended by Trump.

Iowa Republican Sen. Chuck Grassley, chairman of the Judiciary Committee, said in a statement the panel “is taking action to help provide certainty for federal law enforcement and safer streets for American families.” 

“We will work to ensure this critical funding gets signed into law without unnecessary delay,” he added. 

Senate Budget Committee ranking member Jeff Merkley, D-Ore., said in a statement the package shows “Republicans are ignoring the needs of middle-class America and instead funneling money into Trump’s ballroom and throwing billions at two lawless agencies.”

He noted the Department of Homeland Security has more than $100 billion from Republicans’ signature tax and spending cuts package it hasn’t spent. 

“Throughout this process, Democrats will continue to show the American people that we are for bringing down costs, making it easier to get ahead, and building an economy where families thrive and billionaires pay their fair share,” Merkley said. “It is clear that the country has had enough of the Republican ‘families lose, billionaires win’ agenda.”

The package’s release follows a record-setting shutdown at the Department of Homeland Security that began after the two parties were unable to reach a compromise on new guardrails for immigration operations after federal agents shot and killed two U.S. citizens in Minneapolis in January.  

The Judiciary Committee’s bill includes $30.725 billion for ICE, $3.47 billion for Customs and Border Protection and $1.457 billion for the Department of Justice.

The bill from the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs allocates $19.1 billion for CBP to hire Border Patrol staff and $7.45 billion for ICE to hire Homeland Security Investigations agents.

CPB will receive an additional $3.45 billion to purchase new technology “to combat the entry or exit of illicit narcotics at ports of entry,” to upgrade border surveillance technology and to conduct initial screenings of unaccompanied children. 

Another $2.5 billion would go to the Homeland Security secretary for any additional border security needs. 

All of the funding would last through Sept. 30, 2029.

Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee Chairman Rand Paul, R-Ky., said in a statement the panel plans to vote later this month to advance the bill. 

“Senate Democrats refuse to vote for a single dollar to secure our borders or enforce our immigration laws, even against the most violent illegal aliens,” Paul said. 

Republicans plan to pass the bill using the same complex budget reconciliation process they used last year to enact their “big, beautiful” law that provided DHS with $170 billion. 

GOP lawmakers voted last month to approve the budget resolution that unlocks the process that comes with many rules and restrictions but avoids the need to get 60 votes in the Senate to end debate. 

Senate Republican leaders chose to separate funding for ICE and Border Patrol from the annual Homeland Security appropriations bill after the two political parties made little progress toward restrictions on immigration agents. 

The stalemate led to a 76-day shutdown for the Department of Homeland Security, which ended in late April after the House sent Trump the annual funding bill the Senate had approved a month earlier.

Idaho Republican U.S. Rep. Mike Simpson joined a bipartisan group of congressional lawmakers to support designating May 5 as National Day of Awareness for Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls. 

Simpson joined 13 cosponsors to support House Resolution 1257, brought by Washington state Republican Rep. Dan Newhouse. 

“The number of Indigenous women and girls who have been murdered or gone missing every year is staggering,” Simpson said in a press release. “I have been raising awareness about this disproportionate rate, and will continue to use my role as Chairman of the House Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies Appropriations Subcommittee to support the federal agencies working to address this crisis. This is an important resolution, and I’m proud to sign on as a cosponsor.”

May 5 was chosen in honor of the birth date of Hanna Harris, a member of the Northern Cheyenne Tribe who was murdered after being reported missing in Lame Deer, Montana.

The resolution calls for the day to commemorate the lives of thousands of missing and murdered Indigenous women and girls, demonstrate solidarity with the families of victims, and recommends that the Department of Justice’s National Institute of Justice commission a new study with focused data on this issue, “to ensure up-to-date statistics are made public regarding the current state of missing and murdered Indigenous women and girls crisis given nine years have passed since their 2016 study was published.” 

The resolution notes that 2017 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention data found homicide was the sixth leading cause of death for Native American and Alaska Native women and girls under 44 years old, with murder rates more than 10 times the national average. 

The resolution noted progress, such as the 2020 Savanna’s Act and Not Invisible Act, initiating a joint communication between the Department of Interior and DOJ and the 2021 creation of a Missing and Murdered Unit with the Bureau of Indian Affairs Office of Justice Services. However, it also noted that, in 2024, more than 5,000 Indigenous women and girls were reported missing, and more than 4,000 of those were under the age of 18. At the end of 2024, there were 628 active missing person records. 

The resolution said the day is meant to recognize “that, despite the positive efforts made, there is more work to be done to address this nationwide crisis.” 

Key points

• Stratos project developers have proposed a massive campus featuring a data center and a natural gas power plant for an unincorporated area of Box Elder County.
• The county’s three commissioners unanimously approved two resolutions that will allow the project to move forward.
• The proposal has generated huge public outcry, including at the commissioners’ meeting where a large crowd booed, jeered and chanted in opposition to the data center project.

Amid boos and screams from hundreds of community members, Box Elder County commissioners unanimously approved two resolutions in support of a 40,000-acre data center campus proposed for an unincorporated site in the county. 

About 1,100 people filled the Box Elder County Fairgrounds’ fine arts building after gathering for a rally outside. While commissioners had prepared for the crowd, moving to the larger space rather than their regular chambers, they ended up making their decision in a small room away from the public as the group became rowdy.

“For hell’s sake, grow up,” Box Elder County Commissioner Boyd Bingham told the public, growing irritated as a wave of roars interrupted the meeting, not for the first time. 

The angry crowd’s jeers outweighed the voices of commissioners and guests, especially when they spoke about water rights and the county’s tax revenue prospects stemming from the project. Many in the audience asked to allow presenters to be heard, but shouts prevailed throughout the meeting.

No one was escorted out, but instead commissioners left the room and broadcast their quick vote on a screen available to the public. 

“Cowards,” some in the audience yelled. Others repeatedly shouted “people over profit.”

The resolutions were required by state law to allow the Military Installation Development Authority, or MIDA, to move forward with the Stratos project. MIDA, an entity created by the Utah Legislature to advance economic development with a military focus, needed local consent since the data center would be located on private land without zoning regulations. 

“Today’s vote is not the end of the process, it is the beginning. If this project moves forward, it will happen in phases over many years. At every step, it will be subject to continued oversight, permitting and regulatory review,” Commissioner Lee Perry told reporters after the meeting. 

Unlike regular industrial developments, the project was subject to municipal approval before a full environmental assessment is drafted. That study, developers said, will come at a later date, but they are still uncertain as to when. However, during the meeting commissioners said developers will be required to get an air quality permit and then an engineering review, which typically takes 150 to 200 days.

The vote comes after commissioners delayed their decision for one more week, saying they’d had insufficient time to review the project. The quick nature of the approvals has become a source of frustration among the public, who have filled public meetings and public comment channels with questions about the potential impacts of such a large development in northern Utah.

The data center campus sponsored by Kevin O’Leary, a celebrity investor featured in the reality TV hit “Shark Tank,” is set to house its own natural gas plant to supply 9 gigawatts of energy to self-sustain the center, more than double what the entire state consumes in a year. That power generation will be isolated from the grid Utahns share, so it wouldn’t have any effect on utility rates, developers say.

Developers are also planning on using a closed-loop system to cool their equipment, using privately-owned water rights that are unsuitable for drinking or irrigation. But, without a definitive environmental study, the public remains skeptical. 

James Evans, a retired geosciences professor from Logan, showed up to join the people who gathered outside the fairgrounds to rally against the project. He said he wished leaders had slowed down and thought the decision through. 

“I was really struck by the cavalier attitude with which everybody involved was making these decisions and these discussions. This is a multibillion-dollar project. They are talking about building one of the largest gas-fired electrical power plants on planet Earth,” he said.

However, the commissioners’ decision ended up being what Evans expected.

“I think that this unfair process really puts a tremendous burden on these three county commissioners. I don’t think they really have had enough data. They’ve not had enough time, but they have had so much pressure put on them,” Evans said. “I really, truly feel sorry for them.”

Now that the county’s approval has been secured, developers will conduct a capital-raising effort, Casey Hill, a spokesperson for O’Leary Digital said after the meeting. The entire project will be over $1 billion. Its first phase will start in the next few months, he said. 

Now, the state environmental permitting process also begins, and developers have committed to hold town halls with the community at different steps of the process. 

With the resolutions, commissioners laid out certain guardrails around the project, including county representation on a project board, in addition to dark skies protections, noise standards and public safety assurances. 

Editor’s note: The key points for this story were written by a Utah News Dispatch journalist.

This story was originally produced by Utah News Dispatch, which is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network which includes Idaho Capital Sun, and is supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity.

Incumbent Idaho Congressman Russ Fulcher will face challengers in the May Republican primary election by two political newcomers. The 1st Congressional District race covers northern and western Idaho. 

Andy Briner, a 33-year-old kitchen designer and small farmer, and Joseph Morrison, a Marine veteran and IT support technician, are both running for District 1 Idaho U.S. representative. Morrison did not complete the Idaho Capitol Sun candidate questionnaire for the 2026 voter guide. 

Early voting for 2026 primary election begins this week in these Idaho counties

The three candidates have differing priorities for the office. 

Fulcher, 64, was first elected in 2019 to the U.S. House of Representatives after serving in the Idaho state Senate for 10 years. His priorities are energy independence, election security policy, and facilitating more “local control” of public lands, he said in the survey. 

Briner is focused on improving affordability, the “full and total release” of files related to convicted felon Jeffrey Epstein, and ending the war with Iran and removing the U.S. from “all Middle Eastern Conflict.” 

Morrison wrote on his website that his top priorities include reining in executive branch “overreach,” ending corporate bailouts, and protecting privacy and limiting surveillance of “law-abiding” citizens. 

On public lands, Briner and Fulcher want to see more state management 

Nearly two-thirds of Idaho’s land mass is federally owned and managed public land. Fulcher and Briner both supported increased state management of these lands, while maintaining public access. 

“Idaho should manage the majority of its land, that being said Idaho has been known to sell that land to private parties,” Briner wrote. “There needs to be regulation on selling that land but I think Idahoans care more about their state than the federal government.” 

Amid negotiations for the “One Big Beautiful Bill” law, Fulcher voted for a later-removed amendment that would have sold off large swaths of public lands in Nevada and Utah, the Idaho Press reported. In December, he wrote a letter to several Idaho officials to convene meetings to explore transferring management of federal lands to the state, the Idaho Capital Sun reported. 

2026 primary election

In his survey responses, Fulcher said the need for a shift in public land management is urgent. 

“The solution is to keep public lands public but shift (much more) control to the state level,” Fulcher said. “Outdoorsmen, Farmers, Ranchers, loggers, and sportsmen all need to work together with the Idaho Department of lands and local counties, tribes and municipalities to efficiently utilize and take care of this fabulous resource.” 

He said there was declining support among non-Western states’ leaders for current programs that offset revenue lost from a lack of property tax revenue from public lands, such as payment in lieu of taxes (PILT) and Secure Rural Schools (SRS). 

Last year, the U.S. House of Representatives extended the Secure Rural School payments to the end of fiscal year 2026 in a vote of 399-5. The U.S. House in January approved a large budget bill that included reauthorizing the payment in lieu of taxes program in a 397-28 vote.

Fulcher co-sponsors the ‘SAVE Act,’ Briner says it’s a ‘moral dilemma’ 

The U.S. House previously passed the “Safeguard American Voter Eligibility Act” or “SAVE Act,” which would require proof of citizenship to register to vote and photo ID at polls. The bill, which is a top legislative priority for President Donald Trump, is still under consideration in the Senate. 

Fulcher is among the 110 Republican co-sponsors on the bill, which has drawn criticism from Democrats and voting advocates who say it will make it harder to vote for married women who have changed their name to vote, and would end voter registration drives. Some have also expressed concern about its requirement that states submit full voter rolls to the U.S. Department of Homeland Security to check for citizenship status. 

It is illegal for those who aren’t U.S. citizens to vote in federal elections. 

Fulcher said the bill would be “an enforcement mechanism of the Constitutional provision that states citizenship is required to vote in federal elections.” 

Briner said he agreed with the premise that ID should be required to vote in every election. 

“However, I also believe the federal government should stay out of elections and leave it up to the states to run their own elections because I want a limited federal government,” he said. “That is my moral dilemma when answering this question.” 

Fulcher said Medicaid reductions were necessary, Briner says he has other priorities 

The ‘Big Beautiful’ law approved in July is expected to reduce federal spending on Medicaid and the Affordable Care Act marketplace by a total of around $1 trillion over 10 years. 

Fulcher said the bill was necessary to reduce the rate of growth in Medicaid spending. 

“The growth of the program has been so astronomical that neither state nor federal budgets can keep up with the payments,” Fulcher said. “The (Big Beautiful Bill) removed eligibility for non-citizens and inserted a (very minor) work requirement for able-bodied, working age citizens. Although the vast majority of Idahoans (and Americans) support these changes, the program will eventually be crushed under its’ own fiscal weight. To make the system sustainable over the long term, market forces need to be reinserted into the system and mandated health coverage requirements need to be removed.” 

Briner said he opposed “all federal assistance programs,” but that Medicaid cuts were “nowhere near the top of my priority lists.” 

“I would like to work with the Democrats on this issue if it means we can stop the trillions of dollars we spend on the defense budget, all foreign aid and this unnecessary war we are fighting in Iran and bring the focus back to helping Americans’ who are just struggling to pay for their food, their housing and their medical expenses,” he said. “I will not focus on any cuts to our assistance programs until those other areas have been addressed.” 

Fulcher and Briner disagree over immigration enforcement tactics 

Highly visible mass deportation efforts under the Trump administration have at times included U.S. citizens, ProPublicly reported in 2025, with an investigation finding at least 170 citizens who were detained.

Fulcher said that amid the rise in illegal immigration during the Biden era, “there should be no surprise that actions to correct the inevitable problems come at a cost.” 

“Thankfully for the overall future of public safety, the current administration and majority of Congress are staying the course,” Fulcher said. “Like all other administrative actions, Congress has oversight responsibility. The tools to execute on that oversight are woefully inadequate, but that’s another topic.” 

He said he supported adjustments to worker visas and access to legal citizenship. 

Briner said the detention of citizens was an example of the government eroding the rights of American citizens. 

“The way the Trump administration has handled immigration has been a disaster for everyone, and he has deported less people than President Obama did at this time in his presidency,” Briner said. 

Former President Barack Obama oversaw more than 600,000 deportations in 2013, the first year of his second term. In Trump’s first year of his second term, the administration deported around 540,000 people. 

Briner said he supported reforms of the immigration system that would “allow for good, honest hard working people to live here as citizens, but currently both parties are using it as a tool to divide the American people and everyone is being hurt in the end.” 

Briner and Morrison have no reported campaign contributions

Briner’s political action committee reported to the Federal Elections Commission on April 17 that it had not met the $5,000 reporting threshold. There was no reporting record for Morrison on the FEC website. 

Fulcher and his supporting political action committee have collected more than $500,000 in contributions since the beginning of 2025, according to FEC data. More than $300,000 of those were from individuals, and over $230,000 came from other political action committees. 

The Idaho Behavioral Health Council is seeking public input on how to prioritize spending from the state’s opioid settlement fund. 

The fund, created from a nationwide settlement with opioid manufacturers, may be used for certain, approved mitigation for opioids, such as improving access to medication-assisted treatment, providing support for those in treatment and recovery, helping pregnant women and babies with neonatal abstinence syndrome, and others. 

Those who wish to submit ideas for use of the funds must email them to IdahoBehavioralHealthCouncil@idcourts.net by June 5. 

Funds received from the settlement are divided among the state government, participating local cities and counties, and public health districts in Idaho. 

The Idaho Behavioral Health Council will take the input and recommend how to prioritize the state’s portion of the funds. Ultimately, the Idaho Legislature will need to approve the use of the money. 

In total, more than $73 million has gone to Idaho entities as part of the settlement, and around $29.8 million of that has gone to the state government, according to the Idaho Attorney General’s Office. 

More information about use of the settlement funds may be found on the Behavioral Health Council’s website.

Federal agencies say they have yet to take steps to implement President Donald Trump’s executive order restricting voting by mail, as the Department of Justice fights a Democrat-led lawsuit against it.

The Justice Department late Friday filed documents asking a federal judge to dismiss the lawsuit and to not block the executive order on a preliminary basis because the order hasn’t been implemented. The filings marked the Trump administration’s first effort to defend the order in court.

The March 31 order directs the creation of state citizenship lists and restricts how ballots can be sent through the mail, instructions that Democrats and election experts have called unconstitutional and illegal. It comes as Trump has seized on the specter of noncitizen voting, an extremely rare phenomenon, to demand sweeping voting restrictions.

In its Friday filing, the Justice Department sought to persuade Judge Carl J. Nichols in U.S. District Court in the District of Columbia that a legal challenge is premature.

“If and when the Executive Branch takes some action to implement the Executive Order” then a lawsuit can be brought, Stephen Pezzi, a senior trial counsel in the Justice Department’s Civil Division, wrote in a court filing.

Nichols has scheduled a hearing for May 14.

The DOJ’s argument relies on statements by key federal officials that the agencies affected by the order — the Department of Homeland Security, the Social Security Administration and the U.S. Postal Service — are still deliberating over how to carry out Trump’s directive. In declarations filed in court on Friday, officials at all three agencies say final decisions haven’t been made.

“As the Postal Service is still in the deliberation phase of determining how to implement the Executive Order, we have not yet published a proposed rule, nor have we reached any final decisions about the substance of a proposed rule,” Steven Monteith, the Postal Service’s chief customer and marketing officer, wrote.

The executive order directs the postmaster general, who leads the Postal Service, to propose a rule that would block states from sending ballots through the mail except to voters on lists provided by the state to the Postal Service. 

The order also instructs Homeland Security to compile lists of voting-age U.S. citizens in each state with the help of the Social Security Administration. Democrats allege the Trump administration is building an unauthorized national voter list, despite the U.S. Constitution giving states the responsibility of running federal elections.

Michael Mayhew, deputy associate director of the Immigration Records and Identity Services Directorate within U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, wrote in a declaration that the agency “has not yet begun preparation” of state citizenship lists. USCIS is a subsidiary of Homeland Security.

At the Social Security Administration, Jessica Burns MacBride, head of program policy and data exchange, wrote that the agency hasn’t made any final decisions “about its role” in implementing the executive order.

The order’s opponents are especially watching the Postal Service’s response, since it is an independent corporation overseen by its Board of Governors — not the White House.

Democrats and experts on postal law say Trump has no authority to order the postmaster general to take any action. The Board of Governors hires and fires the postmaster general, and board members serve seven-year terms, helping insulate them from political pressure.

Last month, 37 Democratic U.S. senators signed a letter to Postmaster General David Steiner and the Board of Governors urging the Postal Service to not implement the executive order. The senators pointed out the president has no authority to regulate federal elections or the Postal Service.

“Like the President, the Postal Service has no authority to regulate the manner of voting in federal elections, nor who is eligible to vote by mail in such elections,” the letter says.

The Postal Service is a named defendant in the lawsuit filed by Democratic groups and leaders in Congress. 

The Justice Department, which is representing the Postal Service, sidestepped questions about the president’s authority in Friday’s court filing. It called arguments about Trump’s authority over the Postal Service an “abstract legal question” that can’t be resolved before the agency takes action.

Still, Monteith appeared to nod to concerns within the Postal Service over the order’s legality while avoiding specifics.

“I am aware that deliberations are currently ongoing within the Postal Service regarding the implementation of the Executive Order,” Monteith wrote, adding that the deliberations include “legal considerations” regarding the order.

The executive order faces at least five lawsuits, including a challenge brought by a coalition of Democratic state attorneys general led by California’s Rob Bonta. The Justice Department has not yet filed court documents defending the order in that case.

For their part, Republican attorneys general — led by Catherine Hanaway of Missouri — are defending the executive order. Their position, if adopted by courts, would give Trump sweeping control over the Postal Service.

In a May 1 court filing, the GOP attorneys general argue those challenging the executive order are unlikely to succeed in showing that Trump cannot direct the Postal Service to propose a rule. They say that federal law doesn’t specifically prohibit the president from ordering the postmaster general to put forward rules on mail ballots — and it’s unconstitutional if it does.

“The Constitution vests the entirety of the executive power in the President,” The Republican coalition says, articulating a view commonly called the unitary executive theory: the idea that Congress cannot constitutionally create agencies that exist outside of White House control.

The Republican states involved also include Alabama, Florida, Indiana, Kansas, Louisiana, Montana, Nebraska, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota and Texas.

Democrats and many constitutional law experts reject the unitary executive theory, though it has gained support among Trump-aligned Republicans as the White House seeks greater control over independent agencies.

If the U.S. Supreme Court eventually greenlights Trump’s efforts to control the Postal Service and other independent agencies, it would mark a “tremendous” change in how the federal government operates, James Campbell Jr., an attorney in the Washington, D.C., area who consults on postal law, said in an interview last month.

“What you’re basically talking about is redesigning the U.S. government,” Campbell said.

WASHINGTON — Americans saw prices at the pump sharply rise in recent days as the nationwide average cost for a gallon of regular gas shot up 38 cents over the past week, according to GasBuddy.

The motor club AAA clocked the average price of regular gas at $4.46 per gallon and diesel at $5.64, as Iran and the U.S. remain at a stalemate over opening the Strait of Hormuz, where one-fifth of the world’s petroleum passed through prior to the war.

“Gasoline prices rose in every state over the last week, with some of the most significant and fastest increases concentrated in the Great Lakes, where states like Michigan, Indiana, Ohio, and Illinois saw sharp spikes, while Wisconsin experienced more modest gains,” Patrick De Haan, head of petroleum analysis at GasBuddy, said in a statement Monday. 

“At the same time, diesel prices surged to new records in parts of the region, with some areas touching the $6-per-gallon mark,” he added.

De Haan said refinery outages drove prices up, but other factors like Middle East oil output and President Donald Trump’s plan to free oil tankers stuck in the Persian Gulf could help.

“However, with so many moving pieces, the outlook remains highly fluid, and while some localized relief may emerge, broader price volatility is likely to persist in the near term,” he said.

Trump’s approval ratings, particularly on everyday costs, are sinking. About two-thirds of Americans disapprove of Trump’s handling of the cost of living, and 66% disapprove of the president’s handling of the Iran war, according to a Washington Post/ABC News/Ipsos poll published Sunday. 

Trump’s overall disapproval of 62% was the highest the survey recorded since he first took office in 2017.

The nationwide average for a gallon of regular gas was $4.10 one month ago. Last year at this time, it was $3.16, according to AAA.

Brent crude oil, the international standard, jumped to $114.90 a barrel Monday, the second-highest price jump since Russia attacked Ukraine in 2022.

During a small business summit at the White House on Monday, Trump said the war “is working out very nicely.”

“They thought that energy would be at $300 right, $300 a barrel. And it’s like at 100 and I think going down,” Trump said, incorrectly describing the current trend in prices. “And I see it going down very substantially when this is over.”

Trump on Sunday announced “Project Freedom,” an operation to guide cargo ships and oil tankers through the strait with the guidance of the U.S. Navy.

The “humanitarian gesture,” Trump wrote on his Truth Social platform, is “merely meant to free up people, companies, and Countries that have done absolutely nothing wrong — They are victims of circumstance.”

Some 20,000 merchant ship crew members have been stranded in the Persian Gulf during the ongoing war, according to United Nations estimates at the end of March.

Trump threatened that Iran would “be dealt with forcefully” if they interfered with the operation.

As of Monday, U.S. Central Command said two U.S.-flagged merchant ships had been escorted through the strait. The Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps disputed the claim as “baseless and completely false,” according to a statement reported by Iranian state media.

“Any other maritime movements that contradict the stated principles of the IRGC Navy will face serious risks, and any violating vessels will be forcefully stopped,” the statement read.

The IRGC also claimed to have hit two U.S. military vessels in the strait Monday, a claim categorically denied by U.S. Central Command.

U.S. Central Command’s Admiral Brad Cooper told reporters on a press call Monday that the IRGC launched multiple cruise missiles and drones at merchant ships that “we are protecting.” 

“We have defeated each and every one of those threats through the clinical application of defensive munitions,” he told reporters. 

U.S. Apache and Seahawk helicopters sank six small Iranian boats Monday, according to Cooper.

The United Arab Emirates defense ministry reported Monday it was intercepting Iranian missiles and drones over various parts of the country. Iran’s air strikes on its U.S. ally neighbors have largely quieted in recent weeks.

U.K. Maritime Trade Organization, which reports on security conditions, has kept the strait’s regional threat level as “critical.”

Trump said Saturday he was reviewing a new deal from Iran to end the war. Talks have failed since the U.S. and Iran announced a tenuous ceasefire on April 7.

As of May 4, early voting for the 2026 primary election has begun in additional Idaho counties across the state, including in Ada, Boise, Bonneville, Kootenai and Valley counties.

Other Idaho counties, including Bannock, Canyon, Twin Falls and Blaine counties, began early voting last week.

2026 primary election

Voters can check with their local county elections office to see if early voting is available in their county.

Polls will be open for the primary from 8 a.m. to 8 p.m. local time, and voters may register the day of the election at their polling places with a valid photo ID and proof of residence.

To view your sample ballot, check your voter registration status, find your polling place for Election Day, or to request an absentee ballot, view election information at VoteIdaho.gov. Absentee ballots for the May 19 primary must be requested by May 8, and they must be returned to your local county elections office by 8 p.m. on Election Day.

Early voting locations in Ada County

Ada County residents have more options than ever to cast their ballot ahead of the May 19 primary election, with nine early voting locations open starting May 4, according to an Ada County Elections Office press release. Voters in Ada County can vote early, in person from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. weekdays between May 4 and May 14.

• Ada County Elections — 400 N. Benjamin Lane in Boise
• Boise City Hall — 150 N. Capitol Blvd. in Boise
• Eagle Public Library — 100 N. Stierman Way in Eagle
• Meridian City Hall — 33 E Broadway Ave in Meridian
• Library! at Bown Crossing — 2153 E. Riverwalk Drive in Boise
• Star City Hall — 10769 W. State St. in Star
• Kuna Library — 457 N. Locust Ave. in Kuna
• Lake Hazel Library (New this year) — 10489 W. Lake Hazel Road in Boise
• Orchard Park Library (New this year)– 1268 W. Orch Park Drive in Meridian

Eligible Ada County voters may vote at any of the early voting locations listed above.

To find more information about the upcoming May primary election in Ada County, visit www.adacountyelections.gov or contact Ada County Elections at 208-287-6860 or elections@adacounty.id.gov.

The U.S. Supreme Court issued a temporary stay on an appeals court ruling from Friday that was blocking remote access to an abortion drug, restoring access until at least May 11.

The administrative stay, issued by Justice Samuel Alito, pauses Friday’s decision by the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals. That ruling blocked a 2023 rule adopted by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration allowing mifepristone, one of two drugs used to terminate a pregnancy before 10 weeks and to treat miscarriages, to be prescribed without an in-person visit with a health care provider and also allowed it to be mailed to recipients in states with abortion bans.

“The administrative stay is temporary, and I am confident life and law will win in the end,” said Louisiana Republican Attorney General Liz Murrill in a statement. 

Thirteen states have near-total abortion bans, including Louisiana. Murrill sued the FDA in October, saying the rule undermines the state’s laws and causes financial harm because the state paid $92,000 in Medicaid bills for two women who needed emergency care in 2025 from complications related to mifepristone. 

In the years since the 2022 U.S. Supreme Court decision allowing states to regulate abortion access, telehealth prescriptions of abortion medication have become increasingly popular, with more than 27% of all abortions provided that way in 2025, according to data from the Society of Family Planning.

“While this is a positive short-term development, no one can rest easy when our ability to get this safe, effective medication for abortion and miscarriage care still hangs in the balance,” said Julia Kaye, senior staff attorney for the Reproductive Freedom Project at the American Civil Liberties Union, in a statement. “The Supreme Court needs to put an end to this baseless attack on our reproductive freedom, once and for all.”

The case could follow a similar pattern to one that played out in 2023, after U.S. District Court Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk of Texas issued a ruling that would have revoked access to the abortion drug mifepristone altogether. 

The U.S. Supreme Court intervened shortly after that ruling and kept mifepristone available while the case proceeded in the 5th Circuit appeals court, which eventually decided that more restrictions were warranted, but not pulling the drug’s approval. The Supreme Court officially took the case several months later, and unanimously ruled in June 2024 that the plaintiffs suing the FDA did not have standing, keeping access to mifepristone intact.

Responses from the attorneys in the latest case are expected to be filed with the Supreme Court by Thursday, according to Alito’s order.

Stateline reporter Kelcie Moseley-Morris can be reached at kmoseley@stateline.org.

This story was originally produced by Stateline, which is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network which includes Idaho Capital Sun, and is supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity.

A $59 million grant to the University of Idaho to help farmers develop climate-smart practices— which the federal government terminated last year — has been reinstated. The grant is the largest in the university’s history.

The U.S. Department of Agriculture notified officials at the UI College of Agricultural and Life Sciences and partners in April that they could resume work on the five-year program, the university announced in a press release. Other partners in the program include The Nature Conservancy, Desert Mountain Grass-Fed Beef and the Nez Perce and Coeur d’Alene tribes. 

The Innovative Agriculture and Marketing Partnership was originally approved in 2024 under a Biden-era USDA program called Partnerships for Climate-Smart Commodities. More than 200 Idaho farmers from 34 counties had applied for incentives to incorporate practices that reduce climate and environmental impacts of some top commodities, such as potatoes, sugar beats, wheat, barley and beef. 

The program leaders said they intend to focus on the original pool of farmers who participated before accepting new applications. 

“We are going to get a technical support team to help us enroll these people, and we’re streamlining the process so it’s fairly straightforward and automated,” said Doug Finkelnburg, area extension educator and co-leader of the program. “Our hope is to get producers under contract in 2026 as quickly as we can.”  

The USDA in 2025, under the Trump administration, retroactively changed its criteria to evaluate grants, which included requiring a greater percentage of the money to go toward direct grants for farmers, and deemed UI’s program ineligible. 

The university revised its program to comply with the new criteria, including designating up to $7,500 a year for producers, totaling $3.5 million. The program designated $450,000 for marketing projects, the press release said. The revised program also scaled back some of the research objectives to direct more funding toward marketing. 

The practices incentivized under the program include reduced tillage, cover cropping, prescribed grazing, intercropping, reducing use of synthetic fertilizers in favor of organic nutrient sources and use of biochar, a form of charcoal. 

“The practices we’re incentivizing will help make the farms more resilient to risk,” Finkelnburg said in the release. “We’re incentivizing practices that build soil carbon, increase water storage in soils and make it less risky to do production agriculture.” 

After facing costly heating bills this winter, consumers shouldn’t expect relief for the summer months, according to new projections for household utility costs. 

The National Energy Assistance Directors Association projects the average electricity cost to cool homes between June and September will reach $778 this summer. That’s a $61 — or 8.5% — increase from last year and nearly 37% higher than in 2020.

The association, which represents state employees administering federal energy assistance programs, attributes the increase to warmer temperatures and higher electric prices.

“Families are squeezed from both directions,” Mark Wolfe, the association’s executive director, said in a news release. “They are paying more for electricity, and they need more of it to stay safe during increasingly hot summers.”

Projections show a pronounced impact in the South because of its higher temperatures and widespread air conditioning usage. South Atlantic states — from Delaware to Florida —  are expected to see average cooling bills rise by more than $100 between June and September compared with last year. But Midwestern states are expected to see summer costs go up by about $30 per household. 

One in six American households are behind on energy bills, with total utility debt expected to reach approximately $23 billion by the end of the year, the association said. With home energy costs rising by more than double the rate of inflation, the group has urged Congress to appropriate billions more in energy assistance funding.

State lawmakers of both parties are increasingly scrutinizing high electricity prices as most Americans are served by state-regulated utilities. Despite growing outcry, state leaders say they have little ability to provide consumer relief because of broader energy market realities.

