>> PRESENTATION OF IDAHO REPORTS ON IDAHO PUBLIC TELEVISION MADE POSSIBLE THROUGH THE GENEROUS SUPPORT OF THE LAURA MOORE CUNNINGHAM FOUNDATION COMMITTED TO FULFILLING THE MOORE AND BETTIS FAMILY LEGACY OF BUILDING THE GREAT STATE OF IDAHO, BY THE FRIENDS OF IDAHO PUBLIC TELEVISION AND BY THE CORPORATION FOR PUBLIC BROADCASTING.

>> NOW YOU'LL BE VOTING FOR CANDIDATES FOR LEGISLATURE AND STATEWIDE AND LOCAL OFFICES ON ELECTION DAY, BUT WHAT ABOUT THAT PROPOSED CONSTITUTIONAL CHANGE?

TONIGHT LEGISLATIVE LEADERS GIVE THEIR TAKES ON A PROPOSAL TO LET LAWMAKERS CALM THEMSELVES BACK INTO SESSION.

I'M MELISSA DAVLIN.

IDAHO REPORTS START NOW.

HELLO, WELCOME TO IDAHO REPORTS.

THIS WEEK WE SIT DOWN WITH SENATE PRESIDENT PRO TEM CHUCK WINDER AND HOUSE ASSISTANT MINORITY LEADER LAUREN NECOCHEA TO TALK ABOUT THE PROPOSED STILL AMOUNT THAT IF PASSED WOULD ALLOW THE LEGISLATURE TO CALL ITSELF BACK INTO FIRST.

BUT FIRST OUR FINAL TWO DEBATES FOR THIS GENERAL ELECTION CYCLE AIR NEXT WEEK.

ON MONDAY, OCTOBER 24, TUNE IN TO IDAHO PUBLIC TELEVISION AT 8:00 P.M. MOUNTAIN, 7:00 P.M. PACIFIC, FOR THE SUPERINTENDENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUGGS DEBATE BETWEEN CANDIDATES TERRY GILBERT AND DEBBIE CRIP FIELD AND FREX FRIDAY OCTOBER 28th LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR CANDIDATES SCOTT BEDKE AND TERRI PICKENS MANWEILER DEBATE AT 8:00 P.M. MOUNTAIN, 7 P.M. PACIFIC.

THIS WEEK ON THE BOOED CAST, JR. JACLYN KETTLER OF BOISE STATE UNIVERSITY'S SCHOOL OF PUBLIC SERVICE JOINS ME TO DISCUSS SOME OF THIS YEAR'S HOT LEGISLATE ITIVE FACEOFFS.

FIND THAT LINK AT IDAHOPTV.ORG/IDAHOREPORTS, OR SERB FOR IDAHO REPORTS ON YOUR FAVOR PODCAST PLAYERS.

THIS WEEK ON THE THE REPUBLICAN NOMINEE FOR SECRETARY OF STATE.

YOU CAN FIND THEIR FULL INTERVIEWS ONLINE BUT HERE'S A SNEAK PEEK AT WHAT THEY HAD TO SAY.

>> I LOVE MY JOB.

I LOVE BEING THE STATE TREASURER, THE TREASURER'S OFFICE IS ESSENTIALLY THE ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE FOR THE STATE.

SO ALL THE MONEY COMES INTO IDAHO WHETHER IT'S THROUGH FEDERAL OR LOCAL OR STATE GOVERNMENT THROUGH THE STATE TREASURY, AND IT'S REALLY AN AND ELEVATE THE COMMUNITIES IN IDAHO.

I LOVE THE JOB.

I LOVE WORKING WITH IDAHOANS AND I'M THRILLED WITH HOW THE CONSTITUTION GOT THAT YOU NEED TO SEPARATE THE TREASURY FROM THE ENTITY THAT SPENDS THE MONEY.

I HAVE HAD A TRACK RECORD OF SUCCESS.

FIRST THING I DID WHEN I ENTERED FOUR YEARS AGO WAS I CREATED ESSENTIALLY A BUBBLE CHART SHOWING THE ACCOUNTABLE FOR OUR DOLLARS.

I WANT TO SEE THE CONSTITUTION SAYS IT SHOULD BE DONE THIS WAY, THEN WE HAVE LEGISLATIVE LAWS, WE HAVE COMMITTEES THAT OVERSEE IT.

WE HAVE DIFFERENT PAID PROFESSIONALS THAT EVALUATE THE DIFFERENT FUNDS IN THE STATE.

I HAVE BEEN SUCCESSFUL IN CREATING AN ACCOUNTABILITY FOR THE MANAGEMENT OF THESE DOLLARS.

I FEEL LIKE I AM NHL A POSITION THAT I CAN WORK CLOSELY WITH LOCAL UNITS OF GOVERNMENT IN THE FUTURE TO ELEVATE THE IDAHO BOND BANK AUTHORITY'S ABILITY TO LIFT COMMUNITIES.

SINCE I HAVE BEEN IN, THE STATE HAS RECEIVED A TRIPLE-A CREDIT RATING.

WHEN I FIRST STARTED I ESTABLISHED THAT THE BOND RAIDING AGENCIES WOULD CALL IN TO OUR STATE AND SPEAK TO LAWMAKERS AND DIFFERENT POLICY MAKERS SO THAT THEY KNEW WHAT IT TOOK TO HAVE GOOD POLICIES THAT INCREASE YOUR CREDIT RATING.

I HAVE DONE A GOOD JOB AND I WANT TO CONTINUE.

>> I'M SEEKING REELECTION STILL TO DO.

I FEEL THERE'S AN OPPORTUNITY WE HAVE TO CONTINUE TO MAKE IDAHO ONE OF THE BEST RUN STATES FINANCIALLY IN THE COUNTRY.

SO I WANT TO CONTINUE TO DO THAT.

OF COURSE I HOPEFULLY CAN TALK MORE ABOUT TRANSPARENCY BUT THERE'S A LOT OF WORK WE'RE DOING AND CONTINUING TO WORK WITH NOT ONLY THE STATE OF IDAHO LEVEL BUT AT THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT LEVEL AND THAT'S A PART THAT I WANT TO CONTINUE TO HELP BRING THAT FORWARD.

>> ONE OF THE BEST THINGS WHAT WE HAVE DONE WE HAVE OPENED THE BOOKS.

I THINK JUSTICE BRANDEIS SAID, SUNSHINE IS THE BEST DISINFECTANT.

SO WHAT WE HAVE NOW ON TRANSPARENTIDAHO.GOV, WE HAVE A WEBSITE THAT HAS ALL STATE EXPENDITURES.

WE HAVE POSTED FROM THE NIGHT BEFORE.

SO WE HAVE EVERY SINGLE EXPENDITURE FROM STATE AGENCIES, ALL THE STATE EMPLOYEES AND THEIR PAY RATES.

ONE OF THE KEY THINGS THAT WHAT WE ALSO HAVE LAST YEAR HOUSE BILL 73 PASSED THE LEGISLATIVE SESSION.

WHAT THAT PROPOSED MY VISION WAS HOW COULD WE TAKE IT ONE STEP FURTHER.

A KEY POINT IS HOW CAN WE GET THE CITIES, THE COUNTIES AND SCHOOL DISTRICTS' DATA AND ALL TAXING DISTRICTS IN GET ALL OF THEIR INFORMATION.

THEY DO A GREAT JOB.

A LOT OF THE BIGGER ONES HAVE THEIR INFORMATION POSTED ON THEIR WEBSITES.

THAT MEANS YOU HAVE TO GO TO A LOT OF WEBSITES TO TRACK IT DOWN AND HOW DO YOU COMPARE?

OUR TEAM HAS BEEN WORKING ON MAKING THAT UNIFORMITY AND STANDARD ACROSS SO YOU CAN COMPARE A BOISE TO A FAIRFIELD TO A PRESTON OR COEUR D'ALENE.

SAME WITH COUNTIES AND SCHOOL DISTRICTS.

THAT'S OUR BIG OPPORTUNITY.

FROM THAT NOT NECESSARILY TO BE A GOTCHA BUT HOW CAN WE IMPLEMENT BEST PRACTICES.

>> I'M AN ELECTIONS JUNKIE.

I LOVE THIS STUFF.

I HAD THE GREAT PRIVILEGE OF WORKING WITH SECRETARY DENNY AND SEARCY.

WHEN PEOPLE HEAD TO THE POLLS THEY CAN HAVE CONFIDENCE THAT THEIR VOTE COUNTS THE SAME AS EVERYBODY ELSE AND NOBODY IS INTERFERING WITH OUR ELECTIONS IN ANY WAY.

I THINK WE REALLY HAVE A GREAT SYSTEM IN IDAHO.

I'M PROUD TO BE A PART OF IT.

IT'S GREAT THE WORK THE CLERKS AND OTHERS DO THROUGHOUT THE STATE.

I'M EXCITED ABOUT THE OPPORTUNITY TO COLLABORATE WITH THE CLERKS TO BUILD ON OUR ELECTIONS ESPECIALLY IN A TIME YOU LOOK OVER LAST TWO YEARS THERE'S BEEN MORE UNSIRNT AND DOUBT THAN I HAVE EVER SEEN THROUGHOUT MY CAREER SO WE WANT TO TRY TO BUILD TRUST IN THE SYSTEM, TO REBUILD THE CONFIDENCE LOCALLY AND NATIONALLY AND IT'S NOT BECAUSE OF ANYTHING THAT'S HAPPENED HERE BUT CERTAINLY THERE ARE THOSE DOUBTS SO AS I TRAVELED AN THE CAMPAIGN TRAIL IT'S BEEN GREAT TO ENGAGE WITH PEOPLE AND TALK ABOUT OUR ELECTIONS, THE THINGS THAT WE DO BEHIND THE SCENES THAT PEOPLE DON'T REALIZE AND HOPEFULLY EXPAND INFORMATION FOR VOTERS AND ACCESS COMING INTO THE FUTURE.

>> I WONG OF THE BIGGEST THINGS, WE HAVE DONE A LOT OF THIS OVER THE LAST YEAR OR SO, PROVIDING TOURS, HANDING OUT INFORMATION TO VOTERS.

ONE OF MY GOALS FOR THE UPCOMING LEGISLATIVE SESSION THAT I'M PROBABLY REVEALING EARLY, TO TRY TO GET MORE VOTER INFORMATION OUT TO THE PUBLIC SO SPECIFICALLY LOOKING AT TRY TO PRODUCE A VOTER GUIDE.

BOTH THE SECRETARY OF STATE'S OFFICE AND COUNTY CLERK'S OFFICE IT'S THE MOST REQUESTED THING WE GET.

WHERE IS MY VOTER GUIDE?

WE HAVE SO MANY PEOPLE MOVING INTO STATE FROM OTHER LOCATIONS THAT ARE ACCUSTOMED TO HAVING THAT INFORMATION.

THAT'S A TOOL TO BOTH GET INFORMATION ABOUT WHO IS RUNNING FOR OFFICE, IS THERE AN ELECTION COMING UP, BUT ALSO A TOOL TO SHARE INFORMATION ABOUT WHAT WE'RE DOING TO MAKE SURE OUR ELECTIONS RUN SMOOTHLY.

>> FOR THE FULL INTERVIEWS PLUS LAST WEEK'S INTERVIEWS VISIT WEB WEB/IDAHO REPORTS OR LISTEN ON THE PODCAST.

>> IDAHOANS CAN ALSO VOTE ON WEATHER THE LEGISLATURE SHOULD CALL ITSELF BACK INTO SESSION OUTSIDE OF THE REGULAR LEGISLATIVE SESSION.

USUALLY THE FIRST THREE MONTHS OF THE YEAR.

CURRENTLY THE IDAHO CONSTITUTION ALLOWS ONLY THE GOVERNOR TO CALL LAWMAKERS BACK TO BOISE FOR A SPECIAL SESSION.

WHILE LAWMAKERS HAVE WANTED TO HAVE THAT SAME POWER FOR YEARS THE PANDEMIC AND THE ASSOCIATED EXECUTIVE ORDERS AND EMERGENCY DECLARATIONS ISSUED IN 2020 PUSHED THAT CONCERN TO THE TOP OF THE PRIORITY LIST WITH SOME LAWMAKERS GATHERING FOR AN UNOFFICIAL SESSION IN JUNE 2020.

>> WE BELIEVE THERE'S BEEN SO MUCH OVERREACH.

THE LEGISLATORS HAVE REALLY TRIED AND OUR CONSTITUENTS HAVE BEEN ON OUR BACKS SO WE TRIED TO CONVENE TODAY, TRITE TO GET A QUORUM.

THAT DID NOT WORK BUT WE ARE SIGNING ON TO SOMETHING AND GIVING IT TO OUR GOVERNOR TO LET HIM KNOW WE REALLY, REALLY WANT TO BE A PART OF THESE DECISIONS.

>> I TOOK AN OATH TO THE CONSTITUTION TO DEFEND AND PROTECT AND WHEN THIS IS BEING VIOLATED IT'S MY DUTY TO SPEAK UP.

WE HAVE NEVER HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO PUBLICLY SAY HOW WE FEEL.

>> WE NEED TO BE ABLE TO MAKE SURE THAT THE CHECKS AND BALANCES OF GOVERNMENT ARE SOLID.

>> LITTLE EVENTUALLY SUMMONED LAWMAKERS FOR A SPECIAL SESSION LATER THAT AUGUST.

>> WHAT A WEEK IT WAS.

MONDAY THE LEGISLATURE GATHERED IN TO CONSIDER COVID-19 RELATED ISSUES AND LIABILITY ISSUES.

BEFORE THE LEGISLATURE BEGAN CAPITAL POLICE HAD ISSUES TRYING TO ENFORCE SOCIAL DISTANCING IN THE FOURTH FLOOR GALLERY OVERLOOKING THE HOUSE.

BUT DESPITE THE DISTRACTIONS LAWMAKERS WERE STILL ABLE TO GET WORK DONE PASSING LEGISLATION THAT WOULD REQUIRE AN OPTION FOR IN-PERSON VOTING FOR ALL FUTURE ELECTIONS.

AND LIMIT COVID RELATED LIABILITY FOR CERTAIN BUSINESSES AND ENTITIES.

>> TENSIONS OVER PAN DEMIC ORDERS SPILLED INTO THE FOLLOWING 2021 REGULAR SESSION WITH SOME LEGACY GOP OFFICIALS DEFENDING LITTLE'S ACTIONS.

>> IT'S NOT UNUSUAL DURING DISASTERS THAT THE GOVERNOR IS AT THE SCENE OF THE INCIDENT AND THEY NEED A DECISION IMMEDIATELY.

THAT IS NOT THE TIME THAT A GOVERNOR SHOULD SAY, I'LL GET BACK TO YOU.

I MUST CHECK WITH THE LEGISLATURE.

