When the eight of us took the budget pledge last session, we made a clear commitment: we would not vote for any budget that added full-time positions, accepted more federal dollars, or grew by more than 1.2 percent. We weren’t looking for applause. And we weren’t grandstanding. We were drawing a line based on principle and long-term responsibility.
Some dismissed the pledge as a stunt. Others said it was rigid or unrealistic. But today, it is clear that it was neither. It was a prediction. And now that prediction is becoming reality.
This month, the U.S. Department of Education froze $33.3 million in federal education funds destined for Idaho. That freeze put a wide range of programs on hold, including funding for teacher training, migrant education, academic enrichment, before- and after-school programs, and English language instruction. But let’s be honest: these programs weren’t created because Idaho prioritized them. They were created because federal dollars made them politically easy to justify. Now that those dollars are frozen, we’re told it’s a crisis. But the real crisis is building government on a foundation of temporary, unstable money.
At the same time, State revenues have come in below projections, prompting concerns about potential agency holdbacks of 2 to 6 percent. This isn’t the result of an economic downturn or a drop in tax collections. In fact, revenues are higher this year than last.
The $141 million so-called “shortfall” is simply a gap between projected and actual revenue, not a deficit compared to previous years. General Fund revenue is up 2.9% compared to this time last year, and overall gross tax receipts are up even more. The issue isn’t declining revenue, it’s the pace and structure of government spending.
This is exactly why the pledge mattered.
When government assumes money will always flow, it builds on sand. It adds programs, grows payrolls, expands obligations, and avoids asking the tough questions. But when the tide recedes, as it now has, the difference between wants and needs becomes impossible to ignore, and we see how unstable the foundation really is.
We have reached that moment.
Programs that were once treated as essential are now being downsized or scrapped. Services once considered permanent are now being postponed or reassigned. Many of these programs only existed because federal dollars made them politically easy to justify. Without federal dollars to shield them, these programs are being exposed as unsustainable and unnecessary.
This is not how responsible government should work.
As legislators, we believe Idaho must build its budget on what it can sustain, not what it hopes to receive from Washington, D.C. The federal government is $36+ trillion in debt and sinking deeper by the day. That kind of spending isn’t stable, and it certainly isn’t safe to depend on. For years, the federal spigot has flowed freely, fueling programs that expanded state government far beyond what Idahoans ever asked for. But federal funds come with strings, mandates, and risks. And now, as we’re seeing across the state, those risks are becoming real. We must plan for volatility, not pretend it won’t come.
That is why we took the pledge. And it is why we stand by it now.
We will not vote to grow the size of government when revenues are uncertain. We will not tie Idaho’s future to unpredictable federal programs. And we will not look the other way while budgets expand beyond what the people of Idaho can support. It’s time to turn off the spigot, to stop the flow of unsustainable federal dollars and the chains that come with them.
We’re asking Idaho citizens to help hold the line. That means demanding accountability for every dollar spent, rejecting dependence on unreliable federal funds, and insisting that government stay within its proper, limited bounds. Real leadership isn’t measured by how much is spent, but by how much is restrained.
The $33 million federal freeze and the $141 million gap between projected and actual state revenue aren’t coincidences. They’re both the result of building budgets on uncertain ground, federal money that disappears, and revenue forecasts that don’t materialize.
The pledge was not grandstanding. It was a warning.
And with every new financial shakeup, that principle becomes more essential.
Idaho families don’t get to spend money they don’t have. Neither should their government. If you agree it’s time to draw the line, speak up. Contact your legislators, show up at local meetings, and ask the tough questions. Responsible government doesn’t start in Boise—it starts with you.
In Liberty,
Senator Christy Zito, District 8
Zito4Idaho@protonmail.com
Senator Glenneda Zuiderveld, District 24
GZuiderveld@senate.idaho.gov
Substack: @glenneda
Senator Josh Kohl, District 25
JKohl@senate.idaho.gov
Substack: @joshkohl4idaho
Representative Faye Thompson, District 8
FayeforLD8@gmail.com
Representative Lucas Cayler, District 11
LCayler@house.idaho.gov
Substack: @lucascayler
Representative Kent Marmon, District 11
KMarmon@house.idaho.gov
Substack: @kentmarmon
Representative Clint Hostetler, District 24
CHostetler@house.idaho.gov
Substack: @theidahoresolve
Representative David Leavitt, District 25
DLeavitt@house.idaho.gov
Substack: @Leavitt4Idaho
Paid subscribers to this Substack will be recorded on Zito For Idaho’s sunshine report as a contribution to a political candidate. Subscribers don't have special access or content. I appreciate your support.
We've been warning legislators and other elected officials about taking "free" federal (and even state) money for years. Strings attached. And not appropriate government activities anyway.
Only a few listened. Now we're paying the piper.
We must decide carefully between NEEDS (e.g., essential public safety functions) and WANTS (e.g., freebies to illegal residents and those who won't work, massive waste in public education).
Government must STOP pandering to wants and focus on needs only. That switch will be painful to those enjoying taxpayer funded largesse and to the people in charge of doling it out. We ask both the former and the latter to get "real" jobs or create their own real jobs by performing services that people WANT to pay for, not services they are FORCED to pay for.
Voting automatic YES on maintenance budgets bakes in the excesses of previous years. Just because a department spent X last year doesn't (or shouldn't) grant automatic pass for this year and next and next. The first question to ask is "Should we be spending X on that item in the first place?" If the answer is NO, the budget must not be passed without removing the inappropriate appropriation.
We're also adamantly opposed to having government divert funds to ANY non-governmental organizations.
Few legislators have the backbone to meet these no-waste, needs-only standards. But to those who do, we send our sincere admiration and thanks!
Thank you for all your work. It's not an easy job.