This weekend, Idaho news outlets were busy congratulating themselves about their self serving awards ceremony, in which everyone seemed to get a prize, while potential corruption brewed under their very noses without so much as a question. After I posted a detailed report on Friday regarding what appeared to be deceptive electioneering practices in the GBAD election, only two local media outlets chose to raise questions regarding the election financial disclosures, and both dropped the ball after getting what they apparently thought was a plausible explanation. Sven Berg's report in the Idaho Statesman buried the lede when it stated:

Tway, Berch and Walker recently questioned reports showing incumbents Peter Oliver, Rob Perez and Stephanie Astorquia had received no contributions and spent no money on their campaigns. That seemed impossible, since the candidates published a joint brochure in early May promoting their candidacies.

But the reports in question, which were due May 14, covered contributions and expenditures between Jan. 1 and May 5. Contributions hadn't started coming in by then, and the candidates hadn't received the bill for the brochure, said Jason Lehosit, who helped the incumbents' campaigns.

"How are you supposed to report something when you don't know what the cost is because you haven't got a bill from the printer yet?" Lehosit said.

Perhaps Mr. Berg is unfamiliar with Mr. Lehosit's checkered past in running Republican campaigns.

In Idaho's inner Republican Party, the name Jason Lehosit is as familiar as any in the past 10 years. A consultant, fundraiser and campaign manager for several high profile Idaho politicians including Gov. Butch Otter in his 2005 campaign and now, Lt. Gov. Brad Little, is in jail after allegations of violating his DUI probation. Court records show that 33-year-old Jason Lehosit's possible probation violation was for his fourth DUI. Attorney David Leroy says, if Lehosit did in fact violate his probation, a judge won't take his sentence lightly.

Lehosit doesn't work for free, so how he can order up a several thousand dollar print job unless he's on the clock. Lehosit's cost to the campaign surely should have shown up in a sunshine disclosure if he's working for them in early May. More importantly, how would Lehosit persuade a printing business to extend him credit for a job costing several thousand dollars, particularly when he had zero in the way of contributions. The fact that Jason Lehosit is involved in this campaign at all is worthy of investigation and reporting.

Maybe he's new to the area, but Mr. Berg seems to lack any institutional knowledge of the players in this campaign. As I noted in an update in the underlying post, the Idaho Secretary of State, Republican Ben Ysursa, said any complaints regarding election financial disclosures had to fielded by GBAD itself, an inherent conflict of interest, since its the GBAD incumbents filing the misleading disclosures. Moreover the law firm of Givens, Pursley is currently counsel for GBAD, and yet has also been operating on behalf of the incumbent campaigns in filing their own grievances. Perhaps Mr. Berg is also unaware of Givens Pursley's checkered past on conflicts of interest in the University Place scandal.

But the biggest omission in Berg's report is regarding John Foster's involvement, who, like Givens Pursley, has a financial incentive for getting incumbents re-elected so their respective contracts with GBAD can be extended. Foster's fingerprints are all over these campaigns due to the striking similarity between this quest for secrecy, and the deception he endeavored to accomplish in the Referendum election regarding the Luna Laws. Foster and his group, Education Voters for Idaho, who Foster represented as "a group of motivated parents", refused to disclose their donor list prompting Secretary of State Ysursa to sue them under Idaho's Sunshine Act on the eve of election day. The Court ordered disclosure holding:

“The interest in free, fair and honest elections free of fraud and deception and the right of the people to know who seeks their vote for a candidate or an issue is at the heart of the electoral process.”

The judge noted that “Idaho’s Sunshine Law applies to all individuals, corporations, associations or other entities of any type.”

And the subsequent disclosure revealed that the donors were not motivated Idaho parents, but were instead big money interests who stood to gain financially from the Luna laws and privatizing education in Idaho. "Fraud and deception" indeed.

Recognizing that these issues stray slightly from the substance of the GBAD election and the individual platforms of each of the candidates. But consider this, GBAD Board members sole responsibility is to administer the tax revenue received for the best interests of the District. Yet incumbents have chosen to surround themselves with, and to take the advice of, individuals and entities with a demonstrated track record of secrecy and deception instead of open honest disclosure pursuant to Idaho public policy. That's ultimately what is at stake in this election and why your vote is crucial.
------------------------------

The Sunshine Act is very broad in defining expenditures which:

...includes a contract, promise, or agreement, whether or not legally enforceable, to make an expenditure. The term "expenditure" also includes a promise to pay, a payment or a transfer of anything of value in exchange for goods, services, property, facilities or anything of value for the purpose of assisting, benefiting or honoring any public official or candidate, or assisting in furthering or opposing any election campaign.

I.C. 67-6603(h). It is customary to prepay the postage. If people received the mailer on May 4, then there was an expenditure prior to the time of the disclosure deadline on May 5. How does one prepay postage without money in the bank? So there had to be contributions as well.

This was a stealth campaign that succeeded in defeating Tway.

Recently the Idaho Statesman profiled the May 21st election for the Greater Boise Auditorium District membership on the Board of Directors and what's at stake in this election.

Candidates Steve Berch, Jim Walker (both running for six-year terms) and George Tway (seeking a two-year term) have the same campaign manager and are endorsed by GBAD board chairman and Idaho House member Hy Kloc, who was endorsed by Boise Mayor Dave Bieter, who endorses a new baseball stadium. Berch-Walker-Tway were the only candidates among the eight to advocate for a multiuse sports facility (not to the exclusion of convention enhancements) during a candidate forum May 9. They did not spell out baseball specifically, but emphasized "multiuse." They claim they are not a "slate," but they espouse a common anti-incumbent message.