The Edison Electric Institute, which represents the nation’s investor-owned electric utilities, has pointed to surging electricity demand, extreme weather, new technologies and widespread electrification as factors leading to increased prices. The organization says its members will invest more than $1.1 trillion in grid improvements and expansion over the next five years.

“We’ve got to build a lot of infrastructure to meet this incredible growing demand that’s going to benefit our economy, benefit our communities, and help the United States lead in the technologies of the future,” EEI Vice Chair Chris Womack said during an April 14 event hosted by Axios. 

A February study commissioned by the organization said electricity prices have remained stable across much of the country but hikes in “a few states and regions” have put upward pressure on national average costs. 

That report attributed regional price hikes to changes in markets, policies and other circumstances beyond the control of utility providers.

“In general, the utilities have managed controllable costs effectively,” it said. 

Stateline reporter Kevin Hardy can be reached at khardy@stateline.org. 

This story was originally produced by Stateline, which is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network which includes Idaho Capital Sun, and is supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity.

This story was originally posted on IdahoEdNews.org on April 30, 2026.

POCATELLO — A $930 million flood of federal grants could address Idaho’s rural healthcare needs — shortages that stretch across its landscape and reach into nearly all professions.

The money could also bolster programs that serve small towns and align with Idaho State University’s historic mission in healthcare education.

Idaho committee begins process of awarding $186 million in rural health funding

“We feel like there’s a great opportunity for us to leverage some of the programs that we’ve already developed, and I think that we have some shovel-ready things,” said Rex Force, Idaho State’s vice president for health sciences and senior vice provost.

The money is on its way from Uncle Sam. What happens in Idaho is uncertain.

The 2026 Legislature asserted its control over the grants — creating a committee that will oversee the state’s spending decisions. Eight Republican lawmakers will determine what share of the money goes into education, at Idaho State or elsewhere.

And this same Legislature had a mixed record on medical education.

Lawmakers put money into in-state residencies for medical school graduates, a growth area in an otherwise spartan 2027 budget. But lawmakers also tried to cut other residencies.

And lawmakers did nothing to send more Idaho students to medical school — reneging on their own commitment from 2025.

The influx of money comes from the One Big Beautiful Bill. The omnibus 2025 law includes $50 billion in Rural Health Transformation Program grants.

The feds approved Idaho’s grant on Dec. 30.

Now, the state has six months to figure out what to do with $185,974,367.81 — the first installment of the five-year grant.

The state must obligate its first-year grant by Oct. 30. The feds are using carrots and sticks to keep states on task. States that hit their deadlines and use their money wisely could get additional grants in future years; states that struggle could be docked.

“We have a lot of work to do, very quickly,” said Sen. Julie VanOrden, R-Pingree, when the Legislature’s rural health transformation committee held its first meeting last week.

The Legislature carved out this oversight role for itself.

After the state Department of Health and Welfare applied for the federal grant on Idaho’s behalf, the 2026 Legislature created a rural health transformation committee. Co-chaired by VanOrden and Rep. Jordan Redman, R-Coeur d’Alene, the committee will review proposals for the federally funded contracts and grants — on a tight turnaround. The committee will have one week to review each proposal and provide feedback to Health and Welfare.

Barely two weeks after the feds approved Idaho’s grant application, one lawmaker began talking big about the potential uses for the money.

In a Jan. 15 legislative hearing, Rep. Dustin Manwaring floated the idea of using some of the $930 million to buy the Idaho College of Osteopathic Medicine — a for-profit Meridian medical school, aligned with Idaho State, that some lawmakers are interested in acquiring. Manwaring, R-Pocatello, now sits on the Legislature’s rural health transformation committee.

ICOM is not on the market, although it probably will be at some point. Meanwhile, there are mixed signals about whether states can use the federal grants to bankroll a big capital investment.

On one hand, Delaware plans to spend some of its grants to build the state’s first medical school.

On the other hand, Idaho Health and Welfare Director Juliet Charron didn’t directly address ICOM, or a medical school, during last week’s legislative committee hearing. But she said states can spend no more than 20% of their money on infrastructure — to remodel a rural hospital, for example, as opposed to building a new one from scratch.

One section of Health and Welfare’s rural healthcare blueprint ties closely to higher ed: worker training, recruitment and retention.

Lawmakers might have their own ideas, Charron told EdNews last week, but Health and Welfare is looking at how to use some money to bolster residencies — the on-the-ground placements for medical school graduates. Residencies are seen as a linchpin for recruiting doctors into rural communities. The hope is that young doctors stay put after their residencies, launching their careers in underserved communities.

Force recognizes the need for residencies, and using federal grants to build up new programs. But he says it would be “foolish” to use short-term grants to cover the state’s residency program costs.

“That’s a recipe for disaster,” he said.

But Force has plenty of ideas for how Idaho State could spend a share of rural healthcare grants — in programs poised to expand.

“I think there’s a lot of creative ideas within the university,” he said in a recent interview. “But we’re a mile wide and an inch deep, sometimes. With some more resources, we can make that grow.”

He says Idaho State could build on its Area Health Education Center network, which is designed to help link students with healthcare careers in rural Idaho.

A pharmacist by trade, Force is also excited about using federal grants to push pharmacy services into small towns, even if it’s only with a kiosk. He sees it as an extension of Idaho State’s Bengal Pharmacy network, which serves Arco, Challis and McCammon.

“There are many small towns that are teetering on the edge in terms of being able to provide pharmacy services, let alone everything else,” Force said.

While Force is eager to discuss opportunities, his counterparts aren’t. EdNews reached out to every public college and university in the state. Several schools had little to say about the federal grants — or deferred to the State Board of Education.

The State Board is trying to navigate the grant program, Executive Director Jennifer White told EdNews this week. There’s a lot to work through. The interplay between Health and Welfare and the legislative committee. The tight deadlines. And grant awards that will stretch well beyond the state’s campuses.

“This isn’t just a conversation for higher education,” White said. “It’s a conversation for the state of Idaho.”

As the federal grants roll out, the 2026 session provides a glimpse into the Legislature’s mindset on medical education — and Idaho’s physician shortage.

Lawmakers did fund Gov. Brad Little’s $900,000 plan for 15 new residencies for medical school graduates. But that’s only part of the story on residencies.

When legislative budget-writers were weighing deeper cuts into all state budgets, including medical education, they received a sharp warning from a State Board committee. Cutting funding for residencies would undermine existing contracts, and the state’s commitment to growing its physician workforce. Budget-writers walked back their request.

Later in the session, lawmakers passed a budget bill that would have cut residencies. Little issued a line-item veto to spare these programs.

Meanwhile, lawmakers left another aspect unaddressed: medical school.

Following Little’s recommendation, the Legislature funded no new medical school seats for Idaho students. For decades, Idaho has subsidized medical school seats at the University of Washington and the University of Utah — to make up for Idaho’s lack of its own public medical school.

A 2025 state law called for subsidizing additional medical school seats, starting this year. The 2026 Legislature never followed through.

That inaction disappointed Force, who served on a state committee that spent last summer and fall studying the state’s medical school options.

“Every year that we wait is, in essence, a seven-year delay before we have a practicing physician in the state, because you’ve got four years of medical school and a minimum of three years of residency,” said Force.

Fast forward to this summer.

Another state committee on healthcare.

But one with plenty of money at its disposal.

Healthcare is always a tough sell in rural Idaho, even if a community offers well-staffed and well-equipped services a short drive from home.

“Pushing against all of this is the independent Idaho nature,” Force said. “Rub some dirt on it and get back to work.”

A similar, salty skepticism extends to a federally funded healthcare “fix.”

As the 2026 Legislature discussed the rural healthcare grants — a piece of President Donald Trump’s signature domestic policy — some members of his own party did nothing to hide their scorn. They saw the $930 million as part of another runaway program that will add to the national debt, not unlike the surge of federal aid that followed the COVID-19 pandemic.

Some lawmakers will be preconditioned to distrust any grant-funded programs, simply because of the funding source.

Other lawmakers will want results. And immediately.

Force is all too aware of the pressures that come with new money.

“It’s going to be really difficult, especially this first year,” he said. “Maybe it’ll be a lot of needs assessment and planning in the first year. But … spending nearly $200 million on needs assessments does not sound like a good use of funding.”

Kevin Richert writes a weekly analysis on education policy and education politics. Look for his stories each Thursday. 

One of the main methods of obtaining abortion medication for those living in states with bans is now blocked nationwide, after a federal appeals court decision issued Friday afternoon.

The 5th Circuit Court of Appeals blocked a U.S. Food and Drug Administration rule from 2023 that allowed mifepristone, one of two drugs used to terminate a pregnancy before 10 weeks and to treat miscarriages, to be dispensed without an in-person visit with a health provider. 

In the years since, states with abortion access have increased their telemedicine offerings to prescribe the medication remotely and send it through the mail. Many of those states also enacted shield laws to prevent officials from states with abortion bans from prosecuting or investigating their providers — meaning many patients have been able to receive the medication across state lines.

Louisiana judge preserves telehealth abortion access provision for now, puts case on hold

The block will remain in effect as the lower court case proceeds, but the FDA could file an emergency appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court in the coming weeks.

More than 27% of all abortions were provided through telehealth appointments in the first six months of 2025, according to the Society of Family Planning, a research and advocacy group that publishes a report called #WeCount. Nearly 15,000 abortions per month were provided under shield laws during that same time frame, according to the report.

Louisiana Republican Attorney General Liz Murrill sued the FDA in October, seeking to strike down the 2023 provision, and the lower court declined to do so in early April. U.S. District Judge David C. Joseph said then that the stay was premature while the FDA completed a safety review of mifepristone, but allowed state officials the opportunity to re-file the motion after that review was complete. The state appealed that decision to the 5th Circuit.

“Every abortion facilitated by FDA’s action cancels Louisiana’s ban on medical abortions and undermines its policy that ‘every unborn child is human being from the moment of conception and is, therefore, a legal person,’” Friday’s decision said.

There were no dissenting opinions among Judge Leslie Southwick, an appointee of former Republican President George H.W. Bush, and Judges Stuart Kyle Duncan and Kurt D. Engelhardt, both appointees of Republican President Donald Trump.

Without access to telemedicine and the opportunity to receive the medication through the mail, people in 13 states with near-total abortion bans may have to travel to another state to get an abortion.

There is a misoprostol-only abortion pill protocol that some providers can use, but it is slightly less effective and requires a higher dosage, which can increase side effects.

“Reinstating in-person dispensing requirements would force people to travel farther, take more time off work, and absorb costs that are simply too high. For people living in states already hostile to abortion access, many of which are home to Black women and families, this is not health care,” said Regina Davis-Moss, CEO of advocacy group In Our Own Voice: National Black Women’s Reproductive Justice Agenda, in a statement. 

Murrill said in a statement on Friday that former Democratic President Joe Biden’s administration facilitated “illegal mail-order abortion pills.”

Nearly 1 in 4 people seeking abortions out of state chose Illinois. Here’s why.

“Today, that nightmare is over, thanks to the hard work of my office and our friends at Alliance Defending Freedom. I look forward to continuing to defend women and babies as this case continues,” Murrill said, crediting the advocacy legal organization that helped in the case.

The court also found Friday that the 2023 rule injures Louisiana by causing it to spend Medicaid funds for emergency care for women harmed by using the drug. The state identified $92,000 paid by Medicaid for two women who needed emergency care in 2025 from complications “caused by out-of-state mifepristone.”

Numerous studies have shown mifepristone is safe to use, with very low complication rates. A combined review of 10 years’ worth of studies between 2005 and 2015 found that severe outcomes requiring blood transfusion and hospitalization occurred in less than 1% of cases.

“We are alarmed by this court’s decision to ignore the FDA’s rigorous science and decades of safe use of mifepristone in a case pursued by extremist abortion opponents. We are reviewing the court’s order in detail,” said Evan Masingill, CEO of GenBioPro, one of the main manufacturers of mifepristone, in a statement. “We remain committed to taking any actions necessary to make mifepristone available and accessible to as many people as possible in the country, regardless of anti-abortion special interests trying to undermine patients’ access.”

Stateline reporter Kelcie Moseley-Morris can be reached at kmoseley@stateline.org.

This story was originally produced by Stateline, which is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network which includes Idaho Capital Sun, and is supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity.

The Idaho Capital Sun took home 13 awards — including seven first-place finishes — in the Idaho Press Club’s Best of 2025 Awards contest.

The winners were announced at the press club’s annual banquet, held Saturday at the Boise Centre.

Idaho Capital Sun reporter Clark Corbin took first place in three categories: the online Special Purpose Publication and overall Best Graphics categories for his “Howl” series, as well as daily Environmental Report for his coverage of the state’s response to invasive quagga mussels.

Road trips, bear spray and a full moon(ing): How we made the Howl podcast and story series

Idaho Capital Sun editor-in-chief Christina Lords took home first place awards in the editorial writing, winning that category for the second year in a row, as well the daily Spot News category.

In addition, Kelcie Moseley Morris, a reporter for the Idaho Capital Sun’s parent nonprofit States Newsroom, took home a first-place finish in the daily Health/Medical report category, and former Idaho Capital Sun reporter Mia Maldonado took home took home a first-place award for her Spanish-language news coverage.

The Sun, part of the nonprofit States Newsroom network with news outlets and news partnerships to cover state government in all 50 U.S. states, celebrated its five-year anniversary on March 31.

To sign up for the Capital Sun’s free morning newsletter, go to idahocapitalsun.com/subscribe, or to donate to continue to support its award-winning work, go to idahocapitalsun.com/donate.

Here is the full rundown of the Idaho Capital Sun and States Newsroom awards:

Clark Corbin, Special Purpose Publication  — Daily category: Howl: Western wolves and nature’s greatest comeback story

Clark Corbin — Environment Report — Daily category: An inside look at Idaho’s $3M fight against invasive quagga mussels

Clark Corbin — Best Graphics — All Media category:  Timeline of wolf eradication and reintroduction in the U.S. Rocky Mountains

Christina Lords, Spot News Coverage — Daily category: Multiple firefighters shot, killed while responding to North Idaho brush fire; suspect found dead

Christina Lords, Editorial – Daily category: They had tickets. A flight number. An arrival time. Then Trump’s executive order changed everything.

Mia Maldonado, Best Spanish-Language Media Award – Publication category: Selection of three stories

Kelcie Moseley-Morris, Health/Medical Report – Daily category: People struggle to find routine health care after Idaho’s abortion ban

Laura Guido, Serious Feature Report – Daily category: Many Medicaid benefits are optional under the law. For many Idahoans, they’re anything but.

Christina Lords, General Column – Daily category: Selection of three columns

Kyle Pfannenstiel, Courts Report – Daily category:  Idaho Attorney General’s Office asks judge to dismiss fired attorney’s whistleblower lawsuit

Kyle Pfannenstiel, Health/Medical Report – Daily category: ‘That impossible juggle:’ How Idaho parents of disabled kids are bracing for care program’s end.

Mia Maldonado, Business Report – Daily category: Idaho woman says tariffs would mean the end of her fruit business

Are you ready for the Super Bowl?

Not THAT Super Bowl. I’m talking about the Idaho Gives campaign, which runs May 4-7. It is the Super Bowl … the Stanley Cup finals … and the Olympics for more than 700 nonprofits throughout the Gem State that rely heavily on this campaign to help with their good works.

The MVP trophy is a foregone conclusion. It goes to the Idahoans who put their generosity on full display. Idahoans have donated $33 million since the campaign started in 2013. Last year, Idahoans contributed a record $5.1 million to the campaign. The goal this year is $6 million.

Don’t bet against Idaho making that lofty goal.

“Last year, we found that 85 percent of the nonprofits found at least one new donor,” says Evin Bask, senior philanthropic impact director for the Idaho Community Foundation.

Not surprising. The list of nonprofits is like a giant shopping mall for charitable giving. In my year of writing about nonprofits, I have run across so many people doing things to make this state, and world, a better place – and that’s just a small sample of what’s out there.

I’ve written about the Women’s and Children’s Alliance, which helps so many families through the trauma of domestic violence. There are “Angel Wings” in Weiser who transport cancer patients to doctor appointments. Panhandle Special Needs of Sandpoint helps produce “normal living” for people with mental disabilities … and a Health Coalition of Teton Valley, which helps people through a variety of mental challenges. I ran across the Village of Hope (Coeur d’Alene), which provides resources for foster families. And I had the honor of talking to real heroes from the Wildland Firefighters Association and Idaho Mountain Search and Rescue.

Granted, there are some (a very few, actually) that may have controversial political or philosophical leanings. But there are no “eligibility cops” at work here. Leave that to the secretary of state and IRS to determine what’s a nonprofit.

For the charity shopper, Bask says, “There are all sorts of flavors out there, and it’s up to donors to determine the causes they want to support.”

Colin Mannex, executive director of Moscow’s Kenworthy Performing Arts Center, is one who appreciates what Idaho Gives provides.

“As the most active historic theater in Idaho, we’re proud to celebrate 100 years of movies and live arts. Idaho Gives has been a very important part of our annual programming for almost a decade,” he said. 

“Idaho Gives affords an unparalleled opportunity to reach folks spanning ages and various interests who all share the same desire to preserve the arts and cultural scene in Moscow,” he said. “When we hit the giving season, we go all out with special community programs that appeal to different audiences each night.”

This year, the Kenworthy is opening with a staged reading of “Our Town’” (May 4) and closing with a ‘“Groove for Good” jazz concert to benefit local nonprofits (May 7).

With grassroots support, he says, “we’re constantly chipping away at essential upgrades like a new sound system, new popcorn machine and a complete marquee restoration. Next up, we’re going to install a wall-to-wall 40-foot screen and a 4K projector that will provide the best old-school moviegoing experience in the Intermountain Northwest.”

That’s one example of how Idaho Gives has contributed to the quality of life in the Gem State. Bask, in her work, sees many other examples.

“The nonprofit sector does so much to make Idaho a great place to live, We keep saying that you can’t go more than a city block to see the impacts from the nonprofit sector – whether you are skiing at Bogus, going to the Morrison Center, or walking downtown and seeing people housed in shelters,” she says.

“Our nonprofits are filling some critical gaps in our community, and Idaho is a greater place to live because of that.”

She certainly hits the mark there.

Disclosure: The Idaho Capital Sun is a nonprofit news organization and will participate in its first Idaho Gives campaign this year. 

Idahoans may attend multiple events this month to honor the life of former Idaho Governor and U.S. Secretary of the Interior Dirk Kempthorne. 

Kempthorne died on April 24 at the age of 74 after battling colon cancer, the Idaho Capital Sun previously reported. 

Dirk Kempthorne believed in a government that worked to improve the lives of the people

Gov. Brad Little’s Office on Friday announced multiple events on May 15 and May 16 that are open to the public. 

At 10 a.m. on May 15, Kempthorne will be honorably transferred to the Idaho Capitol in Boise with arrival honors performed by the Idaho National Guard and Idaho State Police. Little will preside over the service with Idaho Secretary of State Phil McGrane as master of ceremonies. 

Kempthorne will lie in state in the Capitol Rotunda until 10 a.m Saturday, May 16. 

“Lying in state is a ceremonial tradition in which a public official rests in a place of honor, providing an opportunity for the public to pay their respects,” the press release said. 

At 10 a.m. on May 16, Kempthorne will be transferred from the Capitol to the Cathedral of the Rockies, at 717 N. 11th St. in Boise. A funeral service there will begin at 11 a.m. The service is open to the public and will be livestreamed online here. 

Following the service, a procession and family and invited guests will go to the Idaho State Veterans Cemetery for interment ceremony. 

A celebration of life ceremony will be held in Washington, D.C., at a later date, the press release said. 

Kempthorne also served as Boise mayor and in the U.S. Senate during his 25-year career in public service. In January, it was announced a room aboard the new Navy submarine the USS Idaho would be named for Kempthorne because of his “significant contributions to this project as well as a lifetime of support to the U.S. military.” 

Little ordered U.S. and Idaho state flags to be lowered to half-staff to honor Kempthorne until sunrise on May 17. 

This story was originally posted on IdahoEdNews.org on April 29, 2026.

Editor’s note: This story is part of a series of candidate profiles Idaho Education News will publish ahead of the May 19 primary election. EdNews is highlighting competitive races impacting education policy. Click here to see the EdNews Elections webpage featuring a list of all candidates and much more. Click here to see your voter information. Follow  the EdNews elections blog for breaking news and insights.

A longtime Republican organizer, who has pushed back against what she sees as a hyper-controlling arm of her own party, is challenging Rep. Elaine Price, who is cozy with the groups her challenger opposes.

Christa Hazel, who has been active in mainstream Republican organizing in recent years in Coeur d’Alene, hopes to focus on solving Idaho issues like school funding.

Price, a local business owner in her second term, said she wants to be North Idaho’s voice in Boise. She has long been aligned with hardline groups like the Idaho Freedom Foundation.

• Occupation: Owner of Spartacus Coin Bullion Collectibles.
• History of elected service: Two House terms. First elected in 2022.
• Campaign website: elaine4cda.com

Price decided to run for another term because she wants to address the unique problems North Idaho faces.

“I just feel it’s really important for North Idaho to have a voice in Boise,” Price said. “It feels like Southern Idaho, what they have going on is totally different than what North Idaho has going on.”

Those differences include the rapid growth in Coeur d’Alene, specifically among remote workers. One of Price’s biggest issues is protecting children from grooming and sexualization.

When asked for specific instances where Price has seen this happen in her district, she didn’t have any.

“I just know, I just really feel like we don’t allow our children to be children anymore,” Price said.

She argued society is trying to normalize things and make things acceptable for children at too young of an age.

“Well, grooming, you know, where it’s OK for a boy and a girl to kiss, it’s OK for two girls to kiss. It’s OK for an adult to kiss a child,” she said, when asked to provide specifics.

Price said it’s beyond sex ed, which she feels confident they’ve already legislated.

“I’m just talking about lifestyles that are different than what a parent teaches their child, and that could be a variety of things,” Price said.

She cited inappropriate books in libraries as one of her main concerns, which she said was already addressed under House Bill 710.

“It’s up to the parents to decide that, not society itself,” she said.

Price said she wants schools to get back to the basics.

“Letting teachers be teachers, not social workers, counselors, things like that,” she said. “And I think we’ve kind of strayed from what we expect of our teachers.”

Price said she’s not sure what the solution is and didn’t have programs in mind for cuts.

“I prefer no more policies, just kind of setting teachers back to the expectations that they’ve always had,” she said.

Teachers pushed back against laws they argue are overly regulatory, like the moment of silence bill passed this session. The bill requires a full minute of silence to start the school day, arguing the law is impractical and adds to the stack of requirements they must meet daily.

Price said she considers their perspective “unfortunate.”

“I find that sad, because I feel like we overstimulate kids now, we put them in front of computer screens,” Price said. “So that was the idea behind that was just to remove all that and just let them be kids for a moment.”

When it comes to the $100 million special education funding gap, between what districts spend and what they’re reimbursed by the state and federal government, Price said she has heard about the issue but needs to understand it more.

She’s frustrated by unfunded federal mandates and would prefer to see SPED solutions at the state level.

Price supported private school choice, including House Bill 93. She said she’s willing to expand the program “if that’s the will of the people.”

She has repeatedly sponsored attempts to repeal Idaho’s Blaine Amendment, a section in the state constitution that bars taxpayer funds from benefitting private religious schools.

Price supports a complete rewrite of the state’s school funding formula that is more than 30 years old.

“It needs replaced,” she said. “It’s just so ridiculous at this point that we just need to scrap it and start all over again.”

Price would like to reduce state requirements for schools to access funds but didn’t have opinions on much of the funding formula.

In 2024, Price was the treasurer for the Kootenai County Republican Central Committee and signed off on checks that went to support her campaign through advertising and other avenues.

A complaint was filed with the Secretary of State’s Office.

Price said she “didn’t violate anything.”

She argued she didn’t know what the checks were for, just general categories like advertising. Price said she paid invoices as they came.

“There was no collaboration between me and the KCRCC,” she said.

Price is no longer the treasurer and said she doesn’t know what happened to the complaint.

According to records obtained by EdNews through a public records request, Price and the KCRCC were found in violation of Idaho’s sunshine laws regarding the incident. The KCRCC was fined $1,000.

“Since the PAC’s treasurer was also the recipient of the Expenditures, an irreconcilable conflict existed,” a September 2024 letter to the KCRCC from the secretary of state’s office reads. “That is, it is impossible for the PAC to make an independent expenditure that complies with Idaho Code Section 67-6602(11) with respect to its own treasurer’s campaign.”

The complaint also alleged a similar violation in Price’s role as the treasurer of the Idaho Freedom Caucus PAC.  Price was fined $1,500. The Freedom Caucus was fined $1,000.

Fundraising – 2026 election cycle to date

Rep. Elaine Price

• Beginning cash balance: $7,237
• Total contributions: $13,469 (plus a $22,000 campaign loan)
• Total expenditures: $5,448
• Ending cash balance: $36,277

Christa Hazel

• Beginning cash balance: $0.00
• Total contributions: $26,848 (plus a $20,175 campaign loan)
• Total expenditures: $3,210
• Ending cash balance: $43,813

Source: Idaho Sunshine, as of April 29.

Hazel is running for the House seat to give residents a choice in who represents them in Boise.

“Voters are really looking for a choice, and right now it’s really tough to get people to want to run, and one of the reasons is because it’s so negative and divisive,” Hazel said.

Late last year, the county’s Republican Party reposted court documents from a dismissed 1992 shoplifting complaint that included Hazel’s Social Security number.

Hazel has long sparred with Brent Regan, chair of the Kootenai County Republican Central Committee, dating back to when she unseated him for the Coeur d’Alene School Board in 2013.

Then, starting in 2021, Hazel sparred with the KCRCC-backed board majority at North Idaho College, which led the school to nearly lose its accreditation. Hazel, an alumni of the school, helped found the nonprofit Save NIC. The group was a counter to the KCRCC-backed trustees.

Around the same time, she was among the first to support the North Idaho Republicans, a group opposing the Regan-led KCRCC. NIR has argued that the KCRCC has become controlling and more extreme under Regan’s leadership and has attempted multiple times to take over the county party by winning precinct committeeman seats.

Now that NIC has returned to full accreditation, Hazel has shifted her focus to the Statehouse.

• Occupation: Operates a political consulting business, and formerly ran Manis Investigations with her family
• History of elected service: One term on the Coeur d’Alene School Board, elected 2013; one term as precinct committee member, elected 2016.
• Campaign website: christaforcda.com

Hazel chose to run against Price, in part, because of her support of Todd Banducci and the KCRCC’s backed slate of NIC trustees. She also argued Price supports bills brought by out-of-state actors over issues that aren’t Idaho problems but instead national culture war issues.

“There are a lot of legislators in Kootenai County who are worried about chemtrails,” Hazel said. “I believe they are speaking to a certain demographic and voter and I don’t begrudge them for that.”

But Hazel hopes to court voters worried about things that impact their daily lives, not just culture war issues, Hazel said.

“Families are busy. They’re trying to make ends meet, and they really want to trust that their government’s doing the right thing,” Hazel said.

Education is one of her main focuses. She plans to champion a bill that would allow districts to run supplemental levies for four years, up from two currently.

“It’s necessary to provide the stability,” Hazel said. “And I think people are tired of being asked all the time to support the school system.”

Hazel said she supports school choice but is wary of the state’s new tax credit because it lacks accountability.

“I support school choice, but what I understand is most parents choose public school, and they deserve a voice that’s not being represented in Boise,” she said.

During her time on the school board, Hazel supported the formation of the Kootenai Technical Education Campus, a technical school shared between three area school districts. She also strongly supports charters, virtual options and the Idaho Digital Learning Alliance.

“There has to be accountability across the board,” Hazel said. “Otherwise, you’re forcing the public system to be accountable while not having the same standards for a voucher-type program.”

Hazel is concerned that budget cuts in recent years have gone too far.

“For a few years now, they’ve been trimming into bone, and now we’re talking about amputating significant things from Idaho,” Hazel said.

She cites higher education cuts that are impacting programs like NIC’s nursing school, which put expansion plans on hold. (I recast this first sentence.) Her daughter, Emma, attends NIC and is planning to become a surgical technician.

“It’s just unfortunate that opportunities for Idaho residents statewide and opportunities for medical facilities to solve their workforce issues are being impacted because of just the chaos that can go on in Boise,” Hazel said. “And often it is related to social issues.”

Hazel said she knows many of these social issues are important, but she often struggles to verify systemic, statewide problems.

For example, the flag and banner law that passed last year surrounding “Everyone is Welcome Here” signs in a West Ada classroom has left the state in a legal battle.

Hazel said she wants classrooms to be politically neutral, but argues they largely already were. Controversial bills lead to lawsuits and stoke unnecessary fear.

“There are times where these issues feel like a distraction from what really is important,” Hazel said. “Is a poster really the biggest thing going on when you have cuts to special ed? When you have kids that are in mental crisis.”

Hazel hopes to focus on fixing Idaho problems and allow local leaders the flexibility to solve their own regional problems too.

Scroll through the document below to hear from the candidates in their own words.

Conditions are ripe for an intense summer of wildfires, state leaders say, with blistering temperatures in the forecast and dry brush across the state. The last thing Utah needs is for people to let their guard down and send sparks and embers into the mix.  

“We’re begging Utahns everywhere this year to please use your common sense,” Gov. Spencer Cox told reporters Thursday. “One small mistake, like dragging a trailer chain, a poorly extinguished campfire, or a spark from target shooting can lead to just devastating consequences.”

Utah has recorded 115 wildfires so far in 2026, and more than 84% were caused by humans, Cox said. None were still burning Thursday after recent rains and cooler weather. But that trend is likely to change, Cox said. 

The risk is so high that officials are urging Utahns to think very carefully long before the state sees widespread burning restrictions. 

“I would even say, for this year, ask yourself the question, is it even worth me having a campfire?” State Forester Jamie Barnes said in a recent interview.  

April 1 brought depressing news after a winter of record warmth. The measure of the water contained in Utah’s snowpack, known as snow-water equivalent, registered at about 1/5 the normal amount. 

“We’re seeing historic lows in rivers and lakes, I mean, something we’ve never seen before here in Utah,” Barnes said. 

As a result, Cox said Thursday, “we know that the wildfire season will be especially dangerous this year.”

He touted Utah’s recent moves to build up its wildfire response budget. In the last five years, lawmakers set aside more than $150 million, with the pot growing gradually on a yearly basis. They also freed up millions of dollars for prevention and mitigation efforts. 

“We’ve been putting money aside for bad fire, and so we’re ahead of the game,” Cox said. 

The governor said he plans to issue a drought declaration “fairly soon,” and a state committee on drought will discuss the plan next week. The grim outlook extends to the Great Salt Lake, which Cox noted is vital to Utah’s economy and long-term health but “is not recovering at the pace that we need it to” despite a modest rise since the fall.

Cox said President Donald Trump’s $1 billion proposal to help the lake “recognizes what we’ve been saying now for many years — that this is not just a Utah problem, but a national priority.”

Cox said the money would help boost river flows, restore ecosystems and address issues like invasive plant species and dust from the exposed lakebed containing toxic, heavy metals. But it’s not certain Congress will approve the request for the new budget year starting in October.  

Southern Utah’s Lake Powell is already getting some federal assistance to keep its levels high enough to generate power. The U.S. Bureau of Reclamation announced its plan earlier this month to send more water to the lake from Flaming Gorge, a reservoir more than 450 miles upstream on the Colorado River. 

Utah and the six other states along the river have blown past deadlines to reach a deal on how to manage its dwindling supply, but Cox said this year’s drought may help them get to an agreement. 

“I think it helps sharpen, a little bit, the debate and potentially the solutions, to say, ‘OK, what do we do in a year like this? And can that be the basis of an agreement?’ And that’s where I do have a little bit of hope.”

This story was originally produced by Utah News Dispatch, which is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network which includes Idaho Capital Sun, and is supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity.

In eastern Idaho’s legislative district 28, the chairman of a powerful committee in the Idaho Legislature is facing a challenger in the 2026 Republican primary election.

Sen. Jim Guthrie, 70, a farmer and rancher from McCammon who chairs the Senate State Affairs Committee, is seeking re-election to an eighth term in the Idaho Senate.

