Latest news with #D-Billings
Yahoo
27-03-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Effort to bring increased passenger rail could get boost under new bill
Passenger train cars roll by in Missoula. (Keila Szpaller / Daily Montanan) Hailing from St. Regis, George Bailey has an idea of the benefits a passenger railroad stop near one of the gems of the state could bring. St. Regis, of course, is a common stop for drivers on I-90. Huck's Grill, within the St. Regis Travel Center, already has (arguably) the best milkshakes in the state. But what if rail was bringing passengers too? 'Our little town relies on tourism,' Bailey said while testifying in House Transportation in support of a bill that would boost the effort to bring localized passenger rail through Montana. 'And I can envision people using the train to get to our beautiful area.' Brought by Rep. Denise Baum, D-Billings, House Bill 848 would create a 'Big Sky Rail Account' within the state special revenue fund. It would appropriate $2 million annually to the new rail account and would come from a tax on certain railroad cars. 'I hope that committee members, both in transportation and appropriations, really look at and appreciate the huge economic opportunity for the state to continue to move this forward,' Baum said in an interview with the Daily Montanan. 'Just in connectivity with rural and urban jobs, health care, and again, it benefits freight and rail. They can coexist.' Rail advocates have long pushed for more options in Montana for more railroad options in Montana, led by the Big Sky Passenger Rail Authority. The organization's stated goal is to expand passenger rail in the state, which used to be commonplace. The organization is a transportation authority with membership from 20 counties, as well as cities and transit services across the state. A $500,000 grant through the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law in 2023 helped the agency move through Phase 1 of the project, which involved creating a service development plan and cost estimates, according to the Billings Gazette. The second phase, which the appropriated money in HB 848 would go toward, would include more planning, as well as support for grants to move the project further along. Phase Two of the project would confirm the stops, Baum added. While the Rail Authority is being led by Montana, the organization's chairman — and Missoula County Commissioner — Dave Strohmaier said it includes eight states. Those eight states are part of the 2,300 miles of passenger rail the agency is seeking to use. During the Biden Administration, the project received an important federal green light as two routes through Montana were selected as 'preferred routes' in the Amtrak Daily Long-Distance Service Study. One of the routes would start in Chicago and run through Billings, Helena and Missoula before getting into Washington and going to either Seattle or Portland. In an interview, Strohmaier said it's still up for discussion which of those two major West Coast cities it would connect. The second route would run from El Paso, Texas, to Billings. Between the two routes, Baum said, passenger rail could run through Montana towns including Glendive, Miles City, Billings, Livingston, Bozeman, Helena, Missoula, and possibly either Paradise or Thompson Falls. Passenger rail went by the wayside following a boom in the 19th and early 20th century. The service remains limited in Montana along the Hi-Line in the northern part of the state. The Empire Builder runs from Chicago to Seattle. A longer Amtrak North Coast Limited/Hiawatha line used to connect Chicago to Seattle, passing through the southern part of the state. It's popular — Whitefish is the most visited stop on the Empire Builder between Seattle and Minneapolis. The station had 38,674 visitors in 2022. However, the project will not be cheap, nor will it be coming soon. Rep. Ed Stafman, D-Bozeman, said he was not trying to 'throw cold water' on the project, but pressed Strohmaier for answers on cost and timeline during the hearing. He also expressed concern the rail could be outdated by the time it was built. Strohmaier said if everything comes together without major issues, increased passenger rail service could come to Montana in 8 to 10 years. The total cost was more difficult to estimate, he added. 'Infrastructure wise, in this country, it would not be inconceivable that this would be upwards of $2 billion for a 2,300-mile long route,' Strohmaier said. Paying for the project will likely require significant federal money, and with Elon Musk's quasi-government agency, the Department of Government Efficiency, attempting to find waste, cost was a real worry for Stafman. Strohmaier seemed confident infrastructure investments would be protected. Former North Dakota Gov. Doug Burgum, who is now the Secretary of the Interior, has been a strong supporter of increased rail service, Strohmaier said. 'We feel this is straight up critical infrastructure for our nation. There is no secret that rail infrastructure, particularly passenger rail infrastructure, in the United States has lagged behind other places around the globe,' Strohmaier said. 'So I think that this administration that we have has certainly expressed thus far, support for investing in that critical infrastructure, and we've had some strong support in the past from our congressional delegation.' Large infrastructure projects are inherently expensive. For example, an 8.5-mile extension of light rail opened north of Seattle last year, costing over $3 billion and taking 15 years to build after voters approved the project in 2008. Strohmaier said the Big Sky Passenger Rail Authority could seek a voter-approved tax to fund rail, which is how some metropolitan areas pay for their transportation infrastructure, but that avenue is not likely to occur in Montana. Strohmaier said it would be difficult to ask Montana voters to help subsidize a project that involves multiple states. Importantly, rail projects over 750 miles fall into federal jurisdiction for operation and capital cost, Strohmaier said. 'We've not exercised that option to put the question to voters, and have opted for what other ways can we fund our operations and administration of the rail authority,' Strohmaier said in an interview with the Daily Montanan. 'Which is separate than operating a train or the infrastructure necessary for that. 