Kevin Cook — Identified as the second on the motion.
Mark Harris — The gavel is turned over to Senator Harris to conduct the rest of the meeting.
Mark Harris — Addressed by Ms. Molina in opening remarks.
Mark Harris — Harris was recorded as voting aye in the roll call.
Glenneda Zuiderveld — Named as making the motion to send House Bill 863 to the floor.
Glenneda Zuiderveld — Senator Ziderfeld moved that House Bill 732 be sent to the floor with a due pass recommendation and was identified as the motion’s mover. She then explained her support, noting concerns about the fiscal note, state revenues, and the impact of shifting federal costs to the state, while arguing the bill would help ensure ineligible people are not on SNAP. The exchange concluded with references to the motion and the roll-call vote, including her being recorded as voting aye.
Shawn Dygert — Named as seconding the motion on House Bill 863.
Van Burtenshaw — Called in the roll call vote and recorded as voting aye.
Van Burtenshaw — The chair transitions to Senator Van Orden to introduce House Bill 730.
Van Burtenshaw — Introduces House Bill 730 and describes its purpose.
Van Burtenshaw — Referenced as having already addressed many of the bill's provisions.
Van Burtenshaw — Senator Van Orden closed his remarks by supporting the bill, saying it goes beyond what was requested in the One Big Beautiful Bill and will help states improve their systems. He added that the goal is not to remove eligible people from assistance, but to ensure that those who legitimately need help can remain on it while taxpayer money is used wisely.
Van Burtenshaw — Recorded as voting aye.
Tammy Nichols — Recorded as voting nay.
Mr. Taylor — Mr. Taylor is introduced and then explains his involvement in drafting the bill and working with the department on implementation questions. He discusses the fiscal note, noting upfront software integration and staffing costs but expecting longer-term savings, and says the department requested added monies and staff. He then addresses concerns about whether the bill would increase error rates, arguing that more regular eligibility checks should not raise errors and should help ensure benefits go only to eligible recipients. Finally, he explains that the federal cost share remains 75/25, that the bill is intended to encourage proactive state action, and that over time caseloads and casework should decline as ineligible recipients are removed, producing efficiency gains and savings.
Doug Taylor — Doug Taylor of the Foundation for Government Accountability is introduced, explains that he has been working on the legislation on behalf of the foundation and references prior federal reform work, then concludes his opening remarks by offering to answer questions.
Jordan Redman — Senator Blaylock and Senator Shippey engage in a continuous discussion about the bill’s implementation costs, the department’s capacity to handle additional scrutiny and data integration, and whether the new SOP could increase error rates or state costs. Blaylock questions whether any added costs will be absorbed by savings from the bill and expresses concern that the new process may raise errors despite supporting the bill overall. Shippey follows up by asking whether greater scrutiny might only appear to increase error rates while actually uncovering improper or duplicate benefits that could generate savings, and whether there is any way to reduce the resulting cost-sharing burden over time.
Randy Ford — Randy Ford is called as the next witness and then introduces himself as President and CEO of the Idaho Food Bank, stating that the organization shares the goal of improving SNAP effectiveness and integrity.
Randy Ford, President and CEO of the Idaho Food Bank — Randy Ford, President and CEO of the Idaho Food Bank, argued that the organization has no financial stake in the bill but sees firsthand the harm when Idahoans lose SNAP benefits. He said Idaho already has one of the nation’s best-administered SNAP programs, so the bill appears to import solutions meant for states with higher error rates. Ford warned that eliminating categorical eligibility and adding certification and verification requirements would increase bureaucracy, casework, and error rates, undermining taxpayer protection rather than improving it. He emphasized that the Idaho Food Bank serves more than 216,000 people each month and cannot absorb lapses in SNAP benefits, especially during shutdowns, and he urged lawmakers to preserve program integrity while tailoring the bill’s provisions to Idaho’s existing enrollment practices.
