Bill Description: House Bill 810 would require a legislative candidate to have maintained a home in the district for a year before filing, rather than a year before the general election.
Rating: -1
NOTE: House Bill 810 is similar to House Bill 673 (2026), with the most notable change being the effective date. House Bill 673 would take effect immediately in the midst of an election cycle. House Bill 810 would take effect January 1, 2027.
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?
House Bill 810 would amend Section 34-614, Idaho Code, to impose new requirements on legislative candidates. Currently, the law says a candidate must “have been a registered elector within the legislative district one (1) year next preceding the general election at which he offers his candidacy.”
The bill would expand on this, saying that a legislative candidate must both have been a registered elector within the legislative district for “one (1) year immediately preceding the general election at which he offers his candidacy” and have “maintained a fixed habitation within the legislative district boundaries for one (1) year immediately preceding the date such candidate files a declaration of candidacy for the office of representative or senator.”
It defines a “fixed habitation” as “a residence as defined in section 34-107, Idaho Code, at which the candidate maintains actual physical presence and occupancy for at least one hundred twenty (120) nights during the one (1) year period immediately preceding the date such candidate files a declaration of candidacy for the office of representative or senator.”
The bill contains an exemption from the fixed habitation requirement “due to active military service or a religious mission during the one (1) year period.”
While this bill does not have the retroactive application problem present in House Bill 673, it would still limit who has the right to seek public office. There is also an unequal application of the law by providing an exception for military service and religious missions.
Military and religious service can be noble callings, and the law should not seek to discourage them, but there are many honorable reasons why a candidate or potential candidate might be absent from his normal habitation for an extended period. Temporary relocation for employment, education, or taking care of a sick relative are just some examples.
Another potential pitfall with this law concerns redistricting, which can sometimes result in a candidate’s residence ending up outside of an area he or she has been representing. Candidates sometimes choose to move back into their district in order to continue serving their constituents, but under the timeline in this bill, that might not be possible.
The new legislative district boundaries based on the 2020 census were not finalized until late 2021, less than six months before the filing deadline the following spring. It would not have been possible for a legislator to move back into his or her district in time to have “maintained a fixed habitation within the legislative district boundaries for one (1) year immediately preceding the date such candidate files a declaration of candidacy.”
(-1)
