Press "Enter" to skip to content

SCOTUS ducked

July 23, 2024

Octogenarian.

That's a word used to describe folks in their eighties.  Like your scribe.  And our President.

Octogenarian.

At the moment, thanks to SCOTUS, my octogenarian world has been shaken.  Again.  A SCOTUS ruling that resolved almost nothing regarding Presidential immunity.

Basically, the "Supremes" acknowledged, yes, there are times when it exists.  And, there are times when it doesn't.  But, when it does - and when it doesn't - that's up to the lower courts to decide.  So the "Wise Nine' opined.

Yep.  That's what they said.

At issue was Donald Trump's participation in some parts of the January 6th rebellion.  Did he or didn't he?  Is he immune from prosecution if he did?

I suspect other octogenarians - like me - are having some heartburn over that issue.  And, with some other recent SCOTUS decisions.

We 80-something's have been unsettled about a lot of life's going's-on for some time now.  One-by-one, the institutions we grew up with - the institutions we've respected and lived our whole lives with - have been proven to be fallible.  Just like us.

There was a time, for instance, when SCOTUS handed down a ruling on this or that, it was taken at face value.  The action was firm.  It was, almost always - final.  The last word on the subject at hand.

Not so any more.  As in the immunity case, the Court ducked much of the issue and handed off various unsettled parts to other courts to decide on.

Our current crop of octogenarians is having trouble with other events, as well.  There seems to be a lot of parsing and dissent in the world nowadays.

We were raised to believe that Congressman So-and-So was a fine, honorable gentleman.  Look at Congress now.  Look at the mess - the inaction - clay feet running up past the hips.  Controversy.  Personal frailties and dishonesty.  Not all but enough to dispel the image.

We octogenarians were taught police officers were our protectors.  They were there to help and defend us.  Now, four cops in Chicago are being tried for the killing of an unarmed Black man.  Cops.

We were brought up to respect the President - to trust and believe in whoever was in that powerful job.  We learned about the Oval Office and Air Force One.

Now, the respected and experienced holder of that office is under the political microscope.  He's being asked if he has the "right stuff" for the job.  He's being parsed by critics near and far.  It would almost seem - at the moment - we are "leaderless."  Until the expected tests are in.

But, that's not true.  Joe Biden is serving his Presidency with more guard rails on both sides than any man in history.  He's being watched "24-7" by family - by staff - by White House physicians - Congress - the media - and you and me.

From this point of view?

He's the President.  Duly elected.  Most days, working seven days a week.  He seems steady in carrying out his duties.  Doing the job.

Should he be replaced?  That's up to you.  And me.  Not Congressional Republicans.

 

Restoring decency

July 22, 2024

There has been no shortage in recent days of California political refugees who arrive in the Gem State to “wake up” native Idahoans to a variety of political calamities. One day it is waking us up to the supposed danger that evil librarians pose to the morals of our kids. The next thing you know, they warn us to wake up to the mortal danger of critical race theory, which they have never been able to define or find anywhere in Idaho.

Now, California transplant Morgan MaGill, who works for the extreme-right Idaho Family Policy Center, is awaking us with the claim that the Open Primaries Initiative (OPI) is an evil plot to turn Idaho into California. MaGill says California Governor Gavin Newsome brought the idea for the initiative to Idaho last year. It is passing strange that he would support ranked choice voting in Idaho when he has vetoed the idea in his own state.

The truth is that Idaho’s former GOP House Speaker, Bruce Newcomb, was the earliest proponent of the Open Primaries Initiative in Idaho. He saw it as the only way to break the stranglehold that extremists have on the Idaho Republican Party. Bruce and many traditional Idaho Republicans grew up with a primary system where voters of every political stripe could vote any party ballot they pleased in the primary election. That produced governments where officials worked together for the common good. GOP culture warriors now employ fear and outrage to scare up votes for their own benefit.

Former Governor Butch Otter and many other traditional conservatives support the OPI

because they know it is the best hope for restoring civility and reason to the Republican Party. That means ousting Dorothy Moon and her cronies who use the low-turnout primary election to put extremists on the general election ballot. Almost 90% of the general election winners are actually chosen in the GOP primary in this red state.

