Comparing Policy Positions between Janice McGeachin, Ed Humphreys, and Ammon Bundy
Share this page:
Comparing Policy Positions between Janice McGeachin, Ed Humphreys, and Ammon Bundy
December 15th, 2021
Idaho voters have been trying for months to get a debate, or a series of debates, between the 3 most prominent conservative candidates for Governor: Janice McGeachin, Ed Humphreys, and Ammon Bundy.
The point and purpose of these debates would be to allow one single conservative candidate to rise to the top based on their policies, their experience, their platform, and their ability to inspire voters to vote for them. This would be determined as a result of the debate(s).
Idaho voters have been trying for months to get a debate, or a series of debates, between the 3 most prominent conservative candidates for Governor: Janice McGeachin, Ed Humphreys, and Ammon Bundy.
The point and purpose of these debates would be to allow one single conservative candidate to rise to the top based on their policies, their experience, their platform, and their ability to inspire voters to vote for them. This would be determined as a result of the debate(s).
Janice McGeachin REFUSES to Debate
Both Ed Humphreys and Ammon Bundy have agreed to debate. Only Janice McGeachin refuses to do so. She claims that she will only debate if Brad Little is there, which is like saying I will only debate communism if Karl Marx will be there as well. It's just never going to happen and everyone knows that. Janice is evidently playing politics to try to avoid these debates. It makes one wonder, WHY? What is she afraid of?
Ed Humphreys has gone so far as to offer a $25,000 donation to charity if Janice will just debate—so that the voters can see who is best amongst the three. Janice has responded by claiming that a Ed's donation challenge is a "political stunt," which is ironic considering Janice McGeachin is Idaho's queen of political stunts, having signed an executive order against Governor Brad Little's policies while he was out of town and she was the "acting Governor." This was a complete political stunt that had zero effect and was immediately rescinded when NonBinary Brad returned home—and a stunt that Janice pulled not once, but twice.
Janice calling Ed's challenge a political stunt is quite disingenuous and even hypocritical and makes one wonder who in the world is writing these responses for her? Who is she getting her political advice from?
Ed Humphreys has gone so far as to offer a $25,000 donation to charity if Janice will just debate—so that the voters can see who is best amongst the three. Janice has responded by claiming that a Ed's donation challenge is a "political stunt," which is ironic considering Janice McGeachin is Idaho's queen of political stunts, having signed an executive order against Governor Brad Little's policies while he was out of town and she was the "acting Governor." This was a complete political stunt that had zero effect and was immediately rescinded when NonBinary Brad returned home—and a stunt that Janice pulled not once, but twice.
Janice calling Ed's challenge a political stunt is quite disingenuous and even hypocritical and makes one wonder who in the world is writing these responses for her? Who is she getting her political advice from?
So Let's Compare Their Published Policies
Since Janice refuses to debate the other two candidates in a fair and reasonable public forum, then the very LEAST we can do is juxtapose their published policies and platforms so that voters can easily see the DIFFERENCES between the candidates.
It is unfortunate that many still think they are all the same, when they are actually remarkably different. Laying personalities and experience aside for just a minute, this article will focus solely on the three candidates PUBLISHED POLICY PROPOSALS AND PLATFORMS.
Interestingly enough, Janice is the only one of the three candidates who has no actual platform. She has not offered any real platform or defined policies. She has only offered some generic conservative platitudes on her website. I have put them below so you can see for yourself, along with the links to their websites.
At the Freedom Man PAC, we have always rejected candidates with no platform or who only use generic platitudes for policy positions. History proves that this level of ambiguity is only used by weak politicians who are afraid to stand for principles, and who always end up being controlled by special interest groups, or just end up failing the people altogether.
Therefore, whenever any of the 3 candidates has a failed policy position by our standards, we will note it with a red outline. A positive policy position that we support will be indicated with a green outline. And a policy position that is "okay" but not really what we would want for specific reasons, will be indicated with a yellow outline.
The candidates published positions can be found here:
• Janice McGeachin Issues and Policies
• Ed Humphreys - The Plan
• Ammon Bundy - Keep Idaho IDAHO Plan
To avoid confusion, everything in BLUE below has been directly copied from the candidates websites. In other words, everything IN BLUE below are the candidates' own words.
