BOISE — After more than an hour of debate, the Idaho House overwhelmingly voted to send a bill creating mandatory minimum prison sentences for fentanyl trafficking to the Senate.
The House voted Monday 55-13 with two absent to send HB 406 to the Senate.
One of the bill’s sponsors, Rep. Ted Hill, R-Eagle, said the legislation would act as a deterrent against trafficking the potent opioid in Idaho. He and another sponsor, Rep. Chris Allgood, R-Caldwell, argued that Idaho’s existing mandatory minimums for other drugs were working.
“Mandatory minimums are already in place for the other drugs,” Hill said. “This closes the gap.”
The bill would also create a penalty for “drug-induced homicide” that would apply if someone dies from a controlled substance that they received from someone who broke the drug trafficking statute.
Opponents argued that the legislation had the potential to sweep up users instead of just traffickers. There were also concerns about minors being convicted under the drug-induced homicide portion.
Under HB 406, those arrested with at least 4 grams but less than 14 grams of fentanyl or any mixture of substances containing a detectable amount of the drug would be guilty of a felony with a mandatory minimum sentence of three years in prison and a fine of $10,000. If the fentanyl is in pill form, it would take between 100 and 250 pills to get this sentence.
For those with between 14 grams and 28 grams or at least 250 pills, the sentence would be at least five years and $15,000. For 28 grams or more or 500-plus pills, the minimum sentence would be 10 years and a $25,000 fine.
No parole would be offered to those serving these minimum sentences.
A second conviction would result in a minimum sentence of twice what would be required under the law.
House Minority Leader Ilana Rubel, D-Boise, countered the idea that Idaho’s existing mandatory minimum sentences has been working as a deterrent. She said there isn’t any data showing a strong deterrence correlated with high mandatory minimums.
“Yes, we do have these laws on the books for other drugs,” Rubel said. “I would not say they are a great success. I think they need fixing badly, and I don’t know that the answer is to conform to a broken system.”
She gave examples of long prison sentences judges in Idaho had recently passed down for fentanyl trafficking, arguing that judges are already providing steep penalties and this law would only make a difference in cases where the judge doesn’t think a long sentence is appropriate.
Many of those in favor said that while the bill may not be “perfect,” it was necessary to pass to address the rising threat of fentanyl.
Rep. Charlie Shepherd, R-Pollock, urged lawmakers who had concerns on the bill to pass it anyway to side with law enforcement. Local sheriff’s offices and police departments had testified in strong support of the bill.
“Let’s err on the side of helping (law enforcement) with this tool,” Shepherd said, “and in the future, we can fix this bill and make it better if need be.”
Many of those who opposed it or thought the bill needed amendments expressed concern that they would be painted by some as voting against the interest of law enforcement or as being soft on crime or drugs.
Rep. Heather Scott, R-Blanchard, said that everyone in the chamber wanted to do something to address fentanyl, but she had concerns about unintended consequences of the bill.
“This is an election year, so it’s been really difficult how you want to really vote on this bill,” Scott said. “... I’m torn on it. I want to do something, but I hate when we’re told to vote out of fear, and we have to do something. I want to get it right.”
Scott later made a motion to send the bill to the amending order to address some of the concerns she and others had.
Rep. Bruce Skaug, R-Nampa, said he was strongly opposed to the motion. He said he’d worked on the issue for years and that something needed to be done on the issue.
The motion failed 49-19.
During the final vote, some who had voiced concerns about the way the bill was written ended up voting to approve it. This included Rep. David Cannon, R-Blackfoot, who spoke for more than 20 minutes about concerns he had about the bill, including that it removed judicial and jury discretion in sentencing and that he feared the way it was written, it may impact people who are not truly traffickers but just users.
Scott also voted to send it to the Senate.
Guido covers Idaho politics for the Lewiston Tribune, Moscow-Pullman Daily News and Idaho Press of Nampa. She may be contacted at lguido@idahopress.com and can be found on Twitter @EyeOnBoiseGuido.