The Open Primaries Coalition modeled the OPI after the system that worked so well in Alaska in 2022. All candidates, regardless of party, compete on the same primary ticket. The top four vote-getters move to the general election ticket. In that election, voters select their first choice for each office, but they may also rank the other candidates in order of preference. The candidate receiving a majority in the first vote count wins. If there is no winner, the candidate getting the fewest votes is eliminated from the running. The selections on ballots where that candidate was first choice shift upward a notch (choices 2, 3 and 4, become 1, 2 and 3) and a second count is made. If that count does not produce a winner, a third count will do it. A bonus of the system is that if your favorite does not win, your second choice might.

Alaska voters found the system to be simple. It caused candidates to conduct more civilized campaigns, those elected were more reasonable and pragmatic, extremists with a narrow culture war agenda had a hard time winning and all voters had an actual say in selecting their leaders. GOP Senator Lisa Murkowski said the system worked very well. Similar voting systems have been used in Ireland and Australia for decades.

MaGill contends that primaries are not elections. Actually, they are elections because Idaho law says they are. They are paid for by all Idaho taxpayers, regardless of party, and everyone should have the right to vote in any of them. The Idaho Constitution enshrines the right of all citizens to vote. It conveys no rights to political parties.

MaGill says a close friend heard of registered Democrats asking for Republican ballots in the May primary. If there is one instance where a registered Democrat voted the Republican ballot, it should be reported to election officials because it is a violation of the law. The contention is obviously unreliable hearsay.

It is a given that the OPI will weaken the hold of MaGill’s employer, the Idaho Family Policy Center, over public policy in Idaho. That is precisely the aim of the OPI–to reduce the influence of culture warriors in Idaho’s government. It will hit the Moon branch of the GOP hard. The Idaho Freedom Foundation and its dark-money supporters hate the initiative. On the other hand, the OPI will allow Idaho's 264,000 unaffiliated voters to finally have a say in who represents them in important public offices. Idaho’s 160,000 veterans will have the opportunity to vote in any election they choose. None of this is a California agenda. It is an Idaho agenda that many Idaho voters want to restore.

 

Homelessness help starts in the cities

Homelessness help starts in the cities

July 21, 2024

The widespread take on the June 28 U.S. Supreme Court decision sustaining Grants Pass restrictions on public camping was widely interpreted as kicking the issue, as it did with abortion in the Dobbs decision, to the states.

In many states, few of which have state laws on the subject, that may be the effect. Oregon, which does have a state law on the subject, may be different. Here, the effect of the decision, which simply said the Grants Pass rules were not “cruel or unusual,” was to place the subject back before individual communities.

Oregon’s state law, House Bill 3115, was passed in 2021 following an earlier court decision about the Grants Pass rules. Its lead sponsor was then-speaker and now-Gov. Tina Kotek, and it sets some limits on city and county action on homeless camping, saying that communities cannot pass any unreasonable restrictions.

Following the Supreme Court decision, the next steps are likely to be – and should be – taken by local governments. As they act, they may run into the walls of state law and regulation.

That should make it clearer what action the Oregon Legislature ought to take.

HB 3115’s core provision says: “Any city or county law that regulates the acts of sitting, lying, sleeping or keeping warm and dry outdoors on public property that is open to the public must be objectively reasonable as to time, place and manner with regards to persons experiencing homelessness.”

Some of those terms are defined in the bill, but that’s about it. Local ordinances have to be “objectively reasonable,” but it doesn’t define “reasonable,” only saying that the availability of local shelters should be borne in mind in any restrictions. The anti-camping rules in Grants Pass that sparked the decision barred people from sleeping publicly with “bedding,” set fines of $295 and much more if not paid. Orders to stay away from parks could follow. As a last step, jail time was possible. The Supreme Court decision allows all that.

Would that necessarily violate the Oregon state law? We may have to wait for an Oregon court to say.

That may be the way it goes around the state, because many local communities have been moving ahead on the subject, and may move faster now.

Not all communities in Oregon have a problem with homelessness; most smaller towns do not. But larger cities, especially where more extensive social and other services are located, tend to have larger numbers, and the pressures to regulate, if not resolve, homelessness have been growing there.

Salem, Bend, Medford, Corvallis and McMinnville are among the cities that have passed rules relating to camping areas where homeless people have congregated. With the new Grants Pass ruling in hand, pressure locally likely will increase to do more.

Portland has a new revised camping ordinance, effective July 1, which Mayor Ted Wheeler said would be enforced at first on camps around the city that “present the greatest health and safety risks.” The plan is to develop a series of assessments and then refer them to city agencies, including the police.

Portland’s approach seems likely to shift and change in the months ahead, not least because the planned assessments may uncover information and ideas that change views of what should be done. Some of the same may happen in other cities, too, as they try policies to meet area concerns about homeless health and safety issues, and advocates for the homeless push back.

Although Kotek said she wants to keep the current law on the subject in place, a number of Oregon legislators are likely to weigh in as well. Two Democrats, Sen. Mark Meek of Gladstone and Rep. Paul Evans of Monmouth, have said they would like to see more specificity in the state law so that cities have clearer guidance about what they can do.

That’s true. But the way to get there probably is to allow the cities to experiment – and they should start on that promptly – and see where the problems, legal, practical or moral, turn out to be. As they discover more, legislators probably will be able to better figure out what they should do next.

This column originally appeared in the Oregon Capital Chronicle.

(image/public domain, George Hodan)

 

 

The voters who weren’t

The voters who weren’t

July 19, 2024

This seems to be the month of top Idaho elected officials warning about, and offering decisive action, on a serious problem … that doesn’t exist.

I’m making no argument that non-citizens should vote in public elections in this country; I don’t think they should. (If you want to vote in Germany or India, become a citizen of those countries.)

Problem is, this just isn’t a big problem, as much as some public officials and media celebs try to drive people into a froth over it.

Senators Mike Crapo and Jim Risch (with some of their colleagues) on July 12 were “demanding answers from U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland on the U.S. Department of Justice’s (DOJ) efforts to prevent aliens from registering to vote in American elections.”

They noted the substantial number of people crossing our border (that much is true, quite a few are) and then said, “Plainly, there are opportunities for and instances of non-citizen voter registration, and so the critical question is whether the laws against doing so are being enforced by your Department.  There appear to have been few prosecutions by your Department under these laws, and there is no indication that you have been pursuing cases in places like Georgia and Ohio where aliens have been caught registering or voting.”

First, we know that the states and not the federal government run elections, so what exactly the DOJ is remiss in doing is unclear.

House Speaker Mike Johnson said that “We all know, intuitively, that a lot of illegals are voting in federal elections. But it’s not been something that is easily provable." If after a lot of years of searching for the evidence no one has been able to prove it’s happening, you might have to stop to consider that there might be a reason.  Johnson’s debunked intuition aside, there have been few identifiable cases in the nation, ever.

For one thing, a 1996 law specifically has barred non-citizens from voting in federal elections.

Non-citizen voting is allowed only in the District of Columbia and in some cities in three states: California (San Francisco and Oakland, where it applies only to school elections), Maryland and Vermont - but only in specified local elections.

In Idaho, where Republican Party leaders have - without any evidence - more than once spoken of truckloads of non-citizens crossing the border to vote in Idaho elections, Governor Brad Little and Secretary of State Phil McGrane have joined the chorus.

On July 9 the governor signed “the ONLY CITIZENS WILL VOTE Act.” It is harmless enough: It mostly calls for coordination and reports. But the language describing it is breathless.

“Idaho already has the most secure elections in the nation, and we’re going to keep it that way. My executive order – the ONLY CITIZENS WILL VOTE Act – directs Secretary of State Phil McGrane to work with local county clerks to scrub our voter rolls and make sure Idaho's elections do not fall prey to the consequences of Biden's lawless open border,” Governor Little said.

McGrane: “Across Idaho’s 44 counties, we have excellent mechanisms in place already to ensure non-citizens do not vote in Idaho, but there is always more we can do to make sure only citizens will vote. I am proud to work closely with Governor Brad Little to put in place a plan that keeps Idaho ahead of the pack in election integrity.” Shorter: We don’t have a problem in this area.

Nor do other states. Only a few states have reported more than a tiny stray number of non-citizens either registering to vote or actually voting. The most substantial case is in Georgia, where in 2022 the secretary of state reported “1,634 cases of potential noncitizens registering to vote in Georgia.”  However, most of them seem to have registered to vote in error - they thought they were in a long bureaucratic line to do something else - and none of them actually voted.

 

Federal District Judge Fred Biery in Texas remarked of his state’s efforts on the subject, “This is a solution looking for a problem.”

He’s right.

(image/Robert Couse Baker)

He missed this time

July 16, 2024

So, someone took a shot at the former President.

He survived, thank God.  But, the most obvious question for debate is "Why did it take so long to happen?"

Donald Trump and the National Republican Party have, for years, consistently avoided talk of background checks for purchasers and have pooh-poohed other recommended gun safety laws.  They won't ban automatic rifles like the AR-15.  They've never gotten behind legitimate efforts to keep guns out of the hands of irresponsible people.  They've accused those that do of "infringing" on the rights of others.

So, it's worth asking again, why did it take so long for someone to try to kill another President?  Any President?  And with an AR-15?

The groundwork for this latest assassination attempt was laid many years ago.  Long before this shooter was born.  It's really been a question of where and when.  Which President would be the target?  Where would it happen?  Would it be successful?

I was angered by the President's words and actions following the attempt.  Clenched fist in the air and shouts of "Fight, fight."  That's an excellent example of the kind of rhetoric that inspires people like the shooter.  They soak up that sort of mindless speech, seen by a sick mind as an "order" to take up arms.  Remember January 6th?

In this case, the 20-year-old did exactly that.  Except the rifle had already been purchased by his father and was available at home.

"Fight, fight" Trump repeated with clenched fist in the air.  "Fight, fight."

This nation has been embroiled in the senseless murder of public officials and engaged in endless talk about controlling firearms for generations.  Now, we're doing it again.

But, the killings and the near-killings continue unabated.

The shooter, in this instance, didn't fit any of the previous profiles of an assassin.  He's White.  Middle-income American.  Registered Republican voter.  Description of probably 100-200 million of us.  Just ordinary folk.

The "losers," in this instance, will be the Secret Service.  They'll get the blame for not assuring the locale - probably picked by the President's campaign team - could be adequately secured.  More blame will come as nitpickers charge some one from the Service should have been on that roof.  Some will say the President should not have been on an outdoor stage where protection is more problematic.

All B.S.

We'll likely never know if security agents advised against this locale.  Or, if there were any concerns about the ability - or inability - of the Secret Service to adequately perform their duties in this venue.

When Presidents speak - about anything - they most often get their way.  Nobody in the room has "veto power" over the expressed desires of the "Big Guy."  He say's it.  You make it happen.

It's a blessing the President was only grazed.  Another inch or so inward the bullet would have removed part of his skull.

You can bet the Service will replay videos of the incident over and over and over.  And, they'll likely physically reconstruct the staging for a step-by-step review of what happened.

You can also bet the Secret Service will be more aggressively advising campaign staff on future campaign sites and will be more involved in the selection of speaking locations.  That's what they do.

So, the campaign continues.  As watchers, we'll probably not note much of a change in things.  But, changes there will be.

 

A jewel among nonprofits

July 15, 2024

Many Idahoans might not know the name, Jannus, Inc., but they may be familiar with some of the outstanding work this remarkable social service nonprofit has performed during its 50 years of serving in the Gem State. It operates a broad range of programs that serve practically every segment of our society–veterans, pre-schoolers, refugees, seniors, the distressed, K-12 students, you name it.

Jannus’ 24/7 Idaho Crisis & Suicide Hotline has dealt with 23,827 contacts from distressed individuals. Its Agency for New Americans oversees Idaho’s highly-regarded refugee program that welcomed 1,270 refugees to Idaho in fiscal year 2022, including 512 from Afghanistan and 329 from Ukraine. Refugees are anxious to achieve self-sufficiency for themselves and their families, and Idaho’s refugee agencies provide temporary assistance to help them reach that goal.

Global Talent is a popular Jannus program, designed to help refugees obtain credentials to practice their profession in their new country. The program recently featured former Afghan military pilots who seek federal certification to fly commercially in the U.S.

Idaho Voices for Children advocates for a variety of programs to help Idaho’s children. When the Legislature turned down $36 million in federal child care funds in 2023, Voices rallied support of legislators from across the political spectrum to restore funding in the amount of $28 million, helping many childcare centers to stay in business. Voices was instrumental in passage of legislation this year to protect children in the state’s foster care system. Senate Bills 1379 and 1380 were approved by overwhelming votes.

Jannus operates early head start centers in North Idaho, the Idaho Out-of-School Network and a number of other well-regarded programs. In recognition of the outstanding work it has done to improve the lives of the 58,821 people it has served, the Boise Metro Chamber of Commerce gave Jannus its 2024 Nonprofit Excellence Award.

Imagine the surprise when the ill-named Idaho Freedom Foundation (IFF) came out with a broadside against Jannus last month, claiming it was “funding handouts for illegal immigrants.” The IFF’s only support for that outrageous claim was that “a video surfaced on social media purporting to show migrants getting off a bus in West Boise.” The author of the IFF screed admitted there was no confirmation the people were illegals or that Jannus’ operations “are driving illegal immigration.” That did not stop them from strongly insinuating that Jannus was using “tax dollars to fund welfare for illegals.”

So it looks like the IFF bullies have found yet another target, besides teachers and librarians, to smear with false allegations. Their game is to gain political and financial support by stoking fear and outrage against innocent targets.

The fact is that some Jannus programs are designed to serve immigrants to the United States, but those served are legal immigrants. Refugees are granted entry into the United States only after extensive background checks. They are granted the right to work in the country and are eager to make their own way. They do receive guidance, language instruction, temporary housing assistance and other necessary support to help them adjust to a new country. They don’t get handouts of taxpayer money.

I had the privilege of serving on the Jannus board of directors for a three-year term after retiring from the Idaho Supreme Court. I can attest that the organization works hard to obtain funding for programs beneficial to underserved segments of Idaho society. That’s why I recently contributed to the Jannus drive for endowment funding as the organization embarks upon its next 50 years.

It is disheartening to read IFF’s false claims about an organization that has done so much good for the people of Idaho. Jannus has truly been a sparkling jewel in the Gem State’s nonprofit crown. Nothing the IFF says can distract from that truth.

 

They’re not making more water

They’re not making more water

July 12, 2024

To start with, it’s not a bad deal. It’s just that it’s a temporary stopgap, if that.

Last month, the state of Idaho and users of water from ground and surface sources cut a deal about groundwater use. Absent a deal, thousands of groundwater users, across half a million acres of territory, were in line, because of state orders, to lose their irrigation water this season. Their growing season would have been wiped out. The economic impact, for these people and those connected to them, and even to the state overall, would have been massive.

The hit was directed generally toward groundwater pumpers, because many of them had more junior water rights, while many surface water rights were mostly older and so had a legal priority for water use (“first in time, first in right”). But the issue also pitted ground people against surface people, a not-unusual situation in Idaho water.

Earlier this year, the state Department of Water Resources calculated that the Eastern Idaho Snake River Aquifer was running low - too low. The aquifer has been in decline for about 60 years, a fact that has been carefully measured and hasn’t been ignored. The issue was important in working through the Snake River Basin Adjudication. In 2015 another agreement on water usage was worked out for preserving the aquifer, and the subject has been under regular review since.

The state has been involved in recharging (pumping water back down) and other steps to help, but if too much groundwater is drawn out, the aquifer will drop and eventually dry. You can ask people around the Great Plains’ Ogallala Aquifer about the terrible consequences of that.

Idaho’s water management system, in southern Idaho at least, long has tended to be cooperative, with interested parties usually more willing to talk than insistent on fighting. The state has been the beneficiary of that for decades.