Stephanie Astorquia, Rob Perez (running for six-year terms) and Peter Oliver (running for a two-year term) are incumbents, though Perez and Oliver are relatively new appointees (one year ago and four months ago, respectively). These three share a campaign flier and none advocated specifically for a multiuse sports facility at the candidate forum. They see their strength and their future as operating, and perhaps expanding, the district's convention business. Expansion plans could include a 50,000-square-foot exhibition area that consultants recommend.

The remaining two candidates, John May and Noah Bard, both have industry experience. May's is in the hotel business and serving in community development capacities. His parents have both served on the GBAD board - May's late father, Larry, and his mother, Gail, who left the board in January. Oliver was appointed to the seat Gail May left at midterm.

This is a non-partisan race with strong partisan overtones. With cursory mention, the editorial references bad blood in previous GBAD deliberations with prominent local Republican, Judy Peavey Derr, a GBAD Board Director not up for re-election, occupying center stage in the fracas. Local Democrats will remember Judy Peavey Derr's recent effort to unseat Democratic incumbent Senator Eliot Werk making some vicious personal allegations in the campaign. Werk handily defeated her.

In January, Ms. Peavey Derr maneuvered the Board into executive session where they determined in secret to hire Kestrel West LLC to do public relations work on behalf of GBAD. Kestrel West is the current incarnation of John Foster's public relations and lobbying efforts. Idaho Democrats will recall that Mr. Foster is the former Executive Director of the Democratic Party who ran Congressman Minnick's embarrassing 2010 re-election effort which conducted a fierce campaign against Democrats. After losing this election, Foster then went out of his way to blame Democrats for failing to come out and support Minnick. Thereafter Foster burned any last vestige of goodwill with progressives by agreeing to work with Republicans to defeat Idaho's Education Reform Referendum seeking to void the Luna Laws. The Referendum was overwhelmingly successful.

The need for Kestrel West's services are not specifically identified in the meeting minutes, but GBAD hired Kestrel West for PR work on February 15, 2013, and a copy of the Consulting Agreement is attached at the end of the minutes, right after a Resolution clarifying their bylaws regarding this very election. Clearly, this election was on their mind during the hiring process. The Board and Kestrel West avoided a competitive bidding process, by limiting the term of the Agreement to six months and thus less than $25,000.

Here is where things get interesting. The Board Member incumbents are clearly running campaigns with literature, absentee ballot request mailings, yard signs and the works. All three campaigns have the same Treasurer, Thomas J. Wilford former Chief Executive Officer of J.A. and Kathryn Albertson Foundation, Inc. the primary backer of the Luna laws. Their literature is marked that it is paid for by their respective campaigns. Yet none of the Campaign Financial Disclosure Reports for Peter Oliver, Stephanie Astorquia, or Rob Perez indicates any contributions through May 5, and none of them show any expenditures. The disclosures encompass the time period January 1 to May 5, 2013. But a campaign requesting your supporters to fill out absentee ballot requests requires significant lead time, for your mailer to go out, and for them to respond before the May 15th deadline. Certainly the money would be in place for such expenditures.

These circumstances raise questions for enterprising journalists who are in short supply. But the Republican taint all over the incumbents should motivate pro-growth Democrats into the polling booth.

------------------------------------

Update: 5/17 5:07; for clarification and to note an even stronger connection between the campaigns and John Foster in the guise of:

Mr. Thomas J. Wilford has been the President of Alscott Inc., since 1993. Mr. Wilford has been the Chief Executive Officer of J.A. and Kathryn Albertson Foundation, Inc. since 2003. He served as President of J.A. and Kathryn Albertson Foundation Inc. from 1995 to 2003. From 1986 to 1993, Mr. Wilford was an office managing partner with Ernst & Young in Anchorage, Alaska and Consulting division in Idaho, where he was also tax manager. He was a Tax Partner with Watson, ...

They would have worked together on the Referendum.

-------------------------------------

Update: 5/17 8:06; All of this secrecy looks vaguely familiar. But there's not enough time for the Secretary of State to sue. Dirty politics at its worst?

-------------------------------------

Update: 5/20 4:05; I'm told that the Secretary of State says that any complaints on the election process have to be filed with the Board itself, the majority of which includes the incumbents who are the primary transgressors. Justice delayed is justice denied.

The action is filed in Bonneville County, in the seventh judicial district for the State of Idaho and caps the damage claim at $74,999, despite Vandersloot's assertion in the press that Plaintiffs lost millions. Vandersloot asserts that: “It’s not about (money). It’s about clearing my reputation.” Questionable, but clearly Vandersloot likes his chances in state court in Idaho Falls rather than risking have it removed to federal court and a less friendly venue. $75,000 just happens to be the required amount in controversy which must be pleaded in order to remove a case to federal court for diversity jurisdiction. The pleaded amount was no accident. Vandersloot doesn't want the case anywhere but Idaho Falls.

The jury pool in Idaho Falls is a stacked deck for Plaintiffs. Plaintiffs reside there, employ thousands in call centers, are name throwing philanthropists, routinely buy full page ads in the region's largest newspaper,and finance multiple causes sympathetic to the right wing politics of the area. When pitted in a court room against the liberal Mother Jones, Defendants will have an uphill battle, or as the legal profession puts it, they'll be home towned. Just as significant is a sympathetic judiciary. Vandersloot's history is set forth in this well sourced Wiki entry:

VanderSloot has generally been a major donor to Idaho Republicans,according to Popkey, who described him as the state's "most boisterous conservative financier” and by America Online’s Eamon Murphy, who called him "perhaps the single most influential campaign donor" in the state of Idaho.

VanderSloot spent more than $100,000 on independent advertising on three winning judicial campaigns, two for Idaho Supreme Court and one for district judge in Bonneville County. VanderSloot and Melaleuca were financial supporters of the PAC Concerned Citizens for Family Values. The PAC ran ads targeting incumbent Idaho Supreme Court Justice Cathy Silak during her 2000 re-election campaign against challenger Daniel T. Eismann. The ads alleged that if Silak were re-elected, same-sex marriage and "partial-birth abortion" could have become legal in Idaho.

