The campaign for incumbent Republican U.S. Sen. Jim Risch has firmly rejected allegations that the senator intends to invoke a century-old state statute to bypass the upcoming general election.
Rumors circulated recently suggesting Risch might utilize an Idaho law from 1917 to secure his position without facing voters on November 3. The legislation permits a governor to appoint a replacement if a senator resigns or passes away within 30 days of Election Day, effectively canceling the contest for that vacancy.
Campaign Dismisses Claims
Marc Kilmer, campaign manager for Risch, stated the rumors are “completely false.” Kilmer attributed the speculation to his opponent’s camp and claimed that former Democrat David Roth was coerced into dropping out of the race to clear the field for independent candidate Todd Achilles.
Roth won the Democratic primary in May but withdrew from the ballot in September, citing a lack of support from party leadership. A spokesperson for the Achilles campaign denied originating the rumors about the 1917 statute.
Forum Debate Over Term Commitment
The issue surfaced during a candidate forum held Wednesday evening in Caldwell. Risch did not attend the event. The discussion was moderated by McKay Cunningham, director of the master of applied public policy at College of Idaho.
Crispin Gravatt, communication director for Achilles, criticized Risch for failing to assure voters he would serve a full six-year term. Risch is currently 83 years old and would turn 89 if he completed the term.
Achilles argued that invoking the appointment clause would be unconstitutional and create a cycle of non-elections. Independent candidate Natalie Fleming described the idea as frightening but did not predict it would occur. Libertarian candidate Matt Loesby suggested Risch might retire after winning re-election.
Legal Uncertainty Remains
Cunningham noted that the constitutionality of the 1917 law has never been tested in court. He cited provisions in both the Idaho and U.S. Constitutions regarding the right to vote as potential legal arguments against using the statute.
“I think if it were tried, it would be challenged in courts, and it would be a whole big mess,” Loesby said.
Cunningham suggested candidates could claim due process violations if no election occurred for the Senate seat. The governor’s office did not respond to requests for comment regarding the potential use of the appointment power.
Previous Legislative Efforts
In 2025, lawmakers attempted to address the ambiguity of the 1917 statute. Rep. Kevin Andrus (R-Lava Hot Springs) and Rep. Josh Tanner (R-Eagle) introduced House Bill 324, which sought to amend the law to allow special elections instead of gubernatorial appointments.
The bill did not receive a hearing and did not advance during the legislative session. With no statutory changes enacted, the original 1917 language remains in effect as the November 3 election approaches.
About the Author
