Bill Description: House Bill 735 would expand the scope of government to regulate paid in-person canvassing activities, and by extension, infringe on free speech.
Rating: -7
Does it create, expand, or enlarge any agency, board, program, function, or activity of government? Conversely, does it eliminate or curtail the size or scope of government?
House Bill 735 would create Section 67-6628B, Idaho Code, to regulate what the bill defines as “paid in-person canvassing activities.”
The bill would require the Secretary of State to promulgate rules for badge specifications, establish a complaint system on its website, investigate alleged violations, and refer matters for enforcement. This expands the scope of the office by adding new regulatory, administrative, and enforcement functions.
(-1)
Does it give government any new, additional, or expanded power to prohibit, restrict, or regulate activities in the free market? Conversely, does it eliminate or reduce government intervention in the market?
The bill would require that paid canvassers “meet all of the qualifications of a qualified elector,” provide verbal disclosures of compensation and payer, and wear visible badges. It would also empower the Secretary of State to set rules and investigate violations. This introduces new government regulations on private political advocacy and labor in the election-related market.
(-1)
Does it increase barriers to entry into the market? Examples include occupational licensure, the minimum wage, and restrictions on home businesses. Conversely, does it remove barriers to entry into the market?
By requiring paid canvassers to meet specific residency qualifications, provide verbal notifications, and wear mandatory badges (with government-specified designs), the bill would raise compliance hurdles for individuals entering or operating in the market for compensated political outreach.
(-1)
Does it increase government spending (for objectionable purposes) or debt? Conversely, does it decrease government spending or debt?
The bill’s fiscal note claims “enforcement costs will be managed within existing budgets,” but the bill would assign a range of new duties to the Secretary of State, including rulemaking, maintaining a complaint system, and conducting investigations. It’s unrealistic to claim that these duties will not require some additional administrative resources and overhead.
(-1)
Does it in any way restrict public access to information related to government activity or otherwise compromise government transparency, accountability, or election integrity? Conversely, does it increase public access to information related to government activity or increase government transparency, accountability, or election integrity?
While the bill claims to promote transparency in paid canvassing, it would actually compromise election integrity by imposing burdensome regulations and penalties on political speech and participation, potentially deterring free-market advocacy and reducing overall electoral engagement.
(-1)
Does it directly or indirectly create or increase penalties for victimless crimes or non-restorative penalties for non-violent crimes? Conversely, does it eliminate or decrease penalties for victimless crimes or non-restorative penalties for non-violent crimes?
House Bill 735 would amend Section 67-6625, Idaho Code, dealing with violations and penalties, to impose civil fines (up to $250 for individuals, $2,500 for others) and misdemeanor penalties (up to 6 months imprisonment) for failing to comply with disclosure or badge requirements under this law.
(-1)
Does it violate the spirit or the letter of either the United States Constitution or the Idaho Constitution? Examples include restrictions on speech, public assembly, the press, privacy, private property, or firearms. Conversely, does it restore or uphold the protections guaranteed in the US Constitution or the Idaho Constitution?
The bill would violate First Amendment protections under the U.S. Constitution by compelling speech (mandatory disclosures and badges) and regulating core political expression in elections, as well as infringing on freedom of association and contractual freedom in private advocacy arrangements.
(-1)
