Shawn Dygert — Moved to approve the minutes for February 2nd and February 3rd.
Shawn Dygert — The chair noted that if the questions from Representative Church, Representative Dygert, and Representative Bingham were not answered during testimony, they would be taken up again at the end.
Shawn Dygert — Indicates he still has questions for the sponsor.
Shawn Dygert — Voted no.
Heather Scott — The chair turns the gavel over to Representative Heather Scott, who will run the meeting.
Heather Scott — Adam Pendergrass addresses Chairwoman Scott at the start of his testimony.
Heather Scott — Heather Scott is addressed as the chair throughout a continuous exchange, including being called on to proceed, being addressed as Madam Chair, and being addressed again as Madam Chairwoman during a motion and vote request.
Heather Scott — Credited with giving assurance that removal would not mean public tax dollars would be spent on religious schools.
Heather Scott — Voted aye.
James Holtzclaw — Moves to introduce RS 33159.
James Holtzclaw — Representative James Holtzclaw voted aye.
Mark Harris — Likely intended reference is Representative McCann, but the transcript is unclear; no member ID confidently assigned.
Mark Harris — Answered that the state cannot favor one religion over another and discussed guardrails against government involvement in religious doctrine.
Mark Harris — Cargill thanked Representative Price for the bill being heard.
Mark Harris — Representative Price is being addressed in the exchange; the caption text does not clearly identify the speaker, but the discussion continues with him.
Mark Harris — Representative Price is addressed, but no member ID match exists for Price in the expected list; the transcript references him as the witness/speaker being questioned.
Lori McCann — Introduces herself as Representative for District 6 and explains the bill clarifies campaign finance laws.
Joe Alfieri — Responds 'No, Madam Chair, for motion' and moves to introduce RS 33195.
Joe Alfieri — Voted yes.
Elaine Price — Introduces H.J.R. 7 and notes she expected Chairman Crane.
Bruce Skaug — Representative Skaug is called on and then asks whether Idaho’s Blaine Amendment was influenced by anti-Mormon bigotry, referencing his recent reading on Idaho history.
Bruce Skaug — Praised the witness and asked a follow-up question about state dollars going to religious schools.
Bruce Skaug — Introduces the next procedural step and references prior remarks.
Bruce Skaug — Voted yes.
Stephanie Mickelsen — Representative Mickelsen questions the consequences of repealing the Blaine Amendment, asking whether it would allow state funding for religious schools, including a hypothetical Muslim school teaching Sharia law, and whether the state could then audit or regulate such schools or churches. She also raises concerns about public tax dollars going to private religious schools, the risk of church-state entanglement, and how equal funding could be ensured across different faiths so that no religion gains outsized influence or minority faiths are discriminated against. Representative Price responds that the proposal only asks voters whether to repeal the Blaine Amendment, not to authorize funding for religious schools, and argues that other constitutional protections already prevent the state from establishing or favoring a religion.
Stephanie Mickelsen — Representative Mickelsen follows up with a question and hypothetical about whether a legislature dominated by one religious sect could direct funds to that religion. The discussion continues with a response that such a situation cannot happen, and later references return to Mickelsen’s point as part of the broader neutrality discussion.
Stephanie Mickelsen — Voted no.
Anne Haws — Representative Haws begins a comment and follow-up question, then explains that Blaine amendments were historically motivated by religious animus but that their origin does not determine their current meaning. She notes that Idaho’s Blaine Amendment broadly applies to churches, religious societies, and religious purposes, and continues her point about its scope.
Anne Haws — Representative Anne Haws participates in a discussion about the constitutional guarantee of financial security for public schools. She asks about the ramifications of that guarantee and raises a brief comment tied to the historical motivation behind the provision. Later, her earlier statement is referenced again in the context of explaining the history and meaning of the amendment.
Anne Haws — Voted no.
Mike Pohanka — Representative Pohanka is introduced and then raises a concern that repealing the Blaine Amendment could require equal treatment for religious schools, including a hypothetical Satanic school, arguing that religious schools cannot be discriminated against.
Mike Pohanka — Voted no.
Brent Crane — Representative Crane responds to committee concerns about the implications of repealing the law, including worries about whether certain private or religious schools could be affected. He then asks whether repeal would automatically cause public money to flow to private or Christian schools, and confirms in response that funding would not automatically flow and that additional legislative action would still be needed.
Brent Crane — Representative Brent Crane is referenced early in the debate, then speaks in support of H.J.R. 7, arguing that Idaho’s historical treatment of religion—especially the 1890 oath test and the Blaine Amendment—reflects a dark history of religious bigotry that should be removed. He says history shapes the amendment’s meaning, cites discrimination against religious groups, and contends the amendment is long overdue for repeal. Crane also notes concerns about other religious schools are already addressed by the First Amendment, asks that H.J.R. 7 be sent to the floor with a due pass recommendation, and later, as chair, calls the roll vote and announces the motion passes 8-6 and will go to the floor with a due pass recommendation.
Erin Bingham — Representative Bingham is identified as the next member with a question, and the chair notes that if Bingham's questions are not answered during testimony, they will be taken up again at the end along with other members' questions.
Erin Bingham — Asked whether her question had been answered and declined further questions.
Erin Bingham — Representative Erin Bingham voted no during the vote.
Monica Church — Representative Church is identified as the next member after Representative Bingham, and then included with Representatives Dygert and Bingham in the chair’s statement that any unanswered questions will be taken up at the end of testimony.
Monica Church — Representative Church follows up with Representative Price on the importance of motivation behind the Blaine Amendment, pressing whether the historical and current arguments around repeal are tied to Protestant control of the school system and asking if that is part of what should be told to Idaho voters.
Monica Church — Monica Church spoke on the motion by thanking Representative Crane and reflecting on how past discrimination can affect future generations, especially in the context of LDS history. She argued that if the Blaine Amendment is removed, the same anti-discrimination principles should still apply, and warned about the slippery slope of changing antiquated constitutional language, drawing a parallel to debates over the Second Amendment. She concluded by saying she appreciated the discussion but was unsure how she would vote, and the record then shows her voting no.
Chris Cargill — Chris Cargill is called as the first testifier and then introduces himself as the President of Mountain States Policy Center as he begins his testimony in support of the bill.
Mr. Cargill — The chair thanked Cargill and opened the floor for questions.
Asha Mohingi — Announced as the next in-person testifier, though the spelling appears uncertain.
Asha Mwingi — Testified against H.J.R. 7 and identified herself as a Nampa resident and Boise State University student.
Brian Allman / Brian Elman — The witness was introduced as Brian Allman, but he identified himself as Brian Elman and said he was speaking for himself.
Brian Allman — Asked the committee to send the resolution to the floor so voters can decide whether to remove the Blaine Amendment language.
Shane McCauley — Shane McCauley was introduced as the next virtual testifier, experienced brief audio/muting setup before beginning, then testified from Worley, Idaho in support of the resolution to remove the Blaine Amendment from the Idaho Constitution, and closed by asking for a yes vote on the resolution.
Brianna Valadeo — Brianna Valadeo is introduced as the next witness, gets connected and begins her testimony virtually, and then is thanked by the chair as the committee moves into questions.
Matt Edwards — Matt Edwards was introduced as the next witness, then testified as the executive director of Citizens Alliance of Idaho in support of H.J.R. 107. After his testimony, the chair thanked him and opened the floor for questions.
Samaya Serena — Samaya Serena is introduced as the next witness, and it is noted that she opposes the bill, though there may be connection problems that prevent her from testifying.