In the May 19 primary election, he’s set to face David Worley, 40, a small business owner and veteran who unsuccessfully ran for Pocatello mayor and sued the Idaho National Guard, alleging religious discrimination. 

The two have different visions for their potential legislative service.

How do they stand on Idaho issues?

If re-elected, Guthrie said he plans to introduce a bill in the 2027 legislative session to reinstate the presidential primary election in May — at the same time as other primary elections in Idaho.

“The caucus system results in poor voter turnout and doesn’t provide an opportunity for active military to vote or those out of state for education and missions. It makes it difficult for the elderly who are not as mobile also,” Guthrie told the Idaho Capital Sun for a 2026 primary election voter guide. “Plus it will save the state 2.5 million dollars over holding the Presidential primary separate.”

If elected, Worley said he’d bring a bill to repeal the grocery tax “to help reduce the costs of essential goods in Idaho.”

And, he said, he’d plan “to reintroduce legislation to make E-Verify mandatory and impose penalties on employers who knowingly hire illegal labor.”

“Businesses that obey the law should not have to compete with those who don’t, and we need to stop bringing in illegal labor that drives down wages in Idaho,” Worley said.

Guthrie said he’d also push to change the Legislature’s budget process.

“In my opinion, we should have put a hold on the state income tax cuts until revenue recovered or used some of the 1.7 billion dollars we hold of tax payer money in rainy day accounts,” Guthrie said. “In the 2025 session, a revenue number was set after the money was spent something you would never do in your family budget.”

Worley called for targeted cuts instead of the Legislature’s across-the-board budget cuts.

“Instead of across-the-board cuts, we need targeted cuts that reduce redundancy and waste, and scale back or eliminate programs and agencies whose functions are not tied to the core functions of government,” Worley said. “We can reduce the size and burden of the government without impacting essential functions and services.”

On immigration, Guthrie said he opposes “forcing local law enforcement jurisdictions to contract with ICE,” or the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

“We all know changes occur at the federal level and I am not comfortable ceding our local control to the federal government, especially when local law enforcement who I highly respect is against the mandate,” he said.

Worley did not clearly state if he believed the state should require local law enforcement agencies to partner with ICE, which the Legislature considered this year.

“State and local law enforcement should cooperate with ICE to support the removal of illegal aliens from Idaho,” Worley said.

On public taxpayer dollars for private or religious schools, Guthrie said he’d prefer that the Legislature repeal its $50 million private education tax credit program, which he voted against in the 2025 legislative session. “It was sold as promoting school choice which we already have so the entire sales pitch was not entirely accurate,” Guthrie said.

Worley said he supported expanding the tax credit.

“Parents know best how to educate their children. We need more options for education, not less. We also need to support the needs of families, not systems,” Worley said. “Public schools that are well managed and provide educational services that the families in their communities want have no need to fear expanding education choices in Idaho.”

Who is Jim Guthrie?

A farmer and rancher from Inkom, Guthrie says he still farms and ranches in the Marsh Valley area, raising beef cattle and growing hay. He has served in the Idaho Senate for 14 years, after two years in the state House of Representatives. 

Over the years, Guthrie’s decisions to not allow certain bills to be considered in his committee has drawn frustration from some conservatives.

This year, he debated against proposed health cuts, calling the Legislature’s across-the board budget cuts “a defining moment” and challenging lawmakers to do better. 

“I’ve been here for 16 years, and every so often we experience a defining moment as we serve in the Legislature, moments that signal the path we choose for the state as we pass legislation, and that define us as legislators,” Guthrie said during his debate. 

Guthrie was also the only Republican senator to vote against a bill that would criminalize transgender people using bathrooms that align with their gender identity. In debating the bill, he called legislation like it “harmful.”

“They go in the bathroom they’re supposed to, they upset people. If they go in the one that they now look like, they’re breaking the law, which could include pretty severe penalties,” Guthrie told senators. “ … We seem to be really focused on this space and ignoring the fact that there are people that are just like us, human beings, just like us. What are they supposed to do?”

Who is David Worley?

Worley is a small business owner, project manager and Iraq War veteran, having served 23 years in the military. He unsuccessfully ran for Pocatello mayor in 2021, and for a state Senate seat in legislative district 29 in 2022.

In 2023, he protested a drag queen reading program at the Marshall Public Library in Pocatello, the Idaho State Journal reported. 

He also sued Idaho Gov. Brad Little and two leaders of the Idaho National Guard, alleging religious discrimination in the guard’s punishment of him, then a major. In his lawsuit, filed in January 2025, Worley’s attorneys argue he was reprimanded in the Idaho National Guard due to his constitutionally protected speech and exercise of religion.

But one of his disciplinary records, released publicly by his attorneys, cites comments he made at work as a basis to question his judgement and ability to serve as an officer. 

“You are hereby reprimanded,” Brigadier Gen. J. Cole Packwood wrote in a Dec. 18, 2024, memorandum of reprimand. “An Army Regulation 15-6 investigation has substantiated that you engaged in counterproductive leadership … Specifically, you downplayed an Equal Opportunity complaint one of your Soldiers made, and told your 1SG that, ‘well, it’s not like I raped [the complainant] … well, not yet.’”

The report continued that Worley “made comments expressing your opinion that females in the Army are the reason why the Army adopted lower physical and weight standards, which made one of your female Soldiers feel uncomfortable and singled out.”

In a statement, Worley denied making the comments cited in that report.

“The statements that were used as the basis for the report’s findings are gross mischaracterizations that do not reflect what I actually said,” Worley told the Idaho Capital Sun. “I never said anything, even jokingly, that implied I would harm anyone, and I never mistreated any of my subordinates.”

“It is true that I did not take the equal opportunity complaint seriously. I knew the complaint was frivolous and absurd,” he continued. “The complaint was eventually found to be unsubstantiated. However, the complaint and the investigating officer’s report show that it was my religious and political beliefs, not my performance or service history, that led to my removal from command.”

Worley also said “litigation regarding this matter is still ongoing.”

In a ruling on Feb. 12, federal judge David Nye rejected requests to issue judicial orders requested by Worley — and dismissed three defendants, including the governor and two national guard leaders, from the lawsuit.

“With what is available in the record for this case, it is not obvious that Worley is likely to succeed on the merits of his claim,” the judge wrote. “Worley’s claims center around an alleged policy created and promulgated by the commanders of the Idaho National Guard called ‘No Christians in Command.’ … It is not clear to the Court that this policy exists.”

Are political candidates listening to you?

With the May 19 primary election fast approaching, I repeatedly hear comments of dissatisfaction and a lack of enthusiasm from my fellow voters. They express frustration that politicians spend too much time on issues that don’t matter to most citizens in the Gem State. Instead of proposals that resonate with average Idahoans, out-of-state interests seem to be driving more and more of the legislative agenda.

Idaho needs 1,400 more medical professionals just to catch up to national average

Candidates are asking for our support, but they shouldn’t get our vote without hearing what matters to us and sharing their views on the things we care about. For me, healthcare matters and polling shows it matters to others, too. Healthcare in parts of rural Idaho is on the verge of collapse. We lack primary care providers, mental health providers, and maternal health specialists. Sixty-seven percent of our rural hospitals are struggling financially. In more than 20 years as a healthcare advocate, this is the first time I have been worried about the possibility of a hospital closure that would be disastrous for both community health and the local economy. 

Policy decisions by elected officials will make the current situation worse or help stabilize the healthcare environment and support access to care in our state. For that reason, no candidate will get my vote unless I know what they think about healthcare. I ask the following:

• What have you done or will you do to support your local hospital?
• What will you do to protect and improve access to care in rural areas? 
• What proposals will you support to ensure we have enough healthcare workforce for our growing population? 
• What will you do to ensure healthcare is treated as essential infrastructure in Idaho?

What issues do you care about? We will hear a lot from candidates, but they need to hear from each of us. Whether it be at town hall meetings, candidate forums or campaign events, we must take the time to ensure candidates hear from you and they talk about the issues that matter to you.

I believe healthcare matters to every community in our state, and we should hear more about it. If you are frustrated that candidates do not care about those issues at the top of your list, be sure they know what you want…and vote accordingly. Low voter turnout in Primary Elections gives disproportionate influence to a small percentage of people. Your vote is especially powerful in the Primary Election where a handful of votes can decide a close race. If those seeking office and aspiring to make public policy decisions that impact your life do not hear from you, out of state interests will be happy to fill that void. You have the power if you choose to use it. 

The U.S. House approved, 224-200, a five-year farm bill Thursday as members of Congress attempt to update major agriculture and nutrition policy after three years of extensions.

The bill would authorize subsidy and nutrition assistance programs through fiscal 2031. The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office estimated an earlier version of the bill would not meaningfully affect discretionary federal spending over an 11-year window, and would add $162 million in mandatory spending over the next six years.

Most Democrats opposed the bill, but 14 voted in favor. Three Republicans voted against. Six members did not vote.

The Democrats in favor were: Sanford Bishop of Georgia, Jim Costa and Adam Gray of California, Henry Cuellar and Vicente Gonzalez of Texas, Sharice Davids of Kansas, Donald Davis of North Carolina, Marcy Kaptur of Ohio, Kristen McDonald Rivet of Michigan, Marie Gluesenkamp Perez and Kim Schrier of Washington, Josh Riley of New York, Darren Soto of Florida and Gabe Vasquez of New Mexico.

The Republicans who voted against were: Brian Fitzpatrick of Pennsylvania, Andrew Garbarino of New York and Harriet Hageman of Wyoming.

Because Republicans’ massive spending and tax cuts law last year made major changes to some U.S. Department of Agriculture programs, mainly the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program that helped about 1 in 8 Americans afford groceries in 2024, the farm bill passed Thursday was a “skinny” version and relatively short on major policy updates.

The bill would still have to pass the Senate, which has not yet introduced its version. 

Arkansas Republican Sen. John Boozman, who chairs the Senate Agriculture Committee, cheered House passage Thursday and said a Senate text would be released “in the coming weeks.”

“This is an important step toward updating long-overdue policies that support our farm families and strengthen rural communities,” he said of the House vote in a statement. “We’ve put more farm in the farm bill through the Working Families Tax Cuts (the GOP spending and tax cuts bill), and this legislation builds on that success.”

Farm bills are typically written to last five years. But Congress last approved a version in 2018. Extensions of the 2018 version were enacted in 2023, 2024 and 2025.

House Agriculture Chairman Glenn “GT” Thompson, a Pennsylvania Republican, said the measure would still meaningfully update farm and food programs.

“It is more evident than ever that rural America needs a new farm bill now, not next year or next Congress,” he said. “Producers are operating under the third consecutive farm bill extension and the simple truth is the policies of 2018 are no match for the challenges of 2026.”

Agriculture Committee ranking Democrat Angie Craig of Minnesota opposed the bill, saying it did not address any of the pressing issues that farmers and SNAP recipients face. The bill does not help alleviate the rising costs farmers face from President Donald Trump’s tariffs and “locks in the $187 billion cut” to SNAP in last year’s spending law, Craig said.

“It doesn’t fix any of the underlying policy choices by Republicans and this administration that caused the problems in the first place,” she said, adding that  continuing the SNAP cuts put “more pressure on struggling Americans at a time when the cost of groceries and healthcare continues to grow.  

Craig said Thursday morning that the measure could have helped corn farmers by including a provision to allow gasoline made with 15% ethanol available all year. The product, known as E15, increases demand for corn, but has been limited in summer months because of the pollution it can cause in high temperatures. 

Thompson responded that the committee would consider a separate measure on year-round E15 in mid-May.

The bill does include some new provisions.

It would authorize $200 million for a new local food procurement program, to be used largely by food banks. 

It would move authority for foreign food assistance programs under USDA from the now-defunct U.S. Agency for International Development. 

It would raise the limit that individual farmers could borrow from USDA and expand rural development programs that fund substance abuse and mental health services.

Members voted Thursday morning for an amendment that removed a controversial provision to shield pesticide producers from legal liability to warn users of a risk of cancer. If it became law, the provision would have mooted a case argued before the U.S. Supreme Court this week related to a Missouri jury’s award to a user of Monsanto’s popular Roundup weedkiller who developed non-Hodgkin lymphoma.

Several Democrats slammed the bill, but seemed to take more issue with the “big beautiful” law Trump signed last July 4. The farm bill, Massachusetts Democrat Jim McGovern said, would not counteract the changes in that law.

“We are considering on the floor a five-year farm bill that, quite frankly, does nothing for our farmers and screws over poor people and maintains the nearly $200 billion in cuts to SNAP,” the top House Rules Committee Democrat said on the House floor Thursday. “It is going to make hunger worse in this country.”

Thompson said Democrats were too focused on what was not in the bill, rather than the provisions that enjoy bipartisan support.

“Today, you will hear some opposing comments made that this is a partisan bill and even more on what’s not in the bill,” he said at the outset of floor debate. “This bill is filled with good policy that is also overwhelmingly bipartisan.

WASHINGTON — President Donald Trump signed a bill Thursday that will fund almost every agency in the Department of Homeland Security for the next five months, ending the shutdown that began in mid-February. 

The House approved the bill, which doesn’t include additional spending on Immigration and Customs Enforcement or the Border Patrol, on a voice vote earlier in the day.

The DHS shutdown, the third funding lapse in the last year, stalled paychecks for federal employees throughout much of the department, including those at the Federal Emergency Management Agency and the Transportation Security Administration. 

Trump enacting the DHS appropriations bill finally marks an end to the annual government funding process that was supposed to be wrapped up before the end of September. 

Connecticut Democratic Rep. Rosa DeLauro, ranking member on the Appropriations Committee, said during brief floor debate it was “about damn time” Republican leaders brought the bill to the floor. 

DeLauro said that “from the outset” Democrats wanted to negotiate with Republicans to address “armed, masked agents marauding our streets and terrorizing people in our communities.”

“It has been the Republicans (who) have been intransigent and not willing to do that,” she said. “But there we go. Today we’re going to do it. It could have been done 76 days ago. I’ll take it today.” 

Texas Republican Rep. Chip Roy said separating out funding for Immigration and Customs Enforcement and the Border Patrol from the DHS funding bill “is offensive to the men and women who serve” in those agencies. 

“While we are all unified in funding the rest of DHS, we are absolutely horrified that we are blowing up the appropriations process to target those brave men and women who are doing the Lord’s work to keep us safe from cartels, from dangerous actors and from illegal aliens across the streets of America that have been endangering the American people,” he said. 

Republicans plan to use the complex budget reconciliation process to fund ICE and the Border Patrol for the rest of Trump’s term without negotiating any new guardrails on immigration agents. 

Instead of completing the dozen annual government funding bills before their Oct. 1 deadline, lawmakers’ stark differences over funding and policy led to a trio of shutdowns that stalled paychecks for federal employees and wreaked havoc on hundreds of programs. 

The first shutdown, which affected much of the federal government, lasted 43 days as Democrats tried unsuccessfully to extend the enhanced tax credits for people who purchase their health insurance from the Affordable Care Act marketplace. 

A partial shutdown lasting four days ended in early February when lawmakers approved a stopgap spending bill for the Department of Homeland Security alongside the remaining full-year appropriations bills for other departments. 

But lawmakers failed to reach a bipartisan agreement to place constraints on federal immigration agents before the temporary funding bill for DHS expired on Feb. 14, leading to a third shutdown for the department.  

Senate Democrats demanded several restrictions on immigration agents after federal officers shot and killed two U.S. citizens in Minneapolis in January. While Republicans control both chambers of Congress, most bills cannot move through the Senate without the support of at least 60 lawmakers. 

After nearly six weeks, Senate Republican leaders agreed to remove funding for Immigration and Customs Enforcement and the Border Patrol from the DHS appropriations bill, unanimously sending it to the House for approval in late March.

Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., said at the time a plan to use the complex budget reconciliation process to provide three years of funding for ICE and Border Patrol wasn’t acceptable. He refused to put the Senate-passed bill on the House floor for a vote. 

The Senate tried again in early April, sending an identical bill to the House, which Johnson declined to schedule a vote on until Thursday. 

The House vote on the DHS appropriations bill happened less than a day after Republicans in that chamber voted to adopt the budget resolution that unlocks the reconciliation process. Republican senators approved the tax and spending blueprint earlier this month. 

Congress’ budget resolution isn’t a bill and doesn’t need to go to the president for his signature in order to take effect. It doesn’t actually fund anything, but is designed to help lawmakers plan tax and spending policy for the next decade. 

GOP lawmakers intend to use the reconciliation process the budget resolution provides to approve a bill in the coming weeks that will provide up to $140 billion for ICE and Border Patrol. That avoids the need to place any new constraints on federal immigration officers in order to get Democrats’ votes to limit Senate debate. 

Members of Congress will, however, still need to find agreement on funding for the rest of government ahead of the next fiscal year, which will begin on Oct. 1. 

Another impasse will mean another shutdown, just weeks before the November midterm elections. 

Officials with the Idaho Department of Parks and Recreation celebrated the grand opening of a new accessible kayak launch and dog beach Thursday at Lucky Peak State Park just outside of Boise.

The new amenities located at the park’s Discovery Park day use area include accessible parking, ramps, an accessible kayak/paddleboard launch, stepping stones along the river bank and a sandy dog beach. 

Idaho Department of Parks and Recreation Director Susan Buxton said the funding for the improvements came from $165 million in combined funding the Idaho Legislature approved during the 2021 to 2025 legislative sessions to address deferred maintenance and expand capacity at Idaho state parks. 

Buxton and parks officials said the improvements are designed to provide an accessible Boise River entry point and make it easier for more people and dogs to enjoy the river.

Because the state park is located minutes away from Boise, it is extremely popular and sees more than 1 million visitors a year, Buxton said, adding that the improvements will benefit a lot of people.

The project started as a way to address erosion along the riverbank, but expanded to include the accessibility and safety upgrades, like stepping stones above the river bank, accessible parking, an accessible ramp from the parking lot leading to the river, and kayak launch. 

“It was nice for us to be able to address the erosion that was on this bank, and it made it very difficult for people  – and dogs – to get in and out of the water,” Buxton said. 

“We’re very excited to have the accessible dock for kayakers and boaters and swimmers and everybody else,” Buxton added. 

Boise resident Mark Vickrey brought his dog, Buddy, to check out the amenities during Thursday’s grand opening celebration. Vickrey said he and Buddy plan to spend a lot of time at the park thanks to the improvements that make it easier and safer for Vickery to enjoy the water. 

“This is much easier and much better,” Vickery said. “I think it’s going to be very popular.”

Fellow Boise resident Amae Lemmon agreed. She visited the park Thursday with her dogs Nanuq and RileyRoo and plans to return many times with the dogs and her paddleboard this summer.

“We’ll be up here a lot more now,” Lemmon said. 

Buxton said Idaho Department of Parks and Recreation officials are planning other celebrations this year to highlight maintenance projects and improvements at state parks across Idaho. 

Lucky Peak State Park’s Discovery Park is located on Idaho Highway 21 just outside of Boise. The park offers opportunities for swimming, bicycling, boating, fishing and enjoying a picnic. 

More information about Lucky Peak State Park is available online.

Four conservation organizations claim in a new federal lawsuit the United States Forest Service could be logging and using prescribed burns in one of Montana’s best-known recreational areas without presenting required research that would demonstrate the project isn’t negatively impacting a handful of threatened or endangered species.

Attorneys for the Gallatin Wildlife Association, Alliance for The Wild Rockies, Native Ecosystems Council, and Council on Wildlife and Fish say logging and burning on more than 5,600 acres between Hyalite and South Cottonwood canyons, south of Bozeman in the Gallatin Mountains would mean cutting through old-growth forests, building new roads and negatively impact threatened species ranging from Canada lynx to Northern goshawks to whitebark pine trees. It claims U.S. Forest Service officials have overlooked or ignored a handful of federal laws to fast-track the project which the groups say will be highly visible to recreational enthusiasts.

U.S. Forest Service staff have a policy of not commenting on any pending litigation. 

The lawsuit said while the U.S. Forest Service has given notice of the project, many of those details – or lack thereof – make it impossible to understand what will be happening and therefore it’s impossible for scientists and the courts to understand the possible effects of the project. The attorneys claim the Forest Service hasn’t disclosed the number, location or status of whitebark pine throughout the area. 

“In addition, the Forest Service relies on an overbroad and legally unsupported delineation of the wildland urban interface to exempt large areas of lynx habitat standards that prohibit vegetation management projects that degrade snowshoe hare habitat,” the suit said. 

Canada lynx, which are listed by the federal government as “threatened,” rely on the snowshoe hare as a food source. 

The conservation groups claim the Forest Service is using an overly broad definition of wildland-urban interface area to push ahead plans. The court documents accuse the Forest Service of using a law allowing officials to clear brush and trees from near structures as justification for damaging lynx habitat without more public scrutiny. 

The attorneys claim that the Forest Service used a different density than what is required by the Healthy Forests Reforestation Act in order to claim the logging and burning area is an wildland-urban interface area and therefore allowing officials to more aggressively manage wildfire risks because there are structures in the area. 

“Neither the project’s documents nor the Gallatin Community Wildfire Protection Plan identify structures in the project area, population density, groups of homes, shared utilities or other municipal infrastructure,” the lawsuit said. 

They also said that the Forest Service provides no information about large stands of whitebark pine trees.

“Many logging units in the project will be highly visible for visitors and recreationalists to Hyalite Canyon, which is the most visited area of any National Forest in Montana,” the lawsuit said. 

Of the 836 acres of old-growth forest in the project area, attorneys warn that 562 acres will no longer be considered “old growth” after that.

Attorneys said that forest officials have already admitted in the planning documents that “the project may affect, and is likely to adversely affect wildlife, habitat, and a tree species protected by the Endangered Species Act, including Canada lynx, Canada lynx critical habitat, grizzly bears and whitebark pine.”

The suit claims that as many as 3,688 acres of Canada lynx habitat is at risk with the project. 

The conservation groups question why the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service didn’t issue a biological opinion on the project, something that is often standard for similar projects. 

The groups said that the National Environmental Policy Act also requires more public involvement so that residents can help guide the project, something the conservation organizations argue didn’t happen in this case. 

“In this case, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service acted arbitrarily and capriciously in violation of the Endangered Species Act and the Administrative Procedures Act when it did not prepare a site-specific no-jeopardy determination that consider the action and/or the project’s environmental baseline, effects, including from temporary roads and cumulative effects,” the court documents said. 

The groups are asking the federal courts to declare that the logging project violates a number of federal laws and policies, including the National Forest Management Act, the Healthy Forest Reforestation Act, the National Environmental Policy Act, the Endangered Species Act, and the Administrative Procedures Act.

They are asking the courts to vacate the project’s decision and stop authorities from implementing the 15-year project. The groups are also asking for attorney’s fees. 

“The Gallatin Range is undergoing tremendous recreational impact from the local community,” said Clint Nagel, President of the Gallatin Wildlife Association, one of the groups challenging the move in court. “These landscapes are critical for countless species of wildlife using these drainages as their home and provide connectivity to move freely about within and outside the area. Ignoring that fact will cause serious, irreparable harm to the local ecology as well as ignoring the petition from well over a thousand Montanans who want these areas to be left alone.”

This story was originally produced by Daily Montanan, which is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network which includes Idaho Capital Sun, and is supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity.

Editor’s note: This story was updated at 11:30 a.m. Thursday with additional details from a press conference with the ACLU.

Six transgender Idahoans on Wednesday sued to attempt to prevent from going into effect a new state law that criminalizes transgender people using bathrooms that align with their gender identity, including in private businesses.

The lawsuit is challenging House Bill 752, which passed the Idaho Legislature this year with support from only Republicans and was signed into law by Gov. Brad Little. The law takes effect July 1.

For a Boise family of medical providers, Idaho criminal trans bathroom ban was the last straw

“H.B. 752 presents transgender Idahoans with an impossible choice: use a restroom that does not align with their gender identity and risk severe physical and psychological harms, or continue to use restrooms in public in accordance with their gender identity and risk a criminal record and imprisonment,” the lawsuit argues. “This law upends public life not only for transgender Idahoans but for everyone who uses public restrooms in Idaho.”

Idaho’s new law will create criminal charges for people who “knowingly and willfully” enter a bathroom or changing room designated for the opposite sex, with some exceptions. The bill would apply in government-owned buildings and places of public accommodations, like private businesses. 

A first offense carries a misdemeanor, punishable by up to one year in prison. A second offense within five years is a felony, punishable by up to five years in prison.

The lawsuit argues that Idaho’s bathroom ban violates due process and equal protection rights in the U.S. Constitution’s 14th Amendment. The lawsuit asks a federal judge to stop the law’s restrictions on transgender people’s bathroom access.

The suing transgender Idahoans are represented by attorneys with the American Civil Liberties Union, ACLU’s Idaho chapter, Lambda Legal, Alturas Law Group, and Munger, Tolles & Olson. The lawsuit seeks class-action protections for all transgender people whose bathroom access will be restricted by the new law.

The ACLU says that Idaho’s bathroom ban is the only state ban that extends to private businesses — and that Idaho’s ban has the steepest penalties out of the three states that have criminal bathroom bans.

The lawsuit was filed in federal court against Idaho Attorney General Raúl Labrador and county prosecutors. In a statement, Idaho Attorney General’s Office spokesperson Damon Sidur said “We look forward to defending the law.”

How one transgender woman is bracing for the law

One of the people suing, Emilie Jackson-Edney, is a 77-year-old transgender woman who has lived in Idaho her entire life, the lawsuit says. People perceive her as a female, and call her ma’am, the lawsuit says. For 20 years, she has used the women’s bathroom in public “without issue,” the lawsuit says.

She worries about her safety if she complies with the new law, the lawsuit says.

“She fears that if she were to walk into a space designated for men, it would immediately cause attention and disruption,” the lawsuit says. “She would be worried that she could be exposed to violence by being perceived as a woman in an all-male space or being perceived as a transgender woman because of the law’s new requirements.”

If the law goes into effect, the lawsuit says Jackson-Edney “plans to decrease her time spent in public to reduce the need to use public restrooms,” and she “plans to drink less water and eat less to ensure that she would not need to use public restrooms.”

In a news conference Thursday, ACLU of Idaho Legal Director Paul Carlos Southwick said the Legislature’s bills targeting trans people have pushed some to move away from Idaho — including one of his clients.

“Over the last several years, we have seen relentless attacks on the transgender community here in Idaho from our state Legislature. So many bills have been passed, so many restrictions,” he said. “It’s created a very scary environment for folks to live here. Many people have left. Many people are considering leaving because of this very law, including one of our plaintiffs.”

Diego Fable, a transgender man, told reporters that Idaho’s bathroom ban law will force him to move out of Idaho, where he has lived for a decade. 

“As I’ve watched the Idaho Legislature continue passing harmful anti-trans laws over the years, I started assessing when it (becomes) too dangerous for me to stay in Idaho. With this new law, I decided I have no choice but to relocate to a different state to protect myself,” he said. “This is heartbreaking, because I consider Idaho my home, and I’d be leaving behind a close knit community I’ve developed while living here. But living in fear every time I leave the house is not sustainable.”

But, the lawsuit said, “He may want to return to Idaho if this law no longer threatened him.”

Republicans say bill protects women, girls, but police say law would be hard to enforce

In debate over the bill, several Republican lawmakers who supported the bill said it was meant to protect women and girls. 

“It prevents discomfort and voyeurism escalation and assaults, while preserving single-user options and narrow exceptions so no one is denied access for emergency aid,” said bill sponsor Rep. Cornel Rasor, a Republican from Sagle. 

But Sen. Ron Taylor, a Democrat from Hailey, told senators in debate that the bill is about discrimination. He said constituents told him that they’d move out of Idaho if it passed because it would throw their transgender children in jail.

The bill was opposed during the legislative session by some law enforcement groups and several transgender Idahoans. 

A 2025 study by the UCLA School of Law’s Williams Institute found “no evidence of increased harms to people who are not transgender when transgender people are allowed to use restrooms and other gendered facilities according to their identity.” But when trans people are refused access to facilities that align with their gender, the study found that trans people report verbal harassment and physical assault.  

The bill builds on a wave of anti-LGBTQ+ legislation that the Legislature and governor have approved in recent years. 

The bill outlines several exceptions, including to give medical assistance, law enforcement assistance, and if someone “is in dire need of urinating or defecating and such facility is the only facility reasonably available at the time of the person’s use.”

The Idaho Fraternal Order of Police flagged that exception as concerning.

“Officers responding to a complaint would be placed in the difficult position of determining an individual’s biological sex in order to enforce the statute,” Idaho Fraternal Order of Police President Bryan Lovell wrote. “In many circumstances, there is no clear or reasonable way for officers to make that determination without engaging in questioning or investigative actions that could be viewed as invasive and inappropriate.”

Three states — Utah, Florida and Kansas —  have criminal bans on trans people using bathrooms that align with their gender identity, according to the Movement Advancement Project, an LGBTQ+ advocacy group.

Correction: This story was corrected at 11:13 a.m. Thursday to reflect that the lawsuit was filed Wednesday, April 29. 

Friday is the deadline for supporters who are hoping to qualify two separate ballot initiatives for Idaho’s 2026 general election in November to submit their signatures to county clerks for a 60-day verification process.

Under state law, county clerks have 60 calendar days – until no later than the end of June – to verify all of the signatures on each of the petitions. 

After the 60-day county verification process is complete, supporters will turn in their signature petitions in to the Idaho Secretary of State’s Office on or about July 1 for a final round of verification.

In Idaho there are two ballot initiatives that may qualify for the November general election. 

• The Idaho Freedom and Privacy Act would end Idaho’s criminal abortion ban, restore the right to an abortion and reinstate the same standards that were in place until the U.S. Supreme Court repealed the Roe v. Wade decision that guaranteed a right to an abortion. A group called Idahoans United for Women and Families is gathering signatures for the initiative.
• The Idaho Medical Cannabis Act would legalize medical marijuana as a treatment option for Idahoans who have a terminal illness or debilitating medical condition such as cancer, AIDS, PTSD, epilepsy, Crohn’s disease or Alzheimer’s disease. A group called the Natural Medicine Alliance of Idaho is gathering signatures for that petition.

“We do actually verify 100% of the signatures on all the petitions,” Idaho Secretary of State Phil McGrane said in an interview Wednesday at the Idaho State Capitol in Boise. 

In Idaho, a ballot initiative is a form of direct democracy where the voters – not the Idaho Legislature – decide whether to pass a proposed new law. To qualify an initiative for a general election, supporters must gather signatures from 6% of Idaho’s registered voters statewide and 6% of registered voters in at least 18 of 35 different legislative districts. To reach the statewide total, supporters need at least 70,725 valid signatures. 

McGrane said the group Idahoans United for Women and Families has already been verifying signatures with county clerks as it gathers them, and he believes it likely will meet all requirements to qualify for November’s election – although county and state officials will still complete the normal verification process. 

McGrane said the supporters of the Idaho Medical Cannabis Act have not been turning in signatures for verification as they went through the collection process, so he is not sure where that effort stands. 

Will the abortion rights or medical cannabis ballot initiatives qualify for November’s election?

Supporters of both ballot initiatives expressed confidence and optimism on Wednesday that the measures will qualify.

“It’s not official until it’s official and Secretary McGrane says so, but because we have been turning signatures in and have seen results from counties, we feel very confident that we have met our goals and surpassed them,” Idahoans United for Women and Families Executive Director Melanie Folwell said in an interview Wednesday. “We are powered by 1,200 individual signature gathering volunteers statewide, and that is a big deal. They’ve been out getting signatures for 10 months, through the heat through July and August and through the cold of winter, snow and sleet. Their commitment through all that is directly tied to how much they care about the issue to have literal skin in the game.”

As of Wednesday, Folwell said supporters have met their goal in 20 different legislative districts and have gathered more than 106,000 signatures statewide. 

A spokeswoman for the Natural Medicine Alliance of Idaho also expressed confidence their medical cannabis initiative would qualify for November’s general election. 

