Jim Elliott

The 1^st Alabama Cavalry Regiment, United States Volunteers, is not a well-known outfit in the history of the Civil War, but it fought alongside General Sherman and served as his escort in the march from Atlanta to the Sea. The regiment was raised in Huntsville, Alabama.

They were men of the northern Alabama hill country who were loyal to the Union and refused to be drafted into the Confederate forces that controlled the state. It was common for areas of Tennessee, Alabama, and Mississippi to contain citizens of anti-Confederate, pro-Union sympathizers. Indeed, the citizens of today’s West Virginia live in a state that seceded from the Confederate state of Virginia.

I raise this issue to point out that in a political climate that seems to be unified there are always some individuals, groups of people, and even entire geographical areas that think independently from the majority. It is hard for the majority to tolerate this, let alone believe it. But it is something to be reckoned with when we come to Montana politics and especially with those Oregonians, Idahoans, Washingtonians, and yes, Californians who want to form their own state which is free from the liberally political coastal areas.

Here in Montana, we have, and have always had, enclaves of people with different political views who have had to live in political jurisdictions that they disagree with. It is tough, because while the laws are created and enforced by the majority, they have to be obeyed by everyone. This raises a point that I think is willfully ignored by majority governments and that is that the majority ought to be sensitive and accommodating, within reason, to the sensibilities of the minority among them.

Missoula County is a good place to examine. In the Legislature I represented the rural areas of western Missoula County, as well as Mineral and Sanders Counties. It seemed the further one got from downtown Missoula the less love there was for it, but at the same time, it was the trade center for the area, so, like it or not, we had to deal with it.

Now, even though we Montanans believe we are a people of free thinkers, often that means we really want everyone to be free to think exactly like we do, and so tolerance is not high on our list of ways to treat those with different viewpoints.

It has always seemed strange to me that one level of government wants to impose conformity on those governments beneath it, even though they are elected by the same people. So, what might be good for the people of the city of Missoula might not be welcomed by the entirety of Missoula County and there might be conflict between the city and county governments. And definitely, with Republican control of the state government, there is conflict of conservative state government with liberally controlled city governments. This leads to the state passing laws to restrict the abilities of the city government to enact laws that their local citizens want to see.

And once laws are passed that create conflict between those two forces, who decides? Why, the courts, of course, which are non-partisan. For now.

The current Republican idea is to bring the courts to rule in favor of the laws passed by the state government, which presently the courts often disagree with, and so rule against. By being able to put political party labels on judicial positions the majority government can rule the state as it sees fit and control the independence of the lesser governments. To this end, The Republican party in Montana is hoping to enact laws that can help elect courts that are more in tune with Republican thinking.

Probably the most important decision in the writing of the 1972 Montana Constitution was to have the delegates seated in alphabetical order rather than by political party. Who made the motion is lost to history, but the decision itself made history. It freed the delegates from the bonds of political pressure that happen when people are surrounded by others of the same political opinion. It allowed delegates to interact as individuals, rather than political robots. It allowed delegates to think and to contemplate ideas that had a diversity not found in party politics.

It would be good to return to that method today.

Montana Gov. Greg Gianforte rolled out an agenda of tax cuts and conservative social reforms Monday evening in his State of the State address.

The recently reelected Republican governor called for hundreds of millions in income tax cuts, along with a reduction in state property taxes on primary residences. He urged restrictions on child access to social media, including a cellphone ban in public schools.

Gianforte also used the speech to double down on criticisms of the Montana judiciary and tout efforts that seek to enforce strict sex and gender binaries in many aspects of public life — two salient political issues for the Montana GOP. 

The address came at the start of the 69th legislative session, and Gianforte needs the support of majority-Republican lawmakers to pass his priorities. Though the evening began with members of “The Nine” — a bipartisan group that led a week-long shutdown of Senate committee work — escorting Gianforte onto the House floor.

The escorts were selected by Senate President Matt Regier, R-Kalispell, who lost control of the Senate’s first week to nine lawmakers who balked at being assigned to a committee of questionable purpose. One of the nine, former Senate President Jason Ellsworth, R-Hamilton, quipped that he was selected “I assume, out of respect.”

Regier told the press last week that Gianforte hadn’t played a role in the committee dustup, which shut down bill progress as Republican leaders attempted to work through reassignments. 

The governor led with tax cuts but pivoted quickly to his proposed budget, which combines tax cuts with investments in public safety, teacher pay and housing infrastructure.

Gianforte discussed several of his spending pitches during the hour-long address, including a $100 million ask to provide low-interest loans to help pay for sewer lines and other infrastructure. Gianforte said the money would support new urban housing, expanding an effort he championed during the 2023 Legislature.

The income tax cut Gianforte proposed would extend his prior income tax reductions by lowering the state’s top-bracket rate from 5.9% to 4.9% and modestly expand a tax credit benefiting lower-income working families. According to the Legislative Fiscal Division, the top-bracket rate cut would reduce state tax collections by about $350 million a year and the tax credit for lower-wage earners would reduce their taxes by about $20 million a year.

The governor also asked lawmakers to fast-track his flagship “homestead” property tax proposal, which would increase taxes on second homes in order to lower tax bills on primary homes owned or rented by Montanans. Passing that proposal by mid-February, Gianforte said, would give state tax officials the ability to implement it this year instead of next.

Gianforte said the homestead proposal would reduce homeowner taxes by about 15%. MTFP estimated previously that the tax bill for the state’s median residential property rose by 21% between 2022 and 2023. 

​​“I don’t believe, for example, that a Californian who drops into Montana to ski once in a while near their Montana mansion should get a property tax cut. It’s not fair. It’s not fair to Montanans who own their homes and live here and who invest their lives in their communities,” Gianforte said.

While the state is again heading into a legislative session with a sizable surplus, Gianforte didn’t call Monday for tax rebates along the lines of the income and property tax rebates he and Republican legislators authorized in 2023.

The governor also avoided several significant policy issues during the wide-ranging speech, including abortion, the reauthorization of Medicaid expansion and child care — none of which received specific mention. The governor also did not address state relations with sovereign tribal nations.

MORE MONEY FOR TEACHER PAY, SCHOLARSHIPS

Public education netted Gianforte his first standing ovation of the night, nearly half an hour into his address, as he singled out the $100 million proposed in his budget to raise teacher pay. The money targets low wages, the most-cited challenge to recruiting and retaining educators across the state. Gianforte’s plan would buttress an effort by several Republican lawmakers to embed pay increases directly into Montana’s public school funding formula. 

“As a son and father of teachers, I’m well aware that teaching is one of the most noble professions,” Gianforte said. “For too long, though, Montana teachers, especially those just beginning their careers, have not been compensated properly for their work.”

In addition to heightened funding for teacher pay, Gianforte announced his intention to increase state support for STEM and trades-based education as well as a proposed $6 million boost to the Big Sky Scholarship Program, a dollar-for-dollar tax credit for private donations supporting public school programs and private school scholarships. 

The governor also reiterated a commitment to “creating a distraction-free learning environment” for students by banning or restricting smartphones in schools. Gianforte’s budget includes $1 million to fund state grants incentivizing local districts to adopt such policies. Hellgate Elementary School District Superintendent Molly Blakely, who has imposed a cellphone-free policy, was a governor’s guest.

Gianforte proposed requiring parental consent for child use of social media and a ban on companies selling data about children using social media. He also called on legislators to empower the state government to investigate companies that violate the law. 

“We should require default privacy settings for minors on social media,” Gianforte said. “We should have a curfew, a blackout, on social media overnight for kids. Kids need more rest. Not more reels on Instagram. They need more sleep. Not more Snapchat.” 

COURT CRITICISMS AND GENDER LAWS

Gianforte spent a portion of his remarks focusing on Republican losses before Montana judges on laws related to transgender Montanans. 

The governor chastised state courts for alleged liberal bias and credited “extreme-left, dark-money groups who devise clever names to hide their intent” with electing sympathetic judges. Montana’s two newly elected state Supreme Court justices sat beneath Gianforte as he spoke, alongside other members of the bench.

Gianforte backed partisan judicial races, a major change from current nonpartisan elections. The Legislature will consider that proposal in the coming days. Newly elected Chief Justice Cory Swanson declined to comment about the governor’s remarks.

Democrats remained seated during many of the governor’s comments about sex and gender laws, while their Republican colleagues rewarded Gianforte with several standing ovations. One member of the minority party who was not present in the chamber was Rep. Zooey Zephyr, D-Missoula, a transgender lawmaker and outspoken advocate for the LGTBQ+ community.

“The Governor used his speech to repeatedly attack trans Montanans & push for further restrictions on our ability to exist in public,” Zephyr wrote in a later comment on social media. “These continued unconstitutional attacks have no place in Montana.”

‘ALL-OF-THE-ABOVE’ ENERGY AND INFRASTRUCTURE INITIATIVES

Gianforte also touched on energy production and consumer energy bills, using the address as an opportunity to draw a comparison between his vision for the United States’ energy future and soon-to-be-former President Joe Biden’s.

“The heavy hand of the federal government has thwarted energy development. We need affordable, reliable power, and we need the federal government’s support, not obstruction. We need to unleash Montana and America’s all-of-the-above energy production,” Gianforte said, going on to announce his Unleashing Energy Task Force, which he said would build on the Legislature’s energy-related work.

Over the past four years, Gianforte has frequently criticized the Biden administration for its focus on limiting emissions of climate-warming greenhouse gases. In late November, Gianforte issued a statement denouncing the Bureau of Land Management’s moratorium on new coal leases in the Powder River Basin, which holds the country’s largest recoverable coal reserves. Within two weeks, Wyoming and Montana sued the BLM over the moratorium.

During his tenure as governor, Gianforte has supported a variety of energy companies and projects, including the Colstrip power plant and the coal mine that fuels it, a nearly $1 billion eastern Montana wind farm, a new high-voltage transmission line, and a biofuel refinery that Montana Renewables, a subsidiary of Calumet, opened in Great Falls in 2021. 

Gianforte did not use the word “climate” in his address Monday, but he did mention funding goals geared toward making the state more resilient to natural disasters, such as the siphon failures that last June left northern Montana communities dependent on the St. Mary River for drinking water and irrigation in a lurch.

Gianforte highlighted two items in his budget oriented toward such infrastructure: a $100 million one-time allocation for state projects “that reduce or eliminate long-term risk to people and property from natural disasters like aging levees and canals that might fail,” and a $10 million annual boost in bridge repairs.

REBUTTALS FROM DEMOCRATS, FREEDOM CAUCUS

Democrats highlighted a number of shared political priorities with Gianforte, including affordable housing and education. The minority party balked at Gianforte’s call for partisan judicial races. 

“Democrats will be working hard to make Montana fair by bringing tax [relief] and renewing Medicaid,” Sen. Shane Morigeau, D-Missoula, said in his address.

Morigeau identified the well-being of Native American communities in Montana as one of the Democratic caucus’ focus areas. In an interview after the address, Morigeau also cast doubt on Gianforte’s rosy picture of Montana’s financial future.

“People can say, ‘we’re going to reduce taxes,’ but how much is that for you, how much is that for big corporations and how much of that is that for working Montanans?”

Gianforte’s speech received mixed reactions from the conservative Montana Freedom Caucus, a mix of hyper-conservative Republican lawmakers from the House and Senate, some of whom did not attend the governor’s remarks. 

In a press conference after the speech, caucus chair and Rep. Jerry Schillinger, R-Circle, said the group is prioritizing property tax reductions, a limited state budget, election and border security and judicial reform. He also advocated for ending Medicaid expansion and curtailing abortion. 

The group said it appreciated Gianforte’s calls for tighter laws regulating the judiciary and could see some places where their members’ proposals for property tax reductions could live alongside the governor’s homestead exemption.

“Let’s pass them both,” said Sen. Carl Glimm, R-Kila. “Why not?” 

California couple John and Stacy Ambler are in the midst of a legal fight to keep their home after building it without permission in Glacier National Park in Montana.

Newsweek contacted the Amblers’ legal team, the Flathead Conservation District’s legal team, and the Friends of Montana’s Streams and Rivers for comment via email.

Why It Matters

National parks in the United States are under constant pressure from environmental damages. While the Ambler house is small, allowing it to remain could have major ramifications for how construction in national parks is handled in the future.

The case could also set a precedent for how these kinds of disputes are handled.

What To Know

The Amblers built their home on the McDonald Creek, in Flathead County, Montana, but they quickly faced opposition over environmental issues.

“Glacier National Park did not ‘allow’ the construction on this private property,” the Flathead Conservation District said in a January 2024 court filing. “Glacier National Park has no regulations related to construction on private property. There are rigorous rules related to construction within Glacier National Park (and all federal lands), none of which were complied with by the plaintiffs…The plaintiffs obtained no valid permit, contract or agreement with the United States.”

The Amblers are now facing a federal lawsuit after suing the Flathead Conservation District, arguing that private inholding properties inside the national park are immune from state law as they are a federal jurisdiction.

According to Cowboy State Daily, the Amblers’ home is located in an area where there are no floodplain designations from Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) because it wasn’t mapped. Due to this, the county is limited to regulate floodplain development.

The Amblers’ new neighbors, who were annoyed at the loophole that they used to try and continue building the home, organized the Friends of Montana’s Streams and Rivers (FMSR), which campaigns to protect the integrity of the park’s streams.

The Cowboy State Daily reported that the house can be seen from a nearby bridge, where neighbors keep tabs on the property as they continue to organize against it.

What People Are Saying

Rob Farris-Olsen, an attorney representing Friends of Montana’s Streams and Rivers, said in a statement to the Cowboy State Daily: “It’s frustrating. There’s no continuity of regulation between downstream and upstream. For Wyoming, there’s not a lot of inholdings within Yellowstone. And the ceding of the Grand Tetons to the feds, that was very different than Glacier. I’m not really sure how much of an effect this will have on future Wyoming cases. However, it creates this regulatory void for a lot of inholdings because there’s no building permits necessarily.”

What Happens Next

The case remains ongoing in federal court. If the Amblers are successful, the court could grant them immunity from state law, allowing them to keep the house.

Do you have a story we should be covering? Do you have any questions about this article? Contact LiveNews@newsweek.com.