Idaho's children deserve better from our Legislature
The 2025 Idaho legislative session may be over, but its impact on our children will last far longer — and not for the better.
As the session dragged past its intended adjournment, one thing became painfully clear: Idaho's children were not a priority. Legislators found time to debate flags and push culture war bills into classrooms, but when it came to supporting our youngest citizens — those who will one day inherit this state — they failed.
School buildings continue to crumble, special education remains underfunded, and child care providers are forced to operate under weaker safety standards due to legislative rollbacks. Meanwhile, children from undocumented families were denied food assistance, school lunches, and even health care through Medicaid — all because of their parents' immigration status. These policies don't just hurt children — they compromise the future of Idaho.
Instead of focusing on real issues, our lawmakers catered to special interests and pushed another round of income tax cuts — our fifth in four years. It's true that everyone likes tax cuts. But we must ask: at what cost?
Since 2022, these income tax cuts have drained nearly $1.9 billion from Idaho's budget, with another $948 million lost annually moving forward. That's $2.8 billion in permanent revenue gone by the end of 2025—funds that could have been invested in updating schools, expanding health care, and keeping property taxes in check. This year alone, the Legislature cut $87 million from public education, let a $205 working families tax credit expire, and slashed $15 million from affordable housing while passing yet another tax cut that disproportionately benefits the wealthiest Idahoans.
The numbers don't lie: Idaho's wealthiest 1% received an average tax break of over $15,000. The average Idaho family? Just $337. And now, with the expiration of the Child Tax Credit, most families will actually see a tax increase.
This is not responsible governance, it's a reckless redistribution of resources upward, leaving working families to bear the burden.
At Idaho Children Are Primary, we believe lawmakers should be judged on a simple question: Is this good for kids? That's why we publish our Kids Matter Index (KMI), a non-partisan scorecard tracking legislators' votes on bills affecting children — from school funding and day care licensing to Medicaid and public assistance.
This year's results are sobering. Only 25% of legislators scored 80% or higher — a strong pro-child record. That's down from 30% last year and 40% the year before. Meanwhile, 65% of lawmakers scored below 69%. The trend is unmistakable: Idaho's Legislature is prioritizing children less and less each year.
And those who did stand up for children? Many were punished at the ballot box. In the 2024 primaries, several legislators with strong KMI scores were replaced by candidates backed by out-of-state money and extreme ideologies.
This should alarm every Idahoan. Our children's futures are being shaped not just by what laws pass—but by who we elect to make those laws.
So what can we do?
First, hold your legislators accountable. Ask them how they voted. Ask why. If their priorities don't align with your values, let them know — and vote accordingly. You can find your legislator at the Idaho State Legislature's 'Who's My Legislator?' tool.
Second, engage with your community. Talk to neighbors, attend town halls, and show up to school board meetings. Real change starts locally.
Third, pay close attention to the 2026 May primary election. That's when many key decisions are made — often by just a few hundred votes. Use tools like the Kids Matter Index to learn how your lawmakers vote, not just what they say.
Idaho's constitution is clear: 'All political power is inherent in the people.' If our representatives won't prioritize kids, it's time we elect ones who will.
Idaho's children deserve better. Our families deserve better. And Idaho's future depends on the choices we make today. Let's ensure our lawmakers choose our children — by choosing our lawmakers wisely.
SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Boston Globe
an hour ago
- Boston Globe
In race to replace Fernandes Anderson, District 7 candidates debate housing affordability, reparations during forum
Said Ahmed, a nonprofit executive, said if elected he would push to make the lottery systems that distribute affordable units in private developments more transparent. Miniard Culpepper, a lawyer Advertisement Community activist WaWa Bell supported the idea of creating a more localized area median income that would better reflect the demographics of District 7. Area median income is the standard used for determining income eligibility for affordable housing projects. Such a change would require the state Legislature's approval. Advertisement Mavrick Afonso, who works for the state's executive office of housing and livable communities, also supported the idea of a localized area median income for the district, noting that areas like 'Locally in Roxbury, that median income is a lot lower,' Afonso said, 'we're not making housing for Waltham in Roxbury.' The candidates are running in the only open seat on this year's ballot, and would represent a district that encompasses parts of Roxbury, Dorchester, Fenway and part of the South End. The previous District 7 councilor, Fernandes Anderson, The District 7 race is crowded, with a total of 11 candidates on the Sept. 9 preliminary ballot. Only the top two vote getters in that election will move on to November's general election. The organizers of the event only invited the first four candidates who responded to them so that each candidate would get around 30 minutes to answer questions. The other candidates will be interviewed at future events. When asked by an audience member about how he would make sure that Black people from Roxbury could afford to stay in the neighborhood, Bell said reparations were the solution. Community organizations like Advertisement 'I think I can go a step further and establish the infrastructure,' Bell said, 'so that if reparations does happen … we have a dedicated office that will be able to deliver those resources properly.' On reparations, Culpepper said that Black students at Madison Park vocational high school should be able to attend nearby Northeastern University tuition free if they are admitted. 'The little white kids are paying cash right from the money that was made from the slaves on our back,' Culpepper said. Culpepper said that the University developing the land in the area has limited access to students of the long-underinvested high school to facilities like Carter Playground. The high school was set to get a new building, but 'Look at the disparity,' Culpepper said, 'it's amazing how we've given up the city to Northeastern University.' Afonso, who previously worked for the city's parks and recreation department, said a public discussion about past injustices like redlining was needed before deciding on how reparations may be implemented. 'The first step for me is to really do the work to try to understand the damages that happened at the time, a model that was set forth in South Africa with the Truth and Reconciliation trial,' Afonso said, " I can't tell you I have a solution for all of that right now, because we don't know how deep it's gone and how much it's infected and hurt families over generations." Advertisement Ahmed did not directly voice his opinion on reparations, but said he supported efforts to keep Roxbury residents in the neighborhood. Ahmed, who came to Roxbury at the age of 12, as a refugee from Somalia, went on to become a member of the US track and field national team and later, work in the Boston Public School system. He works as a supervisor of attendance for the school system. Ahmed said he became passionate about advocating for Black and brown families when he saw that those families were disproportionately involved in truancy hearings. He said he began working with students, particularly those from low-income and immigrant families, to address attendance issues before the issue escalated to a court hearing. 'No one wins in court,' Ahmed said, 'The judge might not make the decision that's good for our community.' The candidates were also asked about how they would maintain transparency while in office given that Fernandes Anderson resigned after she plead guilty to violating state ethics laws by hiring immediate family members as paid staff and receiving a $7,000 kickback from a staff member's city funded bonus. All four candidates said they would host regular town halls, Ahmed said he would set up a district office in Roxbury for easier communication and Bell said he would continue the Advertisement 'I know single mothers that make more prudent decisions than some of these [city] departments in their own homes,' Afonso said, 'I'm sure they can handle some of our budget issues.' There will be another forum with the remaining District 7 candidates this Thursday at 6 p.m. at the same location, One Westinghouse Plaza, in Hyde Park, also hosted by Speak Boston. Thursday's forum will also be live-streamed Angela Mathew can be reached at
Newsweek
an hour ago
- Newsweek
Democrats' Chances of Flipping Joni Ernst's GOP Senate Seat in Iowa—Polls
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. Democrat Jackie Norris jumped into the Iowa Senate race to challenge GOP Senator Joni Ernst on Tuesday in a race Democrats are hoping they can make competitive next November. Bryan Kraber, Ernst's campaign manager, told Newsweek Iowans will "reject this Obama-era bureaucrat" in a statement responding to Norris' candidacy. Newsweek also reached out to Norris' campaign for comment via email. Why It Matters Democrats are facing a challenging Senate map ahead of the midterms, despite hopes that President Donald Trump's diminishing approval rating could fuel a 2018-style "blue wave" across the country. The party has to turn to states like Iowa, a former battleground that has shifted rightward over the past decade, as potential flip opportunities if they have any hope of taking back control of the upper chamber. Iowa has not elected a Democratic senator since 2008 and backed Trump in each of his three presidential bids—including by 13 points