“In Idaho, we are fortunate to have the ability to run citizen-led ballot measures, which puts lawmaking directly in the hands of the people,” spokeswoman Amanda Watson said in a written statement Wednesday. “The Natural Medicine Alliance of Idaho has been working hard since last fall to qualify the Idaho Medical Cannabis Act for the people of Idaho’s ballot this November. Thanks to a lot of hard work and the support of Idahoans all over the state, we are optimistic we have the signatures we need to put this important issue in front of the voters of Idaho, which will allow for dignity and choice in healthcare treatment options for those with serious and chronic medical conditions. We look forward to hearing good news from the Secretary of State’s office once the signatures are submitted, reviewed and verified.” 

Earlier this month, Watson told the Sun that the Natural Medicine Alliance of Idaho has collected more than 100,000 signatures statewide. The organization has not disclosed how many signatures it has collected at the legislative district level.

How do election officials verify signatures in Idaho?

On Wednesday, McGrane explained and demonstrated the signature verification process.

As part of the signature verification process, officials scan the petitions with the signatures into the system and officials review every signature on every petition for numerous factors. 

First, each person who signs the petition for a ballot initiative must be a registered Idaho voter, or the signature is rejected. 

The voter’s address also needs to be located within the county listed on the petition the voter signed, and the address on the petition must also match the address listed on the Idaho Statewide Voter Registration System.

Signatures, names and addresses all need to be legible, or they are rejected.

Each voter can only sign a petition once.

Beyond that, officials will use the voter registration system to verify that each voter’s signature on a petition matches that voter’s signature on file in the system.  The signatures on file in the system come from voter registration cards and driver’s licenses, which state officials have scanned into the voter registration system for years.

McGrane showed an Idaho Capital Sun reporter how election officials can click on the signature from a voter’s voter registration card in the system and then overlay it with the signature on the ballot initiative petition to verify its authenticity.  

The petition signatures are also connected to each voter’s voter profile and stored in the system.

The system is so detailed that within a matter of a few seconds, a county or state election official could enter any registered Idaho voter’s name in the system, determine whether that voter signed a ballot initiative petition and then pull up a scanned copy of the petition with that voter’s name, address and signature. 

McGrane said the overall verification process generally invalidates about half of the raw signatures submitted. 

Some of the most common reasons signatures are rejected are because the person who signed the petition is not a registered voter and because the voter registration data is out of date or does not match records on file. 

“On average, about 40 to 60% of signatures get rejected,” McGrane said.

After an Idaho judge delayed the rollout of an Idaho Medicaid contract, a top state health official said the state is delaying the shift to Medicaid benefits being run by private companies.

The contract is among several healthcare contracts overseen by Idaho state government that have led to lawsuits in recent years. But this dispute comes after the Idaho Legislature passed a bill in 2025 directing the state’s Medicaid benefits to shift to being privately run, a common setup in the U.S. called managed care.

Soon after a judge issued a temporary restraining order in response to the latest lawsuit, delaying the launch of the new contract, Idaho Medicaid Administrator Sasha O’Connell told state lawmakers last month that the decision will delay privatizing Medicaid benefits by a year. State officials had hoped to complete that change by 2029, but O’Connell said it’s now looking like the change will take place in 2030.

“We had already eaten away at some of the buffer that was built into our timeline. And so this means that we are at the point now of pushing back comprehensive managed care implementation by a full calendar year,” O’Connell told lawmakers on the Medicaid Review Panel on March 26.

The Medicaid contract that is delayed deals with a major function of the program: processing medical claims for more than $300 million in payments each month. The company Gainwell Technologies, which had previously run the contract, sued the state and the new contractor in August 2025 over the state’s decision to award the contract to a competitor company, Acentra Health.

The Idaho Department of Administration, which handles contracts for state government, declined to comment, saying the agency doesn’t comment on lawsuits.

A spokesperson for Acentra Health, the new contractor, declined to comment on the lawsuit.

“We are proud to work with over 40 states to help them maximize Medicaid dollars with modern, configurable technical solutions and clinical programs that accelerate better health outcomes,” Acentra Health spokesperson Lindsey Rodarmer said.

A spokesperson for Gainwell said the company appreciated the legal review.

“We appreciate that the court is reviewing this matter as part of the state’s established procurement process,” Gainwell spokesperson Natalie Podgorski said. “Our goal has been to support a fair and transparent process that provides Idaho residents with the strongest Medicaid system possible. We value our partnership with the State and remain committed to working collaboratively to improve services and outcomes for Medicaid members and providers. We remain committed to helping advance the State of Idaho’s goals.”

Why the contract delay is stalling managed care

Right now, Idaho Medicaid already uses managed care — somewhat. But it’s more of a patchwork approach, where some services are managed by the state health department, some by managed care organizations, and some by doctors’ offices.

To privatize more Medicaid benefits will require a lot of prep work, state officials say. Here’s how the contract legal dispute will delay things.

Before the lawsuit, O’Connell told the Idaho Capital Sun in a statement that state officials were hoping the federal government would certify the new contract for Medicaid information systems by July 2028. “This would have allowed providers and the State to work through any implementation issues before the target go-live of comprehensive managed care on January 1, 2029,” she said.

But the legal delay, she suggested, leaves little time for people to get used to the new system. 

“Other options are not feasible as having our managed care organizations, providers, and participants go live with one MMIS system, only to then transition to a new system shortly thereafter would risk continuity of care, overburden the provider network, and cost more for taxpayers,” O’Connell said. 

Process used here looks like one the Legislature banned, judge writes

In its lawsuit, Gainwell alleges the state repeatedly changed the rules for the contract award through a noncompetitive bidding process.

The Department of Administration used a process that allows the state to borrow the results of another state’s competitive bidding process, and tweak it to localize needs — without using a competitive bidding process. In this case, Idaho borrowed Montana’s process for a similar contract through a process called a “cooperative purchasing agreement.”

Idaho 4th District Judge Nancy Baskin on March 17 issued a temporary restraining order, delaying the contract rollout. A decision is yet to be made on whether to extend that legal block until the lawsuit is decided, which is called a preliminary injunction.

But Baskin criticized the state’s process to award the contract in a ruling on March 2.

“The ‘process’ used for the … contracts does appear to be based on good intentions by (the Idaho Division of) Purchasing, but it also appears to have been ad hoc and was not an established, long-standing procedure used by (the Division of) Purchasing or approved via the rulemaking procedures provided in the statute,” Baskin wrote in a ruling. “In fact, (the Division of) Purchasing changed its own processes to be used during the ad hoc process to select a vendor for the … contracts.”

And she wrote the procedure the state used in this contract “is arguably the very procedure” that the Legislature repealed in 2024. 

Attorneys for the Idaho Attorney General’s Office, which is representing the Department of Administration in the lawsuit, say the state used an established process that is in line with state law. They argued that Gainwell is “asking the Court to second-guess the State’s purchasing decision.”

“In this case, Gainwell’s argument that being deprived of a fair opportunity to compete for a contract assumes that Idaho issued a competitive solicitation for the contract at play in this case. … There is no legal injury where there is no violation of Idaho law,” the state’s attorneys write. “To put it bluntly, Gainwell had no right to a competitive solicitation or competitive procurement.”

This year, the Legislature widely passed a bill with several reforms to the state’s government contracting process, which is called procurement. The bill, House Bill 889, takes effect July 1.

It’s important to recognize the Idaho lawmakers who understood what’s at stake for our state’s water future and acted accordingly during the 2026 legislative session.

Water is central to our economy, our agricultural productivity, our communities and our way of life. In a year marked by difficult water conditions, ongoing disputes in multiple basins, aging infrastructure and rising costs, the Legislature made clear that Idaho cannot afford to stand still.

That leadership deserves recognition.

As executive director of the Idaho Ground Water Appropriators, and on behalf of our members, I especially want to recognize:

• Sen. Van Burtenshaw

• Rep. Rod Furniss

• Rep. Jerald Raymond

• Sen. Kevin Cook

• Rep. Stephanie Mickelsen

• Rep. Erin Bingham

• Rep. Mike Veile

• Rep. Josh Wheeler

• Sen. Mark Harris

• Sen. Jim Guthrie

• Rep. Richard Cheatum

• Rep. Dan Garner

• Rep. Britt Raybould

• Rep. Jon Weber

• Rep. Mike Pohanka

• Rep. Ben Fuhriman

• Sen. Julie VanOrden

• Rep. Marco Erickson

• Sen. Dave Lent

• Rep. Dustin Manwaring

Their support helped move water policy and investment in the right direction at a time when Idaho needs serious and thoughtful recognition of what’s at risk.

Among the most important outcomes was re-securing the annual $30 million in state funding for recharge and efficiency. That investment matters. It strengthens Idaho’s ability to improve infrastructure, expand flexibility and support the long-term reliability of water delivery systems. Just as important, those public dollars are being paired with thousands of private dollars already going into critical water infrastructure projects. That kind of shared commitment is exactly what this moment requires.

The 2024 Mitigation Plan is another major piece of that progress. In difficult water years like this one, it provides a more durable path forward — one that helps reduce uncertainty, supports compliance and protects Idaho livelihoods.

Good water policy requires more than rhetoric. It requires leaders willing to engage complex issues and support practical solutions. This session, Idaho had lawmakers who did exactly that. They have my thanks, and they have earned recognition from water users across this state.

The Great Salt Lake has already reached what’s expected to be the height of its yearly cycle after the state’s warmest winter on record, state officials said Tuesday. And they expect May and June to make matters worse by bringing hotter weather than normal. 

The prognosis was one of several that water managers pointed out Tuesday at a news conference as they previewed Utah’s grim water outlook for the months ahead, with most of the state already in severe drought. 

“We are truly in uncharted territory,” said Joel Ferry, executive director of the Utah Department of Natural Resources. 

This article is published through the Great Salt Lake Collaborative, a solutions journalism initiative that partners news, education and media organizations to help inform people about the plight of the Great Salt Lake — and what can be done to make a difference before it is too late.

The water year doesn’t end until October, but Ferry said the lake likely peaked at an elevation of 4,192.6 feet earlier this month — a foot below last year’s high point around the same time. While it hasn’t plunged to 2022’s record low, it is still more than five feet shy of its minimum healthy level. 

Looking back over the last century, some years stand out, Ferry said: 2018, 1977 and 1934 were dry, setting previous record lows for snowpack. 

“This blows all of those out of the water,” Ferry told reporters. “This is that much worse.” 

In the winter, cold temperatures and snowfall typically build up an icy reserve of snowpack that helps to replenish the lake in spring and summer, but officials and scientists are referring to the current water year as that of the “no-pack.”

State Engineer Teresa Wilhelmsen administers water rights in Utah under a system based on seniority. Those with the newest water rights are first to see their allocations cut in dry years, and that’s already happening, Wilhelmsen said, a sign of harsh realities.

For example, Weber River water rights from 1907 forward are already “off,” meaning those water users aren’t getting any of their allocation, she said. Planning for a hot, dry summer, some Utah communities are already making difficult decisions. 

Utah’s small city of Emery last week cut off secondary water — the untreated supply used mainly for lawns and home gardens — to conserve for the months ahead. 

“There’s no choice, looking at the runoff and no snowpack,” Mayor Jack Funk told Utah News Dispatch. 

In northern Utah, the Great Salt Lake has suffered from decades of overconsumption, with agriculture as the primary user, as well as the effects of climate change and drought. Its surface area has shrunk to expose parts of a dusty lakebed containing heavy metals such as arsenic and lead, raising concerns about impacts to human health and wildlife.  

The lake rebounded from its lowest point four years ago with help from record-setting snowfall and from the state, which raised a berm to help keep the salt content and ecosystem of the lake’s southern arm in check. Its level will start to decline again in coming weeks as more water evaporates from its surface than flows in, Ferry said. 

Still, some signs are positive. There are more people seeking to lease their water shares to the state to help conserve for the Great Salt Lake and the Colorado River than Utah has capacity to pay right now, Ferry said. The program is expected to grow under new state laws setting aside more money and helping the state to more easily track the flow of the conserved water. 

While the drought may deter some Utahns from signing up, he said, “it certainly doesn’t stop those efforts.”

This story was originally produced by Utah News Dispatch, which is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network which includes Idaho Capital Sun, and is supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity.

This story was originally posted on IdahoEdNews.org on April 27, 2026.

A national school choice super PAC is taking a particular interest in two Idaho legislative races.

The American Federation for Children’s AFC Victory Fund on Friday reported $50,000 in broadcast advertising to oppose District 23 House Seat A candidate Melissa Durrant and District 8 Senate candidate Megan Blanksma.

Durrant is running against Rep. Chris Bruce, R-Kuna, and Blanksma is running against Sen. Christy Zito, R-Mountain Home.

The AFC Victory Fund’s ad blitz comes shortly after its parent organization reported $45,000 in lobbying expenses to support Bruce and Zito.

With the lobbying totals and Friday’s independent expenditure report, it is clear which race is most important to the American Federation for Children: The group wants to re-elect Bruce and fight off Durrant.

2026 primary election

Durrant took the brunt of the $50,000 in broadcast ads, with a total of $27,500 in opposition, and Bruce lead the lobbying spending, with a total of $33,422 in support through direct mailings, social media and text messages.

Their May 19 primary is a rematch, and it was close two years ago.

Bruce, a fervent school choice supporter, beat Durrant by just 83 votes in the 2024 primary. The Idaho Federation for Children PAC in 2024 played a big role in that election, spending $80,655 in independent expenditures to oppose Durrant.

In the District 8 Senate race, Zito told EdNews in March that she is in favor of increasing the $50 million cap on the Parental Choice Tax Credit, which offers $5,000 per student to cover non-public school tuition, or $7,500 for students with disabilities.

“There have been over 6,000 families apply for that tax credit,” Zito said in March. “And it’s a tax credit, and it’s less than it costs to educate a child in public education.”

Blanksma is one of two candidates challenging Zito. In a March interview, Blanksma said the tax credit primarily benefits families in the Treasure Valley and not those who live in the expansive rural district Zito represents.

Friday’s independent expenditure report is confirmation that the American Federation for Children will still be pouring money into Idaho’s elections this year, even after the group in early April terminated the Idaho Federation for Children PAC.

AFC national press secretary Brian Jodice told EdNews that shutting down its Idaho fundraising arm and instead using its national super PAC, the AFC Victory Fund, makes for a more “clean operation.”

“We’re active in a lot of states across the country,” Jodice told EdNews in early April. “Obviously, Idaho we’ve cared deeply about over the last few years, specifically, over the last year getting that school choice program stood up.”

Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis’ office on Monday invoked an upcoming landmark U.S. Supreme Court decision on the role of race in drawing congressional districts to justify the Republican’s proposed gerrymander.

“The use of race in redistricting should never happen,” the governor’s general counsel, David Axelman, wrote in a memo unveiling a map that aims to hand Republicans four additional U.S. House seats in Florida.

On Wednesday, the Supreme Court delivered an opinion sharply weakening a major portion of the federal Voting Rights Act.

Even before the decision, Republicans and Democrats across the country were scrambling to get ahead of the court’s anticipated ruling. 

The rush comes even as state legislative sessions wind down and the window to redraw maps rapidly closes ahead of the midterm elections in November — likely pushing most redistricting battles into the 2028 election cycle.

The opinion in the case, Louisiana v. Callais, could reverberate for decades. The court’s conservative majority significantly curtailed the consideration of race when drawing legislative maps. 

Until now, Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act has limited states from using maps that dilute the voting power of minority citizens.

“If the Supreme Court does decide to gut or significantly weaken Section 2 of the VRA, we’re very concerned that it would give, basically, the green light to states to racially gerrymander,” Michael McNulty, policy director at Issue One, a group focused on protecting American democracy, said in an interview ahead of the decision.

Republicans could ultimately secure up to 19 U.S. House seats nationally directly because of the Supreme Court’s decision, according to a projection by Fair Fight Action, a Georgia-based progressive voting rights group, and the Black Voters Matter Fund, which advocates on behalf of Black voters. At the state level, the groups have projected that Republicans could gain up to 200 state legislative seats across the South. 

“It is hard to overstate what an earthquake this will be for American politics,” Rick Hasen, a professor at UCLA School of Law and director of the Safeguarding Democracy Project, wrote in a blog post following the opinion’s release on Wednesday.

A group of white voters challenged Louisiana’s congressional map as an unconstitutional racial gerrymander after the state in 2024 created a second district where a majority of voters are Black. 

The U.S. Supreme Court’s conservative justices agreed, ruling 6-3 that the map is an unconstitutional racial gerrymander because the state didn’t need to create a second majority-minority district.

In the majority opinion, Justice Samuel Alito wrote that “none of the historical evidence presented by plaintiffs came close to showing an objective likelihood that the State’s challenged map was the result of intentional racial discrimination.”

Justice Elena Kagan, one of the court’s three liberal justices, wrote in a dissent that the Supreme Court has “had its sights set” on the Voting Rights Act for more than a decade.

“Under the Court’s new view of Section 2, a State can, without legal consequence, systematically dilute minority citizens’ voting power,” Kagan wrote.

Following the opinion, Republican-led legislatures across the South are expected to move to break apart Democratic districts where a majority of residents are Black or from other minority groups. 

U.S. Sen. Marsha Blackburn, a Tennessee Republican, called on the state legislature to reconvene and redraw the state’s congressional districts to create another Republican-held seat in Memphis. Blackburn, who is running for governor, said an additional seat is essential to cement President Donald Trump’s agenda.

Mississippi Republican Gov. Tate Reeves last week announced a special session to redraw the state’s Supreme Court districts, to begin 21 days after the court releases its decision.

“It is a decision that could (and in my view should) forever change the way we draw electoral maps,” Reeves said in a statement announcing the session.

Although the Supreme Court case centered on Louisiana, state officials are likely out of time to adopt a new map for this year’s election. The primary election is set for May 16.

Still, Louisiana will be free to pursue redistricting next year.

U.S. Rep. Troy Carter, Sr., a Democrat who represents one of the state’s two majority-minority districts, said the court’s decision was a “devastating blow” to the promise of equal representation.

“This ruling is about far more than lines on a map — it’s about whether Black Louisianians will have a meaningful opportunity to make their voices heard,” Carter said in a statement.

As of 2024, roughly a third of U.S. House seats represented majority-minority districts — 122 held by Democrats and 26 held by Republicans, according to estimates by Ballotpedia. Texas and California account for nearly half of all the districts.

Seven states have already taken the extraordinary step of redrawing their maps this year after President Donald Trump urged Republicans to draw lines that maximize partisan advantage ahead of the midterms. Maps are typically redrawn every 10 years after the census.

Texas and California struck first, followed by Missouri, North Carolina, Ohio and Utah. Virginia voters last week approved a redraw, and Florida lawmakers approved a new map Wednesday. 

All told, Republicans may emerge from the redistricting war with a small net advantage of a handful of seats if the Florida plan is enacted and the other maps are upheld.

The calendar will prove a major obstacle to additional gerrymanders this year. Primary elections have already been held in some southern states and ballots have been distributed in others. 

Mississippi, North Carolina and Texas have already held primaries, while ballots have been distributed in Alabama, Georgia and South Carolina. 

But after November the clock resets, giving states more than a year to pursue further changes to their maps before the 2028 election.

“We are much more concerned about the impact on 2028 and beyond that that would have, letting these politicians basically just pick their voters instead of the voters picking them,” McNulty said.

As Democrats look ahead to Callais’ likely fallout in the coming years, they have begun urgently calling for action in Congress and at the state level. They also say the decision emphasizes the stakes of this year’s elections.

“Today is a devastating day for democracy and a wake-up call for all those who seek to protect it,” Heather Williams, president of the Democratic Legislative Campaign Committee, said in a statement.

Democrats in Congress have repeatedly offered the John R. Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act. Named after the civil rights activist and Georgia congressman who died in 2020, the legislation aims to strengthen Section 2 and other elements of the current Voting Rights Act, though it’s unclear whether the bill would be constitutional under the Callais decision.

The U.S. House, under Democratic control, passed the legislation in 2021 but it was filibustered in the Senate. Some lawmakers are speaking about the measure again, and Democrats may take control of Congress in November’s elections—though they would still face President Donald Trump in the White House. 

“We can and must revive the Voting Rights Act,” Rep. Terri Sewell, an Alabama Democrat and the ranking member of the House Administration Subcommittee on Elections, said at a shadow hearing on voting rights on Monday.

For their part, Republicans hailed the Supreme Court decision as long overdue.

U.S. Rep. Richard Hudson, a North Carolina Republican who chairs the National Republican Congressional Committee, in a statement said “activists” for too long had manipulated the redistricting process to achieve political outcomes, dividing Americans in the process.

“The Supreme Court made clear that our elections should be decided by voters, not engineered through unconstitutional mandates,” Hudson said.

Over more than a decade, the Supreme Court has narrowed the potency of the Voting Rights Act, a 1965 law banning racial discrimination in voting that came as Congress battled Jim Crow laws in southern states. 

The measure was intended to help enforce the U.S. Constitution’s 14th and 15th amendments, which guarantee equal protection under the law and prohibit denying the right to vote on the basis of race.

In 2013, the court effectively halted preclearance — the requirement that some states and local governments with a history of discrimination obtain federal permission before changing their voting practices. At the time of the decision, most southern states and a handful of others were subject to preclearance.

The Supreme Court in 2019 ruled that federal courts cannot review allegations of partisan gerrymandering. The decision cleared the way for state lawmakers to gerrymander their maps for political advantage without fear they would be second-guessed by federal judges. 

The opinion helped empower a wave of gerrymanders after the 2020 census and set the stage for this year’s mid-decade redistricting.

Facing a bleak federal landscape, some voting rights advocates are increasingly turning to state legislatures. The Supreme Court decision undercutting Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act will likely intensify efforts to advance state-level legislation.

“Because political participation is inherently local, it is imperative to press for protections at the ground level,” Todd Cox, associate director counsel at the Legal Defense Fund, a racial justice legal organization, said at the shadow hearing.

Some Democratic state lawmakers already introduced measures in anticipation of an unfavorable Supreme Court decision.

The Illinois House last week approved a state constitutional amendment that would require districts to be drawn “to ensure that no citizen is denied an equal opportunity to participate in the political process and to elect representatives of his or her choice on account of race.”

The Illinois amendment would also require, where practical, the creation of racial coalition or influence districts — terms that refer to districts where racial minorities together constitute a majority of residents. The measure, which must also pass the state Senate before going to voters, was a pre-response to the Callais opinion.

“This will ensure that Illinois will always recognize the fundamental principle that a democracy of the people, by the people and for the people must include all the people,” Illinois Democratic House Speaker Emanuel Welch told reporters after the amendment advanced.

Illinois Republicans have cast the amendment as a Democratic power grab. The state has some of the most gerrymandered maps in the nation, Illinois House Minority Leader Tony McCombie, a Republican, said in a statement. The Princeton Gerrymandering Project has given Illinois’ maps an overall “F” grade.

“Let’s be clear: this has nothing to do with strengthening democracy,” McCombie said. “It’s about locking in one-party control at any cost.”

I am often asked if our democracy will survive four years of President Donald Trump. My answer is always the same: Yes, if we have fair and free elections in 2026. If not, our democracy may not exist as we have known it.

At our country’s founding, not all citizens could participate in our democracy. Women couldn’t vote. White men without property couldn’t vote. Indentured servants couldn’t vote. Native Americans couldn’t vote. Enslaved people couldn’t vote.

But over 200 years voting has expanded in our country and, with it, our democracy. Eventually Black citizens could vote, except in the old Confederacy states where Jim Crow ruled. Then, after a 72-year struggle women won the right to vote in 1920 after the 19th Amendment was approved. Then in 1965 Congress passed the Voting Rights Act which finally broke down the barriers to voting for our Black citizens. It should be noted that Idaho was the fourth state in the country to give women the right to vote, starting in 1896.

Over the years groups like the League of Women Voters and secretaries of state in both Republican and Democrat states encouraged more of their citizens to register and vote. We had registration drives and get-out-the vote efforts. We wanted more Americans to participate in the democratic process.

Now, for the first time in the modern history of our nation, we have a president who wants to restrict Americans from voting. Donald Trump is working to pass laws and policies that would block people from voting or intimidate them from going to the polls this November.

Why? Because he wants to ensure that the Republicans keep control of the U.S. House and Senate in November and the White House in 2028. He is hoping to build a federally controlled electoral system that favors him and his party.

How Trump’s SAVE America Act could make it harder for married women to vote

The Senate has before it the so-called SAVE Act. The act would require two forms of identification for someone to register or reregister to vote – a passport or their original birth certificate. This act, which has passed the House with support of Idaho’s two congressmen, Mike Simpson and Russ Fulcher, is now pending in the Senate.

The SAVE Act would make it especially hard for married women who have changed their name to vote, and it would disenfranchise people who don’t have a passport. In either case, it would make it harder for people to vote.

The good news is the SAVE Act looks like it has stalled in the U.S. Senate because supporters don’t have the 60 votes necessary to break a filibuster. Trump wants this bill passed so badly he has even encouraged Senate Republicans to abolish the filibuster and approve the SAVE Act.

But the SAVE Act isn’t the only way President Trump wants to make it harder to vote. If he had his way, Trump would eliminate mail-in voting, something millions of Americans do. And, if he can’t eliminate it, he wants to make it exceedingly difficult to do.

In late March he issued an executive order that requires the Department of Homeland Security and the Social Security Administration to build a federal data base with information about every American. The U.S. Postal Service would then only send mail-in ballots to Americans Trump deems qualified to vote.

Tammy Patrick, the chief programs officer at the National Association of Election Officials, told CNN the order overrides how each state decides to issue mail-in ballots to their citizens. “At the highest level, it is taking the conduct of the election and the channel with which millions of Americans vote – voting absentee by mail – out of the hands of state and local officials, and into the hands of the federal government,” she said.

Early 2026 primary election voting begins today in Canyon, other Idaho counties

On Tuesday, the voting rights group Common Cause and other groups filed a lawsuit in federal court to block the Justice Department from obtaining data on Americans that include their driver’s license and partial Social Security numbers. This information would then be shared with Homeland Security.

“By attempting to interrogate and exploit voter data for political purposes, President Trump’s DOJ isn’t just threatening the privacy of every American—they are building a system designed to imprison the ballot box and silence millions of eligible voters,” Virginia Kase Solomón, Common Cause president and CEO, said.

Trump doesn’t like mail-in voting because he thinks it favors Democrats. He overlooks the fact that many Republicans vote by mail too because they are traveling abroad, may be living at their second home, may be elderly, or live in rural areas far from a polling place.

The fact is mail-in voting has strengthened our democracy by making it easier to participate. In all mail-in states like Oregon and Washington, the percentage of eligible voters who cast ballots in 2024 was 72 percent and 74 percent respectively compared to 63.4 percent in Idaho with more requirements to vote by mail.

Another way Trump wants to weaken our election is by federalizing the National Guard in each state to stand guard at polling places. He says he regrets not deploying the National Guard in 2020 even though every study shows that he lost that election honestly.

When asked about National Guard troops being deployed on Election Day, Gen. Steven Nordhaus, chief of the National Guard bureau, said, “The National Guard, obviously, always follows the Constitution, law, policy and guidance, both at the federal and the state level.” You can drive the proverbial Mack truck through that answer.

Steven Bannon, Trump’s political alter ego, wants the president to deploy the military to polling places even though the law forbids it except “to repel armed enemies of the United States.” Bannon even wants Trump to deploy ICE agents to polling places.

Can you imagine going to your polling place at a church or school only to see ICE agents or the military standing there in their fatigues, holding high-power rifles, and even wearing masks to hide their identity. It would look like something from an authoritarian country or a banana republic. It would no doubt have a chilling effect on voters or even keep some from going to the polls. 

And no doubt Trump would deploy these troops only to Democratically controlled cities like Los Angeles, Seattle, Portland, New York, Chicago, and Washington, D.C. He has already used ICE agents, the National Guard, and even the military to intimidate and control citizens in those cities, leading to death and mayhem. 

Trump claims that he is promoting these initiatives because there is so much fraud in our elections. But study after study, including those by Republicans, show that there are few ineligible voters casting ballots. Out of 150 million ballots cast in 2024, only a few proved to be invalid and even those had no impact on outcomes.

Until Trump, the United States had the most secure and trusted elections in the world. In 2020, he did what no president in the history of the United States has done – deny that he lost an election. Even in 1860 the citizens of the slave-holding states acknowledged Lincoln won the election even though they didn’t like it and left the union. 

Unfortunately, Trump’s insistence that he won the 2020 election has caused millions of our citizens doubt the honesty of our elections, even though there is no evidence of fraud.

Trump is pushing the SAVE Act and other dangerous initiatives to make it more difficult for women, students, service members, and college-educated citizens to vote, people he considers his enemies.

But Republican members of Congress, like the four in Idaho’s congressional delegation, should think twice about falling in lockstep with their leader. These initiatives could backfire on Republicans as much as Democrats.

It is unimaginable that in the year when we celebrate the 250th anniversary of our democracy’s founding and when our ancestors have fought so hard here at home or abroad to protect and expand democracy that we are even thinking about making it more difficult for Americans to fulfill their most sacred responsibility as citizens.

We have all seen authoritarian regimes around the world deny their citizens the right to vote, or erect barriers to make it more difficult to vote or intimidate them. We have looked on with admiration as people in these countries courageously go to the polls to vote anyway. In fact, we just recently saw the voters in Hungry throw out their authoritarian leader Viktor Orban. It is Orban who Trump has looked to as a role model for his own anti-democratic tendencies. He even sent Vice President J.D. Vance to Hungry to rally support for Orban. 

Americans may now find themselves in the same situation as voters in other countries who have faced authoritarian leaders who sought to limit their democracy. In November, it may be our turn to show the same courage as voters in these countries. 

It would send an unmistakable message that we won’t let anyone, even the president of the United States, weaken or destroy our great American democracy.

WASHINGTON — King Charles III did not name President Donald Trump Tuesday when he acknowledged before a joint session of Congress the transatlantic tension between the United States and the United Kingdom, but stressed “America’s words carry weight and meaning” as he reflected on decades of diplomatic ties.

The monarch of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland told lawmakers that from “bitter division” 250 years ago, the two nations “forged a friendship that has grown into one of the most consequential alliances in human history.”

“I pray with all my heart that our alliance will continue to defend our shared values with our partners in Europe and the Commonwealth and across the world,” he said.

Charles is the first British king to address a joint session of Congress, and only the second monarch to do so after his mother, Queen Elizabeth II, spoke before lawmakers in 1991.

Charles was received with loud unanimous applause from both sides of the aisle — a notable difference from the usual one-party enthusiasm during the president’s annual State of the Union address.

He punctuated his roughly 27-minute speech with laugh lines, including a quip that 250 years for America is “just the other day” for the British.

To whoops and cheers, Charles nodded to the “bold and imaginative rebels with a cause” who declared independence but also “carried forward” the ideals of the Magna Carta, a 13th-century document outlining the protection of rights and property from the monarch.

Both sides of the aisle stood applauding in unison as the king cited U.S. Supreme Court cases that laid the “foundation of the principle that executive power is subject to checks and balances.”

But the king also delivered his speech against the ominous backdrop of a breakdown of American support for Ukraine and an ongoing war in Iran, initiated by the United States and Israel, that has disrupted energy supply in the United Kingdom and around the world.

The conflicts “pose immense challenges for the international community and whose impact is felt in communities the length and breadth of our own country,” he said. 

As the king was still speaking on Capitol Hill, the White House shared on social media a photo of Charles and Trump together under the heading “TWO KINGS” and a crown emoji.

U.S.-U.K. relations have frayed as a result of Trump’s recurrent attacks on British Prime Minister Keir Starmer’s decision to not join offensive operations targeting Iran.

Trump paused his scathing online screeds against the British government during the king’s first full day of his state visit, which included a 21-gun salute and ceremonial flyover after Charles and Queen Camilla arrived on the White House South Lawn. 

Shortly before Charles addressed Congress, Trump took aim on his Truth Social platform at another European leader, German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, accusing him of thinking “it’s OK for Iran to have a Nuclear Weapon. He doesn’t know what he’s talking about!”  

