First of all, you have heard that the budget grew by 17%. Yes, that is true. What’s also true about that number is that it reflects General Fund dollars; these are dollars that the state receives in revenue (taxes) from you, the tax payer. These dollars are what we generally focus on, because they don’t come with strings attached or to be used only for specific purposes, like the two other most common types of funds (Federal funds and State Special revenue). This large growth is in House Bill 2(HB2), which is the Budget Bill for the State of Montana for two years. This 17% growth factor from the last two-year period to this new budget cycle is important, because this is the money that legislators have the most control over. So, with the help of the Nasty Nine (RINO Senators) and the Dirty Dozen (RINO House Members), the Democrats voted to spend your hard earned tax dollars at an extreme increase.

Now, to address this idea that there was only very tiny growth, less than 1%. Well, context here means everything. These numbers were chosen very carefully, it includes all the funds that run through the State of Montana government, every dollar of Federal funding, regardless of if we, as legislators, vote on it or not. So….this number is VERY large, so to get any change in it will take a proportionate increase. This number is very misleading for another reason as well.  Do you have any idea how many millions of dollars the Feds pushed into Montana in the last 4 years, since COVID? Well, with that money finally drying up, but we still managed to increase the total spend of all dollars through State government.

This was the plan from Day 1 of the 2025 Legislative Session, when 9 RINO Republicans, voted with all the Democrats to upset the apple cart. How do I know this was the plan? Well, the most important change that they made on Day 1, was to add 4 additional members, to the Senate Finance & Claims Committee. This addition, gave the Democrats and RINO’s total control of that committee. And with that, they got their huge growth in State Government. So, the truth is the Cake was Baked from the beginning. And yes, there was a 17% increase for General Fund dollars in the State Budget. Let’s vote them out in the upcoming June Primary.

During the summer of 2025 in a CBS news broadcast, the Nasty Nine and a few of the most liberal Democrats honestly admitted they worked together to grow the state government budget. The Nasty Nine promoted a terrible and unnecessary property tax shift bill, HB231. The state had a two-billion-dollar surplus going into the 2025 session but the Nasty Nine chose rather to increase the property tax for many senior homeowners, Montanans with family cabins, business properties as well as agriculture land. Some citizens had their property tax go up 100% or more. Many senior homeowners are being taxed out of their homes, homes they worked their entire lives to acquire. These are homes they planned to live in for the remainder of their lives and then pass on to their children. This high tax burden they now face makes that almost impossible, especially as they retire. These homeowners are not out of state property owners. They are normal Montanans who are trying to save their legacy. It is apparent that the Nasty Nine are ok with taxing normal Montanans out of their homes and their legacy. The state of Montana started this last session with a two-billion-dollar surplus. Why was this tax shift necessary? The Nasty Nine voted with 17 Democrats to pass this bill.

What makes matters worse is that there was a great bill for permanent property tax relief for primary residence while keeping all other property taxpayers whole. Senate Bill 90 sponsored by Senator Carl Glimm would have provided a yearly credit to homeowners by using lodging tax, paid by tourists, instead of going to the bloated state general fund. Also, Senator Hertz had two great property tax relief bills. One would have limited property tax increases by having a fairer voted levy threshold, so the minority does not vote to increase the tax on the majority. His second bill would have taken property tax expenditure periodically back to the voter for approval, leaving more property tax decisions in the hands of the voter. All three of these property tax relief bills failed at the hands of the Nasty Nine. To have a hope of a small efficient state government we need a few more conservative senators in 2027. 

Sincerely, Senator Mark Noland, SD6

 Working together, we’ve made major strides advancing Montana priorities, from increasing our energy dominance, protecting our public lands, and supporting farmers, ranchers, veterans, and working families.

 We now have a majority in the U.S. Senate, which allowed us to quickly confirm President Trump’s cabinet as well as excellent Montana candidates to serve us on the federal level — Kurt Alme to serve as our U.S. Attorney and Bill Mercer to serve as a district judge.

 I worked around the clock with my colleagues in the Senate to implement the president’s agenda as quickly as possible. On Independence Day, I stood with President Trump at the White House as he signed the Working Families Tax Cut, which delivered the largest tax cuts in American history.

Montana families will see the effects in 2026, when their take-home pay is boosted by over $10,000 a year and there are no taxes on tips. The bill also included my provision to save the Bull Mountains Mine, which protects Montana’s energy dominance and saved over 300 good-paying Montana mining jobs.

 And as a lifelong sportsman, protecting our public lands is one of my top priorities. That’s why I was proud to block a provision from being included in the bill that would have sold millions of acres of our public lands.

 Thanks to President Trump’s leadership we’ve saved Montana energy. In addition to keeping the Bull Mountains Mine open, he also signed into law my bill to reverse a disastrous Biden administration anti-coal rule that would have blocked future coal leasing in eastern Montana and caused the loss of billions of dollars in revenue to our state.

 Additionally, President Trump and his cabinet listened to the concerns of Montanans and reversed a Biden mandate that would’ve put the Colstrip Power Plant out of business.

 One of my main priorities this year was supporting the Montana sportsmen and our great outdoors.

 I worked closely with the administration to support our logging industry and ensure we can better fight catastrophic wildfires. I also introduced the “America the Beautiful Act,” which provides critical funding for our national parks and addresses maintenance backlogs, so that people can get outside and enjoy the great outdoors.

 Additionally, I introduced a bill to expand access to our public lands for sportsmen and outdoor recreation.

 I am also working hard to support our farmers and ranchers. Montana beef is the best in the world, and one of my main focuses this year was expanding market access for our farmers and ranchers.

I’m pushing for a robust Farm Bill that will support Montana ag and ensure Montana voices are represented, and worked hard to pass a permanent increase to the death tax exemption, which will allow family farms and ranches to pass their land down to future generations.

 We’ve also made massive strides protecting life and family. In December, President Trump signed into law my bill, the BABES Enhancement Act, which makes it easier for moms and families to safely travel with breastmilk and formula. I’m working to protect women from the harmful abortion pill, which causes traumatic adverse effects at a rate 22 times higher than advertised.

 Montana has the highest number of veterans per capita in the nation, so it’s critical they get the support and resources they deserve. This year I attended the Butte VA Clinic’s renaming ceremony, which honors Montana legend Charlie Dowd for his incredible legacy of service.

 I also introduced bills to protect health care and pension benefits for veterans and their families. Lastly, I introduced a bill to honor fallen service members and keep national cemeteries open on federal holidays.

 Finally, protecting Montana’s tribal communities remained at the forefront of 2025. I introduced a bill to combat drug trafficking in our tribes and also passed a resolution designating May 5 as National Day of Awareness for Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women.

 2025 has brought win after historic win for Montana and the nation. I’ll always work to support the needs of Montanans — from our veterans to our children, and from our farmers and ranchers to our loggers.

 It’s my honor to serve you in the U.S. Senate and I look forward to what 2026 brings.

Then the 2025 legislative session came and 10 Democratic state senators who will be up for election again voted three times to keep corrupt Republican Senator Jason Ellsworth from being expelled from office. 

Ellsworth was fined $600,000 by the Federal Trade Commission for unethical business practices. He pleaded guilty to criminal obstruction of a police officer while trying to abuse his elected office to get out of a speeding ticket. He was accused of domestic violence involving a firearm by the woman he used to live with. He was found by the Senate Ethics Committee and the auditor of state government to have engaged in waste, fraud, and abuse of taxpayer money by directing $170,000 to his longtime friend who hadn’t done any work to earn the money. 

Despite all this, Democrats said it wasn’t enough to justify removing Ellsworth from office, even as a majority of the Senate voted to kick him out. Those Democrats now have to own three votes to protect Ellsworth for the rest of their short-lived political careers. 

Senator Cora Neumann of Bozeman previously ran for Congress. Senator Shane Morigeau of Missoula ran for State Auditor. Senator Laura Smith of Helena wanted to be Attorney General someday. They were some of Montana Democrats’ best hopes to one-day win higher office, until they chose Jason Ellsworth and corruption over the people of Montana and ethical integrity. Their hopes of ever ascending to higher office are now over.

Senators Denise Hayman of Bozeman, Sara Novak of Butte, Jonathan Windy Boy of Box Elder, and Andrea Olsen, Willis Curdy, and Jacinda Morigeau (all from Missoula) represent Democrat-friendly districts in the Senate. Any Democrat from those areas who wants to serve in the Legislature now has an easy path: just point out to Democratic primary voters that those senators sided with a corrupt Republican. Hayman, Novak, Windy Boy, Olsen, Curdy, and Morigeau will never survive a Democratic primary against even a halfway-competent opponent. 

I hope Senator Mary Ann Dunwell enjoyed her last legislative session. Not only will she have to try to survive any Democratic primary after her votes to save Ellsworth, she’ll then have to face a Republican in a red-leaning district in the general election. While the Republican candidate can campaign against Republican corruption, Dunwell will have to explain her pro-Republican-corruption votes as a Democrat. Goodbye, Mary Ann. 

Like elected sheep being led to the political slaughterhouse, these 8 Democrats blindly followed Senate Minority Leader Pat Flowers, a Bozeman Democrat, and Minority Whip Laura Smith, D-Helena, as they urged them to stand with their good friend Jason Ellsworth. It’s amazing to me they can’t see that Flowers and Smith led them straight over a cliff into the political abyss. 

Senator Greg Hertz, SD7 Polson, MT

Chair, Montana Republican Legislative Campaign Committee

That surprise will be especially jarring for farmers and ranchers, because the initial phase of the tax shift is going to lower most of their taxes this year; only to be followed by a larger increase next year.

Also concerning, it appears some legislators who passed this tax shift will be surprised as well. Take Democratic Representative Jonathan Karlen, who has been one of the loudest and proudest promoters of this legislation, for example. 

On May 22, shortly after the session concluded, Rep. Karlen confidently said on the Montana Talks radio show that “I'm very comfortable that we did not pass a bill that would increase taxes on our farmers and ranchers.”

That’s certainly not true in my area—the “Cow Capital of the World,” Miles City. After the legislature concluded, the Montana Department of Revenue (DOR) released its county-by-county analysis of how the tax shift is projected to play out. Here in Custer County, the projection is a nearly 8% property tax increase on production agriculture land from 2024 to 2026.

Rep. Karlen’s misunderstanding is even more apparent in his home county of Missoula, where DOR’s projections show an over 15% tax hike on agricultural and timber lands. A good legislative salesman, I’d expect Karlen to counter that the projected 9% decrease on primary residences in Missoula County will counterbalance farmers’ tax increase. But note that Missoula County is proposing a 7% property tax increase this year alone. The end result? The minimal residential tax cut immediately vanishes while the agricultural tax increase grows even higher.

Rep. Karlen also can’t retreat to the statewide averages. DOR projects a 2% increase on agricultural and timber production land statewide, with the average tax hike on agricultural “residential” buildings that aren’t primary homes clocking in at a massive 24.5%. 

I, along with the majority of conservative Republicans, opposed this tax shift passed by Democrats and a minority of Republicans. There were other bipartisan solutions to property taxes that wouldn’t have caused these tax hikes.

Unfortunately, many of those who voted for this tax shift didn’t fully understand the ramifications of what they were doing. They forced the complex bills through in the final days of the session with barely any public hearing or scrutiny.

Just like Nancy Pelosi once infamously said, some legislators like Democratic Rep. Karlen have adopted the approach of “We have to pass the bill to find out what’s in the bill.” He and others are now learning that, yes, you did pass a bill that raises taxes on farmers and ranchers. 

-Senate President Pro Tempore Ken Bogner

These repairs were neglected for so long they have compounded and created other problems.

We started to address the problem when Senator Daines introduced the Great American Outdoors Act in 2020. President Trump signed it into law and it became the greatest conservation win for Montana and the country in 50 years. It represented a commitment to our public lands on par with the initiatives of President Theodore Roosevelt and created a dedicated line of funding via the Legacy Restoration Fund, which allowed us to address critical repair needs in national parks, forests, and other public lands. 

 To date, the Legacy Restoration Fund has successfully addressed billions of dollars in high-priority deferred maintenance and repair needs in our public lands in every state throughout the country. The successes have been far-reaching, stretching from Acadia to Glacier Bay, and covering a wide-range of projects from crumbling roads and trails to aging campgrounds and visitor centers. 

Partner organizations and volunteers donated countless hours each year and upwards of $570 million in private funds to leverage the federal investment in 2023.

It’s clear that local communities across the country, including many in Montana, have seen the benefits of investing in the maintenance of our public lands. Across all federal land management agencies, Legacy Restoration Fund projects support an estimated 20,000 jobs annually and have contributed more than $10 billion to the economy over the last five years.  There are nearly $200 million of investments in Montana spread across the National Park Service, Forest Service, Bureau of Land Management and Bureau of Indian Education.

This is further reinforced by the robust economic benefits from visitor tourism. In 2024, over 331 million visits generated $50.3 billion in economic activity and supported 378,000 jobs in national parks alone. However, to keep our parks functioning safely, more is needed. There is still $40 billion in deferred maintenance to address across the country.

The America the Beautiful Act is the next step in the process. Senator Daines recently introduced his bipartisan bill with Senator Angus King (I-ME). This legislation invests in our national parks and public lands, building on the progress we made five years ago.  It ensures that people can continue to experience the natural beauty we’re fortunate to have here in Montana and throughout the United States. It will protect our outdoor spaces, create good- paying jobs, and support investments in our local economies. It does this by reauthorizing the Legacy Restoration Fund while leveraging public donations and eliminating assets to further reduce the maintenance backlog.

In Montana, our public lands are a way of life, and we need to ensure that they are protected for generations to come. With the America the Beautiful Act we can do just that. 

 Steve Daines is a United States Senator from Montana. Jeff Mow is a former superintendent of Glacier National Park. 

First, Rep. Barker claims in his article that George Washington warned that political parties may “…become potent engines…to subvert the power of the people…” George Washington’s warning about political parties, though wise in its time, must be understood in context. He spoke from a place of deep concern over factionalism threatening national unity in the republic’s infancy. But more than two centuries later, parties have become an essential mechanism for organizing representative democracy, not a threat to it. While abuses can occur in any political system, parties, when functioning properly, are not “potent engines” of tyranny. They are the means by which voters organize around shared values, hold elected officials accountable, and create clear policy alternatives. Without party structure, our republic risks becoming a fragmented, personality-driven contest where unaccountable actors claim to represent “the people” without a consistent governing vision.

Next, Rep. Barker claims that the Montana Freedom Caucus led the effort at the state convention to purge public servants who refused to bow to party litmus tests. This criticism of the Montana GOP and the Montana Freedom Caucus in particular frames an internal party process as authoritarianism. But intra-party discipline and leadership accountability are not inherently undemocratic. When delegates, who are themselves elected representatives of grassroots activists, vote to replace leaders or enforce standards, that is representative democracy at work within a party structure. We must remember that a political party is a voluntary association with the right to define its identity and leadership criteria. If the party’s delegates choose to centralize vetting, enforce ideological coherence, or require oaths of loyalty to party values, they are not “silencing” voters, they are shaping the party that voters will evaluate at the ballot box. The voters remain free to reject any candidate, regardless of party endorsement.

