Idaho · individual fact

Idaho prices and inflation

Compare Idaho’s price levels, category costs, and changes in its regional price deflator.

BLS does not publish a statewide Idaho CPI or a complete 50-state CPI cohort. The statewide comparisons here use BEA regional price parities and its implicit regional price deflator. They are explicitly labeled and are not CPI.

All-items price level95.52024 · #28 of 50 · highest first
Goods price level96.32024 · #28 of 50 · highest first
Housing-rent price level902024 · #23 of 50 · highest first

Idaho over time

Explore Idaho readings, major events and reviewed actions on the same date scale. Idaho officeholders appear in separate lanes. National event evidence describes national context; it does not measure a Idaho effect.

Major events & context · A curated selection, including uncertain effects. Milestone dates do not establish that an event caused a Idaho change.

Enacted / issuedDid not proceedPending / in progressStatus unclear

Colors show the latest recorded status. Passing one chamber is not enactment. A number groups actions with the same date, body and status.

All-items price level Idaho · source units
IdahoPublished U.S. benchmark

Move across the chart to inspect the nearest observation. Click or tap to keep a reading selected, or focus the chart and use the arrow keys. Hover over or focus a marker to explore; click or tap to pin. Press Escape to clear.

All-items price level2024: 95.589.995.5101.1Idaho, 2014: 93.7Idaho, 2015: 94.3Idaho, 2016: 93Idaho, 2017: 94.5Idaho, 2018: 91.7Idaho, 2019: 92.4Idaho, 2020: 91Idaho, 2021: 91.6Idaho, 2022: 91.8Idaho, 2023: 92.2Idaho, 2024: 95.5201420192024
✦ Major events & context · 27National context · Hurricanes Katrina and Rita disrupt fuel supplies · 2005-08-29Katrina / RitaNational context · Global food and energy price surge · 2008-07-15Food / energy surgeNational context · Great Financial Crisis and Great Recession · 2008-09-15Great Financial CrisisNational context · Fed cuts rates near zero during the crisis · 2008-12-16Fed near-zero ratesNational context · American Recovery and Reinvestment Act · 2009-02-17Recovery ActNational context · Renewed global food and oil price pressures · 2011-04-11Commodity pressuresNational context · U.S. drought damages crops and raises food costs · 2012-08-10U.S. droughtNational context · Oil-price collapse lowers energy inflation · 2014-11-27Oil-price collapseNational context · Fed raises rates after the near-zero period · 2015-12-16Fed rate liftoffNational context · Hurricanes Harvey and Irma disrupt fuel markets · 2017-08-25Harvey / IrmaNational context · U.S.–China tariff escalation · 2018-07-06U.S.–China tariffsNational context · Fed cuts rates amid muted inflation · 2019-07-31Fed cuts rates in 2019National context · COVID-19 pandemic · 2020-03-11COVID-19 pandemicNational context · Fed emergency rate cut and asset purchases · 2020-03-15Fed emergency easingNational context · CARES Act pandemic relief · 2020-03-27CARES Act reliefNational context · American Rescue Plan expands pandemic support · 2021-03-11American Rescue PlanNational context · Reopening demand meets supply and chip shortages · 2021-07-09Reopening / shortagesNational context · Avian influenza disrupts egg supplies · 2022-02-09Bird flu / egg supplyNational context · Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine · 2022-02-24Russia invades UkraineNational context · Federal Reserve begins 2022 rate increases · 2022-03-16Fed rate increases beginNational context · Banking stress raises credit and inflation uncertainty · 2023-03-22Banking stressNational context · Supply recovery and slower rent growth ease inflation pressures · 2023-08-25Supply / rent easingNational context · Red Sea shipping disruption raises supply risks · 2024-02-22Red Sea shippingNational context · Federal Reserve cuts rates in September 2024 · 2024-09-18Fed rate cutNational context · Broad U.S. tariff announcement · 2025-04-02U.S. tariff announcementNational context · Federal shutdown interrupts CPI collection · 2025-10-01Shutdown / CPI data gapNational context · Iran conflict and Strait of Hormuz energy disruption · 2026-02-28Iran / Hormuz shock● Idaho Legislature · 2● U.S. Congress · Idaho delegation · 1◆ Governor · 1■ Idaho agencies · 0No reviewed actions match these filters.2005-08-012026-04-30

4 of 4 reviewed Idaho actions match · 4 date markers shown. 27 major events shown separately.

