After a lengthy and conflicting debate — focused largely on schools — a divided House committee passed a bill banning medical mandates.

Dubbed the “Idaho Medical Freedom Act,” Senate Bill 1023 would extend a state post-pandemic law to the schools. The key clause, for education, reads as follows: “A school operating in the state shall not mandate a medical intervention for any person to attend school, enter campus or school buildings, or be employed by the school.”

During a House Health and Welfare Committee hearing, opponents said this language would keep schools from collecting vaccination data — or keeping unvaccinated children out of schools during an outbreak, as state law now allows.

“We believe this is sending a conflicting message to our school leaders,” said Quinn Perry of the Idaho School Boards Association, which opposes the bill.

State law does not mandate school vaccinations, and Idaho has one of the nation’s highest vaccination opt-out rates. But several school nurses and pediatricians argued that school vaccination data is an essential tool to curb outbreaks.

An anti-vaccination advocate disagreed. Saying vaccinations are unsafe and ineffective, Sarah Clendenon of Health Freedom Idaho said the school records do not prevent outbreaks. Like other supporters, Clendenon described SB 1023 as a matter of personal freedom.

“There should be no fear in exercising your personal medical decisions,” she said.

School-related questions went beyond vaccinations.

Rep. Megan Egbert, D-Boise, repeatedly asked the bill’s architect if the “medical interventions” ban would extend to head lice.

The bill would ban school-mandated treatments for lice, but schools could still try to prevent the spread of lice, said Leslie Manookian, founder of the Ketchum-based Health Freedom Defense Fund.

“Clearly if a kid has head lice, this is an issue that has to be addressed,” she said.

After more than hour of debate, the committee approved SB 1023 on an 8-5 vote. The Senate-passed bill now goes to the House floor for a final vote.

House committee clears ‘fetal development’ bill

A bill that would require schools to show “early fetal development” cleared the House Education Committee after a testy public hearing Friday.

Senate Bill 1046 would direct public schools to show fifth through 12th graders a “high-definition ultrasound video” and “high-quality, computer-generated rendering” that show a fetus developing in the womb. The video would be required during instruction on human biology, contraception or sexually transmitted diseases.

“What we learn in schools basically turns into what culture becomes,” said Rep. Heather Scott, R-Blanchard, who is co-sponsoring the bill with Sen. Tammy Nichols, R-Middleton.

During a Senate hearing last month, Nichols showed an example of a video schools could use. The roughly three-minute video from Live Action, a Virginia-based anti-abortion nonprofit, asserts that life begins at conception.

Bill sponsors didn’t show the Live Action video Friday, but committee members appeared to be familiar with it. Nichols noted that districts could use any video that meets the bill’s standards.

Rep. Monica Church, a Boise Democrat and public school teacher, questioned the feasibility of districts obtaining ultrasound videos or producing a computer-generated rendering if they don’t use Live Action’s. “That sounds expensive,” she said.  

Friday’s public hearing and committee debate was heated. Rep. Barbara Ehardt, who supported the bill, had a hostile exchange with a health care worker and college student who testified in opposition.

Hallie Fox, a Boise student studying to become a physician, urged committee members to consult fetal development information from the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. The ACOG last year told the Associated Press that Live Action’s video is anti-abortion misinformation “designed to manipulate the emotions of viewers.” 

Ehardt, R-Idaho Falls, asked whether other medical trade groups would disagree. Those who support the video “are anti-abortion health care professionals,” Fox said, while others “support the scientifically accurate information of development.” Ehardt then cut off Fox’s answer. “I don’t think it’s right to call the other associations inaccurate and their information inaccurate,” she said. 

No medical associations testified for or against the bill during Friday’s public hearing. 

Terri Marcroft urged the committee to pass the legislation. Marcroft is a board member for Unplanned Good, a nonprofit that promotes adoption, rather than abortion, to handle unplanned pregnancies. “A baby in the womb at eight weeks, at 10 weeks, at 12 weeks, provides students with mental images for life,” she said.