In addition, Rep. Barker claims the Montana GOP platform diverges significantly from the national Republican platform. The tension between a broader national party platform and a more ideologically focused state party is not new. Every party has internal debates between moderates and purists. These disagreements reflect representative democracy in action and do not invalidate the process. If the Montana GOP is misaligned with its constituents, it will pay the price at the ballot box. That’s the ultimate test of whether its platform reflects the will of the people.

Further, Rep. Barker claims the oath public servants take is to the constitution and not to a political party. Montana's Constitution prohibits requiring any oath as a condition to hold public office beyond the one mandated, and rightly so. But political parties are private associations. A loyalty statement or commitment to uphold party principles is not a constitutional violation unless it becomes a legal requirement to hold public office, which it is not. Candidates who reject the party’s principles can still run, either independently or as members of other parties. That’s not authoritarianism; it’s political competition.

Our response to George Washington’s concerns should not be the abandonment of political parties but the ongoing effort to make them better reflect the people they serve. The notion that political parties are inherently corrupt or anti-democratic ignores the role they play in translating individual voices into collective action.

Elected officials should absolutely uphold their constitutional oath — but it’s not mutually exclusive with honoring the principles of the party that helped them get elected. In the political sphere, accountability runs in both directions: from elected officials to voters and from candidates to the party platforms they claim to represent.

Let’s respect that political parties, including the Montana Republican Party, have the right and duty to define their standards, debate their priorities, and evolve. That is not a betrayal of representative democracy but rather one of its essential expressions.

Tom Millett is a Republican state representative from Marion in NW Montana.

Nearly every Montanan will feel the economic benefits of this law, which builds on the success of the historic 2017 Trump tax cuts that led to higher economic growth, increased wages, and more jobs. Had Congress failed to pass the Big Beautiful Bill, those tax cuts would have expired, leaving the American people with a $4.5 trillion tax hike, one of the largest in American history.

Thanks to President Trump’s leadership, we prevented this outcome and delivered tax relief for the American people that will save the average Montana family $3,000 next year. We also give seniors the largest tax break in history. Nearly 90 percent of seniors who receive Social Security will not pay any taxes on their benefits.

I was also proud to lead the charge to stop the tax on tips, which will help those working in Montana’s service industry and I fought for a permanent increase of the death tax exemption, which will protect our family-owned farms and ranches.

Montana’s energy sector will also benefit, thanks to my provision that keeps the Bull Mountains Mine near Roundup open. The mine, which President Biden tried to shut down, is the lifeblood of Musselshell County and provides high-paying jobs and an economic boost to the community.

In addition, the Big Beautiful Bill included my “Supporting Made in America Energy Act,” which supports oil and gas production in Montana. I was also able to add a requirement for timber sales on Forest Service and BLM land, which will expand timber production, support Montana’s logging jobs, and reduce the risk of catastrophic wildfires. Also included is my bill to reauthorize and fully fund the Voluntary Access and Habitat Incentive Program to increase conservation efforts and expand access for Montana hunters.  

The law also includes a win for the Second Amendment by eliminating the unconstitutional $200 excise tax on suppressors, short-barreled rifles, and short-barreled shotguns. I am proud to have helped lead the effort to end this 90-year burden on Montana gun owners.

Unfortunately, Democrats and their allies in the media are spreading lies that we cut Medicaid and food assistance benefits for the poor and needy. Nothing could be further from the truth-we are simply cutting waste and abuse from these programs in order to strengthen them and ensure they are available for those most in need.

If Democrats had their way, they would force taxpayers to continue to fund Medicaid benefits to more than one million illegal immigrants and to nearly five million able-bodied adults who are not working or even seeking a job. In addition, a recent report from the federal government showed nearly three million people are enrolled in two taxpayer-funded health care plans, which cost taxpayers $14 billion each year.

Democrat claims that pregnant women in poverty and disabled children will suffer as a result of our reforms are not true either. All that is required in order to stay on Medicaid is for able-bodied adults to complete just 20 hours of work, education, job training or even volunteering each week.

Claims that we’re cutting funding are also false. Spending on Medicaid has risen 60 percent since 2019. The law simply slows this rate of growth.  Only in Washington, D.C. can a slower increase in funding be called a cut, but that is the logic of the Left. In addition, to ensure our rural populations get the care they need, the bill sets aside a $50 billion fund for our rural hospitals, protects rural nursing homes, and expands telehealth access for rural Montanans.

Similarly, when it comes to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, which provides food assistance for needy families, we strengthen work requirements and exempt those who are 65 and older as well as those with disabilities. This is another commonsense measure to reduce wasteful federal spending and ensure taxpayer dollars are used effectively.

Montanans across our state will be better off because of the Big Beautiful Bill. Our communities will be safer and our families will be stronger.

Unmanaged, dying, and fire-prone forests create multiple problems for everyone. Timber mills continue to close along with the high-paying, blue-collar rural jobs and a substantial amount of property tax revenue they provide. Overgrown habitat drives elk onto private land and reduces elk numbers, frustrating hunters and landowners alike. The Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation (RMEF) is raising awareness about the need to manage forests for these reasons. Montana FWP has likewise highlighted the need to restore quality elk habitat in places like my home in Northwestern Montana.

In addition to providing poor wildlife habitat, unhealthy forests have minimal scenic or recreational value, do not generate forest jobs or tax revenue, and fuel high intensity fires, destroying our air quality, making home insurance more expensive, and filling our cherished clear water trout streams with sediment. These intensifying negative consequences result from mandated idle Montana Federal lands. 

The following highlight efforts already done to address these problems. 

The 2025 Legislature passed a series of wildfire bills, including requiring insurance companies to transparently disclose what factors make up their wildfire risk scores (HB 533), requiring energy companies to follow wildfire mitigation plans while providing liability protections (HB 490),  and improving policies surrounding prescribed fires (HB 84). The 2023 Legislature also passed SB 3 reducing timber production taxes, making them more equitable. 

Governor Greg Gianforte recently signed a major agreement with the Forest Service significantly increasing the state role in actively managing hundreds of thousands more acres of national forests with the federal government. 

Insurance Commissioner James Brown issued a memo reminding insurance companies that it is not legal to cancel homeowner insurance policies without justifying explicit wildfire risk.

In Congress, Senator Steve Daines has championed reforms on mandatory timber sales, reining in frivolous litigation, increasing pay for wildland  firefighters, reducing bureaucratic red tape and more. Senator Tim Sheehy is supporting Daines in these efforts  while utilizing his unique experience as an aerial wild land firefighter to improve federal wildfire policy.  

Despite these efforts from Montana Republicans at every level of government, lawsuits from radical environmentalists and a stifling mountain of federal bureaucratic regulations are two of the biggest remaining obstacles to restoring healthy, productive forests. 

It’s time for everyone—hunters, recreationists, conservationists, homeowners, tradesmen, and the forest industry—to unite and continue pushing for reforms that get forests back working for us instead of against us. Now is the time with a motivated federal administration to make a positive change.  Students at Libby High School have for generations been known as the “Libby Loggers.” Only an extreme minority would rather they be called the “Libby Lawyers.”

