[{"_1":2,"_124":-5,"_125":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,76,88,100,112],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},"mediaId",6100402,"mediaKeyId","2813609-69ca13a9cb95dfd7e482812007143a7b","parentId",2813609,"title","House Energy passes second Utah-related resolution after debate on legal limits, 8-6","audioSeconds",353,"startMs",1606000,"endMs",1959000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2813609-69ca13a9cb95dfd7e482812007143a7b&start=1606&end=1959","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2813609-69ca13a9cb95dfd7e482812007143a7b/thumbnail_1606000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6100402/Montana/House-Energy-passes-second-Utah-related-resolution-after-debate-on-legal-limits-8-6","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6100402-d67e338a26fdaad64342b08f6a760b8c/orig.mp4?Expires=1770951935&Signature=NB1zHJOU1PwuHfz8SzIw2mku3FIk1YBGqgLOr88mMsD8CFc2gPcYzkgcE5Lvygo3frT8WUysiAlk0lXtdF0jfKX~eSEogh7aMSq5rOztHu4u5knhJI-0Ff6RsnDfe1Ss1B1eVt~ACyggrAwsme7dvgjBvrHvtlM15ilQdXxL1ZnfYUohKTUnQYHaGAWMNLxyZA0Exfb7cz~q~6uyZQcr8TTukPNOOZEpnLvbKwa2F-e1xNiGko1EbIqatq-Zwm-WWoBfQPkCNN1X9HQFY3r-d-HkS8Fve~Tp-x1f9ynlFvMeMQFLn5FlZrJP5fFaXBZnPkvs~RWsgwzrXJPkDrM0Hw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Montana Legislature","date","2025-03-28T00:00:00Z","article","The committee took up House Joint Resolution 24 and heard extended discussion about the resolution’s scope and legal ties to prior precedent. Representative Griffith said she studied case law, named Clappy v. New Mexico (as referenced in committee), and questioned whether Article IV, Section 3, Clause 2 allowed the type of remedy Utah seeks. \"I don't think we can support Utah's request legally because I don't believe that it is a sound complaint that they have filed,\" Griffith said, though she ultimately supported moving the resolution forward to start conversation.

Other members stressed the resolution was not a land-transfer bill but an effort to ask the court to resolve a constitutional question. A sponsor framed it as \"a small step\" and \"a statement by the state of Montana to say look we're gonna try to fix this problem we're gonna do our part.\" Representative Carter noted the number of public opponents recorded in committee materials and said that opposition should be respected.

The committee recorded a roll-call vote of 8 ayes and 6 noes; committee members sent HJR 24 to the House.

Why it matters: Like HJR 25, HJR 24 asks the state to endorse judicial consideration of questions about federal land jurisdiction. Members split on the legal merits; proponents said the resolution starts a conversation, opponents flagged legal and political concerns.

Votes at a glance: House Joint Resolution 24 — passed, 8-6; moves to the House.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","House Energy, Technology, and Federal Relations - Friday, Mar 28, 2025 15:19 - 16:18","oneSentenceSummary","House Joint Resolution 24 passed the committee 8-6 after members debated whether supporting Utah’s action concerns land transfer or merely seeks legal clarification. Some members cited legal precedent opposing transfer; proponents called the resolution a statement to get a constitutional question answered.","taxTitle","2025 Legislature MT, Montana","taxId",77694,"location","Montana","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":77,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":78,"_41":79,"_43":80,"_45":81,"_47":82,"_49":83,"_51":84,"_53":85,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":86,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":87,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6100407,"House Energy endorses joint resolution supporting Utah’s constitutional question on federal land",161,1432000,1593000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2813609-69ca13a9cb95dfd7e482812007143a7b&start=1432&end=1593","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2813609-69ca13a9cb95dfd7e482812007143a7b/thumbnail_1432000.jpg","/articles/6100407/Montana/House-Energy-endorses-joint-resolution-supporting-Utahs-constitutional-question-on-federal-land","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6100407-7d88a596dfece91bf4b84ee2afd27eb9/orig.mp4?Expires=1770951935&Signature=lcJ5--qZcGvV5nTsPPHmTSrrIKtALfloOERsnCvqnP1XpMq-aINGF39uXn2zgfovFCXce-cjQ9nk6GBfgMN5LbjfEcdanztyxkQBMWZE3FpWLO5Kdj5oa4asfjm2Swis8DhT2mL9obcF83RqlyunxXivNsh0V9yNfxXzYH26LTK76jaQhMGogBvpf2djzh59s3rAdW728uTAYFo9hA4vfDW2tq1bWMQ-YBgcgmb4Qmtx7KGXg3M7-6HvcLpeVtMYKI7G76eftxjlpeB~YkqnO0IOSZ2QD8DZFCdYx32WFI9EIHFNoJ62j~OMPd0chDe92tJBgSVk9ZJwMZt~mI7rsw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Representative (unnamed on record) moved that House Joint Resolution 25 do pass; members debated whether the resolution was a narrow request to get a constitutional question answered or an attempt at land transfer.