In 2002, VanderSloot and Melaleuca contributed more than $50,000 opposing the election bid of Democrat Keith Roark, a former Blaine County prosecutor, for Idaho Attorney General. The contributions included a $35,000 donation to Roark’s Republican opponent, Lawrence Wasden, and a $16,500 donation to Concerned Citizens for Family Values, an organization run by VanderSloot, to pay for attack ads against Roark in Eastern Idaho. That year, VanderSloot and Melaleuca also donated $7,000 towards Republican Dirk Kempthorne’s 2002 gubernatorial campaign.

In 2006 VanderSloot and his wife Belinda donated nearly $16,000 through the PAC Citizens for Truth and Justice, and via direct payments for ads opposing the reelection of Idaho 7th District Court Judge James Herndon, a Democrat, in a three-way race against challengers Darren Simpson and DaLon Esplin. Ads criticizing Herndon also aired on radio stations run by Riverbend Communications, owned by VanderSloot and his wife Belinda.

In 2010 VanderSloot funded two PACs that launched last-minute ads against Idaho 2nd District Judge John Bradbury, a Democrat, during his electoral run for state Supreme Court against Republican incumbent Justice Roger Burdick. VanderSloot donated $19,000 to the PAC Idaho Citizens for Justice and financed the PAC Citizens for Commonsense Solutions. Idaho Secretary of State Ben Ysursa announced that the PACs were fined $1,900 collectively for failing to appoint a certified treasurer prior to accepting contributions from VanderSloot and for failing to disclose large expenditures for its ads before the election, as required by law.

Citations omitted. There is not a judge, lawyer or legislator in the state that isn't intimidated by the Plaintiffs.

While Vandersloot is quite pleased with his chances in state court, he didn't bother to avail himself of the local attorney talent. Three out-of-state attorneys filed pro hac vice documents with the Court seeking permission to litigate this one matter in Idaho state courts. One of these attorneys is Thomas A. Clare, P.C. with Washington DC firm Kirkland & Ellis LLP. He's a heavy hitter in defamation cases "and routinely advises corporations and prominent individuals who are the subject of false statements by the media and newsgathering torts." His site states that he is the attorney representing Shirley Sherrod in the defamation action against prominent blogger and blowhard Andrew Breitbart and his website. Vandersloot might be right it's not about the money, he has plenty of money. This looks to be more about power, control and intimidation.

And I couldn't say it better.

Jim Messina, who grew up in Boise and graduated from Boise High School led Obama’s reelection campaign that observers said used a mix of behavioral science and technology to identify and get out to vote a new crop of voters to the coalition. He has now kept his election victory record intact since he ran a campaign for former Missoula Mayor Dan Kemmis in 1993. The sky seems to be the limit for his future.

Vice President Joe Biden’s chief of staff Bruce Reed grew up in Coeur D’ Alene, the son of environmental attorney Scott Reed and former Democratic Senator Mary Lou Reed. He was credited by former President Bill Clinton as co-author of his powerful convention speech that energized Democratic activists.

Jim Messina's star couldn't be higher right now given this quote from last week: "We have the math. They have the myth." And to underscore the ludicrous nature of Obama's liberal/socialist tag of which the right wing media is so fond, Messina was formerly the chief of staff to blue dog Senator Baucus of Montana. Even with these conservative credentials, Messina's fact based pragmatism who helped shepherd Obamacare through his senate committee and eventually the full congress before Obama brought him on board in the White House. I cannot think of anyone who has been a more influential force in this administration and thus the country in the last four years.

Bruce Reed formerly headed what's left of the DLC, a centrist Democratic organization, before being asked to be Vice President Biden's Chief of Staff. His efforts at assembling persuasive facts for Clinton's convention speech earned Clinton the internet title of "Secretary of Explaining Shit", a sanitized version of which later became his preferred title by the Obama campaign in later speeches. If Republicans can't find common ground with these two Idahoans, then it's the Republican party playing politics. Or they have become so ideologically extreme in their epistemic bubble, they can't be reasoned with.

11/9: Updated for clarity and to add a link to Rachel's video. Thanks to the Idaho Dems who thought this worthy of a link up.

This guy opted for some last minute electioneering in front of the Idaho Statehouse on election day. A facebook capture shows him walking away from Mitt Romney's Idaho co-chairs, Governor Butch Otter and Senator Jim Risch (I can't confirm if that's the angry little gnome but it looks like his bald spot). I chatted with the man as I asked for his picture. He stated he wanted to exercise his civil rights before they disappeared. He was still shaking from a confrontation with the Idaho State Police just twenty minutes before who threatened him with a felony. They strongly encouraged him to leave the area, the most visible and politically, if not socially, appropriate one in the state. I shared with him my concerns regarding the backfiring of his methods of political persuasion but have no doubt that the first amendment protected him where he was. Despite the police confrontation, he laughed getting flipped off by nearly every grey haired white guy who drove by.

So I view with no small amount of amused perplexity anyone who would politically posture constitutional protection for activities under zero threat of majority vote restricting them. As usual when the skeptical hackles rise, the devil is in the details. The text of the amendment will likely be dismissed by the ordinary Idaho voter in favor of its statement of purpose, to protect hunting, fishing and trapping. However, the proposed amendment may actually harm the ability for successful hunts, would protect some inhumane methods of take, and actually takes aim at killing fish, not protecting them.

The Idaho Secretary of State posts the text along with the pros and cons. The feel good reasons are as plain as a red October sunset, and will induce ready agreement before most will bother reading about the reasons not to vote for the amendment.

1. Future legislation to address public concerns regarding inhumane and unsportsmanlike practices could be affected by this amendment.

