logo
Lawmaker's vacation among 195 missed days by North Dakota legislators

Lawmaker's vacation among 195 missed days by North Dakota legislators

Yahoo17-04-2025

Rep. Landon Bahl, R-Grand Forks, listens in the House chamber during a floor session on April 17, 2025. Bahl has missed 10 days of the legislative session. (Michael Achterling/North Dakota Monitor)
North Dakota lawmakers will be paid at least $41,500 for absences during the 2025 legislative session so far, though most legislators with more than a handful of missed days said they were due to family or medical reasons, military service or their jobs.
Rep. Lori VanWinkle, R-Minot, said earlier this week she felt singled out by criticism from the House majority leader over taking five days off to go on a vacation. Five lawmakers have missed six or more days during the legislative session, including VanWinkle, who has missed seven days of the session.
In total, 84 lawmakers of the Legislature's combined 141-member body were absent for at least one day since the session began in early January. They accumulated 195 missed legislative days as of Thursday, according to Legislative Council. The North Dakota Monitor excluded from the analysis the absences of Rep. Josh Christy, who died in office in February.
North Dakota lawmaker defends absence as she's urged to go without pay for vacation
Legislators are paid for days they are absent unless they ask Legislative Council to withhold their pay, said Legislative Council Director John Bjornson. They are paid $213 per calendar day during the legislative session, with committee chairs and other leadership positions earning slightly more. That's in addition to a monthly salary of $592.
Rep. Landon Bahl, R-Grand Forks, has missed the most with 10 days, according to Legislative Council. Bahl missed the week of March 31 to lobby for fraternities in Washington, D.C., on business not related to the state Legislature, but will receive $1,065 in legislative pay for those five days.
Bahl also has missed days for reasons related to his job. He said his situation is unique because he is the chief operating officer for 322 Hospitality Group, which oversees more than 250 employees across eight different restaurants, hotels and event centers.
'District 17 voted me in as a business operator,' Bahl said. 'I always have two laptops because I'm constantly emailing … and bouncing back and forth because that's my job and this is a part-time citizen Legislature.'
On Monday, House Majority Leader Mike Lefor, R-Dickinson, said he suggested that VanWinkle voluntarily give back the $1,065 in legislative pay she received while on a family vacation. Lefor said he didn't have the authority to withhold a lawmaker's pay.
House and Senate rules, however, appear to conflict with state statute.
North Dakota Century Code states members of the Legislature are 'entitled' to receive compensation.
But House and Senate rules state legislators may not be absent during an entire day 'unless unable to attend due to illness or other cause.' The rules also say 'no one is entitled to draw pay while absent more than one day without leave.'
Lefor and Senate Majority Leader David Hogue, R-Minot, referred questions on the rules to Bjornson.
Bjornson said he was unsure when the absence rules were first added to the chamber rule books, but they were included in every rule book going as far back as 1957, the oldest rule book on his office shelf.
The presiding officer of the chamber, either the speaker of the House or the president of the Senate, signs payment vouchers for the lawmakers, Bjornson said. If the presiding officer and the majority leader of the chamber told the Legislative Council not to pay someone, they would follow that direction, Bjornson said.
North Dakota lawmakers serve up to 80 days every two years. Thursday was day 64 of the session.
Lefor said earlier this week he thinks it's inappropriate for a lawmaker to take vacation during a legislative session. VanWinkle defended her absence to spend time with her family and said she thinks the criticism is unfair. She declined additional comment on Wednesday.
Rep. Jayme Davis, D-Rolette, has missed nine days during the legislative session. Absences early in the session were due to the death of her father. More recently, she said she has missed days to drive her mother from Rolette to Bismarck for medical appointments.
'As much as I want a vacation, I'm here to do a job that I was elected to do,' Davis said. 'Unless it's literally life or death, it's probably the only reason I would miss.'
Rep. Alisa Mitskog, D-Wahpeton, and Rep. Matt Ruby, R-Minot, have each missed six days.
Mitskog said her absences were related to medical reasons for herself and her family. She said her husband is battling cancer that requires appointments in Minneapolis and she attends when possible so she can ask questions. Her elderly mother also needed to be driven to appointments in Fargo that were set up months in advance.
'They weren't vacation days,' Mitskog said.
Ruby said his absences were due to National Guard training and because his son had surgery. He said he communicated every absence to chamber leadership, which he said is important for planning which bills come to the floor for votes.
'I certainly wasn't taking vacation,' Ruby said.
Ruby said he does not think the policy surrounding legislative absences needs to be changed because he doesn't believe people are abusing it, for the most part.
'Sometimes you have doctor's appointments you have to get done,' Ruby said. 'Sometimes you shouldn't be sitting shoulder to shoulder with someone if you are sick … but it's expected to be here if you can, and we're all adults here.'
2025-Regular Session-Absent Members-2
SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Speaker Johnson teases follow-ups to the ‘one big, beautiful bill'
Speaker Johnson teases follow-ups to the ‘one big, beautiful bill'

