Press "Enter" to skip to content
An open letter

An open letter

February 25, 2024

An open letter to Idaho's U.S. senators, from Charles Graham of Moscow, Idaho.

Dear Senators Risch and Crapo,

You are respected lawyers and leaders in the U.S. Senate. As a former lawyer, I ask you to break your silence and speak out publicly against the ever-intensifying attacks on the integrity of our courts, judges, Department of Justice, and judicial system as a whole.

As lawyers, you know better than anyone else the vital role courts play in preserving the rule of law under the Constitution. You are in the best position to condemn the increasingly vitriolic attacks by former president Trump and others. Your silence is dangerous. It tacitly condones and legitimizes indefensible conduct, leads to unacceptable normalization of the more and more frequent physical threats to judges and prosecutors, and makes even more likely the “bedlam” Trump warns of if the courts rule against him. These attacks and threats are a danger to the nation. You should call them what they are, and call out those, including Trump, who propagate them.

You are also among those most able to speak with authority about the vital necessity of keeping the Department of Justice independent, and about the essential role of its attorneys general and special prosecutors in determining whether to seek indictments, and then of grand juries, comprised of ordinary citizens, to decide based on the evidence whether the facts justify an indictment.

There is no longer any doubt that a vindictive Mr. Trump would do his best to subvert an historically independent Justice Department and convert it to an instrument of retribution against those he thinks have wronged him and might stand in his way, including his perceived political enemies, judges, prosecutors, civil servants, and the media. These are the tools of authoritarianism. Trump openly says he will use them if he regains the presidency. You know the dangers for our democracy and the rule of law.

You may say that under our electoral process it is for the voters to repudiate Trump, to reject his efforts to appropriate for himself powers the founders would never have entrusted to the office of President. But it is you, as lawyers and lawmakers, who best understand the dangers. It is time for you to speak out with moral clarity, to denounce these attacks on the institutions of our democracy, and to place the future of this country above whatever political expediency you may think justifies your silence.

 

 

Bully

Bully

February 23, 2024

In a single vote, the governing majority demonstrated its complete lack of concern for two things that likely do interest a wide range of Idahoans:

First, bullying of and by students.

And second, parental involvement and notification of issues in their children’s lives.

House Bill 539 is another in the long line of measures imposing a requirement on how local school districts deal with children, and this one operates in a familiar way: Most significantly, through parental notification. The legislative summary said it would “require school principals to notify parents and guardians of a student’s involvement in harassment, intimidation, bullying, violence, or self-harm and to provide empowering materials and requires school districts to report incidents and confirm the distribution of the materials to the State Department of Education.”

The statement of purpose added, “While it is important to know how much bullying is taking place, there is not much state policymakers can do with this simple quantification. Given the relationship between those who are bullied and harm to self and others, this bill aims to better address the needs of those who are bullied in addition to responding to those who do the bullying.”

Okay: On one level, this would seem to be right up the legislature’s alley. Parental notification is big with Idaho legislators when it comes to a variety of topics like abortion, library materials, gender, curriculum content and testing standards, sex education, vaccinations (and related medical measures) and much more.

And the problem of bullying is not a small matter. Aside from the many reports from schools, there’s been a spike in teen suicides around Idaho (and beyond). Idaho has one of the nation’s worst records for teen suicide (46th best among the states). The Boise School District last fall reported a group of four student suicides in the space of just two months. (That’s the same number of student deaths, but self-inflicted, as the multiple murder of University of Idaho students in Moscow the year before; guess which got the international attention.)

Representative Chris Mathias, D-Boise, the bill’s origins sponsor, remarked that, "For each incident, it would bring us confidence that the districts were providing important pieces of information to all the parties involved: the bully, the bully's parents, the bullied, the bullied's parents. And specifically that they would be receiving, to quote from the bill, 'parental empowerment materials, including suicide prevention resources and information on methods to limit students access to means of harm to self and others.'"