2. This amendment is unnecessary because the rights to hunt, fish and trap are not threatened and are already protected by law.

3. The Idaho Department of Fish and Game's wildlife management decisions could be constitutionally challenged as a result of this amendment.

These very valid reasons are eloquently illustrated by a north Idaho hunter/fisherman Ned Horner in response to a Betsy Russell piece delineating some unseemly trapping methods which would be protected by this amendment.

Although the controversy over trapping is certainly worth discussing, I think you may have missed a bigger issue about this proposal, and that is the threat this amendment poses to habitat. The reaction of most hunters and fishermen will be to automatically support the proposed amendment based on the first part that reads “…, to provide that the rights to hunt, fish and trap, including by the use of traditional methods, are a valued part of the heritage of the State of Idaho and shall forever be preserved for the people and managed through the laws, rules and proclamations that preserve the future of hunting, fishing and trapping;” However, it's the additional language in the proposal that is a threat to every Idahoans ability to hunt and fish.

The next part reads “to provide that public hunting, fishing and trapping of wildlife shall be a preferred means of managing wildlife”. Regulating harvest is certainly a critical part of wildlife management, but regulations mean nothing if there isn't adequate habitat to support wildlife and fish populations. Let's say critical big game winter range is threatened by a mega housing development on the Boise front range. This section of the Constitutional amendment could be interpreted by some to imply that culling the herd would be a priority over preserving critical wildlife habitat.

Of even more concern is the section that reads “shall not affect rights to divert, appropriate and use water, or establish any minimum amount of water in any water body”. Why is this even in this amendment? My Constitutional right to fish or hunt is protected, but that means nothing if the stream is dry or the wetland has been drained. Many streams and rivers in southern Idaho are already so over appropriated with water rights that entire sections dry up each year (including the Snake River). This section gives Constitutional protection to whoever wants to use water for consumptive uses at the expense of the fish and wildlife that water now supports.

America is a model for wildlife conservation and management because of the excise taxes on hunting and fishing (PR and DJ) that have generated billions of dollars for wildlife and fisheries management, but also because a few enlightened people in our nations history (Teddy Roosevelt for one) understood the value of habitat for preserving abundant fish and wildlife populations. As a passionate hunter and fishermen, I want that opportunity and privilege protected, but not if it means changing the Idaho Constitution to make it even more difficult to protect critical habitat. Unfortunately, whoever wrote this legislation had something else in mind than protecting your right to hunt and fish. I intend to vote NO on H.J.R. 2aa.

Indeed, in urging caution on this amendment, the Idaho Statesman identified the source of the broadside attack on minimum stream flows as Idaho Water Users Association headed by embattled former Republican head Norm Semanko. IWUA has endeavored in the past to dry up the Boise River and it's paltry 250 cfs winter minimum stream flow as water properly belonging to irrigators. Last anyone checked, fish require water to live.

While the Idaho AG gave this language a pass as not a threat to Idaho's minimum stream flows, clearly Semanko intends to use this language in a legal assault on Idaho rivers and their fish. Why give it to him. Such amendment proposals in the past have met with opposition from Idaho's Fish and Game, which is demonstrating unusual solidarity in supporting this attempt. However ex F&G director Steve Huffaker opposes the amendment.

“There’s a heck of a lot of daylight between existing stream flow policy or legislation and a constitutional prohibition,” said Huffaker. “I see no valid reason to amend the constitution. We opposed similar attempts for 10 years and now they have inserted the water language which is certainly not good news for fish.”

Anytime laws are advanced that appear to be a solution in search of a problem, look closely. This is just such a case. Vote no.

Superficially the flyer encourages students into political activity which many would agree is laudable. A cause for skepticism regarding the parent's complaints is that we are deep in the election silly season where passions run high and often trump better judgement and rational thought. As a result many tend to view campaigning complaints more cynically than at other times of the year. So what is it about this right wing solicitation effort to Idaho high school students which causes concerned parents to react as if a laws were broken? The answer lies in Americans for Prosperity utilizing deception and money to entice children to do their bidding. Worse, ASP asks those children to also participate in further deception.

Americans for Prosperity (AFP) is a shadowy front group for the Koch Brothers which helped finance the astroturf of the Tea Party. The Koch Brothers are oil and chemical billionaire magnates owning one of the wealthiest privately held companies in the world, Koch Industries. In recent years the Koch Brothers have engaged in extensive political activities spearheading the modern American conservative movement, many of which were identified in this expose in the New Yorker by Jane Meyer. Unlike most political activists, the Koch Brothers seem to align with causes from which they will economically benefit, like global warming denial, environmental de-regulation, union busting, blocking Wall Street reform, and, of course, keeping corporate money in elections. Arguably the AFP is one of the biggest sources of misinformation in the media marketplace today. PolitiFact referred to AFP ads last May as the "sneakiest" in the election cycle, rating the representations within as mostly false, false, to pants on fire. Despite the representations on the flyer, AFP is anything but a non-partisan, non-profit organization.

The flyer is not exactly a classified ad seeking employees for a $10 an hour job, which would be more honest. The flyer is stylized as a good natured contest between rival high schools. AFP invites students from the two high schools to get the most participants to be rewarded an extra $30 to the winning school's participants. Further it describes the task as "making phone calls to survey Americans in priority states like Colorado and Ohio on economic issues (using a scripted message)." The "message" is clearly summarized in the flyer in bold face, to "educate Americans on Obama's failing economic agenda". What is being described here is a push poll,

an interactive marketing technique, most commonly employed during political campaigning, in which an individual or organization attempts to influence or alter the view of respondents under the guise of conducting a poll. In a push poll, large numbers of respondents are contacted, and little or no effort is made to collect and analyze response data. Instead, the push poll is a form of telemarketing-based propaganda and rumor mongering, masquerading as a poll. Push polls may rely on innuendo or knowledge gleaned from opposition research on an opponent. They are generally viewed as a form of negative campaigning. This tactic is commonly considered to undermine the democratic process as false or misleading information is provided about candidates.

Push polling is one of the most hated and dishonest methods utilized in campaigning. From the flyer it appears that AFP will provide the script to the students, which presumably contains similar information about which Politifact complained. The students will then call likely voters and misleadingly tell them they're conducting a "survey", when in fact the caller is not actually determining how they'll vote, but instead delivering negative information about Obama disguised as polling questions in order to influence that voter. It is difficult to evaluate whether a typical Idaho high school student would be aware of these machinations. Certainly a parent has a right to be concerned.

We have no information on where exactly these flyers are being distributed in or around these schools and invite anyone with such information to forward it to us at the address at the top of the right rail. Interesting that one local media station reported in September that AFP and Melaleuca were teaming up for these efforts, stating that "volunteers" would be manning the call centers. Also of some concern is the central role of Melaleuca in this activity which has played a prominent position in the controversial Luna school reform legislation, funding full page ads in the state's major newspapers on several occasions. Melaleuca owner Frank Vandersloot is also integrally involved in setting up the charter schools in Idaho which are stylized as a "patriotic choice for parents" with a focus on "individual freedoms and free market economics." The agenda Vandersloot appears to be pursuing is concerning indeed, given his partners in this endeavor. This issue has ramifications for Idaho's premier statewide race on whether to scrap Luna's reforms, in addition to the race for president.

Here's the first half of [edited segment disclosing the physical altercation between the advocates at] the Luna Cronin City Club debate regarding the controversial Luna school reform legislation. Please observe the 28:20 0:44 mark and the Luna Cronin exchange that the media was anxious to question them about afterwards. At 28:29 0:48 Luna's second grab was clearly done with animosity. Popkey chronicles the event as follows.

Rep. Brian Cronin says Superintendent Tom Luna “forcefully” grabbed his arm, spilling a glass of water, and swore at him during Tuesday’s forum.

After the event, Luna said he complained that Cronin used “a lot of personal attacks” in his opening speech.

Luna grabbed Cronin immediately after he sat down, and Cronin said Luna pungently expressed his displeasure with Cronin’s remarks: “It was vulgar.”

Pressed to elaborate, Cronin said, “He said, ‘That’s the biggest bunch of bull---- I ever heard. I can’t believe you said that.’ ”

Asked if he used vulgarity, Luna said, “No. No. I’m just not going to go there because you will not report this fairly. We had a private conversation. I’ll leave it at that.

In Idaho, a battery is defined as any "[a]ctual, intentional and unlawful touching or striking of another person against the will of the other...." Idaho Code section 18-903(b). No word on whether criminal charges will ensue.

Part two is as follows.

Our governor was a speechifying this week, going all high and mighty on the constitution and it's guarantee of freedom.

...and then use that in the spirit of living that freedom under our constitution because its ONLY if we obey that constitution, if we know the constitution, if we're so familiar with it, as we can challenge any political theater, that would violate that constitution, and their contract to hold that office, then and there is our duty, and our responsibility, and it is exactly what our founders expected of us...

Granted these words are the flowery, fact free, tea bagger version of the constitution and designed to give Otter the very political cover, he cravenly rails against, for his ill fated decision to challenge Obamacare. But Otter must have forgotten a mirror, because his hypocrisy was not as tightly coiffed as his hair on a windy day. This week, plans were disclosed regarding Idaho State Police's "Operation De-Occupy Boise" which was a coordinated law enforcement enterprise to take the very constitutional rights Otter claims to protect.

When the legislature passed "emergency legislation" to shut down the Occupy Boise encampment, which Otter promptly signed and upon which he issued orders to law enforcement, the Occupy Boise movement filed for a restraining order in federal court. Judge Winmill held for the constitution and against Otter stating:

Occupy Boise’s tent city is a political protest of income inequality. As such, it is expressive conduct protected by the First Amendment. The State has the authority to regulate expressive conduct and can require reasonable time and place restrictions that are content neutral. But once a State law, or the State’s enforcement of that law, targets certain speech for restriction because of its content – especially when the target is political speech in a public forum – the law is presumptively unconstitutional. When the restriction is content based, the State bears an “extraordinarily heavy burden” of showing that the law or its enforcement is the least restrictive means to further a compelling State interest.

Here, there is evidence that the State’s enforcement of the recently passed Idaho law banning camping on state grounds targeted Occupy Boise’s expressive conduct protected by the First Amendment. The State’s attorney in oral argument before this Court interpreted the law to permit a symbolic tent city that did not feature overnight sleeping. This interpretation clearly comports with the language of the statute, which only prohibits “sleeping” and “camping” on state grounds and does not purport to ban the maintenance of a symbolic tent city which could be staffed 24 hours a day and 7 days a week. Yet Governor Otter’s letter announcing his signing of the legislation appears to require the removal of all tents, and that appears to be how the State Police are interpreting the law. Such action is simply not authorized by the statute. Because the reach of the State’s enforcement may exceed the grasp of the statute, this creates the appearance that the State is stretching to suppress the core political message of Occupy Boise – its tents – as presented in a public forum.

These circumstances render the State’s enforcement policy of removing Occupy Boise’s tents presumptively invalid under the First Amendment.

Indeed Judge Winmill focused on Otter's order to the state police more than once.“Governor Otter's edict, and the stated intention of the State Police, is to remove Occupy Boise entirely - tents and all. … This creates the appearance that the State is stretching to shut down a political message - a tent city - presented in a public forum.” Now we know that had legal action not occurred, the long arm of Otter's law would have smitten those tents where they stood. The freedoms guaranteed by the constitution would have been the victim at Otter's hands.

