HB 162 Duplicates Existing Government Functions and You Will Fund It

Sponsored by Rep. Judy Boyle (R-Midvale), HB 162 would create an Idaho Council on Federal Lands. At first glance this seems like a harmless idea, maybe even a good idea. But inspecting the bill and it’s cost to taxpayers reveals some glaring issues, and might just be more government for government’s sake. Let’s take a look at the problems:

The cost. The Fiscal Note of the bill claims to cost taxpayers $10-$15,000 a year. However, the Interim Committee on Federal Lands, which was only a two year committee, cost over $100,000 to taxpayers ($50k/year). Further, HB 162 allows the Council to use attorney’s at their disposal, which will cost around $400/hour.  The Federal Lands Committee didn’t have access to attorneys, which means the cost for this Council will likely be much higher. The bill also pays the members of the Council with your tax dollars.

“Modeled after an existing Council”.  The bill sponsor said this Council was modeled after the Idaho Council on Indian Affairs. We checked on that. The ICIA allows only tribal members to sit on the Council. This new Council on Federal Lands only allows state level politicians to have a seat. A more accurate mimicry of the ICIA would allow Council seats to be held by federal lands users- timber, mining, sporting, recreation interests, not politicians. Injecting a council of politicians who constantly seek reelection carries a significant ability to interfere with existing and new projects on federal lands.

Redundancy. The Council would “monitor and review” economic, legal, and jurisdictional issues associated with federal lands and their management. Again, that sounds good on its own, except those issues are already worked on by the Governor’s office, Idaho Land Board, Office of Species Conservation, Department of Transportation, the Attorney General, IDFG Commission, Tax Commission, Interim Committee on Natural Resources, Economic Advisory Council of the Department of Commerce, and the Department of Environmental Quality. The Council would be redundant at the cost of more taxpayer dollars, just to add a few more politicians to the mix.

The Council has no actual power. When pressed to understand what actual power the Council would have in decision making processes, the sponsor answered that it would have “persuasion power”.

Council members pay themselves with your money. For a redundant function already carried out by dozens of state and local agencies and individuals, the Council members get reimbursed for their time reviewing and monitoring issues. With your money.

No Sunset. Most new committees and councils typically provide a sunset clause so they end in a couple years. If the committee does good work then the sunset is extended or removed. Not this Council.

Public Land Transfer Agenda. The bill has created excitement among land transfer advocates who have talked in the past about how this Council could be used as an avenue for the seizure of public lands.

Did we mention you are going to fund this? The Council pays itself with your tax dollars? 

The bill passed the House State Affairs Committee. It is headed to the House Floor and then to the Senate next. We hope the Senate will  consider the redundant use of tax dollars with better scrutiny.

Recent Posts