Candidate Questionnaire: 2024 General Election

Compiled by Zach Hagadone, Ben Olson and Soncirey Mitchell

Publisher’s note: Before each election, the Sandpoint Reader reaches out to candidates in state and local contested races to ask questions about how they would represent the constituents in the offices they seek. Below are questions and answers for the offices of Idaho Legislative District 1A and 1B House, District 1 Idaho Senate, and Districts 1 and 3 Bonner County commissioners on the Tuesday, Nov. 5 election ballot.

All candidates who responded to our questions have been included below, with some answers edited for length.

The Reader joined KRFY 88.5FM and sandpointonline.com to host a candidates’ forum at Sandpoint High School on Oct. 15. Find a recording of the forum at krfy.org or read a recap on Pages 4-5 of this edition.

Finally, don’t forget to vote Tuesday, Nov. 5.

Bonner County Commissioner

1. Why are you running for Bonner County commissioner?

2. Political tensions have reached an all-time high. If elected, what role will your political affiliation play in your future decisions? How will you strive to represent all your constituents, meanwhile maintaining a cordial relationship with county staff?

3. How will you balance the wants and needs of your constituents, your responsibilities as a public servant and your personal philosophies and priorities?

4. Which (if any) major decisions or precedents set by the previous board do you agree with and which would you seek to overturn?

5. The previous board focused on issues surrounding public comment, responsible land use and spending. Are these still the BOCC’s top priorities, and if so, how will you approach them?

District 1

Brian Domke, R

Age: 49

Birthplace and residence: born in New Jersey, Bonner County resident

How many years lived in Bonner County: 10

Past/current government service (if applicable): chairman of the Planning and Zoning Sub-Area Committee for Priest River/Oldtown (2019-2021), member of the Bonner County Natural Resource Committee (2017-2019)

Profession: Landscape architect

Education: B.S., Cornell University; A.A.S., Morrisville State College

Contact info: [email protected], 208-610-9853, Domke4BonnerCounty.com

1. I am running for this office to bring decorum and effectiveness back to the board of county commissioners. The recent dysfunction within the BOCC has created an environment that is inefficient, creating unnecessary liability, a work environment that negatively impacts the retention and recruitment of county staff, and has resulted in an adversarial relationship between the BOCC and the public. It is my intent to reverse these negative impacts so that our county can rebuild a healthy relationship with the public, retain and attract talented county staff, reduce its legal liability and use tax dollars in an effective and efficient manner.

2. County business is typically focused on local services and infrastructure topics that impact all the citizens in our county, regardless of political affiliations. I will focus on working with the public, county staff and fellow elected officers in a respectable manner to make decisions that are in the best interest of our county as a whole, not decisions that are politically driven. I will listen to the concerns and ideas of all county citizens to make better informed decisions and address the issues facing our county. I see the role of a county commissioner as one of being a public servant that has the best outcomes for our county in mind.

3. Balancing the wants and needs of our community will always be challenging due to differing opinions and the fact that our needs will be greater than our available resources. I plan to actively listen to all our county constituents to better understand the wants and needs of our community, and then prioritize the “must have” items over the “nice to have” items. I will also run each idea through the filter of legal conformance and hierarchy to our national Constitution, state Constitution, state laws and county codes. I will strive to treat each person and issue equally under the law. As a public servant, I will accept feedback and strive to always improve in my service to our community. Our inalienable rights come from God and all political power is inherent in the people, so I will strive to serve with humility, while respecting both God and the people.

4. I support the board’s recent decision to allow public comment on each item of the business meeting agenda and to treat the public with respect. I stand in opposition to many actions of the board, which include their decisions to ignore the need of including telecommunications facilities (such as cell towers) in the comprehensive plan to protect residential areas from harm and approving conditional use permits that are being used to circumvent obtaining a zone change, claiming that the private property rights of a permit applicant take priority over that of the adjacent property owners (all property owners have equal rights, which include not being harmed by your neighbor). I will seek to have language added to the comprehensive plan that protects residential areas from the harm that can be caused by cell towers and to revise the county code to remove loopholes from conditional use permits.