Idaho · 2024: 95.5 · Rank #28 of 50, highest first · U.S. benchmark: 100

BEA regional price parity, relative to the overall national price level. The U.S. all-items index equals 100 each year. Measures prices across places within the same year, rather than annual inflation. For all items, 103 means about 3% above the national level. Category benchmarks can differ from 100; compare Idaho with the published U.S. category value shown. Annual observations use December 31; monthly observations use the first of the month. Lines connect consecutive readings and do not supply values between them. Missing observations break the lines.

View observations and export data
Idaho All-items price level · source units
PeriodIdahoRankU.S. benchmark
202495.5#28 of 50100
202392.2#31 of 50100
202291.8#32 of 50100
202191.6#35 of 50100
202091#41 of 50100
201992.4#38 of 50100
201891.7#39 of 50100
201794.5#29 of 50100
201693#36 of 50100
201594.3#30 of 50100
201493.7#32 of 50100
How major events are selected

The timeline combines the corresponding national fact’s reviewed event catalog, labeled National context, with individually reviewed state milestones. State events use primary sources and distinguish signing, effective and filing dates. Each milestone keeps its source-check date, geographical limits and evidence limits. This curated selection is not a complete history.

Date ranges affect events and actions. Action type, status and official-name search affect government records only. Events remain separate from action counts. An event after the latest observation extends context without creating a new reading.

Idaho · state comparison

How does Idaho’s cost of living compare?

The U.S. all-items level is 100. Each category uses its own published U.S. benchmark. Compare the same category and year.

Idaho · 202495.5
Idaho rank#28among all 50 states
U.S. price level100Same measure and period when published

#1 is the highest value. Ties share a rank and leave gaps. D.C. and territories are excluded. Rank describes the measured value; it is not an overall score of the state.

All-items price level

BEA regional price parity, relative to the overall national price level. The U.S. all-items index equals 100 each year.

Measures prices across places within the same year, rather than annual inflation. For all items, 103 means about 3% above the national level. Category benchmarks can differ from 100; compare Idaho with the published U.S. category value shown.

Hover to inspect. Click or tap to compare that period with every state. Focus the graph and use arrow keys, Home or End to select a period. Press Escape to return to the latest period.

Idaho
All-items price level history in Idaho89.795.5101.320142024
2024 · Idaho: 95.5 · Rank #28 of 50, highest first · U.S. benchmark: 100 · Selected for state comparison
View history and select a period
Idaho All-items price level history
PeriodIdahoCompare
201493.7
201594.3
201693
201794.5
201891.7
201992.4
202091
202191.6
202291.8
202392.2
202495.5

Compare states on the graph

Hover or focus a bar to inspect its value and rank. Use the up and down arrows, Home or End to explore states. Click, tap or press Enter to keep a state selected. Idaho stays highlighted. Values use the same measure and period.

Explore the map: hover or focus a state to inspect it, then click or tap to select it. Arrow keys move between states alphabetically. Idaho has a dark outline.

Lower value · 86.9Higher value · 110.7Striped: unavailable

Color shows this measure’s value, not an overall state score. Select a state on the map, graph or dropdown to read its value, rank and comparison limits below.

Idaho · 95.52024 · Rank #28 of 50, highest firstSelected state

50 states shown · scroll to explore every state. Missing values have no bar and are excluded from ranks. Bars start at zero; #1 means the highest value.

