Dennis Mansfield — Dennis Mansfield was introduced as an in-person witness and then testified in support of House Bill 623. He urged a yes vote, describing how silent reflection or a moment of silence can help people begin the day thoughtfully and emphasizing that it is not about imposing faith. He drew on his experience with ex-inmates, ex-addicts, and conversations with his grandchildren to argue that the practice has value and should be considered favorably by the committee.
Alan Gorin — Alan Gorin, introduced as an in-person witness and Idaho representative for Prager University, testified in support of the moment of silence proposal. He said his background gave him appreciation for both sides of the issue and argued that silence is universally meaningful across religious and non-religious perspectives. He emphasized that silence and stillness can improve quality of life, criticized modern distraction and the failure to truly listen, and concluded by urging people to pause and reflect at the start of the day, whether framed in religious or secular terms.
Mendo Leff Schiltz — Listed as an in-person witness to testify; pronunciation noted as uncertain.
Mendel Lifshitz — Mendel Lifshitz testified in support of House Bill 623, describing it as a reflective start to the day that is already used in many states. He argued that the bill would improve student behavior, help minority-faith and non-faith students feel equal, promote diversity through student reflection rather than teacher influence, and return educational control to parents. He also said the bill could help struggling youth by reducing bullying, drug use, suicide, and juvenile crime, citing data from other states such as New York, New Jersey, Texas, Florida, Rhode Island, and Massachusetts. In response to questions, he acknowledged that Idaho-specific suicide data is limited because the bill has not been implemented there, and he offered to share the data he had reviewed with the committee.
Dave Lent — Chairman Dave Lent is repeatedly addressed and thanked by witnesses as they begin or conclude testimony, with the chair also welcoming a witness to committee and managing the transition between speakers. The mentions collectively reflect routine committee courtesy and procedural acknowledgments rather than separate substantive discussions.
Dave Lent — Chair Lent is addressed during the procedural discussion about remaining testimony.
Dave Lent — Chair Lent is addressed throughout a continuous exchange in which members raise concerns about the bill, including pushback to it, questions about implementation and mandate implications, and later discussion of discipline procedures.
Dave Lent — The chair is referenced when the witness is thanked and the next witness is introduced.
Janie Ward-Engelking — Senator Janie Ward-Engelking questioned whether the only change being discussed was the addition of a moment of silence, and expressed skepticism that such a change alone could be responsible for lower mental health incidents and juvenile crime.
Janie Ward-Engelking — Janie Ward-Engelking expressed support for the general idea of the practice at home but raised strong concerns about implementing it in classrooms. She argued that quiet time could agitate some kindergarten and special-needs students, making behavior problems worse, and said it would be difficult to require every class to do it at the same time. She emphasized that teachers are capable, but she does not want children punished for not being able to comply, especially in situations where silence is hard for them. She also noted that the bill places more responsibility on parents and guardians than on schools.
Janie Ward-Engelking — Senator Semaroff asked for clarification on what was meant by Idaho needing to be more competitive to keep students at home. The discussion continued with references to recruiting Idaho kids first and whether the state is yet at the level needed in certain sports. Senator Ward-Engelking then explained that while she would like to support the bill, she could not because she believed it could harm already underfunded universities and teams, especially in sports like golf and tennis. The exchange concluded with a response challenging her view that Idaho does not yet have athletes at that level.
Heather Stout — Heather Stout is introduced as the next video witness and then begins her testimony, stating that she lives in Latah County and opposes HB 623 because a required daily moment of silence in public schools raises serious First Amendment concerns.
Kathy Daz — Named as a forthcoming video witness.
Vicki Fadness — Vicki Fadness is introduced as an upcoming witness, then called to testify. She begins remote testimony by identifying herself as a retired first- and second-grade teacher and says she wants to explain what a minute of silence looks like in a primary classroom.
Kathy Dawes — Kathy Dawes is introduced as the next remote witness and then testifies, identifying herself as a Moscow resident of over 50 years and a retired eighth-grade science teacher speaking on her own behalf.
