Today will not be a day that lives in infamy.  Today will be a day of the Republic that marks the will of the people that show up to vote.  Will it be a day won by expenditures or by diligence and prudence?  Will today’s conclusion be just a sigh in resolve that things never change or a quickening pulse of hope that the voice of the people is and must be the power and energy of our Republic?

 Time will soon tell.  I will be picking up signs today and for the next couple of days.  I hope to see you as I do that.  What an honor it has been to serve you.  What an honor it has been to meet one of the sailors, from Homedale, that helped hoist a space capsule on board out of the sea; what an honor to meet the Army supply sergeant, from Garden Valley, that supervised the mounted Cavalry that patrolled the Oregon coast; or the railroad man from Glenns Ferry.  What an honor it has been to meet the gentle ladies and the gentle men that are the foundations of our existence.  What an honor to meet all the young people and children that will build upon the foundation we leave behind and make a remarkable and unimaginable future.

 What a glorious experience to live in this country and this state with you.  Vote well – make today count for something.

Political flyers can use innuendo and half truths with impunity.  In reality there is no such thing as a half truth because one can never tell which half is true, and it is like being half wet.  Neither the truth nor lies can be proportional.

I am not absolutely certain, but I believe many people in the district have thus far received at least twenty from my opponents with more coming nearly every day; today there were five.

How many are necessary to change the minds of the undecided?  How much does it take to buy the outcome of an election?  If it really worked that an individual or group can indeed buy their preferred result in an election, what does that say about the electorate?  Perhaps even worse; what encouragement does that give to those with the money to buy their preferences?  What legislator would dare stand up to a special interest group or person and say no?  A Democratic Republic demands more courage, not less and more independent thinkers, not fewer.

I have made many mistakes in the last eight years working for you.  I have spoken too little when I should have said more and far too much when I should have said less.  I have scolded when I had no right to and should have spoken more softly.  I have cast some aye votes that should have been nay and nay votes that should have been aye.  I have demonstrated arrogance instead of humility.  The list could go on.  I do apologize for the mistakes I have made even though I know I will make more.

I promise you that you will at times disagree with me and I am proud of you for that.  I am proud that I have always listened to my constituents and have done my best to vote for you and no one else.  I am proud that no one can say I have voted in my own self-interest.  I am proud that I have kept eight years of newsletters so that you know how and why I have voted on difficult issues and you can know my heart as well as my mind.  I am proud that no one has waited more than a few hours for a response from me – ever.  I am proud that you have my phone number and that many of you are very comfortable in calling to let me know when I am off base.

I only know one right way to do this job for you.  Go where you are and listen to you and learn from you.  Go to the businesses and schools and senior centers and the dairies and farms; to the downtown and to the libraries and everywhere you go.  Then, when I believe I understand, I proudly vote for you and stand by those votes and I tell you why.

You can’t tell much about me from the flyers but you can from www.senatortimcorder.com .   However, you can tell because of those flyers who is most important to me and who I listen to – it is not them.  Twenty fliers at $5500 each is $110,000 and counting.  Going once, going twice – not for sale at any price!

 Isn’t democracy painfully grand?  Other places in the world no such finals week exists and women and men are dying for the right to endure such exquisite pain.  Many American lives have been sacrificed to secure the simple right to vote, at home and around the world. However; many people here will simply ignore that right on the 15^th.

 Even here in Idaho we have restricted the right to vote in the caucus and the primary.  The caucus turnout is now a part of history but the Primary election is certainly not.  This is the final week to prepare for test day – May 15.

 I ran into an old friend at Cinco de Mayo.  I have known Juan Rios since I came to Mountain Home in 1977.  Juan has always worked hard and minded his own business and has raised his family to do the same.  He received a green card to work in America in 1954 and has done so legally since that time.  He has paid his taxes and depended on himself and friends and family to survive.  I have never seen him without a smile on his face or heard him utter anything but warm and pleasant words about his life.

 May 15 is a remarkable day for Juan.  He has finished his naturalization process and on May 15 he will be voting for the first time.  He will not take the day for granted.  He is prepared, he will pass the test and for him the very essence of all the human sacrifices, to make that day a reality, will come into focus with the simple mark of a pencil on a ballot in a private booth.

 Ideology is not the goal – liberty is the goal.  Liberty is sustained by government being limited and is lost when “government” is used to simply limit the expression of those who disagree.  There is only one definition of liberty and it has been secured for each of us by the sacrifices of all those who have gone before us.  Government intervention, no matter the cause, is still intervention.  I am learning that my favorite pursuit, for liberty’s sake, may require someone else to surrender their own liberty and that when government is asked to decide between the two of us it should do so blindly but never ignorantly.

 I am looking forward to the end of finals week and May 15.  On May 15 I want to feel just like Juan Rios.  Fight for your right to vote; go early to the court house or to your polling place on May 15, designate a party affiliation, designate a party ballot, then vote.  Don’t surrender your rights!

 We all may like to think we are indispensable but we are not.  However, there are things in life we would prefer not to miss.  The smiles, antics, and laughter of children are on my list of things not to miss; and yet I do during this campaign, and I miss them terribly.  The absence is made more terrible by the realization that missed smiles cannot be recovered.

 The children are the reason for all of us to want responsible government with people in office unafraid to stand by their convictions and willing to serve the common good rather than ideology.  I don’t really trust anyone but me to be the guardian for my children and grandchildren.

 I have been termed a “moderate wildcard”, whatever that means.  Political flyers pollute your mail boxes representing, among other things, that Tim Corder is dangerous to the elderly and the unborn.  These are all tactics that represent the worst of politics.  The organized groups that have put out these flyers prey on your fear and depend on ignorance. 

 I believe in the sanctity of life beginning at conception and will always support that position.  I believe that end of life directives are the right of individuals and should be carried out between those individuals and their families in consultation with their physician and their faith.  The state simply and clearly has no right to inject itself between you and your family or physician. 

 I do listen to you and not one of you has told me there have been problems with physicians terminating life prematurely by withholding care or not honoring end of life directives.  Not one of you has reported overzealous physicians with respect to the beginning or the end of life.  So why change law that is working?

 I choose not to be your conscience, though I might like to be.  I choose not to frighten you with what might happen.  I choose to think for myself and for you and avoid the group think where someone else has judged their conscience and faith superior or more ecclesiastical to mine.

 I choose to serve you and depend upon your trust and the grace of my God.  Government is not the solution to problems.  Don’t believe the hype.  Don’t allow the sanctimonious, the self-serving, or the tired political clichés to purchase this election with fear and innuendo.  Your voice is important and it should be treasured and lifted up for the entire world to hear – you can think and speak, I believe that.

 Applying labels to people seems to make some folks more comfortable.  I believe “moderate wildcard” is a label that means I listen to you rather than the politicos, I trust you, I work for you, and most importantly – I SPEAK for you fearlessly without hesitation.  Will you speak for me on May15?

 Go to the court house anytime between now and May 11 or to the polls on May 15 with photo identification and be prepared to designate your party affiliation, if you have not already done so.  Because the Republican Party restricts their primary participation; only individuals registered as Republicans are eligible to vote the Republican ballot.

• Only registered Republican voters will be allowed to vote in the Republican Primary
• Members of the Democratic, Republican, Constitution or Libertarian Parties and those who do not affiliate with any party will be permitted to vote the Democratic Ballot if they so choose
• Those not registered with a party may do so on election day.

 While many people consider themselves independent, that choice does not officially exist as a party alternative. Individuals are free to change party affiliation after the election.

 I understand many are upset by this process but it is the process we have until the people change it.  You can begin the process of responsible change by going to vote on May15 but go informed and committed.  Committed to affiliating with a party and informed about the person you intend to vote for. 

 My record is clear and it is fully open to everyone at www.senatortimcorder.com.  I have defended our schools and voted against increasing class size.  I have voted to prevent tax shifts.  I have voted in support of business and jobs that grow from the ground up.  I have voted to prevent government from choosing winners and losers.  I have voted against government manipulation of tax policy that interferes with the free market system. I have voted to protect agriculture and main street businesses.  I have voted to keep government out of our lives, our bedrooms, and women’s bodies.

 I believe in small empowered government of the people and I have voted consistently to prove that.  I don’t just say it – I vote it. 

 I need your help on May 15.  I have an unimpeachable record of communication with the people in my district.  I have an undeniable record of voting for you.  I need you to register and vote on May 15 and I need you to see that others are there as well.  You have been able to depend on me every time.  I am depending on you.

 There is a difference between compromise and consensus.  I suppose each legislator draws philosophical and political lines in the metaphorical sand when they begin the session.  The thing about sand is that one can move the line and previous locations get completely forgotten or dismissed.  The definition of fiscal conservatism has changed since January because people want to go home and campaign.  H563 is only $35 million – what the heck!  In January we were looking for the very best way to encourage broad economic activity and restore structural balance to the budget.  At the end of March people just want to go home.

 Of the three bills I started two have made it.  Idaho Code 12-120 has been amended to give more access to the courts through the assurance that attorney’s fees can be collected for the prevailing party.  Children in foster care will now be better cared for because new law will allow foster parents and the department of Health and Welfare to share information about the children under the care of the state.  These reforms have been too long in coming to fruition and I am very pleased with their success.  The third piece having to do with dangerous dogs was once again caught in a political shuffle.  It will need another try next year.

 As chairman of the Local Government and Taxation Committee I must exercise discretion over what bills are heard or not.  I make those decisions on the merits of the bill.  There have been many different ideas about tax policy and local governance this year that have stopped at my desk.  My discretion on House bills has a political cost: dangerous dog legislation.  I will use different strategies next year to see that legislation important to the district is successful.

 Legislation has been passed that broadens the eligibility for energy conservation deductions.  If you own a home built between 1976 and 2002 and you are adding insulation or changing windows or other conservation measures you may be eligible for an Income Tax deduction.  Current law provides that homes older than 1976 are eligible for improvements, though the new legislation narrows the scope of qualified improvements a bit.

 Boise County may yet have a legislative solution.  The previous bill died in the House on close margins.  The current bill is a remake of the former that failed except that it has an election provision and will cease to exist after 2017.  It has now passed the Senate.  Next, it must pass by a simple majority vote in the County.

 I misspoke at a recent meeting at Idaho City.  To clarify: in Idaho there is no Errors and Omissions insurance coverage available for land use planning decisions.  Ordinances, zoning, following state and federal laws to the letter, and having competent legal counsel are the only protections against litigation.

 A bill to allow the auction of game tags has passed both houses.  Another, to restrict Idaho Fish and Game from closing certain roads to ATV’s on Federal lands failed to pass the Senate.  Another bill that classifies and exempts developed properties as “Inventory” from speculative value has passed both houses.

 The “Inventory” bill warrants further comment.  Some decades ago reasonable people decided that development of property and growth in communities should be planned in a way that encouraged long-term developments and large parcel platting.  It was held that to accommodate that goal a developer’s discount might be needed to exempt speculative or unrealized future value.  In 2005 I carried the bill that repealed that discount because it had been abused and values were not realistic for property tax.  Under the discount, land stayed at the agricultural value until the house or business was occupied with no intermediate value.  That wasn’t fair.  After the repeal, developers began to reduce the long term planning approach and some counties began to assess at nearly the completed value – that wasn’t fair either.  This bill establishes a mid-development value for purposes of taxation that reflects the investment in the property and not the future unrealized value.  Only the original developer qualifies for the exemption; any transfer of the property removes the exemption.

 Idaho now will have a felony provision for animal cruelty and, subject to voter approval, an amendment to the constitution that protects hunting and fishing in Idaho.  We have restored the authority for counties and cities to issue Conditional Use Permits, prohibited texting while driving, and given the authority to set speed limits on state highways that lie within cities, back to the state.