Compare Idaho with every state · 50 ranked
All-items price level · 2024 · highest value ranked #1
RankStateValueComparison notes
#1California110.7—
#2Hawaii110—
#3New Jersey108.8—
#4New York107.9—
#5Washington107—
#6Massachusetts105.8—
#7Maryland105—
#8New Hampshire104.2—
#9Connecticut103.6—
#10Florida103.4—
#11Oregon103.4—
#12Colorado103.1—
#13Alaska102.4—
#14Rhode Island102.3—
#15Virginia101.1—
#16Arizona100.7—
#17Nevada100—
#18Illinois100—
#19Delaware99.8—
#20Utah98.9—
#21Minnesota98.6—
#22Vermont98—
#23Pennsylvania97.6—
#24Texas97.1—
#25Maine97.1—
#26Georgia96.3—
#27Michigan96.2—
#28Idaho · your comparison95.5—
#29Montana94.6—
#30North Carolina94.3—
#31Wisconsin94.1—
#32South Carolina93.7—
#33Indiana93.3—
#34Ohio92.8—
#35Wyoming92.7—
#36New Mexico92.2—
#37Tennessee91.9—
#38Missouri90.8—
#39Kentucky90.2—
#40Nebraska90.1—
#41Kansas90.1—
#42West Virginia89.5—
#43North Dakota89—
#44Alabama88.8—
#45South Dakota88.6—
#46Louisiana88.2—
#47Oklahoma87.8—
#48Iowa87.8—
#49Mississippi87—
#50Arkansas86.9—

All 50 states are listed, including states without a comparable observation. Ranks use stored source precision; displayed values may round to the same number.

Idaho · state comparison

How much have prices changed?

This is BEA’s implicit regional price deflator, derived from regional price parities and the national PCE price index.

Idaho · 20246.2%
Idaho rank#2among all 50 states
U.S. benchmark2.6%Same measure and period when published

#1 is the highest value. Ties share a rank and leave gaps. D.C. and territories are excluded. Rank describes the measured value; it is not an overall score of the state.

Annual change in regional price deflator

Year-over-year change in the BEA implicit regional price deflator.

An annual regional inflation measure; different from BLS CPI-U. Changes can reflect regional price parity estimates and revisions as well as national inflation.

Hover to inspect. Click or tap to compare that period with every state. Focus the graph and use arrow keys, Home or End to select a period. Press Escape to return to the latest period.

Idaho
Annual change in regional price deflator history in Idaho-2.1%2.9%8%20152024
2024 · Idaho: 6.2% · Rank #2 of 50, highest first · U.S. benchmark: 2.6% · Selected for state comparison
View history and select a period
Idaho Annual change in regional price deflator history
PeriodIdahoCompare
20150.8%
2016-0.4%
20173.4%
2018-1%
20192.2%
2020-0.4%
20214.7%
20226.8%
20234.3%
20246.2%

Compare states on the graph

Hover or focus a bar to inspect its value and rank. Use the up and down arrows, Home or End to explore states. Click, tap or press Enter to keep a state selected. Idaho stays highlighted. Values use the same measure and period.

Explore the map: hover or focus a state to inspect it, then click or tap to select it. Arrow keys move between states alphabetically. Idaho has a dark outline.

Lower value · 0.8%Higher value · 6.7%Striped: unavailable

Color shows this measure’s value, not an overall state score. Select a state on the map, graph or dropdown to read its value, rank and comparison limits below.

Idaho · 6.2%2024 · Rank #2 of 50, highest firstSelected state

50 states shown · scroll to explore every state. Missing values have no bar and are excluded from ranks. Bars start at zero; #1 means the highest value.

Compare Idaho with every state · 50 ranked
Annual change in regional price deflator · 2024 · highest value ranked #1
RankStateValueComparison notes
#1Montana6.7%—
#2Idaho · your comparison6.2%—
#3Utah6%—
#4Nevada4.8%—
#5Michigan4.7%—
#6New Mexico4%—
#7Indiana4%—
#8Wyoming3.9%—
#9Illinois3.9%—
#10Colorado3.8%—
#11Delaware3.7%—
#12Ohio3.6%—
#13Wisconsin3.6%—
#14North Dakota3.5%—
#15Vermont3.5%—
#16South Dakota3.1%—
#17Maryland3%—
#18Minnesota3%—
#19Kentucky2.9%—
#20South Carolina2.9%—
#21Hawaii2.9%—
#22Rhode Island2.8%—
#23Mississippi2.8%—
#24Kansas2.8%—
#25Pennsylvania2.8%—
#26Arkansas2.8%—
#27New York2.7%—
#28Arizona2.6%—
#29North Carolina2.5%—
#30Texas2.5%—
#31New Jersey2.5%—
#32West Virginia2.5%—
#33Nebraska2.4%—
#34Georgia2.4%—
#35Florida2.4%—
#36Virginia2.4%—
#37Tennessee2.4%—
#38Alabama2.3%—
#39Missouri2.3%—
#40Louisiana2%—
#41Connecticut2%—
#42Alaska1.7%—
#43Maine1.7%—
#44Oklahoma1.6%—
#45Iowa1.5%—
#46New Hampshire1.4%—
#47Washington1.3%—
#48California1.3%—
#49Oregon1.2%—
#50Massachusetts0.8%—

