Missoula, MT — The Montana Senate Ethics Committee is set to resume its investigation into former Senate President Sen. Jason Ellsworth next week, following a temporary suspension triggered by an ongoing criminal inquiry into the lawmaker. The move comes one day after Attorney General Austin Knudsen announced the opening of a criminal investigation into Ellsworth, who has faced accusations of abuse and waste in handling a state contract.
Sen. Forrest Mandeville, R-Columbus, chair of the Senate Ethics Committee, confirmed the committee’s decision to restart hearings on the Senate floor Thursday afternoon. He stated that the suspension of the Ethics Committee’s activities had been lifted after confirming with the Legislative Service Division attorneys that the Attorney General’s response allowed the committee to continue its work.
“The Attorney General’s response satisfies the vote of the Senate to temporarily suspend the Ethics Committee until the Attorney General has weighed in,” Mandeville said. “That’s been verified with the legislature’s nonpartisan Legislative Service Division attorneys. The suspension is over, and so the Senate Ethics Committee will now resume its work.”
Ellsworth, a Republican from Hamilton, has come under scrutiny for his approval of a $170,000 state contract with a former business associate. Senate President Matt Regier, R-Kalispell, had previously called on the Legislative Audit Division to investigate the matter, which led to growing concerns over potential misuse of public funds.
Although the Ethics Committee had initially planned to begin hearings this month, a vote by Democrats and a group of nine Republicans delayed proceedings. Those lawmakers argued the investigation had become overly politicized and that the Department of Justice should handle any potential criminal matters.
Both the Senate and the Legislative Audit Division submitted their investigations to the Department of Justice last week. On Wednesday, Knudsen’s office confirmed that a criminal inquiry would be launched but emphasized that only the Senate held the authority to enforce its ethical codes.
Ellsworth has expressed concerns about the Ethics Committee resuming hearings before the Department of Justice completes its investigation. He maintains that the allegations against him are politically motivated and claims he has not been granted proper due process during the initial investigation by the Legislative Audit Division. He further argued that the Ethics Committee should not have jurisdiction over actions taken outside of a legislative session.
“If you don’t think this is political, you are fooling yourself,” Ellsworth said on the Senate floor. “And if you don’t think this is going to be weaponized in the future – if we don’t follow our own rules that the Constitution says we must follow – it’s a sad day for all of us.”
Sen. Greg Hertz, R-Polson, responded to Ellsworth’s comments by reinforcing the Senate’s constitutional duty to discipline its members. Hertz clarified that the role of the Ethics Committee is fact-finding and that the committee’s goal is to present those facts to the full Senate, where a two-thirds majority vote is required to make any final decisions regarding discipline.
“The Ethics Committee is a fact-finding committee,” Hertz said. “They will not make a determination; they will provide facts to the floor. And then once we have those facts, then the floor will make a judgment – and in the Constitution, that takes two-thirds of us to make that judgment. That’s where we’re at, and that’s where we should be.”
Senate Minority Leader Pat Flowers, D-Belgrade, expressed support for resuming the Ethics Committee’s hearings but urged a narrow focus on ethical allegations. He emphasized the importance of keeping criminal matters separate from the committee’s deliberations.
Mandeville confirmed that the committee would reconvene next week, with meetings scheduled for Monday and Friday.
As the Ethics Committee prepares to resume its work, the investigation into Ellsworth remains a point of contention, with members of the Senate divided over how best to approach the matter. The outcome of the committee’s hearings could have lasting implications for the political landscape in Montana, with many watching to see whether the Senate will take action against one of its own or defer to the findings of the criminal investigation.