 Once again it has been my honor to serve you.  God willing, I will have another opportunity to do that next year.  Please feel free to email or call over the summer.  I look forward to seeing many of you as I travel through the district.

 The sales tax was initiated in Idaho in 1965 and at the onset provided for an exemption for production agriculture.  Before the session ended in 1965 the act was amended to include forestry.  The initial exemption held great value to agriculture because it implied a state policy that recognized the importance of agriculture to Idahoans and the nation.  The exemption for agriculture required one and one half pages in our statute books in 1965.

 Today more than thirty pages are used to contain all the exemptions to the sales tax.  Even the “Production” exemption has been expanded to include non-agriculture production.  With each exemption granted subsequent to 1965 the agriculture exemption has been systematically devalued: other taxes, including the sales tax rate have gone up as a result of the ever shrinking tax payer base. Every time an exemption has been granted there are fewer people left to pay the taxes necessary for government to serve the needs of the governed. The proverbial camel’s nose under the tent has never been demonstrated more clearly than the preceding example.

 The same is true for Income tax credits and deductions.  Over the years the list has gotten longer and longer of those eligible to receive credits and deductions from their income tax.  In my time here the Senate has been successful in slowing the further narrowing of the tax base and preventing the further deterioration of the value of existing exemptions.

 H606, in my view, is another camel’s nose in that it is a new credit for value added agricultural facilities.  Government should not pick winners and losers in tax policy. If passed, history would have repeated itself and the one and one half pages required to codify 606 would become another thirty pages of credits for other industries as non agriculture enterprises were able to capitalize on the opportunity.  Since 1965 the legislature has not had the political agricultural power or will to constrain qualifiers for the production exemption.  The political power for agriculture will continue to wane and may even suffer great reverses in the coming decade. 

 Usage of a credit under 606 would further narrow the tax base and ultimately increase the tax rate for all remaining taxes paid by agriculture and others.  H606 calls for an unprecedented Income Tax credit of 30% of $500,000, for new facilities eligible for recovery over fourteen years.  For the state; it is the equivalent of a dairyman locking in today’s feed prices as the floor for the next fourteen years and believing that the economic benefits over time will justify the action today.  There is no way to estimate the cost of the credit over time.  It only applies to those who can afford the expansion and offers no help to everyone else.  It would narrow the tax base and force the shift of taxes to all other payers.  For those reasons I decided to hold the bill.

 Coming into the recession Idaho had approximately $400 million in reserve accounts.  Idaho also has received over a billion dollars in federal aid dollars aimed at protecting schools, social programs, and economic development.  As the recession seems to be easing, though certainly not concluding, Idaho will have in June a total fund balance of $35 million. 

 Idaho schools have also suffered by decreasing the numbers of teachers, increasing the number of students per classroom, and generally shifting some of the burden of the cost of education to the county property tax through supplemental levies.  Public research through our Universities has been seriously limited and instead has been deferred to proprietary private companies.

 Idahoans are justifiably proud that we have the constitutional mandate to balance a state budget.  What is not mandated is structural balance in the budget: that is to say, ongoing expenses should match ongoing revenues and should not rely on one time revenue to balance.  Idaho’s budget is not structurally balanced because we are using one time revenues to cover costs that are ongoing.

 Idaho is heavily dependent on federal dollars, particularly and directly in the Medicaid area.  Some of us believe there is a very real possibility that federal spending will be brought under control and significant efforts will be undertaken to reduce the federal deficit.  The impacts, in Idaho, to federal reductions could be several hundred million dollars.  Reserves will be imperative to give us time to adjust our budgets and make changes closer to home.

 The dispute over how much money is available stems from the legislature’s projected economic growth of 4.5% while the Governor assumes a 5.7% growth.  History wants to repeat itself.  Within the last decade Idaho reduced taxes only to subsequently endure the longest legislative session ever recorded to raise taxes above the pre-reduction levels.