All 50 states are listed, including states without a comparable observation. Ranks use stored source precision; displayed values may round to the same number.

Idaho · state comparison

Are incomes keeping up with prices?

Real personal income accounts for national inflation and regional price differences.

Idaho · 2024$52,816
Idaho rank#43among all 50 states
U.S. benchmark$59,195Same measure and period when published

#1 is the highest value. Ties share a rank and leave gaps. D.C. and territories are excluded. Rank describes the measured value; it is not an overall score of the state.

Real personal income per person

Regional price-adjusted and inflation-adjusted personal income per resident.

Constant 2017 dollars. This differs from household wages, disposable income, and the national real-hourly-earnings measure.

Hover to inspect. Click or tap to compare that period with every state. Focus the graph and use arrow keys, Home or End to select a period. Press Escape to return to the latest period.

Idaho
Real personal income per person history in Idaho$38.05K$50.1K$62.14K20142024
2024 · Idaho: $52,816 · Rank #43 of 50, highest first · U.S. benchmark: $59,195 · Selected for state comparison
View history and select a period
Idaho Real personal income per person history
PeriodIdahoCompare
2014$40,832
2015$42,381
2016$43,476
2017$43,689
2018$46,299
2019$48,040
2020$52,336
2021$55,840
2022$53,576
2023$53,302
2024$52,816

Compare states on the graph

Hover or focus a bar to inspect its value and rank. Use the up and down arrows, Home or End to explore states. Click, tap or press Enter to keep a state selected. Idaho stays highlighted. Values use the same measure and period.

Explore the map: hover or focus a state to inspect it, then click or tap to select it. Arrow keys move between states alphabetically. Idaho has a dark outline.

Lower value · $48.47KHigher value · $75.5KStriped: unavailable

Color shows this measure’s value, not an overall state score. Select a state on the map, graph or dropdown to read its value, rank and comparison limits below.

Idaho · $52,8162024 · Rank #43 of 50, highest firstSelected state

50 states shown · scroll to explore every state. Missing values have no bar and are excluded from ranks. Bars start at zero; #1 means the highest value.

Compare Idaho with every state · 50 ranked
Real personal income per person · 2024 · highest value ranked #1
RankStateValueComparison notes
#1Wyoming$75,501—
#2Connecticut$74,254—
#3Massachusetts$71,629—
#4South Dakota$69,153—
#5Nebraska$65,297—
#6North Dakota$65,271—
#7Colorado$65,223—
#8New Hampshire$64,632—
#9Washington$64,421—
#10New York$64,153—
#11New Jersey$63,142—
#12California$63,028—
#13Minnesota$62,039—
#14Virginia$61,914—
#15Maryland$61,111—
#16Illinois$60,333—
#17Alaska$60,272—
#18Iowa$60,144—
#19Montana$59,203—
#20Kansas$59,172—
#21Vermont$58,893—
#22Oklahoma$58,692—
#23Pennsylvania$58,620—
#24Tennessee$58,582—
#25Wisconsin$58,273—
#26Texas$58,219—
#27Missouri$57,850—
#28Maine$57,480—
#29Florida$57,131—
#30Louisiana$56,789—
#31Nevada$56,503—
#32North Carolina$56,310—
#33Ohio$56,232—
#34Rhode Island$55,878—
#35Indiana$55,562—
#36Oregon$55,451—
#37Arkansas$55,219—
#38Delaware$55,185—
#39Utah$55,116—
#40Michigan$53,569—
#41Georgia$52,952—
#42Arizona$52,890—
#43Idaho · your comparison$52,816—
#44South Carolina$52,463—
#45Kentucky$52,290—
#46Hawaii$52,272—
#47Alabama$52,216—
#48New Mexico$51,121—
#49West Virginia$50,051—
#50Mississippi$48,465—

All 50 states are listed, including states without a comparable observation. Ranks use stored source precision; displayed values may round to the same number.