Yahoo

time26 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Speaker Johnson teases follow-ups to the ‘one big, beautiful bill'

The 'one big, beautiful bill' may not be so singular, after all. Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) is teasing follow-up legislation to the megabill of President Trump's tax cut and spending priorities that Republicans can push though using the same special budget reconciliation process that requires only GOP votes. That tool can be used once per fiscal year, with the current fiscal year ending on Sept. 30. So after Republicans are done with the 'big, beautiful bill,' the GOP trifecta has, in theory, two more shots to muscle through party-line legislation before the next Congress comes into power after the midterms. Johnson floated plans for a second reconciliation bill while rebutting concerns from deficit hawks on the budget impact of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act — which includes an extension of tax cuts and boosts to border and defense funding, with costs offset in part by new requirements on low-income assistance programs like Medicaid and food aid. 'Everyone here wants to reduce spending,' Johnson said Friday morning on CNBC. 'But you have to do that in a sequence of events. We have a plan, OK? This is the first of a multistep process.' 'We're going to have another reconciliation bill that follows this one, possibly a third one before this Congress is up, because you can have a reconciliation bill for each budget year, each fiscal year. So that's ahead of us,' Johnson continued, also pointing to separate plans to claw back money based on recommendations from the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). 'We're also doing rescissions packages. We got the first one delivered this week from the White House, and that will codify many of the DOGE cuts.' The promise of another reconciliation bill is somewhat surprising given the crux of the debate that dominated the early weeks of the year: Should Republicans divide up their agenda into two bills, passing the first quickly to give Trump an early win on boosting funding for border enforcement and deportations? Or would putting all of Trump's priorities into one bill — which would contain both bitter pills and sweeteners for different factions of the razor-thin majority — be a better political strategy? Trump eventually said he preferred 'one big, beautiful bill,' a moniker that became the legislation's official title in the House last month. It's not clear what would be in a second piece of legislation. Multiple House Republicans who spoke with The Hill were unaware of plans for more reconciliation bills and were not sure what could be included in them. 'I think we need to see what's left on the table after the first one,' Rep. Michael Cloud (R-Texas) said. And to muster through multiple reconciliation bills is a delicate prospect. If members know more reconciliation bills are coming, that complicates the argument that everything in the current package — even policies some factions dislike that others love — need to stay in one megabill. The Speaker declined to elaborate on what might be in such a package when asked in a press conference last week. 'I'm not going to tell you that,' Johnson said. 'Let's get the first one done.' 'Look, I say this is the beginning of a process, and what you're going to see is a continuing of us identifying waste, fraud, abuse in government, which is our pledge of common sense, restoring common sense and fiscal sanity. So we have lots of ideas of things that might be in that package.' Republicans had started planning for the current legislative behemoth months before the 2024 election so they would be prepared to quickly execute on their policy wish list if they won the majority. 'This isn't something we just drew up overnight. So, we'll go through that same laborious process,' Johnson said. But some members have ideas of what else they'd like to see. Rep. Ralph Norman (R-S.C.) said that he'd hope a second bill would do more to tackle rolling back green energy tax credits and make further spending cuts. Ultimately, though, it will be Trump's call, Norman said: 'I know when the president gets involved, it adds a lot of value.' And Rep. August Pfluger (R-Texas) speculated that passing the 'big, beautiful bill' would inspire members to keep going with another bill. 'People like the feeling of winning,' Pfluger said. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

Republicans Offer Cowardly Lack Of Pushback To Hegseth Suggesting Marines Could Quell Protests
Republicans Offer Cowardly Lack Of Pushback To Hegseth Suggesting Marines Could Quell Protests

Yahoo

time26 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Republicans Offer Cowardly Lack Of Pushback To Hegseth Suggesting Marines Could Quell Protests

Congressional Republicans have offered a disturbing lack of pushback to Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth suggesting that active-duty Marines could be sent to quell immigration enforcement protests in Los Angeles. 'I don't think that's heavy-handed,' House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) said when asked about Hegseth's proposal on ABC News's 'This Week.' Hegseth raised the idea in a post on X Saturday evening, writing, 'If violence continues, active duty Marines at Camp Pendleton will also be mobilized.' His remarks come after President Donald Trump ordered National Guard troops to Los Angeles on Saturday, a move that's not typically made without the support of a state's governor, which he does not currently have. The White House has claimed that it took this step because it's addressing violence at these protests that targeted ICE offices and agents, while California leaders have said that they don't needthe troops. The deployment of active-duty Marines would be another major escalation and a move that's rarely employed by a president in response to protests. 'The deployment of active-duty troops under federal authority in response to civil unrest is a rare step, one that usually requires the president to find under the Insurrection Act that they are needed to enforce the law or restore order,' write The Wall Street Journal's Eliza Collins and Nancy A. Youssef. 'The George H.W. Bush administration deployed US Marines to help restore order after violent protests erupted in California in the wake of the 1992 acquittal of four police officers in the beating of Rodney King…[marking] the last invocation of the Insurrection Act.' During Trump's first term, Defense Secretary Mark Esper stated that active duty military should only be used to respond to protests in 'the most urgent and dire of situations,' and that 'we are not in one of those situations now,' breaking with the president. Rather than criticizing Hegseth's post about Marines, however, Johnson and other Republicans have either been open to the idea or declined to denounce it. 'You don't think sending Marines into the streets of an American city is heavy handed?' ABC News anchor Jonathan Karl asked Johnson. 'We have to be prepared to do what is necessary and I think the notice that that might happen might have the deterring effect,' Johnson responded. Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) also declined to repudiate the idea directly, when asked about it on CNN's 'State of the Union.' Instead, he said 'it won't be necessary,' because the National Guard's response will be sufficient. And Sen. James Lankford (R-Okla.) downplayed the role of the Marines in a possible response without rejecting Hegseth's statement out of hand. 'Active-duty Marines are not going to be put into local law enforcement,' Lankford said on NBC News's 'Meet the Press.' 'They would be in support roles on it, as we have at the border. We have active-duty military at the border, but they're not doing law enforcement tasks. They're doing logistical tasks behind the scenes.' 'Local law enforcement should take care of this, but again when you're seeing burning cars and federal law enforcement and law enforcement being attacked on the streets…we want to make sure those protests don't spiral out of control,' Lankford said. Democrats have emphasized that Trump's use of the National Guard is only adding tension in Los Angeles, and have been incredulous at the possibility of active-duty military being sent in as well. 'The Secretary of Defense is now threatening to deploy active-duty Marines on American soil against its own citizens,' Gov. Gavin Newsom wrote in a Sunday post on X. 'This is deranged behavior.'

Horse trading session has arrived at N.H. State House
Horse trading session has arrived at N.H. State House

Yahoo

time26 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Horse trading session has arrived at N.H. State House

Both the New Hampshire House of Representatives and Senate worked late into the night Thursday as they tried desperately to revive bills that the other branch didn't want. The political game of chicken is expected to continue this week when the two bodies return to session to create committees of conference that will be charged with trying to work out differences between competing versions of a bill. This stage in the budget process signals that the 2025 session, barring a negotiating meltdown, will conclude in the coming weeks. Once named, the conference committees will have until June 19 to come up with an agreement that the Legislature must act upon by June 26. Both bodies must vote to create these panels with three state senators and four House members. Any agreement requires all conferees to sign onto the proposal; it then returns to the House and Senate for an up-or-down vote, meaning lawmakers at that final meeting are unable to amend it in any fashion. The two-year state budget is the biggest and most consequential of the disputes, with the Senate last week approving its measure that spent nearly $250 million more than the House-approved version. All of this one-upmanship resulted in some strange bedfellows, like when the Senate voted to add to a bill increasing the penalty for wrong-way driving (HB 776) and a Senate-passed bill to declare the Virginia opossum the state marsupial (SB 30). Sen. Donovan Fenton, D-Keene, thanked his colleagues for this act taken because the House put his own bill at risk when, earlier this month, it had tacked onto it new penalties for improper application of fertilizer. Senate Democratic Leader Rebecca Perkins Kwoka of Portsmouth couldn't resist a punning quip. 'I'm glad the senator from Dist. 10 (Fenton) has not played dead on his bill,' she joked. The House responded last week, adding to a bill raising the personal allowance that residents of nursing homes are allowed to keep (SB 118) the House-passed bill that would allow medically eligible patients to grow their own marijuana rather than have to buy it at alternative treatment centers at market costs. House keeps pushing cannabis agenda Rep. Gary Daniels, R-Milford, tried to convince his colleagues to drop this last-ditch effort. 'The Senate has rejected every single cannabis bill the House has sent it. Do we really want to put a good bill at risk by insisting this be included?' Daniels asked rhetorically. Rep. Wendy Thomas, D-Merrimack, a cancer survivor, said as an eligible patient she takes marijuana every day and that the underlying personal allowance issue is already contained in versions of the state budget. The House voted 215-103 to keep the marijuana bill as part of the House position. Not all of these gambits succeeded. Rep. Judy Aron, R-Acworth and chairman of the House Environment and Agriculture Committee, had wanted to add to legislation that designated Coos County as an economically distressed area to (SB 180), an unrelated bill from her committee to enhance state rules regarding the approval of future landfills that the Senate had rejected (HB 707). The House voted 166-163 against that idea, choosing to keep the Coos County economic bill clean. In one of its last moves, the Senate voted to add onto a temporary youth operator driver's license bill (HB 612) its legislation to declare the third week in September each year "New Hampshire Service Dog Week." Moments earlier, the House had voted, 179-144, to kill that service dog bill (SB 198). "We don't need a special holiday in order to say, 'Good dog,'" said Rep. Erica Layon, R-Derry. Here are some other issues that are likely to need more negotiation before they are settled: • Mandatory Minimums (SB 14): This Gov. Kelly Ayotte-priority bill that cleared the Senate set stiff mandatory prison terms for offenders selling large amounts of fentanyl and for anyone convicted of selling drugs that causes someone else's death. The House changed it to give a judge broad latitude to approve a lesser punishment if the offender meets certain criteria. The House also added to this bill a measure the Senate rejected to decriminalize possession of up to three-quarters of an ounce of psilocybin, otherwise known as magic mushrooms. This change would bring the mushrooms in line with how state law decriminalizes marijuana possession. • Risk Pools (SB 297): Secretary of State David Scanlan convinced the Senate to adopt a bill that gave his office greater power over groups that manage insurance coverage for units of government. The House instead rejected Scanlan's approach in favor of letting these risk pools decide if they would rather come under the regulation of the Insurance Department. • Tenancy Law Changes (HB 60): The House approved this bill that would permit landlords to give notice to any tenant 60 days notice that they would not be extending their lease and require tenants be evicted if they resisted this move. The Senate adopted this proposal but it would only kick in once the state had a 4% vacancy rate; currently this tight housing market has less than one-half of 1% vacancy in it. klandrigan@

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store