Hanauer underscores and illustrates the painfully apparent fact that in our consumer driven society, it's demand that creates jobs. Tax cuts for the rich just means that savings is hoarded in tax sheltered off shore accounts until demand arises. Demand is created by the middle class with disposable income. Nick's editorial and the transcript are both available. This talk was briefly censored by TED which created a bit of a tempest. TED's rationale for refusing to publish a talk that received a standing ovation doesn't hold water as the comments indicate.

Idaho Republicans certainly utilized the economic recession, with its resulting decline in tax revenue, as an excuse to cut Idaho programs long on their ideological chopping block such as Medicaid. Yet, in doing so, Republicans eschewed the 2:1 matching federal funds and left Idaho's sick and infirm as a burden of other state funded programs, like the CAT fund, the judiciary and the the Correction Department. Republicans actually cost the state money demonstrating unequivocally that fiscal conservatism is NOT fiscally responsible.

Idaho’s $35 million in Medicaid cuts have not saved the state money, have eliminated thousands of jobs, put pressure on law enforcement operations and hurt individual residents, according to a panel that met Wednesday to discuss impacts of the cuts.

The panel in Boise included the state’s former chief economic analyst Mike Ferguson, Boise police Sgt. David Cavanaugh, advocates for the disabled and Medicaid recipients.

Ferguson, now executive director of the Idaho Center for Fiscal Policy, estimates the cuts to Medicaid cost Idaho 4,000 jobs. He said the state’s projected revenues allow for the reinstatement of much of the cuts, but lawmakers have no plans to do so.

Moreover Republicans used the fiscal crisis to wield the ax on public employees, enthusiastically imposing spending freezes and furloughs on departments, job elimination and actual employee terminations under the guise of less government is better government. Indeed on May 9, 2012 Governor Otter cynically proclaimed Public Employee Recognition Week, a dubious benefit to the 1000 state employees who lost their jobs, to say nothing of those clinging on with nary a cost of living increase.

Moreover, Governor Otter and Superintendent Tom Luna specifically utilized the revenue shortfall to justify the unheralded Student's Come First public school reforms, designed to give each Idaho student a laptop which would be paid for by eliminating the jobs of 1000 Idaho educators. With this legislative package came laws weakening job protections for teachers including collective bargaining, decreasing the chances of salary increases for the remaining educators. And since Idaho has no computer manufacturing, the tax revenue formerly spent on teachers will go to private interests out of state.

These cost saving efforts coupled with "conservative" estimates of projected tax revenue led to an actual revenue surplus. While Republicans restored some modest Medicaid funding, gave remaining state employees a 2% raise, the bulk of the saving went to Idaho's richest in the form of a $35.7 million tax cut for top earners, an amount almost identical to the Medicaid cuts from the previous year. So in addition to killing at least six thousand Idaho jobs, freezing the pay of thousands more, Idaho Republicans took that money and gave it to the rich, at the expense of Idaho's economy, its sick and infirm, and Idaho's school children and the hope for the future that they bring. If Idaho's economy improves, it will be in spite of Idaho Republicans, not because of them.

And he does it to make Romney more money. Vader argues:'the scary Chicago black man has me on a hit list.' Drudge sirens. Fox News going apeshit about ACORN representatives hiring actual Canadian gay wolves to make the dead vote for the scary black man, basically compelling the tea baggers into their most convincing nightmare that you wanna steal their guns and tri cornered hats to engage in some scientific orgy of secular bestiality that might lessen our dependence on fossil fuels.

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

----------------------------------------
UPDATE 5/20

The Idaho Statesman published two items on Vandersloot in the wake of Vandersloot's multi media launch of his victim status on the right wing noise machine. Both items view the matter superficially, do not investigate the underlying facts supporting the truth, and merely report on "the controversy". This stab in reporting by the traditional media completely glosses over Maddow's expose on his self serving artifice in making pleas for additional cash with a fabricated controversy. By merely approaching this as a 'he said, she said,' both sides do it, false dichotomy, they feign objectivity to become participants in Vandersloot's plea for financial assistance.

In the first "investigative" piece, the Statesman blares in the title Vandersloot's claim of being victimized by Obama, only to note deep into the article that Vandersloot is talking out of both sides of his mouth.

He told a supportive Fox host Bill O’Reilly on Monday that his company had lost a “couple hundred” customers after his mention on the Obama campaign website. But he told the Statesman two days later that all the attention was turning out to be good for business.

“We’re getting a ton of national support, unbelievable, unexpected,” he said. “The phones are ringing off the hook, everyone wanting to know about Melaleuca, people wanting to buy our product, they don’t even know what we’re selling.”

Melaleuca is a direct marketer of 350 health and wellness products. The company last year had about 800,000 customers, more than one-third of whom were also “marketing executives,” a sales force of independent contractors. The company is named for a product of the Australian “tea tree” with antiseptic and analgesic properties.

There's no mention of Vandersloot soliciting donations for Romney during his media barnstorming. And while the Statesman endeavors to 'tell both sides' the article quotes Vandersloot extensively throughout, references an un-returned call from the Obama campaign, yet talks about Vandersloot critics in vague dismissive terms making no effort to interview them. The description of the Melaleuca enterprise is wholly inadequate. The online version of the article contained three links, the O'Reilly transcript, the Rush Limbaugh transcript, and this Media Matters write up. While the write up is solid, it's odd that the Statesman's online article would link to it, and not to the following segment Media Matters excerpted from Rachel Maddow's piece above where Glenn Greenwald calls out Fox News for its hypocrisy demonstrating their willing complicity in Vandersloot's charade.

In the Statesman editorial, with superficial analysis the editorial board merely notes that Vandersloot playing the victim card is unbelievable and insincere.

VanderSloot is a willing participant in an expensive, ruthless bloodsport. Going in, he knew the rules (or dearth thereof). Logic and experience should have told VanderSloot that the bigger the contribution, the sharper the criticism.

After all, VanderSloot has been a key player and well-heeled benefactor in Idaho politics for more than a decade. He has enjoyed the clout and endured the broadsides that come with such status. While his attackers and apologists agree on very little, they should at least be able to agree that VanderSloot knows how the game is played.

For VanderSloot to act as if he is politically naive is not only unconvincing. It’s insincere.

While the opinion is laudable in the face of a billionaire with combative litigious qualities it still does little to highlight the depth of those qualities, or the facts which back them up. Since Glenn Greenwald brought Vanderloot's qualities to light for consumption by a national audience, Rachel Maddow has done two other fact filled exposes on Vandersloot and his politicking beyond the one above. The research for their articles that should have been written is already done. There's no excuse in failing to report these facts. And since this matter is sure to evolve from now till November, it would behoove the Statesman to bring the readers up to speed.

One final note, the Idaho Falls Post Register has published nothing on this matter. Vandersloot's relationship with the Post Register is at the root of much of this controversy. From Facebook reports the editor seems rawly defensive about criticism regarding its lack of coverage.

--------------------------------

This year all three seats are open and as expected District 19 has a wealth of of riches in qualified candidates, with one exception. Representative Cheri Buckner Webb chose to advance (unopposed) to the senate seat being vacated by Nicole LeFavour who surprised many by leaving her safe seat to attempt to dislodge Congressman Mike Simpson. In State Representative, Position A, Mat Erpelding, Tony Rohn, and Dallas Gudgell have filed, and are actively running campaigns. In State Representative, Position B, Brad Goodsell, Holli High Woodings, and Andy C. Edstram have filed, but Mr. Edstram is making no pretense at a campaign and I have seen nothing to speak for his candidacy.

With the exception of Andy and Dallas I have personally spoken to each of these candidates. I have also listened to each of their interviews, including Dallas', with the Idaho Statesman editorial board. The board recently made endorsements to which I don't necessarily disagree. But their recommendations come with a dearth of analysis and a Republican perspective. The Board consists of editor Kevin Richert, former Republican representative Hal Bunderson, Republican operative Lindy High, and former IACI head Steve Ahrens. As a result the Statesman endorsements didn't come with the best interests of Idaho Democrats in mind. The purpose of this post is not to replace their analysis, neither is it an ideology purity test, but to broaden the perspective and allow the Democratic voters in 19 to make an informed choice on Tuesday.

State Representative, Position A

I will start by giving the easy choice first and my main impetus for analyzing this race, Dallas Gudgell's unfortunate interview with the Statesman editorial board. I did not reach out to Dallas to explain because I deemed this interview disqualifying for an Idaho Democratic candidate on its face, let alone a candidate from District 19. Mr. Gudgell was asked whether he would vote in favor of the referendum repealing the Luna laws. After replying that he had anticipated the question and was ready for it, he said that there was enough good in the legislation that he would vote NO. For him to say so displays remarkable ignornace of the facts set forth in these two articles. Gudgell further stated unequivocally that he would have voted in favor of the failed legislation to bust the caps on charter schools, which many believe sucks public funding away from public schools. Dallas is a charter school employee. These statements contradict his website and his subsequent comments on facebook. Yet his interview responses on health insurance exchanges, tax policy, environmental issues and even his own endorsements were muddled, to the point of being incomprehensible, evincing a lack of informed clarity one would expect from a representative in a safe Democratic district. He is not only the wrong leader for Democrats, he is not prepared for prime time. I am surprised at the endorsements on his web page.

And while that choice was easy the next is difficult. Mat Erpelding and Troy Rohn are both excellent candidates who conjure that perennial desire in District 19 Democratic voters to be able to farm our candidates out to other districts where fielding candidates proves so difficult. Indeed its the desire to grow the party that edges me towards Mat Erpelding (erp'-ul-ding).

Troy Rohn is bright, intelligent, knowledgeable, rooted in the community and is passionate about his causes. Mat Erpelding is a political animal. Mat is as tenacious as he is relentless in his causes. Mat lives and breathes politics, and attributes much of his motivation towards activism from the railroading of the Luna legislation through the statehouse which directly affects his vocation of education. He sees politics as pieces on a chess board, knows the opposition's strengths and weaknesses, and how to maneuver legislation. And he's strongly motivated not only to be effective, but also recognizes that he needs skill and organization to mobilize the rest of the state to achieve our common goals. When I asked retiring Representative Brian Cronin about Mat, he said:

He follows through like few people I know. Many people have approached me over the years and offered to help/get involved. Often times, such people have fallen through the cracks simply because I haven't had the time to plug people in, train and support them, and figure out a situation that works for everyone. More often than not, I never hear from them again. Mat was relentless in pursuing me. He kept insisting that we talk and meet. He would call, email, send smoke signals--you name it. He insisted that he could be of assistance and that we wanted to get his feet wet. I finally said, "OK, you wanna do something? Help me draft a package of economic development bills that we're calling IJOBs." And you know what? He did. And he did a great job.

This isn't an endorsement so much as it is a prediction. Mat wants it. Mat has the single minded intensity that enabled him to summit Denali twice in one season. While Democrats have some fine legislators, we have precious few political tacticians, with knowledge of the legislative rules, the players, the forces manipulating the players with the ability to work the game to be able to achieve their constituents' objectives. For Mat many of these skills appear innate, but his volunteer time also give him the edge on legislative experience despite his relative youth. And if there's one thing Democrats need is young skillful leadership in a party whose banquets tend to be more solemn than they are celebratory.