Marcroft and Nichols suggested that state superintendent Debbie Critchfield supported the bill. The Republican superintendent “liked the idea,” said Nichols, and Critchfield’s chief of staff Greg Wilson said his boss was “excited about this,” Marcroft said, recalling a conversation during the bill drafting stage. 

Critchfield spokesman Scott Graf clarified Critchfield and her staff’s involvement after Friday’s hearing. “We were consulted on the bill and offered several suggested changes,” said an emailed statement. “A version of one of those suggestions was included in the bill that’s before lawmakers now while others were not. Ultimately, sponsors have final say on the language of their bill and we appreciate the opportunity to share input in a meaningful way.”

The suggestion that was implemented proposed reducing the scope of grades affected while “letting the local districts decide in what classes the subject matter would be taught,” Graf said.

The House Education Committee voted 9-4 to advance the bill. GOP Reps. Mark Sauter of Sandpoint and Jack Nelsen of Jerome joined Democrats in opposition.

Much of the committee debate focused on whether the required videos would qualify as life science instruction or sex education. Nelsen said they should qualify as sex education — that way, parents could choose whether to opt in or out.

“I don’t see how in the world you can show a legit ultrasound video,” Nelsen said. “If you’ve ever had kids, those are pretty explicit.”

Currently, Idaho parents can excuse their children from public school sex education. Ehardt is sponsoring a bill that would require parental consent for their children to participate in instruction on sexuality — which would switch sex education consent from an opt out to an opt in. The House approved the proposal, and it’s awaiting a hearing in the Senate. 

But Nichols said SB 1046 isn’t a sex education bill. “We’re talking about life science, we’re talking about human growth and development, we’re talking about offspring and how things reproduce, which is part of biology.”

The bill now heads to the full House. The Senate approved it 27-8.

Senate approves child care deregulation bill

The Senate approved a pared down child care deregulation bill Friday, sending it back to the House for concurrence with amendments.

House Bill 243 would relax staff-to-child ratio standards and repeal a statute that allows local governments to set more stringent child care regulations than the state. Before the Senate amended it Wednesday, the bill would have allowed centers to set their own staff-to-child ratios, drawing significant public backlash over safety concerns.

Supporters say the bill would remove barriers for child care centers amid a shortage in options for parents.

“What we’re trying to do is to be balanced in how we deregulate child care in this state,” said Sen. Carl Bjerke, R-Coeur d’Alene, “to allow for more child care, so we can license and ensure the safety of our children.”

Senate Minority Leader Melissa Wintrow, D-Boise, objected to the provision that would block the city of Boise from imposing stricter rules than the state. “When I talk to folks in my city, they value the ordinances that we have put in place, because they expect high-quality and safe environments for their clients and their kids.”

The Senate approved the bill 25-10. It now goes back to the House, which must agree with the amendments before the legislation goes to the governor.

Transportation funding update heads to House

Also Friday, the House Education Committee approved an updated version of a proposal to add alternative vehicle types to state transportation reimbursements. 

The committee introduced House Bill 396 — a replacement for House Bill 293 — Tuesday and voted to send it to the floor Friday. 

The updated version removed a controversial provision that allows virtual schools to collect transportation reimbursements. It also reinstated the 50% to 85% district reimbursement scale and kept a block grant option. 

The only remaining major change would allow districts to claim reimbursements for vehicles other than traditional yellow buses. For off-site activities, districts use cheaper vehicles like SUVs, vans and other passenger vehicles, said sponsoring Rep. Dan Garner, R-Clifton. 

“This will save the districts money,” he said.

The bill now heads to the full House.

House approves trustee spousal employment bill

Without debate Friday, the House approved a bill that would relax hiring restrictions for the spouses of school board trustees.

Under current state law, only school districts with 1,200 or fewer students can employ the spouse of a school board member as long as the spouse’s job is reopened to new applicants each year. Senate Bill 1045 would allow districts enrolling 400 or fewer students to employ the spouse of a trustee, as long as the trustee abstains from hiring and compensation decisions. 

The bill now heads to Gov. Brad Little’s desk.