>> THE HOUSE KEPT ITS FOOT IN THE DOOR THAT SUMMER LEAVING LINGERING QUESTIONS ABOUT THE PRECEDENT SET FOR FUTURE LEGISLATIVE SESSIONS.

>> SPECIL SESSIONS REGARDLESS OF THE SOURCE ARE GOING TO HAVE TO BE SPECIAL.

IT'S THE CHECK AND BALANCE SYSTEM THAT WE ALL ARE FAMILIAR WITH.

THAT'S WHAT WE HAVE DONE.

IT SEEMS TO -- WE'LL SEE HOW IT WORKS BUT AGAIN, THIS IS NOT A BACK DOOR TO A FULL-TIME LEGISLATURE.

NONE OF US IT, NONE OF US WANT THAT.

>> AFTER THE IDAHO LEGISLATURE APPROVED A SENATE JOINT MEMORIAL ON A CONSTITUTIONAL CHANGE IN 2021, THE ISSUE NOW GOES BEFORE VOTERS AND NEEDS A SIMPLE MAJORITY TO PASS.

JOINING ME TO DISCUSS THE PROS AND CONS OF THE CONSTITUTIONAL CHANGE ARE SENATE PRESIDENT PRO TEM CHUCK WINDER AND HOUSE ASSISTANT MINORITY LEADER LAUREN NECOCHEA.

SENATOR WINDER, WHY SHOULD IDAHOANS SIGN ON TO THIS PROPOSAL?

>> IF EVERYBODY WILL THINK BACK TO THE COVID PROBLEMS WE HAVE HAD EVEN BACK TO WHEN WE HAD THE FLOODS BACK IN '96 AND '97 WHEN THESE TYPES OF EMERGENCIES COME UP THE LEGISLATURE HAS A ROLE TO PLAY IN THAT.

UNDER THE CURRENT CONSTITUTION, ONLY THE GOVERNOR CAN CALL US BACK FOR A SPECIAL OR EXTRAORDINARY SESSION.

WE WERE GETTING LITERALLY HUNDREDS OF PHONE CALLS A DAY FROM CONSTITUENTS SAYING YOU GUYS WHERE AREN'T YOU DOING YOUR JOB, GET BACK IN THERE AND WE HAD NO ABILITY TO DO IT.

>> THE FLOODS IN '96, '97, THERE ARE IDAHO VOTERS NOW BORN AFTER THAT HAPPENED.

WHY DID THE LEGISLATURE NEED TO BE PART OF THAT EMERGENCY DISCUSSION?

>> UNDER THE CONSTITUTION WE'RE THE APPROPRIATING BODY, THE POLICY MAKERS.

WE THINK THAT WHEN THERE ARE THOSE TYPES OF EMERGENCIES THAT THE MONEY THAT GETS APPROPRIATED OUGHT TO COME FROM LEGISLATIVE ACTION AND NOT FROM THE EXECUTIVE.

>> WHY SHOULD THE THRESHOLD BE 60% INSTEAD OF A TWO-THIRDS MAJORITY FOR LAWMAKERS TO SUBMIT A PETITION AND SAY WE DO WANT TO CALL OURSELVES BACK TO BOISE?

>> WE'RE ONE OF 13 OTHER STATES THAT HAVE NO ABILITY TO CALL THEMSELVES INTO SESSION.

BASICALLY UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES.

THERE IS A PROVISION IF WE'RE ATTACKED BY MARTIALS OR A FOREIGN GOVERNMENT WE HAVE THE ABILITY TO COME BACK IN EMERGENCY SESSION BUT I JUST THINK THAT WHAT HAPPENS, THE GOVERNOR NEEDS TO BE ABLE TO REACT QUICKLY.

WE GIVE HIM ALL THE AUTHORITY HE NEEDS.

THAT'S WHERE HE GETS HIS AUTHORITY PRIMARILY.

ONCE THAT NIRNL REACTION IS MADE, THERE ARE A LOT OF DECISIONS THAT NEED TO BE JOINTLY MADE, MONEY APPROPRIATED.

WE GOT A MILLION DOLLARS IN THE FIRST ROUND OF ARPA FUNDING.

>> FEDERAL COVID ASSISTANCE FUNDING.

>> YES.

WE HAD NO SAY IN IT UNTIL WE WERE BACK IN SESSION AGAIN.

ALMOST A YEAR LATER.

>> REPRESENTATIVE, WHY SHOULDN'T LAWMAKERS BE ABLE TO CALL THEMSELVES BACK?

>> WELL, THIS WOULD BE A DEPARTURE FROM 130 YEARS OF TRADITION, AND FOR ALL THAT TIME ONLY GOVERNOR HAS BEEN ABLE TO CALL THE LEGISLATURE BAGS INTO SESSION WITH THE SPECIFIC AGENDA.

I THINK THAT'S BEEN A GOOD THING BECAUSE IT'S A BIG DEAL TO CALL US ALL BACK.

IT'S A SLIPPERY SLOPE IF WE OPEN UP OURSELVES TO SPECIAL SESSIONS ALL THE TIME.

