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.
Analyst: Niklas Kleinworth
Rating: -1
Bill Description: Senate Bill 1460 appropriates $191,206,500 and 613.50 full-time positions to the Department of Health and Welfare, Division of Welfare, for fiscal year 2025. It also contains two supplemental appropriations for fiscal year 2024.
ANALYST NOTE: This budget was originally considered by the Senate as Senate Bill 1445, which failed. Senate Bill 1460 is the revised version of the budget. It removes $1,090,600 that was designated to support the Summer EBT (food stamp) program for school-aged children. Removing this funding added one positive rating point for restraining the government and its spending to its proper role. This changed the overall rating from a -3 to a -1.
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?
This legislation excludes $1,090,600 in funding to support the Summer EBT (food stamp) program. This program would have provided funds to cover food purchases for school-aged children over the summer months.
This program originated as a temporary program to mitigate the effects of the COVID pandemic. Upon the passage of the federal Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2021, however, Congress made this program permanent. The appropriation in SB 1460 only pays for the administrative costs of the program. The federal funding for benefits costs within the program are passed through the Division of Welfare and not subject to appropriation. The total expected cost of this welfare program is $17,510,000.
The Summer EBT program is not designed to serve only the needy. School-age children would qualify for this program if they meet eligibility requirements for food stamps or free and reduced priced lunch. If just 25% of students in a school district qualify, then all remaining students would be automatically eligible, regardless of their income.
This program generates dependency and exists squarely outside the proper role of government. This program has the potential to hook families on government assistance regardless of their means. It wrongly places the government in the role of caretaker for Idaho children.
Once the state meets federal matching requirements under the new federal law, the pandemic EBT program would be continued as the Summer EBT program. Removing the appropriation of $1,090,600 effectively eliminates this program, taking one step toward restraining the government within its proper role.
(+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.)?
This legislation provides $11,495,200 in ongoing subsidies to Idaho’s child care industry. This program would provide government-funded child care for families to “maintain employment or complete their education.” The money comes entirely from federal funds through the Child Care Development Block Grant.
This is a wasteful expansion of government handouts. Additional taxpayer funding makes child care less affordable as it artificially increases demand and floods the market with funding. Government action such as this fails to solve the problem of affordable child care, exacerbating the problem and increasing the Idahoans’ government dependency.
(-1)
Is the maintenance budget inappropriate for the needs of the state, the size of the agency, or the inflationary environment of the economy? Conversely, is the maintenance budget appropriate given the needs of the state and economic pressures?
This legislation confirms the program maintenance budget for the Division of Welfare of $177,466,600, growing it from the base by 7.0% over the last three years. The rate is slower than the rate of inflation over the same period, demonstrating modest growth in the cost to maintain the agency.
(+1)
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?
This legislation appropriates more than $139 million in federal funding to the Division of Welfare, or 72.9% of the total appropriation for the 2025 fiscal year. This department administers many federally controlled welfare programs within the state. The agency is substantially dependent on federal funding to sustain its programs and operations.
(-1)
Does this budget contain hidden fund transfers or supplemental expenditures that work to enact new policy or are not valid emergency expenditures? Conversely, are fund transfers only made to stabilization funds or are supplemental requests only made in the interest of resolving valid fiscal emergencies?
This legislation includes two supplemental requests for the 2024 fiscal year. The first is a $1,082,500 transfer from personnel costs to operating expenditures, to cover the cost of the eligibility verification system. The agency projected a shortage of funding for the 2024 fiscal year due to its inability to transfer personnel costs to other expense classes. Though this request uses existing funds to support this unforeseen expense, the agency should not rely on open staff positions as a deficiency fund that collects annual interest payments in the form of the statewide change in employee compensation.
The second request adds nearly $4.3 million in one-time federal funds to support the Low Income Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP). This program is an entitlement that leverages federal funds to cover the cost of utilities for eligible families. This funding would be in addition to the $19.8 million built into the base.
The LIHEAP program is outside the proper role of government and burdensome for working families. This is an inappropriate use of a supplemental request for these expenditures are not unforeseen and fail to qualify as an emergency.
(-1)