Given all this, you might think the anti-bullying bill - which really wasn’t exactly a powerhouse, requiring not much more than notification - would be a slam dunk.

But it failed on the House floor, 32-38; most of the House Republican leadership voted against it. You can see the vote breakdown at https://legislature.idaho.gov/sessioninfo/2024/legislation/H0539/.) Getting at “why” leads to a better and more subtle understanding of what motivates the Idaho Legislature’s majority.

It certainly has nothing to do with the supposed concerns of Representative Bruce Skaug, R-Nampa, who talked about, “The poor principal [who] is going to get this 'Oh one more thing I have to report’.” This is beyond ridiculous: This is a legislature that has poured on the culture war requirements, year after year, decade after decade, when it comes to public schools.

They’re happy to have the parents weigh in on subjects - like those a few paragraphs back - where they suspect the parents (or at least the squeaky-wheel parents) will side with the legislative majority’s viewpoint.

And what is the legislature’s opinion on bullying?

You can’t indict all 105 of them. In the House, 32 (Republicans among them) voted in favor of the bullying notification bill, and there are surely more ayes in the Senate.

But for the operating majority, bullying is one of the facts of student life they’re not interested in discouraging.

Ponder for a moment what that says about the people who run the Idaho Legislature. Then think it over again.

 

Numbers

Numbers

February 22, 2024

Nobody roused a crowd talking about numbers. Images stir us. Just look at TikTok. But the numbers tell the truth. Maybe we just don’t want to know the truth.

The brouhaha about how Idaho’s budget committee (Joint Finance and Appropriations =JFAC) is deciding to spend taxpayers’ dollars needs a specific example for you to understand the folly.

It’s about numbers, not dead fetuses, or freedom, so you might not care. But that’s how this country has become the swamp it is. Us common folk don’t often pay attention to the numbers. Rich folk do. And so, they are rich. We all should do better.

Let’s drill down on the Medicaid “maintenance budget” that JFAC has just passed. I encourage you all to read the bill. You’ll have to get to page six to read the Medicaid budget. This bill has passed both the Idaho House and the Idaho Senate. All Republicans voted for it. All Democrats voted against. It awaits the governor’s signature.

Here’s the catch. That’s last years budget. They have not made any allowances for how Idaho or our relationship with the federal government has changed in the last twelve months. Theoretically, that bill with all the changes is to follow. That’s where our majority Republicans want to nitpick.

Then, the rubber will meet the road.

Last year’s regular Medicaid budget had a federal matching rate (FMAP) for regular Medicaid at 69.72%. This year’s will be at 67.59%.

I warned you about the numbers. They are going to get big.

That small change came about because Idaho became less poor. Idaho led the nation in median household income growth.

Medicaid is a partnership with the federal government to get people health insurance who don’t get it through their workplace. If the state is poor, the federal government forks up. If our incomes improve, the state is expected to pay more. Many states are at a 50/50 rate. We have been as high as 80/20. But our household incomes have risen in the last few years. So, we will need to fork over more if we want to keep this health insurance for our citizens.

Maybe we do, maybe we don’t.

Because when the next JFAC Medicaid bill comes to both houses it will include this FMAP change.

I’m sorry, but you must pay attention to the numbers, and the definitions.

I am NOT talking about the Medicaid Expansion population. That small group of Medicaid expense will never be more than a 10% match for the state. That’s why it was such a good deal.

But the regular Medicaid folks, the severely disabled and the children, and the pregnant women are the ones under regular Medicaid. They are the ones who will become more expensive. $68M more expensive.

Legislators are still butt hurt about Medicaid expansion. They throw numbers around with brazen ignorance and it can alarm you. I have seen my elected representative do this at town halls. But he is doing this to build an image. His numbers aren’t real. They aren’t the truth.

