Montana Senate declines to expel former president after ethics report and lengthy debate

The Montana Senate on Monday debated and then failed to meet the two-thirds threshold to expel Senator Jason Ellsworth after an ethics committee report alleged improper contracting practices by the senator while he served as Senate president.

Senator Mandeville, who moved the expulsion, described the ethics record and contracts at issue and told colleagues the committee’s record established that “the senator used his position as senate president to attempt to steer tens of thousands of dollars over $170,000 to his friend upfront without work having been performed.” The motion to expel did not obtain the necessary two-thirds concurrence; the final recorded vote on the floor was 27 in favor and 23 opposed, and the motion failed.

Why it matters: the ethics committee’s findings, the contested facts about contracting and disclosure, and the floor debate all raise questions about procurement controls and disclosure practices in legislative operations. Senators argued both for strict punishment and for proportional discipline; some urged censure rather than expulsion.

What the ethics report found (as presented on the floor): the committee reported that two finalized contracts totaling $170,100 were delivered to legislative services without the required oversight, that the contracts were with Agile Analytics (owned by a long-time associate of the senator), and that at least one invoice submitted on Jan. 10 for $7,008.87 was for work the contractor later testified had not been performed. The ethics report recommended discipline; the committee adopted its report by unanimous vote before the floor motion.

Senator Jason Ellsworth (the senator at the center of the motion) addressed the chamber and said, “I did not violate any of our senate rules or state laws or state regulations or procedures. I did not attempt to use my position for personal or private gain and I received no personal or private gain.” He also said he “regret[s] that I brought the appearance of impropriety into this body.”

Floor debate: proponents of expulsion characterized the conduct as a betrayal of public trust and urged removal. Senator Mandeville detailed the contracts and the committee’s findings and said the evidence showed an attempt to pay a friend upfront. Supporters of a less severe sanction argued for censure and for developing clearer, proportionate disciplinary rules. Senator Pope, a member of the ethics committee, urged caution about expulsion and argued for proportionality: “I propose instead… that we censure the senator with corresponding losses of privilege and other punishments as allowed by our rules.” Other senators emphasized the need for a consistent process and possible further legal investigation by the Department of Justice.

Votes and motions recorded on the floor - Motion to expel (initial motion by Senator Mandeville): final recorded vote 27 yes, 23 no — outcome: failed (did not meet two-thirds requirement). - Substitute motion to expel effective immediately (moved by Majority Leader McGillivray): the substitute also failed to secure the required two-thirds concurrence (floor tally reported earlier in debate was 27 yes, 23 no and the chair announced the substitute motion failed). - A separate substitute motion to censure was proposed during debate; senators discussed but did not complete a censure resolution on the floor that day.

Clarifying details presented in debate - Total value of the two challenged contracts: $170,100 (as described in the ethics report). - Invoice dated Jan. 10 for $7,008.87 submitted by the contractor; contractor later testified in the ethics proceeding that the work had not been performed. - The contested contracts were signed or delivered in late December; the committee noted the timing and lack of standard procurement review. - The contractor canceled the contract on Jan. 19 after staff inquiries, per floor discussion.

What comes next: because the expulsion motion failed, Senator Ellsworth remains a member of the Senate for the current term. Several senators signaled they intend to pursue reform — including procurement training for legislative leadership and proposals for clearer internal rules and consequences — and some said criminal inquiries by outside prosecutors remain possible and may produce further action.

Speakers quoted in this article are identified in the legislative transcript of the Senate proceedings on the record.