Jordan Redman — The chair is addressed as Mr. Chairman.
Jordan Redman — The speaker welcomes the chair back to the committee.
Jordan Redman — The committee chair is addressed while the presentation continues.
Jordan Redman — Noted that the docket was properly before the committee and invited a motion.
Jordan Redman — Called for discussion and a vote on the motion, then introduced the next docket.
Jordan Redman — Presided over the discussion, recognized motions, and clarified procedural points.
Jordan Redman — Jordan Redman is repeatedly addressed as the chairman during a continuous exchange, including follow-up remarks in the same discussion about Idaho-specific CPA knowledge.
Jordan Redman — Chairman Redman was addressed during the discussion, first at the start of the witness testimony and then again in an exchange with Representative Ehlers, as part of the same ongoing conversation.
David Cannon — Makes the motion to approve docket 18-0405-2501.
David Cannon — David Cannon is referenced in the committee exchange and then speaks to move approval of docket 18-0413-2501.
David Cannon — Representative Cannon moved to approve docket 18-0415-2501 and make it effective on the Legislature's 2026 sine die date.
Richard Cheatum — The chair recognizes Representative Cheatum to ask a question.
Richard Cheatum — Asks whether there is a difference between bonding and dishonesty insurance.
Richard Cheatum — Follows up by asking about the difference in coverage between bonding and insurance.
Richard Cheatum — Continues the line of questioning about coverage and operation.
Richard Cheatum — Was recognized to make a motion on the docket.
Richard Cheatum — Moved to approve docket 18-0411-2501.
Richard Cheatum — Likely the transcript's 'Representative Chita' refers to Representative Cheatum, who moves to approve the docket.
Richard Cheatum — Representative Cheatum asked whether short-term coverage is different from COBRA coverage, prompting discussion centered on that comparison. A later section merely referenced his earlier COBRA question without adding new substantive content.
Richard Cheatum — Representative Richard Cheatham asked about continuing education requirements for CPAs, specifically whether the profession has any continuing education requirement.
Richard Cheatum — Described Pocatello's CPA shortage and supported a pathway into government accounting.
Kyle Harris — Moves to accept docket 18-0406-2501.
Kyle Harris — Moved to accept docket 18-0412-2501.
Kyle Harris — Asked Director Cameron to explain the new language in the definition section and how it differs from prior language.
Kyle Harris — Asked why the definition language changed and how it differs from the prior version.
Kyle Harris — The director remarks that some people in the room are working past 65; no specific member is named.
Kyle Harris — Representative Kyle Harris questioned whether deleted minimum covered benefits were addressed elsewhere in the rule and asked about the change from 'prescription' to 'generic prescription,' specifically whether it would ensure access to generic drugs. Director Cameron responded that the intent was to make sure generic drugs would be available in the plans. Later references by other members pointed back to Harris's earlier question about prescription drugs and generic language without adding a new topic.
Kyle Harris — Kyle Harris questioned why the bill strikes residency language from the exam qualifications section, specifically the provision requiring an applicant to be a resident, have been a resident, or intend to become a resident. He identified the relevant lines in the bill and asked whether the change was being made for reciprocity purposes. He then clarified that the struck language appears in the examination education section and suggested the removal may be intended to allow applicants to take the exam before formally establishing residency, such as someone educated in another state seeking to test in the jurisdiction.
Kyle Harris — Representative Harris questioned McClure about the bill’s CPA licensing changes, focusing on whether removing Idaho residency requirements could affect reciprocity and allow out-of-state CPAs or firms to perform work remotely and move business out of Idaho. He compared the proposal to electrician reciprocity, arguing that unlike other reciprocity arrangements, this bill could undercut Idaho job access goals by enabling firms in other states to run CPA services and farm work away from Idaho.
Kyle Harris — Asked about CPA mobility privileges and whether work with out-of-state CPAs is already allowed.
Kyle Harris — Requested to be recorded on the vote.
Jaron Crane — Representative Crane asked whether the stricken purpose language on page 15 is repeated elsewhere in the rule or statute, noting that the removed language appears to state a good purpose and seeking clarification on whether it is contained elsewhere.
Steve Berch — Raised a general question about why these cleanup changes are not done earlier and whether they relate to recent changes.
Steve Berch — Asked why the redundant cleanup changes were not done in prior years and whether they relate to changes from the last year.
Steve Berch — Was addressed by Director Cameron in response to the question about the review process.
Steve Berch — Asked whether repeal of the Affordable Care Act would affect Idaho's preexisting-condition protections.
Steve Berch — Was addressed directly by Director Cameron during the response.
Steve Berch — Not mentioned in this section.
Steve Berch — Representative Berch asked a question about whether the prescription-drug language is limited to generic drugs.
Steve Berch — Representative Berch asked whether the generic prescription language limits coverage to generics only.
Steve Berch — Representative Berch asked whether the rule changes affect short-term coverage limitations and whether the department has received complaints about short-term coverage.
Steve Berch — Director Cameron responded to Representative Berch's questions about short-term coverage and complaints.
Steve Berch — Asked follow-up questions about the CPA bill and the equivalency of experience versus coursework.
Steve Berch — Representative Birch/Berch was referenced in a continuing exchange, including a question about whether Idaho-specific CPA knowledge is required, with both mentions reflecting the same discussion thread.
Steve Berch — Steve Berch thanked the witness for her email and then asked for confirmation of his understanding that the bill is intended to add another pathway without changing existing ones, while also questioning whether the six words in the bill actually make it harder for someone to obtain licensure or status.
Dean Cameron, Director of the Idaho Department of Insurance — Introduced docket 18-0412-2501 and explained it concerns the Small Employer Health Insurance Availability Act.
Dean Cameron — Explained the history of the Small Employer Health Insurance Availability Act and that the rule changes relate to repeal of part of that bill.
Dean Cameron — Described the rule cleanup, including removal of duplicative language and references tied to repealed sections.
Dean Cameron — Explained specific rule deletions tied to preexisting conditions, assessments, mandated plans, and filing requirements.
Dean Cameron — Explained that the rule language is being removed and that Title 41-4706 supplies the needed definition.