But when the real budget bill comes up for a vote on the floor of the Idaho House and Senate, will they know the numbers? Will they know the truth? I deeply regret to say, they will not. They do not understand the details of the budget. And few of us do.

But here’s the punchline in this numbers game. If the Idaho Republican legislative majority doesn’t approve the next Medicaid budget, with it’s $68M dollar bump for the regular Medicaid folks, Idaho will not be following our agreed upon partnership with the federal government. We will be in default.

Every year I was in the Idaho Senate, and on JFAC, and crafted the Health and Welfare budgets, I would watch the votes for the appropriations bills as they worked through. Medicaid might pass the House with a couple votes to spare. In the Senate it wasn’t as close.

This year, the “maintenance” budget has passed. The next budget bill with its bump will stick in their craw. And they will be voting us out of Medicaid.

And they can lie to you that they voted for it.

 

Moon and the senators

Moon and the senators

February 21, 2024

Give a big welcome to the two new members of the Idaho RINO club – Sens. Mike Crapo and Jim Risch.

It’s not an exclusive club. Gov. Brad Little, Lt. Gov. Scott Bedke and Senate Pro Tem Chuck Winder are charter members. The depth chart also includes Congressman Mike Simpson, anyone who is involved with Take Back Idaho and a slew of GOP legislators – errrr, RINOs – who are accused of supporting big government and otherwise going against the Republican Party platform.

Crapo and Risch are on the list because they are big spenders who lack knowledge in national and international security. Well … they know about those things, but not to the extent of State Party Chair Dorothy Moon. Her resume includes three terms in the Idaho House of Representatives and a primary election loss in her bid to become secretary of state.

Risch’s background evidentially pales by comparison. He’s just the ranking member, and former chairman, of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. During his time as chairman, he was at the table with then-President Trump in high-level foreign policy discussions. Risch receives generous accolades from both sides of the aisle for his knowledge of foreign policy and understanding of national security.

See? He doesn’t know anything.

As for Crapo, he’s the ranking member of the Senate Finance Committee, but surrounds himself with those who understand why the U.S. gives aid to places like Ukraine and Israel. As Moon apparently sees it, Crapo should be spending more time with Rand Paul of Kentucky.

“The phones at the state party headquarters have been ringing off the hook after news broke that 22 Republican senators worked feverishly through the night with Democrats to pass a bill to spend nearly $100 billion, most of which goes to fund the seemingly endless war in Ukraine.”

Moon pays heed to Paul’s warning about the aid package serving as an “impeachment trap” if the next president (Trump) decides to pull funding for Ukraine.

Granted, Risch and Trump appear to be on opposite sides of aid to Ukraine, but it’s a stretch to suggest that the Idaho senator would be leading an impeachment parade. Risch, who has endorsed Trump in this year’s presidential race, would never compromise his access to a President Trump.

Moon offers more: “Americans are not interested in funding more foreign wars. Every taxpayer dollar that we send to fund the war in Ukraine prolongs a conflict that has the potential to spin out of control, even leading to a third World War.”

Risch also sees a threat of a world war, but only if Putin is allowed to take over Ukraine and move on to other nations. As Risch has said, the cost of a world war would be many times more than the $100 billion aid package.

The senators are not commenting on Moon’s rant, but they have issued a joint statement outlining the reasons for their votes.

“Our first and primary responsibility as senators is the safety and security of Idaho and the United States of America. It is critically important we help defend Israel … stop the advancement of China, and halt Russia from once again expanding its adversarial empire.

“The United States cannot be the policemen of the world, nor can we engage in every conflict, which is why we must support allies who will stand with us in what is a very dangerous time globally. Although this legislation is not what we would have drafted, it is a strong bill that makes Idaho and America safer.”

In the end, Moon’s side of the argument probably will prevail. House Speaker Mike Johnson has said that Republicans will not accept an aid package that does not include border control. And, with Trump’s blessing, no bipartisan agreement will come until after the presidential election – and only if Trump wins.

