IDAHO PUBLIC TELEVISION, IS MADE POSSIBLE THROUGH THE GENEROUS SUPPORT OF THE LAURA MOORE CUNNINGHAM FOUNDATION, COMMITTING 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 CASING.

>>> HE SPENT 20 YEARS AFTER IDAHO'S ATTORNEY GENERAL.

NOW LAWRENCE WASDEN SITTING DOWN WITH US TO REFLECT ON HIS CAREER.

I'M MELISSA DAVLIN.

"IDAHO REPORTS" STARTS NOW.

♪ ♪ >>> HELLO AND WELCOME TO "IDAHO REPORTS."

THIS WEEK PRODUCER RUTH BROWN EXPLORES FUNDING CHALLENGES FOR RURAL DOMESTIC VIOLENCE PROGRAMS IN IDAHO.

THEN OUTGOING ATTORNEY GENERAL LAWRENCE WASDEN JOINS ME TO DISCUSS HIS CAREER AND THE TRANSITION TO THE INCOMING RAUL LABRADOR ADMINISTRATION.

>>> BUT FIRST ON TUESDAY, A FORMER STATE LEGISLATOR HI CLOCK DIED AT THE AGE OF -- HY KLOC DIED AT THE AGE OF 75.

HE WAS A CURRENT MEMBER OF THE GREATER BOISE ODD YOU TORE IMDISTRICT.

HE WAS BORN IN 1947 IN A DISPLACED PERSONS CAMP IN GERMANY TO POLISH HOLOCAUST SURVIVORS.

EARLIER THIS YEAR IDAHO PUBLIC TELEVISION PRODUCED A DOCUMENTARY ABOUT HIS LIFE.

HE'S PART OF THAT INTERVIEW.

>> I'VE ALWAYS ADMIRED MY PARENTS, NOT ONLY FOR BEING ABLE TO SURVIVE THE WAR, AND THE HOLOCAUST, BUT ALSO BECAUSE THEY CAME TO THIS COUNTRY WITH TWO KIDS ON THEIR ARMS, NOT KNOWING THE LANGUAGE, NOT HAVING BASICALLY ANYTHING, AND BEING ABLE TO MAKE IT AT LEAST SURVIVE.

MY EARLIEST MEMORY THAT I SEE -- I THINK IS TRUE, WAS WHEN WE WERE COMING OVER ON THE BOAT.

AND I REMEMBER EVERYBODY STANDING ON THE BOAT THROWING UP.

BUT I ALSO REMEMBER MY MOTHER AND EVERYBODY ELSE, WHILE WE WERE NEAR THE STATUE OF LIBERTY, STARTED STAYING "AMERICA."

SO FOR A LONG TIME I THOUGHT, AMERICA WAS THAT BIG STATUE IN NEW YORK'S HARBOR, BECAUSE EVERYONE KEPT SAYING "AMERICA" OVER AND OVER AGAIN.

THE PEOPLE THAT WE ASSOCIATED WITH FOR THE MOST PART WERE ALL HOLOCAUST SURVIVORS.

I WOULD -- I REMEMBER, THEY WOULD HAVE LITTLE CARD GAMES, YOU KNOW, PENNY OR TWO, RUMMY, AND I WOULD LOOK AT THEIR ARMS OF SOME OF THE FRIENDS THAT CAME OVER.

AND THEY ALL HAD NUMBERS AND TAFOOS -- TATTOOS AND NOT THOSE KIND OF TATTOOS.

JUST NUMBERS.

AND I WOUD ASK MY MOTHER WHY I COULDN'T HAVE A NUMBER.

BECAUSE I DIDN'T -- SHE WOULD TELL ME NOTHING.

ALL OF MY FRIENDS, THE ONES IN BROOKLYN, BECAUSE I WENT TO SCHOOL WITH -- KIDS I WENT TO SCHOOL WITH, WHY DP CAMPERS.

SO IT -- THROUGH A LOT OF PEOPLE WHO HAD SIMILAR EXPERIENCES, AND NOW THEY WERE STARTING NEW.

>> YOU CAN SEE THE FULL INTERVIEW AT IDAHOPTV.ORG/IDAHOREPORTS.

>>> THERE YOU'LL ALSO FIND THIS WEEK'S "IDAHO REPORTS" PODCAST.

ASSOCIATE PRODUCER LOGANE IS JOINED BY BILL MANNY TO DISCUSS WHAT THEY LEARNED WHEN PRODUCING THE NEW DOCUMENTARY THAT PREMIERED THIS WEEKEND ON OHIO EXPERIENCE IDAHO EXPERIENCE, REMEMBERING THE SUNSHINE MINE DISASTER.

YOU CAN DESCRIBE TO THE PODCAST ON YOUR FAVORITE PODCAST PLAYER.

>>> ON TUESDAY BOISE STATE CRIMINAL JUSTICE RESEARCHERS SHARED THE RESULTS OF A SURVEY REGARDING CRIME VICTIM NEEDS, THE BY WRENNIAL REPORT ON VICTIMIZATION AND VICTIM ONE RECOMMENDATION IN THE REPORT IS THE LEGISLATURE SHOULD APPROPRIATE FLEXIBLE FUNDING FOR CRIME VICTIM SERVICE PROVIDERS IN IDAHO.

