MT GOP Calls for Senator Ellsworth to Resign

Gallatin County Study Commission to Hold First Public Hearing  Details of the Public Hearing: Date : Thursday, April 10 Time : 5:30 p.m. Location : Community Room on 3rd floor of Gallatin County Courthouse; 311 W Main St, Bozeman Virtual Access : Microsoft Teams link on www.gallatinmt.gov or www.gallatinlocalgovstudy.com , scroll down to calendar Public Participation : Open to all residents of Gallatin County For more details on the Study Commission, including meeting schedules, contact information, and virtual access to weekly meetings, visit www.gallatinlocalgovstudy.com . The Gallatin County Local Government Study Commission will hold its first public hearing on Thursday, April 10, at 5:30 p.m. in the Community Room on the third floor of the Gallatin County Courthouse, 311 W Main, Bozeman. The public has tasked the Local Government Study Commission with evaluating the existing form and powers of a local government, and how local government services are delivered, and comparing them with other forms available under Montana law. Members of the public are encouraged to attend in person or virtually. During this hearing, the commission will share an overview the study’s scope, introduce the current form and structure of the county government, and share examples of different county government models in Montana. The commission will also share a timeline for key milestones for the study process. Residents will have an opportunity to share feedback and ideas about Gallatin County’s government structure. All comments and feedback will be captured as part of the study. Residents will have many more opportunities to provide feedback at listening sessions that will be hosted around the county over the next year and a half. “We strongly encourage your participation in this discussion and invite you, a member of the public, to provide insights from your work and interaction with our county government. Your input will be invaluable in helping us form our understanding of how our local government structure supports or challenges your work.” says Vice Chair Study Commissioner Jackie Haines "The Montana Constitution is unique in that every ten years it allows the citizens of a county or municipality to review if the current form of county government could more efficiently, and effectively, deliver services to the county residents. The seven citizens elected to study our local government have begun the review process and invite the public to become involved with the process." says Study Commissioner Don Seifert About the Gallatin County Study Commission: In the June 2024 primary election, voters across Montana had an opportunity to decide on studying their local governments. This question is posed to voters every 10 years, as required in Montana’s constitution. Montana is the only state where voters regularly decide whether to evaluate their local government structure. In 2024, voters in 12 counties and 44 municipalities across the state voted to conduct a local government review. Voters in Gallatin County voted in favor of the independent study, as did residents of Bozeman and West Yellowstone. In the November 2024 general election, voters elected seven volunteer members to serve on the nonpartisan study commission for two years. The elected members of the Gallatin County Study Commission are (alphabetically): Janae Hagen, Jackie Haines, Jeff Krauss, EJ Porth, Don Seifert, Klaas Tuininga, and Steve White.

GALLATIN COUNTY REPUBLICAN CENTRAL COMMITTEE RESOLUTION FOR REBUKE AND CENSURE OF MONTANA STATE SENATOR SHELLEY VANCE SD34

At an early age, we taught our kids to learn from others and to think for themselves. I still remember telling one child, “Truth doesn’t fly in flocks. You need to seek and find it on your own. And never be afraid to test and re-examine what you believe is true. Belief has no value if you close your mind to the ideas and arguments of others. Living in truth involves not only faith, but also the courage to think for yourself.” Unthinking animals either herd up for security, or run in packs to pull other creatures down. Politicians do both. In the worst example I have seen in 48 years in Montana, the cowardly pack mentality has been on full display in the sixty-nineth session of the Montana State Legislature. Most of us are aware by now of the hostile takeover of the Montana State Senate by a coalition of every Democrat plus a wolf pack of liberal Republicans, who locked claws on vote after vote to deliver a functional majority for the Democratic Party. At one point, twenty separate pro-Democrat floor votes were recorded, all by 27-23 margins – an impressive show of Pack Power over their own Republican leadership. The nine GOP deserters are senators Vance, Gillespie, Kassmier, Lammers, Loge, McKamey, Tempel, Hunter and Ellsworth. First, the Pack held the Senate hostage for many days, eventually forcing leadership to change its own rules so that liberal Republicans could be inserted onto key committees to shift committee control. Then came the Jason Ellsworth affair. Sen. Ellsworth was caught arranging a sweetheart contract for a buddy of his by quietly diverting, at the last moment, over $170,000 from the unspent budget of the Judicial Reform Interim Committee, over the objections of its members. The project made no sense and would be performed from the friend’s home. When discovered, auditors were shocked, and the Senate Ethics Committee began an investigation, as was its constitutional duty. But the nine-member GOP wolf pack again locked arms with the Democrats and stopped the investigation in its tracks – thus assuring that the liberal Ellsworth would remain in the Senate for the entire session, doing the Democrats’ bidding. Other reports of Ellsworth throwing his political weight around started coming out. Clearly, he should have resigned, but the “the Pack” continued to give him protective cover, and he remains there still – larger than life – seemingly incapable of shame or contrition. Meanwhile, the pack of nine went about doing exactly what groups like Montana Conservative Alliance have been warning about for many years -- voting with the Democrat block and against limited government conservatives whenever key legislation comes up. I call them Mutant Elephants: elephant bodies, donkey heads. There they were for example, joining with the Democrats to pass massive Medicaid expansion welfare, and to defeat a bill providing work requirements. (More than 6 out of 10 current recipients are able to work, but don’t.) The state GOP publicly rebuked the nine Republican senators, but they missed the point. This undermining of the conservative Republican cause has been going on for over 50 years, with this just being the most obvious, leadership-smashing example. It’s really nothing new, but the media attention to the orchestrated aspect of this treachery is actually a good thing. Maybe GOP voters will finally take notice. In a larger sense, what we have in our state legislature is a great many legislators who don’t read the bills, don’t read the fiscal notes, and don’t show any natural curiosity for ideas or constitutional principles. They follow their leaders and their lobbyists and rarely do the work of a legislator or think for themselves. The Democrats are the most obvious example – almost never having a party member show independence of thought. It is, after all, easy to be a loyal Democrat. All you need to do is want to grow government in every direction, deny the biology of gender, and make it easier to kill human babies. But Republicans are supposed to be different. Some are – and I acknowledge those men and women as great legislators. Others are not. They run with the pack, and fail to do the deliberative, investigative work of independent-thinking legislators. They’ve put their own pride and positions above their constituents, and deserve to be sent packing. Roger Koopman is president of Montana Conservative Alliance. He served four years in the Montana House of Representatives and eight years as a Montana Public Service commissioner. He operated a Bozeman small business for 37 years.

Let's assume that the explanations of the following facts are correct: Dr. Money's patient, the first infant who was transitioned into a girl, and this person's twin brother killed themselves in their late 30th. But it was only the result of transphobia and bullying. A star in the I'm Jazz reality show has a hobby of dressing as a Mermaid, a sea creature with no genitalia. But it's only this individual's artistic expression. An unusually high percentage of autistic kids, victims of sexual assault, and teens with low self-esteem identify as trans. Still, it has nothing to do with their desire to fit in or their beliefs that their bodies were the reason they were raped. Three gender clinics in Montana are listed on the map of clinics that provide HRT with "no therapist required." The individual who pinned the map on his X profile is lying. Less than 10% of transwomen do "bottom surgery." But, it's not because these surgeries are more barbaric than castration but because, as one transwoman explained, "a woman without a penis is an angel without wings." So, let's say that biology is cis-supremacist, transing kids is not child abuse, and only a tiny percentage of children will regret their gender transition when they are adults. In this case, financially compensating these people for their struggles would be a simple act of kindness and compassion, and the opposition to the bill must reconsider their position and support the extension of statutes of limitations to cover these cases." I have more materials that prove why pediatric gender-affirming treatments are child abuse that must be banned. I support HB218 because TQ+ affirming doctors know that what they do to children is criminal, that most of their patients sooner or later will realize that they were mistreated, and that market analysis that predicts the global sex reassignment surgery market size to reach $1.41B in 2025 and $2.51B by 2030 is wrong.