As for the state Republican Party, forget about the GOP serving as a cheerleader for Republican incumbents. Under Moon’s leadership, it has turned into a lobbying organization, much like the Idaho Freedom Foundation.

Established leaders such as Crapo, Risch, Simpson and Little don’t have much to worry about. They can dismiss Moon’s lobbying efforts and survive without the backing of the state party.

There’s no good reason why they would want that support.

Chuck Malloy is a long-time Idaho journalist and columnist. He may be reached at ctmalloy@outlook.com

 

Congressional thrashing

Congressional thrashing

February 20, 2024

For all useful purposes, the national Republican Party has been “done in.” At least temporarily.

With the firing of former exec Ronna McDaniel - Mitt Romney’s niece - and the pending appointment of DJT’s daughter-in-law as her replacement, the “Grand Old Party” has become a “rump” business of the Trump family.

No longer the need for senior execs getting jobs from various Republican sources.  No longer the need for constituent “appointments” by rich and prominent players.  No longer a place for senior Republicans in Congress to “pay off” supporters needing temporary employment.

No, Sir!  The place is now a “family enterprise” of the Trump dynasty.

Given how Judge Engeron dropped the hammer on Donald last week, ol’ DJT himself may need to file an employment application.

Also troubling for the GOP is the bickering and back-biting going on in various state Republican central committees.  Trumpers versus the non-Trumpers.  Loyalists versus - uh - er - “them.”  In’s versus out’s.

Were the spirits of Bob Dole, Jim McClure or the sainted Ronnie Reagan to visit the Party current headquarters in the dead of night, they wouldn’t recognize the place.  Or, the employment roster.

The Party has been “at war” with itself for more than a generation.  With outbreaks occurring all across the country, let’s just say the national Republican Party is “fluid” at the moment.

Maybe worst of all, the current wannabee-leader has just received a sound thrashing by Judge Arthur Edgeron who saw fit to hit him with a $350-million hammer.  And he ended - for at least three years - the Trump family’s to do business in New York State.  They’re all “persona non-grata.”

It’s likely anyone trying to reorganize Republicans at the moment would have better luck herding cats.

Indeed, in several recent elections to fill open seats in Congress, Democrats have been quite successful in improving their lot.  Last week’s seat flip in New York’s Third made the Party almost dead even with Republicans in the U.S. House.  Thus, Speaker Johnson is going to have a lot more headaches between now and January.

The basic trouble with all this GOP mishmash is the People’s business is not being conducted.  The very basic reason for having a Congress in the first place is to “take care of business.”

How long the Republican Party will stumble around aimlessly, like a weekend drunk, is anyone’s guess.  But, the longer it takes for the more serious members of leadership to “steady the ship,” the more damage will be done.

Anyone looking to Speaker Johnson to get things on the right track is ignoring the fact that Johnson is one of the problems.  He’s in way over his head and unlikely to be the steadying hand needed at the helm.  Johnson is the wrong guy at the wrong time.

Trump may be headed for the hoosegow.  Oh, there’ll be many appeals.  But, he’s going to be less of a factor over time.

One can only hope our current President is using the back-channel to stay in touch with Dems and responsible GOP’ers.  And, that those same members respect knowledgeable advice & counsel given from someone with more than 50 years of Congressional experience.

 

The abortion bet

The abortion bet

February 19, 2024

During his first year as Idaho Attorney General, Raul Labrador has placed most of his chips on the abortion issue in his quest for higher office. He has been aided and abetted, free of charge, by Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF), a powerful extreme-right legal organization in the nation’s capital that is intent on stamping out any perceived form of abortion across the entire country. ADF played a major role in overturning Roe v. Wade.