last November, an indication of how Republican the state has become. Nonetheless, Democrats remain hopeful that a strong national environment, as well as backlash over Ernst's recent Medicaid comments, can make the race more competitive than expected. Iowa Senator Joni Ernst speaks during The Hill & Valley Forum 2025 at The U.S. Capitol Visitor Center on April 30, 2025, in Washington. Iowa Senator Joni Ernst speaks during The Hill & Valley Forum 2025 at The U.S. Capitol Visitor Center on April 30, 2025, in 137 Ventures/Founders Fund/Jacob Helberg What To Know Norris emphasized her experience as a teacher and school board member in a video announcing her candidacy released on Tuesday. "As a teacher and a school board member, you see the invisible burdens families are carrying," she said. "Take the Medicaid cuts. Who is it impacting? Middle class families right now, they can't afford to put food on the table. We have to find a way to make things more affordable for families." Early polls of the race suggest Ernst will have an advantage in Iowa. A Public Policy Polling survey found that Ernst would lead a generic Democrat by about two percentage points—45 percent to 43 percent, with 12 percent still unsure. However, the poll did not ask voters about specific Democratic candidates. The survey of 568 Iowa voters was taken from June 2 to June 3. A Data for Progress poll from May found that Ernst would have a lead over most Democratic candidates on an informed ballot. When asked about Norris, voters preferred Ernst by about six points (50 percent to 44 percent). Democrat Nathan Sage fared better, leading Ernst by about two points (47 percent to 45 percent). Ernst also led State Representative J.D. Scholten by six points (49 percent to 43 percent) and State Senator Zach Wahls by 10 points (52 percent to 42 percent). The poll surveyed 779 likely voters from May 7 to May 12. Republicans are favored to hold the Iowa Senate seat, according to Kalshi betting odds, which give the GOP a 74 percent chance and Democrats a 26 percent chance of winning next November. Outside of Iowa, Democrats view the Maine seat held by Senator Susan Collins and the open North Carolina seat as their best opportunities to pickup a win in a GOP-held seat next November. Maine backed former Vice President Kamala Harris by about seven points, while North Carolina backed Trump by about three points last November. Republicans currently have a 53-47 majority, so Democrats need to win multiple double-digit Trump states like Iowa, Ohio or Texas to win back control of the Senate. Democrats are also defending seats in Georgia and Michigan, both of which backed Trump last year. What People Are Saying Bryan Kraber told Newsweek: "Our state is ruby red because Iowans reject higher taxes, open borders, and woke ideology, just like they will reject this Obama-era bureaucrat" Democratic hopeful Jackie Norris wrote in a press release: "Red versus blue isn't fixing anything. Iowa needs a Senator who doesn't just talk tough but rolls up their sleeves, and has the grit and experience to actually get something done." Sabato Crystal Ball forecasters J. Miles Coleman and Kyle Kondik wrote in a June update: "In 2014, [Ernst] won as part of a broader GOP wave—and she got help from a gaffe-prone opponent. Six years later, she won reelection as Trump was carrying Iowa by a strong margin (Ernst ran a little bit behind Trump). It's possible that 2026 could be like 2018: Iowa did not have a Senate election that year, but Democrats did end up winning three of the state's four U.S. House seats that year, and we suspect that if Iowa had had a Senate election, it likely at least would have been close." What Happens Next Ernst has not confirmed her plans for the 2026 election. Both the Cook Political Report and Sabato's Crystal Ball consider the race to be Likely Republican.
USA Today
an hour ago
- USA Today
Trump plans drug tariffs of up to 250%
President Donald Trump threatened to levy tariffs of up to 250% on pharmaceuticals imported into the United States. The president told CNBC on Aug. 5 that he plans to announce new tariffs "within the next week or so" on imports of pharmaceutical and semiconductor imports. He said he plans to launch a smaller tariff on drug imports before increasing the duties over 12 to 18 months to a maximum amount. Trump would start with an "initially small tariff on pharmaceuticals," he said. "But in one year, one-and-a-half years maximum, it's going to go to 150%, and then it's going to go to 250%, because we want pharmaceuticals made in our country." He said other nations "make a fortune" on pharmaceuticals, citing drugs imported from China and Ireland. Trump has said several times in recent months that there could be trade actions for the pharmaceutical industry, which has globalized since the 1990s with a drug supply chain that stretches from Europe to China and India. In July, Trump said his administration planned pharmaceutical-specific tariffs of up to 200%, though drug companies would have time to establish U.S.-based drug manufacturing. In April, Trump said he planned to impose tariffs on pharmaceuticals made overseas, a move he said would prompt drug companies to move their operations to the U.S. On July 31, Trump sent letters to 17 drug companies urging them to lower U.S. drug prices by Sept. 29 to "most favored nation" amounts paid by other nations. In the letters, Trump urged drug companies to adopt such pricing on drug for Medicaid, the federal-state health insurance program for low-income residents. He also requested drug companies lower U.S. prices to the same levels charged in Europe and elsewhere for newly-launched drugs for people on Medicare, Medicaid and private insurance plans. Trump also urged drug companies to lower pharmaceutical prices for U.S. consumers and businesses that directly purchase from drug companies. "Make no mistake: a collaborative effort towards achieving global pricing parity would be the most effective path for companies, the government and American patients," Trump said in the letters. "But if you refuse to step up, we will deploy every tool in our arsenal to protect American families from continued abusive drug pricing practices."
