Oops! Shepherd spoke his mind about working moms

This editorial was published by the Idaho Statesman of Boise.

———

The 2021 Idaho legislative session has not been a particularly good one for women. Republican legislators have proposed a number of bills that directly affect women negatively and have shot down several bills that would have helped them.

One legislator this week let slip the attitude he has about women: stay in the home, where you belong.

“(Any) bill that makes it easier or more convenient for mothers to come out of the home and let others raise their child, I don’t think that’s a good direction for us to be going,” said Rep. Charlie Shepherd, R-Pollock, in arguing against accepting a $6 million federal grant to establish an early-learning program in Idaho.

It’s a stunning admission that a legislator thinks we shouldn’t establish an early-learning program because he thinks it would serve as a babysitting program and give mothers an excuse just to get out of the house and let someone else raise their children for them.

Is that what they really think?

Shepherd issued an apology on the floor of the House on Wednesday — sort of.

“After hearing my remarks played back, I recognize how my remarks sounded derogatory, offensive and even sexist toward the mothers of this state,” Shepherd said.

No, representative, your remarks didn’t sound derogatory, offensive and even sexist; they were derogatory, offensive and sexist.

Further, Shepherd tried to explain, “My intent was to compliment mothers in every way possible. I stand before you now to admit that I failed miserably.”

We struggle to comprehend how Shepherd intended to compliment mothers by suggesting that they are just looking for a convenient way to dump their kids on someone else so they can “come out of the house.”

The measure to accept the federal money eventually was shot down.

Sorry, kids.

Sorry, moms, get back in the house.

“This vote was such a disappointment and a slap in the face to the working families of Idaho,” House Minority Leader Ilana Rubel, D-Boise, said in a press release after the vote. “This money was a lifeline to communities around our state where children could have the opportunity to get a boost toward literacy and school readiness. Idaho is one of only four states that offer no public early childhood education options, and this was a golden opportunity to expand offerings without expending state funds. Our children are the future of this state, and we should be doing everything we can to invest in their educational development. We must do better.”

Unfortunately, Shepherd’s comments detract from the bigger discussion about the fact that we already have single working moms and dads in need who send their kids to day care centers or preschools. This money would have helped those Idahoans. Further, comments like Shepherd’s show that he’s missing the point about the benefits of early education and having children ready to learn by kindergarten.

Shepherd’s comments perhaps explain a lot about why these Republican legislators keep casting votes against women.

Another bill that would have helped women in Idaho was killed on the same day in the Senate.

Senate Bill 1098 would have allowed women to receive up to a 12-month supply of prescribed contraceptives if they so choose. While some insurance plans reimburse only for a one-month or three-month supply, this bill would have required any health benefit plan issued or renewed on or after Jan. 1, 2022, to include as one of its options reimbursement for up to a 12-month refill supply.

When Idaho legislators like Rep. Shepherd say the quiet parts out loud, we begin to understand why they vote the way they do.

So, thank you, Rep. Shepherd, for at least being honest and opening a window to how you really feel about women’s issues.

At least now we know where women stand with you — in the kitchen.