What candidates are saying

Explore statements about inflation, consumer prices and the cost of living from FactVote’s Idaho candidate profiles. Compare candidates within each recorded race, with each person’s matching statements kept together. These are candidate and campaign statements, not verified outcomes.

4 statements from 3 candidates

2026 Idaho U.S. House — District 1 — General Election

2 candidates with matching statements · 3 statements

Kaylee Peterson

2 statements

Democratic · U.S. House District 1 · ID

Consumer prices & cost-of-living context

American taxpayers cover an unbelievable 36 Billion dollars in direct subsidies for fossil fuel companies every single year. That number skyrockets to a massive 750 Billion dollars if you include indirect subsidies, backroom loopholes, corporate tax breaks, and federal handouts. Gutting clean and re…

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: Public lands, natural resources, and energy

Candidate campaign source

American taxpayers cover an unbelievable 36 Billion dollars in direct subsidies for fossil fuel companies every single year. That number skyrockets to a massive 750 Billion dollars if you include indirect subsidies, backroom loopholes, corporate tax breaks, and federal handouts. Gutting clean and renewable energy contracts has stripped lucrative job opportunities away from Idaho trades and made the United States entirely reliant on fossil fuel monopolies who corner markets and jack up prices for everyday people. Utilizing renewable energy sources in ways that fit directly with local stakeholders and landowners to lower utility bills could be life-changing for working Idaho families. It’s time to get creative with all domestic energy options: using solar and wind to take pressure off the grid while expanding clean nuclear power and geothermal—but only when there is strict government oversight and ironclad regulations to protect local communities from reckless waste management and human error. Long-term safety and affordability must be the metric, not corporate shareholder profit margins.

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 16, 2026

Kaylee Peterson — candidate-owned primary source 2 ↗
View 1 more statement from Kaylee Peterson
Consumer prices & cost-of-living context

Social Security must be unconditionally guaranteed for future generations with automatic, real-world cost of living increases. These cost of living adjustments (COLA) must give American seniors the actual opportunity to retire comfortably and with full dignity. We must crack down on corporate Medica…

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: Health care and reproductive policy

Candidate campaign source

Social Security must be unconditionally guaranteed for future generations with automatic, real-world cost of living increases. These cost of living adjustments (COLA) must give American seniors the actual opportunity to retire comfortably and with full dignity. We must crack down on corporate Medicare Advantage plans, forcing private insurance companies to guarantee comprehensive coverage and ensure affordable prescription drug prices for the massive population being left behind by the current model. It is far more fiscally responsible and humane to proactively fund secure retirement structures than to let seniors slide into homelessness or face preventable medical emergencies due to state neglect.

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 16, 2026

Kaylee Peterson — candidate-owned primary source 2 ↗

Russ Fulcher

1 statement

Republican · U.S. House District 1 · ID

CPI / inflation mention

Mismanaged budgets and an inept administration have led to our most recent crisis – inflation. We will continue to see the price of everyday goods explode until we get spending under control.

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: Economy, taxes, spending, and affordability

Candidate campaign source

Mismanaged budgets and an inept administration have led to our most recent crisis – inflation. We will continue to see the price of everyday goods explode until we get spending under control.

