It appears that during the past week — when I combined a little late summer vacationing with the decidedly bittersweet experience of driving my oldest son to his freshman year of college — I was AWOL for the political dog days.

The big debate of the past week centered on where Republican 1st District Rep. Bill Sali has set up his office, and where Democratic challenger Walt Minnick calls home. Critics keep pounding Sali for renting office space in Downtown Boise, in the 2nd Congressional District. Republicans alleged — erroneously, according to the Associated Press — that Minnick claimed a property tax exemption this year for a home he occupies in the 2nd District.

Sloppy research on the GOP's part, but this whole hoo-ha doesn't really advance the dialogue on issues. Kudos to Lewiston Tribune editorial page editor Jim Fisher; in a weekend editorial, he called out both parties for focusing on trivia.

As long as we're on this non-topic, though, let's look at it from another angle. This is a symptom of a larger dysfunction: congressional district lines that cut through the largest city of the state.

The political interests of Boise east of Cole Road — and the 2nd Congressional District — are no different than the interests of the western half of Boise. And by dividing Boise between two congressional districts, Boise voters' clout is diminished.

There's no easy solution, but here's something to file away. The day will come — sooner than many Idahoans realize — when the Treasure Valley will warrant its own congressional district.

Other Western states have congressional districts designed largely to serve their preeminent metro areas, such as Denver, Las Vegas and Albuquerque, N.M. It makes sense, since the needs of an urban district are going to be considerably different than the needs of a rural district. I could see real advantages to having a member of the U.S. House of Representatives focused on the unique issues facing the Treasure Valley, starting with highways, public transportation and air quality.

I'm hard-pressed to make the map work, though, at least for now. I could draw up a congressional district comprising 10 Southwest Idaho counties — Ada, Adams, Boise, Canyon, Elmore, Gem, Owyhee, Payette, Washington and Valley. But according to the latest Census Bureau figures, these counties' 654,390 residents account for only 43.6 percent of the state's population. That leaves one House member to represent 56.4 percent of the population, and a district stretching from the Utah-Idaho border to Canada.

No, this isn't the time for a change. The ideal time to set up a Treasure Valley district would be after the state's overall population earns Idaho a third House seat — allowing Idaho to set up districts centered roughly around the Treasure Valley, North Idaho and Eastern Idaho.

But if Ada and Canyon counties continue to grow, relative to the rest of Idaho, the Valley will someday account for half of Idaho's population. When that happens, the Valley should have a standalone congressional district, even if it is one of only two districts in Idaho. The transition will be awkward — but no more awkward than continuing to draw up boundaries that bisect Boise.