Idaho Freedom Foundation: Pride in America Month

 Dear Arthur,

It’s “pride month,” and if you’re like I am, you’re probably tired of having the LGBTQA+ agenda shoved down your throat at every turn.

Last year, the Idaho Freedom Foundation decided to flip the script on the month of June. Instead of spending a whole month celebrating the left’s bizarre obsession with your bedroom, we decided to declare June as Pride in America month.

We’re doing a repeat act this year, and sharing with you some of our favorite Pride in America articles. It’s not enough for us to simply stand against the bizarre and often grotesque antics of the pro-trans left. Opposing the woke agenda certainly has value, and I don’t discount the courage we often need to stand against the intolerant culture.

But, Pride in America is about celebrating those on whose shoulders conservatives now stand. We must remember and emulate the brave men and women whose convictions, honor, integrity, and wisdom shaped our country into what it is today.

First up, President George Washington:

    In the annals of human history, a select few rise head and shoulders above their peers. These men single-handedly changed the course of history, and the United States was blessed to have one of these men at her very birth.

    Up until the War for Independence, George Washington was fairly unremarkable. The eldest son of a wealthy Virginia planter, Washington worked as a surveyor, as a planter, and served in a militia unit that fought with the British Army in the French and Indian War. He traveled to Philadelphia at the outbreak of the Revolution in 1775 and was made commander-in-chief of the Continental Army.

    Every schoolchild knows the stories of Washington’s valor during the American Revolution. His victories at Boston and Trenton are heroic tales, but his defeat at Long Island is perhaps an even greater story. Faced with overwhelming odds, Washington began an orderly retreat, keeping his army intact as they withdrew over the Hudson River. In the hands of a lesser general, this retreat might have become a rout, and the Revolution would have never gotten off the ground.

    After independence, Washington could have seized as much power as he wanted. Yet, like the Roman statesman Cincinattus, he retired to private life once more. That was not the end of his story. When it was clear that the Articles of Confederation had failed to create a stable government, Washington returned to preside over the Constitutional Convention. When it came time to choose the first president of the United States, Washington was elected unanimously.

Idaho Freedom Foundation: School Choice Will End Woke Indoctrination

 

Despite the wishes of parents, Idaho’s K-12 public schools are decidedly advancing woke ideologies. From sexually explicit curriculum to pornographic books in school libraries or changing student pronouns without parental consent, public schools are force feeding children values against their families’ wishes. 

It doesn’t have to be this way. New research shows that education choice could be the answer to reducing wokeness in the education system. 

A recently released study by the Heritage Foundation empirically demonstrates that empowering parents to choose the best education for their child significantly reduces wokeness in schools. 

It is reasonable to ask how education choice could reduce woke ideology given that some elite private schools and schools of choice within the public system (charter schools) are pushing the same radical agenda. Teacher training in universities and accreditation reinforces this problem. If critics are right that parental control over their children’s education makes little to no difference, then education choice policies will not solve this impending problem. Perhaps we’re experiencing market “failure” where the only solution is to further regulate the public school system through bans on critical race theory and gender ideology.

Heritage scholars address this question by examining whether more strictly regulated charter school markets are more woke than less regulated markets. The study uses a unique measurement tool evaluating publicly available parent-student handbooks usage of woke terminology (e.g. equity, gender identity, social justice) compared to levels of government regulation. It found that schools in states with higher levels of government regulation are more woke, even after accounting for partisan leanings of states. 

Essentially, the preferences of government officials are more woke than parental preferences. The market for non-woke education isn’t failing. Rather, there is a failure for the market to exist due to the government imposing preferences on its monopoly system of schools. 

The study also demonstrates that the expansion of gender ideology and critical race theory in schools is occurring against the wishes of most parents, not at their behest.  For example, far-left states that highly regulate charter schools, such as Illinois and Washington, have higher levels of wokeness. Whereas Florida and Arizona, where charter schools are more accountable to parents and have fewer regulatory burdens, have lower wokeness levels. 

Ultimately, government bureaucrats and authorizers act as “gatekeepers” for woke ideology in schools. 

This new research should serve as a cautionary tale to Idaho lawmakers. Education choice policies should avoid regulation and protect private and religious schools from government interference. Parents should be given maximum freedom in deciding the education best suited to their child’s needs. It's simple — when schools are held accountable to parents rather than government bureaucrats, the less woke those schools are. 

Parental empowerment is a viable path forward to help stop the spread of corrupt ideologies in the public education system. In a free market, where money truly follows the child to the school of their parent’s choice, wokeness will be reduced and accountability will increase. Lawmakers would be wise to recognize that accountability begins with parents, not government bureaucrats.

Idaho Freedom Foundation: How Do We Determine Voter Fraud?

 

For at least 36 hours, Idahoans believed that Democrat Karma Metzler Fitzgerald had bested Jack Nelson in a Magic Valley race for a House of Representatives seat. But Wednesday morning, state and county officials explained in an about-last-night-style press release, someone noticed that the state’s election results data didn’t match the county’s vote tabulation. Officials declared Nelson the winner. There are two things about this that fascinate me endlessly. The first is that when reporters wanted to know whether there’s any truthfulness to President Donald Trump’s claims about voting irregularities or truth to election complaints by folks like Mike Lindell, they went to election officials in all 50 states. Those officials self-reported that there’s nothing to worry about, which led the press to write, to this day, that criticisms of the 2020 election were “baseless” claims spouted by “election deniers.” Apparently, election results are only wrong if the government makes an announcement that the results are wrong. Whether you believe the 2020 election was stolen or not, I encourage people to not be so trusting of government officials who lie to you about everything from inflation to unemployment numbers to the effectiveness of Covid shots to the quality of the education system. However — and I'm sure I’ll get called a crazy conspiracy theorist for saying so — whenever 100% of government employees or elected officials say something is true, I’m pretty sure it’s not, and I’m usually right. In more than three decades of public policy, I don’t remember ever being wrong in my assessment of government. The second thing that fascinates me is how people think that this reversed result — a Republican winning instead of a Democrat — is in any way consequential to the makeup of the House of Representatives. Sure, it means the Republican caucus will be bigger and the Democrat caucus smaller. It may or may not mean fewer Democrats on committees. Beyond that, there’s probably little difference.

Read the rest here

Copyright (C) 2022 Idaho Freedom. All rights reserved. You are receiving this email because you support making Idaho an even better place to live, work and raise a family. Our mailing address is: Idaho Freedom 802 W Bannock St Ste 405 Boise, ID 83702-5841

Idaho Freedom Foundation Sounds off on Brad Little and Ammon Bundy

Contrary to what you may have heard from the legacy leftist media, neither the Idaho Freedom Foundation nor Idaho Freedom Action has endorsed Ammon Bundy for governor. The Idaho Freedom Foundation is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit. The Idaho Freedom Foundation does not endorse candidates for elected public office, and while Idaho Freedom Action, a 501(c)(4), can endorse candidates, it typically does not do so. Idaho Freedom PAC, an organization that shares IFF’s values and vision for the future of our beloved state, did endorse Bundy. But IFF/IFA and IFP are not the same. They have different leadership and different donors. It’s irresponsible of the press to report misinformation connecting IFF or IFA to the Bundy endorsement. However, IFF and IFA can and do comment on the candidates for governor and other races, and I’ll do so now, because it’s important. I expect that when the votes are counted on election night, Brad Little will still be governor of Idaho. The problem is that Little will have won through a campaign of dishonesty and misdirection. He likes to travel the state and claim that he never shut down the state’s economy during the Covid pandemic or that any of his policies resulted in the permanent closure of businesses or the arrest of people for not wearing masks, congregating at church, or going to a city park with kids. He’s lying. Equally important, Little, when faced with a $2 billion budget surplus, called for a fraction of the money to be returned to taxpayers and proceeded to surrender to the socialists at Reclaim Idaho by dumping more than $400 million into Idaho’s failing government schools. He did so by putting lawmakers in a box by giving them just one take-it-or-leave-it bill to consider in the September special legislative session. These are facts worthy of debate, yet Little has refused to commit to a debate on his record, either in the primary or the general election. That’s terrible for voters. Bundy raises important objections to the status quo in state government -- such as the continued existence of property and income taxes. And recently he began an ad campaign suggesting that as governor, he’d help welfare recipients who don’t want to work leave the state. Whether his plan is executable is not of huge concern. But the fact is, Bundy raises an important issue that has never been properly addressed: Too many Idahoans are dependent on government programs and payouts. This is not sustainable, as we’ve mentioned many times before. Moreover, government dependency is not healthy in society. These government programs disconnect people from communities, charities, and churches in a way that destabilizes society. I don’t think I’ve ever heard a candidate for governor talk about this issue, and so Bundy is saying something refreshing. Bundy isn’t perfect either. His support for Black Lives Matter a couple of years ago is cringy, as was the scene of the Idaho State Police wheeling him out of the Statehouse zip tied to a chair. That, too, is worthy of discussion. Most importantly, today we have two very different candidates for Idaho governor with two very different visions for the future. The role of the Idaho Freedom Foundation is to research public policy matters and communicate our findings to the public. The role of Idaho Freedom Action is, as suggested by the name, to put our ideas into action by engaging with the public. Endorsement of candidates is not what either organization does. Political opportunists and the media attack IFF and IFA because they’d rather not talk about the real issues facing real Idahoans. That’s why they’ve used a tenuous connection between Idaho Freedom PAC to attack IFF/IFA. This is all a distraction so that you focus on the issues they think are important and discount our ideas as “extremist.” In fact, we believe our ideas are the ones that will save our state and save America. There’s nothing extreme about ensuring Idaho doesn’t go the way of California, Colorado, or Oregon. And no amount of whining by washed up leftists will stop us from bringing about the conservative change we all believe in. Send a message to these hacks today. Join Idaho Freedom with a donation of as little as $25 to show that you will not stop and you will not let them silence you. Together, we will preserve our state for generations to come. Yours for freedom,

