What happened with the platform?

Daily Digest 6/22/26

Haters will say it’s fake, but it was my idea to withdraw my platform proposal at the convention on Saturday morning. It had gotten too heated and I decided to turn down the temperature:

The 2026 Idaho GOP State Convention concluded on Saturday evening following three days packed with events, elections, discussion, and debate. As readers know, I proposed a refresh of the party platform that would shrink it from 20 pages of detailed policy positions into a two-page preamble followed by a short list of specific legislative priorities. It passed the Platform Committee on Thursday afternoon and had momentum heading into the general session of the convention.

To be honest, I wasn’t even sure my proposal would pass the committee. However, it soon took on a life of its own. Chairman Bjorn Handeen has spent considerable time studying the history of political platforms in general and the Idaho GOP Platform in particular, and he was enthusiastic about the proposal. We had a robust debate in committee not only about the nature of party platforms in general, but also about what specifically should be included in ours. Branden Durst made several thoughtful suggestions regarding the list of legislative priorities. For someone like me who enjoys discussions and debate, it was a great four hours.

By Friday evening, however, I could see that my proposal was being used as a weapon of division by a small but loud cadre of confrontational-politics enthusiasts. Greg Pruett resurrected his Idaho Second Amendment Alliance brand long enough to send an email blast to his subscribers accusing me of watering down the party’s position on gun rights, which was absurd, of course. The new proposal included the very words of the Second Amendment itself—”shall not be infringed”—but people will do anything for clicks these days. Ironically, just a few years ago Pruett was vice chair of the Constitution Party, whose platform plank on the Second Amendment consists of a single sentence.

Several delegates were preparing to dismantle the new platform on the floor Saturday morning, and I suspected that others were preparing to use it as a weapon against Chairwoman Dorothy Moon’s bid for reelection. I saw numerous comments suggesting that I was “destroying the platform” on her behalf, or on behalf of House Speaker Mike Moyle. That’s the sad thing about confrontational politics: eventually your positions are defined by nothing more than who you hate at any given moment.

To be clear, this proposal did not come from Dorothy Moon. Many months ago, I let her know I wanted to explore the idea, and she said that was fine, but I did not share the text of the proposal itself until after I had submitted it to be part of the platform packet at the convention. The accusation that Moyle was involved is even more absurd. To be equally clear: I did not have a single conversation with the speaker regarding this idea to streamline the platform.

All that said, the vast majority of the feedback I received was positive. Numerous delegates from all across the state came up to me during the convention and told me they thought it was a great idea and thanked me for doing it. Almost every elected official I spoke with was in favor of some sort of streamlining as well. Critics could say that’s because they don’t want to be held accountable, but I don’t think that’s the case. I believe those who have served in the Legislature and participated in the lawmaking process have a different perspective than those who argue in the ivory towers of conventions and social media.

At conventions, we tend to debate ideals—that is, how things should be in a perfect world. We discuss questions such as precisely when life begins, whether property taxes or income taxes should be eliminated—of both!—or whether government itself should be reduced by 99 percent. Legislators, however, must operate in the real world of coalition-building, committee hearings, floor votes, and political constraints. Turning principles into law requires more than simply writing them on paper. It is a difficult process that involves compromise, strategy, and the practical realities of governing.

As I said, however, by Friday night this idea, rather than being carefully discussed and debated, had turned into a cudgel against me, but even more so against Chairwoman Moon. I called her that night and suggested it might calm things down if I made the motion myself to withdraw the new proposal. She said that, should she win reelection, she would appoint a committee to examine ideas regarding the platform over the next two years, and I thought that would be a great idea.

I want people to know that withdrawing the proposal was my idea. I wasn’t cajoled into it. On Saturday morning, I worked out a plan with Brent Regan in which he would move to replace the platform committee report with the 2024 document adopted in Coeur d’Alene, and I would second the motion and explain why I was doing it. Based on the applause I heard when Regan made the motion—clearly less than half the room—I suspect the new platform might have won a majority on the floor. But at what cost?

Even if it had won, it would have taken several hours of debate and parliamentary procedures, leading to more hurt feelings and bad blood. The fact that both Sen. Christy Zito and Rep. Lucas Cayler mentioned the platform fight in their nominating speeches for Mark Fuller for state chair gave the game away. I suspect Fuller was counting on using anger over the platform to drive votes against Dorothy Moon, and I could not allow that to happen.

I said from the beginning that the purpose of this proposal was to start a conversation, and in that I have succeeded. I don’t have an ego attachment to this project that requires me to win at all costs and without delay. Having a committee discuss the issue slowly and transparently between now and the next convention is an excellent idea, and I think it is the ideal outcome from all of this.

I’m not blowing smoke—having a two year conversation about how to make a platform that is lean, nimble, and easy for voters and candidates alike to utilize really is the ideal outcome from all of this. I believe we have a terrific leadership team in place for the next two years and I’m really excited about what the Idaho GOP is going to do going forward.

Make sure to read the whole article for the full story of the platform and where we go from here:

State employees catch a break

Gov. Brad Little issued an executive order today granting additional time off so state employees can celebrate America’s sesquicentennial:

“America’s 250^th anniversary is a once-in-a-generation opportunity to celebrate the enduring ideals of freedom, self-government, and opportunity that have made our nation the greatest in the world. Idaho’s public servants work hard every day on behalf of their fellow citizens, and this additional time off allows them to celebrate this historic milestone with family and friends, participate in community events, and reflect on the sacrifices of the generations who secured and preserved our liberty,” Governor Little said.

I don’t know about you but I’ve been feeling great coming out of the convention. I had a lot on my plate heading into it, though not nearly as much as Chairwoman Moon or the office staff, and it was a relief to be done with it all. The election results were energizing as well. With a great team in place, I believe the Idaho GOP is going to do incredible things this year, and I’m proud to play a small part.

Remember to catch Eagle Fun Days next Saturday where the District 14 GOP will once again take part in the Wet & Wild Parade.

As always, thank you to sponsors Lynn Bradescu’s Boise Realty, Money Metals, and New Saint Andrews College. Thank you also to all the paid subscribers who make it possible for me to do what I do, as well as all the readers who are constantly encouraging me to keep it up. I appreciate you!