CURRENTLY, IDAHO IS ONE OF THE ONLY STATES THAT PROVIDES NO GENERAL FUNDS FOR DOMESTIC VIOLENCE SERVICES, OUTSIDE OF FUNDING FOR THE STATE'S COUNCIL ON DOMESTIC VIOLENCE AND VICTIM ASSISTANCE.

SERVICE PROVIDERS RELY ALMOST ENSPIRAL ON FEDERAL FUNDING.

EARLIER THIS YEAR PRODUCER RUTH BROWN TOOK A LOOK AT THE FUNDING AROUND DOMESTIC VIOLENCE SERVICES AND HOW THAT IMPACTS RURAL IDAHOANS.

>> DESPITE THE THOUSANDS OF INCIDENTS OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE THAT OCCUR EVERY YEAR IN IDAHO, THE STATE STILL PROVIDES NO GENERAL FUND DOLLARS TO THE SERVICES.

THE BULK OF THE SERVICES ARE PAID FOR THROUGH FEDERAL GRANTS.

FOR RURAL AREAS, SUCH AS ONEIDA COUNTY, FUNDING STREAMS ARE A SOURCE OF CONSTANT WORRY.

THE CRISIS CENTER HELPS ROUGHLY 100 VICTIMS A YEAR.

>> WE'VE BEEN IN OUR COMMUNITY FOR 25 YEARS, HELPING INDIVIDUALS WHOSE LIVES HAVE BEEN THROWN INTO TRAUMA BECAUSE OF ACTIONS OF NOT THEIR OWN.

AND EACH YEAR THERE'S THE -- THE STRESS OF FINDING THE FINANCES, THE MONEYS, TO SUSTAIN OUR PROGRAM.

WITHOUT THE COMPETITIVE GRANTS, WE WOULD NOT HAVE ANY MONEY.

BASICALLY.

MY FEW COMMUNITY MEMBERS WOULD NOT EQUAL SUSTAINABILITY.

UNITED WAY WOULD MAYBE KEEP US LIMPING ALONG.

BUT NOT OUR FULL RANGE OF SERVICES.

SO SUSTAINABILITY AND A CONCERN.

>> -- IS A CONCERN.

>> THE SHELTER DOES NOT APPLY FOR THE FUNDING RECEIVED FROM ANY STATE DEDICATED DOLLARS.

>> THE DOMESTIC VIOLENCE STATE FUNDS ARE COLLECTED FROM MARRIAGE CERTIFICATES, DIVORCES, OUR COUNTY IS SMALL.

SO WE DON'T HAVE A LOT OF THOSE.

SO THE POOL OF MONEY THAT I COULD PULL FROM FOR -- FOR THAT GRANT, AGAIN, IT'S COMPETITIVE, IS LITTLE.

AND SO I HAVE CHOSEN FOR THE LAST COUPLE OF YEARS TO LET THAT LITTLE BIT OF MONEY GO TO MY SISTER AGENCIES WITHIN OUR REGION.

>> ACCORDING TO THE IDAHO COUNCIL ON DOMESTIC VIOLENCE AND VICTIM ASSISTANCE, THE MONEY MOST SHELTERS IN THE STATE RELY ON IS NEARLY ALL FEDERAL DOLLARS.

>> 93% OF OUR VICTIM SERVICES FUNDING COMES FROM FEDERAL GRANTS.

THE BULK OF THOSE IS VOCA FUNDING, VICTIMS OF CRIME ACT, WHICH IS NOT TAXPAYER MONEY BUT IT'S PENALTIES ON FEDERAL CRIMES.

AND THAT WAS PAID OUT OF WHAT'S CALLED THE CRIME VICTIMS FUND WHICH WAS DECLINING FOR A VARIETY OF REASONSES.

THERE WAS SOME LEGISLATION PASSED IN JULY OF 2021 CALLED THE VOCA FIX TO START INCREASING THE BALANCE AGAIN.

BUT UNFORTUNATELY, THE INCREASE HAS BEEN SLOWER THAN WE THOUGHT.

>> THAT DEDICATED FUND THAT SHE ALSO REFERRED TO GENERATES $15 PER MARRIAGE LICENSE, $20 PER DIVORCE, AND $10 PER PROTECTION ORDER VIOLATION.

THOSE FUNDS CAN BE USED FOR DOMESTIC VIOLENCE SHELTERS AND ANYTHING THAT ISN'T COVERED BY A FEDERAL GRANT.

BUT ACCORDING TO THE COUNCIL, THE DEDICATED FUND FORMULA IS FLAWED.

THEY HOPE TO ADDRESS THAT WITH THE LEGISLATURE THIS YEAR.

>> RIGHT NOW IT'S DISTRIBUTED BASED ON WHERE THE MARRIAGE LICENSE WAS ISSUED, WHICH HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE NEED FOR DOMESTIC VIOLENCE SERVICES.

SO WE'RE PROPOSING THAT WE TAKE NEED AND DEMAND INTO ACCOUNT SO WE CAN PUT THAT MONEY WHERE IT'S MOST NEEDED.

>> IDAHO SHELTERS AND SERVICE PROVIDERS RECEIVE NO DIRECT GENERAL FUNDS FROM THE STATE.

ACCORDING TO A 2021 REPORT FROM THE MONTANA BOARD OF CRIME CONTROL, NEIGHBORING WASHINGTON STATE HAS SEVERAL FUNDS FOR SEXUAL ASSAULT AND DOMESTIC VIOLENCE VICTIMS USING GENERAL FUNDS, TOTALING MORE THAN $8 MILLION A YEAR.

WHILE WYOMING APPLIES 3.4 MILLION DOLLARS IN GENERAL FUNDS EACH YEAR.

SOME LEGISLATORS HOPE TO CHANGE THE FUNDING IN IDAHO.

>> THE BUDGET IS A REFLECTION OF OUR PRIORITIES AND VALUES.

AND FOR A LONG TIME, SINCE I'VE SERVED IN THIS LEGISLATURE, AND DECADS BEFORE ME, THERE HAVE BEEN PEOPLE THAT HAVE BEEN BEGGING FOR MONEY TO GO TOWARD VICTIMS SERVICES.

NOW, IN A STATE THAT IS SO RESISTANCE TO -- RESISTANT TO TAKE FEDERAL FUNDS, YOU WOULD THINK WE'D WANT TO HELP OUR SENIOR CITIZENS THE IDAHO WAY.

SO I'D LIKE TO SEE OUR STATE ALLOCATE MOSTLY SUNNY SKIES TOWARD THAT CAUSE.

CAUSE.

>> THE OHIO COALITION SEES A NEED FOR STATE FUNDING.

THEY OPERATES PREDOMNAN ON FEDERAL FUNDING AND MORE FUNDING WOULD ALLOW THEM TO OFFER MORE RESOURCES.

>> THE IDAHO COALITION IS ONE OF THE FEW COALITIONS, VERY FEW IN THE COUNTRY, WHO DO NOT HAVE STRAIGHT STATE APPROPRIATED FUNDS SPECIFICALLY FOR DOMESTIC VIOLENCE PROGRAMS.

>> THE ONEIDA CRISIS CENTER OFFERS SERVICES FOR PEOPLE EXPERIENCING SEXUAL ASSAULTS, STALKING, DOMESTIC VIOLENCE, AND HUMAN TRAFFICKING.

>> DOMESTIC VIOLENCE AND FAMILY VIOLENCE ISN'T SELECTIVE AS TO WHERE IT HAPPENS.

AND IT HAPPENS IN OUR RURAL COMMUNITY.

IN FACT, MAYBE IT'S A LITTLE EASIER TO HAPPEN HERE BECAUSE WE'RE ISOLATED AND FOLKS ARE ISOLATED, AND THEY'RE MARGINALIZED FROM THE MAINSTREAM POWER STRUCTURE.

I MEAN, THEY DON'T HAVE LOTS OF PLACES THEY CAN GO TO GET SERVICES.

AND SO NOT ONLY IS THE ONEIDA CRISIS CENTER SO VALUABLE TO VICTIMS OF VIOLENCE BUT TO OUR COMMUNITY AT WHOLE.

AND OUR WHOLE MISSION STATEMENT IS WE WANT A PROSPEROUS AND HEALTHY COMMUNITY.

AND SO IF WE CAN HELP FAMILY RELATIONSHIPS BE HEALTHY, THAT'S GONNA BENEFIT OUR COMMUNITY.

AND SOCIETY AS A WHOLE.

>> THE NEED IS THERE AND WILL CONTINUE TO BE.

>> W STARTED COLLECTING LAST JULY.

WHAT WE CALL NEED AND DEMAND DATA ON COUNSELING AND HOUSING.

AND WE WERE ASKING HOW MANY VICTIMS ARE YOU ABLE TO SHELTER AND HOW MANY ARE ON YOUR WAITING LIST.

AND THOSE NUMBERS WERE A BIT SHOCKING BECAUSE WE FOUND THAT THERE'S ALMOST AS MANY PEOPLE NEEDING SHELTER AND WAITLISTED FOR IT AS PEOPLE WE'RE ABLE TO SHELTR.

THE OTHER DATA POINT WE WERE TRACKING IS WAITLIST FOR COUNSELING, BOTH FOR ADULTS AND KIDS.

AND AGAIN, THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE WAITLISTED AND THAT AMOUNT OF TIME THAT THEY HAVE TO BE ON A WAITLIST BEFORE GETTING SERVICES IS VERY HIGH, WHICH TELLS US THAT THERE IS JUST LIKE OUR PROGRAMS WERE TELLING US, THERE IS MORE DEMAND FOR SERVICES THAN SERVICES AVAILABLE RIGHT NOW.

>> THE COUNCIL COUNTS TO PRIORITIZE THE FUNDING IT DOES HAVE.

>> THE COUNCIL IS TRYING TO KEEP SERVICES AVAILABLE FOR VICTIMS STATEWIDE, BECAUSE WHEREVER YOU LIVE IN THE STATE, YOU DESERVE ACCESS TO SERVICES IF YOU NEED THEM.

AND IF WE'RE GOING TO DO THAT AND HELP OUR RURAL PROGRAMS SURVIVE, WE HAVE TO HAVE SOME WAY TO PRIORITIZE HOW THE FUNDS ARE SPENT AND DISTRIBUTED WHERE WE TAKE INTO ACCOUNT NEED AND DEMAND.

SO AS PARTS OF OUR STRATEGIC -- PART OF OUR STRATEGIC PLAN IS WE'VE AGREED TO PRIORITIZE DIRECT SERVICES, WHICH MEANS FUNDING JOBS FOR COUNSELORS AND VICTIM ADVOCATES, FUNDING SHELTERS, FUNDING THE DIRECT SERVICES, WHICH IS BASICALLY FOOD, SHELTER, COUNSELING, THOSE TYPES OF THINGS, FOR VICTIM STATEWIDE.

>> PLANS TO ADDRESS THE FUNDING DISTRIBUTION ARE IN THE WORKS FOR THE NEXT LEGISLATIVE SESSION.

>> WE ALSO HAVE A HEAVY LIST WE'RE TRYING TO CHANGE OUR ADMINISTRATIVE RULES THIS SESSION, WHICH IMPACTS HOW WE SPREAD OUR FEDERAL MONEY THROUGHOUT THE STATE.

IN THE PAST THAT VOCA MONEY HAS BEEN DISTRIBUTED BASED 0 SQUARE MILES AND POPULATION, WHICH HAS NOW TIED TO NEED AND DEMAND.

AND OUR OTHER FUNDING STREAM, FIPSA, HAS BEEN ANN DIVIDED AROUND THE STATE, BUT WE DON'T HAVE AN EVEN NUMBER OF SHELTERS IN EACH REGION OF THE STATE.

WE WORK WITH STAKEHOLDERS, OUR FUNDED PROGRAMS, TO GO THROUGH AND NEGOTIATE A RULE-MAKING SESSION, WHICH WAS VERY WELL ATTENDED.

AND WE HAVE A NEW MODEL FOR GRANT DISTRIBUTION THAT WE'RE HOPING TO HAVE THE LEGISLATURE APPROVE THIS SESSION, SO THAT OUR NEXT GRANT CYCLE WE CAN TAKE NEED AND DEMAND DATA INTO ACCOUNT WHEN WE HAVE TO SPEND THOSE LIMITED FUNDS.

>> WE ALL NEED TO BE INVOLVED IN BTDING DOMESTIC VIOLENCE -- ENDING DOMESTIC VIOLENCE AND GENDER-BASED VIOLENCE.

AND THIS IS NOT A -- JUST A FAMILY ISSUE.

THIS IS NOT A PRIVATE ISSUE.

>> IF YOU OR SOMEONE YOU KNOW IS EXPERIENCING DOMESTIC VIOLENCE, CALL THE NATIONAL HOTLINE AT 1-800-7999-7233 OR SEXT 8 -- TEXT 88788.

>>> JOINING ME TODAY IS ATTORNEY GENERAL LAWRENCE WASDEN.

THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR JOINING US.

WE HAVEN'T HEARD MUCH FROM YOU SINCE THE PRIMARY OTHER THAN THE REGULAR BUSINESS FROM YOUR OFFICE, CONSUMER PROTECTION, COURT CASES.

I DID WANT TO ASK YOU HOW IS THE TRANSITION TO THE INCOMING LABRADOR ADMINISTRATION GOING?

>> FIRST OF ALL, LET ME TAKE A PERSONAL MOMENT AND TELL YOU THANK YOU.

YOU AND I HAVE KNOWN EACH OTHER A LONG, LONG TIME.

YOU ARE A TREMENDOUS REPORTER.

YOU'VE ALWAYS TREATED ME WITH FAIRNESS AND KINDNESS, BEEN WILLING TO CHALLENGE ME.

AND ASK ME HARD QUESTIONS.

BUT ALWAYS BEEN APPROPRIATE FRO PERSONAL.

SO I WANTED TO SAY THANK YOU TO YOU.

>> I APPRECIATE THAT, THANK YOU.

>> AND ALSO THE STAFF HERE.

I'VE ALWAYS BEEN TREATED WITH RESPECT AND KINDNESS.

AND I WANTED TO SAY THANKS.

>> THANK YOU.

THEY'RE A GREAT CREW.

WE'RE PROUD OF THEM.

>> IN TERMS OF THE TRANSITION, EVERYTHING IS GOING AS WE WOULD EXPECT.

AS IT SHOULD BE.

AND YOU KNOW, IT'S NOT MY STYLE OR MY TIME TO SEEK THE LIMELIGHT.

>> YOU KNOW, WHEN YOU SAY IT'S GOING AS WE EXPECT, IS IT GOING SMOOTHLY?

DO YOU ANTICIPATE, IN OTHER WORDS, ANY INTERRUPTIONS TO THINGS LIKE CONSUMER PROTECTION SERVICES OR THE FUNCTIONS OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OFFICE THAT AFFECT IDAHOIANS?

>> WE WILL -- IDAHOANS.

HAD?

>> WE WILL PERFORM OUR DUTIES TO THE END OF MY TERM AND THAT WILL BE PICKED UP BY AN INCOMING ADMINISTRATION AND THAT'S UP TO THEM.

>> I DID WANT TO ASK YOU A COUPLE MORE QUESTIONS ABOUT THE INCOMING ADMINISTRATION.

