North Dakota Senate removes funding for anti-abortion campaign, advances budget bill
Sen. Janne Myrdal, R-Edinburg, talks to Sens. Ron Sorvaag, R-Fargo, and Brad Bekkedahl, R-Williston. (Kyle Martin/For the North Dakota Monitor)
North Dakota senators on Tuesday narrowly rejected a proposal to add $1 million for a 'life education committee' in the Office of Management and Budget budget to teach people about abortion alternatives.
The amendment was brought by Sen. Janne Myrdal, R-Edinburg, who pitched the program as a way to help pregnant women.
The committee established by the amendment would have administered a campaign to teach the public about state abortion laws, policies 'supporting life and family values,' and resources available for pregnant mothers, families and children. The campaign would have been carried out by a third party contractor.
The amendment was added by the Senate Appropriations Committee, but split from the rest of the budget bill so the Senate could vote on it separately.
North Dakota lawmakers look to add $1 million to state budget for anti-abortion campaign
Sen. David Clemens, who made the motion to split the bill, said he is not opposed to the idea of the program but takes issue with the fact that the proposal was never heard by a policy committee.
'I feel this is in violation of our own rules,' he said. Clemens, R-West Fargo, noted that members of the public were not provided the opportunity to speak for or against the funding.
Sen. Brad Bekkedahl, a Williston Republican and chair of the Senate Appropriations Committee, said he agreed with Clemens that the public did not get proper notice about the amendment.
'Had this been a standalone bill with its own title and its own placement into a policy committee, it would have had people interested in listening to the discussion,' he said.
Sen. Judy Lee, R-West Fargo, said the $1 million would be put to better use in the state's budget for indigent guardianship. The request for the budget was about $9 million, but the OMB budget as currently written sets aside $7 million million for the program.
Myrdal said a procedural technicality should not stand in the way of something that will help women and children. She also pointed out that the committees routinely amend bills after their public hearings.
'Nothing was hidden, nothing was strange about it,' Myrdal said.
The North Dakota Supreme Court in 2023 warned the Legislature against lumping issues to budget bills when it found that the state's previous OMB budget violated the state constitution's single-subject rule.
The amendment failed by a 23-24 vote.
Prairie Public supporters urge North Dakota Senate to restore state funding
The Senate approved other changes to the OMB budget, which included grant funding for Prairie Public.
The House had stripped Prairie Public's $1.2 million base funding after it passed House Bill 1255, which sought to bar the state from spending state money to support public broadcasting. House Bill 1255 was subsequently defeated in the Senate.
The Senate Appropriations Committee added $850,000 to Prairie Public's budget for broadcast tower infrastructure, but did not restore its $1.2 million base funding.
The Senate also reduced funding for a proposed state hospital in Jamestown by $45 million.
The amended funding includes $200 million from the state infrastructure improvement fund and $85 million from a Bank of North Dakota line of credit, for a total of $285 million. The funding was shifted to the OMB budget because that agency will oversee the construction.
The House's version of the budget included $330 million for the hospital in the state's Department of Health and Human Services budget.
The budget also includes $2.3 million for new driveway and additional fencing for the governor's residence.
The Office of Management and Budget bill will next go back to the House for a concurrence vote.
SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New York Post
38 minutes ago
- New York Post
Suffolk jails forced to hold 125 prisoners set for transfer because of state chaos
Suffolk County's jails are being forced to hold onto 125 felons who were supposed to be transferred upstate — with officials blaming state government chaos for the delay, The Post has learned. County Executive Ed Romaine blamed Gov. Kathy Hochul and said housing a growing number of state prisoners is putting staff in a dangerous situation as taxpayers are on the hook for hundreds of thousands in estimated extra costs. 'They've been convicted and are supposed to be in state prisons and they're not because the state is just not taking them,' Romaine told The Post. Advertisement 'Now, why is the state not taking them?' the Republican added. 'Well, [Hochul] fired 2,000 corrections officers striking for better working conditions and she's closing prisons around the state.' 4 Suffolk County's jails are being forced to hold onto 125 felons who were supposed to be transferred upstate. New York Post Under state law, inmates sentenced to hard time in state prison are supposed to be transferred upstate within 10 business days. But Romaine said that has changed in the aftermath of labor unrest with the corrections officer union and Democratic governor. Advertisement He said the delays are now causing headaches across the system, from administration to the inmates themselves. Most of the detainees in the two county jails — in Riverhead and Yaphank — are people accused of low-level crimes that are being held for trial and have not been convicted. They are now bunking alongside convicted criminals who were intended to only pass through the system. 4 Under state law, inmates sentenced to hard time in state prison are supposed to be transferred upstate within 10 business days. Suffolk County Executive Ed Romaine pictured. James Messerschmidt Romaine added that the influx of roughly 125 felons is raising serious safety and management concerns for staff. Advertisement 'Our jail staff are already spread thin,' Romaine wrote in a letter to Gov. Hochul in May obtained by The Post. 'I understand that the state faces similar staffing challenges, but it is unfair to shift this burden to the County with minimal financial compensation and little to no collaboration.' The state Department of Corrections and Community Supervision blamed the backlog on system-halting staffing shortages that were sparked after the state fired 2,000 corrections officers who participated in an unauthorized, nearly month-long strike in March. 4 Romaine added that the influx of roughly 125 felons is raising serious safety and management concerns for staff. Newsday via Getty Images Romaine shot back that the staffing shortages should be Suffolk's problem. Advertisement 'The law says they're state ready, then they need to be in state prisons, not local jails,' he said. New York State is reimbursing Suffolk $100 per day for every inmate stuck in the county jails, but Romaine said the county pays $250 per day for each, meaning taxpayers are on the hook for the extra $150. 'The warden and his staff calculate that we have expended approximately $280,000 in excess of what we have received from the state to house these state ready but unclaimed prisoners since February,' Romaine wrote in the May letter. 4 New York State is reimbursing Suffolk $100 per day for every inmate stuck in the county jails. New York Post More inmates in lockup means more guards are needed to work — with more overtime costs, he added. Romaine warned that if the backlog continues, it could lead to dangerous overcrowding and unravel the work the county has been doing to improve jail conditions. 'This is unsustainable long term,' he said.
Los Angeles Times
an hour ago
- Los Angeles Times
National guard arrives in Los Angeles as fallout from immigration raids continues
California National Guard troops arrived in Los Angeles on Sunday in a show of force following scattered clashes between immigration agents and protesters and amid a widening political divide between California and the Trump Administration. The move by President Donald Trump to activate nearly 2,000 guardsmen marked the first time since 1965 that a president has deployed a state's National Guard without a request from that state's governor. The decision was met with stern rebukes from state and local officials, including Gov. Gavin Newsom who said the deployment was 'not to meet an unmet need, but to manufacture a crisis.' On Sunday afternoon, there were tense moments outside a federal detention center in downtown L.A., with National Guard troops firing tear gas and non-lethal rounds at protesters. But other areas that had seen unrest over the last few days, including the Garment District, Paramount and Compton, seemed calm. It was unclear exactly how many troops were deployed to Los Angeles as of Sunday afternoon. The National Guard's 79th Infantry Brigade Combat Team, based in San Diego, said Sunday that 300 personnel were on the ground to protect federal property and personnel. Trump administration officials have seized on the isolated incidents of violence to suggest wide parts of L.A. are out of control. On Sunday, Trump took to social media to claim 'violent, insurrectionist mobs are swarming and attacking' federal law enforcement. 'A once great American City, Los Angeles, has been invaded and occupied by Illegal Aliens and Criminals,' he wrote, blaming Democratic politicians for not cracking down earlier. While officials have not said how long the immigration enforcement actions will continue, Trump told reporter Sunday 'we're going to have troops everywhere. We're not going to let this happen to our country.' Many California officials, who have long been at odds with Trump, say the president was trying to exploit the situation for his political advantage and sow unneeded disorder and confusion. Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass called the deployment of federalized troops a 'chaotic escalation' and issued a reminder that 'Los Angeles will always stand with everyone who calls our city home.' While most demonstrators have gathered peacefully, some have hurled objects at law enforcement personnel, set garbage and vehicles on fire and defaced federal property with graffiti. The Immigration and Customs Enforcement operation in Los Angeles over the past week has resulted in the arrest of 118 people including some who have been convicted of drug trafficking, assault, child cruelty, domestic violence and robbery, according to the agency. Assistant Secretary for Public Affairs Tricia McLaughlin and Republican politicians who support Trump's immigration actions have characterized the protests as riots intended to 'keep rapists, murderers, and other violent criminals loose on Los Angeles streets.' On Sunday morning, Rep. Maxine Waters (D-Los Angeles) addressed roughly two dozen National Guard soldiers posted outside the Metropolitan Detention Center on Alameda Street. She had arrived at the center to inquire about Service Employees International Union California President David Huerta, who was injured and detained while documenting an immigration enforcement raid in downtown Los Angeles on Friday. 'Who are you going to shoot?' Waters asked the solders. 'If you're going to shoot me, you better shoot straight.' Remnants of tear gas used by law enforcement during protests Saturday lingered in the air around the building, at times forcing Waters to cough. Waters, an outspoken critic of the president, called the deployment of National Guard troops an unnecessary escalation of tensions and accused Trump of 'trying to make an example' out of Los Angeles, a longstanding sanctuary city. Leonard Tunstad, a 69-year-old Los Angeles resident, rode his bike up to the edge of the loading dock where guardsmen were stationed and asked them if they really wanted to be loyal to a president that 'had 34 felony convictions.' He said he felt compelled to shout facts about Trump at the guardsmen because he feared the young men have been 'indoctrinated against their own citizens.' Tunstad said he believed the deployment was a gross overreaction by the Trump administration, noting the city has been home to far more raucous protests that were handled by local police. 'This is just a show. This is just a spectacle,' he said. A Department of Homeland Security officer approached one of the louder demonstrators saying that he 'didn't want a repeat of last night' and didn't want to 'get political.' He told protesters as long as they stick to the sidewalk and don't block vehicle access to the loading dock there wouldn't be any problems. Later, DHS and California National Guard troops shoved dozens of protesters into Alameda Street, hitting people with riot shields, firing pellets into the ground and deploying tear gas to clear a path for a caravan of DHS, Border Patrol and military vehicles to enter the detention center. Jose Longoria struggled to breathe as clouds of tear gas filled Alameda Street. He pointed to a white scuff mark on his shoe, saying that a tear gas canister had hit him in the foot, causing him to limp slightly. 'We're not armed. We're just peacefully protesting. They're acting out,' Longoria said of the officers. Julie Solis, 50, walked back and forth along Alameda Street holding a Mexican flag and urging the crowd to make their voices heard, but to keep the scene peaceful. She said she believes the National Guard was deployed solely to provoke a response and make Los Angeles look unruly to justify further aggression from federal law enforcement. 'They want arrests. They want to see us fail. We need to be peaceful. We need to be eloquent,' she said. National Guard troops were last summoned to Los Angeles and other Southern California cities in 2020, during the George Floyd protests. Those deployments were authorized by Newsom. However, the last time the National Guard was called on by a president without a request from a state governor was 60 years ago when President Lyndon B. Johnson sent troops to Alabama to protect civil rights demonstrators. Antonio Villaraigosa, former Speaker of the California Assembly and a former LA mayor, said Trump's move was 'meant to incite more fear and chaos in our community.' 'Trump's military-style mass deportation ICE raids in California have gone too far, tearing families apart and threatening public safety,' he said in a statement. 'The raids at stores and workplaces are wrong, just as it's wrong to separate families with raids at schools, graduations, and churches.' In Paramount, a group of camouflaged National Guard troops were stationed in a business park with armored vehicles where a Department of Homeland Security office is located. Jessica Juarez walked along Alondra Boulevard with a trash bag full of spent tear gas canisters on Sunday morning. Her voice grew hoarse as she helped a group of volunteers clean up after clashes between protesters and law enforcement the day before. An acrid odor still hung in the air from the gas and flash bang grenades law enforcement fired on protesters Saturday, while scorched asphalt marked the intersection outside a Home Depot where federal authorities had staged. 'I'm proud of our community, of the strength we showed,' said Juarez, 40. 'It's like they put so much fear into Paramount and for what? These guys didn't even clean up after themselves.' The images of Paramount shrouded in smoke and flanked by police in riot gear are unusual for this community of about 50,000 residents. In many ways, the city became the starting point for the escalating federal response. 'What else do you call it but an attack on Paramount and the people who live here?' Resident and union organizer Alejandro Maldonado said. 'People in the community were standing up to unjust immigration policies.' For some, the fight between Los Angeles residents and the federal government is akin to David and Goliath. 'It really does seem like they wanted to pick a fight with the little guy,' Union organizer Ardelia Aldridge said. Staff writer Seema Mehta contributed to this report
USA Today
an hour ago
- USA Today
Trump's travel ban on 12 countries goes into effect early Monday
Trump's travel ban on 12 countries goes into effect early Monday Show Caption Hide Caption What we know now about President Trump's new travel ban taking effect How could President Trump's travel ban or restriction of nearly 20 countries impact you? Here is what we know now. WASHINGTON — President Donald Trump's order banning citizens of 12 countries from entering the United States goes into effect at 12:01 a.m. ET on June 9, a move the president promulgated to protect the country from "foreign terrorists." The countries affected by the latest travel ban are Afghanistan, Myanmar, Chad, the Republic of the Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Haiti, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, and Yemen. The entry of people from seven other countries — Burundi, Cuba, Laos, Sierra Leone, Togo, Turkmenistan, and Venezuela — will be partially restricted. Trump, a Republican, said the countries subject to the most severe restrictions were determined to harbor a "large-scale presence of terrorists," fail to cooperate on visa security, have an inability to verify travelers' identities, as well as inadequate record-keeping of criminal histories and high rates of visa overstays in the United States. He cited the June 1 incident in Boulder, Colorado, in which an Egyptian national tossed a gasoline bomb into a crowd of pro-Israel demonstrators as an example of why the new curbs are needed. But Egypt is not part of the travel ban. 'I caution them not to travel': Expert warns travelers from banned countries to stay home The travel ban forms part of Trump's policy to restrict immigration into the United States and is reminiscent of a similar move in his first term when he barred travelers from seven Muslim-majority nations. Officials and residents in countries whose citizens will soon be banned expressed dismay and disbelief. Chad President Mahamat Idriss Deby Itno said he had instructed his government to stop granting visas to U.S. citizens in response to Trump's action. "Chad has neither planes to offer nor billions of dollars to give, but Chad has its dignity and its pride," he said in a Facebook post, referring to countries such as Qatar, which gifted the United States a luxury airplane for Trump's use and promised to invest billions of dollars in the U.S. Afghans who worked for the United States or U.S.-funded projects and were hoping to resettle in the U.S. expressed fear that the travel ban would force them to return to their country, where they could face reprisal from the Taliban. Democratic U.S. lawmakers also voiced concern about the policies. "Trump's travel ban on citizens from over 12 countries is draconian and unconstitutional," said U.S. Representative Ro Khanna on social media on June 5. "People have a right to seek asylum." (Reporting by Trevor Hunnicutt; writing by Mary Milliken; editing by Sandra Maler)