WE SAW THAT UTAH JUST GAVE THIS ABILITY TO THE LEGISLATURE AND THEY HAVE CALLED SIX SPECIAL SESSIONS SINCE THEN.

ONE OF WHICH HAD THE RESULT OF JUST SENDING A LETTER TO CONGRESS STATING THAT UTAH LAWMAKERS LIKE SOMETHING THEY HAVE DONE.

SO IT WAS REALLY USED MORE FOR GRANDSTANDING THAN FOR POLICY.

THE FOUNDERS RAISED A GOOD POINT ABOUT EMERGENCIES.

WE HAVE TO BE ABLE TO REACT QUICKLY IN EMERGENCIES AND LETTING THE GOVERNOR DO THE JOB IS THE BEST WAY TO DO THAT.

WHEN YOUR HOUSE IS ON FIRE OR YOU'RE FACING A FLOOD THE LAST THING YOU NEED IS 105 LEGISLATORS GOING THROUGH THE PROCESS OF GETTING COMMITTEES TOGETHER AND I'M ACTUALLY FEARFUL OF WHAT WOULD HAVE HAPPENED IF THE LEGISLATURE HAD COME INTO SESSION IN 2020.

I THINK ALL THOSE EMERGENCY NEEDS THAT PEOPLE HAD, BUSINESS LOANS, UNEMPLOYMENT, PERSONAL PROTECTIVE EQUIPMENT FOR HEALTH CARE WORKERS, ALL THOLES WOULD HAVE BEEN AT RISK.

THEY WANTED TO STOP THE EMERGENCY RESPONSE FROM HAPPENING AND THAT WOULD BE VERY DISCONCERTING.

WHEN THE HOUSE IS ON FIRE WE NEED SOMEONE WHO CAN TAKE EXECUTIVE ACTION AND THAT'S WHY WE HAVE THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH.

>> WE HAVE A CODE THAT GIVES HIM LOTS OF AUTHORITY BUT WE THOUGHT HE OVERSTEPPED IN SEVERAL AREAS APPROPRIATING $1 BILLION OVER NINE MONTHS PERIOD.

THERE WASN'T ANY FIRE AT THE TIME.

WITH THOSE DOLLARS.

THERE WERE THINGS THAT COULD HAVE BEEN DONE.

UTAH IS A VERY UNUSUAL STATE.

THEY CAN ONLY HAVE A SIX WEEK SESSION.

SO -- >> REGULAR SESSION.

>> RIGHT.

SO THEY HAVE A HISTORY OF HAVING ALL SORTS OF EXTRA SESSIONS FOR THINGS.

I ALSO THINK THAT WHILE WE TRIED TO DO WITH THE 60% IS IT'S HARD TO GET A MAJORITY BETWEEN THE HOUSE AND THE SENATE ON ISSUES.

WE THINK IT WILL BE VERY DIFFICULT TO GET 60% OF BOTH BODIES TO AGREE.

THE AMENDMENT REQUIRES IT HAS TO BE SPECIFIC AGREEMENT ON THE ISSUE THAT'S BROUGHT FORWARD.

SO WE PUT SOME REALLY GOOD SIDE BOARDS ON IT THAT WILL PROTECT THE PUBLIC AND I DON'T THINK WE'RE GOING TO GO THERE AND TRY TO INTERFERE WITH THE GOVERNOR OR WHATEVER BUT I DO THINK WE HAVE A CONSTITUTIONAL OBLIGATION AND CERTAINLY THE PUBLIC THINKS WE DO BECAUSE THEY RIPPED US UP PRETTY GOOD.

THEY RIPPED US UP IN THE PRIMARY, THEY RIPPED US UP IN THE PRESS THAT WE WERE NOT THERE TO RESPOND AND TO LISTEN AND TO HELP THEM.

>> I'M CURIOUS WHAT HAPPENS IF 60% OF THE RESPECTIVE BODIES SUBMIT A PROPOSAL ON SOMETHING THAT LEADERSHIP DISAGREES WITH.

I'M THINKING LIKE GROCERY TAX REPEAL.

HOW WOULD THAT SITUATION PLAY OUT?

>> I THINK THAT'S AN INTERESTING QUESTION BECAUSE THE WAY IT IS WRITTEN AS LONG AS 60% AGREED THEN THE PRO TEM AND SPEAKER WOULD HAVE TO BECAUSE THEY CAN DO AN INDEPENDENT PETITION IF THEY WISH TO BUT IT'S STILL UP TO THE SPEAKER AND THE PRO TEM TO CALL THAT UNDER THIS AMENDMENT TO CALL THEM INTO SESSION.

SO I THINK YOU'LL SEE PLENTY OF RESTRAINTS, PLENTY OF SIDE BOARDS ON BASICALLY RUN-AWAYS OR A WIDE OPEN TYPE OF A SESSION.

>> YOU BRING UP THE 60% THRESHOLD.

THAT'S ACTUALLY I THINK INSUFFICIENT TO PREVENT A SPECIAL SESSION THAT IS JUST ABOUT GRANDSTANDING, NOT ACTUALLY GOING TO GET LEGISLATION PASSED.

THAT'S NOT A VETO-PROOF MAJORITY.

