‘Big budget bill’ too big, say some GOP, but others say it’s paying for things Montanans need

The House had its final debate Monday on the “big budget bill,” with legislators on the right lambasting spending, and the sponsor defending the increases as paying for the big ticket items Montanans want — such as property tax relief.

Rep. Terry Falk, R-Kalispell, said Gov. Greg Gianforte handed legislators a bloated budget, and it was still too big on the cusp of its near final vote.

Although it was Day 83 of a session that’s a maximum 90 days, Falk said it wasn’t too late to trim the budget, to return more money to taxpayers, contrary to the lyrics of a country song, it’s “too late to do the right thing now.”

“That might be true in love. I don’t think it’s true in budgets,” Falk said.

As the session nears a close, the argument brought political divisions into focus, including a dynamic in the Senate. There, “The Nine” Republicans and all Democrats teamed up as a working majority, frustrating more conservative Republican leadership.

In the House debate, members of the Freedom Caucus condemned Gianforte for presenting a “smoke and mirrors” budget in House Bill 2, and hardline Republicans faulted their colleagues for going along with it.

But Republicans in support of HB 2 said its critics wanted to unfairly characterize the budget as a failure to score political points, and Democratic supporter Rep. Mary Caferro of Helena said it takes care of the basics.

“The House passed a fair budget over to the Senate, and then the Senate made it even more fair, particularly for the working-class people of Montana and their families,” Caferro said.

Monday, the House voted 67-33 to agree with the changes the Senate had made to HB 2 last week, with support from all 42 Democrats and 25 Republicans, albeit some frustrated ones.

In support of taking the budget to the finish line, but against the idea to send it to committee for a trim, Majority Leader Steve Fitzpatrick said any more work on the budget would just backfire.

Fitzpatrick, R-Great Falls, said he didn’t have any particular love for the budget, but it was high time to be done with it before it grew even bigger.

He pointed in particular to a lack of restraint in the subcommittee that handled the health department — “our Section B can’t say ‘no.’” But he said neither could others along the way.

“I sit here and pull my hair out some days wondering what happened to the Republican party,” Fitzpatrick said.

In a later debate over another bill, he told Republicans it was time to be “fiscal conservatives, not part-time fiscal conservatives.”

On the floor, however, sponsor and Rep. Llew Jones, R-Conrad, said the increases criticized in the budget represent legislative priorities and needs of Montanans, and the budget is balanced.

The most recent tally shows $224.8 million unspent at the end of the 2027 biennium.

After the debate, Jones said he believes that amount will increase as bills currently accounted for fail to pass, and as the governor potentially vetoes some spending.

The 2027 biennium budget costs 17% more than the 2025 biennium budget so far, and critics in the legislature have highlighted the figure as much too steep.

Jones, though, sponsor of House Bill 2 and chairman of the House Appropriations Committee, said those costs include as much as $200 million in property tax relief.

He said if giving Montanans their money back is wrong, “then we should be wrong every day.”

The increase also includes nearly $100 million more required in the state match by the federal government for Medicaid, another $100 million for education, and money for “backing the blue,” he said.

Once large items are accounted for, Jones said, the increase looks more like 4% each year, in line with inflation.

“Yes, the budget is bigger,” Jones said. “We’re returning money to taxpayers. We’re keeping criminals off the street. We’re protecting our elders and vulnerable neighbors, and we’re taking care of health care.”

But Rep. Jane Gillette, R-Three Forks, said the budget isn’t fully transparent with taxpayers, an “illusion” from the start.

“It was presented from the governor as a smoke-and-mirrors budget,” said Gillette, a member of the Freedom Caucus.

She said the governor tried to present some spending as outside of HB 2 in order for his proposal to appear more conservative than it was, but legislators didn’t sign onto the idea.

However, Gillette also said the Senate took a $50 million bite out of HB 2 for contract nurses, helping the most vulnerable patients including at the state hospital.

The Senate added $15 million back for hiring employees at the state hospital instead. But Gillette said the health department would spend all the money anyway.

Gillette said the agency has the authority to dip into other funds it controls, and it would simply scrape $35 million out of another bucket, such as for children or nursing homes.

“They’ll take money from next year’s general fund. It’s just putting it on the credit card,” said Gillette, chairperson of the subcommittee that reviews the health department budget.

Rep. John Fitzpatrick, R-Anaconda, though, asked the House to reject Gillette’s testimony.

He said the Department of Public Health and Human Services had been spending money profligately on traveling nurses, largely at the state hospital.

“The department of health … did absolutely nothing to hire state employees at the state hospital, and I mean absolutely nothing,” Fitzpatrick said.

He said Gillette’s subcommittee had included $75 million for traveling nurses. Yet state employees were more affordable than contract travelers, he said — a cost of $91,000 compared to $280,000.

Roughly six weeks ago, however, he said the governor told him, as did health department staff at a more recent committee hearing, that the agency had finally started hiring, and at a rate of one nurse a week.

If that was the case, he said, it didn’t need $75 million for traveling nurses, and the Senate rightly stripped out that money.

“It’s time to make the Department of Public Health and Human Services accountable to the people of Montana, to make a real effort at hiring state employees,” Fitzpatrick said.

“They’re claiming they can do it. Fine. Let’s hold their feet to the fire, and if they don’t get the job done, then we’ll have a real serious discussion about the supplemental (budget request) next time.”

But Rep. Jerry Schillinger, R-Circle, blamed the Senate for the results in HB 2, pointing the finger at the working majority in the Senate, the coalition of Democrats and nine Republicans.

He said the Senate’s Finance and Claims Committee didn’t scrutinize the budget for long, but it wasn’t fully in control, with bills being blasted out of its hands.

“The chaos that started on Day One continues to this day, and we see it on House Bill 2,” said Schillinger, a Freedom Caucus member.

Jones called the allegation the budget was “smoke and mirrors” the “new term of the hour,” and said it must be “the saddest magic show on earth” given the numbers on spreadsheets and results for taxpayers.

After the debate, Rep. David Bedey, R-Hamilton, said some of the accusations on the floor were about showmanship and political games, not crafting a budget that works for Montanans.

“It’s evident from the rhetoric we heard when House Bill 2 was on the floor that several members of the House are creating soundbites for the purpose of attacking their political enemies,” Bedey said.

He said some of the Republicans who spoke against the budget want to paint a negative picture for political purposes.

“The idea is to portray the budget as a failure,” Bedey said. “The budget is balanced. It meets the needs of the state and provides the government services that the citizens of Montana expect with respect to education, health care and criminal justice.”

HB 2 is scheduled for its last vote on Tuesday before it heads to the governor’s desk.