21st Annual Idaho Public Policy Survey

The Public Policy Center has conducted a statewide, survey of Idaho citizens for 20 years. This survey is meant to identify opinions about a variety of public policy concerns. The study is provided to the public–including officials and interested citizens–to facilitate policy discussion and education. This survey of 1,000 Idaho adults was conducted January 11-15, 2016. The survey standard error is +/-3.10

Evaluation of Nebraska’s Problem-Solving Courts

From March 2010 through December 2011, the University of Nebraska Public Policy Center conducted an evaluation of Nebraska’s problem solving courts. Main findings include the following: Nebraska’s problem solving courts are effectively operated, following the ten key components for drug courts, thereby reducing crime and addiction and improving the lives of participants Graduation rates for Nebraska drug courts match or exceed national drug court rates Costs for Nebraska programs are comparable to costs for drug courts across the country Nebraska drug court programs are cost efficient, saving between $2,609,235 and$9,722,920 in tax dollars per year Problem solving courts in Nebraska are serving moderate to high need offenders, the type of offenders most appropriate for drug court services Nebraska drug courts are serving a diversity of offenders, with few disparities based on race, ethnicity, and gender Education and employment skills are emphasized in problem solving courts, which lead to successful outcomes for participant

The Fires Next Time

Because of the severity of the fires in the summer of 2000 and because of the growing debate over what to do about expected future fires, the Andrus Center convened The Fires Next Time conference on December 7, 2000. The conference had several goals in mind. First, it sought to establish a set of sideboards for the discussion of fire by inviting experts to talk about the history, science, and policy of fire management. The purpose was to articulate what we knew, did not know, and should know about fire in the western United States

USDA Forest Service: The Next 100 Years

The U.S. Forest Service is about to celebrate its 100th anniversary. It will host a national congress in early January of 2005, exactly 100 years after the first Forest Congress and subsequent to holding a series of regional conferences throughout the country. On November 18-19, 2004, the Andrus Center for Public Policy, the Idaho Statesman, and the Forest Service presented one of those conferences in Boise, Idaho. The topics for this conference were wildland fire and forest health

A White Paper on Snake: The River Between Us

On November 28-29, 1995, the Andrus Center for Public Policy at Boise State University and two of Idaho’s most respected newspapers, the Idaho Falls Post Register and The Lewiston Morning Tribune, cooperated to convene a major policy and issues conference, focused on the Snake River. The conference was the capstone of a year of thoughtful and detailed reporting of the controversy and promise that always seem to flow with the current of Idaho’s greatest river. The two newspapers, one at each end of the Snake in Idaho, are to be congratulated for teaming up to explore the challenges of keeping the river a great and useful resource for all Idahoans. The reporting—and the subsequent conference—also did much to focus us on the spiritual and historical pull the Snake has on our Idaho experience. We know that the river has helped define our development as a state, and we know that its hold on our commerce, recreation, agriculture, and tourism is essential to our future

The Future of Our Public Lands II: A Second Symposium on Federal Land Policy

On February 11, 1998, the Andrus Center for Public Policy convened The Future of Our Public Lands: A Symposium on Federal Land Policy. The leaders of the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), U.S. Forest Service (USFS), and National Park Service (NPS) were invited to Boise to address conference attendees and then respond to questions and observations from a panel representing various groups interested in land management and from the audience. BLM Director Pat Shea, USFS Chief Mike Dombeck, and NPS Director Bob Stanton were urged, before the conference, to focus their remarks on three questions: 1) What is the current status of land policy in your bureau? 2) In what direction would you like to move that policy? 3) What would you need to achieve that goal

Freedom & Secrecy: Trading Liberty for Security?

In the post-September 11th world, are Americans trading their liberty for their security? How does an open society reconcile the inevitable clash that occurs when our notions of freedom come into conflict with a government’s desire for secrecy? Those issues were the focus of a major conference on October 2, 2003 in Boise, sponsored jointly by the Andrus Center for Public Policy, the Frank Church Institute, and the Idaho Statesman. The day-long conference featured presentations from nationally-syndicated columnist David Broder, former Vice President Walter F. Mondale, and former U.S. Senator Slade Gorton. Also participating was a group of current and former public policy-makers, academics, legal scholars, and journalists. From that conference, we have produced the report that follows, one that we think summarizes the key points that were made and the lessons that were learned. Our goal in presenting the conference was not to attack or defend the current national policies but to create a balanced, informed discussion to illuminate and educate. We believe we achieved that goal

A Challenge Still Unmet: a Critical Assessment of the Policy Response to Wildland Fire: The Fires Next Time

After the historic 2000 fire season, the Andrus Center for Public Policy and the Idaho Statesman convened a conference, The Fires Next Time, which brought together fire experts, state and local officials, the insurance industry, timber executives, and environmentalists. We wanted answers to the vexing dilemma: how to change policy to begin to prevent these almost annual catastrophic fires. Those discussions brought a remarkable degree of consensus. Everyone agreed that we must shift from a federal policy that reacts to fire to one that adopts proactive measures to reduce fire threats to western communities. Three years later, it is painfully obvious that progress on change has been glacially slow

Dateline: The West

A day-long conference, Dateline: The West, was held December 6, 2002 at Boise State University and was presented by the Andrus Center for Public Policy, the Idaho Statesman, and the Gannett Co. Pacific Group. The purpose of the gathering was to explore how news organizations make decisions about what to report and why, and how those decisions, in turn, affect public opinion and public policy decisions, which are often made far from the west

Getting Together in Idaho: A Survey of Six Collaborative Efforts on Public Lands

Collaborative groups -- loosely defined as groups of people working together to achieve a common purpose and share resources – are emerging in Idaho and around the West.i Collaborative groups often form where there are intense and complex conflicts over natural resource management. Often these conflicts spin off into lawsuits, lost jobs and frequently, fractured community relationships. Many people are turning to each other, believing “there has to be a better way.” Federal agencies, largely the U.S. Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management (BLM), manage about two-thirds of the land in Idaho. On these federal lands, collaborative partners try to work among themselves, and within the federal laws and decision-making authorities held by agency managers. Several Idaho collaborative groups have worked on federal land management projects in recent years. Others have worked on a combination of federal and/or state and private land, using federal agencies as partners.ii In the late summer of 2001, we asked 30 participants from six collaborative groups across Idaho to share thoughts and reflections about the collaborative process in which they have been involved. Each received a short-answer survey of approximately 20 questions. Eighteen participants (60 percent) responded. Because no specific collaborative group was identified in the survey’s cover letter, a few of those surveyed provided information on other collaborative processes in which they have participated. Appendix A explains the survey methods, and includes the survey questions