Melissa Wintrow — Senator Harris asked a question that was later followed up by Senator Wintrow in the discussion.
Melissa Wintrow — Referenced as part of the ongoing question-and-answer exchange.
Melissa Wintrow — Addressed in the response to the question about hiring a female OB doctor.
Melissa Wintrow — Asked for clarification on whether sex could be considered when two candidates are equally qualified.
Melissa Wintrow — Referenced as having asked the earlier question.
Melissa Wintrow — Question being answered.
Melissa Wintrow — Expressed concern about the bill and asked what problem it is intended to solve.
Melissa Wintrow — Question being answered.
Melissa Wintrow — Asked how the bill improves health outcomes for Idahoans.
Melissa Wintrow — Asked Dr. Fields a follow-up question about evidence-based practice.
Melissa Wintrow — Asked Dr. Fields to explain how the bill would inhibit evidence-based practice and affect health outcomes.
Melissa Wintrow — Pressed Dr. Fields for a clearer explanation of how geography affects individual health outcomes.
Melissa Wintrow — Asked how geography, including rural versus urban location, can affect health outcomes.
Melissa Wintrow — Asked a follow-up question after Dr. Canty's testimony.
Melissa Wintrow — Asks whether the bill's prohibited acts would block the training Dr. Canty described.
Melissa Wintrow — Asks whether the bill would prohibit the training Dr. Canty described.
Melissa Wintrow — Begins a question after Dr. Boone's testimony.
Melissa Wintrow — During committee questioning, the chair and another senator address Senator Wintrow, with the transcript mishearing the name as 'Senator Lenny' and then correcting it. The exchange continues seamlessly into a question directed to Ms. Cole, indicating a single ongoing questioning moment.
Melissa Wintrow — Senator Wintrow is referenced in the hearing and then questions Ms. Woodruff about confusion in the bill’s language, concerns that it could lead to penalties or discourage doctors from practicing in Idaho, and whether hiring doctors is based on race or merit rather than qualifications.
Melissa Wintrow — Says she is not sure she will support the motion and wants to clear up confusion.
Melissa Wintrow — Her prior remarks are directly rebutted by the next speaker.
Melissa Wintrow — Interrupts to object and says she has the microphone while defending her position on implicit bias training.
Melissa Wintrow — Recorded as opposing the motion.
Daniel Foreman — Deferred the question to his co-sponsor.
Daniel Foreman — Referenced as having made a similar point about evidence-based training.
Cindy Carlson — Referenced as the next senator to speak; likely Senator Ziderfeld is Senator Cindy Carlson? The name does not match the provided list exactly.
Michael Fields — Michael Fields was introduced as the first witness and then testified as a family medicine physician from Idaho in opposition to House Bill 928. He argued that the bill would restrict evidence-based training and interfere with safe, effective medical care, noting that many of the activities it would prohibit are already recommended or required by accrediting organizations and federal programs. He warned that the bill could discourage health care organizations from addressing rural access and other important outcomes, worsen Idaho’s workforce shortages, reduce care in rural communities, and ultimately weaken health care in the state. He concluded by urging the committee to oppose House Bill 928.
Dr. Fields — Dr. Fields explained that health outcomes are shaped by social determinants such as financial resources, geography, distance to care, trauma history, education, trust in physicians, and environmental conditions. He argued that clinicians should be trained to recognize these differences and tailor care to each patient rather than use a one-size-fits-all approach. He also warned that restrictive policies could worsen provider shortages, especially in rural areas, and make it harder for patients to access timely, reliable care. Turning to the bill, he said he had only reviewed the portions relevant to his practice but believed it left too much to interpretation by people without health care training, creating potential conflict between medical standards and political judgment. He concluded that he did not see how the bill would improve health outcomes.
Brian Lenney — Senator Lenny questioned Dr. Fields about whether he had read the bill, then argued that the bill’s language already covers the practices Dr. Fields had described, including demographic data collection and related medical discussions. He thanked Dr. Fields and moved toward the next witness, while continuing to assert that the bill would allow the conduct Dr. Fields said it would restrict.
Kathy Canty — Kathy Canty appears online, is asked to unmute and identify herself, and then testifies in opposition to House Bill 928. She identifies herself as a family practice doctor in Twin Falls and explains that a recent DEI/equity training about Indigenous healing practices taught her to ask diabetic patients about fasting and insulin use so she can avoid causing harm. She argues that funding for such equity training is important because it gave her knowledge that could prevent an acute hospitalization for a patient.
Dr. Canty — The witness is asked to clarify whether her example would be prohibited by the bill.
Richard Bossard — The next witness is announced, though the name is slightly inconsistent with later sections.
Richard Bousart — Begins testimony in support of House Bill 928.
Richard Bozart — Richard Bozart, a board-certified plastic surgeon and senior fellow at Do No Harm, testifies in support of House Bill 928, the Merit-Based Health Care Act. He argues that diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives have shifted medicine away from merit and excellence by emphasizing demographic matching, DEI pledges, and training that he says dilutes medical education and contributes to licensure exam failures. He concludes that physicians should be selected and trained for their commitment to excellence rather than immutable characteristics, and urges support for the bill.
Dorothy Boone — Announced as the next in-person witness.
Dr. Dorothy Boone — Dr. Dorothy Boone, a family medicine physician in training in the Treasure Valley, testifies in strong opposition to House Bill 928. She argues that the bill threatens evidence-based medicine in both medical education and practice, including training on implicit bias and health disparities. She says these tools improve communication, diagnosis, treatment decisions, trust, and access to care, and warns that bills like this deter physicians from returning to or practicing in Idaho, worsening the state’s physician shortage. She urges rejection of the bill.
Ms. Cole — Ms. Cole explains that the bill would worsen rural care by making it even harder to recruit physicians to rural areas and by undermining the trust-building needed between doctors and rural patients. She also confirms that she read the entire bill.
the other doctor who was testifying remotely — The speaker refers back to a prior remote physician witness.
Ms. Call — Ms. Call says the bill’s definition of legitimate use is unclear from a physician’s perspective and could be interpreted differently by those enforcing it. She then explains that implicit bias training is often grouped with DEI, but in her view it helps clinicians communicate better across differences in upbringing and identity and improves patient care.
Edward Clark — He identifies himself as a policy analyst with Idaho Family Policy Center.
Liz Woodruff — The chair introduces Liz Woodruff as the next witness, and Woodruff then identifies herself as the executive director of the Idaho Academy of Family Physicians.
Ms. Woodruff — Explains that implicit bias helps physicians understand patients' perspectives and says the bill's language around prohibited DEI conduct and data use creates confusion.
Grayson Martin Roland — A 15-year-old sophomore from Boca Tello says his mother is a private practice family medicine physician and opposes the bill.
the physicians — Physicians are said to be concerned about the bill's language and the risk of being trapped by unclear terms.
every doctor except one — The speaker claims nearly all doctors testified that implicit bias training requires belief that everyone in the room is inherently racist.
Mark Harris — Recorded as opposing the motion.
Mark Harris — Seconded the motion to hold the bill in committee.
Jordan Redman — Representative Redmond is welcomed to committee and presents House Bill 916, identifying himself as representing District 3 in Cootney County. He is later asked about prior versions of similar legislation and committee composition, then returns to finish the bill presentation by emphasizing the oversight committee. During the same exchange, Senator Seidel raises concerns about committee appointments, arguing they should be merit-based and reflect rural representation and committee experience.
Jack Nelsen — Was addressed in the discussion about how committee members would be selected.
Jack Nelsen — Asked a follow-up question and was responded to regarding leadership selecting committee members.