| Date | State | Bill No. | Bill Title | Outcome |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| April 28, 2011 | MT | HB 2 | 2011-2013 Biennium Budget | Concurrence Vote Passed - Senate (27 - 23) |
| April 28, 2011 | MT | SB 329 | Oil and Natural Gas Revenue for Schools | Conference Report Adopted - Senate (31 - 19) |
| April 28, 2011 | MT | SB 329 | Oil and Natural Gas Revenue for Schools | Conference Report Adopted - House (50 - 49) |
| April 27, 2011 | MT | HB 2 | 2011-2013 Biennium Budget | Concurrence Vote Passed - House (55 - 45) |
| April 20, 2011 | MT | HB 13 | Increases Pay for State Employees | Bill Failed - House (40 - 60) |
| April 12, 2011 | MT | HB 2 | 2011-2013 Biennium Budget | Conference Report Rejected - Senate (25 - 25) |
| April 12, 2011 | MT | HB 2 | 2011-2013 Biennium Budget | Conference Report Adopted - House (54 - 44) |
| April 11, 2011 | MT | HB 439 | Authorizing New Bonds | Bill Passed - Senate (36 - 14) |
| March 26, 2011 | MT | SB 372 | Business Equipment Tax | Bill Passed - Senate (28 - 22) |
| March 23, 2011 | MT | HB 13 | Increases Pay for State Employees | Bill Not Tabled - House (39 - 54) |
| March 23, 2011 | MT | SB 403 | Revised K-12 School Funding | Bill Failed - Senate (25 - 25) |
| March 2, 2011 | MT | HB 248 | Income Tax Credit for Long-Term Care Insurance | Bill Failed - House (44 - 56) |
| Feb. 24, 2011 | MT | HB 334 | Workers Compensation Rates | Bill Passed - House (67 - 31) |
Key Votes
2011 Montana Budget, Spending and Taxes Key Votes
State
- Montana down
- All States
- National
- Alabama
- Alaska
- Arizona
- Arkansas
- California
- Colorado
- Connecticut
- Delaware
- Florida
- Georgia
- Hawaii
- Idaho
- Illinois
- Indiana
- Iowa
- Kansas
- Kentucky
- Louisiana
- Maine
- Maryland
- Massachusetts
- Michigan
- Minnesota
- Mississippi
- Missouri
- Montana
- National
- Nebraska
- Nevada
- New Hampshire
- New Jersey
- New Mexico
- New York
- North Carolina
- North Dakota
- Ohio
- Oklahoma
- Oregon
- Pennsylvania
- Rhode Island
- South Carolina
- South Dakota
- Tennessee
- Texas
- Utah
- Vermont
- Virginia
- Washington
- West Virginia
- Wisconsin
- Wyoming
Issue
- Budget, Spending and Taxes down
- All
- Abortion
- Abortion and Reproductive
- Agriculture and Food
- Animals and Wildlife
- Arts and Entertainment
- Budget, Spending and Taxes
- Business and Consumers
- Campaign Finance and Elections
- Civil Liberties and Civil Rights
- Conservative
- Crime
- Death Penalty
- Defense
- Drugs
- Education
- Employment and Affirmative Action
- Energy
- Environment
- Executive Branch
- Federal, State and Local Relations
- Foreign Affairs
- Gambling and Gaming
- Government Operations
- Guns
- Health and Health Care
- Housing and Property
- Immigration
- Indigenous Peoples
- Judicial Branch
- Labor Unions
- Legislative Branch
- Liberal
- Marriage, Family, and Children
- Military Personnel
- National Security
- Science
- Senior Citizens
- Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity
- Social
- Stem Cell Research
- Technology and Communication
- Trade
- Transportation
- Unemployed and Low-Income
- Veterans
- Women
Keyword Search
About the Selection and Description of Key Votes
Project Vote Smart provides easy access to congressional and state voting records and maintains a collection of key votes grouped by issue. Project Vote Smart uses the following criteria to select key votes:
- The vote should be helpful in portraying how a member stands on a particular issue
- The vote should be clear for any person to understand
- The vote has received media attention
- The vote was passed or defeated by a very close margin
- Occasionally, if a specific bill is consistently inquired about on the Voter's Research Hotline, the vote will be added
Project Vote Smart provides a summary of the version of the bill text associated with each selected key vote. The summary does not necessarily reflect the content of the final version of the bill. Summaries are written by Project Vote Smart's staff and interns, who adhere to the Project's strict policies and procedures in order to guarantee absolute impartiality and accuracy. Each key vote selection is reviewed by the Project's community of advisers, who are political scientists and journalists from all fifty states.