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 16, 2026

Russ Fulcher — candidate-owned primary source 3 ↗

2026 Idaho U.S. House — District 2 — General Election

1 candidate with matching statements · 1 statement

Ellie Gilbreath

1 statement

Democratic · U.S. House District 2 · ID

Consumer prices & cost-of-living context

Powerful interests are getting richer and gaining more influence every day — while working families struggle with housing, healthcare, childcare, groceries, and stagnant wages. That isn’t accidental. It’s the result of policy choices.Congress has the power to fix this — but too many in Congress won’…

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: Economy, taxes, spending, and affordability

Candidate campaign source

Powerful interests are getting richer and gaining more influence every day — while working families struggle with housing, healthcare, childcare, groceries, and stagnant wages. That isn’t accidental. It’s the result of policy choices.Congress has the power to fix this — but too many in Congress won’t do their jobs. Instead, we get finger-pointing, culture wars, and media spectacle while the cost of living rises and public trust collapses.Farmers don’t rely on theory. They test what works. Water only half your crops and the rest wither. The same is true of an economy. When we consistently funnel benefits to the top and neglect the rest, we weaken the entire system.This is not about class warfare. It’s about fairness. You should be able to work hard, buy a home, raise your children, afford your prescriptions, and enjoy the fruits of your labor. That is not radical. That is the American promise.I always tell my children: if you don’t like the way something is, you can accept it or you can do something about it.I am choosing to do something about it.

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 16, 2026

Ellie Gilbreath — candidate-owned primary source ↗
How statements are selected

This section matches specific inflation, consumer prices and the cost of living terms in retained, attributed source text from published Idaho candidate profiles. A profile heading or biography alone does not qualify. The Florida geography is fixed; saved state preferences cannot change these results. A mention can concern a community or group rather than Florida’s statewide measure.

Matching is automatic and does not establish a candidate’s stance, the accuracy of a claim, or an effect on the measured result. Results are grouped by recorded race, then by candidate name. Within each candidate, the matching issue mentions appear first. Only candidates with matching retained statements are shown; this is not a complete race roster. Repeated identical text for the same candidate is shown once. Coverage follows the existing state profiles and is not a complete record of all candidates or everything they have said. Review dates are not statement dates.

Idaho incumbents

What incumbents are proposing

Explore reviewed bills sponsored by current Idaho legislators and Idaho’s congressional delegation, plus retained proposals from Idaho’s governor and agencies. Each record keeps its latest recorded status and official evidence.

2 matching sponsorships or proposals · 2 Idaho incumbents. These filters apply only to this section.

Sen. James E. Risch

U.S. Senate, Idaho · R–ID

1 proposal
View proposals from Sen. James E. Risch
U.S. Congress · Idaho delegation · S 182

Northwest Energy Security Act

Jan 22, 2025 · In Congress

Sen. James E. Risch · Sponsored

FactVote reviewed summary

The proposed Northwest Energy Security Act would require Federal Columbia River Power System operations to follow the specified September 2020 decision, with changes allowed only if all three designated secretaries, each in their sole discretion, determine a listed condition is met. New restrictions on hydroelectric generation would require specific and express authorization in a federal statute enacted after this proposal’s enactment, while necessary maintenance and capital improvements remain allowed. This concerns electricity supply in the regional system; it neither sets Idaho retail rates nor proves lower prices.

Read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works. No enactment of this bill is recorded at the review cutoff.

Why this record is included

The fact measures average retail electricity revenue per kilowatthour across customer sectors in Idaho. Utility cost allocation directly concerns rates, while hydroelectric operations concern an input to electricity supply. Neither connection establishes a measured price effect. This connection does not establish causation. Actions after the measurement period cannot explain the earlier observed value.

Retained Idaho evidence context: Average retail electricity price. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.

