Weak on Many Conservative Issues
Pro-Big Business, Unions, Welfare
- It’s evident that Rep. Mickelsen supports illegal labor for large companies (See Illegal Immigration page).
- She Voted No on HB 745 and HB 516. Both were about prohibiting the use of taxpayer funds to support unions. HB516 was originally about parental rights but was changed to an entirely new bill that prohibited taxpayer funds from being used to support unions — which she voted against.
- She Voted No on HB 109 (2025) to exclude candy and soda from SNAP eligible foods.
Anti-Educational Freedom
Rep. Mickelsen is Anti-School Choice
- HB 93 (2025) created a tax credit program to encourage school choice.
- Sponsored by Wendy Horman
- Rep. Mickelsen voted Against HB 93
- Signed by Gov. Little (See More Here)
- Praised by President Trump (See More Here)
Rep. Mickelsen is Vehemently Opposed to HB 93 and School Choice
- She tried suing to block the implementation of HB 93 after it was signed into law.
- She handily lost — a unanimous (5-0) Idaho Supreme Court ruling.
- The justices rebuked her by asking whether lawmakers can now sue over a lost vote, begging the question if Rep. Mickelsen even had standing.
- She has a pattern of suing and losing, such as when she sued the local Republican Party but lost.
- Stephanie misrepresents HB 93 by calling it a voucher program when it is actually a tax credit.
Deceives Voters
Rep. Mickelsen is aware that our district leans strongly conservative, so her campaign messaging often adopts Republican-style language to appeal to voters and frame her arguments. For example, in a legislative summary this session, she criticized the legislature for:
- Increase mandates on private businesses
- Expand government authority into personal decisions
- Create new legal liabilities and regulatory burdens
- Increase costs that ultimately fall on Idaho families and consumers
While those points sound like traditional Republican positions, she didn’t cite specific bills to let voters see if her views actually match theirs. It’s likely that these comments were actually about prohibiting males from entering female private areas, such as locker rooms and bathrooms.
Examples of clearly deceptive tactics — (i.e. being a politician)
- She has a habit of playing politics by speaking against conservatives and then voting with them or skipping the vote, thus avoiding an official record of her true position.
- HB 607 – Spoke against, then voted in favor. (Details in the next section)
- HB 752 – Spoke against, then skipped the vote. (Details in the next section)
- Below is a video of her switching her vote in 2024. She spoke and voted against HB 515 which allowed the Death Penalty for Severe Child Molestation. However, after it was clear she was in the super minority (Only 1 of 2 Republicans to vote against it), she asked to switch her vote, which is super rare. Usually politicians don’t wait until after the vote to mask their positions. Rep. Mickelsen got caught here.
- If you only look at her voting record, you will be deceived about her true positions.
Traditional Values
When it comes to traditional values of nuclear families, social norms in changing rooms or bathrooms and opposing porn in libraries, Rep. Mickelsen is often at odds with Conservatives.
- HB 752
- Purpose: Making it a misdemeanor for any person to knowingly and willfully enter a rest room, changing room, locker room, or shower room in a government-owned building or place of public accommodation designated for the opposite biological sex. She argued against the preliminaries of this bill in committee by making the following claims.
- She argued it would hurt those who need the “most protections”.
- She didn’t say who that is, but based on the context it sounds like she was arguing for transgenders instead of women and girls.
- She said we already have laws and we should use the lightest touch of government.
- The bill actually gave businesses and individuals a mechanism to deal with the problem of males in private female areas. This problem was created by cities passing non-discrimination ordinances which made it illegal for businesses to tell males they couldn’t enter female areas.
- Rep. Mickelsen implied that the bill would require lots of government resources instead of being a mechanism to deal with a problem when it occurred.
- She voted NO in committee and Skipped the vote on the house floor.
- HB 607
- Purpose: Required businesses and government buildings to provide reasonable accommodations to protect private spaces.
- Rep. Mickelsen again used similar arguments as she used against HB 752 – lightest touch of government, implied it would go against “personal property rights,” implied it was “regulating ourselves to death,” “as a way to intimidate and harass private businesses to push someones particular agenda.”
- Again, the bill is about males entering female private spaces. She might argue that she is not for men entering female spaces.
- But she doesn’t suggest an acceptable way to achieve it.
- All her arguments were opposed.
- She spoke against it, but voted for it.
- You can hear her speaking against those bills by going to NewsTalk 107.9 or downloading the debates on the State’s Legislative Website.
- H314 (2023) prohibited sexually explicit materials from being promoted, given, or made available to a minor by a school or public library. This bill was replaced by HB 710 (2024) and signed by Gov. Little into law.
- Rep. Mickelsen called supporters of H314 Nazi’s and Book Burners.
- Rep. Mickelsen voted against H314 and HB 710.
Here is a quote from an article written in the Gem State Chronicle by Brian Almon on the legislative session that year.
“Rep. Mickelsen said a lot of ridiculous things this session. She claimed that rights were granted by government. She lamented the idea of taking away “abortion care” from medical school curricula. But the craziest moment came when debating against H314, which tells libraries they can’t give graphic and obscene material to children. Stephanie grew increasingly animated as she said that this bill was the first step toward Nazi book burnings, and that Nazi-style genocide was just around the corner.”
Why I support Kelly?
Kelly Golden is running against Stephanie Mickelsen.
Kelly has traditional conservative values.
- Kelly supports Cultural Norms.
- Kelly is Pro-Educational Freedom.
- Kelly is straightforward with you on her positions.
- I questioned her for over an hour asking difficult questions to see how she would respond to test her willingness to be genuine.