Testimony on SB 146 – Request for Clarifications & Revisions Deanna Campbell Bozeman, Montana Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee, I appreciate the opportunity to testify on SB 146, a bill that takes an important step toward protecting private property rights by limiting excessive government control over land use and zoning decisions. By requiring that zoning restrictions be based on a "compelling governmental interest" in public health or safety, this bill seeks to rein in unnecessary land-use regulations that infringe on individual property rights. However, as currently drafted, SB 146 does not fully protect homeowners from forced urban infill, speculative legal challenges, and city-driven upzoning mandates. While limiting government overreach is essential, the bill must also ensure that single-family zoning protections, private property covenants, and neighborhood stability are not eroded by unintended legal consequences. The Bozeman Example: Why SB 146 Needs Stronger Protections In Bozeman, we have seen firsthand how local government, influenced by ICLEI-style planning mandates, is eroding single-family zoning in favor of forced high-density development. Under the Unified Development Code (UDC) and "affordable housing" initiatives, the city has: Upzoned single-family neighborhoods to allow multi-family housing, without homeowner consent. Encouraged speculative developers to buy out older homes and replace them with high-density rental units, fundamentally altering neighborhoods. Raised impact fees and infrastructure costs for single-family homeowners while subsidizing highdensity projects. Reduced local control over zoning by prioritizing state and regional "sustainability" goals over property owner rights. If SB 146 is to be effective, it must include clear protections against these types of forced zoning changes and speculative redevelopment pressures. Recommended Clarifications and Revisions to SB 146 1. Protect Existing Zoning Contracts & Homeowner Reliance Interests Many homeowners purchased property with the expectation that zoning laws would remain stable, preserving the character of their neighborhoods. Zoning serves as a contract-like agreement between property owners and local governments— one that people rely on when making long-term investments. Recommendation: Add language affirming that SB 146 does not weaken or invalidate longstanding zoning protections that homeowners rely upon as a "property interest." 2. Prevent Speculative "Legalized Block Busting" The bill currently allows broad legal challenges to zoning and property use restrictions, but the term "compelling governmental interest in public health or safety" is too vague. Concern: Developers and investors could exploit this vagueness to file lawsuits that erode single family zoning, leading to forced urban infill and destabilized neighborhoods. Bozeman Example: In Bozeman, we have seen developers rapidly replace single-family homes with multi-story townhomes, often against the wishes of longtime residents. This bill must not be used to accelerate such changes. Recommendation: Refine the "compelling interest" standard to explicitly exclude density mandates, forced urban infill, or high-density upzoning as valid justifications for overriding single-family zoning. 3. Clarify That Private Covenants Are Not Affected Many developments use private covenants to regulate land use. If government agencies reference or require certain covenants in the approval process, could those covenants be challenged under SB 146? Recommendation: Add language explicitly stating that private covenants are not subject to SB 146 unless they are directly imposed by government entities. 4. Restrict Judicial Overreach in Land Use Challenges Concern: As written, SB 146 gives courts broad discretion to overturn zoning laws without clear guidelines. This could allow developers to use the courts to override zoning protections in ways that were never intended. Recommendation: Establish specific legal guardrails for judicial review, ensuring that existing zoning can only be overturned when it demonstrably violates constitutional property rights—not simply when it limits speculative development. 5. Prevent SB 146 from Being Used as a Backdoor for Forced Density Policies While the bill is intended to limit government overreach, poorly worded legal provisions could be exploited to accelerate forced densification rather than prevent it. Some cities may reinterpret "compelling governmental interest" to justify forced upzoning, claiming that "climate sustainability" or "affordable housing" qualifies as a health justification. Bozeman Example: City planners frequently justify density increases using sustainability arguments, arguing that compact urban housing is a "public benefit." SB 146 must make it clear that economic and climate-related goals do not meet the "compelling interest" standard. Recommendation: Explicitly state that urban containment policies, forced densification, and elimination of single-family zoning do not meet the "compelling