5. Yes, these issues are still top priorities for our county. I would address these topics by: helping to restore professional conduct within the BOCC through leading by example, such as treating others with respect and staying focused on each issue, not the personalities associated with the issue; improving the comprehensive plan and land use regulations to better assess and define which areas of the county can support stable growth without overtaxing the capacity of the land or harming the adjacent neighbors, plus adding development impact fees to place the burden of cost on the new developments; developing the county annual budget using a zero-based approach to reduce any unnecessary spending that can result from a lack of thorough review and confirming that each budget item is supported by state statute to be sure our tax dollars are being spent on appropriate services and infrastructure, not special interests.

Steve Johnson, D

Age: 74

Birthplace and residence: Lifelong resident of North Idaho, farm in Sagle

How many years lived in Bonner County: 67

Past/current government service (if applicable): Bonner County Library District trustee, Sandpoint Chamber of Commerce education chair

Profession: Retired educator with 40 years experience

Education: M.A., education and administration, University of Idaho

Contact info: stevejohnsonforcommissioner@gmail, stevejohnsonforcommissioner.com

1. I am running for Bonner County commissioner because I want to help return common sense leadership to our local government. Bonner County has been home for a long time and we deserve county commissioners who behave in a civil and productive manner with each other and with the public. It has been embarrassing and unproductive to have commissioners who publicly disrespect each other and disrespect the public. I pledge to treat everyone with respect. We have serious issues and we need serious commissioners committed to finding solutions. I have 40 years of experience working with large, diverse groups of people and helping to solve complex problems. I’ve worked with groups on long-range planning, multi-million dollar public building projects and staff evaluations.

2. My role as county commissioner will include researching issues, listening respectfully to input from the public and from fellow commissioners and engaging in thoughtful deliberations that will guide my decisions. I do not believe political affiliation will impact my interactions with the public or with the other commissioners. I believe the county staff has the right to be respected and I pledge to demonstrate that respect. After all, county commissioners represent everyone in the county.

3. I have over 40 years balancing the wants and needs of individuals and groups. My primary responsibility is to the citizens of Bonner County and what’s in their best interest. Respect, civility and sincere listening will be my guiding principles.

4. I agree with the previous board when they made decisions about accepting state and federal programs that resulted in seven new bridges and the new EMS building. I will be a strong advocate for grants and programs that offer financial assistance to improve the lives of Bonner County citizens. I also approve of the previous board’s decision to develop and complete the Bonner County comprehensive plan. One area I don’t agree with the previous board of county commissioners on is litigation. They should not have sued the city of Sandpoint over the radical behavior of Scott Herndon at the Festival at Sandpoint. It cost our county taxpayers over $100,000. I will not be supporting that type of litigation.

5. I believe the top priorities for the Bonner County commissioners are fiscal responsibility and transparency, regaining the public trust and confidence, completing the comprehensive plan and working collaboratively with private and public groups to develop solutions for affordable housing so we can all afford to live here. I believe in the freedom to vote in every taxpayer supported election and I will vote “yes” for Proposition 1.

District 3

Ron Korn, R (incumbent)

Did not respond.

Glenn Lefebvre, I

Age: 58

Birthplace and residence: Anchorage, Alaska; Bonner County

How many years lived in Bonner County: 58 years

Past/current government service (if applicable): N/A

Profession: Service industry

Education: Communications

Contact info: [email protected], glennforbonnercounty.com

1. I think Bonner County is at a turning point. The main reasons I am running are growth and land use and the dysfunctional board. As a lifelong resident, I have a vested interest in the direction Bonner County is taking. I genuinely think I understand the people of Bonner County and can represent them well. Whether you are a newcomer, a lifelong resident or from a multigenerational family I think we all can agree this is a wonderful place to live. I want to preserve the natural beauty and slower way of life that is accustomed to the people of Bonner County.

2. My political affiliation will not play a role in future decisions. I am nonpartisan and will represent everyone equally and on the merits of each situation. It makes no difference to me what party you belong to or your status. Maintaining cordial relationships comes easy to me and I don’t intend to let politics get in the way of county business.

