Idaho State Capitol building on January 11, 2023. (Otto Kitsinger for Idaho Capital Sun)
In 2022, three Republican state lawmakers in Idaho’s legislative district 6 – in North Idaho — faced challenges from Democrats in the general election.
The incumbents all won another two-year term to represent the district that borders the state of Washington, spanning from Nez Perce on its eastern boundary to Lewiston on its western boundary.
But one race came down to 428 votes.
That November, state Sen. Dan Foreman, R-Viola, won 50.07% of the vote, defeating state Sen. David Nelson, D-Moscow, who had 47.97% of the vote. (Constitution Party candidate James Hartley received 398 votes.)
This November, the same three incumbent Republican state lawmakers will face off against another slate of Democrats vying to serve in the Idaho Legislature, where Republicans have had supermajority among Idaho’s 105 state legislative seats for over three decades.
Idaho’s Legislative District 6 races are between:
Idaho Senate: Republican incumbent Sen. Dan Foreman, R-Viola, and Democrat Julia Parker.
Idaho House-seat A: Incumbent Rep. Lori McCann, R-Lewiston, and Democrat Trish Carter-Goodheart.
Idaho House-seat B: Incumbent Rep. Brandon Mitchell, R-Moscow, and Democrat Kathy Dawes.
The Idaho Capital Sun reached out to all six candidates vying for the three seats in this district and asked them six questions about Idaho policies. All challengers responded. Only one incumbent replied.
Here’s what candidates in Idaho’s sixth legislative district said.
GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.
Idaho legislative district 6-House Seat A
Incumbent Rep. Lori McCann, R-Lewiston, is running against challenger Democrat Trish Carter-Goodheart.
1.) What are your top three state budget priorities?
McCann: Continued infrastructure for roads, bridges, and high-speed Internet. We have made great strides in fixing and updating old infrastructure and can see where funds in our District have gone as we drive up and down Highway 95. However, there are still roads and bridges in District 6 that are unsafe and must be tended to. I will continue to advocate for funding for the Idaho Department of Transportation for these projects.
Rep. Lori McCann (Courtesy of McCann)
Emergency Medical Services must be addressed. This is a topic that seems to get swept under the carpet every Session. It is expensive but we MUST look at beefing up our systems to ensure the safety of all Idahoans.
Public Education continues to be one of my top priorities. The funding formula must be addressed. I would like to see the State go to an enrollment-based formula instead of a formula based on average daily attendance. In addition, we have added substantial funding to help Idaho’s kids be more successful in their reading. We are starting to see some good improvements in this area. I will advocate for similar funding now for math skills.
Carter-Goodheart: Reducing grocery cost and taxes; Increasing funding for education and libraries; Access to comprehensive healthcare.
2.) Do you support public dollars being used for private education, including through tax credits or education savings accounts available to parents, or any other means? Why, or why or not?
McCann: I am a huge proponent of Public School Choice. Idaho currently has one of the most robust menus of options for parents in the Country. I have not been in support of public dollars going to private education because it comes with absolutely NO ACCOUNTABILITY. These private institutions can pick and choose which students they will and won’t accept, and there are no testing requirements showing learning is taking place. In addition, approx. 70% of the students who will receive these funds already are in private schools. How will the underachieving and problem students benefit from these dollars? The Idaho Constitution says that we MUST provide a free public education system that is fair for all children. The proposals I have seen have not been fair and equitable to ALL Idaho students. Further, rural Idaho is limited and in most cases there are NO private schools for these children to choose from. Again, not a fair and equitable solution for these kiddos…and that is a huge problem.
Trish Carter-Goodheart (Courtesy of Carter-Goodheart)
Carter-Goodheart: No; public dollars need to stay in public schools. Public schools are the cornerstone of our communities, and they provide essential resources, opportunities, and support to all students, regardless of their background or financial situation. By diverting funds to voucher programs or private schools, we take away critical resources that our public schools need to thrive. We should focus on strengthening our public schools- improving facilities, increasing teacher pay, and ensuring that every child has the tools they need to succeed. Public schools are the great equalizer in society, and they deserve our full support. Public funding needs to stay where it belongs, in the schools that serve all our children.
3.) Unlike some of its cities, counties and businesses, the state of Idaho does not have a climate plan or climate goals. How does climate change pose a threat to Idaho? How would you address the threats that climate change poses — such as water management, wildfires and energy production — to Idaho?
