Idaho voters head to the polls Nov. 3 and one of the races on the ballot is for Idaho's First Congressional District.
Rep. Russ Fulcher (R-Idaho) is running for reelection and one of the candidates challenging him is Democrat Kaylee Peterson.
Peterson has run against Fulcher before. This year, she's campaigning on everything from the cost of health care and housing to protecting Idaho's public lands and holding elected officials accountable.
She joined Idaho Matters to talk about her campaign and what she would do differently if elected to Congress.
In order to focus our interviews of statewide candidates, click here to see the rules that guided our outreach efforts. To see the full interviews for those who responded, click here.
Read a transcript of the entire conversation below:
Gemma Gaudette: From the studios of Boise State Public Radio News. I'm Gemma Gaudette, you're listening to Idaho Matters. Idaho voters are heading to the polls come November 3rd. And one of the races on the ballot is for Idaho's first congressional district. Republican Congressman Russ Fulcher is running for reelection, and one of the candidates challenging him is Democrat Kaylee Peterson. Now, Peterson has run against Fulcher before, and this year she's campaigning on everything from the cost of health care and housing to protecting Idaho's public lands, as well as holding elected officials accountable. She joins us now to talk about her campaign and what she would do differently if elected to Congress. Kaylee, it's really nice to have you joining us today. Thanks for taking the time.
Kaylee Peterson: Thank you so much for having me. I'm really excited to talk about these issues and how important this election really is.
Gemma Gaudette: Well, as I mentioned, you've run against Russ Fulcher before and you are taking him on once again. What made you decide that you wanted to give this another shot? And what's different about your campaign this time around.
Kaylee Peterson: I think I noticed immediately in 2022 the lack of trust that Idaho voters have with not just government and Congress, but with our elections. And I knew that in order to build a grassroots campaign and movement differently in a way that Idaho voters could trust, it was going to take longer than a single cycle. It was going to take longer than two cycles. So really, this has been a long term commitment I made to Idaho voters to do politics differently. And thankfully, we've built such a vast network infrastructure, contacts, volunteers, fundraising that we're in the position to potentially win an election doing things the right way.
Gemma Gaudette: As you're well aware, Idaho's first congressional district is solidly Republican. And Russ Fulcher has won, you know, comfortably in previous elections. So realistically, what is your path to to winning this time around?
Kaylee Peterson: Yeah it's difficult. Idaho's demographics got tremendously More conservative between 22 and 2024. And the reason that I'm really optimistic about this election specifically, is that nearly every one of the people voting for me have met me face to face. I've driven 117,000 miles across the district. I've held hundreds and hundreds of events and rallies and meet and greets. I've driven three hours each way just to meet with a single voter so that we could build a community network. So for me, I received 120,000 votes in 2024. There's only 48,000 registered Democrats in the first Congressional District. I need roughly 167,000 votes to potentially win November 3rd. So our outreach is there, but making sure that working class voters know that their vote actually matters, that this is our opportunity. That's where our importance really lies. That's how we win.
Gemma Gaudette: So I want to talk about affordability and how difficult it is. It's become for working families to get ahead. And when you talk to people across the district, as you just said, that you've you've 117,000 miles across the district. So you've been talking to people about this. What are they telling you is their biggest financial concern right now?
Kaylee Peterson: It's hard, it's the essentials. I mean, it's how am I going to afford either rent or my mortgage or property taxes? It's groceries. It's gas or diesel. I mean, these are the day to day necessities that all of us rely on to live. And it's just skyrocketing to a point where wages haven't been able to keep up. So for me, every single person, depending on what their life looks like, whether it's an Idaho farmer, an Idaho mom in Meridian, whether it's, you know, a retail worker at Kroger or Albertsons. I mean, affordability is just out of reach for the vast majority of people in the state. 60% of Americans right now are living paycheck to paycheck just for the essentials. And yet they're working longer hours than ever. So I think we need to look at a comprehensive view of how do we fix this problem. That means antitrust legislation to break up monopolies. We've seen committee hearings that found 56% of inflation was corporate profits. We need to make sure that wages are keeping up with the cost of living in the state. We need to fix local economies so that Idaho businesses can compete. So there's so many different ways that we have to look at the affordability issue, and we're trying to address all of them.