So when the state ordered water shutoffs for thousands of irrigators, which led to - call it concerns or something approaching panic - widespread realization that a search for solutions had to be undertaken. Negotiations got underway (Lieutenant Governor Scott Bedke seems to have been a key figure in them), and finally late last month a deal was struck, included in an agreement signed as an executive order by Governor Brad Little.

It has six main provisions. It proposed to “improve understanding of the aquifer”; convene a legislative commission on water infrastructure; put a priority on funding projects that would help the aquifer; ask stakeholders to meet; get the regional groundwater management advisory council to submit a new plan by September; and commit groundwater users to develop a mitigation plan by October.

None of this is bad, but only the last item (and it’s still in the territory of aspiration) has the sound of something concrete that specifically addresses the question of how to deal with not enough water for everybody. Water mitigation in this case presumably means that groundwater users would have to specify how they will be able to use water, or engage in recharges or something else, without further endangering the aquifer. How exactly they will do this seems less than clear.

The problem may not be insoluble. Water conservation - which some elements of Idaho water law doesn’t always encourage - may be one of the options. Finding other new efficiencies or reuse of runoff water might be considerations. Some good engineers are at work on this.

The core conundrum, though, remains: If everyone uses the water they need for their operations, the aquifer likely would be drawn down, maybe to dangerous levels. That’s why the Department of Water Resources took action in the first place.

There are no evil players here. But unless someone comes up with an unexpected, and brilliant, answer, the problem looks like a diminishing circle: An ongoing game of musical chairs with someone being left out. This year’s negotiation, probably a predecessor to next year’s, leaves that problem unresolved.

(image)

New blood

July 9, 2024

What the Hell is wrong with Republicans in the U.S. House?

Speaking as someone who's lived a long life and one who has a penchant for following this country's political affairs, I repeat, "What the Hell is going on?"

House Republicans have been a pain in the ass for several years. But, the current crop has simply gone bananas.

An impeachment committee, looking for evidence it can't find, trying to embarrass a sitting President whose done nothing "impeach-able."  A President, based on his lengthy experience, who could conduct a graduate-level course in politics that many of them couldn't pass.  A "special" committee trying to find "evidence" that doesn't exist?  Really?

There are 221 GOP'ers in the House.  Most are sane.  Most are there to do the people's work.  Most have a sense of the importance of the positions they hold.  The history.  The responsibility.

BUT...

About 40-50 of those folks have no understanding of their roles in our democracy.  They don't know the real work that must be done.  They offer nothing in the way of responsible legislation.  They produce nothing constructive.  They make noises and clutter the atmosphere with baseless charges and personal antics that should be embarrassing.  At least to them.  'Cause they're certainly embarrassing  to the rest of us.

If those cretins were workers at a business in the private sector, it's doubtful they'd be long-employed, given their disgraceful antics.

Facing the 2024 national election, you have to wonder if the folks at home will send these miscreants back for another term.  At an annual salary of $174,000 a pop!  I know.  I know.  Your good guy is my bad guy and my good guy is your bad guy.  Heard it all before.

But, Boebert?  Taylor-Green?  Gaetz?  Biggs?  Johnson?  Really?

All of this is getting out of hand.  What's needed is a Speaker of the House who will "crack the whip" and get things quickly straightened out.  A "Tip" O'Neill kinda guy.  Gonna happen?  Ya think?

The current Speaker is not up to the job.  He's proven time and time again he really doesn't understand all the details.  Mike Johnson, busy trying to hang onto that job, sold his soul to "the devil" to get it and, given ample evidence of his ego, he now must "dance to the devil's tune" to keep it.  At the moment, he's on very shaky ground.

Only takes one member to start a recall under a recently adopted rule.  Just one.  Which means ol' Mike could be out of a job any day now.

The U.S. House appears to be very close to being ungovernable.  There are so many caucuses of this and that.  Little groups of 10 to 40 that vote as a block.  In close votes, one or more "caucuses"can make a difference.

The Senate, while splintered in philosophy as well, seems to be able to get its work done.  How long that will last is anyone's guess.

