Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Safety Trafficking topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee advances bill raising solicitation to felony to target high-frequency buyers; advocates and law enforcement split
Summary
House Bill 88, which would eliminate a misdemeanor option and make paying for sex a felony on the first offense, was advanced to the floor after sponsors argued the change targets repeat buyers; criminal-defense groups warned it could drive the sex trade underground and increase danger for sex workers.
The House Judiciary, Rules and Administration Committee voted to send House Bill 88 to the House floor with a due-pass recommendation after testimony that split legal and public-safety advocates.
Representative Britt Raybould, sponsor of the bill, said the measure removes a misdemeanor option and makes solicitation and paying for sex a felony on first offense to deter repeat, high-frequency buyers. "This should be a crime, period, full stop," Raybould said, arguing that high-frequency buyers drive demand and create market incentives for traffickers.
Raybould cited comparative data from Texas, which changed its statute in 2021; she said arrests increased while convictions were roughly steady in the first years after that state-level change. Raybould said felony sentencing would rely on existing felony sentencing provisions in Idaho Code (which she referenced in testimony as "Idaho code eighteen-one 12"). She told the committee the change was intended to target the person creating demand rather than people who are being exploited.
Opponents and skeptics included Mike French of the Idaho Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, who urged the committee not to send the bill forward. French warned that raising penalties can push the trade underground, make sex workers less safe and make victims less likely to cooperate with law enforcement. "The more we drive this underground, the less willing everyone is to do it in the open, the more dangerous it becomes," French said, citing research from Northern Ireland and law-enforcement concerns.
Sheriff Chris Getz, speaking for himself and noting the Idaho Sheriffs' Association had not taken a formal position, told the committee he believed a stiffer penalty could reduce demand and supported the bill personally. He cautioned the Committee that the association had not taken a formal position.
Committee members debated whether enforcement numbers under current statute should be examined before changing penalties. Representative Gannon successfully moved to hold data-seeking for another bill earlier in the hearing on a different provision and later argued for more quantitative context here; other members supported moving the bill forward as a policy signal. After discussion the committee voted to send HB88 to the floor with a due-pass recommendation (recorded tally 8–7). The bill now moves to the full House for further consideration.