governmental interest" standard under SB 146. Conclusion: Strengthen SB 146 to Truly Protect Property Rights SB 146 is an important and necessary bill that can rein in government overreach and protect private property rights. However, as currently written, it fails to fully address the very threats that homeowners face from speculative redevelopment, forced urban infill, and top-down planning mandates. To ensure that SB 146 upholds its intended purpose, I strongly urge the committee to: Protect single-family zoning from speculative legal challenges Prevent courts from being used to accelerate density mandates Safeguard private covenants from unintended legal consequences Ensure judicial review does not favor developers over homeowners With these revisions, SB 146 can become a strong, balanced law that truly defends property rights for all Montanans. I encourage further discussion and amendment of the bill to ensure that it fulfills its intended purpose without unintended consequences. Thank you for your time and consideration. Respectfully,  Deanna Campbell

All of us have at least one thing in common: we all began life as infants in a womb. Despite our common beginnings, a widespread disregard for vulnerable human lives at this early developmental stage is wreaking havoc here in Montana, where I grew up and have practiced as an Ob/Gyn for more than 20 years. A far-reaching amendment on the ballot in November, CI-128, would allow unlimited induced abortion through all nine months of pregnancy. CI-128's utter disregard for innocent human beings is nothing short of devastating. As a physician whose entire mission involves saving lives, it’s difficult to justify delivering a newborn at 24 weeks in one room only to terminate another child of the same gestational age or older under the guise of “healthcare” in the room next door. But that’s exactly what CI-128 would permit. The truth is, the little person kicking and moving around in the ultrasound image is not a blob of cells, but a human being. With this scientific reality in mind, I often note on early pregnancy ultrasounds how amazing it is that we all start out just like this. CI-128's full text, which voters will be denied the opportunity to read at the ballot box, is riddled with vague language and deceptive terminology that would harm, not help, women and their babies. For example, it uses the terms “healthcare professional” or “provider” to refer to those performing induced abortions. Such a broad categorical term could give anyone license to perform them, regardless of experience or specialty, including non physicians. In fact, the language would eliminate all existing laws governing safe medical practice. This should be frightening, not freeing, to women in need of genuine medical attention. Unfortunately, there appears to be no limit to how far pro-abortion activists will go to advance their deadly abortion-on-demand platform even though Montana laws already permit induced abortion up until 20 weeks' gestation, five weeks beyond the point at which nearly 75 percent of people do not support elective abortion. National pro-abortion interest groups have funneled millions of dollars into our state for the express purpose of turning out votes in favor of CI-128, that would subtly establish a permissive “right” to induced abortion during all nine months for generations to come. Young women in their teenage years would be put at great personal risk should Montanans adopt CI-128. The amendment would eliminate Montana’s parental notification and the consent laws that protect minors from those who wish them harm, including abusive partners who often pressure them to abort against their wills. Under CI-128, these girls would be isolated at a time in life when they are in the most need of parental guidance and support. Most people don’t realize that Ob/Gyn physicians already have the professional training and the legal authority necessary to deliver holistic care to mothers and their children before and after birth without relying on abortion. No constitutional amendment is required for us to deliver that care. You may have heard concerns that we need CI-128 to treat life-threatening conditions related to pregnancy, such as miscarriages (the baby has already died) and ectopic pregnancies (the pregnancy is outside the uterus, which can be life threatening to the mother). This is an invalid concern. We already take care of these women without hesitation, and always have. Don’t let the drama of CI-128's backers mislead Montanans into thinking that abortion is a ticket to a woman’s freedom, health, and peace of mind. Nothing is further from the truth. Montana voters should demand better for women and children in our state. We must focus our efforts on supporting expecting mothers and welcoming unborn children into loving families in our communities so they can go on to experience fulfilling lives from kindergarten to old age. This fall is your opportunity to cast a decisive vote for protecting women and their children and against this radical amendment.

