Save $100 on the Leupold VX-3HD

SB 442 - Habitat and Access

Did the Senate adjourn today? How does that affect a potential veto challenge
Don’t quote me, but I believe that since it passed the senate by more than 2/3 majority, the Secretary of State will have to send ballots to all the Senators. I’m guessing House would vote on the override prior to adjourning.
 
Don’t quote me, but I believe that since it passed the senate by more than 2/3 majority, the Secretary of State will have to send ballots to all the Senators. I’m guessing House would vote on the override prior to adjourning.
Thanks Schaaf.

I think the house adjourned this evening too.
 
Good article over what happened:


More to come later today from the coalition of groups working on this. We're not giving up this fight yet.
 
Good article over what happened:


More to come later today from the coalition of groups working on this. We're not giving up this fight yet.
Is there a time limit on how long the Governor has to veto a bill once it reaches his desk? If so, and that limit fell within the next three days, it seems like a major error to vote to end the session when there is a chance he as already vetoed the bill. Or if the intent is to close the session why not wait to submit the bill an hour before voting to close the session?

I really feel for you and everyone else that has worked so hard on this bill. I hope there is a way to salvage things. It would be a shame for this to fail due to an unforced error by the legislature.
 
@Ben Lamb This is not how I thought it would go. I didn't realize that the Senate would adjourn and not have the chance to override the veto. Two things....a) I thought there's a provision for voting remote....does that not apply post sine die? b) if the bill dies, then I would think there couldn't be any changes made to what was established by HB701 back in 2021.

This stuff is way above my pay grade, but dang the timing of sine die was not something I saw coming....nor the speed of the bill getting to GG for that matter. It's all a buncha crap. Fitzpatrick, in particular, seemingly smug about the whole thing....he needs to go.
 
Is there a time limit on how long the Governor has to veto a bill once it reaches his desk? If so, and that limit fell within the next three days, it seems like a major error to vote to end the session when there is a chance he as already vetoed the bill. Or if the intent is to close the session why not wait to submit the bill an hour before voting to close the session?

I really feel for you and everyone else that has worked so hard on this bill. I hope there is a way to salvage things. It would be a shame for this to fail due to an unforced error by the legislature.
I understand it this way, and someone can correct if I am wrong.

If Gov vetos while in session, they can bring it up again.
If they vote to adjourn and then Gov vetos, they can come back and bring it up again.
If the Gov vetos and then they vote to adjourn, the bill is dead.

That is why the Gov statement said he did it at "2 o'clock" hour because they know the vote to adjourn was at 3.

Politics I guess.
 
I understand it this way, and someone can correct if I am wrong.

If Gov vetos while in session, they can bring it up again.
If they vote to adjourn and then Gov vetos, they can come back and bring it up again.
If the Gov vetos and then they vote to adjourn, the bill is dead.

That is why the Gov statement said he did it at "2 o'clock" hour because they know the vote to adjourn was at 3.

Politics I guess.

That's certainly how that article reads. Almost feels like we got worked.
 
Good question. What is for sure is that it won't get spent on Habitat.
Incorrect. We went into this with a win-win. Even if GG gets his way on 442, we were able to play enough offense that we keep status quo which was HB 701 from the 2021 session which directs a large portion of the dope dough to Habitat Montana.
 
Last edited:
To everyone who worked so hard to make this bill into law, I am truly sorry your efforts fell short.

It is not like I was looking for a reason to vote against Gianforte. Since he survived politically after choking a reporter, he will survive this also. He will offer some explanation, and those inclined to vote for him will but it.
 
Incorrect. We went into this with a win-win. Even if GG gets his way on 442, we were able to play enough offense that we keep status quo which was HB 701 from the 2021 session which directs a lodge portion of the dope dough to Habitat Montana.
I was thinking along the same lines. I'm hopeful you're right on this. Feels like that's how it should be.
 
It's great that 701 remains in function so that Habitat MT retains the weed money. And maybe there's more to come on 442 as well. That said, I don't know if there will ever be an opportunity as flush with cash for an idea like the Legacy Fund.

If it's all over though for this session, I personally would look at the situation of Montana Hunters as much better than I would've wagered in December. Lotta folks putting in a lotta work and a lot of lessons to be learned and used in the future.
 
Incorrect. We went into this with a win-win. Even if GG gets his way on 442, we were able to play enough offense that we keep status quo which was HB 701 from the 2021 session which directs a lodge portion of the dope dough to Habitat Montana.
But wasn't part of the problem (part of the reason for the surplus) was that the money wasn't getting spent there at the level it was being collected? I think the original initiative in 2020 was like 50% of the tax rev. Just going off memory and haven't looked into the spending details, but I believe this was brought up. There was also a SB that tried to kill the whole legalization law - thank goodness for HM that got shot down. Either way, for all the groups that worked on this, I'm not sure it feels like a win-win.
 
To everyone who worked so hard to make this bill into law, I am truly sorry your efforts fell short.

It is not like I was looking for a reason to vote against Gianforte. Since he survived politically after choking a reporter, he will survive this also. He will offer some explanation, and those inclined to vote for him will but it.
He won’t have to offer an explanation. 98% of the people that voted for him did so because there was an R in front of his name.
 
He won’t have to offer an explanation. 98% of the people that voted for him did so because there was an R in front of his name.
No, unfortunately, they voted for him because of the disaster that the national D party has become, where it seems the major initiatives are making poor people pay more for food, gasoline, heating, and for some odd reason I can't fathom talking to little kids talk about sex. And, oh yeah, shutting down coal in Africa and killing a bunch of poor black folks, and enslaving their kids to dig for minerals for EVs.

And I have made lots of money from Biden's policies.

Get some reasonable Ds and we will see a different outcome.
 
Back
Top