 I am attaching a chart that demonstrates the savings from the proposed changes outlined in H563.  You will note that a family of four with a gross income of $100,000 will receive $71.  The majority of our small businesses will not qualify for relief as indicated by the chart.

 Idaho is one of the only states with a state investment tax credit.  That is important when considering a reduction in the corporate tax rate because that means the “effective” (net) rate of corporate taxation is already reduced by the Investment Tax Credit.  Rather than the stated rate of 7.6% the effective rate may be around 4% for some.

 For these reasons many of us believe prudence demands that replenishment of reserve accounts be a first priority, that budgets be structurally balanced, that projections be realistic, that we not spend money we don’t have, and that our tax policy reflect the conviction of our fiscal conservatism.

Sorry, I could not attach the chart.  Send me an email and I will get it to you.

 Along the legislative journey to the messy end of session there is often a bill or two that causes great anguish and forces people, especially in an election year, to choose expedience over conviction.  Black and white are easy to discern but shades of grey are much more difficult; made even more difficult by religious, ideological, or constitutional conflicts.  I try not to judge the motives of others, but when I am forced to vote on a bill that seems heavily influenced by religion or ideology and which also seems to slide constitutional balance away from the center; I tend to push toward constitutional centricity.

 A ruling majority today, conceivably, may not be the majority tomorrow.  I see great danger in allowing any majority a bully pulpit; particularly if that majority demonstrates a propensity toward religious or ideological predispositions.   Therein lays a painful conflict when voting on some legislation.  Which minority should be protected?  How does one prorate a vote? 

 Such was the case with S1387 known as the vaginal ultrasound bill and S1348 known as the conscience or futile care bill.

 I interject here points six and seven from the Idaho Republican Party Platform.  “We believe the proper role of government is to provide for the people only those critical functions that cannot be performed by individuals or private organizations”, and “We believe the most effective, responsible and responsive government is government closest to the people.  That the government is best that governs least.”

 S1348 would create law that says that the end of life instructions a person completes may never be violated, even by a physician.  No reported abuse of current law was offered as evidence for a change in policy.  Then why propose a solution to a non-problem?  I could have voted for the bill knowing very little, if anything would change; but I didn’t, I voted no.  I do believe in personal responsibility.  I do believe in less government.  I do believe that government should not push itself into the lives of people, especially in the most intimate and private times of their lives.  The bill would prohibit family members from intervening or contradicting a person’s directives and under certain conditions, would force physicians and family members to provide care that was deemed futile by the physician. An example would be: suppose a person became comatose and had left instructions through a directive (living will, durable power of attorney) that only comfort measures be used until the end; if the doctor determined that a medication would result in consciousness or even recovery, he could not administer the drug nor could any family member intervene.  Conversely, if a person had declared, in some sort of directive, their desire to be sustained by any means and became comatose with no medical hope of recovery, the doctor and family would be forced to provide all care possible even though it was deemed futile by the doctor.

 S1387 requires a physician, as part of informed consent consultations, to require a woman to see the image of a fetus before an abortion assuming the visual image would change the outcome. 

A vaginal ultrasound may even be required to acquire the image.  There was no provision to accommodate medical emergencies, such as a woman with a tubal pregnancy where the doctor would be forced to acquire an image and require the woman to see the image before the fetus is aborted.  A more cruel, intrusive, and egregious act I can hardly imagine. 

 Idaho has had an informed consent law since 2006 and has required the collection of data since 2007.  Informed consent requires that information be given about abortion and all the alternatives that should be considered.  Ultrasound images are currently optional unless there is a medical necessity determined by and between the doctor and the woman – not the state.  In 2010, 1509 abortions were performed in Idaho (it is not known how many of those were medical emergencies) and of those only one person was not given preoperative educational materials and options.  That person was received in an emergency room as a result of an automobile accident.

