4.14.2025 -- NLS -- Trump’s Tariffs, Horman’s Budget Wins & Biden’s Blowback

On this episode with Neal and Julie, the discussion spans national politics, law enforcement training, and a deep dive into Idaho’s legislative session. Neal opens by critiquing the media and political reaction to recent law enforcement actions, stressing the need for better training in encounters involving individuals with disabilities. The conversation then pivots to Donald Trump’s tariffs, with Neal drawing comparisons to the Biden administration’s Afghanistan withdrawal, arguing that the media wants a similar political downfall for Trump. Julie highlights the disconnect between progressive ideology and the working class, suggesting Democrats have shifted away from their traditional base.

Later, they’re joined by Representative Wendy Horman, who unpacks this year’s legislative session. Topics include Idaho’s education funding reforms, school choice initiatives, and significant tax reductions. Horman explains how the budgeting process has evolved to better control growth and ensure fiscal responsibility. They also cover infrastructure spending—especially for water projects in East Idaho—and touch on state efforts to mirror federal immigration priorities. The episode wraps up with a look ahead at Medicaid reform and a call for more accountability in government spending.

Let’s talk advertising. When you want to advertise on the radio, you call the station, right? But what about Facebook, Instagram, Hulu, Disney+, Peacock, and other streaming platforms?

You could try clicking around, reading books, or taking online courses to figure it out—or you can let us handle it. At Sandhill Media Group, we’re your local experts in both radio and digital marketing.

Visit SandhillMediaGroup.com today.

Transcript

Well, as armchair quarterbacks go. I'm Tom Brady. I mean, the retired version of Tom Brady. Tom Brady in his heyday. You know what? Let me upgrade that. As armchair quarterbacks go. I'm although he can't say Patrick Mahomes they they lost the Super Bowl. So anyway welcome. It's good to have you with it with us. Botched that. Yeah we have a lot going on.

I was thinking about this Stephen A Smith thing. It's almost like he is the New Democrat trial balloon of the week. But the problem with that is they're pumping out more than one a week. Not quite one a day, but, one per week. So I'll get to that. Maybe. Do I care all that much? Not really. Do I think Stephen Smith will ever be president of the United States, Stephen Smith?

I don't think so. Like, I probably wouldn't put any money on that. Just don't don't think that's going to happen. But we'll get he thinks he might be and he thinks he can do the job, which is a prerequisite. If you want to become the president, you need to think that you can be the president. I won't fault him for that.

Also, we have a lot in the last 72 hours with the situation. Tragic, terrible, sad situation, infuriating situation in Pocatello. Victor Perez was deemed, The term they use, of course, is brain dead. And his family made that excruciating choice. Removing life support Saturday morning, I believe around 10:00. An hour prior to that, a candlelight vigil was held outside portion of Medical Center.

And later in the day, and, but this is very predictable and understandable, a, peaceful protest emerged outside of City Hall and a few hundred yards away. I don't know how far away on the top of a building. There were police snipers and they were spotted and some of the news media was there. The video I saw was Linda Larsen and Doug Long.

They said, that looks like police on top of that building. And those look like long guns they're holding. So they went inside the police department and they asked about it and it was confirmed. And they said, is this standard protocol? And the the answer to them was, well, today it is. And apparently they later issued a statement, later said that the FBI had informed them that there was a credible threat.

We don't know against whom or what, but there was a credible threat. And as a precautionary measure, they decided to put snipers on a building not too far away from the peaceful protest outside the the police station. So now that's another sub story to all of this. A lot of people reacted to that and said that that was terrible optics and that, it was that their suspicion was that it was some kind of an intimidation play.

I don't think that's the case. And I and honestly, if it was bad optics, nobody was hurt, nobody was shot, nobody was intimidated by it. And, if in fact, there was a credible threat, then that's exactly what they, should have done, because you can't really go out and cancel a protest, like this. And so they're in, in a really, really tough spot.

I am not going to get worked up over, police snipers, just with long guns, keeping an eye on things when there's the presence of a credible threat as informed to them by the FBI. So I hope we do find out more. And I will say this in the interest of transparency and press freedom and all of that, I do hope that they give us more information about this credible threat that the FBI informed them about so that we we can understand this to it to a greater degree.

And I would imagine if threats have been made, there's probably some criminal charges that could be filed in that case, but we don't have any details. We don't have a name. We don't have any of it. So I was thinking about this. And of course, with all of these developments, I knew that I needed to discuss some degree of this on my show this morning, and we've already talked about it.

And I will tell you, we have a very, very robust text line on the radio show, and we hear a lot from a lot of people. And there were a few two, 2 or 3 in particular, that took great exception to what I had said on Friday in characterizing what had happened Saturday before last. Very protective and defensive of the police officers, which I'm there 99% of the time.

But I, as I, as I read those those comments, I, I feel like I have tried to be very even keel on this that they're not murderers. They, I defended not naming any of any of the officers, quite frankly, because we don't even know what any individual officer did or did not do in that terrible moment.

So if you had an officer that did not fire a weapon, why should they be named and take all of the, you get it. So, I have also pointed out very, clearly they went into a situation based on the 911 call, believing that there were people under an imminent threat, that they went in thinking it was someone who was drunk, not physically impaired or disabled in some way.

They didn't know he was a minor. They didn't know about the autism. I said all of that in an effort to lower the temperature. The point that got people upset, apparently, was when I said we we need to have a situation, not a situation. We need to have training so that in situations like these, a 17 year old kid with autism doesn't end up dead, and they defend the police as though they did the only thing they could do and everything they did was justified.

That's what I would take issue with. I believe it could have turned out better. And I believe that if you'll set your biases aside, your loyalties aside, and just look at the situation for what it was. If you asked the question if upon arrival, the police officers had scanned the situation, recognized nobody was under any kind of an impending threat, that the approach did not need to be for officers immediately drawing weapons and screaming at the young man.

That's the point that I would make. And that's a training issue. That's, How do you when you prioritize de-escalation? Yes. Be ready to fire that weapon when there is that impending immediate threat. But when they pulled up, the young man was lying on the on the lawn, and you had a guy fairly casually leaning against the fence, and that that's the point in all of this.

