 |
 |
 |
 |
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
 |
|
|
 |
Nez Perce County
House B
CANDIDATES' THE COMMON INTEREST IN ACTION SCORE
The Common Interest in
Action Score reflects the percentage of Common Interest in Action
positions that a candidate supports. The Common Interest in Action
takes positions when there is a consensus of two-thirds or more on a given
proposal among the more than 100 members randomly assigned to review our
policy brief for that issue.The Past Score reflects issues on
which we took positions that have already been voted on by both the House
and the Senate. The Future Score reflects positions that we have
taken that have not yet come before both the House and the Senate for
votes. The Past Score for incumbents is based on their actual
votes. The Future Score for incumbents, as well as the Past
and Future Scores for challengers, are based on candidates' answers
to our questionnaire.
| Name |
Status |
Party |
The Common
Interest in Action Score - Past |
The Common
Interest in Action Score - Future |
Average Incumbent
Score: |
97% |
76% |
Average Challenger
Score: |
96% |
80% |
| John Rusche |
Incumbent |
Democrat |
92% |
100% |
| David Mosher |
Challenger |
Independent |
|
|
 Means that
the candidate did not respond to our questionnaire
Details for The Common Interest in Action Score - Past
(Issues that have already been voted on by the full Legislature)
| Issue |
TCI in
Action |
John
Rusche
Position |
David
Mosher Position |
| % of the 100
+ randomly assigned members for or against |
|
| For |
Against |
Our
Position |
| Property Tax - Increased Homeowner's Exemption
'06 H 421a |
79% |
21% |
For |
For |
|
| Property Tax - Increased Circuit Breaker '06 H
422a |
85% |
15% |
For |
For |
|
| Property Tax - Closed the "Developer's Discount"
'06 H 676a |
97% |
3% |
For |
For |
|
| Property Tax - Deferral for Circuit Breaker '06
H 680 |
70% |
30% |
For |
For |
|
| Eminent Domain - Only Significantly Deteriorated
Properties Can be Condemned for Urban Renewal '06 H
555 |
67% |
33% |
For |
For |
|
| Eminent Domain - Further Specification of Scope
of Taking Required '06 S1243a |
96% |
4% |
For |
For |
|
| Eminent Domain - "Quick Take" Procedure
Available to All Property Owners and Govt Entities '06 S1247 |
76% |
24% |
For |
For |
|
| Eminent Domain - Required the Govt to Pay at Least
as Much as Pre-litigation Appraisal '06 S1429 |
89% |
11% |
For |
For |
|
Legislative Committees Can Only Close Meetings
for Certain Extraordinary Circumstances '06
HR 003
SR108 |
68% |
32% |
For |
Against |
|
| Election Reform - Required that calls placed by
an automatic dialing-announcing device (robocalls) must state at start
of call the name of person and for whom call is being made '07 H0223 |
93% |
7% |
For |
For |
|
| Overcrowded Prisons - $15 million for statewide
substance abuse treatment services '08 H0695 |
87% |
13% |
For |
For |
|
| Overcrowded Prisons - Required counties to provide
trained and certified probation officers for misdemeanor probationers
'08 H0408 |
88% |
12% |
For |
For |
|
| The Common Interest in Action Score
- Past |
|
|
|
92% |
|
Details for The Common Interest in Action Score - Future
(Issues that have not yet been voted on by the full Legislature)
| Issue |
TCI in
Action |
John
Rusche
Position |
David
Mosher Position |
| % of the 100 +
randomly assigned members for or against |
|
| For |
Against |
Our
Position |
| Election Reform - Fully Closed Primary in Which
Independents Could Not Vote |
7% |
93% |
Against |
Against |
|
| Election Reform - Party Option to have a State Run
and Financed Closed Primary '07 H0185 |
9% |
91% |
Against |
Against |
|
| Election Reform - Common Interest Modified Open
Primary (independents vote in primary of their choice) '08 S1506 |
79% |
21% |
For |
|
|
| Election Reform - Vote by Mail '07 H0094 |
86% |
14% |
For |
For |
|
| Election Reform - Instant Runoff Voting |
80% |
20% |
For |
For |
|
| Election Reform - Public Campaign Financing '08
S1292 |
80% |
20% |
For |
For |
|
| Overcrowded Prisons - Raising Beer & Wine Tax
to Fund Substance Abuse Treatment '08 |
75% |
25% |
For |
For |
|
| Overcrowded Prisons - Prevention, Treatment, Diversion,
