329 new laws are on the books in third-longest session in state history
By Eric Valentine
If duration serves as any indication, the 2019 legislative session at the state Capitol was an historic one. The 95-day stretch makes it tied for the third longest session in state history, and while 329 new laws may sound like a lot, the number is 11 fewer than last year and—with the exception of 2017—roughly the same as the last several years.
Of those 329 new laws, which ones will impact you? It depends on your situation, of course, but let’s take a look at some of them as well as some the bills that didn’t pass or passed the legislature but got vetoed by the governor.
Ballot Initiatives
This bill was perhaps the most contentious one at the Capitol, seeing Democratic leadership call it the “Revenge on Voters” act. It was sponsored by Republicans in an effort, they say, to include more rural voters when it comes to getting petition-driven initiatives on the ballot. It would have increased the number of signatures required on petitions and increased the number of legislative districts represented by petition signatures.
Democratic leaders called that explanation nonsense, pointing out that it originated after 61 percent of Idaho voters passed a ballot initiative that would expand Medicaid coverage to more residents and that the time to garner all those extra signatures was being cut in half.
Two versions of the bill passed both the House and the Senate, but when they got to Gov. Brad Little’s desk, both were vetoed. Little explained why he shot them down in a letter to lawmakers.
“Although [the bills] give rural Idahoans a greater voice in the initiative process, I believe these bills could give a lone federal judge the only voice in defining our initiative process,” Little said. “I cannot in good conscience let that happen.”
Impact: For now, Idaho voters could see an increasing number of ballot initiatives in future elections.
Medicaid Expansion
Every bit as controversial were the Medicaid-related bills that did get signed into law. Essentially, Republican lawmakers sought to protect against any abuse of Medicaid funds by setting stronger work requirements on a segment of Medicaid-eligible residents. Democrats balked, calling it an unnecessary administrative hurdle that would cost the state millions in enforcement and leave thousands of people without insurance.
Impact: Depending on your income level, you may be finding yourself without healthcare coverage soon.
Concealed Carry
Back in 2016, state lawmakers made it OK for anyone 18 and older to conceal carry a firearm in public places. But there was a caveat—the law did not make it permissible within city limits. That caveat has now left the building.
Impact: You could get more easily shot and/or killed by someone. Or, your life could get saved by a person who otherwise would not have had a weapon to protect you.
Pet-Friendly Plates
Let’s … paws … from the serious stuff for a moment and remind you that lawmakers have made it possible for you to purchase dog- and cat-punctuated license plates with proceeds going in part to help rehabilitate and find new homes for stray animals.
Impact: You can own cuter and more expensive license plates, and help out some innocent animals at the same time.
First Responder Protections
Lawmakers passed a law to make certain first responders have the same protection against lawsuit when it comes to saving, for instance, a dog overheating inside a car that they would have when saving humans.
Impact: Your dog that you left in the car during summer won’t die. As for your car window, that’ll need replacing.
Marry As You May
A bill that would have set the minimum age to marry—currently there is none—at 16 was killed in the House. Right now, 16- and 17-year-olds need parental consent and children younger than 16 can marry if the parents and a judge consent. A host of reasons against the bill were put out there by opponents. Among them: It didn’t sit well with conservatives that, let’s say, a 15-year-old girl could get an abortion in Idaho but couldn’t marry the father of the child.
Impact: Status quo, with a hearty dose of national scrutiny when the rejection of the bill made national news.