Now, you can send your disagreeing, text. That's fine. I have no problem with that. But I I'm probably not going to budge on this. I think we can explain what those officers did, but we can also have the opinion things could have turned out differently if they had handled it differently. And I believe they could have handled it differently.

And I'm guessing, again, we're all sort of guessing here and speculating and wondering. My hunch is that when the Inter-Agency Task Force investigation is done, that's will be part of their conclusion, is that the officers did not read the situation as well as they could have, and they did not prioritize de-escalation as well as they could have. So you have that.

We also, again, I don't I don't want to spend a ton of time on this because we know what we know right now, and we're awaiting the investigation. We're awaiting, what? To find out. I think right now I want to end on this note. Please pray for the family of this young man. Primarily, they are in a world of hurt, right now.

If you have it, if you're able to donate, they're going to need some financial help to get through this. They've got, obviously they're going to have a funeral to to pay for and, and expenses to deal with. So I would, include them in your prayers. I would also include, and this may anger some people. Pray for the police officers and pray for their families.

None of this. None of this is easy for anybody to deal with. So there, we'll leave it there. All right. Lots of politics to get to today. Donald Trump continues to just roll forward. We're now up to 130 countries. A few days ago it was 9090 nations had reached out almost within hours, like a couple of days, that the countries had reached out and said, okay, 10% tariff will negotiate and let's will we understand.

And and they reached a they they don't want to lose the United States as a customer. Nobody does. We buy a lot of crap from a lot of countries and nobody wants to to lose the United States as a customer. So it's now up to 130 countries. You realize doing the quick math here and by the way, I didn't have Common Core went to public school.

And I can tell you 130 countries is about two thirds of the countries in the United States. But man, the Democrats need this to result in economic disaster. They, they have put so many eggs in the tariffs equals Great Depression basket. They are pretending that's what's happening. They are proceeding as though that's what's happened. They have created this little world in their little minds, or in the little vacant space where their mind should be, that the tariffs by Donald Trump are leading to the Great Depression.

And it just isn't the case. And quite frankly, the polling shows that America is in support. I feel like it's cautious support because we're still in the thick of it and we're in the middle of it, and there's a lot of uncertainty remaining. So you have all of that happening. And they're just they've lost their minds. This is Chuck Todd.

He was on CNN over the over the, over the weekend. Listen to how he's characterizing the Trump tariffs. The comparison I'm making right now is that, as is the comparison to the the week that I think was the beginning of the end of the Biden presidency, which was the botched withdrawal from Afghanistan, because this week could have that kind of impact at that point, once Joe Biden lost, the competence question of people because the Afghanistan issue really hurt him harder, because the core competency voters thought Joe Biden had was on national security.

So when it was like, whoa, he's messing that up, it started to erode confidence in everything else. It was a major turning point for turning the president. And it never he never recovers from it. Are you bleeping kidding me? Imposing tariffs is being compared to 13 Marines dead. Others died as well. It was one of the biggest foreign policy disasters in history that will reverberate for a long time.

And we're we had the stock market fluctuate a little bit. I mean okay a lot for a few days. And he thinks this is Donald Trump's Afghanistan. So I have my own explanation for this. I think that there is a problem with the with a broken liberal brain, which is they can't distinguish what they want in terms of what they want to be true from what is the true.

And in this case, what isn't the truth. If Chuck Todd want so badly for these tariffs to destroy the economy and to be so optically disastrous for Donald Trump, that it is equivalent to Joe Biden's completely botched withdrawal from Afghanistan. And in fact, if you go back, wasn't it the Biden administration with Karine Jean-Pierre? I think it was.

It might have been, peppermint Patty at that time, I can't remember. But, they said it was an incredibly successful operation, did they not? I thought that's what they were. If they were saying so. Anyway, And that that is remarkable. But what's fascinating is the American public doesn't look like that. Brad Todd, CNN this week you saw a lot more clarity heading into the goal, which is get tough on China, be open to negotiate with other countries.

If President Trump will sell this as a fairness issue, Americans are going to be with him. That CBS poll indicates a majority support his goals on this. Germany shouldn't be taxing our cars at 100% when we tax theirs. At a quarter of that, it is a basic level of fairness, you know, and Democrats. So they're part this is a big chance for them like Elizabeth Warren who you had on the show earlier.

She's been for tariffs her whole life, but she hates Donald Trump more than she likes the things she believes in. It's a big chance. Joe Biden added tariffs to electric vehicles and solar panels and steel and aluminum. Democrats need to work with Donald Trump to crack down on China. Okay, yeah, you have that. But they won't. You they Democrats will not.

For some reason, they it's it's right that Donald Trump his numbers are staying high largely with the American people. They're still doing quite well. I don't have the numbers in front of me. But they're doing well. So you have Gretchen Whitmer, the governor of Michigan. She goes to the white House over the weekend. She thought it was a private meeting.

She thought that she could keep the meeting with Orange Man. Bad under the radar. Well, Orange man, bad decides to make part of the meeting public and invites the press to come in. And Gretchen Whitmer, Governor Whitmer, not wanting to be seen with orange Man, bad, covers her face. It's almost like you've we've all seen this. When they do the perp walk in a criminal case and you have the the criminal cover their face and and they just they hold their hands up so the cameras cannot take a clear shot of their of their face.

That was Gretchen Whitmer. That was Gretchen Whitmer doing a perp walk. I mean, in this case, she was just standing there and she did not want to be her image recorded inside the Orange Man. Bad run, white House. It's hilarious. Now she may I don't know if it was a joke for her. I hope we get broader context, but I think that it was actually genuine.

I think she put that folder up because she really did not want hurt her people and maybe herself. But her people hate Donald Trump that much that she felt the need to do what they do during a perp walk, which is obscure my face from the cameras, because I don't I don't want to be associated with this. I don't want this harming my my sterling reputation and I think it's another example of Trump Derangement Syndrome and how broken, how broken they are.

We'll be back. It's 825 on Newstalk 1079, little over a half an hour away. Representative Wendy Harmon will join us for the 9:00 hour. We're going to talk about what I think is a truly landmark legislative session, a lot accomplished. And if you're a conservative, you can't help but be, quite pleased with the outcome of this last legislative session.