Just over one month into the U.S. campaign in Iran, Trump, on Truth Social, told the U.K. and other allied partners to “Go get your own oil!”  from the blockaded Strait of Hormuz. 

“You’ll have to start learning how to fight for yourself, the U.S.A. won’t be there to help you anymore, just like you weren’t there for us,” he wrote.

Two weeks earlier, Trump attacked NATO allies, telling reporters in the Oval Office, “I’ve long said that, you know, I wonder whether or not NATO would ever be there for us. So … this was a great test, because we don’t need them, but they should have been there.”

Charles recounted in his speech to Congress how the only time the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, or NATO, invoked Article 5 was to defend the United States following the Sept. 11, 2001 attack.

The king and Camilla are scheduled to visit the 9/11 Memorial in New York City on Wednesday.

“We stood with you then, and we stand with you now in solemn remembrance of a day that shall never be forgotten,” Charles said.

Just under 460 British troops died fighting alongside Americans in Afghanistan.

The king’s trip to the U.S. also comes after the high-profile release of millions of records related to the disgraced hedge fund manager and sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, who had ties to Charles’ brother, Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor. 

Mountbatten-Windsor settled outside of court in 2022 with the late Epstein victim Virginia Giuffre, who accused Epstein and the former British prince of trafficking her for sex.

Mountbatten-Windsor has been stripped of his royal title of prince and is under investigation in Britain for allegedly sharing confidential government information with Epstein, which came to light in the publicly released files.

The king acknowledged victims of sexual abuse in his speech, according to a palace aide, when he remarked to lawmakers, “In both of our countries, it is the very fact of our vibrant, diverse and free societies that gives us our collective strength, including to support victims of some of the ills that, so tragically, exist in both our societies today.”

Answering questions about the king’s address, the palace aide told reporters traveling with Charles, “It was certainly in (his majesty’s) mind to acknowledge victims of abuse, so they are naturally incorporated in this line.”

Sky Roberts, Giuffre’s brother who has become an activist following his sister’s death last year, was on Capitol Hill Tuesday for a roundtable about Epstein victims ahead of Charles’ visit.

Roberts and the king did not meet.

Charles, a vocal advocate for the environment, is also scheduled to visit Shenandoah National Park in Virginia Thursday to view America’s “extraordinary natural splendor.” The king emphasized to lawmakers the need for a collaborative effort to fight climate change.

“Even as we celebrate the beauty that surrounds us, our generation must decide how to address the collapse of critical natural systems, which threatens far more than the harmony and essential diversity of nature,” he said. 

“We ignore at our peril the fact that these natural systems, in other words nature’s own economy, provide the foundation for our prosperity and our national security,” he said.

Charles also celebrated the shared financial economy between the United States and U.K., highlighting $430 billion in annual trade. Just over a year ago, Trump began a new tariff regime on British goods, and imports from many other trading partners.

Trump and first lady Melania Trump welcomed the king and queen on the White House South Lawn Monday morning for a ceremony full of pomp and circumstance, including a review of the troops, a distinguished honor for a visiting head of state.

During brief and mostly scripted remarks, Trump highlighted a tree planted on the White House grounds by Elizabeth II in 1991. Trump described the tree as a “living symbol” of the relationship between the United States and the United Kingdom.

“In the centuries since we won our independence, Americans have had no closer friends than the British. We share that same root. We speak the same language, we hold the same values, and together our warriors have defended the same extraordinary civilization under twin banners of red, white and blue,” Trump said.

Trump and Charles met in a closed-door Oval Office bilateral meeting following the ceremony. 

The first lady and the queen met with American schoolchildren at the White House tennis pavilion, where the students donned Meta Quest headsets to view several U.K. landmarks, including Stonehenge and Buckingham Palace. The event was part of the first lady’s effort to promote technology in education, according to the White House.

Charles and Camilla are scheduled to attend a state dinner at the White House East Room Tuesday night before heading to New York City Wednesday.

The king and queen are scheduled to visit the small town of Front Royal, Virginia, Thursday, as well as meet Interior Secretary Doug Burgum in Shenandoah National Park, according to the British embassy.

The U.S. Department of Justice on Tuesday obtained a second grand jury indictment of former FBI Director James Comey, long a target of President Donald Trump’s anger for overseeing an investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election.

A federal grand jury in North Carolina indicted Comey related to a photo he posted on social media of seashells arranged to read “86 47.” Comey took the photo while vacationing in North Carolina last year. The indictment alleges that Comey threatened to harm the president and that he used interstate commerce to transmit the threat when he posted the photo.

An arrest warrant was also issued for Comey. The indictment alleges that a “reasonable recipient who is familiar with the circumstances” would interpret the seashell photo as a serious expression of intent to harm Trump.

Trump supporters have interpreted the photo as a threat against the president, since “86” is a slang term for removing something and “47” could be seen as a reference to Trump as the 47th president. Comey has said the photo wasn’t intended as a call to violence and deleted the post.

“While this case is unique and this indictment stands out because of the name of the defendant, his alleged conduct is the same kind of conduct that we will never tolerate and that we will always investigate and regularly prosecute,” acting U.S. Attorney General Todd Blanche said at a Justice Department news conference.

In a video posted online after the indictment, Comey said he was “still innocent” and wasn’t afraid. 

“Well, they’re back,” he says at the start of the video.

“It’s really important that all of us remember this is not who we are as a country, this is not how the Department of Justice is supposed to be,” Comey said. “The good news is we get closer every day to restoring those values. Keep the faith.”

A federal grand jury in Virginia indicted Comey in September, accusing him of lying to Congress and obstructing a congressional proceeding. The allegations relate to his testimony in 2020 about the FBI’s investigation into links between Russia and the Trump campaign. The indictment came days before the statute of limitations ran out.

Comey pleaded not guilty before a federal judge dismissed the case in November, finding the prosecutor in the case had been illegally appointed. The judge also dismissed a separate case against Democratic New York Attorney General Letita James.

The new indictment marked another escalation in the Trump administration’s efforts to prosecute Comey and other political enemies. Last week, the Justice Department obtained an indictment against the Southern Poverty Law Center, an organization that has long angered conservatives. 

Hours before the Justice Department announced the indictment, a federal judge in New York ruled that a wrongful termination lawsuit brought by Comey’s daughter, former federal prosecutor Maurene Comey, could proceed. Maurene Comey claims she was improperly fired from the Justice Department because of her father or for political reasons.

The new prosecution also comes as Blanche, a personal defense attorney for Trump, leads the Justice Department following the departure of Pam Bondi. Trump has not yet nominated a permanent attorney general.

The Tuesday indictment was signed by Matthew Petracca, an assistant U.S. attorney in the Justice Department’s Criminal Division.

“This is a ridiculous indictment against James Comey. The Department of Justice will lose in court, again,” U.S. Rep. Ted Lieu, a California Democrat, wrote on social media.

At the news conference, Blanche fielded skeptical questions from reporters about how the case came together and why the criminal case wasn’t brought until nearly a year after the post. He refused to discuss evidence in the case, saying that would be unfair to Comey and prosecutors.

“You are not allowed to threaten the president of the United States of America,” Blanche said. “That’s not my decision, that’s Congress’ decision.”

WASHINGTON — U.S. House Speaker Mike Johnson wants to make changes to a Senate-passed bill that would end the shutdown at the Department of Homeland Security, a move that will further delay funding and prolong the stalemate that began in mid-February. 

The holdup could again interrupt paychecks for workers at the Transportation Security Administration and Federal Emergency Management Agency, both of which are part of DHS. Huge backups in airline security lines resulted in March when TSA officers went without pay for weeks until the administration scrambled to reprogram funds.

Johnson, R-La., has chosen not to negotiate potential tweaks in the funding bill with Senate Democrats, who will be needed to advance it if the House makes alterations.

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., said during a Tuesday afternoon press conference the bill that’s stalled in the House doesn’t “need tweaks.” 

“They’re just stuck. So they come up with, ‘We need some technical changes,’” he said. “Hold up national security for technical changes? It’s absurd. They can pass the bill right now.” 

Washington Democratic Sen. Patty Murray, ranking member on the Appropriations Committee, said during a brief interview she was “flabbergasted” by Johnson’s comments.

She added during the press conference she has “no idea what technical changes they’re looking at.”

The Senate unanimously passed a bill to fund the vast majority of the Department of Homeland Security in late March and again in early April. Johnson hasn’t put it to the House floor for a vote, blocking it from becoming law. 

The legislation doesn’t include funding for Immigration and Customs Enforcement or the Border Patrol, a compromise negotiated after Republicans and Democrats were unable to broker agreement on guardrails for immigration enforcement operations. 

Republicans plan to provide upwards of $70 billion in additional spending for ICE and Border Patrol in a party-line budget reconciliation bill they hope to pass in the coming weeks. 

Johnson said last week he believes the “sequencing is important” on when each of the two bills becomes law. But time is running out for the tens of thousands of federal workers, who are about to miss out on their paychecks once again. 

Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin said in a statement the executive order President Donald Trump signed earlier this month to pay all DHS employees despite the funding lapse can only stretch so far. 

“That money is dried up if I continue down this path the first week of May,” Mullin said. “My pay roll through DHS is just over 1.6 billion dollars every 2 weeks so the money is going extremely fast and once that happens there is no emergency funds after that.”

Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., said he’s working with House GOP leaders to “massage” the DHS funding bill in hopes it will become law sometime soon. 

“I’m very sympathetic,” he said. “We talked last night and he’s got to manage his challenges there. We have to manage our challenges here. But one way or the other, we’ve got to get these agencies funded.”

The disconnect between House Republicans and their Senate GOP counterparts on when to fund DHS is just one of several challenges party leaders are attempting to address this week. 

“We’re trying as best we can to coordinate strategy with the House. But, you know, it’s a unique situation. We’ve got very narrow margins and people with real strong opinions,” Thune said. “So it’s going to take, obviously, I think, the heavy involvement of the White House to bust some of these things loose. But we’re trying as best we can to ensure that we can get all of these issues across the finish line and ultimately on the president’s desk.”

Republican leaders will need the support of their own members as well as at least some Democrats in order to get major legislation, including the DHS funding bill, to Trump. 

But as of midday Tuesday, it didn’t appear they’d looped in key negotiators on possible changes to the Senate-passed spending bill. 

Alabama Republican Sen. Katie Britt, chairwoman of the subcommittee in charge of funding DHS, said she didn’t know what changes House GOP leaders wanted to make. 

“I am not aware. I just know that we need to find a pathway forward,” she said. “And nobody should be leaving here, or certainly flying off to (congressional delegation trips), until we do.” 

Both chambers of Congress are scheduled to leave on Thursday for a week-long break. 

Connecticut Democratic Sen. Chris Murphy, ranking member on the DHS funding panel, said House Republicans hadn’t reached out to him or his staff. 

“I don’t know why he’s making this more complicated than it needs to be,” he said. “Our bill, which passed the Senate 100 to zero, would pass the House easily.”

Utah cities, ski resorts, farmers and scientists tracking and preparing for the fallout of this year’s lowest-ever snowpack and winter drought are already feeling the effects. 

The impact was clear at Utah’s ski resorts, where visitation dropped from last season’s 6.5 million skier days to about 5 million this season, said Hilary Arens, director of sustainability and water resources at Snowbird Resort. 

This article is published through the Great Salt Lake Collaborative, a solutions journalism initiative that partners news, education and media organizations to help inform people about the plight of the Great Salt Lake — and what can be done to make a difference before it is too late.

“With a lower snowpack, less skiers, Snowbird is making less money,” Arens said Monday during a panel discussion in Salt Lake City, sitting under a display declaring 2026 the “year of no-pack.” 

Hosted by the nonprofit Great Salt Lake Alliance, panelists discussed the wide-ranging implications for Utah’s economy and environment, and the realities of a future with less water. 

This ski season, Snowbird suffered a decline in hotel stays and took on fewer employees — 1,600 compared to its typical 1,800 — “because we just didn’t have the business,” Arens said. The downturn limited its philanthropic capacity to help a forest recovery foundation and other groups, Arens said. 

The Monday event followed an announcement from state water managers last week of a “bleak outlook” for the next few months.

“In a typical year, Utah’s runoff — which refills our reservoirs — would just be getting underway,” they said in a prepared statement. “However, due to record-low snowpack and record-high temperatures, peak runoff has already come and gone.”

Also at risk: the groundwater supply and several springs that are already running low, said Bethany Neilson, director of the Utah Water Research Laboratory at Utah State University in Logan. 

“We are becoming less resilient, and that is going to have impacts not just in terms of our upper watersheds, but also throughout the entire system, because we’ll have less water available during the summer,” Neilson said during the panel. The state must then tap more from its reservoirs, or risk drying up streambeds, she added.

This year’s unprecedented conditions also make it more challenging for scientists to come up with reliable projections on streamflows to the imperiled Great Salt Lake, Neilson said.

“We now have entered a kind of a hydrologic realm that is very uncertain,” she said. 

In Salt Lake City, a conservation push is being accompanied by higher water rates, said Laura Briefer, director of  Salt Lake City’s public utilities department.

Briefer said the city is “going to ask our community to conserve more than they ever did, which means the income that we’re going to receive, if we keep the rates the same, isn’t going to meet our costs.” 

She noted Utah’s “no stranger to drought” but said this year feels decidedly different, in part due to the early peak in runoff, which can shrink the water supply and dry out grasses and trees, raising wildfire risk. 

The state’s farmers irrigating crops across the state “are being hit by a double or triple whammy,” said Chris Robinson, CEO of The Ensign Group, the ranching company that owns vast tracts of land in Utah, Idaho and Wyoming. The Iran war has driven up prices for fuel and fertilizer, and he anticipates farmers will receive just 20% to 40% of their usual water allocations because of shortages. 

“It’s a very serious situation, and unprecedented,” Robinson said. 

The panelists agreed the bleak conditions have a silver lining, keeping a focus on Utah’s water supply for the public, government leaders and the private sector. So do the Winter Olympics, slated to return to Salt Lake City in 2034, noted Arens, representing Snowbird.

“We’re going to be on the world stage here in eight years, and we’re going to need a snowpack.”

This story was originally produced by Utah News Dispatch, which is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network which includes Idaho Capital Sun, and is supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity.

SEATTLE — Washington state on Monday sued Albertsons over allegations it has been overcharging customers for years via buy one, get one free offers. 

Attorney General Nick Brown claims Albertsons, which also runs Safeway and Haggen stores, overcharged customers on at least 3.1 million transactions under this scheme between October 2019 and May 2024, bringing in at least $19.6 million from those purchases. 

The lawsuit, filed in King County Superior Court, says Albertsons artificially raises the prices of items like bread, produce and olive oil in the weeks or months before a buy one, get one, or BOGO, offer. It then lowers the prices within a month of the promotion. 

The complaint argues customers pay a premium on the first product, which covers a portion of the cost of the “free” one. The lawsuit comes after a monthslong investigation, Brown said.

“Washington consumers are already burdened by affordability issues, and we’re not going to stand by and let them get fleeced by deceptive marketing,” Brown said in a press conference.

Albertsons said in a statement that the company is aware of the lawsuit.

“We engaged in good‑faith discussions with the Attorney General’s Office and strongly disagree with its claims, which are based on flawed analysis and data errors that we identified and raised,” the company said.

“Albertsons Companies is committed to complying with the law and to offering customers clear value through our promotions,” the statement continued. “As this is pending litigation, we will address the matter through the legal process and cannot comment further.”

In 2021, the lawsuit says, Oroweat Premium Italian Bread at an Albertsons in Tacoma cost $3.69. But the store raised the price to $4.29, about 16%, around the time of a BOGO offer on the bread, according to the lawsuit. After the deal passed, it dropped the price to $4.17. 

Other increases included 50% for mini watermelon at Safeway in Colville, 57% for olive oil at a Gig Harbor Albertsons and 84% for pimiento-stuffed olives at an Albertsons in Renton.

This isn’t the first time this issue has been called out. 

In Oregon, Albertsons paid $107 million to settle a 2016 class-action lawsuit over similar allegations. In that case, eligible customers could each receive up to $200.

And in 2024, Albertsons settled with Washington consumers who brought their own lawsuit against the company. The terms of the settlement weren’t disclosed.

The state’s lawsuit alleges Albertsons is violating safeguards in the state’s Consumer Protection Act against unfair and deceptive practices. 

Brown is asking a judge to order Albertsons to end its buy one, get one practices, provide restitution to customers and pay civil penalties with interest.

Albertsons, based in Boise, Idaho, has 225 stores in Washington, according to the attorney general’s office. 

Washington has previously gone to court with the grocery giant to block its merger with Kroger out of anti-competitive concerns. In response to the lawsuit filed by then-Attorney General Bob Ferguson, a King County judge ruled the merger violated state consumer protection laws and halted it. A federal judge similarly blocked it, after the Federal Trade Commission sued. 

Brown pointed out this new lawsuit comes as the Trump administration has “gutted” federal consumer protection efforts. And grocery prices are on the rise. 

“This is something that everyone is facing, something that I face, trying to decide what products and food to buy for your family feels more important than ever before,” he said.

State lawmakers this year proposed legislation to temporarily ban electronic pricing systems at retailers and prohibit surveillance or algorithmic surge pricing. The bill didn’t pass the Legislature, but its sponsor has said she plans to try again in 2027.

Brown said his office has been “paying a lot of attention” to this issue, and eyeing whether companies are tailoring prices to customers based on personal data.

This story was originally produced by Washington State Standard, which is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network which includes Idaho Capital Sun, and is supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity.

A Trump administration proposal would end gender identity protections for people in federally funded housing and shelters.  

The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development proposed rule would remove references to “gender” and “gender identity” from agency regulations and replace them with “sex,” defined as a person’s biological classification as male or female. That would repeal an Obama-era rule that ensured housing programs are open without regard to gender identity.

The new rule also would allow owners or operators of shelters and other facilities that permit single-sex or sex-specific facilities “to require reasonable assurances and evidence to confirm the sex of an individual seeking service.”

“Through these revisions, the rule would ensure equal access to qualifying facilities would be provided in accordance with the sex of an individual based on his or her immutable biological classification as either male or female rather than the ever-shifting concept of self-assessed gender identity,” the proposed rule said.

The department will take public comments on the proposal through the end of June.

The National Housing Law Project advocacy group criticized the measure, saying it would force federally funded shelters to deny access to unhoused transgender people and allow federally funded housing providers to discriminate against applicants and tenants based on their sexual orientation or gender identity.

“Not only will the proposed policies directly harm families and communities, they will increase costs for state and local governments, hospital systems, and social services agencies by forcing more housing insecure people to live on the street rather than in shelter,” Chief Program Officer Deborah Thrope said in a statement.

The proposed rule would affect a population already experiencing disproportionate levels and risks of homelessness. Nearly one-third of transgender respondents in a 2022 survey by the National Center for Transgender Equality said they had experienced homelessness, while a UCLA School of Law Williams Institute analysis found transgender adults were several times more likely than cisgender straight adults to have been homeless in the past year.

The measure could spark a legal battle between the administration and states that adopted gender identity protections into housing and shelter laws.

California, Illinois, Massachusetts and New York protect gender identity in housing, public accommodations or both. On the other hand, Iowa and Idaho enacted laws that define sex biologically or restrict access to sex-specific spaces, regardless of gender identity. 

Stateline reporter Robbie Sequeira can be reached at rsequeira@stateline.org.

This story was originally produced by Stateline, which is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network which includes Idaho Capital Sun, and is supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity.

I first met Dirk Kempthorne when we were juniors at the University of Idaho and running for student body president. We were waiting to be interviewed by a radio station in downtown Moscow.

While we waited, we asked each other the proverbial question that college students ask: What do you plan to do after you graduate? I told Dirk that I planned to pursue a career in journalism. He said that he was planning to seek political office and make public service his career.

One thing I learned about Dirk over the last 52 years is that when he set his mind to do something he nearly always achieved success. At the age of 22 Dirk knew exactly what he wanted to do in life and then he went out and did it. 

Former Secretary of the Interior and Idaho Gov. Dirk Kempthorne dies at 74

Dirk had what is probably the greatest resume in Idaho political history. Two terms as mayor of Idaho’s largest city. One term in the U.S. Senate. Two terms as governor of Idaho. And one of the few Idahoans to ever serve in a president’s cabinet, as secretary of Interior under President George W. Bush.

Our friendship was rare for a politician and a journalist. The founding fathers envisioned that these two professions would be the pillars of their new republic. They also envisioned that at times politicians and journalists would clash, which they believed would only strengthen the democracy. 

Over the years Dirk and I did a good job of being friends without compromising our professional and personal integrity. We never let politics and media interfere with our friendship, and we never let our friendship interfere with our respective responsivities as servants to the public.

Dirk was the last of the significant Idaho politicians who carried the mantel of the Republican Party’s first president Abraham Lincoln. Dirk believed in limited government, but he also believed in a government that worked to improve the lives of the people. I believe he would have been aghast at disinvesting in institutions like higher education and other programs that served the people, economy, and quality of life in Idaho. 

As governor, Dirk championed a method of financing transportation infrastructure in a creative and effective way. He also championed the Idaho state parks system knowing that our parks allow Idaho families to experience the soul-refreshing splendor of our great state. It is only fitting that the headquarters of Idaho’s popular Ponderosa State Park was named in his honor.

But Dirk’s most important legacy is how he supported public education and endeavored to give our youngest children a strong and healthy start in life. Dirk and Patricia, his wonderful first lady, worked tirelessly for early education. I am sure Patricia will continue that all-important work.

Dirk and I crossed paths many times over the past half century. Two years after we graduated from college, we started a three-person scripture study group. Then, as couples, we joined with friends to have dinners regularly, the hosts always selecting the menu and everyone chipping in. We also enjoyed excursions to McCall and Stanley, enjoying Idaho’s great outdoors. 

I still remember the night when we were at a restaurant in downtown Boise and Dirk said he planned to run for the U.S. Senate in 1992. He said he wasn’t sure if he could win but set the goal of at least running a good, credible race. Of course, he won.

In 2021, when I was working on a book about former Gov. Phil Batt, I asked Dirk to write one of the chapters. He had been Phil’s campaign manager in 1982 when he ran for governor. Dirk revealed some interesting Idaho political history in that piece. One morning Phil knocked on his door and urged him to give up his Senate seat, run for governor in 1998, and replace him in the governor’s office. 

I have always thought that Dirk was born to be a public servant. He had a voice as smooth and calming as honey. He had a great, often self-deprecating sense of humor. When he talked to you, he would look you in the eyes and make you feel like you were the most important person in the world to him. He wasn’t one of those people whose eyes wander about the room to see if there is someone more important to talk to. 

It is hard to believe or accept that Dirk is gone. He lived such an interesting and successful life that you thought he would be around for a long, long time.

As Dirk fought cancer over the last few months, he and I exchanged texts, but we never managed to meet in person and talk. I regret that very much.

Dirk was a public servant right up until the end of his life. He was the driving force behind the building of the USS Idaho, a state-of-the-art submarine that was commissioned on Saturday, the day after Dirk died. It is a tragedy that he did not live long enough to see that dream turned over to the Navy for the defense of our country. 

Henry David Thoreau once said, “If one advances confidently in the direction of his dreams, and endeavors to live the life which he has imagined, he will meet with a success unexpected in common hours.” 

Dirk Kempthorne was a man who advanced confidently toward his dream of public service and endeavored to live the life he was meant to live. And few people I have known achieved so much success “unexpected in common hours.” 

WASHINGTON — The California man said by federal prosecutors to have opened fire just outside the White House Correspondents’ Association dinner, where President Donald Trump was in attendance alongside Cabinet members and lawmakers, was charged Monday with attempting to assassinate the president, administration officials said.

The 31-year-old identified by authorities as Cole Tomas Allen was also arraigned in Washington, D.C., federal court on charges of interstate transportation of a firearm with intent to commit a felony and discharge of a firearm during a crime of violence.

He faces up to life in prison if convicted of attempting to kill the president. Trump, first lady Melania Trump and Cabinet members all safely evacuated the Washington Hilton ballroom.

U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia Jeanine Pirro said, “There will be additional charges as this investigation continues to unfold.”

“But make no mistake, this was an attempted assassination of the president of the United States, with the defendant making clear what his intent was, and that intent was to bring down as many of the high-ranking Cabinet officials as he could,” Pirro said at a Monday afternoon press conference with acting Attorney General Todd Blanche and FBI Director Kash Patel.

Allen was not charged with assault on a federal officer, as Pirro had said Saturday night he would be.

One Secret Service agent was shot in the chest but was protected by a bulletproof vest. Blanche said that particular agent had fired five times at Allen. The suspect was not hit but fell to the ground and scraped his knee, according to Blanche and Pirro.

Blanche would not elaborate further on ballistics, including details about a shot Allen allegedly fired.

“All the evidence is being examined very carefully and expeditiously, and we’ll know more soon,” Blanche said.

The federal prosecutors’ complaint is sealed. 

According to a signed affidavit, Allen made a reservation for the Washington Hilton on April 3, for the dates of April 24-26. He left Los Angeles on April 23 and traveled by train to Washington, D.C., via Chicago, according to the court filing, which also includes what investigators and Trump have described as a “manifesto.”  

Allen arrived at the Washington Hilton around 3 p.m. Eastern Friday, a day ahead of the high-profile correspondents’ dinner that annually draws administration officials, lawmakers, celebrities and often the president himself. 

Trump, opting to skip the event in previous years, was attending the dinner for the first time. Vice President JD Vance and many of Trump’s Cabinet members were in attendance, as was House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La. — several in the presidential line of succession. 

According to the affidavit, at 8:40 p.m. Allen “approached and ran through the magnetometer holding a long gun” at a security checkpoint on the hotel’s Terrace level leading to the Concourse level, where the dinner was ongoing.

“As he did so, U.S. Secret Service personnel assigned to the checkpoint heard a loud gunshot. U.S. Secret Service Officer V.G. was shot once in the chest; Officer V.G. was wearing a ballistic vest at the time. Officer V.G. drew his service weapon and fired multiple times at ALLEN, who fell to the ground and suffered minor injuries but was not shot. ALLEN was subsequently arrested,” according to the affidavit.

Allen was carrying a 12-gauge pump action shotgun and a .38 caliber pistol, according to the court document. Pirro also said the suspect had on him “at least three knives and all kinds of paraphernalia.”

When pressed by a journalist on how investigators know that Trump was Allen’s primary target, Blanche said he could not share details. 

“We’re a day-and-a-half into the investigation. As we talked about earlier, we were able to get multiple devices from various locations, the hotel room and also where he lived in California. We have started that process. There’s nothing more that would be appropriate to share at this time, until we have thoroughly gone through it, which we’re doing,” Blanche said.

Trump publicly shared photos of the man identified as Allen, shirtless and handcuffed on the hotel floor, Sunday night.

During Monday’s press briefing, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt described Saturday’s incident as an attempt on Trump’s life, and she denounced political violence while blaming Democrats and the left for “fueling” it. 

“This political violence stems from a systemic demonization of him and his supporters by commentators, yes, by elected members of the Democrat Party and even some in the media,” Leavitt said.

“Those who constantly falsely label and slander the president as a fascist, as a threat to democracy and compare him to Hitler to score political points, are fueling this kind of violence,” she said. 

Blanche also decried critics for “calling the president horrible names for no reason and without evidence, without proof.” 

Republican party campaigners also delivered a similar message Monday, implicating Democrats’ “reckless, inflammatory rhetoric against President Trump and Republicans.” The committee’s chair, Joe Gruters, also accused Democrats in a statement released Monday of not speaking out against the attack.

Trump routinely namecalls and ridicules his political foes and the press on his social media platform, Truth Social, and in speeches. In a post Friday, the president called Democratic Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries a “Low IQ individual who is not smart enough to be ‘running’ the Democrat Party.”

Upon the death in March of former FBI director and decorated combat veteran Robert Mueller, Trump wrote on social media, “Good, I’m glad he’s dead.”

During a November press gaggle on Air Force One, Trump told a female reporter from Bloomberg, “Quiet, Piggy,” as she asked a question.

Leavitt also blamed Democrats for the monthslong shutdown at the Department of Homeland Security, under which the Secret Service operates.

“This is a national emergency, and every member of Congress needs to put their country over party and get the Department of Homeland Security funded,” Leavitt said. The shutdown occurred after Democrats insisted on new guardrails for federal immigration agents following the deadly shootings of two U.S. citizens in Minnesota.

Leavitt said Trump “continues to have trust in the Secret Service” and “was satisfied with the response.” 

White House Chief of Staff Susie Wiles will convene a meeting with top DHS leadership, members of the Secret Service and White House operations officials “to ensure safety and the security of the president,” Leavitt said.

Leavitt also advocated for the president’s proposed ballroom construction, calling it “critical for our national security” during large events where several officials and lawmakers in line for the presidency gather together.

The National Trust for Historic Preservation legally challenged the construction of the ballroom, for which Trump demolished the East Wing in October. 

Blanche shared a letter on social media Sunday urging the trust to drop its lawsuit by 9 a.m. Eastern on Monday and blaming it for putting “the lives of the president, his family and his staff at great risk.”

The organization responded in a letter that it would not drop the case.

The Trust’s President and CEO Carol Quillen said in a statement the organization is “grateful” to law enforcement for keeping Trump and all guests safe over the weekend.

“We are not planning to voluntarily dismiss our lawsuit, which endangers no one and which respectfully asks the administration to follow the law. Ballroom construction is continuing unabated until June 5th at the earliest because the injunction is on hold,” Quillen said in a statement provided to States Newsroom.

“We have always acknowledged the utility of a larger meeting space at the White House. Building it lawfully requires the approval of Congress, which the administration could seek at any time.”

This story was originally posted on IdahoEdNews.org on April 27, 2026.

Editor’s note: This story is part of a series of candidate profiles Idaho Education News will publish ahead of the May 19 primary election. Idaho EdNews is highlighting competitive races impacting education policy. Click here to see the EdNews Elections webpage featuring a list of all candidates and much more. Click here to see your voter information. Follow the elections blog for breaking news and insights.

A Twin Falls County commissioner is challenging a two-term state senator as voters in the Magic Valley decide who should represent them in Boise.

Sen. Glenneda Zuiderveld, R-Twin Falls, is seeking a third term in District 24, encompassing rural Twin Falls, Gooding and Camas counties.

But first she will face long-running Magic Valley public servant Brent Reinke, a Twin Falls County commissioner and former director of the Idaho Department of Corrections. Some might know him better from “MR. B’s,” a family business he started in the ’80s that sold ice cream at the county fair for 38 years.

Zuiderveld is a member of the “Gang of Eight,” a group of hardline conservatives who vote against new government spending. All eight members, four of whom are from the Magic Valley, will face primary challengers on May 19. Zuiderveld said she will stick to her values and is confident her coalition will survive.

“I will continue to be steadfast,” Zuiderveld told EdNews.

Reinke said he decided to run after many individuals and groups in District 24 encouraged him to challenge Zuiderveld. He said folks in the Magic Valley want local representation.

“They don’t want me to run on a platform necessarily, like my opponent is,” Reinke said.

Political action committees heavily targeted Zuiderveld during the 2024 election cycle, and that trend continues this year.

Her primary campaign in 2024 drew $112,080 in opposition from PACs, a figure second only to Speaker of the House Mike Moyle. That included $78,000 in opposition from Idaho Liberty PAC and $12,250 from WinAg PAC.

WinAg and the Surface Water Coalition, a group aligned with the Twin Falls Canal Company, have already reported spending this year in opposition to Zuiderveld.

As the race heats up, both incumbent and challenger are raising significant money. Zuiderveld has collected $51,117 in campaign contributions and Reinke is slightly ahead with $53,763.

• History of elected service: Two terms in the Senate. Elected 2022 and 2024.
• Campaign website: glenneda.com

Zuiderveld said she’s getting hit on everything.

As a member of the Joint Finance-Appropriations Committee, she routinely votes against budgets that she feels go beyond what is necessary.

“I’ve already been beat up,” she told EdNews. “I’m anti-ag, I’m anti-education, I’m anti-veteran, I’m anti-police, I’m anti-water. And every bill that they show to make it look like that — ‘This is me, I’m against everything’ — every single one of them is the enhancement.”