 Let me be very clear.  I have a pro-life voting record.  Except under the types of emergencies described above, my conscience requires me to defend the lives and rights of the unborn.  

The Republican principles quoted above are based on the Constitution of the United States that guarantees equal rights for all people.  As much as I would love to see the constitutional scale move to the side of the unborn; I could not support a bill that pushes the state further into our lives.

 The House of Representatives has chosen not to hear either bill.

 Next week I will offer some final thoughts on the session. 

 As Always,

 This is more than an argument about property rights or fracking (fracturing layers to allow the flow of gas) or local control.  Some years ago a Democrat Senate Minority Leader proposed a plan for a regional site authority to make decisions with respect to where such things as large power generators, wind towers, or even large dairies should appropriately exist.  The general premise was to protect individual property rights while acknowledging that there are activities that one individual, or county, can undertake that might have significant impact on the neighbors. 

 The idea was shot down, legislatively speaking, because it was usurping local control.

 At the same time, there has been a growing distrust of state agencies by Republican legislators.  Agency proposals and actions are often considered to be synonymous with bigger government and those same agencies are deemed to be anti-libertarian.

 The Great Recession happened.  Oil and gas reserves have been discovered in the United States and feverish economic activity has begun in certain states with more to follow.  Idaho is certainly in line to become the benefactor of new technology and discoveries.  With a focus towards better times and prosperity statewide, H464 successfully usurps local control and hands it over to a state agency.  It was even suggested that a well at the foot of the capitol steps would be just fine – and it would be for some.  Some of us, though fully supportive of the industry, believed that one more opportunity to evaluate the role of local control was entirely appropriate.  Even that opportunity to evaluate some final proposals was taken from us and you Monday. 

 I do not recollect when I began to understand the meaning of the word irony but I know it when I see it.  A majority has a very profound responsibility to listen to and protect the minority:  first, because a really bad minority idea one day may be a really good majority idea on another day; and second, because the majority that does not listen respectfully and with appreciation to the minority might one day find themselves in the minority.

 We are coming down to the line on tax relief.  We recall that the Governor started the legislative year in the State of the State report by asking for $45 million for tax relief while specifically leaving the details to the legislature.  The Governor has changed his mind and made a choice and so has the House.  The Senate is not so certain. 

 Idaho has a constitutional requirement to have a balanced budget: meaning, expenses must equal revenues.  Idaho has no requirement to certify structural balance: meaning, ongoing expenses equal ongoing revenues and one time revenues not be used to cover ongoing expenses.  The budget committee (JFAC) has set budgets and determined that $61 million of forecasted revenues has not been appropriated.  The forecast is made on a very optimistic projected 4.5% growth rate.  Emphasis added. 

The Governor has chosen an Income Tax proposal that would lower the rate of Income Tax for corporations and individuals.  The rate change would reduce taxes for the top 17% of wage earners.  A couple filing jointly with two children and earning $100,000 Gross Income would save $71 income tax: that is not a typo.

 The House has already passed the bill in support of the Governor’s plan.  The Senate is divided.  A slight majority, me among them, would prefer to put the $61 million in savings in anticipation of reduced federal spending towards states, additional economic difficulties, additional demands on corrections, and a general distrust of reliance on the words projected and forecasted.  Spending money we don’t have even on tax relief just does not make sense.

 Just in case the Senate must make a deal with the House and Governor, my task, as Chairman of the Tax Committee is to find the compromise position between tax relief and savings.  I have a proposal for Personal Property tax relief that would eliminate the reporting requirement thus eliminating the administrative burden for counties and all small business.  This proposal would completely eliminate Personal Property tax for 95% of the businesses in the state; perhaps 80% of those are individual tax payers.  They are main street America. 

 The proposal would put in place the process for full replacement dollars to the counties and provide an orderly and defined process that uses an economic trigger to activate phase two (the balance of the PPT [5% remaining]) and provide a mechanism for the legislature to stop the process once triggered.

 That is my task and I need to get back to it right now.  I will have more to report next week.