States findings of the Legislature and rejects certain rules of the Industrial Commission relating to worker's compensation.
Summary
SCR109 is a concurrent resolution that uses the Legislature’s authority to reject an administrative rule adopted by the Idaho Industrial Commission under the workers’ compensation law. The resolution states that the Legislature finds the specified rule in IDAPA 17.01.01, Section 305, Subsection 01.a. is not consistent with legislative intent and therefore should be rejected. If adopted, the resolution declares that the identified rule is null, void, and without force or effect as of July 1, 2025.
The measure does not amend the workers’ compensation statutes directly; instead, it removes one administrative rule from the body of enforceable regulations governing the Industrial Commission. Its practical effect is to prevent the challenged rule from being applied to workers’ compensation administration, claims handling, or related regulated parties after the effective date. The resolution reflects legislative oversight of agency rulemaking under Idaho Code section 67-5291.
Impact
SCR109 would affect Idaho’s administrative law framework by invalidating a specific Industrial Commission rule under the workers’ compensation chapter, rather than changing the underlying statute itself. The immediate impact is on the Industrial Commission and any employers, insurers, injured workers, attorneys, or other stakeholders subject to the rejected rule, because the rule would no longer have legal effect after July 1, 2025. The broader impact is to reaffirm legislative control over agency rules that the Legislature believes exceed or diverge from statutory intent.
Sentiment
The available voting history suggests strong support for the resolution, with the House Third Reading vote recorded at 64 yeas and 1 nay. No committee transcript is available, but the bill’s text and caption indicate a straightforward legislative rejection of an administrative rule, which typically reflects a majority view that the rule should not remain in place. Overall, the sentiment appears largely favorable to the resolution and aligned with legislative oversight of the Industrial Commission.
Contention
The main point of contention is the underlying Industrial Commission rule itself—specifically whether IDAPA 17.01.01, Section 305, Subsection 01.a. is consistent with legislative intent under the workers’ compensation law. Supporters of the resolution appear to believe the rule should be removed, while the lone dissenting vote suggests at least one lawmaker disagreed with rejecting it. Because no committee discussion is provided, the precise policy dispute is not detailed in the record here, but the conflict centers on agency authority versus legislative interpretation of workers’ compensation policy.