Gemma Gaudette: The other thing you've talked about, one of your biggest proposals in your campaign is moving the country to a universal, single payer health care system. That is a pretty significant change from what we have right now. What would that look like for an Idaho family that currently gets health insurance? Maybe like, let's say, through an employer?
Kaylee Peterson: Yeah. So this one is one of the most frustrating issues because of the lies that the American public has been told. Right now, we have a system that only works for people with nothing or people that have everything already. So middle class, working class families, which is the vast majority of Idaho families end up shouldering the burden, whether it's through their taxes or whether it's as consumers. And I wish people understood it would be cheaper as taxpayers and consumers, to just cover health care for every American citizen in the country. So that means that we can have a private market. I don't want to interfere with the free markets, but I want to make sure that taxpayer dollars are going into health care coverage and not HMO profits. So, yeah, I know that it's a huge undertaking, but we've been incrementally changing the health care system for 50 years, and it's only gotten more expensive. And I'm sick and tired of watching Idaho families battle cancer and insurance companies at the same time. I'm tired of watching parents stress about getting their kids asthma inhaler. So it's, I think, something that's worthy of such a dramatic change.
Gemma Gaudette: So you mentioned a taxpayer dollars going to this. I am curious how would, in your opinion, this be paid for? Because critics of single payer health care argue it would require a substantial new federal taxes, and then it could disrupt existing coverage. So how do you respond to those concerns?
Kaylee Peterson: I think we've dealt with such a bad system for so long that Congress should be able to look at the bigger picture here. I'm not saying it's going to be easy. I'm not saying that there's going to be inconveniences and frustrations and trying to get people enrolled on a new system, but I'm saying that the system right now still does not work. People are already frustrated, waiting months to deal with insurance companies who delay and deny care. So I would much rather have an inconvenient shift. That means that health care is more accessible and affordable, and our people are healthier than deal with an inconvenient system that allows Idaho families to be sick or dying because they can't afford it. So yeah, it'd be more like a Medicare. It would be similar to Medicare in the way that its government enrollment. But yeah, I mean, it's going to be a huge change.
Gemma Gaudette: So I want to talk about immigration next, because it's another issue where there's a pretty significant divide between the two major political parties. You've criticized the way immigration enforcement is being carried out, particularly by Ice. So what specifically would you change if you were elected when it comes to enforcement? I mean, how would you balance, you know, securing the borders and enforcing immigration law?
Kaylee Peterson: There were solutions on the table that we should have addressed that Congress should have taken. There was the Farm Workforce Modernization Act, which would have streamlined migrant worker visas in the state. Uh, streamlining the H2A and H2B to take pressure off of local employers. Try and streamline the process so it's not so long, extensive and expensive for people that we really want in our, our state and our economy. But that means investing in enforcement at the border. So immigration judges, immigration courts, border agents, border security and technology, those are huge investments that are incredibly important. My biggest issue, though, is that we are not currently trying to fix our immigration system. With the billions that we are spending, we're spending billions on detention centers. We're not even deporting. I mean, this is an incredibly long and incredibly expensive way to make our immigration system even more convoluted and frustrating, at the cost of the constitutional rights and protections of so many legal residents. So for me, it's looking at streamlining the system, investing in the technology and enforcement mechanisms that work, potentially increasing the partnership between local law enforcement and DHS so that when we have violent criminals on our street, we are able to detain and deport them immediately. But what's happening right now is incredibly expensive and has cost the state of Idaho in terms of tourism at our northern border. So I think it's been expensive, dangerous and unfortunately has done nothing to make the system better.
Gemma Gaudette: Let's switch to public lands now, if we could, because this is an issue that that really matters to to all Idahoans, right? I mean, it doesn't matter where you sit on the political spectrum. We all are concerned about our public lands. And you've been really outspoken about keeping federal public lands in public hands. But there are also concerns about things like wildlife. You know, excuse me, wildfire prevention as well as like forest management. And then, you know, where is the role of local communities in all of this? So what would your approach look like? And I'm curious, where do you disagree with Congressman Fulcher on this?
