Bill Description: House Bill 378 would impose new reporting requirements on legislators and legislative candidates when they engage in private travel paid for by another individual or entity.
Rating: -4
NOTE: House Bill 378 is related to House Bill 320 (2025).
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?
House Bill 378 would create Chapter 7, Title 74, Idaho Code, to impose new reporting requirements on "a legislative candidate who will appear on a general election ballot, a member of the Idaho legislature, and a member-elect of the Idaho legislature who has prevailed in a general election but has not yet received the oath of office."
These people would be required to "report to the secretary of state all travel outside of Idaho reasonably related to a legislative or governmental purpose or to an issue of state, national, or international public policy paid for by another individual or entity."
These required reports would have to include "the travel destination; the dates of travel; the purpose of the travel; and the name and address of the person or entity that paid for the travel, including whether the travel was a campaign contribution and, in the case of current members of the legislature, whether the travel was made in such member's official capacity as a legislator."
These reporting requirements violate the privacy of both the person required to file the reports and the person or entity who paid for the travel. It is worth noting that any travel that was a campaign contribution is already reported through normal campaign finance disclosures. Requiring reporting of personal travel outside the realm of campaign finance is government overreach.
(-1)
Does it increase government spending (for objectionable purposes) or debt? Conversely, does it decrease government spending or debt?
The bill's fiscal note estimates that adding a filing portal to the Secretary of State's website reporting system will cost $5,000. (House Bill 320 estimated the cost of the filing portal at $10,000, and it is unclear why that estimate was reduced for this bill.)
(-1)
Does it violate the principle of equal protection under the law? Examples include laws that discriminate or differentiate based on age, gender, or religion or which apply laws, regulations, rules, or penalties differently based on such characteristics. Conversely, does it restore or protect the principle of equal protection under the law?
The bill only applies to legislators and legislative candidates, not to other elected officials or government employees. It is worth considering why this kind of enhanced scrutiny would be applied to candidates for part-time elective offices as well as incumbents in part-time elected positions but not to elected officials and career bureaucrats who serve on a full-time basis.
NOTE: A separate bill (House Bill 379) would apply similar requirements to statewide elected officials and candidates. Neither bill would apply to other elected or appointed officials or government employees, more broadly.
(-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?
The bill says any legislator or legislative candidate who "fails to file the report required pursuant to subsection (2) of this section within thirty (30) days shall be subject to a late fee in the amount of twenty-five dollars ($25.00) each day until the report is filed, which fee shall be deposited in the public school income fund."
Of note, most fees for violations of campaign finance reporting requirements are capped at $1,000. This fee (which exists outside of normal campaign finance reporting), however, is uncapped. This means a legislator or legislative candidate (including an unsuccessful candidate whose campaign had concluded) who failed to file a report would accrue fees at a rate of more than $9,000 per year.
(-1)