Representative Millett provided historical context when asked about the Seventeenth Amendment: \"The seventeenth amendment was ratified in 1913,\" she said. Representative Griffith urged caution on the legal basis and cited existing case law, referencing a case she called \"Clappy versus New Mexico,\" and argued Article IV, Section 3, Clause 2 constrains the remedy Utah seeks. Griffith said she had done legal research and did not believe the complaint was clearly supportable, but she ultimately said she would vote yes to spur conversation.

Other members framed the resolution as a statement supporting Utah’s request to have a constitutional question resolved, not as immediate land transfer. \"This is just a statement by the state of Montana saying, look we're gonna try to fix this problem we're gonna do our part So I do recommend that you do pass,\" one member said.

The committee recorded a roll-call vote of 8 ayes and 6 noes; HJR 25 moves to the floor.

Why it matters: The resolution expresses Montana's support for Utah's petition to resolve a constitutional question about federal jurisdiction and the status of federal lands. Members split over the merits and legal foundation, and some said opponents feared the resolution could presage land transfers—even though proponents described it as a request for judicial clarification.

Votes at a glance: House Joint Resolution 25 — passed, 8-6; moves to the House floor.","The committee voted 8-6 to pass House Joint Resolution 25, a resolution supporting Utah’s petition on a constitutional question related to federal lands and jurisdiction; members debated legal precedent and whether the resolution implied land transfer.",{"_33":89,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":90,"_41":91,"_43":92,"_45":93,"_47":94,"_49":95,"_51":96,"_53":97,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":98,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":99,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6100412,"House Energy backs competitive bidding for new transmission-line projects",75,1335000,1410000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2813609-69ca13a9cb95dfd7e482812007143a7b&start=1335&end=1410","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2813609-69ca13a9cb95dfd7e482812007143a7b/thumbnail_1335000.jpg","/articles/6100412/Montana/House-Energy-backs-competitive-bidding-for-new-transmission-line-projects","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6100412-9415944869a1578766f9241d9358df86/orig.mp4?Expires=1770951935&Signature=N5nK4WkW0VmJ2vztyCAiH0g0DEC4JFb87sCDNnAPUS-sb4wsjNEOMGTE5UmD90L5fqaF1Ek93G7Vxnkc4KS9figVPOG2PksVT6MSli6EOAH8sPW-2EaGqOBgA0N8QINdkB7oQ~RrrnuxF4U0eKlGvkggz5BLBfVtzlXonyDAO6veRLHEfOmHTm8dtjO0~yzujJWD7i42IsHKY43L9saqHMbIY-PL5PYFGM6bzGT5IYKnvf0DwbYWGGRRTWD7l8k~-Mnx02LMUOaJ4bZSCXYi0gi66Ks8WBZEoxy41IpIG43Ep72SuyZE5SicQvsCtG5PO9l77HRPC540rEtUZGjE3Q__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Committee staff described Senate Bill 355, introduced by Senator Galt, as a measure \"generally revising electric electric utility laws allowing for a competitive bidding process for the construction of new electric transmission line projects, fusil, existing statute, and replacing it with, incumbent electric utility transmission line rights,\" Burns told the committee.

Representative Carter moved to concur in SB 355. The committee conducted a voice vote and counted proxies; staff reported a recorded tally of 13 ayes and 1 nay. \"There are 13 eyes and 1 nay,\" Burns announced, and the committee sent SB 355 to the floor.

