OPINION: Cheers & Jeers: Idaho's obstetricians are going, going, gone

JEERS ... to Idaho House Speaker Mike Moyle, R-Star.

On his watch, the Idaho Legislature failed to even consider passing a health exception to the state’s abortion ban. Without that provision, physicians treating women undergoing crisis pregnancies must risk criminal prosecution if they practice medicine — or they must wait until the patient’s health deteriorates so severely that her life is at risk.

Is it any wonder that Idaho has lost 22% of its practicing obstetricians since the abortion ban took effect, according to a report from the Idaho Physician Well-Being Action Collaborative?

Is it any surprise that Idaho has lost 55% of its maternal fetal medicine specialists in that time?

Should anyone be shocked that many Idaho women live in maternal health care deserts or that three hospitals have closed their birthing centers, often for the lack of staff?

Not only are medical professionals fleeing the state, but candidates who once might have considered locating in Idaho’s health care network have passed — leaving it with twice or even three times the number of OB-GYN vacancies than normal.

So what does the most powerful figure in Idaho’s Republican-controlled Legislature have to say?

That Idaho’s abortion laws may be a “convenient excuse” for health care providers to work elsewhere.

Countered Dr. Amelia Huntsberger in a recent Idaho Statesman column: “If you aren’t sure why doctors are leaving Idaho at this point, it’s because you are not listening to them.”

Of course Moyle isn’t listening.

Like so many members of his party these days, Moyle’s approach to the truth — whether it’s an insurrection on the Capitol, election results or COVID-19 vaccinations — is to deny it.

Nor is his ambivalence on this issue out of character. The House speaker is a known skeptic toward subsidizing the training of Idaho’s health care providers.

If you care about the well-being of Idaho women, seek help elsewhere. If it doesn’t serve his political or professional interests, Moyle doesn’t care.

JEERS ... to U.S. Sen. Mike Crapo, R-Idaho.

As Washington Post columnist Catherine Rampell noted earlier this week, the Idaho Republican is standing in the way of a bill that would:

-- Extend a tax credit that would benefit 16 million children in low-income households.

-- Restore recently expired tax breaks that the U.S. Chamber of Commerce says would benefit struggling small businesses.

-- Pay for the package by eliminating a COVID-19 pandemic program that has fleeced the taxpayer through rampant fraud.

And to top it off, the prospect that Crapo would become Finance Committee chairperson if the GOP wins the Senate majority this year has left Republicans unwilling to cross him.

So what is Crapo’s objection?

He says the child tax credit creates a potential incentive for parents to stay home rather than work — although, as Rampell reported, the tax credit is available only to working families. Even so, Finance Committee Chairperson Ron Wyden, D-Ore., offered to amend the package to Crapo’s satisfaction.

All of which leads in one direction: The once congenial Crapo, like so many of his colleagues, does not want to hand President Joe Biden a “win” on the eve of the 2024 election — even if the real winners are children, businesses and taxpayers. When a politician has forgotten the difference between his personal political ambitions and the well-being of the people who first sent him to Washington, D.C., 32 years ago, he’s been there too long.

CHEERS ... to Idaho Gov. Brad Little.

After four tries, the right-wing fringe of the Legislature passed a bill that would have the state treasurer investing in gold and silver bars. Not certificates but actual bars — to be stored physically within the state.

Little vetoed it — and with good reason.

Think of the cost.

There are brokerage fees.

Then you have to pay to physically transport the bars to the state.

Finally, you have to cut a check for storage because the state lacks facilities that pass muster with the companies that insure the precious metals.

And who is in a position to store the metals?

Charlotte, N.C., businessman Stefan Gleason.

As BoiseDev reported, Gleason’s company is close to constructing a 46,000-square-foot, $26 million depository in Boise.

According to Idaho Statesman’s Kevin Fixler and Take Back Idaho, Gleason and affiliated business groups have spread about $360,000 in political donations. Much of that has found its way into the campaign coffers of lawmakers — and like-minded organizations such as the Idaho Freedom Foundation — who supported gold and silver bills through the years.

Among them:

-- Idaho Freedom PAC and the Idaho Freedom Caucus — close to $209,000.

-- Attorney General Raul Labrador — $20,000.

-- IFF President and former state Rep. Ron Nate, R-Rexburg — $6,000.

-- Sen. Tammy Nichols, R-Middleton — $6,000.

-- Rep. Heather Scott, R-Blanchard — $5,000.

-- Rep. Barbara Ehardt, R-Idaho Falls — $4,000.

Sen. Phil Hart, R-Kellogg — $2,000.

Ehardt and Hart sponsored the latest bill.

Standing in the way of this would-be Goldfinger-esque scenario was Little’s veto stamp.

“This legislation and its fiscal note fail to take into account the many additional costs that will be borne by taxpayers for the storage, safeguard, and purchase of commodities such as gold or silver,” Little wrote.

Good for him.

JEERS ... to Idaho Family Policy Center President Blaine Conzatti.

It’s his agenda, not yours, that the Idaho Legislature followed in passing a bounty on public and school libraries.

As Idaho Education News’ Ryan Suppe reported, the measure is so vague about what constitutes materials “harmful” to minors that it will invite endless litigation. Idaho Falls Library Director Robert Wright told Suppe he now has his city attorney’s phone number on speed dial.

All of which was the point. If the idea was to empower parents to challenge individual materials, the process already exists. But that wasn’t Conzatti’s priority.

“Insurance companies don’t want to pay out damages, they don’t want to defend their clients, and so what they’ll do is, they will change their policies,” he said last year.

There you have it. This was not about protecting young people. It’s about intimidating and destabilizing Idaho’s libraries. — M.T.