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 332 appropriates $36,499,700 and 50.34 full-time positions to the State Board of Education, Special Programs for fiscal year 2026.
Analyst note: The commentary about FTP increases for the Idaho Geological Survey and the Forest Utilization Research Divisions at the University of Idaho were corrected due to a mismatch between the departments and their requests.
Does this budget enact powers and activities that extend beyond the proper role of government? Conversely, does this budget fulfill the proper role of government?
The Special Programs Division of the Office of the State Board of Education is composed of several smaller programs. Some of these are egregiously outside the proper role of government. They include Tech Help and the Idaho Small Business Development Centers (SBDC).
Tech Help provides manufacturing consulting to local businesses and companies throughout the state. The SBDCs provide more general small business consulting services. These programs occupy a role that could otherwise be fulfilled by the free market. Additionally, these programs are known for directing their programs to favor minority-owned businesses to further leftist-style social justice. In this way, programs like this allow the government to pick winners and losers based on a preordained agenda. This prevents the market from dictating which services and products are valuable to our communities.
These programs are squarely outside the proper role of government.
(-1)
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 332 provides nearly $1.4 million in new, permanent spending for the Rural Educator Incentive Program — an incentive program that pays for teachers’ “loan repayments, additional degrees, advanced degrees, or other job-related costs.” Teachers receive more funds the longer they stay in a rural district. These funds are in addition to those already ongoing from previous budget years, totalling $2,750,000 already built into the base appropriation of the program. This addition would be a 50% increase in spending on the program.
Funding for this program is subject to appropriation, allowing the Legislature discretion. Thus far, the Board of Education hasn’t publicly released data to show whether the program works to retain rural teachers. The Legislature should not continue to add funding for programs when their effectiveness is unclear.
(-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 Special Programs at $36,461,800, growing it from the base by 9.5% in the last three years. This rate is just over 3.6 points slower than what would be prescribed by inflationary pressures and growth.
(+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?
Due to budget caps within several of the subsidiary agencies of the University of Idaho, several full-time positions are being added in a piecewise fashion through this bill. The agencies intend to fund these positions with general fund dollars over time.
The Idaho Geological Survey will add 0.13 FTP and $12,800 for a new database manager. The full salary and benefits for this new position is $99,720. There is also a request for 0.14 FTP and $19,500 from the Forest Utilization Research division for a new workforce development manager to oversee crews working in the University of Idaho’s experimental forests. The full cost of salary and benefits for the position is $113,446, with the remainder of the cost supported by other funding.
The appropriations made in this legislation for new FTPs are one time instead of ongoing, meaning the legislature will likely reconsider this request in 2026. Nonetheless, this is an expansion of government through additions to the state workforce.
(-1)
