Latest news with #HouseBill39
Yahoo
5 days ago
- Politics
- Yahoo
Committee starting work on ballot initiative for nonpartisan judicial elections
The door to the old Supreme Court Chamber at the Montana Capitol. (Micah Drew/Daily Montanan) A newly formed political committee is beginning a campaign to enshrine nonpartisan judicial elections in the state constitution, after a multitude of efforts by the Montana Legislature to attach party labels to judges failed. Pepper Peterson, the political director for Montanans for Fair and Impartial Judges, said the goal of putting a constitutional initiative to voters in 2026 came after watching the repeated rebuffing of those actions during the session. 'I think the people of Montana can see the system here is fair,' Peterson told the Daily Montanan. 'This is a common sense idea to have in our state constitution. Anything else is just raw partisanship, and I don't think most Montanans are on that train.' Throughout the 2025 session, legislators introduced more than a half-dozen bills aimed at allowing, or requiring, judicial candidates to declare a party label, a stated goal of Republican leaders in the Legislature and Gov. Greg Gianforte, who argue that the judicial branch is 'nonpartisan in name only.' One bill passed — House Bill 39, which allows political parties to donate to judicial candidates — but a majority failed to gain traction in at least one chamber. Five separate bills attempted to allow, or require, judges to run under a partisan label. Some bills would have only applied to the Montana Supreme Court, others would have included any judicial candidate, including district and municipal judges, and justices of the peace. Lawmakers who supported those measures said that allowing candidates to align with a political party would bring transparency to the process and help educate voters. While a majority of lawmakers didn't seem to have an appetite for changing the system, it was a point of discussion all the way until the final day, with Gianforte's office considering adding the partisan judicial issue into an amendment of a spending bill. Despite the thwarted attempts to alter the judicial selection process, Republican leaders in the Senate said they had laid a foundation for future reform. 'I think that judicial reform is critical, continuously. It's important for our judges to have accountability. It's important for preventative transparency, and what we did this session helps start that process,' said Senate Majority Leader Tom McGillvray, R-Billings, during a press conference at the end of the session. But Peterson said seeing lawmakers pushing partisan judicial elections get 'slapped down over and over and over again' set the stage for bringing the issue to the ballot box. 'That's what we anticipate the people to do as well. We're going to put this in the Constitution, and we're going to stop this,' he said. 'The people are going to have to send this message very loud and very clear so that lawmakers know this is what Montanans want.' Peterson is working with Ted Dick, a former executive director of the Montana Democratic Party more than a decade ago, on the ballot issue — the same team behind the successful ballot initiatives in 2020 designed to legalize adult use of recreational marijuana. Peterson said their experience on that campaign, as well as his decades of political work in the state on issues from coal mining to gun rights, make them the right group to bring forward the ballot initiative, despite not working on judicial issues during the session. 'My career has been nonpartisan activism for the rights of citizens. I consider myself a civil rights activist over anything, whether that's the rights of the 2nd amendment, 1st amendment, 4th amendment,' Peterson said. 'I can get signatures and get this issue across the finish line … It's a complicated process, there's only a few people who are experts, and we're some of them.' To get the issue onto the ballot as a constitutional initiative in 2026, the committee must collect valid signatures representing 10% of votes cast for governor in the last election stateside, as well as 10% in at least 40 legislative districts. If the issue makes it onto the ballot, a simple majority of votes will enshrine it as a part of the state constitution. Two new laws passed by the Legislature make changes to the process for gathering signatures for ballot initiatives. Senate Bill 226, sponsored by Sen. Mike Cuffe, R-Eureka, requires signatures be submitted incrementally, rather than by a single deadline. House Bill 201, by Rep. Braxton Mitchell, R-Columbia Falls, mandates that a paid signature gatherer must verbally disclose their first name, state where they legally reside, and position as a paid gatherer to anyone they approach. They must also wear a nametag with that information. Peterson said the committee intends to have 'thousands of conversations' during the early stages of building out their campaign with lobbyists, special interest groups, and most importantly, citizens. 'Polling done on this issue shows overwhelming support from Montanans for nonpartisan elections,' Peterson said. 'I don't think it's our uphill battle to fight at all — I think it's an uphill battle for the other side to convince people the system we have in place is flawed.'
Yahoo
09-04-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Judge Dan Wilson announces 2nd bid for Supreme Court seat; Baker set to retire
The Great Seal of the State of Montana in the Supreme Court (Photo by Eric Seidle/ For the Daily Montanan). Flathead District Court Judge Dan Wilson, announced Wednesday he will again enter a race for the Montana Supreme Court, after losing his 2024 election for a seat on the state's highest court. Wilson ran for the Supreme Court last fall against now-Justice Judge Katherine Bidegaray, who replaced Dirk Sandefur on the bench. Wilson garnered 254,294 votes in the statewide race, but lost the election by about eight percentage points. Now, Wilson will be seeking the seat currently held by Justice Beth Baker, who will not seek reelection. Wilson is the first candidate to announce for the Supreme Court race nearly 18 months ahead of the election. 'As a native Montanan and a conservative, I firmly believe Supreme Court Justices must apply the law and the constitution as written to all their rulings. As your next Montana Supreme Court Justice, I pledge to follow that guiding conservative principle. I will not be beholden to any special interest group's agenda, and recognize that the court's role is to interpret the law as written – not create it,' Wilson said in a written statement. Baker was elected to the Supreme Court in 2010, and won reelection to her seat in 2018. She confirmed to the Daily Montanan that she will not seek a third eight-year term. 'I think it'll be time for some new energy,' Baker said. 'I've still got almost two full years left, and I want to be able to give my full effort for the rest of my term. It is a tremendous honor to serve the Montana justice system.' Wilson worked as a a prosecutor in Great Falls after graduating from law school in Minnesota and has served as a district court judge in Flathead County since 2017. His campaign announcement highlighted a 2020 ruling he made striking down then-Gov. Steve Bullock's mask mandate made during the height of the COVID-19 pandemic. The 2026 election cycle will be the first following the Legislature's passage of House Bill 39, which allows political parties to donate to judicial candidates. During his 2024 campaign, Wilson was 'strongly recommended' by the Flathead County Republican Central Committee, and received campaign contributions from the Stillwater Republican Central Committee, according to campaign finance reports. He was also endorsed by the Montana Chamber of Commerce, which endorsed current Chief Justice Cory Swanson's campaign. Swanson won his race by roughly eight percentage points. The American Civil Liberties Union spent $1.3 million against Wilson and Swanson during the last election cycle.
Yahoo
10-03-2025
- Health
- Yahoo
Tennessee lawmakers should ensure every school offers free menstrual products
This is the second year we have had the unique privilege to discuss tampons and pads with Tennessee lawmakers, 83% of whom are men. However, most lawmakers aren't uncomfortable discussing periods. Many of our majority male legislators have daughters, granddaughters, or sisters, making this a familiar issue. Not to mention, the primary function of their elected office is to represent the concerns of their constituents on the hill, nearly half of whom menstruate. This is a matter of public responsibility. Period poverty, or insufficient access to menstrual products, sanitation facilities, and period education, is a reality for women and menstruating people across the country. For students who come from low-income or under-resourced families, periods often mean missing school. One in four students has stayed home during their period due to lack of access to menstrual products. Others may use toilet paper, rags, old clothes, or other unhygienic materials during their menstrual cycle. Fifty percent of teenage students have worn menstrual products longer than recommended, proving the point that it is not just materials that are needed, but education as well. Conversations with students and teachers across Tennessee reveal two clear truths: students need free period products in schools, and teachers, counselors, and nurses should not have to pay for them. Yet, many do. A school counselor in rural East Tennessee, with nearly two decades of experience, told us students have regularly come to her for period products throughout her career − even asking for help in the restroom. Opinion: I chose to end my pregnancy for health reasons. I had to leave Tennessee to do it Another teacher working in Metro Nashville Public Schools keeps a stash of pads in their desk, buying boxes out of their own pocket so no student has to go without. Period poverty isn't just a public health issue − it's a mental health issue. Two-thirds of teens say a lack of period products causes them stress, which means focusing and participating in class is significantly hampered when students are too busy worried about bleeding through their clothes. Sofiya Patra, a student at an MNPS school, described the shame of being caught unprepared: 'It's embarrassing. It's mortifying,' she said. 'It degrades you. If you've ever been in a situation where it leaks through, it's not something you want to experience in front of anyone.' For too many students, this isn't just an occasional worry − it's a recurring reality that chips away at their confidence and sense of dignity in the classroom. No student should have to choose between their education and managing a natural bodily function. Yet, too many do. That's why AWAKE introduced the Menstrual Hygiene Product Accessibility Act (House Bill 39/Senate Bill 155 − to ensure that Tennessee students have access to the basic necessities they need to stay in school and focus on learning. This bill, sponsored by Rep. Elaine Davis and Sen. Raumesh Akbari, gained significant support in 2024 but failed for lack of funding. Meanwhile, lawmakers found about $4.8 million to put juveniles through adult criminal courts rather than courts designed for their rehabilitation and nearly $400,000 for law enforcement to surveil and report 'persons not lawfully present' in Tennessee. This year, we have a real chance to change that. With a significantly lower price tag (about $150,000 compared to $5 million) and growing recognition of the need, lawmakers must act now to pass this bill. Lawmakers listen when their constituents speak up, so let them know that no student should have to miss class or feel ashamed because they can't afford a pad or tampon. Kelli Nowers is executive director and Natalie Schilling is policy and advocacy associate at AWAKE Tennessee, which advocates for the systemic advancement of women and young people in Tennessee through education initiatives and policy change. This article originally appeared on Nashville Tennessean: Free menstrual products benefit Tennessee school students | Opinion
Yahoo
07-03-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
When does no tax on overtime start in Ohio? What to know about Trump's campaign promise
The "big, beautiful bill" approved by the U.S. House of Representatives in a late-night vote in February included a tease for U.S. workers: seeking $4.5 trillion in tax breaks. Eliminating taxes on overtime was one of several popular promises made by President Trump on the campaign trail, which included not only no taxes on overtime pay, but also no taxes on tips and no taxes on Social Security benefits. While the resolution seeks $4.5 trillion in tax breaks and $2 trillion in spending cuts over the next 10 years, what it does not have is any policy or bill to end taxes on tips, overtime wages and Social Security benefits. Here's what is happening and what it might mean to you. During his campaign, Trump said he would support legislation to eliminate taxes on overtime pay, saying it could provide more people with the incentive to work. "The people who work overtime are among the hardest working citizens in our country, and for too long, no one in Washington has been looking out for them," he said during a rally in September 2024. Then-Vice President-elect JD Vance also said in September 2024 that both income and payroll taxes would be eliminated on overtime pay for hourly workers. Ohio's overtime laws are based on the federal Fair Labor Standards Act, which requires non-exempt employees be paid overtime for working more than 40 hours in a work week. There are exemptions to overtime pay found in the Ohio Revised Code, such as travel time to and from work and other activities prior to or after the primary job. To calculate overtime, regular pay is multiplied by at least 1.5. On Jan. 1, most salaried workers who make less than $1,128 per week (or $58,656 per year) became eligible for overtime pay. A bill to deduct overtime pay from state income taxes was introduced in November but didn't pass before the Ohio Legislature's session ended in December. It returned this year as House Bill 39, co-sponsored by Reps. Tex Fischer (R-Boardman) and Nick Santucci (R-Niles). The bill has been assigned to a House committee, but has yet to have a hearing. Without taxes on overtime, workers have the potential to take home more of their total pay. Most employees who work more than 40 hours in a seven-day workweek must be paid overtime. Overtime pay must be at least 1.5 times the employee's regular hourly rate. Overtime pay in most cases is not required for hours worked over eight in a single day, however. Trump hasn't provided many details, and the House budget plan does not include specific language about removing taxes on overtime pay. In fact, the budget resolution actually is a 'blueprint to guide Congressional action on budget-related legislation' and 'does not provide funding for federal programs or change tax law,' according to the Congressional Budget Office Passing the House budget resolution is one of the first steps for Trump's tax-cut priorities, which include extending his 2017 tax cuts and eliminating taxes on tips, overtime pay and Social Security benefits, according to Reuters. However, many people, including firefighters, police officers, and military personnel who often earn additional income working overtime, could benefit if a plan is implemented, said Lisa Greene-Lewis, CPA and TurboTax expert. Certified public accountant Richard Pon told USA TODAY 'the proposal will likely be abused. Some (people) get overtime at double or even triple time, so there will be an incentive for employers, including business owners, to classify their income as overtime.' In previous interviews, Trump has said his plan would include unspecified "guardrails" that 'could limit these behavioral effects.' The House narrowly passed — in a 217-215 vote — its budget plan, but that doesn't mean it goes into effect immediately. The Senate approved a competing resolution earlier in the month, and now a compromise bill needs to be worked out, a process that in the past has taken so long it causes a government shutdown. The Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget estimated not taxing overtime would reduce government revenue by $250 billion to $1.4 trillion, and by $1 trillion to $5 trillion if all workers eligible for the tax cut switched to hourly, according to a report from September. Contributing: Joyce Orlando, Medora Lee, Maria Francis, USA Today Network This article originally appeared on Cincinnati Enquirer: Overtime tax continues. Here's what Trump said, Ohio rules for OT pay
Yahoo
22-02-2025
- Health
- Yahoo
Bills to repeal ‘antiquated' law criminalizing transfer of HIV sail through House, Senate
Del. Kris Fair (D-Montgomery) sponsored House Bill 39, to repeal a law that makes it a crime to knowingly spread HIV. It received bipartisan approval from the House this week. (Photo by Danielle J. Brown/Maryland Matters). Legislation that would remove a criminal penalty for intentionally transferring HIV to another person sailed through both the House and Senate chambers this week, garnering bipartisan support in the process. That might be a surprise to some. In fact, Sen. Will Smith (D-Montgomery), who chairs the Judicial Proceedings Committee, said he was skeptical of the legislation when it first came to his committee last year. He ended up sponsoring the Senate version this year. 'I've had reservations on it. I, frankly, was not comfortable with it initially, and that's because I didn't understand the scope of how things are actually playing out,' Smith said Tuesday, after the Senate passed Senate Bill 356. Smith and other supporters say the current law is counterproductive, antiquated and discriminatory. Repealing it would not only help destigmatize those living with HIV, the virus that causes AIDS, but could actually help improve public health, they say. 'The law was, for right or wrong, thought to help curb the transmission of HIV,' said Del. Kris Fair (D-Frederick), who sponsored House Bill 39. 'What public health experts and criminal justice organizations have taught us … is that we've actually seen the exact opposite.' The Senate passed its version of the bill 33-11 on Tuesday, picking up two Republican votes. The House version passed 100-36 on Thursday, also picking up a couple Republican votes. One of the bills must still be passed by the other chamber before it can be sent to the governor for his signature, but with each chamber already passing a bill, the legislation is in good shape. SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE Since 1989, during the height of the AIDS crisis, Maryland has said that 'an individual who has the human immunodeficiency virus may not knowingly transfer or attempt to transfer the human immunodeficiency virus to another individual.' A violation is a misdemeanor, punishable by a fine up to $2,500 or up to three years in prison. Fair says the law actually hinders public health efforts, 'causing people not to get tested, to stigmatize people living with HIV, criminalized otherwise rather innocuous behavior … that would have nothing to do with the transmission or potential transmission of HIV.' Currently, people living with HIV 'walk around on a day-to-day basis with this weird Sword of Damocles hanging over their heads. This code basically dictates their day-to-day lives,' Fair said. 'Because of the way that it's written, because of the way it's interpreted and because of the way it's used by law enforcement and by the criminal justice system, innocuous day-to-day interactions that could be physical in nature or not, suddenly get applied to this code,' he said. Fair said that the charge can be misused. He said that there have been situations where people with HIV have been charged after spitting on or biting someone, even though HIV does not spread through saliva. He also said that people can weaponize the law. 'A few examples include relationships that have soured – two consenting individuals were in a consensual sexual relationship,' he said. 'But they had some kind of falling out, and then one person goes and files charges against their former partner because they're mad at them … they're stuck having this criminal charge levied against them.' According to a report from the Williams Institute, there have only been 148 HIV-related charges in Maryland from 2000-2020, when the first HIV-related charge was issued in Maryland to the most recent charge as of 2024. The Williams Institute reports that more than 80% of the cases in that timeframe were dropped. 'It's such an ineffective and misused tool,' Fair said. Despite that, efforts to repeal the law have been more than a decade in the making. Del. Shirley Nathan-Pulliam (D-Baltimore City and Baltimore County) introduced the first version of the bill in 2013. 'As a nurse, she recognized the way that this kind of criminalization of the day-to-day lives of Marylanders further stigmatizes the issue around HIV and actually frustrated public health efforts to reduce the transmission,' Fair said. Fair took up the effort in 2023, when it passed the House for thei first time, but did not move in the Senate. When the bill came up last year,Smith let it die in his committee. 'I was uncomfortable with it,' he said. 'This was just not high up on the ledger. So I didn't move on it.' A year later, Smith is on board with the legislation and agreed to sponsor it because he believes the current law is 'very discriminatory.' 'No other communicable disease was pulled out separately,' he said of the law that he said was 'skewed towards, frankly, Black men.' He also added that there are other charges, such as reckless endangerment, that are more appropriate to use in the case of someone maliciously spreading HIV. 'For me it was a way to say, 'We can get rid of this antiquated thing that was really created for discriminatory practice,' and also treat all of these dangerous communicable disease the same way,' Smith said.