2.DefinitionsIn this Act:(1)FCRPSThe term FCRPS means those portions of the Federal Columbia River Power System that are the subject of the Supplemental Opinion.(2)SecretariesThe term Secretaries means—(A)the Secretary of the Interior, acting through the Commissioner of Reclamation;(B)the Secretary of Energy, acting through the Administrator of the Bonneville Power Administration; and(C)the Secretary of the Army, acting through the Chief of Engineers.(3)Supplemental OpinionThe term Supplemental Opinion means the document entitled Columbia River System Operations Environmental Impact Statement Record of Decision and dated September 2020.3.Operation of FCRPSThe Secretaries shall operate the FCRPS in a manner consistent with the reasonable and prudent alternative described in the Supplemental Opinion.4.Amendments to supplemental opinion(a)In generalNotwithstanding section 3, the Secretaries may amend portions of the Supplemental Opinion and operate the FCRPS in accordance with those amendments if all of the Secretaries determine, in the sole discretion of each Secretary, that—(1)the amendment is necessary for public safety or transmission and grid reliability; or(2)the actions, operations, or other requirements that the amendment would remove are no longer warranted.(b)Restriction on amendmentsThe process described in subsection (a) shall be the only method by which the Secretaries may operate the FCRPS in any way that is not consistent with the reasonable and prudent alternative set forth in the Supplemental Opinion.5.Limitation on restricting FCRPS electrical generation; clarification(a)Restricting FCRPS electrical generationNo structural modification, action, study, or engineering plan that restricts electrical generation at any FCRPS hydroelectric dam, or that limits navigation on the Snake River in the State of Washington, Oregon, or Idaho, shall proceed unless such proposal is specifically and expressly authorized by a Federal statute enacted after the date of the enactment of this Act. (b)ClarificationNothing in this section affects or interferes with the authority of the Secretaries to conduct operation and maintenance activities or make capital improvements necessary to meet authorized project purposes of FCRPS facilities.
Review official supporting evidence ↗

Tammy Nichols

Idaho Senate, District 10 · R–ID

1 proposal
View proposals from Tammy Nichols
Idaho Legislature · HB 492

TAX – Adds to existing law to temporarily reduce the motor fuels tax for two years.

Jan 31, 2022 · Not enacted

Tammy Nichols · Sponsored

FactVote reviewed summary

HB 492 proposed a temporary motor-fuel tax rate of 16 cents per gallon, with a stated July 1, 2022 start and June 30, 2024 sunset. The bill did not pass. Its gasoline component connects to one input to the five-state Rocky Mountain price series; the proposed rate is not represented as enacted, current, or as a demonstrated pump-price reduction. Tammy Nichols was a House sponsor at the time and now serves in the Senate.

Reported Printed and Referred to Ways & Means. The 2022 regular session ended without enactment. The displayed date is the latest dated legislative action, not the session adjournment or a signed law.

Why this record is included

The fact is EIA’s Rocky Mountain regular-gasoline price, including taxes, for Colorado, Idaho, Montana, Utah and Wyoming. An Idaho fuel-tax proposal concerns one state and one component of that regional price, without establishing a regional pump-price effect. This connection does not establish causation. Actions after the measurement period cannot explain the earlier observed value.

Retained Idaho evidence context: Rocky Mountain regular gasoline price. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.

SECTION 1. That Chapter 24, Title 63, Idaho Code, be, and the same is hereby amended by the addition thereto of a NEW SECTION, to be known and designated as Section 63-2402A, Idaho Code, and to read as follows: 63-2402A. ADJUSTMENT OF TAX ON MOTOR FUEL. Notwithstanding section 63-2402(2), Idaho Code, the tax imposed in section 63-2402, Idaho Code, shall be at the rate of sixteen cents (16¢) per gallon of motor fuel received. SECTION 2. An emergency existing therefor, which emergency is hereby declared to exist, this act shall be in full force and effect on and after July 1, 2022. SECTION 3. The provisions of this act shall be null, void, and of no force and effect on and after June 30, 2024.
Review official supporting evidence ↗
What sponsorship and proposal counts tell us

Only current Idaho officeholders retained in the reviewed collection qualify. Bills require a recorded primary sponsorship; cosponsors and signing officials are excluded from sponsorship counts. An official introducer recorded as acting by request is labeled “Introduced by request”; that procedural role does not establish personal policy endorsement. Governor and agency records qualify when recorded as proposed. A separately verified governor transmittal can also establish an original proposal whose latest status reflects its later outcome. Signing an enacted law alone does not establish a proposal. A record appearing under several facts is counted once per officeholder. A bill with multiple primary sponsors appears under each recorded sponsor.

Enacted bills, adopted resolutions and unsuccessful measures remain visible as proposal history. Passing one chamber is not enactment. These counts do not measure effectiveness or prove that an action changed a Idaho statistic. Collection reviewed Sep 16, 2026.