But we don't see how the state as a whole would be benefitted by the expenditure of several million dollars of the people's money for a road from north Idaho to Boise. At least not yet. Nobody from the northern counties ever has business at Boise, and such a road would attract only occasional auto tourists. Its scenic value would be its chief asset, and not one out of ten north Idahoans have time to look at scenery. The only kind of a road connecting north and south Idaho that would be of practical benefit would be a railroad.
The state could go into the road business in a way that would directly benefit the whole population. It could work out a plan for building a system of trunk roads all over the state, one or more in each county, and there would be no opposition from the taxpayers. The people would heartily approve of such action. Take our own section, for instance. The people would unanimously endorse the building by the state of a trunk road from Bovill, Moscow, and would cheerfully pay any extra within reason to help put it through; but they would not willingly pay taxes to build a road from Whitebird to Boise. What good would a road between these points do them? —La tah County Press.
Down, and both houses of the legislature and the state departments are of one party.
Voluminous promises of legislation were made to "benefit" the farmers, and to benefit the working classes to gain votes. 