North Dakota House Passes Attorney General’s Budget Amid Controversial Proposals

On April 29, the North Dakota House of Representatives made a significant move by approving the budget for the Attorney General’s Office. However, this decision came alongside the removal of a contentious electronic smoking device registry that many critics warned could jeopardize small businesses across the state.

The Controversial Electronic Smoking Device Registry

House Bill 1003 initially included a provision for an electronic smoking device registry, which stipulated that only electronic smoking devices marketed in the United States before August 2016 would be allowed for sale in North Dakota. Additionally, products needed to file an approval application with the FDA by September 2020 and either secure FDA approval or a federal waiver. Proponents of this registry argued that it would enhance regulation aimed at removing unsafe products from the market.

However, smoke shop and gas station owners voiced their concerns, stating that the implementation of such a registry could risk driving them out of business or even out of state. According to the sentiments shared with Forum News Service, the proposed regulations could place a substantial financial burden on small enterprises.

Legislative Context and Decisions

Rep. Mike Nathe, R-Bismarck, who carried the bill in the House, emphasized that the registry’s elimination was a strategic decision not worth fighting at this late juncture in the session. “I’m sure there’ll be legislation to look at it more because there was support in the House and there was support in the Senate,” Nathe remarked. “But at this late stage, we don’t have time for a big floor fight over it.”

Other Provisions Under Scrutiny

Another aspect of House Bill 1003 that attracted attention during discussions included a line preventing district judges from waiving fees for individuals participating in the state’s 24/7 sobriety program. Rep. Bernie Satrom, R-Jamestown, criticized this measure, indicating that it would unfairly penalize financially struggling individuals.

“For some, the daily fees are a real financial burden,” Satrom stated. “If someone can’t pay, they risk being jailed—not for drinking but for being broke. Some will lose their job, housing, or families. That’s not justice; that’s a cycle of poverty.” He expressed concerns that this would ultimately lead to higher costs for taxpayers due to increased incarceration rates.

County Implications and Future Directions

Sen. Jonathan Sickler, R-Grand Forks, highlighted the implications of enforced fee waivers, explaining that counties often bear the financial strain of these decisions. “Counties are forced to cover waived fees, which the Senate views as an unfunded requirement imposed by the state,” Sickler noted. This situation leaves certain counties, like Stark County, in a financial lurch, as they may have set aside funds to cover waivers, unlike many larger counties.

Moving forward, Sickler implied that continued analysis and legislative action will be necessary, particularly with the recent passage of three reentry bills signed by Gov. Kelly Armstrong. These bills are designed to fortify reentry services for individuals exiting the criminal justice system, aiming to reroute those caught within it.

“There could be a way to fix this, to make counties whole, to give judges that discretion. But we just weren’t there for this session,” Sickler stated, defending that while judges have the authority to enforce jail time for unpaid fees, it remains a rare occurrence.

Conclusion

Ultimately, the House voted to adopt the recommendations from the conference committee, passing House Bill 1003 with a vote of 67-23. The bill now moves to the Senate, with a probable vote scheduled for Thursday. As discussions surrounding electronic smoking devices and judicial fee waivers continue, stakeholders will remain vigilant in advocating for measures that support small businesses and address the challenges faced by individuals in financial distress.