Donate now

Idaho Freedom Foundation: Taxapayers are Paying for Sex Mutilation Surgeries

Idaho is one of the reddest, most Republican states in the union. Following the excellent primary election results in May of this year, it's now becoming a more conservative state, too, at least in the legislature. With all things being equal, Raul Labrador, one of the fiery House Freedom Caucus reps, will become the next Attorney General. Other statewide incumbents lost their bid for re-election in 2022, as well.

But the work has only begun in Idaho. There is so much wasteful spending and misuse of funds. Governor Brad Little is one of the biggest spend-thrift RINOs in the country. He often signs off on cultural conservative legislation only because of great pressure from the legislature and the voters.

Following the latest post from the Idaho Freedom Foundation, we now learn that the state of Idaho is funding gender modification or sex mutilation surgeries, too! This is beyond outrageous:

According to a lawsuit filed against the Idaho Department of Health and Welfare (IDHW), the agency has been using the Medicaid program to fund hormone replacement therapy for gender transitions. 

One of the plaintiffs — identified as MH throughout the brief — alleges that he has been receiving feminizing hormone treatments since 2019. Now he and another plaintiff jointly want Idaho taxpayers to fund the removal of their male genitalia so they can pose as females.

Previously, the IDHW has been mute regarding its policies about whether they will fund gender transitions and hormone therapies. Agency Director Dave Jeppesen even noted earlier this year that the department has “no policy related to authorizing surgeries or hormone therapies for gender dysphoria and there are no current plans to implement one.” If MH’s claims are true, Idaho would join 25 states that fund this type of treatment through their Medicaid programs.

It is likely the IDHW assumed its policy for remaining neutral on the issue would prevail as the safest legal avenue for mitigating gender transition claims to the Medicaid system. However, providing approval for hormonal treatments opened the door to questions about why the department won’t fund more invasive medical procedures.

The complaint stresses how the department denied “medically necessary” care on the basis that it is cosmetic according to the Idaho Administrative Code. This is in spite of the fact the policy says it will only fund reconstructive surgery designed to “restore function of the affected or related body part(s),” thus excluding the prospect of adding new or removing functional body parts.

Contrary to claims made by the plaintiffs, the efficacy of using transition surgeries is far from settled. A 2020 report in the American Journal of Psychiatry (AJP) had to be corrected to reflect the fact that gender transition surgeries do not reduce the need for mental health counseling, hospitalization, or medications. If the whole argument is that sex changes preserve life because they prevent transgender suicides — as the complaint appears to assert —  then the updated findings of the report from the AJP suggest that this treatment is purely cosmetic and should not be funded under the program.

This case has the potential to open a new demographic of clientele interested in getting their free (that is, taxpayer-funded) gender transition procedures and treatments. Despite this being a policy that would receive much support from the healthcare establishment, it serves as yet another example of the medical community saddling patients with a lifetime of expensive therapies, medications, and surgeries to chase symptoms while ignoring the underlying cause of the disease.

What should upset taxpayers most is that the cost of the Medicaid program has already exploded in recent years due to the 2018 eligibility expansion. The lawsuit suggests at least one of the plaintiffs is a beneficiary of the expansion. 

Should the verdict go against the IDHW, Idahoans can expect to fund gender transitions for all expansion beneficiaries. It is unclear how much IDHW is spending on hormone therapies and how many people are receiving them, but an unfavorable ruling would only add to the cost. The IDHW has not responded to a request for more information on this matter.

Idaho has faced a suit like this before, albeit against a different department. In 2019, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that Idaho must pay for the gender transition surgery of Andree Edmo, an inmate incarcerated in the Idaho Corrections System for molesting a child. Legislators must do something to prevent taxpayers from having to foot the bill for such audacious requests.

In 2022, lawmakers attempted to make moves in this policy area. The Idaho House of Representatives overwhelmingly passed House Bill 675 to ban the gender transitions of children only to be stopped by anti-conservative leadership in the Senate. After a resounding win for conservatives in the May election and encouraging races shaping up for Republicans this November, it is likely that revisiting legislation on such matters would be possible once again in 2023.

Once the Legislature goes into session in January, lawmakers could push for legislation that clearly defines that the Idaho Medicaid program will not fund gender transition surgeries or hormones. Texas and Alabama are the only two states to explicitly ban spending Medicaid dollars on such procedures. 

Idaho should work to join them by protecting Idaho tax dollars from abuse.

Idaho Freedom Foundation: Time for a Special Session

From Wayne Hoffman of the Idaho Freedom Foundation: 

I understand that Gov. Brad Little is considering calling legislators back to town to cut taxes. That's an excellent idea. There is no reason in the world that our hard earned money should sit unused in the state treasury. 

Moreover, with a $2 billion budget surplus -- that’s more than 40% of the general fund -- the decision to cut taxes without delay ought to be simple. It's a low risk proposition that happens to be great for Idahoans. 

A special session isn’t a done deal yet. Remember in 2020, the governor resisted calling a special session even though the public was demanding action to protect them from government Covid mandates.

If it does come to pass, Little alone would set a special session agenda, and he has been clear on his desire to cut taxes. That means he could use the session to continue delivering on income tax relief and follow through on his campaign promise to repeal Idaho’s sales tax on groceries. The latter has the double benefit of giving Idahoans relief from inflation at the grocery store. 

And if tax rebates are in order, Little should use funds to provide relief to Idahoans crushed under the weight of exploding property taxes. 

And while lawmakers are in their seats in Boise, this would be an excellent time to make sure our schools aren't used by the Biden administration to implement pro-transgender policies.

We pointed out this problem in June and suggested a special session then. Little and other governors wrote a letter protesting the administration's actions last month. But a letter is hardly the protection our kids deserve.

If you recall, Biden issued an executive order that asserts, “Children should be able to learn without worrying about whether they will be denied access to the restroom, the locker room, or school sports.” 

His executive order threatens to create Lia Thomas copycat situations in school locker rooms in Idaho and across the country. 

As lawmakers last session appropriated the federal funds that would obligate our schools to set up trans bathrooms and make other woke accommodations, this is a problem that they alone are needed to fix.

There's an immediate need to protect schoolchildren by undoing the availability of the money lawmakers appropriated, replacing the same with state dollars, or directing schools to not expend funds on wokeism. If Idaho does nothing, the mere act of participating in federal school lunch programs is enough for the federal government to make demands about locker rooms and bathrooms. 

A special session can take on both issues.

It can be a session that repatriates unused tax dollars to the people where they belong. And it can also help put the brakes on Washington, D.C.'s woke foolishness. 

But if the governor uses the session to go on a spending spree -- dumping more money into education or other government programs -- it will be a disaster. Limited to tax cuts and protecting students from Biden's social justice agenda, a special session would do Idahoans a whole lot of good.