State Representative, Position B

Again a difficult choice. Brad Goodsell is experienced, knowledgeable of the administrative process, knows PERSI cold, and counts all three of his grown kids as potential constituents and therefore rooted in the community. Brad grew up in Boise, attended Borah High School before going on to an undergraduate degree at BYU. After getting his law degree at Idaho, Goodsell practiced law in Boise with the attorney general's office and is proud of working to get Attorney General Lawrence Wasden elected. But he says the Republican party has moved away from him, and is running as a Democrat. He has worked as a precinct captain and paid some dues to Democrats in 19. He is solid on the issues. He recently opened a private practice in Boise's north end. Brad has a cool deliberate demeanor, somewhat aloof, but which could be perceived as arrogant.

Holli High Woodings is the President of the North End Neighborhood Association, long considered a stepping stone to higher political office in Boise. Ms. Woodings is a 2007 BSU graduate in English. Holli runs a public relations business focused on growing Idaho’s clean energy organizations through relationship building and collaboration building off her employment with a wind energy development company upon graduation. Holli is green, both in her views on energy, and in realizing her political ambitions. While she says the right things on the issues, the question remains whether she has the legislative experience and political acumen necessary to drive her projects from printed legislation to the governor's desk. But elections are the proving ground for politics, and if she mobilizes through the successful projects with which she's associated, she can prove herself a worthy representative for District 19. She has demonstrated the drive, enthusiasm and ambition.

This race is very difficult. What Brad has in experience, knowledge and salt, Holli has in organization, motivation and charm. After talking to several Democratic insiders I'm satisfied with Brad's Democratic bona fides and would consider him an asset. But by the same token, Holli is more intimately involved with political consensus from the grass roots level. Brad's knowledge and experience would likely be more effective, to the degree anyone from 19 can be in a crimson red legislature. But Holli would be more likely to champion a progressive policy and to build the political power necessary to push it forward. And so I make no endorsement here leaving it to good people of 19 to determine whether they want the representative who will be effective voice for Democrats immediately over investing in the long term prospects of a candidate with potential. Either would accomplish the goal of party building, albeit in different ways.

Whichever candidate the people of 19 choose, I will get behind them. Again the purpose of this post is to encourage the people of 19 to make an informed choice on Tuesday.

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

The unflappable Rachel Maddow doubles down on her exposure of Frank Vandersloot, his conservative politics, his hostility to homosexual causes, and his litigious confrontational methods utilized in Idaho. She addresses concerns those methods may have for the nation due to Vandersloot's close ties to the Mitt Romney campaign. She also observes the close relationship between Frank Vandersloot and Senator James Risch. She further interviews Peter Zuckerman, the award winning Post Register reporter about the personal and professional consequences he suffered as a result of Vandersloot outing him. Vandersloot declined Maddow's open invitation to speak about this on the record.*

This comes on the heels of this report from Mother Jones on Romney's fundraising ties to multi-level marketing (MLM) organizations like Vandersloot owned Melaleuca largely based in Utah and Idaho. For those who aren't familiar with MLM:

Utahns have a joke about multilevel-marketing companies: MLM really stands for "Mormons Losing Money." The notion of selling to one's friends and neighbors is so intertwined with the culture that the final season of HBO's Big Love featured an MLM subplot. According to the Salt Lake Tribune, Utah has the highest concentration of such companies in the country.

There's a reason why MLMs, many of which peddle natural health products like Nu Skin's dietary supplements, have thrived there. Mormon scripture encourages the use of herbs as God's medicine, and the faith has a strong tradition of turning to alternative medicine. Its founder, Joseph Smith, reportedly shunned traditional doctors, believing a physician had killed his brother. The tight-knit Latter-day Saints community, and the trusting nature of its adherents, have made Utah a lucrative terrain for multilevel marketers. Mormons, who typically spend two years serving as missionaries, are also natural recruits for companies that need salespeople with a high tolerance for rejection. And finally, MLM firms often pitch themselves to women as a way to stay home with their kids while still earning substantial incomes.

Yet for all the empowerment rhetoric, companies like Melaleuca and Nu Skin appear to subsist in large part on the hopes and fears of Americans losing their grip on financial security. Industry watchdog Robert L. FitzPatrick says Nu Skin's business model "sets the average person upon his neighbor to get at his assets, savings, and investments." Their structure—vast numbers of foot soldiers feeding a tiny layer of top earners—may not offend Romney, who has dismissed questions about income inequality as a matter of "envy." But a close association with companies that seem to prey on consumers might not play well for a candidate who has battled allegations that the private equity firm he cofounded, Bain Capital, engaged in vulture capitalism. (Romney's campaign did not respond to requests for comment.)

Read it all, it's enlightening. Methinks this issue will not go away in the lead up to the national election.

----------------------------------

UPDATE 5/5 6:00 p.m.:

Jody May-Chang makes some pretty potent observations, demonstrates why the issue isn't fully evaluated and is NOT going away.

VanderSloot’s criticism about Maddow’s coverage was about the outing of Peter Zuckerman. “Ultimately, the specific thing they wanted to criticize about our coverage is they say when they published the ad about that young reporter at that Idaho newspaper and on at length about him being gay, they say it was not outing him as we described it,” said Maddow.

The funny thing about that ad, shortly after Maddow’s Feb 21 segment aired, the ad that outed Zuckerman mysteriously disappeared from VanderSloot’s Melaleuca Post-Register ad archive located on communitypagenews.com. Here is the before and the after index. Pay particular attention to the date range between 5/1/2005 – 6/12/2005 when comparing indices.

If VanderSloot is so confident that his ad did not out Zuckerman why scrub it from his website?

Nice work, Jody! Keep biting into that ankle. Like all political egos, the bigger they are, the harder they fall. And that ego seems to have plenty to hide.

---------------------------------

*UPDATE 5/5 7:30 p.m.: Frank Vandersloot did provide two statements to Rachel Maddow regarding the topic, one of which she read on air.