6 thoughts on “So what exactly is Senate Bill 1067?

  1. Melissa this is a excellent overview of the situation in simple terms for all to understand. The “additional” $88 million we may have to cover this shortfall is not real if we are still woefully underfunding schools and roads. Our “independent spirit” which leads us to attack the Feds and their rules at every opportunity runs false given Idaho receives more in federal assistance than the citizens pay in taxes. A welfare state so to speak. Funded by those other states. Interesting.

  2. I have never heard of anything so childish. Playing games with children’s lives! I am ashamed that we think so little of our children and care more about what the Federal Government will really do!

  3. It is very important that there is uniform law if we are to be The United States of America, and we can not put our union at stake! We separate too much out as it is state by state!

  4. Melissa, Not one word about the enormous difference presented in this bill from the original act. As with all such issues, there’s seems to be a huge dearth of information and research among the press corps as to the meaning and impact that legislation such as S1067 to the citizens and state of Idaho.

    Compounding that is the lack of understanding that the imposition of S1067 is unprecedented in United States law. The bill is essentially an extortion racket in motion to force the states to incorporate international law, the UN Treaty Convention and an international identification/database-tracking methodology directly into Idaho statute.

    This is the best example of the Camel’s nose under the tent in modern times for “Commandeering” the states legislative process, which the SCOTUS has ruled, time and again, is unconstitutional. Most recently in Mack and Printz v US; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Printz_v._United_States

    The law hijacks directly and near completely the Idaho legislative process, fiscal process,judicial and executive processes. Not one word of the “model legislation” can be altered and it is a “must pass” otherwise Idaho immediately loses all its funding. No branch of state government may then question or alter any international court order regarding child support and enforcement against a citizen of Idaho.

    However, I think the key analysis to start with is how the bill can even be considered by the Idaho Legislature under Article I, Sec.10 of the US Constitution and Article I, Sections 2, 3 and 21, Art. III, Sec. 14, 16 (the bill has an illegal title), perhaps 19, of the Idaho Constitution.

    Until all the questions on constitutionality are first satisfactorily answered, I see the subsequent details of implementing language as irrelevant. This will only begin to answer some of the REAL questions around S1067 instead of the red herrings thrown out there about “Sharia Law.”

    All the other questions surrounding S1067 must be answered FIRST, before this legislation moves forward into ANY state, not just Idaho. Until they are, the only thing the Governor should is negotiate with the federal agencies is to keep all payments flowing past June 12. If the feds do cut them off, prior to due process resolution, Idaho should immediately file suit against HHS to resume payments pending outcome of the remaining due process and constitutional issues.

  5. A recall movement for the legislators that voted to table this bill should be considered.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: