Oppose HB33

Opposition to House Bill 33

House Bill 33, proposes changes to the rulemaking petition process for agencies in Montana. While the intent behind the bill may be to streamline the petitioning process and avoid unnecessary rulemaking, I believe this bill raises significant concerns regarding citizens' constitutional rights and access to meaningful participation in government.

Concerns About the Bill's Impact on Citizen Participation

1. Infringement on Constitutional RightsThe Montana Constitution guarantees the right of citizens to participate in government, including the right to petition for changes to laws and regulations that affect them. 

   1. Article II, Section 8 of the Montana Constitution affirms that the people have the right to "instruct their representatives and to petition government for redress of grievances." 

   2. This fundamental right ensures that citizens can raise concerns and request changes without facing undue barriers. 

   3. By allowing agencies to dismiss petitions solely based on jurisdictional grounds, HB 33 undermines this right and could create additional hurdles for Montanans seeking to engage in the democratic process.

2. Potential for Overreach by AgenciesHB 33 grants agencies the discretion to summarily dismiss any portion of a petition that raises issues outside their jurisdiction. 

   1. While it is important for agencies to address only those matters within their authority, this provision could be misused by agencies to dismiss valid concerns that, while outside their specific jurisdiction, are still of significant public importance. 

   2. There is a risk that agencies could dismiss petitions too easily or too broadly, denying citizens the opportunity to have their voices heard and their concerns properly considered. 

   3. This could lead to a lack of accountability and transparency within government processes.

3. Unclear Redirection of IssuesWhile the bill mandates that agencies provide contact information for other relevant agencies or bodies with jurisdiction over the issue, this does not ensure that petitioners will actually find a receptive and accessible platform to address their concerns. 

   1. Redirecting petitioners without a clear path for follow-up could result in frustration and discourage active civic participation, as citizens may feel that their efforts are being dismissed or ignored. 

   2. The lack of a robust and clear process to address redirected petitions is a significant concern for those seeking meaningful engagement with government.

4. Barriers to Accessing GovernmentOne of the cornerstones of democratic governance is the ability of citizens to access government institutions and have their grievances addressed. 

   1. By creating additional steps and potentially discouraging petitions on jurisdictional grounds, HB 33 risks creating unnecessary barriers to accessing government. 

   2. It could also deter citizens from participating in government processes, especially if they perceive that their petitions will be dismissed without adequate consideration. 

   3. This goes against the spirit of Montana's constitutional guarantees of citizen participation and involvement in government affairs.

Potential for Outside Interests to Influence Agency Decisions

Another concerning aspect of HB 33 is the potential for outside interests to exploit the agency dismissal provision to limit public participation and push through policies that benefit specific groups or corporations at the expense of the general public. 

By giving agencies broad discretion to dismiss petitions that fall outside their jurisdiction, there is a risk that agencies could become more susceptible to pressure from powerful stakeholders, who may attempt to influence the process and suppress petitions that challenge their interests. 

This could allow outside actors to effectively "purchase" influence over regulatory bodies, creating bad actors within the government who prioritize corporate or political agendas over the public's interest. 

The lack of transparency and accountability in the decision-making process could lead to further corruption, where agencies, instead of serving the needs of citizens, cater to the demands of special interest groups seeking to shape public policy to their benefit.

While House Bill 33 may have good intentions of improving the efficiency of the rulemaking process, its potential to restrict citizens' rights to petition government and participate in democratic governance is deeply troubling. 

The ability to petition government and seek redress is a fundamental right enshrined in the Montana Constitution.

 I urge you to carefully consider the implications of this bill on the public’s right to engage with their government and participate in the rulemaking process without unnecessary restrictions.