By IDP Chairman Larry Kenck

Boise, Idaho— Much is riding on a slow, inefficient, and mostly ineffective group that has harmed the prosperity of Idaho workers, families, businesses and cities.

Yes, the GOP-dominated Legislature is in full swing.

A toxic dynamic in the Capitol has GOP politicians bullying each other into rejecting good ideas when they come from Idaho Democrats—and Idaho Democrats find those ideas by listening to We the People!

Recall how Gov. Otter flew to Pocatello during his 2014 campaign to brag about a tax incentive that lured Amy’s Kitchen to town. That program arose from the dogged work of Sen. Roy Lacey (D-Pocatello) and Rep. Donna Pence (D-Gooding). For years, GOP politicians rejected the incentive program until they found a way to claim it was their idea all along.

Most Idahoans agree that it was a good idea to create jobs in Idaho. You are welcome, Gov. Otter.

The lessons:

• Good ideas come from Idaho Democrats.
• GOP politicians put partisan politics ahead of workers, families, businesses and communities.
• Eventually, GOP politicians are forced to advance good ideas.

Here’s the most important part:

• If your good idea goes to a GOP politician first, it will probably take longer to see daylight.

Idaho’s GOP politicians run scared of a small, vocal group in their base that likes to slash and cut and burn. That group doesn’t care that we need a functioning, efficient government to maintain roads, bridges and communication routes. They don’t care that it harms businesses and workers. That small, loud group also disputes the indisputable value that a topnotch education delivers to our kids, our communities, our businesses and our futures.

For this year and next year, this slow, inefficient, mostly ineffective system is our only option.

Don’t take my word for it. Just watch what happens in Boise. As the Majority bangs the drum on divisive social issues, you will see issues important to Idaho’s future swept under the rug.

Watch as the Majority boasts about education investment—hoping we forget how deeply they cut education in the first place. Today, we remain at the bottom of the nation in education investment.

Watch as higher education leaders plead for wiser investment. Did you notice how chilly the Majority was to the University of Idaho president’s suggestion that the state cover workers’ raises so he could stop tuition hikes on students? The Majority isn’t concerned that regular Idahoans are being priced out of opportunity.

What can we do about the Majority’s antipathy toward good ideas that help We the People?

We can keep working hard and smart—which is the Idaho way—and we can assist the media in holding the Majority accountable. Let’s help that news reach every corner of the state.

Then, in 2016, we will have another shot at turning this system into a balanced one that welcomes good ideas—no matter who has them first.

Crossposted on Daily Kos

I've noticed many more middle aged, fit-looking white males casually riding bikes around Boise State University's campus today. And there are guys squatting and staring at the ground for long periods of time (and they do not have the usual BSU maintenance uniforms on).

I am glad they are working to keep our president safe.

This will be my fourth time seeing a sitting president.

Regardless of who holds the position, it is always a special experience. There is something about watching the White House staff, the White House Press Corps, and whatever glimpses of the presidential motorcade or Air Force One you may receive, that reminds me of the awesome power of the office itself.

Here's my list of being around U.S. presidents in person:

1) As a reporter, I covered Bush the first, speaking in NJ at a fundraiser for Gov. candidate Jim Courter (who lost to Democrat Jim Florio).

2) Pre-Lewinsky and at one of the heights of his popularity, I shook hands with Bill Clinton on Martha's Vineyard at the fair.

3) I waved to Hillary and Bill outside an Oak Bluffs, MA bookstore and they waved back.

4) Nice job Boise State University!

Student tickets sold out. Then I went onto the faculty line, and was informed that my ID, which works for everything else, would need to be updated to get a ticket. I was nervous about missing this, and thought for a bit:

If nothing else, at least my ID will be updated.

This presidential experience is unlike any other. Mostly due to security reasons, details are always sketchy. We just found out today that doors open at noon, but Obama may speak as late as 2:45. I recall Clinton being as many as five hours later than door openings -- of course, with no advance warning.

I recall stories from friends who worked in stores and restaurants on Martha's Vineyard in the 90s. They told of secret service agents marching in to their places, kicking walls, hitting the ceiling with poles, going basically where they wanted -- then leaveing and saying, "Thanks." The president would often arrive minutes later.

At BSU, know one knows very much. Just the raw basics. When the POTUS says he's coming to your place. He is coming. That's the long and short of it. Your job is to adjust.

I also remember watching, outside of that bookstore, some Press Corps members getting pasted by two secret service agents, who took them down like linebackers. They had ignored warnings to "step back."

Clinton was was much more likely to come and work the crowd than either George W. or Barack. But I can't say I blame them. Times have changed.

It is scary in some ways, when I think about so much power in one institution. But part of me is happy that even in the current world of violence that we live in, the president can still come and see us here in Podunk Idaho.

I recall a skit years before Obama was known, sometime in the 1980s. It may have been Eddie Murphy who parodied how things will be for our first Black president. He joked about him having to make any public speeches for less than two minutes with his head bobbing and weaving, and then running away from the audience and back to the armored car.

