There are always two sides to a story. Such divergence of opinion on one story has surfaced between one former Idaho legislator, and one current legislator.
Sen. Glenneda Zuiderveld posted an article, Understanding the IACI Endorsement, discussing the Idaho Association of Commerce & Industry (IACI) and its political influence over elected officials and policy. In kind, former Sen. Linda Wright Hartgen posted a rebuttal, No, Sen. Zuiderveld, Idaho businesses aren’t the enemy.
Sen. Zuiderveld identified the IACI Political Action Committee (PAC), Idaho Prosperity Fund (IPF), as endorsing and backing several candidates. Her concern centered around the powerful lobbying by IPF and its ties to global economics. She also identified several Idaho corporations and groups that exert this corporate influence and how much money is spent to do so.
Former Sen. Hartgen interpreted Sen. Zuiderveld’s post to say that “IACI is somehow “anti-Idaho” or hostile to working families”, then proceeded to identify IACI as representing employers across the state who create jobs with pay and benefits, and “keep rural communities alive” leading to a “strong economy”. Some potshots were taken towards Sen. Zuiderveld’s voting record without any links to information being referenced, but one was found regarding her comment on quagga mussels.
IACI was supported by Hartgen for its role in business growth, workforce development, and other activities that ” affect Idahoans’ quality of life.” According to Hartgen, engaging with business leaders creates better policies while not engaging leads to families paying the price.
Well, there certainly appears to be no love lost between these two. But actually, they are both right. Corporate influence over politicians distracts from their responsibility towards their constituents, and supporting businesses in Idaho is important for economic health.
So what’s the problem? Both.
Zuiderveld has addressed corporate influence before. Corporate power is now global and has infested Idaho through the IACI Board of Directors that represent those corporations. Directors representing corporations such as Micron, Amazon, AT&T, Wells Fargo, Chobani, Bayer, and Meta are just a few global corporations having influence in Idaho. What is brought with that is potential, if not realistic, influence over Idahoans and how they live. Those legislators who engage with corporations vote in favor of policies supporting corporations that can impact the lives of Idahoans. Constituent opinions may not necessarily always be sought in these decisions.
As Hartgen suggests, these relationships are needed for a healthy and growing economy. However, the problem with supporting and advocating for these global corporations is that favors are often given to the benefit of the corporation, and at times at taxpayer expense. Corporate interests, especially these global ones, are on their own path that don’t necessarily represent Idaho constituents.
There needs to be a middle ground where Idahoan interests, whatever sector they come from, are the first priority, while corporations, and what they can do to help achieve those interests, is secondary. It might also be time to create legislation that derails corporate money and influence over politicians. That might just be the way to bring these two sides of the story together.
