Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Administrative Accountability topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Senate committee advances bill to limit agency policy changes with budget implications outside the legislative session

3112730 · March 3, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

House Bill 90 would restrict the Department of Health and Welfare from making policy changes that carry budget implications outside the legislative session; sponsor cited recent problems in the state childcare program as motivation.

Sen. Brian Lenney, R-Nampa, said House Bill 90 would prevent state agencies, specifically the Department of Health and Welfare, from making policy decisions with budget consequences outside the legislative session. "This is a bill that addresses bureaucrats behaving badly," Lenney said.

Lenney described the Idaho childcare program as a recent example, saying the department made eligibility and payment changes via rule or State Plan Amendment that led to a significant budget problem and a temporary pause in the program. In the hearing transcript the sponsor used two different figures when describing the fiscal effect: at one point he said the decisions "resulted in $50,000,000 in the hole," and later he said the change "put us $15,000,000 in the hole." The transcript does not reconcile which figure is correct.

Sen. Melissa Wintrow said the department had presented the rule change and the committee had voted to support it after considering the department's estimates; she said rules can provide flexibility that law does not and expressed concern that moving all rules into statute could reduce that flexibility.

Sen. Keiser moved and the committee approved a motion to send House Bill 90 to the Senate floor with a do-pass recommendation; the committee recorded the approval by voice vote.

Supporters argued the bill restores legislative oversight over policy changes with fiscal effects. Opponents or fiscal analysts were not recorded in the excerpt; several senators asked questions about potential trade-offs between legislative oversight and administrative flexibility.