McCann: Idaho certainly has not been insulated from the extreme heat, causing additional drought and affecting our water supply and widespread wildfires. District 6 has seen its share of fires this summer. We must take a pragmatic approach to these problems. I believe that wildfires can be mitigated but we must have more control over the management of our Federal Lands. If the State was allowed to manage the Lands within its borders, I believe we could add additional grazing permits, clean up old burns, and downed trees to lessen the amount of fuels in the forest. Our farmers have seen firsthand the effects of the lack of water and the fights that ensue between our surface water folks and the ground water folks. I believe communication has been key and that these discussions must continue so that we find Idaho Solutions to these Idaho problems. We will continue to have issues with energy production. We have a unique opportunity to really take a look at the benefits of nuclear power right here in Idaho. To meet the future power needs of our growing State, I believe it is imperative that we look at nuclear power as an option.
Carter-Goodheart: We are already feeling the impacts of climate change. The increasing temperatures contribute to a rise in invasive plant species, more frequent and intense wildfires, and dangerous heat levels. Wildfires are devastating our forests, threatening our homes, and impacting air quality. Hotter weather has led to more frequent cases of heat exhaustion, and tragically, we are seeing more deaths related to extreme heat. Many construction workers have had to shift to night work, due to unsafe daytime temperatures. Our tourism industry, a key part of Idaho’s economy, could also suffer as extreme heat and air quality discourages longer visits, affecting local businesses and jobs. To address these challenges, we need to invest in renewable energy training to our workforce. This would not only create new job opportunities in growing industries like solar or wind energy, but also help Idaho transition to a cleaner, more sustainable future. By investing in renewable energy, we can reduce our reliance on fossil fuels, protect our environment, and build a stronger, more resilient economy for future generations.
4.) What is your position on the Proposition 1 ballot initiative that would end closed party primary elections and create ranked-choice voting? If voters pass the ballot initiative in November and you are elected, would you work to implement the ballot initiative or repeal it?
McCann: Proposition 1 has been brought by the people. My personal opinion is not what is important here. I will wait and see what the Idaho people decide. If the Idaho citizens decide they want a new system in place, then we as Representatives of and by the People, should listen to them and act accordingly whether it is our personal preference or not.
Carter-Goodheart: I am pro-Prop 1 because it gives voters more flexibility and a greater say in who represents them. Ranked choice allows voters to rank candidates in order of preference, ensuring that their vote counts even if their top choice doesn’t win. We could launch an educational campaign to help voters understand how RCV works and how it benefits them. We could start pilot programs in select districts or for certain local elections so folks could experience RCV firsthand and build confidence in the system.
5.) In May 2023, Texas Gov. Greg Abbott called on state governors to help with border security efforts. This year, Idaho spent nearly $206,000 to send 10 Idaho State Police troopers to the southern border for training. Do you support using Idaho taxpayer dollars to address issues at the southern border? Why, or why not?
McCann: Unfortunately, Congress has failed to protect our borders and in turn has failed Idahoans. I was proud that Governor Little sent the Idaho Na. Guard and State Troopers to the border to help protect and to receive training on issues stemming from the open border. The drugs that are pouring into our Country across the border are killing our citizens, both young and old, and causing untold damages to our people. Any training our troopers can receive to help with this problem, I am in favor of. I proudly support and back the blue in our great State!
Carter-Goodheart: This was political theater and a ridiculous waste of tax-payer dollars. Idaho has its own set of real challenges that require real attention and real resources, and sending our Troopers nearly 1,500 miles away does Little to protect or benefit the people of Idaho. What’s more, Idaho shares a border with Canada – not Mexico. If we were truly concerned about border security, why aren’t we focusing on the northern border that directly affects us? Instead of getting involved in matters outside our state, we should prioritize our public safety needs and invest in infrastructure, not waste our resources on political stunts.
6.) Idaho’s abortion ban is one of the strictest in the nation. Many doctors and hospital administrators have said Idaho’s law is vague, making it difficult to practice medicine, resulting in more airlifted patients to other states and difficulty recruiting maternal medical professionals. Do you support adding health exceptions for pregnant patients to Idaho’s abortion law? Why, or why not?
McCann: I am a proud Idaho pro-life mother who did choose life and have a wonderful son as a result. The current situation we find ourselves in is untenable. Some say it is not true that doctors are leaving our state, however, it is very much true. In a very recent sit down with OB/GYN, Emergency, Sports Medicine, and other doctors, and hospital administrators, in North Idaho, we learned just how true it really is. We need a health exemption for the mother and we need it NOW! It is not just OB/GYN docs leaving the state, but ER doctors as well. These docs gave example after example of women who could not be treated because of our laws. These women are not seeking abortions. These women want to have a child. These families want to grow, and a health exemption makes sense. I will certainly support legislation for an Idaho solution to an Idaho problem. This is not about abortion…it is about saving Idaho’s pregnant women from further harm that very well could lead to death, or sterility if they are not treated properly and with what is the “Standard of Care.”
Carter-Goodheart: I firmly believe that access to abortion is a fundamental aspect of healthcare and that pregnant people are fully capable of making informed decisions about their own bodies and health. I support adding health exceptions to our strict abortion laws to ensure that patients facing serious medical conditions or life threatening situations have access to necessary care. It’s crucial that our laws reflect a compassionate and pragmatic approach, allowing medical decisions to be made between a patient and their healthcare provider rather than by legislators. By including health exceptions we not only respect bodily autonomy but acknowledge the complex realities of individual health situations. Ensuring access to comprehensive health care is a matter of both personal choice and public health, and I am committed to advocating for the rights and wellbeing of all Idahoans.
Idaho legislative district 6-House Seat B
Incumbent Rep. Brandon Mitchell, R-Moscow, is running against Democrat Kathy Dawes. Mitchell did not respond to the Sun’s questionnaire
1.) What are your top three state budget priorities?
Dawes: 1) increasing public education funding, including facilities maintenance and construction, 2) lowering property taxes by increasing the homeowner’s exemption 3) eliminating sales tax on food.
2.) Do you support public dollars being used for private education, including through tax credits or education savings accounts available to parents, or any other means? Why, or why or not?
Dawes: No, I do not support ANY method or means to use public tax dollars for private education. The US Supreme Court ruled that if any public funds are used for private schools, the state cannot prevent those funds from going to religious schools. However, our Idaho Constitution clearly prohibits the use of public funds for any form of religious education according to Article IX, Section 5.
Kathy Dawes (Courtesy of Dawes)
Other states that have used public funds for private schooling have experienced a huge drain on state budgets and increases in taxes, especially property taxes, making this approach fiscally irresponsible.
Proponents argue that this effort promotes “school choice.” However, Idaho already has tremendous options for school choice such as charter schools, magnet schools, online schools, home-schooling options, and public school choice via open enrollment.
Whether the use of public funds for private schooling is by means of a tax credit or school voucher scheme or some other form, it will undoubtedly decrease revenue that could be used for public schools, provide a blank check to parents without any accountability, hurt our rural schools where there are no private school options, and be a clear violation the Idaho Constitution.
3.) Unlike some of its cities, counties and businesses, the state of Idaho does not have a climate plan or climate goals. How does climate change pose a threat to Idaho? How would you address the threats that climate change poses — such as water management, wildfires and energy production — to Idaho?
Dawes: Idaho is experiencing hotter temperatures that are harming community health due to smoke from wildfires, harming the agricultural industry with increased variation in rain patterns and temperatures, harming the recreation/tourism industry due to decreasing snow cover and increasing water temperatures, and decreasing our water and energy resources.
Although many cities have action plans to deal with some of these issues, the state needs to promote sustainable solutions that will provide multiple benefits and address the needs of all Idaho communities experiencing these impacts.
One example would be to increase our electric grid. Electrification has the potential to lower long-term costs compared to technologies using other types of fuels. The state should promote opportunities to increase electrical generation through a variety of renewable resources that will also create jobs and economic growth.
Idaho also needs a comprehensive plan to prevent the spread of wildfires. Our family owns twenty-six acres of woodland just north of Moscow and we have maintained it using thinning and controlled burns to restore it to pre-settlement conditions and prevent catastrophic forest fire because we feel it is important to take action. It would be beneficial for the state to incentivize this kind of stewardship by Idaho forest owners.
4.) What is your position on the Proposition 1 ballot initiative that would end closed party primary elections and create ranked-choice voting? If voters pass the ballot initiative in November and you are elected, would you work to implement the ballot initiative or repeal it?
Dawes: I fully support Proposition 1. If voters pass the ballot initiative and I am elected, I will work to implement it and will actively oppose any attempts to repeal it. The Idaho Constitution, Article 1, SECTION 2 states that “All political power is inherent in the people. Government is instituted for their equal protection and benefit, and they have the right to alter, reform or abolish the same whenever they may deem it necessary…”
I am very much in favor of Proposition 1 because it will 1) give power back to voters, especially Independent/Unaffiliated voters, 2) ensure that taxpayer-funded elections are open to all legal voters in Idaho, no matter what party they affiliate with 3) ensure that elected leaders have broad support, and 4) make politicians more accountable to Idahoans.
