The Attorney General race in Idaho might be decided by two issues that have not been marked by public clashes between the candidates, Raul Labrador and Lori Hickman. Labrador may experience strong backlash from voters for his over-the-top interpretation and enforcement of Idaho’s strictest-in-the-nation abortion law. The proposal to make the Idaho National Laboratory (INL) a long-term storage site for nuclear waste may see Hickman’s specific red lines as more assuring to voters than Labrador’s silence.
Labrador has made abortion the highest-priority issue in his tenure, trying to enforce an extreme interpretation of the total abortion ban that passed the Legislature in 2020.
It banned abortion from the point of conception, except to prevent the death of the mother. Doctors would face the loss of their license and 2-5 years in prison if they could not show an abortion was required to prevent the woman’s death.
Legislators passed the total ban as a political statement, with little consideration of its severe restrictions or how it would impact women with dangerous pregnancies and their caregivers. It was a “trigger law” that would only become law if the U.S. Supreme Court’s Roe v. Wade decision was overturned. At the time, nobody thought that was going to happen. But it did in January 2023, and the total ban was triggered into law. Women and their doctors have been plagued by its severe restrictions ever since.
Many legislators recognize the necessity of dialing back the total ban restrictions. The fact that many women have had to be sent to Utah for life-saving care that would be a felony offense for doctors to provide in Idaho speaks volumes. Yet, legislators are fearful of trying to dial back the extreme law. That has fueled support for Prop 1, the citizen initiative to repeal the total ban and establish more reasonable abortion limitations.
There is a torrent of misinformation in the media about what Prop 1 will do. The initiative is written in clear, understandable language that voters can read for themselves at unitedforyes.com/prop-1-full-text. If it passes, which seems to be a good bet, the Legislature will certainly try to amend or repeal it next January. After the people have spoken, they won’t dare to repeal it, but they may be able to make modest amendments that pregnant women and their doctors can live with.
Labrador has created an atmosphere of fear among many women in Idaho with his take-no-prisoners attitude on abortion. He may face significant backlash on election
day. Prop 1 will likely bring out many voters who want to repeal the total ban and punish Labrador for causing 35% of obstetricians to abandon their practice in Idaho.
The Nuclear Lifecycle Innovative Campus (NLIC) proposed for the INL has been a sleeper issue to date in the AG race. Yet, it may gain substantial voter interest as election day approaches. Hickman told the Idaho Falls City Club last week that she was open to the concept, “but much more needs to be known about the potential costs and benefits.” Hickman said: “The idea of having an Idaho facility advancing the frontiers of nuclear energy and bringing good jobs and robust investment to our state is appealing.” On the other hand, she cautioned that possible negative effects on Idaho water users and electric ratepayers must be carefully considered before rushing forward.
Hickman issued several red lines that she would not cross as Attorney General:
(1) An across-the-board agreement to accept and store nuclear waste in exchange for being chosen as an NLIC would not be acceptable. Rather, the parties would agree on the amount and composition of waste products to be brought to INL and the amount and composition to be removed on a project-by-project basis.
(2) INL must agree to state administration of its decreed water right and to acquire any additional rights under Idaho law. I would not sign an agreement that could adversely impact Idaho water users and electric ratepayers.
(3) Any data center located on INL must employ current best management practices, supply its own water and electric power, and fully comply with Idaho law.
Labrador was part of the task force that developed Idaho’s response to the proposal for the NLIC program. However, he has declined to provide anything other than generalities about the proposal, which are in a voter guide prepared by the Idaho Capital Sun.
Aside from what the candidates may think, I have concerns about why this major proposal popped into view just before the general election, why it was developed out of the view of Idaho voters, and why it is being thrown together on such a rapid timeline. We may see a finalized agreement with the Department of Energy just before the November 3 election. That’s not an appropriate way to develop important public policy.
Voters should carefully consider these two important issues before casting their vote for Attorney General.