Last year she voted against $30 million in ongoing funding for water projects that would benefit the Magic Valley. This year she voted against an enhancement budget that will bring $423,800 in additional funding to the College of Southern Idaho in Twin Falls.

When casting votes, she keeps two things in mind: the Idaho Constitution and the “forgotten man.”

By that, she means the Idahoans who are working one or two jobs and paying their taxes. She said those folks don’t have time to watch what the government is doing.

“Somebody needs to look out for them as well,” she said.

Regarding her opposition to additional funds for her local community college, Zuiderveld said there is only one college that legislators have a constitutional duty to fund — the University of Idaho.

Funneling more taxpayer money to CSI, she said, would take funding away from other constitutional obligations, such as funding K-12 schools. She said corporations should step up and provide more money for scholarships to help train the workforce they benefit from.

Of all of the attacks against her, Zuiderveld said losing the support of the agriculture industry is hardest. She grew up in the Magic Valley and her dad was a potato farmer.

“I guess what hurts the most is the fact that I’ve known them for a long time. They all have my phone number. None of them reach out to me,” she said. “They just believe that I’m against their water.”

After wrapping up her second term, Zuiderveld said she’s starting to get thicker skin.

“It’s very lonely being the only, ‘No,'” she said.

On other education issues, Zuiderveld said she was glad the Legislature passed a bill to prohibit taxpayer funding for teachers’ unions. And she has an idea for how schools could cut administrative costs and put more money into classrooms.

The Magic Valley has 10 districts with fewer than 600 students. Zuiderveld said she wants to explore having fewer superintendents that oversee entire counties or a certain number of students, instead of individual small districts.

“There could be one superintendent that takes care of Wendell, Hagerman, Bliss,” she said.

Zuiderveld said she feels confident that the Gang of Eight will survive the primaries. She said they are all very involved with their constituents and are “very grassroots.”

“We don’t have a lot of money, but our people bank is big,” she said.

But even if she loses, Zuiderveld said she’s not going away. If she’s not serving in the Legislature, she would have more time for research and would be more vocal.

“I made the joke to somebody the other day, I said, ‘If I don’t win, I will still be heavily involved, but I won’t have as much restraint on me,'” she said.

• History of elected service: Twin Falls County Commissioner, former director of the Idaho Department of Corrections and Juvenile Corrections
• Campaign website: reinkeforidaho.com

From superintendents to farmers to law enforcement, Reinke said the people he’s met on the campaign trail want local representation.

He said folks in District 24 have encouraged him to challenge Zuiderveld, but they don’t want him to run on a platform. They want someone who will get local feedback, show up to local events, tour local schools and carry those needs to the Statehouse.

“We now have a voting block in Boise rather than legislators that represent the local individual and those organizations,” Reinke said. “There’s just a gap there, and that’s what I believe I can do.”

Reinke has decades of public service under his belt in city, county and state government.

He is a former director of the Idaho Department of Juvenile Corrections and the Idaho Department of Corrections. He served on the Filer City Council and has been a Twin Falls County commissioner since 2019.

Reinke said he’s running for Senate to apply the lessons he’s learned from those experiences. Those lessons can be boiled down to three steps: listen, learn and lead.

After visiting with local educators, Reinke said he has two areas of concern regarding public schools. He would like the funding formula to be more equitable and fair for school districts, and he said teachers need more support in the classroom.

He said kids with high needs can create challenges for teachers and cause disruptions for other students.

“I’m concerned about the lack of support in a lot of our classrooms now for kids that are on an IEP, or they’re seriously emotionally disturbed,” Reinke said, referring to individualized education programs for kids with special needs.

In his conversations with teachers, Reinke said he’s heard they are trying to educate students but are concerned with recruitment and retention.

“There’s been a tremendous amount of feedback over the last few years where education really feels like it’s under attack,” he said.

Fundraising – 2026 election cycle to date

Glenneda Zuiderveld

• Beginning cash balance: $33,293
• Total contributions: $51,117
• Total expenditures: $16,035
• Ending cash balance: $35,864

Brent Reinke

• Beginning cash balance: $25,541
• Total contributions: $53,763
• Total expenditures: $35,914
• Ending cash balance: $38,605

Source: Idaho Sunshine database, as of April 24

From his experience in juvenile and adult corrections, Reinke said he saw firsthand what a lack of education can do to a family. He said he was surprised at how many kids in juvenile facilities would end up in prison. Education can help break that cycle, he added.

“Education is the key to success,” Reinke said. “It’s a building block.”

He said people in the corrections system can backslide very rapidly, but all it takes is one individual to set them on a different path and help them earn a GED while incarcerated.

“Life is about learning from start to finish, and they don’t see that. They don’t see tomorrow in many, many cases and they need to be able to see that future,” Reinke said. “And that’s the value of education.”

With less than a month until the election, Reinke said he wants to move the needle on voter turnout. He said there was a lot of voter apathy in the Magic Valley in 2024, but voters have woken up.

“If we can get the silent majority mobilized to vote, it’ll be interesting to see what happens,” Reinke said.

With the America 250 celebration happening, he said he can’t think of a better way to recognize the country’s semiquincentennial than by exercising the right to vote.

“This is a right we never want to take for granted,” he said.

This story originally posted on IdahoEdNews.org on April 27, 2026.

Idaho State University will pay $160,000 in damages in a racial discrimination case.

A Bannock County jury Thursday ruled in favor of Chanica Sintima, a Black student pursuing a doctoral degree in pharmacy. Sintima said she was wrongfully removed from a clinical rotation at Eastern Idaho Regional Medical Center in Idaho Falls in the fall of 2023.

As a result, Idaho State gave Sintima a failing grade midway through the semester, and expelled her early in 2024. During the trial, Sintima said Idaho State applied its attendance and tardiness policies inconsistently, treating Sintima more severely than a white classmate, the Idaho State Journal reported Friday.

“We do not have to prove that Ms. Sintima’s midpoint grade was influenced by the color of her skin,” Sintima’s attorney, J. Grady Hepworth of Boise, told the jury, according to the Journal. “We just have to prove that Ms. Sintima had a reasonable concern that she might be being treated differently because of the color of her skin.”

“Idaho State University has established policies and processes in place to ensure students have a safe and respectful learning environment, and ISU’s employees work diligently to create a supportive educational experience for all students,” the university said in a  statement to the Journal. “While we do not agree with the conclusion that retaliation occurred, we respect the judicial system and look forward to moving beyond this issue.”

Sintima had originally claimed $3.4 million in damages. The bulk of the $160,000 will go toward vocational rehabilitation and retraining and lost earnings, the Journal reported; she will receive no award for pain and suffering or lost future earnings.

A Boise daycare and parents are suing Idaho officials over the Idaho Medical Freedom Act, which bans vaccine mandates and requirements for medical treatment in businesses, governments and schools.

In the lawsuit, Le Soleil Child Care LLC and three parents who have or want their kids to attend the daycare, argue that the law’s vague language unconstitutionally bans a range of health protections — from innocuous things like handwashing to basic infection control measures like sending home sick kids.

The lawsuit’s claims — which Idaho Attorney General Raúl Labrador’s legal team rejects — dredge up a heated debate on the bill. In fact, Gov. Brad Little vetoed an earlier version of the bill over similar concerns in schools.

“Medical freedom is an Idaho value,” the governor wrote in his March 2025 veto letter. “However, this bill removes parents’ freedom to ensure their children stay healthy at school because it jeopardizes the ability of schools to send home sick students with highly contagious conditions including measles, lice, ringworm, pink eye, strep throat, stomach viruses, the flu, and other illnesses that disrupt families’ lives.”

Less than a week later, Little signed into law a reworked version of the bill, Senate Bill 1210, that clearly spelled out that schools can send home sick kids, and had a tweaked definition for the banned medical mandates.

Idaho governor says Medical Freedom Act allows schools, daycares to send home sick kids

So, is it really that far-fetched for a daycare to feel like it couldn’t send home sick kids? 

Yes, suggests the governor’s press secretary, Joan Vargas. 

In a statement provided Friday to the Idaho Capital Sun, she said Little signed the revised bill into law “because it does not jeopardize the ability of public schools or daycares to send home children sick with contagious conditions and illnesses that threaten the health of other children and disrupt families’ lives.” 

But Varsek said the governor’s office “looks forward to the courts providing further clarity around this law.” She added that the governor signed into law that same year House Bill 290 to establish in state law vaccine requirements for Idaho daycares and public schools. 

But the governor’s office didn’t respond to a follow up question about what language in the final so-called medical freedom bill makes clear that daycares can send home sick kids. Little did not agree to an interview. 

Horseshoe Bend Republican Rep. Robert Beiswenger, the bill’s sponsor, said the governor’s comments in his veto letter were “unfounded,” arguing that even the original version did not prevent schools from sending home sick kids. 

“I don’t know if he got some bad advice on our bill. But again, there’s separate code that specifically says that schools can send people home and stuff like that. It’s really just, it’s not in the bill,” Beiswenger said in an interview last week. “There’s a wide difference in saying ‘You have to take this measles shot or flu shot to come in here,’ versus, like ‘OK, you’re obviously sick. … We’re just going to ask you to go home.’”

The Idaho Statesman first reported on the lawsuit, which was filed in December. The bill’s author, Health Freedom Defense Fund President Leslie Manookian, wants Idaho’s law to become a national model for similar laws, ProPublica reported. 

What is the Idaho Medical Freedom Act?

The law, approved by the Idaho Legislature and governor in 2025, bans requirements for “medical interventions,” defined as “a medical procedure, treatment, device, drug injection, medication, or medical action taken to diagnose, prevent, or cure a disease or alter the health or biological function of a person.”  (That includes two uses of the term ‘medical,’ compared to zero in the definition in the bill that Little vetoed.) The law doesn’t allow mandates for those things to be used by businesses, government entities, schools and colleges to restrict entry, employment or services.

That language is so broad it sweeps up requiring staff to wash their hands, the lawsuit argues. 

“It is unclear what, if any, health-related action could fall outside the scope of this definition,” the lawsuit alleges. “In particular, any ‘medical action taken’ to ‘prevent … or cure a disease or alter the health or biological function of a person’ by its term sweeps up even the most commonplace medical actions, like excluding a sick person until no longer contagious or even requiring basic standards of hygiene like employee handwashing.”

The lawsuit is against Labrador, who urged lawmakers to override the governor’s veto, and Ada Prosecuting Attorney Jan Bennetts. In a legal filing requesting a judge dismiss the lawsuit, attorneys with the Idaho Attorney General’s Office argue that the term “medical intervention” clearly refers to something related to the practice of medicine.

“Unless an ‘intervention,’ ‘action,’ or other thing that ‘alters the health or biological function of a person’ is ‘medical’ in the sense of relating to physicians or the practice of medicine, then the statute does not regulate it,” the office’s attorneys write. “The absurd potential constructions offered by the complaint fall away: excluding a child who is apparently ill does not require a doctor, or a treatment, or injection, or anything else required by the statute, nor does it involve the practice of medicine. The same is true for excluding a sick employee until they are well.”

The lawsuit asks a federal judge to block the state from enforcing the law against private daycares. 

Beiswenger said the bill doesn’t say that you can’t “ask someone (who is sick) to leave.”

“The bill just comes back and just says ‘You can’t mandate a certain medical treatment.’ It doesn’t say if you have a fever, or you’re sweating out, and having, you know, all kinds of medical issues, you couldn’t ask someone to leave, that’s not in the law at all. So they’re just kind of making things up, quite frankly,” Beiswenger said in an interview. 

Attorneys for the suing daycare and the Idaho Attorney General’s Office could not be immediately reached for comment. A spokesperson for the Ada County Prosecutor’s Office declined to comment, saying the office doesn’t comment on lawsuits. 

Republican lawmakers worried workplaces couldn’t send home sick staff under the bill

Even on the successful version of the bill, several Republican lawmakers worried that the bill would stop businesses from sending home sick employees or customers. 

In the House’s debate, Rep. Dan Garner, a Republican from Clifton, asked Beiswenger three times if workplaces would be banned from kicking out sick people. 

“Can the business ask someone to leave — force someone to leave, if they feel like they are sick?” Garner asked.

“Again, the bill doesn’t address it directly. But I believe a business would be within their rights to ask someone to leave if they are sick,” Beiswenger replied.

Shelley Republican Rep. Ben Fuhriman read the bill’s language.

“I don’t care what your intentions are. A law is a law,” Fuhriman said. “And it’s written right here on page two, line 29: A business entity doing business in the state of Idaho shall not refuse to provide any service, product, admission to a venue, or transportation to a person — because that person has or has not received or used a medical intervention.”

Early voting for the 2026 Idaho primary elections begins today in Bannock, Canyon, Twin Falls, Blaine and several other counties before expanding to other counties next week, according to the Idaho Secretary State’s Office. 

Next week, early voting begins in Ada, Bingham, Bonneville, Kootenai, Cassia, Latah, Madison and other counties. 

All Idaho counties offer either early voting or in-person absentee voting. 

In Idaho, early voting is one of several different options for voting. 

In-person voting at the polls will be available from 8 a.m. to 8 p.m. local time on May 19.

Or, Idahoans can request an absentee ballot online at voteidaho.gov, an official website run by the Idaho Secretary of State’s Office. Idahoans have until May 8 to request an absentee ballot. 

The deadline to change party affiliation or become unaffiliated before the primary election already passed on March 13. 

Idahoans have until May 8 to pre-register to vote before the primary election, or they can register to vote in person at their polling location during the primary election on May 19. 

What is on the ballot in Idaho in 2026?

The 2026 elections are important because the results will shape government and policy decisions across the state for years to come. This year, all 105 seats in the Idaho Legislature and all statewide constitutional offices like governor, secretary of state, attorney general, treasurer, state controller and superintendent of public instruction are up for election.

On top of that, three of Idaho’s four seats in Congress are up for election, as well as judges, clerks and county commissioners across the state. 

Because the Republican Party has controlled all three branches of government for decades, the Republican primary elections are high-stakes contests that often go a long way to determining who will hold office next year. 

A complete list of which Idaho counties offer early voting and which counties offer in-person absentee voting is available online at voteidaho.gov. Idahoans can also use voteidaho.gov to request an absentee ballot, find the location of their polling place, find a list of candidates running for office, view their sample ballot, verify their voter record or begin registering to vote. 

Winners of the May 19 primary election will advance to the Nov. 3 general election.

The alleged shooter at Saturday night’s White House Correspondents’ Dinner in Washington, D.C., wrote a “manifesto” ahead of his planned attack, President Donald Trump said in a Sunday morning interview on Fox News and later in the day on the CBS show “60 Minutes.”

Meanwhile, Trump and MAGA allies online said security flaws exposed by the incident prove the need for a new secure ballroom at the White House. Trump, first lady Melania Trump and Cabinet officials were safely evacuated from the Washington Hilton after shots were fired by a suspect said by officials to be armed with a shotgun, handgun and multiple knives.

Multiple news reports Sunday identified the suspected shooter as 31-year-old Cole Tomas Allen of Torrance, California, and The Associated Press said he is a tutor and amateur video game developer. The White House has not released that information publicly and spokespeople did not return a message Sunday.

Fox News Host Jacqui Heinrich used the name in her interview with Trump, who did not use it himself but did not correct Heinrich when she named Allen and called the manifesto “anti-Trump” and “anti-Christian.”

Trump said the document revealed a “hatred” for Christianity.

“The guy is a sick guy,” he said. “When you read his manifesto, he hates Christians. That’s one thing for sure: He hates Christians.”

The New York Post published what the outlet said was the full text of the manifesto, which sought to reconcile the attack with Christian teachings, rather than mock the religion itself. The document was also referenced in the CBS interview, with host Norah O’Donnell saying it characterized members of the administration as targets.

The document lays out a series of objections to a planned attack and the writer’s rebuttals.

“Objection 1: As a Christian, you should turn the other cheek,” Allen wrote, according to the New York Post. 

“Rebuttal: Turning the other cheek is for when you yourself are oppressed,” he continued. “I’m not the person raped in a detention camp. I’m not the fisherman executed without trial. I’m not a schoolkid blown up or a child starved or a teenage girl abused by the many criminals in this administration. Turning the other cheek when *someone else* is oppressed is not Christian behavior; it is complicity in the oppressor’s crimes.”

Noting this was what he characterized as the third assassination attempt of Trump in less than two years, U.S. House Speaker Mike Johnson wrote on social media that a Trump trademark is a calm demeanor under pressure.

“I’ve spent a lot of time with him over the past several years, and he is at his strongest in times of crisis and turmoil,” the Louisiana Republican wrote. “It is a primary reason why his time in office is so historic. Adding to that history, he has now survived a third assassination attempt.”

Acting U.S. Attorney General Todd Blanche said Sunday on news shows that the gunman appeared to be targeting administration officials but did not say it was specifically Trump. The White House put out a statement with the headline, “President Trump Stands Fearless After Third Assassination Attempt.”

Blanche also said he expects the suspect to be arraigned in D.C. federal court on Monday. Jeanine Pirro, the top federal prosecutor for the District of Columbia, said Saturday night the man would be charged with using a firearm during a crime of violence and assault on a federal officer using a dangerous weapon. 

The suspect traveled from Los Angeles to Washington by train, switching trains in Chicago, Blanche said in a Sunday morning interview on NBC News’ “Meet the Press with Kristen Welker.” That mode of travel would have allowed him to transport the weapons that officials said were found on him across the country without facing a security check, unlike an air flight.

Blanche said he did not think any additional laws to increase security on trains were needed.

The shooter was staying at the Washington Hilton, the longtime site for the annual White House Correspondents’ Dinner, for days before the attack, Blanche said. 

At the time of the interview, Allen was not cooperating with the investigation, Blanche said.

Asked if there was any foreign connection to the planned attack, Blanche said many details of the shooter’s plans were yet unknown.

“We’re still looking into motivation, and that’s something that hopefully we’ll learn over the next couple of days,” Blanche said. “We do believe, based upon just a very preliminary start to understanding what happened, that he was targeting members of the administration. We don’t have specifics beyond that.”

Blanche added that the law enforcement agent injured by a shot to his bulletproof vest Saturday night was doing well and had received a call from Trump.

“The president spoke with him last night,” Blanche said. “He was in great spirits. He apparently didn’t really even want to go to the hospital, although he was certainly injured.”

Trump, a host of right-wing influencers and at least one Democratic member of Congress called for the construction of a new ballroom for the White House in response to the incident.

“What happened last night is exactly the reason that our great Military, Secret Service, Law Enforcement and, for different reasons, every President for the last 150 years, have been DEMANDING that a large, safe, and secure Ballroom be built ON THE GROUNDS OF THE WHITE HOUSE,” Trump wrote on his social media site, Truth Social, Sunday morning. 

“This event would never have happened with the Militarily Top Secret Ballroom currently under construction at the White House,” he continued. “It cannot be built fast enough! While beautiful, it has every highest level security feature there is plus, there are no rooms sitting on top for unsecured people to pour in, and is inside the gates of the most secure building in the World.”

The initial White House announcement of the ballroom, in July, emphasized space needs for large events and gave only a passing mention to security updates, saying the Secret Service would provide them.

U.S. Sen. John Fetterman, a Pennsylvania Democrat who is among the senators who most commonly cross party lines, posted on social media Sunday that a new ballroom was a necessity, calling on opponents to drop their “TDS,” or Trump Derangement Syndrome, a name to describe people who oppose anything Trump does.

“That venue wasn’t built to accommodate an event with the line of succession for the U.S. government,” Fetterman wrote. “After witnessing last night, drop the TDS and build the White House ballroom for events exactly like these.”

Montana Republican U.S. Sen. Tim Sheehy said he would propose a bill to expedite the construction of the White House ballroom.

“This week I will introduce and seek unanimous consent for legislation providing express approval for construction of a Presidential ballroom,” he wrote on X. “It is an embarrassment to the strongest nation on earth that we cannot host gatherings in our nation’s capital, including ones attended by our President, without the threat of violence and attempted assassinations.”

And Rep. Chip Roy, a Texas Republican who is a leader among the caucus’ far-right members, said ballroom construction should be included in an upcoming funding bill for the Department of Homeland Security.

“Any consideration of DHS reconciliation instructions this week & beyond should provide for construction of a secure ballroom on White House grounds – in addition to other concerns,” he wrote.

WASHINGTON — Family and friends of Virginia Roberts Giuffre gathered in the nation’s capital Saturday to mark one year since her death, and to demand justice for victims of the late sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.

On a stage across from the Ellipse, with the White House in the background, family members, advocates and women connected to Giuffre through shared horrors of sexual abuse held a vigil for her. 

They remembered the woman they say changed the world by sharing her story of abuse by the disgraced multi-millionaire who victimized roughly 1,000 women and girls, according to the U.S. Justice Department.

“Sis, today is your day,” Giuffre’s brother, Sky Roberts, said. “Today is Virginia’s Day, a day I know you would want us to be about celebrating survivors around the world, for both those that have come forward and those that have not, to be about inspiring us to continue speaking out, acting and reclaiming what many of us feel like we’ve lost.”

Giuffre died by suicide in April 2025 in Australia, where she had been living for several years. Giuffre had emerged as one of the most prominent victims after she challenged Epstein co-conspirator Ghislaine Maxwell and former British royal Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor, alleging she had been trafficked and sexually abused.

Butterfly decorations, flowers and an artist rendering of Giuffre among animals and nature adorned the stage for the event attended by roughly 250 people.

The ceremony comes after nearly a year of renewed focus on the 2019 federal investigation of the disgraced financier. Interest reemerged and dogged Congress and President Donald Trump following an FBI memo in July that announced authorities found no reason to release further information going forward.

Trump, who campaigned on releasing the so-called Epstein files, and whose supporters for years stoked conspiracies, repeatedly dismissed the files last year as a “hoax.”

Shortly after Trump began his second term, former Attorney General Pam Bondi touted having Epstein’s client list on her desk.

All but one member of Congress voted in November to release the government’s investigative materials that led to sex trafficking charges against Epstein, who surrounded himself with powerful and wealthy figures, including Trump. The president denies any knowledge of the former hedge fund manager’s wrongdoings.

Epstein died in a Manhattan jail in August 2019 awaiting trial.

U.S. Rep. Jamie Raskin, D-Md., told the crowd Saturday, “There is a difference between misfortune and injustice.”

“If you were born into an abusive family, as so many of the Epstein survivors were, as you learn from Virginia’s remarkable book, that’s a misfortune,” Raskin said, referring to Giuffre’s posthumous memoir titled “Nobody’s Girl.”

The Maryland Democrat recounted well-documented evidence that the Justice Department had a 60-count indictment against Epstein ready in 2008, but that then-U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of Florida Alex Acosta negotiated a plea deal for lesser state charges.

“If the whole of the government and the political elite organizes to block the truth and to repress change, that’s not just a misfortune, that’s an injustice, and we’re gonna do something about it,” Raskin said to cheers.

Advocacy groups, including the Women’s Law Project, Ultraviolet, World Without Exploitation and the National Organization for Women, helped stage Saturday’s memorial.

Giuffre’s book publicist, Dini von Mueffling, said shortly before Giuffre’s death she and Giuffre “wept and cheered” when they learned her book would be published by Penguin Random House.

“I so wish she could have seen that her brilliant book debuted at number one on the New York Times bestseller list and stayed on the list for 23 weeks — and then watch as Andrew lost his title,” von Mueffling said.

Mountbatten-Windsor, whose name and likeness appears in the Epstein investigative material, settled outside of court with Giuffre in 2022.

Maxwell is serving a 20-year sentence for sex trafficking, though she was relocated to a lesser security prison by the Trump administration in August.

The Department of Justice, mandated by law, released millions of files related to the Epstein investigation in late 2025 and early 2026, though advocates and some lawmakers contend many redactions violate the law, and that many files remain unreleased.

An appeals court on Friday struck down the Trump administration’s closing of United States borders to asylum-seekers. 

An executive order by President Donald Trump on Inauguration Day last year, and later guidance to turn asylum-seekers around without a court hearing, are “unlawful” and “cast aside federal laws affording individuals the right to apply and be considered for asylum,” according to the ruling by a panel of the District of Columbia U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

Advocates sued and said the administration’s action violated the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) and the right to seek asylum based on fears of persecution.

Trump’s proclamation on Jan. 20, 2025, said “the sheer number of aliens entering the United States has overwhelmed the system and rendered many of the INA’s provisions ineffective,” and that  “an invasion is ongoing at the southern border, which requires the Federal Government to take measures to fulfill its obligation to the States.”

The executive order, along with later guidance, required anyone crossing the border without permission to be turned around or quickly deported without a court date. As of March, about 2.7 million people had been released at the border with immigration court cases in recent years, according to a Stateline analysis. 

Those numbers peaked at more than 100,000 a month at times in 2023 during the Biden administration, and dropped quickly to a few hundred a month after Trump’s 2025 order. 

White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt, speaking on Fox News, blamed the ruling on politics and called it “unsurprising.” White House spokesperson Abigail Jackson said the Department of Justice would seek further review of the decision. “We are sure we will be vindicated,” she wrote in an emailed statement to The Associated Press.

Stateline reporter Tim Henderson can be reached at thenderson@stateline.org.

This story was originally produced by Stateline, which is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network which includes Idaho Capital Sun, and is supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity.

Former U.S. Secretary of the Interior and Idaho Gov. Dirk Kempthorne died Friday night after battling colon cancer, his family announced through the governor’s office.

Kempthorne, 74, also served as a member of the U.S. Senate and the mayor of Boise during a nearly 25-year career in public office. 

In a written statement issued Saturday, Kempthorne’s family said he died Friday night surrounded by the people he loved most.

“Beyond his public service, he was a devoted husband, father, and grandfather whose greatest joy came from time spent with family and the people he met along the way,” Kempthorne’s family wrote. “He had a rare gift for truly seeing others — remembering names, stories, and the small details that made each person feel known and valued.”

Several Idaho political leaders praised Kempthorne’s record of public service and commitment to Idaho.

“He was a political unicorn,” Lt. Gov. Scott Bedke said in an interview Wednesday, referring to the mix of city, state and federal offices that Kempthorne held. “That doesn’t happen very often.” 

“He left his mark on Idaho,” Bedke added. 

Kempthorne, a Republican who was born in San Diego, California, served as the 30th governor of Idaho from 1999 to 2006. 

Kempthorne resigned as governor in 2006 after President George W. Bush nominated Kempthorne to serve as the U.S. secretary of the interior – a position he held until 2009.

On Saturday, Idaho Gov. Brad Little issued an order calling for U.S. and Idaho flags to be flown at half-staff in honor of Kempthorne until the day after his funeral, which has yet to be scheduled.

“(Idaho First Lady) Teresa (Little) and I are deeply saddened by the passing of our dear friend, Gov. Dirk Kempthorne,” Little wrote on Saturday. “Our friendship goes back to our college days, where Dirk and I shared the same state government class – an experience that helped set the course for a lifetime of public service for him.”

Little called Kempthorne, and his wife Patricia, “dedicated and passionate leaders.”

“Dirk’s career was marked by extraordinary service at every level,” Little wrote. “His early work as an industry advocate and campaign manager for Phil Batt led to his leadership as a successful Boise mayor who helped change the trajectory of our capital city. During his distinguished tenure in the U.S. Senate, Dirk served Idaho with vision, integrity, and an unwavering commitment to doing what was right.”

“As Governor, Dirk left an enduring mark on our state,” Little added. “With Patricia’s steadfast partnership, he championed children and families, strengthened public education, and led transformational investments in our transportation system that will benefit Idahoans for generations. He elevated Idaho’s voice on the national stage as chairman of the National Governors Association.”

On Saturday, U.S. Rep. Mike Simpson, R-Idaho, described Kempthorne as a close friend who leaves behind an enduring legacy of service. 

“Dirk Kempthorne was one of Idaho’s most distinguished public servants and my dear friend of over 40 years,” Simpson wrote Saturday. “Dirk’s career was a testament to selfless dedication, from the halls of local government as mayor and governor to national service as senator and secretary. I join Idahoans today in mourning the loss of Dirk, but also feel immense gratitude for his decades of service, loyalty, and the lasting impact he has had on Idaho and America. I am grateful for Dirk’s service to our state and nation, as well as his friendship all these years. To Patricia, his wife, and their children, Kathy and I extend our deepest condolences. May he rest in peace.”

In a statement released Saturday, U.S. Sen. Mike Crapo, R-Idaho, said Kempthorne served as a mentor when Crapo prepared to fill his seat in the U.S. Senate.

“Gov. Kempthorne’s leadership and vision helped shape the state of Idaho for generations,” Crapo wrote. “From his time as mayor of Boise to his tenure as governor, and later, U.S. secretary of the interior, he worked tirelessly to preserve the natural beauty and resources that define Idaho and the American West.  His legacy is rooted in public service, with a decades-long body of work dedicated to improving the lives of others.”

Dirk Kempthorne’s policies affected Idaho water rights, transportation infrastructure

During his time in office in Idaho, Kempthorne “laid the groundwork for water modeling and was a visionary transportation planner,” Bedke said. 

In 2004, Kempthorne and then-Nez Perce Tribal Executive Committee Chairman Anthony Johnson announced the Snake River Water Rights Agreement, which resolved water rights claims in the Snake River Basin, according to the Idaho Department of Water Resources. 

In 2006, Kempthorne signed into law a bill that authorized the state’s first sale of Grant Anticipation Revenue Vehicle, or GARVEE, bonds to finance major transportation projects. 

“I think the whole Treasure Valley owes him a huge debt of gratitude because he pushed the GARVEE program way back when,” Bedke said. “If not for GARVEE, we would be paying as we go to expand the freeway system in the Treasure Valley.” 

Bedke said Kempthorne held everyone’s feet to the fire, legislatively, until the measure passed, and the program has allowed the state to expand Interstate 84.

Last year, the U.S. Navy honored Kempthorne by naming the engine room on the USS Idaho submarine after him. 

U.S. Sen. Jim Risch, R-Idaho, announced the naming honor, pointing out that the USS Idaho is powered by a nuclear reactor pioneered at Idaho National Laboratory. 

“Dirk’s contributions to our great state and our nation are significant,” Risch said in a written statement.  “His leadership and dedication to the USS Idaho Commissioning Committee is a true testament to Dirk’s resounding love for the Gem State.”

“It was my great honor to request the USS Idaho’s Engine Room be named for my dear friend and Idaho’s former governor, Dirk Kempthorne,” Risch added. 

Overall, Kempthorne was a strong public speaker, a good administrator and an effective fundraiser, Bedke said. 

“He’s a good guy,” Bedke said. “He’s a good public speaker, and that’s because he was uber prepared. He practiced a lot.”

Information about memorial services was not immediately available Saturday morning. Kempthorne’s family said additional details will be shared in the coming days. 

“Our family is heartbroken, but we are also deeply grateful — for the time we had with him and for the extraordinary outpouring of love and support we have received from across Idaho and the country,” Kempthorne’s family wrote Saturday. 

A group trying to qualify a ballot initiative to end Idaho’s abortion ban said Friday it has met its signature gathering goals in more than enough legislative districts to qualify for the November general election. 

The group Idahoans United for Women and Families announced Friday that it hit its signature goals in 19 different legislative districts and that counties have officially processed 95% of the 104,000 signatures they have gathered. 

If the state verifies those results, that would be more than enough to qualify the Reproductive Freedom and Privacy Act for November’s general election ballot. 

“It’s Friday afternoon, so I’ll make this quick: the counties have processed over 95% of our 104,000 submitted signatures and the news is very good,” Idahoans United Executive Director Melanie Folwell wrote in an email to supporters.

Supporters have until April 30 to turn in their final signatures for verification to the Secretary of State’s Office. 

How does an initiative qualify for the Idaho ballot?

In Idaho, a ballot initiative is a form of direct democracy where the voters – not the Idaho Legislature – decide whether to pass a proposed law. 

To qualify for the general election, supporters must collect signatures from at least 6% of the registered voters statewide and from at least 6% of the registered voters in at least 18 of Idaho’s 35 legislative districts. To achieve the 6% statewide total, supporters need 70,725 verified signatures. 

