Confusion reigns at colleges like the University of Montana as they struggle to interpret presidential executive orders to erase diversity, equity and inclusion. The Montana Republican party's split continues to play out publicly. And several bills to cut your property taxes are moving toward a climax.
Capitol Talk is MTPR's weekly legislative news and analysis program. MTPR's Sally Mauk is joined by Montana Free Press State Editor Holly Michels and Lee Banville, Director of the University of Montana School of Journalism and Professor of Political Reporting.
Sally Mauk: Lee, The University of Montana, like schools around the country, is asking its administrators and faculty to review its policy and courses to make sure they're not in violation of President Trump's executive orders on DEI — diversity, equity and inclusion. And I'll remind our listeners that you are the head of the journalism school, so you got the memo, too. What does it mean, exactly? And what's been the campus reaction so far?
Lee Banville: So there's a lot of, frankly, confusion about exactly how to handle all this. Obviously the university, and I think pretty much all of us don't want to be in violation of federal law, but what's confusing right now is what is federal law around these questions.
So when we received our guidance, you know, it covered a large swath of potential stuff, including like individual words that may need to be highlighted or, you know, sort of concepts that might percolate throughout curriculum or throughout programing or throughout websites. And so, guidance has been sort of coming out in bits and pieces.
For example, I think most coursework for someone's classes are not covered because that falls under a pretty broad definition of academic freedom, so it's up to the faculty member how they're going to teach their course or what they're going to teach.
A lot of material on websites has been sort of, like, reviewed. You know, I think some people have been very diligent and going through every single thing to try and sort of mop up even language around, like, you know, accessibility questions around ramps in a building, should we be using the word accessibility, which feels pretty broad. And so, my response was, I'm not exactly sure how to respond because I don't want to underreport, but I also don't want to over report,
I don't know. It's a very vague sort of doctrine from the Department of Education. It's a letter. It's called a dear colleague letter that sort of outlines what we're supposed to be doing, but it's not a lot of guidance for like, on the ground, in an individual class description or program description, it gets very sort of like, you know, can I use words like ‘diverse array of platforms to produce journalism for,’ well that's the got the, the 'diverse' word and do I report that? And so, I think the university is making a very good faith effort to try and fulfill its requirements. A lot of this stuff is tied up in court as well at the same time.
But I'll say, I mean, you know, obviously the fear looming over this is, we're a federally funded institution, and so we rely on, in part, federal funds as well as state funds. I think the university wants to respect the desires of the federal and state government, so I think it's an ongoing conversation, but it's a kind of complicated time to be sort of, running a program over here, and really at any higher education institution as they try to navigate these waters.
Sally Mauk: Use the word fear, I think there is alarm actually about this, because where does it end and what's it going to lead to now?
Lee Banville: Well, I think it's just fear of the unknown. Like, we don't know what might anger federal officials and what actually they don't really care about, but might feel like it's kind of covered by this material. And so, like, it's such a broad array of things that they're talking about, you know, everything from programs to improve access to higher education for veterans, to making sure we apply with the Americans with Disabilities Act to questions of Indigenous student recruitment. There are varying legal questions around each of those things. And so, yeah, it's pretty confusing and a little scary because you're not quite sure how to do it and do it correctly, because it's just so broad and complicated.
Sally Mauk: Well, we'll continue to follow that. And meanwhile, Holly, back at the Legislature, we've talked often about the nine Republican legislators who vote with Democrats on some key bills. And this week, the state Republican Party put out a press release rebuking those nine, basically accusing them of being traitors to the Republican cause and threatening them if they don't come around.
Holly Michels: Yeah, Sally, this was a pretty strongly worded statement from the state GOP. They're calling out these nine senators by name, saying that their frequent alignment with Democrats is creating obstacles for the Republican majority. And again, like you said, they're threatening them, though it's not really clear with what that would be. You know, this release claims that the senators are prioritizing personal and political considerations, saying they don't align with the state GOP platform, and they're saying that this is all on top of Republicans having a really strong showing at the ballot box in November.
This isn't the first time we've seen divisions in the Republican Party. That dates back years in Montana. I think you can look back, you know, at least to 2008, when dark-money groups were spending in Republican primaries in the state. It's also been a major factor, this division in the Republican Party in Montana. Things like 2019’s infrastructure bill finally clearing the finish line, and of course in 2015, 2019 and this year, Medicaid expansion bills passing the Legislature. So the Republican division isn't new, but this is a pretty public airing of grievances by the party. And a pretty interesting move to name those senators by name mid-session.
Sally Mauk: Well, on the Montana Talks podcast this week, host Aaron Flint asked Governor Gianforte about this party letter attacking the nine, and Gianforte responded with a complaint about how slow this Legislature has been.
Greg Gianforte: As of last week, the only two bills I got from the Legislature — one renamed a bridge and the other one brought lunch money for the legislators.
Sally Mauk: And needless to say, only Republican lawmakers took offense at the governor's remarks.
Holly Michels: They did, Sally. The governor's office has certainly had criticisms of the Legislature in the past. This time, he said he wanted certain bills to his desk early. That includes his homestead exemption property tax bill. And of course, the reason he would want that early is if it comes early in the session, it can't be tied up in sort of the end-game politics of this building that sometimes dramatically change legislation. But that bill just cleared over to the Senate, and now it does have some language tying its fate to another bill, so it is already caught up in the politics of this building and not on Gianforte desk like he would prefer it would be.