Labrador began his term as AG with a March 27 opinion declaring that Idaho’s strictest-in-the-nation abortion laws criminalized Idaho doctors for “providing abortion pills” and “either referring a woman across state lines to access abortion services” or to obtain abortion pills. When the opinion was challenged in court, Labrador withdrew it, but refused to disavow it. Strangely enough, Idaho’s laws are so strict that the opinion was probably correct, even though seriously suspect under the U.S. Constitution.

Since that time, Labrador has opposed a federal rule change that would protect the confidentiality of pregnant women’s medical records from snooping state attorneys general. The rule is designed to protect the privacy of women who travel out of state for pregnancy care. Labrador has also strenuously sought to enforce Idaho’s “abortion trafficking” law.

With free help from ADF, Labrador was able to prevent women with dangerous pregnancy conditions from getting stabilizing medical care in Idaho’s hospital emergency rooms. The only exception is where an abortion is “necessary to prevent the death of the pregnant woman.” Women who need care for a much-wanted, but non-viable, pregnancy have been forced out of state in order to get the care they need. The emergency care issue will be argued before the U.S. Supreme Court in late April.

The Supreme Court will also consider in April whether to place restrictions on the dispensation of an abortion pill, mifepristone, which prevents pregnancy if taken within 10 days. That case, which originated in federal court in Amarillo, Texas, resulted in a ruling supported and cheered by Labrador and ADF last year. The district judge severely restricted use of the drug, but those restrictions were lessened by a federal circuit court and then lifted by the Supreme Court. The Court will rule on the extent of restrictions, if any, that will apply to dispensation of mifepristone.

Labrador has established quite a track record for cracking down on abortions, even when necessary to protect the life and health of women who are desperate to have a child. But nothing can compare to the move he made in that federal court in Amarillo last November. He and two other state AGs asked the court for permission to file a complaint that seeks to totally ban the use of mifepristone and a follow-up drug, misoprostol, throughout the country. Misoprostol is used to induce a miscarriage.

The lengthy complaint, which was likely drafted by ADF and its allies, is chock full of questionable assertions, including preposterous claims that both drugs are dangerous to patients. In the press coverage I’ve seen about the complaint, the request to ban the use of misoprostol has been overlooked. The requested ban is significant because that drug has been used safely and effectively for decades. Yet, right there at page 102, Labrador and the other two AGs ask the judge to order federal agencies “to withdraw mifepristone and misoprostol as FDA-approved chemical abortion drugs.” That is, to ban the use of both drugs throughout the country.

On January 12 the judge granted the motion to file the complaint, so it will presumably proceed on a separate track from the case to be considered by the Supreme Court in April. AFD was lucky to have the three states front for it because it would not have had standing to get the case into court on its own–it’s good to have pliable, accommodating state attorneys general.

If misoprostol is taken off the market, women like Kristin Colson of Boise will face the heart-breaking situation of a wanted, but non-viable pregnancy, made worse by having no medication available to safely manage the miscarriage. Colson had an anembryonic pregnancy and opted for misoprostol, rather than surgery or waiting weeks for her body to pass the tissue. She was surprised when the pharmacist refused to fill the prescription. She was able to get the prescription filled elsewhere but, if Labrador were to prevail in his Texas lawsuit, there would be no legal source for the drug anywhere in the country.

It is unclear whether Labrador is aware of the impact that his extreme actions have on women who want to have viable pregnancies, but can’t, or whether he is simply blinded by his political ambitions. Regardless, it will be interesting to see how Idaho voters react to his all-in gamble on the abortion issue.

 

Review: Prequel

Review: Prequel

February 18, 2024

Every so often, an old black and white photo of a big, popular event - identified as filling the Madison Square Garden back in the late 1930s - surfaces, and never fails to shock when the caption notes that this American celebration was ... in support of Nazi Germany, only a couple years or so before World War II.

The American cultural and political climate changed so abruptly in and after December 1941, when the United States went to war with that country, that it's now strains the memory that many Americans really did lean, often strongly, in that direction. Some of it may have had to do with ethnic German support for the homeland. (Another book I've been reading recently, Bismarck's War by Rachel Chrastil, points out that during the Franco-Prussian War in 1870, American public opinion was strongly on the German side rather than the French.)