If the Reproductive Freedom and Privacy Act meets the requirements to appear on the November ballot, it would take a simple majority of votes to approve it. 

The ballot initiative seeks to decriminalize abortion in Idaho and allow the right to abortion up to the point of fetal viability – and beyond that, in the case of medical emergencies. Supporters said their initiative restores the same standard that was in place until the U.S. Supreme Court repealed the 1973 Roe v. Wade ruling that guaranteed a right to an abortion and Idaho’s felony abortion trigger law took effect. 

Supporters said their signature drive is not over.

“We will gather signatures until the last minute of our deadline,” Folwell wrote. 

The Idahoans United ballot initiative is one of two different ballot initiatives that could qualify for November’s election. 

A different group, the Natural Medicine Alliance of Idaho, is pushing a ballot initiative to legalize medical cannabis for Idahoans with a terminal illness or debilitating pain. Supporters of the Idaho Medical Cannabis Act told the Idaho Capital Sun earlier this month that they have also gathered more than 100,000 signatures, although backers did not disclose how many different legislative districts they have met their goal in.

The south central Idaho city of Filer will serve as the host of Idaho’s next “Capital for a Day” event on Thursday.

Capital for a Day events feature Gov. Brad Little and many of the state’s agency directors traveling to smaller communities throughout Idaho. During the events, the governor and agency heads discuss state issues and programs and conduct an open forum for local residents to ask questions or make suggestions.

“It is an honor to bring my next Capital for a Day to Filer,” Little said. “I look forward to hearing directly from the people of Twin Falls County about what matters most to them. These conversations help us better understand how we can work together to make state government more responsive and effective.”

Little’s predecessor, former Gov. Butch Otter, also conducted regular Capital for a Day events around the state during his three terms in office. 

The first stop: 10 a.m. to noon at TruLeap Technologies, located at 400 Main St. in Filer

The second stop: 1:15-3 p.m. at Filer High School, located at 3915 Wildcat Way

Officials set to join Little at the event include:

• Lt. Governor Scott Bedke
• Superintendent of Public Instruction Debbie Critchfield
• State Department of Agriculture Director Chanel Tewalt
• Department of Water Resources Director Mat Weaver
• Department of Insurance Director Dean Cameron
• Department of Health and Welfare Director Juliet Charron
• Division of Financial Management Administrator Lori Wolff
• Idaho Office of Energy and Mineral Resources Administrator Cally Younger
• Idaho Transportation Department Deputy Director Dave Kuisti

WASHINGTON — The Department of Justice dropped its investigation Friday of the Federal Reserve and Chair Jerome Powell over building renovation costs, a move that could open the door for new Fed leadership next month — and signaled a victory for North Carolina Sen. Thom Tillis.

U.S. Attorney Jeanine Pirro said her office closed the probe after a request to the Fed’s inspector general to examine the cost overruns.

“The IG has the authority to hold the Federal Reserve accountable to American taxpayers. I expect a comprehensive report in short order and am confident the outcome will assist in resolving, once and for all, the questions that led this office to issue subpoenas,” Pirro wrote on X just after 10 a.m. Eastern.

Pirro said she “will not hesitate to restart a criminal investigation should the facts warrant doing so.”

Powell, whose term expires in May, has been the target of repeated public criticism from President Donald Trump, who threatened to fire the central bank’s chair if he did not lower interest rates.

The Trump administration’s criminal inquiry into Powell for a $2.5 billion renovation project at the Fed’s offices has been eyed with suspicion, including from his own party.

Tillis, R-N.C., said he would not vote for Trump’s pick to replace Powell, former Fed Board Governor Kevin Warsh, unless the administration dropped its “bogus” investigation.

A favorable vote by Tillis on the closely divided Senate Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs is necessary to advance Warsh’s nomination, as all panel Democrats oppose him.

Tillis’s office did not immediately respond for comment.

A federal judge last month blocked the administration’s subpoenas to probe the Fed and Powell.

The Department of Justice declined to comment and referred States Newsroom to Pirro’s social media post.

A White House official reaffirmed Pirro’s announcement Friday.

“American taxpayers deserve answers about the Federal Reserve’s fiscal mismanagement, and the Office of the Inspector General’s more powerful authorities best position it to get to the bottom of the matter. The White House remains as confident as before that the Senate will swiftly confirm Kevin Warsh as the next Federal Reserve Chairman to finally restore competence and confidence in Fed decision-making,” White House spokesperson Kush Desai told States Newsroom in a statement.

Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., issued a statement dismissing the DOJ’s announcement as “an attempt to clear the path for Senate Republicans to install President Trump’s sock puppet Kevin Warsh as Fed Chair.”

“Let’s be clear what the Justice Department announced today: they threatened to restart the bogus criminal investigation into Fed Chair Powell at any time while failing to drop their ridiculous criminal probe against Governor (Lisa) Cook. Anyone who believes Donald Trump’s corrupt scheme to take over the Fed is over is fooling themselves,” she wrote on X and Bluesky late Friday morning, referring to Trump’s abrupt August firing of Feb Board Governor Cook over alleged financial fraud.

Cook successfully challenged her firing in two lower courts. The U.S. Supreme Court is reviewing whether Trump legally dismissed Cook. 

Trump, who routinely posts about news of the day on his own social media platform Truth Social, had not commented on the announcement as of 12:30 p.m. Eastern.

During an unrelated Oval Office event Thursday, Trump sidestepped a question about what he hoped to learn from Pirro’s investigation into Powell and the Fed.

Instead, Trump responded by saying he could have completed the Fed’s Washington, D.C., headquarters renovation for $25 million and “had money left over.”

“On top of that, he’s been terrible on interest rates because he should have lowered interest rates. That’s why call him Jerome ‘too late.’ ‘Too late’ — that’s his nickname — Jerome ‘too late’ Powell. He likes me a lot,” Trump said.

Jennifer Shutt contributed to this report.

WASHINGTON — President Donald Trump is looking to eliminate funding in fiscal 2027 for the agency that serves as the primary federal funding source for libraries and museums nationwide.

But congressional appropriators — who rebuffed similar efforts to gut the agency in fiscal 2026 — expressed little enthusiasm for the proposed cut in interviews with States Newsroom. Groups representing museums and libraries across the country also blasted the president’s proposal. 

The administration is requesting $6 million in fiscal 2027 for the agency, known as the Institute of Museum and Library Services, “for necessary expenses to carry out (its) closure.”

U.S. Sen. Shelley Moore Capito, chair of the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Labor, Health and Human Services, Education and Related Agencies, noted that her panel did not agree to the same Trump request in fiscal 2026 to eliminate funding for the agency. 

“I personally have always been a fan of libraries, and it does a lot for local communities,” said Capito, a West Virginia Republican whose panel writes the annual bill to fund the Institute of Museum and Library Services. 

“So, that’s what he does, he proposes, and then we look at it and make our own decisions,” she said. 

The spending package signed into law by Trump in February provides roughly $292 million for the agency this fiscal year — a sharp rejection of Trump’s efforts. 

Capito said that though her committee will consider the president’s fiscal 2027 request, “if you look at what we did last year, it shows that we kind of rejected that premise.” 

Rep. Robert Aderholt, an Alabama Republican and chair of the corresponding Appropriations subcommittee in the House, appeared noncommittal about pursuing Trump’s fiscal 2027 request to gut the agency.

In response to States Newsroom’s request for a phone interview, Aderholt provided a written statement. 

“We are reviewing the request from the Administration and the requests from every member of the House,” Aderholt said, adding that “this is a member-driven process, and we look forward to working with our colleagues in putting together a strong bill for the American taxpayers.” 

The agency was created by Congress in 1996 and has a mission to “advance, support, and empower America’s museums, libraries, and related organizations through grantmaking, research, and policy development.”

The administration has taken major steps to try to dismantle the agency, including through a March 2025 executive order. 

However, Trump’s Department of Justice reached a settlement earlier in April with the American Library Association — the nation’s largest library association — and the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees — the country’s largest union of cultural workers — that protects the agency and guarantees it will continue issuing grants and program operations. 

In another setback for the administration, the DOJ dropped its appeal this month in a case brought by 21 attorneys general, who challenged the administration’s efforts to dismantle the agency and had secured a major court victory in November. 

Meanwhile, leading Democrats on the House and Senate appropriations panels dealing with the agency’s spending were quick to lambaste Trump’s proposal in interviews with States Newsroom. 

Sen. Tammy Baldwin, ranking member of the Senate subcommittee and a Wisconsin Democrat, described the agency as “such an incredibly valuable entity” and vowed to fight “tooth and nail” to protect it. 

Rep. Rosa DeLauro, ranking member of the full House Appropriations Committee and the spending subcommittee with jurisdiction over the agency, said the administration’s request is “just neanderthal.”

The Connecticut Democrat said “we’ll work to restore like we try to do every time,” while adding that Trump’s request indicates that “the barbarians are at the door.” 

Leading library and museum organizations fiercely opposed Trump’s request and called on Congress to reject the proposal. 

In a statement, Sam Helmick, president of the American Library Association, said Trump’s “continued attack” on the agency in the budget request and the March 2025 executive order to shutter it “shows the extent to which the administration is tone deaf to the needs of millions of Americans who rely on libraries every day: older adults and veterans who use library telehealth spaces; unemployed people who use library resources to find a new job or learn new skills; families who count on story time; and students and faculty who do research in school and academic libraries.”

John Chrastka, founder and executive director of EveryLibrary, said Trump’s proposal is “a direct threat to the infrastructure that millions of Americans rely on every day,” in a statement. 

Chrastka, whose organization is dedicated to building support for libraries, said “libraries are not optional,” but instead represent “essential public resources that support literacy, workforce development, and community connection in every state.”

The American Alliance of Museums blasted the proposal as “misguided and out of step with the American public and Congress,” noting that similar efforts in fiscal 2026 and prior budget cycles to yank funding for the agency were rejected due to “strong bipartisan, bicameral support in Congress and sustained advocacy from the museum community.” 

The Institute of Museum and Library Services declined to comment on Trump’s fiscal 2027 budget request. 

Grizzly bears in Yellowstone National Park will soon be captured again for research, and warning signs will be posted in affected areas, the park said in a news release.

The park said the public should avoid those areas, and it outlined the following in a news release:

As part of ongoing monitoring efforts to document recovery of grizzly bears in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem under the Endangered Species Act, the U.S. Geological Survey, in conjunction with Yellowstone National Park, is working to inform the public that pre-baiting and scientific capture operations are again about to begin within Yellowstone National Park.

Agency biologists with the Interagency Grizzly Bear Study Team will begin the field captures May 1 and continue through Oct. 15. Capture operations can include a variety of activities, but all areas where work is being conducted will have major access points marked with warning signs. It is critical that all members of the public heed these signs.

Monitoring of the grizzly bear population is vital to ongoing research and management of grizzly bears in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem. To attract bears, biologists use natural food sources such as recently road-killed deer and elk. Potential capture sites are baited with these natural foods, and if indications are that grizzly bears are in the area, culvert traps or foot snares are used to capture bears. Once captured, bears are handled in accordance with strict safety and animal care protocols developed by the study team and approved by the U.S. Geological Survey.

Whenever bear capture activities are being conducted for scientific purposes, the area around the site will be posted with brightly colored warning signs to inform the public of the activities occurring. These signs are posted along the major access points to the capture site. It is important that the public heed these signs and do not venture into an area that has been posted. For more information regarding grizzly bear capture efforts call the trapping hotline at (406) 994-6675. Information about the grizzly bear research and monitoring is available here.

This story was originally produced by Daily Montanan, which is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network which includes Idaho Capital Sun, and is supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity.

This story was originally posted on IdahoEdNews.org on April 23, 2026.

Vallivue School District trustee Clay Christensen did not publicly disclose his family’s interest in a district real estate purchase, possibly violating district policy and state law.

Vallivue paid Christensen’s father, Dave Christensen, $5 million for 87 acres of land in September 2024 while Clay Christensen was serving on the board. The land was appraised for $2.87 million, about half the purchase amount. Dave Christensen continues to farm the land — free of charge — until the district decides to build a school some eight to 10 years from now.

The Canyon County prosecutor’s office received a complaint regarding the purchase and has turned it over to the sheriff’s office for investigation. The Idaho attorney general’s office does not have jurisdiction, according to a spokesperson for Raúl Labrador.

District policy and Idaho law state it is unlawful for any trustee to have a “pecuniary interest, directly or indirectly” in any district transaction unless certain conditions are met, including a “full disclosure, in writing” detailing the conflict of interest.

A written disclosure does not exist, according to an EdNews public records request. Clay Christensen recused himself from the unanimous board vote to purchase the property, but the board minutes do not say that he announced or explained the conflict of interest. Clay Christensen has not responded to multiple requests for comment.

Superintendent Lisa Boyd wrote in a Tuesday email that the district fully analyzed multiple provisions in Idaho law that address conflicts of interest to ensure compliance.

“Clay Christensen did not have any direct or indirect pecuniary interest in the contract at the time of its consideration or thereafter,” Boyd wrote.

Clay Christensen is a fourth-generation farmer on his family’s farm, according to comments he made in a video on the Vallivue website.

“That’s an ongoing family business that we’ve had for almost 100 years,” he said in the video.

According to his LinkedIn page, Clay Christensen is the general manager of Dave Christensen Farms. He’s held the position since April 2015, the same year he graduated from Brigham Young University.

Vallivue School District says it handled the transaction ‘appropriately’

EdNews first reported on the land purchase Friday. On Monday morning, Boyd responded with a letter to community members and parents. EdNews’ reporting was factual, according to the letter, but the district wanted to “provide additional context to help our community better understand this decision.”

The letter said the district followed established processes and safeguards to ensure the transaction was handled “appropriately, transparently and without undue influence.”

Boyd said last week that the district did not use a lawyer to prepare the purchase contract and she didn’t think that the district needed to. In a Tuesday email, Boyd said Dave Christensen did not prepare the purchase contract. Boyd signed the purchase contract, not a trustee, and did so before the board voted to approve the $5 million deal.

Boyd’s letter says the purchase contract was contingent upon school board approval, but the three-page contract does not refer to the need for board approval.

According to Boyd’s letter, Clay Christensen recognized the situation could be perceived as a conflict of interest under Idaho law, and “strict separation and recusal” were followed at every stage.

The letter also asked how the public should interpret the situation overall.

“While the relationship between the seller and a trustee may raise understandable questions, the safeguards in place followed ethics and conflicts of interest procedures under Idaho law, ensured that the process remained fair, independent, and free from influence,” the letter states. “The district acted with care to uphold transparency and accountability throughout.”

Read the district policy and state law:

• State statute 33-507 says a trustee shall not have a direct or indirect pecuniary interest in any district contract or transaction unless it qualifies under an exception listed in that section of code.
• District Policy 228 requires board members to disclose any actual or potential conflict of interest in any matter that could result in the “private pecuniary gain” of a board member or their relative.
• The district policy states it is “unlawful” for the board to enter into any contract with a board member’s relative that involves payment of district funds unless the contract meets the requirements laid out in Idaho code, specifically 18-1361, 18-1361A and 74-502.
• Idaho Statute 18-1361A provides four procedures that must be “strictly observed” if a school board contracts with a trustee or relative of a trustee. The trustee must make a “full disclosure, in writing, to all members of the governing body, council or board of said public body of his interest or that of his relative and of his or his relative’s intention to bid on the contract.”

Washington’s gray wolf population is at its highest count since the state began monitoring in 2008. 

State and tribal officials counted a minimum of 270 wolves and 49 packs, including 23 breeding pairs at the end 2025, according to a new report from the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. The numbers are estimates from last winter’s surveying and include lone wolves. 

It marks a 17.4% increase from 2024, when the tally was 230 wolves and 43 packs. That year marked the first decline since counting began. In 2023, the state recorded 254 wolves and 42 packs.

“The growth is pretty consistent in what we’ve seen in our recolonizing population throughout recovery,” said Trent Roussin, a wolf biologist for the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. 

The state groups wolves into three recovery regions: Eastern Washington, the North Cascades, and the Southern Cascades and Northwest Coast. 

The increase was fueled in part by six new or reestablished packs. In northeast Washington, three packs were reestablished. Officials recorded two new packs in the North Cascades and one new pack on the Confederated Tribes of the Colville Reservation.

There were no known wolf packs in the Southern Cascades and Northwest Coast region by the end of 2025, according to the report. 

“Regaining lost footing is essential but these numbers don’t mean wolves are recovered,” said Amaroq Weiss, a senior wolf advocate at the Center for Biological Diversity. “The southern Cascades and North Coast boast some of the best wolf habitat in the state but still have no wolf packs or breeding pairs.”

To get there from their current habitat, wolves would have to cross I-90 or the Columbia Basin, which they can and they have, said Gabriel Spence, wolf biologist for Fish and Wildlife.

“We have had high mortality – human-caused mortality – on wolves in the South Cascades,” said Spence. “That mortality can really slow any population growth.”

At least 28 wolves died last year, according to the report. Six were killed due to livestock conflict. Of those, four were lethally removed by the state. 

Twelve wolves were legally hunted by tribal members on the Colville Reservation. Three wolves died due to alleged poaching with one case referred to a prosecuting office and the other two under active investigation. 

Killing a wolf without authorization can carry penalties of up to a year in jail or a $5,000 fine under state law. 

One wolf that died during a Department of Fish and Wildlife capture operation was determined to have had a congenital heart defect. Two died of natural causes and one died of unknown causes, the report states. 

Under state law, the wolves are classified as endangered throughout the state. That won’t change until at least four successful breeding pairs inhabit western Washington, where none were found, and other pairs continue to survive in the two additional recovery regions of the state. 

For ranchers, an increasing number of wolves means more risk for their livestock. Because the wolves are classified as endangered under state law, ranchers are not allowed to kill them. 

The state compensates ranchers when a wolf kills their livestock, but even then “it’s not enough,” said Chelsea Hajny, executive vice-president of the Washington Cattlemen’s Association.

Attacks on livestock in 2025 decreased by 50% from the year before, according to the report. Five of the 49 packs last year were involved in at least one confirmed or probable livestock injury or mortality.

But ranchers don’t always report depredations when they happen, said Hajny, calling the reported number “skewed.”

“Ranchers are facing a real crisis,” Hanjy said.

It’s not just the loss of a cow, she said. Wolves that inhabit ranches stress cattle to the point where they are not able to breed or successfully carry a calf. 

“We need more action and more ability to take matters into our own hands,” she added. 

Range riders would be a solution, Hanjy said, referring to those contracted by the state to monitor land and report wolf activity to ranchers, but “there’s simply not enough of them.”

This story was originally produced by Washington State Standard, which is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network which includes Idaho Capital Sun, and is supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity.

Nearly one-fifth of Americans relied on drinking water systems with elevated and potentially dangerous levels of nitrate in recent years, according to a new study released Thursday.

The nonprofit Environmental Working Group examined test data collected by water systems across the country between 2021 and 2023, the most recent data available. 

Water systems serving more than 3 million people exceeded the federal safety limit of 10 milligrams per liter over the three years, the research and advocacy organization found.

The analysis also found that thousands of water systems serving more than 62 million people reported nitrate levels above 3 milligrams per liter at least once during those years, which indicates human-caused drinking-water contamination. 

Researchers are increasingly questioning whether the federal threshold should be lowered as more studies find links between even low levels of nitrate consumption and cancer and birth defects. Federal law limits nitrate levels in drinking water because of its association with blue-baby syndrome. 

Nitrate is a natural component of soil, but has become a growing problem for drinking water systems because of crop farming’s use of nitrogen fertilizers and runoff of nitrogen-rich manure from livestock operations.

States with big agricultural industries recorded more reports of elevated nitrate levels. In fact, the report found that 64% of all water systems that recorded nitrate levels at or above the legal limit were in just five states: California, Texas, Kansas, Nebraska and Oklahoma. 

But Anne Schechinger, the organization’s senior director of agriculture and climate research who authored the report, said the issue affects urban and rural areas alike.

“A lot of people have this idea that this issue is just a rural issue for small towns near farms. But we found with this analysis that that is not just the case,” she told Stateline. “Based on how watersheds work, you can live very far from a farm and still be drinking water contaminated with nitrate.”

The analysis relies on public records obtained from public drinking water systems in every state except New Hampshire, where data was not provided, she said. In addition to its report, the Environmental Working Group created a map showing community water systems with elevated nitrate levels across the country.

Elevated nitrate levels have befuddled water providers across the country for years. Not only are they expensive to remove from drinking water supplies, but nitrate levels can fluctuate with the seasons as heavy rains can quickly push remnants of fertilizer or manure into streams and rivers. 

Iowa’s largest water provider last year asked residents to refrain from watering lawns, filling pools and washing cars as its nitrate removal system struggled to keep up with elevated levels. 

Des Moines is home to one of the largest nitrate removal systems in the world, which costs about $16,000 per day to operate, officials said. Smaller communities that rely on groundwater have been forced to dig deeper wells, Schechinger said.

Climate change is further fueling the problem: Agriculture is a major driver of greenhouse gas emission. The heavy rainfalls and prolonged droughts from more extreme weather worsen nitrate runoff into lakes, rivers and groundwater. 

“We know those climate conditions are going to make this problem worse,” Schechinger said. “And that’s likely to cost us all more and also (raise) more concerns for our health.”

Stateline reporter Kevin Hardy can be reached at khardy@stateline.org.

This story was originally produced by Stateline, which is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network which includes Idaho Capital Sun, and is supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity.

Next Friday, on May 1, attorneys across the state will host legal aid clinics to help make the justice system more accessible.

The events are part of the State of Idaho Judicial Branch’s celebrations for Law Day. 

Here’s what’s planned:

• A phone bank staffed by Boise attorneys who will call people between noon and 2 p.m. Mountain time. To participate, send your questions ahead of time online.
• In Twin Falls, a landlord-tenant legal clinic is planned 2-4 p.m. Mountain time in the County West building’s annex conference room. The building is located at 630 Addison Ave. The clinic will offer help with eviction issues, repair and maintenance requests, and security deposit disputes. People are encouraged to register online.
• In North Idaho, the Coeur d’Alene Public Library is hosting a series of legal clinics throughout the day. Attorneys will be available to help answer questions and fill out legal forms related to family law, property and debt issues, and to help prepare wills and powers of attorney. Find times and rooms online at Kootenai County’s website.

With the 2026 Legislature having wrapped up its business for the year, we turn our attention to Idaho’s primary and general election seasons. As we do so, I believe more attention should be given the flow of campaign cash to state legislators seeking re-election or the challengers vying to win their seats. 

There was a time not long ago when candidates built their fundraising around $50 checks from constituents and donations from Idaho companies and organizations that understood Idaho politics and priorities. Times have changed here in the Gem State. 

As reported by media and the Idaho secretary of state, the 2024 election cycle set new records with more than $17 million spent on campaigns and independent expenditures on legislative races statewide. It would come as no surprise if the 2026 cycle set new records. Much of this eye-popping spending is due to a surge in money coming from beyond Idaho’s borders. 

The big cash from out-of-state special interests and their PACs is addictive. Most of these out-of-state PACs are organizations that lack a basic understanding of Idaho values and are more concerned with bending the will of the Legislature to appease their own policy goals and objectives. “Dark money” is an apt description for the murky origin of money funding these PACs.

Each election with its new spending record is eroding faith, trust and confidence that Idaho’s elections are about what is best for our state, people and way of life. The time has come for Idaho to pursue reasonable campaign finance reform, and I applaud the Legislature for taking a meaningful first step toward significant reform with passage of Senate Joint Memorial 109 last month. 

In clear terms, SJM 109 urges the U.S. Congress to pass a constitutional amendment or law that gives states the authority to create their own set of rules for election spending, transparency and accountability in campaign finance. The Legislature is also asking Congress to address federal court decisions that have enabled the increase in corporate, dark and foreign money in our elections. 

Thanks to Idaho there are now 25 states, including Oklahoma earlier this year and Utah last year, asking for Congress to act. More states will undoubtedly join us. The momentum is here. The need is clear. Let’s do this.

Idaho is in a position to lead on this issue. U.S. Sens. Mike Crapo and Jim Risch are respected Senate veterans, and Reps. Mike Simpson and Russ Fulcher have earned the rapport and trust required to build consensus for reform in the House.  

The process for amending our U.S. Constitution is a heavy lift. But thanks to the Legislature, Idaho is now part of a powerful movement of states seeking rightful transparency and change away from a system that is giving out-of-state dark money PACs a bigger voice in our elections than the average voter from Wallace, Kamiah or Preston. 

This is not the Idaho way. It’s time to put Idaho back in charge of its election laws. It’s time for Congress to make it happen.  

Medicinal marijuana products that are legal at the state level will see looser federal regulation under an order the U.S. Department of Justice published Thursday, while a process that could remove the drug in all forms from the federal list of the most dangerous drugs is set to begin in late June.

The order, signed by acting Attorney General Todd Blanche, shifts many marijuana products from Schedule I — the Drug Enforcement Administration’s list of drugs with the greatest potential for abuse and least legitimate use — to Schedule III. 

That will open the door to greater research and provide an effective tax break for businesses that sell medicinal marijuana that is legal under state law.

The move follows President Donald Trump’s executive order last year directing the DOJ to move toward rescheduling.

“The Department of Justice is delivering on President Trump’s promise to expand Americans’ access to medical treatment options,” Blanche said in a statement. “This rescheduling action allows for research on the safety and efficacy of this substance, ultimately providing patients with better care and doctors with more reliable information.”

The order applies to state-licensed medical marijuana products in the states that allow medicinal use of the drug.

The move means those businesses can deduct business expenses from their federal taxes and researchers have access to state-legal products. As a Schedule I drug, only cannabis grown in a federal facility could be studied, severely limiting the supply available to researchers.

The DEA also scheduled a hearing on broader reclassification to begin June 29 and end no later than July 15. That hearing will explore the possibility of rescheduling marijuana products that could include recreational use.

The order likely has no immediate impact on the difficulty marijuana businesses have had accessing the banking system. Institutions that lend to even state-legal businesses could be prosecuted on federal money laundering charges for offering banking services to businesses that violate federal drug laws.

Moving a limited number of products from Schedule I, which includes drugs such as heroin and cocaine, to Schedule III, which includes highly regulated prescription drugs such as acetaminophen with codeine, does not satisfy advocates who have called for complete legalization. 

But it does represent a major shift in the federal government’s official position on cannabis, several pro-legalization groups said.

“It’s historic because the federal government, historically, has denied the existence of medical cannabis, even as a concept,” Paul Armentano, the deputy director of the advocacy group the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws, said in an interview. 

The federal government was in recent memory “outright hostile” to medicinal marijuana, Armentano added. The order “finally acknowledges and recognizes not only the legitimacy of marijuana as a medicine, but also the legitimacy of these state programs, and it is trying now to integrate these state programs into our own existing federal regulatory schemes.”

Forty states and the District of Columbia allow medicinal marijuana.

Jasmine Johnson, CEO of Florida-based cannabis company GŪD Essence, wrote in an email that the federal government’s acknowledgement of cannabis’ legitimate medical value was the most important part of the order. 

“That shift alone helps move the industry out of decades of stigma and opens the door for expanded research, more institutional participation, and a more rational regulatory framework,” she wrote.

Recreational use will see no immediate changes from the order. In the 24 states in which recreational use, also called adult use, is legal, businesses that sell both medicinal and recreational products may experience confusion.

Chuck Smith, the CEO of Colorado Leads, an industry group, said in a statement that for Colorado cannabis businesses, “the immediate effects of this order are significant but relatively narrow.”

“Hybrid businesses should expect a transitional period in which federally covered medical activity and federally non-covered adult-use activity may be treated differently for registration, tax, and compliance purposes,” Smith said.

Such businesses would likely not see a tax benefit “when it comes to producing and selling, arguably, the products that consist of the majority of their business,” Armentano said.

Ryan Hunter, the chief revenue officer for Colorado-based marijuana company Spherex, called the DOJ order “a very silly announcement,” noting that it created a third regulatory category of a single plant species.

“Though this is all the same plant,” hemp and medical marijuana “are now considered Schedule III substances under the Controlled Substances Act (similar to Tylenol + Codeine),” while non-medical use is still considered Schedule I, he wrote in a statement. “My mind boggles at these arbitrary and artificial distinctions, but here we are.”

Johnson, the Florida CEO, said she expected regulators to eventually merge how they treat different uses of the drug.

“The distinction between medicinal and recreational use has always been more regulatory than practical. From an operator’s standpoint, the same plant, supply chain, and compliance standards exist regardless of how it’s categorized,” she wrote. 

“Over time, we’ll likely see a continued shift toward a more unified framework that reflects how consumers actually engage with cannabis, rather than maintaining rigid distinctions that complicate operations.”

This story was originally posted on IdahoEdNews.org on April 23, 2026.

Lobbying groups spent more than $784,000 during this year’s legislative session, and some of the top spenders focused on education policy, including private school choice.

Last week marked the deadline for lobbyists to file March disclosures with the Idaho Secretary of State’s Office, closing out the three-month filing period that covered the bulk of the session, which ended April 2. Lobbyists must disclose their expenses along with the legislation that they supported or opposed. 

For the third time in four years, Idaho’s top-spending lobbying group was the American Federation for Children (AFC), a Washington, D.C.-based advocate for private school choice. 

AFC lobbyists reported spending $142,582 in Idaho so far this year, bringing the group’s total reported spending to $734,126 over the last four years. AFC was also the top spender in 2023 and 2024. It ranked third last year, behind the Modern Ag Alliance and the Citizens Alliance of Idaho. 

In 2026, the group’s spending mostly paid for mailers benefitting several lawmakers who supported House Bill 93 and are running for reelection this year. Idaho’s first private school choice program, HB 93 created a refundable tax credit that nonpublic school students can claim for education expenses, including private school tuition. 

“AFC is focused on advancing school choice and standing behind parents in Idaho to ensure they can fully benefit from the Idaho Parental Choice Tax Credit,” Bill Phillips, AFC’s national director of government affairs, said by email. “This includes working with state legislators to pass and improve good policies as well as thanking members who stood behind the families who needed these options the most.”

AFC spent $26,705 on mailers supporting Rep. Chris Bruce, R-Kuna, plus another $10,981 for Sen. Christy Zito, R-Mountain Home, a member of the Senate Education Committee. Other beneficiaries included:

• Sen. C. Scott Grow, R-Eagle, who co-sponsored HB 93 
• Rep. Judy Boyle, R-Midvale
• Rep. Elaine Price, R-Coeur d’Alene 
• Rep. Barbara Ehardt, R-Idaho Falls
• Rep. John Shirts, R-Weiser 
• Sen. Josh Keyser, R-Meridian 
• Sen. Camille Blaylock, R-Caldwell
• Rep. Charlie Shepherd, R-Pollock 
• Rep. Tanya Burgoyne, R-Pocatello
• Rep. Vito Barbieri, R-Dalton Gardens  

AFC’s registered lobbyists include Phillips and Jeremy Chou, a partner at Boise law firm Givens Pursley. Chou represented the Legislature in a challenge to HB 93’s Parental Choice Tax Credit at the Idaho Supreme Court earlier this year. The court upheld the tax credit program.

Phillips declined to say how AFC is funded. The group was founded by billionaire Betsy DeVos, education secretary during President Donald Trump’s first administration. SourceWatch, an online encyclopedia of political organizations managed by the Center for Media and Democracy, refers to AFC as a “dark money group that promotes the school privatization agenda.” 

Overall, lobbyists spent $784,641 during this year’s legislative session, according to the Secretary of State’s Office. 

While AFC continues to focus on Idaho, other out-of-state school choice groups have backed off since lawmakers passed HB 93. Young Americans for Liberty, which spent $141,181 last year, reported just $157 in lobbying expenditures this year. Yes.Every.Kid, which spent $171,304 last year, hasn’t disclosed any lobbying expenditures this year.  

Still, the top 15 spenders in 2026 include several groups that lobby on education issues, such as the Idaho Family Policy Center and Idaho School Boards Association. 

