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: (-4)
Bill Description: Senate Bill 1191 is an enhancement of $481,000 and 1.00 new full-time position for the Office of Energy and Mineral Resources for fiscal year 2026. This legislation appropriates a total of $13,238,600 and 12.00 full-time positions to the agency.
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.)?
The Office of Energy and Mineral Resources exists under the authority of Executive Order 2020-17, through which Gov. Brad Little extended the role of the office for another four years. The office works to manage energy efficiency efforts and to educate the public and elected officials about state and federal energy policy. It also oversees the Idaho Strategic Energy Alliance.
Presently, the Legislature has no statutory obligation to fund this agency, which acts as a means for centrally planning Idaho’s energy and mineral usage. Though the agency can coordinate statewide energy projects, that task could easily be absorbed by agencies with a statutorily mandated role. This agency, however, is a wasteful use of taxpayer funds.
(-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 Office of Energy and Mineral Resources at over $13 million, growing from the base by over 200% over the last three years. This is far faster than what would be prescribed by inflationary pressures and growth.
Because of the accelerated growth in this budget the last three years, a truly fiscally responsible enhancement budget for FY2026 would reverse the growth with a negative appropriation — a reduction to the base budget.
(-1)
Does this budget perpetuate or expand state dependence on federal dollars, thereby violating principles of federalism? Conversely, does this budget actively reduce the amount of federal dollars used to balance this budget?
Federal funding supports 88.% of its budget. This legislation perpetuates this dependency, then expands it even more.
(-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?
One line item for “governor’s initiatives” would add another FTP to this budget. This position would support the new Idaho Strategic Permitting Council, with a goal of streamlining the permitting process across agencies. It is unreasonable for agencies to spend nearly a half million dollars to improve their communications and reduce regulatory hurdles, let alone grow the size of their staff to accomplish this.
(-1)