We'll have more on that later. People, literally people have walked up to me, including my own pastor, for crying out loud, who has said to me, you don't know what God has planned for you? At least show the respect to the people who believe in you, who respect you, who believe that you can make a difference in this country, to leave the door open for any possibility.

So to three years down the line. All right. It's 831 on Newstalk 1079. Can I, can I talk about the Stephen Smith thing for just a minute? I know I referenced it at the opening of the show, but this is the latest float. This is the, the idea that they're putting out there to see, how's this going to go over?

Because right now we got absolutely nobody to match up against a whole lineup of viable big names in the Republican Party. And they're panicking. And they should. They really they truly should. Especially if they don't perform well next year in the midterms. It's going to be super, super ugly. But I thought about this. There's a clip. Let me see.

He he really goes after the Democrat Party. And here's one. Unless things become disastrous economically, the fact of the matter is the American people have already said during the last election he's a bit more normal or closer to normal than the Democratic Party. And that's where the real problem lies. Is that at two, it might be a two party system, but there's only one party run in this country right now because the Democrats have no muscle whatsoever.

Okay. But he presumably is going to run as a Democrat. So how is it that your line is I don't like either party. I don't like either one. In fact, that's essentially what he says here. I would hope somebody else would step up that's more qualified than me. But if it has to come down to me, it is something I would consider.

Yes, I would, because I don't mind the thought of tussling with these folks at or on the left or the right. All of them disgust me, to be quite honest with you. Okay, you all disgust me. But I'm going to be a Democrat. I mean, how does that work it if you're being intellectually honest, if all of them disgust you, then you run as an independent.

And maybe you, I don't know, maybe he will, maybe he will, but I but I the context that I'm feeling, the vibe that I'm feeling with Steven Smith is that he'll he'll be the Democrat that can step up and be better than all the other Democrats. And that's how I and and sort of this self assigned title of savior of the Democrat Party.

I don't that's that's a weird deal. Like, I, I don't really understand that psychology at all because he's always been a sports guy. And I'll be honest with you, I am not the most prolific watcher of ESPN, okay? And and I'm just not. But those of you who are, I'll just ask you this. Don't call in, but text in if you're if it's safe to do so.

Have you ever viewed Stephen A Smith as presidential material? I, I don't, you know, I again, I don't watch CNN or ESPN all the time, but I certainly know who Stephen Smith is. I've never watched that and thought, you know, that guy's got, much, much broader skill set than just sports. He ought to be the president of the United States.

It's never been. I've never looked at that. I've never heard anybody discuss that even more. So, Donald Trump's been talking about being president since the mid 1980s. I think since he went on Oprah. That's the first I had heard it. Like, here's a guy who had some ideas and talked about maybe becoming president one. I mean, that's all we sort of been for a long time.

It was just kind of the back burner for Donald Trump. And then he built his empire and and he went on to become the president of the United States. So I don't I they are really, really searching. And I also find it fascinating. Explain this to me. And this is sort of that characteristic, contradictory nature of anybody who's a Democrat.

I'm running to be the Democrat nominee, and the Democrats have lost their bearings. The Democrats are off off base. The Democrats have left. Okay, then why are you running to be their nominee? Like, that's, you know, you're certainly not going to be a Republican because you. Right. Those Republicans can't do that. So, you're running to be the nominee of a party that you're criticizing and condemning.

If you want to be the Democrat nominee, you got to help the Democrat brand. You can't just go out and scorch it all the time. But that's what these guys are. Do they're they're they're they are so ripped to shreds internally that they do not know what to do at all. And, they look we saw the the angst and the conditions that were being had in the lead up to Donald Trump 2024.

I mean, look at what they did. They booted the old guy off the stage without any kind of a selection process. They elevated Kamala Harris, who was among the worst candidates ever. She's in that hallway along with Hillary Clinton and the, you know, beta O'Rourke. You know, they're they're the worst presidential candidates in history. And we're solid.

We have a good bench if we're not stupid, if, like, we'll play our cards right, I think we we win in 2028. It may be DeSantis. It may be it might be Vance. I think those are the two leading prospects right now. It could be someone else. I think we could be set up for beyond Donald Trump, another eight, perhaps even 12 years.

We might be at the beginning, right now of a 20 year run for Republicans in the white House. Now, I don't want to get too far out ahead of of this, but I'm going to tell you, if the Democrats try to keep scooping up and shoveling towards us what they have been, I, I'm feeling great. I mean, I get tired of it like anybody else.

But there is a silver lining to that mess, which is it makes Republican much more electable. We'll be back to 837 on Newstalk 1079. It's 843 on Newstalk 1079. Remember when, Trump came into power and the emergence of QAnon happened? That was sort of the far corner of conspiratorial internet and all sorts of things were, pumped out by that.

Apparently there's a group sort of it's mocking QAnon called Blue Anon, and it's mocking all of the conspiracy theorists on the left. There's a new one out. I don't I hadn't even heard about this, which I usually will because I have this affinity for conspiracy theories, not an affinity for believing them, but an affinity for knowing what they are, understanding them and examining why they're happening and and the psychological reasons for it.

But apparently the left believes that Donald Trump is going to declare martial law on April 20th, which, hey, that's now less than a week away. The same people who spent years mocking QAnon are now pushing a full blown blue anon fantasy of their own. Apparently, James Carville is the source of the hysteria. On a recent episode of Politics War Room, Carville was asked whether Trump was trying to provoke enough unrest to declare martial law and suspend the 2026 elections.

You're so correct to be concerned about this. It's getting worse by the day. It is not going to stop getting worse, and I would be we ought to be on high alert. Okay, well, Carville is a nut job, okay? I don't I don't know why people leave. He's just. You know how people get crazy. Remember when, Britney Spears shaved her head and there's, like, this psychological need to always be relevant.

This is J doesn't have any hair to shave, but this is figuratively James Carville shaving his head and putting out these ridiculous, ridiculous claims about this. And people are buying it. If you go through and these are clear, like there's some X account. Oh, no, no, this is, the one that's the blue is a blue blue sky.

Is that what they call it anyway? Democratic activists, as a veteran, if martial law is declared in the U.S, it means the Constitution is suspended. Civilian government gone. Freedom of speech, Assembly. The press gone. Curfews, checkpoints, arrest without warrants, no due process. I believe the military would stand with the people in the Constitution. Another one test trial for declaring martial law.