Why it matters: The bill would change how new electric transmission-line projects are awarded in Montana, introducing competitive bidding where incumbent rights currently apply. Supporters argued the change allows competition for construction; details of statutory replacement were not debated in depth in committee.

Votes at a glance: Concurrence on SB 355 — passed, 13-1; bill moves to the House.","Senate Bill 355, which would allow competitive bidding for construction of new electric transmission line projects and revise incumbent rights, passed committee and will move to the House floor.",{"_33":101,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":102,"_41":103,"_43":104,"_45":105,"_47":106,"_49":107,"_51":108,"_53":109,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":110,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":111,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6100417,"House Energy approves 'kill switch' bill after narrowing amendment to payment agreements",2391,45000,2436000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2813609-69ca13a9cb95dfd7e482812007143a7b&start=45&end=2436","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2813609-69ca13a9cb95dfd7e482812007143a7b/thumbnail_45000.jpg","/articles/6100417/Montana/House-Energy-approves-kill-switch-bill-after-narrowing-amendment-to-payment-agreements","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6100417-7a822b942d6fff35ad85e0be36aa8f85/orig.mp4?Expires=1770951935&Signature=OpvnXyXMpgELuy2NYhe-T36UlWsr8apfAoRYYHzp7djEUQAIjPPoDPeXWmonnpzZBehw6lg3a0fmspINIWSQpu6O81VUwOBZmlRlbL7zSdIAjBYR-Mo2giA5YVM3ftcs9QluzTplXUsM7FImbub1u5myaG0Bkz3NpbitlnENynmZgCmE78DfOaXP0BRPb~ML42JRhlJK8eQFTJzdkuxwzfjTKQmXjCa2CeMf7iCe0sEJ5Kv42jztO2MV0DtW~fK-vjXna~nlndHrHszoG9EAmi-Tn4R2GkaQ6wJ6BXrXq-ZBHiX~hvEY~iD-yv-ucjnFSXubJllpS7ADEnElYvVOdw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Chair Perry introduced Senate Bill 364, an act \"establishing kill switch laws prohibiting an entity from remotely activating a kill switch without a warrant, providing damages,\" as committee staff summarized.

Committee members adopted Amendment 003.003, which expanded the bill’s definition of \"recurring payment programs\" to specify retail installment sale agreements, lease agreements, rental agreements and other secured creditor agreements. Burns noted the amendment was largely responsive to industry concerns that the original language was overly broad.

Several members expressed privacy concerns while noting the technology’s current presence in the marketplace. Vice Chair Kordom said he would support the bill despite objections that it had been watered down: \"I oppose kill switches on lots of things... I have to be able to turn off all satellite and Internet links to me to get off the grid and to feel truly alone... So, I urge the committee to vote for this bill,\" he said. Representative Sharp echoed privacy unease: \"I've never liked this idea... But that's the world we live in. So I think we have to start putting these legislative barriers up to say when officials of the state and maybe even others can use it to their advantage and to our disadvantage.\"

Representative Carter said he plans to offer a floor amendment requiring disclosure to purchasers or lessees when a product contains a kill switch. \"I'm gonna bring an amendment on the floor that says if you're gonna sell something or lease something or rent something to someone in the state that you need to let them know... that it can be killed,\" Carter said.

The amendment to clarify covered payment arrangements passed 13 ayes and 1 no. The committee then concurred in the amended SB 364 by voice vote and sent the bill to the House; Representative Mitchell agreed to carry it on the floor.

Why it matters: The bill seeks to limit remote disabling of consumer devices without judicial process and to establish damages. The committee narrowed the law’s scope to enumerated payment/credit relationships; members signaled further floor amendments are likely, particularly on consumer notice requirements.

