Montana Senate Bill SB563

Montana 2023 Regular Session

• Introduced: 3/28/23
• Refer: 3/28/23
• Engrossed: 4/4/23
• Refer: 4/5/23
• Failed: 5/8/23

Caption

Constitutional amendment establishing a mental health trust fund

Impact

This legislation is poised to significantly influence how Montana allocates its resources for mental health services. By creating a trust fund with a protected principal, the bill aims to provide a reliable funding mechanism that supports mental health initiatives over the long term. The requirement for legislative approval to access funds will help prioritize mental health within state policymaking, ensuring that these resources are used effectively in addressing public mental health needs. Given the growing awareness and need for mental health services, this trust fund can bolster state efforts toward improving mental health care access and affordability.

Summary

Senate Bill 563 proposes a constitutional amendment to establish a Mental Health Trust Fund in Montana, aiming to ensure a dedicated source of funding for the state's mental health priorities. The bill stipulates that the principal amount of the trust fund will remain fixed at $50 million, which can only be appropriated by a majority vote of the legislature for mental health initiatives. The interest and income generated from this fund can also be used for mental health priorities or other measures if approved by a two-thirds vote of the legislature. This separation between principal and appropriable funds emphasizes a long-term commitment to mental health resources in the state.

Contention

Debate around SB 563 centers on the implications of establishing a trust fund and how it will affect future budgetary flexibility within the state. Proponents view it as a necessary step towards better mental health funding, arguing that it secures a dedicated resource that can mitigate the typical fluctuations in state funding. On the other hand, some critics may argue that tying up funds in a trust can limit legislative freedom in financial decision-making, especially during times when budget flexibility is crucial. The requirement of supermajority votes for certain appropriations can also lead to concerns about accessibility of funds when urgent mental health needs arise.