IF YOU HAVE A GOVERNOR WHO IS OPPOSED TO THE SESSION AND THE PROPOSAL AND ONLY 60% OF LEGISLATORS THEY CAN COME TO TOWN, SPEND MONEY, MAYBE THEY WANT TO DO THIS BEFORE AN ELECTION DAY AND GET THEIR NAMES IN THE PRESS WHICH HELPS INCUMBENTS.

BUT THEN THEY ARE NOT GOING TO HAVE A VETO FORT WORTH MAJORITY TO ACTUALLY PASS SOMETHING.

I DON'T KNOW WHY WE WOULD DO THIS WITH 60% THRESHOLD INSTEAD OF TWO-THIRDS.

>> IN MY OPINION WE OUGHT TO DO IT WITH A SIMPLE MAJORITY.

WE'RE A SEPARATE AND EQUAL BODY OF GOVERNMENT, SEPARATE BRANCH OF GOVERNMENT.

WE'RE SUPPOSED TO BE EQUAL TO THE GOVERNOR AND TO THE JUDICIAL BRANCH BUT UNDER THE CURRENT CONSTITUTION WE'RE NOT EVEN CLOSE.

WHEN YOU START LOOKING AT BUREAUCRACY, YOU START LOOKING AT HOW DOES THE LEGISLATURE REACCOUNT TO VARIOUS THINGS GOING ON THERE'S NO ABILITY TO DO T. WE'RE TEMER CY OF THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH.

SO I THINK 60% IS A HIGH BAR.

SOME STATES DON'T HAVE ANY REQUIREMENT.

THEY JUST HAVE TO AGREE AND THE SPEAKER AND PRO TEM CAN CALL THEM TO SESSION.

OTHER STATES HAVE TWO-THIRDS REQUIREMENTS.

BUT WHY WOULD A LEGISLATOR WANT A TWO-THIRDS REQUIREMENT ON SOMETHING THAT REALLY THEY ARE CONSTITUTIONALLY OBLIGATED TO DO?

SO I THINK TO ME IT'S JUST A BOGUS ARGUMENT TO SAY, WELL, THE THRESHOLD IS TOO LOW.

>> DOES THIS PUSH US CLOSER TO POTENTIALLY HAVING A FULL-TIME LEGISLATURE?

>> SOME WILL SAY THAT.

THE WAY WE'RE SET UP NOW PEOPLE HAVE JOBS, THEY HAVE RANCHES, FARMS, FAMILIES THEY ARE RAISING.

BUSINESSES THEY ARE RUNNING.

I ONLY KNOW OF A FEW PEOPLE IN THE LEGISLATURE THAT PROBABLY WOULD LIKE TO SEE IT YEAR ROUND.

BUT THAT'S NOT GOING TO HAPPEN.

I THINK IT COULD HAPPEN IN THE FUTURE AS THE STATE GETS BIGGER AND BIGGER, BUT THERE'S NO WILL AT LEAST IN THE SENATE CAUCUS AND MAJORITY TO HAVE A YEAR ROUND BECAUSE WE ALL HAVE FAMILIES, WE HAVE LIVES OUTSIDE OF THE LEGISLATURE AND I REALLY THINK THIS WOULD ENABLE US MAYBE TO EVEN HAVE SHORTER SESSIONS FOR REGULAR SESSIONS AND WE COULD THEN DEAL WITH SPECIAL SITUATIONS THAT COME UP IN THE FUTURE.

>> AND THAT CONCERNS ME BECAUSE I THINK THE STRUCTURE THAT WE HAVE WHERE WE DO OUR BUSINESS DURING A PREDICTABLE TIME OF YEAR, THAT MEANS THE ADVOCACY GROUPS, BUSINESSES, CITIZENS WHO WANT TO GET INVOLVED IN THE PROCESS, HAVE PREDICTABILITY.

WE OPERATE UNDER NORMAL PROCEDURES WHERE THEY WILL BILLS WILL GET INTRODUCED AND DAYS PASS BEFORE THERE ARE HEARINGS AND THE PUBLIC CAN TESTIFY AND MAKE PLANS TO DO THAT.

WE HAVE A CAREFUL, DELIBERATIVE PROCESS AND I WOULD BE VERY CONCERNED ABOUT SHORTER SESSION AND SPORADIC SPECIAL SESSIONS.

IT NARROWS WHO CAN PARTICIPATE AS LEGISLATORS AND CITIZENS.

AS THE SENATOR SAID WE HAVE A PART-TIME LEGISLATURE AND A LOT OF PEOPLE HAVE FULL-TIME JOBS.

IT'S HARD ENOUGH TO GET THREE MONTHS OFF TO DO THAT AND I THINK IT WILL MAKE IT EVEN HARDER FOR PEOPLE TO PARTICIPATE IF THEY HAVE TO BRACE FOR UNEXPECTED SPECIAL SESSIONS AROUND THE YEAR.

WE DON'T WANT TO HAVE LEGISLATURES THAT ARE JUST PEOPLE RETIRED OR INDEPENDENTLY WEALTHY WHO HAVE THAT LATITUDE.