But a lot of that support for Adolph Hitler and the Nazi regime was specifically ideological (and racially bigoted as well), and it was not small in size. It was also organized and, as the 30s ended, increasingly well organized. A lot of domestic terror plots were being hatched; many small cells around the country were actively trying to destabilize the United States government and (through destabilizing elections) its whole system of self-government, which increasingly many of the people involved were willing to dispense with.

The fact of all this happening has been reported in many books up to now, but mostly in scattered pieces. The usefulness of bringing many of the threads together is one reason the new book Prequel: An American Fight Against Fascism, by Rachel Maddow, is so useful: It puts the larger movement in a context, alongside telling a bunch of interesting stories about the people involved.

Another reason it's useful is that it puts a less-often seen spotlight on the people who took it on themselves to fight the galloping fascist impulse in America. And I do mean "took it on themselves" because the official arms of the United States government, federal and below, were shockingly sluggish and ineffective in doing what they should have to combat the menace - in part because all too many of the people in those agencies were sympathetic to the fascist cause.

Obviously, a third reason the book is so pertinent - why it bears reading now, right now - is because of the dark turn in American politics and society in a distinctly fascist direction, in support of foreign actors like Putin and Orban, and at a time when far-right groups have been arming into militia groups.

Madow wisely does not refer directly at all to current events, letting the readers draw in the links between then and now - and you can find them on just about every page, sometimes several to a page - pop up in your own mind. Donald Trump doesn't come in for a mention (so far as I could tell) anywhere. But the approaches, strategies, rhetoric and ideas underlying all this feel remarkably fresh.

Which is depressing: Have we learned nothing from the experience of the last century, how corrupt, empty and evil this stuff is? The optimistic takeaway is that it can be fought. It was before. It can be again.

 

Review: Video Game of the Year

Review: Video Game of the Year

February 17, 2024

When I read a new non-fiction book, I hope that it will tell me something I didn't know already (not an unusual occurrence). Even better, I hope it will open for a whole new world I hadn't been aware, or barely aware, existed - but which matters.

I hadn't expected the book Video Game of the Year (Abrams Image, 2023), written by Jordan Minor, to do more than the first. But it did: I came away with a whole new perspective on a big part of our American culture in the last half-century.

It may be less strikingly new to you, if you're a video gamer and especially a gamer of longstanding. I'm not, because of no great desire to spend the time and effort needed to become accomplished at the games (or even learn much about them), not because of any animus toward them. My personal involvement with video games started with Pong and ended with either Space Invaders or Pac-Man (all three are profiled in this book), and after that the games, and the environment around them, became too much effort to attract much of my interest.

That doesn't mean they didn't attract lots of other people, of course; over the years I've known quite a few people who play them, to one degree or another. Some of the most popular games have sold immense numbers of copies, into the hundreds of millions, and some of them (Pokemon go is an example) have burst into the general cultural fabric. (Some years ago we often spotted PG players at a residential intersection near our house, deeply engrossed.) But what effect do they games have? Where did they come from? How have their evolved, and where might they be going? I didn't have much of a handle on any of this.

Minor has neatly filled this gap, for me and probably a lot of other people, through the device of naming a game of the year for (almost) every year since Pong arrived in the late 70s. The selections seem carefully chosen to throw light on the development of video games, not least their variety. If like me you're aware of these games only on the periphery - spotting the occasional ad or box in a store or news story that relates to one of them, often in a negative way - there's a lot to miss.

The variety of the games, for example. I'm tended to associate video games in the last couple of decades with hard-core shoot-em-up (or blow-em-away) violence, but while that is a key part of the picture, there's also much more. Some are gentle and artistic. Some are educational; I'd almost forgotten about Sin City, and had never been aware of many of the spinoffs it generated.