and In-Prison Programs that are Proven to be Cost Effective at Reducing
Crime (CI percentages depend on particular program) |
69%-95% |
31%-5% |
For |
For |
|
| The Common Interest in Action Score
- Future |
|
|
|
100% |
|
|
|
| Race: |
House B |
The
Common Interest in Action Score |
|
Candidate |
|
| Past |
92% |
97% |
| Future |
100% |
76% |
|
| Party: |
Democrat |
| Status: |
Incumbent |
| Contact: |
Email: jrusche@house.idaho.gov
Office phone: |
| Web site: |
www.johnrusche.us |
| |
| Comment by Keith Allred about Candidate: |
| |
Representative Rusche has been an early and consistent
supporter of our work. We worked particularly closely with him on
school funding issues. He is also an avid and important supporter
of our efforts to raise the beer and wine tax to provide dedicated
funding for substance abuse treatment as a cost effective way to
avoid having to build $1 billion in new prisons over the next 10
years. With 85% of Idaho inmates having drug abuse problems that
make them likely to commit crimes again when they’re released, Representative
Rusche strongly agrees with us that substance abuse treatment is
central to addressing this problem. |
| Statement by Candidate about Why Running: |
| |
My major concerns are about the welfare of Idaho’s families,
especially children. I also am concerned about diversifying
our economy and our tax base. Finally I am very concerned
about the availability, cost and quality of healthcare.
I first ran for the legislature to return some of what the Lewiston
community and Nez Perce residents have given to Kay and me.
I also felt that the last few representatives had been more interested
in social ideology and big business than the issues of education,
working wages and healthcare cost and availability, issues of
real importance to the families in the area. And these issues—trained
workforce, safe communities, drug abuse, affordable healthcare—are
issues for our businesses too. |
| Candidate Statement about The Common Interest: |
| |
As I said before, I belong to The Common Interest because I believe
in effectiveness and progress more than party or position.
I have been approachable and will continue to be open to TCI as
the legislature considers issues. |
| Candidate Bio: |
| |
Born in Wisconsin, John attended Notre Dame for college and
Washington University in St. Louis for Medical School. There
he met and married Kay. Internship and residency at the
University of Arizona followed.
Drs John and Kay Rusche started practice at Valley Medical Center
in Lewiston, Idaho in 1980. In 1995, Dr. John moved to BlueShield
of Idaho (now Regence) as Medical Director. After working
there 11 years, he retired as the Senior Vice President and Chief
Medical Officer for Regence BlueShield of Idaho and Regence BlueCross
BlueShield of Utah.
John has been a strong supporter of the community with participation
in the United Way, Lewis-Clark State College Artist Series, Northwest
Children’s Home, and CASA (Court Appointed Child Advocates).
He has served as the chief of Staff at St Joseph Regional Medical
Center and secretary-treasurer of the Idaho Pediatrics society.
In 1991 he was awarded the Pediatric Society “Shaker and Mover”
award for child advocacy and governmental activities.
The 2004 campaign was Rusche’s initiation into electoral politics
and he was unopposed for reelection in 2006 and so far in 2008.
He serves on the Idaho House Health and Welfare, State Affairs,
and Business Committees, the Health Care Taskforce, and as the
House Minority Caucus chairman. |
| Candidate Statement on Partisan Politics and
Special Interests: |
| |
|
| |
| Race: |
House B |
The
Common Interest in Action Score |
|
Candidate |
|
| Past |
|
96% |
| Future |
|
80% |
|
| Party: |
Independent |
| Status: |
Challenger |
| Contact: |
Email:
Office phone: |
| Web site: |
|
| |
| Comment by Keith Allred about Candidate: |
| |
|
| Statement by Candidate about Why Running: |
| |
|
| Candidate Statement about The Common Interest: |
| |
|
| Candidate Bio: |
| |
|
| Candidate Statement on Partisan Politics
and Special Interests: |
| |
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
 |
 |
 |
|
 |
|