IT'S ESPECIALLY TRUE FOR JUST CITIZENS WHO WANT A SAY IN THEIR GOVERNMENT.

WHEN WE HAVE SPECIAL SESSION OFTEN A BILL CAN GET PRINTED AND ENACTED IN ONE DAY WHEN WE SUSPEND THE RULES.

THAT MEANS A LOT OF VOTERS COULD BE READING ABOUT IT IN THE PAPER AFTER IT HAPPENED AND NOT GET A CHANCE TO SEE THE PROPOSAL AND THE FULL LIGHT OF DAY AND EVALUATE IT THEN CONTACT THEIR LEGISLATOR TO LET THEM KNOW HOW THEY FEEL ABOUT IT.

>> THAT ARGUMENT DOESN'T HOLD WATER EITHER BECAUSE DURING COVID WE KEPT OUR CAPITAL OPEN.

WE ALLOWED THE PUBLIC TESTIFY.

OUR NEIGHBORING STATES LOCKED THEIR CAPITALS, PEEK WERE NOT ALLOWED TO COME IN TO TESTIFY.

SO I THINK WE HAVE ALWAYS TAKEN THE APPROACH THAT THE PUBLIC SHOULD BE ALLOWED TO PARTICIPATE.

AT LEAST TO ME THE ARGUMENT THAT WE COULD BE YEAR ROUND THERE'S NOTHING IN THE CONSTITUTION THAT PREVENTS US FROM NOT BEING YEAR ROUND NOW.

WE SAW IT AFTER THE '21 SESSION WHEN THE SENATE SINE DIED AND WE TRIED TO END THE SESSION AND THE HOUSE SAID NO, WE'RE GOING TO RECESS UNTIL DECEMBER 30th.

THAT WAS CONSTITUTIONALLY FINE.

SO I THINK TO ME IT'S JUST A BOGUS ARGUMENT THAT IF WE DON'T PASS THIS AMENDMENT WE'RE NOT GOING TO HAVE YEAR ROUND SESSIONS.

WE COULD DO IT NEXT YEAR IF WE WANTED TO.

IT'S THAT SIMPLE.

BUT NO ONE WANTS IT TO BE YEAR ROUND.

NO ONE WANTS IT TO BE FULL-TIME.

THE SENATE HAS ONE FULL-TIME STAFF PERSON AND ONE FULL-TIME SECRETARY FOR THE SENATE THAT DOES ALL THE PROCEDURES THAT WE DO.

SO WE'RE RUN ON A VERY THIN LINE.

WE'RE NOT A FULL-TIME.

WE DON'T WANT TO BE A FULL-TIME.

PEOPLE SHOULD BE VERY CONFIDENT THAT PEOPLE WANT TO GO HOME AND DO THEIR JOBS.

>> I'M CURIOUS.

OVER THE PAST FEW YEARS WE HAVE ALL SEEN LEGISLATIVE SESSIONS EXTEND BECAUSE EITHER CAUCUSES CAN'T AGREE OR THE HOUSE AND SENATE CAN'T AGREE WHETHER THERE ARE TRANSPORTATION ISSUES LIKE IN 2015, EDUCATION, ALL SORTS OF ISSUES.

IF THIS POTENTIALLY CHANGES THE DYNAMIC OF THE REGULAR SESSIONS AND LET'S LAWMAKERS SAY, LET'S ADJOURN, LEAVE THIS ON THE TABLE KNOWING WE CAN COME BACK IN JUNE OR JULY.

DOES THAT CHANGE THE ARGUMENT POTENTIALLY IN THE LONG RUN SAVE TAXPAYERS MON IF YOU'RE NOT EXTENDING SIX WEEKS UNNECESSARILY?

>> I JUST BASED ON HOW I HAVE SEEN THE LEGISLATURE OPERATE, THE TEMPTATION IS ALWAYS TO EXTEND.

WE HAVE EXTENDED ALMOST THE FULL YEAR IN 2021 AND CAME BACK FOR RECONVENING THAT COULD HAVE BEEN AN EMAIL.

THE ONLY THINGS WE PASSED WAS AS IN UTAH A LETTER TO WASHINGTON D.C. SAYING WE DIDN'T LIKE SOME THINGS.

WHEN WE HAD TO SHUT DOWN FOR COVID IN 2020, WE THEN EXTENDED FOR WEEKS AND WEEKS LONGER.

WE WERE NEAR THE END OF WHAT WE NEEDED TO DO FOR BUDGET.

THE LONGER THE SESSION GOES THE LONGER THE SESSION GOES AND THE MORE SPECIAL SESSIONS YOU CALL THE MORE IDEAS COME UP.

IN 2020 WE WERE SUPPOSED HAVE A NARROWLY DEFINED TOPIC AROUND COVID LIABILITY AND THE HOUSE WAS PRINTING BILLS THAT WERE WAY OUTSIDE ACCORDING TO THE CONSTITUTION THE COPE OF WHAT WE WERE THERE TO DO AND NO ONE WAS STOPPING THEM FROM DOING THAT.