'When we're talking a long distance route and talking about trying to bankroll the operation and capital infrastructure, that ought not to fall on the backs of Montanans.' Proponents of the bill came from all corners of the state and much of their testimony focused on how rail could benefit elderly Montanans. Margaret MacDonald, a former Montana senator and representative, who is now with Big Sky 55+, testified in support of the bill. 'I live in Billings, and my husband and I, and I certainly hope we'll be able, at some point in the future, be able to take that train to Missoula, particularly as we get older and may not be the best drivers in the world,' MacDonald said. 'It brings people together. It brings families together. It unites rural areas with urban centers.' Whitehall Mayor Mary Hensleigh also pointed to the benefits rail would have for aging populations. 'Whitehall has a population of 1,000 people, approximately, and a large percentage of those are boomers who have a real hard time admitting that they are now senior citizens, but they are, as I am,' Hensleigh said. Whitehall helps operate one of the few bus services in the state, called Whitehall Public Transportation, which is run through the nonprofit Liberty Place, Inc. The bus service already runs to Bozeman or Belgrade and could allow people to catch the train there, Hensleigh said. Other proponents pointed to economic and tourism benefits. They included the Montana Economic Developers Association, the Missoula Chamber of Commerce and the AFL-CIO — all spoke in favor of the bill. Former Missoula City council member and current Mountain Line CEO Jordan Hess said it could reduce costs associated with transportation. 'Transportation is the second-largest household cost, right behind housing,' Hess said. 'We all know the terrible strains we're in in terms of the cost of housing in the state of Montana. By offering transportation options, we can reduce the second-largest household cost, and make it more affordable for families and seniors to live in Montana and stay in Montana.' Other proponents pointed to the bipartisan nature of rail, including former Glendive City Council member Jason Stuart. He is the vice-chair of Rail Authority and serves as the executive director of the Dawson County Economic Development Council. 'Glendive and Dawson County are no quote, unquote, liberal bastion,' Stuart said. 'It is a deeply conservative community with deeply conservative elected officials. And in the four years since our county commission voted unanimously to make Dawson County one of the founding members of the BSPRA, I have heard no complaints or regrets about that from the people I represent.' Action was not immediately taken on the bill. Amtrak-Daily-Long-Distance-Service-Study-–-Final-Report-2025
Yahoo
26-02-2025
- Health
- Yahoo
House GOP passes bill restricting Montana voters of "unsound mind"
Feb. 26—A House bill to impose new restrictions on voters of "unsound mind" could affect hundreds of patients in the Montana State Hospital and other state-run facilities. While Montana code has long prohibited citizens serving sentences in "penal institutions" and those of "unsound mind" from voting, the state has never clarified what these terms mean. Rep. Braxton Mitchell, R-Columbia Falls, said the omission creates a work-around in the voting system for patients serving felony convictions in the Montana State Hospital. "This bill simply prevents convicted felons from exploiting a loophole that has allowed them to vote," said Mitchell in his opening remarks for House Bill 395. The Department of Justice requested the bill after a patient serving a felony conviction at the Montana State Hospital filed a lawsuit last fall, claiming Anaconda-Deer Lodge County had violated his voting rights. The case remains unresolved, but a district judge temporarily restored the plaintiff's voting rights for the 2024 election after the state Attorney General's Office admitted that the hospital did not fit the definition of a penal institution and that a court had not found the plaintiff to be of unsound mind. HB 395 targets similar cases by codifying new definitions for the terms "unsound mind" and "penal institution" in state voting laws and outlining a court process by which defendants may be declared of unsound mind. While Republicans supported the legislation as a simple solution to a long-term problem, Democrats likened the bill and its implications to Pandora's box. Of particular concern was the bill's definition of unsound mind. "'Unsound mind' means a person is incapable of normally managing affairs in a reasonable manner," reads the bill. "The condition exists when the intellectual powers of a person are fundamentally lacking or when a person is incapable of understanding and acting with discretion in the ordinary affairs of life." As currently written, the definition would only be applied to residents at state facilities like the Montana State Hospital. The bill also includes a provision automatically restoring voting rights upon release, but Democrats remained skeptical. "This gives a lot of power to the courts to decide who can and cannot vote," said Rep. Peter Strand, D-Bozeman. Strand questioned whether people with dementia and similar illnesses might be considered unfit to vote. Rep. James Reavis, D-Billings made similar observations in testimony, noting that the bill did not provide protections for patients in state facilities without criminal convictions and that the restoration provision could be easily rescinded in a future legislative session. "We could be on the path to permanent disenfranchisement of voting rights, and I don't think that's something we should do," said Reavis. Mitchell claimed other state laws had no issues implementing similar definitions. In email correspondence with the Daily Inter Lake, Mitchell cited Idaho and Utah as examples though neither state references individuals of unsound mind in state voting laws. He also mentioned Minnesota, which has a statue stating that individuals "found by a court of law to be legally incompetent" cannot vote, but Minnesota voting codes do not define the term "legally incompetent." Mitchell did not directly respond to an inquiry about possible amendments to the definition, though he maintained his assertion that the claims of opponents are unfounded. The bill passed the House in a 54 — 45 vote on Monday. A hearing in the Senate has not yet been announced. Reporter Hailey Smalley can be reached at hsmalley@ or 758-4433.
Yahoo
13-02-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Bill that protects free speech, journalists and guards against frivolous lawsuits heads to Senate
Rep. James Reavis, D-Billings, speaks before the House Judiciary Committee about House Bill 292 which would prohibit strategic lawsuits against public participation. (Photo screenshot via Montana Public Affairs Network) For now, it's safe to say that no bill may ever be quite as popular as House Bill 292, which unanimously passed the Montana House of Representatives on Thursday and would protect citizens and journalists from 'SLAPP' lawsuits. If passed into law by Montana, after going through the Senate and the governor's desk, it would give new protections to those targeted by 'SLAPP' lawsuits, which stands for 'strategic lawsuit against public participation.' The bill, cosponsored by Reps. Tom Millett, R-Marion, and James Reavis, D-Billings, demonstrated bipartisan and overwhelming support throughout its journey in the House, where it passed the Judiciary Committee 20-0, and then passed both readings on the full House floor by votes of 100-0, and 99-0. The bill will now head to the Montana Senate. SLAPP lawsuits, which have garnered attention increasingly, including an entire segment on the popular HBO news show, 'Last Week Tonight with John Oliver,' are often filed by large corporations or sometimes even government entities to try to prevent the public or media from bringing facts to the public's attention. Often, the lawsuits are funded by corporations or businesses that have extensive legal resources or in-house attorneys, while those speaking out against them must hire their own attorneys, and may not have the legal resources to challenge it in court, thus stifling or completely ending criticism or investigation into wrongdoing. As many advocates argue, the purpose in SLAPP lawsuits isn't to win, it's to stop the opposing party from being able to fight, using wealth and the justice system to force opponents to stop. 'The real goal is to entangle the defendant in expensive litigation and stifle their ability to participate in constitutionally related activities,' Millett said. Both sponsors of the bill told fellow lawmakers that the legislation is modeled after other states that have adopted similar laws. The new anti-SLAPP bill allows courts to quickly dismiss SLAPP lawsuits, while forcing those who brought the suit to pay for the other side's attorney fees. Reavis and Millett said that provides a deterrent from bringing bad faith lawsuits. And both sponsors pointed out that the legislation was consistent with freedom of speech, freedom of press, and freedom of association protections found in the state and federal constitutions. 'The mandatory nature of attorneys' fees will help stop the filing in the first place,' Millett said. As attorney, Reavis said fellow lawyers will look at these cases differently. 'It will discourage the practice because an attorney will have to warn their client that they could be on the hook for the other side's attorneys' fees,' Reavis said. Jacqueline Lenmark, one of five Montana Commissioners on the Uniform Law Commission, said her group unanimously supports the measure, which has been adopted in 32 other states. The bill also had the support of some larger, higher profile groups, like the Motion Picture Association of America, which represents large news organizations as well as small independent documentary filmmakers, who are often sued to stop reporting on a project. 'This protects everyone's free speech against costly and unnecessary litigation,' said MPAA lobbyist Jessie Luther. Al Smith of the Montana Trial Lawyers Association said his organization supports the efforts, too. 'Bad attorneys and their clients get dinged for bringing bad suits, and good attorneys get fees because they brought a valid lawsuit,' Smith said. He said as Montana law stands currently, even fighting a SLAPP lawsuit can take years and thousands of dollars. 'This speeds it up and protects free-speech rights,' Smith said. Jay Adkisson, an attorney in Nevada, told about his experiences as an attorney being sued. He said he was once sued for $4.7 billion and also faced a $20 million SLAPP lawsuit in California, just for writing about a court opinion for He said that both were eventually dismissed, but both could also stifle free speech and a free press. And both lawsuits took an extensive amount of time just to fight, even though he was successful, and the claims were preposterous. 'These cases are not about winning in court, but about wasting the resources of those who speak out,' Millett said. 'We need to make it harder for entities to abuse the legal system.'