YOU KNOW, INCOMING ATTORNEY GENERAL RAUL LABRADOR IS REESTABLISHING THE SOLICITOR GENERAL POSITION IN THAT OFFICE.

WHAT ARE YOUR THOUGHTS ON THIS?

IN OTHER WORDS, YOU DIDN'T HAVE A SOLICITOR GENERAL IN THE ATTORNEY'S OFFICE.

SOMEBODY WHO OVERSEES CHALLENGES TO THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT OR ENCROACHMENTS ON STATE SOVEREIGNTY.

WHY NO?

>> WELL, WE DID HAVE SOMEONE.

WE JUST DIDN'T GIVE THEM THE TITLE OF SOLICITOR GENERAL.

BRIAN KING IN MY OFFICE OVERSAW ALL OF THOSE THINGS.

THE NEW ADMINISTRATION WANTS SOMEONE WITH A TITLE AND THAT'S CLEARLY THE CHOICE THAT THEY GET TO MAKE.

BUT IT ISN'T THAT WE WERE AVOIDING THAT.

WE DID IT.

WE JUST DIDN'T THINK THE TITLE >> YOU MENTIONED BRIAN CA -- KANE AND HE OF COURSE WENT ON TO A NEW POSITION.

HAVE MORE EMPLOYEES LEFT THAN WHAT WE WOULD NORMALLY SEE DURING A TRANSITION BETWEEN ADMINISTRATIONS?

>> WELL, YOU KNOW, I'VE BEEN IN OFFICE 20 YEARS.

WE HAVEN'T HAD A LOT OF THOSE, SO I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE NORMAL NUMBER IS.

BUT THERE HAVE BEEN A SIGNIFICANT NUMBER OF PEOPLE WHO LEFT.

I TOLD FOLKS THIS, THAT THEY'VE BEEN VERY LOYAL TO ME AND THEY HAVE DONE EXACTLY WHAT I ASKED THEM TO DO.

THAT WAS TO CALL BALLS AND STRIKES FAIRLY AND SQUARELY, THAT THEY NEEDED TO MAKE DECISIONS THAT WAS BEST FOR THEM PROFESSIONALLY AND BEST FOR THEIR FAMILIES.

AND IF FINDING OTHER EMPLOYMENT WAS BEST FOR THEM, THEN THEY SHOULD DO THAT AND CONSIDER AS LOYALTY TO ME.

AND IF THEY FELT THAT STAYING WAS BEST FOR THEM PROFESSIONALLY AND FOR THEIR FAMILIES, THEY SHOULD CONSIDE THAT LOYALTY TO ME.

SO I -- IT'S WHAT THEY ARE SEEKING RATHER THAN WHAT I AM CORRECTING -- DIRECTING OR SEEKING.

>> DID ANY OF THE EMPLOYEES WHO QUIT CITE THE INCOMING ADMINISTRATION AS THE REASON THAT THEY QUIT?

>> WELL, YOU KNOW, I'M -- THEY MADE THE DECISION BASED UPON WHAT THEY FELT WAS BEST FOR THEM AND FOR THEIR FAMILIES.

>> YOU KNOW, I DO HAVE TO ASK, YOU SERVED FIVE TERMS AS IDAHO'S ATTORNEY GENERAL.

WERE YOU SURPRISED WITH THE RESULTS OF THE MAY PRIMARY?

>> THAT'S A GOOD QUESTION.

YOU KNOW, I WAS REALLY TIRED.

I'D BEEN THE ATTORNEY GENERAL -- I'VE BEEN THE ATTORNEY GENERAL 20 YEARS.

THAT'S A LONG TIME.

AND I DIDN'T REALLY WANT TO RUN.

IN FACT, I'D MADE THE DECISION NOT TO RUN.

AND -- BUT THEN THIS WERE SOME FOLKS WHO CAME TO ME AND BOTH REPUBLICANS AND DEMOCRATS AND SAID, HEY, YOU KNOW, WE REALLY NEED TO YOU DO THIS ONE MORE TIME.

AND THAT TOOK ME A LONG TIME TO COME TO THAT CONCLUSION.

THAT I HAD -- I WAS TIRED.

IT'S -- THAT'S A LONG HAUL TO CARRY AT THAT LOAD.

AS ATTORNEY GENERAL, IN THE LOAD NEVER ENDS.

IT'S 24 HOURS A DAY, SEVEN DAYS A WEEK.

YOU HAVE -- AT LEAST TWO CELL PHONES ON ME AT ALL TIMES.

YOU KNOW, THERE WAS NEVER A MOMENT IN 20 YEARS THAT I HAVEN'T HAD PHONE CALLS, RESPONSIBILITIES, SPEECHES.

BUT MOST OF ALL DECISIONS TO MAKE.

SO I WAS TIRED.

BUT I RAN BECAUSE I FELT LIKE WE NEEDED TO GIVE FOLKS AN OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE A CHOICE.

THEY MADE THAT CHOICE.

WE LIVE IN A DEMOCRATIC SOCIETY.

WHEN I SAY THAT, THERE'S TWO KINDS OF DEMOCRACY THAT I'M TALKING ABOUT.

ONE IS THE DIRECT DEMOCRACY.

WE DON'T HAVE THAT.

WE HAVE REPRESENTATIVE DEMOCRACY.