IT WAS TAXING ON THE RESOURCES OF OUR LEGISLATIVE SERVICES WHO WERE TURNING OUT BILLS THAT OUTSIDE OF THE CONSTITUTIONAL PROCESS.

WE SPENT A WEEK JUST WITH THIS IN-FIGHTING.

>> I WOULD JUST SAY NO ONE ON THE HOUSE SIDE STOPPED IT.

SENATE STOPPED IT.

WE TOLD THEM FROM THE VERY BEGIN THAT WE THOUGHT THE ADDITIONAL BILLS WERE UNCONSTITUTIONAL AND THEY ARE NOT WITHIN THE PROCLAMATION THAT THE GOVERNMENT PUT OUT TO CALL US BACK INTO SESSION AND WE DIDN'T HEAR ANY OF THOSE EVEN THOUGH THEY SENT OVER A BUNCH OF BILLS.

SO THAT'S THE WAY THE SYSTEM IS SUPPOSED TO WORK.

IT'S NOT SUPPOSED TO BE EASY TO PASS BILLS.

THAT'S WHY WE HAVE TWO BODIES.

SO THAT EACH ONE OF THEM CAN PROTECT THE PUBLIC AND HEAR WHAT THE PUBLIC HAS TO SAY AND I ALWAYS TELL PEOPLE REMEMBER, 36, 18, 1.

TO GET A BILL PASSED.

IT'S NOT EASY.

>> WE HAVE TWO MINUTES LEFT.

I'M CURIOUS IF YOUR VIEW ON THIS MIGHT BE DIFFERENT IF YOU WEREN'T IN THE MAJORITY.

YOU AND YOUR FELLOW MEMBERS OF LEADERSHIP YAFTED THIS WITH A CAUCUS ON YOUR SIDE.

THAT DYNAMIC COULD AND WILL CHANGE IN THE FUTURE WHETHER IT'S NEXT YEAR OR IN 50 YEARS.

ARE YOU STILL GOING TO BE ON BOARD WITH THIS?

>> YOU NEVER KNOW WHAT HAPPENS IN 50 YEARS.

THAT'S WHY THE CONSTITUTION WOULD BE AMENDED.

BUT I THINK THE REALITY IS THE MINORITY SHOULD WANT TO COME IN BECAUSE THEY ARE HEARING DIFFERENT THINGS THAN WE'RE HEARING.

WHERE IS THE BEST PLACE TO DEAL WITH THAT?

IN A LEGISLATIVE SESSION.

SO I THINK THERE'S A WAY TO PROVIDE THAT BALANCE, THE 60% WAS THE EFFORT.

TRYING TO DEFINE IT VERY SPECIFICALLY AS TO WHAT THE AGENDA WOULD BE WAS OUR WAY OF TRYING TO MAKE IT -- SO IT ISN'T WIDE OPEN.

>> WOULD YOUR VIEW ON IT CHANGE IF THERE WERE MORE DEMOCRATS AT THETABLE, IF DEMOCRATS WERE CLOSER TO 50/50 OR EVEN IN THE MAJORITY?

>> NO.

I WANT A STRUCTURE THAT PROTECTS US EVEN WHEN AS A SENATOR SAID THE SENATOR REFERRED TO THIS RESTRAINT THAT THE SENATE EXERCISED WHEN THE HOUSE OPERATED OUTSIDE THE BOUNDS OF THE CONSTITUTION BUT THAT WAS BASED ON INDIVIDUALS WHO HAPPENED TO BE IN THE SENATE AT THAT TIME.

SO I WANT A STRUCTURE THAT PROTECTS US NO MATTER WHO IS MAKING THE CALL AND WHO IS MAKING THE DECISION.

>> BRIEFLY, IF THIS PROPOSAL DOES NOT PASS IN NOVEMBER, WHAT MIGHT THE LEGISLATURE DO NEXT?

>> I THINK THEY WILL RECONSIDER.

TRYING TO GET MORE EDUCATION TO THE PUBLIC AND TRY TO GET THE PUBLIC INVOLVED IN IT.

RIGHT NOW I'M BEING TOLD BY LOTS OF PEOPLE THAT THEY ARE IN FAVOR OF IT AND THEY ARE VOTING FOR IT.

IN SPIED OF THE OPPOSITION WE HAVE HAD.

>> ALL RIGHT.

THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR JOINING US.

WE ARE OFF NEXT WEEK, OCTOBER 28th, FOR THE LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR DEBATE.

WE'LL BE BACK ON NOVEMBER 4th.

WE HOPE YOU TUNE IN.

>> PRESENTATION OF IDAHO REPORTS ON IDAHO PUBLIC TELEVISION IS MADE POSSIBLE THROUGH THE GENEROUS SUPPORT OF THE LAURA MOORE CUNNINGHAM FOUNDATION, COMMITTED TO FULFILLING THE MOORE AND BETTIS FAMILY LEGACY OF BUILDING THE GREAT STATE OF IDAHO.

BY THE FRIENDS OF IDAHO PUBLIC TELEVISION, AND BY THE CORPORATION FOR PUBLIC