Properly managed public lands are a win for everyone - humans, wildlife, business, recreation, the list goes on. Let’s restore healthy, managed Montana federal forests.

Let’s be honest: this new property tax law, passed at the last minute by Democrats and a handful of moderate Republicans, doesn’t cut property taxes at all. It just moves the bill around. The new law simply shifts the burden from one tax column to another and calls it reform. This year residential will get a break and business and Ag will pay significantly more. In 2026, businesses get a break while residential boomerangs back up to the top. That’s not relief—it’s misdirection.

Worse, this new property tax law sends a troubling message to Montanans who are trying to plan for the future. If you work hard, buy a cabin, and now rent it part-time to help pay it off, you’re being punished—not because you’re doing harm, but because you’re not using your property the way Helena says you should. That’s not a conservative value nor is it fair. It’s the government telling you what you’re allowed to do with what you’ve earned. Government favoring one use of your property over another and setting punitive tax rates. 

This new property tax law hits Montana property owners, young families trying to invest in their future, and seniors trying to hold onto what they have. These aren’t loopholes—it’s how Montanans have always made ends meet: through saving, self-reliance, and using what they have. When this all shakes out in 2026, Ag land, Businesses and any part of your property that doesn’t qualify for an exemption (outbuildings etc.) will see significant tax increases. If you don’t qualify, the Dept. of Revenue has estimated your property tax liability here in the Flathead will jump a whopping 67%.  We, the undersigned, are as angry as you. 
 
Your conservative Flathead delegation fought against this during the session, and we’ll keep fighting for tax policy that respects Montana values. Values that Democrats and a handful of moderate Republicans don’t seem to understand. And we’ll keep working for real property tax relief—not games, not gimmicks, and not government overreach.

Sen. Matt Regier

Sen. Mark Noland

Rep. Terry Falk

Rep. Steve Kelly

Sen. John Fuller

Rep. Amy Regier 

Rep. Braxton Mitchell

Sen. Carl Glimm 

Rep. Ed Byrne

Rep. Tracy Sharp

Rep. Tom Millett 

Regarding Medicaid, it does not “gut” the program as Democrats claim. It will reduce Medicaid growth from 5% to 3%, remove illegal immigrants from participating and require work requirements, education, or community service of 80 hours per month for able bodied adults without young children. These common sense requirements encourage work, education, and community service and are already included in Montana law.

Regarding tax changes, OBBB extends the Trump tax cuts from 2017 to avoid the biggest tax hike in American history. Without the bill, a working family of four making $75,000 per year would have faced tax increases of almost $1,500 per year. 

Other provisions benefiting working class Montana families include: no taxes on tips and overtime for those making less than $150,000, a $1,000 per person charitable deduction even if you don’t itemize your deductions, a new $6,000 deduction for those 65 and older, a new deduction for $10,000 of automobile loan interest even if you do not itemize, increasing the standard deduction $750 for single taxpayers and $1,500 for married couples, and increasing the state and local tax deduction from $10,000 to $40,000. These provisions will save Montana taxpayers an estimated $114 million in taxes per year just in Montana income taxes. Federal tax savings will be much higher. 

Montana small businesses will also benefit from the above changes in addition to numerous other tax reforms, including extending the 20% qualified business deduction and the ability to expense 100% of new equipment purchases. 

Montana’s state government budget should not be harmed as it looks like we will be over-collecting close to $100 million more in tax revenue than estimated in Fiscal Year 2025. We also have over $1 billion in rainy day and other funds to stabilize any possible revenue shortfalls.

Once again, Montana Democrats are out of touch with working families, seniors, and middle-class taxpayers. Democrats have consistently and repeatedly voted against Montana income tax reductions. Do not fall for the Democrat talking points that OBBB will gut Medicaid, close hospitals and only benefit the rich. Let Democrats know how these tax reforms are benefiting your family and tell them to keep their hands out of your income, especially when Montana already has more than enough tax revenue. 

*****

Senator Greg Hertz, R-Polson, chairs the Montana Senate Tax Committee. 

That fiscally liberal 27 succeeded in passing too many bills that spent too much money, requiring the governor to now veto his way to a balanced budget. The collusion also gave unprecedented powers to the Democratic Senate Minority Leader and reduced the power of the Republican Senate President. They also blocked the expulsion of Senator Jason Ellsworth from the Senate after an ethics investigation found he gave his friend a no-bid contract funded with taxpayer money. It was unfortunate that they made this session more about personalities and not policy. 

Had there been fewer political shenanigans and more unity among Republicans, we’re confident we could have achieved more on judicial reform, property tax relief and the state budget. As it stands, we did pass several good bills to hold judges more accountable, but other important reforms died along the way. On property taxes our goal was meaningful reform but what Montana got was a tax shift. There will be some reduction of rates on primary residences (in many places it will be negated by the value and mill increase), but at the expense of massive tax hikes on other types of property. Most long-term structural reforms didn’t make it across the finish line. When you get your bill in November (especially the Ag community) know that there were many great legislators trying to stop the shift, we were just a few votes short. 

Despite the intentional chaos caused by the 27, strong leadership and conviction from the 23 Republicans produced some victories that Republicans can be proud of from the legislative session. 

We delivered a huge income tax cut that prioritizes relief to the middle class. We reformed Montana’s unemployment insurance system to reduce costs on businesses, passed bills to bolster apprenticeships in the trades, and boosted pay for new teachers. 

The legislature made Montana safer. We passed bills to enhance penalties for crimes committed against vulnerable people, strengthen theft laws, and address trespassing. Republicans also stood up for the safety and privacy of women and girls by passing bills to keep men out of women’s sports, bathrooms, and shelters.

We continued bipartisan work on housing policy to make owning a home in Montana more attainable and affordable, enacting even more limited-government changes to continue the “Montana Miracle” of pro-housing reforms that began in 2023. 

Montana also continues to lead the nation on privacy and technology policy. We expanded privacy protections for neurotechnology data and prohibited the use of genetic sequencers produced by foreign adversaries like China. The legislature also passed a bill protecting Montanans from having their phone or car shut off by a “kill switch” without due process, while also embracing Montanans’ rights to use new technologies by passing the Right to Compute Act and Financial Freedom & Innovation Act.

In sum, both a lot of good and bad came out of the 2025 Legislature. Thank you to all the Montanans who made your voices heard along the way. 

Matt Regier- President

Tom McGillvray- Majority Leader

Ken Bogner- President Pro Tem 

Sue Vinton- Majority Whip

Daniel Zolnikov- Majority Whip 

Barry Usher- Majority Whip 

Democrats and their allies inflated our budget with reckless spending, repeatedly breaking normal legislative procedure to do so. Then, the same Democrat-led coalition rejected numerous amendments brought by conservative Republicans to rein in the spending and save taxpayer money.

How Democrats – on paper, a small minority in the legislature – were able to hijack the budget in the first place is a longer conversation than we have space for in this column.

Senate Democrats took credit for the unbalanced budget in a press release. We say to them: credit for the irresponsible spending is all yours! The budget is not indicative of the conservative, Republican majority that Montanans voted for in November. It is undoubtedly the spawn of Democrats and their political allies. The Democrat press release even said that the supersized budget “did not go far enough” for their liking.

We sincerely hope that Governor Greg Gianforte uses his veto power to trim the fat off the budget and bring some fiscal sanity back to our state’s finances. Democrats’ frivolous spending should be first on the veto chopping block.

Montana has been able to fund essential programs with a balanced budget numerous times before, and we can do it again. The budget as currently proposed will sacrifice Montana’s financial future for some short-term political talking points.

As the legislative session comes to a close, we ask Governor Gianforte to stand with the conservative Republicans who voted against this irresponsible spending and restore balance to the Democrat-hijacked budget. Democrats were unwilling to work with Republican leaders on a compromise, so now the Governor must be uncompromising in his effort to return some semblance of fiscal sanity to Montana’s budget.

*****

Matt Regier (Kalispell) is the President of the Montana Senate. Ken Bogner (Miles City) is the Senate President Pro Tempore. Tom McGillvray (Billings) is the Senate Majority Leader. Carl Glimm (Kila) chairs the Senate Finance & Claims Committee.

SB 270 is a common-sense bill. Some parts of Montana, like my area, are under objective for elk numbers. Other parts of the state have so many concentrated in certain places that they can become a problem. The bill makes sure our elk tag system reflects this reality by lowering the cap on the number of B cow tags in low-population zones and capping them at two in zones with populations higher than objectives.

Responsible hunting is an essential part of conservation. Nature is a fine balance, and this legislation helps us maintain that balance in Montana, preserving elk populations for generations of hunters to come.

Additionally, the bill limits out-of-state landowners to just two B tags, putting the interests of Montana hunters first. No one deserves to enjoy our state’s wildlife and outdoor recreation more than the people who actually live here.

I am committed to preserving Montana’s hunting tradition, protecting our native species, and responsibly managing our land. This bill helps accomplish all of that. I also sponsored Senate Bill 106 this session, which opens the door for drones to be used more for hazing elk off private lands where they are a nuisance.

SB 270 already passed the Senate and is now being heard in the House of Representatives. I urge Montanans who care about elk hunting, conservation, and land management to contact their representatives and express support for the bill. 
 

***** 

Senator Denley Loge, R-St. Regis, is the sponsor of SB 270. 

Tax reform has been a top priority this session; every lawmaker here can confirm that the people of Montana are eager to keep more of their hard-earned money. We have already advanced several pieces of legislation to accomplish this, including measures to provide property tax relief for Montanans using money that tourists pay when they visit and increasing transparency on local property tax levies that are up to voters.

In addition to providing tax relief, we are also focused on making housing more affordable and available so that Montana families can find a home. The Senate has passed a handful of bipartisan pro-housing bills this session in an effort to continue the “Montana Miracle” on housing policy that we started last session. These reforms are designed to increase the supply of affordable and attainable housing without urban sprawl that would decimate our agricultural lands and cherished open space. 

Moreover, we passed legislation to protect private property, such as a bill to make squatting a criminal offense, safeguarding Montanans against the illegal takeover of their homes. We also passed legislation to revise zoning laws to favor more freedom to use your own property.

To make sure that the laws we pass are not unduly shot down by overreaching courts, we are also advancing a series of important judicial reform bills. We passed legislation to bolster honesty in our judicial races by having judge candidates transparently declare their political affiliations and advanced a bill to create a new Government Claims Court to expeditiously resolve critical constitutional cases while easing the workload of other courts, among many other reforms.

After the “transmittal break” at the halfway point of the session, we’re looking forward to taking up reforms proposed by the House of Representatives on education and school funding, reviewing every detail of the state budget, and fulfilling the Senate’s constitutional duty to confirm gubernatorial appointments. 

You can stay informed about our work in the second half of the session by subscribing to our newsletter or tracking legislation at bills.legmt.gov. It has never been easier to stay engaged and watch as we make – or rather, keep – Montana great.

*****

Matt Regier, R-Kalispell, is the President of the Montana Senate. Ken Bogner, R-Miles City, is the President Pro Tempore. Tom McGillvray, R-Billings, is the Senate Majority Leader. Sue Vinton, Barry Usher, Daniel Zolnikov, and Dennis Lenz are the Senate’s Majority Whips. 

TIFs are subsidized by taxpayers outside the TIF district over the decades-long life of a project, which increases residents’ taxes and takes money away from schools and other services. I support TIFs, but they need to be transparent and not abused.

SB 2 does not stop the development of TIFs. That choice will still be up to local governments. However, TIFs should not be used to inflate city budgets at their conclusion, increasing taxes after that point. Under SB 2, TIF districts would become standard parts of a city’s overall tax base when they are sunset, instead of entering as newly taxable property. 

There are ongoing disputes in Montana over TIFs, highlighting the need to reform how they work. In Missoula, TIFs currently collect approximately $20 million per year in property taxes, indirectly raising taxes on everyone in the city. Common sense dictates that diverting $20 million in property taxes will cause other Missoula residents’ taxes to increase. The city already collects approximately $50 million per year in total property taxes right now.

Moreover, the redevelopment agency that administers Missoula TIFs has an annual personnel budget of nearly $1 million for seven full time employees. I suspect some of those employees are making more than average at the expense of taxpayers and schools. 

Roseburg Forest Products properties have several developers looking at developing their site, which will provide more jobs in Missoula. Some of those developers do not want to be annexed into the city of Missoula, nor do they desire TIF money.

Regardless, Missoula wants to put the property into a TIF district to directly control all the taxes from new growth that will happen. Doing so would increase the taxes of Missoula residents, who are already paying some of the highest property taxes in Montana.

By reforming how TIFs work, local residents can directly benefit from their contribution to TIFs through lower property taxes. Taxpayers should not be punished for supporting development; they should be rewarded.

Montanans have made it clear that they want property tax relief. This bill delivers precisely that, while keeping TIFs as an option for cities to revitalize their communities.

*****

Senator Greg Hertz, R-Polson, chairs the Senate Tax Committee in the Montana Legislature

I know exactly how my constituents in the Flathead Valley would answer that question and I’m sure their opinion is shared by other Montanans. That’s why I’m bringing a bill in the upcoming legislative session to change how the state uses money collected from lodging taxes and car rentals. 

For years, tourists and Montanans alike have paid a tax on their hotel stays and rental cars. It’s one of the only ways Montana—without having a sales tax—can collect revenue from the millions of tourists who visit our state every year. 

What those taxes are used for has fluctuated over the years, but one of the primary uses has been state-sponsored recruitment of more tourists. Because everyone pays the lodging tax when staying at a hotel, that means, for example, Montana families who travel to another town for a soccer tournament have been unwittingly contributing to multi-million-dollar advertising campaigns to bring more tourists into the Last Best Place. 

We don’t need that. A lot of people have moved here in recent years. Campgrounds are full and you now need a reservation to get into Glacier National Park during tourism season. We have a housing shortage and escalating home values have contributed to higher property taxes. 

Senator Daniel Zolnikov, R-Billings, made a good change to the lodging tax in the 2023 legislative session, directing more of the money toward dealing with the impacts of tourism, and only promoting tourism in economically depressed places that could use more of it. 

My proposal is to go one step further in 2025: keep a smaller percentage of those taxes going to the purposes Sen. Zolnikov outlined in Senate Bill 540 last session, but use the majority of the money to reduce property taxes.

Initial estimates are that my draft bill (LC0627) would save every Montana resident homeowner and renter up to about $400 on property taxes every single year. 

With my bill, tourists would be helping pay for things like road infrastructure by taking some of that burden off property taxpayers. And the traveling soccer mom paying the lodging tax at a hotel would get a break on her family’s property taxes instead of her money heading out of state to advertise Montana. 

***** 

Senator Carl Glimm, R-Kila, is the Chair of the 2025 Legislature’s Finance and Claims Committee, which handles the state budget. 

Property tax rates don’t work like income taxes or sales taxes. If you have a 25% income tax rate and you make an additional $10,000 of income, your additional income taxes would be $2,500. Simple. And you get similar results in a sales tax.

Property taxes don’t work like that at all. If you own a $300,000 home and your tax rate is 1.35% (the current rate), your taxes are not $4,050 ($300,000 X 1.35%). Changing the rate to 0.76% would also not lower your taxes by $1,770 as you’d expect. That’s because your actual property taxes owed are calculated using many more factors than just the tax rate.

It starts when schools, cities, and counties set their budgets. Then they calculate how much property tax revenue they need to meet those budgets. The formula used to make that calculation includes not just the different tax rates of residential, commercial, agricultural, and other property types, but also total property values of all those types of property within the jurisdiction issuing the taxes. Those numbers differ wildly depending on which part of the state you’re in.

For example, Lake County has 87% residential property, Flathead 78%, and Silver Bow 46%. Changing a tax rate will impact each county and taxpayer differently depending on types of property in each county. Also, lowering one rate (residential) doesn’t cut the taxes local governments receive, but merely shifts the tax burden to other types of property. If all you did was lower the residential property tax rate in a place like Lake County, you’d be shifting (raising) the property taxes on local small businesses enough to put many of them out of business.

To further illustrate these differences, let’s look at Barrett’s, Jopek’s and my taxes.

According to public records, from 2022 to 2023 Barrett’s taxes (Silver Bow) increased by 25% and his appraised value increased by 75%. Jopek’s taxes (Flathead) decreased—yes, decreased—by 3% even while his appraised value increased by 38%. My taxes (Lake) increased by 34% with an appraised value increase of 49%. We all have the same tax rate of 1.35% on our homes yet our taxes changed in very different ways because of different property types in our counties and different budgetary decisions made by our respective local governments.

Property taxes truly are controlled at the local level, not at the state level. That’s why taxes on homes of the same value are much higher or lower depending on the county or city you live in.

The 2025 Legislature will be working on various proposals to reduce property taxes. Our focus will be on Montana full-time residents along with providing taxpayers more control and oversight over future tax increases. However, if your individual taxes decrease, that means another taxpayer’s taxes will increase—unless school, city and county budgets are decreased, or another source of revenue is used to reduce property taxes.

The calculation of property taxes is not simple. Longtime political and government operatives like Barrett and Jopek should know better than misleading the public with a simple “solution” that, if it were implemented, would devastate people like farmers and ranchers or small businesses.

*****

Sen. Greg Hertz, R-Polson, is the Chair of the Senate Tax Committee in the 2025 Legislature.

CI-126 is an extremist dream come true. CI-126 creates a plurality voting system where four candidates, regardless of party, advance to the general election. Plurality voting systems like CI-126 do not result in more moderation or more representative government. Plurality voting systems like CI-126 allow candidates with extreme views and limited bases of support to compete and win elections.

You don’t need to take my word for it. It is what the supporters of CI-126 said in the 2024 Montana voter information pamphlet in support of their companion initiative CI-127. According to the supporters of CI-126, voting systems which allow a candidate to win with less than a majority of the vote enable “candidates to focus on narrow interests and win elections without representing a majority of their constituents.”

“Narrow interests” is a charitable way of putting it. Under CI-126, a person could win elected office with as little as 26% of the vote. This means a candidate with extreme and radical views could easily be elected to office. Eight years ago, my primary election opponent suggested it would be appropriate to put a “bullet” in me at a Cascade County Republican Central Committee meeting. Under CI-126, he would easily advance into the general election and could potentially win elected office.

Top four voting systems do not result in a better field of candidates. Alaska uses a top four voting system like the one contemplated by CI-126. This year’s field for Alaska’s U.S. House seat includes a convicted felon serving a 20 year sentence for threatening to kill judges and police officers and another candidate who wants to “free the Nation State of Alaska.” If CI-126 had been in place in 2018, the top four candidates in the Montana House District 21 race could have included a former KKK organizer.

CI-126 will make a mess out of our political system. With up to four candidates running for elected office, it will mean more money and more advertising. If you are tired of the ads today, image four candidates running for a U.S. Senate seat, all with the possibility of winning office with a small minority of the vote. There are all types of “narrow interests” who could easily afford to spend millions of dollars to elect a Governor, Congressman, or U.S. Senator to serve their interests, not yours, under the system contemplated by CI-126.

We do not need to make our politics more unrepresentative and more extreme. CI-126 is not a solution to the problems in our political system today; it is a recipe for disaster. Protect our democracy by voting against CI-126.

Steve Fitzpatrick, Senate District 10, Montana Senate Majority Leader

Today, Montanans are being asked to engage in another public policy experiment – the top four primary. Like the promoters of electric deregulation, the backers of CI-126 are also making a lot of promises. They claim it will lead to more moderation and more representative outcomes.

You should be skeptical of these claims.

Under CI-126, four candidates, regardless of party, advance to the general election. While supporters of CI-126 claim this will lead to more moderation, the opposite is probably true. CI-126 creates a mechanism which allows fringe minority candidates to advance to the general election and take enough votes to spoil the outcome of a race for a mainstream Republican or Democrat candidate.

To give you an example, consider this year’s U.S. Senate race. Although most Montanans think Jon Tester is on the liberal side, there are people who do not think Jon Tester is liberal enough. Under CI-126, a far-left Democrat candidate could advance to the general election and potentially siphon off enough votes to guarantee a Republican election. In his last three elections, Jon Tester has never gotten more than 51% of the vote. A second Democratic candidate, who picks up as little as 3% of the vote, would virtually guarantee a Republican win.

While there are certainly Republicans who could lose as a result of a spoiler effect, the party who has the most to lose is actually the Democratic Party. As the minority party, there is simply not enough base Democratic vote to sustain a loss of even 3% to 5% statewide. Moreover, there are more Democratic leaning legislative seats with tight margins between the Republican and Democratic vote.

The spoiler effect is a well-known effect of plurality voting systems. To compensate for the spoiler effect, most political scientists advocate for a ranked choice voting system. However, a ranked choice voting system is not a cure for the disease caused by fringe spoilers. In a ranked choice voting system, voters frequently do not mark a second or third choice. Consequently, fringe candidates still have the ability to spoil the outcome of an election.

Under CI-126, fringe candidates might not just spoil elections, they might actually get elected. Under our current system, the winning candidate in a general election needs to get something close to a majority to win. However, under CI-126, it is possible for a candidate to win with as little as 26% of the vote. Given the polarization in our electorate, it would be quite possible to elect an extreme right wing or extreme left wing candidate to office. If you think our system is bad today, CI-126 could make it even worse.

CI-126 is not a cure for polarization in our electorate. CI-126 is an ill-advised public policy experiment. Our Constitution should not be treated like a science project. Vote no on CI-126.

Instead of safeguarding existing rights, CI-128’s vague and radical language would remove important protections that many Montanans, including pro-choice supporters, agree with—like limits on late-term abortions and the state’s ability to regulate procedures for the safety of both the mother and the unborn child.

The initiative’s language allows any individual to perform an abortion without state-level standards or oversight to define who is qualified to perform abortions. Additionally, CI-128 specifies a patient has no legal recourse when care is incompetent, leaving women vulnerable to substandard care and accountability for those inflicting harm.

Stigmatizing words suggest that abortion access is under immediate threat in order to elicit fear and support for the initiative. In reality, CI-128 doesn’t protect abortion rights, but introduces new dangers by removing widely-endorsed, mindful regulations that protect women. 

Montanans deserve better than emotionally charged rhetoric pushing reckless changes. We value thoughtful decision-making based on facts, not fear, and CI-128 should be treated the same way. 

Rep. Amy Regier, Kalispell

Keith Regier, SD#3

Kalispell, MT

Community Choice Schools and Public Charter Schools are public schools. They are free, open to all students, and funded by taxpayers, just like other public schools. The key difference between Charter Schools and Choice Schools in Montana is that Choice Schools will operate with greater flexibility in exchange for heightened accountability. This means they will have the freedom to innovate in their teaching methods and curricular offerings to better serve their students while still taking standardized tests.

Contrary to the claim that Charter Schools are “outside of public oversight and supervision,” these schools are, in fact, subject to oversight by their authorizing body, which in Montana is the Board of Public Education. Similarly, Choice Schools will be overseen and supervised by a public agency, the Community Choice Schools Commission and even some local school boards will have the authority to authorize. However, if a Choice School fails to meet specific performance goals or fails to meet community needs, it may be closed. No other school model has this level of accountability, not even your local school district. This level of accountability ensures that only high performing Community Choice Schools may continue to operate with public funds.

Let me say this once and for all: public Choice Schools and Charter Schools are not private schools. To state otherwise is to intentionally spread misinformation. Choice Schools, like Charter Schools, are publicly funded, do not charge tuition and do not have entrance requirements. They are free, public, and open to all students, regardless of income, and cannot discriminate based on a student’s needs, including special education requirements.

Far from being controlled by “out-of-state corporations,” in many other states, charter schools are often founded by local educators, parents, and community leaders who are deeply invested in having the power to choose the best type of school for their children. Starting this fall, Montana has 19 Public Charter Schools opening, all of which are authorized by the BPE and run by local school boards. Eventually, Choice Schools will be governed by their own governing boards, allowing them a higher level of autonomy and responsiveness to the needs of teachers and students. This is one of the reasons why the Montana legislature passed the Community Choice Schools Act in 2023—to give communities the power and resources to open high-quality schools that can intentionally diversify academic programs across our state.

Montana’s future Community Choice Public Schools will offer a valuable option for families seeking a learning environment that best meets their child’s needs. Whether it’s a focus on STEM, the arts, classical curriculum, or career technical education, Community Choice Schools and Public Charter Schools can tailor their programs to serve different student populations. In doing so, they provide a much-needed alternative for families who may feel their children are not thriving in the traditional public-school setting to which they are assigned.

The real question is not whether Charter Schools and Choice Schools should exist, but how we can best support all public schools – traditional, community choice and charter schools alike—in delivering a high-quality education to every Montana child. Adequate funding is undoubtedly a crucial part of the solution, but so is the willingness to embrace innovation and new ways of thinking about what public education can look like in today’s ever-changing world.

Rather than pitting Choice Schools and Charter Schools against traditional public schools, we should be working together to ensure that every child in Montana has access to an education that prepares them for success in a rapidly changing world. By fostering collaboration and sharing best practices, we can create a public education system that truly serves all of our students. Montana’s citizens deserve nothing less.

Go to ednavigatemt.com to learn more about Montana’s Choice Schools and Charter Schools.

Sue Vinton, House Majority Leader

For years we have watched news reports of the porous southern border facilitating the illegal influx of 10 million migrants under the Biden presidency (thehill.com, Jan.2024). To be clear, we support immigration- legal immigration. Knock and come through our country's front door the right way. If you are here to chase the dream and embrace the love of our country and values, we welcome you. It is the illegal part with which we have trouble. Illegal migration has brought drugs, human trafficking, mules, cartels, terrorists on watch lists, and much more negative fallout. For years, this has been 'behind the curtain' of the public in Montana. Just ask our Attorney General Austin Knudsen. He continually and relentlessly has warned us of the surge in fentanyl smuggling, a staggering 20,000% increase in confiscations since 2019; and sex trafficking, cases escalating over 116% since 2021 (dojmt.gov March 2024). These crises have become pervasive in Montana due to the current Federal administration's border policy. We have confirmed illegals flown to Kalispell from New York. When hypocritical sanctuary cities realize Montana won’t send them back, where do you think they will keep sending them? Every town in Montana is at risk if we do not act. We are tired of excuses like 'We just need to elect a new president' or 'Let's just wait for the next legislative session’. Yes, we need a federal government that will enforce legal immigration. Yes, we need courts that uphold the law. However, we are the Montana legislative branch responsible for making the law. The time to act is now. The Montana Constitution gives us the task of not only a regular session, but also sessions during the interim as determined by a written request of the members. Montana law enforcement and local leaders tell us they are missing state authority to act. Well, let's give it to them. Call, email, or text your legislator and ask them to join the call for a session to implement authority at the state level to protect our state. This is crucial for the safety and security of all Montanans. 

Rep. Matt Regier, Speaker 

Rep. Sue Vinton, Majority Leader

Rep. Rhonda Knudsen, Speaker Pro Tem

When I served in the Legislature, the Republican Party fought for fiscal conservative principles. Even if we did not win every battle, we certainly had a majority in our party willing to fight against tax and spend policies, government subsidies, and more government programs. Sadly, those days are gone. In the last legislative session, a large number of Republicans preferred to team up with Democrats to spend millions on unnecessary government programs.

This new dynamic is best exemplified by looking at SB 442. SB 442 takes marijuana tax money and allocates it to several new government programs including a new road maintenance program for counties which do not allow the sale of marijuana. When the people of the Montana voted to allow the sale of marijuana, the deal was straightforward – each county gets to decide if it wants to sell marijuana, but if a county does not want to sell marijuana, the county does not get the benefit of marijuana taxes.

SB 442 is different. Under SB 442, every county gets a share of marijuana taxes. Nearly 28% of all marijuana tax revenue for county road maintenance will go to counties which do not allow the sale of marijuana. Instead of using marijuana taxes to do something like pay down property taxes, marijuana tax revenue from counties like Yellowstone County, where they allow the sale of marijuana, will be used to subsidize road maintenance activities in counties like Phillips County, which does not.

The simple reality is that SB 442 is just another tax and spend, subsidy program. Under SB 442, marijuana tax revenue is being taken from places which suffer the consequences of marijuana sales and gives it to places which do not suffer any of the burdens of marijuana. Whether you like marijuana or not, it has real impacts on law enforcement and social services. The places which suffer the burden of marijuana sales should be the places which experience the benefit of marijuana tax revenue.

The Governor wisely decided to veto SB 442; however, many Republicans and several special interest groups are pushing to override the veto. This crossover coalition is pushing to grow government at the expense of taxpayers. The conservative vote is to uphold the veto. The liberal vote is to override it. In a few weeks, we will find out who made the conservative vote and who made the liberal vote. If you are a conservative, please use this information to guide your vote in the Republican primary. No fiscal conservative should vote to override SB 442.

            Like many Montanans, I live in a rural area and I know we could benefit by improving maintenance of county roads.  However, SB 442 is not the solution to our problem.  SB 442 is a bill written for the benefit of a small number of people at the expense of everyone else.

            The primary sponsor of SB 442 is Senator Mike Lang.  If SB 442 goes into effect, the seven counties (Blaine, Daniels, Hill, Phillips, Roosevelt, Sheridan, and Valley) represented by Senator Lang will receive nearly $1.6 million dollars a year in distributions to pay for road maintenance, nearly 17% of the statewide total, even though the seven counties represented by Senator Lang only comprise 4.6% of the state population.  In contrast, the county I represent (Cascade) will only receive $235,000 in distributions annually even though our population is greater than the combined population of the seven counties represented by Senator Lang.  Cascade County also pays more in marijuana taxes too. 

            That is one example, but there are many more.  For example, Cascade County will get more in distributions than Yellowstone County even though Yellowstone County pays over 2.5 times more in marijuana taxes and has a population nearly double the population of Cascade County.  As much as I love Cascade County, I am struggling to justify why Yellowstone County should get less than we do.  At a very minimum, Yellowstone County probably has twice the amount of traffic on its public roads and many more needs.  Getting such a paltry amount is not right.

            There is no nice way of saying it.  SB 442 is a redistribution of wealth scheme.  SB 442 takes marijuana tax money and gives it to a favored few.  As a legislator, I have a duty to my constituents, but I also have a duty to the people of the State of Montana.  Its not right to come up with a scheme which extravagantly favors some parts of the state at the expense of everyone else.  We have a responsibility to do our best to treat everyone in our state fairly.  SB 422 fails this basic test.  On these grounds alone, the Governor was justified in vetoing the bill.

I am a Republican because I believe in fiscal responsibility and limited government.  Redistribution of wealth is not part of the party platform.  If the members of the Legislature want to draft a plan to assist counties in paying for road maintenance, the Legislature needs to draft a bill which takes into consideration the population and the amount of marijuana taxes paid.  We can do that in the 2025 session.  There is no reason to pass the bill to find out how it works and no reason to start giving special treatment to certain parts of the state at the expense of everyone else.  We can do better than SB 442.

Senator Wendy McKamey SD12

Article IX, Environment and Natural Resources, is comprised of 7 Sections. This is where the right to a clean and healthful environment is found, the hinge on which the Held lawsuit swings.  Section 1 states, “The state and each person shall maintain a clean and healthful environment in Montana for present and future generations”. The very next sentence states, “The Legislature shall provide for the administration and enforcement of this duty” (emphasis added). The directive could not be clearer. It is the designated responsibility of the Legislative branch to define policy. The Montana district court ruling in Held v Montana wandered beyond constitutional directive into policy making. Article IX directs oversight, management and responsibility of Montana’s environment and natural resources 13 times to the Legislature. Not once was the Judicial branch mentioned in Article IX, nor given any power to set policy or direction. Thirteen distinct times our Constitution explicitly gave the Legislature the enforcement of balancing the right of ‘a clean and healthful environment’ and now a Montana District court has erroneously ruled in lieu of the legislature. Thirteen to Zero, how could the authors of our Constitution make it any clearer? 

Regardless of the issue, we must uphold the function of our state government and not pervert the role of the Judicial Branch.  I look forward to the Montana Supreme Court following the Constitution, upholding the integrity of the court, and placing this issue back where it belongs - in the legislature. A legislature elected by the people and closest to the people. The Capitol legislative hearing room is where the public testifies, where legislators respond to our constituents and set environmental policy as our Constitution directs. That does not happen in a courtroom and never should.

Matt Regier- Speaker Montana House 

While many members of the Legislature find vetoes frustrating, a vote to override a veto is an opportunity for the Legislature to reconsider its decision and take a second look at a bill. In the last session, the Governor vetoed SB 442 and now the Legislature will have the opportunity to consider whether to override the veto. After having the chance to examine the bill again along with recent calculations from the Montana Department of Revenue, I have concluded the Governor is right, SB 442 as written, is poor public policy and should not be enacted into law.

On its face, Senate Bill 442 is something I would normally support. SB 442 takes marijuana tax proceeds and allocates the tax revenue for county road maintenance, habitat management, and veterans services. However, like any bill, the devil is in the details. In the case of SB 442, the mechanism for allocating county road maintenance funding is inequitable and fundamentally unfair to the vast majority of Montanans.

Under SB 442, county road maintenance funds are allocated based upon a formula which is primarily driven by the number of rural road miles. The formula does not consider the amount of marijuana taxes collected in a county, the population of the county, or the amount of traffic on a road. A consequence of using this method of allocation would be that some counties would receive a disproportionate share of the tax proceeds.

In 2023, Yellowstone County, Montana’s largest county by population, paid $8.6 million dollars in marijuana taxes. Under SB 442, Yellowstone County will receive $210,057 in marijuana tax revenue for road maintenance. In contrast, Phillips County, the thirty-eighth largest county by population, which did not pay any marijuana tax, will receive at least $237,832 in marijuana tax revenue for road maintenance. Does that sound fair to you?

Also in 2023, Lewis and Clark County, the sixth largest county by population, paid $3.4 million dollars in marijuana taxes. Under SB 442, Lewis and Clark County will receive $196,074 in marijuana tax revenue for road maintenance. On the other hand, Sheridan County, the thirty ninth largest county by population, will receive an almost identical amount ($196,834), even though Sheridan County only paid $159,765 in marijuana taxes.

No county is treated worse than Silver Bow County. In 2023, Silver Bow County, with a population of approximately 35,000 people, paid $2.3 million in marijuana taxes. Under SB 442, Silver Bow County will only receive $55,478 in marijuana tax revenue. Only one county will receive less. In contrast, Garfield County, with a population under 1000 people, will get nearly three times as much ($163,091) in marijuana revenue. There are twenty counties, which do not collect any marijuana tax revenue, which get more than Silver Bow County.

As these figures show, the funding formula in SB 442 is unfair. If the Legislature wants to allocate marijuana tax revenue for county road maintenance, it should go back to the drawing board and come up with a formula that is fair and equitable for all Montana counties. There is no reason to shove through a bill which benefits some counties at the expense of others. The Legislature can do better in 2025. Thus, the Governor’s veto of SB 442 should be sustained.

The evening we arrived in Douglas we stopped at a convenience store and by chance ran into three Border Patrol agents with three horses in a horse trailer just going out on patrol. We had a conversation on the part they play intervening with those illegally coming across and moving through the rough desert area filled with mesquite bushes. 

The next day we traveled with the Border Patrol along the border wall. The wall there was a combination of three different styles. When we were there in the 70’s I don’t remember much of a wall at all. The main port in Douglas is very well staffed and maintained. We were able to visit on the many challenges they deal with. The wall across the desert at Douglas is partly a wall approximately 18 feet tall and then blends into a 27 foot steel wall with wire at the top that is very intimidating to view. Even then, the cartels have strategies to get people to our side of the wall with a lot of effort on their part and at great peril to the ones being trafficked. It is such a profitable business for the cartel they are willing to risk the lives and well-being of those they are bringing into our country.

The next day, Doreen and I were allowed to attend a round table discussion among 24 community members in the Cochise area and presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. Each member had five minutes to describe the effect the current border policies are having on the area, economy, schools, hospitals, law enforcement, public safety, etc. Kennedy took meticulous notes and asked detailed questions to clarify certain statements. We also had lunch together and watched presentations of real-life situations.  

We were treated to an evening with friends we met along the way. One was a Border Patrol agent, his wife a teacher in an elementary school. Here again we had enlightening conversations, and were invited to her school the next day, visiting with the vice superintendent and one of the principals. Having served as a School board member in the 90’s, it was helpful to understand some of the dilemmas they face.  

We visited with a lady Doreen met in New Mexico. Her husband was killed along with his dog, by the cartel, as he was out checking on water for his cows. We also had a morning visit with a young rancher still trying to survive in the same area. 

I will conclude with how serious this is. It is imperative we change course quickly. This will haunt us for decades to come.  

*****

Senator Bruce “Butch” Gillespie, R-Ethridge, represents Montana Senate District 9 in the Montana Legislature.