A District Court judge has heard oral arguments in a lawsuit over a vetoed Montana funding bill. The measure would have changed the way the state's marijuana tax revenue gets distributed.

Senate Bill 442 passed the Montana Legislature with overwhelming bipartisan support and would have earmarked 20% of the revenue to maintain and improve access to public roads on county lands.

Republican Gov. Greg Gianforte vetoed the bill after the Senate had already adjourned.

A coalition of environmental groups, including the Montana Association of Counties, sued the governor to give lawmakers the opportunity to consider overturning the veto.

Ross Butcher, president of the association, said because many of them are so remote, heavily used access roads are often in need of repair and expensive to maintain.

"It's quite onerous for those local counties sometimes to maintain some of those, and the folks that are farming or ranching in those areas, those are their access roads; the farm-to-market type roads," Butcher explained. "It really develops a lot of tension between our public land users and residents in those areas."

In his veto letter, Gianforte called spending marijuana revenue on county road projects a "slippery slope," and said the state should not establish funding mechanisms for county governments.

In addition to setting aside money to maintain the county public-lands access roads, Senate Bill 442 would have also funded conservation and recreation programs, addiction treatment and veterans services. The Senate had more than enough votes to override the veto if lawmakers had been given a chance, but since Gianforte vetoed the bill after the Senate adjourned, they could not.

Butcher noted the groups are asking the judge to allow lawmakers to have the opportunity to do their job.

"The legislators should be allowed to legislate," Butcher contended. "They shouldn't circumvent that because of a procedure that overrides the intent, which is that legislators should be allowed to legislate. "

Butcher worries Gianforte's post-adjournment veto could set a dangerous and undemocratic precedent for future governors, allowing them to kill bills with broad bipartisan and public support for political reasons. The judge has not yet ruled on the matter.


get more stories like this via email

Massachusetts Democrats hope a virtual "listening tour" will help clarify voters' rightward shift in last year's election.

While Vice President Kamala Harris easily won the deep-blue state with more than 60% of the vote, President-elect Donald Trump improved his 2020 results by roughly four percentage points, flipping dozens of towns he previously lost.

Steve Kerrigan, chairman of the Massachusetts Democratic Party, said it is time for the party to regroup.

"Shares of the vote in Fall River certainly shifted and other pockets of the Commonwealth," Kerrigan pointed out. "We cannot just rest on our laurels and look at the victories without looking at opportunities for growth."

Kerrigan noted the virtual listening tour will include each of the state's nine congressional districts and their representatives, and will run through Feb. 13. Interested voters can register online at the state Democratic Party's website.

Republican gains in Massachusetts mirrored national trends, including significant swings in majority-Latino communities. The state GOP also managed to flip three state legislative seats. Still, Democrats easily reelected their entire congressional delegation and maintained wide majorities on Beacon Hill.

Kerrigan emphasized it is concerning that 145,000 fewer voters turned out last year compared with 2020.

"Sitting out an election should not be an option," Kerrigan contended. "When our voice isn't heard, election results might not result the way you want them to be and we've got to push back against that sort of apathy."

Kerrigan stressed Democrats want to hear from voters while the president-elect dictates the Republican Party's agenda. Some progressives are pushing Democrats to "redefine" what being a blue state means. They are calling for an increase in the minimum wage, an accelerated transition to a green economy and Medicare for All, which has already been approved in dozens of local nonbinding ballots.

Support for this reporting was provided by Carnegie Corporation of New York.


get more stories like this via email

More than 12,000 people nationwide have shown interest in wanting to learn more about running for office since last year's election and the share coming from battleground states like Nevada has grown by about 50%.

Jordan Haines, chief technology officer for the nonprofit Run for Something, said his organization has noticed the majority of people entering their candidate pipeline postelection Day have been women. He added they are seeing interest in offices at the local and communitywide level such as sheriff and school board positions.

"Those are really important because they are going to be the first line of defense against immigration policy, against cutting a federal education department," Haines explained. "I think hopeful for two reasons: One, building the bench and two, building local power now."

While female representation on Capitol Hill diminished slightly compared to last year, Haines pointed out it is not the case for states like Nevada. It is one of three states where more than half of its legislators are women, according to the Center for American Women and Politics.

Haines added it is too early to know exactly what motivated the more than 12,000 potential candidates nationwide but it is something his organization will keep an eye on. If you are interested in learning more about running for state or local office, you can visit RunForWhat.net.

Haines emphasized his organization will continue to get more people of diverse backgrounds and lived experiences to run for office. He said they not only help guide people along the way but help them determine the best office for which to run. He stressed prep work is crucial.

"A lot of the Run for Something alums, they ran initially to try and solve some problem in their community," Haines recounted. "We are always looking for that, looking for like what really motivates people to get into the race, what office they're looking to run for, if that office has the power to solve the problem that they're trying to solve."

Haines acknowledged for many in Nevada and around the country, November's election results were anything but ideal. But he said change takes time, which is something he and others are working toward.

"We have people in Congress who are Run for Something alumni. That is hope," Haines added. "That is like medium term hope. It takes years and election cycles for that to happen."


get more stories like this via email

Virginia lawmakers begin their legislative session today but with elections ahead in November, passing bills may be more difficult this year.

Democrats are interested in beginning the process of passing constitutional amendments on voting rights, marriage equality and reproductive rights this year. The Virginia General Assembly must pass a constitutional amendment twice, in two different legislative sessions, then the amendment would go to voters for approval.

Kate Seltzer, state politics reporter for the Norfolk Virginian-Pilot, said a major priority for state Republicans will be tax relief, particularly relief from the annual Vehicle Personal Property Tax, known as the "car tax."

"State Republicans are endorsing an end to the car tax, or taking some incremental steps to end the car tax, which they described as the 'most hated tax since the Boston tea tax.' It is an unpopular tax," Seltzer explained.

It is unpopular because it costs people who own or lease a vehicle just over $4 for each $100 of their car's value as of Jan. 1 each year. Democrats, however, are concerned about school and local government funding if the car tax is repealed. One poll last year found more than 60% of Virginians wanted to see it repealed.

Other Republican priorities include raising criminal penalties for breaking laws involving firearms and drugs.

Seltzer noted the elections coming up later this year may lead to both sides digging in and wanting to deliver key parts of their agendas to their bases.

"The sort of cynical school of thought is that everybody will promote their own legislative priorities," Seltzer observed. "What they will then do is go back to their constituents and explain, 'Well, this is what we tried to do. This is what the other party did to prevent you from having this.' And then, they'll use that in the gubernatorial election."

Elections for governor, lieutenant governor, attorney general and the entire state House of Delegates will be held this November.


get more stories like this via email