Get ready America. They are practicing another one blueprint for seeking up martial law in the USA. He must be stopped somehow. And then a list of all they see. And there are others. I'm not going to read all of them to you about this rumor rumored declaring of martial law on April 20th. But what I will say, do you remember back and some of you were part of this and you know who you are.

You thought all during the Trump or excuse me, the Clinton presidency, that he was going to declare martial law. Remember that. And there was this fear about the new World Order and Bill Clinton declaring martial law, and we were going to lose our Constitution rights. And I always viewed those claims with a great degree of skepticism because I thought, no, there's too many safeguards.

Anyway, they are now what we used to be, and we are now what they always claim to be, which was the party of the people. Harry Enten, who I've I've grown to appreciate. He's the CNN numbers guy, and, he's talking about the polling for for Trump and for the Republicans. And now we are equally seen as the party rep.

Presenting the people to me, is one of the most shocking pieces of poll data that I truly, truthfully have seen this year. Maybe in any prior year. Yes, really. Because I want you to take a look cares more about the needs for people like you. You mentioned Dick Bowl. We got a tie. Even after this tariff war had already started, split between Democrats and Republicans on how people feel.

Which party cares more for needs of people like you? And why is that so surprising? Because I want you to take a look at prior year's Democrats always lead on this question. Back in 2017, before the 2018 midterms. 13 point lead 2005 a 23 point lead for Democrats 1994, which was a big Republican year, a 19 point lead for Democrats.

And now all of a sudden a tie, all of a sudden the Democrats, who are the party of the people, no more, no more. We get a tie on this question, on a question that has traditionally overwhelmingly been a Democratic advantage. People for party. Which party cares more for the needs of people like you? It's truly something I would not have expected to see, especially after this tariff war had begun.

Okay, Harry Enten is spot on and the Republicans have rightly taken this position of being the, of being the party of the people. So, the party of the people and, not anymore. Not anymore. Donald Trump is doing what Ronald Reagan did 40 years ago. Ronald Reagan, he appeal to the blue collar. He appealed to, the the, just the average ordinary, a very, very populist approach.

And it's a beautiful thing when when you stop and think about that, that really was sort of their one of their last holdout advantages in electoral politics is they the Democrats were viewed as they are the party that represents the working class, the commoner, the whatever word you want to plug in there. It isn't true anymore. And I believe it.

I'd love to give all the credit to Donald Trump, because he really has resonated with the working class. I think obviously some of the credit should go to Donald Trump, but I will tell you, the lion's share of the credit is actually the Democrats themselves, because they moved some eggs from the we appeal to the working class family over to the trans gendered ideology basket, over to the DII basket, over to the intersectionality politics basket.

And that's almost a zero sum game that you can't maintain one and also have the other. You you've got to choose if you want to be a complete lefty nut job on everything, gender and race, then you're going to lose a significant chunk of support from average, ordinary Americans who believe, rightly so, that that is nonsense. If you want to stake out the position that it's okay for boys and men to compete against girls and women, then you're going to lose a good chunk of just the working class average, ordinary American.

They're you no longer can make the claim you're looking out for them. I'm looking out for your paycheck. But I think this transgender athlete that's two feet taller than your daughter is also a girl and can steal all the, trophies and medals and titles from your daughters. It doesn't. It doesn't work that way, Democrats. You got to choose what you want to be.

I kind of hope you'll keep choosing craziness, because that only benefits us. I hope that you will continue to select being a nut job, because you're making it easy to win. So keep it up. You can own that territory if you want. You can try to make that case if you want, but it it almost becomes not even fun anymore.

In the spirit of it being so easy. The problem is, once you've staked out that position, once you get drunk on and addicted to the high of being more virtuous than everyone else, that's hard to let go. And I think that's what we're seeing in the Democrat Party right now is they are they are drunk. They are alcoholics of their own virtue.

And they can't put that bottle down. And that must be a difficult, difficult position to be in because you're losing your job, you're losing your friends, you're losing your family relationship. You're losing all the things that are truly important to you. One of them would have been you appealed to the working class in America because you can't put your bottle of woke virtue down.

It's really kind of a shame. But if what that means is more rational and more sane people get elected. Yes, Republicans then well, so be it. It's 853. Quick break will come back again. Coming up in about 15 minutes. Representative Wendy Harman will join us and we are going to talk about this last legislative session. We'll have a nice comprehensive look at it for you this next hour on Newstalk 179.

All right. 857 on Newstalk 179. So over the weekend, I finally got to step one. I'm still well within the window, but step one of the four step lawn program from Town and Country Gardens. Step one, of course, is the Hume and, super easy. Every bag covers about 10,000. Now, excuse me, 5000ft² and so I grabbed a couple of bags and with my broadcast spreader, my push broad Scott broadcast spreader, it took me about 18 minutes to to cover my.

And then I'm done for a couple of months. So you have March, April and then May. June is step to July. August is step three. And then, you can skip September and then October. November you do the, the winter iser and that is step four. It's that easy and it's that simple. And, yeah, it's just there four easy steps that you should apply every year.

And by the way, don't feel like you're too late, even if you're in the middle of the summer. You could start this, but I would suggest that you start now, because why not have a beautiful on right now? So put the, down and, then, wait a couple months and you can put the other stuff down, and then you just water and mow like you normally would.

And that's what your lawn needs now, the occasional power raking or aerating. You'd still want to do that as well. But in terms of just having healthy, lush green grass, that's what the four step lawn program is for. They also have all of your other needs at town and country gardens. If you need seeds for your vegetable or flower garden, they've got that.

If you want some nice hanging baskets, you're going to have those as well. Swing by across from the malt plant south of Idaho Falls on the Yellowstone Highway. We'll be back our to Wendy Harmon coming up and we're back. It's 907 on Newstalk 1079. And joining me in studio this hour is Representative Wendy Harmon. Could you hear okay or was it too loud?

It's too loud. Okay. I'll go without I can actually turn it down for you if you want. So if you want them on either way. So, But, Wendy, welcome. It's good to have you here this morning. Here. This is fun. Well, legislative session, which, looking back on it, it felt like it took a little while to get things going, but that's pretty typical.

