Governor Little Says He Opposes Proposition 1
By Greg Pruett • September 27, 2024Governor Brad Little (R) has released a statement saying he is opposed to Proposition 1.
Little’s stance puts him on the opposite side of his predecessor, Republican Governor Butch Otter, who supports Prop 1. Little said in his statement that he is opposed to Ranked Choice Voting, which is one part of Prop 1’s changes to Idaho’s election system.
Here is the complete statement posted on Little’s website:
“As we inch closer to a big election, we reflect on the extraordinary importance of our election system in our great state and country. Elections are the cornerstone of our democratic republic, which is why I made Idaho the first state to take executive action to make sure only citizens vote in our elections. Idaho has a strong track record in championing investments that safeguard election integrity and encourage voter confidence.
I am opposed to ranked choice voting and signed House Bill 179 in 2023 banning it in Idaho. We must promote voting practices that are clear, increase voter participation, and don’t undermine confidence in our elections, and ranked choice voting meets none of those standards. Idahoans will make their voices heard on Proposition 1 at the ballot box in November. As for me, I will not be supporting Proposition 1.”
Little was one of the state’s top elected officials who had not made a public statement specific to Prop 1. Lt. Governor Scott Bedke (R) and Congressman Mike Simpson (R) remain the last two top elected officials who have not made a public statement on Prop 1.
Both U.S. Senators Jim Risch (R) and Mike Crapo (R) and Congressman Russ Fulcher (R) have come out against Prop 1.
Idaho Dispatch has a comprehensive list (click here to view) of Idaho’s state, congressional, and legislative lawmakers’ stances on Prop 1. They are listed by party in alphabetical order.
Idaho Dispatch will update this article with reactions to Little’s announcement as they become available.
Do you agree or disagree with Little’s stance on Prop 1? Let us know in the comments below.
Update on 9/27/24 at 1:46 p.m. MT: Idaho Dispatch has contacted Idahoans for Open Primaries, Reclaim Idaho, and GOP Chair Dorothy Moon for comment on Little’s opposition to Prop 1. We will post their reactions if one becomes available.
Tags: Brad Little, Butch Otter, Prop 1, Proposition 1, Ranked Choice Voting, RCV
21 thoughts on “Governor Little Says He Opposes Proposition 1”
Comments are closed.
Good. I also am opposed. For whatever my one vote counts.
Does his BF Bedke oppose it too?
DEFEAT PROPOSITION 1 VOTE NO!
Proposition 1: Top-Four/Jungle Primaries + Ranked Choice Voting = Idaho Elections Disaster
So glad Gov. Little is taking a stance on the rotten to the core Proposition 1. For anyone else still on the fence, please see the many articles Idaho Dispatch and others have published. Most of these are and will continue to be collected in the article “Jungle Primaries & Ranked Choice Voting (RCV) Ballot Initiative: A Race to the Bottom ” at https://eolson47.substack.com/p/jungle-primaries-and-ranked-choice
Absolute, unequivocal NO on Proposition 1…!!!
Little caved to partisan pressure on this one, I thought he had more guts.
No, he is just standing up for the majority party in Idaho which is the Republican party in case you haven’t noticed and this worthless proposition will go down big on November 5. Why don’t you take those like you leave our beautiful state as we will never cave to your slimy Liberal ways.
That was hilarious! Do you do standup in the evenings?
San Francisco implemented it. That alone is a sign. Do the complete opposite.
ek0x9m
Governor Little is opposed to ranked choice voting because, as he says, we must promote practices that are clear, increase voter participation and don’t undermine confidence in our elections – and RCV meets none of those standards. OK, these points are debatable, but fair enough.
Perhaps the Governor could also have added we should promote practices that encourage those in power remaining in power. Or promote practices that don’t shift power away from parties. RCV doesn’t meet those standards either. Could it be that Governor Little’s greater concern is about these standards?
It’s interesting Governor Little along with Idaho’s two Senators and one of Idaho’s two Representatives have come out against RCV. But Governor Little’s predecessor, Otter, is in favor of RCV. Could it be those in power tend to be skeptical of RCV and those previously in power take a broader perspective?
If “broader perspective” means the garbage that Reclaim Idaho spews than Little is on the right path to keeping Idaho a Red State and not a Liberal cesspool.