If nothing else, at least that didn't come true.

If you're in Boise Wednesday, come see me. I'll be the starstruck fan.

My SAT JAN 17, 2015 AT 05:28 AM PST blog is below:  read more »

Robert C. "Bobby" Scott (D-VA)

Many states can no longer afford to support public education, public benefits, public services without doing something about the exorbitant costs that mass incarceration have created. - Bryan Stevenson founder and Executive Director of the Equal Justice Initiative.

The United States has the highest incarceration rate in the world.

A few years ago, the NAACP released a new report, Misplaced Priorities, that examines America's escalating levels of prison spending and its impact on state budgets and our nation’s children, according to naacp.org.

Misplaced Priorities tracks the steady shift of state funds away from education and toward the criminal justice system. Researchers have found that over-incarceration most often impacts vulnerable and minority populations, and that it destabilizes communities.

The report includes these startling facts:

• The majority of the 2.3 million people incarcerated in U.S. prisons and jails are people of color, people with mental health issues and drug addiction, people with low levels of educational attainment, and people with a history of unemployment or underemployment.

• The nation’s reliance on incarceration to respond to social and behavioral health issues is evidenced by the large numbers of people who are incarcerated for drug offenses. Among people in federal prisons, people in local jails, and young people held in the nation’s detention centers and local secure facilities, more than 500,000 people— nearly a quarter of all those incarcerated—are incarcerated as the result of a drug conviction.

• During the last two decades, as the criminal justice system came to assume a larger proportion of state discretionary dollars, state spending on prisons grew at six times the rate of state spending on higher education.

Thus, I was pleased to see Reps. Raúl Labrador (R-ID) and Robert C. "Bobby" Scott (D-VA), authors of H.R. 3382, the Smarter Sentencing Act, commending the Senate Judiciary Committee for approving S. 1410, the Senate version of the bill.

The Smarter Sentencing Act would reform criminal sentencing laws, empowering judges to make individualized assessments in nonviolent drug cases. This would ensure that limited resources are focused on the most serious offenders, while maintaining public safety.

"The Senate Judiciary Committee’s passage of the bill today is a step forward on this important legislation," said Scott.

“Granting federal judges more discretion in sentencing for nonviolent drug offenses is the right thing to do. Studies of mandatory minimums conclude that they fail to reduce crime, they waste the taxpayers’ money, and they often require the imposition of sentences that violate common sense. This bipartisan, bicameral bill targets particularly egregious mandatory minimums and returns discretion to federal judges in an incremental manner," Scott continued.

"While the Senate Judiciary Committee's action today is an important step in updating sentencing policies that are not working, the amended bill, unfortunately, includes three new mandatory minimums," Scott added.

"If this amended bill passes, we will end up with more mandatory minimums than we started with. The primary purpose of this legislation was to reduce the negative impact of mandatory minimums since they cost taxpayers too much and do nothing to make our families and communities safer. I hope the House Judiciary Committee will act on the original version of the bill."

Raul Labrador (R-ID)

Labrador said he was pleased that momentum continues to build for this common-sense bipartisan legislation.

“There is a growing realization that the ‘one-size-fits-all approach’ to criminal sentencing has tied the hands of judges, hurt the cause of justice, and increased the burden on taxpayers, without making us safer. I appreciate the Senate Judiciary Committee for acting quickly and effectively, and I will keep working with my colleagues in both the House and the Senate to get this bill passed through Congress and become the law of the land.”

During the past 30 years, the number of inmates in federal custody has grown by 500 percent, with nearly half of them serving sentences for drug offenses. Spending on federal incarceration has grown by more than 1100 percent. Today, it costs about $29,000 per year to house just one federal inmate. The Smarter Sentencing Act could save up to $1 billion in incarceration costs.

The House-version of the Smarter Sentencing Act would do the following:

Increase individualized review for certain drug sentences

It would lower certain drug mandatory sentences, allowing judges to determine, based on individual circumstances, when the harshest penalties should apply (while not repealing any mandatory minimum sentences or lowering the maximum sentences for these offenses).

Promote sentencing consistent with the bipartisan Fair Sentencing Act

It would allow certain inmates sentenced under the pre-Fair Sentencing Act sentencing regime to petition for sentence reductions consistent with the Fair Sentencing Act and current law, while not automatically reducing a single sentence.

Expand the existing federal “safety valve”

The legislative “safety valve” has been effective in allowing federal judges to appropriately sentence certain non-violent drug offenders below existing mandatory minimums. Today’s bill would modestly broaden criteria for eligibility.

The Smarter Sentencing Act is endorsed by Heritage Action; Justice Fellowship of Prison Fellowship Ministries; ACLU; American Correctional Association; American Bar Association; NAACP; Constitution Project; and other organizations across the ideological spectrum.

SOURCE: Official Website of Robert C. "Bobby" Scott.