And more generally: What are some of the factors that have made some games immensely popular, while others fall flat? Some useful lessons in consumer preference and economic activity emerge from this. Not to mention some useful dissection of what goes into designing a game, an absorbing subject I'd never much considered.

Then there's the sources of the games. I hadn't realized how dominant, for so many years, developers from Japan were in the field; the corporate field seems to have spread more widely in recent years. I hadn't had much appreciation for the differences in, say, Nintendo and other providers, or how Playstation and XBox fit into the mix. The underlying corporate histories are worth knowing too, given how large some of those organizations have become.

Minor is enough of a good enthusiast to refrain from whitewashing the downsides, which gives me some confidence in his overall perspective. A tip of the hat to his easily-absorbed history, which opened a part of the modern world brand new to me. And maybe you too.

 

 

National security and Idaho

National security and Idaho

February 16, 2024

The national security debate within the Republican Party is writ in Idaho too - smaller scale, but with points intact.

Conditions around the world are in other words coming home to Idaho politics, in a way that hasn’t much been the case for a long time.

A quick recap first. U.S. House Republican leadership to this writing has essentially blockaded aid measures for Ukraine and Israel, whether or not coupled with funding and other measures relating to  border security long proposed by Republicans. Their Senate counterparts have pressed on, working with the chamber’s Democrats. One effort including the border provisions collapsed after House leadership registered opposition, but on February 13 the Senate passed a national security package including help for Ukraine and Israel. It now goes to the House. (There is some talk of the House accepting the bill if a border section is attached; we’ll see. Conditions are fluid at the moment.)

The senators voting in favor included 22 members of the Republican caucus (close to half). Along with Minority Leader Mitche McConnell, they included Idaho’s senators, Mike Crapo and Jim Risch. Risch, as ranking member on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, has been a persistent backer of help for Ukraine.

All of which will likely strike many Americans as good news. But not in the offices of the Idaho Republican Party.

An e-mailed statement from the party shortly after the Senate vote said that, “The priorities in DC are misplaced. Americans are struggling financially, our border is wide open and untold hundreds of thousands are entering our country illegally. Americans are not interested in funding more foreign wars, instead needing relief here at home. Every taxpayer dollar that we send to fund the war in Ukraine prolongs a conflict that has the potential to spin out of control, even leading to a third World War. This bill must be stopped in the House.”

The last part of the statement has it somewhat backward: It is to keep the conflict from spreading - Russia taking on other targets - the aid to Ukraine most specifically is in American interests.

The statement was also interesting in three things it did not mention. First, it didn’t specifically mention aid to Israel, which most Republicans as well as Democrats have strongly backed. Second, it didn’t mention funding and law changes related to the border, which were in the earlier Senate bill that the House essentially blew up.

And third, it didn’t mention directly Idaho’s two senators: It left the criticism of them implicit.

The senators issued their own statement after the vote, saying (along with accurately pointing out non-assistance defense measures in the bill) “It is critically important we help defend Israel, prohibit funding for the antisemitic UN Relief and Works Agency, stop the advancement of China, and halt Russia from once again expanding its adversarial empire. … we must support allies who will stand with us in what is a very dangerous time globally.”

They offered in other words an actual recognition of American interests, both immediate and longer-range, of the kind not visible in the Idaho Republican statement. National analysts pointed out that many of the Republican senators who joined that effort have relatively strong backgrounds in foreign relations, the military or both.

The bill now goes to the House. Representative Russ Fulcher almost certainly will go along with the House leadership position in opposition to it.

And maybe Representative Mike Simpson will too.

But maybe Simpson’s vote shouldn’t be written off too quickly. Risch has been a strong advocate for help for Ukraine and Israel both, and I could imagine that Simpson might pay attention to what he has to say.

The security of the nation and the world may count on conversations like that in the next few days.