5.) In May 2023, Texas Gov. Greg Abbott called on state governors to help with border security efforts. This year, Idaho spent nearly $206,000 to send 10 Idaho State Police troopers to the southern border for training. Do you support using Idaho taxpayer dollars to address issues at the southern border? Why, or why not?
Dawes: No, I do not support Idaho spending money to train Idaho State Police to work at the southern border. I do not believe it is the job of the state of Idaho to address this issue which is happening in another state, and I believe those funds could be better used to address problems within our state.
6.) Idaho’s abortion ban is one of the strictest in the nation. Many doctors and hospital administrators have said Idaho’s law is vague, making it difficult to practice medicine, resulting in more airlifted patients to other states and difficulty recruiting maternal medical professionals. Do you support adding health exceptions for pregnant patients to Idaho’s abortion law? Why, or why not?
Dawes: Yes, I would support adding health exceptions for pregnant patients to Idaho’s current law. An incredible number of problems can arise during pregnancy and there are too many ways that a pregnancy can go wrong, affecting the physical and mental health of the pregnant patient and even their ability to have children in the future.
Idaho’s current law is so strict that it is forcing doctors to leave the state to avoid potential prison time. Patients with crisis pregnancies are having to leave the state to get the help they need. Under the current law, it is not safe to be pregnant in Idaho.
Idaho legislative district 6-Senate
Incumbent Sen. Dan Foreman, R-Viola, is running against Democrat Julia Parker. Foreman did not respond to the Sun’s questionnaire.
1.) What are your top three state budget priorities?
Parker: Eliminating the grocery tax, Adjusting the homeowners exemption for property tax to inflation, Helping rural community schools access funding for maintenance and facilities
2.) Do you support public dollars being used for private education, including through tax credits or education savings accounts available to parents, or any other means? Why, or why or not?
Parker: I do not support public tax dollars being used for private schools. The Idaho Constitution clearly states that “it is the duty of the legislature, to establish and maintain a general, uniform and thorough system of free common schools.” We cannot meet this requirement by funneling money to private or religious schools.
3.) Unlike some of its cities, counties and businesses, the state of Idaho does not have a climate plan or climate goals. How does climate change pose a threat to Idaho? How would you address the threats that climate change poses — such as water management, wildfires and energy production — to Idaho?
Julia Parker (Courtesy of Parker)
Parker: After another summer of extensive wildfires, I see no doubt that we are impacted by a changing climate. Resource conservation and climate change mitigation go hand-in-hand. What were good practices in the past, will continue to help our state as we face climate change. As a member of Moscow City Council, I helped enact a climate action plan. This plan not only helps us to do what we can as a city, but also saves resources and money. In addition, the state needs to work to protect our natural resources and our communities against wildfire by funding robust wildland fire fighting and wildland-urban interface education.
4.) What is your position on the Proposition 1 ballot initiative that would end closed party primary elections and create ranked-choice voting? If voters pass the ballot initiative in November and you are elected, would you work to implement the ballot initiative or repeal it?
Parker: Ballot initiatives reflect the will of the voters when they cannot get the legislature to listen. I will support the will of the people when the votes are counted for or against Proposition 1. I support the open primaries initiative. Our current system disenfranchises about 1/4 million voters in our state who do not want to declare party affiliation. The primaries are paid for by tax money and all voters should be able to participate. I believe that both open primaries and ranked choice voting will help bring more moderation to the state.
5.) In May 2023, Texas Gov. Greg Abbott called on state governors to help with border security efforts. This year, Idaho spent nearly $206,000 to send 10 Idaho State Police troopers to the southern border for training. Do you support using Idaho taxpayer dollars to address issues at the southern border? Why, or why not?
Parker: No, this is political grandstanding and a waste of money.
6.) Idaho’s abortion ban is one of the strictest in the nation. Many doctors and hospital administrators have said Idaho’s law is vague, making it difficult to practice medicine, resulting in more airlifted patients to other states and difficulty recruiting maternal medical professionals. Do you support adding health exceptions for pregnant patients to Idaho’s abortion law? Why, or why not?
Parker: I believe in freedom in medical decision-making. I agree that the abortion ban is poorly written and poorly designed. Clearly, most of our state legislature does not understand or chooses not to understand pregnancy, fetal development, violence against women, or the myriad of complications women face. I believe that adding exceptions would not fix this law. The abortion ban should be scrapped and a clearer and more reasonable law should be put in its place.
YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE.