Citizen Portal
Sign In

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

Get email alerts on the Glamour Photography topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Committee approves repeal of glamour-photography license and advances bill to House

2390330 · February 17, 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 122, which would end state licensure of glamour photographers, advanced from the House Business Committee Feb. 17 with a do-pass recommendation after sponsor Rep. Jeff Ehlers said the license covers two practitioners and there have been no complaints in five years.

The House Business Committee voted Feb. 17 to send House Bill 122 to the full House with a do-pass recommendation. The bill would repeal the state license for glamour photography, a separate licensing category from general photography.

Rep. Jeff Ehlers described HB 122 as a delicensing measure and told the committee that two glamour photographers are currently licensed in Idaho and that DOPL records show no consumer complaints in the last five years. "There are currently 2 licensed glamour photographers in Idaho," he said, adding that general photography does not require a license in Idaho.

Rep. Birch spoke in favor of HB 122 while distinguishing it from the makeup-artist bill considered earlier, noting concerns about health risks for some cosmetology items that are not present for glamour photography. "When you're dealing with a craft that can involve applying what could be toxic chemicals to an exposed part of the brain, which is the eye, I think there's a need to make sure people know what they're doing," Birch said, but he said that concern did not apply to glamour photography.

No members of the public testified. Rep. Barbieri moved the committee to send HB 122 to the House floor with a do-pass recommendation; the motion passed by voice vote.

The committee record shows proponents framed HB 122 as a removal of an unnecessary licensing requirement affecting a very small group of practitioners while opponents did not appear during the hearing. The bill now moves to floor consideration.