3. Having lived and worked in Bonner County most of my life, I think I understand the wants and needs of Bonner County residents. I speak with hundreds of people a week. I have also been following the Bonner County government very closely and I know and share the concerns being voiced. Those include: growth that is changing our rural character, rubber stamping development, public safety, waterways, natural resources, high property assessments and lack of trust, respect and professionalism. I hope to implement positive changes on all those issues, bringing back much needed balance.

4. I honestly can’t think of any major decision that I agreed with from the past board. I watched long-standing and normal business and hearing practices fall apart and I would like to get those back to normal. I support allowing 20 minutes of public comment at the beginning of business meetings, removing the oppressive standing rules and removing the requirement to sign in via Zoom by 9 a.m.

5. I don’t want to see the new board focus any more unnecessary time and energy on the issue of public comment. By removing the obstacles mentioned above and listening to the public’s input, I foresee that issue going away. Responsible land use and spending are still a top priority. I would propose hiring a professional planning firm to evaluate whether the comprehensive plan (currently being updated) accurately represents the sentiment and goals of Bonner County’s unique communities. I suggest utilizing those professionals and the planning department to rewrite county code in a way that will meet those goals. I will consider putting the Planning and Zoning commissions back together again and reconsider the role of the hearing examiner. I think following a plan and closing loopholes in our land use and building code will go a long way toward responsible growth and spending.

District 1 Idaho Senate

1. Why are you running for District 1 Senate? 

2. What do you see as the top challenge facing District 1, and how do you propose to address it?

3. What’s your stance on Proposition 1 — the so-called “Open Primaries Initiative”? 

4. According to the 2024 Boise State University Public Policy survey, a majority of Idahoans favor expanding exceptions to Idaho’s near-total abortion ban, which has effectively limited the availability of women’s reproductive health care in the state. Do you agree with loosening — or repealing — the law, and what do you say to constituents who are concerned that it’s too restrictive and has a negative impact on women’s health care?

5. Idaho’s Republican supermajority is visibly fractured at the moment, including different versions of the “Freedom Caucus” competing for leadership of the party. How do you see yourself operating in that political environment?

Dan Rose, I

Age: 58

Birthplace and residence: Born in Boston, Mass., resides in Samuels, Idaho

How many years lived in Bonner Co.: 9.5 years, including Boundary County

Past/current government service (if applicable): Pend Oreille Hospital District trustee 2017-2023; Bonner County Elections, chief poll judge in Airport, Clagstone/Edgemere, East Priest River, Sagle and Southside/Cocolalla districts

Profession: Retired Massachusetts state trooper, 22.5 years; VFW Desert Storm, 1990-1991; Military Police, enlisted E-6 and commissioned O-3, 10 years

Education: B.S., finance and investment, Babson College; M.A., criminal justice, Ana Maria College

Contact info: [email protected]

1. I’m running for Idaho Senate to represent the taxpayers of North Idaho, not the Boise bureaucrat interests. I have a proven record of public service and integrity in promoting conservative principles to LD1. I am the only liberty/conservative candidate in the Senate race. I recognize the Democrat strategy being employed, initially, between the two Democrats in the LD1 Senate race. Jim Woodward had an unimpressive senator voting record, on par with Democrat peers in his prior years of Senate service. I believe changes will appear before North Idahoans in 2024. An international Central Bank Digital Currency system akin to economic slavery, multiple-front wars, indirect U.S. support of Gazan genocide, a domestic border invasion, inflation, loss of medical sovereignty, election fraud, federal abuse of power against state and individual rights, and a loss of representational trust in elected officials all weigh heavily on the 2024 political discussions if we are to preserve valued liberties and freedoms. 

2. Tax policy: Grocery tax repeal or an increased standard $190/person and/or an itemized rebate increase, property tax parity between commercial and residential properties by purchase of a CoStar assessment tool, school funding of public and private education by a $6,000 school voucher or a $10,000 tax exemption per student and removal of illegal immigration taxes by implementation of Trump’s deportation plan. Woodward has stated he will not provide you full tax relief. With ongoing revenue surpluses, I will seek taxpayer relief for you. 

Misrepresentation: The Bonner County Republican Central Committee passed a nearly unanimous 2021 resolution seeking to remove Woodward from the Republican Party. Currently, the party refused to endorse him by nearly a ⅔ vote. Independent and newly registered voters were actively solicited to augment party crossover voters for the Democrats to push Woodward to a 2024 primary win. Friends and neighbors, as a liberty-conservative, Independent candidate, I’m supported by many of the ⅔ of the BCRCC.

