Water rights, dark money and religious freedom

• A bill aimed at stopping the proposed Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes water compact from being implemented was passed by the House Natural Resources Committee by 10-8 on March 25.

House Bill 630, sponsored by Rep. Theresa Manzella, R-Hamilton, would prevent the state from entering an agreement “that infringes upon the authority of the state to own, manage, administer or protect its water resources for the benefit of its citizens.”

Catherine Vandemoer, who heads the Montana Land and Water Alliance, a citizens group opposed to the CSKT water compact, spoke in support of HB 630.

“I believe it protects Montana land, law, institutions, governance and sovereign priority for water, and by doing so it will protect its citizens,” she said.

Opponents said the language in HB 630 was too overreaching and that it was in contradiction to other parts of the Montana Constitution. Article 1 commits the state to recognizing treaty relationships between the U.S. and tribes.

• A bill aimed at “dark money” used in campaigning narrowly passed the House by 51-49 on March 26 after motions to amend failed 15 times.

Senate Bill 289, sponsored by Sen. Duane Ankney, R-Colstrip, is backed by Gov. Steve Bullock. The bill seeks to shed light on anonymous campaign donations that have increased since the 2010 U.S. Supreme Court ruling in the Citizens United case.

Opponents to SB 289 said the language was too vague or the bill didn’t go far enough. The bill passed in the Senate by 28-22 on Feb. 26.

• A bill that would add additional protections to religious freedom in the Montana Constitution was passed by the House Judiciary Committee by 12-9 on March 26.

House Bill 615, the “Montana Religious Freedom Restoration Act,” sponsored by Rep. Carl Glimm, R-Kila, would be presented to the voters for approval as a Legislative Referendum in the 2016 general election.

HB 615 would give Montanans the right to challenge state laws that they say burden their freedom to exercise religion. Glimm and supporters cited Yellowstone County clerks who refused to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples after U.S. District Court Judge Brian Morris overturned Montana’s gay marriage ban in November 2014.

Representatives from the Montana Family Foundation, the Catholic Church and the Seventh-day Adventist Church testified in favor of the bill. A representative from the United Methodist Church testified in opposition.

Former Montana Supreme Court Justice James Nelson testified that ample religious protections already exist in the U.S. and Montana constitutions.

“Montana citizens should not have to go and beg their public officials for the benefits they’re entitled under the laws in this state,” Nelson said.

Opponents expressed concern that further codification of religious protections might open the floodgates for individuals, corporations and churches to object to any state law that violates their religion.

Bills aimed at stopping the contentious Flathead water compact, shedding light on campaign financing and protecting religious freedom are making their way through the Montana Legislature.

• A bill aimed at stopping the proposed Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes water compact from being implemented was passed by the House Natural Resources Committee by 10-8 on March 25.

House Bill 630, sponsored by Rep. Theresa Manzella, R-Hamilton, would prevent the state from entering an agreement “that infringes upon the authority of the state to own, manage, administer or protect its water resources for the benefit of its citizens.”

Catherine Vandemoer, who heads the Montana Land and Water Alliance, a citizens group opposed to the CSKT water compact, spoke in support of HB 630.

“I believe it protects Montana land, law, institutions, governance and sovereign priority for water, and by doing so it will protect its citizens,” she said.

Opponents said the language in HB 630 was too overreaching and that it was in contradiction to other parts of the Montana Constitution. Article 1 commits the state to recognizing treaty relationships between the U.S. and tribes.

• A bill aimed at “dark money” used in campaigning narrowly passed the House by 51-49 on March 26 after motions to amend failed 15 times.

Senate Bill 289, sponsored by Sen. Duane Ankney, R-Colstrip, is backed by Gov. Steve Bullock. The bill seeks to shed light on anonymous campaign donations that have increased since the 2010 U.S. Supreme Court ruling in the Citizens United case.

Opponents to SB 289 said the language was too vague or the bill didn’t go far enough. The bill passed in the Senate by 28-22 on Feb. 26.

• A bill that would add additional protections to religious freedom in the Montana Constitution was passed by the House Judiciary Committee by 12-9 on March 26.

House Bill 615, the “Montana Religious Freedom Restoration Act,” sponsored by Rep. Carl Glimm, R-Kila, would be presented to the voters for approval as a Legislative Referendum in the 2016 general election.

HB 615 would give Montanans the right to challenge state laws that they say burden their freedom to exercise religion. Glimm and supporters cited Yellowstone County clerks who refused to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples after U.S. District Court Judge Brian Morris overturned Montana’s gay marriage ban in November 2014.

Representatives from the Montana Family Foundation, the Catholic Church and the Seventh-day Adventist Church testified in favor of the bill. A representative from the United Methodist Church testified in opposition.

Former Montana Supreme Court Justice James Nelson testified that ample religious protections already exist in the U.S. and Montana constitutions.

“Montana citizens should not have to go and beg their public officials for the benefits they’re entitled under the laws in this state,” Nelson said.

Opponents expressed concern that further codification of religious protections might open the floodgates for individuals, corporations and churches to object to any state law that violates their religion.