Kendra Knighton, Idaho Center for Fiscal Policy — Kendra Knighton of the Idaho Center for Fiscal Policy testified that the SNAP-related bill would increase costs for Idaho and likely raise error rates. She said the added eligibility certifications, more frequent reviews, and expanded data-sharing/work-related provisions would create more opportunities for department mistakes even when families submit accurate information. Knighton argued that these changes go beyond federal requirements, would burden Idaho taxpayers, and could lead to substantial annual penalties—estimating roughly $14 million at the low end and as much as $42 million if error rates rise higher. She concluded that while program integrity is important, the bill would likely increase unnecessary state spending on SNAP.
Scott Centurino — Scott Centurino delivered his virtual testimony, identifying himself as representing FGA Action and noting that he had served there from January of the previous year until a few weeks ago. He also stated that he previously served as a special assistant to the President for domestic policy, and he concluded by thanking the committee and offering to answer any questions.
Jessica Molina — Jessica Molina is introduced as the next witness, then testifies on behalf of the Hunger Coalition, urging a no vote on HB 730. Her testimony concludes with thanks and the committee inviting questions.
Fred Burmbaum — Fred Burmbaum is introduced as the next witness and immediately begins testimony, discussing the federal debt and how the bill’s costs are split between the state and federal government.
Mr. Centurino — Referenced as having made a good point about error rates and timing.
Mr. Burmbaum — Committee thanked him after his testimony and asked questions about non-citizen eligibility.
Christy Zito — Senator Blaylock said she initially liked the bill but was struggling with the new fiscal note, citing $1.7 million in ongoing spending and 10 new Department of Health and Welfare staff as reasons she could not support it. She reiterated that the fiscal impact made the bill difficult for her to back, and later was noted as sharing budget concerns and concern about whether the bill could get across the floor. The sequence culminated in her voting no.
Brandon Shippy — Senator Shippy commented on the fiscal note and referenced earlier food bank testimony, arguing that administrative costs in entitlement programs are excessive and 'brutal.' He said he would support the motion, while emphasizing that such programs are expensive to administer and should include parameters and checks and balances to prevent fraud.
Fred Burmbaum / food bank witness — Referenced as the earlier witness who testified about food bank operations and verification costs.
Brian Lenney — Senator Lenney was called on and briefly commented that SNAP benefits go to households rather than individuals, noting a gray area involving parents applying for legal children. Later in the same sequence, he was recorded as voting yes in the roll call.
Carl Bjerke — Voted aye in the roll call.
Melissa Wintrow — States opposition to the bill and begins explaining concerns.
Melissa Wintrow — Argues for separating the bill into two bills and supports the audit portion while opposing the motion overall.
Melissa Wintrow — Referenced as having raised the issue of bad actors.
Melissa Wintrow — Recorded as voting aye.
Melissa Wintrow — Senator Wintrow questions the need for the bill’s quarterly approach, arguing that Idaho already has a low error rate and expressing concern that adding more bureaucracy or administrative burden could actually increase errors. She also presses Mr. Taylor on his interest in the bill and suggests there is a disagreement over the best way to handle the issue.
Melissa Wintrow — Senator Wintrow questioned the witness about SNAP administration, asking whether SNAP is an entitlement program and expressing concern that changes in certification timing—from annual or semiannual reviews to quarterly reviews—could increase errors and therefore raise costs. She framed the issue as whether the proposed changes might unintentionally worsen error rates and require the state to pay more.
Melissa Wintrow — Senator Wintrow spoke in support of the broader food assistance discussion, noting that SNAP eligibility already involves substantial verification and expressing concern about the bill’s fiscal impact and whether it could advance given budget pressures. She later returned to the debate to argue that the government shutdown underscored the need for food assistance, emphasizing that wages have lagged for decades, inflation remains high, and a safety net is still necessary. The sequence concludes with her recorded nay vote on the measure.
Kevin Cook — Referenced as having предложed a compromise in JFAC to reduce the cut by half.
Kevin Cook — Was identified as the second on the motion.