And then there was this drumbeat of legislation that was getting passed and signed and you look back in retrospect, it was a fantastic legislative session for conservatives. I agree, it's certainly the strongest one that I've been a part of in 13 years. It, we started strong with introducing, tax cuts and school choice early on. We actually got those through, surprisingly quickly at the beginning of the session.

And then you're right, it was a drumbeat of constant, conservative ideas that have been maybe held back for years that were able to get through the process this year. You sent me a piece, Julie, that you actually penned a week ago, about fac and the headline was it was dedicated, diligent and determined during the 2025 session.

That's not a headline you're all that accustomed to when it comes to the media reporting on Jpac. No. In fact, the editor I said that to several outlets and, Jennifer Swindell at Idaho Ed News said I couldn't resist making the headline because you said there would never be a headline. And she said, so. She said, I'll change it if you want.

And I'm like, no, go ahead and leave it. So you tricked the media into a favorable headline. Congratulations. There you go. Yeah. No, there was so much misinformation out there about what was going on. In fact, you know, the headlines were literally dysfunction, deadlock, delay. And it is true that the legislative process sometimes runs into speed bumps. And Jack was not immune from that.

There were some big spenders on the committee this year that were protesting how we vote, and how many people should vote to create a majority. And and, that's claiming that we weren't operating under any rules, which is just completely false. Yeah. And but that's what grabbed the headlines. And so I thought it was important to get the story out there about the budget this year.

It, it, you know, it's not usually a headline grabbing event. The budget. It's not it's not sexy. It's not. It's just a lot of work. It's a lot of grinding work out there. But it's the people's money. And so it's our role to make sure it's being spent in a transparent and accountable way and that we are, seeking results for taxpayers.

Remind our listeners, representative, how the way you do budgeting shifted a couple of years ago. I think it was two years ago where you separated each budget really into two budgets. And instead of having it all be one big budget, you had what was called a maintenance budget, which was this is basically what you need. If we were to make a family analogy, you got to pay the power.

You've got to, keep the lights on and heat and you have to pay your car payment and you have to have groceries and those basics. But if there's additional if there's more perks, if there's, you know, you want that new cable package or whatever, that's a supplemental add on. And, and you divided those out. Not everybody liked that.

In fact, they pushed back pretty hard. But it appears to be an approach that for those of us who like limited government, it appears to be working. I couldn't agree more. There was a ton of pushback. Senator grow and I became co-chairs of Jack three years ago, and we instituted some changes in the hearing process our first year.

But it was the second year where we were really able to start focusing on how can we limit the growth of government in spending and so we did. We separated out basically what an agency received the last year, plus increases for salary and benefits and then really able to focus in on that growth so we could limit it in an appropriate cases.

We did that this year. Maintenance spending was 5% of, the increase. So all of general government really only increased 1.8%. That's really nothing short of a miracle. But separating those budgets out. And you still have people that are mad about that and they are on fact still. Yeah. And so they, you know, tried to do everything they could to complain about the process and, and protest.

And I had to gavel down a gentleman that was trying to take over the meeting, speak over the chairman. I gaveled him down. We went in my office and had a little conversation about who the chairman is and who's running things, and that. Yeah, it's just not respectful. Yeah. And even if you do have a difference of opinion, you don't like the new process.

You, you still should respect the chairman. So question. I don't know how I don't know how you argue against that. It seems like just a common sense way. Now, if you want to boost the supplemental more than someone else, then make that case right. Did they just not want to make the case and bury the extra supplemental spending in with the overall budget?

This is one of the big complaints of the Democrats and a few Republicans on the Joint Finance Committee, was that we didn't spend enough. We didn't give money for workforce housing. We rejected money for, appliances, that were part of the Green New Deal. We we sent that money back to the federal government. In all, we rejected about $300 million worth of requests.

And if you're a big spender and your idea of solutions is more government rather than less, of course you're mad that we limited spending. Okay, so it's just a philosophical difference, then. Of Democrats and some Republicans. Yeah. All right. We are talking with Representative Wendy Harman. If you'd like to reach us, send a text and, we'll I'll filter through those and relay your questions to Representative Horman.

2085421079I know this was your signature, bill, and, you've absolutely won me over with the parental choice fight that you've gone through over the last couple of years. And I love your somewhat sarcastic, no, just blatantly sarcastic reference to the end of Western civilization as we know it. You're assuring everyone it's it's not the end. It's $50 million out of a multi-billion dollar, scope.

And it doesn't even take from that multi-billion dollar budget. How how is that going? And, and I guess lay out the implementation of that over the next year. Super excited about, House Bill 93, the Idaho parental choice tax credit. It's for families of modest means, below 300% of the federal poverty level. To, be able to send their child to a school that best meets their needs and this has been something I've been working on for so many years.

And so to finally get it across the finish line, I think it will make a big difference in the lives of children. But to hear the hyperbole from the teachers union and, Democrats and even some Republicans that, you know, this will destroy public schools, it will, again, in my my sarcastic reference to, you know, the end of the world in Western civilization.

They're really framing it that way. But fortunately, we weren't on the Mayflower. Lots of other states have already done this, and you can see that rural schools still exist in those states. Public schools still exist in those states. And so it's just not accurate representation of what's going to happen. What is going to happen is maybe 1 to 2% of students might leave the public schools, or it might be, those of very modest incomes that are already in private schools, or maybe those that want to start a micro school.

I met with, a couple that were in town for the Farm Bureau meetings. They run an agricultural preschool here in the region, and they're, it's an experiential learning. You go to the farm and you learn. And their families have wanted them to expand into kindergarten for a second grade for years. This is going to enable some real innovation in the education space for kindergartners.

You know, kindergartners have a hard time sitting for 2.5 hours, or even the full day, I think is even worse for five year olds. But if you could go to a farm and learn and that's your kindergarten, right? We have families that I think are going to become education entrepreneurs. With this, we still invested $400 million in public schools, even though there's only 100 more kids than this year than there was last year.

So there's a big demographic shift happening in public schools right now. The senior class that's leaving is, larger than the incoming kindergarten and first grade classes. So there's a natural, reduction of the kids that we're going to have. And yet we still invested 400 million new dollars in the public school system. So it's just not accurate to say that, you know, you have to support one or the other.