The majority of the Californians moving to Idaho want a liberal cesspool like the state they destroyed.
New voter registration doesn’t support that emotional sentiment. Since 2014, state-wide, there are 6 times more net new registered Republican voters than Democrats. The engines that drive change are multifaceted, but it’s an oversimplification to say it’s all because of relocations from one state.
For what it’s worth, I think RCV is a terrible idea (if that adds any context to my previous comment). In no way do I want to see Idaho ruined by the forces that have destroyed California, but I think it’s important to be vigilant and critical in examining what those root causes are.
When you talk about “staying in power”, are you saying that’s a bad thing, even if it’s the will of the majority or the electoral college? That is, as long as they aren’t cheating ?
The democtrats have stayed in power in California for quite a while, as in many other states. Are you bothered by that? Does it seem ok where power is not shifted away from democrats, no matter what other parties want?
Just wondering what your actual bottom line concern is over. Are you saying the current election system does not favor the majority will? Do you actually think the will of the majority could be served better if candidates who did not get enough votes in the primary, still get to compete in the final election, and win because they got more 2nd, 3rd or 4th place votes?
If you try and search for ANY local Media report of this….THEIR IS NONE!!! It is October 2nd and there is still NO report. This PROVES that all local Media (sans Idaho Dispatch) is a FRAUD!!!
Glad Gov. Little made the right choice! We are a Republic, not a democracy or communist state.
Governor Little’s position on prop 1 is correct. It will not solve the problem of some voters not being able to vote. It will create a system that manipulates votes. I spoke to a friend in Alaska, the State that is now trying to repeal RCV. It created a system where votes are manipulated and your vote ends up going to someone you would not have voted for. When a voter votes he does not want multiple choice. He wants to vote for the person he believes can do the best job. Do not let Idaho go the way of the liberals. Checkout the people who are leading the groups supporting this prop.VOTE NO ON PROP 1!
I went to a “forum” (which was really a pro Prop 1 meeting) where Luke Mayville attempted to explain how RCV would work. Interestingly he only spoke about the FIRST round of voting and how if the candidate you ranked #1 was the loser, your vote would then go to the candidate you ranked #2. Those votes would be moved per ballot and given to the other 3 candidates for round 2. He did not explain further but if there were still no candidate over 50%, then all of those people who NOW showed the candidate in third place as their first ranked, THEY would get THEIR votes “transferred to either their THIRD choice or their SECOND choice depending on the ranking. So SOME voters will now have THIRD VOTE and others will have a SECOND vote. Those who ranked the TOP 2 will still have only voted for ONE candidate. And another guest stated that a “court somewhere” decided that TRANSFERRING your vote in RCV was still considered “one person, one vote” (He didn’t elaborate but I assume that was because the voter only filled out one ballot). This will be a nightmare for voters, especially for Election Offices, and the accusations of voter fraud will be astronomical. Reclaim’s mantra is “we want the winner to be chosen from a broader swath of the community”. Apparently the only way the can do that is to give SOME voters the opportunity to “transfer” their vote over and over again until someone gets over 50%. How is that FAIR to the candidate who garnered the MAJORITY votes of the community in the first round?
“How is that FAIR to the candidate who garnered the MAJORITY votes of the community in the first round?”
It isn’t fair at all, and they know it. The purpose of rank choice is simply to give room & opportunity to those who “count” the votes, to manipulate them. This is their latest strategy to implement Stalin’s observation that who counts the votes can be the deciding factor, rather than who got the most votes.
Democrats have shown that they have no qualms whatsoever over cheating, nor the slightest hesitancy to change the rules at the last minute to insure they win, and that winning is all that matters. It matters not how slimy or questionable the tactics appear either.
Nothing embarrasses them anymore, and they’re at the point where they can look you in the eye and say that stopping the count early on election day, just as your candidate is ahead, closing the polls, sending voters home who haven’t voted yet, then coming up with enough votes to win in the wee hours of the morning is nothing to be suspicious about in the slightest. Nor are all the other plain signs of fraud meaningful in any way.
Democrats and truth have no relationship anymore, and they aren’t the least bit ashamed or apologetic of it, and have created their very own definition of “truth”, and that definition is simply that: if it means they get what they want, it’s true. If not, it’s false.
zm9uww