3. The media calls this question “open primaries” because Part 1 of the question has initial acceptance by some. However, the real problem is the second part of the Prop. 1 question, which many more recognize as unacceptable. I am against Prop. 1. The Prop. 1 question submitted by Reclaim Idaho is a policy design that does not address the county’s cost of implementation and is a citizen-proposed, unfunded mandate. There is no vote integrity in a local review of a ranked-choice vote, as tabulation will occur in Boise. Each round of voting takes additional time, and results may take weeks to determine. The ranked-choice process is not a one person/one vote selection, but rather vote assignment to second, third and fourth rounds. Not identifying alternative, weaker or unacceptable candidates throws my successive round vote out, thus lowering the majority threshold level. There is no need to recreate the voting wheel, unless one is desiring to make Idaho blue.

4. First, a “near-total abortion ban” is a false condition, contradicted by I.C. 18-622. The abortion process is the killing of a viable life, it is not in many cases “health care.” Idaho does not have a health care crisis, unless we’re discussing vaccination and fentanyl injuries. The underlying question is do we have a choice-of-life crisis. Proverbs 19:18, “Discipline your children, for in that there is hope; do not be a willing party to their death.” Principles matter to the faithful. I.C. 18-622 allows for abortion for health of the mother, rape and incest considerations. Legal penalties should be modified starting with a misdemeanor $25,000 and then a $50,000 financial penalty, before implementation of criminal and license penalty. By the third offense, it is clear that a doctor is violating the law. I’m sure there’s an abundant number of OB-GYN pro-life doctors who would love to live and practice in LD1. With a pro-life marketing plan involving BGH and other regional hospitals, I’m sure LD1 can overcome any shortages of staff.

5. There the Reader goes again. The premise of the “supermajority” question is embellished. Though many legislators are registered Republicans, just like Woodward, they vote too often with the Democrat agenda. I am the Independent candidate in the Senate race. I identify with the liberty and conservative agenda. I will be able to help smooth over any conflicts, as I already have relationships with Republican leaders, but the disagreements are overstated. Politics requires thick skin and integrity, and all are positioning for the best legislative session outcome. When the dust settles, unity of the core mission will prevail. I observe weekly Reader comments and guest comments that dwell on Republican bashing, as their agenda promotes the hardline of socialist and Marxist opinions of Jim Jones and Lauren Necochea? I will seek to support both the Idaho Freedom Foundation and the Idaho Freedom Caucus leadership toward influencing liberty Senate leadership, from the pro-tem to the committee chairmanships.has been home for a long time and we deserve county commissioners who behave in a civil and productive man.

Jim Woodward, R

Age: 53

Birthplace and residence: Birthplace: Anacortes, Wash., residence: Sagle, Idaho

How many years lived in Bonner Co.: 28 years; 16 years in Boundary County

Past/current government service (if applicable): 21 years of Navy service in submarines, coastal warfare and physical security; Legislative District 1 state senator for four years; Sagle Fire District commissioner for seven years; Northern Lights board member for 10 years

Profession: Excavation and marine contractor

Education: B.S., mechanical engineering, University of Idaho

Contact info: [email protected], cell 208-946-7963

1. I would like to keep Idaho Idaho. I think most everyone is here for similar reasons, whether new to the area or from a multi-generational Idaho family. We enjoy our independence but with responsibility for our actions. We want small government that is fiscally conservative. We live and let live. We know that the best decisions are those made closest to home. I advocate for states’ rights in our federalist system and local decision-making by locally elected officials within the state. I believe the role of state government is to take on the tasks that we cannot accomplish as individuals. I disagree with the bills coming out of the Legislature that are an attempt to legislate morality based on individual ideologies.

2. I think growth is still the top challenge in Legislative District 1 and in Idaho. Through state and local government, we have to maintain and update our schools and infrastructure to maintain our quality of life. Aside from government functions, we should work together to maintain the Idaho lifestyle we’ve come to know. Times change, but we can hold on to our values and our community.