The Idaho Secretary of State’s Office requires registration and regular disclosures from lobbyists attempting to influence lawmakers and executive-branch officials. People who earn less than $250 per quarter for lobbying activities are exempt from the reporting requirements.

Lobbyists must disclose their expenditures along with the legislation that they supported or opposed. The secretary of state’s office tracks the disclosures here.

Here were the top-spending lobbying groups between January and March of this year:

1. American Federation for Children (Washington, D.C.) – $142,582.38
2. Idaho Dairyman’s Association (Twin Falls, ID) – $46,954.60
3. Freedom Foundation (Olympia, WA) – $30,818.88
4. Idaho Consumer-Owned Utilities Association (Boise, ID) – $30,631.34
5. World Liberty Financial (Wilmington, DE) – $27,473.39
6. Idaho Mining Association (Boise, ID) – $20,851.43
7. Idaho Freedom Action (Boise, ID) – $20,721.43
8. Idaho State AFL-CIO (Boise, ID) – $20,559.70
9. Veterans Guardian (Pinehurst, NC) – $20,148.70
10. Idaho Family Policy Center (Boise, ID) – $17,776.17
11. Idaho Association of Commerce and Industry (Boise, ID) – $16,435.46
12. Citizens Alliance of Idaho (Hayden, ID) – $15,434
13. Idaho School Boards Association (Boise, ID) – $13,485.49
14. Professional Firefighters of Idaho (Boise, ID) – $13,013.49
15. Idaho Potato Commission (Eagle, ID) – $11,632.58

The third-highest spender was the Freedom Foundation, an advocacy group that opposes unions. The Olympia, Washington-based group is not affiliated with the Idaho Freedom Foundation. 

The Freedom Foundation’s 2024 report on Idaho teachers’ unions inspired House Bill 516, which the Legislature passed and Gov. Brad Little signed into law earlier this month. The new law prohibits school districts from using taxpayer resources to accommodate unions. The Idaho Education Association last weekend issued a “vote of no confidence” in Little for signing the bill. 

The Freedom Foundation reported spending $30,819 this session, including $19,798 on phone campaigns and $10,000 on social media. The expenses went toward “grassroots advertising efforts,” said Maxford Nelsen, director of research and government affairs for the Freedom Foundation. 

One phone campaign, which cost $15,000, urged people to call the governor’s office and ask that Little sign HB 516, Nelsen said. Idaho Education News previously reported that Little’s office received 1,592 e-mails and calls urging him to sign the bill, and 1,007 emails and calls urging a veto.

The other phone campaign, which cost $4,798, organized calls to Sen. Dan Foreman, urging him to support an earlier version of the bill, House Bill 745, Nelsen said. Foreman, R-Moscow, had held HB 745 in the committee that he chairs, declining to give it a hearing and blocking it from advancing to the Senate floor. But late in the session, senators inserted language from HB 745 into another bill, which bypassed Foreman’s committee through a controversial process known as “radiator capping.”

Asked how the Freedom Foundation is funded, Nelsen said that the 35-year-old nonprofit organization “relies exclusively on the generous support of thousands of voluntary contributors from around the country, including in Idaho.” Nelsen said supporters “believe in our mission of promoting individual liberty, free enterprise and limited, accountable government.”

This originally posted on IdahoEdNews.org on April 22, 2026.

Money doesn’t win elections, but it certainly helps.

Most incumbents running in the May 19 primary have outraised their challengers, but that’s not the case in nine legislative races, according to an EdNews analysis.

Of those nine races where challengers are outraising incumbents, five are members of the hardline conservative Gang of Eight. The coalition opposes new government spending.

The most stark example of a challenger outraising an incumbent is in the District 8 race for House Seat B, between Gang of Eight member Rep. Faye Thompson, R-McCall, and Brian Beckley.

Beckley, who resigned in January as board chair for the Idaho Department of Parks and Recreation, has raised more than three times that of his opponent. Beckley has drummed up $47,617 to Thompson’s $15,730. Meanwhile, folks in districts 24 and 25 are speaking with their wallets and siding with the challengers of three other Gang of Eight members, all Twin Falls Republicans.

• Brent Reinke is outraising Sen. Glenneda Zuiderveld.
• Alexandra Caval is outraising Rep. Clint Hostetler.
• Cherie Vollmer is outraising Rep. David Leavitt.

Another Gang of Eight member, Sen. Christy Zito, R-Hammett, falls behind former House Majority Leader Megan Blanksma by a $3,100 margin. Here are all nine races where challengers have outraised incumbents, according to data on Idaho Sunshine as of 11:30 a.m. on April 22:

WASHINGTON — U.S. Senate Republicans approved a budget resolution early Thursday intended to speed the way for billions for immigration enforcement, sending the measure to the House, where GOP lawmakers in that chamber need to adopt it to unlock the reconciliation process. 

The 50-48 vote followed a marathon amendment voting session that Democrats used to highlight policy differences on cost-of-living issues and stalled federal emergency relief dollars for states. 

Alaska Sen. Lisa Murkowski and Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul were the two Republicans to vote against approving the measure. Sens. Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, and Mark Warner, D-Va., did not vote.

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer said just before the vote-a-rama began that Democrats would put Republicans on the record about the soaring cost of living and the Trump administration’s immigration crackdown. 

“America will see even more clearly tonight where the Republicans are — not on the side of lowering costs, but on the side of masked agents occupying our streets,” he said. 

Republicans plan to use the complex budget reconciliation process, which avoids the need for Democratic support in the Senate, to provide between $70 billion and $140 billion in additional funding for Immigration and Customs Enforcement and the Border Patrol.

The money is supposed to cover those agencies for the next three years, avoiding the need for Republicans to negotiate constraints on immigration activities with Democrats, who have been calling for guardrails since federal agents shot and killed two U.S. citizens in Minneapolis in January. 

When combined with the Senate-passed bill that funds the vast majority of the Department of Homeland Security for the current fiscal year, the two pieces of legislation are expected to end the ongoing shutdown at that department, which began in mid-February. 

Senators ultimately debated 16 amendments, 12 offered by Democrats and four proposed by Republicans. The only one adopted was from South Carolina Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham, which senators approved on a 98-0 vote. 

The proposal would create a reserve fund to bolster federal immigration agents’ ability to detain and deport adults who entered the country without proper documentation and were then convicted of rape, murder, or sexual abuse of a minor.

“Everybody in this body should be for this,” Graham said. “These people need to be caught, put in jail, or kicked out of our country.”

Illinois Democratic Sen. Dick Durbin said he supported the amendment because “under current law, undocumented immigrants who are convicted of rape, murder, or sexual abuse of a minor are subject to mandatory detention and deportation.” 

“What we object to is what is happening in the streets of Minneapolis and Chicago,” he added.

Louisiana Republican Sen. John Kennedy tried but was ultimately unable to convince his colleagues to add a new set of instructions to the budget resolution that would have allowed the Rules & Administration Committee to write a voter identification law. 

Kennedy said he wanted that bill to have three provisions. 

“Require that in federal elections, you have to be an American citizen to vote and provide for the provisions to enforce that. Number two, it would require that in federal elections, you have to prove you are who you say you are in order to vote, and it would provide provisions to enforce that,” he said. “Number three, it further instructs the Rules Committee that we’re going to go back to having an Election Day and not an election month, and it instructs the Rules Committee to provide the provisions to enforce that.”

California Democratic Sen. Alex Padilla, the ranking member of the rules panel, opposed the amendment during debate, saying he couldn’t believe lawmakers were once again experiencing a “partisan attempt to rush through what I refer to as a solution in search of a problem.”

“Despite the president’s claims, there is zero evidence of massive voter fraud across the country, which is the premise of these proposals,” he said. “So not only is it a solution in search of a problem, to paraphrase a wise man, this measure is all foam and no beer.”

Padilla added that a provision in Kennedy’s amendment would have required states to count ballots within 36 hours of an election, a new mandate he said could cause considerable problems for larger states with millions of voters. 

“It’s unfortunate elections administration has been turned into a partisan issue,” he said. “I actually ask our colleagues to protect the early voters, not just in my state but in yours. Protect vote-by-mail opportunities, not just in my state but in yours. Let’s protect women who are married and change their name and their right to vote, not just in my state but in yours.”

Senators did not agree to waive a point of order against Kennedy’s amendment on a 48-50 vote. Republican Sens. Susan Collins of Maine, Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, Murkowski and Thom Tillis of North Carolina voted with Democrats. 

Missouri Republican Sen. Josh Hawley tried unsuccessfully to create a pathway to extend the one-year prohibition on Medicaid funding to Planned Parenthood that the GOP included in its “big, beautiful” law. That funding ban expires on July 4. 

Hawley didn’t speak about abortion access during debate but focused his criticism of the organization on gender-affirming health care services for transgender youth. 

“Under no circumstance should Medicaid money dedicated to the poor and the needy be used for transgender surgeries and treatments for minor children,” he said. “It is a moral outrage. This body has a duty to stand against it.”

Planned Parenthood’s website states the organization provides surgery referrals as well as hormone therapy, puberty blockers and “transition support.”

Oregon Democratic Sen. Ron Wyden argued the amendment represented “Republicans’ latest attempt to strip women of the health care they need and depend on so that they can go score some political points.” 

Senators didn’t agree to waive a point of order against the amendment, which would have allowed it to move forward, by a vote of 50-48. Collins and Murkowski voted with Democrats. 

Senators rejected an amendment from Oregon Democratic Sen. Jeff Merkley that would have addressed the rising cost of housing after he invoked comments President Donald Trump made during his State of the Union address. 

“We have an opportunity tonight to send a message that we agree with the president, that we have a challenge in home ownership, because home ownership is dying,” Merkley said. “And one of the factors is private equity buying up the homes.” 

Ohio Republican Sen. Bernie Moreno spoke out against adopting the amendment, saying lawmakers have already addressed it in a bipartisan way. 

“I obviously urge my colleagues to oppose this amendment, because we’ve already passed it,” he said. We’ve already solved this problem. In fact, congratulations to all of us. 89 to 10. We banned institutional ownership of single-family homes. I think that’s fantastic.”

The Senate voted in March to approve a bill designed to increase the country’s housing supply, according to reporting from NPR. But since the House has approved a bill of its own, the two chambers will need to work out their differences before any housing bill becomes law. 

Senators did not agree to adopt Merkley’s amendment following a 46-52 party-line vote. 

California Democratic Sen. Adam Schiff proposed an amendment that would have addressed stalled funding from the Federal Emergency Management Agency, which he said is “holding more than $3 billion in disaster relief funding for California.”

“But as we debate this budget resolution, I know our state of California is not alone,” he said. “North Carolina is waiting on millions in relief designated for Hurricane Helene in 2024. Kentucky saw landslides and flooding just weeks after Los Angeles County burned. Florida and the Gulf Coast have also been battered. Texas communities under siege from last year’s floods have still not seen the federal relief their communities need and deserve.”

Oklahoma Republican Sen. James Lankford opposed the amendment, saying that while he agrees FEMA funds need to get to communities, the best way to do that is for the House to pass the annual funding bill for the Department of Homeland Security, which the Senate already approved. 

House GOP leaders are holding on to that bill instead of putting it on the floor as they wait for the reconciliation process to play out. That Senate-passed DHS bill funds FEMA and all of the agencies that make up the department except ICE and Border Patrol. 

“Our challenge has been, we’ve been in a government shutdown on DHS now for two months,” Lankford said. “We’ve got to be able to get those funds released. That means we’ve got to get DHS funding completely done for all of DHS. We have FEMA employees that are being paid but they don’t have program dollars that they can actually release.”

The Senate rejected the amendment following a 49-49 vote. Collins, Florida Sen. Ashley Moody and Murkowski voted with Democrats. 

Montana voters are increasingly concerned over access to public lands, and a vast majority – 84% — support banning the sale or transfer of public lands.

That’s according to the 2026 Voter Survey on Public Lands commissioned by the University of Montana’s Crown of the Continent and Greater Yellowstone Initiative and released on April 22. The biennial survey has tracked how residents think about public land and natural resource issues since 2014.

“Since this poll began a dozen years ago, Montanans’ interest in protecting public lands has only grown stronger,” UM initiative director Rick Graetz said in a statement. “Bipartisan support for conservation is undeniable and deeply rooted. Wherever I go in Montana, I hear from people wanting to safeguard their quality of life and their freedom to visit public lands and waters. There is no appetite for sell-off or industrialization of public lands here and that clearly shows in the data.”

The bipartisan survey was conducted by Republican pollster New Bridge Strategy and Democratic pollster FM3 Research.

Compared to 2022, there was a 30-point increase in poll respondents who said loss of access to public lands is an extremely or very serious problem.

The potential sell-off of national public lands became a flashpoint in Congress last year when proposals to sell off sections of federal land were initially included in President Donald Trump’s “One Big Beautiful Bill.” Montana’s federal delegation, all Republicans, became key figures in removing those provisions and taking a stand against their caucus.

Support from Montana voters for a ban against the sale or transfer of most public lands such as National Forest to private interests or other government entities saw support cut across party lines, according to the poll results.

Four-in-five Republicans and Independents said they would support a ban, and 90% of self-identified Democrats said they supported such a ban – with 84% strongly supporting one.

“Over the last 12 years Montanans of all political affiliations have consistently told us that they consider public lands and access to them as a foundational issue when considering their support for office holders,” Republican pollster Lori Weigel said in a press release. “A consistent theme is Montana voters continue to value public lands as an economic driver in the state and reject efforts to divert funds or downgrade protections.”

Across the board, the biennial poll has shown that Montanans highly support conservation initiatives in all iterations, with 82% of Republicans, 92% of independents, and 99% of Democrats saying conservation issues are somewhat or very important when considering who to vote for in an election — among the highest numbers in the poll’s 12 years.

The poll also found voters are increasingly concerned about low snowpack and drought, with the percentage of respondents who said the issues are very or extremely serious jumping 18% and 17% respectively since 2024 to three-quarters of voters.

One poll question asked how voters viewed the idea of data center construction in Montana and how that might affect their future. While 40% of voters said they thought it would have a positive effect on the state’s economy, compared to 35% who foresee negative impacts, most respondents said they believe data centers would negatively impact the price of electricity (76%), the reliability of the electric grid (68%) and the availability of water (69%).

There are currently 11 data center developers in talks with the state’s monopoly utility, NorthWestern Energy.

Graetz isn’t surprised to see support for conservation issues continuing to grow in Montana, but he said he feels there is increasingly a disconnect between voter sentiment on the ground and the public officials they elect.

“Every year most Republicans and Democrats are pretty close to even on caring about open space, about protecting the Wilderness Study Areas, and I get around the state and do programs, and I have to tell you it’s the same thing we hear about in the poll — people love this state,” Graetz said in a phone interview with the Daily Montanan. “It doesn’t matter if they’re radical right or radical left, they give a damn about public spaces. “

While voters have more than just conservation issues to consider at the polling booth, many votes by the state’s delegation directly contradict the findings in these surveys, Graetz continued.

One example is Montana’s Wilderness Study Areas — U.S. Forest Service and BLM land that was set aside for consideration to become federal wilderness, but never was actually designated. The areas maintain robust access for hunters, hikers, grazing and some motorized and biking use, but do not allow mining, drilling or logging.

The survey has shown a 10-point jump in support for increasing protections in the Wilderness Study Areas, with a total of 74% of respondents saying protections should be maintained or increased. Just 7% of respondents said they favored eliminating the protections.

But Montana’s delegation, led by Sens. Steve Daines and Tim Sheehy and Rep. Troy Downing, is pushing a bill, called the “Montana Sportsmen Conservation Act,” which would remove protections from three areas — the Middle Fork Judith, Hoodoo Mountain, and Wales Creek.

The bill recently cleared a committee hearing and Daines called it “common sense.”

“It unlocks land that’s overdue for release from restrictive Wilderness Study Area status to increase access for outdoor recreation, forest management, and wildfire mitigation,” Daines, who is retiring from Congress this year, said in a press release. “I am glad to see it pass committee, and I’ll keep fighting to get it across the finish line.”

Graetz said politicians from Montana used to be more bipartisan in their dealings and said Daines has a “bad record” on a lot of conservation issues, and preserving Wilderness Study Area protections should be an easier sell for public officials.

“It’s almost impossible today to get any big W’s anymore,” Graetz said. “We’re not going to get anymore Bob Marshalls or Rattlesnakes, so the best we can get is those little areas. Keep them as they are, protect them and don’t let people get too mad about it.”

Several more specific initiatives were included in the survey, and all saw record numbers of support.

83% of voters support enacting the Blackfoot Clearwater Stewardship Act, which would add existing public land to the Bob Marshall, Scapegoat and Mission Mountains wilderness areas; create two new recreation areas; and sustain timber harvest and habitat restoration.

66% oppose speeding up the approval of exploratory mines for rare earth minerals near the headwaters of the Bitterroot River by reducing environmental reviews and local public input.

70% of voters support protecting nearly 100 miles of the Madison and Gallatin rivers with Wild and Scenic River designations. (Zinke introduced this legislation last year, but it has no cosponsors and has had no actions taken since August.)

A record 87% of voters say they support a president using the Antiquities Act to enact the highest protections for public lands such as national monuments.

80% support keeping the current Roadless Rule, prohibiting road construction in key areas of undeveloped national forest land intact.

76% think corner crossing (stepping from one public parcel of land to a diagonally adjacent public parcel) should be legal. Doing so has been ruled legal by some federal courts, but remains unlawful in Montana.

The same pollsters also conduct the annual Conservation in the West poll.

The 2026 statewide Public Lands Survey polled 515 registered voters by phone and online between March 19-25. The poll’s effective margin of error is ±4.32% at the 95% confidence interval. The full survey results and a summary presentation are available at the Crown of the Continent and Greater Yellowstone Initiative website.

A previous version of this article incorrectly stated the number of WSAs in Montana. The Daily Montanan regrets the error.

This story was originally produced by Daily Montanan, which is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network which includes Idaho Capital Sun, and is supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity.

KEMMERER — Because of high winds, Andy Chrusciel joked that he kept his construction helmet cranked so tight it gave him a headache. Walking around the site of the Natrium nuclear power plant, even that painful setting wasn’t enough to keep the hat atop his head — the construction manager raised a hand to pin it down.

Vulnerable headgear wasn’t the only casualty of Wyoming gales that ripped across the Green River Basin on Wednesday.

The winds were also temporarily complicating a much-anticipated construction project that’s now officially underway. Specifically, crews have started to prep the site where Wyoming’s first nuclear power plant is going — at the tip of the Wyoming Range just south of Kemmerer. The crane and the smaller lifts had even been lowered for the day because of the wind, explained Andrew Stockett, a senior project manager. If crews kept working with gusts breaching 30 miles per hour, the siding the lifts were hoisting risked turning into sails, he said.

Proponents say the frontloaders and heavy haulers shaping the earth at the nuclear portion of the TerraPower facility outside of Kemmerer are cause for celebration.

“It’s really historic,” TerraPower CEO Chris Levesque told WyoFile over the phone. “Wyoming is really the center of this. It will have benefits for Wyoming: cheap electricity and jobs.”

Levesque’s appearance at a groundbreaking ceremony was another casualty of the wind. His plane couldn’t land in Salt Lake City because of it.

The timeline of Wyoming’s Natrium nuclear plant

The 345-megawatt Natrium nuclear plant is expected to take 42 months to build, putting its expected completion date in 2031. If that timeline comes to fruition, the nuclear demonstration plant will be completed — from announcement to contributing electrons to the power grid — in almost exactly one decade.

Nearly five years ago, the Bill Gates-backed Bellevue, Washington, company selected a site near the Naughton natural gas-fired power plant for its nuclear plant because of the availability of land, water for cooling and electrical transmission infrastructure. The project was billed as a way to address climate change while helping to meet the nation’s energy demands.

Permitting was a major hurdle. By early 2025, however, the Natrium plant received a Wyoming Industrial Siting Council permit. Then in March, the facility was awarded a U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission construction permit.

A ton of work went into that, Levesque said.

“We had about 1,000 engineers working on the design for over three years,” he said. “That’s really what enabled us to get the approval from the federal regulators.”

‘Not your grandfather’s power plant’

The Natrium nuclear power plant is named after the Latin word for sodium, which is the cooling agent. That’s part of what makes it “next generation” technology — because the plant’s cooling doesn’t require water, which builds great pressure, it requires less steel and concrete to make it safe. In turn, Natrium will take much less labor and time to build to completion.

“We say it’s not your grandfather’s power plant,” Levesque said. “It’s a totally different design.”

The nuclear reactor is also being built underground. Those modifications differentiate the Natrium plant from the 94 existing nuclear reactors distributed at 54 power plants around the country.

It’s also supposed to be cheaper. Shortly after Kemmerer was picked to host the plant, it was billed as a $4 billion community-changing project that would generate about 1,300 construction jobs and another 250 long-term positions.

That price tag has risen. The expense of construction labor and steel has “changed a lot,” said Levesque, who declined to specify the new estimate. Regardless of the cost, the new technology is expected to compete economically, he said.

“The Natrium reactor will be competitive with combined-cycle natural gas plants,” Levesque said, “which are seen as the cheapest electricity out there.”

TerraPower’s plan to construct multiple reactors

Bringing a new nuclear plant online is no small feat. Since the 1979 Three Mile Island nuclear reactor partial meltdown, the industry’s been lethargic, with more plants being decommissioned than built.

Only three reactors have come online in the 21st century: In 2016, the Tennessee Valley Authority finished the Watts Bar Unit 2 reactor and two reactors were added to Georgia’s massive Plant Vogtle in 2023 and 2024.

“It’s a big deal for the industry,” Levesque said. “This is America’s next commercial nuclear power station.”

TerraPower also has big plans. By the time the Natrium demonstration plant is supposed to be wrapped up in 2031, the plan is to have construction on multiple other reactors underway. Between two and eight of those could be providing power for Meta, the owner of Facebook and Instagram.

“We plan on being at 10 to 12 units delivered per year by the end of the 2030s,” Levesque said.

Construction of the very first is now underway in Wyoming.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

After Congress failed to extend deeper subsidies for Americans’ health insurance, an estimated 30,000 more Idahoans who had insurance are likely to be uninsured this year.

That’s according to a report from Your Health Idaho, the state’s insurance exchange. The report highlights how Idaho’s health insurance market has changed this year — as consumers face premium hikes from insurance companies and Congress’s decision to let enhanced premium tax credits expire.

In the months since open enrollment, when people can pick health insurance plans, about 24,400 people disenrolled from health insurance plans on the exchange. That’s a big shift since last year, when just under 16,000 people had their plans canceled later. Your Health Idaho Executive Director Pat Kelly said the figures are among many that show affordability is a key concern this year.

The federal government shut down after a health care clash. In Idaho, the stakes are high.

“We hope that the 24,000 is the end of it,” Kelly told the Idaho Capital Sun on Wednesday. 

“All the way through open enrollment, affordability really permeated all the decisions that we saw,” he added, listing out a range of shifts this year, like more people buying cheaper health insurance plans, and more people canceling plans. 

The cancellations leave Idaho’s health insurance exchange, a common option for people whose jobs don’t offer insurance, with 3.6% less enrollees than it had last year. 

For those who still have insurance on the exchange, it’s often getting more expensive. Your Health Idaho’s report found that the share of Idahoans who are paying more than $300 a month in premiums rose by 13%, while the share of Idahoans who are paying $100 or less fell by 19%. 

When open enrollment ended in December, Kelly said it’d likely take until April for enrollment to settle after cancellations. Part of that is because of consumer protections, he explained. There are grace periods before consumers’ plans are terminated for nonpayment, which can take up to 90 days for renewed customers. Kelly said he isn’t sure how many of the cancellations were by insurers, or by consumers.

“We’re thrilled that Idahoans understand the value of having health insurance, and we’re still concerned about the affordability impacts on the market,” Kelly said. 

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

What are the enhanced premium tax credits?

In Idaho, the enhanced premium tax credits reduced premiums by an average of $407 each month, according to the nonpartisan health policy group KFF. About 87% of Idahoans who have insurance through the state exchange received the credits, according to a report by the federal Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. 

“Idaho is about to be ground zero for a national health care affordability crisis — not because Idahoans did anything wrong, but because Republicans in Congress refuse to act,” Ada County Democratic Party Chair Jared Deloof told reporters at a news conference in December near U.S. Sen. Jim Risch’s office in downtown Boise.

YHI Fact Sheet OE26 Update_04.2026

YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE.

This story was originally posted on IdahoEdNews.org on March 30, 2026.

Idaho school districts are asking voters for more than $183 million this May.

The asks range from a $57 million bond in Kimberly to build a performing arts center to a $200,000 supplemental levy in Mackay to pay for athletics and building utilities over the course of two years.

Idaho ranks last in per pupil spending, again

The asks are more than double that of May 2025, where voters considered $75 million in ballot measures. It dwarfs November’s ballot measure asks, which came in at $159 million. 

School districts can only ask voters for additional funding from property taxes in May and November. Election dates for schools were reduced from four to two by the legislature over the course of the 2023 and 2024 sessions.

Idaho Education News reached out to county election offices statewide to compile this comprehensive list of school ballot measures.

The estimated tax burdens on sample ballots do not take into account property tax relief passed by the Legislature in 2024. Those funds must first be applied to any bonds, then plant facility levies, and then supplemental levies. If school districts do not have any tax measures on the books, the funds go into an account for facility projects. The amount of property tax relief districts receive varies year to year.

The below estimated tax rates, therefore, are the highest possible tax amount for the listed ballot measures. Learn more on the basics of bonds and levies here.

Two districts sought bonds this May, totaling $61.6 million. Idaho is one of two states that require a supermajority of 66.7% or 2/3 in support for a bond to pass. A bond has not passed in Idaho since May 2024.

What: A $57.8 million, 30-year bond.

What’s at stake? The bond would pay for a new fine arts center and auditorium, gym, community field house, and athletic fields at Kimberly High School. The parking lots at both the high school and middle school would also be refinished.

Superintendent Luke Schroeder said the facilities would serve the whole community with community recreational space where the public can come play pick-up basketball, pickleball or walk on the track.

Impact:  The bond would cost taxpayers $277 per $100,000 of taxable assessed value. See sample ballot here.

What: A $3.8 million, 10-year bond.

What’s at stake? The bond would pay for building renovations and the construction of a Career Technical Education and agriculture building. It would also cover a football field with a track and new lighting.

Impact: The bond would cost taxpayers $592 per $100,000 of taxable assessed value. See sample ballot here.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

Four districts are seeking plant facilities levies — adding up to more than $47 million — for school facility maintenance and updates. Plant facility levies typically need 55% of the votes in favor to pass. They are listed alphabetically below.

What: An average of $7.8 million, 10-year levy.

What’s at stake? The levy would pay for school maintenance, including lighting, heating and maintenance equipment. The levy would increase each year, starting at $695,564 the first year, up to $887,736, with an average of $788,528 per year. The district built in that 6% increase each year to cover the cost of inflation, said Superintendent Randy Jensen.

Jensen said that while the district isn’t behind on maintenance, these funds are essential for keeping up buildings and making them last. When state lawmakers gave schools capital project funds two years ago, they also took away districts’ lottery funds that were often used for building maintenance, Jensen noted. That change made the plant facilities levy more integral to the district’s budget.

“It’s probably more important than ever this year,” Jensen said.

Impact: The levy would cost taxpayers $44 per $100,000 of taxable assessed value. The levy would replace an expiring plant facility levy. See sample ballot here.

What: A $5 million, 10-year levy.

What’s at stake? The levy would pay for facility maintenance, including new HVAC units, resealing parking lots, and replacing school buses as they age out.

Superintendent Luke Schroeder said some upcoming expenses include replacing the high school’s 41-year-old stadium lights and bleachers in both the middle and high school gyms. The new levy would be a $200,000 per year increase from the expiring plant facility levy.

Schroeder said the increase is to cover inflated costs for things like HVAC units that have doubled in price from $5,000 to $10,000 over the law few years.

Impact: The levy would cost taxpayers $40 per $100,000 of taxable assessed value an increase of $16 from the expiring plant facility levy. See sample ballot here.

What: A $15 million, 5-year levy.

What’s at stake? The levy would pay for building maintenance and updates like new flooring, playground repairs, repairing cracks in gym walls, a new backup generator at replacing roofs.

Impact: The levy would cost taxpayers $30.24 per $100,000 of taxable assessed value. See sample ballot here.

What: A $19.5 million, 10-year levy.

What’s at stake? The funds would largely pay for school updates like a new security vestibule at Payette Primary, resealing and repairing the McCain Middle parking lot and updating classrooms at Payette High School. The funds would also update the district’s sports facilities like adding a scoreboard and bleachers at the middle school, remodeling Dome gymnasium, and replacing stadium lights at Payette High.

Passing the new levy would revoke the levy’s current $495,000-a-year plant facility levy and replace it with the new, more expensive levy.

See the full plan here. 

Impact: The levy would cost taxpayers $157.44 per $100,000. See sample ballot here.

YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE.

Twenty-eight districts are seeking supplemental levies — adding up to about $74 million. The levies largely pay the salaries and benefits of staff, above state allocations. Levies also commonly cover extracurricular activities. They require a simple majority or 50% to pass. The levies are listed alphabetically below.

What: A $1.9 million, two-year levy.

What’s at stake? The levy would largely pay for staff salaries and benefits at $700,000 a year. It would also pay for maintenance and custodial supplies, technology, School Resource Officer and safety/ security, classroom supplies and curriculum.

Impact? The levy would cost taxpayers $201.78 per $100,000 of taxable assessed value. The levy replaces an expiring levy of the same cost. See sample ballot here.

What: A $19.2 million, two-year levy.

What’s at stake? The levy would largely pay for staff salaries and benefits with $2.5 million a year slated for support staff like paraeducators and another $990,000 for teachers and counselors. Another $1.2 million would pay for full-day kindergarten. Other big-ticket items include $900,000 for classroom supplies, $950,000 for coaches and other extracurricular activity advisors, and $950,000 for physical education and music programs.

Superintendent Scott Woolstenhulme said the increase in the supplemental levy is due in part to a return to an average daily attendance funding model after schools received funding based on enrollment during COVID.

Impact? The levy would cost taxpayers $119.24 per $100,000 of taxable assessed property value. The levy would be an increase of $47.20 from the expiring supplemental levy. See sample ballot here.

What: A $5.9 million, two-year levy.

What’s at stake? The levy would largely pay for curriculum adoption and classroom supplies at just over $1 million per year. The rest of the funds would go to extracurricular activities at $1 million, safety and security at $745,000 and classroom equipment at $200,000.

Impact? The levy would cost taxpayers $73.18 per $100,000 of taxable assessed value. See sample ballot here.

What: A $275,000, one-year levy.

What’s at stake? The levy would largely pay for virtual speech, language pathologist services that also require an in-person paraeducator to supervise students at $100,000 per year. The levy would also pay for utilities, technology, substitute teachers, maintenance and subsidize the district’s food services.

Impact? The levy would cost taxpayers $86.91 per $100,000 of taxable assessed value, an increase of $27.65 from the expiring supplemental levy. See sample ballot here.

What: A $500,000, two-year levy.

What’s at stake? The levy would pay the salaries and benefits of instructional aids.

Impact? The levy would cost taxpayers $52.50 per $100,000 of taxable assessed value, an increase of $24.10 from the expiring supplemental levy. See sample ballot here.

What: A $500,000, two-year levy.

What’s at stake? The levy would largely pay for building maintenance at $104,015 per year. The levy would also cover student activities and clubs, supplies and materials, curriculum, technology, property and liability insurance, and purchased services.

Impact? The levy would cost taxpayers $243.18 per $100,000 of taxable assessed value, the same as the expiring supplemental levy. See sample ballot here.

What: A $4.6 million, two-year levy.

What’s at stake? The levy would largely pay for routine and emergency building maintenance at $1 million per year, with another $700,000 toward custodial services. The levy would also pay for nursing, K-5 behavioral support personnel, and supplemental curriculum and supplies.

Impact? The levy would cost taxpayers $72.03 per $100,000 of taxable assessed value. See sample ballot here.