Kaylee Peterson: I think the easiest thing to answer first is where there might be a level of agreement, because I have only agreed with one thing our congressman has done, and that's the good neighbor authority. I think trying to increase participation in collaboration between local, state and federal stakeholders so that federal agencies are managing these lands with local communities to the best of everybody's quality of life. That I think, was great. Everything else has been a massive failure. We continue to gut staffing and funding for the federal agencies responsible for managing this, this land, and then complain about the maintenance backlog. We complain that the the wildfire prevention and drought mitigations and protecting our watersheds is not strong enough. While we at the same time slash budgets for those issues. So for me, I want to make sure that local communities know as a Democrat and as somebody who values public lands. That doesn't mean I'm against local industries. But right now we're basically writing a blank check to corporations who privately lease this land and then gutted the same federal agencies responsible for overseeing and enforcing the regulations that protect local communities. So for me, it's simple. I think that there are some real creative ways that we can increase revenue. That means new recreation opportunities. That means potentially retaining local recreation fees. That means newly directing some of the shares of timber, mineral and energy production on these lands to local counties. But for me, there is nobody other than the federal government that is big and strong enough to stand between the giant legal teams of giant corporations that were privately leasing this land and local communities. And that's where the role of federal government is most important.
Gemma Gaudette: You've also called for banning members of Congress from trading stocks and imposing term limits, and then also changing the way campaigns are financed. Those are ideas that I think can appeal to voters in both parties. But Congress has struggled to enact those kinds of reforms. So how would you actually realistically think that you could get any of that passed in Congress?
Kaylee Peterson: This is the best and most valid question I get. How am I, as a potential 36-year-old freshman in Congress, supposed to make any of these radical changes? And I'm not naive. I've been a Democrat in Idaho for the last five years. I'm not naive or impractical in the role that I have, which is why I've spent the last five years building coalition. And so we've built communication structures. We've built coalition with grassroots working class candidates across the country with organizations that are prioritizing this level of government accountability, because that's the most drastic change that has to happen. Because if politicians are listening to voters instead of corporate PACs, super PACs, AIPAC, or big lobbyists, then we wouldn't have the other policy issues that we have. We would have politicians voting in the best interest of the people in this state. So for me, it's that building coalition mechanism, but it's making sure that voters know. At one point, Congress had a 16% approval rating, and yet 94% of incumbents were reelected. Because we have the problem where politicians pay a good deal of money to say, I'm not the problem, everyone else is. And we have to start voting for new people who are willing to go in and make those big changes, who are willing to vote against a raise for themselves, willing to vote against potentially raising $5 million in a congressional session. And that's what I've committed to. And thankfully, I'm not asking people to trust that I would eventually do this. I've put in five years of work without a penny, without taking any money from our campaign, because I really believe in the work that we're doing and the movement that we've grown. So I'm excited to make those changes.
Gemma Gaudette: And one quick last question, if I could, for folks who have supported Russ Fulcher over the years and who generally vote Republican, what's your argument for them switching their vote to you in November?
Kaylee Peterson: I think the most important thing for people to realize is that we are not defined by what we see on social media. We have been told for so long that our neighbor, who votes differently than us, wants to change our way of life, hates everything about us, and that could not be further from the truth. I am a working class mom who's been in the Eagle foothills for the last 36 years. I value what Idaho has been, what it is, and I have vision as to how to make the quality of life better for every single person in this state, whether they are conservative Christians, whether they are Boise liberals. I want Congress to live up to their expectations. So for me, I offer policy solutions. I offer solutions to the issues they themselves are dealing with, and I offer respect. And I want to work in these communities, with these communities to make sure that government responds to the people of this state again.
Gemma Gaudette: Well, Kaylee, I want to thank you so much for taking time.
Kaylee Peterson: Thank you so much for having me.
Gemma Gaudette: We've been speaking with Kaylee Peterson. She's a Democrat running to unseat Congressman Russ Fulcher for Idaho's District one congressional seat election.
