Montana Senate President Matt Regier (R-Kalispell) has initiated the first draft of a new bill for the 2027 legislative session. This legislation aims to curb what he terms “political agendas” at professional development conferences for teachers. This move comes after recordings from sessions at the Montana Federation of Public Employees (MFPE) educator conference were circulated online and drew criticism from conservative lawmakers.
Regier, with support from State Superintendent Susie Hedalen, stated that the bill—provisionally named “Revise education laws related to teacher training and education and meetings of teacher organisations”—seeks to prevent taxpayer funds from being used for conferences that promote ideology over actual instruction. He emphasized in a press release, as reported by News From The States, that “We need to make sure that tax dollars aren’t going towards political agendas in our schools.”
What the Proposed Bill Entails
The drafted legislation proposes a significant overhaul of existing laws governing “pupil-instruction-related” (PIR) days. These are state-mandated school closure days specifically allocated for teacher professional development. Currently, schools close for two days every October, during which teachers are required to attend various training sessions and conferences.
The recent MFPE educator conference, held in late October, offered more than 300 sessions and attracted nearly 1,000 educators from both public and private institutions, allowing them to earn professional development units (PDUs). The union proudly highlighted presentations on a diverse range of subjects, including math, science, language, and art.
However, Regier and Hedalen have singled out a few sessions, claiming they “promote radical gender ideology, DEI, nude child photography, and sexually explicit books.” Regier cited audio recordings, reportedly posted on social media by a conservative activist who attended the conference undercover, as proof of politically charged content. The MFPE union, however, has countered that these recordings are out of context and might have been obtained illegally under Montana law. Union President Amanda Curtis asserted, as quoted by News From The States, “They are outright lying about what happens at this conference, and I don’t really understand what good it’s serving Montana students.”
Union and Educators Defend the Current System
The MFPE stated that its conference has been running for over 30 years in collaboration with the Office of Public Instruction (OPI). Teachers had the freedom to choose from hundreds of sessions covering a wide array of topics, such as “Dyslexia the Superpower,” “Bring the stock market to life in your classroom,” “Advancing proficiency in STEM: practical strategies with AI and Socratic dialogue,” “Fostering curiosity in your classroom with live butterflies,” and “Rockets in the science classroom, Grades 6-9,” among many others primarily focused on subject-matter instruction. The union underscored that attendance at any specific session was never compulsory.
The OPI echoed these sentiments, noting its commitment to providing a broad spectrum of high-quality training through initiatives like the OPI Summer Institute, Teacher Learning Hub, and various local programs. While the OPI does not endorse “partisan or ideological content” in professional development, it supports diverse learning opportunities.
Legislative and Financial Ramifications
If enacted, the bill would transfer control over October PIR days from a state mandate to individual local school districts. This would grant districts the autonomy to decide whether to utilize these annual days for the MFPE conference or other alternative training programs. Furthermore, the bill aims to exclude sessions eligible for federally mandated PDUs if they are deemed to promote “ideological” or “political” content. Regier drew parallels to a previous bill, House Bill 557, which ultimately failed a Senate vote. This new draft indicates that the contentious issue will be revisited in 2027.
Proponents of this legislative change argue it will enhance accountability for how professional development time is utilized and safeguard taxpayer investments. Conversely, opponents contend that it risks hindering educators’ access to vital professional learning, diminishes district flexibility, and unfairly labels legitimate training as ideologically driven.
Analyzing the Core Debate
The proposed 2027 bill underscores a critical tension within Montana’s educational framework. While state lawmakers present the measure as a means to protect students and ensure responsible use of taxpayer money for teacher development, educators and their unions maintain that it could severely restrict teachers’ access to diverse training opportunities essential for improving their skills. As this legislation progresses, Montana faces a significant question: how to balance the imperative of upholding educational standards with the crucial need to preserve professional freedom and the rich variety of learning experiences that empower teachers to effectively support their students.