FOLKS GET UPSET, WELL, WE HAVE A REPUBLICAN FORM OF GOVERNMENT.

BUT THERE'S A SMALL D DEMOCRACY THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT.

AND THE ANSWER IS THE PEOPLE GET TO MAKE THEIR CHOICE AND THEY MADE THEIR CHOICE.

AND SO FOR ME WAS -- I WANTED TO ACT IN OFFICE FROM DAY ONE SO THAT WHEN MY TIME WAS OVER, THAT I COULD LOOK MYSELF IN THE MIRROR AND LIKE WHAT I SAW.

AND I AM SATISFIED WITH WHAT WE HAVE DONE.

YOU LEAVE THESE POSITIONS IN ONE OF THREE WAYS.

YOU CAN DIE.

YOU CAN QUIT, END.

OR YOU CAN GET BEAT.

THAT'S THE ONLY THREE WAYS OUT OF IT.

AND THE ANSWER IS, I REALLY FEEL LIKE I HAVE SERVED THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF IDAHO BEING TRUE TO THE RULE OF LAW THROUGHOUT THE ENTIRETY OF MY CAREER.

>> LOOKING BACK ON THAT CAREER, WHAT ARE YOU MOST PROUD OF?

>> THERE ARE A COUPLE THINGS THAT I'M VERY PROUD OF.

ONE OF THEM IS THAT WE HAVE SAVED CHILDREN.

JUST A COUPLE OF EXAMPLES.

WE WORKED REALLY HARD ON THE SAFETY OF CHILDREN ON THE INTERNET.

JUST ONE EXAMPLE OF THAT IS I WAS GIVEN A PRESENTATION -- GIVING IN PRESENTATION IN POST FALLS TO A MIDDLE SCHOOL OF, A JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL.

AND A YOUNG GIRL, 13 YEARS OLD.

AND SHE CAME UP TO US AT THE END OF THE PRESENTATION AND SAID, I'M IN CONTACT WITH A MAN IN TEXAS WHO'S DRIVING RIGHT NOW TO HIEFLTD TO MEET HER -- IDAHO TO MEET HER.

SO WE WERE ABLE TO GET HOLD OF HER MOTHER AND THE BELIEVE AND ABOUT A WEEK -- POLICE CHIEF.

AND A WEEK LATER I GOT A CALL AND HE SAID, WE GOT HIM.

AND THAT'S NOT THE ONLY ONE OF THOSE.

WE'VE HAD NUMEROUS EVENTS LIKE THAT.

SO THE FACT THAT WE'RE ABLE TO INTERCEDE IN A WAY THAT INFORMS PARENTS AND SAVES A CHILD FROM A LIFETIME OF VICTIMIZATION, THAT IS A REWARDING THING.

>> THAT INTERNET CRIMES AGAINST CHILDREN TASK FORCE.

>> YES.

>> CAN YOU EXPLAIN BRIEFLY FOR PEOPLE WHO AREN'T FAMILIAR WHAT IT DOES AND WHETHER OR NOT YOU KNOW IF THAT'S GOING TO CONTINUE IN THE NEXT ADMINISTRATION.

>> WELL, THE INTERNET CRIMES AGAINST CHILDREN TASK FORCE IS A TASK FORCE THAT IS HOUSED IN MY OFFICE.

BUT IT INCLUDES LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS FROM ACROSS THE STATE AND ALSO OUR FEDERAL PARTNERS.

AND WE TARGET CHILD PORNOGRAPHY AND WHY THAT'S IMPORTANT IS BECAUSE EVERY PORNOGRAPHIC PICTURE A -- OF A CHILD IS A PICTURE OF A CRIME SCENE.

THAT'S WHAT IT IS.

IT IS A CHILD WHO'S BEING SEXUALLY ABUSED AND THAT IS A PICTURE OF A CRIME SCENE.

SO CONSUMERS OF THAT, YOU'RE CONSUMING AND CREATING A MARKET FOR A CHILD TO BE ABUSED.

AND IT'S NOT JUST THAT.

BUT IT'S ALSO THE PHYSICAL ABUSE.

OUR -- WE DON'T HAVE -- AND I DON'T KNOW IF WE'VE DONE A STATISTICAL STUDY, BUT BY A FAR AND AWAY THE LARGE MAJORITY OF PERSONS WHO HAVE AND POSSESS CHILD PORNOGRAPHY ARE ALSO PHYSICALLY ABUSING CHILDREN.

AND SO WE CAN'T TURN AWAY FROM THAT.

WE HAVE TO DO SOMETHING ABOUT THAT.

AND SO ON MANY OCCASIONS, WE HAVE BEEN ABLE TO SAVE A CHILD -- I HAD ACTUALLY WAS TALKING TO SOME MEDIA FOLKS SOME TIME AGO AND SPOKE DIRECTLY WITH THE TELEVISION STATION AND TWO WEEKS LATER, THE HEAD OF THE TELEVISION STATION CALLED ME AND SAID, HEY, I HAVE TWO SONS WHO WERE CONTACTED BY SOMEONE WHO WANTED TO SEXUALLY ABUSE THEM.

THAT'S THE KIND OF STUFF THAT'S REWARDING.