You can support both. I have and so did the legislature. So let's talk about that $400 million in new funding. Clearly that had to go through Jdrf, which you chair co-chair and I think back let's go back in time a little bit. The the IEA, through their PAC, spent tens of thousands of dollars to try to defeat you.

True. Which how does that all play out that you're you're in Jdrf and you do cherish education. You just think we can be more creative. We can be more innovative. We can have different approaches to education. But you want every kid in Idaho to get a good education, or else you wouldn't have allowed $400 million in new funding to go toward public education in in Idaho.

How does I, I don't my mind can't even process that relationship because they spent so much money to try and oust you. But yet you're you're still a friend to. Well, I would imagine they'd be happy about $400 million in new education. I don't even know what to ask, but I'm sure you have some thoughts on that. You know, they they spent more against me, and in favor of my opponent than they spent in any all the other races combined.

Oh, wow. And so I think I was listening to your show earlier this morning and I, you or someone said they hate Trump so much. You were talking about tariffs. I think. Yeah. And they hate him so much that they're going against their own principles. When I say I want an excellent education for every child, no matter where they're learning, that includes public schools.

And I have a 30 plus year record of supporting public schools in this community. But their hatred of of what I stand for, of supporting education for all kids in all settings, outweighs their ability to look logically at what we actually did. And I don't understand that mindset. It doesn't resonate with me. It's it's so emotional that it's to their detriment and they're still there.

If you look on Twitter, they're still hosting, town halls and, and recruiting candidates to run against people like me who support, excellent education everywhere, including public schools. All right. Well, we're talking with Representative Wendy Harmon. It's 920. We're going to take a quick break, but we'll come back again. I'll check the text line. If you have any questions for Representative Harmon, you can send them to (208) 542-1079 924 on Newstalk 179.

The program, brought to you by Grand Peak's Prime mates, fill your freezer with delicious steak or ribs or dogs, whatever you want to put on your grill. Now's the time to do it because it's definitely grilling season and Grand Prix peaks. Primates can help you out with that. Just go online to Jeep primates.com and see what packages and specials they have for you.

And if you don't see something that you would like, give them a call because they love to work with you on custom orders. Again, that's Jeep primates.com. Joining us in studio of course, is Representative Wendy Harmon talking about the legacy session I mentioned to you, only we could probably talk education all hour long and still not cover everything.

But a lot more happened. There was a lot of good tax reduction that happened in the legislature this year. So maybe lay that out for us. Sure. Three amazing bills that came forward. House Bill 40 reduced the individual and corporate rates down from 5.695 to 5.3. That I think increased our ranking nationally. I can't remember what it was, but we're, in terms of tax burden to our families that really advanced us in the rankings there, as well as having real world impacts for Idaho families.

House Bill 304 then, was a kind of a continuation of a bill we did two years ago, House Bill 292, where we send money out to school districts, $50 million to school districts to pay off bonds and levies so that they don't have to levy that. So that should be a reduction in on your tax bill that you'll see, as well as $50 million for homeowner relief.

Okay. And so that's another hundred million. And then House bill 231 increase the grocery tax. It was $120 per person. Now it's up to $155 per person okay. And if you think you spent more than that over the year, you are now welcome to save your receipts and claim, how much you actually spend up to $250 per person.

So the, Associated taxpayers did an analysis. They have a fictitious Idaho Spud family. Family of four. And they're they say that in combination, these three bills should reduce the tax impact to a family of four by $1,000. Okay. How to, I guess, explain that a little bit more to me, because if it's just a tax rebate of 155 bucks, how does that translate into $1,000 in savings?

Well, if your income is taxed at instead of 5.7%, 5.3%, I think that was like a okay, $400 overall impact. Yeah, yeah. And then if you are a property owner, again, you will see the cost of bonds and levies going down on your taxes as well as your home. And then the increased amount, okay. Grocery sales tax.

So, so the House Bill 40, the one that reduced the corporate tax, is that also viewed as an economic development tool as well, that will invite more companies and corporations to build here? Absolutely. And ironically, the the the claim that tax break work has absolutely played out in Idaho as we've reduced this rate. First, we created a flat tax a couple of years ago, then we reduced it.

Now we've reduced it again down to 5.3. We are seeing our income tax collections go up. And so it it really is true that when you allow people to keep more of their own money, they use it in ways that benefit the economy. Okay. So we're kind of broadening that base that I think Reagan Reagan talked about. Yeah.

Okay. Well that's that's good news. I do have a few questions from listeners. I just want to throw those to you. What does Representative Horman think of the state's education funding with Doge dismantling the Department of Education? So that's a federal versus state. Yeah, yeah, I'm actually not that worried about it. I'm pretty excited about it, because I have always believed that the state can do a better job at serving the students.

That federal money is designed to help that special education. That's children learning English and migrants, and that is students in poverty. That's the bulk of federal funding, plus school lunch. But that's the bulk of funding in K-12. So if that was delivered to Idaho and we were told, go ahead and create your own programs, get rid of all the the ridiculous federal hoop jumping special education is a really good example.

And some of the people who are most excited about the tax credit are families of those children who have disabilities. There is so much time spent hoop jumping, having mandatory meetings and so much paperwork. We have some really heroic special education teachers who just wish they could spend time with the child. Yeah, instead of filling out paperwork and attending these federally mandated meetings.

And and they do things like, and this is a state policy. If you have a child with difficulties and you've gone out and got a specialized neurological evaluation or something, they don't even have to use that. And so I think we could craft far better solutions for our children who have greater needs than the federal government. So I'm really excited about the possibility of, having those funds come in.

I'm even okay with replacing those funds if we had to. And I had an attorney general opinion, six years ago now where my question was this could we if we didn't take the money, could we get out of the strings? It was a very nuanced opinion, you know, and this was under the previous attorney general, you know, said basically you could and that's only about $250 million in Idaho, which by comparison to a $3.3 billion public education budget is not that much money.

So I'm really excited about the possibility of being able to create our own programs that I think will better serve those special student population. So your you're not anticipating less money necessarily from the federal government, just less requirement, less regulation. Correct. We're not seeing and I actually have a meeting, in June where we'll go over some of these things in detail and it's evolving.

It's very much a moving target right now. Yeah. But all of the national groups that I've been participating with and kind of trying to get the latest information, I'm not seeing any indication at all of a reduction of the funding, just increased flexibility. All right. We have another question about water. Wendy, please respond to the SBA water issues.

Under the current agreement, some farmers are being forced out of business by the reduction in allocated groundwater supply. In fact, the upper snake River has a surplus of in allocated surface water, equaling 1.7 million acre feet on an annual 20 year average, which a large portion of that water should be diverted into the aquifer above American Falls. We have a water management problem, not a water shortage.

And then this follow up, the state of Idaho needs more water judges that represent the people in their area, versus one water judge located in the Twin Falls area that is biased toward the surface water coalition and Idaho Power. So broad multifaceted question here. But maybe give your take. Yeah, a lot going on there. I, we made important strides forward in water this session.

There was some debate over whether the new money, the $30 million should be ongoing or one time, the Senate actually passed a bill out of a policy committee, the resource committee that had an appropriation in it. And the House, that's not how we do appropriations. If we're going to appropriate money, we do it through our Appropriations Committee, not through a policy committee.

Okay. And so that bill went nowhere fast in the House because, again, it was the wrong process. So can I go in, you know, if there's, like, personal sensitive issues here, you don't have to delve into that. But how I mean, I would imagine the chair of that committee would know you don't stick an appropriation into a policy bill.

So how did it happen? Bart Davis said, a chairman's draw sometimes serves an important function. And in this case, with that bill, that's exactly right. Chairman Ron Mendeleev, knew that appropriations have to happen in the Appropriations Committee. Now, the Senate had a different opinion on that, and that's fine. No judgment there at all. But the House is got a bright line between policy and appropriation.

Appropriations can set fiscal policy. But it would be like us passing a policy bill in the Appropriations Committee. That's not our job, except for fiscal policy, although I will say, because I and I don't remember who did the writing on this. But weren't you accused of that, that that in fact, the reverse argument was happening that you were setting policy when really it's clearly just your job to fund the government in the bills that do get passed 100%.

There were, people who were very uncomfortable that we were setting fiscal policy, which is our job. So any time we put intent language in there, we put conditions limitation and restrictions on the use of the funds. I'll use the example from health and welfare. About four years ago, we gave them money for learning loss during the pandemic.

Very specific conditions, ages in person and they paved parking lots and put roofs on buildings. That's a misuse of public funds. And there's still a criminal investigation ongoing over that situation. And so it's our job literally to put conditions, limitations and restrictions on the use of the funds. Yeah. And then it's also our job to set fiscal policy.

And we do that through language in appropriation bills. We can also ask for reports. We caused quite a stir this year by asking the Department of Labor to provide us a report on the potential costs and benefits of using E-Verify. For example, people lost their minds. But that's the role of Javac is to learn about good policy so we can make good funding decisions and ask for these reports back.

We're not setting policy. What we're doing is asking for reports back of how that policy would impact the appropriation process. So yes, there were some criticisms from, folks who didn't like that. We were demanding, transparency and accountability for taxpayer funding. Yeah. So I mean, there is there's a dance there, right? Like there's there's part of this where.

Yeah. How what you just described may impact the policy, but that's not your primary goal. No, our our primary goal is to get information back so that we can set good fiscal policy. Water is a really good example of this. The state of Idaho has invested almost $600 million over the last five fiscal years in water projects.

Almost none of that money has come to the East, Nate. Plane for storage and recharge. Yeah, very, very limp. $14 million in one case, and then about another 10 million, somewhere else. But out of $600 million, that's almost no money. So I was very adamant that this year it's East Idaho's turn, and that this $30 million needs to be dedicated toward the success of the 2024 settlement agreement.

And, boy, I ran into some serious resistance, that we would, insist through our intent language that the money goes to these areas. That's necessary. Even if it all went to eastern Idaho. Mostly people down river benefit from it, right? Our farmers want to deliver the water that we owe them. But it's a matter of how. How do we do that?

And so, I negotiated a deal with the lieutenant governor and others that I would agree to ongoing funding if all the money this year was dedicated toward the success of the 2024 agreement in East Nate Plain and in the magic Valley. And so that was a it was a great compromise, a great win for this area. It is literally a drop in the bucket of what we need to do.

Brian Murdock has an outstanding post on Facebook right now talking about all the water that's going down river right now, simply because we have no ability to capture it. And that's, you know, a problem. Just a little addendum question. We do have to break here in a moment, but is that going to increase talks about rebuilding the Teton Dam and creating more storage here in East Idaho?

Absolutely. That's what that money needs to be used for is exactly those types of projects. Now, the Teton Dam is, a massive project that would take, probably hundreds of millions of dollars to accomplish. But, Jack, always has interim meetings. And this year in May, we'll be having our interim meeting here in eastern Idaho. So we'll be visiting College of Eastern Idaho.

We'll be visiting l also on that, tour schedule is a visit to the Teton Dam site and the Prairie Recharge site. So we'll be making water a big part of our conversation when we're here in town in me. All right. 938 (208) 542-1079 if you have any questions, text them in for Representative Wendy Harmon, and we'll be back after the news right here.

944 on Newstalk 179 representative Wendy Harmon joining me in studio this morning. Never quite got to the answer about the water judge's, Wendy, I think most farmers in East Idaho would love to see more regional representation. Absolutely. And that's a bill I worked on. Did not get it across the finish line. This year. But it's a huge problem.

This this listener is completely right. It's not fair that a judge who is elected from one county is making decisions that impact the entire state. This is not unlike what's going on at the federal level, right? You've got a district judge making a ruling in their little area that's impacting the entire nation. That's wrong. And the, we actually funded some new judges in the system this year.

And the excuse they said was, we have judges coming in to Bonneville County that were elected up in Challis or Salmon, to make or Clark County to make decisions for Bonneville County. And that's not how the system should work. So that is an important fix that needs to happen. And I will continue to work on that next session.