It is unfortunate that many still think they are all the same, when they are actually remarkably different. Laying personalities and experience aside for just a minute, this article will focus solely on the three candidates PUBLISHED POLICY PROPOSALS AND PLATFORMS.
Interestingly enough, Janice is the only one of the three candidates who has no actual platform. She has not offered any real platform or defined policies. She has only offered some generic conservative platitudes on her website. I have put them below so you can see for yourself, along with the links to their websites.
At the Freedom Man PAC, we have always rejected candidates with no platform or who only use generic platitudes for policy positions. History proves that this level of ambiguity is only used by weak politicians who are afraid to stand for principles, and who always end up being controlled by special interest groups, or just end up failing the people altogether.
Therefore, whenever any of the 3 candidates has a failed policy position by our standards, we will note it with a red outline. A positive policy position that we support will be indicated with a green outline. And a policy position that is "okay" but not really what we would want for specific reasons, will be indicated with a yellow outline.
The candidates published positions can be found here:
• Janice McGeachin Issues and Policies
• Ed Humphreys - The Plan
• Ammon Bundy - Keep Idaho IDAHO Plan
To avoid confusion, everything in BLUE below has been directly copied from the candidates websites. In other words, everything IN BLUE below are the candidates' own words.
COMPARING THE POLICY POSITIONS:
PERSONAL INCOME TAX
Janice only offers the following platitude, “As your Governor, I will continue to support eliminating the sales tax on groceries, reducing government spending, and finding other solutions to lower our tax burden.” Empty and vague platitudes will always receive a RED indicator.
Ed has a plan to "abolish the state income tax without disruption to essential services."
Ammon’s Keep Idaho IDAHO plan calls for the complete elimination of state income tax. "Let me be perfectly clear, when I’m governor of Idaho, we will get rid of personal income tax. This will put an average of over $3,000 back into the pockets of Idaho families each year."
PROPERTY TAX
Janice again only offers the following platitude, “I believe that spending needs to be reduced at all levels of government, and as your Governor, I will work with the legislature to craft legislation that makes meaningful and lasting reductions in government spending in order to reduce property taxes and keep them low.” Empty and vague platitudes will always receive a RED indicator.
Ed's plan is to create a Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights which would prevent increases in taxes without voter consent. “A Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights forces the government to put every proposed state tax increase to the voters for their approval. Ed believes a Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights will reign in the growing size and cost of government and put more power back into the hands of the people by reducing the number of elections in a year and eliminating the tax increases passed in sneaky low voter-turnout elections.” This plan receives a YELLOW indication since the plan accepts the concept of property taxes which are completely immoral and reprehensible, and only provides for a means to prevent them from being raised. One of the Freedom Man PAC's main purposes is to completely eliminate property tax as it is the most immoral of all taxes. Ed's proposal takes us in the right direction, but he unfortunately accepts property tax as a given, when it should be eliminated, even more so than income tax.
Ammon’s Keep Idaho IDAHO plan likewise calls for the complete elimination of state property tax. “Key to my Keep Idaho IDAHO plan is the elimination of all Property Taxes in our state. And yes, there is a practical and responsible way to do so. As governor, I will work with our legislature to completely eliminate property taxes altogether. Look, it’s very simple, property taxes are immoral, and we therefore must eliminate them. We can’t just lower that which is immoral, we must eliminate it. Eliminating property tax will effectively put an average of $2,000 back into Idahoans’ pockets every year, but more important than that—it will mean that you finally OWN that which is rightfully yours, and the government can’t steal it from you.”
EDUCATION
Janice again has no platform or policy position, she only offers this platitude regarding education, “As your Governor, I will continue to support an efficient education system that is consistent with our history and values.” Empty and vague platitudes will always receive a RED indicator.
School choice is a cornerstone of Ed's campaign as he states, “Problems in education will be solved by returning power to families and teachers through school choice. Nothing will have a more positive impact on wage growth for teachers and protect the free exchange of ideas in public education than school choice.”
Ammon’s Keep Idaho IDAHO plan calls for total and complete “Education Freedom,” which includes school choice (like Ed Humphreys proposes) and also adds the complete elimination of federal and state interference/regulation into the classroom. Under Bundy’s plan, teachers and administrators are free to do whatever they want to, and parents are free to choose to take their children to whatever school educates best. "Teachers, I support you. I want to empower you to teach in the way that you know will work best without intrusion from senseless bureaucratic meddling into the classroom."
HEALTH FREEDOM
States on her website, “As your Governor, I will take whatever steps are required to make sure Idahoans are protected from government intrusion into their personal health decisions. Idaho Code already contains a provision that “the right to work shall not be subject to undue restraint or coercion.” I support this law and the principle inherent in this language. (§ 44-2001)" This receives a YELLOW indicator because it doesn't provide a clear policy regarding how or what Janice will do to prevent tyranny over our bodies. Though her statement that "steps are required to make sure Idahoans are protected from government intrusion into their personal health decisions" is a good statement, it is met with much distrust considering her lack of action to do this very thing since the beginning of the COVID scam—particularly since she currently holds office as the second highest executive in the state.
Ed states, “Too many in Idaho leadership celebrate mass conformity and scorn questions from regular folks as ignorant. But conformity and conscience don’t go hand in hand. Forcing others to undergo medical treatments for the “collective good” is wrong, plain, and simple. The danger of government bureaucrats and corporations making medical decisions for the rest of us cannot be understated.” This receives a YELLOW indicator because, while his words were strong and acceptable, he does not make any statement as to what he would do to prevent tyranny over our bodies.
Ammon states, “There is no greater form of oppression and authoritarianism than when government takes control over your own body.” His Keep Idaho IDAHO Plan has an overview regarding Health Freedom and Body Autonomy where Ammon states, “As governor, I will make Idaho the very first Health Freedom and Body Autonomy State. This means that in Idaho you can legally take any treatment you want to take, and the state will permit it and protect you. You will have the right to try any treatment here in Idaho. And you will be autonomous over your body like God intended. So let me be very clear—Idaho will never mandate vaccines nor any other medical treatment for any citizen at any time when I am governor. When it comes to vaccines, if you want to take one, you are free to do so. If you don’t want to take one, you will never be required to. Idaho will honor and protect your right to decide what to do with your body. If you have cancer, and you want to take a treatment for your cancer that is not FDA approved, you will not have to leave the country anymore to save your life—you can do it right here in Idaho. Not only will this save lives in Idaho, but Idaho will become the HUB for technology and research in the health and medical fields, with people leaving the rest of the country to come here to save their lives. The economic benefit to Idaho will be beyond compare!”
AFFORDABLE HOUSING CRISIS
Janice uses another empty platitude, “At the root of the housing affordability problem is disequilibrium in supply and demand. We must work to increase the manufacturing of building materials and to grow our skilled labor force in industries such as construction, plumbing, electrical, and HVAC. As your Governor, I will work with stakeholders to promote training, development and expanded infrastructure that is compatible with Idaho’s history and values.” Empty and vague platitudes will always receive a RED indicator.
Ed states, “Current prices make it difficult for lower-and middle-income people to afford housing. Government intervention, like rent control, shifts costs around but doesn’t offer a long-term solution. Ed offers solid, long-term solutions to ease Idaho’s housing price crisis by addressing the key inputs: labor and materials.” Ed's complete policy statement on the Affordable Housing Crisis is good but it has some elements that need to be changed or clarified. For example, he states he would "fast-track technical education that provides A+ training for the trades." Technical education is an excellent opportunity for thousands of Idahoans but the government should not be involved in it therefore the government shouldn't be "fast-tracking" anything.
Ammon’s Keep Idaho IDAHO plan offers a solution to the affordable housing crisis based on the principle of supply and demand. The only way to increase the supply is for Idaho to take back its land from the Federal Government and open it up to development. Ammon also addresses the dangers of rapidly growing population centers and having states with populations that are not “spread out.” The Keep Idaho IDAHO plan states, "The current affordable housing crisis is caused by a number of complicated factors, many of which have been caused by the Federal Government. Nevertheless, at its core, this crisis is simply a supply-and-demand issue. To lower prices, we simply need more supply. And to have more supply, we need to take our land back.” Ammon is the only candidate to claim and propose taking back all of Idaho’s land that is currently controlled by the federal government (over 61% of Idaho’s land). Interestingly enough, Ammon is the only one who has made a connection between affordable housing and the lack of availability of land.
LAW ENFORCEMENT
Janice only speaks to the issue of whether or not law enforcement should be “fully funded” or not, which is based on the false premise that it is currently not fully funded. She states, “I strongly support our law enforcement and I believe we must stand in solidarity with these brave men and women who selflessly put themselves in harm’s way to defend our families and communities. Support for law enforcement shouldn’t be a partisan issue in Idaho. Efforts to demonize and defund the police have no place in our state, and as your Governor, I will continue to advocate fully funding the police at all levels of government.” Funding law enforcement is a no-brainer element of government. But Janice perpetuates the false premise that law enforcement in Idaho is not sufficiently funded.
Ed has no publicly published policy statement on the topic.
Ammon offers a public policy proposal which ensures law enforcement is “fully funded” but also deals with the taboo subject of police abuse and corruption by “empowering police to act according to their conscience.” Ammon states, “As governor, I will advocate for new rules and statutes that both protect whistleblowers in police departments and that empower police officers to act according to their conscience without fear of losing their jobs.”
ABORTION
Janice states that, “As your Governor, I will always remain a staunch defender of the right to life.” Janice both publicly states her position as a pro-life candidate and her political history likewise supports that assertion.
Ed states that “Human life has inherent purpose and value. What have we missed in the arts, in science, in our culture, because we cut short 60 million lives? Ed’s pro-life stance honors families and the values that build strong communities."
Ammon’s Keep Idaho IDAHO plan states, “I will end all abortions by executive order on day one of my Governorship. I will then work diligently with the legislature to enshrine the protection of the lives of our babies while honoring the glory of motherhood and protecting our mothers at the same time, by amending our state constitution with clear laws and plain language forever prohibiting this heinous crime.” All candidates have positions worthy of a green indicator, but only Ammon has been so bold as to claim he will end abortion on day one of his administration via executive order.
Unique Policy Positions from the Candidates:
Above we noted the different policy positions on the issues where each of the candidates has a published statement. However, each of the candidates have several published statements that the other candidates do not address:
Unique policy positions from Janice McGeachin include: a claim to prioritize care for our veterans and a statement regarding “Antifa, BLM, and the Militia," and a statement regarding immigration and the need "for conservative immigration strategies, a secure border, and the rule of law." Janice's statements regarding immigration seem disingenuous considering she voted against a bill that would require illegal immigrants to follow the rule of law and show proof of immigration status before being issued driver's licenses.
Unique policy positions from Ed Humphreys include: refugee resettlement plan, a detailed plan to preserve election integrity, and a plan to champion the use of Nuclear Energy by supporting the Idaho National Laboratory. Ed's unique policy positions here are excellent, particularly his detailed plan on election integrity. Though he should clarify how he will work with the Idaho National Laboratory to ensure that Idahoans will not be subsidizing or sponsoring the Laboratory in any way.
Unique policy positions from Ammon Bundy include: elimination of immoral taxes; elimination of personal property tax (beyond personal income tax and property tax); a plan to only collect taxes through consumption; a plan to take back Idaho’s land from the federal government; a plan to make Idaho a “Financial Freedom State;” a plan to recognize and accept prominent cryptocurrencies by the state; a plan to minimize corrections expenses, fraud, and abuse by instituting restoration and restitution laws, empowering communities to end drug abuse, eliminating the evil practice of civil asset forfeiture, ending cronyism and corruption, canceling Obamacare in the state of Idaho, supporting and defending parental rights, ending corporate and personal welfare, eliminating state licensure, changing the culture of government, and using blockchain technology for state interactions to minimize human error, fraud, abuse, and inefficiencies, and to maximize government transparency.
Other articles you'll probably enjoy:
Quick Links:
Popular COVID-19 Related Articles:
COVID Put Your Heart on Display
America's Kryptonite is Trump's Achilles' Heel
The Great Scam of 2020
ONGOING LIST: Abuse of Power, Government Overreach, and Unconstitutional Force
List of Fake News and Propaganda About COVID-19
Christians Response to Coronavirus is Shameful
COVID Put Your Heart on Display
America's Kryptonite is Trump's Achilles' Heel
The Great Scam of 2020
ONGOING LIST: Abuse of Power, Government Overreach, and Unconstitutional Force
List of Fake News and Propaganda About COVID-19
Christians Response to Coronavirus is Shameful
SITE SECURED BY:
