OPINION: Changing states: What a difference four miles makes

For 39 years, I lived in Idaho. For 27 years, I practiced medicine and was employed at Regence Blue Shield of Idaho. For another 12 years, I served in the Idaho House of Representatives.

Then I remarried and we moved to Clarkston because we found a condominium we both liked, which was a good place still here in the Lewiston-Clarkston Valley, close to friends and families.

But, boy, what a difference that state border makes.

Setting aside the obvious differences in income taxes and marijuana dispensaries, there are a multitude of changes we saw with the move.

Here are some I see, admittedly with a somewhat political eye.

First is voting by mail and open primary elections. It appears that while the GOP in Idaho is quite fearful of “voter fraud,” in Washington the concern is for better voter participation. A multitude of efforts have been made to limit voter participation in Idaho, from closed party primaries (with ever tighter restrictions to participate in those special group nominating elections) to limitations on absentee voting and even helping homebound people to vote. But in Washington, the mail ballot is available to anyone. The primary is open to all voters. And the candidates with the top two tallies in any given contest continue on to the general election.

Voting by mail makes it easier to participate and is especially useful for those who work or are in school during the time polls are open or have transportation issues getting to the polls. Multiple studies have shown better participation and the processes with mail-in voting are proven secure and as fraud-free as any election. Idaho even used “no-excuse” mail-in (absentee) voting during the COVID-19 pandemic with no problems. Idaho’s current antipathy toward mail-in ballots, in fact to greater voter participation, is likely due more to results than to process. When everyone participates, the result is less likely to be polarized and more likely to represent the wishes of the middle and to a majority of the whole population.

Secondly, there certainly seems to be a greatly different feel to government services and public support for programs serving the general good. Whether it is funding for education, participation in federal programs such as Medicaid, child care support or even school lunches for poor kids, Washington seems to accept and support people through programs that Congress and federal agencies have deemed valuable. You seldom hear that feeding hungry 7-year-olds fosters dependence on a “welfare state” from Washington legislators.

Thirdly, the feeling toward individual rights is different as well.

The Idaho Legislature has displayed an increasing tendency to control the individual lives of citizens. Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness are values in the Declaration of Independence. But the Idaho Legislature has decided that phrase means something different there. Limiting access to appropriate health care, especially driving physicians out of state, scarcely promotes life. Outlawing public health measures and vaccines doesn’t, either. Banning clinically appropriate medicines and procedures, restricting books, art and publications in libraries, even denying the use of one’s name or pronoun scarcely promotes individual rights.

But these all have been fair game for the Idaho Legislature.

This is not to say that Washington is totally great, and Idaho is absolutely terrible.

For one thing, the number of ballot initiatives in Washington seems excessive and the process is cumbersome.

And Washington’s homelessness and housing issues certainly need work. But there is a clear difference displayed in attitudes and actions of the state governments. And it is more than just tax policy. Widespread voter participation is a difference as well as recognizing the value of federal programs. There is also an different understanding of personal freedom, and that it means more than the right to carry a gun anywhere you wish.

Individual freedom and — the flip side — personal and public responsibility look different on the two sides of the river. When I look through these lenses, it certainly gives a different shape to the “Greater Idaho” discussion, which proposes to shift a dozen Republican counties from Oregon to Idaho. It is more than wanting a Republican or Democratic majority. It needs to include what the governing values are.

Rusche, of Clarkston, is a retired physician who served six terms in the Idaho House.