Who doesn't enjoy a little game of chance?

An occasional Powerball ticket, maybe, or the March Madness office pool?

But clean air shouldn't be left to luck. No matter what those merrymakers in the Canyon County Courthouse would have you think.

The county commissioners have come up with a remarkably tortured alternative to mandatory vehicle emissions testing — and forgive the bureaucratic jargon, but it's a doozy.

On Monday, they wrote a letter to state Department of Environmental Quality Director Toni Hardesty, suggesting a voluntary emissions program. Gee. Can the voluntary property tax bill be far behind?

I can't accuse the commissioners of overselling their scheme: "the details," they say tellingly, "have not been finalized." But the plan, such as it is, would put some of the voluntary $20 testing fees into a $50,000 fund to help low-income motorists fix cars that pollute. (Think Cash for Clunkers, Caldwell style).

Some fees would go into a drawing, with winners eligible for $5,000 "cash cards." I've heard of scratch tickets. Maybe, in honoring the objective of emissions testing, these should be scratch-and-sniff tickets.

In the first sentence of their letter to Hardesty, the commissioners concede that vehicle emissions pose a "real problem." Then, with a straight face, they contradict themselves by offering up gimmickry.

Some joke. Actually, it's an insult to Ada County motorists who live downwind of Canyon County and have participated in a mandatory emissions testing program since 1984.

And it's more than just insulting. It's bad science. Canyon County commissioners somehow think their voluntary program will help them better understand the emissions problem. "We would like to have the opportunity to run a pilot program and get some scientific numbers before subjecting our residents to a costly program without backup data," they write.

I can't see how a voluntary program can provide useful data. This seems destined to draw a skewed sample: car owners who are a little better off financially, and willing to pay a $20 fee; or car owners who are relatively sure their cars will pass the test. This self-selecting sample is unlikely to accurately measure the emissions problem, and likely to minimize it.

It's up to Hardesty — a level-headed agency boss who is generally serious about using good science to address "real problems" — to review Canyon County's plan. She gets to decide whether this cockamamie counteroffer stands up under state air quality law. I hope Ada County motorists get the last laugh. And they will — with any luck, that is.

Get Twitter updates on my blog and column and Statesman editorials. Become a follower. You can also get updates on Facebook's new Idaho Statesman Opinion Page.