Okay. And I feel like this whole water issue is a is just an ongoing work in progress, like it's never going to be a a fully settled issue. I completely agree, it's one of those things that we're going to just have to work on and improve over time. Yeah, okay. Let's shift and talk about it's also an ag related issue in Idaho especially.

And that's immigration. A lot of immigration action happened. And it seems to to dovetail with what the Trump administration is doing in terms of making sure that we don't create magnets for illegal immigration here in the States, and maybe give us an overview of how that played out in the legislature this year. Sure. I was surprised we didn't make more progress.

We did get one bill through, which was House Bill 83 that did make it, more possible for local law enforcement to support the the Trump agenda. So it, you know, it made it a crime. If you're going to be in Idaho. It made it an Idaho crime. It stops had some language about, trafficking and then enhanced criminal sentences for illegal aliens.

So, it's a start, but I was surprised we didn't make more progress on things like E-Verify. I, which seems like a reasonable approach to just it's just one more step we can take to. Yeah. I mean, that system's already in place, right? It is. And my, you know, my brother is a golf course superintendent down in Utah, but he used to work in Arizona, where they have that system in place.

And, you know, you can argue about the integrity of the system. You can argue a lot of things about it, but it's at least something. And so I was surprised we didn't make more progress on immigration. But I know it's coming again next session. It and and again, any question I ask I don't expect you to delve into the into the personal here, but what was the obstacle to to getting more immigration stuff done?

Is it political? Is it I know that the dairy industry, they pushed back against the E-Verify because that could be very disruptive to their industry? Yes, that that was a big influence. And and of course, we had, Senator Guthrie in Senate State Affairs that, had a big draw with a lot of, good ideas that came from the house.

But the same is true on the house side. There were some bills in, Chairman Crane's drawer that, didn't advance. And so, yes, there's politics involved in that. And what gets held and and what doesn't, but, I don't know, some sometimes you either do it or you don't do it, and and. Yeah. So we didn't do it this session and, and maybe, time will allow us to find some compromises that make sure we don't jeopardize Idaho's ag industry, and we do it in a way that, and, you know, that enables, Idaho to have the workforce.

It needs the legal workforce it needs. And perhaps there will be federal changes, I think, there you know, this is a classic example where you have the ideal versus the the practical. It's not practical to come in and deport every illegal ag worker in Idaho because you're gonna you're going to destroy our economy if you do that overnight and, and on a dime.

So I think most people agree we need a methodical way to either, you know, deport them in phases or to make them legal somehow. But, but that's that's an issue that needs to be corrected. It really does. Right. I couldn't agree more. And this it, it, this is a situation where a common policy across the nation is probably good for all of us, whether that is, a path to legality, or or something else.

I think to have a federal policy on that, it, is important, but we've been talking about that for how many years? Yeah. And it hasn't happened. So if it hasn't, I think the Trump administration's focus on criminal illegal aliens is a good first step. And we've seen that play out here in Idaho in a couple of instances at least.

And we'll see what evolves. And and you can bet we'll be ready for the 2026 session one way or another. Hit the hit the ground running there. One other issue where I think Idaho is sort of dovetailing or at least mirroring what the federal government is doing. Idaho now has its own dose task force. What do you expect from that?

I think that was created perception. Correct. That is one of those bills that was held in the Senate. It passed the House with with good support. I supported the second version of that because the first version that I saw from Representative Jaren Crane, had a bunch of stuff in it, and I said, Jaren, we're already doing that.

Jack is Dodge. We've been Dodge for several years now. Yeah. And so he changed it to his credit. And then it was held in the Senate. So, what the House and Senate leadership did was create kind of a task force, which you don't have to have legislation to do that will focus on, efficiencies in government bureaucracies.

And a couple of other things that will are dodge, like, if you will. But, so we'll I think we'll be ready for more progress. On the fact side of the house. We are we have created a new tool called Base Builder. So all the spending in those maintenance budgets that we haven't had great visibility into, we will now have a tool.

This will debut at our May meeting here in Idaho Falls, where we can go in and see what's in the base. Maybe we funded a contract five years ago that doesn't exist anymore, but we're still giving you the money. Maybe we funded money for a building for you to occupy ten years ago. That's empty now. And yet we're still giving you the money.

So this new tool base builder is really going to give us that ability to go into the base and start examining those funds and, and where we can make cuts and trims. One of the things that Elon Musk has talked about is how someone asked him, where are you finding this? And he said, everywhere. It's everywhere. If you if you look, there's inefficiency or there's fraud or there's abuse of the system, it's everywhere.

I would hope that it's not as rampant in Idaho's government budget, but you're it sounds like you're pretty confident that there are things that you will find if you if you dive deep into those maintenance budgets. Absolutely. There will be and I'm not saying it's misuse of public funds. I'm just saying this is the way the process is work for so long that they haven't had to be accountable for funds that they were given for X many years ago, but are now being spent on Y.

That's what we want to clean up. Yeah. And and make sure that when we send funds there's accountability for that. So in September of 2024, for the first time, when agencies submitted their budgets for the first time in Idaho history, they had to explain how it connected to their performance metrics, their strategic goals, and what the ROI would be for Idahoans.

That's a novel concept for most state agencies, and so we got some data back on that, and we'll be holding agencies accountable for those outcomes moving forward. Okay. So I think that this next year in June, you all need t shirts that say Jay Doge before Doge was cool. There you go. Like Governor Kim Reynolds in in Iowa.

Yes, exactly. All right, quick break. 953. We'll be back and we'll wrap it up with Representative Wendy Harmon after this. 957 on Newstalk 1079. We have literally one minute left. Wendy, we didn't even get to Medicaid reform and some other issues, but I want to give you the last minute your final thoughts on this year's legislative session.

This session was fantastic for conservatives. So that means it was fantastic for freedom and liberty for Idahoans. We hope the and we set policy that will have the, help them have a lower tax burden. So many freedoms that, needed to be adjusted post-Covid, whether that was mask mandates or ivermectin or, we repealed a lot of laws, moved them out of rural into code.

So that the legislature has complete control over what those are. And so it was just overall, the best session I've been a part of for conservatives. All right. Wendy Harman, representative, thank you for joining us today. Thank you. Great to be with you. Been a pleasure to have you, Ian. All right. Up next, Clay Travis and Buck Sexton on Newstalk 179.