Americans in the Arena - Please Help If You Can Catherine Engelbrecht Hi Friend - I’m writing to you today with both an update and a request. First, the Update Over these last few months, True the Vote has been firing on all cylinders: IV3 - Assisted volunteers in 1623 counties across the country to submit ineligible voter records to their county elections office. This effort, called IV3 ( IV3.us ) was an enormous success, resulting in over 1,000,000 records being evaluated. Our next step is to monitor these ineligible records to determine whether they request an absentee ballot or cast an early vote. This information will be useful in a variety of ways, not the least of which is litigation support. Lawfare - Submitted our response to the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals in the Fair Fight vs. True the Vote lawsuit. (We won in Georgia federal court, then Fair Fight appealed to the 11th circuit and we necessarily filed a response brief.)The lawsuit concerned voters’ rights to petition government over ineligible voter registration records - and our win in federal court was an awesome victory, in Georgia and across the country. This is just one of several cases we are involved in. Scan. Check. Protect. - So far, we’ve assisted over 30,000 Americans with Scan. Check. Protect. , our online program for voter registration, voter record review, record cancellation, and mail-in ballot tracking. “We Will Not Be Silenced” - We debuted this documentary on Open.ink . It is a compilation of harrowing testimonials from Democrats who experienced how Barack Obama appeared to have stolen the 2008 primary from the Hillary Clinton. This is a must-watch piece of history, informing us about what kind of behavior we can expect in the general election, as the Obama team is again calling the shots, this time for Kamala. VoteAlert - VoteAlert.org is a web app to support voters and election workers in incident reporting, whether online or through our 24×7 live call center. Pray the Vote - Together with our longtime partner Intercessors for America we’re supporting a joint initiative to Pray the Vote, identifying voters who haven’t participated in a while and praying for them, for election workers, and for an honorable election season. Voto Honesto - Launched a Spanish radio show with Voto Honesto spokesperson Violet Sarria - reaching citizens and noncitizens alike with clarifying commentary on voter engagement, including who is and is not allowed to vote. On the Road Again - Traveled all over the country, speaking, training, supporting - and setting up camp in Wisconsin, as we make plans to address the coming installment of nearly 600 dropboxes across this key battleground state. (I’m not going to publish all we are doing, as it will undoubtedly be used against us, but we are doing … a lot). Open Mics - 3x a week webinars and podcasts to support volunteers, answer questions, and keeping working smart. Activist Support - Consistently message to volunteers with efforts led by Meg Denning, to assist, train, engage, and make an impact. You can find one of Meg’s newsletters here (if you aren’t already getting them, you can sign up here. ) Fake News - Continued to absorb the body blows from legacy media. From CNN’s stalking of TTV volunteers, to Democracy Docket ’s completely unhinged article on our work with Sheriffs, and countless hundreds of similar slams intended to discredit and discourage us all. The fallout from fake news spurs coordinated attacks on our websites, and flooded inboxes and voice messages full of the most hateful things you can imagine, including very specific death threats. (But, newsflash, it’s not working, we are more determined than ever.) This is all since about May. (And there’s lots more on our website TrueTheVote.org ). Our volunteer base is steadily growing, as is our social media following. And we are making an impact. As more and more evidence of corruption has been exposed, public sentiment has changed. The majority of Americans (62% according to a recent Rasmussen poll) now believe that we do have a problem with election fraud. Past naysayers have gone from calling us “election deniers”, to being willing to help support local elections in an effort to avoid reliving the 2020 boondoggle. The situation is far from perfect - but we are on the right road and must keep moving forward. Now, the Request Will you please consider making a donation to support our work? I wish we had a war chest that would allow us to work without the need to ask, but that’s not the position we are in. The opposition wants to ensure that we are defunded — in fact, they have been fairly successful at draining our coffers through the many frivolous lawsuits they’ve kept us in. The truth of the matter is this — we are in the center of the arena. Leading the charge. Fighting every day, in ways seen and unseen, to advance the call for voters’ rights and honest elections. In these next few months, we’re going to give it all we’ve got. No rest, no regrets. We have big things planned. Please help us if you can. I know you are being asked for money every day, all the time. I receive the same emails and texts, I know it’s overwhelming. All I can tell you is, we will remain in the arena come what may. We need your help. We are giving to a point of sacrifice. We humbly ask that you join us in the arena today with a donation that would help us not just to stay afloat, but to make a permanent difference for our country — for all of us, for our families, and the next generation.

Nobody Talks About Freedom Anymore

R esolution on Platform Principles WHEREAS, Republican solidarity in opposition to the Democrat socialist agenda is necessary to preserve the security of our country, our economic and political freedoms, and our way of life; and WHEREAS, Republican faithfulness to its conservative principles and public policies as dictated by members of the GOP during convention and found in the Montana State Platform is necessary to maintain and restore the trust of the electorate in the Republican Party and a proven path that will lead to Republican electoral victories; and WHEREAS, we understand the broad written form of the whole of the Montana GOP Platform provides a great narrative tool for discussing our beliefs, it is a mechanism to detail policy to support in legislation; and WHEREAS, the MTGOP has a responsibility to develop a simple set of Principles based upon the MTGOP Platform that could then be applied to all proposed legislation; THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the MTGOP identifies the following ten (10) policy positions to be detailed in the Montana Republican Platform in a “Principles” section that shall be placed immediately after the Preamble and thus before the main body of planks; Tax Policy: Taxes should be low, broad based, and easily understood. Role of Government: We believe our constitutional system- Limited govt, separation of powers, federalism and the rights of the people- must be preserved uncompromised for future generations. Scope of Government: We believe political and economic freedom are indivisible. Sanctity of life: Support “all life is sacred” policies from conception to natural end of life with the exception of the death penalty. There will be no tax payer funding for abortions or suicides, parental notification and permission in all cases dealing with legal minors, and require taxpayer supported medical services programs to provide ultrasounds and all available choices for individuals dealing with crisis pregnancies. Private Property: Private Property is the foundation of prosperity and freedom. Education: Adopt school choice policies driven by parental control, reduce centralized control mechanisms embracing local control, embrace transparency in local district budgets and curriculum, and preserve the autonomy of private and home school institutions. Social Programs: Adopt policies of “hand up” not “hand out” in all social programs, adopt accountability and eligibility standards that only help the truly needy, and implement measures that define the primary role of all social services to one of reducing dependency. Natural Resources: Montana is The Treasure State and we support natural resource policy that promote jobs, and improves the quality of life and standard of living for all Montanans. State Rights: Support the 10th Amendment, reject all federal programs that do not include funding for the life of the mandate, believe that all Federal Law implemented in Montana must be based on Article 1, AND that every Montana elected official work to confine Federal power to its Constitutional limits. Judicial: We believe in the rule of law and a separation of powers. The judicial branch is a separate branch of government and it should not be a super legislature. The Republican Party of Montana recognizes that this Platform and these 10 principles are the only source for the values, definitions, and expectations the members of this association recognize when evaluating a candidate for public office within the Primary Election, as the Republican members alone have determined these by Convention. The Republican Party of Montana also recognizes the primary goal of this Platform and principles is the expectation that our elected officials will use it as a directing guide when making decisions. We also expect a report be issued by the State Republican Party on the voting results for those standards of each Legislator to all members of the Republican Party. Resolution To Officially Oppose Ranked Choice Voting In Montana WHEREAS, The Montana Republican Party, the party of equality, the party of opportunity for all, party of favoritism for none and to encourage and allow the broadest possible participation of all voters in Montana. WHEREAS, Montana has operated on a well-understood and relatively uniform election system that has been implemented over one hundred years to support our constitutional republic. WHEREAS, Montana primary and general elections ensure that voters who support one candidate, not a plurality of candidates, are heard clearly while ranked choice voting schemes open elections to ‘ballot exhaustion’ on the disenfranchisement of voters who choose not to support multiple candidates who do not clearly represent their values; WHEREAS, States and communities where ranked choice voting has been tested have consistently decreased voter participation in those communities and in many cases the elections have resulted in more discarded votes than counted votes; WHEREAS, Ranked choice voting often results in additional tabulation delays resulting in days or weeks of additional counting while depending exclusively on technology without traceable ballots to support determined winners; and WHEREAS, Supporters of ranked choice voting seek to eliminate or disempower party primaries; therefore, be it RESOLVED, That the Republican Party of Montana rejects ranked choice voting and similar schemes that increase election distrust, and voter suppression and disenfranchisement, eliminate the historic political party system, and put elections in the hands of expensive election schemes that cost taxpayers and depend exclusively on confusing technology and unelected bureaucrats to manage it; and RESOLVED, Montana calls on the Congress, Montana State Legislature, and voters to oppose ranked choice voting and similar schemes at every level of government.