Connect with us

Montana

Montana, Wyoming reps vote against debt ceiling bill

Published

on

Montana, Wyoming reps vote against debt ceiling bill


The debt ceiling bill passed the full house, 314-117, on Wednesday night.

The deal was struck late Saturday.

The legislation did face opposition from the two representatives from Montana and the one from Wyoming.

Rep. Matt Rosendale, R-Mont., representing the eastern part of the state, voted against the debt ceiling bill and was among 35 representatives who signed a letter to Speaker Kevin McCarthy.

Advertisement

“What we saw was again, a reversion back to the swamp tactics where the speaker went behind closed doors with the president and a handful of others and they developed a piece of legislation that doesn’t contain any of those provisions and brought it back,” Rosendale said. “This is a whole new bill.”

Rosendale says the debt ceiling will increase by at least $4 trillion.

He says it does not eliminate 87,000 IRS agents, the inflation Reduction Act with green energy subsidies and the $400 billion student loan redistribution program.

“They have already made the deal with the Democrats to to enrich themselves and to sell the American people down the river,” Rosendale said.

“For those who are afraid that they’re going to get audited because the President wants to have 87,000 new IRS agents, right now he has zero,” said Speaker Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif. “We took every single dollar they were going to hire somebody this year away.”

Advertisement

Rep. Harriet Hageman, R-Wyo., wanted to see more cuts.

“And the other thing is that I don’t like is that we are suspending the debt limit,” Hageman said. “So it is going to be whatever is spent between now and January 1 2025.”

Hageman said it’s not know what the debt increase would be.

She does not trust the deadline of June 5, which was announced as the date when the U.S. would not be able to pay its debts if the the ceiling was not raised.

“It’s Democrats who have always been clear, we will not allow this country to suffer a devastating default,” said Rep. Katherine Clark, R-Mass.

Advertisement

Rep. Ryan Zinke, R-Mont., the western Montana representative, sent a prepared statement.

“We have to look out for number one, the Constitution number two, Montana,” Zinke said. “This bill doesn’t meet the bell on either point.

“The people of Wyoming are very opposed to this particular bill,” Hageman said.

“This legislation absolutely is an example of all of the worst that Washington has to offer,” Rosendale said.





Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Montana

Montana Supreme Court affirms decision in landmark youth climate case

Published

on

Montana Supreme Court affirms decision in landmark youth climate case


What’s New

The Montana Supreme Court on Wednesday affirmed a landmark climate decision that declared the state was violating residents’ constitutional right to a clean environment by allowing oil, gas and coal projects without regard for global warming.

Why It Matters

The decision reinforces an August 2023 ruling by District Court Judge Kathy Seeley, who found that Montana’s practices violated its residents’ constitutional right to a “clean and healthful environment.”

This pivotal case, spearheaded by a group of young plaintiffs aged 6 to 23, represented a milestone for climate advocates seeking judicial intervention to compel governmental action on climate change.

What To Know

On Wednesday in a 6-1 ruling, the Montana Supreme Court upheld the August 2023 decision.

Advertisement

The court’s decision strikes down a state policy that prohibited the consideration of greenhouse gas emissions in granting permits for fossil fuel development.

The state had previously appealed the ruling by Seeley, and arguments were heard in July, in which the state argued that greenhouse gases released from Montana fossil fuel projects are minuscule on a global scale and reducing them would have no effect on climate change.

Dale Schowengerdt, representing Montana Governor Greg Gianforte and state environmental agencies, argues before the Montana Supreme Court on July 10, 2024, in Helena, Montana, in the youth climate lawsuit Held v. Montana. The Montana Supreme…


Thom Bridge/Independent Record/ AP

Chief Justice Mike McGrath dismissed the state’s argument that Montana’s emissions are insignificant on a global scale, likening the defense to an “everyone else is doing it” excuse.

McGrath wrote, “The right to a clean and healthful environment is meaningless if the State abdicates its responsibility to protect it.”

What Are People Saying

Melissa Hornbein, an attorney with the Western Environmental Law Center and attorney for the plaintiffs said, “With the ruling now in place, the Montana Supreme Court’s decision compels the state to carefully assess the greenhouse gas emissions and climate impacts of all future fossil fuel permits.”

Advertisement

Chief Justice Mike McGrath wrote for the majority: “Plaintiffs may enforce their constitutional right to a clean and healthful environment against the State, which owes them that affirmative duty, without requiring everyone else to stop jumping off bridges or adding fuel to the fire. Otherwise the right to a clean and healthful environment is meaningless.”

Republican Governor Greg Gianforte said in a statement that the state was still reviewing the decision, but said it will lead to “perpetual lawsuits that will waste taxpayer dollars and drive up energy bills for hardworking Montanans.

Pushback From State Leadership

The ruling has sparked a backlash from Gianforte, who criticized the court for what he described as judicial overreach. He warned the decision could invite an onslaught of lawsuits, increase energy costs for Montanans and hinder the state’s “all-of-the-above” energy strategy.

“This Court continues to step outside of its lane to tread on the right of the Legislature, the elected representatives of the people, to make policy,” he said in a statement. “This decision does nothing more than declare open season on Montana’s all-of-the-above approach to energy, which is key to providing affordable and reliable energy to homes, schools, and businesses across our state.”

Gianforte also convened energy stakeholders earlier this week to discuss boosting production to meet rising demand, emphasizing the need for “unleashing American energy” to maintain grid stability.

Advertisement

The Plaintiffs’ Perspective

For the 16 young plaintiffs, the court’s decision validates their personal struggles with the tangible effects of climate change. In a Wednesday statement, lead plaintiff Rikki Held called the ruling “a victory not just for us, but for every young person whose future is threatened by climate change.”

During the trial, the plaintiffs described how worsening wildfires, droughts and diminishing snowpack have disrupted their lives, polluted the air and depleted vital natural resources. They argued that the state’s failure to address these challenges imperils their future and violates their constitutional rights.

What Happens Next

The ruling has positioned Montana as a flashpoint in the national debate over climate accountability, potentially inspiring similar legal challenges across the United States.

This article includes reporting from The Associated Press.

Advertisement



Source link

Continue Reading

Montana

Pregnant woman claims Montana Highway Patrol wrongfully arrested her for DUI

Published

on

Pregnant woman claims Montana Highway Patrol wrongfully arrested her for DUI


BOZEMAN — A pregnant woman from Sheridan is claiming she was wrongfully arrested by the Montana Highway Patrol (MHP) for allegedly driving under the influence during a traffic stop near Bozeman.

“I was just pretty shocked. And I constantly told him I’m pregnant, and I haven’t drunk in probably eight months,” says Alyssa Johnson.

Alyssa is a photographer from Sheridan who, at 22 weeks pregnant, was pulled over by an MHP trooper on Dec. 1, 2024 for an alleged traffic violation.

“I have a stutter, and he thought I was slurring so he pretty much said can you step out of the car. Made me do all these kinds of tests,” says Alyssa.

Advertisement

Alyssa explains that she has severe dyslexia, which makes understanding directions, and completing any sort of test, difficult.

“I mean, Alyssa, when she was in school, she used to have extra time to take an exam and she’d have questions read to her,” explains Alyssa’s husband, Tim Johnson.

Alyssa says in addition to her mental handicap, she was in a state of panic during the traffic stop—affecting her ability to give a proper breathalyzer result.

“They were saying that since I couldn’t breathe through the breathalyzer and the testing wasn’t doing good, they arrested me and pretty much took me to the hospital for more blood work,” she says.

A written statement by her therapist confirms Alyssa’s dyslexia diagnosis.

Advertisement

And after the incident, the couple got a third-party blood test—because the one conducted by law enforcement could take up to eight weeks to return.

The blood test, provided by the Johnsons, shows negative for any type of drug.

Alyssa says, “I take a prenatal, an aspirin for my blood pressure, and stuff for my heartburn, like Tums. Just like simple stuff.”

Tim explains that in addition to expecting their second child, they’re currently building a home—making the cost of bail and towing a hard hit on finances.

He says, “We have a budget to stick to and the budget doesn’t include any unexpected costs like this.”

Advertisement

Tim says this is an opportunity for police to receive better training on mental impairments and hopes that charges will be dropped from Alyssa’s record.

“And I understand they have to do their job too. I mean, support police. But this wasn’t right to do,” she says.

The couple says they have filed a formal complaint with MHP.

I reached out to MHP for comment but did not receive a response regarding the incident. We will update this story if we hear back.





Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Montana

Montana's Weather Update: Low Chance Of White Christmas Revealed

Published

on

Montana's Weather Update: Low Chance Of White Christmas Revealed


While our prospects for a “white Christmas” in Montana are still looking dim, a blast of vigorous winter weather promises to make travel tough Wednesday, with high wind warnings, and in some places winter storm warnings.

It’s part of a rather odd winter to date, as we hit mid-December with limited snow in the valleys of Western Montana, but more normal snowfall at the higher elevations.

National Weather Service forecasters have issued wind warnings for many corners of the state, with winds gusting 20 to 30 miles per hour in most locations, with the potential to top 50 miles per hour in the Bitterroot, the Madison, along the passes over the Divide, eastern Flathead County and the Northern Rocky Mountain Front. Some locations in North Central Montana could see gusts top 60 miles per hour this afternoon.

A brief warm-up, then cold

Advertisement

While snow levels will rise, freezing rains will be a problem in some areas, and then temperatures will plunge on Thursday. Northeast Montana will drop to 5-below to 5-above zero, with some areas in the single digits in Southeast Montana.

The severe cold isn’t expected west of the Divide. Forecasters expect overnight and morning temperatures in the Western Montana valleys to drop back into the 20s through the weekend.

And the forecast still doesn’t look conducive to a “white Christmas” unless you’re at that cabin in the mountains or on the slopes. High pressure will move back into the region in the second half of this week and could last into next week.

READ MORE: Missoula Snowplows Stand Ready

Scenic Montana Airbnb Has a Sauna, Perfect for Holiday Getaway

Gallery Credit: Ashley

Advertisement





Source link

Continue Reading

Trending