After that radio appearance, Republican leadership sent out a press release saying that they were setting the record straight. They said that the process at the Legislature is designed to be deliberative. That takes time, and they're trying to be fiscally responsible, weighing these bills carefully. But you also heard those nine Republican senators, they have been pretty critical of the pace of the Senate, specifically this session, is not being as fast as they feel like it has been in past sessions.
Then on Thursday, though, Gianforte in a press conference did pivot to say the Legislature is, in his eyes, doing a good job moving bills to his desk. He cited some that had moved recently. He also mentioned Senate leadership by name, saying he appreciated lawmakers for the sacrifice they're making by leaving their homes to come to Helena for 90 days. He actually went on quite a bit about this, so it's an interesting turn there.
Sally Mauk: Well, Lee, it's fair to say, I think, isn't it, that Governor Gianforte is generally happy with the nine renegade Republicans and what they're doing?
Lee Banville: If we go to the beginning of the week, they're very much aligned on the question of the pace of the Senate, that the Senate is focusing on the wrong things, it's taking too much time to, you know, it's spending so much time in its own bitter fights within itself, rather than moving the major pieces of legislation that the governor outlined in its State of the State when we went into this session. And so I think there is an alignment there where the nine Republicans have really, sort of, like many of the bigger pieces of legislation that have moved out of the Senate have been because of them not, you know, in spite of them. And so it creates an interesting moment.
But I think, you know, as Holly was mentioning, that that pivot later in the week, clearly the governor is like, 'I'm not going to go to war with the Republican majority of the Legislature.' Although he might be frustrated about it, he's going to play ball because he does have a lot of his major priorities, have not made it to his desk, so he needs that upper body to move that legislation as it comes to either out of the House, or as they try to get it to the House ahead of the transmittal deadline.
Basically, what it all highlights is how like, oh, we have one party rule in the state of Montana, and that's technically true, but it doesn't mean that they all agree. And so I think what you're seeing is the complexity of any sort of legislative process, because, you know, at the end of the day, you need these majority coalitions. And the governor can't just stand in front of them and say, do this and they all do it. Instead, they have to sort of hash out these deals. They have to kind of consider — you can call it the deliberative process of the Legislature, and it's one that has been made much more interesting and complex by, you know, the shrinking of the Republican majority, and then this sort of group of nine that have really come to be the sort of focal point of the Senate for, for the first half of the session.
Sally Mauk: Meanwhile, Holly, you mentioned the governor's favored property tax cut bill passed the House and is on its way to the Senate, and he has to be pleased about that.
Holly Michels: Yeah, that bill's in motion. And there's some others that are also in play here. The Homestead Exemption Act is House Bill 231. It's being carried by Representative Llew Jones in the House, and what this bill does is it would lower the conversion rate for the taxable value of primary residential properties. Because that lower revenue needs to be made up from somewhere, it raises that rate for second homes and short term rentals like Airbnbs. The governor's estimating this will lower property taxes for homeowners that it applies to by about 15%, and it doesn't directly target renters. Jones has argued that landlords would need to lower rents to be competitive.
People who are opposed to the bill say it could hurt families with a cabin, or who may inherit homes if someone in their family dies. They also say it could be difficult for people to file applications to claim that credit, which would be following the initial year that the bill would be in effect.
So, like you said, this did clear the House this week, it did so along with two other bills from Democratic legislator Jonathan Karlen of Missoula. One of those is House Bill 151. It's similar to the one that Gianforte and Jones have, except that it would scale that conversion rate up and down, along with the value of the property, and not make the distinction between a primary home or a second home. So the less a home is worth, the lower the rate would be. Democrats argue this is a fair approach, and both bills do have protections to keep small businesses from getting caught up in it.
And then Karlen has a second bill that would establish an income tax credit to help offset property taxes. This one does have a direct provision for renters, saying that renters could attribute 15% of their rent bill to be equivalent to property tax. This would apply to lower and middle income Montanans, and this income tax bill is one that Democrats recently tied to the fate of Gianforte’s bill through some coordination language. So all these bills have seen bipartisan support, including Gianforte’s.
Then, over on the Senate side, there's another bill, Senate Bill 90 from Senator Carl Glimm of Kila. This is the option for some Republicans who don't like Gianforte’s bill. This is what they're backing. This just cleared a second reading in the Senate, actually on a 50-0 vote, and is now on the Finance and Claims Committee.
What this bill does is it would divert some money from the state's lodging tax to a property tax relief fund. Initially, it would have defunded tourism efforts that are paid for with some of that money, but that was amended out of the bill. It is something that schools and local governments are watching pretty closely, as they're the recipient of the biggest portions of property tax dollars and would likely need to make adjustments to their budgets or pass levies to make up any difference in lower revenues they're collecting here.
And of course, there's also bills this session that would directly affect things that local governments can do in the levy and taxation arena. But since the end of last session, Gianforte has been pointing the property tax mirror at local governments, saying it's their growing budgets that are the problem. But local governments have pretty firmly pushed back against that, so there's a lot of options at play here.
The Legislature's near its mid point. We’ll be watching to see which of these bills maybe get cold as we move along, maybe there's more combination, but I'm sure these are going to be pretty much in play through the end of the session, as we kind of see the gamesmanship emerge in the second half.
Sally Mauk: Well, Holly and Lee, it's been a long week, but the sun is shining brightly and I hope we all get out to enjoy it. Talk to you next week.
Holly Michels: Thanks, Sally.
Montana Public Radio is licensed to the University of Montana but MTPR retains full editorial independence.
Tune in during the legislative session online Friday afternoons and on-air Saturdays at 9:44 a.m. Subscribe wherever you get your podcasts.