Unnamed proponent witness — A 15-year substitute teacher describes having seen quiet time used across many classroom settings and supports the bill’s moment of silence. The witness emphasizes that the legislation is not introducing prayer into public schools, but rather allowing a silent period that students could use however they choose, including private silent prayer if they wish, and urges the bill to move forward.
Mr. Murphy — The chair thanks Mr. Murphy after his testimony.
Dr. Mary Mosley — Dr. Mary Mosley, a Meridian resident, opposes the bill as an inappropriate religious insertion into public schools. She argues that the legislature should not suggest that public school students pray, cites her son’s experience of being harassed by students from the majority religious group, and says public schools have an obligation to protect students from religious harassment and safeguard religious freedom.
Benjamin Shavitz — Benjamin Shavitz delivers continuous virtual testimony in support of the bill. He identifies himself as a District 17 resident and parent, says the measure is secular and does not mandate prayer, and argues that a brief moment of silence or quiet reflection is healthy and beneficial for children’s mental health. He concludes by strongly endorsing the bill as a good idea.
Bonnie Faf — Bonnie Faf introduces herself as a Boise resident representing AAUW and opposes the bill.
David Magera — David Magera, a pastor in Caldwell, testifies in support of the bill and explains that his support is based on practical reasons, emphasizing the bill’s value in creating a calm learning environment.
Carrie Semmelroth — Senator Semmelroth questioned the representative about the proposed silence/break practice, asking first about current law and whether teachers are already allowed to use it, then whether schools could implement it school-wide, whether a mandate would undermine local control and community decision-making, and finally whether parents would have an opt-out if the practice were mandated.
Carrie Semmelroth — A senator is addressed in the exchange about competitive opportunities for Idaho students.
Tammy Nichols — Tammy Nichols spoke in support of the motion, arguing that school-related stress and mental health concerns justify the proposal. She cited statistics on chronic stress and depression among children, noted that other countries use quiet periods or self-reflection, and said research supports silence as a cognitive reset for stress reduction. She also shared a personal example from her children's kindergarten class to illustrate how breathing exercises and quiet reflection can help students.
Tammy Nichols — Senator Nichols followed up with Tom Wistersell about whether the NCAA had provided any formal indication, such as a letter or statement, that the bill would be a problem. She then pressed for clarification on whether limiting scholarships would be viewed by the NCAA as discriminatory.
Christy Zito — Christy Zito expressed strong support for the bill establishing a brief quiet period in schools. She recalled childhood school practices of resting quietly, noted her involvement with Bridging the Gap, a children’s suicide prevention organization, and argued that if the measure could help save even one life it would be worthwhile. She added that a 60-second quiet period is harmless, helps students settle in, and provides a healthy, positive way to start the school day.
Christy Zito — Asked whether Idaho must go outside the United States to recruit a competitive level of student-athlete.
Christy Zito — A senator is addressed in the transition to the next speaker, though the transcript mishears the name as 'O'Connor Witts.'
Christy Zito — The transcript repeatedly references a senator’s name in garbled form ('Senator O'Connowitz' / 'Senator O'Conowitz'), likely meaning Senator Christy Zito. The mentions appear to be part of the same ongoing discussion, possibly referring back to a prior speaker, bill sponsor, or idea previously raised, though the exact identity in the transcript is uncertain.
Mrs. Burr — Described as an amazing kindergarten teacher who used breathing exercises and quiet reflection with students.
Jeremiah Dickey — Jeremiah Dickey testified in opposition to Senate Bill 1357, explaining that Boise State’s international student-athletes are valued members of the program and often remain in Idaho after graduation as business and community leaders. He argued the bill would harm team morale, create unnecessary administrative burden and bureaucracy, distract coaches from recruiting and developing athletes, and reduce Boise State’s competitiveness. He noted that Boise State already supports Idaho student-athletes and has more Idahoans on its rosters than international athletes, and he closed by urging the committee to vote against the bill.
Spencer Danielson — Spencer Danielson, Boise State’s head football coach, testified in strong opposition to Senate Bill 1357. He argued the bill would hurt Boise State’s recruiting efforts by creating a negative perception among competing programs and limiting the school’s ability to attract the right players. He emphasized that Boise State prioritizes high-character athletes, noted the team includes both Idaho and international players, and said international athletes view Boise State as home. He concluded that the bill would not help Idaho players, would damage the football team and athletics overall, and would be a black eye for the university.
Beck Roghar — Named as the third witness to testify.
Beck Rogar — Beck Rogar, Boise State’s women’s tennis coach, testified in opposition to Senate Bill 1357. He argued the bill would place Boise State and other Idaho programs at a recruiting disadvantage by imposing unique restrictions while other schools recruit freely, making negative recruiting against them effective. He pointed to Boise State’s success in developing top Idaho talent and said the bill would also hurt the university’s ability to retain current and future coaches and staff. Rogar concluded that the measure would undermine Boise State’s competitiveness, its ability to pursue championships, and the student-athlete experience, and reiterated his opposition to the bill.
Tom Worcesterchell / Tom Wistersell — Introduced as the next video witness; the transcript contains a name uncertainty.
Tom Wistersell — Tom Wistersell, Commissioner of the Big Sky Conference, introduced himself and testified that the bill would harm Idaho and Idaho State by placing them at a competitive disadvantage in conference and non-conference athletics, especially basketball, due to differing recruiting and eligibility rules. He warned that the law could negatively affect competitiveness across sports, reduce opportunities for student-athletes, and jeopardize NCAA tournament hosting on campus because the NCAA disfavors laws that restrict student opportunity. He urged the committee to defeat Senate Bill 1357.
Mr. Wistersell — Said he did not have a letter from the NCAA, only years of experience.
Mr. Wisterell — Mr. Wisterell explained, based on his experience with NCAA national championship bid processes and his role on the men’s basketball committee, that host-site questionnaires and NCAA staff would likely flag state laws that appear discriminatory on the basis of race, creed, color, equity, or similar categories. He said he could not guarantee the issue would prevent Boise from hosting, but it would certainly draw scrutiny because the NCAA does not want to be associated with discriminatory laws.
Terry Golic — Is invited to introduce himself to the committee.
Terry Golic — Identified himself as athletic director at the University of Idaho and said he adamantly opposes the bill.
Terry Golic — Said the bill would restrict Idaho from competing at the highest level athletically and academically, especially in Olympic lifetime sports.
Terry Golic — Said the bill would disadvantage Idaho competitively and could lead to dropping both tennis programs.
Terry Golic — Said Idaho would consider dropping both tennis programs because it could not compete against collegiate opponents under the proposed limits.
Terry Golic — Referenced as being different from him in approach to the bill.
Pauline — Referenced as a later witness expected to make similar comments.
Ms. Gaelic / Mr. Golic — Answered that in certain sports, yes, Idaho would need to recruit outside the United States.
Mr. Golic — Said some sports' lower-level training is not up to Division I competition standards.
Pauline Theros — Pauline Theros, Director of Athletics at Idaho State University, introduced herself and described her background as a former scholarship athlete and longtime Idaho public servant. She then argued that Idaho State actively recruits Idaho students first and needs to remain competitive to keep more students in-state. Theros warned that the bill would impose restrictions Idaho institutions would not face elsewhere, harming their ability to compete on equal terms and ultimately reducing opportunities for Idaho students. She concluded that Idaho institutions should be allowed to compete by the same rules as their peers nationwide.
Sean Carter — Sean Carter, the head volleyball coach at Idaho State, is introduced and then testifies about the bill. He explains that he supports recruiting Idaho kids first but is concerned the bill could create roster turnover and limit coaches’ ability to field competitive teams, ultimately handcuffing programs’ ability to stay at the level needed to compete.
Cody Hawkins — Cody Hawkins is introduced as a witness and then testifies as the head football coach at Idaho State University, noting his experience with USA Football. He goes on to discuss the growing international component of football and the broader opportunities it creates, including the fact that Idaho opportunities do not necessarily keep athletes in-state.