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: Senate Bill 1206 is an enhancement of $14,937,100 and a transfer/reduction of full-time positions (to the Medicaid Division) for the Health and Welfare, Developmental Disability Services (Early Learning and Development) for fiscal year 2026. This legislation appropriates a total of $118,389,600 and 260.83 full-time positions to the agency.
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?
There are several wasteful provisions in this budget. First, one line item allocates $4,227,000 in federal funds to the Idaho Child Care Program. This program provides subsidized child care for low-income Idahoans.
The ICCP was more than $16 million in the red in summer 2024 before then-Director Alex Adams put a pause on enrollment and cut the scope of benefits to correct the budget. These overages were caused by a perfect storm of increased child care costs, oversizing program benefits, and increasing enrollment. Entering the new fiscal year, the department has lowered the income eligibility threshold from 175% of the poverty line to 130%. It is not the proper role of government to subsidize child care services. Instead of providing additional funds to the program’s budget of nearly $60 million, it would be more prudent for the Legislature to investigate ways to remove the perverse incentives within the program and reduce the scope of benefits.
(-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 Health and Welfare, Developmental Disability Services (Early Learning and Development) at $104 million, more than tripling in growth from the base in the last three years. This increase is partially due to substantial reorganization within the IDHW.
Two programs are going to the Division of Medicaid: the Extended Employment Services program and the Children’s Developmental Disabilities program. The division is also absorbing the Idaho Child Care Program. This shift makes it very difficult to accurately directly compare ongoing spending within the agency over the past three years, but it is remarkable that growth is still so great despite the agency shedding two programs.
(0)
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?
There is also another $14 million appropriation to subsidize the child care industry. This is only the latest of new subsidies for child care providers. This funding comes from unspent federal allocations for the ICCP program (since it is a block grant program). It will be used for “building supply through contracted spots, grants, and subgrants, with a specific focus on addressing underserved populations,” according to the Legislative Budget Book. These funds are foregone and do not necessarily constitute waste. However, they would harm the child care industry by making it dependent on government funding, which will further drive up the costs of services instead of lowering them. It isn’t clear from the request whether these funds would be used for valid one-time purposes.
Under this budget, the division would receive a total appropriation of $96,116,400 in federal funding — constituting 81% of its total appropriation. This demonstrates the agency depends on the federal government to support its programs and operations.
(-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?
This legislation includes a reduction of $3,539,100 and 3.00 FTPs to move the Extended Employment Services out of the division and into the Division of Medicaid. This does not constitute a true reduction of the overall size of government. Instead, it is a shift between departments.
(0)
