Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Governance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Some senators voice due‑process and scope concerns over Benjie's Law despite supporters' assurances
Summary
Several senators questioned whether HB 776's reliance on the Department's central registry and a 10‑year lookback could lead to overreach or unintended removals. Sponsors said the bill only elevates timing and references existing Idaho code for triggers and safeguards.
While testimony for House Bill 776 was largely supportive, several senators raised doubts about registry scope and due process.
Senator Lenny warned that the bill could expand administrative power "by using sympathetic framing," and said the mechanism that could lead to removal should be handled carefully. "You can get almost anything passed in this building if you say it's for the kids," he said, and indicated he would not support the measure as written.
Senator Kaiser asked whether the bill preserves due process, noting the draft relies on DHW's Child Protection Central Registry entries going back 10 years and that verification could be escalated without the time to substantiate entries. "It does delegate far too much authority," Kaiser said, urging additional work to narrow the bill.
Senator Shippey expressed interest in additional meetings with DHW to understand how the registry and verification processes function and whether removal or arrest history should continue to carry the same weight over long time horizons. Sponsors responded that the bill calls for faster prioritization only and that the department assisted in drafting and provided an ombudsman letter; the sponsor emphasized that existing warrant and removal procedures remain unchanged.