WE DON'T MAKE A BIG DEAL OF IT, BUT IT IS THE KIND OF REWARDING THINGS THAT WE'VE BEEN ABLE TO DO.

ONE OF THE OTHER THINGS THAT I FELT REALLY COMFORTABLE WITH THAT WE WERE VERY SUCCESSFUL AND THAT'S THE PROJECT WITH THE MEDIA.

AND THAT WAS THE OPEN MEETING PUBLIC RECORDS TRAINING AND THE FACT THAT I DON'T KNOW THAT WE'LL EVER BE ABLE TO DETERMINE HOW MANY FIGHTS WE WERE ABLE TO AVOID, BUT CERTAINLY WE'VE BEEN ABLE TO HELP QUELL SOME OF THOSE.

THAT'S GOING TO CONTINUE, BUT TO TRAIN LOCAL GOVERNMENT OFFICERS AND THE MEDIA AND THE PUBLIC, ALL AT THE SAME TIME, SO THAT EVERYBODY IS HEARING THE SAME -- SAME MESSAGE, I THINK HAS BEEN HUGELY SUCCESSFUL.

>> I KNOW IN MY EXPERIENCE, SO MANY OF THE OPEN MEETING VIOLATIONS AND PUBLIC RECORDS VIOLATIONS WEREN'T -- FOR MALICIOUS REASONS.

THEY WERE FOR PEOPLE WHO WEREN'T FAMILIAR WITH THE LAW ON THE SMALL COUNSELS.

YOU MENTIONED THINGS YOU'RE PROUD OF.

IS THERE ANYTHING YOU WOULD HAVE DONE DIFFERENTLY?

>> YES, THERE IS.

EARLY IN MY FIRST YEAR OF BEING THE ATTORNEY GENERAL, WE PROPOSED A BILL TO THE LEGISLATURE THAT WAS NOT A PROP BILL.

IT WAS DETERMINED TO BE UNCONSTITUTIONAL.

TERRIBLE MISTAKE ON MY PART.

UNFORTUNATELY, WHAT HAPPENED WAS I FAILED TO READ THE BILL.

YOU KNOW, YOU'RE DRIPPING FROM A FIRE HOSE WHEN YOU FIRST COME IN THE OFFICE.

AND SOMEONE SAYS, HEY, THIS IS WHAT WE GOT TO DO.

OKAY.

AND I DIDN'T TAKE THE TIME TO READ IT.

THAT NEVER HAPPENED AGAIN.

THAT WAS A MISTAKE.

THAT WAS SOMETHING WE DID NOT DO PROPERLY.

>> DURING YOUR CAREER, YOU WERE KNOWN FOR -- AS YOU PUT IT, CALLING BALLS AND.

>> , NOT TELLING PEOPLE WHAT THEY WANTED TO, ESPECIALLY AFTER I IMAGINE IN YOUR FIRST TERM.

>> YES.

>> BUT WHAT YOU THOUGHT WAS THE CORRECT CONSTITUTIONAL INTERPRETATION.

THAT COST YOU SOME OF YOUR WORKING RELATIONSHIPS WITH LAWMAKERS.

I KNOW THAT YOU HAD A LONG RUNNING FIGHT WITH GOVERNOR OTTER WHO ULTIMATELY ENDORSED YOUR RUN.

>> YEAH.

>> BUT WOULD YOU HAVE HANDLED ANY -- >> AND ACTUALLY, THAT ACTUALLY COST ME THE PRIMARY ELECTION, TO BE HONEST WITH YOU.

AND THAT WAS THE TEXAS VERSUS PENNSYLVANIA CASE AND THE ANSWER IS I DID WHAT WAS RIGHT.

I DIDN'T DO WHAT WAS POLITICALLY POPULAR.

I DID WHAT WAS RIGHT.

WHAT THE CONSTITUTIONAL REQUIRED OF ME.

I DEFENDED THE FEDERAL -- FEDERALIST SYSTEM.

I DEFENDED THE STATE OF IDAHO AND IT'S SOVEREIGNTER -- ITS SOVEREIGNTY IN THAT CASE.

LOTS OF FOLKS DON'T UNDERSTAND THAT.

THEY WERE -- BACKING ON A MOTION OR POLITICAL AGENDA.

AND WITHOUT REALLY UNDERSTANDING WHAT REALLY WAS AT STAKE IN THAT CASE.

SO THAT'S A PRIME EXAMPLE OF -- AS THE ATTORNEY GENERAL, YOU HAVE TO CALL BALLS AND STRIKES.

YOU GOT TO CALL, MAKE THE HARD CALL.

THE ONE THAT IS NOT EASE OR POPULAR.

-- EASY OR POPULAR.

AND THAT CAN BE DIFFICULT.

>> AFTER THE 2014 PRIMARY, I REMEMBER TALKING TO YOU AND YOU SAID THAT, YOU KNOW, THE REPUBLICAN PARTY IS IN A FIGHT FOR ITS HEART AND SOUL.

HOW IS THAT FIGHT GOING RIGHT NOW?

>> THAT'S A DARN GOOD QUESTION.

AND I THINK THE PARTY HAS TO FIGURE OUT WHAT IT IS.

AND WHERE IS ITS HEART AND ITS SOUL.