3. I would like to revert to the open primary we had for so many decades in Idaho. The closed primary has only existed for a little more than 10 years. The closed primary excludes Independent (unaffiliated) voters who are almost 30% of registered voters. When we shut out 30% of our voters, it is often hard to get an answer that reflects the makeup of Idaho.

4. Idaho has laws in place that are driving our doctors away and preventing new doctors from coming here. We all go to our doctor to fix what ails us and we do it with trust in that professional. We have let a minority remove our trust. It is time to get the situation turned around. We need to revisit Idaho abortion law, specifically in regard to complications during pregnancy and the criminalization of medical providers.

5. I see myself operating glass half full and with sincerity. I will continue my effort to find solutions that fix real problems, problems within the purview of the Legislature, without infringing on individual rights.

District 1A House

1. Why are you running for District 1A House?

2. How do recently passed laws such as the one targeting offensive materials in libraries or Idaho’s near-total abortion ban square with Idaho’s “small-government” philosophy?

3. How does Idaho continue to recruit health care professionals to live and work in the state after multiple maternity wards (including local hospital Bonner General Health) announced they were closing out of fears of litigation and professionals leaving the state due to inhospitable feelings involving women’s reproductive care?

4. Do you support Proposition 1, which has been called the “Open Primaries” initiative?

5. Aside from so-called “culture war” issues like offensive materials in libraries, limits on women’s reproductive rights and defining genders, what are three “kitchen table” issues you think Idahoans are most concerned about and which you would address?

Karen Matthee, D

Age: 67

Birthplace and residence: Redwood City, Calif.; now in Dover, Idaho

How many years lived in Bonner County: Almost 2 years

Past/current government service (if applicable): Worked for an NGO that had a State Department contract to help victims of landmines and cluster munitions in Afghanistan

Profession: Former journalist, then nonprofit communications director

Education: B.A., U.C. Berkeley; M.A., journalism, Northwestern University

Contact info: [email protected], 208-515-2068

1. I believe the state is failing Idaho families. Property taxes are still too high; our public schools remain underfunded to the point of schools closing and teachers leaving; Idaho is one of only three states that contribute $0 to affordable housing; GOP leaders cut off access for hundreds of low-income families to the only child care subsidy program we have when $50 million in unspent federal grant dollars are available for for that very purpose; and the Medicaid eligibility threshold for pregnant women, new mothers and children is significantly higher than that of other states. Thriving families are the backbone of a thriving economy. These are economic issues, not welfare issues.

2. It doesn’t. It robs us of one of the most important freedoms we have: the freedom to read, and it breaks my heart that some of our smaller libraries are closing their doors to children. Laws like these bypass local decision-makers. Parents are responsible for what their children can access. It’s up to the families to determine this, not the government. Additionally, these kinds of laws create problems that don’t exist and encourage frivolous and costly lawsuits that congest our local courts. In the case of House Bill 710, there was already a process in place in every district through library boards to review incoming materials. These boards are elected and held accountable to the voters.

3. Bonner General staff have said it’s been extremely difficult to recruit obstetricians and gynecologists. That is why pregnant women from District 1 are driving 45 miles — sometimes more than once a week — for OB appointments and to give birth. Other women tell me they’ve had to wait three to six months to get a gynecology appointment in Coeur d’Alene or Spokane. Medical providers say that at minimum, it will take an exception to the abortion ban to protect the health and fertility of pregnant women in a medical emergency to satisfy doctors. The current law, they add, is vague and only allows them to save a patient’s life. GOP lawmakers, my opponent included, could have made that correction in the last session, but they chose to do nothing. Only House Minority Leader Ilana Rubel introduced such a bill and was ignored by Republicans.

4. Yes I do, mainly because it will require candidates to be accountable to a broader spectrum of voters, not special interests, and will allow people to vote for the person, rather than the party. It will also give Independent voters, who have been shut out of Republican primaries, a voice. 

5. Because of the resort nature of our communities and rising home values, many of our year-round families and seniors on fixed incomes are struggling to cover just the basic needs. To relieve the pressure, the Legislature needs to:

a. Scrap the grocery tax and save households 6% to 7% every time they shop for food.

b. Bring back the index to the homeowners exemption, stopped in 2016, so the exemption can rise gradually with increases in home values and the tax burden is distributed more evenly between commercial and homeowner properties.

c. Switch to a more progressive state income tax structure so middle-income families aren’t paying a larger share of their income than wealthier individuals.

Mark Sauter, R (incumbent)

Age: 66

Birthplace and residence: Born in Downey, Calif.; resides in Sandpoint, Idaho

How many years lived in Bonner County: Owned property in Sagle since 1993, moved to Sandpoint in 2012

Past/current government service (if applicable): past president of Bonner County Fire Chief Association, current Idaho Legislative District 1A representative

Profession: Worked and volunteered for Selkirk Fire for five years since being in Sandpoint, firefighter through fire chief covering 30 years, another three years in city administration after fire service work

Education: Undergrad degree in fire administration, graduate degree in public administration

Contact info: [email protected]

1. I’m running for office so I may continue to be a responsible representative and to serve our district. I have spent my adult life serving my community. Serving our community is rewarding. There is more to do, we need to improve our health care system and other important issues outlined below. I ran in 2022 to support education, public safety and infrastructure, and I’ve stuck with it. I’ve voted for the four women’s health bills that have come before me. I’ve served our area for the last two years being mindful of our interests and values. Last session, I carried five bills for our district, all of them were signed into law by the governor. Simply stated, I want to continue my efforts and to carry legislation that will improve our district.

2. There is a conflict between the “light hand of government” approach, the belief that “government closest to the people is best” and some of the recent decisions by the Legislature. Laws have been passed (or prevented from passing) in recent years that have had local adverse impacts. One answer is to oppose some of this overreach. Another answer is to craft legislative solutions that address the problems, specifically; build the coalitions necessary to get the bills heard and passed; and then actively support them. I’ve done this and had success passing controversial bills. This can be done again.

3. First priority, we need to pass a bill to provide an exception to the abortion ban for the health of the mother. This effort is supported by many and needs to be done. State attorneys have argued, in court, that our current abortion laws cover this. Let’s convert the attorneys’ points into law for the benefit of our community. It is clear our doctors are not comfortable with the current situation. A majority of doctors believe getting the “health of the mother” exception change will make a big difference in retention, recruitment and training of medical professionals. There are other issues involved in this problem, like hospital operations, shifting patient bases, Medicaid funding and rural hospital finances, too. We must continue to fund our medical residency programs too. These programs feed our local hospitals with young Doctors who may stay where they train.

4. I support the initiative process in the Idaho Constitution. I respect the effort to qualify an Initiative for the ballot by those involved. I believe all voters should be voting on Proposition 1 without the influence or input of elected officials. Proposition 1 is a “citizens’” initiative that will give direction to the Legislature on the will of the voters. If I am re-elected, I will follow the will of our voters and vote accordingly if Proposition 1 comes before the House.

5. Our property tax situation needs attention. The homeowners’ exemption needs to be adjusted up considerably and indexed to keep up with the rising assessments. Averaging the assessments over three to five years would help to dull the cost shocks. Capping the amount annual property taxes can rise would also help the situation. The formula for school funding is based mostly on student average daily attendance. The formula does not address the needs of rural schools (operations, class sizes, facilities, special needs students). A consistent annual funding source needs to be established for facilities. 

The problems with Albeni Falls Dam are alarming, affect everyone and need immediate attention. Our water rights are being challenged. “We” have worked all summer building a coalition (local, state and federal officials) to address the spillway problems with Albeni Falls Dam and the future of lake operations. I want to keep working on solutions and speed them up. The grocery tax exemption needs to be increased and indexed as well.

District 1B House

1. Why are you running for District 1B House?

2. How do recently passed laws such as the one targeting offensive materials in libraries or Idaho’s near-total abortion ban square with Idaho’s “small-government” philosophy?

3. How does Idaho continue to recruit health care professionals to live and work in the state after multiple maternity wards (including local hospital Bonner General Health) announced they were closing out of fears of litigation and professionals leaving the state due to inhospitable feelings involving women’s reproductive care?

4. Do you support Proposition 1, which has been called the “Open Primaries” initiative?

5. Aside from so-called “culture war” issues like offensive materials in libraries, limits on women’s reproductive rights and defining genders, what are three “kitchen table” issues you think Idahoans are most concerned about and which you would address?