Votes at a glance: Amendment 003.003 — passed, 13-1; concurrence on SB 364 as amended — voice vote in favor, bill moves to the House.","Senate Bill 364, which would prohibit remote activation of vehicle or device 'kill switches' without a warrant and provide damages, passed the committee after an amendment clarified which recurring payment arrangements the bill covers.",{"_33":113,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":114,"_41":115,"_43":116,"_45":117,"_47":118,"_49":119,"_51":120,"_53":121,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":122,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":123,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6100422,"House Energy amends, advances Montana Genomic Security Act; requires registration of genetic sequencers",2248,123000,2371000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2813609-69ca13a9cb95dfd7e482812007143a7b&start=123&end=2371","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2813609-69ca13a9cb95dfd7e482812007143a7b/thumbnail_123000.jpg","/articles/6100422/Montana/House-Energy-amends-advances-Montana-Genomic-Security-Act-requires-registration-of-genetic-sequencers","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6100422-a4d2838ca7ab74d1e3c84c08ff66355f/orig.mp4?Expires=1770951935&Signature=WGLnqdaqIxxgtYsf~2Ty7i-Uz0Z1qcWX34KcWDMiqrve-GfwlGzro2-OHn3qRUk5o~hxsnJFpB5w3EoMLTJi~wyc-ImPfDLY2ygPI5EldrMzdv0Ovg09MnrY4G8g1edaF6xyOBOKnz4tkGrBd8Pi9TWi7oFfqtwW3fvHzcK~RaTzrgGNn4ruSmJVTPbmP25MIp4O8n3C6lsSv~ksW8bR9ST59H8Aa89YPIdE5y~1JH5M4PmMlo~lw0uaDx10CKgKFmj-SDgdWnIz59txSwqV2fhV21BnGhGTrx0hzgjZBezTuWYp9sT9QqCkEd6GedegXvDrj0mxNxTl6I3qLHM58Q__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Chair Perry opened consideration of Senate Bill 410, the Montana Genomic Security Act, saying the committee would consider amendments and the bill’s intent. \"This is the Montana Genomic Security Act,\" staff member Burns told the committee, summarizing the bill as \"prohibiting medical and research facilities in the state from using a genetic sequencers genetic sequencing software produced by a foreign adversary,\" requiring written consent for remote access, and adding storage and registration requirements.

The committee adopted an amendment (SB0410.001.002) offered by Representative Griffith that cleared technical language and—by later addition—narrowed the law’s focus toward devices linked to foreign adversaries. \"The sponsor and I worked together on this amendment,\" Griffith said, and added that she planned a further clarification to add the phrase \"foreign adversary\" so the registration requirement would not sweep in ordinary, domestically sourced lab equipment. \"I will be bringing an amendment to add to line 23 and 24, the word foreign adversary to each of those,\" Griffith said.

Members raised concerns about the amendment’s breadth and enforcement. Representative Carter warned a broad registration requirement could include private companies and university labs and ‘‘cast a super wide net’’ that might provoke pushback on the House floor. \"My view is that on the house floor, when we're gonna tell private companies that are doing private things that you have to register your private tools with a state or government, there's gonna be a lot of pushback on that,\" Carter said, urging a narrower focus tied to procurement or supply-chain risk.

The amendment passed on a recorded count of 14 ayes and 0 noes. The committee then voted to concur in the bill as amended by voice vote; members indicated the amended SB 410 will move to the House as amended. Representative Griffith agreed to carry the bill on the floor unless another member volunteers.

Why it matters: The bill would require facilities that use certain genetic sequencing products or operational research software to register details including location of sequencers, where products are produced, and ownership or control of producing entities. Supporters said registration provides supply-chain visibility and data-security checks; critics warned about scope and enforcement against ordinary research and private labs.

The committee record shows the amendment package removed a standalone legislative intent statement and struck an effect date tied to a federal regulation, replacing section language with the new registration requirement.

Votes at a glance: Amendment SB0410.001.002 — passed, 14-0; concurrence on SB 410 as amended — voice vote in favor, bill moves to the House.

Provenance: Committee staff described the bill and the amendment during the hearing; Representative Griffith and Representative Carter discussed scope and implementation, and the committee voted on the amendment and the amended bill.","The committee amended Senate Bill 410 to add registration requirements for genetic sequencers and sequencing software and approved the amended bill for the House. The amendment passed unanimously; members debated the scope of registration and potential impacts on private labs and vendors.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

House Energy passes second Utah-related resolution after debate on legal limits, 8-6

House Energy endorses joint resolution supporting Utah’s constitutional question on federal land

House Energy backs competitive bidding for new transmission-line projects

House Energy approves 'kill switch' bill after narrowing amendment to payment agreements

House Energy amends, advances Montana Genomic Security Act; requires registration of genetic sequencers