The Idaho Spending Index serves to provide a fiscally conservative perspective on state budgeting while providing an unbiased measurement of how Idaho lawmakers apply these values to their voting behavior on appropriations bills. Each bill is analyzed within the context of the metrics below. They receive one (+1) point for each metric that is satisfied by freedom-focused policymaking and lose one (-1) point for each instance in which the inverse is true. The sum of these points composes the score for the bill.
Rating: (-2)
Bill Description: House Bill 347 appropriates $5,711,000 and 35.50 full-time positions to the Secretary of State for fiscal year 2026.
Does this budget incur any wasteful spending among discretionary funds, including new line items? Conversely, does this budget contain any provisions that serve to reduce spending where possible (i.e. base reductions, debt reconciliation, etc.)?
House Bill 347 contains several items for the Office of the Secretary of State that could be considered wasteful spending. The first item is for $192,300 in contract inflation to maintain the old elections, lobbyist, and campaign finance system, Tenex through December 2025. The office is currently replacing this system as part of a larger, $10 million project. While it is understandable that the office would need to phase out the old system as they implement the new one, this adjustment is a 47% increase from last year — an increase not seen in the last five years.
Related, is an additional $287,100 in subscription costs for the new elections, lobbyist, and campaign finance reporting software launched early this year. The office was appropriated $10 million to implement the new software system. One would assume first year subscription costs would be included in these costs since these systems would be otherwise unusable.
Finally, there is an additional $20,000 request for IT conference travel and training. This would increase the base appropriation for this item eleven-fold. Though some conference costs are expected, particularly as new IT systems are being implemented, the size of the request is not justified by the size of the staff, nor the complexity of the systems.
(-1)
Is the continuation or growth in ongoing spending, if any, inappropriate for the changes in circumstances, scope of the agency, or current economic environment? Conversely, is the continuation or growth in ongoing spending appropriate given any change in circumstances or economic pressures?
This legislation funds ongoing spending for the Secretary of State at $5,563,000, growing from the base by 54% in the last three years. This rate is nearly three times faster than what would be prescribed by inflationary pressures and growth over the same period.
(-1)
Does the budget grow government through the addition of new permanent FTPs or through funding unlegislated efforts to create new or expanded entitlement programs? Conversely, does this budget reduce the size of government staff and programs except where compelled by new legislation?
House Bill 374 includes $36,500 to double hire a deputy business director. The person filling this role would be training beneath the person filling this position. This request does not create a new, permanent FTP. Therefore, it does not violate this metric.
(0)