Looking down the political road to the election of 2024, that one is going to be absolutely critical.  If there's any chance to weed out the miscreants and replace the wrong-doers with new, younger, smarter  folks to get things back on track, November 5th, 2024, is the 'drop dead' date.

This time around, we can't keep voting for the same old names.  What's needed now is 'new blood.'  Fresh faces.  Ages between 40 and 60.  Either party.  Younger people, some - hopefully - with legislative experience at home.

'New blood.'

 

Two remarkable Idahoans

July 8, 2024

Two native Idahoans were featured in news stories during June–one received plaudits upon his departure from this mortal world, the other demonstrated her legal prowess on the national stage. The sad news was the passing of John Peavey, a former state senator who had a substantial impact on Idaho’s environment, water policy and political campaign transparency. The happier news was the impact that Elizabeth Barchas Prelogar has had on cases affecting the rights of women in Idaho and across the nation.

John Peavey, who passed away on June 16, will be remembered for his many contributions to public policy issues in the Gem State, including voter approval of Idaho’s Sunshine Initiative, requiring the reporting of campaign financing.  But, another of his major accomplishments was lighting the fuse that forced the state to take action to improve the administration of its water resources to meet the demands of the future.

Peavey and others filed legal proceedings against Idaho Power Company in the late 1970s, claiming the company was failing to protect its water rights on the Snake River to the detriment of electric ratepayers. That sparked one of the largest water fights in state history, often referred to as the Swan Falls water fight, which was not fully resolved until the late 1980s and which resulted in the adjudication of Snake River water rights in southern Idaho.

Former Governor John Evans and I worked in tandem against the power company forces during that fight to protect the State’s control of Snake River waters. It would take a 376-page book to describe the struggle and that’s why I wrote A Little Dam Problem, which explains it in detail. During the course of the fight, the Governor and I were often critical of Peavey for lighting the match that got it started. In retrospect, it is clear that he did us all a big favor. Several years ago, when speaking about my book at a Hailey Rotary Club meeting, I told John that he deserved great credit for focusing attention on the need for action. It was only because Peavey got the ball rolling, that the State modernized its water law and protected that valuable resource for future generations.

The other distinguished Idahoan in the news was Elizabeth Barchas Prelogar, one of the most important legal figures in the United States. Most Idahoans do not know that the Solicitor General of the United States was born, raised and educated in Boise, Idaho. Nor do they realize that she bested the Idaho Attorney General (AG) in two important abortion-related cases decided by the US Supreme Court (SCOTUS) in June.

The AG was able to convince the high court in January to temporarily prohibit Idaho doctors from providing care for pregnant women who come to the emergency room with dangerous complications. Under Idaho’s total abortion ban, doctors cannot provide emergency care until the pregnant woman is on death’s doorstep. A federal law required doctors to provide stabilizing care, including abortion, to protect the health of the mother. The AG repeatedly made the false claim that Idaho’s law was exactly the same as the federal law.

When the case was argued before SCOTUS in April, Solicitor General Prelogar was able to convince Justice Amy Coney Barrett and other members of the Court that the AG’s position was a misrepresentation. The Court decided in Prelogar’s favor last month, allowing emergency room care for Idaho’s pregnant women.

Prelogar was also able to convince SCOTUS to dismiss another case that Idaho and other red-state AGs were supporting to ban Mifepristone, a medication used to end an early pregnancy. She pointed out that the doctors who brought the case did not have “standing” (the requisite legal basis) to pursue the case and that studies claiming the medication was dangerous were manipulated and unreliable. Scotus tossed out the case for lack of standing in June, much to the chagrin of the state AGs.

Those who are knowledgeable in legal circles regard Idaho’s Elizabeth Prelogar as one of the best Solicitor Generals ever, a supreme advocate. She certainly has a bright future ahead of her, perhaps as a member of SCOTUS.

Idaho has produced some remarkable leaders. As we bid eternal rest to that influential rancher and politician, John Thomas Peavey, we wish ever greater success to Elizabeth Barchas Prelogar, our Idaho-grown legal star who represents the entire federal government before the nation’s highest court.