Kathryn Larson, D

Age: 66

Birthplace and residence: Born in Dallas, moved 11 times before high school, raised children in Colorado, resides in Bonner County

How many years lived in Bonner County: Nine

Past/current government service (if applicable): N/A

Profession: Consultant helping organizations function more effectively, focusing on strategy, decision making, risk and understanding tradeoffs

Education: B.S., geology; post-graduate work in education and organizational development

Contact info: [email protected]

1. I care deeply about this place and the people who live here. I want it to be a place where our children and grandchildren can afford to live, get a good education and have opportunities. I want our local businesses to thrive. I want the people who live and work here to be able to afford the time and money to enjoy this amazing place. 

As a legislator, I will give it my all to create balance and bring practical, rational leadership that focuses on the needs of Bonner and Boundary counties. 

Party power has gotten out of control. The Idaho Freedom Foundation sets an agenda that focuses on culture issues, and pressures legislators to vote for that agenda instead of advocating for laws that benefit the quality of life for people in their districts. 

My only pledge is to work for the benefit of the people who live here.

2. More government is not small government. And, good governing doesn’t just mean less government. It means governing with experts in the room, informing better decision making. Extremists ignore the judgment of highly trained experts, in favor of expanding political power. That is not small government. Government’s role is not to “parent” society. We’ve had no abortions in 20 years. Yet, we broke our local health care in order to reduce abortions? When politicians take power, local communities lose. We’ve lost doctors, librarians, our labor and delivery unit, and even spiritual advisers. First, it’s health care, then books, then children’s medical care. What important life decision or personal choice will they try to control next? Bad laws impact everyone by making our communities more divisive and diminishing precious resources. We need to find a path to common sense solutions. Untie the hands of our experts to improve and innovate our health care, education and libraries.

3. Our quality of life and spectacular environment is a natural advantage in attracting talent, but OB-GYNs, pediatricians and family practitioners will not want to practice here if legal risk prevents them from providing compassionate, evidence-based care. No doctor can be expected to watch patients suffer and die from treatable conditions. Legislators cannot interfere in patient-doctor relations. Change the law and:

• Improve state support for medical education and training including incentives for rural practice. Include nurse practitioners, nurses, social workers, behavioral health care providers and other professions where shortages undermine our ability to access local health care.

• Improve wages for health care professionals, entry level and home care workers.

• Improve affordability and availability of housing.

• Guarantee consistent and adequate funding for schools. 

• Improve reimbursement models that disadvantage rural health care providers. Create incentives to develop innovative approaches to rural health care.

• Improve Medicaid payment.

4. I support Proposition 1. I encourage you to watch the documentary Majority Rules. It gives an unbiased view of how open primaries and ranked-choice voting work in other places. It breaks the power of either party to manipulate the outcome of elections. The one-time cost to switch to a trustworthy voting system is about 50 cents per person. Every voter has a vote in the primary. Ranked-choice voting gives third-party candidates a better chance of winning because voters don’t have to choose between the candidate they think will win and the candidate they believe is better. I cannot come up with a scenario in which parties can manipulate open primaries and ranked-choice voting. But I can come up with many scenarios in which parties can and do manipulate our current closed primary system.

5. Economy/affordability — Housing, child care, groceries, property taxes. The people who produce the value should reap the benefits of that value. That means workers as well as business owners. The state has a role in helping communities thrive through better economic policies, taxes and housing authority. 

Education and opportunity — The state defunded schools for decades while piling on time-consuming regulatory requirements that do not improve quality. Throwing a pittance at schools through H.B. 521 isn’t enough. State legislators gave themselves line-item veto power to circumvent local and agency expertise. The current Republican Party platform calls for diverting much needed funds to private, often out-of-state for-profit schools and to defund postsecondary education, including trade schools. 

Sustainability of our lands — A call to take back public lands and monetize them is ill-conceived. It will be an extremely costly and time-consuming effort with little likelihood of success. It’s projected to result in mostly privatization of our public lands. That is not a sustainable model.

Cornel Rasor, R (incumbent)

Did not respond.