>> COMPARED TO EIGHTH YEARS AGO WHEN WE HAD THAT CONVERSATION -- EIGHT YEARS AGO WHEN WE HAD THAT CONVERSATION, SAME TRAJECTORY?

STEP FORWARD, STEP BACK?

>> STEP TO THE SIDE.

>> STEP TO THE SIDE IN YOUR ESTIMATION?

I DO HAVE TO ASK, WHAT'S NEXT FOR YOU?

>> THAT'S A GOOD QUESTION.

DON'T ENTIRELY KNOW.

I'M NOT SURE WHAT I WANT TO BE WHEN I GROW UP.

SO WE'VE GOT A COUPLE OF IRONS IN THE FIRE.

AND YOU KNOW, NOT REALLY AT THIS POINT READY TO TALK ABOUT THAT.

I DO NEED TO TAKE SOME TIME TO KIND OFSH SORT OF HEAL.

I'VE HAD SOME HEALTH CHALLENGES OVER THE LAST FEW MONTHS AND PRETTY SIGNIFICANT THINGS AND A LOT OF THAT IS CAUSED BY STRESS.

AND I NEED TO KIND OF DECOMPRESS A LITTLE BIT.

>> ARE YOU DOING OKAY?

>> I'M ALL RIGHT.

>> OKAY.

ARE YOU RULING OUT FUTURE RUNS FOR OFFICE?

>> I LEARNED LONGING A YO THAT YOU DON'T RULE ANYTHING OUT.

SO I'M NOT SAYING I AM, NOT SAYING I'M NOT.

BUT I -- HONESTLY BELIEVE I'VE PUT IN MY TIME IN PUBLIC SERVICE.

I HAVE -- EVERY ONE OF US OWES OUR SOCIETY SOMETHING.

I REALLY THINK I'VE MADE MY CONTRIBUTION.

>> IF YOU HAV ANY ADVICE FOR THE INCOMING ATTORNEY GENERAL, AND WE HAVE ABOUT TWO MINUTES LEFT, WHAT WOULD THAT ADVICE BE?

>> I WOULDN'T GIVE HIM ANY ADVICE.

YOU KNOW, I'D -- I THINK THAT -- THAT WOULD NOT BE WELL RECEIVED.

AND, FIRST OF ALL.

AND SECONDLY, I REALLY THINK THAT'S A CHOICE FOR HIM TO MAKE.

>> I KNOW THAT YOU SAY IT WOULDN'T BE WELL RECEIVED.

BUT I KNOW THAT THERE'S A LONG TRADITION WITH PRESIDENTS WHO ARE LEAVING OFFICE, WHETHER OR NOT THEY RETIRED OR WERE TERM LIMITED OUT OR LOST, THAT THEY WOULD WRITE NOTES TO THEIR -- PEOPLE WHO WERE SUCCEEDING THEM.

ARE YOU SURE IT WOULDN'T BE WELL RECEIVED?

>> I THINK THAT WE JUST OUGHT TO LET THAT ONE RIDE.

THERE'S, YOU KNOW, PEOPLE MADE THEIR CHOICE AND I'LL STAND BY THE CHOICE.

>> ARE YOU GOING TO PICK UP THE PHONE AND CONTINUE THAT RELATIONSHIP OR AFTER THAT PRIMARY IS THE RELATIONSHIP TOO STRAINED?

>> IF HE WANTS TO PICK UP THE PHONE AND ASK QUESTIONS, HE'S MOST WELCOME TO DO SO.

>> ONE LAST QUESTION.

THE STATE OF IDAHO IS OFTEN INVOLVED IN MULTIPLE COURT CASES AT ANY GIVEN TIME, OFTEN CHALLENGING THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT ON MULTIPLE OTHER ISSUES.

ARE THERE ANY COURT CASES THAT ARE CURRENTLY IN PROGRESS THAT MIGHT BE AFFECTED BY THIS TRANSITION?

>> WELL, THERE ARE A LOT OF CASES THAT ARE CURRENTLY IN PROCESS.

AND CAN THERE BE AN EFFECT?

THERE CAN BE.

BUT WILL THAT BE I HAVE NO IDEA.

-- WHAT WILL THAT BE I HAVE NO IDEA.

WE LITIGATE PROPERLY AND WE'LL SEE WHAT HAPPENS.

>> ANY CASES THAT COME TO MIND SPECIFICALLY?

>> THERE'S A NUMBER OF ABORTION CASES THAT ARE CURRENTLY BEFORE THE IDAHO SUPREME COURT AND THE FEDERAL DISTRICT COURT.

AND THEY'RE HIGH-PROFILE.

I'M SURE FOLKS WILL BE WATCHING.

I DON'T KNOW THAT THERE WILL BE ANY SEVERE CHANGE OF DIRECTION.

THERE MAY BE.

I DON'T KNOW.

ALL I KNOW IS THAT WE WILL -- UNTIL THE END OF MY TERM, WE WILL LITIGATE AS WE'RE SUPPOSED TO.

>> THANKS SO MUCH FOR JOINING US AND THANK YOU FOR WATCHING.

♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ >>> PRESENTATION OF IDAHO REPORTS ON IDAHO PAWB 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 PAWB INVESTIGATION -- PUBLICTATION VICIOUS, AND BY THE CORPORATION FOR PUBLIC